Catless dp on MT

[QTR FMS]

So you want a standalone because you don't want to put the work into understanding the MG1 DME?

Also, if you use the MHD+ options, everything you are struggling with above gets MUCH easier.

didnt say i want standalone because i dont want to put work unto understanding the dme.
im putting 8 hours a day trying to find learning materials and trying to learn by trial and error, but information available are limited.

i prefer standalones for the customization like using pdm, keypad, co2 etc etc.

what i said those who know alot about mg1 are gatekeeping information to sell custom tunes , for example mhd with their locked ots tunes when they could have open sourced it and ecutek with their software for master tuners only. Not many contributing to community.

there are probably over 10,000 tables in the dme and we only have access to 200-400 with names that does not make any sense even when translated to English, no units for the axis ot z-values.

I learned alot from your thread but for example there is no minimum timing intervention with mhd definition. Ecutek have an option to disable throttle closure during overboosting which is not available with mhd definition

Sponsored

 

[ColonelAdama]

what i said those who know alot about mg1 are gatekeeping information to sell custom tunes , for example mhd with their locked ots tunes when they could have open sourced it and ecutek with their software for master tuners only. Not many contributing to community.

I hardly know much about MG1 yet but there's very few MT owners self tuning (probably single digits), so if you have any questions about mine let me know. Or we can share some data and try to figure it out. There are some MT issues to work out I wouldn't mind some R&D collab with.

Sure it does take a lot of time to learn this stuff, that is why tuners want a return on investment for their time. We are lucky to have Bryan to contribute what he does for free.

 

[razorlab]

didnt say i want standalone because i dont want to put work unto understanding the dme.
im putting 8 hours a day trying to find learning materials and trying to learn by trial and error, but information available are limited.

i prefer standalones for the customization like using pdm, keypad, co2 etc etc.

what i said those who know alot about mg1 are gatekeeping information to sell custom tunes , for example mhd with their locked ots tunes when they could have open sourced it and ecutek with their software for master tuners only. Not many contributing to community.

there are probably over 10,000 tables in the dme and we only have access to 200-400 with names that does not make any sense even when translated to English, no units for the axis ot z-values.

I learned alot from your thread but for example there is no minimum timing intervention with mhd definition. Ecutek have an option to disable throttle closure during overboosting which is not available with mhd definition

100% agree, which is why I created that thread. I have also been defining tables above and beyond what is in MHD XDF files. Many of which are the ones you mentioned. I haven't had time to update the tuning thread here but it's on my list. I'm also open to helping individuals if I can.

Speaking of thousands of tables, you might appreciate this project I just did where I defined over 4,400 tables in one BIN version that will help me define more tables in other bins:

I've also been putting some time into defining tables in my personal BIN (some tables are the ones you mentioned):

 

[QTR FMS]

100% agree, which is why I created that thread. I have also been defining tables above and beyond what is in MHD XDF files. Many of which are the ones you mentioned. I haven't had time to update the tuning thread here but it's on my list. I'm also open to helping individuals if I can.

Speaking of thousands of tables, you might appreciate this project I just did where I defined over 4,400 tables in one BIN version that will help me define more tables in other bins:

I've also been putting some time into defining tables in my personal BIN (some tables are the ones you mentioned):

yeah that is an incredible achievement that you managed to do it yourself. I will wait until you define my .bin

 

[BMWAF]

I assure you they have no interest in this after trying for the last month.

Maybe if more of us reach out, eventually they will act? I'll shoot through an email shortly. Doesn't seem like a ridiculous ask, to be fair.

Edit: EMAIL sent. Lets get on this, MHD MT crew!

 

[ColonelAdama]

Maybe if more of us reach out, eventually they will act? I'll shoot through an email shortly. Doesn't seem like a ridiculous ask, to be fair.

Edit: EMAIL sent. Lets get on this, MHD MT crew!

Make sure to grab some high-load shifting datalogs for them and send to me too if you have any questions

 

[GRMan]

Lol, they probably won’t do shit cause you have already handed them the money for the license. If there are 1000 people going to hand out their money to bm3 then they will act like…yesterday. From the look of it I will go with custom tune (bm3) cause that’s what all the tuners here prefers

 

[BMWAF]

Lol, they probably won’t do shit cause you have already handed them the money for the license. If there are 1000 people going to hand out their money to bm3 then they will act like…yesterday. From the look of it I will go with custom tune (bm3) cause that’s what all the tuners here prefers

I'm not disagreeing with you, but it's very little effort vs reward.. albeit a very slim chance of one.

 

[ColonelAdama]

https://datazap.me/u/coloneladama/log-1771531155?log=0&data=2-3-6-17-33-34-35-36-37-38&solo=2

pretty big shortcomings... here's shift behavior you can expect. Don't worry, MHD says you can always just "shift better" or use NLS (no lift shift). Its not their job to make a map that works with MTs, its your job to change how you drive.

serious knock and 10+ psi overboosts are totally fine and need no improvements, don't worry the limp mode does reset after 20 minutes or so.

Its not even hard to fix it genuinely, I hardly know what I'm doing yet on MHD and had shift boost spikes resolved on Revision 2. @QTR FMS - This is MHD+ boost control at .2 psi deviation with a barely tuned PID.


https://datazap.me/u/coloneladama/log-1770994465?log=1&data=16-20-28-30-31-32-33-34-35-37&solo=19

 

[QTR FMS]

Its not even hard to fix it genuinely, I hardly know what I'm doing yet on MHD and had shift boost spikes resolved on Revision 2. @QTR FMS - This is MHD+ boost control - .2 psi deviation hardly tuning the PID.


https://datazap.me/u/coloneladama/log-1770994465?log=1&data=16-20-28-30-31-32-33-34-35-37&solo=19

Initially, I didn't want to use MHD WDGC and PID, since it was rpm-based and didn't have a spool setting and i saw that MG1 logic more advance and overal better, but now that I think I figured out how the tables work i might change my mind.

here is what im gonna try to test today, i want to see if i set 80% wdgc in the spooling area and get the P to raise my wdgc to 100% fast enough until maybe 5psi error, then slow the P down. This should fix partial throttle overboost issues you had in the other thread by using the P for spooling rather than setting 100% in the low rpm area.

This is the WGDC I just built to start testing with, i will lower the WGDC below 2500 once i test the P.

this is the P, not sure if the values are correct, from my understanding this table is not a gain table but rather WGDC adder based on boost deviation. i will rescale it later and make 5 psi 100% duty cycle.

my D table is still 0 not sure how to populate it.

 

[ColonelAdama]

This is the WGDC I just built to start testing with, i will lower the WGDC below 2500 once i test the P.

don't, it looks right for under 2500 Always at 100% under boost threshold rpm

This is a good starting point for WGDC base, I'd probably drop another 5% across the board as you always want a positive PID response.

Yes, the P table (and D) is a WGDC% adder

Here is what mine was in the log I shared, but it actually needs to be even more aggressive.

This is the p-table I try next. It may be a little too much, but spool was a bit slow on occasion.

I haven't really optimized d-factor yet, it definitely needs work, but this was the base table Bryan shared.

 

[ColonelAdama]

Initially, I didn't want to use MHD WDGC and PID, since it was rpm-based and didn't have a spool setting

Spool pretty much sits at 100% WGDC then starts to blend to the MHD+ WGDC somewhere around 5 psi below target from what i've seen.

that is why I re adjusted the Y axis breakpoints of my p-table. If its not using MHD+ logic when boost deviation >5psi, then clip it there and get more granularity in the table.

 

[QTR FMS]

Spool pretty much sits at 100% WGDC then starts to blend to the MHD+ WGDC somewhere around 5 psi below target from what i've seen.

the reason i dont want my base WGDC be 100% because i have bad habit of not downshifting during traffic and lugging the engine at 1000-2500 rpm there is alot of knock and i make 7psi at 30% accelerator pedal position when the target boost is 0-1psi. i only want 100% WGDC when throttle position exceed 75%

thank you for sharing your setting, i will refer to it as i make changes.

 

[ColonelAdama]

the reason i dont want my base WGDC be 100% because i have bad habit of not downshifting during traffic and lugging the engine at 1000-2500 rpm there is alot of knock and i make 7psi at 30% accelerator pedal position when the target boost is 0-1psi. i only want 100% WGDC when throttle position exceed 75%

thank you for sharing your setting, i will refer to it as i make changes.

Shouldn't knock, throttle will manage it as it is supposed to at partial load. Are you looking at manifold pressure?

if you find yourself lugging too much, just drop the boost targets significantly below 2500

You may lose some response with the strategy you are considering

 

[razorlab]

That P table is crazy aggressive in the higher deviation areas. That means P can give up to 50% more WGDC. If you need to have it that aggressive, than your base WGDC tuning needs more work.

D is dampening. Slows or speeds up P response.

For larger turbos, P can be more aggressive without as many ill effects, on stock turbo, you have to make sure it's not too aggressive or it can get erratic.

In simple terms. Your base wgdc should be the main tuning table and you use PID for error correction for different ambient temps and driving conditions.

I am currently tuning my personal G-series M240i, here are my in-progress WGDC, P/D, boost target tables.

E50. Stock car, stock dp, drop in air filter.

You can see I need to tweak P and D a bit, and some tweaks to base WGDC.

Sponsored