Click Here -> Please Consider Making a PayPal Contribution to the FordSix Forum!
2019 Contributors:
NJwpod, 1strodeo, mightynorseman, maxtrux, 6d7coupe, broncr, Phase3, 68Flareside240, bmbm40, mustang6, WorldChampGramp, justintendo, BigBlue94, ags290, motorsickle1130, Rooster, ousooner919, ethanperry, rzcrisis, DoctorC, jamyers, Motorboy, fastpat, Silverback280, chad, drag-200stang, THE FRENCHTOWN FLYER, Jimmys61falcon, rjonah, Sooshi, Robert92867, Invectivus


PLEASE TEST ON http://dev.fordsix.com

<<<***PLEASE READ*** New Site Update >>>

Speed density and it's underlying principles.

Moderator: Mod Squad

sdiesel
Registered User
Posts: 1210
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 12:33 am
Location: NW Oregon,Buxton currently

Speed density and it's underlying principles.

Post #1 by sdiesel » Thu Jul 09, 2020 1:18 am

Does anyone here really get the system.
I'm learning that it's a very tunable system.
I'm totally bewitched by this system and wonder about the engineering team that thot this up. It's frigging brilliant. I wonder how many patents are Ford's and what belonged to others ( Bosch o2)
I marvel that this team provided for everyparameter in a daily operation of an automobile.
This must have required thousands of hours with fairly rudimentary computer modeling.

I tumbled into a vortex of tuners that explain the re- mapping of this system in vague ( to me ) mathematical terms. But have mastered fully the nuances of the speed density system. Or sounds like it to my ears.
One of whom mentioned Feynman whom I had to look up.
So can a system like this be described totally in mathematical terms? Like they were doing on this one forum?
Is engineering , applied math? Or is mathematics a simple tool in engineering. A form of communication to avoid costly mis communication that is so often the case with words .

At certain levels of engineering is it just more comfortable to communicate in math than in words ?

Is this system a slightly debased and devalued because of its perceived complexity?.
It may be the backbone of a huge improvement in our engines if we could take the tuning seriously.
Especially since the darn thing came factory standard and all the improved parts hang already , from our engines.
Remap re cam and hold on, and pass emissions
a long love affair with the 300 six.
my lastest and final fling is a fresh 300 in an 88 ford f350 dually 4X flatbed

User avatar
xctasy
VIP Member
Posts: 7097
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2002 10:40 am
Location: PO Box 7072 Dunedin 9011,South Island, NEW ZEALAND
Contact:

Re: Speed density and it's underlying principles.

Post #2 by xctasy » Thu Jul 09, 2020 2:05 am

Not to Criticize, Complain, Compare or contend about it but Imho, pmuller9 got it summarized best as a shaper of minds and provider of great, terse info.

Fords Speed Density is a before event system of lookups with some N alpha lookups, and some closed loop at event, real time, administrative codes to control it.

MegaSquirt is a 100% closed loop at event, real time, administrative Speed Density system.


MAF systems are open and closed loop, part lookups, part administrative from the MAF inputs.

MechRick and pmuller9 described the TFi dual and single sych systems better than any other on the internet I've ever read.
Image
XEC Ltd ICBE's Inter Continental Ballistic Engines-
FAZER 6Bi (M112 & EEC5) or FAZER 6Ti (GT3582 & EEC5) 425 HP 4.1L/250 I-6
FAZER 6V0 3x2-BBL Holley 188 HP 3.3L/200 I-6 or 235 HP 4.1L/250 I-6
X-Flow Engine Components Ltd http://www.xecltd.info/?rd=10

User avatar
xctasy
VIP Member
Posts: 7097
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2002 10:40 am
Location: PO Box 7072 Dunedin 9011,South Island, NEW ZEALAND
Contact:

Re: Speed density and it's underlying principles.

Post #3 by xctasy » Thu Jul 09, 2020 2:27 am

The best way I describe a Speed Density system that doesn't have a Karmen-Vortex speed control system is that its like an aircraft petite tube and altimeter and compass on a Jet Ranger or other air craft. It gives the air craft a signal for speed , and pilot corrects the crafts speed and altitude and heading against those three things.

And that's what a speed density does inside the CPU. It responds to a flight situation just like a flight simulator. Everything is coded and runs conditional, do if true statements that are estimated heading verses actual. And it just adjusts to the dummy operating the throttle and it calculates what fuel is needed for a given air flow.
Image
XEC Ltd ICBE's Inter Continental Ballistic Engines-
FAZER 6Bi (M112 & EEC5) or FAZER 6Ti (GT3582 & EEC5) 425 HP 4.1L/250 I-6
FAZER 6V0 3x2-BBL Holley 188 HP 3.3L/200 I-6 or 235 HP 4.1L/250 I-6
X-Flow Engine Components Ltd http://www.xecltd.info/?rd=10

BigBlue94
Registered User
Posts: 591
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2018 6:38 pm
Location: Hoyt, Kansas

Re: Speed density and it's underlying principles.

Post #4 by BigBlue94 » Thu Jul 09, 2020 4:35 pm

This should help. Over at FullsizeBronco dot com, we used to have a guru of ford efi. So much so that its rumored that ford themselves shut him down. He used to produce wiring harnesses for a MAF conversion, among other things. He disappeared about 10 years ago and no one has seen him since. His website has been taken over, but luckily, someone saved an archive of it. Theres more info here than I can comprehend lol.

http://web.archive.org/web/20110906080440/http://www.fordfuelinjection.com:80/?p=1
1985 Bronco. 309ci I6, NP435, 4.56 gears, Detroit locker and tru-trac, 4" lift, and 37" swamper tires. The 309 is 9.75:1 CR with a Schneider 140H cam, 4bbl, roller rockers, larger valves, and headers.

sdiesel
Registered User
Posts: 1210
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 12:33 am
Location: NW Oregon,Buxton currently

Re: Speed density and it's underlying principles.

Post #5 by sdiesel » Fri Jul 10, 2020 1:31 am

Is that mech Rick pmuller plug on this forum I missed it somehow , though I remember comments in passing from both sources.

Addressing the system as a whole, it seems aftermarket ( read 5.0 Ford guys), have a handle on the speed density
Mods. Can our sixes be competitive in a variety of config; turbo Whipple etc, with speed density?
I do recall mech rick mentioning the MAF system on the six with sefi was jeezly complicated. SD seems simplier, it can produce power.... It seems cam and remapping the ECU are the essential of performance WITH SD, all things being equal

Big blue,thx fer link I'm headed there now.

And last the tuners I'm reading are calibrating with math, a language I've never learned.
I would hope that there's hope for we who are gifted in areas other than math.
It seems that the thrill is in the mathematical computations as much as the end result
a long love affair with the 300 six.
my lastest and final fling is a fresh 300 in an 88 ford f350 dually 4X flatbed

User avatar
xctasy
VIP Member
Posts: 7097
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2002 10:40 am
Location: PO Box 7072 Dunedin 9011,South Island, NEW ZEALAND
Contact:

Re: Speed density and it's underlying principles.

Post #6 by xctasy » Fri Jul 10, 2020 2:38 am

One thing that hurts us badly as Ford Sixers is that not all of us are rocket scientists. And that is perfectly fine.

But if your a Navy seal and manage people for battle. or a NASA engineer, then the whole language thing goes ballistic pretty soon. Understanding everything is very hard. I seriously doubt if i can help. Explaining when you understand something doesn't create a beneficial virus of understanding that everyone else catches. You can only Read and Feed, and bite it off a little at a time.

