Tuners Rejoice! Free Tuning For M4.4!


Recommended Posts

I used a XC70 lid, which fits the 850 box, in combination with a S90/960 MAF which fits right into it.

Thanks Piet, I get that, it is just the S90 MAF housing isnt very easy to find here (Australia) and would have to be shipped from the US or Europe. The cheapest on ebay is an aftermarket one (i.e. only good for the housing) shipped for about $80.

The ME7 MAFs on the other hand are readily available, I can get one for next to nothing here. I will look into it further so see about compatibility, but I was hoping if someone had already tried and failed that they would save me the trouble :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Piet, I get that, it is just the S90 MAF housing isnt very easy to find here (Australia) and would have to be shipped from the US or Europe. The cheapest on ebay is an aftermarket one (i.e. only good for the housing) shipped for about $80.

The ME7 MAFs on the other hand are readily available, I can get one for next to nothing here. I will look into it further so see about compatibility, but I was hoping if someone had already tried and failed that they would save me the trouble :-)

You know you only need the housing, right? Take your sensor out of your stock 850 MAF and install it in the S90 housing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeh, thanks, I know that. I guess I am a bit of a tight ass, I was more implying that $80 is a lot of money for essentially a tube with a hole in it :-)

If I can get the ME7 housing/sensor working, I will just throw it in and run with it for the time being. If I have to spend $80 on a housing, I will probably just wait and put that money towards the custom filter box/housing that I intend on making at a later stage anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not just to much preload on the actuator?

I've set the preload to 2 or 2.5PSI, it's true, a little more from stock, but not too high. Thank you for raising that up !

Not that I know of. Didn't see that happening in the bin.

You have to tweak your TCV map.

Razorx has developped a good method for it:

I'll try it, I'm a newcomer to TunerPro, as you've seen, I didn't even know how to graph. Been using WinOLS for tuning my Smart :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, I know it's been talked about before, but why the crap is my FKORR 1.12 at 4200rpm, for a load over 8, when the value in VE Map is 1.3, XFK_ANR is at 2.34% and LTFT_PL is at -2.34% ? Apart from LTFT, are other factors implied in calculating overall FKORR so I can link the logged FKORR to the VE MAP ?

Thanks !

Ok, replying to my own questions. It seems that it goes like this :

FKORR = (VE MAP value) * (Inj. constant) + (LTFT_PL) + (XFK_ANR)

At 4300rpm : 1.3047 * 0.8594 - 2.34% + 0.7813% = 1.096. The logged value is 1.0969. Pretty damn close !

Another example, with LTFT_PL=3.13% and XFK_ANR=2.3438% :

At 4300rpm: 1.3047 * 0.8594 + 3.13% + 2.34% = 1.183. The logged value was 1.183 !

Don't know if the calculations had been done before, but I think I've solved this mistery :)

And I think there's also a linear relation to the AFR. I seen 12.8-12.5 AFR on the second example, and around 11.8-11.5 AFR in the first. 12.8/11.8 = 1.08 or 8% difference. 11.8/11.5 = 1.086 or 8.6% difference.

If we divide the injection values, 1.183/1.096 = 1.079, or almost 8%.

My idea is to know how to modify the VE map faster to reach desired AFR for non-Ostrich-ers. If on the current cell values, we get 12.8 AFR, to obtain 11.8 AFR we simply multiply the cell value with the result of the old AFR divided by the desired AFR. Am I just repeating what someone else wrote earlier in the thread ? :arob: I'm not trying to reinvent the wheel, just explaining some things I'm discovering

Edited by Midnight Caller
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeh, thanks, I know that. I guess I am a bit of a tight ass, I was more implying that $80 is a lot of money for essentially a tube with a hole in it :-)

If I can get the ME7 housing/sensor working, I will .

The M4.x sensor will not fit in the ME7 housing - it is designed to prevent such a thing. The later sensor will not work properly. The air temp sensor is integral to M4.x MAF, ME7 uses an external sensor post IC. Waste of time.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The M4.x sensor will not fit in the ME7 housing - it is designed to prevent such a thing. The later sensor will not work properly. The air temp sensor is integral to M4.x MAF, ME7 uses an external sensor post IC. Waste of time.

Ah, thanks. I wasnt aware of the temp sensor issue, I was only at the point where I was trying to figure out what to do with the reverse flow (0-1v) aspect of the ME7 sensor.

From earlier posts, it looks like Mercuric thought he could get the ME7 MAF sensor working, it is a shame he is not around still, he might have had something smart in mind...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even if you could, it doesn't register any more flow capacity - that is still based on the sensor / housing relationship, so what's the point? You can easily make your own housing and JB weld the M4.x collar in place, adjusting height to make sure the sensor is centered vertically. That won't cost you $80

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even if you could, it doesn't register any more flow capacity - that is still based on the sensor / housing relationship, so what's the point? You can easily make your own housing and JB weld the M4.x collar in place, adjusting height to make sure the sensor is centered vertically. That won't cost you $80

Oh, thanks, I was under the impression that the ME7 housing did have more flow capacity. I couldnt find a data sheet for my exact housing, but as it was substantially bigger than the m4.4 variant, and Mercuric was trying to do the same, I assumed (<- my issue) it had higher flow.

I will just wait until I restructure my intake further (i.e. remove the standard box), and do it right. I dont mind spending $80 (or more), I just didnt want spend much on a temporary solution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, thanks, I was under the impression that the ME7 housing did have more flow capacity. I couldnt find a data sheet for my exact housing, but as it was substantially bigger than the m4.4 variant, and Mercuric was trying to do the same, I assumed (<- my issue) it had higher flow.

I will just wait until I restructure my intake further (i.e. remove the standard box), and do it right. I dont mind spending $80 (or more), I just didnt want spend much on a temporary solution.

how big do you plan on going? the 960 MAF housing you can pickup at a local junkyard, and someone was nice enough on here to already do out the calculations and tweaks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Piet: If the TCV isn't "learned", then do you know why IPD shows a method of "learning" it ?

Maybe it has a connection with the adaptive knock routine in fact ? :)

Quote from IPD :

"After the installation of the ipd HD TCV drive the vehicle for 5 minutes without developing any boost
pressure to allow the engine to warm up. In a safe and appropriate place, accelerate the vehicle
to approx half of its maximum boost level and hold there for 5-7 seconds, then decelerate to below
30mph. Proper accelerator modulation will be necessary to control the boost level. Repeat this 4 times.
Turn the engine off and wait for 12 minutes. For optimum results the above procedure should be
performed twice."

Edited by Midnight Caller
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No that's not what I said.

I said "not that I know off, did'nt see that happenig in the bin"..(yet).

So I'am not 100% sure about that.

I did try a similar HD TCV though, didn't notice any difference with the stock TCV.

There was certainly no period of learning in necessary with it.

The IPD was originally developped for ME7 cars, maybe with these a learning in period was necessary, I don't know.

With the 850/early X70 version I didn't notice a learning in period being necessary though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

how big do you plan on going? the 960 MAF housing you can pickup at a local junkyard, and someone was nice enough on here to already do out the calculations and tweaks.

I may well end up with a 960 MAF, it is just I will do the bigger air intake (including different filter) later, and I want to plan it properly and make it all fit together well. As I said earlier, we dont have junkyards full of late model 960s here (in Australia). As such, it looks like the BMW MAF that many others are using might be a more attractive option.

In short, I had a ME7 box and MAF in front of me and it looked like a good temporary upgrade, size and fitment wise. Upon further consideration, that is not the case...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am thinking that a "learning" procedure is also present in the M4.4, but works differently.

If the "new" TCV leads to boost overshoot, it may also lead to knocking. As I've learned, adaptive knock will prevent these further knocks by reducing advance and increasing fueling prior to the overshoot condition.

That's the behaviour I've noticed in my tunes (when I was in the beginning with tuning), because when freshly installing the ECU (of course, with greedy newbie load requests), the check engine light was coming on almost all the time. After a few pulls, it stayed off or came up a lot less.

Maybe ? :)

Edited by Midnight Caller
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share