Fuel Injection
 

im going to make the leap and get the fuelie unit for my 63

i dont know crap about these manual injectors, so i will be buying the book on it, any online site's i could look?

my question is that i have a 350 LT-1 block with some work, probaly close to 400hp, will this unit be ok?

where should i look? ebay? or does anyone have a site to look for one
thanks

Rochester Fuel Injection systems love vacuum. If you do not have a strong idle vacuum signal you will probably never get the unit to run right.

If you do not currently have a unit, be prepared for some sticker shock. At a minimum, I'd think you'll be looking at 6k for a running unit with a distributor. Possibly more. You'll also need an original or reproduction air cleaner, which could be another 2-5k depending.

I wish I could offer suggestions on where to find a unit. Mostly it is word of mouth or being in the right place at the right time. They come up on ebay from time to time but are priced high. Some of the rebuilders also have them available from time to time. Give John Degregory or Jerry Bramlett a call to see if they have or know of available units. Jack Podell might also have some but then you'd have to deal with him.

best rgrds.

:iagree: if you don't have about 15" of vacuum at idle, i'd say you're screwed...
Bill

could i hide a vacumm canister to make up the vacumm if it is that low? i will check it to make sure

I would disagree with "screwed". It may be a lumpy idle, but I have a RACE motor with roadrace cam, and my Rochester FI runs fine. Ask my competition:-)

OK, maybe 'screwed' is a bit harsh... what is your idle speed, and what does your vacuum run at idle?
Bill

Let me put it like this, it won't be fun to drive in normal traffic without a good idle signal. For me, there is nothing more embarrassing than a nice looking car that stalls at stop lights because you stopped feathering the gas, or that has to idle at 1200 for the same reason.

63 f.i.
 

I have a nice original never polished or chromed with matching 1111022 distributor 6500.00 running in my 58 5 years ago.pictures available

Bill, the '64 & '65 FI cars came stock with the 30-30 cam, same as the cam in the L76 365hp motor. This cam typically only produces between 11"-13" of vacuum at idle so the FI units must work well enough at that low of a vacuum or i'd venture a guess that GM wouldn't have been using that cam with the FI motors.

I actually just checked on Jerry Bramlets website and he is saying the same thing - the 30-30 cam produces approx 12" of vacuum and the FI units work fine with that.

Matt, having heard your car you don't have as much lopeyness at idle as my '65 does with the stock 30-30 cam in it so I'd guess that whatever cam you have is not SO radical that vacuum level should be a too much of an issue if you wanted to add the FI unit and associated intake and distributor although to find and purchase one is going to cost you some serious big bucks!

No Problem,... Any Experts Here Own a FI Vette?
 

A LT1 short block is a excelent improvement for your FI dreams...It will idle nice and smooth and run like a MF...`er....:thumbs:

PS, turn your volumn up,,,:lol:

http://s238.photobucket.com/albums/f...FIMOV00006.flv

http://s238.photobucket.com/albums/f...Vettesound.flv

for all of you early Vette owners the engine below is easily identified by the valve covers as a 1970 LT1 crate engine

http://i238.photobucket.com/albums/f...es/LT1FI-1.jpg

What do ya think? If still in doubt ask any friends of Wally Knoch...:cool:

nice!!!!!

yes could you send me pics, you can pm me for my email addy

thanks!!!

A couple of additional comments/observations. For those who do (or do not) know your FI units, there is one particular difference between the 57-63 and 64-5 FI units (there are multiple differences in fact, but one inparticular). The spring in the enrichment housing of the 64-5 units (7380) is not as strong as the 57-63 springs. Thus, the enrichment diaphragm (that's what moves the ratio lever) of the 7380 units require less manifold vacuum to override the spring and pull the ratio lever back to the lean stop (this is important for big profile cams with low vacuum).
The FI unit on my SB400 in the 56 is considerably modified, AND, it has the 57-63 style spring in the enrichment housing. Idle (at best) is about 900-950rpm in cool conditions, about 1000rpm in hot weather.
For years I had the 57 style air cleaner on the unit. I always KNEW that it needed cooler outside air so that it would have better idle qualities (FI units DO NOT like heat!!!). This became apparent during very hot weather/conditions when I opened the hood and it immediately began to run better. Finally, after several years, I acquired (don't ask, 'cause I won't tell) a 57 Airbox. With the Airbox in place, and it can now suck in cooler outside air, it is considerably better behaved.
So, bottom line. An FI unit CAN run/idle OK (well, so-so) if you have a BARE MINIMUM of 10-11in vacuum. It NEEDS to have cooler outside air plumbed to the air meter.
Also, FI units are sooooooooooooooo much better (especially for street driving) if a vacuum advance distributor is used. I had a 62 (mechanical advance ONLY) dist with my unit form many years (and always suspected it would run/idle better with a vac adv dist. Finally added a 65 dist with vac adv, and it became MUCH MORE agreeable for street driving!
http://i65.photobucket.com/albums/h2...ion/FMside.jpg

http://i65.photobucket.com/albums/h2...n/100_0134.jpg

OK, ya'll win; i need to be careful what i say...

anyway, my 62 unit on a stock 70 LT1 wants to naturally idle at about 1000 rpm at about 15" vacuum, and goes down the road at 11 to 15. i do know, from my experience, that the less vacuum you have, the lousier the street manners are..

Tom's comment about a weaker enrichment spring in the 64 - 65 units may have something to do with their better idle characteristics at lower vacuum
Bill

Great car Tom....but what is this "(especially for street driving)" thing of which you speak?:rofl:

'Cause us "thugs" do our bruisin' on the street! :D

ok, I will say this and then duck.....GO WITH EFI.......ok, flame suit ON

WRONG YEAR, THEY DIDN`T HAVE THAT TYPE OF INJECTION THEN. :lol: YA HAVE TO GET INTO THE 80`s

Lt-1
 

I ran a LT-1 cam in a few motors with my '63 FI and it is awesome.
You can idle it as low as you like. Pulls strong, but fades at high rpm, like above 6400 and up. It will spin higher, and sound great, but I feel you run short of CFM capacity. I am putting together a 353 ( 4.155 X 3.25 ) which can really spin upthere, and I need a lot more cfm capacity. I'm considering dual airmeters or boring out my air meter a bit. Something to get a little more air flow.
Did'nt mean to get off topic, but you will love the FI unit on top of a LT-1 motor!!

sure they did....here is a photo to prove it....

http://images33.fotki.com/v1138/phot...0mSmall-vi.jpg


took this photo of a EFI in a 1960 Vette....so if it was available to be put in that one it should be available to put in a 63 no problem....

I will neither argue with nor contradict anyone about the superiority of a later TPI system adapted to an earlier engine/car. Everything about a TPI system is better------------------------EXCEPT one thing. If you're not a computer nerd (and I darn sure am not!!!), then you are dead in the water. I'm great with mechanical stuff (REAL good with Rochester FI), but I don't know how to get to first base with a computer controlled TPI. I do know that when properly dialed in, they perform well, start easily, get (or can get) great gas mileage and can be adapted to many engines. Although as I understand, they don't do so well with a radical profile cam.
Also, when properly dialed in, ESPECIALLY if you have access to and can interpret a dyno/exhaust analizer, the Rochester units are a great system. But as I have said before, the air meter greatly limits the the cfm available to large displacement engines.
And last of all, the Rochester FI units have a "magic" about them that just doesn't exist with modern day computer controlled TPI.
I know that modern day engines are soooooooooooooooooooooo much better, more powerful, more efficient and longer lasting than older engines. But I sure would LOVE TO HAVE a street rod with a 300+inch Flatty with 2-3 carbs and finned alum heads! There again, a trick flatty just has a magic appeal that today's engines don't have! :D
I wish that 40-50yrs ago I had learned to build an upgraded modern flatty.

Hey Tom...
 

...yea the GM TPI setups are great, up to 4800 RPM. They are real good for a low RPM torque motor.

you missed my point, all that was available THEN was mechanical injection. Your photo appears to be mechanical. Hilborn type. Now if i`m wrong then it still would not be available until computers came into existence. Just ask 'Al Gore' when that could have happened. Isn`t he the inventor of either computers or the internet?...hell by now hes probably claiming both.....:rofl: ` [

The picture may be a Hilborn type mechanical fuel injection, but appears to me to be Webber style carburetors, still not electronic FI.

