2.3L TST Optimization Thread

[TheLion]

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?

This is based on Livernois shop car testing on a stock block, turbo, IC, radiator etc. Each car is a little different, some take more than others. However they found on average once you exceed around 350 whp and 425 wtq on the stock motor (save the PCM software) you tend to start eating into the life of the motor significantly (diminishing returns). Doesn't mean it will blow up immediately, it may last 10k, 20k or 30k+. Some motors will take more than others and additional modifications may change that limit.

Post back at 100k and let us know how things are going. You might prove them wrong or you might prove them right, time will tell what the real limits are as the motors pile on miles. But if you have the cash or will to replace a failed engine it's not really relevant, if it fails just go with a built bottom end next time and you can push even more power. You said "very early built motor" so I'm assuming your talking about a built bottom end as that is what is implied by the terms, unless your referring to production time. Livernois offers a built bottom end rated for between 600 and 700 HP. You can double what the stock bottom end can reliably take long term if you put 5k into it, no question about that at all.

I plan on going with a built bottom end after I've gotten at least 150k out of the stock bottom end and then turn it into a "street legal" track car (geared towards performance). But that's a loooonnggg ways off yet and I expect years of fun with the car as it is now. It makes great power, at least good enough for a street car and it will put all but the most extremely modified WRX's, BRZ's and other similar cars to shame.

Listen, Livernois doesn't provide the end all be all software and neither does Ford Performance. However Livernois and Ford Performance have a specific margin of error for safety and long term reliability. You can argue about the merits of that all day long, but that's the OE mentality and how these cars come from the factory and they both work with Ford for OE testing and R&D. That's why I chose them, to boost performance but maintain OE like reliability.

In their testing and based on what parameters they were changing those are the results they saw. Maybe some tuners figured out a magic sauce they didn't...or maybe some tuners are sacrificing the life of the motor in a trade for added power. It all depends on what you want to achieve and what your willing to give up. But Livernois has proven long term reliability with several of their tuned SHO's and F-150's now well over 100k miles and still running good, so we at least have many known cases proving long term reliability. Time will be the ultimate judge of who is sacrificing what quantities for performance.

I think Juben has over 50k on his shop tuned EB, so there's at least one case in favor of his particular tuner but I"m not sure how much whp and wtq his car is making.

Sponsored

 

[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.

Just wanted to update everyone, last night was a cool night, 41. Went out for a back country joy ride after the rec, I did a partial WOT pull in 5th and a few in 3rd and 4th.

On this tank of speedway gas (where I mentioned the OAR was hanging around at -0.61) the car definitely seem "stressed". By that I mean it just didn't seem smooth like it was on the tank of BP gas, it pulled hard, but seemed abnormally clanky, loud and very coarse / gritty.

When I slowed down at a stop light I noticed a strong burning smell, not oil, more like hot metal, gaskets etc, possibly debris up in around the turbo or the turbo housing itself. Also saw white vapor out of my tail pipe at the same time (only drivers side though...), which I believe was actually just moisture, but I couldn't be sure. Yes, checked the oil level when I got home, nothing abnormal, was at the same level it was sever weeks ago, just black now as I'm at 9k miles on the factory fill.

The Livernois 93 tune seem to be aggressive enough that it is fuel sensitive enough for me personally to merit a change. There was no codes (checked with the reader), nothing was out of ordinary regarding OAR (was still at -0.61), idle rpm, coolant or cat temps etc. Idle was a bit rough and the car definitely also sounded more "coarse" as well at WOT, almost knocky (but no distinctive pinging, so if there was, it was not enough to clearly be heard over normal engine noise).

At this point, regardless of Livernois track record and the fact that I couldn't actually find anything wrong, I am running the 91 Octane Stage 3v7 tune while using actual 93 octane fuel, at least during the winter / cold weather and while on trips (due also in part to the fact that not all stations sell 93). It's honestly hard to tell the difference, I wouldn't think there's more than 10 hp to 15 hp at the most between the two, but the 91 tune so far seems insensitive to fuel (as long as your running 93) quality, at least at this point and as long as I'm running actual 93 octane. I prefer consistency over anything else, I'd rather sacrifice a bit of edge for consistent, smooth and predictable behavior. I would expect running a 93 octane on a 91 tune would always give you the highest OAR values as the fuel quality variations should not affect timing given the buffer.

I originally started this threat with only bolt ons (hardware upgrade), but soon added in a few tunes which were more focused on OE like reliability as opposed to pushing the ragged edge as that was the focus of this thread, balancing long term reliability, drive ability and performance.

Now this could all be related to the brisk spark plugs, even the new RR14S (I still want to pull them to inspect them or any signs of abnormality), but I've spent enough time messing with this car this year that I"m not sure I want to swap them back out to the OE plugs to see the difference with the 93 on this particular tank of speedway gas. But there's no denying the safest route to account for bad or sub-par gas is to run a 91 tune while putting 92 or 93 in the tank regularly (plus if you can only find 91, then you don't have to flash back and fourth).

It provides the ultimate buffer against issues even if you running non-tested plugs (from your tuner).

Interestingly enough though, the 91 tune with brisk plugs feels as strong (but less touchy) as the 93 tune with the OE plugs...maybe that's why it seems overly sensitive to fuel source on 93. Then again two tests were on two separate tanks of fuel, one from newer high volume 10 pump BP station and one from a small 4 pump speedway station (it's older).

If you live in a 4 season state, your safest route is to follow the TST optimizations, if you live in a warm weather state you may be just fine running 93 all year round without issues and many do, but I live in a diverse environment that results int he most extreme climates as well as seeing fuel quality variations such as winter blends (worst case combination for pushing the edge).

So far this seems to be a tempearture and fuel quality insensitive combination:
1. Levels Gen 3 Street FMIC
2. Brisk RR14S
3. Boomba BOV
4. 160F Thermostat
5. Mishimoto 2" thick radiator
6. Livernois 91 Octane Stage 3v7 tune

Again, I couldn't find any evidence of an issue other than what my senses perceived, but my intuition says "play it safe, because diminishing returns aren't worth the risk". If this wasn't my daily driver I would look at it differently, I'd be tinkering with the Xv1 regularly...but it is my daily driver and I have little inclination to push to the ragged edge and risk damage. Some times, being overly cautious pays off even without concrete evidence. We'll see how it goes over the remainder of this tank of fuel once a drive cycle fully completes, if there are no abnormalities (even ones based on intuition), I won't bother posting back.

 

[TheLion]

Found this: FP Dyno

Looks like the LMS 91 is still a better overall tune in terms of performance (pending their 91 tune works well with the winter blended 92 and 93 pump gas from less than stellar sources such as speedway).

Here is the link on Ford Perfomance site: M-9603-M4

 

[K-Roll302]

I'm trying out the LMS 91 tune for the winter, since I'm still noticing that almost inaudible spark knock sound. I like the 91 tune as much as the 93, although like you said, there is a noticeable lack of "edginess"with the 91 compared to the 93. Also, throttle response seems to be slightly less to me? But the power delivery seems to be the same, and pulls to redline, but doesn't feel as rushed; much more gradual and naturally aspirated feeling to me.

I ordered the RR14S plugs this afternoon as well, and should have them by Saturday I hope.

 

[metalhead79]

What is the gap supposed to be for stock spark plugs? I want to check/gap mine today.

 

[TheLion]

What is the gap supposed to be for stock spark plugs? I want to check/gap mine today.

0.030 for stock plugs, change ever 10k to 15k miles. Just an update, I did have issues with the Brisk RR14S plugs, no failures, but I had a rough idle on mine and some hesitation at very light low rpm when starting.

I spoke to LMS about it and they said go back to OE plugs if you have issues as all their testing is on OE plugs and that's also what they run in every ecoboost variant. They did suggest NGK if you "MUST" use something other than OE.

I've had great luck with Brisk in the past, I use them in my run of the mill NA 08 Focus SE and I've also used them in my 07 Focus ST 2.3L NA.

It would seem their RR14S plugs, because they are more recessed, don't play well with the combustion process at low rpm and light loads. I could see the timing jump all over the place on the OBDIILink MX timing advance graph when idling, however under any amount of throttle other the very lightest it was smooth as butter. So if you don't mind a bit of rough idle (at least rougher than stock) and occasional light hesitation (give it a tad more throttle and it was fine), they are still a good option.

I can recommend the RR14YS for stock setups or non-tuned bolt on setups, the car ran really well with those on stock tune, however I had some issues. That is the only issue I've run into in the now 11,000 miles I've had the car.

BTW I also spoke with Livernois regarding cold weather just to confirm (lost the e-mail as I had asked them way back about temperature), they use the stock temperature compensation maps from Ford and one of the reasons they do not increase boost is because it invalidates some of those temperature compensation maps, so without re-mapping you could run into issues, which requires very extensive testing. So they do no alter certain parameters which rely on those critical compensation maps (temperature, altitude etc.).

Their tuning is likely very similar in methodology to Ford Performance, but they have more freedom in that they aren't limited to 91 octane and being CARB legal (or emissions legal at all) for all 50 states, which of course is going to limit the power gains significantly.

You can run the 93 tune on 93 all winter, but they said some customers run the 91 tune while using 93 as added protection, but it is not necessary.

 

[TheLion]

I'm trying out the LMS 91 tune for the winter, since I'm still noticing that almost inaudible spark knock sound. I like the 91 tune as much as the 93, although like you said, there is a noticeable lack of "edginess"with the 91 compared to the 93. Also, throttle response seems to be slightly less to me? But the power delivery seems to be the same, and pulls to redline, but doesn't feel as rushed; much more gradual and naturally aspirated feeling to me.

I ordered the RR14S plugs this afternoon as well, and should have them by Saturday I hope.

I'd agree on your assessment regarding the difference. The 91 feels a bit less responsive and edgy or immediate, but it seems to pull hard all the way. It's more like how I imagine a stock GT PP would feel.

I've been running the 93 but MAY go back to 91 just for some added protection even though LMS 93 tune is safe for cold weather and because I'm going out of state so I may run across a station that only sells 92 or 91 (although running a 91 tune on 91 octane isn't any "safer" than a 93 tune on 93 octane, you only get the octane buffer if you run a 91 tune on 93 octane).

 

[metalhead79]

0.030 for stock plugs, change ever 10k to 15k miles. Just an update, I did have issues with the Brisk RR14S plugs, no failures, but I had a rough idle on mine and some hesitation at very light low rpm when starting.

I spoke to LMS about it and they said go back to OE plugs if you have issues as all their testing is on OE plugs and that's also what they run in every ecoboost variant. They did suggest NGK if you "MUST" use something other than OE.

I've had great luck with Brisk in the past, I use them in my run of the mill NA 08 Focus SE and I've also used them in my 07 Focus ST 2.3L NA.

It would seem their RR14S plugs, because they are more recessed, don't play well with the combustion process at low rpm and light loads. I could see the timing jump all over the place on the OBDIILink MX timing advance graph when idling, however under any amount of throttle other the very lightest it was smooth as butter. So if you don't mind a bit of rough idle (at least rougher than stock) and occasional light hesitation (give it a tad more throttle and it was fine), they are still a good option.

I can recommend the RR14YS for stock setups or non-tuned bolt on setups, the car ran really well with those on stock tune, however I had some issues. That is the only issue I've run into in the now 11,000 miles I've had the car.

