When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Munis, you have the C43, but the info you provide is interesting. Based on what you were seeing, Terry must have taken the same approach on the C43 as with the Mini version of the JB. This would explain why there is no "auto-learning" map on the C43 version of the JB4. Based on what you are seeing, the JB4 is not doing all the boost controlling duties...it's letting the ECU actually control almost all the PID and WGDC through it's own internal subtables. The ECU will move up through its internal psi target by load and it will switch to a progressively higher boost table as it's "base" map. That would explain why you will see higher boost even on map 4. In that case, I stand corrected. There is a degree of "learning" around the JB4 with the way BMS is tuning with C43 platform. On the C43 it still shouldn't learn around the JB4 to the point of negating the tuning though. The only way that would happen given the above info, is if the car consistently runs into a reduced boost, increased fuel trim, retarded ignition advance scenario. And that scenario would have to repeat itself 3-5 times consecutively. This tuning setup also makes it more important to reset adaptations if you switch between maps for multiple runs.
The C63 version appears different from the C43 version. From what I'm seeing in the data log posted at the start of the thread at least. That log shows an ECU boost target of ~9.5 psi, but the JB4 is targeting ~15. This setup seems to be more in line with N54 and N55 setups, where the JB4 is acting as the boost controller. If so, then there shouldn't be the same "learning" phenomenon that you are seeing on your C43. Maybe BMS can chime in and advise which tuning approach the C63 JB4 is using, to confirm one way or the other?
Thanks for the info Munis!
You are absolutely right about the a different internal table which the ECU does switch to though. For the C43, Terry has not connected the tuning box to the fuel pump sensor yet, he lets the ECU handle that based on the boost seen by the ECU. So when I get around 23 psi of actual boost, and ECU sees 15psi, my AFR drops to high 11 to 12 ish. Which explains the ECU does have a fuelling table for higher boost levels. I should mention though whatever the ECU has learned over time ( my driving and the adapting around the maps I made), it only made it faster, not slower by any means. I personally would not AT ALL want to reset my adaptations. Whatever it learnt, seems to be working very well for me.
Thanks for your insight as well! Nice learning new things!
PS: WGDC is controlled by the ECU for C43 for sure as Terry previously confirmed. He is planning to release a firmware update which will enable to control it, but he is not finding a customer car to work on at the moment. That is where the C63 section would be really happy because Terry actually has a unit.
Do you think us guys with ecu tunes will be able to plug and play jb4 or will we have to revert to stock? Will it just force the ecu to correct its logic to equal what it would need for what boost jb4 is telling it what to make?
Do you think us guys with ecu tunes will be able to plug and play jb4 or will we have to revert to stock? Will it just force the ecu to correct its logic to equal what it would need for what boost jb4 is telling it what to make?
I think BMS would be able to answer it better. If JB4 is the final boost controller end of the line, then whatever boost value you plug in is the end boost you would probably see. Or if the logic is based on increments from the stock boost, then for tuned guys, you have to use the custom map only. So if your after market tune is giving you X psi (ECU Boost) at YYYY rpm, then for example you will plug in 5psi at YYYY rpm, then your total boost would be X+5 psi. But if JB4 has direct control over the final boost the engine sees, then you will plugin the final boost you want at YYYY rpm, so the number you will enter will be (X+5) psi. The latter is how it works for BMW JB4s in general.
I think BMS would be able to answer it better. If JB4 is the final boost controller end of the line, then whatever boost value you plug in is the end boost you would probably see. Or if the logic is based on increments from the stock boost, then for tuned guys, you have to use the custom map only. So if your after market tune is giving you X psi (ECU Boost) at YYYY rpm, then for example you will plug in 5psi at YYYY rpm, then your total boost would be X+5 psi. But if JB4 has direct control over the final boost the engine sees, then you will plugin the final boost you want at YYYY rpm, so the number you will enter will be (X+5) psi. The latter is how it works for BMW JB4s in general.
I’m interested in how this JB4 will work with a tuned ecu as well.
The JB4 has a lot of features I’d like to have so thinking of getting this once released.
I’m interested to see the figures for the different tunes and how they compare to mine power wise.
Wait a minute the base non S made that much power to the wheels stock?? This is what I’ve been feeling, I KNEW this car was way over the claimed rating by AMG. So what is the stock crank HP TQ? Now time to read this entire thread
Wait a minute the base non S made that much power to the wheels stock?? This is what I’ve been feeling, I KNEW this car was way over the claimed rating by AMG. So what is the stock crank HP TQ? Now time to read this entire thread
It is under rated but not that much that # is what S models Dyno. To the crank it's around 535 540 the non S is prob around 505 crank.
Wait a minute the base non S made that much power to the wheels stock?? This is what I’ve been feeling, I KNEW this car was way over the claimed rating by AMG. So what is the stock crank HP TQ? Now time to read this entire thread
It may have but every Dyno is different along with conditions but based on other reputable tuners the norm is 450 to 460 wheel. Which is right around 530 535 wheel. So this is 30ish crank hp underated from the 503 stated from factory. Which based upon what the car runs in the 1/4 mile and the mph being around 121 mph. The numbers are right on. Because anyone can provide high Dyno numbers but the track #s dont lie.
It may have but every Dyno is different along with conditions but based on other reputable tuners the norm is 450 to 460 wheel. Which is right around 530 535 wheel. So this is 30ish crank hp underated from the 503 stated from factory. Which based upon what the car runs in the 1/4 mile and the mph being around 121 mph. The numbers are right on. Because anyone can provide high Dyno numbers but the track #s dont lie.
Dinan claims the C63S has 533 HP at the crank instead of the claimed 503.
It may have but every Dyno is different along with conditions but based on other reputable tuners the norm is 450 to 460 wheel. Which is right around 530 535 wheel. So this is 30ish crank hp underated from the 503 stated from factory. Which based upon what the car runs in the 1/4 mile and the mph being around 121 mph. The numbers are right on. Because anyone can provide high Dyno numbers but the track #s dont lie.
HP numbers don't mean anything to a track. Our cars can't get out of the hole, that's why we trap 120-130+ on 11 second passes while rs3 trapping 115 on a 10 sec pass.
Sure every dyno is different, I dynod on a dyno jet, doesn't mean anything when u compare to different dyno. But when I redyno on same dyno after mods I can accurately judge what I gained from whatever I've done.
HP numbers don't mean anything to a track. Our cars can't get out of the hole, that's why we trap 120-130+ on 11 second passes while rs3 trapping 115 on a 10 sec pass.
Sure every dyno is different, I dynod on a dyno jet, doesn't mean anything when u compare to different dyno. But when I redyno on same dyno after mods I can accurately judge what I gained from whatever I've done.
Yes for judging difference after mods sure on same Dyno is fine not what I was saying tho. sorry but no rs3 is running 10s at 115 unless there letting out of it. And horsepower directly corlates to mph. Yeah spinning Abit will sometimes give u a higher trap speed then dead hooking. But our cars run from 12.2 to 11.6 stock depending on traction but mph is always around the same 120 mph mark.
Everyone just needs drag radials haha. You can blow the tires off from the line (kill et) and it doesn’t really matter because trap mph is the only indication of horsepower. Now hooking off the line with a good 60’ and running an et that correlates with a good mph requires skill and practice.
Last edited by gOt BoOsT; Oct 21, 2018 at 08:24 AM.
Wow great to see this. Burger, please don't forget the GLC C63s guys too!
The JB4 for the C63 will work just fine on the GLC63. Unlike with flash tuning, the JB4 isn't that vehicle specific. The connectors, ECU model, turbos, and engine on the GLC63 is virtually the same as on the C63. The only thing that might be different is the pinout locations on the OBD2 port, so the logging and a few other non-performance related things may not be fully functional. I am willing to make a good bet, though, that even the pinouts are the same on the GLC63 as the C63 (through the 2018s at least). The different transmission and the TCU for the 4matic are not an issue with the JB4, as it doesn't have any control over those aspects.
The JB4 for the C63 will work just fine on the GLC63. Unlike with flash tuning, the JB4 isn't that vehicle specific. The connectors, ECU model, turbos, and engine on the GLC63 is virtually the same as on the C63. The only thing that might be different is the pinout locations on the OBD2 port, so the logging and a few other non-performance related things may not be fully functional. I am willing to make a good bet, though, that even the pinouts are the same on the GLC63 as the C63 (through the 2018s at least). The different transmission and the TCU for the 4matic are not an issue with the JB4, as it doesn't have any control over those aspects.
I've heard other wise regarding these two car in question being different in that even the connectors are different. Trust me this is why i asked since I was going to purchase other kit similar though they are different,,, unforuantely. Only other option was remove my ECU which i did on my last C63s which i don't want to do again on our GLC c63s
Phew, just read through everything and had to multiquote. I know it's like beating a dead horse, but I just have to clarify a few things
We do not own a Dynojet in house at BMS, all our graphs are third party. We rent a local Dynojet at Specialty Z in Canoga park.
Originally Posted by Troll
Great news but why the $300 Mercedes tax? JB4 for the M3/4 is $599
This is probably one of the most complex Jb4 systems ever made LOL. The harness has 12 connectors, the wire length is much longer than any other as well.
It all really adds up, basically more than double of anything we currently have. All our parts are OEM, we're not being cheap on anything.
Originally Posted by Schulminator
^^Agreed. As noted previously might pick up power on a dyno with hood open and fans going full speed. With the hood closed I would think massive heat soak with power loss due to ecu pulling timing at the end of a long pull.
Actually, these puny fans are nothing compared to what actual air velocity would be when moving at higher speeds lol. I'll copy the quote I made on the C43 intake post as I am directly working on the intakes for both of these cars
Originally Posted by Payam@BMS
We placed the filters in that location for the most air flow. That's where the "negative" pressure occurs and where most of the air flows through and exits once entered from the front.
With the heat shields in place we haven't seen any difference in IAT vs stock, so I don't think that's an issue at all. In fact, I have seen the IATs drop more rapidly with the intakes vs stock when moving.
Originally Posted by rekrul
5 months too late :/...wonder how this compares to the dinan.
We always save the best for last
Originally Posted by gOt BoOsT
Hell yea!!! If you could keep this thread updated with both testing and release dates that would be great!
Most definitely, I will do my best to keep you all informed. I'll get some photos of the intake in a couple of days. Our completed final powder coated product that's going on the car for Shift Sector this weekend.
Really, that's the bulk of what you are paying for with the Dinan (most Dinan products actually): the warranty. One big difference between the JB and the Dinan though, is the quality of components. Put them side by side, and the JB1/4 uses much cheaper, lower quality components. The Dinan connectors are nice, better quality plastic, the wiring is thicker and higher end. One issue that BMS regularly had with their JB3&4 on the BMW N55 version was that the wire coating would actually crack and the connector would sometimes break where the boost solenoid connector attached. This happened after it was exposed to the high heat for an extended period of time. Dinan never had the same issue. In the end though, you are paying a fraction of the cost for the JB, and BMS is usually good at taking care of their customers. Plus, the performance and other features from the JB is much better than the Dinan, and that is really what most people are after.
That may have been true years ago but these days our harnesses are top notch and backed by a 5 year warranty. Made in the USA, all connectors are authentic German or USA made. No split-loom coverings. Enclosures for the MB platform are CNC machined aluminum. It's true that years ago those E series BMW PWG vehicles with first generation harnesses had a heat issue on the boost solenoid connector which we resolved. Dinan never had this issue, because they never bothered to connect their tuner to the boost connector, and were happy to deliver sub-par tuning results to their customers to save a few bucks.
Do you think us guys with ecu tunes will be able to plug and play jb4 or will we have to revert to stock? Will it just force the ecu to correct its logic to equal what it would need for what boost jb4 is telling it what to make?
We've designed the JB4 to be functional as both a stand alone tuning product for those who have not or do not want to flash their ECU, and as a complimentary product for those who are already running a flash but want some of the features the JB4 offers like boost by gear (been huge for our RWD C63!), fine tuning for higher octane fuels, logging and CANbus features, etc.
We've designed the JB4 to be functional as both a stand along tuning product for those who have not or do not want to flash their ECU, and as a complimentary product for those who are already running a flash but want some of the features the JB4 offers like boost by gear (been huge for our RWD C63!), fine tuning for higher octane fuels, logging and CANbus features, etc.
So they are only adjusting afr and boost with the jb4? That’s odd because an aftermarket performance “tune” always has timing adjustments (advance) since Oem timing profile is conservative. I only saw the dyno sheet with hp/tq so I’m not too sure what air/fuel or boost looked like during that pull, but a lean area could cause a timing dip for sure. Thanks for the info brotha and hopefully we will get some news on tunes and product realease from BMS soon!
Actually we've found the C63 to be generally under timed from the factory, and when on E85 mixtures or higher octane we're working on ways to increase timing advance above normal levels for more power.
This is our most recent dyno run and log to go with it:
Mercedes SLR McLaren 722 S Is Extremely Rare Example Modified by McLaren
Slideshow: A one-of-one U.S.-spec Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren Roadster became even rarer after a factory-backed transformation at McLaren's headquarters.
