NefMoto

Hi guys, I feel I have now read and learned enough to post my .bin and ask some questions! ;D ;D

I have a 06a906032DR 0002 ecu running a AUM 1.8t in a Golf GTI.

I have so far copied LDRXN and LDRXNZK from the 180bhp (AUQ) map and increased LDRXN so that the stock trajectory continues and then rejoins stock values at 5000rpm - I have left LDRXNZK stock but I'll be running "Shell V-Power" which is 99RON so I dont think ill be running into knock.

I have also changed LAMFA columns to 85, 87.5, 90, 92.5, 95, 97.5 and then LAMFA itself so it gets progressively richer from 92.5 @ 1480 up until 97.5 @ 6520 with an even richer spot around 3500rpm at max boost.

I don't even know if the fueling was necessary given the fuel I'll be running but I feel this is quite a mild stage 1.

I would like to go into timings but I currently don't fully understand them yet so yeah!

I have attached the bin file with definitions.
Any feedback will be greatly appreciated as I should be getting my cable tomorrow looking to flash!  :o

Basically, is this safe to flash?

I'm just seeing this has all been discussed in the community project this was all done on an 1.8t AMB is this the same hardware as an AUM?

The AUM engine is a little more capable. Follow that topic and adjust after logging. Also read topics from tumed HN ecu's, that is the same engine.

That's fine, but your wording of LAMFA makes me think you don't know that it's pedal position?

So the X axis will be at 100 row and follow that the entire time.

Hey guys, my cable came today, I've read the .bin file successfully ;D I'm getting a charger tomorrow and flashing! Can't wait, going to start with the 180bhp AUQ map as a starting point and go from there.

Yeah I knew LAMFA related to pedal position but wanted to change the integers for more of a fine tune.

I'm only going to change LDRXN and LAMFA to see how I can maximize on these two values alone then maybe look into timing - Ill look at some HN tunes.

What sort of tune could I be looking at running 99RON then guys?

What is the point in finetuning lamfa columns, can you accurately control the throttle up to 2.5% changes while driving? I just use a 95% up row for additional enrichment because then I know I will be at maximum performance. The rest of the fueling I use kflbts, much more resolution there.
For safety you need to pull a little timing from your  high load areas, you can always add it back in if you have 0 cf.

You have a point there!

Regarding KFLBTS, do you manipulate it by lowering TABGBTS so its always on - is that what you are telling me?

I'll have to look into timing, it currently scares me to even consider changing it!

And could anybody tell me - I've searchrd to forum - as I'm flashing over OBD2, how can I stabilize/maintain 12V, whats the trusted method?
Is this suitable? http://www.halfords.com/workshop-tools/garage-equipment/battery-chargers-jump-starters/halfords-automatic-battery-charger-vehicles-up-to-2-0l

Okay guys, just bought this http://www.argos.co.uk/product/7404355?rec=webRespPDP:7405392:alt:CWVTPUBOOT:7404355 it maintains 12.5v.

I flashed modified LDRXN and LDRXNZK from AUQ and it worked!

Going to have to start logging and tweaking maps untill it drives how I want it to.  ;D

KFLBTS is fueling for component protection, it only activates when the O2 sensor senses EGT over a certain temperature. Basically that means unless you're running so rich on the LAMFA map you'll never hit it, and if you leave your numbers they put in from the factory at the stock numbers below 95% you'll NEVER hit the EGT needed to default to that map.

For reference I run at 13:1 AFR on my sisters 04 GLI 1.8t with a full 3 inch exhaust, and an ABD intake manifold, and I NEVER vary into that map, as mapped with a seperately installed innovate motorsports wideband. I wouldn't run much leaner than that.

So at the LAMFA numbers he's showing, he'd never even hit EGTs high enough for KFLBTS. Now, Lets say, ok, lean is power, I'm gonna lean the LAMFA numbers out to the point where I KNOW I'll hit EGT numbers high enough to force the ECM to run the KFLBTS map, and I'll just make those numbers a little bit more conservative, like 12.5 or 13:1. NOW if there's a severe problem, like the maf is underreporting by a lot, or the fuel pump is not able to supply enough fuel because it's failing or the filter is dirty. You've just fucked yourself out of an important safety measure. IF you looke at KFLBTS you'll notice it's .69 Lamda which is 10:1 AFR. It's a manner of saving yourself from burning valves, or melting turbos, or pistons. I personally would NOT fuck with that, and other people on the forum agree in a quick search.

You don't need anything more than LAMFA, it's PLENTY. 70% column I am at .97 from 2000 to 4000, and then .92 up to redline. The right two columns I normally start at like 2000 rpm being .95 or so on on the 80 or 90 - 95% columns, then at 3000 I'm up to .92 and by 400 or so I go to .88 on to redline.

Then I take all the timing from 3500 rpm up to redline over 60 percent throttle and add 3 to 5 degrees of timing.

What an answer, thank you! You have just confirmed what I was already thinking about KFLBTS, I really don't feel the need to change it for the reasons you have quite clearly explained. ;)

I think what I am going to do is keep LDRXN as it is in the .bin I posted and then tweak LAMFA how you have just described, I don't want to alter timings just yet.

My thinking is to get LDRXN and LAMFA optimized safely and then ADVANCE timing as much as possible before it pulls timing.


I am aiming for as much torque as possible, do you think this can be greater achieved by compromising higher LDRXN values so I can add more timing?

Well you can choose either method, but I personally prefer a load based fueling strategy over a pedal based one. No need to ride the EGT limit, you can simply lower the threshold. BTW this is not sensed by the O2 sensor, it is a modeled value and it is not close to actual on a tuned engine. This results in a too rich afr requested when it is not needed and kills power and efficiency. On some engines like the BAM it is an actual EGT sensor in the turbo, but most 1.8t dont have this sensor. If you want to rely on kflbts as a safety, you should calibrate the temp threshold by verification of a real EGT sensor.

The biggest drawback of using LAMFA for me is loss of economy during daily driving, and that is why I choose to use KFLBTS. But to each their own.
I agree that you lose the functionality of egt based enrichment, but when you are not even monitoring actual egts for me that is a small sacrifice.

I tune with BTS too.  Lower TABS and use the huge, load based table instead. 

Okay, so the threshold for KFLBTS is TABGBTS, so if I set TABGBTS to 200 deg then KFLBTS will always be activated enabling the use of the nice load based map.

If that is the case then I assume a good strategy would be to port the values from LAMFA > KFLBTS based upon the load I would expect at those RPMs?

But then again I don't tend to hit WOT in situations where it wouldn't very soon be at high load so I may see what I can muster with LAMFA first.

I'm going to have to learn logging before I can really proceed with any vision from one map to the next...here we go!

You can't really port them because the maps are different sizes.  Concept is good though. :)

Well guys, let me update you! ;D

I increased LDRXN by quite abit, changed LAMFA to give much more fuel and added a fair bit of timing with KFZW.

Flashed it and the car is crazy fast, scared me a little lol :D the pull on it is insane, wheel spinning at 20mpg.

I did a log but only on VAG-COM and they weren't proper pulls just round the block so can't go too fast, I haven't had time to figure out ME7 logger yet, tried earlier un-successfully :(

Below is all files if anyone would like to see!

edit *by the way, the second ignition timings table is what I've ADDED to the original values NOT the values them self*
(https://s16.postimg.org/xsu57edv5/maps1.gif) (https://postimg.org/image/xsu57edv5/)

You've got atleast 6 degrees of knock. You added too much timing.

I forgot to say; It's got 94RON in it atm, waiting for it to run dry then going to put it the VPower 99RON.

You think it will be enough of a difference to prevent retardation? :D

How did you read that .csv file Adam, what program?

Sigh.

My eyes.

It's not even ECUxPlot.

Sorry guys, I tried interpriting it in open office, was abit of a mess to understand. ;D

The logging programs haven't been as good to me as the reading/editing/writing ones.  :(

Thanks for the help anyway, back to the drawing board!

Which is what ecuxplot is for

It's not ECUxPlot compatible.

There is a function to convert from text to columns in both Open Office and Excel which can be used to make it more readable

It should work but does not. VCDS logs should work with ECUxPlot.

I will try to find out what is going wrong.

VCDS seemed to slightly change their format within the last couple releases.   VM7L has issues parsing new ones too.

Figured as much. Please let me know if you see stuff like this so I can fix it :)

There is nothing wrong with ECUxPlot. That csv has no useful data in it.

He needs to provide a much longer duration pull and/or ditch VCDS and use ME7Logger.

There are literally less than 3 useful points in every pull.

Lets look at one of them:

Yeah sorry guys I've struggled a bit getting ME7Logger to work, I'm swatting up so I can get a decent log.

I'll be fitting a FMIC, 3" downpipe de-cat to 2.5" cat back exhaust over the next few days so that alongside some nice high octane fuel might give us something fun to look at after all!

Try a 3rd gear pull so the pull lasts longer than 2 seconds..

I purposely tune my car like that. It's no different than what you would see if you ran 87 octane on a stock file. He has shifted the octane rating range upwards so he can do exactly what he answered and run 94 octane most of the time, but when ambient temperature and humidity allow or you add more octane in automatically just makes more power.

If you're going to do this though you want to make sure that your checking those numbers like during the summer when it's hot out because if you do that during the winter when it gets hot out it might push it over the threshold of detonation.

Now on tunes I do for customers I don't have it Advanced enough that it's pulling 6 degrees because I don't trust them to hear detonation if something goes wrong.





Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

I would not do this without additional LAMFAWKR tuning.

In response to what I said about the timing pull? Or response to something else? You're one of the few people that doesn't talk out of your ass on here so if you think that I should then I'll take a look at it my sister is car has been running it like this for 20,000 miles and when I under the car I beat the shit out of it everyday.

Can you explain why that would be and why it's not just the same thing as the range from the Factory? I do it to everything I tune and I have yet to have an issue and I have tuned probably 75 cars.

I saw somebody mentioned that the whole EGT was simulated and not real but from my setting basic settings with vagcom when working on a cars and watching the catalyst temp Ray's and the oxygen sensor temp raise that doesn't really seem to be the case it seemed to me that they were just using the heater inside of the oxygen sensor to calculate the heat.

If that's the case and I am exceeding that it should just go into the protection app on its own right

Factory should not pull 9 deg timing on 91 oct, or depend on timing pull to "compensate" when you use better gas.

For custom tuning, it is acceptable to pull timing via KR, but you are almost always leaving a lot of power on the table when you do so. Tuning so you have 0 KR timing pull will always guarantee the best power/torque. Stock KR based ignition pull is very conservative, and tweaking KR to be more aggressive is kind of unsafe unless you have detcans to tune it.

Instead of just pulling timing on KR (to provide MORE timing when you have better gas), consider also adding fuel via LAMFAWKR (which, like LAMFA, is disabled in most stock files). Instead of pulling 9 deg on bad gas, you may be able to get away with 3 deg or less.

You'll get better results with both bad (and good) gas.

YMMV, of course. I could be wrong about all of this.