[Anthony1s]

Originally Posted by SeanWRT

I'm not with you on the logic here. And I just don't feel right to see this misinfo spreading in the air.

It's actually simple and very basic - you don't want to know misfire by misfiring your engine.

Driving with a misfire engine (often casued by bad plug or actual imbalanced air/fuel mixture to specific ECU calibration) does physical harm to the engine, no mention of the car accident it adds chances to happen.

A direct result of misfire is the engine vibration (among others), it's especially harmful at high load, and is very sensible to the driver in the cabin. It literally means the rest of the rod/pistion assembly trying to bend your crankshaft which adds significant stress to the components the assembly machenically works with. That's why CEL will be thrown upon misfire.

It's a very protective thing to know the E mixture to make sure you don't have less than needed E in your tank to run the map.

Appologies for my bad english.

Sean

I wasn't recommending that he use misfires to tell when to add better fuel, but was saying I didn't see a difference an ethanol sensor would make in his course of action.

I realize now, if he has an ethanol sensor he can drive gently until it gives a reading, and drive gently if it has a low reading, to prevent misfires until he can get more fuel or uses up the fuel in the take to fit more fuel.

[ZM2]

I appreciate everyone's input & feedback above, but it turns out the issue was not ignition or fuel quality related. Let's call it user error, and a learning experience.

One of my tunes kept having drivability, power, and HPFP issues. The other did not.

When I did my last flash back to the tune that doesn't have any problems, I didn't do a Full Flash, just a quick flash. Apparently, not all the HPFP coding from the tune that I was having problems with got cleared out and started causing problems with the tune I originally didn't have issues with.

You all know all the things I tried to diagnose the problem, but it never 100% went away. So, I reloaded the good tune via Full Flash and instantly all problems are gone and my good tune is back to being a great tune! I'll drive the car more over the coming week to confirm, but the change in the car's behavior is very significant so I'm betting this was the problem all along.

So, sorry for wasting you all's time and I feel like an idiot, but hopefully my notes here help someone else from experiencing this as they're tuning with a larger HPFP.

Of note, I didn't have to do a Full Flash the first time I fired up the car with the Dorch HPFP, just check the box, do a quick flash and it worked perfect. It was only when I was going between a map with Custom HPFP settings and a map with the Dorch setting that I needed to do a Full Flash. I was doing Full Flashes every time prior, but did a quick Flash the last time and that's what caused my good tune to exhibit some of the same issues as my bad tune.

Dyno curves coming in a couple weeks.

[JKen_0115]

Originally Posted by ZM2

I appreciate everyone's input & feedback above, but it turns out the issue was not ignition or fuel quality related. Let's call it user error, and a learning experience.

One of my tunes kept having drivability, power, and HPFP issues. The other did not.

When I did my last flash back to the tune that doesn't have any problems, I didn't do a Full Flash, just a quick flash. Apparently, not all the HPFP coding from the tune that I was having problems with got cleared out and started causing problems with the tune I originally didn't have issues with.

You all know all the things I tried to diagnose the problem, but it never 100% went away. So, I reloaded the good tune via Full Flash and instantly all problems are gone and my good tune is back to being a great tune! I'll drive the car more over the coming week to confirm, but the change in the car's behavior is very significant so I'm betting this was the problem all along.

So, sorry for wasting you all's time and I feel like an idiot, but hopefully my notes here help someone else from experiencing this as they're tuning with a larger HPFP.

Of note, I didn't have to do a Full Flash the first time I fired up the car with the Dorch HPFP, just check the box, do a quick flash and it worked perfect. It was only when I was going between a map with Custom HPFP settings and a map with the Dorch setting that I needed to do a Full Flash. I was doing Full Flashes every time prior, but did a quick Flash the last time and that's what caused my good tune to exhibit some of the same issues as my bad tune.

Dyno curves coming in a couple weeks.

Hi, do you have any new progress or result?

[ZM2]

Originally Posted by JKen_0115

Hi, do you have any new progress or result?

Hey there.

All the Dynojet’s around here have about a 3-week waiting list bc of COVID-19 and I ended up having to reschedule bc I had some house work come up and I had to take one of my dogs in for surgery on my dyno day. Everything is good, but I’m not rescheduled until early Sept.

Halim’s maps have been running great and he sent over one more revision that I’ll dyno, as well, just to see which is putting down more power.

So, it’ll be a few more weeks.

[Daleb]

Here’s some 100-200kph results from a stock turbo n55 M2 with Dorch stage 1 and e40 fuel.



This is a good 1.2-1.5s quicker than the bm3 e30 ots map from my testing. Very impressive results and basically right up there with the stock turbo b58 guys.

[designatedposter]

does that record with with a datalog??

[designatedposter]

Originally Posted by Dec540

I'm working with him on an OTS tune a the moment that I think he is going to try make public in the not too distant future. The tune I'm working with him on is an E30-E40 mix though.

If you're going stage 2 Dorch I'm guessing you want to run higher E mixes?

OTS tune for n55 stock turbo, upgraded HPFP?

[Andi-M2]

Originally Posted by Daleb

Here’s some 100-200kph results from a stock turbo n55 M2 with Dorch stage 1 and e40 fuel.



This is a good 1.2-1.5s quicker than the bm3 e30 ots map from my testing. Very impressive results and basically right up there with the stock turbo b58 guys.

Impressive numbers!
This M2 has at least 540hp. Otherwise you don't reach these times.

[ZM2]

Originally Posted by Andi-M2

Impressive numbers!
This M2 has at least 540hp. Otherwise you don't reach these times.

There’s no way it has that much power. Dorch Stage 1 won’t hold up on E40 with that kind of hp. Stage 2, sure.

Let’s see a dyno and some logs, and then we’ll confirm.

[Daleb]

Originally Posted by Andi-M2

Impressive numbers!
This M2 has at least 540hp. Otherwise you don't reach these times.

The owner had the car dyno'd and it made 418whp on that particular dyno.

Originally Posted by ZM2

There’s no way it has that much power. Dorch Stage 1 won’t hold up on E40 with that kind of hp. Stage 2, sure.

Let’s see a dyno and some logs, and then we’ll confirm.

As above regarding the dyno, logs would be nice to see.

Personally the draggy data is far more reliable than any dyno graph, seen too much variance in numbers for dyno numbers to be meaningful, IMO.

The B58 guys seem far more accepting of this and have a dedicated thread with many posting 100-200kph or 60-130mph times, it would be cool to see some more n55 guys follow suit.

[ZM2]

Originally Posted by Daleb

The owner had the car dyno'd and it made 418whp on that particular dyno.



As above regarding the dyno, logs would be nice to see.

Personally the draggy data is far more reliable than any dyno graph, seen too much variance in numbers for dyno numbers to be meaningful, IMO.

The B58 guys seem far more accepting of this and have a dedicated thread with many posting 100-200kph or 60-130mph times, it would be cool to see some more n55 guys follow suit.

I made a little more than that on a Dynojet with an earlier tune version from Halim and will be posting up results from my final tune when I hit the dyno next week.

Not expecting too much more on the final tune, as I’m Dorch Stage 1, Dinan turbo, and E45, but it’s running good!

Looks like I need to get some Draggy numbers and a -0.5% sloped road like that guy did, not to mention cool weather which won’t be here anytime soon.

[Daleb]

Originally Posted by ZM2

I made a little more than that on a Dynojet with an earlier tune version from Halim and will be posting up results from my final tune when I hit the dyno next week.

Not expecting too much more on the final tune, as I’m Dorch Stage 1, Dinan turbo, and E45, but it’s running good!

Looks like I need to get some Draggy numbers and a -0.5% sloped road like that guy did, not to mention cool weather which won’t be here anytime soon.

if anything your car should have a little more potential with the stage 1 turbo upgrade, this 7.3s run was with the stock turbo.

Definitely get some draggy numbers, that would be good to see and compare

[ZM2]

Originally Posted by Daleb

if anything your car should have a little more potential with the stage 1 turbo upgrade, this 7.3s run was with the stock turbo.

Definitely get some draggy numbers, that would be good to see and compare

Yeah. Altho, the more we tune with the Dinan turbo, the more it seems hardly better than stock. Let’s call it a Stage 0.5 turbo.

The good thing is there’s no lag and spool up is super fast, so it’s a ton of fun around town.

Will post up some numbers when I have them!

[Andi-M2]

Originally Posted by ZM2

There’s no way it has that much power. Dorch Stage 1 won’t hold up on E40 with that kind of hp. Stage 2, sure.

Let’s see a dyno and some logs, and then we’ll confirm.

With regard to many other tuned N55/S55 M2 - upgrade turbo or not - you need much more than 500hp to get 100-200 times lower than 8s.
The wide tyres and a bad cw-value are counterproductive for those exercises. In comparison, one of the reasons for all this fast B58 140i/240i, btw...

Another option would be, that the brazil M2 weighs under 1.400kg.

But a 7,3s with only 418whp? No way, sorry.

[ZM2]

Originally Posted by Andi-M2

With regard to many other tuned N55/S55 M2 - upgrade turbo or not - you need much more than 500hp to get 100-200 times lower than 8s.
The wide tyres and a bad cw-value are counterproductive for those exercises. In comparison, one of the reasons for all this fast B58 140i/240i, btw...

Another option would be, that the brazil M2 weighs under 1.400kg.

But a 7,3s with only 418whp? No way, sorry.

Yeah, I think the 100-200 times have just as much variability as dyno’s. Temps, roads, tires, aero, weight, power, etc are all different even from the same car model to car model and can be run to run.

But, no one’s making 460whp on a Dynojet with the stock turbo to get 540 engine hp, and from my logs the Dorch Stage 1 won’t support that much power on an E40 mix, and Dorch confirmed this. But, they do have some nice high quality sugarcane ethanol there, vs our corn flex fuel here.

So, where’s the discrepancy? I think he’s got the perfect mix of tarmac, cool temps, and low elevation to help him out.

[Dec540]

7.30 is an epic time, especially for the stage 1 HPFP and an E40 mix.

I'm a bit dubious as I've got the same tuner and I'm running the stage 2 HPFP with E85. Albeit on BM3 but I can't imagine the different platform makes any difference when you're flashing a custom tune.

My best time that I've managed is an 8.46 per attached. Slightly different temp and elevation but not drastically different, considering I should be running a lot more timing with E85.

I'd love to see logs from his car to compare differences.

[Daleb]

Originally Posted by Andi-M2

With regard to many other tuned N55/S55 M2 - upgrade turbo or not - you need much more than 500hp to get 100-200 times lower than 8s.
The wide tyres and a bad cw-value are counterproductive for those exercises. In comparison, one of the reasons for all this fast B58 140i/240i, btw...

Another option would be, that the brazil M2 weighs under 1.400kg.

But a 7,3s with only 418whp? No way, sorry.

I suppose it depends on the accuracy of the dyno?

Here in the UK a bm3 stage 1 m2c would dyno around 500bhp and cover 100-200 in high 6/low 7. The cs+ map which sits between the the oem map and stage 1 map runs mid 7s 100-200.

I've seen a large variance in n55 upgraded turbo times with some barely breaking the 8s 100-200 mark which is very poor imo. If those cars are truly making 500bhp + they should be at least 1s quicker.

I've questioned the owner about weight reduction, will update when I hear back.

EDIT: owner removed rear bench and passenger seat, around 70kg according to him. That weight removal would net a few tenths from my experience so it’s still a mid 7s car full weight.

[Daleb]

Originally Posted by Dec540

7.30 is an epic time, especially for the stage 1 HPFP and an E40 mix.

I'm a bit dubious as I've got the same tuner and I'm running the stage 2 HPFP with E85. Albeit on BM3 but I can't imagine the different platform makes any difference when you're flashing a custom tune.

My best time that I've managed is an 8.46 per attached. Slightly different temp and elevation but not drastically different, considering I should be running a lot more timing with E85.

I'd love to see logs from his car to compare differences.

Interesting difference considering you both use the same tuner, you'd gain maybe a few tenths with a single figure temp.

I'm surprised at your time given your mods, my car on bm3 stage 2 98 OTS run 8.7 and another car here in the UK went faster at 8.6s. Thats on 99 Ron fuel and oem fuel pump.

You would expect the extra timing and load you can run with the HPFP and e85 would net more than a few tenths. Do you have any 100-200 times pre HPFP and e85?

[Leonidm2]

Originally Posted by Daleb

Interesting difference considering you both use the same tuner, you'd gain maybe a few tenths with a single figure temp.

I'm surprised at your time given your mods, my car on bm3 stage 2 98 OTS run 8.7 and another car here in the UK went faster at 8.6s. Thats on 99 Ron fuel and oem fuel pump.

You would expect the extra timing and load you can run with the HPFP and e85 would net more than a few tenths. Do you have any 100-200 times pre HPFP and e85?

Hi, 8.7- 100-200, this is 5.8 ots map? I still in 5.7( have 8.8 100-200 on 98ron)

[Anthony1s]

Haha, no way the rear seats are 70kg. That's 155lbs. I have mine removed, it's like 50lbs tops. Lots of others have documented the weight too.

[Daleb]

Originally Posted by Leonidm2

Hi, 8.7- 100-200, this is 5.8 ots map? I still in 5.7( have 8.8 100-200 on 98ron)

Yes both the times were on the stage 2 98 5.8 ots.

[Daleb]

Originally Posted by Anthony1s

Haha, no way the rear seats are 70kg. That's 155lbs. I have mine removed, it's like 50lbs tops. Lots of others have documented the weight too.

Read again, also includes the passenger seat.