Slight Reduction In Acceleration. Has Anyone Else Experienced This Issue.

[ClevelandBeemer]

Let me see if I can simplify this so you understand, I was looking at the screen when the truck changed modes from sport to normal, are you with me so far? Ok just so we're clear, the truck changed from sport to normal with no input from me. Glad that's out of the way.

As far as power increase or loss, I never stated that, I stated exactly what the owners manual describes when changing modes, you should read it sometime and save us all a lot of time.

Speaking of reading, you should read my comments to you. Nowhere do I question that the drive mode changed on its own, so not sure why you keep litigating it…..

However what I keep pointing out is there is NO change in available power between normal and sport. However your comment said when you noticed the change and switched back to sport you “felt the same power you felt from day 1.” I don’t know what you felt on day one but both modes deliver the same mount of power. What you’re feeling is a change in throttle mapping…

It’s difficult because the power on takeoff (the throw you back in your seat feeling) feels different in this truck vs my old one. I can’t make a comparison because I don’t have my old truck to test against. I could compare it against others but those won’t necessarily be the same comparison unless it’s the same model year and software level.

Had I test drove my new truck extensively prior to purchase I would have gone back and done some side by sides, but I bought out of state and since I already owned a Lightning, I did the deal without driving in advance of pickup. It is what it is.

I’m not sure why you’re white knighting so hard for Ford here. Manufacturers make small changes all the time from model year to model year. It’s absolutely plausible that small changes in throttle response were made. I’m simply adding another voice to the chorus of others who have noticed similar things.

I’m not white knighting Ford. I’m asking for hard data because your claim has ton of opportunity for error. Again we know how fast 2022, 2023, 2024, and 2025 trucks are supposed to be. So why not validate your theory? It’s pretty easy to show your 2024 is slower than advertised.

I’ll throw this out as well, testing it improving that it’s slower than it should be is also something to bring to your service advisor when you do your warranty claim.

At one point I felt my S1000R was getting slower after a few years of ownership. It turns out, I just became used to the acceleration. As it still runs a faster 1/4 mile than advertised.

Sponsored

 

[RLXXI]

Speaking of reading, you should read my comments to you. Nowhere do I question that the drive mode changed on its own, so not sure why you keep litigating it…..

However what I keep pointing out is there is NO change in available power between normal and sport. However your comment said when you noticed the change and switched back to sport you “felt the same power you felt from day 1.” I don’t know what you felt on day one but both modes deliver the same mount of power. What you’re feeling is a change in throttle mapping…



I’m not white knighting Ford. I’m asking for hard data because your claim has ton of opportunity for error. Again we know how fast 2022, 2023, 2024, and 2025 trucks are supposed to be. So why not validate your theory? It’s pretty easy to show your 2024 is slower than advertised.

I’ll throw this out as well, testing it improving that it’s slower than it should be is also something to bring to your service advisor when you do your warranty claim.

At one point I felt my S1000R was getting slower after a few years of ownership. It turns out, I just became used to the acceleration. As it still runs a faster 1/4 mile than advertised.

I have the distinct feeling we're discussing two different things within the same subject matter. Have to say in my case there is no missing power so much as it is misrouted power.

 

[ClevelandBeemer]

I have the distinct feeling we're discussing two different things within the same subject matter. Have to say in my case there is no missing power so much as it is misrouted power.

So I went back through the last page or two and I see where the potential misunderstanding is. I take it you’ve edited some of your comments after posting? I swear upon initial read, some of the context currently there was not present.

I’m in total agreement normal and sport absolutely feel different and it would be apparent if you were expecting one mode but were in another. This is also very much what the OP and Maineiac12 are likely feeling.

 

[blb228]

From personal experience - I have driven and drive in Sport Mode 99% of the time. For fun; I had initially gauged my 0-60mph time after purchasing in March of this year to see how close this '24 Flash was to the advertised 3.8 seconds. This was a pretty consistent 4.1-4.2 second 0-60mph times on a very slight downhill, but even grade. I tested this again yesterday several times and was getting consistent 4.6-4.7 second 0-60mph times. It was in fact colder outside yesterday than when I did this same 'test' in March/April.

 

[ClevelandBeemer]

From personal experience - I have driven and drive in Sport Mode 99% of the time. For fun; I had initially gauged my 0-60mph time after purchasing in March of this year to see how close this '24 Flash was to the advertised 3.8 seconds. This was a pretty consistent 4.1-4.2 second 0-60mph times on a very slight downhill, but even grade. I tested this again yesterday several times and was getting consistent 4.6-4.7 second 0-60mph times. It was in fact colder outside yesterday than when I did this same 'test' in March/April.

This is good stuff right here! So a few things, you’re getting 4.1-4.2 0-60MPH because you’re likely calculating without the 1ft rollout that Ford utilizes. When you remove the 1ft rollout you get a 0-60MPH run in ~4.16 seconds. So in March you were dead on.

Now for your run yesterday, was the road wet or covered in salt? Was SoC > 80%? Given the temperatures was 100% power available in the gauge cluster? Finally was TC off? Colder temps will certainly impact your times but just curious if there were other mitigating factors.

 

[sotek2345]

This is good stuff right here! So a few things, you’re getting 4.1-4.2 0-60MPH because you’re likely calculating without the 1ft rollout that Ford utilizes. When you remove the 1ft rollout you get a 0-60MPH run in ~4.16 seconds. So in March you were dead on.

Now for your run yesterday, was the road wet or covered in salt? Was SoC > 80%? Given the temperatures was 100% power available in the gauge cluster? Colder temps will certainly impact your times but just curious if there were other mitigating factors.

There is also the fact that the Ford numbers are on a prepped (high traction) surface. Traction control will and does pull power when you try to do a hard launch which will show up in the times and vary based on the amount of traction you have. Remember, even if it isn't cold enough to be impacting the battery or motors, cold tires have less traction! If you haven't yet turn it all the way off (press and hold) and then try a hard launch and see what happens. 4 wheel burn outs are fun!

 

[ClevelandBeemer]

There is also the fact that the Ford numbers are on a prepped (high traction) surface. Traction control will and does pull power when you try to do a hard launch which will show up in the times and vary based on the amount of traction you have. Remember, even if it isn't cold enough to be impacting the battery or motors, cold tires have less traction! If you haven't yet turn it all the way off (press and hold) and then try a hard launch and see what happens. 4 wheel burn outs are fun!

100%. TC should always be off when doing benchmarking runs. That said Fords numbers can be replicated on a non-prepped surface.

I’m looking forward to the spring so I can get some runs at the track!

 

[PreservedSwine]

Full disclosure: when I first saw this thread, I thought everybody was nuts.

Then I received a phantom update, and it definitely accelerates differently post update.

 

[blb228]

Now for your run yesterday, was the road wet or covered in salt? Was SoC > 80%? Given the temperatures was 100% power available in the gauge cluster? Finally was TC off? Colder temps will certainly impact your times but just curious if there were other mitigating factors.

TC was ON for all tests thus far - I haven't practiced hard starts enough in this thing to do better than the existing TC on dead stop starts. Yes, 100% power was available - I had it plugged in prior to heading out. Road conditions and state of charge were the same (as close as possible in a test like this) [dry and cleanish] in both 'tests'.

I wouldn't be surprised if the update that has changed this for several does have something to do with traction control/power delivery changes from prior. (I've had my studdering/shuttering on acceleration change frequency's several different times from my ownership already-)

Feel free to pick apart the differences/potential differences from my experience. I realize the gear oil would be a little thicker and the air is more dense in the second set of tests...... I wouldn't think air temp would have THAT much of an influence on these motors..... but it sure did on my old Ford Taurus SHO's with the two different length intake runners!

 

[ClevelandBeemer]

TC was ON for all tests thus far - I haven't practiced hard starts enough in this thing to do better than the existing TC on dead stop starts. Yes, 100% power was available - I had it plugged in prior to heading out. Road conditions and state of charge were the same (as close as possible in a test like this) [dry and cleanish] in both 'tests'.

I wouldn't be surprised if the update that has changed this for several does have something to do with traction control/power delivery changes from prior. (I've had my studdering/shuttering on acceleration change frequency's several different times from my ownership already-)

Feel free to pick apart the differences/potential differences from my experience. I realize the gear oil would be a little thicker and the air is more dense in the second set of tests...... I wouldn't think air temp would have THAT much of an influence on these motors..... but it sure did on my old Ford Taurus SHO's with the two different length intake runners!

Again, this is great stuff. It would be nice seeing a result with no TC just to remove that variable, but otherwise your process seems reasonable.

This leaves you with two outcomes:
1. Due to the cold temperatures, traction issues are slowing you down by about 0.5s.

2. You’re also impacted my this mystery update that has reduced power output/deployment.

Hopefully it’s option 1, that said I’ve had wet launches that were better in very wet conditions (see the screenshot below)….. That said, TC was fully off so it’s possible the TC power cut is being a bit aggressive for you. Ultimately that’s going to come down to temperature and road surface. If not comfortable disabling TC you could always do a 30 to 60 roll to remove the traction variable.

 

[ClevelandBeemer]

At the end of the day 1/4 mile is not a very good way to measure this effect. Not only is there the fact that most people dont have 1/4 mile times of their truck, traction will always be an issue, there is also the fact that 1/4 mile runs are easy to predict and if Ford was really trying to sneak in a stealth power cut could detect dead stop, no throttle to full throttle easily and sneak back the power.

What really needs to be done is to measure HVB current like the Mach-e guys did. Using OBD data we could see if maximum current during NOT-quarter mile runs is potentially higher on early, non-updated 22s and 23s than compared to 24s and 25s. This is a direct measurement of HOW ford would cut power.

.

A quick stab at the throttle earlier had current in my truck spiking at over 1200 amps but it was hardly a good test

Was someone advocating for 1/4 mile times to troubleshoot?

 

[ClevelandBeemer]

1/4 mile or 0-60, same thing

Not even close but to each their own.

 

[Timeless Epoch]

You should be able to monitor the power going to the motors in CarScanner during a full throttle 30MPH jaunt. Should hit 433KW’s combined for the large batteries.

 

[TaxmanHog]

A quick stab at the throttle earlier had current in my truck spiking at over 1200 amps but it was hardly a good test

How are you and 10 other testers going to bench mark a STAB at the throttle, for crying out loud!!!!

WOT is the only way to go, everyone's STOMP will be the same, pussy footing the pedal will result in non repeatable measures

 

[ClevelandBeemer]

Obviously they are not the exact same thing, no crap. Nobody is asking for anyone persons personal favorite. For the purpose of testing to determine if there is reduced performance they are practically the same.
As I said, using HVB current is a more accurate method as it is directly comparing the parameter Ford would manipulate to reduce performance.

I mean you literally brought it up, but ok…..

Also HVB current is no more accurate than a 0-60 run. You’re at WOT for about 4 seconds getting meaningful data. Also HVB current is susceptible to TC pulling power to manage traction. So unless it’s is known what the HVB current should be at a given speed then I’d argue it’s just as difficult a metric unless it’s a drastic difference.

Either way both methods can obviously come to the same conclusion.

Sponsored