Lunati VooDoo #21270700 Camshafts

Discussion in 'Mustang Chit Chat' started by GlassTop09, May 24, 2019.

  1. Juice

    Juice forum member

    He didnt, the shop did/will! lol

    I too had thoughts about just paying a shop to do work on my shit. (friend in the business) and than I came to my senses. Im cheap.
    crjackson likes this.
  2. GlassTop09

    GlassTop09 Senior Member


    After talking to Ford dealership & finding out the closest appointment available was 9-20-22 @ 8:30 hrs, I went back to the drawing board. Went on Amazon & picked up this set:

    zerotop Flexible Drill Bit Extension Screwdriver Set 32Pcs Universal Socket Wrench Tool Set 1/4 3/8 1/2 Inch Universal Socket Adapter Set, 105°Right Angle Drill Attachment - -

    Then yesterday, after the tool set I ordered came in, I went at it again behind the dash on DS & this time I got both screws out, unplugged the bad YH1870 actuator (floor\dash) & removed it. Got new replacement & got it inserted onto dowels & arm pin in slot of floor\dash vent arm, got the easier screw in & snugged up to hold actuator in place then fought the second screw for 5 1\2 hrs to no avail (couldn't keep screw straight while trying to start it & kept falling out of socket) so shut down for the night.

    Got up this morning w\ a fresh thought: got out my grinder & ground the flange off the screw head so the screw head would fit into socket then installed a M6 flat washer on screw (washer the same outer dia as the screw head flange) so screw head can fit inside socket & washer will keep screw head from going too deep into socket but hold screw shank straight. Then applied some silver anti-seize inside socket (to hold screw head in socket) then made attempt to get this 2nd screw it in on the 2nd attempt & tightened both screws up. Plugged her up. Pulled glove box & got under dash on PS & pulled the other bad YH1870 actuator (defroster) out & replaced it. This 1 was much easier to get at.

    Pulled 5A fuses on #10 & #12 (for climate control) in SJB to reset system then tested all out.......all working perfectly now so put all back together & cleaned all up.

    Got all fixed now. The other 2 actuators (YH 1865, YH 1869) are still good (much easier to get to as well) so left them in. Pulled both bad YH 1870 actuators apart to check & both had busted the same white idler gear so no salvaging them. Gonna buy 2 more YH 1870 actuators to have on hand as spares.

    So folks, ole GlassTop09 has got her done! The old adage still applies........."use the right tools for the job"......but a little McGuyvering doesn't hurt either.......

    Once again shout out to Dino for the DIY writeup!
    crjackson and Dino Dino Bambino like this.
  3. GlassTop09

    GlassTop09 Senior Member


    On the tuning side, I have been monitoring the Mode 6 Cat CE ratio results over time after each tune revision to see which set of catalyst converter control maps (Spark\Base\Cold Load Adder & Spark\Base\Emissions Reduction Adder) would give the best catalyst performance & found that the 2 OEM Ford catalyst maps for a 08-09 Bullitt (when paired w\ a MAF table that matches the Ford OEM 08-09 Bullitt MAF tables thus the Ford OEM 08-09 Bullitt IMRC closed LWFM maps & Ford OEM 08-09 Bullitt IMRC closed SD MAP at Zero Airmass\SD MAP per Airmass maps for ETC control......running a Ford OEM Bullitt 83mm CAI) maintained the lowest CE ratio B1\B2 numbers & pairing as well as maintaining the tightest STFT+LTFT B1\B2 pairing (-2.3%, -0.8%) as well w\ AAT's over 100*F & hottest running engine temps @ 202*F......which should make sense as all these maps are Ford OEM production tuned to work I have already made\wrote in the final finished tune revision for my car so this is also done.

    Got it all going my way! :driver:
  4. Juice

    Juice forum member

    But sir, we do not tune for emissions.
    We tune for More Power! While staying emissions compliant.

    I may have wrote my final tune also. Testing showed CAI was worth nothing, stock airbox os back on. I fully embraced OAR, and setup the tune so the pcm maxxes timing (most power) based on knock sensors. And shifted bias to add more timing and pull less. (-1.5/.5 vs -1/1 stock)
    GlassTop09 likes this.
  5. GlassTop09

    GlassTop09 Senior Member

    I read an article here: 2008 Ford Mustang Bullitt: Ultimate Guide ( that stated for the 08 & 09 Bullitt PCM calibrations that they had "adaptive spark" capability (a fore runner tech of OAR) that would auto adjust spark timing using the knock sensors to compensate for fuel octane thus, while premium fuel (91 to 93 oct) was recommended to be used, you could also run reg unleaded fuel (87 to 89 oct) w\o issue as the PCM would auto adjust spark timing to compensate. This adaptive spark feature 1st became available in the 2008 Mustang MY...........

    I checked this for the base '08 GT in same article & this wasn't mentioned to exist.......even though the same engine & same PCM hardware is being used as in the Bullitt. I then checked this for the '09 GT....same thing. For '10 GT this is now stated as a std feature (this engine got a lot of the Bullitt's calibration features in its PCM) which kinda sucks but it is what it is. I checked the VID block thru Forscan in my '09 car's PCM but couldn't find any references to it so to get this enabled in my '09 GT PCM, I believe I'd have to acquire a 08-09 Bullitt PCM's firmware\OS & flash it in or acquire a 08-09 Bullitt's PCM & have it reprogrammed to my car's VIN & system parameters.......which could work as long as the 08-09 Bullitt's modules\systems are same\compatible thus all CANbus ID's are compatible.

    From what I understand, the 4.6L from 05-10 used the same TriCore PCM & all 08-10 GT's\ GT variants are similarly configured from a module standpoint thus should also be similarly CANbus addressed so interchangeable........but IMHO is just too much to go thru just so you could run either 87 or 93 oct fuel w\o making any changes in the tune when the plan is to run on 91 & up oct fuels period, so I stopped looking into potentially adding it to my car.

    Would have been nice to have that feature been std across all 08 & up GT's\GT variants, though.
  6. Juice

    Juice forum member

    So to clarify, it is not called OAR in the calibration. Only the PID is called OAR and its value ranges -1 to 1. And it is just an idicator of how "happy" the pcm is with the settings.
    IIRC, the changes were under "knock sensor" in the coypte pcm.
    It was not my intent to tune for different octane fuels. Only to extract the maximum power from whatever fuel I use. And I do run 87 most of the time, and my OAR was going negative. This indicates that the base tune was not knocking/pinging and the pcm is adding timing. More timimg = more power. And a quick scan of the OAR value is quick and easy reference to check.
    Unfortunately, Torque does not read it (added the pid) I have to use Live Link.
    I see no reason to force timing tables, limit which ones are used when you have this available.
    The car runs incredible and sounds insane since the changes. It has that roar, we used to call it the "cop car howl" back in the day.
    I am waiting on OAR to populate, need to put some miles on.
    GlassTop09 likes this.
  7. Forty61

    Forty61 forum member

    I’m always impressed by the depth of fine-tuning you do to your car. You’ve got the have the most dialed-in tune out there! Maybe one day I’ll find the time to learn all this stuff.. right now I barely have time to wash my car!
  8. GlassTop09

    GlassTop09 Senior Member


    Just put in my order for the HPTuners MPVI2+ ProLink+ upgrade package.........
    Gonna start getting real..............soon.
    crjackson likes this.
  9. GlassTop09

    GlassTop09 Senior Member

    I had intended to post the full thickness of the JEGS Ford 8.8" solid spacer kit but forgot so here it is:
    Kit total stack height measured out at .528" tall.

    The Motive Gear F888390 rear gears are doing very well......have put 358 mi on em to date. Plan to make a run to Albuquerque sometime within next week timeframe (this trip should put gears over the 500 mi mark & will be the 1st continuous run on gears w\o intentionally stopping for a cooldown) to get em good & hot (as hot as this Ford 8.8" Track Pack cover will allow) then do a drain, inspection & refill w\ the better Lucas HP 85W-140 GL-5 dino fluid for the long haul.
  10. Juice

    Juice forum member

    Gear set break in? Whats that lol
    I have gone to track events right after installing gears.
  11. GlassTop09

    GlassTop09 Senior Member


    Made my extended run yesterday (only put 1\2 of the total round-trip mileage to Albuquerque due to the many rolling rainstorms happening in my area of the US 4 Corners......didn't want to get caught in them. I just made it back home when the 1st rain drops started hitting the windshield) & all went very well. By the time I got back home the faint decel gear whine\hum occurring between 35-45 MPH was reduced enough that the road noise from the tires essentially drowned it out so all this is good as I know any further extended runs will only improve the gear meshing even more. This put the total mileage on these Motive gears well over the 500 mi mark (currently at 658 mi) but I'm gonna put a few more miles on her before I do the fluid drain since I did replace the initial fluid when I went back thru the snout to redo the solid spacer setup to reset the pinion bearing preload after initial install. No leaks, no drips so no errors so far......but for any future gear\diff work I'll only use the FP 8.8" gear install kits as they use all Timken bearings.

    The other item I noticed was the PCM's avg of fuel mileage since all of the tune changes I did (enabled MAF Adaption, correctly set the Injector CA Ref to match my Lunati cam's adv IVO, correctly matched all closed IMRC LWFM & SD airmass mapping to MAF tables & better matching ETC TB PTA & EA mapping in tune to actual 62mm TB's PTA & EA dimensions so ETC calc airload% will match the actual MAF calc airload% from same 62mm TB's actual PTA\EA dimensions at same TB TPS angles, correctly matched fuel stoich AFR in tune to fuel in tank....the major items that will have an effect). The PCM was showing a fairly large improvement in MPG & MPG rate of increase across the 265 mi of driving (saw avg MPG start at 18.2 MPG then steadily progress upward to 22.6 MPG by the time I parked the car w\ no signs of showing rate stabilization so it seems that engine can attain even better avg MPG) at speeds ranging up to 75-80 MPH.......running 3.91 gears on 26.1" dia tires & aftermarket cams.

    This driving includes a 2,000'+ elevation change (avg fuel MPG was increasing during elevation ascent as well as elevation descent......I checked this periodically while driving) so all this piqued my interest.

    Gonna be looking to see if engine will equal\improve w\ current tune revision & power train configuration vs the 25.4 MPG descent\23.3 MPG ascent avg's I got some 3 yrs ago running on an older revision of prior tuner's tune along w\ 3.73 gears, Kooks Race cats in exhaust & FR IM\BBK 62mm TB installed....all else same.

    Also noted just how good these OEM Ford 08-09 Bullitt take-off springs performed on open road in tandem w\ all the OEM Ford 07-14 SVT suspension, 11-14 Track Pack sway bars & Koni Orange struts\shocks I have installed. I hate to park this car now as it drives sssooo much better!

    Looking good!
  12. GlassTop09

    GlassTop09 Senior Member


    Just got done doing the 682 mi break in diff inspection\fluid changeout of my Motive Gear F888390 gears.
    Drained out the Lucas HP 80W-90 GL-5 dino gear oil....oil color was darker but clean w\ no shimmies (metal flakes) in it. Drain magnet had approx 1\8" of fine metallics (looked like slugde) but no shimmies so all is good there. Pinion is tight but turns smoothly so the 16 in-lbs of preload I put on pinion bearings when I respaced the JEGS solid spacer is working out just fine w\ no leaks around pinion flange. Inside axle housing was very clean so all is looking good.....took my fingers & a shop towel & cleaned out the sludge sump at bottom of diff housing (got a little more of the metallic sludge out but no shimmies found in it). Here's a couple of pictures of the wear pattern on ring gear at the .029" PD, .009" BL, 16 in-lbs pinion preload final setting:
    Motive Gear 3.91 682 mi .029 PD .009 BL Break In Drive Side #1.JPG Motive Gear 3.91 682 mi .029 PD .009 BL Break In Coast Side.JPG
    That's very close to being centered (slightly towards toe end) so I'm gonna ride her out from here. Cleaned up FoMoCo 8.8" Track Pack diff cover & LubeLocker 8.8" cover gasket & reinstalled cover. Loaded diff w\ 2.5 qts of Lucas HP 85W-140 GL-5 dino gear oil for the long haul (this is the good stuff & is compatible w\ the Eaton Tru-Trac LSD). Whipped out the Brake Klean & hosed the diff cover down to clean all up then put her on the ground & took on a I figured this Lucas 85W-140 gear oil silenced the Tru-Trac pretty well as it also helped more w\ the very faint resonance whine now happening between 40-45 MPH on decel only.....all quiet on accel thruout & decel is quiet above\below 40-45 MPH. From looking at my gear's wear pattern I believe my faint resonance whine is more\less strictly pinion bearing-related & I think it'll eventually go away once these Koyo bearings fully wear in. Will definately go back to using only FP 8.8" gear install kits w\ the Hi TQ pinion bearings (all bearings in this kit are Timken brand bearings.......) on any future diff work.

    Checked the rest of the rear axle while under car (all rear axle LCA & UCA bushings still look as new, PHB poly bushings look as new so wiped\regreased them before reinstall of PHB).....all good.

    Now to finish w\ last mod to car (07-09 GT500 Front Brake upgrade).....have the FP 12-13 Boss 302 Brake Line upgrade kit in hand & ordered the 07-09 GT500 OEM front brake splash shields so only have the Power Stop 07-09 GT500 OE front brake replacement kit (both front calipers, both 14" rotors & pads\hardware) left to get from Rock Auto.

    Figured she's due for a brake fluid flush so might as well do the upgrade at the same time.
    Last edited: Sep 12, 2022
    Midlife Crises likes this.
  13. Midlife Crises

    Midlife Crises Senior Member

    The drive side is looking pretty darn good but the coast side looks like it needs just a bit more run time. I wander if that is the light noise you hear. It’s awesome the lighter pinion preload has worked as you suspected it would.
  14. GlassTop09

    GlassTop09 Senior Member

    Could very well be, Midlife Crises. You really have to be listening for it w\ the radio turned way down to actually pick it up above normal road comes in & goes away very quick now. Operation is very smooth & frequency-free (can't pick up anything thru my MGW shifter's handle in which shifter body mount is mounted on a Blowfish Racing remote bracket which is mounted at rear trans flange between isolator & trans tail case housing using AMP bronze bushings on shifter linkage so if DS had any excess vibrations\frequency running thru it, I would feel it thru the shifter I could while I had the Richmond EXCEL 3.89's installed) so the coast side wear pattern could be adding to this......but the pattern looks better at .029" PD\.009" BL than it started out at .030" PD\.008" BL.

    A few more runs to Albuquerque & back using cruise control while ascending\descending grade at speed will work the coast side pattern.........w\ cruise control active & radio going, the resonance whine is virtually non-existent.

    Why I suspect the Koyo pinion bearings now is that when I initially installed these gears & set the final pinion preload, I set this too tight on my 1st go round & the pinion was very stiff\hard on initial turn w\ a "ratcheting action" (I tightened the yoke to the 140 ft-lbs that Ford spec'd) so I had to use up another of my new nuts & back this off to 120 ft-lbs to achieve the 22 in-lbs I reported so I may have induced a flat spot or 2 on a bearing roller\inner or outer race.....but at 120 ft-lbs on the yoke, the pinion was tight and rolled much better, but it was after this that I realized that I may not be in full contact w\ outer pinion bearing's inner race against the solid spacer due to the inner pinion bearing shim stack height change from the shim stack height that On3 used to set the solid spacer stack height\pinion preload to the 25 in-lbs I was told it was set to. That's why I bought another JEGS 8.8" solid spacer kit to redo this as On3 didn't give me back the extra shims that they didn't use (they only used 1 .004" shim.....the kit comes w\ 10 shims in addition to the outer ring & shim cradle & I supplied the kit). So, once I started running the rear axle on the jack stands, the outer pinion bearing heated up & got a little tighter which wasn't helping (the ratcheting came back).

    I don't get any of this now w\ the yoke TQ'd to 180 ft-lbs (which I shouldn't since solid spacers don't crush.......could've stopped at the 140 ft-lbs Ford spec for way of verifying this after properly resetting solid spacer stack height for preload by intentionally overtightening the yoke). My goal was 14-15 16 in-lbs continuous on 1st try so no need to mess w\ it anymore as this was within the 10-19 in-lbs preload all around "spec" I came up with for new\used pinion bearings. I figure the pinion bearings are acting like a tuning fork once they hit a certain rotational RPM range, they start resonating.

    As close as this set up is, I'm sure that this faint resonance whine will eventually go away w\ a little more run time but IMHO it is easily tolerable as it is.
    Last edited: Sep 13, 2022
    Midlife Crises likes this.
  15. GlassTop09

    GlassTop09 Senior Member


    Weather is starting to change up here in the US 4 Corners area, so I had stopped using HVAC while driving around in town for the last week. In the meantime, I have periodically peaked at Mode 6 data & live data (mainly STFT+LTFT data at idle but all the rest as well) & I caught an interesting scenario concerning cat CE ratio\CMBT response to running engine's ECT & AAT.

    To refresh, my tune's cooling fan control is set to run when HVAC (climate control using AC compressor & cooling fan) is disabled during low fan speed mode at ECT enable @ 210*F, ECT disable @ 208*F (when HVAC is enabled during low fan speed mode, the cooling fan runs low speed continuous at low MPH speed <33 this mode the engine operational ECT range is 195*F-197*F). All running on same tune revision #19 (my last tune revision flashed 8-21-22).

    The cat CE ratio avg when HVAC was enabled is around B1 @ .160, B2 @ .156; avg CMBT @ 1,171*F; B1 idle LTFT @ -4.7%, B2 idle LTFT @ -3.1% w\ avg AAT @ 98*F.

    The 2 readings I took over this week when HVAC was disabled (so engine operational ECT was between 212*F-206*F from cooling fan being oscillated instead of running continuous) were higher........avg cat CE ratio was B1 @ .215, B2 @ .235; avg CMBT @ 1,312*F; B1 idle LTFT @ -3.9%, B2 idle LTFT @ -1.6% w\ avg AAT @ 75*F.

    This data is showing the effects of increased running ECT (read increased cylinder temps here) along w\ increasing air density from lowered AAT has on engine combustion efficiency concerning emissions output. The engine power output has gotten better but the emissions got worse from the increased combustion chamber temps due to HVAC being off so cooling fan only ran when commanded raising the running engine ECT above where the engine normally ran w\ HVAC on, even in higher AAT. I started looking thru tune file & saw that in the Spark\Advance\BKT Corrections\ ECT map, the upper deadband range (area where PCM is set to not apply any spark add\retard multi--0--) was set @ 212*F, so PCM may have been momentarily applying a spark multi to retard BKT spark if ECT went past 212*F before cooling fan started getting ECT to start dropping after being turned on @ 210*F, so I bumped this upper deadband range in tune to 214*F to give PCM a little more deadband area (so ECT will have to hit 215*F instead of 213*F before PCM starts applying spark cut to give cooling fan a little more time to catch the running ECT before it crosses this threshold). Now this is no big deal as all of this is well below OEM threshold.....just me using this as an excuse to play w\ the tune & reflash (I had made some other small smoothing tweaks in other maps & settings as I had made note of since last reflash) so after saving all changes in a new revision, I flashed revision #20 in & after running 1st cold start\idle datalogs while allowing PCM to relearn idle, idle STFT+LTFT from EVAP & idle load changes w\ all accessories off, then HVAC on w\ fan & radio, then w\ headlights on low & high beam, I took her on my std 37 mi specific drive cycle route to complete I\M Readiness monitors. All completed except EVAP even though the FLI was at 75%.......oh well, I know it'll complete on the next drive cycle.

    Checked the initial numbers (had HVAC on so cooling fan will run continuous <33 MPH) & all looks to be headed back towards normal (cat CE ratio B1 @ .141, B2 @ .195; CMBT @ 1,313*F; B1 idle LTFT @ -3.9%, B2 idle LTFT @ -1.6%; AAT @ 68*F) but engine is really loving this cooler air (humidity is also up as it was raining this morning & is about to start up again)......she's running very strong & smooth as a sewing machine. Gonna retest again w\ HVAC off after I get a few more DC's in to then see if the cat CE ratios will climb up again or stay down this time when running ECT goes back up.

    So far, PCM seems to be adding all of its spark advance w\o any hint of knock so I believe its capped out at current settings (which is what I was hoping it would do since resetting the fuel stoich AFR to 14.13 & the injector CA ref setting to match my cam's adv IVO) so I need to run some driving datalogs under part throttle\WOT to see how far I can nudge up the spark timing before knock shows up.

    Take away from all my given numbers is the importance of these car's cooling system performance to not only maintain high HP\TQ output, but also emissions output.

    Can't go wrong w\ a larger radiator (running a Mishimoto HP 3-Row Aluminum Radiator) & GT500 cooling fan upgrade......whether NA or FI.

    Posted for informational purposes.

    PS edit (10-3-22)--I also have got all my parts in for my big brake upgrade except the front rotor splash shields (evidently, I gave the parts counter tech the wrong FoMoCo part# for 07-09 GT500.....even though I got the part# off the public Ford parts website--part# was actually for 07-09 Shelby GT which is the same as a std GT & they're discontinued--so reordered the correct parts) which should be in today\tomorrow. My pressure brake bleeder kit should be here tomorrow, so when I have all this in hand & pick up some FoMoCo DOT 3 brake fluid (or DOT 4 if dealership has it in stock) it's go time!
    Last edited: Oct 3, 2022
  16. GlassTop09

    GlassTop09 Senior Member


    Rest of my parts came in, so I picked up 1 gal of DOT 3 brake fluid (local Ford dealership doesn't carry brake fluid in bulk packaging......wasn't gonna buy 11-12oz bottles & overpay, so off to O'Reilly's I went).

    Got her up in the air yesterday & started the process of installing my big front brake kit & upgraded brake lines. All went well w\o much fuss......until I got ready to hook up my new pressure bleeder I bought to bleed out\flush system.......
    Found out the MC adapter that came w\ it wouldn't fit my MC reservoir, even though the description said it fits Ford (bought it from Amazon, 1 of the cheaper units......the size was right, but the internal latching was wrong). So now I can't use it & no helper to fall back on the old two-man pressure method.
    Went to HF to see what they had, struck out there. Went to O'Reilly's to see if they had replacement MC reservoir caps so I could McGuyver a makeshift adapter to use.....bought 2 (were case I messed up the 1st one) then thought to go to local Ford dealership & usual they didn't have the MC reservoir caps in stock so also ordered 2 of them as well (got a deal on them since I ordered "bulk") for backup. These caps should be in today.

    So, back at home yesterday, I checked the MC caps I bought at O'Reilly's (Dorman) & found that they didn't fit either (latching design was right, but were too big....even though they were for Ford.....argh) so can't use these either & I wasn't gonna mess w\ my original MC cap so I decided to go real old school & attempt gravity bleed knowing that it won't be the better method to get all the air out (had plugged all the brake lines to prevent any chance of air entry due to MC emptying out while changing all parts to limit all air issues to calipers). 1st off, I was surprised that this actually worked (I had key off so no power to ABS) on this '09 Mustang. So, I went round following the recommended pattern (RR, LR, RF, LF & on the 4-piston front calipers....I-O-I) 3 times until I saw no more bubbles coming out, then pumped a low but decent pedal. Hit it 1 more time but got no more bubbles out so I know I'll need to do this again once I get my pressure bleeder squared away. Put tires back on & put her on the ground & test drove after tool pickup......pedal was low but good. Made several brake hits to start bedding in front pads & brakes stood car up on front end like right now w\o hardly much pedal effort so I'm gonna like this!
    Drove around for a while thru traffic to work the brakes to get some heat into the system to help any trapped air bubbles in calipers to move up towards all bleeders. Parked at home for the night & checked runs, drips so no leaks. Checked MC fluid level......level did drop a little, so a good sign air is moving in the right direction & breaking out of fluid (microbubbles).

    Pulled up the Ford WSM this morning to look over brake bleeding procedures & in section 206-00 Brake System General Info\General Procedures\Component Bleeding (pgs 206-00-2 thru 5), there is a special procedure for bleeding new rear brake calipers w\ manual integrated park that I wasn't aware of.......will be the same for an existing rear brake caliper that got drained (I replaced brake lines to both rear calipers) so I'm gonna do this today since this is most likely where any trapped air is still hanging out (I worked the parking brake several times but I see now from this procedure that this won't work......need to remove caliper, pull outer pad out, reinstall caliper w\ only inner pad installed then depress brake pedal to push piston out then remove caliper & manually crank caliper piston back in w\ bleed screw cracked to remove air out, repeat until clean).

    While I was on my computer, I hit Rock Auto & ordered the matching PowerStop Evolution ZL1 ceramic rear brake pads to the front brake pads (OE for 07-09 GT500) that came w\ the kit as I liked the way these pads bite.

    Getting there................

    PS edit (today)--She's DONE!
    Went on YT this morning & the 1st video that popped up was a YT'er showing how to make a pressure bleeder adapter out of a MC res cap by using a tire valve stem (drill a hole in center of cap sized for the valve stem then install it into the cap) & a latching tire inflator chuck (to latch onto the tire valve stem then use either an air compressor reg to 10 psi or a portable pressure bleeder). Went to O'Reilly's & picked up the parts. Put car back up in the air & while waiting on the spare FoMoCo MC res caps to arrive, went around & gravity bled her 2 more times just to see before applying the special procedure to bleed both rear a little more air out & it happened to be all of it as the pedal came up back to normal & was rock hard, so I don't have to do anything else. Put all back together & put her on the ground & took her out to NAPI International Raceway & Test Facility to really push brake pad bedding on the front.......the more I pushed them, the better they got as the pads heated up. All good.

    Went by the local dealership to check on parts ordered yesterday before heading home........found out the delivery truck had broken down, so parts won't be in until Tuesday now.

    Oh well, at least I had some good karma going for me today!
    Last edited: Oct 7, 2022
  17. GlassTop09

    GlassTop09 Senior Member


    Been awhile since finishing my Power Stop 07-09 OEM GT500 front brake upgrade kit install...........just reporting on my progress since.

    1st thing, this upgrade is a clear winner (I had this in mind after I bought this car & is another reason why I went w\ the OEM FoMoCo 07-09 GT500 SVT 18" x 9.5" wheels).......wish I'd have done this sooner (was jones'ing over the black powder coating & Brembo name\labeling of the FP M-2300-S kit until I came to conclusion that this wasn't worth the $600.00 price difference to me since I am using this kit on a GT).

    The braking response\performance is heads & shoulders above the OEM GT's front 2-piston\13.2" rotor setup running the OEM GT brake front\rear pad compound when you have a good set of tires installed to take full advantage of them. The response is so good now I have to keep reminding myself to not ride my foot on the brake pedal as I can now detect the brakes starting to bite w\ very, very little brake pedal pressure a VERY good feeling\confidence to drive a little more aggressively & maintain full control of car. I like that the GT500 brake pads are slotted to allow the gasses created from brake friction against rotors to escape thus helping to reduce brake fade (my OEM GT's brake pads didn't come w\ this slot cut into the pad material) from gas buildup between the brake pads & rotors.
    I can now slam the brakes when going straight & turn the steering wheel loose......the car tracks straight as an arrow but will stand up on the nose & shut the car down in a hurry going from around 60-0 MPH w\o any tire breaking traction (skid) or brake fade using the OEM GT's brake bias programmed into the ABS module & the more I do this the better the braking gets as they heat up (tested all this at my favorite NAPI International Raceway & Test Facility.......) .....definately will pin you in the seat belt harnesses......I LOVE it!

    I did run into an issue when I installed the new rear brake pads w\ 1 of my OEM rear calipers......the DS caliper wouldn't retract in far enough to allow it to fit over the new pads against the rotor (was only 3\32" short of making it). PS rear caliper had no issue. While fighting w\ it I accidentally tore the caliper boot which pissed me off then I ended up twisting off 1 of the caliper mounting bolts into the caliper pin from frustration.......thus ended up having to replace the whole DS rear caliper\bracket assembly to fix it all to run the new GT500 rear brake pads. So, I'm now just 1 rear caliper away from having all new system.....

    Have ordered\received my Motive Products brake MC reservoir adapter that will fit the Stang so now I can use my portable brake pressure bleeder & finally do a full brake bleed\fluid flush (which I've almost accomplished anyway while performing gravity bleeding on the system) so am all set for any future work. I also have made my alternative pressure bleeder MC res adapters using a tire valve stem mounted in a spare MC res cap (bought 2 of these from local Ford dealership) so I've covered this as well.

    As of now I have completed all mods\upgrades to chassis, suspension, rear axle & braking as well as engine\drivetrain to my GlassTop so the only thing left to play with is my tune.
  18. GlassTop09

    GlassTop09 Senior Member


    On the tuning front, while looking at my tune file this morning (have made 3 more revisions since post #295....making changes to Spark Advance\BKT Corrections\VCT & Spark Advance\MBT Corrections\VCT maps.....these set up the % of correction to base BKT & MBT spark advance settings based off the amount of airload VCT load% cam degree retard called for.....see post on pg 13 #255 for explanation), I've found another potential error that was made either by BAMA tuners (whose tune file my last tuner used to tune my car) or my last tuner. This has to do w\ the relationship in map axis scaling between all airflow VCT load% & TQ maps & all spark advance BKT\MBT maps using HPTuners Editor software.

    I've discovered that due to the relationship between these 2 PCM functions, the map scaling should be identical between them, so they operate in perfect synch w\ each other. I found this out by running a test between my BKT (borderline knock table) spark map & airflow VCT (variable cam timing) load% map in HPTuners Editor software since both these maps use load% & engine RPM to determine their operations (I've always noticed that my VCT load% map & BKT\MBT spark maps used different scaling, which I always thought didn't make sense but accepted as found......all seems to operate Ok).

    Checked thru all HPTuners Editor info\training & found no info on this so I thought it wouldn't hurt to see what would happen.

    I copied the load & RPM (X, Y axis for those so inclined) scaling from the airload VCT load% map into the base BKT spark map, then checked the rest of the maps in Spark Advance......saw that HPTuners Editor automatically reset all the rest of the spark advance maps in both BKT & MBT sections to the same map axis scaling that I just copied from the VCT load% map into the base BKT spark map.....w\o any more input from me! The software corrected all the rest on its own......before saving the data.

    Cleared this out then reversed the test (copied the base BKT spark map load & RPM scaling into the VCT load% map) then checked all VCT maps under Airflow\VCT\Configuration & saw the very same results!

    Checked thruout the rest of my tune files for this action.........found this action was restricted only to these 2 sections.....Airload\VCT\Configuration\VCT load% & TQ maps & Spark Advance\BKT\BKT Corrections & MBT\MBT Corrections maps.

    So, my hunch has been verified to be this needs to be corrected in my tune! From looking at this process, the best way to go in my situation is using the base BKT spark map axis scaling to correct the airload VCT load% map axis scaling. Doing this will correct a soft spot coming off idle (750 to 1,500 RPM's) & at mid range (3,000 to 4,750 RPM's) where the scaling between the VCT load% map & all BKT\MBT spark advance mapping doesn't match up thus is out of synch w\ each other (causes extra work for the PCM to maintain consistency in application) so should make a noticeable difference in drivability once corrected.....w\o making any changes to settings in any of the map cells!

    It appears to be obvious that my last tuner was\may not be aware of this capability in the HPTuners Editor software......or of the need to make sure that these 2-tune section's map axis scaling is synchronized.

    Revision #24 is coming shortly...............

    PS edit #1--Just checked on HPTuners BBS forums in no hits on this feature\subject in Ford specific or General forums so, unless this is a very recent new feature, it appears to be a hidden one.

    PS edit #2--Finished revision #24 w\ newly synched airflow VCT load% mapping to spark advance BKT\MBT mapping and a little tweaking in newly synched airflow VCT load% map in .20 load row in 1,000 RPM cell (set VCT cam retard at 10* instead of 0* so PCM will begin to start retarding cam timing from 801 RPM's to 1,000 RPM's when Spark Source shifts from Idle Feedback to Borderline Knock which will also start applying a % of additional spark increase to the base BKT timing map as set up in the BKT Corrections\VCT map along the now same scaled X\Y map axis to make up for the lowered static compression from IVC retard to increase overall dynamic cyl compression thus cyl pressure while also at the same time increasing cyl pressure expansion time to crankshaft throw from retarded EVO during power stroke thus increasing overall engine net TQ output at these lower RPM's, continuing on from here). Wrote into PCM & checked all on 1st startup......all operating OK.

    Took car out on initial DC after this reflash........she ain't got no more soft spots during accel off idle now! Engine just pulls nice, smooth & very crisp thruout part throttle w\o effort. Checked all after DC, all I\M Readiness monitors completed except EVAP (couldn't maintain steady enough run at 55-65 MPH for the whole 10 mins.....doing this at night w\ too many folks driving thru NAPI International Raceway & Test facility). All operating OK.

    Every time I think I'm done w\ this tune I keep finding stuff that needs correcting................................;):)
    Last edited: Oct 23, 2022
  19. GlassTop09

    GlassTop09 Senior Member


    Check out this video of the new FR Gen 2 CJ IM vs the old FR Gen 1 CJ IM:
    Testing the New Cobra Jet Intake Manifold | Gen 1 vs Gen 2 - YouTube

    Please note the TB inlet design between the 2 IMs in that the Gen 2 IM has the bridge that separates the 2 TB bores in the TB flange....

    Now refer to pg 6, posts #113 & #114 in this thread of what I noted in this same area of design between the FR IM & the OEM IM for the 4.6L 3V engine...........................


    Looks to me like the fellow engineers at Ford Performance finally ID'd this issue w\ the Gen 1 CJ IM design & corrected it to make this Gen 2 CJ IM more emissions friendly...........that they should have done w\ the 3V version back in the day......

    Very interesting..............................
  20. GlassTop09

    GlassTop09 Senior Member


    I got the thought to go back thru all my unmolested OEM GT\Bullitt tune files for 08-10 SO PCM & check all their map's axis scaling to see how the Ford engineers intended for this stuff to interface..............guess what I discovered..........this is exactly what Ford did so these maps will operate in synch & evenly, so the cell data points line up across the X & Y axis as close as they can be made thus the interpolation also between them.

    So I set 1 up to use in Editor's compare feature to check my current tune file to see which maps that have been altered to then fix them. Found that the only map X\Y scaling axis that had been altered was indeed the Airflow\VCT\Configuration VCT load\TQ maps (also tested & found that all this scaling synch is tied to any tune map that is linked to the IMRC\VCT operation so all MAF LWFM & SD Airmass maps as well as all Spark Advance maps (mainly due to the BKT\MBT VCT IMRC maps).

    So, I have gone & restored all Airflow VCT map's scaling back to the OEM scaling which will now restore proper map synching across all VCT\IMRC-related maps in my tune file & have flashed in revision #25 which now has all this restored (in the process I also reset the Knock Retard\Max Retard map to allow the PCM to pull as much as 8* of spark timing out across the board if needed for safety......up to 2.6* below the base borderline knock settings so the PCM can resolve most any tuning issues derived from this rescaling itself) back to OEM scaling process & to date all is working well w\o issue.

    Now I will need to run driving datalogs under normal driving, part throttle & WOT operation to check the engine operation to ensure that the map scaling operation thru the map data cell sections that were out of synch prior aren't causing any unknown issues (all map cell data is still the same across the load% (Y) axis as this part wasn't's the map sections where the RPM (X) axis spread between columns was different is the concern.....depending on how well the PCM interpolated the same cell data points across the 2 different X axis tracks).

    From all that I've seen\understood\learned, it shouldn't be much of a problem in the interim as the PCM should simply "retune" itself--thus the engine--to the new axis scaling changes......if the Knock Retard\Max Retard map settings are large enough to allow the PCM to do so in the map areas where operational cylinder pressures can get high enough to potentially induce\create knock\detonation--usually part throttle\WOT at 30% load & up in NA config (this area is 1 of the major tuning mistake areas IMHO that causes more engines to blow where some tuners keep these settings too tight to NOT allow the PCM to fully protect the engine w\ the thought to not lose too much HP\TQ during competitive racing or to maintain tuning "clout" thru the social "dyno wars". Competitive racing is 1 different aspect.... you should EXPECT this potential as a reality in this scenario thus has some merit.........because of competition so pushing every advantage.....but in a daily driver type of use.......?).

    My engine, even though it's in excellent condition & runs w\ authority, still has in excess of 161,000+ mi on her so IMHO you don't do stupid.................especially when it isn't necessary.

    PS edit--Now some may see all this as being nitpicky or out of touch in the tuning world............I see it as being a good, smart, safe & responsible tuner taking into account all variables to set this up to reflect any negative aspects until I can get around to doing the datalogging to fine tune all this so I can still enjoy driving my car & not be afraid\worried of hurting anything in the meantime. A BIG plus of tuning your own vehicles!
    Last edited: Oct 26, 2022
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.