Veloster Turbo Forum banner

1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
28 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I have been running a JB4 on my 2016 VT DCT for about 2 months and wanted to share some experiences and invite any questions since there seems to be a fair amount of people that ask questions around here and just get responses like "piggybacks suck".

Firstly, let me tell you about myself. I am about 40yo and have been working on cars since I was a kid helping my dad. I have had several cars over several years, from 4cyl Hondas and straight 6s from Datsun and BMW to a couple V8s. One of my biggest projects was a 1965 GMC that I bought from someone for $400 with a seized 350ci and TH400 that had sat through a flood. I know a lot about how engines work and what makes them work better, and what makes them break. I have never blown an engine. I did ruin a Honda engine once a long time ago by mistakingly loosening the timing belt tensioner bolt when trying to access something else and crashed the pistons into the valves. I am also a software engineer by trade, so I know a lot about programming and can often convey this knowledge to a great understanding of the computer systems that control modern cars.

I have been a fan of BMW for a long time and have been observing Burger Motorsports for more than a decade (Burger Motorsports' origin was strictly BMW). I have also been an advocate against piggyback tuners for a long time. The origin of piggyback tuners, to my knowledge, was mostly tuners that would do things like apply more voltage to fuel lines almost arbitrarily or modify things like intake temp to cause the ECU to enrich the fuel mixture because it would think the air was cooler/denser. Since I grew up in California, which has some of the most strict SMOG laws, I frequently saw people use piggyback tuners or other removable power-adders because they would have to pass SMOG a year later. Burger Motorsports has always been more advanced than that and I was very pleased to find out that they have a tuner for the Veloster. I have had my Veloster since 2019. I bought it with 24K miles on it and I am over 60K on it now thanks to my old commute that was about 85 miles each way. Now that I do not have to make that commute every day, I decided to get a JB4 and start tinkering with it. I was making quite a bit of additional power before the JB4 with a custom intake, better plugs, and running E15, aka "Unleaded 88". My exhaust is stock, and I actually like it that way because all of my sound comes from intake and engine noise and it sounds bone stock when I am not mashing the pedal (even with the tune). I have also done some mods to alter the airflow for air coming through the grille for cooling and the air intake. Some mods have been done to reduce weight, and I also learned that the Tech Package VT has a bit lower of a final drive gear ratio which really helps with acceleration. On a cool morning last year I could regularly do 0-60 in the 5.5-6 second range.

If you aren't already aware, one of the best features about the JB4 is that it communicates with both the CAN bus and the OBD-II port. This allows it to watch damn near every sensor and reading in your car to help it make power reliably. If someone knows of a single VT that has blown an engine or had any other mechanical failure with a JB4, I would love to learn more about it. I cannot recall how many posts and comments I have seen about people with ECU tunes on their second or third engine and/or chasing down problems with heat or other performance problems, often because they get their car tuned and get sent on their way and then perhaps start changing stuff like neglecting oil changes, running lower octane to save a few bucks at the gas pump, etc. Sometimes they try to make even more power and probably should have the tune reviewed. Sometimes they just found some dude on craigs**** or FB with a USB dongle that thinks he knows what he is doing. I am not saying that a JB4 is foolproof, I am just stating that it is certainly not inherently foolish.

With my JB4, I have spent quite a bit of time trying out a few of the maps. A couple aren't applicable to me. Yesterday was a slick, rainy day here, so I did all my driving with Map 4 (Valet mode) and I really appreciated how well-behaved the car was. Today it's nice and sunny so I switched back to Map 5 for a little more fun. I am running an ethanol/octane blend (around 30%) that works well with Map 5 and boosts as high as 25psi (the boost limit is set to 24psi and there is a slight continued increase in boost as it reacts to hitting the limit). If you are curious, I am still running the stock BOV/recirc valve and NOT venting to atmosphere. I am starting to research customizing and running Map 6 because that has some nice features like detuning when the transmission is being shifted automatically. Future plans include the pedal remap add-on for the JB4 and a new BOV/recirc valve. I am also looking into a wheel and tire package to get some wider tires for more traction. I live north of Tampa, FL and am looking for a dyno to see what my numbers are since all I have right now is stats from apps.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,166 Posts
Interesting & informative read. I had burger tuning for my 2011 JCW & couldn't have been happier.
 

·
Registered
2015 auto VT, 2013 manual VT × 2
Joined
·
4,260 Posts
Glad you're loving the JB4 so far and hope you never have issues with it. Are you utilizing the fuel wire to have some control over fueling? That is a big advantage with the JB4 over others if you know what you're doing. Can't wait to see some dyno numbers posted. I've already seen what they'll make on many cars myself.

I'm obviously not a fan of a piggyback since I've actually compared them with good ecu tuned cars in many ways. Piggybacks can be better or worse than an ecu tune depending on many factors at play. Main factors are the quality of the ecu tune and the quality of the oem tune that the piggyback is working on if all else is the same. Most issues with piggyback will be on cars with crap oem tune. Most issues with ecu tune will be from crap ecu tune or tuner. This is ofcourse saying mods, maintenance, and fuel are good on these cars otherwise.

For those that solely want some power gains with convenience and cost being better in some cases I say go for it. I recommend the JB4 and the fuel wire though when doing so. And only on cars with a better oem tune like the 15+ VT. Only with proper mods and fuel as well.
 

·
Registered
2015 auto VT, 2013 manual VT × 2
Joined
·
4,260 Posts
Fyi, do not run 24-25 psi regardless of fuel used unless the head is studded or the engine is built. Especially with a piggyback that has no finite control over boost, fueling, timing, and safety parameters. It will greatly reduce the life of these engines.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
I do not have the fuel wire hooked up to the O2 sensor because I cannot tell which wire to connect it to. If I remember right, the instructions say the blue wire but none of them appear to be blue in color to me. It is supposed to be optional with the hardware version I have and the firmware I have and confirmed that the trims are constantly adjusting. A thread on the Stinger forum says if you have this hardware version, firmware, CAN and OBD connected and see the trims moving then it is working properly. I also see that it will dip into the low 10s on AF ratio when I really mash it. Thanks for the guidance regarding PSI. I think I am going to set the safeguard to 20 or 21 PSI instead. There's not really any need for letting it go beyond that anyway since most of the fun I have seems to be benefitting from the increased boost in the rest of the range. I am thinking if that if I go the route of building a stronger engine I may source a new subframe and suspension to build on and swap it under the car when ready. @trdtoy do you know of anyone who has gone that route?
 

·
Registered
2015 auto VT, 2013 manual VT × 2
Joined
·
4,260 Posts
Fuel trims are one thing but the actual afr curve is another. The oem tune starts off too lean in the mid rpm when boost ramps up quickly and goes too rich in the upper rpm. Both are not good for power or safety. Also keep in mind the afr you read will not be accurate as they're most likely on a different scale than the fuel you're running. So it could be +/- roughly .5 afr in most cases.

If you can't find the wire color then use the same wire position. That's what matters anyway. Not sure why they use color anyway when the oem changes that at times while the function of a sensor wire position the function does not change.

Built engine and better bracing many have done before. Helps a lot when wanting more power and better handling and traction.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
I've had a JB4 on my 2020 Forte GT Manual Trans since July, I bought the car early June.

One of the first things I did was put it on the dyno to see what the fuel and ignition curves looked like.

At that point when I ordered the JB4 from Burger and determined that the fuel wire was a must. That is because I do and will run ethanol and "other" fuel blends at different times. It's been a smashing success; the straight gas tune (Map 1) is severely knock limited. The stock tune is knock limited on 91, but strong torque management keeps the power gains low, though I did see a sizable increase in torque anyway.

Returning to the dyno, the car made more power. But my dyno numbers are bit inconclusive and I wanted to run the car at the track. My first and only attempt came back in August where it went [email protected] mph missing 3rd. I also discovered that I installed the JB4 backward (wrong MAP sensor sockets) as recently the car had to be smogged tested because it was purchased outside of California (Nevada).

I had it installed right the first time because Terry @Burger Motorsports borrowed my car for a couple of days to improve on the calibration; the latest firmware 4 cylinder Hyundai/Kia 1.6L turbo cars are running is based off the alpha that's in my car now.

Water-methanol has been installed and I highly recommend it. Now that it's colder, I'll venture out to the track again very soon.
 

·
Registered
2015 auto VT, 2013 manual VT × 2
Joined
·
4,260 Posts
Have any dyno charts or time slips to post AThomas?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Have any dyno charts or time slips to post AThomas?
We've talked on Facebook before. The time slip I got says 15.xx because the car rolled the beams, but I had the Dragy running, that is the slip I used because of its accuracy.

I do have dyno print outs. They are posted on Facebook under the Forte GT group and Burger Motorsports FB page. Also, posted on Forte Forums.

I can post them later today on here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
We've talked on Facebook before. The time slip I got says 15.xx because the car rolled the beams, but I had the Dragy running, that is the slip I used because of its accuracy.

I do have dyno print outs. They are posted on Facebook under the Forte GT group and Burger Motorsports FB page. Also, posted on Forte Forums.

I can post them later today on here.
106079
FedEx Scan 2021-01-07_15-08-16(4).jpg
 

·
Registered
2015 auto VT, 2013 manual VT × 2
Joined
·
4,260 Posts
It's having a heart attack. What mods is on the car? I'd love to see this on a dynojet to compare and some datalogs to see why the tide is coming in. This is usually related to boost control or lack thereof. Be sure you have updated programming from BMS if running these. I've seen this more in the old programming than the newer and on the newer cars/platforms.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
It's having a heart attack. What mods is on the car? I'd love to see this on a dynojet to compare and some datalogs to see why the tide is coming in. This is usually related to boost control or lack thereof. Be sure you have updated programming from BMS if running these. I've seen this more in the old programming than the newer and on the newer cars/platforms.
My logs look the same.

The car runs fine, I don't have the newest firmware but it should be okay. I am one or two revisions behind but those were to address some other issues some people had with other cars.

I never had any problems and still don't.

The only mod is the JB4 that is Map 4. I gained 10 whp from Map 1-3 and Map 4 was 7 but there is more tweaking I need to do and I have water-methanol injection now.

I would put it on a Dynojet but I'm not really concerned about that. I want to run the car again but all my local tracks are closed except for the 1/8 mile. So I have to drive to Northern CA; I am going to CMI Winter Warmup in Sacramento because the prep will be good.

All three NoCal tracks are slightly above or at sea level.

I'm actually closer to Las Vegas Motor Speedway it's DA is usually 3500 ft or worse which is no different than the tracks in Southern CA.
 

·
Registered
2015 auto VT, 2013 manual VT × 2
Joined
·
4,260 Posts
Based on that dyno curve the car does not run fine and it does have problems. Unless you mean it runs fine and no problems as in it runs and has not had major problems such as something breaking.

Run the water/meth and if setup properly maybe it will save your cars life.

Need to run on a dynojet if you want to compare to other cars apples to apples. Track will do as well. Post those slips and any conditions details and datalogs and I'll gladly show/explain what's going on and why based on the data.

Update that firmware and please send some logs to BMS on this. Post them here in a separate thread I'll gladly have an info session on the datalog comparing what's safe/unsafe.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
It runs great. Very traction limited if I side step the clutch and hammer it.

Fine as in don't look too deeply into that dyno pull.

Datalogs are much smoother.

I am not paying to put it on a Dynojet. I've looked at the release notes and I don't see a reason to upgrade the firmware. I am just getting started, I was working seven days a week until recently.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,166 Posts
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top