What Happens When You Run 87 in the Ecoboost.
Cobra Member
Joined: April 21, 2014
Posts: 1,099
Likes: 2
From: Canada, Ontario
Since the 2.0 and 2.3 Ecoboost are very similar engines, we can compare what tuners do for them and expect similar percentage gains for the 2.3. Lets look at those compared to 3.7 V6 gains from just a tune:
Average stock dyno numbers for Focus ST (2.0 Ecoboost): 231hp/276tq
http://www.focusfanatics.com/forum/s...d.php?t=297467
SCT stock: 230hp/279tq
SCT Tune only: 253hp/324tq
Gain: 23hp/45tq
Percent gain: 10%/16.1%
http://www.sctflash.com/Newsletter/F...ation_185F.jpg
Cobb stock: 220hp/277tq
Cobb tune only: 235/318
Gain: 15hp/41tq
Percent gain: 6.81%/14.8%
http://accessecu.com/dyno/graph.php?...rgb2=204000000
3.7 V6 stock: 257hp/243tq
3.7 v6 tune only: 266hp/257tq
Gain: 9hp/14tq
Percent gain: 3.50%/5.76%
2011 Mustang 3.7L V6 - Cold Air Intake & Bama Custom Tune Dyno Results - YouTube
2015 2.3 Ecoboost Auto Trans Dyno from Motor Trend:
279hp/295tq
https://www.facebook.com/StingerPerf...type=1&theater
If we assume tuners will be able to get the same percent gains from the 2.3 Ecoboost as they do the 2.0 Ecoboost, the 2.3 should end up with a tune only hp/tq of:
298hp/338tq (Cobb)
307hp/342tq (SCT)
So not only is your claim that there isn't a "shred of evidence" that the 2.3 Ecoboost is going to pick up a lot of power with a tune (nearly 3x the gains of the v6), it also makes more power to the wheels than the V6 (+20hp/+50tq) in stock form. This means the power gap between the two engines is only going to get larger once a tune is added.
Then, since you claim "the notion that putting a tune on a stock engine without changing any physical component of the engine is going to turn it into some sort of raging beast is laughable. In the history of tuning stock engines it has never been done nor will it ever be", lets take a look at another Ecoboost engine that proves you wrong again:
Full-Race dyno on Ecoboost F150:
Stock: 320hp/350tq
Tune Only: 347hp/421tq
Gains: +125wtq/+70whp @3000rpm and +75wtq/+60whp @4000rpm
http://www.full-race.com/img/article...tockvstune.jpg
If you don't think a gain of 70hp and 125tq at the wheels won't change something into a "raging beast" then you're delusional. So it's "never been done and never will be" according to you.
Average stock dyno numbers for Focus ST (2.0 Ecoboost): 231hp/276tq
http://www.focusfanatics.com/forum/s...d.php?t=297467
SCT stock: 230hp/279tq
SCT Tune only: 253hp/324tq
Gain: 23hp/45tq
Percent gain: 10%/16.1%
http://www.sctflash.com/Newsletter/F...ation_185F.jpg
Cobb stock: 220hp/277tq
Cobb tune only: 235/318
Gain: 15hp/41tq
Percent gain: 6.81%/14.8%
http://accessecu.com/dyno/graph.php?...rgb2=204000000
3.7 V6 stock: 257hp/243tq
3.7 v6 tune only: 266hp/257tq
Gain: 9hp/14tq
Percent gain: 3.50%/5.76%
2011 Mustang 3.7L V6 - Cold Air Intake & Bama Custom Tune Dyno Results - YouTube
2015 2.3 Ecoboost Auto Trans Dyno from Motor Trend:
279hp/295tq
https://www.facebook.com/StingerPerf...type=1&theater
If we assume tuners will be able to get the same percent gains from the 2.3 Ecoboost as they do the 2.0 Ecoboost, the 2.3 should end up with a tune only hp/tq of:
298hp/338tq (Cobb)
307hp/342tq (SCT)
So not only is your claim that there isn't a "shred of evidence" that the 2.3 Ecoboost is going to pick up a lot of power with a tune (nearly 3x the gains of the v6), it also makes more power to the wheels than the V6 (+20hp/+50tq) in stock form. This means the power gap between the two engines is only going to get larger once a tune is added.
Then, since you claim "the notion that putting a tune on a stock engine without changing any physical component of the engine is going to turn it into some sort of raging beast is laughable. In the history of tuning stock engines it has never been done nor will it ever be", lets take a look at another Ecoboost engine that proves you wrong again:
Full-Race dyno on Ecoboost F150:
Stock: 320hp/350tq
Tune Only: 347hp/421tq
Gains: +125wtq/+70whp @3000rpm and +75wtq/+60whp @4000rpm
http://www.full-race.com/img/article...tockvstune.jpg
If you don't think a gain of 70hp and 125tq at the wheels won't change something into a "raging beast" then you're delusional. So it's "never been done and never will be" according to you.
Hey! Thanks for taking the time to put this together. Its cool to see what the potentials are! I can only imagine what kind of gains can be done with swapping out the stock turbo.
My buddy cracked the turbo on his STI and replaced it with a larger one putting out more boost and dyno'd his with 400hp at the wheels. not bad.
Bullitt Member
Joined: July 16, 2014
Posts: 219
Likes: 0
I think people are over-estimating what kind of gains the aftermarket is going to be able to give them on this Ecoboost engine. Ford and other companies are taking their engines and performance to the next level these days, so without dropping a lot of cash, you won't see big gains.
V6 Member
Joined: February 9, 2004
Posts: 52
Likes: 3
I think people are over-estimating what kind of gains the aftermarket is going to be able to give them on this Ecoboost engine. Ford and other companies are taking their engines and performance to the next level these days, so without dropping a lot of cash, you won't see big gains.
Last edited by Stinger; Sep 26, 2014 at 01:57 PM.
Bullitt Member
Joined: July 16, 2014
Posts: 219
Likes: 0
Bullitt Member
Joined: July 16, 2014
Posts: 219
Likes: 0
Did you miss the post right above yours where I showed how the Ecoboost engines show great gains with just a tune? That doesn't even include CAI and exhaust mods which is where turbo engines really pick up. Lets not forget these are boosted engines that will pick up 8-12hp per psi of boost added as well.
Cheap mods are not going to make the Ecoboost Mustang fast. It is going to take some serious cash to make that happen.
Last edited by Critical Mass; Sep 26, 2014 at 02:07 PM.
Cobra R Member
Joined: February 6, 2014
Posts: 1,564
Likes: 41
From: Motor City
The two vehicles do NOT share an engine. While the Mustang is heavier, it also starts with a bigger motor making more power. Every single Ecoboost engine out there makes very nice gains via JUST a tune. What is your reasoning for this engine being the ONLY to not offer such gains?
V6 Member
Joined: February 9, 2004
Posts: 52
Likes: 3
I think people are over-estimating what kind of gains the aftermarket is going to be able to give them on this Ecoboost engine. Ford and other companies are taking their engines and performance to the next level these days, so without dropping a lot of cash, you won't see big gains.
V6 Member
Joined: February 9, 2004
Posts: 52
Likes: 3
2015 Ecoboost Mustang goes 12.56 with a tune, exhaust, and slicks:
Lets see the V6 do that with the same mods...I won't hold my breath
Last edited by Stinger; Sep 26, 2014 at 09:45 PM.
Spam Connoisseur
I got هَبوبed
I got هَبوبed
Joined: September 8, 2009
Posts: 9,651
Likes: 7
From: Sun City AZ
lots of uneducated people putting out information about the EB motors. They have been fast and used for about 5 years now. some of you are really behind the times and should just hush because its getting sad.
Cobra Member
Joined: October 12, 2004
Posts: 1,188
Likes: 7
From: Milwaukee, WI
Not that I'm disagreeing that the 2.3 will be able to see some nice gains with just a tune, but isn't the 2.3 using a completely different type of turbo than the 2.0 used in the ST?
I'm just saying we might not be able to use gains from the 2.0 to predict the gains possible with the 2.3. It could be less, or it could be more.
I'm just saying we might not be able to use gains from the 2.0 to predict the gains possible with the 2.3. It could be less, or it could be more.
V6 Member
Joined: February 9, 2004
Posts: 52
Likes: 3
V6 Member
Joined: February 9, 2004
Posts: 52
Likes: 3
Not that I'm disagreeing that the 2.3 will be able to see some nice gains with just a tune, but isn't the 2.3 using a completely different type of turbo than the 2.0 used in the ST?
I'm just saying we might not be able to use gains from the 2.0 to predict the gains possible with the 2.3. It could be less, or it could be more.
I'm just saying we might not be able to use gains from the 2.0 to predict the gains possible with the 2.3. It could be less, or it could be more.
Cobra Member
Joined: October 12, 2004
Posts: 1,188
Likes: 7
From: Milwaukee, WI
What are you referring to? Maybe you've seen something I haven't but they both use Borg Warner low inertia integrated turbo systems. The one on the 2.3 is larger (larger engine = larger turbo) so everything is "scaled up" which means power gains should scale up similarly (similarly, not exactly).
As for the 2.3 Egoboost's power potential, it's obviously there whatever else you might think if its NVH qualities. The fairly similar and analogous ST powerplants certainly strongly indicate that and I see no real reason why the 2.3 would differ, at least up to a point.
How about splitting the difference between the V8 symphony and the Egoboost efficiency and have Ford slap in an Egoboost 3.5 of perhaps 375+hp somewhere in between. You get a more melodious and smoother V6 snarl rather than four banger blat but with the greater (putative) efficiencies of a smaller turbo motor as compared to the big 5.0.
How about splitting the difference between the V8 symphony and the Egoboost efficiency and have Ford slap in an Egoboost 3.5 of perhaps 375+hp somewhere in between. You get a more melodious and smoother V6 snarl rather than four banger blat but with the greater (putative) efficiencies of a smaller turbo motor as compared to the big 5.0.
V6 Member
Joined: February 9, 2004
Posts: 52
Likes: 3
I admit that I don't know as much about the various kinds of turbos. I thought I read an article that said something to the effect of "unlike the Ecoboost 2.0, the 2.3 uses a twin scroll turbo". I don't really know what the pros and cons are to a twin scroll turbo as opposed to any other turbo, but it appears the 2.0 uses a twin scroll as well. So I either remembered wrong or that author was misinformed.
Member
Joined: September 6, 2014
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Ecoboost did have an off road exhaust and they really haven't talked about whether there were any mods at all to the intake or if any are needed.
The Ecoboost will make more power with tuning than a v6 simply because of the ability to increase boost as long as there is injector and turbo capacity, it'll also become peaky and all but useless past a certain point of tuning.. At least now the roll racing and blow off valve crowd has a new car to play with.
No one, in all these replies, mentions that when you turn up the wick in the FoST you can't run that level on track very long without overheating.
If you believe tech has no drawbacks, you're just not thinking it through. It is the path things are taking, but it will not be travelled pain free.
Everything the Evo/Wrx crowd has blown up in the first few years will probably be repeated on this car, pitting a high boost small displacement engine against a heavy car with traction...
Popcorn in hand.
The Ecoboost will make more power with tuning than a v6 simply because of the ability to increase boost as long as there is injector and turbo capacity, it'll also become peaky and all but useless past a certain point of tuning.. At least now the roll racing and blow off valve crowd has a new car to play with.
No one, in all these replies, mentions that when you turn up the wick in the FoST you can't run that level on track very long without overheating.
If you believe tech has no drawbacks, you're just not thinking it through. It is the path things are taking, but it will not be travelled pain free.
Everything the Evo/Wrx crowd has blown up in the first few years will probably be repeated on this car, pitting a high boost small displacement engine against a heavy car with traction...
Popcorn in hand.