Megasquirt is an open source Ford EECIV Speed Density system, without a 100% close loop system controlling the air fuel ratios at every situation.

Take up here as a result of Jack Collins work has been a low point on this forum, but its not anyone's fault, its just is what it is. People like Mike 1157 have lovingly handed our asses to all an sundry on occasion because we, each of us, are more interested in idle quality, and s tabbing a distributor than Peformance and Electronic Fuel Injection, Cross flow heads and turbos. Stuff that Speed Density Loves, although the first Turbo Mustang EFi's and Escorts and Turbo Coupe Thunderbird's weren't Speed Density at all. Megasquirt is, and it uses a blend of GM and Intel Chiptech to make engines with Electronic Fuel Injection, Cross flow heads and turbos get up and bark and bite like a Junkyard dog.

How it all blends in with 1-bbl Log intakes and six in a row, I don't know!

Central Fuel Injection was Fords first Speed Density EFi.

Delco Cal Pac Mem Cal P4 was the first Speed Density Throttle Body EFi.

I've had both. I bought an 82 350 Chevy Corvette Crossfire TBi system in 1996, and studied Chevies system first, becasue my mate had a Propane 350 Pickupo, and all the suplemmnty fuel systems were Ak Miller Impc.


Ford's later 60 pin plug EECIV and Chev's 62 pin Delco pin-outs are differently arranged, but do exactly the same thing.

When Ford introduced Port EFi in the 5.0 Mustang and 5.0 Lincoln LSC and 1985 F 150 5 liter trucks and E vans, they kept it all Speed Density for a l-o-n-g time, as long as they could. Chevy with its Tuned Port Injection went Porsche style MAF almost right away, but the base Computer Control Module was just the same kind of beast.


I'll get my alternative indie pop harp out, and sing an alluring song of love to the USA's GM Bendix and then AC Delco and Ford Motor Company with its tie up with Motorola and Intel, and sing this:-

While the West Germans, Swedes, French and British, were busy futzing about with out Bosch D Jetronic and Aston Martin was screwing up Brico AE and Bosch K systems and Jaguar messing up the Lucas Electronic injection,

GM and Ford after 20 years work on EFi in private were thinking about the Win-win, and the Plan/Profit/ Partnership understanding issues. 1974's Cosworth Vega was the first fruit with Bendix, then the 76 Cadillac Seville with Delco, then the 1979 Lincoln Panther plat form Central Fuel Injection with Motorola. They all learned from AMC and Chryslers issues with the first EFi systems in 1957/58, and were constantly doing cross checks with other suppliers like Conlec. In fact, Caroll Shelby was a total lover of Independent Runner Webers and Holley 2 fours, and was so peeved with the issues with Colec injecting and Autlitecarb-ing his Small and Big Blocks, he just decided to leave it all in 1969. Ak Miller kinda felt the same , and decided to move sideways from Autolite to Impco. The issue was endless hours of meetings with some people who hadn't done any thing significant for 30 years as "Project Managers" and "Leading En-GUN-eers". That's not a criticism, that's just how thing got done. John Z Deloren had the excat same issues, its how the Management Machine mixes financials and engineering together in the Matrix.

Outsmarting the guys who would be Servicing the Big Twos EFi (shade-trees, lay on the lawners, weekend warriors, racers, Mechanics, Electrical, Electronic and Mechanical Engineers) was always gonna be the major part, so it was all treated just like a Moon Landing, so onboard Speed Density systems will always be a bit Patriot missile and Stratospheric, and aint no way the jargon can be cut outta it. And the people who did the GM and Ford systems, were ex Space and Defense, with a IBM and Telco guys. All of 'em computer nerds (Sorry FB71 and John Ha and Jack Collins and others on commission to the Gee Oh Vee Apostrophe Tee . All the Beautiful People, The Beautiful People who helped me out).


So understanding Speed Density requires going back to the periodicals, and ingesting some crazy stuff to understand it all. You can try spoon feeding it, and some sugar sure helps.

Enjoy the delving into it SD. U R Well Named!
Image
XEC Ltd ICBE's Inter Continental Ballistic Engines-
FAZER 6Bi (M112 & EEC5) or FAZER 6Ti (GT3582 & EEC5) 425 HP 4.1L/250 I-6
FAZER 6V0 3x2-BBL Holley 188 HP 3.3L/200 I-6 or 235 HP 4.1L/250 I-6
X-Flow Engine Components Ltd http://www.xecltd.info/?rd=10

pmuller9
Registered User
Posts: 4133
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:33 am
Location: Columbus, Indiana

Re: Speed density and it's underlying principles.

Post #7 by pmuller9 » Fri Jul 10, 2020 4:57 pm

Is this conversation only about the Ford 4.9 six speed density EFI system or does it include using aftermarket speed density EFI on the 240/300 six?

User avatar
MechRick
Registered User
Posts: 993
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 7:43 pm
Location: Las Vegas, NV

Re: Speed density and it's underlying principles.

Post #8 by MechRick » Mon Jul 13, 2020 4:03 pm

sdiesel wrote:So can a system like this be described totally in mathematical terms?


A rudimentary knowledge of computer operation helps. Specifically, binary and hexadecimal, and how processors function.

Condensed to the most simple function, computer memory chips store information by latching voltage. In the early days, it was 0 volts for off, and 5 volts for on. Nowadays the on voltage is typically less to conserve energy. Binary is written as 0 for off and 1 for on. Binary is grouped in common lengths to do work. If you think of an LED display with the number 8, you can see there is 7 segments needed to show that specific number (other numbers required less, for instance the number 1 requires 2 segments). So a 7 letter 'word' is enough to display every possible number. An extra position is added for checksum to validate the 7, giving us 8 positions, or 'bits'. The word length is the bandwidth. In the beginning, 8 bit computers were enough to get the job done.

In automotive applications, GM was a big user of 8 bit ECM's early on. Chrysler and Ford opted for more resolution (I'll explain that in a second), adopting 16 bit ECM's for their vehicles.

So a binary 8 bit expression would be something like 01101001. With binary, each successive digit to the left has twice the value of the digit to the right. The far right digit only has a value of 1, so expressed in base 10, 8 bits reads from left to right: 128 | 64 | 32 |16 |8 |4 | 2| 1 . This gives you a number possibility between 0 and 256. If you overlay the key above the number, we have: no 128, one 64, one 32, no 16, one 8, no 4, no 2 and one 1. Add them up to get the base ten number 105.

0-256 is the resolution of an 8 bit computer. In an automotive application, everything revolves around 8 bit word lengths. An automotive computer uses tables with x and y coordinates. 8 bit x and 8 bit y gives you a grid with 64 possible slots. Each slot has a stored number between 0-256. I won't go into detail, but tables can be used for ignition timing, fuel control and more. In a fuel control example, x might be MAP, and y might be RPM. Tables can be scaled by a percentage based on a number between 0-256 (for warmup fuel enrichment, for example).
A good example of 8x8 tables is GM ECM's block learn and integrator values for fuel learning. The exact center point between 0-256 is 128, and 128 is the number expected in both block learn and integrator if the vehicle has no problems.

The shortcoming with 8 bit computers is the lack of resolution. Longer word lengths give more resolution. 9 bits gives 512, 10 bits 1024, 11 bits 2048, 12 bits 4096, 13 bits 8192, 14 bits 16,384, 15 bits 32,768 and 16 bits 65,536.

