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 Last 30 Days Clear All
  • Sticky's Avatar
    04-28-2015, 03:33 PM
    The N54 3.0 liter turbocharged inline-6 is a strong BMW motor that takes boost (and abuse) well. That does not mean it is indestructible as nothing is. BimmerBoost member @Xearom3 unfortunately put a hole in his block but he shared what, how, and when it happened. Most people tend to sweep these things under the rug as if it is some sort of embarrassment or it reflects badly on them. Usually it is tuners as often something they did is responsible for the failure. This one appears to be old fashioned detonation and bad luck with the ECU not being able to spare the motor in time. So, he put a hole in the block but is taking it in stride sharing the details and he has a spare motor to build which will be able to take much more abuse. Hey, shit happens when pushing motors and running them hard at power/torque levels they were not designed for. Respect from BimmerBoost to @Xearom3 for sharing these photos and details: So I figured I would share my experience with the community. Was out making a couple of pulls @ 25/26psi on my PTE 6466 twin scroll setup when cylinder 1 decided to give up on me. Not surprised a stock engine let go at mid to upper 600's, but I am impressed how long it hung in there. Put up a hell of a fight! Pics at the very bottom of my spare engine that apparently is now gonna get built. Log is from earlier in the evening: Also happened to have my GoPro watching the cluster:
    199 replies | 1924 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    04-13-2015, 12:13 PM
    What a difference a different dynamometer can make. For forum bragging, there is no better dyno than the Dynojet. It is consistent and tends to produce the highest numbers which owners of course love to dyno race with. The Mustang being a load bearing and not an inertia based dyno functions differently and also provides different numbers. People get caught up in the numbers and attempting to explain that different machines can produce wildly different results even on the same car is often a lost cause. The average person will see figure X, see it is higher than figure Y, and leave it at that without delving any further into it. What you are about to see is just how much the numbers can vary and why dyno racing should be not be taken seriously. This 6-speed manual F10 M5 features the following modifications and was run on 93 octane pump fuel: - Undercover Performance 3 inch catless downpipes - Undercover Performance catless exhaust - BMS JB4 tuning Dynojet figures 620 lb-ft of torque and 659 whp: Mustang figures 553 lb-ft of torque and 544 whp: That is a spread of 115 horsepower at the wheels and 67 lb-ft of torque at the wheels on the exact same car with the only difference being different dyno machines. The output never changes. The way it is displayed to you is the only change. Does the Mustang deserve its reputation as being a conservative dyno in comparison to the Dynojet? It sure does. But do not get too caught up in its figures either. It can easily be messed with to display whatever the operator wants it to display. When used properly dynos are great tools. It's the tools running around with inflated graphs for frum bragging rights that one has to worry about.
    41 replies | 2043 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    04-21-2015, 12:47 AM
    This thread might get intense. So which one do you choose? Honestly, I'm starting to think the Viper is the way to go. I love the Z06. There is no 'wrong' car here. They're both incredible. But the Viper is just... raw. Something about it. There's something that makes you feel like they just won't build like this any longer. It's a tough one.
    54 replies | 974 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    04-22-2015, 02:09 PM
    A twin turbo S85 V10? That is what the boosted BMW world has been missing. Well, at least in a street car. This is a bit of a premature post as there is a long way to go but our friend @Dr.Tamirlan from Russia shared some pictures and details on his build. You get a couple shots of the turbos mounted and the manifolds which are nice to see. BimmerBoost can say for the record they saw these manifolds almost two years ago in person so that gives you an idea of how long this process is. Additionally, BimmerBoost can say from experience that @Dr.Tamirlan better have a lot of patience and a lot of money. To do what he asks is going to take some serious work to the block. The power will be there with some big turbos and the V10, do not worry about that. Worry about keeping the motor together. BimmerBoost also from speaking with Gintani knows they have tricks up their sleeves for strengthening these blocks but the S85 is a better candidate than the S65 V8 for big power anyway due to its larger size, better oiling system, and offering slightly more material. The DCT swap is not as big of a wildcard here as people might think. Dodson is willing to work with Gintani regarding the transmission so they will be able to keep it together. The challenge once again is the block due to its soft and lightweight aluminum-silicon material. We wish our Russian friend luck with his project. The result certainly would be something to behold and it would challenge for the top street BMW spot in the world.
    37 replies | 1489 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    04-08-2015, 08:02 AM
    Mid 10 second stock internal supercharged E92 M3's are becoming more common as more owners take them to the strip. The record currently is 10.46 @ 135.13 but that is from a heavily stripped out car running in negative density altitude with some question marks regarding the fuel and boost used. Regardless, mid 10 second performance is about what one can expect on a well prepped strip from a supercharged DCT M3 pushing 8+ psi on drag rubber. This car ran 10.5 - 10.6 all day but in the process broke its driveshaft. Things break on the strip, that is how it is. The better prepped it is the better the chance is of something breaking as the torque has to go somewhere if the tires are hooking and not spinning. The 60 foots for the most part are in the 1.7X range which makes it somewhat surprising that the driveshaft gave as nobody else who has launched in this range has broken one. It could be a bad shaft or it could just be time for an upgrade to a DSS carbon unit. Based on the 60 foot it does not look like launch control (capable of 6200 rpm launches) was used. With a supercharger 1.5X-1.6X 60 foots should be possible as bolt on cars have done 1.7X's. The car was not pushed as hard as it could and should be out of hole. The car is running Dodson upgraded clutches and Dodson is the only company to have a real working solution for the BMW M3 DCT. The proof is in the 1/4 mile results. The claim is the car ran on 93 octane but when people claim pump it is best to assume race gas or some kind of octane boost (possibly from meth injection). If trying to set records why run pump gas unless you want to act like there is soooo much more in it? Undercover Performance prepped the car and plans to retune it. There will probably be more boost and some more octane with a more aggressive file if some of these things did not already take place. Regardless, mid 10's are essentially the norm now. There is room to hit low 10's. It's a shame more supercharged cars do not hit the strip but most M3 owners tend to be the kinds of people who are afraid of breaking things instead of pushing things. The runs were done at ATCO (one of the fastest East Coast strips) in negative density altitude up to -470 on.
    28 replies | 1694 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    04-17-2015, 05:12 AM
    It is becoming increasingly apparent that the MKVII Volkswagen Golf R is an 11 second car with bolt ons. APR recently managed 12.011 @ 113.44 in the 1/4 mile out of the car with their Stage 1 tune on 93 octane and an intake. In other words, a hair from the 11's. Race gas alone would probably do it. With a 1.734 60 foot the all wheel drive system is showing its benefits off the line. It is just a matter of time before we see a US spec MKVII Golf R in the 11's and this just further reinforces the results from a US spec tuned Golf R we saw earlier this month. This is a new record though and 113.44 is the new fastest trap speed for US spec Golf R's once again. ROW cars are already in the 11's. With race gas these cars should be doing 11's and 115+ traps all day.
    38 replies | 511 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    04-15-2015, 04:52 AM
    This is not a new story but the only way to combat ignorance is with knowledge and data. Fortunately, there are members in the BimmerBoost community who provide quality data such as what you are about to see below and thanks to them we can differentiate between marketing and reality. The marketing is that the F82 M3 as well as the F80 M3 weigh 3306 pounds. What BMW left out was this weight comes from a European spec F82/F80 (they have different crash test standard affecting whether seats with side impact airbags are used) that is a 6-speed manual without any fluids whatsoever. In other words, it's a bunch of BS. Almost exactly one year to the day BimmerBoost posted an indepently weighed figure for an F80 6-speed manual M3 and it came in at 3562 pounds: This year thanks to member @DD GT3 RD (who also weighed his 991 GTS while he has was it) we have an independent weight figure for an F82 M4 DCT and it is 3661 pounds: Does the DCT add weight? Yes. It is not almost 100 pounds though but the difference between the lighter 6-speed F80 M3 and the DCT F82 M4 can be attributed to the transmission as well as fuel. The rule of thumb for fuel is about 6 pounds per gallon of gas. So how do the F80 M3 and F82 M4 compare to a DCT E92 M3? The previous generation car comes in as lighter than either of them at 3549 pounds. Yes, turbochargers, intercoolers, and plumbing add weight so BMW's hype was nothing more than hype. The aluminum-silicon S65 V8 block in the E92 M3 is very light and compact and this also leads to the previous generation car having better weight distribution. Do not believe everything you read. Especially if it's marketing from BMW.
    23 replies | 1999 view(s)
  • Terry@BMS's Avatar
    04-27-2015, 05:54 PM
    Had a chance to meet up with Payam today to tune his new PTE 6466 G2 twin scroll turbocharger. He's running our port injection and a full fuel-it kit (regulator & return line). 100% E85. Per usual I have a limited amount of time so I'll just share the highlights. 1) The 6466 G2 in a twin scroll works really well. Great boost potential and very good HP per PSI. 2) We found Payam's car wanted a lot less timing than I'm used to giving E85 cars. Around 7.5 degrees up top. 3) I tried a few VANOS curves and found the basic Cobb curves worked better than what we have in our ST back end flash files. Better spool and more power. Sigh. I think I'll just change those all back. 4) He ran in to timing drops around 30psi that we couldn't fix by lowering advance further so decided to call it a day for now. Hopefully it runs well at NFZ this weekend!
    28 replies | 949 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    04-26-2015, 05:56 PM
    Car and Driver is the first one to publish test figures for the 2016 ATS-V coupe. They tested the 6-speed manual version and 8-speed automatic test figures will come later. Is the new ATS-V a BMW F82 M4 killer? Not exactly, but it is a decent first attempt. Let's get the acceleration figures for the 464 horsepower and 445 lb-ft of torque 3.6 liter twin turbo V6 out of the way. 0-60 comes in 4.2 seconds, 0-100 in 9.9 seconds, and the 1/4 mile in 12.6 seconds at 115 miles per hour. Not exactly the world beating acceleration performance that the Caddy boss was bragging about. It is roughly even with a manual M3/M4. It is considerably behind Car and Driver's own figures for a DCT 2015 F80 M3 though. Will the 8-speed 8L90 automatic version close the gap? Maybe. It certainly is not 'whipping' the Germans the way Johan de Nysschen claimed and it does not have a horsepower or torque advantage anywhere other than on paper versus BMW. The Mercedes-AMG C63 S outmuscles the ATS-V by the way. Ok, so he was wrong about that. What about his statements on how it would handle, brake, and just drive better than its German rivals? Well, he is wrong there too as Car and Driver's M4 test figures show .99g on the skidpad and the ATS-V hits .97g. Where is the major advantage for the Cadillac? It does not brake any better either. It is also heavier than the BMW M4 at 3760 pounds. As far as the styling inside and out you do not get the same quality the Germans offer and you should for the $74,450 price as tested. Audi, Mercedes, and BMW simply have better looking cars and better looking interiors. Look at this garbage instrument cluster on the ATS-V: The ATS-V just is not as good as the BMW M3/M4. The Mercedes-AMG C63 remains to be seen but but those of us who have seen the the C63 and ATS-V in person (like this writer) can say it also blows the ATS-V away. The C63 has better styling inside and out, the M177 V8 is more powerful, and you are looking at roughly the same money if not less with options. Johan de Nysschen should not have opened his mouth when the ATS-V can not back his words up. The CTS-V likely will and does outmuscle its German competition with comparable quality inside and out. It likely will come in cheaper too. For the same money as its German rivals the ATS-V does not offer enough performance to overcome its deficiencies. Back to the drawing board Cadillac, you got too cocky and couldn't back it up. Specifications VEHICLE TYPE:front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 4-passenger, 2-door coupe PRICE AS TESTED:$74,450 (base price: $63,660) ENGINE TYPE:twin-turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 24-valve V-6, aluminum block and heads, direct fuel injection DISPLACEMENT:217 cu in, 3564 cc Power: 464 hp @ 5850 rpm Torque: 445 lb-ft @ 3500 rpm TRANSMISSION:6-speed manual DIMENSIONS: Wheelbase: 109.3 in Length: 184.7 in Width: 72.5 in Height:54.5 in SAE interior volume: F:50 cu ft R: 34 cu ft Trunk volume: 10 cu ftCurb weight: 3760 lb C/D TEST RESULTS: Zero to 60 mph: 4.2 sec Zero to 100 mph: 9.9 sec Zero to 120 mph: 13.7 sec Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 5.3 sec Top gear, 30-50 mph: 9.6 sec Top gear, 50-70 mph: 6.9 sec Standing -mile: 12.6 sec @ 115 mph Top speed (drag ltd, mfr's claim): 185 mph Braking, 70-0 mph: 154 ft Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.97 g FUEL ECONOMY: EPA city/highway driving: 16/24* mpg C/D observed: 20 mpg *C/D estimated.
    31 replies | 762 view(s)
  • robc1976's Avatar
    04-19-2015, 01:43 PM
    I am selling my basically brand new (1700 miles) motiv 750 Single turbo kit. The kit comes with everything you need for install. Why am I selling: Only reason I am selling is because I want a top mount and that is the ONLY reason, This is arguably one of the best kits for the N54 period. NOTE: with ER FMIC I had to trim less than 1/4" off the CP since ER has a extra long end tank, this will NOT hurt anything on your install if you use different FMIC and if you like I will get you new CP but is honestly not needed. I just want to make sure all cards are on table. Price: $6950.00 plus shipping (buyer covers shipping and 3% Paypal fees or gifts payment). No over seas shipping, no checks no wire transfers, just paypal or cash. This price I am pretty firm on, Turbo has never went above 23psi and only on several pulls. Included is custom filter with metal top, custom MAC selonoid bracket & custom cut heat-shield and 12-AN fitting on filter for OCC. You can use rubber hose with clamp or -12AN fitting with this setup. If you choose not to run a OCC you can get cap for $5.00. Kit will take 2-4 weeks to remove since I will be waiting on other kit to limit down time so there are 2 options. 1. Put down 50% and pay other 50% once kit is off and ready to ship 2. Pay in full, still will have the waiting time (some prefer to pay up front so giving this option). Motiv 750 kit before install, looks the same except slight coloration on manifold (normal).
    26 replies | 683 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    04-22-2015, 01:10 PM
    Here is yet another absurdly quick and fast 1/4 mile time from the Middle East. Recently, on the BenzBoost forums we witnessed that the something was 'wrong' with a slip and the Yas Marina track was said to be miscalibrated. We wonder just how many tracks in the Middle East are miscalibrated. If we sound skeptical that is because we are. These times are absurdly fast compared to anything else out there. Are they possible with a Porsche 991 Turbo S? Sure, with these mods they are possible: AAP Custon Ecu tune ( remap stock ecu) Custom upgraded Turbos Custom Exhaust system Rear Tyres Toyo R888 We just have to wonder why nobody in the US is matching them or even close. Assuming the is calibrated correctly and the mod list is accurate, this performance is stunning and Al Anabi Racing deserves all the credit in the world. We hope to hear more about these turbos, AAP's tuning, and how the PDK is holding up to what is apparently 800+ all wheel horsepower. What about the fueling? A lot of question marks here but the car clearly hustles.
    28 replies | 435 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    04-29-2015, 02:55 PM
    CAR decided to drag race the Audi RS7 and the BMW F13 M6. Now, the M6 is the lighter car. However, the advantage is in the RS7's court. It has an automatic transmission and all wheel drive so launching it as simple as putting your foot on the brake pedal, other foot on the gas, and then letting go of the brakes. Anyone can do it. The M6 takes a bit more skill and CAR does not seem to have it. Obviously a drag race is all about the launch. The torque these two twin turbo V8's put out is tremendous and the M6 will have traction issues. To get a good launch and actually make this a race the M6 needs drag rubber or at the very least the tire pressure lowered a bit and its tires warmed up to help. Obviously that is not always possible on the street and this result is what most people will see from a stoplight. The RS7 pulling away with no drama as the M6 fights for traction. Unfortunately, CAR provides no data on the trap speed or elapsed times for either car. Jump to to the 1:30 mark in the video to watch the obvious outcome.
    22 replies | 1024 view(s)
More Activity