Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 93

Thread: Optimum Torque, Normalized Torque, Torque to Load: Calculations, Effects, p061, etc

  1. #61
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Jan 2022
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    361
    Luckily for you guys I started noting boost a couple weeks ago. I don't hit 6k much because it usually shifts before that so I noted 5800 instead, but note 6 if I get it.
    Bone stock 2016 E550 w/ 54K miles on it. All oem except K&N filters and intercooler pump is On all the time. Original spark plugs, orig O2's etc. So pretty good for comparo's.

    I don't count spikes, I let it fully settle first or I don't count it. Since boost before the throttle gives false high readings due the throttle closing all the time, I just use MAP. Most all are in 3rd gear, a few may be in 2nd or 4th. My ambient pressure at these times is 14.5 +- .1.
    This is also the peak of summer heat so IAT's are usually 100 to 125, and I do this with the AC on full blast because of the aforementioned heat and as you know the AC dumps its heat on the intercooler. I can't for say for sure if they were all 90% DC and 100% throttle, but if not it's probably pretty close.

    RPM, then psia for each time I hit that rpm:

    4000 MAP 32.3 32.6 32.7 33.1 33.3 33.5 34.1 34.5
    4500 MAP 30.9 31.3 31.4 31.6 31.7 31.8 32.1 32.3 32.8
    5000 MAP 28.7 28.8 29.1 29.5 29.9 30.0 30.3 30.4 31.0
    5500 MAP 26.3 26.4 26.5 27.4 27.9 28.4 28.5
    5800 MAP 25.6 25.9 26.2 26.5 26.9 27.0
    6000 MAP 25.5 25.6 25.8

    The highest rpm I have during this past couple weeks is:
    6063 MAP 25.5 & 12.0 before the throttle. It was 90% duty cycle & 100% throttle.
    Yesterday's max rpm; 5986 MAP 26.0 & 12.6 before throttle, also 90/100%
    Today's max rpm; 5725 MAP 27.7 & 13.4, 90/100%
    So basically 12 is your answer.
    '16 E550 Coupe RWD - C207.373 / M278.922 / MED17.7.3 / 722.909

  2. #62
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Jan 2022
    Posts
    32
    Quote Originally Posted by Schnell View Post
    What does your wastegate duty cycle look like through the rpm range?
    Around 60-80. I believe the lower the duty cycle the more boost it can hold..
    I have it set at Min:65-max:90

  3. #63
    I'm dropping to 7-8 psi at redline, which is sad. May have a boost leak. But my WGDC is also dropping so it doesn't seem like the turbos are at full effort through higher RPM.

  4. #64
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Jan 2022
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    361
    Schnell, you can look at mine (below) to see if you can spot something useful.
    My first thought is the Max Torque Driver Input. I had to really push that to get it to work. The oem #'s are all set to peter out after 3k, mine don't drop until after 6k.
    I had to bump Max Desired Load a lot too.
    I can't see how the Turbo settings would do it since they appear to have virtually nothing to do with peak rpm power. My tweaks are just to keep the DC from dropping so much. Before that it spent more time dropping the DC way low and recovering from it than it did at the target DC, so the DC was all over the place along with my boost. Now it looks more like what I'd expect it to. So my guess is I'm at max possible boost until I change some hardware to get more pressure drop at the turbine.

    33x.hpt
    '16 E550 Coupe RWD - C207.373 / M278.922 / MED17.7.3 / 722.909

  5. #65
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Jan 2022
    Posts
    32
    Quote Originally Posted by Schnell View Post
    I'm dropping to 7-8 psi at redline, which is sad. May have a boost leak. But my WGDC is also dropping so it doesn't seem like the turbos are at full effort through higher RPM.
    That can be possible or it can be a vacuum leak I was having the same issue at one point I noticed when I got beat by a stock Honda Si after that race let me know something was wrong so I look and looked after buying a new boost solenoid still same issue looked some more until I got to the vaccines lines, which was my issue. When I got a muffler delete they crimped the vacuum line running to the mufflers which dry rotted over time and teared apart which was my boost leak issue also caused my wastegate on that side to rattle and whistle

    Or if you took your intakes off before check make sure they?re tight or correctly seated, also check to make sure airbox, filters and screws are seated properly and secured

    If none of these seem to be an issue for you maybe turbos and or wastegates are bad. You can also try uploading a stock tune file and see if your boost still acts weird

  6. #66
    Advanced Tuner outlaw_50's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2020
    Location
    United Arab Emirates, AlAin
    Posts
    204
    Stock turbos are high at mid range but low at high range.

