vegener at post7.tele.dk
Mon Oct 21 11:08:26 EDT 2002
MTM is one of the finest tuner in Germany.
I tested a 200 20V car for a friend with such a chip and it had
the claimed 282 Hp (from comparison with my own notes and readings)
(G-Tech pro and 3. gear WOT from 2000-7000 rpm with split-time-readings)
What made us do the test was, that his dash boost readout show 1. 0 Bar with ignition on.
The 200 is born with a 2.0 Bar boost sensor and if exchanged to
2.5 or 3 the readings have to be faulty (0.7 - 0.6 Bar).
So in this case MTM have gone a step further and exchanged/reprogrammed the boost gauge in the dash - fine.
Soldering or not:
The 100S4 have a 2.5 Bar Bosch boost sensor and for moderate chipping this don't have to be exchanged. IA III and MTM go to 2.3 Bar (compared to std. of 1.8 Bar)
The 200 20V Motronic box have a 2.0 Bar Bosch boost sensor
and have to be soldered (3 terminals but from underside of the
low-level print so completely dismantle is necessary)
The fuelchip and the boost chip are placed in sockets; but
some tuners want to protecht their code and mount their
chips with crypted code upon a de-crypt chip.
This is a problem because the fuel and boost chip are sitting back-to-back upon the 2 different boards and this gives a spaceproblem with standard sockets.
WG-spring or not.
The boost chip is managing boost through the frequency valve.
This is OK for max boost and for the programmed boost curve.
When cruising and the right foot is floored the wgfv still works
on a duty cycle and this hesitation is less if a stronger spring is installed. Try running without the wgfv and a strong spring -
as you did before the Motronic were invented.
Then you feel what the a/r ratio of the turbo turbine side is.
The 200 kkk24 have a small a/r 0.6 - 0.7 and the wgf are smoothing the cruising behaviour through its dutycycle.
Install a 2.3 Bar spring and you get a very quick car - but
without some (not all) of the safety devices built in from the Motronic.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brett Dikeman" <brett at cloud9.net>
To: "Mihnea Cotet" <mik at info.fundp.ac.be>; "Andy" <trifox13 at covad.net>; <200q20v at audifans.com>
Sent: Monday, October 21, 2002 7:37 AM
Subject: Re: MTM chip
> At 7:06 AM +0200 10/21/02, Mihnea Cotet wrote:
> >Huh? So you mean that MTM who sells and installs WG springs on their
> >customers' cars aren't doing their job properly now?
> Well, actually, yes. Early versions of the 3B chips from MTM
> required springs because the code was faulty. Later revisions don't
> require it.
> Ride in a car with the early code, and you'll notice distinct boost
> spikes/surges. Namely, three. Particularly noticeable at highway
> >>>. I have read nothing about this chip and thought that the chips
> >>>were soldered into the computer.
> >>They are. Some vendors install sockets, however. Still, soldering
> >>is required.
> >Nope they aren't !!!!! AT least on the 3B ECUs they have never been
> >soldered and never required unsoldering, and even some UrS4 ECUs
> >that I've seen (they had never been opened, one of them was brand
> >new from Bosch) had sockets in them. So one more time you're wrong
> Take a look at:
> The S-car ecu in the second set of photos clearly has soldered ROMs.
> The 3B pictures show a plastic guard over the ROMs, which might be in
> place to secure the chip in a socket. There could be multiple
> versions as well.
> Your observations of european 3B ecus could have no bearing on US
> ecus which, among other things, were produced a year later.
> >>> The IA chip w/ the stiffer wastegate spring seems to be the
> >>>favorite of this and other groups
> >>IA does not sell stiffer wastegate springs for the 20vt. They are
> >>100% unnecessary with a proper chip.
> >That's not true! MTM sells 2.5 and 3 Bar chip upgrades for the 3B
> >AND install stiffer WG springs without their customers necessarily
> >knowing about that! A 15$ spring would be a too easy improvement if
> >everyone knew it, think a little! I've seen the real MTM "Fat 'n'
> >Low" UrS4 that had a stiffer WG spring from MTM in it, now what do
> >you say to that?
> Well, I'd say that MTM is not the final authority in Audi tuning,
> given that Ned's chip works flawlessly minus any sort of spring
> Among other things, their chips in all the current Audi turbo
> models fall very flat of APR's work. I don't believe I've ever heard
> of an A4 or S4tt owner with MTM chips- most everyone goes with either
> APR or Garret. APR has the dyno charts to prove their numbers, and
> their numbers are a whole lot better. Garret has probably the
> strongest reputation around for custom chip development.
> You and I have had the why-20vs-don't-need-springs discussion and I'm
> not going to rehash it further...especially with your pugnacious
> "They that give up essential liberty to obtain temporary
> safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Ben Franklin
> 200q20v mailing list
> 200q20v at audifans.com
More information about the 200q20v