[s-cars] ECU what is the trick to opening it

[Mihnea Cotet]

Some more thoughts on this thread (I never give up ;-))) )

At 02:30 4/01/2004 -0500, FvAMI at aol.com wrote:
>In a message dated 1/2/04 9:34:28 AM Pacific Standard Time,
>bob.rossato at att.net writes:
>
> > ... and punch in 227 SAE horsepower..Viola!...you get 230 DIN horsepower,
> > and 169 KW.  And going back to the original issue of 269 PS, that 
> equates to
> > 265 SAE hp with is an even larger discrepancy compared to the 280 HP 
> usually
> > quoted by Hoppen.
> >
> >
>
>1) If you dynoed a stock car you would find the Audi HP values to be very
>conservative.

Ummm, not really.... a friend of mine who is good friends with the 
engineers at quattro Gmbh has been there with a few of his friends' S4s in 
order to have them dynoed on one of the world's best dynos. Ambient 
temperature was fully controllable and at 22°C, his car in stock form 
produced 222 crank HP according to the DIN standards. Quite a few others 
were between 225-227. Now if that dyno was "lying" and measuring cr at p, then 
I don't know who to believe anymore.

>2) The Horsepower on the MTM Stage 1 is limited by the K-24. The torque is
>very impressive. MTM has also made it that the chip will be slightly lean and
>conserve fuel while cruising. This chip has essentially set the standard 
>and it
>is quite easy to modify certain parameters and make it a little less
>aggressive and smoother if that is what you are looking for.

450Nm at 4000 RPM is very impressive? I find it just too peaky but maybe 
that's just me.....

>3) MTM was not developed with both 91 octane and 91 Degrees outside in mind.

91 octane, definitely not! Ask Peter Link or Roland Mayer or whomever and 
they will all tell you: as long as the car is chipped, always use 98 RON or 
equivalent fuel quality. If not, stay away from tuning your car.

>Put in 100 octane and the smile will plastered to your face ...

100 R+M/2???????? Pointless, 99 RON should be enough IMO, although I 
haven't really driven myself an MTM1+ car yet for long enough in order to 
find out when/how it pings....

The other reason why the MTM 1+ might ping, and no one has ever noticed 
this, is that the basic chip it comes from is an ABY timing/fuel chip. 
Thus, the ECUs CPU doesn't read all the information the same way and can 
lead to several issues, among which pinging could be one of them.

>4) Real time tuning is great - If the ambient conditions including the
>characteristics of the car always remained constant. If you developed a new
>component (i.e. - MAF) or were testing a bored out engine and needed to 
>verify
>baseline parameters.

So you're saying that real-time tuning isn't as good as it seems actually, 
right????????? Now please tell me what's better then??? Bosch VS-20? Not 
even IMO. One can program a chip so it works ok in 99% of all driving 
conditions and in all ambient temperatures, once one knows the temperature 
delta between the ambient and the intake temperatures, one can do the math 
for other ambient temps and correct everything so the chip never pings 
whatever the ambient air temps.


>A well developed chip should be able to adapt to many environments ... so a
>chip with the proper adaptation program should easily be able to adapt its'
>parameters versus manually adjusted parameters during a couple of real time
>tests.

A M2.3.2 chip has no timing advance adaptation ability, only fuel delivery 
adaptation (and pretty restricted compared to an ME7.5 chip from an RS4 for 
instance) so what you're asking for is simply impossible.

HTH,

Mihnea