|
Title: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: mister t on August 02, 2015, 11:19:25 PM I've updated the first post to just include the map packs and tune for easier reference.
Also, THESE CALIBRATIONS ARE STRICTLY FOR INDIVIDUAL USE, ANY COMMERCIAL USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED Not that this warning will necessarily stop anyone, but you know what, as a lawyer myself, I know enough ways to at least require people to spend money lawyering up to defend a claim. So while I would likely never collect any damages, if I ever catch wind if these calibrations in a commercial file, trust me, I'll do my best to get my pound of flesh.... MAP PACK *****NOTE THERE ARE TWO HARDWARE VERSIONS BELOW, 0001 AND 0004, THE TUNE BELOW IS HARDWARE VERSION 0001 AND THE .kp IS HARDWARE VERSION 0004. THE TWO ARE SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT!!! SO BE CAREFUL IF YOU TRANSFER VALUES. Note in the .kp There are a bunch of duplicates, however I left them in the regular folder system in German and used the "my maps" portion to name them in English for easier reference. Also included the original .bin This is the product of hundreds and hundreds of hours boys and Girls, hope it gets some use :) :) :) FROM PAGE 4: NOTE I HAVE MOVED THE TUNING BINARY AND THE CONTENTS OF THIS POST TO POST 1 FOR EASIER REFERENCE I added 3 degrees of timing to the optimal timing areas (12x16) and between 3-8 degrees to the 11x16 KFZW areas. I also found that I was pulling timing above 6000+ RPM and about 70% load, so I left the uppermost RPM areas of the maps alone and subtracted one degree of the timing I added for the surrounding cells. As indicated, I also changed the intake cam timing. In a nutshell, I extended the intake advance. I also found that extending the long runner intake manifold configuration to about 4200-4400 RPM helped torque production in the areas where you drive the most. I edited the KFPED maps to provide better throttle response, rescaled KFMOIP (left the map values alone), added some to the high load KFMIRL values and I richened up the peak torque ares to about 0.84 lambda and dialed it back to about 0.87 as I approach redline. Hardware on my vehicle: 2003 Audi A4, Quattro, 6 speed manual -2.5 in catless downpipes -2.25 in X pipe exhaust with straight through resonators and mufflers -Zingo mod on the airbox as well as additional ducting into the airbox via the fog light Environmental factors: -ambient temps 0-10C -elevation 2500-3500 ft (approx 13.1 to 12.5 PSI ambient atmospheric pressure) -low humidity -94 Octane E10 fuel used ******* WARNING!!!!!l As indicated, this is to be considered a Beta file and under NO circumstances should you assume that it is safe to use on your vehicle in it's present form. It is the end user's responsibility to verify that the settings in this file will be safe for use on your own vehicle. WARNING!!! You should only consider using this file unaltered if you have a low restriction exhaust. Any exhaust gas reversion resulting from exhaust restrictions may cause detonation and engine damage with the timing levels I have requested. If you do have the stock cats in place, I would advise pulling 2-3 degrees out of all the timing tables to start (or more) you can always use the original binary I posted if the motor will take the timing. However I wouldn't advise just throwing the file on and running it on a bone stock motor. That said, the cam timing, KFPED and Lambda changes should be OK on a stock motor. But as I said above, proceed with caution in any event if you don't have a full exhaust or if you're close to sea level. Factors to consider with this particular file is that the timing was set for cold, dry and relatively high elevation. As well, I have access to 94 octane fuel. If you live in a hot, humid, low elevation area without access to 94 octane fuel, you should consider dropping the timing back to stock, or near stock levels raising it from there. Also, I am offering this file under the assumption that the end user possesses enough knowledge to assess whether or not it is appropriate for use on his/her vehicle. If you use this file, LOG LOG and LOG!!!! Anyway, enough with the legal talk, hope y'all can find some use for this: EDIT: PLEASE BE AWARE THAT I AM PUTTING THIS FILE OUT IN THE HOPES THAT WHOEVER USES IT WILL BE WILLING TO OFFER THEIR OWN FEEDBACK AND OBSERVATIONS WITH THE INTENT TO IMPROVE ON IT. ********EDIT, I have not done the P1681 EEPROM error workaround on these files. If you want to do it yourself, change the value at address 33A90 from 2D to 0D. I haven't found it necessary as long as I've been bench flashing it, so I've left well enough alone. You may want to change it if you're flashing via the OBD port as I understand that's when it will give you issues. One last thing, I made up the full .kp map pack on the 0004 hardware .bin , however when I made the tune, it was on the 0001 .bin ( I lost track of which one I was using after, like, the 50th time I revised the file lol) I included a .kp pack with the 0001 version with a bare bone set of maps that relate to the tune. However, it's not hard to transfer the maps between hardware versions. just line them up side by side and use the "compare map" feature in winOLS to transfer the maps. FEB 24, 2016: i HAVE ADDED ANOTHER TUNE WHERE I WENT MORE AGGRESSIVE WITH THE CAM PHASING. I feel that it is a better overall tune, but I will leave both versions for evaluation. APR 20 2016: So my face is a little red... I realized that I had mixed up ZWOPT AND KFZW in my earlier map packs and tunes. I don't know how I didn't catch this earlier, but I edited the map packs to reflect the changes. I also added more maps to each (especially the 0001 HW version). I'm leaving the two tunes posted as is because in all honesty, what even though the timing maps were mixed up, the end product seems to work. However, just be mindful of the fact that ZWOPT has more timing added than KFZW if you use the tuned .bin as a basis for any of your own stuff. JULY 31 2017: Included the last revision of my tune before my car got demolished last October. It was a solid file :) EDIT: I included my latest version as of august. Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: ddillenger on August 03, 2015, 04:37:56 AM I don't have a damos, but I have done a lot with this file. If you have any questions I will do my best to answer them.
Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: Jim_Coupe on August 03, 2015, 05:38:54 AM Great Keep up the work I will follow this :)
Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: mister t on August 03, 2015, 11:46:27 AM So I've picked out about 50-60 possible map locations. I'll post up a really rough list that I've made up in word.
Bear in mind that a lot of these are educated guesses based solely on my read of the 3d map. As well, the addresses listed are just accurate enough for me to find the location again) So DO NOT take them as gospel truth. The first 20 or so, I used the map locator and the factors from Nyet's 2.7T file. 02B97A Inlet cam timing","8x12","16Bit(LoHi)","","°KW","%","U/min","0.0078125","0.0234375","0.25 1155C, 01163E,lambda maps? 14x14 %correction, %, RPM 0.0078125 / 0.75 / 40 01147A lambda maps? 14x14 %correction, %, RPM 0.0078125 / 0.75 / 40 011398 lambda maps 14x14 %correction, %, RPM 0.0078125 / 0.75 / 40 022C2E lambda 12x16 %correction, %, RPM 0.0078125 / 0.75 / 40 025D02 "KFPEDR_relative pedal 16 Bit (LoHi)","-","%","U/min","% PED","0.0030517578125","0.25","0.0015259021896696422" X ”25CEA” Y “25CCA” 0115A6 KFMIRL","0x14a1c","Kennfeld für Berechnung Sollfüllung","16x16","16 Bit (LoHi)","-","%","%","U/min","0.0234375","0.00152587890625","0.25","3.984375","190.9921875", S"155A6", X"15586" Y“15566” 01779A "KFZWMN", TIMING "12x16","8 Bit","-","grad KW","%","Upm","0.75","0.75","40.0" or maybe ,"0.75","0.0234375","0.25" 027A56 "KFKATI","Kennfeld Korrektur Nachstartfaktor über anzti","12x12","16 Bit (LoHi)","-","-","-","Grad C","3.0517578125E-5","1.0","0.75","1.0","1.0","0x8000","0x8000" OR "3.0517578125E-5","6.103515625E-5","0.25","0.949951171875", 024A13 "KFSZDUB","0x1b1e1","Schließzeitkorrektur in Abhängigkeit von UB","16x7","8 Bit","-","-","ms","V","0.03125","0.1","0.0704","0.53125","6.25","0x11","0xc8" 027118 02720C 027300 0273F4 0274E8 0275DC 0276D0 0277C4 "KFPBRK","0x1e3b0","Korrekturfaktor für Brennraumdruck","10x10","16 Bit (LoHi)","-","-","%","U/min","3.0517578125E-5","0.0234375","0.25", 024635 Pedal vs load vs torque 10x10 0.75 / 0.75 / 40 022AB1 Intake Manifold Changeover 8x12 position I/O, % , RPM 1 / 0.75 / 40 028EE0 "KFLMSKHMAG","0x26c1e","Kennfeld Lambda-Motor-Soll bei Katheizen (Mager -Konzept)","8x8","16 Bit (LoHi)","-","-","%","U/min","2.44140625E-4","0.0234375","0.25","1.0","1.0","0x1000","0x1000" 024A13 "KFSZDUB","0x1b1e1","Schließzeitkorrektur in Abhängigkeit von UB","16x7","8 Bit","-","-","ms","V","0.03125","0.1","0.0704","0.53125","6.25","0x11","0xc8" 014F22 06x16 "KFDYES","0x1f8ac","Lastdynamikerkennungsschwelle","6x16","16 Bit (LoHi)","-","%/seg","%","Upm","0.0234375","0.75","40.0","2.203125","19.9921875","0x5e","0x355" 015562 possible 16x16 0179E4 possible 16x5 series 027434 12x12 unknown 8 or 16 bit 027460 12x10 unknown 8 or 16 bit 027E3A Unknown 06x16 factor 0.001525878 (%) X: 0.25 (RPM) Y: 0.0023435 (%) THE REST ARE PLACES I MARKED FOR LATER, LISTED: ADDRESS/8 OR 16 BIT/ROWS There may be duplicate addresses of the ones listed above 011C61 8 bit 8x 011F66 8 bit 9x ??? 0162DA 8 bit 12x 01835A 8 bit 12x 01839A 8 bit 12x 019B2A 8 bit 12x 02252A 8 bit 12x 022A0A 8 bit 12x NOTE, this whole area seems to have a lot of 12x? 8 bit maps 022D52 8 bit 12x 022D5F 8 bit 12x (may be 4 or 5x) 022F4A 8 bit 12x 023302 8 bit 12x 0234BA 8 bit 12x 0239DC 8 bit 12x 023D97 8 bit 12x 023EEC 8 bit 12x 0285FC 8 bit 12x 028788 8 bit 12x 02898A 8 bit 12x 029DC0 8 bit 12x 029DC3 8 bit 021C0 16 bit 12x 0125C0 16 bit 8x 013F50 16 bit 6x 0155A8 16 bit 015CD8 16 bit 12x 015FF0 16 bit 12x torque map 016188 to 016770 16 bit 12x (likely torque request maps) 0166CE 16 bit 12x (lambda corrections?) 01747C 16 bit 12x (lambda?) 018E1C 16 bit 12x (lambda?) 019110 16 bit 12x (lambda?) All the way to 019D4C 022C0E 16 bit 12x 022D5E 16 bit 12x 023490 16 bit 12x (looks like timing???) 0258D8 16 bit 12x 025C20 16 bit 12x 025F38 16 bit 8x 026230 – 026610 16 bit 8x (4 or 5 tables) then all the way to 026D68 027048 16 bit 027060 16 bit 0270EA to 027892 4 or 5 10x10 maps 027346 16 bit (not to sure if 12x or 16x) 028422 16 bit 12x 028C24 16 bit 8x to 029304 (multiple maps) 029EB4 16 bit repeating maps 8x 02A734 16 bit 02B01A 16 bit 11x (w optimized values) looks like throttle map 02B2F0 16 bit 12x Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: mister t on August 03, 2015, 11:48:35 AM UPDATE:
So after a good 100 hours or so, I've made some pretty good progress in identifying about 120+ individual maps. I'm making the Ols file available here if anyone wants to have a look at it and make some contributions or edit what I've done so far. Bear in mind that this is still a work in progress so some of the map axes are not yet defined. As well, some of the map factors are just guesses. So again, don't take what I've done so far as being verified or complete. Also, it doesn't look as though all the axes are defined in the cells adjacent to the map. so what I've done is come up with a selection of addresses which gives you a nice grade of values for both % and RPM in 10-12-14-16 cell ranges. It appears that others have used this approach as well. Anyone know if that will be an issue? Here are the addresses I've been using 0287E0 10-100% X 11 / f0.023435 (16 bit) 0287DE 0-100% X 12 / factor 0.023435 (16 bit) 022C1E 8-105% X 16 / factor 0.75 (8 bit) 015586 0-99% X 16 / factor 0.001516 (16 bit) 015566 480 – 6520 X 16 / factor 0.25 (16 bit) 01558A 1000- 6520 RPM x 14 / factor 0.25 (16 bit) 022C12 600 – 6400 RPM X 12 / factor 40 (8 bit) Also, there are some sections where there are multiple 8x8 maps and I've only highlighted one. I do realize that there are other maps in that area. I just highlighted on in each so I wouldn't forget where the section was. So feel free to save the rest of the surrounding maps. What do you all think? Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: mister t on August 03, 2015, 06:15:34 PM Hmmm, looks like finding maps manually might be a little easier than I first thought ;D (knock on wood)
So from other's experience, it looks like most maps that you would want for tuning are generally larger, usually 12x16, 14x14, 10x10 16x16 and such. What I've started doing is going into the 3d view, setting it to 12 rows, then starting on 8 bit, just scrolling and noting the addresses where I see nice smooth or recognizable patterns. I've managed to ID quite a few spots that are likely maps. I'll just keep doing this with 8 rows, 10 rows, 14 rows and 16 rows on 8 bit. Then do the same on 16 bit. I find a good trick is that you only look for the patterns that are completely uninterrupted across the grid. If you spot something that looks recognizable, but it's jagged, then pass it over until you re-adjust the row numbers to see an uninterrupted shape. Thoughts on this method? Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: mister t on August 03, 2015, 06:49:21 PM I've also noticed something interesting....
The raw 8 bit values all seem to be 0-240, whereas the 16 bit values are 0-65000. ( I assume it has to do with multiplying integer values) So knowing the x and Y factor values (i.e. that RPM is usually multiplied by 40 or that timing is often multiplied by 0.75), does that mean you should be able to hunch what format certain tables are in. Take timing for example, you know that RPM and degrees are the X and Y axes. Both of these values will likely be arrived at by multiplying by either 40 or 0.75. So if values you're working with are between 0-240, does that mean that a table with an x and y axes consisting of these factors will use 0-240 values, i.e. 8 bit ones? (not sure if this makes sense, but that's what my intuition is telling me). Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: mister t on August 04, 2015, 06:12:52 PM So here's the torque/throttle/RPM maps. I just labelled them Torque 1,2,3etc... for now.
It's not really too bad to do these maps manually once you get the hang of it. Just a matter of how much time you have on your hands lol. 165F0 TORQUE 5 "KFPEDR_relative pedal 16 Bit (LoHi)","-","%","U/min","% PED","0.003056","0.25","0.001525" X ”16772” Y “1678C” (http://i379.photobucket.com/albums/oo238/tlillo1/0e182519-fd5a-4f75-8ebe-de2028af9571_zpswbza7nz4.jpg) (http://s379.photobucket.com/user/tlillo1/media/0e182519-fd5a-4f75-8ebe-de2028af9571_zpswbza7nz4.jpg.html) 16470 TORQUE 4 "KFPEDR_relative pedal 16 Bit (LoHi)","-","%","U/min","% PED","0.003056","0.25","0.001525" X ”16772” Y “1678C” (http://i379.photobucket.com/albums/oo238/tlillo1/538ad466-e2b7-4104-8412-3282ebddd2b4_zpscs8f1tmm.jpg) (http://s379.photobucket.com/user/tlillo1/media/538ad466-e2b7-4104-8412-3282ebddd2b4_zpscs8f1tmm.jpg.html) 162F0 TORQUE 3 "KFPEDR_relative pedal 16 Bit (LoHi)","-","%","U/min","% PED","0.003056","0.25","0.001525" X ”16772” Y “1678C” (http://i379.photobucket.com/albums/oo238/tlillo1/d2763377-5822-41da-ad34-1819d588444e_zpsxzs1tvmu.jpg) (http://s379.photobucket.com/user/tlillo1/media/d2763377-5822-41da-ad34-1819d588444e_zpsxzs1tvmu.jpg.html) 16170 TORQUE 2 "KFPEDR_relative pedal 16 Bit (LoHi)","-","%","U/min","% PED","0.003056","0.25","0.001525" X ”16772” Y “1678C” (http://i379.photobucket.com/albums/oo238/tlillo1/c3a84f4d-a540-4721-9ce8-65b8b65aa598_zpsnwn319ua.jpg) (http://s379.photobucket.com/user/tlillo1/media/c3a84f4d-a540-4721-9ce8-65b8b65aa598_zpsnwn319ua.jpg.html) 15FF0 TORQUE 1 "KFPEDR_relative pedal 16 Bit (LoHi)","-","%","U/min","% PED","0.003056","0.25","0.001525" X ”16772” Y “1678C” (http://i379.photobucket.com/albums/oo238/tlillo1/b2fde1e4-59a3-4f37-a8db-6d05d1b9e7d6_zpsky8jnlhm.jpg) (http://s379.photobucket.com/user/tlillo1/media/b2fde1e4-59a3-4f37-a8db-6d05d1b9e7d6_zpsky8jnlhm.jpg.html) Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: mister t on August 04, 2015, 06:20:11 PM Target cylinder filling
115A6 TARGET CYLINDER FILLING KFMIRL" ,"Kennfeld für Berechnung Sollfüllung","16x16","16 Bit (LoHi)","-","%","%","U/min","0.0234375","0.00152587890625","0.25","3.984375","190.9921875", Z"155A6", X"15586" Y“15566” (http://i379.photobucket.com/albums/oo238/tlillo1/target20cylinder20filling_zpsicvqz3wn.jpg) (http://s379.photobucket.com/user/tlillo1/media/target20cylinder20filling_zpsicvqz3wn.jpg.html) Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: nyet on August 04, 2015, 07:46:16 PM The raw 8 bit values all seem to be 0-240, whereas the 16 bit values are 0-65000 What is 1<<8? What is 1<<16? Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: mister t on August 04, 2015, 09:54:27 PM What is 1<<8? What is 1<<16? That's what I was getting at with the 'integer' comment earlier. (I'm not sure if I used the term right). By the way, I wanted to go on record as thinking you for posting those CSV files with all the factors and such. That was the one document that brought it all together for me. Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: mister t on August 23, 2015, 09:54:01 PM BUMP, I've posted an OLS file of my work so far in post #4
There are about 120 individual maps in it so far ;D Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: mister t on August 25, 2015, 08:54:52 PM Bump, anyone have any feedback?
Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: metronet on August 26, 2015, 02:30:14 PM I am learning using the .ols file you posted. Thanks for sharing your work so far.
I found it useful to plug-in the parameter names like KFWKSTT & KFMSNWDK etc... Here is what I found for ESKONF: Code: 0C C0 B3 F0 00 02 F3 FF AA FA 55 55 33 -> (0x1121D) Anyone knows what the bit pairs are for byte #2 and byte #12? I am guessing they are for different transmission coding and with/without the electric vacuum pump beside the ABS module? Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: Jim_Coupe on August 27, 2015, 12:25:59 AM Is there no Damos for this already?
Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: mister t on August 27, 2015, 01:08:41 AM Metronet: Glad I can help. Also thanks for the hint, I'll give it a shot
Jim: Although I assume there is a DAMOS floating out there somewhere, I haven't seen it yet. Also, here's a revised version with some more maps and better scaling on the high value maps Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: mister t on September 01, 2015, 06:16:39 PM Revision 4 with the P1681 error coded out as well
PS: I gotta say; at the risk of breaking my arm patting my own back, it's come along very nicely (especially for a first crack at mapping :) Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: mister t on September 05, 2015, 11:51:31 PM Sooooo, I managed to get a copy of the Unitronic 93 Oct catless AVK tune to read in bootmode
Here is is, you can compare against my defined file to see where they made their changes To be honest, it doesn't look like they did much Looks like they changed the main timing tables by about 2-3 degrees advance. As well, it looks like they changed the 10x14 intake manifold values as well. what really surprised me is that they didn't change A) the camshaft timing and B) the torque delivery values at all. Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: ddillenger on September 06, 2015, 12:06:44 AM Sorry, I had to delete that file. Rules, liability reasons, etc. I hope you understand that this in no way detracts from your work.
Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: mister t on September 06, 2015, 01:14:26 PM While I understand the reasoning, I should advise that the file I posted can't be used in any meaningful way. All the maps that have been altered have been scrambled, so there's no way that someone could use it to make a useable file.
Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: Jim_Coupe on September 10, 2015, 02:24:47 AM mister t Are you gonna put a turbo on this 3.0? Would be awsome :O) Then im really intressted in be able to tune this ECU hehe..
Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: metronet on September 11, 2015, 12:19:14 PM Below are the codewords to be confirmed.
I basically copied them sequentially from 4Z7907551R.csv location 22004-22032 Code: 0x22004 CDAGR Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: mister t on September 24, 2015, 12:55:21 AM Latest version
Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: mister t on September 25, 2015, 03:31:44 PM Sorry, I had to delete that file. Rules, liability reasons, etc. I hope you understand that this in no way detracts from your work. Soooo.... speaking of that Unitronic tune, I finally managed to get it unscrambled. While I won't disclose the method I used to get Winols to read it the .bin itself (out of respect for the liability issue), I will disclose exactly what changes my $400 got me.... +3 deg timing added across the board on the 4 timing maps between 011EB6-120C6 and 4deg timing added across the board on the other 4 timing maps between 012EB3-013117, along with some additional coding (I assume for the catless exhaust) with consisted of just entering values of 128 on a couple 8x8 maps. As well, There appears to be a tiny bit of coding in a few other areas that I haven't defined yet. That's IT, they didn't touch any lambda maps, camshaft maps, torque requests, target cylinder filling, manifold pulsations, changeover, fueling corrections NOTHING!!!!!!! I'm f*king LIVID. I've already called the shop that did the tune and informed them that I'll be asking Uni for a refund. That said, it's not the shop's fault, they just flash the tune and I told them as much. I'm sure Unitronics will deny my request and this will get ugly, but yeah, looks like my suspicions about this tune were unfortunately confirmed. Also, let anyone think that there are any legal ramifications to me disclosing this, let me assure you there aren't. Trust me, I know a good lawyer, me ;) The legal test for intellectual property rights for copyrighted material (in a nutshell) is that there needs to be some sort of significant skill or expertise applied to the subject matter (i.e. the factory code) to render it unique. In this case, there absolutely has not been. To draw an analogy calling this tune proprietary is literally is the equivalent of singing a song, shifting a few verses up a note omitting a couple of words and calling it your own. Interestingly enough, I think there may be sufficient grounds for legal action on my part (not that it would ever be worth my while) as they made representations that they had invested time and expertise in making it when they clearly have not. Anyway, thought you'd all be interested to hear it. Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: nyet on September 25, 2015, 03:55:57 PM Unitronics may have hidden the changes elsewhere.
Many tuners leave the stock maps alone. Don't jump to conclusions. Also, there is almost nothing that can be done to make the NA v6 any faster. Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: mister t on September 25, 2015, 05:17:19 PM Based on what I've seen of the changes they made and the way that they made them, I don't think that they did much else.
It was pretty obvious what maps they did change as there was an additional layer of scrambling that was only present in the map areas. Basically, there was a numerical constant randomly strewn about the file which was there from one end to the other. However, once that was removed there was another set of numbers that was used in specific map areas. But as indicated, the second layer of scrambling was very specific and targeted. As well, with respect to my assertion that they just threw the same timing across the board, the delta of the unscrambled values was exactly the same across all 4 maps from each of their respective locations. Again, I assume you don't want me to get too far into the specifics of how I isolated everything. But needless to say, I'm pretty certain I'm correct about the lack of effort that went into this file. Now, in the interest of me learning something however, you mentioned that sometimes tuners don't modify stock maps. Care to elaborate on this? If they aren't using the stock maps, what are they using? I know I've heard that they'll play around with the map addresses sometimes. However, where do they end up storing the map info to keep it out of sight? I could see being able to hide small one or two dimensional maps and codewords that way, however a larger map like timing values and the like makes a pretty telltale signature. On a good note though, I finally managed to bootmode and not fry the ME7.5 ECU I got to experiment on at the wreckers ;) Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: mister t on September 25, 2015, 05:33:10 PM Also, there is almost nothing that can be done to make the NA v6 any faster. Hence the reason I have a B6 S4 that I'm in the process of getting on the road ;) This thread was more of a learning exercise for me. Although that said, I found that bolt ons do make a noticeable improvement on those engines. We're just spoiled because Audi has used turbocharging so extensively over the years and the proportion of gains for on the time and investment is so great on a turbocharged vehicle vs an N/A one. Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: nyet on September 25, 2015, 05:43:43 PM Hence the reason I have a B6 S4 that I'm in the process of getting on the road ;) Same thing. N/A motors just aren't that great for tuning. And adding FI to a motor which has N/A motronic is not a good place to start learning. Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: nyet on September 25, 2015, 05:45:30 PM I know I've heard that they'll play around with the map addresses sometimes. However, where do they end up storing the map info to keep it out of sight? I could see being able to hide small one or two dimensional maps and codewords that way, however a larger map like timing values and the like makes a pretty telltale signature. Quite. The new maps are hard to miss... but they are usually scrambled. Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: mister t on September 25, 2015, 06:10:23 PM Same thing. N/A motors just aren't that great for tuning. And adding FI to a motor which has N/A motronic is not a good place to start learning. And that's the reason my A4 is ever going to be turbocharged is if a 2.7T lives under the hood lol. As for the S4 and tuning, I've heard that they actually respond quite well to the JHM tune and headers. I've also heard the same thing about the 3.0 V6 JHM tune as well, although with so few people modding that engine it's a pretty small sample size. I wish I'd had the funds to have gotten the JHM tune in the first place. However I hadn't finished as an articling student so funds were tight. I decided that the Uni tune and the catless downpipes I built with the difference I saved between Uni and JHM tunes would give me the best bang for my buck. Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: mister t on September 25, 2015, 06:48:34 PM Quite. The new maps are hard to miss... but they are usually scrambled. Gotcha, and I can't see there being any maps hidden outside the normal addresses as I've verified the file against a stock 3.0 .bin. Past 02B2xx the files are identical other than one byte at 037E7A Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: hopsis on September 25, 2015, 08:03:52 PM Over the years I've driven a lot of C5 V6 Audis. If this is the same 3.0 V6 engine that is used in those, it should have some headroom left for improvement. The 2.4 V6 is a nice perky little thing, actually pulls rather well. Better than a stock 1.8T anyway. The 2.8 V6 is better but oddly the 3.0 V6 seems more sluggish and in real life actually a little slower than the 2.8
I hear the 3.0 block with older 2.8 12V (AAH) heads will provide good results, mind You that would include so much work, custom parts, and time that you'd be better of buying a V8 and call it a day :) Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: mister t on September 25, 2015, 08:40:27 PM at that time you'd be better of buying a V8 and call it a day :) Just need a replacement 4.2L engine and a rear passenger door for the $500 B6 S4 I picked up and I'm all good to go ;) Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: ddillenger on September 25, 2015, 11:06:56 PM Just need a replacement 4.2L engine and a rear passenger door for the $500 B6 S4 I picked up and I'm all good to go ;) If you're in the states I have an engine. Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: mister t on September 26, 2015, 01:49:55 AM Reeeaallyy.... How's the timing gear and cam adjusters on it?
I was supposed to have a parts car, the same color (so no painting the one door) with a running engine for $1600 CAD. However, the guy seems to be flaking out, hasn't returned any messages all week. So PM me a price and maybe I'll go for it. It looks like on mine, the timing gear skipped. So in reality, I may just need the heads which would be a lot cheaper to ship. **also, you said that you're familiar with the 3.0 ECU maps, any feedback on what I've done so far? I think that all my map areas are good, but some of the axes may be a bit off. Any chance you care to have a look at what I've done so far and offer any feedback? Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: ddillenger on September 26, 2015, 02:52:55 PM Mine has bad guides, but didn't misfire (just a bit of rattle) and has good compression. It had 93k on it when yanked for a 2.7t. I can pull the covers and check it out in the semi near future-lol
Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: mister t on September 27, 2015, 07:41:37 PM Just to clarify, when you say guides, you mean the timing chain guides, not the valve guides right?
No big deal if the timing gear is worn. Unless it had all been recently replaced, I'll likely be replacing most of it anyway since I have the motor out. However, if the cam adjusters were good that would save me quite a bit. What side of the US are you on? I'm in Alberta, so West coast for me. I'll probably end up trying to source one locally or maybe get the heads rebuilt on mine, just because the shipping costs on something like an engine are killer when you start bringing it across the border. That said, think about the price and shoot me a PM. If I do have to go outside my area, I'll certainly keep you in mind as I'm sure you're as a trustworthy seller. Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: ddillenger on September 28, 2015, 12:01:00 AM Just timing chain guides. No smoking, presumably the valve guides are fine. I am east coast US :)
Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: Jim_Coupe on September 30, 2015, 07:45:14 AM Mister T are you gonna swapp in an 4.2 instead of you 3.0 and use same ECU ? In that case i need more popcorn here :)
Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: mister t on October 02, 2015, 01:45:12 AM Mister T are you gonna swapp in an 4.2 instead of you 3.0 and use same ECU ? In that case i need more popcorn here :) Nope, gonna keep the 4.2 engine in the S4 that I bought ;) Having said that, I figured I'd start developing definition files for both the 3.0 and 4.2 so I can tune them both. Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: mister t on October 11, 2015, 10:22:56 AM Latest file (ignore the version if it's less than the previous file, It's the latest file).
PS, if anyone has any feedback, I'd love to hear it (wink wink, cough cough lol). Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: mister t on October 15, 2015, 03:11:12 AM So quick update. After messing around for lord knows how long, I actually decided to go ahead and tune the KFPED maps.
I added some mid range to it. Although I know it doesn't make the car 'faster', I can say that from a subjective standpoint it's a marked improvement. The car feels way more responsive in cut and thrust type traffic. I'm probably going to play with the timing next and try to find out where I can add timing without tripping the knock sensors and getting timing pull. I feel that adding timing across the board will ultimately be counterproductive as I'll encounter timing pull getting into load and I won't get it back. If I can add it in areas that can take the extra timing and work around the peak load areas at lower RPM's, I can probably sustain the extra timing in the higher RPM regions. Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: mister t on October 15, 2015, 06:35:09 PM Well, I finally bit the bullet and altered the cam timing maps as well. while I haven't had a lot of time to verify the MAF readings empirically, I can say that the car definitely feels noticeably torquier. My focus was on expanding the region where the intake cam stays advanced between 3000-5000 RPM. Then, I made a sharper drop off to full retard.
so areas that were modified so far are: 1) KFPED 2) Lamda 3) cam timing So without further ado, I'm gonna put this one out there for anyone brave enough to try it lol. Obviously, I haven't done extensive testing on it, however I've spent the evening driving the car like I stole it and knock on wood, it hasn't blown up. so try it at your own risk. That said, I'd really appreciate having some other testers out there to give some unbiased 3rd party feedback. I'll be releasing revisions as I go along. So let me know what 'yall think... Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: hopsis on October 15, 2015, 10:16:22 PM My crystal ball tells me that file will get deleted in the very near future. There was a "tuned files" section back in the day but it was removed from the forums as the consensus is that you should document the changes you made and then log them so anybody who wants to, can make the same modifications themselves and possibly learn something while doing it.
Post logs of Your tests instead. Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: mister t on October 16, 2015, 02:03:03 AM Yeahhhh, I was wondering about that. Why on earth would a forum, devoted to Bosch programming and tuning not allow someone to post their own work?
If it's a question of learning, why not pass a file around and let people collectively refine it. By that logic, no one should be posting DAMOS files either.... If it's a question of liability, I think that's just plain hysteria. I'm getting on my soapbox a bit here, but this whole notion of "oooohh, if I post a tune and someone blows an engine up I could be on the hook has no real basis in reality, black letter law or just plain practically. 1) if there is in fact a duty of care when it comes to providing a file, any Court would look at what a reasonable person would think. My submission is this: First, this is a forum for a very specialized area. Simply by being a member, there is already a presumption that you possess (or are aware of the need) of some level of expertise in order to properly tune a vehicle. 2) If you do post a file, simply add a disclaimer that the file should be considered a Beta project and that it is the responsibility of the end user to verify that the file will work on his/her vehicle. So long as you don't make any representations that your file is perfectly safe and ready to go, no Court would put you on the hook for damages as a result of blindly using an untested file. I was going to post a detailed list of all my hardware and environmental factors in a README file along with the tune, as well as a list of what I changed. Once you've given those details and provided a visble warning of the hazards associated with using the tune, you've discharged your duty of care as far as I'm concerned. 3) Even if someone decided to try and sue someone, so what? I don't know if anyone here ever looked into what it takes to enforce a judgement across jurisdictions, but it's damn near impossible. Also, litigation isn't free. If someone is dumb enough to try and lawyer up, the only person who's going to be broke at the end of it all is the poor sap who's paying $100+/hr to the lawyer who's laughing all the way to the bank. Anyway, maybe it's not an issue at all, but if it is, I invite the powers that be to consider what I've said. Personally, I feel that not allowing people to post files up for peer review totally short changes this forum. If I created a file from scratch, not even a DAMOS, how am I not entitled to post it??? Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: mister t on October 16, 2015, 02:26:48 AM NOTE I HAVE MOVED THE BINARY TO POST 1 FOR EASIER REFERENCE
I added 3 degrees of timing to the optimal timing areas (12x16) and between 3-8 degrees to the 11x16 KFZW areas. I also found that I was pulling timing above 6000+ RPM and about 70% load, so I left the uppermost RPM areas of the maps alone and subtracted one degree of the timing I added for the surrounding cells. As indicated, I also changed the intake cam timing. In a nutshell, I extended the intake advance. I also found that extending the long runner intake manifold configuration to about 4200-4400 RPM helped torque production in the areas where you drive the most. I edited the KFPED maps to provide better throttle response, rescaled KFMOIP (left the map values alone), added some to the high load KFMIRL values and I richened up the peak torque ares to about 0.84 lambda and dialed it back to about 0.87 as I approach redline. Hardware on my vehicle: 2003 Audi A4, Quattro, 6 speed manual -2.5 in catless downpipes -2.25 in X pipe exhaust with straight through resonators and mufflers -Zingo mod on the airbox as well as additional ducting into the airbox via the fog light Environmental factors: -ambient temps 0-10C -elevation 2500-3500 ft (approx 13.1 to 12.5 PSI ambient atmospheric pressure) -low humidity -94 Octane E10 fuel used ******* WARNING!!!!!l As indicated, this is to be considered a Beta file and under NO circumstances should you assume that it is safe to use on your vehicle in it's present form. It is the end user's responsibility to verify that the settings in this file will be safe for use on your own vehicle. WARNING!!! You should only consider using this file unaltered if you have a low restriction exhaust. Any exhaust gas reversion resulting from exhaust restrictions may cause detonation and engine damage with the timing levels I have requested. If you do have the stock cats in place, I would advise pulling 2-3 degrees out of all the timing tables to start (or more) you can always use the original binary I posted if the motor will take the timing. However I wouldn't advise just throwing the file on and running it on a bone stock motor. That said, the cam timing, KFPED and Lambda changes should be OK on a stock motor. But as I said above, proceed with caution in any event if you don't have a full exhaust or if you're close to sea level. Factors to consider with this particular file is that the timing was set for cold, dry and relatively high elevation. As well, I have access to 94 octane fuel. If you live in a hot, humid, low elevation area without access to 94 octane fuel, you should consider dropping the timing back to stock, or near stock levels raising it from there. Also, I am offering this file under the assumption that the end user possesses enough knowledge to assess whether or not it is appropriate for use on his/her vehicle. If you use this file, LOG LOG and LOG!!!! Anyway, enough with the legal talk, hope y'all can find some use for this: EDIT: PLEASE BE AWARE THAT I AM PUTTING THIS FILE OUT IN THE HOPES THAT WHOEVER USES IT WILL BE WILLING TO OFFER THEIR OWN FEEDBACK AND OBSERVATIONS WITH THE INTENT TO IMPROVE ON IT. ********EDIT, I realized that I had altered the wrong byte with my P1681 workaround. that would explain the intermittent checksum issue I was having. I have included the revised tune with the proper byte altered at address 33A90 (change 2D to 0D). IF YOU HAVE THE ORIGINAL TUNE, CHANGE THE BYTE AT 35E7A BACK TO 2D FROM 0D (o rjust highlight it and click "original value"****** Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: hopsis on October 16, 2015, 03:19:03 AM Nothing to do with responsibilty. I think the point was that this forum is trying and is meant to be a place of learning and innovation. It wouldn't serve anyone if this became a place people just come to download readily modded files without understanding or learning anything. Well it would maybe serve the individual who downloaded the file just until they flashed a file that wasn't checksummed or broke their engine.
Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: mister t on October 16, 2015, 09:47:04 AM Ahh, gotcha, I guess that would serve them right, wouldn't it.
Lol, maybe I'll have to post in a random "poison doughnut" file here and there to keep people on their toes ;) But I guess I'm working under the observation that this forum is far enough off the beaten path that whoever actually downloads the file will be doing so with the intention of trying it out and offering their own feedback and suggestions for improving on what's already been done. With that said, I fear that maybe I'm a little too optimistic in that respect. For all the people who have downloaded the definition file I've been working on, I haven't seen a lot of feedback or additions to it. (although I know there are a few members who have, like metronet so props to them for doing so). Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: nyet on October 16, 2015, 10:19:40 AM Nobody is going to be deleting self tuned files. The policy is against posting commercial files.
Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: mister t on October 16, 2015, 10:32:59 AM Awesome, thanks Nyet :)
Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: mister t on October 26, 2015, 02:55:14 PM So, anyone had a chance to try this tune out?
Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: mister t on October 26, 2015, 03:09:20 PM Also, I have a question about the exhaust cam timing.
I know that the stock programming for the exhaust cam only has it functioning in a binary mode (i.e. either 0 degrees or 22 degrees). However, I've been looking at the documentation for VVT systems and I can't see any reason why the exhaust cams couldn't be made to be infinitely variable between 0-22 deg. As far as I can tell the exhaust cam phasing solenoids and the cam adjuster design is the same as the intake cam (albeit just a smaller range). I know there is a value that you can change from 1 to 2 (sumode?) to tell the ECU to function in adjustable mode vs binary on/off. If you changed that value, could I then alter the exhaust cam timing maps to phase in the exhaust cam earlier in the RPM range in order to take advantage of the enhanced scavenging from my catless exhaust? Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: ddillenger on October 26, 2015, 04:12:36 PM Also, I have a question about the exhaust cam timing. I know that the stock programming for the exhaust cam only has it functioning in a binary mode (i.e. either 0 degrees or 22 degrees). However, I've been looking at the documentation for VVT systems and I can't see any reason why the exhaust cams couldn't be made to be infinitely variable between 0-22 deg. As far as I can tell the exhaust cam phasing solenoids and the cam adjuster design is the same as the intake cam (albeit just a smaller range). I know there is a value that you can change from 1 to 2 (sumode?) to tell the ECU to function in adjustable mode vs binary on/off. If you changed that value, could I then alter the exhaust cam timing maps to phase in the exhaust cam earlier in the RPM range in order to take advantage of the enhanced scavenging from my catless exhaust? On later vehicles, it is in fact done this way. In yours, you are limited by the mechanical function of your vvt solenoid. It's either on or off. It cannot be modulated. Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: mister t on October 27, 2015, 12:06:20 AM Really, so what's the difference between the solenoids on the 3.0 and the later models? As far as I've ever been able to tell, all solenoids are fundamentally on/off switches which modulate pressure based on pulse width.
I would think that as long as whatever ECU is sending the signal can modulate it, that any solenoid could be made to function in PWM mode. Not saying that you're wrong, I'm just trying to figure out where the hardware limitation is. Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: Jim_Coupe on November 02, 2015, 07:57:15 AM Really, so what's the difference between the solenoids on the 3.0 and the later models? As far as I've ever been able to tell, all solenoids are fundamentally on/off switches which modulate pressure based on pulse width. I would think that as long as whatever ECU is sending the signal can modulate it, that any solenoid could be made to function in PWM mode. Not saying that you're wrong, I'm just trying to figure out where the hardware limitation is. Post some pics on intake and exhaust.. that would be nice to se how it looks like Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: cerips on November 02, 2015, 09:53:12 AM Assuming this engine is the same as the ASN in self study programme 255 the solenoids allow or stop engine oil to the variable camshaft mechanism.
The inlet is adjusted continuously from 20 BTDC to 22 ATDC and the exhaust is adjusted through 22 degrees and is with on/off control. Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: mister t on November 02, 2015, 10:35:10 PM Assuming this engine is the same as the ASN in self study programme 255 the solenoids allow or stop engine oil to the variable camshaft mechanism. The inlet is adjusted continuously from 20 BTDC to 22 ATDC and the exhaust is adjusted through 22 degrees and is with on/off control. Exactly. So what I'm getting at though is that the MANNER in which both the continuous adjustment (intake) and the binary on/off adjustment (exhaust) operate should be dictated by how fast the solenoid switches on and off. Think of having a fluorescent bulb above you. If someone flicks it off, the room is dark, they flip it on, the room is lit. However, if the ballast is malfunctioning, it flickers really fast and the room looks dim. Not pitch black, but somewhere in between. The effect is different, but the manner in which it is achieved is fundamentally the same. So what I want to know is: is there a mechanical/electrical limitation in either 1) the solenoid body, 2) the cam phaser 3) the electrical leads, and/or 4) the HARDWARE in the ECU which would prevent it from modulating the exhaust cam solenoid to create phasing which falls in between 0 and 22 deg advance/retard? If so, what is it and where? Also, is it possible to overcome that limitation by swapping the exhaust solenoid with an intake one (i.e .are they interchangeable?) and recoding the ECU adjust continuously between 0-22 degrees. OR, is it simply a matter of adjusting the ECU setting from on/off to continuous? Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: mister t on November 02, 2015, 10:58:27 PM Post some pics on intake and exhaust.. that would be nice to se how it looks like Heat wrapping to insulate the intact tract as well as bypassing the coolant line that keeps pumping the throttle body full of boiling water. (http://i379.photobucket.com/albums/oo238/tlillo1/gold%20heat%20wrap%20a4_zpsk830caqu.jpg) (http://s379.photobucket.com/user/tlillo1/media/gold%20heat%20wrap%20a4_zpsk830caqu.jpg.html) Ducting from the fog light to the airbox, I kept the OEM air duct as well. ***yes, I know it's ghetto lol, I just couldn't find a tapered silicon coupler the day I decided to do it. You could find one that looks a lot better for $30, easy fix. However I'm going to wager that the level of maturity in this forum would preclude any "home depot racing BS.... ;)*** 1) a 90 deg 2 in plumbing elbow and threaded coupler (http://i379.photobucket.com/albums/oo238/tlillo1/2015-05-13%2001.18.26_zpsx6tiw10u.jpg) (http://s379.photobucket.com/user/tlillo1/media/2015-05-13%2001.18.26_zpsx6tiw10u.jpg.html) 2) a 3 in to 2 in rubber transition (actually, a tapered silicon coupler would be best if you can fine one) and (http://i379.photobucket.com/albums/oo238/tlillo1/2015-05-13%2001.19.32_zpsfmwjkcs6.jpg) (http://s379.photobucket.com/user/tlillo1/media/2015-05-13%2001.19.32_zpsfmwjkcs6.jpg.html) 3) some 3 in metal dryer ducting. (http://i379.photobucket.com/albums/oo238/tlillo1/2015-05-13%2001.20.36_zpssxl7hc2n.jpg) (http://s379.photobucket.com/user/tlillo1/media/2015-05-13%2001.20.36_zpssxl7hc2n.jpg.html) Then, you pop out the lower fog light, run the ducting down from the airbox, secure it and VOILA! a second ram air entrance in a high pressure zone. (http://i379.photobucket.com/albums/oo238/tlillo1/painted%20ducting%202_zps8mrfeypk.jpg) (http://s379.photobucket.com/user/tlillo1/media/painted%20ducting%202_zps8mrfeypk.jpg.html) (http://i379.photobucket.com/albums/oo238/tlillo1/painted%20ducting_zpspdouinvc.jpg) (http://s379.photobucket.com/user/tlillo1/media/painted%20ducting_zpspdouinvc.jpg.html) Before and after MAF readings (taken a few days apart, but the barometric and altitude corrections as well as ambient temps as measured by the ECU were pretty much identical between the samples) 7-8 g/sec on the top end and absolutely no losses. Or, to put it another way, the airflow I was seeing at 10-15C was the same as I was logging at -15C during the winter months. (http://i379.photobucket.com/albums/oo238/tlillo1/pre%20and%20post%20ram%20air%20MAF%20readings%2010%20to%2015C%20ambient_zpsq2zgzymq.png) (http://s379.photobucket.com/user/tlillo1/media/pre%20and%20post%20ram%20air%20MAF%20readings%2010%20to%2015C%20ambient_zpsq2zgzymq.png.html) Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: mister t on November 02, 2015, 11:12:23 PM Stock exhaust with my 2.5 in downpipes
(http://i379.photobucket.com/albums/oo238/tlillo1/20150305_224124_zpsv7f3ccpq.jpg) (http://s379.photobucket.com/user/tlillo1/media/20150305_224124_zpsv7f3ccpq.jpg.html) Mid section ***I replaced the crossover with a conventional Magnaflow one as I found that the Magnaflow one worked better than the crossover I fabricated*** (http://i379.photobucket.com/albums/oo238/tlillo1/20150307_221322_zpsqjjojfw8.jpg) (http://s379.photobucket.com/user/tlillo1/media/20150307_221322_zpsqjjojfw8.jpg.html) Here's what it looks like all mounted. I know that it's sitting cockeyed, but I just didn't have the time to go back and re-do the bends/welds that came off the resonators. I may go back in and re-so them when I have the time, but for now I'm going to leave it as-is because doesn't make any difference from a functional perspective. (http://i379.photobucket.com/albums/oo238/tlillo1/20150314_183419_zpsp11xovy3.jpg) (http://s379.photobucket.com/user/tlillo1/media/20150314_183419_zpsp11xovy3.jpg.html) (http://i379.photobucket.com/albums/oo238/tlillo1/20150314_185609_zpsw2dpgjph.jpg) (http://s379.photobucket.com/user/tlillo1/media/20150314_185609_zpsw2dpgjph.jpg.html) (http://i379.photobucket.com/albums/oo238/tlillo1/20150314_185706_zpsrwjx2s00.jpg) (http://s379.photobucket.com/user/tlillo1/media/20150314_185706_zpsrwjx2s00.jpg.html) (http://i379.photobucket.com/albums/oo238/tlillo1/20150314_210954_zpspxdnlh1b.jpg) (http://s379.photobucket.com/user/tlillo1/media/20150314_210954_zpspxdnlh1b.jpg.html) Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: mister t on November 10, 2015, 12:41:19 AM As indicated in the post at the top of page 4, I had the wrong byte changed for the P1681 workaround, I have included a revised file that should avoid any further errors.
If you have the old tune, check the post with my file for instructions on how to remedy the error. Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: mister t on November 10, 2015, 10:17:02 PM Exactly. So what I'm getting at though is that the MANNER in which both the continuous adjustment (intake) and the binary on/off adjustment (exhaust) operate should be dictated by how fast the solenoid switches on and off. Think of having a fluorescent bulb above you. If someone flicks it off, the room is dark, they flip it on, the room is lit. However, if the ballast is malfunctioning, it flickers really fast and the room looks dim. Not pitch black, but somewhere in between. The effect is different, but the manner in which it is achieved is fundamentally the same. So what I want to know is: is there a mechanical/electrical limitation in either 1) the solenoid body, 2) the cam phaser 3) the electrical leads, and/or 4) the HARDWARE in the ECU which would prevent it from modulating the exhaust cam solenoid to create phasing which falls in between 0 and 22 deg advance/retard? If so, what is it and where? Also, is it possible to overcome that limitation by swapping the exhaust solenoid with an intake one (i.e .are they interchangeable?) and recoding the ECU adjust continuously between 0-22 degrees. OR, is it simply a matter of adjusting the ECU setting from on/off to continuous? Also, anyone from the peanut gallery care to comment on this? Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: mister t on November 10, 2015, 10:20:21 PM Lol, and one more question, has anyone actually TRIED the tune I posted?
I'm rather curious to get an unbiased opinion as to how it feels or some empirical comparisons vs stock or other tunes. Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: mister t on January 20, 2016, 09:55:29 PM Made some massive headway on the definition file, posted the .kp in the first post
Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: mister t on February 09, 2016, 11:30:36 PM I've posted an updated and substantially revamped tune. I FINALLY figured out how to manipulate the cam timing. I posted the tune, latest .kp and an ORI in the 1st post
Makes a WORLD of difference. From my calculations, it adds another 5-6 g/sec to the MAF readings over the most useful part of the RPM band (3750-5750). I also found that retarding the exhaust cam between 1500-3300 RPM and makes tip-in way more responsive. Here's the best of the stock cam timing MAF readings compared to my modified cam timing on two separate days. IC ADVANCED 1 is a little more aggressive with the cam advance vs IC ADVANCED 2. I used multiple compiled data points with ME7logger at 30 samples a second over back to back multiple highway pulls. (http://i379.photobucket.com/albums/oo238/tlillo1/V6%20A4%20CAM%20TIMING%20COMPARISON%202_zpsufzetklm.png) (http://s379.photobucket.com/user/tlillo1/media/V6%20A4%20CAM%20TIMING%20COMPARISON%202_zpsufzetklm.png.html) Here is the difference between some of the more average stock data sets and my tuned MAF readings (http://i379.photobucket.com/albums/oo238/tlillo1/V6%20A4%20CAM%20TIMING%20COMPARISON_zpsthjvq5kg.png) (http://s379.photobucket.com/user/tlillo1/media/V6%20A4%20CAM%20TIMING%20COMPARISON_zpsthjvq5kg.png.html) Here's where you can see the interaction between the MAF readings and the intake cam timing (http://i379.photobucket.com/albums/oo238/tlillo1/V6%20A4%20GRAPHED_zpsthn5gtlu.png) (http://s379.photobucket.com/user/tlillo1/media/V6%20A4%20GRAPHED_zpsthn5gtlu.png.html) Here is a graphical representation of what I've done to the cam timing. The trick is that you need to make the representative changes in ALL the 8x16 cam timing maps (including warm-up, knocking inlet cam and leerlauf), not just the main cam timing maps (usually the 8x12 or 16x18 ones). (http://i379.photobucket.com/albums/oo238/tlillo1/cam%20timing%201%20WINOLS_zpsdddnj72d.png) (http://s379.photobucket.com/user/tlillo1/media/cam%20timing%201%20WINOLS_zpsdddnj72d.png.html) (http://i379.photobucket.com/albums/oo238/tlillo1/cam%20timing%202%20WINOLS_zpsv9ch4f0j.png) (http://s379.photobucket.com/user/tlillo1/media/cam%20timing%202%20WINOLS_zpsv9ch4f0j.png.html) Exhaust cam timing and the new intake manifold changeover settings (http://i379.photobucket.com/albums/oo238/tlillo1/cam%20timing%20exhaust%20WINOLS_zps337fnw37.png) (http://s379.photobucket.com/user/tlillo1/media/cam%20timing%20exhaust%20WINOLS_zps337fnw37.png.html) Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: mister t on February 09, 2016, 11:40:26 PM Something I find interesting is that for all the hype about the JHM tune, they didn't do anything to change the cam timing.
Here's the intake and exhaust logs from a JHM tuned Audizine member (http://i379.photobucket.com/albums/oo238/tlillo1/Intake%20and%20Outlet%20Camshaft%20Angle%20JHM_zpsx7n6a6ta.png) (http://s379.photobucket.com/user/tlillo1/media/Intake%20and%20Outlet%20Camshaft%20Angle%20JHM_zpsx7n6a6ta.png.html) Intake and exhaust from my stock tuned ECU (http://i379.photobucket.com/albums/oo238/tlillo1/cam%20timing%20my%20A4%20stock_zpslauww4rt.jpg) (http://s379.photobucket.com/user/tlillo1/media/cam%20timing%20my%20A4%20stock_zpslauww4rt.jpg.html) Here's what MAF and cam timing looks like with my latest file. (http://i379.photobucket.com/albums/oo238/tlillo1/MY%20V6%20A4%20CAM%20TIMING%20AND%20MAF_zps47dutmr6.png) (http://s379.photobucket.com/user/tlillo1/media/MY%20V6%20A4%20CAM%20TIMING%20AND%20MAF_zps47dutmr6.png.html) Not that I'm necessarily trying to rip on JHM, I'm sure that their tune is a good one. However, for all the secrecy about their tune, I have to wonder how much more they did above and beyond KFMIRL/KFMOIP KFPED, Ignition timing and lambda. Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: SJorge3442 on February 10, 2016, 07:25:49 PM I'm all about trying this file out. Just as soon as I work through some basic things.
I checked all three of the .bin files you posted with me7checker, and each is coming back with 3 errors. I also need to find resources on how to adjust your ignition timing so that I can pull back a tad since I still have the stock cats. ============================================================================== me7check v1.08 (c) mki, 06/2004-04/2011 Checking file C:\Users\VCDS\Desktop\Audi Tunes\Initial Download\WinOLS (Audi A4 559E HW0001 V6 2003 AVK TUNE).bin (size=1048576) Reading Version Strings... -> Bootrom Version = embedded in CPU, asume 06.02/06.05 -> EPK = 42/1/ME7.1.1/5/6530.01//24Q/Dst01o/230502// -> Contents of ECUID data table: - '0261207794' (SSECUHN) - '1037366331' (SSECUSN) - '8E0909559E ' (VAG part number) - '0001' (VAG sw number) - '3.0L V6/5V ' (engine id) -> Contents of ECUID data table: - 'HW_MAN004' -> Found 3 errors!!! ******************************* Any idea why this is? Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: hopsis on February 11, 2016, 12:29:43 AM Looks like your using an outdated version of Me7check. Grab the latest version and try again.
Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: SJorge3442 on February 11, 2016, 06:27:18 AM Looks like your using an outdated version of Me7check. Grab the latest version and try again. You were right. Total noob move on my part. I grabbed the first file in the me7checker post on here figuring it was the newest. That was not the case. Everything checks out for me! Now its time to learn how to define and learn maps! Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: Jim_Coupe on February 11, 2016, 10:43:16 AM Hmm I use megalogviewer too.. It would be nice to see if i can log my camshaft like that u posted mrT
Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: carson on May 04, 2016, 08:38:13 AM I want to try some stuff to on my ASN engine. I cant get nefmoto to read my flash, which memory layout should i use?
Code: Validated FTDI device is in dumb mode. Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: mister t on May 04, 2016, 03:33:03 PM I want to try some stuff to on my ASN engine. I cant get nefmoto to read my flash, which memory layout should i use? Code: Validated FTDI device is in dumb mode. Unless you have a Galletto cable, you'll need to disable the immobilizer first before you can flash without using bootmode. Even then, I don't advise flashing with the ECU in the vehicle as it's difficult to get the voltage above 12.5 with all the other systems drawing power. Best bet is to buy a spare ECU, make a bench flasher and do all your flashing that way. At that point, you can always swap between the two and do your file revisions that way. What I did was bought a plug in voltage adapter that puts out between 13.5-15v, then I plug in a power inverter to my cigarette lighter in my car. From there, I can log on the road, pull over with my laptop, make changes, flash the spare ECU while I'm on the side of the road and swap them out (takes all of 3-4 minutes). I've literally done hundreds of file revisions that way. Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: metronet on May 28, 2016, 05:48:20 PM I've got a Readiness question that's specific to the ME7.1.1 AVK engine.
I have done the following code-out according to the thread "Emissions delete and setting actual readiness" http://nefariousmotorsports.com/forum/index.php?topic=615.0 However, the readiness for "Oxygen Sensor(s)" is not set (0010 0000) where the same code-out done on a ME7.1 APB gets readiness (0000 0000). No diagnostic errors and STFT & LTFT looks good to me. I read that perhaps CDLSV (precat) is also required(?) : http://nefariousmotorsports.com/forum/index.php?topic=615.msg25635#msg25635 Any thoughts or suggestions? :) Code: CLRSKA - Post cat fuel enrichment (set to 0) (1 -> 0) Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: SJorge3442 on August 09, 2016, 11:29:49 AM Any updates to the tune recently? I'm looking to give it a go in the coming weeks now that my car has been running good after getting that kompresd tune out. Wanted to make sure you havent grenaded your car since then.
Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: mister t on August 09, 2016, 02:54:46 PM Any updates to the tune recently? I'm looking to give it a go in the coming weeks now that my car has been running good after getting that kompresd tune out. Wanted to make sure you havent grenaded your car since then. Lol, no, still running. Although I've played around with the tune quite a but since then. I'll try and post up a more recent version in a bit. Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: k0mpresd on August 09, 2016, 03:34:44 PM Any updates to the tune recently? I'm looking to give it a go in the coming weeks now that my car has been running good after getting that kompresd tune out. Wanted to make sure you havent grenaded your car since then. or, you could have told me what the problem was. if this was a file with 2step patch, i assume it was, that file in particular would blow a fuse and cause random misfires. fairly severe misfires actually for some reason. this took a very long time to pinpoint as it is not a very popular file. as in, it wasnt fixed until just a few months ago. if you had misfires, told me, and i told you to replace plugs and coils, that is solely because i honestly did not know the patch was causing those issues. like i said, it has taken this long to figure it out. Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: mister t on August 09, 2016, 05:26:26 PM or, you could have told me what the problem was. if this was a file with 2step patch, i assume it was, that file in particular would blow a fuse and cause random misfires. fairly severe misfires actually for some reason. this took a very long time to pinpoint as it is not a very popular file. as in, it wasnt fixed until just a few months ago. if you had misfires, told me, and i told you to replace plugs and coils, that is solely because i honestly did not know the patch was causing those issues. like i said, it has taken this long to figure it out. Hey, just the person I was hoping to hear from on this. Kompressed; have you had a chance to have a look at what I posted for a tune? I'd welcome any feedback and if you'd be willing to compare notes or .bins I'd be even more appreciative. FYI: I have not taken any position as to the OP's problem or the quality of your work (which as I've always understood is excellent :). That's always been between you guys, I was just happy to find someone who was willing to give my tune a try :) In particular, if you've been tuning N/A audi engines, I'd like to get your thoughts on some of the resonance tuning stuff. Do you play much with the cam phasing? Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: thatguyrockz on February 23, 2020, 04:10:04 PM sorry to bump an old ass thread! whats the correct memory layout to select? I tried finding to no avail.
Title: Re: AVK V6 3.0 2003 8E0 909 559E ECU tuning thread Post by: thatguyrockz on February 23, 2020, 06:51:21 PM sorry to bump an old ass thread! whats the correct memory layout to select? I tried finding to no avail. figured it out. :'( |