Unichipped Evo2

M3Nally wrote: Excellent work Shep, The restriction then is a combination of small diameter pipe work on the air box and AFM, not the AFM per se. By increasing the airflow with a bigger pipe/ airbox intake arrangement, you will have to increase the fuelling won't you. If you are getting 13.1 and that is considered a bit lean, can the existing injectors be made to flow more fuel, or will bigger or an extra one be needed?

Thanks for your kind words BTW. It is all trial and error, but I will post all my findings, good or bad.

I wouldn't have thought I would need another injector, but the Unichip makes it possible if thats what you want to do, its almost limitless on what can be done. As I've said above, I will need to do more tests on my car to find why its running leaner at the top end, although 13:1 shouldn't cause any damage, and running between 12.5 - 12.8:1 may not even give anymore power. Another route, although more money, is to run Evo3 or the Volvo injectors mentioned earlier then remap to suit. But if all is normal, I would probably fit the 3.5bar FPR from the Porsche 944 first.

I do intend to fit the Uni-Q to my SE too when we have a loom made up to go between the ECU and the loom to it, so that no cutting and splicing is done to the original loom. I will retain the AFM too and fit a throttle pot without the "switches" so it all looks original too. The Uni-Q will send the switching signals to the ECU when needed, so the original Switch TPS can be replaced with a Throttle pot. I may use a standard ECU to modify for it though? I want to remap the SE with the engine in its present state (2.5 Evo3 engine fitted with 2.3 crank) I suspect we will be very suprised with the results after mapping. Once that is done, I will fit the new correct crank, refit the original ECU, so the map won't be too far away (It will be far too advanced with the map of the old crank) and then once run in, re-map with the modded ECU and Uni-Q. Again, I am expecting atleast BMW factory figures.

stevesingo wrote: Shep, I wouldn't worry too much about your manifold depression reducing fuel pressure. The whole idea behind the FPR is that it will supply fuel at 3 bar above manifold pressure. As your FPR is connected to the mainfold, it too will see the depression. The power you are putting out is right on the limit of the standard injectors, so take daves advice and go down the Porsche FPR route. Steve

Yes Steve, I know you are right, although I thought these usually run rich at the top end?? Where mine is leaner than I expected. I am still going to do my checks nonetheless, if the pressure is normal, I will change the FPR for a 3.5 bar one.

SHEPSM3 wrote: 2002SportEvo...do you have your torque figures too? Your install looks mighty tidy! Were the two power runs before and after or just two runs carried out at the same time?

Thanks for the kind words !!  The runs were both done at the same time when Gerry mapped my Maxx.  I have the torque printout as well - will look it out and post it when i find it !

Right, an update.

My car felt a bit off in the mid-range with partial throttle openings to what it did when I drove back from Dastek. A couple of dyno tests showed that the car was running really rich....10:1 AFR. It had also started drinking fuel compared to what it did after I uni-q'd it. Well, it all seems down to the barometric sensor. Unplugged this and all seems ok. So new one on order.

Also, some further test has confirmed that the air filter housing is the cause of the depression. Basically running the car with the original rubber elbow to the AFM removed also removed the depression. There was nothing but atmospheric pressure on the vac gauge, even at 7500RPM. This makes me wonder if making the intake opening of the plenum wider would make any difference? I would doubt it. BUT, if the engine is reved upto 9000 RPM, then the original 100mm opening of the plenum may well be a restriction then????

So Dave, I will be looking at your mods to your air filter housing, and Steve, I wondered if you could post some details of your air filter top housing too, as I will probably go for this.

I am also considering upgrading the cams and exhaust. But 1st, I will get the air intake sorted and get the max from that. I am also considering CF airbox too, but wonder what gain this would give over what I have mentioned above? Cleaner flow of air??

Has anyone done before and after dyno runs with exhausts? Just wondered what gives the best gains over the OEM system?

BTW, we had a loan dyno last week, My car still makes 226BHP and the torque, interstingly enough was 185 ft lbs on that dyno too. The printer was broken on that dyno, so I have no graph to post.

Thanks Steve,

I was watching the exhaust thread, although I didn't seem to get the last half of it! Some good reading! So the Miltek doesn't make any more than the standard system? I think the Supersprint maybe too load for Castle Combe? Simon, fancy popping over to get yours soundtested?

I can also remember the S14 thread, but couldn't seem to find it. Thanks for the link!

OK.... Gerry maybe incorperating a sensor to detect intake temperature into the engine. This will be used as the temp sensor in the AFM is used to help the Motronic give corrections to the ignition and fueling maps. Obviously this will allow safer running of the engine in hotter climates, etc and take advantage of cold/damp air too. This is a feature of the standard Motronic and Alpha N systems.

Gerry also wants to start making up proper wire harnesses to plug directly between the ECU and ECU connector to enable ease of installation. This obviously will enable the wire harnesses to be left unmodified and original.

Gerry and I need to know how many of you guys would be intersted in this, as we have to order a minimum of 50 looms to make things viable. Prices are to be confirmed, but a whole kit including the new Uni-Q pre-programmed ready to run, suitable TPS, wire harness and inlet temp sensor will be competitive with the current Alpha N kits.

Anyone know if its best to just list your names below or start a poll?

  Paul.

Thanks John, Kevin (M3Nally)-possibly?, Karn (Karnage101)-possibly?

Anyone else?

Maybe a moderator can advise if this is the best way to list or by poll?

Jon,

Yes, at the moment the Unichip and when the Uni-Q is eventually released, has to be mapped at a Unichip dealer. There has been talk about releasing the software for people who want to download it and tweek it, as with Emerald, Omex, etc, etc. But there is so much that can be done with these chips, and being honest tp get the very best out of these chips can only realistically be achieved by a mapping session on the rolling road. My car only took around 40 minuites to map completely. This included ALL light throttle loads sites (13/14 load sites per 400 RPM from 1000 RPM onwards) But it all depends on the dyno used, the Dastek with its cooling and superb stability made things alot easier than say our old Bosch dyno does right now - soon to be changed - watch this space!!!!

The Unichip/Q can be mapped just by insering various numbers into the fuel and ignition maps, but its not ideal, and is hit and miss. You would have to buy the Dastek tuning pots to be able to link the Unichip/Q to your laptop too, but these are only available for dealers at present. I can't see this changing in the short term.

So what I am trying to say is, an hour on a GOOD dyno (the most I've seen for this is approx £85+VAT) its not a case of spending £200+ for mapping sessions, and with mapping on the dyno you know you have the optimum power/torque available from your set up, plus you will have a graph to show you the differences for comparison too.

Please don't be too put off by this, it really isn't an issue.....so long as you find a good dyno with a GOOD operator to map it for you.