Lunati VooDoo #21270700 Camshafts

[GlassTop09]

FYI............................

Got all my exhaust hanger parts in as well as a new trans isolator (Anchor brand off Rock Auto) since in process of installing all this I would be removing the trans crossmember & would be exposing it.

Got car up in the air & got under her to start pulling her apart......upon closer inspection I saw that the existing exhaust hanger rubber inserts actually were not busted up at all & were in good condition, so I left them in service & proceeded to replace the trans isolator. Pulled the old original 14 yr old FoMoCo isolator & checked it.......rubber wasn't cracked\separating but it was very soft (could easily deform it between my fingers whereas the new Anchor unit was much stiffer durometer rubber.......couldn't hardly get it to deform using my fingers as I did w\ the old FoMoCo unit) so I got ahead of this eventually cracking\breaking. Got all reinstalled & TQ'd to specs then got out a pry bar & pried B1 exhaust hanger as far down as it would go (noted it was bent upward & close to hitting the crossmember........) to match the B2 hanger position. Have also ordered 2 new Anchor OE type motor mounts off Rock Auto after this to replace them as well in better weather.

So, from this finding, I know now that the small saw-toothed knock pull data is legit so I went in revision #47 tune file & cut base MBT & base BKT spark advance timing across .40 thru 1.0 load rows .5* so both BKT & MBT spark map data maintained the 4.5* spacing & in all BKT\MBT VCT spark advance adder maps cut the .60 load row .01* multi & .70 load row .02* multi & flashed revision in PCM & performed all initial startup, idle & DC driving datalogs.....pushed her to 6,055 RPM's during this DC to test.......datalog showed that I got rid of most of this but still some showed up, so I went in revision #48 tune file again & cut base MBT\BKT spark advance timing in .70 thru 1.0 load rows another 3* then vertically smoothed .50 thru .70 load rows to transition (cut 3.5* so far), flashed it in & performed all again......datalog showed that I almost got it all gone during the low RPM, high load test as well as during WOT hit to actual engine redline in 3rd gear.....all else good, so I went in revision #49 tune file & cut .70 thru 1.0 rows in both base MBT & BKT spark advance maps another 1.5* (total of 5*....this should cancel out the 4.5* KS spark advance PCM is applying so hopefully clear up all the spark timing pulled from KS activity so I can now start tweaking all BKT\MBT VCT spark advance adder multi's to fine tune WOT) then vertically smoothed .50 thru .70 load rows again for transition & gave her a little more fuel (.84\.86 Lambda @ 11.83 AFR\12.11 AFR) to help further cool the cyls to stop any more pulled spark timing from KS activity.

Was getting dark & raining hard so I shut down for the day & went over\thru latest datalog w\ a fine-tooth comb & made some small setting changes in revision #49 in all MBT\BKT VCT spark advance adder map multipliers @ .80 thru 1.0 load rows based off my airload VCT load map cam retard degree settings in anticipation based off numbers I ran from prior tuner's WOT numbers he got w\o using these VCT multipliers (put all 0's in the .80 thru 1.0 load rows) so my total WOT calc'd numbers w\ VCT multipliers would come out just under his (approx 1*-1.5* less) so hopefully all goes clean so I can then bring my WOT numbers up to match\exceed his then start slowly leaning out the fueling until I see knock or I reach Lambda .88\.90 (12.390 AFR\12.673 AFR), whichever shows up 1st.

Otherwise, all is good........car runs very well w\ excellent drivability manners\responsiveness thruout........the main advantage of street\remote tuning vs a dyno (dynos are better for power tuning\component performance\output comparisons as you can differentiate\measure between small differences in output). I got my "dyno graph" set up & working in VCM Scanner.......but it won't be near as accurate as a real dyno (can't zero it out due to the small IPC WTE's generated between ETC\SD\LWFM airload predictive calc's vs actual MAF airload calcs thus has a calc'd TQ margin of error that varies too much).

Getting closer to being done...................

 

[GlassTop09]

FYI....................

Got revision #49 flashed in this morning (started snowing on me for a bit but temps were in the mid\high 30's so more like rain.......) & performed all including DC...............
All went very well & from looking at data log while running up the 1st 3\4 mi 25*+ incline under low RPM\high load operation showing hardly ANY knock spark cuts off the full 4.4* knock spark advance & under full on WOT showing only 1 cyl (#2) showing some knock but it never got close to the floor (only pulled back 1.5* to 2* from 4.4* max & remained flat across the entire pull) says that I've pretty much have caught up w\ this so going forward from here it's only a matter of fine adjusting the BKT\MBT VCT Spark Advance Adder map multi's to finish dialing in the rest of any spark advance timing to optimum (max spark advance is hovering between the 28* to 32* max range that Jeffery Evans states most NA 3V Mod Motors end up when WOT is fully optimized......right now mine is around 29.5* currently.....w\ full KS activity active). Once I get this part completely happy, I'll then start slowly pulling back on the fueling until it starts to pull knock spark advance timing away from the MBT spark advance line.......at that point she'll be fully optimized.

While doing this I also reset the Knock Retard min load enable setting in revision #49 back to the OEM .30 load & upped the multis in the .10-.20 load rows in BKT\MBT VCT Spark Advance Adder maps .03* (to make up some for the KS's coming online a little later)......this was a good move as this pretty much smoothed out the power application from off idle......engine just responds very quick & strong but also smooth......can't tell when the KS's come online & up spark advance timing the full 4.5* since using the amount of VCT cam retard degrees being applied, the .03* additional multi added close to 2* of the 4.5* to base BKT\BKT VCT spark advance timing at full VCT 30* cam retard ahead of the .30 load KS enable threshold so the power application felt continuous thru this section, so I'm keeping this where it's at.

Most likely why the Ford engineers set this KS enable threshold at .30 load originally....................

Rest went excellent. All I\M Readiness monitors except EVAP completed w\ Cat CE Ratio results as follows:
B1 @ .180.....idle LTFT @ -3.9%
B2 @ .137.....idle LTFT @ -0.8%
CMBT @ 1,463*F avg (this got as high as 1,693*F during WOT......I reset the COT prevention to 1,750*F to allow WOT tuning w\o interference)

Have made tweaks to revision #50's BKT\MBT VCT Spark Advance Adder map multi settings in the areas ID'd on data log to finish cleaning up WOT (from 5,000 RPMs forward where PCM was transitioning into the .80 load row which has the new WOT VCT cam retard settings so trimmed a bit off from this .80 load to 1.0 load row section & across .50-.70 load rows from 1,000 thru 2,250 RPM's to finish addressing the low RPM\high load operations).......left all the rest of tune file as currently set......nothing else to do w\ these settings from here.......only the VCT Spark Advance Adder multi settings & OL base fueling to finish her off street-wise.
Gonna flash this revision in car then test it later..................

Finally getting real close to the end......................

 

[GlassTop09]

FYI...........................

Flashed revision #50 in car yesterday. Set up laptop for datalogging this morning & took her out to datalog using the same 37 mi DC route in same manner.

1st thing, low RPM\high load tests showed that this issue is now largely fixed (thruout tests I only saw a couple of small, very short KS spark retard pullbacks approx .6* then went right back up to full 4.4* max out) so this result only leaves WOT to tune out now.

After finishing the MM 60\40 Training then reaching my spot to turn around (this is a 2 1\2 mi straight stretch) & saw no one coming both ways, I got her on the road in 1st gear & at 20 MPH I rolled her into WOT.......inadvertently tested my limiter setting pretty quick (set soft limiter--using TB only--at 6,500 RPMs) & she just nosed over so smoothly when PCM closed TB so I quickly snatched into 2nd gear & stabbed her into WOT......at that time traction said bye-bye so had to let up momentarily to allow tires to regain traction then stabbed her into WOT again & again she got up on the limiter quicker than I anticipated (1st time pushing these 3.91 gears & this engine w\ my tuning in PCM) & again she just nosed over so smoothly so I snatched her into 3rd gear & stabbed her into WOT again, by this time I was aware of how all was operating & she ran up very quick & smoothly so I snatched into 4th gear around 5,500 RPMs & ran her up to just under 6,000 RPMs then let up & shifted into 5th gear........should be enough data to get a preliminary view of how she's doing under a full WOT load.......then proceeded to finish out the rest of the DC as usual.

Note: I wasn't expecting the car to break traction in 2nd gear off a rolling 1-2 shift @ 5,875 RPMs (to clear ETC limiter 650 RPM hysteresis.....reduced this hysteresis setting in revision #51 to recover ETC quicker), so this was a surprise & caught me off guard......but I quickly figured out that these Motive Gear F888390 3.91 gears, along w\ the new Airload VCT load% map's cam EVO retard degree settings I got in it for WOT from 5,000 thru 6,500 RPMs (reworked this map's settings to take advantage of 2 cyl TQ force application timing per single power stroke rotation--refer to drawing in post #308--so seamless TQ transfer from leading cyl to trailing cyl onto crankshaft journals before leading cyl's cam adv dur EVO point is reached--at 5,000 RPMs @ 15*--the starting point, at 5,750 RPMs @ 18* & at 6,500 RPMs @ 20*. This TQ application method now uses the built up inertial momentum in flywheel\clutch or flexplate\converter to solely help engine "push the car forward" instead of having to help turn engine over to get the trailing cyl into position to assert its TQ force against crankshaft throw during transition from compression\ignition stroke--countering flywheel rotational inertia--into power stroke AFTER 90* leading cyl in same power stroke cycle has already opened the cam's adv dur EVO point releasing its excess cyl pressure off the crankshaft throw--thus counterbalancing TQ force--into exhaust BEFORE the trailing cyl is in position to also apply its TQ force to crankshaft throw--thus a TQ dead zone exists momentarily during crankshaft rotation--while also STILL having to "push the car forward" as well.........this is why at low RPMs a LOT of cyl pressure is necessary to make good TQ.......most cam's adv dur EVO timing points at 0* cam\crank reference is opening ahead of the 73* BBDC for seamless TQ transfer between 2 cyls or even worse, BEFORE the crankshaft's 90* max throw length--like most all lopey camshafts GI cam adv dur EVO points are set--thus max mechanical TQ leverage.....now wonder why they all lose low RPM TQ output--also tend to "buck\shake engine"--against the OEM cams whose adv dur EVO point at 0* cam\crank reference is 80* BBDC.....a full 10* AFTER max crank throw length thus max mechanical TQ leverage & only 7* of rotation away from the 73* BBDC max crankshaft TQ generation point thus needs much less flywheel inertial momentum to roll the trailing cyl into TQ output during power stroke thus applies more of this momentum to pushing the car forward.......there's NO WAY these 4.6L engines w\ their 3.55" bores can generate enough TQ force from NA airload ingestion alone at low RPM's to effectively counter this fact......unless the AFMT camshaft is ground to similar specs as the OEM camshaft.......V-engine 90* crankshaft throw\firing order design 101......this is the beauty of what VCT brings to the table to help counter the shortcomings so this little 4.6L's displacement can punch "uphill"......IF properly used) based off my Lunati VooDoo cam's GI adv dur EVO at 0* cam\crank reference, along w\ the BKT\MBT VCT Spark Advance Adder multi settings (at 5,000 RPMs .08* @ 1.2*, at 5,750 RPM's .09* @ 1.62* & at 6,500 RPM's .10* @ 2*) that VCT is using to roll in additional spark advance timing above all base BKT\MBT & KS spark advance timing when VCT rolls in the cam's retard EVO degrees making up for the same retarded cam IVC timing to recover, maintain and\or improve static\dynamic compression thus cyl pressure for net TQ output, along w\ the fuel injection ref CA timing set to match cam's adv dur IVO to Ford fuel injection's EOIT thus improved fuel atomization\swirl into cylinders, along w\ more accurate ETC\SD\LWFM predictive airload-to-MAF airload calcs from corrected PTA\EA mapping for the FP 62mm TB, has this engine rolling out much more TQ on demand.....even while using approx 1.5* LESS total spark advance timing (in my tune max is 29.5* combined) than prior tune (max was 31* w\ no extra assist from VCT 15* cam EVO retard--had the .80 load thru 1.0 load rows of both BKT\MBT VCT Spark Advance Adder maps zeroed out--so the 15* of cam IVC retard was not accounted for which cut total static\dynamic compression thus cyl pressures, along w\ the fuel injection ref CA timing being set at 349.5* CA instead of at 330* CA to match the Lunati's cam adv dur 30* IVO point thus was 19.5* late which had fuel being sprayed into slightly open intake valves thus losing the atomization\swirl advantage & being out of synch w\ VCT this got worse as engine RPM's increased along w\ the mis-matched PTA\EA mapping for a 55mm TB being used w\ this FP 62mm TB throwing off the ETC\SD\LWFM predictive airload-to-MAF airload calcs) .....thus will also rev much faster.

All this stuff really does make a difference in how the engine performs.......

All went well. Looked thru datalog & saw that I only had 2 cyls break away from the full 4.4* KS-applied spark advance timing (#2 & #5.......coincidentially these 2 cyls exhaust primaries are closest to\aimed right at the NB O2 sensors in Kooks header collectors AND are at the front of OEM IM where the plenum starts so don't get the full advantage of full plenum mixing when EVAP\PCV is purging thus I'm suspecting they're running slightly leaner than the rest of the cylinders on A\F mix) so in tune revision #51, I'm going old school & adjust the OL base fuel map settings......have set this up to put even more fuel into cylinders (set fueling at .84 Lambda @ 11.83 AFR up to 3,000 RPM's then .82 Lambda @ 11.55 AFR from 3,500 RPM's on........essentially the OEM '09 GT tune's OL base fuel map settings using fuel stoich AFR of 14.08 instead of the OEM fuel stoich AFR of 14.64) during WOT to shut down the cyl knocking under load then start slowly leaning it out until I see knock start up again & readjusted the OL Fuel TPS Thresh map settings to bring OL fueling in just a little bit quicker (what started #2 & #5 cyls to pull spark timing.....was a little too slow getting into OL fueling) so PCM started pulling spark timing lightly off #2 cyl but heavily off #5 cyl (went -x.x*) from KS activity but once OL fueling kicked in @ .88 Lambda--12.39 AFR, the PCM started slowly adding spark timing back in under full WOT load to #2 & #5 cyls respectively across the rest of this WOT pull (indicating excess CC heat causing detonation......question is...from what?).

PS--If you look at an OEM IM, you'll note that the very 1st IM runner behind TB flange goes to #5 cyl on B2, not cyl #1 on B1..............FYI.

So, I shouldn't see any KS activity pulling spark timing during WOT w\ OL fueling at .82 Lambda which will then allow me to either step up more spark timing thru both BKT\MBT VCT spark adder maps then lean out fueling, or just lean out the fueling, until I start seeing KS activity cutting spark timing again on #2 & #5 cyls (the weakest ones) during WOT then correct & be done with it.

Just in case, I also have a new set of NGK Iridium IX 0372 plugs on hand to install if #2 & #5 cyls don't stop knocking under full WOT load (these plugs were installed 1-8-22 replacing a used set of Champion 9406 Iridium plugs I put in after pulling out the badly burnt up MC HFSC-24FP plugs from excessive EVAP purging caused by FRPP IM's EVAP port routing\bad Ford F85F-9G444-BD NB O2 sensor operations. Engine has no misfires to date since their install 1 yr ago but you never know......plug gaps in #2 & #5 cyls may have grown a little......install gap was .044" out the box.......might cut them down to .040" like I have done w\ all others prior using these NGK's......book calls for .040"-.050" gap range for NA 4.6L).

Otherwise, all else is operating excellent. Tune revision #51 is already finished\flashed into PCM & is ready for trials\datalogging at 1st opportunity.

Getting even closer now..................

 

[JC SSP]

This is AWESOME! One of the most informative threads on this forum. It should be consolidated into an "Advanced Tuning" sticky.

You mention spark plugs and gaps...

I have noticed some cars are especially finicky about type of plugs and gaps. My little 5.0 coupe and Wife's 5.7 Hemi could care less if you have cheap Champions, they run well on anything...

On my 05' GT I use Brisk Silver Spark Plugs 3VR14S (one heat range cooler) gapped .045 and on my (now put out to pasture) 06' GT had Autolite HT0 (one heat range cooler) also gapped at .045, all performed flawlessly.

On the other hand, my Stage 2 boosted Audi requires one heat range cooler NGK iridium BKR8EIX 2668 and perfectly gapped .028. I even tried the Brisk DOR14LGS-T one heat range cooler (these have no gap) when it was Stage 1 and didn't really run as expected...

FYI In the old days we used to play with the thickness of the spark washers, index plugs, shortest & thickest ignition wires, MSD boxes, etc. With today modern hi-output ignitions and COP this seems to be less relevant... Although I still go one heat range cooler in most of my vehicles... old hot rodders die hard! LOL

 

[GlassTop09]

On my 05' GT I use Brisk Silver Spark Plugs 3VR14S (one heat range cooler) gapped .045 and on my (now put out to pasture) 06' GT had Autolite HT0 (one heat range cooler) also gapped at .045, all performed flawlessly.

This is what I may be looking to do in the end to fully rectify my issue (looking at switching to using NGK Iridium IX 7554 plugs instead of using the NGK Iridium IX 0372 plugs--1 heat range colder & gaps closer in the .025"-.035" area......the 0372 plugs are the NGK OEM replacement using the .044" gap in middle of the .040"-.050" OEM 4.6L gap spec range) due to how VCT operates in the manner I've set it up to operate (operational cyl pressures are a dynamic type of thing w\ these 3V's--not as static as a fixed cam-in-block type engine--so I'm seeing that this is not as easy to ID\adjust for due to ever changing engine airloads & spark advance timing as this changes differently\constantly--even within the same engine operation section from 1 instance to the next--so what you input to fix this may be out of bounds the next time from PCM opening the TB TPS angle 2* more thru TQ Management calcs due to DBW not being married to the APP signal so TQ Management calls for another .5*-.75* of spark advance & ends up tipping the engine into knock again, so you may end up chasing your tail a lot of the time.

I think this is why the Ford engineers just threw more fueling in at WOT than necessary, using the excess fueling to cool the combustion chambers under high loads so you don't have to continually chase engine knock from dynamic engine control operations under high RPM, high airload use (used .82 Lambda in NA 4.6L's using much LESS spark advance timing than I'm using) so I'm putting this to the test........if this arrests all the high load WOT knock I'm seeing now running these NGK Iridium IX 0372 plugs @ .044" gap, I think this may be better handled using a 1 step colder plug w\ extended tip like the NGK Iridium IX 7554 plugs (Brisk Silver equivalent is XOR14YS) in my NA 4.6L that will allow me to lean out the fueling & bump up spark advance timing to make more stable high RPM high load HP\TQ w\o knock (cooler plug tip\strap to resist causing pre-ignition during compression) but also operate well enough at lower airloads w\o fouling.

This is me just looking at potentially applying an outside-of-the-box solution as these NGK Iridium IX 7554 plugs are designed for FI applications (also cheaper than the Brisk Silver equivalent).....high engine airload thus high compression\cyl pressures, high heat operations.......to use them in a SBE NA 4.6L to optimize full on WOT operations w\ full VCT usage while not drastically killing low airload operations due to excessive plug fouling from being too cold\gapped too tight..........I don't think a gap of .035" is gonna hurt these NA 4.6L's performance that much, if at all.

With the way I have all this set up in my tune, I might be able to actually pull this off.........but I'm gonna test this by cutting the gap down in my 0372 plugs 1st to prove this out before going to the 7554's.

We'll see...........................

 

[GlassTop09]

FYI.......................

Ran data log on tune revision #51 today (got to thinking about all this again so I went in tune & revised the WOT section of both BKT\MBT VCT Spark Advance Adder maps multi settings to have VCT roll total combined spark advance timing up to 30* max @ 6,500 RPMs when it hits the Airload VCT load map's 20* max cam retard setting since we were only .5* from it anyway to be done w\ this part of my tuning.......w\ OL fueling set for .82 Lambda.....& reflashed it).

All went excellent & most all repeated pattern exactly as before except for the full WOT part. After performing the MM 60\40 training & turning around at the same spot where I have 2 1\2 mi of straight flat 2-lane road w\ both lanes clear, I did the 20 MPH rolling into WOT from 1st gear scenario again......this time I kept an eye on the tach & made sure I shifted around 6,000-6,100 RPMs to ensure I stayed off the 6,500 RPM limiter.
She once again broke traction off hitting 2nd gear (running Conti Extreme Contact DWS06 295\35\18 rear tires......a performance compound\all season rated tire w\ an 11.6" wide contact pattern thru Motive 3.91 gears on an Eaton Tru-Trac LSD) but this time I didn't let up, so car regained traction after 15-20 secs of spinning got tires heated up enough to hook back up......rear end was very stable throughout, not 1 peep of wheel hop, bounce, shudder, shake & tracked straight while spinning this time (07-14 GT500 LCA's w\ Roush 3rd Link UCA assembly & FoMoCo part# DR3Z-5A638-A 13-14 GT500 UCA Axle Bushing) so liking this. Hit 3rd gear & flat-footed APP to fully engage WOT & shifted into 4th around 6,100 RPM's & let up once RPM's recovered to 6,245 shifting into 5th........all went smooth w\o any noticeable hiccups. Finished rest of DC as usual. All I\M Readiness monitors except EVAP completed & Mode 6 Cat CE ratios as follows:
B1 @ .137......idle LTFT @ -3.9%
B2 @ .187......idle LTFT @ -0.8%
CMBT @ 1,499*F avg

Played back data log & saw that during the WOT hits the PCM switched into OL fueling along w\ OL-PE Demand right on time, so the OL TPS Threshold map settings are fully synched w\ APP & TPS now & the 14.08 fuel stoich AFR\.82 Lambda fueling fixed #5 cyl knock.......#5 cyl was clean thruout, but now #3 cyl decided to start knocking along w\ #2 cyl repeating once I got into 3rd gear & put a heavier load on engine.......wasn't too heavy (#3 cyl got as low as -4.0* on initial hit & #2 cyl down to -1.6* halfway thru the 3rd gear pull) w\ both showing to fully recover back to the full 4.4* KS-applied spark advance timing across the rest of the 3rd gear WOT hit so this appears to be plug-related, especially in #2 cyl since it repeated on 2 back-to-back WOT hits w\ much heavier fueling applied on 2nd run but in #3 cyl also since this cyl only starts to knock when put under a heavy load (noted from all low RPM, high load testing under Lambda 1.0 fueling) even though it was quiet during the prior WOT testing w\ Lambda .88 fueling......all the rest were dead quiet w\o nary a hint of knock thruout on Lambda .82 fueling except these 2 cyls.....during this datalog. All data logged fuel pump data showed rock steady operation thruout so no fuel delivery issues noted. PCM was also rolling in increasing VCT cam retard degrees as engine load\RPMs were increasing so was also applying additional BKT\MBT VCT spark advance adder timing at the same time (upping cyl pressures). So gonna pull the plugs next to inspect them.......have pretty much eliminated fueling from the equation. Gonna pull Mode 6 MM data on each cylinder in AM to check for signs of cyl velocity variance imbalance then take it from there.

Also not gonna mess around & gonna order some colder heat range plugs so I'm sending the NGK Iridium IX 0372 plugs back (Amazon return) & debating on picking up a set of Brisk Silver XOR14YS (1 step colder) or Brisk Silver XOR12YS-1 (2 steps colder) plugs to test this out (Brisk web site recommends the XOR12YS-1 plugs when inputting MY info......found both sets on EBay cheaper than Brisk's web store) or a set of NGK Iridium IX 7554 plugs off Ebay (once seller satisfactorily responds\answers to my email........pictures on description show to fit my engine but when run thru MY compatibility check says they aren't compatible.......).

Almost there.........once I rectify this little cyl knock issue.

 

[GlassTop09]

FYI............................(warning long post)

I put my TS'ing skills to work so I pulled the Mode 6 MM results from PCM that was gathered from the datalog run (why I make sure that I have performed the PCM 60\40 MM training after tune reflashes prior any WOT hits, so the MM is fully enabled in PCM to gather all the data for access in Mode 6 Self-Check results) & this is what I got:
All the EWMA misfire data will always be 0 on the 1st run after a KAM reset (not enough data collected for averaging\corrections) & the last counts data is strictly just CKP sensor velocity variation counts that fell outside of the normal learned averages during training......so as you can see, the counts are small......but they do contain some valuable information. The 2 cyls that showed the knock (#2 & #3) are marked w\ stars. Look at the last counts on #1 thru #4 cyls (B1) ........note the counts are fairly uniform outside of #3......this is not due to just cylinder variation, its due to cam timing variation from B1 phaser\chain tensioner ops. You'll note the same pattern for #5 thru #8 cyls outside of #8 (B2)......so you can see the more stable oil pressure effects on B2 phasers\chain tensioner ops (first bank to get oil volume off oil galleys from oil pump\filter) vs B1 (last part of engine to get oil volume off oil galleys from oil pump\filter) thru the CKP velocity variations. Can back this up from VCM Scanner datalogs of VCT operations showing all this as well.

Now note the recordings in the middle........this is the PCM's misfire % interpretations for either a Type A misfire (dead misfire that sent raw fuel into cats thus potentially damaging it.......in 200 rev cycles according to RPM & engine load......threshold is 1%) or a Type B misfire (continuous cycle checks regardless of RPM or load for emissions calculations......in 1,000 rev cycles, 1 at startup then at least 4-1,000 rev cycles during a drive cycle......threshold is 25%) that PCM is performing from the CKP velocity variations recorded. The useful part is that Type A is using engine RPM\load to interpret the "misfire", Type B is using random interpretation on CKP variation "misfires" that don't line up to a specific RPM\engine load scenario to qualify for Type A classification so this data can be used to help figure out what's going on during the WOT run.

1st off the bat, you see no Type A misfire interpreted on #2 & #3 cyls, only Type B so the cyl knock PCM detected is most likely a random unrelated act as PCM thinks the CKP "misfire" variation caused by the knock is not due to the RPM\load on engine at the time of "detection".....but it saw more of this from #3 than #2 which says there's more going on w\ #3 cyl than cam timing variation (last counts are almost double the others) so #3 plug is more suspect than #2 (already know this from prior plug changeouts.....this cyl showed signs of a potential small intake valve stem oil leak thus hot plug strap from deposit cookoff.....shows small knock inconsistently during low RPM, high load so high cyl pressures but yesterday was 1st time at high RPM, high load so also high cyl pressures, both times when VCT has cams within 10* of 0*.....retarded more than this no knock occurs) but since #2 cyl repeated random knock on 2 successive back-to-back datalogs during WOT (also low RPM\high load & high RPM\high load w\ VCT cam retard within 10* of 0* so high cyl pressures, also VCT retards cams more than this no knock occurs) using different levels of fueling that didn't change it as this did to stop the #5 cyl knock during high RPM, high load w\ VCT cam retard within 10* of 0* but PCM still thinks there's a Type B "misfire" variation going on w\ #5 cyl......even though the PCM records NO ACTAUL MISFIRES at all for ANY cylinder so suspect.

Now that was just 1 Mode 6 MM results recording, so you really need successive recordings to establish patterns which give even more information, as I have done today as follows:
Also provided a drawing of OEM IM showing my thinking (read in post #363) as to why #5 cyl was most likely running leaner than the others.........which the extra OL fueling shows to have verified this was the case w\ it so #5 cyl will be my 1 to use to optimize the OL fueling going forward. Now look at today's Mode 6 MM Self-Check results.......what can we now see from this? You can see the PCM has enough data to now run EWMA misfire corrections so you can see that just going off CKP velocity variations that don't present a very large separation can be very misleading concerning actual engine "misfires". Both #1 & #6 cyls that the PCM thought had at least 1 Type A "misfire" now shows neither Type A or B....thus clean w\ EWMA corrections also showing slim to none.....these 2 cyls never showed\presented hardly anything close to a consistent knock pattern regardless of engine RPM\loads......as did #4, #7 & #8.....thus giving credence to their CKP velocity variations being mostly cam timing driven from phaser\chain tensioner ops & not cyl driven.

But you can also see a repeating pattern forming that is pointing to something going on w\ #2 & #5 cyls since PCM is still interpreting at least 1 Type B "misfire" out of the very small number of CKP velocity variations that fell outside of the normal learned CKP velocity variance window on both 1-5-23 & 1-6-23 Mode 6 MM Self-Checks......again while also still recording NO ACTUAL MISFIRES occurring.

All this data is reinforcing my hunch that all this is actually being driven from my tuning pushing cyl pressures high enough to cause some potential preignition off some of these NGK Iridium IX 0372 spark plug's tip\strap (heat range 6 which is pretty hot & cross matches the OEM MC HSCF-24FP plugs......wouldn't be so bad if tuning was still closer to OEM) at low RPM\high engine loads & high RPM\high engine loads when VCT has cams retarded within 10* of 0*.....outside of this it all goes away & the knock is very short in duration.....a 1-2 sec hit then it's gone & PCM walks it all back to full 4.4* KS applied advance w\o further issue. Sure, it's easy to cut timing until it all stops but I'm not just gonna do that w\o verifying that cutting timing is the right move in my situation (this also could be just false knock due to the use of the OEM knock sensitivity threshold map settings on a tuned 4.6L w\ over 162,000+ mi on the clock.......slightly noisier than an engine w\ lesser mi on it & may be just bumping up against the edges of these KS sensitivity threshold maps so I am going thru the process to verify all this so have installed fresh KS's to remove them from the equation after verifying them to be suspect, verified the exhaust hangers integrity so removed them also. Plugs are next on the list since these have been in service for 1 yr+ & have already eliminated fueling\lean issues at WOT.....have already finally started w\ adjusting the actual transient accel gain & time constant maps in revision #52 to enrichen fueling more during TB tip in (another area where potential leanout thus knock is\may be occurring from using OEM transient accel fueling maps tuned to the OEM 55mm TB w\ a FP 62mm TB installed when PCM ramps it open off accel demand).......tried to short cut this earlier by using the dynamic airflow IM volume setting to "adjust" transient fueling prior (transient fueling is using this setting to calc the additional transient fueling volume to add on both accel\decel broadly but I couldn't tell if this was doing anything so going to the source now.....)......decel side transient fueling is fine as set (no issues w\ engine stumbling during\coming out of DFCO operations so if not broke, don't fix it).

So I contacted the folks at Brisk today (after I sent the new set of NGK Iridium IX 0372 plugs back thru Amazon UPS return RMA) and inquired of them as to what they'd suggest about my situation......they replied back that they suggested to go w\ their XOR14YS plugs (1 step colder than OEM) if still NA SBE but FBO, cammed & tuned........which also verified the NGK Iridium IX ZNAR7AIX\7554 plugs (the NGK Iridium IX ZNAR6AIX-11\0372 plugs I'm running are OEM heat range spec) as these cross reference to Brisk's XOR14YS plugs but are 1\2 the cost of the Brisk plugs.......problem so far is finding them (haven't heard back from Ebay vendor yet) so may end up getting a set of the Brisk XOR14YS plugs to run\test out if I don't hear back soon from the Ebay vendor selling the NGK equivalents.

I've always wanted to run a set of these Brisk Silver plugs anyway to gain real world experience w\ them........have heard\read too many love\hate relationships for\against them so I most likely am gonna put my money to the test & find out for myself as I've never ran them in any of my prior vehicles.

That's it for now..........gonna hold all where it's at now until I get some replacement plugs to put in after inspection of the 0372's currently in engine.

 

[GlassTop09]

FYI..................
Got up this morning & replayed Jeff Evans @ EPA's training video #17 Transient Fuel Tuning to refresh myself on this to see if I may have missed something since the last time..............made note again that this is most useful on large throttle sweeps (like what I've been doing w\ WOT pulls) where sudden large air charge inrush can overcome PCM's ability to calc ETC\SD\LWFM calcs & MAF calcs fast enough to keep up so can create issues until the PCM catches up (which the FP 62mm TB is aggravating this even more)........and he once again said that he prefers to attack this using the Dynamic Airflow manifold volume setting 1st before having to mess w\ the individual accel\decel transient fueling maps after verifying that the MAF tables, LWFM tables, SD tables & ETC tables are accurate\on point (which I know mine are) before going further.

So I went back & set up tune revision #52 & changed this setting back to the 8.90L setting I have tried previously (a 2-point reduction from the OEM 10.90L setting as he also says that it takes at least a 2-point change to see any effects show up) & while I was in there, I ran a test on #5 cyl by cutting the OL fueling from the OEM .82 Lambda setting that arrested the #5 cyl knock to .85 Lambda so leaned this out by .03 Lambda to see if #5 starts knock again & flashed PCM & took on DC.

Went thru all as usual........all went OK (kept focus on tach\road thru WOT hits so couldn't see laptop screen.....). Got home & got datalog loaded up on computer & looked at section where I went thru WOT........

1st thing out of the box.......#5 cyl started right back knocking so this is now confirmed both ways that this cyl is leaning out from being the front IM runner not getting the full benefit of IM plenum mixing\volume & drawing in a fair sized portion of EVAP unmetered air\fumes throwing off the A\F mix thus needs to be enrichened more than the rest to stop this but the next thing I saw is that the 8.90L Dynamic Airflow IM volume setting did work as #5 cyl was almost the ONLY cyl that showed knock......#3 cyl showed a very small amount of knock (dropped 1* off the max KS-applied 4.4* advance) briefly then was entirely GONE the rest of the time.....a very big improvement over the last WOT run.......w\ #5 cyl being the sole offender......the rest were solid w\o a peep.......so the majority of this high RPM\high load cyl knock was being caused by lack of adequate transient fueling during WOT hits to richen up the large inrush of air enough to then allow the OL fueling to get fully established!

Ok.......the code has now been cracked! I have now set up revision #53 & reverted the OL Lambda fueling back to the OEM mapping that stopped #5 cyl knock & have bumped the Dynamic Airflow IM volume setting down a little more (from 8.90L to 8.20L) as I think this will finish resolving the WOT transient fueling issue w\ this FP 62mm TB (now realize that I wasn't pushing the throttle opening rate fast enough to fully kick this in during all prior tests). These results also show that the cyl knock cause is preignition from A\F mix being lean enough from rapid throttle opening rates at higher operational cyl pressures when VCT has cams retarded 10* or less......thus is pointing squarely at the spark plug tips\straps getting too hot under higher cyl pressures at high loads so from this data I'm now definitely getting 1 step colder plugs in her. Found a seller on EBay this morning who is selling a full set of NIB Ford Performance M-12405-3V12MM (NGK Iridium IX ZNAR7AIX 7554 spark plugs) for cheap (had a SC'd '08 Mustang GT that he bought them for but then sold the car so never used them thus still new w\ all packaging & brochures that came w\ kit).


Waiting on response to verify he still has them & still for sale to pull the trigger.............

 

[Dino Dino Bambino]

FYI............................(warning long post)

Aren't they all?
You're an encyclopedia of information. When are you publishing your book?

 

[GlassTop09]

Aren't they all?
You're an encyclopedia of information. When are you publishing your book?

Well, you got me there..........................

FYI..................(well....you already know.......)

I've just discovered a pretty big issue with this SO PCM's calibration that is helping to cause this leanout issue..........concerns the EVAP system & how this operates in all SO PCM calibrations around OL-PE\WOT.

So, this issue is not a problem w\ PCM calibration per se.........it's a USER-initiated issue from not fully understanding how the PCM code functions concerning EVAP & how it fits\interfaces w\ WOT operations........also was not explained in any of the training either.......

This EVAP system's control programming logic is hard coded within the PCM calibration to operate using the tank-mounted FTP sensor input to read fuel tank pressure increases caused from EVAP canister charcoal saturation to tell PCM when to start canister purge cycle, then use front NB O2 sensor's voltage signals\STFT's to determine when canister is empty to close CPV after a purge cycle is initiated......there is no access to this control logic other than to either enable\disable the entire EVAP system operation (also enable\disable OBDII EVAP test & MIL). The PCM will only disable EVAP system from purging the canister when the APP A\D counts exceed 455 (ETC WOT Disable.....any APP A\D count readings below this setting disables WOT activation)......you can set the ETC Pedal Pos WOT Start setting lower than this--most tuners do--to start PCM transition to WOT sooner (PCM will ignore the Driver Demand map & be looking for the OL Fuel TPS Threshold map settings to be satisfied to enable OL fueling using the OL base fuel map Lambda settings which will disable\ignore the front NB O2 sensors at that time), but until the APP A\D counts exceed 455 for PCM to enable WOT activation, then exceed 545 A\D counts so PCM will use the 545 A\D count pedal position row in Driver Demand map for WOT TQ requests, then TPS% exceeds 75% & TB angle% reaches 82% (full open.......which the APP A\D counts should be at 785 or higher), the PCM WILL NOT DISABLE EVAP OPERATIONS until ALL of this happens.........so if you have the OL Fuel TPS Threshold map settings set too low, the PCM will switch into OL fueling using the OL base fuel map Lambda settings & shut down the NB O2 sensors BEFORE it goes fully into OL-PE Demand\WOT so PCM will STILL BE OPERATING THE EVAP SYSTEM w\o ANY NB O2 sensor STFT CONTROL readings to CONTROL the PURGE cycle until you mat the APP to get the PCM to go fully into OL-PE Demand\WOT & shut EVAP down.....so you will be drawing EXCESS UNMETERED EVAP air\fuel fumes into engine UNCONTROLLED under high engine RPM\high engine load causing all kinds of havoc.......resulting in engine knock from leaning out the OL Lambda A\F mix & PCM can do NOTHING about it until you either mat the APP to get fully into OL-PE Demand\WOT so PCM will shut down EVAP thus the UNMETERED AIR entry, or release the APP to get all switched back into CL-Normal Mode to enable the NB O2 sensors so PCM can now properly read\control the EVAP system while also managing the engine A\F control thru STFT+LTFT feedback!

This is what I finally figured out today was what I was actually contending with causing the cyl knock issues at WOT! Good thing I had set the Knock Retard Max Retard map settings the full -8* across the board so the PCM had a full 12.5* of spark retard timing to use (thankfully never had to use the full amount) to get engine\itself out of trouble! So, I was chasing my own tail all this time........but I can say w\ some satisfaction that I actually caught up w\ my tail before my tail caught up w\ me!

The clues were always there staring me in the face (I graph the EVAP CMD% & EVAP VP channels in all my datalogs but are placed in the 4th Chart vs Time tab thus I haven't put much focus on it.........until recently when I actually started paying more attention to them which got me started to figuring out why I saw EVAP still operating when the PCM was clearly in OL fueling thus NB O2 sensors offline but not in OL-PE Demand\WOT status yet on several instances during datalog playback............while discovering\verifying the issue w\ #5 cyl getting leaned out & it being in close proximity to the EVAP siphon tube behind TB flange......

Easy enough fix for now since I'm still NA.........have reset all this CL\OL control management back to OEM stock settings in tune revision #54 which will only enable OL fueling\NB O2 Sensor deactivation when PCM reaches full OL-PE Demand\WOT operation & shuts down the EVAP system.......which means that you HAVE to mat the APP to activate it all (no rolling WOT activation....which is what I was trying to achieve thus set myself up to make this mistake), otherwise PCM operates in CL-Normal Mode Part Throttle only w\ NB O2 sensors & LTFT's active (also why LTFT's are set in OEM tune file to be used across 100% TPS.........) so PCM can manage EVAP purging operations w\ STFT's when EVAP is operating while still maintaining A\F engine STFT+LTFT feedback control until PCM fully & completely switches into OL-PE\WOT to disable EVAP 1st THEN enable OL fueling\NB O2 sensor deactivation for WOT operations.

Also reached out to Jeff Evans @ EPA to see what tuner tricks he has up his sleeve to counter this issue........would have to work around this to get FI working properly so there's a method to this madness.

After finding this it is most likely safe to say that I shouldn't be needing the 1 step colder spark plugs once this is fixed in PCM.........but I'm gonna run them anyway to see how much extra spark timing I can get in w\ fueling to squeeze a little more HP\TQ out of her since these plug tips\straps can dissipate more heat thus are less prone to preignition thus can run even higher cyl pressures thus potentially increase TQ output vs running the OEM heat range plugs...................

I'll definitely figure this out & make it all work to my benefit..........that's how I roll.............

Another item I discovered thru all this is just how good these MagnaFlow #5461336 CARB-certified TWC aftermarket cats are at handling this snafu.........here are the Cat CE ratio results w\ all this going on thru them:
B1 @ .105......idle LTFT @ -3.9%
B2 @ .148......idle LTFT @ 0.0%
CMBT @ 1,488*F avg

So, if anyone who is running FI on an OEM displacement 4.6L V8 & wants a set of legal CARB-cert TWC aftermarket cats that can legally handle the exhaust VE mass output & maintain OBDII passing results as long as you can keep the exhaust temps below 1,750*F...........MagnaFlow has your back. They ain't cheap but they get the job done.........legally!

Acid tested unknowingly by me & passed w\ flying colors!

PS edit--I believe I've figured out how Ford engineers intended this to operate now, so I know how to exploit\optimize this properly & it will be consistent in application going forward once I datalog the OEM settings to get a good feel of their process in actual operation.....................

Stay "tuned"..................

 

[GlassTop09]

This EVAP system's control programming logic is hard coded within the PCM calibration to operate using the tank-mounted FTP sensor input to read fuel tank pressure increases caused from EVAP canister charcoal saturation to tell PCM when to start canister purge cycle, then use front NB O2 sensor's voltage signals\STFT's to determine when canister is empty to close CPV after a purge cycle is initiated......there is no access to this control logic other than to either enable\disable the entire EVAP system operation (also enable\disable OBDII EVAP test & MIL). The PCM will only disable EVAP system from purging the canister when the APP A\D counts exceed 455 (ETC WOT Disable.....any APP A\D count readings below this setting disables WOT activation)......you can set the ETC Pedal Pos WOT Start setting lower than this--most tuners do--to start PCM transition to WOT sooner (PCM will ignore the Driver Demand map & be looking for the OL Fuel TPS Threshold map settings to be satisfied to enable OL fueling using the OL base fuel map Lambda settings which will disable\ignore the front NB O2 sensors at that time), but until the APP A\D counts exceed 455 for PCM to enable WOT activation, then exceed 545 A\D counts so PCM will use the 545 A\D count pedal position row in Driver Demand map for WOT TQ requests, then TPS% exceeds 75% & TB angle% reaches 82% (full open.......which the APP A\D counts should be at 785 or higher), the PCM WILL NOT DISABLE EVAP OPERATIONS until ALL of this happens.........so if you have the OL Fuel TPS Threshold map settings set too low, the PCM will switch into OL fueling using the OL base fuel map Lambda settings & shut down the NB O2 sensors BEFORE it goes fully into OL-PE Demand\WOT so PCM will STILL BE OPERATING THE EVAP SYSTEM w\o ANY NB O2 sensor STFT CONTROL readings to CONTROL the PURGE cycle until you mat the APP to get the PCM to go fully into OL-PE Demand\WOT & shut EVAP down.....so you will be drawing EXCESS UNMETERED EVAP air\fuel fumes into engine UNCONTROLLED under high engine RPM\high engine load causing all kinds of havoc.......resulting in engine knock from leaning out the OL Lambda A\F mix & PCM can do NOTHING about it until you either mat the APP to get fully into OL-PE Demand\WOT so PCM will shut down EVAP thus the UNMETERED AIR entry, or release the APP to get all switched back into CL-Normal Mode to enable the NB O2 sensors so PCM can now properly read\control the EVAP system while also managing the engine A\F control thru STFT+LTFT feedback!

After discovering all this & then going back over\thru all training & HPTuners forum postings that folks are warning to make sure that MAF Adaption is disabled\limit LTFT learning above TPS 50% to prevent PCM from erroneously making fueling corrections causing leanouts during WOT after PCM has gone into OL fueling & disabled the NB O2 sensors.......

I'm now seriously doubting this train of established tuner thought in the tuning world concerning this SO PCM when I clearly can see this occurring from too aggressive APP & OL Fuel TPS Threshold settings w\ no delay timers set\not enough set delay time active to slow transition enough causing the PCM to switch into OL fueling shutting the NB O2 sensors down BEFORE the PCM gets fully switched into OL-PE Demand\WOT to then shut down EVAP purge cycling......causing the exact same symptoms being claimed\blamed on the PCM's calibration coding logic making a "judgemental logic error" thus a programming mistake.............IOW's a human error.

Questioning just how many tuners actually graph the EVAP system's EVAP CMD% & EVAP_VP channels to monitor EVAP system operations while tuning..........?

Human error, yes.................but which set of humans? The Ford-paid computer programmers\engineers who created, coded, compiled\tested then real world tested over several hundred\thousands of hours to ensure operational integrity before releasing to public use? or tuners who misunderstood how all of this actually is operationally integrated so must make sure that they're not doing something that is unintentionally breaking the code logic\causing the issue (incidentally, whose training I've been following\using to tune mine)?

So...............I wonder what I'm gonna find out when I put all this CL\OL switching control back to OEM settings in my tune file........you know, the settings the Ford programmers\engineers came up with to accurately follow the established code logic of the PCM calibration they created?

Food for thought.........................

The datalog data gained from this will then help me to gain a better understanding of how the PCM calibration coding is actually operating to then be much better equipped to exploit it to my satisfaction......

 

[GlassTop09]

FYI.........................(yeah you know.............)

As of today, I have fully run thru & data logged PCM using my tune file w\ the OEM settings applied to control the WOT transition from CL-Normal Mode into OL-PE Demand\WOT & vise-versa.......have confirmed the PCM coding process & the verdict is.........wait for it..........us TUNERS who don't fully understand how Ford has integrated the EVAP control code process in the calibrations to operate in unison\synch w\ the PCM WOT initiation process to prevent this system from operating during WOT......thus WHY Ford set up the settings in the manner that they did.

In short, tuners are using a methodology intended to rectify low RPM lean spikes when using FI (especially Roots\TVS\Twin Screw blowers, but FI in general) by resetting the settings in the OL Fuel TPS Threshold map in a progressively increasing pattern using the RPM scales of this map to determine when to get more aggressive to force this transition into OL fueling quicker (to counter the tendencies of these blowers to go into boost at very low RPM\throttle load inputs--1,000 RPM's thru 3,000 RPM's at TPS loads as low as .20 load.....just off idle) to enrichen the fueling to counter these "lean spikes".
But what can really happen is, if you get too aggressive applying this strategy, you're actually breaking the intended code logic settings used to ensure that the ETC APP Throttle control (which tells the PCM when you, the driver, wants to go into WOT when its travel signal exceeds the 545 A\D counts which tells the PCM to end WOT transition--meaning only that PCM is alerted to be looking for this when the ETC APP Throttle control travel exceeds the 545 A\D counts setting in the Pedal Pos WOT End box AFTER the same control travel has exceeded the 455 A\D counts in the WOT Disable setting box which tells the PCM that WOT usage is now possible & when the APP control travel counts recedes below this same setting, it tells the PCM that you, the driver, is done using WOT so all WOT processes are disabled & switches back into full CL-Normal Mode operation......so any settings inputted into the Pedal Pos WOT Start box that are LOWER than the 455 A\D counts, intending to instruct the PCM to start WOT transition early is essentially IGNORED until the APP control signal exceeds the 455 A\D counts WOT Disable setting....THEN the PCM will start WOT transition thus is wasted effort. May as well have left the OEM 460 A\D counts setting in place in the Pedal Pos WOT Start box..........

Second, the OL Fuel TPS Threshold map settings are important to be maintained to operate in SYNCH w\ the ETC APP Throttle control (the ETC TB TPS Throttle control uses this map settings to determine when to start switching into OL fuel control using the OL Base Fuel Lambda map) so that the PCM knows when to start BOTH processes simultaneously.....at the same time.......tis is why Ford set all this to the same 53.22% settings across all RPM's (the ETC TB Throttle control uses the same A\D counts methodology as the ETC APP Throttle control does......just is converted into % instead: example: to know the % of the 545 A\D counts setting, just take 545\1023 = 53.27%. Now take the OL Fuel TPS Threshold map settings of 53.22%, to know the A\D counts just multiply 1023 * 53.22% = 544.44 A\D counts.......1,023 is the max A\D counts range) so both OL processes initialize at the same time, every time, at the same process point! This is to ensure that the PCM doesn't get too far ahead in switching into OL fueling (which shuts the NB O2 sensors down) from the PCM also waiting on the both the ETC APP & TB Throttle controls to get to their max control outputs to ensure that 1.) the TBA* reaches the full 82* indicating that the TB BF's are at WOT position, 2.) the ETC TB TPS control reaches the max 75.6%-76.5% travel indicating TB is commanded full open to validate the TBA* of 82*AND ETC APP Throttle control has reached close to full signal travel (910 thru 1,000 A\D counts) to tell PCM to now go into OL-PE Demand\WOT.....at which time the PCM will lock the EVAP CMD% PWM output grd control to CPV at 23.5% max (this PWM output is NOT sufficient to overcome the CPV's solenoid return spring thus the CPV stays closed isolating the EVAP system from the IM during WOT operations while operating the OL fueling process w\o NB O2 sensor feedback control........which the EVAP system NEEDS OPERATING for PCM to control the EVAP purge cycle flow rate into IM & the total time of purge by reading the NB O2 sensor STFT output to determine when the EVAP canister is empty to then end purge cycle by closing the CPV.

Note: basic DBW coding logic is for the ETC APP Throttle control to be the main throttle control (thus the driver), the ETC TB TPS Throttle control is the following system that "follows" the ETC APP Throttle control output signal wherever it goes thus the TB moves in "synch" w\ the ETC APP throttle control & will only "divorce itself" from the ETC APP Throttle control once the ETC APP Throttle control output signal becomes stationary (not moving) to regain engine load controls from changing environments\loads to try to maintain the set TQ load request that the now stationary ETC APP Throttle control signal is TELLING the PCM to maintain........or fully close (Limp Mode) if PCM detects excessive IPC Wheel TQ Errors being output thru erroneous ETC airload calcs vs MAF airload calcs or soft rev limiter settings are exceeded.....IOW's the SAFETY stuff. Once the ETC APP Throttle control (driver initiated) starts to move again the ETC TB TPS Throttle control will "resynchronize" itself back to the ETC APP Throttle control output signal & follow it wherever it goes.......rinse, repeat. Or will resynch itself after cycling KOEO after a Limp Mode event to reset the PCM..........

So, in order to achieve full OL WOT operations, you have to essentially mat the APP to the floor to get the PCM to isolate the EVAP system BEFORE the PCM fully initiates OL fueling & shut down the front NB O2 sensors.......now IF you have changed the settings in the OL Fuel TPS Threshold map to LOWER settings than the 545 A\D counts or below 53.27% AND try to use the engine RPM scaling to determine when switching operations will occur (usually trying to speed this up), you are running the real risk--regardless of reasoning for doing this--of throwing both APP\TB TPS throttle control systems synch out of bounds far enough so the PCM can\will get into OL fueling disabling the front NB O2 sensors WELL BEFORE PCM can get into OL-PE Demand\WOT to disable the EVAP system operations as there is no path provided thru HPTuners VCM Editor software to change\alter the EVAP control logic outside of either enabling\disabling the EVAP system operation as a whole.

So those 2 control settings shown above in bold lettering have to remain as set to maintain PCM synchrony to properly process a WOT transition into full OL operations then once it is fully in WOT, the ETC APP Throttle Control's output signal MUST NEVER BE ALLOWED TO DROP BELOW THE 455 A\D count WOT Disable setting while operating in WOT or the PCM will shut WOT down & switch back into CL-Normal Mode in which you will have to start this process all over again to continue to operate in WOT! With engine running under high RPM\high load & fueling switching back into CL thus Lambda 1.0 A\F control....................not good, not good at all.

This can cause\create a "massive vacuum leak" into IM causing all kinds of havoc during a WOT pull.............
It is also, IMHO, the reason why the SO PCM "seems" to be applying LTFT "learning"\MAF Adaption applying MAF corrections thru LTFT corrections to fueling thus causing the fueling to go lean during OL WOT operations..........thus many tuners have falsely identified the real reason for this by blaming the PCM coding as the culprit..........so go in PCM & turn all this off\disable it..........when the real issue is the tuners have created this issue unknowingly by not fully understanding how all this is integrated into the SO PCM calibrations to then fully understand\know which settings HAVE to remain set as the Ford engineers had them to prevent this from occurring.

So, it really IS a PCM "coding" issue.............but not created by the Ford programmers\engineers...........

Now add this nightmare if using FI derived OL\CL control settings (which you have to do some of this thus really need to know\understand where the limits are & not cross them) on a NA 4.6L engine...........so a LOT of tuners will use some of this "tuning" technique being used w\ FI to a NA engine's tune...........which DOESN'T NEED ANY OF IT as the Ford engineers have already tuned all this for a NA engine to operate under WOT.........the only thing you can really do is to lower the OL base fuel map's enable timer setting from the OEM 5.0 secs to 0.0 secs to fully speed up OL fueling transition rate & set the APP Pedal Pos WOT Start setting to 454 or lower so the PCM will start WOT transition as soon as the APP counts hit 456........as the rest of the settings are ALREADY OPTIMIZED to speed up OL fueling transition\OL-PE Demand\WOT operation thus need to be LEFT ALONE............

At this point I digress.................................

In other developments, I have pulled the trigger on a NIB set of Brisk XOR14YS spark plugs (1 step colder than OEM) & they have shipped today so should be at my door by Friday. So, when I pull the NGK Iridium IX ZNAR6AIX-11\0372 plugs (OEM heat range.......cross matched to the OEM MC HSFC-24FP OEM Platinum spark plugs) for inspection, the Brisk XOR14YS's will be going in. Intend to set plug gaps to .035" & run them. Hopefully they'll work well enough to allow me to regain most\all of the 4*+ of base spark advance timing I had to pull out of both base BKT\MBT spark advance maps attempting to arrest the cyl knock to regain the lost HP\TQ then allow me to lean out the OL Lambda fueling to the 12.6-12.8 AFR (Lambda .88\.90) range for max HP\TQ delivery.........all w\o knock.

We shall see..........................

The end is coming up fast now folks!

 

[GlassTop09]

FYI..............(here I come again, you know by now.............)

I've got all this whipped now & the WOT initiation process as quick operating as possible but in proper process synchrony.......in short, everything I typed in post #372 w\ the following tweaks:
In OL Fuel TPS Threshold map settings, I cut the OL Base Fuel Map's Enable Timer setting from 5.0 secs to .05 secs (to speed the transition up AFTER TB TPS has initiated the OL fueling off OL Fuel TPS Threshold map), then trim the OL Fuel TPS Threshold map's 53.22% OEM settings to 50% to offset the control lag latency between the 2 ETC Throttle controls (APP & TB) that caused the TB side to lag slightly behind the APP side during WOT initiation. For the ETC APP Throttle control side I only needed to set the Pedal Pos Wot Start setting to 454 to speed this up as fast as it was gonna go (as posted in post #372) & LEFT THE REST ALONE. After this, then just mat the APP to the floor LIKE INTENDED when going into WOT & PCM switches all from CL-Normal Mode into full OL-PE Demand\WOT & OL fueling using the OL Base Fuel Lambda map, shutting down the EVAP system & NB O2 sensors at the same time, every time as Ford engineers intended in very short order.....w\o fail.

But the same thing I also said in post #372 WILL HAPPEN IF you, the driver, allows the ETC APP Throttle control signal to drop below the 455 WOT Disable setting long enough while power shifting during WOT----the PCM WILL end WOT operations & switch back into CL-Normal Mode reenabling the NB O2 sensors AND the EVAP system, causing this WOT process to have to be reinitialized when the APP signal recrosses the WOT Disable 455 setting, then recross the 545 A\D counts threshold\TB TPS signal recrosses the 50%-53.22% threshold----thus causing the engine to momentarily go LEAN during WOT in the process of restarting the WOT initialization..........not good at all.......but it's NOT the PCM or its calibration coding at fault......it's only DOING what you, the driver, inadvertently TOLD it to do.......thus in order to fix all this I've found that messing around w\ the OL Fuel TPS Threshold map setting\setup ISN'T the answer.

The Ford engineers have provided the only means to properly address this issue..........YOU HAVE TO RESET both TRANSIENT ACCEL GAIN\TIME CONSTANT fueling maps to get the fuel injection system to squirt in the extra fueling AHEAD OF TIME as needed to offset the rapid inrush of air when the ETC TB Throttle control starts to rapidly reopen the TB again to stop the fuel A\F leaning out until the PCM can regain full OL WOT operations again as this is a TRANSIENT fueling issue caused by TB movement........not the PCM or it's calibration being "faulty"!

Next........if a larger TB is installed, the OEM 55mm TB set transient accel gain\time constant map settings are rendered useless......the settings are just not enough to offset the extra air inrush from the larger TB's effective area per TPS angle%\TPS angle% change rate........thus all this has to be reset to match the larger TB's effective area or you'll be causing A\F mix leanouts EVERY TIME the PCM opens the TB as the PCM's fuel control system can't react fast enough to counteract this.......MAF side is reactionary only as the MAF can only calc airmass changes AFTER the TB BF's have moved thus AFTER THE FACT......the ETC TB control using Ford's version of predictive SD calculations w\ LWFM map airload calcs off MAF calibration using the TB's PTA\EA map data (you know, the data that tells PCM the TB's actual ID-to-BF plate predictive throttle angle\effective area per TPS angle to use in these SD airmass calcs.......that should ALWAYS match the TB being used......that a LOT of tuners DON'T do.....), even though it is predictive in nature (predicting 2 cycles ahead of when the MAF is predicted to respond) is STILL NOT FAST ENOUGH to respond.......thus why the Ford engineers designed the fuel transient fueling system......this system is the ONLY counter to this issue.

Now I finally understand why my spark plugs were getting singed from excessive heat generation in addition to ALL the other reasons\culprits I've found\resolved prior now that was causing this as well.......NO ONE retuned the Transient Fueling Accel gain\time constant maps to account for any of this in my tune......all was left STOCK........NOT GOOD.

So, after getting all the WOT settings optimized & squared away, I went after retuning the transient fueling accel side gain\time constant maps only (the startup gain\time constant map settings are good as TB isn't swinging open during startup.......TB is initially set open to approx TPS 18% BEFORE engine is cranked thus not moving off full close position DURING startup) to fully fix this across the board & especially during WOT.

1st off, the taught method of using the Dynamic Airflow IM volume setting to "adjust" transient fueling on a broad scale really SHOULD NOT BE DONE AT ALL! The PCM also uses this 10.90L setting in its SD airmass calcs thru the Ford calc'd IM inHG SD Airmass at Zero map to then use all MAP in Hg entered in all maps to "simulate" a MAP sensor reading downstream TB IM vacuum pressure to then use it w\ the calc'd baro upstream TB air press--to then calculate the needed TB airflow pressure drop deltaP using the TB's PTA\EA map data to calc the ETC TB airmass flow into the IM for fuel calculations to use for proper EQ Ratio Lambda fuel control in both CL & OL.........so this setting NEEDS TO STAY SET as Ford has it set (10.90L) IF you still have the OEM IM installed or if another IM is installed, its representative IM inner volume in L's post TB needs to be entered here so PCM can ACCURATELY calc ETC TB airload calcs (such as the FRPP 463 IM which is 11.8L)......yes this setting also affects the transient fueling on both accel\decel on a broad scale (read the shotgun effect) but if you use this for transient fueling adjustments you WILL ALSO THROW OFF THE ETC TB AIRLOAD CALCS in the process causing even more fueling issues---this is a FACT & I can now prove it.

Once I reset this hack back to the 10.90L setting Ford put here AND started retuning both transient accel gain\time constant map settings did I start to see\feel real power gains from my tuning engine's tune file......once I got enough set in the maps to start showing up in the datalog data (watching the fuel pump INJ PWM% start increasing during any TB initial open movement off predictive ETC TB SD airmass calcs then fall back to reg calc'd airmass according to the EQ Ratio Lambda A\F fuel control).

This tuning "hack"--along w\ bad transient fuel accel gain\time constant map settings is 1 of the main reasons for erroneous Mode 6 Misfire last cyl counts data (due to unstable cyl combustion from cyls being leaned out during accels\engine loading running up unrealistic "misfire last counts") AS WELL AS RUNNING UP MODE 6 CAT CE RATIO test results from poor predictive fueling calcs also causing potential catalyst CE ratio test failures.........emissions. Also have all the data to prove this as well........ The blessing for me is that I'm running a set of what is arguably the best set of 50-State CARB-cert\EPA legal TWC cats made for this 4.6L's VEI EFN# (MagnaFlow #5461336 TWC aftermarket cats).......as ALL of the cat CE ratio results data I've posted before was skewed higher by all the poor transient fuel map tuning........the already excellent emissions numbers just got even better.....consistently better off every tune revision I made since initially finding & now rectifying it all............

The only recourse is to RETUNE BOTH transient accel gain & time constant map settings properly to account for ANY extra airmass inrush encountered anytime the PCM calls for the TB to open up......unless you are STILL USING THE OEM 55mm TB that the Ford engineers have tuned all this to.......but especially for\during WOT applications & especially when installing a larger TB.......this becomes a MUST DO item at this point.

So as of now I have gotten all this corrected as well up to a point.........had to add approx 65% more transient fuel gain (extra fuel above what the PCM calcs) above the OEM gain settings in the 4,500 RPM row across the board (covers WOT as well) then blend it all in progressively starting from 1,500 RPM row downward & 10% more transient time constant (extra time for PCM to add this extra fuel) above the OEM TC settings added in the same manner as laid out above for transient gain......as well as rerun the HPTuners ETC Effective Area calculator to update my FP 62mm TB's PTA\EA mapping at WOT operations to finally get all this under control (this was the main issue w\ knock during WOT)......have greatly REDUCED all knock in #2, #3 & #5 cyls under full WOT load but can't fully stop it due to these cyls plug tips\straps are just too far gone & getting too hot creating preignition under the very high cyl pressures generated & making these 3 cyls too suspect to knock.

So, the Brisk Silver XOR14YS spark plugs 1 step colder heat range\tighter plug gapping should fully resolve the knock issue thus opening the door to full optimization of this 4.6L w\o issue going forward. Will most likely need to cut some of the transient fuel accel gain\time constant settings out to get all fully in line. Have already cut the Lambda WOT fuel settings in OL base fuel map from OEM Lambda .85\.82 (11.97\11.55 AFR) to current Lambda .89\.86 (12.53\12.11 AFR.......using the PCM loaded EQ Ratio Lambda 1.0 setting of 14.08 fuel stoich AFR that matches the E10 91 oct unleaded fuel being burned in engine) along with adding back in 1* of spark advance timing across the board in both BKT\MBT base spark advance maps from all this.........

Even now, the resulting butt dyno felt HP\TQ increases from these corrections is intriguing to experience.........once I get the Brisk plugs in & finish tuning this thing..........................

I think I've now found & caught\bagged all the squirrels in my PCM's tuning going forward........... Man, there was a lot of them hidden buggers in there to root out!

More to come................so stay "tuned".

 

[GlassTop09]

Just a quick analogy of what\why Ford (and everybody else as well) designed the fuel transient system for EFI systems................

All of us OG's back in the carb days are well familiar with the accelerator booster pumps that squirt in a shot of fuel into the venturis when you press the accelerator pedal to get the engine to respond until the resulting air flow increase thru the venturis can now apply the needed amount of fuel to maintain the engine's AFR thus response.......correct?

Then the transient fuel system is EFI's equivalent of a carb's primary\secondary accelerator booster pumps.

Also, when you install a Holley 750 double pumper carb, do you still use the Holley 600's accelerator booster pump(s) on the Holley 750 double pumper you're replacing the Holley 600 with?

Now bring this to the present.....................

Then why aren't tuners, when a larger TB is installed, are retuning the transient accel gain\time constant fueling maps up front when it should be known that these WILL NEED TO BE RETUNED to match the larger TB's PTA\EA that WILL increase the amount of air inrush into the IM per ETC TB Throttle TPS angle% vs the OEM 55mm TB? Why aren't trainers making this a specific point to drive into all tuning students learning that this IS A MUST DO ITEM & to NEVER TRY TO USE THE SD DYNAMIC AIRFLOW IM VOLUME SETTING to try to account for any transient fuel adjustments & only adjust ANY transient fueling needs using the TRANSIENT FUEL ACCEL\DECEL GAIN\TIME CONSTANT MAPS ONLY?

I now recall reading a post on the HPTuners Ford forums where a seasoned tuner actually made this statement to stop using the Dynamic Airflow IM volume setting for transient fuel tuning & do it ALL using the transient fueling maps only when several other seasoned tuners kept insisting to use the Dynamic Airflow IM volume setting to adjust transient fueling......................

Now I know that there are some out there who get this........but also there's whole LOT out there who ain't "caught this on the way home" yet & are making these tuning mistakes, passing them on to their customers & some customers are paying a price for it.........up to & including blown engines..........

The 1 thing I didn't listen to\follow during all of Jeff Evans HPTuners Ford Mod Motor tuning training is the 1 thing that has potentially saved me from a blown engine...........I went on & set the Knock Retard Max Retard map settings to the full -8* across the board anyway instead of following his recommendation of setting this to -4* max due to my primary concern being to protect my engine & not worrying about how much HP\TQ loss you may encounter due to "unnecessary spark retard cuts" because, in Jeff's own words, "I, the tuner, shouldn't have to go to this extent if I've done my tuning correctly"..........in which he is absolutely correct in saying this...............but then also teaching to use tuning techniques that can set you up for the very things that you are teaching to avoid..........

This is what can happen when a tuner's focus......regardless of length of service\level of expertise.......is too narrowly focused\primarily driven on performance tuning methodologies\outcomes only................being used in a factory production PCM that is using a fully integrated calibration.....unlike a standalone PCM using calibrations specifically tailored for performance tuning, thus is devoid of the production vehicle PCM's usage of emissions components......w\ control logic embedded in the tune calibrations that can't be accessed thru most current tuning software (like HPTuners or SCT) that is used to access the tune files in them, so MUST BE AWARE of the provided settings that can break this embedded control logic & stay away from this while at the same time perform the necessary tuning to improve performance........

This, my fellow Mustang enthusiasts, is why I type all this in this thread....................because folks NEED to know that this stuff IS GOING ON in the tuning world so to aware & not be afraid of asking a potential tuner some very pointed questions as to their level of expertise BEFORE you allow them to tune your car........don't let the number of yrs someone says they've spent tuning become a hindrance to you the customer asking these pointed questions either.........if a said tuner gets upset that you are questioning their abilities & not give you reasonable answers that have some verification of proof......that is your sign to walk away.

Now this is where I will publicly commend Jeffery Evans @ Evans Performance Academy & will recommend his training wholeheartedly to anyone..........he is not so full of himself that he doesn't know\understand where his tuning ability limitations are & he isn't so proud that he cannot admit them either when exposed.......because he understands that tuning is an ongoing LEARNING process.......NO ONE KNOWS IT ALL & can learn from ANYONE..........because in several instances where I personally have politely questioned some things (also providing some PROOF of it as well.......so not just talking out my butt.....AND have the email correspondence saved to back this up), he has consistently admitted that he has not had to deal w\ the items I've brought to his attention thus doesn't have any knowledge of how to deal w\ it.......because he has mostly been associated w\ strictly racing vehicles using these factory PCM's w\ most\all of the emissions components removed thus has never had to regularly work around the embedded emissions control logic (most is disabled in tune file thus is why) & has been doing tuning of all stripes for 25+ yrs..............

Now THIS is the type of tuner you WANT to be associated with tuning your vehicle because you can TRUST that what he says is the truth & is genuine......not driven\skewed by ego!

Everybody benefits from associating w\ folks like this.........!

PS edit---Just got notified that my Brisk spark plugs are arriving early & are out for delivery today! I think I know what I'll be doing today!

 

[Juice]

Look at how many revisions you have gone through to get your one car where you want it. And how much time it takes to dial these new cars in perfectly.
So, I ask, if you did tuning for a living, you can see if you go i to this level of detail the cost would be astronomical to the customer. THAT is why tuners do what they do, and settle for "good enough". If it runs good, good enough is good enough to most folk.

 

[GlassTop09]

FYI.........................(warning long posting):

The Brisk plugs came in the mail on the 12th, but at 17:54 hrs........was dark so had to wait until yesterday to install them. Here's a picture of these Brisk XOR14YS plugs for 2008-2010 Ford 4.6L\5.4L "brown boot" engines (how Brisk characterizes these):
This is Brisk's base spark plug designed for a stock to modified 08-10 Ford Mod Motor V8 engine (can include low boost FI packages.......their XOR12YS-1 spark plug is the 1 designed for full FI usage.......its 1 step colder than this XOR14YS w\ a less protruding tip......the big boy plug is the XOR10S....1 step colder than the XOR12YS-1 & is designed for max effort FI packages w\ a recessed tip for max heat dissipation thus full out racing purposes) that is 1 step colder than OEM but still uses a protruded tip for proper tip\strap defouling\cleaning in a NA stock engine at low loads. The plugs I wanted were the NGK Iridium IX ZNAR7AIX\7554 plugs that fit this same engine (that these Brisk XOR14YS crossmatch to) due to the fine wire center electrode design (better suited for the OEM Ford COPs as the OEM MC plugs are a fine wire center electrode design) but I find that these are hard to locate\find so I went with these to move ahead. These come pre-gapped to .028" so I gapped them to .030" for another test (saw a Richard Holdener video on spark plug gap vs HP\TQ which from his testing results using a modern ignition system--GM's version of a COP setup--on the same engine running plug gaps as tight as .010" to as wide as .100" after getting baseline HP\TQ using the recommended plug gap for the engine, that the plug gap didn't have hardly any measurable effect on HP\TQ output (less than 2-3 HP\TQ difference) since the modern COP ignition systems are so strong.....unlike the old weaker distributor ignition systems were.

The reason why I did this is due to me intending to come in after I finish tuning to pull these plugs back out & run a compression test on my engine to also verify my hunch of what all this is telling me......this following summation is why......................

Here are the NGK Iridium IX ZNAR6AIX-11\0372 OEM heat range plugs I pulled out after 1 yr of running:

Left is B1, right is B2.........outside of some greyish depositing on some of the plug porcelain tips (most likely from detergents\additives embedded in the E10 91 oct unleaded fuel I mostly use (ConocoPhillips), these plugs are not hurt or getting too hot thus the preignition\detonation I'm seeing in cyls #2, #3 & #5 are actually caused by higher cyl pressures thus heat......not from carbon depositing (would show up on the spark plugs). These also follow up to verify again the diagnosis\repairs I made in 2021 (found FRPP IM causing issues from its poor EVAP port routing into plenum causing uneven unmetered air\fumes into IM runners throwing off A\F mix to cyls along w\ poor operating Ford F85F-9G4444-BD NB O2 sensor operations that caused this to happen to my spark plugs at the time:
This is what I was looking to either verify\deny the cause of the preignition\detonation that was causing the engine knock after checking\repairing to verifying everything else was sound\not the cause........from verifiable data & not opinion\assumption......that this set of used Champion 9406 Iridium spark plugs I installed after making all repairs by 5-23-21 & pulled on 1-8-22 to check engine operation since then (replacing them w\ the NGK Iridium IX ZNAR6AIX-11\0372 plugs you see above):Note their condition compared to the NGK's........you'll note that the Champions tips do have some light browning on the tip porcelains (means that they were seeing a little too high heat from slight fueling anomalies between 5-23-21 thru 1-8-22) but otherwise in good condition w\ no physical tip\strap deterioration. Also make note that I started doing my own tuning around 5-24-22 (pg 10, post #194 in this thread) & also make note of all the tuning issues\mistakes I, a newbie in this field w\ some help from another tuner's training that I paid for access to, have ID'd, made the proper & correct changes to setup\settings in my car's PCM & have posted it all in this thread over the course of 2022 up until now........so what you see on those NGK Iridium IX plugs is evidence of proper correction of all this........not to my prior tuner's credit as the majority of all this broke stuff I fixed is Ford Mod Motor Tuning 101 stuff........not the advanced stuff........that a 20+yr Ford tuner shouldn't be making.......so this is the kinds of stuff some of you are defending when you say that tuners only do this cause customers don't want to pay, so they only get from a tuner what's "good enough" to get by due to the tuner's TIME\EFFORT\KNOWLEDGE to tune properly is TOO VALUABLE to WASTE on reg folks cars because they essentially don't have the necessary funding to warrant the tuner's TIME/EFFORT/KNOWLEDGE to do this properly\correctly up front......on every customer's car that they take into their custody.......which is THEIR RESPOSIBILITY to do because the TUNER is CHARGING the CUSTOMER for HIS TIME\KNOWLEDGE thus EFFORT to tune the customer's car properly?

At this point I'll digress as I can't support that type of tuner defense at all..........

Back on my original train of thought.......................

What this plug data tells me is that the reasoning for cyls #2, #3 & #5 detonating when the others aren't.........the spark total advance timing I was using was the same amount of spark total advance timing that my prior tuner was using......I applied it using all of the Ford SO PCM's actual coding logic's features in the PCM's calibration vs how my prior tuner did......in the end, 31* of total spark advance timing is 31*.....no matter how it was applied.....in this engine. For those 3 cyls to knock at the same timing when the others didn't is a direct indicator of my engine's overall cyl health.......meaning the other cyls compression has to be low enough on avg vs these 3 cyls to not gain enough dynamic compression to resist detonation vs #2, #3 & #5 cyls.......when ALL OF THEM are running\using the same fueling, timing & settings going under the same stresses\operational conditions.

Now go back to the posting that I typed on pg 18, post #341 concerning the finding from me running my prior tuner's tune file to data log it looking for insight to help me decipher another issue & found that he had (or the BAMA tuners thru the BAMA tune file I left in PCM when I took car to him to be tuned........but he had the car AFTER the FACT of the BAMA tune file & BAMA tune's reputation.....so no excuse) potentially manipulated my engine's knock sensors to be disabled during WOT.......along w\ finding detuned knock sensor sensitivity threshold maps as well........I KNOW damn well I didn't do it & I'm sorry to have to say this, but all this isn't just "coincidental, random findings" to me (this issue didn't just start recently, it's been an ongoing issue that my prior tuner HAD TO HAVE KNOWN WAS PRESENT before I started tuning it myself, my car was bone stock engine wise when I bought it even though high mileage (139,433 mi on the clock at time of purchase) & the only "tuning" done on it prior him was me using a SCT X4 tuner running someone else's tune files)......this is more evidence of a tuner just covering something up, either for himself OR the tuners before him, to get paid since car is already on the rollers.......thus the phrase "good enough" some of you are defending........instead of doing the correct thing.......shutting down the tuning, address the customer of what is actually going on & to tell customer that I'm stopping tuning your car until this stuff is repaired so I put it all back to the way it was setup when it came into my shop & call me when you get it all repaired to reschedule tuning appointment.......at the risk of losing a customer's business.......because THIS IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO. In which he wouldn't have pissed me off in the slightest......because that's the kind of service I EXPECT to RECEIVE.......having prior knowledge of & experience associated w\ operating a well-known & highly reputable family-owned automotive service business (mostly auto paint\refinishing but also mechanical repair) for several decades............

Again, I'll digress.................................

I'm gonna run the compression tests to get an idea of how far gone the ole girl is condition wise........as by driving the car she feels good & solid.........but the evidence is pointing to some more advanced wear in the SBE so need to get an idea of her current condition, so am gonna use these cues & back off the spark timing to a far more safe area to maintain her current operational safety\integrity, so have reset my base MBT spark advance map to lock her down to 27*-28* max spark advance timing from .70 load on (knock almost gone in all but #5 cyl at 29.5*), & reset the KS max spark advance map in the .70 load to 1.0 load range to 2* to then use the base BKT spark advance map settings (set up 4.5* lower than the base MBT spark advance map) & my knock sensors to find out what\where #5 cyl, the most suspect for knock, can safely tolerate under WOT conditions (have no issues otherwise) at an OL Lambda fuel setting of .86 Lambda (using the fuel stoich AFR of 14.08 for EQ Ratio Lambda fuel control, this comes out to 12.11:1 AFR so still fairly rich......for further protection of engine while still operating\enjoying her.....but also steady the engine's combustion to not cause excessive Mode 6 misfire last counts from WOT hits after I finish recalibration procedures for the engine's front CKP sensor to trigger wheel to enable the Misfire Monitor to start recording all this in Mode 6......the 60\40 misfire training.......since plug changeout I'm getting consistent P0300 DTC's......the random "misfire" code because all cyls are exhibiting this variation pattern so PCM can't tell which cyl is "misfiring".....the last counts data confirms this as well). So while I am checking compression (no need to do a cyl leakdown test as PCV return is completely normal & catch can is taking better than 2+yrs to fill up enough to then need to empty it......why I use catch cans that come equipped w\ a dipstick & recent IM R&R to replace KS's confirmed catch can's effectiveness thus PCV flow integrity), I'm also gonna regap these Brisk plugs to as large a gap as I can get on them while maintaining strap to tip alignment properly (guessing somewhere between .035" to .039") as I also think this has something to do w\ the CKP variations as well......engine runs very well & strong w\o misfire, but these particular Brisk plugs I think don't like a heavily rich A\F mix below 12.5:1 (too cool for this plug IMHO.....need a little more heat in the tips\straps) but I'll find out soon enough.

Just got done reworking my base MBT spark advance timing map in tune file to cover all of what I found out yesterday (by succession corrected the base BKT spark advance timing map by copying the new corrected base MBT spark map's contents into the BKT map then cut all settings by the same 4.5* across the board to establish the safe working zone for the KS's to advance\retard spark timing as the KS activity allows for to maintain engine's integrity--or what's left of it.....) safely while as of now I'm going on the lookout for a decent 4.6L complete engine core to start a low budget stroker build (not for racing but want the increased TQ output so don't necessarily need a fully forged setup but most stroker BE kits will include at least a forged crank & matching rods......nothing less than 3.75" to 3.8" stroke......piston choices are debatable).

Enough for now...........more to come w\ the finished results as she's good everywhere else tuning wise except WOT.

 

[Laga]

Have you ever used a borescope to look inside the cylinders that are detonating? There may be excessive carbon buildup on those pistons.

 

[GlassTop09]

Have you ever used a borescope to look inside the cylinders that are detonating? There may be excessive carbon buildup on those pistons.

Hey Laga,
That's 1 of the reasons why I pulled the plugs........looking for evidence of oil contamination to infer what you've suggested.....even though the evidence from my catch can checking\collection over time, my IM when I pulled it off to replace the KS's (oil collection inside it was essentially non-existent.....only talking oil collection in droplets & the number of them was less than 10 when I turned it over to check it for oil collection, engine oil level is stable on every check......even though I know I have a very small oil leak coming thru the bolt that is just above the oil filter that attaches the oil filter adapter to the block.....) & the visual plug condition all says that this shouldn't be........but your point is well taken, as the last thing to do to finish verification is to visually inspect inside the cylinders.....a borescope is the 1 tool I haven't picked up yet so didn't have 1 available when I had the plugs out.......after all this engine does have in excess of 162,000+ mi on her currently thus probably warrants a visual cyl inspection.
I actually had 1 in my Amazon shopping list for years to pick up, but never found the need to pull the trigger on purchase.......so I'll make sure to pick 1 up prior me pulling the plugs out to run a compression test on her. My gut feeling is still leaning towards #1, #4, #6, #7 & #8 cyls static compression is going to be lower than the static compression in cyls #2, #3 & #5 (I threw a LOT of fuel into these cyls--used Lambda .82 w\ 14.08 fuel stoich AFR used in EQ Ratio Lambda fuel control is putting an AFR of 11.546........which is pig rich for this engine @ 9.8:1 CR & if carbon deposits were present creating hot spots, should have immediately cooled them down--carbon deposits have an affinity for fuel vapors.....meaning they will adsorb them into itself thus should have sufficiently cooled during the intake stroke........data logged fuel pump data supports my car's fuel system has no issues delivering the fueling I set it to deliver.......another reason why I installed the 8 awg Fuel Pump Wire Mod to my car's FPDM........to ensure that the FPDM had plenty of amperage--up to 30A-slo-burn fused-thru 8 awg wire that can move in excess of 50A w\o any negative voltage droop instead of less than the 15A thru the OEM 16 awg wire--on hand to drive fuel pump......thus a "Boost-A-Pump" w\o the inverter).

We'll see........................

FYI......................

Was raining today so I didn't do any WOT hits but I did flash in my latest revision #60 (reworked base MBT spark advance map to cap spark advance from .70 load thru 1.0 load to 27* max across the rows @ the "ceiling", then copied its contents into the base BKT spark advance map, then cut the newly input setting by 4* to create the 4* "safe zone" for PCM to apply any KS spark advance as deemed usable from KS activity.....so going forward I should not see any spark retard cuts go below the base BKT spark advance map settings @ the "floor"......the only setting changes made) & data logged using the same 37 mi DC route in the same manner....only this time I didn't do any WOT hits (I suspect the pending Mode 6 P0300 random misfire DTC's were coming from the WOT hits causing excessive cyl velocity variations from unstable combustion.....incidentally is a by-product of detonation & can cause this very issue & not so much the Brisk XOR14YS plugs using a .030" gap) & ran the DC normally.

Got home & checked I\M Readiness after saving the data log file & the I\M Readiness results verified my initial suspicions.........all monitors except EVAP completed w\ no DTC's present & no freeze frame data collection.......clean slate. So, I'm getting all these P0300 DTC's off the WOT hits just after completing the MM 60\40 Training for PCM to relearn the CKP crank trigger wheel's pattern variations between engine loaded vs engine unloaded (coasting in 4th gear during DFCO so is essentially only an air pump thus no crank trigger wheel variation) & PCM activating the MM to record all data in Mode 6 Self-Checks.

This part is solved so known going forward........but from actual looking thru the individual cyls misfire last counts data still shows some fairly high CKP variation going on during normal operations (#1 cyl had 143 counts, #5 cyl had 118 counts & #7 cyl had 148 counts......the rest of the cyls were falling between 34 thru 60 w\ no recorded misfires.....all 0.0%) thus I still think this is due to the .030" plug gaps in the Brisk plugs (gap not wide enough for COPs to dwell up enough energy to produce a hot enough spark to promote good A\F ionization thus good flame creation & stable flame front spread in all cyls......only visual difference between these Brisk XOR14YS's vs the NGK Iridium IX ZNAR6AIX-11\0372 plugs .044" gap). #1 & #5 cyls have another indicator to explain their behavoir........these 2 cyl's IM runner velocity stacks are the 1st 2 in line to ingest more EVAP unmetered air\fumes during EVAP canister purge cycles than the other cyls (operates independently from all other processes during CL operations) which can cause these frontmost 2 cyls to variate from A\F mix disturbances thus PCM is constantly trying to correct for this thru B1\B2 injector PW fueling rebalancing off NB O2 sensor STFT per cyl exhaust sampling to maintain Lambda 1.0 while EVAP is purging the canister........which can cascade into the other cyls in each perspective bank......like #7 cyl for instance).

Mode 6 Cat CE Ratio results were as follows:
B1 @ .109.......idle LTFT @ -3.9%
B2 @ .090.......idle LTFT @ -0.8%
CMBT @ 1,397*F avg
Note: Since I reset the Transient Fuel Accel Gain & Time Constant maps to increase this fueling rate application off PCM ETC TB TPS control TB BF opening sweep rates to try to stop the WOT cyl knock that clearly showed thru data logs to start while TB was sweeping open on accel movements during WOT after hitting 3rd gear on, these Cat CE Ratio results have consistently come in at this level or lower..........indicating that the momentary leaning out of the A\F mix off TB initial opening sweep rates from using a FP 62mm TB (larger TB) & still using the OEM transient fueling accel gain & time constant map settings set for the OEM 55mm TB (smaller TB) is another potential cause for P0420\P0430 Cat Inefficiency failures that is NOT the cats fault......it's the TUNERS fault when the TUNER knows ahead of time that engine is so equipped w\ a larger TB than OEM & doesn't do the proper tuning & reset these maps to tune out the A\F mix leaning off TB opening sweep rates by leaving the stock OEM TF gain\time constant map settings in service......this tuning correction also ADDS engine available HP\TQ when the TF settings are properly matched to the amount of air inrush from TB opening sweeps that the PCM can't account for thru its EQ Ratio Lambda fuel control simply due to not being fast enough to keep up thru calcs thus needs help thru a little extra squirt of fuel for a short period of time--ahead of time--until the PCM catches up.......just like a carb thru its accelerator booster pump(s) (in Holley speak it's called a power valve) when the throttle primary\secondary BF's are initially opened.........

So at least I now know of\verified other tuning miscues where low end TQ output is also lost besides cam timing differences between the OEM cams vs aftermarket cams.........also--another reason in addition to not properly recharacterizing TB PTA\EA mapping to accurately match the actual TB ID-to-BF effective area for ETC airload calcs--why 62mm TBs seem to not perform better than 55mm TBs.........along w\ increased emissions outputs from excessive leaning out of A\F mix during TB opening sweep rates that PCM can't account for due to tuning mismatch (can affect a 55mm TB as well, especially during WOT)..............and have correctly\properly fixed in my tune file going forward.......so 1 more squirrel bagged\captured..........

Getting ever closer to finishing my car's tuning....................

 

[crjackson]

Getting ever closer to finishing my car's tuning....................

Ha Ha Ha… You my friend are a Tinkerbot. No matter how perfect you make it, you will never be done tinkering…

 

[JC SSP]

Not to send you down a rabbit hole, but you mention compression test to compare each cylinder? What are the variances between the cylinders (< 10%?)... Have you tried to add octane booster to see if that alleviates the detonation? Have you considered "seafoam" treatment to clean out the engine of any carbon? I know some people don't like using seafoam... Is there a way to test your COPs and EFI Injectors? What is your A/F ratio and/or EGTs? Maybe adjust plug gap +/-? Just thinking what might cause it????

For my application, Brisk recommended the Silver Spark Plugs 3VR14S which are one heat range cooler and gapped at .045

FYI When I read my plugs I use a jewelers loop and soft white light to see any markings on the porcelain or ground strap... Eyes are getting old