How To: Virtual Dyno

[kelseysautobody]

[MSq5]

Looks great and consistent with your ET and trap. Smoothing 3 would probably look more like a normal dyno curve and probably smooth out your AFR curve, too. Some of the irregularity can be attributed to changes in road surface, like dips and rises. Just a thought.

Do we know how this correlates to a Dyno Jet? Over on the Mazdaspeed board we learned that the Dynojet setting overstates power a little and found that a 1.01 correction factor was more accurate.

[Morritse]

Looks great and consistent with your ET and trap. Smoothing 3 would probably look more like a normal dyno curve and probably smooth out your AFR curve, too. Some of the irregularity can be attributed to changes in road surface, like dips and rises. Just a thought.

Do we know how this correlates to a Dyno Jet? Over on the Mazdaspeed board we learned that the Dynojet setting overstates power a little and found that a 1.01 correction factor was more accurate.

He is using the dynojet correction profile. I think it's 1.10

[kelseysautobody]

Looks great and consistent with your ET and trap. Smoothing 3 would probably look more like a normal dyno curve and probably smooth out your AFR curve, too. Some of the irregularity can be attributed to changes in road surface, like dips and rises. Just a thought.

Do we know how this correlates to a Dyno Jet? Over on the Mazdaspeed board we learned that the Dynojet setting overstates power a little and found that a 1.01 correction factor was more accurate.

I'm new to this so I just saved the first thing it spit out. Not familiar with changing the settings or anything. It's DEFINITELY reading a bit high but isn't that what dyno graphs are for lol? I did like seeing this comparing my recent log before I installed the TB.

[whiped]

You guys need to post the files with your screenshots that way we can compare them.

Just posting the screenshot isn't very helpful :)

[kelseysautobody]

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...it?usp=sharing

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...it?usp=sharing

[whiped]

What's your timing request look like? I think it's interesting, big differences between us being a smaller upper and better fueling. DA might also play a factor but I imagine we are pretty similar right now.



R3.3 is with the TB just bolted on, no adjustments to the tune.
I'm on R3.9 now but don't have good logs to use yet.

I'll try to get some better full RPM range logs tonight to contribute :)

[kelseysautobody]

Neat! The beta 93 TB file I'm on is getting 20.75 max for timing... No corrections lol. I'm also not running meth. On a beta E30 file I was hitting 27* but it needed some fine tuning. I ended up running that file at the track and had my best trap speed. I'm trying to finish up my ice box tonight but I'll load up that E30 file log for shits and giggles tomorrow.

[whiped]

I usually peak at 29* so 27* should put you right in my ballpark I'd think. The only real difference then would be the pulley which is probably like +20 tq/hp?

Good stuff.

[evil35r]

Def good stuff I see 27.75* now almost to your 29*. Have the same ratio as jimmy but I have meth he has ported sc and headers. Once I get test pipes I should be closer. I’ll also post once I get the pipes installed. Hoping I get some more power I assume and hoping for +20

- - - Updated - - -

Geoff what do you see for timing at 5k? I get now 23.625* just curious

[whiped]

I post all my logs publically. Figured someone will find them useful :)

Here are the last few weeks of logging:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...it?usp=sharing
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...it?usp=sharing

To answer your question though, I see ~25.5 at 5,000 rpm.

[evil35r]

http://https://drive.google.com/file/d/1cwG1xVecgMZFom9sKXY406crRKY6cmgu/view?usp=drivesdk
https://drive.google.com/file/d/14NJ...w?usp=drivesdk
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1fUV...w?usp=drivesdk

Here’s some of mine. Sean 5 is my lastest file. A lot of similarities between ours. Pretty cool!

[kelseysautobody]

I usually peak at 29* so 27* should put you right in my ballpark I'd think. The only real difference then would be the pulley which is probably like +20 tq/hp?

Good stuff.

Not that I'm unhappy with the car one bit but if I could get close to what you're putting down I'd be very pleased. I do want to bump up my PR but not sure if I want to go as extreme as you. With the ice box (hopefully) my IAT's shouldn't be a concern but I'm sure I'm getting close to maxing out completely stock fueling. It would also mean buying two pulleys if I want a slightly less aggressive PR than you. Depending on the development of the E30 files maybe I won't feel the need to do that. Here's a pull from an earlier revision E30 file. Max timing on this file was 25.

[UkuRiSh]

Nice ! we done that in B5's Going to test my car in couple hours Good tool to see performance of our cars with different setup nice work Geoff

[Andresci]

This is awesome, great post. Do you manually upload the tune? Where do you buy them, or is it just installing an existing tune like an APR one?

