LMS vs Gearhead "Canned Tunes" Comparison

[tech10002]

Received my new SCT X4 and did all the updates. Waiting for GH auto octane tune. Up until this week, the only tuner I ever worked with was the LMS. Hands down, I like the SCT better. Looking forward to ordering tunes from others if needed.
Now, I need help totally off the subject. I cannot remember how to update my signature on this forum. Embarrassing.

Looking forward to seeing your results with Gearhead. I’ve read some good things, but there’s really not much info online about them. I’d love to see some logs of what the car is doing on it. Really curious to see air/fuel at WOT.

 

[tech10002]

LOL - Well I have never owned anything but Ford and you all make great points, it depends on how long before I need a new "nice car" if I can still find a nice low mileage SHO that I like that would be my first choice, BUT I got spoiled, I really love the AWD sedan so IDK what I will do when the time comes but Ford is just about dead to me at this point. If I have to buy foreign car I would rather it be European then Asian, but that's just me.

- I had NOT heard that but that's even more stupid then not making any sedans, they did the same thing with the Thunderbird and Cougar started screwing around with it and they are no more. The Mustang is GREAT at what it does, as long as they keep making enough models so one is affordable and one will roast the tires off the rims they will keep selling them for years. Anyway I'll be in the SHO for awhile.
C/

As much as I hate to say it, the closest thing to the SHO looks to be the AWD Kia Stinger. Their performance is pretty impressive, especially for what they cost.

 

[bpd1151]

As much as I hate to say it, the closest thing to the SHO looks to be the AWD Kia Stinger. Their performance is pretty impressive, especially for what they cost.

I just saw one of those for the 1st time on the road the other day.....

Was like a clay bar gray color w/clearcoat. I think it was the sportier top of the line variant.

Looked sharp. Did real quick brief search on up on it, and what lil stats I glanced over, impressive it was/is.

Might be a strong contender for when my older Taurus (which gets the DD duties) takes a crap.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

 

[StealBlueSho]

It’s just..... K.I.A.....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[tech10002]

I just saw one of those for the 1st time on the road the other day.....

Was like a clay bar gray color w/clearcoat. I think it was the sportier top of the line variant.

Looked sharp. Did real quick brief search on up on it, and what lil stats I glanced over, impressive it was/is.

Might be a strong contender for when my older Taurus (which gets the DD duties) takes a crap.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Performance is pretty amazing for a car that barely stickers above 50k loaded. It’s within a breath of how fast a tuned SHO is—well, except yours. Lol

 

[tech10002]

It’s just..... K.I.A.....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

LOL

I think a lot of people feel that way. I just wonder how much incentive it will take to move a 52k Kia after the new wears off. I guess we can’t say much considering what they’re selling brand new leftover SHOs for though.

 

[MHW100]

Do you feel lucky?

I don't like them. Just a personal thing .

 

[SHOdded]

Dimensionally there are significant differences. Put the same dimensions on it and see how it does.
https://www.edmunds.com/car-comparisons/?veh1=401725142&veh2=401742057&veh3=401725722&veh4=401747983

 

[StealBlueSho]

Two questions re post 87:

@OmaHahn: Did your dyno operator capture a/f ratios on those runs? Can you post those?

@LMS: Please explain how that big torque dip that starts at 3500 rpm has anything to do with fuel limitations. If there is enough fuel to make 320+ hp, then why is there a big dip when the engine is only making 250 hp? I can understand that if the pump is limited that would explain your peak number being lower, but not why the number is significantly lower in the middle of the rpm range.

I see LMS didn’t respond... based on the extensive datalogging I’ve done with the tunes I would be willing to bet it’s two things...

1: The boost really starts to ramp up starting around 3500rpms which is where all that low end torque comes from. It’s the not the HP you are fueling but the 400+ ft/lbs or torque. The SHO fuel pressure takes a beating once tuned at around 4000rpms due to boost spikes and low end torque productions. So it could be he is running short on fuel due to that.

2: This stems from point 1... To prevent the fuel pressure from completely falling out its ass and controlling torque production tuners will use the throttle to control the load. IE I know for a fact that his throttle isn’t opening all the way until after 4500 rpms to control the load. Gearhead does the same. It’s actually how ford programmed these cars from the factory, tuners just make adjustments to that parameter.

That being said, I am banking on lower rail pressure causing the throttle to dip harder to keep AFRs at demanded causing the dips you see.

Gearhead runs quite a bit leaner (their AFR calibration is pretty standard as LMS runs richer than everyone) so the fuel rails don’t have to supply as much fuel alleviating some of the fuel pressure issues.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[shoblock]

I've owned a 2010 Audi S4 for the last 8 years and not one single issue! Nothing beats the Quattro AWD and the supercharged 3.0 is amazing. Stage 1 APR tune and it's crazy. But it's a very small sedan.

My son had an s4, but it was a 1998.

 

[shoblock]

LOL - Well I have never owned anything but Ford and you all make great points, it depends on how long before I need a new "nice car" if I can still find a nice low mileage SHO that I like that would be my first choice, BUT I got spoiled, I really love the AWD sedan so IDK what I will do when the time comes but Ford is just about dead to me at this point. If I have to buy foreign car I would rather it be European then Asian, but that's just me.

- I had NOT heard that but that's even more stupid then not making any sedans, they did the same thing with the Thunderbird and Cougar started screwing around with it and they are no more. The Mustang is GREAT at what it does, as long as they keep making enough models so one is affordable and one will roast the tires off the rims they will keep selling them for years. Anyway I'll be in the SHO for awhile.
C/

They are going after the Porche Panamera for the four door and will keep all of the two door renditions.

 

[mattr66]

I see LMS didn’t respond... based on the extensive datalogging I’ve done with the tunes I would be willing to bet it’s two things...

1: The boost really starts to ramp up starting around 3500rpms which is where all that low end torque comes from. It’s the not the HP you are fueling but the 400+ ft/lbs or torque. The SHO fuel pressure takes a beating once tuned at around 4000rpms due to boost spikes and low end torque productions. So it could be he is running short on fuel due to that.

2: This stems from point 1... To prevent the fuel pressure from completely falling out its ass and controlling torque production tuners will use the throttle to control the load. IE I know for a fact that his throttle isn’t opening all the way until after 4500 rpms to control the load. Gearhead does the same. It’s actually how ford programmed these cars from the factory, tuners just make adjustments to that parameter.

That being said, I am banking on lower rail pressure causing the throttle to dip harder to keep AFRs at demanded causing the dips you see.

Gearhead runs quite a bit leaner (their AFR calibration is pretty standard as LMS runs richer than everyone) so the fuel rails don’t have to supply as much fuel alleviating some of the fuel pressure issues.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

.82 lambda isn't super lean for a DI engine and it also helps prevent carbon buildup between the top ring gap. Carbon buildup between the ring gap is what causes problems in these engines with high mileage. Also too cold of a thermostat also adds to carbon buildup and is one of the reasons the gen2 ecoboost runs at a higher operating temperature from the factory compared to a gen 1.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk

 

[StealBlueSho]

.82 lambda isn't super lean for a DI engine and it also helps prevent carbon buildup between the top ring gap. Carbon buildup between the ring gap is what causes problems in these engines with high mileage. Also too cold of a thermostat also adds to carbon buildup and is one of the reasons the gen2 ecoboost runs at a higher operating temperature from the factory compared to a gen 1.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk

I didn’t say you were super lean. I just said you were leaner than LMS. But LMS runs really rich.

And based on the soot difference on my tail pipes between GH and LMS, the GH tune is a cleaner burn.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[shoblock]

I see LMS didn’t respond... based on the extensive datalogging I’ve done with the tunes I would be willing to bet it’s two things...

1: The boost really starts to ramp up starting around 3500rpms which is where all that low end torque comes from. It’s the not the HP you are fueling but the 400+ ft/lbs or torque. The SHO fuel pressure takes a beating once tuned at around 4000rpms due to boost spikes and low end torque productions. So it could be he is running short on fuel due to that.

2: This stems from point 1... To prevent the fuel pressure from completely falling out its ass and controlling torque production tuners will use the throttle to control the load. IE I know for a fact that his throttle isn’t opening all the way until after 4500 rpms to control the load. Gearhead does the same. It’s actually how ford programmed these cars from the factory, tuners just make adjustments to that parameter.

That being said, I am banking on lower rail pressure causing the throttle to dip harder to keep AFRs at demanded causing the dips you see.

Gearhead runs quite a bit leaner (their AFR calibration is pretty standard as LMS runs richer than everyone) so the fuel rails don’t have to supply as much fuel alleviating some of the fuel pressure issues.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ah, data. I don't mind data logging if my driveline doesn't feel like it's going to come apart. I now own an SCT tuner and will begin a new tuning relationship. The question now is: do I want to drop $1500 for a fuel pump, or live with a tune that benevolently improves performance.
Thanks for all your helpful input. It makes this a useful thread for years to come.
Shoblock

 

[mattr66]

I didn’t say you were super lean. I just said you were leaner than LMS. But LMS runs really rich.

And based on the soot difference on my tail pipes between GH and LMS, the GH tune is a cleaner burn.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Other than cat/******/o2 sensor overtemp protections I would venture to guess that the factory ran (and always does) a little richer because of injector and airflow tolerances. The factory components aren't exactly matched cylinder to cylinder and the factory needed to ensure that all vehicles are within the minimum amount of enrichment on the leanest cylinder. After logging, I have found that maybe one out of every 30 or so vehicles shows signs of needing a slightly richer mixture to keep KR below where I like to see it.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk

 

[shoblock]

Other than cat/******/o2 sensor overtemp protections I would venture to guess that the factory ran (and always does) a little richer because of injector and airflow tolerances. The factory components aren't exactly matched cylinder to cylinder and the factory needed to ensure that all vehicles are within the minimum amount of enrichment on the leanest cylinder. After logging, I have found that maybe one out of every 30 or so vehicles shows signs of needing a slightly richer mixture to keep KR below where I like to see it.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk

Looking forward to working with you in the future. My GH AO tune goes in this week, but I can't drive until February, and the track doesn't open until April. I feel like a dog with a treat set on my nose, and a 'don't touch' command from my owner! I'm a newbie with SCT, so I may need some coaching.
thanks
Shoblock

 

[StealBlueSho]

Looking forward to working with you in the future. My GH AO tune goes in this week, but I can't drive until February, and the track doesn't open until April. I feel like a dog with a treat set on my nose, and a 'don't touch' command from my owner! I'm a newbie with SCT, so I may need some coaching.
thanks
Shoblock

Here is a how to I wrote up on how to datalog with the SCTx4 device. Hopefully this will help you!

https://www.ecoboostperformanceforum.com/index.php/topic,6554.0.html

 

[rubydist]

I see LMS didn’t respond... based on the extensive datalogging I’ve done with the tunes I would be willing to bet it’s two things...

1: The boost really starts to ramp up starting around 3500rpms which is where all that low end torque comes from. It’s the not the HP you are fueling but the 400+ ft/lbs or torque. The SHO fuel pressure takes a beating once tuned at around 4000rpms due to boost spikes and low end torque productions. So it could be he is running short on fuel due to that.

2: This stems from point 1... To prevent the fuel pressure from completely falling out its ass and controlling torque production tuners will use the throttle to control the load. IE I know for a fact that his throttle isn’t opening all the way until after 4500 rpms to control the load. Gearhead does the same. It’s actually how ford programmed these cars from the factory, tuners just make adjustments to that parameter.

That being said, I am banking on lower rail pressure causing the throttle to dip harder to keep AFRs at demanded causing the dips you see.

Gearhead runs quite a bit leaner (their AFR calibration is pretty standard as LMS runs richer than everyone) so the fuel rails don’t have to supply as much fuel alleviating some of the fuel pressure issues.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Actually, the amount of fuel needed is based on horsepower, not torque (I could bore everyone with the math, but don't think its needed, a quick online search will confirm this statement). That is why I don't understand any legit reason for that torque fall-off in the mid range. (I know that the factory limits the torque on these motors - how else do you get a flat torque curve across nearly all the rpm range on an internal combustion engine?)

My point is that if the pump provides enough fuel for the high end power, why is there this dip in the mid range. I don't believe it is fuel supply related, I think it is something else i.e. timing or throttle position.

 

[mattr66]

Actually, the amount of fuel needed is based on horsepower, not torque (I could bore everyone with the math, but don't think its needed, a quick online search will confirm this statement). That is why I don't understand any legit reason for that torque fall-off in the mid range. (I know that the factory limits the torque on these motors - how else do you get a flat torque curve across nearly all the rpm range on an internal combustion engine?)

My point is that if the pump provides enough fuel for the high end power, why is there this dip in the mid range. I don't believe it is fuel supply related, I think it is something else i.e. timing or throttle position.

You forget that this is a positive displacement pump whose flow increases with rpm because it is cam driven...

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk

 

[SHOinVa]

As much as I hate to say it, the closest thing to the SHO looks to be the AWD Kia Stinger. Their performance is pretty impressive, especially for what they cost.

I have no doubt its a great car with impressive performance and I'm not saying I will never buy a car from Asia, BUT when I was growing up there was ONLY American cars and then the "Rice Burners" showed up and most people picked a side. I have not watched a NASCAR race since Toyota took the track, I know its stubborn, pig headed, and generally ignorant of me BUT I'm just not there yet. I can not go form my Ford to a KIA, I would not feel good about myself.

They are going after the Porche Panamera for the four door and will keep all of the two door renditions.

Maybe BUT the Panamera is not a stretched 9-11 its a completely different car, additionally most people who drive Porche's are very brand loyal, I really don't see the market. I understand they will still build the two door BUT sometimes you can tarnish a car's image so badly it damages the entire fleet. Let me ask you this anyone interested in a two door Taurus, I am not, BUT as I said above I'm not the most progressive person when it comes to what I drive.
C/