Big White - Ford Racing Powerdyne Installation Thread | Page 8 | Ford Explorer - Ford Ranger Forums - Serious Explorations

  • Register Today It's free! This box and some ads will disappear once registered!

  • Holiday Special! - 2 for 1 Elite Explorer sale!

    Right now you can purchase an Elite Explorer membership for $20 and receive a two year membership! If you have an existing Elite membership contact me by PM and I will upgrade your account manually.

    Click Here to start your membership and get rid of the ads!

Big White - Ford Racing Powerdyne Installation Thread

MuscleJunkie

Elite Explorer
Joined
April 14, 2007
Messages
779
Reaction score
134
Year, Model & Trim Level
'00 Ford Explorer LTD AWD
That first linked thread is for a 302 Ranger, he called it a "It was a 2X Exploder.... Now a part time 4X ranger." It says 100k miles engine, a baseline run, safe to bet it was virtually untouched for the swap, and could have had many stock original parts(plus/wires/O2's). I take that from the limited and poor wording, vocabulary, and lack of detailed results or details about the engine or swap.

The other threads are all about SOHC V6's, most that made 180rwhp or more, and I recall Al getting very close to 200rwhp.


The flywheel estimates are useless, please everyone, stop posting those or guessing at those. Only wheel hp matters, not what the engine makes but doesn't reach the wheels. It doesn't matter if the engine has 300flywheel hp, but just 210 reaches the wheels in a chassis dyno test. Today's cars are still rated in wheel hp, none are flywheel hp. Actual dyno test always come in a little under the ratings, OEM cheats by leaving off the accessory belts, tests them in 2WD versions instead of AWD etc.

I don't accept that the 302 Explorer is a 160rwhp truck in AWD form, unless it's far out of tune. Tons of examples now need new plugs and wires, O2 sensors etc. But nobody should baseline an engine in poor condition, and post those mediocre figures online.

The actual computer tune should also be adjusted prior to any baseline testing, and nobody does that either. I'll get to my 98 eventually, and it has 225k miles now(trans is hurt(undriven now)). I will have the PCM re-tuned before every dyno test, including the first baseline test. I too want to know what a decent exhaust is worth. But I have no intention of buying, or installing 1.5" headers, just one muffler, or tail pipe, or use any section of an OEM cat pipe.

So in my opinion, the mild superchargers(6-8psi or so) that have been installed on the 302 Explorers, in AWD, should make at least 250rwhp, and likely under 275rwhp. That's with a good state of tune engine, and the PCM adjusted for A/F ratio etc.
Interesting article regarding Crank vs Wheel horsepower by Weistec Enginering
 


Holiday Special! Join the Elite Explorers $20 for 2 years! Gets rid of the ads!

Elite Explorer members see no advertisements, no banner ads, no double underlined links, can add their own profile photo, upload photo attachments in all forums, and Media Gallery, create and save more private conversations, and more. Join Today. Your support is greatly appreciated.




fastpakr

Elite Explorer
Joined
February 18, 2005
Messages
694
Reaction score
153
City, State
Roanoke, VA
Year, Model & Trim Level
99 4wd - 5.0/4R70W/BW4406
Again - today's cars are absolutely not rated in wheel horsepower.
 




CDW6212R

Hauls the mail.
Elite Explorer
Joined
June 17, 2004
Messages
22,238
Reaction score
2,619
City, State
Knoxville, TN
Year, Model & Trim Level
98 Limited AWD
Again - today's cars are absolutely not rated in wheel horsepower.

We are nitpicking here, it's not a big deal. The manufacturers used to openly claim flywheel hp, before 1972, as Turdle posted. After that, the ratings dropping massively, my first car(72 Gran Torino) was OEM rated at 163hp. The prior same engine(351C-2V) was OEM rated at well over 200hp, I forgot how high it was. But the OEM's then began rating lower at they said wheel hp. Nothing has changed since then, but they(OEM) lies ongoing about tons of things.

Today if you dig deep or pin them down, the OEM or dealer will tell you it's supposed to be wheel hp. But when you confront them about the true dyno results, then sometimes they will admit the ratings are not exactly like a chassis dyno test.

It isn't a huge problem, the OEM ratings are similarly created, they likely cheat in the same ways as I said, testing without everything hooked up. The flywheel hp is typically way higher then the rated figures, and even more than the dyno results. Almost nobody tests an engine alone on a dynamometer, we should try to avoid those comparisons.

The numbers which matter are the results from actual chassis dyno's, not the OEM ratings or random personal guesses.

