2021 SQ5 w/APR tune and intercooler and having problems.

[GoCougs1234]

EDIT - RESOLVED - see post #43 for details.

Sorry that this is a long one but I'm in desperate need of help from the experienced! TL;DR is performance notably decreased after aftermarket intercooler installation on a stage 1 tuned vehicle, and I need to solve it ASAP.

Non TL;DR is I need to make a decision very soon (long story) with what to do with both APR and the vehicle. Yes, I'm in (MUCH) contact both with the tuner and APR, and will address that below. I won't yet go so far as to blame APR (though there have been other issues - more below) - could be me after all - so I wanted to present my case to see if perhaps I've done something wrong - I'm new to Audi, turbos and tuning (but have good automotive knowledge/experience in general). I've outlined the vehicle, test data, notes and status. Looking for any all all hints/tips/tricks. Thanks so much in advance.

Vehicle:
2021 SQ5 w/Sport Package, purchased new (i.e., no tune or such), and at about 30,000 miles I added APR stage 1 91 tune and then soon after the APR intercooler

Test protocol:
All tests done with 31-36k miles on the vehicle.
All tests data collected with Dragy, and each was repeatable 5x each with variation of roughly +/- 0.05 sec,
All Dragy test data displayed as VALID, is not corrected for DA and the 0-60 time does NOT include 1' rollout
All tests done on same stretch of dry road
All tests vehicle same weight with ~1/4 tank of 92 octane
Made sure engine and transmission were at normal operating temp before testing
Made sure launch control engaged for acceleration from a dig (launch RPM ~3800 RPM constant)
40-100 mph run was separate from the 1/4 mile run, and done by starting in M2 at 35 mph and then flooring it thru 100, letting the transmission shift by itself at 6,500 RPM
Never a check engine light during testing
Vehicle always in top operating condition AFAIK, particularity that oil consumption is negligible

Test 1 - Stock:
37F, DA -1100 ft
60' of 1.99 s
0-40 in 2.59 s
0-60 in 4.85 s
1/4 mile in 13.35 s @ 102 mph
40-100 in 10.12 s

Test 2 - APR stage 1 91 tune only:
55F, DA +750 ft
60' of 1.82 s
0-40 in 2.39 s
0-60 in 4.51 s
1/4 mile in 12.91 s @104 mph
40-100 in 9.52 s

Test 3 - APR state 1 91 tune w/APR intercooler:
35F, DA -1300 ft
60' of 1.83 s
0-40 in 2.42 s
0-60 in 4.68 s
1/4 mile in 13.15 s @102 mph
40-100 in 10.25 sec

Notable notes:

1.) In Test 3, there is a slight low frequency pulsing of acceleration during hard acceleration in the higher gears - it's not a misfire or the like, but is is noticeable - can feel/hear/see (in the tach) it. I don't remember this when I got the tune at warmer temps. The pulsing was present both before and after the APR intercooler (but not present when stock)

2.) In Test 3, there appears to be a slight hesitation in the AMAX shifts from 1->2 and 2->3, though this may be more the bucking sensation as the AMAX shifts are quite harsh.

3.) Test 2 vs. Test 3, 60' times and 0-40 mph look equal but note the stark difference in DA (i.e., in reality they're separated probably by 0.05 - 0.1 s).

4.) Test 3, I do get some wheel slip in these cold temps and then a bit of a bog - I'd say like 1/2 a tire rev - so there may be some time lost there but this would not affect 40-100, which to me is 10x more important than acceleration from a dig.

5.) Test 3 40-100 is slower than Test 1 (stock!)

6.) I installed the intercooler

Status:
I've been in contact with both APR and the local tuner. APR says they've never heard such a thing, and to contact the tuner. The tuner offered to investigate, but on my own dime. The tuner gave me some hints and tips, and said the next step (whether them or I do it) is to log data. I have an OBD Eleven on the way but as alluded to the above I need to solve ASAP. I know the B9 3.0T has been in the USDM since MY2017 so I'd think APR would have this all well sorted out by now. Unfortunately, the intercooler install was a disaster (wrong brackets, bad MAP sensor housing, poor directions) so my faith in APR is shaken. But, if I've done something wrong, I'll be more than happy to own up to it.

