tweecerrt

gorgo · Post by **gorgo** » Fri Jul 06, 2007 12:44 pm

ok almost ready to put my 93 together and was wondering if the tweecer rt was worth while to purchase. i have a 98 exployer motor, c4 trans and a mustang harness and a a9l computer. i know that it isnt going to work perfect the first time i run it (it would be nice). is the cost outwayed by the benifit of the tunner and software?

cgrey8 · Post by **cgrey8** » Sun Jul 08, 2007 12:28 pm

As an owner of a TwEECer RT, you couldn't take it away from me. It's helped me to dial things in far closer than the stock tune would do...and the learning experience has been awesome.

In your case though, there's a catch. Unless you are using a standard EEC like a Mustang EEC, then your chances of getting lots of support and control over the tune is much lower. The good news is there are lots of really great BIN hackers on the EECtuning.org website that could probably work with you to get more stuff exposed in the BIN than what's currently exposed in CalEdit (the POS software that comes with the TwEECer).

If you do get a TwEECer, don't waste your time with the base version. Get the RT version. Next, plan on another $55 for EEC Analyzer software. This software is written by another guy on the forum and is WELL worth the money. You can't really do tuning without the ability to "see" the data that's in the datalog (the datalog as made by CalEdit/CalCon is in database format, not flat-file text). If you can swing another $45, you can get BinaryEditor (developed by the same guy that wrote EEC Analyzer). This software will let you communicate to the TwEECer without CalEdit/CalCon. The catch is, I don't think there's a strategy for any of the Explorer EECs. But with a person using it (and paying for it), perhaps that would be incentive to develop one. Email Clint Garrity, the developer, at eecanalyzer@charter.net for more details OR you could ask this question on the eectuning.org forum.

gorgo · Post by **gorgo** » Mon Jul 09, 2007 12:57 am

cgray8,
you might have missed that i am running a A9L on the exployer motor. i switch the exployer over to a tfi and changed the sensers. the only thing i have left is the injectors and the throdoul body and the mas.

cgrey8 · Post by **cgrey8** » Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:42 am

In that case, you WILL want a TwEECer otherwise you'll have lean tip-ins and cold-cranks that sputter the engine lean on crank.

One of the things I learned doing the same EXACT thing (A9L on Explorer injectors) is the Explorers use EV6 generation 19lb injectors with EV1 generation connectors up to about 98. In 99, they went to white 17lb EV6 injectors that have the std EV6 connector. Point is the 19lb EV6 injectors act differently than 302 Mustang era EV1 19lb injectors which cause a fair incompatibility resulting in some driveability issues. You can either replace the injectors and run the A9L without much trouble (the less-expensive option). However getting the TwEECer will allow you to:

Fix injector incompatibility
tweak in a good bit of other stuff like more timing at WOT (for more power) and less timing at idle so takeoffs are smoother (that's only important if you are running a manual)
Turn off the Termactor controls in the A9L since Explorers don't have smog pumps
Do more granular upgrades such as replacing the stock Mustang 55mm MAF with a larger one without too much concern about what injector size it was "calibrated" for

As for getting the most out of the TwEECer, there is a fairly steep learning curve that takes a diligent person a good 6 months to learn (I've been tweakin' well over a year and there are still things I admit I don't know about tuning). When you get the TwEECer, you'll be able to do MAF tweaks and some simple, straight forward stuff right off the bat. But to do the "advanced" things, you'll need to spend quite a bit of time on the forum wrapping your mind around the things they discuss on there or you'll be trial-n-error tweaking. None of it is rocket science. Most of everything there is learning and understanding conditions and scenarios that engines can get themselves into, then learning how to combat those conditions with the controls available in the EEC.

At this point some people think...why does it require all that just to make HP? It doesn't. Making MAX HP is easy. You don't even need a custom tune. All you need for injected power is a true power plant, big injectors to support it, a MAF tuned to the injectors (to fool the computer so it doesn't "need" a tune), twisting the dizzy, and fuel pressure boosting. All that can be quite easily on a dyno with no tune what-so-ever. But you may not want to drive the beast home if all it knows how to do right is WOT. The tune gets you the max power AND driveability AND if it's important to you, the emissions (assuming that's possible with your setup).

