[OzBMR]

Originally Posted by Sµpreme

New logs for Wedge E50 Rev 3. I was gone for a trip and I don't know if it's the new file or just being away from the car and driving a rental but it feels very fast again lol

https://datazap.me/u/tnilson/rev-3-3...og=0&data=4-18

https://datazap.me/u/tnilson/rev-3-4...og=0&data=4-18

Both entries have 2 pulls logged.

Oz- can you do your virtual dyno magic?

Here you go. The 3rd gear runs look to have had wheel spin and torque limiter impact. Looks good. Little bit less boost and more timing in the mid range appears to have given a nice little torque addition

[SC_B5X]

Originally Posted by OzBMR

Here you go. The 3rd gear runs look to have had wheel spin and torque limiter impact. Looks good. Little bit less boost and more timing in the mid range appears to have given a nice little torque addition

[img ]https://i.imgur.com/H4mlVdI.jpg[/img]

Can you send me your configuration for our 340i's for virtual dyno? I'd just to try it out on some of my logs.

[OzBMR]

Originally Posted by Sµpreme

New logs for Wedge E50 Rev 3. I was gone for a trip and I don't know if it's the new file or just being away from the car and driving a rental but it feels very fast again lol

https://datazap.me/u/tnilson/rev-3-3...og=0&data=4-18

https://datazap.me/u/tnilson/rev-3-4...og=0&data=4-18

Both entries have 2 pulls logged.

Oz- can you do your virtual dyno magic?

Here's all the V2 and V3 runs including the 3rd gear and 4th gear runs. Pretty good consistency. To me V3 is a slight improvement. Doesn't look like there's much more to be had with this set up.



For interest I compared your 340i X v3 to one of my M140i MHD Stage 2 95_102 OTS E30 runs. Wouldn't be much in it between these 2 cars in a roll considering the weight difference.

[OzBMR]

Originally Posted by SC_B5X

Can you send me your configuration for our 340i's for virtual dyno? I'd just to try it out on some of my logs.

Car Editor car settings



File>Options>Dyno settings



File>Options>Columns and Profiles settings



Make sure you have these exact column headings and only have 100% accelerator (TPS) rows in the CSV file

[janea1207]

[IMG]undefined[/IMG]
Bmw 340i MHD stage2(98Ron map) & xHP stage3
100-200km/h 8.03sec
Can you tell me please if log is good?
Also according to log can "OzBMR" please tell me how many hp&nm i have? (RWD, R19)
https://datazap.me/u/janea1207/bmw-3...og=0&data=5-24

[OzBMR]

Originally Posted by janea1207

[IMG]undefined[/IMG]
Bmw 340i MHD stage2(98Ron map) & xHP stage3
100-200km/h 8.03sec
Can you tell me please if log is good?
Also according to log can "OzBMR" please tell me how many hp&nm i have? (RWD, R19)
https://datazap.me/u/janea1207/bmw-3...og=0&data=5-24

The log is perfect, so what have you done to the car get this result? My guess is Pure800 with TU HPFP running target boost of 18 PSI on 93 octane.

A few things look unusual if it's stock turbo:

• Power and torque is too high for stock turbo with that boost and timing and 93 octane fuel
• Peak power at 6222 RPM indicates larger than stock turbo, same with torque staying above 500Nm past 6500 RPM
• The 8.03 sec 100 - 200 time is very quick and too quick for stock turbo 93 octane stage 2 OTS with that boost and timing
• The beginning of the run looks off, downhill?
• Why running v2.7 rather than latest v3 MHD map?
• Boost is pretty strong and flat for a standard Stage 2 93 OTS tune, especially below 5500 RPM
• Timing looks like a normal 93 octane tune, but is perfect across all cylinders, no corrections
• WGDC seems low for boost and load, turbo change?
• Rail pressure is very low from 3200 - 6400 RPM so either something is wrong with your HPFP or you have a bigger turbo or you are using E40+

[janea1207]

Originally Posted by OzBMR

The log is perfect, so what have you done to the car get this result? My guess is Pure800 with TU HPFP running target boost of 18 PSI on 93 octane.

A few things look unusual if it's stock turbo:

• Power and torque is too high for stock turbo with that boost and timing and 93 octane fuel
• Peak power at 6222 RPM indicates larger than stock turbo, same with torque staying above 500Nm past 6500 RPM
• The 8.03 sec 100 - 200 time is very quick and too quick for stock turbo 93 octane stage 2 OTS with that boost and timing
• The beginning of the run looks off, downhill?
• Why running v2.7 rather than latest v3 MHD map?
• Boost is pretty strong and flat for a standard Stage 2 93 OTS tune, especially below 5500 RPM
• Timing looks like a normal 93 octane tune, but is perfect across all cylinders, no corrections
• WGDC seems low for boost and load, turbo change?
• Rail pressure is very low from 3200 - 6400 RPM so either something is wrong with your HPFP or you have a bigger turbo or you are using E40+

Thanks a lot for answer!
It is stock turbo with stock HPFP, yesterday received the V2.7 from MHD (all people said that it is faster than V3.0) and tried. it is faster than V3.0 with ~0.2sec. Thinking about my HPFP - what can be problem? I purchased already the TU pump but thinked that is no reason to install with stock turbo and OTS map. What do you think? Can be changing on TU pump with OTS map?

[OzBMR]

Originally Posted by janea1207

Thanks a lot for answer!
It is stock turbo with stock HPFP, yesterday received the V2.7 from MHD (all people said that it is faster than V3.0) and tried. it is faster than V3.0 with ~0.2sec. Thinking about my HPFP - what can be problem? I purchased already the TU pump but thinked that is no reason to install with stock turbo and OTS map. What do you think? Can be changing on TU pump with OTS map?

What fuel, is it straight 93_98RON?

I'm still a bit shocked that you say it is the Stage 2 93 OTS map and stock turbo. That 100 - 200 time would reflect about 460 - 470 WHP for a 340i, which doesn't make sense.

Can you do a couple more 4th gear runs starting from 2500 RPM and post the logs here? Make sure the road has no slope.

[janea1207]

Originally Posted by OzBMR

What fuel, is it straight 93_98RON?

I'm still a bit shocked that you say it is the Stage 2 93 OTS map and stock turbo. That 100 - 200 time would reflect about 460 - 470 WHP for a 340i, which doesn't make sense.

Can you do a couple more 4th gear runs starting from 2500 RPM and post the logs here? Make sure the road has no slope.

Yes, it is 98Ron map on 100Ron fuel. I was thinking that it is 477crank hp. Can't be 470whp and run ~8 sec 100-200. But for 470crank hp is real 8 sec. Why you think that it is more if the boost is 18psi with 12° timing?
I have also video of the run. How can I post here?
I will do few more logs

[SC_B5X]

Anyone on MHD with Big Boost kit/ Pure 800 and ran into this?

Gears 1-4 seem to be limited to 23-24PSI of boost, and then toward redline they tank down to 20PSI. Once I hit 5th gear it targets 25-27PSI like it's supposed to. Tuner has tried adding more WGDC and has done other things but the DME is refusing to go over this 23psi limit in any gear lower than 5th.

https://datazap.me/u/richmichael97/w...&mark=86-58-43

This race against Jaime Esquivel's Big Boost Stage 4 340i (93oct @20PSI of Boost) vs my 340i (23PSI in 1-4th Gear, and 27PSI in 5th Gear+) really shows the problem, you can see he pulls hard, then soon as I hit 5th I start pulling back on him.

[OzBMR]

Originally Posted by SC_B5X

Anyone on MHD with Big Boost kit/ Pure 800 and ran into this?

Gears 1-4 seem to be limited to 23-24PSI of boost, and then toward redline they tank down to 20PSI. Once I hit 5th gear it targets 25-27PSI like it's supposed to. Tuner has tried adding more WGDC and has done other things but the DME is refusing to go over this 23psi limit in any gear lower than 5th.

https://datazap.me/u/richmichael97/w...&mark=86-58-43

This race against Jaime Esquivel's Big Boost Stage 4 340i (93oct @20PSI of Boost) vs my 340i (23PSI in 1-4th Gear, and 27PSI in 5th Gear+) really shows the problem, you can see he pulls hard, then soon as I hit 5th I start pulling back on him.

MAP sensor value is not exceeding 22.7 PSI in the logs. Check the MAP sensor part number and specifications.

The TMAP seems to be OK (combined temperature and pressure sensor in the charge pipe) TMAP sensor is part number 13-62-7-804-742 is combined pressure and IAT with a 4 bar/400 kPa/58 PSI

There was some discussion here about this a while ago https://f30.bimmerpost.com/forums/sh...1&postcount=39

May need to upgrade MAP sensor? https://spareto.com/products/94886-s...ifold-pressure

[SC_B5X]

Originally Posted by OzBMR

MAP sensor value is not exceeding 22.7 PSI in the logs. Check the MAP sensor part number and specifications.

The TMAP seems to be OK (combined temperature and pressure sensor in the charge pipe) TMAP sensor is part number 13-62-7-804-742 is combined pressure and IAT with a 4 bar/400 kPa/58 PSI

There was some discussion here about this a while ago https://f30.bimmerpost.com/forums/sh...1&postcount=39

May need to upgrade MAP sensor? https://spareto.com/products/94886-s...ifold-pressure

Not sure if upgrading the sensor would be the solution. I mean N55 had the same deal (Manifold MAP Sensor and a Chargepipe TMAP), normally on N55 we'd only upgrade the TMAP sensor.

Also the one in the chargepipe from my understanding only measures pressure, then there's a seperate sensor for Charge Temps, the one in the manifold has one that reads pressure and temp.

This whole thing is really weird and honestly annoying the hell out of me because we've been trying to figure it out for 2 days now.

[OzBMR]

Originally Posted by SC_B5X

Not sure if upgrading the sensor would be the solution. I mean N55 had the same deal (Manifold MAP Sensor and a Chargepipe TMAP), normally on N55 we'd only upgrade the TMAP sensor.

Also the one in the chargepipe from my understanding only measures pressure, then there's a seperate sensor for Charge Temps, the one in the manifold has one that reads pressure and temp.

This whole thing is really weird and honestly annoying the hell out of me because we've been trying to figure it out for 2 days now.

You're right, I got confused by the JB+ installation guide that referred to the senor on the charge pipe as the TMAP.

TMAP is actually on the intake manifold and part number 8637900



https://www.realoem.com/bmw/enUS/sho...51#13628637900

MAP on the charge pipe part number 8637896 (superseded 13627804742)



https://www.realoem.com/bmw/enUS/sho...56#13628637896

In Peter's log Pure 800 on M140I using BM3 he looks to have a similar issue, although in that log the throttle was closing from 4200 RPM, but at 6718 RPM 24.7 PSI pre-throttle and 20.9 PSI at manifold. Have you discussed with Pure?

https://datazap.me/u/ozbmr/m140i-pur...0?log=0&data=3

In your log as soon as you start to get divergence between MAP and TMAP you also start getting timing corrections. It makes sense to me that the DME, and you, would want to know what your boost pressure actually is at the inlet manifold.

[OzBMR]

If you upgrade to a 3.5 bar TMAP you're tuner will also need to rescale the TMAP voltage table in the DME and also rescale all load related tables and axis.

What does Pure and MHD have to say?

[SC_B5X]

Originally Posted by OzBMR

If you upgrade to a 3.5 bar TMAP you're tuner will also need to rescale the TMAP voltage table in the DME and also rescale all load related tables and axis.

What does Pure and MHD have to say?

Steven at Wedge is waiting on a response from MHD, I need to contact Pure. So far anyone i've asked about it has no clue.

[IMS-340C]

Hi Kern, What happens more than 3 degrees timing pull? does it mean the engine starts to knock?

Also in BM3 logs you have knock detection but I can't find it in the MHD logs, there is knock delta but it's not exactly knock detection.

Originally Posted by kern417

Things to look for
Boost more than +/- 2PSI from target
More than 3° timing pull
AFRs increasing from target

[OzBMR]

Originally Posted by SC_B5X

Steven at Wedge is waiting on a response from MHD, I need to contact Pure. So far anyone i've asked about it has no clue.

I sent the following and got a fast reply from Fabian Baum, Founder - Engine Calibration at PureBoost, who create the OTS maps for MHD

I see a few people now installing Pure800, VTT B58 GC etc, also running Dorch Stage 2 HPFP with E50 etc and boost over 22 PSI on their BMW B58 engine cars.

As the TMAP on the intake manifold is only 2.5 bar and can't read over 22.7 PSI, but the MAP sensor on the charge pipe is 3.5 bar, it seems there are problems with boost control and general tuning over the 22 PSI level.

Is there a requirement to upgrade to a matching 3.5 bar TMAP sensor and if so, can the TMAP voltage tables and all load related tables in the DME be rescaled via a custom tune using MHD?

Fabian's reply...

We can adjust the tables for manifold TMAP sensor too but this sensor is not used on WOT. so normally not needed, or never had a problem with it on B58

Perhaps PureBoost are worth talking to for custom tuning on this platform with turbo upgrades?

For me, I'd want to be able to datalog the boost at the manifold accurately.

[Supr3me]

Originally Posted by OzBMR

I sent the following and got a fast reply from Fabian Baum, Founder - Engine Calibration at PureBoost, who create the OTS maps for MHD

My Dorch Stage 2 and Pure800 is on order and I appreciate you guys working to figure this stuff out.

+100 for you and SC_B5X and kern417 and everyone else in the community putting in work on the leading edge of this development. Real heroes...

[weehe126]

Just want to point out that neither the N54 or N55 had accurate reading in the manifold either. This isn't something new to the B58. The most likely cause for limited power/ boost is due to an undiscovered torque limiter. Why else would 5th gear not have a problem.

[SC_B5X]

Originally Posted by OzBMR

I sent the following and got a fast reply from Fabian Baum, Founder - Engine Calibration at PureBoost, who create the OTS maps for MHD

I see a few people now installing Pure800, VTT B58 GC etc, also running Dorch Stage 2 HPFP with E50 etc and boost over 22 PSI on their BMW B58 engine cars.

As the TMAP on the intake manifold is only 2.5 bar and can't read over 22.7 PSI, but the MAP sensor on the charge pipe is 3.5 bar, it seems there are problems with boost control and general tuning over the 22 PSI level.

Is there a requirement to upgrade to a matching 3.5 bar TMAP sensor and if so, can the TMAP voltage tables and all load related tables in the DME be rescaled via a custom tune using MHD?

Fabian's reply...

We can adjust the tables for manifold TMAP sensor too but this sensor is not used on WOT. so normally not needed, or never had a problem with it on B58

Perhaps PureBoost are worth talking to for custom tuning on this platform with turbo upgrades?

For me, I'd want to be able to datalog the boost at the manifold accurately.

It'd be nice to Datalog the manifold accurately, but as Fabian & weehe126 just said, it's definitely not a necessity seeing as the N5X community never had to do so either. Under WOT with the throttle body open my TMAP & MAP sensor have always read the exact same readings so i'm not worried about it.

To add onto what weehe said, Steven and I talked to Juan Castillo (Big Boost), and there is indeed a hidden limiter we have to work around. He sent Steven at Wedge the tables and he is now looking into them so we can start pushing my car. I'm sure Steven will share his findings with other MHD tuners as well as MHD so this wont be a problem in the future.

EDIT: Speaking of, soon as I submitted this post I got an e-mail from Steven with a new revision. I'm on my way to my car now so I can test and get back to everyone.

[OzBMR]

Originally Posted by SC_B5X

It'd be nice to Datalog the manifold accurately, but as Fabian & weehe126 just said, it's definitely not a necessity seeing as the N5X community never had to do so either. Under WOT with the throttle body open my TMAP & MAP sensor have always read the exact same readings so i'm not worried about it.

To add onto what weehe said, Steven and I talked to Juan Castillo (Big Boost), and there is indeed a hidden limiter we have to work around. He sent Steven at Wedge the tables and he is now looking into them so we can start pushing my car. I'm sure Steven will share his findings with other MHD tuners as well as MHD so this wont be a problem in the future.

Cool, watching with interest.

Also, the sensor names in the MHD logs appear to be incorrectly named. Wouldn't it be the TMAP that tops out at 4.69V for 22.7 PSI and the MAP that only gets up to 3.22V for 27.1 PSI?

[SC_B5X]

Doesn't look like it fixed the issue, not yet at least.

Log from now:
https://datazap.me/u/richmichael97/w...56-57-58-59-60

Before:

https://datazap.me/u/richmichael97/w...&mark=86-58-43