CBAZA or CBAZ0?

This is the place for questions about things electrical and mechnanical...or any other automotive-related hardware issue.

Moderators: cgrey8, EDS50, Jon 94GT, 2Shaker

Post Reply
dleach1407
Gear Head
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 8:00 am

CBAZA or CBAZ0?

Post by dleach1407 » Fri Sep 07, 2018 5:32 pm

I am building a 57 f100 and am dropping a 302w or 351w based engine into it with a 4r70w. Since I am assembling the engine and trans control system from scratch I am trying to decide which strategy would best suit my needs so I can decide on the ECU. I already have a moates and binary editor. My build will consist of the following:

302 or 351 (have a couple 302s laying around)
F cam
Remote TFI distributor
High Rise intake drilled for bosch style injectors
4 barrel throttle body (PWM IAC)
2600-2800 stall converter
4r70w from a 96 explorer
Aluminum heads around 190-205cc depending on block choice
ECU controlled electric fan preferred
HPX MAF
Needs to support A/C (shouldnt be an issue)
Twin Turbos are the eventual goal though single turbo or blower could potentially happen

Ive read threads that the 4r70w can be controlled by the 94-95 mustang ecu with changes to the gear ratios and potentially other changes like pressure changes. I havent been able to find info on what would potentially need to be changed and honestly I know nothing about automatics regarding tuning them. I just rebuilt the trans so I dont want to burn it up because I didnt tune it correct. Every mustang i have tuned and owned were all t5 cars. My mustang is a turbo 331 T5 combo. I read on the Moates site today that the 94-95 F150 came standard with the 4r70w and is supported by Moates as well. Can someone tell me the positives and negatives of each or if one would be a better choice for me? I know for sure one positive of the CBAZA is that there is the simplified base tune I am using in the mustang (T4M2). I dont think that same tune exists for the CBAZ0
95 Mustang GT, stock block 308, 10.5:1 (Static), 190 CC 11r 56cc heads, E cam, Victor 5.0, 60# inj, HPX blow through, 3.5 inch FMIC, 76mm/.96ar, T5.

User avatar
cgrey8
Administrator
Posts: 10525
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 5:54 am
Location: Acworth, Ga (Metro Atlanta)
Contact:

Re: CBAZA or CBAZ0?

Post by cgrey8 » Fri Sep 07, 2018 7:43 pm

I think either will suit your needs and I believe sailorbob has defs for both so either are affordable. Just going by your comments, it sounds like the CBAZ0 was setup from the factory to work with 4R70w trans?? If that's so, then that's what I'd go with. But like you, I've heard the CBAZA can be made to work with that trans given the similarities in the AODE and 4R70w...and BTW I don't know what those similarities or differences are. I'm not an automatic guy.

But just out of curiosity, why the F-cam?

And of the heads, what heads? The intake port cc is an interesting number, but a far more meaningful number from heads is the combustion chamber cc. I've always been partial to AFR heads. For the difference in price, they just always seemed to be the best return for the dollar. As for the combustion chamber size, that depends on whether you are going 302 or 351, the cc dish on the pistons you go with, and how much boost you are looking to make. Bigger chambers will mean more headroom for boost, but will reduce N/A low-end torque and fuel economy. However too small of a chamber on the 351w could push compression so high that premium pump gas won't keep the knock away...although I doubt that'll be a problem with the F-cam. Aggressive cams tend to lower dynamic compression ratio.
...Always Somethin'

89 Ranger Supercab, 331 w/GT40p heads, ported Explorer lower, Crane Powermax 2020 cam, 1.6RRs, FMS Explorer (GT40p) headers, Slot Style MAF, aftermarket T5 'Z-Spec', 8.8" rear w/3.27s, Powertrax Locker, Innovate LC-1, GUFB, Moates QuarterHorse tuned using BE&EA

Member V8-Ranger.com

dleach1407
Gear Head
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 8:00 am

Re: CBAZA or CBAZ0?

Post by dleach1407 » Fri Sep 07, 2018 9:26 pm

I wouldnt call the Fcam aggressive. .512 lift at the valve isnt that much but with 114 degree lobe separation there is a small amount of overlap. In my opinion the Fcam is a good off the shelf cam that works for both N/A and boosted applications, its cheap, readily available, and good for a street car. I also like the idle quality and sound. The heads will depend on what I decide on at the time. Cant really say at this point but I dont think it will matter much when it comes to picking a strategy. The short term solution is to use a gt40 headed 302 I have. Im mocking that up tomorrow. Ill get something that will put my compression between 10 and 11 to 1 static. Im at high altitude and lose quite a lot due to lower atmospheric pressure. 11.2:1 is 10:1 here. I also have e85 readily available so when the truck gets boosted it will run E unless im doing a long road trip. The AODE and the 4r70w work the same but the internal components are different. The gear ratios are different with the 4r being better for a street car. I have never taken an AODE apart so I cant compare to the internals of the 4r70w. To the best of my knowledge most of the hard components are not interchangeable without swapping the whole internal assembly but its easy to take a 4r70 and put the rotating internals into an AODE. I also should clarify. I will be doing the tuning, I dont plan on buying a tune from someone else. I am not sure if the CBAZ0 supports electric fan or data logging. I will need logging for sure. Way too hard to tune without it... Does anyone know what settings need to be changed in the CBAZA to run the 4R?
95 Mustang GT, stock block 308, 10.5:1 (Static), 190 CC 11r 56cc heads, E cam, Victor 5.0, 60# inj, HPX blow through, 3.5 inch FMIC, 76mm/.96ar, T5.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests