Jack Meoff
Mopar Maniac
Up here like I mentioned it's 88 and up for testing
That's why the newest car I own is an 87....
That's why the newest car I own is an 87....
Lean Burn Conversion 101
- Thread starter Jack Meoff
- Start date
I know what you mean about the hate for old cars! I told my wife (then fiance) while she was in still high school, that I liked my cars old, and my women young! :icon_thumleft: now that she's just had her 26th birthday, I'm not so quick to point that out.
Jack Meoff
Mopar Maniac
My wife turns 45 in November.....
I'd suffer an untimely demise if I said that. :eusa_eh:
it probably wouldn't be an early grave for me just yet, but I'dprobably find that I sleep better on the couch for a while.
8v-of-fury
Well-Known Member
Nocar340 said:
Not for German automobiles
, they were just-a-booming! Two 84 Jetta's and an 87 Jetta. The two 84's have 1997-1998 TDI engines in them, with mechanical pumps from Land Rovers in Europe to do away with all electronics. The 87, is a bone stock 1.6L turbo diesel with about 480k on the original drive train. The two 84's are also well over 500k on each.. Can you tell I like a mechanical automotive world?? LOL
L98TPI
Active Member
Just for the record. Summit has the dist-box-wiring kit under their Proform brand for 150 USD. But I wouldn't do this without some effort to get the original system working. Especially if its the one with the O2 sensor-closed loop. They work rather well. Its usually not the electronics. I just found a bad vacuum delay thing messing up my 5TH. going to replace it and it will drive nice again. If you are going to do a conversion. Why not go to TBI off a later truck? About the same work. Better outcome. Swap the whole engine in if its better than yours.
kkritsilas
Well-Known Member
The original systems have stopped working properly in most cases. Parts for the original system are getting hard to find, and even when new, never worked well (look up the road tests of Lean Burn equipped cars if you want to hear about the issues). The whole lean burn concept was an attempt to get engines that were never designed to run clean and fuel efficiently to do exactly that. It is, and remains, a massive kludge (giant band aid solution) that had issues from day 1. It is complex, has wiring and vacuum lines running all over the place, and the computer/control unit cannot be diagnosed without a special box from Chrysler. Even if you did somehow manage to get one of the magical boxes, finding component parts would be pretty close to impossible today. The new, closed loop fuel injection systems work great; the ELB/ESA system, even though it has an O2 sensor, is nowhere near that level.
Going to a factory fuel injection system, whether TBI or full port fuel injection is not easy. At the least, the entire fuel system will need to be reworked to supply sufficient fuel pressure, and you may have to either get a whole new computer for it, or reprogram the fuel injection computer that comes with the system. Over all of that, you will need to hook up coolant, heater, and air conditioning lines (if so equipped) and throttle linkages, which may or may not be easy, and rework most of the wiring harness going to the engine, as well as provide more power for the computer and injectors.
If you want a fuel injected car, the third party systems from FAST, MSD, Hooker, and I am sure a few others, are a better way to go. They are far less intrusive, and have been designed for a retrofit installation. In the case of a FAST EZ-EFI, electrical connection is 5 wires into the car/engine (positive, ground, RPM signal, coolant temperature, and O2 sensor). It takes about 2 unrushed days to install, and is easy to program, with the included hand held unit. They are not cheap, but they are quick to install, have a good basic program built in that has a learn mode (so it runs better the more you drive it), and don't require any other modifications to the engine. The original air cleaner even fits.
Kostas
Going to a factory fuel injection system, whether TBI or full port fuel injection is not easy. At the least, the entire fuel system will need to be reworked to supply sufficient fuel pressure, and you may have to either get a whole new computer for it, or reprogram the fuel injection computer that comes with the system. Over all of that, you will need to hook up coolant, heater, and air conditioning lines (if so equipped) and throttle linkages, which may or may not be easy, and rework most of the wiring harness going to the engine, as well as provide more power for the computer and injectors.
If you want a fuel injected car, the third party systems from FAST, MSD, Hooker, and I am sure a few others, are a better way to go. They are far less intrusive, and have been designed for a retrofit installation. In the case of a FAST EZ-EFI, electrical connection is 5 wires into the car/engine (positive, ground, RPM signal, coolant temperature, and O2 sensor). It takes about 2 unrushed days to install, and is easy to program, with the included hand held unit. They are not cheap, but they are quick to install, have a good basic program built in that has a learn mode (so it runs better the more you drive it), and don't require any other modifications to the engine. The original air cleaner even fits.
Kostas
Last edited:
Any system (FAST, Edelbrock, MSD Atomic, et al) that claims to be "self learning" is by nature a horrible compromise. Factory PCMs self adjust, but that's a much different ball game than learning with just a few small parametric inputs. It's the classic "Edelbrock v. Holley" syndrome: do you want it to run OK but never remotely live up to its potential? Run a "self learning" EFI system or an Edelbrock carb; both are a compromise. Want that last little drop of performance, be it horsepower, economy, or just overall driveability? Then you're in Holley carb/start-from-scratch fuel/spark mapping territory. There's a lot more work involved, but those running the compromise option will wonder why it's so much better than theirs.
Case in point: You tell it the simple programmer you have a 383. The programmer has no way of knowing if you have a Chrysler B engine or a Chevrolet small-block stroker. Every tuning parameter is totally different between the two. The starting inputs are so vague just to make it run, and it's never going to stray very far from them. It's going to find "good enough" and never improve. How is the programmer going to "learn" about cylinder filling, timing parameters, optimum engine RPM or temperature operating range, etc.? It can't, and there's not enough programmability in any of those systems to properly teach it. These systems, though computers, are not 2GHz processors with 8GB of RAM. Don't fool yourself into thinking they're anywhere near that kind of computing power.
If faster starts are that important to you, by all means go with one of the "self learning" systems. If you're looking to actually gain performance or fuel economy, you'll be many dollars ahead sticking with a carburetor and distributor and learning how to tune them or going with an EFI/ignition system that requires a hell of a lot more from you in terms of programming.
Case in point: You tell it the simple programmer you have a 383. The programmer has no way of knowing if you have a Chrysler B engine or a Chevrolet small-block stroker. Every tuning parameter is totally different between the two. The starting inputs are so vague just to make it run, and it's never going to stray very far from them. It's going to find "good enough" and never improve. How is the programmer going to "learn" about cylinder filling, timing parameters, optimum engine RPM or temperature operating range, etc.? It can't, and there's not enough programmability in any of those systems to properly teach it. These systems, though computers, are not 2GHz processors with 8GB of RAM. Don't fool yourself into thinking they're anywhere near that kind of computing power.
If faster starts are that important to you, by all means go with one of the "self learning" systems. If you're looking to actually gain performance or fuel economy, you'll be many dollars ahead sticking with a carburetor and distributor and learning how to tune them or going with an EFI/ignition system that requires a hell of a lot more from you in terms of programming.
kkritsilas
Well-Known Member
NoCar340:
Sorry, but the experience I have just had with a FAST EZ-EFI doesn't jive with what you wrote. In this case, it was a Chevy crate 350. System got installed (not my car), and it started out really rough. Smoothed out some after about 10 minutes. It was driveable, but running rich. Owner continued to drive it, and it has gotten better and better. It does self learn. I would not even suggest that it is anywhere near a factory port fuel injection system, but mileage and driveability have improved greatly vs. previous, "expertly tuned" Edelbrock 1406 carb setup. It is showing improvements still, 3 weeks after the installation and initial fire up, but they are smaller and smaller.
The FAST EZ-EFI doesn't have a 2 GHz/8GB of RAM, that is for sure. But guess what, neither do the factory units. Reason for that is that they don't need it Most of them are microcontrollers (like what is built into your laser printer) and most have 32MB of RAM or less. Now, the argument will be made that the factory computers don't need a lot of RAM because they are optimized for their specific application, and there is some truth to that. But the flip side of that is that the "fuel injection computers" in today's cars not only run the fuel injection, but the ignition, and in the case of my Dodge Grand Caravan, the transmission and a few other things. . In today's world, with the types of CPU power that is available, it is certainly possible for any competent after market parts manufacturer to come up with a processor/RAM combination that easily exceeds the capabilities of what the factory has put out. Putting in a higher end microcontroller (ie faster and more capable, and remember, these fuel injection computers only handle fuel injection) and 256 MB of RAM (an almost trivial amount, these days) will allow a lot of flexibility. It is not only possible, but highly probable that the third party fuel injection computers are much more capable than the factory fuel injection computers, because they have to accommodate being installed into so many different situations, so are required to be more flexible.
As to the limited parameters the third party fuel injection computers have to deal with, that is somewhat of a non-issue. The EZ-EFI system that I helped with has an O2 sensor, a coolant temperature sensor, a MAP sensor, an Air Temperature sensor, throttle position sensor, and an RPM input. For a system that only controls fuel, you don't need anything else. There is certainly no need for cam position sensors or crank position sensors, as they don't control the ignition, or road speed sensors, or gear position sensors, or anything like that.
The process starts with you entering engine size and number of cylinders, idle RPM, and then you leaving the throttle alone, but with the engine on, but not started, and hit a button. This is the position of the throttle at idle. It then asks you to fully depress the gas pedal, and push a button. This established full throttle position. Engine operating temperature is set when you start the engine up, and it asks you to wait until the engine has reached operating temperature and hit a button, I would guess that it reads the coolant temperature sensor for a value. It then asks you wait for a while until it is finishes. It starts cycling back and forth for a while, and then settles down. From there, you have a basic tune. It self adjusts from that point onward. At any point, you can go in and change a lot of parameters, from A/F ratio to idle speed, to a whole whack of other things, like throttle curves and quite a few others. Things like cylinder filling and accommodation of timing parameters is picked up by the O2 sensor, I would think
There is no doubt that a finely tuned carb can come close, or equal these type of fuel injection systems for power. There is also no doubt in my mind that carb parts are getting harder to find every day, and that no matter how well a carb is tuned, the driveability of these third party fuel injection systems will still be better, and so will mileage, most likely. In addition, the expertise in tuning carbs properly is dwindling rapidly. There is nobody locally that can tune the TQs in my 2 four barrel J bodies, and nobody that I can learn from. The local hot rod shops have no issue tuning up Holleys and Edelbrocks, but they won't touch my TQs, and I want to use my TQs. I will have to send them out to a carb rebuilder as I don't want to do them myself. I have tried to find metering rod kits for my carbs, for a few months, but nothing yet.
The other thing to keep in mind is that FAST does have full port injected systems that are far more capable of producing high horsepower numbers, much higher than anything the factories have come up with, so they knowledge, experience and background are there. Question is, how much do you want to pay to get that Nth degree of perfection? . This isn't the first kick at the can for them, nor are they an new unknown quantity. Most people don't have the knowledge or expertise to program a fuel injection system from the ground up, whether it be a modified factory system or a third party system, so they just modify the fuel maps.
Kostas
Sorry, but the experience I have just had with a FAST EZ-EFI doesn't jive with what you wrote. In this case, it was a Chevy crate 350. System got installed (not my car), and it started out really rough. Smoothed out some after about 10 minutes. It was driveable, but running rich. Owner continued to drive it, and it has gotten better and better. It does self learn. I would not even suggest that it is anywhere near a factory port fuel injection system, but mileage and driveability have improved greatly vs. previous, "expertly tuned" Edelbrock 1406 carb setup. It is showing improvements still, 3 weeks after the installation and initial fire up, but they are smaller and smaller.