Bottom line, to get the most out of a TwEECer RT, it helps if you are a tinkerer. You have to WANT to learn about how the EEC does what it does. Otherwise, you'll just get frustrated with it. So if you are looking for a plug-n-play solution, the TwEECer isn't for you.

MalcolmV8 · Post by **MalcolmV8** » Mon Jul 09, 2007 12:13 pm

Gorgo, get the truck running first and see how you like it and then see if you still want the tweecer. I have a similar setup. A 2000 Explorer motor, stock mustang 19lb injectors, mustang fuel rail, distributor etc.
I'm using the A9P since I have an auto. I have an A9L too but have not tried it on my blue truck.
Anyhow with the stock 55mm mass air my truck runs fine with no tweecer.

When I first got it running I could tell it had a stumble right as I pulled off for the first time in the morning cold. After about a few days the ECC learned its way around it and it runs fun. As Chris pointed out though with a manual tranny this would be noticeable in the mornings those few days. Having an auto masks it almost completely. I heard it but did not feel it.

I had problems running my 73mm C&L mass air which showed itself in the winter with a stumbling idle problem because the computer went open loop because of what it thought was a lean problem. I switched back to a stock Mustang 55mm mass air and it runs fine.

Of course you can always get more out of your setup with a tweecer but it may work for you without one. I wish I had the cash to get a tweecer but since my truck runs just fine I can't justify the cost.

Malcolm

cgrey8 · Post by **cgrey8** » Mon Jul 09, 2007 2:06 pm

I've run both an A9P and A9L in my truck. Both have the stumbling cold start without a tune. The only time it didn't stumble is cranking warm. After getting a TwEECer and datalogging the cranks both cold and hot, I could see the problem was still there when the engine was hot, it was just being handled more gracefully than when cold.

The good news is the truck was at least driveable on the stock tune, even if it had some issues. Believe it or not, the most annoying problem was not the cold-start sputter. It was the hard takeoffs in 1st gear in traffic. The EEC has the ability to control idle both via the IAC and timing. My Explorer motor idles best around 18Â° advance. However the bottom of the spark tables is around 28Â°. So what would happen is the engine would be idling with timing around 18Â° and just as I'm letting out on the clutch, the EEC would see the neutral switch change state and transition from idle-spark strategy to drive-spark strategy. This caused a surge of power right as the clutch engages in 1st gear...and it was quite annoying. For any passenger, it felt like I didn't know how to drive a stick. After it caught eye that this was the problem, I dropped my timing tables down to around 18 in the RPM/Loads of idle and now takeoffs are nice-n-smooth with none of that jerky foolishness. Again, had this been an automatic, this wouldn't have been an issue since you idle "in gear" and torque converters do tend to absorb those kinds of issues at low RPMs.

Generically speaking it seems the GT40p heads don't need nearly the advance the E7TE heads needed. My engine at mid-throttle used to ping at mid throttle using stock A9L spark values AND premium gas. So what I did was backed off timing in these RPM/Loads in the tune. The stock spark for WOT was a bit conservative (for both GT40p heads and E7 heads). I'd heard of people advancing Mustang motors at the dizzy an add'l 6-8Â° above the base 10Â° before pinging...pretty much standard without a tune is to advance things 4Â°. Of course with a tuning device, you leave it at 10Â° and tweak in any advance. At WOT, I got a good 2-4Â° more out of even my heads (higher RPMs took more than the lower RPMs did).

Another tidbit...until I got the TwEECer, I too ran the 55mm stock MAF out of necessity. With the tune, I run a 73mm C&L that might have improved performance a little...but to be honest, I can't say it really did. What I can tell happened is my MAF readings stabilized out @WOT as compared to the 55mm stock sensor. In actuality the 55mm MAF is perfectly sized to a stock Explorer motor's abilities. However what I would see at WOT is air spikes right at tip-in shifts that would run the voltage momentarily up to 4.8-5v (stabilized WOT was around 4.3-4.4v). After I got the C&L installed, those spikes were smoothed out considerably. It still spikes, but only by .1v, not by .4v.

The TwEECer has also been quite convenient in pinpointing a number of little issues I've had with the truck since just by giving me a visual of what is and isn't working. Early on after the V8 installation, it helped me find a ground problem I had that was causing my HEGOs to not switch and thus running my truck WAY too rich as a result. It also gave me some valuable data here recently when my truck was intermittently cutting out. From the datalogs, I could see what was happening. The values in the log weren't as useful as knowing that the EEC was working during the failure so I knew I wasn't dealing with a problem in the EEC or with any of the sensor/controls. I think I narrowed it down to a bad connection on spade connectors going into my MSD unit. After re-seating those spade connectors, the truck hasn't acted up since. I'm crossing my fingers that was the problem.

My point is, the TwEECer has been quite helpful to me. But I have to agree with Malcolm, they are a lot of money. And if the issues are livable for you using the stock tune, then it's not justifiable. However if you are a tinkerer of technology, the TwEECer will certainly satisfy any tinkering desires you may have. I to this day still datalog almost every one of my drives in my truck and I still mess with the tune here and there just to see what happens.

And I'll end by saying this...even if your engine runs fine on a stock tune, if you plan to make big mods to your engine in the near future that might require a tuning device (i.e. supercharger, stroker, etc), you'll want to get some "flight-time" with a working tune so you know what a working tune looks like. That way, you can practice dialing it in to make it a better tune. The exercise of analyzing the datalogs and getting familiar with tweaking will make tweaking your future engine mods much faster and much less of a guessing-game since a lot of the learning curve will be behind you at that point.

gorgo · Post by **gorgo** » Mon Jul 09, 2007 10:12 pm

isnt the exployer tb and maf bigger than a stock mustang that the A9L was running? if so will i have problems with this? also would it be better to swap out the injector for the old style 19lbers. i can pick up a set for 5 bucks apiece at the pick a part. if i dont quite bying parts my wifes going to make me sleep in this thing. when it comes down to it right now i only have about 2000 into it and i got a complete motor and 8.8 tact loc for 1500 plus a whole lot of exployer parts to sell off.

cgrey8 · Post by **cgrey8** » Tue Jul 10, 2007 4:43 am

Yes it is, and technically yes you would want to re-tune that (there's a procedure for doing this). But it's not that much difference to really throw things. Believe me, the effects the larger TB has on the tune is minimal compared to the differences in the injectors. I'd recommend you replace them. If I had it to do over again, I would replace mine. But to be honest, I'm kind of glad I kept them so it would "talk" me into getting the tuner and getting the experience.

87sc302 · Post by **87sc302** » Tue Jul 10, 2007 9:17 pm

Hey
You guys make my 650 holley cold start sound very simple. Just kidding!

But I did pick up a 95 5.0 compete it is setting in my garage so keep up the work I will need the info eventually.

gorgo · Post by **gorgo** » Tue Jul 10, 2007 10:38 pm

thanks for all the info cgrey8 and for malcolm for getting this site started. without all this great info i would not be able to do this swap (using the fuel injection instead of a carb). any idea how much over the stock exployer hp using the A9L and no fan i might be looking at? i know that the fan is around 10 to 15 more plus with the different tune from the A9L verses the exployer eec?

cgrey8 · Post by **cgrey8** » Wed Jul 11, 2007 4:45 am

Since I haven't run my engine with and without the mech fan, I can't say for sure. But gut feeling is the fan was worth about 5hp.

The A9L EEC does give some gain over the Explorer EEC since the Explorers were designed to nearly guarantee no detonation and smooth driving, where the A9L is much more focused on performance than emissions, smooth transitions, and all that. But again, I didn't run the Explorer EEC then convert to the A9L so I can't say how much gain was there either. What I can say is there's at least another 15 horses the A9L leaves on the table that you can get out with a tuner WITHOUTH sacrificing driveability. With a modified engine, there's far more than that waiting to be picked up with DIY tuning.

And I, like you, have really enjoyed this site and the others like it that have helped me when I needed it.