Bimmerpost for iOS has just been updated to version 3.8.9 with a host of new features and bug fixes. Try it out!
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
 
Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      11-04-2012, 10:56 AM   #199
Andrew@ActiveAutowerke
BimmerPost Supporting Vendor
Andrew@ActiveAutowerke's Avatar
140
Rep
3,799
Posts


Drives: 2014 435I M-sport
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Miami Fl

iTrader: (5)

Quote:
Originally Posted by m33 View Post
They sure did. And these two videos show the true superiority of air-to-air as well. Side-by-side results, nothing is more fair comparison that that Andrew.



I dont understand the video's purpose?? But anyway listen again they clearly state for daily driving when turning off your car and opening the hood is not allowed before a 15 second run. Allowing the engine to cool down before runs will not allow any intercooler system to show its downfall. It was a joke anyway
__________________
Appreciate 0
      11-04-2012, 11:06 AM   #200
Andrew@ActiveAutowerke
BimmerPost Supporting Vendor
Andrew@ActiveAutowerke's Avatar
140
Rep
3,799
Posts


Drives: 2014 435I M-sport
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Miami Fl

iTrader: (5)

Quote:
Originally Posted by DLSJ5 View Post
Andrew, what blower is on the Stage 3 car? What CR are you guys running? Did you sleeve the motor? You ran 10psi on the stock motor and made some good power, what psi are you running on the built motor?
Believe we are trying a V2 now with an air to air conversion. Its still in progress so no data just yet. Motor is sleeved with low compression pistons.

Search the thread I made for the info with the Rotrex blower but I believe it was around 11 psi or so?
__________________
Appreciate 0
      11-04-2012, 12:41 PM   #201
m33
Banned
m33's Avatar
United_States
53
Rep
2,697
Posts

Drives: E92 VT650 MCB Individual
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: CT

iTrader: (5)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew@ActiveAutowerke
I dont understand the video's purpose?? But anyway listen again they clearly state for daily driving when turning off your car and opening the hood is not allowed before a 15 second run. Allowing the engine to cool down before runs will not allow any intercooler system to show its downfall. It was a joke anyway
Relax Andrew, mine was a joke too...think of it as a reminder that I've got two tats for every one of your tits. Now, back to reality.

Quote:
But anyway listen again they clearly state for daily driving when turning off your car and opening the hood is not allowed before a 15 second run. Allowing the engine to cool down before runs will not allow any intercooler system to show its downfall.
I think you could also say that cool-downs are a way to hide an intercooler system downfall as well. Now, I realize this happened before you worked at Active and AA has been working hard to improve performance, but I want you to look at these dyno results of your product.
http://www.s65dynos.com/showDyno.php?recID=326

Pay close attention to the results. Runs-2, 3, and 4 were done 2 minutes apart -- just like what would happen if you pulled up at a stop light for some real world racing with the guy next to you. The results were 463, 455, and 459whp. Some pretty clear heat soak going on there right off the bat. But that's not what Active wanted published. AA instructed the dyno operator to cool the car down for 10 minutes, then make three more runs and publish those results. Runs 5, 6, and 7 were 465, 460, and 450 whp. Not only did this spike the results higher but you can still see very obvious and even worse signs of heat soak on what's being sold as a superior air-to-air intercooling. You can click the link to see the instructions given to the dyno operator:
These procedures were specified by Active Autowerke. Since we were on 91 octane, methanol injection must be used. We originally intended to conduct tests with and without methanol injection, but were advised not to do so without 93 octane gasoline. We were instructed to run the dyno and let the car cool down one minute between runs. At the end of three runs, we were instructed to turn off the motor, let the engine cool for ten minutes, then repeat the same testing procedure for three more runs.

Now take a look how a non-intercooled ESS VT1-535 handles the same test, on the same dyno, same weather, same gas, only 24-hours later.
http://www.s65dynos.com/showDyno.php?recID=332

Runs 1, 2, and 3 were done 2 minutes apart, just like racing the guy next to you at a stop light: 467, 471, and 472whp. No signs of heat soak there. Only after the 10 minute cool-down and then six more runs do you see any signs of heat soak: 467, 472, 470, 469, 465, and 465whp.

But here's the best heat soak test I've seen, and it was on that same VT1 car in the dyno test above.
http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=702956

Here's what I'd like to see from Active and Evolve for that matter. I'm not saying your air-to-air isn't better than air-to-water, but I'd like to see something more than slick sales talk to convince me. Do you have anything like that heat soak test article above? If not, why not? If so, why haven't you published it? And since I know Sal is read this, same question to him. Sal, show me something more than technical mumbo jumbo to convince me that your cooling solution is better. Show me the data please.
Appreciate 0
      11-04-2012, 12:47 PM   #202
pbonsalb
Lieutenant Colonel
30
Rep
1,917
Posts

Drives: 08 E90 M3, 99 E36 M3 Turbo
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Concord, NH

iTrader: (3)

Your original post specified 10.1 psi for the Rotrex C38-91 on the built motor, but said the Rotrex had more to go and had not been maxed out yet.

Evolve wrote that the Rotrex C38-91 flows about the same as the Vortech Si Trim, but I think the analysis is a bit more complicated than that. You have to look at the compressor maps and plot where your engine fits on it and where your airflow will be at various pressure ratios to see whether the compressor can deliver what you want or not. I'll guess that even though on some motors the C38-91 might pretty much equal a Vortech Si Trim (although the Rotrex will be at higher boost), it won't do so on an S65, particularly a lower compression S65 that needs a little more boost to offset the reduced volumetric efficiency.
Appreciate 0
      11-04-2012, 01:48 PM   #203
Sal@Evolve
BimmerPost Supporting Vendor
25
Rep
1,063
Posts


Drives: Slow
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Luton, Bedfordshire

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by m33 View Post
Relax Andrew, mine was a joke too...think of it as a reminder that I've got two tats for every one of your tits. Now, back to reality.



I think you could also say that cool-downs are a way to hide an intercooler system downfall as well. Now, I realize this happened before you worked at Active and AA has been working hard to improve performance, but I want you to look at these dyno results of your product.
http://www.s65dynos.com/showDyno.php?recID=326

Pay close attention to the results. Runs-2, 3, and 4 were done 2 minutes apart -- just like what would happen if you pulled up at a stop light for some real world racing with the guy next to you. The results were 463, 455, and 459whp. Some pretty clear heat soak going on there right off the bat. But that's not what Active wanted published. AA instructed the dyno operator to cool the car down for 10 minutes, then make three more runs and publish those results. Runs 5, 6, and 7 were 465, 460, and 450 whp. Not only did this spike the results higher but you can still see very obvious and even worse signs of heat soak on what's being sold as a superior air-to-air intercooling. You can click the link to see the instructions given to the dyno operator:
These procedures were specified by Active Autowerke. Since we were on 91 octane, methanol injection must be used. We originally intended to conduct tests with and without methanol injection, but were advised not to do so without 93 octane gasoline. We were instructed to run the dyno and let the car cool down one minute between runs. At the end of three runs, we were instructed to turn off the motor, let the engine cool for ten minutes, then repeat the same testing procedure for three more runs.

Now take a look how a non-intercooled ESS VT1-535 handles the same test, on the same dyno, same weather, same gas, only 24-hours later.
http://www.s65dynos.com/showDyno.php?recID=332

Runs 1, 2, and 3 were done 2 minutes apart, just like racing the guy next to you at a stop light: 467, 471, and 472whp. No signs of heat soak there. Only after the 10 minute cool-down and then six more runs do you see any signs of heat soak: 467, 472, 470, 469, 465, and 465whp.

But here's the best heat soak test I've seen, and it was on that same VT1 car in the dyno test above.
http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=702956

Here's what I'd like to see from Active and Evolve for that matter. I'm not saying your air-to-air isn't better than air-to-water, but I'd like to see something more than slick sales talk to convince me. Do you have anything like that heat soak test article above? If not, why not? If so, why haven't you published it? And since I know Sal is read this, same question to him. Sal, show me something more than technical mumbo jumbo to convince me that your cooling solution is better. Show me the data please.
Calling me out and saying I am talking technical mumbo jumbo is really not the right way to get a decent response.
I post technical information in the most simplified form possible. I know it's understood by many because I end up having conversations over email and PM on these posts.
Since you are so compelled to write on every supercharger thread I would have thought the very basic information posted up would be understood by yourself. In the FI world, what I have posted is really absolute rock bottom basics.
Go to some other forums and see what I write when I do not simplify it or just look at the other FI forums and see what people do write.

I have posted many many times that an air to air setup is not hands down better than air to water.
It depends on the type of core, size of core, design of end tanks, placement etc etc. The variables are huge.
I can make the same intercooler we are using dimensionally and use a cheap truck core which costs 50. It would be horrendously bad.
In the same way air to water can be very good or very bad. Depends on the core design, core depth, placement within the inlet manifold and how air makes it's way across it. Again, loads of variables.


During our testing and development stage we used both air to air and air to water. It would be stupid not to use both! The packaging on air to water is so much easier to get around rather than making the complex parts we have for our air to air setup.
According to our testing the air to air system kept the temperatures down after repeat runs. I'm not talking 2-3 runs. I am talking 10 + runs to simulate even the first 1/3 rd of Silverstone Grandprix circuit here in the UK.

The simple fact is that once an air to water system heat soaks it will become incredibly inefficient. However, that is WHEN it heat soaks.
For drag racing they are awesome. No question.
When I mean drag racing I mean sitting with engine started for a long time before the run is done.
We chose our design for our reasons and based on our testing. For all I know we have not tested the best charge cooler setup out there and they are in fact way better than air to air. However, the general consensus across the board with multiple race teams and tuners is that air to air will retain lower inlet air temps and recover faster.
Air to water are used in race cars too but the size of those systems are too big to envelope into a road car without making major alterations to the body/structure of a road car.

I cannot be more balanced than this.

Now, these comparison of dyno's.

AA
463, 455 , 459..... 10 mins.......465, 460, 450

This is not the definitive definition of heatsoak and again like usual everyone just focuses on peak numbers. To do some heatsoak analysis you would have been actually measuring the inlet air temperature and looking at the delta.
Power can change because of the DME opening and closing the throttles earlier or later at the very end of the RPM range. The closing of the throttle can occur at different times unless forced to stay open in which case the soft cut is not so soft anymore and I know AA avoids this. It has been posted on this very forum that ESS keep their throttles open 100% all the way to the RPM limiter.
Ignition timing could be moving around like it does on ALL MSS60's.
Fuelling could be moving up and down slightly.

All of these things cause power to jump up and down.

Let's see the power curves of these runs.

I can put up the runs of our kit with time stamps of the runs if you want to see them but since my stance of air to water vs air to air is very balanced so I don't see why I should be drawn into such a debate.
What I do know is this, on a few dyno runs, if either a air to water or air to air heat soaks then they are not worth having.

I do know that if the throttle are not kept open to 100% to the rpm limiter the power will vary from run to run. This is from our own testing. As much as 25hp!

To really see if the system is heatsoaking we need to see the temperature logs of inlet vs ambient temp on all runs and the power runs themselves with ignition timing and AFR + throttle opening. That is the ONLY fair way of doing it.
Appreciate 0
      11-04-2012, 02:38 PM   #204
m33
Banned
m33's Avatar
United_States
53
Rep
2,697
Posts

Drives: E92 VT650 MCB Individual
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: CT

iTrader: (5)

Sal I don't know why you would feel I'm calling you out although I do appreciate your feed back and input which I'm sure if you follow my threads or responses in threads you would know and understand my questioning at Hand which was more towards Active but getting back to my questioning its really simple
..... I like DATA REAL WORLD ON TOPIC DATA ....
Mumbo jumbo to me is non reality wishful talk... I'm not interested in nonsense like that as it gets us nowhere.... And not to mention that you don't learn anything from it. Get my
Drift ?

I like & respect that your open minded to both platforms even though I beg to differ on some points but its not worth getting into at this point....

