[OpenFlash]

Hi guys,
With so many people dialing in their user TQ tables, I figured I do the same on the dyno and show exactly what effects these changes are having. Also took the opportunity to do his on both 91oct and 93oct.

For those who don't know, this dyno tends to read conservatively. Some Dynojets will read 5-15whp higher. Regardless, this is the same dyno we have always used for BMW testing so it is basically comparable to other results we have posted. It was raining yesterday and temps were 68F with CF of 1.02. Pretty normal.


The following results were with Shell 91oct in the car:

Run 176 was the baseline v2.0.2 (default TQ settings of 90%) as it came in from the streets. It put down 346-349whp repeatably. I bumped up User TQ to 92% and did another couple of runs. Run 177 (not shown) put down 357whp with little adaptation. Run 178 put down 363whp. More runs could have improved things a bit more through further adaptation but time wasn't on my side. But just +2% made a substantial change. I'd say that us 91oct guys should stop here (at 92%).


The following results were with a 93oct mix:

Like Run 176 from above, Run 184 was with the default TQ settings if 90%. But this time it made 360whp (~10whp more) just through running higher octane gas gas. Run 185 was with User TQ settings raised to 92%. 366whp immediately. Run 186-187 was with User TQ settings raised to 94%. Power easily climbed to 378-379whp. 93oct guys should stop here at 94%.


Next, I added in 4 gallons of 104oct, bringing average octane up to 98oct:

With the increased octane level, I bumped User TQ to 97%. Only got to do one run because the wheelspeed sensor on the Dynojet broke. And even that run was incomplete (sensor died before the run was complete) It made 388whp. For comparison is the 93oct run with User TQ set to 94%. With User TQ set to 100%, it would have made 400whp. All this on the baseline v2.0.2. Through just User TQ adjustments. Pretty neat, huh?

And yes, we did limit low end torque/boost to 360-370lbft level. We did this just to rule out ANY possibility of people through misfire codes when running poor gas and/or lugging their engine around at 2000rpm in a tall gear at full boost. We'll bring it back with v2.0.3 (as well as another neat feature or two ) So there you have it, 350-375whp on pump gas without having to assume the risks and compromises of running catless or the hassle of mixing race fuels.

I'll also post up datalogs that were taken during the above dyno results later tonight when I get some free time.

The 6AT version of the v2.0.2 map will be up later tonight.

Note: These results were all from our shop car. It is not a ringer or a "factory freak". It has 25,000 hard miles on it. It makes no more or less power than any other similarly modified 335. Rear tire pressure was set to 40psi. The only mods to it are our cat-back exhaust and cone air filters replacing the factory airbox. The factory airbox will start to become an significant inlet restriction at 355-365whp. So don't expect to make 400whp at 100% with it We'll have a basic, inexpensive intake kit ready for sale in January.

Also, please note that these results were with the factory downpipes, factory IC, factory bypass valves, etc,. So this set-up is "emissions friendly" in that it passes the tailpipe sniff test. Full cat-less cars will not pass this test. They will also smell and sound horribly. And can even fart flames during high-rpm shifts (which is actually kind of cool). In other words, the test car represents a mildly modified, hassle-free, compromise-free car that wont make you cross your fingers and pray when a police officer is following you

Cheers,
shiv

[Boostin335]

what do u mean by cone air filters... like cheap 50-80 dollar k&ns? or what do you mean exactly

[OpenFlash]

Originally Posted by Boostin335

what do u mean by cone air filters... like cheap 50-80 dollar k&ns? or what do you mean exactly

Yep. Two of them.

[bmwzimmer]

Thanks Shiv. Less Tq and more HP is easier on the poor tranny.

[Kbueno]

Good stuff. The boost limit in the lower RPMs explains why most of the power difference I feel is midrange on up.

[sflgator]

Nice comparisons...thanks, Shiv!!

[335iheLLraiseR]

i wannna shoot flames from my tailpipes.


thanks for the info Shiv, i guess this is in response to all of the inquiries about user torque settings, and octanes?

