Based on testing by Matt @ ult. Performance, Between his catted and catless downpipes for FFS the gains were minimal. The biggest gains were from increasing pipe diameter and smoothing out the bends
Based on my own experiences there seems to be some torque limiting safety nannies that intervene when you go 100% WOT from a stand still that cant be disabled. My guess is Ford engineers wanted to protect the transmission/ PTU from premature failure
That is what I thought at first, but looking at my datalogs, my throttle plate is wide open during a launch (it's not closing) and wastegate duty cycle is 0% so it's not trying to vent anything anywhere. I looked at the VE model/torque tables and sure enough the 2.7 engine doesn't produce nearly as much torque launching as the 3.5 no matter how you cut it. My SHO had 2.77 final drive, and the Perf Package gives you 3.16 like the Police Interceptors. The Fusion Sport comes with 3.16s, probably to try and make up for the lack of low end torque.
Theres something we are missing, and the reason I suspect it is hidden safety nannies is because when I launch by rolling into throttle without just flooring the gas pedal I seem to get much better response and torque. The best 0-60 times i have recoded is using this method - this is the only way I can get all 4 tires to break loose
Proper tuning will fix this...
I guess we shouldnt be too surprised given the SHO has almost 1 whole liter of displacement advantage over the FFS
To put things in perspective, looking at both VE models the Explorer's N/A 3.5 V6 makes slightly more torque when launching than the Fusion's twin-turbo 2.7 V6. Of course the 2.7 starts to build up a lot more steam than the N/A 3.5 past 3000 RPM, but off the line I'm not that impressed with the 2.7 as it feels like "turbo lag" but I'm more convinced that it is the nature of the engine itself.
Could use these.........
I thought ecoboosts build boost faster by closing throttle very briefly to "pre-build" boost.
