[cda888]

Originally Posted by 5soko335i

From what people have been notified, the wastegate are staying open during idle on 29.2+ cars.
Now the big benefit will be if bmw is keeping both open with this new software, in which we will be able to tell right away if u have a 29.2+ software, or if they are just changing one turbo wastegate position with the new program.

I guess what I meant was, has anyone with a 29.2 looked to confirm that this is the case?

[Black Bimmer]

Originally Posted by 5soko335i

From what people have been notified, the wastegate are staying open during idle on 29.2+ cars.
Now the big benefit will be if bmw is keeping both open with this new software, in which we will be able to tell right away if u have a 29.2+ software, or if they are just changing one turbo wastegate position with the new program.

I'm a bit confused. Wouldn't you want the wastegates to be closed during idle to build boost?

Nevermind, I see what you're saying. You were referring to 29.2+ cars, not the upcoming fix from BMW.

[imoksoami]

Originally Posted by Black Bimmer

I'm a bit confused. Wouldn't you want the wastegates to be closed during idle to build boost?

Yes

[Black Bimmer]

Originally Posted by 5soko335i

^ yup im having the exact same setup. March 07 production MSD80 no updaters ever.

Hopefully someone with a 3/08+ or someone who knows they have 29.2+/v81 can chime in.

I've got a June 2008 build with (what my dealer tells me, I have no way to confirm) 30.0.2 software. I'm assuming the build date means I have MSD81 and the new and improved actuators.

It's VERY hard to tell, but it looks like I have a 1" smooth/clean spot while the car is off. I wouldn't call it a wear mark per se, but the rest of the rod is dirtier. Sorry guys, no turning the car on tonight. I'd rather not disturb the neighbors.

[HighVoltage]

Originally Posted by meyergru

My link was not meant as a convenience for you, who has not even taken enough politeness to read back two pages in this thread.

WTF? I have been reading this 130+ PAGE THREAD, that grows by pages within a day, as carefully as I can since its conception. Excuse me if Ive lost track of that specific detail in the shuffle. If you navigate back a few dozen pages, you will clearly see that I was one of those who also acknowledged the lag and pressed the point months ago. Looks like I'm not the only one who has not taken enough politeness to read back to those pages...

Ill do one better. Ill actually do the polite thing and post the link instead of reprimanding you for not searching the thread:http://www.e90post.com/forums/showpo...postcount=1068

Had you chosen to do so, you'd have noticed that the Autobild article has been scanned by someone and uploaded to the internet.

In the magazine's text, there are quotes from a BMW spokesman he made to german car magazine Autobild. What do you expect? A notice on the BMWNA web site stating that they introduced 150ms lag, while they still officially claim "no lag" in the U.S.?

Why not now? They clearly seem to be acknowledging a lag issue at this point.

The official statement they make in the U.S. is somewhere in this thread. If you don't believe what BMW says about the problem in other countries, go ahead and keep speculating.

Both information sources put together shed a light on what is REALLY going on, IMHO.

Yes I am aware of that statement. Which does not state that specific figure of 150ms. I am not speculating about lag. I know its there. I have it. I stated that several pages ago. I am speculating though, like everyone else here, about the specifics in which it is manifesting itself.

EDIT: BTW, I found the link, downloaded the pdf and read thru it. Technically, if you carefully follow the article, that figure is not quoted from the official spokesman. AUTO BILD states that it came from BMW but they dont seem to specially state how/when/where they came by it.

Das Ergebnis: eine Verzögerung laut BMW 150 Millsekunden. "Das fahrt mit Sicherheit kein Kunde heraus ", so ein BMW-Sprecher gegenüber AUTO BILD.

[meyergru]

Originally Posted by HighVoltage

Yes I am aware of that statement. Which does not state that specific figure of 150ms. I am not speculating about lag. I know its there. I have it. I stated that several pages ago. I am speculating though, like everyone else here, about the specifics in which it is manifesting itself.

I never said they told that figure in the U.S. statement. I said that both statements put together tell you the whole story. BMW clearly does not want to "admit" anything that causes expenses. They just offer a software fix. If you want to rely solely on what they tell you in the U.S., please ignore anything that I have written here.

Originally Posted by HighVoltage

EDIT: BTW, I found the link, downloaded the pdf and read thru it. Technically, if you carefully follow the article, that figure is not quoted from the official spokesman. AUTO BILD states that it came from BMW but they dont seem to specially state how/when/where they came by it.

