Pitiful devil, it's hardly a diversion. Remember, you were banned from NAM, then TMMZ, and you're unwelcome many places because of your lovely personality and impeccable honesty [not to mention your beneficience!]. Who exactly is unwelcome in present condition? You are the one who cannot browse NAM unless you use the IP spoofer that you are using now. Again, the honesty is paramount with you!

 

[/QUOTE] No I was not addressing vendors I was addressing you.
Fact is you have no idea who a guy like me is but you seem to know all about sitting on thumbs
Fact is you have a real credibilty issue that seems to get deeper.
May I remind you that I can can screw up things myself without your help.[/QUOTE]



We do not have a problem with our TB's........period and if we did we would take care of the customer, no questions asked.

But what you manage to do in your "keyboard wisdom" is to condemn, blame and spread false info, leading to nothing more then a situation
where "vendors" will shy away from this board.

And you know this is so funny.....When I responded to this thread I knew
keyboard trolls like you would come out and condemn. and I was right.

Peter
Team M7
562-608-8123

 

No I was not addressing vendors I was addressing you.
Fact is you have no idea who a guy like me is but you seem to know all about sitting on thumbs
Fact is you have a real credibilty issue that seems to get deeper.
May I remind you that I can can screw up things myself without your help.[/QUOTE]We do not have a problem with our TB's........period and if we did we would take care of the customer, no questions asked.

But what you manage to do in your "keyboard wisdom" is to condemn, blame and spread false info, leading to nothing more then a situation
where "vendors" will shy away from this board.


And you know this is so funny.....When I responded to this thread I knew
keyboard trolls like you would come out and condemn. and I was right.

Peter
Team M7
562-608-8123[/QUOTE]
Geesh, I guess I'm gonna have to start ignoring M7 with their ugly attitude now.

 

Lets get back on track.

Does anyone with a large TB with pre V38 or 40. Have the flat spot? Did V38,40 cause it or just amplify it?
















Thanks Mike

 

I'm sure you will be missed


back to the REAL topic at hand. Can MTH possibly account for the flat spot?

What would the CVT software do with the flat spot? Would it wait to get past the flat spot (into the powerband) before engaging? If i had to guess, that would be my guess(based on past experiences with CVT tuning).

 

Have you logged it to see what is going on? It could be the throttle closing, could be timing, fuel injection pulse widths, etc.

 

I had the 62mm TB with V36 and there was no flat spot. The problem started with V38

 

Dont you love when they secretly upload new versions that mess with your performance...they just put one on mine without notifying me, and i swear there is a bit more lag in acceleration.

 

In my case it happened with V40. I have worked around it with the Dinan TB (it is the smallest bore over stock 59.75) and Dinan S5. I tried the S5 with the 62mm it helped a little but the flat spot was still there. The car run smooth now and pulls strong. With my set-up now the car runs great and my gas milage has shot up better than when it was stock. I went to the drags last night and ran 15.104 and 15.162 my previous best was 15.342.

I am still wondering if there are more out there besides Misfit that had throttle bodys prior to V38 with no flat spot issues.

Thanks Mike (When in doubt, Power out)

 

But no, I've been travelling for work, and have had some other issues.

For all those that rag on My, I've got the TB, and the M7 team is being very helpful in trying to sort this on a 02 with the emissions recall. So stuff it, it's not constructive to just rag, rag, rag.

When I'm up and running againg, I'll do the full logging to at least map the engine response when the issue is happening. I'm pretty convinced that they screwed up the TB programming, and it just can't deal with the bypass opening and gets confused. I'm hypothisizing something like...

Bypass is open, revs climb, it starts to close, boost builds and pre-SC pressures drop. Pre and post SC pressure sensors give readings that are changing in opposite directions (more vacuum pre SC because the air isn't coming back through the bypass as fast, and more boost for the same reason). While this shouldn't be that bad, when the valve is either fully open or closed, the pressures should move in the same direction (I think, I haven't logged).
But even if this isn't a correct explanation, since it's tied to the ECU rev, seems that the issue is burried in the drive by wire programming.

Matt

 

Hi all,
I went back to the one-ball exhaust and the stock cat. The problems with the large TB are less severe, but not eliminated. I'll be doing some logging on Sat to see what the engine is doing during the flat spot, I did log my drive into work today, but there's so much data that it's hard to find the information. I'll be doing shorter runs on Sat, so that I can localize the behaviour better. I'll post when I've crunched the numbers....

Matt

 

Has there been any new news on this topic?

My next mod, very shortly, will be a new TB. I'm currently running an '04 JCW MCS that has an Alta CAI and also MTH software.

My thoughts at the moment are between Dinan and M7 and currently leaning toward the M7. Any updates to the topic or thoughts that would lean me towards another TB are very welcome.

 

09-22-2005, 02:36 AM

"I'm so sure you will post those findings next week unless of course...
:impatient
Well last week came and went, are you going to follow up and do what you said, or just call me names.

 

But the PLX software isn't exporting to Excel, so I can't overlay the data. Makes looking into it a big headache! So far, I see that the system is just running lean as all get go during the behaviour, I see some activity from the fuel trims going from one end of the scale to the other, and I'm still testing on the 62mm body..... Even if I don't "see" the root cause in the data on the 62mm, I'll go over to the 60mm to see the drivability changes with the narrower TB.

I'm not the only one with a 60mm, but I can only speak for the testing I'm doing. I was hoping to learn something on Sat, but it didn't close the books on the issue.

Sorry my data analysis and logging is taking more time than any of us would like, but it's not easy. I even broke out the heavy data analysis guns, a package called Simca P+, that I use to analyze semiconductor process data for fault detection and process optimization, but besides making pretty graphs, I haven't learned too much yet... (look at www.umetrics.com for info on Simca.....)

Matt

 

Matt, I really applaud your dedication to trying to find the source of the stumble. Hopefully an answer will present itself in the not too distant future.

 

I've got a service appt tomorrow (DME reset and rear-fog activation) so I put the 60mm on today. I only went for a mile, but much better so far.
I'm doing the DME reset in case the limits on the TB need to be learned, I couldn't find conclusive information....
During the drive in to Mini of Mt View, I'll do some logging to see what's up.
I'm still thinking it's the drive by wire programming, so even if I can confirm that, we can't do anything about it unless one of the tuners figures out how to program that stuff...

More details to follow...

Matt

 

..

 

I think you are right about the DME and drive by wire programming.... Which if true, pretty much eliminates the benefit to be gained from a larger TB.... Oh well, please keep us posted.

 

So far one person with a Dinan isn't experiencing this problem. Are there other Dinan owners that are experiencing this problem?

I saw on the Dinan website that they no longer require a core exchange. Sounds like for $399 you get a new Dinan TB and can hold on to the stock TB. Sounds like a pretty good way to go.

I'm assuming that the HP gain with a larger TB than Dinan's is minimal.

 

I have an early production 05 MCS and recently upgraded to the M7 TB. The first TB was not compatible as I threw an EML within the first WOT run. I called Peter, explained the situation and he sent me a new one. The second one did not work either (another EML code) so I became a little concerned. After explaining the situation again, Peter looked into the problem a little further, made a few modifications to the TB and sent me a third one. This one works beautifully- with the exception of the dreaded flat spot between 2700-3300 RPMs. I am hoping someone out there has "tuned" this out with an aftermarket ECU remap, but I have searched and searched to no avail.

The difference is quite noticeable IMHO. Not so much in hp improvements, but in torque and throttle response. I need a cushier headrest now as my head is now banging against it almost constantly as I shift gears.

Now for my $0.02 on M7...what I can tell you is that M7 is a quality shop and is willing to reengineer their products for their customers when there are problems that arise. They are also very concerned with customer service as demonstrated by Peter's willingness to spend more than 30 minutes on the phone with someone he has never met (me) to chat about all things MINI. I do not know of many suppliers that would do that...personally I have been very pleased with Peter and the M7 team and wish these forums would stay on subject and not digress into vendor bashing... :smile:

 

The progamming for drive by wire only appears to screw up throttle tip-in, not WOT. WOT is wide open, and the additional capacity will help at the high end, and maybe a bit before, as the pressure in front of the SC will be a bit higher, and more stuff into the SC, is more boost, is more power....

I drove to Mini of Mt View today to get my rear fogs enabled ($80?!?!?!), and the hesitation is almost, if not completely, gone. Like a knuckle head, I let my laptop battery discharge over night, so no logging on the way in....

I'll get my car back today, and I'll be pissed, because the service charges are a pure rip-off, but then I'll be able to do some logging....

Matt

ps, I don't think any Dinan TBs will complain, as there's is less than 60 mm diameter. Seems that the ECU programming can deal with that little a change...

 

So can someone tell me if the additional HP/throttle response is that impressive between a Dinan and say a 62mm TB.

If there is a hugh difference then I would say going through the aggrevations seen with the larger TB is worth it. If there isn't why wouldn't a Dinan be sufficient?

And as I stated earlier, Dinan website states "This product is no longer sold on an exchange basis, therefore no core charge applies".

Can someone enlighten me.

 

I do not see what year your MCS is, but if it is pre-05 then go with the larger bore and forget about Dinan. The worst that can happen is you'll get a little more pronounced yo-yo, but the smile on your face will more than compensate for that. Just do it!!!

Bear in mind that Dinan is a BMW tuner first and a MINI tuner second. Their big bore throttle body is probably on the market because BMW gets a cut of their profits (no facts, just conjecture) and they needed to have one considering BMW is stamped all over the engine bay of the MINI. This part is one of those tricky ones that does not add a tremendous amount of anything, so if this is your first mod then spend your money somewhere else. If this is one of your last engine bay mods then go for it!

 

I have an '04 JCW MCS with an Alta intake. My thoughts are TB and then on to the IC (which I'm thinking might be Alta).

I understand the TB by M7 and WebbMotors are bigger than the Dinan but also have heard the troubles (yo-yo, flat spot) that the larger ones are having. I haven't heard anything negative, so far, about the Dinan. Maybe this equates to the Dinan being a closer fit for the Mini??

The other two things that making me hesitate about going with M7 and WebbMotors is the price and the fact that there is no core exchange for Dinan. So if something goes wrong you have the stock TB on hand.

I just installed Andy's VGS to eliminate the hesitation at low revs and not sure I want to reintroduce this effect back into the picture.

If I knew for certain that throttle response was that much more impressive with the larger TB there wouldn't be any question. But I haven't seen anything to indicate that in all the threads I've read.

Maybe I'll flip a coin.

 

The car doesn't know that a given angle change will create more flow than anticipated. You want the throttle response, press the gas pedal further. The big win comes in flow capacity.

The Dinan is a bit less than 60mm, the M7 is 62-63 mm, as is the Webb. (Althogh M7 has a few 60mms out undergoing testing). It seems from posts, that the 05s have an issue with the largest TBs, as do cars that had the emissions recall in CA (Mine's an O2). I think the jury is still out about how to deal with this.....

Matt