Converted 1997 F-350 7.5 460 to Sequential EFI - Dyno Graphs Inside - Pirate4x4.Com : 4x4 and Off-Road Forum
 
Pirate4x4.Com : 4x4 and Off-Road Forum  

Go Back   Pirate4x4.Com : 4x4 and Off-Road Forum > Brand Specific Tech > Ford
Notices

Reply
 
Share Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-18-2010, 06:36 PM   #1 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Member # 167256
Posts: 36
Converted 1997 F-350 7.5 460 to Sequential EFI - Dyno Graphs Inside

As some of you may know, I converted my 97 F-350 with a 460 from bank-to-bank EFI to sequential EFI by making a wireharness and wiring in some other sensors so I could use an AEM full standalone ECU on my speed density setup (saved me from having to convert to MAF) The writeup for the conversion is here: http://ballertown.info/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=77




Well I got it running and took it to the dyno. I don't have pics and vids cause the buddy I went with used his phone and for some reason we can't get his sd card mounted to the computer so those will come later, for now I do have the graphs though:

First is 203HP and 321Torque
Second run I added about 4 degrees of timing and made 210HP and 329Torque
Third run I added 8* down low (went from 19* @600rpm to 28* @ 600rpm, then calculated over to 3500 where I'm running 35*. I kept it at 35* total since a previous run with an added 2* didn't increase it at all) This is when I made 207HP and 341 Torque. Adding any more timing didn't help power so I backed it off to where it was and left it. AFR's were around 12.8 - 12.9 consistently. Stock cams, stock heads, stock headers, cat still installed and a drop in K&N air filter.



Last edited by jonbar87; 11-14-2010 at 08:58 AM.
jonbar87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2010, 07:18 PM   #2 (permalink)
El Fucko
 
br0nc0xrapt0r's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Member # 104270
Location: Kent City MI
Posts: 1,418
What is the rest of the drivetrain composed of?
__________________
Fueled by Hate, caffeine, and sometimes whiskey.

WTB pulley cover for 1959 Homelite 9-23


Semper Fi
br0nc0xrapt0r is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 09-18-2010, 09:30 PM   #3 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Member # 167256
Posts: 36
Stock 5 speed manual tranny, stock 3.55 gears all trying to turn huge 37x12.5 wheels
jonbar87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2010, 10:26 PM   #4 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Crash_AF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Member # 24716
Location: Colorado Springs, CO
Posts: 66
Just out of curiosity, what did the engine dyno at with the stock EFI system in place so we have a baseline on the improvements.
Crash_AF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2010, 02:58 AM   #5 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Member # 167256
Posts: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crash_AF View Post
Just out of curiosity, what did the engine dyno at with the stock EFI system in place so we have a baseline on the improvements.
To be honest i don't know and kinda wish i would have gotten a stock baseline, but here http://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/97...ts-are-in.html this guy made very similar numbers.....think it's a fairly accurate comparison baseline imo....

Last edited by jonbar87; 11-14-2010 at 10:47 PM.
jonbar87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2010, 06:47 AM   #6 (permalink)
El Fucko
 
br0nc0xrapt0r's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Member # 104270
Location: Kent City MI
Posts: 1,418
You should to re gear and hit the dyno again or slap on a set of stock tires.
__________________
Fueled by Hate, caffeine, and sometimes whiskey.

WTB pulley cover for 1959 Homelite 9-23


Semper Fi
br0nc0xrapt0r is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2010, 07:20 AM   #7 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Member # 167256
Posts: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by br0nc0xrapt0r View Post
You should to re gear and hit the dyno again or slap on a set of stock tires.
Yeah i still plan on installing my straight up cam set, (the 97's do have the retarded cam correct...??) getting rid of the cat, installing some hedman headers, hopefully some head work, and then at LEAST a 4 inch exhaust. I'm not too worried about gears....i mean i know it's extremely high geared for a 1 ton and would help acceleration, but i'm looking for actual engine hp....gears are almost cheating if you know what i mean

Last edited by jonbar87; 11-14-2010 at 10:47 PM.
jonbar87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2010, 08:54 AM   #8 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Member # 52361
Location: Tucson,AZ
Posts: 1,405
I've read here about SEFI with a 5.0 harness and reflashed ECU, seemed really interesting.
I'd be interested to see what the differences in fuel mileage are, do you have any reliable "before" numbers?
PROJECTJUNKIE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2010, 09:45 AM   #9 (permalink)
unit dude
 
FORDTECHGURU's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Member # 104639
Location: in da garage
Posts: 2,171
have you removed the "bells" from the intake tubes? they are in the plastic piece that sits in the air intake tubing, heard it is worth 15 hp, they were to reduce air intake noise from ford..
__________________
---------------------------------------------------
LOOK! 2005'-UP FORD SUPERDUTY HI-STEERING *HERE*
LOOK! 99-04' SUPER DUTY HI-STEERING *HERE*
WWW.WEAVERFABRICATION.COM
https://www.facebook.com/weaverfabrication



check out the super ranger
86' RANGER-39.5'S-4.0L-M50D-9"-DETROIT-5.14'S
90' RANGER-42'S-BLOWN 302-E4OD-60/10.5-5.38'S-12 BOLT H1'S
FORDTECHGURU is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2010, 10:31 AM   #10 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Member # 167256
Posts: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by PROJECTJUNKIE View Post
I've read here about SEFI with a 5.0 harness and reflashed ECU, seemed really interesting.
I'd be interested to see what the differences in fuel mileage are, do you have any reliable "before" numbers?
Yes, before i was consistently getting 9.3. I now get 12.2
jonbar87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2010, 10:36 AM   #11 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Member # 167256
Posts: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by FORDTECHGURU View Post
have you removed the "bells" from the intake tubes? they are in the plastic piece that sits in the air intake tubing, heard it is worth 15 hp, they were to reduce air intake noise from ford..
Yes. They are removed. I cut them out long ago.
jonbar87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2010, 12:01 PM   #12 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Member # 52361
Location: Tucson,AZ
Posts: 1,405
To me, those are the impressive #s!
PROJECTJUNKIE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2010, 03:57 PM   #13 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Member # 165401
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 83
I wanna see what the headers and 4'' exhaust do as well as a cam. You might wanna put on a adjustable fuel regulator. Is the 4" exhaust necessary, I thought 3" was adequate enough?
2stroke rider7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2010, 04:56 PM   #14 (permalink)
unit dude
 
FORDTECHGURU's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Member # 104639
Location: in da garage
Posts: 2,171
so you did this 10 years ago in 108 degree weather ? what other mods have you done since then?
__________________
---------------------------------------------------
LOOK! 2005'-UP FORD SUPERDUTY HI-STEERING *HERE*
LOOK! 99-04' SUPER DUTY HI-STEERING *HERE*
WWW.WEAVERFABRICATION.COM
https://www.facebook.com/weaverfabrication



check out the super ranger
86' RANGER-39.5'S-4.0L-M50D-9"-DETROIT-5.14'S
90' RANGER-42'S-BLOWN 302-E4OD-60/10.5-5.38'S-12 BOLT H1'S
FORDTECHGURU is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2010, 05:20 PM   #15 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Member # 167256
Posts: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by FORDTECHGURU View Post
so you did this 10 years ago in 108 degree weather ? what other mods have you done since then?
Ten years ago? i got it dyno'd yesterday, and yes it was like 97* out lol. As for the mods, I don't have anything other than what I listed in my first post.




Quote:
Originally Posted by 2stroke rider7 View Post
I wanna see what the headers and 4'' exhaust do as well as a cam. You might wanna put on a adjustable fuel regulator. Is the 4" exhaust necessary, I thought 3" was adequate enough?
So far I'm not having a problem getting enough fuel. If I go much over 400ft lbs of torque I'll probably go with some upgraded injectors and a walbro 255...

The smallest I'd go with is 4". That engine is starved for air....hence the major drop in torque after 3500. So, if I am ever able to feed it enough air, I'm hoping that a 4" will be big enough...

To put it in perspective, I also own a 2.2L honda Prelude. For the longest time people debated that 3" was "too big" for a 2.2L....that is furthest from the truth:

http://www.honda-tech.com/showthread.php?t=1530154
http://preludepower.net/forums/showthread.php?t=287258
http://bbmoto.net/wiki/index.php?ExhaustTheory

There's a huge misconception out there that 3" is "big enough." If a 2.2L can benefit from a 3", how big of an exhaust does a 7.5L need in order to fully benefit???