[Kbueno]

It would be nice to see the boost levels on these various runs/configurations.

[jpsimon]

nice numbers, especially with a dyno that reads conservatively!

I love that out here on the right coast, we get a good 10-15whp more just by having 93 at our disposal.

[scalbert]

I am enjoying the new curve with a wider power band. While I do like a nice whallop of torque down low; any more and my tires would have dismounted themselves and left.

[max boost]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

Hi guys,
With so many people dialing in their user TQ tables, I figured I do the same on the dyno and show exactly what effects these changes are having. Also took the opportunity to do his on both 91oct and 93oct.

For those who don't know, this dyno tends to read conservatively. Some Dynojets will read 5-15whp higher. Regardless, this is the same dyno we have always used for BMW testing so it is basically comparable to other results we have posted. It was raining yesterday and temps were 68F with CF of 1.02. Pretty normal.


The following results were with Shell 91oct in the car:

Run 176 was the baseline v2.0.2 (default TQ settings of 90%) as it came in from the streets. It put down 346-349whp repeatably. I bumped up User TQ to 92% and did another couple of runs. Run 177 (not shown) put down 357whp with little adaptation. Run 178 put down 363whp. More runs could have improved things a bit more through further adaptation but time wasn't on my side. But just +2% made a substantial change. I'd say that us 91oct guys should stop here (at 92%).


The following results were with a 93oct mix:

Like Run 176 from above, Run 184 was with the default TQ settings if 90%. But this time it made 360whp (~10whp more) just through running higher octane gas gas. Run 185 was with User TQ settings raised to 92%. 366whp immediately. Run 186-187 was with User TQ settings raised to 94%. Power easily climbed to 378-379whp. 93oct guys should stop here at 94%.


Next, I added in 4 gallons of 104oct, bringing average octane up to 98oct:

With the increased octane level, I bumped User TQ to 97%. Only got to do one run because the wheelspeed sensor on the Dynojet broke. And even that run was incomplete (sensor died before the run was complete) It made 388whp. For comparison is the 93oct run with User TQ set to 94%. With User TQ set to 100%, it would have made 400whp. All this on the baseline v2.0.2. Through just User TQ adjustments. Pretty neat, huh?

And yes, we did limit low end torque/boost to 360-370lbft level. We did this just to rule out ANY possibility of people through misfire codes when running poor gas and/or lugging their engine around at 2000rpm in a tall gear at full boost. We'll bring it back with v2.0.3 (as well as another neat feature or two ) So there you have it, 350-375whp on pump gas without having to assume the risks and compromises of running catless or the hassle of mixing race fuels.

I'll also post up datalogs that were taken during the above dyno results later tonight when I get some free time.

The 6AT version of the v2.0.2 map will be up later tonight.

Note: These results were all from our shop car. It is not a ringer or a "factory freak". It has 25,000 hard miles on it. It makes no more or less power than any other similarly modified 335. Rear tire pressure was set to 40psi. The only mods to it are our cat-back exhaust and cone air filters replacing the factory airbox. The factory airbox will start to become an significant inlet restriction at 355-365whp. So don't expect to make 400whp at 100% with it We'll have a basic, inexpensive intake kit ready for sale in January.

Also, please note that these results were with the factory downpipes, factory IC, factory bypass valves, etc,. So this set-up is "emissions friendly" in that it passes the tailpipe sniff test. Full cat-less cars will not pass this test. They will also smell and sound horribly. And can even fart flames during high-rpm shifts (which is actually kind of cool). In other words, the test car represents a mildly modified, hassle-free, compromise-free car that wont make you cross your fingers and pray when a police officer is following you

Cheers,
shiv

shiv excellent post!!!!!

informative......

so if i turn the KNOB to 11 WILL IT DO THE BELOW????

[e90AW335i]

Very nice. Good info as always Shiv.....

[ndahbar]

So the car immedeately puts out more torque all over the place with higher oct gas? No need to have it "learn" over ~50 miles of driving, as they say?

Shiv, how quick does a car regularly fed 93oct "re-adjust" if you fill her up with lesser octane, let's say 89oct? Will one expect to get a check engine light, etc. ?

[pikkashoe]

Hey shiv is there any reason when I run my datalogs, I immediately get 15 psi at the default torque settings, yet your able to bump up to 92% and 94% on 93 octane? My car was fully warmed up after doing 4 or 5 full throttle passes in 2nd, 3rd and 4th gear.

My car is running procede 2.0.2 and the only other modification is an ITG filter.

Im curious to see the datalogs with boost.

[OpenFlash]

Originally Posted by ndahbar

So the car immedeately puts out more torque all over the place with higher oct gas? No need to have it "learn" over ~50 miles of driving, as they say?

Not immediately, but pretty quickly. I did a few acceleration runs on the dyno to facilitate adaption. All it takes is 4-5 3rd gear pulls to get 90% adapted.

Shiv, how quick does a car regularly fed 93oct "re-adjust" if you fill her up with lesser octane, let's say 89oct? Will one expect to get a check engine light, etc. ?

If you feed the car 89oct, power output will degrade substantially and a limp mode will probably be induced

shiv

[Eazyrock]

Pretty damn impressive.

[OpenFlash]

Originally Posted by pikkashoe

Hey shiv is there any reason when I run my datalogs, I immediately get 15 psi at the default torque settings, yet your able to bump up to 92% and 94% on 93 octane? My car was fully warmed up after doing 4 or 5 full throttle passes in 2nd, 3rd and 4th gear.

I'd say it has to do with temp difference between you over the in hot, humid Floriday and us over here in chilly, dry northern California. Remember, the factory ECU will raise the boost to compensate for less-than-ideal conditions (as it is for you). I suspect there is also an issue of car to car variance as well. Not to mention the effects of running different mods (intake and catback).

Shiv

[pikkashoe]

Yeah my temps last night when running where 69 ambient, not sure about humidity. Different mods lower boost?

[tek818]

very nice bro Was there any change in partial-throttle performance between the beta 2.0.2 map and the final?

[OpenFlash]

Originally Posted by AB Tek 818

very nice bro Was there any change in partial-throttle performance between the beta 2.0.2 map and the final?

Yep. And at the last minute we rescaled the map so that users only would have to move the entire User TQ settings up and down instead of in individual RPM increments. We also capped max power at 400whp when set to 100% (octane willing). As well as limited super low end torque which should help control any spikes that would occur for those few out there that are running cat-less. So yes, a bunch of changes.

Shiv

[Driver72]

Great info Shiv.

Seems like v2.02 acts just like v1.4 when 93 Octane is used instead of 91.

As you know, when I did the dyno testing of v1.4 91 Oct. vs. 93 Octane, I got a 11 rwhp and 8 rwtq gain in a matter of minutes, doing just as you did and running the car on the rollers for a bit first.

And thanks for limiting rear wheel torque levels to basically the same as we saw on v1.4 cars.
Actually, you might have a bit less now in v2.02, which is ok too.
As on 91 Octane only (no catback exhaust) on my auto tranny, I got 358 rwtq and on 93 Octane got 366 rwtq

What's interesting is us 91 Octane states have to run the car at 92% settings to get the exact same power as guys in 93 Octane states get on the conservative 90% default settings.

But since they can go up to 94% safely on 93 Octane, they see 15-16 rwhp and 11-12 rwtq more than we can on 91 Octane at 92% settings.

Great work again Shiv.

[Driver72]

Hey Shiv, Calvin told me I'd be getting my v2.02 in the next shipment early next week.
Quick question for you, can you make .5% changes in the user torque settings?
Meaning, you stated 92% is the most you'd want to go on 91 Octane.
But could one set it at 91.5% just to be a bit more safe (at the cost of only 2-3 hp)?

Thanks