my 2017 SHO w/PP

[Cobra93]

Comparing steal blue vs my duty cycle.
His seem to spike and stay flat, mine is a jagged line ramping up.
his goes from .37 to .48 and stays there, mine .27 slowly ramping up to .46.
Our fuel pressure rear (main fuel rail pressure) seem to behave similar.

I also see the (1) torque source is present during his first gear acceleration.
I wonder if ford is limiting torque in first gear on purpose.

I only looked at one of my logs, I will look/ compare his to more of mine.

I remember him having 2 sho's, I think he traded in the first one with a couple of dead cylinders (maybe).

His blue one seemed to run very well, even stock.
If this is '10-'12 this might have been his first sho?

Thanks SHOdded, at least I have something to compared mine to.

If the duty cycle is higher than it should be. Would that (in your best guess) point toward the module or the in tank pump?
For $80.00 I could get one to see if it helps and put the old one in the car as just in case.

[SHOdded]

knowing how common the fpcm problem is in 2013+ i would say go for the new part. from what i have seen a lot of ford problems are electrical / control problems, been true forever. not exactly a prime location for the fpcm to escape the vagaries of heat. maybe put a heatsink on it? but that might cause other issues lol.

sbs is the admin on this site now. you can pm him also but might be a while before you get a response ...

as to the lpfp itself, idk. the fuel pump module duty cycle is a fixed number so it's not something that changes itself over time. the fuel pump of course can get exhausted but i just dont see it happening stock.

[Cobra93]

I'll get  a module coming.
I did manage to get the logging to my laptop today and have the gearhead datalog configuration.
I haven't looked at it yet, but I was keeping an eye on the fuel pump duty cycle.
It would spike all over the place, most of the time it was 24-49%.
What caught my attention was the max value, it was 190%+.
I assume this is not helpful as I hadn't even given it much throttle.
I don't know if the graph will show this or not.
I'll have some time to look at my logs as well as the log you sent me tomorrow.

I have been thinking about the possibility that my car was tuned (without my knowledge) when I bought it.
It would make sense that the last trip to the dealer it could've been flashed, but all my settings (radio stations) were intact. I don't know if the flash would reset or save them.

This would explain the lack of power I was used to.
However, I would have to assume the car would attempt to hit a certain amount of power. So this makes me think it was not.
If torque is able to read the VSS and it can tell time, it should be close to being correct, as opposed to relying on gps. I've read that a phones gps updates at about 1hz. That would be useless. Even draggy updates at 10hz. from what I've read. So I think it should be "comparable".

A goal or a targeted torque number.
Since the ecu knows fuel used and mass of air taken in (probably the wrong wording) It can shoot for a programed amount of torque.
I only mention this because, even though I'm at 97,000mi., I would think it would still attempt to hit this target and could compensate with boost pressure and other things to come close to the original performance when new.
Unlike a NA motor that would have much less left on the "table" to achieve this.
I could be completely wrong.

So I guess I'm back to something isn't right and is slowing the car down for some safety reason.

I'm just thinking out loud. If this is not correct to the best of your understanding, please correct me.

As an aside. My brother has a '13 focus titanium. We were at a light next to each other. I didn't get on it  until I saw he was. I floored it. I was in well into second gear before I was in front of him. That can't be right.

His car does okay for what it is, but I should have overtaken him much quicker.
I may try to hit a test-n-tune at milan dragway to see how good/bad my car is and eliminate seat of the pants feeling. This will at least give me solid numbers on my cars (lack of) performance.

Thanks SHOdded.

[SHOdded]

https://www.underhoodservice.com/pulse-width-fuel-pump-diagnostics/
https://www.underhoodservice.com/pulse-width-fuel-pump-diagnostics-2/

as a reference

for giggles, i would also check the fuses/relays in the bjb for fuel pump and fpcm.

[Cobra93]

I ordered a module, we'll see if that helps anything.
I also swapped the a/c clutch relay with the fuel pump/injector relay, I ordered a new one as well.

I'll attach a log from yesterday.
The fuel pump percentage is in purple, also a screen shot that shows exactly what you posted.
Min= 11.12, max 199.4, avg 104.97.
It is all over the place.
I have not had any no start or stalls with the car, but we'll see if the log changes with the new module.
I'll also see if the relay switch makes ant difference.

I assume the parts will be here thurs.

Thanks SHOdded.

[Cobra93]

Well, I'm still waiting on the module. Supposed to be here monday.
I don't know what took more than a week to ship it.

I had this nagging feeling that I still don't know if I have you on a snipe hunt or not.
I also don't like wasting peoples time.
So I went to milan dragway this past wednesday.
It was about 82° or so.

I made three runs, they were right after the 35 minute drive up there and I pretty much hot lapped the car.
I'm sure things were getting heat soaked pretty good.

I think the problem is the nut behind the wheel is loose.
The combination of torque giving me a slow time and the transmission torque truncation (You found) and no boost got the better of me.

I had a half tank of fuel and bunch of stuff in the car.
They never have the scales working for test-n-tune, but there my be one I can get my car on to see how heavy it is.

I thought I remembered people stating the brakes won't hold over 2,000 rpm foot braking. I don't have that problem. I also seem to remember people saying foot braking much higher than 2,000 rpm made the car unhappy and their runs were slower.
I'm not sure about this either.

My first run  was no foot braking (car 100 on the slips), advance trac off and shifter in "S".
60' - 2.109
1/4 - 13.772 @ 101.17

The second run was foot brake to ~1,800, adv trac off and shifter in "S".
60' - 2.075
1/4 - 13.757 @ 101.66

The third run was the same as the second.
60' - 2.147
1/4 - 13.943 @ 101.24

When I look up advertised times I see 13.6 sec @ 100-102mph.
So I should be happy that my 98,000 mi car still does what it it advertised to do.

I'll attach the logs and pics of the slips.

I think I'll try to get the valves cleaned up in the next couple of weeks and maybe go back up to milan.
Then drain and fill the coolant (switching to the new yellow from orange) and do the plugs, thermostat, MAP and tune from Matt and send him the log along with mentioning this thread and the help you have given me whit what I thought was a  problem.

I still have not been able to find any torque specs on the intake manifold bolts.
I did download the manual someone had posted here or sho forum, but it is mostly trans and other things. It's something like 3,600 pages.

I will assume I can turn the engine over with the crank bolt as long as I only go clockwise (when looking at it from the passenger side) without any problems.
I seem to remember reading there is no "key or keyway" only a taper or friction to keep the  things lined up. I could be wrong on that one.

I'll post a log after I change the fuel pump module to see if anything changes.

Thanks for your time and help SHOdded.
I appreciate your help and gaining a small amount of understanding of how these "new" cars work.

[Cobra93]

I did get the FCPM in on sunday morning.
I had 2 runs with it.
The fuel pump percentage seems to do the same thing as the old one.
It seems to stay below 100% until I put the car into gear, then it seems to be all over the place (up to 199%).

I plant to change the coolant and clean the intake valves this saterday/sunday.
I may try to hit milan for a couple of runs on wednasday.

I think I'll do the tune and associated parts the following weekend.

I also got my car on the CAT scales.
4640lbs. with 7/8 of a tank of fuel and me in it.
I am about 202lbs, plus the stuff I have in the car would put it at about 4,400 lbs with a full tank of fuel.
2720lbs. front axle
1920lbs. rear axle

I spent most of the day showing the car some love.
Cleaned the inside (everything) and some original armor all.
Washed and waxed the the outside including the wheels.
Not the best picture.

[SHOdded]

may kinda help with cleaning
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iE34UU4Iz_A

car looks great.

hopefully the gearhead tune will solve the problem.  or at least finally pin it down.

[Cobra93]

Thanks.
I watch a lot of his videos.
I will check that one out tomorrow.

The best info I could find on the intake manifold bolts was 89 Inch pounds, possibly 45° after torque.
Still not sure on that.

[SHOdded]

hth

[Cobra93]

Awesome.
Thanks for the information.
I'll read it before/as I'm doing it.

thanks again SHOdded.

[Cobra93]

Well, I got the valves clean. It took about 8 hours.
I was being careful and going slow.

After removing the upper intake and looking at the valves, I thought this was a waist of time.
They didn't look anywhere near as bad as some of the pics others posted.
I was wrong, I'm glad I did this.

I was careful to only work on the valves that were closed and tape off the others.
I rotated the engine over by hand with a ratchet on the crankshaft bolt (clockwise when looking from the passenger side).

There was a pretty good powder build up everywhere.
I was not expecting it to turn greasy/gummy as I used the wire brushes in my drill and the picks I bought to scrape everything.

I'm most familiar with the 302/5.0l engines I've had when I was younger.
Those valves had a very hard baked on coating, not like the 3.5l and being powder and soft.

I took some pics before I started.
The pics make  the valve look much worse than they did just looking down the port.

I was pretty tired when I got done cleaning the valves and didn't get pics of the clean valves.

I also cleaned the MAP sensors with MAF cleaner.

I got the coolant refilled, I'll have to watch it and burp it as necessary.
I also see they only replaced the bank  #1 fuel rail and injectors when they were chasing the loss of power and misfires I had going on early this year.

It is supposed to be in the 90's this week, I'm not sure if I'll head back to milan dragway this week or not. I don't know if the valve were bad enough to see any improvement.
I was letting the car warm up to fill the coolant and didn't notice any cold start misses, which I did have before. It would seem to miss about every ten or so seconds. I'll see if this is a fluke or it was the valves being dirty.

Thanks for all the help SHOdded.
I'll post again after milan and the tune installation.

[PDSHO]

I recently had a stumble with my 2016 Taurus Police 3.5 EB, with 102K on it. the RPM would surge up and down about 200 RPM at light throttle cruising. Never a CEL, power seemed good. I replaced the plugs and it was still there. So I took it to my nephews shop and had him do a PTU service, trans flush and fill, and a BG intake cleaning.
RPM stumble is gone, he said the PTU fluid wasn't as bad as some he has seen. I went thru the service records from the Sheriffs Dept. I bought it from, had regular oil changes with synthetic, but no trans service. I am sure the valves probably didn't get as clean as yours are but it helped a lot.
Enjoy reading your thread.
Greg

[Cobra93]

Good to here the service worked to sort out the stumble.

After looking at the amount of powder I got out of each port, I would guess close to a tablespoon. I would be worried about the cats getting clogged up.
My ford protect warranty didn't cover the cats. It would be covered under the emissions warranty and I don't have that.

I would wonder if doing the BG service (or something similar) would be okay if it was every 10 or 15,000 miles.

Thanks Greg, enjoy your ride.

[SHOdded]

zsho had posted a while back about pro induction service, which you can get done at a valvoline service center for example. now that the valves are cleaner, you can go and make this a routine service for your vehicle.

the transverse engines generally do not suffer from excessive buildup like the longitudinal ones do and certainly nowhere near as much as gdi engines from other manufacturers. ford has pretty decent algorithms in place, not to say perfect, but decent certainly.

glad both of you saw benefit from doing this. enjoy the fruits.