Do not go by those results. They are from the pcm self testing systems. If there are no pending codes, you have no pending check engine light.
Pcm creates conditions so the expected result is a "fail" to verify the system CAN detect a fault. That is what I found researching those on mine.
Not quite true. Yes the PCM does do this to test these components for operational conditions to see if the components being tested fall within the established min-max thresholds to determine an OBDII pass-fail state so you're right in this regard (relating to the MIL light). But if this data is
systematically observed it
can indicate whether a component is beginning to fail well before the MIL is lit or
how efficient their operations are inside the given thresholds....which is what most either don't do or don't know...OR if it is used to establish a
baseline when a particular part, such as cats for example, are installed it can give you an
idea of how the cats are faring based on all the parameters I've given after the break in for them (which is usually around 1 hr of use or around 50-100 mi of use) to determine how
efficient they are operating (all this info is available in the FWM...….) within
all the variables they are operating under & what is affecting them once you learn how all this interrelates w\ each other.
Example for cats within a typical NB front\rear O2 sensor system:
The PCM uses the STFT's (which uses the front O2 sensor voltage switching count readouts....which also will determine the LTFT's used to correct the STFT's back to neutral switching or 0% for engine fuel management) on both banks to determine the
amount of exhaust O2% that is sent into the cats (they need O2 to break down HC & CO) then the rear O2 sensor switching counts are checking for the amount of free O2 being passed thru them. The catalyst monitor (or Catalyst Efficiency monitor....same thing) is the PCM self check test results using a specific number of front O2 sensor switch counts based on 3 different cell mappings along w\ other monitor results then within that specific front grouping the PCM then counts the number of actual rear O2 sensor switches made then divides the rear switch count to the front switch count to come up w\ the CE ratio number seen after making EWMA corrections to the initial results then compares this actual ratio against the min-max CE ratio thresholds it calculates from other monitoring conditions & the given fuel index ratio (the ratio of O2 in the fuel....since the advent of ethanol this is important to know for the PCM to accurately assess cat efficiency...in the 05-10 cars this is usually around .5 due to E10-E15 content....the max CE threshold number is the main important 1 & is why I asked cavero for it). To get an idea of the cat's overall efficiency improvement\degrade all 1 has to do is compare where the actual CE ratio number is in relation to the CE thresholds....the closer the actual CE ratio number is to the min CE threshold the
better\higher the cat's efficiency is, the closer the actual CE number is to the max CE threshold the
lesser\lower the cat's efficiency is...….all within the Ford designed, Fed EPA sanctioned OBDII certification process coded in these Spanish Oaks PCM's firmware. Ford also knows that by using a 3rd O2 sensor placed in the mid cat bed that then LTFT fuel control can be used to control cat efficiency as well as engine management (a 3 sensor system where the front O2 sensor is STFT control only, the mid cat O2 sensor is for CE only, the post cat O2 sensor is LTFT control only used for vehicles certified for PZERO OBDII certification so engine fuel control is an actual part of actual cat CE performance as well & can be used as such if understood & applied w\ cats in mind on vehicles that aren't so PZERO equipped to still make some power but also maintain cat efficient).
So yes, you CAN use these to determine their performance as well as adherence to OBDII certification to a certain extent once all other influencing factors are accounted for....and by using other data you can determine if excessive exhaust O2 is aggravating this as well.
For example look at the max CE threshold ratio numbers given for B1 & B2 cats.....notice that B1 cat has a higher max threshold than B2 cat does....why is that? The established Fed EPA certification for HC & CO output is 75% or .75 but the PCM makes adjustments to these according to the actual amount of exhaust O2% it records being sent to the individual cats from that bank's STFT so from cavero's Mode 6 data the PCM is making corrections to these based off the amount of excess exhaust O2% that is entering from his car's EVAP system (the PCM looks for this amount over the established "normal" STFT patterns to determine if the EVAP canister is sufficiently emptied of fuel vapors then close the purge valve but it also has to account for the excess O2 that came in thru the EVAP when measuring cat efficiency cause the PCM knows this O2 is
not metered thru the MAF). B2 is the bank that gets the overwhelming majority of this excess O2 (due to the way the EVAP line is connected to the intake manifold...OEM design) thus it's max CE threshold is reduced further than B1 (also notice B1 CE max is slightly higher than .75....wonder why?) since it is determined from lab testing that the B2 cat will usually degrade faster (work harder) than the B1 cat from having to deal w\ the excessive exhaust O2 from the EVAP system.... This is also why B2 LTFT's are usually higher in % than B1 LTFT's are w\ these 3V's...……. This is also why it's important to maintain LTFT's at 0% or just slightly -% w\ the AFR target at the OEM setting of 14.64 while in CL operation in the tune
IF cat efficiency is to have any chance of relevance\maintenance. Any +% of LTFT (comes from the front O2 sensors seeing more exhaust O2 than what is expected based on the MAF readouts thus the STFT readouts) above 0% is making it
harder on the cats to use this up & keep the rear O2 sensors from excessive switching....this is a
fact. After this it is strictly contingent on the amount of
POUNDAGE of exhaust they have to treat, thus the
SIZE of the cat will come into play then. Note: notice this is reflected in the actual CE ratio results for each cat.
Now does this actually mean that the B2 cat is worse or bad vs B1? Not necessarily...……….to actually determine this you HAVE to account for all the other variables that can affect this beforehand, starting w\ the EVAP system's integrity among other items but the PCM may flag the B2 cat as bad when it may not actually be bad yet…..same goes for B1 as well.
Now back to why I asked cavero for this info.
He has installed a pair of the Kooks Green cats (made by G-Sport\GESI which are reported to be EPA certified\verified) which became a topic within this thread discussion on his car which is a FBO\tuned 3V (may also be FI, don't remember off my head at this time) so is not stock (the main thing for my interests). So to get a gauge on how these Kooks Green cats are actually working within his car's particular parameters\variables according to OBDII this OBDII Mode 6 Component Self Check Test info is a good window of indication & can be even better served if it is
monitored over a period of time to capture any other variables from his driving usage & from his PCM's live data (especially the STFT & LTFT data as well as his EVAP data...EVAP_PCT% & EVAP_VP PID data but mainly the EVAP 40% Leak Detect test result data in Mode 6....have to assume that the CL AFR is still set OEM @ 14.64) which can help others to make a better determination of these as this captured data is REAL data to use....not made up or theorized & is based on the actual Ford designed, Fed EPA sanctioned OBDII process for these 05-10 S197's that most all states are using to determine OBDII emissions compliance outside of any visual OBDII compliance, which again is REAL data, not theorized.
So if another car is comparatively equipped & tuned, the CE results given here can help give guidance as to whether these cats will perform comparably....as long as the fuel being used is E10-E15 based. This is why Ford says these 05-10 S197 cars are not E85 certified (due to the PCM's programming for OBDII, not the engine as none of these Spanish Oaks PCM's were programmed for flex-fuel adaptability for OBDII compliance).
So cavero I appreciate the info given. If I may ask again if you could also provide your STFT, LTFT data from the live data as well as your EVAP system's Mode 6 40% Self-Check test data (this test determines if the unmetered O2 amount coming thru the EVAP system is within the thresholds allowed as read using inches\H2O pressure\vacuum....ie comes thru the CVS vent line or if there are potential leaks in the EVAP system outside of the CVS vent line.....this line is normally open) this will help me to assess these variables as seen thru the cat's CE ratio results which is pretty good considering the amount of time you've had them installed. If curious pull this data periodically to see the overall CE over time....they should get better (the CE ratio result should go lower than where they are now) if all else remains stable.
This helps me out so thanks again!
I have a LOT of real data on hand to back all this up.....not theory's. Sometimes folks make a mistake in perception between experimentation as opposed to validation.....experimentation is performing tests to discover an unknown component testing result, validation is performing tests to discover if the actual component test results follow
KNOWN, PROVEN standards thus the word "validate" or corroborate if you prefer.
To give some more flavor here, I have real data to show that the Kooks Hi Flow cats are very close to actually passing OBDII themselves on a non-stock FBO\tuned NA 3V (actually 1 cat
does fully pass OBDII on my car...B1 cat, B2 cat misses passing OBDII by the small total amount of 3.2 rear O2 switches.....guess why it doesn't make it.....answer is already given above & if I could switch the cats across banks I'm very sure that the CE numbers won't follow them & if the CE max thresholds were the same for both sides they'd BOTH pass...fact, not fiction) & there's nothing I can do about it outside of the already known "fixes" cause I have also now verified, not theorized, all the variables that could affect the results to be sound so if Kooks had just loaded these cat's front substrate w\ some\enough cerium (which is a
requirement for any cat to be OBDII certified as this material is
necessary to retain the
excess exhaust O2% then release it when the substrate needs it due to Ford knowing this imbalance,
thus the Feds AND the aftermarket, will occur) there wouldn't be a need for the G-Sport\GESI Kooks Green cats to be installed on a NA 3V whether OEM or FBO.....only on a FI 3V or a bored\stroked NA 3V due to the higher exhaust poundage volume sent thru them as well as the extra heat vs a NA OEM 4.6L engine which will require a larger sized cat to compensate (referring to the total internal substrate surface contact area which can increase the actual size dimensions of the cat if warranted).
PS--The 1 thing that I do see that will make the results shown not creditable is the fact that both B2 front\rear O2 sensors look to not be functioning across 1 of the Mode 5 O2 sensor self check tests due to the current voltage showing to be 0v which is below the min threshold so look to have an issue w\ them. This may\may not affect the CE results for B2's cat.