[JuniorB]

I think you should start bolting on there turbo kit! Shows that for an excuse?

[blindrooster]

Originally Posted by JuniorB

I think you should start bolting on there turbo kit! Shows that for an excuse?

I've actually decided to wait until they release their turbo before I decide to super charge or not.

[rjahl]

Originally Posted by hassmaschine

yeah, it's there, there must be something that can tap into it rather than adding a second pair of sensors. I'd bet the stock ones are more reliable than most aftermarket sensors anyway.

BTW, here's those time lag maps for the Lambda sensor adaptation routines. See how the 3.0si time delay is higher - presumably because the O2 sensors are further away from the exhaust valves. I don't really understand how the weight factor works exactly but that is different as well on the 3.0si. The only one that stays the same is the sensor aging.

330i:



3.0si:



Weight Factor (330i):



Also notice that the bank 2 lag is higher than bank one, presumably due to different lengths in the exhaust path.

Perhaps it's possible to extrapolate the required changes for headers by comparing the 3.0si and 330i settings. An extra complication is presumably that the exhaust velocity is higher on headers (that's how they make more power), so even if the sensors are further away, the time delay could in fact be shorter in some portions of the map, and longer in others.

Hass, Sorry to bring up such an old post but I'm thinking about a set of headers for the car and was looking at these maps as being one of the first things I need to sort out. I'm was wondering if you have looked at these since this post? I've dug up these maps and come up with a slight difference in the scaling factor and I don't see any difference in the 330I vs the US version of the 3.0SI. The EU versions are certainly different.

[hassmaschine]

Impretty certain of my offsets. These are mapped straight from the disassembly, so there is no ambuguity. The scaling factor is calculated from the A2L, not sure what difference there could be?

The euro maps may be a good start, or maybe the Z4M. Both have less restrictive headers and use the exact same adaptation routine. Now that i have basically all of 921S mapped out, you could potentially change all of the adaptation setting that are different.

[rjahl]

Originally Posted by hassmaschine

Impretty certain of my offsets. These are mapped straight from the disassembly, so there is no ambuguity. The scaling factor is calculated from the A2L, not sure what difference there could be?

The euro maps may be a good start, or maybe the Z4M. Both have less restrictive headers and use the exact same adaptation routine. Now that i have basically all of 921S mapped out, you could potentially change all of the adaptation setting that are different.

OK, I'll triple check my work and get back to you.

The Euro headers seem to have much less delay in the maps. I need to find a few photos to see where the sensors are located vs. the US cars. As you know, the Z4M runs a different processor. I probably have the maps but have not bothered to build files to look at them.

[hassmaschine]

Z4M is the same CPU actually - the internal code is 95% identical to MSV70. Even the valve lift maps are there (but not used, obviously).

The adaptation code is byte for byte identical too.

[rjahl]

Originally Posted by hassmaschine

Z4M is the same CPU actually - the internal code is 95% identical to MSV70. Even the valve lift maps are there (but not used, obviously).

The adaptation code is byte for byte identical too.

I took a look at the MSS70 file today. It really is very similar to the MSV70. Map names, Map axis labels, scaling factors and folders are the same or very similar. I'm not going to audit the whole file.

Learn something new everyday!

Exhaust sensor delays are much longer, as expected for being much further downstream.

[hassmaschine]

Yeah, they share about 95% of the maps too. I use MSS70 to validate my MSV70 map search routine.