Tweaked the Hybrid...

[Rikenbomb]

After speaking with BuckeyeSVT about a few things he wanted to try out and finally using the Pro-Flow MAF I had laying around I decided to get the car retuned:

New mods include:
'99 3L LIM
'99 3L IMRC
Pro-Flow MAF

Overall #s are 228 hp and 203 ft-lbs of torque. The numbers don't mean a whole lot but the gains were more visible by the plots below:

Original dyno tune in blue, new tune in red.

http://www.newcougar.org/gallery/files/2/0/9/Dyno1.jpg

http://www.newcougar.org/gallery/files/2/0/9/Dyno2.jpg

Here is the dyno numbers in SAE measurement.

In here new tune in blue, previous tune in red
http://www.newcougar.org/gallery/files/2/0/9/Rikenbomb.jpg

[NorCalCoug]

Nice little torque increase there on the low end. I like. :)

[fordrule]

are you using a alluminum or plastic 3L upper?

[cpapashley]

It is when you see that huge dip in torque at the imrc point, that I just can't help but think there must be a better way...:disgust:

[BurritaSVT]

It is when you see that huge dip in torque at the imrc point, that I just can't help but think there must be a better way...:disgust:

if you bought a tune you can adjust that transistion better where it is smoother still getting the performance you have or more. Joey

[Rikenbomb]

if you bought a tune you can adjust that transistion better where it is smoother still getting the performance you have or more. Joey

No actually you cannot. It's been tuned already.

It's an SVT EH upper and a '99 3L LIM (split port. larger than the SVT LIM).

[fordrule]

gotcha i forgot the 99 3l were close to the same size

[fordrule]

what did u have to modify to make it work? post some comparison pics

[cpapashley]

what did u have to modify to make it work? post some comparison pics


x2 would like to see some as well thanks

[cpapashley]

No actually you cannot. It's been tuned already.

It's an SVT EH upper and a '99 3L LIM (split port. larger than the SVT LIM).

So is there no way of smoothing that a/f ratio a little more?? seems to get so rich at that changeover point. Mind you a/f just above that 13 looks mighty good indeed.

[Rikenbomb]

Here's the thing: I only really cross that point once when I get on it, usually that's in first or maybe 2nd gear, where the rpms go too fast to really matter. After that I'm in the upper rpm range.

I wouldn't get fixated on the dip. It looks like quite a bit on paper but in reality (on the street) you hardly even notice it.

[buckeyesvt]

The tuner tried to smooth out the dip, and in my opinion from other graphs I have seen he did a very good job. Remember folks, it's dumping air right when the secondaries open. It's very hard to change the AFR in 300 rpm only to compensate for that. He tried and said there was no true way of completely smoothing it out.

I guess if you want it perfectly smooth - Ditch the SVT upper/lower and get a 3L oval port setup without secondaries. I'll show you glass smooth graphs. This car has functioning secondaries even with the 3L LIM - You will have a dip, it's unavoidable.

-Dom

[fordrule]

gotcha i thought u were using a gutted lim. i am curious what my gutted lim afr is at

[Rikenbomb]

what did u have to modify to make it work? post some comparison pics

Were you interested in making the secondaries functional? Making them functional requires more work.

[fordrule]

naw i have a svt lim gutted and imrc removed. i kinda wish i would have gone full 3L svt cams and the st200 UIM i probally be a lil quicker. i have 24# inj and a 65mm mustang tb in my garage. its on my too do list when i get back home. i already have the xcal2 and the prp. so its just tuning

[SpookSVT]

naw i have a svt lim gutted and imrc removed. i kinda wish i would have gone full 3L svt cams and the st200 UIM i probally be a lil quicker. i have 24# inj and a 65mm mustang tb in my garage. its on my too do list when i get back home. i already have the xcal2 and the prp. so its just tuning

No SVT cams in a 3L oval port, the flow coefficients of the ports are different. They most likely will hurt more than help. Cams are designed around the port, your upsetting this with SVT cams.

The 3L cams make have a much broader TQ curve and will have much better low and midrange power. Remember that after you shift you have to 'climb the hill again', more midrange will help shift recovery much better, getting you moving again.

I wouldn't get caught up in HP numbers, transient response and shift recovery is what should be worried about (ie. F1 running engines on track sim to find the 'quickest' engine for the track vs. the most powerful.)

[BigBalledOX]

No SVT cams in a 3L oval port, the flow coefficients of the ports are different. They most likely will hurt more than help. Cams are designed around the port, your upsetting this with SVT cams.

The 3L cams make have a much broader TQ curve and will have much better low and midrange power. Remember that after you shift you have to 'climb the hill again', more midrange will help shift recovery much better, getting you moving again.

I wouldn't get caught up in HP numbers, transient response and shift recovery is what should be worried about (ie. F1 running engines on track sim to find the 'quickest' engine for the track vs. the most powerful.)

EXCELLENT points all of them. Thats why if/when I blow up my hybrid . . . assuming it ever gets on the road again :rolleyes: . . . I'm going full 3L with 3L cams. I've seen the work that can be pulled out of a 3L with a short-ram and an exhaust . . . its definitely a good route to consider.

[fordrule]

this is another good site for info on a 3L Checklist for 3l - FordContour.Org (http://www.fordcontour.org/index.php?showtopic=9864)

[fordrule]

can u pull the imrc and secondaries and throw a larger tb and bigger inj and possibly gain more? well and the correct tune of cource

[SpookSVT]

can u pull the imrc and secondaries and throw a larger tb and bigger inj and possibly gain more? well and the correct tune of cource

NO! The cams are designed to work around the IMRC. This would kill the lowend that is already available. Not to mention the combined port area of the split port is HUGE!

You don't need bigger injectors for more fuel unless there is more air to oxidize it during combustion.

A 65mm TB is not needed unless you're peaking after ~6500RPM and making considerable power up top. The 60mm TB is good for most 3L engines that are built and running right now. A larger TB may yield more power up top (marginal) but midrange wilol suffer.

I can not stress enough how important shift recovery and acceleration is. Maximize the operating range you have and the car will go faster than any peakier engine of similarity.

[fordrule]

ok . i understand. i dont want to start a huge discussion and totally hijack this thread lol. on my 3L , i have the svt goodies installed and I have the secondaries removed. am i hurting my motor. would it be better to just sell my heads and go back to full 3L

[streetracer8605]

nice numbers henry, i remember you saying at fest you were having some problems with the car...i take it thats all fixed?

[fordrule]

henry is there a way to post comparo pics of the 3L LIM and the SVT LIM . if the 3l is larger bore would it work on a split port 3L that is already ported to have svt lim work on a 3L.

possibly look into swapping the svt lim out for the 3L depending on the info that we can obtain.

[Rikenbomb]

It should work on an oval-to-split 3L. The openings are about 1-1.5mm larger on primary and 2mm larger on secondary ports. It will bolt right up to everything. The only tricky part is making the butterflies work as some modifications will have to be done. If you're looking to just seal up the LIM and not use the secondaries it may work, I offer no guarantee.

streetracer, yes the issue was fixed!

[fordrule]

well henry were you able to take pics of the install process. also do you have any pics of the 3L LIM. i think i have a cpl pics of the svt lim. also can we have dimensions of the LIM bores and overall dimensions

[morbid]

What parts did you have before the swap? Looking at the graphs... the gains could easily be attributed to cleaning up your fuel trims, except for the 6250+ rpm range. Doing all that stuff at once... one of the items might have caused you to loose power, but you'd never notice.

[Rikenbomb]

The 3L LIM, IMRC and Pro-Flow MAF is what I added. Everything else in my mod list is what I had in the first tune Check here (http://www.newcougar.org/forums/3-0l-duratec-performance/89951-3-0l-dyno-plot-sheets-post-yours-here.html). The blue graphs is what I had without those mods (previous tune and AFR) the red is the retune for comparison.

Gains were not made my 'cleaning the fuel trims' as it was tuned prior to the mods and retuned.

Fordrule, I'll work on getting what you asked for.

[fordrule]

kick @$$ man

[SpookSVT]

Why go bigger??!!

Perhaps this will shed some light on the better option;

3L vs. SVT cams - FordContour.Org (http://www.fordcontour.org/index.php?showtopic=9873)

On page two you'll notice the overlay of a full 3L vs. Rikenbomb's hybrid. While the hybrid makes over 20HP more at the wheels, you'll see that the 'lowly' full 3L transverses the same RPM range, 2 seconds QUICKER!

Food for thought....

[warmonger]

Why go bigger??!!

Perhaps this will shed some light on the better option;

3L vs. SVT cams - FordContour.Org (http://www.fordcontour.org/index.php?showtopic=9873)

On page two you'll notice the overlay of a full 3L vs. Rikenbomb's hybrid. While the hybrid makes over 20HP more at the wheels, you'll see that the 'lowly' full 3L transverses the same RPM range, 2 seconds QUICKER!

