About 6 years ago, I hopped up a Ford F150 with a Paxton Supercharger, a Ford SVT solid lifter cam and larger fuel injectors.
The biggest problem was setting up the mapping software. The MAF measures the amount of air moving into the engine as you know. I spent hundreds of hours calibrating the software to match the ideal fuel ratio for a given engine speed with a laptop computer.
I think the reason you are not seeing the HP/Torque returns is that the computer has not been mapped for all of the flow increases. Even though the Oxygen sensors are in close loop and should compensate for the increased flow, in the end the mapping of the fuel tables have to be optimized for any new part introduced into the system.
I suspect Mark and the LS engine software programmers have spent thousands of hours optimizing the fuel tables for both engines.
BTW-I blew the engine because at WOT there was not enough fuel flow and it burnt a hole in the #8 piston.
There are two TSBs out for updating the transmission software. 01-01-05 was the orignial. It has been replaced by 01-14-05. This new TSB is the same as the first, with the exception that some cars were missed on the original.
Any 2000 car with an automatic is covered by this TSB.
I agree with jnowski on this one. Airflow is a plumbing issue at both ends of the system. If the intake passage is the most restrictive part of the system, a bigger MAF upstream won't help. Likewise with the exhaust mods. I can see where there could be some tuning and flow advantages on a cat-back replacement, but you're still stuck with the dynamics and flow of the front-end parts.
An interesting comparison would be:
1. What is the known air-moving capacity of the stock system (CFM adjusted for the pumping action of the engine) AND
2. What is the maximum pumping volume of the engine, given the factory cam profile and cylinder volume?
The question: is it possible that both the 3.0L and 3.9L are not even capable of "over-running" the factory intake and exhaust plumbing? If so, then all the hang-on goodies will only result in marginal gains in performance. Also, if the intake and exhaust plumbing are more than enough, then you are left with cam and timing changes to gain more power & torque, or forcing more air in via a turbo or supercharger. Maybe Brian can hustle one of the camshaft grinders into making a set to try out?? There may even be some out there for the 3.0L considering its not a new engine.
When I was looking at a Mustang GT convertible before buying my LS I looked at Saleen and Rousch out of curiousity. IIRC - if you get the engine mods (and if you don't, what's the point?) you're looking at mid $30Ks all the way up to $50K. OTOH you can pick up a slightly used GT for $15K or so.
The rear window regulator problem that some of you are experiencing appears to be caused by a plastic connector that weakens with heat and age. A design revision went into place last year around December.
The problem didn't manifest itself during testing. Appears to be more of an issue in hot weather states (CA/FL/TX). The recent heat wave also appears to have aggravated the situation.
There is currently a national back-order on the parts. Just about all back orders are scheduled to be resolved by the beginning of August with most of the backorders being filled by the very beginning of August. Keep in mind this is the planned schedule. Interestingly enough there is a much bigger back order for the driver's side rear window than the passenger side one.
FCSD(Ford Customer Service Dept.) is going to be monitoring the parts supply for this problem so they can proactively adjust for the possibility of an increased demand due to the recent heat wave.
Brian, where is this "connector". Is it the "plastic bearing" shaped like an ear that the cable rides on that "self-saws"? Or is it the infamous "plastic plug" that attaches the window glass to the trolley? I'm trying to visualize this. Thanks
Okay it was what I suspected and what everyone else did to. The GMS sensor is what was degrading the performance increase of the Borla and opened airbox. The dyno run this morning showed between a 5-8hp increase with the Borla and a stock airbox. With the opened up airbox we got a couple more hp to 10hp. So this is in line with what was expected and mirrors the increase that Lincoln is talking about for the 02s.
In talking with the tech director who has been around the aftermarket industry for a ton of years, he said that this is not abnormal to have a sensor not contributing to the increase and in fact degrading it. Several factors in the LS do it in: 1. The restriction isn't in the mass air flow sensor. It's in the airbox and long air tube that runs to the back of the engine. (jnowski,leadfoot, et al, bingo!) 2. The engine computer is adjusting back to normal parameters for the new sensor readings.(sclark8 good call, he agreed with you!). 3. leadfoot4, the sensor in the Camaro and other GM cars appears to be the more restrictive part of the system, what with the screen and all. So they would benefit from a new streamlined sensor.
Bottom line, on some cars where the main bottleneck is the sensor, it works. On others like the LS, unless you replace the airbox and the air tube along with replacing the sensor you won't see any gains and may see a degradation.
For $360 I agree with leadfoot4, I'd spend my money elsewhere.
The Borla does perform pretty close to advertised claims. Borla claims 10hp and we say between 5-8hp. Is it worth the money? That ends up being a personal question. I like the way it sounds and I just checked what a full tank mileage is without the sensor and I'm getting about 25-26mpg which is about 1.5mpg better than stock.
The part that fails is the "Slider bracket". This part is attached to the cables and moves up and down on the window regulator "rail". The material fractures at the detail that holds the cable to the bracket. The pin concern was an incorrect hole size that the supplier allowed to drift from the design intent and is not the same concern.
Great to hear from you Guy!!! By the slider bracket, do you mean the black thing with the four corner plastic grips (that I call the "trolley" after garage door opener experience) that rises up and down the galvanized "track" or "rail" and has a receptacle for the window glass bottom where the plastic "plug" goes through the glass???? In my car, one of the four corner "grips" of the trolley broke off and it did not "ride the rail" properly anymore. Then the plastic plug fell out but that problem can be solved with a dab of silicone seal. Thanks for the explanation. Stan
I hope Airconhall can test his V-6 on the dyno because I think the Borla benefits the V-6 more than the V-8 due to a huge increase in pipe diameter, the X-chamber instead of the simple crossover pipe and the less restrictive mufflers. It's got to be at least a little bit better than just putting on less restrictive mufflers as the factory is doing to the 2002 V-6. Everytime I look at my old stock system sitting in the side yard, I am amazed at the "little pipes" it has. Have you put in the Bosch +4 spark plugs yet?
Hey Stan, I had considered putting in the Bosch +4 plugs........ then I found out that (at least on the V6) you have to remove the intake manifold (you know, that "bundle of snakes"?) to get to the plugs on the passenger side. My factory plugs are working just fine thank you!!!!!!
Supposedly, the intake manifold gasket is reuseable and it's not too much for the "do-it yourselfer". I had platinum plugs in my Creesida from the factory and they didn't last anywhere near 60,000 miles. They would develop internal shorts and arcing and just look ragged after 30k or so. I'll inquire about the gasket at Witt LM at my next oil change. Maybe the "coil on plug" system helps plug life.
Yes I did put them in Stan. Interesting to see what the stock plugs looked like after 53,000 miles. The center electrode was down to a point on all of them. Don't know if they are designed that way or they were just worn pretty well.
If you change plugs yourself, do yourself a favor and replace them before 50,000 miles. It is nerve-racking to break loose plugs that are starting to weld themselves into an aluminum head. If you have the dealer service them for you then don't worry about. If they break them it's their problem.
Use anti-sieze compound on the threads of the new plugs. You will thank me for this hint the next time you try to remove the plugs.
The +4 plugs are interesting. For those of you who haven't seen them, they don't have the typical upside down L bar over the electrode. They have 4 shaped bars that are on the side of the electrode. The claim is that the spark isn't shielded by the bar so you get a more direct spark. Bosch guarantees that your car will run better or your money back. Don't know how to verify that claim so I won't recommend or not recommend them.
Don't know about the V-6 plug removal. The V-8 is really easy on the passenger side, but a bear on the drivers side. You will definitely need a flex extension shaft for a 1/4 drive socket, 7mm shallow socket and lots of beverage for later. The plugs are located under the cover that goes over the valve covers. The hardest bolt on this cover to remove is the bottom one closest to the firewall on the drivers side. There just is no easy way to get any decent purchase on it due to the closeness of the brake booster. I was finally able to remove it using a 8mm socket with a u-joint adapter, flex socket and two beers. I never put it back.
Use a spark plug socket (5/8") with the neoprene or rubber insert otherwise you will never get the plugs out of the hole.
I don't know about my LS, but a previous owner of my 87 Fiero GT (2.8L MPFI V-6) had used them. I replaced them with AC Rapidfires (regular design platinum plugs) and got a 100% improvement. That being said, the Fiero had copper plugs from the factory, not platinum like the LS. In my years of auto repair, I have never seen a case where "special" spark plugs made a positive change - usually made performance worse. I have heard that platinum tip plugs have a tendency to foul faster on cold starts, but never seen proof that they fouled any faster than copper. In my opinion, fancy spark plugs (+4, SplitFire, etc) are in the same league as snake oil. With Fords I have run into trouble even using another brand equivalent. Do yourself a favor and find a parts store carrying Motorcraft or the Lincoln parts counter to get the OEM plugs.
Brian - the tip on the plugs you removed is normal. Platinum plugs use a narrower center electrode. I do agree about the 50k change for the same reason (aluminum heads).
Also - If you don't have a spark plug socket or yours won't reach the plug (my Snap-ons with the built on swivel are too fat) use a 5/8 deep well and KEEP IT STRAIGHT (to avoid breaking the plug). Once the plug is backed out of the hole, fish it out with a magnet or needle nose pliers.
..as a datapoint, my former vehicle, 1992 BMW 318is (twin cammed 4 banger) used twin-electrode Bosch spark plugs from the factory, and as original equipment replacements from the dealer. Im fairly certain they were platinum tipped. The electrodes were two upside down L's facing each other, with about 1-2 millimeters of gap between each L bar. Those plugs lasted fairly long in that engine. I replaced them about every 40,000 miles. They actually looked like they still had plenty of life left even after the 40,000 mile changes.
I put the original Bosch platinum plugs in my '85 T-Bird Turbo Coupe, which ate 3 sets of stock plugs before 50K miles. Not only did that set of Bosch plugs last till 100K+ miles, but the engine smoothed out considerably, especially at idle. I also put these type plugs in my '93 Probe GT with similar results.
On the original Bosch platinum plugs, the center electrode was a sintered platinum powder core and didn't protrude from the center ceramic insulator, so there was no wear there. The side electrode did show a little bit of wear though.
Extra power? I couldn't tell, but definitely smoother operation.
I'll be putting the dyno graphs on the site as soon as I can see if it will look decent at screen resolution. The graphs don't have very thick lines and the runs are clumped together so the first few times I scanned them in they either looked invisible or they looked like one line. If that won't work I'll see if I can get a disk with the dyno figures on it.
I've got an Aurora, and have been looking to improve the performance like many of you guys. Your discussion of the mods and the dyno's are the greatest. Thanks. These cars are quite "bottled up" for noise reduction, so I,ve tried some things.
I've messed with the air box. I removed the inner plastic liner from the top of the box (sound reduction) because it funnels the intake area of the upper box to a small % of the filter area. The lower box has a strange plastic thing in the bottom (for noise reduction too I think)that I removed to expose a big hole in the bottom for more air flow as well - it normally pulls air from the inside of the fender. I also switched to a K&N filter.
I've talked to Corsa (they make the cat-backs for wheel to wheel - they do the GM pace cars) and they said they got 22 HP (at wheels) from their cat back on a stock 300 HP Caddy. They said they might make one for the Aurora. Does that sound reasonable?? They claim (as well as wheel to wheel) that the system is tame for around town use and cruising - like the borla.
Sorry about talking GM on a Lincoln board, but I've got the desire for more HP too. I've got some questions.
1. Brian - were the dyno's with a K&N as well? Was your "baseline" a car with a K&N??
2. How much more HP on the LS V8 do you get from the K&N by itself?
3. How much do you get from the K&N with an "opened up" air box.
4. Is what I've described above a reasonable shot at opening up the air box?? Is that what you did???
5. Is it normal for moisture to get into the air box when driving in the rain? I'd expect maybe so.
K&N claims a 2% to 4% HP increase with their filter. So for the LS V8 or the Aurora, that's 5 to 10 more. I was hoping for at least 10 with the K&N and opening up the box. Is that reasonable?
Also - I was tempted to get an air induction set-up, (exposed cone filter in engine compartment) but was dissuaded by the threat of pulling hot air off the engine and some reports that it did not work on a Caddy. What do you think??
I'm sorry If I'm asking you to repeat stuff, but I am really interested in your experiences.
No problem, always glad to help out, even if you own a GM!
Q. I've talked to Corsa (they make the cat-backs for wheel to wheel - they do the GM pace cars) and they said they got 22 HP (at wheels) from their cat back on a stock 300 HP Caddy. They said they might make one for the Aurora. Does that sound reasonable?? They claim (as well as wheel to wheel) that the system is tame for around town use and cruising - like the borla.
A.It's possible but it sounds high, based on our experiences with both Borla and Magnaflow. For the most part, and I'm sure there are exceptions, the louder the exhaust the more power you get due to the diminished back pressure. But the most we ever saw when we were prototyping the Magnaflow setup was 15hp, but that was without resonators and small mufflers, and the car was unliveable due to the noise. Plan for an improvement of around 8-10hp and the equivalent in torque increase. If you get more look at it as a bonus. Would hate for you to be disappointed.
1. Brian - were the dyno's with a K&N as well? Was your "baseline" a car with a K&N?? 2. How much more HP on the LS V8 do you get from the K&N by itself? K&N claims a 2% to 4% HP increase with their filter. So for the LS V8 or the Aurora, that's 5 to 10 more. I was hoping for at least 10 with the K&N and opening up the box. Is that reasonable? Also - I was tempted to get an air induction set-up, (exposed cone filter in engine compartment) but was dissuaded by the threat of pulling hot air off the engine and some reports that it did not work on a Caddy. What do you think??
A. The dyno runs were with a K&N filter except for the baseline. You can expect maybe 1 or 2hp from a K&N stock replacement filter. Where K&N gets away with claiming more is when you change over from a stock setup to a cone filter that is open to the outside, The downside is that you expose the filter to the heat of the engine compartment which will reduce your power due to the hotter air unless where the filter is located has pretty good access to outside air.
Opening up the airbox to draw cooler outside air will result in an increase in power. How much depends on a couple of things: -How restrictive your stock air intake is. -Where the biggest restriction in your intake system is. The LS responds very well to opening up the airbox to outside air. That is one of the ways the 2002 gets the 10 additional hp. They put an extra horn onto the airbox drawing air in from the front grill.
3. How much do you get from the K&N with an "opened up" air box.
You might get 5hp, but again depends on how restrictive you stock intake is.
4. Is what I've described above a reasonable shot at opening up the air box?? Is that what you did???
Yes. Club members have opened up their airboxes several different ways. Mine is probably the most dangerous to the engine if I lived where it rained. It draws air in from the lower front grill and if I drove through a puddle I could hydro-lock the engine, which would result in my wife killing me when she saw the bill for the engine replacement
5. Is it normal for moisture to get into the air box when driving in the rain? I'd expect maybe so.
Yes, but make sure that you aren't drawing in too much water. See above. Doesn't sound like you are from what you described. What you are seeing is probably condensation.
You guys seem to be talking about great things for LS in '03. Where is Lincoln going to get the money to make the LS better for '03? Ford announcing lower profit projections, declining sales, shrinking market share, production cutbacks, declining stock price, and now going to eliminate about 10 percent of its managers and engineers. Standard & Poor's credit rating agency planning on lowering Ford's credit rating. Exchange rate helping BMW, MB, Lexus, and Infiniti. Where is Ford going to get any money to spare for serious development work? Volvo and Jag probably also want money, too. And Ford's got to be worried about its SUVs and trucks, its real cash cows.
'02 won't be good for Lincoln. Lots of new competitors and changes to current ones. Can't wait to see Cadillac CTS' release today! And G35 later. Bet Lincoln will be discounting heavily and subsidizing financing and leases. That won't improve profits.
My stock air box seems pretty bad. The bottom part actually channels air to a small part of the filter's dirty side. I can't see fresh air coming in an circulating around the entire filter area very much. The top side (clean side) like I said before, has an inner surface that funnels down to approximately the same small spot as on the dirty side. We're talking about 3"X4" area. The rest of the filter area is usable for any air that can "sneak" past the tight clearances from the rest of the box. That's the best I can describe it - I wonder if your LS Box is as bad.
I saw on the crank & chrome show where a K&N induction kit, FIPK, added 21 HP at the wheels for a Corvette (crankandchrome.com). They dyno'd it right there. I know that with the vette, small %'s turn into bigger numbers, but I would think just using the K&N panel filter would do maybe half of that. Looking at it proportionally, 250HP/350HP X 10 HP gain (assumed - I know) is about 7. That's where I was getting my expectations. Plus K&N told me on the phone the 2 to 4% was for the panel filter. But hey, you Dyno'd it.
Like you said - the key indeed is how bad the stock box is. If it's really bad, a K&N probably won't do much either, but if you open up a crummy box and put a K&N in, it could be like opening the window on a dark room. Maybe I have to do a dyno. Is it expensive? Where do you do that? You got me going, and my wife will really start thinking I'm nuts. Thanks.
As for the exhaust systems, I'm assuming that you are talking about a complete cat-back system, not just the mufflers.
I'm going to point some of the other HP hungry people on the Aurora board over here to read all the interesting posts. Yeah I know, a bunch of GM guys invading. I'm really not partial to any domestic car though - I've always loved that Aurora (if only it didn't need to visit weight watchers).
Reading the previous posts about the air filters jogged my memory about one other item. There is a good sized market in the larger "throttle body" area. This is the part which is usually mounted at the inlet of the intake manifold and contains the throttle plate mechanism. It seems to me that if these (throttle plate openings) are too small, then no amount of tinkering upstream will garner any more than small to moderate gains. Just some food for thought.
Some cause for concern, but do you really think '03 development plans hinge on '02 sales? I'm pretty sure they plan a little farther out than that. Assuming you're right about '02 sales, one slow-selling model isn't likely to bring the Ford Motor Company to it's knees.
As for the CTS, bring it on! I would never buy a car that looks like that thing, but a revival of Cadillac vs. Lincoln competition, in a new arena, would be good for everybody.
If you traded that Aurora in for an LS, you could join the club and have access to this kind of expert advice and gracious company all the time. Just kidding; I've always liked the Aurora. Wish more of you guys had joined the LS vs. 300M vs. Aurora comparison a few weeks ago. Sure needed a few more grownups in that "discussion".
There is a new airbox/induction system on the LS for 2002. This will add power and is retrofitable to the earlier cars. It's probably a better idea than trying to do it yourself.
Yes, the industry is cyclical, and right now there is a general downturn. GM and DCX are suffering all the same problems right now. Standard & Poors has put both GM and F on it's watch list and may downgrade their credit, but it hasn't done that yet.
GM has already laid off 6,000 and DCX has laid off many more, so I don't see the 5,000 as excessive. Of course, I'm not one of the 5,000! My only concern is that they don't cut too deeply, you know, "take the muscle with the fat".
I'm sure that the '03 model would be locked by now. I have a feeling that the '04 is closed to locked too. So I have to agree that the sales year of '02 will not make much of a difference to the up coming '03.
Yes, the competition has become intense. I'm still very satisfied with my 2000 LS. Some of the complaints seem to be buyers remorse, nothing more. With all products, developments can make them outmoded rather quickly. TV, computers, and stereos come to mind. New features are packed in so rapidly, that what you buy today is obsolete in a month. If we were that concerned, we'd own nothing because technology would march past us.
I can't say much about the future of the '02 LS sales, I'm using my crystal ball for lottery numbers right now. I do recall how James Nance and Sherwood Egbert were able to increase sales in moribund companies through advertising alone. You might be correct in your assumption about the rebates to sell the steel, but F might be able to do it in other ways too.
As to the Caddy, we'll just have to wait. I see it as a novelty item. The styling is too radical for the perceived market. It is rather different, but sometimes different doesn't work. But there again, the Taurus proved that one wrong too.
Thanks for the input and info! Jim, you should know by now that some of us just can't leave well enough alone (;~P. Now that I've already done the no-no I guess I'll have to buy an '02 airbox!
Hey Brian, do ya think that there may be some way the club and, say, Ford Parts Network could work out a deal on a quantity purchase? And maybe get the parts a little sooner than the normal replacement parts channel moves at? Just something to think about during one of those "many" moments when you have nothing to do!!
What a great idea! I drive in way too much wet and snow to risk the "LS1BMW0 Poor Man's Ram Air Kit".:) Or maybe, the managers at Wixom will want us to have a souvenir of our visit, and we'll know what to ask for. If all else fails I've got this huge old Army surplus overcoat, a real Shoplifter's Special, probably get a dozen or so in there if you guys help me out. Yeah, I should be ashamed of myself, but it would be faster than normal replacement parts channels.
I need some help from some of you "hands-on" guys out there. Today, while attempting to rotate the tires on my 'OO LS, I managed to wring off one of the lug bolts on the right front wheel. I suppose it was cross-threaded, and it snapped off, leaving it about 1/2" long. My question is, can JUST this lug bolt be replaced, or will I have to buy the spindle assembly etc.? If so, how is the bolt held in place and how do I remove it? Any help would be much appreciated.
scottc8 - I really admire the LS too. It's just a great looking car with lots of power. It fits my formula for a great car - luxury, but sporty, and lots of power. Most luxury cars look like grandpa cars and are just boring. I never cared much about handling as it is almost never a factor in my driving. Interstate cruiser for me and some occasional quick accelerations. But I'm sure the LS can handle pretty good too. I found this 98 Aurora this spring with only 13,000 miles super clean, and it was loaded with the Bose and a sunroof and the 3.71 transaxle, and I got it for 18,900. I had to go for it. I was looking at those LS's too, but they were still so new that a used one could not be had for much under 30K.
ls1bmw0 - I am assuming all the HP info you gave me is at the rear wheels. Thanks again. I've got to dyno.
They are generally pressed into the rotor from behind. They're knurled so the fit is very tight, and so they don't turn when you tighten the nuts. I've never done it on newer car, but the procedure is to remove the rotor, press the old one out and press a new one in. Not a big deal, but maybe best left to a professional mechanic. Shouldn't be very expensive, next to nothing in parts.
My dealer cross-threaded one of my lugnuts (as well as "forgot" to reinstall one) during a rotation. I had occasion to remove the wheel and snapped the lug like you did. This is definitely a warranty item. The lugs shouldn't snap that easily. A different dealer replaced the lug without a problem.
Yes, they likely have "locked" in much of their design plans, needing to get suppliers to commit, but they certainly haven't locked in their marketing budget. Hope the Lincoln engineers and managers who post here aren't forced out. And if the financial news turns even bleaker for Ford in '02, who knows what will happen to a small selling platform like LS. Not a prime candidate to spend much of anything on in really bad times. Major plant changeovers or tooling cost.
What all does Lincoln build in Wixom? Only the LS? Anything else? Will killing off the Conti impact Wixom plant?
Lincoln plans to stop making Continentals have been mentioned several times here. Where is this coming from?
Several months ago I was told, by a friend who works in MoTown, there was talk of Lincoln "spicing" up the LS and putting the Conti label on it. Something about the marketing guys not wanting to drop the oldest, continuous running U.S. auto manufacturer, model name.
seems to be posting this same message everywhere. If I owned a Chevy, I would also hope for Ford's demise. How long can the General keep putting out rolling quality control issues?
Is the biggest maker of FWD appliances and for the most part boring cars. Still clinging to those OHV pushrod truck engines like they were in the 1950's. It's a company run mostly by accountants and marketing types who rightly underestimate the car saavy of the American people. I think they put their engineers in cages every night and bring them out when they want to redesign a part for cost savings. Wasn't it Charles Kettering, a former GM president, that said "parts left off cost nothing and cause no service problems". Ford may have had the Edsel but it was just a styling abortion. GM gave us the Vega, the Caddys with the porous aluminum blocks in the 80's (with cast iron heads), the wonderful Pontiac four-bangers, the 8-6-4 Caddys, the front-heavy Toronados and other highlights. Maybe they should stick with the pushrod trucks and give up on the cars.
Comments
About 6 years ago, I hopped up a Ford F150 with a Paxton Supercharger, a Ford SVT solid lifter cam and larger fuel injectors.
The biggest problem was setting up the mapping software. The MAF measures the amount of air moving into the engine as you know. I spent hundreds of hours calibrating the software to match the ideal fuel ratio for a given engine speed with a laptop computer.
I think the reason you are not seeing the HP/Torque returns is that the computer has not been mapped for all of the flow increases. Even though the Oxygen sensors are in close loop and should compensate for the increased flow, in the end the mapping of the fuel tables have to be optimized for any new part introduced into the system.
I suspect Mark and the LS engine software programmers have spent thousands of hours optimizing the fuel tables for both engines.
BTW-I blew the engine because at WOT there was not enough fuel flow and it burnt a hole in the #8 piston.
Any 2000 car with an automatic is covered by this TSB.
Mark
An interesting comparison would be:
1. What is the known air-moving capacity of the stock system (CFM adjusted for the pumping action of the engine) AND
2. What is the maximum pumping volume of the engine, given the factory cam profile and cylinder volume?
The question: is it possible that both the 3.0L and 3.9L are not even capable of "over-running" the factory intake and exhaust plumbing? If so, then all the hang-on goodies will only result in marginal gains in performance. Also, if the intake and exhaust plumbing are more than enough, then you are left with cam and timing changes to gain more power & torque, or forcing more air in via a turbo or supercharger. Maybe Brian can hustle one of the camshaft grinders into making a set to try out?? There may even be some out there for the 3.0L considering its not a new engine.
The problem didn't manifest itself during testing. Appears to be more of an issue in hot weather states (CA/FL/TX). The recent heat wave also appears to have aggravated the situation.
There is currently a national back-order on the parts. Just about all back orders are scheduled to be resolved by the beginning of August with most of the backorders being filled by the very beginning of August. Keep in mind this is the planned schedule. Interestingly enough there is a much bigger back order for the driver's side rear window than the passenger side one.
FCSD(Ford Customer Service Dept.) is going to be monitoring the parts supply for this problem so they can proactively adjust for the possibility of an increased demand due to the recent heat wave.
Brian
In talking with the tech director who has been around the aftermarket industry for a ton of years, he said that this is not abnormal to have a sensor not contributing to the increase and in fact degrading it. Several factors in the LS do it in:
1. The restriction isn't in the mass air flow sensor. It's in the airbox and long air tube that runs to the back of the engine. (jnowski,leadfoot, et al, bingo!)
2. The engine computer is adjusting back to normal parameters for the new sensor readings.(sclark8 good call, he agreed with you!).
3. leadfoot4, the sensor in the Camaro and other GM cars appears to be the more restrictive part of the system, what with the screen and all. So they would benefit from a new streamlined sensor.
Bottom line, on some cars where the main bottleneck is the sensor, it works. On others like the LS, unless you replace the airbox and the air tube along with replacing the sensor you won't see any gains and may see a degradation.
For $360 I agree with leadfoot4, I'd spend my money elsewhere.
The Borla does perform pretty close to advertised claims. Borla claims 10hp and we say between 5-8hp. Is it worth the money? That ends up being a personal question. I like the way it sounds and I just checked what a full tank mileage is without the sensor and I'm getting about 25-26mpg which is about 1.5mpg better than stock.
Dick Cupka
Brian
that rises up and down the galvanized "track" or "rail" and has a receptacle for the window glass bottom where the plastic "plug" goes through the glass???? In my car, one of the four corner "grips" of the trolley broke off and it did not "ride the rail" properly anymore. Then the plastic plug fell out but that problem can be solved with a dab of silicone seal. Thanks for the explanation. Stan
Have you put in the Bosch +4 spark plugs yet?
http://www.htnews.com/comptltd/
Their claim that they will have a true HID kit that is legal and warranted for one year for $500.
If you change plugs yourself, do yourself a favor and replace them before 50,000 miles. It is nerve-racking to break loose plugs that are starting to weld themselves into an aluminum head. If you have the dealer service them for you then don't worry about. If they break them it's their problem.
Use anti-sieze compound on the threads of the new plugs. You will thank me for this hint the next time you try to remove the plugs.
The +4 plugs are interesting. For those of you who haven't seen them, they don't have the typical upside down L bar over the electrode. They have 4 shaped bars that are on the side of the electrode. The claim is that the spark isn't shielded by the bar so you get a more direct spark. Bosch guarantees that your car will run better or your money back. Don't know how to verify that claim so I won't recommend or not recommend them.
Don't know about the V-6 plug removal. The V-8 is really easy on the passenger side, but a bear on the drivers side. You will definitely need a flex extension shaft for a 1/4 drive socket, 7mm shallow socket and lots of beverage for later. The plugs are located under the cover that goes over the valve covers. The hardest bolt on this cover to remove is the bottom one closest to the firewall on the drivers side. There just is no easy way to get any decent purchase on it due to the closeness of the brake booster. I was finally able to remove it using a 8mm socket with a u-joint adapter, flex socket and two beers. I never put it back.
Use a spark plug socket (5/8") with the neoprene or rubber insert otherwise you will never get the plugs out of the hole.
Brian - the tip on the plugs you removed is normal. Platinum plugs use a narrower center electrode. I do agree about the 50k change for the same reason (aluminum heads).
Also - If you don't have a spark plug socket or yours won't reach the plug (my Snap-ons with the built on swivel are too fat) use a 5/8 deep well and KEEP IT STRAIGHT (to avoid breaking the plug). Once the plug is backed out of the hole, fish it out with a magnet or needle nose pliers.
Are you going to post the dyno charts on the LLSOC site? (or is it there already and I'm not looking in the right place?).
On the original Bosch platinum plugs, the center electrode was a sintered platinum powder core and didn't protrude from the center ceramic insulator, so there was no wear there. The side electrode did show a little bit of wear though.
Extra power? I couldn't tell, but definitely smoother operation.
I've messed with the air box. I removed the inner plastic liner from the top of the box (sound reduction) because it funnels the intake area of the upper box to a small % of the filter area. The lower box has a strange plastic thing in the bottom (for noise reduction too I think)that I removed to expose a big hole in the bottom for more air flow as well - it normally pulls air from the inside of the fender. I also switched to a K&N filter.
I've talked to Corsa (they make the cat-backs for wheel to wheel - they do the GM pace cars) and they said they got 22 HP (at wheels) from their cat back on a stock 300 HP Caddy. They said they might make one for the Aurora. Does that sound reasonable?? They claim (as well as wheel to wheel) that the system is tame for around town use and cruising - like the borla.
Sorry about talking GM on a Lincoln board, but I've got the desire for more HP too. I've got some questions.
1. Brian - were the dyno's with a K&N as well? Was your "baseline" a car with a K&N??
2. How much more HP on the LS V8 do you get from the K&N by itself?
3. How much do you get from the K&N with an "opened up" air box.
4. Is what I've described above a reasonable shot at opening up the air box?? Is that what you did???
5. Is it normal for moisture to get into the air box when driving in the rain? I'd expect maybe so.
K&N claims a 2% to 4% HP increase with their filter. So for the LS V8 or the Aurora, that's 5 to 10 more. I was hoping for at least 10 with the K&N and opening up the box. Is that reasonable?
Also - I was tempted to get an air induction set-up, (exposed cone filter in engine compartment) but was dissuaded by the threat of pulling hot air off the engine and some reports that it did not work on a Caddy. What do you think??
I'm sorry If I'm asking you to repeat stuff, but I am really interested in your experiences.
Thanks.
Q. I've talked to Corsa (they make the cat-backs for wheel to wheel - they do the GM pace cars) and they said they got 22 HP (at wheels) from their cat back on a stock 300 HP Caddy. They said they might make one for the Aurora. Does that sound reasonable?? They claim (as well as wheel to wheel) that the system is tame for around town use and cruising - like the borla.
A.It's possible but it sounds high, based on our experiences with both Borla and Magnaflow. For the most part, and I'm sure there are exceptions, the louder the exhaust the more power you get due to the diminished back pressure. But the most we ever saw when we were prototyping the Magnaflow setup was 15hp, but that was without resonators and small mufflers, and the car was unliveable due to the noise. Plan for an improvement of around 8-10hp and the equivalent in torque increase. If you get more look at it as a bonus. Would hate for you to be disappointed.
1. Brian - were the dyno's with a K&N as well? Was your "baseline" a car with a K&N??
2. How much more HP on the LS V8 do you get from the K&N by itself?
K&N claims a 2% to 4% HP increase with their filter. So for the LS V8 or the Aurora, that's 5 to 10 more. I was hoping for at least 10 with the K&N and opening up the box. Is that reasonable?
Also - I was tempted to get an air induction set-up, (exposed cone filter in engine compartment) but was dissuaded by the threat of pulling hot air off the engine and some reports that it did not work on a Caddy. What do you think??
A. The dyno runs were with a K&N filter except for the baseline. You can expect maybe 1 or 2hp from a K&N stock replacement filter. Where K&N gets away with claiming more is when you change over from a stock setup to a cone filter that is open to the outside, The downside is that you expose the filter to the heat of the engine compartment which will reduce your power due to the hotter air unless where the filter is located has pretty good access to outside air.
Opening up the airbox to draw cooler outside air will result in an increase in power. How much depends on a couple of things:
-How restrictive your stock air intake is.
-Where the biggest restriction in your intake system is.
The LS responds very well to opening up the airbox to outside air. That is one of the ways the 2002 gets the 10 additional hp. They put an extra horn onto the airbox drawing air in from the front grill.
3. How much do you get from the K&N with an "opened up" air box.
You might get 5hp, but again depends on how restrictive you stock intake is.
4. Is what I've described above a reasonable shot at opening up the air box?? Is that what you did???
Yes. Club members have opened up their airboxes several different ways. Mine is probably the most dangerous to the engine if I lived where it rained. It draws air in from the lower front grill and if I drove through a puddle I could hydro-lock the engine, which would result in my wife killing me when she saw the bill for the engine replacement
5. Is it normal for moisture to get into the air box when driving in the rain? I'd expect maybe so.
Yes, but make sure that you aren't drawing in too much water. See above. Doesn't sound like you are from what you described. What you are seeing is probably condensation.
Hope this helps!
Brian
'02 won't be good for Lincoln. Lots of new competitors and changes to current ones. Can't wait to see Cadillac CTS' release today! And G35 later. Bet Lincoln will be discounting heavily and subsidizing financing and leases. That won't improve profits.
My stock air box seems pretty bad. The bottom part actually channels air to a small part of the filter's dirty side. I can't see fresh air coming in an circulating around the entire filter area very much. The top side (clean side) like I said before, has an inner surface that funnels down to approximately the same small spot as on the dirty side. We're talking about 3"X4" area. The rest of the filter area is usable for any air that can "sneak" past the tight clearances from the rest of the box. That's the best I can describe it - I wonder if your LS Box is as bad.
I saw on the crank & chrome show where a K&N induction kit, FIPK, added 21 HP at the wheels for a Corvette (crankandchrome.com). They dyno'd it right there. I know that with the vette, small %'s turn into bigger numbers, but I would think just using the K&N panel filter would do maybe half of that. Looking at it proportionally, 250HP/350HP X 10 HP gain (assumed - I know) is about 7. That's where I was getting my expectations. Plus K&N told me on the phone the 2 to 4% was for the panel filter. But hey, you Dyno'd it.
Like you said - the key indeed is how bad the stock box is. If it's really bad, a K&N probably won't do much either, but if you open up a crummy box and put a K&N in, it could be like opening the window on a dark room. Maybe I have to do a dyno. Is it expensive? Where do you do that? You got me going, and my wife will really start thinking I'm nuts. Thanks.
As for the exhaust systems, I'm assuming that you are talking about a complete cat-back system, not just the mufflers.
I'm going to point some of the other HP hungry people on the Aurora board over here to read all the interesting posts. Yeah I know, a bunch of GM guys invading. I'm really not partial to any domestic car though - I've always loved that Aurora (if only it didn't need to visit weight watchers).
As for the CTS, bring it on! I would never buy a car that looks like that thing, but a revival of Cadillac vs. Lincoln competition, in a new arena, would be good for everybody.
GM has already laid off 6,000 and DCX has laid off many more, so I don't see the 5,000 as excessive. Of course, I'm not one of the 5,000! My only concern is that they don't cut too deeply, you know, "take the muscle with the fat".
I'm sure that the '03 model would be locked by now. I have a feeling that the '04 is closed to locked too. So I have to agree that the sales year of '02 will not make much of a difference to the up coming '03.
Yes, the competition has become intense. I'm still very satisfied with my 2000 LS. Some of the complaints seem to be buyers remorse, nothing more. With all products, developments can make them outmoded rather quickly. TV, computers, and stereos come to mind. New features are packed in so rapidly, that what you buy today is obsolete in a month. If we were that concerned, we'd own nothing because technology would march past us.
I can't say much about the future of the '02 LS sales, I'm using my crystal ball for lottery numbers right now. I do recall how James Nance and Sherwood Egbert were able to increase sales in moribund companies through advertising alone. You might be correct in your assumption about the rebates to sell the steel, but F might be able to do it in other ways too.
As to the Caddy, we'll just have to wait. I see it as a novelty item. The styling is too radical for the perceived market. It is rather different, but sometimes different doesn't work. But there again, the Taurus proved that one wrong too.
Just trying to be helpful.
ls1bmw0 - I am assuming all the HP info you gave me is at the rear wheels. Thanks again. I've got to dyno.
What all does Lincoln build in Wixom? Only the LS? Anything else? Will killing off the Conti impact Wixom plant?
Several months ago I was told, by a friend who works in MoTown, there was talk of Lincoln "spicing" up the LS and putting the Conti label on it. Something about the marketing guys not wanting to drop the oldest, continuous running U.S. auto manufacturer, model name.
the front-heavy Toronados and other highlights. Maybe they should stick with the pushrod trucks and give up on the cars.