Cheers, Steve.
226.36 g/s at 1.12 Scaling (Wilco - earlier this thread) times say 1.25 would give 317 bhp.
(1.31 would be 332 bhp - tbh I don't think it's there yet...)
At this point, I have absolutely no idea!
-
Guest, New Stock alert: Premium CUPRA valve caps now available in the store ? Order now from the merchandise store
DPJ's GTRS Eliminator Install and Development
- Thread starter DPJ
- Start date
Cheers, Steve.
226.36 g/s at 1.12 Scaling (Wilco - earlier this thread) times say 1.25 would give 317 bhp.
(1.31 would be 332 bhp - tbh I don't think it's there yet...)
At this point, I have absolutely no idea!
Sorry Phil, I missed this post!
Yes, 180 psi. I need a 225cc nozzle, don't I.
Thanks for doing the calcs.
Last edited:
Lol, i didnt do the calcs, USRT's little program done it.
You took the time to put the numbers in and press the buttons!
Why was the run stopped at 6774? Which is incidently the same point at where peak power is?
Surely if it revs to 7200 or whatever standard/stage 3 revs to there should be some more power lef in it?
Seems strange peak power was at the same time the run was ended...
Surely if it revs to 7200 or whatever standard/stage 3 revs to there should be some more power lef in it?
Seems strange peak power was at the same time the run was ended...
Here's a log of 002.
ECU and TBA resets before. T9 HB9 / 6.5 degrees outside / no wmi
ECU and TBA resets before. T9 HB9 / 6.5 degrees outside / no wmi
Code:
Monday 22 October 2007 20:17:59
06A 906 032 HN 1.8L R4/5VT 0002
'002
Idle speed Engine load Inj. period Air mass in
700-820 rpm 15-25% 2.0 - 4.0 ms 2.0-4.5 g/s
/min % ms g/s
2440 30.8 2.72 14.69
2440 33.1 2.72 15.92
2440 33.1 2.38 15.58
2440 33.1 2.38 16
2480 33.8 2.72 16.39
2480 33.1 2.38 15.97
2480 33.1 2.72 15.97
2480 33.8 2.72 16.56
2520 60.9 5.1 43.78
2560 86.5 6.12 45.67
2600 92.5 6.12 47.33
2680 99.2 6.8 52.5
2760 104.5 7.14 56.92
2800 109.8 7.82 62.67
2920 112.8 8.16 63.67
2960 115.8 8.5 67.69
3080 119.5 8.84 70.25
3160 125.6 9.52 78
3280 131.6 10.2 84.97
3400 139.1 11.22 92.58
3520 146.6 11.56 98.5
3600 154.1 12.58 107.33
3720 164.7 13.6 118.22
3840 179.7 14.62 137.33
4040 191.7 15.98 151.47
4200 191.7 16.66 165.72
4360 191.7 17.68 183.5
4480 191.7 18.02 189.72
4680 191.7 18.36 196.14
4840 191.7 18.02 202.56
4920 191.7 17.34 196.67
5080 191.7 16.66 194.75
5160 191.7 16.32 191.08
5280 191.7 15.64 195.14
5400 191.7 15.64 194.22
5520 191 15.64 203.75
5600 191.7 15.64 207.19
5720 191.7 15.64 212.81
5840 189.5 15.3 213.83
5960 189.5 15.3 214.17
6040 188 15.3 219
6160 184.2 14.96 216.56
6240 184.2 14.96 220.14
6320 182.7 14.96 222.53
6440 179.7 14.62 223.94
6520 178.9 14.62 222.53
6600 178.2 14.28 223.56
6720 172.2 13.94 217.97
6800 170.7 13.94 220.42
6880 171.4 13.94 221.03
6960 164.7 13.6 222.36
7000 165.4 13.6 223.94
7160 162.4 13.6 221.44
7160 162.4 13.94 217.5
7200 159.4 13.26 217.5
7200 160.9 13.6 225.44
7240 166.2 13.94 235.47
7240 59.4 3.06 1.97Revs to 7240 then?
Still think the rolling road run was cut short by 500rpm.
using the calculators, you need to run the 225cc/min nozzle as that will put out 390cc/min when you need roughly 465cc/min.
With the current nozzle setting your dumping in 100cc/min more than whats needed.
Still think the rolling road run was cut short by 500rpm.
using the calculators, you need to run the 225cc/min nozzle as that will put out 390cc/min when you need roughly 465cc/min.
With the current nozzle setting your dumping in 100cc/min more than whats needed.
Sorry Phil, I couldn't get on here last night to continue this.
I'll start a new thread on this in Bill's forum a little later as it's a topic on its own. I have some questions.
235.47 g/s - it was still pulling hard when the rev limiter cut in.
Dave
I don't think your maf is scaled. If you're running revo bt and a cupra r or tt maf tube, then it reads correctly. The airflow looks spot on for 1.4 bar at the top end on a small port.
WI will probably gain you more hp if your intercooler was too small. There are some gains to be made in timing with WI, but I think most of the gain is in density recovery due to cooler intake temps.
In other words if your boost is set at 1.4 bar, more air will go in at 1.4 bar if it's cooler.
A 40-20C drop in intake temp gives 6-7% more air.
But your intercooler looks prety good. you're only gaining 5-10C with WI. Not much is evaporating, so most of it is in your cylinders, probably depressing combustion temperature to a point where you loose power.
Looks good though dave.
I don't think your maf is scaled. If you're running revo bt and a cupra r or tt maf tube, then it reads correctly. The airflow looks spot on for 1.4 bar at the top end on a small port.
WI will probably gain you more hp if your intercooler was too small. There are some gains to be made in timing with WI, but I think most of the gain is in density recovery due to cooler intake temps.
In other words if your boost is set at 1.4 bar, more air will go in at 1.4 bar if it's cooler.
A 40-20C drop in intake temp gives 6-7% more air.
But your intercooler looks prety good. you're only gaining 5-10C with WI. Not much is evaporating, so most of it is in your cylinders, probably depressing combustion temperature to a point where you loose power.
Looks good though dave.
Last edited:
Thanks for this, John.
I'm confused on one thing though (being a bear of very little brain) - how can my MAF not be scaled? If it's sitting in a tube that's larger than it was designed for, surely more grams of air are actually going through the tube than would be in a smaller diameter tube (where it reads correctly)
Thanks for this, John.
I'm confused on one thing though (being a bear of very little brain) - how can my MAF not be scaled? If it's sitting in a tube that's larger than it was designed for, surely more grams of air are actually going through the tube than would be in a smaller diameter tube (where it reads correctly)
If you're running revo BT, it's based on a code that uses a larger maf, ie cupra r or tt etc. They have basically the same ecu, so it's easier for tuners to start with a code that uses the hardware (as far as possible) that the car has on it.
The only difference between the cupra maf and the cupra R maf is the plastic tube around the sensor, so you effectively have a cupra R maf, and the code is written for it
The water has two effects in WI. Firstly some of it evaporates, and reduces charge temperature, helping density recovery. In the time available only so much can be evaporated, and if you intake temps are already low, the amount of water vapor the air can carry is relatively low.
The residual water has a second effect in that it slows down the flame front speed, but it also reduces flame temperature, and absorbs energy. There's a fine balance between slowing the flame front, and quenching it completely, It also absorbs energy that could be used to increase cylinder pressure, and do useful work on the piston.
So the MAF element will give a lower voltage (for the same airflow) in the LCR tube than in the LC tube. The ecu is recognising this as an 'LCR reading' and reporting g/s 'accurately'.
Cheers John.
Dave I'm not so sure mate. Simply because a standard LCR Maff is 75-76mm OD but correct me if i'm wrong but yours is an 80mm OD housing so there will be a small difference.
Dave I'm not so sure mate. Simply because a standard LCR Maff is 75-76mm OD but correct me if i'm wrong but yours is an 80mm OD housing so there will be a small difference.
hmmm....... It gets more complicated!
Aye, standard LCR MAF tube is 76mm or 3" so if you're running an 80mm housing then the readings will be lower than expected/actual.
and the meth contribution as a fuel.
mine goes rich on my 50/50 mix on lambda logging when WI is on... (compensated by adjusting fueling)
I dont know why USRT's calc's are based on 20% mix tho, when Snow reccomend 50/50.
most definately more timing possible on 50/50 from more than just cooling effect on charge temp.
Time to get measuring
It's dark out there..........
Bill - USRT's 22% is the percentage of 50/50 water methanol to the total fluid flow (fuel + water + methanol)
see my explanation here
Last edited:
Similar threads
- jamiebennett81
- (Archived) Engine Discussion and Tuning 50 51 52
