Nice catch, just when everyone was finished questioning his authenticity. I wonder why he won’t reply here and admit the truth
Hi there,
I think you are talking about me. I am on this thread you know. It’s totally fine to have the character to ask me the question directly. It seems like you have a question about how I got the Pro unit. Is this the case? What would you like to know?
Thanks,
Mike
This was something I was thinking as well. It’s a spoof box as you called it. So they added more spoof. LOL. I wonder how that meeting went. Oh hey we can fool the car more. Update the chipmunk in the box.
Did we ever get a real explanation of what exactly if getting blocked from going into the ecu. Also do they have a test car or are most the gullible cheap guys becoming that.
The only thing that gets altered is the MAP value. The programing/update would only change when and how much resistance is used to alter the signal. From what I can tell, that is the only function of the processor in this application. Some applications appear to have more function (not a lot, but more than just MAP).
Did anyone look inside this box already? Sorry if I missed this post. But it could as well be a bunch of resistors nothing more to it. Can anyone show a picture of the board for us here or a link to it?
It’s pretty much the same concept, but they can tailor when the resistance change starts, stops, and how much at various points.
just post the picture. Easy.
Ok this is all great. Where is the said microprocessor though? It would be great to see how this board is wired if anything more just resistors and rotary switches. Perhaps even a shot from the bottom of this board.
The reason why I ask that is: they mentioned above CW is providing a new upgrade to it. All good. But where is said microprocessor to have its coding upgraded if there isn’t even a way to connect to it? Through the serial that the sensors connect to? Ok… Did the box originally came with a usb-25pin serial adapter?
Do we even know if there any sort of processing in there? Or just resistors connected to the rotary switches.
That would say tons of if this Box was even originally designed with any upgrade ability in mind.
Just do a quick google search:
Ecu piggyback board and every single ecu manipulation board looks 10x more elaborate than that.
Shit even the CDI on my 2 stroke yz250 looks more elaborate than that.
It’s the only reason why I look at this product and frown. It might work, but in no way I believe that’s safe, reliable and of quality.
^^^ and please correct me if I’m wrong. I’m not close minded about it, but this product, until now, did not provide me with any security like a tune would.
It’s impossible to make the voltage map circuit like cw out of just resistors. You would need elements like diodes or transistors to add in those nonlinearities. But a microprocessor would be easy, could use a PIC or arduino or rasp pi. I’m assuming this is what it is.
But LOL at an “update” to that voltage map. Sounds to me like a ploy to keep those guys with car running bad outside of the 30 day return window. Also funny how the thing can be “resold”…which is only true if the community still believes this thing is worth anything…hint: it’s not worth dick. Jb4 is on a whole other level.
where’s the salesman?
Agreed drob but even a arduino or rasp pi boards are 10x more elaborate than that.
Even if it’s just a little pic chip - what will they do? Hey here is a chip, pop your board and remove it from its socket and slide this new one upgraded in?
Hmmmm…
I’m no electronics expert but I grew up in a family of computer engineers and even a small crossover board I had my brother create for my sound system had more to it that that. Yes different applications but same concept no? Separating signals and changing its Outputs…
Idk man I’m a humble photographer with minimal experience in electronic boards and what not. Just I really can’t believe that’s anything so wonderful like the salesman keeps repeating itself.
Absolutely agree, I was just saying it would be easier to make the voltage-to-voltage map using software rather than electronics. The resistor pots and jumper pins could change settings in the microcontroller.
Issuing an update in this case would just be changing some table values in memory. My guess is you just swap a small chip…similar to updating a p3 gauge.
The audio stuff is interesting, usually taking place at higher frequencies and maybe your ear could be sensitive to the dsp. I think this application shouldn’t really care about bandwidth since this map signal can only change so fast.
I was reading the 3.0TFSI study guide to better understand the crank pulley we were discussing, and found this interesting information regarding the MAP sensors:
http://www.s4-mtm.com/images/925803_3.0V6TFSIengine.pdf (page 29 of pdf)
I’ll let you guys make your own conclusions since we’re all “deutshbag punk who spent 1500 on their tune when this one is 300.”
Signal Utilization
The signal generated by the manifold absolute pressure sensor G71 upstream of the throttle valve control module is used to determine the nominal position of the bypass valve. This information is required to set the required charge pressure. This nominal position of the bypass valve depends largely on the pressure level upstream of the supercharger module. Charge pressure sensors G31 and G447 have two purposes. First, they are used to adjust the charge pressure to the required nominal value. Second, the air mass is calculated from their output signal during each working cycle. This air mass is a key input variable of the torque-based engine management system, which determines the injection rate, injection timing and ignition advance angle.
Effects of signal failure
In case of signal failure, the malfunction indicator lamp K83 (MIL) is activated. Failure of the manifold absolute
pressure sensor G71 will result in less precise adjustment of the charge pressure, which may result in uneven
acceleration. If charge air sensors G31 and G447, fail this will result in an incorrect air-fuel mixture throughout the load/speed range because of an incorrect air mass calculation. This will in turn cause an incorrect quantity of fuel to be injected, resulting in higher exhaust emissions and loss of power (and even misfiring) . In charging mode, a fault in this sender can result in wrong charge pressures, causing irreparable damage to the engine. For this reason, all senders are validated after the ignition is turned on. If irregularities are detected, an entry will be made in the fault memory and the system switches over to an equivalent sensor or the backup sender. This allows the system to operate normally from the driver’s viewpoint and consequential damage will be avoided.
Good stuff. That pretty much explains the drivability issues people are having is specific terms if I am reading that correctly. Good find. It also sounds like something can be logged in the internal memory that we don’t see if “irregularities” are detected, but likely a dealer could if there were issues (so there goes the idea that you can fully avoid TD1 in all cases).
And, yeah, that comment might be one of the stupidest things I have read in a while. It took all my power not to go off on that idiot on AZ. I hope he reads this and responds. The above is just further evidence of what you get with a full flashed tune. Not to mention, I paid just over $1500 for my full stage 2 setup with the pulley. Man, there are some really stupid people out there when it comes to tuning and modifying cars…
I’ve been on AW, AZ and this forum (lurking) for 5 years as I had a 2010 S4 and now 2015. I registered here just to post on this topic. Flame suit on…and disclaimer I have a CW Pro (and Alcon 380mm kit and USS Sways) on my current S4.
I did not tune my 2010 because other than Stasis and early APR tunes there wasn’t much history or choice. Now 5 years later there are tons of logs and experience as well as choice. I’m running the CW because no TD1, easy to clear logs and full engine protections are (obviously) still in place as all the device does is attenuate the MAF signal. This (similar) method is proven in the BMW community (I’ve also had a M car) where craziness is when you pay Dinan vs. Burger or Cobb.
I’ve logged my car and at 800 MSL and 93 octane I have normal advance and zero retard with other values normal. I haven’t dyno’d or tracked my car, but a few have and posted so the “stage 1” gains are real. Some have had issues with 91 octane and/or high DA (due to high MSL since temps are yet an issue). In my case (Central TX) and can run a E23 mix and solve those issues pretty easily. Or turn the unit down from D-1 (standard Pro setting) to C-1 or B-1 if needed. The flash based tuners call the “program switching”…
I won’t run a flash based tune not only because of TD1, but because I’m an engineer in the complex software/hardware world and the thought of “someone” modifying the code that runs my $55k car freaks me out a bit.
Why is it not ok to run a piggy that doesn’t mess with code and leaves factory protections in place but ok to have a random (not Audi, not Siemens) programmer modify code and possibly remove protections that can (and have) cause permanent damage?
It wasn’t a cost based decision for me either, just logic.
First off, this is very different than the bmw options. Literally all this does is modify the pressure sensor (and potentially the iat signal). If you are a programmer, then you understand what “garbage in garbage out” means. Everyone defending this seems to think factory protection is some kind of Boolean true or false. It’s not, go up and look at the Audi service manual, and see what it says can happen when the map sensor reports a false value. Secondly, fueling is done both open loop, and closed loop. If you don’t know what that means, go read up on a book on feedback controls. This sensor is fucking up the open loop strategy… is the wideband able to “compensate”…who knows, but I sure as shit don’t want to experiment to find out.
Really your argument is no different than all of the other audizine minions, and honestly, I doubt you want to actually debate this. Just label us haters who trust our cars to tuners for obscene money and just drink kool aid.
There’s a reason I’m not gonna go get in line first to flash apr dsg software because I will let others prove it out first. Because I like data, and reliability…not saving a couple hundred bucks and being fine with clearing cel’s after my car runs like shit cause I didn’t have the “update” for the D1 sensor spoof.
I’m stating my logic and opinion. Never said I was a programmer…but I will read up on controls. I have the Engine study guide and a bookshelf full of engineering manuals. I’m 48, not some kid so this is not my first rodeo…
I know what my logs look like and understand we might not be capturing fine AFR’s, but again I’ve had no CELs or codes thrown, drivability is fine, the car just feels more urgent and is beyond butt dyno territory. There have been codes around underboost (at high altitude) and related to low octane/high DA. These are expected occurrences…which ECU protects by retarding timing, dumping fuel, etc.
My view is still crazy to mess with software, I’ll let Audi/Siemens do that. If they come out with a tune as recently rumored, I’m in. As I stated, saving money is not my decision point. I make plenty.
Cheers
Cool story. I’m 32 and I still think I’m a kid… 
(and I never really cared for “omgTD1”)
I’d rather have software properly calibrated for certain parameters/inputs vs a box that’s tricking signals.
Just me though. ;D
What does this mean?