Unleashed Tune blew my ecoboost mustang up

[SVO MkII]

It's important to keep in mind that we don't have all the data available on these engines. As with most things, people are much more likely to share their bad experiences than good. Google just about anything and you'll find more criticism than praise. Every manufacturer has an expected failure rate for their components, especially if that product comes with a warranty. You have to be able to come up with expected future costs. When the engineers design the product, they know what the anticipated failure rate is. This is used to predict the warranty liability. Unfortunately, we don't know what that rate is and whether or not this particular engine has performed better or worse than expected. This does not make anyone's experience less frustrating, or valid, etc. But it's hard to claim that a particular product is "flawed" without having access to the actual vs expected data. Just my "two cents".

Sponsored

 

[Deleted member]

It's important to keep in mind that we don't have all the data available on these engines. As with most things, people are much more likely to share their bad experiences than good. Google just about anything and you'll find more criticism than praise. Every manufacturer has an expected failure rate for their components, especially if that product comes with a warranty. You have to be able to come up with expected future costs. When the engineers design the product, they know what the anticipated failure rate is. This is used to predict the warranty liability. Unfortunately, we don't know what that rate is and whether or not this particular engine has performed better or worse than expected. This does not make anyone's experience less frustrating, or valid, etc. But it's hard to claim that a particular product is "flawed" without having access to the actual vs expected data. Just my "two cents".

I agree with your logic, but we do know the 2 major flaws of the 2.3 eco engine design.

1. Paper thin material on the exterior of the block, especially on the turbo side between cylinders 2 and 3. Most common place for them to throw a rod through the block is at this point. My own block cracked between the 2 as well.

2. Open deck block design, allows for cylinder flexing regardless of stock or tuned/modified. The cylinders can flex and crack.

LSPI will happen regardless of Ford fixing these 2 issues or not, but LSPI can trigger ecoboom when you have these 2 main weak points. My guess is ford will not go semi closed or closed deck on the block, because then we could all go full bolt on and big turbo and start hurting coyotes feelings without having to worry about going boom.

 

[SVO MkII]

I agree with your logic, but we do know the 2 major flaws of the 2.3 eco engine design.

1. Paper thin material on the exterior of the block, especially on the turbo side between cylinders 2 and 3. Most common place for them to throw a rod through the block is at this point. My own block cracked between the 2 as well.

2. Open deck block design, allows for cylinder flexing regardless of stock or tuned/modified. The cylinders can flex and crack.

LSPI will happen regardless of Ford fixing these 2 issues or not, but LSPI can trigger ecoboom when you have these 2 main weak points. My guess is ford will not go semi closed or closed deck on the block, because then we could all go full bolt on and big turbo and start hurting coyotes feelings without having to worry about going boom.

At the risk of going too far down the semantics trail, not every "weakness" constitutes a "flaw". It may very well be that those are weaknesses of this design. However, I would argue that they only become flaws if they cause failures in excess of expectations. Again, I'm not saying that these are definitely NOT flaws. Just saying without more data, it's hard to objectively determine that they are flaws, by definition.

If anyone wants some interesting reading. Google "Porsche IMS bearing class action". For those not familiar, Porsche's first generation of watercooled flat 6 contained a weakness that contributed to an excessively high failure rate. This ultimately led to a class action lawsuit and subsequent settlement.

 

[Deleted member]

At the risk of going too far down the semantics trail, not every "weakness" constitutes a "flaw". It may very well be that those are weaknesses of this design. However, I would argue that they only become flaws if they cause failures in excess of expectations. Again, I'm not saying that these are definitely NOT flaws. Just saying without more data, it's hard to objectively determine that they are flaws, by definition.

If anyone wants some interesting reading. Google "Porsche IMS bearing class action". For those not familiar, Porsche's first generation of watercooled flat 6 contained a weakness that contributed to an excessively high failure rate. This ultimately led to a class action lawsuit and subsequent settlement.

I would agree with you that its not a high enough rate vs production volume to constitute a lawsuit or recall by ford, like the case with the Porsche's. That being said, most ecoboom failures are from a failure of 1 of the 2 if not both the problems listed above, that's a fact not semantics.

 

[SVO MkII]

I would agree with you that its not a high enough rate vs production volume to constitute a lawsuit or recall by ford, like the case with the Porsche's. That being said, most ecoboom failures are from a failure of 1 of the 2 if not both the problems listed above, that's a fact not semantics.

Yep. "Semantics" is in reference to the terms "weakness" versus "flaw".

 

[Deleted member]

Yep. "Semantics" is in reference to the terms "weakness" versus "flaw".

Wouldn't a weakness that can be exploited even in a stock unmodified vehicle with a general commonality constitute it being a flaw in design?

 

[SVO MkII]

Wouldn't a weakness that can be exploited even in a stock unmodified vehicle with a general commonality constitute it being a flaw in design?

Only if that weakness results in a higher than anticipated failure rate. Every complex component has areas that are considered "weaknesses", relative to those areas that are not. The question is whether that weakness causes unacceptable failure rates, prompting changes to address the weakness. The cost to remedy the weakness could far exceed the cost of anticipated failures. It's an economic decision.

 

[Deleted member]

Only if that weakness results in a higher than anticipated failure rate. Every complex component has areas that are considered "weaknesses", relative to those areas that are not. The question is whether that weakness causes unacceptable failure rates, prompting changes to address the weakness. The cost to remedy the weakness could far exceed the cost of anticipated failures. It's an economic decision.

Fair enough, I respect the logic behind this, and want to thank you for being able to have a civil discussion with me and did not try and turn it into a d**k measuring contest like some forum members like to do.

 

[SVO MkII]

Fair enough, I respect the logic behind this, and want to thank you for being able to have a civil discussion with me and did not try and turn it into a d**k measuring contest like some forum members like to do.

Absolutely. And as I said, this doesn't change the fact that you had a failure. Even if your's was the only failure ever, in the world (which we know it's not). It happened, and it sucks. These forums should be about sharing experiences and ideas, in a civil manner. Thank you.

 

[ZenkaiRacer]

Would just like to input that I've had an Unleashed Tune since 1500 miles 4 years ago and it's never given me a problem. Never had to switch between seasonal tunes. From 30 degree winter canyon runs, to 95 degree drag races, it's been great!

 

[shogun32]

It really seems like there is something going wrong with cylinder 3 as every time I read about this, its always cyl 3 involved lol

crap design. "FEA signed off on it so it must be good."

 

[Flipping Bird]

This guy (unleashed) is the #2 blower upper of ecoboost mustangs.

 

[shogun32]

This guy (unleashed) is the #2 blower upper of ecoboost mustangs.

citation?

 

[Flipping Bird]

So, there is an unspoken thing here. There is a tuner, not named in this thread that was the #1 blower upper of ecoboost mustangs. World champion no doubt. It was in all the forums. This person, imho, is an evil genius type. He figured it out after blowing up roughly 40-50 cars (in the beginning of s550). I have not heard of his tunes blowing a motor in a long time, maybe 18 months to 2 years. He learned on the back of all his blown up customers. Probably got rich off of it. I just shake my head. If you want full out max effort tune, find out who this guy is and seek him out. Personally, I am happy with Cobb stage 3.

 

[Deleted member]

So, there is an unspoken thing here. There is a tuner, not named in this thread that was the #1 blower upper of ecoboost mustangs. World champion no doubt. It was in all the forums. This person, imho, is an evil genius type. He figured it out after blowing up roughly 40-50 cars (in the beginning of s550). I have not heard of his tunes blowing a motor in a long time, maybe 18 months to 2 years. He learned on the back of all his blown up customers. Probably got rich off of it. I just shake my head. If you want full out max effort tune, find out who this guy is and seek him out. Personally, I am happy with Cobb stage 3.

Cough* Adam Cough* there I said it for you

Sponsored