Jim here has now got his first test results, not perfect but a good first step. 251rwhp or well 278rwhp is respectable in a 2nd gen Explorer. It's very respectable considering how tough it is to get past 300rwhp, few people have gone past that with a 302 based engine.
 




fastpakr

Elite Explorer
Joined
February 18, 2005
Messages
694
Reaction score
153
City, State
Roanoke, VA
Year, Model & Trim Level
99 4wd - 5.0/4R70W/BW4406
The OEM's didn't claim to test wheel horsepower. Before or after the 70's. The change was only from gross to net hp ratings - the newer numbers from the early 70's included an air cleaner, basic exhaust, and engine accessories.
 




Blown

Well-Known Member
Joined
December 6, 2007
Messages
647
Reaction score
356
Year, Model & Trim Level
2000 X-Edge
There are differences across dynamometer types and therefor different outputs..

I would go with 25% reduction for an AWD to the wheels. It would be nice to know a starting point for our builds, but what matters to me is the end results of what it feels like to drive and my butt Dyno. Kenne Bell had info on how much power is added per pound of boost on a 302 mustang. Somewhere around 16 horses per pound. 8lbs X 16 = 128 horses.

I was all over Desktop Dyno, currently tune with a Tweecer and did one dyno session with my blown 351W F150. The dyno session just confirmed my tune was good and I got the output. It didn't make for any tuning changes, just output, something to look at.
 




MuscleJunkie

Elite Explorer
Joined
April 14, 2007
Messages
779
Reaction score
134
Year, Model & Trim Level
'00 Ford Explorer LTD AWD
There are differences across dynamometer types and therefor different outputs..

I would go with 25% reduction for an AWD to the wheels. It would be nice to know a starting point for our builds, but what matters to me is the end results of what it feels like to drive and my butt Dyno. Kenne Bell had info on how much power is added per pound of boost on a 302 mustang. Somewhere around 16 horses per pound. 8lbs X 16 = 128 horses.
Yes, I do wish I had dyno'd Big White before I started all of this. I haven't even had a chance to drive or butt dyno any of this so far so I'm very interested to get behind the wheel and feel(and hear with the new XP8 Borla exhaust) the difference after driving around with only headers and a few minor mods for several years. I did have a chance to speak to the tuner and said he's thinking he saw 8psi of boost but again I need to confirm all of this.

I'm going to try out the lightning IAT and also the Cobra IAT was just recommended to me and see how that goes.

Recap of the changes I've done related to this portion of my overall project
  • Ford Motorsport SVO Powerdyne Supercharger Kit
    • Changed pulley from originally included one (6 lbs boost) to a 2.80 pulley which I'm told results in an increase to approx 8 to 10lbs of boost
  • Larger cone filter
    • Modified the kit airbox to bit the new larger filter and MAF
  • SCT 90MM MAF
  • Ford Lightning IAT (may change to a recommended Cobra IAT)
  • Custom Stainless piping for Supercharger Inlet and Outlet
  • Bosche BOV
  • 75MM Throttle Body
  • Custom 80MM Elbow from TB to Intake
  • EGR Delete
  • 1" Intake Spacer
  • MSD Ignition Coils
  • New High Temp Wires with heat socks
  • 1 Range Colder Spark Plugs
  • New modified Harmonic Balancer
    • Machined to fit Powerdyne Supercharger Pulley
  • GM auto tensioner for accessories belt
  • Removal of stock radiator and engine driven cooling fan
    • Replaced with new radiator and Ford Contour Electric Fan Assembly with Custom Controller
  • 255 lp/H in tank fuel pump
  • 56LB Ford Racing GT500 Injectors
    • Modified stock fuel rail to fit these injectors
  • OBX Headers with EGR Capped
  • Saleen XP8 Borla Cat Back Exhaust
  • Custom Tune by Stage Fabrication
  • Still in progress OEM style/look Boost and Fuel Pressure Digital Combo Gage
  • Saleen XP8 Gauge Cluster
Initial dyno with malfunctioning GM IAT (which was reading crazy excessive high temps) resulted in
  • 251.24 rwhp at 4570 rpm and 306.87 ft/lb rwt at 3670 rpm
    • If using 25% driveline loss due to AWD this would be approximately
      • 335 hp at the Crank
        • +120 hp gain over stock 215hp at the crank
        • +50 hp gain over Saleen XP8 Explorer with reported 285 hp at the crank
      • 409 ft/lb torque at the Crank
        • +121 ft/lb gain over stock 288ft/lb at the crank
        • +76 ft/lb gain over Saleen XP8 Explorer with reported 333 ft/lb at the crank
Subsequent dyno with disconnected IAT resulted in
  • 278.8 rwhp at 4570 rpm and 362 ft/lb rwt at 3670 rpm
    • If using 25% driveline loss due to AWD this would be approximately
      • 371 hp at the Crank
        • +156 hp gain over stock 215hp at the crank
        • +86 hp gain over Saleen XP8 Explorer with reported 285 hp at the crank
      • 481 ft/lb torque at the Crank
        • +193 ft/lb gain over stock 288ft/lb at the crank
        • +148 ft/lb gain over Saleen XP8 Explorer with reported 333 ft/lb at the crank
Once the IAT is replaced, intend to do some driving around and then back to dyno to recheck and possibly more tuning.

Speaking to the tuner it was suggested to somehow add a air/to water intercooler to this setup.

These figures used a 25% driveline loss which Blown suggested to use and I've seen this suggested in other threads as well for our Explorers. Some have suggested that the driveline loss could be 27 to 30% or more for the AWD system so if it's true (keep in mind I also have bigger wheels and tires than the stock Explorer (18" X 8.5) then these initial dyno numbers could be higher???

As usual, any thoughts or suggestions are always appreciated.

Thank You!
 




MuscleJunkie

Elite Explorer
Joined
April 14, 2007
Messages
779
Reaction score
134
Year, Model & Trim Level
'00 Ford Explorer LTD AWD
Next step - let’s intercool it…..

Still want to dyno again after IAT sensor replacement but initial results seems pretty good for a mild supercharged application on the 302 in Big White Ford Explorer.

HP results were taken from dyno pull with malfunctioning IAT disconnected and accounting for conservative 25% driveline loss due to AWD, automatic transmission and larger (than stock) 18x8.5 wheels and tires.

D38224AF-BD4D-4BEF-9F6F-8FB7C9898E04.jpeg
 




MuscleJunkie

Elite Explorer
Joined
April 14, 2007
Messages
779
Reaction score
134
Year, Model & Trim Level
'00 Ford Explorer LTD AWD
DC9D4A41-8179-4734-96F4-80253511D7EE.png

This is the updated Dyno pull from when the malfunctioning IAC was connected. Not as much horsepower because the IAC was reporting higher temperatures than reality.

Interesting thing here is that it shows the boost with my upgraded pulley. I’m getting 6.33 pounds at just under 5000 RPM. If I had left the stock pulley that was included with the kit I would have gotten nowhere near that (maybe 3 to 4 lbs) at those RPMs so I’m glad that I upgraded the pulley.

It’s a little bit more clear now why Ford and Saleen were comfortable installing this kit and offering a warranty. At 3 or 4 pounds of boost they probably didn’t have much to worry about but it also explains why they never put a boost gauge in the car especially if they were saying that the kit was supposed to be putting out 6 pounds of boost in the stock configuration. Also explains the XP8s conservative jump from 215hp to 285hp at the crank.

I’d be real curious what sort of numbers I would see with a pulley that would turn a realistic 8 pounds of boost. I’m thinking with the stock motor and everything else so I upgraded 8 pounds should be fairly safe…
 








MuscleJunkie

Elite Explorer
Joined
April 14, 2007
Messages
779
Reaction score
134
Year, Model & Trim Level
'00 Ford Explorer LTD AWD
It will take 8lbs, after that, cooling the air charge becomes an issue as does how much power the running gear can handle.
I think my next step will be to do a custom intercooler and switch to a different pulley.

What would you say the limits are for the running gear? I am AWD with towing package. I think the rear is 3.73 if I remember correctly...
 








Blown

Well-Known Member
Joined
December 6, 2007
Messages
647
Reaction score
356
Year, Model & Trim Level
2000 X-Edge
I think my next step will be to do a custom intercooler and switch to a different pulley.

What would you say the limits are for the running gear? I am AWD with towing package. I think the rear is 3.73 if I remember correctly...
Hopefully others here will reply as my knowledge is limited. I know the front axle, Dana35 is small.....................The front drivesshaft is small..................I don't know what the tranny is rated for nor the AWD T-case. The rear driveshaft seems to be OK and as we know from F150's & Mustangs, the rear 8.8 will take quite a bit and can be built-up. I think the front axle and transfer case are likeliest to be damaged when you apply much more power. One could swap-in a stronger transfer case and be able to put it in 2wd drive and apply that power only to the rear. That is what I would do, if I wanted to build-in more power.

I got a 3 3/8" pulley that will get 8.5lbs here at 5,400' in elevation and 10.5lbs at sea level. It's fun to put on, but as my daily driver, it is hard to keep out of boost and mileage suffers. I tried a 3 1/2' pulley and I have settled on 6.5lbs, 3 11/16" pulley recently. 6.5lbs of boost allows me to keep it in closed loop much of the time for much better mileage.
 








Blown

Well-Known Member
Joined
December 6, 2007
Messages
647
Reaction score
356
Year, Model & Trim Level
2000 X-Edge
Ford 4R70W, 4R70E Transmission Specs
Transmission:Ford 4R70W & 4R70E
Applications:Various, 1993 - 2005 Ford F-150
Case Material:Aluminum
Max Input Torque:~ 516 lb-ft (700 n-m)

I cannot find specs on the AWD transfer case

I know jeep guys with larger tires often upgrade to a Dana44 or 60 depending on how big they go and what they run. A Dana 35 is not that strong. I snapped stock u-joints in a dana 44 with blown 351W and 37" tires. A factor, in these X's, is the AWD transfer case, not only what it is rated for but it splits torque around 60/40, so the front gets less...............................
 








CDW6212R

Hauls the mail.
Elite Explorer
Joined
June 17, 2004
Messages
22,238
Reaction score
2,619
City, State
Knoxville, TN
Year, Model & Trim Level
98 Limited AWD
The pistons are the weakest link in the stock system, that 8psi level is a good limit to stay below if possible. Some have reached the 12psi or more and the hypereutectic pistons survived, but don't expect to have that good fortune.

The overall condition of the rest should be the basis to say it can handle 300rwhp. The 4R trans is strong in top condition, the AWD is fine until you start spinning tires a lot(off roading does that a lot at low speed, but the result is the same). The AWD can handle lots of nice equal power needs(equal traction). Keep it on surfaces that are relatively smooth and have even traction. Then I'd say the front u-joint is the weakest link among the rest, you shouldn't break any of it with under 300rwhp.
 




vroomzoomboom

Elite Canuck STOCK SUCKS!
Elite Explorer
Joined
January 22, 2007
Messages
9,802
Reaction score
1,073
City, State
selkirk, manitoba
Year, Model & Trim Level
98 supercharged 347 sport
FWIW, i still have the stock front diff in mine (and its the ONLY thing i have never touched). i have a 4406m, and a f150 front drive shaft from the same truck. 2 weekends ago i was at the drag strip with it. when i am there, or screwing around on the street, i always launch with it in 4x4. my last run was a 12.55 at 107.99 mph start to finish in four wheel drive and that is also using 20 inch rims with 245/50 r20 tires . i still have yet to dyno it, so i cant really say what its making for power.
 




Blown

Well-Known Member
Joined
December 6, 2007
Messages
647
Reaction score
356
Year, Model & Trim Level
2000 X-Edge
How much boost is running through that built 347?
If anyone is maxing out the running gear, it's you, your rig and build. I know the 4406 is made for larger heavier rigs, and now see the other weak link is that front driveshaft.

I would bet the torque reduction to the front is saving the Dana 35's in these that are built.

I also saw a warning from Dono regarding the front driveshaft, that funky joint and I see that it can be addressed with the T-case swap............................Good stuff and I miss low range.............I appreciate the experience shared here.

I am thinking, guessing at a max input of 500ftlbs of torque with a t-case swap and better front driveshaft to be safe. I'd guestimate that 450flbs of input is really pushing the stock t-case and front driveshaft.
 




vroomzoomboom

Elite Canuck STOCK SUCKS!
Elite Explorer
Joined
January 22, 2007
Messages
9,802
Reaction score
1,073
City, State
selkirk, manitoba
Year, Model & Trim Level
98 supercharged 347 sport
now that its cooler, i am around 11 lbs of boost. i have 2 different front driveshafts. one is a DC, the other is a stock f150 that is in the truck now. dono's motor (which is in my truck now) made shy of 500 ft lbs of torque NA on a motor dyno.
i have also heard the front wheels squeal when i have nailed it from a dead stand still
 


Holiday Special! Join the Elite Explorers $20 for 2 years! Gets rid of the ads!

Elite Explorer members see no advertisements, no banner ads, no double underlined links, can add their own profile photo, upload photo attachments in all forums, and Media Gallery, create and save more private conversations, and more. Join Today. Your support is greatly appreciated.




410Fortune

Truck Season!!
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
August 3, 2000
Messages
26,981
Reaction score
2,624
City, State
NORTH IDAHO, 7B
Year, Model & Trim Level
B2 "Slightly" Modified
Callsign
FOURTEN
Gotta love Ford! Put the power to the ground!! 11 psi in a 347 = stuff many of us just dream about!

Dana 35 in the FRONT (dig at the v8 Jeep cherokee's had them in the Back!), the 31 spline 8.8 is as strong as a dana 60
Troll taught us years ago the AWD t case can handle some serious power!!!

However it also uses a clutch and wears out, the power that is lost through the "AWD" system creates alot of heat, so the fluid life is short lived.
Everyone here knows I hate the AWD t case, its 70/30 split and viscous clutch leaves alot to be desired....

For me, I drive either on road or off, and lots of winter driving in the snow and ice. I prefer the 50/50 split of a traditional t case under ALL CONDITIONS the AWD works good....but not great and it sucks MPG, chews up front end bits, all while costing you power to the wheels
 




Top