Ford Racing ProCal Tune

[Busser48]

IIRC, it seems like he had a JMS boost max and JMS pedal max as well as a flash tuning device, of which brand I do not recall. In my opinion, he was doomed the moment he tried to utilize all three at the same time. It was a ticking time bomb for sure.

If he was utilizing a Livernois tune, I don't think you can blame it on anything they did unless he gave them full disclosure when he purchased the tune/device, which I find hard to believe that anyone especially Livernois would knowingly recommend the combination of those three parts. It would be absolutely counterproductive from a tuning standpoint.

Yea I def don't think it was their fault, but my point of bringing it up, how many of the blown engines that have had other tuners, do I think the owners are honest about what they did or how they treated the car. If people are going to make assumptions on who has or hasn't had a blown engine, everyone should be treated equal and have a level playing field

Sponsored

 

[Livernois Motorsports]

We would never tell anyone to use JMS products, especially in conjunction with our tuning. After a short search on this forum alone one would be able to find that utilizing their products is not the most prudent idea ever.

We would also never advise someone use a fuel that is lesser or chemically different (like additives) than what we provide tuning for. It is common knowledge that you would never want to run a lesser octane fuel or different fuel than what your calibrator is tuning for.

Surely there is no logical way that failure can be attributed to us.

 

[TheLion]

i dont understand why LMS think they are top notch because they worked with ford at one time. also the fact that they use phrases like R&D as well as "proprietary tuning/software." give me a break. i played basketball with blake griffin that doesnt make me a superior lol.. end rant because they are sponsors and they will give me the boot.. -_-

Do you work in any industry as a professional design engineer (mechanical, electrical, software, chemical aerospace etc)? Proprietary is common place in competitive markets or just about any market. Patent laws only require approximately a 10% difference in design, so they have limited protection.

Proprietary is simply a method of keeping what you do better from the competition. If you have knowledge of how to do something better than the "other guy", yes it absolutely will be a closely guarded secret, I had even sign an NDA (Non disclosure agreement) when I was hired as an Electrical Design Engineer, which provided my company with protection that I wouldn't give away their proprietary designs if I left or to sell them to other companies without authorization (such as a competitor or another company in the industry buying a design we not longer wish to support).

These facts still stand also in regard to other posts:

1. Ford Racing only covers you with a warranty for 36k miles, once you exceed that the warranty is no longer in place. There are quite a few 2015 mustangs with 30~50k miles already on them, the Ford Racing Tune won't do a darn thing for their warranty, I thought that one was clear but maybe not.

2. I originally was focused on the Ford Racing tune as the only acceptable solution in my TST optimization thread as I have a new car with only 3600 miles on it, I have the majority of my warranty in tact.

3. Every single item in the TST optimization thread technically can be used as a case against you in invalidating the warranty, because you deviated from the factory component, even if in reality it does the opposite of causing the failure.

4. LMS has an outstanding track record, warranties matter ONLY if you need them, otherwise they are of no use. With a spotless track record, your ONLY substantiated and documented risks with actual occurrences at this point is if you do something to cause the failure OR if you have an infant mortality failure due to a defective component (a Ford manufacturing or design defect). And no it's not a gaurantee of warranty voidance either, there's a good mix of instances were warranties were still honored and where they were not.

5. Working as an R&D partner and OE test partner is a fairly exclusive club. Ford doesn't do everything in-house, but rather they partner with reputable companies who specialize in particular areas of development they are not equipped to deal with or may not be willing to invest in equipping in-house. There's a very small list of PCM software developers that have such claims.

6. If you don't want to take the risk of your own mistakes or of Ford's mistakes (manufacturing defects), you need leave the car completely stock or stay with Ford Racing components only if you have a new car. For early 2015's your pretty much SOL regardless of who make the PCM software if your over 36k.

7. My argument regarding warranty coverage is that there are a mixed number of reports where warranties were honored even on highly modified cars and other instances where they were not. What you do and who you use does play a role, not all vendors are looked at in the same light.

I'm going to take a note from Juben's page and bow out of this thread. We do not all agree on all things. All modifications pose risk which are not Ford Racing approved assuming you even qualify. Also if you use anything other than Ford Racing you have the same risk of not having a warranty repair honored. Some are easier to reverse than others.

I personally would rather not have to use the warranty in the first place, hence why I created the TST Optimization Thread, which was it's main focus. Yes I chose parts which were low risk, but I noted there was some "technical" risk with any of them.

Legally NOT one single part modification voids the warranty, Ford legally has to PROVE it was the cause. How many people have ever actually taken this to court? Not one that I know of, so how do we even know the reality of weather or not a warranty repair is possible on a modified vehicle when the law is on the side of the consumer? Further more, if you can't pay, don't play or at least play it safe and stick with very lost risk items, which is why I recommended the LMS software as an alternative to the Ford Racing which isn't even out yet.

By the way, if FR delay's another 6 months on the release, how many more cars won't even qualify for that warranty...? At 20~30k now? Your only getting 16k at best and 6k at worst in that example of warranty coverage, there are plenty of failures that went 15~20k with mods before failing...how much is it really worth... The warranty has value in certain situations, but it's very limited and contextual. Warranties are based on statistical probabilities of how many people will actually need the warranty and at what point vs. how much they may gain additional sales by a certain amount of coverage by enticing people with that comfort.

It does not necessarily indicate better quality as some have made the claim, it's about sales and profit, not your well being. Ford's a business like any other and they are focused on making money. If that wasn't the case, they would never have sandbagged the 2.3L engine in the first place and we wouldn't be doing half of these modifications...they needed to keep up V8 sales and the 2.3L would in a fully outfitted form take from that product line, which carries with a higher margin. Take the information, consider the reasoning. If you don't agree with it, then don't do it. Over and out!

 

[TEXAS HEAT]

These facts still stand also in regard to other posts:


I'm going to take a note from Juben's page and bow out of this thread. We do not all agree on all things. All modifications pose risk which are not Ford Racing approved assuming you even qualify. Also if you use anything other than Ford Racing you have the same risk of not having a warranty repair honored. Some are easier to reverse than others.

C'mon Lion, don't bow out of this thread because of one little scratch.

I for one appreciate your scientific approach and input regarding the modification of our vehicles. Although, I don't always 100% agree with you, I do however more often than not.

I think this forum benefits as a whole from your contributions as well as the discussions that follow as a result of them. These are the discussions that need to be aired out on a public forum for the betterment of the community.

In my world (15yrs as a Predictive Maintenance and Reliability Consultant) I've come to realize that most failures are usually the result of poor operating discipline and/or poor maintenance practices, not infantile failures. It would be a stretch for me to believe that those that beat on their cars regularly and/or don't maintain them properly or otherwise modify them outside of factory control measures would have anyone but themselves to blame when something fails. It's either poor maintenance habits, or operating it outside of its intended design parameters, or the combination of both. Everything has an L10 life, it's the things you do or don't do that reduces that life expectancy. Are we to believe that a car is any different? Ford knows this, that's why they've cracked down on warrantable repairs. You have to pay to play!

 

[JamesinLittleSilver]

I agree don't drop out I agree with most of what you have said, certainly there are going to be some disagreements. But your opinion has been well thought out and presented. I have learned a few things that is for sure.

 

[TheLion]

My concern is starting an endless argument about the merits of this or that, which is where it seems to be going. BTW, this is an FYI, my May 2016 EB has a brand new Strategy code they have not yet seen according to LMS. I know they have done plenty of PCM tunes for 2016's so some thing(s) have changed.

I'm the process of getting LMS to generate the PCM software and they stated it will take a couple of days due to it being a new "revision". I'm wondering if this is why 2016 EB's seem to be "getting slower" than 2015's as noted by Car and Driver, Motor Trend etc. Yet why Ford has still yet to issue any statements of explanation. The only statement they made was that the power output of the engine has not changed between now and then, but now we know the PCM software certainly has...but to what degree?

They may have changed the limits to operating parameters which are being exacerbated even more by the crap-tastic (yes that's an official technical term for poorly designed hardware) inter cooler. Or perhaps added in additional safe gaurds to deal with customer failures and their associated causes...but again I'm speculating as I have absolutely no data on this :frusty:

Also of interest is that a few people have reported "turbo lag" after an inter cooler upgrade while still running the factory PCM software. Yet they are by far the minority from what I've gathered (only 2 that I know of). I'm curious if this is just a sensitive perception (or lack there of in the majority) or if there is indeed something different about how the PCM regulates boost / timing etc in certain strategies? SO many questions we may never know the answers too...one was a CP-e inter cooler and the other was a gen 2 levels (20x14x3.5, but with welded end tanks, not cast). Of note, lag is typically caused by a longer vs. taller inter cooler assuming the same internal volume in the passage ways. Think parallel vs. serial. Increasing the internal volume will allow higher flow rates, but too much and you no longer have a long enough dwell time, thus inadequate exchange of thermal energy. Longer dwell times also means a higher pressure drop as there is greater restriction (hence why the longer dwell). There's an article written, I forget from who, but it was an inter cooler core manufacturer (who also supplied man OEMs) if you do a big of "googling".

BTW I got my Gen 3 Levels in the mail yesterday and it's top notch, what a great piece of hardware. At this point I may do all of the bolt on's (including the LMS 160F thermostat) and see what the difference feels like for a few hundred to few thousand miles before I change the PCM software. That would give me a good indication if there are any unforeseen side effects on response / turbo lag that occur for those of you following TST optimization thread. If I can remember, maybe I will make a photo journal and post it on a new thread (we'll see if I can remember to use that darn $900 Nikon we never use...). So far I have the catch can and spark plugs. Next is the Boomba BOV, Levels IC and 160F thermostat, end of august will be the Ford Racing X Street Springs (progressive rate).

 

[Juben]

With each new model year comes new strategy codes. I've seen what you're experiencing many times with SCT software, but Livernois will get you taken care of much quicker than SCT. Ford utilizing new strategy codes is pretty common.

The turbo lag is particularly intriguing to me too as I ran an upgrade FMIC and colder plugs before being tuned. I didn't experience any additional lag and I actually felt that it improved performance and response in a very noticeable way. I too wonder if it's a placebo affect in the mind. I would assume that the ECU would have the necessary resolution to compensate for any minor pressure drop from the upgraded FMIC.

By the way, I'm sure you know this, but just in case, don't run that thermostat without being tuned for it.

 

[TEXAS HEAT]

With each new model year comes new strategy codes. I've seen what you're experiencing many times with SCT software, but Livernois will get you taken care of much quicker than SCT. Ford utilizing new strategy codes is pretty common.

The turbo lag is particularly intriguing to me too as I ran an upgrade FMIC and colder plugs before being tuned. I didn't experience any additional lag and I actually felt that it improved performance and response in a very noticeable way. I too wonder if it's a placebo affect in the mind. I would assume that the ECU would have the necessary resolution to compensate for any minor pressure drop from the upgraded FMIC.

By the way, I'm sure you know this, but just in case, don't run that thermostat without being tuned for it.

Actually, it wasn't a placebo, I have datalogs that definitely show a decrease in pressure to the magnitude of 5 psi in some cases. I honestly thought I had a boost leak. I did tighten everything up about the same time I received Adam's baseline tune, so who knows?

 

[Juben]

Actually, it wasn't a placebo, I have datalogs that definitely show a decrease in pressure to the magnitude of 5 psi in some cases. I honestly thought I had a boost leak. I did tighten everything up about the same time I received Adam's baseline tune, so who knows?

Well, if you have logs then you can't argue that, but an intercooler shouldn't drop it 5 psi. If it did, then I'd toss it, lol. I'd guess it was a loose connection or something similar. 5 psi is a big drop though, that's for sure.

 

[TheLion]

Well, if you have logs then you can't argue that, but an intercooler shouldn't drop it 5 psi. If it did, then I'd toss it, lol. I'd guess it was a loose connection or something similar. 5 psi is a big drop though, that's for sure.

Levels claims little to no pressure drop. 5 psi is not little to no by any stretch of the imagination if it was a Levels IC you were using. That would suggest to me there is something else going on, perhaps a leak in the diverter valve or the tubing? There could also be a manufacturing defect in the IC, which would certainly account for pressure loss.

Was it a stage 1 type such as CP-e / MAP Street / Mishimoto or full size type like Levels, Full Race, FFTec etc (perhaps you answered this and I didn't see it but I'm too tired to go back and sift through the posts...)?

Juben, what's the issue with running a 160F thermostat on factory PCM software? There's quite a few 160F thermostats and not a single one of them suggests a "tune", where as most of the high flow catted down pipes and ALL of the catless down pipes do. I've used lower temp thermostats in several factory engines (although none of them were TDI). It would essentially compensate for the blockage to the radiator caused by the Levels IC as well help lower the cylinder head temps a bit thus protecting against knock, unless I'm missing something.

 

[TheLion]

BTW for anyone interested in the LMS software or in the validity of my statement about the PCM software being the latest, I did receive this from LMS today:

"Thank you for sending over that serial number. I have now sent the full tune request over to the head calibrator to have the tunes created for your strategy. This happens to be a brand new strategy for 2016 that is not yet in my list of readily available base tune files to set up on the server. Once he gets everything created and set up specifically for your vehicle , list of mods, octane levels, etc we will get them set up for your tuner's serial number. From there I will let you know when your tuner is ready to update along with further instructions on how to do so as well. This may take a few additional days to have created and sent back to the server for your tuner depending on the workload ahead of you. We have not had any issues with the longevity of these engines being affected form our tuning, so no worries there. We have tuned more ecoboost vehicles to my knowledge than anyone on the planet and still maintain a zero percent failure rate to this day. So I will get this request going for you and let you know soon as your tuner is ready to update with further info on that as well. Thank you very much for your patience as it is greatly appreciated and we hope you have a great evening!"
Also asked them if would be possible to summarize in a paragraph or two a high level what exactly Ford changed in the latest PCM software, out of sheer curiosity. I'm not sure if they will be able to oblige, I can't fault them if they don't either, but you know what they say about curiosity and cat...

 

[TheLion]

We would never tell anyone to use JMS products, especially in conjunction with our tuning. After a short search on this forum alone one would be able to find that utilizing their products is not the most prudent idea ever.

We would also never advise someone use a fuel that is lesser or chemically different (like additives) than what we provide tuning for. It is common knowledge that you would never want to run a lesser octane fuel or different fuel than what your calibrator is tuning for.

Surely there is no logical way that failure can be attributed to us.

Never heard of JMS before, but I took a look at it and I had to laugh, reminds me of the e-bay "chips" which add 1,000 hp and 10,000 ft-lbs of torque while providing 35 mpg all for just $9.99...: http://www.jmschip.com/boostmax-ford-ecoboost-23L-Mustang

I could respect a complete PCM software as some what plausible, but messing with boost pressure on a torque vectored control algorithm by intercepting the PCM output signal is quite foolish and shows a lack of understanding on how the system works.

How many EB's have blown up with this thing? Although on the bright side, I'll bet you could get a warranty replacement engine if all your mods were bolt on and removed prior to being taken in...just un-plug it and there's no evidence it was ever there ;-) Anyone want to volunteer to prove out this theory? JK.

Do a google search for "JMS mustang ecoboost blew up", look at the second finding, which is a youtube video and read the caption:

"IMPORTANT UPDATE!!
About a month after making this video my engine blew up. Because of the mods I had Ford denied my warranty and I had to spend $6300 out of my pocket to get a new engine from Ford and to have my warranty reinstated. Ford did not determine what caused the engine to blow up but they declined my warranty for "Aftermarket Modifications". I fought and fought it but I lost. At this time I cannot recommend any product that adds boost to these cars. If you want to go all in then be ready financially to pay for it. Otherwise I suggest you stick to mods you can easily remove before taking it to the dealer." So I guess I answered my own question, they will deny it anyway without evidence.

Which brings me back to a cautionary note: if your going to tune, do you due diligence and vett out as thoroughly as you can who you choose, be it an OTS type or shop. Also take all of the anti-knock precautions and don't push the boundaries, how much money is running a few hundred milliseconds worth on a DD? $5k, $6k, $7k...

 

[Juben]

There's several parameters within the tune, such as when the fans turn on, that need to be adjusted for the lower temp thermostat. Livernois could elaborate better on what they change specifically vs other tuners as I'm not sure what adjustments they make with their software.

 

[GJarrett]

...Also of interest is that a few people have reported "turbo lag" after an inter cooler upgrade while still running the factory PCM software. Yet they are by far the minority from what I've gathered (only 2 that I know of). I'm curious if this is just a sensitive perception (or lack there of in the majority) or if there is indeed something different about how the PCM regulates boost / timing etc in certain strategies? SO many questions we may never know the answers too...one was a CP-e inter cooler and the other was a gen 2 levels (20x14x3.5, but with welded end tanks, not cast)...

Wow. I just received my 2017 ECB and installed a CP-E IC last weekend. I had put only about 250 miles on it before the install, and thought I noticed a lag it didn't have before the change in IC. I checked it off to having a new car and not being keen to differences yet since I just got the thing and maybe I didn't notice the lag before. Now you have me wondering if it is a real difference.

 

[ForYourOwnGood]

So, just out of sheer curiosity, does the Ford tune have a different "signature" in the ECU than any other aftermarket one? Basically what I'm saying is could you be a sneaky bugger and use the Ford tuner and then a custom tune afterwards? (note that I do not condone cheating the warranty stuff like this I'm just curious).

Sponsored