[Bullitt1841]

You guys need to stop comparing peak HP and torque figures from dyno results posted on the internet. Pay attention, do some research, stop being sheep.

Also, there's no magic to making more power when the octane and hardware is the same. For people expecting to "magically" make more power than other flashes when you are using the same 91 or 93 octane is pretty naive. Sure, a different flash can be more aggressive with boost or timing. But you are giving up safety. Your choice.

[Araemo]

Originally Posted by Bullitt1841

You guys need to stop comparing peak HP and torque figures from dyno results posted on the internet. Pay attention, do some research, stop being sheep.

Also, there's no magic to making more power when the octane and hardware is the same. For people expecting to "magically" make more power than other flashes when you are using the same 91 or 93 octane is pretty naive. Sure, a different flash can be more aggressive with boost or timing. But you are giving up safety. Your choice.

There's a noticeable difference between OEM tunes, which may have been given a target # for market segmentation purposes, and not based on what is the 'safe limit' of the engine, vs an after-market tune trying to find that safe limit, whatever it is. And beyond that are tunes that require modifications produce their numbers safely, whether that means additional fueling, VE, or cooling...

You're right, though, that an after-market tune is never going to have the same peace of mind as a warranted OEM tune.. but if you aren't ok with that, don't flash an after-market tune.

As for peak #s.. that's certainly the attention-grabber, but you're also right that total area under the curve is more important in most cases, as well as the shape of the curve and how early it reaches peak torque, and how badly that torque falls off with RPM, if at all. But as the tuner in this thread commented - a direct comparison of the same car on the same dyno before/after flash is really the way to compare.

[blckz06]

Originally Posted by jalkster

Yes... but it is a badass exhaust. When you decide to sell, if you do, you will have the option to go back to MPPSK tune. Non MPPSK opted cars will not have that option. Look at MPPSK as a mild OEM flash. While this flash will have the ability to be more focused towards big power.

I wonder how this would compare power-wise to MPPSK with JB4. I also have a dp and intake, and don't have any issues with driveability, so would really just look to increased power. Anyone have any thoughts?

[chris-c]

Originally Posted by Bullitt1841

You guys need to stop comparing peak HP and torque figures from dyno results posted on the internet. Pay attention, do some research, stop being sheep.

Also, there's no magic to making more power when the octane and hardware is the same. For people expecting to "magically" make more power than other flashes when you are using the same 91 or 93 octane is pretty naive. Sure, a different flash can be more aggressive with boost or timing. But you are giving up safety. Your choice.

Baaaaaa....

So, what do you think is the maximum we are likely to get for the "stock" car vs a car with decat (st2)?

If we assume the stock 340 runs 335 and the mppsk 340 runs 360, what do you think the numbers should be?

[jrdoming]

Originally Posted by Araemo

There's a noticeable difference between OEM tunes, which may have been given a target # for market segmentation purposes, and not based on what is the 'safe limit' of the engine, vs an after-market tune trying to find that safe limit, whatever it is. And beyond that are tunes that require modifications produce their numbers safely, whether that means additional fueling, VE, or cooling...

You're right, though, that an after-market tune is never going to have the same peace of mind as a warranted OEM tune.. but if you aren't ok with that, don't flash an after-market tune.

As for peak #s.. that's certainly the attention-grabber, but you're also right that total area under the curve is more important in most cases, as well as the shape of the curve and how early it reaches peak torque, and how badly that torque falls off with RPM, if at all. But as the tuner in this thread commented - a direct comparison of the same car on the same dyno before/after flash is really the way to compare.

I believe he's talking about comparing this aftermarket tune vs a different aftermarket tune. If one is making more than the other its because they traded something to get there since they don't change actual hardware. So if you see one with 15-20 more HP it would be a likely assumption that tune is more aggressive and therefore riskier than a tune that is slightly less.

[Bullitt1841]

FWIW, I am local to this company and plan on flashing with them very soon. I am not talking down any flash and am going into this with an open mind. I am mostly flashing to get past the software fueling limitations.

Yes, "area under the curve" is also important. But still, you can't compare one company's dyno sheet to another company's dyno sheet. Here are the variables with that: different physical dyno, potential different dyno parameters/settings, different atmospheric conditions (temperature, humidity, pressure, DA, etc.), operator error, engine heat soak, etc., etc., etc. I sell measuring and test equipment, and this is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to comparing numbers between two pieces of equipment.

My advice is to just wait for Mission Performance to post their results, which they have promised to do this weekend. The best way to compare "gains" is to minimize the variables (same dyno, same conditions, etc.) and look at the delta in terms of % gain, not how many HP gained. Having a higher baseline will likely show a higher total HP gained.

The true test (and best test) is to have 2 cars (with identical hardware and fuel), side by side, doing a roll race. You can't get much more apples to apples than that.

[Bullitt1841]

Originally Posted by blckz06

I wonder how this would compare power-wise to MPPSK with JB4. I also have a dp and intake, and don't have any issues with driveability, so would really just look to increased power. Anyone have any thoughts?

We'll find out in a few weeks

[jpsimon]

Bullitt, I forget, do you have any fuel-it components on your car? Did they even make anything yet for the b58? I hope they go full steam ahead with developing stuff now that we have flashing capabilities.

[Bullitt1841]

Originally Posted by jpsimon

Bullitt, I forget, do you have any fuel-it components on your car? Did they even make anything yet for the b58? I hope they go full steam ahead with developing stuff now that we have flashing capabilities.

Nothing yet, just meth through BMS's throttle body spacer.

I am hopeful that Fuel-It will start offering B58 components once they fully test the flashing capabilities. That has been what they have been waiting on, essentially.

[Araemo]

Originally Posted by Bullitt1841

The true test (and best test) is to have 2 cars (with identical hardware and fuel), side by side, doing a roll race. You can't get much more apples to apples than that.

I'd rather see a few (multiple cars) before/after dynos with the same car on the same dyno on the same day. Car to car differences, even stock vs stock, can be larger than you think. But that really requires multiple buyers, because companies only have so many test cars, and often only one at a time.

As you note, % change is more accurate than # gained, because if your dyno scaling is higher, your base will be higher, and the same % gain will end up with a higher end number, making the total gain seem higher. But % normalizes all of that for the best comparison you can hope to get, short of running the same car on the same dyno with all the tunes.

[Bullitt1841]

Originally Posted by Araemo

I'd rather see a few (multiple cars) before/after dynos with the same car on the same dyno on the same day. Car to car differences, even stock vs stock, can be larger than you think. But that really requires multiple buyers, because companies only have so many test cars, and often only one at a time.

As you note, % change is more accurate than # gained, because if your dyno scaling is higher, your base will be higher, and the same % gain will end up with a higher end number, making the total gain seem higher. But % normalizes all of that for the best comparison you can hope to get, short of running the same car on the same dyno with all the tunes.

Yes, now we're talking about statistical data which provides a true picture of the real world (when done properly).

What a lot of people also don't think about is the repeatability and reproducibility of a single car and single measurement device. Heat soak, ECU learning, etc. all come into play and can vary by multiple % just by themselves with no other car or dyno involved.

Without looking at the statistics (with good sampling and test methods), all HP figures are pure marketing, plain and simple. I live this every day.

[blckz06]

Originally Posted by Bullitt1841

We'll find out in a few weeks

Nice, keep us posted

[MissionPerformance]

We are at the dyno right now dialing her in, but so far the results on B58 are looking promising compared to ones on N55.

Will post dyno and logs later tonight, slightly ahead of schedule.

[Antec800]

If torque intervention is still a thing with a flash I will be holding back till the trans can get tuned, that’s currently the biggest problem with making more power with these cars.

[B58]

Looking forward to the results..... I'm nearly ready to drive down to your shop and get flashed once the group buy goes down!

[Bullitt1841]

Originally Posted by MissionPerformance

We are at the dyno right now dialing her in, but so far the results on B58 are looking promising compared to ones on N55.

Will post dyno and logs later tonight, slightly ahead of schedule.

Thank you!!!

[x5mad]

My question was missed and I don't see answer anywhere so how do we get it flashed. Is it a propriety cable we buy or do we use ENET

[chenry]

Originally Posted by x5mad

My question was missed and I don't see answer anywhere so how do we get it flashed. Is it a propriety cable we buy or do we use ENET

ENET

[Bullitt1841]

Originally Posted by chenry

ENET

Where's the best place to buy the cable?

[BLACK HAWK DOWN]

Originally Posted by Bullitt1841

Where's the best place to buy the cable?

Amazon

[Bullitt1841]

Originally Posted by CIRCLING THE DRAIN

Amazon

Let me be more specific. Which cable to buy? I know not all are created equal.

[MissionPerformance]

Finally, after a very long week we have official dyno results, and numbers look pretty darn good in my opinion.

The vehicle used was a 2016 340i with 40K miles. Nothing done to the car aside from oil changes. Original plugs, not gapped, no exhaust mods, and original intake.

After doing few street pulls in stock form, it was clear that the car is pulling timing due to some carbon build up and unknown/questionable batch of fuel as it was seen by nearly 30 knock counters per short run (acceptable is 0 - 4). So solution: a bit of E85. With that inside, all parameters in stock form were back to normal and car was dyno-worthy.

Here are the numbers put down in stock form: 294/325 wheel as per SAE correction. On WinPep7, STD correction showed 309whp, but WinPep8 has finally adapted SAE correction and now locks that as standard. With that in mind, stock 340i is rated at 320crank. Taking into account a 10-12% loss, that translates to roughly about 290whp, and that is exactly the numbers we got:




Now, we have ability to make a fully stock MPPSK flash work on Non-MPPSK car via some eeprom mods. So, since we have had a lot of MPPSK related questions, we opted out to building a MPPK car. The outcome is a MPPSK 340i, just without the sound/exhaust package. So a 340i MPPK.
Putting that car on a dyno showed a solid 331/352 wheel. That is a 37/27 wheel gain for just software/no exhaust, which is right where it supposed to be at the crank.


With base runs in hand, it was time to do some actual tuning. Remember, with MPPK already pushing limits of the stock exhaust, I didin't expect too much gains left on a table. But after few revisions, I clearly was wrong with my first impression. A stage 1 came out in at solid 65whp/36trq peak gain over stock, but with a much longer torque band that you can feel through the pull with 55-65 wheel torque gains until 5.5k :



Knowing there is more room on a table, we pushed the car even further. Keep in mind, this should only be used as a stage 2 option for all of you with high flow/catless exhaust system since back pressure is climbing a bit too high due to stock cat. But even though, with a bit higher back-pressure, the mighty B58 help up well and gave us solid 372whp/392wtrq, a 78whp/67wtrq gain over stock with 90wtrq gain over stock at 4K rpm. Compared to stage 1, the gain was 13whp/31wtrq. But dont forget, this stage 2 was tested on stage 1 vehicle with very restrictive exhaust. With proper exhaust the numbers will be closer to 400 wheel.




After having a well built stage 1 and 2 version, I just wanted to push the limits of stock hardware and see where that can take us. Raising up boost, relaxing knock control, more timing and many more modifications, we were able to squeeze out 382whp/407wtrq build. Reviewing logs, I can see that this is not something that should even be attempted for stock hardware daily drive, but could be a viable option for a FOB vehicle with minimum of 93octane.




Another graph showing Stock Vs MPPK VS Stg1:


And one more Stock vs Stg1 Vs Stg2




Take a look at the Stage 1 and Stage 2. Notice how smooth they both are compared to MPPK or even stock.


Here is a simplified datalog from today if someone is actually interested in seeing how the backend part runs. :
https://datazap.me/u/missiontuning/3...ta=7-8&solo=11