Cavalli Turbo......

[Nihil]

I had no issues with fueling at 29.7 psi on the stock turbo. I only had issues with the rods keeping up

Getting these turbo upgrades coming down the pipeline and people shooting for 350-400 hp and tq makes me wonder how long the stock block and drivetrain components can hold up to that power output.

Sponsored

 

[dragonacc]

Getting these turbo upgrades coming down the pipeline and people shooting for 350-400 hp and tq makes me wonder how long the stock block and drivetrain components can hold up to that power output.

WMS had to replace their clutch already so it's definitely something to keep in mind. The guys with auto's shouldn't be too worried because those have been shown to take a large amount of abuse in the GTs for several years now.

 

[JJ@WMS]

WMS had to replace their clutch already so it's definitely something to keep in mind. The guys with auto's shouldn't be too worried because those have been shown to take a large amount of abuse in the GTs for several years now.

Yes but also keep in mind that we beat on our car from the first day we got it in October of last year and it was alot of track duty and testing. I think the stock clutch will hold out a bit longer then ours did but I also feel once the power goes up you will have to get rid of the dual mass flywheel completely and go to a solid clutch setup which will make for more NVH.

As far as the motor holding up to more power I think its a bad idea to try and gain 100hp+/100tq+ over stock using the powder metal cracked rods. Sure you can make a ton of power on an unloaded dyno and advertise that all day long but is that really a responsible thing to do? I dont feel that it is and if your a company that is going to do that then take that high dyno numbered car to the track and beat it to death to prove that your combination of parts and tuning will hold up before you start selling those combinations.

The majority of EB owners will do simple mods, mods that will increase the smile factor of driving the car and make the car more fun, sound better and look better and thats why we have focused on our safe and reliable tuning and combination of parts that will serve the needs of the majority. We have and will continue to push our own car to find the limits but we wont use our customers as test subjects.

JJ

 

[dragonacc]

Yes but also keep in mind that we beat on our car from the first day we got it in October of last year and it was alot of track duty and testing. I think the stock clutch will hold out a bit longer then ours did but I also feel once the power goes up you will have to get rid of the dual mass flywheel completely and go to a solid clutch setup which will make for more NVH.

JJ

I think most of the people wanting to swap turbos will also be beating their cars and need a new clutch before too long. Otherwise why bother? ;)

 

[MAPerformance]

Yes but also keep in mind that we beat on our car from the first day we got it in October of last year and it was alot of track duty and testing. I think the stock clutch will hold out a bit longer then ours did but I also feel once the power goes up you will have to get rid of the dual mass flywheel completely and go to a solid clutch setup which will make for more NVH.

As far as the motor holding up to more power I think its a bad idea to try and gain 100hp+/100tq+ over stock using the powder metal cracked rods. Sure you can make a ton of power on an unloaded dyno and advertise that all day long but is that really a responsible thing to do? I dont feel that it is and if your a company that is going to do that then take that high dyno numbered car to the track and beat it to death to prove that your combination of parts and tuning will hold up before you start selling those combinations.

The majority of EB owners will do simple mods, mods that will increase the smile factor of driving the car and make the car more fun, sound better and look better and thats why we have focused on our safe and reliable tuning and combination of parts that will serve the needs of the majority. We have and will continue to push our own car to find the limits but we wont use our customers as test subjects.

JJ

:lol:

If you wanted to try and poke me, you would have better results using the facebook feature.

Moving along, I'm excited to see what the Cavalli turbo can do. Very curious how its going to perform with the factory housings, they are fairly small. Shot them an email to see if we can get some more specs.

 

[JJ@WMS]

:lol:

If you wanted to try and poke me, you would have better results using the facebook feature.

Moving along, I'm excited to see what the Cavalli turbo can do. Very curious how its going to perform with the factory housings, they are fairly small. Shot them an email to see if we can get some more specs.

Its not a poke at all, its my opinion and an opinion based upon years of working on and modifying vehicles especially ones using powder metal cracked rods.

JJ

 

[Juben]

Its not a poke at all, its my opinion and an opinion based upon years of working on and modifying vehicles especially ones using powder metal cracked rods.

JJ

Have you had an EcoBoost experience prior to the Mustang? Just curious. The FoST rods are almost identical yet they're holding up just fine at over 400+ whp/wtq. Seeing how the 2.3 is based on the 2.0, I'd be more likely to think the performance of the 2.3 rods would match that of the 2.0 rods more than older Lightning trucks. :shrug:

We all realize that you were taking shots at MAP with your statements and whether you'd direct statements like that at them or even another vendor, it looks bad on your part. I realize it's your opinion and you have every right to voice that, but from a consumer standpoint, it just looks like your taking cheap shots at them...which is very unappealing.

 

[LeonBorden]

Let's understand that a longer rod means there's more leverage on it, potentially meaning it's weaker. The larger displacement may help achieve higher power at lower pressure though

 

[EcoSwag1990]

No cheap shots here. Solid information for the potentially unsuspecting customer. No names were used so only those who already knew who has an unloaded dyno would get the link

 

[MAPerformance]

Its not a poke at all, its my opinion and an opinion based upon years of working on and modifying vehicles especially ones using powder metal cracked rods.

JJ

It wasn't a poke? I'm sorry, I guess I made a mistake in assuming so. I figured it was seeing you have followed me post to post asking about our dyno. I'll be sure to let the 1000's of manufacturers that use unloaded Dynojet dyno's for their testing, to stop being successful now and only use the track to prove their products. In light of this new information, you guys down south should be happy to know that more performance manufacturers and tuners are heading your way to use your year-round tracks! Maybe if we would of used a loaded dyno to tune our 4g64 4cyl powered RX7 we would of went 8.0 instead of 8.1. But that could only be answered with factual data to prove that theory.

Anyways regarding cracked powder metal rods, we are aware of their capabilities and we are also aware on how to tune accordingly. If you missed our EBM FB group post we bought a spare motor before we even posted any dynographs, disassembled it and documented the pro's and con's of these engines from the start. Of all the EBM's, FoST's, and other weak rod engines I have tuned in house or E-tuned, not a single one has had a failure. The life of the customer's motor is in the hands of their tuner. For MY customers they are in my hands and I take full responsibility for their vehicle.

We are very much off topic, and I feel bad that I haven't contributed more to the actual topic. As I mentioned in a previous post I'm going to grab some more information from Cavalli and share it. I believe BGolden from RIP is working with them directly on testing the turbo, I look forward to his post!

 

[Herr_Poopschitz]

I don't find JJ's statements as 'taking a shot' either. Load is a very important factor in fueling.

That said, I hope the best for all the companies leading the way in EB development.

 

[JJ@WMS]

Have you had an EcoBoost experience prior to the Mustang? Just curious. The FoST rods are almost identical yet they're holding up just fine at over 400+ whp/wtq. Seeing how the 2.3 is based on the 2.0, I'd be more likely to think the performance of the 2.3 rods would match that of the 2.0 rods more than older Lightning trucks. :shrug:

We all realize that you were taking shots at MAP with your statements and whether you'd direct statements like that at them or even another vendor, it looks bad on your part. I realize it's your opinion and you have every right to voice that, but from a consumer standpoint, it just looks like your taking cheap shots at them...which is very unappealing.

We have EB experience, especially in the trucks and understand what other platforms can handle but this is a completely different platform from its internals to it calibration logic and fueling. The longer rod is going to hurt this car along with what its made out of.

If people want to think I'm taking shots then thats fine, everyone is entitled to their opinion including me and if someone doesnt want to do business with me because my opinion is different from theirs then that is once again their right to decide but I wont blindly follow alot of whats posted without giving my opinion and in this instance IMHO its very misleading and wrong to state you have hundreds of runs on an unloaded dyno and made xxx power on the same dyno without any issues when its a FACT that unloaded dyno's arent the true tell of how a combination will perform.... and thats coming from me who has an unloaded dynojet dyno.

You guys spend your hard earned money trusting in companies to give you proper information and technical data on products you want to buy from them and once again IMHO throwing numbers out to impress and drive sales and saying "there is no problem here" is wrong when in fact you havent tested one single time at a track or on a loaded dyno.

In the first month of ownership our own car was at the track 10 times and ran 40-50 times testing different things, it was only on our dyno a few times to show some numbers but I didnt rely upon those numbers, I took it back to the track and found weak links, problems in the calibration and perfected our tunes to where I was happy with the outcome, power level, driveability and SOTP feel. Thats what I call proper testing and something I will continue to do.



