2011 SOHC Ping/spark knock on 87

[PetroleumJunkie412]

You’re still alive???

 

[PetroleumJunkie412]

Interesting. I found the stock tune for a 2006 mustang 4.0l. Very different from ranger.

 

[PetroleumJunkie412]

Well. I'm not crazy. As soon as I go to WOT, all spark is pulled to below baseline.

 

[Uncle Gump]

Again it's been awhile...

But when you go to WOT... the PCM is gonna pull some spark while under load.

If I'm reading it right... that's exactly what happened.

 

[PetroleumJunkie412]

Again it's been awhile...

But when you go to WOT... the PCM is gonna pull some spark while under load.

If I'm reading it right... that's exactly what happened.

You are. But negative seems off. Might not be.

Update is I found where it falls off. When the truck switches from cold base to base fuel table, there's a noticeable power difference. Makes sense.

 

[PetroleumJunkie412]

Again it's been awhile...

But when you go to WOT... the PCM is gonna pull some spark while under load.

If I'm reading it right... that's exactly what happened.

So, a few more things, and since I get tired of talking to my cat, I'm going to talk in your general direction.

Here is a data log I made during a highway merge. The shift is a 4-5 upshift when the PROFESSIONAL DRIVER ON A CLOSED COURSE shifted to finish the merge. The stock tuning on the 4.0l SOHC basically commands 1.00 lambda (14.7:1) at all times while driving in closed loop. When WOT condition is met, the truck dumps from closed loop into open loop, drops all spark, and lowers lambda to 0.87 (12.8:1) and kills spark back to below base timing. And because its in Open Loop, you're stuck with an overly sheepish spark curve.

So, in essence, Ford intentionally made it run like shit when you grab for WOT.

There *is* power loss because Ford programmed it that way. 12.7 AFR and below base timing = poop. POOP. ITS POOP, FORD, CAN YOU HEAR ME? POOP!

Ok, now that I've said that part, this is exactly how Moddbox is getting away with their low psi blower kit. They are taking advantage of Ford's Special Needs Tuning and just shoving more wind in the engine. Engine wont care even with four timing chains and Chineseium internals because its running an ideal FI AFR from the factory with absolutely no timing.

On the one hand, this means the truck is going to run like ass unless you change it, even when it is running well.

On the other hand, this means that there is a lot of room for improvement.







Six years from now someone will reply to this post asking me to remote tune their stepdad's rusted out explorer.

 

[lil_Blue_Ford]

You know, come to think of it, I have noticed that they usually seem to get up and go better at just under WOT…

Interested to see where this leads. Also curious if it’s something that’s found on more than just the 4.0 SOHC

 

[Uncle Gump]

I don't think I've ever just put the pedal to the floor to see what it had. I've also never thought it was under powered.

I leave a bit early if I don't want to be late.

 

[PetroleumJunkie412]

You know, come to think of it, I have noticed that they usually seem to get up and go better at just under WOT…

Would make the most sense. More spark advance and slightly leaner AFR usually equals better efficiency vs pig rich and late spark. See any Briggs and Stratton as proof of concept.

Interested to see where this leads.

We all know where this leads.

Also curious if it’s something that’s found on more than just the 4.0 SOHC

Most certainly. 14.7 AFR = peak catalytic converter efficiency. All vehicles are tuned to emissions, not fuel efficiency or peak power. Keeping it at stoic ratio at almost all times would fit in with EPA regulations for tailpipe emissions.

 

[lil_Blue_Ford]

Would make the most sense. More spark advance and slightly leaner AFR usually equals better efficiency vs pig rich and late spark. See any Briggs and Stratton as proof of concept.


We all know where this leads.


Most certainly. 14.7 AFR = peak catalytic converter efficiency. All vehicles are tuned to emissions, not fuel efficiency or peak power. Keeping it at stoic ratio at almost all times would fit in with EPA regulations for tailpipe emissions.

Somehow I expected this response, lol

So… what are the options?

 

[PetroleumJunkie412]

Interested to see where this leads.

Base Lambda and Spark maps.

Lots of room for improvement.

@bobbywalter its almost like its scared.

Yes, this is why your 4.0 runs like crap and gets ass fuel economy when your CEL is on.

 

[PetroleumJunkie412]

Somehow I expected this response, lol

So… what are the options?

Two that I can think of.

Either tune the base map on a dyno/CLOSED COURSE as an N/A engine, lock the ECM into open loop and post results, or lock the global target afr to something like 0.90 and run low boost on 87 octane while monitoring with onboard wideband while letting it run on closed loop. The global spark modifiers, knock modifiers, and base spark are all (un)surprisingly wimpy so it should be ok.

 

[Uncle Gump]

I remember running LBTand MBT maps at the dyno lab using RCON.

They sure do pull the spark out of it under load.

where did those maps cone from?

 

[PetroleumJunkie412]

I remember running LBTand MBT maps at the dyno lab using RCON.

They sure do pull the spark out of it under load.

where did those maps cone from?

Stock maps pulled from my PCM, strategy PYGP1A7

 

[PetroleumJunkie412]

Base Lambda and Spark maps.

Lots of room for improvement.

@bobbywalter its almost like its scared.

View attachment 143160

Yes, this is why your 4.0 runs like crap and gets ass fuel economy when your CEL is on.

For reference, 2005 Mustang 4.6l three valve base fuel and spark maps

This strategy puts bourbon in its coffee.

My ranger is sipping matcha with its legs crossed like a lady.