Going Stand Alone Management - BMW M5 Forum and M6 Forums

Go Back   BMW M5 Forum and M6 Forums > BMW M5, M5 Touring, M6 and Z8 Forums > E34 M5 Discussion

E34 M5 Discussion 1988-1995 Sedan and Touring


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 2 votes, 5.00 average. Display Modes
Old 29th August 2006, 23:09   #1
Cyrus
m5board.comoholic (>1000 posts)
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Essex

Garage: BMW E34 M5 3.8 Avus Blue

Sales Feedback: (0)

Thanks: 14
Thanked 56 Times in 36 Posts
Going Stand Alone Management

The thought is crossing my mind to ditch the motronic altogether in the 3.8 and fit something like MBE stand alone management.

The idea has been playing on my mind due to the experiences I am having with E30's.

Over the last year I have, with Bexley Motor Works converted quite a few customers' cars from running Air Flow Meter to MAF on various 2.7 and 2.5 E30's. The difference this makes is quite considerable over the nasty AFM.

Then we got hold of an Alpina C2 2.7 - quite a quick torquey machine to start with.

Owner decided to go a step further and went for MBE Stand Alone Management.

Now I thought the MAF conversion was good until I got to use this car over the last few months on a daily basis.

Bexley's took alot of care over the mapping and made sure it was extremely smooth, did good fuel economy and passed the MOT as far as emissions are concerned.

The car runs no MAF or AFM anymore. Everything is done on throttle position with a Barometric sensor and obvioulsy the crank sensor is also used.

The difference this made is simply phenominal. The throttle response is just brilliant, the driveability is so much better than before. Everything is so instant.

Getting back into the M5 - just feels so slow to respond, exactly like an M20 engine with a MAF on it (but much better than one equiped with an AFM).

MBE and many other good stand alone management systems can also have Lambda as an input and run ignition coils.

I think with a setup like this and skillfull mapping the S38 3.8 can really come alive just like the much more basic M20 engine has proven to do so.

The S38 being a much more advanced and power engine, I think the difference will be even bigger.

Has anyone ever tried this?

Also, does anyone know the resolution on the 3.8 ECU?

Sal
__________________
Avus Blue 6 speed 3.8L E34 ///M5 Sedan
Cyrus is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 30th August 2006, 00:39   #2
Yorldi
Addicted Member (>300 posts)
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Montreal, Canada
Age: 33

Garage: '90 M3

Sales Feedback: (0)

Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
The resolution? Sorry, I'm a dirty dago (thanks for the new word, wout! It's changed my whole life) and can't undersand... (really!!!)
Regarding the standalone, I've also been thinking about this for some time now. I've finally found someone to sell me the carbon intake manifold (at a reasonable price and it even seems like it works!) so the Standalone would be mandatory. I've played with these systems on Gr.A and heavily tuned E30 M3s, and difference is amazing. Better fuel consumption (at moderate speeds), sharper throttle response..., better control of the engine, to make it easy. After all, 10-15 years are a lot when it comes to electronic devices...
Yorldi is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 30th August 2006, 08:05   #3
bobz
Addicted Member (>300 posts)
 
bobz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Garage: E34 M5 Black

Sales Feedback: (0)

Thanks: 1
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
I thought you could use the Alpha-N tuning, like in the E46 M3 CSL also one of the guys in Australia, has a 3.0 E36 M3 running an aftermarket CF inlet manifold with a Alpha-N chip and no AFM and standard EMS.

So there might be no need to change the computer.

BobZ
__________________
E46 M3 Phoenix Yellow, with Remus Exhaust
E34 M5 3.6 with 6 speed with SSK, OEM Clears, OEM BBK and OEM 18's
K1200LT Burgundy with all the fruit

Last edited by bobz; 30th August 2006 at 08:06.
bobz is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 30th August 2006, 10:30   #4
farrell
Moderator Emeritus
 
farrell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Unit 2A, Halstead, CO92SZ, UK
Age: 48

Garage: E34 //M5 3.8 Avus blue

Sales Feedback: (4)

Thanks: 126
Thanked 206 Times in 137 Posts
Guys
I had deleted this post.
I now think it should stay

This is bolt on power to an existing engine that for all intents is ablack box item ?
You can bolt on whatever you like to the inlet.
Compared to std, you will lose low to midrange torque so the assumption is top end power ?
The exhaust manifold even now is a work of art.


So lets assume its an 80% efficient engine with conventional frictional & parasitic losses.

Fundementals here.
How much power your engine will make is purely a product of how much air & fuel it can consume.

So then, assuming the engine is a black box item...you have the following..
1. Increase efficiency but its already efficient so you infer that the original calibration is way too conservative..Bull$hit imho & gains are usually made at the expense of emissions & safety parameters.
So the likelyhood is that you will map fuel & spark even closer to detonation & not have the backdrop of a Knock sensor.
Ok, you could fit a knock sensor.

2.Reduce frictional losses..winded crank counterweights..but still involves a tear up of the engine.

3. Extend the rpm range..!
Is it not the only way to combust more air & fuel ?
Limitations..
Engine contruction, ie the bottom end bolts conrod to crank. Crank bearing load increased...are they a weak point already or not.
The physical restriction of the of the head ,valves / cam timing.
New cams & timing requirement...?

4.The cooling system...Is it efficient ?
Can it be improved easily to cope with power increase in any of the above.

In short, you appear so absorbed in the journey to get more power from an already stretched design concept, that you appeear to have have overlooked the fundemantals of why & for how long.

The how long part is very pertinent as currently, half the active part of this board in Europe are contemplating or actually undertaking rebuilds

One last thing is the dangerous drawing of comparisons of mods made to other engines as a good reason for the same thing to work on another engine.
Same configuration is it.
How efficient was that particular engine to start with ?

