Originally posted by karter16
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
CSL '0401' Program Binary Disassembly Notes
Collapse
X
-
- Likes 3
-
Originally posted by ac427 View PostThank you both for you help. It's really good to gain an understanding of not only how it works but the thinking behind it.
- Likes 3
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Bry5on View PostMy data logs show that if you actually duct the lower snorkel to the bumper, you will have low IATs above 40mph. My theory is that the open top half of the flap actually allows air exchange, functioning as an exhaust when the lower half is supply. Just a guess based on my data logs with flap open/closed.
Also, it’s not just the IAT that’s right behind the radiator, but also the thermally conductive airbox itself (carbon should be a lot more conductive than plastic). Hot airbox could mean hot air at low speeds and loads, so it’s my opinion that the IAT is conservatively placed to prevent damage to the engine. If you’re concerned about the IAT readings, you’re WAY better off just ducting from the bumper to the airbox and actually having low IATs vs trying to spoof lower temps. I’ll get off the soap box now.
Originally posted by karter16 View Postyeah echoing this. I've had a look through 0401 and 1801. TAN is calculated exactly the same in both (e.g. there's no adjustment to the calculation of TAN itself in 0401), the KLs and KFs that take TAN as an input are also the same between both. The only difference is 0401 has additional code to utilize TAN in the calculation of RF based on MAP sensor and TAN. However as MpowerE36 has shown, the code implementation of the maths doesn't include any sort of "adjustment factor". Which further supports Bry5on's comment above. I think we can conclude doing it the way BMW did is a conservative approach. I would think as soon as you get some reasonable airflow through the box the IAT will be fairly accurate, and when you are sitting still (which isn't really the point of a CSL in BMW's eyes remember) the heat soak resultas in a conservative reading.
Thank you both for you help. It's really good to gain an understanding of not only how it works but the thinking behind it.
- Likes 2
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Bry5on View Post
My data logs show that if you actually duct the lower snorkel to the bumper, you will have low IATs above 40mph. My theory is that the open top half of the flap actually allows air exchange, functioning as an exhaust when the lower half is supply. Just a guess based on my data logs with flap open/closed.
Also, it’s not just the IAT that’s right behind the radiator, but also the thermally conductive airbox itself (carbon should be a lot more conductive than plastic). Hot airbox could mean hot air at low speeds and loads, so it’s my opinion that the IAT is conservatively placed to prevent damage to the engine. If you’re concerned about the IAT readings, you’re WAY better off just ducting from the bumper to the airbox and actually having low IATs vs trying to spoof lower temps. I’ll get off the soap box now.Last edited by karter16; 03-06-2025, 03:22 PM.
- Likes 1
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by ac427 View Post
No worries. It would certainly be an interesting experiment.
Speaking of calibration, it would be interesting to know how the CSL IAT is coded for the heat soak issue. I mean, BMW could have placed it anywhere but they put it in a place where its output is bound to be skewed by the heat from the engine. Obviously they accounted for this in coding but i wonder if there is a point the output from the IAT just becomes useless?
Also, it’s not just the IAT that’s right behind the radiator, but also the thermally conductive airbox itself (carbon should be a lot more conductive than plastic). Hot airbox could mean hot air at low speeds and loads, so it’s my opinion that the IAT is conservatively placed to prevent damage to the engine. If you’re concerned about the IAT readings, you’re WAY better off just ducting from the bumper to the airbox and actually having low IATs vs trying to spoof lower temps. I’ll get off the soap box now.
- Likes 2
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by ac427 View Post
No worries. It would certainly be an interesting experiment.
Speaking of calibration, it would be interesting to know how the CSL IAT is coded for the heat soak issue. I mean, BMW could have placed it anywhere but they put it in a place where its output is bound to be skewed by the heat from the engine. Obviously they accounted for this in coding but i wonder if there is a point the output from the IAT just becomes useless?
BMW used that IAT for a reason; otherwise, they could have used the other style sensor from their older models.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Bry5on View Post
Not a lot of losses at part throttle, which is where this would be most useful I think. Then tune WOT without the HFM by AFR and open the flap, redo AFR for the flap open case. All the acronyms, sorry!
Speaking of calibration, it would be interesting to know how the CSL IAT is coded for the heat soak issue. I mean, BMW could have placed it anywhere but they put it in a place where its output is bound to be skewed by the heat from the engine. Obviously they accounted for this in coding but i wonder if there is a point the output from the IAT just becomes useless?
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by ac427 View PostWhat year did the E46 M3 GTR come out?
It was a V8. I'm not sure which ECU it used though.
Also, which DME did the E39 M5 have, probably a previous generation MSS5x ECU.
The E39 M5 was the MSS52.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- Likes 1
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by ac427 View Post
True, I guess you could mount a MAF anywhere near the actual air intake path and then calibrate for loses?
- Likes 1
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by ac427 View PostAre MAF's available in the CSL snorkel diameter?
It would interesting to implement an MAF for part throttle quality research.
Apologies, i could have put these these as one post but i was using the phone on the train home.
Leave a comment:
-
What year did the E46 M3 GTR come out?
It was a V8. I'm not sure which ECU it used though.
Also, which DME did the E39 M5 have, probably a previous generation MSS5x ECU.
Leave a comment:
-
Pretty sure a lot of the code is fairly common across MSS54 and MSS52, plus funktionsrahmen suggests at least some fmodules are ported to/from MSS60 project.
Edit: to be clear, MSS54 software in general has provision for 8 cylinders, which I presume is due to similarity with MSS52 software.Last edited by karter16; 03-05-2025, 09:47 PM.
- Likes 4
Leave a comment:
-
Dream E46 M3 right there and it was SMG too. LOVE IT!
Leave a comment:
Leave a comment: