BMW M3 Forum (E90 E92)

BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Go Back   M3Post - BMW M3 Forum > E90/E92 M3 Technical Topics > Engine, Transmission, Exhaust, Drivetrain, ECU Software Modifications
 
BPM
Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      06-07-2010, 10:47 PM   #969
DLSJ5
Brigadier General
DLSJ5's Avatar
United_States
278
Rep
3,942
Posts

Drives: 2016 F82 M4 ZCP
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: CA

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rom3n View Post
Im not going to get into a discussion about different cars in different countries in an attempt to come to some sort of scientific evaluation on performance.
You're not going to get into a discussion? Then why did you continue to discuss it?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rom3n View Post
The M5 in the video is not ours but I am sure if you do some research you can get the details on it. Iím told it was dyno tested at 500 whp and is one of the fastest NA M5's that runs that event. If you claim otherwise based on information I do not have access to please feel free to share.
It has bolt on's Roman, there's only so much power you can make.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rom3n View Post
I know you are trying to draw some sort of comparison of your kit and how it performs to ours by using our various customers dyno's and video's and comparing them to your personal results but you need to understand for you to accomplish your results you are running a lot more boost than we are and your running race and meth during most of your events.
Actually there's been a few comparisons, nowhere did I make a direct comparison here with my setup, just added to the current conversation. But to clarify I never ran race fuel on my car NA because it didn't do anything, but yes now with FI I run race fuel at times when I do pulls, and always run WM because it's the smart thing to do. Hyperbole much? I am not running a lot more boost than this particular car, only 1.5psi, but it appears that I am actually making the power that I claim as the car is running with cars making more and the Vbox times prove it, also did you not tell me that Larry's car is running 8.5psi, at least it was at Mfest? What did he dyno?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rom3n View Post
You need to also understand that we have currently over 60 E9X M3 supercharger kits installed around the world. Due to different conditions and different cars dyno numbers and performance results will vary. This is why we are conservative when we rate our power. I would not expect you to understand this because your kit is 1 of 1. The only car running your kit that has produced your results is your car because there is only one in existence. When you have one car in one location your test results will not fluctuate much. When there are 10-20 people running your kit in different regions of the world then we can use all of the independent data collected and have a discussion on reliability, consistency and the overall performance of your kit.
You may have a thousand kits out there, that's not relevant to this discussion, the fact is we've only seen performance data/results from a few. Different conditions? I would agree that would affect Vbox times, 1/4 mile times, but not much if the conditions are similar. Regardless when you are running other cars head to head it's irrelevant, both cars in the comparo will be subject to the same conditions, good or bad. I am not the only car running this specific setup, there are 4 others, 3 of which made more power than me at the same boost level, they also have performance data and impressive traps, Vbox times etc.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rom3n View Post
I believe your latest numbers you made 573 whp SAE on 9.8 psi and water / meth and if I read your post correctly you had to make a custom intake to achieve it. These results are good but I would not claim they were made from an off the shelf production kit as you are running 1.3 more psi than a production Gintani stage 2+ kit and a custom made intake. Also you stated that your car made 10-11 psi after you took off your intake. I will tell you that if you are losing 1-2 psi from having your intake installed on your "off the shelf" kit you have a major problem. This would tell me that you have been running a 10-11 psi pulley on the car all this time and you had no idea until you removed the filter. You should make the exact same boost with and without a filter on your kit. I would hope that running a 10-11 psi pulley with meth and race would net you good results.
I made 569 on 91 octane Roman, 0 knock as well. and in another run 579whp at "9psi." They are true/independent dyno #'s and translate to real world runs and Vbox data. It is not a custom intake, it is production, it is currently on all the Gintani cars, except one, and as I explained in my dyno post, the initial intake only influenced dyno runs, performance wise it made little difference, and peak boost was unchanged. I prefer Vbox and comparo runs for my "scientific" testing. Both intakes performed in that regard.

Roman, if you removed the intake off your supercharger kit it will make more boost as well. I don't run 10-11psi, never have on the street, that was in ONE Test pull, the car has seen 7.5 - 9.5psi, and the numbers are real, every Stage 2+ kit should make the power I did, anywhere in the world, no adapting necessary, I can assure you so far they all have, or more. As far as results, I would hope 594 WHP would net your setup good results as well, but it appears when the car adapts those #'s become irrelevant?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rom3n View Post
If you feel the need to continue to compare your kit or any Gintani kit to ours in my thread I can start a new thread and we can have an open technical discussion about the differences between them and we can share results.

Let me know
I haven't compared them, and if I have, so what? I have only made attempts to refute others who have, and those who I feel have posted inaccurate info. I know the differences between them, it appears you don't.
__________________
16 F82 M4 DCT - ZCP - JB4 - 556WHP / 570WTQ
08 E92 M3 DCT - Bolt Ons - 60-130MPH 10.71s - 11.88 @ 118MPH - 377WHP
ESS VT2-625 SC 60-130MPH 6.80s - 11.30 @ 129.3 MPH 586WHP / 379WTQ
ESS VT3-750 - 60-130MPH 6.14s - 10.81 @ 135.13 MPH 690WHP/463WTQ
Shift-S3ctor E92 M3 - 1/2 Mile Trap Speed WR - 174.13 MPH
Appreciate 0
      06-07-2010, 10:48 PM   #970
DLSJ5
Brigadier General
DLSJ5's Avatar
United_States
278
Rep
3,942
Posts

Drives: 2016 F82 M4 ZCP
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: CA

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by PencilGeek View Post
I was not talking FI any more than you were when you brought it up in post #994:
http://www.m3post.com/forums/showpos...&postcount=994
Fair enough.
__________________
16 F82 M4 DCT - ZCP - JB4 - 556WHP / 570WTQ
08 E92 M3 DCT - Bolt Ons - 60-130MPH 10.71s - 11.88 @ 118MPH - 377WHP
ESS VT2-625 SC 60-130MPH 6.80s - 11.30 @ 129.3 MPH 586WHP / 379WTQ
ESS VT3-750 - 60-130MPH 6.14s - 10.81 @ 135.13 MPH 690WHP/463WTQ
Shift-S3ctor E92 M3 - 1/2 Mile Trap Speed WR - 174.13 MPH
Appreciate 0
      06-07-2010, 10:58 PM   #971
powertrip
Scared money don't make money.
powertrip's Avatar
35
Rep
1,452
Posts

Drives: 2009 E92 M3 DCT
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Irvine, CA

iTrader: (3)

Garage List
2009 E92 M3  [0.00]
Drew you are correct about the filter changing boost without changing the pulley. My first upgrade to my old GT500 was an intake and made 1.3psi more with ZERO changes to the pulley. I'm sure it would have made additional boost if we had removed the filter and performed another run.
__________________
2009 E92 M3/DCT/Alpine White/Fox Red/Carbon Leather
OE Tuned 402 whp & 303 wtq/Gintani X-pipe/MXP Axle Back/Rogue Pulley/AFE Stage 2/Cosmetics By IND & EAS
HUGE THANKS: Gintani, OE Tuning, and EAS
Appreciate 0
      06-07-2010, 11:51 PM   #972
SleepyE90
Lieutenant
SleepyE90's Avatar
United_States
12
Rep
507
Posts

Drives: Bavarian
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: GhettoBird Metrolpolis

iTrader: (1)

dude
spicy chicken sandwichs are one $1.00 at Carl's Jr.
thats fucking awesome
__________________
Appreciate 0
      06-08-2010, 12:52 AM   #973
powertrip
Scared money don't make money.
powertrip's Avatar
35
Rep
1,452
Posts

Drives: 2009 E92 M3 DCT
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Irvine, CA

iTrader: (3)

Garage List
2009 E92 M3  [0.00]
Any time that you decrease the resctriction of a FI engine (on the intake side in this case) you will see an increase in boost; some are more dramatic than others. You seem to pride yourself in trying to prove others wrong, so why not pull the filter off of yours and see what happens?? I'm willing to bet you will see similar results, as ESS and Gintani set-ups seem to perform similarly on the dyno (depsite what fanboys say for either party).

Quote:
Originally Posted by PencilGeek View Post
Something sounds terribly wrong about this. To me, this says there is a huge restriction in the design. Wouldn't you think they would test this during the design process of making the kit? Maybe it's not possible to remove the restriction -- I don't know. But if you're saying that "all superchargers on the market" had a similar trait, I would be very surprised.
__________________
2009 E92 M3/DCT/Alpine White/Fox Red/Carbon Leather
OE Tuned 402 whp & 303 wtq/Gintani X-pipe/MXP Axle Back/Rogue Pulley/AFE Stage 2/Cosmetics By IND & EAS
HUGE THANKS: Gintani, OE Tuning, and EAS
Appreciate 0
      06-08-2010, 01:12 AM   #974
M3_WC
Colonel
103
Rep
2,371
Posts

Drives: M3
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: CA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by DLSJ5 View Post
Here's the 2nd run, much closer with the M5, the 335I owner claimed his car was "heat soaked" on this run though.
Heat soak maybe.

Also noticed in the first video against the M5, the 335i clearly floored it well before the cones.
Appreciate 0
      06-08-2010, 01:38 AM   #975
M3_WC
Colonel
103
Rep
2,371
Posts

Drives: M3
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: CA

iTrader: (0)

Per get a vbox and do some 60-130 runs.
Appreciate 0
      06-08-2010, 01:56 AM   #976
powertrip
Scared money don't make money.
powertrip's Avatar
35
Rep
1,452
Posts

Drives: 2009 E92 M3 DCT
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Irvine, CA

iTrader: (3)

Garage List
2009 E92 M3  [0.00]
Come on PG you know that you can't compare one dyno to another. The only way to get a clear and concise result is by dyno testing both cars on the same day, same dyno, SAME fuel, reset adaptations, etc.

Also, I believe this has been explained to you, but I'll do it again. Drew's car is tuned for 91 octane, which means that it wasn't tuned with the meth injection on. I've tuned a number of Evo's and STI's the same way. We tune for 91 octane, and then activate the meth injection to simply decrease combustion chamber temps. This method is really popular among guys that want to push smaller turbos hard up top, as temps get very high when that happens.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PencilGeek View Post
I only care about getting to the truth. I could care less if that proves somebody else wrong -- or proves me wrong. I'm definitely willing to give it a try and remove my filter to find out. My next dyno date is this weekend. I just don't know if they have a boost gauge or not on their dyno. I suppose I can find out without a boost gauge simply by pulling off the filter and seeing if I make more power. +/- 5whp would be in the noise. Drew got 40whp simply by taking off the filter (my apologies if I misunderstood Drew's post and that's not what happened). That's clearly not "in the noise" -- that's some type of demonstrable restriction. But I'll definitely give it a try and report the results (provided the "dyno day" operator will give me the latitude to do this).

