Ultimate VTG engines
#121
Toby do all your plugs look the same? or is this a shot o a plug that was on one of the cylinders that misfired?
I remember on my previous RTurbo Ruf installed 1 step colder plugs.. claimed its much better than the stcok heat range..
also back in 2008 a freind of mine had one of the first 7Gt2 in our region he had one of the first tuning kits from FVD he told me that FVD supplied him with 1 step colder plugs....
I remember on my previous RTurbo Ruf installed 1 step colder plugs.. claimed its much better than the stcok heat range..
also back in 2008 a freind of mine had one of the first 7Gt2 in our region he had one of the first tuning kits from FVD he told me that FVD supplied him with 1 step colder plugs....
#122
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Moe
I didn't get to see the other plugs but think they were all similar, when the manifold was holed there was all sorts of shenanigans going on for that 30 mile drive to the shop, misfiring popping, farting etc
I am pretty certain these are the same plugs as I have in my 3.8 993tt, they are ~£25 each so a twin plug 993tt plug change is pricey !
The number is R7436-9 I think they are pretty special pieces...
I didn't get to see the other plugs but think they were all similar, when the manifold was holed there was all sorts of shenanigans going on for that 30 mile drive to the shop, misfiring popping, farting etc
I am pretty certain these are the same plugs as I have in my 3.8 993tt, they are ~£25 each so a twin plug 993tt plug change is pricey !
The number is R7436-9 I think they are pretty special pieces...
#123
Avader, you had the big VTGs on the 600 kit right ? I think you never got into this range we are talking about, you mentioned a few times that you don't agree with 2K rpm and WOT so if you practice what you preach you would never get into this zone, do you not remember your VTGs making a shuffling noise right at peak torque ~3000rpm ? it is this noise which then becomes the misfire at cool temps
Last edited by avader906; 12-11-2011 at 09:24 AM.
#124
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
You can spout all you want but I will wager you that the problem I am having is program related even if it means that the program /VTG boost control function is not working right in the higher air mass conditions, it is no probem to live with and I am still enjoying my car daily but will get it looked at next year when the new intake manifold is available - Is your engine the guinea pig for the new intake ?
#125
Avader- it is NOT compressor surge. I've owned highly tuned turbo cars for twenty years and what we are hearing is problematic boost control, probably inherent in the VTG design. You need to take some of your own advice there buddy.
#126
I could see you were getting a little frustrated but insulting my "naive mechanical prowess" is a bit silly. I have zero mechanical background and any knowledege I have is from experience and observation and I have been observing Porsche tuning for 23 years.
You can spout all you want but I will wager you that the problem I am having is program related even if it means that the program /VTG boost control function is not working right in the higher air mass conditions, it is no probem to live with and I am still enjoying my car daily but will get it looked at next year when the new intake manifold is available - Is your engine the guinea pig for the new intake ?
You can spout all you want but I will wager you that the problem I am having is program related even if it means that the program /VTG boost control function is not working right in the higher air mass conditions, it is no probem to live with and I am still enjoying my car daily but will get it looked at next year when the new intake manifold is available - Is your engine the guinea pig for the new intake ?
We are 100% focused on getting the car done for racing next year - so no interest to get involved in R&D beyond the necessary (drop the variocam). Later next year will procure stands to do the engine/DME simulation/tuning work ourselves.
#127
Nick - I cant argue with the guy who thinkgs that diverter valves actually control the boost in VTG equipped engines....
#128
We've talked about several things here that are issues- torque limiter, diverter valves fluttering noise, and manifolds.
I've said this countless times now- this noise may OR MAY NOT be an issue, but the interesting thing is that it is prevalent in TB's and my cars. Apparently you are not using VTG now, so how are you contributing to a better S/N ratio in this thread?
Now as far as opinions go, I'll stick with those coming from a team whose palamares include several big four post trophies from LeMans and not some anonymous keyboard jockey.
#129
#130
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Whilst I have a naive and very limited mechanical knowledge I know the numbers and never before has it been possible to have 900+NM @ 3000rpm, (as you know if you read my story the engine dyno from RS Tuning broke and had to be upgraded because of this massive torque at such low rpm) and it is the physics of what is happening at this point which is causing the problem and it is the increasing air mass (due to lower ambient temps) which is making the program cut the spark....
#133
But 2 logs you show are widely different - with TTurbine's showing ECU struggling to adapt. Without additional logging it is not possible to actually pinpoint the problem as I've mentioned. I mean it's not clear if this is the cause or the consequence.....
On my kit we never changed the plugs from OEM - because their heat range is what RS based their tuning on - and what ECU has for base parameters. So say by running colder plugs you can trick ECU to more agressive under certain conditions - and trigger faults. This is very unlikely in 18deg C weather - but every little modification could get you there (2-3psi less backpressure catless = 2-3psi more boost for the same vane angle, then add 5-6 degrees of more advance because of plugs etc... we can quickly get out of the range that ECU can adapt to based on the tune.... and show faults). This is why you tune everything together - there are so many moving parts.
The drop in ambient temps basically increased the air mass max by 20% - and ECU should be able to adjust if base tables have no errors (note that ambient temp has no effect other than for motor fan (engine bay temp sensor - as air mass and IATs are measured directly and independently). To give you an example - on my car we played with GT3 throttle body (larger diameter) - without re-tuning base tables that are calculated for the given volume of intake tract and TB diameter - but ECU had adjusted/learned.... that's how flexible software is these days - far from linear (or lookup tables) electronic injection.
It sounds like you should not be showing full boost at that point (either because of more gradual boost set-in required, or release of boost from max via vane control at that point - ie you require less boost for same torque output.) However it does not - and prime suspect -> errors in VE/boost etc calculations.
#134
#135
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
In terms of $$$$$ good customer, just one of the 6 litre CGT engine customers (did 4 last year) spent more than I have done in total on the 5 engine builds/tunes I have had over the last 14 years, they like me cos I am a "tame" customer and believe everything I am told
The drop in ambient temps basically increased the air mass max by 20% - and ECU should be able to adjust if base tables have no errors (note that ambient temp has no effect other than for motor fan (engine bay temp sensor - as air mass and IATs are measured directly and independently). To give you an example - on my car we played with GT3 throttle body (larger diameter) - without re-tuning base tables that are calculated for the given volume of intake tract and TB diameter - but ECU had adjusted/learned.... that's how flexible software is these days - far from linear (or lookup tables) electronic injection.
It sounds like you should not be showing full boost at that point (either because of more gradual boost set-in required, or release of boost from max via vane control at that point - ie you require less boost for same torque output.) However it does not - and prime suspect there is some errors in VE/boost etc calculations.
It sounds like you should not be showing full boost at that point (either because of more gradual boost set-in required, or release of boost from max via vane control at that point - ie you require less boost for same torque output.) However it does not - and prime suspect there is some errors in VE/boost etc calculations.