Questions:
1.) Is there something wrong with my testing?
2.) Is it a known thing that big/aftermarket intercoolers adversely affect performance in the cold (leaning out AFM, excessive turbo pressure drop, or ?)
3.) Won't a boost leak or AFM bad enough to affect performance trigger a check engine light?
4.) Will APR custom mod a tune based on customer data, or do they need my actual vehicle?
5.) Any other thoughts?

[Hostile]

I can’t help but laugh at APR telling you to “talk to the tuner” and offering no help. Their ECU tunes aren’t customizable. What is your local tuner supposed to be able to do?

This is exactly why I have such a hard time giving them any money…

[GoCougs1234]

I can’t help but laugh at APR telling you to “talk to the tuner” and offering no help. Their ECU tunes aren’t customizable. What is your local tuner supposed to be able to do?

This is exactly why I have such a hard time giving them any money…

TBF, I wouldn't expect APR to change a tune based on a customer complaint, and I'm nowhere near AL. APR will need some sort of diagnosis. Tuner said next step is data logging - I can do it, or I can pay to have them to do it. I'm self employed so this is starting to cost me in more ways than one (tuner only open on weekdays).

Looking again at Dragy data, my trap speeds (1/8 mile, 1000' and 1/4 mile) are identical stock vs. tune + intercooler, which means I'm down 50-75 hp from tune only and probably a bit down from stock.

[Hostile]

TBF, I wouldn't expect APR to change a tune based on a customer complaint, and I'm nowhere near AL. APR will need some sort of diagnosis.

034 does. Pretty sure IE does as well.

[JMURiz]

Winter gas?

[GoCougs1234]

Winter gas?

Very likely not. I asked the tuner about it and they said our winter gas has virtually zero affect on performance, plus I was likely already on winter gas for both Test 2 (10/15) and Test 3 (11/28). By my estimate, I'm back to stock power levels, or a bit below, which means a loss of 50-75 hp - I'm new to the turbo world but would be skeptical that winter gas would pare that much power.

Thinking about it more, and using pure macro logic, the question presents: Which is more likely to be true - bad APR tune on a power train they've been tuning for 5+ years or a slight boost leak (5-6 psi by my calcs, which may not be enough to throw a CEL) via my bad install of the intercooler? The latter obviously. By my research, this would also explain why 60' and 0-40 are little if any affected (short gear = less time for boost to build = less leakage = little/no power loss) but the as speed increases the vehicle acceleration drops (taller gears = more time for boost = more leakage = more power loss) as evidenced by the 40-100.

[NRigs]

Very likely not. I asked the tuner about it and they said our winter gas has virtually zero affect on performance, plus I was likely already on winter gas for both Test 2 (10/15) and Test 3 (11/28). By my estimate, I'm back to stock power levels, or a bit below, which means a loss of 50-75 hp - I'm new to the turbo world but would be skeptical that winter gas would pare that much power.

Thinking about it more, and using pure macro logic, the question presents: Which is more likely to be true - bad APR tune on a power train they've been tuning for 5+ years or a slight boost leak (5-6 psi by my calcs, which may not be enough to throw a CEL) via my bad install of the intercooler? The latter obviously. By my research, this would also explain why 60' and 0-40 are little if any affected (short gear = less time for boost to build = less leakage = little/no power loss) but the as speed increases the vehicle acceleration drops (taller gears = more time for boost = more leakage = more power loss) as evidenced by the 40-100.

Before blaming the tune, I would take the front bumper off and check your connections to the intercooler. That is where most boost leaks happen. Make sure you tightened your clamps enough or did not over tighten them to crack anything plastic. Also check to make sure the clamps went on straight and not at an angle. If you have the APR kit with the additional silicone piping, check to make sure all connections are snug and secure and again on straight and not angled.

I had so many problems with the extra piping on my 335 that I won't be touching them on this car. Going with the IE that will hook up to stock piping.

Hope this offers some insight.

[GoCougs1234]

Before blaming the tune, I would take the front bumper off and check your connections to the intercooler. That is where most boost leaks happen. Make sure you tightened your clamps enough or did not over tighten them to crack anything plastic. Also check to make sure the clamps went on straight and not at an angle. If you have the APR kit with the additional silicone piping, check to make sure all connections are snug and secure and again on straight and not angled.

I had so many problems with the extra piping on my 335 that I won't be touching them on this car. Going with the IE that will hook up to stock piping.

Hope this offers some insight.

Yes, the more I reason it out, it's much more likely to be a small boost leak.

The APR intercooler was a colossal disaster (soon to be an FYI thread), which means I've had the front of the vehicle taken apart so many times such that the various fasteners, tabs, and mounting features (including Styrofoam!) have taken a real beating, so I cringe at doing it again. My hope is I can get to the connections by removing the bottom coverings and driver side front wheel well. In fact, I probably know the culprit (MAP sensor just upstream of the throttle body). Surprising I just got word that my OBD Eleven will arrive Wednesday, so I'll first start with boost logging.

[GoCougs1234]

Was able to take boost data with and OBD Eleven (what a POS - a lot doesn't work with iOS just FYI). Here's a full throttle pull through thru gears 1-3 and partially thru gear 4. Rolling start in 1st gear (i.e., not AMAX shifts).

No boost leak as far as I understand. However, it seems odd to me that boost decreases noticeably with RPM. These results were extremely repeatable. Again, new to turbos, but my understanding was boost does not decrease with RPM but here it's reliable falling off ~15-20% by the end of the gear, both specified and actual.

[GoCougs1234]

And there's a long pull in 4th gear showing the same phenomenon:

[NRigs]

Boost drop off is normal as RPM increases. Can you add more parameters to your logs? It looks like you are overboosting which can cause throttle closure. See if you can add throttle position to your log.

If you can get throttle position in there, take another log in stock tune to see if there are still issues.

[jsilas]

Subscribing... good luck with your diagnosis efforts.

[asrautox]

Boost drop off is normal as RPM increases. Can you add more parameters to your logs? It looks like you are overboosting which can cause throttle closure. See if you can add throttle position to your log.

If you can get throttle position in there, take another log in stock tune to see if there are still issues.

This. Look at the 3rd gear pull in the above. You can see the overboost and subsequent drop then it picks back up again. I’d bet you’re getting throttle closures and/or timing pull. This is a tune issue.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GoCougs1234]

This time around, I'm getting good response from both APR and the tuner. Both say it's a boost leak which is causing various issues, including a delay in reaching boost. As it was explained, I don't see a performance degradation much in 60' and 0-60 because "launch control" in the B9 3.0T platform is simply brake torquing against the torque converter for a few seconds, which means the delay doesn't affect performance in first gear, and second gear is very short so the delay barely affect performance. However, taller gears are longer gears, so a delay more prominently degrades performance. And this is all of exactly what I'm seeing. So, on to recheck connections. I will then do more logging, to include the recommend throttle position and timing.

[B6_Dolphin]

When I did the APR IC install on my '21 SQ5 S/B, I made sure to orient the clamps so that I could tighten them without disassembling the front end. At most, I have to pull-off the camera surrounds, which are just held-in with tabs:




No issues with APR IC mounting, other than I had to detach the camera harnesses from the cameras before the front clip was removed.



I don't have an APR tune, but I do have the DTE Systems PowerControl X Boost Controller & PedalBox Pedal Tuner in the loop. No issues with timing pull or boost leaks to date.

[GoCougs1234]

I painted mine black as well!

Just finished my run though of clamps and such. Will test later tonight hopefully.

I did the same with clamp orientation as well - did not have to remove the bumper cover to get to them. The clamp on the turbo outlet was the only clamp that I couldn't get a torque wrench on originally due to space constraints and upon closer inspection today it was ~5 threads of engagement shy of the other 2.75" clamp, so I gave her 5 turns as a proxy for 50 in-lbs. 50 in-lbs feels way way tight but then again ~33 PSI is a lot of pressure.

The issue with the intercooler (beyond bad brackets and poor directions) is the MAP sensor housing was wrong (design or manufacturing I'm not sure) - there was no lead-in for the o-ring MAP sensor o-ring, and when I first called both the tuner and APR about the issue they both said the MAP sensor should fit just fine. Well, it didn't and I ended up ruining the original MAP sensor (or, specifically, the o-ring, which is not available separately), as forcing the sensor into the housing sheared off the outside of the o-ring. Not wanting to spend another $150 I bought a bunch of nominally identical o-rings off of Amazon. None were the exact size of the factory o-ring, and the the best of the lot wasn't as tight as the original o-ring, so today I fixed this as well. I bit the bullet, bought another MAP sensor and chucked the APR MAP sensor housing up beveled the edge to match the bevel of the factory MAP sensor housing. All fits super tight with the factory MAP sensor o-ring.

Anyway, both issues seem like good candidates for a boost leak and both are now fixed. My luck on these things is hit and miss, but we'll see!

[B6_Dolphin]

I painted mine black as well!

Yeah, I had Performance Coatings in Auburn paint it with a thermally-conductive coating in black. They've coated a few of my motorcycle exhausts throughout the years, too.

The issue with the intercooler (beyond bad brackets and poor directions) is the MAP sensor housing was wrong (design or manufacturing I'm not sure) - there was no lead-in for the o-ring MAP sensor o-ring, and when I first called both the tuner and APR about the issue they both said the MAP sensor should fit just fine.

At least you received a MAF housing, abeit wrongly-machined. When I did an inventory of the parts before I installed it, I found the MAF housing was flat-out missing. Had to call APR and they over-nighted me one. From what I recall, I had to use some lubricant and a good push to get the OEM MAF to pop-in.

[GoCougs1234]

Here's the charts for after the fix:





Notable notes vs. original charts:
1.) No more actual pressure overshoot in gears 1 and 3
2.) Actual pressure reaches specified pressure in gears 1-3
3.) Gear 3 is hugely improved - esp no more see saw in actual pressure
4.) 4th gear is unchanged on both charts (which is puzzling, if indeed there was a boost leak)
5.) For the first chart, my hunch is ignore the start of first gear, as I probably did not have the same rolling start speed
6.) I charted absolute throttle position, but the max it ever showed was 88.5%. There were so many different throttle elements I had not idea which one to choose. I didn't chart it but it was 88.5% for both "after fix" charts (i.e., I didn't see any manipulation)
7.) Ditto for timing, plus what I charted doesn't make sense to me

So, all in all, better, but not sure this fully explains the loss in performance. Thoughts anyone? My local tuner does not offer boost leak testing, so it'll be some work for me to do that but don't know if the "after fix" charts are showing a boost leak. It's a bit snowy here so it'll be some time before I can do any acceleration runs.

[GoCougs1234]

Looking at the charts again, and using specified boost as a proxy for acceleration (?) since that is how the ECU commands the vehicle to accelerate based on input parameters (full throttle for these tests, actual vehicle acceleration, actual boost, etc.), there seems to be a marked improvement.

Specified boost - 2nd and 3rd gear by looking at peak of 2nd gear to peak of 4th gear (I didn't take into account 1st gear as the rolling start speeds were not the same):
Before fix: 6627 msec
After fix: 6078 msec
Difference: 550 msec quicker after fix

Note my 40-100 time was off by 700 msec - is there a 150 msec improvement in 4th gear? Not so sure as the charts for 4th gear look identical, albeit incomplete as I didn't run 4th gear out to red line. After the weather improves I'll test to find out!

[NRigs]

Looking at the charts again, and using specified boost as a proxy for acceleration (?) since that is how the ECU commands the vehicle to accelerate based on input parameters (full throttle for these tests, actual vehicle acceleration, actual boost, etc.), there seems to be a marked improvement.

Specified boost - 2nd and 3rd gear by looking at peak of 2nd gear to peak of 4th gear (I didn't take into account 1st gear as the rolling start speeds were not the same):
Before fix: 6627 msec
After fix: 6078 msec
Difference: 550 msec quicker after fix

Note my 40-100 time was off by 700 msec - is there a 150 msec improvement in 4th gear? Not so sure as the charts for 4th gear look identical, albeit incomplete as I didn't run 4th gear out to red line. After the weather improves I'll test to find out!

Charts are looking cleaner. Also, it may help myself and others here to diagnose deeper if you can upload your logs to a data graphing website. A popular one is datazap.me. I used this when I was tuning my 335. See if you can upload your logs to there that way we can go through your logs in more detail.

[GoCougs1234]

New charts. Had to redo the "after fix" charts because I didn't cotton to the fact that the more items OBD Eleven charts the longer the interval, which means missing data, and fairly useless charts, which is why my previous "after fix" graph was curiously drama free and gave a false positive. Made new charts only ever charting two items.

Have included the "before fix" chart as the first, updated a bit.

In summary, the first two charts are virtually identical, which to means there was never any boost leak. 3rd gear looks a bit seesaw-ish in the first half of the gear, but nothing else looks weird AFAIK in any of the other graphs. Open to interpretations. Timing advance and AFR seems about right to me, or in the least I don't see any weirdness that would be an indication of a problem.

To me it looks like the vehicle is doing what it's being told to do. No Dragy results yet because the roads are wet (the launches in the last two charts had a quite a bit of spin so first gear looks weird). Supposed to be dry tomorrow evening, so maybe then.

[GoCougs1234]

Just finished boost leak testing per recommendation of both the tuner and APR. Oh, boy, was it an adventure - spent an ENTIRE day, at least $300 and a borrowed car to make an emergency trip to the auto parts store. Got 'er done though. I'm quite proud actually (the turbo inlet needed significant work!). Anyway, results:

Testing only from the turbo inlet to just before the throttle body, I pressured to 30 psi, and tested all connections with soapy water. Zero bubbles at all connections. I did this test many times - at least 5.

Testing the entire system (turbo inlet thru throttle body, blocking off the PVC return into the turbo inlet), and again zero bubbles on any of the intake charge pipes downstream of the throttle body. For this larger volume, my compressor could only manage 28 psi, and the leak down to 20 psi was ~10 seconds, and then slower below 20 psi.

My research both indicate no boost leak. Thoughts?

[asrautox]

Well, you still haven’t provided any throttle position information, so tough to say. You are definitely seeing a timing drop in 3rd gear where your boost over/under shoots are occurring. I stand by my original analysis from post 13, but it seems like you really want this to be a hardware issue..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GoCougs1234]

Well, you still haven’t provided any throttle position information, so tough to say. You are definitely seeing a timing drop in 3rd gear where your boost over/under shoots are occurring. I stand by my original analysis from post 13, but it seems like you really want this to be a hardware issue..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks for the input.

I did chart that but didn't show the chart - per #18 "throttle valve position (absolute)" - consistent at 88% across any full throttle acceleration (didn't post the chart because it was boring TBH). Of note OBDeleven is abysmal at charting this value - 900 msec between samples, so it'll miss quicker adjustments, if such a thing is happening.

Now that I've done all this testing, at full throttle shifts (not AMAX) there is a hint of a delay. I can't see in the charts though.



It's not so much what I want. Of all the possible problems, that APR done goofed on a tune on a car they've been tuning for 5+ years is the least likely of any of the possible scenarios as I see it. If I have to go back to them with such an allegation, I need advice/data/etc., like I'm getting here. Any test I've run so far shows NPF with either the vehicle or my test methods. I charted IAT but AFAIK this shows NPF either:

[GoCougs1234]

Hmm. Just charted this from today's testing. I'm new to turbos, but know engines quite well. Pulling timing at each shift is wack, and explains the periodic hesitation in shifting I experience. This the smoking gun to go back to APR with? I think so. Something major is causing this.



And here's the boost test from today as well. Plainly, something does not look right in the delay and overshoot - and it seems to have gotten worse. Is the timing cut causing the boost delay and overshoot, or the other way around? To me it seems like the former. But what would cause that?

[asrautox]

Dropping timing at each shift is a fairly typical strategy to reduce transmission NVH. What’s more concerning is that timing picks back up after the shift then drops again. This is unusual and could indicate timing pull due to either knock detection or that overboost or both.

I’m not saying that APR suddenly goofed on your specific tune, but more likely just isn’t as refined as they claim to be. Perhaps especially when used with your specific fuel. You’re not in Arizona/Nevada/Cali by chance?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GoCougs1234]

I'm in the Seattle area. The local APR tuner says our winter gas is actually quite good compared to many other regions in the US (and our highest octane is 92).

I just made a report of test results and data logs and fired it off to both the tuner and APR. As I understand now it sure doesn't look like a boost leak. There's an existing support ticket open on my issue so I imagine (hope!) they get to it right away.

The problem seemed to follow the APR intercooler install but that may be a false signal as I didn't do any data logging prior to the install, only Dragy testing (my gold standard results were post tune at ~55F with stock intercooler). Anyway, will keep the thread updated as the process unfolds.

[yagiska]

I didn't do any data logging prior to the install, only Dragy testing

Anything specific you are looking for? I've got a 2021 SQ5 (prestige, sport pkg) with an APR Plus V2 tune. Only other mods are custom functional exhaust tips and some basic VCDS tweaks.

I was planning on trying to do some VCDS logging over the holiday break if weather cooperates -- ever since I had the dealer do the 91DZ recall, I swear it's not building boost as quickly/pulling as hard. Local APR dealer thinks it's all in my head, which is probably true, but I figure I'll do some logging while I'm off work for peace of mind. Pulling a few extra logs shouldn't be a hassle, though I'll be on empty backroads and not a closed track.

Also shot in the dark here, but any chance you've hit the AMAX counter limit?

[GoCougs1234]

Anything specific you are looking for? I've got a 2021 SQ5 (prestige, sport pkg) with an APR Plus V2 tune. Only other mods are custom functional exhaust tips and some basic VCDS tweaks.

I was planning on trying to do some VCDS logging over the holiday break if weather cooperates -- ever since I had the dealer do the 91DZ recall, I swear it's not building boost as quickly/pulling as hard. Local APR dealer thinks it's all in my head, which is probably true, but I figure I'll do some logging while I'm off work for peace of mind. Pulling a few extra logs shouldn't be a hassle, though I'll be on empty backroads and not a closed track.

Also shot in the dark here, but any chance you've hit the AMAX counter limit?

It will be interesting to see your results since you also have a B9.5. My performance seems to have dropped with the APR intercooler and colder ambient temps (i.e., lower IATs), but maybe not - got feedback from APR and will post after this!

I got the 91DZ update last week, yet my Dragy data showing a drop in performance post intercooler was from November. I called APR about this and they said the same - camera software unrelated to ECU. I have to think if it were, the whole of the APR tune would be wiped and my auto start/stop is indeed still disabled upon startup which tells me the APR tune is still there.

Hmm. I was unawares of a count limit for the ZF8 but I checked a few days ago - I'm only in the 30s for 1/2 and 2/3 shifts, and lower than that for 3/4 shift. Plus, my biggest drop is in roll performance (i.e., no AMAX shifts).

[GoCougs1234]

Dropping timing at each shift is a fairly typical strategy to reduce transmission NVH. What’s more concerning is that timing picks back up after the shift then drops again. This is unusual and could indicate timing pull due to either knock detection or that overboost or both.

I’m not saying that APR suddenly goofed on your specific tune, but more likely just isn’t as refined as they claim to be. Perhaps especially when used with your specific fuel. You’re not in Arizona/Nevada/Cali by chance?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

APR took the day to review my (excellent, if I say so myself) report, and you win the Kewpie doll per post #18! NPF! They called me and we had a nice long convo about it. They wanted to make sure I had all my questions answered.

APR said no problem indicated and the drop in performance is likely that my mix of conditions - temp, DA, humidity, gas quality/type - combined are outside that needed for optimal tune performance. APR also said the B9/9.5 3.0 TFSI with Sport Diff is extremely sensitive to wheel slip, and I might have that without feeling it, which would cut power. Problem is my largest performance drop is from a roll (specifically, 40-100 mph) and in a vehicle this heavy with AWD and limited slip, I have trouble believing rolling traction problems at these power levels.

Anyway, nothing more to do at this point.

[NRigs]

Have you looked into switching to 034 or IE?

[GoCougs1234]

Have you looked into switching to 034 or IE?

Yep. I've spoken to 034 as I'm impressed with their YouTube series. Thing is, I'm ~$3k into APR plus ~$1k in diag tools and parts and hassle to fix their intercooler problems, and I'm still under their Plus warranty. I also want ensure that I won't have a repeat experience, which no tuner can guarantee of course, only to say that they've tested at all reasonable atmo conditions. Plus, there's still a chance it's not the tune but some weird atmo conditions, winter gas, etc., or maybe something with my particularly SQ5 (still never a CEL however), or maybe something in my acceleration testing I'm going wrong. Not quite there yet. Have searched many forums, and now finding sporadic complaints about cold weather performance from tunes that weren't related to fuel flow problems, wrong spark plugs, etc., such as this thread (fix was a revised APR tune, albeit not for the B9/9.5 TFSI 3.0).

[GoCougs1234]

Did some more logging today - now that I'm paying attention to it, there is noticeable hesitation at the gear shifts. Previously I thought it was perhaps the car just moving around a bit, esp. during AMAX shifts since they're comically harsh. Turns out I can log measured torque, and the timing cut shown above hugely cuts torque at the gear shifts, and causes the hesitation as shown via ABS wheel speed sensors. Also of note, the tune is producing the advertised horsepower, so the hesitation is what is killing performance. I revised my report and sent it back to APR for (it is hoped) further analysis:

[Hostile]

Does APR offer a TCU tune? These cars need it.

[GoCougs1234]

Does APR offer a TCU tune? These cars need it.

Haha, Thought that too. No, but as of last Monday APR says they're working on it, soon to be out. Thing is, as I got the tune in the warm-ish temps (50s-60s deg F, and pre intercooler) performance was great and I don't remember any hesitation. It was prominent after the temps dipped and I installed the intercooler (next testing session was at 30F just after intercooler install when I discovered the drop in performance). Scanning the B9 forums, I've not seen any complaints about hesitation from an APR tune on the B9 S4/S5.

[asrautox]

Could be bumping into the trans torque limits with the colder weather. The IE/034 tunes offer a free (with ECU tune) stage 1 trans tune that increases those limits.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hostile]

Haha, Thought that too. No, but as of last Monday APR says they're working on it, soon to be out. Thing is, as I got the tune in the warm-ish temps (50s-60s deg F, and pre intercooler) performance was great and I don't remember any hesitation. It was prominent after the temps dipped and I installed the intercooler (next testing session was at 30F just after intercooler install when I discovered the drop in performance). Scanning the B9 forums, I've not seen any complaints about hesitation from an APR tune on the B9 S4/S5.

It is pretty stupid that APR doesn’t have a TCU tune. The transmission has a factory torque limit that needs to be raised for ECU tunes.

There is a reason 034 includes a basic one for free with their ECU Stage 1 ECU tune.

[GoCougs1234]

When I short shift at ~4,000 RPM at full throttle she rips like crazy with no hesitation, and according to APR's dyno chart I'm making 500 lb-ft at 4,000 RPM so WAY above anything in the chart above. Perhaps the trans torque limit process is much more complicated than just torque (also perhaps engine RPM)? The cold weather + intercooler bumps power a bit, sure, but enough to trip trans torque limits? Sorta hard to believe. There's nothing I see in OBDeleven regarding torque transmission overload or the like so not sure how to determine that if it were occurring.

This morning I charted one of the knock sensors - it flat lined at ~0.25V on a 5V range no matter what I did - seems way far away from knock. Just to make sure, after this testing I put in 50% 92 octane and 50% 100 octane (there's a race track sorta near me), and no change whatsoever - still noticeable hesitation.

I keep logically coming back to the intercooler - that's the only material difference in this whole scenario, specifically the additional to volume of the charge (800 vs. 500 cubic inches) - the turbo not able to keep up with the volume at gear change and I'm just feeling lag? Back-of-the-napkin calcs say not a chance - more volume, yes, but at this flow rate, it's literally in the noise (0.17 cu ft additional volume WRT the engine flowing ~630 cfm). Sigh.

[yagiska]

Your experience is a real mystery. I’m especially curious given that I live in Oregon, have an APR Plus tune, and was planning on doing an IC and intake install this spring. Now I’m hesitating based on your experience.

I also wonder about the lack of proper TCU tune, but as much as I wish APR would release one for other reasons, I’m skeptical that torque limits are being hit here, given that APR also offers an E85 tune w/o a TCU tune and that makes gobs more torque than the 91 tune. Then again I’m not sure how they are avoiding the TCU tune, so maybe that logic is flawed.

Are the timing/torque cuts you are logging during AMAX shifting or no? If non-AMAX, I believe that is normal to reduce NVH and likely not responsible for your drop in performance after the IC install. However, as asrautox pointed out in response to your timing logs, while the drop at shifts is normal, the 2nd small drop after each shift is weird.

It’s been raining non-stop down here this week so I haven’t had a chance to log yet and see if I get the same w/o the IC.

[GoCougs1234]

Your experience is a real mystery. I’m especially curious given that I live in Oregon, have an APR Plus tune, and was planning on doing an IC and intake install this spring. Now I’m hesitating based on your experience.

I also wonder about the lack of proper TCU tune, but as much as I wish APR would release one for other reasons, I’m skeptical that torque limits are being hit here, given that APR also offers an E85 tune w/o a TCU tune and that makes gobs more torque than the 91 tune. Then again I’m not sure how they are avoiding the TCU tune, so maybe that logic is flawed.

Are the timing/torque cuts you are logging during AMAX shifting or no? If non-AMAX, I believe that is normal to reduce NVH and likely not responsible for your drop in performance after the IC install. However, as asrautox pointed out in response to your timing logs, while the drop at shifts is normal, the 2nd small drop after each shift is weird.

It’s been raining non-stop down here this week so I haven’t had a chance to log yet and see if I get the same w/o the IC.

Anything I graph noted as from a roll are non-AMAX shifts, so yes, all the timing and torque charts are non-AMAX shifts. The last few days I've been logging torque during AMAX, and there is ZERO torque cut at shifting - torque doesn't drop below ~325 lb-ft (and that's only at the top of each gear, which matches the APR dyno curve), which points to the tune doing its job.

That would be fantastic to see a non-IC upgraded, APR-tuned B9.5 SQ5 boost/torque/timing curves in my atmo conditions. Odds say it's quite likely not APR - tune or intercooler - but rather some stupid thing I've done WRT to testing but for the life of me I can't determine it. My gold standard performance was a dry day at ~55 deg F, so my next step is to wait for those atmo conditions to see if performance "returns" (currently at 30s deg F).

If performance returns, IMO it would point to APR's original suggestion of traction problems, including from a roll (hard to believe esp. for the latter).