BTW I also spoke with Livernois regarding cold weather just to confirm (lost the e-mail as I had asked them way back about temperature), they use the stock temperature compensation maps from Ford and one of the reasons they do not increase boost is because it invalidates some of those temperature compensation maps, so without re-mapping you could run into issues, which requires very extensive testing. So they do no alter certain parameters which rely on those critical compensation maps (temperature, altitude etc.).

Their tuning is likely very similar in methodology to Ford Performance, but they have more freedom in that they aren't limited to 91 octane and being CARB legal (or emissions legal at all) for all 50 states, which of course is going to limit the power gains significantly.

You can run the 93 tune on 93 all winter, but they said some customers run the 91 tune while using 93 as added protection, but it is not necessary.

Thanks. I'm planning on putting in Denso plugs next month or so. Just wanted to make sure the ones I have now were gapped correctly.

I live in Colorado and 91 octane is all that we have here. Since it's my daily driver and it gets very cold in Colorado, LMS sounds like a good option since I won't have to flash to different tunes for summer and winter.

No interest in E30. Maybe if I ever start frequenting Bandimere I'll look into it, but for now I'll be fine on a 91 octane tune.

 

[TheLion]

Thanks. I'm planning on putting in Denso plugs next month or so. Just wanted to make sure the ones I have now were gapped correctly.

I live in Colorado and 91 octane is all that we have here. Since it's my daily driver and it gets very cold in Colorado, LMS sounds like a good option since I won't have to flash to different tunes for summer and winter.

No interest in E30. Maybe if I ever start frequenting Bandimere I'll look into it, but for now I'll be fine on a 91 octane tune.

I've switched back and fourth between the 91 and 93 about 10x, no joke. It's hard to tell the difference, I think K-Roll stated it pretty well, most of the difference is in the response, the 93 has more edge, it's more "immediate" or rushed. The 91 feels more like an NA engine, however both tunes seem to pull hard all the way to redline. Usually the difference between 91 and 93 is only 2%. So on a Livernoise Tune only car you would see 310 whp / 353 wtq on 91 vs. 317 whp / 360 wtq. That's only 7~8 whp and 7~8 wtq. It's not much, for competition it would matter, but for anything else it makes no practical difference performance wise.

Just an update I did get one code, P061A, trying to figure this one out, however no CEL and I haven't noticed any odd behaviour. The code appears to primarily be related to sensor or internal ECU functions. Found an Evo forum where a bunch of Evo's were throwing that code and it seemed to be related to a software issue in their factory tune. Also found from 6.7L Power Stroke Diesel Ford's throwing that code that were tuned and in that case it seemed to be related to their particular tune.

Since Livernois said I have a brand new strategy code (latest factory PCM software revision), I'm guessing it may be related to that unless there's a sensor fault or damaged PCM IO pin. We'll see if it comes back, but as I stated in the other thread, I think this is related to "Ford" and not Livernois.

 

[metalhead79]

Tune only making 310whp/353wtq? I thought that was full bolt on territory for the non-E30 running people?

 

[TheLion]

Tune only making 310whp/353wtq? I thought that was full bolt on territory for the non-E30 running people?

Posting from my phone which is slow so not going to ling the lms dyno but a bone stock 2015 eb auto dynoed 317 wheel hp and 360 ftlbs wheel torue with lms 93. Going 91 you loose about 2% on average with the 2 octane drop which is 310 / 353...thats on a bone stock eb. Their 93 tune only eb ran 12.67. Then the put on lighter drag radials, removed passenger seat and took off cat back exhaust and ran 12.19 repeatedly. Then the developed their xv1 race gas tune and ran 11.8 with the above mentioned changes. Yah its fast, manuals are a bit slower though due to human limits, im hoping to break into 12s on 91 tune with a downpipe and my current other mods which are mostly colling related.

 

[TheLion]

Stang tv did a livernoise tuned eb back in 2015 with good old fashioned trifecta (tune, intake and downpipe). They dynoed 339 whp and around 390 wtq and that was on livernoise stage 2. They made several optamizations and are currently on stage 3v7. They give you 4 tunes, 91 stage3v7, 93 stage3v7, stock and xv1 race gas tune (which is what they ran 11.8 on).

 

[TheLion]

http://www.*******************/2015/09/29/tech-2015-ecoboost-mustang-bolt-ons/

My bad it was svt. 339whp and 426 wtq but i think that was the xv1 as it was "experimental" at the time. But their 93 tune on a stock car does put down 317whp/360wtq. Add in some bolt ons and you into 330-340whp territory even on 91 tune (91 would be more arou d 320-330).

 

[metalhead79]

Wow. I was thinking I'd get like 275whp/300wtq with just a tune and no bolt ons.

 

[TheLion]

Depends on the tune. The two most reliable tunes are probably Ford Performance and Livernois due to their close relationship with Ford Motor Co. Both have first hand access to proprietary information regarding the PCM software architecture, which is fairly complex.

This allows them to both tune in a very safe manner comparatively. Most tunes on a car by car basis are done using OBDII data, which is reported every 200mS to 300mS. The PCM refreshes it's sensor data ever 8mS, which is 50x the rate. You need an actual data logger (like an auxiliary PCM) which reads the raw sensor data at the same rate as the PCM along with access to Ford's engineering department to really dig into tuning with the highest reliability in mind. OBDII data was NEVER intended to tune the engine with, it is entire for diagnostic purposes for auto technicians and thus the requirements on the accuracy, resolution and polling intervals are different.

That's why I originally suggested Ford Performance and also Livernois for those out of warranty. Livernois however can squeeze a bit more power than FP can because they aren't focused on being CARB legal, emissions aren't a requirement in their testing while FP is required to maintain 50 state legal emissions.

FP also is required to run on 91, so they don't have separate tunes and can't take advantage of being able to run 93 octane only, although 93 doesn't buy you much, 7 hp to may 10 hp at most, but it is something and worth about 1 mph trap speed and maybe 0.1s on the 1/4 mile in the best cases. For competition that matters, for a street car it's irrelevant. The gains over stock are enormous already.

For the scope and purpose of this thread, I would suggest FP for cars that are new and Livernois for cars that are out of the 36k warranty window or near that or maybe that want more power out of the box if they take the afore mentioned steps to cooling.

Assurance is taking steps to prevent a problem, insurance/warranties are for when a problem occures. I'd take assurance over insurance if I had to pick between the two, of course having both is the best and you can do that with the FP tune if your in a lower mileage car. I've already put 11k miles on my car since the end of june. I'd be out of warranty after just a year and half and FP hadn't released their software yet so I ended up with Livernois.

Suggest Cooling related upgrades:
1. Front Mount Inter Cooler
2. 160F Thermostat
3. 2" radiator (if you have a 1.5" PP radiator you should be fine, but I had a 1" base model radiator, the Mishimoto 2" had better cooling an new 1.5" PP radiator and the price was the same)

Originally I had also suggested 1 step colder plugs, while there is absolutely nothing wrong with that, some people have issues with rough idle, cracking insulators, misfires etc. These engines are very picky about plugs. Both FP and Livernois suggest the OE plugs, so that's what I'm running after having some issues with aftermarket plugs.

4. Would be run 93 octane on a 91 tune, giving you an octane buffer for just in case situations (traveling, bad gas, extreme cold etc.).

Here's their dyno on an otherwise completely stock car (aka no bolt on upgrades, these are at the wheels numbers compared to stock, also the boost is at stock, they do not increase boost for a very specific reason):


You can add another 10 to 25 hp with common bolt on upgrades such as the above (which also act as reliability upgrades, according to Livernois a down pipe upgrade actually does increase reliability as the lower restriction keeps the turbine cooler, there's less heat buildup due to better efficiency).

Sponsored