Dale' BNRS3v2 install thread & self tuning experience

[Vansquish]

Originally Posted by Code Monkey Looking at the flow calculations, how much fucked am I based on the attached logs? I flow 380 g/s in 3rd, max out injectors, and log only ~ 300 whp / 315 tq.

I wouldn't say you're fucked, but those numbers don't really add up somehow. I've got a CP-E Nano (ID 2.715" at the MAF), and flow around 340-350g/s at roughly the same temperatures in your log. So...I think the top end of your MAF calibration is probably somewhat skewed. What are your AFR targets, and do they match the low 11's in your log?

There's probably a bit more left on the table if you're willing to push the motor a bit harder. That said, you and I are at about the same performance level in what appear to be similar ambient temperature conditions. My motor has 138k on it, and I suspect that has something to do with the lack of outright performance available relative to Dale's fresh OE motor.

Of course, when the ambient temperatures fall into the 40ºF range, there's significantly more performance available, and with some increased boost/timing, I've seen mid 350awhp numbers in Vdyno.

[Code Monkey]

I should probably do a MAF cal (target is 11.4 AFR), the battery is almost never connected these days, I do a road racing weekend, then flip the circuit breaker and the car chills for 2 weeks....

[speedfreak44]

Fail on my part...lonely ms3 chillin in here with the 6 gang

[voodoo2crue]

Originally Posted by speedfreak44 Fail on my part...lonely ms3 chillin in here with the 6 gang

Nope, I've been lurking in here too

[dale_gribble]

Originally Posted by Code Monkey Looking at the flow calculations, how much fucked am I based on the attached logs? I flow 380 g/s in 3rd, max out injectors, and log only ~ 300 whp / 315 tq.

That's not a MAF cal thing since the MAF voltage was quite a bit higher in the 3rd pull vs. 4th pull, not to mention AFRs are right on target. The car was definitely flowing more between the runs. The entire MAFv curve of 3rd is about .1v higher across the board which in terms of flow means a lot. Then I looked at your IATs/BATs/ECTs between runs and realized you must have done 3rd pull right when car warmed up and done the 4th pull after car was warmed up and maybe a little heat soaked.

Should you have done a 3rd pull after 4th pull and car was same temp, same conditions, the runs would have flowed the same.

@Code Monkey; is just testing us as a master to a student.

[dale_gribble]

I think one thing self tuning teaches you is that the motor has a place that it wants to be, and when you get there, it's there. This is for any configuration of parts/mods. It gets to a place where it's happy and productive, and you can try and try and turn as many knobs as you want, it won't push past that place. That's its happy place.

I tried for months to push the motor past that place in many different directions only to arrive at that same place. Each time coming from 180 degree directions where I would go back to OEM or OTS tune baseline, the tune would always arrive at the exact same spot each time- same boost curve, same timing curve, same power. Once the motor is in its happy place, that's where it stays until you change a fueling or flow characteristic and do it again. Then the motor gets in its new happy place.

In other words, and after years of self tuning what I realized is the point, once the car gets to this place, there's no reason to keep pushing it, because the gains are very minimal and the effort is very significant. The happy place is pretty forgiving and wide in general, but start moving towards the upper edges and the motor lets you know very quickly and unforgivingly that it is unhappy.

I think from this perspective I realized is how tuners can e-tune and know when to stop tuning; they recognize after many, many cars that the motor has settled into that happy spot and that additional work and tweaks will result in very minimal gains. It took me a long time to get here and make this realization; hopefully many of you arrived there sooner.

[Code Monkey]

I take logs on a split highway with a huge median, usually four 3rd gear pulls one way, then make a u-turn, drive for about a mile and do a single 4th gear log. The 3rd gear log I posted was the last 3rd gear log, my fmic and radiator setup is pretty efficient so I usually don't generate much heat in 3rd gear. Running a quart of 50/50, half a bottle of water wetter, and the rest distilled water helps too.

[dale_gribble]

I have been playing around with the Wastegate Dynamics, specifically the Load Error Compensation (coarse) and Fine (Load Based).

FYI, the computer doesn't like too high of Load Error Compensation (coarse) values. It just starts oscillating like crazy. You can see the baseline (blue), which uses lower values and the adjusted map which allows about 25% more WG correction (green). The extra correction just results in WG, boost and subsequent load oscillations. I really wasn't trying to do much here, just experimenting. I was trying to give the computer a little more leeway to reach for load targets, but this is the result.

[sheston]

Looks like you nailed it :-)

[MD1032]

Originally Posted by dale_gribble FYI, the computer doesn't like any Load Error Compensation (coarse) values over the stock mapping.

I don't understand what you mean by this. Are you saying that the ECU doesn't like values that are greater than the ones in the stock map?

With my S3 I've found +4 to +5% and about -10% works pretty well.

[dale_gribble]

Originally Posted by MD1032 I don't understand what you mean by this. Are you saying that the ECU doesn't like values that are greater than the ones in the stock map? With my S3 I've found +4 to +5% and about -10% works pretty well.

Your values are close to mine on the WG adding side and I still have stock values on the overload (pulling) side. My car never goes over targets though since my load targets are at or just above what the car can hit. If you go much above 6%, you'll start seeing oscillations like what I plotted.