Shifterboy45

Last week I had the Ford Racing Power Pak; mufflers, K&N Filter and the Procal II calibration installed... it thought i would drive for a little while and report back. My car is a 2012 Brembo GT with a 6MT.

First -- If you are looking for a "monster tune" type of performance -- this is not the tune for you.

If you're looking for increased drivability with better throttle response, a linear ramp up of power from idle to redline -- keep reading.

First thing i noticed was the engine seems awake now, instead of pushing the car into the power band, it is "there" for you when requested. I have tuned (before on board computer took over) cars and test driven them and you can tell when the engine is "in" or "out" of its powerband just by listening carefully.

From the factory this engine seem to have a significant amount of valve timing overlap at lower rpms which can help with emissions, and fuel economy -

this tune seems to dial in some of that cam timing that is lost in the factory calibration. along with this, spark timing is also advanced; giving a better throttle response off the line.

the throttle requested and throttle commanded percentage is closer than before, and the decel throttle closure is retarded a bit, so the engine doesn't tip in when you take your foot off the gas, this allows for smooth mellow decel which with GT500 mufflers sounds beautiful. this "tip in" in my case use to cause a driveline clunk that was irritating.

low end power is significantly better and the midrange pull will make the back end of the car squat down. highway passing is effortless, in an open stretch traffic is vaporized much quicker than before.

Is this a tune that provides no power -- NO! If you wanna fanboy another tune its OK.. but this does add horsepower.

Is this a tune i would recommend if you're thinking of competing with other tuned Mustangs? -- NO!

if you're looking to improve your daily driver, have a little more fun -- and most of feel like you are driving a real muscle car... this is the tune for you.

either that or go back to FRPP and order up a supercharger or better yet -- get a Cobra Jet

when i get a chance i'll go to do some datalogging and i can post the results -- but don't hold your breath i have full plate right now, sorry === oh yeah there is NO PING on WOT (Calfornia Summer Blend 91 - yuk!)

u00mem9

Good review. All your comments make this sound like just what I'd like. Heal toe shifts in the car are a bit clunky due to the unpredictable throttle response.

One question, what are you using to log throttle request and tb command? I tried logging with torque pro and I couldn't get decent data.

Thamac15

I concur

Shifterboy45

you will definitely notice the ability to heel-toe with ease.. i just came back from a drive this morning. Its as easy now as with my previous BMW... I really hated the off throttle transitions

I use an old ELM5 scanner with OBDWIZ software... its decent, but not state of the art. scantool.net carries some good packages but you'll probably want run them on a laptop..

I sanitized my baseline report, and will attach it here... there are non tuned numbers, and no running data trace.

Number i will watch are highlighted...

Cheers!

cdynaco

I disagree. Valve overlap at lower rpm's not only doesn't help power, but increases dirty exhaust because of a higher amount of unburned fuel and would fail emissions.
Remember how back in the day the big loper's exhaust smelled so rich at idle? It's because fixed cams can't decrease the overlap at idle like TiVCT can.
Valve overlap is dialed in (increased) at higher rpm's for better breathing. During overlap, (the still slightly open) exhaust valve allows scavenging which 'pulls' air/fuel through through the (opening) intake valves. Hence "valve overlap".

Increasing ignition timing at lower rpm's increases the chance for detonation. Timing is increased for higher rpm's.
Remember how you had to plug the vacuum line to the distributor (that retarded spark at idle) so as to get an accurate measure of ignition timing spark advance (usually 10-12* BTDC)?

The ProCal has been noted for improving throttle response. I believe that's just an ECU change for the fly by wire throttle.

Shifterboy45

OK ... let's talk cams and how they affect engine performance and we are both headed in the same direction.

A cam is usually designed to work at specific rpm by virtue of degree of duration opened. cams engineered with a short duration moderately high lift would be considered a "torque application" -- one with longer duration and high lift would be considered a "top end" application. right? These would be static numbers and useful in limited use ranges ... correct? And to add to the equation this would be normally a single cammed engine.

TORQUE = .446 -.484in lift / 250-272 degrees of duration
HORSEPWR = .515-.610in lift /290-302 degrees of duration

if you wanted to advance or retard your valve timing in these circumstance you could "degree" your cam forward or backwards to suit your needs, i.e. tailor your power band to "come on" sooner or later. this required you pull the front cover and make all these adjustments. -- kinda of a pain, huh?