Verle

great!!! how is this photo? can you see the injectors under the fuel rails?

http://images32.fotki.com/v1102/phot...06Small-vi.jpg

http://images36.fotki.com/v1152/phot...14Small-vi.jpg

http://images32.fotki.com/v1105/phot...15Small-vi.jpg

http://images20.fotki.com/v356/photo...1_11_06-vi.jpg

I would get a photo of the ECM but it is buried behind the passenger kick pad.....but here is what is used to program it, of course it is loaded on a laptop...

http://images34.fotki.com/v1146/phot...l1Small-vi.jpg

sorry, the original posting I was being a smart a$$....sorry to all....

Matt, I think that putting the fuel unit on your car is a great idea. I saw your car when it was for sale and it looked to be a real fuel car from what I saw. You need to do your home work before you spend any money on a fuel unit. There are a lot of pieced together units that are floating around. I have seen guys on ebay buying up parts then selling them screwed together as working units.:willy: I still want your wheels if you sell them.:thumbs:

Walt, your right on the money. The LT1 is just a stroked L76. Sounds like the perfect combo.

First gear, the crower crossram has to be one of the best looking MFI systems out there and the conversion looks real nice.:cool: I need to get one for my big block.:smiliedrool:
http://i25.tinypic.com/343j5e1.jpg

Lick your chops on these Tom!


http://temp.corvetteforum.net/classi...ion_04__1_.jpg

EFI 1969 Dodge , 9.52 et
 

I have a fraturnity brother that runs that EFI stuff with a lot of success. His car is a big Black 1969 Dodge Charger with '640' inches of BB 'Chevy' Bet you though I was going to say Chrysler..:lol: His name, Don Vargo placed 3rd.at the Popular Hot Rodding shootout. at 9.52 ET @ 139.50 MPH. On straight engine only and drove it to the shootout in Kentucky. Street driven at home to these nightly car things with a big pro stock bubble hood he would un-pin it after a while and start it up. The Dodge 'boys' would would come running and gasp "its blasphemy' and Dons reply is 'you have the direct connection and I have the correct connection'

He is responsible for me being hooked on Vettes. While at U of Miami and we would switch cars. Mine a stick shift 57 J-2 Super 88 Olds and his a 58 Charcoal FI Vette.

That 640 inch Chevy is now back in a Chevy. His new piece is this Black narrowed fat tired Camaro. The Dodge now has a twin turbo with EFI and 528 cubic inches of new Hemi..:D

http://i238.photobucket.com/albums/f...er/vargo1c.jpg

http://i238.photobucket.com/albums/f...fer/vargo3.jpg

http://i238.photobucket.com/albums/f...er/vargo4c.jpg

I looked at some set ups like that before I bought the one you see. I didn't like the look of the fuel rails sitting on top with the hoses quite visible as well.....

Yours has a clean retro look to it. Did you have it converted or buy it setup already? How is the drivablity and off idle performance? Which control are you using?

well it looks like i made the deal!! i am now diving into the fuelie world!!

thanks for the help, aadvice

What did you end up with?

:smiliedrool: :smiliedrool: :smiliedrool: :smiliedrool: :smiliedrool: :cool:

Fuel Injection- Tales from the crypt
 

I put a 61 Fuelie unit on my first Corvette- a 62 low HP car that had 3 deuces on it when I bought it. It ran OK, but I had occaisional problems with hydrostatic lock due to fuel siphoning down after shutoff. As I recall, there is supposed to be a antisiphon device in the unit, but it obviously wasn't working. A couple of my friends also had problems with hydrostatic lock with a fuel injected 57 Chevy they raced in Junior Stock classes. In their case, they discovered a bent rod or two (I never took my car apart).

I also put a 65 unit on a 67 coupe with a 327/350 HP engine for about 50,000 miles of long-distance commuting. That unit had a solenoid bypass on the spider that not only prevented siphoning, but provided plenty of fuel for starting in cold weather.

I'm just commenting because this would be a concern for me if I were going to put one of these on the 59 I'm attempting to reserect. Personally, I'd put a Tuned Port unit on.

