Inliners International Forums General Discussion MOPAR Flatty Fuel Injection

I am sure this topic has been answered before but I missed it. Here on Vancouver Island our emission standards are getting front page news, a change is coming, our vintage flattys are getting the eye. Having said that, fuel injection is my last hope for continued life,......

If you had to retrofit your flatty what systems/donor cars or manufactures would you use and why. Any and all information is appreciated.

Thanks guys.

I'm told that the Delco system is very capable of being fitted to other cars, that various dealers have the equipment to dyno test, set up and produce a chip for optimum performance.

Hi Walt,
many thanks for the info, I had not thought of Ford EDIS, I will put it on my short list.
I am sure there are other folks out there reading this forum that will benefit from your suggestions.
Good luck with your build up.
Cheers
Bob.

Question what about the dist less system off lets say The chevy 60deg. motors? (ex.3.4)Would this/That even work for Our chevy L6s??

There's an article on the slantsix.org website about fuel injection for street rods. The article is geared to a slantsix in a 40's Dodge. It's interesting reading with some pics. I'm sure a lot of the ideas could be used on the flathead as well.

I found a very interesting site dedicated to converting older vehicles to electronic fuel injection at WWW.CUSTOMEFIS.COM

That one seems to rely on the Delco system too...

Ray, Walt, 40 plyguy, Dennis, and Twisted6,

thank you all for your comments and helpful advice on my question conerning fuel injection for our flatties. I can see now I have a lot of reading and research to do,.......where would I be without you guys.

Thanks so much.
Cheers,
Bob.

You're welcome, Bob.

I'm afraid I did it for selfish reasons, though.

I'd like to see someone build a FI engine and do a step-by-step photo journal of the process. Then, after they've spent all the money, time, made the mistakes and corrected them, they could publish something....so I could benefit from it!

After all that, I could build me one, too...without all the hassle. Man, I'm lazy!

Hi Dennis,
it's nice to converse with someone who tells it like it is. I believe I can do all the hardware fitting out, it's the program sofware that will will take some time to get right.

At any rate,.....I am heading down to Australia in 3 weeks,.....I hope to look up Ray Bell, and maybe discuss some ideas,......on my return I will begin the project, thanks for the ideas.

Cheers

Bob.

Bob,,,,

There is SDS systems located in Canada.
http://www.sdsefi.com/
Maybe they are near you??

That is the system I am going to use, when I get more time,just had baby # 2 ,,6 days old now. :-) Sleep deprived ....

Hi Hank,

many thanks for the info on SDS systems, finally a source of parts not far from me. I enjoy living on Vancouver Island but most everything for MOPAR flatheads resides on the main land.

Good luck with baby #2,......sleep? ...what's that ?

Cheers,

Bob.

I've heard that vintage vehicles with original engines that are not burning oil have passed emission tests handily. Also, the Fish carb could be adjusted sufficiently well to give zero emission readings on 60's test equipment- when I get mine bolted onto the Power Wagon, it should be interesting to see what today's wideband sensors can read. Maine tried to institute testing in the mid 90's, but they angered a lot of people, and we disposed of it via initiative/referendum. The issue never came to a vote- the polticians saw which way the wind was blowing and killed the program. Generally, vintage vehicles in OEM condition are exempt from these programs. If BC has provision for public referendum, you may want to kill it that way. People couldn't wait to sign our petitions- I could have charged a fee, and they still would have signed!

fuel injection on the flathead?

just use the gm system throttle body.

just be handy with a welder for your own manifold and know someone who can modify the chevy distributor as i did to fit the flathead
i wont clog up space here with pics but here is a link to how i did it.
www.fargopickup.com if you want more info, write me off the list john@fargopickup.com

and i will be happy to share. Sorry for the sloppy condition of the site, will be working on it soon and clean up the html.

Just had the good fortune to find 265 inch chrysler flathead it was hooked to a stand by generator, came with the logs and has only 12 hours total run time. Will be tasking the complete fuel injectiion and ignition i have built and installing it on the 265 inch motor

thanks for listening

John

Some of your pics are not showing, Just the dreaded red "X"

does any know if it is possible to run more than one tbi on the same manifold... for example could you run three 2.2L tbi on a three carb manifold? I suppose you could isolate the inputs their computers recieved to just the cylinders they handle or I wonder if on one manifold reading common inputs if they would sync together and act as one. Just thinking of something different. The look of triple carbs but the good starting and fuel mixture of injection...

Dave

I was thinking of a triple manifold like....the guy in PA sells. sorry I forgot his name.

according to this website http://www.megamanual.com/v22manual/mfuel.htm#equation
it's possible.
again in theary.

In the late 60s or early 70s some car companies tested their old engines for emissions. They were surprised to find the old long stroke flatheads had very low emissions.

The long stroke design is particularly good for NOX which was quite a problem for a time. Car makers redesigned their engines with a longer stroke about this time. Engines like the Chev 305 and 307, Chrysler 360, and Olds 400 were small bore long stroke designs compared to the typical V8.

So if your old engine is in good shape, not burning oil, and tuned up well with a good carb you may pass the emissions test with no mods. If it was me I'd try it anyway to establish a baseline if nothing else.

I suspect that the reason that a longer stroke engine had lower NOx emmisions is because it has a smaller bore and therefore a smaller combustion chamber. NOx emmissions is proportional to combustion chamber volume.

That's interesting Jason. I would think that a flathead would have a pretty big combustion chamber no matter what since you have that volume hanging out over the valves. I thought NOx was related to temperature. This is something I'd like to learn more about.

Leif,
It has been awhile since I have studied this... Heat and pressure promote the N and O to combine into NO and NO2 (collectively known as NOx) The larger combustion chamber is more area for the reaction to take place. Fuel/ air ratio are also factors. If you are running lean, you will have more NOx and less HC. The converse is also true. Running stoichometric allows for the minimum combined HC and NOx at the expense of some fuel economy. In other words, you could operate leaner but you would fail NOx emmission requirements. Perhaps the flathead was operating rich, minimizing NOx production.

I know that this string is about passing emissions, but I just jumped in with my thoughts. sorry.. but I guess I should make amends, I used to live in Tacoma, WA and according my friends who've always raced there.. fat may be happy but it won't pass the test... meaning that yes rich won't pass. if you're interested in the O2 sensor trick for tuning. The website I mentioned above does talk about readings off an O2 sensor....as long as you have a volt meter that can check the volts. it should be fairly simple to make sure your running clean. and you could put a sensor off each port if you'd like....or just move the sensor from bung to bung....just plug the holes when not in use... ok ok blah blah blah sorry... I'm rambling...
hope this helps

My recollection of reading about issues with NOX when the restrictions started (ie. stories in R & T, C & D etc about problems makers were facing) is that it's not the volume of the chamber, rather the area of the surfaces in the chamber that caused the difficulties.

Hence the short stroke engine had fewer of these problems. But the chamber in a side valve is, of course, blessed with a very large surface area.

I'll be interested to know how this turns out...

It is, of course, the surface area where the reaction takes place. Generally, a larger chamber volume will also have a larger surface area.

I wonder though the surface area is large but how does the reaction change over the valves? or not at all.

Whoops... got that wrong, didn't I? It's the long stroke engine which had fewer problems...