Judgement day M52 2.8

Discuss general engine, turbo and supercharger conversions in this section

Moderator: martauto

Andy325i
E30 Zone Addict
E30 Zone Addict
Posts: 4052
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 11:00 pm
Location: Avon

Post Tue May 09, 2006 10:13 pm

After getting the M52 in and running, one of the first things I wanted to do was check the fueling was alright (not to lean), if anything I thought it would be lean as its a 2.8 engine running on 2.5 management. Also purely out of interest (as one does!) I was interested to see what the new powerplant was giving as if feels a world away from my M20B25.

I got there at about 10:30am and was greeted with a very welcome coffee to wake me up, after a hard night of getting the electric fan installed and wired in and swapping the wheels over so it had some decent rubber on it :)

After Paul moved a couple of cars out, it was down to business.First things first Paul got the electric fan running infront of the car to keep the under bonnet temps cool

Image

Next the probe was inserted into the exhaust

Image

this was then connected to the little box of tricks that gives an instant readout of the air to fuel mixture

This was at idle

Image

and at at about 4000rpm

Image

I can't remeber what Paul said the optimum AFM was :oops: , I think its about 14.8 to 1 (will check) and as can be seen from the pic above it is overfueling quiet a lot the higher up the rev range it got.

Even so it was nice to see it put down the figures it did :)

Image

Peak power was 118 KW, which translates into 160.48 Bhp at the wheels, so allowing approx. 20% transmission loss, this gives 200.6% at the flywheel, which considering there are a few issues still to get sorted (exhaust, fueling etc) left me smiling from ear to ear :D

Here is the graph:

Image


I would like to say a very big shout and thankyou to Paul for a great morning and all his help. I would not hesitate to recomended him :D

Andy
Image
M50B25NonVanos & M52B28Vanos Heads for sale. Pm Me.
User avatar
tim_s
E30 Zone Squatter
E30 Zone Squatter
Posts: 1661
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 11:00 pm
Location: Bristol/London

Post Tue May 09, 2006 11:34 pm

nice one! m52s always seem to do well on the rollers. any pics of your engine?
Image
2.1 318is, MS, LPG. 200bhp, 175ft/lbs GONE!
Boxster, e46 m3, e36 sport touring and alpina B3 3.0
Andy335Touring
Married to the E30 Zone
Married to the E30 Zone
Posts: 7144
Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2005 11:00 pm
Location: Long Eaton,Nottingham

Post Tue May 09, 2006 11:35 pm

Nice one mate 8)

What are the little jobs you have to do to it to sort the fueling out and what do you have to do to the exhaust ?
jmc330i
Engaged to the E30 Zone
Engaged to the E30 Zone
Posts: 6621
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 11:00 pm
Location: Somerset

Post Wed May 10, 2006 9:00 am

Excellent Andy, bet youre well happy with 200bhp :cool:

The optimum air/fuel ratio is 14.7:1, so you werent far off with your guess.
James
'91 325i Sport
'93 318i touring 16v
Andy325i
E30 Zone Addict
E30 Zone Addict
Posts: 4052
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 11:00 pm
Location: Avon

Post Wed May 10, 2006 9:28 pm

Cheers for the kind comments guys :)

Tim, here are a few quick pics, still got to tidy the wiring, going to loose the box that the ECU is in, extend the wires, then mount it where the E30 one sits :)

Andy, the fueling is way over the top atm for some reason, more so the higher up the rev range you go, so going to go with a unichip or maybe as paul suggested have a chat with Jason at chipped and see what he can do, totally not sure which to do yet. And the exhaust is blowing more than a cheap whore atm lol We have sorted the manifold out now so that doesn't blow :), but its blowing where the bits we have made are joined to the standard 320i system, first things first with the exhaust is to get it sorted in the way of the system itself, so I have an E36 325i Scorpian rear section and going to get from the downpipes back made in S/S too :)

James, Cheers for that dude, I knew it was somewhere around there :D

your spot on, I know its not all about the figures, but it is nice to have the magic 200 :D and it does pull well and has a resonable amount of grunt from lowdown which has certainly left a few people confused winkeye
inc: Rover 220 Coupe turbo (190 Bhp?) pulled away from him nicely for a couple sections of ring road, an alfa (156 spider?, not sure tbh). With the 4.10 diff in its great fun from 60-80 in the blink of an eye literaly. On the way back from the R/R my mate pulled up behind in his bro's E34 535i at the lights. Now that would have been interesting on a clear bit of road :D


Andy
Image
M50B25NonVanos & M52B28Vanos Heads for sale. Pm Me.
User avatar
tim_s
E30 Zone Squatter
E30 Zone Squatter
Posts: 1661
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 11:00 pm
Location: Bristol/London

Post Wed May 10, 2006 11:02 pm

that's a good effort, i like the pics! was that cone filter like that on the rollers?
as far as the overfuelling is concerned, what exactly are you running? have you had it diag'd - i know its the wrong ecu for the engine etc, but i'm still quite suprised its running that rich really. what's it like on part load closed-loop? I can do a diag for you if you like as i have carsoft 6 and leads etc.
what cams, injectors, t/b etc did you use?
i thought you were up at circuit motors before mine went in - thought paul was talking about yours when i was up there a wk or two back. :mad:
Image
2.1 318is, MS, LPG. 200bhp, 175ft/lbs GONE!
Boxster, e46 m3, e36 sport touring and alpina B3 3.0
Turbo-Brown
Boost Junkie
Posts: 4705
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 11:00 pm
Location: Aldershot, Hants

Post Thu May 11, 2006 8:17 am

Mmmm, it's only optimum 14.7:1 at idle and light loads (can go a bit weaker for idle). For acceleration and anything involving power, it should be a fair bit richer than that, and 30:1 is just bloomin dangerous! :(
325i Twin Turbo (until 10am 01/12/07 :( )

www.air-in.co.uk free M20 exhaust and inlet flange
Demlotcrew
E30 Zone Team Member
E30 Zone Team Member
Posts: 13329
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2004 11:00 pm
Location: East Anglia

Post Thu May 11, 2006 8:56 am

Turbo-Brown wrote:Mmmm, it's only optimum 14.7:1 at idle and light loads (can go a bit weaker for idle). For acceleration and anything involving power, it should be a fair bit richer than that, and 30:1 is just bloomin dangerous! :(
Yeah for acceleration you want it about 12.5-13 anything after that it too lean! Turbo-brown, when you have a wideband intalled and you are in over run the AFR goes really lean far more than 30.0! (which is what i think is happening there)

Good results @ 200 bhp, thats what MY S14 got at emerald.

Andrew
User avatar
tim_s
E30 Zone Squatter
E30 Zone Squatter
Posts: 1661
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 11:00 pm
Location: Bristol/London

Post Thu May 11, 2006 11:40 am

sure, but andy's is running 10.9:1 at a steady 4k rpm according to the pic - on an NA engine that's too rich! and if its getting richer the higher the rpm, it will be worse at the redline. iirc the last m52 (a 323) i saw on some rollers was running high 13 AFRs on WOT.
Image
2.1 318is, MS, LPG. 200bhp, 175ft/lbs GONE!
Boxster, e46 m3, e36 sport touring and alpina B3 3.0
Andy325i
E30 Zone Addict
E30 Zone Addict
Posts: 4052
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 11:00 pm
Location: Avon

Post Thu May 11, 2006 7:39 pm

tim_s wrote:that's a good effort, i like the pics! was that cone filter like that on the rollers?
as far as the overfuelling is concerned, what exactly are you running? have you had it diag'd - i know its the wrong ecu for the engine etc, but i'm still quite suprised its running that rich really. what's it like on part load closed-loop? I can do a diag for you if you like as i have carsoft 6 and leads etc.
what cams, injectors, t/b etc did you use?
i thought you were up at circuit motors before mine went in - thought paul was talking about yours when i was up there a wk or two back. :mad:
Thanks :) It took a bit of photoshopping to get the pics sorted (hence why the car looks even dirtier than it is :D

yes the cone filter was as in the pics, need to seal it off really, but not sure which filter setup I will be using yet

As for the fueling I am running:

E30 320i fuel pump, lines and tank
M50B25 fuel rail, inlet manifold throttle body and FPR
M52B28 injectors
K and N filter (temp measure!!!)
M50 Loom, sensors and ECU
Standard M52B28 cams

erm thats about all I can think of :D

Sorry what is part load closed-loop? :oops:

What is Carsoft 6? Could be interesting :)

I popped into see paul a couple of weeks ago, while I was up at Coombe taking some pics at the Porshce action day :D

I have all the AFR on a bit of paper somewhere, but can't find it atm, whe I do I will post it up

Thanks for all the input guys

Andy
Image
M50B25NonVanos & M52B28Vanos Heads for sale. Pm Me.
User avatar
tim_s
E30 Zone Squatter
E30 Zone Squatter
Posts: 1661
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 11:00 pm
Location: Bristol/London

Post Thu May 11, 2006 9:29 pm

Andy325i wrote:
tim_s wrote:that's a good effort, i like the pics! was that cone filter like that on the rollers?
as far as the overfuelling is concerned, what exactly are you running? have you had it diag'd - i know its the wrong ecu for the engine etc, but i'm still quite suprised its running that rich really. what's it like on part load closed-loop? I can do a diag for you if you like as i have carsoft 6 and leads etc.
what cams, injectors, t/b etc did you use?
i thought you were up at circuit motors before mine went in - thought paul was talking about yours when i was up there a wk or two back. :mad:
Thanks :) It took a bit of photoshopping to get the pics sorted (hence why the car looks even dirtier than it is :D

yes the cone filter was as in the pics, need to seal it off really, but not sure which filter setup I will be using yet

As for the fueling I am running:

E30 320i fuel pump, lines and tank
M50B25 fuel rail, inlet manifold throttle body and FPR
M52B28 injectors
K and N filter (temp measure!!!)
M50 Loom, sensors and ECU
Standard M52B28 cams

erm thats about all I can think of :D

Sorry what is part load closed-loop? :oops:

What is Carsoft 6? Could be interesting :)

I popped into see paul a couple of weeks ago, while I was up at Coombe taking some pics at the Porshce action day :D

I have all the AFR on a bit of paper somewhere, but can't find it atm, whe I do I will post it up

Thanks for all the input guys

Andy
andy, give us the part no. of the injectors you're running and the m50 injectors, i reckon this might be why you're running rich, m50 = 3.5bar, m52=3bar, so i reckon the m52 ones are too high a flowrate at 3.5 bar.

feel free to give us a buzz or pm, carsoft is basically a bit of software that you hook up to your ECU and it can read all your sensors live, check fault codes, reset adaptation values etc.
i think its worth getting the motronic as sorted as you can before going unichip or other piggyback. i have little experience but i'd be worried about running unichip with lambda, my mate used to have some trouble with his with the lambda probe and quite an adaptive ECU - his map used to 'go off' after a while. the perfect power unit can alter lamda and might be better on a later car like yours.

cheers
tim
Image
2.1 318is, MS, LPG. 200bhp, 175ft/lbs GONE!
Boxster, e46 m3, e36 sport touring and alpina B3 3.0
Andy325i
E30 Zone Addict
E30 Zone Addict
Posts: 4052
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 11:00 pm
Location: Avon

Post Thu May 11, 2006 10:23 pm

Cheers Tim, I will look into the the injector issue over the w/e. I know one set are green and one are pink, not sure which is which without checking.

the carsoft sounds good

Chatting to paul, the O2 sensor can be lost, the ECU will then go to a default value as regards to this and the Unichip/chip can be programmed to take this into acount :D


Andy
Image
M50B25NonVanos & M52B28Vanos Heads for sale. Pm Me.
User avatar
tim_s
E30 Zone Squatter
E30 Zone Squatter
Posts: 1661
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 11:00 pm
Location: Bristol/London

Post Thu May 11, 2006 11:04 pm

Andy325i wrote:Cheers Tim, I will look into the the injector issue over the w/e. I know one set are green and one are pink, not sure which is which without checking.

the carsoft sounds good
okie dokes - give us the bosch numbers off the tops of the injectors and i'll tell you the flowrates.
yeah i would be interesting to try carsoft see if the injectors have thrown a fault code etc. - its definitely worth getting the motronic spot on before putting money into unichip etc - if you have a dodgy sensor or something thats making it run rich (could be CLT or something), adding a piggyback to alter things even more is not the correct way to deal with it!

Chatting to paul, the O2 sensor can be lost, the ECU will then go to a default value as regards to this and the Unichip/chip can be programmed to take this into acount :D
if you remove the o2 sensor you will for certain throw a fault code, and you may also make the car run like shit. i've never tried this on an obd1 e36 but on an obd2 they run really badly without the sensor - the idle and the fuelling go to shit. i really don't like the idea of getting rid of lambda to run the unichip - it was made for closed loop operation so requires a lamda probe, else it prob won't run correctly.
Image
2.1 318is, MS, LPG. 200bhp, 175ft/lbs GONE!
Boxster, e46 m3, e36 sport touring and alpina B3 3.0
Ant
Retired Team Member
Retired Team Member
Posts: 10496
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2004 11:00 pm
Location: PD+E dept :D

Post Fri May 12, 2006 11:09 am

Good figures !

looking @ the dyno, it looks to go way rich @ 5K below that the curve is steep and smooth, is there a plot showing the AFR too dude ?

the lean @ idle suggests the closed loop is not functioning , is the std M50 02 sensor still in place ?

bin the filter , get the biggest you can find in there, M52's are deep breathing torque monsters, more filter area the better.

opening up the pipe will yeild a good few bhp too, std 325 system alone would suffice, the e36 system is quite small bore in places 8O

Impressive though dude, kudos to you !
Product Development and Endurance for Delphi.

Original performance chips, original works not unlicensed copies :D Email FTW
ShepsEvo3
Master of go faster
Posts: 1881
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 11:00 pm
Location: Bristol/Wiltshire

Post Fri May 12, 2006 5:26 pm

Andy, I've noticed some concerns here with using the Uni-chip. The Uni-chip works extremely well WITH or WITHOUT the lambda probe. I have fitted shite loads and never had a problem, ever.

If you want to keep the lambda sensor, then you should leave it connected and working as Bosch designed it to [EDIT: with the cat still in place]. The Unichip can be mapped fully with it connected on Full Throttle, as the ECU ignores any input from the Lambda sensor in this state. On part throttles, only the timing should be mapped as whatever you tune [EDIT: the fueling] on the Unichip, or any other for that matter, the ECU will see a rich or lean signal from the lambda sensor and alter the injector opening periods to suit [EDIT: its preset maps and values]. I understand there are some systems which ensures the ECU only sees a given signal and you are able to map around that, but it will be the same signal as disconnecting the lambda probe altogether. With the lambda probe disconnected the ECU will log a fault, granted, but allows the engine to be ran safely as long as it has this probe disconnected. It certainly does not effect any performance to the engine.

As your car is an H registration it does not require a catalyst for MOT's. Running a car without a catalyst and fueling being controled by a lambda probe designed to be run with a catalyst installed creates problems in itself. With the cat removed, the exhaust gasses flow past the lambda probe much quicker than normal, so the probe cannot sense the gasses as good as before [EDIT: or as the probe was calibrated to the ECU from the factory], so the fueling will be out in this state too. Keeping the lambda probe connected and just "bagged up" under the bonnet can also be dangerous to the engine too.

Your car was running extremely rich. For Optimum performance you should run 12.8:1 - 13.2:1. This I have seen to work many, many times on the dyno while mapping. Some cars optimum can be 13.6-13.8:1.
Your exhaust was blowing badly too, and I suspect that the 10.9:1 we were seeing would have been richer than that in reality. FYI 30.7:1 is the leanest the machine reads. That was probably with the engine stopped or on over-run, although I did see 30.7:1 a couple of times while it was idling showing how bad the exhaust was blowing.

I suggested Andy speak to Jayson from Chipped UK as he may have a chip which would sort his fuel problems out CHEAPLY. But, as has been said, the injectors could be too large, and the fuel pressure could be too high??? If he wanted to keep that set up, the Unichip can more than cope with the fueling side of things. If he wanted to Turbo it in the future, then the injectors and fuel pressure it has at the moment would come into play, all that would be needed is a turbo module (MAP sensor) and a re-map of the Unichip - simple.

What I will say about the Dastek stuff....Unlike some other set ups and systems, they actually do as it says on the tin. No messing. And works pretty much with anything you throw at it. Unfortunately, but probably the best way, you have to rely on a dyno operator at a Unichip dealer to map it properly, you cannot plug and play yourself. Most of the time - its a good thing. (whether that mapper is the best person at mapping who knows?)

One last thing, I was suprised at the power made by Andy's car. To be as pair as possible, because of the diff he had fitted in the car, I decided to run it in 5th. This on normal geared cars would show less power at the wheels. So the 160 bhp at the wheels is what to look at. We assumed a loss of 20% (same as my M3 on Dasteks dyno in 4th) and came out with that 200 bhp.

I will speak to you over the weekend at some stage Andy about your car and some pics of mine :wink: The Unichip will work extremely well on your car as it is. But if you want to change anything like your exhaust manifold, induction, cams, injectors, fuel pressure, etc, etc, please do it before we map it!

Cheers,

Paul.
E30 M3 Unichip Alpha N style conversions, this is the ultimate for extracting the best out of your S14 M power car.
Also, Live mapping of your Standard Motronic ECU for optimising all your modifications.
www.sabre-tuning.co.uk
ShepsEvo3
Master of go faster
Posts: 1881
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 11:00 pm
Location: Bristol/Wiltshire

Post Fri May 12, 2006 5:36 pm

Thanks Andy for your kind comments :wink:

Can't wait for our new dyno install - its simply an awesome machine! Watch this space! winkeye

[EDIT: Oh Andy, your engine has an oil leak!!! Was gonna phone you, but ran out of time during the day, and totally forgot untill now - sorry!]
E30 M3 Unichip Alpha N style conversions, this is the ultimate for extracting the best out of your S14 M power car.
Also, Live mapping of your Standard Motronic ECU for optimising all your modifications.
www.sabre-tuning.co.uk
Chaos
E30 Zone Addict
E30 Zone Addict
Posts: 2460
Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 11:00 pm
Location: Cardiff, South Wales

Post Sat May 13, 2006 1:59 am

nice one andy, u must be well pleased that its all up n running etc.
ShepsEvo3 wrote:We assumed a loss of 20% (same as my M3 on Dasteks dyno in 4th) and came out with that 200 bhp.
u cant measure power loss on a dyno - its ALWAYS a guess.
coastdown - which im guessing u used isnt accurate (it cant be as the transmission isnt under load at the time)

everything ive read (and ive looked into this quite a lot) says rwd is normally around 17%

3% doesnt sound a big difference but in this instance its enuff to turn 200bhp into 193bhp


this doesnt take anything away from what by all accounts is an excellent conversion - well done andy spot on m8 8)
Chaos
causing havoc and mayhem wherever i go

Image
ShepsEvo3
Master of go faster
Posts: 1881
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 11:00 pm
Location: Bristol/Wiltshire

Post Sat May 13, 2006 9:57 am

[quote="Chaos"]
u cant measure power loss on a dyno - its ALWAYS a guess.
coastdown - which im guessing u used isnt accurate (it cant be as the transmission isnt under load at the time)

everything ive read (and ive looked into this quite a lot) says rwd is normally around 17%

3% doesnt sound a big difference but in this instance its enuff to turn 200bhp into 193bhp
[quote]

Quite! WE do not use a coastdown method. Our dyno doesn't have this facility. This is why we "assumed" a 20% transmission loss. I strongly disagree with you about the coastdown. It is MUCH more accurate than "guessing". If power was down, how would you know where to look? If you didn't use a coastdown, you would automatically assume that the engine was at fault unless it was obvious you had a flat tyre or smoke was billowing out from a driven wheel. With a coastdown you can see if there is excess drivetrain losses and look elsewhere on the car. The engine could be strong and nothing wrong with that. But the coastdown methods used on some dynos are not accurate. The dyno we have decided to go for is ACCURATE and does rely on a coastdown to calculate the losses. ALOT of R&D went into it to develop it, much more than every other dyno available.

I will find a link for you to read, it will change your mind about coastdowns. :wink:

Andy's conversion is very good. The car is quick.
E30 M3 Unichip Alpha N style conversions, this is the ultimate for extracting the best out of your S14 M power car.
Also, Live mapping of your Standard Motronic ECU for optimising all your modifications.
www.sabre-tuning.co.uk
Turbo-Brown
Boost Junkie
Posts: 4705
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 11:00 pm
Location: Aldershot, Hants

Post Sat May 13, 2006 2:23 pm

The dyno we have decided to go for is ACCURATE and does rely on a coastdown to calculate the losses. ALOT of R&D went into it to develop it, much more than every other dyno available
Not Dastek's new system is it? :)
325i Twin Turbo (until 10am 01/12/07 :( )

www.air-in.co.uk free M20 exhaust and inlet flange
Chaos
E30 Zone Addict
E30 Zone Addict
Posts: 2460
Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 11:00 pm
Location: Cardiff, South Wales

Post Sat May 13, 2006 3:26 pm

ShepsEvo3 wrote:[This is why we "assumed" a 20% transmission loss.
http://www.pumaracing.co.uk/power3.htm

this is oneof the best write ups ive found in the past.
he suggests (as do most other sites) 17% to be about right for rwd - tho obviously it will differ from car to car.


I strongly disagree with you about the coastdown. It is MUCH more accurate than "guessing". If power was down, how would you know where to look? If you didn't use a coastdown, you would automatically assume that the engine was at fault unless it was obvious you had a flat tyre or smoke was billowing out from a driven wheel. With a coastdown you can see if there is excess drivetrain losses and look elsewhere on the car. The engine could be strong and nothing wrong with that. But the coastdown methods used on some dynos are not accurate. The dyno we have decided to go for is ACCURATE and does rely on a coastdown to calculate the losses. ALOT of R&D went into it to develop it, much more than every other dyno available.
yes i agree it can point u in the right direction, but it cannot tell u a true transmission loss.
think about it, the components in the drivetrain are not under the same load during coastdown as they are whilst transmitting power to the road - as such any losses found will not be accurate.


I will find a link for you to read, it will change your mind about coastdowns. :wink:
appreciated.

Andy's conversion is very good. The car is quick.
sweet, and regardless of power THAT is the aim of the game 8)
Chaos
causing havoc and mayhem wherever i go

Image
ShepsEvo3
Master of go faster
Posts: 1881
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 11:00 pm
Location: Bristol/Wiltshire

Post Sat May 13, 2006 8:21 pm

Turbo-Brown wrote:
The dyno we have decided to go for is ACCURATE and does rely on a coastdown to calculate the losses. ALOT of R&D went into it to develop it, much more than every other dyno available
Not Dastek's new system is it? :)
winkeye Well, it seems to be the only one where extensive research and development and tuner consideration has been built into the machine. Gerry has explained how the losses are calculated and in all honesty, since he has explained these to me (I will also post which magazine he has written up about it when I remember which it is) I cannot see how you can caluculate the losses to the flywheel. Yes you can say 17% losses for a RWD, but you can also say 18% for a FWD, but in reality that maybe true for a Honda Civic Type R, but for an old Mk2 XR2 the losses are more like 25-30% - trust me I know! Also the losses through the transmission while under load is actually very minimal (we are talking less than half a percent here!) So you can almost discount these losses. The most losses which are found are actually the tyres, tracking, turning the rollers, etc, windage of the roller, etc, etc. All these and much, much more are taken into account for measuring the difference between power at wheels and flywheel.

What is being said is that Andy's car should have 17%losses. He had 15" wheels on with the standard 205 wide tyres. His car made 160.5bhp at the wheels, which means that he had 193.4bhp at the flywheel. If he then fitted 18" wheels with 235/245 tyres fitted his car would have made less power at the wheels due to the extra friction made by the wider tyres, and less torque measured because of the larger wheels too (assuming he kept the same profile) So say it too 5bhp out. So 155.5bhp at the wheels, take 17% for losses - 187.4bhp at the flywheel. If a coastdown was used, that figure would have been 193.4bhp again, with 15" OR 18" wheels, 205 OR 245 wide.

I have tried several "pukka" dynos recently and the one which does not recommend a coastdown required about 8 runs before actually getting 2 repeatable power curves - upto 25bhp difference between 1st run and the 8th. Nothing done to the car, just the transmission losses getting less and less because the oils were getting hotter and thinner! There was only 1 dyno which showed the SAME flywheel power on the 1st TWO runs. Needless to say it measured different wheel figures, but the flywheel figure was the same.

This is why I would rather have this dyno than any other, and where I believe a coastdown is invaluable and important. Atleast you can see the difference in a change you made to a map or a component, not a change in fluid temperatures and viscosity. HOWERVER, the coastdown is open to abuse and therefore insecurities by customers who know a little (always a bad thing) about dyno's. I do not operate like that.

I have heard of that Puma link and read it, but my own experiance and Gerrys knowledge at Dastek (He does build these things too) has made a difference to knowing which is more accurate.

Sorry Andy, I didn't mean to Hi-Jack your thread! :roll:
E30 M3 Unichip Alpha N style conversions, this is the ultimate for extracting the best out of your S14 M power car.
Also, Live mapping of your Standard Motronic ECU for optimising all your modifications.
www.sabre-tuning.co.uk
jmc330i
Engaged to the E30 Zone
Engaged to the E30 Zone
Posts: 6621
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 11:00 pm
Location: Somerset

Post Sun May 14, 2006 2:41 pm

ShepsEvo3 wrote: The most losses which are found are actually the tyres, tracking, turning the rollers, etc, windage of the roller, etc, etc. All these and much, much more are taken into account for measuring the difference between power at wheels and flywheel.
What about the dynos that bolt directly to the hubs? Ive only seen them in the USA but surely they would remove any losses from lack of traction/rolling friction etc.
James
'91 325i Sport
'93 318i touring 16v
ShepsEvo3
Master of go faster
Posts: 1881
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 11:00 pm
Location: Bristol/Wiltshire

Post Sun May 14, 2006 3:38 pm

Yes, but the dyno we are considering has been proven to me more acurate than the bolt on hub type. Also I know someone who uses the hub mounted version who says its also not as "steady" as a chassis dyno. But, I have no proof of this as I have not used one 1st hand.

Also the hub mounted dyno is better for vehicles with over 600 BHP at the wheels, where rims spinning inside tyres can be a problem.

Also, can you imaging the costs of having hub mounts for every single make and model of car, and the labour incolved in jacking the car up, removing the wheels, fitting the dyno to the hubs, lowering it, then having to do it all vica-versa once you've finished!
E30 M3 Unichip Alpha N style conversions, this is the ultimate for extracting the best out of your S14 M power car.
Also, Live mapping of your Standard Motronic ECU for optimising all your modifications.
www.sabre-tuning.co.uk
Andy325i
E30 Zone Addict
E30 Zone Addict
Posts: 4052
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 11:00 pm
Location: Avon

Post Mon May 15, 2006 1:52 pm

tim_s wrote: if you remove the o2 sensor you will for certain throw a fault code, and you may also make the car run like shit. i've never tried this on an obd1 e36 but on an obd2 they run really badly without the sensor - the idle and the fuelling go to shit. i really don't like the idea of getting rid of lambda to run the unichip - it was made for closed loop operation so requires a lamda probe, else it prob won't run correctly.
Just to Clarify that I have been running the car with no o2 sensor plugged in and it runs fine, (apart from the fueling up the top end as mentioned)

With no o2 sensor plugged in, it runs at:
0.6% Co2 on idle

With the o2 sensor pluged in, but in fresh air, the Co2 was:
0.1% on warmup at tickover and
0.0% when warmed up at idle.

Driving the car with the o2 sensor plugged in, it felt very flat (could only spin the wheels in first :lol:) So hence atm it is collecting dust somewhere in the workshop.
Ant wrote:Good figures !

looking @ the dyno, it looks to go way rich @ 5K below that the curve is steep and smooth, is there a plot showing the AFR too dude ?

the lean @ idle suggests the closed loop is not functioning , is the std M50 02 sensor still in place ?

bin the filter , get the biggest you can find in there, M52's are deep breathing torque monsters, more filter area the better.

opening up the pipe will yeild a good few bhp too, std 325 system alone would suffice, the e36 system is quite small bore in places 8O

Impressive though dude, kudos to you !
Cheers Ant :)

Here is a graph I did to show power against AFR

Image

Nope no O2 sensor atm

When you say bin the filter, what would you use? What are the ITG filters like?

What pipe are we talking about opening up? It has the M50B25 inlet system on it :)

ShepsEvo3 wrote:Andy, I've noticed some concerns here with using the Uni-chip. The Uni-chip works extremely well WITH or WITHOUT the lambda probe. I have fitted shite loads and never had a problem, ever.

If you want to keep the lambda sensor, then you should leave it connected and working as Bosch designed it to [EDIT: with the cat still in place]. The Unichip can be mapped fully with it connected on Full Throttle, as the ECU ignores any input from the Lambda sensor in this state. On part throttles, only the timing should be mapped as whatever you tune [EDIT: the fueling] on the Unichip, or any other for that matter, the ECU will see a rich or lean signal from the lambda sensor and alter the injector opening periods to suit [EDIT: its preset maps and values]. I understand there are some systems which ensures the ECU only sees a given signal and you are able to map around that, but it will be the same signal as disconnecting the lambda probe altogether. With the lambda probe disconnected the ECU will log a fault, granted, but allows the engine to be ran safely as long as it has this probe disconnected. It certainly does not effect any performance to the engine.

As your car is an H registration it does not require a catalyst for MOT's. Running a car without a catalyst and fueling being controled by a lambda probe designed to be run with a catalyst installed creates problems in itself. With the cat removed, the exhaust gasses flow past the lambda probe much quicker than normal, so the probe cannot sense the gasses as good as before [EDIT: or as the probe was calibrated to the ECU from the factory], so the fueling will be out in this state too. Keeping the lambda probe connected and just "bagged up" under the bonnet can also be dangerous to the engine too.

Your car was running extremely rich. For Optimum performance you should run 12.8:1 - 13.2:1. This I have seen to work many, many times on the dyno while mapping. Some cars optimum can be 13.6-13.8:1.
Your exhaust was blowing badly too, and I suspect that the 10.9:1 we were seeing would have been richer than that in reality. FYI 30.7:1 is the leanest the machine reads. That was probably with the engine stopped or on over-run, although I did see 30.7:1 a couple of times while it was idling showing how bad the exhaust was blowing.

I suggested Andy speak to Jayson from Chipped UK as he may have a chip which would sort his fuel problems out CHEAPLY. But, as has been said, the injectors could be too large, and the fuel pressure could be too high??? If he wanted to keep that set up, the Unichip can more than cope with the fueling side of things. If he wanted to Turbo it in the future, then the injectors and fuel pressure it has at the moment would come into play, all that would be needed is a turbo module (MAP sensor) and a re-map of the Unichip - simple.

What I will say about the Dastek stuff....Unlike some other set ups and systems, they actually do as it says on the tin. No messing. And works pretty much with anything you throw at it. Unfortunately, but probably the best way, you have to rely on a dyno operator at a Unichip dealer to map it properly, you cannot plug and play yourself. Most of the time - its a good thing. (whether that mapper is the best person at mapping who knows?)

One last thing, I was suprised at the power made by Andy's car. To be as pair as possible, because of the diff he had fitted in the car, I decided to run it in 5th. This on normal geared cars would show less power at the wheels. So the 160 bhp at the wheels is what to look at. We assumed a loss of 20% (same as my M3 on Dasteks dyno in 4th) and came out with that 200 bhp.

I will speak to you over the weekend at some stage Andy about your car and some pics of mine :wink: The Unichip will work extremely well on your car as it is. But if you want to change anything like your exhaust manifold, induction, cams, injectors, fuel pressure, etc, etc, please do it before we map it!

Cheers,

Paul.
Hi Paul, glad you found the post :) Sorry I ment to Pm you to let you know I had put a post up. :oops:

I totally see what you are saying about the Unichip being mappable around the 02 Sensor and to me leaving the cat out can only be a good thing :D

I will let you know what I find with the injectors dude, its on my list of to do's :) which also includes (for the moment)
E36 Rad swap
Sorting the exhaust blow
Relocating the ECU
and getting the 3.07 diff in there

As for turboing it. . . . . . that's just evil putting these idea's in my head :wink:

Give me a shout when you get 2 mins and I will pop up and have a chat about the car pics and the 2.8 :) Thanks again for all the help

Sorry about the leak! I think its one of the connections on the power steering

All the talk about the types of rolling roads makes interesting reading, I only wish I understood it all hehe

Andy
Image
M50B25NonVanos & M52B28Vanos Heads for sale. Pm Me.
User avatar
tim_s
E30 Zone Squatter
E30 Zone Squatter
Posts: 1661
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 11:00 pm
Location: Bristol/London

Post Mon May 15, 2006 4:03 pm

Andy325i wrote: Just to Clarify that I have been running the car with no o2 sensor plugged in and it runs fine, (apart from the fueling up the top end as mentioned)

With no o2 sensor plugged in, it runs at:
0.6% Co2 on idle

With the o2 sensor pluged in, but in fresh air, the Co2 was:
0.1% on warmup at tickover and
0.0% when warmed up at idle.

Driving the car with the o2 sensor plugged in, it felt very flat (could only spin the wheels in first LOL) So hence atm it is collecting dust somewhere in the workshop.
andy, i'm not the best on m3.1 (i've had more experience with later m44/m52 ecus and of course my motronic 1.7!), but i'm pretty certain its adaptive. this means to test the o2 properly you'll need to clear the adaptation values on the ECU and make sure all the fault codes are clear etc., not just switch from having a lambda signal to no lambda signal.
then you'll also need to run the car for quite a few miles - normally people say a wk or so, before things settle down.
to give an example, i recently changed a broken lambda probe on an m44. it was running rich and mpg had dropped on motorway runs from mid 30s mpg to under 30mpg, the idle was off etc.
i swapped the lambda probe over, it still ran the same until the adaptation values and the fault codes had been cleared, and took a little while to settle. now its back to normal.

also i'd have though your car'll be open-loop at WOT, so the AFR graph you've posted won't be related to the o2 sensor. neither will the running rich at high rpms at WOT (its not just at high rpms though, that graph you've posted is rich all the way through).

i really think, especially as you're running so rich, you should get the standard motronic running as intended before doing anything else like removing the o2 sensor. i'd try putting the m50 back to standard, testing all sensors - mb by getting a diag, and drive it for a while and see how it does. its not designed to run the wrong injectors and no o2 sensor - regardless of what engine its running! i'd expect an m50 with the wrong injectors and no o2 sensor to run badly too.
Image
2.1 318is, MS, LPG. 200bhp, 175ft/lbs GONE!
Boxster, e46 m3, e36 sport touring and alpina B3 3.0
ShepsEvo3
Master of go faster
Posts: 1881
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 11:00 pm
Location: Bristol/Wiltshire

Post Mon May 15, 2006 4:30 pm

Hi Andy,

Yep, saw the post! :mad: Sorry it went off topic somewhat. I have sent you a PM.

Cheers,

Paul.
E30 M3 Unichip Alpha N style conversions, this is the ultimate for extracting the best out of your S14 M power car.
Also, Live mapping of your Standard Motronic ECU for optimising all your modifications.
www.sabre-tuning.co.uk
User avatar
Dastek_UK
E30 Zone Newbie
E30 Zone Newbie
Posts: 1
Joined: Sun May 14, 2006 11:00 pm

Post Thu May 18, 2006 9:07 am

Hi Guys,

Firstly let me introduce myself, I am Gerry Gaffney, the Managing Director of http://www.dastek.co.uk

I'll be upfront & inform you that we design & manufacture chassis dyno's (rolling roads) http://www.dastekdyno.com (shameless plug ) so of course I understand if some of you that don't know me say that that I'm just being biased.

There seems to be a huge amount of conjecture & misinformation of the subject of rolling roads, one of the biggest being that the only figure that matters is that of 'Power at the wheels' (PAW) However I strongly disagree. There is greater error on making judgements/assumptions on a PAW only basis.

Allow me to explain, the PAW on a rolling road is not the same PAW as transmitted to the road The reason for this is that the rolling road in itself requires power just to be able to turn over the rollers & retarder (this power comes (or is robbed) from the power available at the wheels) This power requirement goes up in an exponential fashion with speed. Therefore the greater the roller speed at which a power measurement is made the lower the power at the wheels will be (more below) Other factors that can & DO affect the PAW is the wheel alignment, the tyre pressure, the sidewall height, the amount of strapping effort, the size & finish of the rollers, & the roller seperation (to name but a few)

I will also make another bold statement the power lost through the gearbx due to power input is less than 1/2%, the rest of the losses between flywheel & wheels, is made up of heat & noise created by the tyres, gears splashing through the oil, parasitic drag of bearings & seals, & the drag caused by boundary layer windage of the rollers & retarder and this is more or less speed dependant (actually follows a 'Stribeck Curve')

Image

So the whole agurement that power is not being transmitted & the gears are meshing on the wrong side at worst will only make the measurement 1/2% wrong, much less than if the g/box oil temp changes by 10C or the wheel alignment is out

I have huge amounts of real-life data on chassis dynamometers from when I first got involved in them when I was part of a team designing one for our own purposes (I was an engine builder for Toyota on WRC & SuperTouring engines) So it's not just useless drivel from the internet & salesmans blurb )

I don't want to come on here with the sole intention of pissing on anyones fire, however if you are genuine about wishing to get the very best most repeatable results, that are truly meaningful, you need to go & try a few things First mount a thermocouple in the g/box, then warm the vehicle up, do a couple of runs to get a base figure. Next drive the car hard on the dyno (say 15 minutes @ 50bhp) & get the g/box oil temp up by around 25C. Now do another few runs Secondly try doing the runs in different gears Finaly tighten your ratchet straps 2 - 3 clicks then let me know if you still stand by your statement that PAW is the only reliable number

I have included a few screengrabs from our own dyno, to show the usefullness of the coastdown test.

1) A power test conducted in 3rd to 5th gear on our own Civic Type-R

Image

2) Zoomed in on the PAW & flywheel power

Image

3) Zoomed in on the transmission losses on test 1 above

Image

4) A test showing the difference g/box (& diff) oil temp makes

Image

5) A test showing the huge affect a wrongly fitted wheel bearing can make

Image

No Doubt this will open up a huge can of worms, but for people who are genuinely interested in credible information, they need to look much further than the marketing

Cheers,

Gerry
http://www.dastek.co.uk
Andy325i
E30 Zone Addict
E30 Zone Addict
Posts: 4052
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 11:00 pm
Location: Avon

Post Thu May 18, 2006 9:34 am

Very intreresting reading :D

Andy
Image
M50B25NonVanos & M52B28Vanos Heads for sale. Pm Me.
User avatar
tim_s
E30 Zone Squatter
E30 Zone Squatter
Posts: 1661
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 11:00 pm
Location: Bristol/London

Post Thu May 18, 2006 10:06 am

Interesting post!
btw andy, the pink injectors are the 328i ones, and they are a pretty high flowrate, i'd put money on them being higher than the greens. I would like the part no for your greens though to verify this (I have the p/no of the pinks). this is pretty likely to be causing your rich running. before swapping, you could try the 328 FPR on with the 328 injectors, that should help by bringing the pressure down from 3.5 to 3 bar. ultimately you want the 325 injectors and reg in there though as was intended for the ECU.
get the o2 sensor back on there too and get the fault codes and adaptation values reset - i can do this for you if reqd, as long as you have a working diag connector.
Image
2.1 318is, MS, LPG. 200bhp, 175ft/lbs GONE!
Boxster, e46 m3, e36 sport touring and alpina B3 3.0
Andy325i
E30 Zone Addict
E30 Zone Addict
Posts: 4052
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 11:00 pm
Location: Avon

Post Thu May 18, 2006 10:19 am

Hi Tim, yep is is the pink ones in there (found the green ones in the workshop yesterday and wrote the p/n down but dammend if I can find it now :cry: (Bet the washing machine was hungry again!)

I know it began 0280 150 *** or something like that :(

I will post when I find it :)

Andy
Image
M50B25NonVanos & M52B28Vanos Heads for sale. Pm Me.
Andy325i
E30 Zone Addict
E30 Zone Addict
Posts: 4052
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 11:00 pm
Location: Avon

Post Sun May 21, 2006 11:10 pm

Here are the P/N's for the injectors :)

Green: 0 280 150 415 (262)
Pink: 0 280 150 440 (Z71)


Andy
Image
M50B25NonVanos & M52B28Vanos Heads for sale. Pm Me.
User avatar
tim_s
E30 Zone Squatter
E30 Zone Squatter
Posts: 1661
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 11:00 pm
Location: Bristol/London

Post Mon May 22, 2006 12:59 am

Andy325i wrote:Here are the P/N's for the injectors :)

Green: 0 280 150 415 (262)
Pink: 0 280 150 440 (Z71)


Andy
hi andy,
yeah that makes perfect sense, the m52 ones have a much higher flowrate as i suggested fella. try the m50 ones with the m50 FPR etc. make sure you unplug the ECU for ages as well to reset adaptation values if you can (not sure how you reset m3.1 without the diag tools :S).
cheers
tim
Image
2.1 318is, MS, LPG. 200bhp, 175ft/lbs GONE!
Boxster, e46 m3, e36 sport touring and alpina B3 3.0