Factory Five Racing Forum banner

81 - 100 of 498 Posts

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
8,350 Posts
I'm guessing that one switch is the starting interlock and the other provides the "Speed Dial" function, to prevent stalling when rolling to a stop? Just an uneducated guess...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,369 Posts
Top switch, cruise control disable, prevent engine run away, over rev, such as pushing in the clutch while at full throttle?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,777 Posts
Discussion Starter #83
I'm guessing that one switch is the starting interlock and the other provides the "Speed Dial" function, to prevent stalling when rolling to a stop? Just an uneducated guess...
Top switch, cruise control disable, prevent engine run away, over rev, such as pushing in the clutch while at full throttle?
It would be great if they've programmed the speed dial requirement out somehow. Either with the clutch top switch or some other method. The Ford Racing tech guy I talked to actually also suggested the top switch may have something to do with not requiring the speed dial. But he admitted he didn't know that for sure. Only guessing. The information in the instructions is pretty limited about both.

"The switches translate the clutch pedal position to the PCM. The bottom travel switch also acts as a starter safety interlock. The starter motor will not energize until the clutch has been fully depressed."

Also related: "The system supports use of a manual transmission only" and "Cruise control is not available with this system."

So cruise control disable doesn't seem to be one of the choices. As I said earlier, I will incorporate both of these switches into the build. I will keep trying to find out what they actually do, other than the interlock which is pretty obvious.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,777 Posts
Discussion Starter #84 (Edited)
Quick IRS Update

I know some are following this thread because of the new IRS setup, so thought I would pass this along. Yesterday afternoon I got a little bored (OK, both of my football teams were losing badly...) so I decided to play around with the IRS alignment. Just to get it somewhere in the ballpark. Used a level on the hubs for camber and a laser level pointed toward the front of the car for toe. Like I said, really rough. They were clearly way off from the original assembly. What I discovered is now quite obvious in hindsight, but I missed it during the initial assembly and I don't remember it from the instructions. It it's there, I obviously overlooked it. For the two adjustment points on each side, it's necessary to have equal threads showing on both sides before you bolt in the heim joint. I had the toe adjustment pretty centered, but that was mostly by accident I guess. For the camber adjustment, I had the fitting almost all the way into the UCA, but then the heim joint only about halfway in. So it was impossible to adjust it properly. I had to remove the large bolt holding the joint to the knuckle, center things up, and re-torque the bolt. Now it works perfectly. In both cases, you loosen the jam nut on each side and rotate the center adjuster as required. Then tighten the jam nuts. That's it. No dis-assembly required.

Here are a couple of pics. Camber adjustment showing equal threads on both sides now:


Toe adjustment showing roughly equal threads on both sides. Note where I have these as pictured is roughly to the spec. Looks like plenty of adjustment still available either way, and plenty of thread engagement. Also note, not surprisingly, the adjustments interact with each other. Adjusting camber also affects toe. Adjusting toe also affects camber. I'm planning to have the car professionally 4-wheel aligned when the time comes.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,777 Posts
Discussion Starter #85 (Edited)
Engine In

Late yesterday I dropped the Coyote into the chassis for the first time. Hanging over the engine compartment, my first impression is there’s no way that thing will fit in there. But it does! Went it with relatively little drama. This is just a mock-up, so in some ways not completely how it will be when I do the “real” installation. The engine had the bell housing but no transmission. The DS footbox was just set in place, and no PS footbox yet. Next time around it will be different, and I won’t be doing it alone. But based on this first experience, I think it will be OK. I guess I shouldn’t say I was alone. My longsuffering wife helped by keeping it from swinging around, and being another set of eyes as we lowered it into place. I kept my promise of no heavy lifting!

