[mfractal]

Originally Posted by 335e92tx

kind of hard to say with the altitude issue.
Plus you should have boost mean logged. Thats what the DME uses to identify the delta that would cause a 30FF. You could go to a S1 map maybe and see how close the two track. Most the time Boost mean and load targets for those maps are just dead on boost targets and requests (its only 13psi but it should give you an idea if there is anything obvious)

Alright, thanks. will redo the log with boost mean. S1 is problematic cause i'll have to pay for it i guess.

[335e92tx]

Originally Posted by mfractal

So it doesn't look like a boost leak to you ?

Originally Posted by mfractal

Alright, thanks. will redo the log with boost mean. S1 is problematic cause i'll have to pay for it i guess.

If you look at the very first part of your log, you do get really close to boost target.. for a quick period. So I would think if you had a leak it would not get 16+ there.. but you need to see it for a longer period to be sure.

[mfractal]

Originally Posted by 335e92tx

If you look at the very first part of your log, you do get really close to boost target.. for a quick period. So I would think if you had a leak it would not get 16+ there.. but you need to see it for a longer period to be sure.

True, haven't thought of that. it's holding more than 18 psi with around 50% WGDC so i don't see why it wouldn't later in the rpm range.

I redid the log with boost mean now but had to remove cyl6 timing corrections due to MHD limitation of number of channels to log.

here it is :

https://datazap.me/u/mfractal/boost-...-removed?log=0

[335e92tx]

Originally Posted by mfractal

True, haven't thought of that. it's holding more than 18 psi with around 50% WGDC so i don't see why it wouldn't later in the rpm range.

I redid the log with boost mean now but had to remove cyl6 timing corrections due to MHD limitation of number of channels to log.

here it is :

https://datazap.me/u/mfractal/boost-...-removed?log=0

you prob dont need Long term trims for WFO logs. It looks like they zero out.. I imagine it relys on Short term only.
Otherwise, it looks pretty good from what I see. Work on getting closer to sealevel .. or at least making your snails think you are there ;-)

It might be a little tough to hold 16+ at higher rpm with stock snails at your elevation. They prob are spinning pretty good.

[86merc]

Ok looking for some help and insight.

Last fall I had an issue with matching load & boost targets. I had a couple small boost leaks and a bad boost solenoid. After that, it spooled quickly and was never off boost much and almost never off load by more than 5 or so. Things looked great. I just added VRSF downpipes and turbo inlets. I feel the spooling is a little slow. My load and boost targets are off as well. I checked and I have no boost leaks and everything still checks out ok. I notice my wastegate duty cycle commands a lot then seems to have a big reduction. Then settles in around 5000-5500 rpm and then load and boost is close to the targets. So that leads me to believe I probably do not have a boost leak. Sound right?

I also see my short term fuel trims get as high as 17%-18% at times. But LPFP and rail pressure don't seem that low. I know we shouldn't do resets on adaptations, so I have not done that.

I want to make sure everything is in working order before I start working with someone on a custom tune. What do you guys think of the targets and STFT?

2009 335i N54 with automatic
VRSF 5" intercooler
VRSF charge pipe w/ vent to atmosphere BOV.
VRSF catless downpipes
VRSF turbo inlets
Recent walnut blasting, coils, and spark plugs.

This log was on the work this morning. Leaving a light softly and getting on the throttle in 3rd gear. It was about 65 degrees outside. It doesn't seem to take long to spool. But seems like it is off target a lot in the lower rpm. Like it is protecting overshooting the load and boost.

https://datazap.me/u/86merc/log-1506...19-23-24-25-30



For comparison, this is a log from last fall after I fixed the boost leaks and replaced the boost solenoids.

https://datazap.me/u/86merc/log-1478...-5-13-17-18-22

[335e92tx]

Vacuum lines? I would at least check ones to sels and behind OFHG. IF they are a little leakly it could cause vac to come up slower - that might explain the early delta between B-target and mean.. That map has a decent taper so the fact that the WGdcs come down at higher rpm prob isn't surprisng bc you arn't working them as hard.

The other thing I see that is a little strange is your lambda for bank 1 is about .5 leaner than bank2. And the short term trims are adding more fuel to bank2 than 1. I would reset lambda and Air/Fuel adapts.

[mfractal]

Originally Posted by 335e92tx

Vacuum lines? I would at least check ones to sels and behind OFHG. IF they are a little leakly it could cause vac to come up slower - that might explain the early delta between B-target and mean.. That map has a decent taper so the fact that the WGdcs come down at higher rpm prob isn't surprisng bc you arn't working them as hard.

The other thing I see that is a little strange is your lambda for bank 1 is about .5 leaner than bank2. And the short term trims are adding more fuel to bank2 than 1. I would reset lambda and Air/Fuel adapts.

also some light throttle closures towards the end of the rpm range, what's that about ?

[335e92tx]

Originally Posted by mfractal

also some light throttle closures towards the end of the rpm range, what's that about ?

yeah, I kinda saw that. Its hard to say. Normally anything above 80 is considered full open on n54. ANd when you see it drop below that its usually associated with something event (going over a target or something),.. Id try to watch for it in a future log. Id say if you get below 76 thats when something is really going on.

[86merc]

Originally Posted by 335e92tx

Vacuum lines? I would at least check ones to sels and behind OFHG. IF they are a little leakly it could cause vac to come up slower - that might explain the early delta between B-target and mean.. That map has a decent taper so the fact that the WGdcs come down at higher rpm prob isn't surprisng bc you arn't working them as hard.

The other thing I see that is a little strange is your lambda for bank 1 is about .5 leaner than bank2. And the short term trims are adding more fuel to bank2 than 1. I would reset lambda and Air/Fuel adapts.

I tested the lines and vacuum tanks the other night. All looked good. But I am going to look over everything again in a day or two. Hose testing and smoking the cold side for leaks.

I will reset lambda and Air/Fuel adaptations.

Bank 1 & 2 o2 sensors have different length wire and I am pretty sure I have them in the right downpipes and what not. If they were actually switched it would throw a code, no?

Originally Posted by mfractal

also some light throttle closures towards the end of the rpm range, what's that about ?

I saw that too. That is the only log that has anything like that. I figured the target delta and STFT were more of a concern at this point. Like mentioned, I'll keep an eye on future logs to see if it happens again. If it shows up again I will have another thing to look into. haha




Thank you guys. If anyone else has anything to add, please do.

[335e92tx]

Yeah, i think someone the other day had them switched and both sensors thru some fault.

[86merc]

OK. So I reset the lambda and load adaptations. I did a pass, turned right around and did another pass. Seems STFT look a little better and the a/f looks closer than before.

Both logs show a throttle position moving around over 5,000 rpm. Timing corrections. More issues. ugh.

Pass 1
https://datazap.me/u/86merc/log-1506...26&zoom=19-106

Pass 2
https://datazap.me/u/86merc/log-1506...26&zoom=13-120

[335e92tx]

coolant temp was actually a little lower on second run but IATs on second are a little higher. Trims look better - both banks are about dead even and trims are tracking close.

But, now if you look, where you do get the throttle closer is when you have gone over peak boost or are just right at load target.. And its pretty consistent.. So you are just hitting the load limits of the map friend... based on everything I see..

I can do some screenshots but basically look from time stamp 421.4 to about 427 in this log - https://datazap.me/u/86merc/log-1506...-26&zoom=54-91

And from about 461 to 463 in this log - https://datazap.me/u/86merc/log-1506...-26&zoom=69-95

The only option you got is to load the snails more... (tough problem to have)..

I mean the WG-dc are at 90+ during spool and drop to about the normal mid 40 range close to 3000 rpm (again normal) and boost is relatively close to target by then.. so I dont think they are spooling slow.. A little timing and maybe some vanos would help some...

Yeah the first run has a little timing pulled in the middle of 4th but the second didnt.. so I dont know what to make of that. Load requests and boost were about the same.

I think you certainly could use more scroll,, but it might need some tuning to keep you out of any problem areas depending on gas. Yall got eth up there (grain corn cows?? ;-) ) ?? maybe dump in a couple gals and see what that does to timing. Especially if you go up in maps.

Attaching pic

[86merc]

So it seems things are probably ok. I think I feel the car spools slower and isn't as strong in the lower & midrange. Maybe it is the same and the higher rpm pulls harder making it feel softer down low. Not sure. I am sure it is in my head. haha

I am still learning about the tuning and how the DME works. Is it that load and boost targets are set? And that small throttle closures are ok when those targets are being overshot?

I guess I will try Stage 2+ again and see what that looks like. Then contact someone for a custom tune for the car.

Thanks for the help

[335e92tx]

Originally Posted by 86merc

So it seems things are probably ok. I think I feel the car spools slower and isn't as strong in the lower & midrange. Maybe it is the same and the higher rpm pulls harder making it feel softer down low. Not sure. I am sure it is in my head. haha

I am still learning about the tuning and how the DME works. Is it that load and boost targets are set? And that small throttle closures are ok when those targets are being overshot?

I guess I will try Stage 2+ again and see what that looks like. Then contact someone for a custom tune for the car.

Thanks for the help

Well, load specifically.. the DME decides what boost to shoot for based on the load. But once it goes over a target, it starts doing all kinds of stuff to back down. And throttle closure, timing, ignit cuts are all part of its deck to call on so to speak.. and it does the abruptly.. even with OTS maps.

[86merc]

great. Thanks for the help!

[tan_rich]

https://datazap.me/u/tanrich/log-150...og=0&data=3-22
https://datazap.me/u/tanrich/log-150...og=1&data=3-22

Filled up with 2 gallons of e85 and the rest 91 again and flashed the stg 2 91 oct non-acn map. I think i should be good to try the 93 octane map.

Maybe ill try the stg2+ tomorrow if these logs seem okay.

[335e92tx]

Originally Posted by tan_rich

https://datazap.me/u/tanrich/log-150...og=0&data=3-22
https://datazap.me/u/tanrich/log-150...og=1&data=3-22

Filled up with 2 gallons of e85 and the rest 91 again and flashed the stg 2 91 oct non-acn map. I think i should be good to try the 93 octane map.

Maybe ill try the stg2+ tomorrow if these logs seem okay.

You are hitting load limits on the DCT I think. It closes throttle and triggers sometype of protect in the DME and causes it to go open loop in 4th. Not really ideal . The fact that it goes from a lambda of 11.8 or so to 13+ is obviously going lean. I dont think it will make power with more boost that way. I think the OTS map is biting you due to factory torque limits. You either need a custom tune or to be one of the beta testers on this - http://www.e90post.com/forums/showpo...ostcount=10260

[tan_rich]

Originally Posted by 335e92tx

You are hitting load limits on the DCT I think. It closes throttle and triggers sometype of protect in the DME and causes it to go open loop in 4th. Not really ideal . The fact that it goes from a lambda of 11.8 or so to 13+ is obviously going lean. I dont think it will make power with more boost that way. I think the OTS map is biting you due to factory torque limits. You either need a custom tune or to be one of the beta testers on this - http://www.e90post.com/forums/showpo...ostcount=10260

What are you referring to when you say open loops? Also the factory torque limiter, is that a parameter/value that can changed through a custom tune?
I saw that post, if wedge is still accepting applicants I'd be willing to try. I'll email him once I'm off work.

[335e92tx]

Originally Posted by tan_rich

What are you referring to when you say open loops? Also the factory torque limiter, is that a parameter/value that can changed through a custom tune?
I saw that post, if wedge is still accepting applicants I'd be willing to try. I'll email him once I'm off work.

Basically any DME adjustments to lambda (AFR) stop. See how short term trims go to zero for both banks?? that wasnt' happening before it shifted into 4th. So something thru it a curve.

Yes, the torque limits of the OTS maps are like 510mn.. its tripping those and probably going over some preset upper limit. But what the DME does after that only bosch knows.

Yes,, or like you said try the wedge route. You will be a good gunnie-pig..

[tan_rich]

Originally Posted by 335e92tx

Basically any DME adjustments to lambda (AFR) stop. See how short term trims go to zero for both banks?? that wasnt' happening before it shifted into 4th. So something thru it a curve.

Yes, the torque limits of the OTS maps are like 510mn.. its tripping those and probably going over some preset upper limit. But what the DME does after that only bosch knows.

Yes,, or like you said try the wedge route. You will be a good gunnie-pig..

Ahh I see, that torque limit is the estimated torque output right? I wonder how accurate the estimates torque output is. 510 nm seems to be inline with the stock overboost output so that makes sense.

Ahh yes Test subjects, always fun

[335e92tx]

Eh, I dont think its that accurate, its just what the DME sees to trigger traction control and such. Its also the max torque that getrag has designed the GS7d36G for. ..

[tan_rich]

Originally Posted by 335e92tx

Eh, I dont think its that accurate, its just what the DME sees to trigger traction control and such. Its also the max torque that getrag has designed the GS7d36G for. ..

Hmm true, it is still an estimate. Pretty surprising that's the limit they set it as, even though people have tuned to such high numbers on stock clutches.