I would like to hear what active has to say
Appreciate 0
      11-04-2012, 02:49 PM   #205
Sal@Evolve
BimmerPost Supporting Vendor
25
Rep
1,063
Posts


Drives: Slow
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Luton, Bedfordshire

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by m33 View Post
Sal I don't know why you would feel I'm calling you out although I do appreciate your feed back and input which I'm sure if you follow my threads or responses in threads you would know and understand my questioning at Hand which was more towards Active but getting back to my questioning its really simple
..... I like DATA REAL WORLD ON TOPIC DATA ....
Mumbo jumbo to me is non reality wishful talk... I'm not interested in nonsense like that as it gets us nowhere.... And not to mention that you don't learn anything from it. Get my
Drift ?

I like & respect that your open minded to both platforms even though I beg to differ on some points but its not worth getting into at this point....

I would like to hear what active has to say
Thank you.

If you don't want to talk in this thread about how you beg to differ please PM me as I would be interested to know.
Appreciate 0
      11-04-2012, 02:52 PM   #206
Donbona
Lieutenant Colonel
Donbona's Avatar
United Kingdom
40
Rep
1,668
Posts

Drives: E93 M3 DCT 2008
Join Date: May 2009
Location: London UK

iTrader: (0)

No no, talk in this thread as I need entertainment
__________________
M3 E93 DCT, Space Grey,BC HB29 Forged Deep Concave Wheels, Ericsson Amuse F/R Bumper, Evolve Full Exhaust System, INTRAX Coilovers, STOPTECH BBK, Performance Steering Wheel,Custom Red/Black Leather Seats,///M3 ||Bimmerpost M3 Car Of The Month May - 2010SOLD
2010 R35 GTR
Appreciate 0
      11-04-2012, 03:11 PM   #207
Sal@Evolve
BimmerPost Supporting Vendor
25
Rep
1,063
Posts


Drives: Slow
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Luton, Bedfordshire

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Donbona View Post
No no, talk in this thread as I need entertainment
You get enough entertainment on weekends!

How's the Mini. Suspension break your back yet?
Appreciate 0
      11-04-2012, 03:12 PM   #208
Donbona
Lieutenant Colonel
Donbona's Avatar
United Kingdom
40
Rep
1,668
Posts

Drives: E93 M3 DCT 2008
Join Date: May 2009
Location: London UK

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sal@Evolve View Post
You get enough entertainment on weekends!

How's the Mini. Suspension break your back yet?
Lol, yeah... My mrs hates it.
__________________
M3 E93 DCT, Space Grey,BC HB29 Forged Deep Concave Wheels, Ericsson Amuse F/R Bumper, Evolve Full Exhaust System, INTRAX Coilovers, STOPTECH BBK, Performance Steering Wheel,Custom Red/Black Leather Seats,///M3 ||Bimmerpost M3 Car Of The Month May - 2010SOLD
2010 R35 GTR
Appreciate 0
      11-04-2012, 03:28 PM   #209
Donbona
Lieutenant Colonel
Donbona's Avatar
United Kingdom
40
Rep
1,668
Posts

Drives: E93 M3 DCT 2008
Join Date: May 2009
Location: London UK

iTrader: (0)

Sal, maybe you should make a bracket for your charger to fit the Vortech Blower and a different one for the procharger blower. Only then we can see which is better in different scenarios and customers could have more choice.. What do you think?
__________________
M3 E93 DCT, Space Grey,BC HB29 Forged Deep Concave Wheels, Ericsson Amuse F/R Bumper, Evolve Full Exhaust System, INTRAX Coilovers, STOPTECH BBK, Performance Steering Wheel,Custom Red/Black Leather Seats,///M3 ||Bimmerpost M3 Car Of The Month May - 2010SOLD
2010 R35 GTR
Appreciate 0
      11-04-2012, 03:33 PM   #210
Sal@Evolve
BimmerPost Supporting Vendor
25
Rep
1,063
Posts


Drives: Slow
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Luton, Bedfordshire

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Donbona View Post
Sal, maybe you should make a bracket for your charger to fit the Vortech Blower and a different one for the procharger blower. Only then we can see which is better in different scenarios. What do you think?
Vortech one we did a long time ago so that's easy to put into production. Just need to get the intake pipe pattern done.
Procharger - never dealt with one but doesn't look that different.

Might be a good idea.

No one can complain about which chargers we supply then. They can have them all!
Appreciate 0
      11-04-2012, 03:36 PM   #211
Donbona
Lieutenant Colonel
Donbona's Avatar
United Kingdom
40
Rep
1,668
Posts

Drives: E93 M3 DCT 2008
Join Date: May 2009
Location: London UK

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sal@Evolve View Post
Vortech one we did a long time ago so that's easy to put into production. Just need to get the intake pipe pattern done.
Procharger - never dealt with one but doesn't look that different.

Might be a good idea.

No one can complain about which chargers we supply then. They can have them all!
Sounds good, keep us posted!
__________________
M3 E93 DCT, Space Grey,BC HB29 Forged Deep Concave Wheels, Ericsson Amuse F/R Bumper, Evolve Full Exhaust System, INTRAX Coilovers, STOPTECH BBK, Performance Steering Wheel,Custom Red/Black Leather Seats,///M3 ||Bimmerpost M3 Car Of The Month May - 2010SOLD
2010 R35 GTR
Appreciate 0
      11-04-2012, 04:13 PM   #212
m33
Banned
m33's Avatar
United_States
53
Rep
2,697
Posts

Drives: E92 VT650 MCB Individual
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: CT

iTrader: (5)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Donbona
No no, talk in this thread as I need entertainment
Didn't I start by acknowledging that their approach might be superior but nobody has any shown any kind of proof to back it up? I don't get why people have to get all bent out of shape when you just ask them to back up what they say. I mean let's face reality here. None of these air-to-air kits has ever set a single record, not 60-130, not 1/4 mile, not Standing Mile, not nothing...never.

I don't see how asking for technical data is calling anybody out. I would rather get an answer to my question than 800 more words without one. That's why I call it mumbo jumbo and that's all we still have is more mumbo jumbo without an answer.

Sal, that article I posted has everything you said is needed to run a heat soak test. Now I'll ask the question again: do you have anything like that to show the testing on your kit? If not, what are your plans to do it and post the results? If so, then post it.
Appreciate 0
      11-04-2012, 04:26 PM   #213
Donbona
Lieutenant Colonel
Donbona's Avatar
United Kingdom
40
Rep
1,668
Posts

Drives: E93 M3 DCT 2008
Join Date: May 2009
Location: London UK

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by m33 View Post
Didn't I start by acknowledging that their approach might be superior but nobody has any shown any kind of proof to back it up? I don't get why people have to get all bent out of shape when you just ask them to back up what they say. I mean let's face reality here. None of these air-to-air kits has ever set a single record, not 60-130, not 1/4 mile, not Standing Mile, not nothing...never.

I don't see how asking for technical data is calling anybody out. I would rather get an answer to my question than 800 more words without one. That's why I call it mumbo jumbo and that's all we still have is more mumbo jumbo without an answer.

Sal, that article I posted has everything you said is needed to run a heat soak test. Now I'll ask the question again: do you have anything like that to show the testing on your kit? If not, what are your plans to do it and post the results? If so, then post it.
I'm sure once their kit is ready he will post up,the numbers.
__________________
M3 E93 DCT, Space Grey,BC HB29 Forged Deep Concave Wheels, Ericsson Amuse F/R Bumper, Evolve Full Exhaust System, INTRAX Coilovers, STOPTECH BBK, Performance Steering Wheel,Custom Red/Black Leather Seats,///M3 ||Bimmerpost M3 Car Of The Month May - 2010SOLD
2010 R35 GTR
Appreciate 0
      11-04-2012, 04:44 PM   #214
Sal@Evolve
BimmerPost Supporting Vendor
25
Rep
1,063
Posts


Drives: Slow
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Luton, Bedfordshire

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by m33 View Post
Didn't I start by acknowledging that their approach might be superior but nobody has any shown any kind of proof to back it up? I don't get why people have to get all bent out of shape when you just ask them to back up what they say. I mean let's face reality here. None of these air-to-air kits has ever set a single record, not 60-130, not 1/4 mile, not Standing Mile, not nothing...never.

I don't see how asking for technical data is calling anybody out. I would rather get an answer to my question than 800 more words without one. That's why I call it mumbo jumbo and that's all we still have is more mumbo jumbo without an answer.

Sal, that article I posted has everything you said is needed to run a heat soak test. Now I'll ask the question again: do you have anything like that to show the testing on your kit? If not, what are your plans to do it and post the results? If so, then post it.
Bent out of shape eh?
Mumbo Jumbo
No Proof

Maybe it's your approach that might not get the desired answers.

We don't have any plans to do anything further than we have already done which quite frankly is a huge amount of information shared during the development and testing stages.

You will see more when the kit is out.

You will have to wait.

We appreciate that your preferred kits hold all of the records. Doesn't mean we are out to break them even if we do accidently at some stage.

Understand one thing - I am under no obligation as a person/vendor/company to answer your questions or to meet your subtle demands. There is a huge thread about our kit and it's testing. You can go and read that. There is all sorts of information including 1/4 mile times in damp conditions with street tyres.

Let the product do the talking when it's out there if it becomes popular enough.

As far as your heatsoaking theories go - you posted up some WHP number without any further information and called it heatsoak. I replied accordingly. Since it's nothing to do with our kit as our setup is totally different I don't really care what the results are. If you did log everything and more then good on you. I look forward to the data and you can sit there all day proving how bad the AA kit is against your preferred kit.

Oh, and get your gear calculations right. The stock car revs to 8300rpm in the real world, not 8400rpm. Simple stuff....
Just log a car with a stock RPM limit and you will see what it actually does.
Appreciate 0
      11-04-2012, 05:59 PM   #215
m33
Banned
m33's Avatar
United_States
53
Rep
2,697
Posts

Drives: E92 VT650 MCB Individual
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: CT

iTrader: (5)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sal@Evolve
Understand one thing - I am under no obligation
as a person/vendor/company to answer your questions or to meet
your subtle demands. There is a huge thread about our kit and it's
testing. You can go and read that. There is all sorts of
information including 1/4 mile times in damp conditions with
street tyres.
We appreciate the thread, but I'm just asking a simple question
Sal. So when a guy tells me he has a cure for cancer, I want to
see a little more that a flashy press release to prove it. I
think most people do too. Look, if you don't have the answer, and
don't plan to get one, just say so instead of a bunch of attempted
insults and mumbo jumbo that evades the question.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sal@Evolve
As far as your heatsoaking theories go - you
posted up some WHP number without any further information and
called it heatsoak. I replied accordingly. Since it's nothing to
do with our kit as our setup is totally different I don't really
care what the results are. If you did log everything and more then
good on you.
Maybe click the link next time and see what I was talking about
before commenting and being wrong.

Quote:
Oh, and get your gear calculations right. The stock car
revs to 8300rpm in the real world, not 8400rpm. Simple
stuff....
Whether or not the limiter is 8400 or 8300, which calculation
based on either number was wrong? Simple stuff Sal? Apparently
not.
Appreciate 0
      11-04-2012, 06:00 PM   #216
VCMpower
Banned
Canada
9
Rep
941
Posts

Drives: 2010 Dakar, 2013 Fire Orange
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Victoria B.C.

iTrader: (0)






Quote:
Originally Posted by Sal@Evolve View Post
Bent out of shape eh?
Mumbo Jumbo
No Proof

Maybe it's your approach that might not get the desired answers.

We don't have any plans to do anything further than we have already done which quite frankly is a huge amount of information shared during the development and testing stages.

You will see more when the kit is out.

You will have to wait.

We appreciate that your preferred kits hold all of the records. Doesn't mean we are out to break them even if we do accidently at some stage.

Understand one thing - I am under no obligation as a person/vendor/company to answer your questions or to meet your subtle demands. There is a huge thread about our kit and it's testing. You can go and read that. There is all sorts of information including 1/4 mile times in damp conditions with street tyres.

Let the product do the talking when it's out there if it becomes popular enough.

As far as your heatsoaking theories go - you posted up some WHP number without any further information and called it heatsoak. I replied accordingly. Since it's nothing to do with our kit as our setup is totally different I don't really care what the results are. If you did log everything and more then good on you. I look forward to the data and you can sit there all day proving how bad the AA kit is against your preferred kit.

Oh, and get your gear calculations right. The stock car revs to 8300rpm in the real world, not 8400rpm. Simple stuff....
Just log a car with a stock RPM limit and you will see what it actually does.
Appreciate 0
      11-04-2012, 06:53 PM   #217
Sal@Evolve
BimmerPost Supporting Vendor
25
Rep
1,063
Posts


Drives: Slow
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Luton, Bedfordshire

iTrader: (0)

This is your question:
Quote:
Originally Posted by m33 View Post

Here's what I'd like to see from Active and Evolve for that matter. I'm not saying your air-to-air isn't better than air-to-water, but I'd like to see something more than slick sales talk to convince me. Do you have anything like that heat soak test article above? If not, why not? If so, why haven't you published it? And since I know Sal is read this, same question to him. Sal, show me something more than technical mumbo jumbo to convince me that your cooling solution is better. Show me the data please.


You want me to compare with an article that is testing a 535 non intercooled kit running very low boost?
I think you can clearly see that it is completely irrelevant and does not show any comparison of a air to water to an air to air.

Makes sense why I cannot actually answer it?
Because there is no air to water cooling system involved in that test.

Is there a heat soak article on the 575-650 kits?

Sorry, there is no being wrong here. Looks like you just didn't understand my reply to the heatsoak assumption you made on the AA kit.

Why have we not done such a test? Did ESS do that test or publish it anywhere? Tell me if here is such a test.
So why are you expecting us to do it if there is not? Especially since we are releasing info at the moment. I have asked you to be patient. You don't get that part though.
Just wait, it will come.

Do you actually appreciate that me stating the above makes you look like you did not at all think about your question? You do know that I am trying to avoid conflict and now that you have forced me to answer you have put me in a situation where I can be accused of potentially indirectly attempting to make you look stupid.
Don't blame me on this matter now.

Attempted insults? I think everyone can see what it is you are trying to do.
Try harder to bully.
Come back with debates which are logical please and in context with what's being said and compared.
That means we should compare apples with apples.

And clearly point out what you think is mumbo jumbo and let's allow the members here to point out to you what it actually means.

You seem to have a great ability to turn every supercharger comparison thread into a spiraling disaster zone. Why is it you do this? Is your hatred of everything non ESS that severe? You cannot stand to see anything other than your preferred choice? This is how it is coming across. It does not look good and now another company is coming out you are just doing it all over again.

Quote:
Originally Posted by m33 View Post

Whether or not the limiter is 8400 or 8300, which calculation
based on either number was wrong? Simple stuff Sal? Apparently
not.
I'm simply not intelligent to work out rpm's vs gear ratios. I'm just pointing out to you - 8300rpm is your actual RPM limiter. Simple stuff. Apparently so.
You want to seriously test me?
Then be ready to be tested.

Last edited by Sal@Evolve; 11-04-2012 at 07:08 PM.
Appreciate 0
      11-05-2012, 01:56 AM   #218
VCP
Captain
VCP's Avatar
Canada
21
Rep
737
Posts

Drives: F82 Sakhir / E92 Dakar
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Canada

iTrader: (0)

Sal Your kit looks amazing tons of working into it that i can see. I would love to install that kit clients cars here on the canadian west coast. Im sure the kit would love the nice cold air here but might need to put a toque on that blower to keep it spinning

This might be one reason M33 likes spitting in everyones kool-aid.

Quote AJ@ESS:
There is no charge for M33, he is participating in a test program for a new high-end version of the kit that comes with a custom crank pulley and new SC/beltdrive system in addition to uprated software. This will not be a normal update for existing 625 kits as they are already making well above rating in existing form.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sal@Evolve View Post
You seem to have a great ability to turn every supercharger comparison thread into a spiraling disaster zone. Why is it you do this? Is your hatred of everything non ESS that severe? You cannot stand to see anything other than your preferred choice? This is how it is coming across. It does not look good and now another company is coming out you are just doing it all over again.
Appreciate 0
      11-05-2012, 02:32 AM   #219
Donbona
Lieutenant Colonel
Donbona's Avatar
United Kingdom
40
Rep
1,668
Posts

Drives: E93 M3 DCT 2008
Join Date: May 2009
Location: London UK

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by VCMperformance View Post

Quote AJ@ESS:
There is no charge for M33, he is participating in a test program for a new high-end version of the kit that comes with a custom crank pulley and new SC/beltdrive system in addition to uprated software. This will not be a normal update for existing 625 kits as they are already making well above rating in existing form.
__________________
M3 E93 DCT, Space Grey,BC HB29 Forged Deep Concave Wheels, Ericsson Amuse F/R Bumper, Evolve Full Exhaust System, INTRAX Coilovers, STOPTECH BBK, Performance Steering Wheel,Custom Red/Black Leather Seats,///M3 ||Bimmerpost M3 Car Of The Month May - 2010SOLD
2010 R35 GTR
Appreciate 0
      11-05-2012, 03:03 AM   #220
m33
Banned
m33's Avatar
United_States
53
Rep
2,697
Posts

Drives: E92 VT650 MCB Individual
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: CT

iTrader: (5)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sal@Evolve
You want me to compare with an article that is testing a 535 non intercooled kit running very low boost? I think you can clearly see that it is completely irrelevant and does not show any comparison of a air to water to an air to air.
That wasn't the question I asked you. I asked if you had done any type of testing just like that. I provided the link for your convenience, not your insults.

Quote:
Makes sense why I cannot actually answer it? Because there is no air to water cooling system involved in that test.
Is there a heat soak article on the 575-650 kits?
Now that we can see you misunderstood the question in the first place, the rest of this is just off topic and no need to answer.

Quote:
Sorry, there is no being wrong here. Looks like you just didn't understand my reply to the heatsoak assumption you made on the AA kit.

Why have we not done such a test? Did ESS do that test or publish it anywhere? Tell me if here is such a test.
So why are you expecting us to do it if there is not? Especially since we are releasing info at the moment. I have asked you to be patient. You don't get that part though.
Just wait, it will come.

Do you actually appreciate that me stating the above makes you look like you did not at all think about your question? You do know that I am trying to avoid conflict and now that you have forced me to answer you have put me in a situation where I can be accused of potentially indirectly attempting to make you look stupid.
Don't blame me on this matter now.

Attempted insults? I think everyone can see what it is you are trying to do.
Try harder to bully.
Come back with debates which are logical please and in context with what's being said and compared.
That means we should compare apples with apples.

And clearly point out what you think is mumbo jumbo and let's allow the members here to point out to you what it actually means.
I don't see what ESS has to do with any of this because I just asked you if you had done that type of testing. It doesn't even matter if they did it or not because it's a simple yes or no question. I suggest you ask ESS if you really want to know.

As for mumbo jumbo, yeah when you fill pages of technical jargon without getting to the point or answering the question without throwing insults, I call that a bunch of mumbo jumbo.

Quote:
You seem to have a great ability to turn every supercharger comparison thread into a spiraling disaster zone. Why is it you do this? Is your hatred of everything non ESS that severe? You cannot stand to see anything other than your preferred choice? This is how it is coming across. It does not look good and now another company is coming out you are just doing it all over again.
Sal your promise to publish the data later is all you needed to say in the very beginning. If you say you will publish it later, then why cant you say that 2000 words ago without all of the insulting mumbo jumbo? Publish it later is good enough for me and I'll definitely ask you about it later.

Quote:
I'm simply not intelligent to work out rpm's vs gear ratios. I'm just pointing out to you - 8300rpm is your actual RPM limiter. Simple stuff. Apparently so.
You want to seriously test me?
Then be ready to be tested.
I get your point about 8300 vs. 8400. But you haven't shown any miscalculation based on either number. So if you're going to give a test, you better be able to pass it yourself instead of trying to make yourself look smarter than everybody else on the forum.
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
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:32 PM.




m3post
m3post
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, 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