Regarding the "similar" dyno results. On one hand you've got a brand new (un-broken in motor) on 94 octane making 580whp @ 7.5 PSI vs. 91 octane + METH making 574whp @ 9.5 PSI. Granted, the 580 result had two things going for it that were uknown about the 574 result: 1) it was apparently running with reset adaptations; 2) it was running with 94 octane. Whereas that same 580 result had something going against it: it was a very fresh motor. Give that motor 10000 miles and it's entirely possible that any gains lost due to adaptation are regained once the motor is fully broken in. The 574 result is running at 9.5 PSI -- a full 2.0 PSI higher on 91+METH. According to every promotor of W/M kits I've seen, and a few articles I've read, the METH is certainly an octane booster -- a rather significant octane booster at that. Does it increase the octane by 3 points? Beats me. So to summarize: 580@7.5 PSI vs. 574@9.5 PSI -- and you say those are equal? I don't have to be a fan boy to realize there is a chasm of difference between those two results -- and it isn't caused by 3AKI points of octane -- even if METH were not involved. Once you add METH to the equation, that chasm might as well be the Grand Canyon of difference.
__________________
2009 E92 M3/DCT/Alpine White/Fox Red/Carbon Leather
OE Tuned 402 whp & 303 wtq/Gintani X-pipe/MXP Axle Back/Rogue Pulley/AFE Stage 2/Cosmetics By IND & EAS
HUGE THANKS: Gintani, OE Tuning, and EAS
Appreciate 0
      06-08-2010, 02:12 AM   #977
MspiredM3
Private First Class
MspiredM3's Avatar
8
Rep
178
Posts

Drives: Turbo e46 M3
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Encino, CA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by PencilGeek View Post
I only care about getting to the truth. I could care less if that proves somebody else wrong -- or proves me wrong. I'm definitely willing to give it a try and remove my filter to find out. My next dyno date is this weekend. I just don't know if they have a boost gauge or not on their dyno. I suppose I can find out without a boost gauge simply by pulling off the filter and seeing if I make more power. +/- 5whp would be in the noise. Drew got 40whp simply by taking off the filter (my apologies if I misunderstood Drew's post and that's not what happened). That's clearly not "in the noise" -- that's some type of demonstrable restriction. But I'll definitely give it a try and report the results (provided the "dyno day" operator will give me the latitude to do this).

Regarding the "similar" dyno results. On one hand you've got a brand new (un-broken in motor) on 94 octane making 580whp @ 7.5 PSI vs. 91 octane + METH making 574whp @ 9.5 PSI. Granted, the 580 result had two things going for it that were uknown about the 574 result: 1) it was apparently running with reset adaptations; 2) it was running with 94 octane. Whereas that same 580 result had something going against it: it was a very fresh motor. Give that motor 10000 miles and it's entirely possible that any gains lost due to adaptation are regained once the motor is fully broken in. The 574 result is running at 9.5 PSI -- a full 2.0 PSI higher on 91+METH. According to every promotor of W/M kits I've seen, and a few articles I've read, the METH is certainly an octane booster -- a rather significant octane booster at that. Does it increase the octane by 3 points? Beats me. So to summarize: 580@7.5 PSI vs. 574@9.5 PSI -- and you say those are equal? I don't have to be a fan boy to realize there is a chasm of difference between those two results -- and it isn't caused by 3AKI points of octane -- even if METH were not involved. Once you add METH to the equation, that chasm might as well be the Grand Canyon of difference.
Why do you always go back to comparing dyno numbers rather than real world results?

Who cares if one car was on 30psi and one was on 5psi. The bottom line is both cars made similar power numbers (supposedly), yet one failed to perform.

Pea, I really wish you would go to an INDEPENDENT dyno rather than back to ESS
Appreciate 0
      06-08-2010, 02:14 AM   #978
MspiredM3
Private First Class
MspiredM3's Avatar
8
Rep
178
Posts

Drives: Turbo e46 M3
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Encino, CA

iTrader: (0)

I love how Roman tries to throw a twist and make it seem (again) that the Gintani kit is dangerous because removing the intake filter results in an increase in boost. If you remove a filter on a supercharged setup, you will see a rise in boost, that's just how it works. Sometimes its small, sometimes its large. If you don't see a difference, well then your filter isn't really doing it's job 'filtering' things out.

A little off topic, but I hope my car doesn't adapt too much this week and cost me too much power as I am headed to the track

Last edited by MspiredM3; 06-08-2010 at 02:20 AM.
Appreciate 0
      06-08-2010, 02:15 AM   #979
DLSJ5
Brigadier General
DLSJ5's Avatar
United_States
278
Rep
3,942
Posts

Drives: 2016 F82 M4 ZCP
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: CA

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by PencilGeek View Post
I only care about getting to the truth. I could care less if that proves somebody else wrong -- or proves me wrong. I'm definitely willing to give it a try and remove my filter to find out. My next dyno date is this weekend. I just don't know if they have a boost gauge or not on their dyno. I suppose I can find out without a boost gauge simply by pulling off the filter and seeing if I make more power. +/- 5whp would be in the noise. Drew got 40whp simply by taking off the filter (my apologies if I misunderstood Drew's post and that's not what happened). That's clearly not "in the noise" -- that's some type of demonstrable restriction. But I'll definitely give it a try and report the results (provided the "dyno day" operator will give me the latitude to do this).

