S4 B8.5 stage 2+ revo Spark plugs and Decat

[eklavya]

Hi

posting it again here since no one replied to my questions in the official track day thread.

I am from India, we are preparing the car to run on an F1 circuit 45 mins session at a time. I need advice from this community, how to build a reliable S4 track car. Below are the details of the car.
Car- B8.5 Audi S4 DSG

1. Stage 2+ REVO tune with DSG map & SPS (Currently on performance mode 3 98ron, with 20% added toluene to 97ron fuel to create higher octane mix)
2. Capristo cat back exhaust
3. Capristo main cat removal downpipes or test pipes (still waiting for it to go in, need to drop or pull the engine out to fit these)
4. CTS turbo intake with custom heat shield, we developed here.
5. AMS Alpha Cooling kit (On the way)
6. KW V3 Coilovers
7. D2 Racing 356mm 8 pot front BBK
8. BC Forged monoblock 18x8.5 front et-43 and rear et- 33wheels, with Michelin PSS 245/40/18 Tires.

The ambient temperature in New Delhi, India average out at 95°f most of the months with peaks of 118°f. I will appreciate any suggestions or changes you guys can recommend to better the car.

Earlier I had an APR stage 1 tune on the car, we
calculated the hp and torque by logging engine speed & air mass values from the car, the power curve & air mass were very smooth and linear.

Since I have got the REVO tune there is a constant drop and increase in the air mass hence the hp as well as tq at higher rpm, I am running stock plugs with gap .028

1. should i be running 1 step colder and change it to BKR9EIX?
2. Anyone have done decat or test pipes on their S4 B8 dsg car? do we need to pull the engine out or it can be done the other way, there is no information on installation of these?

[-leman-]

FWIW:

1. I run OE spark plugs on my Stage 2+ Revo 2011 (B8) S5 Sportback and had no misfire / excessive knock retard issues which would be the first signs the spark plugs could be not up to the job IMO. This is my all-season setup, but summers in Moscow are obviously not as hot as in Delhi. I run in 98ron mode, but I heard from the local Revo rep that the Revo Stage 2+ tune for Russian market is slightly less aggressive in terms of timing compared to the European one due to fuel quality issues. I did not run the car with Revo tune on track.
2. I run decat (OE cats replaced with falme dampers in the otherwise stock exhaust system). Mine was done without the engine fully pulled out of the car, so yes it can be done. I have no details though on how exactly it was arranged and as far as I know the Audi service manual assumes that the engine would be pulled, so its a kind of workaround approach my tech used.

From what I understand decat does not benefit much on the current Revo tunes (i.e. the difference between Stage 1+ and 2+ in Revo terms is pretty much insignificant). So I would actually think twice before going decat.

[eklavya]

Thanks for reply, this is exactly the kind of information I was looking for.

As far the decat goes, it would be great if you could put me in touch with some techs from Russia, as In India we don't have many great tuners, I have a set of capristo decat pipes just sitting, which costed me a lot and I have stage 2+ tune as well, so I would rather get it done, and maybe later I can get it flashed by whoever supports the decat better.

[bhvrdr]

From you list, I would do the following:

1. Change the tune to APR or GIAC (for a track car I would prefer a tune that doesnt desensitize knock sensors. I want factory knock correction in place).
2. Run a 93 octane map (98ron) on higher than 93 octane quality fuel. Toluene is not the best octane enhancer. I'd also stay away from Torco and Lucus if using it all the time (theyre great but contain MMT which will cause deposits) and just mix in a race fuel such as a fuel from VP racing. You should be able to have it shipped.
3. I'd ditch the idea of the d2 racing 356mm brakes. In fact i'd ditch anything d2 racing on your car. I'd get a proper 380mm brake kit. Go with Brembo, AP Racing, Stoptech, or even a Porsche swap.
4. KW V3 are still street coilovers. Is this going to be a track car or a street car that goes to the track sometimes? If its a track car, id go with a 2 or 3 way race coilover. KW makes them if you are stuck on them. If its a street car that tracks occasionally, a good street/track kit may be the PSS10 as you can work with Steve at BS USA for custom valving and possibly even spring swaps.

If its a track car obviously the big thing is weight reduction. Nothing to tell you there. Start taking things off and weighing them while you go. If its going to be a daily driver though i'd relax on the weight reduction. Once you do LW wheels, battery, exhaust, brakes you start sacrificing comfort for a few pounds that may not be worth it to you.

Mike

[-leman-]

Thanks for reply, this is exactly the kind of information I was looking for.

As far the decat goes, it would be great if you could put me in touch with some techs from Russia, as In India we don't have many great tuners, I have a set of capristo decat pipes just sitting, which costed me a lot and I have stage 2+ tune as well, so I would rather get it done, and maybe later I can get it flashed by whoever supports the decat better.

http://www.audi-club.ru/index.php?members/fanat.79469/

Thats the guy who worked on my car, you could PM him if you wish. I would assume that approaching US-based tuners who did the headers / tespipes swap (e.g. JHM) on b8 platform could be easier due to no language barrier :)

[-leman-]

If its a track car obviously the big thing is weight reduction. Nothing to tell you there. Start taking things off and weighing them while you go. If its going to be a daily driver though i'd relax on the weight reduction. Once you do LW wheels, battery, exhaust, brakes you start sacrificing comfort for a few pounds that may not be worth it to you.

Westwest888 has actually a nice thread on the other forum where he did exactly that (documented weight savings on the most common replacement parts for b8 platform).

[eklavya]

From you list, I would do the following:

1. Change the tune to APR or GIAC (for a track car I would prefer a tune that doesnt desensitize knock sensors. I want factory knock correction in place).
2. Run a 93 octane map (98ron) on higher than 93 octane quality fuel. Toluene is not the best octane enhancer. I'd also stay away from Torco and Lucus if using it all the time (theyre great but contain MMT which will cause deposits) and just mix in a race fuel such as a fuel from VP racing. You should be able to have it shipped.
3. I'd ditch the idea of the d2 racing 356mm brakes. In fact i'd ditch anything d2 racing on your car. I'd get a proper 380mm brake kit. Go with Brembo, AP Racing, Stoptech, or even a Porsche swap.
4. KW V3 are still street coilovers. Is this going to be a track car or a street car that goes to the track sometimes? If its a track car, id go with a 2 or 3 way race coilover. KW makes them if you are stuck on them. If its a street car that tracks occasionally, a good street/track kit may be the PSS10 as you can work with Steve at BS USA for custom valving and possibly even spring swaps.

If its a track car obviously the big thing is weight reduction. Nothing to tell you there. Start taking things off and weighing them while you go. If its going to be a daily driver though i'd relax on the weight reduction. Once you do LW wheels, battery, exhaust, brakes you start sacrificing comfort for a few pounds that may not be worth it to you.

Mike

Thanks Mike, this will primarily be a street car, maybe 6-8 track days in a year for 45 mins session each.

Sent from my ONE A2003 using Tapatalk

[eklavya]

Thanks Mike, this will primarily be a street car, maybe 6-8 track days in a year for 45 mins session each.

Sent from my ONE A2003 using Tapatalk

For weight saving I am getting mono block forged rims from be forged, it supposed to be 7. 8kg/rim. When I hit the track I lose the spare wheel, Jack etc and also the rear seats.

Sent from my ONE A2003 using Tapatalk

[eklavya]

http://www.audi-club.ru/index.php?members/fanat.79469/

Thats the guy who worked on my car, you could PM him if you wish. I would assume that approaching US-based tuners who did the headers / tespipes swap (e.g. JHM) on b8 platform could be easier due to no language barrier :)

I contacted jhm, no reply yet.

Sent from my ONE A2003 using Tapatalk

[jimrobbington]

I contacted jhm, no reply yet.

Sent from my ONE A2003 using Tapatalk

Did you pm jake@jhm? That's probably the best way to get a response other than calling.

[eklavya]

I just sent the mail to the sales that is the only email address available on the website

Sent from my ONE A2003 using Tapatalk

[Thurston]

Op has A capristo exhaust . . . nice . . haven't seen or heard one of those in a long time but they use to sound tremendous on the first generation porsche cayman s.