Food for thought....


I'm not buying this. Something isn't done right because the torque on a full 3L is not that much greater than a hybrid unless you are talking below 4000rpm. When I shift in the MTX contour from even 6700rpm then the rpm only drops to about 4800rpm or so, right in the max torque for the SVT cams.

Also that's crap that the full 3l would be better for autocross. I think it would be better the other way around. The SVT can stay in gear at 4K rpm and pull all the way to redline during the whole course and power on tap is very nice. A properly done hybrid will easily perform better than a straight 3L in almost every case except maybe drag racing with the first gear hole-shot that a straight 3L might get it. The extra low-end torque would help the 3L launch faster and then proper shifting might help it keep the lead.
The SVT was set up for track use like autocross from the engine operational range to the suspension setup. It was NEVER any good at drag racing. A straight taurus 3L ATX is almost better suited for drag racing! lol

[buckeyesvt]

Nobody asked you to "buy it". I'm not buying the split port to oval setup you are pushing. However, that isn't the issue here and that's a discussion for another time.

What issue do you have? This testing was done by a third party, same dyno - almost same conditions. Same person (dyno operator) driving both vehicles. I would say that should about clear up any "errata" in the data. I can't see where there would be some type of "error" as I can pick any run (Henry's was run 19 times during tuning) and mine was run 27 times... I can pick almost any point when the numbers were up there and the results stay the same.

I have the WinPEP software here and the raw data .drf files... I can do this all day long with overlays and comparisons.

-Dom

[morbid]

buckeye... did you get (re-)tuned for your time comparison plot? The 3L plot in that looks nothing like your other plot for that motor. For one, your timed plot shows the 3L with much more top end hp than your other post did.

[Rikenbomb]

That's my car vs. his in the 4th gear pull over time comparison chart. Hopefully that'll clear things up.

[warmonger]

Nobody asked you to "buy it". I'm not buying the split port to oval setup you are pushing. However, that isn't the issue here and that's a discussion for another time.

What issue do you have? This testing was done by a third party, same dyno - almost same conditions. Same person (dyno operator) driving both vehicles. I would say that should about clear up any "errata" in the data. I can't see where there would be some type of "error" as I can pick any run (Henry's was run 19 times during tuning) and mine was run 27 times... I can pick almost any point when the numbers were up there and the results stay the same.

I have the WinPEP software here and the raw data .drf files... I can do this all day long with overlays and comparisons.

-Dom

Wow, I've been away working and lookee here you get all offended and I didn't even realize you were part of this post.

Just so you know I am stating that I don't buy the the points that the lowly straight 3L swap is superior for Autocross racing. In fact I believe with the peakier low-end torque it would be better for drag racing while the SVT cams will be better for autocrossing since the powerband is so wide it will allow the car to stay in gear longer.
I've got no problem with your dyno test where you show your car is faster by 2 seconds in the range you specified. By narrowing the test to limited parameters you have show ONLY that your car is faster than his car in that range. This is a valid comparison but only for a Mano-y-mano test. I don't think this is representative of all 3L's hybrids and straight 3L comparisons and in reality I think you'll find that the torque produced by either engine will be quite close yet the hybrid will peak it's torque at a higher rpm while the straight 3L will peak it's torque at lower rpms.
There really are no bad choices as long as you use one setup or the other to support the type of goals you want.

So I'm cool with the stuff you are saying but I don't know where the attitude "I can do this all day long..." is coming from in the last line.
Especially when I didn't address my response to you. You seem to want to get a rise out of me but for what I wonder???:rolleyes:

[buckeyesvt]

Limiting parameters? I'm confused, I took 2 complete dyno runs performed on the same dyno by the same operator (not us driving) and overlayed the two together and recieved the results. Is there a specific figure or spec you are looking for? I can give you whatever you need to see. Your statement about power is a little off, the engine with the earlier TQ and HP will get the jump on the less TQ but more HP engine. That's fact... Drag racing is more suited for the higher HP engine with the SVT bits because of the "High" nature of the peak HP. The straight 3L peak is almost 1,000 RPM lower meaning you are not waiting the expanse of time to get it under max HP. Of course, if this was a true road course racer - The higher TQ would help immensely out of corners and could easily over the course of a track beat the higher HP engine. How? How many straightways do you see in road courses? There isn't enough time to stay in a high HP situation unless you like coming into corners at 6,000RPM and shifting 700RPM later? I'd rather come into the corner around 4,000 (where the TQ peak is and the sweet spot of the straight 3L) and motor through my HP peak without shifting out of my range right away.

A hybrid engine makes peak HP in the 6,000 range. You have exactly less than a 1,000 RPM to play with before fuel cut / limiter. HP/TQ peak in the 4-5 range on the straight 3L does not present that issue... You may be out of your HP/TQ peak - But there is less recovery after shifting than in the hybrid.

Good points? Maybe.... Civil? I think so. Are we good?

-Dom

[spridget]

I take my car to the road course a couple times a year. I've only been to the drag strip once in the Contour and that was shortly after I purchased it when it was still stock. Straight line racing is for people that have trouble walking and chewing gum at the same time.

I can tell you, my dyno sheets show a FLAT torque band from 2000-6000. 180fwtq at 2000rpm. When I switched from SVT cams to 3L cams, I gained 15 more tq at 2000rpm and lost nothing on the top end. That's usuable power for a road course or street. I don't drag race... buy a Camaro for that. All that low end torque makes for a great daily driver too.

For autoX, the straight 3L would probably have too much torque and you'd spin the tires too easily, but when would you ever get into the narrow peak hp of a hybrid in autoX? For road racing, keep the trans in 3rd and pull out of the corners. Porsches and Bimmer owners can't believe my cheao Furd can chase them down and pass them in the twisties.


Tom, if you are back in central Texas, you should come out to Texas World Speedway the next time FordBastards and Lone Star SHO Club meet for a track weekend. I think they have a couple meets planned for MSR too. The next meet is the Texas Mile in Goliad. Watch some 20yr old Taurus SHO's blow the doors off "muscle" cars. Check out FordBastards.org for info.

[warmonger]

Limiting parameters? I'm confused, I took 2 complete dyno runs performed on the same dyno by the same operator (not us driving) and overlayed the two together and recieved the results. Is there a specific figure or spec you are looking for? I can give you whatever you need to see. Your statement about power is a little off, the engine with the earlier TQ and HP will get the jump on the less TQ but more HP engine. That's fact... Drag racing is more suited for the higher HP engine with the SVT bits because of the "High" nature of the peak HP. The straight 3L peak is almost 1,000 RPM lower meaning you are not waiting the expanse of time to get it under max HP. Of course, if this was a true road course racer - The higher TQ would help immensely out of corners and could easily over the course of a track beat the higher HP engine. How? How many straightways do you see in road courses? There isn't enough time to stay in a high HP situation unless you like coming into corners at 6,000RPM and shifting 700RPM later? I'd rather come into the corner around 4,000 (where the TQ peak is and the sweet spot of the straight 3L) and motor through my HP peak without shifting out of my range right away.

A hybrid engine makes peak HP in the 6,000 range. You have exactly less than a 1,000 RPM to play with before fuel cut / limiter. HP/TQ peak in the 4-5 range on the straight 3L does not present that issue... You may be out of your HP/TQ peak - But there is less recovery after shifting than in the hybrid.

Good points? Maybe.... Civil? I think so. Are we good?

-Dom

Well you will find many track drivers will change their final drive in an attempt to keep the rpm in the power band, witness the only aftermarket final drive available for the contour actually is geared lower than the V6 final drive.

There is really no wrong answer to the torque lower/higher in the powerband when all one has to do on an MTX is pick the gear that keeps you in the powerband at the speeds youneed to run on those tracks. If one motor does it at 3000-4500 because of a high torque peak then so be it. If the other motor does it between 5000-6000 like the SVT, then pick the next lowest gear and roll with it. Then it the straights the car will already have maximum power.
I wouldn't mind seeing the dyno file you have if you'd care to post it as well as an overlay you were talking about though.

[warmonger]

I take my car to the road course a couple times a year. I've only been to the drag strip once in the Contour and that was shortly after I purchased it when it was still stock. Straight line racing is for people that have trouble walking and chewing gum at the same time.

I can tell you, my dyno sheets show a FLAT torque band from 2000-6000. 180fwtq at 2000rpm. When I switched from SVT cams to 3L cams, I gained 15 more tq at 2000rpm and lost nothing on the top end. That's usuable power for a road course or street. I don't drag race... buy a Camaro for that. All that low end torque makes for a great daily driver too.

For autoX, the straight 3L would probably have too much torque and you'd spin the tires too easily, but when would you ever get into the narrow peak hp of a hybrid in autoX? For road racing, keep the trans in 3rd and pull out of the corners. Porsches and Bimmer owners can't believe my cheao Furd can chase them down and pass them in the twisties.


Tom, if you are back in central Texas, you should come out to Texas World Speedway the next time FordBastards and Lone Star SHO Club meet for a track weekend. I think they have a couple meets planned for MSR too. The next meet is the Texas Mile in Goliad. Watch some 20yr old Taurus SHO's blow the doors off "muscle" cars. Check out FordBastards.org for info.

Well I'd like to go out to the track when you are going out there, as long as it can happen between now and the end of october. Let me know if there is something out there.

Also, I have to say that the SVT or SVT hybrid seems to have the flattest powerband usually. The 3L cams with the SVT intake will have a reasonably flat torque curve with a bump at 4500 or so and will not drop off as bad as they will with the ovalport intake. The SVT intake being tuned for the higher rpm does help the oval cams hold on longer and makes for a reasonably good alternative.
However, I'd have to post pics of the comparisons that I have if I had an easy way to post them and show you how good the hybrid torque curves can be.

[Rikenbomb]

ok . i understand. i dont want to start a huge discussion and totally hijack this thread lol. on my 3L , i have the svt goodies installed and I have the secondaries removed. am i hurting my motor. would it be better to just sell my heads and go back to full 3L

To be honest I have no idea. Have you dyno'd or dyno tuned your car yet? I would figure the lack of secondaries may hurt your lower rpm performance, but I have no idea.

[spridget]

Also, I have to say that the SVT or SVT hybrid seems to have the flattest powerband usually.


I have yet to see a single hybrid with a torque curve as flat as mine, especially after switching from SVT cams to the 3L cams. The exception is timeless420's fully built setup.... mine is just a stock 2003 Sable 3L with headers and a K&N.

[fordrule]

To be honest I have no idea. Have you dyno'd or dyno tuned your car yet? I would figure the lack of secondaries may hurt your lower rpm performance, but I have no idea.

i have not dynoed my car yet. after i got the secondaries removed and tuned. i got in an accident and now currently not around my car. the plan when i get home is to install my 65mm TB , 24#inj, take my xcal2 and prp to a dyno and tune it.

[warmonger]

The IMRC switchover point is obvious and that tells you it is 3800rpm at that point.
On the other hand am I the only one who can see that the Crossover points at 5252RPM for both graphs are offset?
Am I also the only one that can see if you line those two back up then the hybrid horsepower will be almost superimposed right over top of the 05 engine in the low range, the real low end will be higher and so will the topEnd!

http://www.fordcontour.org/uploads/1185930140/gallery_1032_101_57813.jpg

Analysis:
Since these are overlayed in terms of time, one has to compare at what time the engine hit a known rpm, 5252 is a good known point on both. It took the hybrid 9.8 seconds or so to hit 5252 rpm and it took the ovalport 3L 8.7 seconds to hit it's 5252 rpm. If you just stop there then you'd think the ovalport was faster to that rpm. However what we don't know is the starting point of each graph. In the graph below we see that the two power curves start at exactly the same time. Well once you shift the graphs over to line up the 5252 rpm point you'll see that the ovalport was started about 1000rpm later in the rpm range, and it added about 1 full second to the time it took to accelerate. So in reality they are not superimposed correctly and the hybrid has been run over a longer rpm range, therefore the time of the dyno run should be longer. The real story is told in terms of area under the torque curve and HP curves. That little torque bump of the escape cams doesn't do much in terms of overal power because of how late it comes on and how fast it drops off. The escape camm'd engine might do better in the low range if it actually had a decent tune but it looks like the spark timing is still designed around the 2.5L split port and NOT a proper tune that maximize the low range of the 3l ovalport.

That hybrid will absolutely DESTORY that O5 ovalport in terms of broad power band and usable power. The torque curve is extremely broad and it makes good power on the same dyno. If the weight in the car is the same then that hybrid will make that ovalport car look like a Ford Tempo on the track.
I have already pulled apart the two graphs in photoshop and repositioned them with proper alignment so that the two graphs are correlated at the 5252rpm crossover point. Once it is posted I'll go ahead and show the breakdown to the errors and why the hybrid is far superior.

[buckeyesvt]

The IMRC switchover point is obvious and that tells you it is 3800rpm at that point.
On the other hand am I the only one who can see that the Crossover points at 5252RPM for both graphs are offset?
Am I also the only one that can see if you line those two back up then the hybrid horsepower will be almost superimposed right over top of the 05 engine in the low range, the real low end will be higher and so will the topEnd!

http://www.fordcontour.org/uploads/1185930140/gallery_1032_101_57813.jpg

Analysis:
Since these are overlayed in terms of time, one has to compare at what time the engine hit a known rpm, 5252 is a good known point on both. It took the hybrid 9.8 seconds or so to hit 5252 rpm and it took the ovalport 3L 8.7 seconds to hit it's 5252 rpm. If you just stop there then you'd think the ovalport was faster to that rpm. However what we don't know is the starting point of each graph. In the graph below we see that the two power curves start at exactly the same time. Well once you shift the graphs over to line up the 5252 rpm point you'll see that the ovalport was started about 1000rpm later in the rpm range, and it added about 1 full second to the time it took to accelerate. So in reality they are not superimposed correctly and the hybrid has been run over a longer rpm range, therefore the time of the dyno run should be longer. The real story is told in terms of area under the torque curve and HP curves. That little torque bump of the escape cams doesn't do much in terms of overal power because of how late it comes on and how fast it drops off. The escape camm'd engine might do better in the low range if it actually had a decent tune but it looks like the spark timing is still designed around the 2.5L split port and NOT a proper tune that maximize the low range of the 3l ovalport.

That hybrid will absolutely DESTORY that O5 ovalport in terms of broad power band and usable power. The torque curve is extremely broad and it makes good power on the same dyno. If the weight in the car is the same then that hybrid will make that ovalport car look like a Ford Tempo on the track.
I have already pulled apart the two graphs in photoshop and repositioned them with proper alignment so that the two graphs are correlated at the 5252rpm crossover point. Once it is posted I'll go ahead and show the breakdown to the errors and why the hybrid is far superior.

Again there my misinformed, much confused know it all of tuning "god"? That is a time graph - Do you see engine RPM across the bottom or a measurement in seconds? I clearly see the bottom reads Time(s) and it starts at -2 and works up to 18 seconds.

I'll take this real slow for you as you and your "slightly ignorant" friend (BurritaSVT) can't comprehend the meaning of this graph. This graph is used by "real" tuners to tune engines by "TIME" not by highest HP. If high HP is your goal, that's great - Have a schlong measuring contest all you want. However, if you really want a "reality based" graph that shows 2 cars on the same dyno pulling the same 2200RPM to 6800RPM and the time it takes in 4th gear (timed by the dyno software) this is how you do it. So while you are talking about the Hybrid spanking the 05 engine and it walking away from it like a Tempo - The reality is in 4th gear alone it pulled the one gear 1.5 seconds faster than the Hybrid. Now, let's cover this point again real slow - It PULLED THE 4TH GEAR RUN 1.5 SECONDS FASTER THAN THE HIGHER HP HYBRID. Got that? Great.

So, now that you've gotten a lesson in something you clearly never "saw" as a "tuner":crazy: now maybe you should go back to school and study how this applies to racing. If you have a car with the same engine, trans and final drive but with different HP's and TQ - This is the true measure of which one is quicker. This is not about top speed, nor is it about the highest HP. This shows you that the midrange HP/TQ coming on earlier helps the straight 3L walk on a Hybrid. I'm not a dyno tuner, but having cars tuned over the years and working with the dyno operators and tuners really teaches you something. It's not always the Highest HP car that wins the race, sometimes the car itself is just faster based on it's combination of parts. Got that?

-Dom

[StealthyWeasel]

I raced a straight 3L with almost the same mods as you and I spanked him eight ways from sunday. Roll, dig, 1-2-3-4-5 you name it we did it. That ain't dyno dragging, number bragging, it's the street.

EDIT for clarity: both 99 cougars, similar weight, both same final drive, stock wheels

[buckeyesvt]

So you raced an 05 Sable motor? You didn't? Was it tuned? Hello? Variables.... they mean the world. 2 engines are not the same even if built with the same parts. Does saying you beat a straight 3L make you "feel better" about this graph? If so, that's ok. I understand. ;)

-Dom

[StealthyWeasel]

Er, yeah.. it helps me sleep at night :biggrin:

nah seriously though I can't be for certain.

It was a 2001 sable motor with [what-fits-under-the-hood-i-forget] UIM, 60mm TB, MSDS headers, test pipe, trubendz catback, and a road tune by local tuner (yeah yeah I know). Also had SVT clutch/fidanza flywheel.

[cpapashley]

Oh come now DOM, who in there right mind when they are racing will let the vehicle drop to a dismal 2,200rpm and then hit WOT and wait patiently for the vehicle to wake up. These two cars have a completely different torque curve and if you are trying to prove that well you have succeeded.

But this is nonsensical. Each engine has its own unique way of getting the best out of it, my MPV will be absolutely spanked by a Holden commodore 3.8l v6 if we lock it in to fourth gear (equivalent of third in an auto assuming 1:1 ratio), yet my same pathetic people mover with the 2.5l engine from a standing or rolling start has (and does) keep up with and in some cases has pulled ahead of a Commodore (which is like a v6 pontiac). Now why the difference, well simple physics in first gear I must spend all of .25 of a second in that same area that you are touting as so important in fourth gear. From then on I am in the territory of my engine 4,500-6500rpm. Never leave that region when racing someone......(not that I do that too often as a responsible people mover driver)

This is such a pointless comparison. It is not real world. Even a "Turbo" set up if you floor it from say 1500 rpm in fourth gear will get beaten by just about any car, even a ford Fiesta.....

Go back and do some homework. Gear on Gear from relevant points this is a very good graph, do the comparison in the 4500-6500rpm section and that is then relevant to a racing situation.

If you then talk about the around town driveability of the ovalport, which is what is being shown then the oval port will seemingly "have it all over" the hybrid. But seriously who drives and holds it in fourth gear from 2200rpm ??? Even my good old CD4e transmission knows to change down so it will use the torque curve of the engine.....:crazy:

I think this discussion is really mute and of no benefit at all.

I am with you warmonger on this one...I think you mentioned in the other thread to get a hybrid and ovalport side by side and race....much better idea.

Now I am not saying that the ovalport does not have some hidden potential that can be found with appropriate tuning/hardware setup but this discussion is just plain stupid.

[fordrule]

henry
my questions were more aimed towards the use of the 99 3L LIM vs 00 lim/SVT LIM. regardless of the secondaries since mine are removed and tuned for the removal of them. you said that the runners were bigger. did u need to use the stock or the 3L gaskets and did you port match for them. I have always been on the assumption more air+more fuel+more spark= more power

or would the use of the svt be of no difference of the 3L . would it be worth the swap or wpuld the notice be un-noticeable

thanks
joey

[buckeyesvt]

Oh come now DOM, who in there right mind when they are racing will let the vehicle drop to a dismal 2,200rpm and then hit WOT and wait patiently for the vehicle to wake up. These two cars have a completely different torque curve and if you are trying to prove that well you have succeeded.

But this is nonsensical. Each engine has its own unique way of getting the best out of it, my MPV will be absolutely spanked by a Holden commodore 3.8l v6 if we lock it in to fourth gear (equivalent of third in an auto assuming 1:1 ratio), yet my same pathetic people mover with the 2.5l engine from a standing or rolling start has (and does) keep up with and in some cases has pulled ahead of a Commodore (which is like a v6 pontiac). Now why the difference, well simple physics in first gear I must spend all of .25 of a second in that same area that you are touting as so important in fourth gear. From then on I am in the territory of my engine 4,500-6500rpm. Never leave that region when racing someone......(not that I do that too often as a responsible people mover driver)

This is such a pointless comparison. It is not real world. Even a "Turbo" set up if you floor it from say 1500 rpm in fourth gear will get beaten by just about any car, even a ford Fiesta.....

Go back and do some homework. Gear on Gear from relevant points this is a very good graph, do the comparison in the 4500-6500rpm section and that is then relevant to a racing situation.

If you then talk about the around town driveability of the ovalport, which is what is being shown then the oval port will seemingly "have it all over" the hybrid. But seriously who drives and holds it in fourth gear from 2200rpm ??? Even my good old CD4e transmission knows to change down so it will use the torque curve of the engine.....:crazy:

I think this discussion is really mute and of no benefit at all.

I am with you warmonger on this one...I think you mentioned in the other thread to get a hybrid and ovalport side by side and race....much better idea.

Now I am not saying that the ovalport does not have some hidden potential that can be found with appropriate tuning/hardware setup but this discussion is just plain stupid.

Perhaps this is beyond you like it is Warmonger and BurritaSVT (that's ok, I'm getting used to it now).

You are comparing 2 different cars (MPV and Holden) with 2 different weights and different motors. Each motor has different characteristics - Of course one would pull on the other in different areas - They are different!

This was between a Cougar and Contour. Same transmission, same 3L block. That is a good close comparison - Follow me so far? Warmonger has been silent so far, however his buddy has still been digging worse on CEG... Funny really. Perhaps reality has set in and the HP figures are starting to bite, I understand.

Stop comparing apples to oranges, and whatever the comraderie is it's pointless. This is a hybrid vs. a straight 3L. Sure any "street race" can have a different outcome - There's shifting involved and driver "skill". This test put all that aside so we could see what the engines could really do. Now you have an arguement? Go away - I can't answer your comments because they are all meritless against the dyno proof.

If you don't like what you see, don't mock it. Deal with it, there's alot of money invested into testing and dyno's. Something that's clealy not coming out of your pocket - So I would take it all in as a benefit and stop the bickering.

-Dom

[fordrule]

http://www.chrlen.ch/gl/images/smilies/popcorn.gif

[buckeyesvt]

Here's a very good reason the straight 3L is faster - Just look at the graph. This will put it all to bed.

-Dom

[StealthyWeasel]

http://www.chrlen.ch/gl/images/smilies/popcorn.gif

pass it over here!

[wadespencer99]

Wow...who the **** are you? :rofl:

[FastCougar]

All this proves is that if you are trolling around in 4th gear at 1,000 RPMs and don't downshift, the straight 3L will beat a Hybrid in acceleration due to having more torque on tap. Last I checked, when I shifted into 4th gear, it dropped me square into the powerband of the SVT cams. This really is getting silly ... who does an entire run in 4th gear from 1,000 RPM? Nobody!

[buckeyesvt]

That's not the point of the graphs - They actually start at 2200RPM ( I won't chastise you for it however, no biggie) and ends at 6800RPM. It's a non-drag race method of comparing like engines. Take it with a grain of salt then, that's cool. Look at the original dyno (starts at 2200), this is the time graph of both runs and the software places everything where it needs to be based on the time it did it. So 4th gear from 2200RPM to 6800RPM.I can see your point about downshifting, how about if we did a pull in 3rd with the same parameters? The results would stay the same, midrange HP / TQ difference over a 2300RPM area between 3000 and 5300 where the Straight is clearly "better". Waiting till 5300 RPM before your HP starts pulling away from straight 3L?

Good points - mostly all of them. I'd be up to racing (in my class - not against a FI engine). Anyone else?

-Dom

[BurritaSVT]

That's not the point of the graphs - They actually start at 2200RPM ( I won't chastise you for it however, no biggie) and ends at 6800RPM. It's a non-drag race method of comparing like engines. Take it with a grain of salt then, that's cool. Look at the original dyno (starts at 2200), this is the time graph of both runs and the software places everything where it needs to be based on the time it did it. So 4th gear from 2200RPM to 6800RPM.I can see your point about downshifting, how about if we did a pull in 3rd with the same parameters? The results would stay the same, midrange HP / TQ difference over a 2300RPM area between 3000 and 5300 where the Straight is clearly "better". Waiting till 5300 RPM before your HP starts pulling away from straight 3L?

Good points - mostly all of them. I'd be up to racing (in my class - not against a FI engine). Anyone else?

-Dom


Ok so lets be fair here we already know the SVT and 3 liter cannot be comapred since the SVT is designed for the person who want to race and if you want the show floor model of the taurus then just put it in still makes more power then the stock engines in our car. I asked you to put a dyno plot with speed which is more accurate since the tires are different ebough to give you a false impression of the time zone stuff where the engine was neve meant to cruise at period. Please show me the speed dyno I can critique it for you or send me the raw file so I can once again take it out of the STD too.

The big point is really no the hybrid but it is the full 3 liter swap here the numbers you have shown was no improvement over the 2003 taurus block in performance and we even discusssed that the coils' voltage output will suffer if you put them in series since I hope you know how resistance decrease drops voltages on coils which means the spark will to weak to support boosted applications. And if you went the parrell way the best in my opinion since we are maintaining the spark if not more but will overload the PCM drivers quicker due to the increase load demand to drive the coils. If you built your own coil driver on a circuit board then forgive me for mentioning this again.

So is it worth these guys buying a harness from you when all they have to do is just swap the engine 2000-2003 and just modify the fuel system like you and the EGR, TB and harness change for less money since you are adding a expense up top to patch up a COP harness for what gains none I can see so far since the mechanical aspects of the motor are identical. I rather use my money for a nice tune than buy a harness to use different coil ( my opionion)

And I can buy my fuel system mod different from yours may I add for $99 shipped their door. Curiuos at what you are selling your fuel system mod for might be a good idea to let people know first how much your system cost total price buying all your stuff for the same results of any full swap.

I do not find you at all a threat to me like you said before because two parts I sell for the 3 liter swaps is not the bread and dough for our company. I am just offering assistance to the guys who are need to upgrade but I am not convinced YET (who knows what the future brings) that the COP is any better for $$ or even better period. joey

[buckeyesvt]

Would you stop copying everything on CEG and posting it here? Like a little robot, thinking you still have a good point. This isn't a discussion I can have right now at length, I am at work. However, when I get home later I will start another thread just for the benefit of you and Tom to educate you on Dynojet dyno's and the WinPEP software.

Perhaps you may call a local dynojet dyno operator near you and have them explain to both of you what a time difference graph is useful for and why you DONT ADJUST THE FIGURES! The figures are extracted from the dyno data, not out of the air - You can't modify them to your whim and call it a "scam".

Ohh yes, I just recieved a copy of your "Cardoc scam" email you sent to my friend - I am so happy that you are emailing people about a "scam" when the only misinformed and miseducated people are you two.

Ohh, and lastly. Answer me this question that so many other people have asked and you have unanswered. Show me your dynos with the split port mod without secondaries. I want to see them, if you can't produce them then shut up. Period. You are speculating about paper, ripping on my COP harness when you yourself have no idea how it works.. The only people kicking and screaming here are you two. If this is how you conduct business... ohh boy.

And calling me a liar, a cheat, a scam artist and other flavorful things on an internet forum gives the all the ammunition I need to disect everything you do and pick it apart. So far, you've proven nothing except you can copy graphs and talk "crap". What else do you have? Next thing you will post a supercharged 3L graph and show how much better it is than a straight 3L - Still, not the point. The point itself has escaped your grasp - Shameful really.

-Dom

[BurritaSVT]

Would you stop copying everything on CEG and posting it here? Like a little robot, thinking you still have a good point. This isn't a discussion I can have right now at length, I am at work. However, when I get home later I will start another thread just for the benefit of you and Tom to educate you on Dynojet dyno's and the WinPEP software.

Perhaps you may call a local dynojet dyno operator near you and have them explain to both of you what a time difference graph is useful for and why you DONT ADJUST THE FIGURES! The figures are extracted from the dyno data, not out of the air - You can't modify them to your whim and call it a "scam".

Ohh yes, I just recieved a copy of your "Cardoc scam" email you sent to my friend - I am so happy that you are emailing people about a "scam" when the only misinformed and miseducated people are you two.

Ohh, and lastly. Answer me this question that so many other people have asked and you have unanswered. Show me your dynos with the split port mod without secondaries. I want to see them, if you can't produce them then shut up. Period. You are speculating about paper, ripping on my COP harness when you yourself have no idea how it works.. The only people kicking and screaming here are you two. If this is how you conduct business... ohh boy.

And calling me a liar, a cheat, a scam artist and other flavorful things on an internet forum gives the all the ammunition I need to disect everything you do and pick it apart. So far, you've proven nothing except you can copy graphs and talk "crap". What else do you have? Next thing you will post a supercharged 3L graph and show how much better it is than a straight 3L - Still, not the point. The point itself has escaped your grasp - Shameful really.

-Dom

First off yout friend you are speaking of is Terry who you drug into this discussion and we were talking about working together to sell new products and already made products to benefit each other. The email was a discussion on how you manipulated the whole idea tp make your graph look better. I was an active member for many years here and CEG and the first time or I am sure everyone here will raisse their hand that this if the first time someone posted time and never rpms. Heck I would have done both at the same time and that would have been more affective but you purposely did not even make the dyno public in rpm till we examined the graph I am will agree with you now on the time part if the car was measured in seconds only which you stated it would have achieved that rpm quicker based on the fact that the tires were the same that is why you must do speed instead because the rollers never lie 30 mph to 118 mph then take the two dyno plots overlap them where there is one graph at speed and one at the mph. Thar is why you can't use secs because smaller tires will be fastee even a worn tire will net 8mph difference where a off size can be as much as 15mph off.

Summary is two identical cars same power an torque the one with smaller tires will accelerate faster do to leverage. Joey

[BurritaSVT]

Would you stop copying everything on CEG and posting it here? Like a little robot, thinking you still have a good point. This isn't a discussion I can have right now at length, I am at work. However, when I get home later I will start another thread just for the benefit of you and Tom to educate you on Dynojet dyno's and the WinPEP software.

Perhaps you may call a local dynojet dyno operator near you and have them explain to both of you what a time difference graph is useful for and why you DONT ADJUST THE FIGURES! The figures are extracted from the dyno data, not out of the air - You can't modify them to your whim and call it a "scam".

Ohh yes, I just recieved a copy of your "Cardoc scam" email you sent to my friend - I am so happy that you are emailing people about a "scam" when the only misinformed and miseducated people are you two.

Ohh, and lastly. Answer me this question that so many other people have asked and you have unanswered. Show me your dynos with the split port mod without secondaries. I want to see them, if you can't produce them then shut up. Period. You are speculating about paper, ripping on my COP harness when you yourself have no idea how it works.. The only people kicking and screaming here are you two. If this is how you conduct business... ohh boy.

And calling me a liar, a cheat, a scam artist and other flavorful things on an internet forum gives the all the ammunition I need to disect everything you do and pick it apart. So far, you've proven nothing except you can copy graphs and talk "crap". What else do you have? Next thing you will post a supercharged 3L graph and show how much better it is than a straight 3L - Still, not the point. The point itself has escaped your grasp - Shameful really.

-Dom

First off yout friend you are speaking of is Terry who you drug into this discussion and we were talking about working together to sell new products and already made products to benefit each other. The email was a discussion on how you manipulated the whole idea tp make your graph look better. I was an active member for many years here and CEG and the first time or I am sure everyone here will raisse their hand that this if the first time someone posted time and never rpms. Heck I would have done both at the same time and that would have been more affective but you purposely did not even make the dyno public in rpm till we examined the graph I am will agree with you now on the time part if the car was measured in seconds only which you stated it would have achieved that rpm quicker based on the fact that the tires were the same that is why you must do speed instead because the rollers never lie 30 mph to 118 mph then take the two dyno plots overlap them where there is one graph at speed and one at the mph. Thar is why you can't use secs because smaller tires will be fastee even a worn tire will net 8mph difference where a off size can be as much as 15mph off.

Summary is two identical cars same power an torque the one with smaller tires will accelerate faster do to leverage. Joey

[fordrule]

http://www.chrlen.ch/gl/images/smilies/popcorn.gif

[cpapashley]

Perhaps this is beyond you like it is Warmonger and BurritaSVT (that's ok, I'm getting used to it now).

You are comparing 2 different cars (MPV and Holden) with 2 different weights and different motors. Each motor has different characteristics - Of course one would pull on the other in different areas - They are different!

This was between a Cougar and Contour. Same transmission, same 3L block. That is a good close comparison - Follow me so far? Warmonger has been silent so far, however his buddy has still been digging worse on CEG... Funny really. Perhaps reality has set in and the HP figures are starting to bite, I understand.

Stop comparing apples to oranges, and whatever the comraderie is it's pointless. This is a hybrid vs. a straight 3L. Sure any "street race" can have a different outcome - There's shifting involved and driver "skill". This test put all that aside so we could see what the engines could really do. Now you have an arguement? Go away - I can't answer your comments because they are all meritless against the dyno proof.

If you don't like what you see, don't mock it. Deal with it, there's alot of money invested into testing and dyno's. Something that's clealy not coming out of your pocket - So I would take it all in as a benefit and stop the bickering.

-Dom

Interesting that you are saying they are the same car.....now even with your meticulous explanation over the thread and various others Dom, it seems that you are missing my point completely, that you then go and admit is relevant when fastcougar states the same point that who hangs around in the same gear....


All this proves is that if you are trolling around in 4th gear at 1,000 RPMs and don't downshift, the straight 3L will beat a Hybrid in acceleration due to having more torque on tap. Last I checked, when I shifted into 4th gear, it dropped me square into the powerband of the SVT cams. This really is getting silly ... who does an entire run in 4th gear from 1,000 RPM? Nobody!

By the way I really don't like your tone toward me. "...go away..." and various other comments. I do want to discuss this as I see there are some important points here that should be discussed on reading through, so I do apologise for my earlier comment that it is not relevant, I think some real world comparisons should be made. (Even if they are in winpep)

My point and comparison was very sensible, it is obvious that the cams and Intake/heads provide a vastly different torque curve, so they may as well be different cars. I understand your reason for comparison though as you are trying to make a point on this superior torque in the lower ranges of straight 3l. Which will make it a wonderful engine for many, hence the reason the 3.0l duratec is in so many vehicles with these same Torque Characteristics. But....

I do think it is important to do some real world runs, because what interests most is what will my car be like when I am "racing" someone. Whether it is the drag strip or the race track.

I don't understand why you don't put together a couple of runs that make some sense and show what really happens on the road. The software you mention surely could produce that.

Forget a run like this that shows the straight 3.0l will provide more torque in the 3300 to 5300 rpm range compared to the Hybrid.

I am just a tad skeptical on the actual useable torque band of the straight 3l, being able to effectively compete against the Hybrids upper torque band. There is clearly increased torque available between 3300rpm and 5300rpm in the Straight 3l according to the posted dynojet runs you posted. But with the torque plummeting at that point and the Hybrid just starting to "wake" up. I guess I would like to see some more real world comparisons, as much of that 2 second gap seemed to open up in the RPM range that suited the Straight 3.0l as compared to the Hybrid. What happens in a comparison over various "speeds" in various gears. That is why they post those in the Auto magazines, they are relevant...50mph to 80mph.....etc. as there may well be a gear change necessary in the straight 3.0l whereas the hybrid may not.

Just make the comparison more real world that is all I am asking.

...and stop the insulting posts, I dislike them, especially when I am quite interested in your COP setup. I want to see some real world comparisons...

http://www.newcougar.org/forums/attachments/3-0l-duratec-performance/30768d1190600609-direct-tq-hp-comparison-3l-straight-oval-hybrid-warmonger.jpg

[buckeyesvt]

Interesting that you are saying they are the same car.....now even with your meticulous explanation over the thread and various others Dom, it seems that you are missing my point completely, that you then go and admit is relevant when fastcougar states the same point that who hangs around in the same gear....



By the way I really don't like your tone toward me. "...go away..." and various other comments. I do want to discuss this as I see there are some important points here that should be discussed on reading through, so I do apologise for my earlier comment that it is not relevant, I think some real world comparisons should be made. (Even if they are in winpep)

My point and comparison was very sensible, it is obvious that the cams and Intake/heads provide a vastly different torque curve, so they may as well be different cars. I understand your reason for comparison though as you are trying to make a point on this superior torque in the lower ranges of straight 3l. Which will make it a wonderful engine for many, hence the reason the 3.0l duratec is in so many vehicles with these same Torque Characteristics. But....

I do think it is important to do some real world runs, because what interests most is what will my car be like when I am "racing" someone. Whether it is the drag strip or the race track.

I don't understand why you don't put together a couple of runs that make some sense and show what really happens on the road. The software you mention surely could produce that.

Forget a run like this that shows the straight 3.0l will provide more torque in the 3300 to 5300 rpm range compared to the Hybrid.

I am just a tad skeptical on the actual useable torque band of the straight 3l, being able to effectively compete against the Hybrids upper torque band. There is clearly increased torque available between 3300rpm and 5300rpm in the Straight 3l according to the posted dynojet runs you posted. But with the torque plummeting at that point and the Hybrid just starting to "wake" up. I guess I would like to see some more real world comparisons, as much of that 2 second gap seemed to open up in the RPM range that suited the Straight 3.0l as compared to the Hybrid. What happens in a comparison over various "speeds" in various gears. That is why they post those in the Auto magazines, they are relevant...50mph to 80mph.....etc. as there may well be a gear change necessary in the straight 3.0l whereas the hybrid may not.

Just make the comparison more real world that is all I am asking.

...and stop the insulting posts, I dislike them, especially when I am quite interested in your COP setup. I want to see some real world comparisons...

http://www.newcougar.org/forums/attachments/3-0l-duratec-performance/30768d1190600609-direct-tq-hp-comparison-3l-straight-oval-hybrid-warmonger.jpg

Ok, praytell- What would you like to see. What in my software would you like to compare. Give me specifics and I will do that tonight and post what you like. As I said in the beginning of this early on (I can do this all day long). I am not altering numbers or photoshopping anything. That said, it's no skin off my back to reconfigure the software to map out whatever your whim wishes.

And my attitude by now should be excused, being dragged through the mud by being called a liar, a cheat and a scammer has certainly spoiled my cheery disposition. Ask how they emailed my friends on the site telling them how I "scammed" everyone. Pretty low blows for information I am freely disclosing. Perhaps they don't like the info or it hurts their "hype" on their product. Too bad, man up and have a decent conversation or shut it...( I'm talking to both Warmonger and BurritaSVT). I have no truck with dropping this whole conversation and moving on if I have to argue with stupid anymore. It's everyone's loss then isn't it - Ruin it for the bunch, go ahead.

-Dom

[cpapashley]

OK don't know anything about the liar and cheat stuff, haven't seen any pm's. So I will leave that in your lap and those that are offending.

For me (of course don't forget that I am in australia, so the time difference probably means you are fast asleep right now) I would like to understand a little better where the biggest difference is on the road in terms of common acceleration points.

A couple of rolling start runs from say 40mph-80mph, 50mph-70mph, 60-100mph

If you can show a third gear run for the first two and a fourth gear run for all, that should clarify for me some areas that are of particular interest.

Include on the graph:

left axis, torque
horizontal axis, time
right axis, mph

now I cannot remember if you said you had the third gear info, but if you do that would be nice as I think in those first two ranges it would be far more relevant.

One thing I noticed on those earlier graphs of the hybrid, was the "jittery" nature above 4500. What is that?

Also I do not know much about these drf files, and winpep. Are they able to be placed into a program I know like excel and graph produced from them? Just pm me on that one.

won't ask any more questions at the moment. While I understand your attitude is a result of proceedings, I still think it is important to understand that I am asking questions that I feel are relevant and need to be answered so I can see and understand whether the difference you are displaying is relevant to real world driving or not.

Thanks in advance.

[morbid]

WinPEP is free desktop software provided to record and view ".drf" files. Those files are dyno outputs from Dynojet dynos. WinPEP allows you to export the files into a wide range of delimited files, which allows for much more versatility beyond what WinPEP is capable of displaying.

[cpapashley]

WinPEP is free desktop software provided to record and view ".drf" files. Those files are dyno outputs from Dynojet dynos. WinPEP allows you to export the files into a wide range of delimited files, which allows for much more versatility beyond what WinPEP is capable of displaying.

Thanks for confirming that, so if it can provide delimited files that means that I can get them into excel. So If you want to send me the files buckeyesvt, I am happy to manipulate to my hearts content. Will provide interesting discussions over on the MPV forum as well. Intend to post some comparisons over there if that is Ok with you.

[Rikenbomb]

It's not ok with me.

[warmonger]

Again there my misinformed, much confused know it all of tuning "god"? That is a time graph - Do you see engine RPM across the bottom or a measurement in seconds? I clearly see the bottom reads Time(s) and it starts at -2 and works up to 18 seconds.

I'll take this real slow for you as you and your "slightly ignorant" friend (BurritaSVT) can't comprehend the meaning of this graph. This graph is used by "real" tuners to tune engines by "TIME" not by highest HP. If high HP is your goal, that's great - Have a schlong measuring contest all you want. However, if you really want a "reality based" graph that shows 2 cars on the same dyno pulling the same 2200RPM to 6800RPM and the time it takes in 4th gear (timed by the dyno software) this is how you do it. So while you are talking about the Hybrid spanking the 05 engine and it walking away from it like a Tempo - The reality is in 4th gear alone it pulled the one gear 1.5 seconds faster than the Hybrid. Now, let's cover this point again real slow - It PULLED THE 4TH GEAR RUN 1.5 SECONDS FASTER THAN THE HIGHER HP HYBRID. Got that? Great.

So, now that you've gotten a lesson in something you clearly never "saw" as a "tuner":crazy: now maybe you should go back to school and study how this applies to racing. If you have a car with the same engine, trans and final drive but with different HP's and TQ - This is the true measure of which one is quicker. This is not about top speed, nor is it about the highest HP. This shows you that the midrange HP/TQ coming on earlier helps the straight 3L walk on a Hybrid. I'm not a dyno tuner, but having cars tuned over the years and working with the dyno operators and tuners really teaches you something. It's not always the Highest HP car that wins the race, sometimes the car itself is just faster based on it's combination of parts. Got that?

-Dom

Wow you talked real bad about me and my friend there. If I were to start name calling you would scream bloody murder....don't be hypocritical.


You are in error about almost everything. :banghead:
You can't compare two graphs by time when all he starting conditions are variable. RPM, wheel size throttle position, ending rpm, etc. You have too many unknowns. The most you can do with your data is compare torque/rpm and HP/rpm
Also, next time do it in SAE so your numbers aren't so inflated and so they can be compared with everyone else's numbers. I Sknosws you can still reprint the graph so why not be fair and print it with the same scaling everyone else uses? We know you want a fair comparison right, not something inflated by misuse of the scaling.

[warmonger]

Here's a very good reason the straight 3L is faster - Just look at the graph. This will put it all to bed.

-Dom

This is just plain scamming and b-crap! And by the way, I never posted publicly that you were scamming anyone...until now.

that graph is just the HP vs. seconds of each engine and again you have no established baseline to show that they started at the same time, that they have the same exact rpm range that they hit the same mph on the dyno at those same rpm points....etc.
It's like showing a painting to someone but turning it on its side so they can look at the edge of the frame and telling them it's a masterpiece. (it could be but is it...??)

I also am not suprised that Terry shared the email, I expected it and would have been a fool to think he wouldn't. I sent that as a little test to see his reaction and yours. I figured he and I are both engineers he might see the significance of posting ONLY the time data and makings so many assumptions about it.
Thank you, your attitude, your unwillingness to put that dyno data in standard format, and in general unwillingness to actually appreciate each point raised in these debates proves you lack a broader appreciation for the finer points of analysis and testing.
Go and read up on the scientific method...it'll help.

[Rikenbomb]

Also, next time do it in SAE so your numbers aren't so inflated...

:rofl: It's like 224 hp 200 tq. Ooooo so inflated. :rolleyes:

[buckeyesvt]

I also am not suprised that Terry shared the email, I expected it and would have been a fool to think he wouldn't. I sent that as a little test to see his reaction and yours. I figured he and I are both engineers he might see the significance of posting ONLY the time data and makings so many assumptions about it.
Thank you, your attitude, your unwillingness to put that dyno data in standard format, and in general unwillingness to actually appreciate each point raised in these debates proves you lack a broader appreciation for the finer points of analysis and testing.
Go and read up on the scientific method...it'll help.

You keep referring to yourself as an engineer? What "kind" of engineer are you? Are you a Rara-type of engineer... :rofl: Self proclaimed "engineers" are no better than self proclaimed "gospel healers". I hate "gospel healers" you do the math where this goes.

Unfortunately Terry didn't back you up - That extra "nudge" you thought you were going to get you didn't. Here's a "really brilliant" idea - if you want someone to back you up - Talk where they are. Terry doesn't do CEG, you know that. He also doesn't post on NECO either. You emailed him to try to bomb me on my own forums.... Acceleration time graphs are accepted for use as a comparison tool not only in the automotive industry but the aftermarket tuning community as well. Hey, they showed it to me - Wanna argue about it call my tuners and call them "misinformed". I'd love to see some type of "showdown"... Prove you are better.

Wasn't it before all this "Nautilis Performance" was created that ADC company also did the same stuff? Turbos, Supers and custom "mail order" tunes/chips? I remember you being an advocate for their products... weird.

Tom, if you want to discuss this with Terry's assistance you will need to do it on FCO. Everyone knows where to find him, if you think he will "assist" you in your "engineering thoughts" perhaps you should start a thread there. We have never deleted your threads or banned you like CEG has done with us in the past - Perhaps you are scared to come on my turf and bring this? You are both (You and Joey) uneducated when it came to the priniciple of the original discussion. It didn't stop either of you from calling me various names. You are still doing it - I'm merely saying I don't see the "plot" in all this as overall we are discussing a product that doesn't exist? Or does it? I'm really tired of discussing all this, as the point seems to stay the same on both sides - Which is fine. If both sides are firm, then do what they do and move on. I didn't steal my own graphs and post them on 2 "other" sites and claim all this stuff - You two did. Nobody even gave you permission to use any of that stuff in the first place... I know at least 2 people in this conversation that were "not happy" you were proving points with their graphs when if you are fixated on the Highest "HP" number the graph is irrelevant. If it makes 235Hp at 6500RPM or at 5800RPM.. what does it matter? You've already said it - It doesn't. It's the fact it does make the highest. Claim victory by getting the highest HP #'s to everyone - I could care less.

Your fixation on the small high end area from 5300 to 6750 is very short sighted compared to what is needed to get there. I don't see stock parts getting there, and if they do the engines put out 20-25ft lb of torque less. What are we doing? Creating Honda engines? Hope you're happy to "rice" out the community with your "ideas"... I'll keep my modest HP/TQ thank you.

-Dom

[buckeyesvt]

To sum this all up in a nutshell so I can stop bouncing between forums.. This is between me (Stage3Motorworks) and you & BurritaSVT (Nautilus Performance).

My original query about the "Split port to oval port" was my only "issue". Since then it has been clouded with graphs of engines that are not equipped with that idea. I'd feel it best if I have a "beef" with that design and you don't have any "data" to back it up with I would suggest you build one and get data or stop the senseless arguing. I'd love to show straight 3L graphs all day long, however I have nothing to compare it against... You know that, CEG & NECO know that - And I know that. This doesn't benefit anyone unless we are discussing and comparing the actual "Base issue".

Until I see some proof that your "budget" idea puts out what you "claim", I am not going to refute or answer any more of your posts. Keep your port load data and all that stuff, it's pretty and I understand it - However you have lost half the forum in trying to understand it. Keep it simple so everyone can understand. My original point was the straight 3L can be built by a skilled novice for $1300 (less if you factor in cheaper tuning). Your point is that your "split port mod" will be cheaper and the best route to go. Therefore, lets compare those. Is that fair logic for everyone?

-Dom

[warmonger]

You keep referring to yourself as an engineer? What "kind" of engineer are you? Are you a Rara-type of engineer... :rofl: Self proclaimed "engineers" are no better than self proclaimed "gospel healers". I hate "gospel healers" you do the math where this goes.
............etc................
-Dom

- We are not name callers, look back and reread who is doing the name calling. Pointing out certain types of behavior is not the same as name calling.

- I am a degreed engineer from a respected institution, A BS in MSE and further advanced education beyond that. Even before that I was a certified Technician at Infinity/Chevrolet dealership for 5 years. I can provide supporting documentation or you can just search the university Alumni and find out yourself. Honestly I know you wouldn't care anyway. Once I proved that your response would be degrees don't mean anything anyway. At least my reputation supports my degrees though...

- If I wasn't currently serving in the US Army as a commissioned officer then I would finish my advanced degree in engineering.

- Because I am an officer and I have a reputation, I LIVE the Army values in every way that I can. We will go the extra mile to ensure we do right by our customers because neither Joey nor I would have it any other way. I will go way out of my way to ensure I do a proper job no matter what the cost just to make sure that I have maintain my reputation for Integrity.
Ask Gary Miller how we do business, he's a respected member here.

- I don't speak for ADC, never did business with ADC. I did business with them when they were Streetflight and they took care of me. The tuning done on my car was adequate for the price I paid. It was not good enough in the long run so I began to tune myself. But as I said, for the price I paid it was adequate.

-I strive to be the best tuner for our platforms. Feel free to get customer feedback if you have any questions. If you need a tune, please go to our website.

- I only know Rara from the internet forums but he strikes me as a very intelligent fellow. He says he is a Ford engineer who works on brake systems and I have no reason to doubt him.

- Terry and I have a reasonable relationship and I am not speaking for him, nor can he speak for me. I don't need his help to research, support and present an argument. I include emails to him periodically of professional topics and I would hope he appreciates that. I could care less if he shares them with you.

- I have had an FCO account and many times been other in years past, but it has been a while. I never disrespected you on any forum before and I've only called BS on this dyno presentation because of the reasons I have already listed. Maybe calling it a scam was a bit disrespectful since that probably wasn't your intent but on the other hand you won't listen to reason and display it in comparable formats so what was I to think? I in no way stooped to the level of name calling that you enjoy. I think I won't go back on your forum any time soon because you have been using it to trash talk us (Nautilusperformance) which I hadn't been aware of since I don't go there until someone pointed it out after this recent drama.
I stick to CEG and NECO because they are both professionally moderated and I know that they will not let things get too out of hand.

- As far as your graphs, you posted them up and made no contention that they were not to be downloaded. I linked to your posts for all but the one where I aligned the graphs by rpm for you. I darn sure know that over the past years many many people have saved information, pics, and dynos that I've posted over the years. No one ever asked me permission but they will bring them back up years later. So far I've remained consistent..... :)

- If two cars are otherwise equal in drivetrain,(transmission shift points, engines, etc.) then the drivetrain that makes the most power is the winner.
You can do it as area under the curve or you can do it as peak numbers. Area under the curve is usually the better way. You can compare them in terms of shift points under acceleration to know the proper area under the curve to use for comparison. In either case it looks to me like the hybrid wins in both area under the curve, area under the curve with regard to shifting points, and in peak HP, but the ovalport wins in peak torque. Two out of three ain't bad.

-Price is debatable because people like Brad Noon among a few others has done complete hybrid SE swaps for less than $1000 by himself and made comparable power to a straight 3L. Labor rates also vary. In the end it is only performance that can compared.

[buckeyesvt]

- We are not name callers, look back and reread who is doing the name calling. Pointing out certain types of behavior is not the same as name calling.

You directly called me a liar and a scammer. Do you agree? I called your "idea" silly and stupid. I guess that is the same as calling you "silly and stupid"? If that's the way you see it, cool - But get the facts right.


- I am a degreed engineer from a respected institution, A BS in MSE and further advanced education beyond that. Even before that I was a certified Technician at Infinity/Chevrolet dealership for 5 years. I can provide supporting documentation or you can just search the university Alumni and find out yourself. Honestly I know you wouldn't care anyway. Once I proved that your response would be degrees don't mean anything anyway. At least my reputation supports my degrees though...

Ex-Ford line tecnician (through school) for 4 years and working for a friend privately. A BS in CS and partial (2yr) in EE (due to time / costs dropped). Degree's are degrees. Perhaps this arguement would be a fine one if we did our "degrees" in Automotive Engine design. Otherwise we can talk accredidations all day. Your rep supports your degrees? I guess my degree is worthless in this.. ohh wait - I did take circuit design and prototypiing!!! That's a pointless thing isn't it when I do electronics all day at my regular job.


- If I wasn't currently serving in the US Army as a commissioned officer then I would finish my advanced degree in engineering.

- Because I am an officer and I have a reputation, I LIVE the Army values in every way that I can. We will go the extra mile to ensure we do right by our customers because neither Joey nor I would have it any other way. I will go way out of my way to ensure I do a proper job no matter what the cost just to make sure that I have maintain my reputation for Integrity.
Ask Gary Miller how we do business, he's a respected member here.

Point being? I went to school instead of enlisting. My family is a military family (Marines). Perhaps my choice wasn't as "honorable" as yours - But to sit here and say you are a better person because you served is a matter of opinion. I've plenty of enlisted friends, they also say it's no different in than it is out. You can't change one's mental capacity or attitude - Repress yes. Change... no.

So your time served is the reason you are that good to customers? I can't think of a "solid" business anywhere that doesn't try to bend backwards for their customers. I don't have any upset customers, do you? I wouldn't know would I - I never attacked your business practices - Only a couple of "inventions". Stop pointing all over the map and make a point.


- I don't speak for ADC, never did business with ADC. I did business with them when they were Streetflight and they took care of me. The tuning done on my car was adequate for the price I paid. It was not good enough in the long run so I began to tune myself. But as I said, for the price I paid it was adequate.

Funny, that was the rage on CEG for quite a while. I believe you were also behind them until the fit hit the shan. Wrong?


-I strive to be the best tuner for our platforms. Feel free to get customer feedback if you have any questions. If you need a tune, please go to our website.


I never said you strived to be less? However fact is fact, ask any "other" real tuner about your "mail order tunes". I'm sure at your shop you tune solidly - But to send out that tune to other people and adjust from datalogs is not only time wasting, I can almost 100% assure you that you are leaving things on the table. Ohh, what's a couple of HP/TQ? To you, that's a lifeline it seems. Perhaps whip up a tune for me and I will pull my chip and compare. I'll pay the dyno costs and see how it works... Game?


- I only know Rara from the internet forums but he strikes me as a very intelligent fellow. He says he is a Ford engineer who works on brake systems and I have no reason to doubt him.

No comment.


- Terry and I have a reasonable relationship and I am not speaking for him, nor can he speak for me. I don't need his help to research, support and present an argument. I include emails to him periodically of professional topics and I would hope he appreciates that. I could care less if he shares them with you.

Emails of me scamming people are not "professional" solicitations. You stated above you don't name call - However "Subject: Emailing: cardoc's scam revealed.jpg" is ok? Lol, It still amazes me that you STILL think the time graph plots on each car should cross at 5252RPM. They would if it was an RPM graph - It was a time graph. Call yourself whatever name you would like, because if that isn't silly I don't know what is. Perhaps diving into "books" yourself may teach you a thing or two.


- I have had an FCO account and many times been other in years past, but it has been a while. I never disrespected you on any forum before and I've only called BS on this dyno presentation because of the reasons I have already listed. Maybe calling it a scam was a bit disrespectful since that probably wasn't your intent but on the other hand you won't listen to reason and display it in comparable formats so what was I to think? I in no way stooped to the level of name calling that you enjoy. I think I won't go back on your forum any time soon because you have been using it to trash talk us (Nautilusperformance) which I hadn't been aware of since I don't go there until someone pointed it out after this recent drama.
I stick to CEG and NECO because they are both professionally moderated and I know that they will not let things get too out of hand.

Tom, I can see through your feathers. Terry would rip you a new one and you know it. Alot of what you speak you have half-ideas and truths that beg to be differed. Like 13-15% Flow gain using SVT cams... Where's the proof? You state you used someone else's numbers - I guess it's too hard to pull out a caliper and measure it yourself. That's ok, I'll correct you on something else - I have no problem doing that all day. Perhaps if Terry didn't get shafted on CEG (like others) and had a real reason to come on NECO ( as most that need his services or questions ask on FCO) I bet this would be an entirely different situation. *Cluck* ...


- As far as your graphs, you posted them up and made no contention that they were not to be downloaded. I linked to your posts for all but the one where I aligned the graphs by rpm for you. I darn sure know that over the past years many many people have saved information, pics, and dynos that I've posted over the years. No one ever asked me permission but they will bring them back up years later. So far I've remained consistent..... :)

Yes, consistantly wrong. You've proven that fact over and over - However you won't face up and admit you looked at the graphs incorrectly. The rest is conjecture and propaganda. What I said about "people unhappy" isn't a lie. Take it at that and leave it alone.



- If two cars are otherwise equal in drivetrain,(transmission shift points, engines, etc.) then the drivetrain that makes the most power is the winner.
You can do it as area under the curve or you can do it as peak numbers. Area under the curve is usually the better way. You can compare them in terms of shift points under acceleration to know the proper area under the curve to use for comparison. In either case it looks to me like the hybrid wins in both area under the curve, area under the curve with regard to shifting points, and in peak HP, but the ovalport wins in peak torque. Two out of three ain't bad.

If the debate was about the highest performance - Your claims would be founded. Perhaps if the debate wasn't a hybrid's ability vs. that of a straight 3L drop in.... Then your oranges would compare to my apples. You say people have built them themselves. Sure, if you have all the parts handy it can be done cheaper. But look at it this way - I don't expect everyone here to say they have SVT equipment (plus they still need to buy your "paper product" to make it work. That's $400 right there they don't need with the straight engine. It has everything they need from the start. The only real thing that gets revised on the engine is a Fuel rail. $120 OEM from Ford.


-Price is debatable because people like Brad Noon among a few others has done complete hybrid SE swaps for less than $1000 by himself and made comparable power to a straight 3L. Labor rates also vary. In the end it is only performance that can compared.[/quote]

Stop right there. First off to be that closed minded that you pool everyone here into Contour/Cougar engine swap experts is silly. Brad Noon did that as a business, I'm sure he did it cheaper because he had his own parts and did his own fabrication. ASK BRAD NOON RIGHT NOW TO BUILD A 3L FOR ANYONE ELSE HERE FOR THAT MONEY. What's that? He can't. Then your whole point is less than moot and you get no cookie for wasting my time reading it. Like I said before, take a regular Cougar and outline costs involved - You won't come out smelling like a rose, I can assure you of that. If you want to sell your bits as "performance" parts - That's cool. But to line it up against a budget build and say it has more performance and it wins...

:crazy::bowdown::bs::gtfo::banghead::confused:

I'm not as mad as you are (mentally). Thanks for playing.

-Dom

[warmonger]

Okay. Have it your way. You are totally right.

[buckeyesvt]

Before rightfully handing this thread back to Rickenbomb who is the owner of this thread - I will say one thing. I have no tact, none whatsoever. Blame my parents and my military family for it - There was never any sugar coating of anything. It was "here's your options", EOS. If I'm too harsh for you, I bet your instructors in the service were much better than I - I'll freely admit that. I freely admit that I have no tact to put it "easier" than I see it as I speak my mind. So, with that said and the fact I've been on the internet for over 6 years doing the same thing... Wouldn't you think you would learn by now how I am. I'm not going to change overnight to deal with you on "your terms". I have facts, data and "here it is". Attacking me personally is naturally a hot-button. I would say if you and Joey hadn't double teamed me on both CEG and here I would be alot less "apprehensive" about both of you. That was a bad move, considering your points were all wrong and the choice of comparison horrible. I don't see you admitting anything - As far as your concerned sending emails to people I condsider "friends" telling them I'm scamming people when the fact is I wasn't - was competely acceptable. I didn't accept that as "agreeable" and I feel that was very poor judgement on your part. You started the ball rolling with that move - Deal with it.

-Dom

[Rikenbomb]

I added the dyno with SAE measurement in my first post. Please refer back to my first post

226 hp 200 tq - new mods and tune - blue

221 hp 198 tq - previous tune - red


Nice little torque increase there on the low end. I like. :)

And thank you! :)

[spridget]

I think it's time for a group hug!:wiggle: