The F119 power modification thread

Tim,

The fabrication has already been done, and everything is assembled. The only things we are gonna need is to swap your throttle linkage over, and your tbs. Almost everything else doesn't come out of the engine bay.

Are you gonna do a baseline with stock eproms and then your eproms? Oh and did you get an Ostrich for the Motronics?

Looking forward to seeing your dyno results.

 

Oh for sure Andy.

The stock air box needs to go, the corrugated tubing from the quarter windows needs replacing, the tubing from the maf to the tb needs to be better. In a nut shell the ENTIRE 348 intake system needs modifying.

 

YOu got to keep in mind with the duel plenums and intakes on both sides driving them. During a crosswind you will lean out one side of the motor as one side gets forced and the other side has negative air pressure. Ever see a semi trailer in crosswinds. thats whats happening in out motor also.

Best is to draw air in a single low pressure area or forced if we go to a faster ECU combo that can take advantage of the forced air.

 

Ernie, great video post. The way that engine revs at WOT is our holy grail.

We can make larger plenums providing more air. Ernie essentially joined the 2 halves together with some extra aluminum to really open up the volume. Group77racing created new custom plenums resembling the 360 intake. I added some volume with spacers, but it just isn't significant enough.

Another route, like Andy Hill, is to replace the whole thing with TB's like the 355. There are some pretty neat alternatives like the Weber replicas. You just need to make a mounting plate for them and decide on what injectors would want to use.

However, regardless of what you do, a modern ECU is going to be necessary unless the 2.7 can be customized. Which I have yet to see. It's been juiced, but no one so far I have seen has essentially custom programed chips for the Motronic to match someone engine modifications. Maybe we will get there.

 

As long as both sides of the engine share a common air source side to side disparity from the air intakes will have no effect on mixture. But you may very well have discovered why Maranello chose a single air filter housing. There is a great deal more engineering in the factory induction system than many people realize. I'll continue that thought in a later post.

 

Even with a single air filter housing I seen saltflat cars suffer from this, they pull air from a low pressure area, preferably to help the areo package. Just so many variables when you get t the lunatic fringe.
Single air box with large volume is plenty good for a street car.

 

Most interesting, although it's tough to see how low pressure in one intake stream would affect only one bank drawing from a common filter housing. Perhaps something in the design of the filter housing itself? If that's the case it only serves to support my point that the manufacturers go to great lengths to ensure a safe and effective design. That doesn't mean that there aren't gains to be had, but it's not like they're just lying around on the ground, waiting to be taken advantage of. As I'm fond of reminding the BMW guys who think they own The Ultimate Driving Machine, but keep wanting to improve it, if it's truly The Ultimate, what makes you think you can make it "more ultimate" by using parts ordered off the internet?

Ferrari employs very capable engineers to design their cars and they had/have access to far more tools and experience than we have, even today, so it takes more than backyard engineering to significantly improve on what they gave us. The bit about the effects of low pressure in the intake tract illustrates just how tricky it can be to out-engineer the factory.

 

Yet Ferrari still left at least 100hp on the table with the F119. Roughly 1/3 or at least 33% of the potential of the engine missing from the power out put. Any way you slice it that is a LOT of missing power.

 

I doubt that. The 348 in stock trim is already faster on track than the TR at least at the club racer level. Maybe the static numbers of the TR outshine but the on track performance does not. Remember that Joe public could not handle the tunability of the 348 suspension which resulted in factory shock changes, rear wheel ofsets, and changes in rear pickup points. In 348 challenge trim the early 348 chassis was not faster than the "improved" later subframe with new pickup points. But all those improvements made the lay driver feel better. Can you imagine adding 100hp and no traction control? Death is what comes to mind. The average driver just does not have the skill set.

 

Why do you think ferrari engineered a whole new 355 motor for 55hp rather than massage the 348 motor?

 

Has anybody looked at these products

They convert motronic to standalone for BMW's, might be possible for Ferrari

Jason

https://www.millerperformancecars.com/store/war-chip

 

Let's be honest here, "back in the day" Joe Public wasn't that interested in track lap times in the same way they are today. Back then, your "bar room/country club" bragging rights came from the 0~60mph time, your top speed, your power output, and in the USA - Your standing 1/4 mile time.

The last thing "Irvington hedly Smyth Hampton the third" wanted to find out was that his new flagship Testarossa out in the Country club car park was slower than the club owners lowly 348 TS that cost $40K less than his car!

TBH, the Testarossa was a flawed product that had similar issues to the early 348's - Namely a rear end that was a tad too eager too come round and have a look-see as to where you were heading if you lifted off or applied too much power mid-corner.

To make matters worse for the Testarossa, the centre of gravity of the engine/gearbox combo (especially on the early models), was frankly awful compared to the 348.

Part of the reason why a 348 is quicker around a track is because (and don't let the TR owners find out I've said this!) - They don't handle that well at the limit! There's too much weight, too high up, sat just behind the driver that doesn't really enjoy changing directions quickly.

