BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
M2 Technical Topics > N55 Engine / Drivetrain / Exhaust / Bolt-ons / Tuning > N55-M2 OTS map version 5.8 is out for 93 and E30 octane

Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      01-10-2020, 12:03 PM   #67
Anthony1s
Lieutenant Colonel
1243
Rep
1,825
Posts

Drives: 2018 Mineral Grey M2
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Pennsylvania

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony1s View Post
I got you, Sean.

Ambient ~26F

http://www.bootmod3.net/log?id=5e179de4c090c660d027d6a2
http://www.bootmod3.net/log?id=5e179d34c090c660d027d69b

My observations:
Seems my HPFP isn't hitting target now, was fine in summer
Coolant temp is 20+ degrees hotter than summer
Timing is a bit more stable across cylinders compared to summer
MAF lb/min is higher compared to summer. So making quite a bit more power. I think 20-50hp more if we assume 1lb/min=10hp
And here is another. I was on the AGG tune previously, this one is regular.
Ambient ~40F

http://www.bootmod3.net/log?id=5e18b4b2c090c660d027da23
__________________
Click "Appreciate" on my post if I was helpful. Thanks!
Appreciate 0
      01-10-2020, 10:34 PM   #68
SeanWRT
Colonel
SeanWRT's Avatar
2571
Rep
2,341
Posts

Drives: E90 M3 & F87 M2
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Shanghai

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony1s View Post
And here is another. I was on the AGG tune previously, this one is regular.
Ambient ~40F

http://www.bootmod3.net/log?id=5e18b4b2c090c660d027da23
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony1s View Post
I got you, Sean.

Ambient ~26F

http://www.bootmod3.net/log?id=5e179de4c090c660d027d6a2
http://www.bootmod3.net/log?id=5e179d34c090c660d027d69b

My observations:
Seems my HPFP isn't hitting target now, was fine in summer
Coolant temp is 20+ degrees hotter than summer
Timing is a bit more stable across cylinders compared to summer
MAF lb/min is higher compared to summer. So making quite a bit more power. I think 20-50hp more if we assume 1lb/min=10hp
If you're using about the best OCT you can get, I'd give 91OCT map a try, could run same or even more power and more safely.
__________________
Lemania 2320
Appreciate 0
      01-23-2020, 11:54 AM   #69
widetyres
Second Lieutenant
United Kingdom
114
Rep
266
Posts

Drives: M2 6MT, 2016
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: UK

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by SeanWRT View Post
If you're using about the best OCT you can get, I'd give 91OCT map a try, could run same or even more power and more safely.
Hi,

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 isnít picked up by the chart.

Cheers.
Attached Images
   
Appreciate 0
      01-23-2020, 02:37 PM   #70
widetyres
Second Lieutenant
United Kingdom
114
Rep
266
Posts

Drives: M2 6MT, 2016
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: UK

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by widetyres View Post
Hi,

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 isnít picked up by the chart.

Cheers.
It's even worse with the Stage 2 91 map....
Attached Images
 
Appreciate 0
      01-23-2020, 02:43 PM   #71
widetyres
Second Lieutenant
United Kingdom
114
Rep
266
Posts

Drives: M2 6MT, 2016
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: UK

iTrader: (0)

And another going even lower! (to 2150, when target is 2450)
Attached Images
 
Appreciate 0
      01-23-2020, 08:50 PM   #72
SeanWRT
Colonel
SeanWRT's Avatar
2571
Rep
2,341
Posts

Drives: E90 M3 & F87 M2
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Shanghai

iTrader: (1)

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 Pee1296.50

      01-23-2020, 09:35 PM   #73
Anthony1s
Lieutenant Colonel
1243
Rep
1,825
Posts

Drives: 2018 Mineral Grey M2
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Pennsylvania

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by SeanWRT View Post
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
Care to share you wisdom about why it's not an issue instead of being condescending , oh wise one.

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.
__________________
Click "Appreciate" on my post if I was helpful. Thanks!
Appreciate 0
      01-23-2020, 09:42 PM   #74
SeanWRT
Colonel
SeanWRT's Avatar
2571
Rep
2,341
Posts

Drives: E90 M3 & F87 M2
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Shanghai

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony1s View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeanWRT View Post
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
Care to share you wisdom about why it's not an issue instead of being condescending , oh wise one.

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.
Anthony, your pump is fine, but oct is not.
__________________
Lemania 2320
Appreciate 0
      01-23-2020, 09:45 PM   #75
Anthony1s
Lieutenant Colonel
1243
Rep
1,825
Posts

Drives: 2018 Mineral Grey M2
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Pennsylvania

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by SeanWRT View Post
Anthony, your pump is fine, but oct is not.
Please explain how my pump is fine when it drops below target.
__________________
Click "Appreciate" on my post if I was helpful. Thanks!

Last edited by Anthony1s; 01-23-2020 at 09:54 PM..
Appreciate 0
      01-23-2020, 10:13 PM   #76
SeanWRT
Colonel
SeanWRT's Avatar
2571
Rep
2,341
Posts

Drives: E90 M3 & F87 M2
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Shanghai

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony1s View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeanWRT View Post
Anthony, your pump is fine, but oct is not.
Please explain how my pump is fine when it drops below target and the car goes into limp mode.

Octane doesn't address the issue either because I've paid for a 93Oct tune. So there is 100% an issue that I need to run a different tune.

There are two issues that have to be explained. The pump issue. Why it's dropping below target and why that is apparently okay.

Then the second issue of being sold a tune that I cannot use.
Rail pressure drop was already there since a decade ago. There is a general acceptance standard of how low FPH(one of useful jb4 readings) can go with no issue established in the JB4 world. Above 2kpsi(13+) do not meet the threshold.

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
widetyres113.50

      01-23-2020, 10:21 PM   #77
Anthony1s
Lieutenant Colonel
1243
Rep
1,825
Posts

Drives: 2018 Mineral Grey M2
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Pennsylvania

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by SeanWRT View Post
Rail pressure drop was already there since a decade ago. There is a general acceptance standard of how low FPH(one of useful jb4 readings) can go with no issue established in the JB4 world. Above 2kpsi(13+) do not meet the threshold.

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", not how you 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
Haha, caught my post before I edited it. I removed the limp mode part because I don't have proof it was related to the tune and didn't want to muddy the convo. And I used it as a "if there is nothing wrong then why did my car go into limp mode" as some "i told you so thing" Which wasn't right.

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.
__________________
Click "Appreciate" on my post if I was helpful. Thanks!
Appreciate 2
      01-24-2020, 02:33 AM   #78
Bee Pee
Brigadier General
United Kingdom
1297
Rep
4,059
Posts

Drives: AW M2 DCT
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: SW London

iTrader: (3)

Quote:
Originally Posted by widetyres View Post
And another going even lower! (to 2150, when target is 2450)
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 - gone but not forgotten:
AW M2 DCT
Appreciate 1
widetyres113.50

      01-24-2020, 12:28 PM   #79
ZM2
Lieutenant Colonel
1092
Rep
1,767
Posts

Drives: 2017 LBB M2
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Baltimore

iTrader: (0)

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
widetyres113.50

      01-24-2020, 12:43 PM   #80
widetyres
Second Lieutenant
United Kingdom
114
Rep
266
Posts

Drives: M2 6MT, 2016
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: UK

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bee Pee View Post
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
Hi,

Thanks for reviewing.

TBH, I wasnít 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 donít 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 Anthonyís 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 Ė 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 Pee1296.50

      01-24-2020, 12:45 PM   #81
widetyres
Second Lieutenant
United Kingdom
114
Rep
266
Posts

Drives: M2 6MT, 2016
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: UK

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by SeanWRT View Post
Rail pressure drop was already there since a decade ago. There is a general acceptance standard of how low FPH(one of useful jb4 readings) can go with no issue established in the JB4 world. Above 2kpsi(13+) do not meet the threshold.

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
For me, I’m not sure octane is the issue as the dips are more pronounced with the 91 map (still while running 99RON/92.5AKI). If octane was the issue, then I would have expected the 91 map to cope better?

In any case, it appears that everything is running fine, so happy with that!

Cheers.
Appreciate 0
      01-28-2020, 09:25 AM   #82
Anthony1s
Lieutenant Colonel
1243
Rep
1,825
Posts

Drives: 2018 Mineral Grey M2
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Pennsylvania

iTrader: (0)

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.
__________________
Click "Appreciate" on my post if I was helpful. Thanks!
Appreciate 0
      01-30-2020, 02:53 PM   #83
widetyres
Second Lieutenant
United Kingdom
114
Rep
266
Posts

Drives: M2 6MT, 2016
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: UK

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony1s View Post
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.
Hi,

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
widetyres
Second Lieutenant
United Kingdom
114
Rep
266
Posts

Drives: M2 6MT, 2016
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: UK

iTrader: (0)

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
ZM2
Lieutenant Colonel
1092
Rep
1,767
Posts

Drives: 2017 LBB M2
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Baltimore

iTrader: (0)

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 0
      01-30-2020, 07:11 PM   #86
PackPride85
Major
United_States
768
Rep
1,223
Posts

Drives: M2
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: NC

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by widetyres View Post
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.
We're you comparing stage 2 91 vs 93? Would be curious to see the difference between stage 1 93 and stage 2 91
Appreciate 0
      01-31-2020, 01:17 AM   #87
widetyres
Second Lieutenant
United Kingdom
114
Rep
266
Posts

Drives: M2 6MT, 2016
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: UK

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by PackPride85 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by widetyres View Post
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.
We're you comparing stage 2 91 vs 93? Would be curious to see the difference between stage 1 93 and stage 2 91
I wasn't impressed with stage 1 93 - far too gentle in power delivery (even more so than stock). There was no "drama" at all. Plus it pushed the ic to the max and its was easy to get octane/knocking issues as a result.

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
widetyres
Second Lieutenant
United Kingdom
114
Rep
266
Posts

Drives: M2 6MT, 2016
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: UK

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ZM2 View Post
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?
Yep, that's normal between the modes.

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
ZM21092.00

Post Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:32 AM.




m2
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST