Official End to is this "Tune" or Engine Software worth it?

[Nighthawk399]

If you have a Engine Software Modification or a tune, Please give us a review of it!

Im currently interested in getting better throttle response and a little seat dyno excitement, Do I go with a injector style or do I go to an actual tuner?

[Mr Bingley]

Had Shark Tune, CAI, and Super Sprint DTE exhaust before I went FI (I still have the Super Sprint). I used to think they did something, but once I installed the supercharger, I realized what a real power increase fees like--they did nothing, don't bother.

[E.Hands]

Turbo

[Z3speed4me]

Turbo +1 on one car
NA on other

Both with the best in the business, Nick G.

[rf900rkw]

Nick G. Stage 1+ and 10psi. The best in the business.

To answer your question, I have compared the leading brand off-the-shelf tune back to back with a stock tune (S52). There is nothing really noticeable between them other than the higher redline and speed limiter.

[Tim95M3]

Nick G. Stage 1+ and 10psi. The best in the business.

To answer your question, I have compared the leading brand off-the-shelf tune back to back with a stock tune (S52). There is nothing really noticeable between them other than the higher redline and speed limiter.

+1

The only reason I got a tune on my S52 (pre-FI) was to raise the rev limiter to 7200. Couldn't stand the 6500 limit. Other than that, pointless.

[fmcfad01]

Agree with the s52 sentiment here

[BenFenner]

Are there any fuel economy gains with a typical ECU "tune" assuming someone is WOT often?


(From my experience as an engine tuner, the stock tune seems very rich. Although I have no instrumented tests to confirm. I would assume most of the fuel tuning on these tunes would be subtractive, and aid in fuel economy. Adding an over-run fuel cut alone seems like it would do wonders for economy and get rid of that stupid over-run exhaust racket the M division likes to give their cars in the name of impressing the uninformed.)

[rf900rkw]

These tunes don't change any programming. They just change the base maps... Mainly bumping the ignition timing a bit. 14.7 is still the law of the land.

[BenFenner]

Good to know. Maybe not measurable, but ignition timing enhancements should yield economy gains.

Is there any open loop operation, over a certain RPM, throttle position, or air flow reading?

[Terry F.]

S/C, 10psi. Nick G tune which is a no-brainer. Besides a gearhead, he is a degree'd software engineer. He really knows his stuff and will never sell you a dangerous tune. You get the most power possible within the limits of a safe tune.

Terry

[328 Power 04]

These tunes don't change any programming. They just change the base maps... Mainly bumping the ignition timing a bit. 14.7 is still the law of the land.

This.



I have a little bit of experience in self-tuning, and also have 3 cars tuned with Jim Conforti Shark Injector, or Active Autowerke.
The tunes to a stock car help it gain 5-8hp at best. I think my Z3 with the M52tu gains the most, as it was slightly detuned from factory.



There are very minor changes to fueling (helps a little with the larger manifold swaps, but can be tweaked to get to 14.7 again without help of closed loop fueling), but the biggest difference is in the ignition advance, that raises the ceiling of ignition advance to be able to use higher octane fuels. Higher octane fuels make more power *WHEN PROGRAMMED FOR THEM*.


Jim Conforti's tune is quite safe, and looks to be more like a tweaked 91 octane (AKI) octane tune, but it can be pushed a little more in my opinion. There are also changes to throttle maps for throttle response, and in catalyst safety maps, allowing for higher cat temps before reducing fueling/ignition advance. Also some very minor tweaks to VANOS activation.


AA's tune is much more aggressive with the ignition advance, and a bit more fueling, but it was made for M50 manifold. I have further tweaked the VANOS maps for using hotter cams. I also found some mistakes in the VANOS maps, and it really helped out once fixed. They also changed throttle response for WOT. I edited this tune a little to raise my idle RPM, as the lightweight flywheel with ceramic clutch is very loud at the stock 680rpm.



There are some forums online that deal with teaching/self tuning and we have most relevant maps for S52 and M52B28 single vanos mapped. This along with a very good logging program can really get the car optimized. I have played with the ignition advance maps from the Alpina B3 3.2 (Bored out M52B28, with hotter cams, and better manifold using dealer data), which are mildly aggressive, and they can work fine for S52B32 engine.



Overall, a tune is (almost) useless unless you have some mods (M50 manifold - allows for more ignition advance maybe a little more fueling), or hotter cams. On the S52 putting an M50 manifold, CAI, usually gets you to intake flow values higher than the fueling map allows for, so that's why the larger MAF helps (when tuned for it).


The fueling/ignition maps on MS41 ecu are defined for up to 700 mg/stroke of air, and for every flow after that, it uses the 700mg/str data (and some feedback loops) to try to adapt.
A stock S52 flows about 680mg/stroke ( (3152cc / 6cyl) x 1.294 ) of air at WOT, without pulsations. Adding more air mods, it gets past 700mg/stroke with pulsations, so a larger MAF and tune can take account of that to get more fueling/ignition advance.
A stock M52B28 flows about 605mg/stroke as measured by maf, without pulsations taken into account. Even with pulsations, you're not really going over the 700mg/stroke limit.



For me the biggest benefit was tuning for hotter cams/m50 manifold, then raising the rpm limits, and idle values for my needs. There are some advanced things you can do as well, but beyond the scope of this thread.

And no, I will not share professional tune info.

[rf900rkw]

My understanding of the MS41 and later is they extrapolate. Thus there will be several data points where the graph is curving, and not many where it is a straight line. The highest point on the map is 700, but that doesn't mean it's the highest it can handle. Anything above 700 will be linear, not capped.

[328 Power 04]

d_munter, and mrf have said the MS41 doesn't extrapolate, confirmed through IDA Pro disassembly. http://www.romraider.com/forum/viewt...10691&p=101222

- - - Updated - - -

Unless it selectively extrapolates.. I'm not sure if it's even a thing. I trust your knowledge though.

Now, we could also test this by editing the MAF load axes lower, and seeing the behavior of what happens when you pass it up, what fueling/ignition values go into effect. Although feedback loops may hide the true answer.

[rf900rkw]

I'm gonna back off to just interpolation for now. Most of my ms41 info came from backing into it from the mss54 threads. RR wasn't yet.

[Nighthawk399]

What do you guys like for turbo or supercharged systems on a Z3? Im running the M52 single vanos

[Mr Bingley]

What do you guys like for turbo or supercharged systems on a Z3? Im running the M52 single vanos

There are many options. The cheapest complete bolt on is the VF Vortech internally lubricated V3 SC 6 lb. boost set up. It comes with everything you need including the tune. The downside to the VF kit is that there are no stage 2 or stage 3 bolt on options out there if you want to upgrade, however, if you are reasonably comfortable working on your car, you can instal it yourself. From there RMS makes a complete kit, Dinan makes a kit, and others. Turbocharging is a different animal altogether and costs significantly more than supercharging (but provides significantly more power).

Bimmerforums has an FI section that is devoted to only these issues--check it out.

[jajou318]

For turbo charging. Stock internal limits are around 500wtq. So if you buy a kit that's anywhere from 6-7k plus fabrication of the exhaust.

More work has to be done for a turbo install vs supercharger. HG is a must. Oil pan needs to be dropped. Exhaust needs to be built. Good boost controller is recommended possibly with a fail safe.

[poordna]

I think this is the best place for me to ask... I am a week or two away from putting on an M50 manifold w/ the "m50manifolds" kit. Only other relevant modification to the car is... I guess a cat-back exhaust and ASC delete (so, nothing really.)

What should I do in terms of a tune? I checked Turner and Bimmerworld, the Shark Injectors only seem to be offered with tunes for bone stock, or M50+MAF+cams+injectors...

Should I not bother with a tune for the time being? Or should I hold off on doing the modification until I've gotten more parts? And... another thing... I would really rather not even get into swapping cams... Just too damned expensive to get all of that together!!

[BimmerBreaker]

Riot Racing cams really are not that expensive, have you looked into those?

[rf900rkw]

Read RomRaider, buy the equipment, and do your own tune. All it takes is bumping the ignition timing in the midrange to try and partially cover for the loss of VE.

[poordna]

Read RomRaider, buy the equipment, and do your own tune. All it takes is bumping the ignition timing in the midrange to try and partially cover for the loss of VE.

This is interesting...

Riot Racing cams really are not that expensive, have you looked into those?

I have not! I was only aware of Schrick

- - - Updated - - -

So... Now I'm being told (elsewhere) that this basic 7k RPM injector will be a good fit for what I have planned for the time being (M50 manifold, period)

http://www.turnermotorsport.com/c-69-shark-injector-performance-software-1996-2005-models.aspx

[SamGrant951]

I wonder if you could run the conforti tune (for m50/shricks/24#etc) with the riot racing cams...close enough? By the time you sell off your stock S52 cams they are pretty cheap.

[gtwhimself]

I'm surprised by all the nay-sayers for tunes. I'm running Dinan Stage 3 along with Riot Racing BBTW and Dinan CAI and on a Mustang Dyno put out +222 wheel HP. That's a pretty significant increase and a great seat-of-the-pants result. Next is M50. And then...

[SamGrant951]

whats a bone stock s52 put down on a mustang dyno? 200?