Got an Ecoboost and a Cobb AP? Then you have a free lifetime Dyno!

Glenn G · Aug 2, 2016

I've been reading up on the tuning strategy for the EB engine and found out Ford uses a demanded torque tuning strategy which means the engine has to have a way of calculating how much it's making!

Dug into the Accessport a bit and found the right parameters to log, applied some math and spreadsheet skills to it and boom, fairly consistent too.

These pulls were done in a hurry during my lunch break so I used 3rd gear which is far from Ideal but kept the speeds down. I will get a 5th gear pull this weekend (80-145 mph, God I love Germany!)
I would love to start at 2000 rpm but I don't want to risk LSPI so 3k it is meaning I will be a little short on Max torque but that's ok

All of these are exactly in line with what I have seen at the wheels on an FBO EB running 93 on a Chassis dyno and all within a few HP of each other.

Way to go Ford and Cobb!

Glenn G · Aug 2, 2016

I'll put a detailed write up on how to do this here tomorrow night, It's bed time now.

Juben · Aug 2, 2016

I think the AP has a function that will estimate your hp/tq as well in the Performance option.

JStang15 · Aug 2, 2016

I've been using Virtual Dyno as my own little free dyno. Not to see exactly what the car is making, but more as a tool to give an estimate of what gains are made from mods that I put on (by comparing VDyno results from before and after the mod). I'm curious to see what parameters you used and how this was calculated, and if it lines up with my results from Virtual Dyno.

Keiferson22 · Aug 2, 2016

Great stuff, what's keeping the graphs from faceplanting after 5500 rpm? Any specific mods? BTW I was stationed at Ramstein AB for 4 years, had a freaking blast!

Busser48 · Aug 3, 2016

Glenn G said:
I've been reading up on the tuning strategy for the EB engine and found out Ford uses a demanded torque tuning strategy which means the engine has to have a way of calculating how much it's making!

Dug into the Accessport a bit and found the right parameters to log, applied some math and spreadsheet skills to it and boom, fairly consistent too.

These pulls were done in a hurry during my lunch break so I used 3rd gear which is far from Ideal but kept the speeds down. I will get a 5th gear pull this weekend (80-145 mph, God I love Germany!)
I would love to start at 2000 rpm but I don't want to risk LSPI so 3k it is meaning I will be a little short on Max torque but that's ok

All of these are exactly in line with what I have seen at the wheels on an FBO EB running 93 on a Chassis dyno and all within a few HP of each other.

Way to go Ford and Cobb!

From what Adam has said before. About the TQ estimates in the AP, they are nowhere near accurate

Glenn G · Aug 3, 2016

Keiferson22 said:
Great stuff, what's keeping the graphs from faceplanting after 5500 rpm? Any specific mods? BTW I was stationed at Ramstein AB for 4 years, had a freaking blast!

Nice to meet a fellow brother in Arms!

4 things that help in order from most effective to least.

1) The Tune: Ford felt that the 2.3 Engine was far too close to the 5.0 in it's natural state of tune ~ 360 HP and 400 ft lbs at the crank so limited the boost to achieve the 310/320 numbers making if just above the V6 in performance and far enough from the Coyote to not steal sales from someone who was on the fence. the easiest way to do this was to crush the top end so it wouldn't hurt emissions down low.
2) Intercooler: Fords number 2 way of gimping the ecoboost is the Crappy stock IC, It cools well enough to be serviceable at low RPM and boost but will be north of 140 degrees above 5500 rpm and start pulling timing and power.
3) Downpipe: the stock down pipe really chokes up at higher rpm, again by design
4)the MAP cat back causes a few psi less back pressure than the stocker

Glenn G · Aug 3, 2016

Busser48 said:
From what Adam has said before. About the TQ estimates in the AP, they are nowhere near accurate

Could be, Just like no two dynos are alike and should not be compared, I feel like given the number of sensors and the consistency of the multiple runs I did, It can be used to measure gains.

That being said, the numbers I got are dead on what I was expecting given how the car drives.

arghx7 · Aug 3, 2016

https://cobbtuning.atlassian.net/wiki/display/PRS/Ford+Data+Monitor+Support

The ECU torque model reported value isn't wheel torque. It's estimated flywheel torque (brake torque). See link above, search "estimated torque".

The way these models work is that it breaks up torque into its individual components:

1) the indicated torque - this is the torque produced from combustion. It is based on the amount of trapped airflow (modeled in the ECU based on pressure, temperature, and valve timing), the spark timing, air fuel ratio, residual gases

2) the pumping losses - based on physical constants set by the hardware, as well as speed/load and cam position

3) the parasitic loses (friction) - this is based on accessory load, friction in the rotating assembly, that kind of thing

The brake torque (flywheel torque) takes the indicated torque and subtracts the two types of losses. Then there are further losses in the drivetrain before you get to the wheels.

The best you can hope for with the ECU torque model is being accurate within about 10% on a car with stock hardware. And the ECU torque model starts losing accuracy as you start changing hardware on the engine. Reducing backpressure (change in pumping loss) or changing pulleys (change in friction/parasitic loss) for example will add an element of error.

Glenn G · Aug 4, 2016

arghx7 said:
https://cobbtuning.atlassian.net/wiki/display/PRS/Ford+Data+Monitor+Support

The ECU torque model reported value isn't wheel torque. It's estimated flywheel torque (brake torque). See link above, search "estimated torque".

The way these models work is that it breaks up torque into its individual components:

1) the indicated torque - this is the torque produced from combustion. It is based on the amount of trapped airflow (modeled in the ECU based on pressure, temperature, and valve timing), the spark timing, air fuel ratio, residual gases

2) the pumping losses - based on physical constants set by the hardware, as well as speed/load and cam position

3) the parasitic loses (friction) - this is based on accessory load, friction in the rotating assembly, that kind of thing

The brake torque (flywheel torque) takes the indicated torque and subtracts the two types of losses. Then there are further losses in the drivetrain before you get to the wheels.

The best you can hope for with the ECU torque model is being accurate within about 10% on a car with stock hardware. And the ECU torque model starts losing accuracy as you start changing hardware on the engine. Reducing backpressure (change in pumping loss) or changing pulleys (change in friction/parasitic loss) for example will add an element of error.

Pretty much sounds like any dyno to me where they can make it read whatever they want, Again I plan on using it to compare mods not bench race. The only "dyno" worth a damn anyways is Trap speed.

Juben · Aug 4, 2016

Glenn G said:
The only "dyno" worth a damn anyways is Trap speed.

This man speaks truth!

Busser48 · Aug 4, 2016

Glen G, if the only dyno that's with a damn is trap, then why waste your time on this??? lol

. Jk

arghx7 · Aug 4, 2016

Glenn G said:
Pretty much sounds like any dyno to me where they can make it read whatever they want, Again I plan on using it to compare mods not bench race. The only "dyno" worth a damn anyways is Trap speed.

Sorry if I wasn't clear - introducing mods makes the ECU torque calculation less accurate, because the torque calculation assumes stock hardware. It's a physics-based model. The more you mod your engine, the less you can trust the torque calculation.

Glenn G · Aug 4, 2016

Busser48 said:
Glen G, if the only dyno that's with a damn is trap, then why waste your time on this??? lol . Jk

Because I like spread sheets and graphs and numbers:lol:

Busser48 · Aug 4, 2016

Glenn G said:
Because I like spread sheets and graphs and numbers:lol:

Got an Ecoboost and a Cobb AP? Then you have a free lifetime Dyno!

Glenn G

Well-Known Member

Glenn G

Well-Known Member

Juben

Well-Known Member

JStang15

Well-Known Member

Keiferson22

Well-Known Member

Busser48

Well-Known Member

Glenn G

Well-Known Member

Glenn G

Well-Known Member

arghx7

Well-Known Member

Glenn G

Well-Known Member

Juben

Well-Known Member

Busser48

Well-Known Member

arghx7

Well-Known Member

Glenn G

Well-Known Member

Busser48

Well-Known Member