Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: A Stock Coyote, worth tuning w/o mods?

  1. #1
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    605

    A Stock Coyote, worth tuning w/o mods?

    Guys my 14 GT is stock except a converter and axle-backs. I've only ever run 93 octane. My tune primarily focuses on trans tuning for the converter and all of the must do values to keep the car safe.

    Did Ford leave anything on the table as far as power gains on a 100% on the factory tune with no engine mods? Timing seems to be on point in my stock logs vs modified ones.. I see 25+ degrees spark regardless of what I do. As for VCT timing.. folks here said there are no gains to be had really...

    Anyone tested bone stock and got real gains on the dyno?
    Last edited by blackbolt22; 06-29-2019 at 07:45 PM.
    Knock Retard is the reduction or prevention of knock by lowering ignition timing:

    (+) Adding Knock Retard = Reducing Timing. PCM is seeing knock.
    (--) Lowering Knock Retard = Increasing Timing. PCM isn't seeing knock.
    __________________________________________________ ________

    2014 Mustang GT Premium. VMP Gen2R Supercharged with an FTI 3000rpm Converter. JLT, BMR, Steeda, Viking, etc.
    Don't fix it if it ain't broken | Maximum effort gets maximum results

  2. #2
    Senior Tuner mbray01's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Slidell, La.
    Posts
    1,015
    fueling and cam timing is everything on these. Yes there are tons of places for improvements
    Michael Bray
    Rusty Knuckle Garage
    Slidell, Louisiana
    20yr Master Tech.
    Advanced Level Specialist
    Custom Car Fabrication, Customization, High Performance.
    GM World Class Technician
    Shop Owner

  3. #3
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    605
    Quote Originally Posted by mbray01 View Post
    fueling and cam timing is everything on these. Yes there are tons of places for improvements
    Fueling like A/F Ratio? Stock from 5k to 7500 is .835 increasing to .820 lambda on the stock tune. The consensus I think is .820 to .830 lambda on these cars. I set it all to .820 because I like safe.. Also I've dialed in my MAF . Anything else you can think of for fueling?

    As for cam timing I will never know because I don't think it's fruitful to dyno tune all day bracketing angles on a stock car lol. I bought the cookbook but I don't recall any cam angles for stock. Folks here have said stock is best but I am reluctant to agree since it looks like blanket angles...
    Knock Retard is the reduction or prevention of knock by lowering ignition timing:

    (+) Adding Knock Retard = Reducing Timing. PCM is seeing knock.
    (--) Lowering Knock Retard = Increasing Timing. PCM isn't seeing knock.
    __________________________________________________ ________

    2014 Mustang GT Premium. VMP Gen2R Supercharged with an FTI 3000rpm Converter. JLT, BMR, Steeda, Viking, etc.
    Don't fix it if it ain't broken | Maximum effort gets maximum results

  4. #4
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    23
    So you think making it richer will make more power? I picked up about 30 hp with a tune that I worked on for a while on my dyno. I picked up major in timing and a/f tables, and picked up with cam timing as well. It takes a lot of work and knowledge gained from trial and error. I have a wyn4 14 as well. It runs high 11's stock, except for X pipe which was worth 9 rwhp, kind of not really worth it. Aluminum driveshaft as well, only 3 hp, but worth the peace of mind. Other than drag radials, it's stock. Went 118 mph. I'm shooting for 120 mph and mid 11's as is. Just takes time.

  5. #5
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    605
    Quote Originally Posted by nxcoupe View Post
    So you think making it richer will make more power? I picked up about 30 hp with a tune that I worked on for a while on my dyno. I picked up major in timing and a/f tables, and picked up with cam timing as well. It takes a lot of work and knowledge gained from trial and error. I have a wyn4 14 as well. It runs high 11's stock, except for X pipe which was worth 9 rwhp, kind of not really worth it. Aluminum driveshaft as well, only 3 hp, but worth the peace of mind. Other than drag radials, it's stock. Went 118 mph. I'm shooting for 120 mph and mid 11's as is. Just takes time.
    Everyone says these cars like it rich. How much HP is being lost converting the stock .835 @ 5000 rpm to .820 @ 5000rpm? Should I just do the whole table at .835? I didn't think there would be much loss if any and it would allow more timing which would be more power on 93 octane - That's what I thought anyways.

