[B58]

Is the burble mode similar to the MPPSK with the down-shifts and pops?

[rockymtnpilot]

Originally Posted by MissionPerformance

91 is not an issue, but altitude is for sure. We have a few high altitude customers, from co to nm) and those cars are for sure not performing as good as cars at sea level.
For those cars, higher octane is highly recommended not because of knock, but because of lower possible boost.

At high altitude, tuning changes dramatically. When dme doesn't hit torque target, it starts raising boost targets. But because of less dense air, the turbo just can't flow enough air and you can't get power levels you want. One wait to counter that, higher octane. Better gas allows dme to adjust timing much higher (closer to 13 degrees) and lower boost targets.

So for you, for sure 2-3 gallons of e85 will be good.

That's not ENTIRELY true though the spirit is close enough. These turbos provide more than enough air mass though it takes more RPM from the compressor to reach that equal mass. I guess my question would be: now that the DME is flashable, are our turbos the limfac now versus the fuel system?

[G.Newt]

Originally Posted by rockymtnpilot

That's not ENTIRELY true though the spirit is close enough. These turbos provide more than enough air mass though it takes more RPM from the compressor to reach that equal mass. I guess my question would be: now that the DME is flashable, are our turbos the limfac now versus the fuel system?

This has been my experience. Engines need 2 things: air and fuel. At that altitude, with less air, you also need less fuel to maintain the desired AFR. That means less power compared to a sea-level car at any given RPM. We just need to move up in the power band but probably won't achieve peak numbers.

[rockymtnpilot]

Originally Posted by G.Newt

This has been my experience. Engines need 2 things: air and fuel. At that altitude, with less air, you also need less fuel to maintain the desired AFR. That means less power compared to a sea-level car at any given RPM. We just need to move up in the power band but probably won't achieve peak numbers.

The turbo offsets a lot of the effects of altitude because it's not a constant speed turbine. As long as the potential output exceeds the required demand of the engine effects should be near enough to negligible in a perfect system. That's all scientific speculation on my part (see- bullshit) but changes in density altitude would have a greater effect than pressure altitude in my experience for a number of reasons

[tobefair-idontcare]

My question is this: I really want the stage 2 performance gains since I’m already running the MPPSK tune from the factory with an aftermarket intake, but I do not want the run a DP because I don’t want to increase or change the sound of the exhaust. Is it possible to run a stage 2 without the DP? Does running 93 octane instead of 91 have any affect on this?

[BLACK HAWK DOWN]

Originally Posted by MissionPerformance

Fueling Limitations:
As we have found out by doing extensive and pretty risky testing, fueling system on B58 is MUCH better then the one on N55. On our 380whp pulls, even with few gallons of E85, we were able to maintain a very good 20MPa of rail pressure with safe drop to ~19MPa.

Now, on a way back from the dyno, the car was running our 380whp revision as I decided to find the fuel system limits. I filled up with even more E85 bringing a tank mixture to around 8/7. After adjusting fueling for the mixture, I went on a drive to get a car adapted a bit. Around town the car felt good with even more mid range torque. Pushing it a bit in a gear showed no problem, but as soon as I did a 2-3-4th pull, the pump HPFP said "Hell No" and fuel pressure dropped. So from all the logging and testing it seems that at around 400whp/ the fuel system can hold about 2-4 gallons tops. That is more then enough to remove the unwanted knock and still give the HPFP a headroom.
Now, on 93-95 octane, these cars should be capable of 450-470whp with stock pumps.

Bmw doubles I really want to try and do a 2-3-4 pull with a bone stock M3. That could be a good test for sure.

What other mods would this require?

[B58togo]

Originally Posted by CIRCLING THE DRAIN

What other mods would this require?

Meth or port injection on top of the flash/DP/intake.

[CruzM3]

Originally Posted by tobefair-idontcare

My question is this: I really want the stage 2 performance gains since I’m already running the MPPSK tune from the factory with an aftermarket intake, but I do not want the run a DP because I don’t want to increase or change the sound of the exhaust. Is it possible to run a stage 2 without the DP? Does running 93 octane instead of 91 have any affect on this?

I'm in the same boat and wondering this also.

[jalkster]

Originally Posted by Cruz28/40

I'm in the same boat and wondering this also.

Posted in the group buy thread:

Originally Posted by MissionPerformance

Stage 2 can be ran on stock downpipes but we recommend cat-less for it. If you do end up paying for stage 1 flash now and later want to upgrade to stage 2, you only have to pay the difference in price, and not entire cost of a tune.

[TWIN-SCROLL]

What about mating with Pure Stage 1 and 2 Turbo mods ?

[jalkster]

Originally Posted by TWIN-SCROLL

What about mating with Pure Stage 1 and 2 Turbo mods ?

Posted in the group buy thread:

Originally Posted by MissionPerformance

2) For custom turbo vehicles, we will have to build a custom flash for you. That includes data-logging remotely and adjusting flash as needed.

[Antec800]

Anyone have the flash done yet?

[TWIN-SCROLL]

Originally Posted by jalkster

Quote:
Originally Posted by TWIN-SCROLL View Post
What about mating with Pure Stage 1 and 2 Turbo mods ?

Posted in the group buy thread:

Quote:
Originally Posted by MissionPerformance View Post
2) For custom turbo vehicles, we will have to build a custom flash for you. That includes data-logging remotely and adjusting flash as needed.

Thanks, I just saw, awesome !

[Pr3dict]

Oh I want to see what this does to 0-60 times. MPPSK has shown 4.3ish times. Anyone think this will give under 4 or am I high?

[Antec800]

Originally Posted by Pr3dict

Oh I want to see what this does to 0-60 times. MPPSK has shown 4.3ish times. Anyone think this will give under 4 or am I high?

Considering map 3 on the jb4 is faster then the mppsk I’m sure this flash will be a lot faster

[ishowerinjager]

Originally Posted by MissionPerformance

Here is a fully stock 340. First pull is for 91 octane and second 2 pulls are for few gallons of E85. Those logs I took few days ago and now they are on datazap, so I cant go back and rename the parameters to something more human, but I'm sure you can figure them out:

https://datazap.me/u/missiontuning/2...=0&data=11


Now from today on the dyno, here is MPPK log:
https://datazap.me/u/missiontuning/2...g=0&data=6

"MPPK" tune is a factory file (swfk: 3c9e_080_017_001) loaded on computer with modified eeprom and cas certificate check. The file it-self is bare virgin factory flash.

Your AFR are richer because your car has to make more boost/load to achieve torque target. MPPK can go from anywhere in 1700 to 2100hpa of boost at 5-6500rpm just to hit a desired demand.

With load of anything under 155, you will be running stoich lambda all they way to redline since there is enough timing to meet the desired demand. On that MPPK run, we had E85, so even though there was some knock, computer didint pull timing as you can see due to engine not "Super Knocking"...YES, Super Knocking is actual BMW terminology as off N54/N55 days and is different then regular knock.

Is it just me or do these dynos not really show much of anything?

The mppsk shows a torque value without comparison to the stage 1.

Am I not adding the right values on the chart? Any way you could make some standard roger and after charts like everyone else does?

[Araemo]

Originally Posted by ishowerinjager

Is it just me or do these dynos not really show much of anything?

The mppsk shows a torque value without comparison to the stage 1.

Am I not adding the right values on the chart? Any way you could make some standard roger and after charts like everyone else does?

Those aren't dynos, they're datalogs. The sensor readings from the ECU during the dyno. So the 'torque' value is the ECU estimate of torque output, not actual measured torque output. But they show how well controlled the AFR was, what the fuel rail pressure was, etc.. things that help us understand how refined the tune is, and how much safety room there is. (not an absolute understanding of either, but a slapdash tune would look different from a well done one)

Personally, I have to get friends to look at it to really understand it, but there's good info there.

[ishowerinjager]

Originally Posted by Araemo

Those aren't dynos, they're datalogs. The sensor readings from the ECU during the dyno. So the 'torque' value is the ECU estimate of torque output, not actual measured torque output. But they show how well controlled the AFR was, what the fuel rail pressure was, etc.. things that help us understand how refined the tune is, and how much safety room there is. (not an absolute understanding of either, but a slapdash tune would look different from a well done one)

Personally, I have to get friends to look at it to really understand it, but there's good info there.

Sounds good, a bit beyond my understanding.

Thanx for the heads up

[Bullitt1841]

Originally Posted by Antec800

Anyone have the flash done yet?

I am going to start the process tonight. I'll keep everyone posted

[B58]

Originally Posted by Bullitt1841

I am going to start the process tonight. I'll keep everyone posted

Sweet!! Let us know how she’s running!!

[chenry]

Originally Posted by Bullitt1841

I am going to start the process tonight. I'll keep everyone posted

awesome - I'm planning on heading there next week / keep us updated!!

[B58togo]

Originally Posted by Pr3dict

Oh I want to see what this does to 0-60 times. MPPSK has shown 4.3ish times. Anyone think this will give under 4 or am I high?

I've gotten 4.1 on the Dragy with JB4 map 3, intake, 93 octane and 255 PSS on my M240i. If I had X-Drive, 3.9 would easily be possible at the same power levels. I don't worry about 0-60 too much, as I'm more into 1/8, 1/4 and 60-130 times, as those are better indicators of a car's true power potential. The 340i is around 100-150 lbs heavier than a 240i, so keep that in mind, but I bet a Stage 2 flash/DP/intake/93 RWD car will be able to flirt with breaking the 4 second barrier. Drag radials would certainly do the trick, as 0-60 is more about traction. It's a Catch-22 in that the more power you add, the more you're traction compromised off the line.