Augment Automotive.

[944Turbo]

Tom (Augment) did detail the development of his board for the 944 here, I cant find the topic now but some of his early experience of running it is here https://www.porscheclubgb.com/forum/tm.aspx?m=725360

To me the advantage of Vems or Augment is that you are getting new hardware to replace the original ecu in a plug in box that means you could return to the original. The original ECUs are doing very well but a few have suffered from dry joints - corrosion etc. and this number is likely to increase, so overall you should see an improvement in the longer term. It may take a lot of hours on a rolling road to set up, iron out the bugs and additional tweaking may be required later. Another advantage over other standalone units is that with these 2 there has been a lot of work with our cars, others Emerald / Motec / Link etc. will require even more work.

On installation there are problems likely to arise with other components not being so 'fresh' - the ISV on my car was leaking a massive amount of air which with my Vitesse MAF which caused it to run very rich - so issues are not just found with replacement ECUs but they may be more sensitive to them.

So in answer to the original question - I have considered it but on my coupe, but still thinking a new factory GM ecu to match a new GM v8 - (If only I had time to get started, hoping to bring the coupe home this year which should help) and the cab I am keeping standard as tuning likely to adversely affect its value - If the ecu failed then it would be a hard choice!
Tony

 

[924Srr27l]

Tom (Augment) did detail the development of his board for the 944 here, I cant find the topic now but some of his early experience of running it is here https://www.porscheclubgb.com/forum/tm.aspx?m=725360

To me the advantage of Vems or Augment is that you are getting new hardware to replace the original ecu in a plug in box that means you could return to the original. The original ECUs are doing very well but a few have suffered from dry joints - corrosion etc. and this number is likely to increase, so overall you should see an improvement in the longer term. It may take a lot of hours on a rolling road to set up, iron out the bugs and additional tweaking may be required later. Another advantage over other standalone units is that with these 2 there has been a lot of work with our cars, others Emerald / Motec / Link etc. will require even more work.

On installation there are problems likely to arise with other components not being so 'fresh' - the ISV on my car was leaking a massive amount of air which with my Vitesse MAF which caused it to run very rich - so issues are not just found with replacement ECUs but they may be more sensitive to them.

So in answer to the original question - I have considered it but on my coupe, but still thinking a new factory GM ecu to match a new GM v8 - (If only I had time to get started, hoping to bring the coupe home this year which should help) and the cab I am keeping standard as tuning likely to adversely affect its value - If the ecu failed then it would be a hard choice!
Tony

Yeah but they (VEms, AA,) are all marketed and sold that they are a "Modern" superior design to the original units (More power gains?) and that they can be tuned far more.....
If this was a very firm "cut and dry" fact then I could understand lots of people buying them, without any questions but as you've mentioned you and probably many others see them more as an alternative should in time the original electronics fail, but the question here is are really what they are all cracked up to be?

I'd say no, purely based on my engine using 30+ year old 2.5L Stock Bosch mangement / fueling to outperform a claimed all singing / dancing "Race Cam" electronic wizardry and wasted spark etc...OH and the famous AFM that 's apparently so restricted! (The Yankies are so obsessed with this Myth)

The cliche is common that when you're asking for more power then several things have to be all 100% otherwise there will be issues, the amount of cars that are re-mapped and then blow up and / or have clutch slipping issues , leaks etc..is a lot.

These systems do seem to take hours of setting up because of the above, other differences from one model to the next and also because they are attempting to emulate and replace what would of been a big chunk of money to produce all the OE Bosch electronics and fueling in the first place.

People that really know their onions in Mapping (Which is very few) won't have any more lengthy issues at all setting up some of the best standalone units, compared to the two you mention here, quite simply because their hardware and software development are superior as used extensively by the best race teams.

For Race applications (Looking for the last .5 HP) they are a great tool, but for road use and even road and track there's plenty other areas on these cars that will reduce your lap times and make the car go faster for the same or less amounts of time, faff and money.


R

 

[Eldavo]

An interesting viewpoint as ever Roger (the standard, "this is what I’ve done so it must be right”).

The guy I’ll use for live mapping when I get to that point is based down south. He’s a huge fan of VEMS and fits/maps them on many cars when he’s in the country. When he’s not in the country it’s because of the day job as "Senior Calibration Engineer Special Projects at Aston Martin” which means he spends lots of time at WEC races.

You've admitted yourself on here before that you know very little about the Turbo or its electronics, funnily enough I do know a fair bit - but also enough to know I know nothing in the grander scale of things.

The standard ECU works by guesstimating air flow based on the 30 year old AFM and corroborating that to a lookup table to sort the fuelling and hoping it all works - which it does most of the time. A Turbo also has a potentiometer throttle position sensor so it adds a granular level of throttle input to the lookup table too. Although the KLR receives a boost signal, this is for overboost protection and the ECU does not factor boost into the fuelling equation AFAIK. Many people with modified Turbos fit a wideband O2 sensor to monitor AFR and then tune fuelling to try and hit an acceptable figure under full boost.

My VEMS ECU knows what air is coming into the engine, what the throttle position is and what the boost level is at any given point and then builds a 3D map of what’s going on and compares that with the map of what should be going on. It also knows, via a wideband O2 sensor, what’s coming out of the engine and is able to use this information like a modern ECU to affect fuelling, timing, etc. on the fly.

Quite simply, the drivability of my Turbo has been transformed by VEMS. Off boost it is smoother, it builds boost quicker and earlier and rather than tune for full chat only and be too rich the rest of the time, I’m seeing more power across the Rev range and significantly more "area under the curve.”

Oh - and with the map that mine came loaded with it started and ran first time and off I went with it in self tuning mode. Sorry, if none of that fits your narrative - especially as lots of people are buying and fitting these ECUs, just not you!

 

[924Srr27l]

An interesting viewpoint as ever Roger (the standard, "this is what I’ve done so it must be right”).
The guy I’ll use for live mapping when I get to that point is based down south. He’s a huge fan of VEMS and fits/maps them on many cars when he’s in the country. When he’s not in the country it’s because of the day job as "Senior Calibration Engineer Special Projects at Aston Martin” which means he spends lots of time at WEC races.
You've admitted yourself on here before that you know very little about the Turbo or its electronics, funnily enough I do know a fair bit - but also enough to know I know nothing in the grander scale of things.
The standard ECU works by guesstimating air flow based on the 30 year old AFM and corroborating that to a lookup table to sort the fuelling and hoping it all works - which it does most of the time. A Turbo also has a potentiometer throttle position sensor so it adds a granular level of throttle input to the lookup table too. Although the KLR receives a boost signal, this is for overboost protection and the ECU does not factor boost into the fuelling equation AFAIK. Many people with modified Turbos fit a wideband O2 sensor to monitor AFR and then tune fuelling to try and hit an acceptable figure under full boost.
My VEMS ECU knows what air is coming into the engine, what the throttle position is and what the boost level is at any given point and then builds a 3D map of what’s going on and compares that with the map of what should be going on. It also knows, via a wideband O2 sensor, what’s coming out of the engine and is able to use this information like a modern ECU to affect fuelling, timing, etc. on the fly.
Quite simply, the drivability of my Turbo has been transformed by VEMS. Off boost it is smoother, it builds boost quicker and earlier and rather than tune for full chat only and be too rich the rest of the time, I’m seeing more power across the Rev range and significantly more "area under the curve.”
Oh - and with the map that mine came loaded with it started and ran first time and off I went with it in self tuning mode. Sorry, if none of that fits your narrative - especially as lots of people are buying and fitting these ECUs, just not you!

"The standard ECU works by guesstimating air flow based on the 30 year old AFM and corroborating that to a lookup table to sort the fuelling and hoping it all works"

Wow You make this sounds like it's quite an incompetent system

Isn't is rather impressive then that my 2.7 motor (Dyno sheet comparison) produced 205bhp / 205 ft lbs (both at much lower RPM) on 9M's rolling road
This is all stock Bosch v AA 's (ECU / Race Cam / AFM delete - Hotwire / Wasted spark / Injectors? etc..) ?

This is what the dyno figures recorded , nothing to do with it must be right because I said so. It's just the ink on the paper that I'm looking at.

How can this (defunct) system that guesstimates be more powerful?

I and many others would no doubt be interested to learn why ? as you say you "know a fair bit "

Wayne @ Chipwizards (One of two engineers who recommended and tuned the stock electronics) is pretty handy too! and it would be a very long list to start naming the car's and companies he has and does work for and with....

This thread is in regard to the harder task of tuning an N/A Engine, not the easier solution to increase more bang on a forced induction engine.

R

 

[944Turbo]

Back in the early days of this forum we had a number of dyno days - there were some cars there mapped by Wayne and some running cheap off the shelf 'guru racing' chips from the states - the custom mappped cars should have produced more power / same dyno - same day but they didn't. I don't doubt this got back to Wayne and he had a good look at the code!


The Vittesse MAF uses the standard electronics but re-calibrates them so that they can measure the airflow across the entire range - VEMS and Autronic will do this better and at the same time all three remove the AFM which isn't the best for smooth airflow and without modification to the ecu maxes out at about 4000 rpm so is relying on lock up tables.
There are tricks to ensuring the 30 year old afm gives good feedback within its range - back in those guru chip days I adjusted the spring on mine and the track, but the car is better without it. There are factors here too the AFM has a better cold air supply with the standard layout than say a filter behind the rad, but that is relatively easy to sort.
A friend of mines turbo made around 320BHP 370ftlbs on a turbo with standard turbo/ internals / exhaust / intake with a freer flowing exhaust and dropping the AFM it would make more, mine made 340Bhp 340ft/lbs (with a bit bigger turbo and an exhaust ) also on the AFM but it was nicer to drive when I went to the MAF, I never got a good dyno on the MAF 1st was was the day after I fitted it and was still setting up - though I think it produced more than Peter SH on that occasion (Bournemouth) and by the time we made it to Liverpool the engine was more than a little smokey c185k 100k of which it was modified - think it might have still been the most powerful on the day.

Twice my boost controller failed - once on a wet A30 (wheelspin at 3500rpm) in 4th and the second time on the bedford trackday a few of us did a few years ago. I hit over 30 psi on a car that usually ran 18 the MAF threw everything the uprated injectors and fuel pump could throw at it and probably saved the engine from breaking - with the afm the look up table wouldn't have known and would have fueled for the expected 18psi.


Tony

 

[Eldavo]

This thread is in regard to the harder task of tuning an N/A Engine, not the easier solution to increase more bang on a forced induction engine.

Actually, this thread is in regard to Frenchy enquiring about an aftermarket ECU for his Turbo S. You were the one that derailed it to bleat on about your car, your findings and your opinions on everything.

Maybe you should take your 205hp and go wait outside while the big boys talk and provide Jim with some useful information that’s pertinent to the question he originally posed!

 

[924Srr27l]

This thread is in regard to the harder task of tuning an N/A Engine, not the easier solution to increase more bang on a forced induction engine.

Actually, this thread is in regard to Frenchy enquiring about an aftermarket ECU for his Turbo S. You were the one that derailed it to bleat on about your car, your findings and your opinions on everything.
Maybe you should take your 205hp and go wait outside while the big boys talk and provide Jim with some useful information that’s pertinent to the question he originally posed!

I did ask that question, what car was it for but was ignored...!

Just like I've asked you to explain:

"This is what the dyno figures recorded , nothing to do with it must be right because I said so. It's just the ink on the paper that I'm looking at.

How can this (defunct) system that guesstimates be more powerful?

I and many others would no doubt be interested to learn why ? as you say you "know a fair bit "


Lets have it answered then Mr Insulting Turboboy ? I'm keen to see this........

R

 

[Eldavo]

I think you’ve caused enough damage to the 944 forum.

I suggest we remain on topic and if you want to argue with me on a personal level that you take it to PM. Then I can ignore you and your 924 there as well.

 

[tscaptain]

I suggest we remain on topic

I suggest the same....

 

[John Sims]

.... the MAF threw everything the uprated injectors and fuel pump could throw at it and probably saved the engine from breaking

While a very long way from ideal I quite like my Link MAP system for the similar reason. I've lost induction pipes and the MAP just fuels the engine accordingly. It is an absolute git of a thing to map and calibrate though - it pretty much foxed Wayne. Either way the original barn door is pretty useless on a modified Turbo (YMMV).

I can fully understand why Jon moved away from 944's. I remember thinking at the time that concentrating on 944 Tuning wasn't perhaps the best business model as the train had probably already left the station.

 

[blade7]

I can fully understand why Jon moved away from 944's. I remember thinking at the time that concentrating on 944 Tuning wasn't perhaps the best business model as the train had probably already left the station.

Andy at Promax said pretty much the same thing years ago.

 

[924Srr27l]

I suggest we remain on topic and if you want to argue with me on a personal level that you take it to PM. Then I can ignore you and your 924 there as well.

You need to go to Specsavers then! Only I'm discussing and asking things about the AA Components, (Unlike your zero contribution and instead insulting remarks) asking you to explain why you seem to think the Bosch system is very poor with comments like:

- "fudging signals on 30 year old tech"
- "The standard ECU works by guesstimating air flow based on the 30 year old AFM and corroborating that to a lookup table to sort the fuelling and hoping it all works"

There's been a lot of views on this thread so I'd say there's a lot of people interested to find out about this thread's opening question "Is the AA stuff any good"

See attached a Dyno Graph from the 2.7 Engine AA mapped also fitted with their Race cam, ECU, and more ...
Look at not just the peak Torque and BHP figures but also where they are in the RPM ranges.


R

Download

 

[924Srr27l]

Now compare the AA figures with the 924S 2.7 Road car I built:

The peak figures are higher, and with lower RPM.
The Cam fitted has a smaller profile (272 duration) and the exhaust system has a smaller bore than a standard 2.5
The head is the smaller valved 2.5 litre version (Lindsey Racing Ported) and the Inlet Manifold internals were extrude hone polsihed)

How can these figures of happened with the antiquated / restrictive / guesstimating 30+ year old Bosch ECU, AFM, Injectors, and electronics etc.. ?

R

 

[CarreraRSR]

I’m no expert, but looks like it’s working well?

https://youtu.be/17Jls153l8A

 

[944Turbo]

- "The standard ECU works by guesstimating air flow based on the 30 year old AFM and corroborating that to a lookup table to sort the fuelling and hoping it all works"

That is how it works- Wayne will play with the numbers in the look up table and as I said earlier with off the shelf chips I had to increase the spring pressure to stop it opening early. Once the AFM is fully open - around 3800rpm If I remember correctly - you are then just reliant on maps based on throttle position / rpm / knock sensor for your ignition and fueling. The modern options allow airflow monitoring throughout the full rev range, Vitesse manages it with the standard ecu but with a board in the chip socket.
In addition to full range airflow monitoring you can smooth the path of the airflow and a maf or map setup is less restrictive.
Tony

 

[944Turbo]

I’m no expert, but looks like it’s working well?

https://youtu.be/17Jls153l8A

nice video!

 

[Dan944t]

Who’s 924 is this in this video? It looks to drive awesem ??

 

[CarreraRSR]

Who’s 924 is this in this video? It looks to drive awesem ??

PCGB Speed Champs 2018 P2 class winner Justin Mather

Appears to lap pretty quickly .......

https://youtu.be/YqTBBXheNds

 

[Dan944t]

Looks great!

 

[924Srr27l]

I’m no expert, but looks like it’s working well?

https://youtu.be/17Jls153l8A

I’m no expert, but looks like it’s working well?

https://youtu.be/17Jls153l8A

I’m no expert, but looks like it’s working well?
https://youtu.be/17Jls153l8A

I know everything with you is for "looks" but this doesn't assist a technical discussion on electronics.

Have you "Looked" at and compared the graphs ? this would be more applicable

Moving on it must of not been good enough as the engine's (On your movie clip) has now gone forced induction.

I wonder who rebuilt the engine, and did the charger install and also I'd of thought there would of been a power figure
quoted or a dyno sheet on the AA website had they of done it? or had someone else done it for them

They had a go at a charged application 5 years ago, but didn't finish it or have produced and marketed a kit since.

R