8600 rpms is fun

[SROC5]

always wanted to use that one! the fight was pretty decent and entertaining.

8600 is fun, had it, but removed it since it wasn't so noticeable for me to add that extra tension to the engine.

Now, if someone can increase to 9000 rpms safely, we're talking turkey friends....

[img]

Originally Posted by SROC5

always wanted to use that one! the fight was pretty decent and entertaining.

8600 is fun, had it, but removed it since it wasn't so noticeable for me to add that extra tension to the engine.

Now, if someone can increase to 9000 rpms safely, we're talking turkey friends....

8600 is really pushing the limits on stock internals. Rods,Valve Springs,Bearings can not take it !

[m33]

Originally Posted by img

8600 is really pushing the limits on stock internals. Rods,Valve Springs,Bearings can not take it !

+1
All you really doing is stretching your peak power " not gaining power " and if you think about it that stretch is delaying you from jumping into the next gear so it works against you ,but.......... You do have an advantage of catching your next gear (upshift) at a higher Rpm, still not worth it IMO, if this is done on a built motor with added components that would let you take advantage of the added Rpm then that would make sense.

[m33]

Btw Mike , wheel spin can occur for many reasons ...
Bald tires
Wet roads
Hitting it on a turn
Cold tires
Cold surface
The point that I'm trying to make is I highly doubt 10 wtq is going to turn your car into a "massive" torque monster , that's not to say your tune is not a good one it probably is but their are Tuners that been tuning these M's long before you and non come out claiming what you do , I think that's what irritates people most, let your product speak for itself , let your customers do the bragging.


Lets all move on

[Mike Benvo]

Originally Posted by m33

Btw Mike , wheel spin can occur for many reasons ...
Bald tires
Wet roads
Hitting it on a turn
Cold tires
Cold surface
The point that I'm trying to make is I highly doubt 10 wtq is going to turn your car into a "massive" torque monster , that's not to say your tune is not a good one it probably is but their are Tuners that been tuning these M's long before you and non come out claiming what you do , I think that's what irritates people most, let your product speak for itself , let your customers do the bragging.


Lets all move on

thanks for the history lesson.. my claims are pretty standard in wot

definitely move on, i don't know why you posted again

btw you missed overly inflated tires

img: not sure why you think it's pushing the limits, i don't think so. but we can let it rest

[img]

Originally Posted by Mike Benvo

thanks for the history lesson.. my claims are pretty standard in wot

definitely move on, i don't know why you posted again

btw you missed overly inflated tires

img: not sure why you think it's pushing the limits, i don't think so. but we can let it rest

Im just talking from experience of the amount of M3s that ive seen at the dealer with broken valve springs at etc...
Hope all is well

[Munit]

This makes no sense! Prolonging your peak power (which actually isn't true if you look at the dyno of people with 8600 plus, the power keeps climbinb) but even assuming it prolonged peak power, you prolong "414 or whatever you call peak" for 200 extra RPMS in the lowest gear possible which gives you that 414 hp multiplied by the lower gear mutlipcliation advtage for longer and that means you spend 200 rpms less in the next gear with less of an advantage and you are higher on the power curve meaning also less time at the lowest end of the power band.

Not accounting for whether its a stress to the engine, raising RPMS will ALWAYS be better for power to the ground and acceleration as long as power continues at peak, OR even a bit less than peak, given the gear multliplicaiton effect of lasting in the gear. So if the m3 held up to 9k structurally and the peak power was flat until 9k, it would be that much faster than a standard m3 at 8400

Originally Posted by m33

+1
All you really doing is stretching your peak power " not gaining power " and if you think about it that stretch is delaying you from jumping into the next gear so it works against you ,but.......... You do have an advantage of catching your next gear (upshift) at a higher Rpm, still not worth it IMO, if this is done on a built motor with added components that would let you take advantage of the added Rpm then that would make sense.

[mhabs]

So how much hp is being produced at 8,600 rpm with a tune compared to 8,300 rpm?

[aussiem3]

Originally Posted by mhabs

So how much hp is being produced at 8,600 rpm with a tune compared to 8,300 rpm?

I am not a tuning expert. I think it is subject to a lot of things, like the optional equipment in the car, road conditions, tyre, weather etc). Even standard ///3 are different to one another, so when you tune it, again it's going to be different similarly tuned car. I have seen on the dyno a few times. It's very interesting.

Hopefully, experts like Mike can enlighten us as to how all these conditions impact on the power output of a car,

[Mike Benvo]

Originally Posted by Munit

This makes no sense! Prolonging your peak power (which actually isn't true if you look at the dyno of people with 8600 plus, the power keeps climbinb) but even assuming it prolonged peak power, you prolong "414 or whatever you call peak" for 200 extra RPMS in the lowest gear possible which gives you that 414 hp multiplied by the lower gear mutlipcliation advtage for longer and that means you spend 200 rpms less in the next gear with less of an advantage and you are higher on the power curve meaning also less time at the lowest end of the power band.

Not accounting for whether its a stress to the engine, raising RPMS will ALWAYS be better for power to the ground and acceleration as long as power continues at peak, OR even a bit less than peak, given the gear multliplicaiton effect of lasting in the gear. So if the m3 held up to 9k structurally and the peak power was flat until 9k, it would be that much faster than a standard m3 at 8400

The +300 RPM bump is really insignificant in lower gears where you have the multiplication advantage. You're missing the biggest element in this which is TIME. In first and second (and to some degree third), not only will you have the DME intervening sooner because of the steeper gradient of RPM rise, you'll only be there for a seconds or a fraction thereof.

Same idea with impulse in physics (I=FdeltaT)

Where it makes a difference, is when you're there for a prolonged period of time. The biggest difference would probably be on the 5th to 6th shift when the car with the stock redline shifts at 8,400.

Saying "raising RPMS will ALWAYS be better for power to the ground and acceleration as long as power continues at peak..." is a pointless statement. Obviously if the power is better or the same it will be beneficial - many engines will have a significant drop in HP at higher RPM's.

[///M Rakete]

I lost traction just trying to stick with this thread.

My problem is that redline comes up so fast in 1st, even 2nd, that I often hit the limiter.

I get a nice kick in the arse shift, Drivelogic Mode 5. I'll bet with Mode 6 (and thus DSC off) I'd get good tire chirp and a sideways kick, especially if the weather goes back to being cold.

I got those pre-tune but I haven't felt the need to try DSC off post tune. I'll have to eat my Wheaties.

[Longboarder]

I'm looking forward to seeing what kind of power I can make with a bump to a 8,600 redline.

[tom @ eas]

Originally Posted by Longboarder

I'm looking forward to seeing what kind of power I can make with a bump to a 8,600 redline.

The ESS setups typically are left at stock redline.

[biggynuts01]

Originally Posted by m33

Btw Mike , wheel spin can occur for many reasons ...
Bald tires
Wet roads
Hitting it on a turn
Cold tires
Cold surface
The point that I'm trying to make is I highly doubt 10 wtq is going to turn your car into a "massive" torque monster , that's not to say your tune is not a good one it probably is but their are Tuners that been tuning these M's long before you and non come out claiming what you do , I think that's what irritates people most, let your product speak for itself , let your customers do the bragging.


Lets all move on

I have Mike's stage 1 tune (stock x pipe/cats) and my car is definitely much faster. I can break the wheels loose all day in 1st, 2nd it will break loose temporarily (not as bad as mike's) if I punch it at 3k rpms. 70 degree weather, 33psi, dry asphalt.

[1MOREMOD]

yeah lets all hold it to the floor and see if we can spin tires.

[Longboarder]

Originally Posted by tom @ eas

The ESS setups typically are left at stock redline.

Hi Tom. That is true to for people who want to keep their ESS warranty in tact. See you soon for my 8,600 RPM dyno

[Mike Benvo]

This is what I like to hear

[tom @ eas]

Originally Posted by Longboarder

Hi Tom. That is true to for people who want to keep their ESS warranty in tact. See you soon for my 8,600 RPM dyno

Sounds good - we have some catching up to do.

[Munit]

Originally Posted by Mike Benvo

The +300 RPM bump is really insignificant in lower gears where you have the multiplication advantage. You're missing the biggest element in this which is TIME. In first and second (and to some degree third), not only will you have the DME intervening sooner because of the steeper gradient of RPM rise, you'll only be there for a seconds or a fraction thereof.

Same idea with impulse in physics (I=FdeltaT)

Where it makes a difference, is when you're there for a prolonged period of time. The biggest difference would probably be on the 5th to 6th shift when the car with the stock redline shifts at 8,400.

Saying "raising RPMS will ALWAYS be better for power to the ground and acceleration as long as power continues at peak..." is a pointless statement. Obviously if the power is better or the same it will be beneficial - many engines will have a significant drop in HP at higher RPM's.

Mike you are so antagonistic-obviously you are more knowledgable and do this for a living than I, but when I post accurate information to posts that are just plain wrong, you than try to pick apart my posts.

Point I made was obviously in more "slow motion/theoretica" mindset and yes its tough to tell a difference in 1st and 2nd but not at 3rd and beyond and the fact is someone posted a dyno recently after a tune that showed the ongoing linear increase of power after 8400 to 8600 so point was given the m3 can maintain its peak torque or atleast near peak torque until 8600 rpms (I know it is going down at this point)-it still has power to be made, probably if you dynoed to 8800 would be my prediction before it would start to decline.

[BMRLVR]

Originally Posted by img

8600 is really pushing the limits on stock internals. Rods,Valve Springs,Bearings can not take it !

Originally Posted by img

Im just talking from experience of the amount of M3s that ive seen at the dealer with broken valve springs at etc...
Hope all is well

Pushing the limits? Most likely not. Is it putting additional stress on everything? definitely! I wish BMW would list the maximum continuous engine speed allowed for the S65 like they used to in the olden days of the S50

Izzy, 200RPM is only a 2% increase in engine speed over the stock redline. I would agree that 8.8k or 9K may be pushing it, but if an engine broke a valve spring from 200RPM over factory redline the design would not have an acceptable safety factor built in to it.

I'd say any broken valve spring, stretched rod or main/rod bearing that has failed on an N/A S65 is most likely from a defective part, substandard machining, the engine has the rev limit excessively raised to say 8.8K or higher, or, the owner overspeeded the engine severely with a mis-shift. I don't think any OEM would risk making anything for series production without at least a 5% (and most likely more like 10%) safety factor engineered into it, especially an engine that can rev to 8.4k out of the box. I wish BMW would

The reason the factory set the redline at 8.4K is because the engine won't make much power above redline on stock cams. turning the engine to 8.6k or 8.8K on stock cams would be a waste of time IMO. I don't think more duration from vanos timing is the answer in making power up high, I think the engine needs higher lift (Maybe porting and larger valves would help a bit too if there is room for improvement there) to shine up top......... Valvesprings would be nice for an added safety factor too!

[img]

Here is CARTEST data that shows the change from 8300 to 8600 RPM redline makes virtually no difference. 0-1/4 mile and even 0-170 made virtually no difference. Strangely, 60-130 does seem to make more difference than 0-170. Maybe some of the smarter people can explain that.

All of the results below come from the same car dyno input into cartest. It's a 400+ whp FBO M3 that is one of the strongest dyno's to date. Dyno data was input into CarTest and results are compared to see if extra 300 RPMs makes any difference.

The columns below are as follows
1. FBO M3 6MT @ 8300
2. FBO M3 6MT @ 8600
3. FBO M3 DCT @ 8300
4. FBO M3 DCT @ 8600





You can see from this picture that this is a very serious S65 build...possibly the most serious build to date. This build measured every spec and every clearance of the S65 engine. For valve springs, they measured seat pressure at various lifts and how much lift the spring can take before coil bind. It was the shop's opinion that the factory valve springs didn't have enough seat pressure beyond factory specs (8400 RPMs and 11.5mm lift). They didn't like the idea of increased redlines or higher lift cams with these factory springs. Maybe others might disagree and maybe the shop is too conservative, but that's what they said after measuring the stock springs.

They decided to change to aftermarket valve springs on this build. The aftermarket springs have 80% more seat pressure and can take 1mm more lift than factory valve springs.