[hassmaschine]

here's a few MSV80 130i maps. They're pretty similar to the 330i, naturally. actually, all of these maps are identical except the full load VVL map, which is very slightly more aggressive.

Ignition:


Lambda:


full load VVL:


Part load VVL:


I have a 328i bin now so I can find those too.

[andrey_gta]

how is the Mvs80 130i bin different from 328i bin
Adding the Disa manifold to 328i almost makes it look like a standard 130i power curve

[hassmaschine]

Haven't mapped out the 328i yet. Soon.

[DickBlisken]

Originally Posted by hassmaschine

Haven't mapped out the 328i yet. Soon.

[David0ff]

Originally Posted by hassmaschine

here's a few MSV80 130i maps. They're pretty similar to the 330i, naturally. actually, all of these maps are identical except the full load VVL map, which is very slightly more aggressive.

Ignition:


Lambda:


full load VVL:


Part load VVL:


I have a 328i bin now so I can find those too.

thx Hass

[hassmaschine]

Tested something else today - I can make the water pump errors trigger the CEL light.

[hassmaschine]

expanding on that... it's really simple. here's the MSV70 string for "2E81 Electric coolant pump, speed deviation, speed outside the tolerance":

00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 2E 81 05 E9 EA EB 01

the last byte is the error type code. changing that from 01 to 56 will trigger the CEL.

there's a lot of type codes, eventually I want to map out what they all do. using 2F0D as a test mule (since we can't make it go away). that's how I tested triggering the light.

so now if something with the pump is slightly out of tolerance, you could at least see something was wrong by the "service engine soon" light, and know to read the codes. as it is stock, it logs the code but doesn't trigger anything, so you would never know unless you looked.

Hopefully, that would give you at least more warning than the pump suddenly failing and leaving you stranded on the side of the road. Presumably, when the pump starts to fail things like the current load and output speed are outside of their normal ranges.

[631twentyeighteye]

This gets better with every update. That would be incredibly useful on any car, let alone our BMW's with awful cooling systems. Keep up the good work!

[hassmaschine]

well, these specific changes are only relevant to N52s.

[Taskmaster]

Originally Posted by andrey_gta

Axiom, you may know better, but I haven't found anything to suggest they are 1:1. Tuned 130 vs 125 from Auzzie dynos showed this. Do you think that is differentia gearing & exhaust manifold differences?

Following up on this, I would put them about equal from everything I've seen.

[hassmaschine]

Hit the dyno saturday. Here's my experimental tune vs the stock tune. The car is bone stock except a drop in K&N filter, 92 octane pump gas:



There's definitely more left on the table. The DME does something after the stock rev limit that kills torque. I'm thinking maybe the throttle closes, i need to do more research. It also appears to go too rich.

I ran out of time unfortunately, i did not get to do anything with VANOS. It also looks to me like the motor likes being leaner, i lost several HP when i richened it up a bit. Ignition didn't seem to make much difference, but i couldn't tell if it pulled timing or not. Next time I'll make sure i can do data logging.

[andrey_gta]

Very nice for a diy custom 330i tune!!
Your not far off from 330i tunes
Even if the chart is u corrected

[Taskmaster]

Originally Posted by hassmaschine

Hit the dyno saturday. Here's my experimental tune vs the stock tune. The car is bone stock except a drop in K&N filter, 92 octane pump gas:



There's definitely more left on the table. The DME does something after the stock rev limit that kills torque. I'm thinking maybe the throttle closes, i need to do more research. It also appears to go too rich.

I ran out of time unfortunately, i did not get to do anything with VANOS. It also looks to me like the motor likes being leaner, i lost several HP when i richened it up a bit. Ignition didn't seem to make much difference, but i couldn't tell if it pulled timing or not. Next time I'll make sure i can do data logging.

So A/F, lift and ignition timing changes? What were the STD/SAE numbers - I hate using uncorrected numbers.

[hassmaschine]

on that run it was basically the stock A/F curve except I leaned out the last cell a bit (~12.2 to 12.9). when I richened it up to 13.2/13.0, I lost power. the N52 appears to like lean, which given the stock 325/328 fuel curve, makes sense.

VANOS, Valvetronic and ignition maps were all modified.

corrected/uncorrected doesn't really matter to me, since I'm comparing against my own stock baseline, and that's what I put down under that day's conditions. but for comparison purposes, 225whp/214wtq vs 218whp/204wtq (stock). Consider my investment is close to $0.

[David0ff]

great work hass!
I wanted to ask you
as I have a 2008 2.5L n52, cuts off at 6500, would i be able to straight dump a 330 map ( all maps) on my MSV80 and tweak from there?

[Taskmaster]

Originally Posted by hassmaschine

on that run it was basically the stock A/F curve except I leaned out the last cell a bit (~12.2 to 12.9). when I richened it up to 13.2/13.0, I lost power. the N52 appears to like lean, which given the stock 325/328 fuel curve, makes sense.

VANOS, Valvetronic and ignition maps were all modified.

corrected/uncorrected doesn't really matter to me, since I'm comparing against my own stock baseline, and that's what I put down under that day's conditions. but for comparison purposes, 225whp/214wtq vs 218whp/204wtq (stock). Consider my investment is close to $0.

What?

12.2 -12.9 is a RICHER A/F ratio then 13.2/13.0? Are you sure you don't have those number mixed up? Furthermore, the M5X had the same reaction to ignition adjustments - they could add a lot of timing.

You tweaked valvetiming? (Vanos) You stated that you didn't?

Originally Posted by hassmaschine

I ran out of time unfortunately, i did not get to do anything with VANOS. It also looks to me like the motor likes being leaner, i lost several HP when i richened it up a bit. Ignition didn't seem to make much difference, but i couldn't tell if it pulled timing or not. Next time I'll make sure i can do data logging.

You'll probably find the Vanos maps are pretty decent, you might want to retard the intake cam to the max in the higher RPM ranges as well.

I'm not knocking your work and I hope this works out for you, but your investment is hardly $0 at this point and your still behind the 12 or so whp offered by the "overpriced canned tunes" out there.

[David0ff]

Originally Posted by hassmaschine

on that run it was basically the stock A/F curve except I leaned out the last cell a bit (~12.2 to 12.9). when I richened it up to 13.2/13.0, I lost power. the N52 appears to like lean, which given the stock 325/328 fuel curve, makes sense.

VANOS, Valvetronic and ignition maps were all modified.

corrected/uncorrected doesn't really matter to me, since I'm comparing against my own stock baseline, and that's what I put down under that day's conditions. but for comparison purposes, 225whp/214wtq vs 218whp/204wtq (stock). Consider my investment is close to $0.

also, 12.x:1 is richer than 13.x:1
not sure I understand when you say when you enriched it to 13.2/13.0

[Taskmaster]

Originally Posted by David0ff

also, 12.x:1 is richer than 13.x:1
not sure I understand when you say when you enriched it to 13.2/13.0

He's mixing up his terms, but he added fuel and the car made power.

[bimmerquick43321]

I actually tried the tune, buttdyno is in concordence with the showed dyno. Car does feel stronger in the mid/upper rpms. Also a nice addition is the fact that the engine is smoother, it's something I noted to hashmachine before I saw the dyno, looks like the dyno is also showing it.

I could be wrong but peak gains might not be great, but if you look at other areas, it actually makes +10whp versus stock tune, and for a stock 330i, it's pretty good even when compared to the paying tunes.

I'm sure that with some small adjustements it would be able to pick up some torque downlow and add some gain in the higher rpm's, with this I think we're in business, as I don't think I saw more than 10whp gain on a stock 330i with any tune out there.

[Taskmaster]

Originally Posted by mecbain

I actually tried the tune, buttdyno is in concordence with the showed dyno. Car does feel stronger in the mid/upper rpms. Also a nice addition is the fact that the engine is smoother, it's something I noted to hashmachine before I saw the dyno, looks like the dyno is also showing it.

I could be wrong but peak gains might not be great, but if you look at other areas, it actually makes +10whp versus stock tune, and for a stock 330i, it's pretty good even when compared to the paying tunes.

I'm sure that with some small adjustements it would be able to pick up some torque downlow and add some gain in the higher rpm's, with this I think we're in business, as I don't think I saw more than 10whp gain on a stock 330i with any tune out there.

Then you haven't been looking.

[Taskmaster]

Originally Posted by mecbain

the joke's on me, I can't freaking block a user on this forum so I can't see his posts... ridiculous...

No worries, everyone else can see how ignorant you continue to be.

[hassmaschine]

Originally Posted by TheAxiom

What?

12.2 -12.9 is a RICHER A/F ratio then 13.2/13.0? Are you sure you don't have those number mixed up? Furthermore, the M5X had the same reaction to ignition adjustments - they could add a lot of timing.

~12.2 is the stock value for the last cell. I leaned that out to 12.9. Then I richened up the entire map to 13.0 (from 13.5), which reduced power. I'm sure I don't have them mixed up, thanks.

I added a 2-4 degrees of timing, I didn't try to go higher. maybe I can, but I'd want to log knock control to be sure it wasn't pulling timing.

You tweaked valvetiming? (Vanos) You stated that you didn't?

I had already adjusted it (retarded intake/advanced exhaust), what I didn't have time to do was to isolate those adjustments by themselves.

You'll probably find the Vanos maps are pretty decent, you might want to retard the intake cam to the max in the higher RPM ranges as well.

I've done that. I think there is room for improvement. Otherwise, the canned tunes wouldn't be able to do much. Intake vanos is basically already maxed out stock, all you can do is retard it at lower RPMs. There's lots of adjustment room left in exhaust, although it makes a smaller difference.

I'm not knocking your work and I hope this works out for you, but your investment is hardly $0 at this point and your still behind the 12 or so whp offered by the "overpriced canned tunes" out there.

Well, I already had the hardware for flashing the DME (that's been paid for many times already from doing other DMEs), and the software was free.. I guess I paid for dyno time, but so did everyone else who had theirs on a dyno after the $700 tune.

I looked at a lot of charts, it looks like I'm right in there with everyone else. was AA's 233whp corrected or uncorrected? it doesn't say. also, it's an experimental tune, and the car is bone stock (I haven't even removed the carbon filter). I'm not finished yet. You're not knocking, but you sure are defensive.