New Update!!!! | Page 4 | Ford Explorer Forums - Serious Explorations

  • Register Today It's free!

New Update!!!!

OK, here goes. HP not quite what i was expecting, TQ was pretty massive gain, which correlates with the seat of the pants feel.

2015-12-30%2020.20.11_zpsnk76npqq.jpg
 



Join the Elite Explorers for $20 each year.
Elite Explorer members see no advertisements, no banner ads, no double underlined links,.
Add an avatar, upload photo attachments, and more!
.





OK, here goes. HP not quite what i was expecting, TQ was pretty massive gain, which correlates with the seat of the pants feel.

Thanks for posting that. The A to B comparison on the same dyno under similar conditions really tells the story.

As you said, that's a huge(70ftlb) torque increase at lower RPM, which translates to SOP feel. That's what gets this beast off the line and makes it much faster.

This makes me more intrigued to purchase a tune. Hmmm, I did get a bunch of cash from "Santa".

Question though: What's up with the stock AFR reading? It's at ~14.7:1(Stoich) all the way until almost the end where it drops to ~10:1?
 






EcoBoost vehicles do not operate nor are they even able to recognize AFR. They actually operate on what is called Lambda.
 






EcoBoost vehicles do not operate nor are they even able to recognize AFR. They actually operate on what is called Lambda.

If that was a response to my post, "thanks", but it doesn't answer my question.

At the bottom of the image posted, there's a graph that shows AFR. I'm assuming that graph was generated from a tailpipe "sniffer", which is not typically(never?) tied to the ECU in any way except for the fact that whatever the ECU tells the engine, the sniffer should follow. If that's the case, why was there a significant drop in AFR between 72 and 76mph?

Also, I'm assuming the same lamba->AFR factor was used for both runs.

You know what they say about assumptions, but that's why I asked.
 






OK, here goes. HP not quite what i was expecting, TQ was pretty massive gain, which correlates with the seat of the pants feel.

Interesting about the less than expected horsepower gain.

Livernois advertises 59 HP and 82 Ft. Lbs. peak gains which would put it about 425 HP and 440 Ft lb torque when all is said and done and that makes more sense. When you compare to a Porsche Cayenne GTS (440 HP and 440 Ft lb), the 0-60 times are identical based on the info in this thread--both at about 5.1 seconds. The vehicle weights are not much more than about 100 lbs or so different.

I would tend to believe Livernois' claims.

2015-12-30%2020.20.11_zpsnk76npqq.jpg
 






EcoBoost vehicles do not operate nor are they even able to recognize AFR. They actually operate on what is called Lambda.

Livernois, am I correct in my belief that you are not one of the tuners at Livernois? Do you know what Lambda is? 14.7 x Lambda = AFR. So, the Ecoboost tunes might use the equivalent Lambda values in the tables, but they are still talking about AFR. 14.7 is the stoichiometric AFR for gasoline. Yes, it is different for alternative fuels and I think Cali 91 octane might even be somewhere around 14.13. A lambda of 1 is stoich.

The dyno's measured AFR from the tailpipe sniffer had to be messed up on that stock baseline. There is no way Ford's calibration would have the motor running that lean at WOT.

You guys should plot your dyno curves vs RPM and not speed.

Edub, was this the 91 or 93 tune?

Dynos are fun, but the real story is told at the track. That is where shift improvements and reduced torque management off the line really show how much quicker it is. Power is just one piece of the puzzle. I will baseline my wife's at the track and then tune it, but it probably won't happen until the Wednesday night bracket drags start up again in March, unless my son's baseball interferes.
 






Livernois, am I correct in my belief that you are not one of the tuners at Livernois? Do you know what Lambda is? 14.7 x Lambda = AFR. So, the Ecoboost tunes might use the equivalent Lambda values in the tables, but they are still talking about AFR. 14.7 is the stoichiometric AFR for gasoline. Yes, it is different for alternative fuels and I think Cali 91 octane might even be somewhere around 14.13. A lambda of 1 is stoich.

The dyno's measured AFR from the tailpipe sniffer had to be messed up on that stock baseline. There is no way Ford's calibration would have the motor running that lean at WOT.

You guys should plot your dyno curves vs RPM and not speed.

That is not one of our dynographs. We do plot power VS RPM...look back at any graph that we have posted.

Secondly, to your reference on stoich, you are assuming that the fuel that is present is pure gas at 14.7. That is definitely not the case. The Lambda of 93 pump fuel is more like 14.1 because of the presence of 10% ethanol. If you would like the math this is what it would look like:

Lambda of 100% gas is 14.7

Lambda of ethanol is 9.0

(13.23+.9)=14.1 This equation would equal your Lambda of 1.

So, mathematically, your cal is actually wrong because of the assumption of the fuel makeup.

The problem in this case is that AFR is a calculation, and that is not a basis that we want to use for tuning. We do not like to use conversions for our tuning.

PS
I try to keep everything fairly low-level so that nobody is ostracized in the threads.
 






Interesting about the less than expected horsepower gain.

Livernois advertises 59 HP and 82 Ft. Lbs. peak gains which would put it about 425 HP and 440 Ft lb torque when all is said and done and that makes more sense. When you compare to a Porsche Cayenne GTS (440 HP and 440 Ft lb), the 0-60 times are identical based on the info in this thread--both at about 5.1 seconds. The vehicle weights are not much more than about 100 lbs or so different.

I would tend to believe Livernois' claims.

That is a very good comparison vehicle! The Cayenne is almost identical to the XSport in all of the important categories.
 






I was talking about the guys in this post that put up their dyno graphs. I knew these were not from Livernois. Both of them plotted vs speed.

As far as AFR, I just don't like how you have said in more than one thread that AFR doesn't mean anything. It does. I don't care what you use to tune, but you do adjust the mixture. Using a wideband O2 is a way of checking that. If you know what fuel you are using, you know what numbers to look for.

How does the EB computer monitor the mixture and give feedback for closed loop operation?
Is Cali 91 Octane an E10 fuel?
 






The point is that AFR is a conversion calculation for someone that is monitoring what is going on as a vehicle is in operation. We do not base ANY of our tuning or modifications off of a converted value. We only use Lambda. All of the fuel that we have here is E10.
 






If you use the correct conversion then it is the same information. If a tune (or any hardware) is f'd up and a wideband in the tailpipe reads 15:1 AFR with the correct conversion for the fuel used, then you know it is too lean and is going to melt down. That was my point when 16 Sport was having problems. Looking at a measured AFR can definitely give you useful information. I am sure it should be below 11.5:1 for a safe tune when at WOT and decent boost levels. If someone measures higher than that, they should look for problems. First step is comparing measured vs commanded mixtures with whatever means you have. If they differ, then track down why.

Maybe direct injected motors like more fuel or can get away with less, I don't know. What lambda do you shoot for at WOT? I know there are a bunch of adders and subtracters and multipliers, but after all that is accounted for, what lambda is typical with your tuned ecoboost? At sea level and 70 degrees outside? I will guess 0.78 Lambda at 5250 rpm based on edub's dyno graph.
 






In a perfect world .78-.80 Lambda would be ideal.
 






big difference.

hold brake, press accelerator to 2,000-2,500 let off brake and stomp it. enjoy!!!!

trying this today :D
 






I just place my order this morning! I can't wait for it to arrive!
 






Are you adding any other mods?
 






It's gonna be tuner, plugs, thermostat, 3-band, and cai. I also ordered the lowering springs. I'm gonna try to get the down pipes and catback asap!
 






Thank you very much for the business, we appreciate it greatly! If you have any questions or need help with anything please let us know.
 






You are welcome! I barely post but I read a lot and I finally got convinced and decided to become part of the Livernois family. I can't wait to have my hands on that V4 tune!!!
 






You are welcome! I barely post but I read a lot and I finally got convinced and decided to become part of the Livernois family. I can't wait to have my hands on that V4 tune!!!

She is a beast...I tested our 87 tune way back, and the fact that all 4 can break loose with zero effort even on cheap dealership gas is crazy!
:salute:
 



Join the Elite Explorers for $20 each year.
Elite Explorer members see no advertisements, no banner ads, no double underlined links,.
Add an avatar, upload photo attachments, and more!
.





I can't wait to get home!!!! :burnout: :party:

image.jpg
 






Back
Top