|
prj
|
 |
« Reply #15 on: September 17, 2018, 11:46:10 PM »
|
|
|
I talked to several pro tuners in my country about SIMOS 8.4 tuning. They say there is no need for modification in the TCU box for Stage 1.
That means your tuners are shit. Look on the dyno where max power is, now consider than on most of these cars shift point is at 6400 rpm (S4 excluded, that has it at 6800 rpm). "No need for modification" is in other words "I am a shithead who doesn't know how". If someone tells you gearbox is "not needed" on these, then you know where to NOT go. As for prices - I don't know about the US, but over here I do 600 EUR inc. VAT on Dyno for Stage 1 and ca. 850-950 inc. VAT for Stage 2, depending if I need the 4 bolt pulley or the normal one... Both of those include the gearbox mapping, whether it is a C6 with GS19, C7 with DL501, B8 with DL501 or D4 with a AL551. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: September 17, 2018, 11:50:56 PM by prj »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Kacza
Full Member
Karma: +20/-7
 Offline
Posts: 216
|
|
« Reply #16 on: September 18, 2018, 01:19:25 AM »
|
|
|
That means your tuners are shit. Look on the dyno where max power is, now consider than on most of these cars shift point is at 6400 rpm (S4 excluded, that has it at 6800 rpm).
"No need for modification" is in other words "I am a shithead who doesn't know how". If someone tells you gearbox is "not needed" on these, then you know where to NOT go.
As for prices - I don't know about the US, but over here I do 600 EUR inc. VAT on Dyno for Stage 1 and ca. 850-950 inc. VAT for Stage 2, depending if I need the 4 bolt pulley or the normal one...
Both of those include the gearbox mapping, whether it is a C6 with GS19, C7 with DL501, B8 with DL501 or D4 with a AL551.
That's why I think pro tuners are scammers. They have money for expensive equipment, and therefore the ability to cheat others and use them. I will not give you where, but I called a few large companies in my country to ask about the course of the modification. In many files tuned in ME7, MED9, MED17 I encounter large tuner errors. I think that very few people have an idea for SIMOS and that's why nobody says anything. Probably most of the pseudo-pro tuners that work with others. If we are talking about an automatic transmission. I think that it is enough to limit the engine's revolutions, at which the change of gear will occur, raise the upper and sometimes also the torque limiter. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
prj
|
|
« Reply #17 on: September 18, 2018, 01:28:38 AM »
|
|
|
I also change shift speeds, shift characteristics and a lot of other things.
If you approach things only with "it is enough to do this" you will never get good at anything.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
aef
|
|
« Reply #18 on: September 18, 2018, 04:31:59 AM »
|
|
|
So for a stage1 i will have to do the dl501 aswell because of what? torquelimiter?
Do you really need this for lets say 400hp/500nm or a little bit more?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
prj
|
|
« Reply #19 on: September 18, 2018, 05:38:19 AM »
|
|
|
So for a stage1 i will have to do the dl501 aswell because of what? torquelimiter?
Do you really need this for lets say 400hp/500nm or a little bit more?
At the very least.... Because look at the dyno graph where max power is. It's at 7000+ rpm on a Stage 1 car. And when your shiftpoint is at 6400 rpm (S5) that's not quite where you want it to be, now is it? On S4's the shift point is 6800 rpm usually, that will still cut into your max attainable/usable power. Also, I already said about "really need" - you don't "really need" to do shit. Drive the car stock. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: September 18, 2018, 05:39:51 AM by prj »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
SB_GLI
|
|
« Reply #20 on: September 18, 2018, 06:54:26 AM »
|
|
|
I have tuned my own manual s4 to stage 1 on both pump and e85. I am certainly nowhere near as comfortable with this ecu as I am with bosch motronic ecus, but enough to feel confident that I was able to tune mine better than any other OTS pro tune could be.
I will participate in this thread as time allows with what I learned while tuning my own car.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
prj
|
|
« Reply #21 on: September 18, 2018, 07:11:14 AM »
|
|
|
Engine not much to it - request correct lambda, make sure the compressor flap is shut all the way and tune timing to suit the vehicle/fuel combo.
No mystery there whatsoever.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
SB_GLI
|
|
« Reply #22 on: September 18, 2018, 10:12:06 AM »
|
|
|
Certainly no mystery to what the end goal is, but how to calibrate the software to do it can be difficult for the first timer.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
SB_GLI
|
|
« Reply #23 on: September 19, 2018, 05:42:00 PM »
|
|
|
Attached are exports that should help.
The first is an export of the maps I have defined for my file. One could make an XDF out of this.
The other is an export of the maps I changed for stage 1 & e85. I can't be sure that every change is absolutely necessary, but through a lot of trial and error and some slightly educated guessing, it works great for me.
Also attached is a shitty VCDS log. I feel like I am tuning half blind, being limited to 10 vars per log.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
smelly240
Full Member
Karma: +10/-0
Offline
Posts: 102
|
|
« Reply #24 on: October 01, 2018, 04:16:08 PM »
|
|
|
Engine not much to it - request correct lambda, make sure the compressor flap is shut all the way and tune timing to suit the vehicle/fuel combo.
No mystery there whatsoever.
i was just gonna say this  Biggest thing on b8/b8.5 is closing the bypass flap that opens and lets all the boost fly away. And then up revlimit, flash tcu so it'll matter... I also adjust the knock sensitivity quite a lot at high RPM on the b8 cars as long as IAT isn't an issue. Be careful if you change pulley without a heat exchanger, because IAT will be high. Intake and tune b8 with a tcu flash is faster than a single pulley car without a tcu flash |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
aef
|
|
« Reply #25 on: November 08, 2018, 03:35:13 AM »
|
|
|
At the very least....
Because look at the dyno graph where max power is. It's at 7000+ rpm on a Stage 1 car.
Stock NM Limit in the Dl501 is 500nm and i finally had the pleasure to drive a car with and without tcu tune. It makes a whole lot of difference and i know understand what you mean. These cars exist with and without launch control from factory. They have changed it with the facelift maybe. Does someone have a file, version number or anything else and can clearly say its a facelift or non-facelifted car or has/has not lc? this is still a mystery to me |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
quattro85
Full Member
Karma: +3/-0
Offline
Posts: 79
|
|
« Reply #26 on: February 18, 2019, 03:18:44 PM »
|
|
|
Any progress on this topic? A friend of mine ask me to do something for his Q7, which have some down tuned version of this engine (only 206kW). ECU is SIMOS 8.33 I agree that real power of this engine is in upper rpm range, but this obviously is not the nature of Q vehicles  And there is another thing - as I know this vehicles are equipped with AISIN gearbox not with S-tronic like in B8 vehicles. Anyway. I start to study FR and files shared by SB_GLI (very helpful). However I don't like to change unnecessary things in any tune. So I'd like to continue this tread so we can discuss any map/line/SV that we think should be modified. I'll start with maps pointed out from SB_GLI 1) ip_flow_vol_scha_bas_1 - Supercharger basic volume flow - I don't think we should modify this map if we didn't made any hardware change on supercharger. I think we should change this map extrapolating values in it only if we plan to go over 2.1 Pressure Ratio or we plan to spin SC over 18 000rpm. Stock pulley configuration is 1:2.55, which means we can bump rpm limit to 7 000rpm without touching this map. If we plan some pulley upgrades together with rising rpm limit, then maybe we should extrapolate values in this map. 2) ip_maf_max_stnd_vvl - Maximum intake air of the engine at standardized ambient pressure for different valve lifts - I think this map should be changed only if we make some hardware changes on intake/exhaust side of the engine rising its breathing potential. Anyway in this map I can see enough air for close to 300kW. 3) ip_map_max_pow_lim - Maximum intake manifold pressure for MAF_SP limitation - If we take into account values from ip_flow_vol_scha_bas_1, engine displacement - 3 liters, and pulley ratio - 1:2.55, then maximum PR that we can achieve with stock configuration is close to 2.3-2.4, so maybe with stock hardware we can get 2 300mbar absolute pressure. I'll appreciate if some one share another opinion on those or other maps. I'll continue with other maps in next days... |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
quattro85
Full Member
Karma: +3/-0
Offline
Posts: 79
|
|
« Reply #27 on: February 19, 2019, 12:15:50 AM »
|
|
|
btw.. here you can find original file for 8K5 907 551 E, for a very helpful map exports that SB_GLI posted earlier. Also in this folder you can find 3.0t & 3.2FSI materials that I already found somewhere in the internet. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
aef
|
|
« Reply #28 on: February 19, 2019, 12:23:14 AM »
|
|
|
This is pointless
buy a pro file and use it. log the car stock, log the tune. try do define the changed maps, try to understand.
i dont think you will make progress by studying the FR and to things in theory. also you will not "try" things on a expensive Q7 friends car
i like your diy approach but this engine/ecu is not used widely becuase its not cheap like the me7 cars and so on
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
quattro85
Full Member
Karma: +3/-0
Offline
Posts: 79
|
|
« Reply #29 on: February 19, 2019, 02:26:55 AM »
|
|
|
Sorry that maybe I'm too rude, but I think your post was pointless.
So you are pro, and we should buy a file from a pro - maybe you are right.
The big problem is that I already saw a lot of shits in pro files.
Let's start from the beginning - it was ten years ago, when ME7 cars was not so cheap.
It was moderately upgraded 2004 B6 1.8T car. Tuning was very nice unfortunately there was small problem - when you sharply floor the car, there was some slight detonations right after flooring.
Pro tunner that I was using then didn't manage to find why this is happening.
Then I discover ME7Logger and I find out that there was exactly 1s delay from flooring the car to requesting reasonable lambda. So it turns out that in my file TLAFA was 1sec, and pro tuner didn't manage to find it out.
When I moved to EDC16 car (3.0tdi in B7) I searched a lot, and in most of the case I saw misscalibration of duration maps together with upped boost, and this was most of the PRO tunning solutions. In all of the PRO solutions that I examined there was no change in measuring block limits.
Recently I gave a look at a file of tuned 1.8tfsi in A5 of a friend - I should admit it was quite good, without changes everywhere in the file. But still why you want to bump LDRXNZK to the same level as LDRXN? I don't think this is good solution.
Don't take me wrong - there is different ways to do something and even decalibrating injector times in EDC16 could bring good results in terms of power - surely it is not the right way.
I can understand why pro tunes could do something like this. When you should do something for living you should be time efficient. Decalibrating injection times and rising all kind of boost controling maps in EDC16/17 is most time efficient way. It is quite easy to find those maps in every file of those ecu families and not everyone will go high in the mountain with his car.
That's way I prefer to spend my personal free time in studying this system, and to find best way for stage 1 tune, without extensively changing everything containing lambda/timing/load in it's name.
If you have some knowledge in this system, that you want to share with this great community that is ok. Everyone here will appreciate it!
If you'd like to sell something - still ok, but not in this sub-forum.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
