Drivetrain Recirculation (DV/BOV) valve.
#76
04-19-2011, 10:02 AM
Yup, had the 'full engine power not available' lamp lit, and again the codes P303e and P2885.
Put the stocker back in with the VAG spring, after some spirited gear shifting, the lamp did not come on, the P303e came back but P2885 is gone. Still couldn't find out what P303e is, maybe, quit having too much fun code?
That Vag does indeed pass air. Didn't pay attention to the smoothness factor though.
Oh, it took me about 20 mins. to swap it out Big
.
Put the stocker back in with the VAG spring, after some spirited gear shifting, the lamp did not come on, the P303e came back but P2885 is gone. Still couldn't find out what P303e is, maybe, quit having too much fun code?
That Vag does indeed pass air. Didn't pay attention to the smoothness factor though.
Oh, it took me about 20 mins. to swap it out Big
.
#77
04-19-2011, 10:11 AM
Since you have the code number , its just a matter of finding out if its mini specific /bmw specific code. you can clear the ecu by resetting it-
Disconnect the positive battery terminal,
Hit the brake pedal 10x to remove the remaining electrons from the brake light circruitry
wait 2-5 minutes
Reconnect.
This will clear the faults but all faults even when cleared by a basic tool are stored in the bmw icid logs.
Those codes can only be cleared by an ICID
Disconnect the positive battery terminal,
Hit the brake pedal 10x to remove the remaining electrons from the brake light circruitry
wait 2-5 minutes
Reconnect.
This will clear the faults but all faults even when cleared by a basic tool are stored in the bmw icid logs.
Those codes can only be cleared by an ICID
Yup, had the 'full engine power not available' lamp lit, and again the codes P303e and P2885.
Put the stocker back in with the VAG spring, after some spirited gear shifting, the lamp did not come on, the P303e came back but P2885 is gone. Still couldn't find out what P303e is, maybe, quit having too much fun code?
That Vag does indeed pass air. Didn't pay attention to the smoothness factor though.
Oh, it took me about 20 mins. to swap it out Big .
Put the stocker back in with the VAG spring, after some spirited gear shifting, the lamp did not come on, the P303e came back but P2885 is gone. Still couldn't find out what P303e is, maybe, quit having too much fun code?
That Vag does indeed pass air. Didn't pay attention to the smoothness factor though.
Oh, it took me about 20 mins. to swap it out Big
.
#79
04-21-2011, 05:36 AM
FYI a quote from a VW forum about the DV 
Nico and All,
The group of APR Engineers have returned from their trip and have reported back to me about the new 06H 145 710D Diverter Valve. The story you heard somehow got all mixed up as stories often do. There was a car on the dyno with what was suspected to be a Diverter Valve related issue. However, that car was running the older "G" revision rubber diaphragm style valve. An "N249 Mechanical Error" code was stored in the ECU during a drive with the older "G" revision valve in place. The person driving the car may have thought that there was a new "D" revsion at the time but this was not the case.
Once the car was returned to the dyno, it was run with the "G" revision valve still in place. The "G" revision was then changed to the newer "D" revision and the power and spool time were identical. So there you have it. One of our Engineers swapped in a "D" revision valve after running an older "G" revision diaphragm valve in an Audi S3 on the same dyno on the same day and saw no differences. To add to this, I have measured the Audi S3 DV housing and compared it to the DV location on the stock K03 turbo for the GTI/A3 and A4 and the critical measurments are all exactly the same. I have also performed the same measurements on the TT-S DV housing, which the "D" valve is standard on, and all of the critical sealing mesurements are again the same as the stock K03 turbo found in the A4 and GTI/A3.
Since I like to see things with my own eyes, I have one of these on order for my B7 Stage 3 car and it should be here soon. I will be doing a good amount of logging directly from the ECU to another data point to what we have already seen. However, based on what the other APR Engineers saw in Australia, I would say that changing over to the "D" valve is a non-issue and should be a nice reliability upgrade compared to the old diaphragm valve.
