[harkes]

I have yet to find an argument for the Turbosmart - except spending money on the car and tju tju sounds (dual port).

Is there an argument...?

[Bmw doubles]

Originally Posted by $howtime456

you can have the vent to atmosphere diverter valve. Car will start up and run fine. No issues. Your tune will be off and car running hella rich due to metered air. If your fine with your car running rich, green light it.

You're saying the DV+ cause rich conditions or the turbo smart? Your Turbo smart diverter is noticeably more responsive? Interesting stuff.

[Rayzor]

So silly question... will the turbosmart work on PWG turbos?

[AmuroRay]

Try clearing adaptations and do one more run. I see no changes though

[ChristosD]

Originally Posted by Rayzor

So silly question... will the turbosmart work on PWG turbos?

yes its the same unit for EWG and PWG

[Rayzor]

Originally Posted by ChristosD

yes its the same unit for EWG and PWG

Awesome, thanks

[ZM2]

So, where’d we end up as the best option—DV+ with spring, or the Turbosmart with full plumb back?

[AmuroRay]

Originally Posted by ZM2

So, where’d we end up as the best option—DV+ with spring, or the Turbosmart with full plumb back?

Wasn’t there a review that the Turbosmart give better throttle response than the DV+? It’s also easier to install.

[oma3710]

Originally Posted by AmuroRay

Wasn’t there a review that the Turbosmart give better throttle response than the DV+? It’s also easier to install.

Installation is the same for both. I think it has better throttle response.

[AmuroRay]

Originally Posted by oma3710

Installation is the same for both. I think it has better throttle response.

It isn’t, from what I heard. The DV+ requires so additional effort - again, from what I read.

[oma3710]

I had the gfb dv+ in my car which I installed. I recently removed it and installed the turbosmart bov. The turbosmart is one piece and the gfb dv+ is an add on to the stock dv.

[Bmw doubles]

Is there a night and day difference or just different?

[johnung]

Originally Posted by AmuroRay

It isn’t, from what I heard. The DV+ requires so additional effort - again, from what I read.

Kinda both right. The installation procedure on the car itself is the same. But the DV+ installation adds another procedure.

In the Turbosmart installation, you remove the stock DV and then reverse the process to install the Turbosmart. It's a direct swap.

But in the DV+ installation, you remove the stock DV. But then you have the take it to the bench and follow another procedure to take your stock DV apart and combine parts with the DV+. Once you have the DV+ assembled out of the old and new parts, then you install it on the car.

[johnung]

Originally Posted by $howtime456

you can have the vent to atmosphere diverter valve. Car will start up and run fine. No issues. Your tune will be off and car running hella rich due to metered air. If your fine with your car running rich, green light it.

I think that you are making an incorrect assumption which is causing you to think that the engine will run rich.

The Turbosmart BOV Dual Port is venting some, but not all, excess boosted air to the atmosphere which makes that whoosh sound. But the fuel mixture is determined by sensor measurements just before air enters the engine, which is after the BOV. BOV has no disruptive effect on fuel mixture ratio.

[johnung]

Originally Posted by Rayzor

So silly question... will the turbosmart work on PWG turbos?

Not a silly question at all. The Turbosmart BOV for the N55 engine fits all N55 engines. But the photos of the Turbosmart show an electronic cable with a connector on the end. Photos of the stock DV don't show a cable.

Since N55 owners are conditioned, because of various parts variations, to think in terms of whether their engine is a Pneumatic Wastegate model (PWG) or an Electronic Wastegate model (EWG). So seeing an electronic cable with connector on the Turbosmart leads to the assumption that maybe it only works on the N55 EWG engine. Not so! The stock DV works on both the N55 PWG and N55 EWG engines.

If you turn the stock Diverter Valve and look closely you'll see that it has the same cable connector on its body. (Please see photo) For some reason, Turbosmart decided to locate the connector off the body and onto a cable. Both the stock DV and the TS BOV connect exactly the same way to the car's wiring harness back to be controlled by the DME.

[travie319]

Originally Posted by johnung

Not a silly question at all. The Turbosmart BOV for the N55 engine fits all N55 engines. But the photos of the Turbosmart show an electronic cable with a connector on the end. Photos of the stock DV don't show a cable.

Since N55 owners are conditioned, because of various parts variations, to think in terms of whether their engine is a Pneumatic Wastegate model (PWG) or an Electronic Wastegate model (EWG). So seeing an electronic cable with connector on the Turbosmart leads to the assumption that maybe it only works on the N55 EWG engine. Not so! The stock DV works on both the N55 PWG and N55 EWG engines.

If you turn the stock Diverter Valve and look closely you'll see that it has the same cable connector on its body. (Please see photo) For some reason, Turbosmart decided to locate the connector off the body and onto a cable. Both the stock DV and the TS BOV connect exactly the same way to the car's wiring harness back to be controlled by the DME.

There is no difference from EWG and PWG Platforms. The Turbosmart valve will fit all N55 platforms with exception of the N55 M2 since the plug is different. I am not sure that they have mentioned any changes or part numbers for the M2. I would look on their site or social media pages for updates.

[thejeremyman9]

Originally Posted by johnung

I think that you are making an incorrect assumption which is causing you to think that the engine will run rich.

The Turbosmart BOV Dual Port is venting some, but not all, excess boosted air to the atmosphere which makes that whoosh sound. But the fuel mixture is determined by sensor measurements just before air enters the engine, which is after the BOV. BOV has no disruptive effect on fuel mixture ratio.

What do you mean the sensors are after the BOV? The MAF is in the very beginning of the intake track.

Any vent to atmosphere BOV that vents air that has already been read by the MAF is going to cause a rich condition when that air is vented to the atmosphere instead of going into the engine. Having said that, whether or not this affect is negligible on a modern car/engine like this has not been determined to my knowledge. The DME can probably correct for it using STFT, etc.

An apples to oranges comparison is my 3000gt. It came factory with a recirculated BOV and runs based on a MAF (no closed loop fueling on WOT). When i got the car 12 years ago it had a vent to atmosphere BOV. If you were to do a hard pull and immediately push the clutch in and go to neutral at the end of the pull the wideband would read extremely rich, the idle would dip, and sometimes the car would stall. I converted it back to recirculating. Now again were talking about 1991 ECU versus 2013+ with additional sensors, etc, but the concept is the same - the MAF thought a certain amount of air was going into the engine and fueling was determined based on that, but some of that air was vented, leading to a temporary rich condition.

[johnung]

Originally Posted by thejeremyman9

What do you mean the sensors are after the BOV? The MAF is in the very beginning of the intake track.

Any vent to atmosphere BOV that vents air that has already been read by the MAF is going to cause a rich condition when that air is vented to the atmosphere instead of going into the engine. Having said that, whether or not this affect is negligible on a modern car/engine like this has not been determined to my knowledge. The DME can probably correct for it using STFT, etc.

An apples to oranges comparison is my 3000gt. It came factory with a recirculated BOV and runs based on a MAF (no closed loop fueling on WOT). When i got the car 12 years ago it had a vent to atmosphere BOV. If you were to do a hard pull and immediately push the clutch in and go to neutral at the end of the pull the wideband would read extremely rich, the idle would dip, and sometimes the car would stall. I converted it back to recirculating. Now again were talking about 1991 ECU versus 2013+ with additional sensors, etc, but the concept is the same - the MAF thought a certain amount of air was going into the engine and fueling was determined based on that, but some of that air was vented, leading to a temporary rich condition.

I'm no expert on this. Obviously there's a lot of computer calculations going on with algorithms developed based on information from many sensors. MAF is at the beginning of a very long intake air road where air is compressed, heated and cooled before it enters the actual engine to be mixed by fuel. There is no way that MAF information is being used to fine tune the mixture. Too much happens to that air after it goes past the MAF sensor.

IMO it is more likely that the MAF information is being used almost as a ballpark range check. Then the mixture fine tuning occurs from sensor information as the air continues towards the engine. What convinced me of this was when I was investigating Inlet Pipe options.

Guys voiced concerns that the connection from the air pipe to the turbo Inlet wasn't really secured and subject to leaks, yet it didn't seem matter to engine performance. Guys installed the first version of the Pure Turbos Inlet that didn't really have a fastening system like a sleeve. It just kinda fit into the opening. It didn't even have a bolt hole like the stock plastic Inlet Pipe. A leak there obviously changes the amount of air that the MAF already measured. But doesn't severely effect how the engine runs. That's the experimental evidence that tells me that the MAF sensor reading isn't critical to fine tuning the mixture.

Not sure if I'm explaining myself well but that's where my opinion is coming from.

[Wattens]

Originally Posted by travie319

There is no difference from EWG and PWG Platforms. The Turbosmart valve will fit all N55 platforms with exception of the N55 M2 since the plug is different. I am not sure that they have mentioned any changes or part numbers for the M2. I would look on their site or social media pages for updates.

Nah I made that mistake already on my M2. I bought their VR9 model which is "for most N55's", tried to install it and found it had the wrong plug for my M2, called them up and we had a bit of a giggle because I ordered the part by saying "please send me the valve for the N55" when I should have said "please send me the valve for the M2 N55". So they sent me the N55 valve (VR9) which is different to the M2 N55 (VR11) because the plug is different. But I can say for sure that they have both a part for all the N55's, and a separate part for M2 N55's.

I got attacked on the M2 forum by a person who just seems doesn't like aftermarket diverter valves in general.

My experience in the N55 M2 is I seem to have better response over stock DV (even though someone was literally telling me that my experience is wrong), I definitely achieve higher boost over stock DV according to before and after dyno runs, boost comes on a little earlier than stock, I've now been running the dual port for 6 months with no issues or CEL's. Because of my experience, I've come to the conclusion my stock valve was leaking. Car was only 2 years old when I made the change, the stock valves IMO aren't ideal, even at stock boost as my car was and still is.

I've been brand loyal to turbosmart since 2006 when I bought my first boost tee and ran over it by accident and they repaired it for me for free even though it was my fault I broke it. So maybe I'm biassed against other brands of bovs and wastegates? I've never had an issue with their products that I hadn't caused myself.

Would I swap the DV+ out for the Turbosmart one if I wasn't having issues with the DV+, probably not. But I'd definitely swap it if I thought the DV+ was leaking rather than going to stock DV. And I personally would just go for the Turbosmart product from the beginning anyway and not worry about if I'm losing boost, or if I forgot to oil it or needs to be re-oiled like seems to be happening with the DV+.

[Bmw doubles]

This oiling of the DV+ is new to me. What are the symptoms of a dry/un-oiled DV+?

[thejeremyman9]

Originally Posted by johnung

I'm no expert on this. Obviously there's a lot of computer calculations going on with algorithms developed based on information from many sensors. MAF is at the beginning of a very long intake air road where air is compressed, heated and cooled before it enters the actual engine to be mixed by fuel. There is no way that MAF information is being used to fine tune the mixture. Too much happens to that air after it goes past the MAF sensor.

IMO it is more likely that the MAF information is being used almost as a ballpark range check. Then the mixture fine tuning occurs from sensor information as the air continues towards the engine. What convinced me of this was when I was investigating Inlet Pipe options.

Guys voiced concerns that the connection from the air pipe to the turbo Inlet wasn't really secured and subject to leaks, yet it didn't seem matter to engine performance. Guys installed the first version of the Pure Turbos Inlet that didn't really have a fastening system like a sleeve. It just kinda fit into the opening. It didn't even have a bolt hole like the stock plastic Inlet Pipe. A leak there obviously changes the amount of air that the MAF already measured. But doesn't severely effect how the engine runs. That's the experimental evidence that tells me that the MAF sensor reading isn't critical to fine tuning the mixture.

Not sure if I'm explaining myself well but that's where my opinion is coming from.

The MAF is the first sensor used to tell the DME how much fuel needs to be added to achieve targeted lambda. It is extremely sensitive and accurate, as evidenced by how it is disturbed by aftermarket intake shapes and/or oily air filters. The O2 sensor is then used for fuel trims (e.g., STFT) to make corrections to the amount of fuel compared with what was determined using the MAF readings. Letting in (as you mentioned above) or out (as with a VTA BOV) unmetered air is definitely not ideal. As i mentioned however the question or whether or not it is going to tangibly affect performance basically depends on the magnitude of the extra air in or portion of air out compared with what was measured relatively to how much deviation can be easily corrected using the O2 sensor and fuel trims. There may be a negligible impact, we just need some data to support it.

Having said all that i would never install a VTA BOV on a car that came recirculating from the factory, but that's just me, and i know other people will. Probably the same people that add extra burbles - to each his own.

[1QuikWS6]

All reasons if you dont want to take chances to just go with the Plumb Back VR9 version of Turbosmart

I'll be switching out my DV+ for a TSPB in a month or so

Never had problems with the DV over yrs (never reoiled it either), just like to try out different avenues from time to time