Ford Fusion V6 Sport Forum banner

61 - 80 of 93 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
91 Posts
It may hold the power but with just a bit of wheelspin or wheel hop mine is super unpredictable where it will shift late or feel like complete crap when it does shift. I was hoping it would be better behaving than the one in my 2011 SHO but not so much luck.


As it sits, I honestly think we may already have one of the strongest transverse transmissions made to date. That said, when I win the lotto and retire, I'm definitely gonna swap in the drive train from the new Explorer ST. Then I could really see what the 3.0 is capable of.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
352 Posts
I own a Foxbody currently, owned a '69 F-100 with a FE block (seller claimed 390 which I discovered was actually a 360) and an F-150 with a 300-6, all with manual transmissions. I know what throttle response is. I also owned a '88 Turbocoupe with a t3/t4 turbo, had a good buddy with '04 STI and another good buddy with a big turbo Mk3 Supra, so I know what turbo lag is. Both have their own fun little perks.

If the Sport was offered in a manual, then yes, the lag would probably be a bit more noticeable, but as it is, I've never really found myself to be bothered by the little lag it has. 🤷‍♂️

I would trade a little more lag for a lot more top end without a second of hesitation.
Not me. My car already pulls from 80 to 120 like it does from 50 to 90 - top end isn’t the problem. I’m afraid to drive more than 90 or so on the highway for fear of deer (wrecked two cars on deer), State Police (wasted thousands of dollars in fines and insurance premiums in my younger days), so except for short triple digit blasts just for fun or to teach someone a lesson I don’t really need more on top. My wish list is quicker response off the line without having to brutalize my transmission with 3000 rpm brake drops.
P.S. I’m an FE motor guy too! Drag raced a ‘69 428SCJ Mustang, daily drove a ‘67 390 Galaxy 500, still own the ‘66 390 4bbl Thunderbird (all C6 cars). My ‘91 Thunderbird SC had no lag torque, and the top end to walk almost anything. IMO - turbos aren’t ideal. But I bought this car on purpose, kept it and spent big bucks modding it and I don’t regret it one bit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
848 Posts
Well turbos are in, the wastegate duty cycle is showing 100%. No idea what that means, but Torrie said it isn't good. I have attached some pictures of the new turbos as I unboxed them, I didn't think anything of the scratches, but you tell me, do these Wastegates need to be completely sealed? Are these holes the issue? Did Hong make a mistake or maybe is it just a vacuum line the dealer forgot to attach? What do I do here. Between the fuel and turbos with labor I'm around 9500. I really cant justify another 5k in labor to take these back out and put 'fixed' ones back in. So i'm hoping some folks here have some insight. Thanks in advance. defeated at the moment
They looked damaged, but they can be replaced without pulling the turbos.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
723 Posts
torrie is saying it is external at the control side. not actually part of the turbo, or the turbo's fault. maybe missing a vacuum line or something of that sort. I am throwing a code as well. just hoping the dealership stands by their work and fixes it as they charged 2400 for the install already.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
91 Posts
Here's to hoping its something stupid and easy to fix.

torrie is saying it is external at the control side. not actually part of the turbo, or the turbo's fault. maybe missing a vacuum line or something of that sort. I am throwing a code as well. just hoping the dealership stands by their work and fixes it as they charged 2400 for the install already.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shawnski

·
Registered
Joined
·
723 Posts
Thank you bro. I need positive vibes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,395 Posts
torrie is saying it is external at the control side. not actually part of the turbo, or the turbo's fault. maybe missing a vacuum line or something of that sort. I am throwing a code as well. just hoping the dealership stands by their work and fixes it as they charged 2400 for the install already.
They might complain that you supplied the parts, but they also should have known holes in the WG actuators was not good.
Who actually hacked up those actuators? And on another note, anyone make upgraded one's for these turbos?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
515 Posts
Only way to know for sure is vacuum test that wastegate if it holds the vacuum it is good and if not then that is a problem , which turbo has the wastegate damage issue front or rear , when I installed the mkz turbos on my car I left the rear waste gate vacuum line off and I also got a code waste gate fault
 
  • Like
Reactions: Oreo

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
515 Posts
I just went and looked at my car and it was easy to tell if the waste gate vacuum tube was on or not , here is a pic just in case
20201011_094245 rear.jpg
20201011_094316 front .jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Oreo

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
515 Posts
first pic is rear turbo hope it helps
 
  • Like
Reactions: Oreo

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
830 Posts
Not me. My car already pulls from 80 to 120 like it does from 50 to 90 - top end isn’t the problem. I’m afraid to drive more than 90 or so on the highway for fear of deer (wrecked two cars on deer), State Police (wasted thousands of dollars in fines and insurance premiums in my younger days), so except for short triple digit blasts just for fun or to teach someone a lesson I don’t really need more on top. My wish list is quicker response off the line without having to brutalize my transmission with 3000 rpm brake drops.
P.S. I’m an FE motor guy too! Drag raced a ‘69 428SCJ Mustang, daily drove a ‘67 390 Galaxy 500, still own the ‘66 390 4bbl Thunderbird (all C6 cars). My ‘91 Thunderbird SC had no lag torque, and the top end to walk almost anything. IMO - turbos aren’t ideal. But I bought this car on purpose, kept it and spent big bucks modding it and I don’t regret it one bit.
I meant top end of the rpm band. That has nothing to do the need to drive at prison inducing speeds. That also doesn't mean the torque won't hit at the same low rpms. Turbo lag doesn't determine the shape of the power band. It only determines how long it takes the turbos to build boost after you mash the throttle at any rpm. The only affect it has on your launch from a stop is how long you need to brake boost before you go. In the case of these tiny stock turbos vs the upgraded turbos, it might take an extra half a second to spool at the most, probably. The only way I could see this not being the case would be of the 46mm versions are too big for the turbine side to effectively spool, which I hope isn't the case.

Turbos really are one of the best methods of forced induction because they don't rely on engine rpm. They only spool when you want the boost, unlike superchargers which are always spinning in relation to rpm, and any boost you aren't using is then dumped. The superchargers give you better throttle response, but boost depends on rpm. Turbos give you full boost at any rpm, but you have to wait a moment after you pin the throttle.

As far as the problem at hand with the turbos of the day, I hope it's not a case of the compressor and turbine being too far mismatched. If there is a hole on the vacuum side of the regulator, that's a problem. The holes on the bottom side closer to the turbo are fine. That side is supposed to be vented, but the top needs to be sealed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,395 Posts
I meant top end of the rpm band. That has nothing to do the need to drive at prison inducing speeds. That also doesn't mean the torque won't hit at the same low rpms. Turbo lag doesn't determine the shape of the power band. It only determines how long it takes the turbos to build boost after you mash the throttle at any rpm. The only affect it has on your launch from a stop is how long you need to brake boost before you go. In the case of these tiny stock turbos vs the upgraded turbos, it might take an extra half a second to spool at the most, probably. The only way I could see this not being the case would be of the 46mm versions are too big for the turbine side to effectively spool, which I hope isn't the case.

Turbos really are one of the best methods of forced induction because they don't rely on engine rpm. They only spool when you want the boost, unlike superchargers which are always spinning in relation to rpm, and any boost you aren't using is then dumped. The superchargers give you better throttle response, but boost depends on rpm. Turbos give you full boost at any rpm, but you have to wait a moment after you pin the throttle.

As far as the problem at hand with the turbos of the day, I hope it's not a case of the compressor and turbine being too far mismatched. If there is a hole on the vacuum side of the regulator, that's a problem. The holes on the bottom side closer to the turbo are fine. That side is supposed to be vented, but the top needs to be sealed.
Who wants to brake boost from every stop sign. These cars are a PIA to get it right, on a good day..

TVS's mustang gets 10 lbs of boost, INSTANTLY off idle. Their just horrible on gas.

Even if that actuator is not leaking now, I wouldn't leave it. Looks like someone took a hack saw to it, repeatedly.
I wouldn't trust it won't leak in the future...
.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
830 Posts
Who wants to brake boost from every stop sign. These cars are a PIA to get it right, on a good day..

TVS's mustang gets 10 lbs of boost, INSTANTLY off idle. Their just horrible on gas.
Like I said, blowers vs turbos each have their pros and cons. I've gone around and around countless times about what I want on my fox. Do I want the neck snapping throttle response of a twin screw? Do I want the smooth and linear power of a centrifugal? Do I want the hilarious power of a single big turbo? The lower lag of twin turbos? I still don't have the answer, and with each method evolving every day, it's not getting any easier. I've always loved both turbos and blowers, but for a small displacement engine like ours, imo, there is really only one option. There's a reason you don't see many superchargers on small engines. If I were trying to build a dedicated max track machine, I sure as hell wouldn't start with a Sport. For a practical DD sleeper, I'm not too worried about whether or not I can get a perfect launch. If anyone wants to talk smack and get the peewee ruler out, I have my 1100cc hyperbike for them to answer to.

If the little bit of lag is a deal breaker for you, though, I look forward to seeing the first blower swapped Sport. Personally, I would go with a twin screw. I think a centrifugal would be tough to fit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
723 Posts
Dealership fixed in 10 seconds today. He didn't put the vacuum line on the actuator. Good to go now. Tuning in progress. Holy **** this is fast on the 2nd revision. Only 18lbs already faster noticeably.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
91 Posts
Yeah buddy!
Dealership fixed in 10 seconds today. He didn't put the vacuum line on the actuator. Good to go now. Tuning in progress. Holy **** this is fast on the 2nd revision. Only 18lbs already faster noticeably.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
723 Posts
Sameeeee i was in the deep end of doubt. But things are looking good. Going to log tune 003 in the morning and see where we are at. For those who care we are doing a 93 tune first then e85.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
723 Posts
I have only done 2 pulls so I can't say for certain. But the 2nd pull i went 30 to 80 and it was noticeable at 40. And just kept pulling. Ill use my draggy tomorrow for some preliminary numbers. Stay tuned, ill make a new thread for this. As I dont want to keep stealing this threads thunder.
 
61 - 80 of 93 Posts
Top