3liter vs hybrid vs COP revealed

[BurritaSVT]

As we all been aware we did have a new engine swap added to Contour/Cougar community. The COP is used on the newer 05 engine and will be easier to find in the future with lower miles once the escape engine are mostly higher mileage.

COP
pros:

*minus the spark plug wires
*cleaner engine bay to some
*will be offered in the future for low mileage
*still easy to install like the Escape full swap

cons:

*coil pack configured in series will drop low voltage on high rpm or parrelled will overload the pcm drivers and damage pc or coils
*still have to rewire the harness using patch work (really need a standalone coil driver to support the driver loads)
*pay more for the motor even double
*still have to modify the egr
*still have to modify the TB
*availablity low at this point
*no HP gain from the orginal 3 liter since no mods except expensive coil packs to replace
**still need to modify the fuel system (return Style Only)
*needs tune CEL

Full 3 liter swap

pros:

*less expensive
*easy to install
*readily available for $500
*great for ATX cars

Cons:

*modify the EGR
*modify the TB
*still need to modify the fuel system (return style only)
*needs tune CEL
3 Liter hybrid:

Pros:

*price is low based on labor too
*labor cut in half with LIM Mod (loose Secondaires not needed)
*direct swap no modifying
*no tune needed
*any mechanic could swap it too even you
*no fuel rail modification

Cons:

*without LIM Mod cutting and grinding (High Labor)

Now for dyno results that were provided by Buckeye he already shared

Now as you noticed this is the original dyno now we all saw the dyno he shown us where he said it ran quicker on the dyno when he shifted the dyno 1.7 sec earlier where the car started later at same RPMS.
Now here is the real layover after you line up the 5250rpm crossover point we all know does not lie.

Now look at how the hybrid has more torque down low ........then maintains that line till the 3800 rpm IMRC opens and still nevers drop below the troque curve of the so called torque monster he claimed makes it the best. It finally tips the hybrid torque for only 500 rpms wow that is a short torque curve there. Of course you notice the torque is 40wtq over the COP at 6500 rpms. Now all the BS he spreading and worst off he was trashing me and tom months back on our site you can see for yourself and comes here to call us out. Well the proof on the dyno never lies but I will be darn if he will lie to all the ceg's & neco about the data he shifted to make his setup seem superior. You can obviousily see the hyrbid accelerated in time at the same rate and even faster once you compare the time they actually started the pull.

I just can't see this guy BS everyone and then bashing our products and if I ever made something that was hurting performance I would hit the drawing boards again for something better.

Thanks Joey

 

[yamaha racer 686]

sweet!!! thanks i was going to ask about the comparison on the 3 types and which is better. you just answered my questions. im going hybrid when i get there

 

[BuckeyeSVT]

What planet are you on?

What planet are you on?

Do you realize you posted a graph which has nothing to do with what you are talking about. First off, 5252RPM is just fine - Let me show you the graph you need:

Click Here for Graph - Very Large Pic

Secondly, you are all about the TQ numbers being flat. That's nice, have a nice flat torque curve.. However there is a certain amount of stuff you are omitting to the audience.

What's that? This whole combination I put together here (including COP) cost me out of pocket $1300 (including SCT chip and dyno tuning). Your method requires 3L PnP heads ($1200), Reworked UIM (Max EH) ($250-$280)... plus engine, plus tune, plus headers... Do you see where I am going with this? ($2500+). Heck, I don't even have headers - I have gutted precats! This was done as a package study for price and feasability. There is no cutting of the throttle bracket required (put your brazing rods and welders away) and it's more or less plug and play (splice in the injection harness and COP harness to the SVT original harness and go. I would say it's ALOT less labor and does not require removing one head bolt to do. And my engine cost $500 (included the COP and harness with it). I can buy them all day long at that price for 2004 / 2005 Taurus. Why you choose to use Escape engines only is beyond me - the engine bracket is cheap ($40) and fits without removing the heads. If you can't do what's needed to install a full 3L, you have no business building a hybrid or anything else for that matter.


(Directed only to BurritaSVT)
Before you get any ideas to lay any more "smackdown" perhaps you should research first and open your mouth later. If you think I will sit idly by because this is CEG - You are dead wrong.(/Rant)

Your attack on the COP system is without merit or proof. I did the amperage draw readings and this is common practice on older EDIS modules in racing. How would I know? I work with these guys, we share our secrets. I had to completely rewire the whole ignition harness to make the COP's work (thanks for thanking me for that ) and the system draws the proper current and works within standard parameters. Unless you have hard data of some type of "potential" issue - I am all ears. If not, don't waste your breath. You can shoot in the dark all day long - However your points are invalid and have no real research or proof behind them.

