N75 VCDS Logs (Cupra)

[Scott.T]

Has anyone logged good and tired (but not necessarily bad) N75 Boost control Vs Actual & Specified Boost.

Before I jump head long into the world of Cupra tuning I thought I would take some logs of my stock setup and see what needs a refresh before I approach a tuner.

On my K1 the actual boost is a touch lower than specified boost (only about 0.05bar), but from the logs I have found on Cupranet (below) this seems to be fairly common.
http://www.seatcupra.net/forums/showthread.php?t=293368&highlight=0.85+bar&page=2

Infact the standard maps (from the above link) run so close to how mine is running you would think it were the same car.
Both though however do seem to waiver around a bit trying to keep up with the specified boost. So I was just wondering if this was normal or signs of a tired N75.

Stage 1&2 cars seem to run a lot neater and closer to the specified boost. Is this a result of the tighter tolerances on the remap (i.e better N75 mapping) or better performing N75 ?

What I did find is that the new K&N only managed MAF G/S in the 170's whereas the stock OE filter managed high 180's and a 191 (3rd gear pulls). I'm assuming the (New) K&N is over oiled, and hence restricting airflow. So the OE one has gone back in for now.

I look forward to any replies

 

[OldManPooley]

Not sure about the N75 mate but what i do know is that the oe air filter flows better than so called performance panel filters. From reading many different threads on audi and vw forums( 2.0 Tfsi same as Cupra). Lots have done some logging and found they dont flow as good.

Bottom line is if your keeping original airbox stick with the oe filter.

 

[mty12345]

The oil soon screws up the maf too, another reason to stick with the oem one.