M52 dyno results

[327ire]

I had my m52 project dyno'd recently. I tested a stock ECU and Danthe's remapped ECU.

Specs:
-m52 from a 328i auto
-e36 gearbox (328i i think)
-m50 intake manifold
-BBTB
-regular spark plugs
-cold air feed duct + reflective heat shield surround
-K&N cone
-e36 exhaust mani
-Danthe's m52 map specially tuned to these mods.

The graph...


The air/fuel ratio results on the stock ECU...


The air/fuel ratio results on the remapped ECU...


The stock ECU graph is the thin line. Remapped ECU is the thick line. The wise among you will notice that the stock ECU is actually making more power than the remapped one???

I went out and did a few 'on the road tests'. I did 2 runs on each ECU from 2000-6000rpm in 3rd gear, 30-80mph. Full throttle of course. I recorded this as a video and edited it later on iMovie. 24 frames per second so the accuracy is fairly good. The results are very similar to the dyno results.

Results:
Stock ECU
run 1. 7.97
run 2. 8.03

Remapped ECU
run 1. 8.27
run 2. 8.27

The weird thing is the remapped one really feels faster. I guess it performs better at part throttle only as it uses an aggressive map here. That would explain the better MPG. It looks like the full throttle map is performing worse than the stock ECU.

[rich318i]

you need a custom map not a clone map

[macas]

I cant make head or tail of them printouts,(me being a thick cooont),could you tell me the bhp and torque forbith chips please.....

[Jimbob]

The original ECU appears to make 238ft/lb and 226bhp, whilst the modded ECU makes ~232ft/lb and 225bhp. That's my interpretation, could be wrong!

Interesting graphs, should've taken a standard airbox to test against the K&N cone

[327ire]

Im fairly sure the torque figures are way off. I'd say at least 20lb too high. Peak figures can be pointless anyway. I'd say the HP figures are about right though.

The thing to note is the difference between the 2 maps. At all times danthe's remapped ECU is below the other ecu. 26lb of torque at one point. That's a bad remap! And the worse thing is Iv spent nearly 200£ for this between shipping and having to buy another ecu that was compatible with his equipment. Iv asked for my money back but no joy. I'm now left with a very expensive paper weight. He has offered to put another map on it but that's tuned for cams, which I don't have.

[macas]

So dan,when you done the original mapping for the chip,how much bhp was you getting out the car?did it have the same mods as the one above?

Also,im not conversant with this cloning chips malarky,how does it work?do you map a car then save the sttings and just upload them to the new chip?

Im only asking because im looking to get a chip of you,thanks...

[327ire]

"do you map a car then save the sttings and just upload them to the new chip? " - thats about it. These ones are a bit trickier than the old ECU that had a chip, it could be plugged in and out for upgrades. The newer ECUs have to be flashed, a process that involves downloading the new map directly to the ECU. Most tuning companies have a library of pre-made maps that they just download straight onto the cars ECU. Its obviously not as good as a live 'on the dyno' remapping session but thats fairly pricey. The benefit of the 'off the shelf' map is the cheaper cost.

Want to buy my ECU macas? Ill sell it cheaper if your interested so I can get some of my money back!

[penton08]

A mate of mine paid a lot of money for a re map a few years ago and his car went no better than my standard e36. We asked the bloke what may cause this?? He was stumped at the time but came back to us a month or 2 later saying its something to do with the original program written into the ECU, the programs where improved over time, so an early remapped ECU may not be as good as a standard later one. It might be total bollox, but it sounds like a fair point!!

[DanThe]

Ive exchanged a few emails with Ian about this and asked if he had spoken to the dyno operator about the results, as I believe thats the best person to explain them. He told me he hadnt and that he'd just handed over the keys and collected the car later. Im not a dyno operator or expert by any means but I do know most dynos will record power increases the more times they are run and most operators worth their salt will do 2 or 3 runs to get consistent results.
The figures are way out, a standard 2.8 with M50 inlet is realistically about 210hp and 200lbsft torque.
Ians exhaust manifold in his own words 'is hammered to clear at No 6 and cut and welded badly' maybe this has something to do with it? I dont know what exhaust system he has

As far as im concerned the above results are inconclusive, the ECU was bought nearly a year ago and Ian has also said maybe his standard ECU has already been chipped, nobody knows.
The map was made around a road car with standard engine apart from M50 inlet and de-cat/free flowing exhaust to improve all round drivability/MPG which would give approx 15hp, ive not compared the ECU with a standard on a dyno myself, ive never felt the need to or had the opportunity, but this is the first complaint ive had so far in over 12 months

[327ire]

Id did chat with the dyno op. after for a while. He did a number of runs, about 2-3 per ECU. The only reason I mentioned that the other ECU could have been mapped is because I cant rule it out. I got it from a scrappy with an EWS system. Even if it was, Iv proven that your map at full throttle is a lot less effective than the random ECU.

Maybe other m52's out there would improve with your map, but not mine. I have asked you to take back my ECU and send it to your next customer, then refund me. Im not looking for you to take cash out of your pocket, just bounce the next payment my way. No work involved, just post my ECU to them.

The last we spoke was a week ago but you went quiet. Iv bought stuff from you before and you are a pleasure to deal with, good products and quick and easy to do business with. Im sure you have your reasons for your decision but I dont think its fair.

[DanThe]

I cant think of any other situation where 12 months after buying something you can just get your money back on an item because you dont want it anymore, admittedly the printouts you posted show one map is different to the other but the figures are way off and there is no explanation for it.

If you did talk to the dyno op what did he say about the figures being so far away from the norm? You didnt say anything about it in the emails you sent me, as I understand it you were not even there while the dyno runs were being made, you just collected the car afterwards. All you seemed interested in from the start was getting a refund, for all I know you could have had the ECU cloned and your trying it on to get your money back, I dont understand the purpose of this thread, its not like anybody will be buying the ECU now you have deemed it worse than a standard

[magpie]

can you run an m50 inlet on a standard chip or will it just over fuel ?

[rich318i]

it will run lean as in fuel as i been told, but the air mass and O2senser should work it out thats there job(best way the engine should run) . but a full remap is the way

[Gunni]

The original ECU appears to make 238ft/lb and 226bhp, whilst the modded ECU makes ~232ft/lb and 225bhp. That's my interpretation, could be wrong!

Interesting graphs, should've taken a standard airbox to test against the K&N cone

You can be sure that those torque numbers are not right. Thats the kind of numbers you get from 12.5:1 compression ratio and exceptionally good airflow through the engine.

[rich318i]

@327ire

you running a steel liner ??
and whats the miles on the eninge??

[redcar]

can you run an m50 inlet on a standard chip or will it just over fuel ?

would run leaner if anything, surely?

[magpie]

that's what meant ,run rich,lean, over fuelling etc,etc,etc .

[327ire]

@magpie
There is a graph for the air/fuel ratios on each ECU. Danthes is 'ecu1' and the other ecu is 'ecu2'. ECU 2 seems to be a little more lean in fueling compared to Danthes map. I no expert either tho!

@rich318i
The guy I bought the engine from said that it was re-called so the liner issue was solved, but Iv never looked for evidence. Mileage as under 100k miles but youd never know! It was an auto and the look of the exterior of the engine was perfect.

@gunni
Id agree with the torque being way way out. Its more like 3l figures. The hp figure im guessing is within 10hp or so.

@danthe
It took me 3 separate diagnostics sessions to get it out of limp mode so by the time I managed to buy and fit / fix the issues and get it dyno'd it took me a while. I wasnt exactly rushing to get it done either.

Iv been holding back putting up these dyno figures as I wanted to solve this issue with you personally but you went quiet. Its not exactly good for business as you said.. "I dont understand the purpose of this thread, its not like anybody will be buying the ECU now you have deemed it worse than a standard".

The dyno guy had me wait in his waiting room, I heard several runs over the space of a half hour. The operator assured me his dyno chassis was within 0.2% of accuracy but I wasnt going to argue with him. He was one of these "know it all" types. It is wrong though. Id didnt really notice the torque figures till i got home and compared them to a 3l m52 dyno. I argued that your ECU felt a lot faster. He said it was probably just around town or that it sounded better and made me think that it was better. He suggested that I would time test it to make sure. I was shocked when I saw the results of these test as I was convinced your map was the better one. And in terms of normal driving at part throttle, throttle response and fuel economy your map is better. The dyno doesn't tell us anything about that. The main reason I bought your performance map was for full throttle power, as you'd expect from a performance map. The dyno and road test shows that it does not perform properly here. That there is a fault in the product. This is why Iv asked for a refund.

[327ire]

Now that I look at the graph again i can see another reason why Danthes map felt fast. Theres a very quick spike in torque of about 20lb's at 3500 - 3600 after a flat spot. I noticed this felt like a vtec/vanos kick or something. The other ECU has a more gradual curve so theres no kick.

[Gunni]

If torque is wrong so will hp. they are mathematically linked together in the dynos software .

[327ire]

So I could probably take 10-15 off the HP, that would bring the figures in line with a stock ecu with the other mods. I guess that makes sense.

[Gunni]

Usually I´d say that torque results usually tell you if the chart is wrong.

NA Torque per liter

90nm/liter = 80´s engines
100nm/liter = 90´s engines
105nm/liter = modern engines
115nm/liter = race engines - almost exclusively.
125nm/liter = almost impossible for any NA engine.