Das Ergebnis: eine Verzögerung laut BMW 150 Millsekunden. "Das fahrt mit Sicherheit kein Kunde heraus ", so ein BMW-Sprecher gegenüber AUTO BILD.

O.K., I give up. It's obvious, that in your parallel universe, BMW never told Autobild anything.

Remember? You asked where the 150ms came from and the answer already was two pages back. I referred you to the source and you still disbelieved that the figure comes from BMW. I referred you to the original article of a magazine that is sold ~630.000 times here which says translated: "The result: a delay – 150 ms according to BMW. „For sure, no customer gets that out“, says a BMW speaker to Autobild.". You still tell me that it's not sure that the figure was stated by BMW.

I severely doubt that you will get that 150ms statement from "BMW proper" in a country where they specifically market the car with the claim of "no lag". BTW: They never used that claim here in Germany. Autobild was the first to get BMWs "sort-of" acknowledgement of the lag problem, probably before the official U.S. statement was forged where that 150ms is characterized as "small amount of increased turbocharger lag" which "may be perceptable to the most sensitive BMW drivers". This is Newspeak to me.

Sorry I could not help you out.

[ezatnova]

Originally Posted by cda888

I guess what I meant was, has anyone with a 29.2 looked to confirm that this is the case?

Sorry guys, I completely forgot to check my rod last night. I will write my self a note to do it tonight.

On another note...I wonder why, pertaining to this update, we have heard "January, January, January" and nothing else, regardless of where in the world the update will be. What I mean is, in the past, with normal progman updates, Germany will see it first, then all of Europe, then finally the U.S. I wonder why we haven't heard that Germany and Europe will get this "fix" weeks or so before us in the U.S.?

[HighVoltage]

Originally Posted by meyergru

I never said they told that figure in the U.S. statement. I said that both statements put together tell you the whole story. BMW clearly does not want to "admit" anything that causes expenses. They just offer a software fix. If you want to rely solely on what they tell you in the U.S., please ignore anything that I have written here.

You seem to be clearly missing the point. Its important to be clear where all the information concerning this issue comes from. I believe AUTO BILD, however until they release the source of that information and how it was obtained than you cant say it came from BMW. Its clear as mud at this point that 150ms comes from BMW.

O.K., I give up. It's obvious, that in your parallel universe, BMW never told Autobild anything.

This kind of statement clearly demonstrates you have no intention of actually discussing the issue and have denigrated this whole issue to some kind of personal jihad.

Remember? You asked where the 150ms came from and the answer already was two pages back. I referred you to the source and you still disbelieved that the figure comes from BMW. I referred you to the original article of a magazine that is sold ~630.000 times here which says translated: "The result: a delay – 150 ms according to BMW. „For sure, no customer gets that out“, says a BMW speaker to Autobild.". You still tell me that it's not sure that the figure was stated by BMW.

Clearly your reading comprehension skills are suffering. I posted the excerpt from the article in the original format in my previous reply. I read it. I understood it. Those quotes do not surround the 150ms figure. According to that simple syntax, the figure was not quoted from the BMW spokesman.

I severely doubt that you will get that 150ms statement from "BMW proper" in a country where they specifically market the car with the claim of "no lag". BTW: They never used that claim here in Germany. Autobild was the first to get BMWs "sort-of" acknowledgement of the lag problem, probably before the official U.S. statement was forged where that 150ms is characterized as "small amount of increased turbocharger lag" which "may be perceptable to the most sensitive BMW drivers". This is Newspeak to me.

Sorry I could not help you out.

Your attitude is not helping me out. I'm not arguing over the validity of data, like this 150ms. At no time have I stated that if it was not an official statement from BMW, that the information was not valid. However it is important to any discussion to be clear where the information is coming from..

[imoksoami]

High Voltage,
meyergru has been one of the most helpful posters in this thread. Please stay on topic and if you have issues PM him. This topic is too important to have the thread hijacked.
Cheers

[Cobu]

Originally Posted by imoksoami

High Voltage,
meyergru has been one of the most helpful posters in this thread. Please stay on topic and if you have issues PM him. This topic is too important to have the thread hijacked.
Cheers

Concur

[HighVoltage]

Originally Posted by imoksoami

High Voltage,
meyergru has been one of the most helpful posters in this thread. Please stay on topic and if you have issues PM him. This topic is too important to have the thread hijacked.
Cheers

I agree. A basic problem with this thread however is that the issue has become extremely polarized and some people's responses have become volatile.

The first post, that was going to maintain a general FAQ about this, unfortunately has not been updated since Sept. The thread has ballooned to 130+ and counting. Before people start whipping out the ,they may want to consider this.

On Topic:
There is a complete lack of a consolidation of the information gathered so far. A FAQ about what has been determined so far, as stated from their respective sources, IMHO would help everyone.

[imoksoami]

Originally Posted by HighVoltage

I agree. A basic problem with this thread however is that the issue has become extremely polarized and some people's responses have become volatile.

The first post, that was going to maintain a general FAQ about this, unfortunately has not been updated since Sept. The thread has ballooned to 130+ and counting. Before people start whipping out the ,they may want to consider this.

On Topic:
There is a complete lack of a consolidation of the information gathered so far. A FAQ about what has been determined so far, as stated from their respective sources, IMHO would help everyone.

You couldn't be more right. The OP is Slubu. I would volunteer, though someone else may be quicker, to go through and copy and paste all of the factual up to date info, links etc from this thread onto a word document and send it to Slubu if he would use it to update the 1st post.
Cheers

[BMWagain]

Originally Posted by imoksoami

You couldn't be more right. The OP is Slubu. I would volunteer, though someone else may be quicker, to go through and copy and paste all of the factual up to date info, links etc from this thread onto a word document and send it to Slubu if he would use it to update the 1st post.
Cheers

My respect for such an offer

[Erregend]

Originally Posted by 5soko335i

From what people have been notified, the wastegate are staying open during idle on 29.2+ cars.
Now the big benefit will be if bmw is keeping both open with this new software, in which we will
be able to tell right away if u have a 29.2+ software, or if they are just changing one turbo wastegate
position with the new program.

Per the bold text above: If you look at the "plumbing" of the vacuum lines running the wastegates, it
appears to me (and several other posters) that both wastegates are operated in parallel from one
vacuum circuit. There ARE two separate vacuum circuits BUT they are joined together into one by
the ~6 inch long piece of straight tubing between the two "T" connectors.

See the tubing (#7) between the two "T connectors" (#9) in this diagram:
http://www.realoem.com/bmw/showparts...75&hg=11&fg=45


My E93 is an April (~10th) build so I "should" have 29.2 and MSD81.
I will try and check the visible wastegate rod tonight and report back here.

[Black Bimmer]

Originally Posted by Black Bimmer

I've got a June 2008 build with (what my dealer tells me, I have no way to confirm) 30.0.2 software. I'm assuming the build date means I have MSD81 and the new and improved actuators.

It's VERY hard to tell, but it looks like I have a 1" smooth/clean spot while the car is off. I wouldn't call it a wear mark per se, but the rest of the rod is dirtier. Sorry guys, no turning the car on tonight. I'd rather not disturb the neighbors.

Okay, checked today during lunch. The 1" smooth/clean spot definitely disappeared after turning the car on and the rod is certainly shorter by about 1". Does this contradict what everyone is thinking?

[shaddai]

Originally Posted by Black Bimmer

Okay, checked today during lunch. The 1" smooth/clean spot definitely disappeared after turning the car on and the rod is certainly shorter by about 1". Does this contradict what everyone is thinking?

Sounds really close. For some reason I think mine only moves about 3/4", but perhaps that's just a vantage point/perspective issue.

I was thinking about this last night - maybe this has something to do with the blow off valves instead... Perhaps they're too aggressive in blowing off turbo boost, or perhaps they're slow to close? Page 15 of the 2007 ENGINE MANAGEMENT document:

The system design dictates that the blow-off valves are also opened during operating
close to idle (pressure differential Pcharger/Psuction = 0.3 bar). However, this has no
further effects on the turbocharging system.

The turbocharger is pressurized with the full exhaust-gas flow at these low speeds and
already builds up a certain level of induction-air precharging in the range close to idle.
If the throttle valve is opened at this point, the full boost pressure required is very quickly
made available to the engine.

Then again - I don't see how these are controlled via the computer, and we'd most likely see others with aftermarket BOV's reporting different issues or fixes.

[ezatnova]

OK, I looked at my rod.

I think this (and the response above from Black) is shooting down our theory.... my rod disappeared by AT LEAST an inch...I'd say 1.5 inches, once the car was turned on. Sooo....unless there are SMALL differences (like 0.5 inch variances or something) of wastegate rod movement, then I don't think we're seeing anything drastically different.

This sure is confusing...how can the car surely have more open gates (hence my car being much louder at idle, and,uh...the LAG ) yet the rod results are the same. argh.

ONE SUGGESTION - maybe we could mark our rods with the car on (CAREFUL...don't get burned or sucked in) with a sharpie, right at the point where it is just entering the wastegate. Then, AFTER the "fix" we could see any change, exactly. If the mark is gone, then the rod is going in more. If there's not a gap between the mark and the wastegate body, then the rod is going in less. Just an idea...maybe stupid.

[slubu]

Originally Posted by imoksoami

You couldn't be more right. The OP is Slubu. I would volunteer, though someone else may be quicker, to go through and copy and paste all of the factual up to date info, links etc from this thread onto a word document and send it to Slubu if he would use it to update the 1st post.
Cheers

If anyone wants to do that, I would first off be more than appreciated and secondly would gladly insert that into the first post. I just don't have the time right now to go through all the posts and get the information together in a coherent way.

Feel free to PM me an update if anyone wants me to stick it in, although only 1 person should do it so we do not have conflicting verbiage.

[cda888]

Originally Posted by ezatnova

OK, I looked at my rod.

I think this (and the response above from Black) is shooting down our theory.... my rod disappeared by AT LEAST an inch...I'd say 1.5 inches, once the car was turned on. Sooo....unless there are SMALL differences (like 0.5 inch variances or something) of wastegate rod movement, then I don't think we're seeing anything drastically different.

This sure is confusing...how can the car surely have more open gates (hence my car being much louder at idle, and,uh...the LAG ) yet the rod results are the same. argh.

ONE SUGGESTION - maybe we could mark our rods with the car on (CAREFUL...don't get burned or sucked in) with a sharpie, right at the point where it is just entering the wastegate. Then, AFTER the "fix" we could see any change, exactly. If the mark is gone, then the rod is going in more. If there's not a gap between the mark and the wastegate body, then the rod is going in less. Just an idea...maybe stupid.

What year is your car, and do you have 29.2? Because I don't think "Black Bimmer" has it- he has the newer hardware and some other software that is not 29.2. Whatever "lag" the post 03/08 builds feel, I suspect the 29.2 cars have something different, probably worse.

[5soko]

The best way to do this is to have someone start the car for you.

Have a flash light on the wastegate rod, let someone start the car and keep an eye on it. You will DEF. see if it moves or not since the rod connects to the wastegate arm, so if you can't see the rod itself move, you will def. see the wastegate arm move back.

Only thing i am not sure is, if the wastegate are controlled together or seperate. If they are controlled seperate, then the only thing being effected might be the front turbo which we can't see and the rear turbo might have been left alone, but i dont understand bmw doing that and as one MEMBER mentioned this might not be the case.
But like i mentioned try to get someone to start the car while your looking at the arm.

[Black Bimmer]

Originally Posted by cda888

What year is your car, and do you have 29.2? Because I don't think "Black Bimmer" has it- he has the newer hardware and some other software that is not 29.2. Whatever "lag" the post 03/08 builds feel, I suspect the 29.2 cars have something different, probably worse.

Right. So to summarize:

Build date: June 2008
Software 30.0.2/V81
Engine off: 1" of "wear"
Engine on: No wear
Lag: I'll need to drive the car a bit more to get a feel for it. It's not my daily driver (it's my wife's ).

[lablueboy]

This is a repost.. Just FYI for those with 06-early 08 production car:

"In an effort to address specific noise concerns, BMW updated the turbocharged engine software on 335i/xi and 535i/xi models built from June 2006 through March 2008. The updated software causes a small amount of increased “turbocharger lag” under certain circumstances and, while not substantial, the lag may be perceptible to the most sensitive BMW drivers. X6, 135i, and 3 Series/5 Series vehicles from March 2008 production onward are not affected. Release of the new software to restore the original turbocharger response is planned for January 2009, and it will be available for vehicles produced from September 2007 through March 2008 when they are brought to an authorized BMW center for a repair which requires a programming update. Clients with vehicles produced from June 2006 through September 2007 may request installation of the January 2009 software update. Clients who get this update should understand that there is a possibility of slightly increased engine noise levels under certain circumstances."