You do know that EcoBoost engines make their peak TQ early and carry it throughout the RPM range? It really gets the car moving off a tight corner.
You'll be surprised how is sounds. I really like hearing it uncorked.
I'm Calling it Right Now...
- Thread starter SID297
- Start date
You do know that EcoBoost engines make their peak TQ early and carry it throughout the RPM range? It really gets the car moving off a tight corner.
You'll be surprised how is sounds. I really like hearing it uncorked.
Ok, not really relevant to my point, but ok. Out of curiosity, where do the stock engine's tq and hp peak at? What is the 2.3's redline? If I carry that 400+ lb/ft of tuned torque high enough, then I should outpower a 435 HP 5.0 too. That would at least quip my interest a bit. I don't, then I'm back to pulling trailers and over-steering out of tight corners.
I will have to agree. There is something secretive about the first post. Tell us what you know OP.........LOL
I welcome the new technology and its headed that way. But this is creating a war between mustangs which imo is not a good thing. Let the i4's go after the little imports and let the v8's gave their own battles. There's plenty to go around. Now with that said I know I'll get crap from some saying let the little i4's battle it out and butt out but just my 2 cents
Last edited:
Take a look at the dynosheet from the FRPP tune on a Focus ST:
http://www.fordracingparts.com/parts/part_details.asp?PartKeyField=24025
Now imagine it with a bigger turbo and more displacement.
There's nothing wrong with properly designed quality cast pistons. How many ultra-high powered diesels do you see grenading pistons? Not many, and they are all cast.
I don't believe there will be much cross shopping or competition between the GT and EcoBoost. The EcoBoost and V6 are a different story.
Eh...ok. Lot of low-end power, no doubt. I'm not a road racer, so if that will be the ticket for those venues, then I wish y'all luck! But for what I do, just not my thing, as it simply doesn't make good power in the higher rpm range (4k-7k). Not trying to hate....just my personal bias. Will bow out now.
The turbo on the ecoboost is a Honeywell / Garret Gt22. I believe its the 60 trim version. Its only slightly larger than a Focus ST turbo. I don't see 400 ft/lbs (2015 Coyote range) possible with only a tune on the ecoboost mustang. A tune alone on an Evo or STI would not reach 400 ft/lbs. The Evo 16G is a much larger turbo capable of 34 lbs/min vs the GT22 of 22 lbs/min. Sure, the evo is down .3 liters, but it won't make that large a difference. I don't see stock turbo mustangs much of a threat to the Coyotes.
Eh...ok. Lot of low-end power, no doubt. I'm not a road racer, so if that will be the ticket for those venues, then I wish y'all luck! But for what I do, just not my thing, as it simply doesn't make good power in the higher rpm range (4k-7k). Not trying to hate....just my personal bias. Will bow out now.
The thing about the turbo 4 is how the power is repositioned. In a 5.0, your powerband is 4000-7000 or so. In a T-4, its just 3000-6000, it makes no difference. What is different, is the way that power is made, most stock turbo cars tend to make a plateau over 1500-2000 rpms, whereas all motor tends to increase with rpms. Nothing a big turbo cant fix though
The size of the turbo is what dictates torque. I made 450 wtq on my stock turbo, but struggled to make 390 on my 35r with a built motor and a ton of cam tuning and timing advance. Larger turbos spool slower = less torque. Also, theres no way the EB 4 comes with a 22 lb/min turbo... the mazdaspeed3 has a tiny as hell turbo and it flows 29 lb / min, and going off the rough 1 lb/min = 10 hp, its about on point. There is no way a 22 lb/min turbo will support a 305 hp claim...
If even a third of the rumors are true about the 2.3EB in Focus RS trim are true then this more will easily make more torque than a 5.0L.
The ecoboost 2.3 will give those people who do NOT need over the top power a nice and balanced package. With some good tuning and downpipe the car will be a great corner carver and give great MPG's overall. Having that turbo torque available will make the car seem much faster than it is. And that's ok...
Are you serious that it makes no difference? Are you sure?
I'm a bit wary of the MPG rating, based on what I've read about other Ecoboost platforms, but overall I think you hit the nail on the head.
Yes, you said you needed high rpm power because i'm assuming you drag race. Whether your powerband is 5000-7000 rpms, or 4000 to ~6000 rpms (just my assumption based on my turbo 4 experience) you still have 2000 rpms of "powerband," which is more than enough to cover your typical fall back after a shift. The way turbos build power, you don't "need" high rpms to make that power. Obviously the powerband is different, which I acknowledged already, but my point remains the same.
Your typical 4 cylinder builds power much like a Boss does (albeit at much lower rpms), so that's what I mean by "it makes no difference." I pulled up a dyno to demonstrate this point (I just got a new computer and have not transferred my files over, so this is not a mazdaspeed3 I tuned, but one I found on google)
You can see you basically end up with a torque, and HP plateau. My initial assessment of the RPMS may have been slightly off, but there are 101 different ways to tune a turbo depending on where you want the power to come in, but you can see what I mean here.
*Note, this is not a stock turbo car, but rather a hybrid. Stock turbine side, with a slightly upgraded compressor wheel / housing. The turbine side dictates the powerband however, so this powerband is identical to the stock turbo, just higher obviously.
Last edited:
Yes, you still have the same 'size' powerband. But the difference where it makes that power still matters. I can be much more aggressive gearing the car with the extra thousand rpm - think 3.90 vs 4.56. That's a lot of tq multiplication at the wheels I can take advantage of.
If the 2015 can hold serve with the current cars, expect bottom 12's with a tune only A6. No way a 2.3 is touching that with tune and CAI.
I don't really worry for the Coyotes, I think they'll still be the top dogs. The guys I feel sorry for are the ones with 3V 4.6 GTs. Without a power adder they're probably going to get slaughtered by bolt-on I-4s with half the displacement. I would hate to have bought a 2010 GT new and still be making payments on it.
I would expect the EB to run with 3valves and 2011+ v6's stock. The EB will make more power tune only.
If someone can drive, i can see an EB PP (3.55 helps in the 1/4) getting low 13s high 12s with minimal mods. Seen plenty of stock Mazdaspeed3s (again... i spent a LOT of time on that platform) run mid 13s. There was a guy with an intake and rear motor mount running 13.5s all day, and thats with like 2.2-2.3 60'. Id like to think a car with a superior power band, rear wheel drive, and 40 more horsepower (albeit, 200 lbs heavier) could do the same with a tune and intake... You cant compare the peak whp numbers of the ecoboost to the 3v GT and V6, this will hands down wipe the floor with those cars because of the turbo powerband.
E85 agreed will really help. but on pump gas its not as easy.
Look at the Livernois 3.5L ecoboost setup they are on the cutting edge of ecoboost and if you want big power the block must be sleeved and stout rods AND steel crank put in and still 520HP whp is about maxed, that's a 3.5L. reduce that power by reduction in displacment 2.3/3.5 * 520HP = only 341 to the wheels.. std. Ecoboost should be 310hp*.825= 255hp to the wheels so something's not adding up but still - I don't think we are going to see 450 to the wheels very easy except with e85 and big boost, maybe its the heads that don't flow.. or, maybe the 3.5 vs. 2.5 displacement calc I used is wrong, and the 2.5L makes almost as much power as the 3.5.
THat said, with the independent suspension on a mustang type dyno, nothing is pushing over 500 yet on 93, and that's a 3.5L.
Hmmm, i'm not sure what the problems are with the 3.5 EB, but i can assure you the heads have to be better than the Ms3, and plenty of those folks are doing 400+ on stock motor. Same with the Cobalt SS/Tc which is a DI 2.0 (if you didnt know).
The DI helps what can be pushed on 93 alone, but stock turbos just dont tend to breathe well up top, which is what pump gas performance requires. I have seen a Nissan Sr-20 make 500 whp on 91 octane... it was also revving to 8000 rpms with a large turbo and significant head work so take that for what its worth. I was able to get my mazda to about 400 whp on pump gas alone, but that was with a GTx3576 turbo (big) that basically lagged so bad it made no difference, i would still run even with or barely beat stock turbo E85 cars because they had so much more torque. Its almost a requirement to have E85 if you're going to be a fast 4 cylinder these days.
Keep in mind also, it just takes big boost to make hp on a 4 cylinder. Its not going to be 5,6,7 psi like a 5.0 with a turbo, I've tuned about 3 cars to 500 whp (all with turbos in the 60-65 lb/min range) and they were all running 28-32 psi. It just is what it is.
The DI helps what can be pushed on 93 alone, but stock turbos just dont tend to breathe well up top, which is what pump gas performance requires. I have seen a Nissan Sr-20 make 500 whp on 91 octane... it was also revving to 8000 rpms with a large turbo and significant head work so take that for what its worth. I was able to get my mazda to about 400 whp on pump gas alone, but that was with a GTx3576 turbo (big) that basically lagged so bad it made no difference, i would still run even with or barely beat stock turbo E85 cars because they had so much more torque. Its almost a requirement to have E85 if you're going to be a fast 4 cylinder these days.
Keep in mind also, it just takes big boost to make hp on a 4 cylinder. Its not going to be 5,6,7 psi like a 5.0 with a turbo, I've tuned about 3 cars to 500 whp (all with turbos in the 60-65 lb/min range) and they were all running 28-32 psi. It just is what it is.
Everything I've read is they run out of fuel.
Users who are viewing this thread
