ECU Remap

S

stevenwu

Well-Known Member
Hi pal,

Can also try ST Power, I think they have a new user-adjustable AFR system, piggyback type........check the New items column.

Best is dyno tuned, you will know where you gain in torque across the rpm. Ofcause torque gain at high-end give good HP number.

Will not get 'fool' with improved throttle response as torque gain if tuned by dyno. Since most of the cars nowsaday are 'drive by wire', electronic accelarator paddle. If ones will to alter the paddle movement by small increase in paddle being depressed is equal to 'full throttle'- (fully depressed), then this will give very responsive throttle response as results.

Anyway, I am not anyway related to ST Power or so ever, just very interested to see how optimising AFR can achieve ?% of the torque gain, best is across the rpm range.

thanks
 
stevenwu said:
Hi pal,

Can also try ST Power, I think they have a new user-adjustable AFR system, piggyback type........check the New items column.

Best is dyno tuned, you will know where you gain in torque across the rpm. Ofcause torque gain at high-end give good HP number.

Will not get 'fool' with improved throttle response as torque gain if tuned by dyno. Since most of the cars nowsaday are 'drive by wire', electronic accelarator paddle. If ones will to alter the paddle movement by small increase in paddle being depressed is equal to 'full throttle'- (fully depressed), then this will give very responsive throttle response as results.

Anyway, I am not anyway related to ST Power or so ever, just very interested to see how optimising AFR can achieve ?% of the torque gain, best is across the rpm range.

thanks
Click to expand...

Bro... neber read my thread ah...

Dun think its beneficial cos even if tuned, the stock ECU will overwrite the mapping.

Why not u ask desmond to trial it on ur car?
 
Hi,

Looking at the control loop point of view, I think it can be done to 'fool' the ECU but to what level is the answers that we (layman) will not know.

I believe there is % of torque gain since the default settings programmed by the design center are always in the 'high tolerance' side. These values have to let the cars run properly in all conditions (temp, humidity, altitude, different Octave fuel etc). BMW should have run many many tests under all conditions to obtain these numbers. The ECU itself will also have its own self-adapt to accommendate changes in variation of conditions (but only limited range).

I believed this is the same as the ECU self adaptation of a simple disc drive that run under different conditions in the field.

I believed that pushing to the limits will gain torque but increasing chances of 'pinking', increase stress to the engine, increase wear and tear, at the saturation point.

Coming to the question of whether my car will be the first to try,.........I want to know the 'max possible' gain that optimising AFR can get first, from those 'old birds'.............hee.ee.e.e.e.

How much did you get from superchips ? torque increase or throttle response ?

I believe Superchips and Hiop are mod that change the factory default values (new target) so will not 'neutralise' over time.

Happy New Year to you and your family.
 
stevenwu said:
Hi,

Looking at the control loop point of view, I think it can be done to 'fool' the ECU but to what level is the answers that we (layman) will not know.

I believe there is % of torque gain since the default settings programmed by the design center are always in the 'high tolerance' side. These values have to let the cars run properly in all conditions (temp, humidity, altitude, different Octave fuel etc). BMW should have run many many tests under all conditions to obtain these numbers. The ECU itself will also have its own self-adapt to accommendate changes in variation of conditions (but only limited range).

I believed this is the same as the ECU self adaptation of a simple disc drive that run under different conditions in the field.

I believed that pushing to the limits will gain torque but increasing chances of 'pinking', increase stress to the engine, increase wear and tear, at the saturation point.

Coming to the question of whether my car will be the first to try,.........I want to know the 'max possible' gain that optimising AFR can get first, from those 'old birds'.............hee.ee.e.e.e.

How much did you get from superchips ? torque increase or throttle response ?

I believe Superchips and Hiop are mod that change the factory default values (new target) so will not 'neutralise' over time.

Happy New Year to you and your family.
Click to expand...

Wah... 1st time see such a long post along with substance from you!
knn... so many time lunch together also never hear this kind of knowledge from you. Next lunch you better share. kekkeke

Did u ask for the price of superchip? Anyway...its S$700 for custom tuning when I last did it in 2002, now duno.
My dyno chart is still at ST Power, when u there just ask them to retrive it.
(165hp from 150hp, 211nm from 190nm??)

However, just to relate the dyno figures on the road...
Dragged with a stock 2.2L (170hp, torque 210nm)
My car was on par with his! Simply to say tat if anyone of us just launch alittle later, he has lost.
On North South highway, over took the 2.2L at 210kph (hanged) and top at 230kph.

On Gtech, best timing was 10.4sec, average was 10.7sec

As Shuan has said, Superchip is not a piggyback. Duno abt Hiop.
 
Whisky_Tango said:
My dyno chart is still at ST Power, when u there just ask them to retrive it. (165hp from 150hp, 211nm from 190nm??)

However, just to relate the dyno figures on the road...
Dragged with a stock 2.2L (170hp, torque 210nm)
My car was on par with his! Simply to say tat if anyone of us just launch alittle later, he has lost.
On North South highway, over took the 2.2L at 210kph (hanged) and top at 230kph.
Click to expand...

Eric, juz curious. Your bhp went up to 165bhp and torque went up to 211nm. Compared to the 320 2.2, your bhp is still lesser by 5 bhp and torque is only 1 nm more. So what was the factor that enabled u to overtake at 210kph? Cld it be becoz the 320 2.2's power has been overed declared on paper by BMW or some of those power was lost in driving other parts of the car? ;)
 
area under the curve in the upper rpms probably was greater even though the curve had lower peaks.
 
T6 said:
Eric, juz curious. Your bhp went up to 165bhp and torque went up to 211nm. Compared to the 320 2.2, your bhp is still lesser by 5 bhp and torque is only 1 nm more. So what was the factor that enabled u to overtake at 210kph?
Click to expand...

Shuan is right. After superchip mapping, my power curve maintain almost straight and at higher rpm. Where stock power curve, once it reaches peak power it will dip down and this is where I over took the 2.2L taking account that we are in the same rpm range.

T6 said:
Cld it be becoz the 320 2.2's power has been overed declared on paper by BMW or some of those power was lost in driving other parts of the car? ;)
Click to expand...

Unlikely, maybe +/- 3% due to climate, petrol octane.
 
T6 said:
Eric, juz curious. Your bhp went up to 165bhp and torque went up to 211nm. Compared to the 320 2.2, your bhp is still lesser by 5 bhp and torque is only 1 nm more. So what was the factor that enabled u to overtake at 210kph? Cld it be becoz the 320 2.2's power has been overed declared on paper by BMW or some of those power was lost in driving other parts of the car? ;)
Click to expand...

Andy... It's gearing... :)

The M52 and the M54 320i has got different gearing... :)
 
Thanx Shawn.

The problem is tat no one knows the true value of the transmission losses although there are mathematical calulations.

One can only estimate the losses, example between 18% to 25%.

Dyno at the wheels will give you the exact power but might not be 100% accurate becos loading is variable now.

Unless numerous tests/dyno are done with same parameters and perhaps 2 cars for comparison.

At the end of the day, its just too much trouble and before you know it, you looking to sell the car for a better one.
 
i thought the losses are calculated when you are doing the first deceleration from the first run. there it will calculate how much drag in total are your mechanicals giving when there's no engine power input. it shouldnt be a flat loss rate for everyone thing.
 
coastdown is only a rough measure of driveline loss. better than nothing, yet still not very accurate. the different components of the loss - friction, inertia - increase in magnitude differently.. some linearly with acceleration or speed, others exponentially. Degree of each depends on transmission type, gearing, power, fluids, component masses and surface areas. therein lies the problem with arriving at a definite transmission loss and being able to know for certain crank power by adding transmission losses to wheel power. the measurement of wheel power alone is an issue.

for a pure wheel number figure (not for tuning), I believe it is hard to top a standard inertia type dyno since it is much simpler, less reliant on pressure sensors, strain gauges. What would be better is a inertia type dyno that somehow attaches to the hubs. Doesn't seem to exist right now though probably because of the coupling to a large mass issue.. having masses on either side of the car would require alot more space
 
thats why dyno's good for a agaration gauge. and is useful when using back the same dyno to test relative performance of various mods. any mods that yields less than 5bhp or even up to 10bhp need not be dynoed coz the variation between runs can amount to that much.

so dynos are useful if you take them to be just an indicative.

we should simply compare 1/4 mile runs shouldnt we. hehehe
 
Racebred said:
at crank.
Click to expand...

thanks but what bro stevenwu wrote:
'Hi,

My dyno chart is still at ST Power, when u there just ask them to retrive it.
(165hp from 150hp, 211nm from 190nm??) '


ST power dyno at crank also??? sorry for my stupid qns :screwedu:
 
The dyno machine is taking reading (torque) from the rollers (built-in strain gauge) which is rotated by the wheels.

So all the time, the machine is reading wheel torque and calculate a HP.

But the computer, can also give you torque and HP at the engine crankshaft. This is done with input of transmission losses and calculates again.

So results at crank or at wheels will be provided to you. Just that which you prefer.

Of course at the wheels is more accurate than crank value.
 
Whisky_Tango said:
The dyno machine is taking reading (torque) from the rollers (built-in strain gauge) which is rotated by the wheels.

So all the time, the machine is reading wheel torque and calculate a HP.

But the computer, can also give you torque and HP at the engine crankshaft. This is done with input of transmission losses and calculates again.

So results at crank or at wheels will be provided to you. Just that which you prefer.

Of course at the wheels is more accurate than crank value.
Click to expand...

u mean can chose which reading we one?? :thinking: :thinking:
 
loveE3series said:
u mean can chose which reading we one?? :thinking: :thinking:
Click to expand...

Yes, all u need is to tell them.

So say total run is 6 runs

First 3 at wheels and last 3 at crank.

Pay additional $20 for AFR reading. This is useful for any ECU tuning.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Members online

No members online now.
Total: 259 (members: 0, guests: 259)

Forum statistics

Threads
82,757
Messages
1,019,359
Members
78,670
Latest member
oxbett2com

Latest posts

Back
Top