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 Forums Clear All
  • Sticky's Avatar
    07-07-2015, 03:06 PM
    People are already asking about it so we will start accepting people for open spots. Priority goes to last year's participants. The format will be the exact same except with three commissioners. If you wish to be a commissioner you can apply now and it will be determined based on league votes. Policy changes in the league will be based on commissioner votes. We did $100 last year and it kept everyone involved for the most part. I'm happy to do $100 again as I doubt most will go for more: Payout at $100 would be as follows: 1st place: $900 2nd place:$200 3rd place: $100 Payments through paypal. Address: admin@boostaddict.com There are currently three open spots: 1. @Sticky PAID 2. @135pats PAID 3. @chrisisnapping PAID 4. @Legionofboom PAID 5. @Terry@BMS PAID 6. @nafoo PAID 7. @Group.america PAID 8. @zeenon53 PAID 9. @Tony@VargasTurboTech PAID 10. @cadillacgrills PAID 11. open 12. open There will be a trophy this year as well that goes to the winner. I'm thinking about making my own trophy. Welding some old turbo on some wood. Something like that. Thoughts?
    305 replies | 3418 view(s)
  • 5soko's Avatar
    07-06-2015, 08:55 AM
    Some really interesting races here... All mods listed in the video.. Skip to 4:00 mark to see the F10 M5 Jb4 vs the Evolve modded with long tube headers E60 M5
    101 replies | 1165 view(s)
  • Hipressr's Avatar
    42 replies | 300 view(s)
  • triggz's Avatar
    07-20-2015, 12:50 PM
    Here's a video of a Eurocharged F80 M3 with downpipes and race gas vs a JB4 N54 335i with FBO, 94oct, Meth and stock turbos running the BMS backend race flash without the modified knock tables. All runs were done in Mexico. First run the N54 was on a 60 additive and second run the N54 was on a 75 additive.
    25 replies | 457 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    Yesterday, 12:47 AM
    The more I read about the GT350R the more enticing it becomes. Now, the Stingray is lighter and arguably sexier but the GT350R just has that special something. The flat-plane crank, the high revving V8, the carbon fiber wheels, the track focus, etc., it's like a better M3. Not to mention it is manual only making it a true driver's car as if the options to delete things like the navigation, AC, and rear seats didn't already tell you that. I'm in love with both of these cars:
    29 replies | 202 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    07-17-2015, 11:58 PM
    Always good to get more dyno numbers for the new M177 twin turbo 4.0 liter V8 motor under the hood of the W205 Mercedes-AMG C63 and S models. The C63 AMG S 503 horsepower of course being higher than the 469 horsepower in the standard C63 AMG model. This output difference is due to software only so owners of the base C63 AMG should not fret as they can easily match and exceed the C63 AMG S. Speaking of which, 503 horsepower using 17% drivetrain losses for an automatic on a Dynojet which is the traditional figure results in 417 horsepower to the wheels. The C63 AMG S is not losing only 24 horses or 4.8%. The car is underrated quite a bit in power and is producing closer to ~565 horsepower at the crank. The torque figure is really underrated at 495 lb-ft at the wheels which is more like ~585 lb-ft of torque at the crank. It is interesting to note that the C63 AMG S M177 and the AMG GT S M178 both have similar peak wheel horsepower figures however the M177 is producing more peak torque at the wheels by roughly 40 lb-ft. That is a sizeable difference. Thank you to BenzBoost user @CarlBENZ for this graph. We will soon have tuned figures from him as he intends to purchase a Rebellion piggyback box and dyno the results afterwards.
    33 replies | 189 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    07-21-2015, 02:49 AM
    This era of engine efficiency is bringing with it turbochargers and smaller motors. With naturally aspirated high revving motors being slowly phased out (with exceptions) redlines have dropped a bit. This affects even lofty producers such as Ferrari who historically managed to offer some of the highest revving motors seen in production cars. You will notice however that naturally aspirated motors still dominate when it comes to high revs. This list is in order of highest to lowest redline. It also favors new motors and not motors being phased out. That means we did not omit the M159 V8 of the Mercedes SLS Black Series we simply realize it has reached the end of its lifespan and the M178 twin turbo V8 is replacing it. The same reasoning is why we do not list the Ferrari 458 naturally aspirated V8 but instead the 488 GTB turbocharged successor taking its place. Enjoy the 2015 list. 1. Ferrari LaFerrari - 9250 rpm 6.3 liter V12 Horsepower: 789 Torque: 663 lb-ft Bore x Stroke (mm): 94.0 x 75.2 Fuel Injection: Direct Aspiration: Natural Piston Speed FPM: 4564.304 2. Porsche 918 Spyder - 9150 rpm 4.6 liter V8 Horsepower: 608 Torque: 398 lb-ft Bore x Stroke (mm): 95.0 x 81.0 Fuel Injection: Direct Aspiration: Natural Piston Speed FPM: 4863.189 3. 2015 Porsche 911 (991) GT3 - 9000 rpm 3.8 liter flat-6 Horsepower: 475 Torque: 324 lb-ft Bore x Stroke (mm): 102.0 x 77.5 Fuel Injection: Direct Aspiration: Natural Piston Speed FPM: 4576.772 4. 2015 Porsche 911 (991) GT3 RS - 8800 rpm 4.0 liter flat-6 Horsepower: 500 Torque: 338 lb-ft Bore x Stroke (mm): 102.0 x 81.5 Fuel Injection: Direct Aspiration: Natural Piston Speed FPM: 4706.037 5. Audi R8 - 8700 rpm 5.2 liter V10 Horsepower: 540/602 Torque: 398/413 lb-ft Bore x Stroke (mm): 84.5 x 92.8 Fuel Injection: Dual direct and port Aspiration: Natural Piston Speed FPM: 5297.638 6. McLaren 650S/675LT - 8500 rpm 3.8 liter V8 Horsepower: 641/666 Torque: 500/515 lb-ft Bore x Stroke (mm): 93.0 x 69.9 Fuel Injection: Port Aspiration: Turbo Piston Speed FPM: 3898.622 6. Ferrari F12 - 8500 rpm 6.3 liter V12 Horsepower: 731 Torque: 508 lb-ft Bore x Stroke (mm): 94.0 x 75.2 Fuel Injection: Direct Aspiration: Natural Piston Speed FPM: 4194.226 6. Audi RS5 - 8500 rpm 4.2 liter V8 Horsepower: 450 Torque: 317 lb-ft Bore x Stroke (mm): 84.5 x 92.8 Fuel Injection: Direct Aspiration: Natural Piston Speed FPM: 5175.853 6. Lamborghini Huracan - 8500 rpm 5.2 liter V10 Horsepower: 602 Torque: 412 lb-ft Bore x Stroke (mm): 84.5 x 92.8 Fuel Injection: Dual direct and port Aspiration: Natural Piston Speed FPM: 5175.853 10. McLaren P1 - 8300 rpm 3.8 liter V8 Horsepower: 727 Torque: 537 lb-ft Bore x Stroke (mm): 93.0 x 69.9 Fuel Injection: Port Aspiration: Turbo Piston Speed FPM: 3806.89 11. Lamborghini Aventador 8250 rpm 6.5 liter V12 Horsepower: 691 Torque: 508 lb-ft Bore x Stroke (mm): 95.0 x 76.4 Fuel Injection: Direct Aspiration: Natural Piston Speed FPM: 4135.827 12. Ford Shelby GT350 - 8200 rpm 5.2 liter V8 Horsepower: 526 Torque: 429 lb-ft Bore x Stroke (mm): 94.0 x 93.0 Fuel Injection: Port Aspiration: Natural Piston Speed FPM: 4950.131 13. Ferrari 488 GTB - 8000 rpm 3.9 liter V8 Horsepower: 661 Torque: 561 lb-ft Bore x Stroke (mm): 86.5 x 83.0 Fuel Injection: Direct Aspiration: Turbo Piston Speed FPM: 4356.955 14. Porsche Boxster and Cayman, S, and GTS - 7800 rpm 2.7/3.4 liter flat-6 Horsepower: 275/325/340 Torque: 213/272/280 lb-ft Bore x Stroke (mm): 89.0 x 72.5 / 97.0 x 77.5 / 97.0 x 77.5 Fuel Injection: Direct Aspiration: Natural Piston Speed FPM: 3710.63 / 3966.535 14. Porsche 911 Carrera, Carrera S, and GTS - 7800 rpm Horsepower: 350 / 400 / 430 Torque: 287 / 325 / 325 lb-ft Bore x Stroke (mm): 97.0 x 77.5 / 102.0 x 77.5 Fuel Injection: Direct Aspiration: Natural Piston Speed FPM: 3710.63 / 3966.535 16. Ferrari California T - 7500 rpm 3.85 liter V8 Horsepower: 552 Torque: 557 lb-ft Bore x Stroke (mm): 86.5 x 82.0 Fuel Injection: Direct Aspiration: Turbo Piston Speed FPM: 4035.433 16. Nissan 370Z Nismo - 7500 rpm 3.7 liter V6 Horsepower: 350 Torque: 276 lb-ft Bore x Stroke (mm): 95.5 x 88.4 Fuel Injection: Port Aspiration: Natural Piston Speed FPM: 4350.394 16. BMW F80 M3 / F82 M4 - 7500 rpm 3.0 liter inline-6 Horsepower: 425 Torque: 406 lb-ft Bore x Stroke (mm): 84.0 x 89.6 Fuel Injection: Direct Aspiration: Turbo Piston Speed FPM: 4409.449 19. Subaru BRZ / Scion FR-S - 7400 rpm 2.0 liter boxer four Horsepower: 200 Torque: 151 lb-ft Bore x Stroke (mm): 86.0 x 86.0 Fuel Injection: Dual direct and port Aspiration: Natural Piston Speed FPM: 4175.853 20. Aston Martin V8 Vantage - 7300 rpm 4.7 liter V8 Horsepower: 430 Torque: 346 lb-ft Bore x Stroke (mm): 91.0 x 91.0 Fuel Injection: Port Aspiration: Natural Piston Speed FPM: 4358.924 21. Maserati GranTurismo - 7250 rpm 4.7 liter V8 Horsepower: 444 Torque: 376 lb-ft Bore x Stroke (mm): 94.0 x 84.5 Fuel Injection: Port Aspiration: Natural Piston Speed FPM: 4019.849 22. AMG GT S 7200 rpm 4.0 liter V8 Horsepower: 503 Torque: 479 lb-ft Bore x Stroke (mm): 83.0 x 92.0 Fuel Injection: Direct Aspiration: Turbo Piston Speed FPM: 4346.457 22. Porsche 911 Turbo S 7200 rpm 3.8 liter flat-6 Horsepower: 560 Torque: 516 lb-ft Bore x Stroke (mm): 102.0 x 77.5 Fuel Injection: Direct Aspiration: Turbo Piston Speed FPM: 3661.417 22. BMW F10 M5 / F13 M6 - 7200 rpm 4.4 liter V8 Horsepower: 560/575 Torque: 500 lb-ft Bore x Stroke (mm): 89.0 x 88.3 Fuel Injection: Direct Aspiration: Turbo Piston Speed FPM: 4171.654 25. Porsche Panamera GTS 7100 rpm 4.8 liter V8 Horsepower: 440 Torque: 384 lb-ft Bore x Stroke (mm): 96.0 x 83.0 Fuel Injection: Direct Aspiration: Natural Piston Speed FPM: 3866.798 Complete list: 1. Ferrari LaFerrari - 9250 rpm 2. Porsche 918 Spyder - 9150 rpm 3. 2015 Porsche 911 (991) GT3 - 9000 rpm 4. 2015 Porsche 911 (991) GT3 RS - 8800 rpm 5. Audi R8 - 8700 rpm 6. McLaren 650S/675LT - 8500 rpm 6. Ferrari F12 - 8500 rpm 6. Audi RS5 - 8500 rpm 6. Lamborghini Huracan - 8500 rpm 10. McLaren P1 - 8300 rpm 11. Lamborghini Aventador 8250 rpm 12. Ford Shelby GT350 - 8200 rpm 13. Ferrari 488 GTB - 8000 rpm 14. Porsche Boxster and Cayman, S, and GTS - 7800 rpm 14. Porsche 911 Carrera, Carrera S, and GTS - 7800 rpm 16. Ferrari California T - 7500 rpm 16. Nissan 370Z - 7500 rpm 16. BMW F80 M3 / F82 M4 - 7500 rpm 19. Subaru BRZ / Scion FR-S - 7400 rpm 20. Aston Martin V8 Vantage - 7300 rpm 21. Maserati GranTurismo - 7250 rpm 22. AMG GT S 7200 rpm 22. Porsche 911 Turbo S 22. BMW F10 M5 / F13 M6 - 7200 rpm 25. Porsche Panamera GTS 7100 rpm
    26 replies | 155 view(s)
  • richpike's Avatar
    07-17-2015, 06:46 PM
    Called "Ludicrous Speed" it's a step up from insane mode. 10.9s quarter and 2.8s 0-60. Upgrade for $10k to any existing P85D. Faaawk. I kind of want one. :drool: http://time.com/3963205/tesla-ludicrous-speed/ Just think if Tesla would be more open to hacking/"tuning"... -Rich
    26 replies | 291 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    07-15-2015, 06:36 PM
    It is not every day you can get four cars of this caliber side by side and going at it at the same time. The camera car is a stock Lamborghini Huracan which captures the action. The big brother Lamborghini Aventador is also stock. The Germans are not as they feature tunes. The 991 Turbo (standard model) has a GIAC tune with a full exhaust. The SL63 has an unnamed tune and aftermarket downpipes which may or may not have cats and also are unnamed. What is interesting is that the 991 Turbo performs very consistently and is clearly the quickest out of the four cars. The Huracan is either trying to hang out back to film or the slowest as it should not be getting beaten by all four as badly as it is in the first run. The SL hangs in well but it is really the 991 Turbo and Aventador going at it up top with the Turbo clearly pulling away. The second run has the Huracan do much better passing the SL63 but again the 991 Turbo wins with the Aventador coming up second. The third run is just the Aventador and the 991 Turbo and the 911 Turbo impressively pulls away from the Huracan. The fourth run has them going four-wide again but the Huracan again appears to hang back filming. The SL63 just can't keep pace with the 911 Turbo and the Aventador and yet again the 911 Turbo wins. It clearly is the fastest car of the group. The final run has a botched start but again the 911 Turbo comes out on top. Very interesting to see these four run together.
    21 replies | 142 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    07-19-2015, 06:16 PM
    The AMG GT S comes in a bit heavier than one would expect in independent testing but considering the twin turbo M178 V8 and dual clutch transmission we can live with that. Especially since it results in excellent 47% front to 53% back weight distribution thanks partially due to the dual clutch transaxle design. 3691 pounds is also lighter than the ~4000 pounds the W205 C63 AMG S is pushing although that is partially due to the panoramic roof option. Still, the AMG GT S offers excellent balance considering the twin turbo V8 front engine layout. This balance pays dividends on skidpad where the car records an spectacular 1.09g. The 60-0 braking figure is also impressive taking only 100 feet. Simply outstanding handling and braking figures. Now to the acceleration numbers. 0-60 comes is done in 3.5 seconds. The 1/4 mile takes 11.6 seconds and the trap speed is 124.2 miles per hour. Realistic figures considering the summer testing. Compare them to the 11.4 @ 126 Weistec achieved on a California dragstrip. What these numbers show is that the AMG GT S is a very well rounded high performance sports car. AMG did an excellent job with this platform and the best is yet to come in the form of a Black Series or GT3 model. 2016 Mercedes-AMG GT S BASE PRICE $130,825 PRICE AS TESTED $154,420 VEHICLE LAYOUT Front-engine, RWD, 2-pass, 2-door coupe ENGINE 4.0L/503-hp/479-lb-ft twin-turbo DOHC 32-valve V-8 TRANSMISSION 7-speed twin-clutch auto. CURB WEIGHT (F/R DIST) 3,691 lb (47/53%) WHEELBASE 103.5 in LENGTH x WIDTH x HEIGHT 179.0 x 76.3 x 50.7 in 0-60 MPH 3.5 sec QUARTER MILE 11.6 sec @ 124.2 mph BRAKING, 60-0 MPH 100 ft LATERAL ACCELERATION 1.09 g (avg) MT FIGURE EIGHT 23.2 sec @ 0.95 g (avg) EPA CITY/HWY/COMB FUEL ECON 16/22/18 mpg ENERGY CONS., CITY/HWY 211/153 kW-hrs/100 miles CO2 EMISSIONS, COMB 1.06 lb/mile
    20 replies | 71 view(s)
  • BlackJetE90OC's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:50 AM
    Motor Trend compars BMW M3 vs. Cadillac ATS-V Sedan vs. Mercedes-AMG C63 S ATS-V really shines in just about every performance measure. C63S takes home the win due to overall package, ATS-V lacking in refinement. BMW M3 takes third, but by no means does Motor Trend say it is a terrible car. The segment is just full of very capable machines. 3rd Place: BMW M3 It's cliché to say, but this is the best third-place finisher in Motor Trend history. C'est la vie. 2nd Place: Cadillac ATS-V
 This stud athlete is let down by its lack of powertrain refinement and sonic thrills. Cadillac has very little tweaking to do to get things right. 1st Place: Mercedes-Benz C63 S AMG 
 An iron fist in a velvet glove. Race mode transforms the beast into an iron fist in an iron glove. Lap times: Caddy ATS-V 1:31.43 C63 1:31.52 BMW M3 1:32.51 Link to full article and more performance data: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/1507_bmw_m3_vs_cadillac_ats_v_sedan_vs_mercedes_amg_c63_s_comparison/viewall.html
    19 replies | 84 view(s)
  • tjav8b's Avatar
    07-10-2015, 10:00 AM
    Supercharging is still the best power adder for the S85. Video was taken from the Evolve vs Bren Tuning cars in previous post. No flaming for the music, I didn't make the video.
    16 replies | 325 view(s)
  • quattr0's Avatar
    07-29-2015, 09:14 AM
    The boys at MT stated the trans in the new C63 S is as good as PDK. I thought it still has same ole trans w older model?
    17 replies | 158 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    07-15-2015, 05:00 PM
    A great video here featuring some heavy hitters. These are Middle Eastern cars and the C6 Z06 features a sleeved and procharged 6.0 liter LS block so it is not using the LS7 it comes with. The Procharger head unit is an F1X good for ~1100 horsepower to the wheels on boost only and this goes to 1410 to the wheels with nitrous as shown in the video. The builder and tuner is Hisham Al-mulla. That makes the car a bit of a mismatch for the GTR said to be pushing 1100+ wheel horsepower. The Z06 has more power, torque, and is lighter by roughly 600 pounds. This video is being posted not only because this is a great race to see between two very fast modded cars but also that it is edited well with HD-quality video. We were beginning to think high definition video was banned in the Middle East. They run from 75-200 and the Z06 looks to get the hit and the lead early. The GTR hangs in well in the lower gears but up top the Z06 just pulls away and it looks like it is leaning heavily on the nitrous into the triple digits. Good video quality and multiple angles but it would have been fun to see boost only vs. boost only between these two.
    13 replies | 131 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    07-21-2015, 07:10 PM
    The comparison everyone has been waiting to see with laptimes included. Car and Driver compared the AMG GT S to the Porsche 911 GTS and Jaguar F-Type R but what everyone really wants to see is the AMG GT S squaring off against the 911 Turbo and Nissan GTR. Well, here you have it. MotorTrend chose the 911 Turbo S which is the most powerful 911 model available for sale. The 2016 Nissan GTR 45th anniversary edition is likewise the top of the line GTR on the market. As far as power is concerned the AMG GT S trails the other two at least on paper. It is rated at 503 horsepower and 479 lb-ft of torque although dyno results show it is slightly underrated. The Nissan GTR offers more crank horsepower at 545 but less peak torque with 463 lb-ft. The 911 Turbo S is rated the highest with 560 horsepower and 516 lb-ft of torque. It is important to understand that the AMG GT S sends power to the rear wheels while the GTR and Turbo S send power to all four wheels. This means higher drivetrain losses for the all wheel drive cars. As they all use dual clutch transmissions they are efficient for their power levels but the AMG GT S gets an efficiency bump from only powering the rear tires. The GTR is the heaviest of the trio at 3911 and offers the most weight on the nose with a 55% to 45% front to rear balance. The AMG GT S weighs less at 3691 pounds but it is no lightweight. It does have exceptional balance with 47/53% front to rear. The rear engine 911 Turbo S of course has most of its weight on the rear with 61% of its 3563 pounds in back and 39% up front. The quickest and fastest car acceleration wise is the 911 Turbo S. The 11.0 elapsed time in the 1/4 mile is impressive but the 124.6 miles per hour trap speed belies its 6.9 second 0-100 sprint. The AMG GT S manages a similar trap speed at 124.2 miles per hour but its 0-100 time takes 7.6 seconds. This sure looks like Porsche 911 Turbo heat soak rearing its ugly head and the ECU pulling timing as well as boost yet again. The Nissan GTR gets the second quickest 1/4 mile time at 11.2 seconds but the slowest trap speed of 122.0. It looks like at speed where the all wheel drive is not providing a traction advantage of the line the AMG GT S should be faster. The truth is all of the trap speeds are rather slow for these cars and it looks like that is due to California heat. Speaking as someone in California who just recently had their air conditioning system give out, it's hot. That will impact times but also provide realistic numbers one can hope to reproduce themselves. We know all three cars are fast and powerful. What about how they go around the track? What is interesting to note is the AMG GT S pulls the most on the skidpad at 1.09g followed by the 911 Turbo S at 1.07g and the Nissan GTR at 1.00g. The figure eight test has the 911 Turbo S come out on top at 22.9 seconds at .95g followed by the AMG GT S with 23.2 seconds at .95g and the Nissan GTR again taking the last spot with 23.5 seconds at .90g. On the actual roadcourse the AMG GT S leads the entire way at Big Willow until the final turn. What happens on the final turn? The Porsche 911 Turbo S is able to put its power down quicker and use its acceleration to come out on top. The Porsche wins based on muscle, not finesse. Speaking of which the Nissan GTR's heavier chassis and weight on the nose is finally starting to show signs of age as it should. Putting down torque early thanks to all wheel drive to mask these deficiencies can not defy the laws of physics. The GTR trails the other two cars by over two seconds. A lifetime on the roadcourse. On a longer 2.42 mile course like Big Willow the AMG GT S is able to truly excel showing off its grip and ability to transition. This is much more telling than the comparison the Brits at EVO did between the AMG GT S and the 991 Turbo where the Turbo dominated the AMG on a tiny and tight course simply due to putting its power down earlier. The car MotorTrend ultimately picks is the AMG GT S. Why? Because it is the best blend of performance and passion. It is the car you want to drive. People joke the GTR is a Japanese robot without emotion and that actually hits home here. The 911 Turbo S is slowly becoming a German robot as well and MotorTrend states it is simply all about business. The AMG GT S is the car you pick when you want to do the driving and connect with the car. It is the driving enthusiast's choice and a hell of an achievement. 2016 Mercedes-AMG GT S 2016 Nissan GT-R 45th Anniversary 2015 Porsche 911 Turbo S POWERTRAIN/CHASSIS DRIVETRAIN LAYOUT Front-engine, RWD Front-engine, AWD Rear-engine, AWD ENGINE TYPE Twin-turbo 90-deg V-8, alum block/heads Twin-turbo 60-deg V-6, alum block/heads Twin-turbo, flat-6, alum block/heads VALVETRAIN DOHC, 4 valves/cyl DOHC, 4 valves/cyl DOHC, 4 valves/cyl DISPLACEMENT 243.0 cu in/3,982 cc 231.8 cu in/3,799 cc 231.9 cu in/3,800 cc COMPRESSION RATIO 10.5:1 9.0:1 9.8:1 POWER (SAE NET) 503 hp @ 6,250 rpm 545 hp @ 6,400 rpm 560 hp @ 6,500 rpm TORQUE (SAE NET) 479 lb-ft @ 1,750 rpm 463 lb-ft @ 3,200 rpm 516 lb-ft @ 2,100 rpm REDLINE 7,000 rpm 7,000 rpm 7,200 rpm WEIGHT TO POWER 7.3 lb/hp 7.2 lb/hp 6.4 lb/hp TRANSMISSION 7-speed twin-clutch auto. 6-speed twin-clutch auto. 7-speed twin-clutch auto. AXLE/FINAL-DRIVE RATIO 3.67:1/2.31:1 3.70:1/2.95:1 3.44:1/2.13:1 SUSPENSION, FRONT; REAR Control arms, coil springs, adj shocks, anti-roll bar; control arms, coil springs, adj shocks, anti-roll bar Control arms, coil springs, adj shocks, anti-roll bar; multilink, coil springs, adj shocks, anti-roll bar Struts, coil springs, adj shocks, adj anti-roll bar; multi-link, coil springs, adj shocks adj anti-roll bar STEERING RATIO 14.3:1 15.0:1 15.0:1 TURNS LOCK-TO-LOCK 2.3 2.5 2.6 BRAKES, F;R 15.8-in vented, drilled carbon ceramic disc; 14.2-in vented, drilled carbon ceramic disc, ABS 15.4-in vented, drilled disc; 15.0-in vented, drilled disc, ABS 16.1-in vented, drilled carbon ceramic disc; 15.4-in vented, drilled carbon ceramic disc, ABS WHEELS, F;R 9.0 x 19-in; 11.0 x 20-in, forged aluminum 9.5 x 20 in; 10.5 x 20 in, forged aluminum 9.0 x 20-in, 11.5 x 20-in forged aluminum TIRES, F;R 265/35ZR19 98Y; 295/30ZR20 101Y Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2 255/40ZRF20 97Y; 285/35ZRF20 100Y Dunlop SP Sport Maxx GT 600 245/35ZR20 91Y; 305/30ZR20 103 Dunlop Sport Maxx Race DIMENSIONS WHEELBASE 103.5 in 109.4 in 96.5 in TRACK, F/R 66.1/65.0 in 62.6/63.0 in 60.6/62.6 in LENGTH x WIDTH x HEIGHT 179.0 x 76.3 x 50.7 in 183.8 x 74.6 x 53.9 in 177.4 x 74.0 x 51.0 in TURNING CIRCLE 37.7 ft 36.6 ft 34.8 ft CURB WEIGHT 3,691 lb 3,911 lb 3,563 lb WEIGHT DIST., F/R 47/53 % 55/45 % 39/61 % SEATING CAPACITY 2 4 4 HEADROOM, F/R 39.5/- in 38.1 in 37.8/26.0 in LEGROOM, F/R 43.5/- in 44.6 in 66.7/26.0 in (est) SHOULDER ROOM, F/R 58.3/- in 54.3 in 53.4/47.3 in CARGO VOLUME 12.4 cu ft 8.8 cu ft 4.1 cu ft TEST DATA ACCELERATION TO MPH 0-30 1.6 sec 1.1 sec 1.0 sec 0-40 2.2 1.6 1.5 0-50 2.8 2.1 2.0 0-60 3.5 2.9 2.7 0-70 4.3 3.7 3.4 0-80 5.3 4.8 4.5 0-90 6.3 6.0 5.6 0-100 7.6 7.3 6.9 PASSING, 45-65 MPH 1.4 1.5 1.3 QUARTER MILE 11.6 sec @ 124.2 mph 11.2 sec @ 122.0 mph 11.0 sec @ 124.6 mph BRAKING, 60-0 MPH 100 ft 103 ft 98 ft LATERAL ACCELERATION 1.09 g (avg) 1.00 g (avg) 1.07 g (avg) MT FIGURE EIGHT 23.2 sec @ 0.95 g (avg) 23.5 sec @ 0.90 g (avg) 22.9 sec @ 0.95 g (avg) 2.42-MI ROAD COURSE LAP 88.12 sec 90.48 sec 87.81 sec TOP-GEAR REVS @ 60 MPH 1,700 rpm 2,200 rpm 1,650 rpm CONSUMER INFO BASE PRICE $130,825 $103,365 $183,695 PRICE AS TESTED $154,420 $104,660 $187,430 STABILITY/TRACTION CONTROL Yes/Yes Yes/Yes Yes/yes AIRBAGS Dual front, side, head, and knee Dual front, front side, front curtain Dual front, front side, front curtain, front knee BASIC WARRANTY 4 yrs/50,000 miles 3 yrs/36,000 mi 4 yrs/50,000 miles POWERTRAIN WARRANTY 4 yrs/50,000 miles 5 yrs/60,000 mi 4 yrs/50,000 miles ROADSIDE ASSISTANCE Unlimited 3 yrs/36,000 mi 4 yrs/50,000 miles FUEL CAPACITY 19.8 gal 19.5 gal 18.0 gal EPA CITY/HWY/COMB ECON 16/22/18 mpg 16/22/19 mpg 17/24/20 mpg ENERGY CONS., CITY/HWY 211/153 kW-hrs/100 miles 211/153 kW-hrs/100 miles 198/140 kW-hrs/100 miles CO2 EMISSIONS, COMB 1.06 lb/mile 1.06 lb/mile 0.99 lb/mile RECOMMENDED FUEL Unleaded premium Unleaded premium Unleaded premium
    13 replies | 100 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    07-06-2015, 11:29 PM
    Be forewarned, there is a bit of tuner politics going on here. That said, recently something caught our eye and also caught a few tuners eyes. BenzBoost received an e-mail from MTB Germany regarding their Stage I tuned for the Mercedes W205 C63 AMG M177 engine. A day later, Rebellion Automotive sent us a very similar graph offering a similar product with the dyno graph in German. To us, it looked like MTB and Rebellion releasing their products at the same was more than a coincidence as was the same style of dyno graph betwen the two with both being in German. This is the not the first time we have seen this. Why would a UK tuner be promoting with German graphs unless their source was German? This type of thing happens often where tuners who are not vendors send us products hoping we feature them. Usually we dismiss these but BenzBoost is interested in making friends and promoting products so our users are aware of their options even if they are from non-supporting vendors. This is why you read articles on products and achievements not just from the people who pay to advertise. It is also why we were glad to show more options on a new platform like the AMG M177 motor. Something interesting happened after the articles went up. More than once source saw these MTB and Rebellion articles and mentioned Rebellion was sourcing from MTB Germany. BenzBoost asked Rebellion about this and they said they do all their work in house. BenzBoost also asked Rebellion if their tune was a piggyback like the MTB tune but was told it is a flash. BenzBoost asked for a flash vs. piggyback overlay from Rebellion but did not receive it. One of the tuners to notice all this was Renntech who said they prefer to stay out of these things but since Rebellion was implying behind the scenes to supply their M133 piggyback box (Renntech since released a flash tune) that they had to set the record straight. Interesting, especially considering you can see Rebellion marketing the MTB dyno bay under their name: Renntech definitely did not like the implication that Rebellion is supplying them especially when Rebellion is the one that looks to be supplied and is reselling: Striking similarity between those boxes and graphs that MTB and Rebellion post. We asked MTB directly if they supply Rebellion. They did not confirm it but they did not deny it: Rebellion denied it: "The reason the dyno is in german is because our physical delivery vehicle isnt arriving until first week in July. We had to go to Germany to work on a Clients vehicle which was one of the first delivered. ... In the UK there is only around 10cars total so far! I have a team of coders on my payroll experts in various fields.. Not other companies.." Now, Renntech alleges the V2 Rebellion box released in April 2014 copies the Renntech design: "Again: they just found out where we got our wiring and hardware from… Still these are NOT the same boxes, even if they use the same connectors. We have a different hardware + a different program that we have programmed by ourselves. In the end we will not get future units from the same supplier to avoid these problems in the future." So Renntech is changing suppliers to avoid potential copy cats naturally. Renntech is using TTE for their M133 turbo upgrade because TTE already began doing the work so it is logical to use them as a supplier. Rebellion also uses TTE as do many other companies. Building turbos is what TTE (The Turbo Engineers) in Germany does. Renntech waited until they had full control of the ECU before venturing into the turbo upgrade. Rebellion automotive did not. Renntech Regarding the M133 Turbo: "We played with an upgraded turbo from the beginning (September 2013) but since the results were not better to start with compared to Stock turbo and Box, we decided to wait until we have full ECU access. Meanwhile MTB sent a unit over to TTE (the turbo engineers) https://www.facebook.com/MTBFahrzeugtechnik/photos/a.144749192238163.25327.140054956040920/610506145662463/?type=1 They also didn’t get much better results but still… The TTE unit was “born” and available from then on, this is why we decided NOT to go our own way with the Turbo upgrade but just to buy the TTE unit as well. The truth is as well, that Rebellion never had whatsoever “development” work on anything. I am sure TTE will confirm that the even didn’t know a firm called Rebellion existed until February/March 2014." Now of course there are politics at work here. Rebellion did not directly state they supply Renntech but implied it: "2015 22:00:46: Matt - Rebellion: You know where the renntech turbo comes from right? 07/06/2015 22:01:16: LondonViking: Same as where you got yours TTE 07/06/2015 22:02:57: Matt - Rebellion: You know who developed the turbo for the A45 with TTE back in October 2013? 07/06/2015 22:03:11: Matt - Rebellion: And has been updating the range with TTE 07/06/2015 22:04:00: LondonViking: I know what your answer will be but and ? 07/06/2015 22:04:21: Matt - Rebellion: Yes it was us 07/06/2015 22:04:43: Matt - Rebellion: And the question why the renntech box is very very similar to ours.. 07/06/2015 22:04:55: Matt - Rebellion: I promise you we are not a guess work company 07/06/2015 22:05:20: Matt - Rebellion: We are a development company and we push the boundaries to a brief 07/06/2015 22:05:36: Matt - Rebellion: Fir most of our customers they want fast road cars 07/06/2015 22:05:53: Matt - Rebellion: For* 07/06/2015 22:24:29: LondonViking: Sorry for the late reply but if you claim their box is a replicate of yours that's interesting 07/06/2015 22:27:49: Matt - Rebellion: I'm not claiming anything �� 07/06/2015 22:28:56: LondonViking: Aren't you saying between the lines they've copied your stage I box ? 07/06/2015 22:31:34: Matt - Rebellion: Not at all. I'm still slightly confused as to why the group insist we have not provide info when we have provided more than anyone else" This certainly is interesting. The truth is probably that Rebellion has a German source and the logical conclusion is that the source is MTB based on the evidence provided although we can not say this with 100% certainty as neither MTB or Rebellion will confirm it. Renntech does not like the implication that the Rebellion box and the Renntech box are similar due to Rebellion's work and is switching suppliers as they believe Rebellion sourced the same supplier as Renntech in a move to copy. You can decide on your own what the truth is.
    15 replies | 169 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    07-21-2015, 05:43 PM
    Pure Turbos N55 upgrades just continues to impress. Over 500 wheel horsepower for the Pure Turbos Stage 2 upgrade is essentially the norm now. This comes with ~500 lb-ft of torque at the wheels as well. It shows with how easily this M135i dispatches this stock BMW F82 M4 on the highway. The video quality is not the best but as the race takes place in the daytime it is easy to see what happens. As you are an astute reader you of course realize the M135i hatchback was never sold in the United States. This race comes to us from our friends in Brazil. There are shift paddles on the steering wheel of the M4 camera car so it is a DCT model making just how effortlessly the M135i pulls all that more impressive. The N55 is a serious tuning option.
    10 replies | 124 view(s)
  • Legionofboom's Avatar
    9 replies | 242 view(s)
  • drfrink24's Avatar
    07-14-2015, 08:49 AM
    Got to thinking of alternative ways to generate income that would be something I'm fairly interested in, which would be cars/tuning/etc... Then I thought about what it probably is like being a vendor/fab in this market: - Unlike some domestics, I have to imagine the market is very small. - Being a small market, your volumes would be small. Small enough where even a great selling, large ticket item you'd be lucky to sell perhaps 100 or less. - Small volumes means if you're doing fab work yourself, you still might have enough work to be constantly under the gun to get stuff finished - Small volumes means you're also the PR guy. And the shipping guy. And the support guy. - Then there is the overhead of a garage/facility, insurance, phones, tooling, R&D cars/parts etc... In short: I'd imagine being a vendor in this space requires tons of work, you have limited windows of opportunity on successful products and in the end, whats left that you don't decide to roll into your business is probably less than people imagine when they're talking about the BMW tax on your newly released product.
    12 replies | 236 view(s)
  • mpower33's Avatar
    07-19-2015, 12:51 PM
    bmw m5 e60 , smg , modded (driver and passenger ) mercedes cls63 amg performance package 2013 , mct , stock (driver only) rolling 80 km/h
    11 replies | 121 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    07-30-2015, 01:24 AM
    Very impressive Stage 2 M178 tuning numbers here from Renntech. As you may recall, Renntech started work on the M178 motor early this year. They showed a baseline of 531 crank horsepower and 472 wheel horsepower. They have the AMG GT S with their turbo upgrade and downpipes up to 682 crank horsepower or 625 at the wheels on their dyno now. Those are some major gains. Torque alone is up by 167 lb-ft over stock. What is also nice to see is how flat the M178 torque curve is once the motor spools and how the torque curve does not really start to drop hard until past 6500 rpm. The M178 in general is definitely breathing better up top than the M177 in the C63 especially this example. Renntech previously shared an acceleration video of their intermediate tuned AMG GT S running up to 195 miles per hour and this time they take it to 199 miles per hour with the Stage 2 setup. The car accelerates hard with the Stage 2 package and the gearshifts look to be about instant. They get to 198 miles per hour in no time. It's incredible how easily the car gets there and with no drama whatsoever. This car is fast. It will be interesting to see how much further Renntech takes it on the turbo upgrade with race gas but for now they obviously are not pushing the transmission beyond its limits.
    12 replies | 63 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    07-07-2015, 02:23 AM
    This Audi RS7 we have seen in action before going up against a tuned BMW F82 M4 where it performed very much like a stock RS7. The tuner VAG-Doctor (no gynecologist jokes please) must have actually done some work to the RS7 this time as it does much better going up against a PP-Performance tuned Porsche 991 Turbo. The RS7 loses against the 991 Turbo but it puts up a strong fight this time with faster trap speeds. In the 1/4 mile the RS7 goes 10.9 @ 128.48 which is exactly the range for a tuned RS7. The Porsche 991 Turbo goes 10.40 @ 132.32 which is about the same we saw out of this same car previously against an Aventador. The second race has the 991 Turbo square off against a tuned CLS63 AMG 4MAtic with its M57 tuned by Ramon Performance whoever they are. The 991 Turbo catches the CLS63 sleeping at the line and gets a nice jump. The CLS63 has no chance to catch up and loses the kilometer drag race. At the 1/4 mile marker the 991 Turbo manages a 10.314 @ 133.42 to the CLS63 10.962 @ 129.823. The kilometer figures for the 991 Turbo is 18.982 @ 172.07 to the CLS63 19.753 @ 149.328 as the owner clearly let off. It's too bad the CLS63 and the RS7 did not go at it as they are more evenly matched.
    12 replies | 136 view(s)
  • Legionofboom's Avatar
    07-31-2015, 06:23 PM
    Looking for a secret awesome HQ (or best quality possible) stream.
    12 replies | 192 view(s)
  • 7plagues's Avatar
    07-10-2015, 02:39 PM
    Little clip showing the difference a backend flash(race), some more ethanol, and an intercooler can make for a 335i. The supra put down 415rwhp on a dyno dynamics which reads low compared to a dynojet. one of the races where we are side by side he got a little jump. 335i: FBO+E50 Supra: Single turbo (SP57) stock intercooler, 100oct 430+rwhp down in mexico. final races added backend flash and intercooler. TLDR: pre backend/intercooler lose by couple cars which increases past 120.... POST has me a couple cars out at 120.
    9 replies | 382 view(s)
  • MR747's Avatar
    07-05-2015, 09:57 AM
    Was out today racing and ran a 10.56 at 131mph also ran a 135mph pass also on a different run pretty happy with today's effort
    9 replies | 220 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    07-31-2015, 01:05 AM
    If this picture offends you then you somehow wandered onto the wrong website. Our regular readers will understand and even identify with this. Go ahead and laugh.
    9 replies | 65 view(s)
  • DisCiteFullRetard's Avatar
    07-08-2015, 08:48 PM
    31.6 lbs of wheel weight savings! That's what you get with Apex ARC-8's compared to stock BMW style 264 wheels and the ARC-8's are an inch wider front and rear! I've been trying to get a set of these for over a year and finally they were restocked. In the meantime, I ordered a custom set of forgestar F14's. Same size but different offsets at +44 front and +57 rear. These are supposed to be the highest offsets you can get on the F14 wheel that will fit over 135 stock brakes. Weighed all of these myself. Here are the numbers: BMW style 264 F: 7.5x18 +49 25.4 lbs R: 8.5x18 +52 26.4 lbs Apex ARC-8 F: 8.5x18 +45 17.8 lbs R: 9.5x18 +62 18.2 lbs 31.6 lbs of wheel weight savings! Forgestar F14 F: 8.5x18 +44 19.8 lbs R: 9.5x18 +57 21.0 lbs 22.0 lbs of wheel weight savings I hope this data on wheel weight is helpful for anyone with a 135i that is looking for high offset wheels to fit wider tires since options are quite limited. The Apex ARC-8's are in the Hyper Black finish. They look GREAT! Exactly what I've been wanting on the Jet Black 135. The Forgestar F14's are in the Gunmetal finsh. I could have lived with them, but the ARC-8 color and design is really what I wanted. These F14s will be going to a new home.
    6 replies | 319 view(s)
More Activity