So was the advent of the adjustable cam sprocket -- this was used extensively on import cars like my VW -- now you could (if you had the proper clearance in the engine) advance or retard cam timing, making the power band more flexible with bigger lift and duration cams -- but obviously the car would not pass a smog inspection.

then came VANOS from BMW... this automatically advanced or retarded the cam timing on their twin cam engine, giving the best performance on the low end, and healthy power on the top end, overall cam design (lift/duration) could remain the same, just the "timing and overlap" changed to suit the need, plus meet emission specs.

now meet the four cam motors we have today -- if these things were running static valve timing and reaching a useable and strong 7000rpm, by convention they would be lopping like crazy to sustain the lift and duration required to feed this engine on the top end. Evidence of this is the current "lope idle" tune that have come out for this Coyote engine.


Since these engines are V-8's i'm (almost) sure they are reducing the initial lift on the intake side and modulating the timing on the exhaust for improved cylinder scavenging at low rpms, thus reducing the low rpm emission profile.

as for ignition timing -- i think you read into my statement something that was not there - or unclear. Raising the base timing like 10degrees BTDC to 15degree BTDC would be unwise -- causing detonation out of the hole, but a ramp up of timing in conjunction with cam timing modulation is consistent with good tuning ethics.

As i think about this-- when i'm referring to overlap, i use the term to describe how the electronic valve timing is controlling each of cams -- when the engine reaches it optimal RPM and the both intake and exhaust cams are at "full lift and duration" and no other compensation is being made by the electronics then and only then is the cam profile "in time"...

JAJ

I'm reading this thread with interest. I've had an aftermarket tune and I had the FRPP tune on my naturally aspirated engine, and now with the blower I'm coming to appreciate more of the subtleties of the valve train, the spark timing and the ECU strategies.

The ECU can change the valve timing, both intake and exhaust, through a wide range. They can make it do "dumb valve timing tricks" like putting the exhaust opening and closing really late to maximize the amount of exhaust gas left in the cylinder. This held-over exhaust dilutes the incoming fuel-air mixture (essentially the same as EGR) and reduces the temperature of the burn. That's why 87 octane runs fine in an 11:1 compression ratio engine. It helps emissions too.

As far as I can tell, the FRPP tune is the tune that Ford would have used if the engine didn't have to run on 87 octane. It's more "awake" and easier to drive, and it does produce more oomph down low, probably from changes to the valve timing as well as spark advance.

As for valve timing changes, they vary all over the map depending on load and RPM, as does the spark timing. For spark timing, the ECU has a "learning" function that never sleeps: it constantly creeps the spark timing up to the beginning of knock and backs it off a little bit. As far as I can tell, the tuners can't turn this off, so if the octane's there, the spark advances to use all of the benefits it offers. That's why even a stock Coyote will make more power on 91 than on 87.

Shifterboy45

Its amazing what can be done with the right electronics

the adaptation (learning feature) assures that the no static numbers are stored too long based on existing driving conditions -- this keep the engine happy at low/high altitude and hot/cold weather.

It used to be a tuning nightmare if you raced at sea level vs. some track in high desert. from what i understand there are a myriad of maps embedded in the system all interpolated (swapped out) based on the current knock profile.

thanks for the input

cdynaco

Yes I understand. I cut my DOHC 4V teeth on the '74 Lotus 907. My hotter cam mod came with adjustable cam sprockets to enable more valve overlap of the intake and exhaust cams (functional at higher rpm exhaust flows) to create the "5th cycle".

Valve overlap refers to the period when the closing of the exhaust valve overlaps the opening of the intake valves - so at the higher rpm's - esp WOT - the hot expanding exhaust gases race out the manifold/header and create a scavenging/suction effect. With the intake valves opening prematurely, that scavenging increases the flow of intake air/fuel mix into the combustion chamber - but only at higher rpm's. Consequently, overlap makes for the lopey idle and bucking at low rpm's - and fail on emissions test as you said.

Overlap does not refer to lift and duration.

With the SOHC 3V, VCT was used but with limited abilities due to one cam per bank. Any adjustment applied to intake valve timing also affected exhaust valve timing. Probably had 'smoother' cam profiles to deal with this limitation. Regardless, VCT added HP to the 4.6L
With the change to a DOHC on the 5.0, TiVCT now had the ability to adjust the intake cam seperately from exhaust cam - graduating throughout the power band for better mid-range torque and peak rpm HP. I believe that is its main function because lift and duration are a function of how the cam profiles are ground.

To facilitate a smooth idle and low rpm driving, plus to beat ever tightening emissions, requires zero valve overlap.

Shifterboy45

I think you have made your point... but if you could read what i wrote with some clarity it would help both of us come to agreement of sorts
here's what i said:

From the factory this engine seem to have a significant amount of valve timing overlap at lower rpms which can help with emissions, and fuel economy -

actual valve overlap is a value normally determined by the lobe center which in certain cases be 106/108/112 degrees --

"This is the angle between the intake and exhaust camshaft lobe peaks described in camshaft degrees."

now this is very consistent with modern racing technology, but what if you were able to change the actual timing of the intake/exhaust valve opening and closure -- altering the "effective lift/duration" and changing overall "valve timing"

Cams are not easy to explain and how they work is still quite mysterious to some. I know from your comments you are well versed in engine technology -- so i need some help...

how does this engine pull to 7000rpm with a mediocre lift cam? -- the cam can be advanced only to its most effective lift/duration. if this engine doesnt have a big cam profile how do they do it?

btw: internal combustion engine will always have have some type of overlap - an engine with zero overlap would have trouble charging the cylinder and discharging the exhaust- either that or use some sweet F/I setup with over 94% vE

Shifterboy45

here is a piece from the Comp Cams site....

"we will discuss is the difference between intake centerline and lobe separation angle. These two terms are often confused. Even though they have very similar names, they are very different and control different events in the engine. Lobe separation angle is simply what it says. It is the number of degrees separating the peak lift point of the exhaust lobe and the peak point of the intake lobe. This is sometimes referred to as the "lobe center" of the cam, but we prefer to call it the lobe separation angle. This can only be changed when the cam is ground. It makes no difference how you degree the cam in the engine, the lobe separation angle is ground into the cam. The intake centerline, on the other hand, is the position of the centerline, or peak lift point, of the intake lobe in relation to top dead center of the piston.

This can be changed by "degreeing" the cam into the engine. Figure 1 shows a normal 270 degree cam. It has a lobe separation of 110°. We show it installed in the engine 4° advanced, or at 106° intake centerline. The light grey curves show the same camshaft installed an additional four degrees advanced, or at 102 degrees intake centerline. You can see how much earlier overlap is taking place and how the intake valve is open a great deal before the piston starts down. This is usually considered as a way to increase bottom end power, but as you can see there is much of the charge pushed out the exhaust, making a less efficient engine."

if you have blueprinted an engine, degreeing the cam is a must based on how you want the engine to perform -- irregardless of the actual cam profile.

the TiVCT are electronic degree wheels, advancing and retarding the cams base on load/performance requirements

http://www.compcams.com/Pages/416/va...-tutorial.aspx

Shifterboy45

I had some time last week end so i hooked up the scanner and took a diagnostic report on the engine stats..

you will quickly notice one difference -- total available timing. The FRPP tune adds 6.5 degrees of timing. This not to say that the timing comes on all at once, but it does add it through the engine RPM range.

previous report stated 17 degrees of advance @ cylinder #1
current report shows 23.5 degrees of advance @ cylinder #1

So its pretty clear that the Procal II does do more than accentuate the drive-by wire control system

MarineCWO

Good stuff. I don't understand the technical cam talk but I bought this tune and air filter minus the mufflers and noticed a throatier intake and improved throttle response. My 1/4 best bone stock was 12.91 @ 113 MPH (crappy 60 foot and reaction time though) after the tune I went 12.83 @ 113.9 and recently went 12.81 at 114 MPH still spinning heavily. I noticed mid-range torque pick-up and the car seemed to pick up a MPH at the traps. I'm still on street tires too so I launch low, don't bog, but still spin so overall, for less than $400 bucks I got what I wanted. What I need is better traction (DR and likely traction control arms to control wheel hop) to get all the power this gem of a NA motor has. I think my car is fully capable of low 12s on good tires with the power it has on this tune and that's pretty **** good considering. I'd like to add an X pipe and CAI with this same tune but am afraid the increased airflow might not be ideal with the current tune. Any suggestions. Thanks for the help.

2011 5.0 GT w/ 3.73 AND FRPP tune and K&N filter.

Shifterboy45

Good to hear you're happy. If you're still working with the stock exhaust, i would recommend you pick up the GT500 mufflers, they will give you a little boost in HP. I cant remember which site it was on -- they did a video of the muffler installation alone and it did record some increase.

I did the mufflers before i got the tune installed, and it made a seat of the pants difference. No joke -- not earth shaking but you could tell the bottom end torque perked up a smidge.

I'll try to find the link to the site i mentioned... that is if your interested.

dafreeze

Marine, I wouldn't expect any gains from the GT500 mufflers, but for me the increased note is perfect. Not too loud and no drone.

Regarding adding an X and CAI with the ProCal, I don't think it's recommended. As you know, this tune can't be adjusted to compensate.

I've been running it for almost a year and ~ 15K miles (have had the car for 14 months and 21K+ miles) and am now confident enough w/this motor and drive train I'm considering stepping up a bit to a CAI and BAMA or similar tune.

Shifterboy45

http://www.stangtv.com/news/video-dy...-2013-mustang/

check out the video ... this shows there is a bit of truth in popping on a set of less restrictive mufflers.

not what i expected either

dafreeze

Hmm, 9hp and 7#...surprises me. General consensus has been that the GT500's aren't less restrictive enough to notice an appreciable gain.

When I ordered my car I'd included the Power Upgrade as an accessory. The ProCal wasn't avail (waiting on CARB approval) for ~ 3months, but I had the mufflers put on the next day after putting 200 miles on the car. I don't recall noticing any difference but admittedly I wasn't expecting one.

Nice bonus...even so, just the increase in the sweet throatiness of the exhaust note and the fact that they're not loud enough to irritate older folks or the police, coupled with the low cost, makes them probably the most popular of them all.

Shifterboy45

those number surprised me also -- I would have said three or four HP at the most if anything.

In retrospect it pretty clear that certain types of mufflers are effective in producing horsepower -- normally at mid-range to upper mid-range RPMs. A clear example is the true "Turbo" muffler designed in the early 60's for the turbocharged Chevy Corvair flat 6 engine. It was found to give a HP improvement when used on on the small block V8s. So most engine builders and tuners around that era would recommend these for street applications.

You can see two manufacturers building forced induction mufflers and N/A guys using them for their increase flow characteristics. I'm surely not hyping the use of these mufflers but there is volumes of work that show there are little pieces to the horsepower puzzle.

I don't have the full background on the development cycle of this kit, so i am wondering if the procal and air filter were introduced first and then the mufflers where added at a later date -- or were both kits released at the same time. If that is the case the numbers Ford Racing put out reflect the 16hp/7ft/lb gains -- would it have tested differently than advertised with the mufflers or was the difference only negligible so no figure correction was required?

dafreeze

This '71 Plymouth was the quickest car stoplight to stoplight in Lincoln, NE in '76-'77, although there was a '70 Dart w/4-speed that would pull with us as long as the kid wouldn't miss a shift.

Special ordered. Light duty auto truck transmission w/B&M shift kit, Dana quick change rear end. Loved the Carter 780 Thermoquad that sat on top of this sweet little 340. Primaries the size of your little finger, 2-1/4" dia secondaries. Only things not stock were the hand made traction bars, stock rears widened 2" and the Doug Thorley headers which dumped into a pair of those turbo Corvair mufflers. Car sounded just as sweet as it ran. Was my best friends, who's at the motor compartment checking the timing and dwell. I'm inside wiping down, Cowgill's vacuuming. Friday afternoon and we're hitting 'O' Street that evening.

Can't say, but it's interesting to note that FR includes the copied performance selling point statements below in both the kit and ProCal pages, but make no mention of any gains on the mufflers page;

Approximate peak increase of 16 hp and 7 lb-ft on 93 octane fuel
Up to 60 lb-ft increase at 1500 rpm!

magnido45

Thanks for this link...I have the tune and k&n filter...now you got me thinking about the gt500 mufflers that I skipped out on...by the way...luv this tune...will never go back to stock...