Jump to content

spark table compare

Recommended Posts

ive been looking at the stock spark maps for an fg xr6 turbo, f6 and sprint. ive reinterpolated all axis for the spark tables so that i can compare them, but im a bit confused as to the reasoning behind why ford have done what they have done...

as you can see, the xr6t has a far more aggressive spark map, compared to the f6, and the sprint is even more sedate in terms of spark calibration.

now when trying to build from a map and modify, which spark map is a better platform to work with? does the lower spark in some lower load cells help turbo spool as seen in the f6 and sprint?







Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, richardpalinkas said:

now when trying to build from a map and modify, which spark map is a better platform to work with?

That depends on your mods etc. I would choose whatever map came out of your car to start with as the low and medium load stuff will be where you want it. You also need to consider the corrections for iat, lambda etc and cam timing. As these aren't mentioned with the timing maps you posted you can't just say which one is better.


If I had to pick from the 3 maps you've posted I would go with the third one as that is the closest to the actual numbers most people modding a fairly stock vehicle will end up with on 98 octane. To fix the map slightly I'd copy the 1.8 load values and paste them to the 2.4 load values. Then I'd interpolate the vertical cells from 1.6 load to 2.4 load. It'll need some more fiddling but it'd be very close.

Before you did that you'd want to log it and see where the timing is and go from there. Then of course you need to log what happens afterwards and have some knock detection gear on hand so you don't hurt the motor.

35 minutes ago, richardpalinkas said:

does the lower spark in some lower load cells help turbo spool as seen in the f6 and sprint?

It depends on how much load you've got, but no. A load of 2.4 is roughly 20 to 24psi depending on where in the rev range it is. With the size of the motor and the size of a stock turbo you would want to have a larger timing number below the boost threshold to get it (the vehicle) making more power and moving quicker. If you had a giant turbo then you might decide to change the timing to get it spooling quicker but generally you don't do that.

As always, that's just my opinion. With all of that said you need to work this out yourself for the car in question, but it's a starting point.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cheers for that. My current setup is a pte6235, so slightly bigger then the f6 and sprint file. Currently is around the 400rwkw mark. Peak load around 2.2, but steady around 2.1 load


Also having said that, all spark adders and modifiers between all 3 maps are the same. Hence my confusion why such a drastic difference between all 3 BLK maps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



mainly this part of the map that i am trying to fine tune. as you can see if i were to work with the factory map for my vehicle, thats quite aggressive compared to the other 2, by far. 

the other 2 maps are a lot less aggressive but also have larger turbos, which i would have thought less heat, less chance of detonation, and more chance of advancing timing closer to mbt

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I dunno why they are so different.

You can follow where the engine moves through the map by watching the rpm, load and timing and then you can see how it responds to adding or removing timing down low/off boost.

Re your last post, I dunno what's up with the timing table. It looks like it isn't really suited for anything. It's got more timing where it should have less, and less timing where it should have more. Maybe it's set up to run a 100 shot while on e85 🤣

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't read everything in this thread (will do tomorrow) but something I can quickly add is the xr6 sprint runs much richer than other cals, this means more lambda adder will be applied and hence more total spark. I have also heard from an OEM calibrator that the sprint had to run that rich (0.68 from memory) as it would destroy the catalytic converters after a single 0-200kph run otherwise.

So knowing the above, a lot of what Ford do is for reliability and emissions. This means the maps might be far from optimal from a performance perspective if you have aftermarket exhausts, intercoolers etc.

I also heard there was a very small budget for the sprint calibration, so it did not get the love it needed. 12 degrees of timing at 2.2 load, 1500 rpm would ping its head off. 

@richardpalinkas it sounds like you want an optimal cal, the only way you are ever going to get this is on a load cell dyno holding it in steady state spending hours with knock ears on. Plenty of people will hire you a dyno for cheap if you find shops that have dynos un-utilised, I highly recommend you do this. It will be a great learning experience and you'll get the results you want. You won't be satisfied relying on knock sensors and road tuning as there is too much guess work and you simply cannot ever be confident in your work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Relying on the knock sensors will leave you 2 to 3 degrees short.

These motors are severely knock limited on 98 octane so it's very easy to find peak power by listening to the engine.

Nothing wrong with road tuning, it will get you the same result as a dyno, if you have a set of matrix goggles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

on the topic of timing maps, what is better. i already have my high load borderline knock timing pretty good, but regarding blk lambda correction, would it be better to leave it 0 or reapply the lambda correction table, and adjust the borderline knock table (as in minus at given load and commanded lambda the relevant spark adder) to suit, so that the spark will be optimised for the lamda correction values? or is it a 6 to one half dozen to the other situation?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would appear that it doesn't matter but there are so many tables linked together, that changing one by zeroing it out can affect many others. For this reason I leave it alone and also there is too much stuffing around with the timing map to get the same result.

But at then end of the day you're tuning the car, not the pcm. If the car is running right, correct afr and timing and still has the factory fail-safes working how you want them, then however you choose do it is ok. That's my opinion on things anyway. :)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...