[Alex@Stratified]

I'm making a "How-To" thread right now and there will be things to watch for and FAQs so people don't have to keep asking the same thing OVER and OVER and OVER again.

This is good - looking forward to an informative thread.
I feel a little differently about people asking though ... the more people ask and the more they know about their custom tunes, the more they enjoy them and the experience on top of making sure the car is running in top shape and safely. After all the tunes are unique and catered to their particular cars, mods, fuel, and driving environment - right?

Now back on topic - has anyone used a different CAN logger other than the AP and SCT on this car? I've been looking into options for something to augment the AP or for a more permanent monitoring solution.

 

[MrTMB]

I don't understand why people are getting offended about a section dedicated to sharing information and learning. As has already been stated many times... if one is not interested in sharing information and/or learning about topics in this subforum then simply do not participate.

Personally, I've already learned a lot from these discussions and find this subforum very interesting, informative and helpful.

 

[ST3 4 ME]

FYI Since no one else publicly has a modded Ko3 I will be posting a few vdyno's along with datalogs. Kinda wish there was a way to datalog the stock map to compare.

 

[rader1]

FYI Since no one else publicly has a modded Ko3 I will be posting a few vdyno's along with datalogs. Kinda wish there was a way to datalog the stock map to compare.

Map 0 is the "stock" map

 

[Alex@Stratified]

FYI Since no one else publicly has a modded Ko3 I will be posting a few vdyno's along with datalogs. Kinda wish there was a way to datalog the stock map to compare.

Have you ran the modified turbo with the OEM map? I am not sure what was changed in your turbo but keep an eye on boost control as the upgraded turbo may not agree well with the OEM boost control parameters. Boost spikes can cause engine damage so just ease into the throttle making sure boost responds as you expect it to without spiking.

 

[ST3 4 ME]

Have you ran the modified turbo with the OEM map? I am not sure what was changed in your turbo but keep an eye on boost control as the upgraded turbo may not agree well with the OEM boost control parameters. Boost spikes can cause engine damage so just ease into the throttle making sure boost responds as you expect it to without spiking.

yes and it feels as slow as a stock '13 ST3 that I test drove a few weeks ago.

Turbo has larger compressor and turbine wheels.

 

[Alex@Stratified]

yes and it feels as slow as a stock '13 ST3 that I test drove a few weeks ago.

Turbo has larger compressor and turbine wheels.

Was the wastegate actuator changed or the WG ported at all? It sounds like it controls boost well so it's safe to run those Vdynos.

 

[rader1]

yes and it feels as slow as a stock '13 ST3 that I test drove a few weeks ago.

Turbo has larger compressor and turbine wheels.

Be sure to post up some map 0 logs so we can see how the ECU deals with it on the stock map. Since it's should be moving more air at the same WGDC compared to the stocker I feel like you may be seeing some boost related throttle closures. Although, the upgrade you've chosen isn't a big change so maybe it's fine.

 

[ST3 4 ME]

Was the wastegate actuator changed or the WG ported at all? It sounds like it controls boost well so it's safe to run those Vdynos.

yea i changed it to the Turbosmart

 

[Alex@Stratified]

yea i changed it to the Turbosmart

Was spring pressure different from stock? I am curious how adaptable the PID boost control logic is on this car.

 

[duster360]

On a stock tune and if the WG learning has enough capacity, the PCM should be lowering the boost a tad to meet the measured airflow through the TB and hit its Torque target. So it kinda makes sense that he thinks it feels about the same as a Stock ST.

IIRC the Turbosmart is barely stiffer than stock and that's assuming its adjusted right. I think its quoted as ~"7psi" and stock its ~6psi. imo put a few cranks on the stock wga and save yourself the $200

Its hard telling if his SCT tune is running true Torque based boost control or a static psi target like with the AP

 

[Justin@FreekTune]

On a stock tune and if the WG learning has enough capacity, the PCM should be lowering the boost a tad to meet the measured airflow through the TB and hit its Torque target. So it kinda makes sense that he thinks it feels about the same as a Stock ST.

IIRC the Turbosmart is barely stiffer than stock and that's assuming its adjusted right. I think its quoted as ~"7psi" and stock its ~6psi. imo put a few cranks on the stock wga and save yourself the $200

Its hard telling if his SCT tune is running true Torque based boost control or a static psi target like with the AP

If the wastegate actuator was only 1psi stiffer than stock, then the stock PCM logic should def be able to compensate for it, and then follow the load target tables as they are set up.

 

[Silver_Shooter]

On a stock tune and if the WG learning has enough capacity, the PCM should be lowering the boost a tad to meet the measured airflow through the TB and hit its Torque target. So it kinda makes sense that he thinks it feels about the same as a Stock ST.

IIRC the Turbosmart is barely stiffer than stock and that's assuming its adjusted right. I think its quoted as ~"7psi" and stock its ~6psi. imo put a few cranks on the stock wga and save yourself the $200

Its hard telling if his SCT tune is running true Torque based boost control or a static psi target like with the AP

Did this last summer. With everything zeroed out, I hold 7.5psi. However it did nothing to help hold boost up top, only a little in the mid range.
May be a different result with a modded turbo tho.



Sent using Tapatalk

 

[duster360]

If the wastegate actuator was only 1psi stiffer than stock, then the stock PCM logic should def be able to compensate for it, and then follow the load target tables as they are set up.

Yes if there's only a small difference in spring stiffness, the WG DC table is just fine. Regardless, with a larger turbo, the stock PCM tune "should" then wind up using a lower boost.

If I'm remembering right the MAX/MIN WG DC adjust range is +/- 30%.

In my experience, larger compressors wheels coupled to turbines that are already too small, increase pre-turbine pressure even more and pretty much dictate a stiffer wga just to keep the wg valve shut.

Did this last summer. With everything zeroed out, I hold 7.5psi. However it did nothing to help hold boost up top, only a little in the mid range.
May be a different result with a modded turbo tho.

Did what exactly? max out the WGA adjustment or just test boost level of the stock WGA at 0% WG DC?

 

[Silver_Shooter]

Yes if there's only a small difference in spring stiffness, the WG DC table is just fine. Regardless, with a larger turbo, the stock PCM tune "should" then wind up using a lower boost.

If I'm remembering right the MAX/MIN WG DC adjust range is +/- 30%.

In my experience, larger compressors wheels coupled to turbines that are already too small, increase pre-turbine pressure even more and pretty much dictate a stiffer wga just to keep the wg valve shut.



Did what exactly? max out the WGA adjustment or just test boost level of the stock WGA at 0% WG DC?

Preloaded the stock WG more. I zeroed the WG tables and logged before and after to track the pressure increase. I got it to 7.5psi but never went any further for fear of not allowing the gate to fully open when it needed to. There was still about 3/4" of adjustment left.

I thought it would help hold a bit more boost at the top end but it didn't.

As for wgdc, when I saw 16% D-adder being applied, I added some to the P-table to bring the D down a bit. It seemed to smooth out achieving the boost target. Cobb uses 16% pos correction and stock is 25%. Don't know what the max is.



Sent using Tapatalk

 

[ST_Fan]

Why would any business want to share their hard work? It's not shareware and they are running a business. I totally get why the VW guys do it that way. It's the same way with Ford. I have people hit me up all the time asking if I want to see data logs from Torrie or Steeda. I tell them no. I want to do my own work. I take pride in that. And I don't care about what anyone else is doing; let them do their own work and I will do mine.

You guys need to talk to Cobb and SCT to scramble the logs otherwise it's shareware.
I agree that tuners should be able to keep their work proprietary if they choose.
I also appreciate the insight Alex, Duster and others provide on how and why a car is running like it does.

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

 

[jakebrewer]

Missed this for a few days. Still don't see the point. If we had open source then sure it'd make sense. If I have issues with my car or want the tune checked, I catalog and send to my tuner, not post for a bunch of "expert" opinions. I could see this for atr but at the same time if you don't have enough knowledge to tune, you shouldn't be touching it.

 

[FSWerksVP]

Just because a log is posted does not mean somebody can say "oh I know exactly how that car is tuned" There are many tables and each tuner ends up with their own style of tuning. Posting logs is mostly important for people that are modded to know that their car is running the way it should.

Just by logging you can tell if there is a boost leak, plugs that are on their way out, bad fuel, etc. All things that can potentially cause harm to an engine, especially a forced induction engine.

The mentality of set it and forget it doesn't work for me and many other guys. We are on a forum to A) have fun, and B) share info.

Partially true and partially untrue. In any case, I get that people are interested in knowing all that they can. Helping people is great, but that's not the only reason why people want to see data from others and everyone who does programming knows it. If that were really the case everyone would offer FREE programming for EVERYONE. That is not the case, though, is it?

I don't mind helping my customers; that's a huge part of my job. I do have to wonder about some things, though. I mean why do people who talk trash on my programming ask me for updates? Are they lying to me or lying to others about their intentions? Why do people keep asking to see big turbo kit data logs? Between Cobb and I, we have our customers well taken care of.

 

[Alex@Stratified]

Preloaded the stock WG more. I zeroed the WG tables and logged before and after to track the pressure increase. I got it to 7.5psi but never went any further for fear of not allowing the gate to fully open when it needed to. There was still about 3/4" of adjustment left.

I thought it would help hold a bit more boost at the top end but it didn't.

As for wgdc, when I saw 16% D-adder being applied, I added some to the P-table to bring the D down a bit. It seemed to smooth out achieving the boost target. Cobb uses 16% pos correction and stock is 25%. Don't know what the max is.



Sent using Tapatalk

My experience with preloading is that it does work for a few psi worth of gain just like you were seeing. However eventually you preload it enough such that boost starts to spike and is hard to control. Are you familiar with PID tuning?

 

[rader1]

Partially true and partially untrue. In any case, I get that people are interested in knowing all that they can. Helping people is great, but that's not the only reason why people want to see data from others and everyone who does programming knows it. If that were really the case everyone would offer FREE programming for EVERYONE. That is not the case, though, is it?

I don't mind helping my customers; that's a huge part of my job. I do have to wonder about some things, though. I mean why do people who talk trash on my programming ask me for updates? Are they lying to me or lying to others about their intentions? Why do people keep asking to see big turbo kit data logs? Between Cobb and I, we have our customers well taken care of.

Curiosity mainly. Just to see how well the factory boost control works when it's dealing with something quite different than the stock hardware. Fueling is another one, also. For all this talk of people where the fuel system limit is(or isn't) it would be nice to actually see a log of a big turbo car hitting the limit and where it is.

Personally, I don't care where the data is coming from or who's tuning the car. I'd just like to see it. When it comes time to place the order for a big turbo and have it tuned I will not choose a tuner that doesn't share logs of their work. Fortunately, I'm already good to go as far as a tuner is concerned.