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 7 Days Clear All
  • Chris@VargasTurboTech's Avatar
    09-23-2016, 02:49 PM
    Hey guys, We got the white car (6MT) back up and running strong and thought we'd revisit some GC numbers for your viewing pleasure. Car specs: Built Short block Stock head with bad valve guide seals GC turbos BMS DP's Custom Exhaust dual 3" into 4" Shotgun Single Barrel VTT Rear Silicone intake Custom VTT front intake VTT DCI Custom VTT Catch can set up EOS Intake manifold with built in PI Custom LPFP set up 100% E85 for fuel MHD tune by V8bait FLASH ONLY ADE Intercooler AEM AQ1 data logging set up with Dual EGT, Dual BP, Manifold Pressure, FMIC In / out temps 6MT (4th gear logs) Numbers: Now, on to the numbers. Note that we're referencing boost from the AEM logs (screen shots attached) in lieu of MHD reading it in the charge pipe, which isn't accurate. The AEM map sensor is calibrated and tested to be accurate. Datazap of course references the MHD values for those who care. 765 was made on 29.3 psi at redline 740 was made on 28.5 psi at redline 693 was made on 25.4 psi at redline 655 was made on 22.8 psi at redline Dyno Charts: 765 whp dyno: 740 whp dyno: All 4 dynos on one graph: AEM Screenshots: 765 whp AEM Screenshot: 740 whp AEM Screenshot: 693 whp AEM Screenshot: 655 whp AEM Screenshot: These numbers speak for themselves, but any comments from competitors or their pawns about these reaching a bottle neck around 650 whp should be recognized as the marketing gibberish that it is. These turbos are very efficient. 600 wtq at 3500 rpm and no wheel spin on the dyno! Datazap links: 765WHP - http://www.datazap.me/u/vargasturbotech/gc-testing-09-23-16-02?log=0&data=4-23&zoom=24-80 740WHP - http://www.datazap.me/u/vargasturbotech/gc-testing-09-23-16-01?log=0&data=4-23&zoom=26-83 693WHP - http://www.datazap.me/u/vargasturbotech/gc-testing-09-23-16-01?log=2&data=4-23&zoom=34-100 655WHP - http://www.datazap.me/u/vargasturbotech/gc-testing-09-23-16-01?log=1&data=4-23&zoom=31-95 MHD Logs: Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xd5-sOxQYY4&feature=youtu.be (sorry for poor quality vid)
    50 replies | 1958 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    09-21-2016, 08:41 PM
    There is no stopping the Viper ACR. It is a track animal bent on destroying whatever dares come across its path. The M4 GTS? The Shelby GT350R? The Porsche 911 Carrera S? The new Acura NSX? The McLaren 570S? All simply lambs led to the slaughter. Emphasis on slaughter. Just look at what the Viper ACR did around Laguna Seca in the hands on Randy Pobst: 1. Dodge Viper ACR - 1:31.58 2. Audi R8 V10 Plus - 1:34.23 3. McLaren 570S - 1:34.58 4. Mercedes-AMG GT S - 1:35.30 5. Ford Mustang Shelby GT350R - 1:36.11 6. Acura NSX - 1:36.36 7. Porsche 911 Carrera S - 1:36.44 8. Nissan GT-R - 1:37.08 9. BMW M4 GTS - 1:37.66 10. Chevrolet Camaro SS 1LE - 1:37.78 11. Jaguar F-Type SVR - 1:38.75 12. Aston Martin V12 Vantage S - 1:41.77 It is almost a full three seconds faster than the next car up which is the Audi R8 V10 Plus. That is a beatdown. The Viper ACR is just on another level and it's amazing this car does not get more respect. Now, it is interesting to contrast MotorTrend's results at Laguna Seca to Car and Driver's results at VIR (Virginia International Raceway). The R8 V10 showed very weakly in Car and Driver's hands yet it is the second quickest car here with Randy Pobst at the wheel. When we say Car and Driver's hands we mean their staff who simply is not on Randy's level when it comes to driving prowess. Car and Driver's Lightning Lap is a good comparison but it is not as scientific as MotorTrend's (which also isn't perfect) due to taking place on multiple days with multiple drivers. MotorTrend uses Pobst at Laguna Seca with the cars running on the same day. That is a big difference. As is the fact VIR rewards power in the lap time more than the shorter and tighter Laguna Seca. What do we learn? That the M4 GTS get its ass handed to it by the Mustang GT350R yet again. It loses at VIR, it loses at Laguna Seca, and it is simply safe to say the GT350R is the superior track performer anywhere. Yes, at a fraction of the price. When you bring the M4 GTS asking price into the argument the car looks like a joke. Is its laptime respectable? Sure, if beating a Camaro SS that comes in at less than 1/3 of the money by a tenth of a second is respectable. The AMG GT S is cheaper, the 911 Carrera S is cheaper, the Nissan GT-R is cheaper, the Mustang GT350R is cheaper, and the Viper ACR is cheaper. What do they all have in common? They are all better performance cars than the M4 GTS. The Mercedes-AMG GT S deserves honorable mention beating the stout GT350R as well as the incredible new Porsche 911 Carrera S. Considering the GT S is not even anywhere near as hardcore as the GT model line gets, that is impressive. Enjoy the videos of the laps below with impressions from Pobst. The winner of the competition will be announced shortly. If we were to guess, the Carrera S is the favorite.
    55 replies | 1275 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    09-25-2016, 01:32 AM
    How does almost 800 wheel horsepower sound from a 6 speed manual N54 with VTT GC turbos? Pretty nice, right? VTT hit 765 whp at 29.3 psi of boost but of course you can run less boost pressure. 28.5 psi resulted in 740, 25.4 psi in 693, and 22.8 in 655 to the wheels. Complete details below form @Chris@VargasTurboTech Hey guys, We got the white car (6MT) back up and running strong and thought we'd revisit some GC numbers for your viewing pleasure. Car specs: Built Short block Stock head with bad valve guide seals GC turbos BMS DP's Custom Exhaust dual 3" into 4" Shotgun Single Barrel VTT Rear Silicone intake Custom VTT front intake VTT DCI Custom VTT Catch can set up EOS Intake manifold with built in PI Custom LPFP set up 100% E85 for fuel MHD tune by V8bait FLASH ONLY ADE Intercooler AEM AQ1 data logging set up with Dual EGT, Dual BP, Manifold Pressure, FMIC In / out temps 6MT (4th gear logs) Numbers: Now, on to the numbers. Note that we're referencing boost from the AEM logs (screen shots attached) in lieu of MHD reading it in the charge pipe, which isn't accurate. The AEM map sensor is calibrated and tested to be accurate. Datazap of course references the MHD values for those who care. 765 was made on 29.3 psi at redline 740 was made on 28.5 psi at redline 693 was made on 25.4 psi at redline 655 was made on 22.8 psi at redline Dyno Charts 765 whp dyno: 740 whp dyno: All four runs: AEM Screenshots: 765 whp: 740 whp: 693 whp: 655 whp: These numbers speak for themselves, but any comments from competitors or their pawns about these reaching a bottle neck around 650 whp should be recognized as the marketing gibberish that it is. These turbos are veryefficient. 600 wtq at 3500 rpm and no wheel spin on the dyno! Datazap links: 765WHP - http://www.datazap.me/u/vargasturbotech/gc-testing-09-23-16-02?log=0&data=4-23&zoom=24-80 740WHP - http://www.datazap.me/u/vargasturbotech/gc-testing-09-23-16-01?log=0&data=4-23&zoom=26-83 693WHP - http://www.datazap.me/u/vargasturbotech/gc-testing-09-23-16-01?log=2&data=4-23&zoom=34-100 655WHP - http://www.datazap.me/u/vargasturbotech/gc-testing-09-23-16-01?log=1&data=4-23&zoom=31-95 MHD Logs: 2016-09-23 09_22_23_VTTGC_IJE0S_N20_RUNFILE_4_765WHP.bin.csv 2016-09-23 08_49_49_VTTGC_IJE0S_N20_RUNFILE_2_740WHP.bin.csv 2016-09-23 09_54_15_VTTGC_IJE0S_N20_RUNFILE_6_693WHP.bin.csv 2016-09-23 09_43_22_VTTGC_IJE0S_N20_RUNFILE_5_655WHP.bin.csv Video:
    50 replies | 747 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    09-21-2016, 08:34 PM
    There is no stopping the Viper ACR. It is a track animal bent on destroying whatever dares come across its path. The M4 GTS? The Shelby GT350R? The Porsche 911 Carrera S? The new Acura NSX? The McLaren 570S? All simply lambs led to the slaughter. Emphasis on slaughter. Just look at what the Viper ACR did around Laguna Seca in the hands on Randy Pobst: 1. Dodge Viper ACR - 1:31.58 2. Audi R8 V10 Plus - 1:34.23 3. McLaren 570S - 1:34.58 4. Mercedes-AMG GT S - 1:35.30 5. Ford Mustang Shelby GT350R - 1:36.11 6. Acura NSX - 1:36.36 7. Porsche 911 Carrera S - 1:36.44 8. Nissan GT-R - 1:37.08 9. BMW M4 GTS - 1:37.66 10. Chevrolet Camaro SS 1LE - 1:37.78 11. Jaguar F-Type SVR - 1:38.75 12. Aston Martin V12 Vantage S - 1:41.77 It is almost a full three seconds faster than the next car up which is the Audi R8 V10 Plus. That is a beatdown. The Viper ACR is just on another level and it's amazing this car does not get more respect. Now, it is interesting to contrast MotorTrend's results at Laguna Seca to Car and Driver's results at VIR (Virginia International Raceway). The R8 V10 showed very weakly in Car and Driver's hands yet it is the second quickest car here with Randy Pobst at the wheel. When we say Car and Driver's hands we mean their staff who simply is not on Randy's level when it comes to driving prowess. Car and Driver's Lightning Lap is a good comparison but it is not as scientific as MotorTrend's (which also isn't perfect) due to taking place on multiple days with multiple drivers. MotorTrend uses Pobst at Laguna Seca with the cars running on the same day. That is a big difference. As is the fact VIR rewards power in the lap time more than the shorter and tighter Laguna Seca. What do we learn? That the M4 GTS get its ass handed to it by the Mustang GT350R yet again. It loses at VIR, it loses at Laguna Seca, and it is simply safe to say the GT350R is the superior track performer anywhere. Yes, at a fraction of the price. When you bring the M4 GTS asking price into the argument the car looks like a joke. Is its laptime respectable? Sure, if beating a Camaro SS that comes in at less than 1/3 of the money by a tenth of a second is respectable. The AMG GT S is cheaper, the 911 Carrera S is cheaper, the Nissan GT-R is cheaper, the Mustang GT350R is cheaper, and the Viper ACR is cheaper. What do they all have in common? They are all better performance cars than the M4 GTS. The Mercedes-AMG GT S deserves honorable mention beating the stout GT350R as well as the incredible new Porsche 911 Carrera S. Considering the GT S is not even anywhere near as hardcore as the GT model line gets, that is impressive. Enjoy the videos of the laps below with impressions from Pobst. The winner of the competition will be announced shortly. If we were to guess, the Carrera S is the favorite.
    55 replies | 616 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    09-21-2016, 10:44 PM
    It's been quite a while since the BimmerBoost.com E92 M3 was discussed. Where we last left off the vehicle was making more power and torque than any E9X M3 in the world and setting records. As a quick refresher, the car featured a built 10.0:1 compression motor with a sleeved S65 V8 block and a Vortech YSI blower. Yes, this build has taken years. Through the missteps, mocking, long nights, fabrication, tuning, and records set the S65 engine platform was pushed very far forward despite how uncooperative it is. Let's not forget this car made more torque than anyone else has up to today: And it also set the E9X 1/2 mile record with a 173.07 pass. This angered a lot of people in the community and let's just be honest ESS-Tuning in particular. ESS with their 'record setting' VT3 car at the same event as the BimmerBoost.com M3 could not even get close to its trap speed. At a subsequent event where the BimmerBoost.com M3 did not run ESS and the VT3 owner cheated by backing up as far as possible to get a running start to inflate the trap speed. It took them several manipulated tries like this but finally they eked out a trap speed a mile per hour higher. Yes, they cheated, because that's what it is and that is how these people are. They actually take pride in posting contrived records. This is all being mentioned to show you just how hard the car was pushed and what took place. The stock trans slipped as you can see in the dyno with the Vortech YSI at 18.5 psi of boost. If it held, just do the math. Even with 'only' 554 lb-ft of torque at the wheels well before the torque peak this is still the torque record today on the S65 platform. Do the math for the redline: 8400 rpm x 554 lb-ft / 5252 = 886 wheel horsepower. A conservative 886 mind you as the torque is still rising as the YSI really hit its sweet spot toward redline. It's a real shame we never saw a clean Dynojet run but the fact is nobody else was within 150+ whp of this car. Unfortunately, Dodson at the time did not have the DCT transmission upgrades available it does now and Kris Gagnon at SSP (South Side Performance) screwed this project over delaying it by over a year with his inability to deliver a working product and misleading me while utilizing my transmission as a model to get discs made overseas he could sell and now does sell. Showing this person's true colors will come in another article at a later date. So what happened? We pushed too hard on a platform BMW cut costs on. The fact of the matter is the S65 V8 is a weak design for boost unless tremendously reinforced. BMW loves to tout how light the motor is and how it is lighter than the iron block S54 it replaces despite offering more displacement and being a V8 but the S54 block is not only stronger it is built better. The S65 aluminum-silicon makeup while being light is very weak. Combine this with tight bore spacing, little to no material to work with, and a poor oiling system resulting from cost cutting going from the S85 V10 oiling system to the S65 V8 and you get a cheap, mass produced motor. The goal is quite simply to build it as cheaply as possible while still making it past the warranty period. Ask E9X M3 guys who did not get their bearings replaced and now are paying the price how they feel about BMW engine quality. It's amazing BMW gets away with this. While many things in this motor were upgraded and it handled more than anyone had ever thrown at the S65 we simply went too far because the goal was not to manipulate circumstances to set some bogus records that idiots on forums slurp up but to raise the performance envelope to unforeseen levels. No, it was not a tuning issue. Look at the pictures of motor below. The pistons look practically brand new. The problem was that the main bearings spun: Why? Tons of stress. A Vortech YSI is a monster blower that requires a ton of power to spin. This was not a build with a new crank as the displacement was kept the same. Increasing the boost only exacerbates problems. Things could have been done slightly differently to get it to work but you're always going to be putting more stress on the motor with something like a YSI at high boost than a V3si with low boost. Just the pulley setup alone is completely different and further off the front of the motor which doesn't help reduce various stresses. The other issue is the block flexing. My engine was built quite strong but in order to install sleeves you have to remove material. The idea is the sleeves add material and while the cylinders may be stronger the block as a whole becomes compromised due to how fragile it is to begin with. The block will not be sleeved this time around. Instead, Gintani advocates using a bedplate/brace. AMS does something similar with their GTR builds: AMS uses a billet aluminum piece but Gintani will be using a chromoly piece to brace the block: This should mitigate flex but additionally by switching to turbos stress on the motor is reduced as a whole. It will be possible to make more power at less boost without needing to manually turn a blower. A huge difference in efficiency alone with increased reliability. Furthermore, the factory crank will not be utilized. A new custom forged stroker crank will also take much more abuse than the factory piece: You will notice the stroke is 76.5mm which is a minimal increase over the factory 75.2mm stroke. This is not about displacement gains but simply increased strength and rod to stroke ratio. Technically, yes, it is a stroker build but you will notice those who went big on a stroke increase in the past and tried to add boost ended up with blown motors. That happened for a reason. What else does this build entail? - Mahle pistons - Ferrea intake and exhaust valves - Forged rods - WPC main bearings - BE rod bearings - Two turbos (specs will be provided later) - Welded and machined heads - Dodson build DCT trans - Water/meth - Upgraded fuel system - Carbon driveshaft - Upgraded oiling system - E85 tuning - Gaskets, fluids, etc. When we get to the tuning portion further details will be posted at that time. For now, stock DME tuning is looking likely but the Syvecs S65 standalone may be incorporated. To those who have supported this project and understand the work involved to push a BMW to these levels and that everything does not always go as planned, thank you. To those who have not I'd like to point out not only is BimmerBoost.com bigger than ever before but things will only continue to get better from here on out.
    32 replies | 964 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    09-20-2016, 04:40 PM
    This is the same BMW F80 M3 that recently broke into the 10's on the factory S55 turbochargers. In case you were wondering what kind of power it took to get there here is the answer. 585 horsepower at the wheels along with over 600 lb-ft of torque at the wheels. It looks like two different maps were tested as on the lower power figure runs the peak torque is substantially higher. Unfortunately, the full graphs are not posted so we can not get a look at the entire curve. Perhaps @Mike_f80nyc can post them. Still, impressive numbers. Especially the torque figures topping over 600 lb-ft at the wheels with a JB4 and methanol on the stock turbos. To BimmerBoost's knowledge, these are the highest power and torque figures from the factory turbos with bolt on modifications. FBO (full bolt on) + Methanol AWE heat exchanger E30 fuel BMS JB4 Toyo R888 Evolution of Speed intercooler
    39 replies | 842 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    09-21-2016, 10:34 PM
    It's been quite a while since the BimmerBoost.com E92 M3 was discussed. Where we last left off the vehicle was making more power and torque than any E9X M3 in the world and setting records. As a quick refresher, the car featured a built 10.0:1 compression motor with a sleeved S65 V8 block and a Vortech YSI blower. Yes, this build has taken years. Through the missteps, mocking, long nights, fabrication, tuning, and records set the S65 engine platform was pushed very far forward despite how uncooperative it is. Let's not forget this car made more torque than anyone else has up to today: And it also set the E9X 1/2 mile record with a 173.07 pass. This angered a lot of people in the community and let's just be honest ESS-Tuning in particular. ESS with their 'record setting' VT3 car at the same event as the BimmerBoost.com M3 could not even get close to its trap speed. At a subsequent event where the BimmerBoost.com M3 did not run ESS and the VT3 owner cheated by backing up as far as possible to get a running start to inflate the trap speed. It took them several manipulated tries like this but finally they eked out a trap speed a mile per hour higher. Yes, they cheated, because that's what it is and that is how these people are. They actually take pride in posting contrived records. This is all being mentioned to show you just how hard the car was pushed and what took place. The stock trans slipped as you can see in the dyno with the Vortech YSI at 18.5 psi of boost. If it held, just do the math. Even with 'only' 554 lb-ft of torque at the wheels well before the torque peak this is still the torque record today on the S65 platform. Do the math for the redline: 8400 rpm x 554 lb-ft / 5252 = 886 wheel horsepower. A conservative 886 mind you as the torque is still rising as the YSI really hit its sweet spot toward redline. It's a real shame we never saw a clean Dynojet run but the fact is nobody else was within 150+ whp of this car. Unfortunately, Dodson at the time did not have the DCT transmission upgrades available it does now and Kris Gagnon at SSP (South Side Performance) screwed this project over delaying it by over a year with his inability to deliver a working product and misleading me while utilizing my transmission as a model to get discs made overseas he could sell and now does sell. Showing this person's true colors will come in another article at a later date. So what happened? We pushed too hard on a platform BMW cut costs on. The fact of the matter is the S65 V8 is a weak design for boost unless tremendously reinforced. BMW loves to tout how light the motor is and how it is lighter than the iron block S54 it replaces despite offering more displacement and being a V8 but the S54 block is not only stronger it is built better. The S65 aluminum-silicon makeup while being light is very weak. Combine this with tight bore spacing, little to no material to work with, and a poor oiling system resulting from cost cutting going from the S85 V10 oiling system to the S65 V8 and you get a cheap, mass produced motor. The goal is quite simply to build it as cheaply as possible while still making it past the warranty period. Ask E9X M3 guys who did not get their bearings replaced and now are paying the price how they feel about BMW engine quality. It's amazing BMW gets away with this. While many things in this motor were upgraded and it handled more than anyone had ever thrown at the S65 we simply went too far because the goal was not to manipulate circumstances to set some bogus records that idiots on forums slurp up but to raise the performance envelope to unforeseen levels. No, it was not a tuning issue. Look at the pictures of motor below. The pistons look practically brand new. The problem was that the main bearings spun: Why? Tons of stress. A Vortech YSI is a monster blower that requires a ton of power to spin. This was not a build with a new crank as the displacement was kept the same. Increasing the boost only exacerbates problems. Things could have been done slightly differently to get it to work but you're always going to be putting more stress on the motor with something like a YSI at high boost than a V3si with low boost. Just the pulley setup alone is completely different and further off the front of the motor which doesn't help reduce various stresses. The other issue is the block flexing. My engine was built quite strong but in order to install sleeves you have to remove material. The idea is the sleeves add material and while the cylinders may be stronger the block as a whole becomes compromised due to how fragile it is to begin with. The block will not be sleeved this time around. Instead, Gintani advocates using a bedplate/brace. AMS does something similar with their GTR builds: AMS uses a billet aluminum piece but Gintani will be using a chromoly piece to brace the block: This should mitigate flex but additionally by switching to turbos stress on the motor is reduced as a whole. It will be possible to make more power at less boost without needing to manually turn a blower. A huge difference in efficiency alone with increased reliability. Furthermore, the factory crank will not be utilized. A new custom forged stroker crank will also take much more abuse than the factory piece: You will notice the stroke is 76.5mm which is a minimal increase over the factory 75.2mm stroke. This is not about displacement gains but simply increased strength and rod to stroke ratio. Technically, yes, it is a stroker build but you will notice those who went big on a stroke increase in the past and tried to add boost ended up with blown motors. That happened for a reason. What else does this build entail? - Mahle pistons - Ferrea intake and exhaust valves - Forged rods - WPC main bearings - BE rod bearings - Two turbos (specs will be provided later) - Welded and machined heads - Dodson build DCT trans - Water/meth - Upgraded fuel system - Carbon driveshaft - Upgraded oiling system - E85 tuning - Gaskets, fluids, etc. When we get to the tuning portion further details will be posted at that time. For now, stock DME tuning is looking likely but the Syvecs S65 standalone may be incorporated. To those who have supported this project and understand the work involved to push a BMW to these levels and that everything does not always go as planned, thank you. To those who have not I'd like to point out not only is BimmerBoost.com bigger than ever before but things will only continue to get better from here on out.
    32 replies | 336 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    09-20-2016, 04:32 PM
    This is the same BMW F80 M3 that recently broke into the 10's on the factory S55 turbochargers. In case you were wondering what kind of power it took to get there here is the answer. 585 horsepower at the wheels along with over 600 lb-ft of torque at the wheels. It looks like two different maps were tested as on the lower power figure runs the peak torque is substantially higher. Unfortunately, the full graphs are not posted so we can not get a look at the entire curve. Perhaps @Mike_f80nyc can post them. Still, impressive numbers. Especially the torque figures topping over 600 lb-ft at the wheels with a JB4 and methanol on the stock turbos. To BimmerBoost's knowledge, these are the highest power and torque figures from the factory turbos with bolt on modifications. FBO (full bolt on) + Methanol AWE heat exchanger E30 fuel BMS JB4 Toyo R888 Evolution of Speed intercooler
    39 replies | 324 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    09-21-2016, 01:54 AM
    I want one of these just to frame and hang on the wall. Going into Solo Motorsports' E82 135i:
    20 replies | 1504 view(s)
  • bradsm87's Avatar
    09-22-2016, 06:56 AM
    I know a lot of cars do have a tendency to have a nasty single knock on one or two cylinders when grabbing the next gear suddenly. I don't want to take any timing out there because it doesn't knock there when in steady state. I'm tempted to lower spark retard intensity 1 & 2 as we all know a -10 degree timing pull (ALL of the timing advance) is excessive for ANY knock event. I do like the feeling of having a huge safety margin though. Are there any other/better tricks? http://datazap.me/u/bradsm87/rev25?log=0&data=4-8-9-10-11-12-13-22-26&zoom=428-466
    14 replies | 927 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    09-24-2016, 04:48 PM
    We all know the Tesla Model S P100D is quick off the line. GPS test numbers showed 0-60 in 2.5 seconds and 0-100 in 6.5. The 1/4 mile trap speed on the VBOX used for the GPS numbers showed 124.5 GPS trap speed timing often inflates trap speeds versus real world drag strip numbers. That is the case here. The Tesla is still fast but on an actual strip runs 10.825 @ 122.93. The Huracan manages 10.843 @ 127.23. The two cars and very close and it really comes down to reaction time for the win. The Tesla is hard to beat right off the line but you can see just how much harder the Huracan is pulling past the 1/8 mile. From a roll, the Tesla has no chance. Certainly impressive performance from the P100D but it is a bit of a one trick pony.
    16 replies | 218 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    09-24-2016, 01:42 AM
    With MotorTrend wrapping up their Best Driver's Car 2016 competition having all the cars together provides for a great opportunity to do a big drag race. They have been doing this every year for the past six years following the competition and who can blame them for the extra content? Obviously, some of these cars are more at home on the roadcourse (*cough* Viper ACR *cough*) than the dragstrip and that should be the focus but this drag race is undeniably fun. While they call this the world's greatest drag race (such creative self-promotion guys) it does not take place on an actual prepped drag strip. They use the tarmac at the defunct El Toro airbase in Irvine, California. This surface does not lend itself well to the rear wheel drive cars and MotorTrend doesn't seem capable of putting on the world's best roll on race to get both perspectives. Ok, ok, enough nitpicking but it is important to highlight the conditions in a drag race. They throw in a Charger Hellcat and cut the Aston Martin (lame) for good measure and we're off. No surprise that on the dusty old runway the all wheel drive vehicles lead of the line. Now, as this is not done a dragstrip do not take these 1/4 mile times as representative of what you can hit on the strip. They are timing the cars electronically and the times are inflated due to this. We have yet to see a stock Huracan or R8 V10 Plus top 130 in the 1/4 mile on the dragstrip. Now, due to the traction issues let's list the cars in order of trap speed to truly get an idea of who is the fastest in a straight line: McLaren 570S - 132.0 Audi R8 V10+ - 130.3 AMG GT-S - 126.7 Viper ACR - 124.7 Acura NSX - 123.6 Nissan GT-R - 123.4 Jag F-type SVR - 122.7 Porsche 911S - 120.5 Shelby GT350R - 118.9 BMW M4 GTS - 118.8 Camaro 1LE - 114.2 The 570S is the real straight line champ and if you actually properly launch it you will watch it destroy an R8 V10 Plus in a drag race.
    8 replies | 1090 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    09-24-2016, 04:55 PM
    We all know the Tesla Model S P100D is quick off the line. GPS test numbers showed 0-60 in 2.5 seconds and 0-100 in 6.5. The 1/4 mile trap speed on the VBOX used for the GPS numbers showed 124.5 GPS trap speed timing often inflates trap speeds versus real world drag strip numbers. That is the case here. The Tesla is still fast but on an actual strip runs 10.825 @ 122.93. The Huracan manages 10.843 @ 127.23. The two cars and very close and it really comes down to reaction time for the win. The Tesla is hard to beat right off the line but you can see just how much harder the Huracan is pulling past the 1/8 mile. From a roll, the Tesla has no chance. Certainly impressive performance from the P100D but it is a bit of a one trick pony.
    16 replies | 154 view(s)
  • bradsm87's Avatar
    09-21-2016, 07:47 AM
    I'm getting Torque Limiter Active 4 every time. See below: http://datazap.me/u/bradsm87/rev25?log=0&data=4-7-22-27-28&solo=26-27-28&zoom=377-473 Are any of these tables set incorrectly? I'm 6AT running 7603537 Alpina flash. I really don't want to lower calculated torque. I'd much prefer to find what's causing the limit and fix it.
    10 replies | 913 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    09-20-2016, 03:33 AM
    Performance SUV's are popular and BMW loves producing as many SUV variants as possible to pad the bottom line. An X7 is on the way for this reason and BMW plans to create a 2018 X3 M model launching next year. Many of you have seen the spyphotos of this model testing. The X3 M will go head to head with the Mercedes-AMG GLC63 AMG. As the AMG M177 twin turbo V8 packs some serious muscle BMW will need the S55 motor out of the F80 M3 and F82 M4. The question is, will they fix the problems with it? They pretty much will have to. It just depends on if BMW intends to announce they made changes which publicly admits they screwed up. BMW is insecure, cheap, and petty so seeing them have to admit to design changes would be satisfying and deserved. Keep in mind the S55 motor making its way under the hood is a rumor floating around but what other motor will the car use to competitive? The S55 is pretty much the choice as BMW does not have the balls to give it a V8 and have the X3 M run circles around the X5 M.
    12 replies | 420 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    09-23-2016, 05:11 AM
    That is according to MotorTrend of course. After the testing of the lap times at Laguna Seca and the subjective impressions were factored in McLaren's 570S came out on top. The BMW F82 M4 GTS on the other hand finished second to last and we can officially call the car a failure at this point. If you want to check out the laptimes and videos click here. The subjective impressions rank the cars as follows: 1st - McLaren 570S 2nd - Shelby GT350R 3rd - Porsche 911S 4th - Camaro 1LE 5th - Viper ACR 6th - AMG GT-S 7th - Audi R8 V10+ 8th - Acura NSX 9th - Jag F-type SVR 10th - Nissan GT-R 11th - BMW M4 GTS 12th - AM V12 Vantage S The Nissan GT-R in 10th place is about right considering it is a soulless robot that best excels at going from a dig with power upgrades. That's really where it has made its name and please do not act like it is a great driver's car or track weapon. It's a heavy soulless robot with little driver involvement. The McLaren 570S on the other hand is a lithe and technologically advanced driver's tool. It's also light at 3188 pounds and incredibly fast in a straight line. It's hard to beat but it also costs over $200k as tested. Yikes. 2016 McLaren 570S BASE PRICE $187,400 PRICE AS TESTED $219,770 VEHICLE LAYOUT Mid-engine, RWD, 2-pass, 2-door coupe ENGINE 3.8L/562-hp/443-lb-ft twin-turbo DOHC 32-valve V-8 TRANSMISSION 7-speed twin-clutch auto. CURB WEIGHT (F/R DIST) 3,188 lb (42/58%) WHEELBASE 105.1 in LENGTH x WIDTH x HEIGHT 178.3 x 75.4 x 47.3 in 0-60 MPH 2.8 sec QUARTER MILE 10.7 sec @ 132.0 mph BRAKING, 60-0 MPH 97 ft 0-100-0 MPH 10.1 sec LATERAL ACCELERATION 1.04 g (avg) MT FIGURE EIGHT 23.0 sec @ 0.93 g (avg) 2.2-MI ROAD COURSE LAP 94.58 sec EPA CITY/HWY/COMB FUEL ECON 16/23/19 mpg ENERGY CONS, CITY/HWY 211/147 kW-hrs/100 miles CO2 EMISSIONS, COMB 1.05 lb/mile POWER @ RPM 562 hp @ 7,500 rpm TORQUE @ RPM 443 lb-ft @ 5,000 rpm SUSPENSION F;R Control arms, coil springs, adj shocks, anti-roll bar; control arms, multilink, coil springs, adj shocks, anti-roll bar BRAKES, F;R 15.5-in vented, drilled, carbon-ceramic disc; 15.0-in vented, drilled, carbon-ceramic disc, ABS Ferrari and Lamborghini wouldn't even play which makes us respect McLaren all that much more. Ferrari is simply a bitch when it comes to these comparisons. Unless they can control all the variables they won't participate. They are not run by enthusiasts and frankly do not deserve the business of enthusiasts. Posers on the other hand should continue to line up and bend over just to get f@#ked by dealers offering them the illusion that the artificially over inflated price they paid for their prancing horse is worth it. The overrated Italians are scared of the Viper ACR. They should be, it owned everyone. Ferrari even tries to hold it back. What a bunch of insecure Italian douchebags. Does the ACR really deserve to be 5th? Allow me to translate that for you: The Viper is loud and scary. It's the best driver's tool but we're a bunch of old men that have gone soft. We readily admit it's the best at doing what this competition is about, driving, but it's just too much car and too involving. Seriously, grow a pair MotorTrend. Reward Dodge for making a car that scared Ferrari and Lamborghini into staying home under the bed peeking out from time to time to make sure there isn't an ACR driving by. What about the F82 M4 GTS? Everyone should be sick and tired of hearing about this $134k failure from BMW. Just shut up about it already. It's hot garbage. The M in M4 GTS stands for Mistake not Motorsport. If that's the best BMW M can do for $134k when producing a dedicated high performance track car you might as well just shut the whole thing down and send everyone to work at 'i' instead. 'i' don't care anymore and neither should you. Let's to get real performance cars now and the one that should have won. The Shelby GT350R. Is it a higher performance driver's car than the McLaren 570S? No. Is it a better driver's car? Arguably, yes. When you factor in the amazing (and unique) powerplant along with the sticker price you scratch your head wondering how Ford pulled this car off. It's manual only. No dual clutch and no nonsense. Only real driver's should apply. Shouldn't that bump it up in a driver's car competition? How about that it beats up on more expensive cars? How about that it is the first production car with carbon fiber wheels? How about that the Americans are delivering engines that even Ferrari states are no longer economically feasible? Sure, it's not perfect but when you factor in the entire package the Shelby GT350R truly deserves the victory over something like the McLaren 570S that is purchased by spoiled brats. The fact it is American and the Americans are producing the best performance cars for the money today is just icing on the cake. The GT350R may not be MotorTrend's winner, but it's ours. 2016 Ford Mustang Shelby GT350R BASE PRICE $63,495 PRICE AS TESTED $66,990 VEHICLE LAYOUT Front-engine, RWD, 2-pass, 2-door coupe ENGINE 5.2L/526-hp/429-lb-ft DOHC 32-valve V-8 TRANSMISSION 6-speed manual CURB WEIGHT (F/R DIST) 3,711 lb (54/46%) WHEELBASE 107.1 in LENGTH x WIDTH x HEIGHT 189.7 x 75.9 x 53.6 in 0-60 MPH 4.0 sec QUARTER MILE 12.2 sec @ 118.9 mph BRAKING, 60-0 MPH 101 ft 0-100-0 MPH 12.5 sec LATERAL ACCELERATION 1.08 g (avg) MT FIGURE EIGHT 23.3 sec @ 0.87 g (avg) 2.2-MI ROAD COURSE LAP 96.11 sec EPA CITY/HWY/COMB FUEL ECON 14/21/16 mpg ENERGY CONS, CITY/HWY 241/160 kW-hrs/100 miles CO2 EMISSIONS, COMB 1.18 lb/mile POWER @ RPM 526 hp @ 7,500 rpm TORQUE @ RPM 429 lb-ft @ 4,750 rpm SUSPENSION F;R Struts, coil springs, adj shocks, anti-roll bar; multilink, coil springs, adj shocks, anti-roll bar BRAKES, F;R 15.5-in vented, drilled disc; 15.0-in vented, drilled disc, ABS
    6 replies | 976 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    09-24-2016, 01:40 AM
    With MotorTrend wrapping up their Best Driver's Car 2016 competition having all the cars together provides for a great opportunity to do a big drag race. They have been doing this every year for the past six years following the competition and who can blame them for the extra content? Obviously, some of these cars are more at home on the roadcourse (*cough* Viper ACR *cough*) than the dragstrip and that should be the focus but this drag race is undeniably fun. While they call this the world's greatest drag race (such creative self-promotion guys) it does not take place on an actual prepped drag strip. They use the tarmac at the defunct El Toro airbase in Irvine, California. This surface does not lend itself well to the rear wheel drive cars and MotorTrend doesn't seem capable of putting on the world's best roll on race to get both perspectives. Ok, ok, enough nitpicking but it is important to highlight the conditions in a drag race. They throw in a Charger Hellcat and cut the Aston Martin (lame) for good measure and we're off. No surprise that on the dusty old runway the all wheel drive vehicles lead of the line. Now, as this is not done a dragstrip do not take these 1/4 mile times as representative of what you can hit on the strip. They are timing the cars electronically and the times are inflated due to this. We have yet to see a stock Huracan or R8 V10 Plus top 130 in the 1/4 mile on the dragstrip. Now, due to the traction issues let's list the cars in order of trap speed to truly get an idea of who is the fastest in a straight line: McLaren 570S - 132.0 Audi R8 V10+ - 130.3 AMG GT-S - 126.7 Viper ACR - 124.7 Acura NSX - 123.6 Nissan GT-R - 123.4 Jag F-type SVR - 122.7 Porsche 911S - 120.5 Shelby GT350R - 118.9 BMW M4 GTS - 118.8 Camaro 1LE - 114.2 The 570S is the real straight line champ and if you actually properly launch it you will watch it destroy an R8 V10 Plus in a drag race.
    8 replies | 283 view(s)
  • NJ-M4's Avatar
    09-25-2016, 11:32 PM
    Made 4 consecutive 10 second passes today. Best was 10.877. Props to Kevin Baldi at Precision Tuning in Spotswood, NJ. He's the man. Xona Turbos / JB4 / Precision Tuning Custom Tune & Flash by Kevin Baldi / AEM Meth Kit / Dodson Sportsman Clutch Packs / DSS 1200 hp axles / ER Downpipes / ER Chargepipes / Maximum PSI Intake. Runs were made on Mickey Thompson ET Street S/S 305 35 18s.
    8 replies | 328 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    09-20-2016, 06:21 PM
    Last year an article was posted showing the Z06 can go 9's with $2500 dollars in bolt on modifications. Well, you can even spend under that amount and still get into the 9's and over 140 miles of trap speed as the slip below shows. What is the recipe here? Halltech Stinger-RZ 18% underdrive pulley X-pipe Tune Drag Radials The tune is a 93 octane pump gas tune as well. Keep in mind 45 degree weather obviously helped tremendously but with winter approaching we are going to see a bevy of 9 second Z06's with basic mods.
    9 replies | 193 view(s)
  • The Convert's Avatar
    09-25-2016, 01:28 PM
    The Convert started a thread MHD question in N54
    So, I'm getting ready to switch to MHD from the Cobb AP. The AP is still married to the car at the moment, but I want to get my "licenses" purchased so I have everything ready to make the switch. When I connected my tablet to the car I got the error below when trying to access the MHD store. Is this because the AP is still married to the car, or is my cable, also shown below, the problem? For reference, I have used that cable before for connecting to the car to code injectors. Any help is appreciated.
    7 replies | 345 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    09-20-2016, 05:24 PM
    The Camaro SS arguably should be going up against the C63 and not the C43. It is impossible for it to go up against a B9 RS5 as there is no B9 RS5 on the market yet so the brand new B9 S5 is the logical Audi representation. The new S5 has a potent and impressive 355 horsepower and 368 lb-ft of torque twin scroll single turbo 3.0 V6. It should be an Audi tuner's dream. Speaking of which, it is going to need a tune to beat these cars. It is not surprising the Camaro SS is the quickest of the bunch. What is surprising is that the Mercedes C43 beats the S5. The Mercedes does not even have a true AMG powerplant but a 367 horsepower slightly tweaked M276 DELA30 twin turbo V6. Unfortunately, as this is Autobild and they do not understand that trap speeds would be very telling in a drag race comparison including rear wheel drive V8 but we only get elapsed times because they suck at this: Camaro: 12.60 C43: 12.84 S5: 12.94 The Audi brings up the rear which is surprising. Maybe it's a bit heavier than Audi let on?
    6 replies | 596 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    09-25-2016, 07:11 AM
    You have to respect how Underground Racing does not give up an inch to anyone. If a record falls, they quickly take it back. Heffner has been learning this the hard way for years and recently ETS got a taste of UGR's relentless record pursuit topping their standing 1/2 mile world record set earlier by their GTR this month. The record previously was 244.83 miles per hour and now is 247.25 miles per hour. The next milestone will be topping 250 in the 1/2 mile it looks like but these cars are getting so absurdly fast how much further can things go?
    5 replies | 184 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    09-23-2016, 06:42 AM
    There are turbo upgrade options out there in the AMG 5.5 liter V8 world. Most of you know about them and they are solid options but there is no true value option. Well, Pure Turbos decided to enter the M157 market with an upgrade for the OEM turbo housings. What is the pricing? How much power? These details are not available yet but will be soon: The main thing to take away here is that more competition is a good thing and Pure Turbos will likely offer the best turbo upgrade value in the segment.
    4 replies | 431 view(s)
  • Payam@BMS's Avatar
    09-21-2016, 01:48 AM
    We now offer N54 engine block fittings for people who piece together their own single turbo kits. 6061 Aluminum CNC'd and anodized to fit the N54 engine. These are coolant block off fittings, and an oil feed conversion to 1/8" NPT Female. Coolant Block off set - $30 Oil Feed Adapter - $25 http://burgertuning.com/N54_single_turbo_conversion_oil_coolant_fittings.html
    3 replies | 524 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    09-23-2016, 05:10 AM
    That is according to MotorTrend of course. After the testing of the lap times at Laguna Seca and the subjective impressions were factored in McLaren's 570S came out on top. The BMW F82 M4 GTS on the other hand finished second to last and we can officially call the car a failure at this point. If you want to check out the laptimes and videos click here. The subjective impressions rank the cars as follows: 1st - McLaren 570S 2nd - Shelby GT350R 3rd - Porsche 911S 4th - Camaro 1LE 5th - Viper ACR 6th - AMG GT-S 7th - Audi R8 V10+ 8th - Acura NSX 9th - Jag F-type SVR 10th - Nissan GT-R 11th - BMW M4 GTS 12th - AM V12 Vantage S The Nissan GT-R in 10th place is about right considering it is a soulless robot that best excels at going from a dig with power upgrades. That's really where it has made its name and please do not act like it is a great driver's car or track weapon. It's a heavy soulless robot with little driver involvement. The McLaren 570S on the other hand is a lithe and technologically advanced driver's tool. It's also light at 3188 pounds and incredibly fast in a straight line. It's hard to beat but it also costs over $200k as tested. Yikes. 2016 McLaren 570S BASE PRICE $187,400 PRICE AS TESTED $219,770 VEHICLE LAYOUT Mid-engine, RWD, 2-pass, 2-door coupe ENGINE 3.8L/562-hp/443-lb-ft twin-turbo DOHC 32-valve V-8 TRANSMISSION 7-speed twin-clutch auto. CURB WEIGHT (F/R DIST) 3,188 lb (42/58%) WHEELBASE 105.1 in LENGTH x WIDTH x HEIGHT 178.3 x 75.4 x 47.3 in 0-60 MPH 2.8 sec QUARTER MILE 10.7 sec @ 132.0 mph BRAKING, 60-0 MPH 97 ft 0-100-0 MPH 10.1 sec LATERAL ACCELERATION 1.04 g (avg) MT FIGURE EIGHT 23.0 sec @ 0.93 g (avg) 2.2-MI ROAD COURSE LAP 94.58 sec EPA CITY/HWY/COMB FUEL ECON 16/23/19 mpg ENERGY CONS, CITY/HWY 211/147 kW-hrs/100 miles CO2 EMISSIONS, COMB 1.05 lb/mile POWER @ RPM 562 hp @ 7,500 rpm TORQUE @ RPM 443 lb-ft @ 5,000 rpm SUSPENSION F;R Control arms, coil springs, adj shocks, anti-roll bar; control arms, multilink, coil springs, adj shocks, anti-roll bar BRAKES, F;R 15.5-in vented, drilled, carbon-ceramic disc; 15.0-in vented, drilled, carbon-ceramic disc, ABS Ferrari and Lamborghini wouldn't even play which makes us respect McLaren all that much more. Ferrari is simply a bitch when it comes to these comparisons. Unless they can control all the variables they won't participate. They are not run by enthusiasts and frankly do not deserve the business of enthusiasts. Posers on the other hand should continue to line up and bend over just to get f@#ked by dealers offering them the illusion that the artificially over inflated price they paid for their prancing horse is worth it. The overrated Italians are scared of the Viper ACR. They should be, it owned everyone. Ferrari even tries to hold it back. What a bunch of insecure Italian douchebags. Does the ACR really deserve to be 5th? Allow me to translate that for you: The Viper is loud and scary. It's the best driver's tool but we're a bunch of old men that have gone soft. We readily admit it's the best at doing what this competition is about, driving, but it's just too much car and too involving. Seriously, grow a pair MotorTrend. Reward Dodge for making a car that scared Ferrari and Lamborghini into staying home under the bed peeking out from time to time to make sure there isn't an ACR driving by. What about the F82 M4 GTS? Everyone should be sick and tired of hearing about this $134k failure from BMW. Just shut up about it already. It's hot garbage. The M in M4 GTS stands for Mistake not Motorsport. If that's the best BMW M can do for $134k when producing a dedicated high performance track car you might as well just shut the whole thing down and send everyone to work at 'i' instead. 'i' don't care anymore and neither should you. Let's to get real performance cars now and the one that should have won. The Shelby GT350R. Is it a higher performance driver's car than the McLaren 570S? No. Is it a better driver's car? Arguably, yes. When you factor in the amazing (and unique) powerplant along with the sticker price you scratch your head wondering how Ford pulled this car off. It's manual only. No dual clutch and no nonsense. Only real driver's should apply. Shouldn't that bump it up in a driver's car competition? How about that it beats up on more expensive cars? How about that it is the first production car with carbon fiber wheels? How about that the Americans are delivering engines that even Ferrari states are no longer economically feasible? Sure, it's not perfect but when you factor in the entire package the Shelby GT350R truly deserves the victory over something like the McLaren 570S that is purchased by spoiled brats. The fact it is American and the Americans are producing the best performance cars for the money today is just icing on the cake. The GT350R may not be MotorTrend's winner, but it's ours. 2016 Ford Mustang Shelby GT350R BASE PRICE $63,495 PRICE AS TESTED $66,990 VEHICLE LAYOUT Front-engine, RWD, 2-pass, 2-door coupe ENGINE 5.2L/526-hp/429-lb-ft DOHC 32-valve V-8 TRANSMISSION 6-speed manual CURB WEIGHT (F/R DIST) 3,711 lb (54/46%) WHEELBASE 107.1 in LENGTH x WIDTH x HEIGHT 189.7 x 75.9 x 53.6 in 0-60 MPH 4.0 sec QUARTER MILE 12.2 sec @ 118.9 mph BRAKING, 60-0 MPH 101 ft 0-100-0 MPH 12.5 sec LATERAL ACCELERATION 1.08 g (avg) MT FIGURE EIGHT 23.3 sec @ 0.87 g (avg) 2.2-MI ROAD COURSE LAP 96.11 sec EPA CITY/HWY/COMB FUEL ECON 14/21/16 mpg ENERGY CONS, CITY/HWY 241/160 kW-hrs/100 miles CO2 EMISSIONS, COMB 1.18 lb/mile POWER @ RPM 526 hp @ 7,500 rpm TORQUE @ RPM 429 lb-ft @ 4,750 rpm SUSPENSION F;R Struts, coil springs, adj shocks, anti-roll bar; multilink, coil springs, adj shocks, anti-roll bar BRAKES, F;R 15.5-in vented, drilled disc; 15.0-in vented, drilled disc, ABS
    6 replies | 193 view(s)
  • bigdnno98's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:10 AM
    bigdnno98 started a thread For Sale: 2011 335is DCT in For Sale Vehicles
    Well, sadly it looks like Im going to have to either sell or part out the BMW. It is a 2011 BMW 335is DCT, with 71,000 miles. The car has a very good bumper to bumper warranty that is transferrable to the new owner. There are 27 months and 24,000 miles remaining on the warranty. Mods are below with prices, in the event of a part out. Asking $28,000 with all mods. JB4 G5-$350 MHD BEF with tablet and K Can cable-$50 BMS 2.2gal meth kit with FSB-$350 VRSF 7 FMIC-$250 VRSF 3 DPs-$250 BMS DCI-$50 Boostin Concpets stage 2 LPFP (Walbro 450 e85 pump) Not for sale Apex Arc 8 wheels with new Nitto Nitto NT555 G2 tires (17x9F, 17x9.5R)-$1,800 or $1000 + Good condition style 189 Spare BMW 18 style 264 wheels with Mickey Thompson ET Street Drag Radials-$800 New but not installed slotted rear rotors and pads-$200 Below are maintenance items replaced on the car: HPFP LPFP Battery and Cable Valve Cover Low Fuel Pressure Sensor 6 index 12 injectors 6 Coils New OEM Spark Plugs New Muffler
    5 replies | 274 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    09-20-2016, 05:18 PM
    The Camaro SS arguably should be going up against the C63 and not the C43. It is impossible for it to go up against a B9 RS5 as there is no B9 RS5 on the market yet so the brand new B9 S5 is the logical Audi representation. The new S5 has a potent and impressive 355 horsepower and 368 lb-ft of torque twin scroll single turbo 3.0 V6. It should be an Audi tuner's dream. Speaking of which, it is going to need a tune to beat these cars. It is not surprising the Camaro SS is the quickest of the bunch. What is surprising is that the Mercedes C43 beats the S5. The Mercedes does not even have a true AMG powerplant but a 367 horsepower slightly tweaked M276 DELA30 twin turbo V6. Unfortunately, as this is Autobild and they do not understand that trap speeds would be very telling in a drag race comparison including rear wheel drive V8 but we only get elapsed times because they suck at this: Camaro: 12.60 C43: 12.84 S5: 12.94 The Audi brings up the rear which is surprising. Maybe it's a bit heavier than Audi let on?
    6 replies | 262 view(s)
More Activity