Quote:
Originally Posted by strombomb
Hey Escy, those are impressive numbers, great job. Sounds like you sorted out a few gremlins, that’s a win by itself.
What’s up with the misfires and FW version? That seems a little fishy. I bet you’ll be taking that up with manufacturer; hopefully they can help sort out the misfires.
|
Thanks. It isn't definately an issue with the FW, it's not been confirmed yet. He'd added a fueling schedule look ahead setting for the latest firmware, where it gets a timing value. I don't know if you saw my latest update but it turns out I messed up and got the cam chain tensioners on the wrong banks, when I've been stripping it down to fix, I've just noticed my cambelt is really slack (thinking maybe caused by the tensioners working in the opposite way?). This explains the inconsistent power with the timing being all over the place. It should hopefully do a bit better once I sort it all out and get it back down there. The suspected FW issue could be my end (there was a FW update a few months back which caused an issue on my car and it was a problem their end).
Quote:
Originally Posted by strombomb
The dyno graph you posted on pistonheads looks great. You are peaking at 30psi and tapering to ??. Looks well controlled. Are you using the 2.7t N75 valve (wastegate control valve)? How has it been tuning the wastegate control with the LPC8?
|
The graph should look better when I go back, thinking it might be around 80-100bhp better off at about 4000rpm once the inlet cam is advancing rather than retarding. There's no tapering of the boost at all, it's holding 30psi at the 7200rpm redline. That's impressive for a 2.7t isn't it?! I didn't want a power band that drops away so happy with that. Standard N75 controlled by the ECU. No issues, it's doing what we want when we want. I guess it's down to the experience of the tuner, I struggled to tune the PID on the road, I had it reasonable but he got it a lot tighter to our target. Just looking at my logs and PID isn't even working much to keep it at 30psi at the redline. That's down the the physical spec of the engine I think, probably mainly the larger exhaust manifolds.
Quote:
Originally Posted by strombomb
Your experience with the a2w intercoolers reinforces my concerns about intake temps. Having the a2w intercoolers in the engine bay means the intercooler coolant needs to not only cool the charge, but also overcome the heat soaking and ambient temps of the engine bay. To that end, more coolant flow, better cooling of the coolant, and lower ambient temperature around the intercoolers would be helpful.
|
Yeah, I had a charge cooler mounted in the boot before and it stayed cooler for a lot longer (it was also larger). You could touch it and one side was hot the other cool.
20160925_174312
I never got to use the car properly hard as it wasn't tuned, on the road it stayed really cool, on the dyno, it eventually got overwhelmed. From a performance view this was definately a better set-up than my current one. One thing I'm quite proud of, with my current car is I've not made any sacrifices in terms of practicality. Everything is hidden away, meth tank, charge coolers, meth pump, etc. That's why I won't consider cutting away bodywork to improve airflow, my car isn't about that.
Like you say, just circulating coolant into the engine bay is going to heat it up. One improvement I can make is wrapping my exhaust manifolds and making some heatshields. My charge coolers are right next to them. My system might recover better on the road compared to the dyno, there's no airflow through the engine bay so everything is probably a bit hotter than normal. We got a load of runs where the IAT was <50c, for road use, it'll be fine.