Reducing Boost/Load

[mituc]

But big differences in the first few. Do you know why?

You pasted it wrong!
Copy it FROM THE BEGINNING and paste it FROM THE FIRST CEL!

[quickdraw]

I've downloaded and compared again and I'm not finding any mistakes in my original comparison.

[mituc]

Ok, upload the tune here and I will re-upload it back with the changed MAF callibration.

[quickdraw]

Thanks Mituc. I'm away on holiday for two weeks so I'll have to wait until I get home.

[quickdraw]

Back from holidays . Attached is my current tune

[quickdraw]

I've changed to your MAF calibration. The first few cells with values in them that were significantly different to the stock calibration I wasn't concerned about as the voltages are such low values they are never used anyway.

[mituc]

Ok, then just to be sure I will attach your map with my modifications on the MAF calibration only.

MP_YES v1.06.vtune

(218.1 KiB) Downloaded 31 times

I did no other changes even if my fingers were itching. Apart from other things, you should NOT use min AFR set to 11.02 when you are targeting lower than that in several parts of your tune, and also put limits on the ECU logic on how to handle knock if it comes down to that.
Also, I noticed that you enriched the mixture by a significant amount in areas where is not needed (actually you could even lean the mixture a bit in some of those areas) and took away a lot of the timing in various places.
What that will do, if the car is driven in those areas of load/RPM frequently you will murder your engine oil quickly and also promote carbon deposits formation on the piston head, sparkplugs, injector tips, and possibly smoke all the exhaust.
And one more, you're targeting fuel pressure a tick above the overall max, and also close to the pressure value at which the PRV is fully open (1850PSI, you're targeting 1799). Remember, fuel flow is proportional with square root of the fuel pressure report, so you are not gaining a significant amount of fuel, but you're maybe loosing some because it's spilled out through the PRV while the change is meant to push it though the injectors which may not be happening. By example, upping the fuel rail pressure from 1700 to 1800PSI will give you almost 3% fuel flow gain for an almost 6% fuel pressure increase - that if all that 6% difference will actually make it through the injectors and not be spilled partially through the PRV which is most likely the case.
Enriching the mixture a lot and lowering the timing a significant amount will result in what we call "a hot tune", a tune which will generate a lot of heat and soot. In the case of your tune the hot zone is around 2000-3500rpm, load 0.8-1.1-ish, in both closed and open loop. Remember this is not an NA LS running on ethanol, it's a turbo DI L4 running on pumpgas...

[quickdraw]

Love your work mate, even if its picking apart my tune. I've added comments below

You should NOT use min AFR set to 11.02 when you are targeting lower than that in several parts of your tune, and also put limits on the ECU logic on how to handle knock if it comes down to that.

I can not see where I have it richer than Lambda 0.76 (WOT with Knock). How rich would you go in knock situations? I could set this back to stock tune figures. 0.618

Also, I noticed that you enriched the mixture by a significant amount in areas where is not needed (actually you could even lean the mixture a bit in some of those areas) and took away a lot of the timing in various places.

After reading some threads in the High Performance Academy IE - https://www.hpacademy.com/forum/general ... ght-boost/ site I setup based on the responses the following targeting AFR's as it comes on to boost. Is this the area you are referring to?

I was targeting the following AFRs as boost comes on. Are you suggesting there is no need to be this rich at low boost levels?



In that tune I did have ignition timing map copied from this thread https://web.archive.org/web/20191115104 ... x-137280/ as I was getting some KR at WOT. Though last night I changed the timing maps back to the OTS versatune tune as I noticed a lot less timing in the cruise areas in that map and just took out 2 degrees above 1.6 load at WOT. I might add some timing back in until I see KR again. For now though there was no knock.

And one more, you're targeting fuel pressure a tick above the overall max, and also close to the pressure value at which the PRV is fully open (1850PSI, you're targeting 1799).

The fuel pressure table I haven't changed. This is as per the OTS Versatune Tune. Do you suggest I change to match the stock tune?

Enriching the mixture a lot and lowering the timing a significant amount will result in what we call "a hot tune", a tune which will generate a lot of heat and soot. In the case of your tune the hot zone is around 2000-3500rpm, load 0.8-1.1-ish, in both closed and open loop. Remember this is not an NA LS running on ethanol, it's a turbo DI L4 running on pumpgas...

Sounds like the area where its coming on to boost and I was targeting the AFR's as per above. Do you suggest I change this back to as per the OTS Versatune Map? Which roughly targets vs boost the following in my setup

[mituc]

I can not see where I have it richer than Lambda 0.76 (WOT with Knock). How rich would you go in knock situations? I could set this back to stock tune figures. 0.618

Set it to like 0.7 - 0.71-0.715, but not 0.76.
The ECU will enrich the mixture as needed when getting knock or inputs from the ESP module. It may not necessarily follow the knoc AFR target, it may need to go lower.

I was targeting the following AFRs as boost comes on. Are you suggesting there is no need to be this rich at low boost levels?

Ok, but what was the engine discussed there? What bore, stroke and compression ratio it had? What displacement? What air cooling system? What fuel was it using?

In that tune I did have ignition timing map copied from this thread https://web.archive.org/web/20191115104 ... x-137280/ as I was getting some KR at WOT. Though last night I changed the timing maps back to the OTS versatune tune as I noticed a lot less timing in the cruise areas in that map and just took out 2 degrees above 1.6 load at WOT. I might add some timing back in until I see KR again. For now though there was no knock.

Those stages of tuning on this platform were pretty early. Also, people were trying to make sense of what the Cobb guys copied and pasted around between the ignition and AFR tables without thinking, and they still have those engine blowing values today more than 400 years later, and engines still get hurt with their stage0 (supposedly stock) OTS tunes.
The timing values you are using are lower than stock, and we know that the stock values are good for 89-91 octane fuel (91-95RON). However, if you lean out the AFRs too much you may get knock just from that, there's not enough piston head/cylinder cooling so the mixture will become very unstable.

The fuel pressure table I haven't changed. This is as per the OTS Versatune Tune. Do you suggest I change to match the stock tune?

Yes, or lower the peak values to 1700 (they will be like 1699 in the tune when you write 1700 in there).

Sounds like the area where its coming on to boost and I was targeting the AFR's as per above. Do you suggest I change this back to as per the OTS Versatune Map? Which roughly targets vs boost the following in my setup

For the initial tune to work you need a pretty good setup. I'd rather start with a normal high load OTS tune and go from there. If your setup is not appropriate for that tune you will actually make less power on higher boost and airflow than you'd make on a tune that is more in sync with your mods.
Also, you keep talking about boost values. Well, at what ambient temps? At what BATs? At what RPM? Boost is a relative value, and also varies with RPM based on other targets or limits.
You can make, say, 300bhp with 18PSI of boost one day, and another day make the same power on 20. 2PSI is a lot, but may be needed to compensate for air density variations due to heat, humidity, air fronts, and so on.