NefMoto

Mk5 R32 stock,  on 98Ron, ecu relies on knock sensors to retard the stock ignition under WOT by 3-6 degrees. Apparently this is normal. So, in my wisdom, just for learning purposes, I changed Lamfa from 0.9 to 0.84. I expected power to probably decrease, but to also see less or no retard I was astounded when the logs now show even more retard of 8-10 . This seems to go against all I have read. Any ideas?

Post the logs.

If the ECU needs to pull more than 3 degrees timing, the octane is too low for the calibration or the static compression ratio is too high or the intake charge temp is higher than expected and lacking sufficient compensation.

That being said the R32 actually is two 3 cyl. engines connected to one crank and the two engines are not the same. The induction runners/chambers/operating temps etc. are different from one bank to the other. Most engines have a point where additional fuel beyond Leanest for Best Torque (LBT), will tend to reduce spark knock - up to a point. Most engines also can have a point where the AFR is so rich that you have secondary combustion that produces detonation of the remaining intake charge.

I ran across other forums where they suggest the same, but then an expert who has tuned 100s of cars reckons he's never seen a case where too rich caused knocking with non alcohol fuels, only misfire. Do you think the misfire is the detonation you mention or the more usual one where   is the spark is too weak to ignite the too rich mixture? The error log did not have any missfire logged and 0.84 isnt that rich i didnt think..

https://www.hpacademy.com/forum/practical-dyno-tuning/show/rich-knock-and-low-timing-question

Obviously different people's experience is going to vary. I have personally observed Ford I-4 Turbo 2300cc engines that run fine at WOT with the OE 11:1 true AFR measured by actual fuel and air flow measurement in real time on an engine dyno yet the same engine will go into spark knock at 10.9 or richer AFRs, in my experience using in-cylinder pressure transducers and real time knock sensing equipment.

At .84 lambda you should not experience excessively rich AFR spark knock if the lambda reading is correct on the R32 engine. It would be common to run closer to .80 @ WOT with forced induction. OE C-O-P ignitions are somewhat output power limited due to reduced coil windings but due to the fact they do not use ignition cables a lower voltage is required to fire the sparkplug. In a NA application the OE C-O-P coils should not cause a misfire unless they are bad.

Detonation doesn't show as a misfire but it can be seen by the knock sensor if the frequency of the detonation is in the filtered "window" for the knock sensor and it is functioning properly. Unfortunately other engine components can sometimes produce a noise in the same knock sensor frequency range and cause ignition timing to be pulled when there is no actual detonation occurring. If the knock system is pulling 8-10 degrees of timing at WOT then you can typically hear the engine "rattling" under WOT as this would be severe and often terminal engine detonation. In a situation like this the sparkplug porcelain will typically have what appear to be aluminum speckles from the detonation abrading the pistons. The center porcelain may also be blistered or broken from excessive heat or shock. This may be your "misfire" if the plugs are cracked or otherwise damaged.

BTW, if you live where it gets cold, Winter fuel mixtures have cold starting additives that will cause unexpected detonation in some engines under WOT. The reason for this is the two types of lab test engines used to determine fuel octane ratings are not identical to many modern engine designs. Motor octane is a more severe test and tends to be more representative of WOT use where as Research octane is a very old test of much milder engine operating conditions.

Umm, I heard no rattling at all during the runs, but I will check the plugs when I bring the R32 back from storage.
I noticed UM drops their lambda down to .88 in their tune.
http://www.unitedmotorsport.net/products/mk5-r32/
So that will be my next test. I assume they got the extra torque throughout the whole rev range by adding a bit more timing and/or preventing KR, something I wont be able to do on vpower 98 Ron unless going from .9 to .88 really makes such a difference

None of the aftermarket tunes use SAE MBT/LBT calibration IME which is how you produce the maximum power at all points in the operating range of an engine. Basically the tuners try to find what they believe is an acceptable AFR/timing range that increases power as best they can. I'd take all chassis dyno data with a large grain of salt as the only proper way to actually calibrate an engine is on an engine dyno with proper instrumentation, true fuel/air flow in real time, knock sensing measurement, etc. in steady state mode with fixed operating temps for fluids, induction charge, etc. Flash readings on a dyno can be made to say pretty much whatever the dyno operator wants them to say.

It's worth noting that VW and other car makers use internal EGR to actually lower cylinder pressure at specific points where the peak cyl. combustion pressure exceeds what the fuel will tolerate to prevent detonation and allow a couple degrees more timing. They achieve this by advancing the intake cam so that some of the burnt exhaust blows up the intake port and dilutes the incoming charge. Retarded timing causes excess heat and poor drivability so with high static compression ratio and 98 RON fuel, proper calibration is important.

True, those graphs can be altered to show whatever they want. All I know for sure, is that going down to 0.84 was no good for this engine. It only takes me 5 mins to remap the car so I will test out a few numbers not too far from the factory lambda  Regarding EGR, I noticed that the later R32s have some weird exhaust cam maps as well. There is a high load area where the cam closes around 15 atdc at ~ 2200 rpm. Earlier motors don't have that, but the timing is not as aggressive in that area.

Just so that you are clear - a richer AFR does not make more power than the proper LBT (Leanest for Best Torque), AFR calibration. For an NA engine MBT and LBT will produce the maximum power possible for a given octane fuel. With FI ignition timing is generally knock limited and a richer AFR is typically used to be able to add a couple degrees more timing or to cool the pistons/intake charge for reliability.

Think ULEV ex. emissions and mpg for the different MK V ex. cam vs. the MK IV cam.

Just a quick update, I managed to tune out all knock with Vpower 98 RON, by limiting kped torque request to 75% and decreasing lamfa  if needed by a few points to remove knock. Then I went to 85% torque and repeated the process etc, until KPED was back to stock. All runs done in 4th gear, since it was more sensitive to knock retarding than the lower gears. 1.0 is good up to about 75% torque request, then  0.87 was great up to about 90% torque, then 0.83 was required. Timing was left stock. I haven't done any runs with dragy as yet, but I do wonder if stock 0.9 with some knock retard would be any better than 0.83 with no retard.

Engines run at factory LBT/MBT calibration should not have knock if the engine is mechanically sound and the proper octane fuel is used. Ignition retard is used to save the engine when the engine or operating conditions are different than how the engine was originally calibrated, i.e. lower octane fuel, carbon build-up in engine, timing chain or other engine wear, etc. What you are doing is attempting to recalibrate the engine for it's current fuel and/or mechanical condition which is fine as long as you understand the current engine condition is slightly different than when the engine was factory calibrated. LBT/MBT by definition will deliver the maximum power possible for the engine and fuel used.

For those unfamiliar with how factory engineers perform LBT/MBT calibration on an engine, it's quite simple. They run the engine under controlled conditions (steady oil/air/water temps, etc.), on an engine dyno at WOT in steady state mode at each RPM point from just above idle to maximum RPM. With the engine at WOT, they adjust the AFR to find the maximum torque. Then they adjust the ignition timing for maximum torque without spark knock. This becomes the base calibration for that rpm point in the base map. The process is repeated for every cell point over the entire RPM operating range.

There is something mechanically wrong with your car, I dont think you should see knock correction with 98 RON

If it is "normal" the correct way to "fix" it is not by pulling req torque. Pull timing or add fuel (as you've already tried).

For N/A cars, running richer than LBT/MBT is rarely needed; pull timing instead.

Let BTS/ATR do lambda dump for you.

Thank you GolfSportWagen & nyet for your input. Its got me a bit worried. The car runs well, and I can get a quarter mile done in 14.2s which is slightly better than factory specs and much better than the 15s I've seen on youtube but one possible explanation I just found is that the fuel where I live (AU) may not be real 98 octane. On the gov Federal  Register of Legislation, I just found this sentence. So I could well be putting 95 in the tank, I have no idea.

With ~11:1 compression from the factory you could experience knock with 95 RON octane.

Absolutely. Not could. Will.

Get some toluene, mix 9:1

If your knock goes away, it isn't 98RON

The toluene works to reduce the knock. Some days no knock , other days there is still some but small.
So I decided to do what I though would be a simple thing - retard the ignition a little where the knock retarding occurs which is around 2100 at WOT (95% load). Then I'd be able to use the crappy aussie 98 ron, which is not always 98. I mean the car goes well, but the logs show that once knock is detected in the low revs,  the retarded timing travels through the whole rev range for a few seconds and chops up to 0.5s to 60mph.

This is just a stock r32 from 2008, so nothing much compared what you guys are trying to achieve on here.

Initially I used LAMFA to make the the fuel richer at WOT. It worked wonderfully some days, then awfully on others. When it didnt work, the ignition retard was huge, 6.8 on all cylinders. I recently found a map that shows how the ecu retards more if the knock occurs with a rich mixture, so no wonder I was getting those big numbers. So back to stock LAMFA I went and I gave retarding the ignition a go.

To cut a long story short, I found that the 032KG has 4 kfzw and 4 kfzw2 maps and some kfzwa maps.  I  cut 6 degrees from 60% load up between   1500 to 3000 rpm on all the 8 maps mentioned but left the kfzwa maps alone as they are apparently not used normally.

And when I tested in the car, the  ignition timing logged by vcds in that area  is  the same as before.This is the the 8th time I've flashed the ecu just to try changing the timing, changing each of those maps at a time and  I guess next will be those kfzwa maps, cos I cant see any others!
Is there some trick to acieving this simple task in this overly engineered ecu? Why the F is the timing not following the damn maps.

Just an idea: perhaps MAF is reading too low thus causing load (rl, rl_w) to read low so it picks a timing value from a too low load column (lower engine load = more ignition advance usually).
Compare ps with actual boost pressure.

The actual load reported by vcds is in the mid to high 90s. Throttle is 99% open, the timing though is around 16 to 17  at 2100 rpm. About 6 to 7 more than the maps I modified.

If throttle is open 100% then ps and pvdkds should be close. I don’t know about VAG and VCDS if that is something you can log from there. That will show if load value is ok.