[Rife]

Hi all

I am having some issues with my M2

About 8 months ago, I decided to start modding my car
Started replacing the DP by an HJS 300 cells and my IC by Wagner Evo2 Comp
Tuner did a remap and all went well. It was putting down 440bhp (350whp) and 585Nm of torque. Awesome!

This setup ran for almost 12k kms until the moment I came across with some tuners who were able to extract a bit more from the engine with a simple LPFP and piping replacement
Thus, I ordered charge&turbo pipes from Forge and a Walbro450 hopping to achieve a bit more

Those parts were installed and it was the moment when the nightmare began!
We put the car on the dyno and it is making less power than before with the same file.
We checked the timing advance and turbo pressure and above 4000rpms both drop significantly
We also noticed that the fuel pressure drops above 4000 rpms from 194 bar to 130 bar. The OEM target is 190 flat from 4000 rpm onwards. We decided to put back the old LPFP and re-dynoed it and got the same figures

Next step will be to put back the old pipes and see if this gets solved
We have tested it with the spark plugs and coils from another M2 and did not solve

Any clue?

Currently my BMW M2 LCI has 19k kms on its odometer

Thanks in advance

Cheers
RF

[cecaa850]

I'm assuming that they checked for air leaks on the new pipes?

[Rife]

Originally Posted by cecaa850

I'm assuming that they checked for air leaks on the new pipes?

Yes, we have done that
All fine

[cecaa850]

It has to be something that happened during the install of the new parts. Kinked fuel line? They just need to carefully go over everything they touched. If they were competent you shouldn't have to be going on a forum for help. Don't take anything that they did or said for granted. It's time to start double checking everything.

[x7289155]

self inflicted problem. if you want 500hp.. why dont you put the money on an m3?

[SeanWRT]

It isn't necessarily an issue with the newly installed hardware.

First of all, dyno reads differently at different times. You don't expect power gains please from pre and post intercooler piping and LPFP. No one does.

The drop of rail pressure down to 130bar (1900psi) is at the edge but most of time it's not low enough for DME to pull back load. And timing falling is a direct result of the lack of octane for the boost/IAT that you're dealing with.

It looks to me the software may be flawed in your particular case in the first place. I would be asking to adjust it.

[Rife]

thanks for your replies

Tuner has been asking for more fuel at the top end, but it seems that HPFP fails to deliver even the OEM target (190)
I suspect that the OEM HPFP is failing. After 12k kms of being on its limit plus the new demand and more capacity of the Walbro450, it is, probably, causing this failure

Even with the OEM map struggles to deliver the fuel

I always fill up the tank with 98RON. Moreover, we added an Octane booster

[Lukeni]

Originally Posted by Rife

thanks for your replies

Tuner has been asking for more fuel at the top end, but it seems that HPFP fails to deliver even the OEM target (190)
I suspect that the OEM HPFP is failing. After 12k kms of being on its limit plus the new demand and more capacity of the Walbro450, it is, probably, causing this failure

Even with the OEM map struggles to deliver the fuel

I always fill up the tank with 98RON. Moreover, we added an Octane booster

Might be a bit offtopic but....350wph does not translate to 440 at the crank in my books. More like 400-410.

Maybe the first tests were just wrong and now you are not able to reprpduce since the dyno is now correctly dialed in?

[ICantDrive4Sht]

Originally Posted by Lukeni

Might be a bit offtopic but....350wph does not translate to 440 at the crank in my books. More like 400-410.

Maybe the first tests were just wrong and now you are not able to reprpduce since the dyno is now correctly dialed in?

You're correct about that hp. No N55 makes 440 crank hp with stock turbo and fuelling, it's impossible, after reading that i really didnt take this post seriously.

[Rife]

Originally Posted by ICantDrive4Sht

You're correct about that hp. No N55 makes 440 crank hp with stock turbo and fuelling, it's impossible, after reading that i really didnt take this post seriously.

image attached

[Lukeni]

This looks like a stock power curve, definitly not making 440hp at the crank with 350ish at the wheels. The powerdrop and the power peak is way too stock'ish. Wondering if the software ever has worked correct.

Edit: have you ever done a baseline run?

[Rife]

I will look for it
Nevertheless, my car was running 100-200kph in 9,25s.
Stock map on the same road and pretty much the same temperature outside did 10,93s

Both measures were taken with M Analyzer via OBD port

[Lukeni]

Originally Posted by Rife

I will look for it
Nevertheless, my car was running 100-200kph in 9,25s.
Stock map on the same road and pretty much the same temperature outside did 10,93s

Both measures were taken with M Analyzer via OBD port

9.25 sounds healthy i have to admit

[Rife]

9.30s actually

Sadly, it is not the case anymore
I guess the HPFP passed away

[SeanWRT]

Originally Posted by Rife

image attached

Originally Posted by Lukeni

This looks like a stock power curve, definitly not making 440hp at the crank with 350ish at the wheels. The powerdrop and the power peak is way too stock'ish. Wondering if the software ever has worked correct.

Edit: have you ever done a baseline run?

The graph shows the CRANK TQ/HP, where the values are hugely affected by the ramping up DRAG (considered by Dynamometer as drivetrain loss), the curve of which is at the bottom of the chart.

Wheel TQ/HP should be the crank curve MINUS Drag curve. And in OP's case, WTQ and WHP would have shown a very very quick falling down.

[Lukeni]

Originally Posted by SeanWRT

The graph shows the CRANK TQ/HP, where the values are hugely affected by the ramping up DRAG (considered by Dynamometer as drivetrain loss), the curve of which is at the bottom of the chart.

Wheel TQ/HP should be the crank curve MINUS Drag curve. And in OP's case, WTQ and WHP would have shown a very very quick falling down.

Primarily wondering about the huge drive train loss factor (over 20%)