Interested in chipping my 2007 Z4M Roadster -

[racerbruce]

-Bavarian Autosport's website does not list a chip app for the MZ4
-The site lists an app for the MZ3

Fellow ZPost Guyz and Girlz:
Will this app work?
Anyone out there w/an M that has this app?

My question to our forum:
Is this a true statement?S54B32: The final iteration of the M50 was the S54 engine which powered various BMW M vehicles between 2001 and 2008.



The website's response is below:
Thank you for your inquiry.

This is available for the MZ4. But the dyno chart is from an MZ3. It's the same engine.

Ken Brown
Bavarian Autosport Web Services
275 Constitution Avenue
Portsmouth, NH 03801
800-535-2002




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: bruce jarrard [mailto:racerbruce@msn.com]
Sent: Saturday, April 09, 2011 10:57 PM
To: Ken Brown
Cc: jarrard bruce home
Subject: Showing products for 2007 Z4 M Roadster??


Is there a Power Programmer for the 2007 Z4 M Roadster?

Your website states "Showing products for 2007 Z4 M Roadster"....and the weblink below states "Performance chart for MZ3":


Showing products for 2007 Z4 M Roadster.




(Click for a larger image)
BMW programs certain limitations into their on-board diagnostics software (OBDII). Our Power Programmer remaps you BMW's software to improve performance across the full rpm range. You'll realize quicker acceleration, faster 1/4 mile times and a higher top speed. Installation is an easy, do-it-yourself operation that takes less than an hour and WHAM! - your BMW is instantly faster, and more responsive. The Power Programmer also captures your BMW's factory settings so you can restore them at any time. NOTE: to perform the Power Programmer upgrade you will need a good-quality 10-amp battery charger to maintain your BMW's battery at a minimum of 12.5 volts. If you do not have a battery charger, you can order one from us (part #VEC 1090A). ** Only for North American specification cars

Dyno Charts:
Performance chart for 2.5 liter ( 325i & Ci, Z3 2.5 )
Performance chart for 3.0 liter ( 330i & Ci, Z3 3.0 )
Performance chart for M3 ( M3 Coupe & Convertible )
Performance chart for MZ3 ( M Roadster & Coupe )

[esqu1re]

Same engine, but the ECUs should be different; kind of like how the Z4m and the M3's had slightly different ECU.

[3002 tii]

Regarding the s54 motor in the Z3, yes it showed up in the later years but the redline was lower in that car.

Why not look at ESS or Active Autowerke for a tune? Few members here already have it and reported great feedback.

[BTM]

flash > piggyback

[arggg45]

In order of cost and performance:
Chip< ECU Reflash< Piggyback< Standalone

ESS and RPI both do a good job with their ECU flashes. Bimmerworld's EPIC Race Tune is also an excellent tune.

[BTM]

Originally Posted by arggg45

In order of cost and performance:
Chip< ECU Reflash< Piggyback< Standalone

ESS and RPI both do a good job with their ECU flashes. Bimmerworld's EPIC Race Tune is also an excellent tune.

I've come to the conclusion that most use the terms chip and piggyback interchangeably. How are you differentiating between the two, where one would be worse than a flash and the other would be more advantageous?

[Serious]

Sorry but I don't see any reason to mess with the factory programming. The Hp gains are minimal, cars often have inspection/emissions issues, and reliability seems to be worse on many chipped cars I have experienced.

[BTM]

Originally Posted by Serious

Sorry but I don't see any reason to mess with the factory programming. The Hp gains are minimal, cars often have inspection/emissions issues, and reliability seems to be worse on many chipped cars I have experienced.

If I had a main complaint about the factory software it's that the stock throttle response is to soft and the sport button is too aggressive. The 3.0si sport button gives you full throttle at about 3/4 pedal depression, which is about perfect. On the M's it seems that about 1/2 pedal depression is full throttle...not enough travel for me

[The HACK]

Originally Posted by BTM

If I had a main complaint about the factory software it's that the stock throttle response is to soft and the sport button is too aggressive. The 3.0si sport button gives you full throttle at about 3/4 pedal depression, which is about perfect. On the M's it seems that about 1/2 pedal depression is full throttle...not enough travel for me

If I am correct, there's no "different" programming curve for throttle position in sport mode between the M and non-M. All BMW engineers are doing, is converting from a Polar coordinates (meaning the opening of the throttle being measured in angles) to cartesian coordinates (meaning the opening of the throttle being measured in percentage). The behavior is quite same between the M and non-M, in that 50% throttle opening in non-sport mode maps to having the throttle plates open at 45º (thus about 30% opening area), while 50% throttle opening in sport mode maps to having the throttle open at 60º (thus about 50% opening area).

The major difference between the M and non-M is the M has 6 individual throttle bodies, one for each cylinder. Therefore the engine revs to the throttle position, the actual throttle response, is 100X quicker (I'm exaggerating here) than the non-M.

[ZED4Mjjl]

I have the AA tune and essentially the best part of it is the throttle reprogram, it just perfect, in between the default setting and the sport button on the M model. There is also better power delivery after 7500 RPM (or at least a more linear feel as opposed to a drop off) and there seems to be more mid range torque at full throttle. No issues with inspections or emissions so far. Finally, the fuel cutoff is softer and extended to 8150 RPM instead of 8000, which makes it easy to take to redline without hitting limiter. There is probably no gain in acceleration by revving all the way to 8K but it just sounds so good, it's addicting. I would recommend the AA tune for anyone with a Z4M.

[BTM]

Originally Posted by The HACK

If I am correct, there's no "different" programming curve for throttle position in sport mode between the M and non-M. All BMW engineers are doing, is converting from a Polar coordinates (meaning the opening of the throttle being measured in angles) to cartesian coordinates (meaning the opening of the throttle being measured in percentage). The behavior is quite same between the M and non-M, in that 50% throttle opening in non-sport mode maps to having the throttle plates open at 45º (thus about 30% opening area), while 50% throttle opening in sport mode maps to having the throttle open at 60º (thus about 50% opening area).

The major difference between the M and non-M is the M has 6 individual throttle bodies, one for each cylinder. Therefore the engine revs to the throttle position, the actual throttle response, is 100X quicker (I'm exaggerating here) than the non-M.

You're probably right, my figures were just butt dyno estimates from driving each car. Either way, I much prefer the throttle response of the 3.0si in sport to that of the M in sport, so while the algorithm might be the same, the result certainly isn't

[arggg45]

Originally Posted by BTM

I've come to the conclusion that most use the terms chip and piggyback interchangeably. How are you differentiating between the two, where one would be worse than a flash and the other would be more advantageous?

There are two ways to really answer your question, simple and not so simple, but I'll do it both ways. That said, neither is better or worse per se, but each allows you varying degrees of control over your engine.

Disclaimer: I'm not an engineer, I can't explain the inner mechanics of what makes this all work, but I know enough to be dangerous.

Simple answer:
They're not the same, a piggyback is actually a separate ECU that connects to your sensors before your ECU, while a "chip"/tune just modifies the existing map files of your OEM ECU

Complex Answer:

Standalone ECU
There are many different types of stand alone ECUs that all encompass their own unique features (Motec, EFI, etc), but I'll spare you that conversation for a separate thread. A Standalone ECU is separate and independent from your cars stock ECU which lets you build new maps (software programs that actually define the parameters that dictate how the engine runs) for your car, starting from scratch. I.E. your car, when properly tuned, can run without the OEM ECU. This is the most common type of ECU used by race teams, because it gives them complete control over every aspect of the engine tune.

A Standalone ECU lets you build, from scratch completely new ignition timing maps, fuel maps, airflow maps, cam angle maps, etc. This is why you'll hear alot of racers say something to the effect of "Add a Motec, gain 30hp." because it allows you complete control over how your engine runs, and how various environmental factors affect how it runs. That said, engine tuning is part art, part science, and if you don't know what you're doing, you WILL destroy your engine. This is the most expensive option, but can allow you to get the absolute maximum performance out of an engine, typically at the expense of longevity. (Caveat Emptor: What they do at F1 teams in terms of engine tuning and performance is pure witchcraft, brilliant witchcraft, but witchcraft nonetheless.)

Piggyback ECU
A piggyback ECU takes signals from your sensors and modifies them to trick your ECU into reading a different value. The parameters that they can tune are limited relative to the type of ECU used. This ECU is not independent from the OEM ECU, and the car can not run on the Piggyback ECU alone.

A Piggyback ECU does not effectively control the engine in the same way a standalone or the OEM ECU can. A Piggyback takes readings from your sensors and alters them, tricking your ecu into reading a different signal. Since all your maps are tied in together inside the OEM ECU, your modified outputs also will dictate where your ecu reads its ignition timing, etc. For example, your MAF sensor output is not only used to maintain air/fuel, but it is also used by the ecu to determine load, which in turn, is used for determining timing advance, etc. This has the aggregate effect of allowing for a condition where the ECU can be fooled into advancing timing beyond what is safe.

OEM ECU Reflash and Chip
OEM ECU is retuned through the modification of the map files.

A Chip, as most people refer to it and an ECU reflash are fairly similar. A Chip used to mean (OBD-I) days, literally throwing a chip into the OEM DME, but now refers to something like a Bullydog (for diesel trucks) that reflashes the OEM ECU from a handheld controller or computer. The biggest risk with "chipping" your ECU yourself, is somehow corrupting the files, and then you're stuck with a non-functional car, and will likely have to purchase a new ECU.

The "Sport" mode question has been discussed ad nauseum in other boards, and I won't rehash the entire discussion, since it's fairly easy to find, but here goes a basic explanation. "Sport" mode is a great marketing feature, but once you get past the novelty, it is pretty useless. It affects the portion of the ECU called throttle translation table which tells the throttle bodies how much to open (in percent terms) for a given amount of throttle pedal input.It makes the car respond "faster" (read makes twitchy) by effectively making the making the throttle bodies open on a convex line, i.e. opening the throttle bodies more for a given distance of pedal travel. Ultimately however, when the pedal is to-the-floor, the throttle bodies are open 100%, irrespective of wether or not the sport button is pushed.

[BTM]

Understood^^

Long story short, the consensus I've come to regarding (using your terminology) as to why a flash is (generally) more advantageous to a piggyback is that a piggyback (as you said) tricks your ECU into letting it get away with something, like increased boost as it is with turbochargers, and relies on the ECU to correct/adjust/adapt to it. A flash on the other hand is a modified version of your OEM program and can thus keep more "proactive" control over things while keeping the rest of the program intact, untouched. While a flash might not always produce the biggest performance figures when compared to a piggyback, it is because of this that it is (again, generally) safer and more reliable than a piggyback. The integration is much more transparent when compared to a piggyback application.

[arggg45]

Originally Posted by BTM

Understood^^

Long story short, the consensus I've come to regarding (using your terminology) as to why a flash is (generally) more advantageous to a piggyback is that a piggyback (as you said) tricks your ECU into letting it get away with something, like increased boost as it is with turbochargers, and relies on the ECU to correct/adjust/adapt to it. A flash on the other hand is a modified version of your OEM program and can thus keep more "proactive" control over things while keeping the rest of the program intact, untouched. While a flash might not always produce the biggest performance figures when compared to a piggyback, it is because of this that it is (again, generally) safer and more reliable than a piggyback. The integration is much more transparent when compared to a piggyback application.

It depends, a Piggyback gives you some control over engine tuning, whereas a flash typically gives you very little, if any control over engine tuning. Most people would blow up their engine if they tried to tune the map parameters themselves, and using a flash also allows them to pass inspection (in some cases, if applicable)

What is more important is that the person doing the tuning, regardless of implementation, knows what they are doing. You can screw up an ECU reflash just like you can a piggyback.

As far as what is better, it depends on the application. If I turn the M into a w2w race car, I'll be running a standalone, because it puts ultimate control over the engine in my hands.