[Yozh]

Wow, that does sound promising, keep my fingers crossed and more rep point to you.

[Hoooper]

Originally Posted by DWR

we are now able to supply the HP26 in a form that will handle 1600 nm in racing conditions.

[Whitbread]

Maybe I won't do a manual swap after all, 1180lbft should be enough trans capacity to break everything else in the driveline LOL.

[DWR]

More good news from NizPro regarding ODBII flashers:

As soon as we have customer stock on hand we will make an announcement so customers wanting them can purchase. We would be happy to work with you and your diesel community to customize a calibration for what you are looking for, and provide customization of the tune at no cost. I own some fairly seriously fast petrol cars { GTR R35 } however my everyday car is VW V8 TDI Touareg, so I full understand what you are after.

Tonight I'll have an adult beverage raised in the direction of Simon Gischus!

[Yozh]

Originally Posted by DWR

Tonight I'll have an adult beverage raised in the direction of Simon Gischus!

I think we should send him a bottle of some well aged adult beverage as an encouragement....

[Unklejoe]

It's crazy how Nizpro has apparently cracked this TCU out of no where, meanwhile, we have multiple highly experienced software/hardware engineers in this thread who were all working towards this same goal, yet were unable to achieve it.

I want to be very optimistic, but until I see actual cold hard proof of them being able to flash this TCU with arbitrary images, I won't let myself celebrate just yet.

I wonder if someone here has figured it out and provided them with a solution?

There's been a lot of noise lately about TCU flashing in the 335i world (from a few different companies), so it makes me wonder if there was some solution that has been finally released that all of these companies are using...

It's kind of like how when FLASHTEC (or whoever) finally "cracked" the late model N55 ECU, suddenly, there were 20 different tuning shops advertising that they have "finally cracked the N55 ECU".

I realize that Nizpro is a legitimate company, but it seems more like they specialize on the mechanical side of things. Generally, the people who have the skills required to do these types of software projects end up working for companies whose primary purpose is software. I'm not saying it's impossible, I'm just saying that if this turns out to be true, it will be kind of shocking. That being said, please don't confuse my skepticism with hate. I really hope it is true.

It would ease my mind if Nizpro would at least throw out some words such as "RSA", "private key", "signature", etc..., but instead, most of the specifics in the press releases seem to be regarding shaft upgrades, with the ability to flash the TCU seeming like an afterthought. You'd think that if they achieve something as impressive and desired as this, that would warrant its own press releases and hype.

EDIT: Nizpro, if you are reading this, and it turns out that you really can flash the TCU, here's what many people in the 335i community want (sorry to hijack from the diesel guys):

We (or at least I) want the Alpina flash, but with a more aggressive "D" more and perhaps more clamping pressure in "M" mode. The Alpina flash in general is good, but the main complaint from a lot of people is that it shifts too early. It's already in 6th gear at 40mph. Also, it's too reluctant to downshift. You basically have to floor it to get it to kick down.

"M" mode is pretty good already though.

[DWR]

Originally Posted by Unklejoe

It's crazy how Nizpro has apparently cracked this TCU out of no where, meanwhile, we have multiple highly experienced software/hardware engineers in this thread who were all working towards this same goal, yet were unable to achieve it.

While I share your concern, I'm not sure your assessment of the situation is entirely accurate. This group has no motive for commercialization. There is no budget for development. The effort is when time is available. There is no central coordination of effort and not everyone has been approaching the problem from the same direction. AND NizPro has not claimed to have cracked our TCU. I'm actually surprised a solution has not come from the market place before this. I also won't be surprised if our TCU turns out to be tougher to work with.

I guess we will find out ...

[Unklejoe]

Originally Posted by DWR

While I share your concern, I'm not sure your assessment of the situation is entirely accurate. This group has no motive for commercialization. There is no budget for development. The effort is when time is available. There is no central coordination of effort and not everyone has been approaching the problem from the same direction. AND NizPro has not claimed to have cracked our TCU. I'm actually surprised a solution has not come from the market place before this. I also won't be surprised if our TCU turns out to be tougher to work with.

Good point, however, I'm not sure I understand the following statement:

Originally Posted by DWR

AND NizPro has not claimed to have cracked our TCU.

According to their website, it seems like they are implying otherwise:

Quote:
["Now, many said re-calibrating the ZF via the BMW OBD2 port along with locating the calibration tables required for transmission control could not be possible. We at Nizpro are very excited to say that we have now been able to achieve this goal. It is now possible to read existing calibration, and also write new calibrations. New calibrations can be flashed directly to the ZF TCU via the OBD2 port."]


Perhaps by "we have been able to achieve this goal", they actually mean "the tools now exist to achieve this goal".

Who knows. Either way, they seem pretty direct about it. In the end, I suppose it doesn't really matter who actually cracked it as long as they can deliver on their promise.

[Unklejoe]

Originally Posted by dave205t

Indeed this is 'just a' side project for me, but i'm committed. Have not had too many leftover cycles from the day job last week(s), however i have some achievement to report: i successfully erased calibration and wrote back a calibration to Roberts TCU from the binfile i read earlier (extended TCU_flash for write, no need for Winfkp).

Have not tried to disassemble the TCU just yet (after an initial attempt and seeing some pics of the very sensitive electronics inside), this initial writing to calibration and program sections (not finished yet) should be safe enough to try without BDM access.

Best regards, Dave

That's good news.

Just so I'm up to date in terms of the progress made thus far...

Am I correct in assuming that you've been able to successfully:

- Read/write the area of flash (via UDS) that contains the code which performs the RSA signature check

- Decompress (if compressed) and disassemble this code

- Modify it in such a way as to bypass the RSA signature check (or replace the private key with one from your own keypair)


If so, then:

Are we at a state where you are reluctant to attempt to flash this modified image in fear of bricking the device? Is that why you don't want to try without BDM access?


Forgive me if I'm totally off here.

[DWR]

Originally Posted by Unklejoe

According to their website, it seems like they are implying otherwise:

Quote:
["Now, many said re-calibrating the ZF via the BMW OBD2 port along with locating the calibration tables required for transmission control could not be possible. We at Nizpro are very excited to say that we have now been able to achieve this goal. It is now possible to read existing calibration, and also write new calibrations. New calibrations can be flashed directly to the ZF TCU via the OBD2 port."]

I thought they were very explicit. The very next paragraph reads:

"The next development period will see us concentrating on custom calibration for use with both the standard ZF 6-HP21, and our upgraded transmissions."

Followed by:

"So what does this mean regarding performance gains for N54 owners?"

We have ZF6HP28 transmissions in N57/M57.

[Nadir Point]

As nizpro implies, you have to understand that the manufacturer has already done the work necessary to maximize the trans performance and longevity in stock form, for the intended application. As I always tell people looking for more performance: "There is no substitute for hardware." Hard part upgrades (input shaft, clutches, torque converters, etc) are the only things that are going to properly support big power increases - along with the appropriate software tweaks, of course.

At the end of the day, it's interesting to study what makes them tick, but squeezing more torque through a trans is akin to forcing a bolt/nut. The manufacturer knows the tensile strength of the material and has already factored that into his software. You can probably push it a little harder before it breaks - but not much.

[Red_Bean_Bun]

Originally Posted by UberArchetype

As nizpro implies, you have to understand that the manufacturer has already done the work necessary to maximize the trans performance and longevity in stock form, for the intended application. As I always tell people looking for more performance: "There is no substitute for hardware." Hard part upgrades (input shaft, clutches, torque converters, etc) are the only things that are going to properly support big power increases - along with the appropriate software tweaks, of course.

At the end of the day, it's interesting to study what makes them tick, but squeezing more torque through a trans is akin to forcing a bolt/nut. The manufacturer knows the tensile strength of the material and has already factored that into his software. You can probably push it a little harder before it breaks - but not much.

You seriously think so ?

Your nut/bolt analogy implies most tuners out in the world are kind of dumb ...

[rjahl]

Originally Posted by UberArchetype

As nizpro implies, you have to understand that the manufacturer has already done the work necessary to maximize the trans performance and longevity in stock form, for the intended application. As I always tell people looking for more performance: "There is no substitute for hardware." Hard part upgrades (input shaft, clutches, torque converters, etc) are the only things that are going to properly support big power increases - along with the appropriate software tweaks, of course.

At the end of the day, it's interesting to study what makes them tick, but squeezing more torque through a trans is akin to forcing a bolt/nut. The manufacturer knows the tensile strength of the material and has already factored that into his software. You can probably push it a little harder before it breaks - but not much.

I completely disagree....

These transmissions have been rated by ZF to handle a lot more toque than the standard engine can supply. There is is also plenty of "overhead" in the ZF ratings. Yes, at some point you need hardware to improve performance. In this group, I think those people are a minority.

BMW has tuned these gearboxes to be comfortable slush boxes. Most of us here are simply looking for ways to tweak Shift points and torque reduction requests so our performance cars perform more like their namesake. These tweaks do not necessarily need to decrease the life if the transmission.

Personally, I think the term "faster" shifts is being thrown around too loosely. I've changed the DMEs response to the torque reduction request and the shifts feel harder and faster but they are not. Logs show they still take the prescribed 800 milliseconds. The difference being the engine output during the shift. I'd still love to increase my line pressure a tad at the high end but not much, just a tweak. Yes, if I was competing with this setup I would probably need to upgrade some hardware but same can be said for my tires, breaks, suspension.....

A real tranny tune would be great and it's nice to see that being discussed in other forums as well.

[DWR]

Originally Posted by UberArchetype

At the end of the day, it's interesting to study what makes them tick, but squeezing more torque through a trans is akin to forcing a bolt/nut. The manufacturer knows the tensile strength of the material and has already factored that into his software. You can probably push it a little harder before it breaks - but not much.

I agree with the general concept, and safety margins are smaller than they used to be. Still, those margins are quite generous. The proof is in the pudding, as witnessed right here, in this forum. However, we are talking about something different than torque.

The shock loading Simon refers to is know as impulse force in physics. It is the force required the change momentum. So, both mass and the changing rate of speed are at work. Since the mass of rotating parts is essentially a constant, increased impulse is directly proportional to decreased shift time. While our transmission maybe able to withstand a 50% increase in torque, it cannot withstand a 50% decrease in shift speed. That would double the impulse and require a doubling of any margin of safety.

It was many years ago, as a young physicist, I had the opportunity to educate a much senior engineer from MIT about this subject. He had designed a test fixed as part of a quality check for Navy sonar bouys. His fixture applied tension to the signal cord (attached to the bouy) via air pressure in a cylinder. When the test was initiated the cylinder would move the fixture until the slack in the cord was take up and the air pressure in the cylinder would apply a tension force according to the test criteria. I got involved because the bouys were failing at an alarming rate and was asked to find out why.

The first thing I noticed was the fixture was made of steel and had considerable weight. The signal cord was taking the static force of the air pressure AND the impulse force of the rapidly decelerating fixture. I calculated the total force to be 5 times the test criteria. It was amazing that anything passed the test! The solution was to make the fixture out of aluminum and slow down the extension speed of the cylinder.

I used the above example because the air pressure is analogous to the torque on the tranmission and the decelerating fixture represents the mass of rotating parts. In that example, the impluse force greatly exceeded the static force. Similarly, the reason torque is reduced during shifting is to allow for higher impulse associated with a faster shift. For engines that have slow transient response, this strategy may ultimately reduce acceleration.

[Nadir Point]

Originally Posted by Red_Bean_Bun

Your nut/bolt analogy implies most tuners out in the world are kind of dumb ...

No, the analogy is intended to make a complex concept more easily understandable. If you insist on breaking it down even further to a 1 or 2 word characterization, then I'd say the tuners might be "over-zealous." The diesel car world has not been through this as much as the truckers yet. Maybe you'd better understand if you saw the never-ending travails of broken truck tranny's in the diesel truck work.

[RollingCoal]

Originally Posted by DWR

I agree with the general concept, and safety margins are smaller than they used to be. Still, those margins are quite generous. The proof is in the pudding, as witnessed right here, in this forum. However, we are talking about something different than torque.

The shock loading Simon refers to is know as impulse force in physics. It is the force required the change momentum. So, both mass and the changing rate of speed are at work. Since the mass of rotating parts is essentially a constant, increased impulse is directly proportional to decreased shift time. While our transmission maybe able to withstand a 50% increase in torque, it cannot withstand a 50% decrease in shift speed. That would double the impulse and require a doubling of any margin of safety.

It was many years ago, as a young physicist, I had the opportunity to educate a much senior engineer from MIT about this subject. He had designed a test fixed as part of a quality check for Navy sonar bouys. His fixture applied tension to the signal cord (attached to the bouy) via air pressure in a cylinder. When the test was initiated the cylinder would move the fixture until the slack in the cord was take up and the air pressure in the cylinder would apply a tension force according to the test criteria. I got involved because the bouys were failing at an alarming rate and was asked to find out why.

The first thing I noticed was the fixture was made of steel and had considerable weight. The signal cord was taking the static force of the air pressure AND the impulse force of the rapidly decelerating fixture. I calculated the total force to be 5 times the test criteria. It was amazing that anything passed the test! The solution was to make the fixture out of aluminum and slow down the extension speed of the cylinder.

I used the above example because the air pressure is analogous to the torque on the tranmission and the decelerating fixture represents the mass of rotating parts. In that example, the impluse force greatly exceeded the static force. Similarly, the reason torque is reduced during shifting is to allow for higher impulse associated with a faster shift. For engines that have slow transient response, this strategy may ultimately reduce acceleration.

Very good example. However, couldn't the torque converter lockup timimg be adjusted to absorb some of the impulse?

[Red_Bean_Bun]

Originally Posted by UberArchetype

No, the analogy is intended to make a complex concept more easily understandable. If you insist on breaking it down even further to a 1 or 2 word characterization, then I'd say the tuners might be "over-zealous." The diesel car world has not been through this as much as the truckers yet. Maybe you'd better understand if you saw the never-ending travails of broken truck tranny's in the diesel truck work.

If you think the tranny is going to break if it gets tuned and the manufacturer has fully optimised everything - there is nothing to talk about and you can go about in your merry little way with your trucks...

[DWR]

Originally Posted by RollingCoal

Very good example. However, couldn't the torque converter lockup timimg be adjusted to absorb some of the impulse?

Great question. I purposely did not talk about the affect of the torque convert because it is especially complex in our vehicles (it never really locks up). But let's just say, yes the torque convert does absorb some of the impulse force. In fact, it absorbs a great deal of it. Still, however much it absorbs, quickening the shift speed will mean more of it will be transferred to the gearbox.

[Nadir Point]

Originally Posted by Red_Bean_Bun

If you think the tranny is going to break if it gets tuned and the manufacturer has fully optimised everything - there is nothing to talk about and you can go about in your merry little way with your trucks...

A bit presumptuous, knowing what I think. You can kiss my rosie red rectum. Oh and BTW - welcome to my ignore list!

[Red_Bean_Bun]

Originally Posted by UberArchetype

A bit presumptuous, knowing what I think. You can kiss my rosie red rectum. Oh and BTW - welcome to my ignore list!

Looks like you're getting anal about transmissions ....

Whatever.

[DWR]

Originally Posted by Red_Bean_Bun

Looks like you're getting anal about transmissions ....

Well, we are trying to get the power to the rear end, right? Lol.

[RBT-Tuning]

Plz stay on topic, as this discussion right now is completely worthless. All we want to achieve has already been done by BMW and ZF on stock cars. Alpina B3, Alpina B5 and normal 5-series with the sport-option. The cal's are all there and bullet proof, but we don't have a way to use them in our 3-series at the moment. That's all. No need for a topic that has been sorted out about 40 pages before....