Quite lean AFR's on the ESS dyno run.
Originally Posted by Activ3
Jean, I know you're well versed on semantics and forum posts, so I'll address a few things that I noticed.
AA's kit does have more area to cover before the charge reaches the throttle bodies. You're right on that. However, would you not agree that charge cooling through an air-water core is more restrictive than a larger sized air-air intercooler? I'm sure you'll also agree that for any sort of cooling to be effective, there must be some sort of restriction.
As for pressure drop, have you personally measured pre and post cooler pressure differences on both kits on a day with similar conditions?
You can't compare the N54 to the S63TU, obviously the twin turbo v8 makes more power than the straight 6 3.0L. The N55 was released air-air, along with the N20. If you've worked on the S63TU you'll notice that with the location of the turbos it's not logical to run an air-air setup.
We both know that throttle response with a drive by wire system can be tuned to different sensitivities. Some people prefer their throttle control to be exponential, whereas some prefer a linear style delivery. Doesn't mean one is better than any other.
Banging the rev limiter like the e46 M3 is how you bend rods. You put the most stress on a motor when you lift at high rpm under load. Again, different tuners will do different things, it's preference.
Reving a centrifugal blower higher will yield higher HP numbers. The last AA meth kit we installed had a green LED.
If you look at both dynos, the AA kit makes more power up until about 7250rpm. Would you attribute that to restriction, blower design, tuning, or the somewhat lean afr on the ESS car?
The ESS car peaks higher, but it also revs higher.