Sooo intercoolers, BOV and headers?

[Indominus49er]

I plan on a tune, exhaust, and all the other goodies as soon as available. Warranty, smorenty ?. Here I come supercharged coyote if I blow it up. Lol

Sponsored

 

[Felix808]

Personally I'm more concerned in where the power curve is / will be . Making peak HP /Tq means nothing if its in an unusable rpm range. I want the torque to be down low for tail use. My understanding of having twin-turbos is to have a more constant power curve, where when one turbo is cutting out the other is cutting in to alleviate lag. Am I thinking correctly?

 

[LemonShark]

Personally I'm more concerned in where the power curve is / will be . Making peak HP /Tq means nothing if its in an unusable rpm range. I want the torque to be down low for tail use. My understanding of having twin-turbos is to have a more constant power curve, where when one turbo is cutting out the other is cutting in to alleviate lag. Am I thinking correctly?

That is true in some applications, but not this one. You have two equal size turbos each feeding their own bank of cylinders.

Small turbos, quick spool, FAT torque curve through the most usable part of the rpm range.

 

[Felix808]

That is true in some applications, but not this one. You have two equal size turbos each feeding their own bank of cylinders.

Small turbos, quick spool, FAT torque curve through the most usable part of the rpm range.

Thanks, I'm a Turbo newbie & trying to read up on this engine.

 

[DrewBronc21]

Personally I'm more concerned in where the power curve is / will be . Making peak HP /Tq means nothing if its in an unusable rpm range. I want the torque to be down low for tail use. My understanding of having twin-turbos is to have a more constant power curve, where when one turbo is cutting out the other is cutting in to alleviate lag. Am I thinking correctly?

full torque by 3000 rpms should be very responsive from both the 2.7 and 2.3. See baseline dynos on a Ranger 2.3 and F150 2.7 From another thread:

 

[TOWMA8R]

Tune and downpipe for me. I'd say intake, but this is my first off-road vehicle, and I plan to learn to use it appropriately, so I imagine the stock airbox will be better at keeping trail funk from the engine.

I'm not sure I'll go much further than that (I'm lying to myself, and all of you, forgive me.)

There are lots of intakes with sealed boxes, I agree there is no place for an open filter style intake.....those cause heat, suck in heat and dust... not good.But in the F150 intakes there is really no need, the stock bock will support all the custom tunes you can throw at it

 

[ATLBronco75]

I feel like people are really sleeping on the 2.7 it’s an amazing engine. It’s got so much potential I expect to see a lot of 400+ hp tunes once the aftermarket really digs into it.

 

[Bronco Country]

Coming from a heavily modified big turbo 500 hp mk7 GTI, I will be just fine with an IC, intake, DP and exhaust.

VD of GTI...

Last Dragy with not the best DA for 60-100.

 

[DonsBronc]

I don't want a BOV, though would like to see upgraded re circulation valves

 

[D K]

Well the 2.7 won't have headers since its a direct-to-head turbo. The exhaust port is integrated in the cylinder head.
The 2.3 will have lots of choices thankfully from the Mustang and Focus crowd.
If the Sasquatch will be available in the manual, it will be a hilarious car to drive

Sponsored