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

I like books with pop-up pictures.

Glenn G said:

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

Click to expand...

I was looking for something like that in order to estimate the impact of mods on the car (just a rough estimation), so thanks for that, I think it's useful.

One quick question: to do all the above, did you use the Estimated Torque (Current brake torque as calculated by the torque algorithm) or the TC Torque (Estimated engine torque at the flywheel)?

Thanks

After posting the above, I took my AP and decided to try several gauges that are relevant to what I wanted to measure (torque). I tried the following gauges (for explanation of each data monitor go to https://cobbtuning.atlassian.net/wiki/display/PRS/Ford+Data+Monitor+Support)

1. Estimated torque
2. TC torque
3. LTT Torque Final
4. Max Engine Torque Allow
5. Requested Torque
6. TTL Torque Final
7. TTL Torque Base
8. LTT Torque Base
9. Load Actual

After a 2-hours drive, the data monitors 4-9 were eliminated because they didn't make any sense. Data monitors 1-3 (in red/bold) seem to be very close to what I expected to see, based on the setup of my car. In fact Estimated Torque seems to be what I was looking for, as the numbers I made are almost a perfect match to Cobb's Stage 1 map.

A small piece of information: TC Torque seems to be equal to LTT Torque Final at any given time. Also both are very close to Estimated Torque (they are a bit lower though).

Next thing to do is some 3rd and 4th gear pulls in order to make a couple of "virtual dyno" graphs. I know that this method is not 100% accurate and that it is a calculation of the engine torque (not rwtq) through an algorithm, but I can use it to compare mods and get an estimation on my car's performance.

What number are you seeing for estimated torque?
I have that monitor on my main screen.
I'm Adam tuned and I've seen as high as 405.

The highest I saw was 525 Nm (387 lb-ft). But I only tried it casually, while driving at a relatively busy road, when I had the opportunity to step on it. I was basically trying to figure out which gauge makes more sense to use.

arghx7 said:

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.

Click to expand...

Does this mean that if you have upgrade exchaust with less backpressure, the motor is making more torque than what's show on the model?

Glenn G said:

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

Click to expand...

Who doesn't? :shrug::hitcomputer:

Bull Run said:

Does this mean that if you have upgrade exchaust with less backpressure, the motor is making more torque than what's show on the model?

Click to expand...

If you have an exhaust and no tune, you are probably making less torque.

Chef jpd said:

If you have an exhaust and no tune, you are probably making less torque.

Click to expand...

Not sure why upgraded exhaust will cause less torque without a tune, but my thought is that since the model assumes loss from stock components, the actual torque should be higher than the torque estimate with upgraded components.

For example, if a stock component is known to cause loss of 15 ft/lb of torque and its replacement only causes loss of 5 ft/lb, should 10 ft/lb be added to the estimate? Or not because that 10 ft/lb gain would show up somewhere else in the estimate.

Bull Run said:

Not sure why upgraded exhaust will cause less torque without a tune, but my thought is that since the model assumes loss from stock components, the actual torque should be higher than the torque estimate with upgraded components.

For example, if a stock component is known to cause loss of 15 ft/lb of torque and its replacement only causes loss of 5 ft/lb, should 10 ft/lb be added to the estimate? Or not because that 10 ft/lb gain would show up somewhere else in the estimate.

Click to expand...

The stock tune does not assume a "loss" it uses torque targets based on a standard engine. Deviations will not change that target. Also, it's a relative fact that CAI and exhaust modifications on a stock tune do not add any power, they just make noise.

Chef jpd said:

The stock tune does not assume a "loss" it uses torque targets based on a standard engine. Deviations will not change that target. Also, it's a relative fact that CAI and exhaust modifications on a stock tune do not add any power, they just make noise.

Click to expand...

I think that we are talking about completely different topics here. I'm trying to find out if the actual torque numbers with modified parts will be lower or higher than estimates shown on the AP.

Bull Run said:

I think that we are talking about completely different topics here. I'm trying to find out if the actual torque numbers with modified parts will be lower or higher than estimates shown on the AP.

Click to expand...

Ok, I see where you are going.
I think the only way to tell would be to do before and after pulls looking at the Estimated Torque on the AP.
Or compare yours to someone who has a bone stock car.

Glenn G said:

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

Click to expand...

WileECoyote79 said:

Who doesn't? :shrug::hitcomputer:

Click to expand...

Every intercooler manufacturer and retailer.

So in a similar way to Glenn's, I did third gear pulls using the AP to get the Estimated Torque. I know these numbers are calculated through an algorithm, but they should give a good estimation of the engine's torque and, consequently, hp.

The only mods that I have so far on the car is the MBRP Race Catback Exhaust system and a Cobb Accessport Stage 1 map (which is night and day compared to the stock map). In a couple of days I will install the cp-e intercooler and right afterwords I will get an e-Tune from Adam. So I wanted a tool to follow-up on how things progress as I move along with the mods.

Although I am in Europe, I converted all numbers to the US system of measurement (lb-ft instead of Nm for Torque, F instead of C for temperature), as most of the members in this forum are from the US and this is the conventional way of plotting tq and hp.

At worst you may get an estimate that is between 10-17% of actual numbers, but at best you can still use this pertaining to just your vehicle to gauge relative gains on changes you make to your vehicle specific, which really is what we are looking for anyway. You can measure theoretical torque with your trap speed, weight, RPM, etc. anyway =)