COBB Accessport Confirmed for 2.3L Bronco + PandaTuned Custom Tunes Coming SOON!

[Ducati1098]

Low side from Ford have been amazing for years. We hit their limit around 550WHP on the RS with E50. Surge Tank and we are now on our way. DI from Nostrum keeps improving and giving us more headroom as well which means there will be some monster 2.3 engines running all DI soon over 700WHP which we are excited about as well!

Yep. I made 500WHP on my 2.7 with pump E85, still on the stock low side pump and I know the 2.3 uses the same pump. So It'll be more than enough for most people.

Sponsored

 

[DrewBronc21]

I thought the big HP 2.3 EB mustangs, RS, etc needed a built motor after like 450ish whp. I remember them actually doing 2.0 liter built motors.

Damn, 500 whp in my two door 7mt Badlands would be pretty insane. My Cobb AP Tuned STi is close to that. Never had it in a manual 4x4 though

 

[Dave2020GT]

I thought the big HP 2.3 EB mustangs, RS, etc needed a built motor after like 450ish whp. I remember them actually doing 2.0 liter built motors.

Damn, 500 whp in my two door 7mt Badlands would be pretty insane. My Cobb AP Tuned STi is close to that. Never had it in a manual 4x4 though

There is a reason they earned the moniker of "Ecobooms!!"

 

[CarmeloS]

There is a reason they earned the moniker of "Ecobooms!!"

Weren't the Ecobooms running stock intercoolers and charge pipes?

No wonder they went Boom!

 

[Dave2020GT]

Weren't the Ecobooms running stock intercoolers and charge pipes?

No wonder they went Boom!

Its more than just that. I am talking about the smaller 1.5 to 2.3 motors. The V6s not so much. As far as the newer MPC 2.3 litre motor I don't know. The larger intercoolers and charge pipes just let the cars don't go into heat soak as quick.

 

[CarmeloS]

Its more than just that. I am talking about the smaller 1.5 to 2.3 motors. The V6s not so much. As far as the newer MPC 2.3 litre motor I don't know. The larger intercoolers and charge pipes just let the cars don't go into heat soak as quick.

I remember reading this years ago and sticking with it

How bad did ford Sandbag the Ecoboost?

• Jun 9, 2016

According to my former Engineering professor, alot! I grabbed my stock parts out of the basement and headed to his house for some beers and BBQ (rained out unfortunately so we got some pizza) and Had a look at some things in the garage.

First is the much maligned intercooler. The Stock unit in his exact words "Cheap garbage but at least it's Cheap!"
___
His notes.
"Far too small and light for a gasoline turbo application, might be ok on a Small Diesel, No where near enough thermal mass, Tube and fin is terrible for Air to Air applications, but it's cheaper to manufacture."

So we pulled the end tanks off, Not hard by the way and he mused, "I'll give those 5 years before they leak."

"Terrible flow, the Air has to make a sharp 90 degree turn here, creating a high pressure area blocking flow, the volume and design of the endtanks do not provide adequate flow to the top, the botom 3rd is doing the most work here. Plastic is a good insulator so will not provide any real thermal mass either."

"Nearly half of the area is blocked, fin density and surface area are minuscule, the only advantage is strength for weight here, It's like they used a design for a water to air heat exchanger and built it out of aluminum. This is a major restriction, and one that does not provide an airspeed increase like a venturi."

We talked about the detrimental effects on an engine and he said, "if you were sitting in traffic for like 10 minutes on a warm day, the road opened up and you were to give it gas, this would actually heat up your air charge and could cause DET if you had low quality fuel, I don’t think you could pull timing fast enough".

I told him about the blown motors on this forum and he asked me how many had stock intercoolers. As far as I'm aware no engines have blown with upgraded ones! His exact words “I would expect a cooler of this size and design to support 250 hp at relatively low boost. At 310 and 18 psi on a small turbine like this, this is a danger to the engine”.

“The Primary concern developing this part was cost, nothing else, not even performance. The thing that really jumps are the end tanks, unless they are used in something else that is highly space limited, they could have been designed much better at no additional cost or complexity to manufacture. I bet Ford produces these at around $10-12 a unit, they could have made it much better at 0 cost unless they had tons of these cores and end tanks lying around,” (as far as I can tell this intercooler is Mustang specific) and the could have nearly doubled the efficiency by spending 25 cents a car more, but that is a bean counter issue, well over $1million in profits over the lifespan of the car. The only way this passed hot weather certification was by avoiding boost.”

----------

The second thing he noted was the turbo is too small for an engine this size, “2.3 liters at WOT and high RPM, this turbo will be too far off of its efficiency Island to make good power, It just doesn’t have the flow, It will overboost in the mid-range and be putting out lots of heat at the top, a bit more turbo would not hurt reaction time much, a few hundred rpm at most but the benefits in all around efficiency and power would be well worth it, the choked up turbo combined with the junk intercooler, means you need a pretty aggressive anti knock strategy to protect the engine Seeing as these are specific to the platform, it would have been a no cost option to size this turbo appropriately, this is deliberate, when I was working at (he asked me not to say but it was a Global Manufacturer with a division in Germany) we would be forced by management to use a more expensive, smaller turbo to keep a predefined distance from a larger motor. One of the reasons I left was having a beancounter tell me my engine was making too much power, make me redesign and de tune it to run like garbage and complain when I went overbudget .”

-----------------

Interestingly enough, the part he found most laughable was the downpipe.
“I know this well, when we had to make a crap turbo not overboost or were forced to run a larger setup because they were already in place we’d mess with the downpipe. It doesn’t cost much to do and we felt ok because any car guy with a welder could make his own plus you can actually get some emissions benefits by using an oversized cat and slowing down the exhaust flow”
“1st no need to neck down the turbine outlet from 3 inches to 2.5, From a manufacturing perspective the cost in negligible, It helps the turbo spin up a bit faster which is nice and helps maintain some post turbine back pressure which will limit boost if you don’t have enough wastegate.”

“With no clearance problems, there is no need for an ‘S’ here, those extra bends take time and material which adds cost. It will slow down the exhaust before the cat which is good for emissions. The top of the cat is good, the smooth transition tries to evenly spread the exhaust gas over the full area.
http://i300.photobucket.com/albums/nn17/gman-r33/General stuff/20151207_181157_zpshxhe56n7.jpg[/IMG]

“A big fat Cat slows down the car nicely as well as allowing you to use a cheaper substrate like ceraminc, the end is nearly flat, promoting a high pressure area that keeps gas in the cat longer,

 

[zyglyrox]

I can’t wait, taxes are in the wings to get filed and my return is going right to a tune

 

[DrewBronc21]

Any update on when the Cobb Accessport will be available?

 

[abeabeabe]

For those with 2021-2024 2.3L Bronco, would it be possible to add/integrate the factory port injection from the 25+ 2.3 Bronco? Not sure if that requires any CANbus stuff to make work on the oem ECU. I have a 2022 and it would be awesome to have that capability of adding the port injection system from Ford. This port injection system seems to add a ton of fueling headroom on the newest-gen 2.3L Mustang.

 

[MWILD]

For those with 2021-2024 2.3L Bronco, would it be possible to add/integrate the factory port injection from the 25+ 2.3 Bronco? Not sure if that requires any CANbus stuff to make work on the oem ECU. I have a 2022 and it would be awesome to have that capability of adding the port injection system from Ford. This port injection system seems to add a ton of fueling headroom on the newest-gen 2.3L Mustang.

What is the goal? Are you trying to run full E85?

 

[abeabeabe]

What is the goal? Are you trying to run full E85?

Yes. I rather not do a mix E30 or E50. I rather do full E85 for ease of not mixing. Although an upgraded HPFP would achieve full E85, the PI system would help the intake valves to stay cleaner.

 

[MWILD]

Yes. I rather not do a mix E30 or E50. I rather do full E85 for ease of not mixing. Although an upgraded HPFP would achieve full E85, the PI system would help the intake valves to stay cleaner.

I know there are PI systems out there for the Ecoboost Mustang, so I image they could be made to work. Might be a better question for a ecoboost tuner, TBH.

That said, I'd personally just run a catch can and upgrade the HPFP. I may end up going this route, since I also hate mixing fuels

 

[redone17]

Any updates on 2025+?

 

[CarmeloS]

Can't wait for results

 

[DrewBronc21]

Where is this ?

Sponsored