Comparing Stage II tunes

[JJDubya]

This is a long post. So grab your favorite beverage and check it out.

I've been on the fence about getting a tune for some time now... pretty much biding my time until my warranty slowly expires and staying focused on other mods. Unfortunately for my bank account, I rode in fromario's B8.5 yesterday. Even though he only has a Stage I GIAC tune until they release a Stage II tune for the 6MT car, the cat is out of the bag for me and now I need it. Thanks a lot, fromario. (As payback, I gave him a ride in my car with AWE exhaust, and now he has to buy that, so we are essentially even). Anyway, since I am a numbers guy and I'm on a plane with some time to kill, I wanted to figure out a way to do an apples-to-apples comparison of the tuning options. Of course, unless they are done on the same physical dyno, with the same car, on the same day, with sufficient equilibration time between each run, there is no such thing as "apples-to-apples". But, I did my best. Here is what I came up with. I hope this analysis adds to the forum's collective knowledge.

First, I like the perspective of "gains vs. stock" across the RPM range. In lieu of 1/4 mile times (again, same day, same track, same car, same driver, etc), I think this is the next best thing. Dyno plots typically report the maximum values obtained for either HP or TQ in the run. For APR's tune, they claim stock was 327AWHP (@5500RPM) and the tune was 388AWHP (@7100RPM). The fact that those two values are at different RPMs means you can't tell just how much faster the car will feel at any given RPM compared to stock. Fortunately, APR also provides a plot of gains on a per-RPM basis on their website:

http://www.goapr.com/includes/img/products/dyno/30tfsi_long_b8_s4/b8_30tfsi_s0_vs_s2+_cb_in_p_gain_cw.gif

These data compare the AWHP/AWTQ from a 93 octane tune on a car with supporting mods (pulley, exhaust, intake). Instead of just accepting that the APR Stage II+ tune yields 388AWHP/377AWTQ, instead, you get a good sense of what you'll get across the powerband. This plot is great. I do not see on APR's website if these data are from a DSG or 6MT car. I had it in my head from prior research that the car was 6MT, but I can't confirm. Perhaps someone knows? **Important note: the Stock vs. Stage II dyno plot on APR's website as of the original posting date (Jul 29 2013) reflects their V1 tune. Using their published Stage II v1 vs. Stage II v2 (cold weather testing) dyno plots, the v1 values will be adjusted to approximate how a Stage II v2 tune would compare to stock. More in a moment.

Anyway, I searched for the same kind of data from AWE/GIAC. I do not believe they have published this. So, I created it myself. I took their published AWHP/AWTQ dyno plot from their website:

http://www.awe-tuning.com/media/dynosheets/B8_S4/dynosheet_wheels_awe_stage2_30t_pulley_stronic.jpg

Like APR's data, these data compare the AWHP/AWTQ from a 93 octane tune on a car with pulley, exhaust, and intake to a stock setup. But, it is very hard to compare gains vs. stock across the power band from that plot without squinting and getting a headache. So, I digitized the data. I took the image representing the dyno plot and calibrated the pixels. Using the tick marks on the plot, I used the X pixel coordinates to calibrate RPM and Y pixel coordinates to calibrate AWTQ. Then, using X,Y pairs for both the stock and Stage 2 AWTQ curves, I interpolated using the calibration data and I was able to synthesize the data they used to make the plot in the first place. I then calculated the AWHP values using the well-known conversion TQ*RPM/5252 = HP. Formatting these data similarly to how APR presents their data (same scale, intervals, ticks, grid, etc), I created a "gains vs. stock" plot for the AWE tune:

http://db.tt/kuG17AQ1

Since the original AWE dyno plot only goes to 6700RPM (the Mustang dyno truncates the measurement at this RPM), I had to project up to 7100RPM so I could use the same scaling that APR used on their plot. Since the gains are linear from 5980RPM up, this is a simple matter of calculating a trend line from 5980RPM to 7100RPM. This may be a bit generous as the HP curve is starting to trail off at 6700RPM, but let's go with it. AWE specifically indicates these data are from a DSG car. I believe the parasitic / driveline losses for a DSG to be very similar to a 6MT, so this is likely a pretty good comparison to the gains you would get AWE vs. APR for Stage II with supporting mods. However, the max AWTQ/AWHP numbers reported by AWE for the Stage II tune on a DSG car are actually lower than for the 6MT (unfortunately, the dyno plot they provide for the 6MT does not show the stock run... run 1 is with a Stage I tune, so I can't use that plot to synthesize the data). At this point, you'll probably be scrolling back and forth to compare the APR and AWE data. In a moment, I'll present the "take-home" plot.

Now, some will argue that you can't compare HP/TQ numbers from two different dynos/cars/days/etc and call it "apples-to-apples". I agree. But, since I presume each company releases data that are acquired from the same car/same dyno/same day, the percentage increases over stock on a per RPM basis can be compared for each tune (in fact, AWE goes as far to state on their website that they will "guarantee power improvement as a percentage gain over stock"). So, I digitized APR's dyno plot in a similar manner as described above so I would have the actual HP/TQ data values for the APR dyno plot and I could calculate percentage gain as a comparison (for what it is worth, to verify my modeling technique, I recreated the EXACT plot for gains-vs-stock that APR has published and got the identical result... so I believe I have all the data nailed down). Then, using their Stage II v2 vs. Stage II v1 dyno plot, I calculated an additional gain over Stage II v1, and adjusted the numbers accordingly.

With those data, I created a new plot that compares both APR (v1/v2) and AWE Stage II tunes on the basis of percentage gain over stock:

http://db.tt/hNDAtMAE

To me, these are VERY interesting data and something I haven't seen presented as explicitly in the past. Again, since each curve on the plot is calculated from data generated by the same car on the same dyno, I believe this to be a fair comparison of the tunes when on the same plot. The APR shows greater gains below, say, 2600RPM. But, this is due to the fact that the Mustang dyno AWE used for analysis truncates below 2600RPM. Comparing Stage II APR v2 to Stage II AWE, with data available as of August 1, 2013, the conclusion should be that you can't go wrong with either tune.

This isn't new information, per se, but it is presented in a slightly different way. I hope these data are found to be interesting.

Discuss...

[elhalish]

Very interesting! Thanks for putting this together. Maybe APR now needs a v2.3....

[myazforumname]

What you really want to plot out is the percent increase in horsepower at each RPM level. These companies are private businesses and they want to show modding in the best light. What you miss here is with the ECM, pulley, intake and exhaust, you basically get a 15% or so increase in power for the honor of voiding of warranty and dropping $3k or whatever these mods cost. The stock engine is detuned at about 5500 RPM so for the last 1000 RPM before the redline, you get the big boost.

That's $3k, more noise, loss of warranty and lots of wear on your now warranty-less car for a horsepower increase that's mostly only noticeable at the top 15% of the power band.

I've posted about this before. Basically, take the data from the APR graph, divide it by what the engine is putting out and you'll see what the real difference is throughout the range.

Now that Audi is frying warranties for this, I'd be more than a little leery of the minimal HP gain.

[CasualObserver]

Interesting read. Comparing percentage gain seems to be more sound than trying to directly compare the numbers. However depending on dyno calibrations and ambient temps among other things between runs it is hard to use dyno numbers. In the mean time it would be nice to get a Giac tuned car and an APR tuned car to line up at a dragstrip. If anyone in the Chicagoland area has a Giac stage II tune I would love to get the chance to pit my 13' APR stage II against it for a true comparison.

[JJDubya]

Interesting read. Comparing percentage gain seems to be more sound than trying to directly compare the numbers. However depending on dyno calibrations and ambient temps among other things between runs it is hard to use dyno numbers. In the mean time it would be nice to get a Giac tuned car and an APR tuned car to line up at a dragstrip. If anyone in the Chicagoland area has a Giac stage II tune I would love to get the chance to pit my 13' APR stage II against it for a true comparison.

Agreed.. as I note, E/Ts are the real referee. But, in lieu of that, it helps to do SOMETHING with the data they give us. I think the last plot in my post is the best way to compare tunes. The dyno calibrations, ambient temps, etc... are all accommodated by this analysis and normalized out by using percentage gains vs. the stock run. Unless my logic has major flaws, that is...

Also, for what it is worth, I am not advocating one over the other -- I respect both companies tremendously. I was just trying to figure out which one should get ~$2K from me.

[myazforumname]

I think GIAC does provide some warranty coverage which will be handy if something expensive happens like your engine blowing up. Not many people can afford a $10k bill and that could be really bad news when you're driving a car owned by someone else (aka lease).

[JJDubya]

I think GIAC does provide some warranty coverage which will be handy if something expensive happens like your engine blowing up. Not many people can afford a $10k bill and that could be really bad news when you're driving a car owned by someone else (aka lease).

I don't think this is accurate... I am not aware that GIAC provides a drivetrain warranty with their tunes. You may be thinking of STaSiS?

[phillips2024]

thank you for putting this together! its great to see data displayed in different ways esp when you're still stock (and contemplating a tune+)

[MrFunk]

What you really want to plot out is the percent increase in horsepower at each RPM level. These companies are private businesses and they want to show modding in the best light. What you miss here is with the ECM, pulley, intake and exhaust, you basically get a 15% or so increase in power for the honor of voiding of warranty and dropping $3k or whatever these mods cost. The stock engine is detuned at about 5500 RPM so for the last 1000 RPM before the redline, you get the big boost.

That's $3k, more noise, loss of warranty and lots of wear on your now warranty-less car for a horsepower increase that's mostly only noticeable at the top 15% of the power band.

I've posted about this before. Basically, take the data from the APR graph, divide it by what the engine is putting out and you'll see what the real difference is throughout the range.

Now that Audi is frying warranties for this, I'd be more than a little leery of the minimal HP gain.

You need to drive a tuned B8 then repost.
There is a significant increase in TQ which is very usable and noticeable in DD scenarios. The car is much more "drivable" and fun to drive worth every penny...
Noise? LOL -
The vast majority of people do not have warranty issues either...

[thedollardoctor]

You need to drive a tuned B8 then repost.
There is a significant increase in TQ which is very usable and noticeable in DD scenarios. The car is much more "drivable" and fun to drive worth every penny...
Noise? LOL -
The vast majority of people do not have warranty issues either...

THIS!

I agree with MrFunk. You need to actually DRIVE a tuned B8 or B8.5 car before basically saying its a waste of money because it "may" void certain aspects of your warranty. The "FEEL" of a tuned S4 vs. stock is NIGHT and DAY and VERY noticeable when driving day to day, even under 50% throttle and NOT running it up to the top of the RPMs.

As to the OP, I appreciate the different look at the data presented by these two great companies and also think this is a very unique and accurate way to review the data. Thanks for the contribution!

[CreoSTi]

Noise? LOL -


That's exactly what I thought when I read it... [:p]

[The_Transporter]

That's $3k, more noise, loss of warranty and lots of wear on your now warranty-less car for a horsepower increase that's mostly only noticeable at the top 15% of the power band.
.

NOISE? From a tune and pulley??

And 'if' you are referring to the glorious sound of exhaust and intake on the sonorous 3.0T... Are 75years old??

I'm sorry, but this is an enthusiast website, we don't buy cars here to smell them gathering warehouse spores.

[benben01]

What you really want to plot out is the percent increase in horsepower at each RPM level. These companies are private businesses and they want to show modding in the best light. What you miss here is with the ECM, pulley, intake and exhaust, you basically get a 15% or so increase in power for the honor of voiding of warranty and dropping $3k or whatever these mods cost. The stock engine is detuned at about 5500 RPM so for the last 1000 RPM before the redline, you get the big boost.

That's $3k, more noise, loss of warranty and lots of wear on your now warranty-less car for a horsepower increase that's mostly only noticeable at the top 15% of the power band.

I've posted about this before. Basically, take the data from the APR graph, divide it by what the engine is putting out and you'll see what the real difference is throughout the range.

Now that Audi is frying warranties for this, I'd be more than a little leery of the minimal HP gain.

No offense, but you sound like my dad which is not a bad thing.... As for OP, where were you when I was taking Statistics? :)

[fromario]

JJDubya, first of all you're welcome.

Second of all I hate you lol

As I mentioned when we were out, I think what will make the biggest difference in perceived speed is going to come from the low end torque (~+30-40 down low) and the fact that it will pull hard all the way through to redline

I am still waiting to ride in a stage 2 car but I will being heading to a dyno next week to get some first hand comparison on the same dyno same car with stock vs stage 1 map. Yes there will be some heat soak yada yada yada but I think it will give me a good data point before I go up to the strip

And no I haven't ordered the exhaust yet only because I am debating between wheels or exhaust.

Or both }:)

[jfabes]

more talk about absolute loss of warranty with a tune. GAWD.

you say that your a numbers guy...that's your first mistake in this instance :) presume this and assume that, b8's and b8.5's, dsg's and 6mt's, different dyno's and days and the list goes on and on. can we add some more variables? this is where too many people on this forum run into trouble, they get caught up in numbers and they don't tell any of the story when you drive the car or run a car that should be faster on paper but you win or should be slower on paper but you lose. so here's my advice to you:

1) if you've hit the 5k service and are trouble free, go to stg 2+. why on earth people are waiting years until warranty is up is beyond me. life is short, live in the now.
2) both giac and apr stg 2 tunes are awesome. go look at the logs, the cars are identical in 60-130, 1/4 mile, etc. you cannot go wrong with either.

[plev72]

Great post JJDubya - and on the related notes - I'd say discussion about noise and warranty are both relevant - unless you've got more money than you know what to do with and feel like sharing with the rest of us... I'm planning on going to Stage 2 regardless (as soon as I get around to voiding the warranty by getting the pulley installed...) but I'd also like to find quieter mufflers, I enjoyed the car more before I got the exhaust done. If I'd wanted boy racer I would have bought a WRX STI for half (?) of what I paid for my S4.

[fromario]

1) if you've hit the 5k service and are trouble free, go to stg 2+. why on earth people are waiting years until warranty is up is beyond me. life is short, live in the now.


LOL, this is EXACTLY what I did... except they didnt offer stage 2 for the B8.5s at the time

[stlcity]

U guys think waiting for the 5K service is a good idea before flashing any one of these tunes(not sure which one I'm going with: leaning towards GIAC for now)??

[Tyrnnus]

U guys think waiting for the 5K service is a good idea before flashing any one of these tunes(not sure which one I'm going with: leaning towards GIAC for now)??

It seems to be the general consensis here. I did mine just before and had the GIAC stg I for almost 20k km now and 5k on the stg II and loving it.
BTW if you want to change out the factory grill, its a great time to do it when installing the pulley. they have to put the front end in the service position anyways.

[Ray Khan]

JJDubya, one thing to keep in mind is that the APR support in this area is a bit better than the GIAC/AWE. I'm trying to upgrade to GIAC stage 2 and it's looking like I'll go to one shop for the pulley install and another for the software flash from stage 1 to stage 2. Kaizen in Acton is close to you and they are a full service shop. There are other good APR shops within 30 minutes of you as well. Good luck.

[CasualObserver]

So out of Curiosity has anyone had their stgII B8.5 car to the drag strip yet? I have in both APR STGI/STGII form. I went 12.78 on STGI with only an Carbonio intake, and 12.28 on STGII with a carbonio intake. It was much cooler on the STGII run BTW. For reference the car in question is an S5 DSG...

[JJDubya]

JJDubya, one thing to keep in mind is that the APR support in this area is a bit better than the GIAC/AWE. I'm trying to upgrade to GIAC stage 2 and it's looking like I'll go to one shop for the pulley install and another for the software flash from stage 1 to stage 2. Kaizen in Acton is close to you and they are a full service shop. There are other good APR shops within 30 minutes of you as well. Good luck.

Ray, always a good point. But, I did say I'm not advocating one tune or another by this thread. Simply numbers!

[Austin@GIAC]

This is a long post. So grab your favorite beverage and check it out.

I've been on the fence about getting a tune for some time now... pretty much biding my time until my warranty slowly expires and staying focused on other mods. Unfortunately for my bank account, I rode in fromario's B8.5 yesterday. Even though he only has a Stage I GIAC tune until they release a Stage II tune for the 6MT car, the cat is out of the bag for me and now I need it. Thanks a lot, fromario. (As payback, I gave him a ride in my car with AWE exhaust, and now he has to buy that, so we are essentially even). Anyway, since I am a numbers guy and I'm on a plane with some time to kill, I wanted to figure out a way to do an apples-to-apples comparison of the tuning options. Of course, unless they are done on the same physical dyno, with the same car, on the same day, with sufficient equilibration time between each run, there is no such thing as "apples-to-apples". But, I did my best. Here is what I came up with. I hope this analysis adds to the forum's collective knowledge.

First, I like the perspective of "gains vs. stock" across the RPM range. In lieu of 1/4 mile times (again, same day, same track, same car, same driver, etc), I think this is the next best thing. Dyno plots typically report the maximum values obtained for either HP or TQ in the run. For APR's tune, they claim stock was 327AWHP (@5500RPM) and the tune was 388AWHP (@7100RPM). The fact that those two values are at different RPMs means you can't tell just how much faster the car will feel at any given RPM compared to stock. Fortunately, APR also provides a plot of gains on a per-RPM basis on their website:

http://www.goapr.com/includes/img/products/dyno/30tfsi_long_b8_s4/b8_30tfsi_s0_vs_s2+_cb_in_p_gain_cw.gif

These data compare the AWHP/AWTQ from a 93 octane tune on a car with supporting mods (pulley, exhaust, intake). Instead of just accepting that the APR Stage II+ tune yields 388AWHP/377AWTQ, instead, you get a good sense of what you'll get across the powerband. This plot is great. I do not see on APR's website if these data are from a DSG or 6MT car. I had it in my head from prior research that the car was 6MT, but I can't confirm. Perhaps someone knows?

Anyway, I searched for the same kind of data from AWE/GIAC. I do not believe they have published this. So, I created it myself. I took their published AWHP/AWTQ dyno plot from their website:

http://www.awe-tuning.com/media/dynosheets/B8_S4/dynosheet_wheels_awe_stage2_30t_pulley_stronic.jpg

Like APR's data, these data compare the AWHP/AWTQ from a 93 octane tune on a car with pulley, exhaust, and intake to a stock setup. But, it is very hard to compare gains vs. stock across the power band from that plot without squinting and getting a headache. So, I digitized the data. I took the image representing the dyno plot and calibrated the pixels. Using the tick marks on the plot, I used the X pixel coordinates to calibrate RPM and Y pixel coordinates to calibrate AWTQ. Then, using X,Y pairs for both the stock and Stage 2 AWTQ curves, I interpolated using the calibration data and I was able to synthesize the data they used to make the plot in the first place. I then calculated the AWHP values using the well-known conversion TQ*RPM/5252 = HP. Formatting these data similarly to how APR presents their data (same scale, intervals, ticks, grid, etc), I created a "gains vs. stock" plot for the AWE tune:

http://db.tt/kuG17AQ1

Since the original AWE dyno plot only goes to 6700RPM (DSG shift point?), I had to project up to 7100RPM so I could use the same scaling that APR used on their plot. Since the gains are linear from 5980RPM up, this is a simple matter of calculating a trend line from 5980RPM to 7100RPM. This may be a bit generous as the HP curve is starting to trail off at 6700RPM, but let's go with it. AWE specifically indicates these data are from a DSG car. I believe the parasitic / driveline losses for a DSG to be very similar to a 6MT, so this is likely a pretty good comparison to the gains you would get AWE vs. APR for Stage II with supporting mods. However, the max AWTQ/AWHP numbers reported by AWE for the Stage II tune on a DSG car are actually lower than for the 6MT (unfortunately, the dyno plot they provide for the 6MT does not show the stock run... run 1 is with a Stage I tune, so I can't use that plot to synthesize the data). At this point, you'll probably be scrolling back and forth to compare the APR and AWE data. In a moment, I'll present the "take-home" plot.

Now, some will argue that you can't compare HP/TQ numbers from two different dynos/cars/days/etc and call it "apples-to-apples". I agree. But, since I presume each company releases data that are acquired from the same car/same dyno/same day, the percentage increases over stock on a per RPM basis can be compared for each tune (in fact, AWE goes as far to state on their website that they will "guarantee power improvement as a percentage gain over stock"). So, I digitized APR's dyno plot in a similar manner as described above so I would have the actual HP/TQ data values for the APR dyno plot and I could calculate percentage gain as a comparison (for what it is worth, to verify my modeling technique, I recreated the EXACT plot for gains-vs-stock that APR has published and got the identical result... so I believe I have all the data nailed down).

With those data, I created a new plot that compares both APR and AWE Stage II tunes on the basis of percentage gain over stock:

http://db.tt/hNDAtMAE

To me, these are VERY interesting data and something I haven't seen presented as explicitly in the past. Again, since each curve on the plot is calculated from data generated by the same car on the same dyno, I believe this to be a fair comparison of the tunes when on the same plot. And, I think it illustrates why the general consensus is that the AWE/GIAC tune feels "faster" (not just based on raw dyno plots). The APR shows greater gains below, say, 2600RPM. But, given that these are percentage increases, a ~12% increase at lower RPMs is a smaller absolute AWTQ/AWHP number. But, what is also very apparent is the "flatness" of the APR tune... it basically looks like ~12-15% gain over stock from off-idle up to ~5200RPM. I've often read how APR's tune is perceived to be very smooth... perhaps this is why. The AWE tune looks like the winner above 2600RPM, and shows the more aggressive, perhaps "harder hitting"?, nature of the AWE/GIAC tune as it has a positive slope pretty much all the way across the RPM range. The plot also shows that AWE/GIAC nets a higher total gain at max RPM than APR. Of course, since both tune eliminate the precipitous drop of the stock tuning due to boost bleed at around 5200RPM, this is where the major numerical gains are for both tunes. Both track upward at about the same slope, with AWE on top by a bit all the way up to red line.

This isn't new information, but it is presented in a slightly different way. I hope these data are found to be interesting.

Discuss...

FYI, Mustang dynos have start and stop speeds so you can't actually pull to the physical redline. Additionally, both AWE and GIAC start their dyno passes at 2500 RPMs, which is why you don't see any real power down there. I've stated before that our cars run more physical boost and because of that are capable of more power. This only goes to further support that.

[Austin@GIAC]

So out of Curiosity has anyone had their stgII B8.5 car to the drag strip yet? I have in both APR STGI/STGII form. I went 12.78 on STGI with only an Carbonio intake, and 12.28 on STGII with a carbonio intake. It was much cooler on the STGII run BTW. For reference the car in question is an S5 DSG...

Well_armed ran 12.2 on GIAC stage 1. The time is up on the 1/4 mile database.

[rs4dreams]

Aren't the APR plots on the website still from their V1 tune? If so, I would expect that V2 would be very close to the GIAC numbers.

[JJDubya]

FYI, Mustang dynos have start and stop speeds so you can't actually pull to the physical redline. Additionally, both AWE and GIAC start their dyno passes at 2500 RPMs, which is why you don't see any real power down there. I've stated before that our cars run more physical boost and because of that are capable of more power. This only goes to further support that.

AH! That explains the lack of measured torque below 2500RM and the termination at 6700RPM. Thanks Austin. I edited my original post to incorporate this point.

[JJDubya]

Aren't the APR plots on the website still from their V1 tune? If so, I would expect that V2 would be very close to the GIAC numbers.

I think they refer to the v2 tunes as "+" versions... so Stage I+ and Stage II+ are the v2 tunes. I used the Stage II+ dyno plot. Perhaps I'm wrong. Regardless, I can only perform the analysis on the plots they publish. I'm happy to update if I have an updated dyno plot.

[rs4dreams]

I think they refer to the v2 tunes as "+" versions... so Stage I+ and Stage II+ are the v2 tunes. I used the Stage II+ dyno plot. Perhaps I'm wrong. Regardless, I can only perform the analysis on the plots they publish. I'm happy to update if I have an updated dyno plot.

Not saying your analysis is bad, just pointing out that they were using old dyno plots the last I heard. The "+" simply means supporting hardware modifications which in this case mean intake and exhaust.

[jfabes]

I think they refer to the v2 tunes as "+" versions... so Stage I+ and Stage II+ are the v2 tunes. I used the Stage II+ dyno plot. Perhaps I'm wrong. Regardless, I can only perform the analysis on the plots they publish. I'm happy to update if I have an updated dyno plot.

no, that's incorrect. the + refers to the supporting equipment (intake, exhaust, etc.). the plots on their site are v1, the v2 graphs aren't published on there because they were done in cold weather. see v1 vs v2 here:

http://www.goapr.com/news/2012/02/03/apr-is-pleased-to-present-a-new-ecu-calibration-strategy-for-all-3-0t-ecu-upgrades/

[JJDubya]

no, that's incorrect. the + refers to the supporting equipment (intake, exhaust, etc.). the plots on their site are v1, the v2 graphs aren't published on there because they were done in cold weather. see v1 vs v2 here:

http://www.goapr.com/news/2012/02/03/apr-is-pleased-to-present-a-new-ecu-calibration-strategy-for-all-3-0t-ecu-upgrades/

Ok, I stand corrected. Now that the weather is warm, perhaps they'll post the updated dyno plots. Eye-balling the plot from that link, it looks like the greatest incremental gain in AWTQ is around 3500RPM and is approximately 5%. This should make a difference in the analysis. However, given that it was done in cold weather, some of that will be given back. So, perhaps my original analysis isn't that far off.

I edited my original post so it is clear the APR data are from a V1 tune.

[El Romano]

Fwiw, GIACs dyno, which was in the beginning of March, was most likely just as "cold".. ;)

nice plots, btw, thx for your time in this!!

Adrian

[Austin@GIAC]

Fwiw, GIACs dyno, which was in the beginning of March, was most likely just as "cold".. ;)

nice plots, btw, thx for your time in this!!

Adrian

Our cars have been able to back up the power we claim with both times and traps in high temps and density altitudes as well. Not saying others haven't, just that we still make great power in hot weather as well.

[fromario]

Our cars have been able to back up the power we claim with both times and traps in high temps and density altitudes as well. Not saying others haven't, just that we still make great power in hot weather as well.

I'll be dyno-ing your Stage 1 tune this Friday. It'll probably be around 75-80deg so should be nice to provide some more data

[robos4]

This is all really cool data and analysis...

It would be even better if we started seeing some real comparisons between the two (APR stage 2 v idendical setup from GIAC - line up and run together). I'm surprised to see no one has done this yet...

Rob

[JJDubya]

Ok, I stand corrected. Now that the weather is warm, perhaps they'll post the updated dyno plots. Eyballing the plot from that link, it looks like the greatest incremental gain in AWTQ is around 3500RPM and is approximately 5%. This should make a difference in the analysis. However, given that it was done in cold weather, some of that will be given back. So, perhaps my original analysis isn't that far off.

UPDATE: I used the "cold weather testing" data APR has provided comparing Stage II v1 and Stage II v2 tunes. Since this is not a Stage II v2 vs. Stock dyno plot, it can't be used directly and still maintain the "fairness" of the comparison. So, I used the v1 vs. v2 dyno plot to calculate the percentage gain the v2 tune provides on top of v1. As I speculated above, I wasn't far off. The maximum gain, at 3500RPM, is exactly 8.3% v2 over v1. Using the exact percent gain at every RPM as calculated from the dyno plot, I applied those values to the same RPM values for the Stage II v1 tune calculated previously and added another line to the plot. This shows what one could expect from the APR Stage II v2 tune compared to the AWE Stage II tune.

Now, the tunes look much more similar. I should have done the v2 analysis from the start. Sorry for the rabbit hole.

Bottom line: you can't go wrong with either tune. APR and AWE: Thanks for all you do for our cars.

Enjoy!

http://db.tt/hNDAtMAE

[rs4dreams]

EDIT: Plot was corrected, looks right now!

[JJDubya]

You made some errors while plotting the data. Looking at APR v1 vs v2, there's a ~20 hp power gain at 6000 RPM, which represents about 1/3 of the 60 hp gain for APR stage 2 vs. stock at 6000 RPM. If you look at the plot you posted, APR v1 is right at 20% gain vs stock at 6000 RPM. Adding another 1/3 of that to 20% gets you ~26-27% gain over stock, which almost exactly matches the GIAC curve at that point.

Extrapolating from the cold weather v1 vs v2 graph, we can pretty much conclude that APR and GIAC have almost identical gains throughout the powerband. You should fix the issues and plot it.

Good catch my friend. I plotted the wrong column of data. I should have been more skeptical when the increase wasn't what I expected when I first plotted. The update looks much better. Do me a favor and edit your post so you aren't suggesting the updated plot is wrong...

[rs4dreams]

^^ done!