K03/K04 DIY Tuning Summary

[Rusty]

So here's a summary to date of my K04 DIY tuning efforts, with some K03 numbers thrown in for reference. You'll notice a big drop in power going to the K04, even though the MAF increases and everything else stays constant - I'm not sure what the hell that is. Anyone got an idea? I suspect a collapsed muffler - I'll find out when I install a 3" exhaust this weekend.

Anyone want to start a pool on how much WHP/WTQ I gain with the exhaust? I'll guess +30 WTQ and +30 WHP. If that sounds insane - I drop to 10 lbs boost at redline. If I hold 16 to redline with the exhaust, that should be about 30 HP, eh?

Mod Abbreviations
COAM: Colorado Outlaw Airbox Mod
MBC: Dawes Mechanical Boost Controller
Cartech: Cartech FMU Fuel Control
PMI: Port-Matched Intake
HMAF: Holey MAF Housing *skews the MAF numbers low
RCAT: Random CAT
PME: Port-Matched Exhaust
SESR: Stock Exhaust Sans Resonator
FMIC: Front Mounted Intercooler
nnni/nbar: injector cc/FPR setting
BPM: Barometric Pressure Mod
PCIII: Dynojet Power Commander III Fuel Control

All runs are 91 octane, except the one labeled 97. I did that just for fun. :)


WHP/WTQ MAF* Tim Ret Bst Cfg
avg
200/210 108 30 2 15 K03: COAM,MBC,Cartech,PMI,HMAF,RCAT,PME,SESR,FMIC,440i/2bar,BPM
185/215 105 27 0 14 PCIII,380i/3bar,bad turbo
150/200 K04: Stanley knife in intake(!)
170/200 121 27 5 16 K04: Baseline (Stanley knife removed)
180/210 126 23 5 16 gutted RCAT
190/215 124 26 5 17 APR Intake Hose (no MBC increase)
195/220 125 29 1 17 APR hose 97 Octane


Dyno Charts (there's not one for "Stanley knife")

K03 200/210:
http://home.comcast.net/~rragan7540/Passat/dynos/012805-K03-Cartech.gif

K03 185/215 (bad turbo - see how slow it spools?):
http://home.comcast.net/~rragan7540/Passat/dynos/121405-K03-PCIII.gif

K04 170/200:
http://home.comcast.net/~rragan7540/Passat/dynos/072906-K04-baseline.gif

K04 180/210:
http://home.comcast.net/~rragan7540/Passat/dynos/080306-K04-catgut.gif

K04 190/215:
http://home.comcast.net/~rragan7540/Passat/dynos/082906-K04-APRhose91.gif

K04 195/220 97 Octane:
http://home.comcast.net/~rragan7540/Passat/dynos/082306-K04-APRhose97.gif

[scotty_passat]

hmmm....more maf, more timing, cooler temps....should be ripping! that is some nutty timing on the 97 octane!! stuck brake or slipping transmission maybe?

[Purplezr2]

why is your horsepower so low compared to Modifeid who is also running a ko4 What am I missing.

[Rusty]

Scotty and Purple, I'm clueless except for two:

1) Way back when I removed the resonator, I noticed that the exhaust pipe was crimped above the axle - crimped as in "not a circular cross-section." Because of this, I had always intended to upgrade exhaust b4 upgrading turbo, but the turbo just didn't last long enough.

2) A local high-speed road has a concrete barrier very close to the driver's side of the car. With the windows down, when I punch it I can hear the high-pitched, engine-noise-drowning sound of a collapsed muffler. Have y'all heard that sound? Like compressed air rushing out an air nozzle.

If it's not the exhaust causing my low numbers, I guess I'll learn something...

[Rusty]

Humor:

You can imagine my utter, abject depression when my first K04 dyno yielded a whopping 150/200. It took weeks to discover why. Weeks of "Where's my Stanley Knife?" Weeks of "All this work and my car runs like SHIT?!?!?!?"

I had been trimming some vac lines, and laid it on that nice flat area above the grill in front of the intake snorkel. And forgot about it.

It was such a RELIEF when I found that thing wedged in the aft part of the snorkel. :lol: :crazy: :beer:

[scotty_passat]

how doe sthe AFR differ between these runs (you have a wideband, right?)

[Electron Man]

If you haven't gotten a decent dyno run with the K04 since your K03 started leaking oil, you may have a partially clogged cat. :banghead:

Check it out..that's my guess. You should've seen at least ~15HP with *just* a K04 swap.

[Rusty]

Scotty: Still tuning with narrowband (a.k.a. "po' boy" method) - I used to try for .89's, but that's too rich. I now tune for .86's. The K03 runs were about .88, but in terms of a dyno plot, anywhere between .84 and .89 give nearly the same results. It's transient situations (mainly shifts with the Tip) that drive my AFR. .88-.89 causes great heaping bogs between shifts. .84-.86 help it out alot. These bogs *might* be due to the exhaust, and if that's true, then I'll be able to go richer again (.88's) to help out the timing issues. I'll get a wideband someday, I promise. :whistle:

'Lec: what part of "gutted cat" does not register? :poke: :lol: - and that's exactly why I gutted it. Well almost. I took it off to check it, and the CAT looked great. :confused: But I was damned if I went to all the trouble of removing the CAT for nothing, so I gutted it anyway. :D

[evilvariant]

get software and you'll be where you belong with the KO4 numbers. just a thought

[ONE8T]

Anyone want to start a pool on how much WHP/WTQ I gain with the exhaust? I'll guess +30 WTQ and +30 WHP. If that sounds insane - I drop to 10 lbs boost at redline. If I hold 16 to redline with the exhaust, that should be about 30 HP, eh?

You were doomed to low numbers without an exhaust. I'll go with 15whp and 20 wtq. How did you go that long on stock? A real McGyver would have duct taped beer cans together.

[Rusty]

get software and you'll be where you belong with the KO4 numbers. just a thoughtPeople have been telling me to "get software" for three years now. Meanwhile, I've been having a lot of fun and learning 10x more than if I had followed that advice.

We'll know soon. I test-fitted the exhaust last night. OMG it's a work of art. This is the exhaust that Femi fabricated for his car. It's pure sex. All the welds are perfect. All the bends are the largest radius they can possibly be, given the constraints of the Passat chassis. It's got to be the closest thing to a pure straight pipe than can be installed in the stock location. The fit is absolutely perfect, and it HAS to be because 3" is BIG and there's not room for more than a millimeter or two of error. The joints are slip-joints with V-band clamps. It's just awesome. Even if I don't get much power out of it, it's such a pleasure to look at...

Dan, are you reading this? Thank you SO much.:kiss: :heart:

It goes in for good tonight, after I saw off the 4" tip. I liked it on Dan's and Femi's cars with the bodykits. No way is it going to happen on my "sleeper." :lol:

OBTW - my muffler is NOT collapsed. However, the crimp in the tailpipe is far worse than I remembered, and I had another (small) crimp in the downpipe. What the hell did those factory workers DO when they installed my exhaust? :confused:

[Rusty]

You were doomed to low numbers without an exhaust. ... How did you go that long on stock? ...Lack of money, plain and simple. At least I removed the resonator... :)

[turbo2000]

Awesome Rusty! I think my ko3 is strating to go so all of the recent ko4 info has been Great!!

[1.8Tttturbo]

rusty,

are your 8/3/06 and 8/29/06 runs no different with the exception of only the apr hose? if so, that's an awesome gain from just that turbo inlet hose.

[Rusty]

rusty,

are your 8/3/06 and 8/29/06 runs no different with the exception of only the apr hose? if so, that's an awesome gain from just that turbo inlet hose.Yup, that's correct. No difference except the APR TIH.

