MTM Cantronic installation results
01-12-2010, 08:50 AM
#21
Audiworld Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is a cross post from Audizine. I posted first over there because that's where the conversation started. I figured you guys would like to take a look as well.
Alright so I spent some time this afternoon figuring out the install and testing of the stage 2 MTM Cantronic. This isn't meant to be a DIY so I'm not going into full installation detail. Here it goes.
The instructions that come with it are pretty bad. They are in German with English subtitles and literal translations. It's funny actually looking back on it though at the time it was a bit frustrating. The whole thing took about 1.5 hours including some confusion in the middle. My brother and I wound up calling Hoppen Motorsports where I spoke with Mike and he helped us out. Kudos to him for calling me back from his house as he wasn't working today. If I had to go back and do it again I think we could get it done in 35-45 minutes.
Prior to doing the install I did some before runs with the Gtech SS that I ordered. I was extremely surprised how fast the car was from the factory. Here is the test environment. S4 prestige/stronic/ads in dynamic mode. 20" Hartmann wheels with 255/30/20's. The car had 1/4 tank of gas and two passengers weighing 225lbs and 180lbs. Temperature was 30 degrees.
The best stock time was 4.76s 0-60. It was a number that I couldn't duplicate for the rest of the stock runs. The slowest time was 5.0s. It can consistently run 0-60 in the upper 4.8x's. I knew once I saw these times that I would need to include pics of the gtech screen. They are posted at the end of this write up.
The best post install run was 4.31s. Not only could I not duplicate that number for the rest of the runs, I couldn't even get close to it. The next best number was 4.58s. That was more like it. Mixed in the middle were a bunch of low 4.6x's. The slowest time so far was 4.69s.
So the end result being that pre-install the car consistently ran high 4.8x's and now it runs low 4.6x's. The net result being 2.5 tenths of a second decrease in 0-60. Needless to say I am very happy with it. The car is so obnoxiously fast now it's criminal. The 0-60 times don't really do the modification justice. It is faster in every real world test I can think of as well. I spent about an hour driving it home from my brothers house during which I went on highways, residential roads and a bit through the city. Every different driving scenario had a noticeable difference. Though I'd be naive to think that some of my "butt dyno" impressions aren't partly in my head.
Here are the screen shots of the gtech.
Alright so I spent some time this afternoon figuring out the install and testing of the stage 2 MTM Cantronic. This isn't meant to be a DIY so I'm not going into full installation detail. Here it goes.
The instructions that come with it are pretty bad. They are in German with English subtitles and literal translations. It's funny actually looking back on it though at the time it was a bit frustrating. The whole thing took about 1.5 hours including some confusion in the middle. My brother and I wound up calling Hoppen Motorsports where I spoke with Mike and he helped us out. Kudos to him for calling me back from his house as he wasn't working today. If I had to go back and do it again I think we could get it done in 35-45 minutes.
Prior to doing the install I did some before runs with the Gtech SS that I ordered. I was extremely surprised how fast the car was from the factory. Here is the test environment. S4 prestige/stronic/ads in dynamic mode. 20" Hartmann wheels with 255/30/20's. The car had 1/4 tank of gas and two passengers weighing 225lbs and 180lbs. Temperature was 30 degrees.
The best stock time was 4.76s 0-60. It was a number that I couldn't duplicate for the rest of the stock runs. The slowest time was 5.0s. It can consistently run 0-60 in the upper 4.8x's. I knew once I saw these times that I would need to include pics of the gtech screen. They are posted at the end of this write up.
The best post install run was 4.31s. Not only could I not duplicate that number for the rest of the runs, I couldn't even get close to it. The next best number was 4.58s. That was more like it. Mixed in the middle were a bunch of low 4.6x's. The slowest time so far was 4.69s.
So the end result being that pre-install the car consistently ran high 4.8x's and now it runs low 4.6x's. The net result being 2.5 tenths of a second decrease in 0-60. Needless to say I am very happy with it. The car is so obnoxiously fast now it's criminal. The 0-60 times don't really do the modification justice. It is faster in every real world test I can think of as well. I spent about an hour driving it home from my brothers house during which I went on highways, residential roads and a bit through the city. Every different driving scenario had a noticeable difference. Though I'd be naive to think that some of my "butt dyno" impressions aren't partly in my head.
Here are the screen shots of the gtech.
That certainly calls into question the validity of whether the car is making 430hp per the MTM advertisement. It also bodes VERY poorly for the actual tunability of a S4. It appears that the 335i actually does benefit much more from a tune based on the dramatic improvement in its acceleration.
I really like Audis, but always find that they are just totally outclassed in power by the BMW and Mercedes, and now Cadillacs and Infinitis. Can't figure out why Audi in not capable of providing more inspiring acceleration. The Quattro sucks power argument is just starting to get old really fast.
Last edited by mc3456; 01-12-2010 at 08:58 AM.
01-12-2010, 09:29 AM
#22
AudiWorld Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 783
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the update. Unfortunately, aside from the mythical butt dyno improvement, I have got to imagine you are deep down inside somewhat disappointed with the actual, measurable results. Personally, I know I am. Somehow, I figured the car would have been a more repeatable 4.3 Sec 0-60 performer with the expensive upgrade.
That certainly calls into question the validity of whether the car is making 430hp per the MTM advertisement. It also bodes VERY poorly for the actual tunability of a S4. It appears that the 335i actually does benefit much more from a tune based on the dramatic improvement in its acceleration.
I really like Audis, but always find that they are just totally outclassed in power by the BMW and Mercedes, and now Cadillacs and Infinitis. Can't figure out why Audi in not capable of providing more inspiring acceleration. The Quattro sucks power argument is just starting to get old really fast.
That certainly calls into question the validity of whether the car is making 430hp per the MTM advertisement. It also bodes VERY poorly for the actual tunability of a S4. It appears that the 335i actually does benefit much more from a tune based on the dramatic improvement in its acceleration.
I really like Audis, but always find that they are just totally outclassed in power by the BMW and Mercedes, and now Cadillacs and Infinitis. Can't figure out why Audi in not capable of providing more inspiring acceleration. The Quattro sucks power argument is just starting to get old really fast.
I think to most S4 buyers, Audi hit a home run with this car. To me, it feels like a grand slam.
Although, I too wish the S4 can obtain higher gains than those shown by MTM. However, I feel this is only the tip of the iceberg in terms of ECU management, so I would hold a bit of reserve until more tuners come out with their products(APR, Giac, Revo, etc). In short, don't be too discouraged.
As for Voltron, I think he's 100% happy with his purchase and has one of the fastest S4's in the states right now. He knew what he was getting into as another poster on Audizine had already posted the improvements with a Gtech. Voltron's post confirms those results.
Last edited by ShadowJet; 01-12-2010 at 09:44 AM.
01-12-2010, 09:49 AM
#23
AudiWorld Super User
Actually I will disagree here with the statement that this speaks to if the car is making 430hp and speaks to the lack of ability to tune this car.
If you want to take the standpoint that the Audi stock numbers are accurate and that this is a ~100hp increase, then yes, I will say that the numbers are poor, so that either the MTM is not producing 100 more HP, or the S4 is not a good car to attempt tuning on.
I do not believe the MTM is a +~100hp tune though. Nowhere do they state it is - ever. What they do (very carefully) say is "Audi claims 333hp, we claim our tune puts the car at 430hp," which sounds the same on the surface, but is not the same at all.
Numerous dyno runs, Gtech pulls, and VCDS software data support that the car is nowhere near 333hp stock, and it is likely much closer to the 370 neighborhood. This doesn't sound like a lot, but it's another ~37hp over the stock claims - a more about an 11% increase over what stock claims to be. This also make the delta between stock and MTM, only a ~60hp increase, roughly 16% over what real world testing has shown stock to be - which looks more believable as well from the Gtech runs provided. If you take the best of each run above, you will see a .45 time drop in 0-60, or a 9.5% increase in 0-60 times.
Bruce has asked for some HP runs on the Gtech, and the raw data so that he can use his spreadsheet with takes things like aero drag and gear ratios into account, but still has not gotten these in order to give some more imperical data.
I also don't think that a piggyback is nearly as good a solution as the ECU change and upgrade. You can only feed false data to the ECU and still get it to do the max of whatever it's programmed to do. If the ECU is told never to close the bypass valve more than 60% (allowing 60% of total boost to go into the engine) you can attempt to tweak the data being fed to the ECU to get more boost, but it will still never go past this hard line. The ECU also has it's default programming of fuel/air mappings on a per gear/throttle position, so feeding in false MAF, air temp, O2 sensor data will still only allow the ECU to alter what it's doing to within the parameters programmed by Adui.
A complete ECU rebuild will remove any sorts of limitations like this, as well as provide the custom fuel/air mappings designed around the full use of the SC, rather than a hack trying to get it to do something beyond the limits of what Audi programmed it for. If you are interested in more in depth data on Superchargers, and specifically what is in the S4, check out the post over here:
http://www.audizine.com/forum/showthread.php?t=337450
If you want to take the standpoint that the Audi stock numbers are accurate and that this is a ~100hp increase, then yes, I will say that the numbers are poor, so that either the MTM is not producing 100 more HP, or the S4 is not a good car to attempt tuning on.
I do not believe the MTM is a +~100hp tune though. Nowhere do they state it is - ever. What they do (very carefully) say is "Audi claims 333hp, we claim our tune puts the car at 430hp," which sounds the same on the surface, but is not the same at all.
Numerous dyno runs, Gtech pulls, and VCDS software data support that the car is nowhere near 333hp stock, and it is likely much closer to the 370 neighborhood. This doesn't sound like a lot, but it's another ~37hp over the stock claims - a more about an 11% increase over what stock claims to be. This also make the delta between stock and MTM, only a ~60hp increase, roughly 16% over what real world testing has shown stock to be - which looks more believable as well from the Gtech runs provided. If you take the best of each run above, you will see a .45 time drop in 0-60, or a 9.5% increase in 0-60 times.
Bruce has asked for some HP runs on the Gtech, and the raw data so that he can use his spreadsheet with takes things like aero drag and gear ratios into account, but still has not gotten these in order to give some more imperical data.
I also don't think that a piggyback is nearly as good a solution as the ECU change and upgrade. You can only feed false data to the ECU and still get it to do the max of whatever it's programmed to do. If the ECU is told never to close the bypass valve more than 60% (allowing 60% of total boost to go into the engine) you can attempt to tweak the data being fed to the ECU to get more boost, but it will still never go past this hard line. The ECU also has it's default programming of fuel/air mappings on a per gear/throttle position, so feeding in false MAF, air temp, O2 sensor data will still only allow the ECU to alter what it's doing to within the parameters programmed by Adui.
A complete ECU rebuild will remove any sorts of limitations like this, as well as provide the custom fuel/air mappings designed around the full use of the SC, rather than a hack trying to get it to do something beyond the limits of what Audi programmed it for. If you are interested in more in depth data on Superchargers, and specifically what is in the S4, check out the post over here:
http://www.audizine.com/forum/showthread.php?t=337450
01-13-2010, 04:11 AM
#25
Audiworld Junior Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NWS4guy,
things for MTM are not as you say..... i checked with them on the subject... they say that the ECU does not send a signal to make the S/C run at a certain PSI value, but the ecu reasons in terms of sending a signal to raise the PSI boost, till a certain value is reached... this way, feeding the ecu with a PSI boost value lower then real, it's possible to obtain a S/C boost greater then the programmed limit...
Fab
things for MTM are not as you say..... i checked with them on the subject... they say that the ECU does not send a signal to make the S/C run at a certain PSI value, but the ecu reasons in terms of sending a signal to raise the PSI boost, till a certain value is reached... this way, feeding the ecu with a PSI boost value lower then real, it's possible to obtain a S/C boost greater then the programmed limit...
Fab
01-13-2010, 05:04 AM
#26
AudiWorld Super User
I am curious how, without cracking the ECU code they can be sure there is no limit set. There is an actuator, which the ECU controls, insinde the SC, which controls the bypass valve, and without some sort of value to use on this, there is no way to measure what "more boost" means if the ECU is simply calling for more. There has to be some sort of range or scale to this actuator, since the ECU controls it all - the SC has no brain to know what it is doing or capable of.
01-13-2010, 05:43 AM
#27
Audiworld Junior Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
your question is absolutly legit... i do not know the answer, and i don't think that MTM is willing to share those details... my wild guess is that the actuator works with discrete positions... so, the ECU, if it wishes to increase the boost, just tells the actuator to go to the next aperture position...faking the ECU with lower actual values has the effect to reach any position (till completly closed if needed)...
in any case, i wait for someone with the MTM module to post some VAG logs and see what PSI pressure is reached... so to clear all the doubts...
Fab
in any case, i wait for someone with the MTM module to post some VAG logs and see what PSI pressure is reached... so to clear all the doubts...
Fab
01-13-2010, 08:00 AM
#28
AudiWorld Super User
Yes, I would love to see this as well. Perhaps once APR/GIAC and others get their flashes out the door, we can get some of these answers if they are not took closely guarded.
01-13-2010, 11:17 PM
#29
Audiworld Junior Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
thinking better on the subject, i fear that a vag log would read the same faked value of the psi boost that is passed to the the ecu... the only way to really know what are the maximum PSI values obtainable with the mtm kit is to put a sensor BEFORE the m-cantronic unit....
01-14-2010, 06:35 AM
#30
AudiWorld Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,616
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
curious- nowhere do i see that Audi claims the hp "max" is 333. The brochure states that it simply creates 333 from 5500-7000rpm (IIRC)...
Most hp curves are just that- some have sharp peaks, some are relatively flat. I have not seen the actual Audi hp curve... does it peak somewhere between 5500 and 7000, where the "max" hp is, say, 370hp?
Could be a slick little marketing ploy....
??
Most hp curves are just that- some have sharp peaks, some are relatively flat. I have not seen the actual Audi hp curve... does it peak somewhere between 5500 and 7000, where the "max" hp is, say, 370hp?
Could be a slick little marketing ploy....
??