[E90ice]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

It is unfortunate to lose any customer. Especially when you know it is for the wrong reason. I think the email conversation will bring things to light. Can't post it without permission. And I think it's silly for it to even come to this point. But seeing how quickly opinions and conclusions are formed, I think its best for all the info to be disclosed. Some of it is a bit technical but I think there will be many people who can get the gist of it.

Shiv

Shiv, is it true that the 2.0.2 map detunes itself much less that 2.0.1 map?

Does it offer more hp up top also?

I would like for this map to detune itself less.

[schneid4323]

Originally Posted by 335lvr

Dude...why don't YOU research: those posts are earlier than the beta-testing he was doing with the new map. Read Shiv's responses.

Is it me or is the entire thread about him taking it out of his car?

[335iheLLraiseR]

another clue:

Originally Posted by e.n335

Hi Shiv,

You got email ( latest v2.0.2ATbeta_11-26 test results ).

@all: Some progress has been made. Still not there to be able to roll it out, IMO. However, detailed data from my logging is available now . More from Shiv, when he will chime in.

- Eugen

wtf happened?

[schneid4323]

Originally Posted by 335iheLLraiseR

another clue:



wtf happened?

I still wanna know what the heck vishnu changed with V2 that is making this so difficult...... I really dont wanna rip apart the dme again, but oh well. Maybe by march we will have a working v2 map

[Orb]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

It is unfortunate to lose any customer. Especially when you know it is for the wrong reason. I think the email conversation will bring things to light. Can't post it without permission. And I think it's silly for it to even come to this point. But seeing how quickly opinions and conclusions are formed, I think its best for all the info to be disclosed. Some of it is a bit technical but I think there will be many people who can get the gist of it.

Shiv

Shiv,

It might be better to explain a few in depth detail instead of bits and pieces about this boost behavior in v2 and is your plan of quality and being safe or power. Make a statement that defines your company path in development. I thought it was quality and reliability with v2 so I bought in?

Anyway, the problems don’t sound alarming.

Orb

[335iheLLraiseR]

Originally Posted by schneid4323

I still wanna know what the heck vishnu changed with V2 that is making this so difficult...... I really dont wanna rip apart the dme again, but oh well. Maybe by march we will have a working v2 map

i thought you didn't have any more problems....

[schneid4323]

Originally Posted by 335iheLLraiseR

i thought you didn't have any more problems....

yeah but i also spent another grand to not have anymore problems.

[seccsc]

As the ENGINES turn, these are "Days of our Lives".....

[satinghostrider]

Originally Posted by Ninjaneer

Minus the pretty girls and dance scenes

Shiv could play the pretty girl who falls in love with the villains(Terry) daughter(Eugen).

[OpenFlash]

Originally Posted by Orb

Shiv,

It might be better to explain a few in depth detail instead of bits and pieces about this boost behavior in v2 and is your plan of quality and being safe or power. Make a statement that defines your company path in development. I thought it was quality and reliability with v2 so I bought in?

Anyway, the problems don’t sound alarming.

Orb

Here's the datalog that Eugen provided me this morning:

Running up the gears at WOT (he has a 6AT):

Partial throttle single gear:


He was dissatisfied with the brief ~0.5-0.75psi boost spike that occurred after shifting in the first graph (at ~66 second timestamp). I explained that this is normal and will always be the case for a number of reason (valve timing changes during upshift, small turbos, automatic throttle closure, etc,.)

In the second graph, he was dissatisfied with the partial-throttle boost behavior, primarily the way the boost ramped up to 13psi by 3000rpm, from 7-8psi at 2300rpm. And then how it ramped back down to 8-9psi above that. I explained that turbos are inherently nonlinear devices and that we can't expect to make a constant boost pressure at a constant throttle angle, as revs increase. Especially when the throttle you induce at the pedal does not equal the amount of throttle opening at the engine (in throttle-by-wire engines). Not to mention the fact that the turbo is a positive feedback device that relies on exhaust energy for motivation. And that exhaust energy will depend on a the pumping efficiency of an engine which differs at different engine speeds.

This is the data that was provided to me. This is how I interpreted it. Eugen did not agree with my conclusion. He informed me that he was going to sell his PROcede and that we did not share the same expectations. That's basically the gist of it. More details will be revealed once/if the actual email exchange between us gets posted up. But I think this should shed some light on the matters at hand. Not nearly as fun as some of the speculation topics. But still interesting from a technical standpoint at least.

Regards,
shiv

PS. For those who don't know how to read the PROcede datalog, here's a quick overview:
X/horizontal axis is time in seconds (s).
Y/vertical axis is logging variable. In the first graph, it is rpm. In the second, it is boost (psi). In the third, it is fuel correction. And so on.
The only two graphs worth looking at here (for the sake of boost control) are the top two (RPM and Boost). Boost target with the v2.0.2 beta map is 11-15psi depending on RPM and gear. The goal with this version of the beta map was to avoid any excessive boost spiking (once the ecu is fully adapted).

[stillclaimndp]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

In the second graph, he was dissatisfied with the partial-throttle boost behavior, primarily the way the boost ramped up to 13psi by 3000rpm, from 7-8psi at 2300rpm. And then how it ramped back down to 8-9psi above that. I explained that turbos are inherently nonlinear devices and that we can't expect to make a constant boost pressure at a constant throttle angle, as revs increase. Especially when the throttle you induce at the pedal does not equal the amount of throttle opening at the engine (in throttle-by-wire engines). Not to mention the fact that the turbo is a positive feedback device that relies on exhaust energy for motivation. And that exhaust energy will depend on a the pumping efficiency of an engine which differs at different engine speeds.

This makes sense, anyone that has ever driven a turbo car can feel this via the butt dyno, anyone that has had a boost gauge (i have had 7 cars with boost gauges) realize any tune, stock, etc are going to have boost rise then fall if running equal throttle position from low to mid to high rpms... just how turbo's work since they are perpetuated by the exhaust...

[uberschnell]

Anyway, the problems don’t sound alarming.

Having read the entire "boost control" post I have to agree. Certainly not enough to get me to join the bandwagon.

[Orb]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

Here's the datalog that Eugen provided me this morning:

Running up the gears at WOT (he has a 6AT):

Partial throttle single gear:


He was dissatisfied with the brief ~0.5-0.75psi boost spike that occurred after shifting in the first graph (at ~66 second timestamp). I explained that this is normal and will always be the case for a number of reason (valve timing changes during upshift, small turbos, automatic throttle closure, etc,.)

In the second graph, he was dissatisfied with the partial-throttle boost behavior, primarily the way the boost ramped up to 13psi by 3000rpm, from 7-8psi at 2300rpm. And then how it ramped back down to 8-9psi above that. I explained that turbos are inherently nonlinear devices and that we can't expect to make a constant boost pressure at a constant throttle angle, as revs increase. Especially when the throttle you induce at the pedal does not equal the amount of throttle opening at the engine (in throttle-by-wire engines). Not to mention the fact that the turbo is a positive feedback device that relies on exhaust energy for motivation. And that exhaust energy will depend on a the pumping efficiency of an engine which differs at different engine speeds.

This is the data that was provided to me. This is how I interpreted it. Eugen did not agree with my conclusion. He informed me that he was going to sell his PROcede and that we did not share the same expectations. That's basically the gist of it. More details will be revealed once/if the actual email exchange between us gets posted up. But I think this should shed some light on the matters at hand. Not nearly as fun as some of the speculation topics. But still interesting from a technical standpoint at least.

Regards,
shiv

PS. For those who don't know how to read the PROcede datalog, here's a quick overview:
X/horizontal axis is time in seconds (s).
Y/vertical axis is logging variable. In the first graph, it is rpm. In the second, it is boost (psi). In the third, it is fuel correction. And so on.
The only two graphs worth looking at here (for the sake of boost control) are the top two (RPM and Boost). Boost target with the v2.0.2 beta map is 11-15psi depending on RPM and gear. The goal with this version of the beta map was to avoid any excessive boost spiking (once the ecu is fully adapted).

This is real so as good as it gets and actually looks nice and steady. If all the logs are coming back like this way then I will install it.

Orb

[OpenFlash]

Originally Posted by Orb

This is real so as good as it gets and actually looks nice and steady. If all the logs are coming back like this way then I will install it.

Orb

Well.. that's what I thought. I tried to explain why they were fine but Eugen got offended and claimed that we had different expectations. But he can speak for himself at this point. Especially after this ridiculous fiasco of a thread.... sheesh.

Shiv

[stillclaimndp]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

Well.. that's what I thought. But Eugen didn't agree with me. But he can speak for himself at this point. Especially after this ridiculous fiasco of a thread.... sheesh.

Shiv

The funny thing is that he didn't even start this thread; i'm glad to see that you have brought some fact and reason back to the enslaught of group think

[OC Guy]

The bandwagon just jumped off and are probably back on again.

[NPDAN]

I love you shiv, no matter what anyone says...

[OC Guy]

Originally Posted by NPDAN

I love you shiv, no matter what anyone says...

That's because you have your v2 already.

[OpenFlash]

The bandwagon makes us feel like we are married to this forum. A strange, somewhat disfunctional marriage full of intrigue, speculation, and drama. It's 11PM and Dustin and I are still here on our computers, after spending much of the evening freezing our butts off in glorious Sacramento. I'm posting in this stupid thread and he is responding to PMs/emails.

[NPDAN]

Originally Posted by OC 335i

That's because you have your v2 already.

sshhhhh ha ha ha

[OC Guy]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

The bandwagon makes us feel like we are married to this forum. A strange, somewhat disfunctional marriage full of intrigue, speculation, and drama. It's 11am and Dustin and I are still here on our computers, after spending much of the evening freezing our butts off in glorious Sacramento. I'm posting her and he is responding to PM/emails.

11pm, go to sleep man!

[Dustin Bramell]

Are you kidding me? Who can sleep at a time like this..........A man is selling his PROcede.

Originally Posted by OC 335i

11pm, go to sleep man!