N54Tech.com - International Turbo Racing Discussion
(#26)
Old
Bullitt1841's Avatar
Bullitt1841 Bullitt1841 is offline
Legend
 
Posts: 1,462
Join Date: Aug 2011
Car: '07 335i Sedan, Built & Blown '08 Mustang Bullitt
Default 04-20-2018, 11:08 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Turboh
OK Bullitt,

You are my hero!!!

Did as suggested. Updated firmware, gain down to 8, ran map6 at 16.5 flat. Raised duty bias by5 for most rpms. Best best run is attached.

I really like this setup. It is very smooth. The best ever. Timing is better (almost no"0"), but still not reaching target.

I am think raising the gain by 1 point might help.

Suggestions?

Thanks

Alex
Looks decent. You could use a tiny bit more octane, but it's not bad. Can you add any ethanol? If not, maybe try reducing target to 16.0 at 5,000 RPM and later.


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
(#27)
Old
Turboh's Avatar
Turboh Turboh is offline
Junior Member
 
Posts: 193
Join Date: Nov 2017
Car: 2017 BMW 340iX
Default 05-08-2018, 10:13 AM

Made some more changes. I like this setting pretty much. Quite smooth. Still would prefer less zero timing advance. Not sure if that is significant.

I have attached the latest runs on map6, 17psi flat. Higher duty bias. FF curve is trending down over time. Not sure what that means or if it is significant.

Sure would appreciate suggestions.

Thank you,

Alex
Attached Files
File Type: csv 2018-05-07 12_49_56m617g8fol75fua13ff12db70.csv (9.2 KB, 40 views)


2017 340iX with M track handling package, 6 speed manual, BMS intake, and JB4 piggyback; EWG and FP wires; 93 octane; and fun with Honda S2000; Ninja Z1000.
Reply With Quote
(#28)
Old
Bullitt1841's Avatar
Bullitt1841 Bullitt1841 is offline
Legend
 
Posts: 1,462
Join Date: Aug 2011
Car: '07 335i Sedan, Built & Blown '08 Mustang Bullitt
Default 05-08-2018, 10:33 AM

Your FF is lowering since your Duty Bias is much higher than the stock curve. They are interrelated. FF auto adjusts, DB does not. Why taper DB at higher RPM's? You need more boost then, per your log.

I would try setting boost to 16.0 across the board, keeping DB at 70 across the board, changing FF to something higher like 50, then log. FF might actually need to be set higher than that to maintain boost.


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
(#29)
Old
Turboh's Avatar
Turboh Turboh is offline
Junior Member
 
Posts: 193
Join Date: Nov 2017
Car: 2017 BMW 340iX
Default 05-09-2018, 11:33 AM

Hi Bullitt,

I did as suggested and raised the gain to 9. Five pulls starting at FF 55....ending at FF19.

16 psi was not great and the gain rise made it a bit rougher, and timing period for 0 advance, was quite long. AIT was fairly high, which may have affected the length of 0 timing period.

Terry's last comment to me about B58 DB adjustment was just get it close, since the DME does its own thing.

No matter how high the FF start, it always tend to lower and settle out around 19-15.

A 17 and 16 psi run is attached.

Suggestions?

Thanks


2017 340iX with M track handling package, 6 speed manual, BMS intake, and JB4 piggyback; EWG and FP wires; 93 octane; and fun with Honda S2000; Ninja Z1000.
Reply With Quote
(#30)
Old
fuzzywuzzy987 fuzzywuzzy987 is offline
New Member
 
Posts: 10
Join Date: Mar 2018
Car: m240i
Default 05-09-2018, 03:46 PM

I'm assuming no access to E85? that is the only thing that aloud me to fix my timing issues. How does timing look with lower boost in map1/4?
Reply With Quote
(#31)
Old
Bullitt1841's Avatar
Bullitt1841 Bullitt1841 is offline
Legend
 
Posts: 1,462
Join Date: Aug 2011
Car: '07 335i Sedan, Built & Blown '08 Mustang Bullitt
Default 05-09-2018, 05:37 PM

You can lock FF in to a higher value. That's what I've done at times. You just need to review each log, each time.

I agree that you do not have enough octane, even for 16 PSI. Post up a Map 0/4 log or two.


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
(#32)
Old
Turboh's Avatar
Turboh Turboh is offline
Junior Member
 
Posts: 193
Join Date: Nov 2017
Car: 2017 BMW 340iX
Default 07-22-2018, 06:12 AM

Hi,

I have attached a high IAT map4 run along with a high IAT map 6 15.5 psi flat run.

Map 6 absolute continues to be my favorite. High IAT seems to affect timing most.


I would appreciate comments on these three runs. Am I safe with these settings considering timing? Am I better off dropping psi to something like 14.0?


Thank you,

Alex


2017 340iX with M track handling package, 6 speed manual, BMS intake, and JB4 piggyback; EWG and FP wires; 93 octane; and fun with Honda S2000; Ninja Z1000.
Reply With Quote
(#33)
Old
Bullitt1841's Avatar
Bullitt1841 Bullitt1841 is offline
Legend
 
Posts: 1,462
Join Date: Aug 2011
Car: '07 335i Sedan, Built & Blown '08 Mustang Bullitt
Default 07-22-2018, 09:16 AM

Your IAT is not that high. High IAT would be something like over 120 deg-F.

Timing looks fine. It's not ideal, but you are totally fine with 15.5 PSI. What I've noticed is that if you go too low with Map 6 absolute targets, DME BT will start getting all messed up and then everything goes bad.

Map 6 absolute will always feel stronger and smoother when used correctly


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
(#34)
Old
Turboh's Avatar
Turboh Turboh is offline
Junior Member
 
Posts: 193
Join Date: Nov 2017
Car: 2017 BMW 340iX
Default 07-22-2018, 04:22 PM

Thank you Bullitt.

I have noticed that a ratio of rpm/time can be a good indication of effective boost. In some cases a lower boost target gives a higher rpm/time ratio. To me that shows how important timing is. Too high a boost target retards timing and drops effective power, hence slower rpm rise.

Stunningly, an IAT of 30F actually doubles the the rate. All because of ignation advance.

Have you looked at this?

Thoughts?


2017 340iX with M track handling package, 6 speed manual, BMS intake, and JB4 piggyback; EWG and FP wires; 93 octane; and fun with Honda S2000; Ninja Z1000.
Reply With Quote
(#35)
Old
MasterYous MasterYous is offline
BMW After BMW
 
Posts: 319
Join Date: Aug 2017
Car: BMW M240i
Default 07-23-2018, 08:40 AM

Alex, there are some other variables that would be nice to understand as well (assuming you have no access to E85).

- do you have the MPPSK? That makes a difference. I don't, but I have the M240 and my 16.0 PSI runs on Map 6 seem to do well even on just 93 octane (timing is a slight issue). Likely because the tune is different and AFR doesn't lean out as quickly. My settings are like Bullitt's. For you it's possible 16.0 is too high given your fuel.
- Have you tried the IAT spoof (it's a FUD bit you can set). For me, it makes a difference in how well the car will hold boost, but not how quickly it reaches target. Once I hit my 16.0 target, it stays there pretty well.

I also think your logs @ 15.5 look ok. Timing is tough to make major strides because of fueling limitations on this motor (wait for the flashes). I am adding meth and so my car is not drivable atm as I've taken things apart, so no logs, but I am certain timing will improve, so you can also consider that.

My goal atm (pre-flash) is to hit an absolute target of 17.0, with 93 octane, some E85 to raise octane, and meth to raise octane and to cool. Fuel matters, a lot. My car is unmodified save for the BMS intake, hence I probably can't go too much higher for now.

This is the best hobby, ever.


2017 F23/M240i Convertible (B58) / 6MT / FF Wires / EWG Wires / BMS Air Intake / Stock Exhaust / BMS Meth (100%) / 93 Octane
Reply With Quote
(#36)
Old
imsorussian imsorussian is offline
Junior Member
 
Posts: 54
Join Date: Jun 2018
Car: 2017 BMW 340i Xdrive
Default 07-23-2018, 02:13 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Turboh
Hi all,

I like this thread. I am playing with map 6 also. 16 psig flat seems like a good start.

The smoothest run I have found so far is attached. Very little jerking, minimal throttle plate action, and getting to target nicely. I do wonder about variability with temperatures...makes a big difference along with elevation....I will look at that more closely.

Regarding the attached run I am thinking of dropping the gain to 8 to lessen the oscillation and also change the DPG to reduce overshoot during the initial boost.

Also, I am wondering if the PWM and FF readings should not be higher. These are essentially bottomed out. To me that means less control over possible changes.

Problems? Thoughts?

Thanks,

Alex
Can you screenshot your map 6 set up. I want to try in mine, im fairly new to this. Thanks
Reply With Quote
(#37)
Old
MasterYous MasterYous is offline
BMW After BMW
 
Posts: 319
Join Date: Aug 2017
Car: BMW M240i
Default 07-23-2018, 02:34 PM

Mine are in post #1 of this thread: http://www.n54tech.com/forums/showthread.php?t=47581 - they are Bullitt’s.


2017 F23/M240i Convertible (B58) / 6MT / FF Wires / EWG Wires / BMS Air Intake / Stock Exhaust / BMS Meth (100%) / 93 Octane
Reply With Quote
(#38)
Old
imsorussian imsorussian is offline
Junior Member
 
Posts: 54
Join Date: Jun 2018
Car: 2017 BMW 340i Xdrive
Default 07-23-2018, 03:03 PM

Thanks
Reply With Quote
(#39)
Old
Antec800 Antec800 is offline
Junior Member
 
Posts: 74
Join Date: Jul 2017
Car: 340ix
Default 07-23-2018, 03:14 PM

Don’t want to hi jack the thread but is it normal to have more timing in comfort mode then sport plus mode? The car is faster in comfort mode then sport plus that seems weird
Reply With Quote
(#40)
Old
Turboh's Avatar
Turboh Turboh is offline
Junior Member
 
Posts: 193
Join Date: Nov 2017
Car: 2017 BMW 340iX
Default 07-24-2018, 05:12 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by imsorussian
Can you screenshot your map 6 set up. I want to try in mine, im fairly new to this. Thanks
Here is my current set up.

http://www.n54tech.com/forums/attach...5&d=1532264689


2017 340iX with M track handling package, 6 speed manual, BMS intake, and JB4 piggyback; EWG and FP wires; 93 octane; and fun with Honda S2000; Ninja Z1000.
Reply With Quote
(#41)
Old
Turboh's Avatar
Turboh Turboh is offline
Junior Member
 
Posts: 193
Join Date: Nov 2017
Car: 2017 BMW 340iX
Default 07-24-2018, 05:28 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterYous
Alex, there are some other variables that would be nice to understand as well (assuming you have no access to E85).

- do you have the MPPSK? That makes a difference. I don't, but I have the M240 and my 16.0 PSI runs on Map 6 seem to do well even on just 93 octane (timing is a slight issue). Likely because the tune is different and AFR doesn't lean out as quickly. My settings are like Bullitt's. For you it's possible 16.0 is too high given your fuel.
- Have you tried the IAT spoof (it's a FUD bit you can set). For me, it makes a difference in how well the car will hold boost, but not how quickly it reaches target. Once I hit my 16.0 target, it stays there pretty well.

I also think your logs @ 15.5 look ok. Timing is tough to make major strides because of fueling limitations on this motor (wait for the flashes). I am adding meth and so my car is not drivable atm as I've taken things apart, so no logs, but I am certain timing will improve, so you can also consider that.

My goal atm (pre-flash) is to hit an absolute target of 17.0, with 93 octane, some E85 to raise octane, and meth to raise octane and to cool. Fuel matters, a lot. My car is unmodified save for the BMS intake, hence I probably can't go too much higher for now.

This is the best hobby, ever.
Hi,

Thank you for your ideas. I have been advised against the IAT spoof by Bullitt. His thinking makes sense.

I do not have MPPSK. I do like tweaking and enjoy the N54 site. I am trying to find that map6 setting which gives me smooth and maximum power, year around. Timing really retards heavily at higher IATs, so I am trying to find the best boost setting for high IATs (+100F). I think that without dyno testing, my logged rpm vs time slope may be the best way to go. The steeper the slope the better. I think higher timing advance at lower boosts are the likely answer. At the moment 15.5 flat is the best. I just do not like seeing a lot of zero advance records in my WOT logs.

Perhaps I will do alcohol injection to cool the IAT.....much later.

Meantime...more fun...


2017 340iX with M track handling package, 6 speed manual, BMS intake, and JB4 piggyback; EWG and FP wires; 93 octane; and fun with Honda S2000; Ninja Z1000.
Reply With Quote
(#42)
Old
Turboh's Avatar
Turboh Turboh is offline
Junior Member
 
Posts: 193
Join Date: Nov 2017
Car: 2017 BMW 340iX
Default 07-24-2018, 05:38 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Antec800
Donít want to hi jack the thread but is it normal to have more timing in comfort mode then sport plus mode? The car is faster in comfort mode then sport plus that seems weird
Hi,

Sport mode only affects the rate at which the throttle opens for a given amount of pedal depression. It also opens up the second muffler pipe and creates a nicer sound along with a few other goodies like steering and suspension settings, depending on your package.

Also,.... butt feel on power can be very deceptive. I am trying to go by rpm/time curve slopes off the logs, using excel. IAT affect is huge.


2017 340iX with M track handling package, 6 speed manual, BMS intake, and JB4 piggyback; EWG and FP wires; 93 octane; and fun with Honda S2000; Ninja Z1000.
Reply With Quote
(#43)
Old
MasterYous MasterYous is offline
BMW After BMW
 
Posts: 319
Join Date: Aug 2017
Car: BMW M240i
Default 07-24-2018, 11:47 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Turboh
Hi,

Thank you for your ideas. I have been advised against the IAT spoof by Bullitt. His thinking makes sense.

I do not have MPPSK. I do like tweaking and enjoy the N54 site. I am trying to find that map6 setting which gives me smooth and maximum power, year around. Timing really retards heavily at higher IATs, so I am trying to find the best boost setting for high IATs (+100F). I think that without dyno testing, my logged rpm vs time slope may be the best way to go. The steeper the slope the better. I think higher timing advance at lower boosts are the likely answer. At the moment 15.5 flat is the best. I just do not like seeing a lot of zero advance records in my WOT logs.

Perhaps I will do alcohol injection to cool the IAT.....much later.

Meantime...more fun...
There are several things you wrote that I don't really get, but I'll save those for another post. Meantime, what is the thinking against the IAT spoof, assuming you have the octane?


2017 F23/M240i Convertible (B58) / 6MT / FF Wires / EWG Wires / BMS Air Intake / Stock Exhaust / BMS Meth (100%) / 93 Octane
Reply With Quote
(#44)
Old
MasterYous MasterYous is offline
BMW After BMW
 
Posts: 319
Join Date: Aug 2017
Car: BMW M240i
Default 07-24-2018, 11:59 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Turboh
Hi,

Sport mode only affects the rate at which the throttle opens for a given amount of pedal depression. It also opens up the second muffler pipe and creates a nicer sound along with a few other goodies like steering and suspension settings, depending on your package.
The CANflap feature of the JB4 opens up the second muffler pipe, not the sport or sport+ mode. According to BMW, sport mode does the following:
- increase pedal responsiveness
- dial in some heft to the steering (I wish it would not)

if you have the M-adaptive suspension package, it will also:
- lower the suspension 10mm
- stiffen the suspension - I have absolutely noticed the difference
- give you Sport+ Mode: all the above but with DTC switched to DSC (more wheel slip allowed)


2017 F23/M240i Convertible (B58) / 6MT / FF Wires / EWG Wires / BMS Air Intake / Stock Exhaust / BMS Meth (100%) / 93 Octane
Reply With Quote
(#45)
Old
Antec800 Antec800 is offline
Junior Member
 
Posts: 74
Join Date: Jul 2017
Car: 340ix
Default 07-24-2018, 07:04 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterYous
The CANflap feature of the JB4 opens up the second muffler pipe, not the sport or sport+ mode. According to BMW, sport mode does the following:
- increase pedal responsiveness
- dial in some heft to the steering (I wish it would not)

if you have the M-adaptive suspension package, it will also:
- lower the suspension 10mm
- stiffen the suspension - I have absolutely noticed the difference
- give you Sport+ Mode: all the above but with DTC switched to DSC (more wheel slip allowed)
Is it recommended not to full time spoof ait, especially if itís really lowering timing
Reply With Quote
(#46)
Old
Turboh's Avatar
Turboh Turboh is offline
Junior Member
 
Posts: 193
Join Date: Nov 2017
Car: 2017 BMW 340iX
Default 07-25-2018, 03:33 AM

http://www.n54tech.com/forums/showthread.php?t=52736

Per Bullitt on AIT.


2017 340iX with M track handling package, 6 speed manual, BMS intake, and JB4 piggyback; EWG and FP wires; 93 octane; and fun with Honda S2000; Ninja Z1000.
Reply With Quote
(#47)
Old
MasterYous MasterYous is offline
BMW After BMW
 
Posts: 319
Join Date: Aug 2017
Car: BMW M240i
Default 07-25-2018, 06:12 AM

Thanks. Seems consistent with my observation about it allowing me to hold boost just a bit longer at the high RPMs.


2017 F23/M240i Convertible (B58) / 6MT / FF Wires / EWG Wires / BMS Air Intake / Stock Exhaust / BMS Meth (100%) / 93 Octane
Reply With Quote
(#48)
Old
Turboh's Avatar
Turboh Turboh is offline
Junior Member
 
Posts: 193
Join Date: Nov 2017
Car: 2017 BMW 340iX
Default 07-25-2018, 07:27 AM

I have summarized roughly a hundred WOT runs on various maps at various IATs. I have looked for the smoothest and quickest map and user settings. For each run I graphed timing, rpm, boost vs time. All on 93 octane. Same road, same elevation, different weather conditions, spring, summer, fall.

I imported the csv files with excel and ran the graphs with it. Rate changes are easily calculated using the excel trend lines. Slopes in the trend line equations are the rate of change, or equivalent to quickness. The higher the rate the quicker.

To me the rpm vs time graphs shows the effect of boost and timing best, without going to a dyno.


Looking at Maps 6, 5, 4,3,2, and 1, I think map 6 at 15.5 psi flat is the best overall. Map 5 and 3 appear a bit quicker at times but not very smooth and less adjustable. I assume that is due to internal timing adjustment spoofing by the JB4.

Comparing map results must be done at the same IAT.

Such fun....


2017 340iX with M track handling package, 6 speed manual, BMS intake, and JB4 piggyback; EWG and FP wires; 93 octane; and fun with Honda S2000; Ninja Z1000.
Reply With Quote
(#49)
Old
Turboh's Avatar
Turboh Turboh is offline
Junior Member
 
Posts: 193
Join Date: Nov 2017
Car: 2017 BMW 340iX
Default 07-25-2018, 07:48 AM

BTW...I have to thank Risktaker for getting me on this track.


2017 340iX with M track handling package, 6 speed manual, BMS intake, and JB4 piggyback; EWG and FP wires; 93 octane; and fun with Honda S2000; Ninja Z1000.
Reply With Quote
(#50)
Old
MasterYous MasterYous is offline
BMW After BMW
 
Posts: 319
Join Date: Aug 2017
Car: BMW M240i
Default 07-25-2018, 10:13 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Turboh
I have summarized roughly a hundred WOT runs on various maps at various IATs. I have looked for the smoothest and quickest map and user settings. For each run I graphed timing, rpm, boost vs time. All on 93 octane. Same road, same elevation, different weather conditions, spring, summer, fall.

I imported the csv files with excel and ran the graphs with it. Rate changes are easily calculated using the excel trend lines. Slopes in the trend line equations are the rate of change, or equivalent to quickness. The higher the rate the quicker.

To me the rpm vs time graphs shows the effect of boost and timing best, without going to a dyno.


Looking at Maps 6, 5, 4,3,2, and 1, I think map 6 at 15.5 psi flat is the best overall. Map 5 and 3 appear a bit quicker at times but not very smooth and less adjustable. I assume that is due to internal timing adjustment spoofing by the JB4.

Comparing map results must be done at the same IAT.

Such fun....
Thank you for posting this, and for sharing your thoughts with all of us.
That's pretty cool.

Couple of questions/comments, if you don't mind.
First and foremost, can you post those summarized charts, with the datapoints?
Quote:
To me the rpm vs time graphs shows the effect of boost and timing best, without going to a dyno.
Do the slopes you produce on rpm mathematically (not just visually) correlate with boost at all? Do they correlate with mph? Have you tried to graph mph to time and see if it correlates more or less strongly to both boost or rpm? I have more on this below...
Quote:
Slopes in the trend line equations are the rate of change, or equivalent to quickness.
I agree on rate of change, assuming linear, but what you really want to do is slope of the slopes (second derivatives) because it's not exactly linear. What is your ultimate goal, e.g. how do you define "quickness?" Is it how quickly the car gets to 60mph, or maybe how quickly it covers a given distance, or some other metric? To me, boost and rpms and all that are just a means to an end, the end being how well the car accelerates, and what is its maximum speed for as long a time as possible. You could measure relative speed. If the distance is short enough, measure out the set distance, launch the car, record your times with each setting. You could measure acceleration - I think the JB4 records MPH and you could set the log rate to raw sampling or 2 seconds, then you would be able to see the second derivative (the rate of change of velocity over time a = dv/dt) approximating an acceleration curve.

I'm really curious why velocity over time is not a key metric in your measurements.

Obviously none of this substitutes for a dyno, which measures torque and power, increasing both of which would be my real end-game...
Quote:
Comparing map results must be done at the same IAT.
How do you control for IAT, since it correlates so strongly to results? Even with me injecting meth to lower IAT (which should yield better timing, etc), I can't see how you can control for a set IAT to experiment with?


2017 F23/M240i Convertible (B58) / 6MT / FF Wires / EWG Wires / BMS Air Intake / Stock Exhaust / BMS Meth (100%) / 93 Octane
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