What I learned. The engine hooks I made will be fine. Front DS is wide open. The PS rear can’t be in the back cylinder exhaust header holes, but one forward. Then it will clear the PS footbox. The steering column needs to be swung out of the way to clear the alternator going in. I just loosened all the set screws, pulled it off the steering column, and swung that end over. The 2bking modified panels on the DS are awesome. Wow, what a great job he did on those. The head sits in the DS footbox perfectly, and the restored space for the driver’s feet below is outstanding. FF needs to make this a standard for the Coyote builds. Completely removes one of the major objections. I was thinking of doing an expanded footbox on the PS. But the gained space isn’t that much, and the factory pieces I have already are powder coated with the anniversary white PC. I’m going to use them as is. I used Whitby spacers on both motor mounts. Both motor mount bolts are in the bottom of the slots, and the engine is relatively level. I will be leaving both in. I have the engine blocked at 2 degrees down measured off the dampener, roughly what I expect it will be when the transmission is installed and pinion angle set. The Moroso pan is slightly above the frame rails in the front, and just flush or very slightly below in the back. Fine with that. The Quicktime bell housing does extend a little lower than the pan on the bottom circle. I would say about 1/2 inch. I will probably go ahead and trim that off. But honestly if I get in a situation where I hit that, I’m probably hitting something else too. We’ll see. Also confirmed the shorter/compact oil filter clears the 4 inch chassis tube just fine. No remote oil filter to install. Fine by me.

I bolted in the stainless headers. PS, obviously especially without the footbox there, was wide open and easy as can be. Note to self. Get all the bolts started before tightening any of them! Even finger tight. The header flange is very precise. Now the DS is another whole story. I was able to get 4-5 of them on with a little effort, but there are a couple that are nearly impossible. I’ve read about this, and my experience is quite typical. Some guys put an access panel in the footbox, but for now I’m not planning to do that. My thought is for the hard to reach ones to use studs vs. the allen head bolts I'm using everywhere else. I think I’ve read where others have done this as well. Assuming there’s enough room to get the header into the opening and hooked over the studs. Another thought, which I’m seriously considering, is to install the DS header during engine installation. Once the engine is low enough that the header can go under the 3/4 inch frame tube, go ahead and install the DS header while more accessible. Using a combination of bolts and studs, still would able to re-torque the bolts later if necessary after a few run cycles. But anything more may require loosening the engine mounts and lifting the engine. Not something I want to think about, but not unlike many regular production cars. I’m planning to use Remflex gaskets, and I’ve had great luck with those. Both of my former builds haven’t needed the exhaust headers touched after the initial installation. Hopefully my luck will hold.

I also test fit the Gas-N side pipes. Wasn’t particularly easy because how I have the frame sitting on my 2-post, the pipes hit the side arms. So I had to lift each side to check them. But I wanted to get a sanity check on what pipe alignment looked like. I’ve had to work with this a lot on my previous builds, and many can cite how this aspect has kept them awake at night. I’m happy to report it looks pretty good. The ends of the Stainless headers exit the frame area at nearly the exact location on both sides and the pipe alignment seems OK. Both pipes will likely take a little bit of wedge to get parallel to the body. The DS more than the PS. This will all be finalized later during body installation. But I’m very satisfied with this initial check.

Here are some pics of the engine install. Engine hovering over its intended destination:


Settling in:


All in. Note these are the newer style 2015-2016 covers. A little chunky looking compared to the previous style, but they’re growing on me. I think they’re a little different around the back with the new CMCV setup on this engine.



DS stainless headers, after some “minor” frustration getting most of the bolts in.


PS stainless headers. Also checking the fit and clearance of the PS footbox pieces. All good.


This afternoon I starting playing with some of the control pack components, trying to decide where best to locate things. Still way more planning and work to do here, but here’s a couple first shots. Based on where the main harness comes off the engine (I think the same as the 2011-2014 engine) and the length of that harness, the PCM has to go alongside the engine. No way it will reach the firewall or even PS footbox as some have done. This location for the PCM allows the engine harness and then also the control pack harness to plug in reasonably OK and look decent from the engine side. I tried every possible angle, location, upside down, right side up, multiple cable routings, etc. This seems about the best. I will need to design and fabricate some type of tray for the PCM to set in. I wish it could be further from the headers, because I have to think there’s going to be a little more radiated heat there than elsewhere. But I don’t see where I have a choice. The PCM case has what looks like heat fins on one side, and those aren’t facing the headers. So if I shield the other side some – while still allowing airflow all around it – I think it should be OK. It’s designed to work in the harsh underhood environment, but don’t want to heat it unnecessarily.


I’m thinking the power distribution box will be somewhere in this area on the firewall. It’s just too big to fit behind the dash. I’m not planning a heater – only heated seats like I’ve done before – so I have some flexibility of where to place it on the firewall. Just need to find the best location taking into account the wiper motor and fuel lines and regulator. With the box in this location, the large bundled harness back to the PCM is still a bit too long, but I can deal with that in the fender well area I think. I may have to adjust the lengths a bit on a couple of the cables that go into the dash area. But that’s not something I have any qualms about doing and the smaller cables only have a few conductors.


I still have a lot of studying and thinking to do about joining the control pack wiring into the RF harness and main power wiring. The control pack came with a bunch of big power wires, including the main alternator charging wire, starter power wiring, etc. It’s not just clear to me why I would need to do those differently than I have in the past with the RF harness. As long as I have the always on connection from the battery to the main power input on the power distribution box, I think I have the power covered. And obviously the control pack has its own wires to the starter, ignition switch, cooling fan, fuel pump, etc. But need to spend more time with this. It’s definitely different than the previous version.

Still to be checked out are the intake, radiator and cooling lines, radiator reservoir, power steering lines and reservoir, brake and clutch reservoirs, fuel lines and regulator, and a decision about battery location. Still going back and forth between the Breeze front mount and the FFMetals under trunk mount. There is a lot going on in there. Still having fun though!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
511 Posts
My envy meter just shot off the scale. The build is so much fun.

I didn't get too hung up about bolt torque when it came to the installation of the the Stainless Headers. I removed the factory studs from my Coyote and used zinc clad bolts as specified in the FFR instructions. Yep, some of the DS bolts are a little tricky to get at. I originally had the FFR shorty headers installed and they were a nightmare. So for the Stainless Headers I was able to a get a torque wrench on most. The others got my less calibrated box end. I used some blue thread lock and I have rechecked after lots of miles and everything is still tight and true.
Its good to get picture of those headers now. Once the body is on its a shame you can't see them very well.

Question: Did the kit come with coloured rivets to match the PC aluminum panels.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,777 Posts
Discussion Starter #88
Question: Did the kit come with coloured rivets to match the PC aluminum panels.
No. Those white rivets are from McMaster. They're just painted, so you have to be gentle with them. But I'll use them for all the exposed rivets on the white panels.
 

·
Mustang Convert
Joined
·
1,282 Posts
You mentioned computer placement potentially further forward more over the headers... This is exactly what I did. It it over the headers in an enclosure which is open facing the inner fender behind the splash panel. I put some gold heat reflective material I got from Pegasus Racing to avoid heat soak. I have run the car in 100 degree weather in a parade and never had the cooling fins of the computer go above 90 degrees.

I also made aluminum heat shield panels with the same gold stuff on them for the footboxes that standoff 1/4" to give an air gap. No heat issues in the footboxes either.

ImageUploadedByAutoGuide1446049312.661407.jpg

I put louvers in the hood to vent hot air mainly when stopped to avoid heat soak too.

ImageUploadedByAutoGuide1446049342.739331.jpg
ImageUploadedByAutoGuide1446049364.249921.jpg

Just some Coyote thoughts...

Kevin
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
162 Posts
If you decide to do the footbox mod on the PS, put the Stainless headers on first to determine the size. I did the standard mod that everyone does and had a header conflict. I took it out and reverted back to the standard foot box. It probably would work with the header/j-pipe set up.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,777 Posts
Discussion Starter #93 (Edited)
2015 Coyote Control Pack Installation

Since the last update, I’ve mainly been focused on installing the 2015 Coyote control pack. There is a lot of information on the forums, and from FF, on how to install the previous version of the Coyote control pack in the Roadster. But none that I’m aware of for the new 2015-2016 version. As I mentioned before, there are some pretty significant differences.

First thing I went after was mounting the PCM. The large cable off the front PS corner of the engine goes to the PCM, and the length and position of that cable just about dictates only one location as I showed previously. I played around with several patterns (cereal boxes to the rescue again) and ended up with this version and cut/bent some aluminum. It will rivet to the underside of the top 3/4 inch tube and the outside of the lower 3/4 inch tube. I used some 1/2 inch shock mounts to locate the PCM on the outside of the new bracket. The shock mounts don’t have much give for the light weight of the PCM. But between the mounts and the .040 aluminum, it has just a little give but still very solid. It’s as far away from the header as I could place it, with the bracket shielding facing the header and an airspace between. The heat sinks for the PCM are facing the other way and completely open. This area should have decent airflow with the side vent right behind it. So I’m satisfied the PCM shouldn't see any extreme temps and is reasonably protected. I'll have the new piece powder coated when I do everything else, and then rivet it permanently.

I started routing some of the cables. It’s still a work in process, so no style points. Lots of straightening and clean-up to do yet. It’s not going to be very pretty no matter what, but mostly will be hidden inside the fender. The control pack harness goes into the other large connector in the PCM, with a large branch going from there to the power distribution box. That I’m going to mount on the firewall, low and just about on center. More about that later. The branches for the MAF sensor and alternator control wires go up and around the engine under the cover, so good there. I’ll need to add extensions to the fan and starter trigger wire to reach their intended destinations. The rest of the connections are on the other side of the firewall. Once you get your head around it, the connections to the Coyote are pretty simple. Here are a couple pics of where I’m at with this part.



I posted a picture before of the power distribution module. This is part of some of the differences between this control pack and the previous one. Here it is with the covers off. You can see two power connections. The large lug on the front and then a power cable that exits the harness just a few inches away from the box. Today I checked every fuse and relay in the box. Most are connected to the large lug in the front, and only a couple to the separate power cable.


The control pack includes a massive 15 foot long power cable. Nothing like this is included in the previous control pack versions. The instructions describe connecting the power cable directly to the battery, and also includes a 250 amp fuse to be placed at the battery end. Also included are lugs and shrink sleeve to shorten the cable if necessary.


Then it’s routed to the power distribution box with a lug for the large connection on the front and a connector for the separate cable.


Checking continuity in the cable, the +12V connections are tied together. Now I’m not an electrical engineer (no comments please…) and I guess I understand why Ford engineers chose to provide a home run cable from the battery to the power for the control pack. This is a universal kit and will be installed in many different cars with many configurations. Getting the power directly from the battery makes it consistent for all. As for the other end, with the lug and plug, both have the same +12V power, so I guess this is related to the power distribution box adapted to this setup.

But I’m thinking now not to install it with the provided battery power cable. Like my previous build, I’m planning a master power disconnect centered under the dash with the lugs extending into the engine compartment. Whether I do a front or rear battery (still considering…) the first stop for uninterrupted battery power will be inches away from the power distribution box at the center of the firewall. Assuming I use the right size cable, I see no reason to run a duplicate battery cable.

Just to confirm how the provided power cable is wired, and to prove this plan, I stripped the insulation off each end of the provided cable. The continuity checker didn’t lie. This is the power distribution box end. Large 4 gauge +12V wire to the lug, and smaller gauge power and ground.


This is the battery end, showing the two +12V wires tied together at the battery lug and the separate ground wire.


So the power setup I’m considering is +12V battery power to the master disconnect. Off the same lug, I’ll tap to the two control pack power distribution +12V connections through the provided 250 amp fuse. So they’ll have always on fused power. Just like the provided cable. On the switched side of the master disconnect, I’ll go to the RF fuse box. So technically, not everything will be switched off with the master disconnect. But the PCM has to have always on power to store settings and codes, and there’s no provision to do this other than to leave it connected through the main power leads. Based on how the RF harness is connected to the control pack using the ignition sense wires, the main disconnect will still shut down the car when switched off. I would ground the battery to the chassis, per normal. The control pack has several ground connections, also I would take to chassis. Done properly, I don’t see why I need the dedicated ground wire in the provided power cable.