[Rusty]

Can you guys imagine how much money all these dynos would have cost me at the dyno shop? They were all done using the E-mail Dyno (http://www.passatworld.com/forums/showthread.php?t=175559).
My number-one tuning tool. Props to Uwe for VAG-COM and Andy for his Dynoplot spreadsheet. :salute:

[ONE8T]

Yup, that's correct. No difference except the APR TIH.
Really the APR TIH compared to a 100,000+ mile hose.

The email dyno is an absolutely great tool. As often said, it is less important what type of dyno you use, more important to keep the machine (or method)the same. So all Rusty's info is comparable for his tuning purposes.

Maybe we should call it the butthead dyno. 3rd gear WOT runs are cool. Huh huh huh.
http://www.holmesdale.net/images/features/lookalikes_butthead.jpg

[Rusty]

152,000 to be almost exact.
I dunno how much difference that really makes. My OEM hose was firm, and in good shape (snicker). I think that horrible corrugation folding in the OEM hose is bad karma. I have always thought that. I have always wanted something better. Now I have it. :)
...Maybe we should call it the butthead dyno. 3rd gear WOT runs are cool. Huh huh huh.
http://www.holmesdale.net/images/features/lookalikes_butthead.jpgROFLMAO...

[Rusty]

Gee, I just did a quick count of my "dynos" folder. 109 dynos since September of 2003.

Typical dyno run @$75 times 109 = $8,175.

Damn, am I hijacking my own thread?

[evilvariant]

People have been telling me to "get software" for three years now. Meanwhile, I've been having a lot of fun and learning 10x more than if I had followed that advice.
:

all that said and done....190WHP/220lbs on a KO4 is not worth all the time and effort. torque should be way up..and it isn't

and 10x more fun and learning and you still have stock exhaust? might want to upgrade that with a ko4.

[nibor82]

Haven't seen too many AEB K04's over 200whp.

[ryan8186]

all that said and done....190WHP/220lbs on a KO4 is not worth all the time and effort. torque should be way up..and it isn't

and 10x more fun and learning and you still have stock exhaust? might want to upgrade that with a ko4.

He just bought Femi's/D.Passat's 3 inch turboback...

[ONE8T]

all that said and done....190WHP/220lbs on a KO4 is not worth all the time and effort. torque should be way up..and it isn't

and 10x more fun and learning and you still have stock exhaust? might want to upgrade that with a ko4.
You're mean.

[Rusty]

all that said and done....190WHP/220lbs on a KO4 is not worth all the time and effort. torque should be way up..and it isn't

and 10x more fun and learning and you still have stock exhaust? might want to upgrade that with a ko4.
You know what? Fuck you Nuno.

On second thought - FUCK YOU NUNO.

I am sick and tired of your condescending, know-it-all, "I'm better than you" attitude. STFU. I'm sick of you. :thumbdown :thumbdown

[evilvariant]

i love you rusty

[scotty_passat]

rusty I'd like to see you get an EGT gauge or wideband for your road dynos, maybe it's too rich up top killing power (now that you are in uncharted MAF-range territory)? re-post up your boost level, MAF, injection time + PC correction + fuel pressure + injector size, rpms, etc..

you've been tuning fuel to eliminate knock correction, while keeping narrowband O2 "rich", right? you have lots of timing maybe there is a tradeoff to be made.

what are your boost levels again? MBC still, right?

[1.8T2003B5]

Lmfao

[Rusty]

i love you rusty
Oh, man, first Jacob, now YOU! I am so special today. :lol:

I sincerely apologize for flying off the handle. Thanks for your PM. I did not realize you were "ribbing" me. Next time, put a poke and a smile on it, OK? :poke: :)

Nevertheless, I'm way too sensitive about the whole exhaust issue. I tried to get 17's and an exhaust for three years. My wife kept getting us into debt trouble, and my car money had to bail us out. It got so bad (she kept getting credit cards behind my back, and charging them up to the limit - the end total was about $50K), I finally had to declare bankruptcy (community property state = her debts are my debts). So I've been slowly climbing out of the hole. Oh, yeah, and after all the sh*t, she left me for a guy she met on an Internet porn site. It was a year ago August 21st that she announced she was leaving. It's still raw for me. :mad: :censored:

I'll take that post down if you like, or we can leave it up as an example of what happens when Rusty's buttons get pushed...

[Electron Man]

Leave it up...I suspected the tone of his post, but your "retaliation" is hilarious. :lol:

[Rusty]

rusty I'd like to see you get an EGT gauge or wideband for your road dynos, maybe it's too rich up top killing power (now that you are in uncharted MAF-range territory)? re-post up your boost level, MAF, injection time + PC correction + fuel pressure + injector size, rpms, etc..Good suggestions. Let's wait 'til I get the exhaust on and see what happens. I was gonna put it on last night, but I was exhausted and fell asleep at 6:30... I slept through the night, it was awesome. :sleep:

you've been tuning fuel to eliminate knock correction, while keeping narrowband O2 "rich", right? you have lots of timing maybe there is a tradeoff to be made.Well, I don't really know how to answer this without a dissertation. If the exhaust doesn't help, then I think I just have too much timing to support the MAF that I'm cramming into the cylinders, so even if I'm not getting "knock," the engine is working against itself. Make sense? That's the only way I can figure that I'm getting less power with more MAF. I could see how I'd be running rich with .89 volts, but not .85.

Here's the data from my last run. The A/F is an estimate. 380cc injectors, 3bar FPR:

RPM Fuel PCIII% MAF IAT Tim O2 A/F Knock Retard 1,2,3,4
1720 7.10 0 22 27 14 0.750 14.2 0 0 2 0
1760 7.62 0 28 27 13 0.630 14.6 0 0 5 0
1920 9.66 9 39 27 8 0.450 14.7 0 2 4 0
2120 15.36 20 60 27 0 0.655 14.5 2 2 6 2
2400 14.72 25 67 27 5 0.750 14.2 7 2 8 5
2640 14.85 20 76 27 7 0.850 13.3 7 2 9 5
2920 14.59 20 82 29 8 0.850 13.3 6 1 9 4
3200 14.46 25 86 30 17 0.845 13.4 6 1 8 4
3520 13.95 25 91 30 14 0.850 13.3 5 3 8 3
3800 13.57 20 94 32 19 0.845 13.4 5 5 8 3
4080 13.57 25 97 32 17 0.840 13.4 5 5 8 5
4320 13.70 22 103 33 20 0.845 13.4 5 7 7 5
4600 14.08 22 108 35 20 0.850 13.3 7 7 7 5
4840 13.89 20 111 35 21 0.855 13.2 7 7 9 5
5080 14.14 15 113 36 22 0.860 13.1 9 6 9 4
5280 14.21 15 117 36 20 0.855 13.2 9 6 8 4
5480 14.34 10 119 38 19 0.845 13.4 8 5 8 3
5680 14.53 5 122 38 21 0.845 13.4 8 5 8 6
5880 14.27 10 124 38 25 0.845 13.4 8 5 8 6
6040 13.82 20 123 39 26 0.855 13.2 8 5 8 6
6200 13.50 10 122 41 24 0.855 13.2 7 4 7 5
6320 15.10 10 124 41 8 0.850 13.3 7 4 7 5



what are your boost levels again? MBC still, right?Still MBC, 16 lbs from 2200-4500, then it drops to 12 at 5500, then 10 at redline. Curious thing that I haven't figured out yet. I got an extra lb of boost when I installed the APR hose. The MBC shouldn't care - it should still hold it at 16 - ???