0-65,536 is a significant increase in resolution. Representing 16 bit binary is confusing, though. Imagine a number like 1011010110100100. This is where hexadecimal comes in.

Binary has two digits, 0 and 1. Base ten, our numbering system is 0123456789. Base 16, or hexadecimal needs more digits, and is represented as 0123456789ABCDEF.

Converting 16 bit binary to hexadecimal simplifies programming. 1011010110100100 in binary converts to B5A4 in hexadecimal (46,500 in base 10). If you peek in a Ford ECM table, you will see hexadecimal values written there. It's common to see groups of four digits. For instance, one line of code might look something like this:

E62A F4B1 56CC 00F7 0000

The various Ford and GM software tuners allow a user to get access to this code and make changes. Unless the particular ECM has been reverse engineered, such changes are flying blind though.
Last edited by MechRick on Tue Jul 14, 2020 8:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
1994 F150, 4.9L/ZF 5 speed, C-Vic police driveshaft
EFI head w/mild port work, 3 angle valve job
1996 long block, stock pistons, ARP rod bolts
Stock cam, aluminum cam gear
Hedman header, full mandrel bent duals, crossover, super turbos
http://fordsix.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=73244
Bronco II with a 2.3L swap http://fordsix.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=72863
1988 F250 2x4, 460 ZF 5 speed.

User avatar
MechRick
Registered User
Posts: 993
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 7:43 pm
Location: Las Vegas, NV

Re: Speed density and it's underlying principles.

Post #9 by MechRick » Mon Jul 13, 2020 5:02 pm

sdiesel wrote:I tumbled into a vortex of tuners that explain the re- mapping of this system in vague ( to me ) mathematical terms. But have mastered fully the nuances of the speed density system.


Remapping is simply changing the value of a table entry, otherwise known as a 'cell'. By reverse engineering the tables in a given ECM, modifications can be made to the engine, and the ECM's tables, to compensate.

All automotive ECM's have major inputs and minor inputs. Major inputs of a speed density ECM are: MAP, TPS, RPM, etc. Minor inputs would be ECT, IAT, EGR, O2, BARO, etc. The airflow calculations are done with MAP and RPM. At a given MAP and RPM the engine pumps a repeatable amount of air. BARO and IAT is used to scale that number with respect to air density (altitude) and air temperature.

The two big problems with factory speed density is (1) Anything done to the engine to increase airflow causes a mismatch between the factory fuel map and actual airflow. (2) Big, lumpy camshafts decrease idle vacuum to the point that the ECM thinks it's on the throttle and adds unneeded fuel.

(1) can be fixed by remapping, but (2) is almost impossible to fix with factory hardware.

One of the reasons I usually switch to Megasquirt is the idle vacuum problem can be addressed. It's possible to ignore the MAP sensor below a set RPM, using the TPS instead (this is called Alpha-N).

MAF cars use actual airflow instead of manifold vacuum for airflow calculations, solving both problems.
Last edited by MechRick on Tue Jul 14, 2020 1:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
1994 F150, 4.9L/ZF 5 speed, C-Vic police driveshaft
EFI head w/mild port work, 3 angle valve job
1996 long block, stock pistons, ARP rod bolts
Stock cam, aluminum cam gear
Hedman header, full mandrel bent duals, crossover, super turbos
http://fordsix.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=73244
Bronco II with a 2.3L swap http://fordsix.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=72863
1988 F250 2x4, 460 ZF 5 speed.

User avatar
THE FRENCHTOWN FLYER
VIP Member
Posts: 6500
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2002 9:25 pm
Location: FRENCHTOWN

Re: Speed density and it's underlying principles.

Post #10 by THE FRENCHTOWN FLYER » Mon Jul 13, 2020 8:39 pm

Thanks for the excellent overview MechRick.
FORD 300 INLINE SIX - THE BEST KEPT SECRET IN DRAG RACING

sdiesel
Registered User
Posts: 1210
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 12:33 am
Location: NW Oregon,Buxton currently

Re: Speed density and it's underlying principles.

Post #11 by sdiesel » Mon Jul 13, 2020 9:12 pm

Indeed thank u. That's very clear.

Thus the limiting factor factory ecm, can be replaced by MS.
Leading to a follow on question, can we realize some very nice gain over current options by reworking the SD with megasquirt?
Seems so.
I proffer the question in hopes that we can discuss yet another avenue to h.p.
SD is an option that is not currently very popular. With 6 owners but if someone has made power with this then it's a avenue worth traveling.
With Ms we can turbo easily ?

IF CONVERSION to MAF,. Can a non ford MAF. Be used? As the 96 's are getting scatce
a long love affair with the 300 six.
my lastest and final fling is a fresh 300 in an 88 ford f350 dually 4X flatbed

User avatar
MechRick
Registered User
Posts: 993
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 7:43 pm
Location: Las Vegas, NV

Re: Speed density and it's underlying principles.

Post #12 by MechRick » Tue Jul 14, 2020 1:54 pm

sdiesel wrote:Leading to a follow on question, can we realize some very nice gain over current options by reworking the SD with megasquirt?


One feature of Megasquirt is it can be set up either speed density or mass airflow. I don't see the advantage of mass air in a performance application. The O/E's went to mass air primarily for emissions concerns, but another advantage is small year to year changes in intake/exhaust/cam specs/cylinder head flow/etc. would be absorbed by the mass air system without the need to remap the fuel curve.

There are some manufacturers that still use speed density. Dodge for sure, maybe Honda. One of the idiosyncrasies of speed density in the past is faults that would make the engine run bad (plug, plug wire, etc.) would cause engine vacuum to drop, making the ECM inject too much fuel. These modern speed density systems have tables with sensor ranges. For instance, if the MAP sensor started reading out of the expected range, the ECM will set a fault code and substitute a MAP value that makes sense. The check engine lamp will be on, but the vehicle will run well enough to drive to the repair shop.

With a stock engine, a switch to an aftermarket controller will offer minimal gains. You may be able to pick up a few HP by using a more aggressive ignition timing curve, but little to nothing is gained with fuel. As FTF has alluded in the past, the stock tunes are conservative, to help the engine last in a truck environment.

sdiesel wrote:With Ms we can turbo easily ?


Major changes to the engine, such as forced induction, radical head work, radical camshaft, etc. is where aftermarket controllers shine.

sdiesel wrote:IF CONVERSION to MAF,. Can a non ford MAF. Be used?


The stock sensor has a 0-5v output (specifically, .34v at a flow rate of 1.66 g/s and 3.9v at a flow rate of 151 g/s). The hot wire sensor unit typically doesn't change from vehicle to vehicle. It's the housing diameter that changes...
1994 F150, 4.9L/ZF 5 speed, C-Vic police driveshaft
EFI head w/mild port work, 3 angle valve job
1996 long block, stock pistons, ARP rod bolts
Stock cam, aluminum cam gear
Hedman header, full mandrel bent duals, crossover, super turbos
http://fordsix.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=73244
Bronco II with a 2.3L swap http://fordsix.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=72863
1988 F250 2x4, 460 ZF 5 speed.

Lazy JW
FSP Moderator
Posts: 5618
Joined: Fri May 16, 2003 10:25 pm
Location: Careywood, Idaho

Re: Speed density and it's underlying principles.

Post #13 by Lazy JW » Tue Jul 14, 2020 4:57 pm

THE FRENCHTOWN FLYER wrote:Thanks for the excellent overview MechRick.


Amen to that! :D 8) :nod:
"The White OX" 1974 F-350 300-6, Stock single exhaust, Carter YF, T-18A, Dana70 w/4.11, Flatbed dually w/dump bed. "Where no oxen are, the crib is clean, but much increase is by the strength of the ox" (Proverbs 14:4)
Image

User avatar
MechRick
Registered User
Posts: 993
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 7:43 pm
Location: Las Vegas, NV

Re: Speed density and it's underlying principles.

Post #14 by MechRick » Wed Jul 22, 2020 1:39 pm

MechRick wrote:0-256 is the resolution of an 8 bit computer. In an automotive application, everything revolves around 8 bit word lengths.


I felt like I left a bunch of information out.

An 8 bit computer stores and manipulates numbers. The range of those numbers is 0-256.

A vehicle's sensors and many of it's control devices (injectors, coils, idle valves, solenoids, etc.) work with voltage. To interface the digital nature of a computer to the analog nature of electronics, analog to digital and digital to analog converters are used.

For instance, common a sensor voltage is 0-5v (TPS, MAP, ECT/IAT, etc). An analog to digital converter takes the voltage output of, say a Throttle Position Sensor, and converts it to binary.

So 0-5v becomes 0-256 (base 10), or 00000000-11111111 (binary). The halfway point (2.5v), should be 128 in base 10, which is stored in binary as 10000000. Imagine 8 pins of a computer memory chip, of which 1 pin has latched voltage, and the rest are off.

8 bit computers would 'see' that rising TPS voltage as 256 small stair steps, because of the lack of resolution (actually less, because most TPS's start around 1v and rise from there). 16 bit machines having 0-65,536 resolution would still see the rising voltage as steps, but the resolution is greatly improved. The halfway point for a 16 bit A/D converter would be 32,768 in base 10, 1000000000000000 in binary or 8000 in hexadecimal (don't let that number fool you, 32,767 in hex would be 7FFF).

Outputs of a vehicle ECU are usually digital. We mostly see on/off control circuits, that are simple to implement. The stored value of a memory chip location is either 0 (no voltage) or 1 (voltage). That output tickles the base of a driver transistor to allow voltage or deny voltage. In the case of injectors, flow rate is controlled by the amount of time the injector is 'on' compared to 'off', called duty cycle (or dwell, for us old timers).

The resolution range of 16 bits is 0-65,536. 16 bit computers don't use tables with 65,536 on the x and y coordinates, that would be overkill. Megasquirt 16 bit ECU's use 16x16 tables which is enough (actually, I think the MS 1 MSextra 12x12 tables are enough).

The cell entries can use the full resolution though. 0-65,536 translates to 0000-FFFF in hex. A reverse-engineered fuel table in a Factory ECU might have entries between 0000-FFFF. The halfway point (8000) would be approximately a 50% duty cycle on the injector (50% on, 50% off). Injector off would be 0000 in hex. Injector on at 100% duty cycle would be FFFF. So by changing cell entries in a fuel table a user can add or take away fuel. For instance, changing a cell entry from 8000 hex to 8001 hex would add the smallest possible increment of fuel, and changing from 8000 hex to 7FFF hex would take away the same amount.

Disclaimer: All of the above is very general information. Now would be a good time for someone with extensive time hacking a factory ECU to comment with specifics.
1994 F150, 4.9L/ZF 5 speed, C-Vic police driveshaft
EFI head w/mild port work, 3 angle valve job
1996 long block, stock pistons, ARP rod bolts
Stock cam, aluminum cam gear
Hedman header, full mandrel bent duals, crossover, super turbos
http://fordsix.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=73244
Bronco II with a 2.3L swap http://fordsix.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=72863
1988 F250 2x4, 460 ZF 5 speed.

sdiesel
Registered User
Posts: 1210
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 12:33 am
Location: NW Oregon,Buxton currently

Re: Speed density and it's underlying principles.

Post #15 by sdiesel » Sun Jul 26, 2020 1:13 am

So, with my vague comprehension and very basic knowledge, the fuel map that ford used is then migrated from ford ecu, to MS or quarterhorse or whatever, then it can be manipulated?.

The manipulation is done with the 14:7 in mind? I mean,am I going to improve on Ford's map with my tinkering?. But I guess I must if I alter the components of the engine itself rendering the old maps out of synch with the new reality... I'm struggling with this, the MS forums give vague ideas to me but dive deeply very quickly.
It would seem a huge task to rewrite the entire map.

A wide band would " learn" the ECU , but a knowledgeable tuner may not want 14:7 all the time. And then emissions, how to deal with that?

I've confused myself with my original question, the answer to which seems to be" yes ,fords eec-4 is agreeable, with MS or equal, but I'm still a confused soul on if this system is valuable to increase the viability of the six. I believe it is, but have no idea how I can prove it.
JUST DRIVABILITy and idle should be enough for most of us to really want this system, but I hear so little about it.
The hardware used and manipulated under turbo seems like a dream come true..am I wrong?

The 5.0 fox guys are rocking the heck out of it , can't we do it too?
In another forum I've read some friendly voices I recognize from this board ( take a bow ecstasy) expound in detail on various workings of this system under other circumstances, (351w), with seemingly great result....
a long love affair with the 300 six.
my lastest and final fling is a fresh 300 in an 88 ford f350 dually 4X flatbed

User avatar
xctasy
VIP Member
Posts: 7097
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2002 10:40 am
Location: PO Box 7072 Dunedin 9011,South Island, NEW ZEALAND
Contact:

Re: Speed density and it's underlying principles.

Post #16 by xctasy » Sun Jul 26, 2020 6:14 am

I lost all my post changes.

See Uncle Tonys Garage post (Tony de Freo, Evan Smith, Neil and the MM&FF team who with other guys like Steve Colleson and the Freehold Daves street raced these 14.7 sec cars to 13.43 and later 11.19 secs.)

28.09 to 45 minute mark on the video you tube link, you get Bernie G. Wonderfull info on how the EECiv was a tight ship of mystery.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_cont ... W-QM9mFXPo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?28&v=HW-QM9mFXPo

"Ask Bernie" Gollick, now in his mid 80's, was Muscle Mustang & Fast Fords (MM&FF) technical guy. He has said it best. EECiv was propriety and difficult. EECV is way easier and able to be re-flashed. There are no Speed Density Port EFi's in EECV, though.

Despite those locked in and propriety restrictions, with the port EFi sequential 5.0, the explosion of Port EFi EEiv came as a result of experimentation by guys like Tony de Freo and Hot Rod Magazine staff who did stuff that Fords engineering guys couldn't believe. The racers found other ways around EECiv...leaving it alone, or finding the best single box code variations that made the 14.7 second factory 1988 car a less than 12 second terror with just a ten minute modification, better tires and some work with Bank fire 1985 5.0 or 1988 5.8 lower intake porting parts. Fords development guys in the factory are kinda sworn to secrecy over things that FoMoCo have invested in. It was an act of Congress that un-bundled the protections Ford had in EECiv.

