123d plus Superchips

[The_Doc]

Hi.

Am thinking of buying a second hand 123d and taking it to Superchips.

I ran an e46 330d for 110,000 miles after superchipping it.
This is a different proposition obviously


http://www.superchips.co.uk/search?make=3&fuel...

Any hints or tips?

Edited by The_Doc on Friday 27th March 17:33

[smashy]

Hi I would go over to http://www.babybmw.net/forum/viewforum.php?f=11 very busy forum good set of people knowledgable.

Edited by smashy on Friday 27th March 18:32

[Tea Pot One]

I was thinking of a 123d a few years ago and most of the main players in the remap market seem to get good results from mapping it.

I did have an issue with Superchips on my auto 320d though as their mapping didn't seemingly alter the auto box settings so the box struggled to the point I took the map off and got a refund. The engine side of their map was great though.

A remap from most sees in the region of 250-260bhp on this engine which should make it amusing ! Superchips figures are in line with others such as Evolve, DMS, etc.

[The_Doc]

I'm going through the stuff on babybmw.co.uk

very useful.

I'm keen to buy a used one, then perhaps work through remap, intercooler, brakes etc

[Mr Tidy]

I had a 123d for 6 and a half years, then last year I sold it and bought a Z4 Coupe with the 3 litre straight-6 N52 engine.
I realise there may be reasons why you may want/need a diesel, but personally I would buy a 130i in the first place as the 3 litre petrol engine is so much more exciting than any turbo-diesel will ever be!

[Tea Pot One]

Mr Tidy said:

I had a 123d for 6 and a half years, then last year I sold it and bought a Z4 Coupe with the 3 litre straight-6 N52 engine.
I realise there may be reasons why you may want/need a diesel, but personally I would buy a 130i in the first place as the 3 litre petrol engine is so much more exciting than any turbo-diesel will ever be!

I think finding a decent 130i may be an issue at the moment.

[gareth h]

I've run a 123d for 75k it has a ecotune 260-270hp remap, for a 2 litre diesel it is a very impressive mile muncher.
But be prepared to spend on suspension and non rft tyres.

[gareth h]

I've run a 123d for 75k it has a ecotune 260-270hp remap, for a 2 litre diesel it is a very impressive mile muncher.
But be prepared to spend on suspension and non rft tyres.

[Welshbeef]

gareth h said:

I've run a 123d for 75k it has a ecotune 260-270hp remap, for a 2 litre diesel it is a very impressive mile muncher.
But be prepared to spend on suspension and non rft tyres.

Apart from MPG.
Its shorter geared than the 120d so m way speeds its reving higher and notably less economical which is frustrating.

Its a great handling car and agree the engine is superb

Why not a E90 330d/335d?

[Technomad]

I ran my '08 123D for 40k miles with a Superchip map (via a Bluefin) and it was brilliant: circa 250bhp, ridiculous torque for the overtake and the economy improved by about 8-10%. No technical/mech problems with the car whatsoever. Typically 43-45mpg, dipping to 36mpg only if I was having a very determined (ie traction control in 4th) hoon. I strongly recommend the combination with the simple caveat (as noted by others) of ditching the feckin' runflats, especially if you've got the 18" wheels. The OEM Bridgestone RE050 RFTs were puncture magnets and there was so little compliance in the sidewalls that hitting a matchstick on the road kicked the TC into life for several seconds. After the first winter with 17" non-RFT winter tyres, I actually left them on the whole summer as the ride was more comfortable, there was more steering feel, a more progressive turn-in and the narrow section meant that controllable throttle oversteer was there on demand rather than the snap oversteer that the RFTs tend to create.

[Welshbeef]

I run a F10 with 19" latest generation run flats - I've always previously gone with non run flats but these seem worlds apart from those dire ride I had with run flats years ago.

Mind you they cost a chunk more than non run flats so assuming the wear out all at the same time I might investigate the price difference and make a call.

So far these have done 6-7k miles and are hardly worn. My old RS6 ate tyres - that distance would mean a new set already !!!

[Darranu]

Welshbeef said:

Apart from MPG.
Its shorter geared than the 120d so m way speeds its reving higher and notably less economical which is frustrating.

This has to be the biggest shortcoming of these cars, it's like BMW compromised the whole car just to chase a couple of 10th 0-62 to grab headlines with journalists.

I'm guessing they've just fitted a different diff to change the final drive which, if the case wouldn't be to much hassle to swap with a 120 item.

After doing 2 runs to the Alps boarding in the last 3 months in ours I'd say this is the biggest compromise on anotherwise fantastic car

[s m]

Tea Pot One said:

Mr Tidy said:

I had a 123d for 6 and a half years, then last year I sold it and bought a Z4 Coupe with the 3 litre straight-6 N52 engine.
I realise there may be reasons why you may want/need a diesel, but personally I would buy a 130i in the first place as the 3 litre petrol engine is so much more exciting than any turbo-diesel will ever be!

I think finding a decent 130i may be an issue at the moment.

If you like the coupe shape and want similar all-out performance, the 125 is newer than the 130 hatch. You can coax more bhp out of them as you mention tuning the 123d

[gizlaroc]

We ran a 120d m-sport for two and ahalf years, loved it, in fact it sat on the drive with a 535d, then a 335i and an A6 3.2 Quattro Avant plus an M3 CSL. And still tool the little 1er to a trip to the Italian Lakes as I knew how much fun it would be on the mountain passes.
When we swapped we looked at everything and ended up with a.......123d.

The 123d was OK, but the gearing annoyed me and I preferred the 120d overall.

Simon from eMaps mapped mine...

[Mr Tidy]

Darranu said:

Welshbeef said:

Apart from MPG.
Its shorter geared than the 120d so m way speeds its reving higher and notably less economical which is frustrating.

This has to be the biggest shortcoming of these cars, it's like BMW compromised the whole car just to chase a couple of 10th 0-62 to grab headlines with journalists.

I'm guessing they've just fitted a different diff to change the final drive which, if the case wouldn't be to much hassle to swap with a 120 item.

After doing 2 runs to the Alps boarding in the last 3 months in ours I'd say this is the biggest compromise on anotherwise fantastic car

You are so right - that was my biggest disappointment with mine.

It was lower geared than the 320td Compact it replaced, so barely as economical despite the "efficient Dynamics" nonsense (that probably killed my starter motor)!

I bought mine in January 08 (it was pre-registered in September 07 so one of the first). A couple of years later BMW offered a 20bhp preformance option on the 120d which would probably be a better car overall.

I got a Z4 Coupe to replace it but have now acquired a 325ti Compact as a daily - I should probably have just got a 130i and used it all the time! I still may.

[smashy]

A question I ask every now and again which never gets answered...would an automatic as opposed to a manual 123d still be "short geared " and give relatively less economy?

[gizlaroc]

smashy said:

A question I ask every now and again which never gets answered...would an automatic as opposed to a manual 123d still be "short geared " and give relatively less economy?

Both mine autos and same applied. Gearing crap on 123d.

[lord trumpton]

Tea Pot One said:

I was thinking of a 123d a few years ago and most of the main players in the remap market seem to get good results from mapping it.

I did have an issue with Superchips on my auto 320d though as their mapping didn't seemingly alter the auto box settings so the box struggled to the point I took the map off and got a refund. The engine side of their map was great though.

A remap from most sees in the region of 250-260bhp on this engine which should make it amusing ! Superchips figures are in line with others such as Evolve, DMS, etc.

Completely seperate ecu's. The 'box should have been reset and he adaptation procedures followed to re teach the 'box the engine parameters

[gareth h]

Darranu said:

Welshbeef said:

Apart from MPG.
Its shorter geared than the 120d so m way speeds its reving higher and notably less economical which is frustrating.

This has to be the biggest shortcoming of these cars, it's like BMW compromised the whole car just to chase a couple of 10th 0-62 to grab headlines with journalists.

I'm guessing they've just fitted a different diff to change the final drive which, if the case wouldn't be to much hassle to swap with a 120 item.

After doing 2 runs to the Alps boarding in the last 3 months in ours I'd say this is the biggest compromise on anotherwise fantastic car

Any more info on whether the different gearing is just down to the diff? It woulld be a useful upgrade if it is.

[s m]

gareth h said:

Darranu said:

Welshbeef said:

Apart from MPG.
Its shorter geared than the 120d so m way speeds its reving higher and notably less economical which is frustrating.

This has to be the biggest shortcoming of these cars, it's like BMW compromised the whole car just to chase a couple of 10th 0-62 to grab headlines with journalists.

I'm guessing they've just fitted a different diff to change the final drive which, if the case wouldn't be to much hassle to swap with a 120 item.

After doing 2 runs to the Alps boarding in the last 3 months in ours I'd say this is the biggest compromise on anotherwise fantastic car

Any more info on whether the different gearing is just down to the diff? It woulld be a useful upgrade if it is.

Here's some road test figures for a standard manual coupe




Newer 220d isn't quite the same era but similar weight and dimensions, different gearing ( although it's a shorter ( numerically higher ) final drive and rev limit is higher )

Edited by s m on Wednesday 1st April 22:44