metroplex

The inside of my exhaust pipes are totally clean because I use 87 octane. If you use 93 octane, the inside turns black very quickly because a lot of fuel isn't being burned. It's a minor issue but an observance. My 07 GT is still totally stock, and I don't feel motivated to flash the PCM with a new tune.

Five Oh Brian

If you use 93 octane and a tune to take advantage of the longer burn from the extra octane, you would not have unburned fuel leaving black on your tailpipes.

metroplex

Are the insides of your tailpipes black? The reason I ask is that every production car that I've seen that requires 93 octane will get a pitch black exhaust within a day or so. Audi, BMW, etc... all of them were the same way. My 09 Cobalt SS Turbocharged uses 93 octane from the factory, and the exhaust is covered in a THICK layer of soot within a day of use - heck, if I clean and polish the tip and fire up the car, carbon will shoot out. This is normal even for a turbocharged high compression direct injected engine that is designed to use 93 octane. As for the 93 octane tunes, they're simply modified ignition timing tables where they bump up timing at higher loads and RPMs. When I ran a 93 octane tune for my 4.6 2V, the exhaust turned black very quickly. I eventually reverted to a 87 octane tune with a modified timing table.

theedge67

Who cares if the inside of your pipes have some black in them? I certainly don't, and the benefits dramatically outweigh whatever inconvenience of dirty inner exhaust pipes may be.

06GT

When stock, the car "wakes up" at 3400 RPM because that is when the IMRC butterflies open.


Are people seriously arguing about the cleanliness of the INSIDE of the exhaust pipes?

theedge67

That sure changes with a good tune!

You obviously don't know Metroplex very well.

2k7gtcs

Kevindust

I owned a stock '94 5.0 with a 2.73, it was OK for it's day and could smoke Civic's, trucks and most '94 cars, etc.
I owned a supercharged '95 5.0 with a 3.73, it was sick quick but died at 4200rpm (like the '94)
The '05 4.6 blows the blown 5.0 out of the water. (period) and from 4-6300rpm it will rock you.

RedCandy5.0

Run a 93 Brenspeed tune. My tail pipes are as clean as the day i bought them.

mcate

My 1st mod V8 was in a '95 T-Bird LX. Only 215 hp, & it flat-out died above 4000 rpm. I couldn't understand why they did away with pushrods on such a low rpm engine. Then I had an '04 Mustang GT with the PI heads/cams/intake that made 265 hp, & revved to 6000 rpm. Much nicer. Then my 1st '03 Mach 1 5-spd with the 32V DOHC setup & 10.1:1 compression. Redline was 6800 rpm & it pulled all the way to redline. I have another '03 Mach now, but it's an automatic & redline is only 5800. And my '09 GT 5-spd with the Ford Racing tune & 4.10 gears. The throttle response improved dramatically with the tune. And, as others have said, the tune really seems to even out the torque curve.

topbliss

my GT's pipes were perfectly clean before the tune and 89 octane. Now with a Tillmans 93 tune they are still perfectly clean. Our other two everyday drivers are like this.l New Rav4 s pipe are black as the night and my 7 year old Suzuki XL7 has PERFECTLY clean pipe since new. Its amazing actually..

NJ3

Mine too, clean tailpipe innards FTW.

fdjizm

hmm in one word my 4.6 is "revvy"

smitty

I have to agree with earlier posts that the most powerful pull from the stock tunes on these cars comes on around 4000 rpm. This is true even with my frpp tuned twin screw supercharger, a supposed boon to low end torque. While the car is much faster than without the supercharger, it still exhibits the same driving character with the frpp tune, pulling the hardest from 4-6k rpm. By the way, this is not a complaint if it's sounding like one. I've owned 9 mustangs, including this one, and the 5.0 engines torque peak was about 1000 rpm lower in a lighter car, so of course it would feel more responsive off the line. But it would flatten out too soon without a head and cam swap. I did that with my '89 notchback and the car became scary because the brakes and suspension were no longer up to the task. Both the old and new cars have more than ample power to overwhelm the tires and screw up your launch, but I like how the new car pulls almost all the way to redline. I bump the rev limiter with the supercharger frequently as the car is so smooth and relatively quiet. I'm not a power monger or 1/4 miler, so I like the daily driveability of this package. While I look forward to the new 5.0 engine, I really feel that the mustang would benefit much more by focussing on greatly improving the brakes and suspension to give the new car the balanced driving experience we all deserve. For me, the overall driving experience is more gratifying than a whole bunch of power, regardless of how it's delivered.

By the way, my pipes are pretty clean inside

Coupe Guy

Made Wards top ten engine list for 2005-2008.

06GT

Agreed on that, have mine set to open at 2900 now

TheReaper

Was there performance before the tune? NO!!!!!!!!!!!!

Get the new JLT for your 2010 and a good 93 Race tune.

cdynaco

That reminds me of S197_guy posting about the engineers designing the Bullitt's exhaust to match the movie soundtrack... said it was like trying to make a clarinet sound like a tuba! LOL

As for the dirty tailpipes, seems obvious those engines are running rich - either from safety margin from factory on some cars, or the aftermarket tunes not matching local fuel well enough.

I can't get 93 here, and the 91 only recently shows 92 (due to 10% ethanol). But I've run both 87 tankfuls and 91/92 tankfuls and my pipes are clean... but that may be due to Bullitt's Adaptive Spark system.

Paris MkVI

I think when the 5.0 shows up, we may find some behavior that will remind us of the 4.6 (initial lag, etc.) And it too will be resolved by tunes.

I think there's a combination of federal regulations, driveability and marketing going on here that Ford has to deal with. They need to push the fuel mileage numbers as high as possible, make the engine run bulletproof, and give marketing a number to play with (300hp, 400hp, or whatever). The factory tune is designed to balance all those things.
So we see lag when the engine revs down between shifts and other behaviors that help the engine scavenge everything it can to make the feds happy, etc.

Ford will still be forced to play that game, so don't poopoo them if you see similar behaviors in the next gen engines. A tune will fix them, of course. But those tunes probably would not help Ford out from the factory when they had to generate numbers for the feds.

So we'll tune 'em, saying to heck with gas mileage, etc.

Someone once said we buy horsepower, but we drive torque. When I get a tune, I will likely get an 87 torque tune. I will probably never have the girl at top speed. But I am getting her out of the hole multiple times every day. The more below 3500rpm she wakes up, the better!

houtex

Re: the original question, my answer, after much consideration, is:

It's a FUN personality!

---

Re: the black inside pipes on 93 octane... Interesting. I use 93 because she gets a little better gas mileage, and also doesn't ping on acceleration. Anything less it pings, but I don't wanna clean black stuff, and I'm just not a tune person (I'm not a non-stock powertrain guy... yeah, I'm paranoid about it...)

So I'm really screwed up about what to do now. Thanks a lot.