Lunati VooDoo #21270700 Camshafts

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

  1. GlassTop09

    GlassTop09 Member

    93
    20
    Update:

    I ran across a copy of the OEM Ford Workshop manual for the '05-'10 S197 Mustangs that covered the operation of the VCT & how the PCM uses it.....noted that when TPS sees the TB go past a certain % blade angle (didn't say what it was but by deduction this has to coincide w\ the IMRC open\close mapping tables which the PCM switches from IMRC closed tables to IMRC open tables--read CMCV's--around the 2800-3200 RPM area) this tells the PCM that the engine is past closed throttle operation & is in part throttle to WOT throttle operation so from this point forward the PCM will only retard cam timing using either RPM or load% (Ford's word for torque management) as after this point the PCM will now ignore/disable the EGR & IMRC closed function (emissions) & switch to IMRC open mapping tables to go for max power so will follow the VCT retard per RPM schedule as set in the WOT tables.
    So in my case of the false knock noted between 3500-3800 RPM's the PCM isn't retarding the cams using RPM's until after 3750 mark so unless the PCM is retarding the cams due to some load % trigger threshold setting (that I have no knowledge of) to stall the TQ curve it appears to be initially due to spark timing cut from the false knock detected then the big cam retard degree change following shortly thereafter (going from 2* retard after 3750 RPM's to 12* retard) is most likely the main cause of the flat TQ curve between 3500-5000 area.
    Manual doesn't give any details as to what & how the PCM will retard the cam timing according to load % calculations during part\WOT throttle operation, only that the PCM will retard cam timing during part\WOT throttle using RPM, load % or TPS only so I'm giving my best interpretation of what may be occurring from application of the info (according to my understanding) gained from the FWM which is subjective to some degree.

    Just put some 1,752 mi on these Lunati VooDoo cams & all went great....no issues, no MIL's, all Mode 6 data checks out clean & car shows a green check light for IM readiness on my Foxwell NT301 scan tool both going down & coming back (yeah I keep it w\ the car at all times & have a ScanData 900 scan tool stored in the wife's MKS as well) so I know that all component tests have ran, completed & passed several times so all is good. She sure loved the 14.3 atm air while we were in E. Dallas, TX visiting family this past week/weekend.....didn't hardly need to downshift out of 5th to pass, just press the throttle & she was GONE (well, the 3.73 gearing & 26" dia tires giving the rear end a mean 3.88 gear ratio along w\ the extra engine TQ output)! ;)

    I did note that the exhaust resonance from these Pypes Super Bomb mufflers/resonators does cause some stuff underneath the car to rattle due to heavy vibration around the 3,000-up RPM mark so's I will be getting under the car in the near future to see if I can locate the offending culprits & try to silence them. I intend to also get a couple of cans of Boom Mat Spray Mat sound deadner & spray the entire trunk floorboard area to try to quiet the car internally as much as I can (most of the noise is coming from the trunk area where the 2-4" x 14" resonator tips reside).

    So I'm gonna let this all rest for a while going forward & just enjoy the car for the time being. Eventually we'll get it all sorted out but I have to say that these Lunati VooDoo #21270700 cams are a worthwhile investment in my case.

    FYI...…………………...
     
    Last edited: Sep 16, 2019
  2. Screamin_dutch

    Screamin_dutch Member

    79
    35
    This thread is a good read and a wealth of knowledge, as these online boards are supposed to be. Tip of the hat from Europe!
     
  3. Dino Dino Bambino

    Dino Dino Bambino I have a red car

    Age:
    56
    690
    89
    Dale, I replotted your dyno curves with the stock cams and the dyno curves with the Lunati Voodoo cams (with a x1.11 multiplier) onto the same sheet so we can make a direct comparision of the two.
    Stock cams: 330.6 rwhp @ 5800rpm, 325.6rwtq @ 4400rpm
    Lunati cams: 354.5rwhp @ 6600rpm, 329.1rwtq @ 4900rpm

    I think the FRPP intake manifold & 62mm TB complement the Lunati cams very nicely.

    Lunati Voodoo Stage 1.jpg
     
  4. GlassTop09

    GlassTop09 Member

    93
    20
    Got no argument from me Dino as I agree w\ your results as well...………….

    Now I'll need to tell off on myself here as I think I've just solved the false knock issue as well....and I'm the cause of it.
    I got under the car Tuesday to check for the rattles\vibrations heard during our trip coming from the rear of the car & the only thing I could find was where I had installed some rubber hose around 2 sections of the BMR PHB brace where the exhaust piping came over it. I did this after installing the BMR equipment early in 2018 as I thought the exhaust might come into contact w\ it causing rattling against it (BMR PHB brace is much wider than the OEM brace & exhaust piping was VERY close to hitting it). I had forgotten about this assuming that the rubber would absorb any rattling from exhaust striking the brace so while I was under here I made adjustments to both side's exhaust piping to close up the gap between the X-pipe & catback piping (found that the Ford dealership had put the 2 front piping sections between the X-pipe & M80 mufflers too far into the mufflers so pulled them out approx. 1" which closed the gap at the X-pipe to within 1/8" so then this allowed me to move both sides rearward approx. 1\2" which gave the necessary clearance from the PHB brace to put both side's exhaust fully back on the exhaust hangers w\ 3/16"-1/4" of clearance gained from the PHB brace which when I drove the car afterwards & revved the engine RPM's into the 3,000-4,000 area the rattling & vibration that I had heard prior during our trip was now gone.....also betting that the false knock was being caused by this & is gone now as well.

    The good thing is at least I finally made some real progress in this area.

    The stuff we create sometimes...……………...

    :facepalm:

    PS---I forgot to mention here that during our trip my car w\ these Lunati VooDoo #21270700 cams tuned w\ all VCT tables max retard set @ 20*, w\o CMCV's & running 3.73 gears w\ 26" dia tires & all the FBO's still hit 24.5 MPG going (into lower alt thus denser air) & hit 23.3 MPG coming home (into higher alt thus less dense air but was also tuned in this higher air) running avg speeds of 75 MPH w\ the AC on turning around 2350 RPM's (when I use the actual gals fuel pumped over the actual mileage travelled the car hit 26.6 MPG going & 25.1 MPG coming home) so not only do these cams make excellent power\torque pretty much across the entire powerband they are also very efficient while doing it, which is a good thing considering that I'm limited to using only 91oct or higher premium fuels (tuned for them only). I got caught in a situation on the way back home where I had to stop at an Exxon station where they only had 90 oct premium gas & the store didn't sell any octane booster so this had me a little worried but it turned out that the oct was close enough for the PCM to make easy corrections to spark & cam retard timing to keep all good but you could tell that she was running w\ a little less power until I refilled on the next stop w\ some good COPC 91 oct premium fuel then it all came right back to normal.
     
    Last edited: Sep 21, 2019
  5. GlassTop09

    GlassTop09 Member

    93
    20
    Update:

    Since the last time I have made the following changes to the car: I installed a new set of Ford Racing M-9593 LU24A injectors after continuing to see the LTFT's continue to spread apart between B1 & B2 (had gotten to B1 @ +1.6%, B2 @ +12.2% at hot idle) and after rechecking all for vacuum leaks & finding none anywhere, then running a can of Seafoam thru the gas tank then catching the LTFT's change on B2 (dropped down to +8.6% w\ B1 remaining unchanged for a couple of days then seeing B2 LTFT's go back up to +12.2%) which I concluded that I had a screen trying to plug on at least 1 or several B2 injectors (side which fuel enters the fuel rails from the tank...had already changed the fuel filter earlier in the year) so instead of buying new screens & O-rings to replace on these OEM injectors (the purple LU24's that came std on '09 on) that had 151,000+ mi on them I decided to replace them w\ the new LU24A's which are supposed to have an improved 6-nozzle spray pattern vs the older LU24's. After installation of the new injectors & checks to ensure all was up to snuff I then checked the LTFT's after warmup & noted that the B2 LTFT's didn't change but B1 did....they moved towards the B2 LTFT setting (at +9.4% from +1.6%) which indicated that the issue was actually at least 1 or several B1 injectors were slightly leaking thru or over spraying causing vs B2 side. So then to see how bad this was vs the base tune mapping I reset the KAM then had my scan tool hooked up & set up on live data to see all thru a cold start to hot idle & saw the fueling was now way lean so it was apparent that my tuner had the fueling set up good from the start (had him to reset this at last dyno session due to being heavily rich w\ car getting misfires until warmed up) & this injector leaking issue in combination w\ the bad spark plug resistors that I found was the cause. So I reached out to my tuner, informed him of all this & set up another session to get all checked, new injector data updated in the tune & rerun to see where we are now...………….

    Just got her off the rollers again (same place: On3 Dyno & Performance) & now reporting that we have gained some more HP\TQ over the last time. The 2nd sheet shows the final HP/TQ gains vs the last dyno session in which we gained another +10.52 HP\+11.53 TQ all across the board. When my tuner had input all the pertinent injector data for the new LU24A's in the tune & made a few drivability runs to check all he also took note of the MAF data looking a little off so after pulling the MAF sensor & checking it to make sure that it was clean (it was) he then closed the hood to ensure the MAF signal was as clean as it could be then checked it & found the MAF signal calibration was approx 15% low from where it should have been w\ the TB TPS idle angle so he recalibrated the MAF sensor in the tune to correct it then after making a few more drivability runs to make sure all is well he made a couple of WOT runs w\ the hood closed sealing the FR Bullit 85mm CAI then made the last WOT run w\ the hood up (this is the results on the 1st sheet posted) for comparison which shows that there was a difference but the difference was pretty small between the 2 (+3.18 HP\+1.78TQ) which verifies the good design of the FR Bullit 85mm CAI as the only noticeable difference is mostly at the top end (which the ram air effect would rectify). So we're now sitting @ 331.48 HP @ 6750 RPM's (she's still gaining to redline)\308.15 TQ @ 4895 RPM's (moved slightly up curve as well) final peak numbers on this Mustang dyno (using the same 8%-10% correction factor given earlier in this thread to correlate to DynoJet numbers this puts us at peak 357.99 HP/332.80 TQ @ 8% correction, 364.62 HP/338.96 TQ @ 10% correction). Also during all this we again saw the false knock is still occurring at the same area of the curve, still the same small amount of spark timing pulled as before & all going back to normal as before. At this time this is definitely a quirk of this particular 4.6L's harmonics output as I know for certain that all is definitely clear on the exhaust now & all else is good so not worried bout this going forward. Checked the LTFT's when I got home at hot idle they were as follows: B1 @ -.08%, B2 @ +.08% so looking very good at this time but will need to perform a complete drive cycle to allow the PCM to relearn then check them again to see where they shake out afterwards.

    Just for grins & giggles I conducted a survey awhile back of several tuners online who had actual experience tuning on both Mustang & DynoJet dynos to get a more direct avg of the median difference between the 2 dynos & from this survey I found that the smallest difference given was 8% low, the largest difference given was 14% low but the overwhelming consensus difference given was between 10%-12% low. When you avg both sets of numbers (the max hi & low & the consensus hi & low) they both come out to the same median difference of 11% low on a Mustang vs DynoJet so this is a good result due to the agreement of both avg's from individually given info from several individual & autonomous sources. But in the end IMHO peak dyno numbers don't give much real info except for direct comparisons of work\parts done\changed or weather changes....but the dyno HP\TQ curves-especially the TQ curve-themselves can give you a wealth of info as to what to expect as to how the engine should react & how the power should come on & hold and\or drop off when the throttle is nailed WOT. The rest will have to be determined from actual use in some type of timed event (drag strip, autocross course, 0-60 time, etc), from driving feel & response afterwards (butt dyno) or datalogging the vehicle thruout all aspects of cold start, idle, closed throttle\part throttle operation then having your tuner look over the logs to determine if any other changes need to be made tune wise......

    When I asked my tuner as to what he thought was a factor in the HP\TQ gains that we saw today over the last session, he said that the injectors "may" have an impact due to being new w\ the better nozzle spray pattern (read fuel atomization here) as well as the recalibrated MAF "may" have helped w\ the load% (TQ) calculations in the tune but the far & away difference was the IAT difference due to climate changing in our area (AAT at last session was 96*F @ 8-27-19, AAT at this session was 71*F @ 10-8-19) from summer to fall here in the US Four Corners area @ 5380' elevation.

    So once again these Lunati VooDoo #21270700 cams are still carrying the mail w\ no signs of drop-off up top. They continue to show to be an excellent cam choice for those who want across the board performance improvement vs the OEM cams w\ a good idle quality but not stock & works well w\ the std array of FBO's commonly used. This is Lunati's mildest camshaft set (the low end) they make for the 4.6L\5.4L 3V engines.

    IMG_E0120.JPG

    IMG_E0121.JPG
     
  6. Dino Dino Bambino

    Dino Dino Bambino I have a red car

    Age:
    56
    690
    89
    I still think you should be getting around 355/329 on a Dynojet so with your new dyno numbers, I'd use a multiplier of 7%. That would translate into peak numbers of 354.7/329.7 with ~290rwtq at 2700rpm.
     
  7. GlassTop09

    GlassTop09 Member

    93
    20
    Yeah that'll be a good comparison factor to apply for conversation sake. Note the change in the HP/TQ curve line pattern off 2500-3500 RPM vs the other 2 prior On3 dyno sheets....this is amazing to me that a 25*F change in IAT would realign the low end HP\TQ that much thru load% (TQ) calculations then carry out across the rest of the curve but I have to think that the MAF recalibration also has to play a factor here as well as the MAF readouts are also used in the load% (TQ) cals so a 15% correction (especially when the correction is higher) has to have an effect. Now how large of a factor, I don't know but I do know that it had to be a factor in the outcome.

    This round has also improved the closed throttle performance & this has to be due also to the cooler IAT & MAF recalibration as well as getting the fueling back that my tuner had taken out during last session when I reported the car being overly rich on cold start (I had replaced all coils & spark plugs before last session to rectify the misfires that I was getting..found 2 bad plug resistors w\ very high OL olms >9K max resistor limit for the MC HJFS 24FP spark plugs w\ a little over 10,000 mi on them), which turned out to be from injector leakage on B1 side. She's much more responsive to throttle inputs now & the power delivery is very smooth & linear to throttle inputs w\ no drop-off or hesitation so all is well.

    At this point I believe that she's pretty much topped out in current build form & I have really come to appreciate the performance that I've gotten from these Lunati VooDoo #21270700 camshafts...excellent all around power gains over the OEM cams w\ very good fuel efficiency that also rivals or exceeds the OEM cams as well. Also I have to give a big shoutout to my local tuner who has done a masterful job of tuning my car w\ these Lunati cams.

    :happythumbs:
     
    Last edited: Oct 16, 2019 at 10:24 AM