[Joshboody]

Thought I’d write a little FYI on stacking. Primarily just going over some of the basics and what I do…hopefully this may help others be more comfortable with this setup.

Well I just started typing and turned out to be very long and maybe confusing, but ask any questions.

First, simply, what does Procede do? It has couple primary responsibilities:
Boost: The Procede intercepts the TMAP signal and takes this info to directly control the boost solenoids based on a simple WG map and PID. This works very well compared to the DME at higher boost levels… basically the user can dial in any boost curve desired. The Procede then communicates actual boost to the DME based on the CANbus boost setpoint value.
Throttle: Throttle is measured directly and boost is set based on foot position after a certain point. Up to this point, boost is set at about 1psi higher than DME boost setpoint, with potentially some variation based on boost response. I have always used 100% for response, since experimenting with less, I found boost targeting after a shift slower with anything less than 100%. But I don’t know what boost gain specifically alters. DME throttle mapping will be the primary effect of boost setpoint.
AFR: Set by biasing O2 signal. About 3 (or 4) points richer and leaner max ranges.
Fuel Pressure: how the Procede increases fuel volume. It takes the rail pressure voltage and reduces it so the DME thinks it has not reached desired setpoint and thus more fuel volume is added. It is not crucial to meet pressure target, as the DME will compensate in IPW also.
Ignition Timing: The crank angle signal to the DME is altered to directly change ignition timing.
Meth: Tuning is altered based on meth flow, so max aggression at 100% flow. If have PWM valve, DC can be set for various boost and max flow is also set based on DC.

So the purpose of stacking is to tune parameters like AFR, VANOS, and increase fueling base. The standard Procede on the stock tune works very well, but my motivation was more out of curiosity since I have both tunes. Also I am hoping for cooling system options in the future.

For someone already running Cobb primary advantage is meth integration. Very good peace of mind knowing your tuning is set per the conditions. Gives more opportunity for higher aggression.

Also I don’t like the peaking torque curve of Cobb because so far it seems that mid-range boost has to be raised in order to increase top-end boost. This peak doesn’t really help acceleration by much, but instead just adds to clutch, turbo wear, heat… basically unnecessary in my opinion.

Settings
ATR Load: I like a load target well below my max boost settings so that hotter temps won’t effect my desired settings. I set around 140 which is about 11psi peak at 105degF. You can alter “load limit factor ECT” to account for this though.
ATR Throttle: you can copy the desired “Torque Request” tables from Cobb maps. Keep in mind that some of these maps, even some LT, will max load at <100%... Procede will then be linear to 100%.
ATR AFR: set what you desire. Keep in mind that your actual load will be higher then the max DME setpoint so try and correlate these based on Procede setpoints. Depending on when you max load based on throttle you may have steady AFR for multiple boost setpoints. You can keep the progression by using the Procede offset if you want, but not necessary. For rev2.5 this is 0-50 = -4-0 point offset and 0-4 points for 50-100. Procede value of 50 is Cobb setpoint (pass through) which I use across the table.
ATR Ignition Timing: simplest method is to set you desired timing at max throttle load for WOT and increase down to about load of 90. Below 90 stock mapping ok. Actually this can get a little complicated and there's various ways to do this with minor offsetting. A lot depends on your throttle mapping also. Be conservative at first.
Procede Timing offset: used mainly for the off-meth, less aggressive map.
NOTE: I add some offsetting for retard and advance to increase flexibility for various conditions.
Procede Open Loop: because I set a fairly lowish load target through ATR I still use fuel pressure biasing, but at a much lower offset then Procede alone.
ATR VANOS: transport intake and exhaust moving warm tables from the Cobb map that’s similar to your settings. And depending on the difference between Procede, Cobb boost setpoints you may want to increase some values in the lower load cells.

Some notes:
Logging CAN DME setpoint and/or actual will give a good indication of the boost to load, so you can set your mapping accordingly. Or you can log your Cobb base map with the AP.

For loading maps, clearing codes with AP while car is off you do NOT have to be in map0 (pass through).

Some logs:
First is boost and boost setpoint… notice how closely they match. DME setpoint and Procede setpoint are also graphed together. Fuel trims match nicely around 0. This is at OL of 40%, so I have plenty of room.

The next log is stepping throttle, again showing the boost control. Notice DME and Procede setpoints following closely by about 1psi until DME is maxed. AFR very steady, and as you can see steady from 10 to 14psi… this is because max load is reached around 70% throttle. I actually like this because its easier to tune the top end, but truthfully some of the Cobb throttle mapping is slightly confusing and haven’t wanted to really mess with it yet. Another note at the very beginning of the pull, you see boost slightly higher then setpoint… this is common with the n54 since the throttle is partly closed at this point.

Oh boy, done I think. I guess my reason for writing the long thread is to maybe get more ATR peeps interested in stacking… it is the most powerful tuning combo at this time mainly because you can increase meth tuning aggression with more peace of mind and sustain higher boost in the top end for more average power.

[jayzF30]

Excuse me, what?? Lol way over the top of my head here...why are you running both tunes?

[rader1]

Originally Posted by jazze90

Excuse me, what?? Lol way over the top of my head here...why are you running both tunes?

Simpler boost control and meth "integration."

IMO All of this can be done just by using ATR. Using the PROcede(or JB4) on top can lead to some unforeseen complications when you're trying to fine tune everything.

I'd rather just spend the time on figuring everything out in ATR.

Good write up though, josh.

[Joshboody]

Originally Posted by rader1

Simpler boost control and meth "integration."

IMO All of this can be done just by using ATR. Using the PROcede(or JB4) on top can lead to some unforeseen complications when you're trying to fine tune everything.

I'd rather just spend the time on figuring everything out in ATR.

Good write up though, josh.

Actually its pretty easy, but i probably made it sound more complicated then it is. ATR is fairly limited in control now despite what others claim. Remember its just an interface into the DME based on Cobb's reverse engineering. i encourage peeps that are pro-tuned to post logs, especially the race maps.

[brusk]

I've been thinking about this as well as I like the thought of altering most things at the DME and using the piggy to alter or fine tune the rest. I don't understand the comment about peaking torque curve mine is flat from 2400-4400 where it then start a linear drop. I would think that using the Stage2+ for most tables would be a good starting point as that would have the fuel and vanos setup that was already adjusted to the higher boost levels. Then couldn't you set the Cobb map to stock and run Procede with meth to get the timing values that it's using and plug them into the Cobb Map. Then set the procede maps to slightly up the boost/fuel where the Cobb map needed help and lower the timing back down to how it should be off meth. Unfortunately I have very limited exposure with ATR at this time and don't know what can/can't be done in the Procede.

[jippii ensio]

Josh, can you generate a good combo for 50% e85?

[Joshboody]

Originally Posted by brusk

I've been thinking about this as well as I like the thought of altering most things at the DME and using the piggy to alter or fine tune the rest. I don't understand the comment about peaking torque curve mine is flat from 2400-4400 where it then start a linear drop. I would think that using the Stage2+ for most tables would be a good starting point as that would have the fuel and vanos setup that was already adjusted to the higher boost levels. Then couldn't you set the Cobb map to stock and run Procede with meth to get the timing values that it's using and plug them into the Cobb Map. Then set the procede maps to slightly up the boost/fuel where the Cobb map needed help and lower the timing back down to how it should be off meth. Unfortunately I have very limited exposure with ATR at this time and don't know what can/can't be done in the Procede.

my comment on peaking torque curve is mainly refering peaple trying to maximize power through atr or pro tuning. These maps have greater ign timing in the mid-range showing this peak... Unecessary in my opinion, but this is the only "easy" tuning method currently (to my knowledge). Basically its difficult to have an increasing wgdc. Thus the stacked approach is better for tuning along with the added benefit of meth integration.

You can port stg2 maps, but you need to understand throttle for the mapping to be precise. Also since you need to keep load target bellow your desired boost, you will have to account for this in the tables. I'm probably a liitle detail oriented though and porting will be a good first step. After logging the combo you will then better understand the changes needed. For timing have an idea from logs where you want to be at WOT and set this as your aggressive curve if using meth. Procede timing retard would be used in map1 when meth is not flowing.

Originally Posted by jippii ensio

Josh, can you generate a good combo for 50% e85?

Sure, but for fueling you can just use the scalar. Procede would be mainly used to flatten the boost curve.

[Tzu]

Good stuff Josh. Those logs look great. This is the same thing I wanted to do when Cobb released ATR.

[themyst]

Originally Posted by Joshboody

Actually its pretty easy, but i probably made it sound more complicated then it is. ATR is fairly limited in control now despite what others claim. Remember its just an interface into the DME based on Cobb's reverse engineering. i encourage peeps that are pro-tuned to post logs, especially the race maps.

1. What specifically is wrong with the boost control? In my previous Cobb experience the car ran great.

2. You are trying to fool the ecu via cps when you can directly write in the timing curve you want at full load. Why?

3. You are limited by the meth hardware that you have installed because there is no other way to run it other than keeping the Procede installed. Those with HFS-4 or external failsafes like wastegate vents are perfectly safe if the methanol system fails.

I surmise you'd be singing a different story if you didn't have meth hardware that can only be controlled by the Procede. no flame intended, but I simply don't believe stacking is necessary any longer with ATR. anyone with extensive experience with the software knows this.

As a former Procede user, I agree the boost control is superior to that of the JB4 but I am certain it hasn't changed since rev2.

[Joshboody]

Originally Posted by themyst

1. What specifically is wrong with the boost control? In my previous Cobb experience the car ran great.

2. You are trying to fool the ecu via cps when you can directly write in the timing curve you want at full load. Why?

3. You are limited by the meth hardware that you have installed because there is no other way to run it other than keeping the Procede installed. Those with HFS-4 or external failsafes like wastegate vents are perfectly safe if the methanol system fails.

I surmise you'd be singing a different story if you didn't have meth hardware that can only be controlled by the Procede. no flame intended, but I simply don't believe stacking is necessary any longer with ATR. anyone with extensive experience with the software knows this.

As a former Procede user, I agree the boost control is superior to that of the JB4 but I am certain it hasn't changed since rev2.

So I have to answer you on both forums:
1. No it didn't thus the switch to JB... I believe you set me logs for advice at that time.
2. I do both... basically my desired meth curve in ATR, but flexible based on conditions. off meth there is more CPS of course.
3. I am limited, but not the reason I prefer to stack... integrated meth tuning is vastly superior in drivabilty and potentially safer. I have explained this before in GIAC's threads.

[brusk]

Originally Posted by Joshboody

So I have to answer you on both forums:
1. No it didn't thus the switch to JB... I believe you set me logs for advice at that time.
2. I do both... basically my desired meth curve in ATR, but flexible based on conditions. off meth there is more CPS of course.
3. I am limited, but not the reason I prefer to stack... integrated meth tuning is vastly superior in drivabilty and potentially safer. I have explained this before in GIAC's threads.

Would you mind explaining again? Or put the link to the other post?

[themyst]

Originally Posted by Joshboody

So I have to answer you on both forums:
1. No it didn't thus the switch to JB... I believe you set me logs for advice at that time.
2. I do both... basically my desired meth curve in ATR, but flexible based on conditions. off meth there is more CPS of course.
3. I am limited, but not the reason I prefer to stack... integrated meth tuning is vastly superior in drivabilty and potentially safer. I have explained this before in GIAC's threads.

Well actually, ATR wasn't out 3 months ago, was it? Now that it is, a red bull and a night in mexico and I can dial my car in myself, thank you very much.

PS: car DID run great on stock turbos. With RBs not so much, but that's everyone.

Integrated meth tuning... Meaning your meth kit is rendered useless if you run a flash tune standalone.

Let's carry on this conversation on the other forum.