Tuning the ecoboost

[edizzle]

It all boils down to different preferences everyone's and right to drive whatever they want it just amazes me that the market and Industry is providing these higher horsepower SUVs. To some of us, myself included, I think it's a total waste. I think 95% maybe more of the SUV owners out there don't even know how much horsepower they have, rarely ever push the pedal to the floor and don't care how fast they are 0 to 60. I too have had appreciation in the past for sleeper vehicles but they were not SUVs.
If they're going to make a special RT model Durango put racing stripes on it, cool looking wheels and give it 450 + horsepower that's okay. A small percentage of people buying Durango's will buy those. Jeep has done the similar thing with a Grand Cherokee. Ford has only made the Expedition in a off-road model as far as I know. If they want to put racing stripes or cool paint Scheme on an expedition add a front rear spoiler or air dams maybe some painted to match wheel flares above the tires. I've always liked that look. Then give it some really sporty Wheels and make it a special GT series then that's fine to have 500 horsepower but for the other ninety-nine point something percent of the ones they make.... people care far more about the color of the exterior and the color of the interior and the comfort of the seat than they do about horsepower.
So I'm not saying you shouldn't be able to have 500 horsepower on tap in the SUV if you want it. I'm just saying it seems as a very small market for it but yet they keep pushing the horsepower levels higher and higher having compete between the major brands. It makes sense in a Mustang a Camaro a challenger or charger it just doesn't make sense to me in a four-door family truckster daily driver SUV.
I don't get my kicks for enjoyment out of driving an SUV it's my daily driver mode of transportation. I have other cars that are my fun cars. If someone doesn't want to have multiple vehicles and wants to combine the two then one of these sporty options lots of horsepower is good for them. I just don't see that many people being in that situation.

So what HP do you find acceptable in an SUV? It’s just funny that you have such an issue with HP in a full size SUV?!?!?! I’m not sure I understand. My platinum is a daily driver, it will never see a track. It will never line up at midnight in an abandoned industrial park. But I LOVE having that power on tap. Have you driven on an interstate in the last 5 years? Underpowered vehicles are more dangerous.

 

[edizzle]

When that happens to me, I just chuckle and say I wonder how much fuel that fool wasted...

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

I’m good for a tank or two of gas!! What do you have? Beemer or Benz?

 

[mquick5]

I’m good for a tank or two of gas!! What do you have? Beemer or Benz?

All American here. I have a small fleet, and really need to downsize. 1979 F150 4x4, 2000 Firebird, 2003 Malibu, 2005 Suburban, 2006 Roush Mustang, and of course the 17 Expy. Almost forgot my old stomper truck, but it's been in long term storage. 5+ years.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

 

[edizzle]

Well yes, I would probably think the same thing (how much fuel that fool wasted) if an expedition pulled up next to me and stomped it in any of the cars you listed (except for maybe the stang)

But when a young guy in new coupe wants to flex a little and gets walked by a 3 ton tank it is fun, I don’t care who you are!!! My daughter will even pick out who she thinks needs a lesson. Guys revving, rolling back and forth or inching forward, she will quickly point out. We love a spirited jaunt!!!

 

[TobyU]

So what HP do you find acceptable in an SUV? It’s just funny that you have such an issue with HP in a full size SUV?!?!?! I’m not sure I understand. My platinum is a daily driver, it will never see a track. It will never line up at midnight in an abandoned industrial park. But I LOVE having that power on tap. Have you driven on an interstate in the last 5 years? Underpowered vehicles are more dangerous.

I don't have such an issue I guess I'm just playing devil's advocate.
I think each person has what they would think is adequate amount of power or hp, more than enough, and way more than sensible.
I love power... acceleration really...
I drove on the freeway today.
I'm a street racing light to light fanatic!
Ive just never felt the need to race someone in my Trailblazer (and they even made an SS for those who do). Never once thought about blowing someone's doors off in our old Expedition but I'm sure it could take some of the wannabe tuners with no muffler from a few years ago.
I have a fast car for all that.
There have been times when I saw somebody who thought their car was hot crap and wished I was in my fast car.... so maybe this is where the quicker SUV can fit the bill.
I guess my issue is that if I were buying a new SUV today, I'm stuck getting one with like 360-400 hp and a 0-60 time. When I want one that they would never list it compete on 0-60 because it worked be an embarrassment to post those numbers!
I just want the option of a BASE model SUV. Just a big tall 4 door 4wd(optional), 3rd row seating(option again because apparently some people don't want this), cloth or leather, with AC(never a delete option), with no other frills or entertainment centers or packages, no WiFi, hotspot, DVD(lowering headliner area), probably no Auto sensing wipers, adaptive cruise, blind spot sensors, Auto braking, no power running boards, coffee pot, replicator or kitchen sink.
190-240 hp more than enough for me for this base model.
But I can't get this now.
I had a town car with a 4.6 and about 190 hp and never had to give it over half throttle to ever beat any traffic merging on Highway. Had a 2000 Expedition with 5.4 (what's the hp on those) never punched it either.
Now my Turbo Regals and 4th gen Trans Am's there us no such thing as too much power under the hood.
I just can't relate it to my SUV.
I just want options.
Just a bummin around SUV because you like the way you step up into it.

I don't get it either and I'm not criticizing anyone else for wanting or being happy that they have the extra stuff and hp.
I just don't really understand it.
I am very surprised the companies are competing in this arena and marketing them this way at last to a point.
I just think that most owners, soccer moms, soccer dads, non enthusiasts don't know or care about the engine or 0-60 as long as it runs and goes faster when they push the thin one on the right.

 

[TobyU]

I know! I know! I got it now.
The current expeditions make me feel like they are all Mustang GTs or Cobras.
There is no 4 cyl Mustang with the same body, size, and look(almost),like there used to be (later only 6 cyl I think)
That's what bugs me.

 

[rjdelp7]

Wow bro, you’re sad. Embarrassing actually. Go back to the first gen forum!!!!! You are astoundingly ignorant about vehicle performance and tuning!! If you want to learn and ask questions and participate in a thread that’s one thing, but you actually do the exact opposite!! Very annoying

I find it 'annoying', people are on EXPEDITION forum since 2017 and didn't actually own one until 2018. WTF? Then they post as 'tuning expert', based on 1998 Toyota and a Nissan Altima. I find annoying, know it all, jackwagons,like edizzle, don't wan't to hear anything they don't like and post complaints and insults. I have a tuned vehicle you condescending A-hole. A performance car, not a 5000lb SUV. Tuning a Expedition is embarrassing and sad. EcoBoost owners are way to sensitive and have something to prove. V8 envy, its a new disorder.

 

[TobyU]

I find it 'annoying', people are on EXPEDITION forum since 2017 and didn't actually own one until 2018. WTF? Then they post as 'tuning expert', based on 1998 Toyota and a Nissan Altima. I find annoying, know it all, jackwagons,like edizzle, don't wan't to hear anything they don't like and post complaints and insults. I have a tuned vehicle you condescending A-hole. A performance car, not a 5000lb SUV. Tuning a Expedition is embarrassing and sad. EcoBoost owners are way to sensitive and have something to prove. V8 envy, its a new disorder.

Could be.. . But see, I just don't get on here and insult people or care to argue back and forth. I just State my personal opinions preferences. Of course people love to jump on me and tell me I'm wrong or whatever else but see that's not possible. When it's my opinion or preferences it can't be wrong.
When I complain about what manufacturers are offering, once again, just my personal opinion. If they're selling lots of vehicles either they have it right, or there's enough people who like them or back to my opinion that it doesn't really matter what people want they can only buy what's out there in the vast majority of people buy new vehicles.
I also prefer the right vehicle for the right job. If I want to have fun on the roads I'll go home and get my fast car. When I'm out going somewhere or driving to the store I'm not really looking for a race in my navigator. I guess some people are always open to the option or like to combine the two. I don't agree but I won't condemn them for it.

 

[JohnT]

I like that I can buy a 5000+ SUV that posts a good 0-60, has lane assist, adaptive cruise control, gently massages my ego etc etc. Hell if I could afford/justify it to myself it I'd buy the top of the range Navigator. Equally if someone wants to tune their SUV, go for it, doesn't impact me in any way and as long as what you do doesn't negatively impact me I fully support your right to whatever the hell you want to your SUV. Tune it, add big tires, fender flares, wrap it, paint it, whatever rocks your boat.

Your money, spend it how you wish, you earn that right. I may not agree with it, I may not think it's sensible, I might want to do it myself but my risk/reward ratio is different to you.

It'd be a boring world if we all thought the same, but I fully defend your right to think differently to me.

Beyond that, the name calling, the trash talking, the "My omniscience about tuning is better than your omniscience about car tuning", I've gone around the sun more often that you, well I owned more cars schoolboy ******** is getting a bit tiresome.

 

[JExpedition07]

For the last decade or so the full size vehicles have been pretty fast relatively compared to the rest of the given automakers fleet. Big V8 or now some turbos in the trucks vs the 4 banger cars and crossovers. One is more fuel economy driven one is more capability driven. This trend started around 2000 I’d say. I’m not big on racing the expy since it’s a 6,000 pound tank but I’ve mashed the go pedal my share of times.

Most punks are driving cars with 10 sec 0-60 times and a fart can.....like Honda civics, Subaru’s, maybe even an old escape. Not much of a challenge for a 5.4L V8 or a 3.5L Twin Turbo to teach them a “lesson” lol.

 

[edizzle]

You will not notice a 25hp increase. I read years ago, you have to almost double HP, before you really feel it. The increase would be at the top end and lets face it...its an Expedition. You are not going to 'red line it' much or race. A tuner is $300+, forces the use of Premium fuel and could easily void a warranty. I installed a Jet Performance module in my 2011 5.0l Mustang. All the gains are past 3,000rpm, when horsing it. The car drives the same, maybe a bit peppier.

balderdash...325hp boost? No.

The EcoBoost IS tuned for 91 octane. It de-tunes for cheap gas(87). There is no way you gain 100hp, by adjusting timing, changing fuel mixture, eliminating the knock sensor and deleting the rev limiter. The engine max hp never changes, it just makes it differently. The turbo boost can't be changed electronically. It runs off the exhaust. It can only boost and fast as its driven. The stock, single exhaust, can not support such HP. In the Mustang the 'Boss" engine makes more power, from a different intake. Lincoln Town Car cars, were offered with a dual exhaust option and made more power than the single version.

Nonsense, I own 3 vehicles and a Harley. I have researched this. I actually own a performance car(Mustang GT, plenty info on them), not like these wannabe, suv Hot Rodders. I am not bashing anyone. But calling out ridiculous post, stating 100-325hp gains form tuning. Mustang owners, love how there car drives after tuning. The engines are not making that much more hp. The HP wars between Ford and Chevy, have squeezed every bit out of these engines. No way they are leaving untapped power behind. My 2011 GT 5.0l uses/requires 91 octane. Its factory tuned for it. My Lincoln 32V 4.6l uses 91. Both will de-tune for 87 octane. It has been covered numerous times in this forum, that the ecoBoost recommends, 91 or higher for towing and advertised power. Ford lied to buyers, with HP/Torq rating. On 87 pump gas, its way lower.

How is this 'boost' accomplished? The 2 stage, turbos on these engines, are very small in diameter. This was intentional, to eliminate lag. They can only push, so much air and spin, so fast. Its a stock, factory V6, in a large SUV. Why are you pushing the limits on it? You actually made a video, beating the piss out of it? Its not a sports car.

Your right I am jealous...of your V6 Expedition? That's funny! I never would consider buying one. That is why I kept my reliable 1st gen, work horse so long. Ford ruined the Expedition.

Your Expedition 'is' factory tuned for 91 octane. Read your owners manual, under fuel. A fill up of 91 should bring a small power increase. A 93 tune will advance timing, which will increase detonation. It will lean, the fuel mixture. It overrides the knock sensor and rev limiter, 2 safety features. It will override the transmission module, shift points.

How is the additional fuel delivered? How is this 'boost' made? By the computer? Ugh NO! Why didn't FORD set the boost higher? Maybe they thought, owners don't want more power or the head gaskets will blow? What is a 'tuning house'? How does the factory, 'single' exhaust support 550-600hp? You do not have own one, to question these ridiculous claims.

I find it 'annoying', people are on EXPEDITION forum since 2017 and didn't actually own one until 2018. WTF? Then they post as 'tuning expert', based on 1998 Toyota and a Nissan Altima. I find annoying, know it all, jackwagons,like edizzle, don't wan't to hear anything they don't like and post complaints and insults. I have a tuned vehicle you condescending A-hole. A performance car, not a 5000lb SUV. Tuning a Expedition is embarrassing and sad. EcoBoost owners are way to sensitive and have something to prove. V8 envy, its a new disorder.

LOL!!! Every post you have posted above is 100% false. You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. That’s a fact Jack! You "tuned" a naturally aspirated 5.0! Couldn’t be more different than tuning turbo cars. Who the eff comes on the 4th gen forum, doesn’t own one and is talking shit about tuning one! Get a life! You also may want to read some info on how a modern forced induction motor works and what can and can’t be done with just tuning!

 

[rjdelp7]

LOL!!! Every post you have posted above is 100% false. You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. That’s a fact Jack! You "tuned" a naturally aspirated 5.0! Couldn’t be more different than tuning turbo cars. Who the eff comes on the 4th gen forum, doesn’t own one and is talking shit about tuning one! Get a life! You also may want to read some info on how a modern forced induction motor works and what can and can’t be done with just tuning!

Please tell, WHAT IS FALSE? I made no claims, only questioned some exaggerators. You can't increase boost, without adding fuel. The stock, single exhaust is junk and not for high hp. The tune is timing and air/fuel. That's it. The mechanics of the engine doesn't change. The Expedition, Mustang and some Lincolns use 91 octane(aka 91 octane tune). You are sticking up for troll Mike Wolfe, who probably works for Livernois. You have stated nothing but "your wrong". If you can't be helpful get off this forum.

 

[edizzle]

Please tell, WHAT IS FALSE? I made no claims, only questioned some exaggerators. You can't increase boost, without adding fuel. The stock, single exhaust is junk and not for high hp. The tune is timing and air/fuel. That's it. The mechanics of the engine doesn't change. The Expedition, Mustang and some Lincolns use 91 octane(aka 91 octane tune). You are sticking up for troll Mike Wolfe, who probably works for Livernois. You have stated nothing but "your wrong". If you can't be helpful get off this forum.

LOL, if you can’t be helpful get off the forum!!! I love it. Man you have got some issues!! Many have posted actual proof that you can EASILY add 100hp+++ by tuning ONLY. EVERYTHING INCLUDING BOOST is electronically controlled. Again, putting a chip in a 2011 Mustang is not anything like tuning a forced induction vehicle. The exhaust on the truck is fine for another couple hundred extra HP. Of course, replacing it with a higher flowing unit will further help the cause.

So let’s go through a few of your ridiculous statements!!

You have to double power to feel it. ABSOLUTELY NOT TRUE

The increase would be at the top end. ABSOLUTELY NOT TRUE

The eco boost is tuned for 91. IT ACTUALLY SUGGESTS 93, BUT WILL WORK FINE WITH ALL GRADES BY ELECTRONICALLY ADJUSTING TIMING AND OTHER PARAMETERS.

There is no way you gain 100HP with a tune. YOU OBVIOUSLY DONT WANT TO HEAR WHAT ANYONE HERE SAYS, SO GO TO ANY TUNERS WEBSITE AND LOOK AT THEIR DYNO RESULTS. 100HP IS ON THE LOW SIDE!!!

The engine MAX HP never changes!!!! OMG, WTF

The turbo boost can’t be changed electronically. ABSOLUTELY NOT TRUE

Ii can only boost as fast as it’s driven! WHAT DOES THAT EVEN MEAN! LOOK UP WASTEGATE, IT WILL TELL YOU HOW BOOST PRESSURE IS DETERMINED!!!

This was your first TWO posts I quote!!! I don’t have time to go through anymore. But I’m telling you you couldn’t be anymore mis-informed if you tried. You are on here spouting mis-information with no pretense of, I think, I am pretty sure, a friend told me................ you are staunchly expressing false information.

A guy on here names 10 cars he has tuned INCLUDING 5 eco boosts and you want to quote the fact he tuned a Toyota and a Nissan to discredit him, COMPLETELY IGNORING the fact he actually has more experience with the ecoboost platform than most on this forum. You are the definition of a troll!!!

 

[1955moose]

I watched a rerun of Richard Rawlings garage rehab the other day. This episode was about a tuner, originally from Russia, working with a partner in Oaklahoma. One of the things for Richard to plunk down his money was for the tuner to get the 700 hp car in his shop over 1000hp, by just computer tuning. According to the show he did just that. It might have been rigged some for TV, but if he could move it 300 points, why is 100 not possible?

Sent from my N9131 using Tapatalk

 

[JohnT]

Between 81 and 86, Class B world rally cars small displacement turbos could produce 500 bhp. They damm near needed a rebuild after every stage but it's doable. Not exactly a daily driver though


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_B

Weight was kept as low as possible, high-tech materials were permitted, and there were no restrictions on boost, resulting in the power output of the winning cars increasing from 250 hp in 1981,[2] the year before Group B rules were introduced, to there being at least two cars producing in excess of 500 by 1986, the final year of Group B.[3] In just 5 years, the power output of rally cars had more than doubled.


MG Metro 6R4 3.0 V6 No turbo, 410 bhp
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austin_Metro#MG_Metro_6R4_rally_car


Peugeot 205 T16E2 1.8 turbo 400 bhb
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peugeot_205#205_Turbo_16_(T16)



Lancia Delta S4 1.8 turbo and supercharged 483 bhp (possibly even 500 and Lancia tested a 5 bar boost version at 1000 bhp)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lancia_Delta_S4


And the lust of my automotive life as a teenager

Audi Quattro 2.1 il5 turbo 302hp in road going form and 473hp in competition mode where a recirculating air sytem meant power in excess of 500hp was avaialbe at 8000rpm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audi_Quattro#Sport_Quattro_S1_E2

 

[JExpedition07]

I find it hard to believe you don’t notice a difference in power and response on a tuned 5.0L LOL. Tunes certainly do the 5.4 Triton a favor....and this example is a 3.31 gear ratio.

 

[Mike Wolfe]

LOL, if you can’t be helpful get off the forum!!! I love it. Man you have got some issues!! Many have posted actual proof that you can EASILY add 100hp+++ by tuning ONLY. EVERYTHING INCLUDING BOOST is electronically controlled. Again, putting a chip in a 2011 Mustang is not anything like tuning a forced induction vehicle. The exhaust on the truck is fine for another couple hundred extra HP. Of course, replacing it with a higher flowing unit will further help the cause.

So let’s go through a few of your ridiculous statements!!

You have to double power to feel it. ABSOLUTELY NOT TRUE

The increase would be at the top end. ABSOLUTELY NOT TRUE

The eco boost is tuned for 91. IT ACTUALLY SUGGESTS 93, BUT WILL WORK FINE WITH ALL GRADES BY ELECTRONICALLY ADJUSTING TIMING AND OTHER PARAMETERS.

There is no way you gain 100HP with a tune. YOU OBVIOUSLY DONT WANT TO HEAR WHAT ANYONE HERE SAYS, SO GO TO ANY TUNERS WEBSITE AND LOOK AT THEIR DYNO RESULTS. 100HP IS ON THE LOW SIDE!!!

The engine MAX HP never changes!!!! OMG, WTF

The turbo boost can’t be changed electronically. ABSOLUTELY NOT TRUE

Ii can only boost as fast as it’s driven! WHAT DOES THAT EVEN MEAN! LOOK UP WASTEGATE, IT WILL TELL YOU HOW BOOST PRESSURE IS DETERMINED!!!

This was your first TWO posts I quote!!! I don’t have time to go through anymore. But I’m telling you you couldn’t be anymore mis-informed if you tried. You are on here spouting mis-information with no pretense of, I think, I am pretty sure, a friend told me................ you are staunchly expressing false information.

A guy on here names 10 cars he has tuned INCLUDING 5 eco boosts and you want to quote the fact he tuned a Toyota and a Nissan to discredit him, COMPLETELY IGNORING the fact he actually has more experience with the ecoboost platform than most on this forum. You are the definition of a troll!!!

Thanks EDIZZLE
Not sure what
rjdelp7 Is ranting about
He obviously has no experience tuning dual turbo GDI/PORT FI engines that have stepper motors controlling the wastegate openings, VCT, Special lightened compressor wheels in the turbo's, HPFP's etc, etc

 

[rjdelp7]

LOL, if you can’t be helpful get off the forum!!! I love it. Man you have got some issues!! Many have posted actual proof that you can EASILY add 100hp+++ by tuning ONLY. EVERYTHING INCLUDING BOOST is electronically controlled. Again, putting a chip in a 2011 Mustang is not anything like tuning a forced induction vehicle. The exhaust on the truck is fine for another couple hundred extra HP. Of course, replacing it with a higher flowing unit will further help the cause.

So let’s go through a few of your ridiculous statements!!

You have to double power to feel it. ABSOLUTELY NOT TRUE

The increase would be at the top end. ABSOLUTELY NOT TRUE

The eco boost is tuned for 91. IT ACTUALLY SUGGESTS 93, BUT WILL WORK FINE WITH ALL GRADES BY ELECTRONICALLY ADJUSTING TIMING AND OTHER PARAMETERS.

There is no way you gain 100HP with a tune. YOU OBVIOUSLY DONT WANT TO HEAR WHAT ANYONE HERE SAYS, SO GO TO ANY TUNERS WEBSITE AND LOOK AT THEIR DYNO RESULTS. 100HP IS ON THE LOW SIDE!!!

The engine MAX HP never changes!!!! OMG, WTF

The turbo boost can’t be changed electronically. ABSOLUTELY NOT TRUE

Ii can only boost as fast as it’s driven! WHAT DOES THAT EVEN MEAN! LOOK UP WASTEGATE, IT WILL TELL YOU HOW BOOST PRESSURE IS DETERMINED!!!

This was your first TWO posts I quote!!! I don’t have time to go through anymore. But I’m telling you you couldn’t be anymore mis-informed if you tried. You are on here spouting mis-information with no pretense of, I think, I am pretty sure, a friend told me................ you are staunchly expressing false information.

A guy on here names 10 cars he has tuned INCLUDING 5 eco boosts and you want to quote the fact he tuned a Toyota and a Nissan to discredit him, COMPLETELY IGNORING the fact he actually has more experience with the ecoboost platform than most on this forum. You are the definition of a troll!!!

Again not one explanation, just mindless typing. There is no 93 octane recommendation for the EcoB, its 91. 93 is hard to find in California and other states. Look in YOUR owners manual. No single, truck exhaust, with converters and exhaust manifolds, 'will be fine' for HP stated? Mike Wolfe's 'experience' included modifications, like supercharging and provided nothing to prove his embellished claims. A reputable manufacture, like SCT, say 40hp with no mods, 80hp with exhaust and CAI. Are they wrong to? 40hp is not a night and day difference,barely worth spending $400 on a Expedition. That is what the original poster wanted to know, not Nissans, or Taurus'.

 

[Artie]

Again not one explanation, just mindless typing. There is no 93 octane recommendation for the EcoB, its 91. 93 is hard to find in California and other states. Look in YOUR owners manual. No single, truck exhaust, with converters and exhaust manifolds, 'will be fine' for HP stated? Mike Wolfe's 'experience' included modifications, like supercharging and provided nothing to prove his embellished claims. A reputable manufacture, like SCT, say 40hp with no mods, 80hp with exhaust and CAI. Are they wrong to? 40hp is not a night and day difference,barely worth spending $400 on a Expedition. That is what the original poster wanted to know, not Nissans, or Taurus'.

My manual says 91 or higher... I get 93 in my area so that’s what I run.

 

[edizzle]

Again not one explanation, just mindless typing. There is no 93 octane recommendation for the EcoB, its 91. 93 is hard to find in California and other states. Look in YOUR owners manual. No single, truck exhaust, with converters and exhaust manifolds, 'will be fine' for HP stated? Mike Wolfe's 'experience' included modifications, like supercharging and provided nothing to prove his embellished claims. A reputable manufacture, like SCT, say 40hp with no mods, 80hp with exhaust and CAI. Are they wrong to? 40hp is not a night and day difference,barely worth spending $400 on a Expedition. That is what the original poster wanted to know, not Nissans, or Taurus'.

Forgive my 93 recommendation although technically it was correct as they state 91 or HIGHER. Every single thing else I posted about your incorrect posts is correct. YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT!!!! I’m not going to take the time and do the research for you!!!! I hope you figure it out one day because your statements are so wildly ignorant!!!