02-17-2020, 09:10 PM | #419 | |
Captain
575
Rep 585
Posts |
Quote:
The map versions you're flashing do have the XHP lash/Manual Trans tick box? Definitely not the ZF torque limiter? This compares V1.10 to V1.7.5 more boost = more torque
__________________
Tesla Model 3 Performance 0 - 60mph 3.1s
M140i LCI Mineral Grey Dorch Stage 2 HPFP, CG Precision DS-1, XHP, MHD Stage 2 HPFP E30 @ E42 100 - 200 6.96s Quarter mile 10.93@127mph |
|
Appreciate
0
|
02-17-2020, 09:54 PM | #420 |
Built Motor F30 340i
403
Rep 257
Posts |
There is no tick box when using custom tunes, only OTS. But XHP has torque limiters disabled so there shouldn't be anything holding it back except some random torque limiter we don't know what it is yet.
__________________
|
Appreciate
0
|
02-18-2020, 06:25 AM | #421 | |
Lieutenant
249
Rep 504
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
02-18-2020, 06:29 AM | #422 |
Lieutenant
120
Rep 410
Posts |
Just check xhp as they have the option to limit the torque (or raise the limit less) custom or preset > not that you flashed it with lower torque limit in gears 1-4
|
Appreciate
0
|
02-18-2020, 06:56 AM | #423 | ||
Cheapskate
4448
Rep 4,993
Posts |
Quote:
Quote:
Just my opinion. I like safety headroom on a daily driven car more than peak power that can only be accomplished in perfect conditions. |
||
Appreciate
0
|
02-18-2020, 11:24 AM | #425 | |
Major
395
Rep 1,010
Posts |
Yeah sorry that's what I meant, so basically the ECU pulls timing to avoid knock and above 3 degrees there's too much knock detected ?
Interestingly it seems BMW changed the way the ECU avoid knocking by pulling boost instead of pulling timing. I noticed this because as you know I only have low octane fuel in my country. Check the logs below the change is interesting. Old OEM MPPSK tune: https://datazap.me/u/ims/bmw-oem-mpp...og=0&data=5-24 New OEM MPPSK Tune: https://datazap.me/u/ims/bmw-oem-mpp...og=0&data=4-19 Quote:
__________________
2018 340i 8AT RWD - M Sport - Catless MPPSK - Stock Turbo - Stock HPFP
-------- Tunes: Self Made Tunes - MHD ------ Fuel: 92RON/87OCT -------- |
|
Appreciate
0
|
02-18-2020, 01:11 PM | #426 | ||
Private First Class
161
Rep 151
Posts |
Quote:
__________________
Kirill @ OdinTuned
|
||
Appreciate
0
|
02-18-2020, 03:13 PM | #427 | |
Cheapskate
4448
Rep 4,993
Posts |
Quote:
I've never seen an ECU pull boost. That won't affect timing. If anything there are other parameters that cause boost to vary like IATs and AFRs, but not timing. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
02-18-2020, 03:39 PM | #428 |
Captain
575
Rep 585
Posts |
If it's an X Drive it has 70kg (155 lbs) more weight than rear drive only M140i. Everything else is the same.
Here are settings for M140i X Drive, if not X Drive simply deduct the additional weight.
__________________
Tesla Model 3 Performance 0 - 60mph 3.1s
M140i LCI Mineral Grey Dorch Stage 2 HPFP, CG Precision DS-1, XHP, MHD Stage 2 HPFP E30 @ E42 100 - 200 6.96s Quarter mile 10.93@127mph |
Appreciate
0
|
02-18-2020, 04:24 PM | #429 |
Enlisted Member
3
Rep 40
Posts |
|
Appreciate
0
|
02-18-2020, 06:37 PM | #430 | |
Built Motor F30 340i
403
Rep 257
Posts |
Quote:
It's not a transmission limiter, it's actually a load limiter in the DME it seems.
__________________
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
02-18-2020, 06:56 PM | #431 | |
Captain
575
Rep 585
Posts |
Quote:
Perhaps ECU version/specification and or other hardware components may influence things, but integration level and software versions? The flash tunes by MHD, BM3 etc would all probably be based on an earlier version of the DME software.
__________________
Tesla Model 3 Performance 0 - 60mph 3.1s
M140i LCI Mineral Grey Dorch Stage 2 HPFP, CG Precision DS-1, XHP, MHD Stage 2 HPFP E30 @ E42 100 - 200 6.96s Quarter mile 10.93@127mph |
|
Appreciate
0
|
02-18-2020, 09:16 PM | #432 |
Colonel
650
Rep 2,601
Posts
Drives: G81 M3 Touring, GR Supra GTS
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Perth
|
Gearing
Manual: 1st = 4.11:1 2nd = 2.315:1 3rd = 1.542:1 4th = 1.179:1 5th = 1:1 6th = 0.846:1 Reverse = 3.727:1 Final Drive = 3.077 Auto: 1st = 5:1 2nd = 3.2:1 3rd = 2.14:1 4th = 1.667:1 5th = 1.285:1 6th = 1:1 7th = 0.82:1 8th = 0.64:1 Reverse = 3.46:1 Final drive = 2.813 Weight My M140i is 1542kgs, I assume a xi will be slightly more. Drag coefficient 0.34 Frontal area 23.03477 sqft Tyre Diameter Depends what size you are running. Standard 245/35/18 is 24.75 inches.. |
Appreciate
0
|
02-19-2020, 02:37 AM | #433 | |
Enlisted Member
3
Rep 40
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
02-19-2020, 06:29 AM | #434 |
Cheapskate
4448
Rep 4,993
Posts |
Maybe we're saying the same thing. Somewhere in their communication, the DME limits load based on the TCU parameters (gear). I'm telling you that's the same thing the A90 guys have been fighting for months, to the point that people stopped recommending turbo kits because they can't use the extra power anyway. The guys that are in the 9s are the ones that found workarounds, but there's a reason the fastest times are on stock turbo. And of course they aren't sharing how they did it.
|
Appreciate
0
|
02-19-2020, 07:59 AM | #435 |
Private
73
Rep 95
Posts |
In my experience the ecu cannot target higher then 22 psi, or 2.5 bar absolute, using current tools like BM3. If you put in lets say 2.6 bar to the "boost ceiling", and save, it just reverts back to the max value of 2.5 bar the next time you open it.
You really do not want it to go too much over the target or you risk throttle closure or poor boost control, so until they can figure out how to hack the ecu to accept a higher boost ceiling I think your stuck with 23 PSI at best case. Again even if you get lucky and hit 25 psi without throttle closures it will not be consistent, you add more WGDC the boost PID controller will just reduce it or it will close throttle. You can also see this in the Pure Turbo 600 whp log they posted, they hit it at about 25 psi got the power number, and the throttle starts to close off, not ideal.... One way to target higher values is to use a JB4, you can target 25 PSI for example using JB4 map 6, stacked on top of your custom flash. This is what I do on my B48 Also one note to watch for is that boost is dependent on timing, when the ECU retards the timing boost will naturally increase, as more of the combustion energy is ejected out the exhaust port vs pushing the piston, yes the ECU will compensate for it with the boost control PID increase WGDC, however not totally, so you may see this dependence. Be sure your not seeing this effect as you get timing correction under high load in high gears, and think its gear dependence when really it is timing dependence, and in fact your better off at the lower boost with better timing FYI that last log posted by SC_B5x looks perfect, boost right on top of target, and nice timing at 17 deg, your probably not going to do much better then that without a JB4, the load target is high and stable, load target is not the limiting factor, it is boost target and that is limited by the boost ceiling of 2.5 bar, your a little bit over boost target at 24 psi in top end but not enough to get throttle closure, looks pretty much goldilocks to me Last edited by RMMAGA; 02-19-2020 at 08:20 AM.. |
Appreciate
1
OzBMR574.50 |
02-19-2020, 08:49 AM | #436 |
Captain
551
Rep 684
Posts
Drives: Your mom crazy
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Sioux Falls SD
iTrader: (0)
Garage List 2020 BMW X3M CURRENT [0.00]
2016 BMW 340i BEAST [0.00] 2011 BMW 335i RIP [0.00] 2003 BMW 330i SOLD [0.00] |
SC_B5X Do you think you're getting 600 WHP out of the tune/platform with this limiter in place? Have you run virtual dyno numbers or real dyno?
|
Appreciate
0
|
02-19-2020, 09:46 AM | #438 |
Cheapskate
4448
Rep 4,993
Posts |
Everybody says that but they all vary. A car can set a time 1 perfect day out of the year. Does that make a difference? If someone's time's suffer because of their DA, hell even their crosswinds, then what? It's just another variable tool like a dyno.
|
Appreciate
0
|
02-19-2020, 11:28 AM | #439 | |
Private
30
Rep 49
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
02-19-2020, 04:20 PM | #440 |
Private First Class
29
Rep 135
Posts |
B58
|
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
|
|