The FAST EZ-EFI doesn't have a 2 GHz/8GB of RAM, that is for sure. But guess what, neither do the factory units. Reason for that is that they don't need it Most of them are microcontrollers (like what is built into your laser printer) and most have 32MB of RAM or less. Now, the argument will be made that the factory computers don't need a lot of RAM because they are optimized for their specific application, and there is some truth to that. But the flip side of that is that the "fuel injection computers" in today's cars not only run the fuel injection, but the ignition, and in the case of my Dodge Grand Caravan, the transmission and a few other things. . In today's world, with the types of CPU power that is available, it is certainly possible for any competent after market parts manufacturer to come up with a processor/RAM combination that easily exceeds the capabilities of what the factory has put out. Putting in a higher end microcontroller (ie faster and more capable, and remember, these fuel injection computers only handle fuel injection) and 256 MB of RAM (an almost trivial amount, these days) will allow a lot of flexibility. It is not only possible, but highly probable that the third party fuel injection computers are much more capable than the factory fuel injection computers, because they have to accommodate being installed into so many different situations, so are required to be more flexible.
As to the limited parameters the third party fuel injection computers have to deal with, that is somewhat of a non-issue. The EZ-EFI system that I helped with has an O2 sensor, a coolant temperature sensor, a MAP sensor, an Air Temperature sensor, throttle position sensor, and an RPM input. For a system that only controls fuel, you don't need anything else. There is certainly no need for cam position sensors or crank position sensors, as they don't control the ignition, or road speed sensors, or gear position sensors, or anything like that.
The process starts with you entering engine size and number of cylinders, idle RPM, and then you leaving the throttle alone, but with the engine on, but not started, and hit a button. This is the position of the throttle at idle. It then asks you to fully depress the gas pedal, and push a button. This established full throttle position. Engine operating temperature is set when you start the engine up, and it asks you to wait until the engine has reached operating temperature and hit a button, I would guess that it reads the coolant temperature sensor for a value. It then asks you wait for a while until it is finishes. It starts cycling back and forth for a while, and then settles down. From there, you have a basic tune. It self adjusts from that point onward. At any point, you can go in and change a lot of parameters, from A/F ratio to idle speed, to a whole whack of other things, like throttle curves and quite a few others. Things like cylinder filling and accommodation of timing parameters is picked up by the O2 sensor, I would think
There is no doubt that a finely tuned carb can come close, or equal these type of fuel injection systems for power. There is also no doubt in my mind that carb parts are getting harder to find every day, and that no matter how well a carb is tuned, the driveability of these third party fuel injection systems will still be better, and so will mileage, most likely. In addition, the expertise in tuning carbs properly is dwindling rapidly. There is nobody locally that can tune the TQs in my 2 four barrel J bodies, and nobody that I can learn from. The local hot rod shops have no issue tuning up Holleys and Edelbrocks, but they won't touch my TQs, and I want to use my TQs. I will have to send them out to a carb rebuilder as I don't want to do them myself. I have tried to find metering rod kits for my carbs, for a few months, but nothing yet.
The other thing to keep in mind is that FAST does have full port injected systems that are far more capable of producing high horsepower numbers, much higher than anything the factories have come up with, so they knowledge, experience and background are there. Question is, how much do you want to pay to get that Nth degree of perfection? . This isn't the first kick at the can for them, nor are they an new unknown quantity. Most people don't have the knowledge or expertise to program a fuel injection system from the ground up, whether it be a modified factory system or a third party system, so they just modify the fuel maps.
Kostas
Last edited:
First of all, starting out with an Edelbrock is no comparison. An "expertly tuned" Edelbrock 1406 is a carburetor Chrysler and GM considered outdated by 1967 (the Carter AFB). There is no expertise required in tuning it, other than the secondary air door, which can only be tuned by drilling holes in the counterweights or adding mallory metal to it. Did the "expert" do that? No, he didn't. In fact, he didn't even know that. Even if it was done, it's a compromise. Spend an afternoon at an NHRA class event. The you will not see any Edelbrock carburetors, because the competitors came to win. The only Carters you'll see are those mandated by class rules. The ThermoQuad is the best Carter ever made, but the tuning parts that do exist are rare and wildly expensive... and it's still really not tuneable enough.
