Megasquirt, what can squirt do for me???

[fordwheelinman]

Ok so i just recently read another topic about Megasquirt modules being used. I was wondering about what exactly they are used for? Are they purely for people who are using their vehicles for performance, or can they be used on an otherwise stock vehicle. Im starting to daily drive my explorer now (see sig) and im used to my big truck. The truck has power, but the explorer is better on mileage and has (or will have) a few more comforts. Id just like to be able to have a little more power out of it, and not have to go into a major engine rebuild . It has a 3:27 rear gear, so i know not to expect much out of it, but id like a little more. Its gonna be used for highway driving, and trips to the beach or mountains when i get a weekend off work and id like to not have to tach it out everytime i want to pass someone on the interstate. Is this at all something i should think about.

I also will be assembling a 2.9 shortly that has been bored .060 over and will be going in a gen2 BII with 4.10's and a mazda tranny. Its a total project vehicle and might become a future trail rig or at least mud runner. Id like to get as much power out of it as i can, its getting a stock cam, performance cam was a little out of the budget, and at least for the moment stock exhaust. Again is this even something i would want to think about?

I dont really know much about how this end of things work. If its possible i was thinking maybe the Megasquirt would allow me to play with the timing of both the engines and the injector pulsations or pulse width to allow me to get a little more fuel in (espically in the 2.9) and get some more power out. I realize that would affect mileage in the Ex, but maybe in that instance a "test and tune" would be more appropriate to get what im looking for. Or am i just better off buying a chip for both? I could really use a little help and understanding here.

thanx, FWM.

 

[almostclueless]

MS is a custom engine management system that is primarily used for standalone situations I.E., not in tandem with the original system. It usually requires a good bit of fab and decent electronic and possibly computer skills (though some make it work just by dumb luck).


You do realize that the computers in any explorer and probably broncoII should be programmable with the right hardware and software? It will still cost a few hundred bucks, and require experimentation and patience.

 

[Ozwynn]

best mod for what you want is get 3.73's for the explorer. It runs and performs better when you tach it out. I got between 18 and 20 mpg with 31's and 3.73's.

 

[ZMan]

On another forum I'm on a guy megasquirted an IROC Camaro. Even in the early stages of his tuning he was reporting a noticable increase in power and was getting 30+mpg, this is with a Tune Port 350!

best mod for what you want is get 3.73's for the explorer. It runs and performs better when you tach it out. I got between 18 and 20 mpg with 31's and 3.73's.

ehh when I changed gears on my extended cab my highway mileage decreased, ESPECIALLY if I go above 65mph. I went from 3.08s to 3.73.

 

[fordwheelinman]

I realize they are a stand alone system. Getting 3.73's will only hurt the mileage i get now seeings as how i can cruise (once i get there) at 65 mph and be UNDER 2000 rpm's. All im really looking for there is a little more pick up, not so much tire spinning power, just a little more. I dont likely see an IROC camaro getting 30+ mpg.......unless it coasts downhill a lot. Changing my gears will only make the engine rev higher at cruising speeds, which i dont want. All i really want is a little more low end power so i dont....repeat DON'T have to tach it out....notice i said DON'T......

 

[Dave R]

The Megasquirt will allow you to change and adjust ALL of the engine's parameters at will. As far as I know the only member here that is actually working on/has a MS system running is... Anupaum <-clicky

 

[MAKG]

I realize they are a stand alone system. Getting 3.73's will only hurt the mileage i get now seeings as how i can cruise (once i get there) at 65 mph and be UNDER 2000 rpm's. All im really looking for there is a little more pick up, not so much tire spinning power, just a little more. I dont likely see an IROC camaro getting 30+ mpg.......unless it coasts downhill a lot. Changing my gears will only make the engine rev higher at cruising speeds, which i dont want. All i really want is a little more low end power so i dont....repeat DON'T have to tach it out....notice i said DON'T......

This is wrong. If this is a 2.9L, its powerband starts at 2000 RPM. You won't change this (much) with any kind of tuner. You need a cam.

But gears make A LOT more sense. 3.73 gears work very nicely on 2.9Ls at even very fast highway speeds. That's what I had on my former Bronco II, and it I had it peg the speedometer on the Montanabahn. Did just fine. Your mileage will not drop at 65 MPH. It will probably GO UP. below 2000 RPM is TOO SLOW for a 2.9L (it's too slow for any RBV, really, but the 2.9Ls are particularly unforgiving).

I wish I understood why people are so scared to rev the engines.

 

[JoshT]

I wish I understood why people are so scared to rev the engines.

Possible because for years the manufacturers have said it's wrong, though I'm more inclined to agree with you. The Ranger motors like to spin, let them do it.

