sonicc
Mr. Bond
Yeah validated from my account. I set up the account, then logged in on shop's laptop to download ProCal and tune. I think I just need to contact support and see if they can do anything.
Sponsored
Sponsored
poncho@home
GettingOld
I just chatted with someone at Ford Performance. The download link under my account is the latest version 3.x. The only have the latest version on their server. No mention of a v4.x
I am downloading this version and testing it this afternoon.
I am downloading this version and testing it this afternoon.
TheLion70x77
Well-Known Member
By the way, this is why Power Pack 3 will dominate in any absolute performance metric assuming your geared to compact the power bad. The Power Pack 3 power graphs show how much engine power is applied over each gear in sequence (just assuming running straight through the gears). On higher speed stuff, your going to be in the 5,000 rpm range and up typically if you re-gear the rear end with 3.91's and run lower profile track tires (35 or 30 series depending on wheel widths).
Also remember these power output numbers for the 5.0 are assuming a DLC coating obtaining 3% average increase in power (reproducible gains very consistently across many cars using TriboTEX, CeraTek or Archoil). So these numbers are from LMR's power pack dynos + 3% from a DLC coating. The LT1 wheel hp numbers are from a 2017 SS 1LE 6M with a rotofab CAI, so they are a little higher that a bone stock SS 6M (about 10 hp on average).
Power Pack 2 gives you roughly an equivalent of a stock LT1 powered Camaro SS. The stock 2015-2017 2nd Gen 5.0 powered GT's just gets royally creamed by the stock 5th gen LT1 powered Camaro SS's. Power Pack 2 levels the playing field. Power Pack 3 is the middle finger to the SS and takes full advantage of the Boss 302's (code named Road Runner) valve springs, valve lift, high flowing heads all mated to the GT350 IM / throttle body / intake setup from the current track variant Mustang.
It's a hodge podge from two of Ford's low volume high performance focused track setups rolled into the 2nd Gen mass production 5.0 with a unique high octane tune, but holy crap does the average power applied just blow away the Power Pack 2 and LT1. Ford performance claims anywhere from 472 crank hp up to 495 crank hp on Power Pack 3. LMR's Power Pack 3 dyno of 432 whp and a 12% drive train loss puts it at 483 crank HP, right in the middle of their range (it also has a x-pipe FP exhaust which is worth about 5-7 hp).
Remember, power is work being done. I don't give a crap about torque other than for traction purposes and at what RPM it is made at. Dyno graphs only show the MOMENT OF TORQUE at the point of measurement at that particular RPM. Torque on a dyno graph alone doesn't illustrate how much work is actually being done by the motor. And thrust charts are most useful for determining traction capabilities in various gears at various speeds (or assuming you do the calculations, how much power the engine can make).
Work being done is what accelerates a car, torque and how many times you apply that torque (aka RPM) is how you do the work. If the 5.0 only made 100 ft-lbs of torque, but revved out to 50,000 RPM...it would be making 952 HP. That's double the power of the Power Pack 2 5.0 or LT1....but if you looked at peak torque or even the torque curve without factoring in how gearing compacts the distance over which the work is done, you'd think its' a sucky motor, yet it will allow the car to accelerate far faster and reach far high top speeds than what a real 5.0 or LT1 can manage.
That's just a theoretical example and quite unrealistic, but it also illustrates why electric motors can achieve such crazy acceleration. The make big torque, but they hold that torque to very high RPM's that even many super charged motors cannot, 10,000 to 15,000+. That enables them to make BIG POWER and do more work than a piston engine. If you look at many cars and their torque ratings vs. their acceleration, there's no correlation between peak torque numbers and how fast the car accelerates. It's random. Some cars make big torque, but have relatively poor acceleration. Other cars make low torque but achieve rather high acceleration. Yet others have big torque and achieve high acceleration.
But if you look at the scatter plot (see attachments) of many various cars by their power output, the trend becomes clear. The better power the weight ratio, the better the acceleration and that's universal. A low torque engine can be geared short so that it does all of it's work over the same distance of a high torque engine that runs a taller gear ratio. But the lower torque engine, over the same distance, because it makes more power, will achieve better acceleration.
