[robnitro]

I was wondering how are you guys reading and writing to the tcu without xhp? My x5 35d 2011 is not supported yet, so I can't even buy that to flash...

[Unklejoe]

Originally Posted by robnitro

I was wondering how are you guys reading and writing to the tcu without xhp? My x5 35d 2011 is not supported yet, so I can't even buy that to flash...

We are using xHP

[bradsm87]

Originally Posted by robnitro

I was wondering how are you guys reading and writing to the tcu without xhp? My x5 35d 2011 is not supported yet, so I can't even buy that to flash...

The supported list is just for off-the-shelf maps. Custom TCU tuning will work as long as you have an E series vehicle with a 6HP transmission with the second generation TCU.

[robnitro]

Thanks, I was able to do a backup, but the app did pop up saying my car is unsupported, so I didn't think the flash capability would work if I buy it.

What I want to change is the super long unlocked tc on warning up and change the dumb ds shift points, ex: 1 to 2 at 2k good, but 2 to 3 at 2300 even with barely any throttle ehhh. Feels counter intuitive. I use ds in city driving to reduce shifts and theoretically less soot to dpf and egr (more mass airflow over fuel flow ratio-hard to see with lambda/afr)

[bradsm87]

Originally Posted by Unklejoe

What do you find in regards to the relationship between the shift pressure and the "Timespan"? It seems clear that both increasing the shift pressure and decreasing the “Timespan” will have the same effect of “hardening” the shift, but I’m curious to what extent each one contributes.

I'm trying to figure out exactly what the shift pressure maps are actually defining. If my theory is true, then those shift pressure maps are actually the “final” clamping pressure in each gear at each load, and the “Timespan” maps are what dictate how long it takes to ramp up to that pressure. The reason I’m curious is because there are some high power 335i cars which have problems with slipping in 4th gear (well after the shift). Perhaps a way to deal with that issue would be to increase the clutch pressure but also increase the "Timespan" so that the shock load on the transmission during shifts remains reasonable.

It seems like the "Timespan" maps are the ones which are most important, as the shift pressure maps are all pretty close between the different modes.

My theory is somewhat different. The shift behaviour I've seen with cars with piggybacks without flash tunes (severely under-reported torque) is that it sorta slips for the normal time then hits the next gear with a hard clunk. This makes me think the shift pressure is only related to the shift and once a certain amount of time elapses, it just goes "all in" on the next gear and the gear grabs HARD if the revs have not yet matched by that point.

[DWR]

Originally Posted by bradsm87

My theory is somewhat different. The shift behaviour I've seen with cars with piggybacks without flash tunes (severely under-reported torque) is that it sorta slips for the normal time then hits the next gear with a hard clunk. This makes me think the shift pressure is only related to the shift and once a certain amount of time elapses, it just goes "all in" on the next gear and the gear grabs HARD if the revs have not yet matched by that point.

Reported torque effects many things, and not always in the right way, when trying to "fool" the TCU. You are correct that the timing target may pass before a phase is complete. The hard grab is the holding pressure, which is different than the inertial phase pressure, which different than the torque phase pressure, which is different than the fill phase pressure ... you get the drift.

This is ALL about interactions.

[Hoooper]

Any 335d guys here try both the stage 2 and the newly updated stage 3 V1_2? Im curious how they compare. Based on the descriptions I think I would want a stage 2 in D mode and stage 3 in M/S mode. However, since I am running a JR stage 2.8 with meth I am a little concerned that the shift time reduction of the stage 3 in M/S mode might be too tight for the transmission long term. Everything else about the stage 3 M/S mode seems perfect.

How about reviews of stage 1 in D mode? No reviews yet on here? Curious if the shifts are quicker and smoother or if the only changed shift behavior is the shift point and TCC maps.

[Mark M]

Originally Posted by Hoooper

Any 335d guys here try both the stage 2 and the newly updated stage 3 V1_2? Im curious how they compare. Based on the descriptions I think I would want a stage 2 in D mode and stage 3 in M/S mode. However, since I am running a JR stage 2.8 with meth I am a little concerned that the shift time reduction of the stage 3 in M/S mode might be too tight for the transmission long term. Everything else about the stage 3 M/S mode seems perfect.

How about reviews of stage 1 in D mode? No reviews yet on here? Curious if the shifts are quicker and smoother or if the only changed shift behavior is the shift point and TCC maps.

Great questions Hooper. I agree 100%...I've been stopping by here over the last few weeks looking for detailed impartial reviews, so far I have not seen anything substantial to rest my check book on. Hoping some will chime in.

[kydiesel35]

Originally Posted by Hoooper

How about reviews of stage 1 in D mode? No reviews yet on here? Curious if the shifts are quicker and smoother or if the only changed shift behavior is the shift point and TCC maps.

Much smoother shifts. I've been sticking with the stage 3 comfort file since the car transforms in s or m mode at command.

The v1 stage 3 would be the choice for autocross, but 2nd gear had just a touch too much rpms for my liking when shifting, but that being said I still contemplate going back to v1 since it had other attributes I miss.

How bout a stage 3 with sport mode in drive RBT-Tuning

[bradsm87]

Originally Posted by DWR

Reported torque effects many things, and not always in the right way, when trying to "fool" the TCU. You are correct that the timing target may pass before a phase is complete. The hard grab is the holding pressure, which is different than the inertial phase pressure, which different than the torque phase pressure, which is different than the fill phase pressure ... you get the drift.

This is ALL about interactions.

Excellent that confirms my rough understanding of the shift. The question I have is:

Do we have enough tables in the XDF to manipulate a shift properly or are there missing essential tables relating to the way it shifts (eg. a shift pressure limit)?

I honestly don't mind about not having the torque limit. The 630-640nm Alpina limit works OK for me and my real torque is only a little above that. I can also live with the paddle delay and the Alpina file already has downshift rev matching. Those are the missing tables I can do without. I just need to know about what, if any, are essential tables relating to the shift.

Also can we go back a step and confirm that the 8HP map pack is the one to get for clues? You mentioned it before and I want to confirm it's not a typo.

Thanks in advance

[Unklejoe]

Update:

I've made a few small fixes to the XDF involving the axis scaling of some of the shift pressure/timespan maps. The changes are small and relatively inconsequential. See here.

Also, I can report that changing the axis values of the shift pressure/timespan maps appears to work as expected. They had to be changed manually via a hex editor, as I don't have them defined in my XDF, so I would be careful, but it does work.

I've constructed and have been running a custom map based off of the Alpina B3 file.

My changes to the file include:

- Replaced every single shiftmap and TCC map with those from a stock file. Many of the values were already the same, but there were some differences in a few of the XE/E maps. Given the complex interactions between all of the shiftmaps/TCC maps, I felt that copying all of the maps from another OEM calibration was the safest bet for now.

- Copied all of the "M Alpina" pressure and timespan values into the "D" and "S/M" mode tables so that the transmission essentially runs the "M Alpina" pressures all the time. This required me to change the axis values of the "D" maps since they were different (hence the above comment).

You may ask what the point of doing this was if I was just going to run all of the stock maps, so here's my answer:

My goal in the end was always to have the Alpina B3 flash, but with stock "D" and "S" mode shift points. It appears that there are some undiscovered maps and switches within the Alpina B3 file (shift delays, torque thresholds, etc…), so patching in the stock shift points was the most sensible method to achieve my goal. Changing the "D" and "S/M" pressures was the icing on the cake.

The results have been pleasing so far. I might try to raise some of the pressures as well as the 5->6 shift points a little, but overall, I’m pleased.

One last thing:

How confident are we in regards to the Y axis locations of the shift point maps? I noticed that some of them are using the same addresses for their axis values. Was this intentional? Also, the last map seems to have its axis values hard coded. I would have expected all of the shiftmaps to have the same overall structure, but who knows.

[DWR]

Originally Posted by bradsm87

Also can we go back a step and confirm that the 8HP map pack is the one to get for clues? You mentioned it before and I want to confirm it's not a typo.

Not a typo. I have not seen it.

[bradsm87]

Originally Posted by DWR

Not a typo. I have not seen it.

What? You haven't seen it?

How do you know it's helpful if you haven't seen it or do you just mean you personally haven't seen it and another xHP person takes care of the table definitions?

[Hoooper]

So, I got the new stage 3 v1_2 tune and it's great, but seriously whose bright idea was it to lock out 2nd in m from a stop?

Edit: sounds like they are deleting that from the file soon, good to know. Aside from that the stage 3 v1_2 is exactly what I wanted from this trans tune

[Bimmerguy1987]

Has anyone run this with USB C with a Google pixel? Or any of the newer Android products? I have tried a few USB to obd2 readers and they don't connect.

Also, if someone has a link to the obd2-usb connector please let me know so I can compare it to the ones I have.

[bradsm87]

Originally Posted by Joemann892

Has anyone run this with USB C with a Google pixel? Or any of the newer Android products? I have tried a few USB to obd2 readers and they don't connect.

Also, if someone has a link to the obd2-usb connector please let me know so I can compare it to the ones I have.

Not any USB to OBD cables will do. It needs to be a K+DCAN cable to suit BMWs.

[DWR]

Originally Posted by bradsm87

What? You haven't seen it?

How do you know it's helpful if you haven't seen it or do you just mean you personally haven't seen it and another xHP person takes care of the table definitions?

I am not aware of any Damos/A2L/mappack for the ZF6HP transmissions. That is why we must use transmissions that share control strategies, etc. and have documentation available. I shared which mappack I would like to see. I have reasons I cannot share. Very sorry to be so cryptic, but there are reasons.

xHP is a commercial venture. I am not part of xHP. Mik325tds and I agreed in the beginning that we would not seek any profit for our efforts. I'm not going to answer any questions that I think might negatively impact the early stages of success for xHP (some of which will not be obvious). In the future. if I do not respond, it is nothing personal.

If you would like to have discussions on how to discover maps, what maps might be missing, how to use the maps, etc. that would be great. BTW, your idea about mapping the axis for tunability is good. For the most part, being able to change the axis in a "bulk edit" would be very helpful.

[bradsm87]

Originally Posted by DWR

I am not aware of any Damos/A2L/mappack for the ZF6HP transmissions. That is why we must use transmissions that share control strategies, etc. and have documentation available. I shared which mappack I would like to see. I have reasons I cannot share. Very sorry to be so cryptic, but there are reasons.

xHP is a commercial venture. I am not part of xHP. Mik325tds and I agreed in the beginning that we would not seek any profit for our efforts. I'm not going to answer any questions that I think might negatively impact the early stages of success for xHP (some of which will not be obvious). In the future. if I do not respond, it is nothing personal.

If you would like to have discussions on how to discover maps, what maps might be missing, how to use the maps, etc. that would be great. BTW, your idea about mapping the axis for tunability is good. For the most part, being able to change the axis in a "bulk edit" would be very helpful.

Thanks for letting me know. I understand a lot better now. I thought you were a part of xHP for a start.

Another thing I'm toying with the idea of is to just port the XDF tables to an ECUFlash XML, which is better than TunerPro in most ways. Better graphing, can edit axises in the actual tables, can choose common conversions from a drop-down etc.

[DWR]

Originally Posted by bradsm87

Another thing I'm toying with the idea of is to just port the XDF tables to an ECUFlash XML, which is better than TunerPro in most ways. Better graphing, can edit axises in the actual tables, can choose common conversions from a drop-down etc.

That sounds interesting. Can you share some screenshots?

[bradsm87]

Originally Posted by DWR

That sounds interesting. Can you share some screenshots?

I meant toying with the idea of but haven't started anything yet. I'll have a good play with ECUFlash later today with another ROM so I can weigh up the pros/cons of TunerPro vs ECUFlash to see if it's worth the 4 or so hours to change it over.

[DWR]

Originally Posted by bradsm87

I meant toying with the idea of but haven't started anything yet. I'll have a good play with ECUFlash later today with another ROM so I can weigh up the pros/cons of TunerPro vs ECUFlash to see if it's worth the 4 or so hours to change it over.

Creating a "map" of a group of axis is a 2 minute exercise in TunerPro.
ECUFlash map images are really nice. If I were doing a lot of tuning I would probably consider it more seriously.

[bradsm87]

Originally Posted by DWR

Creating a "map" of a group of axis is a 2 minute exercise in TunerPro.
ECUFlash map images are really nice. If I were doing a lot of tuning I would probably consider it more seriously.

Also TunerPro doesn't calculate percentages and offsets properly if the item is more than two decimal places. You have to copy and paste to Excel, do the calculation and copy back. It's annoying on N54 DME work. That issue might not apply to 6HP work though.