I looked at a pro tuned 06A906032hn last night its a stage 2 map and compared it with the stock equivalent . I used the full damos so it was easy to see which maps where changed by the tuner, however on both files LDRXN was identical. I thought I had made a mistake so compared the files in mapanalyser using to map address to locate the map and again it was the same. KFMIRL was tuned.

My question is , LDRXN is a limit so how can the pro tuned file produce more power if they are the same, surely it'll be limited by the same as stock?

have I missed something here?

I was going to suggest the same thing but phila_dot snuck in first, along with the caveat that increasing power lower down the engine speed range seems to be the way forward for most pro-tuners resulting in a larger peak torque as on my tune. This can be achieved either by increasing KFMIRL as the delta or margin to LDRXN is probably lower at lower engine speeds, but also (but not in your example) by increasing LDRXN lower down (which doesn't necessarily affect the peak output that most people focus on).

My tuned peak power was hardly changed 254/259 bhp on the dyno before and after but because of the additional mid-range power, peak torque increased enormously to 359 lbft on the dyno.

TTQS

I always use LDRXN to limit req torque.

Don't forget that the tuner could have also underscaled load by playing with the MAF and injector scaling.

You pretty much want LDRXN capping IRL if IRL is higher than what your turbos can make at low RPM... you want req load to stay low enough to not cause positive deviation faults

After you hit peak boost, you want to use LDRXN to prevent overspinning your turbos.

for part throttle below cracking pressure, and wherever your turbos can keep up, you can rely on IRL (i.e. wg fully closed, torque governed by throttle plate)

basically, tune LDRXN based on turbo and wastegate limitations.

IRL should be whatever your IDEA of ideal throttle response is, without regard to turbo/wg limitations.

I always do everything with KFMIRL (easy with my generator ) and then just reflect load limit via LDRXN

1. Tuner did not advertise anything other than peak power to be expected from a Stage 2 tune (ca. 265 bhp). Yes, the dearth of information from pro-tuners is lamentable.
2. I was well aware of the general strategy of optimising mid-range torque.
3. I was and am delighted (as were other TT 1.8T owners) with the engine behaviour because a large torque output in the mid range makes for rapid in gear acceleration for overtaking, etc. This is perfect for U.K. trunk roads... we don't really do traffic light sprints or standing 1/4 mile shootouts so a peaky tune will not be fit for purpose. Behaviour elsewhere in the rev range is either the same or better.
4. The parting comment from the agent was indeed along the lines of "you have diesel levels of torque/a diesel like torque characteristic".
5. Both my previous cars were diesels and I loved the mid-range torque characteristic.
6. The dyno output is questionable in any case but there is very little I have uncovered so far through my own logging with VCDS and ME7logger that causes me to think that this is anything other than an excellent remap for my car.
7. If I was to attempt my own tune, I would be pleased to emulate this output characteristic.

I'm happy for any pro, semi-pro or amateur tuners on here or elsewhere to compare their 'before and after' 1.8T 225 or 240 PS remapped power and torque curves with mine given the same physical mods.

TTQS

Yes, good spot. Of course power and torque curves will always be equal at 5252 rpm because that gives equivalence in the relationship:

torque (lbft) = (bhp x 1.34102 x 60 x 1000 x 0.73756215) / (RPM x 2 x pi)
where 0.73756215 converts Nm to lbft and 0.00134102 converts W to hp

I would also be hesitant to draw too deep conclusions because the dyno deceives. I understand that they measure wheel power and derive/estimate clutch power from the run down. Before I had VCDS, I used the Liquid TT gauge to measure power based on MAF/0.8 and feel that these results more accurately reflect the peak output.

Once I get a new battery for my laptop, I'll log the car comprehensively with ME7logger and try to shed some light on what Revo's strategy is. Some Nefmoto members scoff at pro tunes (with some justification in most cases) but I have confidence they know what they're doing and I can learn from their tune. What I have gleaned so far indicates that their AFR tuning methodology is sound and mirrors what several experienced Nefmoto users do.

TTQS