Printable Version | Subscribe | Add to Favourites
<<  1    2    3    4    5  >>
New Topic New Poll New Reply
Author: Subject: Some ST170/Zetec engine questions
mtechmatt

posted on 27/2/14 at 02:07 PM Reply With Quote
Dave,

Correct

Matt






V4 Engine Management System | Online Shop | Rolling Road Tuning | Motorsport Preparation | Engine Packages | Throttle Bodies

Check out what's happening in the workshop via our Facebook Page:
The Workshop


MEGASQUIRT ROLLING ROAD & BIKE CARB TUNING SPECIALISTS
www.mtechautomotive.co.uk

View User's Profile Visit User's Homepage View All Posts By User U2U Member
daveb666

posted on 27/2/14 at 02:11 PM Reply With Quote
Awesome. Got a price yet? LOL.

Saves me messing about putting a duratec in - I'd be very interested to see what gains could be had on a TB'd ST170 unit.





2007bc Photography - Commercial and Wedding Photographer based in West Yorkshire

http://www.2007bc.co.uk / http://www.huddersfieldcommercialphotographer.co.uk

View User's Profile Visit User's Homepage View All Posts By User U2U Member   daveb666 's Aim
mtechmatt

posted on 27/2/14 at 02:17 PM Reply With Quote
The system is 240inc, if you are up north you can source it from Chester Sports Cars, and they can give more local support if needed, if nearer us the we can supply for you.

Cheers
Matt






V4 Engine Management System | Online Shop | Rolling Road Tuning | Motorsport Preparation | Engine Packages | Throttle Bodies

Check out what's happening in the workshop via our Facebook Page:
The Workshop


MEGASQUIRT ROLLING ROAD & BIKE CARB TUNING SPECIALISTS
www.mtechautomotive.co.uk

View User's Profile Visit User's Homepage View All Posts By User U2U Member
Rob Allison

posted on 27/2/14 at 06:23 PM Reply With Quote
Dave inlet and exhaust are slightly different on the st to the zetec. You will need to alter them both to fit the st. Inlet ports are higher and bigger, exhaust is also larger but same place.






View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
Jenko

posted on 27/2/14 at 10:32 PM Reply With Quote
First off, as previously mentioned...what a great article, you need to get this in PPC mag...the work you are doing is great and very informative.

I have a question though :-)

I couldn't agree more that the fully controlable setup is always going to be the best......But..and here me out....assuming the you have not remapped with the vvt on /off experiment, im not surprised at the result. To optimise this set you would undoubtedly need to map the fuel (and maybe ignition) to make the most of it. So, what would be interesting is to see what the afr is doing when the vvt is simply turned ON. and then to map the fuel accordingly....Worth a punt?.





MY BLOG - http://westfieldv8.blogspot.co.uk/

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
coyoteboy

posted on 28/2/14 at 08:24 AM Reply With Quote
quote:
Originally posted by rhinopower
Running vvt leaves the cam at 90degrees at rest, and 130 degrees at advance, neither of these are the cams peak power figure. I understand the reasons for running it, and I did previously, however there is a better way of doing it.


If you mapped it correctly it would not run lean and should provide better results, it makes absolutely zero sense for a manufacturer to add huge complexity to make a poorer performance. The whole point of vct is to allow better performance and efficiency at low revs but provide correct timing at high revs too, why would Ford make it so it's worse at both if it didn't have to? Your suggestion that when activated it goes lean suggests you were not mapping to account for this, a simple automatic table switch should work and could match ignition timing to.





Report your local potholes, it actually works!

View User's Profile Visit User's Homepage View All Posts By User U2U Member
mtechmatt

posted on 28/2/14 at 09:11 AM Reply With Quote
quote:
Originally posted by coyoteboy
quote:
Originally posted by rhinopower
Running vvt leaves the cam at 90degrees at rest, and 130 degrees at advance, neither of these are the cams peak power figure. I understand the reasons for running it, and I did previously, however there is a better way of doing it.


If you mapped it correctly it would not run lean and should provide better results, it makes absolutely zero sense for a manufacturer to add huge complexity to make a poorer performance. The whole point of vct is to allow better performance and efficiency at low revs but provide correct timing at high revs too, why would Ford make it so it's worse at both if it didn't have to? Your suggestion that when activated it goes lean suggests you were not mapping to account for this, a simple automatic table switch should work and could match ignition timing to.


Of course, its merely to show how we can get Ford power curve properly now, as opposed to the traditional bodged methods.

Fords ECU will be compensating 'quite' well as its fuelling is based on a MAF sensor, we change the VE of the engine by altering cam time, the Ford PCM adapts. AFRs in all cases were happy around 13.5 at full power, which is good enough for a back to back test.

You wouldnt need a map switch either, if you map the engine AFTER mapping VVT (or of course do them at the same time) then you will get the best results possible. Any other method other than mappable (locked or switching) means you sacrifice torque somewhere in the curve, you just get to choose where... mappable is the best position, at any point

Matt






V4 Engine Management System | Online Shop | Rolling Road Tuning | Motorsport Preparation | Engine Packages | Throttle Bodies

Check out what's happening in the workshop via our Facebook Page:
The Workshop


MEGASQUIRT ROLLING ROAD & BIKE CARB TUNING SPECIALISTS
www.mtechautomotive.co.uk

View User's Profile Visit User's Homepage View All Posts By User U2U Member
Jenko

posted on 28/2/14 at 09:26 AM Reply With Quote
I guess the point is.....The on / off method, although clearly not optimum is not used with the ford ecu, it's typically used with aftermarket ECU's that are mapped accordingly to compensate for when the cam turns 'on'.

I think the real test is to understand how the on/off method works on a fully mapped ECU. Also I assume you mean Lambda sensor rather than MAF for the compentsating. Again, I would imaging the Lambda comensation to not be able to keep up with the on / off function.....Im far from an expert however, so just adding more discussion points to the experiment. Keep up the good work.





MY BLOG - http://westfieldv8.blogspot.co.uk/

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
BaileyPerformance

posted on 28/2/14 at 10:30 AM Reply With Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Jenko
I guess the point is.....The on / off method, although clearly not optimum is not used with the ford ecu, it's typically used with aftermarket ECU's that are mapped accordingly to compensate for when the cam turns 'on'.

I think the real test is to understand how the on/off method works on a fully mapped ECU. Also I assume you mean Lambda sensor rather than MAF for the compentsating. Again, I would imaging the Lambda comensation to not be able to keep up with the on / off function.....Im far from an expert however, so just adding more discussion points to the experiment. Keep up the good work.


Matt is correct, its the MAF reading that will change when the cam angle is changed, as the air flow will change when the cam is moved.
The lambda on a standard ST is a narrow band, so is not used after a give point (open loop)

NOTE:This user is registered as a LocostBuilders trader and may offer commercial services to other users
View User's Profile E-Mail User Visit User's Homepage View All Posts By User U2U Member
Jenko

posted on 28/2/14 at 11:24 AM Reply With Quote
quote:
Originally posted by BaileyPerformance
quote:
Originally posted by Jenko
I guess the point is.....The on / off method, although clearly not optimum is not used with the ford ecu, it's typically used with aftermarket ECU's that are mapped accordingly to compensate for when the cam turns 'on'.

I think the real test is to understand how the on/off method works on a fully mapped ECU. Also I assume you mean Lambda sensor rather than MAF for the compentsating. Again, I would imaging the Lambda comensation to not be able to keep up with the on / off function.....Im far from an expert however, so just adding more discussion points to the experiment. Keep up the good work.


Matt is correct, its the MAF reading that will change when the cam angle is changed, as the air flow will change when the cam is moved.
The lambda on a standard ST is a narrow band, so is not used after a give point (open loop)


Fair enough my mistake......





MY BLOG - http://westfieldv8.blogspot.co.uk/

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
Rob Allison

posted on 28/2/14 at 09:56 PM Reply With Quote
Matt did you manage to alter the VCT without the standard ecu reading any fault codes for the cam not being in the correct position the ecu wanted.

Controlling the VCT with this box is one of the cheap route to using the ST engine. But there are going to be no big gains unless more cam duration is used i.e. new cams.

From reading about another ST build which has head work,cams, pistons and rods done. They have still not managed over 198bhp. But its still on the standard inlet. So it looks like the inlet may be far more restrictive to the engine.






View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
mtechmatt

posted on 9/3/14 at 12:16 PM Reply With Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Rob Allison
Matt did you manage to alter the VCT without the standard ecu reading any fault codes for the cam not being in the correct position the ecu wanted.

Controlling the VCT with this box is one of the cheap route to using the ST engine. But there are going to be no big gains unless more cam duration is used i.e. new cams.

From reading about another ST build which has head work,cams, pistons and rods done. They have still not managed over 198bhp. But its still on the standard inlet. So it looks like the inlet may be far more restrictive to the engine.


Rob,

havent tried that to be honest as far as PEM goes we are only using the fatcory ECU as a test.

The gains are clearly shown in the graphs, more bottom an top end power/torque, rather than scarificing one end or the other...


FURTHER DEVELOPMENTS: Mapping Software and PID Tuning...

Following on, we now have a nice mapping environment for tuning and developing our VVT system:



As you can see we have loaded in our OEM values, and using the datalogging features of the software we have recorded the Actual_advance and Required_Advance so we can start to tune our PID algorithm. After a few tweaks, we have currently got to this point....



Good tracking with a max error when rapid angle changes are requested of around 7 degrees, that settles almost instantly... certainly as good as OEM response of the cam!






V4 Engine Management System | Online Shop | Rolling Road Tuning | Motorsport Preparation | Engine Packages | Throttle Bodies

Check out what's happening in the workshop via our Facebook Page:
The Workshop


MEGASQUIRT ROLLING ROAD & BIKE CARB TUNING SPECIALISTS
www.mtechautomotive.co.uk

View User's Profile Visit User's Homepage View All Posts By User U2U Member
mtechmatt

posted on 11/3/14 at 11:36 AM Reply With Quote
The results are in...


We carried out the testing on this Mk1, fitted with 6R carbs and a NODIZ for ignition management...





The below are the AMAZING RESULTS. The RED is the normal switch on at 1500rpm Method, the BLUE line is running the VVTPro with a factory VVT advance curve. We never did any mapping, just plugged it in..


10ft/lbs gain for the majority of the graph, with even more gains at the end, and 21bhp overall power gain...




With finer PID tuning and more mapping we expect even more gains, but I think out of the box, that'll do donkey, that'll do!






V4 Engine Management System | Online Shop | Rolling Road Tuning | Motorsport Preparation | Engine Packages | Throttle Bodies

Check out what's happening in the workshop via our Facebook Page:
The Workshop


MEGASQUIRT ROLLING ROAD & BIKE CARB TUNING SPECIALISTS
www.mtechautomotive.co.uk

View User's Profile Visit User's Homepage View All Posts By User U2U Member
daveb666

posted on 11/3/14 at 01:44 PM Reply With Quote
Wow that's an epic increase.

Going to find something with an ST engine on bodies next?





2007bc Photography - Commercial and Wedding Photographer based in West Yorkshire

http://www.2007bc.co.uk / http://www.huddersfieldcommercialphotographer.co.uk

View User's Profile Visit User's Homepage View All Posts By User U2U Member   daveb666 's Aim
mtechmatt

posted on 11/3/14 at 01:49 PM Reply With Quote
Dave,

Thats the plan

if anyone has one, and wants it mapped for free I(I assume already running an OMEX600 or a megasquirt, and is happy to wire a beta unit into their car, and can get down to wiltshire, PM me






V4 Engine Management System | Online Shop | Rolling Road Tuning | Motorsport Preparation | Engine Packages | Throttle Bodies

Check out what's happening in the workshop via our Facebook Page:
The Workshop


MEGASQUIRT ROLLING ROAD & BIKE CARB TUNING SPECIALISTS
www.mtechautomotive.co.uk

View User's Profile Visit User's Homepage View All Posts By User U2U Member
daveb666

posted on 11/3/14 at 01:57 PM Reply With Quote
damn having a silvertop





2007bc Photography - Commercial and Wedding Photographer based in West Yorkshire

http://www.2007bc.co.uk / http://www.huddersfieldcommercialphotographer.co.uk

View User's Profile Visit User's Homepage View All Posts By User U2U Member   daveb666 's Aim
BaileyPerformance

posted on 11/3/14 at 02:10 PM Reply With Quote
Matt,

Interesting work - is that power at the back wheels or the engine?

If at the engine then it would seem little point in using an St170 engine when we have seen over 160BHP using bike carbs and 175BHP on Jenveys on a stock black top.

We have dyno'd a totally standard ST170 and they do make close to 170BHP, that's with a CAT and all factory electronics and hardware.

So, there is a problem with the Escort shown in your post - maybe the carbs are too small? was the fueling spot on?

We have noticed the exhaust system is critical on a blacktop, i would assume more so on than ST170 - the system must be 2.5" with an free flowing manifold - the stock ST170 one is very good. (could be modified for RWD?)

NOTE:This user is registered as a LocostBuilders trader and may offer commercial services to other users
View User's Profile E-Mail User Visit User's Homepage View All Posts By User U2U Member
mtechmatt

posted on 11/3/14 at 02:34 PM Reply With Quote
quote:
Originally posted by BaileyPerformance
Matt,

Interesting work - is that power at the back wheels or the engine?

If at the engine then it would seem little point in using an St170 engine when we have seen over 160BHP using bike carbs and 175BHP on Jenveys on a stock black top.

We have dyno'd a totally standard ST170 and they do make close to 170BHP, that's with a CAT and all factory electronics and hardware.

So, there is a problem with the Escort shown in your post - maybe the carbs are too small? was the fueling spot on?

We have noticed the exhaust system is critical on a blacktop, i would assume more so on than ST170 - the system must be 2.5" with an free flowing manifold - the stock ST170 one is very good. (could be modified for RWD?)
#

Dale,#

Flywheel

Indeed it was running VERy rich so we weren't doing tuning per se, but the gains from correct VVT is a sure thing, the torque stays high at the end of the run unlike locking or full advancing.

Totally standard St170s have never made 170 on my rollers (dyno dynamics), usually 155 ish. Funny how even though Ford never stated the 170 meant 170bhp, people assume it be... A mondeo St24 makes abit more than 24bhp, and an st220 isnt 220bhp... just numbers with ST, not numbers followed by BHP... Good old amrketing at its best

Would you like to try a beta unit out can send one up in next few weeks?

[Edited on 11/3/14 by mtechmatt]






V4 Engine Management System | Online Shop | Rolling Road Tuning | Motorsport Preparation | Engine Packages | Throttle Bodies

Check out what's happening in the workshop via our Facebook Page:
The Workshop


MEGASQUIRT ROLLING ROAD & BIKE CARB TUNING SPECIALISTS
www.mtechautomotive.co.uk

View User's Profile Visit User's Homepage View All Posts By User U2U Member
ianm67

posted on 11/3/14 at 03:18 PM Reply With Quote
According to Ford spec's, the ST170 produces 170PS (168bhp) and the ST220 makes 222PS (219bhp) so the figures aren't totally meaningless. I guess an ST219 may not have sold quite as well......





Always biting off more than I can chew.....

View User's Profile Visit User's Homepage View All Posts By User U2U Member
mtechmatt

posted on 11/3/14 at 03:21 PM Reply With Quote
Hmm, IIRC Autodata liosts the St170 as around the 155 mark, certainly all we have ever seen anyway...

Our stock St170 focus we dynoed at the start made sub 150 And that is a normal car bought for testing, with no modifications at all

Matt






V4 Engine Management System | Online Shop | Rolling Road Tuning | Motorsport Preparation | Engine Packages | Throttle Bodies

Check out what's happening in the workshop via our Facebook Page:
The Workshop


MEGASQUIRT ROLLING ROAD & BIKE CARB TUNING SPECIALISTS
www.mtechautomotive.co.uk

View User's Profile Visit User's Homepage View All Posts By User U2U Member
Dave Bailey

posted on 11/3/14 at 03:55 PM Reply With Quote
Matt,
I have an ST170 on jenvey 48's dry sumped gagging for a tune BUT as contacted you before I have it running on a DTA S60.... I am in Horndean so a couple of hours away.... :-)

Dave B

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
mtechmatt

posted on 11/3/14 at 04:02 PM Reply With Quote
Dave,

Yes unfortunately im no DTA expert

Cheers,
Matt






V4 Engine Management System | Online Shop | Rolling Road Tuning | Motorsport Preparation | Engine Packages | Throttle Bodies

Check out what's happening in the workshop via our Facebook Page:
The Workshop


MEGASQUIRT ROLLING ROAD & BIKE CARB TUNING SPECIALISTS
www.mtechautomotive.co.uk

View User's Profile Visit User's Homepage View All Posts By User U2U Member
mtechmatt

posted on 11/3/14 at 05:30 PM Reply With Quote
The question is, will it go viral?








V4 Engine Management System | Online Shop | Rolling Road Tuning | Motorsport Preparation | Engine Packages | Throttle Bodies

Check out what's happening in the workshop via our Facebook Page:
The Workshop


MEGASQUIRT ROLLING ROAD & BIKE CARB TUNING SPECIALISTS
www.mtechautomotive.co.uk

View User's Profile Visit User's Homepage View All Posts By User U2U Member
BaileyPerformance

posted on 12/3/14 at 10:14 AM Reply With Quote
quote:
Originally posted by mtechmatt
Hmm, IIRC Autodata liosts the St170 as around the 155 mark, certainly all we have ever seen anyway...

Our stock St170 focus we dynoed at the start made sub 150 And that is a normal car bought for testing, with no modifications at all

Matt


155bhp at the wheels would be correct, about 20bhp loss through transmission is normal.

The one we tested made close to 170bhp stock, we also tested a stock 2.0L focus mk1, was within 5bhp of what ford stated.

Same goes for my standard mk1 focus RS.

The point I'm making is Ford do not lie about power outputs, this is true right back to pinto powered escorts, we did a stock RS2000 and it make 105bhp, spot on.

We have stripped a couple of ST170 engines, looking at the ports compared to a black top you can see these engine will make power - if a stock blacktop will make 160 an ST should make 190 with decent induction and your VVT device.

NOTE:This user is registered as a LocostBuilders trader and may offer commercial services to other users
View User's Profile E-Mail User Visit User's Homepage View All Posts By User U2U Member
Paul Turner

posted on 12/3/14 at 11:50 AM Reply With Quote
quote:
Originally posted by mtechmatt
Funny how even though Ford never stated the 170 meant 170bhp, people assume it be...



Found the Ford brochure from 2005 last night whilst sorting some stuff. In the specs Ford quote 171 PS @ 7000 rpm and 196 Nm (144 lbs/ft) @ 5500 rpm.

After test driving the car I was left totally underwhelmed (owned a Puma 1.7 at the time). Although it had an extra 45 PS over the Puma it felt very slow, the very poor gear ratios were partly to blame plus they were a fair bit heavier than the Puma. The narrow power band (the VVT was supposed to help here!!!) probably did it no favours either. Bought a Cooper S which was total pants.

quote:
Originally posted by mtechmatt
A mondeo St24 makes abit more than 24bhp



Did the ST24 Mondeo possibly refer to 24 valves and not 24 bhp, I suspect it did.

[Edited on 12/3/14 by Paul Turner]

View User's Profile E-Mail User View All Posts By User U2U Member
<<  1    2    3    4    5  >>
New Topic New Poll New Reply


go to top






Website design and SEO by Studio Montage

All content 2001-16 LocostBuilders. Reproduction prohibited
Opinions expressed in public posts are those of the author and do not necessarily represent
the views of other users or any member of the LocostBuilders team.
Running XMB 1.8 Partagium [ 2002 XMB Group] on Apache under CentOS Linux
Founded, built and operated by ChrisW.