F150 Ecoboost Forum banner

21 - 29 of 29 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,190 Posts
Discussion Starter #21
The XDI-HPFP's have there place in this ecosystem of ours. E85, Big turbos, Build motor ect.

Not so much on stock turbos and 93 octane.
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
7,098 Posts
So from what I gathered from you, the 35% pump will not help the dip and this is only fixed by tuning?

I was under the impression b what explained to me that the flow is what causing the dip, since this flows better it can provide fuel better.

Let me ask you this, would the dip cause lamda to not be met? If lamda is still being met WOT with the dip, this is still a "safe" situation or no?
Wooboost. AFR is more important than a dip in fuel. You need the fuel if you have a dip and tuning for peak power, but you can also change the tuning logic and make your power linear. This is same exact setup stock motor, stock everything including fuel. Bolts ons cai, catback, DP, 93 pump gas.

Note the dangerous peak tq rpm. Graph two is literally night and day difference. Much stronger pulling tune and safer through the entire rpm range
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,523 Posts
Lamda is easier to follow IMO.

That second graph looks nice. You're saying a stock turbo truck on 93 with down pipes made 415 peak hp and 450 tq across the range? What year truck and who did the tuning? That seems more than enough to have fun and pretty much exactly what I am targeting. With upgraded turbos I would want to limit to between 425-450 hp and tq anyways to save the motor.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,680 Posts
Lamda is easier to follow IMO.

That second graph looks nice. You're saying a stock turbo truck on 93 with down pipes made 415 peak hp and 450 tq across the range? What year truck and who did the tuning? That seems more than enough to have fun and pretty much exactly what I am targeting. With upgraded turbos I would want to limit to between 425-450 hp and tq anyways to save the motor.
This!!!!!

Except I don't want to even be concerned about the motor. I still want it BUILT for abuse (fun)
If it's easy enough to get more out of it without sacrificing civility and a sweet curve, then fine.
But I mostly want "elegant power", if there is such a thing.
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
7,098 Posts
Lamda is easier to follow IMO.

That second graph looks nice. You're saying a stock turbo truck on 93 with down pipes made 415 peak hp and 450 tq across the range? What year truck and who did the tuning? That seems more than enough to have fun and pretty much exactly what I am targeting. With upgraded turbos I would want to limit to between 425-450 hp and tq anyways to save the motor.
That is my truck. Stock fuel, stock turbo, typ bolts ons. This was stock motor.

Graph 1 was the emailed and logging style tune from a known tuner for the ecoboost.

Graph 2 same exact thing but the tuners tune who did the dyno tune for me. It was jeff Evans. I’d prefer not to say who did the email tune because I already said I don’t like the curve and I don’t want to speak ill of anyone. Not MPT, his tunes are more linear than the one seen on graph one.

By the way, I have to point out, the graph 2 tune wasn’t even on the same planet as the other. So while 1 was making higher PK TQ, the tune from graph 2 was like having another 100 rwhp from 0-5200 rpm
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25 Posts
That is my truck. Stock fuel, stock turbo, typ bolts ons. This was stock motor.

Graph 1 was the emailed and logging style tune from a known tuner for the ecoboost.

Graph 2 same exact thing but the tuners tune who did the dyno tune for me. It was jeff Evans. I’d prefer not to say who did the email tune because I already said I don’t like the curve and I don’t want to speak ill of anyone. Not MPT, his tunes are more linear than the one seen on graph one.

By the way, I have to point out, the graph 2 tune wasn’t even on the same planet as the other. So while 1 was making higher PK TQ, the tune from graph 2 was like having another 100 rwhp from 0-5200 rpm
Call me "Thread Digger" I had the impression Jeff was no longer providing tuning???

If I am mistaken, please PM me, how to get in touch with him. If he's still in Pennsylvania, I'm 3.5-6 hours away from any point in that state.

Thank you
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,190 Posts
Discussion Starter #27

·
Registered
Joined
·
25 Posts
Thanks, the last time I clicked on the link for appointment, it took me to a site, saying something to the effect that he was no longer tuning, but would be teaching how to do so.

When did this change?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,190 Posts
Discussion Starter #29
After the EPA didn't put him out of business.
 
21 - 29 of 29 Posts
Top