When Ford realized that guys were working around the EECiv restrictions, they also became a little more relaxed. In any case, it was the acts of Congress that made OBD2 and EECV and very good SAE "gilded" guys like Alec Pepper able to interface the EECV codes and open source the fuel/air , timing and fault codes, allowing people to see what previously was only seen with the factory EECiv Breakout Box, Crane Interceptor or FordMotorSport Extreme Edge 60 pin voltage reader which measures what we now call activated PIDs. The F truck and E van Speed Density 5.0's and 5.8's are the engines that kept the early Speed Density MAP sensors with the later activated PID's so you can get inside the air fuel and ignition ramps wile still having access to the knock sensor. The Knock sensor was removed for the SEFi 5.0/5.8's but kept in the F and E commercial vehicles. Unlike Chevy and GM, the knock sensor wasn't really used to dial in the delicate backing off of ignition advance. In any case, the trucks didn't need the knock sensor and the SEFI V8's and sixes probably did due to better chamber filling. (See again Bernie's comments)


A follow on from the post that didn't upload 10 hours ago....EECiv Speed Density Port EFi reworks.

1. Ford Falcon/Fairmont/Fairlane/LTD 1988 to 1991 EA26/ EB 3.9 liter SOHC Multi-point Port EFi computer, ex Ti Performance, can be adapted to the 4.9 EFi. Its a 186 hp and 255 lb-ft capable EECiv computer. Jason Bolger is the person to contact. See

This guide aims to provide tuning tips and method for tuning Speed Density (SD) or MAP sensor based EECs, i.e. those
from the I6 EA - AU Falcon
https://www.tiperformance.com.au/Docume ... 0Guide.pdf
https://www.tiperformance.com.au/library/diy-guides/


2. Speed Density auto or manual V8 5.0 SEFi or Gang/ Bank Fire truck Speed Density 5.0 or 5.8 EFi can be re programmed by Moates J3 link to fire six cylinder engine.

http://vb.foureyedpride.com/showthread. ... eads/page2
svocapri wrote:I tuned an 87 speed density with a Moats Quarterhorse for my Dad a number of years back and he is still driving it weekly today. The car has a Comp Cams Xe264 with 112 degree lobe separation. It also has AFR 164 heads, a ported Explorer intake, and Ford Racking 47pph injectors. The car runs and idles smooth.

As for tuning, I added timing down low to compensate for the bigger cam and I had to pull fuel in the lower RPM higher load areas of the fuel map to compensate for the lower vacuum at idle and just off idle. The only problem is that when shifting from drive to reverse or vice versa, the sudden loss of load on the engine when passing through neutral causes it to overshoot the idle speed target and close the IAC motor and pull timing just as the transmission is engaging and the engine stalls. This car has a factory stall converter and I suspect a slightly higher stall speed would prevent this, but a brief pause in neutral when shifting from reverse is all it takes to keep it running.

I forgot to mention, I had SailorBob on the EEC Tuning board generate the Definition file necessary for Binary Editor to be able to modify the Strategy that was in the ECU. I believe the catch code on that speed density automatic computer was DC.




3. SHO Taurus 3.0 5 speed or 3.2 auto can be fitted and re programmed by Moats J3 link. It should work as it is though. It is however an EECiv with MAF sensor.


4. Option of mapping the Speed Density 4.9 EFi computer. Get 10 people together who are prepared to pay 100 US dollars each, and have Moats or Sailor Bob at EECIV.Org do a custom re-tune.


I'm pretty sure I've informed you before, but the box codes, Jim DeAngelo (FB71) he gave a link to the 49 mapped EECIV bin codes.

Those are the 49 Kinds of updated EECIV strategy files that you can upload to remap 42 or 43 existing Ford bin code EECIV ECM's.

There is a little cross over with this, but not a huge amount. Mapping went to where the money and performance gains were greatest, the SHO, SVO, XR4Ti and any good Port EFI 5.0 or 5.8.


Post #32 http://vb.foureyedpride.com/showthread. ... fold/page2
Last edited by xctasy on Mon Jul 27, 2020 3:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image
XEC Ltd ICBE's Inter Continental Ballistic Engines-
FAZER 6Bi (M112 & EEC5) or FAZER 6Ti (GT3582 & EEC5) 425 HP 4.1L/250 I-6
FAZER 6V0 3x2-BBL Holley 188 HP 3.3L/200 I-6 or 235 HP 4.1L/250 I-6
X-Flow Engine Components Ltd http://www.xecltd.info/?rd=10

User avatar
MechRick
Registered User
Posts: 993
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 7:43 pm
Location: Las Vegas, NV

Re: Speed density and it's underlying principles.

Post #17 by MechRick » Mon Jul 27, 2020 10:58 am

https://www.moates.net/quarterhorse-for ... p-199.html

https://www.tweecer.com/

Those are two most common methods of changing tables in Ford EEC_IV ECM's.

Both require a circuit board that plugs in the J3 port of the factory ECM. The add on boards transfer the ROM from the factory ECM onto RAM where it can be changed.

Common performance ECM's such as the Mustang 5.0L A9L have been reverse-engineered. I doubt the 4.9L ECM has, but I may be wrong.

Transferring a Ford ECM table to MS wouldn't be an exact match. The formulas and scalers in the Ford ECM are likely different. For instance, MS uses an IAT scaler table that was reverse-engineered from a Corvette 8 bit ECM. It has a reputation of inaccuracy, and I can verify that. Luckily, it can be changed.
1994 F150, 4.9L/ZF 5 speed, C-Vic police driveshaft
EFI head w/mild port work, 3 angle valve job
1996 long block, stock pistons, ARP rod bolts
Stock cam, aluminum cam gear
Hedman header, full mandrel bent duals, crossover, super turbos
http://fordsix.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=73244
Bronco II with a 2.3L swap http://fordsix.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=72863
1988 F250 2x4, 460 ZF 5 speed.

pmuller9
Registered User
Posts: 4133
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:33 am
Location: Columbus, Indiana

Re: Speed density and it's underlying principles.

Post #18 by pmuller9 » Mon Jul 27, 2020 4:20 pm

sdiesel wrote:So, with my vague comprehension and very basic knowledge, the fuel map that ford used is then migrated from ford ecu, to MS or quarterhorse or whatever, then it can be manipulated?.

The manipulation is done with the 14:7 in mind? I mean,am I going to improve on Ford's map with my tinkering?. But I guess I must if I alter the components of the engine itself rendering the old maps out of synch with the new reality... I'm struggling with this, the MS forums give vague ideas to me but dive deeply very quickly.
It would seem a huge task to rewrite the entire map.

A wide band would " learn" the ECU , but a knowledgeable tuner may not want 14:7 all the time. And then emissions, how to deal with that?

I've confused myself with my original question, the answer to which seems to be" yes ,fords eec-4 is agreeable, with MS or equal, but I'm still a confused soul on if this system is valuable to increase the viability of the six. I believe it is, but have no idea how I can prove it.
JUST DRIVABILITy and idle should be enough for most of us to really want this system, but I hear so little about it.
The hardware used and manipulated under turbo seems like a dream come true..am I wrong?

The 5.0 fox guys are rocking the heck out of it , can't we do it too?
In another forum I've read some friendly voices I recognize from this board ( take a bow ecstasy) expound in detail on various workings of this system under other circumstances, (351w), with seemingly great result....

This particular conversation has happened on this forum several times but I understand that a search is not always successful.

The 14.7:1 air fuel ratio is used to minimize emissions but the engine cannot operate at that ratio under load without damage and the A/F must be richened.
That means that the ECU can operate in closed loop mode with the O2 sensor during idle and cruise but must go open loop relying on table information without the O2 sensor during heavier load conditions so the mixture can be made richer closer to 13:1.

The tables can be adjusted for things like elevation by using a multiplier from the “Adaptive Fuel Table”
This table is created while driving in closed loop mode where the fuel map is compared to the O2 sensor and is adjusted by a multiplier to correct the A/F ratio to 14.7. These adjustment values are stored in the “Adaptive Fuel Table”.
The assumption is that the multipliers are also valid when the ECU goes open loop.

