NefMoto > Noob Zone > Noob Questions (Moderator: turboat) > 2000 Audi A4 1.8T ME7.5 K04-025 need a little help with start
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 12
« previous next »
Author Topic: 2000 Audi A4 1.8T ME7.5 K04-025 need a little help with start  (Read 83115 times)
K92
Full Member
***

Karma: +0/-7
Offline Offline

Posts: 137
« Reply #45 on: February 03, 2020, 12:53:46 AM »
Yes, I measured ID on both mafs. AWM one had 66mm and the BAM one had 76mm.
How to determine if maf is scaled correctly ?
EDIT: I took dust protections off mafs and measured in the middle. Yes I have made measuring error  Angry
Right ones _ Awm id 60mm and Bam 70mm. Feels bad.

Quote from: BlackT on February 02, 2020, 02:12:30 PM
Did you measure MAF iner diametar? Schloud BAM have 2.75", and standard 1.8T 2.25"

Second, you have 0.7 bar boost at 6000 RPM with K04, how you think that will result in higher flow than 160 g/s?
Give him boost, than you will have more airflow
Beacuse you have more req looad, and more boost

To get rid of timing oscilation set DARO,DAROS to 100 at last column
Logged
BlackT
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +82/-48
Offline Offline

Posts: 1535
« Reply #46 on: February 03, 2020, 01:27:41 AM »
Quote from: K92 on February 03, 2020, 12:53:46 AM
Yes, I measured ID on both mafs. AWM one had 66mm and the BAM one had 76mm.
How to determine if maf is scaled correctly ?
EDIT: I took dust protections off mafs and measured in the middle. Yes I have made measuring error  Angry
Right ones _ Awm id 60mm and Bam 70mm. Feels bad.

Please read a S4tuning wiki couple of times, you have there most of answers for your question

Another good MLFHFM sanity check is to log ps_w vs actual boost at WOT - ps_w should generally be slightly below actual boost. If it is over, your MAF is probably overscaled


https://s4wiki.com/wiki/Tuning
Logged
K92
Full Member
***

Karma: +0/-7
Offline Offline

Posts: 137
« Reply #47 on: February 03, 2020, 11:18:25 AM »
Is this considered good ? For the time saving purpose should i  scale it further to get ps_w closer?
Logged
nyet
Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +613/-172
Offline Offline

Posts: 12354


WWW
« Reply #48 on: February 03, 2020, 11:21:47 AM »
slight underscaling is fine if your load doesn't seem too off.

How far off is your KRKTE from theoretical?
Logged
ME7.1 tuning guide
ECUx Plot
ME7Sum checksum
Trim heatmap tool

Please do not ask me for tunes. I'm here to help people make their own.

Do not PM me technical questions! Please, ask all questions on the forums! Doing so will ensure the next person with the same issue gets the opportunity to learn from your ex
K92
Full Member
***

Karma: +0/-7
Offline Offline

Posts: 137
« Reply #49 on: February 03, 2020, 12:07:37 PM »
Quote from: nyet on February 03, 2020, 11:21:47 AM
slight underscaling is fine if your load doesn't seem too off.

How far off is your KRKTE from theoretical?

I need to study more to answer Your question. There is some wierd spike in fuel log also which came after installing new maf.
I think I took too big bite.
Logged
nyet
Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +613/-172
Offline Offline

Posts: 12354


WWW
« Reply #50 on: February 03, 2020, 02:37:37 PM »
Quote from: K92 on February 03, 2020, 12:07:37 PM
I need to study more to answer Your question

Do NOT DO ANYTHING ELSE until you can answer my question. Full stop.
Logged
ME7.1 tuning guide
ECUx Plot
ME7Sum checksum
Trim heatmap tool

Please do not ask me for tunes. I'm here to help people make their own.

Do not PM me technical questions! Please, ask all questions on the forums! Doing so will ensure the next person with the same issue gets the opportunity to learn from your ex
xsix
Jr. Member
**

Karma: +0/-4
Offline Offline

Posts: 32
« Reply #51 on: February 04, 2020, 01:52:19 PM »
Quote from: BlackT on January 28, 2020, 12:26:13 PM
BDW. Original MAF in original housing schpuld br able to read up to 220 g/s
Why stock MLHFM is scaled to 1005kg/h (~280g/s)@5v but real max actual reading is 220g/s ?  Huh Thank you for reply.
Logged
BlackT
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +82/-48
Offline Offline

Posts: 1535
« Reply #52 on: February 04, 2020, 02:16:48 PM »
Quote from: xsix on February 04, 2020, 01:52:19 PM
Why stock MLHFM is scaled to 1005kg/h (~280g/s)@5v but real max actual reading is 220g/s ?  Huh Thank you for reply.
Beacuse MAF offset on BOSCH is 200 kg/h
1000-200= 800 kg/h ~ 220 g/s

At 1V you will see 200 kg/h in your file, but for real that is 0g/s and ECU see it as 0 g/s
Logged
K92
Full Member
***

Karma: +0/-7
Offline Offline

Posts: 137
« Reply #53 on: February 04, 2020, 02:25:20 PM »
Quote from: nyet on February 03, 2020, 11:21:47 AM
slight underscaling is fine if your load doesn't seem too off.

How far off is your KRKTE from theoretical?

Will check LTFT AND STFT with this scaling.
Logged
xsix
Jr. Member
**

Karma: +0/-4
Offline Offline

Posts: 32
« Reply #54 on: February 04, 2020, 02:28:34 PM »
Quote from: BlackT on February 04, 2020, 02:16:48 PM
Beacuse MAF offset on BOSCH is 200 kg/h
1000-200= 800 kg/h ~ 220 g/s

At 1V you will see 200 kg/h in your file, but for real that is 0g/s and ECU see it as 0 g/s
Yes, now I see that in funktionsrahmen. Thank you very much.  Wink How max reading stock a4 maf sensor in 3inch housing ?  Calculator to rescale maf diameter housing work properly for you or need some additional corrections ?  OEM MAF from BAM 225 reading more than a4 sensor in 3inch housing ?
« Last Edit: February 04, 2020, 02:34:56 PM by xsix » Logged
K92
Full Member
***

Karma: +0/-7
Offline Offline

Posts: 137
« Reply #55 on: February 07, 2020, 03:52:03 AM »
My STFT part are a bit off  -13%  -  +6% and LTFT 2%. ( Will reset and check LTFT again ) So to get them in place i should play with krkte in which case it would be off from my theoretical. So if i understood the subject correclty, my actual KRKTE should be very close to my calculated theoretical. So i guess i should scale maf further and see if changes are positive.

Quote from: nyet on February 03, 2020, 11:21:47 AM
slight underscaling is fine if your load doesn't seem too off.

How far off is your KRKTE from theoretical?
« Last Edit: February 07, 2020, 04:03:58 AM by K92 » Logged
K92
Full Member
***

Karma: +0/-7
Offline Offline

Posts: 137
« Reply #56 on: March 02, 2020, 10:35:42 AM »
So im away for some time as mine k04-025 just went poof. Cold side fins broken. Repair is expensive, new is expensive so i decided to go for GT2871R 064ar.  If anybody have some experience with this turbo on 1.8t please comment the experience. Is the tuning really that different compared to small turbos as people say ?
Logged
fknbrkn
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +224/-28
Offline Offline

Posts: 1566


mk4 1.8T AUM
« Reply #57 on: March 02, 2020, 09:17:28 PM »
Aaand if stock one expensive for you then im pretty sure youre talkin about chinese crap
Logged
K92
Full Member
***

Karma: +0/-7
Offline Offline

Posts: 137
« Reply #58 on: March 02, 2020, 11:50:27 PM »
Quote from: fukenbroken on March 02, 2020, 09:17:28 PM
Aaand if stock one expensive for you then im pretty sure youre talkin about chinese crap
I mean expensive for K04-025 turbo as it is rare.
Logged
prj
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +1110/-531
Offline Offline

Posts: 6196
« Reply #59 on: March 03, 2020, 07:12:01 AM »
And the GT2871R is a real GT2871R?
Or more like chinese turbo X named GT2871R by eBay? Wink
Logged
PM's will not be answered, so don't even try.
Log your car properly - WinOLS database - Tools/patches
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 12
  Print  
« previous next »
 
Jump to:  

Navigation
Personal Tools
  • June 20, 2026, 10:47:39 AM
  • Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
    Did you miss your activation email?

    Login with username, password and session length
Search
 
Advanced Search
About Disclaimer
All Rights Reserved 2010 Nefarious Motosports
Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Page created in 1.607 seconds with 16 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0s, 0q)