[JaredC01]

Preface - this is a repost of the results from the tip-in thread for better visibility without having to look through 6 pages of people saying they'll throw some cash in.

DYNO RESULTS​

Info:

The car was dyno tested on an AWD Mustang Dynamometer on a 92-96*F ambient temperature day (with corrections in HP/TQ for weather). The car has an AFE dry air filter installed - this is the only mod on the car, and was running 93 octane fuel. All pulls were done in 4th gear, using Sport mode on the transmission. The initial speculation was that 4th gear was the nearest to a 1:1 ratio - this was incorrect, 5th gear is a 1:1 ratio. The shop has assured me that the testing results won't be far off of accurate, though some speculate that the HP will be a bit down and the TQ will be a bit up from where it should be when ran in 5th gear.

The dyno had a couple of hiccups in the readings on a couple of the pulls that were made, and most of those results have been excluded (though the graph for said pulls fell in line with the rest, side the hiccups). After a total of around 6 pulls, we had a couple good graphs - these are included below, along with one graph including a hiccup run to show line consistency. In the graph that includes the hiccup, you can see the spike around 4400 RPM which increased the "maximum" HP for that run to an incorrect figure. It was left in on that graph to show the consistency, the other graph has it removed.

The exact vehicle profile for the FuSpo in the dyno software doesn't exist yet, so a 2015 Fusion AWD was used for the weight and aerodynamic profile, which should be near-enough to correct for a good reading (the minor refreshes in the 17 MY shouldn't change aero performance much). Along the same lines, there are no extra parameters that were able to be captured through the OBD-II port as the software didn't have a sensor location for them yet.

ALL HP AND TQ NUMBERS ARE TO THE WHEELS (AWHP / AWTQ).

That out of the way, on to the business...

Few pics to start the day off with:

Empty Dyno

Car pulled in!

Car strapped in and ready to go!

Uploaded a couple of 4k videos from my phone of the runs. The phone was OUTSIDE of the dyno room, looking through glass. Kinda loud in the dyno area, and it's a safety hazard, so I had to wait just on the other side.

Final Results:

3rd run...

5th run...

Runs 3 and 5 graphed...

Runs 2, 3, and 5 graphed (graph 5 is the one with the hiccup, but shows line consistency side the hiccup)...

 

[BIG ACH]

Those are actually some really impressive numbers. If you are factoring in a 20% driveline loss (because AWD)...

Then essentially you're talking:

334 HP
412 lbs-ft TQ

 

[JaredC01]

Yeah, with the percentages vs stock estimates, I wonder if the people saying the horsepower will be down and torque will be up when running a gear low are correct.

Even so, I can't imagine the 13% HP and 7% TQ difference between stock numbers at the crank and power to the wheels with dyno runs in 4th gear would shift to much more than a 10% and 10% in 5th gear, and I don't think there's any way the drivetrain in the car is efficient enough to run at only 10% loss, especially with AWD.

This engine has to be underestimated from the factory.

 

[OX1]

Not that far off from this before dyno on an F150 really.
If Livernois can get 350 @ the wheels (70 HP increase )
with a tune, I might have to get one anyway and just ****
the warantee.

 

[Donjohnk]

Preface - this is a repost of the results from the tip-in thread for better visibility without having to look through 6 pages of people saying they'll throw some cash in.

DYNO RESULTS​

Info:

The car was dyno tested on an AWD Mustang Dynamometer on a 92-96*F ambient temperature day (with corrections in HP/TQ for weather). The car has an AFE dry air filter installed - this is the only mod on the car, and was running 93 octane fuel. All pulls were done in 4th gear, using Sport mode on the transmission. The initial speculation was that 4th gear was the nearest to a 1:1 ratio - this was incorrect, 5th gear is a 1:1 ratio. The shop has assured me that the testing results won't be far off of accurate, though some speculate that the HP will be a bit down and the TQ will be a bit up from where it should be when ran in 5th gear.

The dyno had a couple of hiccups in the readings on a couple of the pulls that were made, and most of those results have been excluded (though the graph for said pulls fell in line with the rest, side the hiccups). After a total of around 6 pulls, we had a couple good graphs - these are included below, along with one graph including a hiccup run to show line consistency. In the graph that includes the hiccup, you can see the spike around 4400 RPM which increased the "maximum" HP for that run to an incorrect figure. It was left in on that graph to show the consistency, the other graph has it removed.

The exact vehicle profile for the FuSpo in the dyno software doesn't exist yet, so a 2015 Fusion AWD was used for the weight and aerodynamic profile, which should be near-enough to correct for a good reading (the minor refreshes in the 17 MY shouldn't change aero performance much). Along the same lines, there are no extra parameters that were able to be captured through the OBD-II port as the software didn't have a sensor location for them yet.

ALL HP AND TQ NUMBERS ARE TO THE WHEELS (AWHP / AWTQ).

That out of the way, on to the business...

Few pics to start the day off with:

Empty Dyno

Car pulled in!

Car strapped in and ready to go!

Uploaded a couple of 4k videos from my phone of the runs. The phone was OUTSIDE of the dyno room, looking through glass. Kinda loud in the dyno area, and it's a safety hazard, so I had to wait just on the other side.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sk0zhe3wiPU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kudNUohm8XQ

Final Results:

3rd run...

5th run...

Runs 3 and 5 graphed...

Runs 2, 3, and 5 graphed (graph 5 is the one with the hiccup, but shows line consistency side the hiccup)...

Awesome #'s and on a mustang dyno..

 

[[email protected]]

Really great numbers - it does appear that the factory HP and Torque are are understated - and as someone said a Mustang Dyno reads low compared to a Dynojet

 

[JaredC01]

Awesome #'s and on a mustang dyno..

Agreed! For future use though, would you mind NOT quoting the entire first post when it's that long? Clutters things up a bit...

 

[GT500R]

I really think with some engine and transmission tuning, we are going to see some amazing results. We know there is even more untapped power in the 2.7. That, along with firmer shifts/modified shift points these puppies are gonna scream. The 12 Second Club is only a matter of time. I'm confident a good 93 performance tune will bring us to mid/high 4 sec 0-60's and mid/high 12's.

I disagree. The 0-60 will be mid 4 and high 12's

I have the Edge Sport and can grab 0-60 in 4.9 on a cold night and that is heavier/less aerodynamic then the Edge. I even clicked one with a 1 foot roll out (how car mag tests) in the 4.5-4.6 range.

 

[GT500R]

That'll work.

And that's using a Vbox to measure, not an app or some ob2 thing.

 

[metroplex]

This might have been pointed out earlier, but the Fusion Sport is much much heavier than a non-Sport. The FSport is about 4100 lb, same as a 98-02 Crown Vic. The non-2.7 Fusions are several hundred pounds lighter. The dyno's I've seen for the stock 2.7 Eco on the F-series show the factory numbers tend to be over-rated, and our engines and turbos are the same.

 

[Donjohnk]

This might have been pointed out earlier, but the Fusion Sport is much much heavier than a non-Sport. The FSport is about 4100 lb, same as a 98-02 Crown Vic. The non-2.7 Fusions are several hundred pounds lighter. The dyno's I've seen for the stock 2.7 Eco on the F-series show the factory numbers tend to be over-rated, and our engines and turbos are the same.

TUrbos are different. Just a FYI

 

[metroplex]

TUrbos are different. Just a FYI

Do you have any data to show this other than part numbers?

FYI, the VE torque modeling and compressor maps are the same (except for inferred turbine speed mapping). I've been working with another tuner that has been working on the truck 2.7 and we are getting comparable flow and boost values. The truck has a much larger intercooler, but the efficiency modeling/surge line/etc... are the same. You can run a bit more boost on the truck engines without overspeeding the turbo, but the 58% choke line is still the same so the amount of flow (and not just hot air) is still limited to about 42-44 lb/min. The inferred turbine speed is just lower on the truck than the Fusion Sport according to the map.

 

[Donjohnk]

I’m not looking for it on here. It’s been discussed and proven.

 

[metroplex]

I'd like to see the link if it is already proven. My guess is there's only a slight difference accounting for the difference in compressor speed lines. Otherwise the speed density and VE modeling is known to be the same. It's easy to check when you compare the base read of the F150 and Fsport.

 

[i8acobra]

Our engines and turbos are not the same. Our longitudinal engine has different intake and exhaust manifolds, different accessories, different cams. Our turbos are made by two different makers.

 

[metroplex]

Proof? The factory calibrations say otherwise. I will go one step further. A F150 tuner is getting the same results as my Fusion Sport when we run the same boost and desired torque. If the engines and turbos are totally different, then they are behaving almost exactly the same. That's not surprising given the speed density volumetric efficiency tables are the same including the turbo models with the exception of the compressor speed lines.

 

[i8acobra]

Proof? Lift the hood. Use eyes.

 

[metroplex]

Proof? Lift the hood. Use eyes.

Main differences are in packaging, transverse vs longitudinal. Intake manifold looks similar and has same volume IIRC in factory calibrations. Fsport does not have the engine oil cooler and has that extra mount. Fsport has a longer dipstick. Turbos are oriented differently in transverse package. Charge piping is routed differently as well. Mainly packaging changes.

But the torque tables are the same, the speed density VE modeling is the same. To the ECU, theres not a whole lot of differences. Like I said before, the F150 engine behaves the same when tuned to the same boost and desired torque as the Fusion Sport. Respectfully asking for information that indicates the engines are truly different because I have yet to see this.

 

[VanWilder]

The F150 uses the Borg Warner K03 and our Fusions use Garrett GT1548

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

[757va]

The dyno's I've seen for the stock 2.7 Eco on the F-series show the factory numbers tend to be over-rated, and our engines and turbos are the same.

It was well documented back in 2015 when the Edge came out with the 2.7 that the turbos were different. I guess your gonna tell me the Edge and Fusion Sport have different motors too?