Remaps can work on NA engines and here is proof!

[Gibbo205]

Hi there

First of all, those reading this please make sure you read and understand these two points:
1. A dyno is for comparing modifications and you should use the same dyno with same settings, ideally same day. A dyno is not 100% accurate for power figures, just a good idea, there main role is to compare modifications.
2. I have no affiliation with Evolve or any other tuners and the car was rolling roaded at a venue who have nothing to do with Evolve and had no idea, it was just a regular rolling road day with lots of different types of cars doing power runs.


Now onto the thread. Many here and I myself am sceptical over remaps for NA cars, I've always being of the thought you will never gain much from a remap on an NA car, I tried on my Porsche 911 C2S and the gains were less than 5BHP from the remap itself, as such not even worth the time and money. So when I heard about people getting big gains on the E46 M3 or S54 engine in general, but in particular with Evolves remap, especially when they simply email you the tune, my thoughts were no different than the Softronic tune I had on my 911, be a waste of time and money. But I kept hearing and seeing more results with people showing real dyno gains, plus the guys down at Evolve seemed really genuine even with a money back guarantee.

So I purchased the remap!

My car spec is:
2002 M3 SMG
Recent inspection 2
BMC Panel Filter
Milltek 100 Cel cats
Top gear cheap crappy catback noisy exhaust system
Evolve Remap


So I went to a rolling road day at Powerstation, there was 3 more E46 M3's in attendance plus a Z4M, so all S54 based cars. Two M3's were standard as was the Z4M and the other had the same Evolve remap as me but the Alpha-N version with CSL air box but was a stock exhaust system. Here is what these cars made on Powerstations maha dyno:-

2003 M3: 324BHP (The owner admitted he had unleaded in it, DOH)
2005 M3: 341BHP (Stock car)
2006 Z4M: 344BHP (Stock car)
2005 M3 CS: 384BHP (CSL airbox, Alpha-N Evolve Remap)

2002 M3 (my car): 336BHP (Spec above, so not making stock power )
2002 M3 (my car with Evolve remap): 367BHP (WOW 31BHP from just the remap!!!!)


I literally ran my car, made 336BHP, flashed it and re-ran it on the dyno, same settings, same day, dyno operator changed nothing, ran it again, boom 31BHP more, he did three pulls as each pull it improved no doubt due to adaptions or whatever, but 367BHP was the best, the two before it were both over 360BHP. So a clear and evident gain from just flashing the map to the car.

I then drove the car, and OMG the difference was so noticeable, above 6000rpm the car pulled much harder, since flashing it I've come across other M3's and the difference is noticeable like 2-3 car lengths noticeable over a rolling start run.

Here are the graphs:

This is the run with remap:


This is run with remap with the remap overlayed onto so you can see difference:




You can see the gains are all at the top-end and it is where it is felt, throttle seems a little smooth but could just be perception but at the top-end it is very noticeable and I love it.

Rich at Powerstation did comment that he thought maybe the map had an issue or the exhaust on my car is really crap, due to the massive dip in power and torque around 3000rpm, he said it is not normal and I should look at the exhaust with it not being stock.








So I got myself a CSL mid section and stock M3 back box, I fitted and could instantly feel a huge difference in torque and power down low, it felt like I'd gained huge power, like 50 horsepower or more!!!! So I drove back to Powerstation for another re-run:

Here is the result from the car stock with just 336BHP to how it is now with Evolve Remap and CSL mid-section and M3 standard back box:




I am ignoring the peak power difference as I do not believe going to the stock exhaust gave me more peak power, I certainly could not feel anything and I attribute this to it being on a different day and a different guy (Andy) operating the dyno, so maybe he used different settings as Rich was off when I re-visited.

But the whole point was to see if I'd remedied my massive dip in power around 3000rpm and low and behold the exhaust had fixed it. Andy asked me how the designed on the mid-pipe differed and when I told him the top gear one was just two straight pipes and the stock M3 mid-section had a H in it he said yep that is exactly why, BMW put that H there for a good reason.

In short the car is a joy to drive and so much quicker than a stock M3, it is very noticeable, I now have a CSL air box in the car also but when I re-ran with the CSL air box it was on Evolves dyno as I wanted them to tweak the map as I was getting some hesitation down low since going to Alpha-N and the CSL box, which they did and fixed the issue.

Here is the result:







Sal the dyno operator said a stock M3 normally dyno's around 320-330BHP on their dyno in stock form as they tend not to make stock power and as such he said my car was very strong and one of the strongest he'd seen and the result was great and I should be happy with it, which I am.

Now dyno-dynamics are supposed to under-read a bit more compared to a Maha hence maybe why the lower figure, but I think this figure is probably more likely closely to the true power of the car now.

So my car makes more power than a CSL, having owned a CSL previous, this car is faster without a doubt, I've got Vbox racelogic results from my CSL and now on this car and for example:
CSL 60-100mph: 5.9s
M3 60-100mph: 5.5s

So quicker in real world usage, but this car is about 50kg lighter and has a little more power and keenness to rev.

Those who say impossible you can't have gained 30BHP from just breathing mods and remap, on the CSL they had to do so much more. You have to remember BMW had to so much more yes to get that power as they still had to keep emissions low so it could be sold in all countries and were also trying to hit certain emission/mpg targets, with a remap this all goes out the window.


Overall I am very happy and to the naysayers who say impossible, this is proof that on some NA cars a remap can work and on the E46 M3 S54 engine it really does, hell I did not need a dyno to know this remap worked, I could instantly feel it and very easily, so I can recommend Evolve all day long. Whereas on my 911 the remap was a waste of money, the gains were so little, the biggest gain on the 911 came from highflow cats and that was without the map, I needed the map to stop the emission light from coming on.

I hope this helps some and is proof to the doubters, but will probably still not please some.

Edited by Gibbo205 on Wednesday 24th December 17:34

[jayemm89]

Interesting. If I decided to keep my Z4MC I am very tempted to give these guys a visit and see about their CSL airbox. Lot of money but seems well worth it.

[Crackie]

I've had Evolve maps on my past couple of cars for the past 100k miles; first was an E36 Evo with Simota induction and a Supersprint exhaust and currently an early E92 335i. Have been very happy with both.

[Sir_Dave]

So bear in mind that the higher power maha run was done in a much cooler environment - look at the ambient data!! So yes, a good indication, but not conclusive imho. Unless the correction takes this into account of course.

Much colder temps = more power surely?

Edited by Sir_Dave on Thursday 25th December 00:27

[Gibbo205]

Sir_Dave said:

So bear in mind that the higher power maha run was done in a much cooler environment - look at the ambient data!! So yes, a good indication, but not conclusive imho. Unless the correction takes this into account of course.

Much colder temps = more power surely?

Edited by Sir_Dave on Thursday 25th December 00:27

Hence the corrected figure as the maha has the very correction you speak of built in.

[Magic919]

An extra 16HP at the wheels, seems reasonable for a remap.

[Baz Tench]

Interesting topic.

What happens at M.O.T time though. Are the emissions still in tolerance?

[Gibbo205]

Baz Tench said:

Interesting topic.

What happens at M.O.T time though. Are the emissions still in tolerance?

Keep stock cats then yes, otherwise likely not.

[DVandrews]

Baz Tench said:

Interesting topic.

What happens at M.O.T time though. Are the emissions still in tolerance?

The emissions test takes place at idle and at around 3000RPM on minimal throttle, these areas are likely to be the same as the standard calibration and will operate in closed loop. If the Cats are functioning then it should have zero affect on the emissions test.

Dave

[shim]

Gibbo

would love to see how the lap times go at Donny. WIth all that extra BHP and the mods youm should be really going well.

[Nikko 40691]

It's just like the K20 motor from Honda, that responds very well to a map with a few 'bolt ons' and still nay sayers are skeptical.

[mmm-five]

Why does the 'drag power' vary by almost 30bhp - considering it's the same car on the same rollers? Surely this number should be almost identical each time and the only change being the RWHP?

[Gibbo205]

shim said:

Gibbo

would love to see how the lap times go at Donny. WIth all that extra BHP and the mods youm should be really going well.

In the 1:21-1:22 region at moment on national, the weakness being me the driver so I need to improve my ability.

Got a 4.10 ratio to go in which I think will bring me sub 1:20 and if I move to slicks quicker again, or just give the keys to someone else as I'm not the best driver.

[scarecrow]

Very good write up there Gibbo.
Written with modesty and facts.

The guys at Evolve always seem to know their stuff and are quite conservative with projected power gains compared to a lot of tuners.

Best track day tuning I ever had was good instruction for the track you are on. Worth at least 5 seconds a lap.

For £20 or so you can't get a bigger bang for your buck!

[stevesingo]

mmm-five said:

Why does the 'drag power' vary by almost 30bhp - considering it's the same car on the same rollers? Surely this number should be almost identical each time and the only change being the RWHP?

That is the question you will not get a straight answer for from any dyno operator/manufacturer. They will all say that is representative of what was measured at the time of the run as measured during coast down. The thing is the tyres interact with the rollers in a different way during acceleration than they do during coast down, but at least the Maha attempts to measure the losses, unlike a Dynodynamics which adds an arbitrary percentage based on the number of cylinders, FI or NA, front, rear or four wheel drive.

Talking wheel figures is also misleading on rolling road dynos as differences in how the car is installed on to the dyno, wheel alignment, tyre pressures, tyre type all influence the results. It is easy to change the result by changing the tyre pressures, adjusting the tension of the tie towns.

The OPs examples demonstrate the differences in installation perfectly. 3 runs on the same dyno where the car was removed and reinstalled between each run, 2 of which on the same day on on another day. If we think about it, the coast down loss measurement is the rate of deceleration from the end of power run down to close to zero. This is compared to a known inertia value of the dyno rotating masses. The faster the deceleration the greater the recorded coastdown losses. So, all things being equal, of the end speed is the same and nothing else has changed, the losses should always be the same. On the OPs graphs, the end speeds are between 159 and 165-within 4%, but the power losses are 25% different. OK, you would expect the run with the highest terminal speed to have the greatest losses as losses are proportional to road wheel speed, but at the same wheel speed, plotted from the graph they should be the same.

So, unless you do the back to back runs without removing the car from the dyno, you will be adding in inaccuracy. I was talking to someone who always uses a RotoTest hub dyno, and even runs done months apart are within 1-2%.