Gen 2 Cobb ATR discussion

[Bucker]

Originally Posted by f-castrillo I shot another PM to Braden @ COBB outlining my 4th gear problem in detail. It's essentially a cut and paste of the post and graph I did here. The other day, I sent him a PM about the same problem, but in less detail. Here's the original PM and his reply. I'm kinda tempted to make the switch back to boost-tuning. But I like how consistent power delivery is with load-tuning. It's just that this road-block with the 4th gear load targets is a little bit discouraging.

Did you do what he said and ensure that your boost comp per gear is set to 1.0? If it is, try making it 1.05. That might help achieve your load targets.

[f-castrillo]

Originally Posted by Bucker Did you do what he said and ensure that your boost comp per gear is set to 1.0? If it is, try making it 1.05. That might help achieve your load targets.

Yes, boost comp for 4th is set to 1.0. I guess I could try setting it to 1.05 or 1.10, but I can't get over the fact that the ECU doing what it's supposed to in order to meet load targets.

Sent from my Thunderbolt (Tapatalk)

[rfinkle2]

Originally Posted by f-castrillo Yes, boost comp for 4th is set to 1.0. I guess I could try setting it to 1.05 or 1.10, but I can't get over the fact that the ECU doing what it's supposed to in order to meet load targets. Sent from my Thunderbolt (Tapatalk)

I am much like you (I like to know the who, why, what and where all while maintaining 100% consistency) LOL. After all is said and done though, it is a combination of all of the tables working in unison to get desired results that is the goal.

[Bucker]

I would think that it would require more power to maintain an equal load in a higher gear, but I could be wrong. I dont know shit about mechanics.

[f-castrillo]

Originally Posted by Bucker I would think that it would require more power to maintain an equal load in a higher gear, but I could be wrong. I dont know shit about mechanics.

You're right. Which is why I'm wondering why the car won't compensate by increasing WGDC.

The car actually reacts to changes in the TRL 4th gear table. But it's like it achieves targets up to a certain point, at which the ECU says "OK, close enough" when its still quite far off.

I can target 2.15, car will achieve 2.04; I'll target 2.0, car will reach 1.9; I can target 1.88, but it may only achieve 1.77. All with plenty of WGDC still left on the table.

If the ECU is truly trying to hit 4th gear targets, I should be seeing WGDC at or near 100% for target loads in 4th gear, since my 3rd gear targets are a touch lower than my 4th gear targets and those settings already result in 80-90% logged WGDC

Sent from my Thunderbolt (Tapatalk)

[JS + MS3]

After some revision on the map..

I think it's my first time breaking off that 250 g/s wall.. the car feels pretty damn good these days at night.

It's targeting 18.5 from like 3500-5500rpm and tapering down to 16.5.

[f-castrillo]

Hey guys, so my Corksport TMIC is coming in sometime today. Is it safe to say that I can run the TMIC without changing the current tune, and expect it to run slightly less boost for the loads I've been targeting?

[rfinkle2]

Originally Posted by f-castrillo Hey guys, so my Corksport TMIC is coming in sometime today. Is it safe to say that I can run the TMIC without changing the current tune, and expect it to run slightly less boost for the loads I've been targeting?

I don't think that it will affect your tune all that much (besides cooling your bat's some and for longer periods of time).

[f-castrillo]

Originally Posted by rfinkle2 I don't think that it will affect your tune all that much (besides cooling your bat's some and for longer periods of time).

That's really the primary reason I bought it, to keep BATs down, which keeps KR at bay. Any gains in volumetric efficiency and airflow are bonuses otherwise

So Braden @ COBB had me email him my map last night. He's gonna take a look at it to see if he can figure out the issue I'm having with the car not meeting 4th gear load targets.

[rfinkle2]

Originally Posted by f-castrillo That's really the primary reason I bought it, to keep BATs down, which keeps KR at bay. Any gains in volumetric efficiency and airflow are bonuses otherwise So Braden @ COBB had me email him my map last night. He's gonna take a look at it to see if he can figure out the issue I'm having with the car not meeting 4th gear load targets.

Very cool. Travis was looking @ Bucker's log last night, so in typical Cobb fashion, they are on top of any issues we may be having.

Good luck with the tmic btw.

[Bucker]

Originally Posted by f-castrillo Hey guys, so my Corksport TMIC is coming in sometime today. Is it safe to say that I can run the TMIC without changing the current tune, and expect it to run slightly less boost for the loads I've been targeting?

I have one installed. I had to tweak my WGDC a minor bit (required less WGDC to meet my boost targets) and I added a very little bit of timing (lower BATs). Just put it on, get a log, and youll see. All my adjustments were within the error comp tables ability to compensate, so they weren't "necessary".

[BlueStreak]

Originally Posted by f-castrillo Hey guys, so my Corksport TMIC is coming in sometime today. Is it safe to say that I can run the TMIC without changing the current tune, and expect it to run slightly less boost for the loads I've been targeting?

I'd keep an eye on WGDC. The stock TMIC is quite restrictive at higher boost levels. Throwing on a higher flowing TMIC will require less WGDC to maintain the same level of boost.

[f-castrillo]

Originally Posted by BlueStreak I'd keep an eye on WGDC. The stock TMIC is quite restrictive at higher boost levels. Throwing on a higher flowing TMIC will require less WGDC to maintain the same level of boost.

That's what I thought, but since I'm targeting load, I don't think I'll have a problem managing WGDC. The car will do what it can to hit x.xx load. Right now, I think it's pushing 19-20 psi to hit most of my load targets. I'm assuming it will only need to make 17-18psi (that's just a wild guess) to hit the same targets.

Question: would I feel the Boost Limits - Fuel Cut and Throttle Close tables kick in? I mean, would it be an obvious "hitting a wall" feeling, or does the car just stop trying to make power? I ask because my Fuel Cut and Throttle Close tables are pegged at 21psi and 22psi, respectively. I don't feel any sudden halt in power, but I wonder if they're the limiting factor in the ECU not trying to hit 4th gear targets?

[rfinkle2]

If you hit the boost cut, it'll feel like you blew your motor up. LOL.

I almost crapped my pants the first few times I hit "boost cut".

I don't think you are going to overboost that much with your new tmic, if @ all.

[JS + MS3]

Nataphen said I'm now done with fueling and boosting.

Finally, it's time for timing! Can't wait to learn more about this.

The car's been running really well lately. Probably because I don't drive during the day. LOL

The heat just kills the power and gives me KR.. I'm a full time work + full time student, so that solves the problem.

[phate]

Originally Posted by rfinkle2 If you hit the boost cut, it'll feel like you blew your motor up. LOL. I almost crapped my pants the first few times I hit "boost cut". I don't think you are going to overboost that much with your new tmic, if @ all.

Yeah, boost limit fuel cut is like hitting a brick wall. You'll know it when it hits it. The throttle close limit is a much softer limiter. I can typically feel a short lull in power when it happens. In a datalog, you should see a short dip in airflow where the throttle is closing, then it will open back up when targets have been met.

[BlueStreak]

Originally Posted by f-castrillo That's what I thought, but since I'm targeting load, I don't think I'll have a problem managing WGDC. The car will do what it can to hit x.xx load. Right now, I think it's pushing 19-20 psi to hit most of my load targets. I'm assuming it will only need to make 17-18psi (that's just a wild guess) to hit the same targets. Question: would I feel the Boost Limits - Fuel Cut and Throttle Close tables kick in? I mean, would it be an obvious "hitting a wall" feeling, or does the car just stop trying to make power? I ask because my Fuel Cut and Throttle Close tables are pegged at 21psi and 22psi, respectively. I don't feel any sudden halt in power, but I wonder if they're the limiting factor in the ECU not trying to hit 4th gear targets?

Yes and no w.r.t WGDC. You still have to come close-ish with the WGDC targets (and WGDC ramp etc) so the ECU can hit its load targets. It'll do what it can within the boundaries/authority you give it.

When you hit cut, you'll know. It'll scare the crap out of you the first time :-P

EDIT: You'll only hit boost limit fuel cut if the car is boosting above your set threshold for a good few seconds (less than 5, I believe). After that, it cuts and you'll hear a "thunk". It feels like you just jabbed the brakes really hard as you get launched forward in your seat but the car will keep accelerating if you keep going WOT.

[JS + MS3]

Anyone in SoCal area running intake/racepipe/hpfp/AP?

I would love to see the logs just to compare!

[Ex_WRX_driver]

Originally Posted by JS + MS3 Anyone in SoCal area running intake/racepipe/hpfp/AP? I would love to see the logs just to compare!

No hpfp or rp, but intake/tip.


Im also sad. Due to FP issue I dropped down to 15 psi, still needs some work, but logs attached.

[JS + MS3]

Originally Posted by Ex_WRX_driver No hpfp or rp, but intake/tip. Im also sad. Due to FP issue I dropped down to 15 psi, still needs some work, but logs attached.

Yeah, my FP was pretty crappy before upgrading it.

Clean logs man, let me know if you need anything since we are both using the most shitty gas in the US. LOL

I think 18.5psi is about the maximum that we can pull off without getting KR. And this is only for the ambient temp under like 70degrees.

Once we play with the timing, I'll let you know here!

[JS + MS3]

Originally Posted by JS + MS3 After some revision on the map.. I think it's my first time breaking off that 250 g/s wall.. the car feels pretty damn good these days at night. It's targeting 18.5 from like 3500-5500rpm and tapering down to 16.5.

One thing to note is that I did another datalog after hitting up the Angeles Crest Highway for 20 minutes... My poor stock turbo was so heatsoaked that it only pulled like 16.5-17psi throughout the run. :pofl:

[f-castrillo]

Originally Posted by BlueStreak Yes and no w.r.t WGDC. You still have to come close-ish with the WGDC targets (and WGDC ramp etc) so the ECU can hit its load targets. It'll do what it can within the boundaries/authority you give it. When you hit cut, you'll know. It'll scare the crap out of you the first time :-P EDIT: You'll only hit boost limit fuel cut if the car is boosting above your set threshold for a good few seconds (less than 5, I believe). After that, it cuts and you'll hear a "thunk". It feels like you just jabbed the brakes really hard as you get launched forward in your seat but the car will keep accelerating if you keep going WOT.

My WGDC was set to ~80% for much of the RPM range, since that's what the ECU was calculating would be appropriate to hit load targets in warmer weather. My ramp limiters allow for up to 100% WGDC to be subtracted, and allows up to 20% to be added (I didn't make that value larger, since 20% extra in my 80% range would cause it to max out already).

However, since I installed the CS TMIC, I will get around to adjusting WGDC to account for the extra efficiency of the new TMIC. I need to get a warm-weather datalog and see what kind of WGDC the ECU wants to make to hit load targets, and adjust accordingly.

[bewsted]

You guys and your load tuning...lol JK

[Bucker]

Lolz bewsted. You homos and your E85...

[bewsted]

This may be a long long long shot....I am curious to as if of you boost tuning guys have had a issue. Since the new wg tables have come out supposely the use of load tables effecting the boost tuning was removed....well i've been battling this slight blip of KR since this the new tables were brought out....and i'll be completely honest I hadn't been paying much attention to any of the "old" load tables shit since it should have no effect on anything boost tuning related. Well i just thought....maybe this old table is still in some sort of control. Sure enough prior to my slight blip of KR I'm exceeding the old Req load number just slightly. I had them set @ 2.85 and I hit 2.87. I have yet to test the new map yet and I may just be ranting but any input would be NICE.

[rfinkle2]

I was looking @ a guys map and logs earlier, and although his wgdc load error comp table was 0's, his load dynamics table was still populated.

I think that the KR @ spool may be @ least partially related to the time it takes for the intercooler to cool the bat's down.

Now that we have max boost @ 3,000 or so rpm, rather than a slow onset like the ots maps, it may just be a matter of some of the remaining high bat air entering the engine.

[bewsted]

I was no where near the high bat flag.....which supposely does nothing anymore for boost tuning..

[bewsted]

No cigar on the previous idea.....

[f-castrillo]

Hey guys, so the TMIC definitely feels better to drive with (and it's pretty cold to the touch after parking and shutting the car off), but my gas mileage has dipped again.

The cure-all to my gas mileage woes previously was to use the stock Boost Targets table. This doesn't appear to work much anymore, as it's taking everything I have just to get the car to stay above 24MPG on the MID (I hit 25.1 MPG for a minute)

My assumption is that the dip in mileage has something to do with how different the Corksport TMIC flows vs. stock, and maybe some revised WGDC and Boost Target values for light TPS% is in order. Any suggestions on what could be causing the sudden MPG dip?

[Bucker]

Originally Posted by f-castrillo Hey guys, so the TMIC definitely feels better to drive with (and it's pretty cold to the touch after parking and shutting the car off), but my gas mileage has dipped again. The cure-all to my gas mileage woes previously was to use the stock Boost Targets table. This doesn't appear to work much anymore, as it's taking everything I have just to get the car to stay above 24MPG on the MID (I hit 25.1 MPG for a minute) My assumption is that the dip in mileage has something to do with how different the Corksport TMIC flows vs. stock, and maybe some revised WGDC and Boost Target values for light TPS% is in order. Any suggestions on what could be causing the sudden MPG dip?

I did not experience this when I installed my CS TMIC nor at any other point in my tuning journey. Are you just using the "fun pedal" too much?

[f-castrillo]

Originally Posted by Bucker I did not experience this when I installed my CS TMIC nor at any other point in my tuning journey. Are you just using the "fun pedal" too much?

Well I am getting on it more often lol. But I did a few controlled tests (driving 25 miles to work without going WOT), and it was a struggle to keep it above 24MPG on the MID. The same drive on the stock tune read 27-27MPG on average.

I'm not sure if it's just the way the car calculates and displays gas mileage on the MID, though. I guess only a fill up from empty will tell.

In an attempt to get better mileage, I've advanced timing a tad at cruise loads (<.8). I also upped the Ign Max A/B tables to accomodate the increased Low Throttle/CL table values. I'm also experimenting with adding timing at higher loads (1.44 and up) and see how high it'll let me go before I encounter consistent KR close to or above 2. I'd prefer to make all my power with ignition timing changes rather than boost.

If I'm targeting the same loads as always, but timing is advanced to allow for more power, then I should be seeing slightly less logged boost, correct?

[f-castrillo]

I feel like an idiot. I checked my dipstick and the oil level was below the MIN mark. Got an oil change, and guess what? Fuel economy issues resolved LOL. I guess the constant datalogging and last month's SoCal road trip really burned up a lot of oil. It lasted 5k miles, through all those WOT runs and long non-stop cruises.

Anyways, I've begun working on my timing tables. I've been advancing my Low Throttle/CL tables in cruise loads by 1 degree per map revision (to aid gas mileage), until I start seeing consistent KR reports. Similarly, I've been advancing the High Throttle/OL tables in the higher loads and RPMs (4000+ RPM, 1.25 load and up), but retarding lower RPM/load timing to aid with spool up (2000-3500 RPM, .81 load and up).

Attached is my current High Throttle/OL table. It's still a work in progress, as I'm barely seeing KR over .5 (sometimes a little blip or two of KR above 1.0), but does this look half-decent to you guys? I know it's kind of hard to critique a timing table since every car behaves differently, but enlighten me if I did something terribly wrong here.

[rfinkle2]

Nothing wrong, but retarding timing early will heat up exhaust gas temps and spool the turbo quicker.

[f-castrillo]

Got a reply from Braden @ COBB regarding my 4th gear load tuning issues:

In looking at the various datalogs it appears you are seeing what is common with load target based tuning. The ECU is "testing the waters" to see what boost it needs to achieve in order to hit the target loads. In doing so I'm seeing anywhere between 17-20psi in these runs. While it doesn't appear to be spiking boost very much, it is starting to upset the ECU as you can see in a few of the logs where KR becomes highly active. If you want to continue using the load target based tuning methods I would have a few suggestions for you. 1. Put factory values back in WG Duty RPM Comp. A/B -This will allow the factory PID controller to work as designed and might help alleviate some of the issues you are seeing. 2. Adjust WG Duty Cycles to avoid overshooting load targets -Your base is too aggressive. Try starting with values as low as 30-40%. 3. Your throttle is closing to try and achieve target load. -Adjust your boost targets and boost limits to prevent throttle closure Is there any particular reason you are using load target tuning instead of boost target tuning? We have made significant improvements to the way Boost Targets are achieved with this platform and see much more consistency tuning this way.

I'm going to try the above changes out tonight. For those who have moved to boost tuning from load-based tunes, is it worth the jump for ease of tuning at the expense of less consistency between temperature changes? Or did everybody who switched to boost tuning eventually go back to load-based tuning?

[Bucker]

Originally Posted by f-castrillo Got a reply from Braden @ COBB regarding my 4th gear load tuning issues: I'm going to try the above changes out tonight. For those who have moved to boost tuning from load-based tunes, is it worth the jump for ease of tuning at the expense of less consistency between temperature changes? Or did everybody who switched to boost tuning eventually go back to load-based tuning?

I am boost tuned and have no reason to even consider switching.

[atvfreek]

I am boost tuning, and it seems very consistent. Even on hot days my car pulls hard and will burn the tires off 2nd gear. And when cruizing get my MID to show an average of 27 mpg on the highway. No reason for me to try load tuning at this point.

Sent from my MB300 using Tapatalk

[f-castrillo]

Originally Posted by atvfreek I am boost tuning, and it seems very consistent. Even on hot days my car pulls hard and will burn the tires off 2nd gear. And when cruizing get my MID to show an average of 27 mpg on the highway. No reason for me to try load tuning at this point. Sent from my MB300 using Tapatalk

What are your boost targets, and what do your datalogs say your Calc. Loads are at night (cold) temps vs. day (warm) temps? How much does your MAF g/s vary between cold and warm temps, if at all?

Part of me is considering switching over to boost tuning again, but I'm so far into my load-targeting map that I feel inclined to just stick with it. The 4th gear underachieving load issue aside, load tuning isn't too terrible.

[atvfreek]

Originally Posted by f-castrillo What are your boost targets, and what do your datalogs say your Calc. Loads are at night (cold) temps vs. day (warm) temps? How much does your MAF g/s vary between cold and warm temps, if at all? Part of me is considering switching over to boost tuning again, but I'm so far into my load-targeting map that I feel inclined to just stick with it. The 4th gear underachieving load issue aside, load tuning isn't too terrible.

My boost targets are 20 from 3k to 4500 then tapering to 18 at redline. Realistically it holds 20 no problem then about 17 at redline. My calculated load hits around 2.1x at spool up then holds around 2 til boost tapers off. It stays pretty consistant. When I get home later i'll try to find some logs between different temps.

The more important thing to me though is how consistent it gets through a gear. In 3rd I can usually go from 40-80 in 5.5-6 sec. And 4th gear roll go from 60-100 in about 6 sec as well.

I have made some slight changes since it got really hot out, added a little wdgc to hit my target and reduced timing by about .5 deg. at 4k to keep my kr min to non existent. But i'll always tinker and never by 100% satisfied. Lol

Sent from my MB300 using Tapatalk

[Bucker]

I do see more load at night. Usually in the heat it is ~ 2.13-2.15 peak. I have seen up to 2.23 at night when it is almost 20º cooler. That's fine with me, because that load number would be unachievable for me in the heat. Load tuning or not I wouldn't make that power.


Also, I have no DP yet.

[JS + MS3]

Did a 3rd gear log on the way to work this morning.