I've been a fan of chip/ECU tuning since before I had a mini. In many of the threads (on MTH, UniChip etc) there are many who seem unconvinced that tuning works. If you're interested in some real world numbers, there is an excellent review of a Mini build up on european car.

The're trying to build a 200 WHP mini, and have been bolting things on to that end. Like many of us, they didn't get the bang for the buck they were expecting with adders, until they unleased the custom tune. The Mini runs very rich, and correcting that gives gobs of power (10% for them!)

See this link for the details.....

http://www.europeancarweb.com/projectcars/0401ec_mini/

Have fun, and tune for power and efficiency!

Matt

 

When I had my '03 S "upgraded" to software 3.6, it erased my Evotech software and [what felt like] a bunch of torque and horsepower. Less acceleration, greater pedal movement for similar acceleration. It was MUCH slower. While some of that may be attributable to adaptive logic having to re-learn my mods, the change was too dramatic not to notice.

My opinion, without a dyno sheet to prove it, is that Evotech engine tuning does make power in the MINI. Others may make more or less. Randy Webb sells various types of tuning software. Ask him.

 

I KNOW that tuning the computer will get you gobs of power. I've had that done on my mustang. This post was more to let the people on the fence, or some real sceptics, see a fairly balanced write up about tuning for power on modern cars.

I'm sure loosing the Evotech tune did more than just seem slower.... All that extra fuel takes up space of stuff that can burn, and you loose power.

matt

 

Does Shark ECU upgrade is the same thing as one-click? (I don't know if this make any sense, but it's a question anyway)

 

the shark has an improved map for a particular set of mods and octane level. It can program the ECU, and return it to stock. It won't do as well as the iterative dyno tune, as the shark doesn't take into account the tolerance stacking of your particular car.

Tuning to take these effects into account can only be done with data logging & dyno tuning.

Matt

 

have no clue what you're saying....sorry my mechanical knowledge is so limited. ? What I understand is Shark doesn't do as good as MTH?

 

The Shark Injector and AmD OneClick are the same in the sense that they both have "black boxes" which store the stock and a "tuned" ECU remap, and allow you to easily load either on your MINI. The "tuned" ECU remap on each have been done by two different tuners.

Whose ECU remap is the best is conjecture as nobody has done comparitive testing on them all

 

Here's some back-ground. Cars today are run by computers. the computer looks at a bunch of sensors (temps, pressures, throttle positions etc) and figures out what to do (when to fire the injectors, and for how long. When to fire the sparkplug etc). The computer can do lots of other things as well (control the electric cooling fan, rev limiters, DSC and the like).

So, now you've bought a Mini, and you want to make it go faster.... Well, the programming from BMW/Mini has to work on lots of gas grades (from the 93 in the east coast, to the 91 here in CA, and whatever is in Europe and Cananda etc) so the programming has to work for the worst anticipated grade of fuel. And each part on the mini has an ideal dimension, but due to manufacturing issues, every part isn't perfect (like each injector is slightly different etc) The build up of these imperfections is called "tolerance stacking". Each part can be a bit off perfect, and still be OK. Some of these errors build up, and two identical motors don't perform the same.

Mini also wants a program that will last the life of the car, so it has to work as the motor ages as well. All of this spells compramise in the engine programming, from a performance perspective that is.

So, what can we do about it? We can model (either theoretically, or by testing) the engine with various mods, and come up with tunes that work better than stock. This is good in that we're using the motor more efficeintly, and changing the programming to better fit the modified description of the motor, but we're still saying "This map worked better on a DIFFERENT motor with the same mods". This gets you part way there, and is what the Shark, and MTH do. So is one better and one worse? Not really. MTH will keep giving you different maps as you keep changing you car, and it's less expensive, so I went that way. there's more of a headache with installation, and the Shark is a nice little package. But this still doesn't take into account the particular fit of all your particular parts....

So the next step is custom tuning. You put your car on a dyno, or you log the data from your ECU as you drive, so you can MEASURE the effect of programming changes on your individual car. If you read the EC mag article I referenced above, it might make a bit more sense. So, the best tune is done by providing a map that is custom for your particular car.

There are things I skipped over, like the computers ability to tune itself as you drive (but with what tuning goal?), the use of narrow vs wide O2 sensors, knock sensor etc.

Anyway, I hope this helps.

Matt

 

Thanks MINIAC and Matt!

I kind of getting the idea now...I think for me the easier is better...I would go with shark then...

I need to start reading some car magazines.

 

If you like the convenience of the "all in one package" concept for your chiptuning, you may also want to look at the AmD OneClick. The AmD OneClick has gotten some good reviews. I would do a search on this site as well as on Mini2. There were some complaints early on with the AmD unit but that mostly dealt with engine cutoffs and always was a problem with regular Coopers and Ones as far as I can remember. The AmD got favorable ratings with EVO magazine as well.

 

I'm surprised by the lack of before-and-after dynos out there for the various chips. These are the only two that come to mind:

https://www.northamericanmotoring.co...ad.php?t=26838

https://www.northamericanmotoring.co...ad.php?t=29748

 

I got the MTH. Major butt dyno difference.

 

My wife drove the Mini for the first time in over three months (due to pregnancy stuff). She's seen me tinkering on the car, but didn't know what I'd done. When she came back, she said the car is very "vroom vroom" compared to what she remebered. And she commented on this without any promting.

I know I WANT to percieve a difference, but she isn't biased like me. but she noticed a difference with the MTH, One-ball and HAI.

Matt

 

Vroom vroom sounds like a technical term. Does it void your warranty?