[Raimund]

Originally Posted by AmuroRay

well, it was originally my idea to change the DISA setpoint (I had mine at something high like 7500RPM or off completely) back in 2018. During that point, all the tuners were just tuning around it. Bob (stageFP) then changed it on my request and all his tunes for the 3SM should have it like that since.
I'm guessing it's not updated since it's not a 3SM tune your running.

But I'd be curious to see if there is any gain from E85 - Looking at peak power and timing, I doubt it.

From my datalogging and testing, there is a definite HP gain with E85 if you only have access to 91 octane (R+M)/2. I could run much more timing on ethanol. 91 cannot take much more timing over stock in my experience. I only run E85 now due to local gas stations not carrying 91. (Plus it smells better)

Now if you have access to 93 octane, the difference in power is not substantial.

[AmuroRay]

Originally Posted by Raimund

Here's my personal experience with both StageFP and 22RPD

I bought the StageFP tune first. It ran ok, but there was a lot of low end torque loss on the n54im which I had assumed was normal. I moved from Colorado to Arizona (lower altitude, more airflow) and the car started knocking on their tune and I could not get a revision from SFP even with calling/emailing for 6 months. So I reinstalled the 3sim and ran the bimmerlabs nomaf tune for awhile.

I saw a post on Facebook from 22RPD with a 275whp dyno sheet on an N52 with s54 headers, n54im, and 2.75" single exhaust so I reached out to them to remote tune my car.

I had had them tune my current setup with a 3sim, and then with an n54im. The low end torque was significantly improved on the n54im, feeling very similar to the 3si but with more power at the top end.

I became a vendor for 22RPD after speaking to the owner and being impressed at how much quicker the car was and his customer service. We now test different tunes and mods on my personal car. (Hopefully velocity stacks soon)

I set the NA E9X N52 1/4 mi record on dragy at NHRA sea level corrected 13.6 101.7mph with the RPD tune

The legend Biginboca (Love that guy) is in the #2 spot with a StageFP tune while being at 1300ft lower elevation and ~150lbs less.

I can understand any skeptism of my review as I am now a vendor for them, however I did pay for my tune and test it before becoming a vendor. There are also a lot of 22RPD reviews on the "BMW N52" group on Facebook.

Here is a 0-120mph clip of the 330i on the 22RPD tune
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UAy741AhYzc

Tune I'm running on my car
https://bavautoparts.com/products/22...0-stage-2-tune

I think I still hold the record for a OTS dyno (SAE corrected) 245whp before MILVs.
https://www.e90post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1566807

E85 nets almost nothing:
https://www.1addicts.com/forums/show....php?t=1536377

Your ET is impressive, but trap speed indicates power and at 101.7mph, you're right in line with Boca (actually under), who was at 102.7mph:

https://www.e90post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1579797

[Raimund]

Originally Posted by AmuroRay

I think I still hold the record for a OTS dyno (SAE corrected) 245whp before MILVs.
https://www.e90post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1566807

E85 nets almost nothing:
https://www.1addicts.com/forums/show....php?t=1536377

Your ET is impressive, but trap speed indicates power and at 101.7mph, you're right in line with Boca (actually under), who was at 102.7mph:

https://www.e90post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1579797

Hi AmuroRay,
Here is 275whp without MILVs


Regarding E85, as I had said above, there aren't substantial gains to E85 over 93 octane, which is what the car in the thread you linked was running before switching. There are gains to be had over 91 octane, which I have tested and proven on dragy and datalogs.

Weight is also a factor in trap speed, which is why I mentioned Alphonse being 150lbs less. Every 100lb weight reduction is good for around +1mph in the 1/4 mile.

If I removed 150lbs from my car to control for weight difference, it would be about 103.2mph. Also, generally manual cars trap higher than auto cars, which is another difference between my car and Biginboca's.

My 0-60 also matches his at 5.58 sec, while being at +1300ft altitude (3% HP loss every 1000ft above sea level) over him and 150lbs heavier.

And just to clarify, this is in no way putting down Alphonse or his car. We are friends and I am only using the cars for tune comparison as we have similar modifications aside from the tune.

[AmuroRay]

Originally Posted by Raimund

Hi AmuroRay,
Here is 275whp without MILVs


Regarding E85, as I had said above, there aren't substantial gains to E85 over 93 octane, which is what the car in the thread you linked was running before switching. There are gains to be had over 91 octane, which I have tested and proven on dragy and datalogs.

Weight is also a factor in trap speed, which is why I mentioned Alphonse being 150lbs less. Every 100lb weight reduction is good for around +1mph in the 1/4 mile.

If I removed 150lbs from my car to control for weight difference, it would be about 103.2mph. Also, generally manual cars trap higher than auto cars, which is another difference between my car and Biginboca's.

My 0-60 also matches his at 5.58 sec, while being at +1300ft altitude (3% HP loss every 1000ft above sea level) over him and 150lbs heavier.

And just to clarify, this is in no way putting down Alphonse or his car. We are friends and I am only using the cars for tune comparison as we have similar modifications aside from the tune.

Your numbers are already corrected for altitude, as I'm sure the raw numbers aren't as comparable.

I don't know what transmission you have, nor do I know the weight of the cars - I do see him with a 1mph advantage, which is pretty quick - I'm not sure what calculator your using, but I don't think a 150lb difference (about 10whp) is giving you another MPH.

And I've seen that dyno - custom (s54) headers, custom tune, custom intake manifold, unknown fuel, unknown dyno type. nothing on that is (O)ff (T)he (S)helf

[Raimund]

Originally Posted by AmuroRay

Your numbers are already corrected for altitude, as I'm sure the raw numbers aren't as comparable.

I don't know what transmission you have, nor do I know the weight of the cars - I do see him with a 1mph advantage, which is pretty quick - I'm not sure what calculator your using, but I don't think a 150lb difference (about 10whp) is giving you another MPH.

And I've seen that dyno - custom (s54) headers, custom tune, custom intake manifold, unknown fuel, unknown dyno type. nothing on that is (O)ff (T)he (S)helf

My 0-60mph is not corrected for altitude, as I'm not aware of a formula for that, only 1/4 mile.

I do know the weight of both cars Which is why I had stated he is 150lbs lighter in the original post for clarity in comparison.

A general rule is -100lbs or +10whp = -0.1 and +1mph in the 1/4 mile. This has been confirmed many times and is easy to confirm on Dragy as I have in the past with before and after weight reduction runs.

I'm not sure the relevancy of your OTS dyno as my posts were both comparing N54 intake manifold tunes between StageFP and 22RPD, and then comparing to Alphonse's car which also has an N54 intake manifold.

[AmuroRay]

Originally Posted by Raimund

My 0-60mph is not corrected for altitude, as I'm not aware of a formula for that, only 1/4 mile.

I do know the weight of both cars Which is why I had stated he is 150lbs lighter in the original post for clarity in comparison.

A general rule is -100lbs or +10whp = -0.1 and +1mph in the 1/4 mile. This has been confirmed many times and is easy to confirm on Dragy as I have in the past with before and after weight reduction runs.

I'm not sure the relevancy of your OTS dyno as my posts were both comparing N54 intake manifold tunes between StageFP and 22RPD, and then comparing to Alphonse's car which also has an N54 intake manifold.

I just ran it through a 1/4 mile calculator:

You're not picking up 2mph from less 150lbs, nor are you making more power - but you're easily making more torque considering you have a 3.91 FD compared to his 3.73 - it's a wash.

These tunes aren't making anything more in power compared to one another, considering there is only so much Cam retard and timing you can run. With that said, it's pointed out in a thread, that SageFP's tune is a little more aggressive but it doesn't amount to much at these levels.

I've never dealt with 22rpd, but I love having competition. I've Run a stage FP/BPC tune on my N52 and my N55 - and in both cases the power was above average.

[Raimund]

Originally Posted by AmuroRay

I just ran it through a 1/4 mile calculator:

You're not picking up 2mph from less 150lbs, nor are you making more power - but you're easily making more torque considering you have a 3.91 FD compared to his 3.73 - it's a wash.

These tunes aren't making anything more in power compared to one another, considering there is only so much Cam retard and timing you can run. With that said, it's pointed out in a thread, that SageFP's tune is a little more aggressive but it doesn't amount to much at these levels.

I've never dealt with 22rpd, but I love having competition. I've Run a stage FP/BPC tune on my N52 and my N55 - and in both cases the power was above average.

Boca also has a 3,91 diff 🙂

In regards to timing and "aggressiveness": when looking at datalogs I have taken, the StageFP tune was well past optimal timing. Which does not add more power and can actually do the opposite. The StageFP tune peaked at 39* of timing while 22RPD was about 27.

I have already tested that the 22RPD tune has a better powerband than StageFP on my car by dropping time off of Dragy runs. 😀

[AmuroRay]

Originally Posted by Raimund

Boca also has a 3,91 diff 🙂

In regards to timing and "aggressiveness": when looking at datalogs I have taken, the StageFP tune was well past optimal timing. Which does not add more power and can actually do the opposite. The StageFP tune peaked at 39* of timing while 22RPD was about 27.

I have already tested that the 22RPD tune has a better powerband than StageFP on my car by dropping time off of Dragy runs. 😀

Tested it with no logs and no dyno?
and past optimal timing means that the car would be generating excess heat and or detonation, which it wasn't doing either.

[Jros]

in my experience and in my application both tunes top up at 27 degrees ignition advance, YMMV.

In the past i had a StageFP N54 manifold tune too and found it weak, maybe i should retry that manifold with 22RPD for shiz and giggles...

To be honest, having a 2.5 liters N52 i need all the torque i can get, at the moment i am running three stage manifold and a 3.91 diff; the car takes off effortlessly in 3rd and there is no problem in accelerating from 1k5 rpm in 6th, the combination of final gearing and manifold/tune works very well.

I surely feel the car dying after 6k8 rpm though so I am tempted to fit the N54 manifold again....

[bmwtouge]

Trying to download a backup of my current maps via 22RPD cable and application. It keeps running into an issue.. anyone have ideas? Have battery tender and laptop is a Lenovo X1 which I've used to flash another car.

[rice_smuggler]

Anybody know if 22RPD tune supports the MILVs mod?

[chilledn52]

Originally Posted by rice_smuggler

Anybody know if 22RPD tune supports the MILVs mod?

yes its supported