Close

    • ESS VT3-725 supercharged built motor E92 M3 S65 V8 compared to VT2-625 - Underwhelming results?

      There are going to be several built motor supercharged S65 V8 M3 V8 setups starting to roam the streets this year. ESS will have the VT2-725, Gintani will have their Stage III and Stage III+, and Active Autowerke will have their level 4. Each takes a different approach with ESS using the same Vortech V3Si blower their kits already employ, Gintani offering Vortech T-Trim, V3, and YSI options, and Active Autowerke employing a Rotrex C-38 but is able to accommodate other blowers as well.

      Here is the different between a VT3-725 and a VT2-625 supercharger setup, both on DCT M3's with meth in SAE correction:


      645 wheel for the built motor setup and 586 wheel for the stock internal setup. VT2-650 kits claim to be over 600 wheel on stock internals so one has to ask themselves if it is worth the cost to build a motor for only 50 wheel horsepower? $15,000+ on top of the supercharger kit for 50 wheel? Sure this power will likely be more reliable but one has to scratch their head at this price for performance ratio. It certainly makes sense to upgrade to a VT3 setup if one were to take the stock motor too far though.

      The Vortech blower used here is approaching its limit. For a built motor application, it would seem to be a bit undersized as 12 psi is not providing all that much versus the 7.5 psi of the stock internal kit partially due to the lower compression. To really see solid gains a bigger blower is necessary. Gintani has shown up to 16.5 psi with a Vortech YSI thus far and higher dyno results on the lower reading Dyno Dynamics dyno.

      Hopefully a comparison of the three major built motor setups will be able to be made soon.
      This article was originally published in forum thread: ESS VT3-725 supercharged built motor E92 M3 S65 V8 compared to VT2-625 - Underwhelming results? started by Sticky View original post
      Comments 173 Comments
      1. ultimateendz's Avatar
        ultimateendz -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        Make fun or don't make fun you aren't doing a good job and yes acting a bit stupid. Haha whatever hate away who cares. I don't care what you hate or don't hate but stop taking threads off topic.
        actually i can name at least 5 members right now that think this is hilarious. now get that s65 done so i can see it rule over us all...Click here to enlarge
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ultimateendz Click here to enlarge
        actually i can name at least 5 members right now that think this is hilarious. now get that s65 done so i can see it rule over us all...Click here to enlarge
        Considering how funny I think it is I hope so. Ok I'll get right on that! Now back on topic.
      1. inlineS54B32's Avatar
        inlineS54B32 -
        Isn't a 12.0 AFR RICHER than a 13.0 AFR (being leaner than the 12.0 AFR because it's 12.0 parts of air to 1 part of fuel?) - or do I have this backwards?
      1. singletrack's Avatar
        singletrack -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Andrew@activeautowerke Click here to enlarge
        Proof tuning alone will not ruin the engine? I still believe oil starvation is the number one cause of a blown s65.
        Curious; what do you base that on Andrew?
      1. singletrack's Avatar
        singletrack -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Andrew@activeautowerke Click here to enlarge
        No, we do not have a 100% way to prevent it but a shorter oil change interval along with sending your oil out for analysis might be a good thing to do.
        What on earth does oil change interval have to do with oil starvation?

        EDIT - saw your other post.

        Still haven't seen the data to support the oil starvation argument personally.
      1. singletrack's Avatar
        singletrack -
        Power seems reasonable to me. Things get exponentially more expensive as you get closer to the leading edge of development in car tuning. Power is cheap-ish stock or for a simple blower setup. Start messing with rebuilt motors, a setup that only a limited amount have in the world, and the price goes up. I don't see that as a surprise personally.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by singletrack Click here to enlarge
        Curious; what do you base that on Andrew?
        It's a pretty well known issue.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by singletrack Click here to enlarge
        Power seems reasonable to me. Things get exponentially more expensive as you get closer to the leading edge of development in car tuning. Power is cheap-ish stock or for a simple blower setup. Start messing with rebuilt motors, a setup that only a limited amount have in the world, and the price goes up. I don't see that as a surprise personally.
        I see the surprise here in the very modest gains. A built motor has a ton more in it but then again he doesn't have a sleeved block so it isn't really doing the S65 justice.
      1. Autobahn335i's Avatar
        Autobahn335i -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        I see the surprise here in the very modest gains. A built motor has a ton more in it but then again he doesn't have a sleeved block so it isn't really doing the S65 justice.
        So how much does your own car put down? Where are the OMG dynos, videos?? You're pretty silent on the subject for someone who got his car back after a two years wait.
      1. fastgti69's Avatar
        fastgti69 -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Autobahn335i Click here to enlarge
        So how much does your own car put down? Where are the OMG dynos, videos?? You're pretty silent on the subject for someone who got his car back after a two years wait.
        I don't think he has it back yet...
      1. singletrack's Avatar
        singletrack -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        It's a pretty well known issue.
        I've heard people say that, but I've never seen a convincing, to me, explanation.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by singletrack Click here to enlarge
        I've heard people say that, but I've never seen a convincing, to me, explanation.
        Well you can track your car frequently and find out...
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Autobahn335i Click here to enlarge
        So how much does your own car put down? Where are the OMG dynos, videos?? You're pretty silent on the subject for someone who got his car back after a two years wait.
        It will put down more than this. Not silent at all I'm right here.

        Don't have the car back yet so don't know what you are talking about.
      1. Autobahn335i's Avatar
        Autobahn335i -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        It will put down more than this. Not silent at all I'm right here.

        Don't have the car back yet so don't know what you are talking about.
        Ah I thought you said somewhere that it was ready. My bad then.
      1. BrenM3's Avatar
        BrenM3 -
        I think alot of this power and boost limiting has to do with the stock DCT clutch / limits.
      1. singletrack's Avatar
        singletrack -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        Well you can track your car frequently and find out...
        Shiiiiiiiiiiiiit, I don't know anyone that tracks more than Klammer and his car is going strong. Track miles are harder on the car...people need to be realistic about things. No engine will last forever and parts do wear. What oversights/design-flaws may be accelerating wear, if any, is what is in debate in my opinion.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by singletrack Click here to enlarge
        Shiiiiiiiiiiiiit, I don't know anyone that tracks more than Klammer and his car is going strong. Track miles are harder on the car...people need to be realistic about things. No engine will last forever and parts do wear. What oversights/design-flaws may be accelerating wear, if any, is what is in debate in my opinion.
        I agree regarding track wear but if I thought there wasn't an issue would I really be prepared to shell out $7k to dry sump mine?

        Would dry sump kits even exist if there was no oil starvation issue?
      1. LostMarine's Avatar
        LostMarine -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by singletrack Click here to enlarge
        Shiiiiiiiiiiiiit, I don't know anyone that tracks more than Klammer and his car is going strong. Track miles are harder on the car...people need to be realistic about things. No engine will last forever and parts do wear. What oversights/design-flaws may be accelerating wear, if any, is what is in debate in my opinion.
        I'd bet the VAC/VF car does more
      1. singletrack's Avatar
        singletrack -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by LostMarine Click here to enlarge
        I'd bet the VAC/VF car does more
        Ok, well I meant individuals. Klammer is out there basically every week beatin'.
      1. singletrack's Avatar
        singletrack -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        I agree regarding track wear but if I thought there wasn't an issue would I really be prepared to shell out $7k to dry sump mine?

        Would dry sump kits even exist if there was no oil starvation issue?
        I don't know if you would honestly.

        The existence of a commercial product doesn't convince me there is an issue; simply that there is a market for said aftermarket item.

        I'm not trying to be obtuse, but I'd like someone to explain to me, on a technical level, how they have concluded that there is an issue.