The BMW UUC Digest Volume 2 : Issue 13 : "text" Format Messages in this Issue: Re: Neohio SCCA Competition Clinic Re: Weird Dyno chart ( WAS s50 intake manifold loses ...) Re: WTB: M30 adjustable fuel pressure regulator Re: FPR and timing adjustment, was WTB: M30 adjustable FPR Re: FPR and timing adjustment, was WTB: M30 adjustable FPR Laguna Seca OT 2/7-2/8 Hoosier Chapter Rites o' Spring School Re: [All] MIG Welder, the follow-up (kinda long) Ellipsoid Wanted Re: Ellipsoid Wanted Weird Dyno chart ( WAS s50 intake manifold loses ...)
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 22:06:11 -0500 From: "Kathy Lyle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "BMWUUC Digest" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Neohio SCCA Competition Clinic Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I haven't been on the track since it was paved after season-end, but local chapter officials vidoed the repaving and it looks fantastic. There will no doubt be a NO BMW CCA school there toward the end of July on the usual date. This race will happen before then. Kathy Nelson's been repaved? Cool. Do you know if NoOhioBMW plans any events there this year? Have you been on it yet? Woody ---- Kathryn M. Lyle, CPA, CVA Lyle & Associates CPA www.lylecpa.com Creating Business Value ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 21:36:58 -0500 From: "Gary Derian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Weird Dyno chart ( WAS s50 intake manifold loses ...) Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Only if power is SAE horsepower and torque is lb-ft, and if the same scale is used for both. If you look at the scales, the power and torque scales are not the same, thus accounting for the different crossover. Gary Derian > > the above dyno chart was shifted up 500 rpms for some > > strange reason. torque and hp curves MUST ALWAYS > > cross at 5252 rpm. this deceptive chart has them > > crossing at ~5750. > > > > -zs ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 21:35:00 -0500 From: "Gary Derian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: WTB: M30 adjustable fuel pressure regulator Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I believe the DME uses the rpm only map any time the WOT switch is made. It is best to adjust the map. Turner can make custom chips. Playing with fuel pressure moves the whole curve up and down which is a very crude adjustment. Plus the timing probably needs adjusting. Gary Derian > > Barry - most helpful! > > For background, I'm working to tune a 3.5L M30 with MM built ported head and > MM camshaft. Stock bottom end. Car has a distinct flat spot in the power > band from about 3k to 3.8k. Car pulls strong beyond 3.8k. Theory is that > the AFM flapper is going wide open about 3k and the DME is switching from > the mid throttle load map to the RPM based fuel map - which is insufficient > at that point. As I know the fuel map is not linear & it appears the fuel > map is sufficient (or better suited) about 3.8k RPM. > > A dyno run with a wideband reading of course would be helpful in determining > if the theory is correct and that's something that should happen shortly. > > Stock FP is 3 bar (42psi) and I've verified it's correct on the car. > > I have a friend with a similar setup (ported head, schrick cam, non MM > build) who's reported good results running 48psi. This dovetails nicely > with your 533 experience. He's running a rising rate adjustable FPR. > Thoughts on rising rate vs. just adjustable? > > Cheers! > > Jeff > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "JSN" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2004 12:28 PM > Subject: Re: [UUC] WTB: M30 adjustable fuel pressure regulator > > > Re: [UUC] WTB: M30 adjustable fuel pressure regulator > > Jeff, > The Bosch part number for adjustable fuel pressure regulators is the > same part number for any pre-fuel rail mount FPR, but with the last three > digits being either 001 (1 outlet), 003 (3 outlet) or 007 (Mercedes V8 3 > outlet lower pressure [not recommended]) Prices will be $58. to $85. > depending on source and how good a deal they want to give you. > Metric Mechanic modified (don't know if they still produce them) the > fuel rail injector with an adjusting screw instead of the vacuum fitting. > These have been available since the seventies. Currently on my 3.2 > liter E36 with a larger HFM tube I use the 001 unit set to 59psi (4 bar). I > mount it at the rear or the intake manifold where the fuel return line > already passes. I secure it with zip ties to the #6 intake port. > I suggest to never exceed 60psi. If your motor needs more than that > then you really want bigger injectors. The current E46 uses 4 bar pressure > from that factory. > Higher fuel pressure does give better atomization and economy with > motors that have greater intake flow than stock, but its a safe idea to > replace all fuel injection fuel hoses with current high pressure spec hose > and new clamps > before upping the pressure. > How much pressure is right for your engine? Here's a few I've done: > (all with header or free flow exhaust, engine optimally tuned) > 2 liter in an 8 valve 84 318i w/325e throttle plate: about 56psi. > 3.3 liter from a 533 in a 78 530i: 48psi. > E36 3.2 liter //M3, 3 1/4 hfm tube and intake silencers removed: 59psi > Dinan's E36 //M3 euro hfm kit also supplies a 59psi(4 bar) regulator. > When pressure is too high you waste a lot of fuel. too low you run too > lean. Err on the rich side since too lean will kill your motor. Simplest > way to know you're in the ballpark is to read the spark plugs. > > If you want to up the fuel pressure on an OBDII system, you also have to run > fuel lines to bypass the fuel pressure check valve and sensor. That is > located on the underside next to the driver side frame rail, above a metal > cover plate. Run fuel lines to bypass the valve, and be sure to leave the > harness connector to the valve or you will get a check engine light. > I discoved this because when I first tried upping the pressure on the > //M3, the pressure would blip up to what I wanted, but then bled back down > to stock 3.5 bar. Drove me nuts. Spent some time looking in the ETK for > the different E36 M3 versions and found that foul ugly turd only on the US > spec OBDII. The check valve connects to both the sending and return fuel > lines and bleeds excess pressure directly over to the fuel return line if it > exceeds the preset value. > Some professional tuners maintain stock fuel pressure by correct ECU > remapping while others prefer to up the fuel pressure. One part of that > consideration is the risk of selling a product that would violate DOT or EPA > laws regarding the OBDII systems. Either way the stock injectors on most > BMW motors are insufficient for heavier modifications. > Happy tuning, > > Barry > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: JSN [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Hi, > > Do you have an adjustable fuel pressure regulator for a M30 that you'd > like > > to part with? > > > __________________________________________________________________________ > In memory of Michel Potheau - friend, enthusiast, founder of the BMW CCA. > > UUC Motorwerks - BMW Performance Fine-tuning and home of the Ultimate > Short Shifter - accept no substitutes! > 908-874-9092 . http://www.uucmotorwerks.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2004 05:24:58 +0000 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "Gary Derian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: FPR and timing adjustment, was WTB: M30 adjustable FPR Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Re:[UUC] FPR and timing adjustment, was WTB: M30 adjustable FPR, In this motor I think several variables are at play; displacement, hotter cam, and greater head flow. Greater displacement and intake flow requires directly proportional higher fuel pressure, all other variables equal. Hotter cams come on at higher revs than stock cams. So they tend to run flatter in the middle threes than stock cams. Some of the sensation of the flat spot can be perception too, since the whomp of power when the cam comes on at, in this case, 3.8krpm, makes the transition from off cam to on cam seem greater. Some aftermarket cams have a few degrees of retard dialed in, giving the power curve less bottom end from that too. Greater spark advance at revs below where the cam comes on full helps the flat spot, while higher fuel pressure helps when the ECU is already giving a full injector shot, so that some way, either more fuel pressure or larger injectors, is needed to get the greater amount of fuel needed. On the older models that used 2.5 or 3 bar, upping the pressure 3 to 6 psi (1/4 to 1/2 bar) in general gave a performance or economy increase. The better atomization helps if a higher compression stock cam motor is prone to pinging at low revs. Barry > -----Original Message----- > From: Gary Derian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, February 5, 2004 02:35 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [UUC] WTB: M30 adjustable fuel pressure regulator > > Search the ARCHIVES:http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > I believe the DME uses the rpm only map any time the WOT switch is made. It > is best to adjust the map. Turner can make custom chips. Playing with fuel > pressure moves the whole curve up and down which is a very crude adjustment. > Plus the timing probably needs adjusting. > Gary Derian > > > > > Barry - most helpful! > > > > For background, I'm working to tune a 3.5L M30 with MM built ported head > and > > MM camshaft. Stock bottom end. Car has a distinct flat spot in the power > > band from about 3k to 3.8k. Car pulls strong beyond 3.8k. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2004 09:56:19 -0800 From: "JSN" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Gary Derian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: FPR and timing adjustment, was WTB: M30 adjustable FPR Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> OK. Again, helpful. Few data points. Car's a 90 535i 5 speed (Motronic 1.3). Summary of suggestions so far: - Changing the fuel can be done via either adjusting the FP or via the chip or even both. Issues as noted by Gary and Barry. - The flatspot in the mid range may be timing related more than fuel related. I can try upping the fuel pressure by the 1/4 to 1/2 bar as Barry suggests without too much trouble - easy field test. I understand how a dyno run can help determine the mixture issues. Some questions on approaching making timing mods: - Is it possible state or are there rules of thumb based on the cam parameters on "how much advance" might be a good starting point? If so, can someone suggest a reference? - Am I mostly looking to advance the curve off cam only? - Can a dyno run tell me what the optimum advance curve is? What make/type dyno gear should I look for? Unfortunately, I don't have the financial luxury of endless dyno runs to get this right so I need some forum help in setting the right approach. Advice and experience from those who've done this before are most appreciated! I'll try calling TMS to see what they might offer in terms of a chip. Jeff ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2004 23:35:31 -0800 From: Roger Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: undisclosed-recipients:; Subject: Laguna Seca OT 2/7-2/8 Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I noticed there are still a few more spots left on the Laguna open track this weekend. So any of you last minute types craving a little track driving, check out the following link... http://www.norcal-saac.org/ The novice & intermediate groups have quite a few openings on Sunday, so check it out & keep a fellow BMW driver company in amongst all the muscle cars. -- Roger ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2004 09:06:25 -0500 From: Neil Maller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Hoosier Chapter Rites o' Spring School Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Student enrollment for the Hoosier Chapter's annual Rites o' Spring Driver School, 17-18 April 2004 at Putnam Park, is now open. This link will take you straight to the online registration form: http://www.hoosierbmw.com/driverseventform.asp?event=29 or you can navigate there from the Hoosier Chapter home page: http://www.hoosierbmw.com For those not familiar with it, Putnam Park is located less than an hour's drive west of Indianapolis, making it very accessible from the major Midwest population centres. This is a fun and technical 1.8 mile track with 10 turns, and is exceptionally safe due to the generous runoff areas. More information about the track is available at: http://www.putnampark.com The Rites o' Spring school in April traditionally kicks off the track season here in our area. Sign up to come, and bring your shorts and parkas - you could need either. Or both! Neil 96 M3 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2004 07:54:50 -0500 From: Neil Maller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [All] MIG Welder, the follow-up (kinda long) Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (Note: this is a resend, since the original 1/30/04 message never made it to the Digest.) ---------- A few weeks ago I posted here looking for advice on buying a MIG welder for use at home, and received a number of useful replies. Thanks to all of you who responded. Here's what I ended up doing, and why, which might help anyone else thinking of a similar purchase. After a great deal of research I bought a Clarke 180EN package, see: http://store.weldingdepot.com/cgi/weldingdepot/WE6524P-7.html This package includes the welder, shielding gas regulator, wheeled cart and auto-darkening helmet. The only thing to add is a bottle of Ar/CO2 mix gas, procured locally, and a supply of other consumables (welding wire, replacement tips, etc.). I went for the 180A rating not to weld bridge girders, but because the 20% duty cycle at max output translates to practically unlimited run time at normal (<100A) welding currents. I wanted to be sure I wouldn't later regret not having ordered a more powerful unit, and have 240V in the garage anyway. However if you only have 120V available, or want to save a little money, the Clarke 130EN: http://store.weldingdepot.com/cgi/weldingdepot/WE6523P-7.html would be plenty adequate for most personal use. I also retrofitted a 25 ft. long 10 gauge power cord with a NEMA 6-30 twist-lock plug so that the welder cart can be wheeled anywhere in my garage. While I had