Lunati VooDoo #21270700 Camshafts

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

  1. GlassTop09

    GlassTop09 Member

    414
    134
    I ran thru the 2013 OBDII Summary on both the UEGO & rear O2 sensors independent checks & outside of any circuit checks (including the O2 sensor heaters) most of the rest show in the min test entry requirements a min fuel level input of =>15% for the test to start running so this may have a bearing on your O2 sensors completing as well as on a few of them it says that the check test will run continuously until it completes.
    The fuel level input scenario w\ your PCM may be the key to it all.
     
  2. Juice

    Juice forum member

    2,305
    662
    My plan is to read the fuel level PID to confirm value. Will have to wait till after work. I have 2 1/2 years of working left before I can retire. lol

    And fuel level is 0% as reported by:SCT Livelink, Torque, and Forscan. 0<15%.
    I tried something in the tune, only time will tell. One drive cycle complete, 4 more to go before I get a result.
     
    Last edited: Apr 7, 2021
  3. GlassTop09

    GlassTop09 Member

    414
    134
    I was thinking bout this wondering if the FLI could be hard set in the tune.....had checked thru HPTuners Editor software but couldn't find any setting in it so I deduced that w\ SCT software you're using (access to binary code) you could find a way to "trick" this input in the PCM to say, 50%.
    I would also consider to build a resistor setup (if the tune coding doesn't work) to mimic the FLI switch in 2013 OEM fuel pump (to ensure the electrical specs match up to the OEM Coyote's PCM) then wire it into the corresponding PCM connections to then set this in PCM on a permanent basis.....

    Thinking out loud....................

    Hope this helps.
     
  4. Juice

    Juice forum member

    2,305
    662
    Fuel level signal on the 11&up comes over the can from the cluster. Resistor wont work.
    In the 07, fuel level comes from the SJB over the can.
    The 07 cluster does not communicate with the coyote pcm, it can only receive broadcast data from the coyote pcm (speedo, tach, temp, CEL, etc) Doesnt leave many options on this frankenstein. lol
     
  5. GlassTop09

    GlassTop09 Member

    414
    134
    Just got done checking up on this looking at the wiring diagrams in the FWM for both MY's & noted what you've posted so I stand corrected on the resistor idea.

    Yes you do have a Frankenstein going there!
     
  6. GlassTop09

    GlassTop09 Member

    414
    134
    Intake Manifold CFD Modeling for Power - Plenum and Inlet Radius Design - YouTube

    Hey Dino,

    Thought this was interesting.......may give a window into why the OEM IM design is the way it is & contributes to the better TQ thru the longer intake runners by locating the plenum below the intake runner openings to increase the runner velocity pressure delta within them vs the FPIM design at low RPM's AND kinda, sorta gives some window into the AFR issue across cylinders to degrade OBDII cat monitoring w\ the EVAP port design in FPIM vs the OEM IM as well at low speed, low RPM operation.

    I can't help it........I geek out when I'm watching these types of videos.....the mad scientist in me comes out! Like watching Schoolhouse Rock when I was a young'un............

    :Big Laugh:
     
  7. GlassTop09

    GlassTop09 Member

    414
    134
    IMG_0340.JPG
    This is what a C-note can get you just for the name..............................not even a full set!
    Now it's about to go down.............................
     
  8. Juice

    Juice forum member

    2,305
    662
    Are those labeled 'one time use'? Thats some bs IMO. I reuse those anyway. (I know, you didnt have them, so cant reuse.)
     
  9. GlassTop09

    GlassTop09 Member

    414
    134
    Naw they can be reused so I'm good......don't plan on losing or stripping any of em out either. At full list price they're $75.96 + tax for a 4-pack so yeah this is not cool price-wise but I wanted the OEM bolts so had to suck it up & dish..........
     
  10. GlassTop09

    GlassTop09 Member

    414
    134
    It's DONE!
    All went well as expected. Reset KAM before startup to allow PCM to relearn it all. Looking at the live data STFT\LTFT trimming the O2 sensor feedback is much more stable & consistent now & the idle LTFT's closed up 2.2% so she's rebalancing just nicely.....STFT switching is very consistent & stable now w\ this OEM IM vs the FPIM. LTFT's trimmed out & essentially locked down w\ no fluctuation while EVAP was cycling. CMBT's were slowly climbing upwards during idle indicating that the cats were heating up\operating well.

    Took her out on the initial drive cycle of mostly stop & go low speed, low RPM driving to allow O2 sensors, O2 heaters & cat CE monitors to run then hit a little bit of higher speed operation (50-60 MPH open rd) to allow the PCM to do some more trimming then back to stop & go driving on the way home (37.2 mi of driving). Parked car & hooked up scan tool....IM Readiness completed all but 1 (Evap) so all good. Gonna plan to take her out to NAPI International Speedway tomorrow to run the Misfire Monitor 60-40 DFCO Relearn training & complete the EVAP monitor then put her on a little freeway action to trim her out some more. Car is running very well & noted during the drive home that the acceleration has gotten a little more crisp so it's gonna be interesting to see how she does on the dyno.......coming very soon.

    This is how she looks under the bonnet now.................
    IMG_0342.JPG

    Also here is a shot of the EVAP port in the FPIM.........
    EVAP Port Opening FPIM.JPG
    That upper (lower PCV port for that matter, too) is pointing directly into #1 & #2 intake runners w\ #5 & #6 intake runners just on the opposite side....this is what was causing the STFT\LTFT to bounce\fluctuate irregular when EVAP cycled & that fluctuation can throw off a cat CE check....especially if using a cat that doesn't have that cerium brick in it up front to control the O2 flow into the substrates & is why I pulled it off & went back to the OEM IM.

    Stay tuned.................
     
  11. Dino Dino Bambino

    Dino Dino Bambino I have a red car

    Age:
    57
    2,666
    789
    Very tidy indeed.
    I think you're going to enjoy the new found midrange torque. You'll lose a bit of performance above 5000rpm but probably too little to notice. The dyno will tell the tale.
     
  12. MrBhp

    MrBhp Member

    551
    342
    The timeslip will tell the tale.
     
  13. Juice

    Juice forum member

    2,305
    662
    Wish my monitors would complete that quick. One monitor incomete is a PASS around these parts.
     
  14. Dino Dino Bambino

    Dino Dino Bambino I have a red car

    Age:
    57
    2,666
    789
    I'd say the 1/4 mile trap speed is likely to slightly lower due to the loss of torque at 5000+rpm, but the ET is likely be virtually unchanged as the improved launch and short time (provided traction isn't the limiting factor) will offset the slight loss of acceleration at the top end of the strip.
    The increased torque at lower rpm will really be felt in a rolling start from low rpm in the higher gears, and it'll also improve highway cruise gas mileage.
     
  15. GlassTop09

    GlassTop09 Member

    414
    134
    This is the main reason why I provided the link to the Ford OBDII Summary for 2013 MY & I would highly recommend, when you get the time, to really go thru it & study every topic within to see what each specific part of the OBDII system uses\needs to operate. Then you will easily figure out what to watch for, how to plan a driving route that will assist the specific monitors to run & complete very quick & then just how to actually drive the car to make it all come together.

    Yes it is some dry reading (remember a Ford engineer put this together targeting their dealer techs) but if 1 really wants to know the in's & out's of a Ford PCM's OBDII operations, these docs are the 1's to have on hand or access to them.

    This is what I did once I discovered where to find them. The Ford drive cycle procedure is a condensation of these OBDII Summaries but it doesn't cover the specific aspects of each OBDII monitor w\o which being known, can cause you to unknowingly abort a monitor(s) simply by the way you may be driving the car, prolonging the process.

    My dad the 35yr auto tech told me this growing up: "Learn every aspect of how something works 1st so then you can manipulate it in any way to your benefit because until this is done 1st you will be making educated guesses which in the end is still guessing."

    I took those words of wisdom to heart & I apply them to everything I do to this day.........
    :beer:
     
    MrBhp likes this.
  16. Juice

    Juice forum member

    2,305
    662
    The one thing they left out for 2013 MY is the need to complete 5 warmup cycles before the monitors even consider running. lol
    EGR and Componenets are the only 2 that run (and must complete. EGR completes within 5 miles of driving. And stopping and idling for 60-90 seconds completes the components monitor. This needs to happen 4 times with a full cooldown in between. Following the drive cycles will not do anything until the 5th drive cycle.
     
  17. GlassTop09

    GlassTop09 Member

    414
    134
    Just to give a summary on how the O2 sensor feedback has improved since IM swap................

    I used my scan tool to reset the KAM (this clears out all IM Readiness monitor\Mode 6 data but not the PCM learned data....need a hard reset for that) before initial startup @ 4-8-21 so at full hot idle the LTFT's were as follows: B1 @ -7.8%, B2 @ -3.9% (as last set from EVAP purge cycling thru the EVAP port\plenum design in the FPIM). By the time I got back home after initial drive time to set the IM Readiness monitors the hot idle LTFT's had readjusted as follows: B1 @ -5.6%, B2 @ -3.1%......a 2.2% correction on B1 & a .8% correction on B2. This is occurring from the EVAP port\plenum design in the OEM IM more evenly spreading the EVAP purged fuel vapors\unmetered air thruout the intake plenum\runners.
    Next day (4-9-21) as I had said I took the car out to my MM 60-40 DFCO Relearn training area to do so. Got this done but I haven't got the EVAP done yet (I filled up the tank so the FLI is >85% but once the FLI drops below 85% the EVAP monitor will run\set very fast off the high fuel level in tank). I also put her on US 550 for a few miles at 70+ mph to allow some more fuel trimming to take place (including some spirited acceleration to complete a "merge" into traffic). Got back home after putting a little over 56 mi on & checked the hot idle LTFT's again before I shut her down as follows: B1 @ -3.9%, B2 @ -3.1%....another 1.7% correction on B1 & 0% correction on B2 so now the B1\B2 LTFT's have readjusted within .8% of each other showing a much better balanced O2 sensor feedback pattern w\ the EVAP purge cycling patterns staying pretty much the same for this time of year since replacing the faulty EVAP canister\lines assembly last year (getting more fuel vapors w\ less unmetered air now so better purging of the canister....CPV opening as much as 56% to achieve full canister purge at the moment....).

    Haven't started the car yet today (watching TV & paying bills) so I took the time to post this info. Individual cylinder A\F ratios across both banks should be much closer to each other from the better EVAP purge mixing within the OEM IM so should be more consistent, better regulated free O2 flow control into catalysts....which is the result I want for cats so now to find out where the HP\TQ curve shifts have occurred.

    Sent text to my tuner to inform on when the next available dyno session slot is available so's I can get her in.

    PS (4-11-21)--Took car out today for some more PCM trimming & to see if all the improved O2 sensor feedback would bring about the hoped for effects on Cat CE. While warming the car up I checked the current CE ratios for reference as follows: B1 cat @ .217, B2 cat @ .223. Drove the car approx 22 mi, mostly stop & go driving intentionally using 5th gear to lug the engine to make PCM calculate as high a load% at low RPM's (1,000-1,500 range) to force the exhaust to get as dirty as it would get to really test this. Mixed in a little hiway time as well to allow some more PCM trimming. Got back home & hooked up scan tool to pull up Catalyst Monitors in Mode 6 & this is what I found: B1 @ .215, B2 @ .219 (lower CE ratio result mean cat efficiency has improved) so the reinstall of the OEM IM to correct the EVAP issue to clean up the O2 sensor feedback fidelity is showing to pay some dividends so this is looking very promising (thru all my cat testing last year w\ the FPIM manifold installed I never saw the cat CE ratios respond in a positive direction this quick....after initial pass they slowly kept degrading over several days operation until the B2 cat settled at .617 which was over the calc'd OBDII CE threshold of .578 for B2 cat but is well under the EPA threshold of .75......result of EMWA threshold correction based off of O2 sensor feedback of initial measured free O2% in exhaust to calc the cerium brick deterioration rate to then make new CE threshold target....except these Kooks Hi Flow Race cats don't have any cerium in them so the PCM is calc the max deterioration rate which is false as these cats are not designed to operate under an OBDII monitor so aren't OBDII-compliant. This is why hi flow race cats have a hard time passing an OBDII Cat CE monitor).

    FYI........................
     
    Last edited: Apr 11, 2021
    MrBhp likes this.
  18. GlassTop09

    GlassTop09 Member

    414
    134
    FYI,

    Got w\ my tuner this evening...........found out they're in the process of moving to a larger shop in a better area of town so was told to check back w\ him in 2 weeks to give em time to finish moving so around 4-26 timeframe. My guess is around the 1st of May....

    While there I finally got my T-shirt he kept forgetting to order for me in times past...........:Big Laugh:
     
  19. GlassTop09

    GlassTop09 Member

    414
    134
    Some more data for your consideration concerning the O2 sensor feedback fidelity I was seeing w\ the FPIM.....
    O2 Sensor Feedeback FPIM.JPG
    This is a FORSCan datalog of my Stang dated 12-9-20 at full hot idle.....graph #3 @ B1 STFT, #4 @ B1 LTFT, #5 @ B2 STFT, #6 @ B2 LTFT. Note the pattern....PCM is also performing EVAP purge cycle during this section of graph (have this recorded on dashboard as well but in Oscilloscope Mode FORSCan can only graph the 1st 12 PIDS of the dashboard)...see how the LTFT's are fluctuating, this is due to the EVAP purge (canister vapors & unmetered air) coming into the FPIM thru it's EVAP port design & not being evenly distributed thruout the plenum so the PCM is having a harder time deciphering when the EVAP canister is empty (the time line in graph is set to locate the highest % PCM has commanded the EVAP CPV to open to achieve a full canister purge)...the CPV valve is at 76.86% open w\ fuel tank pressure at -3.012" H2O so there is a fair amount of unmetered air along w\ excessive fuel vapors being drawn into the intake manifold thru the EVAP canister so the PCM is constantly having to update the LTFT's based on the STFT's constantly trying to keep up w\ the erratic distribution of the excessive canister fuel vapors\unmetered air thruout the intake runners. This is definately harder on catalysts to handle this excess....

    Now compare the datalog above w\ this 1 I recorded dated 4-14-21 at full hot idle w\ OEM IM installed.....
    O2 Sensor Feedback OEM IM.JPG
    Note the pattern of the STFT's\LTFT's in this one......PCM is also performing EVAP purge cycle here as well............see any difference?
    You will note that the STFT cycling pattern has smoothed out very noticeably & the LTFT's have stopped fluctuating....essentially have locked down & are flat w\ EVAP purge CPV valve being opened a max of 56.7% w\ fuel tank pressure @ -1.311" H2O to achieve the same canister purging. This is essentially 1\2 the vacuum rate pulled on the EVAP system to achieve the same process point....all from just changing out the FPIM to take advantage of the EVAP porting design of the OEM IM...the only item that was changed. Now that the O2 sensor feedback fidelity is clearly shown to be improved to the PCM so it can do a better job of EVAP purge control as well as free exhaust O2% calc's for cat CE checks & since the LTFT's have reset back to prior fueling pattern once some driving time has allowed the PCM to relearn (drove the car approx 80 mi today, mostly freeway mileage @ 55-100 MPH speeds but some in town stop\go as well....checked live data & noted the LTFT's pretty much holding this pattern at hot idle now) it would appear that the intake runner length differences between the 2 manifolds isn't a contributor to this (no effect at idle but also perceive little to no effect at 2,500-3,000 RPM) so I've a hunch that my tuner may be making some minor fueling\MAF scaling tweaks in CL as well as fueling tweaks in WOT (OL) along w\ some others this coming dyno session......but nothing major.

    But as it is right now she gets to 100 MPH from 60 MPH in 5th gear very damn fast w\ a lot of APP travel left....I don't think the TB is even making it to 25% open TBA (based off the amount of APP travel I input from 60 MPH...I didn't floor the pedal either) so if this OEM IM is making a difference it is definately in this area of the curve along w\ the Lunati cam's profile.

    Posted for the info....................

    PS---Ford knew this beforehand.....question is why they didn't design the EVAP port in the FPIM the same as OEM?
     
    Last edited: Apr 17, 2021 at 3:17 AM
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.