Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 81 to 100 of 100

Thread: Ecoboost Mustang dummy check

  1. #81
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    564
    Forscan unfortunately does not have this feature as such. What should I try next guys. Did any body form an opinion of the last logs I sent? Who should I send this data too?

  2. #82
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    293
    That first log would seem to indicate an issue on 1, but then the second log has the ECM having issue with 2 and 3 more than 1 and 4, so I don't know what to tell you.
    Unless you actually have failing knock sensors, but it doesn't seem to have any issues with adding timing in the low load areas.

  3. #83
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    564
    Thank you for your analysis sir

  4. #84
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    564
    How.hpl
    And just like that....It runs fine again

  5. #85
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    293
    No changes? Same brand fuel?

    That second pull in that log looks really good!

  6. #86
    Advanced Tuner IARLLC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    942
    I wish that we understood why more clearly but either way, good news is good news.

  7. #87
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    564
    Quote Originally Posted by Seishuku View Post
    No changes? Same brand fuel?

    That second pull in that log looks really good!
    No changes other than this. I noticed it was running better so I went back to the old tune and sent it. It's like there was never a problem. I do not under stand. Same fuel octane, same gas station. I was content to just limp it along until it blew but it just went away. It is a blessing I know that lol

  8. #88
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    564
    Quote Originally Posted by IARLLC View Post
    I wish that we understood why more clearly but either way, good news is good news.
    So do I, so do I. If I do narrow it down I let you guys know.

  9. #89
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    767
    Still the scoring on the cylinder walls is not a good sign just just keep that in mind that down the road at some points things will get worse

  10. #90
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    293
    Yeah, that scoring isn't great... Not much you can do about it, unless he wants to tear it down and give it a good honing and re-ring.
    But if it's leak down is good and compression is still showing good numbers, I'd doubt it'll be a real issue... These engines burn some oil anyway.

    I should get my scope out and check my cylinders, I'd bet I have some scoring as well.

  11. #91
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    564
    Quote Originally Posted by Seishuku View Post
    Yeah, that scoring isn't great... Not much you can do about it, unless he wants to tear it down and give it a good honing and re-ring.
    But if it's leak down is good and compression is still showing good numbers, I'd doubt it'll be a real issue... These engines burn some oil anyway.

    I should get my scope out and check my cylinders, I'd bet I have some scoring as well.
    That would be interesting to know. Let me know if you do sir.

  12. #92
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    293
    Some tweaks, trying out HPP Mustang MBT, torque tables, and turbo params (wastegate canister, DC, etc), at first they were pretty good, but it doesn't *seem* to be settling in as well as the previous tune. So I may go back to the previous torque tables at least.

    It doesn't seem to want to hit that 400 lb/ft torque number like before, though it is around 380 lb/ft for days. It feels pretty good... So, I don't know what to make of it.

    On the plus side, I've been running with flex fuel enabled for a few weeks now and it's been working great! The AFR is a bit on the rich side for the mix that's in the tank (should be about 20% alcohol), but I'm not sure if that's the flex logic getting confused between LTFT and alcohol content.
    I have my 3" downpipe on again, which usually pushes LTFT out about 4-6%, so maybe that's it?
    I don't know, as long as lambda is logged where it should.

    Also good news, with the injection window where it is, I'm pretty sure I can safely run this config with E30 mix and not go lean. I know the HPFP isn't going to like this, as it's already at 83% regulator DC.
    Attached Files Attached Files

  13. #93
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    293
    So just an FYI for anyone wanting to enable flex fuel on a Ford that didn't have it from the factory:
    If your fueling tables aren't on target, the flex logic *will* take up the slack in extra fuel instead of LTFT... UNLESS flex AFR is locked and learned, then LTFT will work as intended. But then that goes all wacky the next time you fill up the tank, because that will then trigger flex learning again.

    Now, while none of this is a problem from the ECU's fueling algorithm standpoint, it all works out correctly weather it's flex logic adding the fuel or LTFT... It DOES however make the AFR gauge in the cluster mostly useless.

    Though while typing all this, I did some math, assuming there's (at worst) 15% alcohol in the tank, that's 13.7:1 AFR...
    I had just filled up last night, AFR gauge is showing a stoich of 11.8, that's still 16% richer than it should be... But I know my LTFT has never been that high before, usually about 6% (as I stated above), so I have no idea what's going on here.
    I even went as far as resetting PCM adaptations, hoping that it was just a goof, but no... Went right back to 11.8 AFR.

    Anyone know if there's a way to display lambda in the cluster on a 2015 Mustang? That would actually solve a lot of headaches for me. lol

    Edit:
    Is there an option in Forscan for the IPC that changes that? I don't remember seeing it before.
    I guess I can check myself, I've been meaning to disable the horn honk when you close a door with the engine running anyway.
    Last edited by Seishuku; 05-20-2023 at 09:02 PM.

  14. #94
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    564
    Sanity check. Since the issue I had back in Feb has not returned I figured I would experiment with the tune file again. I have added and then removed an electronic cutout to my catless downpipe so it is capped at the moment. What I wanted to achieve here is good power all the way to redline instead of basically running out of puff around 5700. Boost is up and timing is up very slightly but no real seat of the pants difference. I do like the engine note better above 6k rpm. Actually sounds like its worth listening to. I wish I had ethanol fuel around me to try your flex fuel changes but I am no help there.
    new.hpl

  15. #95
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    293
    Power to redline isn't going happen with the stock turbo... The stock turbine housing is tiny, while great for spool, it really chokes the flow at high RPM.
    You're well past peak torque at ~4800RPM anyway, so there really isn't any point on going higher other than noise.

    Though your torque graph does drop off quite a bit more, about 100 Ft/LBS, where my last log only drops 30 from peak... Though I didn't log to nearly as high of an RPM either, only 5k (you went to 6.8k), so maybe mine would drop more?

  16. #96
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    564
    Confirmed. Much slower with extended shift points. I would trade spool time to shift rpms out to 7k rpm.

  17. #97
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    293
    Sounds like it's time for a Precision NX2 turbo then!
    Still might not hold torque to 7k, but should get pretty close and make the same torque at lower pressure.

  18. #98
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    564
    I agree. I honestly believe that reducing the exhaust back pressure by using a larger turbine housing and external wastegate would only add to the longevity of the engine. As long as tq spikes are held in check and over all power is not pushed too high. Time for a large turbo upgrade. Too bad we cannot just decap these injectors for additional fuel flow.

  19. #99
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    293
    $700 for 1700cc injectors from Deatschwerks isn't too bad, but you'll still run out of flow from the HPFP, so I feel money is better spent there... Not that $1300 for an XDI pump is great.

    Edit:
    I'm often wondering just how bad the knockoff 1700cc injectors on eBay really are, they're half the price...
    I mean, I would never use them, but would be interesting to bench test them and see.
    Last edited by Seishuku; 08-28-2023 at 02:28 PM.

  20. #100
    Quote Originally Posted by Seishuku View Post
    $700 for 1700cc injectors from Deatschwerks isn't too bad, but you'll still run out of flow from the HPFP, so I feel money is better spent there... Not that $1300 for an XDI pump is great.

    Edit:
    I'm often wondering just how bad the knockoff 1700cc injectors on eBay really are, they're half the price...
    I mean, I would never use them, but would be interesting to bench test them and see.
    I would be happy to flow them in my bench to see how they pan out.
    Owner/Tuner@Evolution Automotive Performance
    Lincoln, Ne