roketman

Kendal,
Those are great numbers!Sign me up!

P0 Corsa

Hey Ron, to be "signed up" you need to supply Kendall your credit card...

Kendall- Again great numbers for a system with cats. Questions:

1) Was your car data run with Black key or TK?

2) It is intersting the data seems "normal" up until about 7350 rpm or so and then it diverges. With the advertised 7500 rpm limit on our roadrunner engines, is the rev limit being invoked early on your tests. (ECU produced or driver right foot?) All of the plots seem to indicate the data really stops before 7500 rpm. Comments?

nota4re

Great questions. (I think I have Rocketman's cc on file. I stole his wallet when he was giggling like a highschool teenager driving my LS at MMP..... while I was screaming like a girl out of fear! LOL) Seriously, nothing scarey about Rocketman's driving!!

1) Once again we tested Track Key after letting the car drop into "Engine Enabled" mode and the Black key. Performance (HP/TQ) is nearly identical between the two programs. The measureable difference is that the car runs noticeably leaner in Track Key mode.... and I'm far from convinced that this is a good thing. (FYI - I have sent a lot of data to some secret emails...)

2) Unlike the Ford GTs that we test on the dyno where we will rarely intentionally hit the rev limiter, we do the exact opposite with the Boss'. On each dyno pull we are hard in the throttle until we feel the rev limiter. As to the cut-off point being a little lower than you would expect, my theory is that it is all to do with the rate of acceleration. The ECU has to have a logic to step in before the actual rev limiter - otherwise the max RPM target will be over-shot. Perhaps on a dyno it is a tad aggressive on the step-in. This is just my theory. I've been wrong two other times in my life

MJockey

Kendall,

Thanks for posting your results. I have a few questions.

1. Would you say the weather / air pressure were similar for both of the runs on your car?

2. Re: the Trackey A/F ratio, If the engine stated to experience detonation due to the lean A/F ratio wouldn't the knock sensor pick that up and richen up the A/F ratio?

3. Did you look at the A/F ratio under no load and light load / part throttle to see how they compare to stock?

As always, thanks for your informative posts.

zwede

I believe the computer only reduces timing advance when it senses knock.

nota4re

Great questions.

1) The weather was a little cooler for the second test but the built-in Dynojet software make corrections based on temp, borometer, etc. When very cold, sometimes the corrections factors are a little aggressive. However, it wasn't THAT cold for us AND we can display the graphs in an "uncorrected" form. We did look at all of that and the delta improvements were pretty much identical.

2) The knock sensors employed in the Boss are mostly as a safeguard (last ditch effort) to make sure the car is safe - and, over simplifying, the knock sensor wil cause the ECU to pull timing as opposed to using knock sensors as a "tool" for A/F's. Rather, unlike virtually ANY previous modern-day fuel injected car, the Boss is equipped with 2 wideband sensors - 1 on each bank. As such, the ECU has the means to control A/F's throughout the RPM range and does so - even in what we would traditionally call open loop mode. This is why the AF's remain good... not so much by the knock sensors.

3. No, we did not. We DO have the capability to do that on the dyno we use but just haven't yet had the time to do this. Not a bad idea at all.

SoCalBoss302

Can we get some video, but more importantly some audio?

adam81

Not sure if you saw this........

nota4re

Hi Adam,

I DID see your Post # 26 and I replied in Post #28.

adam81

I DID see post #28, which I was still a little unclear on and why I posted after your post #28...... Bottom line: your answer in post #28 was not clear to me......

So please answer...... Is 27lbs from everything after the hpipe or does that include the hpipe? I think you are saying everything after the hpipe... Then is the 16lbs from swapping out stock cats and hpipe for the kooks non-catted hpipe or...?

Thanks

nota4re

27 lbs savings BEHIND the H-pipe. I'd call the H-pipe about a push. And, you're right, the remaining savins is from replacing ~9lbs OEM cats (x2) with ~ 1lb pipes (x2).... resulting in an additional 16lbs of savings.

Total (Cat-delete) Exhaust weight savings = 27 + 16 = 43 lbs
Driveshaft weight savings = 19 lbs.
Also, side pipes *may* be deleted as well.. another 15lbs (estimated)

Total possible could be 77lbs!!

(Sorry if I was confusing before.)

adam81

Got it......tracking all! Thanks Kendall. 15lbs from the side pipes.....wow!

Side note: Do you think the car would respond to a CAI the same way it does with the Kooks full exhaust no cats??? Basically.......NO TUNE!!! I know it has been said that you need a tune by other companies, but I wonder........

nota4re

CAI - lol IMO.

I'm dying for someone to do the following.......

1. Buy a CAI with the tune.
2. Baseline dyno the car
3. Install CAI and re-dyno and verify - No Results. (Some people have already done this)
4. Install the tune. Re-dyno and see what, if any, results.
5. Leave tune and temporarily re-install OEM pipe and filter.
6. Dyno with OEM airbox and tube.

I bet same results.

In other words, I think CAI with "required tune" is really that you are buying a tune - and made to buy a CAI box as a tax. JMO, ICBW.

adam81

I can see your point.... and wouldn't be surprised if the results are what you think they would be.

However we do know this. There are a lot of different CAIs out there that DO make a difference on many different applications. I am not 100% sold on the fact that nothing about the factory CAI can be improved. I have only seen ONE person do some sort of dynoing before/after procedure with a CAI. This was the guy with the Airaid CAI. And yes I think the manufacture's response was ridiculous with what he was supposed to do to "properly test", but I also would have tested a lot differently than what he did.

However I have no idea if the car will adjust itself to work with a CAI without a tune. This is what I am curious about..... To most everyone's surprise the Kooks full exhaust seems to work just fine!!!! I am not in the position to do the test myself or I definitely would (not in country). We need someone to step up to the plate and give it a shot who has great access with a dyno and knows a little sumpin sumpin........

06GT

This sounds like a dilemma for.................................





























...............someone with more disposable income than me!

SteedaGus

In testing we did, there was not much improvement when sticking to the similar size MAF housing. We just released our Boss cold air system and it uses a much larger MAF housing which also requires tuning. We saw substantial gains then between airflow and camshaft timing changes within the tune.

This thread here has the info for anyone interested: https://themustangsource.com/f813/st...elease-503239/

I am not surprised the Boss seems to respond so well to long tubes. With the improved exhaust cam, larger exhaust valves, and all the other minor changes I came to believe that made this engine an ideal candidate for long tubes. But I didn't have any data to support that.

Unfortunately we haven't done a set of those on a Boss yet ourselves, but we are really looking forward to doing one, especially combined with our cold air and tuning, which I believe would benefit long tubes even further.

2 Go Snake

How much horespower is gained by removing the stock mufflers and leaving the cats on and replacing the stock mufflers with straight tubing ? Would the sound be excessive with just the cats and exhaust tubing ?

12C/OBoss

5-8 hp max

Zoldier

I say you and Kendall work something out so we can get this intake on his LS for a combo Dyno run.

SteedaGus

Hmmm...