Recent Posts

you are showing the wrong compressor map for 1.8T, 1870E is the one for 2.7BiTurbo.
1.8T uses 2072G and later models 2075E compressor.
There is still some room for tuning, noticing the 180PS line (red)

Understandable. Appreciate the quick response! Thankfully I do know Python, so maybe I can help with some improvements. I gather you're just working with the S4 platform? So that's ME7.1 with 2 narrowband front sensors?

yea, actually 4 N/B sensors! Yes, MR/PRs are appreciated

Seems like we probably have a similar IT background!

lol looks like it

BTW i *still* run cygwin under win10/11 and it seems to work though you may have to build a few bits yourself (no big deal, just using pip), as some of the various cygwin python package libraries are old.

I don't have a full record of what I had to do, it was a bit of a pita with respect to pinning some versions.

At worst, try the --text option to avoid the graphing stuff which is more twitchy than the rest.

Sadly, no, because the tool requires a pretty recent version of the various math libraries and plotting bits. That said, you MIGHT get it to work under cygwin (i dont think there is wsl for win7)

Understandable. Appreciate the quick response! Thankfully I do know Python, so maybe I can help with some improvements. I gather you're just working with the S4 platform? So that's ME7.1 with 2 narrowband front sensors?

I only have a 1.8T ME7.5 wideband to play with right now, but I'm hoping I can work on a friend's early A6 as well.

I think TunerPro should work fine with WINE these days. Just a question of a nice lightweight distro for this old laptop. Cygwin brings back memories. Seems like we probably have a similar IT background!

I just realized there is a script for this. I don't know how I missed it. Unfortunately, I run Windows 7 natively on my tuning laptop for maximum compatibility with special tools from the era, and the Windows binaries are linked to Python v3.11, which isn't supported.

nyet if you're listening, maybe you could compile this against a slightly older Python to help us in this situation out?

Sadly, no, because the tool requires a pretty recent version of the various math libraries and plotting bits. That said, you MIGHT get it to work under cygwin (i dont think there is wsl for win7)

It is not wasting time to adjust KRKTE as close to 0, and I would disable LTFT correction while scaling injectors and rely only on STFT. Adjusting KRKTE as close to 0 on idle will give a good starting point to get the car going and linearize the injector through FKKVS. An example: on idle you have an injection time of 1.5ms, and you are off by 0.5ms, this would be a difference of 33%, but the same 0.5ms on a higher injection time, like 20ms for example, would only be 2.5%. In my opinion, if you have the proper injector dead time (TVUB) and KRKTE is adjusted to have a lambda control close to 1.0 (0%) on idle, then it is just a matter of adjusting the linearization for other engine conditions that have more margin for disparities / errors

By no factory reference points, do you mean a blank/empty calibration, like no manifold model, no injector and no MAF data? This seems rather unlikely on an OEM ECU

Sorry for the delayed response! Is removing one of my resistors enough to sufficiently disable LTFT, or do I actually need to use NOLRA?

I should have been more clear. I do have proper TVUB for the injectors as well as proper MLHFM curve for the MAF sensor and housing. The main issue in this particular case is that I can't put the stock airbox back in to make it easy to adjust FKKVS.

I wouldn't say it has been ignored, I even think it is well documented compare to other OEM ECU. There are codewords for some hardware variances and for components that needs specific calibration (like MAF, injectors, coilpacks, etc.), there are multiples constants and maps to adjust/adapt them. I am sorry if I misunderstand your question, are there any adaptation you have in mind?

I was mostly just wondering what is required for LTFT to set, how many samples and what data it refers to. How often and when it can update after that, etc. For example, I noticed when studying E85 conversions that someone said cars in Brazil have been designed to run up to 100% ethanol for a long time. One of the conditions when it adjusts is a significant change in the fuel tank level. Given the variances in pump gasoline, even when it doesn't involve a lot of ethanol, it made me wonder if this is also used on regular gasoline tunes.

Will your script allows for custom axis and custom filters?

I just realized there is a script for this. I don't know how I missed it. Unfortunately, I run Windows 7 natively on my tuning laptop for maximum compatibility with special tools from the era, and the Windows binaries are linked to Python v3.11, which isn't supported.

nyet if you're listening, maybe you could compile this against a slightly older Python to help us in this situation out?

I don't mind dual booting Linux on it, but I'm not sure if TunerPro works well with WINE, and it would be rather annoying booting back and forth to make changes.

NefMoto is great, a lot of smarter and more genuine knowledgeable people. I like feeling dumb around them, it is a good thing.
Take my contribution like a grain of salt, considering I have been cheating my MAF reading to "fix" my manifold model (not proud of this one)

It is great! I feel like there should be somewhere I can donate some crypto.

Hi folks.

I would like to share this fork repo https://github.com/ljscodex/NefMotoOpenSource

I just updated the master branch to run on NET8, if you wanna run the project and let me know if is working will be amazing, I have no RS232 cable to test it right now

You're struggling with tuning for two things at once.

You should tune idle/partial throttle for one of the two first

a) stock injectors, modified intake
b) modified fueling, stock intake

If you don't you're in for a world of hurt.

when you've got idle/partial nailed, then you can go on to bigger and better things.

Setup:
2.7t AGB
630cc EV14 Bosch injectors
4bar FPR
95mm MAF (with new RS4 B5 MAF Sensor)

I scaled the MAF (MLHFM) with the program mafadjust.exe from the forum (from 81.5mm OEM RS4 B5 to 95mm)

I use the data for the injector from the manufacturer (similar to https://www.finjector.com/documents/6450c9f86cb90/0280158123_Data.pdf)

When idling at 840 rpm, the system achieves an STFT of +25%.

When idling at 1440 rpm, the system achieves an STFT of +-4%.

I don't know why the STFT is so high at 840 rpm.

At 840 rpm, approx. 4g/s air mass is measured and the injection time is approx. 1.9 milliseconds.

At 1440 rpm, approx. 5.8g/s air mass is measured and the injection time is approx. 1.65 milliseconds.

I don't know why the mixture is richer with more air mass and less injection time. I would have expected exactly the opposite.

I don't know if I should correct the data for the injectors next or if I should correct the data for the mass air flow sensor.

How would you proceed?













I have calculated TEMIN according to http://nefariousmotorsports.com/forum/index.php?topic=1531.msg14587#msg14587:

349cc / 705cc @ 3.5 Bar = 0.49504
TEMIN = 0.49504 * 0.8400ms = 0.41582ms

I cannot explain myself how a reputable tuner everybody knows across europe and the states only managed to make 187hp from absurdly high values in KFLDS. This is something I have seen personally, no assumptions made or "a friend told me".

I wonder how anyone could get any more with stock turbo. The 180hp variant runs at about 140g/s MAF at full power. See attachment... 

There's nothing to figure out. The engine needs the flaps to start well.
The alternative is to dump a ton of fuel, which he did.

This is on turbo. On NA the flaps are responsible for manifold length tuning and midrange torque takes a nosedive with them removed (should never be done).

yes but theres something im missing. like i reported in the past, up to 49 celsius it drives bad, at 50 its perfect.