Ford Forums banner

41 - 60 of 67 Posts

·
FF Town Mayor
Joined
·
1,700 Posts
xr6 ute said:
Why is it, that people cant believe that with a few changes, the BA 6cylinder cant possibly come from 140rwkw(standard) to 180rwkws? The cold air on standard cars is small and restrictive, the air filters are thick cardboard crap which are impossible to get free flowing air through, the zorst are small and have 20 muflers, resonators catylitic converters(only designed for zero emissions), and a computer that detunes the engine for maximum life spand and best fuel economy. It's only a 40kw increase!?! how do you think that FPV makes a boss 260 into a boss 290? a turbo? a supercharger? or extreme internal work? No, a zorst, a filter, a more radical fuel gusling chip for the computer. Same with HSV, what makes a VX SS 235kw different to a VX GTS 300kw? thats 65kw increase with similar mods.
And i'm sure in time, we will all see chip, cam, and exhaust packages for all the ford motors which will considerable increase the power.
Oh yeah XRchic, do you really believe that with all the mods you've done to your car, and all the money you've spent it, it has on increased the engines power by 20 piss weak kilowatts? if it has girl take the shit back!
I would also query something. You compare the two boss engines, with and increase from 260 to 290. These are in FWkw. Also the same with the HSVs - the difference between the SS and the GTS is 65 FWkw.... My gain of 20 is in RWkw.... so if you translate that to FWkw as you have done comparing the others, I am estimating that would be somewhere around 25 to 30FWkw.... which is close to the gain made between XR8 and GT as you have stated.

So to compare apples with apples, I am not seeing a massive problem here with 25-30FWkw gain with just a chip and exhaust...

So you are saying a 40RWkw gain is reasonable? That takes it from a 182FWkw car to around 230FWkw.....with chip and exhaust? I dont think so. From memory, with the XR6T and APS stage 1 including boost increases, Im pretty sure there is only a relatively small gain of a bit more than 30rwkw.... takes it to around 280 - 290fwkw (I think).
 

·
Jim Mock You Rock
Joined
·
1,766 Posts
XRChic....congratulations on your mods and increased output.As long as you are enjoying the benefits of what you got ,figures don't really mean all that much.As for numbers...well personally I have no respect for them.

I had raced ss vu commodores when the dev4 was running and believe me they could not get away.The dev 4 was had 150 rwkws and the look of frustration said it all from them.They claim ridiculous amounts ,but what counts is real world.
If you get better fuel economy and the feeling that the car goes well ,thats what counts.
 

·
Falcontastic.
Joined
·
6,039 Posts
xr6 ute said:
Why is it, that people cant believe that with a few changes, the BA 6cylinder cant possibly come from 140rwkw(standard) to 180rwkws? The cold air on standard cars is small and restrictive, the air filters are thick cardboard crap which are impossible to get free flowing air through, the zorst are small and have 20 muflers, resonators catylitic converters(only designed for zero emissions), and a computer that detunes the engine for maximum life spand and best fuel economy. It's only a 40kw increase!?! how do you think that FPV makes a boss 260 into a boss 290? a turbo? a supercharger? or extreme internal work? No, a zorst, a filter, a more radical fuel gusling chip for the computer. Same with HSV, what makes a VX SS 235kw different to a VX GTS 300kw? thats 65kw increase with similar mods.
And i'm sure in time, we will all see chip, cam, and exhaust packages for all the ford motors which will considerable increase the power.
Oh yeah XRchic, do you really believe that with all the mods you've done to your car, and all the money you've spent it, it has on increased the engines power by 20 piss weak kilowatts? if it has girl take the shit back!
Oh dear, you have a lot to learn buddy, before you dissrespect people like you have here with XRchic you really should do your homework 1st, like other's have anwsered your above post, you will never gain 40 rwkw's in those mod's your are talking about that is like a gain of 55odd fwkw, yeah right.
 

·
BOFH
Joined
·
7,777 Posts
xr6 ute said:
Oh yeah XRchic, do you really believe that with all the mods you've done to your car, and all the money you've spent it, it has on increased the engines power by 20 piss weak kilowatts? if it has girl take the shit back!
I can only assume 2 things here:
A) You really havent done much research into car mods at all have you? Just do the maths. 180rwkw is probably close to 240fwkw. No bolt on mod is going to do that. It is possible but I think it is only possible if you open the head up and do some work in there (Cam, port, polish etc)
B) You dont know XRchic. She probably understands and knows more about cars, mods and the likes than you do. As she said, she knows what is realistic and what isnt. She had a goal to achieve and, all said and done, achieved it.

Time to settle down and start to listen to what others already know. That way you wont look like a fool again.
 

·
BLUEPRINT
Joined
·
87 Posts
Discussion Starter #47
Well,
If i am wrong, then would one you ring John Mock and tell him thats he's a liar and sells false misleading products. Also contanct auto speed and tell them there articles are bullshit and unresearched. PLease i dare you!!
 

·
BLUEPRINT
Joined
·
87 Posts
Well,
*********edited by laminge**************

I value everyones veiws but, i put my faith in autospeed, a company that has revued thousand of cars and also John Mock Motorsport, the real people working on cars in a performance shop everyday. If these people advertise that a BA can get 180 at the wheels, i will believe them.


THIS IS THE AUTOSPEED ARTICLE I READ.
BA-LLISTIC

We test JMM's bolt-on upgrade for the naturally aspirated Ford BA 4.0!

Michael Knowling
Advertisement

Advertisement

At a glance...

The first aftermarket development of the local Ford DOHC non-turbo six
Dyno-developed intake, headers, exhaust and UniChip kit
Up to 180kW ATW
Good on-road performance gains
Cost effective

Email a friend Print article

With all the ranting and raving over Ford’s BA XR6T and quad-cam V8 engines, the run-of-the-mill 4.0 litre DOHC straight six is being completely overlooked. But after a drive of a BA Falcon 4.0 equipped with Jim Mock Motorsport’s DEV3 kit, we can assure you there is some go-fast potential!

With double overhead camshafts, infinitely variable cam timing, 24 valves and the latest engine management system, the BA 4.0 six offers substantial power from the factory. Peak power is an impressive 182kW at 5000 rpm.


After Ford’s mammoth engineering effort with this engine, it should come as no surprise that there’s limited scope for the aftermarket to achieve peak power – at least, not without adding forced induction or nitrous... However, it is achievable to increase the average power output and to sharpen throttle response.

And that’s exactly what we found behind the wheel of the Jim Mock Motorsport BA Falcon XT.


The throttle response of the JMM BA Falcon (with its manual gearbox) is wonderfully crisp. In fact, we can’t think of another car we’ve driven that offers better response – except, perhaps, the Mitsubishi Magna VR-X with manual trans (believe it or not, the Magna has stunning throttle response). The JMM Falcon’s crisp throttle response is immediately followed by a mountain of torque, which is greatest between 2000 and 4000 rpm. Performance falls away toward 6000 rpm - a result of the standard camshafts.


Despite weighing 1700kg+ and with two people onboard, we hand-timed the JMM BA to 100 km/h in the mid-to-high 6s. That’s decidedly quick and, unlike other modified performance cars, we found it very easy to get off the line. Just don’t be too eager when you pop the clutch...

According to JMM, a stock BA Falcon makes about 140kW at the wheels on their Dyno Dynamics chassis dyno. Autos are generally a couple of kilowatts below the 140 mark and manual versions are a couple of kilowatts above. Once brought up to DEV3 spec, output jumps to a claimed 180kW at the wheels – just 8kW behind what they’ve seen from a stock XR6 Turbo under the same conditions.

The subtleties to the upgrade are also impressive.


The engine fires into life with just a tiny amount longer cranking on the starter motor and the high-flow exhaust is completely resonance-free and quiet at cruise. Give it a bootfull and the exhaust howls, but it’s not offensively loud. The engine is also happy to trundle along in carparks in second gear with absolutely no surging, stalling or general misbehavior. Jim Mock suggests filling the tank with premium unleaded for maximum performance and, as we noticed, there’s no sign of detonation.

Okay, so that’s the result of modification - what exactly are the modifications?

The Jim Mock Motorsport DEV3 BA upgrade builds on the modifications involved in the DEV1 and DEV2 kits.


DEV1 begins with a 2 ½ inch cat-back mandrel exhaust with two large-body mufflers. The precise details of the system are a secret as DMM has invested a lot of R&D in achieving a broad torque curve without resonance or excess noise. Note that the exhaust for BA Falcon utes is slightly different to those for sedans and wagons.


DEV1 also includes a high-flow air intake, which comprises a Tickford over-the-radiator snorkel and a pod filter hidden inside the standard airbox. A custom plastic adaptor is required to secure the filter to the airbox. JMM defends their choice of installing a pod filter inside the factory airbox by citing their dyno development figures.

Another interesting component of the DEV1 kit is performance spark plugs sourced from America. Again, these are dyno tested.

The entry-level DEV1 upgrade for BA 4.0 Falcons retails for just AUD$695 (AUD$50 more for utes). JMM have seen this kit reach 148kW at the wheels – about 8kW more than stock.


DEV2 – the mid-level kit – employs everything found in DEV1 and adds JMM’s latest “Scavenger” headers along with a high-flow cat converter and adjoining 2 ½ inch pipe. The headers are the result of extensive dyno testing and JMM tells us their design ended up being about halfway between their scavenger and race series headers used in SOHC 4.0s. We’re told that the Ford six is extremely sensitive to combustion chamber scavenging. Note that the headers are also HPC’d to keep heat away from the nearby engine bay wiring.


DEV2 adds a significant AUD$885 to the price of the DEV1 kit, bringing the total to AUD$1580 (AUD$1630 for utes). However, the power gain justifies the extra cost – JMM claim about 168kW ATW. That’s a full 20kW more than DEV1 and 28kW more than stock.

Note that a slightly different version of this kit is also available – the DEV2A upgrade. DEV2A incorporates a 3 inch mandrel exhaust and cat converter (an early prototype is shown here), instead of the 2 ½ inch arrangement used in the usual DEV2 kit. The bigger exhaust adds AUD$260 and provides an extra 4kW, for a total of 172kW at the wheels.


DEV3 – the kit that we tested on the JMM BA Falcon XT – introduces one relatively expensive component. A UniChip interceptor module. JMM is tight-lipped about the specific air-fuel ratio and ignition timing changes they’ve made, but cam timing and electronic throttle control strategies remain unchanged.


In addition to providing improved drivability thanks to the UniChip, the DEV 3 upgrade ups the ante to 180kW at the wheels (see graph). The UniChip module contributes AUD$990 for an all-up cost of AUD$2570 (50 bucks extra for utes).

And the 3 inch exhaust upgrade? Well, at the time of writing, JMM were yet to see any extra power over their 2 ½ inch system. At around 180kW at the wheels, we’re told the DOHC Ford six is crying out for a new set of camshafts. JMM is currently working on this.


For now, though, the DEV 3 kit is a very well behaved and cost-effective upgrade for anyone with a naturally aspirated BA six. Fear not – you are guaranteed to feel the difference over a stocker!

Ford’s atmo engine does have some potential!

Contact:

JMM (Jim Mock Motorsport)
+61 3 9399 4401
www.jimmockmotorsport.com
 

·
BOFH
Joined
·
7,777 Posts
Take your ute to JMM, get the kit.
I doubt you'll get 180rwkw BUT I will say you will love what you get and the car will be so much better for it.
I think JMM do fantastic work and their products are the very best in quality and performance for the I6. Ask anyone on here, they all know I think JMM are top notch.
I just dont think it will get 180rwkw. I would love to be proven wrong but I doubt it.
 

·
BLUEPRINT
Joined
·
87 Posts
Discussion Starter #50
To clear the air, I spoke with Gary(laminge) he has informed me that in the past, JMM dyno's have been inacurate and misleading from other threads and peoples personal experiences. Also to XRchic, i want to appolise for having a stab at you and your car and offended you in anyway.
 

·
FF Town Mayor
Joined
·
1,700 Posts
Not a problem. Apologies from me too, I was harsh as well. :beer2:
 

·
In a blue Galaxy
Joined
·
5,716 Posts
xr6 ute said:
Well,
*********edited by laminge**************

I value everyones veiws but, i put my faith in autospeed, a company that has revued thousand of cars and also John Mock Motorsport, the real people working on cars in a performance shop everyday. If these people advertise that a BA can get 180 at the wheels, i will believe them.
I wouldn't beleive anyone who's name is John Mock! :p
 

·
In a blue Galaxy
Joined
·
5,716 Posts
xr6 ute said:
I value everyones veiws but, i put my faith in autospeed, a company that has revued thousand of cars and also John Mock Motorsport, the real people working on cars in a performance shop everyday. If these people advertise that a BA can get 180 at the wheels, i will believe them.
I wouldn't beleive anyone who's name is John Mock. :p
 

·
Sik EA bro
Joined
·
732 Posts
i never hear anything bad/see anything bad come from his workshop, only happy customers as casper pointed out. Only that he is pricey, but what do u expect taking your car to a 4L specialist...specialists are not your typical petrol station workshop...:)
 

·
FF Town Mayor
Joined
·
1,700 Posts
p4r4l3l said:
i never hear anything bad/see anything bad come from his workshop, only happy customers as casper pointed out. Only that he is pricey, but what do u expect taking your car to a 4L specialist...specialists are not your typical petrol station workshop...:)
Id agree with that. I think his work is really good and they guys who looked at it, here, a few days later commented that it was a class job. I have NO issue with the quality of the work that was done, or the price for that matter. And they are really nice blokes. I love the sound of it, and the feel of it - so I repeat, I have no issues with the quality of their work at all and I would recommend them to anyone and I have.

I just think Jim would do well if he bought a new dyno and perhaps altered his predictions of rwkw in his advertising - then he wont go wrong.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
69 Posts
Casper said:
Considering that mine is not so easy to launch and I've only had about 7 or 8 runs in it since I had the mods done I could also use the same argument that I could get quite a bit better. Maybe even get into the 14.8's as my first 60' is very slow, only 2.3's. So if thats the case, and I know I have around 140rwkw, that actually just reinforces my point more.
There is no way he is a second, or probably even .5 of a second off the cars potential. They are not that hard to drive. The tale is really in the 60 foot time. If he can remember it than that will really help detemine if its off the pace. If its a 2.6 or so then yes, the car has heaps more potential. If its a 2.3 or a 2.2 then the car is probably running what it should.
In the end its impossible to say. We dont really know the car and the conditions. All we can do is make subjective comparisons based on known std's. I am not putting him down at all. I think the time is excellent however I just cant see a 180rwkw BA doing 14.8'[email protected] It doesnt add up.
My runs down the 1/4 were not clean that's for sure. My 60ft was just under 2.5 seconds on my best try, for some reason I just can't get out of the hole quick enough, I don't think I'm that bad of a driver and I'm not trying to make excuses but, my gearbox seems to be slipping.....a mechanic mate reckons I was probably stalling it up for too long before the launchs and had excess trany fliud circulating around in the hot auto causing the converter slip excessively.....I dunno, I'm not a mechanic? BTW, the time was managed on my last run, which was my 4th run ever down any dragstrip in my life.

I still reckon the weight is the biggest factor in the BA XR6 N/A. I think the BA XR6 N/A auto with 1/2 a tank of juice would tip in at near 1800kg. I know the specs say that the BA XT is approx 1700kg, but the BA XR6 N/A is most definately heavier. Add my 120kg frame in it (1800+120=1920) and I reckon you would need more than 160rwkw to get that sucker down the 1/4 in less than 15secs.

Cheers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,410 Posts
XR6 N/A Modded said:
My runs down the 1/4 were not clean that's for sure. My 60ft was just under 2.5 seconds on my best try, for some reason I just can't get out of the hole quick enough, I don't think I'm that bad of a driver and I'm not trying to make excuses but, my gearbox seems to be slipping.....a mechanic mate reckons I was probably stalling it up for too long before the launchs and had excess trany fliud circulating around in the hot auto causing the converter slip excessively.....I dunno, I'm not a mechanic? BTW, the time was managed on my last run, which was my 4th run ever down any dragstrip in my life.

I still reckon the weight is the biggest factor in the BA XR6 N/A. I think the BA XR6 N/A auto with 1/2 a tank of juice would tip in at near 1800kg. I know the specs say that the BA XT is approx 1700kg, but the BA XR6 N/A is most definately heavier. Add my 120kg frame in it (1800+120=1920) and I reckon you would need more than 160rwkw to get that sucker down the 1/4 in less than 15secs.

Cheers.
Mate with a 60 footer like that you've got much quicker times ahead.
 

·
BOFH
Joined
·
7,777 Posts
I agree, there is improvement to be had for sure. You have an easy 14.7 sitting there for the taking.
Its not the time that I'm concerned with though, its the MPH. It is a very good indicator of power and, regardless of the 60 foot time, still shows itself to be reasonably accruate.
An example from my own records. These are 2 runs I did on the same night a while back during the chip challenge.
Run 1.
60 ' 2.541
ET 16.242
MPH 87.53

Run 2.
60 ' 2.380
ET 15.942
MPH 88.06

As you can see, vastly different 60' times, over .3 of a difference in ET (in drag racing, without a car being changed, thats a hell of an improvement) however the MPH at the end of the track is only 0.5mph different. This just keeps takeing me back to the fact that 92mph...even 93mph, just doesnt add up to 180rwkw

Also, estimating 1900kg is way off. An admin on this site weighed his BA GT-P when he got it. Including himself and 2/3 a tank of fuel he got 1821kgs on a weighbridge. I'm sorry to tell you but your XR6 does not weigh close to a fully decked out GT-P. I think you'll find its a lot closer to 1800kg than 1900kg.
 
41 - 60 of 67 Posts
Top