• Welcome to N-cars.net - the largest Hyundai N car forum. Check out the model specific sections below and scroll down for country specific forums. Scroll down for i20 N, Kona N and Tuscon N forums! Check out the i30 N Bible Here!

Tuning JB4 and Non-PP Veloster N

biggeley

Member
Nthusiast
Dec 3, 2019
33
21
8
USA
I have a non-performance pack (NPP) Veloster N and a Jb4. Thought I'd share some findings I've been collecting with my car to show how the tuning compares to the performance pack (PP) models.

As is well known, the NPP has 250 HP and pulls 260 ft/lbs to 4000rpms. The PP has 275 HP and pulls 260 ft/lbs to 4700rpms, based on data that Hyundai has published. I've suspected that this difference is entirely caused by tuning differences and it seems the datalogs show this.

So I've data logged my NPP and compared it to PP data based on ecu_psi data recorded by the jb4 data logger. What's interesting is that both models have around the same boost (14-15psi) up to 4000 rpms. However the NPP model quickly drops the boost to 11-12 whereas the PP model holds 14-15 to 5500 RPM before dropping off to 11-12 PSI. You can see that in the first graph below. It also confirms my feeling that the NPP stock tune has nice kick in the midrange but craps out noticeably thereafter.

So, with the JB4 tuner I've found you can create a map6 (custom) profile that uses the same boost offsets as map 2 until 4k rpm, and then uses map3 offsets above 4k rpm. This results in similar boost through the rpm range that others have posted for map2 on their PP cars. For those not aware, map2 is for 93 octane, and adds 5 lbs of boost, tapering off to 4 lbs on the top end. With the NPP you can add 6 lbs of boost above 4k, and then taper off later in the rpm range to achieve the same affect for 93 octane use.

The second screenshot is my current map 6. Below 4k, what I'm currently using is closer to map1 (lower boost) which helps ease 2nd gear wheel spin on the all-season tires I'm running for winter. However, 4500rpm and above is the map3 profile. Even so, boost peaks at just below 18 psi at around 4k and then then tapers to just above 16 psi at 6k rpms. I'm seeing full timing advance on all 4 cylinders, and intake air temps look reasonable. I could run an extra pound or two down in the low to mid-range, but I'll probably wait to do that once the summer tires go back on. The third screenshot is a graph of a third-gear pull in upper 50-degree (F) weather. The blue line is boost -- look how flat it is until 6k.

I'll have to say, with the custom tune, the feeling is much improved. I like the power delivery much better as it feels much more linear up to 6k. The boost kicks you back and then it keeps you there in the seat until 6k, which is where I normally shift.

I have not confirmed via dyno, but I don't see any reason why the NPP version with a tune would have any less horsepower than a PP with a tune. It does take a different boost map to get there. Regardless, it ends up being a pretty good bang for the buck as you can gain back the 25 HP deficit, plus gain the additional power a PP car would get with a jb4 tune.
 

Attachments

  • boostcomparison.png
    boostcomparison.png
    94.8 KB · Views: 186
  • map6.png
    map6.png
    78.1 KB · Views: 212
  • 3rdgearpull.png
    3rdgearpull.png
    102 KB · Views: 181
Last edited:
The NPP and PP both use the same boost profile. The PP drops to 11-12 PSI at redline just like the non-PP. The only difference in the tunes are torque limiters, but even then they are very very close. On the dyno they make just about the same power.
 
The NPP and PP both use the same boost profile. The PP drops to 11-12 PSI at redline just like the non-PP. The only difference in the tunes are torque limiters, but even then they are very very close. On the dyno they make just about the same power.

Correct -- they both do drop to 11-12 PSI at redline. However the PP holds 14-15 PSI between 4000-5500 before dropping to 11-12 PSI. The NPP's drops boost to 11-12 PSI after 4000rpms. This is according to JB4 datalogs I've observed of both cars.

I personally haven't seen anything in the way of good (same day, same dyno) dyno comparisons between the two models however. I just wanted to point what probably explains the difference in Hyundai's published specs between the two cars (25 HP more and holds peak torque 800 rpm longer for the PP).

I also wanted to show that the NPP needs a slightly different "tune" than the canned maps to get full boost in the 4000+ rpm range.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: cihkal
This is a really awesome post, thank you so much for the info man!

My dad, bro, and I just installed a JB4 on my non-PP today. It's definitely an awesome addition!

My bro has a JB4 on his PP, so we did a pull from 30-115/120ish. We ended the pull basically dead even, but what you found explains what we saw. I pulled on him a bit pretty quickly because I had better throttle management for the conditions. He "jumped" forward to kill that gap in the top end near the end of our pull. We were both running map 2 with 93oct.

For reliability I'm gonna daily a map 6 based on your findings that will essentially make my non-PP have identical performance to a stock PP.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20200111-211821.png
    Screenshot_20200111-211821.png
    127.1 KB · Views: 120
  • Like
Reactions: biggeley
This is a really awesome post, thank you so much for the info man!

My dad, bro, and I just installed a JB4 on my non-PP today. It's definitely an awesome addition!

My bro has a JB4 on his PP, so we did a pull from 30-115/120ish. We ended the pull basically dead even, but what you found explains what we saw. I pulled on him a bit pretty quickly because I had better throttle management for the conditions. He "jumped" forward to kill that gap in the top end near the end of our pull. We were both running map 2 with 93oct.

For reliability I'm gonna daily a map 6 based on your findings that will essentially make my non-PP have identical performance to a stock PP.

That's a great idea! Even with the boost "corrected" you may still pull on that PP since the NPP model have roughly an 80 pound weight advantage! Too bad we can't store two user-defined maps...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: cihkal
That's a great idea! Even with the boost "corrected" you may still pull on that PP since the NPP model have roughly an 80 pound weight advantage! Too bad we can't store two user-defined maps...

Funny you mention that, I never thought of the weight difference until my dad and bro pointed that out... makes perfect sense.

Storing two maps would be great! Then I would daily my "PP tune" and save your modified map 2 for the really fun days!
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20200114-082728.png
    Screenshot_20200114-082728.png
    133.3 KB · Views: 108
  • Screenshot_20200114-090338.png
    Screenshot_20200114-090338.png
    163.1 KB · Views: 90
So I've played with the tune a little more. It looks like I can extend the 6 psi of boost a little higher into the RPM range and then taper it off a little more gradually. Did a couple of 3rd-gear pulls in 60 degree temps and observed no timing pull. Still getting full timing advance.

I was not able to increase boost on the top end more, either by extending the 6psi or by adding an additional pound of boost in the 5000-6000 rpm range.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20200117-075240.png
    Screenshot_20200117-075240.png
    79.6 KB · Views: 120
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: cihkal
So I've played with the tune a little more. It looks like I can extend the 6 psi of boost a little higher into the RPM range and then taper it off a little more gradually. Did a couple of 3rd-gear pulls in 60 degree temps and observed no timing pull. Still getting full timing advance.

I was not able to increase boost on the top end more, either by extending the 6psi or by adding an additional pound of boost in the 5000-6000 rpm range. This is probably as much as I'm going to be able to run on 93 without affecting timing (either not advancing as much or actually dropping).
Where them logs at lol. My map 2 logs mirror your custom map settings. And as long as your logs are good I’d keep playing with the boost some more
 
  • Like
Reactions: cihkal
Where them logs at lol. My map 2 logs mirror your custom map settings. And as long as your logs are good I’d keep playing with the boost some more

Thanks for the confirmation that my custom map gets it pretty close to a PP car running map2. I've attached the graph of a 2nd-3rd gear run using settings in my previous post. This site doesn't seem to support csv files do I didn't upload the entire dump, just a screenshot of the most important params.

Note that this data is from the v13 beta, and the release notes report that it scales the boost numbers up 10% to make jb4 readings more in-line with what external boost gauges report. I assume that testing was done based on stinger data, but I have no idea if that holds trues for the N... The firmware did increase the logged boost numbers.. It's not clear how the numbers were scaled but to me it seems like ecu_psi was inflated 10%. It makes numbers harder to compare with previous versions of the jb4 software.

Anyway, I think this map6 is a good starting point for a non-PP car.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20200119-212324.png
    Screenshot_20200119-212324.png
    108.9 KB · Views: 94
  • Annotation 2020-01-19 214358.png
    Annotation 2020-01-19 214358.png
    92.6 KB · Views: 100
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: cihkal
Thanks for the confirmation that my custom map gets it pretty close to a PP car running map2. I've attached the graph of a 2nd-3rd gear run using settings in my previous post. This site doesn't seem to support csv files do I didn't upload the entire dump, just a screenshot of the most important params.

I'm getting full timing on all 4 cylinders. Any more and I do see a bit of timing pull on the top end, though I suppose I could possibly try and run a little more boost at 5500 and below.

Note that this data is from the v13 beta, and the release notes report that it scales the boost numbers up 10% to make jb4 readings more in-line with what external boost gauges report. I assume that testing was done based on stinger data, but I have no idea if that holds trues for the N... The firmware did increase the logged boost numbers.. It's not clear how the numbers were scaled but to me it seems like ecu_psi was inflated 10%. It makes numbers harder to compare with previous versions of the jb4 software.

Anyway, I think this map6 is a good starting point for a non-PP car.
B49CE237-34BD-409F-9F3B-084AA29E5907.png
Here’s my Map 2 with sh*t gas and 90° intake temps.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cihkal
The NPP and PP both use the same boost profile. The PP drops to 11-12 PSI at redline just like the non-PP. The only difference in the tunes are torque limiters, but even then they are very very close. On the dyno they make just about the same power.
Post the side by side dynos and show everyone. Frankly, this is the kind of crap I'd expect.

Post the comparative data supporting what you're claiming and simply prove what you've stated.:rolleyes:
 
Post the side by side dynos and show everyone. Frankly, this is the kind of crap I'd expect.

Post the comparative data supporting what you're claiming and simply prove what you've stated.:rolleyes:

I doubt anybody is gonna pay to have 2 different stock cars dyno'd back to back just to prove a point on an internet forum...

Anybody with a JB4 can datalog requested (ECU_PSI) and actual (BOOST) boost.. The graph in the first post shows the boost differences in the 4500-5500rpm range between the base and the PP. I can post the raw JB4 dumps, if anybody (else) cares to go the spreadsheets line by line to compare..

If there are different "torque" limits in effect within the ECU tuning, it manifests as a drop of about 2-3psi in the that 4500-5500 rpm range on the base model. That is going to affect peak horsepower numbers. It may not make a huge difference in overall acceleration since it's in a smallish rpm range, and the base has a slight curb weight advantage. Anyway, whether or not this boost difference equates to 25 actual (or less) horsepower I can't say.. I really just wanted to show that the base needs a map6 tune to make the same boost that map2 gives you on a performance-pack car with a jb4.

Note: Edited for tone (Sorry RVelosterN and Xerces)..
 
Last edited:
It’s been stated elsewhere that the stock PP power advantage is a result of a “modified overboost strategy” or something similar. I’m not familiar with overboost, what conditions need to exist for it to apply, etc but is it possible that Xerxes just wasn’t meeting the criteria for overboost and as a result did not see the same boost levels out of the PP over 4K?

I have a base with no tune and the 4000 rpm “hiccup” that some people mention in other threads feels like it could just be an abrupt drop in boost, such as neutering the overboost. I also only notice it in 3rd gear or higher (and assume they only allow overboost in these gears).
 
Last edited:
It’s been stated elsewhere that the stock PP power advantage is a result of a “modified overboost strategy” or something similar. I’m not familiar with overboost, what conditions need to exist for it to apply, etc but is it possible that Xerxes just wasn’t meeting the criteria for overboost and as a result did not see the same boost levels out of the PP over 4K?

I have a base with no tune and the 4000 rpm “hiccup” that some people mention in other threads feels like it could just be an abrupt drop in boost, such as neutering the overboost. I also only notice it in 3rd gear or higher (and assume they only allow overboost in these gears).

Well, my experience has been with datalogging my own (base) and well as a friend's performance pack car. The ECU PSI values for said friend's performance pack were consistent with
Y0UKN0WITSCHRIS's numbers above as well as a few others who have posted datalogs of PP cars on the N54tech forums. The ECU PSI values on my own car have been consistent one or two others who have posted datalogs of base cars on the N54tech forums.

Total boost has stayed pretty consistent in the data i've logged (and looked at over on n54tech or other forums) in that the base boosts to around 15-16 psi but drops off to 11-12 psi by 4500, whereas the performance pack holds 15-16 until around 5500. Both are about the same after 5500 rpm. I personally haven't seen anything different at this point. I don't believe that an "overboost" strategy exists for the VN.

As far as racing said friend goes. When I was stock he'd pull on me once we hit third gear... Cihkal posted a similar experience (above) as well.

Though clearly subjective, I've always felt like there wasn't much productive going on past 5500 with the stock tune, and the car pulled noticeably less if you floored it at 4500rpm vs flooring it at 2500 rpm.. With a good map6 tune and a velossa snorkel in place, the power to me feels more linear into the upper rpms now and 6000-6200rpm feels like a much better shift point.

I'll update later with my latest map6.. I've been able to go a bit more aggressively than before. I'm now set to peaking at just above 20PSI and have been able to hold around 19PSI to 6k. This is working well in the current conditions with 93 octane.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: cihkal
Well, my experience has been with datalogging my own (base) and well as a friend's performance pack car. The ECU PSI values for said friend's performance pack were consistent with
Y0UKN0WITSCHRIS's numbers above as well as a few others who have posted datalogs of PP cars on the N54tech forums. The ECU PSI values on my own car have been consistent one or two others who have posted datalogs of base cars on the N54tech forums.

Total boost has stayed pretty consistent in the data i've logged (and looked at over on n54tech or other forums) in that the base boosts to around 15-16 psi but drops off to 11-12 psi by 4500, whereas the performance pack holds 15-16 until around 5500. Both are about the same after 5500 rpm. I personally haven't seen anything different at this point.

As far as racing said friend goes. When I was stock he'd pull on me once we hit third gear... Cihkal posted a similar experience (above) as well.

Though clearly subjective, I've always felt like there wasn't much productive going on past 5500 with the stock tune, and the car pulled noticeably less if you floored it at 4500rpm vs flooring it at 2500 rpm.. With a good map6 tune and a velossa snorkel in place, the power to me feels more linear into the upper rpms now and 6000-6200rpm feels like a much better shift point.

I'll update later with my latest map6.. I've been able to go a bit more aggressively than before. I'm now set to peaking at just above 20PSI and have been able to hold around 19PSI to 6k. This is working well in the current conditions with 93 octane.
Keep us posted - I'm convinced it's mostly a boost profile difference beginning slightly after 4K. The base gets a little bit more of a bump at 4K before tanking to 11psi, but the PP holds 14-15ish until 5.5K like you've been saying.

I daily a map6 [4.5K, 5K, 5.5K]:[3.3psi, 3.3psi, 3.3psi]. For cereal runs I screenshot your map6 PP stage 2 equivalent; really nice work btw.

FYI I had low fuel pressure issues on FW14 on my daily map6 under WOT 🤔😑 so I'm staying at FW13 which has been great for me.Screenshot_20200417-012734.png
 
Last edited:
Here's my new map6 which is doing really well in the 60-70degree weather we've been getting lately. The boost peaks at just over 20 psi. It drops to 19 psi at 6k and then continues to drop towards redline. I'm running 93 octane fuel.

I did add a Velossa intake snorkel. This actually helped a good bit in allowing my car to hold the boost longer into the RPM band (5200+ RPMs).

Had a little fun involving a 11/12 mustang gt 5.0L yesterday with an exhaust, while merging onto a highway.. He couldn't pull me in the 60-120 range. I'll call the current tune a winner.

Interesting note about firmware V14.. I have not tried it yet since V13 is working well for me.. Perhaps I should wait. ;-)
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20200419-170027.png
    Screenshot_20200419-170027.png
    71.8 KB · Views: 119
  • Screenshot_20200427-154033.png
    Screenshot_20200427-154033.png
    90.6 KB · Views: 87
Last edited:
I wish I stayed on V13 as well i updated to V15 which seems fine but map 2 is very aggressive now it spikes up to 21lbs and I'm not sure if its the AFE Down pipe or the updated firmware? My car is pretty much full bolt on now and I definitely would like to create or test out your tune. On version 13 i was running great on map 3 but i feel like now after doing the update map 3 would be to much. I have a performance pack running full forge set up intake, turbo inlet, intercooler, bov , AFE DP AND MID PIPE! ANY SUGGESTIONS ON A Custom map 6 tune i would like to try yours.
 
I wish I stayed on V13 as well i updated to V15 which seems fine but map 2 is very aggressive now it spikes up to 21lbs and I'm not sure if its the AFE Down pipe or the updated firmware? My car is pretty much full bolt on now and I definitely would like to create or test out your tune. On version 13 i was running great on map 3 but i feel like now after doing the update map 3 would be to much. I have a performance pack running full forge set up intake, turbo inlet, intercooler, bov , AFE DP AND MID PIPE! ANY SUGGESTIONS ON A Custom map 6 tune i would like to try yours.
Welcome to the forum. Please take the time to introduce yourself to the members and read the forum rules located here;
Make sure you utilize the search engine often, to locate specific topics of interest and discussions. It will help the forum staff to keep down duplications of discussions.

Have fun and enjoy the forum. :) 👍
 
I wish I stayed on V13 as well i updated to V15 which seems fine but map 2 is very aggressive now it spikes up to 21lbs and I'm not sure if its the AFE Down pipe or the updated firmware? My car is pretty much full bolt on now and I definitely would like to create or test out your tune. On version 13 i was running great on map 3 but i feel like now after doing the update map 3 would be to much. I have a performance pack running full forge set up intake, turbo inlet, intercooler, bov , AFE DP AND MID PIPE! ANY SUGGESTIONS ON A Custom map 6 tune i would like to try yours.

Generally adding a downpipe and doing other exhaust modifications can lead to boost spikes... The JB4 shouldn't be causing that, as wastegate control is handled entirely by the ECU. Over on N54tech, Burger tuning is testing out a wastegate control extension for the JB4, currently aimed at TTv6 Stinger and Genesis. Boost spike has been problematic for the v6 folks as well running a less restrictive exhaust. If the extension ends up being successful at controlling boost spike, Burger has mentioned implementing it for the 4-cyl models as well. For now, all you can do is make sure your max psi parameter is set slightly higher than your boost spike to prevent the JB4 from reverting back to map0.

I'd caution using my latest tune params on a Performance Pack model... This tune is aimed towards the base model on 93 octane, which runs less boost in the 4500+ rpm range. Boost would be higher and possibly dangerous to run on a performance pack model, as it is more aggressive than even Map3.

I suppose you could try the params from my first post in this thread, as this is basically map1 in the lower rpms and map3 on the top end.

I think the best starting approach would be to copy the map1 or map2 boost targets into map6. You can get the boost settings for the pre-defined maps from your datalogs logs as it's the "target" column. Start with your clone of map1/2, and then adjust accordingly, watching timing on all 4 cylinders, afr, and boost. You want to be comfortable with reading and understanding many of the parameters in the data logs before creating your custom map. Too much boost or a lean condition would be a bad thing.
 
Last edited:
I wish I stayed on V13 as well i updated to V15 which seems fine but map 2 is very aggressive now it spikes up to 21lbs
[...]

I just downloaded V15 and data logged it myself.. I'm not seeing increased boost spikes, but after datalogging I did observe that I am seeing higher peak boost by .5 to 1 lbs.. It seems that ECU_PSI is reported higher.. Don't know if that's due to weather changes since I last datalogged (it's about 20degF warmer now) or reporting differences in this version. I left it peaking near 22psi on boost and not seeing any timing pull in 20-85 mph runs in 90degF weather.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: cihkal