[tke344]

So I just started playing around with the Cobb ATR software in an attempt to create a map for e30 based off of the OTS stage 1 aggressive. It seems the two main tables that I need to adjust are the fuel scalar and the main timing table.

The two screen shots below are what I'm running currently. So far, I left everything else alone.





I put in a little over 4 gallons of E85 with the rest of the tank 93 octane. The car feels good so far, didn't notice much of a difference honestly but the timing I used is pretty conservative. I know it's mostly meaningless until I get some logs (which I plan to do this afternoon) but I wanted to get a thread going in the meantime. I'd love to hear of others experiences or tips.

Edit: I just noticed that the fuel scalar load only goes up to 160 - I should probably adjust that to end at 180 correct?

[Subaru335i]

This is relevant to my interests. Haven't done it myself but I have ATR and have wanted to start using E.

[tke344]

It seems a lot of the N54 guys are using the software but it's not as common here on the N55 sub-forum. I'd really like to see some screen shots of the N54 e30 map and use that as a basis. Obviously scale it back because it's a FBO map but it would be nice to have some ceiling. Unfortunately I can't open the map because it's for a different ECU version.

Also, someone may have already figured this out by now but I thought I'd ask. Under the advanced options you have the ability to suppress specific codes, such as the rear o2 code thrown by catless downpipes. If that was to be enabled on a stock like map would I get more than one OBDII monitors "not ready"? I passed NYS emissions with the Stage 1 aggressive which doesn't clear any codes. For the emissions test you're allowed one monitor to be in the "not ready" state. Might be a way around that downpipe fix we've all been waiting for.

[tke344]

So I had a chance to log a 3rd gear run. I'm just learning this stuff but it seems I have a lot of headroom.. Zero timing corrections across the board, I'm confused why my actual load never went much about 140.



And the full log can be found here

http://www.datazap.me/u/tke344/e30?log=0&data=1-9-10


The STFT was pretty deep into the negative, I believe that means I need to back down the scalar.. I'm going to try again using the Stg1 aggressive + FMIC as a base this time and significantly raise the timing.

[Subaru335i]

The DME actually targets Load(torque) so you can't just increase the timing to get more torque.
You need to modify your load tables. Have you read the threads on BB for ATR in the N54 section? You will learn a lot even if all of the tables aren't exactly the same for the N54.
For the N55 just poking around a little it looks like you will have to raise your "torque request ceiling". I have attached the stock table, no matter what it is only going to request 425nm of torque (which is the max load the DME will target) so if you just increase timing it will calculate that it just needs less boost to get to this load, which might be why it was only making like 8 or 9 psi in your log.
425nm is equal to about 313 ft-lbs which is about right for the stock mapping (I am not sure what the torque request ceiling for the cobb stage 1 aggressive is but take a look at that and increase within reason if you want more torque)
If I were you I would look at the differences between the stock, cobb sport, and aggressive maps to see what exactly Cobb changed based on octane.
Then increase those values in those tables and see what it does. You will have to do many many many logs to get the hang of things and get it dialed in.

[Subaru335i]

I just loaded the other maps because I was curious to compare for you. Obviously the torque request ceiling is not the only thing you need to change (you can add timing up top like you were trying to do to take advantage of the Ethanol) but it is certainly key in getting more power and torque.
Here are stock vs stage 1 sport vs stage 1 aggressive vs stage 2+ aggressive (which is the most powerful map Cobb has OTS).
Look how the torque request changes.

[Subaru335i]

It actually looks like the sport to aggressive doesnt actually change these values. I will look some more.

[tke344]

Originally Posted by Subaru335i

The DME actually targets Load(torque) so you can't just increase the timing to get more torque.
You need to modify your load tables. Have you read the threads on BB for ATR in the N54 section? You will learn a lot even if all of the tables aren't exactly the same for the N54.
For the N55 just poking around a little it looks like you will have to raise your "torque request ceiling". I have attached the stock table, no matter what it is only going to request 425nm of torque (which is the max load the DME will target) so if you just increase timing it will calculate that it just needs less boost to get to this load, which might be why it was only making like 8 or 9 psi in your log.
425nm is equal to about 313 ft-lbs which is about right for the stock mapping (I am not sure what the torque request ceiling for the cobb stage 1 aggressive is but take a look at that and increase within reason if you want more torque)
If I were you I would look at the differences between the stock, cobb sport, and aggressive maps to see what exactly Cobb changed based on octane.
Then increase those values in those tables and see what it does. You will have to do many many many logs to get the hang of things and get it dialed in.

Yep. I realized this after researching more, I guess it's a good thing that my boost was low and it makes perfect sense. The main difference that I noticed between the sport and aggressive maps are timing, sport is specifically for 91 octane and aggressive is for 93. I did modify my map based on the 2 point octane increase and the relative difference in timing between the two maps. I was able to bring it even higher though with no issue.

I just logged another 3rd gear pull, this was based on the Stg 1 aggressive + FMIC with adjustments made to fuel scalar and timing. Scalar is now at 1.09 and the timing is below.



Here's the link to the log.

http://www.datazap.me/u/tke344/fmic-...=0&data=1-9-10

Again I'm seeing mostly negative STFT, effectively no timing correction, and this time, more boost. The car pulled much harder up top.

[tke344]

This is what I'll be trying next.

Made a few adjustments based on the previous log.













I plan to log this tonight, I feel like I still have a good amount of headway based on the relatively low boost and lack of timing corrections.

[tke344]

Logged on my way home.. Looks like I need to back down the timing a bit.. seeing -2 to -3 deg now. It may be because I raised the target AFR values in the mid to high range. Hopefully bringing those back down will fix some of the knock due to the cooling effect.



The full log here.

http://www.datazap.me/u/tke344/rev-4...=0&data=1-9-10

I guess I have a good LPFP, STFT% is still deep in the negative. I'm going to lower the scalar a bit more, on the plus side it seems I have room to run a higher ethanol %.

[Subaru335i]

Yeah try more ethanol and maybe those timing corrections will go away.

[tke344]

Made some more slight adjustments to AFR targets, went a bit richer where the timing corrections started. Lowered the timing a bit also in that range. I plan to top off my tank today and bring the mixture closer to 40% ethanol, at these power levels my fuel trims should be fine. If all goes well with that I'm going to begin to raise the load targets in the high RPM range a little at a time. The most recent log I ran after tweaking a bit more had me at ~8PSI at 6500 or so with the timing mostly ironed out. I need to find an efficiency chart for the n55 turbo but I think I'm safe up to about 10PSI without putting much strain on it correct?

[Subaru335i]

Yeah I think the compressor is still efficient even higher than 10psi but the hot side is so restricted that you can't hold it past 5500rpm or so.
Doubt there is a compressor map out there so you will probably have to find out through trial and error.
If your IAT starts getting really high then the compressor isn't being very efficient. A bigger FMIC and/or meth can compensate for this a little bit.

[tke344]

I just realized I haven't been doing much with the mid range, under 14 PSI with no timing corrections from 2500-5000RPM Seems like like I could squeeze another 1-2PSI without issue.

A FMIC is definitely on the list, first off I probably need to replace the stock charge pipe though. Still deciding on whether it's worth getting an intake or just a drop in filter. They don't seem to do much until you're up around the 400whp mark. Catless downpipes are going in this spring after my original warranty is up and I get the car inspected.

[tke344]

Got a short 3rd gear log done this morning, with the E40 all timing corrections are gone, zero's to redline. I did lower the target AFRs a bit so I imagine that helped too. I did get some short throttle closures so I've since raised the WGDC numbers a bit. I'm surprised I'm still seeing negative 5 to negative 12 STFT values in the 4700+ RPM range. I raised the scalar a bit in the lower range to compensate for positive values and lowered it in the high RPM range to hopefully compensate for the negatives. With the numbers where they are, it seems like I could run E50 on the stock LPFP. Here's the log incase anyone is interested.

http://www.datazap.me/u/tke344/e40-r...18-19-20-21-22

[Myrder]

on your fuel scalar you have 1.14 in low areas and 1.09 in high rpm/load areas. Wouldn't you want this opposite? Having increased fuel scalar under higher loads/rpms? I know cobb lists 1.17 for e30 as a scalar.

[tke344]

Originally Posted by Myrder

on your fuel scalar you have 1.14 in low areas and 1.09 in high rpm/load areas. Wouldn't you want this opposite? Having increased fuel scalar under higher loads/rpms? I know cobb lists 1.17 for e30 as a scalar.

You would think that should be the case, but after logging again with the scalar closer to 1.0 my STFT values were closer to zero. I was worried that I was misreading the logs, with negative values indicating the car is adding fuel but its definitely not. Positive STFT = adding fuel

http://www.datazap.me/u/tke344/e40-r...18-19-20-21-22




I still need to work out some small throttle closures but I think I have it fixed, pretty easy once you log MAF requested WGDC and boost setpoint factor. I think I'm nearing the limits until I add an intake and downpipe, I'm honestly feeling more of a difference between stg 1 aggressive and this tune than I did going from stock to stg 1. I wouldn't be surprised if I picked up 50whp.

[tke344]

Logged again this morning.

http://www.datazap.me/u/tke344/e40-r...18-19-20-21-22

Timing took a second to figure itself out in the beginning but I think it's because I went WOT a little late. I topped off again so that was ~e45% - Going forward I plan to just fill up with half e85 and half 93 oct to make things simpler. I'm not seeing any signs of fuel issues. I imagine it'll take a toll on my LPFP eventually but it's a relatively cheap and easy fix. I ordered a K&N drop in filter but I'm holding off on the charge pipe, boost levels are so low I don't think it's necessary at this point. Most of the power I'm making is because of the timing.

[tke344]

This log was with the addition of a K&N drop in filter and I'm running ~E55. I adjusted the scalar a bit too much so I've since brought it back down. Also had a period of throttle closures and I backed down the WGDC base values as needed.

http://www.datazap.me/u/tke344/e50-r...17-18-19-20-21

[Subaru335i]

how does the car feel? a big difference over before? What actual loads are you seeing peak and at redline?

[tke344]

Originally Posted by Subaru335i

how does the car feel? a big difference over before? What actual loads are you seeing peak and at redline?

I've been constantly tuning since I started the thread but stopped posting updates. The car feels very powerful, the modeled torque limit seems to be pretty in line with wheel torque (as I think you mentioned before) maybe high by 10% - My table has 430ft/lbs from 2500-5500RPM and I'm hitting the target through most of that. I'd say the car feels like it's making every bit of 400ftlbs to the wheels. I've been able to hit 175 load targets in the mid range tapering to 135 at 6500RPM. ~11psi with a 70% WGDC%.

I know most people will think I'm crazy but I've actually ran nearly straight e85. with the fuel scalar at ~1.25 my STFTs are hovering around 0 at peak load. AFR is exactly where I set it, ~12 tapering to 11.5 - At these power levels I think I'm fine, the N54 guys are running into problems with their LPFP because they're making 500ft lbs of torque, obviously thats going to require a lot more fuel. Once I get this tune dialed in 100% I might just hold off on other mods for a while. What I'm actually interested in is running a low concentration of meth for cooling purposes. A very basic WW tank setup with a boost switch is inexpensive and as long as I don't up timing it won't matter if flow stops.

[Subaru335i]

Awesome!
You have a 2011 E90 6mt with rwd? Thats what I have and I was wondering if you might be open to sending me your map?
I know I would want to start smaller like you did an monitor as I go up to make sure my car can handle it but I would like to see what exactly you have changed and whatnot.