SCT Tuner for 2007-2010 Edges/ Lincoln MKX

[Lincwitsync]

Hey Forum...

I have read about some who bought the tuner for the 3.7 liter in the newer models (EDGE/MKX).

 

Well... after my last daily driver (a last generation Pontiac GTO), I knew I had some adjusting to do.I had a Diablo tune on my GTO and loved its acceleration even more than factory. Just want to share my experience with my Tuner for my MKX.

 

During my test drive for the MKX, I realized that this vehicle is tuned for smooth take off and absolutely no throttle response (unless you floor it). I understand this is NOT a sports car, and I never expected it to be. However, there is nothing wrong with having more acceleration without needing to rev the piss out of your engine. Without haste, I purchased a tuner from SCT and tried a couple of the tunes available. I've used it for about a year now. For those who do not know, there are 3 canned tunes (general performance reflashes/tunes that are installed from the company) 87/91/93 octanes. There are even options to edit certain parameters within the canned tunes such as removing top speed, turning off traction control, increasing wide open throttle shift speed etc...I have used the 87 octane tune and recently switched to the 93 octane (gas prices have dropped since I originally purchased this thing...lol). Takes about 15-20 minutes to install program. The tuner can also be used as a trouble code scanner for your vehicle. COOL.

 

I chose to increase the shift speed by 2 mph for each gear, make it a little richer at wide open throttle, and remove speed governor.

 

What were the results... In 87 Octane Tune, the throttle response is more sensitive than the dull factory tune. Acceleration seems quicker and the exhaust note changes. It doesn't sound like a rice burner or anything, but there is more burble on start up and throatier sound on take off. Didn't notice much difference in fuel economy. I'd say negligible at best!

 

I reflashed my ECM to the 93 Octane Tune about 3 weeks ago. I have filled up with 93 Octane (BP brand) four times and I honestly feel greater change in throttle response versus the 87 Octane Tune. It's a night and day comparison over the factory tune. Exhaust note is about the same as the 87 Octane Tune. My MKX will spin wheels on take off (yes i have AWD) without giving full throttle. It's like the throttle response shifted to the 2500-4000 rpm range (which I actually prefer) versus a dead pedal until 3500-6000 rpm range. I kid you not! It still has the top end punch that I love, but there is so much more usable power down low. Ford has left much power on the table with this motor. I'm getting about .5-.7 mpg better in normal driving. My weekly commute is 70% highway/30% city. Nothing scientific, but for seat of the pants feel, this tuner was worth my money.

 

Has anyone else used this tuner? Let us hear your opinions.

 

Linc

Edited November 30, 2012 by Lincwitsync

[jayson]

Good info and thanks for the post...even If it was 7 months ago.

I have experienced similiar results as you have explained...my hypertech tuner on 87 octane (economy tune setting) gave me good gains at WOT yet not much below 70% foot pedal depression (it is programmed that way according to hypertech)...yours might be the same? Yet the tuner when on 93 octane performance setting gave me crazy/sick gains at WOT (felt like double the gains compared to the 87 octane tune) plus gave me a moderate bump in accelation during normal driving.

Hopefully my post will help you in understanding your vehicles response to tuning and/or you might be able to help me understand how and why my vehicle responded differently with 93 octane tune vs 87.

Hypertech did use a 2007 Edge 3.5 (FWD) on their dyno to create the tune yet I have it on my 2008 Taurus 3.5 (FWD)...works flawlessly. After I bought tuner and used it on both 87 & 93 octane tunes I called hypertech to ask some questions. I questioned their dyno gains hp/tq with vehicle stock vs 87 vs 93...on their website it shows a +15hp/+12tq gain with 87 octane vs stock (which I have no doubt to be true)...yet dyno gains with 93 octane vs stock were +17hp/+12 tq (+2hp/+0tq) and the hp/tq curves were near identical throughout entire rpm range from start to finish.

My question was why do I feel the car gained double the hp/tq with 93 vs stock compared to 87 tune vs stock. After questioning the tech I found that the 93 octane tune is actually tuned with 92 octane to be used for gas with 91-93 octane. According to what I have read this 92 tune makes the vehicle only have to adjust up or down 1 octane to be happy (depending on what state you live in, different states have different octane gas). After doing some thinking, researching and talking with some mechanics who work on predominately Fords I have concluded the following as the possible reasons of why dyno results being virtually the same between economy 87 tune & performance premium 91-93 tune (yet butt dyno says different):

1. My Hypothesis is that since their performance tune uses premium gas being 91-93 octane they used 91 octane gas (instead of 92 or 93) when they did the dyno testing for the hp/tq gains that were to be published on their website...to be ethical and honest and to avoid deceptive practices (BTW, they are a very honest/ethical company). Thus they may have simply published the minimum gains for using their performance tune when using 91 octane gas (not 92 or 93). If they had used 93 octane on dyno runs for their website numbers they would see higher gains...yet if someone buys their product & can only get 91 octane gas in their state...they would look like liars who overinflate results & be discredited in the publics eye...so they used 91 octane.

 

Furthermore, since it was tuned for 92 octane gas, by using 91 octane gas for website (published) gains it would result in less gains than actual because a drop in hp/tq would occur on the dyno until the vehicle adapts & adjusts to compensate...hp/tq would then bump up slightly once it did finally compensate (yet it could take some time to compensate).

 

2. Hypothesis that they averaged the hp/tq gains from their dyno testing of all 3 different types of gas (91,92 & 93)...each of which will work on their performance tune (which again is set for 92 octane gas). Therefore, if a person uses 93 octane gas in their vehicle they might see actual gains of say +20hp/+15TQ vs the published +17hp/+12TQ. Further, better 93 octane gains on dyno of say +22hp/+17TQ could have been possible if they (assuming they did not) allowed proper time for vehicle to compensate for changes in octane type between dyno runs...knock sensors cutting back on peak hp/tq (switching from 91 to 93 in back-to-back dyno runs).

 

3. Hypothesis that the Intake & exhaust is a restriction prohibiting further hp/tq gains on premium gas 91-93 octane vs 87 tune...yet you would experience further gains with 91-93 tune (vs 87 tune) if you have installed an aftermarket & less restrictive exhaust system inconjunction with a cold air intake...which I have done both. Therefore, one might gain +22hp/+17tq by using their 93 octane tune if they already have an exhaust & cold air intake...yet if you have the stock intake & exhaust you would only gain the published +17hp/+12tq as they state on their website. I honestly think this is why I felt double the hp/tq gains of 93 octane gas with their 91-93 octane tune vs 87 octane gas with their 87 octane economy tune (although, their dyno gains of the 2 tunes is virtually the same).

 

I feel hypothesis #3 is the biggest reason in my case (and supported by several articles I have read)...yet hypothesis #1 & #2 could also be factors to some degree.

 

Some this info could apply to your Edge 3.7L...as the 3.7L is very similiar to the 3.5L (I believe main difference being it is bored out a little with different cylinder heads...I could be wrong?).

 

BTW, Hypertech used on the 3.5L is awesome...I seriously thought I gained 30-40HP after installing (with 93 octane gas)...would highly recommend for anybody with 3.5L. I Don't know if they make it for the 3.7L Edge.

 

Anyone feel free to comment on the above as I do not have all the answers and would like to gain some more insight.

 

Jay