Ranger Mods

Hi everyone!

So just for interest, I've been doing some datalogging after having the PCM remapped to see changes.
One PID I monitor is CET (Calculated Engine Torque).
It now max's out at 425Nm. Before it max'd out at 410Nm.

The TQ_REF(Engine Reference Torque) PID is set to 350Nm (from factory).
I have the 2017 2.2 Ranger rated at 385Nm so I find that odd.

Going back to older (premapping) logs shows that TQ_ACT % (Calculated torque output of the engine) never exceeded 117%
This equates nicely with the 410Nm I used to get.

TQ_ACT now max's out at 121% = 425Nm CET Whereas before the CET plot vs RPM would roughly follow the expected torque curve of the engine along with boost pressure, it now hits a ceiling and the graph is flat for about 1500rpm staying at a fixed 425Nm.

If I can change the TQ_REF value to, say, 385Nm then the CET result would be able to go higher as it seems the TQ_ACT is the limiting factor here at 121%.

So 1st question: Can this value be changed?
2nd question: Has anyone else checked this PID and why it is not inline with the engines actual rated spec?

I know this is not the real values put out at the flywheel but it is interesting to monitor and see how it compares to the actual response on the dyno plot.
The CET (and boost) max values and response did change as i did small inlet and exhasut mods so they can give a rough idea of the result of certain mods.

Cheers

Yes, the TQ_REF value can be changed. No, it won't change engine behaviour. I think it is a reference number for diagnostic calculations. The 3.2 engine has the same reference value.

CatHerder wrote: ↑Thu Dec 16, 2021 10:46 am Yes, the TQ_REF value can be changed. No, it won't change engine behaviour. I think it is a reference number for diagnostic calculations. The 3.2 engine has the same reference value.

Thanks.
I know it won't change the engine behaviour, if only it was that easy to get more power!
That's what the tune was for!
I'm just looking to have the CET value not max out due to the limits on the TQ_ACT % used in the calcutaions.

Before my tune the calculated torque graph followed an expected curve but now hits that limit.

Where does one change the TQ_REF value?
I didn't see it in the PCM config and Programming section.

With the 3.2 the TRQ_ACT% goes up to 130%, but it's not calculated on 350Nm or 470Nm (engine rated trq).

Changing this value will require engine tuning software. This is outside the scope of FORscan.

EDIT: It hasn't been explicitly said, but the TRQ_REF value does not limit Nm/kW (that I've discovered). If you're hitting a 425Nm ceiling, then that will be a table that's limiting trq somewhere else in the tune, or if trq is still increasing (need a dyno) a table that only goes to 425Nm for calculations.

I believe the PCM uses the TQ_REF value of 350Nm as the base for calculations hence the CET resultant is equal to the TQ_ACT % multiplied by the TQ_REF value.
(EDIT: Not always the case as I've seen now after digging through more data)

I chatted to the tuner about what has been done in terms of requesting more power he did say he was removing the torque limiting from the maps.
The dyno recorded before and after plots show about 60Nm increase which clearly isn't evident in the CET values.

I did come across a pull i did at the coast where the CET actually hit 427Nm (before the remap...) so i don't know why the limit at 425Nm now after the remap at higher altitudes.
I wasn't recording TQ_ACT unfortunately...
Boost pressure at the coast was nearly the same as at my home altitude hitting 148kPa vs 152kPa at coast.

Before the remap at the altitude I live at the CET never went above 410Nm and now after the remap it is higher at 425Nm which must be as a result of the remap (though not reflective of the 60Nm increase).
No boost pressure changes were done on the remap.

Would be nice to have the tools to dig deeper and see what was done in the map or why the PCM reports the figures it does.

NathanSA wrote: ↑Wed Dec 22, 2021 10:07 pmWould be nice to have the tools to dig deeper and see what was done in the map or why the PCM reports the figures it does.

Agreed.
The PCM has a bunch of PIDs available, but what they represent and how they are used (if at all) I haven't found documented.

Put it on another dyno and see what it says. Log it at the same time.

350nm although incorrect, it is only a reference and basically does nothing except make a positive figure above 100%. Have not seen a factory cal with a 100% accurate torque reference figure yet, whether that be Mustang, F150 etc...

Question is, is how accurate is calculated engine torque PID, how was the dyno run, how accurate was the factory tuned dyno run... No dyno is going to 100% calculate wheel torque to engine torque, there are to many variables so it is an estimate.

100% agree with what you are saying Stewart.
I know it's all estimates and calculations but was just looking to monitor that particular PID and compare it to the dyno graph.
Fortunately I have the torque/power at the wheels dyno plot and the flywheel estimate plot.
I insisted he do a run giving wheel power only.

At some stage i may get a run done on a different dyno but I'm not fussed.
I can feel the change in the torque/power delivery quite clearly - it's a different vehicle now!