Interesting notes from Scangauge on EB
04-28-2011, 09:16 PM
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Interesting notes from Scangauge on EB
I managed to program in some XGauges for the Ecoboost and scanned it. I got a boost gauge to work, as well as Wideband readout left and right banks. Cool stuff. On my old car, I had to install a wideband and boost gauge. On this, it's all electronic.
Couple notes:
Wideband reads 14.5 most of the time, but richens up to about 12.3-12.5 at full boost. This is about right for power.
Boost runs right at 0 psi at 75 mph. This maximizes mileage by simulating a Diesel's zero manifold pressure at cruise.
Boost at full throttle has peaked around 15 psi, but normally runs 8 - 12 psi. It seems to be all over the place. I'm not sure why, but I suspect Ford does this for a reason, as the boost is totally controlled by the ECM.
The throttle position is the weird thing. The Scangauge reads the actual electronic throttle position, not the pedal position. I've never seen it go over ~73%. And, a large portion of the time, it runs 40-60% when my foot is to the floor. Seems like there might be a lot of "opportunity" there.
First post BTW. Just switched from a 5.7 Tundra.
Mike
Couple notes:
Wideband reads 14.5 most of the time, but richens up to about 12.3-12.5 at full boost. This is about right for power.
Boost runs right at 0 psi at 75 mph. This maximizes mileage by simulating a Diesel's zero manifold pressure at cruise.
Boost at full throttle has peaked around 15 psi, but normally runs 8 - 12 psi. It seems to be all over the place. I'm not sure why, but I suspect Ford does this for a reason, as the boost is totally controlled by the ECM.
The throttle position is the weird thing. The Scangauge reads the actual electronic throttle position, not the pedal position. I've never seen it go over ~73%. And, a large portion of the time, it runs 40-60% when my foot is to the floor. Seems like there might be a lot of "opportunity" there.
First post BTW. Just switched from a 5.7 Tundra.
Mike
04-28-2011, 10:01 PM
#4
Senior Member
Thread Starter
I liked my Tundra, as it got better gas mileage, more towing capacity, and had nearly the same power as my Lightning (13.9 vs 13.7 in the quarter stock). I didn't have most of the problems the others complain about - just the radio display that went out.
That said, I find the F-150 rides smoother, is quieter, and has more creature comforts than the Tundra.
Mike
That said, I find the F-150 rides smoother, is quieter, and has more creature comforts than the Tundra.
Mike
04-28-2011, 10:28 PM
#6
Senior Member
Thread Starter
No, the Tundra did better than the Lightning and Harley trucks. The EcoBoost is definitely better than the Tundra, with the same power. The best I ever did with the Tundra 5.7 was 18 (not bad really), whereas the EB got 19 on the first tank that included more city driving than my usual plus some 3500 lb boat towing. I'm sure the EB will beat the Tundra by 3-4 mpg in the same conditions.
04-28-2011, 10:45 PM
#7
Go Blue
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Hudsonville, MI
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Excellent post! I am glad to see the A:F ratio is safe, the PUTz.com dyno article said that the run had to be done in 2nd because the cats got too hot and limited power in 3rd. In my experience that only happens when the EGTs go up due to a lean condition, so those A:F numbers are encouraging.
Trending Topics
04-28-2011, 10:52 PM
#8
Good to hear. Cause I'm going to be ordering one soon and I'm hoping to get as good of milage with it as my 98 tacoma 4x4 but with way more power for towing my boat and way more room. But alot more money, but that ok I'm older now and thats what i work for is so I can enjoy things. lol