EAT chip rev limit for late M30?

[pundit]

I have a '90 535iA. (DME 0 261 200 179)
I wish to fit an EAT chip. I was wondering about the rev limit. Mark lists 3 versions on his website.

Stock rev.limit E34-179.6K
6500 rev. limit E34-179.6K5
6800 rev. limit E34-179.6K8

My car is mainly a daily commuter. Apart from the rev limit is there any other difference between the three versions?

It appears if I drive 'sedately' I should see a marginal improvement in fuel economy? - Cheers

[BigKriss]

i got the 6500 rpm limit one, never revved to the car to the cut out yet though. no difference apart from the rpm limit. i don't know how high the zf4hp22 will rev to.

regards

kristian

[Robin-535im]

Apart from the rev limit is there any other difference between the three versions?

No difference at all I believe. I have the 6800 I think but I have yet to hit it. I hit the stock a few times.


It appears if I drive 'sedately' I should see a marginal improvement in fuel economy? - Cheers

I think so... maybe 5% fewer L/km ( or whatever units you use out there :) )

[632 Regal]

I would go the stock route, no need to try to bust **** up. If you track it and beat the pissants outta it then go with a higher limit.

[MarkD]

I have a '90 535iA. (DME 0 261 200 179)
I wish to fit an EAT chip. I was wondering about the rev limit. Mark lists 3 versions on his website.

Stock rev.limit E34-179.6K2
6500 rev. limit E34-179.6K5
6800 rev. limit E34-179.6K8

My car is mainly a daily commuter. Apart from the rev limit is there any other difference between the three versions?

The only difference is the rev limit. The 6K2 was made mainly for automatic transmissions. The other two are good choices for 5 speeds.



It appears if I drive 'sedately' I should see a marginal improvement in fuel economy? - Cheers


Yes you easily should see anywhere from 3 to 8% improvement in fuel economy at part throttle cruising. (typically 5%)

MarkD

[pundit]

The only difference is the rev limit. The 6K2 was made mainly for automatic transmissions. The other two are good choices for 5 speeds.




Yes you easily should see anywhere from 3 to 8% improvement in fuel economy at part throttle cruising. (typically 5%)

MarkD
Thanks Mark,

I may go for the 6.5k chip just in case I wind up fitting a 5 speed sometime down the track! I'll place my order sometime over this weekend - Cheers.

[bill g]

I have a '90 535iA. (DME 0 261 200 179)
I wish to fit an EAT chip. I was wondering about the rev limit. Mark lists 3 versions on his website.

Stock rev.limit E34-179.6K
6500 rev. limit E34-179.6K5
6800 rev. limit E34-179.6K8

My car is mainly a daily commuter. Apart from the rev limit is there any other difference between the three versions?

It appears if I drive 'sedately' I should see a marginal improvement in fuel economy? - Cheers

I have an 89 535i manual with the 6800 rpm EAT chip - the only problem I have is hitting the limit quickly in first gear, especially if the car loses traction in the wet.
You might want to run some before and after tests with a stop watch to determine how much if any real improvement you get in performance ie. on the same stretch of road, similar weather conditions, approx. same vehicle weight, and same fuel. Seat of the pants impressions can be misleading.
I got a slight improvement in performance with the chip, much less than some of the raves would lead you to expect. I was using Shell Optimax before and after installing the chip - have not checked for any change in fuel consumption.

bill g Melbourne

[MarkD]

I have an 89 535i manual with the 6800 rpm EAT chip - the only problem I have is hitting the limit quickly in first gear, especially if the car loses traction in the wet.
You might want to run some before and after tests with a stop watch to determine how much if any real improvement you get in performance ie. on the same stretch of road, similar weather conditions, approx. same vehicle weight, and same fuel. Seat of the pants impressions can be misleading.
I got a slight improvement in performance with the chip, much less than some of the raves would lead you to expect. I was using Shell Optimax before and after installing the chip - have not checked for any change in fuel consumption.

bill g Melbourne


Hello Bill,
sorry to hear about this. I have searched my inbox for email from you but can not find anything. What email address would you have used?

I want to read any email you may have sent. I would say that your experience is not what 98% of the purchasers experience, especially with the E34 535 chip. I'd like to investigate your situation further, and start off by reading any email you sent me regarding this first.

There will be a small number of cars that don't respond well to the tuning, but that is due to some deviation in that particular motor (sensor variations, mainly, or a defective sensor.) It's possible that your car is running a bit lean, or that it's not running on the map I expect it to. (do you have a cat and O2 sensor in your car? ) There are other happy 535i customers in Australia, such as BigKriss who is also a member here. Try running some 95 RON fuel and see how that works, you may find that the performance is better with that.


Thanks

Mark