Audi/VW MQB 2.0T Tuning Thread

[sidejobjames]

Looks fine, I don't see any red flags. But I don't think you're logging anything to see boost level (MAP or Throttle inlet pressure). 5G0905259L is now well supported on the editor side, time to get moving with hp tuners! Be happy to answer any questions on getting MPI/flex fuel going.

Nice! thank you for offering the guidance going forward, you've been very helpful so far. I'll look into the MAP/TIP pid, and I did notice the changes that HPTuners has been making recently. It was a good move on their part, their commitment to advancing the platform is the main factor in my decision to finally buy some credits for my GTI, and i doubt i'm the only one in this scenario.

Before i start in with the MPI/E85 stuff, I'm going to spend a lot of time going through the max torque tables, and the 'limiters' ect. and read about what others have done, to see how different tables effect the way the car runs/logs/butt-dyno's. (after i purchase the credits obviously). And before I do start making changes i'm going to ditch the jb4 completely.

The tables i was planning on starting with relate to the EGT max temps/EGT limit for cat over-temp type stuff. Then I'll look at manifold pressure set point limit type tables, as well as the torque limiters. But I'm definitely going to study a lot more about the pressure ratio tables, because i noticed in my logs that my throttle only ever opened 85%. and i remember reading in the ecu-tek write up (i think it was there) that the throttle pressure ratio needs to be reduced around the point where vacuum turns to boost, if i'm remembering correctly, in order to actually achieve 100% throttle opening? And i'm sure that's not the only table in control of the end result throttle %, but seemed like a good place to start my research.

Lemme know if there are any other tables/limiters that i should look into when i get started with making adjustments. Any and all advice is appreciated!

[aaronc7]

The limiters can be a little tough-- there's so many of them and different calibrations have some maxed out and some actually use them for some purpose etc. For example generally speaking the Golf R/S3 tunes have many more 'layers' of limiters in place and the GTI/A3 has a lot of these limiter type tables maxed out. Different tuning teams I think, so you see different approaches (which is also kind of neat to look at / compare).

Anyways, to increase boost/power, it goes something like this.

- Torque Management -> Driver Request -> Max torque table is what the ECU requests at WOT
- Torque Model -> General -> TTA converts requested torque to Airmass desired or set point. Spark efficiency comes into play depending on your ign timing, so you'll likely see higher airmass desired than you'd expect, based on the requested torque value alone.
- Airmass desired goes thru the VE model to come to a MAP desired to hit said airmass target.
- Airflow -> Pressure Control - TIP desired -- MAP desired gets converted to TIP desired. Generally nothing fancy here, but this table can act as a limiter too.
- Now you have a basic TIP desired..however there's many other limiters that get calculated and the min airmass/min TIP desired is the TIP desired actual
- Most common other limiter you see used is Airflow -> Turbocharger - Max PR, to set a max pressure ratio for boost.
- Other limiters can come into play, such as turbo speed, charge air temp limits, etc.

You can generally go about tuning in 2 main ways that I've found
- Torque target
- Pressure/boost target

Torque target is kinda what you'd expect, put the 'torque' (keep in mind it's an internal ecu calc, not actual engine or wheel torque) in the request table and that's what the ECU will go for. Nice thing about this is that it will automatically try to compensate for high IATs, higher elevation etc to shoot for a target torque value.

Pressure/boost target, generally the idea is to set your torque request to some value that will result in MAP desired being a little higher than you'd ever want it to be, and generally set the torque request high and constant value to redline (even if you're tapering boost).

Then, use the TIP desired and/or Max pressure ratio tables to "bring down" that MAP desired request to what you want. This maybe is a little more 'simple' approach to things, but many of us like to deal with tuning this way, since we can directly measure MAP/boost and work it that way. Vs torque which is kind of a made up value anyways. There are other tables that you can have the ECU reduce torque target with high IAT etc., so there's ways to make it a little more 'advanced' technique.

And you can layer these approaches too-- that is what the stock tune does. Personally I do the latter- high torque request, bring in my desired boost vs TIP desired and max PR tables. I'm at 4300', so I generally just have it ride the max PR table and my TIP desired table is more of a 'max boost in any scenario' limiter.

[sidejobjames]

I pulled the trigger on some credits, finally made some adjustments to my tune file and wrote them to the vehicle. The adjustments i made were mostly guided by the stock tune files of audi s3's, posted up in the drop box repository. I'll post an attachment with my tune file, along with a screen shot of the maps that i thought would make a difference. I'm sure i missed a lot, but definite noticeable difference in the power output, as well as the part throttle response and feel, which was my main issue with the piggy back. I only did one log, I'm going to do more for sure before i make anymore changes.
The jb4 is still installed, and i made some adjustments to the 'map' that i've got it set to. I changed over to the 'user defined' boost map, which gives you the ability to add an additional x amount of boost through the rpm range, in 500 rpm increments. Previously i was running map 1, which was an additional 4 psi across the board, now i'm running map 6 (the adjustable map) and i set it to 3 psi additional across the board. I did this out of curiosity, i wanted to know if the changes i made in hp tuners would be noticeable. figured this would help me notice, i guess.. idk. i'm going to phase the piggy back out completely, before too long from now.

Oh yeah, in the log, the dip in the graph, i actually broke traction!! I don't know why it didn't pull throttle, but i was going around a very long, gradual turn down this on-ramp, and that with the combination of my balding tires and the extra torques.. definitely noticeable. I've broken traction in third before, but not this easily.

modified GTI.hpt3rd gear post-write.hplscreen shot of changes made.png

[aaronc7]

I would ditch the JB4 completely and immediately. You have full control over the ECU now, you don't need or want some piggyback in the mix.

Looking at your log again, definitely some weird stuff going on with the boost pressure and airmass/torque in the middle of the pull.

[aaronc7]

Here's a decent logging list since they added all of the new params

[sidejobjames]

I would ditch the JB4 completely and immediately. You have full control over the ECU now, you don't need or want some piggyback in the mix.

Looking at your log again, definitely some weird stuff going on with the boost pressure and airmass/torque in the middle of the pull.

As far as the jb4, i hundred percent agree, next chance i get i'm completely removing it. I changed the settings while i was on my lunch break so it would no longer make any changes to the inputs it intercepts. I did so because on the way to work i did a log and saw some things i didn't like. Maybe its the same as the weird stuff you're referring to. What concerned me was the difference between the desired map and actual map, if I'm remembering right (the log is on the laptop in the car, haven't gone down to grab it yet).

I'll probably put it back to stock, or near stock for the time being. I've been looking at is38 kits for a while now, and after i get rid of this other car i'm trying to sell, i think it's time to pull the trigger on that. I'll definitely get an ethanol sensor at the same time, but i might wait to get the mpi hardware until is38/flex fuel shit is dialed in. The car has almost 60k on it, and i've been piggy backed like the whole time, with maybe 30 trips to the drag strip. A lot of the time with a catless down-pipe, but not all. I wouldn't be surprised if my turbo was close to its last leg.

thanks again for all the help man

[aaronc7]

MAP desired isn't that useful in many cases as it tends to get limited by other things-> max pressure ratio.... max TIP, etc. For boost control, what you really care about is TIP vs TIP desired. MAP desired can be useful to make sure your initial torque request is sufficient to hit your boost goals (since we can't log airmass desired... MAP desired is kinda synonymous).

Stock car or near stock car is definitely the best/safest way to get started with tuning and to learn the ECU and what's going on

[aaronc7]

Some things going on in MQB world. I'm using a bit of a hybrid tuning solution--open source tools to flash some of the OS mods, but continuing to use HP tuners to tune the calibration etc (I like VCM editor too much!)

https://www.golfmk7.com/forums/index...4#post-7627709

[aaronc7]

Couple guys have asked me for example file with MPI enabled.... here is my stock file vs MPI enabled with some of the common settings edited also to highlight what else you'll probably want to change. Also including a FlexFuel enabled tune.

[aaronc7]

So, definition files are pretty good for Mk7 / simos 18.1/18.6 2.0T, USDM cars. Also the latest 1.8T box code/OS

GTI/A3
5G0906259A
5G0906259D
5G0906259L

R/S3
8V0906259K
8V0906259P
8V0906259J (World market)

1.8T GSW
8V0906264M

Only one lagging behind right now is the USDM / common box code arena is 8V0906259H, which is used for at least 2016-2017 Golf Rs I believe, generally. They seem to be slowly but surely adding the defs to the other box codes.

Just updated the dropbox repository as well: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/llu1kggpz...nav_tracking=1

[aaronc7]

Anyone try a virtual read with a DQ381 yet-- does it work, are they working support for them?

[this guy]

Alright I'm back to messing with my car. Work and life really cut into my HPT time. Has any of the GTI guys got MPI working? I have tried a bunch of different set ups and I can't seem to find the correct one.
aaronc7 I tried the setup you told me and a few different ones but I think HPT still needs to add "calibration table of inhibit assignments" as you said you needed to do that for your car.

[aaronc7]

Alright I'm back to messing with my car. Work and life really cut into my HPT time. Has any of the GTI guys got MPI working? I have tried a bunch of different set ups and I can't seem to find the correct one.
aaronc7 I tried the setup you told me and a few different ones but I think HPT still needs to add "calibration table of inhibit assignments" as you said you needed to do that for your car.

PM me or hit me up on the Discord channel and let's dig into it! I don't know of anyone with a GTI doing MPI yet. Each file is a little different, but I think we can figure it out.

[aaronc7]

BTW I got my Vortex hybrid turbo installed last weekend and will be getting into that more soon. I noticed HPT added a bunch of tables for the 2019+ Golf R Simos 18.10 definition file as well. Keeps getting better, only thing that is still missing for a complete suite is high speed logging

[aaronc7]

Not a refined tune by any means (basically my old 'stage 2' file, boost just capped at 280 kPa), but running pretty well already. Boost does overshoot in the mid range in this log.

EQT Vortex Std, 91 octane.

[TylerJDubbs]

Not a refined tune by any means (basically my old 'stage 2' file, boost just capped at 280 kPa), but running pretty well already. Boost does overshoot in the mid range in this log.

EQT Vortex Std, 91 octane.

Good work as always!

11.5 AFR is a bit rich for DI? but I'm guessing with 91 it likes it 93 would be nice to see

[aaronc7]

Seems to be what works on these motors. They will run happily on leaner AFR for sure, but I like to be safe/extra cooling and it does not seem to hugely affect power, so I'm all about it. Seen quite a few motors pop on these and leaner AFR seems to be a trend. I had a similar issue on a LS1 where I cracked a piston on a road course--probably just too much heat. So I guess my mindset is safer/plan for worst case scenario, even if I can get away with a leaner AFR.

[Exley]

I'm down to .80 / 11.7. Seems crazy rich to me on DI but seems to be helping with knock in the higher RPMs

[GCtech]

On flexfuel were do you send the sensor input ? or are you using a virtual sense ?

[aaronc7]

On flexfuel were do you send the sensor input ? or are you using a virtual sense ?

Pin 71 I believe with sensor? If you follow the CTS or PR MPI instructions or whatever that pin is. I've posted it a time or two on here.

There is a toggle between virtual/sensorless and sensor flex fuel. I quickly tried sensorless once and it wasn't working and I didn't dig any further. With a sensor is very easy to config and works great