If anyone has any feedback about any of this, fire away.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,777 Posts
Discussion Starter #94
If you decide to do the footbox mod on the PS, put the Stainless headers on first to determine the size. I did the standard mod that everyone does and had a header conflict. I took it out and reverted back to the standard foot box. It probably would work with the header/j-pipe set up.
Thanks for the comments, but no footbox mod on the PS. I'm using the stock setup. I've got 2bking's patterns for the PS mod, but the space gained is pretty modest. Plus I have the stock panels already on hand and powder coated the anniversary white. I'm using them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
494 Posts
So the power setup I’m considering is +12V battery power to the master disconnect. Off the same lug, I’ll tap to the two control pack power distribution +12V connections through the provided 250 amp fuse. So they’ll have always on fused power. Just like the provided cable. On the switched side of the master disconnect, I’ll go to the RF fuse box. So technically, not everything will be switched off with the master disconnect. But the PCM has to have always on power to store settings and codes, and there’s no provision to do this other than to leave it connected through the main power leads. Based on how the RF harness is connected to the control pack using the ignition sense wires, the main disconnect will still shut down the car when switched off. I would ground the battery to the chassis, per normal. The control pack has several ground connections, also I would take to chassis. Done properly, I don’t see why I need the dedicated ground wire in the provided power cable.
I think your logic is spot on. The older controls pack had some redundant wiring which I dieted out and simplified.

Your PCM mount is very clean and well placed.
 

·
FFCobra Craftsman
Joined
·
22,112 Posts
Do both 12V+ feeds to the ECU need constant power? I am asking because I don't know but on the Lexus ECUs I used to work on there were several 12V+ to the ecu but only one had constant power.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,777 Posts
Discussion Starter #97
Do both 12V+ feeds to the ECU need constant power? I am asking because I don't know but on the Lexus ECUs I used to work on there were several 12V+ to the ecu but only one had constant power.
I don't know and probably not too easy to find out. Could be the PCM only needs power on one of the 12V feeds to keep alive. But as delivered, the battery cable provides always on power to both inputs, and that's what I'm planning to duplicate. But that raises a good point. It would easy enough to measure the current draw from the battery once everything is wired up to confirm that it's within reason, e.g. xx (whatever) milliamps.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,110 Posts
Once you get your head around it, the connections to the Coyote are pretty simple.
And brain surgery's pretty easy once you know how. :)

I'm so glad you're writing this build up in such detail. It confirms my decision to go with the 302, 'cuz there's NO WAY I'd ever figure any of this stuff out. Your build is truly inspirational.

Cheers,


John
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,777 Posts
Discussion Starter #99
I think your logic is spot on. The older controls pack had some redundant wiring which I dieted out and simplified. Your PCM mount is very clean and well placed.
Thanks for your feedback. I really appreciate it.

And brain surgery's pretty easy once you know how. :)

I'm so glad you're writing this build up in such detail. It confirms my decision to go with the 302, 'cuz there's NO WAY I'd ever figure any of this stuff out. Your build is truly inspirational.

Cheers, John
Thanks for my Sunday morning laugh out loud. Funny comment there. :yes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
511 Posts
I don't know and probably not too easy to find out. Could be the PCM only needs power on one of the 12V feeds to keep alive. But as delivered, the battery cable provides always on power to both inputs, and that's what I'm planning to duplicate. But that raises a good point. It would easy enough to measure the current draw from the battery once everything is wired up to confirm that it's within reason, e.g. xx (whatever) milliamps.
I have the 2012 (older version) Coyote and controls. My power is routed from the battery through a battery cut off switch then forward to the rest of the car. . The battery cut off switch kills ALL power to the car. The PCM in my car does not need constant power. I have had no issues with losing any settings, tune or codes in 25,000 kilometers. Every time I turn off the car I also turn off the battery cut off. Winterizing is easy. Turn off the battery cut off...Pull the cover over...Set the temperature in the garage to 50F and put her to sleep.
 
81 - 100 of 498 Posts
Top