K3rm1tTh3Fr0g

Thank you for the reply. Now that I recall/looked at logs it appears it overboosts by around ~1-2 PSI. I'll post a log/tune in a bit after I do some more pulls. Another question, this car is flex tuned for E85 and I am noticing the WG DC 1 and WG DC 2 tables are identical and boost target is what differentiates boost levels. Do the WG 1 and WG 2 tables represent WGDC on the different fuel bleds? Or is it referring to something different all together?

Bumping for question about G4X sorry - is ~1psi over target boost considered overboosting when using a 38mm EWG and 3 port mac on a G4X using closed loop boost control? EJ20 WRX. Thanks!

Thank you again Adam for quickly dispelling my stupidity fueled anxiety.

Hi all, excuse my lack of tuning experience. I have a full bolt on 02 WRX with a Link G4X and recently took my car back to my tuner to enable closed loop boost control among other things. However looking at the boost targets now that I have the car, I see it set quite a bit higher in the map than we had discussed - goals were 22psi on pump and 24psi for E85. Though it was set in open loop around ~25.5 hitting 26 on occasion. I was under the impression with closed loop one should have the targets as close as possible to the real boost you intend to achieve, rather than setting the value higher than desired and using offsets or trims to achieve desired boost. Wanted to get some expert opinions before I bring this up to my tuner. I was able to hit 26 psi on the drive home. No complaints with performance, I just thought boost targets should match real world desired boost. Here are the target tables and the PID config.

Thank you for that distinction regarding retard vs absolute degrees. Is it safe to say those guidelines regarding latched launch retard hold true when tuning normal launch control from a stop as well? Meaning would latched launch control and single launch control both call for a similar/same amount of retard and or fueling in those two different situations given you are comparing the same engine? I was planning for standard launch control to start with retarding launch timing in -5 degree increments to see how if affects boost.

I decided just to do it the proper way and buy another expansion loom. Thanks!

Are you using the latest version of PCLink? I would make sure you're on the latest version, as reinstalling the latest version will reinstall the drivers.

Would it still be advisable to trim -30 degrees of timing on a for example a 2.0L motor? Based on other rolling anti lag maps I've seen, the timing isn't retarded quite to that extent. Thanks.

Interesting. That is supposed to be 2.5mm pitch and I just tried a 2.5mm pin header and it is quite loose. Are the pins intended to be loose but it's held in from the clip?

Would someone be able to confirm the size of the pins on the expansion loom connector, I don't have calipers? Smaller than 2.54 so 2.0? 1.27?

Thank you!

Thanks a lot of the help. I have an unrelated question regarding latched launch control. I am trying to use the front windshield sprayer button on the stalk as my LLC activation as I have the sprayer deleted, and I can't figure out how to add it. I don't see it as a DI switch like the rear demister. Thanks!

Gotcha so I am good to leave the LTT table blank until I drive/tune the car next. And thank you for that clarification on the CLL gain. I await Adamw's reply.

Thanks for the explanation. So does the ECU populate the CLL Long Term Trim Table itself with learned data? And what is the suggested way to dial in gain control for LTT? I know it said excessively large numbers result in oscillation and too small will yield poor response.

Ah okay thanks for that. Can I safely switch from stoich mode (wideband) over to auto mode (wideband) and use the same AFR/Lambda target table assuming it was tuned on stoich mode (wideband) in order to enable the use of long term fuel trimming? And is there an optimal CLL update rate per RPM/load?