Why don't manufacturers "Map" their engines

[StottyZr]

Max_Torque said:

StottyZr said:

An idle thought that popped into my head today.

I noticed today whilst sitting in traffic my temp gauge rising, do OEMs allow the maps to change based on engine temp for example. Over fueling would aid cooling which could be very helpful whilst the car is running warm. Similarly they could run as close to a 14.7:1 AFR to aid warming up (even under full throttle for example) and then slowly amend the AFR as the car warms up.

They could also use the gear and a gradient sensor so the ECU has an idea of what load the engine is going to be up against at each throttle input etc...

Wow, you should sell some of these "ideas" to the manufacturers. I doubt they have thought of such "advanced" ideas themselves. I mean, it's not like that have huge offices and workshops full of hundreds highly qualified and trained engineers, with access to the best data logging, analysis and simulation techniques, carrying out thousands of system and vehicle tests each week, and each car has probably only a couple of million man hrs of development in it, so i think you might be onto a winner there.............


/massive sarcasm


;-)


(BTW, overfuelling, does not provide extra "cooling")

Notice how I started with "Do OEMs allows the maps to..." I figured they did and was looking for confirmation.

I was going to say thanks for confirming, but I don't really think its due.

[nickfrog]

CraigyMc said:

Kawasicki said:

Pints said:

BMW used the same 2.0l lump in everything from the 116d to the 123d.

You can never be 100% sure that the parts are identical between lower and high powered versions of the "same engine". For example the 116d might have a cast crank, while the 123d might have a forged crank. Car manufacturers aren't daft.

You can, actually, if you're of a mind to. I'm not super-beardy, but I did take a look at this in some detail when I was looking at remapping my 320d/ED.
You can go to http://www.realoem.com/bmw/select.do and have a look at the parts numbers for the various BMW engines (realOEM is specific to BMW).

For the BMW 2.0 i4 diesels (N47D20 family) from x16d to x20d, the short engine is identical, as is the head. I've not checked the other, more powerful versions.

There are changes outside the basic engine, in the turbo and fuel systems for example.
It isn't the case that each model of engine runs a different setup - they tend to go in pairs: the x16d and x18d engines are physically identical to each other, save for a different mapping.
The same goes for the x20d and x20d ED engine: same exact motor parts (but incompatible with the x16d and x18d parts), it's the different tuning that results in the loss of ~20bhp in the ED engine.

By the way the N47D20 range also has the x25d in it: the 125d (for example) is now a 218ps i4 2.0 diesel.

• x16d (116ps)
• x18d (143ps)
• x20d/ED (163ps - ie. 320d EfficientDynamics)
• x20d (184ps)
• x23d (204ps) *deprecated. replaced with x25d engine
• x25d (218ps)

All the current engines run the same bore/stroke and compression ratio (16.5:1), but the injector pressures vary as follows:
116d, 118d :1600bar
120d/ED, 120d :1800bar
123d, 125d :2000bar

BMW have a modular approach to diesel engines: their N57D30 (and N57S) 3.0 i6 diesel engines have the same piston size/shape/compression ratio as the i4 engines do.

If you were able to take the technology from their x50d engine and apply it to the i4 (2200bar injection pressure etc) you may end up with a 254ps 2.0 diesel. I'll be quite surprised if they don't do that someday and call it something like "528d" or something like that.

For completeness, note that the 114d and 116d/ED engines are actually 1.6 turbos from the Mini/PSA and aren't "pure" BMW engines - I only add this in case someone's wondering why there's no 114d above.

C

The N54 engine in the 218ps E82 125i is a "down-mapped" version of the 265ps 130i engine and easily/cheaply remaps back to "normal" 130i power.

[Huff]

StottyZr said:

An idle thought that popped into my head today.

I noticed today whilst sitting in traffic my temp gauge rising, do OEMs allow the maps to change based on engine temp for example. Over fueling would aid cooling which could be very helpful whilst the car is running warm. Similarly they could run as close to a 14.7:1 AFR to aid warming up (even under full throttle for example) and then slowly amend the AFR as the car warms up.

They could also use the gear and a gradient sensor so the ECU has an idea of what load the engine is going to be up against at each throttle input etc...

Already done for the last 20+ years.

You'll find that anything at all with engine management already has sensors for throttle position, intake air temp, manifold pressure or mass-air-flow or both; coolant temp, which along with cam and crank position and knock detection allows even basic ECUs to do all of what you envisage and considerably more, just by different paths. E.g. compare throttle position (demand) with air mass flow (actual) tells the ecu 'the driver wants more torque do something about it .. for this air temp and that rate of throttle roll-on, this spark map can be applied' etc. And that's just the stuff in my old 1995 E34. Now manufacturers really have to worry about fleet-average emissions it's all much more complicated I'm sure.

Edited by Huff on Saturday 24th August 01:14

[Debaser]

Max_Torque said:

StottyZr said:

An idle thought that popped into my head today.

I noticed today whilst sitting in traffic my temp gauge rising, do OEMs allow the maps to change based on engine temp for example. Over fueling would aid cooling which could be very helpful whilst the car is running warm. Similarly they could run as close to a 14.7:1 AFR to aid warming up (even under full throttle for example) and then slowly amend the AFR as the car warms up.

They could also use the gear and a gradient sensor so the ECU has an idea of what load the engine is going to be up against at each throttle input etc...

Wow, you should sell some of these "ideas" to the manufacturers. I doubt they have thought of such "advanced" ideas themselves. I mean, it's not like that have huge offices and workshops full of hundreds highly qualified and trained engineers, with access to the best data logging, analysis and simulation techniques, carrying out thousands of system and vehicle tests each week, and each car has probably only a couple of million man hrs of development in it, so i think you might be onto a winner there.............


/massive sarcasm


;-)


(BTW, overfuelling, does not provide extra "cooling")

I'm often surprised how little thought most people think goes into developing a vehicle!

[New POD]

Debaser said:

I'm often surprised how little thought most people think goes into developing a vehicle!

The problem being that the marketing people have identified a few ownership demographics, but the only I'm in is a bit of a compromise.

WHERE for instance was the Seirra Cosworth Estate ?

[anonymous-user]

There is a thread for everything on here so no point reinventing the wheel.

With manufacturers clamping down on remaps and voiding warranties... they could still sell their ‘own remap’ but they still don’t. Reading online some engines are the same but different maps. Why don’t manufacturers sell their own maps? They could charge for a different warranty although it might be controversial.

Edited by Super_G on Sunday 21st February 22:54

[thiscocks]

Super_G said:

There is a thread for everything on here so no point reinventing the wheel.

With manufacturers clamping down on remaps and voiding warranties... they could still sell their ‘own remap’ but they still don’t. Reading online some engines are the same but different maps. Why don’t manufacturers sell their own maps? They could charge for a different warranty although it might be controversial.

Edited by Super_G on Sunday 21st February 22:54

Some do / did. Volvo offered a 'polestar' oem remap on most of their engines. Not sure if they still do. I'd imagine there is little profit in it even if the manufacturer remap is twice the price of an independent one, which they usually are.

[CraigyMc]

Super_G said:

There is a thread for everything on here so no point reinventing the wheel.

With manufacturers clamping down on remaps and voiding warranties... they could still sell their ‘own remap’ but they still don’t. Reading online some engines are the same but different maps. Why don’t manufacturers sell their own maps? They could charge for a different warranty although it might be controversial.

Plenty of scope for that to blow up in their faces. The BMW example I gave has different power outputs for basically the same engine. They all result in different emissions levels too, so if BMW were to sell you a 320d/ED (120kW/163bhp) and then remap it so it behaved like the normal 320d (135kW/184bhp), it would start to put out emissions like the normal one. The tax on these cars is based on emissions so that would effectively need to be recoded for VED for it to be fair.

As others have said, there are manufacturers who will do immediate remaps of new cars (thinking things like Ford/Mountune).

[otolith]

A resurrected thread from the days before we knew quite how cynically some OEMs were abusing test cycle emissions.

[wisbech]

Super_G said:

There is a thread for everything on here so no point reinventing the wheel.

With manufacturers clamping down on remaps and voiding warranties... they could still sell their ‘own remap’ but they still don’t. Reading online some engines are the same but different maps. Why don’t manufacturers sell their own maps? They could charge for a different warranty although it might be controversial.

Edited by Super_G on Sunday 21st February 22:54

Given the emissions test scandals I think the authorities would take a very dim view of a manufacturer that sells a car at ‘X’ carbon output, with a nudge nudge wink wink cheap, warranted remap that changes it to X+20% after purchase

[anonymous-user]

Makes sense. Thanks
Didn’t know about polestar.
I mean they could make it a legal thing and say that if it changes the emissions the dealer notifies the duvvla (dvla) but I doubt this would ever happen.

Edited by Super_G on Monday 22 February 10:37

[Kawasicki]

CraigyMc said:

You can, actually, if you're of a mind to. I'm not super-beardy, but I did take a look at this in some detail when I was looking at remapping my 320d/ED.
You can go to http://www.realoem.com/bmw/select.do and have a look at the parts numbers for the various BMW engines (realOEM is specific to BMW).

For the BMW 2.0 i4 diesels (N47D20 family) from x16d to x20d, the short engine is identical, as is the head. I've not checked the other, more powerful versions.

There are changes outside the basic engine, in the turbo and fuel systems for example.
It isn't the case that each model of engine runs a different setup - they tend to go in pairs: the x16d and x18d engines are physically identical to each other, save for a different mapping.
The same goes for the x20d and x20d ED engine: same exact motor parts (but incompatible with the x16d and x18d parts), it's the different tuning that results in the loss of ~20bhp in the ED engine.

By the way the N47D20 range also has the x25d in it: the 125d (for example) is now a 218ps i4 2.0 diesel.

• x16d (116ps)
• x18d (143ps)
• x20d/ED (163ps - ie. 320d EfficientDynamics)
• x20d (184ps)
• x23d (204ps) *deprecated. replaced with x25d engine
• x25d (218ps)

All the current engines run the same bore/stroke and compression ratio (16.5:1), but the injector pressures vary as follows:
116d, 118d :1600bar
120d/ED, 120d :1800bar
123d, 125d :2000bar

BMW have a modular approach to diesel engines: their N57D30 (and N57S) 3.0 i6 diesel engines have the same piston size/shape/compression ratio as the i4 engines do.

If you were able to take the technology from their x50d engine and apply it to the i4 (2200bar injection pressure etc) you may end up with a 254ps 2.0 diesel. I'll be quite surprised if they don't do that someday and call it something like "528d" or something like that.

For completeness, note that the 114d and 116d/ED engines are actually 1.6 turbos from the Mini/PSA and aren't "pure" BMW engines - I only add this in case someone's wondering why there's no 114d above.

C

Just because the part numbers for replacement pistons is the same for all engines of a particular capacity, doesn’t mean the production parts are identical. BMW stated that they build the engines with pistons designed for various power classes. So they use three different pistons, for low/mid/high powered versions.

[otolith]

Kawasicki said:

Just because the part numbers for replacement pistons is the same for all engines of a particular capacity, doesn’t mean the production parts are identical. BMW stated that they build the engines with pistons designed for various power classes. So they use three different pistons, for low/mid/high powered versions.

That's a bit disturbing - so if you get a piston replaced under manufacturer's warranty you might get an inferior part with the same part number?

[kambites]

Kawasicki said:

Just because the part numbers for replacement pistons is the same for all engines of a particular capacity, doesn’t mean the production parts are identical. BMW stated that they build the engines with pistons designed for various power classes. So they use three different pistons, for low/mid/high powered versions.

Whilst it's possible they'd have several specs of pistons for engine production but only use the highest spec for spare parts, it would add some unnecessary limitations to their design process because each type of piston type would have to be exaclty the same weight.

What is more likely, is that they produce one type of piston, perform various tests on each example, then classify each individual piston by its quality so they can put the higher quality parts into the higher powered engines. Then it would make sense to only use the higher quality parts for spares to reduce stock keeping costs. That's a common approach in various engineering disciplines.


ETA: If that is the case they will have different part numbers for internal tracking, it's just that only one of those part numbers will be available as a spare part.

Edited by kambites on Monday 22 February 09:06

[Hol]

otolith said:

Kawasicki said:

Just because the part numbers for replacement pistons is the same for all engines of a particular capacity, doesn’t mean the production parts are identical. BMW stated that they build the engines with pistons designed for various power classes. So they use three different pistons, for low/mid/high powered versions.

That's a bit disturbing - so if you get a piston replaced under manufacturer's warranty you might get an inferior part with the same part number?

Are we confusing model numbers with part numbers?

Considering that their own parts department would need a way of ordering the correct piston, it must have a specific ID number.

But, the designated engine model concerned, would still have multiple different piston, cam, spring options available.

[J4CKO]

I did read that the turbo on the Ford 1.0 Ecoboost triple is made from different materials on the 100 to the 125 and 140.

Not sure of the specifics but its worth bearing in mind.

These are the part codes, all the same apart from the last two letters.

CM5G-6K682-GA, CM5G-6K682-GB, CM5G-6K682-GD, CM5G-6K682-GE, CM5G-6K682-EC, CM5G-6K682-HD, CM5G6K682HB, CM5G6K682HC, CM5G6K682HE, CM5G6K682JA,

Edited by J4CKO on Monday 22 February 10:26

Edited by J4CKO on Monday 22 February 10:26

[FA57REN]

Nedzilla said:

Boost pressure is raised from 0.8 to 1.1 bar and the increase in performance is substantial to say the least. One owner on the forum has seen 597 bhp with just these mods!

The boost pressure went up at that instant in time and space at that atmospheric density and humidity.

Take the car to a hot and high road in Spain and you'll probably find it struggling because the remap had 'stolen' overhead from the turbo spec and left it no margin for different conditions.

Remaps don't create power from magical pixie dust, they drive the components harder and increase the risk of failure when operating in different climates or conditions.

[ddom]

The point of a remap isn’t just willy waving power figures. It’s drive ability, smoothing out and removing the dips that are engineered into cars to pass emission tests. Dyno racing is pointless but remapping a car, when you have someone who knows what they are doing brings decent gains. Everyone would have you believe that the engines explode when not running the factory map, it’s just not the case IME. I remember the weak point on some cars was always clutches, the manufacturer has to allow for Granny to hammer the clutch, and it remain functional until the warranty has expired.

[Kawasicki]

So, I read the old document again. It’s a letter from an engineer at BMW.

Here is an excerpt in German...

„ Heute gibt es jeden dieser Zylinder für Diesel in drei Ausführungen: UL, OL und TOP.

UL steht für untere Leistung/Drehmomentanforderungen, die Kolben bestehen z.B aus einer einfachen Aluminumlegierung, die Kurbelwelle ist einfach geschmiedet und verwendet werden Sinterpleuel. Damit kann man Leistungen bis 25kw bzw. 75Nm je Zylinder abdecken und verwendet wird diese Variante z.B. x16d, x18d und x25d (außer F10 ab 2011)

OL steht für Obere Leistungs/Drehmomentanforderungen, die Zylinderbahnen werden mehrfach gehohnt, es gibt geschmiedete Pleuel und die Lager der Pleuel und Kurbelwelle sind Sputterlager. Damit lassen sich Anforderungen bis zu 35kw je Zylinder oder 100Nm vertreten und verwendet wird diese Basiszylinder in den x20d, x30d.

TOP ist für Hochleistunganforderungen mit einer speziell nachbehandelten KW sowie laserbearbeiteten Zylinderlaufbahnen. Damit ist eine Erhöhung der Nenndrehzahl sowie eine Erhöhung des Einspritzdruckes möglich. Diese Basiszylinder wird im x23d, 525d ab 2011 sowie in den x35d und x40d Modellen verwendet.

Die Motoren sind in den mechanischen Abmessungen identisch, aber nicht in Bezug auf die verwendeten Materialien:

UL-Modelle: (25d-6Zyl), 18d,usw.) Mahle Typserie 124, Kolben mit 0,6% CU, Magnetinjektoren,

OL-Modelle: (20d, 30d) Mahle Typserie 148, Kolben mit 1,2% CU, Piezoinjektoren, Raildruck bis 1800 bar, Pleuel und Kurbelwellen aus anderem Material

TOP-Modelle (23d, 35d, 50d) Mahle Typserie 174, div. weitere Modifikationen“

The whole email mentions different forging techniques, different con rod manufacturing processes, different finishes to cylinder walls, different piston models from the supplier Mahle.

I worked at Ford Australia. Ford Australia developed a supercharged V8 using the 5.0 Ford V8 as a Basis. There were two power options, and everyone wrote that the difference between them was just a software tune. They actually were different, the higher powered one had a much higher specification crankshaft.

So, chip tuning is great, just don’t pretend to know what car companies build into their engines/gearboxes/etc.

[culpz]

VW is a good example here. Their 2.0 TSI engine comes in varying amounts of power, from as little as 150bhp all the way up to 320.