GTI Data Logging Compendium

[U-20T]

i own 4 engine tunes.

stage 1 91
stage 1 93
stage 2 91
stage 2 93

So the pull timing thing is all the "0's" on my graph, in other words, good?

i thought about running the stage 1 93, but didnt know if i would really gain any power since i only have 91 gas available.

0 timing is more than good, 1-2 deg pull is np either. try the 93 stg 1 and log that. You will most likely make more power from what I see. as long as your 4.5 deg and less pull you ar in sth super safe zone, up to 6 safe but loosing some power due to pull.

Being you have 0s now i would say you will prob pull max 3-4 deg and the car will be faster.

 

[mdhollis]

i own 4 engine tunes.

stage 1 91
stage 1+ 93
stage 2 91 (custom)
stage 2 93

So the pull timing thing is all the "0's" on my graph, in other words, good?

i thought about running the stage 1 93, but didnt know if i would really gain any power since i only have 91 gas available.

Yeah you have absolutely no CF at all. That's why I said your logs look so good

 

[2013R]

i know my car looks really "safe" and all.. but im the kind that wants a more agressive risky tune. my logs look "too safe." i never keep my cars more than a couple years at most anyway. i want to have some fun in the car, and push the turbo hard.

 

[2013R]

maybe on the same token... i could run my stage 2 in 93 mode instead of 91 mode. .. since the car runs so safe anyway.

 

[U-20T]

maybe on the same token... i could run my stage 2 in 93 mode instead of 91 mode. .. since the car runs so safe anyway.

very likely, log the 91 octane setting, if you pull less than 2.5, you can bump it up a few pulls to see where you are at.

TRD420 ran the 93oct 2+ while in California no issue.

 

[2013R]

very likely, log the 91 octane setting, if you pull less than 2.5, you can bump it up a few pulls to see where you are at.

TRD420 ran the 93oct 2+ while in California no issue.

bah ill just set up stage 2 93 octane first, and check logs. most likely its ok. will save an un-needed step of tuning.

guess i wont even try stage 1 93, i cant stand this stage 1 anyway. at least stage 2 was tolerable.

 

[U-20T]

bah ill just set up stage 2 93 octane first, and check logs. most likely its ok. will save an un-needed step of tuning.

guess i wont even try stage 1 93, i cant stand this stage 1 anyway. at least stage 2 was tolerable.

That works

 

[U-20T]

not really anything worth talking about, .16psi, flash the 93 program then log

 

[2013R]

just re-installed the downpipe and flashed stage 2 93. it feels killer now, like i expected it would. i hope it doesnt get slower and adapt down over the next few days like tunes usually do. right now, its about all i could ask for on a stage 2 tune. i just hope it stays that way. ill do the same logs some morning when the traffic and timing is right. i'm interested to see how the timing and boost numbers differ.

after another drive: this is def faster than the stage 2 91 i ran for a couple months. i dont know if its the 93 or the adaptation which is making the difference.

 

[2013R]

Unitronic Stage 2 93 logging done. (On 91 octane...)

You can download the XLS here:
www.bellbottomblasters.com/images/unitronicstage2.xlsx

Noteables compared to the stage 1 91 log I did earlier:

-Went from 14.4psi max boost to 17.3psi max boost

-MAF g/s air flow readings from 191.28 to 197.72, same aFe dry drop-in filter

as long as your 4.5 deg and less pull you are in the super safe zone, up to 6 safe but loosing some power due to pull.

-Max timing pull on stage 2 was -4.5 for just 2 instances out of dozens.

Car runs very nice, and has the power to satisfy me now. I think when i first went to stage 2 I switched to the 91 octane weak file real quick, and never really experienced this proper power.

 

[2013R]

one thing i dont like is how long it takes actual boost to match requested boost.

At the time it matches or beats requested on each run:

RPM/REQUESTED/ACTUAL
3800 16.008 16.443
3040 17.168 17.313
3680 16.588 16.878
3720 16.588 17.023
3400 17.313 17.313
3360 17.313 17.313
3640 16.878 17.313

This is the average point at which the ECU requests the top boost: 2657rpm
Most of the time my actual boost doesnt meet requested until an average of 3520rpm

Maybe a 900-1000rpm delay is normal.

RPM/REQUESTED/ACTUAL
2680 17.313 15.718
2520 17.313 13.688
2600 17.313 15.428
2600 17.458 15.283
2840 17.748 17.023
2800 17.603 16.733
2560 17.313 15.283

 

[timneedscoffee10]

Thought I'd post up here and see if anyone had any insights... did some data logging on the new APR K04 v3 tune this evening. 3'rd gear WOT from < 2000 RPMs through cut-off. My actual vs specified boost seems to be way off, and boost drops off pretty early despite the requested staying high.

Raw data can be had here:
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/3fr3iyw7qy3p3t4/8TnmRJggeS

 

[2013R]

Thought I'd post up here and see if anyone had any insights... did some data logging on the new APR K04 v3 tune this evening. 3'rd gear WOT from < 2000 RPMs through cut-off. My actual vs specified boost seems to be way off, and boost drops off pretty early despite the requested staying high.

Raw data can be had here:
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/3fr3iyw7qy3p3t4/8TnmRJggeS

if you look above your post, my requested/actual are almost exact. you have to have a leak somewhere to be losing 2-3psi of actual psi near the top.

 

[timneedscoffee10]

if you look above your post, my requested/actual are almost exact. you have to have a leak somewhere to be losing 2-3psi of actual psi near the top.

Mine are almost exact within that 3k-4k range as well... but interesting thought on the leak... I'll definitely have to go over her very carefully. I looked back at my logs from 9 months ago, and notice a similar drop-off of 2-3 psi after 5500 RPMs, so at least I'm convinced it's not related to the new APR software release. I didn't notice it back then because the scale on my chart went down to -10 psi, so it flattened the line a bit.

 

[timneedscoffee10]

i guess youre right. my top end boost doesnt match either. im almost exactly 3psi down at each redline.

Nice, thanks for pulling that ... here's my raw data, very very similar to yours:
RPM Specified Actual
1640 11.74805678 0.290075476
1880 12.90835868 1.885490594
2080 15.08392475 3.916018926
2360 16.96941535 6.381660472
2680 17.11445308 10.58775487
3040 17.25949082 14.5037738
4960 22.48084939 22.19077391
5400 22.48084939 22.48084939
5840 22.48084939 21.7556607
6200 22.48084939 20.16024558
6520 22.48084939 19.14498142
6880 20.74039653 18.56483046
6920 20.16024558 18.56483046
7120 -4.206094402 15.22896249

(Ignore the negative specified #; I took off 1000 mbar before converting to PSI)