    So they climb then drop thats the way the stock turbos work and if you tried to make the boost steady through the power band you will loose power pushing the turbos to overwork.

  7. #67
    I think I probably do have a boost leak, though I don't expect to hold peak boost to 6k anyway. But 12psi would be nice at least.

  8. #68
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Jan 2022
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    361
    I'd imagine if I can do then you can too. It took a lot of tinkering to get it to where I'm at, and at this point I have well over 100 tunes. Basically I think simply maxing everything out is key, at least maxing >4k or maybe 4500 since it can't make too much boost above that imo so there doesn't seem to be any point in limiters there so I'd push them all outta the way.
    I've been playing with DC for a while but it's not without drawbacks. Overboosting is the problem, if you push it far enough I'll get actual overboosting, but mostly the issue is the ECU is waaaay to sensitive at part throttle and trips the overboost code for virtually no reason which turns off boost altogether. So the more I raise DC the better it works, but more easily triggers overboost and shuts down >:|
    VVT tweaking can fix that. By retarding Ex timing in the part throttle problem areas, I can lower boost and it won't trip. The Ex timing has a huge effect on lower rpm boost, but still does at 6k too. So if you have pushed your limiters out of the way, or are unwilling to push them further, then maybe try advancing VVT. I think it's a long shot because it seems the oem # gives peak boost at 6k, but it doesn't hurt to try. On mine any advancing >5k will lower boost, so if by chance your position sensors are off and it's really more advanced, then retarding will help. Or maybe mine are off, who knows, but I'd try advancing 3 deg just to see. If nothing happens then maybe 3 retard. For me -15 to -18 makes the same boost/power, but outside that range I lose power.

    Then there's the DC on the boost solenoid, which I'd imagine varies car to car because the solenoid is a crude device, and the vac pump isn't much better. So a the DC settings on mine will likely be too much or too little for you. They don't matter much at 6k, but I have two solenoids and the new one isn't as good. For oem power the lame one is fine, but when pushing for max power it isn't cutting it. I forget what the loss was but it was something like you're seeing. It worked fine up to say 4500, then the higher the rpm the more obvious the problem. So I suppose you could have a bum one too? Or bum vac pump? My vac pump had an issue one can the same problem appeared, boost loss >4k or so.
    With my setup I think it needs a min of ~82% DC to hit 12psi at 6k, so if your vacuum or solenoid are not as good as mine it won't take much to kill that. Or if you're at 60-80 like Globois, <80 would drop my boost. Not by much but I could kiss 12 @ 6k goodbye.
    Globois: that min DC of 65 would overboost me <4k in a heartbeat! In fact 55% overboosts me a lot, both triggering the ECU at low rpm/load to kill the turbos or actual overboost when floored <4k. So I've only gone as far as 55% a few times, which is still too much... I consider 52% my limit, which only sometimes triggers overboost and always spikes above 20, more like 25, but it's a compromise that is better than 50% DC which actually makes a big difference compared to 52.
    Point being if you're able to go 65 and not overboost then I'd say your vacuum or solenoid isn't working nearly as well as mine, or similar to my crappy one, which would of course kill your higher rpm boost.
    '16 E550 Coupe RWD - C207.373 / M278.922 / MED17.7.3 / 722.909

  9. #69
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Jul 2022
    Posts
    31
    Lots of useful info in this thread.

    I have been trying to mess with the torque tuning, I was having issues with overboost at partial throttle, stemming from Base TIP issues

    I have a 2013 Audi S6 with Rs7 turbos I know the car is not the same but it is also Med17 ecu, I was wondering if anyone here would be willing to review my torque maps/ driver demand and let me know what they think?