When engine components are changed the 14.7 A/F ratio may no longer be desirable so you need a system that utilizes a wide band O2 sensor.
Examples:
The longer duration camshafts currently being used on many builds have a significant valve overlap period that prefers rich A/F mixtures for off idle torque.
A leaner than 14.7 A/F ratio may be wanted at cruise for increased fuel mileage.
A turbocharger application needs a 2 BAR or more wide band O2 sensor with A/F ratios as low as 11:1

So off to aftermarket EFI systems you go.
Long story short and simplified you answer the questions concerning the engine and the system helps you get started.
If the system is in closed loop mode it will compare the Target A/F ratio values against the wideband O2 sensor readings and re-write the table for you as you drive.

There are too many features to be covered here.
There are many control outputs that do not exist on the stock EFI system.

Some systems have multiple tables that can be switched between.
You can set up a for power then switch for emissions inspections or you can switch to different fuels or whatever.
Two sets of injectors with two different fuels for high horsepower turbocharging is a good application. (See Nelson racing engines)

The new EFI systems are relatively easy to use and are very versatile.

sdiesel
Registered User
Posts: 1210
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 12:33 am
Location: NW Oregon,Buxton currently

Re: Speed density and it's underlying principles.

Post #19 by sdiesel » Mon Jul 27, 2020 11:30 pm

Yes I'm getting a lot of Info. Nothing I could find on a very well engineered or re-engineered eec-4 with turbo on our forums. Its heartening that ecu can be re-config. to six from 8. Thus the maps can be imported and much is left to the skill of the tuner. The idea that there can be several maps for different needs is intriguing. A big deal in California. Even better that they can be available with a switch , I suppose.
So, review is that its done , a lot but just not with our sixes, in America. That is what I gathered looking into it with the epic tuners in the fox body crowd. I would love to see it in our, ahem, group,can hardly call us a crowd

Thx for video feed, our band width here at station is so small that I won't be able to view till I get back to civilization ( if u can even call Portland civilized), my closest companions here are cows and a few rank fire guys out in middle of nowhere with a shared can and string for communication, and now its raining, oh balls!!!
Someone step up and try this please on a six, ill donate some parts......or at least encouragement
a long love affair with the 300 six.
my lastest and final fling is a fresh 300 in an 88 ford f350 dually 4X flatbed

pmuller9
Registered User
Posts: 4133
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:33 am
Location: Columbus, Indiana

Re: Speed density and it's underlying principles.

Post #20 by pmuller9 » Tue Jul 28, 2020 12:50 am

sdiesel wrote:Someone step up and try this please on a six, ill donate some parts......or at least encouragement

What exactly do you want done?

sdiesel
Registered User
Posts: 1210
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 12:33 am
Location: NW Oregon,Buxton currently

Re: Speed density and it's underlying principles.

Post #21 by sdiesel » Tue Jul 28, 2020 9:11 am

[quote="MechRick"]https://www.moates.net/quarterhorse-for-fords-p-199.html

https://www.tweecer.com/

Those are two most common methods of changing tables in Ford EEC_IV ECM's.

Both require a circuit board that plugs in the J3 port of the factory ECM. The add on boards transfer the ROM from the factory ECM onto RAM where it can be changed.

Common performance ECM's such as the Mustang 5.0L A9L have been reverse-engineered. I doubt the 4.9L ECM has, but I may be wrong.

These 2 you list seem to be generally well accepted as reliable. Can they be called piggyback? Will they be able to hold separate tunes to switch one to another.
most applications I have read about are owners seeking extreme power from their given combination of parts. In my case and many here, a reliable adjustable daily driver mode would be very appealing. In my case specifically, a truck, towing, low rpm , vacation trailer puller,

Imagine a nearly stock 93 f150 with this available that would make a monster out of Ford's eec4 without changing few ,if any , hard parts.
a long love affair with the 300 six.
my lastest and final fling is a fresh 300 in an 88 ford f350 dually 4X flatbed

sdiesel
Registered User
Posts: 1210
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 12:33 am
Location: NW Oregon,Buxton currently

Re: Speed density and it's underlying principles.

Post #22 by sdiesel » Tue Jul 28, 2020 9:26 am

pmuller9 wrote:
sdiesel wrote:Someone step up and try this please on a six, ill donate some parts......or at least encouragement

What exactly do you want done?


what I'm arguing here is that the factory EFI system is often overlooked as a source of substantial power.
I'm trying to bring attention to this by opening discussion on how we might get very solid numbers from a totally factory platform, simply by manipulating existing technology, adapting it to our own needs. (ADAPTING TWEECER, and q horse to the six)

Many of the forum members here own the EFI vehicles, and a trailblazer using q horse or tweecer could open up this segment to possibly surprising gains for a cash investment that is dwarfed by the cost associated with many builds currently taking place here on this board.
Especially true if the mentioned piggybac style modifiers can support forced induction, which they do on the v8 side of things. So, a turbo, with modest boost numbers, a factory efi, and a modded ecu, gets us ....? No one knows for sure, but he fox body crowd is giving us good hints.
a long love affair with the 300 six.
my lastest and final fling is a fresh 300 in an 88 ford f350 dually 4X flatbed

pmuller9
Registered User
Posts: 4133
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:33 am
Location: Columbus, Indiana

Re: Speed density and it's underlying principles.

Post #23 by pmuller9 » Tue Jul 28, 2020 9:31 am

sdiesel wrote:what I'm arguing here is that the factory EFI system is often overlooked as a source of substantial power.
I'm trying to bring attention to this by opening discussion on how we might get very solid numbers from a totally factory platform, simply by manipulating existing technology, adapting it to our own needs. (ADAPTING TWEECER, and q horse to the six)

Many of the forum members here own the EFI vehicles, and a trailblazer using q horse or tweecer could open up this segment to possibly surprising gains for a cash investment that is dwarfed by the cost associated with many builds currently taking place here on this board.
Especially true if the mentioned piggybac style modifiers can support forced induction, which they do on the v8 side of things. So, a turbo, with modest boost numbers, a factory efi, and a modded ecu, gets us ....? No one knows for sure, but he fox body crowd is giving us good hints.


The closest project at the moment is this one using tweecer.
It addresses the many conversations about producing N/A power with ported heads and larger cams while maintaining the stock EFI system
viewtopic.php?p=632787#p632787

User avatar
MechRick
Registered User
Posts: 993
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 7:43 pm
Location: Las Vegas, NV

Re: Speed density and it's underlying principles.

Post #24 by MechRick » Tue Jul 28, 2020 11:03 am

sdiesel wrote:Can they be called piggyback?


When I hear 'piggyback', I think of the add-on boxes that add fuel or change ignition timing when under boost, without altering the factory ECM in any way. Hondas and Mitsubishis come to mind. With the two tuners mentioned, the circuit board plugged into the J3 port hijacks the EEPROM and substitutes it's own.

sdiesel wrote:Will they be able to hold separate tunes to switch one to another.


That I'm not sure on. MS has that ability, I've used it to switch between gas and E85.

sdiesel wrote:I'm trying to bring attention to this by opening discussion on how we might get very solid numbers from a totally factory platform, simply by manipulating existing technology, adapting it to our own needs. (ADAPTING TWEECER, and q horse to the six)


It's not cost-effective today. The reason those systems got popular in the early 90's was because there was no other option. Today we have much better choices in the aftermarket. The flexibility offered by today's aftermarket EFI systems dwarfs what you can do with the tuners.
1994 F150, 4.9L/ZF 5 speed, C-Vic police driveshaft
EFI head w/mild port work, 3 angle valve job
1996 long block, stock pistons, ARP rod bolts
Stock cam, aluminum cam gear
Hedman header, full mandrel bent duals, crossover, super turbos
http://fordsix.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=73244
Bronco II with a 2.3L swap http://fordsix.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=72863
1988 F250 2x4, 460 ZF 5 speed.

sdiesel
Registered User
Posts: 1210
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 12:33 am
Location: NW Oregon,Buxton currently

Re: Speed density and it's underlying principles.

Post #25 by sdiesel » Tue Jul 28, 2020 2:42 pm

MechRick wrote:
sdiesel wrote:Can they be called piggyback?




It's not cost-effective today. The reason those systems got popular in the early 90's was because there was no other option. Today we have much better choices in the aftermarket. The flexibility offered by today's aftermarket EFI systems dwarfs what you can do with the tuners.



...and the aftermarket would be sniper, fitech or equal. I would guess.

That far-out cool stuff, yet trying to avoid the nearly 2000 dollar price for that,if components are bought new, and the resulting tuning costs when hired out, also the time /effort factor of install.

Then the question becomes, "can I get nearly the same result with Ford's system simply....ahem, " tweaked "

Are there efi systems that I have overlooked in my conclusions?

Ms can use ford or gm sensors and factory parts to gain control of the maps that is what I have gleaned from what I hear here and elsewhere.
Can it produce power!!!??

I'm being a pain here but drilling down into very specific ponderings.
Posts above document a serious improvement in power and no loss, zero reduction in drivability.... I'm on to something here but too ignorant to know exactly what I'm trying exactly to say, though I can say it well.
a long love affair with the 300 six.
my lastest and final fling is a fresh 300 in an 88 ford f350 dually 4X flatbed

sdiesel
Registered User
Posts: 1210
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 12:33 am
Location: NW Oregon,Buxton currently

Re: Speed density and it's underlying principles.

Post #26 by sdiesel » Tue Jul 28, 2020 2:44 pm

pmuller9 wrote:
sdiesel wrote:what I'm arguing here is that the factory EFI system is often overlooked as a source of substantial power.
I'm trying to bring attention to this by opening discussion on how we might get very solid numbers from a totally factory platform, simply by manipulating existing technology, adapting it to our own needs. (ADAPTING TWEECER, and q horse to the six)

Many of the forum members here own the EFI vehicles, and a trailblazer using q horse or tweecer could open up this segment to possibly surprising gains for a cash investment that is dwarfed by the cost associated with many builds currently taking place here on this board.
Especially true if the mentioned piggybac style modifiers can support forced induction, which they do on the v8 side of things. So, a turbo, with modest boost numbers, a factory efi, and a modded ecu, gets us ....? No one knows for sure, but he fox body crowd is giving us good hints.


The closest project at the moment is this one using tweecer.
It addresses the many conversations about producing N/A power with ported heads and larger cams while maintaining the stock EFI system
viewtopic.php?p=632787#p632787


this, in part , got the thought process going, and the Probst book, some clever comments on other forums, all combine to make it sensible to explore this avenue fully.
a long love affair with the 300 six.
my lastest and final fling is a fresh 300 in an 88 ford f350 dually 4X flatbed

User avatar
MechRick
Registered User
Posts: 993
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 7:43 pm
Location: Las Vegas, NV

Re: Speed density and it's underlying principles.

Post #27 by MechRick » Tue Jul 28, 2020 5:38 pm

sdiesel wrote:That far-out cool stuff, yet trying to avoid the nearly 2000 dollar price for that,if components are bought new


That's why I like the Megasquirt stuff. I can scrounge parts and be up and rolling with a few hundred dollars.

sdiesel wrote:what I'm arguing here is that the factory EFI system is often overlooked as a source of substantial power.


sdiesel wrote:Ms can use ford or gm sensors and factory parts to gain control of the maps that is what I have gleaned from what I hear here and elsewhere.
Can it produce power!!!??


Power is easy. It's part-throttle driveability and efficiency that's tough. Throw a big injector at something and it will make power. Getting it to idle with that big injector is the challenge.
1994 F150, 4.9L/ZF 5 speed, C-Vic police driveshaft
EFI head w/mild port work, 3 angle valve job
1996 long block, stock pistons, ARP rod bolts
Stock cam, aluminum cam gear
Hedman header, full mandrel bent duals, crossover, super turbos
http://fordsix.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=73244
Bronco II with a 2.3L swap http://fordsix.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=72863
1988 F250 2x4, 460 ZF 5 speed.

pmuller9
Registered User
Posts: 4133
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:33 am
Location: Columbus, Indiana

Re: Speed density and it's underlying principles.

Post #28 by pmuller9 » Tue Jul 28, 2020 8:53 pm

sdiesel wrote:...and the aftermarket would be sniper, fitech or equal. I would guess. trying to avoid the nearly 2000 dollar price for that,if components are bought new, and the resulting tuning costs when hired out, also the time /effort factor of install.

No!
You are looking at retrofitting an aftermarket EFI system using as much of the Stock Ford 4.9 components as possible including intake and exhaust manifolds meaning you are not going to look at TBI systems like sniper, fitech or equal.

An aftermarket multi-port injection unit shouldn't cost you much more to install than using a stock unit with the additional tuning software hardware.
In addition you are more likely to need an outside tuner at your expense to work with the stock system than the aftermarket system.
I don't know of anyone that has had to pay for tuning an aftermarket system at this level.

sdiesel wrote:Then the question becomes, "can I get nearly the same result with Ford's system simply....ahem, " tweaked "

Not quite the correct question:
The question has always been "Can a modified Ford system meet the demands of the engine modifications I'm about to make and can I live with any compromises that may result from the systems shortcomings?"

sdiesel wrote:Can it produce power!!!??

The engine configuration determines the power potential.
It is up to the EFI system to meet the demands of the engine by providing the correct air, fuel and spark combination.

The wide band O2 sensor aftermarket multi-port system has the flexibility to provide the correct tune-up throughout the operating range and be able to compensate correctly with atmospheric changes.

If operating in the sequential mode some systems can individually tune each cylinder for both fuel and spark timing.
You also have the option of using any of the distributorless ignition systems.

When turbocharging the aftermarket system controls the wastegate for boost control.
There are many other control outputs incorporated in the aftermarket system that are not available when using the Ford system without adding additional units.

There are more multiport systems than I care to list.
The MS is probably the least expensive. The MS3 would be the choice for sequential injection.

Here is an excellent Ford 4.9 turbo project.
https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/1631 ... st19399174

sdiesel
Registered User
Posts: 1210
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 12:33 am
Location: NW Oregon,Buxton currently

Re: Speed density and it's underlying principles.

Post #29 by sdiesel » Thu Jul 30, 2020 2:42 pm

That's why I like the Megasquirt stuff. I can scrounge parts and be up and rolling with a few hundred dollars.



Power is easy. It's part-throttle driveability and efficiency that's tough. Throw a big injector at something and it will make power. Getting it to idle with that big injector is the challenge.[/quote]


this is where I'm headed, a few hundred $, will net X HP increase, without losing the reliability of factory parts. Yes there are limitations, by design. The heads, cam and so on.
What are the limitations of that design? No one knows cause its never, to my knowledge been tried on the six, though it produced results on v8. So for 600 dollars of tuning for example , could I gain 50? 75? In torque? ,HP?
Can I switch between maps for emissions ? When needed? Even better.
I would consider that a good ROI.
THE PART THROTTLE DRIVABILITY oops, is what makes the factory system seem appealing, ford did the work, thru tuning, we could cut some corners and roll out a bit of compromise, in favor of enhanced performance. In this case I am excluding talk of a turbo , jus NA.

Its a lovely job on the link u sent. Leandro , is a craftsman. Yet a brief summation of visible modifications easily exceeds 2000 dollars, and is a project aiming for different goals than what here I propose.
a long love affair with the 300 six.
my lastest and final fling is a fresh 300 in an 88 ford f350 dually 4X flatbed

pmuller9
Registered User
Posts: 4133
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:33 am
Location: Columbus, Indiana

Re: Speed density and it's underlying principles.

Post #30 by pmuller9 » Thu Jul 30, 2020 4:49 pm

sdiesel wrote: So for 600 dollars of tuning for example , could I gain 50? 75? In torque? ,HP?

No.
In order to make significantly more power the engine has to pump more air. (any combination of cam, headwork, intake system, exhaust system, ect..)
The 300 six make about 10 HP for every 1 lb/min of air being pumped.
Tuning the engine for best power with the engine components at hand will (If the tune-up is not already optimal) only result in a small gain in power.

User avatar
MechRick
Registered User
Posts: 993
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 7:43 pm
Location: Las Vegas, NV

Re: Speed density and it's underlying principles.

Post #31 by MechRick » Fri Jul 31, 2020 12:08 pm

sdiesel wrote:So for 600 dollars of tuning for example , could I gain 50? 75? In torque? ,HP?


Well, if that $600 included a junkyard turbo, sure. ;)

Paul is right. The Ford ECM's are set up with the correct amount of fuel, and mild, knock sensor tweaked timing tables. Little to gain without a major rework of intake/cylinder head/exhaust (or forced induction).

Take the 2.3 Lima four as an example. The cylinder heads are severely restricted on that engine in stock form. They can be ported, big valves installed, etc., but Ford slapped a turbo on it and created a performance engine. At 14.7 psi there is roughly double the amount of air entering the engine, with double the fuel needed, producing double the power and torque. No amount of cylinder head modification can produce the same results. N/A HP is possible, but you have to zing the thing to 7000+ RPM with an aftermarket head to get there.

A good experiment would be an EFI engine with a reworked carb head (big valves and porting) and mild camshaft. It would need more timing, but if the intake supported the flow, good gains should be possible...
1994 F150, 4.9L/ZF 5 speed, C-Vic police driveshaft
EFI head w/mild port work, 3 angle valve job
1996 long block, stock pistons, ARP rod bolts
Stock cam, aluminum cam gear
Hedman header, full mandrel bent duals, crossover, super turbos
http://fordsix.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=73244
Bronco II with a 2.3L swap http://fordsix.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=72863
1988 F250 2x4, 460 ZF 5 speed.

User avatar
MechRick
Registered User
Posts: 993
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 7:43 pm
Location: Las Vegas, NV

Re: Speed density and it's underlying principles.

Post #32 by MechRick » Fri Jul 31, 2020 2:12 pm

My opinion, after working on and modifying 300 sixes for 28 years, is the magic of this engine happens *below* 2000 RPM. If you are looking for an engine to run and make power in the higher RPM ranges, you really are better off with a V8.

If you overlay the torque curves of a 300 six with a 302 V8, the 302 seems to beat it everywhere. But driving both trucks, the 300 six will *feel* faster. It's because dyno operators typically don't pull numbers from an engine below 2000 RPM. The six has way more grunt between 900-2000 RPM. I feel you should stay away from camshafts that rob torque from that range.

My formula would be mild changes. Good headwork to extend the RPM range a bit, mild cam, intake and exhaust. And, if EFI, a tuneable system to take advantage of the extra airflow.
1994 F150, 4.9L/ZF 5 speed, C-Vic police driveshaft
EFI head w/mild port work, 3 angle valve job
1996 long block, stock pistons, ARP rod bolts
Stock cam, aluminum cam gear
Hedman header, full mandrel bent duals, crossover, super turbos
http://fordsix.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=73244
Bronco II with a 2.3L swap http://fordsix.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=72863
1988 F250 2x4, 460 ZF 5 speed.

sdiesel
Registered User
Posts: 1210
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 12:33 am
Location: NW Oregon,Buxton currently

Re: Speed density and it's underlying principles.

Post #33 by sdiesel » Fri Jul 31, 2020 7:04 pm

900-2000 is where I live with a ZF 5 speed, in a heavy truck. 4000 and up is dusty on the TACH face as the needle never swings past that.

I suspect there are a number of owners just like me.
Recently I was pulling a camp trailer out to fire camp. There is a long pull from the Columbia river onto the plateau, about 12 miles medium grade, just easy steady climb through dry land wheat farming. The current 351 did not much enjoy the lower RPM's, and I did not enjoy the higher RPM's. The six would have been perfect I. 4th gear at 1950 or so, all day long.
moving along there is a new avatar under Mechrick 's dig, care to tell us more?
a long love affair with the 300 six.
my lastest and final fling is a fresh 300 in an 88 ford f350 dually 4X flatbed

User avatar
xctasy
VIP Member
Posts: 7097
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2002 10:40 am
Location: PO Box 7072 Dunedin 9011,South Island, NEW ZEALAND
Contact:

Re: Speed density and it's underlying principles.

Post #34 by xctasy » Sat Aug 01, 2020 6:42 am

When your tuning an engine its much like a Cesna 152 air fuel and ignition curve. Unless an engine is massively detonation limited like an 11:1 Cleveland 351 Boss or 4V, a speed density tune is just like a Small Block Chevy tune...pig rich it will still run fine, but ignition advance or retard will have a HUGE influence. Ford locked all that jazz up so no one could ruin engines. Fords 3.0 Vulcan 4.9 Big six and 5.0 and 5.8 fuelie engines had the lowest warranty claims. No significant issue primarily because the EFI and Spark systems couldnt be fiddled with.

The TFi class action suit was a heat issue.

TFi is tied into EFi air fuel because this is what happens when air fuel and timing are changed.

Chebby test, but the changes in hp and torque are the same percentages on a 300 six.

When you get some band width, watch this video

https://youtu.be/HXX4zcPr9IE
Image
XEC Ltd ICBE's Inter Continental Ballistic Engines-
FAZER 6Bi (M112 & EEC5) or FAZER 6Ti (GT3582 & EEC5) 425 HP 4.1L/250 I-6
FAZER 6V0 3x2-BBL Holley 188 HP 3.3L/200 I-6 or 235 HP 4.1L/250 I-6
X-Flow Engine Components Ltd http://www.xecltd.info/?rd=10

sdiesel
Registered User
Posts: 1210
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 12:33 am
Location: NW Oregon,Buxton currently

Re: Speed density and it's underlying principles.

Post #35 by sdiesel » Sat Aug 01, 2020 8:36 pm

Yes, will do thk u
a long love affair with the 300 six.
my lastest and final fling is a fresh 300 in an 88 ford f350 dually 4X flatbed

pmuller9
Registered User
Posts: 4133
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:33 am
Location: Columbus, Indiana

Re: Speed density and it's underlying principles.

Post #36 by pmuller9 » Sat Aug 01, 2020 9:04 pm

Great Video!

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests