I've never seen my timing do that. Usually when I go WOT, the timing drops immediately to some value then stays there plus or minus a degree. I'll try and do some logging tonight, with and without meth. (currently is about a 20/80 mix of water/meth - eventually it will be 100% as I keep refilling with pure meth).

Can you save the data from the Scangauge for graphing later? It could just be that other things are changing (like boost increasing or intake temps increasing) which are causing the change in timing.

 

When you guys go WOT, should you see the timing full (a lights on the gas gauge are lit) than see a drop or like what cerenkov said it sarts at a point and you shouldnt see if drop more then 3 corn lights. For ex. go WOT 5 corn lights light up if you lose 3 thats a bad sign?

 

When looking at my graphs, say I'm at WOT and timing drops then stays constant, sometimes it will drop a few degrees but that also coincides with an increase in boost or timing will increase a few degrees and that usually coincides with a decrease in boost. So it hard to say if it was reactionary or not.

It nice to see that timing is constant on the graphs during a full gear pull. If all of a sudden timing started to decrease while all other thing remained the same, I'd be concerned.

I'm beginning to think that monitoring timing just by itself might not be very useful. AzMINIspeedin brought up this point a while back.

 

Every other time I'm at WOT I see my AFR at 11.4 and other times at 12.3 or 13.2. Only using 93 octane, is there something I'm missing?

 

I believe that when WOT it switches over from closed-loop to open-loop mode, so AFR will go to some predetermined value which I think is based on many variables.

 

Cerenkov is right. The computer switches back and forth to maximize economy, but also to be certain it is running safely at high load values.

I don't know about any of that candy corn math above, I prefer to monitor using real values.

 

Was about 84 degrees here in Texas. Running 3 gal of e85 with the pot dial on 2 and only seeing about 14.5 PSI. I know boost is not a good gauge as the mini is load based and there are many other factors but last summer running straight 93 with the dial on 12, I was seeing 16.8 at times.

 

That's weird last summer I saw in 80+ degrees 16.4psi(at the 12 position w/ 93) and just recently when it was only 45 degrees I saw at the 1 position 16.9psi with only 93.

I can't wait to see what happens when it's going to be 55 degrees on Monday.

 

I remember Terry saying once that higher on the dial does not always means better performance.

 

Southwest Mini Fest is going on this weekend down here in Phoenix AZ. Tonight we are headed to The track to run some 1/4 mile times and tomorrow is dyno day on the dynojet. Im running the JB+ on my JCW at 100% with DOS style intake, helix FMIC, 2nd cat delete, and stock jcw downpipe. Using 32oz torco accelerator in a full tank of gas, and should be around 98 octane. Car has been running perfect for the last couple months. Timing looks good. I will post some videos of the dyno results and also 1/4 mile runs tomorrow.

 

^^^ looking forward to the results

Sent from my iPhone Office

 

Out of interest I tried using 335 model. It was just the same as selecting 2007 mini on bavarian technic. When I scan both of my N18's it gives me engine codes in BMW format, but no context. Yes, it will clear them. However, that is not much help. No point getting a code in BMW fault code format, clearing it, but not knowing what it was or what it meant. You have no idea if it was soemthing really important or just a nothing code.

 

Are those the codes on the BMS forum site?

 

OK guys dyno day was today at southwest mini fest. 14 cars went up on the dyno, and I was the only guy running the JB+ . By the time I got to the dyno session everyone there was complaining that the dyno was reading low so I wasnt sure what to think. Im sure people complain like that allot LOL! A friend of mine ran his car right before mine for comparison sake so we could atleast see how the car stacks up against his car. He has a 2011 JCW with Alta FMIC, DOS intake, catless downpipe, and Alta accessport tune running 91oct at 23psi. He put down 223whp and 241trq witch seemed kinda low to me. I was up next and to my surprise (after everyone elses low numbers) my car put down 231whp and 230trq!! The torque does seem a little low compared to other peoples dynos with the JB+ but I guess not all Dynos are made equal. Enjoy the video. Its pretty short.

 

Impressive! Good numbers on the JCW!

 

Not sure, where are they on the site?

Bavarian technic gives me codes on my N14 like

30A9 : crash deactivation error.
276A : catalytic converter conversion error

I know these 2 codes are related to removing the airbag unit, which has disabled the crash deactivation of the fuel pump, and from a decat. I get them all the time

On the N18 the same two codes just show as CD89 and 3106 with no text. (I have worked out these are the same 2 codes).

When something goes wrong on the N18 I just get random codes from the bavarian technic, with no text, and no ability to decipher them

 

FWIW: Put the Countryman thru it's paces this morning. Yesterday was on 91 octane 'vapors' (car mileage said: --.-, lol) with the JB+ at 40%. Just prior had dragged my buddy in his modded (heavily) '05 MCS. Boy the ALL4 is *hard* to launch. Anyway, he got all the hole shots (with plenty of wheelspin :-) and slowly pulled away on runs to about 100+ mph. :-( for me, lol. So I filled up with a e85 mix (4.13 gallons, ~33%), and turned the dial a smidge past 60% (after sleep protocol...).
Took the MCSCA4 out this morning and did two back to back TopSpeed runs (roll-on in first and WOT thru to 6th). Was able to do approximately 20-30 seconds in 6th at WOT (during the run, gunning for a TopSpeed) and the timing was showing 6-7° advance on the fuel gage, sustained (it showed 'good' advance thru all gears under WOT, btw).
Saw an indicated 137 one way and 138 on return (stock wheels and original run-flats). Held the 130's for approximately 10 seconds or more, no timing retard.
Temp was 10.0°C. Wind was negligible.
Time to 'schedule' a rematch... now that we have a baseline for the JB+ @40% on 91, I am eager to see how it improves(?) with it @60% on e85.

(oh, and forgot to fold the mirrors in, darn. lol)

 

http://www.n54tech.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1895

Direct link to pdf: http://www.n54tech.com/flash_files/N55_codes.pdf

You want to read the second column (hex). CD89 shows up as:

PT-CAN, message (status, crash deactivation, electric fuel pump, 135): missing

Which seems about right

 

Thanks, that really helps

 

nice to see other people have started experimenting with Torco....if your getting those numbers out of a JCW, then my esitmations of ~200-210WHP out of my MCS are probably pretty spot on.

thanks for the report and nice numbers!

in case anyone was wondering, ive ran through 6x 32oz bottles of Torco through my MCS with my JB+ @80%, and ive experienced no ill effects from the torco so far.....just ordered another 6 bottles for the spring, hopefully ill find time to get to a dyno.

 

CAN tool on eBay.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/161261361939...84.m1558.l2649

 

That's encouraging. I am trying to figure out if I want to switch to using the Torco and put the dial up even higher like at the setting you have, right now I am at 61-ish% and an e85 of 33%.

Any input on Torco vs. the e85? Are you using the Torco because you can't get e85?
Running the e85 has been trouble free but wondering if the Torco is a safer product for higher dial settings (e.g. 75%+)

 

I was running my JB+ at 100% for a short while with 32oz of TORCO added to a tank of 93, and i never had any ill effects....i chose to turn it down to 80% just to buy myself a little added security and piece of mind.

and the only reason im using TORCO is because i cannot readily find E85 in my area, nor do i want to install a water/ meth kit.....and its been working pretty well, so i see no immediate need to change to anything else...the only real downside ive found is that it adds $20 to a tank of gas....so im paying ~$5/ gallon

 

I've used Torco also. E85 isn't readily available. With Torco you can get a higher octane rating. With 3 gallons of E85 mixed with 10 gallons of 93 (with 10% ethanol) you'll get a maximum of 96. Effectively E27 fuel.

 

Cerenkov - where can one find (verifiable/trustworthy) octane ratings for e85? All my google searches pretty much lead to forum posts like ours...
I'm not saying you're wrong, just interested in the source, if available. The engineer in me likes to be the eternal 'doubting Thomas'.

I'm using 91octane that is ethanol free. I could get the (up to) 10% stuff (in 91octane) but I am paying a small premium for the e-free stuff in an attempt to having (as much as possible) control of the ethanol mixture.

From all I've read, my own (limited) e85 experience (admittedly anecdotal) and your and Mcameron's most recent posts:
1. e85 is a good mixture for increasing octane for the purposes of dialing up the JB+ (to a limited degree, and as your own personal risk allows, but the octane is always a 'good' guess at best). It's cheaper than Torco and if available in your locale, readily had.
2. Torco has known octane boost values based on 91octane pump fuel (their own chart) and can therefore be (somewhat*) safer as an octane enhancer. Thus, the JB+ may be adjusted (again, to a limited degree, and as your own personal risk allows) but with a 'better' guess. It's considerably pricier that e85.
*the caveat: the rating at the fuel pump is never 100% certain...

Boy - some of us (myself included) always gotta **** with s***t...