The group of APR Engineers have returned from their trip and have reported back to me about the new 06H 145 710D Diverter Valve. The story you heard somehow got all mixed up as stories often do. There was a car on the dyno with what was suspected to be a Diverter Valve related issue. However, that car was running the older "G" revision rubber diaphragm style valve. An "N249 Mechanical Error" code was stored in the ECU during a drive with the older "G" revision valve in place. The person driving the car may have thought that there was a new "D" revsion at the time but this was not the case.
Once the car was returned to the dyno, it was run with the "G" revision valve still in place. The "G" revision was then changed to the newer "D" revision and the power and spool time were identical. So there you have it. One of our Engineers swapped in a "D" revision valve after running an older "G" revision diaphragm valve in an Audi S3 on the same dyno on the same day and saw no differences. To add to this, I have measured the Audi S3 DV housing and compared it to the DV location on the stock K03 turbo for the GTI/A3 and A4 and the critical measurments are all exactly the same. I have also performed the same measurements on the TT-S DV housing, which the "D" valve is standard on, and all of the critical sealing mesurements are again the same as the stock K03 turbo found in the A4 and GTI/A3.
Since I like to see things with my own eyes, I have one of these on order for my B7 Stage 3 car and it should be here soon. I will be doing a good amount of logging directly from the ECU to another data point to what we have already seen. However, based on what the other APR Engineers saw in Australia, I would say that changing over to the "D" valve is a non-issue and should be a nice reliability upgrade compared to the old diaphragm valve.
#80
04-22-2011, 06:19 PM
2nd Gear
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Denver
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I had ordered this the other night before seeing this thread.
So it's still up in the air? I also have the alta spring coming in on monday. I was planning on combining the internals and the alta spring together ... but now i'm in hesitation in swapping the internals over.
Should i pay for return shipping and get my money back? This will be my first mod to the engine on my 2011 MCS that i picked up 2 weeks ago.
So it's still up in the air? I also have the alta spring coming in on monday. I was planning on combining the internals and the alta spring together ... but now i'm in hesitation in swapping the internals over.
Should i pay for return shipping and get my money back? This will be my first mod to the engine on my 2011 MCS that i picked up 2 weeks ago.
#81
04-22-2011, 07:20 PM
Well, what I have decided, is I have an extra diverter valve, that I will use if I need to, when the stocker gives up the ghost. Electrical parts are hard to return once you have used them. Actually, I liked it alot with the seemingly smooth transition between gears, and it was the first time I hit + 20 psi although I also may have gone into overboost for the first time as well. I think it's a nice mod if you drive somewhat sensibly.
I just didn't like the fact that with hard shifting in the lower gears that I pulled a CEL, with the resulting 1/2 engine power.
It's about time I quit acting like a kid anyway , I'm only 64.
I just didn't like the fact that with hard shifting in the lower gears that I pulled a CEL, with the resulting 1/2 engine power.
It's about time I quit acting like a kid anyway
, I'm only 64.
#82
04-22-2011, 07:31 PM
5th Gear
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 750
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think BigPRFed said it best here:
https://www.northamericanmotoring.co...51-post33.html
Basically, if you're looking for smoothness then this is a safe mod. But there appears to be an issue with leakage so it's not a perfect mod. I did the swap and I can attest to the overall smoothness this gave to my car. I didn't actually try testing this with the stock ECU map but after reading what Czar had to say I wonder if this mod might not be the best thing for a stock car. Meaning, if you're only boosting at stock PSI then maybe the loss of pressure doesn't outweigh the smoothness from replacing the rubber diaphragm. I'm sure someone smarter will chime in and provide better info.
I say do it, it's easy to rollback.
https://www.northamericanmotoring.co...51-post33.html
Basically, if you're looking for smoothness then this is a safe mod. But there appears to be an issue with leakage so it's not a perfect mod. I did the swap and I can attest to the overall smoothness this gave to my car. I didn't actually try testing this with the stock ECU map but after reading what Czar had to say I wonder if this mod might not be the best thing for a stock car. Meaning, if you're only boosting at stock PSI then maybe the loss of pressure doesn't outweigh the smoothness from replacing the rubber diaphragm. I'm sure someone smarter will chime in and provide better info.
I say do it, it's easy to rollback.
#83
04-22-2011, 08:44 PM
2nd Gear
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Denver
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not sure i like the idea of it leaking 
Even if a little bit.
From the reports on this forum regarding the alta spring upgrade; it seems the spring mod is comparable to the effects of the DV internal swap ... ? Other then the rubber in the stock DV having a chance of being faulty down the road the spring upgrade and internal swap seems to be the same thing.
Would that be accurate? I have no way to track my boost pressure right now.
Even if a little bit.From the reports on this forum regarding the alta spring upgrade; it seems the spring mod is comparable to the effects of the DV internal swap ... ? Other then the rubber in the stock DV having a chance of being faulty down the road the spring upgrade and internal swap seems to be the same thing.
Would that be accurate? I have no way to track my boost pressure right now.
#84
04-22-2011, 11:35 PM
Has anyone, Czar or Bprfed or Mike especially, looked at the Way Motor Works version to see if it has the same issues? I'm not going to screw with the Audi one now, but I'm tempted to get the one from Way. I'd like to hear what people have experienced with it, however. It would be EXTRA awesome if Way himself commented. 
#85
04-22-2011, 11:37 PM
2nd Gear
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Denver
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Has anyone, Czar or Bprfed or Mike especially, looked at the Way Motor Works version to see if it has the same issues? I'm not going to screw with the Audi one now, but I'm tempted to get the one from Way. I'd like to hear what people have experienced with it, however. It would be EXTRA awesome if Way himself commented.
https://www.northamericanmotoring.co...-opinions.html
#86
04-23-2011, 01:08 AM
#87
04-23-2011, 09:10 AM
If it has a diaphram if is internally sealed. The vag doesn't which makes it fast but not air tight. The way part im sure can be replicated w a spring upgrade. Im running the alta 23 million dollar spring teamed up w a plastic washer and 1/3rd of the factory spring to achieve the "tightness" i wanted. I wanted to run a closed system but with our cars it will be tough not to through a cel. it clears itself because it is a check sum cel but a cel none the less.
#88
04-23-2011, 09:29 AM
#89
04-23-2011, 10:25 AM
#90
04-23-2011, 11:14 AM
#91
04-24-2011, 05:01 PM
2nd Gear
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Denver
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If it has a diaphram if is internally sealed. The vag doesn't which makes it fast but not air tight. The way part im sure can be replicated w a spring upgrade. Im running the alta 23 million dollar spring teamed up w a plastic washer and 1/3rd of the factory spring to achieve the "tightness" i wanted. I wanted to run a closed system but with our cars it will be tough not to through a cel. it clears itself because it is a check sum cel but a cel none the less.
#92
04-24-2011, 08:33 PM
yup i used the alta spring and half of the stock spring with a small plastic washer in between to keep them from tangling. Still experimenting on a few things.
#93
04-28-2011, 11:14 AM
Manufacturer
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Oregon
Posts: 995
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So this all started for ALTA when a good customer of ours said there are these upgraded internals you can buy for the Mini BOV. He gave me a part number, so i ordered it. He said that our ALTA BOV Spring upgrade worked great in this part and i wanted to verify what this part number was and how our spring worked.
So i showed up, and within 5 seconds i was crying in disappointment. Apon inspection, i noticed NOTHING has a proper seal.
I bolted this up to my BOV test fixture and it leaks big time! All there is, are plastic pieces to create a seal, but even then, there is clearance (meaning a gap) between all the parts that are intended to seal. In a resting position (piston extended) there is an ok seal because of the washers, the piston "skirt" and all that contacting one anohter. But it still leaks. In fact you can see light around the sides of the piston/seal.
In an installed state, this "OK" seal goes away! Its like Pierburg forgot to install a seal around the piston.
Now you all have seen the piston is plastic and it seals on a metal surface. That sounds bad, but it works perfectly fine. Think of valves in your engines head or a fuel injector pintle seal. Those are all metal on metal. If anything plastic is softer and will seal better. So while that sounds bad, that is not the issue with this part.
So how much boost is leaking is the question. I can't simulate the amount of air flow on the test fixture, but in other similar situations with a boost tube not being very tight, i can say that you may only loose 1-2PSI. The reason is the ECU is trying to hit a target and it will adjust boost accordingly. So while its leaking, the surface area its leaking through is pretty small making the volume of air escaping small. Since its venting it back to the intake after the MAF, in most cases it not going to hurt anything..... Well it can start to hurt the turbo because it can cause over speeding of the turbo. What i mean is the, the ECU has a target boost/load. Lets just say at 7000RPM the turbo is running 18psi, and 100,000RPM turbo speed. Now you have a boost leak and the turbo has to make up for that lost airflow, and the ECU adjust your wastegate to hold 18psi, but the turbo is now 120,000RPM. Why is this bad? As the turbo spins faster it puts it futher off the compressor map and that means its less efficient ,and pushing hotter air.
I think some people were confused how either of these BOV's work, in that the pistons has holes, this is only to equalize pressure behind the piston to allow the solenoid to pull the valve open, without having to fight against boost pressure (only the spring installed behind it). So the holes need to be there, that is for sure. This also means that during a resting state, not matter how much boost there is in the system, almost any spring pressure keeps it closed. The ALTA BOV Spring is stiffer to make it close faster, and hold more boost between shifts.
So why do people say their car is faster? Or better shifting?? My guess is their OEM one with the old MCS spring (much lighter than the JCW, and way lighter than our spring) and the stiffer spring in this part does make the piston close better between shifts.
So why do people say the car comes on much smoother? Simple, they are missing out on boost. If you drive your car with a boost leak, it will spool slightly slower. With our Tune on the car, you know that hit of power can be abrupt, and having a leak smooths that out. I also think that there is always a bit of the placebo effect that happens when installing something new, and that could account for others saying its awesome. That and their OEM part was ripped.
I also am guessing that customers with ripped diaphragms, feel a bigger change because the ripped diaphragm would leak way more than the upgraded VeeWee part. (VeeWee= VW/Audi)
One more thing, The Mini and the BWTS turbo being used on them is a newer turbo that the "Upraged VeeWee BOV" that people are talking about. So really, isn't the Mini BOV the upgrade?? I bet VW uses a leaking BOV to help make the car smoother, or for that matter an over boost controller. Car manufactures are weird. Who we really need to talk to is Pierburg and tell them to make better diaphragm!
Conclusion. The OEM MCS/ JCW part with an ALTA spring is the best part to install on your car, Period! It sucks the Diaphragms rip sometimes, but i do know of a bunch of guys with ZERO issues and many track days. I just tuned a customers JCW this weekend and with 15k miles and about 20 track days, his BOV is still good (i had him check before he came out here because of all this BOV buzz).
Bigprfed22 has the picture that best shows the area of concern.
So yes, i did 
Do you have an AccessPORT? There is a parameter that we change to allow a wider range off boost control and if you can log your car under full throttle, i can see if its leaking boost using a couple of the data points.
WMW part is just the JCW BOV. So it the same as the 09+MCS, or if you go to the dealer and buy a new one its the same.
So i showed up, and within 5 seconds i was crying in disappointment. Apon inspection, i noticed NOTHING has a proper seal.
I bolted this up to my BOV test fixture and it leaks big time! All there is, are plastic pieces to create a seal, but even then, there is clearance (meaning a gap) between all the parts that are intended to seal. In a resting position (piston extended) there is an ok seal because of the washers, the piston "skirt" and all that contacting one anohter. But it still leaks. In fact you can see light around the sides of the piston/seal.
In an installed state, this "OK" seal goes away! Its like Pierburg forgot to install a seal around the piston.
Now you all have seen the piston is plastic and it seals on a metal surface. That sounds bad, but it works perfectly fine. Think of valves in your engines head or a fuel injector pintle seal. Those are all metal on metal. If anything plastic is softer and will seal better. So while that sounds bad, that is not the issue with this part.
So how much boost is leaking is the question. I can't simulate the amount of air flow on the test fixture, but in other similar situations with a boost tube not being very tight, i can say that you may only loose 1-2PSI. The reason is the ECU is trying to hit a target and it will adjust boost accordingly. So while its leaking, the surface area its leaking through is pretty small making the volume of air escaping small. Since its venting it back to the intake after the MAF, in most cases it not going to hurt anything..... Well it can start to hurt the turbo because it can cause over speeding of the turbo. What i mean is the, the ECU has a target boost/load. Lets just say at 7000RPM the turbo is running 18psi, and 100,000RPM turbo speed. Now you have a boost leak and the turbo has to make up for that lost airflow, and the ECU adjust your wastegate to hold 18psi, but the turbo is now 120,000RPM. Why is this bad? As the turbo spins faster it puts it futher off the compressor map and that means its less efficient ,and pushing hotter air.
I think some people were confused how either of these BOV's work, in that the pistons has holes, this is only to equalize pressure behind the piston to allow the solenoid to pull the valve open, without having to fight against boost pressure (only the spring installed behind it). So the holes need to be there, that is for sure. This also means that during a resting state, not matter how much boost there is in the system, almost any spring pressure keeps it closed. The ALTA BOV Spring is stiffer to make it close faster, and hold more boost between shifts.
So why do people say their car is faster? Or better shifting?? My guess is their OEM one with the old MCS spring (much lighter than the JCW, and way lighter than our spring) and the stiffer spring in this part does make the piston close better between shifts.
So why do people say the car comes on much smoother? Simple, they are missing out on boost. If you drive your car with a boost leak, it will spool slightly slower. With our Tune on the car, you know that hit of power can be abrupt, and having a leak smooths that out. I also think that there is always a bit of the placebo effect that happens when installing something new, and that could account for others saying its awesome. That and their OEM part was ripped.
I also am guessing that customers with ripped diaphragms, feel a bigger change because the ripped diaphragm would leak way more than the upgraded VeeWee part. (VeeWee= VW/Audi)
One more thing, The Mini and the BWTS turbo being used on them is a newer turbo that the "Upraged VeeWee BOV" that people are talking about. So really, isn't the Mini BOV the upgrade?? I bet VW uses a leaking BOV to help make the car smoother, or for that matter an over boost controller. Car manufactures are weird. Who we really need to talk to is Pierburg and tell them to make better diaphragm!
Conclusion. The OEM MCS/ JCW part with an ALTA spring is the best part to install on your car, Period! It sucks the Diaphragms rip sometimes, but i do know of a bunch of guys with ZERO issues and many track days. I just tuned a customers JCW this weekend and with 15k miles and about 20 track days, his BOV is still good (i had him check before he came out here because of all this BOV buzz).
Bigprfed22 has the picture that best shows the area of concern.
.Has anyone, Czar or Bprfed or Mike especially, looked at the Way Motor Works version to see if it has the same issues? I'm not going to screw with the Audi one now, but I'm tempted to get the one from Way. I'd like to hear what people have experienced with it, however. It would be EXTRA awesome if Way himself commented.
#94
04-28-2011, 11:16 AM
Manufacturer
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Oregon
Posts: 995
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can tell you that there is some room to go stiffer, but keep in mind that we tested this on our bench with boost and we did get to a point where the solenoid started to have issues. This tighter spring also caused a bit of compressor surge on the car in certain situations. I would make sure that you are not getting surge. If you have a stock intake, it will mask the surge occurring also. Just keep that in mind.
#95
04-28-2011, 11:19 AM
2nd Gear
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Denver
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Great post Jeff.
Someone should post this info. in this thread too > https://www.northamericanmotoring.co...heck-this.html
Because I saw the thread above while searching before i saw this thread and had purchased the part a few weeks ago. Only to find this thread while the part was in shipment to my house. I've returned it this week (in fact shipped it back today) for a refund.
Just keeping the alta spring in my DV.
Someone should post this info. in this thread too > https://www.northamericanmotoring.co...heck-this.html
Because I saw the thread above while searching before i saw this thread and had purchased the part a few weeks ago. Only to find this thread while the part was in shipment to my house. I've returned it this week (in fact shipped it back today) for a refund.
Just keeping the alta spring in my DV.
#97
04-28-2011, 03:16 PM
3rd Gear
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 176
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#98
04-28-2011, 03:26 PM
#100
04-28-2011, 04:32 PM
