I did get the FCPM in on sunday morning.
I had 2 runs with it.
The fuel pump percentage seems to do the same thing as the old one.
It seems to stay below 100% until I put the car into gear, then it seems to be all over the place (up to 199%).

I plant to change the coolant and clean the intake valves this saterday/sunday.
I may try to hit milan for a couple of runs on wednasday.

I think I'll do the tune and associated parts the following weekend.

I also got my car on the CAT scales.
4640lbs. with 7/8 of a tank of fuel and me in it.
I am about 202lbs, plus the stuff I have in the car would put it at about 4,400 lbs with a full tank of fuel.
2720lbs. front axle
1920lbs. rear axle

I spent most of the day showing the car some love.
Cleaned the inside (everything) and some original armor all.
Washed and waxed the the outside including the wheels.
Not the best picture.

Well, I'm still waiting on the module. Supposed to be here monday.
I don't know what took more than a week to ship it.

I had this nagging feeling that I still don't know if I have you on a snipe hunt or not.
I also don't like wasting peoples time.
So I went to milan dragway this past wednesday.
It was about 82° or so.

I made three runs, they were right after the 35 minute drive up there and I pretty much hot lapped the car.
I'm sure things were getting heat soaked pretty good.

I think the problem is the nut behind the wheel is loose.
The combination of torque giving me a slow time and the transmission torque truncation (You found) and no boost got the better of me.

I had a half tank of fuel and bunch of stuff in the car.
They never have the scales working for test-n-tune, but there my be one I can get my car on to see how heavy it is.

I thought I remembered people stating the brakes won't hold over 2,000 rpm foot braking. I don't have that problem. I also seem to remember people saying foot braking much higher than 2,000 rpm made the car unhappy and their runs were slower.
I'm not sure about this either.

My first run  was no foot braking (car 100 on the slips), advance trac off and shifter in "S".
60' - 2.109
1/4 - 13.772 @ 101.17

The second run was foot brake to ~1,800, adv trac off and shifter in "S".
60' - 2.075
1/4 - 13.757 @ 101.66

The third run was the same as the second.
60' - 2.147
1/4 - 13.943 @ 101.24

When I look up advertised times I see 13.6 sec @ 100-102mph.
So I should be happy that my 98,000 mi car still does what it it advertised to do.

I'll attach the logs and pics of the slips.

I think I'll try to get the valves cleaned up in the next couple of weeks and maybe go back up to milan.
Then drain and fill the coolant (switching to the new yellow from orange) and do the plugs, thermostat, MAP and tune from Matt and send him the log along with mentioning this thread and the help you have given me whit what I thought was a  problem.

I still have not been able to find any torque specs on the intake manifold bolts.
I did download the manual someone had posted here or sho forum, but it is mostly trans and other things. It's something like 3,600 pages.

I will assume I can turn the engine over with the crank bolt as long as I only go clockwise (when looking at it from the passenger side) without any problems.
I seem to remember reading there is no "key or keyway" only a taper or friction to keep the  things lined up. I could be wrong on that one.

I'll post a log after I change the fuel pump module to see if anything changes.

Thanks for your time and help SHOdded.
I appreciate your help and gaining a small amount of understanding of how these "new" cars work.

I ordered a module, we'll see if that helps anything.
I also swapped the a/c clutch relay with the fuel pump/injector relay, I ordered a new one as well.

I'll attach a log from yesterday.
The fuel pump percentage is in purple, also a screen shot that shows exactly what you posted.
Min= 11.12, max 199.4, avg 104.97.
It is all over the place.
I have not had any no start or stalls with the car, but we'll see if the log changes with the new module.
I'll also see if the relay switch makes ant difference.

I assume the parts will be here thurs.

Thanks SHOdded.

https://www.underhoodservice.com/pulse-width-fuel-pump-diagnostics/
https://www.underhoodservice.com/pulse-width-fuel-pump-diagnostics-2/

as a reference

for giggles, i would also check the fuses/relays in the bjb for fuel pump and fpcm.

I'll get  a module coming.
I did manage to get the logging to my laptop today and have the gearhead datalog configuration.
I haven't looked at it yet, but I was keeping an eye on the fuel pump duty cycle.
It would spike all over the place, most of the time it was 24-49%.
What caught my attention was the max value, it was 190%+.
I assume this is not helpful as I hadn't even given it much throttle.
I don't know if the graph will show this or not.
I'll have some time to look at my logs as well as the log you sent me tomorrow.

I have been thinking about the possibility that my car was tuned (without my knowledge) when I bought it.
It would make sense that the last trip to the dealer it could've been flashed, but all my settings (radio stations) were intact. I don't know if the flash would reset or save them.

This would explain the lack of power I was used to.
However, I would have to assume the car would attempt to hit a certain amount of power. So this makes me think it was not.
If torque is able to read the VSS and it can tell time, it should be close to being correct, as opposed to relying on gps. I've read that a phones gps updates at about 1hz. That would be useless. Even draggy updates at 10hz. from what I've read. So I think it should be "comparable".

A goal or a targeted torque number.
Since the ecu knows fuel used and mass of air taken in (probably the wrong wording) It can shoot for a programed amount of torque.
I only mention this because, even though I'm at 97,000mi., I would think it would still attempt to hit this target and could compensate with boost pressure and other things to come close to the original performance when new.
Unlike a NA motor that would have much less left on the "table" to achieve this.
I could be completely wrong.

So I guess I'm back to something isn't right and is slowing the car down for some safety reason.

I'm just thinking out loud. If this is not correct to the best of your understanding, please correct me.

As an aside. My brother has a '13 focus titanium. We were at a light next to each other. I didn't get on it  until I saw he was. I floored it. I was in well into second gear before I was in front of him. That can't be right.

His car does okay for what it is, but I should have overtaken him much quicker.
I may try to hit a test-n-tune at milan dragway to see how good/bad my car is and eliminate seat of the pants feeling. This will at least give me solid numbers on my cars (lack of) performance.

Thanks SHOdded.

knowing how common the fpcm problem is in 2013+ i would say go for the new part. from what i have seen a lot of ford problems are electrical / control problems, been true forever. not exactly a prime location for the fpcm to escape the vagaries of heat. maybe put a heatsink on it? but that might cause other issues lol.

sbs is the admin on this site now. you can pm him also but might be a while before you get a response ...

as to the lpfp itself, idk. the fuel pump module duty cycle is a fixed number so it's not something that changes itself over time. the fuel pump of course can get exhausted but i just dont see it happening stock.

Comparing steal blue vs my duty cycle.
His seem to spike and stay flat, mine is a jagged line ramping up.
his goes from .37 to .48 and stays there, mine .27 slowly ramping up to .46.
Our fuel pressure rear (main fuel rail pressure) seem to behave similar.

I also see the (1) torque source is present during his first gear acceleration.
I wonder if ford is limiting torque in first gear on purpose.

I only looked at one of my logs, I will look/ compare his to more of mine.

I remember him having 2 sho's, I think he traded in the first one with a couple of dead cylinders (maybe).

His blue one seemed to run very well, even stock.
If this is '10-'12 this might have been his first sho?

Thanks SHOdded, at least I have something to compared mine to.

If the duty cycle is higher than it should be. Would that (in your best guess) point toward the module or the in tank pump?
For $80.00 I could get one to see if it helps and put the old one in the car as just in case.

welcome to the real. lol.

that fuel pump duty cycle looks high at 60, i have usually seen it set to just under 50. 60 means the pump is allowed to overdrive to 120% of max iirc. it may be a difference between 2010-12 and 2013+ tuning but i dont think so.

anyway i found an old log for your perusal, from a 2010-12 sho iirc.

I've been screwing around with the x4.
I deleted all the config files I loaded.
I looked at the Gearhead file and it has TFT selected.
I found out how to switch to 8 gauges from 2 and TFT is displayed and working.

Wow, this is a rabbit hole I've traveled down.
Late to the party as usual, and allot of catching up to do.

I had torque running on the way home today. I was surprised 8 miles on the e-way and the trans was only at 142°.
The car felt better this morning after exiting the e-way, the log is below.

It is still odd with the actual throttle angle and it went from 0 to torque source of 1  while accelerating in first gear. It felt better though.

After work and the TFT in the 140°'s I thought I'd try another 0-60 run.
the shifter was in S, the car seemed to fall on it's face and not really recover.
The time on torque was 6.4 seconds.
I don't have a log of it. Torque is showing all blue (obd, gps and car) except my phone is red.
The logs seem to have a long span between data and is not really usable.

SO whatever is going on seems to be caused by the transmission, no clue what.
I believe the trans was around 90° before I pulled out of the parking lot, so I don't think the sensor is faulty or at least it is not obvious like reading some arbitrary low number. Even after 3 0-60 runs it only hit the 170°'s.

I did find on live link where I can delete the config files, so I should be able to see the one with TFT selected.

This is very frustrating.

I have been doing the 5 in/out on the tranny, I'll recheck the level and ad a 1/2 quart to see if that makes any difference.

Thanks SHOdded.

I'll add this. Up to 1/2 throttle seems strong, but more than that (when it does this) feels much less strong.