• Mustang Forums
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
  • SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech

Superchips Tuner on 87 octane runs Better?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Arnolds97
  • Start date Start date Aug 31, 2010
A

Arnolds97

New Member
Jan 22, 2004
103
0
0
Liberty, MO
Aug 31, 2010
#1
  • Aug 31, 2010
  • #1
Have any of you experience a Superchips Maxtuner that when you select the 91 over the 87 octane tune that it does not seem to run as good. With the 91 it seems to have a little more throttle response but midrange up it does no seem to run as good or rev as smooth. Less power? I have switched it back and forth several times and thought I was crazy but I don't think so. It also get less mpg with the 91 level. Custom tune need most likely instead of the cookie cutter one . Anyone?

Mods to engine are just bolt ons - C&L Upper manny with a 75mm BBK T, BBK cold Air, No cats H pipe and Dynomax Super Turbos (Replaced Flowmaster 50's on the Flowmaster catback , March UD pulley. Rearend and trans are 4.10 gears with 5 speed.
 

wmburns

SN Certified Technician
Aug 14, 2009
5,892
514
204
Houston Texas
Sep 2, 2010
#2
  • Sep 2, 2010
  • #2
Some underdrive pulleys can cause problems the quality of the crank shaft possition (CKP) sensor signal. Especially piggy back style. This can show up as misfire or loss of power.

The CKP signal can also be affected when the damper bolt has not been torqued correctly.

Since the 91 octane tune makes more power by advancing the timing, it is possible that the 91 tune may be more affected by an unstable CKP signal. For example, the extra power being made by the 91 tune is being offset by additional misfires caused by a weaker CKP signal.
 
A

Arnolds97

New Member
Jan 22, 2004
103
0
0
Liberty, MO
Sep 5, 2010
#3
  • Sep 5, 2010
  • #3
March Pulley.

I have the one piece March Pulley SFI version which is really nice. It had Piggys on it and I took it off. I do not know how this could be a problem. The Bolt was torqued to spec too. No wobble and aligned perfect with all the other pulleys so I know it is seated. It runs good without a miss but just seems rough or something not as smooth.
 

trinity_gt

10 Year Member
Jan 31, 2003
3,125
81
99
Canada
Sep 5, 2010
#4
  • Sep 5, 2010
  • #4
Can you do some logs and see what the timing is doing for both tunes?

My suspicion would be that Superchips is simply trying to be too aggressive with the timing in their 91 tune. And you're right, a custom tune > cookie cutter any day.

Also, lose the IAT resistor. Trying to fool the PCM by lying to it about intake air temperature is only going to interfere with proper fuel and timing delivery. Ford spent thousands of hours of R&D and dyno time and incorporated all the physical and chemical properties of air into its calibration data and algorithms and they got it right. There's no benefit to making the PCM think the air is cooler than it actually is. If you want more fuel up top (e.g.) at WOT, use your tuner.
 

wmburns

SN Certified Technician
Aug 14, 2009
5,892
514
204
Houston Texas
Sep 5, 2010
#5
  • Sep 5, 2010
  • #5
trinity_gt said:
Can you do some logs and see what the timing is doing for both tunes?

Also, lose the IAT resistor. Trying to fool the PCM by lying to it about intake air temperature is only going to interfere with proper fuel and timing delivery. Ford spent thousands of hours of R&D and dyno time and incorporated all the physical and chemical properties of air into its calibration data and algorithms and they got it right. There's no benefit to making the PCM think the air is cooler than it actually is. If you want more fuel up top (e.g.) at WOT, use your tuner.
Click to expand...
Outstanding call/catch!

I went back and looked at the OP's sig and then saw the IAT resister. I agree 100%. An ODB2 PCM need accurate sensor data. It creates more problems trying to "lie" to the PCM. Better to create a tune from accurate data.

Also datalogging is a great idea to help narrow this down.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
Fox '87 GT can't get to stay running
  • spilly
  • Mar 29, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
27
Views
697
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Jun 20, 2026
spilly
S
0
01 running rich
  • 01_GT
  • Oct 6, 2020
  • SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech
Replies
3
Views
1K
SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech Nov 21, 2020
McFly2
N
SOLD Supercharged 1989 SSP Coupe $13,500 obo
  • notchlubber
  • Jul 17, 2018
  • Fox Body Mustangs For Sale (1979-93)
Replies
13
Views
13K
Fox Body Mustangs For Sale (1979-93) May 28, 2020
notchlubber
N
B
Digital Tuning Octane Question
  • blk97gt
  • Mar 3, 2013
  • SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech
Replies
4
Views
760
SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech Mar 4, 2013
sneaky98gt
New 5.0 87 Octane Vs. 93 - Overall Runs Better On 93?
  • ScottyG00GT
  • Sep 13, 2013
  • 2005 - 2014 S-197 Mustang -General/Talk-
Replies
13
Views
4K
2005 - 2014 S-197 Mustang -General/Talk- Oct 30, 2013
ScrewedUp
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
  • SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech
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?