[cstavaru]

Originally Posted by dzenno

sucks...must cost a small fortune to fix...

At Tischer, a 335i engine (remanufactured) costs $3682. While this is not cheap (mostly because of the labor cost to install), I wouldn't call it the end of the world either.

[enrita]

Its a 10K job in total... wont call that cheap....

[cn555ic]

I hope the person this happened to, is open to discuss the matter like Enrita did. He told Terry of his failure but we need to find out more instead of speculating. It would help the community. Like Scott stated this happened to a car that has the most aggressive setup possible on stock turbos and pump gas

[techlogik]

When did it become a common attitude that running any kind of meth was somehow a safe endeavor?

You are playing with fire particularly at those boost levels on a stock setup.

As Shiv stated, if you are not on top of the timing/boost at the point your have this stuff flowing....be prepared for blown parts on your engine. This is basic tuning and "Danger Will Robison" stuff.

Good thing most tuners have this under control and factor this into their solutions when offering meth support.

I would guess 99.9% of people running tunes on here would never be in the situation this thread is about. Running 15-16psi and tapering it down on high octane pump will probably result is little issues if any ever.

I think we are not getting much in the way of technical details since very little was given to begin with on this situation.

Subscribed.

[Mike@N54Tuning.com]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

Its not limiting boost that is the issue. It's about being able to limit ignition advance setpoint. Doesn't matter if you are running low boost or high boost. Or with meth or without meth. The need for timing control is there in all applications. It's just that the consequences of not having it are going to be most obvious in high boost/meth applications. You NEED to limit advance when meth harbor started flowing (or stops flowing suddenly). Just knocking down boost IS NOT ENOUGH.

It's insane to do what some are doing with boost without timing control. Its the biggest scam perpetrated in the n54 tuning world and not enough knowledgeable customers out there to recognize it.

Shiv I've seen many logs from your customers posted running 18psi+ and ZERO TIMING RETARD on meth and/or race gas. Just like in this case.

On the failsafe, when triggered the ECU instantly drops timing and closes the throttle body. The JB3 failsafe works by telling the ECU it is instantly several PSI over its target. The JB3 has an excellent meth failsafe but its not clear whether it was in place in this case.

Mike

[cn555ic]

Originally Posted by Mike@N54Tuning.com

Shiv I've seen many logs from your customers posted running 18psi+ and ZERO TIMING RETARD on meth and/or race gas. Just like in this case.

On the failsafe, when triggered the ECU instantly drops timing and closes the throttle body. The JB3 failsafe works by telling the ECU it is instantly several PSI over its target. The JB3 has an excellent meth failsafe but its not clear whether it was in place in this case.

Mike

I don't understand how anyone in their right mind would not have meth failsafe enabled running such an aggressive setup. It just doesn't make sense and by you and Terry saying you don't know it was working leads me to speculate it was not enabled. If it wasnt working I think the person has no clue to what he is doing with his car

[scottp999]

Originally Posted by Mike@N54Tuning.com

Mike

I've seen Terry say 18ohm is good for race gas or meth, wouldn't the 12 ohm be best for both at the same time (104 Octane + Meth).

BTW - You are now writing directly to Shiv on the timing debate. Look for this thread to go in the sh**** pronto. We have been down that path before and nothing results except for people siding in one camp or the other.

I think it's great that Terry is now recommending limiting boost to <=17 PSI when on meth and pump. Whoever blew this engine was either warned on the dangers, or just didn't care. How does someone get a 12ohm board, woud Terry have to be working with them for them to request and/or get one? Or is it a user modification?

I assume they have a big enough wallet that it's no big deal (hopefully).

Originally Posted by Terry @ BMS

With meth normally the 18ohm is the way to go....

[vasillalov]

Originally Posted by Mike@N54Tuning.com

...The JB3 has an excellent meth failsafe but its not clear whether it was in place in this case.

Mike

What do you mean by "whether it was in place in this case"? You mean to say that a JB3 customer can choose to disable safety mechanisms?

Sorry for the rough comment, but this seems rather idiotic to me from at least two points: a) BMS offering this option altogether and then praising the safety of their product, and b) users knowingly disabling safety mechanisms.

[cn555ic]

Originally Posted by vasillalov

What do you mean by "whether it was in place in this case"? You mean to say that a JB3 customer can choose to disable safety mechanisms?

Sorry for the rough comment, but this seems rather idiotic to me from at least two points: a) BMS offering this option altogether and then praising the safety of their product, and b) users knowingly disabling safety mechanisms.

No one in their right mind running that an aggressive setup would turn off the failsafe period or even run the car with it not working...Just plain dumb and careless...

[Sniz]

Originally Posted by vasillalov

What do you mean by "whether it was in place in this case"? You mean to say that a JB3 customer can choose to disable safety mechanisms?

Sorry for the rough comment, but this seems rather idiotic to me from at least two points: a) BMS offering this option altogether and then praising the safety of their product, and b) users knowingly disabling safety mechanisms.

I would assume you could simply not have the failsafe hooked up.

on my system I simply cant boost any higher than my low boost if the meth doesn't flow to the prescribed flow rate, seems safe to me.

[Sniz]

Originally Posted by cstavaru

At Tischer, a 335i engine (remanufactured) costs $3682. While this is not cheap (mostly because of the labor cost to install), I wouldn't call it the end of the world either.

man thats not bad at all!!

[vasillalov]

Originally Posted by Sniz

I would assume you could simply not have the failsafe hooked up.

The this sounds like the BMS product is not good because it should automatically detect if methanol is flowing or not. Also, the product should not even allow the engine to start if it detects a methanol system is installed but the failsafe is not connected. Its simple...

...or am I totally talking out of my ass here?

[scottp999]

Originally Posted by Sniz

man thats not bad at all!!

The car owner just posted on the other board. Said total for everything will be around $13000.

[Jeff@TopGearSolutions]

Originally Posted by vasillalov

The this sounds like the BMS product is not good because it should automatically detect if methanol is flowing or not. Also, the product should not even allow the engine to start if it detects a methanol system is installed but the failsafe is not connected. Its simple...

...or am I totally talking out of my ass here?

You're out of your a$$ as usual.

Terry can not control how people modify their boards or use their fail safes.

Jb3 implements safety via failsafes when in use... however the end user, just like any other tune has to set it up accordingly.

This does not disregard the fact that there can be more then one reason besides the failsafe being the problem if it is even the problem to begin with.

[Mike@N54Tuning.com]

Originally Posted by vasillalov

The this sounds like the BMS product is not good because it should automatically detect if methanol is flowing or not. Also, the product should not even allow the engine to start if it detects a methanol system is installed but the failsafe is not connected. Its simple...

...or am I totally talking out of my ass here?

The systems do whatever the user tells them to do. In the first post it said it was unclear whether the failsafe system was enabled. Apparently the customer would often disable the system for logging for some reason.

Mike

[enrita]

Failsafe was always on for racing as far i know and meth always under control . This is not a guy messing around himself and leaving things unchecked.
Meth flow can be monitored together with IAT while doing pulls as well.
Just for reference whats needed for a rebuild:
it is much more expensive in Sweden to rebuild an engine. there are tons of part that need to be replaced when you open it.
Cheaper is just to get a remanufactured engine from BMW but install costs is about 2000 USD to get out and 2000 to get it in.
All parts you see on page 2 and 3 which have the kod/Artikelnr besides Motorblock and kolv (pistons) and Tändstift (sparkplugs) are needed when you take apart one engine and put it back together. Antal means amount.

[OpenFlash]

Originally Posted by Mike@N54Tuning.com

Shiv I've seen many logs from your customers posted running 18psi+ and ZERO TIMING RETARD on meth and/or race gas. Just like in this case.

On the failsafe, when triggered the ECU instantly drops timing and closes the throttle body. The JB3 failsafe works by telling the ECU it is instantly several PSI over its target. The JB3 has an excellent meth failsafe but its not clear whether it was in place in this case.

Mike

And this is where BMS/Terry will suddenly understand why reverse engineering the Procede through datalog analysis hasn't work so well:

None of the secondary ignition retard corrections are reflected in the datalogs. They are applied after the ignition (map) correction stage. This has been the case since we released v4 and I'm surprised that you guys haven't figured that out. My suggestion is to care less about what we are doing/how we are doing it and more on what it takes to make your tune as safe as possible for end users. Post engine failure public service announcements don't cut it. Especially the guys that shell out $10k+ due to a tuning failure.

And ramping up the boost output signal in case of meth flow failure is ridiculous. All it does it close the throttle. But only after dozens of engine events. You need to apply a timing correction that takes less than 1 engine event to be induced. Oh wait... CPS offsetting doesn't work according to Terry.

I think Terry needs to learn a bit more about engine tuning before anything else. His approach to tuning conflicts with not only basic engine tuning theory but also common sense. And a service to those who really care about tuning their engine correctly, I think you should bow out of this argument. Because, no offense intended, the same suggestion/observation applies to you.

Shiv

[MisterSkiMask]

oh fer chrissakes this shit again.

[michael1284]

[chiaobaby]

hell hath no fury like a woman scorned

[Jeff@TopGearSolutions]

The point is the last two cars that had engine failure were from Sweden and were running excessive boost of 19+ PSI.

So it begs the question what is going on over there that is not going on over here.

Now normally I wouldnt segregate an entire country.... but maybe their fuel isnt up to par, or maybe they are pushing beyond limits we do over here?

There is a lot more people with tunes in the US then in other countries I would assume? So you would think if anything a country with more people using a product would have more cases of failure, but this is not the case.

I dont know, I'm just in for answer.

Not trying to point fingers, im just bringing up the obvious.

All I'm really trying to say is how ironic.

[cn555ic]

Originally Posted by JPSlick

The point is the last two cars that had engine failure were from Sweden and were running excessive boost of 19+ PSI.

So it begs the question what is going on over there that is not going on over here.

Now normally I wouldnt segregate an entire country.... but maybe their fuel isnt up to par, or maybe they are pushing beyond limits we do over here?

There is a lot more people with tunes in the US then in other countries I would assume? So you would think if anything a country with more people using a product would have more cases of failure, but this is not the case.

I dont know, I'm just in for answer.

Not trying to point fingers, im just bringing up the obvious.

All I'm really trying to say is how ironic.

They both were running high boost but one had upgraded turbos and the other stockers...
There is one more thing they had in common also that they both were running at the time of failure...thats one aspect that I am