[Whitee]

It’s insane to see over 500whp on this platform. Never thought it would happen. Should put you into the mid 10s with great track conditions.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[UkuRiSh]

Hit the boost limit that's why graph is not stable

[Morritse]

Hit the boost limit that's why graph is not stable

Jesus man, that's insane! It's impressive how your top end power doesn't drop off at all.

[UkuRiSh]

Jesus man, that's insane! It's impressive how your top end power doesn't drop off at all.

Yep, I pick up lot's of power with the dump pipe 3.5" Looks like my exhaust create lots of backpressure that's why I hit over boost protection 29psi. This run was 7.19s 60-130 After I play around with the boost profile she runs 6.9s but I didn't do log so should be even more power ;) This Dyno plot pretty close to original numbers

[Whitee]

Yep, I pick up lot's of power with the dump pipe 3.5" Looks like my exhaust create lots of backpressure that's why I hit over boost protection 29psi. This run was 7.19s 60-130 After I play around with the boost profile she runs 6.9s but I didn't do log so should be even more power ;) This Dyno plot pretty close to original numbers

Ever think of producing a kit like yours?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[maty360414]

Post TB tune file.

No Ported Blower

[UkuRiSh]

Fixed my boost profile better run !

[Morritse]

Fixed my boost profile better run !

Wtf

[whiped]

Wtf

Here is his log if you want to compare it against yours lol.

STAMP,Engine speed,Throttle valve position (absolute),Accelerator position,Fuel pump: actual fuel pressure,IGA_AD_1_KNK[0],IGA_AD_1_KNK[3],Ignition angle: actual,Intake air temperature,Intake manifold pressure: absolute,Lambda probes actual: bank1
,/min,%,%,hPa,°,°,°,°C,hPa,
0.01,2129,22.7,35,5163.44,0,0,18.375,29.25,418.73,0.9795
0.19,2145,29,44,4821.16,-1.875,0,10.125,29.25,965.49,0.8535
0.38,2165,66.7,59,4370.09,-0.75,0,18.375,29.25,999.16,0.9111
0.57,2252,78.8,78,4521.33,-0.75,0,18,29.25,1018.89,1.0059
0.76,2310,82.7,88,4508.06,-0.375,0,18,29.25,1043.85,0.9678
0.95,2370,86.7,88,4561.13,0,0,18.375,29.25,1069.47,0.9648
1.14,2442,88.6,89,4611.54,0,0,17.625,28.5,1096.42,0.9453
1.33,2518,88.6,89,4680.53,0,0,18,28.5,1121.21,0.9336
1.52,2594,88.6,89,4744.21,0,0,17.625,28.5,1148.66,0.9189
1.71,2662,88.6,89,4850.34,0,0,17.25,27.75,1173.86,0.918
1.9,2743,88.6,89,4887.49,0,0,17.25,27.75,1204.87,0.9063
2.09,2817,88.6,89,4943.21,0,0,16.5,27.75,1233.07,0.9004
2.28,2902,88.6,89,4914.02,0,0,16.125,27,1267.15,0.8867
2.47,2986,88.6,89,4858.3,0,0,16.125,27,1305.79,0.8779
2.65,3078,88.6,89,4794.62,0,0,15,27,1348.24,0.8672
2.84,3166,88.6,89,4876.88,0,0,13.875,27,1395.83,0.8604
3.03,3269,88.6,89,5158.13,0,0,13.5,26.25,1453.54,0.8428
3.22,3311,88.6,89,5548.18,0,0,13.125,26.25,1521.45,0.834
3.4,3417,88.6,89,5985.98,0,0,12,26.25,1610.09,0.8262
3.6,3532,88.6,89,6328.27,0,0,12,25.5,1715.98,0.8223
3.79,3663,88.6,89,6797.91,0,0,12,25.5,1879.57,0.8223
3.98,3784,88.6,89,6816.48,0,0,11.25,25.5,2078.49,0.79
4.18,4075,88.6,89,6726.27,-3,0,12.375,25.5,2321.28,0.7725
4.37,4319,88.2,89,6646.67,-2.625,0,13.875,24.75,2496.81,0.8447
4.56,4416,88.6,89,6543.19,-2.625,-3,13.875,24.75,2499.96,0.8604
4.76,4603,88.6,89,6338.88,-2.25,-3,14.625,24.75,2499.96,0.8428
4.95,4783,88.2,89,6238.05,-2.25,-2.625,15.75,25.5,2499.96,0.8301
5.15,4937,88.2,89,6214.17,-1.875,-2.25,16.5,25.5,2499.96,0.8125
5.34,5115,88.2,89,6076.2,-1.875,-2.25,17.25,26.25,2499.96,0.8027
5.53,5309,88.6,89,5890.46,-1.5,-2.25,17.625,27,2499.96,0.8223
5.72,5470,88.6,89,5611.86,-1.5,-1.875,18,27.75,2499.96,0.8125
5.91,5667,88.6,89,5479.19,-1.125,-1.875,18.375,28.5,2499.96,0.8281
6.1,5783,88.2,89,5110.37,-1.125,-1.5,18.75,29.25,2499.96,0.8066
6.29,5960,88.2,89,4579.7,-0.75,-1.125,19.5,30.75,2499.96,0.8096
6.48,6127,88.6,89,4205.58,-0.75,-1.125,19.875,31.5,2499.96,0.8232
6.68,6298,88.6,89,4340.9,-4.125,-0.75,19.125,33,2499.96,0.8164
6.88,6490,88.2,89,4404.58,-4.125,-0.75,19.875,34.5,2499.96,0.8125
7.07,6637,88.2,89,4423.15,-3.75,-0.375,20.25,35.25,2499.96,0.8193
7.26,6792,88.6,89,4553.17,-3.375,-0.375,20.25,36.75,2499.96,0.8018
7.45,6943,88.2,89,4630.11,-3.375,0,20.625,39,2499.96,0.8477
7.64,7084,88.6,89,4919.33,-3,0,21.375,39.75,2499.96,0.8428
7.84,7193,88.2,89,5131.6,-3,0,22.125,41.25,2499.96,0.8447
8.03,7224,88.6,89,5359.79,-1.875,0,19.5,42.75,2499.96,0.8447

The other two lines in his chart are my old logs lol

[Loe]

Found S5 specs for the S5 guys:

Drag coefficient Cd claimed:

0.306

Drag coefficient Cd estimated by a-c:


Frontal area A claimed:

2.17 m2 (23.36 square ft)

Frontal area A estimated by a-c:


Drag area CdA claimed:

0.664 m2 (7.15 square ft).

So, we are slightly heavier, and apparently have more drag

Also to keep it consistent, select SAE and type in the actual barometric pressures and temps of the run. My last actual from earlier this month in 900ft D/A was 529awhp @ 6,808rpm (battling with some ign correction up top lately of 2 or 3*), 508awhp SAE corrected.

[JACKAL]

Dual Pulley but only making ~16 PSI (in process of fixing that). Look about right?
Dual Pulley Low Boost.jpg

[evil35r]

Roughly yes 👍

[whiped]

For 16 PSI it is a little high but UM always makes strong tunes.

Nice to see them finally joining the DP game.

[JACKAL]

Roughly yes 👍

For 16 PSI it is a little high but UM always makes strong tunes.

Nice to see them finally joining the DP game.

Appreciate the feedback. When I get the tune updated, I will re-post.

[UkuRiSh]

Ever think of producing a kit like yours?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sorry, didn't see your post! I can make it if there is interest. I'm not owning the shop so all the work I'm doing in my small garage. I'm planning to do two set one for my Q7 4M CREC engine and other is for my buddy.

[JACKAL]

I took another log on my way home today (still haven't gotten an updated map) and it seems that I held just slightly more boost yet delivered a reasonable amount more power. I did the pull on the same road and with the same fuel mix so the only variable was the temperature (which you will see I have added in the SAE corrections). I did learn today that the tune is only requesting ~16.5 PSI so once it is updated to truly maximize the dual pulley setup this thing should really pull like a beast.

Comparison.JPG

I should note that in this run the I was seeing less timing pull than I did in the previous run. I added a shade more e85 but ambient temps were also 15*F plus cooler than before. I accounted for this in the SAE correction factor but I wonder if that also favorably impacted my ignition advance. In any case I’m very eager to see what happens when I pick up another 5+ PSI.

[JACKAL]

Managed a quick run today after installing the Chipwerke and driving for a bit to let the ECU adjust. I definitely noticed an improvement in performance but not just at WOT (as the graph shows). I also found that mid-throttle driving around town felt more snappy. Does that seem logical or am I just projecting a placebo effect knowing that the Chipwerke is now installed? Doe it keep the bypass shut during partial throttle operations as well?

The other interesting observation was that my clutch still didn't slip nor did I have any low fuel pressure / lean ARF codes. Makes me think that the clutch and fuel pump must have been upgraded no?

Comparison.JPG

[whiped]

Is this a CW stacked on top of a UM DP tune?

If so be careful, My timing was crazy when I ran a similar setup a few years ago.

B8s don't have LPFP issues quite like the B8.5s do. It is highly unlikely the LPFP was upgraded, HPFP is possible but also unlikely IMO.

Clutch it wouldn't surprise me if you bought it already tuned.

[JACKAL]

Is this a CW stacked on top of a UM DP tune?

If so be careful, My timing was crazy when I ran a similar setup a few years ago.

B8s don't have LPFP issues quite like the B8.5s do. It is highly unlikely the LPFP was upgraded, HPFP is possible but also unlikely IMO.

Clutch it wouldn't surprise me if you bought it already tuned.

It is a CW but the UM tune is not for dual pulley. It appears to only be a stage 2 tune with max boost requested at ~16.5 PSI. When I logged the run on the graph above with the CW timing maxed at 20* so probably okay?

So you think the fuel pump is stock? I was seeing around 1400 PSI at redline with a 4 gal e85/93 blend but still at a decent AFR and no codes thrown. If it is stock would there be any benefit to upgrading it if I’m not leaning out?

[Morritse]

Did some logging tonight, hit my best numbers so far. Unfortunately I was bleeding boost the whole time, gonna have to figure that out.

Second graph is the highest TORQUE I've ever seen, unfortunately I had to stop that log early :(
logs
https://drive.google.com/file/d/15O1...ew?usp=sharing

[JACKAL]

It is a CW but the UM tune is not for dual pulley. It appears to only be a stage 2 tune with max boost requested at ~16.5 PSI. When I logged the run on the graph above with the CW timing maxed at 20* so probably okay?

So you think the fuel pump is stock? I was seeing around 1400 PSI at redline with a 4 gal e85/93 blend but still at a decent AFR and no codes thrown. If it is stock would there be any benefit to upgrading it if I’m not leaning out?

Geoff you were probably right about the fuel pump after all. I didn't throw any CELs but I did a scan this morning and found this:

6183 - Low Pressure Fuel regulation
P310B 00 [032] - Fuel Pressure Outside Specification
Intermittent - Not Confirmed - Tested Since Memory Clear
Freeze Frame:
Fault Status: 00000001
Fault Priority: 2
Fault Frequency: 1
Mileage: 142033 km
Date: 2018.12.10
Time: 12:08:56

Engine speed: 2624.00 /min
Normed load value: 36.9 %
Vehicle speed: 110 km/h
Coolant temperature: 95 °C
Intake air temperature: 12 °C
Ambient air pressure: 970 mbar
Voltage terminal 30: 14.319 V
Unlearning counter according OBD: 38
Engine speed: actual: 2624 /min
MAF_ENVD: 359.50587 mg/stroke
Coolant temperature (unfiltered): 95.3 °C
T_AST_ENVD: 1259.30 s
FUP_EFP_ENVD: 6819.14 hPa
Battery voltage: 14.421875 V

6171 - Signal Line for Fuel Pump Electronics
P3089 00 [032] - Electrical Malfunction
Intermittent - Not Confirmed - Tested Since Memory Clear
Freeze Frame:
Fault Status: 00000001
Fault Priority: 2
Fault Frequency: 1
Mileage: 141609 km
Date: 2000.00.00
Time: 00:00:00

Engine speed: 0.00 /min
Normed load value: 0.0 %
Vehicle speed: 0 km/h
Coolant temperature: 36 °C
Intake air temperature: 34 °C
Ambient air pressure: 980 mbar
Voltage terminal 30: 12.390 V
Unlearning counter according OBD: 13
Engine speed: actual: 0 /min
MAF_ENVD: 0.00000 mg/stroke
Coolant temperature (unfiltered): 36.0 °C
Engine: operating status: ES
FUP_EFP_ENVD: 2045.74 hPa
Vehicle speed: actual: 0 km/h

Is it time to install my Autotech HPFP?

[Morritse]

These aren't HPFP codes...

[JACKAL]

These aren't HPFP codes...

What are they?

[maty360414]

Time to look for another tuner with dual pulley software and not worry about messing something up. EPL, IE

It is a CW but the UM tune is not for dual pulley. It appears to only be a stage 2 tune with max boost requested at ~16.5 PSI. When I logged the run on the graph above with the CW timing maxed at 20* so probably okay?

So you think the fuel pump is stock? I was seeing around 1400 PSI at redline with a 4 gal e85/93 blend but still at a decent AFR and no codes thrown. If it is stock would there be any benefit to upgrading it if I’m not leaning out?

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

[maty360414]

The graph looks a bit weird idk lol. 530tq there must be something wrong lol

Did some logging tonight, hit my best numbers so far. Unfortunately I was bleeding boost the whole time, gonna have to figure that out.

Second graph is the highest TORQUE I've ever seen, unfortunately I had to stop that log early :(
logs
https://drive.google.com/file/d/15O1...ew?usp=sharing

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk