Disclaimer: Links on this page pointing to Amazon, eBay and other sites may include affiliate code. If you click them and make a purchase, we may earn a small commission.
Yes you do...but it will help you none as they are set at the most optimal place from the factory. They open at 3950 rpms. Unless you go forced induction, there really is no point in changing them.
Open them earlier and you loose torque...open them later and your choking the engine until they open.
Yes you do...but it will help you none as they are set at the most optimal place from the factory. They open at 3950 rpms. Unless you go forced induction, there really is no point in changing them.
Open them earlier and you loose torque...open them later and your choking the engine until they open.
I disagree. If you look at the dyno graph from my stock 90, you can see how much power AND torque picks up once the secondary runners open. You can see on the graph that they could certainly benefit from opening sooner.
When I tune 4 valve 4.6 cars with IMRCs, I open them sooner as well and it always nets a power increase with no loss in torque.
![]()
In answer to one of your first questions - the system does get more fuel when the secondaries are open, simply because there is more air coming into the cylinder. The EEC is striving to maintain a proper A/F ratio. I don't know, but I'd assume the fuel map is already tailored to this profile so it doesn't have to 'learn' to add more fuel by watching the O2s.
This is kinda secondary (sorry for the pun) to your main question that's already been answered, but I felt like chiming in![]()
Also, the 4 valve 4.6 are a totally different animal...yes they are 4 valve motors like the SHO, but they have no secondary tracks like the SHO intake whatsoever. The 4 valves are always running I believe, so how do you "open then sooner" on a 4.6. The secondary runners open on the SHO at 4K...the valves are always running. I find this hard to believe...as I do own one and have never seen or ready anything about what you are saying anywhere...and I frequent quite a few forums.
IIRC the factory programming is pig rich at WOT. Ford did not want to risk damaging the cylinders. I might be wrong, but I heard Ted Breaux talking about it.