Virtually everything you describe could've been achieved by switching to a Holley and having a real expert tune it. Go read the entire build thread on theturboforums.com about a blown385's Chevy pickup. Pack a lunch and bring toilet paper. 17-18MPG, daily-driver convenience, pulls a 25-foot boat, and runs high 9s. With a Holley carb and a hairdrier on a full-size. Like you said, it's not that hard to figure out a fuel curve. Those intimately familiar with a Holley can do it to a $50 swap-meet 3310 without spending over $1,000 to get there.
I'm quite familiar with FAST and had one of their much-more-complex MPFI systems drown in a basement flood several years back. I know all about them. Yes, their stuff is impressive and they're very well-versed in the science of EFI. I know, I paid a lot of money for that system and was spending a lot of time learning how to control it when the sewer clogged and left me shin-deep in human waste and "grey water". I could not afford a replacement PCM (at that time, if I recall, it was around $2,700) and decided to start over with the MSII. I have no doubt of FAST's capabilities. However, I'd like to know which sensor input tells the ECM that a particular engine combination makes its best power at 12.7:1 A/F rather than 13.5:1. How does it know if your engine is perfectly comfortable running @ 16.6:1 at part-throttle cruise, increasing your economy? What sensor input tells it how to transition most-effectively between the two? Where does the FAST get that information? Or does it just shoot for stoich all the time, which is the best way to not make power or economy? It can't figure those things out. It's a hope-for-the-best-and-not-blow-stuff-up-trying compromise, just like the Edelbrock 1406 that came off the car.
I also know that there's a lot more to be found in messing with the ignition than with the air/fuel ratio, which is why I consider standalone fuel-only EFI systems to be a complete waste of money, especially if there's still a basic flyweight-advance distributor involved. That's where your computer control is most effective.
The secret's in the spark, not the fuel.
Virtually everything you describe could've been achieved by switching to a Holley and having a real expert tune it. Go read the entire build thread on theturboforums.com about a blown385's Chevy pickup. Pack a lunch and bring toilet paper. 17-18MPG, daily-driver convenience, pulls a 25-foot boat, and runs high 9s. With a Holley carb and a hairdrier on a full-size. Like you said, it's not that hard to figure out a fuel curve. Those intimately familiar with a Holley can do it to a $50 swap-meet 3310 without spending over $1,000 to get there.
I'm quite familiar with FAST and had one of their much-more-complex MPFI systems drown in a basement flood several years back. I know all about them. Yes, their stuff is impressive and they're very well-versed in the science of EFI. I know, I paid a lot of money for that system and was spending a lot of time learning how to control it when the sewer clogged and left me shin-deep in human waste and "grey water". I could not afford a replacement PCM (at that time, if I recall, it was around $2,700) and decided to start over with the MSII. I have no doubt of FAST's capabilities. However, I'd like to know which sensor input tells the ECM that a particular engine combination makes its best power at 12.7:1 A/F rather than 13.5:1. How does it know if your engine is perfectly comfortable running @ 16.6:1 at part-throttle cruise, increasing your economy? What sensor input tells it how to transition most-effectively between the two? Where does the FAST get that information? Or does it just shoot for stoich all the time, which is the best way to not make power or economy? It can't figure those things out. It's a hope-for-the-best-and-not-blow-stuff-up-trying compromise, just like the Edelbrock 1406 that came off the car.
I also know that there's a lot more to be found in messing with the ignition than with the air/fuel ratio, which is why I consider standalone fuel-only EFI systems to be a complete waste of money, especially if there's still a basic flyweight-advance distributor involved. That's where your computer control is most effective.
The secret's in the spark, not the fuel.
kkritsilas
Well-Known Member
it doesn't know. The dyno does, though. And the car will be visiting a dyno, soon. Out of the box, the MSD runs rich. It was running at about 13.2-13.3:1. After the initial tune, I set it to run at 13.7-13.8:1. Seems to run better there. Dyno day will figure out what is best.
Like I said, not my car. The person who tuned the Edelbrock 1406 is supposed to be the best in town, based on the recommendations from the other guys in his car club. The MSD out of the box (i.e. before I leaned it out, and before it goes on the dyno) was miles better. Mileage is much better, power feels better (don't know if it actually is or not, I'm not used to the car, this is from the owner). Car is a cruiser, not a street/strip nor drag car. For the purposes it was built for, the owner is very happy. If ultimate power was a requirement, he would have probably gone a different way. Are there better ways? Sure, lots probably. But this works, and works well. Not perfectly mind you, but well enough for the purpose that the car was built for. Could he eke out another .5 MPG, or 10-20 HP with a sophisticated multi-port fuel injection and integrated ignition system? Far more than likely. Does he want to make that effort. NO. He wants to drive the car, not chase minor improvements for huge bucks.
I am sticking with my TQs on my cars. Should be fine for street use, and I do not intend to race either car at any time. They will get good engine rebuilds (eventually), some bolt on modifications (lean burn delete, headers, tuned up TQs, maybe a better cam (but may wait for the rebuilds for that)), and if I can get good ones, A518 transmissions and 8 3/4" posi rear ends. That will be all of it. The blue car will get a big block (that has been rebuilt) eventually. The big block car will get an 8 3/4" rear end, and either an A518 with a conversion bell housing, or a TCI 6X. Again, none of these cars will be raced, street/cruise only.
Kostas
Like I said, not my car. The person who tuned the Edelbrock 1406 is supposed to be the best in town, based on the recommendations from the other guys in his car club. The MSD out of the box (i.e. before I leaned it out, and before it goes on the dyno) was miles better. Mileage is much better, power feels better (don't know if it actually is or not, I'm not used to the car, this is from the owner). Car is a cruiser, not a street/strip nor drag car. For the purposes it was built for, the owner is very happy. If ultimate power was a requirement, he would have probably gone a different way. Are there better ways? Sure, lots probably. But this works, and works well. Not perfectly mind you, but well enough for the purpose that the car was built for. Could he eke out another .5 MPG, or 10-20 HP with a sophisticated multi-port fuel injection and integrated ignition system? Far more than likely. Does he want to make that effort. NO. He wants to drive the car, not chase minor improvements for huge bucks.
I am sticking with my TQs on my cars. Should be fine for street use, and I do not intend to race either car at any time. They will get good engine rebuilds (eventually), some bolt on modifications (lean burn delete, headers, tuned up TQs, maybe a better cam (but may wait for the rebuilds for that)), and if I can get good ones, A518 transmissions and 8 3/4" posi rear ends. That will be all of it. The blue car will get a big block (that has been rebuilt) eventually. The big block car will get an 8 3/4" rear end, and either an A518 with a conversion bell housing, or a TCI 6X. Again, none of these cars will be raced, street/cruise only.
Kostas
Last edited:
L98TPI
Active Member
In the same vein as my earlier post. I would love to put a late TBI 318/360 pullout into my 85 Ramcharger (as in NO computer). I would get mileage, power, drive-ability like the Holly 2bbl as good as it is, will never give. Depending on what deal you can get at the junk yard it might be the most economical way to go.
The Qjet is in the same boat as the TQ. great carb. But tough to tune for modified engines.
I wonder if there is a market for an adapter to make the FAST Multiport drive TBI low impedance injectors. If so I could whip one up.
I am sure someone will correct me if I am wrong. IIRC those FAST controllers learn and then can be put into a "static" mode were they adjust a small amout just like the OEMs for changing fuel and conditions.
The Qjet is in the same boat as the TQ. great carb. But tough to tune for modified engines.
I wonder if there is a market for an adapter to make the FAST Multiport drive TBI low impedance injectors. If so I could whip one up.
I am sure someone will correct me if I am wrong. IIRC those FAST controllers learn and then can be put into a "static" mode were they adjust a small amout just like the OEMs for changing fuel and conditions.
kkritsilas
Well-Known Member
I think what is needed is a third party computer that can use factory parts (port injectors/sensors) but be completely tuneable. It would need to be able to read factory sensors (air temperature, MAP, O2, coolant temperature, and optionally, crank and camshaft position sensors), and drive factory injectors. It would be able to have camshaft,bore/stroke, and combustion chamber volumes entered. And it should be able to have baseline tunes dumped in from a USB port or memory card. This would allow for a practical starting point for getting started. If there is a willingness on the part of a vendor, or a community starts up, then baseline programs could then be made freely available for all sorts of combinations.
System could optionally be used to control ignition as well.
Kostas
P.S. the FAST EZ-EFI system I wrote about before uses standard GM sensors.
System could optionally be used to control ignition as well.
Kostas
P.S. the FAST EZ-EFI system I wrote about before uses standard GM sensors.
greyghost
Well-Known Member
Thanks Cap for pointing me to this thread! I notice on the first page of the article Rick says you need to have a service manual for your car. What I have is a 1972-1979 Chilton's (the old hardcover), recently purchased Dodge, Plymouth & Chrysler 1971-1989 Haynes manual and just received this past week the 1979 Chrysler/Plymouth/Dodge chassis,body & electrical service manual from Mopar on cd. I've tried to find manuals that were specific to the 1979 LeBaron but have been unsuccessful in my search. Do ya think I've got enough material to cover "Trash That Lean-Burn"?
Jack Meoff
Mopar Maniac
If you've got the Chrysler service manual I would say yes.
They didn't make model specific one's.
They would generally just make one service and one electrical for all the models of that year.
In the 80's Fifth Ave years they'd just make one all in one book.
Last edited:
Blackbirdsrt78
Well-Known Member
This might be a stupid question but here goes... how do you know if your system is "lean burn"?
Jack Meoff
Mopar Maniac
There's a computer box mounted on your air cleaner on the V8's
It was labeled either Electronic Lean Burn or Electronic Spark Control System...some said Electronic Fuel Control System.
No vac advance.....the computer controls it.
You also had one of two cards...a Holley 2280 or a 6280
The 6280 was the "feedback" model meaning the computer told it what to do.
In it's defense it wasn't a terrible setup.....I'm still running mine on my Fifth
When they work they work and when they don't it's time to lose it.
I'm a bit foggy on the slants.....I'll have to crack the books again
But the Super Sixes didn't have it....they had the electronic ignition setup which was a ballast resistor and the ignition box mounted on the wheel well....no actual computer.
Mostly sensors and emissions line routing I believe
But no idiot box and still have vac advance. the slants weren't as saddled with crap as the smog era 318's and 360's..and as far as I recall didn't have an actual computer box.
Last edited:
greyghost
Well-Known Member
Thanks for the input. My LeBaron's air cleaner has a computer in it even though the labeling is missing. The distributor does not have a vacuum advance (even though it's hard to tell by the pics) The carb is Holley R-8448 4095918 3248 and when I looked up the number the information told me it is a type H2-2280. Here are some pics (it looks uglier in pics than it does in real life)
Jack Meoff
Mopar Maniac
Yep....2280.
The 6280 has a large solenoid that controls your fast/curb idle.
A PITA as opposed to the normal setup.
The 6280 has a large solenoid that controls your fast/curb idle.
A PITA as opposed to the normal setup.
Mr C
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2014
- Messages
- 403
- Reaction score
- 137
The LB finally died on the 84 Diplomat. Conversion completed with parts mostly sourced from the stash I've collected over the years. I did decide on a rebuilt dizzy and carb (which I needed anyway for the vacuum advance and the ported vacuum source that the old carb lacked) since my parts stash stuff had been sitting 25 years in boxes.
She's back on the road and running great again.
She's back on the road and running great again.
Last edited:
