Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 33 of 33

Thread: If you own an Audi or VW dont buy a HP tuner

  1. #21
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    30
    Well said!
    Quote Originally Posted by kbaldi29 View Post
    I believe is very difficult if not unrealistic to pretend or expect any new vehicle application to be completely developed right from the get-go, considering this ECUs represent a challenge for anyone who works with them in a daily basis, regardless of how many you have done in the past, you cant take for granted the next one will be the same as any of the previous car you couldve done before.

    Its not a secret VAG cars are not precisely the best example of a user/tuner friendly in comparison to most popular cars in the tuner industry, for the most part simple procedures that are considered to be essential, easily accessible, in cases taken for granted by Tuners and experienced users when programming other vehicles, for sure become a luxury, sometimes even impossible to perform on anything with a Bosch ECU, jumping from applications where everything is fully developed by companies like HPT, ready for you to input numbers you can understand and cool descriptions to know what each table does, for sure seems to be very deceiving for some people, this feeling of entitlement is the most challenging aspect when tuning Bosch ECUs.
    Very awakening as well to see first hand how really difficult is to deal with such intrincated logics used by Bosch, on top of hundreds of SW variations and scrambled code used by the same ECU on the very same cars, you think you have one figured out and all done, the next car you cant even get the boost up because now the logic changed to use a different torque table and to complete the painful reality check, next car you cant even read the stock file because now they removed the reading capabilities for this ecu, nothing but an ID number hopefully no one else before you touched or manipulated, now you need to obtain the matching SW to even attempt flashing the car, hoping you are able to find a matching file which is not guaranteed you can put your hands on it....
    At this point you have not even start with what you really think you know how to do, tuning the tables previously "handed" to you, the very fast 400 cars you tuned last year give you the same advantage as someone who has never touched a computer before has. The worst part has now began, you get ready to start tuning this one cool car that now, unfortunately you cant even pay someone to hand you the tables you need because even those big companies you used to rely on, take months if not years before they can come up with this tables once you believe were not a big deal to define.

    Nothing but funny to see how we all at some point dared to complain about how incomplete a company's tuning solution is, not having the slight idea of what really takes to even offer support to only read or write software for this cars, the fact they can supply you with a value you can understand in every table they defined and integrated for you to use, is beyond mind blowing. I think I can forgive them for not having 20 tables they missed when I tuned the first Audi with HPT, considering there is over 50k tables inside this ECUs, even if they were to miss 1000 tables on the next car I do, I truly will be fine with it, for sure beyond impressive to have the resources, knowledge and man power to come up and develop software for any Bosch ECU, that otherwise will still be very exclusive to very advanced tuners/engineers and their mercy charging whatever they consider to be fair for this services.

    Very easy to judge what is beyond our understanding, maybe is time to realize Car manufactures all are moving into this kind of techniques, very similar if not the same, Bosch today controls a huge part of the market and their products are implemented more and more every day by car companies, this only means tuning industry will become a more selective and tuner limited as the cars get more advanced, maybe the correct move here to make is actually put some time educating ourselves and maybe at some point understand better what really means and is required to move on from thinking I know, to really understand how this works, for sure will be helpful for those quick to complain having zero idea of what is going on and perhaps show how to respect and recognize we can sit down and type numbers in a laptop and pretend to know, all thanks to someone who dedicated real time into developing this interfaces/software solutions.

  2. #22
    Advanced Tuner Ghostnotes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    328
    Just wish HPT would do the TT....
    I always tune VVE....

  3. #23
    Me too.. and the RS3...

  4. #24
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    16
    have you tried changing target angle of the bypass valve and its inverse map here?

    Supercharger-Bypass-Valve.jpg

    Hope this helps

  5. #25
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    30
    can you tell me the use of this map and why do i need to change it ?

  6. #26
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    16
    Also it looks like you haven't made changes in your airflow maps or torque request maps

    Airflow-maps.jpg

    for a start try to change your aircharge to torque map final row to 750 and the last row of the Load axis to 1360 and see what your load levels are at hope this helps

  7. #27
    Potential Tuner
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    7
    hey tylerj, when datalogging, what airflow PID are you using to make corrections. i have my a7 making 18.6 psi boost steady across rpms, but it starts commanding .75 lambda around 5k rpms even though my PE table is targeting .85 lambda. MASS AIRFLOW or SUPERCHARGER DESIRED AIR FLOW doesnt match up so im confused what airflow PID i need to properly make fueling corrections. any insight/help would be much appreciated. Thanks

  8. #28
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    16
    Please post up your stock file and you can PM me your tuned file if you want me to have a look 👌

  9. #29
    Potential Tuner
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    7
    here is my stock file.
    Attached Files Attached Files

  10. #30
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    16
    Thanks, i will have a look!

  11. #31
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by Hemithis01 View Post
    hey tylerj, when datalogging, what airflow PID are you using to make corrections. i have my a7 making 18.6 psi boost steady across rpms, but it starts commanding .75 lambda around 5k rpms even though my PE table is targeting .85 lambda. MASS AIRFLOW or SUPERCHARGER DESIRED AIR FLOW doesnt match up so im confused what airflow PID i need to properly make fueling corrections. any insight/help would be much appreciated. Thanks
    Hey Neil,

    for starters i think this is where you're going to want to look to maintain your PE fueling request but there's three ways you can go about this.
    1) first way is to raise the temperature set point of temperature control fueling (ECM 29221) to where it never is engaged and deal with fueling purely via PE
    2) you can play around with the actual Lambda request of temperature control fueling (ECM 29220) to where it will request a richer mixture but not too rich (.84-.80) and you can use this as intended by the oem to reduce cylinder temps and help better control knock
    3) a little mix of both by raising the limit slightly and leaning out the Temp control requested lambda so it only engages a small amount of enrichment and only when you're in conditions of sustained engine load

    Hope this helps ��

    A7-.jpg

  12. #32
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    30
    thats good tips tyler

  13. #33
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by samtuning View Post
    thats good tips tyler
    I try lol