SUPRA ULTIMATE B58 JB4 GUIDE AND LOG REVIEW (V1)

[razorlab]

yeah you probably aren't wrong, there just aren't really many resources besides what you contributed, which is greatly appreciated.

Honestly I'd love to just run a compare bin on stock vs an OTS map, I learn best from reverse engineering

Happy to share one of my .bins to compare.

Sponsored

 

[Cornfed5.3]

@ColonelAdama have you ran into over boost on up shifts with a mt? Jumped from 18psi to 28psi the other day. I’m assuming shift redux from each gear will be better than setting default wastegate position because I could control how much boost I’ve got going into the next gear vs a global wg default position making it variable on different shifts/load. Is shift redux field number related to WGDC %? Pedal drop at high rpm makes WGDC go to 50 while throttle is still 100%. I still have the boost low and have dropped from E50 to E44, but the HPFP isn’t keeping up with demand. Plan is to work ethanol down 5% at a time at lower boost until the fp_h is >28 and then add boost until I reach 21-23psi. Also assuming lower boost <4000rpm is just compensated by additional timing from the looks of it. I now have a Kenji race dp, lowered ff from 30 (stock dp) to 15 (Kenji) and dropped to 10 because of throttle closure. This was a 2nd gear pull letting off at 6500rpm.

 

[ColonelAdama]

@ColonelAdama
I can't seem to get calc_torque to be under 49 in the mid range area. It seems to always spike to 49-50 around 4500rpm. DME_BT and ecu_psi don't seem to be within 1 psi difference until 5000+rpm. Otherwise car pulls very hard.

Log was around 65F OAT.
FF:30, PID:20
E25

https://datazap.me/u/nvidiagefore/l...-26-27-28-29&trim=0&tmin=1511.62&tmax=2028.85

looks fine to me, don't worry about the calc_tq thing unless you are trying to diagnose boost stuttering/throttle closures. Gets worse at higher boost and E%

 

[ColonelAdama]

@ColonelAdama have you ran into over boost on up shifts with a mt? Jumped from 18psi to 28psi the other day. I’m assuming shift redux from each gear will be better than setting default wastegate position because I could control how much boost I’ve got going into the next gear vs a global wg default position making it variable on different shifts/load. Is shift redux field number related to WGDC %? Pedal drop at high rpm makes WGDC go to 50 while throttle is still 100%. I still have the boost low and have dropped from E50 to E44, but the HPFP isn’t keeping up with demand. Plan is to work ethanol down 5% at a time at lower boost until the fp_h is >28 and then add boost until I reach 21-23psi. Also assuming lower boost <4000rpm is just compensated by additional timing from the looks of it. I now have a Kenji race dp, lowered ff from 30 (stock dp) to 15 (Kenji) and dropped to 10 because of throttle closure. This was a 2nd gear pull letting off at 6500rpm.

yeah I get boost spikes when letting off and sometimes between shifts. I'll have to see with Terry if we can just have WGDC drop to 0 between shifts or something. Just look at boost2, the throttle definitely keeps boost under 28.

If you get on newer firmware you can see Aux3 is true wastegate position (range 0-80), and it is usually at 80 (100% dme WGDC) between shifts. I recommend E35-E40 for max power.

 

[Cornfed5.3]

yeah I get boost spikes when letting off and sometimes between shifts. I'll have to see with Terry if we can just have WGDC drop to 0 between shifts or something. Just look at boost2, the throttle definitely keeps boost under 28.

If you get on newer firmware you can see Aux3 is true wastegate position (range 0-80), and it is usually at 80 (100% WGDC) between shifts. I recommend E35-E40 for max power.

My assumption is dropping wg initial position would hurt response <1500rpm and on tip in where you could tailor boost on shifts with the redux feature. The other log went from 18-28psi on 2-3 shift and immediately reduced throttle. I read where he stated he wanted it high because manuals would drop boost on shifts, but the log suggests otherwise.. I may try 30-40 wg initial or 10-30 on the redux to see the changes.

 

[ColonelAdama]

My assumption is dropping wg initial position would hurt response <1500rpm and on tip in where you could tailor boost on shifts with the redux feature. The other log went from 18-28psi on 2-3 shift and immediately reduced throttle. I read where he stated he wanted it high because manuals would drop boost on shifts, but the log suggests otherwise.. I may try 30-40 wg initial or 10-30 on the redux to see the changes.

MT car dme flash intentionally closes wastegate when off the pedal for response, yes.

 

[Julian Baynes]

https://datazap.me/u/ahnika10/log-1756411172?log=0&data=1-2-4-11-25-26-27-28-29

Any idea what might be going on here? All three of these pulls were within minutes of each other on the same drive. Only change was lowering FOL from 65-60 after the first pull. I've been getting major boost dips ever since I tried increasing FOL to 65. Second pull looks good, had really bad wheel spin at the start, but the third is terrible again. Absolutely zero changes between the second and third pull.

I've had the FP upgrade installed for weeks with no issues until I changed FOL. Running about E30.

 

[ColonelAdama]

https://datazap.me/u/ahnika10/log-1756411172?log=0&data=1-2-4-11-25-26-27-28-29

Any idea what might be going on here? All three of these pulls were within minutes of each other on the same drive. Only change was lowering FOL from 65-60 after the first pull. I've been getting major boost dips ever since I tried increasing FOL to 65. Second pull looks good, had really bad wheel spin at the start, but the third is terrible again. Absolutely zero changes between the second and third pull.

I've had the FP upgrade installed for weeks with no issues until I changed FOL. Running about E30.

it seems to just be the calc_tq>47 causing the closures.

In your good log, you see >47 tq at 3300, 4000, and 5000. At 5000 you can see it even try to pull boost back a little. So your best bet is starting to lower duty bias around those areas in increments 3-5 or so until calc_tq stays under 48, shouldn't really have closures, maybe occasionally.

ie:

duty_15	duty_20	duty_25	duty_30	duty_35	duty_40	duty_45	duty_50	duty_55	duty_60	duty_65	duty_70
60​	60​	30​	30​	35​	30​	40​	45​	56​	59​	64​	64​

 

[Julian Baynes]

it seems to just be the calc_tq>47 causing the closures.

In your good log, you see >47 tq at 3300, 4000, and 5000. At 5000 you can see it even try to pull boost back a little. So your best bet is starting to lower duty bias around those areas in increments 3-5 or so until calc_tq stays under 48, shouldn't really have closures, maybe occasionally.

ie:

duty_15	duty_20	duty_25	duty_30	duty_35	duty_40	duty_45	duty_50	duty_55	duty_60	duty_65	duty_70
60​	60​	30​	30​	35​	30​	40​	45​	56​	59​	64​	64​

I'll give that a shot. Thank you. Just threw me that the biggest closure on that last run was at 47 tq. I've had plenty of runs with closures, but never at 5000 and never that cut boost so hard after 3500. Maybe just a bad day.

 

[ColonelAdama]

I'll give that a shot. Thank you. Just threw me that the biggest closure on that last run was at 47 tq. I've had plenty of runs with closures, but never at 5000 and never that cut boost so hard after 3500. Maybe just a bad day.

The window of settings where you get it consistent is very small but possible.

 

[GRMan]

Not all 93 (or premium) fuel is created equally.

Here's the strongest pump gas 93 (shell) JB4 car I've been finishing up at 20-21 psi. Easily a 440whp/500wtq car.
https://datazap.me/u/coloneladama/log-1749237553?log=1&data=1-2-11-25-26-27-28-29-34&zoom=52-90

This is why logging is so important. My car won't even run Map 1 this cleanly on 93 around here.

The BMS map suggestions are rarely accurate in my experience.

Cali 91 on Map 1 will be rough. Consider not tuning your car unless you have ethanol.
Proper 91 on Map 1 will be ok.
93 on Map 1 will be good.
93 on Map 2 will be iffy (usually not good enough). 2 gal E85 in the mix guarantees a strong Map 2.
Rare cases where Map 3 works fine with E30, but its really more for Gen 1 b58 or B48s handle it pretty well. M40i engines can't handle it as they already run so much boost factory.

Map 4 or 5 on P158 firmware are strictly to be used with E30-E40 with FOL control ONLY (fp upgrade).

In this case, this owner got a Map 6 (similar to Map 3) out of his 93 fuel.


His testimonial is that his wife's JB4 tuned X4 is now quicker 60-120 kph than his M240 on MHD stage 2. (2.95s vs 3.12s) JB4 car in worse DA and about 500 lbs heavier. Definitely unusual for JB4 to be so much quicker than MHD on pump gas!! Shows that OTS is usually conservative for the given fuel, and a custom JB4 map can match it or beat it if the fuel is exceptional.

Hi ColonelAdama,

Does this mean if a stock 24 DP, MT running 92, can just run on map 1 (no other changes on FF or duty bias?) and call it a day?

Am I right is saying that as there is only a 1psi delta between Map 1 and Map 2, can't be that much difference in the top end?

 

[mk5Santana]

Hi ColonelAdama,

Does this mean if a stock 24 DP, MT running 92, can just run on map 1 (no other changes on FF or duty bias?) and call it a day?

Am I right is saying that as there is only a 1psi delta between Map 1 and Map 2, can't be that much difference in the top end?

Can I post my logs for you to look at? I paid for an E40 map from that dude Jesse Debears, he fucked it up and has been ducking me ever since.

 

[i3igpete]

Can I post my logs for you to look at? I paid for an E40 map from that dude Jesse Debears, he fucked it up and has been ducking me ever since.

Not sure why you didn't do that in the first place - just post them.

 

[ColonelAdama]

Hi ColonelAdama,

Does this mean if a stock 24 DP, MT running 92, can just run on map 1 (no other changes on FF or duty bias?) and call it a day?

Am I right is saying that as there is only a 1psi delta between Map 1 and Map 2, can't be that much difference in the top end?

Map 1 tapers off sooner than Map 2. So I'd say like 20whp difference.

For stock MT on 92, try map 1 at FF30

 

[GRMan]

Map 1 tapers off sooner than Map 2. So I'd say like 20whp difference.

For stock MT on 92, try map 1 at FF30

Thanks but how about using map 6 to change the boost curve so it doesn't taper off as fast?

Sponsored