[Driver72]

Ok, so let me preface this by saying again my car is an 335i Coupe with 6AT tranny. Has 3900 miles on it now.
I went to the same dyno as I did on Monday. Conditions were basically identical in temp and humidity. These are the runs with the K&N drop in filter in as well.
I am on 92 Octane and with v2.0.2 have settings at 92%
**Quick note here, this is the v2.0.2 map that has a "detune" in the top 300 rpms before redline, so you'll notice the big power drop off of the v2.0.2 dyno in the last 300 rpms.
Shiv said this was the quick fix for the couple autos that threw a code.
He actually emailed me the better version last night, but I didn't have a chance to upload it before the dyno session, so I would expect with that map the hp and torque to hold even higher than v1.47 up near redline.

**BTW, Terry will post up in another thread his results of the JB2HR on 96 Octane with DP's but on stock exhaust. Surprisingly he made the same rwhp on the completely stock exhaust as he did when on the stock exhaust with 2nd cats deleted and cut-outs in place. But with a decent amount less torque though.
Seems like the stock exhaust does pretty good. And the catless DP's help in the horsepower, but REALLY in the torque dept. Thanks again Terry for meeting up with me and getting me the good deal on the dyno runs. ***

Here it is:

Blue run 003 is v1.47
Green run 006 is v2.0.2 (12-11-07)

[Driver72]

For the quick math this "detuned" and still conservative (at 92%) v2.0.2 has a:
+9.1 rwhp gain
-15.6 rwtq loss

when compared to v1.47


As for the K&N, you all know the test I did and the gains it made on v1.47
which was:
+4.3 rwhp
+2.8 rwtq

On v2.0.2 the gains were about:
+2.2rwhp
+2 rwtq

So it's clear the K&N still adds power.
Why doesn't it add as much in v2.0.2 you ask.

Well, that's simple. With v1.47 I was peaking boost at 13.7 psi
With this conservative v2.0.2 map I was only peaking at 13.1 psi

With more boost, comes more air, so if I was boosting the same on v2.0.2 as I was on v1.47 I'm sure we would of seen the same +4.3 or so rwhp and nearly 3 rwtq gains at peak.

[ironic]

hmm interesting

[Barat]

are you sating the V2 curve if under the 1.47 curve untill 5250 and then it's above it by only 10hp ?

that seems low, what gives?

[ironic]

Originally Posted by Barat

are you sating the V2 curve if under the 1.47 curve untill 5250 and then it's above it by only 10hp ?

that seems low, what gives?

was thinking the same thing, i'v eheard the 2.02 makes less peak tq than the 1.47 but quite a bit more hp throughout the band. it doens' tlook like that's the case here.

[orientblue3]

Because he's running the v2 tune more conversatively than v1.47?

[CanadianTSi]

Hmm could you post the logs?

[ezatnova]

That's really odd...obviously.

[Driver72]

Originally Posted by Barat

are you sating the V2 curve if under the 1.47 curve untill 5250 and then it's above it by only 10hp ?

that seems low, what gives?

Yes, that's exactly what's happening at this point.
I spoke to Shiv on the phone and even though I'm at 92% on the torque settings it's still a conservative tune.
He said I could actually go to 93% on 91 Octane with no problems.

But he also told me, he has intentionally put limits on the torque curve of v2.0.2 at this stage, so even going up to 94% would not give equal torque.
He basically said that he will be removing some of those torque limits in the near future, so we'll have equal (and more) torque as v1.47 has if we choose to dial that in.

I admire that he's taking the cautious route with the v2 first and protecting us all from destroying or damaging our trannys.

I too would like a bit of that torque back, but atain don't mind it being less than v1.47.

Ideally, I would have torque that's about 8-10 rwhp less than v1.47 up to 4000 rpms, then about equal from 4000-4500 rpms, and then the additional power of v2.0.2 up top.

I'll be honest, I was hoping for more than a 9 rwhp gain from v2.0.2 however.
If I have the torque values I just stated above with a 15-20 rwhp gain from 4500-7000 rpms from v2.0.2 I think it would be a PERFECT daily driver set up....and most importantly still run on 91 Octane with no race gas needed.

With what Shiv expressed to me, that seems very likely in the near future.

[Driver72]

Sorry guys, another note too.
Even with this conservative, torque limited v2.0.2 tune, it still feels MUCH better on the road than v1.47 did.
It's just so stinking smooth.

The only thing I hate is the sudden power drop off at 6700 rpms with this map.
Again, Shiv sent me the version that does not do that, and hopefully I will load that up soon.


Sorry I can not datalog, I don't have a PC laptop, but rather a MAC laptop.

[OpenFlash]

Hi guys,
The v2.0.2 numbers are perfectly in-line with our testing. Baseline map (with 90% user torque settings) made 345whp on our car (which has an exhaust and intake). At 92%, it made 357-363. But because of it's intake and exhaust mods, it was also seeing 14.5-15psi peak boost. not the 13.1psi as Driver72 is seeing.

So basically, there's still another 15-20whp to squeak out of the car. Just need to adjust boost pressures/User TQ level accordingly. The base maps are conservative for a reason (to account for variance between cars and kinds of modifications)

Shiv

[Driver72]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

Hi guys,
The v2.0.2 numbers are perfectly in-line with our testing. Baseline map (with 90% user torque settings) made 345whp on our car (which has an exhaust and intake). At 92%, it made 357-363. But because of it's intake and exhaust mods, it was also seeing 14.5-15psi peak boost. not the 13.1psi as Driver72 is seeing.

So basically, there's still another 15-20whp to squeak out of the car. Just need to adjust boost pressures accordingly. The base maps are conservative for a reason (to account for variance between cars and kinds of modifications)

Shiv

Thanks Shiv for chiming in there.
I couldn't explain it very well.

[OpenFlash]

Originally Posted by Driver72

Thanks Shiv for chiming in there.
I couldn't explain it very well.

No problem. Also, we didn't necessarily "limit" torque with the v2.0.2 map. That is, each time you bump up the User TQ number, both hp and tq will increase. However, we have scaled it to not allow monster torque (400+lbft) down at low RPM. Unless you are running catless exhaust systems (like down4it) and then you are greeted with a 440+lbft torque plateau.

shiv

[revah2]

Thank you for this comparison Dyno. Not to rehash the past but this is certainly what I expected- not the advertised 40whp. Unless ofcourse you crank the sttings up a bit more but I believe you have to be on race gas.

[ed021180]

V2.0.2 at 100% with 93 octane shell everyone plays it so "conservative" you are moding the car. c'mon and tranny is off the m5/m6 so you are fine relax and boost.

[OpenFlash]

Originally Posted by revah2

Thank you for this comparison Dyno. Not to rehash the past but this is certainly what I expected- not the advertised 40whp.

Revah2--- If one wants to see full power with v2, he needs to run full boost (14.5-15psi). What is so hard about that to understand? We allow for the user to monitor and adjust boost levels because not all cars are modified identically or run on the same octane. Not to mention the fact that not users are after the same thing (reading this board, that should be obvious).

Here's the thread explaining how to set-up the v2 map for the customer's specific needs:

http://www.e90post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=100073

Cheers,
shiv

[e.n335]

Much better bottom up than top down. Good decision.

- Eugen

[OpenFlash]

Originally Posted by revah2

Unless ofcourse you crank the sttings up a bit more but I believe you have to be on race gas.

You don't need to be on race gas to run 14.5-15psi as explained in the v2.0.2 documentation. Driver72 would pick up 10-15whp and 10-15lbft of torque at this boost level. That would put him at 355-360whp on anotherwise stock car with a drop in air filter. Is this not sufficient?

Shiv

[revah2]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

You don't need to be on race gas to run 14.5-15psi as explained in the v2.0.2 documentation.

Shiv

... I know there is clearly a significant power gain... I witnessed it first thing with gator at Moroso. All i did was question how much power was gained and was flamed for it in the past.


Quoted from the link you provided

"Power easily climbed to 378-379whp. 93oct guys should stop here at 94%.
With the increased octane level, I bumped User TQ to 97%
We also capped max power at 400whp when set to 100% (octane willing)"

[Evo8MRto335I]

WOW, what is happening at the exact 530rpm mark?, it clearly looks like the tide changes directions. The dyno shows how one maps is superior to the other from iddle to 5300rpm then the other map takes over and is superior from 5300rpm and up.

The only way I see it is that the v1.47 is just vastly better until 5300rpm than the v2.02 then from that point on from that point on the roles reverse. Would you agree?

[e.n335]

Originally Posted by revah2

... I know there is clearly a significant power gain... I witnessed it first thing with gator at Moroso. All i did was question how much power was gained and was flamed for it in the past.


Quoted from the link you provided

"Power easily climbed to 378-379whp. 93oct guys should stop here at 94%.
With the increased octane level, I bumped User TQ to 97%
We also capped max power at 400whp when set to 100% (octane willing)"

It's important for all to have a quite good AT map now. The V2 kits are delivering, all customers get benefits.

Now give some time for v2.0.3.

Thanks,
Eugen

[OpenFlash]

Originally Posted by revah2

... I know there is clearly a significant power gain... I witnessed it first thing with gator at Moroso. All i did was question how much power was gained and was flamed for it in the past.


Quoted from the link you provided

"Power easily climbed to 378-379whp. 93oct guys should stop here at 94%.
With the increased octane level, I bumped User TQ to 97%
We also capped max power at 400whp when set to 100% (octane willing)"

Yep... but the documentation on the v2 download page suggest running a max of 14.5-15psi for max power. Driver72 was running 13.1psi. I think that takes precedence over any other suggestion, no?

BTW, my car makes a tick over 14psi with 92% settings. But it also has cone filters and a cat-back.

Shiv