TCCoA Forums banner

1 - 20 of 35 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
61 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
While looking through a very cool magazine, Ford Builder, I read a article about the Lincoln MKR concept. I thought ''sweet car, sweet motor, build it!!". The one part about the MKR that really caught my eye was the twin force turbo system. 265HP with good mileage, then twin turbo madness on demand 415HP.
Is the twinforce system really true. Can turbos be on demand? what would you have to have in order to twin force a 4.6L, if you catch my drift? I still want mileage for college, but power is good too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,639 Posts
you would have to run a electronic wastegate to bleed of the exhaust and its got to be a big one
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,055 Posts
ohhhhh ho ho!

Sure you can make a system like that...





with a lot of money.

Turbos CAN be changed on demand, using what's called Variable Vane Technology (VVT), which changes the vane angle of the turbos if I recall correctly.
The thing is, getting the car to know when "DEMAND" is...
Like use the 415hp ECU map under WOT but the stock ECU map under partial throttle?

Really the best option is to PI swap the darn car already...
If you're REALLY after mileage, perform a 5-spd swap and PI or 5.0L swap (using the M5RE from the supercoupe with supercoupe clutchbits) and mod the 5.0L, while using a very low gearset such as 2.97 gears... but for optimal power/mileage I suggest investing in an aluminum PI motor (-90lbs) aluminum MKVIII Lower Control Arms (-30lbs), aluminum driveshaft (-5lbs), aluminum differential carrier from MK VIII (-25lbs), Non-Power seats (-65lbs)... Then go and scrape out the sound deadening(-15lbs)... remove that weird brace behind the rear seat (-10lbs)...

Assuming the car started out weighing 3750lbs, and you lose all that weight, you can get the car down to 3510lbs without ANY real sacrifices to comfort...
that will not only boost gas mileage by like 4 city mpg, but you are also running 240lbs lighter (that's equivalent to 24rwhp)...

If you really go crazy with weight reduction you might go as low as 2800...

back to my original point,
the turbos-on-demand thing will probably be significantly expensive...

bottom line, for a budget college kid (who is not an engineering student capable of doing hands-on work) this will be VERY expensive.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,639 Posts
variable geometry is for creating a faster spool up on the turbo not shuting it down
btw turbos are basically boost on demand lol the car runs NA and sees great gas milage under part throttle and cruise
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
680 Posts
Don't Remove the Brace

Then go and scrape out the sound deadening(-15lbs)... remove that weird brace behind the rear seat (-10lbs)...
The brace is structural support... I would recommend against removing it

- Stephen
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,055 Posts
The brace is structural support... I would recommend against removing it

- Stephen
But if you're going for absolute weight reduction that'd do it.
I got that from the "Getting Weight Off Your Bird" tech article ON THIS SITE.

I figured it's there as a brace of some kind, so that's why I've left mine there, I'm probably going to get f/r shock tower braces as well.

anyhow, what they're saying about turbos being boost on demand as it is, that's true... it's only under nearly full throttle the little boost solenoid closes and it provides pressure on the intake...

-Ghost
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
680 Posts
Ghost, I agree that it would remove some weight if one were putting his or her car on the ultimate weight loss plan, but the benefits of the 5lbs does not outweigh the risk of the car breaking under a hard turn. It is part of the structural support with the rear window (at least I am sure the window is with the cougars). Even though the site may say to remove it, I always try to remember that sometimes articles are inaccurate and outdated, and I would feel that the general consensus would be to keep the brace on. Then again, that is just my 2 cents.

- Stephen
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,639 Posts
i ditched that brace years and years ago and after so many hard turns everythings fine
 

·
Moderator, Iowa Chapter Director, Uber Luber, TCCo
Joined
·
8,978 Posts
But if you're going for absolute weight reduction that'd do it.
I got that from the "Getting Weight Off Your Bird" tech article ON THIS SITE.

I figured it's there as a brace of some kind, so that's why I've left mine there, I'm probably going to get f/r shock tower braces as well.

anyhow, what they're saying about turbos being boost on demand as it is, that's true... it's only under nearly full throttle the little boost solenoid closes and it provides pressure on the intake...

-Ghost
so would removing the k-member.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
680 Posts

·
Moderator, Iowa Chapter Director, Uber Luber, TCCo
Joined
·
8,978 Posts
actually, mine has managed to snap apart from the top mounting spots. I would assume that this is because my chassis is not braced beyond stock, and I have eibach springs. I take corners HARD sometimes and the stress probably fractured that weak sheet metal. If I were to fix it, I would make a new one out of 1/4" steel. It would act as a shock tower brace.
-Thomas
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,639 Posts
i agree that these cars dont have the best rigidness but removing that brace isnt going to make the difference if the body is going to twist that flimsy seat brace isnt going to stop that. The only way would to build subframe conectors and get fancy with x braces and such...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,656 Posts
do i hear a summer project? lol. i know racecougar has a steel or aluminum plate in place over that funky brace thing... maybe you should hit him up for deets. he also sells rear shock braces pretty decent.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
680 Posts
I agree that the brace is flimsy... and what Thomas said to do is a way to upgrade. The thing is, the forces that the brace feels is not in the flimsy direction; that is, it is similar to bending sheet metal. The piece bends easily one way, but can be incredibly strong in another. I haven't had mine break, and I have seen cougars with them removed and have been fine, I am just concerned about recommending something that has been proven to be a structural component of the car. . . back to the MKR? Sorry to sway topics

- Stephen
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,055 Posts
I need f/r shock tower braces, and a complete suspension rebuild

This is such a threadjack...

Anyhow, like I said, a power-on-demand kinda set up would be hard to do.
*I* think the best option would be a set of switch-on-the-fly tunes to use, one for low power, high economy, and one for low economy, high power... much like BMW's (M) button. Oh, I love the (M) button.

The closest answer would be to simply twinturbocharge the 4.6L, and use switch-on-the-fly tunes for variable rates of fuel consumption. This would require a VERY skilled tuner and definitely a dynomometer, forged internals and some other goodies...

IMHO I think all-aluminum suspension bits, add f/r shock tower braces, and a twin-turbocharger setup... that'd be the best thing... That would get you close to the MK-R, but the thing is, it is a newer vehicle with newer OEM technology, and pushing 15 year old equipment to do the same thing is hard.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
680 Posts
... but the thing is, it is a newer vehicle with newer OEM technology, and pushing 15 year old equipment to do the same thing is hard.

Very good point. That what sucks yet is the beauty of working on these cars. They have so much potential, but it sucks getting them to that point of happiness.

- Stephen
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,639 Posts
I need f/r shock tower braces, and a complete suspension rebuild

This is such a threadjack...

Anyhow, like I said, a power-on-demand kinda set up would be hard to do.
*I* think the best option would be a set of switch-on-the-fly tunes to use, one for low power, high economy, and one for low economy, high power... much like BMW's (M) button. Oh, I love the (M) button.

The closest answer would be to simply twinturbocharge the 4.6L, and use switch-on-the-fly tunes for variable rates of fuel consumption. This would require a VERY skilled tuner and definitely a dynomometer, forged internals and some other goodies...

IMHO I think all-aluminum suspension bits, add f/r shock tower braces, and a twin-turbocharger setup... that'd be the best thing... That would get you close to the MK-R, but the thing is, it is a newer vehicle with newer OEM technology, and pushing 15 year old equipment to do the same thing is hard.
like i had said before turbos are power on demand
 
1 - 20 of 35 Posts
Top