Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

New Miller Alpha-N System

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #16
    Brody, Hoping to get ahold of you this way. Haven't heard back from you on any of my emails about the WAR chip. Would really just like to know what's going on. I'm in a crunch for time and the shop my car is at needs it gone. If you could please get back with me asap I would greatly appreciate it.

    1984 Hennarot 325i - Euro swapped /Built m20 -FOR SALE-
    1968 Mercury Cougar --Restored Garage queen-

    Comment


      #17
      Brody

      Did you hear back from Brody ?

      Comment


        #18
        This is what I don't understand....


        E30 M3 owner that you helped had an incorrect install, poor tune and/or a incorrect EPROM chip.
        The exact same could be said for the two MAFs that popped up for sale. You would not believe how many customers A) never contact us about tuning B) never fine tune their cars C) install our products wrong. I don't even know how many M3 really are still out there, but I am shocked with how many MAF's we sell for those cars.

        Tony's car had a conforti chip for his stock 2.3L car. Hardly the wrong chip. His car was also mechanically sound. Evident by us going through it, installing our Alpha system and developing the tune. Also proven further by the fact that the same "base tune" that we developed with Tony's car as a starting point was ALMOST bang on for our customer we installed one on today in LA. Yes, we tuned it on the dyno to verify and the changes required were no more than a minute adjustment to tailor it SPECIFICALLY to the car. We are talking the same amount of time it would take conforti to load a base tune into a car and massage it out specifically to the car. Not days, not hours - about 45 minutes.

        STRAIGHT FROM THE PIPERS MOUTH

        the alpha doesn't intercept any signals, process them (falsify them) and then feed them back into the ecu.
        it synthesizes the load signal electronically. the AFM creates same kind of load signal, but mechanically (by movement of the vane/door). the load signal is what is used to index all the maps on the chip. so basically the AN is simulating the AFM electronically, the AFM and the flow restriction it created is eliminated.
        That by definition IS a piggyback. That by definition IS intercepting the signal since it is not feeding STRAIGHT to the ECU. THAT BY DEFINITION IS falsifying the signal. He clearly states that the MAXX piggyback is SYNTHESIZING a signal to resemble the AFM. FAKING A SIGNAL TO LOOK LIKE THE AFM!!!! Why? Because they do not rewrite the ECU code to PROPERLY be in ALPHA-N Configuration. They are FAKING an AFM load signal.

        I am not saying the system is wrong to the point of it not working. Clearly it works, but it definitely is LESS ideal than recalibrating the ECU to use the TPS signal directly. In our software, it does not need to see an AFM load signal.

        it is not true that the ECU "jumps around between cells" inside a map, when it is being fed from a signal by the AN. not sure where this is notion is coming from.
        An advantage of indexing tables via load is that it smooths out the response curve.
        I did not want to say anything, but since he admits that the MAXX box is "Synthesizing" an AFM signal, I will lay it out. They did not reconfigure the ECU to run TRUE alpha N. The Air flow table, which is still in ALL the chips running on a MAXX system is key to the driveability of the car. Because they have simply tried to "synthesize" their load signal, the active byte(s) scatters TERRIBLY in the air flow table. This scattering causes an AFM, MAF, or in this case also a MAXX powered car to lack accuracy since the ECU can't get an EXACT reading of what is happening.

        I will be the first to admit, customers who are UNHAPPY with the Miller MAF for low load stumbling issues are experiencing this exact phenomenon. That is the nature/problem with a MAF sensor on a very resonant ITB car that flows little air at low engine speeds/light throttle.

        The next MAXX powered car we see in person, we will make a video to show you EXACTLY what we mean. There is ZERO denying this. The fact that they don't understand a "choppy" or "Scattered" signal on the air flow table is bad for accuracy and driveability is really mind numbing. The reason this happens is they ABSOLUTELY have RC filters in the box to enable the signal to come into their unit "cleanly" but the problem with an RC filter is it slows signal response down. THEN when they send that now simulated signal to the ECU it is again futher slowed down. The fact that they are not letting the uninterrupted voltage signal to go directly to the ECU is the cause of this scattering.


        Ask any stock ECU tuner. If the air flow signal is all over the place in terms of cell reference in the AFT the ECU has trouble with what is going on, PERIOD.

        Sometimes people have engine running problems, e.g. something wrong with a sensor, wiring, grounds, or intank fuel pump. We've all read about such problems before. Occasionally someone might first think its a problem with their alpha N, but so far has not been the case. If inconsistent signals are fed into the system, then obviously you will have running issues.

        Even if you just worked out your perfect tune on the dyno, initially the car can run very well and then sometime later something is off. e.g. this can happen if there is a problem with the intank fuel pump. Initially the problem is compensated for in the tune, but then later intank fuel pump degrades/changes further, and the problem returns. Of course when the new pump is installed, the tune is still off and needs to be re-tuned.
        Again, exact same thing goes for our MAF. EVERYONE blames the last after-market part they put on their cars for any problems present and future simply because 90% of people HAVE NO CLUE about the technical system running their car. PRIME EXAMPLE. A customer with our PSIK (for M20 engines) had been down for a year with a "fuel" problem. He took it to a local (to him) shop who's owner is very close friends with us for diagnosis and repair. This shop owner and all the staff know what we do for these older cars. Because it had an aftermarket product on it, which happened to be our PSIK, they immediately had a melt down and said they did not know how to troubleshoot it. Well, you troubleshoot it just like any other car. Anyway, they sent the car away without being diagnosed, without being repaired and simply said take it to Miller. Fast forward to the end of last month. I PERSONALLY go to the customers house to help him out because EVERYONE has him believing it is our PSIK that is causing this poor running.

        In about 45 minutes problem solved. plugged fuel return line in the gas tank. it was causing 80 PSI fuel pressure which is simply ridiculous and explained why his car was breaking up so bad. Guess what? MAF was perfect, tune was perfect, the shop that is extremely reputable and has been around for 30 years was made to look kind of foolish.

        Point of the story, even the pros shit bricks and blame aftermarket parts because even THEY usually have ZERO clue about how the systems ACTUALLY work. They know how to follow a manual, and customers know how to blame parts that aren't original and or simply throw parts at a car. This is true OBVIOUSLY for the MAXX System. The fact is for every UNSATISFIED Miller MAF customer, there are easily 5 or 6 happy customers. I am sure same can be said for MAXX.

        That brings me to the next point though. You would not believe what people consider to be tuned "good." We have seen the most outrageous stuff whether it was something fully built and tuned by a customer who wanted us to "polish" it off, or whether it was a customer who installed our product incorrectly on their cars and same thing, coming to us for a "polishing" of the tune. The reaction when they get an actual properly tuned car back is priceless. At that point, customers usually start to listen to everything we have to say rather than second guess or state that they heard XYZ on the internet.

        We've helped solve a lot of running problems over the years. Ive personally tuned cars when on track visits (here and when in the USA). Free of course. When you go to BMW and tell them you have a running problem they will charge for that, even if the AFM that is installed on the car originally came from them... There are only 24 hours in the day."
        NO SHIT. Why is BMW USA or BMW DE even being brought into this????? BMW is not in the business of custom tuning. BMW does not give a rats ass about how you "THINK" your car is running. Of course they won't even look at your car without charging you money????

        I don't know what DATA you are looking for. This is all he-said-she said bullshit of which the only data we can and will provide is the scattering signal the stock ECU sees with the MAXX system vs our TPS input table which is not used to reference all necessary tables is BANG ON and does not falter.

        The next thing we can only do is start having customers use our ALPHA-N System to let THEM tell you how it is. The advantage for North American customers is that we are reachable BY PHONE during normal waking hours for North Americans instead of waiting until 11pm to XX AM in the morning to contact someone in Europe by phone. It is extremely easy for us to come to customers if they want us to tune the car in person as we are both US and Canadian Citizens.

        The fact that there is NO soldering NO wiring manipulations etc to install our hardware. It literally takes 20 minutes or less to install.

        The fact that no signal is "simulated," "synthesized" "faked" or "manipulated" which can all be said for what that MAXX box does shows that a better MORE DIRECT way of doing things is possible. JIM CONFORTI many consider the god of Motronic did not need to use a piggy back. OF ALL PEOPLE, if he did not use a piggyback it is because 100% doing it on the stock ECU is the best way to do it.

        we have a video posted on our Facebook Page showing how fast the system installs. MILLER FACEBOOK

        It is the first post on our wall so you can't miss it.

        Comment


          #19
          Originally posted by Henna30 View Post
          Brody, Hoping to get ahold of you this way. Haven't heard back from you on any of my emails about the WAR chip. Would really just like to know what's going on. I'm in a crunch for time and the shop my car is at needs it gone. If you could please get back with me asap I would greatly appreciate it.
          Have not yet received your broken WAR Chip coming back for repair. responded to your PM and email.

          Comment


            #20
            Brody, I think it's great you guys developed this although it's about a decade late. Split Second was the premier MAF people for E30 M3's ...not Miller and many people had issues with them as well and went to MAXX. I think you guys were messing with M20/M30's exclusively back then. At least that's what it seemed like. This isn't a MAF kit discussion though. I just wanted to point out that BMW themselves used chip based alpha N and then switched to the piggyback. I'm guessing they did it so they can tune on the fly vs removing the chip and rewriting, then repeating which is something you guys have rectified with the WAR chip. The reason for my posts is to figure out the pros and cons of each setup.

            As for cars falling out of tune due to wear, etc. The MAXX closed loop feature adjusts on the fly and can compensate for this within certain parameters.
            Last edited by reelizmpro; 05-19-2015, 09:17 PM.
            "I'd probably take the E30 M3 in this case just because I love that little car, and how tanky that inline 6 is." - thecj

            85 323i M TECH 1 S52 - ALPINEWEISS/SCHWARZE
            88 M3 - LACHSSILBER/SCHWARZE
            89 M3 - ALPINEWEISS II/M TECH CLOTH-ALCANTARA
            91 M TECHNIC CABRIO TURBO - MACAOBLAU/M TECH CLOTH-LEATHER

            Comment


              #21
              Originally posted by brody View Post
              Have not yet received your broken WAR Chip coming back for repair. responded to your PM and email.
              Thanks for getting back with me. I replied to your pm on here and via regular email. Can't wait to have the war machine up and running this weekend. Thank you for the help.

              1984 Hennarot 325i - Euro swapped /Built m20 -FOR SALE-
              1968 Mercury Cougar --Restored Garage queen-

              Comment


                #22
                Originally posted by reelizmpro View Post
                Brody, I think it's great you guys developed this although it's about a decade late. Split Second was the premier MAF people for E30 M3's ...not Miller and many people had issues with them as well and went to MAXX. I think you guys were messing with M20/M30's exclusively back then. At least that's what it seemed like. This isn't a MAF kit discussion though. I just wanted to point out that BMW themselves used chip based alpha N and then switched to the piggyback. I'm guessing they did it so they can tune on the fly vs removing the chip and rewriting, then repeating which is something you guys have rectified with the WAR chip. The reason for my posts is to figure out the pros and cons of each setup.

                As for cars falling out of tune due to wear, etc. The MAXX closed loop feature adjusts on the fly and can compensate for this within certain parameters.
                The reason why the split second kit doesn't work as well as it could is simply because the ECU doesn't use the MAF directly. We started the ECU controlled MAF, were the first to do so BECAUSE of the constant inconsistencies with the SS kits and knew if the ECU was in full conrtol of the signal use it would self adapt and operate more precisely as if BMW had intended it to be there. The s14 resonance makes a MAF signal difficult to deal with with low air speeds and high resonance. The m20, M30, M88 and S38 all work EXCELLENT with the MAF but yes, this is not a MAF discussion thread.

                What Piggy-back did BMW use??? I can't see BMW ever using a piggyback. A new TOTALLY STANDALONE computer, yes but that would still be 100% controlled by ONE computer using signals directly from the sensor they are reading. They/BOSCH aren't lazy or budget limited enough to make a piggyback.

                Any, BMW has always been able to emulate their computers. They have never been limited to burning chips to see the results and have always been able to emulate or simulate on the fly.

