|
SB_GLI
|
 |
« on: April 21, 2014, 07:03:57 PM »
|
|
|
2004 Jetta GLI - AWP 1.8t - 6 speed 02m.
Frankenturbo F4H k04 turbo
Audi 225TT injectors (386cc)
AUDI 225TT MAF + housing
Changes:
Air Intake -
MLHFM
Fueling -
KRKTE
TVUB
KVB
Boost PID -
KFLDIMX (c+p from another K04 file)
KFLDRL (c+p from another K04 file)
Load -
KFMIRL
KFMIOP
KFMIOP Load Axis
LDRXN
LDRXNZK
Timing -
KFZWOP/2 (interpolate with new kfmiop load axis)
Other:
FVPDKLDUS (to correct limp mode from "pressure drop" code)
NLLM0/1/2/3
NFSM
-----------
My goal is to come up with a solid frankenturbo k04 tune for my jetta that will make power comparable to other k04 tunes on the market, yet can control overboost better than the other off-the-shelve professional tunes on the market. I want to throw away my MBC.
I started off by modifing MLHFM to account for the 225TT MAF and housing. I adjusted KRKTE and TVUB for larger injectors and then further adjusted KRKTE based on LTFTs.
KFLDIMX and KFLDRL were a cut and paste from another k04 file.
I then used the ME7TuningWizzard to guide me through load based changes. I wanted to target around 1.2bar for my first iteration so I could focus more on a good boost/load profile. I plugged my numbers into the KFMIRL advisor and took only the last column of data for my KFMIRL. I then adjusted KFMIOP based off my KFMIRL and edited the KFMIRL load axis. The chagnes to the load axis were then accounted for in KFZWOP/2.
LDRXN and LDRXNZK were modified.
Results:
Crappy part throttle, boost actual above requested at part throttle. WOT is a bit better with boost actual/requested close but surges. Runs a drives fine around town, but partial throttle, moderate load (going uphill) will result in overboost and little power.
Original, Modified, XDF and logs attached.
Please advise.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: April 24, 2014, 04:17:40 PM by SB_GLI »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
SB_GLI
|
|
« Reply #1 on: April 21, 2014, 07:28:55 PM »
|
|
|
Shameless visualme7logger plug. Included screenshots of a couple sections of the log file posted above.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
adam-
|
|
« Reply #2 on: April 21, 2014, 11:41:55 PM »
|
|
|
This is similar to my build, so it's a good to see what's going on and how you've changed it. I've currently got a K03s so I've not had to change the PID, so I'll use yours as a base!
I've tweaked my IRL using the Excel too, and my part throttle isn't great. It's not bad, there's a certain point where it surges and you can hear the wastegate open and stay open.
It's not bothered me thaaaat much though.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
userpike
|
|
« Reply #3 on: April 21, 2014, 11:53:50 PM »
|
|
|
change krkte back to the factory value for the TT225 injectors (tvub also) because you won't get a better calibration then Bosch unless you are going to run e85 or running the AWP 1.8t's factory "3bar" FPR.( Use a 4bar FPR from a 225TT or other audi, some of the v6 vw passats had them also or use an adjustable one) Adjust your fueling correction maps after. really you could just copy them over from the 225TT file also to get a better ball park figure and fine tune from there. Again Bosch spent alot of time getting those factory numbers using professional equipment. Maybe take a look at the TT225 boost PID also as its close already to what you'll need to make changes for. I think those frankenturbos have a tighter wastegate tension though but still you should get less overboost by using the 225TT boost PID settings. Also with krkte and tvub set to factory for the 225tt injector settings and fuel correction maps copied over and your fuel trims are > +5% or < -5% you have a vacuum or boost leak.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
SB_GLI
|
|
« Reply #4 on: April 22, 2014, 05:05:35 AM »
|
|
|
Thanks for the suggestions. I have a 4 bar fpr on the way. I will try to get my hands on an audi 225TT file and use that as an example going forward.
I just pressure tested my system last week and there are no boost/vaccum leaks. The MBC that I have though (boostvalve) has a little pin hole drilled in it to make it "more responsive" which is a tiny boost/vaccum leak in itself. Just another reason to throw it away once I feel safe running without one.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
fknbrkn
Hero Member
Karma: +185/-23
 Offline
Posts: 1454
mk4 1.8T AUM
|
|
« Reply #5 on: April 22, 2014, 09:46:50 AM »
|
|
|
look at mine KFLDIMX
i made some changes in it after the same problem with K03hybrid turbo
now its ok
maybe it helps
p.s. but i have a hardware problem with pressure drops after 5k rpms so maybe you will need to tweaking WOT area, but part throttle is very good with my setup
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: April 22, 2014, 09:51:17 AM by fukenbroken »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
SB_GLI
|
|
« Reply #6 on: April 22, 2014, 04:25:24 PM »
|
|
|
I then used the ME7TuningWizzard to guide me through load based changes. I wanted to target around 1.2bar for my first iteration so I could focus more on a good boost/load profile. I plugged my numbers into the KFMIRL advisor and took only the last column of data for my KFMIRL. I then adjusted KFMIOP based off my KFMIRL and edited the KFMIRL load axis. The chagnes to the load axis were then accounted for in KFZWOP/2.
Unfortunately, it was this part of the tuning process that murdered my part throttle. So today I choose to pluck a few maps from the BAM engine code (225TT). All of these maps are available in the "Understanding ECU Remapping" document that can be found in these forums. I took the KFMIRL, the load axis as well as KFMIOP and KFZWOP maps. I've only taken a short drive around, but part throttle feels smooth like butta all over. I'm really feel like I am going in the right direction now! Once I get out to take logs I'll post everything up. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
SB_GLI
|
|
« Reply #7 on: April 22, 2014, 06:38:13 PM »
|
|
|
Here is a new log file and my my latest edit. Feels pretty good and I think this is a good base for a frankenturbo tune for others to go off, but in no way would I consider this complete. I have not adjusted load based fueling or timing tables yet and still has room for more power up top.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
SB_GLI
|
|
« Reply #8 on: April 23, 2014, 06:03:09 PM »
|
|
|
Latest log files show fuel going lean coinciding with the initial (over)boost spike. Should I focus on the lean spike and try to account for it with changes to fueling maps, or should I focus on taming the overboost first?
I've updated the axis of and changed the last two rows of LAMFA for .85 lambda. I've also increase fueling a bit in KFLBTS in the higher areas.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: April 24, 2014, 06:16:30 AM by SB_GLI »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
userpike
|
|
« Reply #9 on: April 24, 2014, 09:04:00 AM »
|
|
|
Latest log files show fuel going lean coinciding with the initial (over)boost spike. Should I focus on the lean spike and try to account for it with changes to fueling maps, or should I focus on taming the overboost first?
I've updated the axis of and changed the last two rows of LAMFA for .85 lambda. I've also increase fueling a bit in KFLBTS in the higher areas.
I would wait for that 4bar FPR and not change anything until its installed. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
nyet
|
|
« Reply #10 on: April 24, 2014, 09:28:55 AM »
|
|
|
Agreed. always get fueling right first.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
ME7.1 tuning guideECUx PlotME7Sum checksumTrim heatmap toolPlease 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
|
|
|
|
ddillenger
|
|
« Reply #11 on: April 24, 2014, 10:50:11 AM »
|
|
|
With the TT injectors you should be safe in the fueling department once you get a 4 bar in. I'll download your logs when I get home and take a look. I love these threads, I really do. This is the entire point of the site that seems to be lost on so many others. Steve, good work. With your efforts here, and your other contributions. I will help anyway that I can  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
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 experience!
Email/Google chat:
DDillenger84(at)gmail(dot)com
Email>PM
|
|
|
|
SB_GLI
|
|
« Reply #12 on: April 24, 2014, 01:16:35 PM »
|
|
|
Thanks everyone for the positive support! I turned my MBC down to 15 psi to keep the spikes at bay for the time being... But I'll play it safe a keep pulls at minimum until then. Attached here I have logs from my GIAC k04-02x tune that I took a few short weeks ago... Same hardware that I am running with this tune. No issues with lean spikes with that software.  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
chlippo
Newbie
Karma: +0/-0
Offline
Posts: 22
|
|
« Reply #13 on: April 24, 2014, 01:53:04 PM »
|
|
|
why didn't you stay with giac?
And I beleive I had read somewhere that you also had an APR tune?
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: April 24, 2014, 01:56:00 PM by chlippo »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
SB_GLI
|
|
« Reply #14 on: April 24, 2014, 04:11:27 PM »
|
|
|
why didn't you stay with giac?
And I beleive I had read somewhere that you also had an APR tune?
What would be the fun of just sticking with GIAC?  I just felt there was room for improvement. Subpar mpgs, overboost that required a MBC, without w\m it pulled timing like mad, and really didn't make that much power without the w\m either. I have an allroad that had a APR tune from the previous owner that didn't work. Had to work with APR's excellent technical support, ehem, for a couple months to prove that their tune didn't do shit. They were very quick to blame it on a hardware issue. This is the same tune they've been selling to customers for years (for a '03 allroad "R" ecu IIRC). Turns out they didn't properly tune ldrxn (or one of the many on that ecu) and I eventually got an updated file from them which finally works. The fixed tune kinda sucks anyway, so I am glad I didn't pay for it. Funny story, the reason I came to these forums in the first place was for ME7Logger to get the logs that APR needed finally fix their shit. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: April 24, 2014, 04:16:36 PM by SB_GLI »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