Think about it...everyone is all about more air, more air, well if more air is coming in, you need to get it out somehow. Then this is where you hear the "burnt valve" misconception. "If I go with too big of an exhaust, I'll burn my valves." Well here's the truth:

(Not my writing)

Back pressure, Exhaust velocity and scavenging.

The myth: “engines need some backpressure.”

One of the most misunderstood concepts in exhaust theory is backpressure. People love to talk about backpressure on message boards with no real understanding of what it is and what its consequences are. I'm sure many of you have heard or read the phrase "engines need some backpressure" when discussing exhaust upgrades. That phrase is in fact completely inaccurate and a wholly misguided notion.

How the myth came about:

It is easy to see how this misunderstanding arises. Lets’ say that Max puts a 3-inch system on his normally aspirated car. He soon realizes that he has lost power right through the power band. The connection is made in his throbbing brain….

Put on 3" pipe = loss of backpressure = loss of power.

Max erroneously concludes that you need backpressure to retain performance. He has ignored the need for exhaust gas velocity to get that scavenge effect.

The other myth: “engines can get burned valves from not enough backpressure”


How this myth came about:

The other reason why people say "backpressure is good" is because they hear that cars (or motorcycles) that have had performance exhaust work done to them would then go on to burn exhaust valves. Now, it is true that such valve burning has occurred as a result of the exhaust mods, but it isn't due merely to a lack of backpressure.

The internal combustion engine is a complex, dynamic collection of different systems working together to convert the stored power in gasoline into mechanical energy to push a car down the road. Anytime one of these systems are modified, that mod will also indirectly affect the other systems, as well.

Now, valve burning occurs as a result of a very lean-burning engine. In order to achieve a theoretical optimal combustion, an engine needs 14.7 parts of oxygen by mass to 1 part of gasoline (again, by mass). This is referred to as a stochiometric (chemically correct) mixture, and is commonly referred to as a 14.7:1 mix. If an engine burns with less oxygen present (13:1, 12:1, etc...), it is said to run rich. Conversely, if the engine runs with more oxygen present (16:1, 17:1, etc...), it is said to run lean. Today's engines are designed to run at 14.7:1 for normally cruising, with rich mixtures on acceleration or warm-up, and lean mixtures while decelerating.

Getting back to the discussion, the reason that exhaust valves burn is because the engine is burning lean. Normal engines will tolerate lean burning for a little bit, but not for sustained periods of time. The reason why the engine is burning lean to begin with is that the reduction in backpressure is causing more air to be drawn into the combustion chamber than before. Earlier cars (and motorcycles) with carburetion often could not adjust for his.

Once these vehicles received performance mods that reduced backpressure, they tended to burn valves because of the resulting over-lean condition. This, incidentally, also provides a basis for the "torque increase" seen if backpressure is maintained. As the fuel/air mixture becomes leaner, the resultant combustion will produce progressively less and less of the force needed to produce torque.

Some basic exhaust theory

Your exhaust system is designed to evacuate gases from the combustion chamber quickly and efficiently. Exhaust gases are not produced in a smooth stream; exhaust gases originate in pulses. A 4 cylinder motor will have 4 distinct pulses per complete engine cycle; a 6 cylinder has 6 pulses and so on. The more pulses that are produced, the more continuous the exhaust flow. Backpressure can be loosely defined as the resistance to positive flow - in this case, the resistance to positive flow of the exhaust stream.

Backpressure and velocity.

Some people operate under the misguided notion that wider pipes are more effective at clearing the combustion chamber than narrower pipes. It's not hard to see how this misconception is appealing - wider pipes have the capability to flow more than narrower pipes. So if they have the ability to flow more, why isn't "wider is better" a good rule of thumb for exhaust upgrading? In a word - VELOCITY. I'm sure that all of you have at one time used a garden hose w/o a spray nozzle on it. If you let the water just run unrestricted out of the house it flows at a rather slow rate. However, if you take your finger and cover part of the opening, the water will flow out at a much, much, faster rate.

The astute exhaust designer knows that you must balance flow capacity with velocity. You want the exhaust gases to exit the chamber and speed along at the highest velocity possible - you want a FAST exhaust stream. If you have two exhaust pulses of equal volume, one in a 2" pipe and one in a 3" pipe, the pulse in the 2" pipe will be traveling considerably FASTER than the pulse in the 3" pipe. While it is true that the narrower the pipe, the higher the velocity of the exiting gases, you want make sure the pipe is wide enough so that there is as little backpressure as possible while maintaining suitable exhaust gas velocity.

Backpressure in its most extreme form can lead to reversion of the exhaust stream - that is to say the exhaust flows backwards, which is not good. The trick is to have a pipe that that is as narrow as possible while having as close to zero backpressure as possible at the RPM range you want your power band to be located at. Exhaust pipe diameters are best suited to a particular RPM range. A smaller pipe diameter will produce higher exhaust velocities at a lower RPM but create unacceptably high amounts of backpressure at high rpm. Thus if your power band is located 2-3000 RPM you'd want a narrower pipe than if your power band is located at 8-9000RPM.

Many engineers try to work around the RPM specific nature of pipe diameters by using setups that are capable of creating a similar effect as a change in pipe diameter on the fly. The most advanced is Ferrari's which consists of two exhaust paths after the header - at low RPM only one path is open to maintain exhaust velocity, but as RPM climbs and exhaust volume increases, the second path is opened to curb backpressure - since there is greater exhaust volume there is no loss in flow velocity. BMW and Nissan use a simpler and less effective method - there is a single exhaust path to the muffler; the muffler has two paths; one path is closed at low RPM but both are open at high RPM.

So why is exhaust velocity so important?

The faster an exhaust pulse moves, the better it can scavenge out all of the spent gasses during valve overlap. The guiding principles of exhaust pulse scavenging are a bit beyond the scope of this doc but the general idea is a fast moving pulse creates a low pressure area behind it. This low pressure area acts as a vacuum and draws along the air behind it. A similar example would be a vehicle traveling at a high rate of speed on a dusty road. There is a low pressure area immediately behind the moving vehicle - dust particles get sucked into this low pressure area causing it to collect on the back of the vehicle. This effect is most noticeable on vans and hatchbacks which tend to create large trailing low pressure areas - giving rise to the numerous "wash me please" messages written in the thickly collected dust on the rear door(s).

Conclusion.

SO it turns out that engines don't need backpressure, they need as high a flow velocity as possible with as little backpressure as possible.

There are so many myths out there, don't just believe whatever you hear!!

Last edited by jonbar87; 09-19-2010 at 05:23 PM.
jonbar87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2010, 06:04 PM   #16 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Crash_AF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Member # 24716
Location: Colorado Springs, CO
Posts: 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonbar87 View Post
Ten years ago? i got it dyno'd yesterday, and yes it was like 97* out lol. As for the mods, I don't have anything other than what I listed in my first post.
The date readout on your dyno sheets above is 3/4/2000. I'm guessing they didn't reset the dyno computer's date to current and that's why he made the comment.

I was reading the other thread on FTE and the OP's stock 460 was putting out almost the same horsepower and about 20 lb/ft torque less than your final reading although he has no cat and 3" exhaust.

I find it interesting that his numbers were right in line with your initial readings before you started tweaking the timing curve. It will be interesting to see what improvements you get with exhaust mods alone if you can do a comparison dyno reading at that point. (apples to apples and all)
Crash_AF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2010, 06:28 PM   #17 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Member # 167256
Posts: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crash_AF View Post
The date readout on your dyno sheets above is 3/4/2000. I'm guessing they didn't reset the dyno computer's date to current and that's why he made the comment.

I was reading the other thread on FTE and the OP's stock 460 was putting out almost the same horsepower and about 20 lb/ft torque less than your final reading although he has no cat and 3" exhaust.

I find it interesting that his numbers were right in line with your initial readings before you started tweaking the timing curve. It will be interesting to see what improvements you get with exhaust mods alone if you can do a comparison dyno reading at that point. (apples to apples and all)
ah ok. yeah when I was there I noticed the actual time on the computer was off but didn't even notice the date was also.

