Has anyone tuned a 2019-up Ranger? What kind of air mass flow figures are you seeing? It seems to be running a much bigger turbo than the other 2.3 engines or it might be my imagination?
Has anyone tuned a 2019-up Ranger? What kind of air mass flow figures are you seeing? It seems to be running a much bigger turbo than the other 2.3 engines or it might be my imagination?
I hopefully will be once my Tremor comes in.
I'm coming from Cobb and my 2017 WRX so this will be interesting to use HP Tuners.
You,ll find it better in a lot of ways versus Cob, but there are areas Cobb does a better job. I have a 13 Fusion 2.0 that I used Cobb on for 5 years doing tuning, then bought my 17 Sport, and use HP Tuners for it. I can say using Cobb on my 13 was a huge help learning Ford's way of doing stuff, and I,m still learning things, even after doing this for six plus years now.
Yeah, trying to wrap my head around all of the different spark tables is going to be something ridiculous.
Spark is easy, if your gonna do any testing just go to the global table , upper right corner. Just put in what you want to bump all tables up by. So say you just want to add 2 degrees, put in 2.00 and it will add 2 degrees to everything. As Cobb says, it's a great way to find power, once your happy with the results. Go in and adjust all the the tables to reflect the changes for better results. When I started using HP Tuners on my 17 Sport, I was glad too see they put this in with the timing tables. Gives you a fast and easy way to do rough tuning.
Personally I like to initially just allow more knock advance. If it takes it with no issue, then you can add to the borderline tables. I think global add is a riskier way to do it.
The ranger appears to truncate torque in 1st gear. I think the first things I would do is remove 1st gear torque truncation, remove PE enrichment delay, and increase torque demand. If all seems well, then start increasing spark and finding/addressing limits as they pop up.
Far as global goes, I wouldn't go any more than 3 degrees at a time, and don't run with it for a long time. Boarderline tables I make addjustments based on where and how much load. Cruising, hard pull, idle. You can hit the whole table, but breaking the tables down into areas works better sometimes.
Do you happen to have a stock ranger map? I'd like to see it before I jumped in.Originally Posted by engineermike
There's one here: https://forum.hptuners.com/showthrea...anger-Ecoboost!
thank you so much!
Edit - it doesnt seem to want to open - i am assuming that is because i dont have the adapter or credits yet? I have been able to open older mustang 2.3's. Any idea if that is the case?
Last edited by Rbelar21; 11-14-2021 at 06:18 AM.
Ah, yea... When I open it, it asks for me to connect my interface and it polls the servers for more resources.
My MPVI comes in today - So I'll be sure to keep you all up to date!
So poking through the tables... I really like engineermike's logic of removing pe delay, and messing with the throttle demand tables.
One question I do have is - is it worth messing with the Torque Model stuff at all? It seems as though that is a part of the whole ford HDFX setup with inverses and such.
Realistically I would like to just update some things to get my feet wet.
In terms of the torque truncation on the transmission - they seem to have it down pretty low, I will probably try to up it a bit (albiet not as high as the other gears yet).
Torque model you should only have to mess with if you're trying to push a load higher than it supports.
At least that's how it works on my Mustang, I'm assuming it still limits to the highest load there.
Beautifuly that's all i needed to hear - thanks so much.
Realistically I am just trying to see what I can push torque wise by just working with the Driver Demand Tables, then when i hit limits just try to push them up as well.
I've heard so many different theories and ideas behind tuning these things, but I would really like to manipulate torque, see it happen, then move to timing advance once i feel comfortable.
But isn't the torque model based on the VE Modeling for the engine/turbos as-is? If you're trying to push it to an air load higher than it supports, then it doesn't seem to make sense unless you are somehow changing something in the VE (like bigger displacement, bigger turbos, etc...)
I experimented with the torque/inverse torque tables with the 3.5 in the SHO and I was able to raise the boost quite a bit but otherwise didn't seem to do anything. I had the opportunity to look at a vendor's tune and noticed they tweaked the torque/inverse torque tables as well but for the MP's associated with WOT operation for that particular engine - the changes to those tables basically raised the load values in the inverse torque table.
Yea I wouldn’t mess with the torque model unless you’re changing something about the engine that fundamentally changes its torque to load ratio. I’d feel comfortably making truncation the same for all gears. The 10r80 can support that and way more.
Mike - i notice that there the truncation is Truncation vs gear - what is the VID config? seems like it could just be truncation to gear, so the VID is throwing me off a bit.
Otherwise yes - i am looking at mostly going at the following:
Fuel - power enrichment & WOT Lambda
Torque Management - General - Max Torque Tables & i would assume LSPI reduction limits
Torque Managment - Driver Demand - Desired torque - Engine (not gonna mess with the pedal map yet...)
From there if i feel happy with what i see I will work with spark. Is that a good road to go down?
@metro - To your original post's point i will get a log today to show airflow.
Anything I should be looking for PID wise?
I don’t know what the vid config is, but all of them use the same value. If it were me, I would increase the entire row the same amount.
Reply With Quote