Good points. Most FI folks recommend installing an anti-siphon solenoid to prevent this. Is is a really simple device with simple installation. It is available from the FI part suppliers (John Degregory, Jim Neuffer, etc.) and is mostly hidden away under the dog house when installed.

here is an example of the aftermarket C1 anti-siphon solenoid installation:

http://i28.tinypic.com/22jea1.jpg

Bill

For Sting Ray era FI units, for a retrofitted solenoid valve to prevent hydrolocking an engine, the fuel plumbing path needs to be modified when installing an anti-siphon valve.

The attached picture shows what has to be done:


http://jmlckwd.home.mindspring.com/f...olenoid-re.jpg



Fuel that normally circulates from the high pressure pump, by the spider, and back to the spill valve must be re-routed. As modified, it flows from the pump, by the solenoid valve, and then to the spill valve.

(Note that one side of the "T" fitting at the spider must be plugged.)

If the solenoid valve is installed only in the puel path to the spider, fuel can still reach the engine by way of the return path that normally flows fuel towards the spill valve. (Yes, this is experience talking.)

I can't say with certainty that altering the fuel path like this doesn't upset the calibration slightly. I've done this to two Sting Ray units which the owners needed back in a hurry so I wasn't able to look for changes in calibration. I do keep in touch with one of the owners and he's happy as can be with the way his car runs. Whatever effect this has, therefore, is probably slight. A third unit that I modified in this way was recalibrated after the installation of the solenoid and it works well.

Jim

here is what i bought
http://i128.photobucket.com/albums/p...g50/b45c_3.jpg

and the added solenoid
http://i128.photobucket.com/albums/p...g50/f369_3.jpg

What you've got appears to be a '64-'65 unit. If so, the solenoid valve in the picture is not for anti-siphon protection; rather it provides a bypass path for fuel to reach the nozzles during engine cranking.

My guess is there is no anti-siphon solenoid valve and that the only siphoning protection is a small check valve that is (1) integral to the unit (2) in only one of the two siphoning fuel paths and (3) tends to fail.

If that were my unit, I'd replumb the fuel path to provide positive siphoning protection like I described in my earlier posting.

Good luck,

Jim

Matt, you've posted photos of a '63 7375 series FI unit with a modified starting circuit. Instead of a Cranking Signal Valve, your unit now uses a solenoid controlled by-pass around the fuel meter to provide nozzle fuel pressure during cranking.

For this modified starting circuit to work, you'll have to connect one solenoid lead to a terminal with 12 volts only during engine cranking. This same lead will also require a switch that can be used to disconnect the solenoid during engine re-starts. (Otherwise your engine might flood during hot re-starts.) I believe you already have such a switch mounted on the bellcrank boss.

This unit originally came with an anti-siphon "pill" valve inside the fuel meter. It also came with a spring-loaded anti-siphon needle valve in the spider hub. I can not tell if either of these is still present and working, however.

My own experiments with installing anti-siphon solenoids in the '63 - '65 fuel meter-to-spider tubing have been disappointing. Regardless of where it is placed in this tubing, a standard solenoid valve causes a flow restriction in this particular application that changes the fuel supply curve. In my experiments, this change has been significant. However, if you can find a solenoid valve that is full opening (like a tiny gate or ball valve) with no flow restriction when open, I can see how it could be installed in the short feed line without affecting calibration.

Regards,

Jerry

thanks jerry for the input, i do have other pics of the unit apart, and yes it is a 63 unit with the solenoid "upgrade"
i will look into that wiring as you described

i checked my vacumm today, off the carb going to dist, and my guage bounces for 8-15 vacumm, is this possiable or is this an issue
would that be too low for the fuelie unit?

thanks

A manifold vacuum reading that varies from 8" to 15" at an 800 rpm idle speed indicates a serious mechanical problem. Please find another source point to measure and recheck this reading.

There is a write-up on my website in the "Tech Tips" section that discusses camshaft selection for fuel injected engines.

The TPI manifold was designed for the 305, a 350 is pushing the limits, a 327 would probably work just fine. A better solution down that road is a TPI computer running an LT1 manifold modified for a distributor. Torque will suffer a bit with the shorter runners, but the bigger engine will make up for it and high RPM behavior will be much better.

Back to the regularly-scheduled mechanical FI discussion. :leaving:

hey all Mr. Stupid here!!! :willy:

i tried another vacuum guage and guess what, i have 12 of vacuum!! at 800 idle

the other guage that i was using was no good, so i guess i should be good for my fuelie setup

thanks