01-10-2020, 12:03 PM | #67 | |
Banned
756
Rep 2,149
Posts |
Quote:
Ambient ~40F http://www.bootmod3.net/log?id=5e18b4b2c090c660d027da23 |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-10-2020, 10:34 PM | #68 | ||
Colonel
3179
Rep 2,577
Posts |
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Lemania 2320
|
||
Appreciate
0
|
01-23-2020, 11:54 AM | #69 | |
Lieutenant
280
Rep 488
Posts |
Quote:
I think that I will definitely give this a go tomorrow. Looking at my logs on some different tunes, the OTS 93 maps seem to be pushing the OEM HPFP too far (particularly in gears 2 or 3 on my car, higher gears are fine). With the Stage 2 93 log, the CSV actually shows that the drop is even more pronounced going down to 2042psi momentarily (target being 2450), but that isn’t picked up by the chart. Cheers. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-23-2020, 02:37 PM | #70 | |
Lieutenant
280
Rep 488
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-23-2020, 08:50 PM | #72 |
Colonel
3179
Rep 2,577
Posts |
A few of you guys really don't know what you're looking at...and always try to find something, and thus over interpret the HPFP drop from your logs.
The way they look, I wouldn't be concerned a bit. Suggesting using 91OCT map, it has nothing to do with the pump. Really need to listen to the point. That Halim didn't bother with a response is no surprise. Sean
__________________
Lemania 2320
|
Appreciate
1
Bee Pee1783.50 |
01-23-2020, 09:35 PM | #73 | |
Banned
756
Rep 2,149
Posts |
Quote:
There is literally no reason for someone to pay for a 93Oct map then be told to run the 91Oct map because the fuel pump can't handle it. Especially since the fuel pump isn't a listed upgraded need for the car. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-23-2020, 09:42 PM | #74 | ||
Colonel
3179
Rep 2,577
Posts |
Quote:
__________________
Lemania 2320
|
||
Appreciate
0
|
01-23-2020, 09:45 PM | #75 |
Banned
756
Rep 2,149
Posts |
Please explain how my pump is fine when it drops below target.
Last edited by Anthony1s; 01-23-2020 at 09:54 PM.. |
Appreciate
0
|
01-23-2020, 10:13 PM | #76 | |
Colonel
3179
Rep 2,577
Posts |
Quote:
A lot of things that doesn't meet target are not a problem. In some cases, it's even how it's designed, for example, top end post throttle boost. As human nature goes, you want to see everything perfectly in check but that's not the case with N55, or you leave too much on table to be happy with. There're priorities and trade offs here. In your case, if there is ever an issue, it's the octane. The ignition timing constantly corrects under extremely cool IAT, which is a warning, at least to me. The fact you paid for 93OCT map doesn't mean the gas you use is up to the task. Do a search and you'll know what I mean. I do not want to go into more basics, and certainly nor am I paid for that. Even PTF guys do not need to tell you more than what you need to do with "your problem", and how you should properly read your log. However I understand your frustration not having someone follow up your concern from logs. In the end log is big part of fun with BM3 platform. If you have the log or error shared of the limp mode, maybe there would be more to discuss outside of octane. Sean
__________________
Lemania 2320
|
|
Appreciate
1
widetyres280.00 |
01-23-2020, 10:21 PM | #77 | |
Banned
756
Rep 2,149
Posts |
Quote:
I also found this post from PTF about what to look for in fuel readings. Though it's for the N54, it shed some more light on things for me. https://www.e90post.com/forums/showp...26&postcount=1 My fault and thank you for being cool about it in your response, Sean. |
|
Appreciate
2
larry.beck217.00 widetyres280.00 |
01-24-2020, 02:33 AM | #78 |
Brigadier General
1784
Rep 4,525
Posts |
WT,
As Sean says already, logs look OK. How does the car feel / drive between 91Oct and 93Oct maps ? What fuel do you fill up with ? BP
__________________
Fettled M135i EB AT then AW M2 DCT - both gone but not forgotten:
Current '22 X3M LCI.. |
Appreciate
1
widetyres280.00 |
01-24-2020, 12:28 PM | #79 |
Brigadier General
2828
Rep 3,703
Posts |
For the guys concerned about HPFP drops, you’ll see in my Stg 2 5.8 E30 logs earlier in the thread that mine will drop to 1500-1600psi (with no issues) on the initial pull, and then stabilizes and meets target on subsequent pulls.
From doing a ton of logs, driving, and playing with E mixes, I’ve come to find the big HPFP psi drop is probably mostly because of how BMW programed the stock HPFP to respond. For instance, on the same drive I can have the car on cruise control for a while and if I do an immediate acceleration, the HPFP will dump every time. If I instead do a couple of half throttle applications and then punch it, the HPFP is fine. It seems like it’s something in BMW’s control algorithm for the pump that doesn’t let it respond quickly enough when it’s been chilling for a while and then you ask it to immediately max out. But, that takes me back to my Chemical Engineering process controls days that I don’t want to relive. Either way, down to 1500psi has been OK from my testing. |
Appreciate
1
widetyres280.00 |
01-24-2020, 12:43 PM | #80 | |
Lieutenant
280
Rep 488
Posts |
Quote:
Thanks for reviewing. TBH, I wasn’t that worried about the 93 logs, as they are only slight drops and I guessed that there would be headroom. But Anthony was also having issues so I started to wonder about it more, and these things start to work on your mind if you don’t have all the facts to dismiss them!!! I have checked my logs more thoroughly and the timing is all fine with only minor adjustments really, not like Anthony’s that are moving around a lot towards the top end. Most logs are on 99 Shell V Power. On stage 2, I'm having none of the knocking issues I was having with stage 1 on SVP. Logs are here (I would jump to the last pull/peak rev set in each) Full stage 2 91 log is here: http://www.bootmod3.net/log?id=5e29f639c090c67ba6b5cc3e (forgot to turn off DSC in this one) Full stage 2 93 log is here: http://www.bootmod3.net/log?id=5e14e6e0c090c66aa3637802 I have only driven the car briefly as stage 2 91. There is a big surge in the mid-range compared to 93, which can be seen in the charts (see revs silhouette), but it tails off sooner at the top end. My immediate thoughts were that the 91 map feels more like a turbo car – lots down lower in the revs, with not so much up top. The smoother building 93 map feeling more like NA in comparison, which seems happier to be at higher revs. I will stick with the 91 map for a bit and see how I like it. I will also do some identical pulls and compare the times (when I did that for Stage 1 91 vs 93, the 93 map was only 0.05 seconds faster = nothing in real terms!). Cheers. |
|
Appreciate
1
Bee Pee1783.50 |
01-24-2020, 12:45 PM | #81 | |
Lieutenant
280
Rep 488
Posts |
Quote:
In any case, it appears that everything is running fine, so happy with that! Cheers. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-28-2020, 09:25 AM | #82 |
Banned
756
Rep 2,149
Posts |
I did get a response from Halim today. He said that it's okay to drop 500PSI from target and it will start misfiring once it drops 1000PSI. He didn't mention anything about octane, so I assume my fuel quality is okay.
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-30-2020, 02:53 PM | #83 | |
Lieutenant
280
Rep 488
Posts |
Quote:
Re your octane, check out your timing on the upper revs - the timing advance is relatively low and changing constantly between cylinders - this is what Sean is referring to - you can compare with my logs above, which have more timing advance that is pretty stable across the cylinders. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-30-2020, 03:03 PM | #84 |
Lieutenant
280
Rep 488
Posts |
Having run the stage 2 91 map for a little while now (using decent 99ron fuel) I can actually say that I much prefer it over 93 map.
There is much more shove down low and it pulls really well to 6k. Sure it tapers off above that, but it's so well delivered before then that I honestly don't mind. As I mentioned before, it feels much more like a turbo'd car compared to the 93 map, but in a good/fun way. Imo it feels like there is slightly less lag. And certainly on the motorway the torque in 5th and 6th is noticeably stronger in the mid range, and I find I'm down shifting less. Also, since moving to the 93 map with fresh ps4s, the engine couldn't really over power the tyre's grip, even on damp roads. However, the stg 2 91 map can very easily spin the rears if asked to. Highly recommend giving it a try, even if you don't have octane issues. |
Appreciate
0
|
01-30-2020, 03:10 PM | #85 |
Brigadier General
2828
Rep 3,703
Posts |
Question for you guys:
When going WOT, I’ve got a decent bit more lag in Comfort (and MDM) & Sport (and DSC off), vs Sport+. Is this typical? It seemed like this got worse when the Wagner Evo II Comp when on, but I’m curious how much is tune related, as well? |
Appreciate
1
TargaM22495.50 |
01-30-2020, 07:11 PM | #86 | |
Lieutenant Colonel
1120
Rep 1,644
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-31-2020, 01:17 AM | #87 | ||
Lieutenant
280
Rep 488
Posts |
Quote:
Imo stage 1 doesn't really exist on this car, as the stock ic becomes overloaded extremely quickly. The stage 1 93 is imo the worst of the ots maps. If you are on stage 1, I would recommend switching to the 91 map - much more fun - sure, perhaps peak power is less than 93, but 90% of the rest of the rev range is better. |
||
Appreciate
0
|
01-31-2020, 01:52 AM | #88 | |
Lieutenant
280
Rep 488
Posts |
Quote:
I too noticed additional lag with larger ic. Imo the lag on stg2 91 is slightly less noticeable than stg2 93. Search re gfb dv+ to reduce lag. That combined with the pure turbo inlet pipe is supposed to make a big difference. I haven't done these yet but plan too (shame they such a bitch to fit) |
|
Appreciate
2
ZM22827.50 ngliuxiang37.50 |
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
|
|