    Also interested in help scaling up base TIP to correspond with wastegate duty if anyone knows

    any help is appreciated, thanks!
    Attached Files Attached Files

  10. #70
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Jul 2022
    Posts
    31
    Quote Originally Posted by boostboy View Post
    Lots of useful info in this thread.

    I have been trying to mess with the torque tuning, I was having issues with overboost at partial throttle, stemming from Base TIP issues

    I have a 2013 Audi S6 with Rs7 turbos I know the car is not the same but it is also Med17 ecu, I was wondering if anyone here would be willing to review my torque maps/ driver demand and let me know what they think?

    Also interested in help scaling up base TIP to correspond with wastegate duty if anyone knows

    any help is appreciated, thanks!
    Stock map attached for reference.
    Attached Files Attached Files

  11. #71
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Jan 2022
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    361
    boostboy:
    Mine only does that when I have the min duty cycle on the turbo set to high and/or Wastegate Canister Pressure to Duty Cycle too aggressive.
    Your turbo settings have been tampered with so I'd put everything under Wastegate, Feedforward and Proportional back to oem. I can't say I know exactly how these work but I have played with them a lot in my car and the oem settings are actually pretty good. When I mess with what's under Wastegate, Feedforward I don't really see bennies, it just screws it up. Unless I do it to match a higher min duty cycle, which you're not doing. But you no doubt have different canisters so I guess maybe copy the data from a car that has those same ones? Like your Wastegate Desired Stroke Position is VERY aggressive compared to oem and even 10% as much as you changed yours would cause me to overboost at part throttle. Ask me how I know
    I assume by overboost at part throttle you're experiencing the same as I do, which isn't actual overboost but simply too much boost when not needed. Eg the intake is still under vacuum but the the Tbos are making 5psi. Or too much "TIP" as they call it. Mine has a TIP setting in there somewhere, which I bumped to the max of 37psi, which did nothing to help my problem. Imo a lot of things in there do nothing at all. Maybe they work on some other car but they don't tell you what your car uses and what it does not, so I've wated countless hours on things only to discover they do nadda. Or they do something very different than claimed.

    The Wastegate Canister Pressure to Duty Cycle is another one I have to be careful with, or again, overboost at part throttle. That's the one just under Spring Constant. It seems to me it's a guide to command duty cycle, so the ECU says I want -10kpa canister pressure, based on all it's calcs, then looks at this chart. So in your case it says I'll give it 27.2% duty cycle to get there. The ECU has no way to see that pressure so it's relying on that chart. Since you have different turbos I suppose it's logical to assume different diaphrams and maybe all those values are too much.
    Then it overboosts at part throttle before it can correct for the mistake, which is exactly what mine does if I set the values too aggressive. So I'd cut all the values in half, excluding the -80 and see how it responds. It should lower said part throttle boost nicely, then you can adjust up/down as needed. Your Proportional Gain could be turned up because imo it doesn't hurt anything and if your new Tbo is making too much boost in an unexpected zone then this will allow the ecu to respond quicker. You could also zero out your Derivative which will speed things up. I don't have an Intergal Time Constant but I'd just put it back to oem for now.
    Then Min Duty Cycle, at the bottom left there named "Min Sol Protect". That one helps me greatly reduce turbo lag but it also cause part throttle overboost, and over boost period if set to high. If I set mine at 50% I'm right on the edge of both scenarios. And when it overboosts on either, the boost logic turns off and duty cycle goes to the minimum. If I have it set to 50% then I don't actually lose all my boost, compared to the oem setting which kills all boost. So if you want, you can bump that min # up like I did to minimize lag. It also keeps the wategates close most of the time so less wastegate hinge wear, which is an issue, at least on my car.

    Then looking at your Torque to Load I think that's making it worse? I easily hit 50% load at part throttle under normal driving, and yours is set to suddenly go full throttle at that point. If putting at say 2-2500rpm that means a lotta boost asap, and if any of the settings above are wrong it'll overboost in a heatbeat. Well, it will on mine.
    So to make Torque to Load work well in my car, the largest increase in Tq to Load is at max % row. In your case 100%. Then the row above, 90%, is blended between the the 80 and 100 so it isn't a sharp transition. Optionally you could blend, or interpolate, the 80 & 90% if you wanted. Imo no need to go below that because all the oem values at 70% and below are fine. Also, your Tq to Load values seem really high. Not sure what power/boost you're trying to hit but I suppose for now I'd limit 100% to 250? Just a straight 250 across the board at 100% and blend? Mine for example only goes to 80%, and I bump that to the max I want, then the 70% row just above it is a blend of 80 & 60. Done. Works perfectly.

