N54Tech.com - International Turbo Racing Discussion
(#26)
Old
JB4OFF JB4OFF is offline
Junior Member
 
Posts: 121
Join Date: Nov 2016
Car: 340i
Default 06-08-2017, 05:45 AM

Logs look normal to me. Stick with map 1 and shell 93
Reply With Quote
(#27)
Old
risktaker76's Avatar
risktaker76 risktaker76 is offline
Junior Member
 
Posts: 223
Join Date: Dec 2016
Car: BMW 440XI MPPSK
Default 06-12-2017, 06:44 AM

Saga continues... again MPPSK 440 with Shell 93 octane

I have been fighting "smoothness" and predictability... In other words sometimes the car runs like a champ (relative) and other times like a stuttering mess (normal driving no issues - mostly hard accel or WOT is the issue)...

I also have noticed that my Sport Gauges no longer would hit my peaks as I once had (pre JB4).. 370HP and 375TQ (about)... Its clear when I hit my previous peaks on these gauges the car pulls... when not such as 300 peak HP 320tq peak the peak bounces around - its a stuttering mess and doesnt pull at all near stock...

The logs unfortunately dont tell much either how the car is driving or performing... Logs look fairly good...but dont tell the truth unfortunately.. As you can see FOL at 60 looks decent - but its a stuttering mess actually..

I decided to revert back FOL to 0 and the car is running MUCH smoother under normal driving conditions (partial to before WOT)... At WOT its still unpredictable but much much better - and the car pulls like a rocket now... Its almost as if FOL at 60 is either not giving it enough fuel or too much.. (im no expert)... But overall FOL at 0 the car is running better throughout the RPM range under most driving conditions.

One other point - with FOL at 60 pops and crackles (MPPSK exhaust) was at a minimum - Now they are back with a vengeance...

Why all this?

So.... I need some insight from the experts in the community.. I figured I would share these findings in the open community to hopefully help in tuning MPPSK cars...

I am playing now with map 3 and will do the same (fol 0) and report back... I have a concern about the amount of boost now... Its now averaging almost 17 and peak at 21 - from watching the real time gauges! Is this safe?

I will be ordering the EWG wires to run fixed Boost - however, I think the community would love to be able to get a stable map without all the extra wires.

Maybe we need a MPPSK map...

thanks again for all the help the community has given..
Attached Images
 
Attached Files
File Type: csv 2017-06-07 17_22_14Run2 FOL60.csv (18.3 KB, 28 views)
File Type: csv 2017-06-11 20_23_49FOL0.csv (10.8 KB, 28 views)

Last edited by risktaker76; 06-12-2017 at 06:53 AM.. Reason: Why testing Map 3..
Reply With Quote
(#28)
Old
risktaker76's Avatar
risktaker76 risktaker76 is offline
Junior Member
 
Posts: 223
Join Date: Dec 2016
Car: BMW 440XI MPPSK
Default 06-12-2017, 06:03 PM

Terry@bms Any feedback ?

Thanks!
Reply With Quote
(#29)
Old
risktaker76's Avatar
risktaker76 risktaker76 is offline
Junior Member
 
Posts: 223
Join Date: Dec 2016
Car: BMW 440XI MPPSK
Default 06-13-2017, 05:29 AM

Here are logs from Map 3 FOL 0...

The car is running significantly better with FOL at 0 (Flex / Fuel Pressure wires disabled) vs FOL at 60...

Map 3 doesnt pull as hard as Map 1 but clearly some nice gains...

Of course feedback always welcome..
Attached Images
 
Attached Files
File Type: csv 2017-06-13 07_54_36.csv (17.7 KB, 23 views)
Reply With Quote
(#30)
Old
Bullitt1841's Avatar
Bullitt1841 Bullitt1841 is offline
Legend
 
Posts: 1,463
Join Date: Aug 2011
Car: '07 335i Sedan, Built & Blown '08 Mustang Bullitt
Default 06-13-2017, 07:02 AM

Try setting FUA to 10. That helped me with smoothness a little.


2018 Audi RS3 | Stage 1 E85 and 91 Flashes | JB4 for Logging

SOLD: 2017 F36 440i Gran Coupe | PS2 | MPPSK | Track Handling Package | JB4

SOLD: 2007 E90 335i | PS2's | JB4 | FBO | 160k+ miles on the car, 120k+ miles on the JB4

Log, log, then log some more...
Reply With Quote
(#31)
Old
risktaker76's Avatar
risktaker76 risktaker76 is offline
Junior Member
 
Posts: 223
Join Date: Dec 2016
Car: BMW 440XI MPPSK
Default 06-13-2017, 07:43 AM

If I am not mistaken, I need the EWG wires for that to work correct?

I have to say changing FOL to 0 maybe very close to stock smoothness... I need more time to evaluate but I went back to look at my Map 0 logs and in fact I have less Throttle closures with similar curves except with more boost (albeit less timing)...

Have you ever tried taking yours to FOL 0? If not, try it and report back.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bullitt1841
Try setting FUA to 10. That helped me with smoothness a little.

Last edited by risktaker76; 06-13-2017 at 10:19 AM..
Reply With Quote
(#32)
Old
risktaker76's Avatar
risktaker76 risktaker76 is offline
Junior Member
 
Posts: 223
Join Date: Dec 2016
Car: BMW 440XI MPPSK
Default 06-14-2017, 11:58 AM

No new logs... But the car does not like Map 1. At WOT its not getting to full power and seems to lose it as you approach red line. It also seems as if something resets and takes time to learn again as its fine for a little bit then again some stutter and not getting full power...

Map 3 however is very smooth - not perfect but pulls to red line with little fuss... Does not exhibit the symptom of falling flat...
Reply With Quote
(#33)
Old
Terry @ BMS's Avatar
Terry @ BMS Terry @ BMS is online now
Tuner
 
Posts: 29,348
Join Date: Jan 2008
Default 06-16-2017, 09:33 AM

Open loop only works with the fuel pressure connector on, and FUA only works with the EWG connector on, regardless of settings. Red herring there since you have neither as I understand it. Once those sensors are attached if fuel trims are maxing out raising open loop will lower them. If you're getting excessive throttle closure (from boost going over target) raising FUA will lower WGDC and bring boost down to target.

The map3 log looks OK to me. You're going to run 2-3psi more boost than stock on map3, PPK it hitting 16-17psi, so makes sense for you to hit 19psi.

You mentioned map0 also feels off? That makes no sense as its a straight pass through!


Burger Motorsports
Home of the Worlds fastest N20s, N54s, N55s, S55s, N63s, and S63s!

It is the sole responsibility of the purchaser and installer of any BMS part to employ the correct installation techniques required to ensure the proper operation of BMS parts, and BMS disclaims any and all liability for any part failure due to improper installation or use. It is the sole responsibility of the customer to verify that the use of their vehicle and items purchased comply with federal, state and local regulations. BMS claims no legal federal, state or local certification concerning pollution controlled motor vehicles or mandated emissions requirements. BMS products labeled for use only in competition racing vehicles may only be used on competition racing vehicles operated exclusively on a closed course in conjunction with a sanctioned racing event, in accordance with all federal and state laws, and may never be operated on public roads/highways. Please click here for more information on legal requirements related to use of BMS parts.
Reply With Quote
(#34)
Old
risktaker76's Avatar
risktaker76 risktaker76 is offline
Junior Member
 
Posts: 223
Join Date: Dec 2016
Car: BMW 440XI MPPSK
Thumbs up 06-16-2017, 11:02 AM

Hi Terry,

Right now I have the Flue Pressure connector. However running FOL 60 power delivery was very inconsistent under WOT.. Even around town driving acceleration smoothness was very unpredictable.. Even though the logs look OK the car was not accelerating smoothly - with some points with loss of power - However as you can you can see where I compare FOL 60 vs 0 there no throttle closures with FOL 60 but the car was not accelerating cleanly (it was actually slightly bucking during this run) - http://www.n54tech.com/forums/showpo...4&postcount=27

Any advice on this point?

I also now purchased the EWG - though not installed yet.

In general I am fighting inconsistency in acceleration across all maps tried and why I purchased the TWO cables; To allow complete tweaking as needed. Again, some times no issues, other times (within minutes) stuttering. Here is an example taken 1 day apart - http://www.n54tech.com/forums/showpo...2&postcount=21

With that said, whats a good starting point with Fuel Pressure Cables and EWG Cables installed for Maps 1 or Map 3 (I will try both)... Eventually I will tackle Map 6.

DOn't mind putting in some time logging and sharing the results for future improvements..

Regarding Map 0 - I am not sure at this point. At that time Map 0 wasnt liking something but it could also be the computer relearning. I will write that off as that.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Terry @ BMS
Open loop only works with the fuel pressure connector on, and FUA only works with the EWG connector on, regardless of settings. Red herring there since you have neither as I understand it. Once those sensors are attached if fuel trims are maxing out raising open loop will lower them. If you're getting excessive throttle closure (from boost going over target) raising FUA will lower WGDC and bring boost down to target.

The map3 log looks OK to me. You're going to run 2-3psi more boost than stock on map3, PPK it hitting 16-17psi, so makes sense for you to hit 19psi.

You mentioned map0 also feels off? That makes no sense as its a straight pass through!

Last edited by risktaker76; 06-16-2017 at 11:11 AM..
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




vBulletin Skin developed by: vBStyles.com
Copyright 2007 - 2018, N54tech.com