Having had a look online BW Chiptune doesn't have universally positive feedback.
3.0si remap - The Results (page 4) - Update
- Thread starter Marlon
- Start date
Pre-map results are in and although a little disappointing, I'm not sure how close to the 261bhp/265ps these cars actually make?
240bhp
207whp
306nm
Map is being written to ECU and another run shortly. Will post back with results and graphs then. Fingers crossed I recover some of that loss and maybe then some!
240bhp
207whp
306nm
Map is being written to ECU and another run shortly. Will post back with results and graphs then. Fingers crossed I recover some of that loss and maybe then some!
So...the results are in, and are rather disappointing!
Before map
240.7bhp
207whp
306nm
Before map
246.2bhp
212whp
313nm
So, even after the map, my car is technically well under what stock should be (261bhp). What's strange is that I test drove 3 Coupes before settling on my one, and all felt very similar in terms of acceleration. So, I'm not sure why/if mine is down on power.
I haven't yet had a chance to drive the car properly. The 80miles home were during torrential downpour on the M4 so can't comment on how the drive feels yet. But if you look at it from a pure numbers perspective, it isn't great :| :headbang:
Before map
240.7bhp
207whp
306nm
Before map
246.2bhp
212whp
313nm
So, even after the map, my car is technically well under what stock should be (261bhp). What's strange is that I test drove 3 Coupes before settling on my one, and all felt very similar in terms of acceleration. So, I'm not sure why/if mine is down on power.
I haven't yet had a chance to drive the car properly. The 80miles home were during torrential downpour on the M4 so can't comment on how the drive feels yet. But if you look at it from a pure numbers perspective, it isn't great :| :headbang:
Hi Chris, your car probably isn't down on power-it's more than likely the dyno that's reading low.
Another dyno could easily measure 270bhp from your car, the actual figure isn't important, the increase is the important bit & that does seem a bit low
What did the guy say about the small increase?
Rob
Another dyno could easily measure 270bhp from your car, the actual figure isn't important, the increase is the important bit & that does seem a bit low
What did the guy say about the small increase?
Rob
He was tweaking the map and did multiple runs and said that he couldn't get any more out of it safely. He didn't want to lean it out for what he reckoned could be another 5bhp because he didn't seem happy with the engine running hotter as a result.
I do wonder what a lot of our 3.0si's would dyno like and what actual gains these maps can really make! All very interesting.
I do wonder what a lot of our 3.0si's would dyno like and what actual gains these maps can really make! All very interesting.
Wouldn't it be nice if everyone, including manufacturers, quoted horsepower at the wheels so we could properly compare. It would also avoid all the backwards estimating that rolling roads do.
At least the tuner wasn't in it just to make headline numbers and leave you with potential issues but it would seem the N52 is not worth tuning in this way.
At least the tuner wasn't in it just to make headline numbers and leave you with potential issues but it would seem the N52 is not worth tuning in this way.
Whp isn't accurate either - different gear oils, and resistance in the drive train will differ between cars fairly significantly.
What I want to know is why on earth your mapper didn't raise the rev limiter?! It's an na car, the power is obviously at the top end, and it's still increasing right up until the dyno operator lifts off....
What I want to know is why on earth your mapper didn't raise the rev limiter?! It's an na car, the power is obviously at the top end, and it's still increasing right up until the dyno operator lifts off....
That doesn't matter, what's important is how much power is reaching the road. This would give a figure that was comparable between cars regardless of drivetrain losses. If you've got an Audi 4WD producing 360bhp at the flywheel but only 300bhp at the wheels you might be more interested in the BMW producing 340bhp at the flywheel and 310bhp at the wheels.
oke:
It's all conversion factors and witchcraft!
Scooba_Steve said:
To say you heard negative things is laughable really maybe you need to revisit some BMW performance magazines and have a good read. You will see tuners like bw chiptune,thorney and evolve time and time for cars featured. If you have been to bmw annual show you would know BW chiptune sets the fastest times for both non aspirated and turbo bmw cars each year. I must of read countless threads about why is my car smoking after remap, there's too much torque, why is my gains not as much as I expected etc and all the other horror stories around ECU remaping. Who puts the bad remapers to shame and fix's a lot of the work its a place called BW chiptune. You clearly don't know of Jason's work in the industry if you spoke with him you would know he knows his stuff when it comes to bmw's. Now with a remap from Jason being ex bmw tech who understands your car not some guy just bothered about adjusting parameters guessing gains and taking your money. With Bw chiptune you can opt for a ECO blend map (simple amp many tuners offer), Aggressive remap (the way bmw should have done it) and live mapping (for serious track heads). With the eco blend maps tuners sell they will promise you a gain and better mpg which is sort of true if you drive steadily. The aggressive remap Jason sells will in fact make your mpg less. Why is that well its a proper remap as I've been saying It's made for performance. The live tune mapping is adjusted whilst on the dyno and takes all day its for proper track cars really.
There's too many people out there that just don't understand ECU mapping. All you hear is that's not worth it because the gains ain't as big as what you hear on turbo cars. A remap is like a mini brain check up, over time your car naturally develops flat spots. These can only be smoothed out by remaping the ECU which in turn makes the car more efficient again. Bmw map there cars to be linear if you look at a dyno chart that's good as power is smooth and constant but in everyday driving its not always best. Torque is what moves you and you feel so increasing the torque early on in the rev range will make the drive of the car better that's a known tuning fact. Now some will think why didn't bmw just do that and that's because the make a lot of cars for the world so have a unique map to cover them all for different driving conditions. I'm sure some people just think because bmw makes a car that's it they know best if that was the case we wouldn't have motorsport and engineers who take such cars and take them further. Take the bmw S3 dinan for example they took the M3 did a few adjustments to ECU and the car now has 100 bhp more thanks to good non bmw engineers and track tuning.
this thread is so funny its clearly for people who don't understand ECU tuning so as a mechanic I find it all really funny having remaped all my petrol bmw's no matter of gains because I know the real benefits from exp not what my mate said down the pub
ChrisN53 said:So...the results are in, and are rather disappointing!
Before map
240.7bhp
207whp
306nm
Before map
246.2bhp
212whp
313nm
So, even after the map, my car is technically well under what stock should be (261bhp). What's strange is that I test drove 3 Coupes before settling on my one, and all felt very similar in terms of acceleration. So, I'm not sure why/if mine is down on power.
I haven't yet had a chance to drive the car properly. The 80miles home were during torrential downpour on the M4 so can't comment on how the drive feels yet. But if you look at it from a pure numbers perspective, it isn't great :| :headbang:
Just because bmw quoted you a figure doesn't mean it actually has that that power many will run under power i think ive only ever sen one M3 run close at 340 out of possible 343bhp. Its usually down to the vanos why bmw's give out different power. You may feel disappointed that's because its just a blend map you had not a real performance one done by someone who understands your bmw engine. 6 bhp is still 6bhp gained dude, would you rather loose 6 bhp from a bad map instead of course not. Your map is tailored for eco u can see that on the dyno graph the torque would be a lot steeper on car in low rpm with no regards to loosing mpg whereas yours is tailored to give a better mpg as many ECU mappers predict
Ask yourself how you can really improve the performance of a car of whats already a well tuned car by bmew without using more fuel. It's just not possible your mpg will go down if the performance is greater its basic physics and engineering.
This is why so many don't understand ECU remaping and think you pay someone £200+ and your car no has lots more bhp/torque and mpg. In theory with a turbo car that does apply until you accelerate hard.....lol
In fact i've just took a second look at your graph most good tuners offer 7 day trial id be asking for a refund as the new map doesn't look any diiferent to the original. It almost mirrors it what's that all about. Are remaped car for performance would have a steeper curve then would go flat later later in rpm. This is what makes the car feel like a new car al that extra torque earlier which is what shifts you and you pushes you into the seat. Bmw set there peak torque around 3500-4500 rpm on the linear oem map. It just looks like they have mirrored it to me the curve is almost the same and still linear curve of power/torque yes its remaped but not a good map at all
