Sponsored

Ford Racing ProCal Tune

OP
OP
TheLion

TheLion

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Threads
68
Messages
1,621
Reaction score
585
Location
US
Vehicle(s)
Ruby Red 2016 Mustang GT PP 6-MT
Maybe I missed it in one of your above posts but why the change in intercooler?
Or your just trying a different shape one to see how performance compares.

The ATM does seem to have a deeper core were the main airflow is, at the bottom, at least from the pics.
I was given the opportunity to test one of ATM's new production units by Dave at ATM at cost. The Levels Gen 3 did pretty good on cooling, but I've noticed the car had some lag and it would periodically hesitate which I never experienced prior to installing the Levels (however the stock unit would heat soak so quickly the car would constantly be pulling power with anything beyond 2nd gear, sometimes even in the middle of 2nd gear on a hot day, it was no good even on the factory calibration). So while the Levels introduced some lag and periodic hesitation and low rpm / light throttle, it was still a big improvement over stock. The car was still making good power over all.

I also noticed however the top end was extremely flat with the Levels inter cooler and -CJA FP Calibration, this was especially apparent when switching to the FP Calibration (which for a while I thought it was just the limits of the Calibration). While the intake manifold (cold side) temps were great, the inter cooler seemed to be causing the turbo to run out of steam at the top end. It was very noticeable when the rest of the power and torque band was so strong.

I've suspected the inter cooler and possibly the calibration, may be responsible for the weak top end for a while, but wasn't sure which one or possibly both were the culprits. According to FP the only difference between -CJA and -CJB is the fix in the mid range, so that means the drop off in power at the top end was being caused by the inter cooler, which I'll explain below.

Once I had it dynoed I confirmed what was very obviously felt in real world driving. Torque would rapidly drop off starting at 5800 RPM and by 6000 RPM power dropped from 300 hp at the wheels to 250 hp and stayed at 250 hp until fuel cutoff at 6800. I believe at the upper RPM range the turbo wasn't able to maintain pressure at the flow rates required from 5800 to 6500 RPM, causing it to run outside of it's efficiency range.

Once you move outside of the efficiency island of the turbo your heat output increases significantly on the compressor side as well as the back pressure (and hence you get heat buildup in the exhaust) on the exhaust side. This would certainly cause catalyst temps to increase significantly and consequently the PCM was protecting the cat by pulling power and dumping fuel to cool things off. Both the shop owner I had the car dyno'd at and Mike Goodwin af FP confirmed that as they both told me that same thing.

That power drop off is not due to mechanical limits of the turbo / cams, timing, fuel or air intake rates, it's clear from the dyno the PCM is limiting power for some reason at the top end. While the rest of the power band (save for the funky glitch between 5000-5300 that gets fixed in -CJB) was great. I changed two variables at once just last Saturday after the dyno (installed the ATM inter cooler and flashed to the -CJB revision), which seems to have corrected that issue at the top end and also the flat feeling in the mid-range between 5000-5300 RPM.

The car seems to pull much better at the top end and there's almost no detectable fade, at least compared to before. You'll drop some power as your reach 6500, but not nearly as much as my dyno showed. Of course the flat spot in the mid range is also gone due to the calibration. The lag is also gone now as well (mostly due to the inter cooler).

I originally had wanted to purchase the ATM inter cooler when I first started upgrading but they were closing up shop right at that time so I was not able to get one before they dried up. There's more to the ATM inter cooler's design than just it's stepped core shape making the best use of air flow. It also uses rounded bars instead of traditional flat bars. They act like a velocity stack and allow for 15% better air flow compared to the flat bars (80% efficiency vs. 95%). The rounded bars are internal as well as at the ambient face (outside), so you get high flow rates externally which increases cooling capacity, and lower pressure drop internally without altering fin density (which reduces cooling by reducing both surface area and dwell time).

Flat bars add inefficiency to flow rates internally and externally without adding to the cooling capacity. Fin density determines dwell time and heat transfer (by surface area) primarily, but the flat bars decrease efficiency without any positive cooling benefits by creating additonal restriction where the air is not passing the cooling fins be inhibiting their entry into the cooling vains (where the fins are stacked).

The end tanks on the ATM appear to also be minimized for as low of a volume as possible without inhibiting air flow to the various parts of the core where the end tanks of the levels are quite large (more appropriate for a big turbo application). Adding volume to the end tanks only adds lag without any other benefit, it also adds turbulence which creates additional pressure drop and cooling inefficiencies. So those 3 differences when combined make for a reasonable increase in overall performance. Buy once, cry once!

Simply put, the combination of one of the best inter coolers on the market from ATM and the -CJB revision of the Ford Performance Calibration is impressive and the car now runs with the responsiveness of an NA engine but with all the benefits of a FI engine.

It pulls nice and smooth throughout the entire RPM range now without the wall at the top by 5800 RPM and the lag I had wit the Levels Gen 3 is gone. I think I've found the warranty friendly (and long service life of the car) trifecta for the ecoboost mustang owners who want the safest and most reliable route to tap into power potential the car has to offer (without stepping up to a V8).

1. FP Calibration (-CJB revision)
2. ATM inter cooler
3. 3.73 Torsen diff (or 3.55 Torsend diff for auto)

You can't get much better than that without going to more involved and warranty voiding after market modifications (like big turbo's, built bottom ends, shop tunes) at which point you mine as well buy a super charged coyote for $10k from Midway Mustang and swap it in which can put out 670 HP on pump gas all day long without a hitch.



Externally, the ATM occupies 880 in^3 while the levels occupies 980 in^3, not a huge difference, but internally the could not be more differently designed.
Sponsored

 
Last edited:

Glenn G

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 3, 2015
Threads
51
Messages
2,075
Reaction score
802
Location
Kaiserslautern, Germany
First Name
Glenn
Vehicle(s)
15 DIB 6MT base Ecoboost
Makes sense, I've said it here somwhere that while the levels is a really good inter-cooler, it is just too big for the stock turbo, With a max flow rate of around 39 lbs/minute, the stock turbo is running out of breath just keeping it full.
Everyone knows bigger is better when it comes to inter coolers, Alot of people do not realize that you can have too much of a good thing too.

While I wouldn't hesitate to recommend the Levels (or MAP Race like I have) for big turbo cars, I do believe the ATM is probably the best unit out there right now.
 
OP
OP
TheLion

TheLion

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Threads
68
Messages
1,621
Reaction score
585
Location
US
Vehicle(s)
Ruby Red 2016 Mustang GT PP 6-MT

 
OP
OP
TheLion

TheLion

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Threads
68
Messages
1,621
Reaction score
585
Location
US
Vehicle(s)
Ruby Red 2016 Mustang GT PP 6-MT
Makes sense, I've said it here somewhere that while the levels is a really good inter-cooler, it is just too big for the stock turbo, With a max flow rate of around 39 lbs/minute, the stock turbo is running out of breath just keeping it full.
Everyone knows bigger is better when it comes to inter coolers, Alot of people do not realize that you can have too much of a good thing too.

While I wouldn't hesitate to recommend the Levels (or MAP Race like I have) for big turbo cars, I do believe the ATM is probably the best unit out there right now.
Glenn, I completely agree with you. I think the Levels was affecting negatively the performance of the stock turbo, it just could not maintain flow rates at the desired pressure that the FP Calibration was asking, so it was all tapped out by 5800 RPM.

The ATM is impressive with the stock turbo and FP Calibration. It's the most efficient cooler out there even if it's doesn't have the absolute highest cooling capacity (there are some mega sized FMIC's that would be well suited to big turbo applications).

The stock turbo is not bad, but it you definitely need to be careful what modifications you use or you may actually hurt performance or hurt performance in certain areas to gain it in another even if you achieve better overall performance. The idea is to increase power across the entire RPM range which I was not able to do with the Levels on a stock turbo. There's no doubt the car was faster with the Levels than with the factory FMIC as the total area under the curve increased significantly compared to the factory FMIC, but there are better suited FMIC's out there for stock turbo applications that won't negatively affect the flow rates and pressure at the top end where the Turbo is moving to the edge of it's efficiency island aka small changes have dramatic impacts.

Stage 1 units are ideal like the CP-e or Mishimoto or MAP Stage 1. If you want more cooling than the Stage 1 units, the ATM will provide the best cooling on the stock turbo without affecting the turbo efficiency at the top end or inducing lag. Like anyone, I don't know everything and sometimes there's a better way. I wasn't satisfied with the car even though it was significantly improved compared to stock. I'm now at the point where the power, response and reliability are very well balanced between the 3 main mods (FMIC, gearing and FP Calibration). I'll do the data logging and dyno for peace of mind some numbers to compare before / after but I think I'm done fiddling with the engine and time to finish the suspension.

Any more power and I think I'd be better off swapping in a super charged V8 (better power / reliability and about the same cost than a built bottom end / big turbo I4 in my opinion).
 

Edkiefer

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2015
Threads
0
Messages
324
Reaction score
38
Location
NYC
Vehicle(s)
XR4ti
Glenn, I completely agree with you. I think the Levels was affecting negatively the performance of the stock turbo, it just could not maintain flow rates at the desired pressure that the FP Calibration was asking, so it was all tapped out by 5800 RPM.

The ATM is impressive with the stock turbo and FP Calibration. It's the most efficient cooler out there even if it's doesn't have the absolute highest cooling capacity (there are some mega sized FMIC's that would be well suited to big turbo applications).

The stock turbo is not bad, but it you definitely need to be careful what modifications you use or you may actually hurt performance or hurt performance in certain areas to gain it in another even if you achieve better overall performance. The idea is to increase power across the entire RPM range which I was not able to do with the Levels on a stock turbo. There's no doubt the car was faster with the Levels than with the factory FMIC as the total area under the curve increased significantly compared to the factory FMIC, but there are better suited FMIC's out there for stock turbo applications that won't negatively affect the flow rates and pressure at the top end where the Turbo is moving to the edge of it's efficiency island aka small changes have dramatic impacts.

Stage 1 units are ideal like the CP-e or Mishimoto or MAP Stage 1. If you want more cooling than the Stage 1 units, the ATM will provide the best cooling on the stock turbo without affecting the turbo efficiency at the top end or inducing lag. Like anyone, I don't know everything and sometimes there's a better way. I wasn't satisfied with the car even though it was significantly improved compared to stock. I'm now at the point where the power, response and reliability are very well balanced between the 3 main mods (FMIC, gearing and FP Calibration). I'll do the data logging and dyno for peace of mind some numbers to compare before / after but I think I'm done fiddling with the engine and time to finish the suspension.

Any more power and I think I'd be better off swapping in a super charged V8 (better power / reliability and about the same cost than a built bottom end / big turbo I4 in my opinion).
Yeh, for stock turbo airflow the levels is probably little to big, or tank area to big also, that you get slight lag.
ATM is more compact but still has very good size core area.

I know from past installing upgraded IC or various models and makes, when you go to much bigger and were intercooler is remounted (were piping gets longer), on come combo's depending on turbo size and IC size some low rpm response lag happens.
I can't comment on this platform, as haven't worked on it yet.
 

Sponsored

BTBAM

Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2017
Threads
1
Messages
16
Reaction score
16
Location
Chicago
Vehicle(s)
2017 GT 350 Oxford White/Blue Stripes
Well crap I just bought a Levels street core off someone here and I'm about to install it :( I wish I would have known about the ATM, I would have jumped on that.
 

marjen

2015 Mustang Ecoboost
Joined
May 14, 2014
Threads
57
Messages
806
Reaction score
111
Location
Ct
Vehicle(s)
2015 mustang Ecoboost premium
What is a CJB revision for this tune?
 
OP
OP
TheLion

TheLion

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Threads
68
Messages
1,621
Reaction score
585
Location
US
Vehicle(s)
Ruby Red 2016 Mustang GT PP 6-MT
What is a CJB revision for this tune?
It's just the latest revision that fixes the torque drop off that occurs from around 5000 to 5300 RPM. There was some sort of programming bug in their intial release. It doesn't hurt anything, but your missing a big chunk of power right in the mid band.

Basically it makes the car feel flat from around 5k to 5.5k then you'll get a surge of power. I do not believe there are any other changes than the fix for that bug.

If your just downloading their calibration, just check to see if the last letters of the pc3 file are -CJB and not -CJA. Procal should automatically pick the latest rev.

If you need to update or don't know which version you have installed, just plug in your OBDII dongle and laptop, start of ProCal 3 and see what it reads at the top under the "Software ID" field at the very top. The last letters will either be -CJA or -CJB (unless in the future of course they have a Rev C in which case it would -CJC etc.).
 
OP
OP
TheLion

TheLion

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Threads
68
Messages
1,621
Reaction score
585
Location
US
Vehicle(s)
Ruby Red 2016 Mustang GT PP 6-MT
I second this question. A while back there was an update to the tune. Has there been another update??
The update your talking about IS the -CJB revision. I bought the FP Calibration in the first month or two it was out on the market and didn't know there was a bug that caused the torque to drop off in the mid-range for about 300 RPM.

I always just thought that flat feeling in that are was normal until some one in this thread mentioned and update. As I said, if you've recently purchased the Ecoboost Power Pack then you should have -CJB, but you can double check by the above post method quite easily.
 

Sponsored
OP
OP
TheLion

TheLion

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Threads
68
Messages
1,621
Reaction score
585
Location
US
Vehicle(s)
Ruby Red 2016 Mustang GT PP 6-MT
Well crap I just bought a Levels street core off someone here and I'm about to install it :( I wish I would have known about the ATM, I would have jumped on that.
Sell it on e-bay. It's not a bad inter cooler. It's still going to be a huge improvement over stock. But it's not optimal for a stock turbo and the FP Calibration.

Most of these turbo systems come very well tuned (in terms of mechanical design) and optimized for a good balance of drive ability vs. power. So making significant changes to charge pipe diameter and routing, inter cooler core size etc can have significant impacts on performance as my dyno showed at the top end.

UNLESS there's another bug in the initial release (-CJA) of the software that was causing my top end to behave like that (which according to FP there is not), then it was the Levels Gen 3 FMIC as the only two things I've changed are the FMIC and re-flashed to the updated -CJB revision of the FP Calibration. The top end is completely different than before, it pulls nice all the way to 6500 and it should show up on my second dyno run in a few weeks once I can get another appointment. I also am seeing higher boost in the 5800 to 6500 range. Before boost would typically fall off to between 18 and 19.5 PSI, some times as low as 16 to 17 PSI. It's now typically around 20~22 PSI out at 6500.

So to me that was a big indication the Levels Gen 3 FMIC was not flowing the charge air optimally at that RPM. It is most likely due to a combination of factors ranging from core shape (and it's utilization of the oncoming air flow), bar sizing and core / end tank volume. The best stage 1 FMIC would be the CP-e Delta core, but the MAP and Mishimoto are also great upgrades from the factory unit. The ATM is at the top of the list in terms of cooling capacity compared to the stage 1 units without negatively affecting flow. I'm thoroughly impressed at he difference. In terms of cooling capability I don't think the ATM is significantly better than the Levels, which does a great job cooling, but with a stock turbo application there are negative side affects with a core that large and withat that design.
 
Last edited:

marjen

2015 Mustang Ecoboost
Joined
May 14, 2014
Threads
57
Messages
806
Reaction score
111
Location
Ct
Vehicle(s)
2015 mustang Ecoboost premium
So I finally read through a lot of this thread, its been awhile. Realized there was an upgrade to the tune so I just installed it. I have had the tune since December so had the original file.

So now that the 18s are announced, I am thinking of ordering one. The one thing that sucks though is I am sure there will be NO FP tune for the new model. Or at least I assume this one will not be compatible. I guess we need to wait a bit to find out, but that kind of sucks as I am not a fan of the stock tune.
 
OP
OP
TheLion

TheLion

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Threads
68
Messages
1,621
Reaction score
585
Location
US
Vehicle(s)
Ruby Red 2016 Mustang GT PP 6-MT
So I finally read through a lot of this thread, its been awhile. Realized there was an upgrade to the tune so I just installed it. I have had the tune since December so had the original file.

So now that the 18s are announced, I am thinking of ordering one. The one thing that sucks though is I am sure there will be NO FP tune for the new model. Or at least I assume this one will not be compatible. I guess we need to wait a bit to find out, but that kind of sucks as I am not a fan of the stock tune.
Power output for 2018 EB's is the same for the Ecoboost, most of the meaningful changes are on the V8's with higher compression / flow for a power bump and the 10 speed auto (although I suppose a 2018 EB might get a 10 speed auto as well but I'll bet my bottom dollar they will keep the 6R80 in the EB as more justification to buy a V8). That's mostly because the current mustang V8's stock can't compete against the new ATS chasis and corvett V8 GM used in the 2016+ Camaro.

If there is any minor power bump in the 2018 EB's it's unlikely to be anywhere close to the power output of a FP tuned EB and even less likely that there are any hardware changes (turbo, pistons, rods etc), so any power potential of the 2018's is not going to be any better. So what's the point? I could see some one who leased a V8 trade up to the 2018, but I think most people who got EB's bought them to mod so they aren't leasing. A trade in will loose a bunch of money in the mods. I'm not hopeful Ford will make the stop EB anywhere close to a FP tuned EB with a FMIC upgrade, not this cycle. Plus they would be encroashing on Focus RS territory which which is even less justification to update the EB stang platform and for $1200 worth of upgrades (FP Calibration + FMIC) you can spank a stock Focus RS / WRX STi at 7k less.

I'm just wondering what value there is in getting a 2018 over putting the trade up cost towards suspension / power / body mods that would make your 2015 the better car by a wide margin.
 
Last edited:

Redcruzer

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 23, 2015
Threads
10
Messages
750
Reaction score
386
Location
Redwood City
First Name
Chris
Vehicle(s)
2015 eco boost premium convertible, Ruby red
2018 EB gets 310hp, torque is at 350. It does get the 10 speed and reported at sub 5 sec 0-60. Cant see current tune working with the 10 speed.
 
Last edited:

marjen

2015 Mustang Ecoboost
Joined
May 14, 2014
Threads
57
Messages
806
Reaction score
111
Location
Ct
Vehicle(s)
2015 mustang Ecoboost premium
^^ what he said. I currently have a 15. In very good shape with what I owe on it, I would like th 10 speed auto, upgraded interior, difigtsl dash, sync 3 and that bright orange fury. My car has 55k on it and is in its second engine. Just looking to start over. Thought about a GT but don't think it's worth the extra cost as this is a DD and I do a lot of driving.
Sponsored

 
 




Top