    Your Max Desired Load under Airflow claims to be based on Intake Air Temp? Mine is water temp. Weird, but point being that on mine it does have a big influence on torque and I actually use this to control wheel spin. But my numbers are much higher than oem, so the low #s I use to control spin are higher than the oem #'s. Then the rest of the #'s at 2500+rpm are more than double oem. Point being that on my car this chart is one that actually does something and at least for me it needs to be bumped up a lot, but can also limit where needed. So maybe your 2250 rpm #'s are too much, or too sudden a jump. I think your turbo settings are the cause but maybe this and the Tq to Load are too abrubt for part throttle to deal with when your Tbo settings are too agressive. I'd make this much more gentle, or oem, until you figure out your issue.
    The stuff under Torque Management/Driver Demand is different than mine, so all I can really say is I'd put back to oem for now, unless you have that page figured out and know it's good. My throttle settings are basically oem except I lowered throttle response down low. For example oem was a 5% throttle position gave a 5% command, 20% = 20 etc. Since the other tune settings upset that and increased output, the car would jump at the slightest touch of the throttle. To tame that my 5% throttle position = 2% command, 10% = 5 etc, but 100% equals 100% which is all that really matters.
    '16 E550 Coupe RWD - C207.373 / M278.922 / MED17.7.3 / 722.909

  12. #72
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Jul 2022
    Posts
    31
    Quote Originally Posted by chevota View Post
    boostboy:
    Mine only does that when I have the min duty cycle on the turbo set to high and/or Wastegate Canister Pressure to Duty Cycle too aggressive.
    Your turbo settings have been tampered with so I'd put everything under Wastegate, Feedforward and Proportional back to oem. I can't say I know exactly how these work but I have played with them a lot in my car and the oem settings are actually pretty good. When I mess with what's under Wastegate, Feedforward I don't really see bennies, it just screws it up. Unless I do it to match a higher min duty cycle, which you're not doing. But you no doubt have different canisters so I guess maybe copy the data from a car that has those same ones? Like your Wastegate Desired Stroke Position is VERY aggressive compared to oem and even 10% as much as you changed yours would cause me to overboost at part throttle. Ask me how I know
    I assume by overboost at part throttle you're experiencing the same as I do, which isn't actual overboost but simply too much boost when not needed. Eg the intake is still under vacuum but the the Tbos are making 5psi. Or too much "TIP" as they call it. Mine has a TIP setting in there somewhere, which I bumped to the max of 37psi, which did nothing to help my problem. Imo a lot of things in there do nothing at all. Maybe they work on some other car but they don't tell you what your car uses and what it does not, so I've wated countless hours on things only to discover they do nadda. Or they do something very different than claimed.

    The Wastegate Canister Pressure to Duty Cycle is another one I have to be careful with, or again, overboost at part throttle. That's the one just under Spring Constant. It seems to me it's a guide to command duty cycle, so the ECU says I want -10kpa canister pressure, based on all it's calcs, then looks at this chart. So in your case it says I'll give it 27.2% duty cycle to get there. The ECU has no way to see that pressure so it's relying on that chart. Since you have different turbos I suppose it's logical to assume different diaphrams and maybe all those values are too much.
    Then it overboosts at part throttle before it can correct for the mistake, which is exactly what mine does if I set the values too aggressive. So I'd cut all the values in half, excluding the -80 and see how it responds. It should lower said part throttle boost nicely, then you can adjust up/down as needed. Your Proportional Gain could be turned up because imo it doesn't hurt anything and if your new Tbo is making too much boost in an unexpected zone then this will allow the ecu to respond quicker. You could also zero out your Derivative which will speed things up. I don't have an Intergal Time Constant but I'd just put it back to oem for now.
    Then Min Duty Cycle, at the bottom left there named "Min Sol Protect". That one helps me greatly reduce turbo lag but it also cause part throttle overboost, and over boost period if set to high. If I set mine at 50% I'm right on the edge of both scenarios. And when it overboosts on either, the boost logic turns off and duty cycle goes to the minimum. If I have it set to 50% then I don't actually lose all my boost, compared to the oem setting which kills all boost. So if you want, you can bump that min # up like I did to minimize lag. It also keeps the wategates close most of the time so less wastegate hinge wear, which is an issue, at least on my car.

