Home Forums Articles How To's FAQ Register
Go Back   Xoutpost.com > BMW SAV Forums > X5 (E70) Forum
Fluid Motor Union
User Name
Password
Member List Premier Membership Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Xoutpost server transfer and maintenance is occurring....
Xoutpost is currently undergoing a planned server migration.... stay tuned for new developments.... sincerely, the management


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 10-22-2011, 05:41 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 13
Mike Benvo is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by motordavid View Post
+1...I've run tanks full of 87 & 89 through our '01, in the past decade; never an unusual sound or 'detonation', and also no discernible difference in 'performance'.
If there is no discernible difference in performance, then I guess you should run 87 octane all the time?

If you notice no performance change, you simply aren't loading the car up hard enough.

There is a difference between detonation and pre-ignition. You should never hear something very audible, but if you listen closely and know what to listen for, you will hear slight pinging under certain load conditions if the car is used to having higher octane and you make an immediate switch to lower octane.
__________________
Mike Benvo
BMW/Coding/Programming Specialist
2010 BMW E60 550i Msport
2008 BMW E90 M3 6SP
2006 BMW E60 M5 SMG (RIP)
2003 BMW S/C 330ci, 450WHP (retired)
1990 BMW 735i Turbo
http://ultimatetune.com/Coding.pdf
Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links

  #12  
Old 10-23-2011, 01:58 AM
JCL's Avatar
JCL JCL is offline
Premier Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 11,853
JCL will become famous soon enoughJCL will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Benvo View Post
Do you tune ECU's?

Do you know how minimum ignition maps work on this particular DME family?

Do you know about target based systems, and how this works in conjunction with minimum timing maps when you change the targeted timing?

I wouldn't make statements that the "DME is operating at the speed of sound" when that is not of relevance in this particular case. I could go into processor architecture here, but that's a whole different case. And were talking about faster than the speed of sound.. these are electrical signals.

There are so many different adaptations - over 20 of them. Do you think that the DME can pull timing infinitely? It can't. It will to a certain point.

If you go from higher octane to lower octane, there is a chance it will ping until it makes corrections to prevent it from happening.

On some E46 M3's we REMOVE timing from stock in certain areas due to the factory timing maps being too far advanced in certain areas for 91 octane piss water fuel.
No, I don't tune ECUs. Have you recurved a distributor? That might date me a bit.

The speed of sound is a joking reference to the acoustic sensors that listen for knock. Yes, I understand that the processor is using electrical signals, once the acoustic sensors hear the onset of knock.

No, the DME can not adjust timing infinitely. But on these engines (not S54s, with much higher specific outputs, but rather these engines in X5s) I have not heard pinging.

The OP also referenced hearing knocking sounds on startup, using 91. Given that these engines can run well on 89, and often 87, pinging or knocking on 91 suggests that the fuel isn't really 91. All that takes is a fault in the blending system inside the gas station pump. And startup noises aren't likely to be pinging anyway.

Yes, I understand the consequences of crap fuel. See post #2.

Before going further, let's agree that fuel varies a lot geographically. In my area, the fuel is very good. Yours may not be. And the label on the pump is just that, simply a label. It may or may not represent what is coming out the nozzle.

My X5 3.0 operated great on 89 AKI. No change in fuel economy from 91 or 94, measured over several tanks and various elevations and temperatures, by calculating (not relying on the OBD). That suggests to me that the timing was not being retarded, and so with my local fuel, in my driving conditions, there was absolutely no reason to buy more than 89 AKI. 87 AKI was OK, but occasionally I noticed driveabilty issues. But no ping, ever. And yes, I know what pinging is, all the way back from SU carbs, the onset of emissions controls in US vehicles in the early 70s, and so on.

I know your followup question was directed at MD, but I would point out that if there is no discernible difference in performance (and efficiency) then yes, one should run 87 all the time. The correct fuel is the lowest AKI (let's stop calling it octane, since motor fuel doesn't necessarily have any actual octane in it) that doesn't cause knock, or with these control strategies, performance degradation. This recommendation is leaving aside the effects of higher concentrations of detergents in higher grades of fuel, differing amounts of ethanol crap in different grades of fuel, etc.

I don't agree that means that one isn't loading the engine up enough. The engine is there to serve the driver; the driver is not there to serve the engine. IMO.

Thanks for the post. It is good to have an engine discussion again; we had gone awhile with a lot of wheel spacer, window tint, and similar threads.

Jeff
__________________
2007 X3 3.0si, 6 MT, Premium, White

Retired:
2008 535i, 6 MT, M Sport, Premium, Space Grey
2003 X5 3.0 Steptronic, Premium, Titanium Silver

2002 325xi 5 MT, Steel Grey
2004 Z4 3.0 Premium, Sport, SMG, Maldives Blue
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 10-23-2011, 01:50 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 13
Mike Benvo is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by JCL View Post
No, I don't tune ECUs. Have you recurved a distributor? That might date me a bit.

The speed of sound is a joking reference to the acoustic sensors that listen for knock. Yes, I understand that the processor is using electrical signals, once the acoustic sensors hear the onset of knock.

No, the DME can not adjust timing infinitely. But on these engines (not S54s, with much higher specific outputs, but rather these engines in X5s) I have not heard pinging.

The OP also referenced hearing knocking sounds on startup, using 91. Given that these engines can run well on 89, and often 87, pinging or knocking on 91 suggests that the fuel isn't really 91. All that takes is a fault in the blending system inside the gas station pump. And startup noises aren't likely to be pinging anyway.

Yes, I understand the consequences of crap fuel. See post #2.

Before going further, let's agree that fuel varies a lot geographically. In my area, the fuel is very good. Yours may not be. And the label on the pump is just that, simply a label. It may or may not represent what is coming out the nozzle.

My X5 3.0 operated great on 89 AKI. No change in fuel economy from 91 or 94, measured over several tanks and various elevations and temperatures, by calculating (not relying on the OBD). That suggests to me that the timing was not being retarded, and so with my local fuel, in my driving conditions, there was absolutely no reason to buy more than 89 AKI. 87 AKI was OK, but occasionally I noticed driveabilty issues. But no ping, ever. And yes, I know what pinging is, all the way back from SU carbs, the onset of emissions controls in US vehicles in the early 70s, and so on.

I know your followup question was directed at MD, but I would point out that if there is no discernible difference in performance (and efficiency) then yes, one should run 87 all the time. The correct fuel is the lowest AKI (let's stop calling it octane, since motor fuel doesn't necessarily have any actual octane in it) that doesn't cause knock, or with these control strategies, performance degradation. This recommendation is leaving aside the effects of higher concentrations of detergents in higher grades of fuel, differing amounts of ethanol crap in different grades of fuel, etc.

I don't agree that means that one isn't loading the engine up enough. The engine is there to serve the driver; the driver is not there to serve the engine. IMO.

Thanks for the post. It is good to have an engine discussion again; we had gone awhile with a lot of wheel spacer, window tint, and similar threads.

Jeff
I agree with all of your points - they are all accurate. I like your reference about the speed of sound, upon first read I didn't know you were referring to the knock sensors "hearing" knock.

As far as "I don't agree that means that one isn't loading the engine up enough. The engine is there to serve the driver; the driver is not there to serve the engine." - you are correct about the engine serving the driver, I was just illustrating that if you make a quick switch from 91 to 87 and don't hear pinging, you aren't pushing the car enough (e.g, you aren't hitting areas in the timing maps which advance the timing to a point that which the car may ping). This could be for a number of reasons - it has detected you are running 87 during the course of your normal driving and has pulled it to some degree already (pun intended), as there are static and dynamic corrections (in a sense sort of like STFT and LTFT but pertaining to timing and other motor running characteristics other than fuel trims), or the car is not being pushed enough (in particular environments - high humidity, high altitude, high temperatures, etc.). If you drive normally in favorable environments, it may drive just fine on 87. Higher octane only comes into play when the car is pulling timing. Now, BMW has recommended 91 as a minimum because they know that anything less will cause knock in unfavorable conditions, especially when pushing the car harder. Obviously if the car was tuned for a lower octane it would be just fine, but it is a performance car with higher timing targets than 87 octane can handle. At least soccer mom will be ok
__________________
Mike Benvo
BMW/Coding/Programming Specialist
2010 BMW E60 550i Msport
2008 BMW E90 M3 6SP
2006 BMW E60 M5 SMG (RIP)
2003 BMW S/C 330ci, 450WHP (retired)
1990 BMW 735i Turbo
http://ultimatetune.com/Coding.pdf
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 10-23-2011, 05:25 PM
ard ard is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Sierra Foothills, California
Posts: 6,732
ard is on a distinguished road
Mike-

is it your contention that even with Knock Sensors you will get pinging? Actual, repeatable, pinging??? And that these knock sensors actually will not sense the knock and slam the timing so far that it will not ping?

Are you saying 87 will ping and the 'failsafe' knock sensing mode will not prevent it?

Curious....
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 10-23-2011, 06:34 PM
JCL's Avatar
JCL JCL is offline
Premier Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 11,853
JCL will become famous soon enoughJCL will become famous soon enough
Mike

Couple of comments. First, thanks for the reasoned response. This topic all too often degenerates into "If you can't afford 91 you shouldn't be driving a BMW" or something similar. I think the engineering and science is actually interesting here.

You say that the car "detects you are running 87" but I don't think that is the right way of saying it. The engine has no way of knowing specifically what you are running. What it can determine is that there is persistent knock being experienced, which could be caused by lower AKI, or higher temperatures, or altitude, etc, or a combination of the above. Since AKI is determined by comparing a fuel to a reference fuel on a test engine, a very artificial environment, and since different fuels of the same AKI can vary in their knock responses at low rpm vs high rpm, at full throttle vs partial throttle, etc, AKI or octane rating is not absolute. I agree that persistent knock can push the DME into a different map, but it is because of the sensors hearing the onset of knock, not because of the fuel in and of itself.

I understand your point that shifting between maps can come with a lag, probably due to time-based averaging, but I can only comment that I haven't heard pinging due to that issue. Even if there is a lag switching to an alternate map, that wouldn't cause the knock sensors to stop working. It may cause the engine to use a less than ideal map in terms of efficiency while the DME adapts.

You also say "BMW has recommended 91 as a minimum because they know that anything less will cause knock in unfavorable conditions". I don't agree with that, because AKI or octane rating is not an absolute. In the real world, assume that fuel qualities overlaid on varied engine conditions will result in the onset of knock according to a bell curve or Gaussian distribution, ie lots of engines will experience the onset of knock at a typical AKI, fewer will experience it at a lower AKI, and fewer will experience it at a higher AKI. It is no good designing the engine to run precisely on 91, because in that situation, half of the population would have knock (all the ones on the right side of the bell curve). If BMW wanted to make sure that no owner ever had knock, they would specify a fuel way over to the right side of the curve, so that all (or nearly all) were 'safe'. But that would mean that most owners were paying for fuel they didn't need to pay for, ie cost without benefit. So they pick a spot a little over to the right, good for most owners most of the time, and that turns out to be 91 AKI. The engine is actually designed to run on something less than that, ie the mean or peak of the bell curve, recognizing that there are a range of fuels sold as 91, and a range of operating conditions.

So, some may have problems on 91 despite the best intentions of all involved. Many will run on 91 forever, with no problems, and no need to think about it beyond choosing the 91 nozzle when they fill up. But some of us checked our local fuel, and found that the engine ran every bit as well on 89 (my example) or 87 (others). They aren't wrong, they are just fortunate to have a combination of local conditions, fuel quality, and engine condition that works fine on that AKI octane rating. My engine was new when I ran it on 89, and it may be that at high miles, it would have required a higher AKI.

Finally, in my experience, soccer moms can experience pinging at least as often as other drivers, due to the use of a light foot on the throttle on a long grade.

Jeff
__________________
2007 X3 3.0si, 6 MT, Premium, White

Retired:
2008 535i, 6 MT, M Sport, Premium, Space Grey
2003 X5 3.0 Steptronic, Premium, Titanium Silver

2002 325xi 5 MT, Steel Grey
2004 Z4 3.0 Premium, Sport, SMG, Maldives Blue
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 10-23-2011, 10:53 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 13
Mike Benvo is on a distinguished road
When I said the car detects you are running 87, I didn't mean that the car knows exactly what octane you are running. It has no idea if you are running 87 or 100, but it can advance and retard from the preprogrammed map depending on input from the knock sensors and other inputs as well. If you go too far out of range, limp mode and other safety features will kick in.

Much of what you said is accurate but is beyond beyond scope. There is no reason to expand this to include the standard distribution of fuel quality. Lets stay within 87 octane and 93 octane which is a fair range for most of the cars out there. I never said the car is programmed to run a specific octane level.

The car will run on 87 octane just fine. It won't be optimal, but you could fill with 87 octane for the life of the car and it would drive fine. I merely made a statement about how the car EXPECTS fuel to have specific characteristics within a relevant range. It will only advance UP to what is programmed in the code, which is why adding 100 octane doesn't give you the boost that it could. Most BMW cars out there are pulling timing to some degree. I never said there was lag in switching maps, that is instantaneous. There is a definite time lapse in advancing timing, and a much smaller time lapse in retarding timing. This isn't due to map switching but the way that adaptations work.

You seem to be weighing on environmental factors more, and alluding that based on a certain set of environmental conditions, that 89 octane is fine. You will get more performance out of higher octane only to a certain degree. If you are driving around town and not calling for much ignition advance, it might run the preprogrammed map value just fine. It's only when you push the car harder, and run it in less unfavorable environments, that the benefits of higher octane/quality gas become realized. 89 octane is not going to cut it in all conditions, and neither is 91.

Put a car on the dyno, clear the adaptations, and watch it pick up 10+ wheel horsepower.

ard to answer your questions:
Q: Is it your contention that even with Knock Sensors you will get pinging? Actual, repeatable, pinging??? And that these knock sensors actually will not sense the knock and slam the timing so far that it will not ping?

>>Yes, you can get some slight pinging under certain circumstances. It won't be consistent as the car will pull timing and add it back as it sees fit up to the limited map value.

Q: Are you saying 87 will ping and the 'failsafe' knock sensing mode will not prevent it?

>> There is no "fail safe" knock sensing mode. It is always getting input from the knock sensors. The fail save mode, called "limp-home mode" or "emergency mode" is only activated if a sensor goes awry, or if there is a more severe condition it detects. If you clear the adaptations on a car, and run it hard with 87 octane in conditions which call for the use of higher octane gas (up to the preprogrammed timing limit), you will ping as the car removes timing. If it detects a misfire, the ECU will take it a step further. It's not going to ping ping and blow the motor, but you will get occasional pings as it adapts to the poorer fuel quality.


Quote:
Originally Posted by JCL View Post
Mike

Couple of comments. First, thanks for the reasoned response. This topic all too often degenerates into "If you can't afford 91 you shouldn't be driving a BMW" or something similar. I think the engineering and science is actually interesting here.

You say that the car "detects you are running 87" but I don't think that is the right way of saying it. The engine has no way of knowing specifically what you are running. What it can determine is that there is persistent knock being experienced, which could be caused by lower AKI, or higher temperatures, or altitude, etc, or a combination of the above. Since AKI is determined by comparing a fuel to a reference fuel on a test engine, a very artificial environment, and since different fuels of the same AKI can vary in their knock responses at low rpm vs high rpm, at full throttle vs partial throttle, etc, AKI or octane rating is not absolute. I agree that persistent knock can push the DME into a different map, but it is because of the sensors hearing the onset of knock, not because of the fuel in and of itself.

I understand your point that shifting between maps can come with a lag, probably due to time-based averaging, but I can only comment that I haven't heard pinging due to that issue. Even if there is a lag switching to an alternate map, that wouldn't cause the knock sensors to stop working. It may cause the engine to use a less than ideal map in terms of efficiency while the DME adapts.

You also say "BMW has recommended 91 as a minimum because they know that anything less will cause knock in unfavorable conditions". I don't agree with that, because AKI or octane rating is not an absolute. In the real world, assume that fuel qualities overlaid on varied engine conditions will result in the onset of knock according to a bell curve or Gaussian distribution, ie lots of engines will experience the onset of knock at a typical AKI, fewer will experience it at a lower AKI, and fewer will experience it at a higher AKI. It is no good designing the engine to run precisely on 91, because in that situation, half of the population would have knock (all the ones on the right side of the bell curve). If BMW wanted to make sure that no owner ever had knock, they would specify a fuel way over to the right side of the curve, so that all (or nearly all) were 'safe'. But that would mean that most owners were paying for fuel they didn't need to pay for, ie cost without benefit. So they pick a spot a little over to the right, good for most owners most of the time, and that turns out to be 91 AKI. The engine is actually designed to run on something less than that, ie the mean or peak of the bell curve, recognizing that there are a range of fuels sold as 91, and a range of operating conditions.

So, some may have problems on 91 despite the best intentions of all involved. Many will run on 91 forever, with no problems, and no need to think about it beyond choosing the 91 nozzle when they fill up. But some of us checked our local fuel, and found that the engine ran every bit as well on 89 (my example) or 87 (others). They aren't wrong, they are just fortunate to have a combination of local conditions, fuel quality, and engine condition that works fine on that AKI octane rating. My engine was new when I ran it on 89, and it may be that at high miles, it would have required a higher AKI.

Finally, in my experience, soccer moms can experience pinging at least as often as other drivers, due to the use of a light foot on the throttle on a long grade.

Jeff
__________________
Mike Benvo
BMW/Coding/Programming Specialist
2010 BMW E60 550i Msport
2008 BMW E90 M3 6SP
2006 BMW E60 M5 SMG (RIP)
2003 BMW S/C 330ci, 450WHP (retired)
1990 BMW 735i Turbo
http://ultimatetune.com/Coding.pdf

Last edited by Mike Benvo; 10-23-2011 at 11:09 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 10-24-2011, 12:03 AM
JCL's Avatar
JCL JCL is offline
Premier Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 11,853
JCL will become famous soon enoughJCL will become famous soon enough
I wasn't talking about fuels anywhere beyond 87 and 93. I was focusing on fuels around 89 and 91. Below 87 isn't necessarily safe, and above 93 can't provide any real world benefit to a stock engine.

Due to variations in real world fuel quality, BMW can't design an engine for 91 and then specify 91, simple as that. You said that BMW specify 91 because they know that less than that will result in knock in unfavourable conditions. I was just pointing out that that isn't necessarily true. BMW design it for less than 91, and by specifying 91 they reduce or eliminate complaints from owners. If they designed it for 91, half the owners would be complaining that their vehicles didn't operate well on that fuel.

My point is that a specific local example of something that is called 87 or 89 can work fine, and can in fact be optimum, but not for all owners. It depends on a multitude of variables, including local fuel quality, engine condition, and ambient conditions.
__________________
2007 X3 3.0si, 6 MT, Premium, White

Retired:
2008 535i, 6 MT, M Sport, Premium, Space Grey
2003 X5 3.0 Steptronic, Premium, Titanium Silver

2002 325xi 5 MT, Steel Grey
2004 Z4 3.0 Premium, Sport, SMG, Maldives Blue
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

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
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On





All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:39 AM.
vBulletin, Copyright 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0
© 2017 Xoutpost.com. All rights reserved. Xoutpost.com is a private enthusiast site not associated with BMW AG.
The BMW name, marks, M stripe logo, and Roundel logo as well as X3, X5 and X6 designations used in the pages of this Web Site are the property of BMW AG.
This web site is not sponsored or affiliated in any way with BMW AG or any of its subsidiaries.