[enrita]

i guess its a matter of taste. i prefer the way it is now. more ignition advance and less abrupt boost at low rpm. Gives a smoother drive and more "feeling".

[dzenno]

...and it provides for a lot better part throttle AFRs...I prefer current setup as it's really a better tune...

[jpsimon]

Originally Posted by dzenno

...and it provides for a lot better part throttle AFRs...I prefer current setup as it's really a better tune...

agreed, current feel is great

[cn555ic]

Originally Posted by jpsimon

agreed, current feel is great

Both you and Enrita are running upgraded turbos so maybe its different than running the stockers...I also feel the 12-17 maps rock as for the boost during lower rpms

[Glowin]

Originally Posted by dzenno

...and it provides for a lot better part throttle AFRs...I prefer current setup as it's really a better tune...

I can say that the partial throttle AFR's are WAY better. I was on the last map in V4 (8-17) and was constantly having partial throttle AFR issues, especially if going up a hill. I had even done the update to the harness, but no good. Car would hiccup if I didn't let off the gas and then get back on it, and AFR's would shoot up to the high teens.

This new map doesn't seem to do that, but I definitely miss the boost onset of the old maps. As I jumped from those maps straight to this one, I can't tell where the difference happened in the V5 maps, but it's night and day for sure.

For example, cruising on the highway, third gear (I've got a 6MT), if I got on the gas at like 20 to 30% throttle, the car would jump. Now, I have to mash the pedal to get the same feeling.

This might be blasphemy... But a friend has a stock auto 535 that I drove for a bit, and in DS mode, I swear, his car is more responsive!

[TurboBimmer]

Originally Posted by Glowin

This new map doesn't seem to do that, but I definitely miss the boost onset of the old maps. As I jumped from those maps straight to this one, I can't tell where the difference happened in the V5 maps, but it's night and day for sure.

For example, cruising on the highway, third gear (I've got a 6MT), if I got on the gas at like 20 to 30% throttle, the car would jump. Now, I have to mash the pedal to get the same feeling.

+1 the crisp throttle response was one major thing I missed when I switched from V4 to the JB4. Too bad that seems to be gone with the V5. I want that "riding a bullet" feeling, where the car just takes off when you tip in the throttle Or at least make it adjustable.

[335i-boy]

Originally Posted by cn555ic

Both you and Enrita are running upgraded turbos so maybe its different than running the stockers...I also feel the 12-17 maps rock as for the boost during lower rpms

+1

Throttle response on the 12-17 maps is way better than with the latest releases. Would slight adjustment of the "Boost Response" settings take care of any Under Boost codes that a few users were getting?

Can we please have the throttle response of the 12-17 maps back in the next map release.

[NiVeDh]

Agreed, the 5-10 maps feel less powerful at low RPM than the 3-30 maps.

[C4sF80M3]

Originally Posted by dzenno

...and it provides for a lot better part throttle AFRs...I prefer current setup as it's really a better tune...

I agree that part throttle response and normal drivability is far superior. I love the power that this car has in the low load/low boost conditions. However, I don't see why that should be a trade off in the high load, full throttle conditions. In fact why try to regulate in the lower rpms at all? One of the things I loved about my Z's boost response is that the only thing that controlled boost until desired pressure was reached was my foot! You want light boost, part throttle. You want full boost, full throttle. Of course the boost controller regulated the response, how much boost, and "over boost" I wanted to allow. But overall the waste gates were pinned shut until those levels were reached. I even liked how I could give the turbos higher boost in the lower rpms and have it taper off to desired pressure in the 4k+ range. Sort of a let The turbos boost what they can in the sub 4k range. Because 17-20 psi is okay in the lower rpm range. And with these small of turbos, why not take advantage of their quick boosting capability?

So basically I would like more power/torque in the lower rpm range, instead of worrying about peak capability beyond 6k. On the track coming out of slow turns, low end torque is everything. That and a little more fuel enrichment above 4k, around 11.5:1, instead of 12.5:1.

[DaFish]

Originally Posted by NiVeDh

Agreed, the 5-10 maps feel less powerful at low RPM than the 3-30 maps.

I drove today for a couple of hours and DEFINTELY noticed less power from 2.5 RPM to 4. At 4k RPM, the car takes off.... (the analogy is the M3 - except it is 2,000 RPM higher 5k to 8k power band.... )

The beauty of the 335 is the low end torque that we had in the earlier maps - that I and others loved. I don't want to wait for 4k for the thing to pull... I want it back where it was.

I also have boost response at 100% and it is not fixing this problem.

Questions for Vishnu:
1) will 5-25 maps fix this issue?
2) will 5-25 AUTOTUNING fix this issue?

if not, then I will have to consider not going with this release ... and miss out on traction control, DIC and autotuning (combined) - I'd try it of course.

I don't know why we can't have all of this AND the lower torque at 2 or 2.5k

Bump if you agree.

[NM_BMW]

Originally Posted by DaFish

I drove today for a couple of hours and DEFINTELY noticed less power from 2.5 RPM to 4. At 4k RPM, the car takes off.... (the analogy is the M3 - except it is 2,000 RPM higher 5k to 8k power band.... )

The beauty of the 335 is the low end torque that we had in the earlier maps - that I and others loved. I don't want to wait for 4k for the thing to pull... I want it back where it was.

I also have boost response at 100% and it is not fixing this problem.

Questions for Vishnu:
1) will 5-25 maps fix this issue?
2) will 5-25 AUTOTUNING fix this issue?

if not, then I will have to consider not going with this release ... and miss out on traction control, DIC and autotuning (combined) - I'd try it of course.

I don't know why we can't have all of this AND the lower torque at 2 or 2.5k

Bump if you agree.

Feeling the same.... Car lags until you get up to 4k.

[cn555ic]

Just go back to 12-17 for now and you should be happy until something comes along. 12-17 has that feeling that your looking for

[TurboBimmer]

Originally Posted by cn555ic

Just go back to 12-17 for now and you should be happy until something comes along. 12-17 has that feeling that your looking for

I don't want to go through the same *!$!* again, but please remember that the V4 12-17 maps aren't an option for all of us. Only the latest V5 5-10 maps seem to fix all the issues/bugs previous versions had.

But now we're lacking power down low. Input from Vishnu on this would be very welcome...

[cn555ic]

Originally Posted by Autobahn335i

I don't want to go throught the same *!$!* again, but please remember that the V4 12-17 maps aren't an option for all of us. Only the latest V5 5-10 maps seem to fix all the issues/bugs previous versions had.

But now we're lacking power down low. Input from Vishnu on this would be very welcome...

I think 12-17 maps were already V5.

[TurboBimmer]

Originally Posted by cn555ic

I think 12-17 maps were already V5.

Hmm, could be, but definitely not misfire-proof

[NM_BMW]

I'm actually really happy with the new maps. Very linear, just miss the hard hitting torque down low.

[NoQuarter]

This was in another thread here somewhere:

I noticed the slower boost response on my datalogs. In day to day driving it makes the car smoother.......but I have to admit missing the instant boost response of the older maps like 1-22nd.

On the older maps boost hit target during WOT in about 1/4 of a second. On the 5-10 maps, it takes almost a full second since it climbs towards the target more gradually when you go WOT.

Shiv mentioned in the readme file that he set boost gain down to 45% on these maps intentionally. The default used to be 50%.

I spoke to shiv on the phone about this as well. I set boost gain to 50% and I got the boost response back like the 3-30 maps.

[Glowin]

OK, so there are currently 4 maps on the Vishnu site.

V4 - 8/17
V5 - 12/17
V5 - 3/30
V5 - 5/10

I went straight from V4 - 8/17 to V5 - 5/10 and noticed a huge difference. It is really noticeable for me in city driving where I do most of it, and I could press the throttle 20-30% only, and car would jump. If you ride a motorcycle, you know the feeling when you just want to jump into a lane, and it's so quick and nimble feeling.

I don't want to press the throttle 50% or more to get that, as I'll accelerate too much then by the time the car's sped up. I'm not joking if I say my car feels stock in those low throttle, low RPM, scenarios.

For the V5 maps, in order of boost response, which is the best you think? Some here are saying 12/17, some are saying 3/30.

It would be good also if Shiv came in here and explained the rationale for the change. I wonder if partial throttle AFR's were a problem on these two maps, as on the 5/10, I'm not having any, and on the 8/17's it was ALL the time for me.

[Jeff@TopGearSolutions]

There is definitely a difference in boost relationship between throttle input between all the available maps. Perhaps those should try the boost gain of 50 on the 5-10 maps and see if they like how that responds. I too will try it myself next time im out.

[DaFish]

Originally Posted by Jeff@topgearsolutions

There is definitely a difference in boost relationship between throttle input between all the available maps. Perhaps those should try the boost gain of 50 on the 5-10 maps and see if they like how that responds. I too will try it myself next time im out.

My boost is set to 100.... so would this set me BACK?

[C4sF80M3]

Originally Posted by DaFish

My boost is set to 100.... so would this set me BACK?

The boost duty cycle at the bottom of the user parameters page. The 5-10 maps came set to 45, you can up it to 50 where most of the maps are typically set to see if that helps.

[Glowin]

Originally Posted by c4s335i

The boost duty cycle at the bottom of the user parameters page. The 5-10 maps came set to 45, you can up it to 50 where most of the maps are typically set to see if that helps.

Which as Shiv said himself in this thread, is useless for most people, unless they have loose wastegates, since it auto adjusts in a few days.

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

Boost Control Gain scales the Boost control duty cycle table. The bigger the number, the more DC for the given boost target/rpm combo. If you are running stock turbos that aren't suffering from loose wastegates, it's unlikely that you will ever have to adjust this. This is because the Procede automatically adjusts this setting through it's wastegate compensation logic. It has a +/- 5% authority range which should be more than enough for the vast majority of users. For those exceptions (RB turbos running excessively tightened wastegate stiffness or stock turbos suffering from extra loose wastegates), the +/- 5% authority range may not be enough, thus requiring a manual adjustment. You can see if this applies to you by simply looking at wastegate compensation in the datalog menu. If it's anywhere between 5 and -5%, no need to change anything. But if it's stuck at 5 or -5%, then a little manual adjustment is necessary to get optimal boost control.

Boost Response parameter just controls the throttle point at which boost starts to ramp up. Mostly a subjective thing as different people prefer different boost/throttle relationships.

Cheers,

Shiv

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

Please re-read my post regarding checking for wastegate compensation and/or waiting for the Procede to auto-compensate for your wastegate stiffness.

Also, low end boost targets have not changed appreciably over the past year or so. So the old maps do not have more low end torque. In fact, they have slightly less. But what has changed over time is the relationship between boost target and applied throttle.