Joorsh

I've heard it can muck up the process if you don't let the locks fully finish cycling before you turn it off. I've never been game to try it myself, but my recommendation is to let the car do it's thing before you turn it off when you're done

There's a lot of factory options for these cars (some of which are ludicrously expensive). There's also a few common parts between different years & models of Ford (like the fuse/relay box). My bet is it's meant to be empty, and will only get used with a particular combination of model and factory upgrade options. TL/DR: Don't worry about it. You'd be seeing fault codes & dash messages if there was an issue.

It's hilarious to see someone else actually write this down. It's EXACTLY what I think about almost every time I park my car. I'm not the only paranoid crazy on the planet, YAY! I guiltily admit that I have even been known to glance in their windows from time to time to check for booster seats/jackets that may indicate passengers. #obsessive

Yeah they do the run in one gear, but auto's smooth out the little bumps and spikes in the power curve thanks to the fluid. If you look at a manual power curve you'll see more little spikes and blips in it - everything from the engine is transferred directly to the wheels (unless your clutch is slipping).

Regarding the formula for oil temp, I've got a bit of a head for maths so I can probably work one out for you. But I don't quite understand how the raw data works. I see your formula has two inputs (A & B). I can understand one variable (Say, A) being the actual temperature data from the sensor as a hex number, but what's the other variable (B)? Providing I can get my head around that, what I'll need is: The figures that come straight off the EOT sensor (with no formula applied), and corresponding real/accurate temperature figures taken at the same time from something like forscan.Ideally, a pair of figures taken from cold start, every 5 or 10 degrees all the way up to 100 degrees or so.Then I should be able to plot a formula to cover that range and fairly accurately convert it.

Nice result! Is that auto or manual? I'm guessing auto from the smoothness of the power curve?

Well my first guess would be front bushes, but if you've definitely changed 100% of them then I'd be checking: Front ball joints and linkages aren't worn (you'll normally hear clunks in and out of driveways when these start to go though)Wheels/tires are correct width and offsetNo spacers are being usedWheel nuts (obvious but often overlooked) + sway bar linkages are all tightAnd the most obvious one (in case you haven't done it already) - get a good, laser wheel alignment done. I think most places like Bob Jane have those big nifty machines that do it well. It's a huge piece of kit: mirrors, reflectors and lasers everywhere, but it does a very accurate job of it. It'll be really obvious if the place has it or not. Bad alignment (I think it's the castor adjustment usually) can induce shocking tramline and wandering - I've felt that one first hand.Regarding worn ball joints and linkages - these aren't always obvious with just a visual inspection. Often you'll need to apply force with a pry bar to the linkage (or just yank on the top/bottom of the wheel while it's jacked up).

Does anyone here have a dyno chart they can post up showing manifold pressure on an FG XR6 with a standard turbo, standard tune, but an aftermarket dump pipe? It has to be a standard tune because you can bump up exhaust gasses by messing with the cam profiles and cause turbo's to spool earlier. I can then post my dyno chart up with the standard dump, and we'll get a concrete answer as to whether or not it helps the turbo spool any earlier (provided the dyno operator doesn't pre-load the hell out of the run).

I thought it was leaning-out that caused EGT's to spike, not running rich? Either way, cat's do eventually fall apart with age and repeated heat cycling, regardless of the temp they run at. Excessive heat probably isn't going to help the lifespan though. From what I understand they have an optimum operating temperature, so I think hotter is only better up to a point. Car manufacturers use all sorts of tricks to get heat into cats as fast as possible during cold start, but I believe that's just to get them into the temperature "sweet spot". Nuking them probably isn't going to make them run any better, but I may be wrong.

That Nizpro setup is crazy tidy, absolutely love it (and wish I could afford it). Penniless chumps like me will have to stick to hole saw's and Dremel's though I think

I took an M3 for a run around Wakefield Park that had both ceramic coated headers + heat wrap. The guy who owned the car swore by it, and after 3 laps at full noise I was able to touch the exhaust manifold with my bare fingers (albeit briefly). It certainly did an excellent job keeping heat out of the engine bay. As to how much better than just heat-wrapping (or using two layers of heat wrap) it was, I have no idea. There are certainly folks out there that do it though.

Regarding sucking in hot air, the standard airbox is on the cold side of the motor, so temps are quite tame in that area. I'd say that's probably why Mr Ford has the intake pipe crossing over like it does in the first place. As soon as you're doing more than 10kmph, cold air absolutely belts in around the airbox from the side of the radiator support panel and headlight surround. You're going to see virtually no intake difference. Further more, when it hits the turbo it'll be heated up massively, so even if there are a few degrees difference at the intake those differences will be negligible after is passes through (or very close to) the red-hot sections of a glowing turbo. Your intercooler is going to do all the work cooling it off afterwards. Yes there are turbo thermal efficiency gains to be had from slightly cooler intake temps pre-compression, but I honestly don't think we'd be talking more than 2-3 degrees difference here. When people talk about how much better their car performs on a cold day, that's largely due to the intercooler performing better, rather than the initial pre-turbo intake temps. They still play a part, but not nearly as much as the intercooler does. The other thing worth mentioning here is that I have actual, quantifiable performance gains from my intake mods. So regardless of any discussion, the evidence shows that it does work. I'm not sure what the real-world gains are from those aftermarket intakes, but I would assume (hope!) they would be slightly better than my approach. How much better than mine, I don't know. If anyone has any pre/post dyno figures I'd be very interested to see them. Just beware that manufacturers will often claim figures like "+45kw", but it will be on a car already making 300rwkw. To be fair in comparison we'd need to see it on a dead stock car like mine. The gains from intake and exhaust mods increase exponentially as you modify engines (in particular, increased gas velocity and volume). Regarding the sound, yeah there's a bit more induction noise with my mods - a very soft whistling sound. You don't really hear it in the cabin though. It's certainly not offensive, and nothing the boys in blue are going to even glance at. It's much, MUCH quieter than the Nissan RB & SR engines. It's even quieter than the Toyota 1J & 2J series, and those are pretty tame standard. As for looks, most of those aftermarket intakes look pretty damn good - there's definitely no competing with that. That KPM one in particular looks very nice, and there's no question that it would flow really well.

It may sound retarded but he's dead right, it works well. I've done a similar mod to the airbox on my last couple of cars, and I actually quantified it this time. A number of standard auto FG XR6T's have been run at the dyno at MRC and all make in the low 230rwkw range. I ran mine today and it made 241 rwkw. My only mods are on the intake - I removed the intake muffler and hacked up the airbox, otherwise it's dead stock (aside from the COP CHIP, obviously). Here's some pics of my butchered airbox if you want any ideas. I've chopped a few up in my time and this seems to be the best way (leaving the ribbing in tact):

I know this is a bit of a late reply, but I think there's some good arguments both for and against heat-wrapping. As far as I can tell the pro's are: It considerably lowers engine bay temps (especially when combined with a turbo beanie). Most of the data I've seen shows that it's actually more effective than performance coating in terms of insulation and heat transference.It's cheap and easy to do.It helps get the cat up to operating temp faster because it directly transfers more of the heat faster down the pipe.As for the cons: If you have any sort of oil leaks the heat-wrap can absorb the oil and then potentially start a fire.It can transfer excessive heat further down the exhaust (depending how far you heat-wrap and what is down there). I've heard stories of hand-brake levers and interior carpet melting from super-hot exhausts, but never actually seen this myself.As mentioned already, it can lead to cracked welds and pipes. I have actually seen this first hand - I had a stainless heat-wrapped dump pipe on one of my cars crack, but it was also revealed that the pipe probably wouldn't have cracked if thicker/better quality stainless was used.For my money, if you want a budget option and you have a well maintained car (no oil leaks) then heat wrapping is an acceptable thing to do. But if you can afford it, a good performance/ceramic coating is probably a better option. Even though the coating may be slightly less effective thermally, it's only a marginal difference and the safety/reliability benefits outweigh the efficiency loss.