[Saif2018]

Originally Posted by ab987

Yeah that's what I mean, 10.5 is not slow but even for an e93 it definitely feels a lot slower than usual. It falls on its face completely past 5k, at 90 mph it was pulling harder in 6th than 3rd. I know stock turbos get restrictive up top but at 5k? That where peak power usually is for our tuned cars. The coils are Delphi Genuine? I'm out of town for about 2 weeks so I'll take more logs with LTFTs when I get back, I didn't realize those weren't on by default. If it was injectors wouldn't it more likely be isolated to a cylinder, if not a bank if it's messing with fuel trims? It being all 6 makes me think it might be bad gas, but I usually don't have a problem with Chevron. Plugs don't need to be gapped for 93 stage 2+ right? I will probably go with colder ones when I get my LPFP so I can run e50 anyways. Thanks, I'll follow up with those logs

Your boost psi looks fine, when you do the log, go wot till just over 6k at least then shift into 4th then back off.

If your inlets are popping off, that will definitely be causing loss of power.

OEM Bosch 3 pronged plugs don't need gapping, 1 step colder plugs do. Would start by replacing the coils, at 45k they are probably on their way out. If you have Index 12 it's unlikely the injectors, but should be able to get an idea with fuel trims.

Which map version of stage 2+ are you running?

[ab987]

Originally Posted by Saif2018

Your boost psi looks fine, when you do the log, go wot till just over 6k at least then shift into 4th then back off.

If your inlets are popping off, that will definitely be causing loss of power.

OEM Bosch 3 pronged plugs don't need gapping, 1 step colder plugs do. Would start by replacing the coils, at 45k they are probably on their way out. If you have Index 12 it's unlikely the injectors, but should be able to get an idea with fuel trims.

Which map version of stage 2+ are you running?

Yep, they're not fully popping off but the rear one is not at all fully seated no matter how many times I push it completely flush against the CH, clamped VRSF ones should fix it. I'm on v9 93 2+. I do recall boost tapering to 15.5ish psi by 6000-6200 with target staying at 18.2 and WGDC in the 60s on my 2nd gear log (on my PC at home). I guess that's what caused the initial concern. I think before I get those coils I'll try my luck with new gas and get some LTFT logs.

[Saif2018]

Originally Posted by ab987

Yep, they're not fully popping off but the rear one is not at all fully seated no matter how many times I push it completely flush against the CH, clamped VRSF ones should fix it. I'm on v9 93 2+. I do recall boost tapering to 15.5ish psi by 6000-6200 with target staying at 18.2 and WGDC in the 60s on my 2nd gear log (on my PC at home). I guess that's what caused the initial concern. I think before I get those coils I'll try my luck with new gas and get some LTFT logs.

That's perfectly normal for stock turbos, they will struggle to hit 18psi up top, so wgdc will go up as a result.

Once you've sorted the inlets out and new coils, should run even better.

Just for info, your N54 stage 2+ is quicker than a 2018 M2 with DCT transmission, so its definitely putting out some good power.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...htmlview#gid=0

[ab987]

Originally Posted by Saif2018

That's perfectly normal for stock turbos, they will struggle to hit 18psi up top, so wgdc will go up as a result.

Once you've sorted the inlets out and new coils, should run even better.

Just for info, your N54 stage 2+ is quicker than a 2018 M2 with DCT transmission, so its definitely putting out some good power.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...htmlview#gid=0

Hmm, wouldn't WGDC be 100% if it was truly spooling as much as it possibly can? That's why I'm confused, it falls off boost target but seems like it's not even trying.

Also I'm not saying 10.5 seconds is slow, but I know e92s are usually in the low-mid 8s, so the extra 400lbs of the e93 should make it what, low-mid 9s?

[Dave92N54]

Originally Posted by ab987

Hmm, wouldn't WGDC be 100% if it was truly spooling as much as it possibly can? That's why I'm confused, it falls off boost target but seems like it's not even trying.

Also I'm not saying 10.5 seconds is slow, but I know e92s are usually in the low-mid 8s, so the extra 400lbs of the e93 should make it what, low-mid 9s?

Still relatively normal for an OTS map. It may be slightly slow, when was your last walnut blast?

Also FWIW, I recently recieved a log to look at from a local guy running 28.9psi on stock turbos in 4th

[ab987]

Originally Posted by Dave92N54

Still relatively normal for an OTS map. It may be slightly slow, when was your last walnut blast?

Also FWIW, I recently recieved a log to look at from a local guy running 28.9psi on stock turbos in 4th

Walnut blasted about a 2 months/2k miles. Got all but cylinder 6s front valve, and they still all look pretty good. It's normal for boost to fall and WGDC to still be relatively low? 29psi... sheesh. Somebody is looking for an excuse to get big turbos

[Dave92N54]

Originally Posted by ab987

Walnut blasted about a 2 months/2k miles. Got all but cylinder 6s front valve, and they still all look pretty good. It's normal for boost to fall and WGDC to still be relatively low? 29psi... sheesh. Somebody is looking for an excuse to get big turbos

From my own logs i've seen and others on here, when running maps like 2+, most people's stock turbos are just tired and the wastegates don't seem to seat properly and they have some trouble meeting target and it won't max out WGDC. I don't believe the DME will actually target 100% unless it's tuned to do so, I think the highest i've seen on an OTS map is around 80%

[ab987]

Originally Posted by Dave92N54

From my own logs i've seen and others on here, when running maps like 2+, most people's stock turbos are just tired and the wastegates don't seem to seat properly and they have some trouble meeting target and it won't max out WGDC. I don't believe the DME will actually target 100% unless it's tuned to do so, I think the highest i've seen on an OTS map is around 80%

Gotcha. I will note turbos are only 8 months old, I did them last October about 7k miles ago so I don't think they should be tired so soon :P. It also does target 100% when initially spooling from zero, but that might be a special case.

[Dave92N54]

Originally Posted by ab987

Gotcha. I will note turbos are only 8 months old, I did them last October about 7k miles ago so I don't think they should be tired so soon :P. It also does target 100% when initially spooling from zero, but that might be a special case.

I could absolutely be wrong, i'm no tuner. Though I have taken a 2 classes and would like to start working on one for myself. I've just only ever seen I believe around 80 max after the initial spool.


I can say though for the guy hitting 28.9, target was 33 LOL.

With your turbos being so new honestly i'd expect them to hit target but i'm not sure. I'm likely doing RB OEM Billets in the coming months (just trying to eek the last life out of my stockers and save up a little more, been working crazy hours) and i'd love to compare our logs afterwards, since your turbos are so new. I think the only difference is the lighter wheel, upgraded thrust bearings and anti-wear waste gates.

[ab987]

Originally Posted by Dave92N54

I could absolutely be wrong, i'm no tuner. Though I have taken a 2 classes and would like to start working on one for myself. I've just only ever seen I believe around 80 max after the initial spool.


I can say though for the guy hitting 28.9, target was 33 LOL.

With your turbos being so new honestly i'd expect them to hit target but i'm not sure. I'm likely doing RB OEM Billets in the coming months (just trying to eek the last life out of my stockers and save up a little more, been working crazy hours) and i'd love to compare our logs afterwards, since your turbos are so new. I think the only difference is the lighter wheel, upgraded thrust bearings and anti-wear waste gates.

Me too. I will do inlets and report back, there might be some weird turbulence or something created by the unseated rear one. I was heavily considering the RB ones myself, the only reason I went with stockers is the warranty. Let me know how you like them. Eventually I'll get some fun ones myself

[Dave92N54]

Originally Posted by ab987

Me too. I will do inlets and report back, there might be some weird turbulence or something created by the unseated rear one. I was heavily considering the RB ones myself, the only reason I went with stockers is the warranty. Let me know how you like them. Eventually I'll get some fun ones myself

I definitely considered the same due to the warranty but i've come to the conclusion that as long as I take my time, double check everything and ensure the waste gates seat at 6in/hg and close at 7 then i'll be fine. It also helped that the RB OEM Billets (figured worth the $150 over the standard RB OEMs for the lighter wheel) including inlets, outlets and gasket kit comes out to less than a new set of stocks + gasket kit

[Saif2018]

Originally Posted by ab987

Hmm, wouldn't WGDC be 100% if it was truly spooling as much as it possibly can? That's why I'm confused, it falls off boost target but seems like it's not even trying.

Also I'm not saying 10.5 seconds is slow, but I know e92s are usually in the low-mid 8s, so the extra 400lbs of the e93 should make it what, low-mid 9s?

No it won't be 100%,

60-70% WGDC as it tries to hit 18psi up top is normal.

Here's my log on JSR Custom tune, only on 2nd revision but you can see turbo's peak about 19psi and then start dropping psi to about 16psi up top. WGDC is reaching nearly 70%

I don't have any boost leaks and my wastegates are uprated Incolnel ones about 2 years old. I need to get Index 12 Injectors, but otherwise the car is pulling very hard and consistently.

https://datazap.me/u/shelim2020/jsr-...=0&data=3-4-23

The additional weight of your car and if its a Manual transmission and Inlets coming loose will all have an effect.

Sort the inlets out and New coils should make a difference.

[Saif2018]

Originally Posted by Dave92N54

From my own logs i've seen and others on here, when running maps like 2+, most people's stock turbos are just tired and the wastegates don't seem to seat properly and they have some trouble meeting target and it won't max out WGDC. I don't believe the DME will actually target 100% unless it's tuned to do so, I think the highest i've seen on an OTS map is around 80%

Targeting 100% WGDC turbos Probably won't last long, I've also never seen any stock turbos hit 18 or more psi up top, even new ones. If anyone has a log to prove otherwise with stock turbos I'd like to see it. Stock turbo's loose efficiency after about 5k.

[Dave92N54]

Originally Posted by Saif2018

Targeting 100% WGDC turbos Probably won't last long, I've also never seen any stock turbos hit 18 or more psi up top, even new ones. If anyone has a log to prove otherwise with stock turbos I'd like to see it. Stock turbo's loose efficiency after about 5k.

When I get home i'll have to post that log, really blew my mind. I told him to his face he was lying when he said he was running 29psi and then I saw it :

[Saif2018]

Originally Posted by Dave92N54

When I get home i'll have to post that log, really blew my mind. I told him to his face he was lying when he said he was running 29psi and then I saw it :

Muwahahaha 29psi

[Dave92N54]

Originally Posted by Saif2018

Muwahahaha 29psi

https://datazap.me/u/e92dave/nicolo-...?log=0&data=21

Uploaded it to my datazap, looks like the 29 is actually during a boost spike but either way, this log is wild. WGDC stays above 90 pretty much the whole time LMAO. Makes it look like a massive boost leak.

[ab987]

Originally Posted by Dave92N54

https://datazap.me/u/e92dave/nicolo-...?log=0&data=21

Uploaded it to my datazap, looks like the 29 is actually during a boost spike but either way, this log is wild. WGDC stays above 90 pretty much the whole time LMAO. Makes it look like a massive boost leak.

Something is strange about that log, the DME only thinks it's making 550nm (super low for 20+psi, and timing is 7 deg advanced over mine), not to mention a similar 100-200 time (10-10.5 seconds) to mine, keep in mind I am a 2+ 6mt E93 chonk and this is an auto car, and mine is having issues. Obviously I am here for help so I am far from the most knowledgeable on these things but unless he chopped off a cylinder this log doesn't make sense to me

[Dave92N54]

Originally Posted by ab987

Something is strange about that log, the DME only thinks it's making 550nm (super low for 20+psi, and timing is 7 deg advanced over mine), not to mention a similar 100-200 time (10-10.5 seconds) to mine, keep in mind I am a 2+ 6mt E93 chonk and this is an auto car, and mine is having issues. Obviously I am here for help so I am far from the most knowledgeable on these things but unless he chopped off a cylinder this log doesn't make sense to me

IAT is going to be a huge factor in a scenario like this. Your power potential drops significantly with IATs at 100 F and it goes all the way up to 140 in this log. 20+psi at ~115F is a lot different than 20+psi at even 95-100. Other than that, I have no clue. I'm nowhere near as insane as this guy is to run this tune lmao.

[Saif2018]

Originally Posted by Dave92N54

https://datazap.me/u/e92dave/nicolo-...?log=0&data=21

Uploaded it to my datazap, looks like the 29 is actually during a boost spike but either way, this log is wild. WGDC stays above 90 pretty much the whole time LMAO. Makes it look like a massive boost leak.

lol, looks like a mess, way off boost targets and turbo's probably gone go pop, at least he'll go out with a bang lol. Which turbos this on?

[Saif2018]

Originally Posted by ab987

Something is strange about that log, the DME only thinks it's making 550nm (super low for 20+psi, and timing is 7 deg advanced over mine), not to mention a similar 100-200 time (10-10.5 seconds) to mine, keep in mind I am a 2+ 6mt E93 chonk and this is an auto car, and mine is having issues. Obviously I am here for help so I am far from the most knowledgeable on these things but unless he chopped off a cylinder this log doesn't make sense to me

Didn't even bother having a proper look but, this just proves what a mess the log is, nowhere near as fast as he thinks it is. We're all here for help mate, some more knowledgeable than others.

Chopped of a cylinder!

[ab987]

Originally Posted by Dave92N54

IAT is going to be a huge factor in a scenario like this. Your power potential drops significantly with IATs at 100 F and it goes all the way up to 140 in this log. 20+psi at ~115F is a lot different than 20+psi at even 95-100. Other than that, I have no clue. I'm nowhere near as insane as this guy is to run this tune lmao.

Oh I'm no stranger to IATs, I recently ditched my stock intercooler after stage 2 (15psi) was putting me from 100 to 170 F IATs in one pull. Yes, a single third gear pull. But even so at 140+ degree IATs and 14psi the DME thought it was making 580Nm of torque. My last 2+ one that I posted here was 104 degree IATs constant through the pull, and the DME still thought it was making 590-600Nm (which is pretty accurate if you look at 2+ dynos). I don't know, maybe I'm trusting the DME's torque figure a bit much but I would imagine it's not too far off given it's probably calculated from MAP and AFR. A car with 20-30% higher MAP making 10% less calculated torque, I dunno it's just odd to me

[Saif2018]

Originally Posted by ab987

Oh I'm no stranger to IATs, I recently ditched my stock intercooler after stage 2 (15psi) was putting me from 100 to 170 F IATs in one pull. Yes, a single third gear pull. But even so at 140+ degree IATs and 14psi the DME thought it was making 580Nm of torque. My last 2+ one that I posted here was 104 degree IATs constant through the pull, and the DME still thought it was making 590-600Nm (which is pretty accurate if you look at 2+ dynos). I don't know, maybe I'm trusting the DME's torque figure a bit much but I would imagine it's not too far off given it's probably calculated from MAP and AFR. A car with 20-30% higher MAP making 10% less calculated torque, I dunno it's just odd to me

MHD states around that figure (Upto about 650nm on Ethanol map, if I recall correct) it should be reasonably accurate. No idea about calculations.