5.0L GT Modifications Placeholder for future motor based GT's modifications.
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

The #8, and why it failed. An inside look.

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Apr 26, 2014 | 06:09 PM
  #61  
dmhines's Avatar
Shelby GT350 Member
 
Joined: September 11, 2006
Posts: 2,349
Likes: 5
From: Cumming, GA
Originally Posted by thegame
The reason for the #8 failure on stock cars was due to a weird problem in the stock tune. In certain cases, the tune will command an afr of 13.5-14.7 during WOT. Sean from AED has documented the issue and has seem it numerous time on cars running the stock tune. The problem only occurs on MT cars. For whatever reason, the failures don't seem to be as frequent with the newer cars.
Was that only with the ZFK0 calibration ?
Reply
Old Apr 26, 2014 | 06:42 PM
  #62  
5.M0NSTER's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: August 2, 2013
Posts: 3,090
Likes: 254
From: Little north of Stuttgart, Germany
Originally Posted by Thamac15
I say the #8 failures are obamas fault,...the end.
I'm going the other way and I'd like to introduce a theory blaming the Tea Party. Patriotism means sacrifice, and a few #8 failures have to happen if we want lover taxes
Reply
Old Apr 26, 2014 | 07:08 PM
  #63  
Thamac15's Avatar
Mach 1 Member
 
Joined: April 1, 2012
Posts: 595
Likes: 3
From: Waddell, AZ
Originally Posted by 5.M0NSTER
I'm going the other way and I'd like to introduce a theory blaming the Tea Party. Patriotism means sacrifice, and a few #8 failures have to happen if we want lover taxes
The reason your wrong is because Obama appointed Katherine Sebelius to oversee the PCM calibrations at the factory,...need I say more? Hahahahaha I'm just messin
Reply
Old Apr 27, 2014 | 11:02 AM
  #64  
thegame's Avatar
V6 Member
 
Joined: February 3, 2013
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
From: Pittsburgh, PA
Originally Posted by dmhines
Was that only with the ZFK0 calibration ?
It could be, I'm really not sure.
Reply
Old Apr 27, 2014 | 02:11 PM
  #65  
Thomas S's Avatar
Shelby GT350 Member
 
Joined: April 29, 2005
Posts: 2,133
Likes: 5
Originally Posted by cdynaco


To me it just seems that removing the squirters was such an about face to how they touted them initially when rolling out the 5.0. All the mag rags had write ups about it. It was pretty innovative for a street car. Ford has always been good at getting power out of smaller displacement engines and this seemed a sound method for allowing higher compression in the 5.0, adding to higher HP.

The removal for 13 forward was much too coincidental with the #8 failures the 11/12's had, to be just an improvement vs solving a very real failure rate. The combination of squirter deletion, revised oil rings, piston coatings, hood vents - all at the same time - points to a (heat related/upper cylinder oiling) engineering change to resolve the piston failures that were triggered by unsafe tune parameters.

Also, if the failure was only related to the tune allowing knock/detonation to stress pistons beyond their capability, why only #8 failures? (I think I only read of one #4). Why weren't other pistons failing? Detonation does not happen only in #8 cylinder and not others.

But I am just observing with some old school common sense and reasonable mechanical aptitude point of view. I don't have the technical/engineering expertise some of you have. So I am hoping for something concrete to resolve my restless mind.

Granted Ford has been very tight lipped for obvious reasons, and what info we have collected has only come by tidbits here and there by some that either work at Ford or have technical involvement with Ford products.

Everything you say makes perfect sense. If it is a heat issue, I wonder if us 11-12 owners should be doing something to better cool our engines?
Reply
Old Apr 27, 2014 | 02:33 PM
  #66  
Thamac15's Avatar
Mach 1 Member
 
Joined: April 1, 2012
Posts: 595
Likes: 3
From: Waddell, AZ
What was up with bama warranting #8 cylinder if it was a design flaw/overheating issue?
Reply
Old Apr 27, 2014 | 02:40 PM
  #67  
GrabberBlue5.0's Avatar
Mach 1 Member
 
Joined: August 3, 2011
Posts: 700
Likes: 4
From: East Haven, Connecticut
Originally Posted by Thamac15
What was up with bama warranting #8 cylinder if it was a design flaw/overheating issue?
Probably because in the beginning they were the biggest culprits in causing the failures so they had to come up with a gimmick to save face. Pretty good marketing ploy as many fall for it.
Reply
Old Apr 27, 2014 | 02:45 PM
  #68  
Thamac15's Avatar
Mach 1 Member
 
Joined: April 1, 2012
Posts: 595
Likes: 3
From: Waddell, AZ
How many #8 failures are we talking about? Hundreds? Thousands? Or 50?
Reply
Old Apr 27, 2014 | 02:52 PM
  #69  
cdynaco's Avatar
Post *****
 
Joined: December 14, 2007
Posts: 19,953
Likes: 4
From: State of Jefferson Mountains USA
Originally Posted by Thamac15
What was up with bama warranting #8 cylinder if it was a design flaw/overheating issue?
Like Matt said in the OP, when tuners restored the safety parameters of the factory tune, that allowed the ECU to pull back when knock was detected.

However, that doesn't explain why Ford stopped the original 11/12 design and made engineering changes for 13 forward.

