Einspritzpumpen und Tuning (größere Förderkolben) | Posts 32+

Hey everyone.

I was made aware of your forum by a friend.
That's really interesting, but I doubt that 'good gremlin' actually believes that you can turn a 90 hp engine into a 110 hp TDI just by changing the injectors.

I think there are probably still a few other changes needed.
And according to his description (hack kack ahl Automatik!!!!!). I can't stand hearing this anymore. With injectors that have higher injection pressures, the leakage amounts must be so high that a few milligrams are probably lost per stroke! (Let's see if there's a hole in the line?)

The start of the injection process is not controlled by the NBF (Nozzle Flow Balance), but rather the SG (Steuergerät) uses the signal from the NBF to determine the timing for the start of the feed pump in the ESP (Electric Spark Plug).

The 'pump head,' as it is often called, is actually called a distribution body.
Unfortunately, you can't rely on the statements made by Bosch technicians; they're not even brave enough to disassemble an ESP system.
When upgrading to larger distribution manifolds, the ESP (Engine Control Unit) must be properly initialized; otherwise, nothing will work.

I installed 216 injectors in my engine, but I barely noticed any increase in performance. However, switching to the distributor with the 12mm jets made a huge difference.

I've been driving my car with this modification (measured 205 hp and 395 Nm / complete modification package) for 20,000 km, and I haven't had any problems so far.

I think it's great that everyone here is theoretically very knowledgeable, but theory and practice can sometimes be quite different.

Okay, I'd like to compare the AHL (Automatic Headlight) characteristic curves for the 'Autom' (automatic) version and the 90 hp manual transmission version, as I'm sure there will be differences.
I'm sure our [insert offensive word here] already did that.

Okay, my fingers are sore, so that's enough for now.


Best regards,
Thomas

@Corrado-TDI:

'Where are you from? I actually want to sell my Ibiza TDI with the AFN engine because it doesn't have enough power even as a daily driver. Now I'm thinking about keeping it and tuning it, which I had planned to do anyway. I'm just worried about the mileage, which is currently 163,000 km. Could you please email me (braun_s@gmx.de) and let me know how much a conversion would cost (pump to 12mm / 17-inch turbo and tuning)?' 'I would install the turbo myself beforehand, as I've already learned how to do it.'

Otherwise, great topic. I hope the discussion continues, and one thing is certain: anyone who has truly achieved great things understands people like you.


Sure, here's the translation:

'Best regards, Dr. B.'

corrado-TDI wrote:

I have a 1Z pump manufactured in 1996 and an AFN manufactured in 1997. They are definitely not the same part numbers.

Hi Mirco,

Comparing apples and oranges is like comparing two completely different things.
The 1Z engine uses a turbocharger with a wastegate, which means it requires a completely different pump characteristic compared to the VTG AFN engine. However, besides the 1Z, there are other 90hp TDI engines (some even with a VTG turbo).

Gremlin clearly only mentioned VTG VP TDIs above, and indeed, there are 90PS and 110PS engines within that range. These engines actually have the same fuel pumps (see ET catalog) but different injectors. As you mentioned earlier, injectors that are too small can limit performance (as is the case with the 90PS AGR). If you install larger injectors in this engine, you can achieve almost the same performance as the larger engine (although a software modification is recommended for better emissions). Installing larger injectors in the 110PS engine may not provide much benefit, as the fuel pump may simply not be able to deliver enough fuel. In that case, you would need to resort to the modifications you mentioned. Absolutely correct.

You completely talked past each other.

Audi_Tdi210 wrote:

I think there are probably still a few other changes needed. And according to his description, the leakage amounts in nozzles with higher injection pressures should be so high that a few milligrams are likely lost per stroke!!!!! (let's see if there's a hole in the line?)

Nothing is lost; it simply cannot reach the combustion chamber through the nozzles. That's all there is to it. With the smaller nozzles, the (intended) leakage losses are higher.

When you connect a garden hose to a faucet, a certain amount X (the free flow rate of the pump) flows out of the hose. If you slightly reduce the size of the outlet opening, the speed of the liquid initially increases, but the amount remains (largely) the same. If you further reduce the opening, the amount will eventually decrease because the liquid can no longer accelerate. The amount of water coming out of the garden hose is smaller. There are no losses. The excess liquid flows back into the supply circuit through the existing gaps in the pump (and is therefore not directed to the outlet).
If, on the other hand, I use the ideal opening at the end of the hose, I can only extract a maximum amount X from the hose; it doesn't matter much if I double the diameter of the hose.

Audi_Tdi210 wrote:

The start of the injection is not controlled by the NBF, but rather the SG uses the signal from the NBF as a parameter to determine when to initiate the pump start in the ESP.

... thereby influencing the start of the injection ... exactly!

Audi_Tdi210 wrote:

Unfortunately, there's nothing you can rely on from Bosch technicians; they're not even brave enough to disassemble an ESP.

"There are all sorts of people. Anyone who doesn't have a pump testing stand should probably just stay away from it." My Bosch service center used to repair a wide variety of VP37 injection pumps.

Gremlin wrote:

The 1Z unit has the old pump with potentiometer feedback from the actuator. This is the first row of the VP37-EDC.

There's also the HDK 1Z (I believe starting with model year 95). Mine already had an HDK pump.

I think it's really great how our forum experts (Gremlin & Co.) ruin every topic with their know-it-all attitude. They argue about every tiny detail. It seems like no one is actually interested in the main topic; they just want to satisfy their need for attention.

But let's get back to the topic:
'So far, the .216 injectors haven't provided any significant benefits for me or other users who have installed them. The power increase (with unchanged hardware and software) was at best 8 horsepower (for the AFN engine), while the 12mm upgrade, on the other hand, resulted in an increase of approximately 32 horsepower (and at a lower cost).'
where the combination of both components truly delivers optimal performance.

Okay, let's start wrapping things up now:
'If you want to have fun and be on the safe (stable) side, you should definitely stick with an 11mm distributor body. Combined with .216 injectors and decent software, you can achieve quite a bit. I think the power output, depending on the tuning, is around 160-170 horsepower.'
If you really want to make significant progress, you can't avoid the 12mm conversion. However, the resulting torque is so immense that some other parts won't last long. The biggest weak point is the clutch. Since the AFN was usually delivered with the CYP gearbox, you'll run into problems. It's very difficult to find a reinforced clutch for this. Also, the gear ratio is too short, so it's recommended to convert to an EFF or DRW gearbox with a 240mm sports clutch. This will allow speeds of over 250 km/h (according to the speedometer).
Another problem is the turbocharger. The standard VNT15 and even the VNT17 have serious difficulties in properly controlling the exhaust flow. Unfortunately, this results in boost pressure spikes exceeding 2 bar.
With slight modifications, the VNT17 can still be controlled reasonably well. The VNT15 definitely cannot. Even with a setting of 0.95 bar in the map, boost pressures exceeding 1.5 bar are achieved (peak pressure!).
Therefore, anyone who wants to modify their pump must be aware that they will inevitably need to make further modifications.
'Chips, nozzles, LLK (low-loss catalytic converter), exhaust systems, etc. are all fine and good, but things really only become truly sophisticated with a pump upgrade.'

Amen.

Okay, I have one more.
@thomas:
I don't understand what you want from me. You're accusing me of fraud and criticizing me for not providing details, claiming there are reasons for that. Well, there are reasons. I earn my living through tuning, and I certainly won't freely share my hard-earned knowledge so that next week someone can sell conversion guides on e*b*a*y...
and it's probably not possible to have a factual discussion in the forum you mentioned.
I'm not usually the type to get angry quickly, but when you're constantly being criticized by people who have absolutely no practical experience with the subject, it's understandable that you might eventually lose your patience.
I maintain, among other things, two rally-TDI vehicles, and I've gained quite a bit of experience with them. I can only agree with my predecessor: theory and practice often differ greatly.

I think we've stopped talking to each other.

Let's please forget about the 90hp TDI. We want to talk about engines that have over 160hp, not about engines that are tuned from 90 to 110. Am I wrong about that?


Best regards,
Mirco

Okay, let's talk about serious tuning...

I just want to make a note of something here:

The blanket statement 'the amount of fuel injected is not limited by the injectors' is FALSE!
The amount of fuel injected is definitely limited by the injectors. This is evident in the 66kW versions.

The 216 injectors on the 10mm pump aren't delivering the desired performance, which is understandable.
The 10mm pump is designed to deliver a flow rate that is suitable for the 205 injectors.
For larger nozzle diameters, you need to use a size 11 or 12.

@stefan:
I get my know-it-all attitude directly from the source. If you're going to criticize, you should be aware of all the facts and connections. I'd like to post the interpretation guidelines or simulation data here, but I'm not allowed to.

@thomas (Audi_Tdi210)
Of course, using 205 injectors will increase the power of a 66kW engine to 81kW.
You are welcome to examine the components used in both engines.
Besides other nozzles and other bearing shells for the connecting rod bearings, you won't find anything that's different. You're welcome to call Feuerbach if you have any questions...


And I'm going to sign off now...

CU Gremlin.

Hi,

@Gremlin:

Quote:

Of course, using 205 injectors will increase the power of a 66kW engine to 81kW.

Please also mention that you mean the ALH, otherwise it will be interpreted in the direction of 1Z again...

Best regards,

Jan.

The control unit is definitely different, not in its physical structure, but in its software, which has been programmed with much higher values.

Best regards,
Mirco

@gremlin

I was just having a nice conversation with someone via private message. We were talking about you. I wrote to them that I don't think you're stupid. It's obvious that you're knowledgeable, and no one denies that. The problem is that you rely too much on theoretical facts, and unfortunately, you often ruin the conversation with your know-it-all attitude (which, to be fair, is often correct).

Regarding the nozzles, I agree with you. A .216 nozzle won't make much difference on a 10mm pump because the pump isn't delivering enough fuel. However, if you increase the fuel flow, the .205 nozzle will become the limiting factor. Then, a larger nozzle will really start to make a difference.
So, the nozzle only represents a limit when the flow rate of the pump exceeds the maximum spray rate (please excuse the expression ) of the nozzle.
In my opinion, the main advantage of the .216 nozzles is the higher opening pressure.

Hello everyone!

The discussion here is becoming increasingly dynamic!
Assuming incompressible working fluids, Stefan's statement would be completely correct: the injection volume is determined solely by the volume displaced by the pump piston.
However, in fuel injection systems, we operate in pressure ranges where neither the compressibility of the diesel fuel nor the elasticities of the pump cylinder, the pressure lines, and the injector body can be neglected.
Therefore, the actual amount of fuel injected is influenced by the overall system, i.e., the interaction between the injector and the pump characteristics.
This can be clearly observed in group 1 (VAG-COM). With the same injection quantity, the quantity control valve must be deflected further as the engine speed increases (resulting in a higher RWG voltage). This means that the volumetric losses, due to the effects mentioned above, increase with increasing rotational speed.
If you can only increase the power from 90 hp to 110 hp by changing the injectors, then it should be possible to identify the 110 hp version by the fact that, under full load and the same engine speed, Group 1 should show the same RWG voltage, even though the indicated fuel amounts (mg/H) are higher in the 110 hp version.
"Could someone with a genuine 110PS TDI engine perform a DZR test and log group 1 data? This would allow me to compare the results with my own data. It's important to also provide the minimum and maximum values." RWG voltage (I don't remember the exact group designation now), which allows you to determine the actual displacement of the switchgear.
I assume that the actual characteristic curve is defined by the RWG voltage within the characteristic map, and that the displayed injection quantity is scaled either linearly using a correction factor or non-linearly using a characteristic curve.

If this comparison reveals that the 110 horsepower versions cause a significantly greater deviation in the MSW, then Stefan would be right, because that would indicate that the pump is not delivering enough fluid. However, in this specific case, I have gained practical experience and can confirm an increase in performance.
With the 216 injectors combined with the 10-bar fuel pressure, the increase in power might be minimal or mainly limited to the higher RPM range, where the EDC further adjusts the MSW to compensate for volumetric losses.

@Stefan:
Have you already done any conversions from 10-liter to 11-liter pistons, using 205 injectors? "How much does such a conversion cost, and what are the effects on the engine's power/torque output and reliability after the conversion?"

Regards,
Alex.

donalexo wrote:

With the 216 injectors combined with the 10-liter piston, the performance gain might actually be marginal or mainly limited to the higher RPM range, where the EDC further deflects the MSW to compensate for volumetric losses.

Hi Alex,

The 216 injectors offer some improvement in the mid-range RPM, even without any other modifications.
The 80-120 time zone is in the 5th hour. "According to my experience, the operating range (approximately 1800-2700 rpm) is reduced by more than 10% compared to the stock injectors (I no longer have the exact comparison data), which corresponds to the approximately 15% increase in power mentioned above."

@donalexo

You've phrased that very nicely...

On February 12th, I will be converting an AF lens to a 11mm mount.
The nozzles, etc., remain stock. Only the clutch is changed.
and 5th gear will be updated (the software will, of course, be updated as well).
adapted).
If I have the time and inclination, I'll take some measurements.
make.

Hello.
If a 110 hp TDI engine is only limited to 90 hp through the injectors, I wonder how it's possible to gain an additional 40 hp with a good chip tuning.
With such performance improvements using the original nozzles, the potential impact with 216 nozzles must be enormous.
So, if the performance of a system were to increase from 205 to 216 nozzles by up to 15%, then we would have to expect enormous performance gains from the smaller nozzles to the larger ones!

Purely theoretically, with a 90 hp engine, a chip upgrade, and larger injectors (15%), the potential output would be 150 hp.
I don't think you actually believe that it's producing 20 horsepower more.
This calculation is currently very conservative because the leakage rates increase progressively with the increasing flow rate. Therefore, if the difference of 20 horsepower is significant even in the standard configuration, it should be considerably higher in tuned models.
No one is perfect, and even when sharing newly acquired knowledge from excellent sources, even those sources can sometimes be wrong.

Best regards,
Thomas

@Audi_Tdi210:

Let's reach for the slide rule, then.

For the AGR engine (90 hp), the RWG voltage varies between 0.68 and 4.68 V (the interval limits may vary slightly, but the effective MSW travel should be the same for all pumps).
This means that we have a voltage range of 4.00 V available for the 100% control range of the metering skid (MSW), which corresponds to a flow rate from 0 to 100% relative to the maximum possible pump flow rate.
At idle, the voltage is approximately 1.65V. Under full load at low RPM (1500 to 1700 RPM), the RWG voltage is just above 3V. This means that a voltage difference of approximately 2.4V is sufficient to shift the control valve from zero fuel delivery to full fuel injection (as specified by the EDC). However, this also means that there is still a potential of approximately 1.6V available for increasing the fuel injection amount through tuning. That should be enough to achieve 40% more performance, right?
In the higher RPM range, the theoretically possible amount of fuel injected decreases because the fuel quantity control mechanism swings up to approximately 4 volts to compensate for the speed-dependent losses. However, there are still almost 0.7V available to increase the fuel injection amount!
Unfortunately, the mathematical relationship (characteristic curve) between the control voltage of the servo and the geometric stroke of the plunger piston is unknown to me. However, I assume a non-linear relationship that results in a progressive increase in the stroke at higher voltages. This achieves good resolution in the range of small quantities (idle speed control!!!) and lower resolution at higher speeds, where it is less critical.

Of course, when increasing the fuel quantity in this way, the boost pressure should also be adjusted to ensure that the fuel burns as completely as possible and releases energy, rather than creating mist. But I think that's pretty obvious, right?

Regards,
Alex.

Okay, I'll keep that in mind.
but there's one thing I don't understand:

If the difference in performance between the AGR and AFN models is solely controlled by the injectors, then...
Why is the maximum fuel quantity listed as 38mg/H in the specification fields of the AGR?
and for afn, 43 mg/H?
That would mean that an AGR engine with .025 injectors achieves the same power output as a 110 horsepower engine, even though 5mg/hour less fuel is injected?
How is that supposed to work?
The characteristic curves for boost pressure and pump pressure are identical for both engines. Therefore, increasing the boost pressure would not be necessary. The boost pressure characteristic curve for the AGR engine has values up to 45 mg/H, just like the AFN engine.
The pump voltage is also 3.8 volts for both, but the EGR motor is reduced to 38 mg/H via the transmission protection map and the opacity map.
No other significant changes are present.

Okay, so how can an AGR engine with .205 injectors achieve the same power output as a 110 horsepower engine, even though the engine control unit (ECU) has reduced the fuel flow by 5mg/H?
It would be great if someone could explain this to me.

@all

Okay, Stefan.
It's probably clear that simply replacing the nozzles won't solve the problem.
The control unit has something to say.

205 injectors + (110 hp) EDC = 110 hp TDI.

Best regards,
Mirco