Robbie C's Ibiza Cupra

Jan 8, 2007
2,958
1
Wiltshire
Yeh it'd need to be automatic failover to a low boost map with retarded timing when a fault with the WMI was logged and/or persistent high CFs

At a minimum you could get by with a fault light to indicate a failure and a hard wired switch to changeover
 

rsmith

Robbie
Apr 28, 2004
2,797
1
Tipperary, Ireland
Or some sort of soloneid to trip limp mode when something happens.I know the map i was testing a while back for laucnch control on the ME7.5 was set to limit the car to limp mode if i tried to drive the tits of it when the oil wasn't up to temp, i wonder could my mate do something similar for high CF's
 
Last edited:
Jan 8, 2007
2,958
1
Wiltshire
Not sure how much room you have to manipulate the ole ME7s - will ask Bill when I see him next to see if there's anything he can offer here

Picked up a couple of new bits and pieces today, namely some nylon and metal braided oil hose for the inlet/outlets to my catch tank to make it look a little nicer with some accompanying hose finishers, and my new Bosch LSU-4 wideband sensor to fit together with my plugs to see what difference they make. I've also bought some flexi-silicone from Forge for my dump valve return to replace my current setup and tidy things up. Simple is beautiful

WP_000221.jpg


I've also got a new MAF in my garage I can try to see if this has any bearing on the lambda code I keep getting, once we've verified the wiring looks alright.

More to follow next week once we take another look
 
Jan 8, 2007
2,958
1
Wiltshire
OK - been a few weeks without any updates while Dale and I have been busy and I wanted to give myself a breather from the car so as to regain some motivation.

First of all we decided to inspect the plugs to gauge what the fuelling might be doing and swap them out for a new set of NGK BK7REs while they were out. Here's how the old ones looked after 400 miles on the new engine (1-4, left to right):

WP_000236.jpg


Once these were in we then swapped my Bosch LSU-4 wideband sensor out for a new one, which it turns out was f--ked. As soon as the new sensor was fitted I was able to see proper readings on my AFR gauge once again :)

Here's how the old one looked:

WP_000237.jpg


With that fixed I then decided to swap out my MAF for a new replacement I had lying around from GSF as a spare when I last went to the Nurburgring to see if this has any impact on my pre-cat lambda fault, bearing in mind I've already replaced this sensor and a few people seem to think a new MAF sorted it. Seeing as I had one lying around its an easy one to cross off the list.

In light of all the reliability issues I've had with my meth I've decided to run without it until I replace it with the AEM kit - I just don't feel I can trust it. My ignition timing offset has been reset to 0 and I've pulled the fuse on the controller, leaving the bottle empty so as it can't seep into my intercooler again...

We also intended to inspect the pre-cat lambda wiring for continuity etc though we weren't able to find a wiring diagram for the ME7 ECU in autodata, only the 7.5 was coming up (though no evidence of a wideband sensor). Does anyone know where we might be able to source one?

So, with a new set of plugs, MAF, a working wideband sensor, and disconnected meth I set out to collect some new logs, captured on a dual carriageway in 4th gear, starting at steady state cruise of ~3,500 RPM before hitting WOT to just past 5,000 (car in front slowed me down)

Code:
Sunday	26	June	2011	16:19:24	
6K0 906 032 AA		1.8L 20VT EU3    05 0002			
					
	Group A:	'002			
		RPM	Load	Inj. On Time	Mass Flow
	TIME				
Marker	STAMP	 /min	%	 ms	 g/s
	54.77	3400	44.4	4.1	28.56
	55.97	3440	42.9	4.1	27.72
	57.17	3480	39.8	3.69	25.64
	58.37	3440	31.6	2.87	20.97
	59.57	3440	31.6	2.87	20.64
	60.77	3440	31.6	2.87	20.75
	61.97	3480	101.5	10.25	81.39
	63.17	3720	173.7	20.09	120.86
	64.37	3920	172.9	20.91	130.53
	65.56	3640	26.3	0	14.14
	66.77	3600	99.2	12.3	79.61
	67.96	3800	168.4	25.42	120.64
	69.27	4080	168.4	24.6	130.89
	70.68	4320	169.2	24.19	139.5
	72.07	4520	169.9	24.19	145.72
	73.36	4680	170.7	24.19	152.61
	74.56	4880	170.7	23.78	158.44
	75.76	4960	169.9	23.78	161.42
	76.96	5160	168.4	23.37	163.67
	78.16	5240	168.4	23.37	169.03

Code:
Group B:	'020			
	Idle Stabilization	Idle Stabilization	Idle Stabilization	Idle Stabilization
TIME				
STAMP	 CF	 CF	 CF	 CF
55.17	0	0	0	0
56.37	0	0	0	0
57.57	0	0	0	0
58.77	0	0	0	0
59.97	0	0	0	0
61.17	0	0	0	0
62.37	0	0	0	0
63.57	0	0	0	0
64.77	0	0	0	0
65.96	0	0	0	0
67.17	0	0	0	0
68.37	0	0	0	0
69.76	0	0	0	3
71.17	0	0	0	3
72.56	0	0	0	3
73.76	0	0	0	2.3
74.96	0	0	0	0.8
76.16	0	0	0	0.8
77.36	0	0	0	0
78.56	0	0	0	0

Code:
Group C:	'118			
	RPM	Temperature	Load	Absolute Pres.
TIME				
STAMP	 /min	°C	%	 mbar
55.57	3440	36	0	1140
56.77	3440	36	0	1130
57.97	3440	36	0	1100
59.17	3440	37	0	1080
60.37	3440	37	0	1080
61.57	3440	37	0	1070
62.77	3640	38	46.7	2010
63.97	3840	37	39.6	1990
65.17	3760	35	0	1200
66.37	3560	37	0	1040
67.56	3760	39	73.7	1980
68.87	4000	38	80	1970
70.16	4200	38	81.6	1960
71.67	4440	39	77.3	1960
72.96	4640	39	93.3	1940
74.16	4800	40	87.1	1930
75.36	4920	41	80.4	1930
76.56	5080	42	80	1930
77.76	5240	43	85.9	1920
78.96	5240	43	0	1850

I was happy to see no significant timing pull (remembering I've overridden requested boost by winding back my manual MBC to ~1 bar) and the car felt less hesitant and smoother than before, also bearing in mind it was ~30 deg ambient heat when collecting these logs.

Keeping an eye on my AFR gauge I'm seeing high 11s/low 12s on WOT and it smells VERY rich, with visible black smoke when you rev hard sat still.

All in all though it appears to be looking OK while I run it in - though curious to gather peoples opinions on the above figures.

The engine has now covered 400 miles so only really another 100 before I'm looking to get the map tweaked as it should be with a bit more boost, I'd just like to know it's safe to continue running in as it is.

I think I'll opt to get the map set to run without the water/meth and just leave this disconnected until I go BT, where I'll replace it with the AEM kit in one hit.

Bill also mentioned concerns that my injectors may now max out on a ported head and 1.85L bottom end so we'll have to keep an eye on this but I don't see the point in fitting my 550CCs and spending out on a whole new map when I intend to change it in the future anyway. If I need to keep the power capped to stay on these injectors (BAM 386CC) then so be it until I make the plunge into BT territory when funds permit.
 
Last edited:

joehirth

Rate me up baby
Apr 19, 2010
1,896
3
Woking, Surrey
www.facebook.com
I think I'll opt to get the map set to run without the water/meth and just leave this disconnected until I go BT, where I'll replace it with the AEM kit in one hit.

No much help on the readings, but I never thought I'd hear the day when you say that ^^

IMO I wouldn't want to run in unless the fuelling is correct as you want to be revving a fair bit to get those rings bedded. Also essentialy being a brand new engine I wouldn't want to break it straight away. What sort of fuelling are you getting if you disconnect the N75/ MBC you have?
 
Jan 8, 2007
2,958
1
Wiltshire
Think you may have misunderstood Joe. The meth was added on top of the map with additional timing advance, which I've now reset to 0 and the logs above show no timing pull on WOT in 30 Deg+ ambient heat.

My AFR shows high 11s/low 12s on WOT, remembering that boost is currently still capped to 1 bar by my Forge UNOs during run-in
 

joehirth

Rate me up baby
Apr 19, 2010
1,896
3
Woking, Surrey
www.facebook.com
Think you may have misunderstood Joe. The meth was added on top of the map with additional timing advance, which I've now reset to 0 and the logs above show no timing pull on WOT in 30 Deg+ ambient heat.

My AFR shows high 11s/low 12s on WOT, remembering that boost is currently still capped to 1 bar by my Forge UNOs during run-in

Ahh ok so it was never written in the map. You say now you've deleted it as such and you're still having problems, it's sounding more like a mapping issue. My AFR's on WOT at 5000-6000 odd are 10's. Capping boost as such, as Wak said, is like having a 12" penis and trying to tell the girls you have something smaller. :cartman:

Are you still running the N75 valve too? Quite possibly capping the boost is confusing the MAP sensor as N75 is requesting 1.2 bar for example and the MAP sensor is only seeing 1 because it's capped at the UNOS... Dunno just a thought.
 
Jan 8, 2007
2,958
1
Wiltshire
You have to remember the difference in hardware since my map was applied, namely a ported head and overbored bottom end which is bound to have an effect.

No evident problems - it's not missing like it was when I took you out, I'd just like to know whether or not my lambda sensor is really f--ked and if the above figures are safe.

The map itself is still requesting 26 PSI peak boost and is being throttled by the Forge UNOs which is also not ideal but necessary for running in
 
Jan 8, 2007
2,958
1
Wiltshire
Update: now my wideband is giving me true readings I've been able to do a few more miles tonight and taken a good look at what's happening.

The hesitation/misfiring I'd been referring to is a direct consequence of the car running extremely rich under certain heavy loads, i.e. WOT in 5th at 2,500 RPM for example.

In these specific circumstances I see AFR go as low as 9.9, and the ZT-2 controller itself will only read as low as 9.5 so the hesitation is essentially the car drowning in fuel. This also ties in with the 25% max fuel correction I saw logged before clearing some faults as I mentioned before.

Luckily this only happens in very specific circumstances - most WOT runs within the peak powerband return mid 10s to 11s, some low 12s which seems OK and the old plugs weren't too discoloured. The bad news is that the methonal would have only been drowning it further so I'm glad I've disconnected it.

Other than this the car is now running well, with 450 miles covered since the rebuild. I'll take out 10% fuel tomorrow in Lemmiwinks and monitor from there, continuuing in 5% increments if necessary just to help even things out.
 

joehirth

Rate me up baby
Apr 19, 2010
1,896
3
Woking, Surrey
www.facebook.com
Other than this the car is now running well, with 450 miles covered since the rebuild. I'll take out 10% fuel tomorrow in Lemmiwinks and monitor from there, continuuing in 5% increments if necessary just to help even things out.

Lemmiwinks :headhurt: remember that will take out 10% across the whole rev range not just at a specific spot where you want it reduced, i.e. WOT.
 
Jan 8, 2007
2,958
1
Wiltshire
Had a word with Bill last night to talk over these latest figures etc and having now covered 450 miles advised that I crank up the boost some more. As the map is still expecting 26 PSI peak boost and the UNOS is capping it at 14 then it's not a surprise it's massively overfuelling as the crude ME7 doesn't know any better.

Unwinding it out to ~20-21 PSI peak the car feels like a completely different animal and pulls very nice and hard once again. I'm back in love with it once more :)

AFRs have levelled out much better with high 11s/low 12s on WOT across the rev range.

Here's some logs I managed to collect - accelerating WOT through 2nd, 3rd and 4th, though the time sampling rate is poor:

Code:
6K0 906 032 AA		1.8L 20VT EU3    05 0002			
					
	Group A:	'002			
		RPM	Load	Inj. On Time	Mass Flow
	TIME				
Marker	STAMP	 /min	%	 ms	 g/s
	0.99	3000	36.8	3.28	20.5
	2.19	3480	162.4	16.81	125.89
	3.39	5000	191.7	22.14	195.33
	4.59	6040	181.2	19.68	207.58
	5.79	4320	150.4	16.81	147.47
	6.99	4920	191.7	23.37	194.5
	8.19	5440	191.7	22.14	200.11
	9.48	5880	172.2	23.78	196.06
	10.78	4680	191.7	23.78	182.5
	11.99	4800	181.2	25.42	172.94
	13.19	5080	191.7	24.6	199.67
	14.38	5320	191.7	23.78	198.58
	15.58	5400	33.8	2.46	8.08

Code:
Group B:	'020			
	Idle Stabilization	Idle Stabilization	Idle Stabilization	Idle Stabilization
TIME				
STAMP	 CF	 CF	 CF	 CF
1.39	0	0	0	0
2.59	0	3	0	0
3.79	0	3	0	3
4.99	0	2.3	0	3
6.19	1.5	3	3	5.3
7.39	1.5	3	2.3	5.3
8.59	1.5	3	2.3	5.3
9.88	0	0	0	0
11.19	1.5	3	3	3.8
12.39	1.5	3	3	3.8
13.59	1.5	5.3	2.3	3.8
14.78	1.5	5.3	2.3	3.8
15.98	0	0	0	0

Code:
Group C:	'118			
	RPM	Temperature	Load	Absolute Pres.
TIME				
STAMP	 /min	°C	%	 mbar
0.59	2960	38	0	870
1.79	3200	38	95.3	940
2.99	4600	38	92.5	2220
4.19	5680	37	95.3	2020
5.39	4960	37	0	1200
6.59	4720	39	91.4	2180
7.79	5280	41	94.9	2110
8.99	5760	43	95.3	2030
10.28	4480	42	68.6	1430
11.59	4840	45	1.2	2430
12.79	5000	45	1.2	2240
13.98	5240	45	94.9	2130
15.18	5480	47	91.8	2080

Beginning to pull a few CFs now but nothing too concerning, with ambient temperatures of mid 20s when these were collected.

Peak IATs of 48 Deg C without WMI seems pretty good to me too for 21 PSI

The car has now covered a smidge over 500 miles so it's time to drop out the mineral oil and refill with some Fuchs/Silkolene Pro-S and a new filter before I look to get it back over to Badger5 for a few tweaks to the map, and possibly swap out my Devil's Own WMI kit for the AEM.
 
Last edited:
Nov 2, 2004
9,335
0
South Wales
Good news robbie. I always found that mine overfuelling with less boost, makes sense really.

Time to crank it up and give it the full beans. :)
 
Jan 8, 2007
2,958
1
Wiltshire
Cheers Phil - yeh makes me wish I'd upp'ed the boost a little earlier now really but nm.

I'd forgotten just how aggressive the car is, absolutely savage boost delivery which makes for plenty of smiles per gallon

Even after changing to a new MAF I still keep getting the B1 S1 lambda error so I'll need to check the wiring next but other than that all seems to be good, with no oil consumed in 500 miles.
 
Last edited:
Jan 8, 2007
2,958
1
Wiltshire
While the sun was out over the weekend me and Dale decided to have a little play out and about and had some pictures taken by a mate around the local area. Enjoy :)

C01.jpg


C02.jpg


C04.jpg


C06.jpg


C08.jpg


C09.jpg


C10.jpg


C11.jpg


C14.jpg
 
Progressive Parts, performance parts and tuning specialists