                Comment


                  #23
                  Ok so ECU 4a was an entire engine management that replaced the entire Motronic system. You can't compare it to a MAXX box as it was the sole computer for the car that was running the engine on its own. That eould also be a tune on just a chip just with a different ECU...

                  I can almost guarantee it was an in house standalone that had no emission related hooey like the public's motronic version.they still use computers like this today.

                  Do you think the BMW owned pro race cars are using factory production ECUs? NOPE. they are using bmw designed standalone systems OR Bosch Motorsport standalone systems etc.
                  Last edited by brody; 05-19-2015, 10:40 PM.

                  Comment


                    #24
                    Ya killin me Brody.

                    From people who own Ex DTM/Grp A race cars...BTW, I'm referring to the early cars before ECU4A. They went through several changes.

                    http://s14net.vbulletin.net/forum/s1...s-ran-motronic

                    Here are quotes...

                    "I have an Original DTM group A engine harness. It was imported along with a schnitzer enduro 2.3 that was installed in a gruppe N car.
                    After a few years of sitting on it, I have decide to sell. It is boxed and ready to go. These are NLA from BMW, It has the alpha N conversion box wired in and ready to go. It is a 4 injector harness (not 8). I am asking 6k for it. If you are building a Gruppe A car (or copy (or just like cool things habging on your garage wall like me)), Then I have just the thing for you. The only thing you need is a standard DME and a chip burned for your engine.
                    All proceeds will be deposited into my newly aquired m3. Thanks

                    I can email pics to anyone interested.
                    "
                    So I emailed and got this response...

                    "You are correct. The group A cars ran a Motorsport alpha N piggy back. It was hardwired into the engine harness. The unit used to be listed in the group A catalog, but I haven't checked in a long time. "


                    I have the Grp A catalog. I'll check it out but I have seen pictures of the unit from people parting out their original Grp A cars.
                    Here ya go...



                    "The race cars used a piggy back system which used the motronic to control ignition." - Marco

                    This one basically backs up everything I have said...

                    "Since the piggy back uses it own microcontroller it has more
                    processing power vs. a chip AN which relies on the limited processing power
                    of the 8051. BMW and Bosch both chose to use a 2nd offboard microcontroller
                    for their alpha N, when Bosch could easily write the software to do it on chip.
                    In the case of the MAXX, it has a few more features that are handled by the
                    microcontroller. e.g. it decodes the RPM
                    signal itself (where the BMW unit relied on the internal motronic decoding
                    and required a hardware change within the motronic). It also has built in
                    compensation capability (2 user input channels), its own lambda controller,
                    ICV control and will log its signals. Its not the most sophisticated
                    system, but its easy to use. "

                    Note: Wideband closed loop control was added later

                    "The users are aware that they either continue to use their tuner
                    chip (usually JC), which for minor changes in breathing is not
                    entirely off the mark as youd like to have people believe, or they
                    burn a custom eprom (e.g. for highly modified motors). If you read
                    the postings you will see people are getting very good results.

                    BTW, changing rev limit in eprom is extremely simple, for anyone
                    who doesnt know how to do it, we can send a new eprom or the modified binary
                    file via email for the user to burn.

                    Chip AN also has programmed fuel and ignition. But not everyone
                    wants to work with an eprom simulator. Tuners usually do that.

                    If the user wants something changed, e.g. cold start is off (a 1 day tuner
                    session usually doesnt get this right),
                    then he has to return to the tuner just to correct this. That lacks
                    in flexibility. What the user saves $$$ wise in electronics, he
                    pays for in lack of flexibility and additional tuner time. When
                    you look at it that way, a MAXX system is really cheap because
                    with a little aptitude a user can make the correction himself.

                    As ignition is just a pre-programmed table and not in closed loop, for street cars it must
                    be setup to run under a variety of conditions. It cant be setup to
                    run on the cutting edge as is done on a race car. Is it better to
                    do a custom chip (this is true independent of AN, MAF or AFM setup)
                    vs. a generic tuner chip, yes it is. But, "optimal" depends on several
                    parameters and the application." - John @Maxx in 2004.
                    Last edited by reelizmpro; 05-20-2015, 06:50 AM.
                    "I'd probably take the E30 M3 in this case just because I love that little car, and how tanky that inline 6 is." - thecj

                    85 323i M TECH 1 S52 - ALPINEWEISS/SCHWARZE
                    88 M3 - LACHSSILBER/SCHWARZE
                    89 M3 - ALPINEWEISS II/M TECH CLOTH-ALCANTARA
                    91 M TECHNIC CABRIO TURBO - MACAOBLAU/M TECH CLOTH-LEATHER

                    Comment


                      #25
                      Fair enough. I am not Mr s14 history buff, so I didn't know there was something BEFORE ECU4a as well.

                      Who is the reply from john aimed at? It is kind of confusing as it sounds like it is a response to me from someone who doesn't read what our product is AND is from 2004?

                      To touch on a few points there...

                      BTW, changing rev limit in eprom is extremely simple, for anyone
                      who doesnt know how to do it, we can send a new eprom or the modified binary file via email for the user to burn.
                      WAR Chip. Lets you change all fuel and ignition, idle speed, O2 sensor control, cold start, rpm limit etc. No burner, no eeprom, comes with a user interface that has everything laid out so a 12 year old could understand it.

                      Chip AN also has programmed fuel and ignition. But not everyone
                      wants to work with an eprom simulator. Tuners usually do that.
                      An emulator is the same in terms of function and layout as the interface you get with MAXX. not sure why he would say only tuners would use that? If you are tuning the maxx box yourself, you are doing the same thing a tuner would do, only with MAXX not Motronic.

                      If the user wants something changed, e.g. cold start is off (a 1 day tuner
                      session usually doesnt get this right),
                      then he has to return to the tuner just to correct this. That lacks
                      in flexibility. What the user saves $$$ wise in electronics, he
                      pays for in lack of flexibility and additional tuner time. When
                      you look at it that way, a MAXX system is really cheap because
                      with a little aptitude a user can make the correction himself.
                      WAR Chip - Included with our Alpha system...

                      As ignition is just a pre-programmed table and not in closed loop, for street cars it must
                      be setup to run under a variety of conditions. It cant be setup to
                      run on the cutting edge as is done on a race car. Is it better to
                      do a custom chip (this is true independent of AN, MAF or AFM setup)
                      vs. a generic tuner chip, yes it is. But, "optimal" depends on several
                      parameters and the application.
                      Street car OR race car, why not optimize everything including timing to the specific car? NO TWO ENGINES ARE EVER ALIKE. I don't care if you built them identically, they will NEVER BE EXACTLY THE SAME.

                      The WAR Chip that comes with our alpha n kit allows for 4 different tunes that can be swtiched to on the fly. It allows you to optimize ALL parameters needed to tailor a tune specifically to a car, ignition included. You do not have to wait for revised timing tunes to be sent to you. Make the change in 10 minutes by yourself if you want.

                      I don't think we will see eye to eye on 100% motronic control vs the maxx box. For years we decided NOT to make alphaN because we assumed the maxx system was 100% perfect due to its long standing name and use. But then we got to see one run in person BEFORE a customer removed it and saw what many stock ECU tuners would consider issues leading to true accuracy and knew we could improve upon it.

                      Again, if you are able to hook up with Dan while he is in LA, he would love to show you exactly what we are talking about from a technical see with your own eyes perspective. Then you could probably try one of the recent miller alpha N customers cars to see that our system is at least equal to the maxx in terms of performance and driveability OR better.

                      Comment


                        #26
                        Originally posted by brody View Post
                        Fair enough. I am not Mr s14 history buff, so I didn't know there was something BEFORE ECU4a as well.

                        Who is the reply from john aimed at? It is kind of confusing as it sounds like it is a response to me from someone who doesn't read what our product is AND is from 2004?

                        To touch on a few points there...



                        WAR Chip. Lets you change all fuel and ignition, idle speed, O2 sensor control, cold start, rpm limit etc. No burner, no eeprom, comes with a user interface that has everything laid out so a 12 year old could understand it.



                        An emulator is the same in terms of function and layout as the interface you get with MAXX. not sure why he would say only tuners would use that? If you are tuning the maxx box yourself, you are doing the same thing a tuner would do, only with MAXX not Motronic.



                        WAR Chip - Included with our Alpha system...



                        Street car OR race car, why not optimize everything including timing to the specific car? NO TWO ENGINES ARE EVER ALIKE. I don't care if you built them identically, they will NEVER BE EXACTLY THE SAME.

                        The WAR Chip that comes with our alpha n kit allows for 4 different tunes that can be swtiched to on the fly. It allows you to optimize ALL parameters needed to tailor a tune specifically to a car, ignition included. You do not have to wait for revised timing tunes to be sent to you. Make the change in 10 minutes by yourself if you want.

                        I don't think we will see eye to eye on 100% motronic control vs the maxx box. For years we decided NOT to make alphaN because we assumed the maxx system was 100% perfect due to its long standing name and use. But then we got to see one run in person BEFORE a customer removed it and saw what many stock ECU tuners would consider issues leading to true accuracy and knew we could improve upon it.

                        Again, if you are able to hook up with Dan while he is in LA, he would love to show you exactly what we are talking about from a technical see with your own eyes perspective. Then you could probably try one of the recent miller alpha N customers cars to see that our system is at least equal to the maxx in terms of performance and driveability OR better.
                        Well I told you didn't I? Anyway, the quotes were from different threads on S14.net and John's response was to someone who didn't like piggybacks, especially the cost of MAXX and insisted Standalone (DTA, Vipec, etc) was the only real solution to be considered and insisted the price to setup both was about the same. The discussion turned into a nice thread about S14 engine management and pros/cons of each setup. I included the year it was posted to point out that it was not in response to you guys but Chip AN in general. Granted, the WAR chip you guys came out with gives more flexibility but it's still a chip, is it not? It begs the questions...Why did BMW move away from it? Why did Cyntex go under and the product pulled? Was it because of the chip or the approach? My understanding is it wasn't user friendly. The Miller WAR changes things a bit since people can now rewrite the chip without removing it AND store 4 switchable maps. I get that. That definitely helps but is it enough? With realtime tuning you see what's going on when it happens and can fix it right way, not make guesses later and use trial and error. That doesn't seem very user friendly to me. There's also other big reasons you want real time tuning. For example: I thought I was getting wot but when I floored the gas pedal I found out thru the MAXX software in real time that the tps was only reaching 60% never really reaching WOT. Throttle cables can stretch, tps can go bad or fall out of calibration probably due in part to the buzzy nature of the s14. You just wouldn't find that without real time monitoring. This goes back to my point about being user friendly.

                        The reason why I was sold on the MAXX besides being one of the only Alpha N kits at the time (and I looked at SMT, Unichip, Megasquirt, LINK, DTA, Redline, AEM, MoTeC was 1) it's a piggyback, reversible and kept all my motronic functions 2) it's very user friendly with excellent support via Maxx or S14.net itself. 3) I knew BMW used it on their early cars and if it was good enough for them, it's certainly good enough for my 250HP street car. 4) It was less expensive overall ($800 at the time) than standalones and designed for the S14.

                        #2 shouldn't be underestimated. John having been on S14 from the start has intimate knowledge on the Motorsport M3's. Pardon me for saying but you didn't even know they used a piggyback. So please understand my skepticism when someone comes out claiming they have a better product. I will be in touch with Dan hopefully before Bimmerfest.
                        Last edited by reelizmpro; 05-20-2015, 02:31 PM.
                        "I'd probably take the E30 M3 in this case just because I love that little car, and how tanky that inline 6 is." - thecj

                        85 323i M TECH 1 S52 - ALPINEWEISS/SCHWARZE
                        88 M3 - LACHSSILBER/SCHWARZE
                        89 M3 - ALPINEWEISS II/M TECH CLOTH-ALCANTARA
                        91 M TECHNIC CABRIO TURBO - MACAOBLAU/M TECH CLOTH-LEATHER

                        Comment


                          #27
                          Not jumping into the middle of this, but I was the car who started all this. To be honest I don't know much of what I had in my car. Bought the carbon box and everything i believe on a group buy on s14 several years ago. I installed the system(with help from other s14 owners) and had CarbConn(Seattle area) tune it. Believe it was his 1st alpha-n tune. The car never received a correct tune, it would sometimes bog out in the higher rpms. (I've owned the car for 14+ years, and most of those 14 years I may get to drive it once a month(drive a company car 7 days a week). I just dealt with it due to how infrequent I used the car. I then wanted to drive from Seattle to Bimmerfest so I found a guy with a dyno who said he could tune it. He made the car run better, Got from Seattle to Bimmerfest and back. I was happy but not totally satisfied, I knew it should run better/cleaner but kept on driving it.

                          The car then couldn't pass emissions back in 2010, frustrated I parked the car and waited til it about 2 months ago to get the car back on the road. Waited til it was 25 years so I didn't have to pass emissions/family life, etc. to get the car back on the road, I missed her.

                          So I had a great shop in the Seattle/Redmond area, West Werks drain all the fluids, new belts and a full tune.(highly recommend them for any BMW needs in the Seattle area/east side) The car felt great, with all new fluids/ plugs etc. but after a few drives I started to get that feeling that it was heading back to the way it was due to the tuning.

                          So I looked into getting it retuned for the 3rd time. I couldn't find an alpha-n tuner in washington. went back to carbconn to see if they understood or have tuned any recently. The guy said he may have done 1 since he did mine way back when. And the only person who tuned alpha-n in the area move from Washington to Arizona of something. I was then told about Miller performance here on r3v and that they have a new shop in the Seattle area. So I talked with them about going to their MAF system and brought the car up to them. I was excited to have someone in the area who had tuned and was willing to tune the s14. I got a call from them later the night I dropped it off and they asked if I would be willing to let them try(what we now know as the miller alpha-n system) to my car. My whole point on every time I called them going into the MAF is that I am not looking for more power, I just want my car to run clean. I want the car to start up and just go whenever I wanted to go. So when they asked me to try this out I was weary but I went a head and let them do it.

                          All I can say is that the few times I have driven the car since I have had it back it feels great. That gut feeling that something may happen I used to get is going away. The car feels more snappy and clean. This is without going onto a dyno either, which We want to do soon. What ever they did to my car @ miller has made me happy.

                          Ultimately my original system was never tuned correctly, I'm not saying it was or is a bad product(plenty of people run it) but I couldn't get it to work in my situation.

                          Seats Taken...No one rides for free...

                          Comment


                            #28
                            Here is the thing, the system sounds cool and all but I don't see any potential. Sure the MAXX-automotive alpha-N was archaic and old in design but it worked especially if the tuner knew had the knowledge to make it work. That knowledge is extremely limited in the US in most places. Your alpha-N system just like the WAR chip is not reliable and needs work, because it is proprietary in design, I know of many tuners that had trouble with it because it simply didn't work as advertised hence the skepticism with this alpha-n kit. Having a system that only you can make work only convolutes this product.

                            I had the pleasure of using the WAR chip and a tune that Dan put on the car and neither one worked to my satisfaction and no one could figure out the interfaces, code and other bugs that went along with it. Not just me or the tuner that had this problem but many others.

                            While I applaud you for bringing products to the market for these older motors and being innovative. I think more research and development needs to be done to make it user friendly for everyone to use, not just the company developing it.
                            "Driving anything else would be uncivilised"

                            Comment


                              #29
                              btw, I used the MAXX-alpha-N, War chip and Dan Miller tune on my S38B36 stroker, with negative results!
                              "Driving anything else would be uncivilised"

                              Comment


                                #30
                                battle///m3, I am glad that Miller got your car sorted. As soon as I have the money I think I will take mine to them as well. Did you convert to a Miller MAF along with this Miller Alpha-N setup?

                                Daniel
                                1990 M3 - http://www.r3vlimited.com/board/showthread.php?t=376104
                                2011 328i Sport Wagon - 6sp Manual, RWD, Sport, Cold Weather, Premium, Value, Navigation

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X