turbo changes model year 2016/17?

[micablue]

I recently had my ecoboost tuned at a local company. They said the dyno results where spectacular compared to other ecoboost Mustangs. More like the Focus RS. They believe Ford must have done some changes to the turbo at the least, because apart from the increased oem power, the turbo has a different serial number.

Is there any info on this? Thanks.

Sponsored

 

[paullyd210]

I thought they were the same, however, your supporting mods compared to other customers could have made a difference.

 

[micablue]

At the time of the first dyno it had a Roush air intake and a Ford Performance catback. Would these alone give that much difference?

 

[apx632]

What were the numbers on the dyno? What tune were you using and what fuel?

 

[micablue]

No tune at that time, numbers where 295.7 HP and 402.3 Nm. Compared to other ecoboost Mustangs in Belgium (260-270 HP) that is a big difference.
Maybe the Roush intake is delivering on there promise.

For the record: With the tune (BR Performance, local tuner), the new intercooler and downpipe, the car makes 362 HP and a very nice 566 Nm.
Also the car sounds very racy and the torque is amazing compared to before.

 

[BoostedCanadianPoney]

are those wheel numbers?

 

[apx632]

Ah you are in europe. What fuel do you run 95 ron?

 

[micablue]

are those wheel numbers?

No, crank.

 

[micablue]

Ah you are in europe. What fuel do you run 95 ron?

Actually 98, always did, even when it was still stock. I always wonder wy 87 is considered high in the US.

 

[TheLion]

are those wheel numbers?

293 * 0.85 = 249 WHP.

Livernois measured 262 peak WHP on a bone stock 2015 EB Auto (a 16% drive drain loss puts their car at 303 crank HP, being brand new and not broken in that's pretty close to spec). The Euro cars are MAF tuned as opposed to MAP tuned like in the US, so their output may be a tad different and you cannot use a Blow Off Vavle without a tune on the Euro cars.

Livernois measured almost exactly a 16% drive train loss in their 2015 shop EB (comparing Ford's Crank HP rating to their dyno measured WHP).

You sure 293 isn't at the wheels? Most dynos measure power at the wheels, however it would be easy to program in a "drive train loss" multiplier and give you projected crank numbers for a direct comparison against factory specs, however drive train losses do vary a bit from car to car depending on design and each particular car.

I would think 98 octane with a CAI would net a good 20~30 hp IF the PCM is tuned to take advantage of it. If it's not, a CAI may actually cause a loss in power because the car will run a bit lean (more air than the fueling map is set to use). On factory software, the PCM only attempts to meet the torque demand up to the limit or set point, not what the engine can safely output.

Basically it's an artificial power output limit which is why these cars output so much more power with just a tune. It doesn't matter if the engine is mechanically capable of 425 C_TQ and 400 C_HP, once it hits the torque limit of 320 C_TQ it simply tries to maintain that instead of pushing to the verge of knock as with most naturally aspirated engines.

It's interesting because a good tuned ecoboost mustang even on 91 tune will about match a or best a stock GT which has more than 2x the displacement and cylinders (and is about 175 lbs lighter). No surprise they limited it from the factory (also makes a nice niche market for their affiliate Ford Perofrmance who can then sell $700 ecoboost power kits which only cost them the programmer (a $15 item to manufacture) and their CAI, probably around $100 to manufacture...

 

[Edkiefer]

Actually 98, always did, even when it was still stock. I always wonder wy 87 is considered high in the US.

87 is baseline , we used to be able to get 96, 98 etc too, but now 93 is most common, but that even depends on state.
I am also not sure you can compare the numbers directly. you need to check the same rating units.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octane_rating

 

[micablue]

293 * 0.85 = 249 WHP.

Livernois measured 262 peak WHP on a bone stock 2015 EB Auto (a 16% drive drain loss puts their car at 303 crank HP, being brand new and not broken in that's pretty close to spec). The Euro cars are MAF tuned as opposed to MAP tuned like in the US, so their output may be a tad different and you cannot use a Blow Off Vavle without a tune on the Euro cars.

Livernois measured almost exactly a 16% drive train loss in their 2015 shop EB (comparing Ford's Crank HP rating to their dyno measured WHP).

You sure 293 isn't at the wheels? Most dynos measure power at the wheels, however it would be easy to program in a "drive train loss" multiplier and give you projected crank numbers for a direct comparison against factory specs, however drive train losses do vary a bit from car to car depending on design and each particular car.

I would think 98 octane with a CAI would net a good 20~30 hp IF the PCM is tuned to take advantage of it. If it's not, a CAI may actually cause a loss in power because the car will run a bit lean (more air than the fueling map is set to use). On factory software, the PCM only attempts to meet the torque demand up to the limit or set point, not what the engine can safely output.

Basically it's an artificial power output limit which is why these cars output so much more power with just a tune. It doesn't matter if the engine is mechanically capable of 425 C_TQ and 400 C_HP, once it hits the torque limit of 320 C_TQ it simply tries to maintain that instead of pushing to the verge of knock as with most naturally aspirated engines.

It's interesting because a good tuned ecoboost mustang even on 91 tune will about match a or best a stock GT which has more than 2x the displacement and cylinders (and is about 175 lbs lighter). No surprise they limited it from the factory (also makes a nice niche market for their affiliate Ford Perofrmance who can then sell $700 ecoboost power kits which only cost them the programmer (a $15 item to manufacture) and their CAI, probably around $100 to manufacture...

No it is 295.7 engine hp.

I was my goal to have a sportier, lighter Mustang ecoboost that is quicker off the line than a v8 and has much better allround handling (Less weight/FP track pack).

 

[dot]

It's interesting because a good tuned ecoboost mustang even on 91 tune will about match a or best a stock GT which has more than 2x the displacement and cylinders (and is about 175 lbs lighter).

You mean the EB is lighter

No surprise they limited it from the factory (also makes a nice niche market for their affiliate Ford Perofrmance who can then sell $700 ecoboost power kits which only cost them the programmer (a $15 item to manufacture) and their CAI, probably around $100 to manufacture...

The Ford Performance tune always requires 91 octane or higher. They can't have that on every car. Lots of people want to just put 87 octane in their vehicles. Though they likely could make it detune more on 87 and liven itself up on 91+ (as it currently does)...

No it is 295.7 engine hp.

How can it be 295.7 engine hp? It's sold as ~312 hp in Belgium. They really must mean wheel hp!

 

[micablue]

How can it be 295.7 engine hp? It's sold as ~312 hp in Belgium. They really must mean wheel hp!

It is all a big lie from Ford. Most even make only 260-270 HP and that is engine, not wheels! My brochure says 317 engine HP, yeah right.:lol: I guess they wanted a number that would attract people who wouldn't buy a v8 anyhow (like me), but not make the v8 a unnecessary car. Especially in Europe (Extra taxes on a v8 in Belgium are: 13000$ to put it on the road and an extra 5000$ every year). That is also wy the stock ecoboost sounds like a base model Fiesta, while mine with the exhaust alterations sounds like a roaring thunder passing by.
Anyway, I had to spend an other 15000$ on my car to get it the way I dreamed it, an agile sportscar with bad ass looks.

 

[mbreinin]

Did you pull the engine and run it on an engine dyno, or was it on a chassis dyno?

Sponsored