Correct, 97-99.5 in North America is Non Drive By wire or Drive By Cable.

The DBC/NDBW cars came with an older verison ECU which does not allow the end user to change the values inside the ecu programming like those with a 2000+ can do using a program like Lemmiwinks. The 2001+ ecu also uses a wide band 02 to help adjust the tune on the fly, the pre 2001 ecu uses a narrow band 02 sensor which is not used during Wide Open Throttle.

A fully stock 2001 comes with 11-12psi stock and it makes 170whp, some of the older chips like TAP and Neuspeed ran .8 bar. After that chip tuners started pushing 1 bar(14.5psi) and later on pushing 1.1-1.45psi depeding on the year of the car. Intake/Exhaust does not add much peak power, it will mainly change the power under the curve which is why you dont see many people advertising "peak power gains".


Those are numbers for a chip that is running 1.1+ bar of boost and as you can see your TAP is no where near that.

That is what it can push out when pushed hard. That is not what it will make when pushing low boost or on a weak tune.

AEB stock is 150hp and 150tq. Yes they would be correct on a GIAC tune and believe me the GIAC tunes run much more then 1 bar of boost, I used to be sponsored by GIAC for 5 years and back then we were able to push the stock K03 on my 2000 to about 250chp.

If you really want the power out of a K04, then go with the GIAC PC16 tune. But to run that tune you need to run 310-317cc injectors with an adjustable Fuel Pressure Regulator down to around 2.6-2.8 bar. That is by far the strongest K04 tune for your car. The strongest K04-15 setup is the J31 which is for the 2000 only.

[/QUOTE]- I did not drive the stock car, only with the basic mods (sans straight pipe) on it. But it sure (without the coming K04 mod) feels substantially (I am after torque, not HP at high RPM) stronger than "170 HP". The straight pipe seems to bring torque on even early.[/QUOTE]

The K04 will only give you tq down low, after 6k rpms the turbo pretty much dies out anyway.

Yes but the power only moves up by less then 1000 rpms, you will find that going beyond 6500 with a K04 is pretty pointless.

and we are here to help as much as possible.

 

I think you mean FWHP. Kind of hard to use that graph seeing it is full of spikes which are used for the peak numbers. If the graph was smoothed out those peak numbers would come down a bit. So you might be looking at around 180-185 hp with that TAP chip. Even the 1-1bar chips for the ndbw/dbc made around 190-195hp.

 

Mike, thanks for patiently helping me on my way.

"A fully stock 2001 comes with 11-12psi stock and it makes 170whp, some of the older chips like TAP and Neuspeed ran .8 bar. After that chip tuners started pushing 1 bar(14.5psi) and later on pushing 1.1-1.45psi depeding on the year of the car. ."

What do you think is the boost with my TAP chip? 0.8 bar amounts to 11.6 psi. TAP advertises 12.5 psi.

"Intake/Exhaust does not add much peak power, it will mainly change the power under the curve which is why you dont see many people advertising "peak power gains"

Well, that's ideal. I rarely see 5k RPM, once a year 6k RPM. I couldn't care less what the turbo is doing beyond 5k.

My dream engine is still the direct injection turbo diesel Audi 12 cylinder, providing 1000 Nm torque.

So for ME, the 'gain' (which the advertisers use for your above mentioned reason, not peak gain) is actually applicable. That jives well with my earlier mentioned 'seat of the pants' evaluation.

What boost should I run on the K04 (together with injectors if needed and tune)?

I am guessing that the boost is set by the ECU (opening or closing a valve that sends vacuum (or pressure?) to the waste gate actuator) AND the calibration of the waste gate actuator (How does it work? The force is determined by the spring which holds it closed against the turbine pressure, the area of the actuator bladder times the vacuum (???) pressure which add to the closing force?)

 

Here is the write up from the comparison test of various (this is 1998!) chips:

The next chip tested was the TAP unit. This chip began pulling strong from between 2700 and 2900 rpm, and built poser in a smoothly progressive manner. The TAP chip did have a slight, though somewhat variable, lag in throttle response and seemed quicker to dump boost with a declining throttle opening. The latter characteristic was especially noticeable when shifting; shifts themselves were smoother, but there was a slight pause when getting back on the gas. The TAP chip never hinted at detonation. In addition, it felt faster by the seat of the pants, and in fact posted the fastest 50-70 time of the group, though beating out the Hoppen chip by only 1/20th of a second 0 to 60. The Wetterauer chip did well on the road, taking second-place honors for acceleration both 0 to 60 and 50 to 70. Despite its spectacular low-rpm performance on the dyno, on the road the Wetterauer chip seemed to hit later than the other chips, with a big rush of power around 4000 rpm. As with the Hoppen chip, our hypersensitive ears detected very slight pinging as the needle swung quickly past 4000 rpm, when it felt that boost was building rapidly. The Wetterauer chip bested the TAP chip 0 to 60, but was significantly behind in the 50 to 70 contest. One tester noted that the Wetterauer chip "seems the most impressive" by the seat of the pants. The AMS chip was a conundrum. It made the least improvement and the least torque overall of any of the chips, so we were not surprised when it was slowest in 50 to 70 testing. But when it came out quickest 0 to 60, we could only scratch our heads. It was noted as "very progressive," as one would expect from examining its torque curve, and that may be responsible for its performance off the line. Our tester described his launch technique as, "Let it sit at 3000 rpm, and gently drop the clutch." Apart from the fact that the AMS chip's mild torque curve may have favorably influenced what was meant by "gently dropping the clutch," we cannot offer any good explanation for its performance.

 

Those tests were done before most of the tuners starting making the higher boost K03 chips. Aso in 1998 the A4 1.8t had only been out for 1 full year and in its 2nd year of production for us here in North America. The chips didn't really start getting better till 2000.


Is TAP still in business? I know AMS is not.


You want to run around 18+psi on a K04 to get some good power out of it. The PC16 runs around 18-20psi and the J31(2000 only) runs anywhere from 25-30psi.

12.5psi is basically .86 bar.

 

I will find out regarding TAP. I just sent an email what they suggest for my setup.

With any luck, my TAP my actually BETTER than what the test refers to, yeah!

The PC16 sound right (2 bar = 29 psi sounds too scary for my taste)

Just got off the phone with INMotion, VERY helpful (slightly larger injectors from the TT, fuel pressure regulator from 3 to 4 bar (from TT or >2000 A4), DV (from TT ("710N" or so or aftermarket, not sure what) is a must.
Custom tune $500 lifetime retune ($25 for ECU shipping), needs my VAG info; should get me to 270 HP (which I don't believe).

 

Mike: Couldn't he make a little more power and faster spool time with a k03s/k04 hybrid? Compressor from k03s and turbine from k04?

I mean since he did mention custom turbos with roughly the same sort of set up.

 

I ran my K03 at 26psi, not an issue if the tune is right. I run 37psi now but that is on a GT35r.

The 180 TT not the 225, the 225 TT uses 380cc injectors while the 180TT used 317cc.

None of the A4 1.8t's came with a 3 bar, all of them come with a stock 4 bar which is what your car already has. The transverse cars came with the 3 bar.


As for TAP(Total Audi Peformance), looks like their site hasn't been updated since 2008 when they went on vacation. http://www.tap1.com/catalog/

 

Oh right on! Would that hybrid even work? How would you tune it? Just a K04 tune?

Just curious after reading that turbo updgrade sticky

 

We discussed this option, too. But felt the K04 will be a better fit for my mods (clear, large exhaust, decent intake) and for my goals (min turbo lag, good low to mid torque, don't care >5k RPM).

The 'custom' part is modifying the K04 compressor and turbine wheels, tight tolerances, flow improved housing, calibrated actuator.