• Mustang Forums
  • 2005 - 2014 S-197 Mustang -General/Talk-

2014 V6 Sluggish

  • Thread starter Thread starter Captain_Jack
  • Start date Start date Sep 17, 2017
  • Tags Tags
    power tune

Captain_Jack

Member
Sep 13, 2017
11
4
13
Antelope Valley, CA
Sep 17, 2017
#1
  • Sep 17, 2017
  • #1
I've heard there are methods for tuning the 2014 V6 Cyclone so that the power band begins somewhere around 1 or 2k RPM instead of the stock 3k. Is this true? (I assume there is some truth to it because there is a forum prefix called "Digital Tuning"). Has anyone tried this? Are there some to stay away from? I don't want to make things worse.
 
Reactions: imp

imp

Mustang Master
Jul 13, 2017
531
105
83
Sep 17, 2017
#2
  • Sep 17, 2017
  • #2
Captain_Jack said:
I've heard there are methods for tuning the 2014 V6 Cyclone so that the power band begins somewhere around 1 or 2k RPM instead of the stock 3k. Is this true? (I assume there is some truth to it because there is a forum prefix called "Digital Tuning"). Has anyone tried this? Are there some to stay away from? I don't want to make things worse.
Click to expand...
Well, power band is a function of valve timing, I think, spark advance to some extent, I also think, but can't imagine how some kind of "tuning", meaning electronic rigmarole (?), might adjust power band by very much. I could be dead wrong, being a novice, though. My own experience lately has shown that sadly, I have indeed managed to make things worse, a story for another place & time. imp
 

Captain_Jack

Member
Sep 13, 2017
11
4
13
Antelope Valley, CA
Sep 17, 2017
#3
  • Sep 17, 2017
  • #3
imp said:
Well, power band is a function of valve timing, I think, spark advance to some extent, I also think, but can't imagine how some kind of "tuning", meaning electronic rigmarole (?), might adjust power band by very much. I could be dead wrong, being a novice, though. My own experience lately has shown that sadly, I have indeed managed to make things worse, a story for another place & time. imp
Click to expand...

I'm in the same boat with you imp. I've had my baby since February 2016. I've finally managed to get over being triggered by the guys who think a V6 isn't a real Mustang. A Mustang is a Mustang no matter what engine it has - and 305hp is respectable.
 
Reactions: imp

imp

Mustang Master
Jul 13, 2017
531
105
83
Sep 17, 2017
#4
  • Sep 17, 2017
  • #4
Captain_Jack said:
I'm in the same boat with you imp. I've had my baby since February 2016. I've finally managed to get over being triggered by the guys who think a V6 isn't a real Mustang. A Mustang is a Mustang no matter what engine it has - and 305hp is respectable.
Click to expand...
Most "experts" believe the V-8 will universally be dead soon. Thus old geezers like me will keep working with the "old iron". imp
 

Captain_Jack

Member
Sep 13, 2017
11
4
13
Antelope Valley, CA
Sep 17, 2017
#5
  • Sep 17, 2017
  • #5
I don't think the V8 will ever go away completely. The V6, however, is already gone as an option in the Mustang because of the Ecoboost 4-cyl. Personally, I don't like the Ecoboost because my experience with a 2015 Ecoboost was all eco and no boost. My V6 walked it like a dog.
 

imp

Mustang Master
Jul 13, 2017
531
105
83
Sep 17, 2017
#6
  • Sep 17, 2017
  • #6
Captain_Jack said:
I don't think the V8 will ever go away completely. The V6, however, is already gone as an option in the Mustang because of the Ecoboost 4-cyl. Personally, I don't like the Ecoboost because my experience with a 2015 Ecoboost was all eco and no boost. My V6 walked it like a dog.
Click to expand...
The problem with the big displacement engines is compliance with "CAFE", government-mandated minimum fuel economy requirements. imp
 

Captain_Jack

Member
Sep 13, 2017
11
4
13
Antelope Valley, CA
Sep 17, 2017
#7
  • Sep 17, 2017
  • #7
imp said:
The problem with the big displacement engines is compliance with "CAFE", government-mandated minimum fuel economy requirements. imp
Click to expand...

Don't I know it. That 's been going on since 1973. Honestly, it's bull and I hate it. Thank you Jimmy fricking Carter.
 
Reactions: imp

David Young

Active Member
Sep 16, 2012
182
18
38
Clinton, Tennessee
Sep 18, 2017
#8
  • Sep 18, 2017
  • #8
I haven't read or heard of what you are wanting to do but, what is your rear gear ratio? Should be a little white tag on the rear end pumpkin. Most v6 Mustangs came with a 2.73 rear gear ratio. It was so Ford could advertise "over 300 horsepower and over 30 miles per gallon". I ordered my 2011 v6 with the only option for the rear gearing of 3.31 ratio. It wasn't enough for me so I had my local Ford dealer change them to 3.73. The 3.73 gear ratio really woke my Mustang up. I also have long tube headers and other bolt on parts but, the problem your having sounds like you need a lower rear gear ratio. Just my opinion and good luck


Captain_Jack said:
I've heard there are methods for tuning the 2014 V6 Cyclone so that the power band begins somewhere around 1 or 2k RPM instead of the stock 3k. Is this true? (I assume there is some truth to it because there is a forum prefix called "Digital Tuning"). Has anyone tried this? Are there some to stay away from? I don't want to make things worse.
Click to expand...
 

Mustang5L5

That is…until I whipped out my Bissell
Mod Dude
Feb 18, 2001
43,174
17,872
224
Massachusetts
Sep 18, 2017
#9
  • Sep 18, 2017
  • #9
I also second changing the rear gear ratio out to something a little numerically shorter. It will get you into the power band sooner. Downside if those shifts will come on a lot quicker for you.
 
Reactions: imp

Captain_Jack

Member
Sep 13, 2017
11
4
13
Antelope Valley, CA
Sep 20, 2017
#10
  • Sep 20, 2017
  • #10
Okay, I'll bite. This thread got moved. Don't understand why. Are we not supposed to talk about our S197s anymore?
 

Captain_Jack

Member
Sep 13, 2017
11
4
13
Antelope Valley, CA
Sep 20, 2017
#11
  • Sep 20, 2017
  • #11
David Young said:
I haven't read or heard of what you are wanting to do but, what is your rear gear ratio? Should be a little white tag on the rear end pumpkin. Most v6 Mustangs came with a 2.73 rear gear ratio. It was so Ford could advertise "over 300 horsepower and over 30 miles per gallon". I ordered my 2011 v6 with the only option for the rear gearing of 3.31 ratio. It wasn't enough for me so I had my local Ford dealer change them to 3.73. The 3.73 gear ratio really woke my Mustang up. I also have long tube headers and other bolt on parts but, the problem your having sounds like you need a lower rear gear ratio. Just my opinion and good luck
Click to expand...

I'll assume that it's whatever Ford put in it at Flatrock. I haven't crawled under there yet. I'll do that next chance I get. Thing is, if you're changing gears like that don't you have to replace the axles as well? Sorry if I sound like a greenhorn...it's because I am.
 

Mustang5L5

That is…until I whipped out my Bissell
Mod Dude
Feb 18, 2001
43,174
17,872
224
Massachusetts
Sep 20, 2017
#12
  • Sep 20, 2017
  • #12
Captain_Jack said:
I'll assume that it's whatever Ford put in it at Flatrock. I haven't crawled under there yet. I'll do that next chance I get. Thing is, if you're changing gears like that don't you have to replace the axles as well? Sorry if I sound like a greenhorn...it's because I am.
Click to expand...

No. You are changing the ring and pinion so you don't replace the center diff unit or axles. You'll also need to recalibrate the speedometer. That can be done in Forscan.
 

Captain_Jack

Member
Sep 13, 2017
11
4
13
Antelope Valley, CA
Sep 20, 2017
#13
  • Sep 20, 2017
  • #13
David Young said:
I haven't read or heard of what you are wanting to do but, what is your rear gear ratio? Should be a little white tag on the rear end pumpkin. Most v6 Mustangs came with a 2.73 rear gear ratio. It was so Ford could advertise "over 300 horsepower and over 30 miles per gallon". I ordered my 2011 v6 with the only option for the rear gearing of 3.31 ratio. It wasn't enough for me so I had my local Ford dealer change them to 3.73. The 3.73 gear ratio really woke my Mustang up. I also have long tube headers and other bolt on parts but, the problem your having sounds like you need a lower rear gear ratio. Just my opinion and good luck
Click to expand...

Just out of curiosity, did you notice an appreciable decline in mileage for this kind of upgrade? Of course, if I'm going to so this, why not just make it a posi-trac rear end? Oh...
 

Mustang5L5

That is…until I whipped out my Bissell
Mod Dude
Feb 18, 2001
43,174
17,872
224
Massachusetts
Sep 20, 2017
#14
  • Sep 20, 2017
  • #14
Captain_Jack said:
Just out of curiosity, did you notice an appreciable decline in mileage for this kind of upgrade? Of course, if I'm going to so this, why not just make it a posi-trac rear end? Oh...
Click to expand...

Depends on how you drive.

And yes, if you are going to tear the rear apart, I'd add a limited slip. This will get expensive. Welcome to modifying cars
 
Reactions: imp

Captain_Jack

Member
Sep 13, 2017
11
4
13
Antelope Valley, CA
Sep 21, 2017
#15
  • Sep 21, 2017
  • #15
Mustang5L5 said:
Depends on how you drive.

And yes, if you are going to tear the rear apart, I'd add a limited slip. This will get expensive. Welcome to modifying cars
Click to expand...


Yeah, to have what you really want it's a foregone conclusion that expensive is the word of the day.
 

General karthief

wonder how much it would cost to ship you a pair
5 Year Member
Aug 25, 2016
27,844
10,519
203
polk county florida
Sep 23, 2017
#16
  • Sep 23, 2017
  • #16
Mustang5L5 said:
Depends on how you drive.

And yes, if you are going to tear the rear apart, I'd add a limited slip. This will get expensive. Welcome to modifying cars
Click to expand...
Are they not 8.8 rears? Have not looked but if so can't a diff from a gt slid in there for a low buck traction lock?
 
Reactions: imp

David Young

Active Member
Sep 16, 2012
182
18
38
Clinton, Tennessee
Oct 2, 2017
#17
  • Oct 2, 2017
  • #17
My display is showing 21.8 mpg at this moment, all in town. Our v6's 2011 + have the 8.8 posi rearend, the same as in the gt.
Captain_Jack said:
Just out of curiosity, did you notice an appreciable decline in mileage for this kind of upgrade? Of course, if I'm going to so this, why not just make it a posi-trac rear end? Oh...
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Place to Avoid: Jamison Auto Group in Gulfport, MS
  • D Durden
  • Oct 20, 2025
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
  • 2 3
Replies
45
Views
2K
1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk- Feb 4, 2026
nickyb
Engine 302 production block selection
  • FastDriver
  • May 19, 2024
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
  • 2 3
Replies
48
Views
7K
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Jul 1, 2025
FastDriver
Fresh Nitrous Tune
  • White Wolf
  • Jul 3, 2020
  • 2005 - 2014 Specific V6 Tech
Replies
2
Views
2K
2005 - 2014 Specific V6 Tech Jul 4, 2020
White Wolf
Holley Sniper review - The good, the bad, and learn from my frustration
  • LX Dave
  • Aug 14, 2020
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
34
Views
60K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Jun 2, 2026
Robin Rhino
R
A
Engine Turbo 5.0 Mustang bad misfire at WOT
  • AwxyMoron
  • Apr 3, 2021
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
  • 2 3
Replies
51
Views
9K
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech May 5, 2021
a91what
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 2005 - 2014 S-197 Mustang -General/Talk-
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Forums
  • What's new
  • Media
  • Resources
  • Contact
  • Sponsor
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?