DINAN M5 ECU Tune (?)

[Boss330]

Originally Posted by Mike@N54Tuning.com

I think the sweet spot for the current piggybacks is 3psi on pump gas and 5psi on race gas. Switzer, BMS, and all the other piggyback tuners I know of are running these levels for some time now and I've yet to hear of any damage.

To take it to the next level I think a new generation of CAN based piggybacks will be required. Or methanol injection.

On repairs whether you agree with it or not likely if someone blew a motor they would just remove the after market parts and warranty it. As the piggybacks leave no trace left behind once removed. But I checked getbmwparts.com and a rmfd short block from BMW is "only" $18k + labor which would be an expensive way to repair it. More likely you'd just do a rebuild, replace the faulty piston with a new OEM one, rebalance, etc, and be looking at less than $10k out the door. I understand some of you guys pay almost that for your exhaust systems, lol.

Mike

AC Schnitzer use CAN based piggybacks.

[Mike@N54Tuning.com]

Originally Posted by DrewM5

Are you telling me that BMW will not be able to detect that there were increased boost levels? I find that hard to believe since they can track just about everything else. For example, many of the E60 tunes increased the max rpms. If you were to blow your engine and then remove the tune, BMW could still detect the fact that the rev limit had been exceeded, when and how may times.

Correct. The tuning is setup in such a way that the DME is unaware of the true boost levels.

Mike

[Mike@N54Tuning.com]

Originally Posted by Boss330

AC Schnitzer use CAN based piggybacks.

The most popular CAN based piggyback in use today is the JB4. But BMS has not adapted it to the M5 yet. I hope they do some day.

Mike

[Boss330]

Originally Posted by Mike@N54Tuning.com

The most popular CAN based piggyback in use today is the JB4. But BMS has not adapted it to the M5 yet. I hope they do some day.

Mike

I don't think the JB4 is widely used by tuners here in Europe though. Almost every company are now using some variation on this box (don't remember who's the manufacturer):





http://preisliste.ac-schnitzer.de/ac.../110082360.pdf

[gmd2003]

Originally Posted by Boss330

AC Schnitzer use CAN based piggybacks.

Yep which is why they can safely run more boost than BMS. Mike I have only seen one dyno of +3psi with the BMS on pump gas and the torque curve looked HORRIBLE. I mean less torque than stock in the 4500 rpm range , massive knock sensing horrible. + 5psi with the BMS is buying a whole new motor, no way I'd do that with any fuel.

[Mike@N54Tuning.com]

Originally Posted by gmd2003

Yep which is why they can safely run more boost than BMS. Mike I have only seen one dyno of +3psi with the BMS on pump gas and the torque curve looked HORRIBLE. I mean less torque than stock in the 4500 rpm range , massive knock sensing horrible. + 5psi with the BMS is buying a whole new motor, no way I'd do that with any fuel.

I'm not aware of anyone running a CAN piggyback on the s63tu yet. Do you have a link to the install guide?

On Stage1 with pump gas I've seen plenty of clean dynos. I'm starting to think you just have an anti-BMS agenda as I see you pop up in every thread mentioning their products negatively. FYI if you monitor timing/knock on these cars when pushing things too far knock comes up at higher RPM a bit past peak power, not peak torque at lower rpm. So if your dyno has issues around peak torque its not likely to be knock related. More likely trans intervention/throttle related. You'd have to study the details of the specific instance though to determine that.

PS here is a forum member's pump gas Stage1 dyno. Note more hp and torque vs stock and a curve that mirrors the stock curve in terms of smoothness. Both stock and tuned curves are a bit wavy as they left the dyno smoothing setting at 1 instead of 5.

http://f10.m5post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=917077



Mike

[Tom C]

Originally Posted by Boss330

I don't think the JB4 is widely used by tuners here in Europe though. Almost every company are now using some variation on this box (don't remember who's the manufacturer):





http://preisliste.ac-schnitzer.de/ac.../110082360.pdf

http://www.racechip.com/chiptuning/b...12kw/index.php

RaceChip?

[gmd2003]

Originally Posted by Mike@N54Tuning.com

I'm not aware of anyone running a CAN piggyback on the s63tu yet. Do you have a link to the install guide?

On Stage1 with pump gas I've seen plenty of clean dynos. I'm starting to think you just have an anti-BMS agenda as I see you pop up in every thread mentioning their products negatively. FYI if you monitor timing/knock on these cars when pushing things too far knock comes up at higher RPM a bit past peak power, not peak torque at lower rpm. So if your dyno has issues around peak torque its not likely to be knock related. More likely trans intervention/throttle related. You'd have to study the details of the specific instance though to determine that.

PS here is a forum member's pump gas Stage1 dyno. Note more hp and torque vs stock and a curve that mirrors the stock curve in terms of smoothness. Both stock and tuned curves are a bit wavy as they left the dyno smoothing setting at 1 instead of 5.



Mike

Stage 1 is not +3 psi . I agree stage 1 ( +2.2 psi) works well on pump gas . This is the only dyno I've seen of +3 psi on a car with DP's akra and BMS on 94 octane pump gas and it doesn't look good, wouldn't you agree . I said it makes 620whp with DP's on the stage 1 setting on 93 octane which is not 3psi , how is that anti BMS . Most of the other piggybacks from Manhart etc utilize tunes in conjunction with their piggybacks to optimize timing / fueling this they can run more boost and get a little higher HP . For the money BMS is a good deal but I get annoyed when people say turn it up from stage 1 to 3 psi, it will be fine when we have not seen sufficient evidence for that .
Hit the wrong graph this is Terry's race gas 96 mix on 3 psi which looks ok .

[gmd2003]

Originally Posted by Mike@N54Tuning.com

I'm not aware of anyone running a CAN piggyback on the s63tu yet. Do you have a link to the install guide?

On Stage1 with pump gas I've seen plenty of clean dynos. I'm starting to think you just have an anti-BMS agenda as I see you pop up in every thread mentioning their products negatively. FYI if you monitor timing/knock on these cars when pushing things too far knock comes up at higher RPM a bit past peak power, not peak torque at lower rpm. So if your dyno has issues around peak torque its not likely to be knock related. More likely trans intervention/throttle related. You'd have to study the details of the specific instance though to determine that.

PS here is a forum member's pump gas Stage1 dyno. Note more hp and torque vs stock and a curve that mirrors the stock curve in terms of smoothness. Both stock and tuned curves are a bit wavy as they left the dyno smoothing setting at 1 instead of 5.

http://f10.m5post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=917077



Mike

This is MKarims 3 psi dyno on 94 octane pump gas with DP's which is not .

[Boss330]

Originally Posted by Tom C

http://www.racechip.com/chiptuning/b...12kw/index.php

RaceChip?

They don't make them AFAIK. Because many Euro tuners have the same housing, just with different branding on...

http://www.remus.eu/powerizer/


http://www.chiptuning.com/eng/shop/d...nu=BMW&model=3 Series (F30, F31) (2012-...)&motor=320i 2.0 184 PS aut.

[avlnch]

ECU cutting the fuel 1000rpm's early.. defiantly not good.

Let's just hope that DINAN did in fact break the M5 ECU encryption and are not far out from releasing it.

[M5Rlz]

Originally Posted by gmd2003

Stage 1 is not +3 psi . I agree stage 1 ( +2.2 psi) works well on pump gas . This is the only dyno I've seen of +3 psi on a car with DP's akra and BMS on 94 octane pump gas and it doesn't look good, wouldn't you agree . I said it makes 620whp with DP's on the stage 1 setting on 93 octane which is not 3psi , how is that anti BMS . Most of the other piggybacks from Manhart etc utilize tunes in conjunction with their piggybacks to optimize timing / fueling this they can run more boost and get a little higher HP . For the money BMS is a good deal but I get annoyed when people say turn it up from stage 1 to 3 psi, it will be fine when we have not seen sufficient evidence for that .
Hit the wrong graph this is Terry's race gas 96 mix on 3 psi which looks ok .

he specifically told me to only use 3lbs in limited track settings with 100 octane which I can easily get... I certainly don't think its perfected to the point where I'd consider it safe to just drive and boost around town like I do with the 2.2 which I've been safely using for the last 5k or more.

[M5Rlz]

Originally Posted by avlnch

Let's just hope that DINAN did in fact break the M5 ECU encryption and are not far out from releasing it.

Thats what I'm hoping on, but the fact that it's shaping to be a piggyback and might not have software like Every other car they do is somewhat concerning. Dinan doesn't strike me as a company that would do a piggyback unless they had to as its much easier to send out software then hardware to local installers.

[avlnch]

Originally Posted by 335iRlz

Thats what I'm hoping on, but the fact that it's shaping to be a piggyback and might not have software like Every other car they do is somewhat concerning. Dinan doesn't strike me as a company that would do a piggyback unless they had to as its much easier to send out software then hardware to local installers.

Just found something..

[gmd2003]

Originally Posted by 335iRlz

he specifically told me to only use 3lbs in limited track settings with 100 octane which I can easily get... I certainly don't think its perfected to the point where I'd consider it safe to just drive and boost around town like I do with the 2.2 which I've been safely using for the last 5k or more.

Thank you ! I think Mike didn't know we have a different TMap sensor and don't run + 3psi like the N63 stage 1 . I just hate it when people argue when they don't all the facts .

[avlnch]

I hope it's not a piggyback.. but what is a DINAN TCU (sounds like a piggyback device to me)?

[Boss330]

Originally Posted by Spinny02

I agree that he did not go in to details but he stated his opinion of piggybacks and why they can't accomplish what needs to happen because the amount of sensors in the system that have to be fooled.

Seems like Dinan has chosen a piggyback, or TCU in Dinan speak...

[Mike@N54Tuning.com]

Originally Posted by avlnch

ECU cutting the fuel 1000rpm's early.. defiantly not good.

Let's just hope that DINAN did in fact break the M5 ECU encryption and are not far out from releasing it.

In 5th gear you hit the 155mph speed limiter around 6000rpm. The speed limiter is the "fuel cut". I hope Dinan removes it!

Mike

[Mike@N54Tuning.com]

Originally Posted by gmd2003

Stage 1 is not +3 psi . I agree stage 1 ( +2.2 psi) works well on pump gas . This is the only dyno I've seen of +3 psi on a car with DP's akra and BMS on 94 octane pump gas and it doesn't look good, wouldn't you agree . I said it makes 620whp with DP's on the stage 1 setting on 93 octane which is not 3psi , how is that anti BMS . Most of the other piggybacks from Manhart etc utilize tunes in conjunction with their piggybacks to optimize timing / fueling this they can run more boost and get a little higher HP . For the money BMS is a good deal but I get annoyed when people say turn it up from stage 1 to 3 psi, it will be fine when we have not seen sufficient evidence for that .
Hit the wrong graph this is Terry's race gas 96 mix on 3 psi which looks ok .

The default +2.25psi setting is actually +3.00psi on an s63tu. This is the suggested setting for pump gas. The +3.00psi setting is actually around +4.00psi. The reason for this is the interface shows the increase limit as if there was an n63 2.5 bar map sensor but the s63tu has a 3.5 bar map sensor.

Secondly, you are mistaken that those torque drops on the dyno are tuning related or knock. They are DME torque management related. When dyno testing a DCT especially in 5th gear it sometimes decides to cut boost in the midrange. You can look at the logs and watch boost drop there. It's a dyno only artifact and its not entirely consistent. Some runs it will hold full boost there and other runs it will decide to drop it. It does this both stock and tuned. 4th gear pulls rarely get that issue but the runs are so short you often don't make as much power. So many prefer to do the runs in 5th.

Finally, the other tuners are just adding +3-4psi on top of the competition/press flash. The CP runs a little less peak timing and a little richer AFR so has more room for manipulation. So if you happen to have the CP you can likely go a little more aggressively than the 2.25 pump gas and 3.0 race gas mix settings with a similar safety margin.

Mike

[gmd2003]

Originally Posted by Mike@N54Tuning.com

The default +2.25psi setting is actually +3.00psi on an s63tu. This is the suggested setting for pump gas. The +3.00psi setting is actually around +4.00psi. The reason for this is the interface shows the increase limit as if there was an n63 2.5 bar map sensor but the s63tu has a 3.5 bar map sensor.

Secondly, you are mistaken that those torque drops on the dyno are tuning related or knock. They are DME torque management related. When dyno testing a DCT especially in 5th gear it sometimes decides to cut boost in the midrange. You can look at the logs and watch boost drop there. It's a dyno only artifact and its not entirely consistent. Some runs it will hold full boost there and other runs it will decide to drop it. It does this both stock and tuned. 4th gear pulls rarely get that issue but the runs are so short you often don't make as much power. So many prefer to do the runs in 5th.

Finally, the other tuners are just adding +3-4psi on top of the competition/press flash. The CP runs a little less peak timing and a little richer AFR so has more room for manipulation. So if you happen to have the CP you can likely go a little more aggressively than the 2.25 pump gas and 3.0 race gas mix settings with a similar safety margin.

Mike

Mike the instructions on the BMS specifically tell you to change the setting to +2.2 psi for the S63 TU . Bc of people saying + 3 is ok on pump gas , the owner turned the setting to + 3 psi which is way more than he should have on pump gas . I'm talking about settings not measured psi , which since I don't and won't own the BMS in its current state are not sure about . That midrange tq is less than stock and 450 lb feet is not the torque limit , come on you're better than that . And that dyno was not in 5th gear according to the owner as I recall .

[Mike@N54Tuning.com]

Originally Posted by gmd2003

Mike the instructions on the BMS specifically tell you to change the setting to +2.2 psi for the S63 TU . Bc of people saying + 3 is ok on pump gas , the owner turned the setting to + 3 psi which is way more than he should have on pump gas . I'm talking about settings not measured psi , which since I don't and won't own the BMS in its current state are not sure about . That midrange tq is less than stock and 450 lb feet is not the torque limit , come on you're better than that . And that dyno was not in 5th gear according to the owner as I recall .

It looks like a DCT 5th gear dyno due to the torque limit down low and abrupt cut off up top. But I know nothing more about that dyno than the chart you posted. If you have a link to addl info and logs from the run I'd be happy to offer more detailed analysis.

For starters, if you are going to say its making less torque than stock, we need to see the stock tuning run from the same dyno/gear/day to establish what stock torque was.

The dyno I linked above looks as it should on pump gas when everything is setup and measured properly. 30-50whp gains across the board.

Regarding settings, the 3.0 (+4psi) setting is meant for a race gas mix. I'm not sure how often I need to repeat the same fact. At some point people just need to read the manual.

Mike

[Boss330]

Originally Posted by Mike@N54Tuning.com

Regarding settings, the 3.0 (+4psi) setting is meant for a race gas mix. I'm not sure how often I need to repeat the same fact. At some point people just need to read the manual.

Mike

Reading the manual is good

But it would have been FAR better to have a product that is programmed properly! Having a program interface that requires input of a "+Psi" number that isn't related to the actual boost increase makes no sense. It would have been far better to have a code that made no sense to anyone so that the operator actually HAD to look in the manual to find the correct code for +3Psi. As it is now, the operator is led to believe that a input of +3Psi actually means that.

IMHO, such a method is a disaster waiting to happen as people either loose their manuals or don't read them. That's just how we humans are put together. Legal responsibility is one thing. Reputation is another.

Just imagine having a fuel gauge in your car that, by design, reads different from reality and where the driver has to read the manual to know what a reading of 1/2 tank really means... Does it mean 3/4 or 1/3

Why not do at least that minimum of reprogramming of the BMS interface, so that +3Psi actually means +3Psi?