[Dr_Dirt]

Originally Posted by Calgary Agent

Exactly. Pushing the turbos beyond 14psi is apparently outside of their efficiency range *I qualify this as I haven't seen the efficiency islands for the Mitsi turbo maps on the N54*. Can you do it? Sure. Will it impact the life expectancy of the turbos? Absolutely.

Are you sure that 14psi is outside the efficiency range of these turbos?
The Alpina setup pushes 1.1bar or 16psi with these turbos...
ref link

[oc24]

Originally Posted by Dr_Dirt

Are you sure that 14psi is outside the efficiency range of these turbos?
The Alpina setup pushes 1.1bar or 16psi with these turbos...
ref link

14 psi is according to Steve Dinan. I was there at his presentation when he said it. I'm not saying 14psi is the limit, I'm just repeating what Steve Dinan said.

[e90AW335i]

Originally Posted by Dr_Dirt

Are you sure that 14psi is outside the efficiency range of these turbos?
The Alpina setup pushes 1.1bar or 16psi with these turbos...
ref link

I would think they would get more than 369hp out of 16psi....

[judec]

Originally Posted by Dr_Dirt

Are you sure that 14psi is outside the efficiency range of these turbos?
The Alpina setup pushes 1.1bar or 16psi with these turbos...
ref link

Well, if they are pushing 16 bar to the engine, I dont understand that low 360HP number. Maybe it's because of the turbos are outside of their efficiency range at those high pressures and that pressure level is contraproductive to performance? Well, knowing Alpina I highly doubt it, but it's possible. More probable is some BS in that data.

Originally Posted by slubu

14 psi is according to Steve Dinan. I was there at his presentation when he said it. I'm not saying 14psi is the limit, I'm just repeating what Steve Dinan said.

Dinan stated that above 14psi the air blown from the compressors is so hot the stock IC cant cool it down sufficiently so the pressure increase is inefficient or contraproductive. But they are applying new IC for that reason...

[5soko]

speaking of pricing, was my total of about 700.00 or so bucks to achieve the shark editor correct?

[lndshrk]

Originally Posted by jdink

Will anyone still have MSD80 by then?

If you have it now, why wouldn't you have it then?

BMW isn't going to sneak in your car and change the DME to MSD81.

Jim

[Dr_Dirt]

Originally Posted by judec

Well, if they are pushing 16 bar to the engine, I dont understand that low 360HP number. Maybe it's because of the turbos are outside of their efficiency range at those high pressures and that pressure level is contraproductive to performance? Well, knowing Alpina I highly doubt it, but it's possible. More probable is some BS in that data.

Alpina lowered the CR to 9.4:1 and that explains the lower power #'s but the fact remains that they are running 16 psi and the only concern were the pistons that they changed to Mahle to handle the 16 psi.
Apparently they think the turbo can handle the added boost, maybe the stock pistons can't...

[stressdoc]

Lowered CR and Mahle pistons are more likely part of reducing the overheating problems and detonation than with 'pistons breaking'.

[Lane]

Lower CR -> less flow. Stock CR at 16psi is beyond their efficiency.

[Dr_Dirt]

Originally Posted by Lane

Lower CR -> less flow. Stock CR at 16psi is beyond their efficiency.

I'm not sure how the CR relates to flow requirements?
I do know that higher CR's usually demand higher octane requirements.

[stressdoc]

All things being equal I suppose higher CR would generate more 'frontside' energy for the turbos, but that does not seem to be a limiting factor with these little turbos, particularly at high rpm.

[sales@ESSTuning]

Originally Posted by T Bone

Slight correction.... The M3 uses the Bosch MS S60 and the M5 / M6 uses the MS S65

The new M3s started with MSS60, but a little birdie tells me they are switching to MSD81 as well. Jim, what is your M3?

Originally Posted by Lane

Lower CR -> less flow. Stock CR at 16psi is beyond their efficiency.

Unless something changed in the world, less CR (such as dished piston crowns) = slightly bigger displacement = more flow per cycle. Lower CR just keeps higher boost levels happy under the ECR threshold on the same octane.

[stressdoc]

On a different issue, I'm wondering if it would be possible to integrate the programming of the tranny -- in particular the upcoming DTC, for reasons that will be apparent below -- so as to minimize the nasty stresses that are generated during shifts, when shutting off throttle stops the flow, jerking the compressor and turbine (until the BOV relieves the pressure), and then jerking everything back the other way when back on WOT. It seems feasible to 'predict' using info from the tranny. This could work particularly well with a DTC because you would not have to back off the throttle as much.

[smdandb2]

Originally Posted by MarvelPhx

The new M3s started with MSS60, but a little birdie tells me they are switching to MSD81 as well. Jim, what is your M3?

The M3 is direct injection?

Thats what the D stands for.

[sales@ESSTuning]

Originally Posted by smdandb2

The M3 is direct injection?

Thats what the D stands for.

No, I don't believe it stands for DI.

As of internal BMW doc dated rev. 03/08 I am looking at: the 320, 325, 330, and 335i all use MSD81 now even though only the 335i actually has DI, correct. The 320 is actually MSD81.2.

Jim, I got your PM. Feel free to correct me, of course.

While I agree it would be unconventional to not use the MSS moniker on a M engine DME, I could see BMW setting up the same "leave me alone" changes in the DME and call it MSS61. Even without the boost, it's a thought.

[smdandb2]

I stand corrected.

[TurboFan]

Originally Posted by Calgary Agent

...As for the oil cooler, heat is the enemy of any engine, especially one that has FI. Pushing power close to / beyond 400hp (crank) results in undesired level of heat that cause not only premature oil breakdown, but also severe strains on certain mechanical components.

Oil breakdown isn't so much the issue with synthetics. The elevated temp of the oil is a concern becuase the components that it come in contact with aren't getting sufficient cooling.

[lndshrk]

Originally Posted by MarvelPhx

As of internal BMW doc dated rev. 03/08 I am looking at: the 320, 325, 330, and 335i all use MSD81 now even though only the 335i actually has DI, correct. The 320 is actually MSD81.2.

For those w/ MSD80, MSD80.2, MSD81 or MSD81.2

They are all HPI (aka GDI) engines.

320 = N43B20 (4 cyl, 2.0 liter, Gas Direct Injection)

325/330 = N53B30 (6 cyl, 3.0 liter, Gas Direct Injection)

Likely with different tuning and manifolds like the early 325/330's were.

In essence the 325 and 330 went to GDI at the same time as the
DME went from MSD80 to MSD81

335 = N54B30 (6 cyl, 3.0 liter, turbocharged Gas Direct Injection)

the S65B40 is 8 cyl and not direct injected.

Could they be coming up w/ something dastardly? Sure.

But remember that MSD80 was designed to be untuneable - they didn't
"think piggy".

MSD81 was only there because of the piggy.

If not for the piggybacks and MSD81, the 320/325/330 would be on MSD80
now - the original GDI ecu.

That, of course, is my 0.02.

I could be a lunatic

[sales@ESSTuning]

Lunatic? No... Crazy? For sure!

In essence, we are both correct! lol

MSD81 currently does exist in the 320, 325, 330, and 335... but in Europe. They didn't bring the N53 (which you are correct as being HPI) to the US due to our fuel. So our 325, 330s in the E9x remained MSV70 (Valvetronic).

I stand corrected via correction haha

Do I still believe that the new M3 is going to Tricore (aka MSDxx), you bet. Will it still be called MSS60... probably. Would it be hard to covert the MSD8x to run 8 cylinders? Not at all. Can the MSD80/81 in the 335i do it now? No, not setup for 8 cylinders (only 6 injector drivers, finals, etc). But, it will be interesting to see. Tricore will very likely be the future of BMW like you mentioned with the new MSD85 in the new 4.4TT X6 engine. And I see BMW pushing more FI as time goes on. Power, fuel economy, and decades of experience...

Sorry for the OT!

Originally Posted by lndshrk

For those w/ MSD80, MSD80.2, MSD81 or MSD81.2

They are all HPI (aka GDI) engines.

320 = N43B20 (4 cyl, 2.0 liter, Gas Direct Injection)

325/330 = N53B30 (6 cyl, 3.0 liter, Gas Direct Injection)

Likely with different tuning and manifolds like the early 325/330's were.

In essence the 325 and 330 went to GDI at the same time as the
DME went from MSD80 to MSD81

335 = N54B30 (6 cyl, 3.0 liter, turbocharged Gas Direct Injection)

the S65B40 is 8 cyl and not direct injected.

Could they be coming up w/ something dastardly? Sure.

But remember that MSD80 was designed to be untuneable - they didn't
"think piggy".

MSD81 was only there because of the piggy.

If not for the piggybacks and MSD81, the 320/325/330 would be on MSD80
now - the original GDI ecu.

That, of course, is my 0.02.

I could be a lunatic

[T Bone]

Originally Posted by MarvelPhx

Lunatic? No... Crazy? For sure!

In essence, we are both correct! lol

MSD81 currently does exist in the 320, 325, 330, and 335... but in Europe. They didn't bring the N53 (which you are correct as being HPI) to the US due to our fuel. So our 325, 330s in the E9x remained MSV70 (Valvetronic).

I stand corrected via correction haha

Do I still believe that the new M3 is going to Tricore (aka MSDxx), you bet. Will it still be called MSS60... probably. Would it be hard to covert the MSD8x to run 8 cylinders? Not at all. Can the MSD80/81 in the 335i do it now? No, not setup for 8 cylinders (only 6 injector drivers, finals, etc). But, it will be interesting to see. Tricore will very likely be the future of BMW like you mentioned with the new MSD85 in the new 4.4TT X6 engine. And I see BMW pushing more FI as time goes on. Power, fuel economy, and decades of experience...

Sorry for the OT!

There would have to be compelling business reasons to homologate the MSD81 for the S65. The tuning opportunities for the new M3 and the M5 / M6 appears limited (or the right tuners haven't stepped in).

I plan on getting the shark injector / edit just to play around with settings on my M6, not the tune.

[Dallas_335_Coupe]

Jim,

Two questions:
1. At one time in this massive thread, I thought I remember you (or someone quoting you) stating that you had planned to offer a Shark Injector with a solid mid range program for those of us interested in a robust, well designed, reliable tune.
2. Would BMW upgrade the many of existing MSD80 cars to MSD81, or will they simply get a revised Progman (2.92)? I quess I do not completely understand why the MSD81 exists, other than some kind of revision system linked to a year of a car. Any help here would be appreciated for those of us concerned about the next time we take the car into the dealership for an oil change, minor issue, or other warrentee work.

Thanks,

Russ

[ZJP]

So if I read correctly, this almost sounds similar to a Cobb AccessPORT reflash for an STi. You plug in a gameboy-like device into the OBDII port, load the map to the ecu and you're done? And all of this for only $300?! What about attaining different maps for different mod setups? Will we be able to download them online via usb cable?

Sorry if this was already mentioned - I don't feel like reading 33 pages and if this is infact a new way for tuning the 335i, I'm game. Makes piggybacks seem obsolete.