Also remember these power output numbers for the 5.0 are assuming a DLC coating obtaining 3% average increase in power (reproducible gains very consistently across many cars using TriboTEX, CeraTek or Archoil). So these numbers are from LMR's power pack dynos + 3% from a DLC coating. The LT1 wheel hp numbers are from a 2017 SS 1LE 6M with a rotofab CAI, so they are a little higher that a bone stock SS 6M (about 10 hp on average).
Power Pack 2 gives you roughly an equivalent of a stock LT1 powered Camaro SS. The stock 2015-2017 2nd Gen 5.0 powered GT's just gets royally creamed by the stock 5th gen LT1 powered Camaro SS's. Power Pack 2 levels the playing field. Power Pack 3 is the middle finger to the SS and takes full advantage of the Boss 302's (code named Road Runner) valve springs, valve lift, high flowing heads all mated to the GT350 IM / throttle body / intake setup from the current track variant Mustang.
It's a hodge podge from two of Ford's low volume high performance focused track setups rolled into the 2nd Gen mass production 5.0 with a unique high octane tune, but holy crap does the average power applied just blow away the Power Pack 2 and LT1. Ford performance claims anywhere from 472 crank hp up to 495 crank hp on Power Pack 3. LMR's Power Pack 3 dyno of 432 whp and a 12% drive train loss puts it at 483 crank HP, right in the middle of their range (it also has a x-pipe FP exhaust which is worth about 5-7 hp).
Remember, power is work being done. I don't give a crap about torque other than for traction purposes and at what RPM it is made at. Dyno graphs only show the MOMENT OF TORQUE at the point of measurement at that particular RPM. Torque on a dyno graph alone doesn't illustrate how much work is actually being done by the motor. And thrust charts are most useful for determining traction capabilities in various gears at various speeds (or assuming you do the calculations, how much power the engine can make).
Work being done is what accelerates a car, torque and how many times you apply that torque (aka RPM) is how you do the work. If the 5.0 only made 100 ft-lbs of torque, but revved out to 50,000 RPM...it would be making 952 HP. That's double the power of the Power Pack 2 5.0 or LT1....but if you looked at peak torque or even the torque curve without factoring in how gearing compacts the distance over which the work is done, you'd think its' a sucky motor, yet it will allow the car to accelerate far faster and reach far high top speeds than what a real 5.0 or LT1 can manage.
That's just a theoretical example and quite unrealistic, but it also illustrates why electric motors can achieve such crazy acceleration. The make big torque, but they hold that torque to very high RPM's that even many super charged motors cannot, 10,000 to 15,000+. That enables them to make BIG POWER and do more work than a piston engine. If you look at many cars and their torque ratings vs. their acceleration, there's no correlation between peak torque numbers and how fast the car accelerates. It's random. Some cars make big torque, but have relatively poor acceleration. Other cars make low torque but achieve rather high acceleration. Yet others have big torque and achieve high acceleration.
But if you look at the scatter plot (see attachments) of many various cars by their power output, the trend becomes clear. The better power the weight ratio, the better the acceleration and that's universal. A low torque engine can be geared short so that it does all of it's work over the same distance of a high torque engine that runs a taller gear ratio. But the lower torque engine, over the same distance, because it makes more power, will achieve better acceleration.
poncho@home
GettingOld
Actually 4.2 is a version of ProCal 3!! Just downloaded the Mac version for fun and this is the file name when I look at it
TheLion70x77
Well-Known Member
I misunderstood, I thought you had meant version 3.0...my bad 
Sponsored
TexasRebel
Gearshifter
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2016
- Threads
- 27
- Messages
- 2,500
- Reaction score
- 836
- Location
- between the mustard and the mayo
- Vehicle(s)
- 2016 YZ GTPP - PP2
Any way you can sum up the area under those curves and show us the integral of horsepower applied v. speed?
TheLion70x77
Well-Known Member
Maybe with Riemann Sums. RM can integrate anything now with the massive and cheap computing power now available. Normally what I do is an area compare. I just shift the graph of one engine dyno back or forward over the same RPM span so we can see the actual differences in area under the curves visually. Here are area compares below. I also included a bone stock Gen 3 5.0 from a 2018 D4 GT.
Remember also the Power Pack's 2 and 3 have a +3% fudge factor across the curves to include the effects of the DLC coatings like TriboTEX, Archoil and CeraTek which I am personally running and many others are as well. The LT1's dyno is from a 2017 SS 1LE 6M with a Rotofab CAI but otherwise stock, it represent the "hottest" SS dyno I could find on the stock tune with 93 oct. Obviously the 5.0's graph's are NOT on the correct RPM scale, the entire purpose of this is to show you the same RPM span of 4,500 RPM of each engine and how the power bands compare. Obviously you would need to gear the cars accordingly to utilize their power bands to greatest effect. And the different generations of the GT are not the same. 2015-2017's use a 5 speed with 1 over drive gear. 2018-Present GT's use a 4 speed with dual over drive like the TR6060 in the 2106+ SS.
With the 5.0, you would need to gear the car differently than with the LT1 when comparing a 2015-2017 GT to the Alpha, but 4th in the SS is 1:1 and 5th in the GT is 1:1. The thrust curves above provide a good illustration of the gearing differences and how the torque bands are used. For Power Pack 2, I find the best all around gearing to be 3.73 with 35 series tire that results in 4% increase in final drive ratio (aka shortens the gearing). This brings the 2015-2017 Power Pack 2 equipped GT very close in 4th gear (1.315 with a 3.73 final drive, 26.6" tire) to the SS in 3rd gear (1.300 with a 3.73 final drive and 27.6" tire). Top speed of the GT is 115 in 4th and 111 in the SS. So both engines are utilizing the maximum area under their respective power bands. I often compare it to the SS because it's such a great all around performer, even if visibility sucks, the trunk is small and has some other quirks.
Because of the extra rev range of Power Pack 2 vs. stock (7,150 vs. 6,800), I can shorten the gearing a bit, lower the CG without messing with geometry and significantly lower rotating mass. This compacts the power band of the 5.0 over a shorter distance (more gear reduction) to achieve better acceleration without giving up top speed in each gear over stock, even with the shorter 35 series tires, I still have +1mph over stock but am putting down WAY more torque to the wheels because of the combination of final drive reduction and gains from the Power Pack 2, TriboTEX and x-pipe. Even though the GT is a 5 speed single OD and the SS is a 4 speed dual OD, in the actual gears that one would use for performance, the overall thrust charts are nearly identical. Just that the GT has more granularity at lower speeds which could be a boon when getting out of the hole on a 35~40 mph hair pin turn.
All dynos are from DynoJet dynos, SAE corrected values, 93 octane on all cars and generally represent the best I could find for each car. Some people will cherry pick things and pick the worst run they can find from one car and compare it to the best run from another...which is idiotic and doesn't really give you a realistic comparison. The LT1 (with a CAI) would also benefit from DLC coatings and most likely directly match Power Pack 2 + DLC coatings + X-pipe. Gains aren't huge from DLC coatings, but they are there, verifiable and repeatable. I attached a bunch of actual dnyos of the same cars before and after CeraTech just to prove my point on DLC coatings. Both hBN and MSH provide similar coefficients of friction and over all function, just by different means.
Remember also the Power Pack's 2 and 3 have a +3% fudge factor across the curves to include the effects of the DLC coatings like TriboTEX, Archoil and CeraTek which I am personally running and many others are as well. The LT1's dyno is from a 2017 SS 1LE 6M with a Rotofab CAI but otherwise stock, it represent the "hottest" SS dyno I could find on the stock tune with 93 oct. Obviously the 5.0's graph's are NOT on the correct RPM scale, the entire purpose of this is to show you the same RPM span of 4,500 RPM of each engine and how the power bands compare. Obviously you would need to gear the cars accordingly to utilize their power bands to greatest effect. And the different generations of the GT are not the same. 2015-2017's use a 5 speed with 1 over drive gear. 2018-Present GT's use a 4 speed with dual over drive like the TR6060 in the 2106+ SS.
With the 5.0, you would need to gear the car differently than with the LT1 when comparing a 2015-2017 GT to the Alpha, but 4th in the SS is 1:1 and 5th in the GT is 1:1. The thrust curves above provide a good illustration of the gearing differences and how the torque bands are used. For Power Pack 2, I find the best all around gearing to be 3.73 with 35 series tire that results in 4% increase in final drive ratio (aka shortens the gearing). This brings the 2015-2017 Power Pack 2 equipped GT very close in 4th gear (1.315 with a 3.73 final drive, 26.6" tire) to the SS in 3rd gear (1.300 with a 3.73 final drive and 27.6" tire). Top speed of the GT is 115 in 4th and 111 in the SS. So both engines are utilizing the maximum area under their respective power bands. I often compare it to the SS because it's such a great all around performer, even if visibility sucks, the trunk is small and has some other quirks.
Because of the extra rev range of Power Pack 2 vs. stock (7,150 vs. 6,800), I can shorten the gearing a bit, lower the CG without messing with geometry and significantly lower rotating mass. This compacts the power band of the 5.0 over a shorter distance (more gear reduction) to achieve better acceleration without giving up top speed in each gear over stock, even with the shorter 35 series tires, I still have +1mph over stock but am putting down WAY more torque to the wheels because of the combination of final drive reduction and gains from the Power Pack 2, TriboTEX and x-pipe. Even though the GT is a 5 speed single OD and the SS is a 4 speed dual OD, in the actual gears that one would use for performance, the overall thrust charts are nearly identical. Just that the GT has more granularity at lower speeds which could be a boon when getting out of the hole on a 35~40 mph hair pin turn.
All dynos are from DynoJet dynos, SAE corrected values, 93 octane on all cars and generally represent the best I could find for each car. Some people will cherry pick things and pick the worst run they can find from one car and compare it to the best run from another...which is idiotic and doesn't really give you a realistic comparison. The LT1 (with a CAI) would also benefit from DLC coatings and most likely directly match Power Pack 2 + DLC coatings + X-pipe. Gains aren't huge from DLC coatings, but they are there, verifiable and repeatable. I attached a bunch of actual dnyos of the same cars before and after CeraTech just to prove my point on DLC coatings. Both hBN and MSH provide similar coefficients of friction and over all function, just by different means.
TheLion70x77
Well-Known Member
And here's a Gen 3 5.0 stock to the CAI'ed LT1 (otherwise stock)...yah it's slower in the 1/4 by 2-3 tenths still, but that's because of the gearing, suspension tuning and weight. That same car beats the pants off the SS in 1/2 mile drag races and 1 mile top speed runs (beat the SS by four car lengths 30 times in a row back to back on the salt flats, I think it was C&D that did the testing). Also the 10 speed GT is faster by a tenth or two than the 10 speed SS and even more than the older 8 speed SS.
It's all how you gear the car. The biggest draw back to the 5.0's design is fuel economy vs. performance. The torqy LT1's power band is more compact, so it's easier to gear the car for both performance and fuel economy. Where the GT's power band is way higher up, your compromising either fuel economy or performance more with the 5.0. It's better at doing one or the other, but not both as well as the LT1. The 3rd Gen 5.0 is more of a fair comparrison to the LT1 because both are DI and both have higher compression ratios than the 2nd Gen 5.0's.
Eventually I get my 5.0 up on the dyno and see if I can manage to match or exceed LMR's. If I'm correct on what I've done I should be able to manage roughly 431 whp vs. LMR's 421 for the Power Pack 2 runs. Both theirs and mine are a 3.73 PP GT, mine is a 2016, theirs a 2015. But essentially the same car.
It's all how you gear the car. The biggest draw back to the 5.0's design is fuel economy vs. performance. The torqy LT1's power band is more compact, so it's easier to gear the car for both performance and fuel economy. Where the GT's power band is way higher up, your compromising either fuel economy or performance more with the 5.0. It's better at doing one or the other, but not both as well as the LT1. The 3rd Gen 5.0 is more of a fair comparrison to the LT1 because both are DI and both have higher compression ratios than the 2nd Gen 5.0's.
Eventually I get my 5.0 up on the dyno and see if I can manage to match or exceed LMR's. If I'm correct on what I've done I should be able to manage roughly 431 whp vs. LMR's 421 for the Power Pack 2 runs. Both theirs and mine are a 3.73 PP GT, mine is a 2016, theirs a 2015. But essentially the same car.
TexasRebel
Gearshifter
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2016
- Threads
- 27
- Messages
- 2,500
- Reaction score
- 836
- Location
- between the mustard and the mayo
- Vehicle(s)
- 2016 YZ GTPP - PP2
I guess what I'm looking for is either position v. time or velocity v. time. Heck, even acceleration v. time would be good.
TheLion70x77
Well-Known Member
I did the GT350 Air Box cover mod a little differently. I also followed the advice and used a card board cut out to get the general shape first. Basically, what I did was create a "floating cover" design that isn't super sensitive to twisting of the cover, and it will maintain it's seal even if substantial flexing etc.
I re-used part of the original hood seal as a gasket around the entire cover in a very similar manner so how it originally mated to the hood, but instead it mates to the lexan cover. Basically you want to drill the holes at the outside edge of the rubber sealing gasket instead of through it. Then you trim the rubber seal with a scissors but not all the way down to the plastic. Just cut it down at the base where the "accordion" portion is. There's two folds, you want to trim one of the folds so there's only a single one left (like a Z). So you want it to have one bend with a flat top so it can compress and seal.
I also used some push pins to create a guide to hold the foam piece in place better. Originally I had a push pin at the end before the mod, but with the cover on, there's no way to put it in any longer as the hole I drilled went through the top portion of the CAI. But this works well. I wanted to make a as good of a seal around the top as possible, so making sure there is one "Z" fold left when you trim it down is important. You don't need to tighten screws all the way either, I used Nylock 10-32 nuts and tightened the 3/4" long 10-32 screws down to the head of the screw was flush with top of the nut.
This makes a "floating lid" where the rubber gasket is pushing back up against the lid but the nuts limit how far up it can travel. Much more and you'll over compress the gasket and the lid will start to warp or bow out. I drill holes ever 2-3 inches in most spots.
I re-used part of the original hood seal as a gasket around the entire cover in a very similar manner so how it originally mated to the hood, but instead it mates to the lexan cover. Basically you want to drill the holes at the outside edge of the rubber sealing gasket instead of through it. Then you trim the rubber seal with a scissors but not all the way down to the plastic. Just cut it down at the base where the "accordion" portion is. There's two folds, you want to trim one of the folds so there's only a single one left (like a Z). So you want it to have one bend with a flat top so it can compress and seal.
I also used some push pins to create a guide to hold the foam piece in place better. Originally I had a push pin at the end before the mod, but with the cover on, there's no way to put it in any longer as the hole I drilled went through the top portion of the CAI. But this works well. I wanted to make a as good of a seal around the top as possible, so making sure there is one "Z" fold left when you trim it down is important. You don't need to tighten screws all the way either, I used Nylock 10-32 nuts and tightened the 3/4" long 10-32 screws down to the head of the screw was flush with top of the nut.
This makes a "floating lid" where the rubber gasket is pushing back up against the lid but the nuts limit how far up it can travel. Much more and you'll over compress the gasket and the lid will start to warp or bow out. I drill holes ever 2-3 inches in most spots.
Last edited:
Sponsored
TheLion70x77
Well-Known Member
And also my foil tape / flashing mod to cover the gasp at the inlet tube to the intake (I forgot to take a pic when I had the bumper off, but you can see it decently well to get the idea). It may not look super sexy, but you can't really see it normally and it gets the job done. Maybe we could get VelossaTech to make a special version of their ram air duct with an extended bottom and a ramp to close off the gap:
NvrFinished
Well-Known Member
Looks good!
jstump2490
Well-Known Member
I am looking to buy a used power pack 2 and can't find the answer to this after searching for like 20 minutes, so I am just going to ask. Can you reuse the tune that comes with the kit? Is it like most other tuners where you just unjoin it from the old car and it allows you to use it on a new car?
thelostotter
Well-Known Member
You can use the hardware but the tune is going to be married to the previous car's VIN. You cannot transfer the power pack tunes between cars.
jstump2490
Well-Known Member
That's what I was afraid of. Thanks for the info!
Sponsored