IS20+JB4=no problem, IS20+Stage2=blown engine

[Ton]

These look like map 6 with the target pegged at 30psi at some parts. Looks like user error of some sort. Its a tough pill to swallow for the user.

I think we have done a couple stacked Stage 2 Is12 tunes on Is20 with the same software with no issues.

The jb4 and car alone seem to have strong protection from user error. When stacking you lose some of this protection?

 

[toledospeed]

These look like map 6 with the target pegged at 30psi at some parts. Looks like user error of some sort. Its a tough pill to swallow for the user.

I think we have done a couple stacked Stage 2 Is12 tunes on Is20 with the same software with no issues.

Ah, yes. Look at that target curve plateau at 30 PSI...it must have been hitting some failsafe there and flatlining.

George, with all you have seen with the 1.8t gen 3 thus far, what do you think safe boost levels are for a daily driven car with some spirited driving? Have you seen or heard about any damaged rods, heads etc.? For example, if you were going to run a 1.8t as a reliable DD for yourself, what would you be dialing in for 80F weather near sea level?

 

[George Smooth]

Ah, yes. Look at that target curve plateau at 30 PSI...it must have been hitting some failsafe there and flatlining.

George, with all you have seen with the 1.8t gen 3 thus far, what do you think safe boost levels are for a daily driven car with some spirited driving? Have you seen or heard about any damaged rods, heads etc.? For example, if you were going to run a 1.8t as a reliable DD for yourself, what would you be dialing in for 80F weather near sea level?

This is the first 1.8T Gen3 I know that has broken. Prior to this it ran 280whp on a Mustang just fine.

Its hard to tell what is the safe level. I reckon 22-24psi peak with a taper to 18psi is conservative and will last the lifetime of the car.

 

[toledospeed]

This is the first 1.8T Gen3 I know that has broken. Prior to this it ran 280whp on a Mustang just fine.

Its hard to tell what is the safe level. I reckon 22-24psi peak with a taper to 18psi is conservative and will last the lifetime of the car.

Thanks George, appreciate the quick response! I am running 21 tapering to 17 for the last few weeks with IS20/DP/E20. Been very happy with it, but still have been wondering about safety/longevity if I would choose to turn it up another notch.

 

[TwinDad]

This is the first 1.8T Gen3 I know that has broken. Prior to this it ran 280whp on a Mustang just fine.

Its hard to tell what is the safe level. I reckon 22-24psi peak with a taper to 18psi is conservative and will last the lifetime of the car.

George, I told him he should have just stuck with the JB4! He originally told me he was just map 4. He told me it was ok to post here for him just to see if anyone might know what the cause would be. After I posted I started to really look at things more and more and really think about it. It didn't make any sense if it was just map 4. The plugs were severely fouled and that 30 psi plateau was really sticking out. I asked him a little while ago if he was definitely on map 4 and he then questioned whether or not he might have screwed it up and left it on map 6. I asked if he had a CSV file, but I haven't seen it yet. It would then make sense that the fuel bias was off as well and it dumped some fuel on him at some points. I'm not sure what else would foul up the plugs that bad. He still managed to run a 13.6@105.5. I'm definitely not switching from my JB4. I know I can take down a flash with it. Just need to get my ass to the track.

 

[Ton]

This is the first 1.8T Gen3 I know that has broken. Prior to this it ran 280whp on a Mustang just fine.

Its hard to tell what is the safe level. I reckon 22-24psi peak with a taper to 18psi is conservative and will last the lifetime of the car.

Taper to 18 at 6500 or earlier?

 

[MeltedSolid]

George make a good point. The only reason the target would be reading non-zero is if the JB4 was requesting extra boost, meaning it wasn't in map 4, and like Ton pointed out a lot of the user error protection goes away when you start stacking, so I also think it was a simple but costly screw up on TwinDad's friend's part. I would also like to see the raw CSV because then we will know the whole story for certain, but at the very least we now know some of the limits of the engine.

 

[Diggs24]

Targeting 30 psi at 5k...... wow.

Was the massive boost dump at 4500 not a good sign to stop?

 

[MonkeyMD]

So how safe is it to run an is38 with even higher power levels?

 

[MK7.5_Roa]

I wish I understood even half of this, hope your friend gets this sorted soon.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TwinDad]

George make a good point. The only reason the target would be reading non-zero is if the JB4 was requesting extra boost, meaning it wasn't in map 4, and like Ton pointed out a lot of the user error protection goes away when you start stacking, so I also think it was a simple but costly screw up on TwinDad's friend's part. I would also like to see the raw CSV because then we will know the whole story for certain, but at the very least we now know some of the limits of the engine.

I asked him for the CSV file and waiting to see if I can get it. It will be right on there what map it was on. I can't see just the tune doing this. What is puzzling though is that he wasn't running additive as far as I know. I have one of his JB4 logs and it was absolute. Wouldn't the computer still just try to target the absolute setting even with a flash? I wonder if a big part of it was the fuel bias being on 100. Maybe he tried additive? As soon as I get it I'll share it.

 

[MeltedSolid]

I asked him for the CSV file and waiting to see if I can get it. It will be right on there what map it was on. I can't see just the tune doing this. What is puzzling though is that he wasn't running additive as far as I know. I have one of his JB4 logs and it was absolute. Wouldn't the computer still just try to target the absolute setting even with a flash? I wonder if a big part of it was the fuel bias being on 100. Maybe he tried additive? As soon as I get it I'll share it.

That absolute vs additive thing is puzzling me too. If it were set to add mode the target in the log would have looked different and much lower as target in add mode only shows what is trying to be added, and not absolute target like is displayed. This either means map 1/2 works in a different way by converting additive into absolute, or that your friend set the boost to be that high manually with map 6, but who in their right mind would try to target 30psi intentionally like that.

 

[Diggs24]

It is clearly targeting 30psi from 4k to 5k via absolute.

5500 28
6000 26
6500 25

Yes, the JB4 will still target your absolute settings after a flash. The nanny really only limits boost to 9-10psi above ECU AFAIK, so if ECU reads 27psi it isn't going to stop you from adding another 3 psi. I don't know of any tuner that is targeting 30psi.

This is an APR stage 2 GTI stacked:

http://www.datazap.me/u/worldpacgti/log-1497101747?log=0&data=1-2-3-4

 

[TwinDad]

It is clearly targeting 30psi from 4k to 5k via absolute.

5500 28
6000 26
6500 25

Yes, the JB4 will still target your absolute settings after a flash. The nanny really only limits boost to 9-10psi above ECU AFAIK, so if ECU reads 27psi it isn't going to stop you from adding another 3 psi. I don't know of any tuner that is targeting 30psi.

This is an APR stage 2 GTI stacked:

http://www.datazap.me/u/worldpacgti/log-1497101747?log=0&data=1-2-3-4

Yeah, but his absolute settings were not that high. He has it peak at 25 or 26 j think and then taper down. Still trying to get the CSV to see. I'm wondering if he set it to map 2 by accident instead of map 4. The target will show additive on the CSV, but will show over the actual boost on a graph. At least I think it does.

 

[LG3MK7]

Well that sucks. But does seem like user error. Hopefully repairs aren't too expensive. When stacking like that always try to contact George, he been great at helping tweak those stacked tunes. 26 psi @ 6k is crazy ?