Justins '89 535i turbo... gathering parts + learning

[justin517]

I am putting together the pieces to turbo my E34.

I have downloaded Tunerpro RT and have an ostrich 2.0 on the way, and I know a few people that are VERY talented tuners of motronic systems that I can ask some tuning questions to...

My BMW specific question to you guys is this... can I use a 173 definition file and bin file with my 179 ECU and just change the parameters (which I planned on doing anyway) ?

I have read about people running a 173 in their 179 car, and it ran... it didnt run well, but it ran. And this article on pelican parts:
http://www.pelicanparts.com/bmw/techart ... Repair.htm
claims that most of the time an ECU with the same motronic version can be used in another car with the same version as long as you swap the eprom.

I will be essentially making my own eprom using the emulator so I would think it would work, no?

I only ask because the 173 definition file seems much more extensively developed, and more people seem to be doing what I wish to do with them (more turbo E30s/M20s than Turbo E34s/M30s it seems)

any info is greatly appreciated!!

Oh and please try to refrain from "just go megasquirt" or "just go with the WAR chip" comments. lol.

[turbodan]

Why not just use the 173 ecu? If you're going to making your own chip you can tune it to run any way you want.

[justin517]

Why not just use the 173 ecu? If you're going to making your own chip you can tune it to run any way you want.

I was just under the impression that a 173 and 179 ECU are the same exact thing, except for the eprom which I will be pulling out and replacing with the ostrich 2.0 emulator, then with a burnt chip eventually, once I get the tune the way I wanted it.

I would basically be "converting" my 179 to 173 spec by running a 173 definition file.

I just didnt want to spend whatever a 173 ECU costs (probably cheap... I know) if I didnt have to...

does anyone know for sure if this is true?

if not... anyone have a 173 for sale for cheap? lol.

[turbodan]

A 173 shouldn't be more than $50. I'd be suprised if a 179 would work with a 173 chip. If I were you I'd just use the ecu that you have a definition for.

It would be super cool if you could pull the stock ignition maps out of a 173. I'd like to see those.

[e30-m30_kid89]

It would be super cool if you could pull the stock ignition maps out of a 173. I'd like to see those.

x2

[justin517]

A 173 shouldn't be more than $50. I'd be suprised if a 179 would work with a 173 chip. If I were you I'd just use the ecu that you have a definition for.

It would be super cool if you could pull the stock ignition maps out of a 173. I'd like to see those.

Yeah, I'll have to look around for one. According to that pelican parts link I posted it should work fine... I guess it cnat hurt to try once I have the emulator in my hands, I doubt itll cook my engine or ECU if I just tried starting on it?

Tunerpro has a .bin for a stock 173:

High part Throttle Ignition map:

% Load RPM
130 150 170 175 180 190
6000 27 25 24 24 24 24
5520 31 28 27 27 27 27
5220 27 24 23 23 23 23
5000 16 12 12 12 12 12
4820 18 14 13 13 13 13
4520 23 19 18 18 18 18
4000 19 15 15 15 15 15
3620 19 15 15 15 15 15
2920 28 27 27 27 27 27
2680 30 29 29 29 29 29
2080 27 22 22 22 22 22
1760 22 17 17 17 17 17
1440 15 9 9 9 9 9
1120 10 5 5 5 5 5
800 6 4 4 4 4 4
680 2

Low part Throttle Ignition Map:

% Load RPM
14 38 48 60 74 90 110 130
6000 39 39 39 38 37 36 30 27
5520 39 39 38 37 36 36 34 31
5220 39 38 37 36 35 33 30 27
5000 33 32 31 30 29 25 21 16
4820 33 32 31 30 29 26 22 18
4520 33 32 31 30 30 28 25 23
4000 35 33 32 30 28 26 24 19
3620 35 33 32 30 28 26 24 19
2920 39 37 34 31 30 30 30 28
2680 39 37 34 31 30 30 30 30
2080 39 37 33 31 30 28 28 24
1760 39 37 33 30 29 25 25 20
1440 31 29 26 24 24 20 19 15
1120 22 22 22 24 24 18 15 10
800 21 21 21 24 24 16 10 6
680 20 20 21 24 24 16 7 2

Ignition WOT Map 1

RPM Deg. Advance
(null)
6200 24
5840 29
5600 29
5480 24
5240 15
5040 15
4800 22
4520 22
4360 18
4200 18
3800 30
3000 30
2400 21
1800 17
1200 8
800 1

There are 2 other WOT maps but one is the same numbers with slightly shifter up RPM values, and the other is just slightly different, but accoring to the program the ECU pretty much never uses the other 2.

[turbodan]

I may try a MSII map based on those numbers. I'm running a hell of a lot more advance than that, and I know I dont know exactly what I'm doing. Not as much as the guy at BMW that mapped that out when they were building these cars.

[justin517]

the thing that bothers me with the 179 definition and .bin is that the low load maps go from 0-50% load and the high load map has 0-36% scale for load.... but now that I'm typing this does that mean low load is 0-50% then high load is 50-86% (0-36%) and beyond 86% it just switches to the WOT maps?

same with the low load and high load ignition maps both only go up to 36%... should that mean 0-36% is low then 36-72% is high load then beyond the 72% it switches to the WOT timing map?

that seems like it would make sense?

[justin517]

For an example, here are the timing maps from the 179 ecu:

IGNITION MAP 4

% Load RPM
........800 1200 1800 2200 2600 2800 3200 3800 4200 4500 4800 5200 5600 6200
36% 33 37 34 37 43 48 48 48 46 43 43 41 38 38
30% 40 37 37 37 43 48 48 48 48 46 45 45 42 42
26% 40 37 34 34 40 46 46 48 48 48 48 48 48 48
20% 36 31 30 30 34 39 39 46 46 46 46 46 46 46
16% 31 27 24 25 28 34 36 43 46 46 46 46 46 46
10% 26 20 22 23 25 27 32 37 43 43 43 43 43 43
8% 26 20 22 23 25 27 32 37 43 43 43 43 43 43


Ignition HIGH load map (in real BTDC)

% Load RPM
10% 16% 20% 26% 30% 36%
6200 7 18 26 23 21 21
5600 9 21 31 26 26 27
5200 14 27 37 30 30 32
4800 18 32 41 33 34 35
4500 22 33 42 39 37 39
4200 30 34 45 38 38 39
3800 34 36 49 42 36 42
3200 14 24 28 18 19
2800 1 17 30 31 22 21
2600 5 21 36 36 26 22
2200 10 24 40 40 30 25
1800 13 30 43 44 33 28
1200 19 31 44 42 34 31
800 30 33 45 45 36 36


Ignition LOW load map (in real BTDC)

% Load RPM
10% 16% 20% 26% 30% 36%
5200 48 48 47 43 42 42
4800 48 49 47 42 41 36
4500 49 50 50 39 36 36
4200 50 50 50 40 36 36
3800 42 50 50 45 43 42
3200 35 45 50 50 50 45
2800 27 39 50 50 50 49
2600 23 36 45 49 49 45
2200 18 30 42 42 42 36
1800 15 20 24 36 36 33
1200 9 14 18 32 36 34
800 9 12 14 28 30 30

I dont know why the %'s only go up to 36%??

This is the WOT ignition:

WOT IGNITION MAP( in real BTDC)

RPM Deg. Advance
(null)
6400 31
6120 24
6000 20
5480 20
5200 23
4800 20
4400 19
3920 21
3200 28
2800 28
2200 28
2000 28
1720 25
1400 14
1040 7
880 0

[George]

the thing that bothers me with the 179 definition and .bin is that the low load maps go from 0-50% load and the high load map has 0-36% scale for load.... but now that I'm typing this does that mean low load is 0-50% then high load is 50-86% (0-36%) and beyond 86% it just switches to the WOT maps?

same with the low load and high load ignition maps both only go up to 36%... should that mean 0-36% is low then 36-72% is high load then beyond the 72% it switches to the WOT timing map?

that seems like it would make sense?

Yes.

Having burned chips for several years for both the 173 and the 179 using Tunerpro, I will tell you that you're wasting your time in forced induction unless you make the switch to a 5v MAF and spend the working out the transfer function in Tunerpro. But I guess you didn't want to know that so carry on.

[turbodan]

I dont know if its that dire. If I could have made chips for motronic I would have never installed MS.

[George]

I dont know if its that dire. If I could have made chips for motronic I would have never installed MS.

Download tunerpro and the bin files for yourself and start playing. You still have a motronic car right? Having direct access to a load bearing dyno for past year has given me some good perspective on some things.

[justin517]

the thing that bothers me with the 179 definition and .bin is that the low load maps go from 0-50% load and the high load map has 0-36% scale for load.... but now that I'm typing this does that mean low load is 0-50% then high load is 50-86% (0-36%) and beyond 86% it just switches to the WOT maps?

same with the low load and high load ignition maps both only go up to 36%... should that mean 0-36% is low then 36-72% is high load then beyond the 72% it switches to the WOT timing map?

that seems like it would make sense?

Yes.

Having burned chips for several years for both the 173 and the 179 using Tunerpro, I will tell you that you're wasting your time in forced induction unless you make the switch to a 5v MAF and spend the working out the transfer function in Tunerpro. But I guess you didn't want to know that so carry on.

Thank you very much for the info!

can you shed some insight on what the "ignition map 4" is? it looks to be ina different format, but still only goes up to 36%... but it has different values from the other two.

I plan on going forced induction but I dont know if I'll even be using this setup for that, I may just end up using it to tweak the timing and still use an FMU. This was basically my alternative to buying an N/A chip now, then the TCD timing chip later... and an added benefit is that I will learn alot in the process.

this car is just a toy... it doesnt need to get me anywhere, I have 2 other reliable cars plus a company truck, who knows... I might decide to strip/part the thing tomorrow and store away the parts I want to save.

do you have any insight on if I can just use the 173 definition and bin with a 179 DME? now that I understand the 179 a bit more (still a little fuzzy on some stuff) I will likely use that, but it would be nice to have the option of using the 173... unless they are very different animals?

[George]

Its been a while since I've seriously messed with chip tuning. When we first got the dyno, I was constantly on the thing. I must have racked up several hundred miles in the first month just fucking around with different systems and different tunes. I destroyed more than 1 engine in the process. They best way to learn is to establish what limits are.

I've got various Tunerpro stuff, Miller War files, Megasquirt, Electromotive...I just like to play with stuff to figure out how it works. I'm not a expert and I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn last night.

I don't see why you can't, but don't hold me to it. The AFM and Injectors are obvisouly different. Where exactly did you "read" that they can be interchanged? Were the chips swapped on the cars that ran poorly?

The biggest problem I see with all this is the lack of ability to log data. I'm a data fiend. The more the better. This is something Peter Florance taught me when I first getting my own MS car running and new absolutely nothing about anything.

While you can easily set-up external data acquisition systems on early motronic, the cost of such a system is what makes stand alone such a viable option for these old systems. This is another reason why I am slowly warming to the idea of the newest OBDII Bosch Motronic systems. I can log damn near everything. I'm surprised it doesn't know what I'm thinking and want for lunch.

As for the Ignition Map 4, I don't have Tuner Pro on this computer and frankly I haven't looked at in a while. Its all at work and I'd really have to open it up to take a look. Best guess is that its the ignition map for overrun as the advance is super higher and the motor is pulling lots of vacuum.

[justin517]

Thats cool... you wouldnt be willing to share any .bin files you might have, would you? more or less so I have something to compare the (supposedly) stock map to?

I read here:
http://www.pelicanparts.com/bmw/techart ... Repair.htm
the 2 paragraphs above the chart of ECU's, that you should be able to switch the chip from ecu to ecu as long as its the same version.

the accounts I have read where a car would run, but not well on an ecu with different last 3 digits said nothing about swapping the chip, just running an M30 on a straight unopened M20 ECU.

Map 4 being over run seems to make sense. I need to read up a bit more on ignition curves, they just seem so all over the place, nothing like a fuel map.

I think I really just need to get the ostrich in (should be here wednesday) and hook it up, and see where trace is hitting... I have the feeling that will make things ALOT clearer for me.

[e30-m30_kid89]

Hmm...If i have nothing to do tonight im going to try putting those values into a spark table on MS.

Thanks for sharing!

[justin517]

Hmm...If i have nothing to do tonight im going to try putting those values into a spark table on MS.

Thanks for sharing!

no problem.

it was all free to me and anyone else who wants it, it just takes a lil deciphering. I figure... I help you, you help me someday down the road if you can.

I just want to go fast, lol.

[justin517]

well I tried the 173 def and bin file and it started and ran... not well but it did. I might try messing with a few things to get it to run better but the 179 def and bin work VERY well.

I have added some timing for WOT across pretty much the entire rev range, and use 93 octane. I also richened it up at the top of the rev range a bit too, the map was way lean above 6k rpm for some reason. I also bumped the rev limiter up to 6800.

I know this isnt forced induction, but its the first step in that direction. As I mentioned I will likely still use an FMU and the stock AFM in blow through layout but this will be a good tool to mess with timing as necessary to stop any potential detonation and maybe trim the fuel map a bit, as I dont expect I will be able to completely tune for boost with just this. I could also probably make it so I dont need an o2 clamp too?

In other news... My Holset HE351VE should have come in to work on friday, I had the day off so I dont know for sure, lol.

[Jeremy]

I may try a MSII map based on those numbers. I'm running a hell of a lot more advance than that, and I know I dont know exactly what I'm doing. Not as much as the guy at BMW that mapped that out when they were building these cars.

Why would you use an m30 timing table on an m20?

[justin517]

I may try a MSII map based on those numbers. I'm running a hell of a lot more advance than that, and I know I dont know exactly what I'm doing. Not as much as the guy at BMW that mapped that out when they were building these cars.

Why would you use an m30 timing table on an m20?

The first set of maps I posted were from the 173 M20 ECU.

[George]

I may try a MSII map based on those numbers. I'm running a hell of a lot more advance than that, and I know I dont know exactly what I'm doing. Not as much as the guy at BMW that mapped that out when they were building these cars.

Why would you use an m30 timing table on an m20?

Those are M20 ignition tables. The m30 ones are posted later.

[bornagain]

not that ill be burning any chips in the near future running ms but i did notice a trait in a few of the maps that makes me think about the tuning of these cars, but also makes me very curious. What i notice is that in a few of the maps, right around 4200 - 4400 ingnition advance drops off, sometimes mildly and some time dramatically and then comes right back in from there. Reading about ?jareds's dyno experience and looking back at my auto tuning and mainly how the car responds when driving, i have noticed that afrs in my maps with auto tune create a huge valley around that point, torque dropped of 40 ft/lbs with jareds dyno charts, and the car generally feels like it hangs up there a bit. Any ideas as to why that is? educate me if you know.

[Jared S]

I was looking at these ignition maps as well and noticed some valleys and peaks in the timing and am very curious why that is and if it is just the way these motors are. I was looking at these maps to get some insight on why torque drops off in the 3300-3500 rpm range then climbs right back up.

[Scottinva]

I will tell you a lot of spark advance at the lower rpm ranges makes the engine feel not near as smooth. I use to have much higher numbers, and when I pulled timing the car felt much better. I was running Brad's map and got around to playing with it, and I found that my engine did much better with less timing under around 3500 rpm.

[justin517]

Well I have all this stuff now:





I just have to order some sched 10 or sched 40 steel pipe (yup just doin cheap steel) to make a log manifold.

and probably pick up an FMU that I had from an old project that I sold to a local guy, he wont be using it so I'll be buying it back for probably $30-$40

Here is a pic of the emulator:


I probably wont do much until I I get the thing on my buddies lift and get the suspension all sorted, its all pretty shot and I have all new parts ready to go in.

should probably get a fog light too...


the damn warning is pissing me off, lol.

[justin517]

Bringing this back up.

The cars suspension is now mostly all sorted (bilsteins+H&Rs, all new steering linkage and control arms, new rear busing on the control arms and subframe)

I havent messed with the emulator much lately though.

Next up is brakes all around and rebuild the shifter.

then I should be able to start building a turbo manifold and downpipe.

I have a fresh BEGI 2025 now too and piced up some breyton (ACS knockoffs) 17x8.5's et13s too that I'm going to put 255/40's all around on.

[Jeremy]

breyton (ACS knockoffs) 17x8.5's et13s too that I'm going to put 255/40's all around on.

Good luck with that, it'll be a small challenge in the back.

[skip535i]

breyton (ACS knockoffs) 17x8.5's et13s too that I'm going to put 255/40's all around on.

Good luck with that, it'll be a small challenge in the back.

Not on an E34....with rolled fenders I can run 235-45-17 on 8.5" wheels et 0

[justin517]

breyton (ACS knockoffs) 17x8.5's et13s too that I'm going to put 255/40's all around on.

Good luck with that, it'll be a small challenge in the back.

I have an E34 so it wont be an issue (I like it here much better than bimmerforums, and I wanted an E28 but got this thing for cheap) I have a friend running 265s on 10" wide, et10 (I think) wheels in the rear with no problem. The front actually poses more of a problem because of the lower spring perch on the strut housing, but 255/40 is basically the biggest you can run, most run staggered 235 front/255 rear or 245 front/265 rear but I'd like to be able to rotate the tires.

[justin517]

got this in today, yay.