the case off doing this I was able to see that the Clarke is quite well made, better in at least some respects than more expensive units I've seen. For those with more expensive tastes, more demanding needs and the budget to suit, there are some really nice welders made by Miller and HTP. Those from Lincoln and Hobart are in between in price, and I couldn't find the extra value to justify their higher cost. My Clarke 180EN works well in practice. Its only shortcoming is in documentation, which is not very well translated (from Italian), not especially comprehensive, and contains several minor technical errors plus one big one: the gas flow setting value shown in l/min is low by more than an order of magnitude. On the plus side, my email to Clarke USA's tech support resulted in a helpful return phone call to me later that day. Spare parts seem to be readily available. Shipping weight for the whole package was 99 lbs (in 3 cartons) so the right choice of vendor is also a function of shipping distance. My Clarke came from weldingdepot.com in NW Indiana near Chicago, not too far from me. http://www.Eastwood.com in NJ also sells them. Other useful online vendors I found were http://cyberweld.com (Hobart and Miller, free shipping), and http://www.toolking.com (Hobart, free shipping). Toolking is especially interesting because they often have reconditioned Hobart units with full warranty at substantial savings. Neil 96 M3 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2004 11:49:33 -0800 From: "BMWBits" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Uucdigest" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Ellipsoid Wanted Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Just got a 1989 750il this last weekend . Currently looks like a pirate as one 'eye' is closed ...outer 5 3/4" ellipsoid headlamp was busted when I got it . So I am looking for a replacement with all the usual descriptors ..used,working, cheap ,readily available etc etc .I doubt I can get just the lens cover from Hella ..right ? I am told with authority that a standard H4 reflector wont fit ..so cant 'go there' even though it'd be my choice. So ..has anywun gotwun ?? Otherwise I am off to the wreckin yard when it quits peeing down (maybe March sometime ?) Bill & Shirley Proud Seattle Summers , Tennessee Winters . Long Commute between , ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2004 19:36:11 -0500 From: Ed MacVaugh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Ellipsoid Wanted Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I have passenger side, which side do you need? Ed BMWBits wrote: >So ..has anywun gotwun ?? Otherwise I am off to the wreckin yard when it >quits peeing down (maybe March sometime ?) > > > ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2004 20:29:00 -0500 From: "Michael Metzler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Weird Dyno chart ( WAS s50 intake manifold loses ...) Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Note: the graphs show very similar values for torque and hp at 5250, but since the scales are different, the graphs do not cross there. Nor should they, since the scales are different! Regards, Mike Metzler > > Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 20:59:28 -0600 > From: "Jon Siccardi." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > "Zack Steinkamp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Weird Dyno chart ( WAS s50 intake manifold loses ...) > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > That's scary. It's a dyno sheet from the master himself. > > Boneville = Jim C. > > Right? > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Zack Steinkamp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "E36M3" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2004 9:00 PM > Subject: [E36M3] RE: s50 intake manifold loses low end? I don't think so > > > > Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 18:45:40 -0800 (PST) > > From: Zack Steinkamp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: RE: s50 intake manifold loses low end? I don't think so > > > > --- "Burgess, Kim L" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > Chris - The scales are a bit different so it is > > > difficult to compare. But you are correct, the low > > > end losses don't seem as significant as have been > > > alluded. > > > > > > > > http://eurosporthighperformance.com/images/dyno/sb52cams.gif > > > > the above dyno chart was shifted up 500 rpms for some > > strange reason. torque and hp curves MUST ALWAYS > > cross at 5252 rpm. this deceptive chart has them > > crossing at ~5750. > > > > -zs > > (always on the lookout for dyno foolery... remember > > last year: > > http://nobot.2y.net/m3/dyno_orig.jpg > > http://nobot.2y.net/m3/dyno_shifted.jpg > > ) ------------------------------ End of [bmwuucdigest] digest(11 messages) **********
