Tuned EZ-F
12-27-2007, 04:20 AM
#1
Three Wheelin'
Thread Starter
Tuned EZ-F
Ken (Porken) brought his 86.5 auto over today and we tuned his EZ-F using John Speake's Sharktuner and V4.0 software. I had intended to give a blow by blow account of the ordeal, but John made it too easy. No problem at all. The instructions are accurate leaving no doubts as to how to get it all connected. The explanation of the different screens and various tuning maps is good. Everything went quite smoothly.
Ken wanted to check the effects of the low octane fuel loop so we did that. He was interested in finding out how the after market (eBay) EZ-F chip he uses stacked up against a real tuned chip, and how both compared to the stock EZ-F chip. We got all that information sorted out. Ken left riding tall in the seat and I'll let him post the chart and numbers. I'd like to report that he left prowling for unsuspecting prey, but there was snow on the roads and my chip burner won't burn a 27C32 chip so all he got was the EZ-F file emailed to him and no new chip in his EZ. His LH needs some tuning attention above 4000 RPM so he'll have even more power when we get to that.
Another big thanks to John Speake for a really useful upgrade to his outstanding Sharktuner. This leaves no one with a '85 or newer 928 without means for both fuel and ignition tuning their car for best performance and overall smooth operation. I'm continually surprised and pleased at how well the '85/'86s respond to simple performance mods such as exhaust improvements and tuning. There is more inside those models than most 928 enthusiasts think.
Ken wanted to check the effects of the low octane fuel loop so we did that. He was interested in finding out how the after market (eBay) EZ-F chip he uses stacked up against a real tuned chip, and how both compared to the stock EZ-F chip. We got all that information sorted out. Ken left riding tall in the seat and I'll let him post the chart and numbers. I'd like to report that he left prowling for unsuspecting prey, but there was snow on the roads and my chip burner won't burn a 27C32 chip so all he got was the EZ-F file emailed to him and no new chip in his EZ. His LH needs some tuning attention above 4000 RPM so he'll have even more power when we get to that.
Another big thanks to John Speake for a really useful upgrade to his outstanding Sharktuner. This leaves no one with a '85 or newer 928 without means for both fuel and ignition tuning their car for best performance and overall smooth operation. I'm continually surprised and pleased at how well the '85/'86s respond to simple performance mods such as exhaust improvements and tuning. There is more inside those models than most 928 enthusiasts think.
12-27-2007, 04:42 AM
#2
Inventor
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
I wanted to break 300 rwhp...but ended up with a repeatable 312 hp, 301 tq, rwsae! 
Many thanks to Louie, for his expertise/enthusiasm, and John, for all the extra work for the LH2.2/EZF SharkTuner upgrade.
Modz
SharkTuned EZ-F
Sparkplugs: wr5dc+
Ford MS 24# injectors
Ott X pipe (w/PK balance pipe)
Oil: 5W40syn, level: min^ <½ ^max
Rear muffler (pumkin), baffles removed
-cats, -vapor, -PCV (atmo crank vent), -MAF screens, -airpump
Intake leg ends smoothing (1" in from head, -bumps, surface still rough)
MAF to throttle body J-bend smoothing (-bumps, PCV ports filled w/silicone)
Stock
LH chip
Rebuilt MAF
Airbox, 85-86 tubes
Belt driven clutch fan
Cam timing (32V'r 0° hot)
Fuel pressure (2.5 bar) AFPR
85-86 tubular exhaust manifolds
Exhaust pipes (2¼"), big resonators
Temperature Notes (in retrospect)
Cool intake manifold, <90°F airbox
Possible bad thermostat, just below upper white line
The stock LH chip is too rich at top end, and the clone chip was no better at fueling, in fact, it overfuels on acceleration.
Taking the airbox lid off leaned it out a touch, and it made 316 HP, so a little LH Sharktuning might get it over 320 (GT w/X territory)?
In case you were wondering, connecting the octane loop on the LH side showed no change in WOT fueling.
Many thanks to Louie, for his expertise/enthusiasm, and John, for all the extra work for the LH2.2/EZF SharkTuner upgrade.
Modz
SharkTuned EZ-F
Sparkplugs: wr5dc+
Ford MS 24# injectors
Ott X pipe (w/PK balance pipe)
Oil: 5W40syn, level: min^ <½ ^max
Rear muffler (pumkin), baffles removed
-cats, -vapor, -PCV (atmo crank vent), -MAF screens, -airpump
Intake leg ends smoothing (1" in from head, -bumps, surface still rough)
MAF to throttle body J-bend smoothing (-bumps, PCV ports filled w/silicone)
Stock
LH chip
Rebuilt MAF
Airbox, 85-86 tubes
Belt driven clutch fan
Cam timing (32V'r 0° hot)
Fuel pressure (2.5 bar) AFPR
85-86 tubular exhaust manifolds
Exhaust pipes (2¼"), big resonators
Temperature Notes (in retrospect)
Cool intake manifold, <90°F airbox
Possible bad thermostat, just below upper white line
The stock LH chip is too rich at top end, and the clone chip was no better at fueling, in fact, it overfuels on acceleration.
Taking the airbox lid off leaned it out a touch, and it made 316 HP, so a little LH Sharktuning might get it over 320 (GT w/X territory)?
In case you were wondering, connecting the octane loop on the LH side showed no change in WOT fueling.
Last edited by PorKen; 08-15-2008 at 12:48 PM.
Trending Topics
12-27-2007, 02:06 PM
#8
Sharkaholic
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Shhhhhh! Must keep this a secret!!
No real HP available with these model years, nothing to see here, move along...
Excellent news Louie and Ken. I expect I'll be hitting the dyno in a couple of weeks with both of my 5 speeds.
No real HP available with these model years, nothing to see here, move along...
Excellent news Louie and Ken. I expect I'll be hitting the dyno in a couple of weeks with both of my 5 speeds.
12-27-2007, 02:37 PM
#10
Three Wheelin'
Thread Starter
The engine was stock with X pipe and other minor mods to the rear exhaust. Ken did completely refurbish the intake system which included new injectors. He had an adjustable fuel pressure regulator and we messed with that, but it was of no value. The mixture was 1 AFR leaner below 4000 than above 4000. Changing fuel pressure didn't change the curve. It only moved the curve up or down and still wasn't close to what it needed. The only fix is to Sharktune the LH. We ran out of time for that. We left FP for max power AFR below 4000 and too rich above. That was at the stock fuel pressure. Save your money on an adjustable FPR and Sharktune instead.
Whether the absolute power level as read on the dyno is spot on correct doesn't matter a lot. The key thing is that the engine made ~280 at the start and ended at ~312. That's good.
We did find one other thing that makes a difference, but I'll leave that for a future Porken project.
The stock EZ-F WOT timing is so conservative (retarded) it's probably ok for boost of around 5 psi as is. Above that, better Sharktune.
12-27-2007, 02:45 PM
#11
Inventor
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Dynograph added, above.
Strangely uneventful. 
I have the sensor installed, but I haven't received the Knocklite in the mail, yet. I would like to have the light installed when I put in the max chip.
The 43/44 engine seems to able to handle large amounts of advance. There's no squiggles at the top end, which usually indicate pre-ignition. Adding Xylene didn't change the power level (HP/TQ actually dropped).
With EZF, you must keep the manifold/airbox cool during dyno runs! With the SharkTuner, I could see that the air temps were way too high with the hood closed, and the EZF was retarding (3° >125°F). Opening the hood, putting a cover over the radiator, and a fan to blow on the intake lowered the intake temps from >132°F to 90°!
I have the sensor installed, but I haven't received the Knocklite in the mail, yet. I would like to have the light installed when I put in the max chip.
The 43/44 engine seems to able to handle large amounts of advance. There's no squiggles at the top end, which usually indicate pre-ignition. Adding Xylene didn't change the power level (HP/TQ actually dropped).
With EZF, you must keep the manifold/airbox cool during dyno runs! With the SharkTuner, I could see that the air temps were way too high with the hood closed, and the EZF was retarding (3° >125°F). Opening the hood, putting a cover over the radiator, and a fan to blow on the intake lowered the intake temps from >132°F to 90°!
12-27-2007, 02:47 PM
#12
OK..devils advocate here.. ....no knock sensors?...will there be an issue down the road due to changes in fuel quality etc if Ken has that chip set in and doesn't take it easy? Is he pushing the limits of Porsche's tuning since they have to by default create a "safe" map?..
Even so..comparing apples to apples..lets say the 87 and up S4 motor benefited by more aggressive maps and the ability for Porsche to do so since the knock sensors were incorporated and that otherwise the 5.0 liter 32 valvers are the same power producers...now with smaller intake valves..in theory..then should the later S4 motors have even more potential since the 85/86 intake valves are smaller..(of course you'd have to add the 85/86 cams)..hmm....seems we are starting to see what Porsche did to the Holbert car..just maximized the hidden potential by maxxing out the maps..and using 85/86 cams..
Anyway..it's all very cool...and likely to make the 85/86 cars even more rare since all the 87 and up S4 owners will buy them just to rip out their cams ..and toss the older body style to the side (joke lol)..
later,
Tom
89GT
82 Track Car..(maybe I should find some 85/86 cams for it's motor)
....no knock sensors?...will there be an issue down the road due to changes in fuel quality etc if Ken has that chip set in and doesn't take it easy? Is he pushing the limits of Porsche's tuning since they have to by default create a "safe" map?..Even so..comparing apples to apples..lets say the 87 and up S4 motor benefited by more aggressive maps and the ability for Porsche to do so since the knock sensors were incorporated and that otherwise the 5.0 liter 32 valvers are the same power producers...now with smaller intake valves..in theory..then should the later S4 motors have even more potential since the 85/86 intake valves are smaller..(of course you'd have to add the 85/86 cams)..hmm....seems we are starting to see what Porsche did to the Holbert car..just maximized the hidden potential by maxxing out the maps..and using 85/86 cams..
Anyway..it's all very cool...and likely to make the 85/86 cars even more rare since all the 87 and up S4 owners will buy them just to rip out their cams ..and toss the older body style to the side
(joke lol)..later,
Tom
89GT
82 Track Car..(maybe I should find some 85/86 cams for it's motor)
12-27-2007, 05:11 PM
#15
Three Wheelin'
Thread Starter
OK..devils advocate here.. ....no knock sensors?...will there be an issue down the road due to changes in fuel quality etc if Ken has that chip set in and doesn't take it easy? Is he pushing the limits of Porsche's tuning since they have to by default create a "safe" map?..
Even so..comparing apples to apples..lets say the 87 and up S4 motor benefited by more aggressive maps and the ability for Porsche to do so since the knock sensors were incorporated and that otherwise the 5.0 liter 32 valvers are the same power producers...now with smaller intake valves..in theory..then should the later S4 motors have even more potential since the 85/86 intake valves are smaller..(of course you'd have to add the 85/86 cams)..hmm....seems we are starting to see what Porsche did to the Holbert car..just maximized the hidden potential by maxxing out the maps..and using 85/86 cams..
Anyway..it's all very cool...and likely to make the 85/86 cars even more rare since all the 87 and up S4 owners will buy them just to rip out their cams ..and toss the older body style to the side (joke lol)..
later,
Tom
89GT
82 Track Car..(maybe I should find some 85/86 cams for it's motor)
....no knock sensors?...will there be an issue down the road due to changes in fuel quality etc if Ken has that chip set in and doesn't take it easy? Is he pushing the limits of Porsche's tuning since they have to by default create a "safe" map?..Even so..comparing apples to apples..lets say the 87 and up S4 motor benefited by more aggressive maps and the ability for Porsche to do so since the knock sensors were incorporated and that otherwise the 5.0 liter 32 valvers are the same power producers...now with smaller intake valves..in theory..then should the later S4 motors have even more potential since the 85/86 intake valves are smaller..(of course you'd have to add the 85/86 cams)..hmm....seems we are starting to see what Porsche did to the Holbert car..just maximized the hidden potential by maxxing out the maps..and using 85/86 cams..
Anyway..it's all very cool...and likely to make the 85/86 cars even more rare since all the 87 and up S4 owners will buy them just to rip out their cams ..and toss the older body style to the side
(joke lol)..later,
Tom
89GT
82 Track Car..(maybe I should find some 85/86 cams for it's motor)
IMHO, yes to your first question. I think this timing map has no built in safety. It should only be used with a knock sensor and when knocks show up, decrease the timing using the low octane link. Since knocks could show up with bad fuel, hot day, cold day, different altitude, the driver might be a busy person. Ken has some ideas to make a dynamic knock sensor activated switch. My recommendation is to use the J&S Vampire knock sensor automatic spark retard. That unit works perfectly on my GT and I wouldn't mess around with anything else.