Lunati VooDoo #21270700 Camshafts

[GlassTop09]

Update:

Still waiting on tuner to get caught up to schedule a dyno session (in process of hiring another shop tech to free up tuner--tuner is the shop's general manager as well as performance tuner--was told to expect a call within a couple of weeks)....but in the process I've captured some more data to show the reasoning behind my removing the FRPP IM when emissions is a concern (cat operation in particular) & noting some other cause\effect from other issues as well:

Below is a copy of a FORScan OBDII Mode 6 Component Self Check result dated 11-18-20 to show where my car was at using the engine parts used at that time (FRPP Bullitt 85mm CAI using OEM MC MAF sensor, FRPP 62mm TB, FRPP IM, Lunati VooDoo #21270700 cams, Kooks 1 5/8" LTH's w\ Catted X-Pipe using BDG 90* CEL Eliminators, 4-Ford OEM F85F-9G4444-BD O2 sensors, MC OEM HJFS-24FP Spark Plugs all thru last PCM tune done on 4-2-20). Please note the Catalyst 1 & Catalyst 2 OBDII Threshold readings the PCM tested the cats efficiency to be. Had no idea as to the condition of the O2 sensors\spark plugs or of the EVAP port routing in the FRPP IM at this time.

(Note: Now the BDG 90* CEL Eliminators I'm using DO NOT have the internal mini cat substrate inside to further skew the rear O2 sensor readout by altering the free O2 % in the exhaust sample that enters them thus are only an open chamber w\ a 1\4" entry\exit port open to exhaust flow so they work by reducing the rear O2 sensor exhaust sample % exchange rate around rear O2 sensor's element vs the actual flowing exhaust sample % in exhaust pipe post-cat to slow the rear O2 sensor's rich to lean; lean to rich transition (V\ms) switch rate vs the pre cat O2 sensor's lean\rich amplitude switch rate around stoich (how the PCM determines the amount of free exhaust O2 that got thru the cat vs what enters it to calc the cat's operating efficiency)...so the results shown thru these BDG Eliminators will also correspond in proportion to what is occurring within the cats themselves as the exhaust sample exchange rate inside the eliminators is determined by the 1\4" entry\exit port so the Cat Efficiency curve derived inside these Eliminators is very relative to what is actually occurring in the exhaust pipe post-cat. Any O2 reduction inside the Eliminators is due to a proportional O2 reduction in exhaust piping post-cat. FYI.......)

Now please note what I typed in the post script (PS 4-11-21 of B1 Cat Effic @ .215; B2 Cat Effic @ .219) of my post #137 when I checked the Mode 6 data using my Foxwell NT301 scan tool after initial KAM reset. This is representative of cat efficiency improvement from the IM swap concerning the EVAP porting difference between the FRPP IM vs the OEM IM w\ CMDP's alone when compared to the 1st FORScan recorded Mode 6 data @ 11-18-20.
Now I also used my Foxwell NT301 scan tool to do the same thing after I ran a test @ 4-20-21 observing thru live data the Ford pre-cat O2 sensor voltages during OL to CL transition, found them not operating well at all causing excessively rich fueling until they responded (as noted in 1st part of post #140) so pulled them & reinstalled my NTK 22060\22500 O2 sensors & tested these in same manner to see\verify the operational improvement between the 2 sets of O2 sensors then performed KAM reset & ran thru 2 full drive cycles to fully complete all monitors beforehand.....the B1 Cat Effic @ .126; B2 Cat Effic @ .134.....notice the amount of improvement now w\ only the IM + O2 sensor changeout so the pre-cat, post-cat O2 sensor operational accuracy is just as important if not more so for good Cat Efficiency results.
Since that time I've finally gotten around to getting my FORScan extended license. While using FORScan to go thru & save all module AS-BUILT data as currently programmed for back up purposes & cleaning up other module's DTC's that were set before I bought the car but were never cleared when the issues were fixed (got all cleaned up except the GEM\SJB B2053...LF Repeater Lamp Circuit Malf....but all is physically working so don't know what's keeping SJB triggering this DTC yet & B2276 Less Than 2 Transmitters Programmed....figured this 1 out-have only programmed 1 key w\fob using the SJB in-car key\fob transmitter programming process since I had locksmith reset the SJB security when they cut\programmed my initial spare keys & original key fob after car purchase so I can dismiss this 1) I used FORScan to record the Mode 6 data after finding\replacing the bad spark plugs I posted about in my last post #140 then reset KAM using my Foxwell NT301 scan tool & ran car thru 2 full drive cycles to fully complete all monitors. Pulled the Mode 6 data this morning (car has been sitting idle for some time while doing yard work & pulling weeds around fence in service alley then recovering from the allergy & muscle spasms....) & have posted it below.....

The Cat Efficiency improvement results shown in this data are from the IM changeout, then O2 sensor changeout, then spark plug changeout.....all else is the same including the tune.
Am tempted to drop the midpipe to remove the BDG CEL Eliminators 1 more time, reinstall the rear O2 sensors back in the exhaust piping post-cats then rerun the monitors to test the Kooks Race cats again under this OEM IM w\ CMDP's, NTK O2 sensors & good Champion 9406 Iridium plugs to see if they'll now retain\hold a passing IM Readiness Cat Efficiency test result but I think I'm just gonna run all as is for now & wait to see what changes after the dyno\retune session before doing anything else exhaust wise.

Interesting how other physical items, parts design differences can have a far larger impact on actual Cat Efficiency than actual tuning changes or even a cat's internal design. The good thing for me in this scenario is the Kooks Race Cat's substrate being made of metallic foil instead of ceramic.....metal substrates don't degrade nowhere near as easily as ceramic, can withstand far higher exhaust temps nor are as easily poisoned since no oils can penetrate into the metallic foil so are more easily recoverable from contamination as long as none of the cell channels get completely plugged off w\ carbon to reduce usable substrate surface treating area.

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

PS--Looking back thru the 11-18-20 Mode 6 data, the misfire counts pattern should have clued me into checking the plugs, especially all plugs on B1 but since no DTC's were flagged, counts were small in number & no detected actual hard plug misfires at that time I easily dismissed the data....but when compared to the 6-9-21 data saved this morning of a fully, properly operating engine this becomes very obvious........

Shows the importance of having good recorded baseline data of a properly operating engine system on hand to use to spot upcoming issues before they get out of hand.......while waiting on a DTC to alert you.............

Almost forgot......my tuner also sent me a text to inform me after I sent him the pictures of the burnt up MC plugs that he recommended to use NGK Iridium IX series plugs going forward as he didn't think very highly of Brisk plugs from his experiences using them in the past vs NGK (which do cross match heat range-wise w\ the MC HJFS-24P plugs as do the Champion 9406 Iridium plugs but were cheaper than the NGK's so I bought the Champions back in summer 2019) so whenever the Champions finally give out I'll pick up a set of the NGK's to try out on my tuner's recommendation.

 

[GlassTop09]

Update:

I FINALLY got a dyno session scheduled for 7-27-21 @ 10:00 hrs!
Tuner finally texted me today to let me know the date & time of my session so I know I'm on the schedule now.......

 

[GlassTop09]

Update:

Ok folks....we've been dyno'd & the results were not exactly what I was expecting to see............

This is overlaid on the 4-2-20 final run that hit 352 HP/322 TQ under 66*F AAT @ 30.02" inHg density. Today this was run under 96*F AAT @ 29.86" inHg density....this ole 4.6L w\ them Lunati VooDoo #21270700 cams running w\ the only part changes from the 4-2-20 final run being the intake manifold (FRPP IM to '08 FoMoCo OEM IM\Steeda CMDP's) & radiator\fan (OEM rad/6-blade OEM cooling fan to Mishimoto HP 3-row aluminum rad\13-14 GT500 7-blade cooling fan)....all else was the same outside of the spark plugs (used set of Champion 9406 Iridium plugs gapped to .040" that I used to replace the burnt up MC HJSC-24FP OEM Platinum plugs). The NTK 22060\22500 O2 sensors ran in today's run are the exact same ones used in the 4-2-20 final run.
As expected the peak TQ curve point on today's final run moved to the left from the peak TQ curve point on 4-2-20 so the engine peaked earlier & lost 2.79 lb\ft peak to peak TQ (you can see this in the mid range 4,000-5,000 RPM area where the peaks essentially flipped position) between the 2 but you can also see outside of this the TQ curve essentially laid over the other one thus same for HP curve. You can also see where this Mishimoto rad\GT500 cooling fan worked it's magic as well at the top end of the curve preventing the engine's temp load (temps never exceeded 220*F on the dyno--even thru a 3 back to back hit session) from causing the PCM to pull spark timing so she carried out to redline. So peak HP points didn't change between the 2 graphs but we only lost .35 HP peak to peak between the 2 graphs.
This result I wasn't expecting to see....was expecting at least a 5-6 peak HP drop on the top end in this hotter, less dense air on top of the OEM IM design but it appears that this OEM IM setup can flow very comparative flow numbers to the FRPP IM.....on my setup, on the same dyno, being run by the same tuner. Initial tune check showed engine was running a little rich (which was expected due to IM swap) but nothing coming close to hurting anything so fueling was tweaked to correct but otherwise all CL closed throttle\part throttle mapping was still good so most tweaking of settings was done in VCT angle-load% WOT tables (bottom section of mapping) to smooth out the WOT TQ curve as best we could between 3,500-5,000 RPM's (here is where the OEM IM w\ CMDP's had the most changing effects vs the FRPP IM but not quite in the manner I was expecting) & we still kept seeing the same old small temporary knock spark timing cut\recovery in the same section of graph (3,500-4,500 RPM) since the initial 8-31-18 tuning w\ the OEM cams so at this time we can definately chalk this up to natural engine harmonics in this area causing this (I know for sure now that the exhaust system isn't causing this since replacing the BMR PHB brace w\ a '14 OEM PHB brace which clears the exhaust piping by 3\4"-1"....piping\mufflers\resonators\headers clears everything else underside by at least 1\2"). So these observed results leave the bad O2 sensor operation I found earlier w\ the FoMoCo F85F-9G4444-BD O2 sensors as a major cause w\ the EVAP port design in the FRPP IM also being a contributor to the badly burnt up MC HJSC-24FP spark plugs (B1 cyl #3 & #4 plugs were leaned out\detonated so badly that the porcelains would spin inside the metal shell thus were leaking compressed air\fuel gasses on compression stroke & ignited air\fuel gasses on power stroke.....are the 2 furthest cyls away from the offset EVAP port entry in the FRPP IM.......) so all this had to have happened during low speed, normal CL closed throttle operation where this EVAP air\fumes distribution issue will be at it's worse due to lower intake runner air charge velocities FWIW.

IMHO I don't think this is a coincidental observation of this FRPP IM's EVAP port routing design but to each their own.....

Anyhow she's all fixed up & operating excellent.....ran drive cycle & all completed except the EVAP (fuel tank level was >85% which disables this test until level drops <85%) so's she all good. Cat B1 CE @ .136, B2 CE @ .157 so all looking good....will need to get a few more full drive cycles in to see where all shakes\settles out.

This will most likely be the last dyno\tuning session done on my Stang.......until at least after my 3.90 gears\Eaton Tru-Trac diff along w\ my 2 new MagnaFlow #5461336 Spun 304 SS EPA OEM VEI fitted, CARB EO#-cert, OBDII-compliant, 3-way universal cats are installed & all broken in. Plan for this to happen is around September-October time frame (gonna have On3 Dyno & Performance do all the work....they use TIG instead of MIG on all SS exhaust work which I like & I just don't want to go thru a rear end overhaul on jack stands).

Now it's time for some of this.....................

 

[Dino Dino Bambino]

Not quite the dyno result I was expecting either Dale but that's a good thing 'cause your HP/TQ curves are smoother and there's a more even distribution of torque. The twin torque peaks at 4300 & 5100rpm are typical of a cammed set up with stock intake manifold plus delete plates, and still having 350+rwhp is awesome.
Looks like you have your engine very nicely dialed in now. Enjoy!

 

[GlassTop09]

Not quite the dyno result I was expecting either Dale but that's a good thing 'cause your HP/TQ curves are smoother and there's a more even distribution of torque. The twin torque peaks at 4300 & 5100rpm are typical of a cammed set up with stock intake manifold plus delete plates, and still having 350+rwhp is awesome.
Looks like you have your engine very nicely dialed in now. Enjoy!

Yeah....since we were at the old shop where the dyno is at the moment (nobody else present) my tuner set his equipment up so that his laptop screen was remoted to the big screen so that I could see EVERYTHING he was doing in real time to my tune in HPTuners VCM Editor along w\ all the VCM Scanner datalogs\Mustang Dyno info as a courtesy to me (he doesn't do this w\ just anybody) so I was liking that.
He also explained\showed me what was going on to cause the graph curve shape off the 2,500-3,100 RPM area....this is the result of the PCM switching the IMRC closed to IMRC open mapping (even though he has copied all IMRC open map settings to the IMRC closed map for all parameters to get around the issue when the IMRC--CMCV's--are disabled in the tune) when the PCM has read the APP WOT position, calc'd the desired load% in 4th gear, switched from CL dynamic operation to OL manual operation so the PCM is advancing the cams from their retarded VCT cam timing position from the CL dynamic operation (emissions focused to control NOx output once the calc'd load% has reached the APP desired calc'd load% target) while running at speed in 4th gear prior to the WOT hit to the manual VCT cam retard timing settings in the WOT VCT load% tables so is working the spark timing to get the engine to respond. Since he has all these tables set up in my tune to limit the max VCT cam retard angles to 20* instead of the OEM 55* this is the best this would get w\ my Lunati VooDoo cam's timing profile....if we still had the OEM 55* VCT max cam retard in play this would have been more steep than what it is now thus the lag in response would be worse. More pronounced when run on a load bearing drum dyno vs an inertia drum dyno for obvious reasons.....

This is why most just start the dyno recording at the 3,000 RPM mark since at this point the PCM will have already done some of this before the WOT hit occurs (especially the IMRC closed to IMRC open mapping switch thus moved into part throttle operation which will move closer to the WOT section of the mapping thus reducing the amount of time for the engine to respond) & is why 4.6L's seem to be somewhat "lazy" on response at times to an initial APP desired load% input change then come on w\ some authority.......

Simply the nature of the beast.......

PS--Yes I've gone thru my car's systems w\ a fine tooth comb ad nauseum to ensure that all are operating properly & within specs to ensure the best tuning results.....w\ these old cars this can take some time\effort to do but the results IMHO is what makes it all worth it.

 

[GlassTop09]

Since I mentioned these in my last posting......here is a picture of the MagnaFlow #5461336 CARB EO# D-193-140 OBDII-compliant 3-way universal catalytic converter that matches the Ford VEI EFN# 9FMXV05.4VEK off my '09 GT's VEI sticker (a 46 state Fed car) that I have sitting on the floor behind me (2 to be exact) to get installed by On3 Dyno & Performance in 2-3 months:

This is a universal design that is CARB certified (thus Fed EPA exempted) for specific use w\ this MY GT's 4.6L V8 (meets\exceeds all the EPA CoC design, operational & warranty requirements as issued to Ford Motor Co which includes the Bullitt & Shelby GT) as well as the same MY Shelby GT500\GT500 KR w\ the 5.4L 32V DOHC SC'd Modular V8 which some models also are listed under the same EFN# class as the 4.6L V8 but all EFN#'s up to the 2010 MY show this #5461336 as compatible (have the CARB EO# D-193-140 product document in hand along w\ the MagnaFlow sales receipt\5-yr 50,000 mi manuf warranty card which satisfies the term "certified condition" as long as the aftermarket emissions part itself isn't altered\changed from it's certified design\usage & documentation is provided to validate it's use on the vehicle intended for installation...the VEI\EFN# & CARB EO# solves that).
Now as far as location of installation, the CARB EO# paperwork states location to be in UL (underbody left) & UR (underbody right) & there are only 2 areas underbody where these can be installed w\o alteration to the part itself...4"OD x 11"L.... 1.) in the original location as the OEM direct fit version has them located & 2.) in the area just aft of the 45* turn & ahead of the trans crossmember.....which is the exact same area where the Kooks Hi Flow cats are currently located in the midpipe. Either place will allow the EPA CoC legal OBDII compliant mid-mounted "post-cat" O2 sensor bungs to be clocked to the OEM 10 o'clock-2 o'clock position for sensor fidelity purposes. Works fine w\ a manual trans....don't know if this will clear an automatic in location #2......

Then once installed, broken in & validated thru OBDII, I plan to take car to a certified vehicle emissions tester in Bernalillo Co that has a sniffer as well to get the actual raw CO, HC & NOx output reduction numbers to go along w\ the OBDII IM Readiness results to satisfy the testing validation requirement then put all documentation (including the 11-23-20 Fed EPA Title II Tampering policy w\ all pertinent sections related to my "setup" highlighted) in an envelope to store it in the vehicle glove box just in case it's needed in the future. I already have the last Fed EPA emissions test passed result that was done prior to me buying the car in 10-2017 (bought it in Bernalillo Co but registered it in San Juan Co which at the moment doesn't require Fed EPA vehicle emissions certification for vehicle registration......).

Got these due to MagnaFlow informing me that the Fed EPA certified version of this SS spun metal design (#51766) has been discontinued (the shielded Fed EPA OEM clamshell designs won't fit in space #2 due to size & MagnaFlow is the only manuf that makes a CARB cert OBDII-compliant SS spun metal straight flow universal cat....Walker makes a CARB cert OBDII-compliant SS universal cat as well but it is designed to fit in the original location only...outlet port of cat is clocked in the 45* angle like the OEM unit is).

Just getting ahead of the game. As they say.......buy once, cry once.

FYI.

 

[GlassTop09]

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

I ran some calc's today concerning this MagnaFlow #5461336 cat to give some insight on why I went w\ them.

When ARB ran the CARB cert test on these MagnaFlow #5461000 series designed cats they used the EPA 120K mi weighted avg of NMOG @ .090 gms\mi, CO @ 4.2 gms\mi & NOx @ .007 gms\mi (this is Cali std....Fed EPA is the same as Cali except for NOx which is .010 gms\mi FYI...) using a "worst case scenario" test vehicle....which was a 2012 Dodge Challenger SRT8 w\ the 6.4L Gen III HEMI V8 wear avg to 120K mi that ARB chose to use as the test mule (120,000 miles wear avg on all OEM engine components w\ a factory VE rating of 80%). 2 tests were ran w\ this series cat design installed & the car legally passed both times. Note this is an OEM Cali-legal performance class LEV II vehicle tested around the 2,000-2,500 RPM range for ECU CL, closed throttle normal daily driving usage (up to freeway operations) which will be using the ECU AFR target of 14.64 (or Lambda 1.0) for air\fuel mass + engine load% calc's....

So all 2002 thru 2019 PC (passenger cars w\ GVWR <8,500 lbs) engines covered under this CARB EO# & their exhaust lbs output falls at\below this test car's rating @ 14.64 AFR (optimum AFR for catalyst oxidation\reduction performance as well as engine efficiency performance) @ 80% VE this MagnaFlow #5461336 cat should be able to treat the exhaust output to achieve the Cali target (more stringent than equivalent Fed EPA target thus the EPA exemption) AND be compatible to OBDII testing algorithms used in ECU's of the same MY's given above for MIL accuracy & integrity.

The 6.4L Dodge HEMI OEM long block V8's VE at 100% I calc'd to be 50.62 lbs air @ 6,250 RPM's (max air mass poundage throughput thru cat using air density at 96*F + 5% relative humidity @ .0714 lbs\cu ft...needed a good number to run calc's) so 3.46 lbs of fuel using 14.64 AFR std so at 80% VE this comes out to 40.49 lbs air & 2.76 lbs fuel at same RPM's. Using the same math the 4.6L 3V Modular V8 (OEM long block) at the same RPM's calc'd to be 36.28 lbs air\2.47 lbs fuel @ 100% VE, 29.02 lbs air\1.98 lbs fuel at 80% VE @ same 14.64 AFR.

This is all based on the OEM NA displacement configuration of 281 cu in (4.6L), 392 cu in (6.4L)....

(Side note: Air\fuel mass at optimum AFR according to an engine's VE at a given speed\RPM & engine load% is what's relevant to determine the exhaust treating capacity\capability of a catalytic converter. 1.) As the AFR goes richer than 14.64 the NMOG & CO increases...NOx decreases. 2.) As the AFR goes leaner than 14.64 the NMOG & CO decreases....NOx increases. 3.) As the AFR remains constant at 14.64 but the engine's RPM's & any frictional changes on intake side or exhaust side to incur additional air\fuel mass increase at same RPM's--thus VE--& load% increases the NMOG, CO & NOx increases proportionately. Any engine pumping losses incurred aggravate this as well since these affect engine VE & effective air\fuel mass....why the engine component mileage wear avg is used in EPA vehicle catalyst cert testing.... The main gas that is targeted is NOx as this gas compound is responsible for "acid rain" & "smog" & it doesn't exist naturally on it's own as opposed to NMOG & CO. The 1st 2 scenarios tuning can fix by realigning the AFR to optimum at any given engine RPM & load% but the 3rd scenario can only be fixed by either 1.) increasing the cat's substrate size\precious metal loading vs the OEM cats to compensate for it OR 2.) intentionally tune the engine output to a lower level to get the NMOG, CO & NOx levels below the EPA vehicle threshold targets using the existing OEM cats....)

These numbers put the OEM 6.4L Dodge HEMI V8 to be able to move more 14.64 AFR poundage @ 80% VE (40.49\2.76) than an OEM 4.6L Modular V8 at 100% VE (36.28\2.47....which this engine will NEVER achieve in NA configuration regardless of mileage or condition but can achieve\exceed it in FI configuration depending on the amount of boost used...OEM targets the 80%-85% engine design VE range & is the min acceptable target range used in all diagnostic VE softwares) so it stands to show that this MagnaFlow cat #5461336 should be able to legally handle the exhaust output of any sensibly modded\tuned 4.6L Modular V8 in OEM long block NA config (will include some level of FI as well) at the OEM GVWR of around 4,500 lbs (as pulled from my '09 GT's VI class sticker in door jam....most cars actually weigh less than this....thus the importance of GVWR rating as cars that weigh less they GENERALLY will pollute less & OEM cats are typically sized in accordance to the vehicle's OEM GVWR rating for proof of life of vehicle capacity) as by these numbers this MagnaFlow #5461336 cat's capacity is roughly 39% oversized based on the numbers I've calc'd above (using quick math based on the 4,500 lb GVWR of my '09 GT this puts this aftermarket cat in the range of 6,255 lbs GVWR rating....which allows some headroom for performance tuning).

This is why IMHO you should consider to look for a Fed EPA#\CARB EO# certified 3-way OBDII-compliant universal cat that is specific to your vehicle's VEI\EFN# if engine mods are used & being EPA compliant is desired for legal street use once the vehicle in question has exceeded it's original OEM warranty period (which makes it legal to use any legally EPA\CARB tested\certified aftermarket cat in place of an OEM cat...this was amended to go into effect Jan 1, 2009 to accommodate OBDII vehicles as they age due to cost of & scarcity of actual OEM replacement parts availability post OEM warranty since most OEM manuf's stop making these parts after a car platform class exceeds it's OEM assigned warranty....like our S197's have) since legal universal cats are usually designed to cover a wider array of engine EFN classes (like a 2007-2010 Ford OEM 5.4L 32V SC'd Modular V8 as well in this specific Ford EFN# 9FMXV05.4VEK class for example...) that can handle any extra exhaust poundage added from mods that can potentially increase air\fuel mass throughput over the OEM components (CAI, TB, IM, camshafts, exhaust headers, rear axle ratios, wheel dia, some tuning, etc) at 14.64 AFR but still capable of reducing the extra NMOG, CO & NOx output levels below the EPA legal PC exhaust output thresholds as outlined in the Clean Air Act..... This is what the actual OBDII testing or independent 5-gas analyzer testing should reveal & be used for exclusively on modded OBDII vehicles.....visual inspections alone can't verify this as well as individual CARB EO# on individual engine components (in parenthesis above) outside of the cats can do either. These were intended for use on vehicles that are otherwise untouched tune-wise (still OEM), still are using the OEM cats & are still under the OEM assigned warranty period as mandated by the EPA to the OEM's to grant the CoC certifications. I've found that the EPA does allow for this type of testing to be used to certify compliance as an alternative & they DO NOT prevent any State, county or local gov from instituting it....they only require that they make a record of any vehicle that doesn't visually meet "certified condition" or "original condition" but actually passes the legal OBDII test legally\5-gas analyzer test legally to have to put into archive of the vehicle's actual installed components so that it can then be used as an "example" for any other vehicle in the same class, w\ a similar component configuration w\ passing OBDII test results to attain "certified condition" status.... The cats themselves are the key to attaining this as they alone can cancel out effects from most component changes or tuning changes that is not considered OEM to fall under the EPA CoC issued to the OEM manuf's.....if you can find them large enough\heavily loaded enough to do the job & still fit under the car in a reasonable proximity to the OEM location (this is intentionally vague in the Fed EPA regs but is more stringently documented under CARB...CARB rules only allows a max of 3" either direction from the OEM location\orientation....but this is NOT listed as such on the CARB EO# document of this universal cat...only the UL & UR location designation so is vague by design & thus open to interpretation....just as the Fed EPA rules are when outside of the OEM warranty period (EPA lists 5 yr, 50,000 mi as the minimum but CARB carries this to 7yr, 70,000 mi but cat manuf's use the EPA 5yr, 50,000 mi std as the basis for warranty on their legal, tested\certified aftermarket cats to satisfy the Fed EPA mandate for certification. So if no warranty is given\provided on an aftermarket cat, it is usually not considered legal for use on Fed roads\hiways (this is mandated by the EPA primarily for consumer protection from buying products to use on OEM cert vehicles that won't pass a cert test and\or give false operational MIL's causing a failed cert test).

Now y'all understand a little better why the "for off road use only" disclaimer used by manuf's\sellers of such equipment in times past? And why the EPA is going after these folks hard now? As Paul Harvey used to say....."wait until you hear the rest of the story".

IOW's use a legally certified larger sized\rated cat than the OEM rating for your vehicle's engine class & GVWR.......then test it thru EPA CoC legal OBDII algorithms (which already exists in our PCM's if left unaltered & fully operational) or a 5-gas analyzer on a load bearing dyno to ensure compliance (the EPA thresholds as outlined in the 1st part of this posting is all the Fed EPA cares about & they provide 2 ways of testing to legally verify this.....the rest is up to the States to implement it & how they want to go about doing it (or add\subtract any further changes of their own that does not hinder or reduce the original EPA regs intent). So the States themselves have some answering to do w\ all this as well concerning our hobby\passion....but everybody loves to bash\blame the Fed gov for everything but gives YOUR State, county & local govs too much slack (along w\ the performance parts industry in general but some do actually comply)...where the real implementation takes place.....except for California and\or the other 3 States that have adopted CARB & made amendments to it to fit their specific needs (the other 3 States allow some things to follow the original Fed EPA regs in certain instances within CARB rules that California will not so read up to know what's actually what. CARB isn't the same exact meaning for all States that have adopted it outside of California). This is also why the EPA takes enforcing all this on a case by case basis instead of a blanket approach & if certain things are done\documented to show what they deem as "reasonable conduct" to comply they will cut you some slack as an individual consumer since they realize that the bulk of illegal parts\services were sold to consumers by companies\places of business or commerce....not just individuals that made these illegal parts themselves...thus have a legal obligation to comply w\ the Fed EPA regs concerning the Clean Air Act w\ selling vehicle parts\services to consumers....which they knew that they did beforehand & for years prior to now. So I personally don't buy\fall into all the crying & boohooing that is being spread across social media by a lot of these companies\places of commerce to rile up consumer ire to then use this to try to leverage against the Fed gov for their own personal gains\goals when they simply are getting called out\some actually fined for doing what they already knew was illegal to do......in order to make a buck. But this is just me & my take on all of this........

The sulfur side of this is that these cats ain't cheap to produce\purchase as CARB-cert cats will usually be the most heavily loaded rare precious metal cats out there (thus the high costs & the most prized for theft) but also be the most effective\reliable.........they also won't be found thru most of the usual speed shop's\suppliers web sites either (can't be legally advertised to show\promote any performance improvement vs OEM or as "high flow"...even if it's actually true. This is mandated by the EPA for marketing purposes) so you'd have to go to the actual cat converter manuf's web sites to find them (as well as any legal documentation outside of CARB EO# documentation as kept by California on their web site). The rest you'd have to use some math to figure out (as I just demonstrated above) from the criteria found in the CARB EO product document (mainly the "worst case scenario" test mule that was used to certify the part then do the calc's based on the test mule's engine displacement vs your car's engine displacement to see where it all shakes out against the EPA worst case regs which will be for our vehicle's classification the 120K mi weighted wear avg NMOG, CO & NOx targets as tested using the "worse case test mule" vehicle's OEM engine displacement). At least California does provide some pertinent testing info you could use to find an acceptable legal aftermarket cat for your vehicle's engine class...the Fed EPA does nothing to help you out as a consumer in this regard....only the cat manuf's Fed EPA certification number that the cat manuf is tasked to provide either in writing or listed on the part description on their web site as well as inscribed\stamped on the actual aftermarket cat's outer shell....nothing else.

This is the part that no one has any data posted for consumer use & most likely can't do legally any way (outside of what California has done w\ their CARB EO# aftermarket parts registry so I give them a leg up in this regard...no other US State has come or done anything close).......you gotta do the actual dirty work yourself to find out, then know which legal cat part# will suffice\cover your specific needs as it all stands at this time.

More than 1 way to legally skin a cat......but it does require some effort & research on the consumer's part. Sometimes you just gotta do the work yourself.....can't always depend on others to do it for you.

Now if your vehicle falls outside of all this you just know you're up a creek w\o a paddle concerning the EPA...........so sooner or later you're gonna end up in their crosshairs.......this is a personal decision for each to make on their own as I see it.

Ok I'm done & going to bed now.....

 

[Dino Dino Bambino]

I have a pair of 11k-mile used Pypes 2.5" high-flow cats plus a pair of JBA knockoff shorty headers sitting in my parts box that I'm hoping will magically self-install themselves.
Realistically they'll most likely go on when my stock cats begin to fail, but that might be a while as my car has only 94k miles.

 

[GlassTop09]

I can see some cramping fingers\hands in the forecast when it comes time to install them JBA's!

In hindsight I wished I'd have gone w\ Pypes 1 5/8" LTH's\Pypes Catted H-pipe using the metallic substrated version cats as at least Pypes does make claim on their web site that their stuff is emissions friendly & would most likely pass emissions (Fed EPA, not CARB) so the odds would have been better (combo also would've been cheaper vs this Kooks combo & would've achieved essentially the same performance levels)....something no one else does.

You'll get it all installed cause you'll simply just get tired of looking at them parts staring back at you (I got the same issue as you w\ a set of 3.90 gears & a Eaton True-Trac diff w\ a Motive bearing\shim kit, a JEGS solid spacer pinion kit & a Moser 8.8" bearing cap stud kit, new FoMoCo axle bearings\seals sitting on the floor behind me for the better part of 1 yr, along w\ these new MagnaFlow cats which I just recently bought.....plan is to get it all installed at On3 Dyno & Performance by October of this year....initial plan to do the rear end work myself but I just can't put myself thru that job off jack stands so I'm passing it off to On3--was gonna have them do the cat install since they use TIG welding on SS).

 

[Juice]

I can see some cramping fingers\hands in the forecast when it comes time to install them JBA's!

In hindsight I wished I'd have gone w\ Pypes 1 5/8" LTH's\Pypes Catted H-pipe using the metallic substrated version cats as at least Pypes does make claim on their web site that their stuff is emissions friendly & would most likely pass emissions (Fed EPA, not CARB) so the odds would have been better (combo also would've been cheaper vs this Kooks combo & would've achieved essentially the same performance levels)....something no one else does.

You'll get it all installed cause you'll simply just get tired of looking at them parts staring back at you (I got the same issue as you w\ a set of 3.90 gears & a Eaton True-Trac diff w\ a Motive bearing\shim kit, a JEGS solid spacer pinion kit & a Moser 8.8" bearing cap stud kit, new FoMoCo axle bearings\seals sitting on the floor behind me for the better part of 1 yr, along w\ these new MagnaFlow cats which I just recently bought.....plan is to get it all installed at On3 Dyno & Performance by October of this year....initial plan to do the rear end work myself but I just can't put myself thru that job off jack stands so I'm passing it off to On3--was gonna have them do the cat install since they use TIG welding on SS).

lol
Im about to pull the 3.90s and put in 3.55s. Last gear swap, 3.90s proved to be too much. First is useless, too short. Never use 5th & 6th on track, so they might as well be taller for cruising. Maybe now I will be able to use 2nd on track, not just 3rd and 4th.

 

[Rick Simons]

GlassTop09, can you go into a little more detail RE the EVAP porting issue on the FRPP IM? Apologies if you already did in one of your posts and I missed it. thanks!

 

[GlassTop09]

GlassTop09, can you go into a little more detail RE the EVAP porting issue on the FRPP IM? Apologies if you already did in one of your posts and I missed it. thanks!

Hi Rick,
No problem......I'll give you some reference to the pgs\posts I've made in this thread so you don't have to search....

FRIM vs OEM IM w\ CMDP's:
Pg 6 posts #113, #114, #130, #139 (within these posts you'll find pictures of the EVAP porting design of both IM's & Forscan data logs of car at full hot idle w\ FRIM installed vs OEM IM w\ CMDP's...all else same)

I'll throw in this for other context:

O2 Sensor issues (found after IM changeout):
Pg 6 #112 (noting of NB O2 sensor swap out from NTK 22060, 22500's to Ford F85F-9G4444-BD's which are based off the BOSCH #51717 Ford direct fit O2 sensor design)
Pg 7 post #140 (tested the Ford's to be bad...poor response during warmup-slow response-O2 sensor volt output still at 0mV even though O2 sensor heaters & exhaust have temps high enough for PCM to switch from OL to CL causing PCM to command excessive fueling thru STFT's until they finally responded then PCM corrected erroneous STFT fueling....issue also perceived prevalent during any DFCO event during normal driving-engine pumping air thru exhaust cooling the O2 sensor elements-causing erratic PCM STFT\LTFT fueling control as well. Tested the same NTK 22060\22500 O2 sensors used prior after reinstallation & found these operating properly during warmup, mV output up from 0mV & switching well before PCM went into CL from OL so PCM command STFT fueling correctly from cold start fuel enrichment & perceived to be accurate during any DFCO event during normal driving so PCM commanding correct STFT\LTFT fueling adjustments from good O2 sensor feedback operation thruout entire operating range & conditions)

Spark Plugs (found after IM changeout & O2 Sensor changeout):
Pg 7 post #141 (includes Forscan Mode 6 data captures of car w\ FRIM, bad O2 sensors & bad plugs installed all else same vs OEM IM w\ CMDP's, good O2 sensors & good spark plugs installed all else same....focus on the B1 & B2 Catalyst readings & all Misfire Monitor cylinder last counts data between the 2 Mode 6 data captures).

All this done prior to 7-27-21 dyno\tuning session (IM changeout main reason for dyno\tune check)...

Hope this helps.

 

[GlassTop09]

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

Just checked OBDII Catalyst CE ratio on my car a couple days back & this is where they are now (used my Foxwell NT301 scan tool):
B1 Catalyst @ .109
B2 Catalyst @ .105

Showing an ongoing improvement in OBDII Cat CE ratio (lower ratio result means higher cat efficiency) in current state since last tune session (post #143) so I'm gonna see if my tuner (also shop manager) @ On3 Dyno & Performance can set me up to get these MagnaFlow #5461336 cats installed 1st so's I can then get the actual OBDII Cat CE ratio numbers on them ahead of having On3 install the 3.90 gears & other rear axle stuff to then see what effect a shorter gear ratio will have on net OBDII Cat CE ratio (yes, shorter gear ratio will tend to lower the PCM load% somewhat due to increased mechanical TQ ratio but they'll also increase running engine RPM's at same wheel speeds--same tire dia\revs per mile--vs a taller gear ratio thus somewhat affect engine VE% output thus air\fuel poundage thru cats).

Haven't found any info to date on this so I'm gonna see what I can find out thru a real world test process using my car & it's systems. Since the gear ratio difference between 3.73's (what's currently installed) & 3.90's is only .17 I don't expect to see much of a change in either direction...if at all (these #5461336 cats are fairly oversized to begin with so may cancel any effective VE change from the gearing anyway) but the info will be good to know\have from my perspective.

Will post the results as I get them.

 

[GlassTop09]

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

Just checked OBDII Catalyst CE ratio again today just to see where they are now as follows (used my Foxwell NT301 scan tool):
B1 Catalyst @ .089
B2 Catalyst @ .094

Again showing improvement in CE ratio thus again validating the negative aspects of the FRPP IM's EVAP CPV port routing design has on cat's ability to treat exhaust & OBDII Catalyst Efficiency monitoring vs the OEM IM's EVAP port routing w\ all 22 mi out of 27 mi of driving today being mostly stop & go driving between 30-45 MPH w\ the last 5 mi being mostly open road driving at 50-60 MPH (this is the speed ranges\driving conditions where the PCM carries out most O2 sensor testing & catalyst CE ratio testing for catalyst efficiency....also processes EVAP canister purging as well....the low speed, <2,500 RPM, higher PCM load% CL closed throttle engine operations in 4th & 5th gear which can\will put a load on the ignition system to fire the plugs as VCT will usually be at 0* or full advance so cyl pressure will be at it's highest...the leaner the mixture in this scenario the harder for the spark to jump the gap thus the hotter the tips get from coil dwell energy ramp up so can burn plugs over time.....). Gets worse if driving in areas where roads aren't flat (lot of incline in US 4 Corners area roads which will have PCM command more load% at slower RPM's......main curse of the Tremec 3650 5-speed manual trans ratio spread between 4th & 5th gear).

Both front\rear O2 sensor operational fidelity as well as ignition system condition\operation matters here as well but they'll only be as good as the IM's ability to evenly distribute the purged EVAP canister fumes\unmetered air entry into the IM plenum (as well as any unburnt CC blowby gasses entering IM thru PCV system) & into the individual cyl intake runners along w\ the metered air for good, clean OBDII Catalyst CE ratio testing.........notwithstanding any tuning performed or other non-OEM component installs (CAI, TB, cams, headers, FI, etc).....

So I have gotten w\ On3 & scheduled appointment for next week to bring car in to get the Kooks Hi Flow Race cats cut out & the MagnaFlow #5461336 CARB EO legal universal cats installed in the same place in the midpipe that the Kooks cats were at. This will revert the 2 rear O2 sensors back to the OEM mid bed location in the cat's 4" shell instead of in the 2 1\2" piping post cat which will most definately change the O2 sampling% entering the O2 sensor's element shielding (as the BDG CEL Eliminators are designed to do BTW) due to slowing of exhaust velocity thru cat's substrates & larger shell area from expansion along w\ the substrate treating of the exhaust (converting NMOG & CO into H2O & CO2 using up the free O2 sent into exhaust from front O2 sensor switching & the cerium to control O2 flow into\thru substrates to facilitate O2 oxidation by the substrates) so from what I'm seeing already thru these Kooks Hi Flow Race cats\BDG CEL Eliminators I'm predicting that the cat CE ratio results w\ these MagnaFlow cats will be in the low .2xx to low .1xx range which would be fantastic if found true but I can't see them getting any higher than high .2xx to low .3xx at the most which is still very, very good (B1 CE ratio threshold @ .656, B2 CE threshold @ .578 as set by my PCM's running algorithms from the MY EPA base CE of .750).

We'll find all this out soon............

Will be interesting to see if the PCM recalc's the running cat CE ratio thresholds to a higher level based on these new cat's performance since they're designed\tested\certified to be fully compatible w\ my PCM's OBDII cat CE testing strategy as opposed to the Kooks Hi Flow Race cats which aren't tested\certified to be.

 

[GlassTop09]

FYI.....

Since all that I have gone thru\done w\ my car surrounding these Lunati VooDoo #21270700 cams I'll post here a summary of all data learnings entailed in this thread:

1. These Lunati VooDoo #21270700 camshafts are a very good NSR\full VCT compatible (drop in) NA choice that can provide the necessary VE improvements to take advantage of what most FBO components can provide (CAI, TB, LTH's) concerning HP\TQ gains vs the OEM cams w\o giving up noticeable low end performance\drivability. Built from very high quality cam stock & have a high QA\QC grind process so are very robust. They provide a good rich\deep exhaust note but not a "lopey" cadence so if the lopey sound is a requirement these won't give that. These Lunati VooDoo #21270700 cams also show to be very Fed 49 State emissions friendly from my OBDII CE tracking\testing results but like all other non EPA\CARB-certified components, Lunati Power provides only the familiar "for off road use only" phrase to CYA Lunati when selling these to individuals either directly or thru 3rd party sellers.....but from my testing it appears that actual emissions output concerns from using these cams are nil....even after performance tuning has been applied. Lunati Power does state in their #21270700 product description that these cams are compatible w\ the stock tune, require no cam phaser mods or valve spring upgrades....so there's that.

Just as all other "off the shelf" camshaft products goes, tuning is necessary (along w\ CAI & LTH's installed at a minimum) to extract the most HP\TQ performance out of them.

2. Emissions output concerns w\ these modded 3V's show to stem from certain, specific aftermarket component design criteria\operation or OEM modifications than any performance tuning....as long as the OBDII emissions strategies in the tune are left alone & intact AND the VCT is left operational (for EGR application) AND the CL AFR target is left set at the OEM setting. There is a certain amount of VCT cam degree angle retard, based on the specific cam profile being used in these 3V's, that can be reduced to maintain higher overall cyl pressures & ignition timing thus TQ output during low speed drivability operations while also providing enough EGR flow to still achieve good enough NOx reduction to pass emissions at higher HP\TQ outputs if cooling system improvements are also installed\utilized to help remove any excess cyl head thus CC temps generated from engine operations due to performance tuning to keep them below the 2,500*F NOx creating temp threshold as much as possible.

The OBDII Mode 6 Catalyst CE ratio tracking\testing results I've shown\posted in this thread....once the FRPP IM EVAP CPV internal routing distribution issue (which set off no other DTC's thus MIL's but heavily influenced the P0420\P0430 CI DTC's since it's install), the bad FoMoCo F85F-9G444-BD O2 sensor operation issue (which again heavily influenced the P0420\P0430 CI DTC's & occasionally set P0139\P0159 B1 & B2 O2 Sensor Slow to Respond DTC's aggravated by the BDG CEL Eliminators being used), bad spark plugs (which were a symptom of the FRPP IM EVAP routing & bad FoMoCo O2 sensor issues....never had this issue while running the NTK O2 sensors, even w\ the FRPP IM installed) & all other small, hard to find vacuum leaks w\o using smoke leak detection (bad brake booster check valve, bad BBK 62mm TB outer BF shaft seals, bad EVAP canister connecting lines & leaking CPV\CVS....none of this set off any Lean\EVAP DTC's thus MIL's but heavily influenced the P0420\P0430 CI DTC's) were discovered & rectified over time....pretty much proves that the P0420\P0430 CI DTC's I was seeing all along definately wasn't related solely...if at all...to the Kooks Hi Flow Race Cats used, the NTK 22060, 22500 NB O2 sensors used, any of the performance tuning done before\since Lunati cam install by my tuner or any of the aftermarket non-OEM FBO engine components installed....outside of the FRPP IM (the MagnaFlow cats may have canceled out the EVAP port distribution issue w\ it but the last dyno results ran @ 7-27-21 w\ the OEM IM\CMDP's installed along w\ the follow up OBDII CE test results sealed it's fate as far as my car is concerned) thus the prospect of passing US Fed emissions legally (my car PCM's OBDII algorithms are programmed for MY Fed 49 State Emissions monitoring\certification, not CARB) w\ all the other aftermarket non-OEM engine components installed (CAI, TB, CMDP's, cams, LTH's w\ catted mid pipe) or performance tuning done (results show the same level of CE improvement across 2 different tuning file adjustments) at higher HP\TQ outputs over OEM is easily attainable now so once I get these MagnaFlow #5461336 CARB-certified cats installed to permanently remove the BDG CEL Eliminators from use this should become a legally dead issue w\ my car as equipped.....even w\ the OEM FoMoCo IM CMCV's removed & disabled in tune. The OBDII Catalyst CE ratio results bear this out.........

Note: The Kooks Hi Flow Race cats may very well be able to legally retain a passing Fed OBDII CE ratio now but the advent of the lack of legal certification on them from Kooks sets up too much of a potential future hassle for me to contend with so these MagnaFlow CARB-cert cats once installed should remove any future legal hassles but not affect engine HP\TQ performance output.

So in closing these Lunati VooDoo #21270700 cams are a legit product IMHO & perform exactly as Lunati says they'll do & be emissions friendly to boot while doing it.

PS--Replace all them damn cam followers up front when doing a cam swap w\ the new design & be mindful about the "dielectric grease" you use in the boots of these FoMoCo COP coils to keep from chasing "self-induced" misfires!

 

[GlassTop09]

Here is a video of my car on the dyno running these Lunati cams for anyone interested in the sound (has Pypes Super Bomb catback exhaust system along w\ Kooks 1 5\8" LTH's & Catted Midpipe):

On the Dyno at On3 Dyno & Performance - YouTube

 

[GlassTop09]

FYI (more numbers crunching & long post),

Some more numbers to give credence to what I've predicted concerning the new cats performance (also the Kooks Hi Flow Race cats if kept....all numbers came from PCM Mode 6 Catalyst CE ratio testing algorithms):

In post #141 I posted a 11-18-20 Mode 6 readout of my car w\ the FRPP IM, Ford F85F-9G444-BD O2 sensors, MC plugs & Kooks cats w\ BDG eliminators installed using the 4-2-20 tune showing B1 Cat CE @ .258, B2 Cat CE @ .293. This was at the worst end of the spectrum.
In post #154 I posted Mode 6 Cat CE results as read off my Foxwell NT301 scan tool w\ the OEM IM & Steeda CMDP's, NTK 22060, 22500 O2 sensors, Champion 9406 plugs & same Kooks cats w\ BDG eliminators installed using the 7-27-21 tune showing B1 Cat CE @ .089, B2 Cat CE @ .094. This is at the best end of same.
Note: The 6-9-21 Mode 6 readout Cat CE results w\ the 4-2-20 tune still used posted in post #141 backs up these results so no fluke & tuning didn't change anything concerning this.

Using a little math the B1 Cat CE improvement (.258-.089) is .169, B2 Cat CE improvement (.293-.094) is .199.

Now here are the actual Kooks cat CE test results from 5-20 that I ran w\ FRPP IM, NTK 22060, 22500 O2 sensors, brand new MC plugs, no BDG eliminators installed (rear O2 sensors installed in exhaust piping post cats), bad BB check valve, bad BBK TB shaft seals, bad EVAP CPV\CVS & lines (vacuum leaks) fixed & running on 4-2-20 tune:
(PCM Cat CE Threshold of B1 @ .656, B2 @ .578)
1st test:
After initial full IM Readiness monitor completion:
B1 Cat CE @ .336, B2 Cat CE @ .422
22 days & 333 mi later (mix of low speed stop & go w\ some freeway type driving) here are the failing results:
B1 Cat CE @ .648, B2 Cat CE @ .617 (P0430 DTC)

2nd test (after using MotorKote Catalyst Cleaner to remove perceived oil contamination from PCV):
After initial full IM Readiness monitor completion:
B1 Cat CE @ .320, B2 Cat CE @ .359
6 days & 69 mi later (all mostly low speed stop & go type driving) here are the failing results:
B1 Cat CE @ .551, B2 Cat CE @ .617 (P0430 DTC)

During both tests the CE ratio numbers never reversed....all subsequent test results slowly increased from the initial results to the failing results.

If these Kooks cats were actually bad the PCM Cat CE ratio test should have failed them outright on initial drive cycle (pending DTC) then set permanent DTC on 2nd drive cycle (PCM action after a KAM reset)....but that wasn't the case. All happened after a minimum of 7 drive cycles & max of 9 drive cycles so I knew something was off....but couldn't figure it out at the time. So I just kept working\thinking my way thru it all until the moment I actually paid attention to the EVAP port routing design of the OEM IM vs the FRPP IM along w\ a Forscan datalog showing the erratic STFT, LTFT & EVAP purge data then it became clear to me what was going on.........then made the changes & recorded the results to confirm.

Now using some math w\ these real results this is what I believe could happen now w\ the same Kooks Hi Flow Race cats:
Using the Cat CE improvement numbers above now w\ OEM IM & CMDP's, same NTK O2 sensors, used Champion 9406 plugs w\ Kooks cats but no BDG eliminators installed:
Kooks worst case.... B1 CE ratio (.648-.169 = .479), B2 CE ratio (.617-.199 = .418) result = Pass
Kooks best case.... B1 CE ratio (.320-.169 = .151), B2 CE ratio (.359-.199 = .160) result = Pass

Real actual CE ratio results should fall somewhere in between these 2 scenarios.....= Pass.

Since the MagnaFlow #5461336 cats substrates have almost 2x the surface area of the Kooks cats (6"L vs 3 1\2"L at 300 cell, 4" OD round shell for both brand cats), rear O2 sensors being mounted in the MF cat's 4" shell & not in the 2 1\2" piping post cat (will slow the exhaust flow velocity around the rear O2 sensor elements thus reduce the sample density collection inside the sensor shielding....much like the BDG Eliminators do) as the Kooks cats & these MF cat substrates are very heavily precious metal loaded AND are OBDII-compliant (meaning cerium is used to control the O2 flow release thru the substrates to facilitate max substrate oxidation rates--HC & CO into H2O & CO2 w\ free N2 but no free O2 in exhaust ahead of rear O2 sensors--then reduce NOx into more free N2 & free O2 after O2 sensors), I believe the MF cats CE ratio results should fall around the Kooks cats best case scenario CE ratio numbers or even lower......but definately get no higher than low .2xx to low .3xx at the most.....

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

Demonstrating that this prediction is supported by some actual calc'd PCM Mode 6 CE ratio numbers tracking results before\after IM, O2 sensors & plugs changeout......once again also isolates the FRPP IM's EVAP port routing during normal EVAP purging cycles causing excessive unmetered air\fumes entry & uneven distribution into IM runners thus cylinders throwing off the PCM Cat CE ratio results as the main non-OEM engine component contributor of the Kooks Cat CE ratio failures, not necessarily the Kooks Hi Flow Race cats themselves or any performance tuning applied or any of the other non-OEM engine components installed (CAI, TB, CMDP's, cams, LTH's) that can affect engine VE% output thus exhaust poundage into cats.

The PCM itself is 1 of the best diagnostic tools we have at our disposal......if we take full advantage of the data contained within it using a decent general OBDII scan tool that can display Mode 6 Self Check data as well as live data w\ some graphing ability of the live data.....

Ok going to bed now.

 

[GlassTop09]

FYI,

Took ole girl in to On3 Dyno & Performance yesterday morning to get the Kooks Hi Flow Race cats cut out & MagnaFlow #5461336 CARB-cert cats installed. Got text today that she's all done so picked her up this evening. This is how they look mounted in the Kooks X-pipe under the car:

Look like they were made to fit there!

Took my Foxwell NT301 scan tool & reset the KAM before start up of car to perform a drive cycle on the cats to see how they'll perform on a maiden run (MagnaFlow states they require no special break-in procedures so should work right off the bat but will need at least 300-500 mi on them to fully settle the catalysts so now I got another real good reason for a road trip).

Drove mostly stop & go driving between 0-45 MPH w\ some hiway type driving between 55-65 MPH for a total of 37.2 mi. Parked car & hooked up scan tool to check IM Readiness & Mode 6 Self Check data:

IM Readiness.......all monitors passed w\ 1 incomplete (EVAP as usual). All Mode 6 Self Check O2 sensor test data was good & pretty much mirrored the O2 sensor test data w\ the Kooks Hi Flow Race cats & BDG CEL Eliminators so this was very encouraging to see.

Mode 6 Self Check B1 Catalyst CE ratio @ .055, B2 Catalyst CE ratio @ .055 w\ CMBT's (real temp data between the 2 catalyst substrates within the cat shell....not post cat) @ 1011*F avg for both cats.....these are damn fantastic results for the 1st drive cycle!
If further CE ratio results improve over these (I can't see how that will happen but these cats are 39% oversized based on my VE calc's so they might) I'll be beside myself but we'll see after I get several drive cycles more on them & some freeway time at 70-80 MPH to get em good & hot.

Car ran excellent w\ no loss of throttle response or acceleration that I could detect so all is good at this time.

Next stop.....Richmond Elite 3.90 gears, Eaton Tru-Trac diff w\ Moser carrier cap stud kit & JEGS pinion solid spacer kit in about 2 months or earlier.......

Looks like good times a coming!





This is straight from the Ford Workshop Manual on how the OBDII Catalyst Monitor works in the 05-10 S197 Spanish Oaks PCM....so according to this these MagnaFlow #5461336 cats are about as high in efficiency as you can get at .055 (0.0 is 100%). To show this in switch count ratio using a 50 count for front O2 sensor switches, at a CE ratio of .055 the rear O2 sensor switched from rich to lean then back to rich a total of 2.75 switches (50 x .055), at 70 front switch counts the rear switch counts at same CE ratio is 3.85 switches (70 x .055) & at 30 front switch counts the rear switch counts at same CE ratio is 1.65 switches (30 x .055)......
This is how little free O2 is making it's way thru the catalyst substrates ahead of the rear O2 sensors (most likely due to the PCM forcing it thru to test the rear O2 sensor's rich to lean V\ms transition response then lean to rich V\ms transition response to validate the sensor operation).

The 50-70-30 front O2 sensor switch count numbers are actual numbers the PCM uses in 3 different cells which represent varying load%, MPH & catalyst operating temp ranges to calc the CE ratio results so my rear O2 sensor switch count numbers are very relative (PCM avgs all 3 results to come up w\ the final CE ratio result).

Added for informational purposes.........

 

[GlassTop09]

Last word of advice I'll put here for those who are running cats on these 4.6L V8's for vehicle emissions purposes:

1.) You're better off to stay w\ the OEM IM intact or w\ CMDP's to ensure that any EVAP purging is evenly mixed & distributed across all cylinders to prevent excessive EVAP purging issues\interference w\ cats operation & OBDII monitoring of the cats....even when considering going to turbo or centri FI (PCM uses STFT's rise--thus the amount of unmetered air entry--above the normal established STFT operational pattern to determine when the EVAP canister is empty so anything that upsets the STFT pattern enough that the PCM can't tell when the canister is empty will cause the PCM to continue EVAP purging opening the CPV further making the issue worse until it can "figure out" the canister is empty then close the CPV) as this is going on after the air is compressed & passed thru MAF thus can create the same potential at low speeds. Also know that the PCM also uses the STFT's to determine the amount of free O2 that is present in the exhaust to use in OBDII Cat CE monitoring as well as engine fuel control....PCM STFT accuracy is dependent on the accuracy of the O2 sensor's voltage output fidelity in reaction to amount of free O2 present so all this is interrelated to each other.....garbage in, garbage out. The FRPP IM is a nice looking piece to use.....in a pure racing environment where racing is the predominate use of the car & vehicle emissions isn't a concern (PCM disables EVAP when running at high speeds). This OEM IM w\ CMDP's can flow fairly competitive numbers vs the FRPP IM so unless you plan to be running into very high RPM's where max airflow is a premium, save yourself the money....unless the looks of the FRPP IM is what you really want.
Just be aware of what potential you'll be setting yourself up for if using this FRPP IM in a mostly normal daily driver usage scenario & using cats to pass vehicle emissions......

I found this out thru testing & applying my knowledge of these systems & their design properties & critical thinking......there's absolutely NO info out anywhere about this issue w\ this FRPP IM, mostly cause most that use this part ain't caring bout emissions so aren't aware\looking for it (including myself at 1st as I live in a safe haven county of NM that doesn't require emissions certification....yet. 1 of the reasons why I initially bought it) & Ford didn't bother to inform us of this issue....they had to have known this, they also designed the OEM IM for emissions purposes so IMHO was not done in a vacuum.
There are other, more serious issues that we should be more concerned about that can arise from this design "flaw" in this product.........so be warned.

Maybe why they didn't bother to have it go thru EPA certification.....like they've done w\ other "performance parts" so they could keep the price down to sell it using the same old CYA "for off road use only"....

2.) O2 sensor operational integrity is another item to make sure is good....I wouldn't wait on a MIL to do this either as they can cause other issues to occur that are more serious w\o throwing a MIL so be warned....

3.) Make damn sure that all the EVAP system is in good operating condition (if you're using it), especially that the CPV is fully sealing off when it closes to prevent excessive purging (CVS is only closed by PCM to run EVAP integrity tests & is open most of the time so check this part's operation when any EVAP DTC's are thrown to ensure the PCM run tests results thus DTC's are legit). System should pull no more than -1.5" H20 to effectively purge the canister (CPV should not be commanded more than 60%-65% max open to achieve this). If system is being pulled more than -2.0" H2O for any reason during purge (outside of actual PCM EVAP system leak test running) then you might want to start checking as to why, or if system has any -" H2O pressure on it & CPV is commanded shut this is indication of either CPV is bad or EVAP tank pressure sensor is faulty or system is plugged somewhere....which can affect the cats operation & OBDII cat monitoring. All this can occur w\o the PCM setting off EVAP DTC's.....all the vacuum leaks & EVAP failures I found never threw a DTC (the Mode 6 Self Check EVAP .040" Leak Test results was getting very close to doing it...was within .018" of the threshold when I ran the smoke leak detection testing on my car's EVAP system), some were present when I bought the car but ALL of this had an effect on the cats\OBDII monitoring operations.

So if you're getting the P0420\P0430 DTC's you need to check some stuff to ensure that something else isn't the cause of your cats not passing emissions (can cost a pretty penny for good quality cats so make sure that the issue IS the cats before going further).

My 2 cents.................

 

[MrBhp]

Now that I live in another nanny state, I'll need to somehow pass a sniff test. I wonder how I do this with a single turbo???