FWIW - 203FWHP/209FWTQ is not bad for $1300. You show me those numbers for $1300. Anyone?

I'm a liar? Your an idiot. Talk about the pot calling the kettle "black"? Get some sense and some real "data" and this can be a "real" conversation.

-Dom

 

[BuckeyeSVT]

I have to add this because I think this is important and you are leaving it out.

First off, you modified a time graph to suit your needs - That was stupid - If you had a point to make and needed the data - Just ask, I'm not going to say "no".

Secondly telling people they can do a hybrid without proper tuning is retarded. Of course they will need tuning - I've built plenty of these engines since 2002 and I've never seen ANY engines that haven't needed tuning. Unless you like your AFR around 10:1 over 4,000RPM, and the spark curve out of whack because you never ADJUSTED for the SECONDARIES YOU REMOVED WITH YOUR SILLY MOD!

Duh, hello **knocks wood**.. no one's home.

-Dom

 

[Pudmunkie]

Holy big picture, wanna size that down a bit there chief? You'd think being a site owner yourself you would know what that does to the forum :shrug:.

Either way, I dont really think you need to be insulting Joey, he could have listed zero benefits for the full swap. He instead tried to offer all the pros and cons of each set up.

You want to call someone else out "pot calling the kettle black"... Why dont you just calm down a little bit? You want him to gather 'data'..... I want you to stop insulting people. THEN we can ALL have a ADULT discussion about this.

Take a zanax or something man.

 

[WorldTour]

Buckeye... You have a PM.

 

[BurritaSVT]

I have to add this because I think this is important and you are leaving it out.

First off, you modified a time graph to suit your needs - That was stupid - If you had a point to make and needed the data - Just ask, I'm not going to say "no".

Secondly telling people they can do a hybrid without proper tuning is retarded. Of course they will need tuning - I've built plenty of these engines since 2002 and I've never seen ANY engines that haven't needed tuning. Unless you like your AFR around 10:1 over 4,000RPM, and the spark curve out of whack because you never ADJUSTED for the SECONDARIES YOU REMOVED WITH YOUR SILLY MOD!

Duh, hello **knocks wood**.. no one's home.

-Dom

here is your dyno you spliced
http://www.fordcontour.org/uploads/1185930140/gallery_1032_101_57813.jpg

and here you are the one compaing time and we are just telling you that the time is ok to use if you start at the same rpm as the other 3 liter hybrid. Where you just slid the graph over to line up the rpm unlike you did. You even stressed to everyone how much faster the car pulled gear saying now which one is faster. So next time you layover at graph make sure you have the two dyno starting at the same rpm when you time as a reference.

here is the post you mentioned it in your own little world
http://www.fordcontour.org/3L-vs-SVT-cams-t9873.html&st=20

 

[BuckeyeSVT]

Listen very clearly to what I am about to say before you say one more word (patience is very thin).

The graph you have and think is smoking proof of something is actually a dyno graph I posted about the time difference only between a Hybrid and a straight 3L. That was the whole purpose of that graph...

I didn't splice anything, I sure as hell didn't erase lines and add lines where I felt they should be like Tom and you did. The car is faster, I can't make the graphs up (well, I guess I could use MSpaint like you guys did - i don't play that way). You can call my dyno shop and get the results yourself and look at them to your content.

There's a software called WinPEP made by DynoJet, look it up. I have the raw .drf files here. All I do is open both files and the software overlays them for me. It's all legit and works beautifully (it the software the dynojet uses to compute runs as well). I have version 7.5.1 if you are interested, it's a fun product and they allow you to download it for free if you are interested in playing with it.

Aside from that, quit while you are ahead... This is all pointless banter because you have no idea what you are trying to make a point with. A comparison graph between 2 different runs on the same dyno is hardly "proof" of anything. And I wish I had the dyno plot of the higher HP 3L you see - However he has almost $4000 invested in that motor, I have $1300 - let's keep that in mind. Ohh, and just in case you are wondering - I built that hybrid. Jealous?

-Dom

 

[BurritaSVT]

Listen very clearly to what I am about to say before you say one more word (patience is very thin).

The graph you have and think is smoking proof of something is actually a dyno graph I posted about the time difference only between a Hybrid and a straight 3L. That was the whole purpose of that graph...

I didn't splice anything, I sure as hell didn't erase lines and add lines where I felt they should be like Tom and you did. The car is faster, I can't make the graphs up (well, I guess I could use MSpaint like you guys did - i don't play that way). You can call my dyno shop and get the results yourself and look at them to your content.

There's a software called WinPEP made by DynoJet, look it up. I have the raw .drf files here. All I do is open both files and the software overlays them for me. It's all legit and works beautifully (it the software the dynojet uses to compute runs as well). I have version 7.5.1 if you are interested, it's a fun product and they allow you to download it for free if you are interested in playing with it.

Aside from that, quit while you are ahead... This is all pointless banter because you have no idea what you are trying to make a point with. A comparison graph between 2 different runs on the same dyno is hardly "proof" of anything. And I wish I had the dyno plot of the higher HP 3L you see - However he has almost $4000 invested in that motor, I have $1300 - let's keep that in mind. Ohh, and just in case you are wondering - I built that hybrid. Jealous?

-Dom

Funny you said you said it was just layed down that way because you were bragging to everyone that is did the pull faster by a second. Seem pretty funny that the dyno you overlapped or "just placed it that way" would back up the talk about being faster heck just read your darn post on your own forum. Oh now you talked down to me like I have no idea what software we uses for our tuning Dynojet in WINPEP. If you can't overlap the comparison right then send me two files where I don't have to paste the image in photoshop. So now you are crawfishing backwards about you were not talking about it was faster then you post a pic of two runs same car not even the hybrid in the plot.

Sit tight I have some more dyno numbers that are in league with just gutted cats etc.

 

[warmonger]

I have to add this because I think this is important and you are leaving it out.

First off, you modified a time graph to suit your needs - That was stupid - If you had a point to make and needed the data - Just ask, I'm not going to say "no".

OKAY. Please post the same two graphs with respect to rpm of the two DIFFERENT cars (instead of the same car with two different runs) so that we can see them both on the same sheet with the HPandTQ scaled equally. I'm sure it will look like the one I interpolated earlier from YOUR data, but I'm willing to entertain the notion that it might be a tad different.

Secondly telling people they can do a hybrid without proper tuning is retarded. Of course they will need tuning - I've built plenty of these engines since 2002 and I've never seen ANY engines that haven't needed tuning. Unless you like your AFR around 10:1 over 4,000RPM, and the spark curve out of whack because you never ADJUSTED for the SECONDARIES YOU REMOVED WITH YOUR SILLY MOD!

Duh, hello **knocks wood**.. no one's home.

-Dom

It doesn't need any tuning to run right when using SVT PCM/injectors/maf. It can be improved YES but runs pretty good by itself if you do the swap right and seal it up.

In the case of non SVT pcms/17#inj then it will not run right. This is mainly because the SVT came with an upgraded fuel system and nothing else.

 

[BuckeyeSVT]

I'm going backwards? Dude, I'll end this right now. Your accusations are unwarranted and you clearly lack any type of "mental capability" to understand what you are looking at.

Pissing me off by calling me a liar, and now saying I'm back stepping?? You have alot of balls, very tiny one's I suppose. I have a better idea, you and your brother Tommy play this little game with someone else - I really don't need this useless, pointless and mindless garbage from either of you. Sorry you don't like the results, they are what they are. No amount of "arguing" changes "hard data".

-Dom

 

[BurritaSVT]

take your pick you can even choose the dyno graph you like here but knowing you so far you will pick the lesser one.........

http://easylink.playstream.com/burritasvt/progressive/timeless420_3l_esc_w-svt_stuff_11-5to1_compr_steeda_tune_sept2305.jpg[/img]

 

[BurritaSVT]

take your pick you can even choose the dyno graph you like here but knowing you so far you will pick the lesser one.........

 

[warmonger]

Listen very clearly to what I am about to say before you say one more word (patience is very thin).

The graph you have and think is smoking proof of something is actually a dyno graph I posted about the time difference only between a Hybrid and a straight 3L. That was the whole purpose of that graph...

I didn't splice anything, I sure as hell didn't erase lines and add lines where I felt they should be like Tom and you did. The car is faster, I can't make the graphs up (well, I guess I could use MSpaint like you guys did - i don't play that way). You can call my dyno shop and get the results yourself and look at them to your content.

There's a software called WinPEP made by DynoJet, look it up. I have the raw .drf files here. All I do is open both files and the software overlays them for me. It's all legit and works beautifully (it the software the dynojet uses to compute runs as well). I have version 7.5.1 if you are interested, it's a fun product and they allow you to download it for free if you are interested in playing with it.

Aside from that, quit while you are ahead... This is all pointless banter because you have no idea what you are trying to make a point with. A comparison graph between 2 different runs on the same dyno is hardly "proof" of anything. And I wish I had the dyno plot of the higher HP 3L you see - However he has almost $4000 invested in that motor, I have $1300 - let's keep that in mind. Ohh, and just in case you are wondering - I built that hybrid. Jealous?

-Dom

No one said you spliced it. You just displayed both cars with HP/TQ as a functions of time in seconds. The problem is the dyno runs on the cars were started at different rpm so the time can never be properly compared until the two graphs are aligned through a different method...i.e. lining up the rpm. We know the hp/tq crosses over at 5252rpm so we can line them up there. Since you weren't willing to do that I did it for you. NO MS-Paint was used, those are the very same pixels your picture had just shifted left until the rpms were correlated the same. Then all the information I posted became as clear as day.

Oh, and it would take you $3000 to get that motor of yours to perform the way that hybrid is going to perform. The sad part is you made that guy FELL BAD about his car while showing how "fast" yours was and it wasn't even accurate. He has a hell of a nice motor there.

Trust me, I'm all about cheap powers and if you look at my 3L hybrid from way back in 200-2001 producing about 217/185 wHP/TQ that only had gutted precats, K&N, borrowed MAF, and 3L valves with porting; that I did for about $1200-1300 in parts and machine shop work, then you'll see that I agree with you.

 

[warmonger]

I'm going backwards? Dude, I'll end this right now. Your accusations are unwarranted and you clearly lack any type of "mental capability" to understand what you are looking at.

Pissing me off by calling me a liar, and now saying I'm back stepping?? You have alot of balls, very tiny one's I suppose. I have a better idea, you and your brother Tommy play this little game with someone else - I really don't need this useless, pointless and mindless garbage from either of you. Sorry you don't like the results, they are what they are. No amount of "arguing" changes "hard data".

-Dom

Nobody called you a liar. Not at all. Backpedaler-yes; misinformed - yes; but not a liar.

 

[beyondloadedSE]

Secondly telling people they can do a hybrid without proper tuning is retarded. Of course they will need tuning - I've built plenty of these engines since 2002 and I've never seen ANY engines that haven't needed tuning. Unless you like your AFR around 10:1 over 4,000RPM, and the spark curve out of whack because you never ADJUSTED for the SECONDARIES YOU REMOVED WITH YOUR SILLY MOD!

Duh, hello **knocks wood**.. no one's home.

-Dom

A 3.0L hybrid shouldnt need a tune. You've changed the displacement and thats it. The MAF should take care of the rest to compensate for the extra CFM being drawn into the engine.

FWIW, Y2KSVT's 3.0L hybrid made 196 whp untuned. AFR was spot on. A tune did net him 10 more whp.

 

[warmonger]

A 3.0L hybrid shouldnt need a tune. You've changed the displacement and thats it. The MAF should take care of the rest to compensate for the extra CFM being drawn into the engine.

FWIW, Y2KSVT's 3.0L hybrid made 196 whp untuned. AFR was spot on. A tune did net him 10 more whp.

Yeah but that was on SAE corrected power, the provided data was on STD if you look at the top. That means it would fall more in line with the averages we have seen and the ovalport would actually be less than 200wHP.

 

[Y2KSVT]

Tom, Jim was just referring to my old SVT, in response to Buckhole's post up there. I ran that hybrid motor for over two years without a tune. No smoking, no funny idle, no rich smell from the exhaust, nothing. It pulled 196/191 with no tuning at all. With the tune, it pulled 206/196, so yes, there was power to be had. But no, a tune was not necessary.

Mark

 

[Rara]

Mark, Tom was simply referring to the fact that your numbers were based on SAE correction, where the previous numbers from Dom were based on STD correction, which on generally results in higher numbers. Basically, your dyno results would have "looked" better if they had been based on STD correction.

 

[BuckeyeSVT]

take your pick you can even choose the dyno graph you like here but knowing you so far you will pick the lesser one.........

First off, pulling a NECO members dyno chart and comparing it to others is great - if you think it proves something... What are you trying to prove? The time graph shows bigger isn't always better... Something more than one person has TRIED to tell some people here but they don't listen. It's cool, I won't burst your bubble - But just showing me cars that dyno higher means absolutely nothing to me - I built mine for $1300. Did they?

Better yet, when you compare the others to the time difference chart - It means they would get pulled on if raced on the street. With all the HP it's irrelevant - That's the purpose OF THE TIME DIFFERENCE GRAPH!!! There is life outside your "bubble" I can assure you. Perhaps not focusing on the highest number like a schlong measuring contest and perhaps "real world benefit" tuning may help more. Geez... some of you are truly sheltered - I feel bad coming here and showing you this. I wouldn't want a straight 3L pulling 1.5 seconds per gear on you would you? Maybe more to think about in your overall tuning thoughts than highest numbers????????

-Dom