CW with tune?

[dansjuice]

Anyone try the CW with a tune? I think our main man Mike said he was possibly going to try this. Mike, care to chime in on what you think?

[DBL R]

Are you asking if anyone is going to have their car tuned (for clarification we'll say to stage 1) then add a chipwerke piggy for additional gains?

[jran76]

If your current tune is keeping the bypass closed under normal conditions (it should), there probably won't be much in terms of gains. Mike was talking about doing it with the dual pulley where most tunes do seem to bypass now since they are not tuned for the extra boost. It might make sense in that case; at least until more tunes are available to support the dual pulley (only EPL has an officially released tune for it right now).

[dansjuice]

Are you asking if anyone is going to have their car tuned (for clarification we'll say to stage 1) then add a chipwerke piggy for additional gains?

Ya, if you have stage 1 and throw on the CW. I'm sure Mike will posting something when he tests it.

[DBL R]

Ya, if you have stage 1 and throw on the CW. I'm sure Mike will posting something when he tests it.

I think you may have misunderstood what mike is testing. Putting a CW on a stage 1 car won't yield greater power gains because all that device does is attempt to mimic a stage 1 tune by closing the release valve at higher rpm. Now if he were to use a CW on a stage 2 (single pulley) tuned car, while actually having a dual pulley, then the CW could manipulate the signals enough to allow the dual pulley to function without the system going into limp mode due to an over boost situation.

[bhvrdr]

Yup you guys covered it perfectly :)

Mike

[mrmomo313]

I think you may have misunderstood what mike is testing. Putting a CW on a stage 1 car won't yield greater power gains because all that device does is attempt to mimic a stage 1 tune by closing the release valve at higher rpm. Now if he were to use a CW on a stage 2 (single pulley) tuned car, while actually having a dual pulley, then the CW could manipulate the signals enough to allow the dual pulley to function without the system going into limp mode due to an over boost situation.

I'm not sure what settings etc you would need to use on the CW to achieve this... Kind of intriguing idea but I'd much rather wait for a proper tune. I'd like to see how it works out for Mike since he seems somewhat set on doing it.

That said, I haven't gotten any over boost codes running dual pulleys on APR v3.1 ECU software with stock TCU...

[shoe3k]

That said, I haven't gotten any over boost codes running dual pulleys on APR v3.1 ECU software with stock TCU...

I'm pretty sure the APR v3.1 will do the same thing that the stock ECU does and opens the bypass valve when boost targets are reached.

[bhvrdr]

I'm not sure what settings etc you would need to use on the CW to achieve this... Kind of intriguing idea but I'd much rather wait for a proper tune. I'd like to see how it works out for Mike since he seems somewhat set on doing it.

That said, I haven't gotten any over boost codes running dual pulleys on APR v3.1 ECU software with stock TCU...

its definitely going to be experimental if I do it at all.


Having said that, it should be pretty easy to rough guess the outcome. This is because to OD crank pulley is the same ratio of increase in SC rpm as the original jump from stage 1 to Stage 2 is. IIRC it is roughly a 10% change each step from 1, to 2 and from 2 to dual pulleys (id have to go look at he figures).

Knowing now, how the "stage 2" CW map worked with the 10% change it conceivably could work now very similar with the new 10% change layered on the tune. That is to say, if the stage 2 tune is bleeding off boost similarly to how the stage 1 car bleeds boost with a SC pulley I may see similar results. Now, if it is not the same, I always have the option of using a less aggressive CW map or turning the settings down (whichever works best in logs).


Yes, I would much prefer to have a custom tune that works and logs perfectly for the dual pulleys. This would just be possible experimentation. The one thing that would concern me is that the timing could get too high using the CW since it will stay at stage 2 level timing requests. I'd only be guessing but my guess is that dual pulley setups may not want to run as much timing.

Mike

[034Motorsport]

Anyone try the CW with a tune? I think our main man Mike said he was possibly going to try this. Mike, care to chime in on what you think?

This isn't a good idea. You won't be able to get more boost from the supercharger (as a tune will prevent the bypass from opening, so you're now mechanically limited in terms of making more boost) which is really where the gains from the CW come from.

These piggyback units merely intercept and manipulate the MAP sensor signals, which is what your ECU relies on for load/airflow/fueling calculations. Stock cars with these interceptors are doing ~30% fueling corrections (you can log this yourself) to keep AFR within specified values, and until the primary oxygen sensors warm up and come online, you're essentially running 30% lean.

Since aftermarket tunes already request more boost, clamping MAP sensor signals will likely result in underboost codes as well.

- Laszlo

[bhvrdr]

This isn't a good idea. You won't be able to get more boost from the supercharger (as a tune will prevent the bypass from opening, so you're now mechanically limited in terms of making more boost) which is really where the gains from the CW come from.

- Laszlo

This is for running dual pulleys in which some stage 2 tunes that are designed for only 1 pulley are bleeding boost just like running a SC pulley with a stock or stage 1 tune was.

Mike

[034Motorsport]

This is for running dual pulleys in which some stage 2 tunes that are designed for only 1 pulley are bleeding boost just like running a SC pulley with a stock or stage 1 tune was.

Mike

I apologize for any confusion. The OP specifically asked about running this on Stage 1, which is what I was responding to.

Personally (for a dual-pulley car) I would wait for or purchase a proper tune for a dual-pulley setup, although if you're just after more boost and comfortable with what you see in logs, then it's your choice.

Ya, if you have stage 1 and throw on the CW. I'm sure Mike will posting something when he tests it.

[DBL R]

its definitely going to be experimental if I do it at all.


Having said that, it should be pretty easy to rough guess the outcome. This is because to OD crank pulley is the same ratio of increase in SC rpm as the original jump from stage 1 to Stage 2 is. IIRC it is roughly a 10% change each step from 1, to 2 and from 2 to dual pulleys (id have to go look at he figures).

Knowing now, how the "stage 2" CW map worked with the 10% change it conceivably could work now very similar with the new 10% change layered on the tune. That is to say, if the stage 2 tune is bleeding off boost similarly to how the stage 1 car bleeds boost with a SC pulley I may see similar results. Now, if it is not the same, I always have the option of using a less aggressive CW map or turning the settings down (whichever works best in logs).


Yes, I would much prefer to have a custom tune that works and logs perfectly for the dual pulleys. This would just be possible experimentation. The one thing that would concern me is that the timing could get too high using the CW since it will stay at stage 2 level timing requests. I'd only be guessing but my guess is that dual pulley setups may not want to run as much timing.

Mike

That was going to be my next post. In theory the difference in % change between CW settings would allow for some wiggle room. Knowing the % extra boost from the dual pulley you could select/easily change the CW setting to allow for that same % change in what the ecu reads for boost. And yes, timing would be my only concern. Unless the ECU is able to read the timing as being too advanced and pull from there, without changing the target boost.... Definitely an interest thought. As always I look forward to any logging that you do, you mad scientist.

[bhvrdr]

Personally (for a dual-pulley car) I would wait for or purchase a proper tune for a dual-pulley setup, although if you're just after more boost and comfortable with what you see in logs, then it's your choice.

I agree. So fire up the calibration suite and i'll be pleased to try it :)

8K5 907 551 F -- REV 0002

And perhaps in the free time a DSG tune for...

8K5 927 156 D -- REV 0004


Thank you sir :)

Mike

[034Motorsport]

8K5 907 551 F -- REV 0002

And perhaps in the free time a DSG tune for...

8K5 927 156 D -- REV 0004


Thank you sir :)

Mike

The OP is actually running our Stage 1 and has a 551F ECU as well! I think he's itching for more power, which is why he was thinking of adding the CW on.

I'll keep you posted on the status of our tunes, but we're testing as much as possible with both hardware and software at each stage to make sure we're offering the best tuning options, hardware, and advice we can.

[Loe]

its definitely going to be experimental if I do it at all.


Having said that, it should be pretty easy to rough guess the outcome. This is because to OD crank pulley is the same ratio of increase in SC rpm as the original jump from stage 1 to Stage 2 is. IIRC it is roughly a 10% change each step from 1, to 2 and from 2 to dual pulleys (id have to go look at he figures).

Knowing now, how the "stage 2" CW map worked with the 10% change it conceivably could work now very similar with the new 10% change layered on the tune. That is to say, if the stage 2 tune is bleeding off boost similarly to how the stage 1 car bleeds boost with a SC pulley I may see similar results. Now, if it is not the same, I always have the option of using a less aggressive CW map or turning the settings down (whichever works best in logs).


Yes, I would much prefer to have a custom tune that works and logs perfectly for the dual pulleys. This would just be possible experimentation. The one thing that would concern me is that the timing could get too high using the CW since it will stay at stage 2 level timing requests. I'd only be guessing but my guess is that dual pulley setups may not want to run as much timing.

Mike

I'll be starting this experiment soon. My CW arrived yesterday and once I get back home from West Palm on Weds evening, i'll be hooking it up and logging for the remainder of the week. I'm not too concerned with ignition timing issues when running an ethanol blend, my car has zero knock corrections at the moment with a dual-pulley set-up and hitting 28 degrees of timing on GIAC's Race file.

[Loe]

The OP is actually running our Stage 1 and has a 551F ECU as well! I think he's itching for more power, which is why he was thinking of adding the CW on.

I'll keep you posted on the status of our tunes, but we're testing as much as possible with both hardware and software at each stage to make sure we're offering the best tuning options, hardware, and advice we can.

I can't wait until you all dig deeper into the dual-pulley realm (as well as a flash at home), i'll be one of your first if I can't find a resolution with my current set-up

[Loe]

quick update...

The CW took a whopping 3 minutes to install once out of the box, holy cow is this thing simple. The downside is that I feel the wires aren't long enough to move the box to a cooler area of the engine bay. I ordered the Pro box w/ a stage 2 file loaded (figured since the OD crank pulley is essentially added a stage 2 one top of a stage 2, I'd need a box with a stage 2 loaded on it to keep the bypass shut).

Initial impressions, this thing increased low-rpm TQ from my standard GIAC stage II file not designed for a dual-pulley. There are some upshift hiccups at heavier throttle settings (like 75%), particularly on the 3-4 upshift which in reading other threads, says that resetting the ECU/TCU will allow it to re-adapt, which I will do sometime this week. The hiccups don't occur at WOT or at more sane accelerator positions.

My 5,250rpm surge in boost is now gone (the GIAC file goes from 1975 hPa to approx. 2200-2300hPa abruptly at that time, which you do not feel on a regular stage II, but you will feel it on a dual-pulley with the extra potential boost it is capable of). It's replaced by a nice smooth power from mid-range to redline, no hiccups in power delivery.

Which tells me either:

1) The bypass is fully closed (or at least consistently closed near 0%), and the car is reaching max boost for a dual-pulley set-up throughout the entire rev range.

or

2) the bypass is consistently opened to prevent that 5250rpm surge in boost (meaning it consistently stays at 1975hPa throughout the entire powerband).

judging by my a$$-dyno, I am venturing into option #1, which I will be verifying with logs. No CEL yet, no ghost codes showing pending overboost/underboost. This may be the solution for those wanting to run a dual-pulley without having to switch brands. Time will tell

On a side note...

I do miss that 5250rpm power spike, the surge was pretty awesome.

[bhvrdr]

Very interesting stuff Loe! You beat me to trying this with the Unitronic. I'm kind of regretting getting rid of the S4. Hopefully I can do this with the A6.


Keep in mind you're going to see reduced "actual boost" in the logging with the CW installed because it is fooling the MAP sensor readings. It is trying to make the ECU see less boost than the ECU program is requesting in order to keep that BPV closed.

You'll want to see that actual boost stays below requested boost and most importantly log the bpv. If it stays closed you know you are making the maximum amount of boost a dual pulley car can make at your given altitude. You'll also want to pay strict attention to timing corrections (log cyl 6 in there). Make sure you are not getting too much knock corrections. Finally, pay close attention to requested and actual AFR. Make sure that afr is keeping up fine with the demands on it.

Let us know. You are going to be setting some records ;)

Mike

[Loe]

Very interesting stuff Loe! You beat me to trying this with the Unitronic. I'm kind of regretting getting rid of the S4. Hopefully I can do this with the A6.


Keep in mind you're going to see reduced "actual boost" in the logging with the CW installed because it is fooling the MAP sensor readings. It is trying to make the ECU see less boost than the ECU program is requesting in order to keep that BPV closed. I'm no longer bleeding in the mid-range, the only issue I have is that I don't know the true actual hPa in that range as prior to the CW it would bleed up to 11.75% in that region with just the GIAC + double pulley.

You'll want to see that actual boost stays below requested boost and most importantly log the bpv. If it stays closed you know you are making the maximum amount of boost a dual pulley car can make at your given altitude. You'll also want to pay strict attention to timing corrections (log cyl 6 in there). Make sure you are not getting too much knock corrections. Finally, pay close attention to requested and actual AFR. Make sure that afr is keeping up fine with the demands on it.

Let us know. You are going to be setting some records ;)

Mike

You are spot on with the actual boost, the CW shows on the logs that the "actual" boost is really 550-600hPa under GIAC's target amount, allowing it to keep the BPV closed where it was opening before adding the CW.

cliff notes on my log (I hit the turbo button, but it did not capture the full 1-4 gear run so i'll have to relog once I figure out whats going on with the ross-tech):

BPV is closed, but partially opens (3-5%) during upshifts, but quickly closes.
Requested hPA is over 2400 with the GIAC, max "actual" hPa is approx. 1880hPa (but I know its more than that since the BPV is closed at 0% from at least 3,500-redline.
Very little to zero ignition correction on cyl 1 (I should add 6 on there like you had mentioned).
Max timing = 27.6 degrees
AFR does not deviate away from my previous E85/93 dual-pulley runs

more testing will be needed as well as full logs, but no codes, no ghost codes, and fuel trims in the mid-range approach 14% (previous without the CW, it was near or below 0%, so its not exactly starving for fuel, but any more boost will pose an issue with fueling).

Records may come, but the humidity is holding up in FL. Possibly a few good runs next Thursday evening test-n-tune and also Saturday morning test-n-tune. Sure hope soon though!