Mo powah!! Tunes?

[Evil2ltr]

It has been pretty widely reported that these use a rather small turbo compared to the other 2.0T cars.

We for sure will not see gains like the 2.7 and 3.5 Eco's do in the F150, however, gaining 40whp and roughly 60wtq isn't bad for your basic tune. That is an 18% jump in power. I'm going off of the 5 star dyno plot. They also said this trans is the same as the Edge ST, in which case I don't see us hurting with this 2.0T unless it's forged and running much more power.

Yet they make the same rated power numbers as the other 2.0T variants. And of course we will not see V6 twin turbo gains...

40/60 at the wheels are legit, tangible gains and will move the Mav along pretty nicely.

Sponsored

 

[GaMaverick]

Yeah, alot of them just spoof what the ecu sees.

for example, it may tell the ecu you have 0 boost (but really you have like 5psi) so then the turbo (if it’s variable) may change the vanes positions to build more boost… in turn this can give you things like more boost from a start or higher peak values at certain areas of the curve.

the issue one may run into though:
Your tranny may not be rated for that level of Torque, so earlier failure

the ecu itself may have guard bands in place

(For example, they may code it ina. Fashion that says… if you have x rpm, you should have y boost, if not… there is an issue and send a flag for check engine light)

you really don’t want to buy one in a beta or early phase. Let the Guinea pigs work it out.

I’m well versed in ecoboost turbochargers. I have a Mustang 2013 3.7 V6 with a custom twin turbocharged setup using 3.5 EB Ford Racing turbochargers it makes 520 whp and 600 wtq. On 93 octane. I do use a water meth kit but for cooling the air charge and cylinders not power adder.
Stock block, pistons, rods, crank and stock 6R80 transmission.

All truck ecoboost turbo engines make more torque then horsepower. Stock and when tuned. You have to change out the turbocharger is you want more horsepower then torque.

 

[RonFetty]

I’m well versed in ecoboost turbochargers. I have a Mustang 2013 3.7 V6 with a custom twin turbocharged setup using 3.5 EB Ford Racing turbochargers it makes 520 whp and 600 wtq. On 93 octane. I do use a water meth kit but for cooling the air charge and cylinders not power adder.
Stock block, pistons, rods, crank and stock 6R80 transmission.

All truck ecoboost turbo engines make more torque then horsepower. Stock and when tuned. You have to change out the turbocharger is you want more horsepower then torque.

I prefer more torque than hp. I like that getup and go!!!

 

[nick112288]

Where did you hear 5 Star say it has the 8F57?

Everything I've seen and read says it's the 8F35 behind the 2.0

 

[Dueces]

Where did you hear 5 Star say it has the 8F57?

Everything I've seen and read says it's the 8F35 behind the 2.0

In a direct email from them when I asked if they were concerned about making 373wtq on this chassis.

 

[nick112288]

In a direct email from them when I asked if they were concerned about making 373wtq on this chassis.

Interesting. I would think more places/people who be talking about that.

 

[JASmith]

for example, it may tell the ecu you have 0 boost (but really you have like 5psi) so then the turbo (if it’s variable) may change the vanes positions to build more boost…

The 2.0 Ecoboost has a variable vane aka vgt turbocharger?

 

[Dueces]

Interesting. I would think more places/people who be talking about that.

I don't have my Maverick yet, or I would be doing the investigating myself. I was hoping someone would have posted part numbers and such of all the major components under the Mav. specifically for this reason.

 

[FakeCowboy]

In a direct email from them when I asked if they were concerned about making 373wtq on this chassis.

Even the Ford parts site says that all Ecoboost versions of the Maverick to include the 4K tow package models are using the 8F35. Seems like hearsay to me......

 

[Dueces]

I don't have my Maverick yet. If you guys want to make sure, look at the trans for some part numbers and see what cross references. I don't take their word for gospel, but I have a hard time believing a trans meant for a max of 258 lbft is holding up to over 400lbft at the crank. I don't know for a fact, I'm just forwarding info I have received. Like I said, I'll do more research whe I actually have my truck.

 

[VRausch]

The 2.0 Ecoboost has a variable vane aka vgt turbocharger?

It does not. It's a twin scroll I believe, and I don't know of a domestic gas vehicle build with a VGT setup currently.

 

[Bn1970]

torque management software limits power during shifts, which is when stuff usually breaks. this is why I find it hilarious when all the ''professional tuners'' claim to mess with the shift algorithms to give it firmer/faster shifts. just because you can doesn't mean you should. end result will eventually be a broken transmission, and, if the dealer finds the software's been messed with, no warranty work.
buyer beware. I've yet to see a ''tuner'' help out the owner when warranty is denied.

 

[VRausch]

this is why I find it hilarious when all the ''professional tuners'' claim to mess with the shift algorithms to give it firmer/faster shifts.

That's often increasing the apply pressures/reducing the time to shift to protect the clutches and transmission parts from more slipping under higher tq loads as a separate tune for the transmission available from a decent 'professional' tuner. It's usually a benefit for those reasons and reduces the potential for increased wear. The manufacturers balance wear with comfort to some degree, and that is based on the stock power levels. If you increase the output of an engine sufficiently and do nothing to the transmission (auto or dual clutch), you will absolutely cause increased wear.


Not sure what this has to do with the topic however, since I don't believe ANY current Ecoboost tunes make any changes to transmission parameters, let alone any one for the Maverick.

Sponsored