Regarding the "similar" dyno results. On one hand you've got a brand new (un-broken in motor) on 94 octane making 580whp @ 7.5 PSI vs. 91 octane + METH making 574whp @ 9.5 PSI. Granted, the 580 result had two things going for it that were uknown about the 574 result: 1) it was apparently running with reset adaptations; 2) it was running with 94 octane. Whereas that same 580 result had something going against it: it was a very fresh motor. Give that motor 10000 miles and it's entirely possible that any gains lost due to adaptation are regained once the motor is fully broken in. The 574 result is running at 9.5 PSI -- a full 2.0 PSI higher on 91+METH. According to every promotor of W/M kits I've seen, and a few articles I've read, the METH is certainly an octane booster -- a rather significant octane booster at that. Does it increase the octane by 3 points? Beats me. So to summarize: 580@7.5 PSI vs. 574@9.5 PSI -- and you say those are equal? I don't have to be a fan boy to realize there is a chasm of difference between those two results -- and it isn't caused by 3AKI points of octane -- even if METH were not involved. Once you add METH to the equation, that chasm might as well be the Grand Canyon of difference.
Just a few corrections in your comparison-

1. I made 579whp at "9psi", but I never posted the dyno
2. I made 569whp at "9psi" on 91 ONLY
3. The car did this on two different dyno's a few days apart
4. My dyno #'s more than match how the car performs in the real world and the Vbox, Per in his own words says his DO NOT
5. Per's car made more power than you on pump, with a TAD more boost, why?
6. You are correct, WM is certainly an octane booster, but it depends on how it's applied
7. The WM on my car never reaches the CC, it does not affect the AFR at all, but feel free to call it what you want, I can understand your reasoning
8. Octane will only change the dyno result if- the car is fully adapted OR if it's tuned for it on the spot and adjustments are made, you and I both know it does nothing simply by pouring race fuel in at the dyno
9. DCT vs. 6MT
10. I don't think Elden was specifically talking about my car and Per's, he was speaking in general about the FI dyno's and if you look in the database, he's right, in general they make similar #'s
__________________
16 F82 M4 DCT - ZCP - JB4 - 556WHP / 570WTQ
08 E92 M3 DCT - Bolt Ons - 60-130MPH 10.71s - 11.88 @ 118MPH - 377WHP
ESS VT2-625 SC 60-130MPH 6.80s - 11.30 @ 129.3 MPH 586WHP / 379WTQ
ESS VT3-750 - 60-130MPH 6.14s - 10.81 @ 135.13 MPH 690WHP/463WTQ
Shift-S3ctor E92 M3 - 1/2 Mile Trap Speed WR - 174.13 MPH
Appreciate 0
      06-08-2010, 02:17 AM   #980
sales@ESSTuning
sales@ESSTuning's Avatar
224
Rep
3,154
Posts

Drives: ESS M3 / M4
Join Date: May 2007
Location: AZ

iTrader: (6)

You're not going to get into a discussion? Then why did you continue to discuss it?

Iím sorry when did I open a discussion on different cars in different countries and how the performance between them proved anything ? I made a comparison of three cars that ran each other on the same day in the same location. The 335 in this video runs a 60-130 in 9 sec without meth. This is the same as some supercharged E9X M3's so I would say it's a pretty fast car.


It has bolt on's Roman, there's only so much power you can make.

Really ? so exactly what are the limits of the E60 M5 in NA form with bolt ons and software ?

Actually there's been a few comparisons, nowhere did I make a direct comparison here with my setup, just added to the current conversation. But to clarify I never ran race fuel on my car NA because it didn't do anything, but yes now with FI I run race fuel at times when I do pulls, and always run WM because it's the smart thing to do.

Like I said before with close to 10 psi and meth you should be making the power and performance you are and you should definitely be running meth at all times.

Hyperbole much? I am not running a lot more boost than this particular car, only 1.5psi, but it appears that I am actually making the power that I claim as the car is running with cars making more and the Vbox times prove it,

Your current dynos show max boost at 9.8-9.9 psi. This customers car runs max boost at 7.5 psi how is that a 1.5 psi difference? That is a 2.3 psi difference and you run meth.

also did you not tell me that Larry's car is running 8.5psi, at least it was at Mfest? What did he dyno?

Larry ran 8 psi at Mfest on a 50/50 mix of race and 91 for fun. He never ran a 60-130 or dyno with that setup.

Larry's car on 91 octane and 5.5 psi made slightly over 500 whp with catless exhaust. He also ran a low 8 sec 60-130 with this setup. I would say his Vbox data confirms his car is making rated power.

You may have a thousand kits out there, that's not relevant to this discussion, the fact is we've only seen performance data/results from a few.

Actually it has a lot to do with the discussion. We have videos and dynos from all over the world. If you like I can post them up for you to view. These independent videos and dyno's have shown that our kits always make rated power and perform extremely well in the real world. This is something that you seem to deny or are attempting to refute with your continued comparisons and comments.

Different conditions? I would agree that would affect Vbox times, 1/4 mile times, but not much if the conditions are similar. Regardless when you are running other cars head to head it's irrelevant, both cars in the comparo will be subject to the same conditions, good or bad. I am not the only car running this specific setup, there are 4 others, 3 of which made more power than me at the same boost level, they also have performance data and impressive traps, Vbox times etc.

Then have the customers who have these 4 cars post up all of their data. As of now there is only one car that has made your numbers and it's your car.

I made 569 on 91 octane Roman, 0 knock as well. and in another run 579whp at "9psi." They are true/independent dyno #'s and translate to real world runs and Vbox data. It is not a custom intake, it is production, it is currently on all the Gintani cars, except one, and as I explained in my dyno post, the initial intake only influenced dyno runs, performance wise it made little difference, and peak boost was unchanged. I prefer Vbox and comparo runs for my "scientific" testing. Both intakes performed in that regard.

You said you removed the filter off your kit and the car made 10-11 psi and 600 whp and then went into a limp mode. I would say this qualifies as making a performance difference. This is not complicated to figure out. If you made 10-11 psi and 600 whp without a filter on your intake you were running a 10-11 psi pulley and your filter was restricting the boost and power. Going out on the road and running a 60-130 to test this is not science itís a nice way of saying there was a problem but it did not matter in the performance of the car. If this was the case and it did not effect performance on the road why did you need to re-design it? Boost is mechanical; it is determined by the size of the pulley it will only go down if you have a boost leak or restriction of air coming into the blower. You called this design "new intake" this would usually be understood as you changed it from its original design. So far the only change I have seen is you cut the carbon fiber cover off that used to sit over the top of the filter. What exactly did you change to gain the power you did ?

Roman, if you removed the intake off your supercharger kit it will make more boost as well.

Drew you are wrong again, you need to open your mind to more than what is under your hood. We have run our cars without the filter during R&D to ensure the filter we were running did not restrict air flow and the car makes the same power with the same boost. We tested 4 different filters before we found the right size to use in our kit. We do not have our customers testing our intake design to determine what works properly.

I don't run 10-11psi, never have on the street, that was in ONE Test pull, the car has seen 7.5 - 9.5psi, and the numbers are real,

I never said you run 10-11 psi on the streets I said you had a 10-11 psi pulley on your car and you had no clue as the intake was restricting boost back to 9.5 psi. I have no doubt your dyno numbers are real, with 9.5-10 psi of boost and meth they should be.

every Stage 2+ kit should make the power I did, anywhere in the world, no adapting necessary, I can assure you so far they all have, or more.

Should make and do make are two very different things. The only way you would know if other cars would make the same power anywhere in the world would be to actually have kits in other parts of the world. The only way you could assure me or anyone else is to actually have all the independent data from these cars posted up by the customers, so please do.

As far as results, I would hope 594 WHP would net your setup good results as well, but it appears when the car adapts those #'s become irrelevant?

If you understood how the MSS60 works you would know it's adaptation based and it self corrects based on conditions, this includes intake air temps and fuel quality. When the car is first flashed with a new software file or adaptations have been reset the car will default to a slightly lower than target timing map. Over time if fuel and air temp allow it will slowly advance it's timing until it reaches target. If conditions do not allow the opposite occurs. This adaptation process can take some time and power output can change for the better or worse. Because we have not re-tested this car we do not know if it is making the same power, more or less. The only exception is if the tuner programmed a really high timing target in an attempt to force the car to run high timing under any conditions. In this case the car will almost always pull timing as it adapts making less power. I would expect someone with your knowledge of these cars to understand this process and to also understand that power output is directly related to timing.

I haven't compared them, and if I have, so what? I have only made attempts to refute others who have, and those who I feel have posted inaccurate info.

Where in this thread did anyone comment on the performance info of your car VS a M5 or a 335 that forced you to chime in and defend how your car did against these two cars ? you jumped into this thread in an attempt to compare the performance of your car to one of our customers.

I know the differences between them, it appears you don't.

I am well aware of the difference many of them are pointed out in this thread by you.
Appreciate 0
      06-08-2010, 02:19 AM   #981
sales@ESSTuning
sales@ESSTuning's Avatar
224
Rep
3,154
Posts

Drives: ESS M3 / M4
Join Date: May 2007
Location: AZ

iTrader: (6)

Quote:
Originally Posted by MspiredM3 View Post
I love how Roman tries to throw a twist and make it seem (again) that the Gintani kit is dangerous because removing the intake filter results in an increase in boost. If you remove a filter on a supercharged setup, you will see a rise in boost, that's just how it works. Sometimes its small, sometimes its large. If you don't see a difference, well then your filter isn't really doing it's job 'filtering' things out.

A little off topic, but I hope my car doesn't adapt too much this week and cost me too much power
Your being serious with this post ?
Appreciate 0
      06-08-2010, 02:38 AM   #982
MspiredM3
Private First Class
MspiredM3's Avatar
8
Rep
178
Posts

Drives: Turbo e46 M3
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Encino, CA

iTrader: (0)

So, Roman, it should be noted that when looking at the dyno's that you post, that one should deduct 40-60rwhp? I mean who cares what a car does on one dyno run, people care what the car will really be putting out on the street after it 'adapts'. Why even publish these too good to be true dynos and give future potential customers a false hope of the power they think they are going to get with your kits?
Appreciate 0
      06-08-2010, 03:07 AM   #983
M3_WC
Colonel
103
Rep
2,371
Posts

Drives: M3
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: CA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rom3n View Post
We have videos and dynos from all over the world. If you like I can post them up for you to view. These independent videos and dyno's have shown that our kits always make rated power and perform extremely well in the real world. This is something that you seem to deny or are attempting to refute with your continued comparisons and comments
Yes, please post vbox data/numbers, 1/4 mile times, videos of either. What you call, "real world."

Only ESS 60-130 numbers I have seen are:
8.31 - Biglare/ E90 M3 DCT ESS VT-600 SC
8.84 - RomanESS / E92 M3 VT-575 /DCT
Appreciate 0
      06-08-2010, 03:09 AM   #984
sales@ESSTuning
sales@ESSTuning's Avatar
224
Rep
3,154
Posts

Drives: ESS M3 / M4
Join Date: May 2007
Location: AZ

iTrader: (6)

Quote:
Originally Posted by MspiredM3 View Post
So, Roman, it should be noted that when looking at the dyno's that you post, that one should deduct 40-60rwhp? I mean who cares what a car does on one dyno run, people care what the car will really be putting out on the street after it 'adapts'. Why even publish these too good to be true dynos and give future potential customers a false hope of the power they think they are going to get with your kits?
First answer my question were you really serious with that last post ?

To answer your question we post a lot of the dyno's and the videos our customers send to us and the numbers we make on our dyno even during R&D. Some cars perform better than others that's just how it goes. If you would take the time to visit our website http://www.esstuning.com/categories/...252dSeries/M3/ we tell customers exactly what they should expect from all of our kits and the dyno's we post there are a good example of what we have seen on customers and our cars.

Customers like to see dynos mspired. One of the most common questions I get when customers contact me is what is the rated power of our kits and what do they dyno to the wheels. I always quote the rated power that we list on our site. They don't call and ask what our 60-130 times are or what our standing mile is, so to answer your question I would say a lot of people care what our kits dyno at. What customers decide to do with that added power is up to them.

In the case of the VT2-625 customers should expect to dyno 50% more power than stock. In the case of per's car anything more than 515 whp for him is above rated power and is a bonus.
Appreciate 0
      06-08-2010, 03:12 AM   #985
M3_WC
Colonel
103
Rep
2,371
Posts

Drives: M3
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: CA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by PencilGeek View Post
Regarding the "similar" dyno results. On one hand you've got a brand new (un-broken in motor) on 94 octane making 580whp @ 7.5 PSI vs. 91 octane + METH making 574whp @ 9.5 PSI. Granted, the 580 result had two things going for it that were uknown about the 574 result: 1) it was apparently running with reset adaptations; 2) it was running with 94 octane. Whereas that same 580 result had something going against it: it was a very fresh motor. Give that motor 10000 miles and it's entirely possible that any gains lost due to adaptation are regained once the motor is fully broken in. The 574 result is running at 9.5 PSI -- a full 2.0 PSI higher on 91+METH. According to every promotor of W/M kits I've seen, and a few articles I've read, the METH is certainly an octane booster -- a rather significant octane booster at that. Does it increase the octane by 3 points? Beats me. So to summarize: 580@7.5 PSI vs. 574@9.5 PSI -- and you say those are equal? I don't have to be a fan boy to realize there is a chasm of difference between those two results -- and it isn't caused by 3AKI points of octane -- even if METH were not involved. Once you add METH to the equation, that chasm might as well be the Grand Canyon of difference.
You seem to think they dyno the same.

But can you honestly say that Pea's VT625 would match Drew's 60-130 of 7.37?

Real world numbers shows Drew's car is using that extra boost and meth very well.

7.37 - DLSJ5 / E92 M3 Gintani Stage 2 SC / DCT / 91 octane and meth / 3 shifts

Last edited by M3_WC; 06-08-2010 at 03:29 AM.
Appreciate 0
      06-08-2010, 03:44 AM   #986
sales@ESSTuning
sales@ESSTuning's Avatar
224
Rep
3,154
Posts

Drives: ESS M3 / M4
Join Date: May 2007
Location: AZ

iTrader: (6)

Quote:
Originally Posted by M3_WC View Post
Yes, please post vbox data/numbers, 1/4 mile times, videos of either. What you call, "real world."

Only ESS 60-130 numbers I have seen are:
8.31 - Biglare/ E90 M3 DCT ESS VT-600 SC
8.84 - RomanESS / E92 M3 VT-575 /DCT
[u2b]<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/BA1NiBDxecQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/BA1NiBDxecQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>[/u2b]

[u2b]<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/wF1w3DEAozY&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/wF1w3DEAozY&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>[/u2b]

[u2b]<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/rFHaabltcT8&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/rFHaabltcT8&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>[/u2b]

[u2b]<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/L1XdEe9Zzig&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/L1XdEe9Zzig&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>[/u2b]

[u2b]<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/-BtG4pDiU2w&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/-BtG4pDiU2w&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>[/u2b]

[u2b]<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/OSmD6pESLdc&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/OSmD6pESLdc&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>[/u2b]
Appreciate 0
      06-08-2010, 03:52 AM   #987
M3_WC
Colonel
103
Rep
2,371
Posts

Drives: M3
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: CA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by PencilGeek View Post
As of today, Roman @ ESS is still the only company that has posted a VBox time with a company car. I look forward to you making the same request of other companies as well -- starting with your next post.
Who cares if its a company car?

Quote:
Originally Posted by PencilGeek View Post
v60-130 results between 6MT and DCT cannot be directly compared. The last time we had this discussion, both sides seemed to agree that the DCT had a 1.1 second advantage in v60-130 over 6MT. So that would mean a 7.37 second v60-130 for DCT was equivalent to 8.47 seconds for 6MT. And yes, I already have 8.47 beat in my only attempt at v60-130. Furthermore, I was at 2000 ft altitude on cold street tires 91 octane and only 6PSI. To date, that's the only time I've attempted a v60-130 on my car.
Ok so when someone gets a VT625 kit on their DCT, you expect it to match Drew's 7.37.

Please?

