2.3L TST Optimization Thread

[lisandra]

^^this

Sponsored

 

[TheLion]

What about the aftermarket metal substrate or "spun metallic" performance catalytic converters - how to those fare in plead of the ever so common ceramic cats?

Wouldn't the EB benefit from that type of metallic cat over ceramic (excluding the option to go totally catless).

I would imagine so, that may be what the "high flow" catted down pipes are using. However most after market down pipes, catted or not, require custom PCM software. The stock unit does not and the power gains are not large. The factory DP is reasonably well tuned for he stock turbo size and there are tones of cars putting out 350 to 375 wtq. On stock rods, pistons and crank we can't really go much beyond that without eating into the safety margin as the factory internals start to fail at about 425 wtq and 350 whp.

So if you want backwards comparability with the factory software and aren't going for broke then I don't think it's a good path to go, an IC would or tune would provide far more power and consistency. IC's will produce around 20 to 30 hp in the upper range and allow you to make that power run after run vs. the 15hp or so of a down pipe. Now if your going with a big turbo and getting more involved with mods than what the scope of this thread is for, then by all means it makes sense and the gains will be much bigger. The goal of this thread was the most critical mods to 1. allow the engine to make consistent power and 2. allow the engine to make more power without sacrificing reliability or adding substantial risk.

Also, just an FYI, I did contact LMS regarding the catalyst temperature issue to see if they are aware of any problems. I associated lifting the power band in the upper rpm range (aka holding a linear torque slope vs a decreasing torque slope) with automatically high catalyst temperatures. LMS claims none of their software causes those conditions as they do not exceed any factory specific limits on engine components.

We also know that Ford Racing also stays within those limits, so that is two. There are likely others well, however it would be very wise to investigate the issue before you go down a particular upgrade path. Ford Racing and LMS are known safe paths regarding the stock catalyst, if anyone gets any information on others, feel free to add it to the list of stock cat safe PCM software.

 

[TEXAS HEAT]

Have you flashed the LMS tune yet? I'm curious as to your impressions.

 

[lisandra]

I would imagine so, that may be what the "high flow" catted down pipes are using. However most after market down pipes, catted or not, require custom PCM software. The stock unit does not and the power gains are not large. The factory DP is reasonably well tuned for he stock turbo size and there are tones of cars putting out 350 to 375 wtq. On stock rods, pistons and crank we can't really go much beyond that without eating into the safety margin as the factory internals start to fail at about 425 wtq and 350 whp.

So if you want backwards comparability with the factory software and aren't going for broke then I don't think it's a good path to go, an IC would or tune would provide far more power and consistency. IC's will produce around 20 to 30 hp in the upper range and allow you to make that power run after run vs. the 15hp or so of a down pipe. Now if your going with a big turbo and getting more involved with mods than what the scope of this thread is for, then by all means it makes sense and the gains will be much bigger. The goal of this thread was the most critical mods to 1. allow the engine to make consistent power and 2. allow the engine to make more power without sacrificing reliability or adding substantial risk.

Also, just an FYI, I did contact LMS regarding the catalyst temperature issue to see if they are aware of any problems. I associated lifting the power band in the upper rpm range (aka holding a linear torque slope vs a decreasing torque slope) with automatically high catalyst temperatures. LMS claims none of their software causes those conditions as they do not exceed any factory specific limits on engine components.

We also know that Ford Racing also stays within those limits, so that is two. There are likely others well, however it would be very wise to investigate the issue before you go down a particular upgrade path. Ford Racing and LMS are known safe paths regarding the stock catalyst, if anyone gets any information on others, feel free to add it to the list of stock cat safe PCM software.

On the ebm it sucks. So far even the most craptacular dp has shown a lot of gains without tune and massive gains with it torque wise

 

[Juben]

[MENTION=25093]TheLion[/MENTION], look up Mountune. They're a performance company, like LMS, that works closely with Ford. A lot of their products and tuning is certified by Ford and warranty approved. I had forgotten about them, but they could potentially be a good option for warranty friendly tuners and products.

The last time I heard, they was working on getting their EBM product line worked out with Ford. That might be something worth looking into as I know this is an immense area of interest for you.

Their tuner, Randy Robles, tuned my 2.0EB Fusion and a lot of friends cars. He's a very knowledge guy and does very good work.

 

[TheLion]

Have you flashed the LMS tune yet? I'm curious as to your impressions.

Still waiting for the software release. They said I have a brand new strategy code (probably because I have a May 2016 build) they have not yet seen, so they do not have an off the shelf software build available. What's different in this latest release from Ford vs. say a Jan 2016 build I'm not sure, but usually they have small efficiency tweaks, bug fixes and some times added safety's or adjustments to values etc. which is standard fare from year to year and even month to month in some cases.

In the mean time I've been testing out the hardware modifications to their comparability with the stock PCM software, so far it's great. The Levels Gen 3 IC really makes the engine a consistent performer (when the darn traction control is FULLY turned off and not messing with light wheel slippage), its much less "lazy" feeling and will pull strong in 3rd gear now all the way through. It's just more responsive and consistent at every RPM, this was the biggest improvement. I tested this by itself before I put in the Boomba to see if I could notice any difference on the low end after installing the boomba.

The Boomba BOV sounds great, but also helps the most with low RPM as it seems to build boost earlier on than with the stock valve, which was one of their claims. My only concern with the Boomba BOV is when the PCM engages low load continuous venting as there's no filter on the boobma valve. While there is still positive pressure and exhausting air, the volume is much lower than normal venting post throttle, so there is a higher risk of contamination, but a simple filter outerwear would solve that possible issue and no I don't have any instances of where that has actually caused any problems or has even occurred, but I like to be prudent to potential risks: http://www.outerwears.com/proddetail.asp?prod=2279

The UPR DV catch can has collected about 1~1.5 table spoons of oil, proving the factory oil separator is far from 100%. I added a 1/4 NPT ball valve to the bottom of the can in place of the drain nut, so I can simply place a plastic cup or small container under it, open the valve lever and be done in about 30 seconds, but I don't see a need to drain more than once every 3k to 5k while still maintaining a good safety margin against over flow, a good synthetic oil with a low NOAC like AMSOIL Sig should result in even less oil vapor and longer drain intervals.

The Brisk RR14YS plugs are working great, fuel economy went up a very slight amount, 0.2~0.3 mpg, but more importantly the car continues to make good power. They are 1 step colder so add protection against knock / LSPI (which isn't really an issue on EB engines) and partially fouled conditions. No cracked / blown plugs (more an issue of improper torquing, I used a calibrated torque wrench as suggested by Brisk).

The LMS 160F thermostat works great, cylinder head temps dropped from an average of 185~190 to about 170~175. The only issue with using a 160F thermostat with the stock PCM software is that the fans don't keep it regulated at 170 while idling, so it will slowly drift up to 185~190 (some times low 200's during extended idling), but then move back down as soon as I start moving. Honestly this isn't really an issue, because your not going to knock while idling...your going to knock while loading the engine and the 160F thermostat does it's job as long as you have enough air flow from moving, which doesn't take much. With the LMS tune, the fans will be calibrated for that as well. However I wanted to be able to run the factory PCM software for emissions or any warranty service (i'm talking minor things like the alternator failing, or a gasket failing etc.). I'm not sure if the LMS will pass emissions as they aren't relaly concerned about that, but about making the most power safely, which is another reason why the Ford Racing PCM software will likely be more conservative as they are 50 state legal, which isn't easy. Although here in ohio the LMS may still pass as Ohio isn't overly restrictive and quite a few counties don't even have emissions (unfortunately mine does).

I have the Ford Racing X Springs to install for the suspension which I'm planning on doing with family at the end of august (kind of a man's fun project as some of my family are auto enthusiasts).

Got an OBDLink MX to start data logging, but haven't really fiddled with it much yet. And lastly I'm waiting on LMS to complete my software.

 

[TheLion]

[MENTION=25093]TheLion[/MENTION], look up Mountune. They're a performance company, like LMS, that works closely with Ford. A lot of their products and tuning is certified by Ford and warranty approved. I had forgotten about them, but they could potentially be a good option for warranty friendly tuners and products.

The last time I heard, they was working on getting their EBM product line worked out with Ford. That might be something worth looking into as I know this is an immense area of interest for you.

Their tuner, Randy Robles, tuned my 2.0EB Fusion and a lot of friends cars. He's a very knowledge guy and does very good work.

That's awesome, I"ll take a look at their stuff, it's good to list everything we can which is geared toward making the most power safely. Balancing drive ability and reliability with performance is the ultimate goal of this thread in case anyone is wondering.

So we are sticking with very low risk changes. Changes that are low risk meet at least one of the following criteria if not multiple:
1. Resolves an OEM deficiency and is reversible
2. Decreases the risk of Knock or LSPI
3. Is either warranty approved or has an exceptionally low statistical failure rate
4. Does not affect the daily drive ability of the car, which includes operation in a broad range of environments as opposed to a highly specific modification which limits usage to a very narrow range of environmental conditions
5. Functions with the factory PCM software

 

[TheLion]

I use a Vibrant GESI CAT, more than enough flow for what im doing.

Great, but can you use it with the factory PCM soft ware without causing functional issues? I'm not suggest there aren't performance gains from upgrading the down pipe, there certainly are.

However for the cost, a tune and an inter cooler will yield far more consistent power than a tune and a down pipe. Also most down pipes violate one of the requirements of being able to function with the factory PCM software. This is important for trouble shooting, emissions and safety if you start having issues with a tune.

 

[K-Roll302]

Figured I'd just ask in this awesome thread because my question has to do with optimization. Would a step colder set of plugs reduce or prevent engine knock or spark knock if you're running a tune? Just switching from the stock plugs at least?

 

[TheLion]

Yes and no. The PCM software is going to play the most critical role in preventing knock, but plug type certainly does play a significant role. "Heat Range" is a SEPARATE parameter than "Plug Depth", but plug depth does effect the "Heat Range".

If you run stock software use RR14YS, they worked really well for me on the stock software, the car was much smoother and overall responsiveness when combined with the FMIC was very predictable and CONSISTENT.

If you run a tune however, you need to run RR14S or OE depending on the tune. The deeper the electrode is projected into the chamber, the more advanced the ignition timing is if all other metrics remain the same. The PCM software does not compensate for the delay time between when it discharges the coil and when it expects actual ignition of the fuel to occur, this is assumed instantaneous but in reality can vary slightly. It's an "open loop" variable that is part of a closed loop system, so it can impact engine function.

However a projected tip plug like the RR14YS also absorbs more heat due to the higher exposure. A projected tip plug (RR14YS) is effectively 1/2 a heat range hotter than the same plug in a non-projected tip (RR14S) even though they are both considered 1 heat range colder (stock is rated at 15 by Brisk). The reason is that the RR14YS was specked for stock power applications and at those power levels it actually does run 1 heat range colder than stock even though the electrode is seated deeper in the chamber than the OE iridium plug.

Increasing HP by 75+ and Torque by 100+ increases chamber temp quite a bit, so the RR14YS will get too hot, I never bothered to reanalyze my plug choice after tuning (I ran the RR14YS when I was on the stock software but it didn't cross my mind to re-evaluate their stability after tuning). So while I took a lot of steps to keep things cool (FMIC, 160F thermostat, 2" radiator upgrade) I still ended up with a cracked plug insulator after about 5k miles on the Livernois 93 Stage 3v7 tune. That was not a Livernois problem, but a plug choice problem. Brisk believes I was getting very mild knock, when combined with the over heating the plug caused the insulator to fatigue and fail (if anything however, that's a testament to the quality of Livernois software, that kept my engine from being damaged even with an over heating plug and plug induced ignition advance).

Once I realized the issue after some investigation, I threw in a set of RR14S plugs so far so good (also ran the OE plugs while I was investigating the cause and had no issues). Livernois stated they used OE plugs for all of their PCM software development and that back in the early 2000's they had issues with Brisk plugs inexplicably cracking insulators in several of their shop cars and couldn't track down the cause (knock was not an issue), but never had issues with OE plugs or the Denos's they started using instead.

It's possible Brisk had a quality control issue at one point or it may be related to the ceramic material or perhaps their technical service made an incorrect application recommendation, who knows, but if you can make them work (which I don't see why you couldn't if you choose the proper plug for the specific application), then in my experience their performance is very noticeable over OE, at least in terms of how smooth the engine runs.

I can't say if the car is actually making more power or not (it's hard to tell on the butt dyno unless it's a big jump of 30+), you'd have to dyno the car with OE and with Brisk. The nice thing is though, with the Livernois software I can run OE or Brisk RR14S safely, but unless I have any more issues with the RR14S I will continue to run them.

I did get a bit of an engine stutter with the Brisk RR14S plugs between 40~42mph, very light engine load before the PCM completed it's first drive cycle (reset the PCM after the RR14S arrived as I was running the OE), but that was only under those specific conditions and the PCM seems to have "optamized" that out all togeather. My guess is that because the RR14S plugs are LESS projected than even the OE plugs, the PCM had to make some adjustments over the first drive cycle to correct that stutter (no codes either from the stutter). That was the only thing I noticed with the RR14S but even before the stutter was optimized out, all other RPM and load ranges the car just felt smoother and a bit stronger. My sig has my current setup and save for some swaybars and the Ford Performance CAI next year it I'll probably keep it as is, it just runs awesome!

 

[K-Roll302]

I see. I'm now running Livernois XV1 tune and noticed very audible engine or spark knock WOT. In the one 2nd 3rd gear pull I did, AFR was between 10-11.7 if I remember right and the knock only occurred while under full throttle; which is where that AFR range came from.

I've the 160 degree thermostat as well, and you're familiar with my other mods (FMIC, dual valve CC, and muffler delete). I think I will go back to the V7 until the issue can be determined and remedied.

 

[TheLion]

I can't comment on their Xv1, I have not tried it yet and I probably won't until the car is paid off, not for a street car. The Xv1 is obviously pushing the limits and they make that very clear, they told me not to run it with passengers (I asked if I could run the car fully loaded with passengers on their 93 initially, they said 91 and 93 that's fine but Xv1 no). There is a version of the Xv1 you can get also that is race fuel only, so that one really pushes things.

The Xv1_93 is fairly aggressive and maximum performance is really intended to be achieved with octane boosters. They say it can be run with just 93 pump gas, but it seems risky to use that without octane booster (not only that but it performs best with 100 octane anyway). It's not a street / dd friendly tune, that's for sure. My goal has been blending performance and reliability on 93 pump gas. That's something I can get just about anywhere and drive every day.

If your hearing knock, it must be more akin to detonation than knock for it to be audible. Detonation is just a term to describe severe knock. I have yet to hear any form of knock in my engine, which is how I could crack a plug insulator and not hear something was amiss until a part failed and I started getting constant misfires due to the insulator. In fact most people will not hear knock, but can hear detonation (aka sounds like marbles or an intense high frequency pinging). Some NA engines actually run with constant mild knock as that's where the highest efficiency is obtained.

I would contact Livernois about their Xv1 if you're certain you heard what you heard (or saw data on your logger) and see what they have to say about it. BTW, what plugs are you running? The more power you push, the more important cooling and plug choice becomes, a 160F thermostat MAY not be enough by itself, I upgraded the radiator as well, although I have more reasons to upgrade than you as I have a base model (thinner radiator than PP cars) AND I used a 20x14x3.5 in FMIC, which blocks a significant portion of the radiator flow so the Mishimoto 2" radiator compensated for both of those deficiencies even though I hadn't actually had any over heating issues per say'.

One thing you can do however is run the Mishimoto synthetic coolant, there are quite a few reviews on Americamuscle.com of all kinds of mustang owners using that coolant even in stock radiators and having success resolving heat issues. It has better thermal conductivity properties and is much cheaper than upgrading the whole radiator. I will probably switch over to it next year just as one last precaution against heat. For $65 it's a good added protection.

Then again, according to a certain vendor, I might be spouting lots of nonsensical garbage...what do I know, I'm only a degreed Engineer and couldn't possibly figure something out for myself...nor could I possibly have consulted other experts on their opinions regarding the matter who must also be spouting nonsensical garbage as well. JK.

 

[K-Roll302]

I wasn't told to run it without passengers. Luckily there's a shell station that sells race gas 10 minutes from my house so I reckon I'd try that, check the gap on the plugs and see if the problem persists in a single pull. If it does, I'll run full 93 octane and go back to the V7 tune. The sound I'm hearing is indeed akin to marbles hitting each other very rapidly and only at full throttle. It doesn't happen anytime other than going flat out. I'm gonna try a blend of 93/race gas for a week and see what happens from the increased octane rating.

They also told me that the OEM Motorcraft plugs were fine as that's what's they calibrated the tunes with. I'm still running the MC plugs but I'm pulling them out to check the gapping later tonight. Honestly, the XV1 feels like a more aggressive variation of the V7 to me, and though I've only driven with it for two days, it feels no different driving around town. Throttle response is much more sensitive though.

I'll look into their synthetic coolant for next year as well.

 

[TheLion]

I wasn't told to run it without passengers. Luckily there's a shell station that sells race gas 10 minutes from my house so I reckon I'd try that, check the gap on the plugs and see if the problem persists in a single pull. If it does, I'll run full 93 octane and go back to the V7 tune. The sound I'm hearing is indeed akin to marbles hitting each other very rapidly and only at full throttle. It doesn't happen anytime other than going flat out. I'm gonna try a blend of 93/race gas for a week and see what happens from the increased octane rating.

They also told me that the OEM Motorcraft plugs were fine as that's what's they calibrated the tunes with. I'm still running the MC plugs but I'm pulling them out to check the gapping later tonight. Honestly, the XV1 feels like a more aggressive variation of the V7 to me, and though I've only driven with it for two days, it feels no different driving around town. Throttle response is much more sensitive though.

I'll look into their synthetic coolant for next year as well.

Interesting, I'd like to hear Livernois response on the knocking occurring with the Xv1 tune. I think your probably correct about the Xv1 being a more aggressive variation of the 93 stage 3v7. The question is, how much is going down the 1/4 a bit faster worth to you? Is it worth a blown engine? 10,000 miles less life, 20k, 30k...50k? Your a little more adventurous than me, I would not use the Xv1 if I encountered any knock until I contacted Livernois about it. While the engine can withstand some knock for short periods of time, you still want to avoid it as much as possible as it does add stress.

It may be a fuel issue, it may be a plug issue or both, but from Livernois is telling you regarding the OE plugs being adequate for the Xv1, it sounds like a fuel issue unless something is amiss in their software or there's something else going on in your car that wasn't seen in their shop cars...I'd consult them first before trying again, even with the race gas. According to them 93 pump gas should be working fine, which clearly it's not.

 

[Apwrx]

I would imagine so, that may be what the "high flow" catted down pipes are using. However most after market down pipes, catted or not, require custom PCM software. The stock unit does not and the power gains are not large. The factory DP is reasonably well tuned for he stock turbo size and there are tones of cars putting out 350 to 375 wtq. On stock rods, pistons and crank we can't really go much beyond that without eating into the safety margin as the factory internals start to fail at about 425 wtq and 350 whp.

So if you want backwards comparability with the factory software and aren't going for broke then I don't think it's a good path to go, an IC would or tune would provide far more power and consistency. IC's will produce around 20 to 30 hp in the upper range and allow you to make that power run after run vs. the 15hp or so of a down pipe. Now if your going with a big turbo and getting more involved with mods than what the scope of this thread is for, then by all means it makes sense and the gains will be much bigger. The goal of this thread was the most critical mods to 1. allow the engine to make consistent power and 2. allow the engine to make more power without sacrificing reliability or adding substantial risk.

Also, just an FYI, I did contact LMS regarding the catalyst temperature issue to see if they are aware of any problems. I associated lifting the power band in the upper rpm range (aka holding a linear torque slope vs a decreasing torque slope) with automatically high catalyst temperatures. LMS claims none of their software causes those conditions as they do not exceed any factory specific limits on engine components.

We also know that Ford Racing also stays within those limits, so that is two. There are likely others well, however it would be very wise to investigate the issue before you go down a particular upgrade path. Ford Racing and LMS are known safe paths regarding the stock catalyst, if anyone gets any information on others, feel free to add it to the list of stock cat safe PCM software.

They start failing at 350whp?? From what I've seen more like 450whp is safe. Hell I daily near 380whp on a very early built motor, over 20k miles no issue at all. My race Tune should be 430's maybe more we'll see next month.ive streeted that for a bit as well. Many others pushing well over 400 without issue. Where'd you get 350whp?

Sponsored