you got it right dude! The chopped photo is wrong. take care

 

That's what I was waiting for. Thank you for the clarification.

**Images have been edited.**

 

no problemo man.

 

since mine had the white out rubbed off, should the device be closer to the valve or further. I installed it were the bump in the hose was closer to the valve.

 

as long as the valve is closest to the black piece, its all good Silver one.

ah crap, the end of the hose that has the bump in it should be closer to the black piece. there thats it.

 

silver-mini-S, did you get your issue figured out and fixed. Was it a leak at one of the couplers. I've done the same, so just wondering.

 

TRUE or FALSE: The bump in the hose where the device is installed should be farther away from the valve closer to the black piece. The longer part of the hose without the restriction should be between the device and the valve?

 

The SEL is still on and I can't get rid of it. I reinstalled the intercooler even though I didn't see or hear a leak. I just ordered a ODBII scanner so I can check out the fault and clear the SEL. Ill keep you posted...

 

I checked with our resident expert " device " installer about your SEL light. He thought that possibley a electrical connector MAY have become dislodged. He has seen it where the front mounted Map sensor has become a bit off kilter and caused that same problem. Also there is one or two connectors down by the by pass vlave itself. He mentionedthat if the decive is properly installed , meaning no leaks at either end, the direction it faces would not cause a warning light of any type. Good luck in your search and I hope some ofthis may have helped. We will keep checking in to see your progress or call me at 818 497 4341.

Randy
Team M7

 

Not to throw this whole thing completely off course, but how do you account for this apparently *excellent* mileage? I've got a 2002 MCS, and in the most extreme example of 6th gear cruising for 400 miles at a time over flat Illinois/Iowa terrain with little or no wind, the most I've *ever* seen is 32-33 mpg. Typically it's more in the range of 27-30 for me, with a 70-30 mix of highway and city driving. And, those numbers are from the overly optimistic onboard computer.

 

BigBrownDog, I wonder the same thing whenever I see the lower mpg claims. I can say that my only mods so far are Alta intake, Borla race exhaust, Alta catch can and air diverter/sprayer. Never had any ecu updates by dealer. Avg. speed is about 70mph , I dunno thats what it says. Our range on a full tank of petrol gets to about 544 miles. I guess thats good too.? Brutus is 7/02 build. and should of been one of the MINIs with hella probs., maybe we got that lucky.

 

BigBrownDog, your mention of "most extreme 6th gear cruising", justmakes me want to remind you that being in sixth under 65mph uses more gas than being in 5th at 65mph.

 

ok, after reading this 50 times........................TRUE!

 

Peter or Max, why does it make any difference which way the restriction in installed?

 

come on guys i drive to work and back on the freeway, i only get 25.5 per galon average speed 37,after mods (K&N typhoon intake, borla sport exhuast) my on board computer says 26.4 miles per galon...the most i get out of a tank of gas is 280-290. ......how do you guys get so much more.. ...2002 MCS.

 

Must be the catch can -

I can't figure it out - I definitely am not getting anywhere close to your mileage, and usually I'm cruising around 70-75 as well. I've been trying to find the optimum fuel efficiency point in RPMs -- using the OBC and resetting it to try and get instantaneous readings when the car is somewhat steady state (even speed, no hills, etc). Seems to me that I'm getting the best mileage readings around 3700-3900 RPM using this technique.

Just got my boost gauge installed, so maybe I can try using it as somewhat of an "fuel economy gauge" on my next trip (since it reads vacuum too).

Maybe your car really does have problems, and you're only running on 3 cylinders

 

Actually, I do remember one occasion when I was getting significantly better mileage readings from the OBC -- earlier this year my car had a problem that eventually required the electronic Throttle Body to be replaced (EDK for all you BMW folks). Anyway, during the time that the car was acting weird and generally misbehaving a lot I would sometimes see very strange numbers on the OBC display - extremely high MPG as an example (i.e. 33 MPG after a hour of stop and go traffic in the city) and others. It led me to believe that due to whatever problems that the bad TB had was affecting the overall data integrity of the system.

My problem was caused by poor or nonexistent feedback in the closed-loop throttle system (post warm-up cycle). I don't know if somehow the throttle position information fed back by the TB is used as input data to the OBC MPG calculation or not - it's quite possible that it is, since the fuel delivery is most likely calculated by the ECU based on other factors and not actually measured.

 

Maybe your car really does have problems, and you're only running on 3 cylinders [/QUOTE]


you got me on that one! take care man.

 

Max or Peter, why does it make any difference which way the restriction is installed?

 

The originator of the device felt that with the shorter end closer to the valve itself it may give a even quicker responce. But to be honest you are talking about a subtle difference on a subtle device. I doubt seriously if you could tell from the butt dyno. I think it would work ALMOST as well in either direction.
Randy
Team M7

 

I just got one of these "devices". Will report back tomorrow.

 

Andy, be sure to "demuéstreme los números" once you have the "device" evaluated

click pic for better view :D
His, Chile RED over, Madness intake, Magnaflow exhaust, Helix 15% Pulley & RDR Swaybar
Hers, Electric Blue / Union Jack on top and BONE Stoc

 

hey andy thanks for the 1/4 mile info.

i am getting very good ideas for my next mods....(helix pulley)
i see alot of good product ,
it is strange that a MCS with a supersprint header would be slower than car with a stock header.....there is something that no mod can change and that is a good driver.

 

I've only scanned through the multiple pages of this thread, so forgive me if this question has already been asked/answered, but can someone from M7, or anyone else with direct experience with this "device" comment on any impact to fuel economy.

I have no direct experience with superchargers, but I read some comments on another thread that said that changing the bypass valves characteristics affected the fuel economy. So, I'm wondering if this "device" will have a similar affect.

It's not a big concern, but I'm just trying to understand the supercharger behavior.

Any thoughts/comments ??

BB

 

hello Blue Brummie, I have not noticed a change in gas mileage for better or worse. I'd think though that if you smash the throttle often, your mileage would go down a little more just because of the supercharger being used a bit more. take care.