My minor modding thread

<tuffty/> said:
224372_161525230651321_1771508880_n.jpg


This rather groovy pic was taken by Bullymeister Photography... his Facebook page contains loads of pics of really nice cars so check it out...

https://www.facebook.com/bullyphotography

<tuffty/>
Click to expand...

great photo!

First time I've seen a picture of your car posted as a piece of art rather than a cadaver for the purposes of education. Having said that your engine bay is pretty sexy
 
Good progress, just thinking, with the inlet working loose, do you think it is because of the inlet bracket that no longer fits after fitting a phenolic? I say this because i extended mine so it still fits and checked my bolts 10 mins ago (out of curiosity) and they are still locked down...slight vibrations??
 
s3dave said:
Good progress, just thinking, with the inlet working loose, do you think it is because of the inlet bracket that no longer fits after fitting a phenolic? I say this because i extended mine so it still fits and checked my bolts 10 mins ago and they are still locked down...slight vibrations??
Click to expand...

Tbh no... I don't think its related to it in this case... while supporting a great lump of metal hanging off the engine is a good thing its not been an issue on my previous phenolic install as I recall having to tighten the bolts after the initial build once the car had spent some time on the dyno... I noticed it when sorting out an unrelated boost leak from a split pipe and put it down to tightening sequence at the time so I now always tighten from the middle out (like head bolts) and never had a problem since...

I just forgot to re-check this time around as I haven't used new gaskets the last couple of times the inlets been off as they came off clean so I used a little high temp silicon and refitted..

The loosening is purely the gaskets settling in this case..

<tuffty/>
 
Actually managed to flash in a file tonight that I have being doing some more work on... done quite a few tweaks here and there and obviously needed to cap off the boost a bit as I knew it would go mental with the stronger springs in the Tial...

Capped off N75 to 70% as a start (was set to 90% previously) and initial runs produced a rather scary off scale boost reading over 2bar so clearly needed to be a bit lower lol...

Capped off at 50% and although still getting a spike to just under 2bar it settles down to around 1.5bar ish... although to be fair I was more concerned about what was happening on the road at the time :whistle2:

Only did a quick log just to see where everything was...
T118-001.jpg


Timing is a bit wiggy atm... getting pull as a result of the boost spike and slow recovery which I know I can fix but tbh I am pretty happy with where its currently at as a start point to finer tuning... LTFT's are currently sat at -3.1% which I can live with for now and to be on the safe side I have disconnected the N75 again until I can get a chance to log some more stuff and makes tweaks to bring the boost under control...

Other nice thing is the drivability... I have tweaked some stuff and off boost performance is much better than before... felt a tad flat before but feels nice now... more timing can be added below 3k to improve this more but will leave that for the dyno now I think...

Happy with the results... map is loads better than I remember previous ones were which goes to show how much the hardware changes had affected my original one... learning stuff all the time with this mapping lark which is quite exciting too...

Pending any emergency tweaks this will do now until the inlet manifold is on... I want to do the final (I say final but it won't be of course LOL) stage of tuning with the final hardware configuration all done so there are no nasty surprises..

Nearly there after all this time... be nice to finally draw a line under this 'stage' of her evolution :D

<tuffty/>
 
Last edited:
Andrew@A.L.D said:
Got a S4 one you can have

If you do fit a RS4 one could you let me know what % you input into the liquid gauge to calibrate the bigger maf
Click to expand...

Just the MAF tube I assume? is it a Bosch one or Hitachi?...

S4 one ironically should be just enough tbh as they max at 420hp... can't see me getting much over that on my setup and with how I want to run the engine anyway so I'm game..

As for the Liquid stuff... tbh this is more to cater for the 'popular' TT modshack mofo MAF tube mod... (Modshack | Stage 2 MOFO (BAMM))... from what I understand you use a combo of this larger tube and a 4bar to 'fudge' the ecu into not adapting out the extra fuel from the 4bar whilst allowing better breathing from the larger MAF... you can adjust the Liquid to calibrate air flow for liquid but obviously it will still be out in VCDS...

<tuffty/>
 
The standard BAM S3 maf will actually read higher than an S4 one.

The wideband sensor gives it a wider range, meaning the BAM MAF will read to ~345g/s whereas the S4 ones will only read to 330ish.

I suspect your 292.58 is just VCDS reaching its silly internal limit, do some logs with ME7Logger and compare!
 
aragorn said:
The standard BAM S3 maf will actually read higher than an S4 one.

The wideband sensor gives it a wider range, meaning the BAM MAF will read to ~345g/s whereas the S4 ones will only read to 330ish.

I suspect your 292.58 is just VCDS reaching its silly internal limit, do some logs with ME7Logger and compare!
Click to expand...

Its a VCDS thing to do with 8bit and 16bit something or others... anyhoo... fitting an RS4 MAF tube to a car we did recently actually gained power (same sensor, larger tube) so from a flow perspective going larger is a no brainer... it will be using the S3 sensor as below anyway so its 'just' a case of getting the scaling right... but again this isn't the end of the world...

Andrew@A.L.D said:
Its the tube with the S3 sensor

PM me your address and i will get it out asap for you as i have no need for it
Click to expand...

Thanks mate... I will sort it shortly... thanks very much

<tuffty/>
 
Andrew@A.L.D said:
The thing is when we fitted the RS4 to mine we didn't swap the sensors over so we just used the RS4 sensor

I take it the sensors are the same
Click to expand...

RS4 sensor is different to both the narrow band (APY) and wideband (AMK/BAM) S3's... I think we ended up using the original sensors in both the TT and the LCR...

I have read though that RS4 scaling on a 4 pot can be a big wiggy... need to read up a bit more about it of course but tbh I suspect teh S4 tube will do my current power level... just need to find an early S4 map pack... A-box and B-box I believe have bosch MAFs so I am sure I have something kicking about

<tuffty/>
 
<tuffty/> said:
Happy with the results... map is loads better than I remember previous ones were which goes to show how much the hardware changes had affected my original one... learning stuff all the time with this mapping lark which is quite exciting too...

<tuffty/>
Click to expand...

Hi Tuffy, is there anything to download or books a I can buy to start learning about this mapping stuff.
How are you learning?

Cheers
 
audi upgrades
Scullies said:
Hi Tuffy, is there anything to download or books a I can buy to start learning about this mapping stuff.
How are you learning?

Cheers
Click to expand...

I work with a tuner at the weekend and I am a programmer by trade... I also use NefMoto (NefMoto - Index) and a few other resources to help me


<tuffty/>
 
Why would you mess around fitting an S3 sensor into an RS4 (or S4) tube anyway?

Just use a complete RS4 (orS4) MAF and use the MAF calibration lifted straight from the original cars file.

Messing around with different sensors in different tubes is never going to be as accurate as a proper Audi factory calibration.
 
aragorn said:
The standard BAM S3 maf will actually read higher than an S4 one.

The wideband sensor gives it a wider range, meaning the BAM MAF will read to ~345g/s whereas the S4 ones will only read to 330ish.

I suspect your 292.58 is just VCDS reaching its silly internal limit, do some logs with ME7Logger and compare!
Click to expand...

Correction to this!

I didnt account for the MAF offset when working this out, so its wrong.

BAM MAF actually maxes out at 1053kg/hr, which is 292.5g/sec.
 
There is a discussion on NefMoto concerning RS4 scaling on a 20v..
Load capping out

I need to absorb this a bit and see where it goes... sadly its never just a case of copy and paste with these things as subtle differences between the hardware mean that you will have to adjust something somewhere...

The RS4 MAF sensor is different to the S3 (049) one so would need adjusting regardless... tbh its irrelevant as its just a case of fine tuning on the dyno really...

All part of the fun and games :)

<tuffty/>
 
Andrew@A.L.D said:
I'm using the RS4 sensor so what sort of problem will i have then

I still have the S3 sensor
Click to expand...

Tbh I don't know as I wasn't around at the mapping stage of the cars when Bill was playing with the MAFs.... RS4 MAFs have a thermistor to measure air temps at the sensor from what I understand... not sure of the implications of this hence the reason I would imagine using the S3 MAF sensor in the RS4 tube...

I thought you were going MAF less? have you fitted the wideband ECU yet? you will most likely need the later 049 S3 sensor if on wide band unless you scale accordingly I guess...

Mapping wise its all down to finding the right start point and work from there... you can run larger MAFs without scaling as you can compensate in other maps for fuelling and such... its just the gs readings will be out when logging...

Will see how it goes... I will be rescaling mine in the S4 MAF kindly supplied by your good self and see what issues occur but generally I know stuff has been successfully tuned without scaling as long as everything is kept relative... dyno helps :D

<tuffty/>
 
Decided agents it as with the maf would get better drivability for everyday driving.

Wideband ECU is fitted and was a very simple conversion as i followed the guides on the net and all the rest was left to Paul. He mapped out the EGT bit as my APY didn't have it so i think Paul scaled the RS4 to suit as he did ask for the Bosch part number to get the right scale for the map

With the wideband Paul thought it was better to map and much better for my power levels i'm aiming for.
 
Andrew@A.L.D said:
Decided agents it as with the maf would get better drivability for everyday driving.

Wideband ECU is fitted and was a very simple conversion as i followed the guides on the net and all the rest was left to Paul. He mapped out the EGT bit as my APY didn't have it so i think Paul scaled the RS4 to suit as he did ask for the Bosch part number to get the right scale for the map

With the wideband Paul thought it was better to map and much better for my power levels i'm aiming for.
Click to expand...

Thats good then... what you need to do is a single build thread post bunging links to all your other links (as lets face it they are all over the place LOL) so that peeps can actually see the amount of effort gone into yours...

Happy to help sort that if you let me know how you wanna play it... PM me details etc as and when..

<tuffty/>
 
Paul: I'm not sure the above nefmoto link is related specifically to using the RS4 MLHFM. It seems to me (from a quick skim) that once load/power starts getting very large, an internal limit in the ECU is reached.

This would happen with any correctly scaled MAF, be it an RS4 one, V8 one, or S3-sensor-in-some-bigger-housing. The bodge-fix being to underscale the MAF so the ECU doesnt see such high load figures.


I'm still intrigued as to why Bill thinks the RS4 MAF as a complete unit isnt compatible, when theres a lot of evidence out there showing that they work just fine...
 
aragorn said:
I'm still intrigued as to why Bill thinks the RS4 MAF as a complete unit isnt compatible, when theres a lot of evidence out there showing that they work just fine...
Click to expand...

plugged in motor would not run stable.. on all RS4 copied values... where 049 ~(225 sensor) worked fine on RS4 values

underscaling does work..

maybe it was a duff sensor I dont know... all I know is it did'nt work at all, so reverted to 049 sensor in RS4 housing
 
Not a problem as said i had no need for it and your needs are greater than mine.

I know that my maf tube is good for about 800 bhp? ( correct me if i'm wrong bill ).
 
<tuffty/> said:
Rods, injectors and various other parts are now on order with a mind to get this fitted early September and hopefully done and mapped ready for the Castle Combe Audi track day in October...
Click to expand...

Winding back to your first post Paul lol

3yrs later, still a no show down the strip or CastleCoombe! :laugh:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

deeman88
a3 turbo vs vr6 golf
Replies
5
Views
1K
Customboy
Customboy
S3addict
Audi S3 8l VR6 turbo build!
Replies
80
Views
24K
Ivan Fuentes Hagar
Ivan Fuentes Hagar
Danny Cawsey
Arashi gt35 turbo
Replies
1
Views
1K
superkarl
superkarl
Sevv
My Rather Slow S3 minor modding thread!
Replies
94
Views
10K
Sevv
Sevv
D
Vr6 & G60 kit
Replies
0
Views
702
Deleted member 65282
D
Top
Back