2.3L FORD PERFORMANCE TUNE Install & Dragy Test! 0-60 in 7.57s on RTR Everglades (**VIDEO**)

[ROCKO]

Seen many others with this upgrade and results on the 2.3 are trash with Dyno comparisons. There had to to be something else pushing the 2.3 besides the Ford performance tune

Sponsored

 

[lakesinai]

Its a cool thing, the added HP and torque. Not something I'd want to install myself. However, he says in the video that there was little or no increase at 91 octane, but that 93 octane was required for the performance increase to kicked in. I dont think the added gasoline cost is worth it to me, although I'm sure some will love it. I assume that you can still run 87 octane efficiently with the tune, and when you need the power, use 93? How does the tune effect MPG?

 

[MM_Mike]

Seen many others with this upgrade and results on the 2.3 are trash with Dyno comparisons. There had to to be something else pushing the 2.3 besides the Ford performance tune

We initially had the same or worse 0-60 on the 91 octane, only the 60ft improved. We added 93 octane and it completely changed the tune. There are no other modifications to this Bronco. We had same conditions, same spots for both stock and performance tune. We also logged the IAT, MAP and Spark Advance during both runs but didn't post it because the numbers proved the increase. I will try to put something together if anybody wants some more data

Thanks
MM_Mike

 

[MM_Mike]

Its a cool thing, the added HP and torque. Not something I'd want to install myself. However, he says in the video that there was little or no increase at 91 octane, but that 93 octane was required for the performance increase to kicked in. I dont think the added gasoline cost is worth it to me, although I'm sure some will love it. I assume that you can still run 87 octane efficiently with the tune, and when you need the power, use 93? How does the tune effect MPG?

I would always run minimum 91 octane with the tune even though the bronco should pull timing if it sees knock but if you drove normally with no WOT it would probably be fine. We haven't done any MPG testing but the throttle response is higher it seems with the tune so it might consume more fuel because it is opening the throttle more with less throttle input.

 

[Chuck_Ruck]

I cant justify that much money for 30hp & 60ft/lbs and thats before driving 140 miles to get 93 octane. Plus the 7MT isnt a racing trans, and WOT isnt called upon too much in these Arizona hills.

 

[2020FordRaptor]

That's quick for a 2.3.

 

[Sparkherd]

Everglades in Wisconsin huh?
(Just bein an ass over here...)

 

[wkaotp]

The biggest take away for me is the tune fixes the lag in the shift points in the 10Spd auto. Its has so much more life. Ive only driven mine so far with 89 octane, got a 1/4 tank to go through to before i fill with 93 to see the real effects.

 

[BroccoliBronc]

I cant justify that much money for 30hp & 60ft/lbs and thats before driving 140 miles to get 93 octane. Plus the 7MT isnt a racing trans, and WOT isnt called upon too much in these Arizona hills.

You wouldn't think by the numbers it's a big deal but on my 2 door Black Diamond manual, this was the best money I have spent so far. It absolutely scoots, and the Rev matching is SO nice on the manual when off-road, it makes it easy to get down that 2-1 shift at slower speeds. It feels more meaty all over the powerband and here in Western Pennsylvania with all of the hills it's nice having more power.

 

[Lakelife36]

You wouldn't think by the numbers it's a big deal but on my 2 door Black Diamond manual, this was the best money I have spent so far. It absolutely scoots, and the Rev matching is SO nice on the manual when off-road, it makes it easy to get down that 2-1 shift at slower speeds. It feels more meaty all over the powerband and here in Western Pennsylvania with all of the hills it's nice having more power.

What octane gas do you run? Have you noticed any significant increase in fuel consumption?

 

[Chuck_Ruck]

You wouldn't think by the numbers it's a big deal but on my 2 door Black Diamond manual, this was the best money I have spent so far. It absolutely scoots, and the Rev matching is SO nice on the manual when off-road, it makes it easy to get down that 2-1 shift at slower speeds. It feels more meaty all over the powerband and here in Western Pennsylvania with all of the hills it's nice having more power.

I have a 2dr manual badlands, so I'm sure it does help some, but driving to find 93 octane is half a tank away from me, while you might have easier access to it. The joys of living in an Arizona border town are plentiful, but high octane fuel isnt one of them.

 

[Laminar]

Seen many others with this upgrade and results on the 2.3 are trash with Dyno comparisons. There had to to be something else pushing the 2.3 besides the Ford performance tune

There might be more to it than just peak numbers/curves. We can tell that the factory tune is set up extremely soft to protect the fragile axles and drivetrain components. A WOT dyno chart wouldn't show that. Given the weight and horsepower numbers, the Broncos are much slower than they should be. If the tune tightens up the shifts and allows more power in more places, the truck would get faster even with the same peak numbers, because the ECU spends so much time not at peak numbers in order to protect the drivetrain.

 

[BroccoliBronc]

What octane gas do you run? Have you noticed any significant increase in fuel consumption?

I run 93 all the time, I'm still sitting at 19 combined which is mainly back roads with some highway. If I lost some it would still be worth it for the driveability improvements.

 

[Maul_ii]

Does it feel more peppy during normal driving and acceleration or just wide open runs?

Yes, much more peppy (esp. in a 2 door manual) with gains as follows for the 2.3L:
55 HP (Stock: 275 HP @ 5700 RPM | Power Pack: 330 HP @ 5500 RPM)
70 ft lbs of torque (Stock: 315 lb-ft @3400 RPM | Power Pack: 385 lb-ft @3500 RPM)
https://performanceparts.ford.com/part/M-9603-B23

The power increase in applied to all modes, this makes ECO mode much more enjoyable to drive.

What this doesn't tell you is you have to be much more careful with your heavy foot or you can really take a huge hit on your mileage.

Pre upgrade I was averaging 16.8 -17.1 accelerating pretty aggressively. Once I applied the power pack, and test drove it with the same "enthusiasm" my average over 2 tanks dropped to 15.8.

But with the HO and torque increase you dont have to be quite and heavy with the throttle and once you dial it back in and use Eco in the city and Normal mode on the highway I have been able to get my average back up to the 16.6 - 16.8 range again.

This is with a sizeable roof rack upgrade and a hard shell RTT, so results may vary depending on your loadout.

I am very happy with this overall, but those spare fuel cans will become a much more critical part of my overlanding kit .

 

[gtabert]

These are not sports cars, its not about the horsepower and 0-60 times as much as the torque. HP is for high speed. Its the torque you need on a four wheel drive, it's whats down low that counts. 60lb.-ft is mighty impressive for the money. If you expect to get any performance even the stock 300hp 325lb.-ft then plan on using Premium.

Sponsored