Your file N5X tuning spreadsheet 03082016.xlsx has been approved
Your file N5X tuning spreadsheet 03082016.xlsx has been approved
Thanks I've learned a lot from your previous spreadsheet!
I should probably add a link in MHD...
Awesome job. I think some people prefer to stay ignorant to their tunes so if something breaks they can claim they didn't know any better.
This worksheet really helps people get a grasp on what's going on inside a tune.
a lot of bef, flash only etc., no longer use the timing "hump" (additional advance) bmw use in stock and ppk files at 3500rpm mid to high load. similarly although less pronounced a fuel leaner streak through ~2200rpm.
interested in hearing anyone's thoughts on those aspects of why bmw does this with timing and fuel.
Thanks for taking the time to update this.
One thing that all the forums are lacking is discussion on ECU tuning and this document along with the COBB ATR topic is one of the baselines for begginers. The VANOS sheet is a nice little touch that I hadn't really considered before, I understand variable valve timing but never really tried to rationalise the values in the table with the mechanical action.
The boost control tab is nice. Hopefully get more people interested in ditching their piggyback and just using the DME to control the wastegates.
I like to log the D Factor error aswel as P Factor error. That way you can see how much of the overshoot is related to influence of the derivitive.
D Factor multiplier is also a nice easy table for people to reel in oscillating boost at certain RPM ranges.
Now we're making some progressRepped.
I turn the hump into a more conventional timing curve. Have been doing that for years now, my only idea was a sort of soft limiter or something. I also lean out my cruise afr to 3000rpm a lot for e85 and add around 2 degrees of timing, helps fuel economy a little. I tend to get 240-270 miles with E60.Originally Posted by rac
Yeah that's a good way to do it, I've found that typically oscillation is primarily D factor, but it varies based on car and how well the turbos are functioning. Decreasing them fit the higher boost helps a lot without removing their effect. Reducing the multiplier a little bit up top is useful too.
There's lots of tables that are best to re scale for higher maf values tat I didn't get into yet, but I think once you kinda get used to scaling the important ones flash only like wgdc and airflow adders, you'll start to see others you should re scale as well.
Are the values you have in your spreadsheet using the current conversions found in the most recent XDF files? The reason I ask is because the MAF(Nanny) values you specify (2047.94) is out of range based on the current formula in the XDF ((x/32)*.277778). FFFF = 569 with the current XDF conversion.
2048 would make sense if the conversion was the original x/32, before someone tried to normalize unit conversions in the XDF files.
I didn't verify the scaling across bins. Just set it to max whatever that is. I probably pulled the values from I8A0S or INA0S.