 

[Ozwynn]

I realize they are a stand alone system. Getting 3.73's will only hurt the mileage i get now seeings as how i can cruise (once i get there) at 65 mph and be UNDER 2000 rpm's. All im really looking for there is a little more pick up, not so much tire spinning power, just a little more. I dont likely see an IROC camaro getting 30+ mpg.......unless it coasts downhill a lot. Changing my gears will only make the engine rev higher at cruising speeds, which i dont want. All i really want is a little more low end power so i dont....repeat DON'T have to tach it out....notice i said DON'T......

yeah I guess I don't know anything about power curves and driving...... (where is the shakes head smiley)

 

[Will]

It all depends on application, Blue. In small engines designed to make power at higher rpms, more gear is better. In my diesel pickup, it's worse by a lot. My onld diesel with the same motor made 25mpg at 70mph with 2.39 final drive (3.42s and a .70 overdrive) and my current truck, same motor and turbo gets 18 with a 3.20 final (4.10s with a .78 overdrive). 4.0s are great at lower rpms so I am not suprised ZMans doesn't like to rev. Our old friend Big Truckin 90 has 3.08s in a 2wd and he went with me to Wellsville one year driving it. I had a 91 4.0 with 4.10s and I swear he only filled up once on our 800 mile round trip. I don't doubt that the 4.0 likes 3.08s better. It's a good little lugger.

 

[almostclueless]

I wish I understood why people are so scared to rev the engines.

I don't want to have to, which is why my next ranger will have a 4.0


One undeniable fact. The ONE THOUSAND RPM LOWER peak of the 4.0 means it can cruise efficiently at lower rpms. NOTHING can change the fact that less revolutions is less wear.


Period.

 

[fordwheelinman]

I don't want to have to, which is why my next ranger will have a 4.0


One undeniable fact. The ONE THOUSAND RPM LOWER peak of the 4.0 means it can cruise efficiently at lower rpms. NOTHING can change the fact that less revolutions is less wear.


Period.

Someone FINALLY understands.

This is wrong. If this is a 2.9L, its powerband starts at 2000 RPM. You won't change this (much) with any kind of tuner. You need a cam.

But gears make A LOT more sense. 3.73 gears work very nicely on 2.9Ls at even very fast highway speeds. That's what I had on my former Bronco II, and it I had it peg the speedometer on the Montanabahn. Did just fine. Your mileage will not drop at 65 MPH. It will probably GO UP. below 2000 RPM is TOO SLOW for a 2.9L (it's too slow for any RBV, really, but the 2.9Ls are particularly unforgiving).

I wish I understood why people are so scared to rev the engines.

So first of all, they NEVER put a 2.9L in an explorer, thats the one im talking about gears. SECONDLY, you say the 2.9 doesnt do well in low rpms.....so explain how our 89 BII manual, mainly shifted at or slightly about 2000 rpms is getting 26-28 mpg with 3.45's???? Seems to me shiting where the powerband starts is inefficient??? Or am i really the stupid kid most people take me for?

 

[Ozwynn]

3.73's with his tires at 65mph puts him about 2200 rpms. the torque peak on a 92 4.0L is 220 @ 2400. that gives him room to play. 3.73 is a good gear ratio for cruising anywhere from 60 mph to 75 mph. any engine is most efficient at peak torque..... change the gears and save the money the mega squirt would cost for something else. 3.73 is an ideal set up on an Explorer. Like I said, I got 18-20 out of mine with 31's, got 18-20 with the 235/75/15's, I would cruise around 70 and never worried about getting on it when I needed to pass, it would get to 100 mph as quick as sticking my foot in it (also would go from 70 to 100 as quick as our 95 3.8L Taurus)

 

[Sevensecondsuv]

Ok real world evidence

With the 3.27's my explorer had from the factory:
I had to slip the clutch alot.
It was a gutless turd.
2000 lbs was a heavy trailer for it.
it got about 16-17 MPG

With the swapped in 8.8 (I got it for $100) with 3.73's:
No more slipping the clutch.
Great passing power and much faster 0-60
It will pull a 4000 lb enclosed trailer up a hill without too much work
it consistently gets 18-20 MPG (corrected for the speedometer error from the gear swap)

It's a no brainer. Getting 3.73's is the single best thing you can do for it. Cruising at 2500 RPMs instead of 2100 is not going to have a measurable effect on engine life. Instead it will put you much closer to peak torque. Mine has 150,000 miles and runs perfect. As I stated my gas mileage went up, significantly.

 

[ZMan]

MY realworld experiance with gear changes is that I dropped a whopping .2 off of my 60ft time, and dropped nearly a full mile off of my gas mileage. Not cool when I was doing as much highway driving as I was for a year afterwards

Maybe its just the weight difference between a 4x4 Explorer and a 2wd x-cab Ranger, along with tire size, I've got stock diameter tires. If you're keeping stock size tires its worthless imho, I think I'm gonna switch back to 3.08 when I install my limited slip.

You'll get much more power and fuel economy out of megasquirt than you ever will with gears though,