Originally Posted by GrabberBlue5.0
Probably because in the beginning they were the biggest culprits in causing the failures so they had to come up with a gimmick to save face. Pretty good marketing ploy as many fall for it.
Bama adjusted their tune and stood behind it so buyers would have confidence.
That's more than Brenspeed did - and they had reported failures too but stiffed customers.
Reply
Old Apr 27, 2014 | 04:03 PM
  #70  
GrabberBlue5.0's Avatar
Mach 1 Member
 
Joined: August 3, 2011
Posts: 700
Likes: 4
From: East Haven, Connecticut
Originally Posted by cdynaco
[COLOR=darkgreen]
Bama adjusted their tune and stood behind it so buyers would have confidence.
That's more than Brenspeed did - and they had reported failures too but stiffed customers.
And yet Bama is still having issues with their tunes. They need more adjustments.
Reply
Old Apr 27, 2014 | 04:25 PM
  #71  
Thomas S's Avatar
Shelby GT350 Member
 
Joined: April 29, 2005
Posts: 2,133
Likes: 5
Originally Posted by GrabberBlue5.0
And yet Bama is still having issues with their tunes. They need more adjustments.
Care to elaborate?
Reply
Old Apr 27, 2014 | 04:41 PM
  #72  
cdynaco's Avatar
Post *****
 
Joined: December 14, 2007
Posts: 19,953
Likes: 4
From: State of Jefferson Mountains USA
Originally Posted by GrabberBlue5.0
And yet Bama is still having issues with their tunes. They need more adjustments.
Originally Posted by Thomas S
Care to elaborate?
That (alleged) complaint is a separate issue for a different thread. Unless you are referring to #8 failures caused by their tune recently how about we keep this thread on topic.
Reply
Old Apr 28, 2014 | 04:35 PM
  #73  
GrabberBlue5.0's Avatar
Mach 1 Member
 
Joined: August 3, 2011
Posts: 700
Likes: 4
From: East Haven, Connecticut
Originally Posted by Thomas S
Care to elaborate?
Sure. Here's one example. Want more?

http://www.svtperformance.com/forums...66-Bama-Tuning
Reply
Old Apr 28, 2014 | 06:34 PM
  #74  
Thomas S's Avatar
Shelby GT350 Member
 
Joined: April 29, 2005
Posts: 2,133
Likes: 5
Originally Posted by GrabberBlue5.0
Sure. Here's one example. Want more?

http://www.svtperformance.com/forums...66-Bama-Tuning
Funny that this was just posted a couple hours before you linked it.

Last edited by Thomas S; Apr 28, 2014 at 06:41 PM.
Reply
Old Apr 29, 2014 | 12:54 AM
  #75  
GrabberBlue5.0's Avatar
Mach 1 Member
 
Joined: August 3, 2011
Posts: 700
Likes: 4
From: East Haven, Connecticut
Originally Posted by Thomas S
Funny that this was just posted a couple hours before you linked it.
What does that have to do with anything?
Reply
Old Apr 29, 2014 | 02:28 AM
  #76  
cdynaco's Avatar
Post *****
 
Joined: December 14, 2007
Posts: 19,953
Likes: 4
From: State of Jefferson Mountains USA
Originally Posted by GrabberBlue5.0
What does that have to do with anything?
Because you obviously have a burr up your asz dip s*** and refuse to quit your *****in about YOUR bias. There are numerous tuners that screwed up - save a few.
Feel free to search this forum about Brenspeed's screwing of a member of TMS before you continue your rant across numerous threads about bama or others.
But do YOU mention that?
Nope.
So take your ***** private or elsewhere because YOU are only tellin one side of the story.

Last edited by cdynaco; Apr 29, 2014 at 02:32 AM.
Reply
Old Apr 29, 2014 | 03:47 AM
  #77  
GrabberBlue5.0's Avatar
Mach 1 Member
 
Joined: August 3, 2011
Posts: 700
Likes: 4
From: East Haven, Connecticut
Well I would agree I would never use a tune from Brenspeed. And don't get mad at me for just posting the facts. It is what it is.
Reply
Old Apr 29, 2014 | 06:47 AM
  #78  
zeroaviation's Avatar
Thread Starter
Mach 1 Member
 
Joined: March 1, 2007
Posts: 669
Likes: 5
From: Kansas City
I asked in that thread to see the datalog. Need to get specifics before anyone can blame anyone.

(I also agree about Brenspeed... I would never recommend their tunes)

-Matt
Reply
Old Apr 29, 2014 | 07:54 AM
  #79  
GrabberBlue5.0's Avatar
Mach 1 Member
 
Joined: August 3, 2011
Posts: 700
Likes: 4
From: East Haven, Connecticut
Matt, if you search on SVT for some Bama datalogs in other threads you'll find them. I also have some saved that I have done for some guys. Trust me they're not pretty.
Reply
Old Apr 29, 2014 | 09:09 AM
  #80  
zeroaviation's Avatar
Thread Starter
Mach 1 Member
 
Joined: March 1, 2007
Posts: 669
Likes: 5
From: Kansas City
Originally Posted by GrabberBlue5.0
Matt, if you search on SVT for some Bama datalogs in other threads you'll find them. I also have some saved that I have done for some guys. Trust me they're not pretty.
I've diagnosed/seen several Before anyone starts blaming Bama, I would prefer to see a datalog to look at all conditions.

Its different when you know the functions to achieve commands.

-Matt
Reply



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:42 PM.