Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 60

Thread: Audi 3.0T Simos 8.5 Issues

  1. #1
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    28

    Audi 3.0T Simos 8.5 Issues

    Hello,
    There is very little information on this platform and engine so to find answers is not easy. I am having a few issues with tuning the Simos 8.5 and HPTuners. One of my main problems is a loss of power at the top end. I have Unitronics Dual Pulley (187mm crank pulley and 57.55mm SC pulley) and have made some adjustments to the tune, however in the "Airflow" tab in the "Max Airflow" table, the max amount is 1389mg and I believe thats whats cutting power around 5500-6000rpm. The MAF plataus out and boost is blead off in the process.

    Another issue I have is I can not data log MAF sensor voltage and am having trouble figuring out how to calibrate the MAF sensor, as my fuel trims are high.
    Attached Files Attached Files

  2. #2
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    ON, Canada
    Posts
    346
    Quote Originally Posted by SteveMcQouy View Post
    Hello,
    There is very little information on this platform and engine so to find answers is not easy. I am having a few issues with tuning the Simos 8.5 and HPTuners. One of my main problems is a loss of power at the top end. I have Unitronics Dual Pulley (187mm crank pulley and 57.55mm SC pulley) and have made some adjustments to the tune, however in the "Airflow" tab in the "Max Airflow" table, the max amount is 1389mg and I believe thats whats cutting power around 5500-6000rpm. The MAF plataus out and boost is blead off in the process.

    Another issue I have is I can not data log MAF sensor voltage and am having trouble figuring out how to calibrate the MAF sensor, as my fuel trims are high.
    I would start by taming back the torque request, your Driver Demand tables are all set to FF, that's not good practice....

    try and keep your requested torque within the tables [ECM] 29540 - Indicated Aircharge to Torque and [ECM] 29523 - Indicated Torque to Aircharge: AFAIK these tables will be where the aircharge request comes from

    as you can see they are limited to about 700

  3. #3
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    28
    Yes I agree with the torque tables, mostly just high to ensure that's not what is cutting power anywhere. Mostly relying on the MAP limit table right now until the whole power drop off. I guess what I'm mostly trying to confirm right now is, is it the Airflow table maxing out?

  4. #4
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    ON, Canada
    Posts
    346
    Quote Originally Posted by SteveMcQouy View Post
    Yes I agree with the torque tables, mostly just high to ensure that's not what is cutting power anywhere. Mostly relying on the MAP limit table right now until the whole power drop off. I guess what I'm mostly trying to confirm right now is, is it the Airflow table maxing out?

    2013 Audi S5 TylerMod.hpt

    Give this a log without any modifications if you can please

  5. #5
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    28
    More of the same with some other pulls. I have a decent amount of data logs with this happening. I daily the vehicle its very noticable when it goes from 20psi to 13psi.
    Attached Files Attached Files

  6. #6
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    ON, Canada
    Posts
    346
    Quote Originally Posted by SteveMcQouy View Post
    More of the same with some other pulls. I have a decent amount of data logs with this happening. I daily the vehicle its very noticable when it goes from 20psi to 13psi.
    does it drive better at least? XD

    I'm going to lower it 10% in this file and see if the whole thing changes

    2013 Audi S5 TylerMod[ECM] 29520.hpt

  7. #7
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    28
    I made the changes and did some logs, the first log is with the changes you made. The MAF is still staying around the 375 g/s so I guess we can rule out the Airflow table since there was no drop there.
    There is a good 4th gear pull at 11:13:48 and a 3rd gear pull at 11:16:21.

    The second log I pulled some timing and moved the MAP limit up to 260kpa to see if that would do anything. Similar results.
    2, 3rd gear pulls in second data log

    What I can't figure out, is on Unitronic?s stage 3 tune, the MAF will go well past 400 g/s while maintaining boost and still computing the same 475 ft*lbs estimated Torque
    Attached Files Attached Files

  8. #8
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    ON, Canada
    Posts
    346
    Quote Originally Posted by SteveMcQouy View Post
    I made the changes and did some logs, the first log is with the changes you made. The MAF is still staying around the 375 g/s so I guess we can rule out the Airflow table since there was no drop there.
    There is a good 4th gear pull at 11:13:48 and a 3rd gear pull at 11:16:21.

    The second log I pulled some timing and moved the MAP limit up to 260kpa to see if that would do anything. Similar results.
    2, 3rd gear pulls in second data log

    What I can't figure out, is on Unitronic?s stage 3 tune, the MAF will go well past 400 g/s while maintaining boost and still computing the same 475 ft*lbs estimated Torque
    Can you post the file you’re using with the logs also please?

  9. #9
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    28
    This is what was on the car for the second data log, I updated it from the first one so I don't have the one for the first data log.
    Attached Files Attached Files

  10. #10
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    ON, Canada
    Posts
    346
    Quote Originally Posted by SteveMcQouy View Post
    I made the changes and did some logs, the first log is with the changes you made. The MAF is still staying around the 375 g/s so I guess we can rule out the Airflow table since there was no drop there.
    There is a good 4th gear pull at 11:13:48 and a 3rd gear pull at 11:16:21.

    The second log I pulled some timing and moved the MAP limit up to 260kpa to see if that would do anything. Similar results.
    2, 3rd gear pulls in second data log

    What I can't figure out, is on Unitronic?s stage 3 tune, the MAF will go well past 400 g/s while maintaining boost and still computing the same 475 ft*lbs estimated Torque

    It would indicate that there may be some MAP to torque scaling required. I didn’t think the airflow table was the limit because it’s indicated in MG, leads me to believe it’s MG/stk not KG/hr

  11. #11
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    28
    Quote Originally Posted by TylerJDubbs View Post
    It would indicate that there may be some MAP to torque scaling required. I didn’t think the airflow table was the limit because it’s indicated in MG, leads me to believe it’s MG/stk not KG/hr
    Ok I'll look into that. I also rescaled the "Airflow/Supercharger" "Airflow table". Stock was limited to 18k rpm and it's spinning up to the 24k range. Which odly enough, 18k rpm at the SC is 5500 rpm (3.249 ratio), around when it seems to power loss. Not sure if that has anything to do with it, the graph is pretty close to the same shape as the stock one.

  12. #12
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    ON, Canada
    Posts
    346
    Quote Originally Posted by SteveMcQouy View Post
    Ok I'll look into that. I also rescaled the "Airflow/Supercharger" "Airflow table". Stock was limited to 18k rpm and it's spinning up to the 24k range. Which odly enough, 18k rpm at the SC is 5500 rpm (3.249 ratio), around when it seems to power loss. Not sure if that has anything to do with it, the graph is pretty close to the same shape as the stock one.
    I was going to suggest underscaling the torque to aircharge tables ([ECM] 29540 - Indicated Aircharge to Torque and [ECM] 29523 - Indicated Torque to Aircharge)so it maxed out at 500nm instead of 750nm to still request 1389mg because seems we are being limited to about 600nm max torque up top in the hopes that less torque can request more airflow

  13. #13
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    ON, Canada
    Posts
    346
    2013 Audi S5 Rev 3-TylerMod.hpt

    see how this goes?

  14. #14
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    28
    Great Success!!!!!
    I built Torque tables last night too, however I rebuilt my whole table and that lead to me in limp mode..... ooops
    Your torque table build worked, this data log is with it. Best pull was 3rd gear at 10:33:09. Pulls through the full gear. My only concern is, now we are "tricking" the ECU, is there anyway to have the torque table built properly so it works correctly?
    If you don't mind me asking, how did you go about building the table?
    Attached Files Attached Files
    Last edited by SteveMcQouy; 01-06-2022 at 09:54 AM.

  15. #15
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    ON, Canada
    Posts
    346
    Quote Originally Posted by SteveMcQouy View Post
    Great Success!!!!!
    I built Torque tables last night too, however I rebuilt my whole table and that lead to me in limp mode..... ooops
    Your torque table build worked, this data log is with it. Best pull was 3rd gear at 10:33:09. Pulls through the full gear. My only concern is, now we are "tricking" the ECU, is there anyway to have the torque table built properly so it works correctly?
    If you don't mind me asking, how did you go about building the table?
    I wouldn't call this "tricking the ECU" as its just rescaling the amount of torque required to make a specific airload, as long as torque monitoring is satisfied its solid

    I just looked at the lowest point of max actual torque we were making and then made that the new max in the tables, also tuned it inversely to keep torque monitoring happy

    time to tweak the boost max and then throw some timing at it haha

    2013 Audi S5 Rev 3-TylerMod2.hpt
    Last edited by TylerJDubbs; 01-06-2022 at 11:45 AM.

  16. #16
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    28
    Thank you!! It's the tuned inversely that I don't understand. For some reason my VCM software does not have the inverse calculator, not sure if I'm supposed to use that or something like that. I'll give the update a try.
    I see you also added spark to the [ECM] 29498 and [ECM] 29499 tables, the Rich Base tables. Is that where I want to do that? I've been messing with the [ECM] 29681 and [ECM] 29682, Minimum Spark tables to advance and retard spark.

  17. #17
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    ON, Canada
    Posts
    346
    Quote Originally Posted by SteveMcQouy View Post
    Thank you!! It's the tuned inversely that I don't understand. For some reason my VCM software does not have the inverse calculator, not sure if I'm supposed to use that or something like that. I'll give the update a try.
    I see you also added spark to the [ECM] 29498 and [ECM] 29499 tables, the Rich Base tables. Is that where I want to do that? I've been messing with the [ECM] 29681 and [ECM] 29682, Minimum Spark tables to advance and retard spark.
    Inverse means that when you modify the table values and axis in [ECM] 29540 you must also make changes to the Table and Axis in [ECM] 29523 so that the table and axis matches up between the two tables, because if one table thinks that 750nm makes 1389mg and the other table thinks that only 550nm will make 1389mg torque monitoring will see the 750 value as an error in the torque system as the deviation is too large.

    I use the rich base tables because I'm not getting paid, I'm lazy, and its easy, lol. Timing adjustment should be done with [ECM] 29490/29491/29492 - Base Spark Tables to be 100% proper

    IMHO using min spark tables to substitute base spark is a NO NO as it wont use any of the corrections (IAT, ECT, ambient temp/pressure) as they apply to timing

  18. #18
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    28
    Quote Originally Posted by TylerJDubbs View Post
    Inverse means that when you modify the table values and axis in [ECM] 29540 you must also make changes to the Table and Axis in [ECM] 29523 so that the table and axis matches up between the two tables, because if one table thinks that 750nm makes 1389mg and the other table thinks that only 550nm will make 1389mg torque monitoring will see the 750 value as an error in the torque system as the deviation is too large.

    I use the rich base tables because I'm not getting paid, I'm lazy, and its easy, lol. Timing adjustment should be done with [ECM] 29490/29491/29492 - Base Spark Tables to be 100% proper

    IMHO using min spark tables to substitute base spark is a NO NO as it wont use any of the corrections (IAT, ECT, ambient temp/pressure) as they apply to timing
    Ok that makes sense, new added timing had a lot of knock, however I have messed with the min spark tables a lot not knowing that was a NO NO. I'll put those back to stock other than pulling timing for sake of shifting slow in traffic. Then I'm guessing I should rebuild the spark advance in the other table. Also, should I have a value other than 0 in the "Rich Lambda Ref" under the base section?
    Attached Files Attached Files
    Last edited by SteveMcQouy; 01-06-2022 at 12:26 PM.

  19. #19
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    ON, Canada
    Posts
    346
    Quote Originally Posted by SteveMcQouy View Post
    Ok that makes sense, new added timing had a lot of knock, however I have messed with the min spark tables a lot not knowing that was a NO NO. I'll put those back to stock other than pulling timing for sake of shifting slow in traffic. Then I'm guessing I should rebuild the spark advance in the other table. Also, should I have a value other than 0 in the "Rich Lambda Ref" under the base section?
    0 for [ECM] 29495 should be fine!

    this should be nice, you can tweak on your own now

    Next I would look at injection timing to see if there is any advance from the injection side that could pickup power or reduce knock

    2013 Audi S5 Rev 3-TylerMod3.hpt
    Last edited by TylerJDubbs; 01-06-2022 at 12:38 PM.

  20. #20
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    28
    Quote Originally Posted by TylerJDubbs View Post
    this should be nice, you can tweak on your own now

    2013 Audi S5 Rev 3-TylerMod3.hpt
    Thank you very much for the help, those TQ tables are tricky lol.
    One last question if you happen to know much about Audi. The car is a manual gearbox and when I 2-step it with traction control off the 2-step goes away and it will rev all the way up. Not sure if it's a vag-com thing or what