Bootmod3 non-ZCP / ZCP (Comp) / CS / BM3-CS / BM3 STG1 91OCT dyno results

[emcd4]

Thx for the response. I personally am not interested in amplifying the exhaust burble. I think that cs+ or stage 1 with reduced torque in first and second gear might be the way to go.

[BMthusiast]

Originally Posted by emcd4

Thx for the response. I personally am not interested in amplifying the exhaust burble. I think that cs+ or stage 1 with reduced torque in first and second gear might be the way to go.

My pleasure. And yeah, as long as you reduce 1st and 2nd gear, Stage 1 is fine with Stock traction. Third gear is a blast!

[Claudi]

Hello Guys

After reading multiple threads and searching forums about that BMW DME unlock, i still have no idea what is working now. So i thought im gonna ask you guys in this thread.

I drive an M4 build on 05.05.2017 an he got the lastest Istep update last week. I read the istep and its F020-19-07-539. So good so far, but i wanna OBD flash it with BM3. I have read various things about that update. Some says old M4 without OPF will still work with the newest update and some says it will not work... i have no idea now.

Can someone give me the right answer please? will it work on my M4?

Greets.

[rokkuchan]

Originally Posted by Claudi

Hello Guys

After reading multiple threads and searching forums about that BMW DME unlock, i still have no idea what is working now. So i thought im gonna ask you guys in this thread.

I drive an M4 build on 05.05.2017 an he got the lastest Istep update last week. I read the istep and its F020-19-07-539. So good so far, but i wanna OBD flash it with BM3. I have read various things about that update. Some says old M4 without OPF will still work with the newest update and some says it will not work... i have no idea now.

Can someone give me the right answer please? will it work on my M4?

Greets.

I got latest update same istep and it works. But mine is 2016.

[Claudi]

Originally Posted by rokkuchan

I got latest update same istep and it works. But mine is 2016.

Thanks for your help. I tryed to Flash today and it worked i'm so happy

[M3hf80]

Can someone explain what the differences are between BM3 stage 1 map vs CS+? I have a non zcp 6mt and I'm currently running stage 1 but would like to switch it up if CS+ is better.

[AlpsRider]

Originally Posted by M3hf80

Can someone explain what the differences are between BM3 stage 1 map vs CS+? I have a non zcp 6mt and I'm currently running stage 1 but would like to switch it up if CS+ is better.

They have different driving characteristics. What one person likes another person may not. Try them.

[chewbakam4]

I really like the CS+ map but Stage 2 rips tires better LOL

[TrueNorthM5]

Originally Posted by M3hf80

Can someone explain what the differences are between BM3 stage 1 map vs CS+? I have a non zcp 6mt and I'm currently running stage 1 but would like to switch it up if CS+ is better.

CS+ is less violent through the mid range. It makes for a nice stock feeling map with some extra torque and extra top end.

As you've already been driving with Stage 1, you know it has massive thrust from 3500-7000rpm that will leave you pinned to the back of your seat. It's quite obviously not stock the moment you stomp on it - but they drive very similarly when driving normally or even at part throttle.

[BMthusiast]

Originally Posted by Claudi

Thanks for your help. I tryed to Flash today and it worked i'm so happy

Did you flash GTS Transmission?

Originally Posted by M3hf80

Can someone explain what the differences are between BM3 stage 1 map vs CS+? I have a non zcp 6mt and I'm currently running stage 1 but would like to switch it up if CS+ is better.

They're both great, but for me STG1's is more addicting. If you're having any issue with slippage because of STG1's power with stock traction CS+ might be a better option. Or have competition/GTS traction coded.

[bpray9223]

2016 M3 with BM3 Stg 2 93 oct tune made 489 whp/496 wtq on a Mustang dyno. The attached dyno graph is the first pull, ambient temps were around 45 degrees (F). This was the only "good" pull we registered as all subsequent pulls the rear tires were spinning on the rollers due to cold temps and low tread, so the readings were not accurate.

Mods:
BM3 Stg 2 93 octane OTS
K&N Panel Filters
VRSF Catless DP's
VRSF Single Mid-pipe

[MR RIZK]

Halim@HCP

Are you able to post the logs again listed in your first post as "services.bootmod3.net" does not appear to be valid.

[Halim@HCP]

Originally Posted by MR RIZK

Halim@HCP

Are you able to post the logs again listed in your first post as "services.bootmod3.net" does not appear to be valid.

I just checked, yes. The logs seem to be gone due to me deleting my account and doing some testing on our end.

I'll try get an M4 in and do the same thing, this time with the new updated OTS maps!

[ALCOBENDAS]

Originally Posted by Halim@HCP

Thing is, the GTS has water injection for cooling.

As most S55 does not, the GTS will work like the CS map whenever that is not present. But the CS+ is a good replica of what the real GTS would do. Torque wise identical to CS. Topend is slightly higher than CS but a tad lower than CS+

Hi what AFR have the cs+? i see the GTS have 8afr!!! THANKS!

[ALCOBENDAS]

Originally Posted by spool twice

I thought it was pretty interesting on BMW's own OE approach to how different the tunes are. I originally had thought it was simply a boost curve revamp, which is only a small part of it.

Looking at the logs at 4,000rpm, it appears to be as follows:

Base: 14.89psi, 7.5* of timing
ZCP: 15.1psi, 6.5* of timing
CS: 16.83psi, 6.5* of timing

All seem to hit 14.4-14.5 AFR (.9798 lambda)

At 6,500rpm:
Base: 18.5psi, 9.5* of timing
ZCP: 16.7psi, 10* of timing
CS: 15.5psi, 10.5* of timing

All seem to target 12.3 AFR (.8367 lambda)

Things get more interesting as RPM climb, as the ZCP utilizes less boost and more timing, and the CS follows the same trend, although to a bigger degree, particularly in timing advancement. I wonder why BMW took such a different approach to boost and timing curves? It would appear the CS would be more susceptible to poor quality gas after 6,000rpm and beyond than the ZCP or base car as timing can approach 17* by 7,000rpm (vs 12* on the ZCP, and 11* on the base).

I wonder if the OE CS would benefit from some 93/100 octane mix to maximize that timing curve?

side note, Cyl *4 seems to be sleeping in all of the logs.

Hi, have the info of AFR GTS map??? need need!!! ehehe

Now cs+ not free? before if it was?

[_Timm3]

It would be nice to see GTS dynograph on here too. I'm assuming it would position right below CS+ graph?

[Juras]

Hi,

I have a few questions I am hoping someone could answer. I have a stock 2017 f82 zcp lci 6mt, no dp. Had it from brand new, broken in as should, oil change each 10kkm, driven rather moderately, currently 40kkm, no issues ever.

I want to get bm3, I just dont know what would be the most optimal map for me. Both octan and stage options are considered. I am tempted by the less risky (is it?)
stg1 91 option, but dont seem to find any dyno chart of such setup.

1) What are the gains of 93 over 91 on stg1?
2) Is it true that stage 2 could be more risky for the engine?
3) I'm not really interested in crazy gains, rather smooth, risk free increase. Let's say 530hp at crank would be enough. What option would you recommend as the least risky?
4) Is it true that it might not be healthy for the car to have 2 maps and constantly switch between them? If the switching wouldn't impose any risk in itself, I could consider going stg2 and having two maps, let's say 530 & 570-80hp at the crank. I am 98% of time using shell vpower 100 RON octane racing fuel.
5) Would there be a way to take advantage of going catless dp and running 100 RON most of the time not to max out the gains but rather limit the increase in boost that is needed to achieve given moderate hp level?
6) Or maybe GTS map would be the way to go? Maintaining the OEM reliability (?) while still pushing ~500hp at the crank? Though 50hp gain (or less if my zcp has more than 450 out of the factory...) might not sound worthwhile?

To sum up - as you can see I am a bit lost here. Limiting the risk of engine failure is priority even at the cost of gains. More aggressive secondary map would be welcome for switching once a month, given the switching itself back and forth isn't unhealthy for the engine. I run 100 RON and am willing to install catless downpipes if it would make sense considering my prios.

I would highly appreciate your input to make my mind.

[chewbakam4]

Best to start around with like a CS map to feel it out and then go stage 1 then stage 2. If you have ethanol then ho E30 after that.

[SilverBulletLV]

Are there any dyno graphs comparing the CS+ and GTS tunes on 91 oct? I'm curious which one builds more hp/tq.

[StepAsideButch]

BM3 Stage 2 91ACN

ARM Resonated DPs
VRSF midpipe

[gpennell0812]

Forgive me if this is a question that was answered previously. Is the wheel HP/Torque gains with BM3 stage 1 any different with non-ZCP vs ZCP or is the power difference between the stock non-ZCP vs stock ZCP only in the tune and the BM3 Stage 1 overrides the tune difference?

[gspannu]

Originally Posted by gpennell0812

Forgive me if this is a question that was answered previously. Is the wheel HP/Torque gains with BM3 stage 1 any different with non-ZCP vs ZCP or is the power difference between the stock non-ZCP vs stock ZCP only in the tune and the BM3 Stage 1 overrides the tune difference?

No difference whether you start from non-ZCP or ZCP. All the DME settings are in the BM3 tune. The net output of any tune will be the same regardless of model.
It has also been discussed earlier that the engine hardware is identical in non ZCP and ZCP - so all tunes are suitable to both models.