Close

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 158
  1. #51
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    454
    Rep Points
    559.9
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    6


    Yes Reputation No
    This is all good info, but now I don't know which way to go. I can stick with my tried and true JB4 and add methanol with FSB, or I can jump onto the Cobb wagon and try something new. I like the fact that Cobb is a cleaner install, but I'm the only one who pokes around in my cars ECU coffin anyway. Click here to enlarge what to do, what to do....

  2. #52
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    6,682
    Rep Points
    3,335.6
    Mentioned
    225 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    34



    Yes Reputation No
    to be honest and fair, this info really shouldn't be cause enough for anyone who already owns a tune and runs stock turbos to switch over...piggybacks have and still run the stock turbos without issues...this really starts to matter once you go aftermarket bigger turbo of some sort and are looking to push about 450+whp...
    Click here to enlarge

  3. #53
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    6,682
    Rep Points
    3,335.6
    Mentioned
    225 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    34



    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Terry@BMS Click here to enlarge
    Sounds like good info on the flash side. Just keep in mind what you guys do on the flash end doesn't necessary have much to do with what we do on the piggyback end. There are two basic problems with the fueling at the moment. IPW limits and fuel pump limits/pressure dropping. On the piggyback end we've hacked around the IPW limit by telling the DME it's running much less fuel pressure than it actually is. In some cases maybe only 25% of what it's actually running. This allows sufficent IPW to hit the desired AFR target (with a side effect of higher overall pressure) but now we're stuck at the fuel pressure dropping issue in the 500rw+ range. We've found you can mask that issue a bit with a boost-a-pump on the LPFP but all in all we're sort of stuck at that point.

    Now it's possible using flash mapping with lower fuel pressure vs. much higher pressure the pump system will support a higher volume, and we won't see that fuel pressure drop until higher power levels. I hope so. Dzenno time to hit up the dyno and shoot for 530rw? Click here to enlarge
    530? First I need to make 497 Click here to enlarge all good points by the way and nothing i particularly disagree with

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by cstavaru Click here to enlarge
    dzenno,

    How stable are the latest Cobb maps for upgraded turbos with the fueling solved ? Can they be used daily with no headaches (supposing the all the injectors are coded right and no misfires) ? I am wondering if now it's the time to pull the trigger on upgraded turbos (I do not want to run any piggybacks) or maybe I should wait like a year or so until the maps are stable ?

    Thanks !
    Now that the MAF fix is in we can start turning it up...race maps aren't finished as this is finally just a good solid start, and Rob is also putting together a nice street map as well...if you have meth you can already run the current map with RB turbos without any issues but you really should run either race gas "for now" or meth injection (they're running 80/20 and injecting about 1000cc/min using the hfs-3 with 2 1mm nozzles)

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by bmw335iguy Click here to enlarge
    I realize you, clap, and dzenno have been running the pps meth kits without issue, but why do you think cobb went with the HFS-3? Must be a reason
    Aquamist has the highest quality kit, no question about it, but it is the most expensive obviously...most meth kits have issues with the flow sensor with doesn't support higher than 50/50 meth concentrations and fittings which leak over time...i can't speak about HFS-3 and its "usefulness" on this platform as I have not personally used it BUT given that you can setup your meth injection more precisely than a PPS kit (i.e. use injector duty cycle and inject in a much more refined way) it definitely is a better solution than the cheaper PPS kits as far as "refinement" in tuning is concerned, IMHO...however, to the average end user this really honestly won't matter...at best most will do a couple pulls here and there, maybe even hit the 1/4 and maybe maybe go to a dyno...in these situations the advantages of the aquamist kit such as the HFS-3 or HFS-6, in most cases, won't be fully realized at all

    as with any mod people should try to understand what they're getting...if not sure or can't fully understand/appreciate it then i say go for the cheaper option
    Click here to enlarge

  4. #54
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    118,865
    Rep Points
    31,852.6
    Mentioned
    2092 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    319


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Laloosh Click here to enlarge
    You are right sticky can you delete my post as ten minutes passed.
    It's fine, thread moved on from it.

  5. #55
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    118,865
    Rep Points
    31,852.6
    Mentioned
    2092 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    319


    Yes Reputation No
    Ok, let me see if I understand this.

    So, Cobb found an area of the ECU that deals with calculating fuel limits and altered this to raise the limitation? Is this correct?

    Secondly, does this spell the end of any piggyback tuning on the higher end?

    Thirdly, what is the injector / fuel system limit with this software area addressed or is this yet to be established?

  6. #56
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    6,682
    Rep Points
    3,335.6
    Mentioned
    225 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    34



    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    Ok, let me see if I understand this.

    So, Cobb found an area of the ECU that deals with calculating fuel limits and altered this to raise the limitation? Is this correct?

    Secondly, does this spell the end of any piggyback tuning on the higher end?

    Thirdly, what is the injector / fuel system limit with this software area addressed or is this yet to be established?
    Safest thing to say at this point, and mostly to avoid any senseless battles, is that Cobb can continue marching on without a fuel limit that is found in the DME's MAF related load calculation, all while keeping DME's load target logic fully in place letting the DME adjust its running parameters in realtime to meet requested load targets

    Initial fuel system limit with flash tuning has been dealt with and "at the moment" there isn't any other...that's not to say there is no limit obviously as it'd be early to say that with any level of confidence
    Click here to enlarge

  7. #57
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    118,865
    Rep Points
    31,852.6
    Mentioned
    2092 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    319


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by dzenno Click here to enlarge
    Safest thing to say at this point, and mostly to avoid any senseless battles, is that Cobb can continue marching on without a fuel limit that is found in the DME's MAF related load calculation.
    Ok but if the fuel system can not support much more does it really matter?

    Also, if Cobb announced this will other flash tuners be copying this approach now?

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by dzenno Click here to enlarge
    Initial fuel system limit with flash tuning has been dealt with and "at the moment" there isn't any other...that's not to say there is no limit obviously as it'd be early to say that with any level of confidence
    I see. I look forward to seeing it established what the limit actually is.

  8. #58
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    6,682
    Rep Points
    3,335.6
    Mentioned
    225 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    34



    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    Ok but if the fuel system can not support much more does it really matter?
    we'll know once we get there...not there yet..plenty of fuel at 475whp even down low with this MAF fix which is definitely a challenge for some tunes out there...

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    Also, if Cobb announced this will other flash tuners be copying this approach now?
    Rob didn't have issues in me updating the community on this new advancement so i don't see them being worried about someone knowing the idea here...I'd think its one thing to know the tables and update them, its another thing to be able to recode operating system routines in the DME...but i digress

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    I see. I look forward to seeing it established what the limit actually is.
    hopefully it won't happen on RB turbos and we'll have the fuel to fully take advantage of their potential...we may need a 3bar MAP sensor to do that and Rob said that they already have access to the MAP sensor voltage mapping and offsets

    one thing i forgot to mention is that they now also have access to fuel mass flow values as well as pulse timing for fuel injectors, so basically quite covered in terms of fuel control
    Click here to enlarge

  9. #59
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    78
    Rep Points
    162.7
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    Yes Reputation No
    Great thread Dzenno.. Keep me in the loop.

  10. #60
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    SoCal (OC/Riverside)
    Posts
    501
    Rep Points
    427.5
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by themyst Click here to enlarge
    For something simple, BMS flash meth kit and buy a boost bypass solenoid and safeinjection from snowperformance. Safeinjection is 160 from Snow and boost bypass solenoid is 60.

    Or you can piece together a basic meth kit from DevilsOwn or coolingmist for a little cheaper but the install will be slightly harder.

    DO NOT BUY USED METH KITS! They are not worth the headache trust me.
    Thanks for the heads up! I think I will go with the BMS Flash kit with the fail safe and solenoid you mentioned (unless I find any reason the Aquamist will perform better)...Time to save up some money!!

  11. #61
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    884
    Rep Points
    1,435.3
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    15


    Yes Reputation No
    Thanks for the info themyst and dzenno on the hfs-3! I wonder if the install will be much harder, being that it has 3 failsafes. Is my understanding correct that it doesn't include a flow sensor and you need to get the hfs-6 if you want one? I'm probably gunna wait and see now that ATP is out if a 100% e-85 map will be available soon, as i would rather run that then a meth kit.

  12. #62
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Luxembourg
    Posts
    1,191
    Rep Points
    917.6
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    10


    Yes Reputation No
    Wow amazing! Feels like Christmas again for us N54ers Click here to enlarge

    Dzenno, when will you hit the dyno and break some records? Click here to enlarge

  13. #63
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Stockholm
    Posts
    1,528
    Rep Points
    1,177.6
    Mentioned
    61 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    12


    Yes Reputation No
    would be great if somehow @Terry@BMS could have the jb4 close throttle if flow interrupts abruptly as a failsafe.
    07 335i AT - MOTIV 750 - MHD BMS E85 - BMS PI - JB4G5 - Okada Coils - NGK 5992 Plugs - Helix IC - Stett CP - Custom midpipes with 100 HJS Cats - Bastuck Quad - PSS10 - QUAIFE LSD - BMS OCC - Forge DVs - AR OC - ALCON BBK - M3 Chassi - Dinan CP - Velocity M rear Toe arms - Advan RZ-DF - LUX H8 - Level 10 AT upgrade
    Click here to enlarge

  14. #64
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,926
    Rep Points
    1,372.7
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    14


    Yes Reputation No
    Great!
    What has been the fueling limit so far with RBs? Has pump+meth been octane limited as well, so that the fueling limit has not been a big problem? And when running race gas + meth to remove the octane limit, then the fueling has been the one and only limiting factor?

    If so, can we conclude that now on pump+meth you are able to have richer AFR, which will cool in the top end -> decrease the octane requirement there and -> enable a bit more power?
    Also, that when running race fuel + meth to max the octane, the previously limiting factor fueling being solved enables quite a bit more power?

  15. #65
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    298
    Rep Points
    272.3
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    3


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by bmw335iguy Click here to enlarge
    Is my understanding correct that it doesn't include a flow sensor and you need to get the hfs-6 if you want one?
    Incorrect, HFS-3 includes a flow sensor and flow gauge. The HFS-2 is the one that doesn't include it. I ran HFS-2 with no problems whatsoever, but HFS-3 gives more piece of mind when you look at the gauge and see the flow indication Click here to enlarge

  16. #66
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Luxembourg
    Posts
    1,191
    Rep Points
    917.6
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    10


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by 654 Click here to enlarge
    Great!
    What has been the fueling limit so far with RBs? Has pump+meth been octane limited as well, so that the fueling limit has not been a big problem? And when running race gas + meth to remove the octane limit, then the fueling has been the one and only limiting factor?

    If so, can we conclude that now on pump+meth you are able to have richer AFR, which will cool in the top end -> decrease the octane requirement there and -> enable a bit more power?
    Also, that when running race fuel + meth to max the octane, the previously limiting factor fueling being solved enables quite a bit more power?
    On pump gas, the limit with RBs was around 450whp (dynojet). With meth, you could reach 500whp.

    Hopefully this new finding will allow to reach higher power levels on pump fuel without needing meth as a bandaid!

  17. #67
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    6,682
    Rep Points
    3,335.6
    Mentioned
    225 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    34



    Yes Reputation No
    Let's not confuse octane limitations (resistance to pre-ignition) and fuel flow (AFR targeting) limitations...the limitations discussed here are/were related to high load AFR targeting as the DME would clamp the MAF value at a certain high value which was lower than what RBs were providing when compared to stock turbos...

    Octane provided by pump gas will surely limit the amount of timing you can safely run on pump gas but more boost will be added...i've been taught that it is timing that kills motors, boost not so much, obviously "very" roughly speaking
    Click here to enlarge

  18. #68
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    225
    Rep Points
    173.2
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    Yes Reputation No
    So thats where Rob has been and not answered my mail yet!! Well if this is what they come out with then i will wait, no upgraded turbos but im glad there has been development on the platform that would help fellow users. Checkmate shiv!
    Seriously now answer my mail already Click here to enlargelol

  19. #69
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    225
    Rep Points
    173.2
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by dzenno Click here to enlarge
    Let's not confuse octane limitations (resistance to pre-ignition) and fuel flow (AFR targeting) limitations...the limitations discussed here are/were related to high load AFR targeting as the DME would clamp the MAF value at a certain high value which was lower than what RBs were providing when compared to stock turbos...

    Octane provided by pump gas will surely limit the amount of timing you can safely run on pump gas but more boost will be added...i've been taught that it is timing that kills motors, boost not so much, obviously "very" roughly speaking

    @dzenno, question;
    Lets say you've reached your 12ish AFRs for higher RB boost on pump, how low or what would be the advance/timing limit you can run before you'd need higher octane(drops)? How low can you go in timing before you comprimise performance? Even if you ran at 22psi!

  20. #70
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Midwest USA
    Posts
    1,120
    Rep Points
    2,371.5
    Mentioned
    36 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    24


    Yes Reputation No
    Very cool that a soft limitation has been identified. I'm curious to see what hard part is up next and at what point beyond this now known limitation.

  21. #71
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    558
    Rep Points
    785.8
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    8


    Yes Reputation No
    I was chatting with a couple of guys from COBB yesterday and they alluded to a 'bug' or algorithm issue that had slowed their development recently. If that is what this is, then it is entirely possible that BMW never meant to impose the limit but that it happened because of this algorithm that would never be a problem unless you are pushing almost twice as much power as stock. According to those I spoke with, they have rewritten the algorithm and the problem went away. So that certainly sounds like what Dzenno is saying here.

    Also, for those of you who wondered about reprogramming the TCU (Transmission Control Unit) like COBB did to the GT-R, that was shot down by COBB's representatives. According to them, the BMW TCU is not reprogrammable like the GT-R one is.
    Click here to enlarge

  22. #72
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    6,682
    Rep Points
    3,335.6
    Mentioned
    225 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    34



    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Bash Click here to enlarge
    @dzenno , question;
    Lets say you've reached your 12ish AFRs for higher RB boost on pump, how low or what would be the advance/timing limit you can run before you'd need higher octane(drops)? How low can you go in timing before you comprimise performance? Even if you ran at 22psi!
    That's what dyno/street tuning/datalogging are for...in general, with higher boost than stock you back off the stock timing curve on pump gas to be able to raise boost...similarly you'd do the same on nitrous...for instance on nitrous its typically advisable to retard timing by about 1-1.5deg for ever 50hp in nitrous power you're adding...it is pretty mind boggling that people like hotrod are getting away with stock timing, a fairly large nitrous nozzle, pump gas and meth with this engine

    tuning obviously stems from basic engine theory and many things are typically calculable...in the real world you start off with what you get from the factory, raise boost, drop timing, do runs, datalog and take it from there...
    Click here to enlarge

  23. #73
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    919
    Rep Points
    780.4
    Mentioned
    42 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    8


    Yes Reputation No
    One comment: Cobb discovered one road block in the STOCK fueling software logic. They have not discovered the actual fuel limitations of the stock hardware.

    I highly doubt that this software limitation was a bug or oversight. More likely, this is an intentional limitation that they have coded. Here are some reasons that I can think of:

    * Emissions - perhaps at such high fuel levels the cats are no longer able to keep up with the volume of exhaust gases.
    * Hardware output consistency - All hardware operates within engineered ranges. We all know that. You have a optimal sweet spot where you get max reliability vs performance. Sure, the hardware can possibly produce a much higher output, but what happens to the consistency of the output over time.

    etc, etc...

    I am glad that Cobb discovered and removed this road block. This is definitely a big step forward for the N54 tuning scene. I am sure there will be other things they will discover as they continue to dig into this. When they really start pushing the limits with the RBs and (hopefully soon) single big turbos they undoubtedly learn a lot more. Ultimately, this translates for better software which will produce a smoother and more consistent tune for everyone!

    To me, and for the most people in the N54 game, this is what will be the biggest benefit: smoother, consistent, predictable and reliable tune.
    From all the things I've lost,
    I miss my mind the most!
    Click here to enlarge

  24. #74
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    1,324
    Rep Points
    1,955.5
    Mentioned
    37 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Brey335i Click here to enlarge

    Also, for those of you who wondered about reprogramming the TCU (Transmission Control Unit) like COBB did to the GT-R, that was shot down by COBB's representatives. According to them, the BMW TCU is not reprogrammable like the GT-R one is.
    That's bull$#@!.

  25. #75
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    1,324
    Rep Points
    1,955.5
    Mentioned
    37 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Laloosh Click here to enlarge
    As for this limit I believe georgesmooth spoke about it months ago as his flash tuner ran into the same pproblems.
    Thanks for remembering that.

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •