BMW M3 Forum (E90 E92)

BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Go Back   M3Post - BMW M3 Forum > BIMMERPOST Universal Forums > General Automotive (non-BMW) Talk + Photos/Videos
 
Evolve Automotive
Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      02-14-2008, 05:18 PM   #1
theslik1
Second Lieutenant
theslik1's Avatar
4
Rep
213
Posts

Drives: Lexus IS-F
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: SC

iTrader: (0)

Thumbs up Shiv's EVO X Tune - First Look

Looks very promising, and makes a hard decision even harder for those on the fence between 135i/EVO/STi. Apparently the new motor responds extremely well to a simple tune (no turbo, intake, or exhaust hardware mods).

"Simply put, the X has proven to be more tune-friendly than even the IX. While it makes a bit less power in stock configurations, it ends up making quite a bit more power when tuned both cars are tuned. All tuning was done with a modified version of our BMW PROcede v2 engine control computer that was re-coded to accept the new Mitsu-specific 36-3 trigger wheel and misc sensors."

http://forums.evolutionm.net/showthread.php?t=322616

Of course, there's also some Shiv bashing but the info bodes well for the general EVO X tuning market.
Appreciate 0
      02-14-2008, 05:52 PM   #2
imported_MPower
Zoom Zoom
12
Rep
1,071
Posts

Drives: 2010 VW GTI
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Arizona

iTrader: (0)

I would be concerned, of course, with driveability. A lot of these aftermarket ECU tunes are getting nice peak numbers but exponentially increase the lag.
__________________

In the garage: 2007 MINI Cooper S

WARNING: What you have read is an opinion. Yours will differ.


Appreciate 0
      02-14-2008, 07:18 PM   #3
Evolved
Bad Lieutenant
No_Country
4
Rep
465
Posts

Drives: Evo
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: PA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by MPower View Post
I would be concerned, of course, with driveability. A lot of these aftermarket ECU tunes are getting nice peak numbers but exponentially increase the lag.
What?
Appreciate 0
      02-14-2008, 07:20 PM   #4
larryn
Major General
United_States
148
Rep
8,447
Posts

Drives: '97 332ti, '10 E92 M3
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Seattle

iTrader: (2)

A lot of single turbo tunes add excessive turbo-lag feeling, because the boost comes on harder, and at a higher RPM than the stock mapping (usually).
Appreciate 0
      02-14-2008, 07:24 PM   #5
imported_MPower
Zoom Zoom
12
Rep
1,071
Posts

Drives: 2010 VW GTI
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Arizona

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evolved View Post
What?
Is this a new concept or something? Most of the time when these ECU tunes come out, they do a really good job of producing high peak outputs but increase the amount of turbo lag in low rpms.
__________________

In the garage: 2007 MINI Cooper S

WARNING: What you have read is an opinion. Yours will differ.


Appreciate 0
      02-14-2008, 07:29 PM   #6
Evolved
Bad Lieutenant
No_Country
4
Rep
465
Posts

Drives: Evo
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: PA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by MPower View Post
Is this a new concept or something? Most of the time when these ECU tunes come out, they do a really good job of producing high peak outputs but increase the amount of turbo lag in low rpms.
And how is that possible?

I think you are confusing turbo lag with something else.
Appreciate 0
      02-14-2008, 09:05 PM   #7
theslik1
Second Lieutenant
theslik1's Avatar
4
Rep
213
Posts

Drives: Lexus IS-F
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: SC

iTrader: (0)

I think what is being called "lag" in this case is the feel of the power delivery. The small turbo used in the EVO shouldn't be laggy at low rpms, but the power comes on so much stronger up top due to the tune that it could be perceived that way. Of course, the ECU is controlling the wastegate so it is completely possible to delay turbo spool-up down low (example: launch control). That would be artificially-induced lag.

What I know traditionally as lag has more to do with the turbo's physical spool-up characteristics based on size, vane design, etc as boost is demanded.
Appreciate 0
      02-14-2008, 09:10 PM   #8
PrematureApex
Captain
13
Rep
602
Posts

Drives:
Join Date: Jan 2008

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by MPower View Post
I would be concerned, of course, with driveability. A lot of these aftermarket ECU tunes are getting nice peak numbers but exponentially increase the lag.

Name one?

I think you are referring to instances where a larger turbo has been added.

I would love to see you find one aftermarket EM system where lag and/or midrange power has not been increased on the stock turbo. I think you are confused.
Appreciate 0
      02-14-2008, 11:29 PM   #9
Drawarms
Private First Class
Drawarms's Avatar
3
Rep
150
Posts

Drives: 2010 VW GTI
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: LI, NY

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrematureApex View Post
Name one?

I think you are referring to instances where a larger turbo has been added.

I would love to see you find one aftermarket EM system where lag and/or midrange power has not been increased on the stock turbo. I think you are confused.
Amen. Thats gonna happen to a crappy stock turbo.
Appreciate 0
      02-15-2008, 12:00 AM   #10
theslik1
Second Lieutenant
theslik1's Avatar
4
Rep
213
Posts

Drives: Lexus IS-F
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: SC

iTrader: (0)

Back on topic with more dyno goodness...on crappy 91 octane again.

http://forums.evolutionm.net/showthread.php?t=323641
Appreciate 0
      02-15-2008, 01:23 AM   #11
imported_MPower
Zoom Zoom
12
Rep
1,071
Posts

Drives: 2010 VW GTI
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Arizona

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrematureApex View Post
I think you are confused.
So do I...

Let me rearrange my original argument. In my own experiences, most modifications of these sorts achieve peak numbers while sacrificing driveability (forget lag, I don't know what I was trying to say there...). What I mean by driveability is mainly smoothness and consistent, linear power delivery. I think that is why many in the MINI world were happy to pay the 6,000 or so dollars for the JCW kit when they could have achieved similar or better results in the aftermarket. While those aftermarket products would get you the power, they did not deliver their power not nearly as smoothly as the JCW kit.

Now, each car is different, but my fear with aftermarket modifications is having to sacrifice the typical OEM "polished" power delivery.
__________________

In the garage: 2007 MINI Cooper S

WARNING: What you have read is an opinion. Yours will differ.


Appreciate 0
      02-15-2008, 10:04 AM   #12
theslik1
Second Lieutenant
theslik1's Avatar
4
Rep
213
Posts

Drives: Lexus IS-F
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: SC

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by MPower View Post
Now, each car is different, but my fear with aftermarket modifications is having to sacrifice the typical OEM "polished" power delivery.
Good morning to all!

That seems to be less of an issue with modern ECU hacks. Most of the reviews I've seen for N54 applications (Procede, TT, AA Xede, etc) indicate that typical "puttering around" driving isn't adversely affected at all. They also indicate that, along with better mid-range and top-end power, mpg is improved in normal driving.

Shiv states that the EVO X is tuned ridiculously rich from the factory, which is no surprise for Mitsu veterans. We should expect to see N54 type results from good tunes i.e. higher power throughout the range and as-good or better part-throttle drivability/improved mpg.
Appreciate 0
      02-15-2008, 10:51 AM   #13
Dave
formerly izzo/comeback
Dave's Avatar
Canada
68
Rep
3,378
Posts

Drives: Jag 07' XK Vert (BRG)
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: To

iTrader: (3)

Garage List
2008 135i  [3.40]
nice dynos... i wonder how much more cams and tbe will yield?
__________________
BMW CCA # 418268
Appreciate 0
      02-15-2008, 10:56 AM   #14
imported_MPower
Zoom Zoom
12
Rep
1,071
Posts

Drives: 2010 VW GTI
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Arizona

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by theslik1 View Post
Good morning to all!

That seems to be less of an issue with modern ECU hacks. Most of the reviews I've seen for N54 applications (Procede, TT, AA Xede, etc) indicate that typical "puttering around" driving isn't adversely affected at all. They also indicate that, along with better mid-range and top-end power, mpg is improved in normal driving.

Shiv states that the EVO X is tuned ridiculously rich from the factory, which is no surprise for Mitsu veterans. We should expect to see N54 type results from good tunes i.e. higher power throughout the range and as-good or better part-throttle drivability/improved mpg.
Well, like I said, it depends upon the car and the tune. There is no question that Vishnu does a great job with their ECU tunes. Even then, most of the time, any slightly unsmooth power delivery that is present in the OEM-state of tune is most likely going to be amplified with the ECU tune.

BTW, I am the only one that thinks that the dyno they posted actually isnt that impressive at all? Considering they replaced cats and exhaust as well as modify the ECU, I would expect more than a ~20 horsepower and ~25 lb.ft. of torque improvement. Perhaps I am reading that dyno wrong...
__________________

In the garage: 2007 MINI Cooper S

WARNING: What you have read is an opinion. Yours will differ.


Appreciate 0
      02-15-2008, 11:33 AM   #15
grant
Lieutenant
grant's Avatar
United_States
8
Rep
524
Posts

Drives: 1973 Porsche 911
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Denver, CO

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by MPower View Post
BTW, I am the only one that thinks that the dyno they posted actually isnt that impressive at all? Considering they replaced cats and exhaust as well as modify the ECU, I would expect more than a ~20 horsepower and ~25 lb.ft. of torque improvement. Perhaps I am reading that dyno wrong...
Yes, you are reading the dyno wrong. Those numbers are at the wheels (about 80% of power made at the flywheel). Subject line said 90 awhp added from stock (or about 112hp added at flywheel over stock).
__________________
1973 Porsche Carrera RS 2.7 Carbon Fiber (240hp & 1,890 lbs)
Appreciate 0
      02-15-2008, 12:45 PM   #16
chemhalo
Private
0
Rep
98
Posts

Drives:
Join Date: Jul 2007

iTrader: (0)

What really needs to be determined is if the Lancer Ralliart can make the exact same evo numbers with tune. It will be one hell of deal if it can. And im sure stock evo x owners will be if a tuned ralliart blows them away.
Appreciate 0
      02-15-2008, 12:54 PM   #17
grant
Lieutenant
grant's Avatar
United_States
8
Rep
524
Posts

Drives: 1973 Porsche 911
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Denver, CO

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by chemhalo View Post
What really needs to be determined is if the Lancer Ralliart can make the exact same evo numbers with tune. It will be one hell of deal if it can. And im sure stock evo x owners will be if a tuned ralliart blows them away.
That only matters if you want to go straight. The EVO X's best feature (and only reason to buy a X instead of a IX) is the Torque Vectoring AWD with Active Yaw Control which prevents any understeer (very difficult to achieve with AWD) and is not available on the Ralliart.
__________________
1973 Porsche Carrera RS 2.7 Carbon Fiber (240hp & 1,890 lbs)
Appreciate 0
      02-15-2008, 01:00 PM   #18
Nixon
Banned
23
Rep
1,396
Posts

Drives: :
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: :

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by chemhalo View Post
What really needs to be determined is if the Lancer Ralliart can make the exact same evo numbers with tune. It will be one hell of deal if it can. And im sure stock evo x owners will be if a tuned ralliart blows them away.

That is exactly what I was thinking! I could care less about all the rest of the differences between the Ralliart and the Evo, as long as the engine could be tuned!

I could care less about the computer nannies trying to take over control to reduce understeer. That's what suspension mods, "The Flick", and a heavy gas pedal is for. Forget the computer nanny, control it yourself.
Appreciate 0
      02-15-2008, 01:04 PM   #19
grant
Lieutenant
grant's Avatar
United_States
8
Rep
524
Posts

Drives: 1973 Porsche 911
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Denver, CO

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nixon View Post
That is exactly what I was thinking! I could care less about all the rest of the differences between the Ralliart and the Evo, as long as the engine could be tuned!
So you're only looking for a drag racer? There are better and cheaper ways to go fast in a straight line, imho...
__________________
1973 Porsche Carrera RS 2.7 Carbon Fiber (240hp & 1,890 lbs)
Appreciate 0
      02-15-2008, 01:08 PM   #20
chemhalo
Private
0
Rep
98
Posts

Drives:
Join Date: Jul 2007

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by grant View Post
So you're only looking for a drag racer? There are better and cheaper ways to go fast in a straight line, imho...
Name one new car with AWD, over 300hp (assuming tuned), looks good (rules out the WRX in my opinion :smile, has 4 doors, can be driven every day, and for the price of the Ralliart.
Appreciate 0
      02-15-2008, 01:33 PM   #21
grant
Lieutenant
grant's Avatar
United_States
8
Rep
524
Posts

Drives: 1973 Porsche 911
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Denver, CO

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nixon View Post
I could care less about the computer nannies trying to take over control to reduce understeer. That's what suspension mods, "The Flick", and a heavy gas pedal is for. Forget the computer nanny, control it yourself.
A local (for you and me) professional racer, Paul Gerard seems to take a different position. I've driven with him on the track and he knows his sh!t:
http://forums.evolutionm.net/showthread.php?t=324421

Besides, if $30k is the target, you're only $3k away with the EVO X and that's before the inevitable rebates/discounts, once the newness wears off...
__________________
1973 Porsche Carrera RS 2.7 Carbon Fiber (240hp & 1,890 lbs)
Appreciate 0
      02-15-2008, 02:27 PM   #22
imported_MPower
Zoom Zoom
12
Rep
1,071
Posts

Drives: 2010 VW GTI
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Arizona

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by grant View Post
Yes, you are reading the dyno wrong. Those numbers are at the wheels (about 80% of power made at the flywheel). Subject line said 90 awhp added from stock (or about 112hp added at flywheel over stock).
Ahh... I see. The dyno graph shows the differences between "tuned Stock" (I just saw stock and ran with it) and the tuned plus cat and exhaust.
__________________

In the garage: 2007 MINI Cooper S

WARNING: What you have read is an opinion. Yours will differ.


Appreciate 0
Post Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:19 PM.




m3post
m3post
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST