Sponsored

Ford Racing ProCal Tune

OP
OP
TheLion

TheLion

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Threads
68
Messages
1,621
Reaction score
585
Location
US
Vehicle(s)
Ruby Red 2016 Mustang GT PP 6-MT
It would be nice if there was a tool to download multiple pages of a thread into a PDF or something so that you could just scroll through the conversations instead of having to click page by page... or if you could change the default number of posts per page for yourself.
I'm going to try and edit my original post and add in all the information we've learned at some point then just stop posting lol. That way at least people can see what the end results were and what works well without having to read through the entire thing or skim. But for now I'll summarize below.

Hopefully this fall I can get to the local drag strip as well, they just sunk 10 mil into redoing the entire thing, our elevation is only 1100 ft so not too bad and probably about average. They have open test and tune nights about once or twice a month. If I wait til fall and get good turbo weather in the 50's, 60's or low 70's that will also give us the best results of what the car CAN do as is, or at at least what I can do with the car as is (I'm average as a driver).

In a nut shell use the Ford Performance Calibration with a good Stage 1 inter cooler or something no bigger than the ATM.

Stage 1 Types: CP-e, MAP, Mishimoto and Garett etc...

Full Size Types that are lag free: ATM and possibly the MAP Race (ask Glenn G. on it as he tested it).

Full sized race type inter coolers just don't play well with the stock turbo in terms of making the best power (assuming we can get over the -CJA vs. -CJB debate) across the RPM band. The top end is where the car needs the most help and I have proven that the ATM in concert with the latest revision of the FP Calibration does pretty well and gives us a nice broad power band.

Regardless of any questions people may have, I made what I think is some pretty impressive power with just the Ford Performance Calibration, Inter Cooler and Gearing on 93 pump gas. The whole point is to remain warranty friendly and insure the car lasts 150k~200k instead of throwing a rod by the time you hit 30k. For the cost of a new motor, you could have bought the GT that will still best even the tuned and inter cooled EB on the highway by quite a bit.

This entire thread was geared towards daily drivers and making the most of the Ford Performance Calibration which really means just the best inter cooler you can get.

DV+ valve upgrade helps and some constant tension hose clamps or good charge pipes to make sure your not leaking boost as well, but that's more of a reliability upgrade.

Oil cooler and a low NOAC rated oil like AMSOIL Signature is better than ANY catch can, hands down. No worrying about emptying it and oil consumption is so low it's almost non-existent. I think it's a better solution than just catching oil that's burning up for two reasons. 1. boiling oil will also gum up and leave deposits in the hot spots, namely the turbo bearings = not good so keeping it cool and using an oil not as prone to boiling is better 2. it's no maintenance comparatively. You won't even have to add oil until it's time to change! No forgetting to empty the catch can and risk letting it over flow. No gas / oil smell (I always had that nasty smell even with a high end unit, couldn't get it to stop until I returned it to stock).

I have a slightly used Mishimoto oil cooler sitting on my kitech table i picked up for $250 that's going in soon, but I've been running AMSOIL Signature 5W-30 since 9,500 miles when I had 3% left on the factory oil life and changed it. I only lost 1/4 of a court of AMSOIL over 10k while I lost a tad over 1/2 quart of Motorcraft Semi Synthetic (still not bad because I ran the piss out of the car while on the factory oil to break in all the bearing surfaces).

All the lost oil is obviously going through the PCV system and most of the boil off is due to the turbo and pistons (oil cooled pistons). I ran a catch can for a while but after switching to the AMSOIL it was almost entirely water. I just don't see a need for them unless your running a factory grade oil with a higher boil off rate, even then for daily driving it's likely not necessary, especially if you use an oil cooler.

Then there's good old fashioned gearing, at least for us base model guys. PP guys it may not be worth a gearing change unless you want to actually do track or auto cross, then it's worth it for the Torsen alone.

Exhaust can net you some weight, slightly better flow (mostly due loosing the "briefcase") and way better sound.

Light weight flow formed 19's or Forged 18's or even factory 18's keep the unsprung weight low = better acceleration and better handling. RTR makes some good reasonably priced 19" flow formed wheels you can see on my car a few posts back. They come in 4 different colors as well.

Rest is just suspension mods and cosmetic stuff. I'd suggest only running oiled cotton filters at the track. While they do flow better, they also allow much higher engine wear, not worth the 5~7 hp gains. They are easy enough to swap back and forth and the synthetic dry filters provide same protection as paper filters but at a lower cost over the life of the car. Just spray them, rinse them out and put them back in.

A clean dry filter will flow better than a dirty oiled filter anyway and oiled cotton filters have have only about 1/2 the dust capacity so they clog 2x as fast. They are just not well suited for daily use but do work good at the strip. It's not worth the wear on the piston rings, especially on a very high compression engine where compression is uber important to make full power.

It's one thing to make the power, it's a whole new ball game to keep making the power. Think if your daily driver as a LeMans car vs. a drag car. Two different aspects of racing entirely! And of course nothing helps more than a good set of tires, good track prep and some plain old driving. Have fun and stay safe!
Sponsored

 

Spykexx

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2016
Threads
30
Messages
876
Reaction score
309
Location
Quad Cities, IA
Vehicle(s)
2019 Mustang GT Prem M6, 2019 Charger Scat Pack Plus
It would be nice if there was a tool to download multiple pages of a thread into a PDF or something so that you could just scroll through the conversations instead of having to click page by page... or if you could change the default number of posts per page for yourself.
You can change it to 40 posts. this cuts it to like 40 pages. The reason behind not allowing it all, is for memory purposes. WAYYY too many resources to put to thousands of people doing that. Much easier on the system to only load and display 10-20
 

Regs

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2016
Threads
5
Messages
546
Reaction score
79
Location
NJ
Vehicle(s)
Mustang 2016 Echoboost
https://www.cp-e.com/tech/n54FMIC.pdf


This is good information regarding the efficiency difference between aftermarket and stock intercoolers. You obviously have to consider the source, but it MAKES SENSE. If you want to jump to page 13 of the pdf you will see the graph and how huge the difference is above 4.0-4.5 RPM at 14psi.

FIGURE 15
As expected we picked up just under 20whp at our power peak, and gained very little below 4000rpm (Figure 15). It is also interesting to note how well our empirical temperature data agreed with our dyno data. The cp-e™ intercooler really started to shine over the stock intercooler after 4000rpm, which is exactly where we found hidden power that was previously lost to heat. Making more power with an intercooler isn’t the only advantage a better performing core can offer either. A well designed intercooler will help prevent engine knock, and can also keep engine coolant and oil temperatures down.

Interesting enough, that 20whp figure shows true in TheLions graph and results. Very consistent observations here.

This is just one pull above 4 RPM in 4th gear using a stock tune. Imagine the difference with a FP tune that makes the turbo work harder. The differences would be even more dramatic. I am not sure you are adding more power "to the crank" from ford factorys measurement, because I don't think crank HP calculates heat soak and air flow restriction.
 
Last edited:

vegetakid24

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2016
Threads
4
Messages
49
Reaction score
5
Location
houston
Vehicle(s)
ecoboost
What oil are you guys running with this tune? I saw lion recommend amsoil signature series but I just wanted to see what others are running.
 

Sponsored

jtmat

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2015
Threads
9
Messages
1,998
Reaction score
881
Location
DC/MD/VA metro
Vehicle(s)
Vert turbo!!!!
It would be nice if there was a tool to download multiple pages of a thread into a PDF or something so that you could just scroll through the conversations instead of having to click page by page... or if you could change the default number of posts per page for yourself.
Look at my sig for FP tune info.... I need to update for the tune update...

I'll more than likely pull it from my build and drop it as its own thread here in the future... the FP tune has about run its course for me.

Find myself posting here less and less, enjoying my car more, and focusing on other hobbies. :lol:
 
OP
OP
TheLion

TheLion

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Threads
68
Messages
1,621
Reaction score
585
Location
US
Vehicle(s)
Ruby Red 2016 Mustang GT PP 6-MT
Interesting mine says CGB, why is there different variations? model year? PP vs base?
There are different "builds", yes, that's the programming term, of the PCM software depending on your car's configuration and options from the factory. Also if they find bugs in the software or make minor hardware changes etc. they will revise the software so you end up with different versions.

Some times when cars have an issue that can't seem to be solved by hardware fixes (aka throwing an O2 sensor code for example even with replacing O2 sensors, cat, checking plugs, vacuum leaks etc) it may be due to software set points (of what is an is not acceptable for the car according to the PCM).

I have a 2016 base, some people have 2015's in various flavors and other's have 2017's etc. Each year and configuration (base, PP, Premium) will have difference revisions.

Just look at the last letter of the 3. That's the program revision. So your's would be -CGA and -CGB, but if your car is new enough there would not even be a -CGA because they fixed the bug before the newer 2017's were even out so they would have only made the newest Revision B variant.
 

Regs

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2016
Threads
5
Messages
546
Reaction score
79
Location
NJ
Vehicle(s)
Mustang 2016 Echoboost
Google spit this out to me today: https://www.carthrottle.com/post/mountunes-394bhp-ford-focus-rs-m400-is-here/

Is a mountune tune kit for the RS. It mentions a recirculation valve for the turbo. It also mentions the 400hp wall, but that is crank number. They also mention the plastic manifold is not designed for anything above 400bhp.

A lot of money 4k or so for 50 horses and a engine maxed out with no warranty. Just something to note about the Ecoboost srt up.
 
OP
OP
TheLion

TheLion

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Threads
68
Messages
1,621
Reaction score
585
Location
US
Vehicle(s)
Ruby Red 2016 Mustang GT PP 6-MT
Google spit this out to me today: https://www.carthrottle.com/post/mountunes-394bhp-ford-focus-rs-m400-is-here/

Is a mountune tune kit for the RS. It mentions a recirculation valve for the turbo. It also mentions the 400hp wall, but that is crank number. They also mention the plastic manifold is not designed for anything above 400bhp.

A lot of money 4k or so for 50 horses and a engine maxed out with no warranty. Just something to note about the Ecoboost srt up.
I'm highly skeptical the stock re-circulation valve for the RS is any different than for the Mustang Ecoboost. That's why on our list of recommended upgrades is the DV+ valve.

I've been running it in the "stock" configuration, just switched it back over to the "enhanced" configuration last night to see if I can notice any difference. The difference is subtle, but there. According to DV+ testing I posted a while back they found it to allow the turbo to make full boost sooner as it doesn't have to re-pressurize the intake system.

I questioned however if the car would make any less total power by pushing the peak of power band out further on the RPM range due to rotational velocity of the turbo slowing down faster off-throttle with more back pressure now that it can't vent as much air. So instead of free wheeling with little to no back pressure its fighting pressurized air on the outlet side. But then again the inter cooler and manifold pressure isn't very high, it appears they tune it based on application, but in their example they hold it at about 2.5 PSI.

http://www.gfb.com.au/tech/tech-articles/13-turbo-lag-and-the-turbo-management-systems-solution

With these "low inertia" turbos, it will get back up to speed fast, but it will also slow down faster. I'm wondering if we can increase the area under the curve between gear shifts with the DV+ and if that would make any meaningful difference on the 1/4 mile or a track. So far this morning I really like the response with the DV+. The car is scary smooth and responsive, it's also even more linear feeling than before.

Either way, the DV+ is a great re-circulation option which you can run in stock configuration or the enhanced configuration, probably the best out there as it keeps you from running lean off-throttle, it's silent which MOST of us prefer, especially for a daily and you can get VTA adapters if you really want to make it into a BOV without giving up the ECU control and fast response.

The FP calibration with an inter cooler, oil cooler and DV+ valve is a great track setup (if you have a base model, add to that a PP radiator). It's not a 1/4 mile beast like the 670 hp super charged coyote, but it will beat out all of it's competitors like the standard WRX, Camaro V6 and 370z all which run between a 13.5 and a 13.7 1/4 mile. I think with an inter cooler it will best a stock STi as well by a good 2-3 10ths of a second and run bottom of the 13's, can't wait til this fall to see if I can get into the low 13's consistently at our local track. I think an auto in "boost weather" could even squeak into the very top of the 12's. FP ran a 12.5 with a 3.73 geared auto on their tune with DR's and that's well into the 12's.
 
Last edited:

Sponsored

Juben

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2015
Threads
35
Messages
2,519
Reaction score
807
Location
Chattanooga, TN
First Name
Justin
Vehicle(s)
2015 EcoBoost Mustang (AT) w/PP
Yeah, the FoRS BPV is mounted to the compressor housing, like the FoST, and is similar in design to a BW EFR turbo.
 
OP
OP
TheLion

TheLion

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Threads
68
Messages
1,621
Reaction score
585
Location
US
Vehicle(s)
Ruby Red 2016 Mustang GT PP 6-MT
I suppose it doesn't really matter much because I don't own a Focus RS nor do I plan do. Can't throw a super charged 5.0 into an RS without massive modification and going all custom.

Not that hard to do on a Mustang consider some of them come like that from the factory :D. I'm pretty happy with my half engine for now though. As is it has a really good balance of power and handling.
 
OP
OP
TheLion

TheLion

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Threads
68
Messages
1,621
Reaction score
585
Location
US
Vehicle(s)
Ruby Red 2016 Mustang GT PP 6-MT
I've been running the DV+ in the "enhanced" configuration now for a few days. Seems like it takes time for the PCM to adjust timing, boost, fueling, ignition etc. down low, but the car's response is very good.

It was good before in stock operation, but it's even better now. The real question is, is the car actually quicker? It seems to me the average boost is lower across the board now. I'm typically seeing about 19~20 psi across the low end, mid-range and top end instead of 22~23 across the low end and mid range, tapering to 20~21 typically at the top end.

Only change was putting the spring back in for "enhanced" operation. Temps did drop from 70F average to now high 50's / low 60's, so that may be part of the reason. Anyone else notice this phenomenon with the DV+ in stock vs. "enhanced"?

I never really bothered to run it in "enhanced" with the Levels, it was always stock mode, so this would be new to me with how it affects the turbo spool up rates as it changes the dynamics of off-throttle and turbine rotational velocity.

The only data i have is from the first of the four dyno runs where the car made about 12 hp less across the board than runs 2,3 and 4. I'm thinking the PCM adapted fueling, timing and boost etc. to the conditions. But during that run boost was also lower, around 19~20 psi across the board just like I"m seeing now.

Seat of the pants can be tricky as it's not exactly accurate, but my seat of the pants dyno tells me the car responds noticeably quicker but with less power across the board.

There is no such thing as a free lunch and I'm starting to think there's a reason the manufacturers don't partially bleed the inter cooler system. It's not exactly costly to put a spring in the stock plunger if there was that much of an advantage. I'm starting to think the car may be slower over all with the DV+ in the "enhanced" mode because of how the turbo responds.

Yes you start making power quicker, but you MIGHT be sacrificing the spool up rate and it seems the turbine is a bit behind the whole time. There's definitely a difference in pull or at least my perception of it and I don't think the drop in temps can account for that much lower boost across the board, at least that's not what my intuition says...any thoughts or ideas on this? Anyone else notice this? Nothing definitive here, just throwing out my observations.

I really like how quickly power comes on though, that is definitely noticeable, but I'd really like to figure out if the lower boost is mainly due to the drop in temps or at the very least it's not affecting power output as it has some similar parallels to that first of the four dyno runs where the car made 298 hp instead of 312~315.

If you switch, just make sure to run the car a few days before determining how it is one way or the other as it seems with mine it took time to adapt to the change. No, I"m no saying the DV+ isn't still the best option, I'm just considering that using it in the non-standard mode may be hurting overall performance. I could be wrong, maybe the PCM is running more timing and less boost / fuel to compensate, boost may not be telling the whole story. I suppose drag runs or another dyno run would tell the whole story.
 
Last edited:

TEXAS HEAT

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 25, 2016
Threads
37
Messages
706
Reaction score
278
Location
TEXAS
Vehicle(s)
2019 Mustang GT PP1 A10
I've been running the DV+ in the "enhanced" configuration now for a few days. Seems like it takes time for the PCM to adjust timing, boost, fueling, ignition etc. down low, but the car's response is very good.

It was good before in stock operation, but it's even better now. The real question is, is the car actually quicker? It seems to me the average boost is lower across the board now. I'm typically seeing about 19~20 psi across the low end, mid-range and top end instead of 22~23 across the low end and mid range, tapering to 20~21 typically at the top end.

Only change was putting the spring back in for "enhanced" operation. Temps did drop from 70F average to now high 50's / low 60's, so that may be part of the reason. Anyone else notice this phenomenon with the DV+ in stock vs. "enhanced"?

I never really bothered to run it in "enhanced" with the Levels, it was always stock mode, so this would be new to me with how it affects the turbo spool up rates as it changes the dynamics of off-throttle and turbine rotational velocity.

The only data i have is from the first of the four dyno runs where the car made about 12 hp less across the board than runs 2,3 and 4. I'm thinking the PCM adapted fueling, timing and boost etc. to the conditions. But during that run boost was also lower, around 19~20 psi across the board just like I"m seeing now.

Seat of the pants can be tricky as it's not exactly accurate, but my seat of the pants dyno tells me the car responds noticeably quicker but with less power across the board.

There is no such thing as a free lunch and I'm starting to think there's a reason the manufacturers don't partially bleed the inter cooler system. It's not exactly costly to put a spring in the stock plunger if there was that much of an advantage. I'm starting to think the car may be slower over all with the DV+ in the "enhanced" mode because of how the turbo responds.

Yes you start making power quicker, but your sacrificing the spool up rate and it seems the turbine is a bit behind the whole time. There's definitely a difference in pull and I don't think the drop in temps can account for that much lower boost across the board...any thoughts or ideas on this? Anyone else notice this?

If you switch, just make sure to run the car a few days before determining how it is one way or the other as it seems with mine it took time to adapt to the change. No, I"m no saying the DV+ isn't still the best option, I'm just considering that using it in the non-standard mode may be hurting overall performance. I could be wrong, maybe the PCM is running more timing and less boost / fuel to compensate, boost may not be telling the whole story. I suppose drag runs or another dyno run would tell the whole story.
The important thing to remember is that the ecu uses a load based tuning strategy, so in your case the drop in temperatures would require less overall boost because it hits its targets with less overall pressure. If you were a boost based tuning strategy you would always see x amount of boost in all temperatures which would likely exceed the load limits set by the ecu, especially in cooler air.
Sponsored

 
 




Top