I'm thinking that with headers, 4" header back exhaust w/no cat and maybe a little cooler day I'd hopefully see 350 torque.

Does anyone know if the 1997 has the retarded cam timing?

Last edited by jonbar87; 09-19-2010 at 06:35 PM.
jonbar87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2010, 07:49 PM   #18 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Member # 161999
Location: Truckee CA,
Posts: 348
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonbar87 View Post
Yes. They are removed. I cut them out long ago.
Are you guys talking about the tubes that go fromt the intake to the stock air box???/ I will look inside and see if i cant figure it out!!! The stock air box got crushed when the 94 was rolled, so i picked up a K&N filter from Summit, but it still uses the stock air tubes!!!
__________________
[url]www.dependabletowinc.com[/url]
Dependable Tow Man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2010, 07:51 PM   #19 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Member # 167256
Posts: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dependable Tow Man View Post
Are you guys talking about the tubes that go fromt the intake to the stock air box???/ I will look inside and see if i cant figure it out!!! The stock air box got crushed when the 94 was rolled, so i picked up a K&N filter from Summit, but it still uses the stock air tubes!!!
Yes. They are right in the middle of the stock air box and throttle body....at least on the 97 460 they are...can't speak for other models.
jonbar87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2010, 07:53 PM   #20 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Member # 18324
Location: Visalia CA.
Posts: 275
All EFI 460s already have stright up timming and a double roller timing chain.
Leadmic
leadmic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2010, 08:11 PM   #21 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Member # 167256
Posts: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by leadmic View Post
All EFI 460s already have stright up timming and a double roller timing chain.
Leadmic
That's what i was needing to know. Thanks so much! And You're 100% sure? If so i'm going to sell mine.
jonbar87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2010, 08:12 PM   #22 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Member # 161999
Location: Truckee CA,
Posts: 348
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonbar87 View Post
Yes. They are right in the middle of the stock air box and throttle body....at least on the 97 460 they are...can't speak for other models.
Thanks, im heading down to the shop to finish up the EFI harness, i will look for the balls on the stock air tubes!!!
__________________
[url]www.dependabletowinc.com[/url]
Dependable Tow Man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2010, 08:42 PM   #23 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Member # 167256
Posts: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dependable Tow Man View Post
Thanks, im heading down to the shop to finish up the EFI harness, i will look for the balls on the stock air tubes!!!
no problem. Not really balls, once you remove the intake tubes toward the air box side, you'll see two trumpet lookin things attached to the center piece....once you get there you'll see what i'm talking about.
jonbar87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2010, 07:04 PM   #24 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Member # 167256
Posts: 36
YouTube - Ford 460 dyno sefi conversion
jonbar87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2010, 04:42 PM   #25 (permalink)
unit dude
 
FORDTECHGURU's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Member # 104639
Location: in da garage
Posts: 2,171
it is a free country but 4" will cost you torque, headers would be a better start, i didn't read the book above but basically if the pipe is too large the air speed slows and can tumble in the pipe, you need laminar flow, yes backpressure is a misnomer, and higher airspeed in the exhaust increases scavanging affect, the reason the torque peaks at 3500 is the camshaft is dinky and the intake side of things is small crossection wise to promote torque for towing.
sometimes people get away with way too big of an exhaust, when a v-type engines primary sides terminate at a x-pipe, the engine doesn't see the rest of the piping so much, the system is now tuned to the primary legnth/size of the exhaust from the header port to the x. the flow pulses are divided into both pipes from there and the primary wave or pulse is cancelled. hence why the engine sounds like it is at a higher rpm, twice as many pulses down each pipe. .02
__________________
---------------------------------------------------
LOOK! 2005'-UP FORD SUPERDUTY HI-STEERING *HERE*
LOOK! 99-04' SUPER DUTY HI-STEERING *HERE*
WWW.WEAVERFABRICATION.COM
https://www.facebook.com/weaverfabrication



check out the super ranger
86' RANGER-39.5'S-4.0L-M50D-9"-DETROIT-5.14'S
90' RANGER-42'S-BLOWN 302-E4OD-60/10.5-5.38'S-12 BOLT H1'S
FORDTECHGURU is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:00 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.