Lunati VooDoo #21270700 Camshafts

GlassTop09

Senior Member
Joined
May 24, 2019
Posts
1,141
Reaction score
525
Location
Farmington, NM
Yes, I did have a small glitch after the update. I unmarried the x4 before updating it. Then when I went to reload my tune, the x4 gave me an error and prompted me to "restore to stock". That was a headscratcher, but I let it restore to stock and all is well since. I dont care if I brick the pcm, I can recover it with IDS. :)
SCT should be able to help you "force" the update to the x4. I dont think it is a hardware issue .
Ok, will get w\ SCT on this.

Thanks!
 

GlassTop09

Senior Member
Joined
May 24, 2019
Posts
1,141
Reaction score
525
Location
Farmington, NM
FYI...……...

I just had another thought on this that didn't occur to me until I was watching another YouTube video last night from Go Tech on VCT\VVT solenoid testing\inspection after getting P0011\P0013 DTC's that gives more reason to pull the valve covers & pull the VCT solenoids for inspection & that is to check the overall health of your engine as if there is any metal wear or indication of this occurring, these VCT screens will catch it as they are very fine mesh (to keep particulates from getting around the plungers as all this equipment uses close tolerance fit to seal) as the metal\varnish\sludge particles will be transported in the engine oil & will be caught there. So if slow VCT operation is detected this should be the next move if the cause can't be found thru the electronics....or just to gauge the engine's overall internal health (to coincide w\ any oil filter inspection for the same).

The screens on the OEM VCT solenoids that I removed were very clean (you can clearly see the screen mesh pattern) outside of the 2 pieces of metal debris thus is a very good indicator of my engine's internal health & physical condition….which is very, very good for the 153,000+ mi on her as there was no other buildup on the VCT screens so I can breath a sigh of relief as this didn't register w\ me when I was looking at them until after I saw this Go Tech video (they showed a couple of VCT\VVT solenoids w\ screens plugged w\ debris deposited thru the engine oil after inspection due to getting the P0011\P0013 DTC's as these 2 DTC's denote non-electrical VCT\VVT issues.....the instructor didn't have many kind words to say about the customer's maintenance upkeep of the vehicle he was working on as his statement is also very true..."This happening is not the engine's or mechanic's fault & all I can do as the mechanic is change the bad part but this issue is going to happen again as the damage is already done & the customer needs to know that up front").

Gonna remember this line for future use...…………...

This data also bodes well for the usage of the MotorCraft Full Synthetic 5W-30 engine oil I use in this 4.6L 3V engine since I bought the car some 2 1\2 yrs ago (along w\ the evidence provided from the pictures of both of the cylinder heads & components as both heads are very, very clean w\ no evidence of any varnish, sludge, wear or gum buildup...even on the broke cam follower) due to this oil's high detergent mix\high lubricity properties\high film strength & the service maintenance length (I change it every 6 months or 5,000 mi whichever comes 1st as the 5,000 mi changeout recommendation comes from Ford for this particular blend). I will be changing the oil soon due to me having the valve covers off the engine twice, even though I was very careful to plug the oil reliefs in the head when I was cleaning off the valve cover sealing surfaces on the heads to prevent any trash from falling into them then quickly removing the rags to dispel any trash that I couldn't see (once I get the followers fully seated to the lash adjuster's pintles then any trash I missed should be flushed to the oil pan by then) as this oil doesn't have 2,000 mi on it since last service & looks clean but it's gonna get changed anyway.
This is a practice I have held to since my youth as my Dad (the auto tech by trade) drilled this into me when you do ANY engine work that requires the engine to be opened up, no matter what.

Sometimes you get the 1-off instances....stuff just happens....but these instances are very few & very far in between & not the norm.....
 

GlassTop09

Senior Member
Joined
May 24, 2019
Posts
1,141
Reaction score
525
Location
Farmington, NM
Update:

Hooked up my laptop & monitored her thru a full cold start thru full hot idle using FORScan w\ VCT angle PWM % & VCT angle2 PWM % PID's set up in dashboard (these 2 PID's are the PCM commanded VCT angle PWM signal in % sent to the VCT solenoids) to go w\ the VCT angle * & VCT angle2 * PID's (these 2 PID's are the VCT angle movement in degrees as read thru the CMP sensors off both cam phaser's tone rings) so that I can see how the VCT solenoids (and cam phasers as well) are responding to the PCM commanded VCT angle PWM signal % sent to the VCT solenoids so that I can gauge the operational readiness of the VCT system since the repairs. Fired her up & all was looking good. Waited until the engine made it to full hot idle before making throttle snaps to test VCT response. Made several throttle blips keeping the RPM's below 2,000 to test VCT response at low engine RPM's (highest recorded RPM hit was 1758 during the blips). Noted on 1 instance PCM commanded VCT angle\angle2 PWM signal of 52% from 0% sent to both VCT solenoids at the same time immediately saw the VCT angle\angle2 * move from 0* to +15*(cam retard angle) & once the engine load% was reached the PCM commanded the VCT angle\angle2 PWM signal back to 0% & the VCT solenoids\cam phasers immediately responded advancing the cam angles back to 0* so the VCT solenoids\cam phasers are responding very well & very quick to the PCM VCT command signals at engine RPM's less than 2,000 (min oil pressure specs call for 75 psi @ 2,000 RPM's for these 4.6L V8's) so it looks like the VCT response (subsequently the engine's operational oil pressure) has indeed been restored & all appears to be fully operational as designed. The VCT adverror\adverror2 angle * stayed within +- .8* difference thruout this low RPM snap throttle testing so system is operating very precisely as well. Got similar VCT response patterns to the instance given above on the other throttle blips so VCT system operation checks out.

So all is looking good at this time.....VCT system function is normal.

FYI.
 

GlassTop09

Senior Member
Joined
May 24, 2019
Posts
1,141
Reaction score
525
Location
Farmington, NM
Not sure if Forscan can calibrate that. I only know of the nuetral profile correction test that must be run when a pcm is replaced or the engine was replaced. This must be done for the misfire monitor. So I would assume it would need to be run after a cam swap. I used my x4 to run this.
I do have IDS, and dont recall seeing anything in there.
Hi Juice,
I found this snippet of info while looking up data on a Spanish Oaks PCM concerning crank relearn:
OBDIICrankRelearnTSB2011.PNG
This is a snippet of a TSB issued on 8-26-10 that coincides w\ the introduction of the Coyote engine & Copperhead PCM that states the need to do a crank relearn after certain hard engine repairs due to the KAM 60\40 DFCO crank relearn procedure being removed AND that the Ford IDS software has the ability to do this.
So this is most likely why your X4 has the crank relearn feature (you have a '12 Coyote using a Copperhead PCM) & mine didn't (have a '09 Modular 4.6L 3V using a Spanish Oaks PCM) so this is obviously read thru the tune files w\ the X4 firmware so it knows when to unlock this feature, but since you do have Ford's IDS software you have the capability to do this thru it as well.

I'm also willing to bet that the Ford IDS software can do this w\ the Spanish Oaks PCM as well (the NPC crank relearn) but the firmware in this PCM has the KAM 60\40 DFCO crank relearn procedure enabled (as a backup to the NPC crank relearn as stated in the 09 MY OBDII System Operation Summary) so the X4 doesn't enable the crank relearn feature when it knows it's reading a Spanish Oaks PCM...….

That was why I asked the question about the 2 PCM's in an earlier posting...…..now this is making more sense after finding this TSB.....I'm also thinking that this capability to perform NPC crank relearning\programming has to be in FORScan as well within the various module programming that needs the extended license to unlock.
 

GlassTop09

Senior Member
Joined
May 24, 2019
Posts
1,141
Reaction score
525
Location
Farmington, NM
Update:

Called in to my local Ford dealership as to the status of my EVAP system order & if not in yet, the reason why not (ordered it on 2-3-20)….checked & found it had been delivered for at least 1 week but got no message so I went & picked it up.

Rolled the Stang up on the ramps & started pulling the old EVAP system off the car & found that the existing EVAP on the car was NOT the original system for these S197's (the front shield mounting holes didn't line up w\ the mounting stud bosses in unibody so someone had used wood screws to mount the front side to unibody) but fortunately whoever installed this thing had left the 2 studs w\ nuts installed on the bad unit so I could reuse them w\ the new replacement. Once I got it off I then saw the other reason....1 of the front mounting bosses had been ripped (assuming from hitting something which damaged the original EVAP system so it was replaced w\ a junkyard Ford part off another Ford vehicle) so I had to do a little metal work to reshape the ripped metal back into shape to accept the stud (stud didn't have the locking clip on it that locks it into the boss). Installed the new replacement EVAP system w\ the 2 new rear bolts that comes w\ the unit & the existing front studs w\ nuts & reattached all hoses & CVS wiring. In the process of removing the bad unit I broke the Christmas tree end off the line bracket clip that attaches the lines to the shield so I went full McGuyver & got a 1\2" coated line P-clip, put it on the metal line that goes to the CPV then got a M6 x 1.0 flanged bolt, ran the bolt thru the shield bracket where the Christmas tree end would have gone, slid the new line P-clip on, put a flat washer & M6 lock washer on then the M6 nut & tightened all to secure the lines to the EVAP shield then adjusted the metal line in the P-clip to ensure the plastic corrugated line isn't stretched to allow this line to flex w\o binding when system has a vacuum drawn on it.
Fired up the car after hooking up my scan tool to monitor all thru startup....saw the STFT's go +% for a short time after PCM commanded EVAP CPV open to run EVAP test (due to new canister having no fuel vapors in it...only unmetered air) long enough to spike the B1 LTFT from 0% to +2.3% & B2 LTFT from +5.5% to +6.8%. Idled car for approx 1 hr to see if FT's would recover from initial air draw out of new canister....all held steady w\ FLI @ 30% so I took car to fill up the gas tank to force fuel vapors into the new canister to start conditioning it. Drove car around to allow system to normalize then hooked scan tool back up to check....FT's had returned back to prior settings (B1 LTFT @ 0%, B2 LTFT @ 4.7% w\ both side's STFT switching at 0%....PCM didn't run EVAP tests yet due to FLI >85%) so now all is good w\ no vacuum leaks ahead of EVAP canister & CVS is working & sealing so as of now all is repaired & operating fine. Will need to take car on a long run to finish OBDII EVAP system testing (all passed OBDII except EVAP) & allow PCM to fully reset all KAM data & to fully bed in the new cam followers then take her back to On3 Performance for her final tune recheck after making all the repairs & dyno runout to see if all has recovered.
Engine is running very well....the more it runs the quieter it gets as the new cam followers wear in to the cams & the lash adjuster pintles (oiling at the roller\cam lobe interface is also helping to quench tappet noise). Idle is very smooth & steady in the 750 RPM range (the OEM 55mm TB has realigned all idle air flow thru it & the PCV system) so these Lunati VooDoo cams were actually slightly loping at idle prior due to the BBK 62mm TB\PCV system air control along w\ all the vacuum leaks that were present at that time. The engine is running so smooth now that the MAF readout hardly fluctuates at all during idle (.73 lbs\min @ 13.3% TPS angle...same angle that the BBK 62mm TB idled at) & are pretty much indistinguishable from the OEM cams as far as idle quality goes.
Also installed a pair of Accelatec Clutch Pedal Extensions (got off CJ Pony Parts) on both the clutch & brake pedals today to allow me to sit back away from the steering wheel & allow my legs to fully extend (short legs) comfortably to the AP & the dead pedal but also comfortably fully extend the clutch pedal w\o having to stretch leg & comfortably operate brake pedal w\o kneeing into the dash...….makes cruising soooo much more comfy now....like sitting in my recliner so I'm very pleased w\ this result.

Got all going my way now. Will post results of final dyno runs when done.
 

Juice

forum member
Joined
Aug 24, 2017
Posts
4,622
Reaction score
1,904
I have Forscan and I didnt see the crank relearn under PCM functions. As a side note, I use Forscan now to adjust the speedo not the x4. No need to full flash just for a tire or even gear ratio change.
 

GlassTop09

Senior Member
Joined
May 24, 2019
Posts
1,141
Reaction score
525
Location
Farmington, NM
I have Forscan and I didnt see the crank relearn under PCM functions. As a side note, I use Forscan now to adjust the speedo not the x4. No need to full flash just for a tire or even gear ratio change.
Ah Ok, assumed it would be in there w\ the extra programming functions that the extended license would give access to. I'm gonna get the extended license for it anyway.
Agree on the ability to make speedo adjustments\gear ratio corrections w\o reflashing tune using FORScan….was another reason for me getting it. Question: How can the Ford IDS software be acquired? Is access to this software restricted? I would also love to acquire a fully licensed copy of it to gain access to the available features & am willing to pay for it within a reasonable price range (not looking to go into business doing diagnostic work but I do like some of the OE testing\bi-directional controls it has that makes diagnostic work on Ford, Lincoln & Mercury vehicles much easier & faster to perform).
My goal is to build a 1-stop shop type of centralized automotive diagnostic tool center for performing all automotive diagnosis thus the laptop, FORScan & OBDII\USB dongle purchase. I've now recently added a Hantek 1008C PC USB 8-Channel Oscilloscope w\ all necessary cables & attachments including inductive pickup to add to my Autel AL539B OBDII\DMM tool & attachments so I can now perform much more precise diagnostic testing of systems & components so the last part I need is to build a 12v fused power socket lead to clip to vehicle battery to provide an external 12v power source for my laptop's 12v power brick to allow external setup of all equipment (already have a 10' USB extension cable to allow OBDII connection to laptop externally so I can have both FORScan & the Hantek oscilloscope running at the same time....hopefully Ford's IDS software as well in near future).
 

Juice

forum member
Joined
Aug 24, 2017
Posts
4,622
Reaction score
1,904
For IDS, there are two options. Real or clone. You can get a temp license from Ford for i think it was $35 for a 3 day license. You still need a VCM module to communicate with the car. Real Ford VCM is expensive, like $1000 expensive.
A Clone VCMs can be buggy or not work at all. Same can be said for the cracked software.
For the Forscan extended license, you can generate a trial license for free, it expires in 60 days. But it does fully unlock Forscan.
 

GlassTop09

Senior Member
Joined
May 24, 2019
Posts
1,141
Reaction score
525
Location
Farmington, NM
For IDS, there are two options. Real or clone. You can get a temp license from Ford for i think it was $35 for a 3 day license. You still need a VCM module to communicate with the car. Real Ford VCM is expensive, like $1000 expensive.
A Clone VCMs can be buggy or not work at all. Same can be said for the cracked software.
For the Forscan extended license, you can generate a trial license for free, it expires in 60 days. But it does fully unlock Forscan.
Ah Ok. So the VCM interface is where the money is tied up vs the software.
I noted a web site where you can get the IDS software download so I'll check this out 1st then look into finding a Ford VCM interface in the wild later.

Thanks for the info, Juice!
 

Juice

forum member
Joined
Aug 24, 2017
Posts
4,622
Reaction score
1,904
Just watch, if you plan on a clone VCM but get the real license from Ford maybe a bad combo. IDS uses real time communications and most likely will NOT work with a clone module.
 

GlassTop09

Senior Member
Joined
May 24, 2019
Posts
1,141
Reaction score
525
Location
Farmington, NM
Just watch, if you plan on a clone VCM but get the real license from Ford maybe a bad combo. IDS uses real time communications and most likely will NOT work with a clone module.
Gotcha, I was planning on finding a used real VCM for use w\ a real copy of IDS, not a clone.....which can be a real task in & of itself.
 

GlassTop09

Senior Member
Joined
May 24, 2019
Posts
1,141
Reaction score
525
Location
Farmington, NM
Update:

Have driven the car long enough to allow the PCM to run the OBDII EVAP self check tests & all is now passed so car is ready for retune\dyno but may be awhile coming now since the COVID-19 outbreak (NM gov called for state-wide stay home order so all non-essential businesses are closed) as my tuner @ On3 Performance hasn't gotten back to me to set up a session (texted me last week that they were still open when I filled him in on my progress but this was before the stay home order was issued) so don't know if they're still open at this time.

So since this also caused us to cancel a trip\cruise that was planned previous to all this (will get a full refund since the cruise line initiated the cancellation) & I was missing the throttle response from the bad BBK #1763 62mm TB, I broke down & bought a new Ford Performance 62mm TB to replace the OEM 55mm stocker I reinstalled & have installed it. Since the FP 62mm TB TPS signal @ KOEO was within .3v of the calibrated tune's TPS KOEO signal (FP @ 1.19v vs the tune @ 1.16v which is the OEM 55mm TB's TPS setting) the PCM easily readjusted for this w\o needing a tune adjustment so all is well....operates normally so the missing throttle response has also returned (was a little flat on initial throttle tip in off idle since reinstalling the OEM 55mm TB but drove fine otherwise). From checking the live data after installing this FP 62mm TB it appears that there is also some aero improvements that this FP 62mm unit has vs the OEM 55mm/BBK 62mm unit (the LTFT's on both banks have adjusted +.8% higher AND the TPS angle % has closed up more to maintain the same 750 idle speed....closed to 12.9% from the 13.3% it had settled on prior changeout proving the increase in air flow thru the FP 62mm TB vs the other 2) I'm assuming due to it's polished & blended porting ahead of the TB butterfly blades vs the BBK's more OEM looking TB casting so am very interested as to where she ends up at the top end now from a WOT hit.
I also noticed that both of the Ford TB's have fully sealed outer butterfly shaft seals vs the BBK unit (no vent holes drilled into the TB housing between the TPS sensor\actuator mounting & outer butterfly shaft seals for unmetered air to enter if seals leaked) so now I know. Shame since other than failing the smoke test the BBK #1763 62mm TB unit operated just fine.
Engine still runs very smooth, steady & quiet w\ this FP 62mm TB installed (tune was matched to the BBK 62mm unit prior so is very close) so all is good.

Will update w\ results as soon as I can get her on the rollers...……...
 

Dino Dino Bambino

I have a red car
Joined
Aug 11, 2014
Posts
3,880
Reaction score
1,751
Location
Cyprus
Ported TB.jpg
I ported my stock 55mm TB 'cause I don't think it's worth spending $600+ on a Ford Performance 62mm unit, and the reliability of other aftermarket 62mm units is patchy.
 
Last edited:

Juice

forum member
Joined
Aug 24, 2017
Posts
4,622
Reaction score
1,904
Actually, any bypass passage IS medtered air as it is after the maf sensor. There is actually a setting in the tune for minimum throttle angle at idle. It is normally set to 0, completly closed. Setting this to just under what you see at idle can reduce idle surge. This setting does the same thing essentially as the bypass passage.

Other differences noted make perfect sense, like less throttle opening for same idle speed. Nice work!
 

GlassTop09

Senior Member
Joined
May 24, 2019
Posts
1,141
Reaction score
525
Location
Farmington, NM
IMG_0197.JPG
This is the port shape of this FP 62mm TB in comparison to the OEM 55mm TB (the BBK #1763 62mm TB port shape is very similar to the OEM 55mm TB-just larger butterflys...I'll take a picture of it & post it later), there is definitely an airflow improvement between the 2 as proven by the PCM readjustment numbers for fueling\TPS angle% at same idle speed on same tune operating under similar conditions & I don't think it's all due to just the larger TB butterfly blades as I had the BBK 62mm TB installed & when I pulled it & installed the OEM 55mm TB that came w\ the car I also noted that the TPS angle % didn't change w\ the 55mm OEM TB vs the 62mm TB at same engine idle speed (read in post #85) as it should've increased w\ the 55mm TB. So IMHO this porting design work on the FP 62mm TB has to be a contributor as well....from my understanding of airflow dynamics any porting that provides a more linear\laminar airflow path will incur less deltaP due to the absence of vortexing created from excessive port angles\shapes that cause airflow to oscillate (roll) thus will allow more air volume flow, especially just before coming into contact w\ the butterfly plates which would aggravate airflow passage thru them further due to the vortexing in the air stream than it would otherwise.

There is a substantiated, scientific & provable reason why Ford engineers designed this 62mm TB's porting in this manner as opposed to the production OEM 55mm TB design & I'm sure that they have all the wind tunnel & performance testing data to confirm this TB's port design efficiency improvements as well as the materials used in construction thus why they designed & marketed it for sale.

Now whether it's worth the $600.00+ price tag or not is up to the individual to decide.....not trying to sell it or provide rationale for it for anyone else, I just posted the info I witnessed from the install\operation of this part. I do know this though.....the 2 main areas where a larger TB design in general does make sense is 1.) improved throttle tip-in response off idle & 2.) max WOT airflow but there is a size limit that can be used w\o creating drivability issues at the low end. But you will need to upgrade the entire airflow tract thru the engine over OEM (minimum of CAI, intake manifold, cams, headers & FF exhaust) & retune the PCM to begin to take full advantage of it at a minimum as it is indeed a wasted design investment otherwise....unless the pure asthestics of it are what you desire as it is a good looking, very robust piece (machined out of billet aluminum so is not a casting which is reflected in it's price) which I do place some weight on (1 reason why I went w\ the BBK unit as it looks better than all the rest except the FP unit as there are 62mm TB's out there that are cheaper than either of these 2....1 in particular I know of costs about the same as an OEM 55mm TB does that also comes fully complete w\ TPS & actuator).
The only thing I can say I regret is not knowing of those 2 vent holes drilled in the BBK unit & the issue they can cause so I ended up wasting the $349.95 I spent on it that could've been put to the FP 62mm TB from the jump & not had to worry bout any leakage so the old adage still applies, "You get what you pay for....sometimes more up front is actually better\cheaper in the long run than less". But if you're a true car guy some of this is gonna be part of the total cost of ownership of these types of vehicles....so for me this is really small potatoes in the grand scheme of it all especially if you have\own a car that you like\want & intend to keep\not sell.

So in short it was worth it to me.

Actually, any bypass passage IS medtered air as it is after the maf sensor. There is actually a setting in the tune for minimum throttle angle at idle. It is normally set to 0, completly closed. Setting this to just under what you see at idle can reduce idle surge. This setting does the same thing essentially as the bypass passage.

Other differences noted make perfect sense, like less throttle opening for same idle speed. Nice work!
Hhmm…..that's good to know as I hadn't paid close enough attention to the sample tune files I looked at thru HPTuners Editor software to make note of that....gonna revisit to see if I can find that setting. I had read that you had to be careful when using the TPS stop to set the TPS angle due to the spring loaded tip (which is there for the PCM to use when it calls for the throttle to be set in limp mode) so as not to allow the throttle to go to 0% angle & maintain the max limp mode 1,000 RPM limit, thus why any Ford TB's have this stop set using a sealer to not allow it to be moved once it is calibrated. When I got this new unit it came w\ a warning to not try to readjust the TPS stop as it was sealed & you would only break it (which would also void the warranty as these TB's are warrantied by FP for proper operation\workmanship).

Yeah I do look at the PCM operational live data before\after whenever I do install\change a part to see if the part's design in question does cause a change in the data....another way to determine if the part may\will have an effect on the engine's operation to either improve or retard engine performance outside of a dyno as anything that causes\creates improved airflow thruput will cause\create improved HP\TQ once the fueling is matched to it & vice\versa if it retards airflow thruput. So far I have seen the before\after number changes thru the PCM operational live data that verified the FP Bullitt 85mm CAI, FP Intake Manifold, Lunati VooDoo #21270700 cams & FP 62mm TB all showing to move more airflow at idle when I installed them separately on my car vs the OEM part they replaced (already had the Kooks headers\catted mid pipe & Pypes Super Bomb FF exhaust installed but didn't have a scan tool at that time to check for any airflow changes, just assumed they were there) prior tuning so once tuned I figured I should get the most from them. It was very interesting to me that when I pulled the BBK 62mm TB & reinstalled the OEM 55mm TB (which both emitted the same TPS KOEO output voltage as I initially set the BBK 62mm TB's TPS stop to the OEM tune calibrated KOEO signal of 1.16v as output from the OEM 55mm TB's TPS stop setting before any PCM tuning was done) that the idle TPS angle% was exactly the same at the same set idle RPM's using the same tune file even though the actual TB butterfly blades were different sizes so from this data in comparison to the data I got from the new FP 62mm TB install that something else had to be in play to explain the increase in airflow thruput thru the FP unit at idle besides the TB butterflies & the obvious design difference is the FP's TB port design layout vs the OEM & the BBK units which share a similar port design layout that is easily seen to be a much better, less restrictive flowing design from a visual comparison standpoint...…….

PS--Just now caught my typo in earlier posting where I typed the KOEO TPS voltage difference @ .3v...…..should have typed .03v as if the difference was actually .3v the PCM would've probably had issues w\ that large of a TPS voltage difference w\o a tune adjustment to recalibrate...…
My bad....
 
Last edited:

GlassTop09

Senior Member
Joined
May 24, 2019
Posts
1,141
Reaction score
525
Location
Farmington, NM
IMG_0199.JPG
As I posted, here is the picture of the BBK #1763 62mm TB inlet port. Both this unit & the FP 62mm TB inlets are designed to fit the OEM stock CAI tube so in essence all this design work is done within the same inlet sq in "area" per se. So it would appear that the inlet area located in the center is an apparent area of concern with laminar airflow into the TB butterfly blades, judging from visuals of the 3 TB's as w\ the FP unit you can clearly see that the porting is tapered to smoothly transition air flow into the butterfly blades w\ the center section height cut down then blended to remove any chance of air flow oscillation from air flow splitting between the 2 ports vs the BBK\OEM units (both ports aren't tapered much past the outer edges which do leave area for some air oscillation to occur ahead of the butterfly blades) which could cause slightly higher deltaP at idle thus less air volume thruput vs the FP unit & the FP unit should have less deltaP at WOT to allow more total air volume thruput but as I said Ford has the test data to substantiate the design.

Just to put it out, I have sent in a request to BBK Performance to inquire into the outer seals that they use w\ this #1763 62mm TB to see if the seals are designed to actually hold some positive air pressure, if so what is the max & if these seals are replaceable. When I get a response I'll post what they say.

The good news is that my tuner texted me this morning to inquire when I wanted to bring my Stang in for retune so I know that they haven't been shut down yet so we'll be headed to On3 Performance in the AM @ 9:00 hrs to put her on the rollers!

We'll see if all pans out.
 

GlassTop09

Senior Member
Joined
May 24, 2019
Posts
1,141
Reaction score
525
Location
Farmington, NM
Update:

We hit the rollers this morning at On3 Performance & Dyno to check tune since making all repairs for integrity then running her to see if all lost HP\TQ came back. Once car was strapped down & secured my tuner made a couple of drivability runs to warm her up & to see how all systems were functioning....all was looking good so he then pulled the tune file copy that correlated to the 10-8-19 final dyno run & made 1 change to it (reset the min ECT enable setting for the misfire monitor from the OEM setting of 20*F back to the 80*F setting we had set in current tune file in use during the 12-27-19 session to fix the false misfires we saw then that was helping to cause the P0307 DTC along w\ the broken cam follower & the bad dielectric grease I found & resolved later (from the Lunati VooDoo cams operational profile when the engine ECT was <80*F during cold starts) then flashed this tune file back in the PCM (did this to see if the engine will follow the 10-8-19 curve to determine if the VCT operation had returned using a known tune file that matched the 10-8-19 curve) then after making a couple of drivability runs\tweaks to ensure all is operating as it should then made a couple of WOT hits to see how she did:
IMG_0202.JPG
As you can see, she's back on track on the low end so the VCT system operation has fully recovered (also showed the same VCT system recovery on the datalog comparisons as well) since replacing the broken cam follower(s) & removing the 2 metal pieces when replacing both VCT solenoids (recovered the lost oil pressure\volume flow to the VCT system....). But you can also see that we picked up even more mid range & top end HP\TQ over the 10-8-19 curve using essentially the same tune file settings. Outside of repairing all the vacuum leaks (replaced EVAP system: CPV, CVS, canister & all lines off canister; replaced bad brake booster check valve & replaced leaking BBK #1763 62mm TB--both outer butterfly shaft seals leaked) there are only 3 other main items that were different across both curves......1.) AAT. The AAT at the 10-8-19 session was 71*F, today it was 61*F... 2.) The FP Bullitt 85mm CAI's open air filter had an air filter sock cover in place on today's session--wasn't installed on 10-8-19 session & 3.) The FP 62mm TB was installed on today's run vs the BBK #1763 62mm TB being installed on 10-8-19..... From looking at this sheet it is obvious that the AAT wasn't the main contributor for the increase as it should've picked up across the curve. The air filter sock cover definitely wasn't a hindrance as it didn't affect the engine's airflow in any aspect (as my tuner had said it wouldn't, why I got 1 to extend air filter service length...using it on the very same original air filter that came w\ the CAI & has been on the car since CAI install & has been thru all 5 dyno sessions) so the main difference maker here is the Ford Performance 62mm TB showing to flat out flow the BBK #1763 62mm TB in this same region on the curve. This is why I was interested as if all was equal the TB porting of the FP unit should have made a difference vs the BBK unit when the airflow velocities got higher & this sheet showed this pretty clearly. The only thing here is that my tuner had let up before she hit redline due to seeing the PCM start pulling spark timing at the top of the HP curve (where it starts dropping off) but she peaked @ 348.96 HP @ 6,304 RPM, 321.43 TQ @ 5,047 RPM....up +17.48 HP, +13.28 ft\lbs TQ over the 10-8-19 curve w\ no low end loss. Looking at the datalogs we saw that as of now we're starting to fully saturate the cooling system at this current power load (PCM started pulling spark timing at top end due to ECT)….wasn't running short on airflow or fuel so wasn't due to leaning out, just due to cooling system getting saturated (ECT at 220*F-230*F range so CHT is in the 280*-310*area) at the upper RPM ranges >6,350 (still running the OEM 195*F thermostat w\ OEM radiator & fan) w\o the benefit of ram air. We let the car cool down for 20 mins then tried her again to see if she would heat up again...this time we pushed her to the limiter @ 6,750 but we only got a total of +.55 ft\lbs TQ & +3.99 HP more at the peaks (352.95 HP @ 6,374 RPM\321.98 TQ @ 5,057 RPM) but saw the HP\TQ break over (PCM pulling spark timing due to excessive ECT) get even worse at the top end so we called it good as to do anything else significantly power wise we'll need to install FI & more importantly will need to upgrade the cooling system (radiator, fan & thermostat) in either case to carry it as this isn't gonna cut it during the summer months even in NA form so I'll be shopping soon. My tuner made recommendation to upgrade the thermostat to a 170*F unit as he says that this works well at our elevation to help the engine w\ cooling but also heat up sufficiently during the winter months up here but the radiator upgrade can be optional if I also upgrade the cooling fan to the 07-12 GT500 cooling fan to go w\ the 170*F stat if I chose to stay NA w\ the current FBO load out as it should handle the extra heat load when car is in motion using ram air so I'll do this 1st as these 2 items are the cheaper of the 3 to do (need to do a coolant flush anyway just cause.....)…..unless somebody has a good spare GT500 radiator\larger radiator for a manual GT just lying around that needs a home at a good price...……....just saying...……….

So these Lunati VooDoo #21270700 cams can still deliver even w\ the extra airflow thruput of the FP 62mm TB which also substantiates the airflow capability of the FP Bullitt 85mm CAI as well as the FP Intake Manifold as well as the Kooks 1 5\8" LT headers\Kooks Catted Midpipe & Pypes Super Bomb Mid Muffler FF catback exhaust thru a stock OEM production long block assembly. My tuner said these are pretty good numbers for a NA 3V on a Mustang dyno (just to use the same 8% peak correction correlation I've used before to "simulate" a typical DynoJet peak outcome for comparison it comes to 376.88 HP\347.14 TQ which I know is subjective....I still plan to run her on a DynoJet dyno to get a more real world comparison at some point when this COVID-19 saga is finally under control). But regardless of the numbers the curve is the curve & it shows this engine is putting out some very good power\torque across a wide area of the curve so should run very well for what it is. She's still very quiet post dyno runs so the new improved 3V cam followers are toting the mail....only the injectors, fan & exhaust note are the bulk of all audible noise.

Now will need to take her on a full drive cycle to retrain the misfire monitor (the 60-40 DFCO procedure) & reprove the EVAP system but from a short drive after tuning have completed the rest of the OBDII IM Readiness component check tests. Since retune the OBDII Mode 6 CC efficiency O2 sensor switch ratio test results came back better now since the fueling has been restored\corrected (B1 cat test @ .186 vs .285 prior, B2 cat test @ .234 vs .305 prior....lower numbers indicates better CC efficiency even though both sets of numbers were passing OBDII IM Readiness).

So here we are now finally at full NA optimization.....that's all she wrote, folks.
:driver:
 

GlassTop09

Senior Member
Joined
May 24, 2019
Posts
1,141
Reaction score
525
Location
Farmington, NM
FYI...………...
As of today I haven't gotten a return response from BBK Performance on the email I sent on 4-1-20 of the issue of the 2 outer butterfly shaft seals @ BBK #1763 62mm TB leaking & failing a smoke test.....been 11 days & counting.
 

Dino Dino Bambino

I have a red car
Joined
Aug 11, 2014
Posts
3,880
Reaction score
1,751
Location
Cyprus
The 353rwhp & 322rwtq that you got on that last run is very close to what I'd expect you to get on a Dynojet. You have very good reason to be happy.
Do you have a printout of that last dyno run?
 
Last edited:

Latest posts

Support us!

Support Us - Become A Supporting Member Today!

Click Here For Details

Sponsor Links

Banner image
Back
Top