JJ

 

[JJ@WMS]

It wasn't a poke? I'm sorry, I guess I made a mistake in assuming so. I figured it was seeing you have followed me post to post asking about our dyno. I'll be sure to let the 1000's of manufacturers that use unloaded Dynojet dyno's for their testing, to stop being successful now and only use the track to prove their products. In light of this new information, you guys down south should be happy to know that more performance manufacturers and tuners are heading your way to use your year-round tracks! Maybe if we would of used a loaded dyno to tune our 4g64 4cyl powered RX7 we would of went 8.0 instead of 8.1. But that could only be answered with factual data to prove that theory.

I asked about your dyno for the very reason you avoided answering, because you know as well as I do that when you post "we have over 400 dyno runs on our EB Mustang with no problem fueling" that anyone with a sense of whats real would take you to task on the fact that your dyno is not loaded and that makes a huge difference in how a vehicle is fueled.

I agree with you, a dyno is just a tool to show what differences products can make. We too enjoy using our Dynojet dyno to show those differences when they are applicable but we also know that when products prove themselves at the track that is more important then any dyno sheet posted. Our 9 second 4200lb Lightning was never even on our dyno, it was track tested and tuned exactly where it should have been done.

We are on the same page, we just disagree on how the information is delivered to the community. I'll keep doing it my way and you keep doing it your way, we can agree to disagree but I'll hold my head up high knowing I wasnt questioning the quality of your product like you did mine, I'm only disagreeing with the delivery of the information.

:cheers:

JJ

 

[MAPerformance]

I asked about your dyno for the very reason you avoided answering, because you know as well as I do that when you post "we have over 400 dyno runs on our EB Mustang with no problem fueling" that anyone with a sense of whats real would take you to task on the fact that your dyno is not loaded and that makes a huge difference in how a vehicle is fueled.

I agree with you, a dyno is just a tool to show what differences products can make. We too enjoy using our Dynojet dyno to show those differences when they are applicable but we also know that when products prove themselves at the track that is more important then any dyno sheet posted. Our 9 second 4200lb Lightning was never even on our dyno, it was track tested and tuned exactly where it should have been done.

We are on the same page, we just disagree on how the information is delivered to the community. I'll keep doing it my way and you keep doing it your way, we can agree to disagree but I'll hold my head up high knowing I wasnt questioning the quality of your product like you did mine, I'm only questioning the delivery of the information.

:cheers:

JJ

I only avoided your question to avoid a dyno conversation like this with you. People arguing over what dyno is better has been an ongoing debate for 10+ years, and definitely not an argument that I wish to spend my time on. With experience on tuning many different platforms on may different dynos, its very easy for me to know what I can and cannot do on my dyno. I have a limit set in my head for many parameters when calibrating a car on our dyno, because I know when it goes out onto the street it's going to be slightly different. I guess you missed my comment where I said I finalize every tune on the street.

Every Accessport we sell comes with one of my tunes as an added bonus. I don't email the tune file to them until they receive the Accessport, and we have a conversation about the modifications on their car and the quality of fuel in their area. They log what I request, and I make adjustments as needed. I am personally checking every tune I email out to each customer before I give them the OK to let it rip. Again, my customers vehicle is my responsibility the second they load my tune onto their Accessport and plug it into their car. It is my job to make sure the products I am offering are going to keep the customers engine healthy, so i'm literally custom tuning multiple EBM's a day that are being driven on the street with my products, other products like yours, and even completely stock EBM's. This allows me to know how these vehicles respond in different locations in the world, with different types of fuel, and at different elevations. So, I don't just have experience with just one Mustang, in one location, on one type of fuel, on one type of dyno. I'm simply using our dyno as a tool just like you mentioned, to show where our products are exceeding the performance of the factory units, and to give me a better idea on how to answer the question "How much power will I be making with XXX and XXX?" The question I get multiple times a day.

Regarding your fueling comment "we have over 400 dyno runs on our EBM with no problem fueling". First, its actually 600+ runs now ;), and I don't have a problem with fueling on our dyno nor do I have a problem fueling on the street. My logs from our car, customers cars, and even other shop's cars that I have tuned, all are showing me no signs of fueling issues on E10/E30/E85 with my changes. Even Cobb has stated they aren't near running out of fuel just yet.

I'm very jealous of you though JJ, you are fortunate enough to have tracks that were open during your ownership of the EBM. Since we have had our car, the temperature has never been about 40 degree's and there is still snow in front of my shop.

 

[Billy1]

Thanks guys for keeping this civil. We are all here just to learn.

Sponsored