Don't get Me wrong, I love the Testarossa (not the 512M version though!) - It probably has something to do with growing up in the "Miami Vice" era, but the TR is a bloody handful around a race track, it's not really what it was designed to do.

The original TR did 0~60mph in @ 5.2 secs., whilst the 348 managed 5.6secs. When the 348 GTB/GTS came out with an additional 20bhp, the 0~60mph time became 5.4secs.
So if the 348 had only been given an additional 75hp, it would outshine the TR quite easily.

Would a 375~400bhp 348 have been too much for owners? - Possibly, but as others have demonstrated, the 348 had the potential to produce a lot more than it did, and there's no way Ferrari were not aware of it. They weren't too afraid of offering the TR to the public, despite its "handling quirks" shall we say, so I can't see them worrying that much about a more powerful 348 from the point of view as to whether owners could handle it or not. (If that were the case, they would never have offered the 288 GTO or F40's to the public - ever!).

I seriously can't see the Ferrari bosses back then being comfortable with the baby of the family outshining their flagship model whilst carrying a similar looking design concept. From a corporate point of view, in the interest of sales it would make sense to hold the 348 back, otherwise you would lose sales of your more expensive model.

I could be totally wrong on all of this, and you could be totally right - It was just a thought at the end of the day! (And the World loves a good conspiracy theory! )

 

+1

With everything I have learned so far about the restricted power of the F119, I am coming to the same conclusion. One thing is for certain, LdM will NEVER admit to it, even if what we are speculating is in fact true.

 

Because Luca would have had too much egg on his face.

Think about his statement, "The worst car Ferrari has ever made". From what I have learned all the factory would have had to do was change the design of the intake, a different cam grind, bigger intake valves and better springs, swap the valve shimming for under valve followers, better injectors, a better tune with more revs, and *presto* +100hp. Plus after Enzo passed away he was the new sheriff in town. It's better for him to present a shiny new, state of the art diamond in the 355, that way his disparaging comment about the 348 could be validated. It makes far better sense to leave the 348 an uncut, unpolished, "ugly" little stone, than to shine and polish it up to be more brilliant than the current "crown jewel".

I have seen first hand how brilliant the 348 can shine when all polished up. I was truely astonished at the power the F119 produced once it was allowed to properly breath and rev. Heck you yourself know how well the 348 can handle with proper suspension tuning. The 348 is best kept secret in the Ferrari world. There is a treasure trove of unpolished 348s running around the world, just waiting to be shined up to the brilliant little diamonds that they are.

 

Ok, so an order of upgrade here would be a good idea. Most owners will go for the exhaust and cats first. That's just the way we all work. After that, would the best bet to be to figure out the ECU before diving head first in the the headers and the intake side? The last thing anyone would want to do is to harm their Ferrari motor. (Whether it's a turd or a diamond to be polished, it's still not cheap)

Also, if you're going to look into a new intake manifold, would moving to something like this http://s7d4.scene7.com/is/image/Turn5/102246?$prodpg640x480$ work better? Yes, it's Ford, but it's dual 65mm plates with a single mechanical throttle connection.

 

Ernie - this is a great thread - well done for setting it off. Its now taken as read that Ferrari suffocated the 348 at birth due to marketing strategies.

I guess that most of us would like to polish the engine a little so we can drive up the exhaust pipes of those pesky 355'5. At the same time most of us wouldn't want to spend a fortune getting the last few ponies. Given that my car already has test pipes and a Tubi, the next step of a 'low cost' upgrade must be the TB's and maybe the injectors you have sourced. After that it will get expensive (Headers, cams etc), so whats your best guess on how many ponies we will be getting out of our F119 at this level?

 

And that is precisely why (although I have an F355) I am replacing the ECU with one that I have complete authority over. I believe in large part that the 348 motor left a lot on the table with regards to power, it's capable of making more power, but you have to have a way to get at it -using the stock ECU just seems like too much of a fight when aftermarket ECU's are so cheap and capable these days (even if you have to pass smog).

Note for those in "smog states", first with a 348 there is no OBD-II non-sense to contend with, so as long as everything looks sorta factory you can sail under the radar. Even those like myself driving OBD-II cars could run the factory system in parallel with the aftermarket ECU, and, if done right, the factory ecu is unaware that it no longer controls the fuel and ignition signals. Why would you even continue to mess with the factory ECU?

 

Going to need to stop by one day to get your opinion how best to achieve this.

 

With out tuning, and running the bone stock mapping, my best pulls hit the power wall at 305 peak/hp and 234 peak torque to the hubs on a Dynapack dyno. But that peak horsepower is only very brief @ 7200rpm. My engine hits 300hp to the hubs at 6900rpm and carries the power flat all the way out to the rev limiter at 7750rpm. Assuming different drive train losses here are the theoretical crank horsepower numbers for my car:

-8% = 332hp
-10% = 339hp
-12% = 347hp
-15% = 359hp
-18% = 372hp

I have no idea what that translates to at the crank because we don't know exactly what the drive train loss is. The only real way to know for sure would be to bolt a F119 to and engine dyno, make some pulls, put it back into the car, then dyno on a chassis dyno. That would be the dead nuts for sure way to know.

On the same dyno, and the same day, darkkangel's spider (running Larini exhaust and hiflow cats) put down 286hp to the hubs. From the factory the spider is rated at 310hp. Darkkangel's 348 HAS GOT to be making more power than stock with the free flow muffler & cats. (BTW he now has a set of Fabspeed headers on his car, no dynos yet though). Anyway, Larini doesn't advertise any power numbers. I think it's safe to assume Jeff picked up +15hp from both the free-flow exhaust and hi-flow cats over stock. Then, a 355 with the following mods Tubi headers, Tubi exhaust, Tubi test pipes, Kreissieg Y-pipe, and Gruppe M intake made 311hp to the hubs on the same type dyno (dynapack), but at a different shop. So who knows exactly what the drive train loss actually is??????? Pick your poison.

The modifications I had on my car for that pull are as follows:

screen less MAF
ported throttle bodies
ported intake runners
radiused plenum throttle body port
hi-flow cats
free-flow exhaust
custom headers

All pulls where on stock spider/ss ecu mapping.

That is pretty much as far as you can go with modifications and remain on the stock tune. Anything above that and you must be able to tune for it. Even with the modifications I listed, though they do work on stock mapping, it should get retuned to take proper advantage of the modifications. That is the magic key to extracting all the power possible from the engine, tuning, tuning, tuning, tuning. Without the ability to tune, the modifications will hit a power wall, and even loose power (ask me how I know). Wanna get crazy with mods? My suggestion is make sure you can actively tune for them FIRST. Best bet is a modern stand alone ECU and new custom MilSpec wiring harness. Then modify to your heart's content. Otherwise you are stuck to the list of stock ecu mods.

 

The 458 Italia has a specific output of 124.88 hp/l. It took variable cam timing, variable intakes, an exhaust bypass, knock sensors to support a 12.5:1 compression ratio, direct injection, and a 9000 rpm redline to achieve that (I’m probably forgetting some other engine wizardry).

The immediate successor to our cars, the F355, produced 108.57 hp/liter (assuming it was a 380 hp engine), but it took 5 valves per cylinder, valve timing trickery, ITBs, an exhaust bypass, a compression increase to 11:1, and titanium connecting rods to support an 8500 rpm rev limit in order to achieve it.

The original F119D produced 88.24 hp/l (rising to 91.76 in the later cars thanks to nothing more than a different muffler and updated ECU mapping), but this was out of a simple, straightforward, robust 7500 rpm 4 valve V8 with absolutely no engine wizardry other than the valve between the two intake plenums. As an aside, the Euro-only GTB/GTS models produced 94.12 hp/l.

Contrasting the 348 with its contemporaries, the Euro spec Testarossa produced 78.89 hp/l (the US spec cars produced only 76.88 hp/l). In its ultimate form, the 512M produced 89.01 hp/l, so still under the specific output of the later F119Ds. It took until 1992 before Chevrolet got 300 hp out of the 5.7 liter engines in the standard C4 Corvette, achieving a lofty specific output of 52.63 hp/l (although the late LT5s in the ZR1 did manage 71.05 hp/l). Also in 1992, Porsche introduced the S4 version of the 928, powered by a 5.4 liter 4 valve V8 making 345 hp, for a specific output of 63.89 hp/l (note that the 928 had been in production for 15 years by that point so the car/engine were well into their development cycle). The original Honda/Acura NSX produced 90.7 hp/l, but it took VTEC and an 8000 rpm redline (again supported by Ti connecting rods) to get there. The later 3.2 liter cars managed 91.22 hp/l, again through the use of VTEC and 8000 rpm. So even in its ultimate form, the NSX did not achieve the specific output that Ferrari did with the later US 348s, which did not benefit from the wizardry used in the NSX engines.

The fact of the matter is that the F119 was at the very top of heap in its time. I would submit that Ferrari engineers did a magnificent job with that engine.

Oh, and for the F119 to pick up the 100 hp the engineers supposedly "left on the table", it would have to produce 117.65 hp/l. So you'll have to out-engineer the guys who designed the F430's engine, since it only made 112.33 hp/l in standard form and 116.98 hp/l in the Scuderia version.

 

Silly question, but would it be a case of buying a used harness like this one and then getting a company like MilSpec to copy it?

Then install the new ECU.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

You could I suppose.

Why not just ask Andy what he did?

Me, when the time comes, I'm gonna have one made custom on the car. I want it all contained in a single loom, with a sealed MilSpec barrel connector in the fire wall. That way I don't have to fool with threading the connector through the needle of a hole in the fire wall. Time to remove the engine? Unscrew it and drop the engine.

 

Only if you want to use the OE sensors in the OE locations.

 

I would leave the ecu in the engine bay. Less connectors the better IMO

 

Thanks.

Car is going in for a service in 2 weeks and have considered asking them to mod it. May postpone engine out till next year. I just want 401bhp.