Black2003Cobra said:
I'd love to see those results!
Anyone have the stock Timing curves? Fuel Curves? These maps might also shine some light on the subject. :thumbsup:
What A/F ratio are you guys running in your tunes
- Thread starter redfire03 svt
- Start date
I'd love to see those results!
Anyone have the stock Timing curves? Fuel Curves? These maps might also shine some light on the subject. :thumbsup:
PlatinumCobra said:
Of course Kenne Bell is going to say this stuff. They are covering their asses. If you believe that you can only run 9 psi on 92 octane, I don't know what to say. Tell me how an Evo can run 18psi from the factory on 91 octane(Aside from being a turbo)?
Running a richer A/F is simply being used to help keep the combustion chamber cooler with more fuel to prevent detonation that is all I can think of. I think most of these blow motors are from detonation and not a pure result of A/F being too high(ie they drove the car too hard build up too much heat in the block/heads). Unless you could data log to the exact minute when something happened to the engine and see the A/F(constant at what it was suppose to be) I am not buying it that a 2.93" or 2.80" pulley is too much for daily driving. That list of blown engines is good, but totally unreliable testing cause not everyone was running the same tune so there are too many factors to base your assumption on. If everyone had the same A/F, same tune, same bolt on, etc. then it would be great, but they don't. It is a nice guide line, but unless you can give these people some hardcore fact(ie your an engine builder, or tuner, or engineer) don't scare the shit out of people so bad.
And instead of buying a Whipple for $3200 and running 8psi-10psi(waste of money in my opinion) why not invest in a better cooling system?
Edit: I do agree that time will tell, but I think Ford made some **** ups and the pulleys are just showing them quicker. 7&8 cylinders running hotter for example.
Last edited:
Turbochargers are completely different and have different characteristics. And the phrase "pump gas" is relative. Pump gas can be 85,86,87,89,91,93,94, and 100. You will see many T/C applications that require premium fuel aren't running any more than 14 psi. Some motors can take more of a beating, and therefore are designed to run at higher boost levels by the engine builders. I doubt this is the case with the Terminator motors.
If Kenne Bell is convering their asses, why not follow suit and do the same? If you read his information carefully, "throwing boost" around is not the best solution. I'm not trying to scare anybody away; I'm trying to get people to THINK before they mod.
Nobody said more boost was bad. But think of the paradox. More boost. Then leaner A/F. Same octane. Hmmm. Guess we better retard the crap out of the timing so we don't detonate. Wouldn't it make more sense to boost less and retain timing and A/F with higher octane ??? It'll certainly run cooler!
People should be deeply concerned, not "scared", if this is their only means of reliable transportation. Unless they really understand what's going on they won't be able to make intelligent choices regarding the risks to modding their motors. If you don't think it's a risk, by all means fire away! If you understand the risks and are willing to pay, fire away! Remember, it's your car! If this is your toy and can afford to break it (not to say it will, but one never knows), FIRE AWAY!
There is simply no replacement for octane. PERIOD. You're better off making the most HP at lower boost levels than going the easy route by simply adding more boost and leaning it out. Cooler air and higher octane makes a denser charge, and the engine produces more power...safely. Sure, you can run 12.1 A/F @14 psi, but I would highly recommend using racing fuel. At least 4-5 gallons per fillup. It's a good insurance policy, and so is running richer at WOT.
I firmly believe that it would be a crime to see these cars blow engines before they get to 100K miles, and would rather do sensibly safe modifications and leave the real aggressive modding to a fox body where 5L crate engines can be had for $700 a pop instead of $7000.
But that's my opinion. I'm finito with the thread. Apparently, I've hit some nerves.
If Kenne Bell is convering their asses, why not follow suit and do the same? If you read his information carefully, "throwing boost" around is not the best solution. I'm not trying to scare anybody away; I'm trying to get people to THINK before they mod.
Nobody said more boost was bad. But think of the paradox. More boost. Then leaner A/F. Same octane. Hmmm. Guess we better retard the crap out of the timing so we don't detonate. Wouldn't it make more sense to boost less and retain timing and A/F with higher octane ??? It'll certainly run cooler!
People should be deeply concerned, not "scared", if this is their only means of reliable transportation. Unless they really understand what's going on they won't be able to make intelligent choices regarding the risks to modding their motors. If you don't think it's a risk, by all means fire away! If you understand the risks and are willing to pay, fire away! Remember, it's your car! If this is your toy and can afford to break it (not to say it will, but one never knows), FIRE AWAY!
There is simply no replacement for octane. PERIOD. You're better off making the most HP at lower boost levels than going the easy route by simply adding more boost and leaning it out. Cooler air and higher octane makes a denser charge, and the engine produces more power...safely. Sure, you can run 12.1 A/F @14 psi, but I would highly recommend using racing fuel. At least 4-5 gallons per fillup. It's a good insurance policy, and so is running richer at WOT.
I firmly believe that it would be a crime to see these cars blow engines before they get to 100K miles, and would rather do sensibly safe modifications and leave the real aggressive modding to a fox body where 5L crate engines can be had for $700 a pop instead of $7000.
But that's my opinion. I'm finito with the thread. Apparently, I've hit some nerves.
I think this could be a never ending thread on the correct A/F Ratio. I think if somebody slapped an EGT gauge in their car they could really tell if their tune was too lean. I totally agree with plat cobra that a little on the safe side is better. I've had my car up to a couple 160mph runs, but my tune is 11.0-11.5 across the top....its a bit on the rich side. If somebody wants to pull a 160+mph run then I think that a 12:1 a/f is way to lean, especially with an eaton blowing a blazing inferno of air into your motor.....maybe a 12:1 A/f is good with an eaton at 8psi??
I really think the only true way to save your pistons is use an EGT and find out really how an eaton or whipple at high and low psi really effect your temps.
Does anybody have any data on this? I'd like to see it myself....
I really think the only true way to save your pistons is use an EGT and find out really how an eaton or whipple at high and low psi really effect your temps.
Does anybody have any data on this? I'd like to see it myself....
PlatinumCobra said:
Not trying to be disrespectful with my above post, I just think we need more facts. You are right people should give stuff some though and a lot don't. You have people that are not mechanically inclined pulleying the crap out of their car with no idea of what they are doing. Most don't even have an aftermarket temp gauge to tell them how hot they are running.
Adding a lot of timing can also cause too much heat in the cylinders, so I guess you just need to find a nice balance between boost and timing.
Anyways I hope people may get 100K out of their engines, but I don't know if that will happen for everyone even if you remain bone stock and drive the car really hard.
illadvisedSnake said:
Do you know what an ideal exhaust temp should be for this configuration? If so then this is a good idea, but how much will your temp change for every half a point of A/F change. I like this idea since I am guessing this gauge is less then a WB02.
Users who are viewing this thread
