Anyone gone dual pulley on REVO tune?

[RLB6]

Its known that their method for tune is cause for concern (altered timing knock strategy) and may not be ideal to do a dual pulley setup. This doesn't mean no one has made an attempt. Has anyone successfully done this?

[xpoweruk]

a chap in the dual pulley thread has

[RLB6]

There are a couple of dual pulley threads. Which one please?

[mrmomo313]

There are a couple of dual pulley threads. Which one please?

The "official" one. I believe it is pcardenas who is running it

[jran76]

The current Revo tune by itself has a very low requested (specified) pressure value in most cases. They bypass in really good conditions with just the SC pulley. With a dual pulley, you'd just bypass most or all of the additional boost, and you'd create a lot more heat. You'd have to run something like the CW on top of it, or wait to see if Revo does a dual pulley tune (mixed feedback on that one).

[RLB6]

But the midrange power and torque would be nice which is exactly what I'm looking to improve.

[jran76]

But the midrange power and torque would be nice which is exactly what I'm looking to improve.

You'd bleed most the the midrange off with the Revo tune. That's the point. There is little to no headroom for extra boost with the Revo tune throughout the entire rev range.

[RLB6]

Is this documented or speculation because I haven't seen any data to back this claim.

[jran76]

Is this documented or speculation because I haven't seen any data to back this claim.

It's documented in the 8-10 Revo logs I've seen. Search on here for Revo logs, and take a look. Revo is much more conservative in their boost strategy, so they leave little headroom for more boost. If you have a Revo tune, log your car to see what kind of Delta you have between specified and actual boost.

http://www.audizine.com/forum/showth...evo+log+bypass
http://www.audizine.com/forum/showth...evo+log+bypass

[-leman-]

Actually, based on my logs there may be a lot of extra boost had on Revo in the low end. If you look on the logs jran76 referred you'll see that theres still 0.2-0.3 bar gap between actual and specified intake maniforld pressure up until 3500 revs, then this gap gradually reduces to virtually nil at 6000+ revs.

It is however not only the requested intake manifold pressure that governs the boost regulation, it looks like there are some more advanced algorithms at play, so having your "Specified boost pressure" parameter at 1,2 bar @ 3500 on single pulley setup does not mean that you would actually get this boost when your blower would be able to deliver this with dual-pulley setup. What we saw in pcardenas logs was that his actual boost on the higher revs was actually lower than what I see on my regular single-pulley Revo setup (I'm still a bit puzzled since everyone except me in that thread was raving re. how much boost he managed to get, I'm still secretly wondering if I maybe messed up something when checking out his logs ).

Pcardens also mentioned that his car felt strong after dual pulley upgrade which indicates low-end torque increase rather than anything else.

To summarise: with Revo single-pulley tune you'll most likely get low end torque but would easily lose up top, making the car feel stronger (esp. in city traffic) but questionably faster overall.

[RLB6]

Actually, based on my logs there may be a lot of extra boost had on Revo in the low end. If you look on the logs jran76 referred you'll see that theres still 0.2-0.3 bar gap between actual and specified intake maniforld pressure up until 3500 revs, then this gap gradually reduces to virtually nil at 6000+ revs.

Yes. This is what I've also noticed in those logs. There is room to make more power down low and does taper off up high. Again, I'm looking for low to mid power improvements. Top end, not so much. Now, if I want something to maximize power throughout the range, then yes, I'd have to move to a tune that is dedicated to taking advantage of a dual pulley setup.

[-leman-]

The point is that there is a risk of losing up top, rather then just not getting much.

Check out pcardenas logs here, he's actually the only one I saw posting logs from dual-pulley Revo setup.

http://www.audizine.com/forum/showth...1#post11855170

[xpoweruk]

The point is that there is a risk of losing up top, rather then just not getting much.

Check out pcardenas logs here, he's actually the only one I saw posting logs from dual-pulley Revo setup.

http://www.audizine.com/forum/showth...1#post11855170

Looking at that,he's making upto 20PSI corrected.Stilla good 4-5PSI over the standard revo usually does

[bhvrdr]

Looking at that,he's making upto 20PSI corrected.Stilla good 4-5PSI over the standard revo usually does

His boost calculations were way off. As you can see from his post he only subtracted 77 hpa for his ambient pressure. It should have been 10 times that at 770hpa. Just treat his hpa like milli bar and subtract his 800. You get ~800 mbar left or about 11.5psi boost he was making according to his logs.


There's a second thing to keep in mind about his logs. He is at around 9000 feet elevation yet his bypass valve is still opening significantly. If you are at sea level or significantly less than 9000 feet elevation (as 99% of us are in the US) you are going to see even less boost than he is seeing since the vehicle is going to see more pressure in our cars that aren't at elevation like that. That means less boost than his 11psi or so that he is seeing most likely.


I agree with what Jran and leman posted. You may get a bit way down low but the car won't be faster. Once you go full throttle you won't see that low in the Rev band.

Mike

[jran76]

His boost calculations were way off. As you can see from his post he only subtracted 77 hpa for his ambient pressure. It should have been 10 times that at 770hpa. Just treat his hpa like milli bar and subtract his 800. You get ~800 mbar left or about 11.5psi boost he was making according to his logs.


There's a second thing to keep in mind about his logs. He is at around 9000 feet elevation yet his bypass valve is still opening significantly. If you are at sea level or significantly less than 9000 feet elevation (as 99% of us are in the US) you are going to see even less boost than he is seeing since the vehicle is going to see more pressure in our cars that aren't at elevation like that. That means less boost than his 11psi or so that he is seeing most likely.


I agree with what Jran and leman posted. You may get a bit way down low but the car won't be faster. Once you go full throttle you won't see that low in the Rev band.

Mike

^^ Agreed. His calculations are waaaaay off. And it's hard to read a lot into logs taken at 9000 ft. when you're talking primarily about boost.... They also show where you'll run into issues. For the ambient temps, his IAT's climb too much to make it worth while. You can see a much higher jump than you'd see on a single pulley car, and boost get dialed back accordingly.

--------------------------

I've also logged 3-4 Revo cars that had little room for extra boost in good conditions. i.e. they were bypassing a little from 4000 rpm on up. You'd pick up some under that obviously, but not anywhere close to what the pulley is capable of, and I'm not sure if it'd be enough to negate the extra heat created because....

You also need to understand how Revo tunes work, and consider that as you look at the logs. The specified boost you see in the single pulley logs will drop with the extra heat created by the dual pulley. That's basically the way Revo tunes these engines. They request more timing with less knock sensitivity, but dial back the specified pressure more than any other tuner as IAT's increase. Faster spinning SC=more heat=more bypass. Even more so with the off-the-shelf Revo tune.

If you're going go to the trouble of adding the pulley, why not go with something that will let you take advantage of it?

[jran76]

I don't have a dog in this fight, but I've logged a lot of Revo cars. Just trying to save you the trouble.... The Revo tune is easily the least conducive to a dual pulley for the reasons I mention above.

[bhvrdr]

Exactly. I don't have a dog in the fight either. Revo was arguably one of the best tunes for the B6 A4. For the B8 S4 if I wanted to go dual pulley and was reluctant to spend money for a new tune when I had already dropped it for another tune...Id probably just get the CTS pulley and call EPL during a sale. They have done good pricing and, who knows, may even cut you a break for switching tunes. CHeck with APR and GIAC too as they used to run deals for switching tunes. They'd give you a bit of a credit as long as you could prove you had a competitor tune.

Mike

[RLB6]

All very good points. I've reached out to pcardenas to see if he'sdone any additional logging or has strapped it to a dyno. While the logic seems far to assume how the REVO tune would react, my least expensive route would be to install an overdrive crank pulley and give it go. If the results are less than satisfying, then yeah, I'd look to EPL or 034 for a dual pulley tune. Also, who's to say what APR has up its sleeve for this platform.

[jran76]

All very good points. I've reached out to pcardenas to see if he'sdone any additional logging or has strapped it to a dyno. While the logic seems far to assume how the REVO tune would react, my least expensive route would be to install an overdrive crank pulley and give it go. If the results are less than satisfying, then yeah, I'd look to EPL or 034 for a dual pulley tune. Also, who's to say what APR has up its sleeve for this platform.

As long as you have the ability to log your car after the change, you'll know exactly how it's working. It's definitely not going to hurt anything to try the Revo tune first. You'll have plenty of options if you want to try something different. Everything from adding the CW on top of Revo, to EPL, GIAC, maybe 034 or APR or JHM down the road. There was even some talk that Revo may do something (they also said no way at one point, so....). The dual pulley is obviously going to be a popular choice, so I'd expect to see something from most the major tuners at some point.

[xpoweruk]

His boost calculations were way off. As you can see from his post he only subtracted 77 hpa for his ambient pressure. It should have been 10 times that at 770hpa. Just treat his hpa like milli bar and subtract his 800. You get ~800 mbar left or about 11.5psi boost he was making according to his logs.


There's a second thing to keep in mind about his logs. He is at around 9000 feet elevation yet his bypass valve is still opening significantly. If you are at sea level or significantly less than 9000 feet elevation (as 99% of us are in the US) you are going to see even less boost than he is seeing since the vehicle is going to see more pressure in our cars that aren't at elevation like that. That means less boost than his 11psi or so that he is seeing most likely.


I agree with what Jran and leman posted. You may get a bit way down low but the car won't be faster. Once you go full throttle you won't see that low in the Rev band.

Mike

Ahhthat makes more sense.
I didn't notice the calculation he used was wrong.
Thankfully I have a tuner lined up for when I go dual :)

[abamfo]

Thought I'd give you guys my thoughts as I have the Revo tune on my car and I plan on installing the 183mm overlay on the 163mm Fluidampr crank I have on, once I've fixed a random misfire issue and bought a CPS. I'm no mechanical expert by any means but I have been gathering information and logging the Revo file for a few months.

Couple of findings from my logs so far:

1. Ignition timing for the 93 tune is around 20/21* at 7k RPM in third (IATs below 55 degrees) with the bypass valve 100% closed and sometimes 1.25* of timing pulled... so high but not that high
2. There is little to no headroom in the tune with actual vs specified boost (as jran mentioned), except lower down in the rev range... I run the CTS pulley which is ~1% smaller than the Revo pulley and so I cant get the bypass valve closed during 3rd gear pulls at all... Using the CW unit on 3-1, I can fix this issue and the mid-range power is up also
3. My boost is far higher than what was seen in pcardenas log, around 14-15 PSI at max RPM
4. As a result of no boost headroom there is often significant boost bleed, which is how Revo have tuned according to their comments from a few years ago... I believe there is also higher than normal ignition timing in the lower range
5. During my logging there is timing pulled throughout the range (up to around 5* maximum), so I'm not sure if comments around Revo "removing the knock safeties" is the exact process for how their tune works

From conversations with other AZ members and my research, I think the timing curve which Revo runs is actually far more similar to APR/GIAC than people think. My guess is that things were changed from what they first came out with.

I honestly do think that the Revo tune will work fine with the dual pulley setup, except for the fact that there is no headroom for the additional boost at higher RPMs... so the CW unit is an absolute necessity for anyone wanting to run the dual pulley setup for maximum performance with Revo

I did notice that pcardenas was using the 100 file, I wouldn't suggest running the 100 file and a CW without anything less than race fuel and VCDS to check what is going on... The Revo North American head quoted one of the engineers (who has since left the company) a while back who worked on the development of the 3.0 TFSI files and said that you can run the 100 file on 93 octane and it will pull enough timing to run fine, I have tested this and it does indeed hold up (up to 8/9* of timing pulled) but I wouldn't feel comfortable doing this with the CW unit

[xpoweruk]

I have a log of the revo 1+ 100RON (95AKI)file whilst using 3.5 litres of pure ethanol in a full tank of 99ron fuel
The ignition advance is quite a bit more than 20/21*.No boost values on the log as I was looking at knock

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...it?usp=sharing

Anything much over 7,000RPM & boost is pretty much dumped completely though

Boost can be seen in the below log when trying 1 liter of etanol in a full tank of 99
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...it?usp=sharing

it shows just how much boost revo 1+ dumps

[RLB6]

Thought I'd give you guys my thoughts as I have the Revo tune on my car and I plan on installing the 183mm overlay on the 163mm Fluidampr crank I have on, once I've fixed a random misfire issue and bought a CPS. I'm no mechanical expert by any means but I have been gathering information and logging the Revo file for a few months.

Couple of findings from my logs so far:

1. Ignition timing for the 93 tune is around 20/21* at 7k RPM in third (IATs below 55 degrees) with the bypass valve 100% closed and sometimes 1.25* of timing pulled... so high but not that high
2. There is little to no headroom in the tune with actual vs specified boost (as jran mentioned), except lower down in the rev range... I run the CTS pulley which is ~1% smaller than the Revo pulley and so I cant get the bypass valve closed during 3rd gear pulls at all... Using the CW unit on 3-1, I can fix this issue and the mid-range power is up also
3. My boost is far higher than what was seen in pcardenas log, around 14-15 PSI at max RPM
4. As a result of no boost headroom there is often significant boost bleed, which is how Revo have tuned according to their comments from a few years ago... I believe there is also higher than normal ignition timing in the lower range
5. During my logging there is timing pulled throughout the range (up to around 5* maximum), so I'm not sure if comments around Revo "removing the knock safeties" is the exact process for how their tune works

From conversations with other AZ members and my research, I think the timing curve which Revo runs is actually far more similar to APR/GIAC than people think. My guess is that things were changed from what they first came out with.

I honestly do think that the Revo tune will work fine with the dual pulley setup, except for the fact that there is no headroom for the additional boost at higher RPMs... so the CW unit is an absolute necessity for anyone wanting to run the dual pulley setup for maximum performance with Revo

I did notice that pcardenas was using the 100 file, I wouldn't suggest running the 100 file and a CW without anything less than race fuel and VCDS to check what is going on... The Revo North American head quoted one of the engineers (who has since left the company) a while back who worked on the development of the 3.0 TFSI files and said that you can run the 100 file on 93 octane and it will pull enough timing to run fine, I have tested this and it does indeed hold up (up to 8/9* of timing pulled) but I wouldn't feel comfortable doing this with the CW unit

Very good info. So, stacking REVO with a CW should allow for the bypass valve to remain closed up high while being able to pull timing if needed. Sounds doable.

[bhvrdr]

Guys I would be very very careful stacking CW on the Revo tune. I'd honestly advise against doing this but I understand people have to scratch an itch. Revo makes power using timing and purposefully bleeds boost. They have clearly engineered them for lower boost and higher timing. Using the CW you are fooling the computer to make more boost. This is not smart to do if you have a program that is aggressive on timing IMO. Its just not worth the risk IMO. Very simple to go with a less aggressively timed program or write and ask for them to come out with a dual pulley tune. Very simple and its the right thing to do IMO. Dont cut corners or occasionally you will get bit.

Mike

[RLB6]

I'm VAG-COMing this the entire way.

[fitzydude]

Guys I would be very very careful stacking CW on the Revo tune. I'd honestly advise against doing this but I understand people have to scratch an itch. Revo makes power using timing and purposefully bleeds boost. They have clearly engineered them for lower boost and higher timing. Using the CW you are fooling the computer to make more boost. This is not smart to do if you have a program that is aggressive on timing IMO. Its just not worth the risk IMO. Very simple to go with a less aggressively timed program or write and ask for them to come out with a dual pulley tune. Very simple and its the right thing to do IMO. Dont cut corners or occasionally you will get bit.

Mike

I think you are going to try it I would start out with Revo's 91 octane setting and run a 93/e85 blend.

[abamfo]

Revo's comments on a dual pulley tune...

"This isn’t something we are working on at the moment, we have 3.0T’s in our fleet should it be something we look at in the future"

[-leman-]

Is it a recent comment or an old one? You refer to the Australian rep or REVO HQ?

The reason for asking is that my local REVO rep says they are working on it, he gives no ETA though...

[abamfo]

Is it a recent comment or an old one? You refer to the Australian rep or REVO HQ?

The reason for asking is that my local REVO rep says they are working on it, he gives no ETA though...

Nothing to do with Australia, it is the International Sales Manager... I doubt he would lie about this

[-leman-]

Not implying he would lie, just interested what was my local REVO rep talking about then...

Anyway, with all this inconsistent feedback from REVO I guess it makes sense to look elsewhere for a dual-pulley map if the goal is to get it quick.

[abamfo]

So I installed the 183mm FD overdrive piece on the FD crank pulley this week in conjunction with my CTS pulley. So I'm now running the 57 / 183 (~3.2 ratio) with the CW on 2-1, on the Revo 93 tune. Snapshot of a log from this afternoon, the bypass valve was completely closed the whole time.

My god the car pulls like a freight train compared to Revo 1+ and with the 2-1 setting, I can't feel any transmission troubles. Interestingly, the Revo tune automatically runs a substantially lower timing map than with the 1+, even though though the Chipwerke unit is on. As you'll see below the car hits ~14* max in 3rd gear (which for me is around 7k RPM), whereas I used to to hit 21* with the CTS pulley alone. I'm not exactly sure what the reason is, I thought it would run the same timing map but obviously not. Either way, I am happy for the moment but I think this is evidence that the Revo file itself isn't anymore dangerous than the other files for using a CW unit, EPL/GIAC/APR dual pulley guys seem to run higher timing.

[jran76]

The timing map would be a result of things like load, IAT's, etc. Not knowing those would make it hard to speculate on why the timing dropped so much. Also, seems like it is running a little rich (11:1).

[-leman-]

If the bypass is closed the whole time (i.e. ECU sees lower boost than the 1 BAR specified by Revo after CW), then it's not the boost / load which makes the ignition angle lower. So I'd guess IAT. Rich AFR could also a result of this. Would be really interested to see a log of IAT / intake manifold pressure / specified pressure though.

[bhvrdr]

So I installed the 183mm FD overdrive piece on the FD crank pulley this week in conjunction with my CTS pulley. So I'm now running the 57 / 183 (~3.2 ratio) with the CW on 2-1, on the Revo 93 tune. Snapshot of a log from this afternoon, the bypass valve was completely closed the whole time.

My god the car pulls like a freight train compared to Revo 1+ and with the 2-1 setting, I can't feel any transmission troubles. Interestingly, the Revo tune automatically runs a substantially lower timing map than with the 1+, even though though the Chipwerke unit is on. As you'll see below the car hits ~14* max in 3rd gear (which for me is around 7k RPM), whereas I used to to hit 21* with the CTS pulley alone. I'm not exactly sure what the reason is, I thought it would run the same timing map but obviously not. Either way, I am happy for the moment but I think this is evidence that the Revo file itself isn't anymore dangerous than the other files for using a CW unit, EPL/GIAC/APR dual pulley guys seem to run higher timing.

Good start and kudos for taking the plunge. Like others suggested I think its important now to log IAT and also the EGTs. I would agree that there is a reason the timing tables switched to lower targets or a timing offset occurred. There is a reason for fuel enrichment too. Both IAT and EGT can help illuminate this.

Mike

[abamfo]

Good start and kudos for taking the plunge. Like others suggested I think its important now to log IAT and also the EGTs. I would agree that there is a reason the timing tables switched to lower targets or a timing offset occurred. There is a reason for fuel enrichment too. Both IAT and EGT can help illuminate this.

Mike

Mike and others, haven't got a log just yet but on my vcds mobile app I can see that EGTs are way up. IATs creep up faster than before but it's the huge increase in EGTs which really stands out and would cause both timing pull and rich AFR.

Not much I can do about it but I wonder how hot other DP cars run. When I hit the gas on the freeway, EGTs head into the 900 degree range.

Does anyone know what other DP car EGTs have been?? What is too much for this engine?

[bhvrdr]

Mike and others, haven't got a log just yet but on my vcds mobile app I can see that EGTs are way up. IATs creep up faster than before but it's the huge increase in EGTs which really stands out and would cause both timing pull and rich AFR.

Not much I can do about it but I wonder how hot other DP cars run. When I hit the gas on the freeway, EGTs head into the 900 degree range.

Does anyone know what other DP car EGTs have been?? What is too much for this engine?

Don't panic yet. EGTs upwards of 950C are not totally shocking on repeated WOT runs. That should be the max though. If you see EGTss getting up into the 980C range or higher this is really too high. You need to stress the car a bit though to see how high the IATs and EGTs will get. Do some back to back full throttle runs without recovery time (no long coasting in between) too see what is what.

Mike

[RLB6]

Good start and kudos for taking the plunge. Like others suggested I think its important now to log IAT and also the EGTs. I would agree that there is a reason the timing tables switched to lower targets or a timing offset occurred. There is a reason for fuel enrichment too. Both IAT and EGT can help illuminate this.

Mike

I wonder if the REVO tune has switched to a more conservative timing map caused by the inability to bypass boost (requested vs actual) due to being stacked with chipwerks.

[bhvrdr]

I wonder if the REVO tune has switched to a more conservative timing map caused by the inability to bypass boost (requested vs actual) due to being stacked with chipwerks.

Thats a cool question. The more I think about it though the more I think that is not likely. Remember its not bypassing boost only because it thinks it is making too little boost right now. So any boost/load related timing offsets shouldnt be triggered because the ECU actually thinks it is not hitting load targets. I am betting it is a more obvious safety offset like IAT or EGT... but cool question and it does make me wish I had the tools to see into every nook and cranny of the Simos.

Mike

[fitzydude]

Mike and others, haven't got a log just yet but on my vcds mobile app I can see that EGTs are way up. IATs creep up faster than before but it's the huge increase in EGTs which really stands out and would cause both timing pull and rich AFR.

Not much I can do about it but I wonder how hot other DP cars run. When I hit the gas on the freeway, EGTs head into the 900 degree range.

Does anyone know what other DP car EGTs have been?? What is too much for this engine?

Those egts seem high compared to what I've noticed. I think Ive seen as high as the 700's. I'll get more specific numbers when I get the car out next.

[abamfo]

Thats a cool question. The more I think about it though the more I think that is not likely. Remember its not bypassing boost only because it thinks it is making too little boost right now. So any boost/load related timing offsets shouldnt be triggered because the ECU actually thinks it is not hitting load targets. I am betting it is a more obvious safety offset like IAT or EGT... but cool question and it does make me wish I had the tools to see into every nook and cranny of the Simos.

Mike

Thanks Mike. Unfortunately the roads I were on this morning weren't conducive to going 160kmph to so couldn't do WOT pulls but I'll post logs as soon as I can as I want to get your feedback. I did notice that during 2nd gear (from memory) EGTs hit just over 1000* quickly during WOT. But for the most part, what I saw was that EGTs maxed at around 950* C while IATs were actually quite low (max 50* C) as it's cold down here at the moment (12* C).

With IATs low, I'm guessing that it must be EGTs, I wonder what EGTs are for those guys who have the larger pulleys and run higher timing. I also don't have a CPS installed yet but I'm not sure that would do anything for EGTs, would be.

I wonder what the timing map would be if I chose the Revo 100 file and not the 93 file. I might grab some race gas and give it a go.