    Yes I have wyn4. If I can go mid to high 11s on motor I probably wouldn't mod any more.. It's just a driveway queen that I want to be faster to race a few friends with stuff like Camaros, G8s just for fun... No competition or anything I baby it mostly.

    I think your car is impressive!! It's what I would be happy with. Do you think you are being risky with the mods/tune? I really appreciate your reply and explanation and sounds like you put a lot of work into it. Thanks for pointing me in the right direction...

    So an X-Pipe is worth 9 rwhp over stock H ? What about an aftermarket H?
    Knock Retard is the reduction or prevention of knock by lowering ignition timing:

    (+) Adding Knock Retard = Reducing Timing. PCM is seeing knock.
    (--) Lowering Knock Retard = Increasing Timing. PCM isn't seeing knock.
    __________________________________________________ ________

    2014 Mustang GT Premium. VMP Gen2R Supercharged with an FTI 3000rpm Converter. JLT, BMR, Steeda, Viking, etc.
    Don't fix it if it ain't broken | Maximum effort gets maximum results

  6. #6
    Senior Tuner
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Hawaii
    Posts
    2,101
    WOT lambda table values don't matter too much on a stock car that should be going into COT protection.
    Get rid of that COT and look at the values in the MBT lambda modifier table that lower the MBT the most, .85-.9. This shows you the most pumping loss reduction from PE, right from part of Fords own equations for calculating torque. You don't want the most timing you want MBT(Minimum for Best Torque timing). The least timing advance for the least pumping losses. There is all kinds of bread crumbs backed up by researched concepts in the calibration from ford. Assuming you are at MBT The leaner you can go with out detonation the more torque you will get, until stoich, then torque drops off from lack of fuel to create adequate cylinder pressure.

    Tuning the spark tables for higher octane 93+ and not 89 or 91 with the adaptive knock logic picks up power. Not really "left on the table" as Ford was targeting sales for a larger market over the extra 10-15 HP requiring premium fuel.

    Many times when you can get to MBT on good pump gas (this is by design by ford, they have to warranty this thing), and MBT on E85, it doesn't net any gains, you can enlean the E85 and pick up power, where you couldn't do that with gas as it creates too much heat and detonates not reaching MBT. You could go to a octane booster, 100 octane race fuel, or MS109, and again you would need to lean it out moving the MBT/ pumping losses to get more out of the fuel, compared to just what the fuel does, which can actually be make less power than a good pump gas for the same lambda/MBT.

    There are so many things we can do that OEMs can't because of the standards and regulations they need to meet.

  7. #7
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    605
    Quote Originally Posted by murfie View Post
    WOT lambda table values don't matter too much on a stock car that should be going into COT protection.
    Get rid of that COT and look at the values in the MBT lambda modifier table that lower the MBT the most, .85-.9. This shows you the most pumping loss reduction from PE, right from part of Fords own equations for calculating torque. You don't want the most timing you want MBT(Minimum for Best Torque timing). The least timing advance for the least pumping losses. There is all kinds of bread crumbs backed up by researched concepts in the calibration from ford. Assuming you are at MBT The leaner you can go with out detonation the more torque you will get, until stoich, then torque drops off from lack of fuel to create adequate cylinder pressure.

    Tuning the spark tables for higher octane 93+ and not 89 or 91 with the adaptive knock logic picks up power. Not really "left on the table" as Ford was targeting sales for a larger market over the extra 10-15 HP requiring premium fuel.

    Many times when you can get to MBT on good pump gas (this is by design by ford, they have to warranty this thing), and MBT on E85, it doesn't net any gains, you can enlean the E85 and pick up power, where you couldn't do that with gas as it creates too much heat and detonates not reaching MBT. You could go to a octane booster, 100 octane race fuel, or MS109, and again you would need to lean it out moving the MBT/ pumping losses to get more out of the fuel, compared to just what the fuel does, which can actually be make less power than a good pump gas for the same lambda/MBT.

    There are so many things we can do that OEMs can't because of the standards and regulations they need to meet.
    Thanks for this reply. I understand most of it but don't exactly get what you say "pumping loss reduction from PE" . How can you reduce pumping loss by enrichment.. do you mean compensating by increasing power output? Least timing advance for least pumping loss? I know what pumping loss is and if you are @ WOT it's easier for the engine to intake air .. I'm guessing this has to do with exhaust pumping losses?

    .85 lambda is the peak in that MBT chart.. So this is the most efficient lambda? Obviously not that safe though, right?

    As far as COT. Couldn't I just leave it enabled but raise the temperature or reduce the fuel ratio by setting that to something like .80 ? I notice everyone disables all of the overtemp protections. I have the stock cats.. would disabling COT cause them to fail early?
    Knock Retard is the reduction or prevention of knock by lowering ignition timing:

    (+) Adding Knock Retard = Reducing Timing. PCM is seeing knock.
    (--) Lowering Knock Retard = Increasing Timing. PCM isn't seeing knock.
    __________________________________________________ ________

    2014 Mustang GT Premium. VMP Gen2R Supercharged with an FTI 3000rpm Converter. JLT, BMR, Steeda, Viking, etc.
    Don't fix it if it ain't broken | Maximum effort gets maximum results

  8. #8
    Senior Tuner
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Hawaii
    Posts
    2,101
    The engine is has four strokes, some sort of pumping loss happens in all of them, as the engine is always pumping, even when both the valves are closed. During the intake and exhaust stroke you have a valve open, so pumping loss is relatively low. during the power stroke burning fuel with both valves closed gives you a net gain in pumping energy. Things like reducing rotating assembly weight and bearing friction would be a reduction in pumping loss in all strokes including the power stroke. During the compression stroke both valves are closed and the most pumping loss occurs, this stroke takes the most energy. Toward the end of this stroke you have spark advance starting the combustion, so the time between spark advance before TDC and TDC is just and increase in pumping loss. It is made up for by not having a dip or flat spot in cylinder pressure just after TDC in the start of the power stroke. This is MBT, the spark advance that gets you a cylinder pressure that has a smooth rising edge across TDC, but does not excessively work against the piston on its way to TDC. Look into the difference between SI and HCCI engines and you will probably find what most peoples common sense would tell them is the most efficient way it should be done and the way it actually needs to be done due to the combustion rate.

    From a torque output perspective .82 to .88 probably wouldn't be much difference in efficiency, just more heat as you go leaner, but stoich is still most powerful. When detonation limited you benefit from this efficiency. If you go richer you can reduce the heat and avoid detonation further. That just means you need better fuel.
    From a fuel efficiency perspective stoich is more efficient. At .85 the extra fuel isn't being burnt to give you more energy output. The excess is just wasted fuel and fuel economy. When there's more fuel readily available in the combustion reaction, what does burn is used up faster, leading to a faster rising edge of cylinder pressure, and a retarded MBT.

    Safe is just a balance between cylinder pressure, heat, detonation, and physical limits of engine components. OEMs design certain engines to run stoich all the time just for emissions and the fuel mileage benefit. Saying ".85 isn't safe" is way too general of a concept. Run a fuel you can achieve MBT(after the correction) with lambda at .92, and you will see more torque than at .85. can you run that for 15 minutes straight around a road course probably not, 10 seconds down a drag strip starting with everything very cold you can probably get away with it.

    Disabling the COT protection and driving like you obey all traffic laws would probably do nothing. Its just another "how much can this part take before failing?" It is any ones guess. Some will have a lean condition and have the cats fail in a 100% stock car, others will disable it and run 12 pounds of boost and they will live a long life as they never go WOT for more than 12 seconds and let things cool off between pulls.

  9. #9
    Senior Tuner veeefour's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    1,712
    Quote Originally Posted by murfie View Post

    Disabling the COT protection and driving like you obey all traffic laws would probably do nothing. Its just another "how much can this part take before failing?" It is any ones guess. Some will have a lean condition and have the cats fail in a 100% stock car, others will disable it and run 12 pounds of boost and they will live a long life as they never go WOT for more than 12 seconds and let things cool off between pulls.
    Most of the canned tunes from "tune factories" I've seen have COT protection disabled anyways.

  10. #10
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    605
    Quote Originally Posted by murfie View Post
    The engine is has four strokes, some sort of pumping loss happens in all of them, as the engine is always pumping, even when both the valves are closed. During the intake and exhaust stroke you have a valve open, so pumping loss is relatively low. during the power stroke burning fuel with both valves closed gives you a net gain in pumping energy. Things like reducing rotating assembly weight and bearing friction would be a reduction in pumping loss in all strokes including the power stroke. During the compression stroke both valves are closed and the most pumping loss occurs, this stroke takes the most energy.
    I appreciate your explanation of everything! My interpretation of pumping losses differs completely from yours and this may be the cause of my initial confusion.

    The entire statement quoted above is the opposite of what I understand pumping loss to be. To me: Pumping loss occurs in the act of moving the air in and out of the cylinder. Energy is wasted by 'pumping' the air in and out with resistance to that air flow. If the throttle is closed or exhaust is restrictive those losses increase greatly. The way you are wording it seems like pumping loss occurs more when valves are closed and less when they are open. If the valves are closed there are no pumping losses as no air is actually moving in and out of the cylinder. There IS compression losses.

    Cylinder deactivation technology (where an 8 cyl runs on 4) works by reducing pumping losses - by keeping the valves closed on those deactivated cylinders for all four strokes. The energy spent compressing what air is in the cylinder is regained by decompressing that same air - an 'air spring'. Obviously this can't be 100% efficient but still more efficient than pumping the air in and out with high resistance from low throttle (highway speeds)

    Intake stroke: pumping loss occurs - air/fuel is moved in . At low throttle there is resistance to this air flow which is why there is a vacuum at low throttle. At high throttle pumping loss is actually lower because there is less resistance to sucking in 5L of air.
    Compression stroke: no pumping loss occurs, this is compression losses. No air is moving in or out.
    Power stroke: no pumping loss occurs. No air is moving in our out.
    Exhaust stroke: pumping loss occurs - air/fuel is moved out against all of the restriction of the exhaust. This is why scavenging is a thing and timing the pulse waves to help each other in a certain rpm range is beneficial.

    Bearing and reciprocating friction are frictional losses, not pumping losses.

    All of the losses are additive and even relate to each other.

    When I get a chance I will look up the other technologies you mentioned. I invite more discussion!!
    Knock Retard is the reduction or prevention of knock by lowering ignition timing:

    (+) Adding Knock Retard = Reducing Timing. PCM is seeing knock.
    (--) Lowering Knock Retard = Increasing Timing. PCM isn't seeing knock.
    __________________________________________________ ________

    2014 Mustang GT Premium. VMP Gen2R Supercharged with an FTI 3000rpm Converter. JLT, BMR, Steeda, Viking, etc.
    Don't fix it if it ain't broken | Maximum effort gets maximum results

  11. #11
    Senior Tuner
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Hawaii
    Posts
    2,101
    I'm probably being to general in how I'm using the pumping loss terminology.

    I think of the process as a single cylinder with net gain and loss of energy.
    I see how having the valves closed in a deactivated driven cylinder could result in a near 0 net loss of energy. It's just not the same comparing it to an active cylinder.

    Take a small single cylinder engine for example. Remove the spark plug to remove the compression, it's very easy to turn over. Compare that to when it is allowed to make compression, it takes more effort to turn that engine over.

    The energy extracted during the power stroke gives you your net of energy out put. The intake and exhaust stroke take some of the energy, but the compression stroke takes the most. Then considering how advanced MBT is falling, to get the most energy from the fuel, that just increases or decreases the required energy for that stroke.

  12. #12
    Senior Tuner
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Hawaii
    Posts
    2,101
    HCCI, is basically MBT at 0 advance or TDC. No added loss to the compression stroke. The entire charge ignites all at once so you don't need the advance to achieve the smooth cylinder pressure rise across TDC.

    I would edit and add this to my other post, but on mobile edit post, means delete post.