Fast Mavericks upgraded turbo

[Cherokee]

They're no longer sold, but the first WRX STi hit the road in 2004, 20 years ago, with a rated 300 hp and it weighed about 500 pounds less than a Maverick ecoboost awd.

I was just pointing out that your comment was a little silly.

I remember the WRX, I wanted one back then but could not justify spending the money on one. My wife was perfectly fine with me bringing home a 2008 HD 1200 Roadster rubber mount. But that was a lot less money.
The WRX and the Brat were the only two Subaru’s I ever almost bought :’P
Now they have that fantastic Boxster engine.
But I don’t like the CV transmissions, don’t like the way they operate.

Sponsored

 

[Cherokee]

A flat out Gone in sixty seconds car chase I found myself in because of a stupid comment a pal made about a girl. He yelled at the house as we drove by, “Wayne wants to f&@$? Glenda !
Her father heard it.
My buddy begged me to help him get away.
The bad dad’s car.
1968 Camaro.
I saw traction bars in my rear view mirror and heard the roar of the Holley headers as he came flying out of his drive way after the three of us idiot high school boys.
That man was hell bent on whipping our asses.
I hit the gas in my, don’t, ok ok go on and laugh.
In my 1969 Plymouth Barracuda with the
Cough cough 225 Slat six.

The chase was on. It was midnight and the dad was drinking beer on the porch when we rode by.
I was sober and with my spotter in the right seat we spent the next thirty minutes running for our lives.
Inner city, lots of streets, alleys and a few jaunts through parking lots and vacant lots.
I drove that Cuda like it was the
General Lee.
I lost him !

That thirty minutes cost me a set of tires. Drifting is not some new thing the kids do these days. It was 1976 and we called it point and shoot.
Let up a little on the throttle to throw weight on the front tires. Once pointed where you wanted to go floor it while sideways and eventually you stop going sideways. All with a low powered engine. Lots of tire rubber scrubbed.

His Camaro. Almost every turn he’d spin out. I think the posi rear end and traction bars plus the fat tires gave him a very loose rear end.
I hid my car in a friend’s garage for a month.
It was green, it was night, he was drinking.
I don’t think he remembered the color.
He never killed us.

I out drove him. It was Intense.

Glory Dayz.

 

[Big Swede]

The 2.0L EcoBoost can handle somewhere between 300–350 hp safely, depending on how it's tuned and driven. GROUP IV engine OIL - A MUST -

But here's the real limiting factor — it's not the engine, it's the 8-speed automatic transmission (8F35). That trans was originally designed for around 260–265 lb-ft of torque, which is already being pushed by the stock tune (277 lb-ft).

So while you can squeeze more power out of the engine, going much higher on torque without addressing the transmission is a risk. That’s the real bottleneck — not the block.

What about the 7 speed in the Lobo?

 

[Shoptruck]

What about the 7 speed in the Lobo?

It's the same transmission in the 22-24 ecoboost...

 

[Big Swede]

It's the same transmission in the 22-24 ecoboost...

I’m new to Ford’s. So are you saying the ecoboost makes a bunch of power so the transmission is fine in a Maverick with an upgraded turbo?

 

[Shoptruck]

I’m new to Ford’s. So are you saying the ecoboost makes a bunch of power so the transmission is fine in a Maverick with an upgraded turbo?

I've had a big turbo in one of mine for about a year now. Stay up on fluids and maintenance. Don't hammer on it from a dead stop, and it will be relatively fine. Obviously it's increasing wear adding more power but we have had zero issues with ours.

 

[Nw_adventure]

I’m good with my stock Turbo,
I can smoke a Subaru :’P

My friends 2024 - Subaru Outback/XT 2.4L Turbo definitely has more get up and go off the line than the 2.0 Eco- Even though its only rated at 10 more ponies.

 

[710-oil-614]

Has anyone here found out how far the HP can be boosted before the engine goes boom?

The 8F35 will go boom before the engine does.

 

[710-oil-614]

What's your references/sources for these assertions? Until that is demonstrated, I feel that your statements are 100% speculation unless you're either speaking from having experience with at least one Maverick modified to these levels whether as an owner or a tuner, and it's not helpful.

People from the Focus ST and/or Focus RS community own Mavericks and have tuned them. The 22-24 2.0 ecoboost is not the same as what any Focus ST used, despite the displacement and rated HP similarities, and the RS 2.3 is radically different other than the physical size of the block itself. The new '25 2.0 ecoboost is even more different from what a Focus ST had since it's port and direct injected.

But let's take a stop back and talk about you kind of setting these arbitrary guidelines.

First of all-- it's completely on the person paying the bills what's worth it, how much risk to take, if this is their daily driver or just a project that they can go days/weeks without driving, etc. I have only seen reports of one or two engines (one documented here on MTC) that have blown and both had a lot of miles (60-100k+) so it's not like people tune their trucks and it only lasts 10k miles after.

I have seen a number of reports of transmission replacements but there is no correlation to being tuned; it's much more, in my opinion, about ATF level and not following Ford's ridiculous 150k service interval for the 8F35. (Apparently they think that first service is full replacement?) Besides issues with them completely dying, I have seen a few 8F35s with issues with shift solenoids. Very few - and some of them were stock, not tuned. There are some people using launch control with their Livernois tunes - and even none of those have broken yet, or if they did, they aren't posting about it.

He is correct on the ft lb torque rating for the 8F35 (258.15 ft lbs) but Ford has already shown they are willing to exceed it with the Maverick stock rating.

https://www.transmissiondigest.com/ford-motor-company-and-the-hat-trick/

 

[R785_2022]

I can't speak for power levels over 300whp. I'm tuned with a 3" turboback and it's been launched plenty. Knock on wood, but 94,000 so far no issues.

I also own a 2006 Subaru Sti that's just tuned on Cobb. The Maverick is a ton of fun, a great daily, and hauls the occasional trailer, but it's not faster than the Subaru.

 

[Valzyran]

yeah. so, point being, there are a variety of Subarus that could likely outrun Cherokee's stock ecoboost Maverick.

My 2019 WRX would have been one of those Subaru's . Stock tune, catback, drop in filter and different wheels , Ooh and a roof rack ofc lol.

 

[Cyclone25]

I'd be interested in seeing exactly what parameters they used in assigning the peak torque value to the 8-speed. Seems kind of bizarre to assign a peak torque figure, and then ignore it and attach it to a motor with substantially more torque. Especially when it's going to be used for towing. I'm guessing they fortified the tranny somehow to be able to handle more torque than the official rating.

 

[RR - All the way]

You're somewhat new, and welcome to the forums.

You lead with "SAVE YOUR MONEY" in all caps, so I qualify that as a strong opinion and it remains one based on no-hands on experience with the Maverick.

I get it. There are transmissions in the Aisin 8/9 speed family that are rated for more torque and those that are rated for less. And clearly, the 8F35 mated to an engine making 277 lb-ft stock is questionable on paper when you start making more than a hundred additional.

But they're not breaking en masse. A person who tunes their Maverick and nothing else, or even a person who upgrades their turbo, is hardly pulling a pin on a live grenade.

There are risks to tuning and there are rewards.

Driving fast and driving abusively aren't necessarily the same thing, so in the context of this specific topic, people can upgrade their turbos, yes. Will it decrease the life of the engine and transmission? Yes, but powertrains don't live on dynos. Your truck could be totaled next week, or it could be retired at 150k miles. If the life of a properly maintained stock 2.0 ecoboost is materially the same as the life of a properly maintained *modified* 2.0 ecoboost, why not have some fun? The people who don't want to modify anything and care most about mpg are over in the hybrid powertrain subforum.

What does his being "new" have to do with it??

 

[Taemian]

Umm...in that video posted earlier...that guy completely lost credibility with me by saying that a cold air engine compartment hot air intake will produce 3-10 whp. I've worked with enough turbo and s/c'd engines to know that unless you have a ram air set up pulling in from a hood scoop/Naca duct/headlight housing, that it is a minus total hp, or at best it's a draw. Or the company is doing glory pulls where the intake is iced down and they make 3 runs a day to make heat soak non existent.

But then, I'm coming from a V8 (Terminator) and V6s (GNX) perspective which both produce a TON of heat, so maybe I don't have a clue with straight fours. But I'll bet dimes to donuts that the physics apply equally in all situations.

Sponsored