Close

Activity Stream

Filter
Sort By Time Show
Recent Recent Popular Popular Anytime Anytime Last 24 Hours Last 24 Hours Last 7 Days Last 7 Days Last 30 Days Last 30 Days All All Photos Photos Forum Forums Articles Articles
Filter by: Popular Clear All
  • Sticky's Avatar
    06-27-2016, 10:52 PM
    You will find that after a certain point the majority of high power N54 builds utilize supplemental injection. In the early days it was methanol and these days a port fuel injection system is more common. Either way, it is easy to max out the factory direct injection fuel system at higher power levels especially if running E85. The details from VPG on their 654 whp run using the direct injection system are below: Hey everyone! Extremely excited to post a little more data on what we're doing over at Vargas Performance Group. We're testing a prototype hpfp system, and simultaneously testing control over it. Our testing started with normal E85, then Tony switched to E98 to really put the fueling system through its paces. Disclaimers/Info: -"proof of concept" prototype hpfp system -prototype is called "the prototype" because it's not ready for production, meaning we have significant work to do in order to turn this into a product ready to sell, if ever -indicates that DI only 600+ whp is possible on stock injectors -stopped log at 6300 due to auto transmission (have other logs revving higher, fuel pressure & A/F is still good but those weren't the glorious dyno this is) -Rail pressure was much smoother when we used higher targets, there is some control system learning that occurs -this dyno was done with no learning Run Data: Boost: ~28 psi Timing: ~9* Fuel: E98 Low Pressure Fuel Pump: Fuel-it! Stg 3 High Pressure Fuel System: Prototype Port Injection: None Methanol Injection: None Future Plans: -More DI only testing and prototype development -Examination of feasibility for production type configuration/implementation Take Home: -There is room to run over 600 whp direct injection only -Injectors and injector window is not an issue yet -Vargas continues to innovate and push hard
    216 replies | 1816 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    07-07-2016, 06:51 AM
    Well, the 7XX horsepower range has gotten boring. Here is another 8XX wheel horsepower N54 from BimmerBoost member @The Ghost. He detailed his engine rebuild and went with a PTE 6466 Gen 2 turbocharger as well as port fuel injection. Here are the specs: Setup: N54, FBO, 6MT (Spec 3+) VM single turbo kit, PTE 6466 G2 JB4 G5, back-end flash (MHD) BMS/CPE Port Injection kit JB4 controlled Split Second injector controller Fuel-it Stage 3 dual LPFPs Fuel-it FPR, -6AN feed/return lines e85 Engine: JE pistons (1 overbore, standard compression) CP/Carillo rods All else stock Good stuff there. He is going to post more details in his forum thread but here are some graphs and pictures to look at for now: Very impressive and great to see a BimmerBoost member yet again pushing the N54 envelope. Be sure to check out the video below.
    103 replies | 1560 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    07-15-2016, 01:01 AM
    The big thing as far as turbochargers in the stock location for the N54 platform this year is new cast options. Vargas Turbocharger Technologies has their 'GC' cast N54 twin turbo option which is generating buzz on the forums. What many wanted to see were pump gas dyno numbers. These are real world figures without ethanol or methanol to boost octane. Ideal for those who just daily drive their cars and do not dyno race, right? Enjoy the results below. We finally got around to doing what we promised we would do -test the GC's on good old pump gas. We tested on 93; if you have 91 expect numbers a little lower, if you have ACN91, weep and gnash your teeth and expect significantly less to be safe (we aren't doing max effort ACN91 testing anymore). If you are missing one spark plug, run 86 octane and have a turbonator installed, please stop emailing me questions. This is good 'ole 93 octane pump fuel. Temperature was 95*, timing target was 4.5 degrees up top, AFR was 11.5 or so up top. Our first run was 16 psi. Our final run targeted 30 psi, but made 32 psi and tapered down to 28 psi. Note; this is admittedly a lot of boost, however, we did the testing to show what was possible at/near the limit. I have a few pics for you all to check out; First, all of the runs. Everything from 16 psi through our 30 target. You can easily see the upward progression. A few points of interest; 16 psi: 449 whp 427 wtq 20 psi: 482 whp 460 wtq 22 psi: 509 whp 478 wtq 25 psi: 543 whp 519 wtq Keep in mind these runs are all the same a/f target, same timing target, same vanos, just increasing boost. There is room to adjust the tune to make more power at most of these boost levels, especially the lower ones. While the top runs were aggressive on the boost profile, this wasn't a glory pull; Tony did 5 back to back runs, all over 550 whp. Finally, this is a comparison of the first and last runs. Again, boost is the only change here.
    52 replies | 1238 view(s)
  • Termn8u's Avatar
    07-03-2016, 01:23 AM
    Hey everyone. A guy I know has a 2008 SL65 with speed driven intercoolers and a tune on it. I own a 2016 E63 S with awd and eurocharged's latest stage 3 tune. They tell me it makes 645 at the tire...... Idk if that's true or not but it has kicked the shit out of a lot of fast cars already. Last week I ran a 2010 C6 corvette with Cam, I take, exhaust, auto,3.45 gears Mickey Thompson ET streets that were aired down and a 100-150 shot of nitrous. From a dig, using race start I got him by 3-4 cars and then from a 30 mph roll I pulled him even more. How should I fare against this guys SL65?His car suffers really badly from heat soak.........
    21 replies | 6569 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    06-30-2016, 05:52 AM
    Our Australian friends at Nizpro were nice enough to answer some questions for the BimmerBoost N54 community which is hungry for automatic transmission upgrade options. Nizpro recently demonstrated their upgraded ZF 6HP21 capability with hard launches on the drag strip. That is obviously just the beginning and development continues. BimmerBoost wanted to know when they were planning to release their transmission upgrade, what the upgrades entails, if the TCU software can be purchased separately, etc. These questions and answers below should provided some much needed details. BB: What is the expected cost? Nizpro: A fully internal Nizpro transmission upgrade will be approximately $ 7900 Australian dollars. BB: How close is it to release? Nizpro: We would like to be able offer full upgrades by Christmas . BB: Who is doing the TCU software tuning? Nizpro: Software calibrations are being done in house at Nizpro. BB: Does the $7900 AUD include software? Nizpro: Yes the calibration will be included as a complete package, however various calibration will be needed for various power levels. BB: Is it possible to purchase the software separately from the hardware? Nizpro: Absolutely, our plan is to offer calibrations totally separately. There will be a number of different calibration we will make available, for customers seeking different requirements. All will be based on standard transmissions, or of course our own upgraded transmission, if you have an upgraded transmission from another workshop you can certain use an off the shelf calibration but how it will behave I have no control over. BB: What is the expected torque capacity? Nizpro: Actual maximum torque numbers are a little hard to say, simply because there are many parameter that come into it. There is also a direct relationship with maximum torque numbers vs durability. In other words we could claim the transmission is capable of 1000 ft lbs of torque and in the fine print disclose it will last for half a mile at the torque figure. Customers need to be aware that the standard HP21 is rated at 450 nm, however this has a durability of 60,000 miles. It is clear that the stock transmission will cope with double its factory rating although its life expectancy is more like 20,000 miles those torque numbers. BB: How soon will Nizpro be testing the software as thus far the 335i with Nizpro upgrades did not utilize the software in its 1/4 mile runs? Nizpro: We actually have. We have track tested the car twice. Once using our upgraded transmission with Alpina for a base test data. 4 runs were recorded. We are not concerned with overall quarter mile times simply gear shift times for comparison, between calibrations. The second lot of testing using software changes were done the following weekend at a different track. The track had little grip on the day so the results were not really useful in terms of quarter times. This is all good news. Nizpro is on schedule to release their product this year and they will not force you to bundle their hardware and software together. Here are some additional details which should help get a better idea of what is involved. Things are looking up for the N54 automatic scene.
    31 replies | 3227 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    07-02-2016, 02:42 AM
    Many readers are familiar with twin scroll turbocharger systems but it never hurts to in basic terms explain turbocharger technology which can seem like witchcraft to the casual car fans. In the most basic of terms, a twin scroll turbocharger is like having two turbos in one. How is that possible you say? Well, just think of your classic V6 or V8. There are two exhaust banks. Traditionally, an efficient turbocharger setup would mean two turbos hanging off the manifolds at the bottom of the car. Each is fed by that set of cylinder banks which it is connected to. It looks like this: Such a setup can make a ton of power, no doubt about it. A good twin set of modern single scroll turbochargers on a V8 or V6 can produce quadruple digit horsepower. However, look at all that piping. Look at the distance the exhaust gases have to travel. Can a single twin scroll turbo do the job of these twins more efficiently? Absolutely. Imagine if the exhaust gases traveled to the turbocharger right from the cylinder head. That poses a packaging problem but one that a twin scroll turbo helps alleviate. The new B9 Audi S4/S5 3.0 TFSI turbo motor is a great example of this: Audi placed a twin scroll turbo in the V at the top of the motor and with a very trick manifold feeds a single turbo with both banks of exhaust pulses. It is like having two in one yet also with the benefit of less piping, less travel distance, and quite simply greater efficiency. BMW started the trend with a pair of twin scroll turbochargers mounted in the valley of their S63 V8. It is the same principle except they are feeding two turbochargers with a cross engine manifold: BMW has two V8 twin turbo motors, the N63 and the S63, but the S63 outpaces the N63 considerably. Why? Because of the twin scroll cross manifold design. The N63 can essentially be turned into an S63 by changing the manifold and turbos and that is basically what an S63 is. Imagine turbochargers being fed by pulses from both banks instead of just one bank. That is exactly what a twin scroll setup does with the turbocharger taking in exhaust gases from both banks. This pays dividends in many areas. Spool is said to be increased which leads to low end torque gains as well as an improvement in throttle response. The turbos in theory will make more power through the rev range as they are continuously fed with exhaust pulses through the curve. One should also see a decrease in intake charge dilution during valve overlap along with lower exhaust gas temperatures. You also have reduced pumping losses and better fuel consumption. What are the disadvantages? There really aren't any other than more manufacturing and tuning complexity. In theory a good sized single twin scroll turbo will cost you less than a pair of high end traditional turbos. The main thing to get right is the firing order feeding the twin scroll turbo. For example a four-cylinder motor usually fires 1-3-4-2. You would want one exhaust passage to get gases from the number 1 and 4 cylinders and the other from the 3 and 2 cylinders. This may all sound too good to be true but the principle has been tested and a twin scroll setup is simply more efficient: More power through the curve? Yep: You also get the benefit of greater boost at lower engine speeds which is that low end torque and response benefit discussed earlier. You are going to see more and more twin scroll turbocharger applications in production cars. Expect variable geometry twin scroll turbochargers as well which means the turbocharger has vanes that can adjust. This way the turbocharger can adjust itself to maintain the speed of gas flow based on how much exhaust gas it is being fed. Turbo lag will never be eliminated but with twin scroll and variable vane turbo technology manufacturers are getting so close it may no longer matter. The modern turbo era is providing excellent response, efficiency, and power with fuel economy nobody would have thought possible not too long ago. Much respect to twin scroll technology!
    31 replies | 3323 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    07-02-2016, 01:51 AM
    Many readers are familiar with twin scroll turbocharger systems but it never hurts to in basic terms explain turbocharger technology which can seem like witchcraft to the casual car fans. In the most basic of terms, a twin scroll turbocharger is like having two turbos in one. How is that possible you say? Well, just think of your classic V6 or V8. There are two exhaust banks. Traditionally, an efficient turbocharger setup would mean two turbos hanging off the manifolds at the bottom of the car. Each is fed by that set of cylinder banks which it is connected to. It looks like this: Such a setup can make a ton of power, no doubt about it. A good twin set of modern single scroll turbochargers on a V8 or V6 can produce quadruple digit horsepower. However, look at all that piping. Look at the distance the exhaust gases have to travel. Can a single twin scroll turbo do the job of these twins more efficiently? Absolutely. Imagine if the exhaust gases traveled to the turbocharger right from the cylinder head. That poses a packaging problem but one that a twin scroll turbo helps alleviate. The new B9 Audi S4/S5 3.0 TFSI turbo motor is a great example of this: Audi placed a twin scroll turbo in the V at the top of the motor and with a very trick manifold feeds a single turbo with both banks of exhaust pulses. It is like having two in one yet also with the benefit of less piping, less travel distance, and quite simply greater efficiency. BMW started the trend with a pair of twin scroll turbochargers mounted in the valley of their S63 V8. It is the same principle except they are feeding two turbochargers with a cross engine manifold: BMW has two V8 twin turbo motors, the N63 and the S63, but the S63 outpaces the N63 considerably. Why? Because of the twin scroll cross manifold design. The N63 can essentially be turned into an S63 by changing the manifold and turbos and that is basically what an S63 is. Imagine turbochargers being fed by pulses from both banks instead of just one bank. That is exactly what a twin scroll setup does with the turbocharger taking in exhaust gases from both banks. This pays dividends in many areas. Spool is said to be increased which leads to low end torque gains as well as an improvement in throttle response. The turbos in theory will make more power through the rev range as they are continuously fed with exhaust pulses through the curve. One should also see a decrease in intake charge dilution during valve overlap along with lower exhaust gas temperatures. You also have reduced pumping losses and better fuel consumption. What are the disadvantages? There really aren't any other than more manufacturing and tuning complexity. In theory a good sized single twin scroll turbo will cost you less than a pair of high end traditional turbos. The main thing to get right is the firing order feeding the twin scroll turbo. For example a four-cylinder motor usually fires 1-3-4-2. You would want one exhaust passage to get gases from the number 1 and 4 cylinders and the other from the 3 and 2 cylinders. This may all sound too good to be true but the principle has been tested and a twin scroll setup is simply more efficient: More power through the curve? Yep: You also get the benefit of greater boost at lower engine speeds which is that low end torque and response benefit discussed earlier. You are going to see more and more twin scroll turbocharger applications in production cars. Expect variable geometry twin scroll turbochargers as well which means the turbocharger has vanes that can adjust. This way the turbocharger can adjust itself to maintain the speed of gas flow based on how much exhaust gas it is being fed. Turbo lag will never be eliminated but with twin scroll and variable vane turbo technology manufacturers are getting so close it may no longer matter. The modern turbo era is providing excellent response, efficiency, and power with fuel economy nobody would have thought possible not too long ago. Much respect to twin scroll technology!
    31 replies | 2104 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    07-12-2016, 06:14 AM
    Nurburgring laptimes are basically a big dick measuring contest. That is fine of course as most things associated with automotive performance can be boiled down as such. The problem is everyone is not playing with the same sized ruler. What does this mean? Well, take Porsche's recent claim of a world record on the Nurburgring with the new Panamera Turbo. This tops the record set by the Alfa Romeo Giulia Quadrifoglio's 7:39 laptime. Alfa Romeo never proved they set a 7:39 time by providing a video as proof. Did they do it? Maybe, maybe not, but who knows at this point if it wasn't just a marketing ploy. The issue is Porsche did not provide a full laptime video now either. They simply wrote '7:38' and claimed a world record in their video and that is supposed to be good enough. It isn't good enough. The gold standard for proving a laptime is what Dodge did with the Viper ACR. They claimed thirteen track records and provided thirteen timed videos of the car lapping the tracks as proof. Lamborghini did a beautiful job showcasing their 6:59.72 Nurburgring lap from the Aventador Superveloce. A video of the whole run with timing included is exactly how to display the result. So why are we taking Alfa Romeo and Porsche's word for it? How do we even know if the cars are running factory tunes? Nissan started this whole mess when they would claim lap records with the R34 GT-R but everyone knew they were upping the boost. Part of the problem Nissan had was that old (and stupid) Japanese horsepower cap. Porsche accused Nissan of cheating with the GT-R on the Nurburgring back in 2008: Was Nissan using ringers? Nobody else was able to match Nissan's own GTR laptimes. Nissan provided videos as proof but the problem is a video doesn't tell us what software the car is running or what tires. Nissan's response to Porsche was to post a video of a 7:29 GTR lap and to tell Porsche they would offer Porsche test drivers training. They essentially mocked Porsche as beating them in their own backyard was unacceptable to the Germans. Complicating matters beyond manufacturers playing games with software, tires, or just making claims without proof is that the Nurburgring imposed a testing ban recently. Sections of the track were repaved, changed, and additional safety precautions were put in place. The Nurburgring tested on now is not the same Nurburgring and this is a large factor when even fast laps are over 7 minutes long. Minor changes will add up. Add into this that differing weather conditions will change laps considerably as will traffic on the track. BMW rented out the track specifically for their F82 M4 GTS test which of course gives them an advantage over times set with traffic to avoid. The result was a 7:28 time which tops the Porsche Carrera GT and Koenigsegg CCX. Does anyone really believe the M4 GTS laps a track quicker than those two lighter cars with mid-engine layouts that are far more aerodynamic and more powerful? Porsche and Alfa Romeo proved people will believe whatever they say. At least BMW posted a video of the M4 GTS making its run even though we do not know what software they used (and BMW does use special press software for marketing). Porsche just decided to put the Panamera Turbo ahead of the Alfa Romeo Giulia Quadrifoglio as Alfa Romeo never backed up their time with anything of substance and Porsche wanted big press for the new Panamera. You can not trust manufacturers to play this game honestly when the general public will not take any factors into account other than time X is less than time Y. If the Nurburgring is to be taken seriously as an automotive testing ground a standard must be created where production cars are brought in to set the records and more than one driver not on the manufacturer payroll get a crack at setting a time. Until then, you can not trust anyone because there is simply too much BS being thrown around. That is unfortunate for those competing honestly. Enough of the bullshit. If we are going to use the Nurburgring for comparisons then testing for timed and record laps must be standardized.
    32 replies | 2124 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    06-28-2016, 06:00 PM
    Well, it seems the Nizpro upgrade is real although this is still early. There is a competitive offering based in the US and Nizpro of course is in Australia. They took their E92 335i with factory N54 turbos to the strip and ran an impressive 11.2 @ 120 in the 1/4 mile. That elapsed time for the trap speed speed is very good. This is indicated by the 1.57 60 foot: Make no mistake about it there is room to improve but their transmission is holding together thus far. It would instill confidence to see higher torque launches. At this point, who cares about stock turbo N54 performance? The best test for the trans would be a high load launch with upgraded twins at the very least. More runs and details will come with time as Nizpro ran this car without any corresponding transmission software upgrades. They are clearly doing shakedown runs before going further. So far, so good.
    26 replies | 1405 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    06-28-2016, 03:30 PM
    Whoa! These pictures will definitely get you rethinking the W205 generation Mercedes design. Although the cars are blending together that is not to say the modern Mercedes styling language is bad. Just look at this black Mercedes-AMG C63 Coupe for proof of that. The car is lowered with dark window tint and tinted lights. Vossen wheels in a matte bronze finish round it out but a gloss black finish would look even meaner. Either way, this is a badass C63 Coupe.
    39 replies | 1091 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    07-11-2016, 02:12 AM
    The Doc Race N54 single turbo kit is getting pretty popular in the BMW N54 world. Why shouldn't it be? It is a quality upgrade with the performance to back up the looks. This is Doc Race's own N54 project car in action which is a 6-speed manual. It also is in street trim which is stated to be 20 psi. The Yamaha R6 is not a liter bike but it is no joke. That the N54 pulls considering it is a manual and not running 30+ psi as it could is incredible. Maybe a liter bike should be up next? R1 matchup anyone? Happy Independence Day fellas!! Well here's how it starts out. A group of us were down an abandoned road (in Mexico of course) and I let a buddy of mine take a rip in my car. He takes off through the top of forth and it just sounded bananas. Never heard my car from the outside, from the driver's seat it always sounded very mild. Anyways this guy comes up with an R6 and ask who owns that car, he wants to race it. So it took us a minute to set it up because he wanted to start from a dig. I didn't want to break axles so I say we go from a roll starting at 30. Well here was the first race. The shift bog just kills me and I end up chasing him the rest if the way. Guy pulls up to me after and say he let off at the end lol. Maybe he did but I was going to pass him either way. He wanted to go again so we go again. This time I was a bit faster on my shifting. No chance on this one. BTW guys I was on 20psi.
    30 replies | 970 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    07-12-2016, 06:05 AM
    Nurburgring laptimes are basically a big dick measuring contest. That is fine of course as most things associated with automotive performance can be boiled down as such. The problem is everyone is not playing with the same sized ruler. What does this mean? Well, take Porsche's recent claim of a world record on the Nurburgring with the new Panamera Turbo. This tops the record set by the Alfa Romeo Giulia Quadrifoglio's 7:39 laptime. Alfa Romeo never proved they set a 7:39 time by providing a video as proof. Did they do it? Maybe, maybe not, but who knows at this point if it wasn't just a marketing ploy. The issue is Porsche did not provide a full laptime video now either. They simply wrote '7:38' and claimed a world record in their video and that is supposed to be good enough. It isn't good enough. The gold standard for proving a laptime is what Dodge did with the Viper ACR. They claimed thirteen track records and provided thirteen timed videos of the car lapping the tracks as proof. Lamborghini did a beautiful job showcasing their 6:59.72 Nurburgring lap from the Aventador Superveloce. A video of the whole run with timing included is exactly how to display the result. So why are we taking Alfa Romeo and Porsche's word for it? How do we even know if the cars are running factory tunes? Nissan started this whole mess when they would claim lap records with the R34 GT-R but everyone knew they were upping the boost. Part of the problem Nissan had was that old (and stupid) Japanese horsepower cap. Porsche accused Nissan of cheating with the GT-R on the Nurburgring back in 2008: Was Nissan using ringers? Nobody else was able to match Nissan's own GTR laptimes. Nissan provided videos as proof but the problem is a video doesn't tell us what software the car is running or what tires. Nissan's response to Porsche was to post a video of a 7:29 GTR lap and to tell Porsche they would offer Porsche test drivers training. They essentially mocked Porsche as beating them in their own backyard was unacceptable to the Germans. Complicating matters beyond manufacturers playing games with software, tires, or just making claims without proof is that the Nurburgring imposed a testing ban recently. Sections of the track were repaved, changed, and additional safety precautions were put in place. The Nurburgring tested on now is not the same Nurburgring and this is a large factor when even fast laps are over 7 minutes long. Minor changes will add up. Add into this that differing weather conditions will change laps considerably as will traffic on the track. BMW rented out the track specifically for their F82 M4 GTS test which of course gives them an advantage over times set with traffic to avoid. The result was a 7:28 time which tops the Porsche Carrera GT and Koenigsegg CCX. Does anyone really believe the M4 GTS laps a track quicker than those two lighter cars with mid-engine layouts that are far more aerodynamic and more powerful? Porsche and Alfa Romeo proved people will believe whatever they say. At least BMW posted a video of the M4 GTS making its run even though we do not know what software they used (and BMW does use special press software for marketing). Porsche just decided to put the Panamera Turbo ahead of the Alfa Romeo Giulia Quadrifoglio as Alfa Romeo never backed up their time with anything of substance and Porsche wanted big press for the new Panamera. You can not trust manufacturers to play this game honestly when the general public will not take any factors into account other than time X is less than time Y. If the Nurburgring is to be taken seriously as an automotive testing ground a standard must be created where production cars are brought in to set the records and more than one driver not on the manufacturer payroll get a crack at setting a time. Until then, you can not trust anyone because there is simply too much BS being thrown around. That is unfortunate for those competing honestly. Enough of the bullshit. If we are going to use the Nurburgring for comparisons then testing for timed and record laps must be standardized.
    32 replies | 1154 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    06-28-2016, 03:25 PM
    Whoa! These pictures will definitely get you rethinking the W205 generation Mercedes design. Although the cars are blending together that is not to say the modern Mercedes styling language is bad. Just look at this black Mercedes-AMG C63 Coupe for proof of that. The car is lowered with dark window tint and tinted lights. Vossen wheels in a matte bronze finish round it out but a gloss black finish would look even meaner. Either way, this is a badass C63 Coupe.
    39 replies | 420 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    07-20-2016, 03:41 PM
    The BMW M badge really doesn't mean much any longer. It's been diluted to the point that when you see it on a car and often on a non-M car it hardly even gets your attention. I mean, they put M decals and badges all over the 2-Series Active Tourer so BMW doesn't give a crap at this point. If you're going to sell out, sell out harder BMW. Make an M version of your new FWD 1-Series sedan. Let's just take a big piss on the M badge while lighting hundred bills on fire? Who cares? While you're at it, put M badges on some Mini Coopers too. Maybe a Rolls Royce M? Maybe start selling M badged toilet paper? That way we can truly wipe our ass with the badge just as you have.
    34 replies | 616 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    07-18-2016, 09:01 AM
    While direct fuel injection brings with it certain upsides such as greater fuel economy and higher compression ratios on pump fuel there are downsides to the technology as well. One such downside is carbon buildup which you see on the intake valves. This is why walnut blasting to clear out carbon deposits is popular maintenance especially considering buildup can and will reduce engine output. Not to mention if it gets severe enough it will cause other problems. Newer motors are better about this (especially engines with dual injection systems where fuel sprayed on the backside of intake valves helps keep them clean) but anyone with a direct fuel injected motor would be wise to monitor their carbon buildup situation. You don't want that much gunk just sitting in your motor, do you? The photo is from carbon deposits removed from a VW TSI engine with 78k miles.
    22 replies | 1159 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    07-03-2016, 05:51 PM
    If you are squeamish don't watch this. Many people write that before videos but this is a very disturbing video that captures someone in China using their car as a weapon. There are stories and rumors from China that killing an injured pedestrian is preferred than paying out a lifetime of restitution but this is on a whole different level. What takes place is the white car aims for two people next to a taxi. One gets in and the other gets run over by the taxi the white car hits. That right there should stop everything but it is just the beginning. Those in the taxi get out and the white vehicle backs up and begins another assault. The passenger from the taxi is run over. The car backs up and then runs over the other person who was under the taxi. Absolutely insane. This road rage continues as the white vehicle circles the injured as if it is stalking more prey. Another taxi comes into the picture and is rammed. The taxi driver gets out and attempts to get into the white car which backs away. Eventually the car just leaves the scene but this is shocking, disturbing, and just psychotic behavior that can not be explained.
    10 replies | 2424 view(s)
  • SeanWebster's Avatar
    07-15-2016, 06:14 PM
    I got some nice runs in last night against some friends. Summary: M5 made 500whp - Lost Mustang has not yet dyno'd - Even Golf R made like 315whp I think - Lost Infiniti Q50 is stock - Lost M5 and Mustang runs: Golf R and Q50 runs:
    18 replies | 1551 view(s)
  • DQE92's Avatar
    07-02-2016, 02:08 AM
    Brand new upgraded fuel system I purchased a while back when I was going to upgrade turbos. These are still brand new in the box and need gone ASAP!! Spent over $3000 for this fuel system Asking Price is $2500 including shipping or OBO Complete Fuel-it Stage 3 with hobbs switch MOTIV Port Injection Spacer, Rail and Injector Kit (#MOTIV-PIFS-SRIK1) Select Model: 335 MOTIV Port Injection Feed, Regulate, and Return Kit (#MOTIV-PIFS-FRRK1) Which Port Injection Fuel System Will You Be Using?: MOTIV Spacer, Rail, and Injector Kit Select Model: 335 Split Second - Additional Injector Controller (#SPLIT-AIC1-G6H) Please message me for inquiries
    15 replies | 2266 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    07-18-2016, 10:14 AM
    Many in the Gen V Viper world would have you believe this is impossible. One such group is Calvo Motorsports and their tuner Collin Murphy who states a Motec is the only possible way to tune a Gen V Viper twin turbo. Is that because their Motec based twin turbo kit costs $55k and he makes more money tuning a Motec? The Stage 6 Motorsports Stock ECU tuned kit retails for $19,999.99. In other words, less than half the price of the Calvo Motorsports setup. Is a Motec worth another $35k? It certainly isn't providing double the horsepower: Stage 6 Motorsports hit 1002 wheel horsepower on 93 octane pump gas at only 9 psi of boost. This is tuned using HP Tuners which Calvo Motorsports and their tuner claim can not properly be done: Keep in mind many early on, especially those who were selling Arrow heads/cam kits, stated HP Tuners and the stock ecu would not be able to properly tune a Viper with an aftermarket cam. A&C performance proved that wrong by producing the world's most powerful naturally aspirated Viper and it is tuned through the factory ECU. Pretty much all Viper twin turbo kits use a standalone ECU but this pushes the turbo kit price of entry well over $40k. At less than half that price and with quadruple digit power with stock ECU tuning suddenly the Viper becomes a tuning bargain. Keep in mind HP Tuners is continually evolving as will stock ECU tuning on the platform (just like any platform) which is a good thing. Well, a good thing for consumers and not necessarily the bottom line of certain tuners such a Calvo Motorsports' Collin Murphy. When searching for aftermarket products it is often difficult to separate what is the truth from what is best for a tuner's pockets. In this case, it is definitely possible to produce forced induction setups on the stock ECU as D3PE's supercharger system already demonstrates. It's up to the consumer to decide if a standalone ECU and the features/benefits that come with it are worth the additional cost. Don't let a tuner mislead you into spending more than you need to. Don't dismiss the ingenuity and capability of tuners who tune on the stock ecu either.
    4 replies | 3145 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    07-19-2016, 09:31 AM
    Running 10's in the 1/4 mile by the F80 M3 and F82 M4 platforms has been done over and over. The thing is, the cars doing it are all DCT (dual clutch transmission) models. There is only one exception and that would be this 6-speed manual F80 M3 from TPG Tuning. The car is tuned by Jordan of @RK-Tunes and runs a flash tune along with a BMS JB4 piggyback. The turbos are upgraded to Xona Rotor Green Turbochargers. Fuel is MS109 race gas. The result? Here: For some reason someone thought it would be a good idea to upload a slip at such a low resolution as to be unreadable but here are the numbers: 60 FT - 1.5399 330 FT - 4.5682 1/8th ET - 7.0202 1/8th MPH - 102.23 1000 ET - 9.1173 1000 MPH - 116.52 1/4 ET - 10.8695 1/4 MPH - 129.42 Excellent numbers and some great driving as evidence by the 60 foot, 1/8 mile, and 1/4 mile marks. Will this car be pushed further? Apparently E85 may be up next but with crank hub issues on the motor scaring everyone maybe they stop here.
    22 replies | 736 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    07-18-2016, 09:00 AM
    While direct fuel injection brings with it certain upsides such as greater fuel economy and higher compression ratios on pump fuel there are downsides to the technology as well. One such downside is carbon buildup which you see on the intake valves. This is why walnut blasting to clear out carbon deposits is popular maintenance especially considering buildup can and will reduce engine output. Not to mention if it gets severe enough it will cause other problems. Newer motors are better about this (especially engines with dual injection systems where fuel sprayed on the backside of intake valves helps keep them clean) but anyone with a direct fuel injected motor would be wise to monitor their carbon buildup situation. You don't want that much gunk just sitting in your motor, do you? The photo is from carbon deposits removed from a VW TSI engine with 78k miles.
    22 replies | 495 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    06-27-2016, 10:33 PM
    This is incredible considering that AMR Performance already showed a gain of 63 horsepower and 100 lb-ft of torque at the wheels on the 2016 W205 C450 model. That was with their 1.01c tune revision and now with their 1.02b tune revision they take things considerably further. How about 371 at the wheels or in other words another 53 whp from where they already were? That is more than 100 horsepower at the wheels over stock: Utilizing this tune and no other modifications a C450 went 12.3 @ 112 in the 1/4 mile in 98 degree weather. We expect easy 11's in winter conditions or just cooler weather: We are waiting on the slip but AMR is pushing the C450/C43 models harder than anyone else along with the M276 DEL30 engine. #AMR #amrperformance
    19 replies | 690 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    06-25-2016, 09:01 PM
    More runs here from BimmerBoost member @TZ04XJR and his Active Autowerke Level II supercharged E92 M3 DCT. Last month this M3 impressively beat up on a Ferrari 458 Italia. Now he decided to take on a variety of cars ranging from those mildly modded with bolt ons to 600+ whp beasts. Keep in mind he is still running the Level II Active Autowerke S65 supercharger and still has yet to install his Level III components. The Active Autowerke supercharger kit continues to impress. Cars and specs: M3- AA Gen 2 Level 2 S/C (553whp) C7- Procharged (575whp) 15' 5.0- Bolt Ons & Nitrous Z32 300ZX TT- Upgraded Turbos (600+whp) EVO 9- FBO, Stock Turbo (440whp) vs C7 Run 1 vs C7 Run 1, C7 View vs C7 Run 2 vs 15' 5.0 vs 300ZX TT vs EVO 8
    13 replies | 1017 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    07-01-2016, 02:00 AM
    Potentially an interesting drag race here as it pits three very fast cars each representing their nation against each other but Autocar screws the whole thing up. The Nissan GTR and the Porsche 911 Turbo S are not all that different from each other. Both feature twin turbo six-cylinder powerplants, both have all wheel drive, and both have dual clutch transmissions. The GTR is heavier however with less torque on paper. No direct fuel injection for the VR38DETT motor and of course a front engine layout. It's also quite a bit cheaper than the Porsche. The best horsepower per dollar value of the trio is the Hellcat but you already knew that. Just as you likely knew it is the heaviest car of the trio. We're talking 400 kg more than the 911 Turbo S or in other words more than 800 pounds. As this is Autocar they have no clue how to launch the Hellcat. The car is still spinning its tires when they go green. Why? What's the point of the drag race if the Hellcat never even gets a chance to hook up? Of course they also provide no data because it's Autocar and we should all just be happy they aren't doing this in the rain while sipping tea. They try again and the Hellcat again does its stupid spin until the tires go green routine. At no point do they think of going from a roll because producing quality performance comparisons escapes the people at Autocar. Essentially we get a frustrating and pointless drag race video. Someone tell these idiots at Autocar THIS is how you drag race a Hellcat.
    14 replies | 1087 view(s)
More Activity