Forum Discussion
- VeebyesExplorer IIIt might be a sign of old age but I am of the opinion that if it runs fine, leave it alone.
In developing an engine millions are spent, by people who know a whole lot more than this backyard mechanic, on creating an engine that has the right balance between performance, reliability & longevity.
If you want to go racing, start tinkering with performance at the expense of reliability & longevity. If you want it to last year after year give it the best treatment in frequent oil changes using the best filters & keep up with regular preventative maintenance. - pianotunaNomad IIIMex,
I've increased my tire height and it did make a small improvement. The best part was very little tail dragging on entrances to gas stations. - MEXICOWANDERERExplorerThe last energy crunch had the cost of gasoline doubling in short order. I decided that something needed to be done. The vehicle was a C20 model Chevrolet pickup with the standard 350 CI engine. The transmission was a granny 1st gear 4 speed.
Crane Cams in Florida claimed they developed an "Economy Camshaft" for the 350.
So I purchased the cam and new hydraulic valve lifters. I did an "in frame" overhaul with 70K miles. The heads were completely gone through.
Bottom line was a reduction in power with zero gain in economy.
Now before you get your dander up, read on...
Disgusted, I purchased a brand new OEM cam and lifter set from Chevrolet parts.
The power returned and the gas mileage never changed.
End of reinventing the wheel engine wise.
I changed the differential gearset to an automatic transmission ratio. From 4:10 to 3:70
That bought mileage from a flat 13 to 15.5 mpg. And yes, the speedometer gear was changed.
My grand experiment with the engine utterly failed.
A later radical upgrade with an LPG only engine worked however. - dodge_guyExplorer II
Chum lee wrote:
Somehow the "experts" who swear by "chip tuning" never seem to connect future failed emission tests, broken exhaust manifold studs/bolts, cracked exhaust manifolds, premature catalytic converter failures, burned exhaust valves, cracked cylinder heads, excessive oil consumption (because of burned valve guide seals) with their economic "magic" of chip tuning.
Aaaaawwww. Such an inconvenient truth. Yeah, . . . . . the engineers at Ford have no idea what they are doing.
Chum lee
All your little failures happen without tuning anything,
I also can’t remember the last time someone had an issue with a failed valve seal.
Cracked cylinder head? Seriously?
Catalytic converter failures? Happens all the time on stock vehicles.
Oil consumption because of a tune? That one doesn’t add up!
And yes, driving an F53 with the stock generic tune I can tell you there is a lot to be desired from it.
As far as the engineers/designers go……don’t get me started on what I have to repair/replace because of what an engineer thought was a great idea! 3 threads per spark plug hole on a V-10 is one of them! Too small of exhaust studs is yet another great engineering design! Need I go on! - pianotunaNomad IIIThanks to all who opined.
My decision is to leave things as they are. I'm at 121,000 miles. One mass flow air sensor has been the only mechanical failure. All is well.
I don't stomp on anything. However the OEM brakes "eat" rotors as they overheat and warp. I'm on my third set.
The high cost of fuel will curtail long trips--so my RV may never see Florida again (6000 miles round trip). - Chum_leeExplorerSomehow the "experts" who swear by "chip tuning" never seem to connect future failed emission tests, broken exhaust manifold studs/bolts, cracked exhaust manifolds, premature catalytic converter failures, burned exhaust valves, cracked cylinder heads, excessive oil consumption (because of burned valve guide seals) with their economic "magic" of chip tuning.
Aaaaawwww. Such an inconvenient truth. Yeah, . . . . . the engineers at Ford have no idea what they are doing.
Chum lee - Desert_CaptainExplorer III
dodge guy wrote:
Desert Captain wrote:
dodge guy wrote:
As usual the people that have never used a tuner know more than the people that have used it and can tell you the real before and after differences.
On the other hand the folks that plop down serious bucks for a chip or tuner think the chip tuner folks know more about their vehicle than the manufacturer... Just sayin.
:R
Even I can tell from driving my Excursion and now my MH that they don’t have the customers best interest at hand. They make a one size fits all tune, they go into everything from pickups, box trucks, dump trucks and bread trucks as well as delivery trucks. They are all loaded to different weights. Mostly empty. Where a MH is built and is mostly loaded all the time. So the performance in an empty box truck is far different than that of a loaded MH.
Oh, the I can tell from driving my Excursion and now my MH that they don’t have the customers best interest at hand argument...seriously??? :h
Since you obviously missed it I will reprint Gdetrailer's previous post. You might want to read it, you could learn a lot...
Then there is the ones who don't believe that the OEM has their "best interest" at heart and believe their "rights" to "roll smoke" have be trampled on..
OEMs like Ford, take a lot more than HP/TQ and mileage into account when they design, build and execute the design. That means a fine balancing act between HP/TQ/EMISSIONS and longevity.
Once you decide that you know all and more than the OEM knows and hack and rewrite the code you have now tossed all caution to the side and one or more items will end up being thrown into the waste can..
For what it is worth, Ford did a good job with the design of the V10, it can be capable of more HP/TQ, but consider a few things.
Once you move to the Super Duty platforms Ford does intentionally "derate" the engines and drive train. It is done for a purpose and not to be a fun buzz kill.
The idea to derate is to save and protect the engine and drive train under industrial continuous heavy duty use. In other words the duty cycle increases as you derate.
If I remember correctly Ford did an additional derate to F and E450 and heavier platforms and that is due to the commercial customer use aspects of those platforms in order to get the highest longevity with the least breakdowns. The engineers are not stupid..
Tuners remove the derating which in turn does indeed reduce the duty cycles, reducing it's over all life if you continually flog it..
If you tune it, it isn't like your gonna drive it like a little old lady who only drove it to church on Sundays.. No, your gonna stomp on it, a lot.
Ford did a lot of homework on the modular series and other than a few tarnishes like skimping on the sparkplug threads and a few yrs of a weak oil pump they are decent engines with very long service lives.. I had a 2003 5.4 for 16 yrs, when I sold it, there was just under 250,000 miles on the engine. That engine purred like a kitten all of it's life. Oil changes, one plug change and one set of COPs was all it needed while I owned it. Never used a drop of oil, never had cooling issues..
I just leave things bone stock and things tend to be very reliable for me.
Contrast that to my Dad who was constantly trying every little moonshiners tricks under the sun to make more power and get better mileage while towing.. Very often the hop up mods left him stranded somewhere along the road.. Higher compression (shaved heads, decked the block, different pistons), more aggressive cams, over advancing the stock timing settings.. Multiple times took the ends right off of sparkplugs, multiple under hood fires, burned up wiring harnesses and plug wires, boil overs and the worst was shattered holes right through 6 out of 8 pistons 10 hrs from home with a 5th wheel in tow..
Leave the tuners to the teeny boppers trying to prove they are better on main street and the midlife crisis guys trying to relive their lost youth again.
I could apologize for agreeing with him wholeheartedly but since he is right I'll pass. If the money you spent makes you happy, hooray. When your improvements overcome the basic laws of physics, even better. Run what you like and I'll do the same and as noted keeping things stock actually does work pretty well for me. YMMV.
:C - MEXICOWANDERERExplorer
- Lighter weight
- Smaller cross section
- Fewer cylinders
- Less liters
- Slower mph
- Fewer trips
Are the only things that reduced my anal pump agony.
Costco i.e. Marathon refined no alcohol gasoline is still $3.88 gallon down here. Cross the border northward and it's simply eyepopping.
And idiots give their car full fill throttle cutting in and out of traffic. dodge guy wrote:
Or maybe they have used a tuner and are sharing the results.
As usual the people that have never used a tuner know more than the people that have used it and can tell you the real before and after differences.- dodge_guyExplorer II
Desert Captain wrote:
dodge guy wrote:
As usual the people that have never used a tuner know more than the people that have used it and can tell you the real before and after differences.
On the other hand the folks that plop down serious bucks for a chip or tuner think the chip tuner folks know more about their vehicle than the manufacturer... Just sayin.
:R
Even I can tell from driving my Excursion and now my MH that they don’t have the customers best interest at hand. They make a one size fits all tune, they go into everything from pickups, box trucks, dump trucks and bread trucks as well as delivery trucks. They are all loaded to different weights. Mostly empty. Where a MH is built and is mostly loaded all the time. So the performance in an empty box truck is far different than that of a loaded MH.
About Technical Issues
Having RV issues? Connect with others who have been in your shoes.24,199 PostsLatest Activity: Feb 17, 2025