[gboop]

Bravo Terry! You're the Bill Gates of the BMW tuning scene.
Great business sense, but IMO the execution must be flawless.
I wonder what the competition will focus on next?

[chili36]

Originally Posted by BrianMN

So a couple questions that should be pretty easy:

Q: Will CPS offsetting (Proactively reducing ign. advance) help the car reduce knock and related timing dropouts?

Q: Is this suggested to be added to JB3/4 tunes?

Q: If it was so easy to make, why not do it until now?

Q: The consensus for 3 years has been that CPS offsetting is not needed nor desirable...what changed?

Some of your questions answered...

Originally Posted by Terry @ BMS

The short term plan is we will tune a worst case offset curve in to the JB4 based on boost, RPM, IAT, gear, and whatever other factors come up during tuning. So maybe 8 degrees of offset @ 6500rpm. Then add a 0-100% user adjustable for you guys to play with.

It's not going to be safer or faster for most. But I've found CPS to be sort of a cult thing. Team CPS will use this module to do JB4 logs showing how great it is and team DME will use this module to do JB4 logs showing how useless it is. So just pick a team. :drinking: The group with the highest theoretical benefit are those on 91 octane at 13psi+ boost levels. Those with 93 octane will have only a minor benefit. Those on race gas/meth will have zero benefit. Large turbo guys and nitrous guys should have a big safety benefit.

We probably won't bother with JB3 user adjustable support although the module itself is compatible with any tune. If not connected to a JB4 it will default to a medium curve based on RPM and its rate of gain. Not very precise but would be OK for JB3 guys, a generic nitrous retard, etc.

http://www.n54tech.com/forums/showpo...4&postcount=38

[Jeff@TopGearSolutions]

Originally Posted by ExpensiveTaste

Well its not really reinventing the wheel. It's using the full functionality of the factory ECU. Why would you pick constantly tuning the car manually when the ECU has the ability to pick the best tune for the given conditions? Obviously, you could lower the timing to nothing and then you would never show timing dropouts but why leave power/efficiency on the table? How do we know that the factory ECU isn't very conservative with these 3 degree timing dropouts? Any kind of knock sensed and drop the timing. And we all know that the internal combustion engine always knocks but we try and avoid larger knock events. There is no perfect "boom".

I as well as 10's of thousands of people have been tuning cars successfully with a simple load vs RPM tables for ignition and fuel seamlessly with consistent power.

The difference between a simple load vs RPM table VS todays technology is compensation tables. Which I do agree are important. We know the stock DME does have some sort of compensation tables in place in some respect. Specifically and how I dont know.

In the future of tuning....as long as the tuning program your working with has logical built in to compensate for IAT, Oil Temp, Gear, ETC ETC It can be a strong tune in any condition.

I agree a simple load vs RPM table with no ability to adjust via compensation tables would be quite the head ache.

My last car ran seamlessly in any weather or humidty.

IT was tuned in 30 degree weather with about 40% humidity, and was able to do 13 pulls in a row in 100 degree 80+% humidity without 1 knock.

With the right control and tuning you should be able to find consistent power.

Keyword being control.

Not much else to say really.

Edit- I think I agree with you, it was just said different. LOL

[ExpensiveTaste]

Originally Posted by JPSlick

I agree a simple load vs RPM table with no ability to adjust via compensation tables would be quite the head ache.

lol ya, I have simple advance tables in the Mustang and tuning that is a PITA. It runs the timing you enter no ifs, ands, or buts.

[Jeff@TopGearSolutions]

Ya my last car ran the timing tables you input no matter what, and if it knocked 100 times, it still ran those timing tables (under WOT).

The only good thing was it had compensation for IAT as well as gear.

So like I said, If i was able to tune it in 30 degree weather and have it run back to back dyno runs in 100 degree weather with insane humidity and not knock once.... that should be sufficient.

[Litos]

Originally Posted by Terry@BMS

The short term plan is we will tune a worst case offset curve in to the JB4 based on boost, RPM, IAT, gear, and whatever other factors come up during tuning. So maybe 8 degrees of offset @ 6500rpm. Then add a 0-100% user adjustable for you guys to play with.

It's not going to be safer or faster for most. But I've found CPS to be sort of a cult thing. Team CPS will use this module to do JB4 logs showing how great it is and team DME will use this module to do JB4 logs showing how useless it is. So just pick a team. :drinking: The group with the highest theoretical benefit are those on 91 octane at 13psi+ boost levels. Those with 93 octane will have only a minor benefit. Those on race gas/meth will have zero benefit. Large turbo guys and nitrous guys should have a big safety benefit.

We probably won't bother with JB3 user adjustable support although the module itself is compatible with any tune. If not connected to a JB4 it will default to a medium curve based on RPM and its rate of gain. Not very precise but would be OK for JB3 guys, a generic nitrous retard, etc.

seems to me like i still won't need it simply due to the fact that 1) i don't WOT my car everyday and 2) he's saying i won't see much benefit other than "knowing that it controls ignition advance".

is he also saying that the user themselves will have to control it manualy?

[ExpensiveTaste]

Originally Posted by Litos

seems to me like i still won't need it simply due to the fact that 1) i don't WOT my car everyday and 2) he's saying i won't see much benefit other than "knowing that it controls ignition advance".

is he also saying that the user themselves will have to control it manualy?

From what Terry has stated so far on N54Tech, the user will be able to control the CPS offset manually and they will also develop it to work with map 5 (autotuning). In all cases it's optional and most users who run map 1 (tune only) will not benefit much if using 93 octane. There will be no benefit to meth or race gas users other than another fail safe.

[Jeff@TopGearSolutions]

It benefits those that want PROACTIVE Ignition offset from stock mapping. Which should be everyone. Those who understanding tuning, will know how much to offset.

[Litos]

last 2 posts were extremely helpful.

i had origininally planned on running Map 1 until Map 5 was finalized.

with the creation of this new proiduct, it seems as if my plans are still 100%, i just need to buy this new "controller thing".

hopefully it does the shit on it's own because i don't wanna mess with it.

[Proper Motion LLC]

So now JB4 has the potential to be better than Procede because you can set and choose your ignition correction values?

[Clap135]

Originally Posted by Mike@N54Tuning.com

Most of those technical questions are better asked to BMS directly. My personal opinion is there are negative drawbacks on injection and VANOS timing and I don't want to see the misfire problem plaguing the other system crop up with the JB4. That real misfire problem is much worse than the imaginary knock problem in my opinion. Thankfully by having it optional it's not a fight about whether to get a JB4 or get another system. It's a fight about whether the JB4 CPS add on module is worth getting. I asked BMS re: potential cost and they said it's not finalized but probably in the $50-80 range depending on a couple variables to be determined. So if you believe in CPS you get a fully unlocked (all maps, user tunable, and no VIN lock) CAN piggyback with CPS for $530-560. If you don't believe in it you save a few bucks at $479. Pretty good prices if you ask me.

Mike

imaginery knock? that isn't a term, just like pre knock isnt a term either.

[Jeff@TopGearSolutions]

Originally Posted by Rysandro

So now JB4 has the potential to be better than Procede because you can set and choose your ignition correction values?

Neither are perfect....

[Proper Motion LLC]

Originally Posted by JPSlick

Neither are perfect....

Right, but this almost sounds like ATR for piggy backs lol

[Jeff@TopGearSolutions]

Originally Posted by Rysandro

Right, but this almost sounds like ATR for piggy backs lol

Not even close.... trust me I wish it were that easy. Ignition offset only goes so far. Its not optimally choosing ignition values, its simply offsetting the stock timing map. That's why I said neither are perfect.

Inputting your own values would be ideal.

No discredit to BMS, the implementation of these concepts is exactly why this thread started believe it or not. Its a call out to improve your product. You guys couldnt have asked for a better thread to come about.

Everyone wins.

[Forcefed3]

Originally Posted by FlyLow335i

lol (again)...i sincerely wanted to know your age...kinda your profession now too (what i do for a living always has me intrigued to know what others do for a living)

I am 16 and in high school, my daddy just bought me this wonderful car. Would you like to know how old he is too?

[rgpwr]

Originally Posted by gbreeE90

I am 16 and in high school, my daddy just bought me this wonderful car.

Sounds about right.

[Forcefed3]

Originally Posted by rgpwr

Sounds about right.

[ZTUNER]

Originally Posted by Clap135

imaginery knock? that isn't a term, just like pre knock isnt a term either.

Remember phantom knock from the mazda days ? Same ing in the dsm world.

Harry

[Ilma]

Originally Posted by ExpensiveTaste

From what Terry has stated so far on N54Tech, the user will be able to control the CPS offset manually and they will also develop it to work with map 5 (autotuning). In all cases it's optional and most users who run map 1 (tune only) will not benefit much if using 93 octane. There will be no benefit to meth or race gas users other than another fail safe.

I'm going to post a couple of logs you have seen before where I changed my CPS offset from 1.8 degrees in the first graph to 2.8 in the second.

They show the impact of introducing 1 additional degree of timing offset while using 98 octane gas........much higher octane than 93 that Terry states will see no benefit of CPS.

Point of story is you can actually end up with more overall advance by avoiding a knock event to adjust your timing curve for you.

[Jake@MOTIV]

Originally Posted by gbreeE90

I am 16 and in high school, my daddy just bought me this wonderful car. Would you like to know how old he is too?

i was actually being serious...but mmk

[Clap135]

Originally Posted by ZTUNER

Remember phantom knock from the mazda days ? Same ing in the dsm world.

Harry

These drops in ignition are not phantom knock though.

[Mike@N54Tuning.com]

Originally Posted by Ilma

I'm going to post a couple of logs you have seen before where I changed my CPS offset from 1.8 degrees in the first graph to 2.8 in the second.

They show the impact of introducing 1 additional degree of timing offset while using 98 octane gas........much higher octane than 93 that Terry states will see no benefit of CPS.

Point of story is you can actually end up with more overall advance by avoiding a knock event to adjust your timing curve for you.

Those timing drops are somewhat random in nature, vary with time under load, heat, etc. Just becuase you changed the offset does not necessarily mean that it reduced the likelihood for the drop. But either way I'm sure you're pleased to see the CPS feature will very soon be available with the JB4 as well.

Mike