[UdubBadger]

Originally Posted by T7R_Sky

Your E90 only made 169 HP stock? Mine made 183. What dyno you run on?

And on that note... there may be a difference between the N52 and N51. I know I have an N51. Is there a different tune for N51 motors?

Also... What are the air to fuel ratio's with this tune?

Thanks

Originally Posted by hasrice

he has an XI e90, your's is rwd. Probably where the difference is. Funny, just noticed your in Escondido. I'm one city over from you.

yeah

I was kinda expecting to see higher numbers myself but I didn't know the AWD usually loses about 20% of its power between the crank and wheels (plus an extra 10% on the mustang dyno). I'll be thinking about RWD for my next car for sure.

[mikeokimster]

I noticed that on your dyno sheet that your AFR's are quite lean at just over 15. Optimal afr's that I have seen usually range from 12.5-13.5 Any chance you have a full plot of rpm vs afr? Also, I noticed that you power kept increasing, but the dyno graph stopped at 6300rpms. Any reason for not going to the full 7k?

[Nebster]

that is the maximum. BMW's naturally like to be a bit lean but the AFR's do drop down, he just posted maximum so you'll see the max (essentially at idle).

The power flattens out after 6300rpm on the stock car. A couple of pulls were done to 7200 and actually dropped off after 6300 so pulls to 7k were stopped as they were deemed unnecessary. The potential to keep power going past 6300 was seen but it never went up after that point.

[UdubBadger]

Originally Posted by mikeokimster

I noticed that on your dyno sheet that your AFR's are quite lean at just over 15. Optimal afr's that I have seen usually range from 12.5-13.5 Any chance you have a full plot of rpm vs afr? Also, I noticed that you power kept increasing, but the dyno graph stopped at 6300rpms. Any reason for not going to the full 7k?

Unfortunately I didn't get the dyno sheet printed with the AFR. I can tell you it ran at about 15 for most of the band however it dropped at about 5500 rpms down to about 13.5-14ish from what I remember.
Strangely enough, I have seen a small increase in MPG's when I'm not driving it hard (normal city driving or highway coasting).

We decided NOT to push the engine as far as it could go because 6100 rpms is where we saw a drop in power the 1st time around on the stock runs. Our last 4-5 runs after the tune we upped it to 6300, 6500 and then 7000 and saw it was still making power at 6300 rpms with the new tune but then plateaued and started dropping again after 6500 rpms so in the interest of not over doing it on the engine, we just kept it at 6300 rpms and stopped the last few runs there.

[mikeokimster]

Originally Posted by UdubBadger

Unfortunately I didn't get the dyno sheet printed with the AFR. I can tell you it ran at about 15 for most of the band however it dropped at about 5500 rpms down to about 13.5-14ish from what I remember.
Strangely enough, I have seen a small increase in MPG's when I'm not driving it hard (normal city driving or highway coasting).

We decided NOT to push the engine as far as it could go because 6100 rpms is where we saw a drop in power the 1st time around on the stock runs. Our last 4-5 runs after the tune we upped it to 6300, 6500 and then 7000 and saw it was still making power at 6300 rpms with the new tune but then plateaued and started dropping again after 6500 rpms so in the interest of not over doing it on the engine, we just kept it at 6300 rpms and stopped the last few runs there.

Originally Posted by Nebster

that is the maximum. BMW's naturally like to be a bit lean but the AFR's do drop down, he just posted maximum so you'll see the max (essentially at idle).

The power flattens out after 6300rpm on the stock car. A couple of pulls were done to 7200 and actually dropped off after 6300 so pulls to 7k were stopped as they were deemed unnecessary. The potential to keep power going past 6300 was seen but it never went up after that point.

Thanks for the info, sounds good!

[canucklion]

Udubbadger, kudos and my respect to you for being the guinea pig and reporting back to us the results in a well-documented manner. ASAIK, this is by far the best 'proven' tune for the N52. Other 328i will have you to thank for having this tune optimized for the 328i. Hope there are 325i and 330i owners in the Chicago area that can go into the shop to have the tune customized for those particular cars as well.

[UdubBadger]

Originally Posted by canucklion

Udubbadger, kudos and my respect to you for being the guinea pig and reporting back to us the results in a well-documented manner. ASAIK, this is by far the best 'proven' tune for the N52. Other 328i will have you to thank for having this tune optimized for the 328i. Hope there are 325i and 330i owners in the Chicago area that can go into the shop to have the tune customized for those particular cars as well.

thanks buddy. I am pretty sure the tunes will all be pretty similar, however you might be able to tweak here and there according to how they are set up. My guess is all the tunes will be based off this one though.

[ntpcrew13]

hopefully ill be in there on the 29th or 30th when tony gets back.

[T7R_Sky]

Originally Posted by Nebster

Hes an xi on a mustang dyno. Your a i on a dyno jet (most likely)

Ok. I understand the Xi part now. But i was on both a Mustang Dyno and DynoJet. I put 183 and 215 respectively.

[Nebster]

Originally Posted by T7R_Sky

Ok. I understand the Xi part now. But i was on both a Mustang Dyno and DynoJet. I put 183 and 215 respectively.

you put 183 on a mustang dyno and on the dyno jet?

its been proven that a mustang reads a considerable amount lower than a dynojet.

But i could be wrong. It has been different on my previous cars

[scanboy]

So will this work for N51? I think that's what I have.

[scanboy]

Originally Posted by T7R_Sky

Ok. I understand the Xi part now. But i was on both a Mustang Dyno and DynoJet. I put 183 and 215 respectively.

I believe he meant Mustang Dyno = 183, DynoJet = 215

[T7R_Sky]

Originally Posted by scanboy

I believe he meant Mustang Dyno = 183, DynoJet = 215

+1 Haha

[UdubBadger]

Originally Posted by T7R_Sky

Ok. I understand the Xi part now. But i was on both a Mustang Dyno and DynoJet. I put 183 and 215 respectively.

Well your numbers match mine then cuz ur only losing 10% to the wheels... Add another 10% loss to your 183 and you'd be right where I hit.

In respect to your differing numbers from mustang to dynojet, its only about a 15% difference so who knows, maybe they didn't factor in any weather numbers or something.

[Nebster]

Originally Posted by UdubBadger

Well your numbers match mine then cuz ur only losing 10% to the wheels... Add another 10% loss to your 183 and you'd be right where I hit.

In respect to your differing numbers from mustang to dynojet, its only about a 15% difference so who knows, maybe they didn't factor in any weather numbers or something.

naw i believe 15% is pretty common difference between the mustang and the dyno jet.

[ni8shadow]

Nice job Badger!! Hope to get this done later this year. Wheels come first!!

[UdubBadger]

Originally Posted by ni8shadow

Nice job Badger!! Hope to get this done later this year. Wheels come first!!

don't wait too long... that intro price isn't gonna last forever!

[T7R_Sky]

Originally Posted by UdubBadger

don't wait too long... that intro price isn't gonna last forever!

Any way you can confirm this works for the N51 also? We run a different compression than you guys

[UdubBadger]

it works, its just a matter of letting them "tweak" anything necessary. I'd suggest contacting Tony and seeing if/when he'll be out in Cali (should be soon) and maybe you guys can meet up and let him do the tune to your car, dyno and then tweak if necessary.

[w00kiec00kie]

So, I know that the tune is guaranteed for the life of the vehicle and that they claim that they have worked around the ECU's re-learning.

It makes sense at some level and doesn't at some level to me.

ECU re-learning does NOT:
- increase / reduce the power output as far as I can tell, I am not sure what the ECU actually modifies to "learn" the driving habits
This Tune does:
- increase the power - again I don't know what this is modifying but maybe it is different from what the ECU will try and relearn.

However, it is POSSIBLE that whatever the ECU does to re-learn may cancel out the effect of the tune.

I am concerned that while they would be happy to do a reflash for you if the tune goes away, it would become a hassle if it does go away. (Disconnecting the battery for 30 mins is still a hassle )

I am not sure what the learning period is, but would they be into dynoing your car again after some period of time, just as an assurance?

Maybe I'm asking for too much, maybe I'm asking the right thing, maybe I'm not even on the right track...

Thanks again for stepping up to do this, both to you and Tony.

BTW the deposit for remote flash is 2k

[Nebster]

learning is still enabled but what this does (if i believe) is it changes the maps so what the ECU is learning is adapting to the modified maps in the ECU. So if anything after 100-200 miles you will INCREASE power not decrease power. That is something i have noticed with my turbo flash, the car now seems more powerful and seems faster. Could be the placebo effect but it does make sense. This is not a signal intercept like the procede, jb3 or sstt or anything, it literally CHANGES the maps that are in the ECU.

I'd have to verify with tony but i believe that is what is going on here.

[tna3]

Originally Posted by w00kiec00kie

So, I know that the tune is guaranteed for the life of the vehicle and that they claim that they have worked around the ECU's re-learning.

It makes sense at some level and doesn't at some level to me.

ECU re-learning does NOT:
- increase / reduce the power output as far as I can tell, I am not sure what the ECU actually modifies to "learn" the driving habits
This Tune does:
- increase the power - again I don't know what this is modifying but maybe it is different from what the ECU will try and relearn.

However, it is POSSIBLE that whatever the ECU does to re-learn may cancel out the effect of the tune.

I am concerned that while they would be happy to do a reflash for you if the tune goes away, it would become a hassle if it does go away. (Disconnecting the battery for 30 mins is still a hassle )

I am not sure what the learning period is, but would they be into dynoing your car again after some period of time, just as an assurance?

Maybe I'm asking for too much, maybe I'm asking the right thing, maybe I'm not even on the right track...

Thanks again for stepping up to do this, both to you and Tony.

BTW the deposit for remote flash is 2k

Why would disconnecting your battery make the tune go away? You are burning flash memory. The only way the flash would go away is if it got re-flashed. Someone else could confirm.