[evilvariant]

Yeah Fuck Me! :)

[modifiedA4]

rusty since you pm'd me to this thread, ill add my 1.9999cents :)

IATs looks pretty nice...so thats not the limiting issue, especially with 97 octane in there. but for some reason the timing is off...and the wavyness of the graph is interesting...perhaps you are overboosting/surging?

overall i guess the hp number seems a bit low. from a plain-jane k04 setup 200awhp is average to above average. 195fwhp, seems a little low relatively speaking. my 220awhp seems to be an anomally, of the dyno or my car :D, I plan to have another dyno done in oct at AWE.

keep up the good work, fuck you, and get a CAPS time so i have a better understanding of where you're at :thumbup:

[ONE8T]

You still should try the 2.75" ID maf housing. You'd likely see peak maf readings somewhere in the 130-140's. It just looks like th maps you're getting thrown into are giving you too much timing, so it is a constant battle with the retard. You adjust fuel to make it as workable as possible, but the more direct method is to back off the timing by getting the maps closer to normal by getting your maf readings closer to the scale the ecu is expecting.

If maf housings were meant to have holes, they'd be made out of cheese.

[Rusty]

You still should try the 2.75" ID maf housing. You'd likely see peak maf readings somewhere in the 130-140's. It just looks like th maps you're getting thrown into are giving you too much timing, so it is a constant battle with the retard. You adjust fuel to make it as workable as possible, but the more direct method is to back off the timing by getting the maps closer to normal by getting your maf readings closer to the scale the ecu is expecting.That's reasonable, and I will consider it. Thanks for the feedback.

If maf housings were meant to have holes, they'd be made out of cheese.But I've become emotionally attached to it! It's such a cheesy mod...



As far as timing goes - doh, rusty - the whole reason I put 97 octane in there (6 gals 91 + 10 gals 101) was to see if that was it. Well it obviously wasn't. doh, me. I don't think it's timing.

There's one more variable here that I just thought of last night. The K03 runs were on F6DTC plugs. I wanted colder plugs to help the knock retard - Bosch makes F5DTC's but I couldn't find them anywhere so I got F5DPOR's. They helped the retard by 3 or 4 degrees. But they do not project as far into the combustion chamber. I wonder if that's important? At some point, I'll throw the F6DTC's back in to see if there's a difference.

Exhaust goes on tonight, dammit! God, it's beautiful...:heart:

[ONE8T]

There's one more variable here that I just thought of last night. The K03 runs were on F6DTC plugs. I wanted colder plugs to help the knock retard - Bosch makes F5DTC's but I couldn't find them anywhere so I got F5DPOR's. They helped the retard by 3 or 4 degrees. But they do not project as far into the combustion chamber. I wonder if that's important? At some point, I'll throw the F6DTC's back in to see if there's a difference.

Exhaust goes on tonight, dammit! God, it's beautiful...:heart:
Good luck with the exhaust, it'll be great.

The plugs are just like the fueling. No reason you should have to run plugs that cold except to make up for the overadvanced timing due to the maps you're in. Go direct to the source. If I had a housing that would work for you, I'de send it to you for free just to stop this madness.

[evilvariant]

Rusty you running a stand alone?

[D.Passat00]

We'll know soon. I test-fitted the exhaust last night. OMG it's a work of art. This is the exhaust that Femi fabricated for his car. It's pure sex. All the welds are perfect. All the bends are the largest radius they can possibly be, given the constraints of the Passat chassis. It's got to be the closest thing to a pure straight pipe than can be installed in the stock location. The fit is absolutely perfect, and it HAS to be because 3" is BIG and there's not room for more than a millimeter or two of error. The joints are slip-joints with V-band clamps. It's just awesome. Even if I don't get much power out of it, it's such a pleasure to look at...

Dan, are you reading this? Thank you SO much.:kiss: :heart:

It goes in for good tonight, after I saw off the 4" tip. I liked it on Dan's and Femi's cars with the bodykits. No way is it going to happen on my "sleeper." :lol:


glad you liked it! i've seen lots of welds at my previous job, and whoever femi got to weld it did a very very good job. i don't think i've seen a stainless weld as clean as what's on that exhaust. and the v-band makes it a sinch to remove, unlike the ghetto stock exhaust. i'm glad i sold it to you, as you can appreciate the high quality of the exhaust. :)

[ONE8T]

Maybe some of this recent Rusty hating is really just exhaust envy.:lol:

[ganseg]

Scotty: Still tuning with narrowband (a.k.a. "po' boy" method) - I used to try for .89's, but that's too rich. I now tune for .86's. The K03 runs were about .88, but in terms of a dyno plot, anywhere between .84 and .89 give nearly the same results. It's transient situations (mainly shifts with the Tip) that drive my AFR. .88-.89 causes great heaping bogs between shifts. .84-.86 help it out alot. These bogs *might* be due to the exhaust, and if that's true, then I'll be able to go richer again (.88's) to help out the timing issues. I'll get a wideband someday, I promise. :whistle: :D

Hey Rusty! Hope you have it full power by Oct 15. I am driving a jeep with a software upgrade right now. I am borrowing some very simple software (CarChip) that will tell me o2 voltage. Do the voltage numbers cross brands? And what is the goal of getting to .86? To be rich enough to help with detonation? The software company said their goal is to get as lean as they can without knocking. hum.

[Rusty]

Rusty you running a stand alone?Sort of. It's the "PCIII" referred to. Here's the details: "Standalone" Fuel Management Install - DynoJet PowerCommander for 1.8T (http://www.passatworld.com/forums/showthread.php?t=182011)

[Rusty]

Exhaust is on. Loud as hell but the tone is glorious, especially at 6000 WOT. But I guess this will be a learning experience as opposed to a HP celebration. I'm getting tired of learning... :thumbdown

No appreciable change in HP or TQ, but I'm getting:
1) 10 g/sec more MAF - 134 max
This is pushing the maps to:
2) lowered timing (21 deg max instead of 26)
3) and I'm starting to bump up against the 16.32 msec limit - at 6000 rpm.

Number (3) is very bad - it was ok bumping up against it in mid-rpm's - just add some with the PCIII. But adding pulswidth at 6000+ is going to make the injectors go static. Argh. I'll be scratching my head a lot this weekend. :confused:

The boost curve hasn't changed one bit. I'm still dropping off to 10 lbs at redline. :confused:

Positive results: the big dip in the HP curve from 4000 to 5500 is gone. Throttle response is greatly improved. The horrific bogging between shifts that's been plaguing me for two years - ever since I removed the resonator - is completely gone.

I just don't underf*cking stand how I can get 10 gm/sec more MAF (more like 12-14 taking into account HoleyMAF) without a corresponding increase in HP. Actually a 25 gm/sec increase compared to the K03. With no HP increase. WTF?!?!? :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

:confused:

I read in an Autospeed article that bleed-type MBC's tend to loose boost at high rpm. It just so happens I have a pressure-regulator valve laying around, so my next "trick" will be to replace the MBC with the pressure reg. But even if that works to keep boost from falling, I'll still have to deal with static injectors. :cry: :banghead: :censored:

185WHP/220WTQ:
http://home.comcast.net/~rragan7540/Passat/dynos/090206-K04-3inExhaust.gif

"bsln" in the title is "baseline." I tried maps with +5% more fuel, and +10% more fuel, with predictable results - a bit more TQ at midrpm, and drastic drops in HP at high RPM because it was too rich. Here's the data for the above graph:

RPM Fuel MAF IAT Tim O2 Knock Retard 1,2,3,4
1680 6.53 21 29 23 0.205 0 0 0 0
1760 7.62 25 27 20 0.735 0 0 2 0
1960 9.09 35 27 14 0.585 2 2 2 0
2160 15.23 56 27 6 0.280 2 2 4 0
2440 14.21 63 27 2 0.665 2 5 6 5
2720 14.91 74 27 8 0.835 4 5 8 5
3000 14.40 80 29 7 0.850 4 4 8 4
3320 14.02 85 29 11 0.845 3 4 8 4
3640 13.95 90 29 17 0.845 3 3 8 4
3920 13.57 94 30 15 0.845 5 5 7 3
4240 13.50 100 32 19 0.840 5 5 7 5
4480 13.76 106 32 18 0.845 4 7 8 8
4760 14.40 110 33 17 0.845 6 7 8 8
5000 14.66 114 35 18 0.855 6 7 8 7
5240 14.59 117 35 20 0.855 5 6 8 7
5480 15.04 122 36 18 0.855 5 6 8 6
5680 15.36 125 38 19 0.850 8 5 7 6
5880 16.32 133 38 21 0.850 11 5 7 6
6000 16.32 133 39 18 0.865 11 5 6 5
6160 16.00 132 41 17 0.870 10 5 6 5
6280 15.49 132 42 20 0.875 10 5 5 5
6440 15.36 129 44 21 0.865 9 4 5 5

[Rusty]

Hey, what kind of boost do you guys with K04's get at 6000 and 6500 rpm? And what's the timing in the 6000-6500 range?

The pressure regulator helped - sort of. I have 235 WTQ now. Peak HP didn't increase, I'm still around 190, but the car feels a whole lot better, and doesn't die as bad from 6000-6500. This is supported by the dyno which shows a 10 HP gain from 6000 to 6500. Which corresponds to the boost gain:
Dawes = 8 lbs boost @ 6500
PReg = 10 lbs boost @ 6500

But now I am plagued with boost spikes. Maybe I need a $75 regulator instead of a $25 one. :) And I also need a pressure-relief valve to help the turbo spool quicker - with the Dawes I had 16 lbs @ 2200. The pressure regulator allows wastegate creep, and it's creeping like mad - now I don't get the full 16 lbs 'til 3500 or later. 12 lbs @ 3000. It's nicely drivable like this, though, and really tames the low RPM timing curve. And I'm not convinced the PR is really the way to go. Maybe the Dawes got fouled by oil from the bad turbo. I'm going to open it up and check later today.

190WHP/235WTQ:
http://home.comcast.net/~rragan7540/Passat/dynos/090306-K04-PR.gif

RPM Fuel MAF IAT Tim O2 Knock Retard 1,2,3,4
1600 5.89 17 26 22 0.820 0 0 0 0 13.7
1720 6.46 20 26 23 0.740 0 0 2 0 14.3
1760 7.36 24 26 20 0.145 0 2 5 2 16.1
1920 8.00 29 26 17 0.595 0 2 4 2 14.6
2120 8.13 34 24 14 0.635 2 2 4 2 14.6
2320 8.96 38 24 16 0.200 2 2 3 2 15.9
2560 8.51 44 24 16 0.530 2 1 3 2 14.7
2760 10.94 55 24 17 0.725 4 3 2 1 14.3
3000 12.93 70 24 13 0.845 4 3 5 1 13.4
3280 13.63 80 26 17 0.870 3 3 5 0 12.8
3600 14.08 88 26 17 0.860 3 5 4 2 13.1
3880 14.40 97 27 14 0.850 2 7 8 5 13.3
4200 14.98 106 29 18 0.840 5 7 8 5 13.4
4520 15.36 113 29 19 0.850 7 6 8 9 13.3
4800 15.17 116 32 17 0.850 9 6 8 9 13.3
5080 15.55 118 32 19 0.855 11 5 8 8 13.2
5320 15.49 121 33 20 0.855 11 5 7 8 13.2
5560 15.42 123 35 20 0.860 11 5 7 8 13.1
5760 15.42 125 35 19 0.860 11 5 6 8 13.1
5960 14.98 126 36 20 0.855 11 5 6 8 13.2
6160 14.53 127 38 22 0.850 10 4 6 7 13.3
6360 14.34 126 38 22 0.860 10 4 5 7 13.1

[ONE8T]

Hey, what kind of boost do you guys with K04's get at 6000 and 6500 rpm? And what's the timing in the 6000-6500 range?

18-21 degrees, varies a little from run to run, but with little or no retard.

I'll look at boost, don't generally log it, but it's not much at that rpm level. I'm guessing 10-12 psi.

[mb598]

I am absolutely impressed with how far you have come on your journy rusty the simple fact that you still dont have programing and are producing pretty damn good numbers blows my mind. cudos to you my friend:) :thumbup:

[D.Passat00]

rusty-are you running the high flow cat, or the test pipe?

[Rusty]

rusty-are you running the high flow cat, or the test pipe?The test pipe, and for only one reason - so I can get a torque wrench on the flange bolts.

The exhaust note while the turbo is spooling up is interesting. With the Dawes it was smooth as silk, with the PR it's rough and choppy. So you can actually "hear" the wastegate creep.

[Rusty]

18-21 degrees, varies a little from run to run, but with little or no retard.

I'll look at boost, don't generally log it, but it's not much at that rpm level. I'm guessing 10-12 psi.

Thanks, Pat, this makes me feel better.

1) If you are indeed getting 10-12 psi at your altitude, and I'm getting 10-12 psi way up here, then I'm doing pretty good boost-wise.

2) For timing - the numbers given in block 011 are the corrected timing curve, after the knock retard is applied, right? If so, then the corrected timing curve also looks good.

Hmmm... wonder what's next? I could get rid of this retard easy by re-installing the IAT mod, but I'm nervous about frozen fuel trims...
:hmmm:
Washing the car, that's what's next! - I haven't washed it since June 23rd. It looks like it's been rally-racing. Maybe that will help the knock retard. :crazy:

[modifiedA4]

rusty,

as far as normal k04 boost goes...my guage has been reading about 15psi at 4500-5250rpm and tapers to 12/13psi by redline. this is at sealevel. i dont have any block 115 logs for you though. perhaps i can get a block 003/115 log for you this week.

my 'real' g/s max out consistanly at about 190g/s. my IATs are through the roof. :banghead:

[Electron Man]

Timing retard is negating some of the "power" you're expecting from the higher MAF readings.

Putting a HF cat back in (something with media, not "gutless") will help reduce boost overshoot.

Didn't you change your fuel filter last year? :confused: Trying to think of all possible causes of low fuel delivery.

[ONE8T]

2) For timing - the numbers given in block 011 are the corrected timing curve, after the knock retard is applied, right? If so, then the corrected timing curve also looks good.

Hmmm... wonder what's next? I could get rid of this retard easy by re-installing the IAT mod, but I'm nervous about frozen fuel trims...
:hmmm:

Like electron man said in a later post, the timing retard is not good for power. As best as my simple mind understands it, things aren't quite as simple as just looking at the "net" timing. You don't want the ecu to be fighting the requested timing, it causes a choppiness in power delivery after there is some degree of correction, then back on, then corrected.

I ran into some of this when I had some extra timing added via Lemmiwinks and I did the "real" dyno runs a few months back. Explained to the dyno guru at Mustang what I was doing and he suggested backing off the extra 3 degrees I had added and leave the program as is. Power curve peaked the same and was smoother.

[Rusty]

Just so you guys know, I've made a lot of progress. No time to post all the details, but

1) Spark plugs made a big difference. I swapped the F5DPOR's for my old trusty F6DTCs. The DTC's project about 2mm more into the combustion chamber. From 2500 to 5000, they cut power as expected because of more knock retard (hotter plug). But they got rid of the severe dropoff after 6000. Now I hold my power all the way to redline!!! So I investigated F5DTC's one more time - and I found some! www.ecodetuning.com has them. So does the local Porsche dealer - they are the stock (Beru FR5DTC - resistor) plug on a '97 Carrera. I'll be testing them this weekend.

2) I turned my BPM down evern further. From 2.5 to 1.0. This made a dramatic difference! A couple of degrees less retard, and such an improvement in combustion efficiency that it was driving the boost spikes to overboost conditions, so I put the Dawes MBC back in.

3) Because of 2, even with no boost spikes using the Dawes, I was getting overboost at 16 psi. So I had to turn the boost down to 15 lbs. So I'm consistently getting 220 WTQ, and about 195 WHP, with 15 lbs boost. But, because of the altitude I think, it starts dropping at 4000!
2200 - 4000 = 15
5000 = 12
6500 = 10

4) The "feel" of the car is tremendous. It feels the way I've always wanted it to run. It's a real kick in the pants to be able to actually use the powerband above 5000.

5) Next step after the F5DTCs is Genesis injectors: The best fuel injectors I've used (http://www.passatworld.com/forums/showthread.php?t=221153)

6) I'm still mulling over the fact that the dynos don't show any real improvement over my K03. There is tremendous improvement. I think I figured some of it out. The coastdown calcs were done with 205/60x15 back in Sep 2003. The K03 runs in this thread were done with 225/50x15. I think the smaller diameter tires skewed the data high for those runs. All my K04 runs are with 225/45x17. This is getting too complicated. I'm thinking about tossing the 15's on this weekend just to see what happens.

[ONE8T]

6) I'm still mulling over the fact that the dynos don't show any real improvement over my K03. There is tremendous improvement. I think I figured some of it out. The coastdown calcs were done with 205/60x15 back in Sep 2003. The K03 runs in this thread were done with 225/50x15. I think the smaller diameter tires skewed the data high for those runs. All my K04 runs are with 225/45x17. This is getting too complicated. I'm thinking about tossing the 15's on this weekend just to see what happens.
No doubt about it. I saw about 1/2 second diff in CAPS times going from 195/65/15 winters to 225/50/16 summers.

[D.Passat00]

too bad you didn't want the plugs earlier - i went to ecode last weekend to a gtg, and they where giving 15% off everything.

in any event, i'm glad it's running better now. hopefully the colder plugs and usrt injectors will reduce the knock.

[Rusty]

BTW I re-did my dyno with a tire size correction factor, and now the dynos are matching the performance that I feel. The K03 dynos with the smaller tires were definitely too high. New Numbers:

K03 Cartech: 190H/200T (15 lbs boost)
K03 PCIII: 170H/200T (14 lbs)
Current K04: 200H/220T (15 lbs)

[Rusty]

So anyway, here's what I've decided.

There's a certain way I want my car to run, and I'm almost there. If the Genesis injectors do the trick, then I'm done.

If they don't do the trick, then I'm going to re-do my boost control with a higher quality regulator, and add a release valve so I can control boost onset.

If that doesn't do it, I'll be done until spring. Then - you read it here first - I'll get the PC-16 file. Yes, I'll get chipped. (Did hell just freeze over?) There's just no other reasonable way around the stock ECU's overboost limit and timing curve. I want 17-20 lbs boost at the torque peak. With the PC-16, plus good boost control, the PCIII, and maybe one or three holes in my MAF housing :lol:, I should be able to tweak it just the way I want it.

Oh, yeah, come spring I'll probably throw a Kinetic or APR exhaust manifold at it. Maybe give me a couple more psi at top end?

I have redone all the dynos in this thread with my wheel correction factor. I'll post them up in a summary thread after I get the Genesis injectors in.

All in all, this tuning nightmare was a good experience. It exposed a flaw in the e-mail dyno. This is a great thing for all the hordes of people clamoring to use it.

[D.Passat00]

If that doesn't do it, I'll be done until spring. Then - you read it here first - I'll get the PC-16 file. Yes, I'll get chipped. (Did hell just freeze over?) There's just no other reasonable way around the stock ECU's overboost limit and timing curve. I want 17-20 lbs boost at the torque peak. With the PC-16, plus good boost control, the PCIII, and maybe one or three holes in my MAF housing :lol:, I should be able to tweak it just the way I want it.


i don't think i heard that correctly...Rusty is CONSIDERING gettting a chip?!?!?!?

[Electron Man]

...I'll get the PC-16 file

sound of other shoe dropping...after five years! :lol:

Something tells me you'll find a little more power between now and then...just enough to convince yourself you don't need software...yet.

:beer:

[modifiedA4]

hehe...i love this thread :)

[1.8Tttturbo]

rusty's been brainwashed by giac.

[Rusty]

Actually, meeting Jeff Moss had a lot to do with it. He didn't hesitate to share all kinds of cool stuff with me, most of which I can't even remember now. We had a great talk. He's just a car guy like all the rest of us. No ego. :salute:

Oh, I've been meaning to share some of the things he told me, and I got his permission, so lessee here... hmmmm...

1) Fuel Trims are NOT applied to open-loop maps.

2) The knock correction factor that is applied to the overall timing curve is based on knock retard from cylinder 1 only.

3) The GIAC PC-16 file was designed on a car with an adustable FPR. It was supposed to be set at 3 bar, but it was actually set at 2.8. So a PC-16 will run a little rich (open-loop) on a 3bar.

#2 is interesting. What it means is that you can have a severely knocking cylinder, but if cyl 1 is OK, there will be no overall correction to the timing curve. Of course, the inividual cylinders will correct, but if one of them is out-of-range, well then, ouch. I used this to advantage because my #3 cylinder has always been the worst knock retard, even though #1 was always OK. So I used the cylinder fuel trim feature of the PCIII to cut fuel out of #1, causing it to have knock retard, causing the overall timing curve to be corrected, which helped #3 out a lot. I adjusted the trim on #2 and #4 accordingly, so that my knock retard is nearly the same for all cylinders. This greatly mitigates the negative effect of knock retard. My trim values for cyls 1,2,3,4 are:

-4 +1 +5 +2

[1.8Tttturbo]

i think for all of rusty's hard work, we should set up "buy rusty a chip fund"

we can all paypal $1 and rusty will have himself a chip. and then going forward, we can do that for other members.... pw's own mod raffle, and because i'm the originator, i go next. LOL!

[lithiumfox]

its not cost effective for a dollar, you loose 1/3 the donation in fees :(

[1.8Tttturbo]

its not cost effective for a dollar, you loose 1/3 the donation in fees :(

fees are only 3%... do they have a min charge of $0.33 regardless of transfer amount?

[Rusty]

HAH!

I just hit 210 WHP.

Run 2 out of 4 runs, the other three were 200. And I don't have the injectors yet. The FR5DTC plugs are treating me right. They are SO much better up top than the F5DPOR's.

Note that I measure by the trend line (the thin black line in the charts), not by the peaks in the red or blue HP/TQ lines. Based on peaks, all four of my dynos this morning were 210. Sweet.

[D.Passat00]

fees are only 3%... do they have a min charge of $0.33 regardless of transfer amount?

it's 2.9% + $0.30 (up to $3000), so it'd actually be $0.329 if you where to donate $1.00.

[D.Passat00]

Actually, meeting Jeff Moss had a lot to do with it. He didn't hesitate to share all kinds of cool stuff with me, most of which I can't even remember now. We had a great talk. He's just a car guy like all the rest of us. No ego. :salute:

Oh, I've been meaning to share some of the things he told me, and I got his permission, so lessee here... hmmmm...

1) Fuel Trims are NOT applied to open-loop maps.

2) The knock correction factor that is applied to the overall timing curve is based on knock retard from cylinder 1 only.

3) The GIAC PC-16 file was designed on a car with an adustable FPR. It was supposed to be set at 3 bar, but it was actually set at 2.8. So a PC-16 will run a little rich (open-loop) on a 3bar.

#2 is interesting. What it means is that you can have a severely knocking cylinder, but if cyl 1 is OK, there will be no overall correction to the timing curve. Of course, the inividual cylinders will correct, but if one of them is out-of-range, well then, ouch. I used this to advantage because my #3 cylinder has always been the worst knock retard, even though #1 was always OK. So I used the cylinder fuel trim feature of the PCIII to cut fuel out of #1, causing it to have knock retard, causing the overall timing curve to be corrected, which helped #3 out a lot. I adjusted the trim on #2 and #4 accordingly, so that my knock retard is nearly the same for all cylinders. This greatly mitigates the negative effect of knock retard. My trim values for cyls 1,2,3,4 are:

-4 +1 +5 +2



wow...very interesting stuff indeed. i've talked to him when he tuned my car, but i never even thought to ask those questions. i'm still a n00b when it comes to this stuff.

quick question though, open loop is normally when you're at high load correct?

#2 is also interesting...normally, cylinder #2 gets the most air, but same as you, #3 gets the most timing pull.

[Rusty]

...quick question though, open loop is normally when you're at high load correct?...Yes.

BTW I got the injectors this weekend. Put them in Sunday morning. First impression is awesome. :thumbup: :thumbup: The car runs noticeably different - better different - similar to putting race gas in. Much smoother idle, much better cold starting. I'll do the numbers later this week, but for now, it sure feels great!

[1.8Tttturbo]

210whp... not too shabby and i bet the tq numbers are much more impressive. now im more determined to find k04 software for my b5.5 in the next few months!

[ixi]

Kind of an off topic question but do any of you k04 peoples gap your plugs at 0.28? I think I've read that modifieda4 does, anyone else?

[Rusty]

1) Fuel Trims are NOT applied to open-loop maps.I've been uncomfortable about this, and I think I've finally proved it wrong.

I just swapped my 3bar FPR for a 4bar. No other changes.
Trims went from +3/-7 to +4/-17.
Open-Loop Fuel injector duty cycles lowered approx 10%:

RPM 3bar 4bar
4000 14.08 12.86
4240 13.70 12.80
4520 13.95 12.93
4760 14.46 13.18
5000 14.85 13.57
5240 15.10 13.50
5440 14.78 13.70
5640 14.85 13.76
5840 15.74 13.89
6040 15.94 14.14
6200 15.49 13.70
6360 15.36 13.63
his

Only slight changes to O2 sensor voltage, like about .005 higher accross-the-board.

I tried this because I wanted to stay far away from 100% duty cycle at high rpm. Looks like I was successful.

It bears repeating - LTFT a.k.a. "Mult" trims ARE applied to the open-loop maps. At least they are on an AEB. If this data doesn't prove it, then I do not understand the data.

Now that I've got more fueling headroom, time for more boost: http://www.passatworld.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1500175&postcount=46

BTW, the Genesis injectors kick ass. More on them later.

[euphoria68]

Kind of an off topic question but do any of you k04 peoples gap your plugs at 0.28? I think I've read that modifieda4 does, anyone else?

I gap mine at .28 also and no problems.

Rusty when u taking your car on the dyno?

[modifiedA4]

CAPS time :)

[dutch-mountains]

Kind of an off topic question but do any of you k04 peoples gap your plugs at 0.28? I think I've read that modifieda4 does, anyone else?

Same here, one heat range colder and a 0.7mm gap.

Voting for a CAPS too.

[scirocco78]

Two more days of driving and you'll go too rich and get a CEL.

Most tuners can tune the snot out of any 1.8t except the AEB. It's the early motor and really limited by it's management. I guess they all jumped on the 1.8t bandwagon after the AEB. So many tuners don't even know about the injector pulsewidth limit :banghead: and still try to get fuel tims close to zereo.

[dutch-mountains]

There's more than 2ms headroom on injector time before the AEB limit is hit + the mult. fuel trim is settled at -17% (preventing rich condition). Adding boost will get the trim closer to zero and more fuel at open loop at appr. the same injector on time.

[ONE8T]

I just swapped my 3bar FPR for a 4bar. No other changes.
Trims went from +3/-7 to +4/-17.


I don't believe you want your mult trims to stay in the -17 range, no matter how much you like the duty cycle. That amount of trim under high load conditions could leave you lean. Look at the esimated flows under 3 and 4 bar pressures with trims applied. 3 bar with -7 trim ~ 293cc/min. 4 bar with -17 trim ~ 302cc/min. A 3% difference and that's if the -17 holds, I agree with scirocco78 that you may still go richer.

[Rusty]

...3 bar with -7 trim ~ 293cc/min. 4 bar with -17 trim ~ 302cc/min. ...Huh? I have 380's. I'm running 380's at 4 bar.

So far, car is running great - I mean, really great! It's finally running like I thought a K04 should. I'll post some data in a day or two. The -17 is holding.

[scirocco78]

I always "assumed" there was a separate open loop map that didn't care about fuel trims. So, assuming this, by just increasing fuel pressure you are running richer at open loop only. You can go as rich as you want as long as you don't get a CEL to get your desired AFR (I shoot for .85-.89 Lambda). This is how I tuned my GIAC PC-16. I've been driving it with a LTFT of -18.5 and an AFR of 13.1 open loop according to Rusty's Lambda to AFR chart for a year now. I still get 34 MPG highway and make great power.

I think Rusty will get a CEL because 315cc at 4 bar gave me a CEL after about 3 days of driving and my fuel trims hit -25!!! It was 3 days of FUN but the ECU didn't like it and put me into limp and limited my boost to 5 psi until I lowered my FPR and cleared the code. This is why I don't think the LTFT are applied to open loop. My 3 days of fun the car used the extra fuel for an extra kick in the ass. I think only base fuel pressure applies in open loop.

This might only apply to the AEB. The red headed, buck toothed, illegitimate, stepchild of the 1.8t tuning seen.

I think :confused:

[ONE8T]

Huh? I have 380's. I'm running 380's at 4 bar.

So far, car is running great - I mean, really great! It's finally running like I thought a K04 should. I'll post some data in a day or two. The -17 is holding.

Oops, I lost track.:P

In that case the diff is 362cc/min with the 4 bar trimmed and 352cc/min with the 3 bar trimmed.

If it's working, it's working. Just stay in the mountains!

[Tico]

HAH!

I just hit 210 WHP.

Run 2 out of 4 runs, the other three were 200. And I don't have the injectors yet. The FR5DTC plugs are treating me right. They are SO much better up top than the F5DPOR's.

Note that I measure by the trend line (the thin black line in the charts), not by the peaks in the red or blue HP/TQ lines. Based on peaks, all four of my dynos this morning were 210. Sweet.

210WHP is that all? What is the goal of this project car?

[Anthrassat1.8t]

210WHP is that all? What is the goal of this project car?


Tico, you should do some reading before you throw out a post like that.........:poke:

[D.Passat00]

I always "assumed" there was a separate open loop map that didn't care about fuel trims. So, assuming this, by just increasing fuel pressure you are running richer at open loop only. You can go as rich as you want as long as you don't get a CEL to get your desired AFR (I shoot for .85-.89 Lambda). This is how I tuned my GIAC PC-16. I've been driving it with a LTFT of -18.5 and an AFR of 13.1 open loop according to Rusty's Lambda to AFR chart for a year now. I still get 34 MPG highway and make great power.

I think Rusty will get a CEL because 315cc at 4 bar gave me a CEL after about 3 days of driving and my fuel trims hit -25!!! It was 3 days of FUN but the ECU didn't like it and put me into limp and limited my boost to 5 psi until I lowered my FPR and cleared the code. This is why I don't think the LTFT are applied to open loop. My 3 days of fun the car used the extra fuel for an extra kick in the ass. I think only base fuel pressure applies in open loop.

This might only apply to the AEB. The red headed, buck toothed, illegitimate, stepchild of the 1.8t tuning seen.

I think :confused:

too bad rusty doesn't have a dbw...you can use lemmiwinks to adjust the fuel trims.

[Rusty]

OK, guys - just l:rolleyes: k at the data I posted. The fuel injector pulsewidth decreased the same order of magnitude as the trims - about 10%. All I did was swap FPR's. Drove it for a couple of days to make sure the trims were stable. Then ran the data.

This is what I always found in the early days of tuning my car with the Cartech. But there were other variables involved, so when Jeff told me the trims weren't applied to the OL maps, I didn't argue. But now I can argue.

If you are tuning (an AEB) assuming the OL maps aren't affected by fuel trims, then you're chasing your tail. I imagine it's the same on DBW cars, but who knows? Not me.

If I'm wrong, and this data doesn't prove that trims are applied to OL maps - then why did my OL injector pulsewidth decrease when I increased the fuel pressure? Why didn't the pulsewidth stay exactly the same?

...315cc at 4 bar gave me a CEL after about 3 days of driving and my fuel trims hit -25!!! It was 3 days of FUN but the ECU didn't like it and put me into limp and limited my boost to 5 psi until I lowered my FPR and cleared the code. This is why I don't think the LTFT are applied to open loop. My 3 days of fun the car used the extra fuel for an extra kick in the ass. I think only base fuel pressure applies in open loop....I think that if you had had enough "headroom" in your trims for them to stabilize w/o a CEL or limp, you would have eventually found yourself with the same power as before. This is what used to happen to me with the Cartech - I'd increase the fuel pressure and it would run great for a day or three until the trims caught up, then I'd be right back to square one.

[Rusty]

210WHP is that all? What is the goal of this project car?I have no goal. I just get happy every time the numbers increase. :)

EDIT: Actually I do/did have a goal. I want/wanted my car to look like this, w/o chipping it:
http://www.photohost.org/gallery/data/500/574img001-med.jpg

I think I'm there!

[scotty_passat]

I can't remember the block off the top of my head but there is an instant trim that goes to 0 on open loop, maybe that is what jeff was referring to. the add and mult are based on averaging the instant trim....ie at open loop the instant trim goes to 0 (so the open-loop feedback does not affect the overall fuel trims) but the net fuel calc is still using the add and mult trim.



OK, guys - just l:rolleyes: k at the data I posted. The fuel injector pulsewidth decreased the same order of magnitude as the trims - about 10%. All I did was swap FPR's. Drove it for a couple of days to make sure the trims were stable. Then ran the data.

This is what I always found in the early days of tuning my car with the Cartech. But there were other variables involved, so when Jeff told me the trims weren't applied to the OL maps, I didn't argue. But now I can argue.

If you are tuning (an AEB) assuming the OL maps aren't affected by fuel trims, then you're chasing your tail. I imagine it's the same on DBW cars, but who knows? Not me.

If I'm wrong, and this data doesn't prove that trims are applied to OL maps - then why did my OL injector pulsewidth decrease when I increased the fuel pressure? Why didn't the pulsewidth stay exactly the same?

I think that if you had had enough "headroom" in your trims for them to stabilize w/o a CEL or limp, you would have eventually found yourself with the same power as before. This is what used to happen to me with the Cartech - I'd increase the fuel pressure and it would run great for a day or three until the trims caught up, then I'd be right back to square one.

[ONE8T]

I can't remember the block off the top of my head but there is an instant trim that goes to 0 on open loop, maybe that is what jeff was referring to. the add and mult are based on averaging the instant trim....ie at open loop the instant trim goes to 0 (so the open-loop feedback does not affect the overall fuel trims) but the net fuel calc is still using the add and mult trim.

That's great info. So basically it would be the mapped injector pulse, +/- the stored trim, +/- the instant trim and in open loop there is no instant trim.

[Rusty]

That's great info. So basically it would be the mapped injector pulse, +/- the stored trim, +/- the instant trim and in open loop there is no instant trim.

It's block 099, and that's the only explanation that makes sense. Commonly known as Short Term Fuel Trims STFT.

[scotty_passat]

yeah!

One8T, here is some data I collected from a BT car (GT28RS running 22 psi), this is block 033 and should work on your AUG motor...you can see when the car goes full open loop the STFT trim goes to zero (and the file really pours on the gas!). Rusty I assume the behavior is the same for your car jsut you might have to use the block 099. when the STFT is active it is basically making tweaks to maintain the spec lambda.

you can see how the AFR follows the trim...the trim goes positive to compensate for initial throttle-on lean condition, then backs off, then back on until afr stabilizes, where it is basically +/- 1-2% correction until open loop is detected (which is pretty close to boost onset of this monster turbo)..then it is zero and the AFR is the result of MAF + base map + mult trim/LTFT.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v239/scotty_passat/turbowolf_BT_wotafr_3rdgearblock33_4_22_05.jpg

[Rusty]

"Turbowolf" - ooooh, that's badass... :lol: :thumbup:

[scirocco78]

I think that if you had had enough "headroom" in your trims for them to stabilize w/o a CEL or limp, you would have eventually found yourself with the same power as before. This is what used to happen to me with the Cartech - I'd increase the fuel pressure and it would run great for a day or three until the trims caught up, then I'd be right back to square one.


This is how I ended up at the -18.5. Looking for headroom.

So do we have a verdict? LTFT applied or not applied to open loop?

Am I correct in my thinking of running the highest fuel pressure without a CEL? According to Lambda to AFR chart and my vagcom logs I am. Or am I missing something?????

[ONE8T]

Here's my thinking on why you still want trims as close to zero as possible.

As posted above in #86-88, fueling is based on the maps +/- the add/mult trims, +/- the "instant trims". During most driving you get the benefit of both trims. When going WOT, the O2 sensor feedback is gone and you don't get the benefit of the "instant" trims. If your maps combined with add/mult trims are adequate, you're fine. But, having maps reduced 15-20% with no further backup adjustment, you better hope the maps are adequate. If you start with stock maps and then play with things like maf scaling, you're really no longer in stock maps when you go WOT, more like stock maps for a 130 g/sec maf reading which may give less fuel and more timing advance than the map for 180 g/sec maf reading.

All that said, it seems like Rusty has lined up all the planets.:thumbup:

[scirocco78]

So if I understand this correctly, getting my trims close to zero will give me more fuel at WOT and a better AFR. This is because of LTFT being applied to open loop maps.

A few questions come to mind.

(1) So if I put my adjustable FPR back in and adjust it to 2.5 bar to get a + trim I'll be adding fuel at WOT ?????

(2) How does this work on an AEB with the 16.32 ms pulse width limit on the injectors ?

(3) Why did my AFR get better the more negative I got my fuel trims?

[ONE8T]

So if I understand this correctly, getting my trims close to zero will give me more fuel at WOT and a better AFR. This is because of LTFT being applied to open loop maps.

A few questions come to mind.

(1) So if I put my adjustable FPR back in and adjust it to 2.5 bar to get a + trim I'll be adding fuel at WOT ?????

(2) How does this work on an AEB with the 16.32 ms pulse width limit on the injectors ?

(3) Why did my AFR get better the more negative I got my fuel trims?

What I was suggesting is that the less adjustment needed to get to the target AFR the better. So long as you're closed loop, it really doesn't matter what your trims are, you get basically the same AFR due to the work of the stored trim and active trim. But when you go open loop and you lose the "instant" trim, you're limited to map plus mult trim and if that isn't optimal, you're stuck. So my feeling is, the less trim the better because it means your base fueling is closer to program/optimal.

(1) If you mean taking pressure down until you get + numbers for mult trim, you will be adding fuel in both closed and open loop. The problem with 2.5 bar pressure can be at idle, I've tried that range before. Before I started all the fiddling on mine, the basic GIAC K03 1.2 bar program for DBW had the fuel trims at like 0 to -1 for add and +1 to +3 for mult. I confirmed this was there target and the thinking was under most conditions the trims take care of everything and under WOT it will maps plus a little extra.

(2) Not sure how it would work, but it may not be possible or you'd be at the limit.

(3) I don't remember where your AFR ended up but if you mean better as in a little leaner than that just means you leaned it up from what the tuner program called for. This is often debated and I think it usually ends up that most tuner programs will run fat up top for safety and longevity. Cooler EGTS without sacrificing too much performance. I've taken mine into the negative numbers a bit for that reason, about -3 to -5%.

[Rusty]

So if I understand this correctly, getting my trims close to zero will give me more fuel at WOT and a better AFR. This is because of LTFT being applied to open loop maps.

A few questions come to mind.

(1) So if I put my adjustable FPR back in and adjust it to 2.5 bar to get a + trim I'll be adding fuel at WOT ?????

(2) How does this work on an AEB with the 16.32 ms pulse width limit on the injectors ?

(3) Why did my AFR get better the more negative I got my fuel trims?

Everything Pat said is exactly precisely true, except in case of that god dam 16.32 msec limit. It works for you, Bill, because the fuel pulse at WOT for you is 16.32 msec pretty much regardless of fuel pressure and trim. Yes, even the mighty PC-16 is hobbled by the "16.32". They should'a' used 380's. Hell, I'm getting 15+ msec with 380's and a FOUR BAR.

Since the injector duty cycle is fixed, if you raise your fuel pressure you will get more fuel, but only in the RPM/load range where your maps say "16.32." In all the other rev/load ranges, the trims will trim out the extra pressure-induced fuel.

Which seems to contradict what I said in a previous post, but it doesn't, cause what I said in the earlier post was referring to the latter days of the Cartech, when I was running 440's and was nowhere near the 16.32 limit.

[Rusty]

Oops, I lost track.:P
LOL!

210cc OEM Bosch Dark Green Tops
252cc Denso Bright Blue Tops
310cc FoMoSpo Red Tops
380cc FoMoSpo Blue Tops
440cc FoMoSpo Green Tops
380cc FoMoSpo Blue Tops rerun
380cc Genesis Funky Tops (Pat, you should get yourself some of these... they have 310's)

(Hell, everyone should get some of these. Incredible, simply incredible. You'll just have to take Bill's and my word for it until I get the dam data posted.)

[D.Passat00]

(Hell, everyone should get some of these. Incredible, simply incredible. You'll just have to take Bill's and my word for it until I get the dam data posted.)

I'd get it for my new car...if it worked :poke: :P

[scirocco78]

Ah ha! So I've been tuning my car correctly all along, but my theory behind it wasn't all correct. That's ok, I was basing it all on VAGCOM logs that I had enough sense to understand.

Thanks ONE8T and Rusty for helping me to understand this better. :bowdown:

[scirocco78]

I wanted to add this to the thread. I've found it very helpful combined with the information contained in this thread. Thanks to Mike at Tyrolsport.

http://www.tyrolsport.com/Site%20pics/Techtippage/Fuel%20Pressure%20Tech%20Tips.pdf

[Rusty]

Mike is a smart cookie. And a great guy.

[pete1]

So, if I understand correctly...

Closed-Loop = Base Fuel Map +/- LTFT's +/- STFT
Open-Loop = Base Fuel Map +/- LTFT's

In that case, having negative LTFT's (due to slightly higher pressure or slightly larger injectors) is useful for fighting the AEB's 16.32msec ceiling, because the basic injector duty cycle will be reduced by the negative LTFT's: it will take a larger mass airflow to require the injectors to fire for 16.32msec, and hopefully push the injector ceiling beyond 7000 RPM.

Of course, none of this matters for closed-loop fueling because you'll just "chase your tail" until the ECU has trimmed out the fueling to match its target lambda maps.

Thoughts?

[Rusty]

^ Yup, good summary.

[Rusty]

UPDATE:

I'm done. After a 6000 mile road trip with altitudes varying from 9,000 ft to zero plus a few tweaks along the way, this car is finally running like I always wanted it to.

Denver Pat asked me once - "How much horsepower do you want?" I said "as much as I can safely use with FWD."

I'm there. I haven't dynoed it yet, but I will eventually. It'll be interesting to see what the numbers are that match the incredible feel of this engine. If I had to guess, I'd say 230 WTQ / 210 WHP. Maye even more HP - it is incredibly strong all the way to redline, whereas it used to be useless above 5000. I'm pulling 140 g/sec at redline, compared with 102 when I had the K03 (MAF numbers holey-MAF scaled). In all my road trips, the extra power at lower altitudes has always left me hungering for more when I got back home. This time, the car still feels good up here at 5300 ft. I'm totally happy with it. I can spin the front wheels at-will in 1st gear, even with the 225 tires on it. Second and sometimes third can spin the fronts exiting a corner - I have to be careful now. It's not out-of-control, it just requires attention with my right foot. Perfect. Just how i wanted it.

Unfortunately, I just missed getting in a run at the dragstrip. Sunday (11/19) was the last day they were open until Spring. (Just as well - my coolant sensor o-ring failed yesterday. If I had busted my ass to get there Sunday, it most certainly would have failed at the strip - ouch!)

OBTW, since the last update, I have retarded the cam timing about 6 degrees, and gone back to the 3bar FPR. FOr whatever reasons, the retarded cam timing plus the Genesis injectors (plus mind-numbing iterations of tuning with the PCIII) put me exactly where I wanted to be. The engine is very happy. Rusty is finally content. No more engine work - except maybe to find a way to retard the timing (double-digit knock retard makes me nervous). Just an A8 rotor upgrade, Shine rear springs, a matching racing seat for the pax side, and I'm done. Really. I don't think I'll need Level Ten.

Chris, I promise I'll get you a CAPS time soon. :thumbup:

[modifiedA4]

hey, thanks for the update....

what do you think your max "real" g/s is at WOT at say sealevel? for comparison the max i ever have seen (in all different weather conditions) is about 196g/s. Using the rule of thumb of HP=(g/s)/.8=>245CHP, which puts me right around where I've dyno'd.

The CAPS time will also be good info for comparison :)

Congrats on a successfully (reliable) completed road trip :thumbup:

[Rusty]

My MAF housing is so swiss-cheesed I have no idea what the max real g/sec is. I'm scared to try and calculate it. :lol: I'll just wait until I get a dyno run and a CAPS time done.

[modifiedA4]

My MAF housing is so swiss-cheesed I have no idea what the max real g/sec is. I'm scared to try and calculate it. :lol: I'll just wait until I get a dyno run and a CAPS time done.

ok cool, shoot me a PM once you enter a CAPS time...the php script on the server is flaky. :icon_eek:

If you look at the CAPS database there are some entries at altitude, so you will have some direct comparisons availible.