My Nissan is tuned...40% increase in power.
Two engine rebuilds in 65,000 kms !

This topic should be more about the straw that broke the Camels back !

Farrell

Last edited by farrell; 30th August 2006 at 16:37.
farrell is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 30th August 2006, 13:42   #5
Yorldi
Addicted Member (>300 posts)
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Montreal, Canada
Age: 33

Garage: '90 M3

Sales Feedback: (0)

Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Yes, you can use the Alpha-N. But the E34 M5 EMS is not a work of art, and upgradding to a more cappable unit will have great benefits on driveability over a stock engine

Last edited by Yorldi; 30th August 2006 at 18:40.
Yorldi is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 30th August 2006, 18:11   #6
unesential
Senior Member (>500)
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Nassau, New York

Garage: 1991 M5 black

Sales Feedback: (0)

Thanks: 3
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Farrel,
I believe Cyrus was talking about an improvement in response time to change of state not as much as power gain, what little more you could squeeze out. There certainly have been vast improvements in this area with better EMS systems. The main determining factor would be value in making the changes. Now for instance if my MAF were to fail again @ $800 or a DME @ $950 to go to a newer stand alone EMS would not hurt so bad.
John
unesential is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 30th August 2006, 21:18   #7
farrell
Moderator Emeritus
 
farrell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Unit 2A, Halstead, CO92SZ, UK
Age: 48

Garage: E34 //M5 3.8 Avus blue

Sales Feedback: (4)

Thanks: 126
Thanked 206 Times in 137 Posts
Yes, I agree John
Sal was talking mainly about throttle response.
The wider topic included power increases mentioned.
Thats why I decided to expand on my topic as this type of management system is usually looking for power ,not just response.

Past threads on this topic & many recent failures prompted me to clarify that these systems appear to give on one front & take much more on other not so obvious aspects of the calibration.

Farrell

Last edited by farrell; 30th August 2006 at 21:20.
farrell is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 30th August 2006, 21:42   #8
de Witt
m5board.comoholic (>1000 posts)
 
de Witt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Denver CO

Garage: jlkjldf

Sales Feedback: (0)

Thanks: 3
Thanked 7 Times in 7 Posts
The benefits of a standalone ECU are not as noticable on the S38B36 as they are on the AFM S14/S38B35/M88. The difference with one of my E28 M5s and the Autronic ECU is quite impressive, but there reaches a point of tuning which requires an approach that Farrell mentions. I am happy with the MAF and ECU on the E34 M5, but I wish there was a way to get the coil packs like the 3.8 has.

I have toyed with a S38B38 swap into an old 528e, and for that project I would use a complete Autronic standalone ECU, no question.

Last edited by de Witt; 30th August 2006 at 21:42.
de Witt is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 30th August 2006, 22:11   #9
unesential
Senior Member (>500)
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Nassau, New York

Garage: 1991 M5 black

Sales Feedback: (0)

Thanks: 3
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
I had thought that the coil packs were prone to failure. If had the time and resources to dedicate that would be a project worth doing. I think that an E12 would perform wonderfully.

Last edited by unesential; 30th August 2006 at 22:15.
unesential is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 30th August 2006, 22:21   #10
de Witt
m5board.comoholic (>1000 posts)
 
de Witt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Denver CO

Garage: jlkjldf

Sales Feedback: (0)

Thanks: 3
Thanked 7 Times in 7 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by unesential
I had thought that the coil packs were prone to failure. If had the time and resources to dedicate that would be a project worth doing. I think that an E12 would perform wonderfully.
I have no idea about the 3.8 coil packs. I have not had a problem with the coils on the Autronic ECU.

An E12 with standalone managment and a stroked out M30 would be really sweet.
de Witt is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Reply

Bookmarks


Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the BMW M5 Forum and M6 Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Removing the Bosch Motronic Engine Management.... de Witt E28 M5 Discussion 5 24th July 2009 12:44
Press Release no 2: The new V10 Power Unit in the BMW M6: A Masterpiece in Engine... Gustav E63 BMW M6 Forum and BMW M6 Convertible | m6board.com 0 15th December 2004 01:15
Official press release: Engine / Drive System enots E60 M5 and E61 M5 Touring Discussion 9 24th June 2004 01:50
ENGINE MANAGEMENT LIGHT - MISFIRE foxyboym5 E39 M5 and E52 Z8 Discussion 11 27th January 2004 10:25

Loading...

All times are GMT +2. The time now is 15:02.



Everything Copyright 2000-2008. Do not use ANYTHING from this site without written permission. All images, graphics, sound files, video files and text appearing on this web site are the exclusive property of m5board.com and are protected under international copyright laws. All images, graphics, sound files, video files and text on this site are for on-screen and on-site viewing and listening only. No part of this web site may be reproduced, copied, saved, stored, manipulated, or used in any form for personal or commercial purposes without the prior written permission of m5board.com. Use of any image or graphic as the basis for another photographic concept or illustration is a violation of the copyright. Any copyright infringement will be prosecuted to the full extent of federal and international copyright laws. M5board.com is an enthusiast board and we don't condone any dangerous activity. Our airfield events are completely safe based on years of experience, we conduct them during clear visibility with mature participants that have several years of experience with high-performance automobiles, large unobstructed run-off zones on sealed off private former military airbases and we clearly mark the braking zones. If inexperienced with high speed driving we do not recommend organizing your own event but attending a high-performance driving school. The use of the term "BMW" on this site is for reference only, and does not imply any connection between m5board.com and BMW AG or BMW North America.