21.5 or 24lb injectors? which chip?

[Jim Conforti]

Originally posted by scottycs
The R&D I'm talking about, is about actually spending time on
the dyno and tunning it. Not bench tunning it and guessing #'s
while sitting in front of a computer in a air conditioned room.

The R&D I'm also talking about is spending the money on a
dynomometer and not going to local dynos and get a bunch of
BMW enthusiasts and rent it out for the day

Chris, unfortunately you show how little you know of the tuning process at all.

Work done on a dyno is about 5% of the actual labor in properly developing ANY "chip".

Throw it on the dyno.. now what do you "adjust"?

Do you know where the fuel is, and what it will affect, and when?

Or do you take someone elses word for it and hope the locations are right?

This isn't a carburetor. There is no "screw" to adjust.

Better yet, get your new "friends" to throw headers and cams on
an E46 m3 (example) and tell us why you then get an "empty fuel tank"
fault code.

(No, the tank wasn't empty.. it was full)

We don't need to own a dyno, instead we have a shop with a full
3-axis CNC lathe... I have an agreement with a local shop, and FWIW TMS
also owns a dyno.

If you think the only tuning we do is the times we've included local
club members to support the BMW CCA, then.. well.. time for a
serious reality check. 99% of our development is done behind
closed doors. For every hour "on the dyno" our test cars spend
some 100-300 hours on the road.. sometimes instrumented.

In all that time.. we've never seen ONE afr graph that looks like
the ones you guys are purporting yet.. not one.. from any finished
and released product of ours.

Of course, I don't waste my time looking at AA, or APE, or Dinan chips because IMHO,
it's not "good business". When you design
from scratch, in a vacuum so to speak. Assures you don't make the same
mistakes as someone else might have at the very least.

As to "Sacramento 95".. you have it backwards.. racers came to ME
looking for more performance to beat the competition. I didn't build my
reputation by "giving things to racers".. because I actually gave them
away to EVERYONE thru much of 1996.

Most everyone from then on was a "repeat" race customer.

Of course, that doesn't explain the consulting work I do for
professional race engineering concerns overseas.. nope.. never
GAVE them a thing.. in fact, I charge them precipitously for it.

Couldn't be because I know what I'm doing.. nope.

FWIW, "graphs" don't show you anything. Anyone can take any
product of a competitor.. sandbag it on a dyno and say "lookee here"
Not really magic there.

It might be notable, that I *engineered* the EFI mods for AA's Gen II, stage 1, 1.5,
and 2 M3 turbo kits. Still have the calibrations sitting on my computer.

Of course, I only "knew what i was doing" back then when I was
teaching them how to do it.. LOL... I'm not able to do it myself.

[Sacramento M3]

Sorry Jim,
Didn't mean to step on your toes with the comment of you going to race teams or them coming to you. I was basing that purely on how I've been informed in the past with the rather mainstream style racing (oil companies sponsoring cars, tire companies, etc etc) events.

Now as far as I know BMW *engineered* the M3, but couldn't possibly be someone or some few individuals out there that could *improve* on the design any ....huh?

As for consulting services....well I suppose if AA *wanted* to get their hands in that arena of the business they probably could and probably quite easily just as you did. Seems like AA is geared more towards providing what works well with daily driven street cars though, than concerned with race cars, and really I don't see what race experience has to do with your tuning since you have to detune everything a tad anyways to make it safe for the streets.

FWIW I think graphs are a key important part of tuning a car. Scientists just don't pull numbers out of their asses do they? Well....not for the most part anyways. They document and and keep tables and *graphs* of their experiementation. You can't fault what is basically the only thing that we as consumers can provide as scientific proof. Yep you are right some people can cheat on their graphs, but I'm sure there are others who are as honest as they can be with them.

It also might be notable that BMW *engineered* their own DME software editor, and they knew what they were doing too. Someone just managed to reverse engineer it for themselves, so I don't see what you are crying about there.

[NickG]

Originally posted by Sacramento M3
Sorry Jim,
It also might be notable that BMW *engineered* their own DME software editor, and they knew what they were doing too. Someone just managed to reverse engineer it for themselves, so I don't see what you are crying about there.

LOL, no they didn't......they contracted Bosch and Siemens to do their ECUs (sound familiar?). And if you think reverse engineering an ECU is easy, then I suggest you give it a try

[Sacramento M3]

Nick,
I didn't say it was easy. Usually any kind of work to me on a car is not easy heheh spare changing the oil. What I am implying is that he didn't *create* the DME software editor, he and everyone else under the sun are complaining about how AA is using his DME editor, when he took it from BMW. So what gives???

[NickG]

Originally posted by Sacramento M3
What I am implying is that he didn't *create* the DME software editor, he and everyone else under the sun are complaining about how AA is using his DME editor, when he took it from BMW. So what gives???

Why are you implying that? Do you have some insight or proof behind that statement, especially the part where he took it from BMW? Jim Conforti designed his own Motronic DME editing software and called it the DME Editor. AA has it, ERT has it, RMS has it, *I* have it.

[Sacramento M3]

Ok well.....

http://www.bonnevillemotorwerks.com/technology.html

an Electrical Engineer specializing in Robotics we set out to learn all there was to know about the hardware of the Electronic Control Unit in Jim's 1987 BMW 325iS. Rather than an attempt to develop a product, it was a quest for knowledge that lasts to this day. From this initial learning period, we developed special tools for unlocking the mysteries of Motronic. These tools have matured constantly, culminating in our DME Editor.

The front page pretty much says most of it. You can read the rest of the website if you like.

[NickG]

Uh, you do realize that Bonneville Motor Werks is owned and run by Jim Conforti, right? Bonneville Motor Werks (aka Jim Conforti) came out with the DME Editor.

So what was your point again?

[Jim Conforti]

No worries, no toes stepped on at all.

Actually.. BMW *didn't* engineeir their own DME Editor.

They use (or used) two programs..

One from Bosch.. called the VS-100.. now the VS-1000 (progress)

One from Siemens called SAMS-2000

I've used them both.. they are tedious programs at best.

The DME Editor that I designed years ago was actually a pretty
darn revolutionary tool. The new one, in the works now, makes
the old one look like DOS 5.0 compared to Win XP.

But all that aside, before you make judgements, learn the history
of who taught what to whom.

Graphs are useless.. smooth AFR's are "pretty".. "pretty" doesn't
make power.. an engine might make best torque at 12.8:1 and
best power at 13:5 to 1. To make a soft rev limit you might also
make it super rich, just before the redline.

Result.. a curve that looks "out of control".. it goes rich.. then
lean.. then rich again dramatically.. but it's designed that way.

It might have rich or lean "spikes" in the middle to smooth over the
"feel" of a WOT vanos transition on a single vanos car.

(You know.. when the cam swings from adv to retarded/etc)

The "consumer" won't know anything other than "that doesn't
look very good"... when in fact it IS very VERY good for their
engine to be that way.

Hence, I'm sorry.. but someone who isn't "a tuner" or a combustion
engineer won't really get much information from an AFR graph.

Chris/ScottyCS:

Here's a little of that Air-Conditioning at work.

IN alphabetical order, and intentionally obfuscated from the order
they appear in the MS41 control unit, here are just a few of the
tables that are needed to properly tune something on an E36
OBD-II car.

% of ICV MAF to use
Air Density Divisor for CALC_TEST_MAF
Base ICV (A/C)
Base ICV (Drive & A/C)
Base ICV (Drive)
Base ICV (nom.)
Basic Ignition Advance 1
Basic Ignition Advance 2
Basic Injection Time
Basic TI_MAF_AE
Basic TI_TPS_AE
Calculated Kat Temp
Catalyst Protection Enrichment Correction for Ti
Coldstart Enrichment Deactivation Factor
Coldstart Enrichment Restart Correction Factor
DFCO RPM Min (A/C Comp Active)
DFCO RPM Min (Nom.)
Full Load Enrichment Correction for Ti
Idle PWM % for Start
Idle PWM Factor for Cat Heating
Idle Speed (A/C on)
Idle Speed (Drive & A/C)
Idle Speed (Drive)
Idle Speed (Nom.)
Ignition Advance Compensation for Vanos Active
Ignition Angle Correction for IGA_TIA_TCO
Ignition Angle for Cranking/Start
Initialization factor for TI_MAF_AE
Lambda TCO Threshold
Lambda TCO Threshold #2
LM (mg/Hub) Threshold for TI_COP Activation
MAF Transfer table
MAF(mg/Hub) Calc from ICV
MAF(mg/Hub) Calc from RPM/TPS
Min TPS Threshold for Full Load (and TI_FL)
Minimum MAF Threshold for Knock Detection (mg/TDC)
TCO Linearization Table
Ti Correction for Vanos Active
TI Idle Correction (TI_IS)
TI_CAST (Initialized Value for Coldstart Enrichment Factor)
TI_COP Correction for Knock Control
TI_CST (Initialized Ti for Cranking/Start)
TI_DEAC_CST (Start Fuel Deactivation Factor)
TI_TKW_DEAC_FAC (Coolant Temp Deactivation Factor for Start Fuel)
TIA Linearization Table
TIADADDn Warmup Factor
TIADFAKn Warmup Factor
TIPR_CST (Initial Injection Pulse for Cranking/Start)
Vanos Actuation Control Table #1 for TPS hi
Vanos Actuation Control Table #2 for TPS hi
Vanos Actuation MAF Threshold #1 for low TPS
Vanos Actuation MAF Threshold #2 for low TPS
Vanos Select Logic TPS Threshold
Weighting factor for IGA_TIA_TCO

(Those, BTW, were just some of the less-obscure map/field titles
from a map printout from one of my programs for ONE variant of
E36 328i)

Of course, this is just "bench racing" right?

FWIW, a properly tuned chip might modify all of these maps and
many more..

Not to mention all of the fault strategies.. which I haven't listed
because this Forum doesn't have enough diskspace.

Thats ONE variant.. of ONE type of BMW ECU.

Right now.. there are 634 current/known US versions of BMW software
just for OBD-II cars.

Try managing those 634 variants "on the dyno".

Of course, maybe that's why my "airconditioned room" and all the
DP resources we have cost more than your average 4wd dyno.

That is to say cost well into the SIX figures.

Not to mention the few MILLION dollars worth of engineering time
spent in divining the data STORED on our network.

I only say that since you've equated "Research & Development"
with "spending money on a dyno".

Like it or not, the vast majority of tuning time isn't spent on the dyno.
It's spent over 512k of Motorola or Intel assembly code, usually
in a nice air-conditioned room, and usually with a nice supply
of snacks and Mtn Dew.

That means, that 512k of uncommented code has to MEAN something
to you.. if it doesn't.. well.. (video game noise) thanks for playing
better luck next time.

The air-conditioning won't help you then.

Of course, if you had a dyno, in a proper dyno cell, the dyno would
also be air-conditioned to the tune of a $300k+ HVAC and
environmental controls system. Don't have one of those, huh

Of course, excepting a few firms like Dinan, Autothority and the
like, the vast majority of the tuning never gets DONE. I started
my company to take already GOOD levels of achievement, one
(or several) steps beyond the (then) current state of the art.

By all rational accounts, we've achieved our goals.

[Jim Conforti]

Sacramento.. not to drag this on any longer..

The DME Editor is copyright JIM CONFORTI.

I wrote it.. didn't copy ANYTHING from ANYONE.

(Of importance is that, at the time I wrote it, there wasn't
anything "to copy" from)

It's a program.. I wrote.. for the 32 bit windows environment
from scratch.. using Microsoft tools. VC++ and VB.

I'm not sure what you're trying to get at, but the site you
refer to is MY site. Explaining how/why we started things.

(someone, queue the Twilight Zone music)

[Sacramento M3]

Originally posted by Jim Conforti
Sacramento.. not to drag this on any longer..

The DME Editor is copyright JIM CONFORTI.

I wrote it.. didn't copy ANYTHING from ANYONE.

(Of importance is that, at the time I wrote it, there wasn't
anything "to copy" from)

It's a program.. I wrote.. for the 32 bit windows environment
from scratch.. using Microsoft tools. VC++ and VB.

I'm not sure what you're trying to get at, but the site you
refer to is MY site. Explaining how/why we started things.

(someone, queue the Twilight Zone music)

Yep and Windows is copyright Microsoft, *created* by Bill Gates, not copied from anyone.

...sorry Jim, I just think it an ironic statement that you say this when you openly admit to using the Bosch and Siemen programs and then try to sell the public that you absolutely have not copied anything from either of those programs. Perhaps you didn't use the same code, but I'm willing to bet that a lot of the same functionality from their programs exists in your program....and may only be *improved* on.

[Jim Conforti]

Sacramento.. it's time for a serious reality check.

I wrote the DME Editor back in 1996. Some 7 years ago.

I hadn't even SEEN the VS-100/1000 or SAMS-2000 tools

I got access to those, later in life in my consultancy work.

Those programs cost more than both our yearly salaries
combined.

If you still don't understand who OWNS the IP rights to the
DME Editor, that's OK.. the US Courts do.

It wasn't copied from anywhere. I wrote the code, 100% of
the code.

FWIW, I don't know of one Microsoft thing that is "copyright
Bill Gates".

[Sacramento M3]

That's right Jim, that's why I said copyright Microsoft.

And I'm sure you do own the IP rights to the DME editor, but I still don't believe you developed it from scratch without input or insight from other programs.

[M3RACER]

Originally posted by Sacramento M3
That's right Jim, that's why I said copyright Microsoft.

And I'm sure you do own the IP rights to the DME editor, but I still don't believe you developed it from scratch without input or insight from other programs.

Seriously who the fu%k cares? You are proving nothing, so just don't even bother posting.

[Sacramento M3]

So what now, I can't support my own opinion in a public forum?? Sheeeeeeeeeeeezus!!! Excuse me!

[Number9]

Originally posted by Sacramento M3
That's right Jim, that's why I said copyright Microsoft.

And I'm sure you do own the IP rights to the DME editor, but I still don't believe you developed it from scratch without input or insight from other programs.

Wow! One shouldn't cast aspersions such as that without backup detail. You're entitled to your opinion. If it's not an informed opinion, then you're just a putz!

[Jim Conforti]

Originally posted by Sacramento M3
but I still don't believe you developed it from scratch without input or insight from other programs.

Too bad.. some of us actually write our own programs without
copying from others.

I didn't copy the DME Editor from anyone else.. I didn't develop it with "input or insight" from anyone else, or other programs.

I didn't figure out how to recalibrate Injectors or HFMs in DME's
from "anyone else".. including Bosch and/or Siemens.

Sometimes, the truth is hard to swallow, eh.

[Sacramento M3]

It's just all non-tangible rhetoric until you and only you (seeing's as the software is copyrighted) prove me wrong.

I am by no means a programmer Jim, but I do know that many competing software companies use ideas from the competitors software as.....they can be really good ideas! No one could fault anyone for that. I believe that at the point you wrote the DME you had a lot of experience already with other ECU tuning software and you probably built yours based on a few solid ideas and some improvements you may have added along the way.

Number 9:
This whole thread is filled with opinions that could be considered *uninformed* because no one but select few people have seen the software, and only one company has beef with Jim C. while the rest support him, so how could anyone else be expected to make more of an *informed* opinion than what we can possibly try to conceive logically in our minds. As far as your argument goes, your opinion is just as uninformed as mine, so you are just as much of a putz for posting as I am. Doesn't really make sense huh??

[Number9]

Originally posted by Sacramento M3
This whole thread is filled with opinions that could be considered *uninformed* because no one but select few people have seen the software, and only one company has beef with Jim C. while the rest support him, so how could anyone else be expected to make more of an *informed* opinion than what we can possibly try to conceive logically in our minds. As far as your argument goes, your opinion is just as uninformed as mine, so you are just as much of a putz for posting as I am. Doesn't really make sense huh??

Wrong. I don't make potentially libelous comments unless I'm damned sure that they're true. So no, by my standards, you're still a putz, and in this instance, I'm not...

[Sacramento M3]

Well so far I've made no potentially libelous comments. Now you're just twisting what I've said into something you'd like to believe would maybe possibly have a legal repercussion, but really doesn't because the 1st amendment guarantees me freedom of speech, and since I haven't stated any slanderish accusations then I'm not overstepping any boundaries. Damn seems like you can't have an opposing viewpoint these days without someone trying to sue ya. And if I were you, I would be careful of how you attack people on this board. Kevlar's already issued a warning once. We don't need another. Try to keep your arguments level headed please. I think there is a lot to learn in this thread. I simply wanted to post my opinion, and defend it.

[Number9]

Originally posted by Sacramento M3
And if I were you, I would be careful of how you attack people on this board. Kevlar's already issued a warning once. We don't need another.

I haven't had occasion to be the subject of Kevlar's warnings, so I presume the "we" that you're referring to is the royal "we." And if you were me, then you'd have an IQ well over 150 and not be engaging in ad hominem attacks against JC or me or anyone.

[Croak]

It's pretty simple. Conforti did start with somebody else's work, in the form of a stock DME, and he was using tools supplied by another company (C++ and VB).

But from there on, it was all him, and it was no small feat.

This is a pretty stretched analogy, but the Wright Brothers and every one else in early aviation essentially reverse engineered birds and insects, then improved on the original to develop the airplane.

Did this make them copy-cats? And then, did the people from Bell who designed the X-1 copy the Wright Brothers? Or Boeing and the 707? Or Lockheed with the SR-71?

No, they took the underlying principles of aerodynamics and improved on them, and tailored them to solve the particular needs of each design, and quite often used tools from other sources to accomplish the work.

But everyone acknowledges the accomplishments of Wright, Bell, Boeing, and Lockheed, and doesn't say "Hey, they just copied birds, and used other peoples tools to make the tools they needed, no big deal!"

I'm not putting Jim's work in the same scope as that, but the principle is the same.

It'd be useless speculation at this point, but imagine the state of the BMW mod and enthusiast community today if Jim Conforti had not built his DME editor, and then put it to work.

[Sacramento M3]

Well pardon me for not being the most intelligent person on earth. Damn.

[tylerblue]

I thank you all for allowing me to read one of the most entertaining threads on bimmerforums.com.

[tylerblue]

And might I add that I have a JC chip in my E30 M3 and it runs like a Gem.

[Tanks95]

I'm sold. Fact over Fiction. Because i will never forget the AA Track (crack) pipe wars, those were great threads also. If I remember correctly AA lost that battle also? Great thread!