anyone look at the new gm to ford2.8 tbi swap article yet?

[cammeddrz]

anyone look at the new gm tbi onto ford 2.8 article yet?

I came up with the idea to stick a gm 2.8l tbi system onto my buddy's (RICO9) carbed 2.8l broncoII.
so we went to the j/y, pulled the parts and did it.

it made it into the tech articles
http://www.therangerstation.com/tech_library/2_8-chevy-tbi-swap.shtml

he has been driving if for months now, even wheeled it once or twice, all seems to be well, the wiring in the pictures isn't super clean but it was a pretty awesome way to get fuel injection onto a 2.8L, unlike the ford tbi swap it doesn't require changing in tank sending unit, or running new fuel lines or anything. It also works with a duraspark distributor, it also doesn't need jury-rigging of the iac valve

another buddy and i have already gone and pulled the parts for his swap.
but tragedy has struck his family, and he likely won't finish his swap for a while

just thought i would put it out there

To be clear
If i worded this wrong, to give the wrong idea. I am sorry

we just used the TBI injection system from a gm 2.8, we did not swap any engines

the engine we mocked it up on, in the pics was just a spare 2.8l ford.

 

[alwaysFlOoReD]

I've followed this since the beginning. But shouldn't the title be changed slightly?

"anyone look at the new gm on to ford2.8 tbi swap article yet?"

Good job by the way!

Richard

 

[PetesPonies]

It's an interesting swap. I hated my 2.8, swapped it. I had even done a Duraspark and 2100 swap. But what I would like details on is what is the final result as far as efficiency? Does it get better fuel mileage? Does it have more power? I found the 2.8 extremely under powered and not good enough MPGs to accept that low power. Just a bad combination in these vehicles. So what is the real world differences now?

 

[cammeddrz]

it seems to run the same as the it was when it was durasparked. which the duraspark conversion has been known to be quite a power adder for the 2.8

Rico says his fuel efficiency doesn't seem any different.

 

[PetesPonies]

MPGs the same, runs the same . . then what is the reason someone will want to make the change? Efficiency is what you see when going from a carburetor to a fuel injected fuel system. I understand this is a TBI, but still . . no advantage that can be seen? Then as much as I like FI ( used to teach fuel systems ) I can't see why anyone would want to do it.

 

[cammeddrz]

MPGs the same, runs the same . . then what is the reason someone will want to make the change? Efficiency is what you see when going from a carburetor to a fuel injected fuel system. I understand this is a TBI, but still . . no advantage that can be seen? Then as much as I like FI ( used to teach fuel systems ) I can't see why anyone would want to do it.

you are serious?

if you "used to teach fuel sytems" then you are aware that a carburetor on anything but a perfectly level surface does not function properly. whereas fuel injection could function properly upside down (or any angle in between as long as there is fuel in the pickup)

if you don't see the advantage, i can't help you

 

[PetesPonies]

Son read carefully. Yes I taught auto for 30 years. Everything from carburetted engines to fuel injection systems. I understand both. There are ways to achieve graded inclines with carburetors, but FI would do better. However, if that was your only intention, why not state it?? To me, who cares nothing or very little about off road duties, it means nothing. But I can see if hill climbing where it would be better. But IMO, so would a different engine better matched to that platform.

 

[cammeddrz]

if you don't get it....i can't help you

 

[PetesPonies]

Thank you for proving my point . . . . . .

 

[509lifted]

petesponies you must not get that buying an engine and intalling it costs way more than this swap does. You don't have to come in here and try and diss on him when he spent time working on it and working on the write up, if you don't like it then don't comment.

 

[Twister]

What happened to the white space Rico got from ebay, i saw in the write up you guys made a different one out of aluminum or something?

 

[tidmarshsmiths5]

Depending on which 2.8 GM this is; they have more HP (120 - 130) and more torque (150-170).

Doesn't sound like such a bad idea to me...did it bolt right up to the tranny?

Trying to decide what I'll do later...either a 2.8 rebuild, a 2.9 (like the more hp and torque as well as FI)...but a 4.0 or a 4.3GM would be awesome.

Do the 4.0 swaps get the same fuel economy in 1st Gen Bronco II's and do they bolt right up to the FM 145s with no mods?

Wonder if the GM 4.3 would bolt right up? I used to have a blazer with a 4.3 and it was a strong horse with 239,000 trouble free miles.

Would love to put a 3.9Magnum out of a Dodge Dakota in as well (175HP with 225 ft lbs of torque) and they are extremely easy to work on - there's one in my 95 Dakota pictured right behind my BII.

P.S. I'm envious of you guys that can do this so effortlessly...I'm not mechanically inclined and have to really study and work hard to copy what y'all do...great job and write up!

 

[cammeddrz]

What happened to the white space Rico got from ebay, i saw in the write up you guys made a different one out of aluminum or something?

The ebay one was like 1/8" too small, and left a vacuum leak on the IAC channel, we fixed it, but the white plastic kept pulling bolt threads out and not sealing properly. so we scrapped it.

Depending on which 2.8 GM this is; they have more HP (120 - 130) and more torque (150-170).

Doesn't sound like such a bad idea to me...did it bolt right up to the tranny?

Trying to decide what I'll do later...either a 2.8 rebuild, a 2.9 (like the more hp and torque as well as FI)...but a 4.0 or a 4.3GM would be awesome.

Do the 4.0 swaps get the same fuel economy in 1st Gen Bronco II's and do they bolt right up to the FM 145s with no mods?

Wonder if the GM 4.3 would bolt right up? I used to have a blazer with a 4.3 and it was a strong horse with 239,000 trouble free miles.

Would love to put a 3.9Magnum out of a Dodge Dakota in as well (175HP with 225 ft lbs of torque) and they are extremely easy to work on - there's one in my 95 Dakota pictured right behind my BII.

P.S. I'm envious of you guys that can do this so effortlessly...I'm not mechanically inclined and have to really study and work hard to copy what y'all do...great job and write up!

If i worded this wrong, to give the wrong idea. I am sorry

we just used the TBI injection system from a gm 2.8, we did not swap any engines

if you want opinions on swapping engines talk to petesponies, i think he might have a hand-crank started model T engine from the first car he bought brand-new you may need to wipe the Ben-Gay off the crank-handle though

he called me "son" i think based on how old he sounds he should have called me "grandson"

BTW in case you were wondering all 4.3 gm engines share the V8 bellhousing bolt pattern, and the 60 degree V6 engines (2.8, 3.1, 3.4 etc)shared the gm 4 cylinder bolt pattern. so no, a gm4.3 does not share the bolt pattern with a gm 2.8

 

[tidmarshsmiths5]

Nope, I just didn't read it right.

Now, that's an idea...a 2.8 GM TBI.

 

[Mudhound]

I found it to be rather helpful, esp. for the fuel return set-up. Now, I can finish the "go-cart" that the kids and I have been working on for awhile.... 2.8 ( eh, it was left over after the 4.0 swap in the 84 BII) m5, e-shift 'case, all piled on the frame from a 93 "X", with some old 31" Mud King tires and a full rollcage. Just what a couple of kids growing up on a farm need, right? Thanks again, Cammeddrz.