Once again, Drew's time shows his car is using the extra boost and meth very well.

Last edited by M3_WC; 06-08-2010 at 04:00 AM.
Appreciate 0
      06-08-2010, 03:54 AM   #988
DLSJ5
Brigadier General
DLSJ5's Avatar
United_States
278
Rep
3,942
Posts

Drives: 2016 F82 M4 ZCP
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: CA

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rom3n View Post
I’m sorry when did I open a discussion on different cars in different countries and how the performance between them proved anything ? I made a comparison of three cars that ran each other on the same day in the same location. The 335 in this video runs a 60-130 in 9 sec without meth. This is the same as some supercharged E9X M3's so I would say it's a pretty fast car.
You did when you posted up about those cars, what country is irrelevant, the fact that you believe it makes a huge difference, doesn't carry much weight IMHO. What difference does it make where the car is or the location? When you are comparing two or more cars in the same place, it doesn't. I don't get your line of reasoning here, I made a comparison of the same three cars in the same location as well, what exactly did I say that ticked you off? Are we not allowed to discuss this? Regardless I concured with you Per's car pulled nicely on Tom's 335I which is no sloutch, it is a fast car, but not 594whp fast. M5's run 10-11 second 60-130's, but with the outstanding fuel in europe, I don't doubt that Tom's car ran some impressive 60-130's, the guy can paddle as well. FYI the fastest 60-130 for an M5 is 8.58, that's a 500+whp stroker, that car is running very close to a C6 Z06.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rom3n View Post
Really ? so exactly what are the limits of the E60 M5 in NA form with bolt ons and software ?
Yes really, I would think at 568CHP that car is at it's limit. Strokers are rated around 600BHP, with bolt ons as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rom3n View Post
Like I said before with close to 10 psi and meth you should be making the power and performance you are and you should definitely be running meth at all times.
That's the point, I have no doubt my dyno matches how the car performs, Per's, according to him, does not, don't care at what psi, I would also argue any stock S65 making near 600whp, should probably refrain from running pump fuel, even if it's the magical euro 94 octane.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rom3n View Post
Your current dynos show max boost at 9.8-9.9 psi. This customers car runs max boost at 7.5 psi how is that a 1.5 psi difference? That is a 2.3 psi difference and you run meth.
I informed you that I have another dyno, 579whp at 9psi, that is 1.5psi difference, I won't post it on this thread.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rom3n View Post
Larry ran 8 psi at Mfest on a 50/50 mix of race and 91 for fun. He never ran a 60-130 or dyno with that setup.
Right, I just asked if he dynoed it, I would think you would to make sure it's running safely and dyno the car before adding a smaller pulley, and since we are counting every last psi, you stated "8.5" psi.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rom3n View Post
Larry's car on 91 octane and 5.5 psi made slightly over 500 whp with catless exhaust. He also ran a low 8 sec 60-130 with this setup. I would say his Vbox data confirms his car is making rated power.
I would concur, it is interesting though with less boost and a stock motor that his 60-130 is the same as PG's ESS Stroker. I was specifically talking about Per's dyno vs. performance, not Larry's. I believe your car and Larry's dyno's match how the cars perform.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rom3n View Post
Actually it has a lot to do with the discussion. We have videos and dynos from all over the world. If you like I can post them up for you to view. These independent videos and dyno's have shown that our kits always make rated power and perform extremely well in the real world. This is something that you seem to deny or are attempting to refute with your continued comparisons and comments.
I've seen all of them. They are few and far between though, and most are the Red car in Russia, his moves no doubt. Your kits perform well, never said they didn't, the discussion was about a specific car and certain dyno's. I concur your kits do make the "rated" power on your website, but at times you post dyno's that are not OTS kits, I believe AJ said that your 560whp setups, are not available to everyone, nor are they supported by you at that power level, I think Per's #'s certainly apply.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rom3n View Post
Then have the customers who have these 4 cars post up all of their data. As of now there is only one car that has made your numbers and it's your car.
They did, you just didn't see it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rom3n View Post
You said you removed the filter off your kit and the car made 10-11 psi and 600 whp and then went into a limp mode. I would say this qualifies as making a performance difference. This is not complicated to figure out. If you made 10-11 psi and 600 whp without a filter on your intake you were running a 10-11 psi pulley and your filter was restricting the boost and power. Going out on the road and running a 60-130 to test this is not science it’s a nice way of saying there was a problem but it did not matter in the performance of the car. If this was the case and it did not effect performance on the road why did you need to re-design it? Boost is mechanical; it is determined by the size of the pulley it will only go down if you have a boost leak or restriction of air coming into the blower. You called this design "new intake" this would usually be understood as you changed it from its original design. So far the only change I have seen is you cut the carbon fiber cover off that used to sit over the top of the filter. What exactly did you change to gain the power you did ?
Roman, it made little to no real world performance difference and I explained why, forget the dyno #'s. The Vbox #'s, were very similiar with the old and new intake, that is what is relevant. Why are you so concerned with the intake? The old intake was a box, with a panel filter, the new one is a cone intake of the back of the charger, it's in pictures, did you not see them at Bimmerfest? Roman an intake with a filter on it will restrict the incoming air a bit, if your kit defies physics, as it seems to on the ESS dyno as well, fair enough.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rom3n View Post
Drew you are wrong again, you need to open your mind to more than what is under your hood. We have run our cars without the filter during R&D to ensure the filter we were running did not restrict air flow and the car makes the same power with the same boost. We tested 4 different filters before we found the right size to use in our kit. We do not have our customers testing our intake design to determine what works properly.
So none of the filters restricted the air? You say you tested 4, none of them changed the boost level, so let me understand this, a filter causes no restriction through an intake that does a 180 degree turn through a filter, vs nothing? Interesting.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rom3n View Post
I never said you run 10-11 psi on the streets I said you had a 10-11 psi pulley on your car and you had no clue as the intake was restricting boost back to 9.5 psi. I have no doubt your dyno numbers are real, with 9.5-10 psi of boost and meth they should be.
I do not have a 10-11 psi pulley on my car, right now I have the 9 - 9.5psi pulley, do you know of one that utilizes the stock Crank Pulley size that can pull off 10-11psi and with a filter on? That's a very small SC'r pulley, mine is not that small, lol.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rom3n View Post
Should make and do make are two very different things. The only way you would know if other cars would make the same power anywhere in the world would be to actually have kits in other parts of the world. The only way you could assure me or anyone else is to actually have all the independent data from these cars posted up by the customers, so please do.
Agreed, myself and others have, independent is the key word here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rom3n View Post
If you understood how the MSS60 works you would know it's adaptation based and it self corrects based on conditions, this includes intake air temps and fuel quality. When the car is first flashed with a new software file or adaptations have been reset the car will default to a slightly lower than target timing map. Over time if fuel and air temp allow it will slowly advance it's timing until it reaches target. If conditions do not allow the opposite occurs. This adaptation process can take some time and power output can change for the better or worse. Because we have not re-tested this car we do not know if it is making the same power, more or less. The only exception is if the tuner programmed a really high timing target in an attempt to force the car to run high timing under any conditions. In this case the car will almost always pull timing as it adapts making less power. I would expect someone with your knowledge of these cars to understand this process and to also understand that power output is directly related to timing.
Here comes "how the ECU works" lecture again, let's cut to the chase, instead of hiding behind a bunch of tuner jargon, because none of that matters, what matters are the #'s you posted/advertised vs. what the car really makes in the real world, in this case, unless you find something wrong at your inspection, it appears they don't.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rom3n View Post
Where in this thread did anyone comment on the performance info of your car VS a M5 or a 335 that forced you to chime in and defend how your car did against these two cars ? you jumped into this thread in an attempt to compare the performance of your car to one of our customers.
Does it matter? FYI, I didn't defend how my car performed, lol, I simply stated where a bolt on M5 and fully modded 335I stand against a bolt on M3, not just my car. You claimed that car was making 500whp, I disagreed. I wasn't even referring to my FI setup and since when is comparing the performance of those cars a sin?
__________________
16 F82 M4 DCT - ZCP - JB4 - 556WHP / 570WTQ
08 E92 M3 DCT - Bolt Ons - 60-130MPH 10.71s - 11.88 @ 118MPH - 377WHP
ESS VT2-625 SC 60-130MPH 6.80s - 11.30 @ 129.3 MPH 586WHP / 379WTQ
ESS VT3-750 - 60-130MPH 6.14s - 10.81 @ 135.13 MPH 690WHP/463WTQ
Shift-S3ctor E92 M3 - 1/2 Mile Trap Speed WR - 174.13 MPH
Appreciate 0
      06-08-2010, 03:55 AM   #989
M3_WC
Colonel
103
Rep
2,371
Posts

Drives: M3
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: CA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by PencilGeek View Post
4. I must have missed it. I only saw him post his account of each match up.
Pea quoted on N54tech:

"The M3 is my new car, and it has the ESS VT-625 kit , the dyno that shows 595 whp was not correct , i will do another dyno this week and i belive i will get 540-550 whp. But as you see it doesnīt have much torque and when i start at 50km/h i am totally wrong in the powerband 1 st gear to short and 2d gear to long.

And i have 3000 km on the car , still in running in period"
Appreciate 0
      06-08-2010, 04:29 AM   #990
MspiredM3
Private First Class
MspiredM3's Avatar
8
Rep
178
Posts

Drives: Turbo e46 M3
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Encino, CA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rom3n View Post
First answer my question were you really serious with that last post ?

To answer your question we post a lot of the dyno's and the videos our customers send to us and the numbers we make on our dyno even during R&D. Some cars perform better than others that's just how it goes. If you would take the time to visit our website http://www.esstuning.com/categories/...252dSeries/M3/ we tell customers exactly what they should expect from all of our kits and the dyno's we post there are a good example of what we have seen on customers and our cars.

Customers like to see dynos mspired. One of the most common questions I get when customers contact me is what is the rated power of our kits and what do they dyno to the wheels. I always quote the rated power that we list on our site. They don't call and ask what our 60-130 times are or what our standing mile is, so to answer your question I would say a lot of people care what our kits dyno at. What customers decide to do with that added power is up to them.

In the case of the VT2-625 customers should expect to dyno 50% more power than stock. In the case of per's car anything more than 515 whp for him is above rated power and is a bonus.
Of course I'm serious, physics are physics...

It's very simple. I can claim my kit will yield you 100rwhp, but when I keep posting UNREALISTIC dynos, over and over again, I will soon set an expectation that my kit is underrated and that you should expect much more power that I "claim".

My question still stands...


WHY WOULD YOU POST A DYNO THAT CAN BE ACHIEVED ONLY ONE TIME, AND ONLY ON THE DYNO WITHOUT SPECIFYING SUCH?
Appreciate 0
Post Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:15 PM.




m3post
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST