Green Giant injectors (AWE) misfires / cold start feedback from my mechanic in Toronto ...
08-09-2006, 02:52 PM
#24
AudiWorld Super User
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 12,088
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Honestly, all the kits have their advantages/disadvantages...
You should all be happy that it's still supported and there are revisions and such provided. Yea, it's not optimal, but it's also very common in factory ECU's as well. Hell, I had to have my A3's ECU updated to accomodate 10% Ethanol fuel (Cold-start issues).
Anyhow, When properly running, they all make an S4 freakishly fast
Anyhow, When properly running, they all make an S4 freakishly fast
08-09-2006, 02:57 PM
#25
AudiWorld Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,084
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do you know your Average Speed Via Trip computer....
I need to get a better idea of how slow my driving actually is, based on the MPG I'm getting. Best I've done is an average speed on 30.6mph and 15.9 calculated mpg.
Previous around town was avg 17mph and about 13.6mpg.
Previous around town was avg 17mph and about 13.6mpg.
08-09-2006, 03:07 PM
#26
AudiWorld Super User
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 14,290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
it wasn't a revision....it was their main file that AWE recommends on their fueling kit....they also
have a file for Cone intakes, which was a collaboration from Moss/GIAC/AWE iirc. THAT is the file that has PT richness issues. Yes, my crying is that i was recommended to run that file for "Socal" cars cuz supposedly it runs strong on 91 Cali Octane. However.....now having switched back to the original file for about 3 weeks now (which runs the stock airbox FYI), the car runs stronger than the Cone file with "regular" gas mileage. To answer your question, there is NO revision needed for the main AWE/GIAC file...and there hasn't been for some time. Yes, there will be a revision for the Cone file...but this file is/was a relatively new file, released sometime last fall. IMO...the AWE kit is a pretty solid kit, driveability and powerwise. I am sure you have a different opinion, and that may be with the Motronic "programming/tuning" itself from Garret. So i would like to know/ask.....what is it that makes GIAC the Evil of Motronic Tuning as opposed to MTM or ABT. Toss in APR, ASP, and AMS to the mix as well? I am curious and would like to hear what you have to say. tia
08-09-2006, 03:10 PM
#27
AudiWorld Super User
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 14,290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yup....absolutely agree Mike,
i'm glad that there are revisions to address whatever needs to be improved from kits, whether it be AWE, ASP, or even Audi themselves. Maybe MTM got their tuning right the very first time...and never had the n33d for revisions. One shot deal to make an impression?
08-09-2006, 03:15 PM
#28
AudiWorld Super User
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 14,290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i didn't reset it when i switched back.............
so i couldn't tell you what my average MPH is. As far as MPG, i am just calc it off how many gallons i top off with and how many miles i get before the light comes on again. I actually wish they would recalibrate this part of the programming.
08-09-2006, 03:16 PM
#29
New Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 340
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Would it be fair to say that they have sold the most stage III kits, judging by this forum?
I would bet that they are the number one seller of Stage III Kits. My hypothesis is that they sold the most based on one key factor. Now people will tend to use other factors, that I find less meaningful, as you would with sprinkles on top of some ice cream. Which is fine. But those sprinkles are still riding on top of the main factor, or the ice cream in this case. Any thoughts?
08-09-2006, 03:24 PM
#30
AudiWorld Super User
yes. why are you speaking in riddles? what is the "main factor" of your hypothesis? ;^)