    Then looking at your Torque to Load I think that's making it worse? I easily hit 50% load at part throttle under normal driving, and yours is set to suddenly go full throttle at that point. If putting at say 2-2500rpm that means a lotta boost asap, and if any of the settings above are wrong it'll overboost in a heatbeat. Well, it will on mine.
    So to make Torque to Load work well in my car, the largest increase in Tq to Load is at max % row. In your case 100%. Then the row above, 90%, is blended between the the 80 and 100 so it isn't a sharp transition. Optionally you could blend, or interpolate, the 80 & 90% if you wanted. Imo no need to go below that because all the oem values at 70% and below are fine. Also, your Tq to Load values seem really high. Not sure what power/boost you're trying to hit but I suppose for now I'd limit 100% to 250? Just a straight 250 across the board at 100% and blend? Mine for example only goes to 80%, and I bump that to the max I want, then the 70% row just above it is a blend of 80 & 60. Done. Works perfectly.

    Your Max Desired Load under Airflow claims to be based on Intake Air Temp? Mine is water temp. Weird, but point being that on mine it does have a big influence on torque and I actually use this to control wheel spin. But my numbers are much higher than oem, so the low #s I use to control spin are higher than the oem #'s. Then the rest of the #'s at 2500+rpm are more than double oem. Point being that on my car this chart is one that actually does something and at least for me it needs to be bumped up a lot, but can also limit where needed. So maybe your 2250 rpm #'s are too much, or too sudden a jump. I think your turbo settings are the cause but maybe this and the Tq to Load are too abrubt for part throttle to deal with when your Tbo settings are too agressive. I'd make this much more gentle, or oem, until you figure out your issue.
    The stuff under Torque Management/Driver Demand is different than mine, so all I can really say is I'd put back to oem for now, unless you have that page figured out and know it's good. My throttle settings are basically oem except I lowered throttle response down low. For example oem was a 5% throttle position gave a 5% command, 20% = 20 etc. Since the other tune settings upset that and increased output, the car would jump at the slightest touch of the throttle. To tame that my 5% throttle position = 2% command, 10% = 5 etc, but 100% equals 100% which is all that really matters.
    Man I really appreciate this response, this is the most informative help ive gotten, I will take a look at each thing and see how it responds

    I should also add that a lot of the tables I copied over from the stock rs7 map which has the same turbos, so some of that stuff is "oem" but I can definitely see now where a lot of my changes were causing issues so I'm going to review everything with this new insight

    Ill attach the rs7 map for reference in case you wanted to look

    the rs7 also has the exact same wastegates as my stock s6 wastegates so I will use that as reference too, I liked the throttle response and boost build up when I set the wgdc feedforward to 100 and changed it around but I think thats what started causing a lot of the issues because I couldn't find what else needed to be changed in correspondence to that so I just changed it back to rs7 wgdc tables. I need to review all of my torque tables too, Ill get them fixed and smooth before trying to adjust for more power again. Ive been figuring it out as i go so the advice really helps a lot.
    Attached Files Attached Files
    Last edited by boostboy; 02-05-2023 at 05:25 PM.

  13. #73
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Jan 2022
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    361
    That 7 file is helpful in understanding things.

    Normalized Mass Airflow are not what I expected, but you have 7 wastegates so I suppose use the 7 chart. But they do look weird, too different. Is the linkage on the wastegates different or something? If it's different because they're trying to account for something else, either physical or in the logic, then the 6 #'s would be the way to go. So maybe try both just to see what happens.

    Wastegate Desired Stroke Position is sensitive in my car. I'd use 6 to start for sure. The #'s are very different and in the 6 it's asking to open the wastegates a lot more at part load so if you use the 7 #'s it'll no doubt give you your part load TIP overboot. That much change would in my car, in a heartbeat.

    Wastegate Spring Constant would make sense to use 7 because again it's physically a 7 wastegate and the Wastegate Canister Pressure to Duty Cycle charts are the same I assume they are physically the same cans and springs. So the wastegate is the factor and you should, imo, use use the 7 chart. Which one of the three, up to you. I suppose the safer Var 0 chart, then later try Var 1 if you want. Not much different anyway.

    Wastegate Actual Stroke Position; again same canister/spring, 7 wastgate. Plus 7 is the safer of the two charts so 7 it is imo.

    Wastegate Canister Pressure to Duty Cycle chart, being the same, makes this one easy, and makes the others easier to grasp. One less twist to equasion.

    The Intergal Time Constant I'd leave at 6.
    That "Max Tem", if I understand it correctly, I'd set to the 7 # of .2.

    The other stuff like Pressure Ratio & Compressor/Turbine Model etc, using 7 #'s seems obvious.

    Since most everyting you had set is, imo, correct or not that bad, then I suspect the fail was Wastegate Desired Stroke Position. I suppose for fun you could just change that one thing to see if the overboost stops.

    You're very welcome. It's usually tumbleweeds around here so I try to help when I can. I have a million questons too but pretty sure nobody knows the answers. Or if they do they aint talking.
    '16 E550 Coupe RWD - C207.373 / M278.922 / MED17.7.3 / 722.909

  14. #74
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Jul 2022
    Posts
    31
    Quote Originally Posted by chevota View Post
    That 7 file is helpful in understanding things.

    Normalized Mass Airflow are not what I expected, but you have 7 wastegates so I suppose use the 7 chart. But they do look weird, too different. Is the linkage on the wastegates different or something? If it's different because they're trying to account for something else, either physical or in the logic, then the 6 #'s would be the way to go. So maybe try both just to see what happens.

    Wastegate Desired Stroke Position is sensitive in my car. I'd use 6 to start for sure. The #'s are very different and in the 6 it's asking to open the wastegates a lot more at part load so if you use the 7 #'s it'll no doubt give you your part load TIP overboot. That much change would in my car, in a heartbeat.

    Wastegate Spring Constant would make sense to use 7 because again it's physically a 7 wastegate and the Wastegate Canister Pressure to Duty Cycle charts are the same I assume they are physically the same cans and springs. So the wastegate is the factor and you should, imo, use use the 7 chart. Which one of the three, up to you. I suppose the safer Var 0 chart, then later try Var 1 if you want. Not much different anyway.

    Wastegate Actual Stroke Position; again same canister/spring, 7 wastgate. Plus 7 is the safer of the two charts so 7 it is imo.

    Wastegate Canister Pressure to Duty Cycle chart, being the same, makes this one easy, and makes the others easier to grasp. One less twist to equasion.

    The Intergal Time Constant I'd leave at 6.
    That "Max Tem", if I understand it correctly, I'd set to the 7 # of .2.

    The other stuff like Pressure Ratio & Compressor/Turbine Model etc, using 7 #'s seems obvious.

    Since most everyting you had set is, imo, correct or not that bad, then I suspect the fail was Wastegate Desired Stroke Position. I suppose for fun you could just change that one thing to see if the overboost stops.

    You're very welcome. It's usually tumbleweeds around here so I try to help when I can. I have a million questons too but pretty sure nobody knows the answers. Or if they do they aint talking.
    Sometimes tuning these ecu feels like trying to crack davinci's code lol I've been having a lot of fun with it though, but yeah talk about tumbleweeds. The VW/audi side of the forum is even more dead. I'm very grateful that you're here to help.

    I've looked over everything and made some tweaks, just waiting on my brakes to deliver then I will be back to testing again, I'll show you some logs with the revisions, but just from looking and reading everything you said, im excited about the improvements, I can tell it will run much smoother. There were a lot of tables you mentioned that I tweaked and didn't truly understand but your explanation makes the most sense, theres some things that I should have left alone. Getting it smooth on the RS7ish map will be first then I will worry about adjusting for more power on E blends. There is a lot of power to be made on this setup for sure, much more power than the rs7 map is requesting, but I want to get the drivability back to where it was first

    I should also add that a lot of the base tune was inspired and came from help of one of my good friends. He has a car with the same engine but its still a new platform for both of us.

    I have much love for mercedes as well, had a w218 CLS63 with m157 before this. My next car will be an s550 coupe that I will be tuning with hptuners as well.

    Good luck and thanks again Ill let you know how it goes
    Last edited by boostboy; 02-07-2023 at 10:19 PM.

  15. #75
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Jan 2022
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    361
    Normalized Torque question:
    If I lower Normalized, should I also adjust one or both of these? Or anything else? Because adjusting Normalized, for me, does very little to nothing. So I've been leaving it at 796 of late to net what is possibly a little gain. So I wonder if I'm doing it wrong or I'm simply maxed, physically, and nothing I do in the ECU will net more power?
    All it really does for sure is lower the torque reading by 10%, which is annoying, but makes sense and suggests it's working. I'm just not certain about the others possibly countering it somehow?

    If they are not related to Normalized, anyone know what happens if you mess with either of them?[

    ATTACH=CONFIG]128313[/ATTACH]
    Attached Images Attached Images
    '16 E550 Coupe RWD - C207.373 / M278.922 / MED17.7.3 / 722.909

  16. #76
    Hi Chevota,

    Your attachment code got split up - the first bracket needs to be touching the word ATTACH.

    Normal.jpg

    I've never changed the normalizer. But interestingly, increasing the inj slope has the same effect of reducing the amount of torque the computer thinks the car is making. For the scanner, I made a user math with (Engine Torque * 1.10), or whatever % adjustment was made to inj slope, to adjust logged tq in proportion to inj slope increase.

    I suspect this is related to the reason that we get STFT swings at idle with a higher inj slope value. Computer must think there is less airflow than there actually is, and leans out the fuel delivery, which then gets attacked by STFT. I'm experimenting with increasing airflow tables to see if it corrects this. We really need more scanner PIDs.

  17. #77
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Jan 2022
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    361
    I had a hella time with that pix for some reason, and I saw that but it seemed to work?
    I did not notice the fuel thing. Seems weird. My slope is .02. I suppose I should put it back to stock n see what happens

  18. #78
    Quote Originally Posted by chevota View Post
    I had a hella time with that pix for some reason, and I saw that but it seemed to work?
    I did not notice the fuel thing. Seems weird. My slope is .02. I suppose I should put it back to stock n see what happens
    Are your LTFTs good with that .02 slope?

  19. #79
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Jan 2022
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    361
    Depends on what you call good. Usually ~ +6-7 +-4 or so. Full throttle is ~0 to -5. STFT usually averages 0 +-5, excluding idle.
    At .021 trim was better most of the time, but STFT at idle often faults out.
    Then, which I think I mentioned, setting the Inj Pulse Mult set a bit lean at idle causes LT to go up at idle which means ST doesn't need to go so high and I'm safe.

    If Slope is .021, and Inj Pulse Mult is lean then my trims during most driving are much better but idle is pushing my luck. In that case LT is more like 5 at idle and ST hits 25 and a fault is waiting to happen. So .021 and lean idle Inj Pulse Mult mod is about the same as .02 and no Inj Pulse Mult mod. But .02 + leaning Inj Pulse Mult at idle and I'm safe. I suppose I could lean idle further to see if that will allow .021, but I'm a bit sick of playing with it. For example I tried playing with Inj Pulse Mult to dial in everything above idle. It was a disaster... Since I'm not in the mood to decipher yet another mystery puzzle, I put it back to what worked.
    It doesn't bother me that trims are off, as long as it doesn't fault. Plus, under load, trims are usually 0 to -5 so I don't feel there is a risk if it faulted and I didn't notice. Which btw it did once. One O2 faulted out and I floored it, but there was zero spark retard. So I can only assume that side follows the settings I have, or maybe it uses the remaining functioning O2? I've never had both O2's fault which is either luck or it's programmed that way. I am curious what would happen if both faulted. Does it blindly follow my settings or does it falls back on an open loop map hidden somewhere? My guess is the latter, but will it add the slope setting or not?

    The pix below is my slope and Inj Pulse Mult idle tweak that works, plus diff vs oem. Fyi. Keep in mind that I had Slope at .0185 on gas to more or less zero LTFT, which is ~10.8% over oem. So I figure my .021 slope is really only ~13.5% more than for gas.
    The setting in the pix is good to 30% E85. 32% E85 is pushing my luck. No faults so far but I try to keep it at 30% for that reason. I don't believe they reduce the Ethanol content for winter where I live because the trims are the same compared to summer. I also suspect, based on the % of trim compared to gas, that it is 85%. I suppose I could test it, but if it's not 85% there's nothing I can do about it.

    I still haven't lowered Slope to see if it bumps the power reading. Seems so weird that it would that. I mean what's the thought process there? I have noticed that my peak power readings have been lower for some 6-8 months, which I think is about the time I bumped Slope to .0185 for gas? I used to break 800ftlbs here and there, but now, especially with Normalizer 10% low, I hit more like 600-650. Of course it wasn't really making >800, but I believe that high reading is why I have issues, and why I bought HP.

    Fyi this is my latest tune: E550x 15 (16 Feb '23).hpt and it's borderline the best one yet. What is different about it is I tweaked the Optimum and Opt (Monitoring) and more importantly, the scaling. Oem scaling is 180/185, now it's 190/191. Making the Optimum 190 but leaving Monitoring 185 cost me power, making monitoring 191 brought it back. So while I'm still no better than not tweaking either one, it shows that monitoring somehow plays a part and so does scaling. I also tried this same setup but bumped Optimum scaling to 200. Monitoring only goes to 191 so there it sat and I lost power just as before.
    Some months ago I played with these two but did not touch scaling. Bumping the values in Optimum did nothing, but simply bumping the #'s in monitoring a bit, I think to 80, cost me power. I will continue picking this lock because it seems the right combo of tweaking here could net power. I also think I'm probably physically maxed so even if it did net power I wouldn't see it. Eg the attached tune may be exactly that but I can't see it. My 0-60 is still a stockish 4.5sec My acceleration above 60 is better than stock, and 0-60 would be better if the throttle let it. It usually pauses mid way 0-60 so bad that when you play it back and watch the speedo it looks like I floored it to ~30-35, let off the gas completely for a second, then continued. Sometimes the speedo stops moving altogether during that time. If it did not do that I suspect 4sec or less?? 0-100 is ~9sec, and 120 ~12. That might just = 12.0 in the 1/4?
    Too bad my Dragy doesn't work, so my time est data is from the HP scanner, which is iffy. Repeatable, but still iffy. The data is also patched together, so 0-60 here, 60-90 there, 90-120 and I put them together assuming that works in one run.

    Schnell & Globois: I believe I recall both of you not being able to hold boost up top? Note my Max Desired Load under Airflow/General, Turbo settings, Fuel/Temp Control and everything under Torque Management/General. My Torque to Load is high so I suppose be wary, but imo these key items seem to unlock max turbo duty cycle under load to 6k. Strangely enough I tweaked 2nd Fuel by just a little this week and it killed my turbo DC and power along with it. Maybe a fluke because I've used totally different fuel settings before without issue, but not that day. All I really know for sure is these settings net the most boost for me. 12-13psi at 6k.
    Basically that turbo DC is my main indicator if I screwed up. If it's not pegged at max under full load >4k, I did something wrong. Sometimes, like the fuel thing, a change seems totally unimportant but it kills it anyway. When I get lost and just can't seem to recover, I default back to these basic settings and so far it works every time. Again, don't use all my settings, like spark, but I'll be curious if the mentioned ones in your cars keep the DC at max too.

    fuel tweaks.jpg
    '16 E550 Coupe RWD - C207.373 / M278.922 / MED17.7.3 / 722.909

  20. #80
    Potential Tuner
    Join Date
    Feb 2023
    Posts
    6
    been reading this thread very good info I think. I have heard that all the tunes for a specific car are encoded and then chosen. I've also seen some stuff on the coding side that makes me think that is part of this equation as well. i.e. tq limit removal, S package, etc.