[eklavya]

Will forward it to Jake

Sent from my ONE A2003 using Tapatalk

[RLB6]

From you list, I would do the following:

1. Change the tune to APR or GIAC (for a track car I would prefer a tune that doesnt desensitize knock sensors. I want factory knock correction in place).

Mike

REVO tunes lower the sensitivity on the knock sensors? Any documented proof? I have a REVO tune and yeah, that could spell bad new and would want to move onto another tune.

[eklavya]

REVO tunes lower the sensitivity on the knock sensors? Any documented proof? I have a REVO tune and yeah, that could spell bad new and would want to move onto another tune.

Same I am already looking for other options

Sent from my ONE A2003 using Tapatalk

[cobrario]

REVO tunes lower the sensitivity on the knock sensors? Any documented proof? I have a REVO tune and yeah, that could spell bad new and would want to move onto another tune.

That was years ago on i guess what could be called a "first gen" tune and there were a few instances of engine issues because of it. I know of no known engine failures or other issues with Revo since although many were left with a very bad taste and continue to be cautious of Revo on the B8/8.5.

post # 69 discusses Revo's tune strategy but many are still skeptical: http://www.audizine.com/forum/showth...2012-APR/page2

I don't know that "desensitizing" is the most correct wording, Jran has more logs of recent Revo cars that do show higher timing requests than either APR or GIAC but instead it bleeds boost at higher RPM to offset.

I've personally had my Revo 1+ for 18+ months and have had no issues- it does appear however you won't break any records with Revo, so if your ok with that then I'd think you're fine where you are.

[sigaddict]

Running those conditions and those mods, you should be running a custom tune period. A canned tune isn't going to cut it. I know EPL can help there, but there are other tuners who probably can as well

[RLB6]

That was years ago on i guess what could be called a "first gen" tune and there were a few instances of engine issues because of it. I know of no known engine failures or other issues with Revo since although many were left with a very bad taste and continue to be cautious of Revo on the B8/8.5.

post # 69 discusses Revo's tune strategy but many are still skeptical: http://www.audizine.com/forum/showth...2012-APR/page2

I don't know that "desensitizing" is the most correct wording, Jran has more logs of recent Revo cars that do show higher timing requests than either APR or GIAC but instead it bleeds boost at higher RPM to offset.

I've personally had my Revo 1+ for 18+ months and have had no issues- it does appear however you won't break any records with Revo, so if your ok with that then I'd think you're fine where you are.

Just read the post. Definitely no "desnsitizing". They enrich fuel earlier to achieve more advanced timing and then offset the boost. Sounds like this would would adapt to a dual pulley scenario more readily. Obviously a tune designed for a dual pulley setup would be more optimal.

[bhvrdr]

Just read the post. Definitely no "desnsitizing". They enrich fuel earlier to achieve more advanced timing and then offset the boost. Sounds like this would would adapt to a dual pulley scenario more readily. Obviously a tune designed for a dual pulley setup would be more optimal.

Read it again :) The logs and the post confirms that they desensitize them. Basically they are able to run more timing than the other tuners on the same octane without the knock correction because they do change the response to knock sensors. In their post, if you read around the fluff, they state...

"...The stock strategy is EXTREMELY conservative with how it responds to knock. When it picks up a little bit, it will pull out MUCH more timing than is necessary, creating higher EGTs and a sloppy curve. We modify the factory strategy in a way that keeps the factory safety routines in place, but changes the response loop so it will pull less timing and add it back in quicker."


That is desensitizing the factory knock control and although they seem to get away with it ok, its just not something I would do on a track car. They tune for timing and bleed boost. Thats not as safe IMO as the other tuners that allow both OEM knock control and the opening of the bypass valve (bleeding boost) when the IKC calls for it. Not bashing on them its just my opinion and it is a fact that they do desensitize the knock control. APR enriches the fuel earlier than all the others I have seen. They enrich basically off of idol at WOT...and they enrich a lot. (not saying that is bad). GIAC enriches more and earlier than OEM but it is still a progressive fuel curve...I believe Revo is similar to this.

Mike

[-leman-]

Just read the post. Definitely no "desnsitizing". They enrich fuel earlier to achieve more advanced timing and then offset the boost. Sounds like this would would adapt to a dual pulley scenario more readily. Obviously a tune designed for a dual pulley setup would be more optimal.

I would agree that it's yet to be proven that Revo decreases the knock sensors sensitivity and such, I also personally never saw the extreme ignition timing which was mentioned (could be due to my Russia-specific Revo tune though).

What I may say for sure is that the dual-pulley config is not likely to work well as the requested boost pressure is met on my Revo tune in the higher revs with a single pulley setup already. Dual pulley on regular Revo Stage 1+/2+ would be probably a low end torque monster (as in the lower revs the requested boost is high) but could be even worse in the top end.

[-leman-]

Read it again :) The logs and the post confirms that they desensitize them. Basically they are able to run more timing than the other tuners on the same octane without the knock correction because they do change the response to knock sensors. In their post, if you read around the fluff, they state...

"...The stock strategy is EXTREMELY conservative with how it responds to knock. When it picks up a little bit, it will pull out MUCH more timing than is necessary, creating higher EGTs and a sloppy curve. We modify the factory strategy in a way that keeps the factory safety routines in place, but changes the response loop so it will pull less timing and add it back in quicker."


That is desensitizing the factory knock control and although they seem to get away with it ok, its just not something I would do on a track car. They tune for timing and bleed boost. Thats not as safe IMO as the other tuners that allow both OEM knock control and the opening of the bypass valve (bleeding boost) when the IKC calls for it. Not bashing on them its just my opinion and it is a fact that they do desensitize the knock control. APR enriches the fuel earlier than all the others I have seen. They enrich basically off of idol at WOT...and they enrich a lot. (not saying that is bad). GIAC enriches more and earlier than OEM but it is still a progressive fuel curve...I believe Revo is similar to this.

Mike

I would not agree with that. Desensitize = allow the car to run with a slight knock without pulling timing (i.e. the knock is there but the timing is not pulled unless the knock noize exceeds the certain level). What Revo rep said was that their tune will pull the timing in all cases when the knock is seen but will do it slower (in lower increments) than OE strategy and will return faster to baseline timing map once the knowck is not present anymore.

[bhvrdr]

What Revo rep said was that their tune will pull the timing in all cases when the knock is seen but will do it slower (in lower increments) than OE strategy and will return faster to baseline timing map once the knowck is not present anymore.

When you pull timing in lower increments and slower and then add it back in slower than the OEM factory routine that IS reducing the factory knock control strategy in how it responds to knock. That is literally the definition of it.

You can sugar coat it but thats what it is. They literally said that (in their opinion) the stock routine pulls out too much timing and they modify the routine to not only pull out less timing [in response to knock obviously] but to then add back in the timing sooner than the factory routine would. That is, by definition, desensitizing the factory knock control.

I'm not arguing that its the end of the world and definitely not saying that no one should buy Revo or that Revo will blow your engine but there is no question this is what they do and its not what I would do on a track car. The logs dont lie and they dont deny it. They confirm it.

PS: btw, your Russia tune would and should be FAR different than US and even other euro tunes. The tuners for russian tunes have to be extremely conservative on russian tunes in particular due to the very inconsistent (and usually poor quality) fuel. please no offense intended at all.

Mike

[RLB6]

desensitizing the factory knock control.

Yes. They are refactoring/altering the "action" of the factory knock controls when knock is detected - not desensitizing the the sensors themselves. This is how I read it. Two completely different things here. Desensitizing the knock sensors would mean to reduce their ability to detect knock, therefore, reducing the onset of timing being pulled as it was originally programmed to do. I guess we can agree to disagree

[bhvrdr]

Yes. They are refactoring/altering the "action" of the factory knock controls when knock is detected - not desensitizing the the sensors themselves. This is how I read it. Two completely different things here. Desensitizing the knock sensors would mean to reduce their ability to detect knock, therefore, reducing the onset of timing being pulled as it was originally programmed to do. I guess we can agree to disagree

They dont actually say how they decide to make the car pull out less timing and add back in less timing. How they accomplish this is arbitrary as any way you do it still allows more timing to be run in response to knock but when you look at logs it is pretty clear that however they do it the Knock Correction channels that would show how many degrees of timing being pulled are less on the Revo cars that are running the same octane and their ignition timing values are more than the other tunes on the same octane.


Now, I agree that the knock voltage values [knock sensors themselves] may not be directly manipulated but, thats arbitrary. None of us look at knock voltages anyways because the VCDS is not fast enough for them to make any useful sense. We look at knock corrections. Either way, it doesnt really matter. This is semantics. Either way the car is not going to protect itself against knock in the same manner as the factory knock control strategy. In that sense I guess it is more appropriate to say "Revo desensitizes the OEM knock control [knock safeties]" as opposed to "Revo densitizes the OEM knock sensors." but again, thats not really relevant IMO.

The Revo car purposefully allows for more knock than the non Revo car and purposefully runs lower load targets for boost so it is programmed to not make 100% boost and instead runs higher timing than other cars. This is part of their tuning strategy. Again, not bashing on it but it is what it is. You either agree with the strategy and buy their stuff or prefer a different strategy and buy a competitors stuff.


BTW, I agree with "leman" that I would absolutely not run a dual pulley and do something like stack a CW on a Revo car to close the BPV and get full boost because they already are running more timing that the stock knock strategy would allow. This would be a very bad idea IMO.

Mike

[RLB6]

BTW, I agree with "leman" that I would absolutely not run a dual pulley and do something like stack a CW on a Revo car to close the BPV and get full boost because they already are running more timing that the stock knock strategy would allow. This would be a very bad idea IMO.

Mike

Hmmmm, I would believe if REVO's strategy is to bleed boost vs pull timing, why would a dual pulley not be ideal? Would mean the boost will bleed sooner? Maybe not soon enough? Who knows. On the flip side, the more aggressive timing and alter altered action to not remove as much timing may not be enough for the onset of more boost earlier in the rev range This may prove to be more riskier route.

[bhvrdr]

Hmmmm, I would believe if REVO's strategy is to bleed boost vs pull timing, why would a dual pulley not be ideal? Would mean the boost will bleed sooner? Maybe not soon enough? Who knows. On the flip side, the more aggressive timing and alter altered action to not remove as much timing may not be enough for the onset of more boost earlier in the rev range This may prove to be more riskier route.

It would bleed the same amount up top (all else being equal such as IATs) so you wouldnt see any gains there but down low you'd likely see some additional boost from the dual pulley. I wouldnt want to run more boost when they are purposefully not programming for full boost already. I was more speaking to stacking a CW on a dual pulley Revo tune. This would likely produce full allowable [allowable by the pulley] boost both down low and up top and be a bad idea IMO.

Mike

[sigaddict]

Again, it doesn't really matter what these canned tunes do and don't do, he should be running a custom tune for the mods he is running and what he is trying to accomplish.

[-leman-]

When you pull timing in lower increments and slower and then add it back in slower than the OEM factory routine that IS reducing the factory knock control strategy in how it responds to knock. That is literally the definition of it.

You can sugar coat it but thats what it is. They literally said that (in their opinion) the stock routine pulls out too much timing and they modify the routine to not only pull out less timing [in response to knock obviously] but to then add back in the timing sooner than the factory routine would. That is, by definition, desensitizing the factory knock control.

I'm not arguing that its the end of the world and definitely not saying that no one should buy Revo or that Revo will blow your engine but there is no question this is what they do and its not what I would do on a track car. The logs dont lie and they dont deny it. They confirm it.

PS: btw, your Russia tune would and should be FAR different than US and even other euro tunes. The tuners for russian tunes have to be extremely conservative on russian tunes in particular due to the very inconsistent (and usually poor quality) fuel. please no offense intended at all.

Mike

Pls. don't take it as a blind Revo defense on my side. I'm just saying that the Revo rep statement is not a sweetened confirmation that they decrese knock sensor sensitivity (actually, any adequate tuner would deny they do it a road cars even if they actually do :)). I think he basically said that when the knock is detected during in the specific cylinder (i.e. the signal of the knock sensor in a specific frequency exceeds the progremmed threshold during this cylinder ignition event) the OE knock management algorithm pulls timing fast (say 1 degree per crank revolution) until the knock is not present anymore and then reverts to base timing map slow (say 1 degree per 3 crank revolutions) while Revo pulls timing slower and reverts faster. Note that even slower knock management implies that the timing will be pulled up to a point where no knock is present. Reducing the knock sensor sensitivity is a big no-no in my mind mainly because it implies that you increase the programmed knock sensor threshold for the knock management (whether fast or slow) to kick in, and that means that you may basically run the engine with knock for whatever long in certain scenarios (opposed to only short "transfer periods" with adequate knock management system).

The whole concept of Revo knock managemnet approach has been always an "educated guess". I mean the Revo logs show high base ignition map, no ignition pull and higher bypass values. Thats it. That "proves" nothing. You may treat it as the whole new knock managemnt concept where upon the knock detected the boost is bled but no ignition pull. You may treat it as lower target boost which allows higher timing (which is supported with requested boost being met in the higher revs my logs, for example). It's up to personal preference, and noone will know for sure before he will dig into the Revo map file with a proper understanding of SIMOS map structure.

PS. The shitty fuel in Russia is true for sure, it's also more expensive now compared to US (total joke IMO). Still much cheaper than in Europe though :)

[-leman-]

In that sense I guess it is more appropriate to say "Revo desensitizes the OEM knock control [knock safeties]" as opposed to "Revo densitizes the OEM knock sensors." but again, thats not really relevant IMO.

The Revo car purposefully allows for more knock than the non Revo car and purposefully runs lower load targets for boost so it is programmed to not make 100% boost and instead runs higher timing than other cars.

The thread is suddenly active and I'm not keeping up. The first statement is exactly what I was meaning with my earlier posts.

I would not agree that its irrelevant though exactly because this explanation assumes that Revo does no allow "more knock". Similar to stock knock managemnet Revo will pull timing until there is no knock eventually.

Also, (knowing you have quite an experience in Civic mapping :)) I think you would agree that generally lower boost allows for more timing and this is perfectly normal (i.e. not necessarily a sign of "agressive tuning strategy").

PS. looking at the dyno charts in jran76 thread linked above I would rather be worried about Revo AFR than ingnition / knock managemnet. That does seem more agressive / lean in the midrange followed with some weird instability in higher revs :)

[eklavya]

If I can be of any help, I am willing to log whatever parameters with Vcds you guys can recommend,

Like I said before, we have 97ron fuel here, but I have access to Toluene, Xylene, ethanol, methanol.

Although my personal experience is with Toluene and have used it and seen fair amount of gains.

Sent from my ONE A2003 using Tapatalk

[bhvrdr]

The thread is suddenly active and I'm not keeping up. The first statement is exactly what I was meaning with my earlier posts.

I would not agree that its irrelevant though exactly because this explanation assumes that Revo does no allow "more knock". Similar to stock knock managemnet Revo will pull timing until there is no knock eventually.

Also, (knowing you have quite an experience in Civic mapping :)) I think you would agree that generally lower boost allows for more timing and this is perfectly normal (i.e. not necessarily a sign of "agressive tuning strategy").

PS. looking at the dyno charts in jran76 thread linked above I would rather be worried about Revo AFR than ingnition / knock managemnet. That does seem more agressive / lean in the midrange followed with some weird instability in higher revs :)

Good conversation. I definitely dont take it as you blindly being defensive and also please dont take my thoughts as bashing on Revo either. I do think they have had some awesome products. In the B6 A4 platform they had some really great stuff available that no one else really touched such as the SPS devices (you could adjust fuel mixture, timing, and boost) and the ability to buy a big turbo tune without having to buy a hardware package from them.


The Revo car on the dyno did seem to be possibly breaking up a bit but I think their normal afr looks somewhat similar to the GIAC curve.


Yes, I definitely agree that Revo has chosen to make power with timing while the others are focusing more on making power with boost and retaining the OEM knock safeties to pull timing. It is a preference thing but if I were tracking the car seriously i'd prefer the boost method while retaining aggressive knock control.


Eklavya,

You can run logs of:

rpm
throttle position
afr
knock on cyl 5 (actually it will be cyl 6 because they start labels at cyl 0)
ignition timing
request boost
actual boost
bypass


Thatll give just a general sample of how the car is doing but keep in mind when you log the knock control channels it is not going to be representative of how the knock would look on an OEM or other tuner car. So you cant assume no knock is there on your car because you wont see it logging the Revo car.


Mike

[eklavya]

I think we have logged the car with most of the above parameters with Apr stage 1 and stock tune. Let me go through the logs.

Sent from my ONE A2003 using Tapatalk

[-leman-]

Well, let's just say that while I'm still of the opinion that the Revo "fighting knock with boost rather than ignition" thing was never finally proven by the logs (at least the ones I saw) it definitely remains a viable version and has its grounds.

Coming back ontopic :) There is a great thread by jran76 on VCDS logging (http://www.audizine.com/forum/showth...rmance-Logging) which is definitely worth looking at. This thread as well as further clarifications by Mike (bhvrdr), jran76 and others helped me immensely in understanding the b8 platform.

I would also check out westwest posts on AR forum as he runs Revo tune as well and tracks his car a lot.

[eklavya]

will check it out, I tried finding fanat79469 but like you said language barrier

[-leman-]

Yeah I initially meant more language barrier on his side, I just now realize though that my link is also in Russian

I don't have better contact info for you unfortunately as this is a smaller local shop focusing on S/RS Audis (no working website I know of etc.). I normally stay in touch with them via the phone but I doubt that international calls are a viable option to discuss the testpipes install specifics :)

[eklavya]

no worries will try and figure this out at my end, do you think revo can develop new tune to benefit from exhaust and decat, if I provide them with enough logging data, if not I guess I would eventually shift to some other tuner.

After spending so much money only to realize revo doesn't give any added benefit for decat.

[-leman-]

Not sure if Revo works on custom tunes. I personally had no luck in this respect - when my TCU tune did not work well my local Revo rep was rather willing to return the money than to try and arrange any tune modifications via Revo headquarters based on my logs etc. But then I figured I had no major benefit from the TCU tune over OE B8 TCU file, so I was not really insisting.

Actually, I think there is no specific issue with Revo decat tune. It appears that headers and decats were found to be not really beneficial on the B8 / B8.5 platform irrespective of the tune. At least at Stage 1/2 levels - it could be that on dual pulley setups there would be more effect from decat. APR also claimed that the headers / high flow cats do contribute on their Stage 3 and still unknown "Stage X" supersecret setup.

[eklavya]

Just installed my decat test pipes , we had to lower the subframe thanks to Jhm Motorsports for helping out.

There in no check engine light but after installation the following error is showing in the Vcds :

6334 - Oxygen (Lambda) Sensor Heating; B1 S2

*********P1118 00 [039] - Open Circuit

*********Not Confirmed - Tested Since Memory Clear

We have disconnected and reconnected both the sensors, it is still there, any insight? Is it safe to drive with this error?



Sent from my ONE A2003 using Tapatalk

[-leman-]

Try clearing the codes and check again. Could be left from disconnecting the sensors.

If the code pops up again inspect the wiring harness to lambda sensors for damages and check if all the connectors are fully plugged.

For decat you should have what Revo calls "Stage 2+" map, it inter alia disables second lambda check. Otherwise you have high chance of check engine light occasionally due to catalyst efficiency issue detected (it is NOT the code you are experiencing now).

BTW do you feel any difference in performance after test pipes install?

[eklavya]

Try clearing the codes and check again. Could be left from disconnecting the sensors.

If the code pops up again inspect the wiring harness to lambda sensors for damages and check if all the connectors are fully plugged.

For decat you should have what Revo calls "Stage 2+" map, it inter alia disables second lambda check. Otherwise you have high chance of check engine light occasionally due to catalyst efficiency issue detected (it is NOT the code you are experiencing now).

BTW do you feel any difference in performance after test pipes install?

Cel has just showed up randomly, when I scanned, it was the same error but with the cel, there was no decrease in performance after the cel, whenever I try to delete it via Vcds, the car hesitates and then gets normal.

Performance wise I have felt the difference, logging it tonight will post the results, yes this car has a revo stage 2+.

Sent from my ONE A2003 using Tapatalk