Herbmiester

The manifold has new gaskets and I may well fit a manual pressure gauge and do a check should the charge pipe not fix the issue. The reason is simple the FF30 fault code is now pretty well understood and as the CP and DV's are known weaknesses I will just replace them as they both struggle when boost is raised above stock and I intend to do this, 300 hp is not enough for this HP junkie. Road vs Drag car is irrelevant in this test as the it is only when accelerating constantly at full throttle as you would at a drag strip does this occur, in a on/off throttle situation like the majority of road driving it does not occur. . In fact a drag strip would be the perfect place to log the data.

Well all I can do is use the stock sensor as that's all MHD will read.

To be clear the only reason the shops did the work is that the code only showed up after the intake ports were cleaned. I made it clear that it wasn't doing it previous to them doing the clean. Whether it was just a coincidence or a contributing factor I can't say, but they removed and re-installed the manifold twice afterwards in case that was the issue. I still wonder if that is somehow causing the issue. In any case it will have a lot of new parts on it when it finished.

Yeah I have checked the cans and replaced the vacuum hoses with silicone hoses, the hose on the front turbo was cracked and at that stage I thought I had found the problem but alas no.

And that is the issue, everyone has a different opinion, so I will upgrade the pipe and valves as I would want to do this anyway when I load an MHD map.

Yes I have the charge pipe and valves as mentioned and having looked at the other likely places I suspect it's there. Will fit these parts over the next few days and re log. I think saying its straightforward is a bit unfair as 2 workshops were unable to find the fault.

Yeah will try for a 3rd gear pull, but that means I have to go illegally fast.

Actually mabe a link would be better for anyone who wants to read all parameters. http://www.datazap.me/u/herbmiester/2007-335i-hermiester?log=0&data=3-7-23

So the left hand scale is RPM and the right hand is PSI, what I am reading on graph one is a 1psi average difference between what the computer wants and what is actually being delivered. 1 psi may be enough to trigger the 30ff code. I will check this on the yank forums.

This one is run with the check engine light on, actual and targeted boost are both way down.

Here is a log of a pull from low revs to 6472 rpm. Green is predicted boost, yellow is actual boost and the grey line is rpm. It's a big leak.

My cables have just arrived so I will log with MHD good reminder i nearly forgot about logging.

Update, the shop never put on the injector connection correctly. Duh! Anyway the 30FF check engine light issue is improved but not solved. In the past I would get on to a longish straight and from about 50kph floor it, as the revs rose and the boost built it would hit around 4500 rpm and the check light would come on. In the past it would do it every time. Now it does it around 50% of the time, I guess that's an improvement. USPS shows the ERW charge pipe is in NZ and should be here tomorrow, I will get it on asap and fit the original diverter valves, check, then fit the forge diverter valves. The journey to 400 MHD enhanced horsepower is proving to be a long and trying one. This car reminds me of a Redhead I once dated, great to look at, was great when new but went downhill rapidly.

Sad to say Runflats do have to be considered on later BMW's as there is no room for a proper spare. I worry that if I go away on a weekend or worse a holiday weekend I have to rely on my can of tyre goop. BMW efficiency ie less weight because of no extra wheel or tyre does have a downside. Run Flats for some people are sadly a real world requirement. I had two sets of RE 050 RFT's on my E60 the first were old and subjectively hard, a second set felt much better and were only a year or so old. So yes age makes a big difference.

I went to pick the car up today after the valve cover gasket was replaced. I took the car down the road bringing it up to temp so I could do a pedal to the floor pull and you guessed it, the check engine light came on. But this time it was cylinder 6 injector issue. Back she went to the shop, hopefully its an easy fix.

The Re050A has always had a good reputation.

Does it work?

I had Bridgestone RE050 RFT's on my old E60 and while the stiff sidewalls did nothing for ride comfort the car was very composed at speed.

Aren't Prado's and Pajeros, old body on frame designs? The X5 is a monocoque chassis so pretty different really. The first two have semi serious off road ability while the X5 is not meant to do proper off road work. Also the Jap diesels are old school designs while the X5 diesel is a modern common rail design. Its pretty well accepted that common rail diesels are much more efficient than old pump engines. Also I was not aware that j90 Prados were full time 4WD, every one I have seen has a high/low/2wd/4wd option.

I suspect you are right re moderators, would be interesting to know why? Anyhow The Prado's battery location is irrelevant, as mentioned it is a far more capable off road vehicle than an X5, but yes an X5 is far more capable on road.Not an apples to apples comparison. On road a 5 series is better yet again. While I can see you are enamored with your X5 a better comparison would be a Touareg a Q7/5, Cayenne or an ML even a Territory can can match an e53/70 dynamically. But comparing the handling of SUv's is a bit of a joke as even the best are dynamically well behind a good car like a 5 series and that is really the point here. Olaf enjoys driving and I just dont see how he will get that satisfaction in a boat like SUV.

Olaf this might be worth a look. Tail lights show its an LCI so it should have the N53 engine. looks sharp. http://www.autotrader.co.nz/used-cars-for-sale/bmw-530i/1727787

Ron no comparisons are completely fair but as these cars both use the same engines and the highlander is a Camry/Aurion on stilts with a rear diff grafted on its about as real world as it gets. As to the laws of physics the X5 is heavier, has more drag and open diffs or not there are two as opposed to one. Highlander uses open diffs and electronics as well, and the 2wd Highlander was 1l per 100km better. Even subaru admit that that AWD compromises fuel economy as opposed to 2WD. The Ford Territory had rwd and awd options again running open diffs. The difference was 0.6l per 100km. So as efficient as you may think you x5 is, the laws of physics are definitely in play here. I would also say the Prado is not a fair comparison as it has actual off road ability. hench its 2 batteries the X5 is a gravel road cruiser and real mud rocks etc should be avoided.

The 3 X5,s I drove were very good as far as SUV,s go, better than my Highlander, but only marginally better than a Ford Territory. My Highlander would hose the 6 cylinder petrol e53 sixes in a straight line. All this is academic as a 5 series will accelerate more quickly (same engines) and be quicker through the corners. A sprint across the Rimutakas or Paihiatua track in an X5 will no longer be a fun driving experience it would be in a 5 series.

Last time I spoke to Mark about this he said around 11l/100km. My M54 530 was around 9.5. N52 and 53 engines improve on that by a small amount. Whats nice about the N53 version is 200kw, they are deceptively quick.

17 and 18 is the sweet spot for tyres price wise, move to 19 and things go up noticeably. As to fuel the X5 is a blunt shape and that combined with the extra weight and parasitic drag of the 4wd system will cost you at the pump. I just compare my wife's old company car, a toyota Aurion, vs my Toyota Highlander, same engine but an extra 350kg, 4wd and a brick like aerodynamic profile mean economy goes from a real world 8.7l/100 to 12.3l/100. You can't beat the laws of physics, hold out for a decent 5 series, if you like driving it will be so much more rewarding.