Whipple Installed!

[JTredway]

Do you have an iPhone or Android? I think Google has still banned this from the Play Store unless it's back on again... I'll have to check.

I'm running Forscan Lite on both of my phones, personal is an Android and my work phone is an iPhone. You might have to use a downloader to sideload it as it does not appear to be in the appstore when I try to update it. I did some quick googling and found that they got removed, added back, and removed again.

I did find this on their website

Support Request

 

[Modman]

I'm running Forscan Lite on both of my phones, personal is an Android and my work phone is an iPhone. You might have to use a downloader to sideload it as it does not appear to be in the appstore when I try to update it. I did some quick googling and found that they got removed, added back, and removed again.

I did find this on their website

Support Request

I saw that as well. Neither link worked for me so I guess the Google environment has to be totally circumvented.

 

[JTredway]

I saw that as well. Neither link worked for me so I guess the Google environment has to be totally circumvented.

do you have developer mode turned on and allowing apps from unknown sources?
I used those links as part of my posting, granted I do have Forscan already on my phone, but the legacy link allowed me to update my FS.

 

[Modman]

do you have developer mode turned on and allowing apps from unknown sources?
I used those links as part of my posting, granted I do have Forscan already on my phone, but the legacy link allowed me to update my FS.

I did at one time as I side-loaded several other apps. I'll have to check and see if it flipped back at one of the updates...

 

[GT-SD]

I'm talking a bit out of my element since I'm not intimately familiar with the Whipple setup. Most modern s/c applications have a bypass valve so the airflow "bypasses" the blower under a set load threshold. Usually it's not rpm related. The one I had on my centrifugal s/c was triggered by vacuum - the throttle plate opens to a certain point and you get boost. Light loads, therefore higher vacuum, and you stay out of the boost.

This was before VCT and ETB calibrations so it may be more complicated nowadays...

Modman is correct. There is a valve that is opened under vacuum situation.

Once the throttle body opens enough to drop the vacuum off the line, then the valve shuts allowing boost.

When the valve is open, the intake to the "pump" is just recirculating any excess from the exhaust and no real boost or load is being put on the engine. As soon as the throttle body opens to a certain % based on throttle demand and the vacuum on the valve nears atmosphere, the valve closes and forces all the air going to the engine to be pumped in through the screws.

 

[GT-SD]

I gather, from your explanation, that the increase in power at anything less than high RPM, is only because of a different throttle body and injectors. Is that what you are saying? Of course, manifold pressure above atmospheric, matched with more fuel is what gives the big hp gain. It seems there must be new fueling map too.

The throttle body position is opened based on throttle position and demand, not necessarily RPM. Yes, the higher the RPM the more volume of air can go through, but the Whipple is a positive displacement pump, so it builds boost at lower RPM's, but just cannot pump the "volume" which limits it somewhat until you get to the higher RPM. However, the kit is well balanced so you can get 6-7psi of boost at 2k RPMS.

The best way to describe it might be like this. On a stock 7.3L, if you go over an overpass doing say...75MPH and you want to maintain that speed, then the stock engine might downshift to 9th or 8th gear depending on headwind, temp, incline etc. With the Whipple, this does not happen. It stays in 10th and you see the boost gauge get near atmosphere (no boost). The 7.3L holds its gear and RPM, just pulls more power from having more air and fuel available. As soon as you crest, it goes back to -7inHG (or whatever). In driving through the TX Hill Country empty, I put my cruise control on 75 - 80 and it never leaves 10th. Sure on a few of the steeper inclines it pulls 4 - 5psi of boost, but the extra power is just there staying in 10th the entire time. Very similar to how my 6.7L would run.

The Whipple Calibration optimizes the fueling map, AFR, Transmission pressures/shifting to the changes in parameters. I'm fairly certain that the flaring issue is a 10R140 characteristic/build issue with Ford and not necessarily a calibration issue.

 

[GT-SD]

When you mention it being under boost or not under boost, is this determined by a gauge, sound, or, feel?

It brings up more questions I forgot to ask Whipple. Does the computer know the amount of boost? (I think it would.) Is that data available to the driver?

Our Ecoboost Mustang as a display setting that lets you see boost or vacuum and how much. I like it.

I have a gauge. There is a separate thread on here, but below is my install.

 

[GT-SD]

It brings up more questions I forgot to ask Whipple. Does the computer know the amount of boost? (I think it would.) Is that data available to the driver?

Yes and you can datalog it using the Whipple Tomahawk tool. The issue is the Ford F-Series IPM does not have a setting configured to take advantage of it like the mustang. I did add the "boost" gauge for Diesel trucks and it may even work, however it only goes from 0 - 40 and given my observations with the boost gauge, you rarely get above 3 - 4 PSI, and only for a short amount of time so the resolution isn't good enough to see movement. Installing a boost gauge is the best method.

 

[GT-SD]

Dumb question as I'm not a mechanic... anyone know why there isn't a turbo charger product being made by like Garrett, for instance?

ProCharger and Whipple are the two main players that have a "mass" produced solution in kit format. It would be cool to have a Turbocharger option, but those installs can be a little more complicated with the turbo oil lines, exhaust manifold modifications, etc. My guess would be that the amount of modifications required would drive the cost up to a point there wouldn't be a large market. Who knows, there is a lot of people producing parts/kits for the 7.3L, so something might pop up on the market.

 

[Raspy]

The throttle body position is opened based on throttle position and demand, not necessarily RPM. Yes, the higher the RPM the more volume of air can go through, but the Whipple is a positive displacement pump, so it builds boost at lower RPM's, but just cannot pump the "volume" which limits it somewhat until you get to the higher RPM. However, the kit is well balanced so you can get 6-7psi of boost at 2k RPMS.

The best way to describe it might be like this. On a stock 7.3L, if you go over an overpass doing say...75MPH and you want to maintain that speed, then the stock engine might downshift to 9th or 8th gear depending on headwind, temp, incline etc. With the Whipple, this does not happen. It stays in 10th and you see the boost gauge get near atmosphere (no boost). The 7.3L holds its gear and RPM, just pulls more power from having more air and fuel available. As soon as you crest, it goes back to -7inHG (or whatever). In driving through the TX Hill Country empty, I put my cruise control on 75 - 80 and it never leaves 10th. Sure on a few of the steeper inclines it pulls 4 - 5psi of boost, but the extra power is just there staying in 10th the entire time. Very similar to how my 6.7L would run.

The Whipple Calibration optimizes the fueling map, AFR, Transmission pressures/shifting to the changes in parameters. I'm fairly certain that the flaring issue is a 10R140 characteristic/build issue with Ford and not necessarily a calibration issue.

Maybe you meant to say "Blower bypass valve " instead of "throttle body". It seems the blower bypass valve would stay open (bypassing) until the manifold vacuum got close enough to atmospheric that boost was needed. Or nearly full throttle. Then there might be a smooth transition where the bypass was only partially open and boost would begin to build. Then under some conditions of full throttle and low enough manifold vacuum (closest to atmospheric) the valve would be fully closed and all intake air would go through the blower and into the engine without bypassing. This could also be used to limit the boost level if boost became high enough to cause a problem, rather than just selecting pulley sizes to limit it. Does it build boost rapidly if you just floor it from an idle, like at a signal? That would be when the manifold vacuum was lowest, or closest to atmospheric, and there would be no need for bypassing.

I've felt that the stock transmission programming downshifted too early on grades, especially when in cruise control. But I have also found that if I lock it into a gear, say 10th, when it wants to downshift, it has a hard time pulling that grade. So, I concluded that Ford got it mostly right, but I don't like it shifting earlier in cruise. Adding boost instead of downshifting would be nice, more like a diesel, and would run at a lower RPM. But of course, the tradeoff is having to run high octane gas, just for the occasional boost conditions. I still want to see some longer term, higher mileage trucks with the blowers and make sure they are not blowing head gaskets. Brian Wolfe has had good luck keeping the engines together under high power output, and I have no doubt the lower end is extremely tough with its forged crank, large bearings and six bolt mains. And the cooling system seems to be completely adequate as I have never seen mine above normal, in hot weather while towing on grades. Very well done! But there is no doubt the bore spacing is very close with absolute minimal gasket surface between the bores. I talked to Brian about this very thing and he agreed. If I put a Whipple on mine, I would also want to keep the original style water pump with the bigger impeller. It seems to me that the only advantage of the smaller pump would be slightly lower parasitic losses. I wonder if the Whipple engine computer programming changes the oil pump flow curve too? It might be a good idea to add more oil to the squirters under boosted load.

I'm still thinking about the Megazilla with its 617 naturally aspirated HP. It also has beefed up internal parts, like forged pistons and, I think, upgraded rods. Not sure on all the differences. It would be fun to compare the HP/torque curves of a Whipple Godzilla and a Megazilla. The Godzilla would probably have higher torque down low, but at some point the Mega probably has higher HP. What is the claimed HP with the Whipple setup?

As far as flaring is concerned, if the flaring stops when you reset or shut off adaptive learning, it tells me the learning is seeking a softer and softer shift and is going too far. Meaning something like too low line pressure. If it does not flare after being reset, it must be going to a default starting setting that is a safe place for it to work at until it learns. Seems to me if we just disable the learning, the problem might not come back. After resetting the learning program, have you noticed the shifts are more abrupt?

 

[Raspy]

ProCharger and Whipple are the two main players that have a "mass" produced solution in kit format. It would be cool to have a Turbocharger option, but those installs can be a little more complicated with the turbo oil lines, exhaust manifold modifications, etc. My guess would be that the amount of modifications required would drive the cost up to a point there wouldn't be a large market. Who knows, there is a lot of people producing parts/kits for the 7.3L, so something might pop up on the market.

It would be interesting to have a side by side comparison of a Roots type blower vs a turbo, as far as throttle response, horsepower, drivability and fuel mileage. But either way, turbocharging a big V8, under the hood of a pickup, is a real packaging problem. Ford's twin turbo Ecoboost engines make some sense in this regard, instead of the convoluted piping up to a single turbo. But you still have to have an intercooler. The belt driven blower, mounted in the valley, really does make sense for a simple kit and packaging.

But whatever system is used, the conventional V8, such as the 7.3, can only be boosted so far with a blower or a turbo because of the preignition problem. And either a belt driven blower or a turbo can take these engines to their practical limit. Pressurized intake air means higher compression pressure and more heat. Engines with fuel already in the air during the compression stroke are limited by preignition problems on conventional pump gas. Direct injection is an attempt to limit this problem, but the 7.3 has port injection, so the fuel is in the cylinder during compression. The Ecoboost engines try to work around the shortcomings of a blown conventional gas engine with direct injection. Pre-ignition can't happen with a diesel because the fuel never enters the combustion chamber until it is time to fire. The injection event is the timing. So diesels can be boosted to around two atmospheres and work fine. A turbo on the diesel can double the horsepower, or more, and still be reliable and driveable on low grade fuel. Bottom line: The 7.3 can be boosted and work well, but there are limits and premium fuel must be used at anything over stock HP. It wasn't designed to be heavily boosted.

 

[ScottK]

You all left out what the heck you are talking about. Whipple is a medical procedure. How does that apply to a truck?

 

[Modman]

Does it build boost rapidly if you just floor it from an idle, like at a signal? That would be when the manifold vacuum was lowest, or closest to atmospheric, and there would be no need for bypassing.

Again, I'll let @GT-SD respond with his personal experience but share my thoughts. The positive displacement blowers I have driven build boost almost instantly, unlike a centrifugal that develops boost as a function of rpm. Both have their place depending on application. I went with the latter for my track application since the resulting power curve better replicated the unboosted curve. Just amplified. Also, the bypass valve is not as effective, or really intended, as a turbo wastegate at controlling boost. It's typically binary in operation. I mentioned in my previous post that I haven't kept up with the tech lately but could see the application of a DC controlled valve (much like a small ETB) being employed. I don't think there are a lot of benefits to be gained which would make the retention of the simpler vacuum control understandable.

 

[GT-SD]

Again, I'll let @GT-SD respond with his personal experience but share my thoughts.

Yes, it provides 6-7-8psi boost instantly when you give aggressive acceleration.

 

[GT-SD]

But whatever system is used, the conventional V8, such as the 7.3, can only be boosted so far with a blower or a turbo because of the preignition problem.

You are correct, there is a limit to the amount of boost it can handle on pump fuel. The 7.3L has knock sensors that the Whipple calibration monitors and will adjust fueling and timing depending on the read (including Manifold Temp, press, etc). The base calibration is for 91 Octane, but if you use 93, it will adjust timing/fueling accordingly giving slightly more power. I use quality (Top Tier) 93 and in all of my data logging rarely have I seen the knock sensor come into play where it has started pulling timing. Either I am not pushing the truck hard enough, or that indicates the fuel is good and that the calibration is conservative and is not pushing the power limits.

 

[Raspy]

You are correct, there is a limit to the amount of boost it can handle on pump fuel. The 7.3L has knock sensors that the Whipple calibration monitors and will adjust fueling and timing depending on the read (including Manifold Temp, press, etc). The base calibration is for 91 Octane, but if you use 93, it will adjust timing/fueling accordingly giving slightly more power. I use quality (Top Tier) 93 and in all of my data logging rarely have I seen the knock sensor come into play where it has started pulling timing. Either I am not pushing the truck hard enough, or that indicates the fuel is good and that the calibration is conservative and is not pushing the power limits.

Do you have a way to monitor mixture? A good strategy for knock is to lower the combustion chamber temp by richening the mixture. Retarding the ignition timing probably does something similar by sending a higher percentage of the heat out the exhaust.

 

[Raspy]

Again, I'll let @GT-SD respond with his personal experience but share my thoughts. The positive displacement blowers I have driven build boost almost instantly, unlike a centrifugal that develops boost as a function of rpm. Both have their place depending on application. I went with the latter for my track application since the resulting power curve better replicated the unboosted curve. Just amplified. Also, the bypass valve is not as effective, or really intended, as a turbo wastegate at controlling boost. It's typically binary in operation. I mentioned in my previous post that I haven't kept up with the tech lately but could see the application of a DC controlled valve (much like a small ETB) being employed. I don't think there are a lot of benefits to be gained which would make the retention of the simpler vacuum control understandable.

Yes, turbos are famous for having to spool up to be build boost, rather than a positive displacement pump just ramming air in right now. I'm just thinking out loud here, but it seems a gradual closing of the bypass would increase drivability when the engine is under heavy load, like pulling a grade in 10th, for instance. If there was a certain vacuum level that simply closed the bypass, it seems there would be a big sudden surge of power, instead of a gradual increase like can be had with the throttle. A smooth transition would just appear to be a more powerful engine, rather than a suddenly boosted engine. Funny that you mention how a turbo will tend to replicate the unboosted power curve. Is that because you had a racing cam that gave a narrow upper RPM power band? My experience with turbos has mainly been on different generations of Cummins engines. Early ones came on like a peaky two stroke. Later ones were just more and more power the harder they were pushed. In the 60s Studebaker was running the Paxton centrifugal superchargers on a couple of models of their cars. Those seem like they would be very much RPM related and harder to bypass in order to save parasitic losses. More like a turbo. Detroit two stroke diesels often had turbos feeding the roots blowers. I was curious about that as a kid and was told, (right or wrong) that the turbo relieved the parasitic load of the roots blower. An engineer friend once told me about an engine he knew of, (I've never found information on it) that had reciprocating pistons, but no power output shaft. Its purpose was to create exhaust that drove a turbo and the power was taken from the spinning turbo shaft. As a 14 year old kid, trying to figure out how to make engines more efficient, I was stuck on breathing efficiency and specifically, the exhaust side. Turbos were some kind of magic I could not understand. The simple notion of getting a little more air in, provides a lot more power out, but having to overcome a restrictive exhaust to do it, was hard to grasp. The forces and the heat seems like big problems for efficiency. So I wrote to Clessy Cummins and asked him about that question. He actually wrote back, but gave me a very unsatisfactory answer. Essentially, it works. No physics beyond that. Too bad.

 

[Modman]

Funny that you mention how a turbo will tend to replicate the unboosted power curve.

I mentioned a centrifugal s/c, not a turbo. Depending on the trim and match of a turbo they can act similarly to a centrifugal s/c or a positive displacement s/c. Depends on the application and constraints of the architecture.

Paxton centrifugal superchargers on a couple of models of their cars. Those seem like they would be very much RPM related and harder to bypass in order to save parasitic losses

Yes. Mine was a Vortech, but same idea...

 

[Modman]

Turbos were some kind of magic I could not understand. The simple notion of getting a little more air in, provides a lot more power out, but having to overcome a restrictive exhaust to do it, was hard to grasp

There is some restriction but don't think of it like a pump directly restricting the airflow. The turbine wheel is using the thermal energy in the gas to spin the shaft, not the physical force of the gas passing by the wheel. That is why the shaft can reach 200,000+ rpm (for instance, in the EcoBoost applications) at low engine speed. It's not just the volumetric flow of gas, it's how much energy is contained. That is based more on engine load.

The turbine wheel is attached to a common shaft that drives the compressor wheel. The design of the wheel can be adjusted depending on the airflow/boost curve desired.

I was curious about that as a kid and was told, (right or wrong) that the turbo relieved the parasitic load of the roots blower

Correct, superchargers require a mechanical connection to the engine to rotate. Most commonly a crankshaft driven belt. That adds parasitic loss (fmep, friction) depending on the size of the supercharger being used. The turbo shaft rotates independent of the mechanical rotation of the engine and doesn't add parasitic loss.

There are losses incurred with a turbo but in general a supercharger has a higher total loss due to the added fmep.

 

[VB!]

Yes and you can datalog it using the Whipple Tomahawk tool. The issue is the Ford F-Series IPM does not have a setting configured to take advantage of it like the mustang. I did add the "boost" gauge for Diesel trucks and it may even work, however it only goes from 0 - 40 and given my observations with the boost gauge, you rarely get above 3 - 4 PSI, and only for a short amount of time so the resolution isn't good enough to see movement. Installing a boost gauge is the best method.

I'll ask them if this is still the case for the '23-'23 trucks. They noted that the entire engine management system was different for '23 and they were starting from scratch with the programing. They have a '23 Super Duty and '24 Mustang getting going through the programing process right now so the boost question should be easy enough to answer.