COBB tuning Raptor tune

[FORZDA 1]

... its daunting, but the temptation of considerable gains w/ a simple tune is huge!

Yep, such it the case with modern forced induction. Just don't exceed the tiny turbo's turbine exhaust flow capability and everything is great!

 

[Thor2j]

@Thor2j
Ford and most car manufactures will essentially over build their cars if they're smart. If the motor and other components limits were 500hp and they sell the cars or trucks with 500 hp theres very little margin for error... possibility for a lot of cars to break, in turn a lot of warranty work for them to cover.
Example, you can throw twin turbos on a new mustang GT it'll make 1000+ hp on a stock motor. Ford sells the cars making about 460, yet the motor can take 1000+, however at that point you're definitely stressing the motor. Find a middle ground at around 700-800hp with a supercharger and the motor isn't being stressed, it'll be fine. The Cobb tune is adding power, but also being very conservative. No where near enough to stress the motor to the point of "premature wear".

My point is the minute you add more power it adds more stress. There is zero ways around this. Of course manufacturers build a margin, hopefully large. My simple point was added boost and timing will reduce the lifespan of a motor. Didnt say if it was 1% or 50%. Just stated that it will increase wear and tear. Sure adding the minimal power that Cobb adds wont cause it blow up anytime soon most likely but it WILL add wear and tear vs not having it. Internal heat is added theres no way around it without doing some major changes.

I appreciate you having a normal conversation unlike the other moron who over years on both this forum and the focus rs forum has proven that his intellect is in the bottom third proven by his very limit vocabulary and half brain ideas pulled straight out of his ass. My guess is his online engineering degree came from the same place his mail order bride did.

Theres a reason he is despised on both.

 

[FORZDA 1]

.....Theres a reason he is despised on both.

There is some validity to this sentence as the overwhelming majority of forum posters are fuckwits with whom I have lost all patience. I deal in facts where most like you deal in “feels”, so your entire point is invalid.

 

[FORZDA 1]

... My simple point was added boost and timing will reduce the lifespan of a motor...

You fuckwits should know that you cause more wear and "stress" on the engine within the first 5 to 15 minutes of cold (near freezing and below) starts than a 25% power increase at normal operating temps.

Maybe we should delve just a bit into the physics of the slight increase in perceived "stress" from more boost and timing, within the limits of about 25%. The result of "more power" is simply more cylinder pressure. Now the cylinder pressure obviously passes the load to the rod bearings which are isolated from the crankshaft by the oil film, so no actual contact ever occurs, except at cold startup.

If the engine oil quality is within specs and the temperature is within normal operating range, the oil provides the "bearing" surface to prevent the piston rings (top 2, not the oil scraper) from actually contacting the cylinder wall, so ZERO wear occurs. The top 1/4" or so at the very top of the stroke is where the cylinder wear occurs as the piston slows down to reverse direction and the oil has a more difficult time of isolating the ring-to-cylinder contact. Previous decades' oil and materials quality allowed much more wear to occur here and stock high-mileage (80-100K) engine would show significant wear at the cylinder tops and the camshafts would be worn to nubs with the engine needing a full overhaul.

The job of motor oil is to isolate the metals from each other, so if you're experiencing "reduced lifespan", then your oil or maintenance interval is to blame, not the 25% power boost.

These are FACTS, not feels.

 

[TXRaptor]

Well said!

 

[2ndRap]

You are the one that is completely clueless. Ask any engineer, or better anyone with any common sense, and they will tell you added stress equals premature wear.
If this were the case why wouldn't Ford just make a 500hp raptor. Would be a much better marketing tool. Hell why not 550hp, just turn the boost and timing ul. According to your brilliant logic it would last just as long. Man you are an idiot.

Talking about power out of context has no relation to long term reliability... I would honestly have reason to believe that Cobbs tunes could potentially be more conservative and better long term overall than ford OEM maps... if Cobb puts out maps that start slinging rods out of the sides of blocks they have a big long term issue... if ford does the same they warranty the first hundred, issue a re call and re flash all ecu's as they come through for service/ warranty. Just a small bump for Ford and a big problem for Cobb.

Fyi I will be leaving mine stock, im not convinced these trucks gain enough to justify a tune so I'm not going to attempt it as a trial. I also don't and never had any Cobb ots tunes but just speaking my opinion on the matter. If I had a Cobb AP for this truck your damn right I would flash there ots maps and never look back! Cobbs a great company that has long term reliability as a priority.

 

[melcam23]

I second that [emoji106]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Thor2j]

You fuckwits should know that you cause more wear and "stress" on the engine within the first 5 to 15 minutes of cold (near freezing and below) starts than a 25% power increase at normal operating temps.

Maybe we should delve just a bit into the physics of the slight increase in perceived "stress" from more boost and timing, within the limits of about 25%. The result of "more power" is simply more cylinder pressure. Now the cylinder pressure obviously passes the load to the rod bearings which are isolated from the crankshaft by the oil film, so no actual contact ever occurs, except at cold startup.

If the engine oil quality is within specs and the temperature is within normal operating range, the oil provides the "bearing" surface to prevent the piston rings (top 2, not the oil scraper) from actually contacting the cylinder wall, so ZERO wear occurs. The top 1/4" or so at the very top of the stroke is where the cylinder wear occurs as the piston slows down to reverse direction and the oil has a more difficult time of isolating the ring-to-cylinder contact. Previous decades' oil and materials quality allowed much more wear to occur here and stock high-mileage (80-100K) engine would show significant wear at the cylinder tops and the camshafts would be worn to nubs with the engine needing a full overhaul.

The job of motor oil is to isolate the metals from each other, so if you're experiencing "reduced lifespan", then your oil or maintenance interval is to blame, not the 25% power boost.

These are FACTS, not feels.

Cant wait until you run Ford. I'm tired of all these cars with less then 500 hp. When you are there they will all have 1000hp+ and never wear out. I cant wait. You are so smart.....Idoit

 

[FORZDA 1]

Cant wait until you run Ford. I'm tired of all these cars with less then 500 hp. When you are there they will all have 1000hp+ and never wear out. I cant wait. You are so smart.....Idoit

Enjoy your ignorance, for sure. Bless your heart, I know you can't help it. You know, with your cognition problems and all.

You may want to run spell check too, since you misspelled idiot...

 

[2ndRap]

Come on guys, this is all pety BS and nether side of this argument nor anyone else for that matter really knows the true answer to this bickering.

To each is there own... I may order a cobb just for the sake of a review!