Mark D Chip Install

[BlueBMW]

I just received my Mark D 93 octane chip today.  I've read the write ups on its installation and it looks pretty straight forward.  Is there any sort of adaptation period after you've installed the chip or is it instant plug and play?  

I have arranged some time on a dyno later this morning and I was going to see if I couldn't do a few runs before and after just for curiosity sake.  My car is totally stock but running well (only mod is a COP conversion) So I'll be curious to see what it actually puts out.  One question though.... one of my rear wheels is a little bent, should I balance and rotate my front wheels to the rear for the dyno test?  I have never dealt with a dyno before ever and so I'm not sure how much of a difference that might make.  Also, is there anything else I should do in advance of having a car dyno tested?

Hopefully tomorrow I'll be posting some real life results!

[Ryann]

Holy shit! A pre/post dyno on an m42 engine mod! Factual performance information! This forum needs more of this.

BlueBMW, you are the man.

[Warsteiner]

Well going to the dyno is like going to a track event.  You need to look the whole car over but mainly should have all fluids topped off and hoses in good shape.  Make sure that they have a fan running in front of your car so that you have no worries of getting the engine bay too hot and that may skew your results. Even though they have a correction factor on the dyno, you would not have been at your optimum.

As far as your chip is concerned, just let the computer hang without the metal cover on. Make sure it doesn't hit anything metal in the surrounding area, but we're talking about your glovebox here so I think you'll be ok. This will make it easier to change chips and also keep the computer cool. When I say hang open that just means without metal casing covering it, not leaving it "unsandwiched" because it does unsnap and fold open to get to the chip.

Other than that, have a great time and report back with some awesome numbers.

Cheers,
~Ralph

[Romrog318is]

u should drive the car with the chip installed for a few days B4 a dyno... im just saying though it seemd like after a week with mine it started to run better


but still its cool to see a dyno right after instalation!

[BlueBMW]

The results are in!

My car started the day as a 99% stock 318is.  The only mods are a COP conversion and an aftermarket catalytic converter and muffler.  Oh and the PO installed a small case 4.10 lsd to replace the open diff.  Otherwise its just a stock 200,000 mile plus M42.  A/C still operational... clutch fan still installed... dual mass flywheel still there.

So here's how the day went...

First... I filled up the tank with some nice 93 octane fuel!



Next... I did a quick test install to make sure the chip worked and that I wouldn't have any trouble later at the dyno...



Finally... Here's the little E30 up on the dyno machine!



And now the results....

First pull...  stock baseline test...



Results...  107 whp @ ~6000rpm, 99 lb/ft torque @ ~4600rpm

Next pull...  Mark D 93 chip installed...



Results... 114 whp @ ~6100rpm, 104 lb/ft torque @ ~4700rpm.
There was a noticable increase across the board from 3000rpm to redline.
Bottom line... 7whp and 5lbs of torque max increase!

Next pull... now the guy doing the dyno was starting to have fun... he asked what kind of spark plugs I had... I answered that I never checked them.  So he had me pull a plug out... they were NGKs but they were completely toast!  I also checked my air filter and found it to be very dirty as well.  So we got some new plugs on their way over and an air filter.  The plugs arrived first so we installed them... NGK irridiums that were 1 heat range higher (as per the tuner's recommendation)  We removed the air filter for this run (after thoroughly cleaning the airbox and surrounding area)



Results...  116whp and 107lbs of torque!  Just with new spark plugs!  Also smoothed out the air/fuel ratio curve!  There was a slight dip at low rpms apparently because of the lack of resistance on the intake side.

Last test.... a basic new purolator air filter installed for one final run...



Results...  a loss of 1whp and 1lb of torque across the board but it elminated the low rpm dip!  He suggested that a K&N filter would do significantly better, but the purolator was all that was in stock local.

Final thoughts....

The car drives suprisingly smoother and stronger!  When I drive with the A/C on it feels like the car felt before with the A/C off.  It pulls strong anytime its above 3000rpm.  The 7100 redline seems a bit excessive, but it is nice to have the headroom.  Overall... definitely worth it.

Also, the tuner noticed that the fuel seemed to be a bit lean and that if he were tuning it he might have run it a bit richer for a bit more power, but he noted that I would probably see a mile or two per gallon increase in fuel economy as a result of the chip's tuning.  That sounds great to me!  I know some people have reported fuel economy increases and this tuner seems to agree with that sentiment.

So between a little tune up (plugs and an air filter) and Mark's chip, I went from 107 whp to 115whp and 99lbs of torque to 106lbs of torque.  Not bad at all!  We'll see how the fuel economy does now!

Overall... WELL DONE MARK!

[e30guydownunder]

Holy shit! A pre/post dyno on an m42 engine mod! Factual performance information! This forum needs more of this.

BlueBMW, you are the man.

I posted a before/after dyno graph in the Mark d Chip GB thread.


BlueBMW nice results there, I picked a similar sort of gain up top, but the mid range gains around peak torque are what completly transformed the driving experience.

[Ryann]

Great writeup. Thank you!

[Romrog318is]

this is kind of odd make me wonder what all was done to mine B4 i chipped it...
i got 163.3 on the dyno and 148.6 tq HMM

but ive read somewhere that the chip acctually gets better as it in the car longer?

[BlueBMW]

I didn't think these DMEs had much in the way of adaptation over time, maybe though.  Mark responded to my post on another forum and he thought it looked like i am running way to lean at WOT, so I guess we'll see what we can figure out.

[Ryann]

this is kind of odd make me wonder what all was done to mine B4 i chipped it...
i got 163.3 on the dyno and 148.6 tq HMM

but ive read somewhere that the chip acctually gets better as it in the car longer?

Those are some huge numbers.. there's got to be something else going on there.

[dvmotorsports]

Those are some huge numbers.. there's got to be something else going on there.

Agreed

[cristimm]

Excellent job BlueBMW. How much whp was suposed to have this car when it was brand new?

[deekay]

an average of 14.4 is lean... difficult to read, though, because there is just the line for the AFR, and no scales on either side to indicate where it's at...

[BlueBMW]

The second graph has the AFR on the side.  I am trying to get a table with exact values.  Oh and when I mentioned to the tuner that the car was rated at 136 hp from the factory, he said that 136 at the crank would probably show up as 112 at the wheels, not sure how they calculate all that though.

[Warsteiner]

Just a few things to point out here.....

Deekay:) there is a reference to the AFR in dyno chart #2.  Every 15HP is 1 full AFR point. Also don't go by average AFR's because if your rich down low and very lean up top and then you average it out, it doesn't mean that the car is ok on AFR's.

This was a Mustang Dyno.  A lot of people take numbers at different values and it gets very confusing:eek: There is an article about dynos versus dynos and I'll post it but take it as you wish.
http://www.mazdas247.com/forum/showthread.php?t=123629978

From my dyno experiences on my M3, the Mustang dyno runs 17% less than a Dynojet.  I have real world experience of that because I dynoed my car on both with the same mods. On the Mustang I made 200rwhp and the Dynojet was 233rwhp which is roughly 275HP at the crank. So it was within 1rwhp with a 17% factor.

If you were to take the 107rwhp from BlueBMW and add the 17% you're at 125rwhp/.85 or (x1.17) to get crank HP, which is about 147 at the crank.  Now is this high? I don't know. Factory says 134HP at the crank. Maybe drivetrain loss is different from M3 to 318 even though they are both E30's? Maybe the article is right?

So to now move on to Mark D's results.....(M)115rwhp x 17% = (DJ)134.5rwhp/.85= 158 at the crank. NOW...is that unheard of? No. Maybe BlueBMW just has one of the motors that was really strong and still is at 200K? It also shows that Mark D's chip is putting him in the 11HP gain.

On my 2.3L S14 with a Conforti chip I was at 186rwhp and added Schrick cams and power went to 202rwhp. Now that was at 100k on the motor and the Factory power was rated at 192HP at the crank. I was almost making that at the wheels before the cams. Odd? Maybe.

So Mark D's chip made about 10.5HP at the crank. I think that is low actually. Maybe Mark can chime in and agree that the AFR's look a little too lean therefore the Power is still on the table for BlueBMW? I know from track experience that you want an AFR somewhere in the realm of 12.8-13.0 for max power.  Just looking at the last dyno chart the AFR's are in the high 14's like 14.8 up until around 6Krpm when they drop to 13.2 . Maybe street tuning is a bit different than track. Mark D?

At the end of the article they give calcs for the possible figures that Mustangs are real world and the DJ's are already over calculated.

So... (M)115rwhp x 17%=134.5rwhp/.85 = (DJ) 158 crank

Now the article calcs....
(DJ) 158 crank x (-)14.5% = 135 x (-)15% = 114.75rwhp on Mustang
Hmmm... Looks kinda like what BlueBMW came up with no?

Cheers,
~Ralph