Taurus Car Club of America : Ford Taurus Forum banner

1 - 18 of 18 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I guys and gals, i'm new to your forum. I am wondering if there is an aftermarket intake manifold for a 94 3.0L motor that I could bolt a carb on to. I may buy a tempo with the 3.0L in it and swap it into my car but i'd like to put a carb on it instead of fooling with the wiring harness and all the sensors and such, which is why I like the carb option. Or can the throttle body be removed from the manifold and a carb put in it's place. I'd like to hear what you folks have to say. Thanks
 
G

·
Welcome to the Forum, Im Sal!

Hmm.... my first question: Why a Carb?

When fuel injection is soo much more efficient?

You also know that when you switch a EFI Vehicle to a Carbed Vehicle, you have a WHOLE lot of switching over to do... right?


Well, these are things I thought you would know. Aslo a Carb has to be mounted straight up in order for it to work.. seeing if it was mounted side-ways.. it would leak out fuel.


Well, I would stick with the Stock Set-up.

...but that's just me :)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
15,578 Posts
AFAIK, there is no aftermarket bolt on manifold that can be used with a carb. There are very few aftermarket parts to begin with. There would be no way to simply swap the throttle body for a carb because of several reasons, the first of which would be that a carb needs to operate vertically, while the throttle body is mounted horizontally on the side of the manifold. Why would you want to swap your Vulcan out? Is it blown?

JR
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,458 Posts
Well, for starters, what year and engine do you have?

If you have an older Vulcan, you are out of luck... unless you feel like cutting and machining the intake. The TB is integral with the intake, so you'd have to remove it somehow and install a side-draft carb in its place. Weber makes some great side-drafters with cfm ratings near what you would need.

If you have a 3.8L, you are in luck... sort of. The 3.8L is an old enough engine that you can get carb intakes for it. Of course, you may need a hood scoop for clearance reasons, and the intake would be designed for a RWD application, so the carb probably won't sit level.

If you have a Duratec or SHO, you'd be crazy to mess with the intake or EFI systems, IMNSHO. :freak2:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
71 Posts
the carbs can be mounted sideways i seen them on a skyline, although i dont see how carbs would improve performance and it would be hard to tune as well to make it run smooth through out the rpm range
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
Well here's the thing guys, I actually have a Tempo and I asked the people at TempoTopaz.com about it and well I figuered you folks have more experience with the 3.0L then over there. So I want to swap in the motor (it's out of another tempo) into my 86 tempo which is carburated. I dont have the o2 sensors and such which is why I want to put a carb on the 3.0L instead of keping the fuel injection. The fuel injection would be nice but to do the swap would require me to install the computer and all the sensors as well which i can imagine is going to be a royal pain in the a**, so i figure the simplest thing to do is make the 3.0L carburated. I just need to find a manifold for it. If your wondering why I dont just keep the car with the V6 in it instead of swaping it into my 86, well my 86 has a much better body than the 94 and there are some other issues that i dont want to get into here (just too long of a story). So keping the motor in the other car and fixing it up is not an option for me. Swaping the motor into my 86 and keeping the fuel injection is an option but a really poor one. My only really option is swaping the motor into my 86 and slaping a carb on it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
318 Posts
You're putting way too much work into an old car...
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
15,578 Posts
Originally posted by Sablewagon@May 26 2004, 04:06 AM
You're putting way too much work into an old car...
I agree...sorry man...you also might be setting yourself up for a BIG letdown if the thing don't work...

JR
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,022 Posts
Another place you could look for info is any ranger forum. The vulcan was/is also used in the rangers, and they would be more likely to retrofit a carb onto it.

As for my opinion, the only feesible and (relatively) cheap way to fit a carb onto the vulcan would be to use a side-drafter carb, like SixFOFalcon mentioned. You could cut off the old TB flange, and have a shop weld on a carb flange. The problem with this setup is that the fuel would have to travel all the way through the UIM, LIM, and heads to get into the combustion chamber. There is a HUGE chance that the fuel will puddle somwhere along the way. And with the detonation problems that are inherent in the vulcan, you could very quickly have a big boom and a VERY bad day.

Good luck to you.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,458 Posts
Originally posted by silvapain@May 26 2004, 07:17 PM
There is a HUGE chance that the fuel will puddle somwhere along the way.  And with the detonation problems that are inherent in the vulcan, you could very quickly have a big boom and a VERY bad day. 
I don't think so. If you saw the stock intake on my Falcon, you'd see that none of that matters. FWIW, most old carbed inline engines have intakes that would be more likely to pool than most modern EFI intakes. Pooling of fuel just isn't a problem. It's not like the Vulcan has a surge tank or anything.

Also, I don't think detonation is inherent in the Vulcan. I've never had any problems with detonation. Those that have had detonation problems usually had other contributing factors.

The more I think about this, the more I say GO FOR IT! :p Hell, I'm putting an Aussie Crossflow head on my US200... and that's a LOT more work.

So you hack off the TB and slap on a side-draft Weber. No biggie. I'm assuming emissions testing is non-existant, so you might as well do away with the cats. Keep the EGR, since you don't have knock sensors. Later, when you feel like dumping more money into the project, P&P the heads and intakes, add water injection & roller rockers... maybe mill the heads a smidge for some more compression. Then you'd be makin' some HP. :)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,022 Posts
Originally posted by SixFoFalcon+May 26 2004, 05:47 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (SixFoFalcon @ May 26 2004, 05:47 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-silvapain@May 26 2004, 07:17 PM
There is a HUGE chance that the fuel will puddle somwhere along the way.  And with the detonation problems that are inherent in the vulcan, you could very quickly have a big boom and a VERY bad day. 
I don't think so. If you saw the stock intake on my Falcon, you'd see that none of that matters. FWIW, most old carbed inline engines have intakes that would be more likely to pool than most modern EFI intakes. Pooling of fuel just isn't a problem. It's not like the Vulcan has a surge tank or anything.

Also, I don't think detonation is inherent in the Vulcan. I've never had any problems with detonation. Those that have had detonation problems usually had other contributing factors.

The more I think about this, the more I say GO FOR IT! :p Hell, I'm putting an Aussie Crossflow head on my US200... and that's a LOT more work.

So you hack off the TB and slap on a side-draft Weber. No biggie. I'm assuming emissions testing is non-existant, so you might as well do away with the cats. Keep the EGR, since you don't have knock sensors. Later, when you feel like dumping more money into the project, P&P the heads and intakes, add water injection & roller rockers... maybe mill the heads a smidge for some more compression. Then you'd be makin' some HP. :) [/b][/quote]
Talk to ranger guys about detonation and all the pinging they get. If you go to a ranger forum that's about all they ever talk about. Then there's the story of the G4 with the composite intake that blew apart when the engine had detonation.



The detonation can be a result of carbon buildup, which I can attest to seeing alot of when I pulled apart my UIM. Also, the collant flow characteristics of the vulcan are not that great. Especially if the "brown coolant" sludge builds up.



AS for the EGR, the EEC controls the opening and closing of the valve. The EEC mostly opens it during cruising and decelleration. I don't think it will do any good if he doesn't use the EEC.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
102 Posts
skyline with carbs thats a new one lol.

Aslo a Carb has to be mounted straight up in order for it to work.. seeing if it was mounted side-ways.. it would leak out fuel.
umm hmm side-draft carb yeah think again.. yeah just talk to me twin side-draft webbers. and see what they think.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,458 Posts
Originally posted by silvapain@May 26 2004, 11:11 PM
AS for the EGR, the EEC controls the opening and closing of the valve.  The EEC mostly opens it during cruising and decelleration.  I don't think it will do any good if he doesn't use the EEC.
Hmm... in the same post you say EGR won't do any good, yet detonation is a problem. :headscratch:

EGR reduces NOX emissions, and lowers combustion temperatures, reducing the possibility of detonation. If detonation is such an inherent problem, you would want to keep the EGR.

And the computer-control aspect is not an issue. The computer basically just prevents the EGR from engaging before the engine gets up to operating temperature. Aside from that, an EGR system can work perfectly fine with cues only from intake vacuum.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,022 Posts
Except that the EGR is not tied directly to engine vacuum. That's what I was getting at. I know what the EGR system does.


I am NOT aying that the EGR won't do any good. I'm saying that I don't think it will work with the EEC not connected.








Maybe we should continue this over PM, so that we don't hijack this thread.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
Well in my Tempo (1986) I dont have a computer so if I decided to swap that over from the 94 i'd have to move over all the sensors also and that dosent sound very fun. Does anyone know where I can get more info about the side mount carbs? This may be an option. I found a site that says they have a manifold for the 3.0L but from what I'm hearing from you guys and the people over at tempotopaz.com, there was never one made for it (a carb'd version of the manifold). I asked the guy with the manifold to send me some pictures but i'v never heard back from him yet. I'll let you guys know what I hear back from him. I still dont see how such a popular engine could not have an aftermarket carb manifold for it although it was never produced with a carb option. Someone out there must have made a carb application for that motor and hopefully i'll find it.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,022 Posts
The vulcan has been an engine in the Taurus since the taurus was first released in '86. It has also been in the Aerostar and the ranger. I know that the Aerostar had a carbeurated v6, and I'm wondering now if maybe it was a vulcan. It might be worth checking out.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
15,922 Posts
No, the Vulcan was never carburated from the factory. I believe the carburated V6 in the Aerostar was the 2.8L.
 
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Top