|
|
01-17-2010, 12:26 PM | #23 |
Brigadier General
501
Rep 4,033
Posts |
When did he do that?
__________________
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
|
01-17-2010, 12:28 PM | #24 | |
Automotive Industry Insider
462
Rep 1,948
Posts |
Quote:
Raw power is not an absolute barometer for everyone. The amount of usable power is the key. Traction is at a premium with this (or any other) car. Putting that power to the ground without torching your rear tires is a much more impressive feat in my opinion. (for a daily driver)
__________________
The best is yet to come...
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-17-2010, 12:38 PM | #25 | |
Enlisted Member
2
Rep 43
Posts |
Quote:
1 - 1/4 mile 2 - 60-130 3 - Any race that is captured on vid. I for one would like to see Drew go with either ESS or Gintani since he is the most active (based on vids and records, just look at his sig) and has a huge amount of cars in Cali to get this done. Now its just of matter of which kit he goes with.... |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-17-2010, 12:50 PM | #26 | |
Automotive Industry Insider
462
Rep 1,948
Posts |
Quote:
All the supercharged cars are slower than his NA car in that measurable performance test. That goes back to my statement about getting that power to the ground. All the power in the world means absolutely nothing (to me) if you can't get traction in 1st, 2nd, or 3rd gear (spinning the tires)... BTW: Drew is one smart dude. I'm sure he has a clear idea about who makes the best SC kit hands down.
__________________
The best is yet to come...
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-17-2010, 01:05 PM | #27 |
Moderator
673
Rep 4,737
Posts |
I have a question for all the experts:
How does the additional power (be it +100, 200, or more hp) affect the life, reliability, and driveability of the engine and the drivetrain? In other words, is it sound to subject engine internals (crank shaft, connecting rods, pistons, etc) designed for much less power and torque and transmission components through significantly higher stress and strain? Thank you. |
Appreciate
0
|
01-17-2010, 01:26 PM | #28 |
Banned
114
Rep 2,682
Posts |
Buying a kit based on a Video is bold ! thats like buying a product from a 3am late night commercial Quality hmmmm i dunno about that
And one to say that one kit is better than the other with out owning one or knowing/having any experience from either or doesn't hold either And as far as who puts down the most power doesnt justify whoes is better! A stout kit is COST / QUALITY / LONGEVITY & TUNING] ...... You want your $10+ kit to perform day in and day out just as long as the stock motor was intended to do so With factory safety margins ( thats where tuning plays the key roll here ) And judging by on what I've been seeing Gintani SC'd cars play with boost , fuel ect so whoes to say it will be a fare equal race based on boost and fuell ??? ESS SC'd kits come in specific settings (575 5.5lbs 91 oct) (600 6lbs 93oct) For the Record I'm not taking sides on Venders !!! Facts speak for itself .. A 2 minute video doesn't prove nor validate anything except for top speed and time it took to get there even then conditions come into play , that video doesnt tell you quality and longevity of the kit Track record say's it all |
Appreciate
0
|
01-17-2010, 01:59 PM | #29 | |
Enlisted Member
2
Rep 43
Posts |
Quote:
Exactly. We need real world use cases (roll racing, 60-130, etc) that all of us love to measure our cars by. Without it, we are just having expensive Dyno contests. Last edited by ST06M3; 01-17-2010 at 02:01 PM.. Reason: fixed quote |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-17-2010, 02:03 PM | #30 | |
New Member
0
Rep 18
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-17-2010, 02:19 PM | #31 | |
Automotive Industry Insider
462
Rep 1,948
Posts |
Quote:
BTW: The most vulnerable internal engine part of them all...are the rings. By bolting a forced induction kit onto an engine (that was originally built to be naturally aspirated), I think (or hope) most consumers understand that the life expectancy of these components is going to be reduced. (even under ideal circumstances) If the M3 owners don't understand that... then shame on them for being a little too naive. Now the wear factor of going FI on a naturally aspirated engine isn't proportional. (historically speaking) The life expectancy of your engine is not going to be reduced by the 50% simply because you increased the horsepower and torque by 50%. It's not that cut and dry... BMW engineers build in some safety margins into these internal engine parts, so you may end up reducing the life span by 20% which will still be well over 100,000 miles on the average M3. Now, these numbers are pure speculation on my part, since no long-term data is actually available to answer this specific question. I am basing this estimate on what I have seen over the past 15-20 years. (anecdotal evidence) No good verifiable records are kept on these FI cars, since they usually change hands three or four times before the odometer hits 100k. That makes it incredibly difficult to know exactly how much the engine's lifespan is actually being reduced. (by going FI) I can tell you this much... The LINEAR power output of a centrifugal supercharger (like the Vortech) will have a less profound effect on the engine internals. (since MAX BOOST is only achieved at rpms levels near redline) Since the boost is tied to the rpm of the engine with centrifugal superchargers, the S65B40 will spend very little time at maximum boost. (in between shifts) And even then...the boost pressure necessary to make that 50% power increase (in this car) is a drop in the bucket vs. other supercharged cars. (thanks to the efficiency of S65B40 V8 engine and four Double-VANOS camshafts) Bottom line the engine is not going to implode because of the increased stress on the engine transmission or drive train components in 20,000 if that's what you are worried about. From what I have seen, the few stress related failures have occurred in BMW cars that were trying to effectively double the stock hp and torque output of the car. Most of those vehicles were E36 and E46 M3 turbocharged BMW's. (where the power comes on much faster in a more violent and aggressive manner) Cylinder pressures, stress, and heat builds so quickly inside the engine...that wear is always going to be a concern for turbocharged cars. (much more that it would for a centrifugal supercharged car) This is assuming both cars have perfectly tuned FI software. Again, only a naive person thinks they will get exactly the same life out of the engine with a 50% increase in power. That little 'detail' simply comes with the territory... That shouldn't scare anyone off going FI, since this has always been the way it works. In fact, it's less of an issue now, due to all the engine and forced induction hardware innovations over the past 10 years. For the record... Poorly engineered forced induction hardware componants, or poorly executed forced induction software files have destroyed far more engine parts than the 50% increases in power output. Just my .02
__________________
The best is yet to come...
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-17-2010, 03:11 PM | #32 | |
Brigadier General
501
Rep 4,033
Posts |
Quote:
Robert, I very much appreciate the kind words about my driving skills and I wish I could take all the credit, but I'm pretty sure even my wife could take a DCT M3 down the track and get some good times, with a good launch in good conditions. I give credit to BMW for going with this incredible transmission over my driving skills, I also give credit to the additional modifications, etc., and those Nitto Drag Radials. If The SC'd cars were running Drag Radials they would have easily eclipsed my times. I have no doubt others will hit/beat my times and once a SC'd car gets a good launch you will see some impressive runs. Vbox times tell a lot as well, lining 'em from a roll does too, IMHO, that's how I judge, and whether we like it or not, the majority of guys who want to go faster do too. What is the main reason we mod our cars? You want to be faster than the other guy, it's really that simple and yes that shallow, lol. You and I just happen to disagree on what's the best way to measure "performance" not necessarily all the other stuff, reliability, etc. no question Leman's billet points are important, as are other concerns people have posted here.
__________________
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
|
01-17-2010, 03:16 PM | #33 | |
Brigadier General
501
Rep 4,033
Posts |
Quote:
haha, I appreciate the kind words Bro.
__________________
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
|
01-17-2010, 03:27 PM | #34 | |||
JOSH SHOKRI.
524
Rep 5,881
Posts
Drives: 991 GT3RS, 964, Raptor
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: los angeles, california.
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I know Gintani might come off to everyone as a "new" company but this is exactly how horsepower freaks got started when they first started making turbo kits for the M3. Everyone doubted them, spoke bad about them and look at the situation a year later, everyone is kissing their ass. I don't mean to sit here and defend them (the other members already got banned for defending their hard work) but honestly, I have been to their shop way too many times. I've seen all the testing, dyno runs, changes, everything being made IN house infront of my eyes, even when I had the Gpower kit... There is a lot you guys can't see or swallow but I'm sure in time, it will happen.
__________________
Current: 16 991 GT3RS , 91 964 C2, 17 Raptor | Past: 2015 991 GT3, 2015 i3,15 YMB F80 M3, 13 E92 M3 DCT, 08 E92 M3 6MT, 07 E60 M5, 02 E46 M3
Instagram: @josh_speeddistrict #SpeedDistrict @SpeedDistrict |
|||
Appreciate
0
|
01-17-2010, 04:08 PM | #35 |
Banned
114
Rep 2,682
Posts |
Tightie makes a good point !
im dieing to get video footage of some races , as soon as the weather gets better i will contribute ! Allthough i cought a nice race with and Evo8 putting down 450+whp with the car being much lighter than stock , saw that he had carbon trunk , hood , fenders ect.. 1st race was 2nd through 4th , put 2to3 cars on him , second race put 1 car on him i think he turned up the boost or somthing This was with me having major traction issues in 2nd and a bit or 3rd .... I wished it was warmer out |
Appreciate
0
|
01-17-2010, 04:19 PM | #36 |
Lieutenant
6
Rep 402
Posts |
I apologize, his transmission was still intact, but could not handle the S/C. Hadn't read this thread in a while:
http://www.n54tech.com/forums/showth...sticky&page=33 |
Appreciate
0
|
01-17-2010, 04:24 PM | #37 |
Lieutenant
6
Rep 402
Posts |
Wrong. People want the most reliable. You can have the fastest Supercharger and the bill that'll come with replacing the engine when it blows. I bet this M engine costs as much as a 328.
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-17-2010, 04:34 PM | #38 | |
JOSH SHOKRI.
524
Rep 5,881
Posts
Drives: 991 GT3RS, 964, Raptor
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: los angeles, california.
|
Quote:
__________________
Current: 16 991 GT3RS , 91 964 C2, 17 Raptor | Past: 2015 991 GT3, 2015 i3,15 YMB F80 M3, 13 E92 M3 DCT, 08 E92 M3 6MT, 07 E60 M5, 02 E46 M3
Instagram: @josh_speeddistrict #SpeedDistrict @SpeedDistrict |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-17-2010, 04:38 PM | #39 | |
Brigadier General
501
Rep 4,033
Posts |
Quote:
Regardless being the "faster" kit does not necessarily mean it will be the one that is more susceptible to blowing an engine in comparison to the "slower" cars.
__________________
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
|
01-17-2010, 04:51 PM | #40 |
Banned
0
Rep 29
Posts |
Wrong, don't speak for all people. Many want the fastest and that does not mean you have to forego reliability, you can have less power and blow the motor.
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-17-2010, 04:54 PM | #41 | |
Banned
0
Rep 29
Posts |
Quote:
The BMW transmission cooler was not designed with the DCT in mind and definitely not with more power in mind. It is the same cooler the manual transmission uses yet the DCT puts out far more heat. Why have people overheated with stock power? Why have DCT's gone into limp mode stock on the track? Let me guess, they could not handle the power or is it that the cooler is under-engineered to begin with? You seem to be blaming an individual for mechanical issues due to BMW skimping on parts instead of giving the DCT the better cooler it needs. That is reckless and not correct. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-17-2010, 04:55 PM | #42 | |
Banned
0
Rep 29
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-17-2010, 04:57 PM | #43 | |
Banned
0
Rep 29
Posts |
Quote:
You also seem to be forgetting times are not set in stone, what are you going to say when the SC cars put up numbers that are out of reach which they already have? I can not believe you are so eager to blindly interpret that you can not see the potential with the numbers posted. Last edited by Rectify; 01-17-2010 at 05:13 PM.. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-17-2010, 04:59 PM | #44 | ||
Banned
0
Rep 29
Posts |
Quote:
What is the problem with water-meth? HPF has run it successfully and someone not running it on 91 octane can potentially be creating an issue that would not take place with a proper water-meth setup. I believe VF blew 3 motors on 91 octane because they disregarded the water-meth yet this company is one you defended and now you are saying this type of thing is superfluous? You are not making sense and the results do not support your assertions. This statement is reckless and dangerous and I can not believe how someone can say it: Quote:
|
||
Appreciate
0
|
Bookmarks |
|
|