# JB1 or JB2?



## Jalal28 (Apr 9, 2007)

Terry...

I have followed many of your posts over on the E90 board... before your unscheduled departure.

Although somewhat combative, I've always found you to be a straight-shooter with a large knowlegde base for the 335.

That all said, I have a dilemna and (obvious conflict of interests aside) was wondering which mod you would suggest for a non-track, leased 335 driver like myself looking to beef up the power delivery in my 3.

JB1 or JB2?

Can you outline the pros and cons of each unit and what the intended application for each unit is?

I'm sure you've seen the recent write-up in Road and Track on the Procede, however for the price, I'm just not sure I want to lay down $1,500 when your mod gives 85% of the gains for 1/4th the price.

A little help from you or the other members of the message board would be greatly appreciated.


----------



## Boosted08 (Sep 5, 2007)

stage 2, if your going to do it, then do it!!


----------



## Terry @ BMS (Apr 27, 2007)

Jalal28 said:


> Terry...
> 
> I have followed many of your posts over on the E90 board... before your unscheduled departure.
> 
> ...


Hi, happy to help!

The basic difference between the JB1 and JB2 is the amount of boost being added, and the extra fuel enrichment. The JB1 adds around 1.75psi, the JB2 around 3psi (with richer air/fuel targets to support it).

While I always love to sell JB2s, I think the JB1 might be a better fit for you. The first 1-2psi give the most gains per pound of boost increased due to diminishing marginal returns. The JB1 is also easier to install (fewer wires, no vacuum solenoid bypass required), and obviously much less expensive. For the average 335i owner I'd say the Stage 1 is the way to go. One thing I really like about the JB1 is that once installed its impossible to tell its there unless you dig in to the ECU area. No exposed grounds or wires, no stickers, no solenoid bypass, nothing for people to see with the hood open. The stealth factor is great.

For the rest of us who are going to be running at the track, or really want GTO killer power, the Stage 2 is worth the extra money/work.

I'd suggest you start with the S1 and take advantage of our upgrade program when you're ready for more power.

T


----------



## Tomsbeemer (Aug 29, 2007)

*IS the JB1 complete unnoticeable if removed?*

Hi Terry,

Your information is great. Question, if the system "Check Engine" or another problem occurs with the engine while the JB1 is attached and then you remove it....will the service department be able to tell that it was attached?

Receiving my 335 ci in mid October and just curious.

Thanks.


----------



## Terry @ BMS (Apr 27, 2007)

Tomsbeemer said:


> Hi Terry,
> 
> Your information is great. Question, if the system "Check Engine" or another problem occurs with the engine while the JB1 is attached and then you remove it....will the service department be able to tell that it was attached?
> 
> ...


With any piggyback system (not just the JB) it's a bad idea to leave freeze-frame data in the ECU as the dealer _could_ infer modification from the long term fuel trims or other data. If one were to get a code I'd suggest they clear it, remove the device (be it JB or other), and let the code reappear on its own before taking the car in. This has the side benefit of ensuring the tuner wasn't the cause of the code.

Aside from that there is no trace left behind, and if you clear the code there is no trace at all.


----------



## batlin (Mar 8, 2007)

Tomsbeemer said:


> Hi Terry,
> 
> Your information is great. Question, if the system "Check Engine" or another problem occurs with the engine while the JB1 is attached and then you remove it....will the service department be able to tell that it was attached?
> 
> ...


I currently have the JB1 and plan on moving to JB2 once i get some extra cash, I have it installed and have been having some issues with other parts of my car and have taken it into the BMW service 3 times and they have not commented on anything nor have they told me i have any mods on the car.. completely invisible!


----------



## Terry @ BMS (Apr 27, 2007)

batlin said:


> I currently have the JB1 and plan on moving to JB2 once i get some extra cash, I have it installed and have been having some issues with other parts of my car and have taken it into the BMW service 3 times and they have not commented on anything nor have they told me i have any mods on the car.. completely invisible!


Great to hear, stealth is a good thing.


----------



## Tomsbeemer (Aug 29, 2007)

*Other Car Problems*

Hey Batlin,

Thanks for the info. What have the "other problems" been? Any kind of engine/I drive related issues? How long did you wait to put the JB1 on the car in terms of miles and have you been impressed with the difference?


----------



## batlin (Mar 8, 2007)

Tomsbeemer said:


> Hey Batlin,
> 
> Thanks for the info. What have the "other problems" been? Any kind of engine/I drive related issues? How long did you wait to put the JB1 on the car in terms of miles and have you been impressed with the difference?


I have 3K miles on the JB1 right now.. and I just now hit 7K.. so i waited 4K miles before I put it in... LOVE it and once i get some liquid cash I will be getting a JB , I saw an AWESOME post on e90post that had a youtub video of the JB2... you should check it out...






My other issues have been a leek in my windshield washer fluid hose (for which I JUST now realized I missed my appointment to get that fixed this morning d'oh) And my center console cup holder.. umm.. broke 

I did though have an issue about a week ago where my car stuttered and I got the DSC malfunction, I dont think it was related to JB as all.. I just turned the car off and on and it was fine...


----------



## Raz5219 (Sep 22, 2005)

Wow...great video! I can't wait to get my JB2!!


----------



## rickpump76 (Oct 24, 2006)

I went from JB1 to JB2. Best MOD for the money. Period.


----------



## reb03 (Sep 15, 2005)

Terry, question for you. If the stock ECU adds up to 3psi to compensate for altitude why do you have to add fuel for JB2 if it only adds 3psi? It seems the stock ECU should be able to compensate fuel and timing for the added boost. Also, I think the TT adds about 3psi for a max of 11-11.5psi and there is no need to add fuel above and beyond what the stock ECU does. Just curious as I try to understand the limits of the ECU. What am I missing? Thanks!


----------



## Terry @ BMS (Apr 27, 2007)

reb03 said:


> Terry, question for you. If the stock ECU adds up to 3psi to compensate for altitude why do you have to add fuel for JB2 if it only adds 3psi? It seems the stock ECU should be able to compensate fuel and timing for the added boost. Also, I think the TT adds about 3psi for a max of 11-11.5psi and there is no need to add fuel above and beyond what the stock ECU does. Just curious as I try to understand the limits of the ECU. What am I missing? Thanks!


Keep in mind at altitude the stock ECU is raising boost to keep the oxygen level in the combustion chamber consistent with sea level. It just so happens to do that requires more boost (say 3psi @ 6000'). So even though you have higher boost, you have the same oxygen density, make the same power, and thus have similar fueling requirements.

In the sea level scenario an extra 3psi means much more oxygen (and thus much more power, around 40rwhp), and thus the fueling requirements are different.

In my testing I found the best balance of performance and safety at ~1pt richer than stock (e.g. 13.4:1 in the midrange, 12.4:1 up top, vs 14.4:1 and 13.4:1 stock).


----------



## reb03 (Sep 15, 2005)

Terry @ BMS said:


> Keep in mind at altitude the stock ECU is raising boost to keep the oxygen level in the combustion chamber consistent with sea level. It just so happens to do that requires more boost (say 3psi @ 6000'). So even though you have higher boost, you have the same oxygen density, make the same power, and thus have similar fueling requirements.
> 
> In the sea level scenario an extra 3psi means much more oxygen (and thus much more power, around 40rwhp), and thus the fueling requirements are different.
> 
> In my testing I found the best balance of performance and safety at ~1pt richer than stock (e.g. 13.4:1 in the midrange, 12.4:1 up top, vs 14.4:1 and 13.4:1 stock).


Thanks for the explaination and now it makes complete sense. But it also raises another question as it pertains to me comparing your JB2 to the TT. In the case of the TT, how does the ECU handle the fuel requirements of the added boost?


----------



## Terry @ BMS (Apr 27, 2007)

reb03 said:


> Thanks for the explaination and now it makes complete sense. But it also raises another question as it pertains to me comparing your JB2 to the TT. In the case of the TT, how does the ECU handle the fuel requirements of the added boost?


I'd have to defer to the SSTT team on that one, but in many ways tuning is like preparing food. Different tuners use their own mix of ingredients to get to their desired result. It's up to the customer to decide what tastes better, and rarely can everyone agree on the perfect recipe.


----------



## reb03 (Sep 15, 2005)

I appreciate your position on the last question. I've demoed the TT and was impressed and have heard nothing but good about JB2 also. Too bad the there isn't really any info out on exactly how the TT works.


----------



## midlife (May 10, 2007)

batlin said:


> I currently have the JB1 and plan on moving to JB2 once i get some extra cash, I have it installed and have been having some issues with other parts of my car and have taken it into the BMW service 3 times and they have not commented on anything nor have they told me i have any mods on the car.. completely invisible!


great, but question is DID YOU REMOVE THE JB1 BEFORE YOU WENT TO THE DEALER??

thanks,


----------



## spoolin spec v (Nov 3, 2007)

Terry @ BMS said:


> I'd have to defer to the SSTT team on that one, but in many ways tuning is like preparing food. Different tuners use their own mix of ingredients to get to their desired result. It's up to the customer to decide what tastes better, and rarely can everyone agree on the perfect recipe.


I personally, tune cars a little on teh rich side, b.c. people will beat on their cars. We did a lot of supra's evo's and sti's. Tune them to a Air fuel i like, then fatten it out up top a little in case, it bounces limiter, the mis a gear, or whatever, there is extra fuel there to prevent detonation, and it also will help keep the motor cool. Sure, when i tune a car, you may make 5hp less than the next dude, but your motor will not give up after 30k miles of abuse.

Also, other tuners i know, will tune a motor right on its edge, or the edge of the fuel system....yes you make more power, but yes the risk of something failing, is much higher.

Like he said, Different tuners, have different styles, and ways to tune.


----------



## reb03 (Sep 15, 2005)

spoolin spec v said:


> I personally, tune cars a little on teh rich side, b.c. people will beat on their cars. We did a lot of supra's evo's and sti's. Tune them to a Air fuel i like, then fatten it out up top a little in case, it bounces limiter, the mis a gear, or whatever, there is extra fuel there to prevent detonation, and it also will help keep the motor cool. Sure, when i tune a car, you may make 5hp less than the next dude, but your motor will not give up after 30k miles of abuse.
> 
> Also, other tuners i know, will tune a motor right on its edge, or the edge of the fuel system....yes you make more power, but yes the risk of something failing, is much higher.
> 
> Like he said, Different tuners, have different styles, and ways to tune.


While I'm no tuner I agree with your and Terry's approach. Flying small Cessnas and Pipers, the aircraft engines always make more power if you lean it out but it always runs hotter if you have the mixture leaned out to the edge (adjustable in the cockpit). Running a little rich means slightly higher fuel consumption and a cooler running engine and I find this to be a fair compromise. Given I've never heard of detonation in a TT car I think the stock ECU is up to the task but I sure wish there was some documentation about the ECU's limitations.


----------



## spoolin spec v (Nov 3, 2007)

reb03 said:


> While I'm no tuner I agree with your and Terry's approach. Flying small Cessnas and Pipers, the aircraft engines always make more power if you lean it out but it always runs hotter if you have the mixture leaned out to the edge (adjustable in the cockpit). Running a little rich means slightly higher fuel consumption and a cooler running engine and I find this to be a fair compromise. Given I've never heard of detonation in a TT car I think the stock ECU is up to the task but I sure wish there was some documentation about the ECU's limitations.


Adjusting air fuel is all good and fine with a piggly back like a SAFC or something like that, but once you get into ign. and timing. THEN, you have to realize timing, directly reflect Air fuel ratios.

So, you just gotta find that happy medium.

and remember kids, Start Rich, then lean the car out. :thumbup::thumbup:


----------

