Gen 2 Cobb ATR discussion

[bewsted]

Originally Posted by 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.

I only see 2.7-2.9 in the heat lol

[Bucker]

Originally Posted by bewsted I only see 2.7-2.9 in the heat lol

Yeah, "only"... fucker.

DP goes on today if UPS ever shows up... This is retarded. How can it be "out for delivery" since 4:30 AM? Ugh.

[bewsted]

Your prolly the last stop HAHA

[Bucker]

Originally Posted by bewsted Your prolly the last stop HAHA

Yeah, typical. I hate shipping companies.

[rfinkle2]

Originally Posted by Bucker Yeah, typical. I hate shipping companies.

What company's TP did you go with Bucker?

[Bucker]

Originally Posted by rfinkle2 What company's TP did you go with Bucker?

I've had a CS test pipe on for a while now, just waiting on the DP that was supposed to be here ~ noon... I have the stock one off and the car torn apart just waiting.

[rfinkle2]

Originally Posted by Bucker I've had a CS test pipe on for a while now, just waiting on the DP that was supposed to be here ~ noon... I have the stock one off and the car torn apart just waiting.

Totally catless?

Todd98se pointed out the unique divorced design of the Corksport DP to me. Quality stuff.

[Bucker]

Originally Posted by rfinkle2 Totally catless? Todd98se pointed out the unique divorced design of the Corksport DP to me. Quality stuff.

Yes, Catless. If I don't like it it shouldn't be too hard to sell the TP and get a catted one or put the stocker on, but I think catless should be ok.

[rfinkle2]

Originally Posted by Bucker Yes, Catless. If I don't like it it shouldn't be too hard to sell the TP and get a catted one or put the stocker on, but I think catless should be ok.

I think it will too. I think you'll definitely be able to tweak your map for better results with that set-up for sure.

The only reason I don't run catless is the occasional smell, but Bewsted mentioned he gets no smell @ all.

[Bucker]

Originally Posted by rfinkle2 I think it will too. I think you'll definitely be able to tweak your map for better results with that set-up for sure. The only reason I don't run catless is the occasional smell, but Bewsted mentioned he gets no smell @ all.

Yeah, not too concerned about that, I've had MUCH worse exhaust smell wise (had a car with blown rings that spit oil globs as I would drive). Ill keep my thread updated with results.

[rfinkle2]

Originally Posted by Bucker Yeah, not too concerned about that, I've had MUCH worse exhaust smell wise (had a car with blown rings that spit oil globs as I would drive). Ill keep my thread updated with results.

I like the smell of gasoline anyway. I don't think you'll have an issue. There are a ton of guys on here that don't seem to have a problem.

Looking forward to your results.

[bewsted]

Tuned in for buckers dp was for a ms6.

You best be making a new map. I want to see some numbers out your GUY!

[Bucker]

Originally Posted by bewsted Tuned in for buckers dp was for a ms6. You best be making a new map. I want to see some numbers out your GUY!

DP is on. Drove it for 10 miles, felt the same as before except a little louder and lots of PB smoke. I have a log, will post in my thread.

[bewsted]

Trust me it will be better once you get a lil more aggressive

[Bucker]

Another "First Log" post

[f-castrillo]

Despite my love for load-based tunes, I'm really considering going back to boost-tuning. My car has no problem hitting whatever boost targets that I want. Likewise, while load-tuning, I can hit my 3rd gear load targets, but my 4th gear loads still aren't being met.

So tell me again MSF, when going from a load-based tune to a boost-based tune, what tables should I be changing? I figure the following should be changed/zeroed out:
- Boost Targets (set to desired boost)
- TRL x gear (leave the same or zero out, shouldn't matter on boost tuning?)
- WGDC (match to logged values)
- Load Dynamics (zeroed out)
- WG Duty Load Error Comp (zeroed out)

Should I be changing anything else? Will my ignition tables be affected at all?

If my load-based tune was hitting 19-20psi in order to hit 2.x load, can I set my boost targets to 19-20psi and expect to hit in the ballpark of 2.x load still? I wonder if matching my boost targets to my last datalogged Load tune log will suffice

[rfinkle2]

Don't zero out the trl-x gear tables because the throttle plate will still try to close if you limit those tables (see important post here: ATR Resolution to Oddities Reported with the Pressure-Based Boost Tuning Calibrations - Page 3)

I also copied and pasted a quote from Cobb here:
The throttle load tables are still active during boost tuning. If you set them to 1.0, the throttle will close to a point where it can try to achieve 1.0g load. Since most vehicles will likely breathe better with Stage2 modifications, it will be hard for the car to limit load down to 1.0g at WOT even with a partially opened throttle plate. It would be best to target a higher load and zero out the load dynamics & boost comp rpm tables to allow the system to work properly.
Otherwise, the table questions you have are spot on.

Your ignition tables may need tweaking because they are referenced by load, and until you get your boost dialed in, you won't be sure of the load you will hit @ your desired boost.

[Bucker]

Originally Posted by rfinkle2 Don't zero out the trl-x gear tables because the throttle plate will still try to close if you limit those tables (see important post here: ATR Resolution to Oddities Reported with the Pressure-Based Boost Tuning Calibrations - Page 3) I also copied and pasted a quote from Cobb here: The throttle load tables are still active during boost tuning. If you set them to 1.0, the throttle will close to a point where it can try to achieve 1.0g load. Since most vehicles will likely breathe better with Stage2 modifications, it will be hard for the car to limit load down to 1.0g at WOT even with a partially opened throttle plate. It would be best to target a higher load and zero out the load dynamics & boost comp rpm tables to allow the system to work properly. Otherwise, the table questions you have are spot on. Your ignition tables may need tweaking because they are referenced by load, and until you get your boost dialed in, you won't be sure of the load you will hit @ your desired boost.

Isn't this what the Beta ATR was supposed to fix?

That is, the WGDC load error table can now be zeroed in order to completely sever the load tables so they will not step in now. I could be entirely wrong though. Despite that I would still set the load req gear x tables a bit higher than the load you expect to see.

[rfinkle2]

It did to a large extent.

The throttle plate will still try to limit the load you have entered into the trl-x gear tables.

I just try to remember that the car is load tuned from the factory, and getting the car to where you want it to be is a juggle between many of the tables.

@Bucker The quote I posted above is from yesterday, btw.

[Dano]

Originally Posted by f-castrillo Despite my love for load-based tunes, I'm really considering going back to boost-tuning. My car has no problem hitting whatever boost targets that I want. Likewise, while load-tuning, I can hit my 3rd gear load targets, but my 4th gear loads still aren't being met. So tell me again MSF, when going from a load-based tune to a boost-based tune, what tables should I be changing? I figure the following should be changed/zeroed out: - Boost Targets (set to desired boost) - TRL x gear (leave the same or zero out, shouldn't matter on boost tuning?) - WGDC (match to logged values) - Load Dynamics (zeroed out) - WG Duty Load Error Comp (zeroed out) Should I be changing anything else? Will my ignition tables be affected at all? If my load-based tune was hitting 19-20psi in order to hit 2.x load, can I set my boost targets to 19-20psi and expect to hit in the ballpark of 2.x load still? I wonder if matching my boost targets to my last datalogged Load tune log will suffice

You don't want to zero out any load tables, quite the opposite, put them at values that are out of reach like 3.0.

[Bucker]

Originally Posted by rfinkle2 It did to a large extent. The throttle plate will still try to limit the load you have entered into the trl-x gear tables. I just try to remember that the car is load tuned from the factory, and getting the car to where you want it to be is a juggle between many of the tables. @Bucker The quote I posted above is from yesterday, btw.

Thanks! I was unaware they had put out new guidance on that. Thanks, you rock.

[bewsted]

Originally Posted by rfinkle2 Don't zero out the trl-x gear tables because the throttle plate will still try to close if you limit those tables (see important post here: ATR Resolution to Oddities Reported with the Pressure-Based Boost Tuning Calibrations - Page 3) I also copied and pasted a quote from Cobb here: The throttle load tables are still active during boost tuning. If you set them to 1.0, the throttle will close to a point where it can try to achieve 1.0g load. Since most vehicles will likely breathe better with Stage2 modifications, it will be hard for the car to limit load down to 1.0g at WOT even with a partially opened throttle plate. It would be best to target a higher load and zero out the load dynamics & boost comp rpm tables to allow the system to work properly. Otherwise, the table questions you have are spot on. Your ignition tables may need tweaking because they are referenced by load, and until you get your boost dialed in, you won't be sure of the load you will hit @ your desired boost.

So that means that my theory about TRL affecting boost tuning still was correct?

I was under the impression that the new WG duty tables were taking them out of the loop until i started having what I felt was AFR drop due to exceeding the TRL. I raised the TRL but didn't see a MASSIVE difference in the odd AFR's but some slight improvement.

[atvfreek]

Originally Posted by bewsted So that means that my theory about TRL affecting boost tuning still was correct? I was under the impression that the new WG duty tables were taking them out of the loop until i started having what I felt was AFR drop due to exceeding the TRL. I raised the TRL but didn't see a MASSIVE difference in the odd AFR's but some slight improvement.

Yup, TRL req per gear does still affect a boost tune, I have mine set to 2.3, and this morning when it was near 2.3, throttle plate closed to 70% rather than staying at 76%.

But they shouldn't affect your afr. Only boost and the throttle plate should be affected. That's kind of odd.

[bewsted]

Well anything that is related to throttle position would be effected.

[silvapain]

Originally Posted by atvfreek Yup, TRL req per gear does still affect a boost tune, I have mine set to 2.3, and this morning when it was near 2.3, throttle plate closed to 70% rather than staying at 76%. But they shouldn't affect your afr. Only boost and the throttle plate should be affected. That's kind of odd.

Agreed.

OL AFR targets are determined by RPM, and fuel is added based on MAF g/s, so TP% should not affect them.

Even on the new Beta maps I would still see my TP close when I got above my TRLxgear values, which confirms what COBB is saying.


Tapadatass

[bewsted]

Meh....

I did find out my maf cal was off. Imagine that was the reason for the afr flucuation rather then the TRL.

[f-castrillo]

Originally Posted by Dano2010 You don't want to zero out any load tables, quite the opposite, put them at values that are out of reach like 3.0.

Just curious, what's the logic behind setting TRL x gear tables to 3.0 on a boost tune? Is this just to prevent throttle closure when/if my desired boost levels start netting me higher calc. loads?

[wolly6973]

Setting them to something unattainable just helps ensure that they aren't messing with your results at all.
These tables affect only some cars it seems, so the best way to deal with them is to make them unreachable.

However, once your tune is dialed in, it wouldn't hurt to set these to just slightly higher than what you typically see as a safegaurd.

[f-castrillo]

Originally Posted by wolly6973 Setting them to something unattainable just helps ensure that they aren't messing with your results at all. These tables affect only some cars it seems, so the best way to deal with them is to make them unreachable. However, once your tune is dialed in, it wouldn't hurt to set these to just slightly higher than what you typically see as a safegaurd.

And this applies to all the throttle req. load tables, correct? Not just the TRL x Gear, but the TRL A-C and Baro vs RPM tables as well?

Sorry, last time I was targeting boost, the new tables weren't available yet, so I don't know how much tuning via boost targets has changed since I've been on a load-based tune.

[wolly6973]

TRL A-C yes, not sure about the baro. I don't think you would need to touch it if your target loads are all way high.

[f-castrillo]

How accurate is the live data/current parameter screen on the AP? I drove to work on my latest map revision (went back to boost-target strategy), and the highest boost I hit during a 3rd gear WOT pull was 16.5 psi; my targets for most of the RPM range is 18psi, tapering down to 16psi by redline. So if the monitor is accurate, then I'm off by quite a bit.

I upped my WG Duty Boost Error Comp High Limiter to 45% (my base WGDC is currently at 40% across the board), and the Boost Error Comp table remains the same as OTS/stock. Load Dynamics and WG Duty Load Error Comp-related tables are zeroed out. I'm not sure how my logs look, I'll find out once I get off work tomorrow afternoon.

Question: is it unrealistic to tune the car safely for WOT runs in hot weather? It seems that some major overhaul of the Ign BAT vs ECT % used and Comp tables is needed in order to run WOT in 100F temps with KR < 2.0... I still have some more room to advance timing in cooler weather, but warmer IATs = higher BATs = tons of KR

I will leave my ignition tables where they're at for now though, until I can consistently hit my boost targets again.

[bewsted]

Ok so either you have your WGDC set too low and thats why you aren't hitting boost or you forgot to zero out the boost error comp....If your not load tuning anymore then you just zerod out the wrong table.

As long as you understand that zeroing out the boost error comp takes the ability of the ecu to adjust WGDC out of the equation LOL.

Oh and regarding tuning the car in hot weather. That is the downfall of boost tuning. It just doesn't adjust as easily as load tuning. So the best way I figure is finding a happy medium. Tune as far as you can in hot weather without seeing KR.

[Bucker]

Originally Posted by bewsted Ok so either you have your WGDC set too low and thats why you aren't hitting boost or you forgot to zero out the boost error comp....If your not load tuning anymore then you just zerod out the wrong table. As long as you understand that zeroing out the boost error comp takes the ability of the ecu to adjust WGDC out of the equation LOL. Oh and regarding tuning the car in hot weather. That is the downfall of boost tuning. It just doesn't adjust as easily as load tuning. So the best way I figure is finding a happy medium. Tune as far as you can in hot weather without seeing KR.

And because tuning is so simple with ATR, make adjustments when it gets cooler out for more power.

[f-castrillo]

Originally Posted by bewsted Ok so either you have your WGDC set too low and thats why you aren't hitting boost or you forgot to zero out the boost error comp....If your not load tuning anymore then you just zerod out the wrong table. As long as you understand that zeroing out the boost error comp takes the ability of the ecu to adjust WGDC out of the equation LOL. Oh and regarding tuning the car in hot weather. That is the downfall of boost tuning. It just doesn't adjust as easily as load tuning. So the best way I figure is finding a happy medium. Tune as far as you can in hot weather without seeing KR.

Did you mean zeroing out the load error comp tables? Hitting boost targets correctly by using the WG Boost Error Comp table is what we want, correct? Zeroing out the Boost Error comp table would negate the ECU's ability to compensate for under/overboost, but zeroing out the Load Error comp table would take load calculations out of the equation, if I remember right.

Originally Posted by Bucker And because tuning is so simple with ATR, make adjustments when it gets cooler out for more power.

This is the reason why I wanted to stick to a load-based tune. More consistency in power output in a wide variance of ambient temperatures.

I'm gonna see how different the car feels in hot vs. cold weather on a boost tune. If it's too big a difference for me, I may just pick up from my last load tune and go from there.

[bewsted]

As the above math may be difficult for some to understand, we are able to modify a few tables withing the ECU to greatly simplify the boost tuning process. We can eliminate the ability of the ECU to modify WGDC based on a load error by setting the newly exposed WG Duty Load Error Comp. table to zero as pictured below.


Code:

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

This will force the ECU to solely use feedback from the MAP sensor for all boost tuning strategies. Any errors in load targeting will have no influence on boost control. The values in the WG Duty Cycles table are used as a base for WGDC calculations then the WGDC can be modified by the ECU according to any Boost Error that is measured.

We have found that the below WG Duty Boost Error Comp. table settings are a great starting point for the closed-loop boost control feedback settings.


Code:

0.04 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.02 -0.07 -0.11 -0.16 -0.20

You can modify the settings from here if you would like to give the ECU more authority (values further from zero) to modify WGDC or less authority (values closer to zero).

By zeroing out the WG Duty Load Error Comp. table, you will also smooth out the part-throttle response as well by disallowing the ECU to modify WGDC based on any load errors. Below is a sample of a 2010 MS3 WGDC table that we've found to work very well for a linear part-throttle response for boost control, you are welcome to use this as a starting point for your WGDC table:



This the post from christian.

I zero out both tables. Use the throttle close and fuel cut tables as my fail safe for overboosting.

[f-castrillo]

Originally Posted by bewsted As the above math may be difficult for some to understand, we are able to modify a few tables withing the ECU to greatly simplify the boost tuning process. We can eliminate the ability of the ECU to modify WGDC based on a load error by setting the newly exposed WG Duty Load Error Comp. table to zero as pictured below. Code: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 This will force the ECU to solely use feedback from the MAP sensor for all boost tuning strategies. Any errors in load targeting will have no influence on boost control. The values in the WG Duty Cycles table are used as a base for WGDC calculations then the WGDC can be modified by the ECU according to any Boost Error that is measured. We have found that the below WG Duty Boost Error Comp. table settings are a great starting point for the closed-loop boost control feedback settings. Code: 0.04 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.02 -0.07 -0.11 -0.16 -0.20 You can modify the settings from here if you would like to give the ECU more authority (values further from zero) to modify WGDC or less authority (values closer to zero). By zeroing out the WG Duty Load Error Comp. table, you will also smooth out the part-throttle response as well by disallowing the ECU to modify WGDC based on any load errors. Below is a sample of a 2010 MS3 WGDC table that we've found to work very well for a linear part-throttle response for boost control, you are welcome to use this as a starting point for your WGDC table: This the post from christian. I zero out both tables. Use the throttle close and fuel cut tables as my fail safe for overboosting.

So as I understand it, the WG Duty Boost Error Comp table only works for closed-loop operations? How do you limit boost to x.xx psi without having the Boost Error Comp table do its thing? I haven't come home from work yet, so I can't read my logs, but I presumed that I could raise the base WGDC to hit close to my desired boost, and use the WG Duty Boost Error Comp table to fix any further deviations from target boost?

[rfinkle2]

Originally Posted by f-castrillo So as I understand it, the WG Duty Boost Error Comp table only works for closed-loop operations? How do you limit boost to x.xx psi without having the Boost Error Comp table do its thing? I haven't come home from work yet, so I can't read my logs, but I presumed that I could raise the base WGDC to hit close to my desired boost, and use the WG Duty Boost Error Comp table to fix any further deviations from target boost?

The wgdc boost error comp table works under all conditions. It is a fine tune adjustment that the ecu performs for you so your wgdc table does not have to be perfect.

I'm using the following values and they are working well for me:

[f-castrillo]

My log read 16psi and 40% WGDC throughout a 3rd gear pull. I imagine that's because my WG Duty Boost Error Comp value for being under 1 psi is set to 0... lol

I will try populating my table with your values, @rfinkle2

Sent from my Thunderbolt (Tapatalk)

[Bucker]

Originally Posted by rfinkle2 The wgdc boost error comp table works under all conditions. It is a fine tune adjustment that the ecu performs for you so your wgdc table does not have to be perfect. I'm using the following values and they are working well for me:

holy crap you give that table a LOT of authority rob.

I run something like .07 .05 .04 .03 .02 0.0 -.04 -.11 -.20 -.45 ?? ??

I might have to give it some more power it increase WGDC...

[f-castrillo]

I'm having some trouble coming from load-based tuning to boost-targeting. It doesn't seem like the WG Duty Boost Error Comp tables are doing much of anything at all. I have it set a tad more aggressively from OTS with the following:

0.20 0.12 0.10 0.07 0.04 0.00 -0.02 -0.07 -0.12 -0.25 -0.80

Logged WGDC is holding to my commanded 55% throughout the entire 4th gear pull. Not once does the car even try to compensate for over/underboost conditions by modifying WGDC. Any takers?

EDIT: I'm at work, so I can't give exact boost targets, but to the best of my memory, I'm targeting 18psi from 3000 to 5500, then taper to 16psi from 6000-RL. What's the general consensus for acceptable boost error? .5 psi? On second inspection, pegging my WGDC at 55% seems to work well for keeping boost at 18 psi for the most part. However, logged boost starts to stray ~4500 RPM, falling under over 1.5 psi from targets, and WGDC still holding at 55. My Boost Error High Limiter is set to 30%, so the ECU has room to raise WGDC to 85% if need be. The problem is that it isn't doing it.

Is it possible that my map might have been screwed up from the numerous revisions, jumping between boost and load targeting, and saving between different ATR versions? My current maps originate from the Stage1 CS+TIH v101 BT OTS map. I wonder if rebuilding a map from the newer v102a maps and just pasting my old tablse back in would fix anything.

Also, I don't like that -4.5% LTFT during random points of the log. I will probably do a MAF cal run on the way home from work in the morning to make sure I'm still in acceptable limits.