Close

Activity Stream

Filter
Sort By Time Show
Recent Recent Popular Popular Anytime Anytime Last 24 Hours Last 24 Hours Last 7 Days Last 7 Days Last 30 Days Last 30 Days All All Photos Photos Forum Forums Articles Articles
Filter by: Popular Last 30 Days Clear All
  • hidinginfl's Avatar
    01-07-2016, 07:26 PM
    got my kit today, manifold looks great. im not gonna post a million pics, but will post a few. it took Jerry 2 months to get it to me, but its here. and as a small form of proof im not jerry my florida tag.
    407 replies | 8487 view(s)
  • elijahcole92's Avatar
    01-17-2016, 08:45 PM
    Hey all, So i'm pretty tired of dealing with smoking rbs and was thinking of getting a single kit to replace them. However, I'm pretty picky and would only change the setup if i kept similar low-end and spool. Therefore i need help from you wonderful people. I choose rbs because they seemed to make 400ft lbs and full boost sooner than all the other hybrid and i'm not looking for 650hp+ but i've always hated the sound of hybrids and LOVE open wastegate setups. My current setup made 622 on e50 at 26psi maxed out hpfp. So i'm just looking for right at 600hp but i need to find a turbo/setup that can make the same tq just as early. Here's my current dyno sheet, and i'm making 20psi around 2800-2900rpm on the street in 4th. (at 3k in 3rd) http://www.bimmerboost.com/showthread.php?71545-RBs-Inlets-e50-Trebila-Flash-Dyno-Numbers! In the past i've ran a SP QSV on both a 900hp Supra and 500hp Civic that greatly increased the spool and low end tq curve. The gt35r civic spooled faster than a 30r :awesome: Seen here: http://honda-tech.com/forced-induction-16/ls-v-gtx3576r-quick-spool-valve-results-3225623/ However, i don't know if i could make this work with any of the current manifold/kit offerings. Any links to fast spooling singles is appreciated too
    146 replies | 3816 view(s)
  • Terry@BMS's Avatar
    01-23-2016, 01:37 AM
    Hey guys, Had a chance to get on the dyno with Payam today for some random dyno testing. We initially were planning on testing out the new 4bar TMAP sensor with a 40psi boost curve. Unfortunately we ran in to problems with the car misfiring, and the 12psi WG springs maxing out around 36psi, and we only were able to put down ~790whp. 4bar works awesome at least. Luckily we also had some new VANOS tables created by 3000gtMR to test out while it was strapped down. We decided to do the testing at 20psi which meant fewer runs were aborted due to misfiring in cyl6. All runs were started at 1500rpm in 4th. Attached is a representative torque trace from each of three VANOS curves so we can evaluate spool. The red line is the "tried and true" Cobb values that most of us use currently. The green line is Chris's first shot. Which dramatically improved spool but had power nosing off over 4500rpm. So we made some additional tweaks which retained the improved spool while getting some of the top end back. After a couple hrs on the dyno we called it a day. But this 3rd set which I'm posting here we think will be the hot ticket. Worth noting this is a large turbo so these changes need to be evaluated on a wider range of turbos and manifolds. When time permits I'll do similar spool testing on our MOTIV 750 kit. If anyone is bored feel free to test em out.
    121 replies | 3648 view(s)
  • Tony@VargasTurboTech's Avatar
    01-29-2016, 12:05 PM
    Decided to get the car ready for big power once we get the built motor back, and throw the stage 3 back on it. Bought the Radium triple surge tank, 3 Walbro 450's, and was able to tuck it into the trunk cubby for a completely stealth system that can easily support 1000-1200WHP on 100% E85. I have each pump wired to a relay, one pump is triggered by the factory signal, second pump comes in at 10 psi, 3rd at 20 psi. Took quite a bit of work, but to me this is the cleanest way, everything in the tank stays nice and stock except one return fitting, and the rest is hidden from view, and extremely quiet. Couldn't be happier with the set up, and honestly it cost me around $1200 to do it not counting my labor, that's not bad considering what other kits cost. If anyone has any specific questions on how its set up, I would be happy to answer them. Basically this is the break down. Stock pump feeds stock filter, which feeds surge tank, 3 pumps into a 3 to 1 Y fitting. Three -6 in one -8 out. -8 all the way to the FPR, then -8 out of the FPR -8 to dual -6 Y fitting, one -6 up to shotgun, one -6 to PI. -6 return from FPR to surge tank, -6 from surge tank to driver bucket. Anyone trying to make real power on these motors is going to need a fuel system like this, until a real double or triple drop in option is available
    135 replies | 2186 view(s)
  • Tony@VargasTurboTech's Avatar
    01-29-2016, 07:18 PM
    There is a lot of interest in fueling on the N54 platform. This is necessitated of course by limitations of the direct fuel injection system. Many guys are now running supplemental port fuel injection in addition to upgrades to the direct fuel injection system. VTT (Vargas Turbocharger Technologies) is upgrading their project car's fuel system. They are not selling these upgrades but it certainly is fueling (haha, get it?) a big discussion on the BimmerBoost forums regarding the topic. The car is running the VTT 'Shotgun' direct injection upgrade along with a port fuel injection system. Further details on how VTT is upgrading the fuel system from Tony@VargasTurboTech are below. Decided to get the car ready for big power once we get the built motor back, and throw the stage 3 back on it. Bought the Radium triple surge tank, 3 Walbro 450's, and was able to tuck it into the trunk cubby for a completely stealth system that can easily support 1000-1200WHP on 100% E85. I have each pump wired to a relay, one pump is triggered by the factory signal, second pump comes in at 10 psi, 3rd at 20 psi. Took quite a bit of work, but to me this is the cleanest way, everything in the tank stays nice and stock except one return fitting, and the rest is hidden from view, and extremely quiet. Couldn't be happier with the set up, and honestly it cost me around $1200 to do it not counting my labor, that's not bad considering what other kits cost. If anyone has any specific questions on how its set up, I would be happy to answer them. Basically this is the break down. Stock pump feeds stock filter, which feeds surge tank, 3 pumps into a 3 to 1 Y fitting. Three -6 in one -8 out. -8 all the way to the FPR, then -8 out of the FPR -8 to dual -6 Y fitting, one -6 up to shotgun, one -6 to PI. -6 return from FPR to surge tank, -6 from surge tank to driver bucket. Anyone trying to make real power on these motors is going to need a fuel system like this, until a real double or triple drop in option is available
    135 replies | 1547 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    01-21-2016, 01:10 PM
    Sorry for the small graph that is all they posted. Also no torque figures which are important on the S55 engine. Other flash tuners are getting much more than this 444 to the wheels:
    128 replies | 2496 view(s)
  • NniftyFour's Avatar
    01-29-2016, 03:13 PM
    NniftyFour started a thread Advantages of DI vs PI in N54
    So I wanted to start a thread to discuss what advantages we could have running just DI. Only because I do believe if we all want it it could possibly happen. I'm also going to have to supplement my fuel system this spring and at the very least want to learn a bit about the safety, so dual purpose. 1. Safety/cut off- So as I understand it there's two control schemes for PI right now. AIC6 by itself and AIC6 controlled by JB4. Using AIC6 if the DME cuts fuel I'd assume the only reference's AIC6 has is boost reading and spark timing. So it would have to wait until it recognizes boost falling then react to that and cut PI. I'm not sure how quickly it'll pick up on the loss of spark, maybe thats faster and it uses that? Wouldn't we end up with several combustion events where the motor is running on just PI.. So super lean? JB4 is great and maybe Terry can answer but I doubt throwing that in the mix is gonna make it react that much faster. Power- Would we make significantly more power using just DI? Obviously the atomization would be a lot better. I know that's good for efficiency and a better burn but at high load levels would there be a difference in power output? It would be more resilient to knock at least right? Letting us feel comfortable with tossing some more timing perhaps? Or even just helping to eliminate timing drops. Head Flow- Our intake tract was obviously designed for just air, not a fuel air mix. Therefore our runners are quite small. Not an issue I'll run into, more for you big single guys but pretty soon won't you guys run out of head flow. N54 is at what ~860whp max currently. At what point do these runners just run out of flow? I'm sure there's math that can be done but I'd imagine looking at them we have to be close at this point. I'm sure you could port the head to expand the working range some but at the loss of low end drivability and possibly throwing the intake cam optimization out of wack.. Which can't be fixed because aftermarket cams that play nice with VANOS don't seem to exist. Just seems like the most complicated path to be going down. What we know about our fuel system. Injectors- Our injectors are huge to allow the motor to run on just low pressure fuel (72 psi) in case of a HPFP failure. Theoretically our injectors should be good for 1000whp easily. We also know that raising injection pressure is NOT recommended, a Continental engineer made it clear he wouldn't raise the pressure due to leaking concerns. Injection window is the likely cure here and injectors shouldn't be an issue. LPFP- there's obviously plenty of solutions for this. Including Vargas's custom 1200hp system. Non issue. HPFP- This is where our problems lye. Our HPFP are mechanically driven and run out of breath fairly quickly. They also historically aren't that reliable. It's important to realize how they're not reliable. Our pumps consist of a mechanical bellow pump directly driven by the Engine. This is at set ratio compared to the motor and output rises with engine RPM. Fuel flow is therefore controlled by an electrical valve. The fuel control valve (FCV), THIS is what fails on our HPFP NOT the mechanical element. Vargas turbo has come up with a possible solution. The solution is to drive the pump at a faster ratio compared to the Engine, this is done by moving the driving force from an internal chain in the engine to on the accessory belt. This shouldn't play into the HPFP failures we've seen as once again the problem has been with the electrical control valve which is uneffected by this change. Pump weaf has not been an issue stock and Tony says hes tested it for over a year on the same pump. I know not everyone loves Vargas but this approach IMO might be the best one. This is good for 550whp on E85 or less. (Ethanol seems a requirement at this point) The other solution would be leaving the OEM pump alone and adding a second pump in Vargas shotgun fashion. I believe this would be our ultimate solution. Theoretically should be good for ~900whp. Enough that anyone wanting more then that could use port injection. (Remember at 900whp our intake would only be carrying the air, not the air plus about 350whp of fuel, allowing margin for PI) these real OG guys looking for that power could deal with the associated sketchyness that we deal with now, thats life at the top. Now the FCV system is complicated so running anything other then OEM pumps doesn't look likely for us. Even running two OEM pumps seems to trip up the DME. Jyamona thinks he can work on that though.. And that's something I'd love to see, so what do you guys think? Personally the possible lag in control of the PI erks me and I dont really like it.
    127 replies | 2151 view(s)
  • mmmcookies335's Avatar
    02-01-2016, 10:51 AM
    Replaced my valve cover yesterday, threw the old one away. Realized on the way to work I forgot to replace my RB PCV valve.... dumbass. What was your fuck up of the day?
    101 replies | 2086 view(s)
  • rac's Avatar
    01-11-2016, 07:05 AM
    rac started a thread Hexon 2+ RR700 Dyno in N54
    Taken from facebook page. Most of you will note the stock catback reference being incorrect, someone posted that on facebook already. "For guys been fellowing our page and other hexon threads probably have seen a lot of great tuning works on upgraded turbos setup from Ken and his team. I personally want to thanks to Ken again for pulling this first RR700 test result together so quickly during the holiday season for Hexon. So, I give you guys the very first dynojet result of Hexon BMW N54 Hybrid 2+ RR700. Result: 654.10 RWHP & 612.99 RWTQ @28psi. Here is his setup: '07 E92 Sport AT - HEXON Hybrid 2+, TFT Intake, ADE FMIC, MOTIV PI, Fuel-IT Stage 3 Hulk LPFP, Haltech by AD Engineering (PI Control), 3" Catless DPs, Stock Cat-Back Exhaust, Stock Hot Side Charge Pipe. Ken's side note: "I think it's safe to say the new Stage 2+ turbos should be called the RR700's. For a stock frame turbo, they truly move a lot of air and spool super quick. Unfortunately I think I'm hitting a limit with my stock cat-back exhaust. I don't know anyone else that is making over 600 whp on stock exhaust. I also had a plug going bad and couldn't push it any harder due to misfires. Not every dyno session goes as well as you would like for it to go. We were shooting for 700 whp, but... I honestly believe there is another 50+ whp to be had with a good set of plugs, more time for tuning VANOS, upgraded exhaust, and upgrade hot side charge pipe. Only a matter of time & money". We're hoping to get back on the dyno again very soon once the exhaust and hot side CP are upgraded, the plugs replaced."
    72 replies | 2774 view(s)
  • Tony@VargasTurboTech's Avatar
    02-02-2016, 09:32 PM
    VTT is proud to announce our new cast turbocharger samples arrived today. I can say seeing my vision, and direction put into motion, and finally seeing a working production turbocharger is a really great feeling. These turbochargers we hope will shape the landscape of the N54 turbocharger market, and we are happy to share them with you, bringing you a true stock frame location turbo with no compromises. We will be installing, tuning, and testing these in the next couple weeks, and once we have the data, and numbers. We will be making a full announcement thread, with pricing, availability, buy back incentives, specs, as well as our plans for a giveaway. Until then, here are a few photos, we will post some more one we get it on the engine, and installed! Stay Tuned, things are about to get interesting...:music-rockout:
    63 replies | 2012 view(s)
  • ricecrackers101's Avatar
    02-02-2016, 12:59 PM
    These have been out for a while now. any have dyno results posted yet? only result i've found so far is for a 1/4 mile run. 10.9@133
    74 replies | 980 view(s)
  • spectacula's Avatar
    01-22-2016, 10:00 AM
    I was searching for a turbo manifold and came across this company on Facebook. They seem to have a kit that works on the xi so I'm assuming it works for all models. I am not affiliated with this company. It's nice to see we have another option that is priced decently for the guys not looking to spend so much. Maybe we can get them here and get some more info on this.
    54 replies | 1841 view(s)
  • ///Monst3r's Avatar
    01-11-2016, 12:51 AM
    So I feel my car has always been kind of a runt. On pump 92 meth it only made 400/440 (know this dyno reads low though) with stock turbos 19psi. I was getting pulled by tune only 5.0's. Installed a custom gtx35r and it felt really fast pulled on a few fast cars. Fuel is the main problem, always resorted to a lot of meth and torco. I wont lie I beat the hell out of my car and its my daily. Wanted to run with some higher hp cars and get more on pump so I went with jpworks and 6466. I've been having tuning issues the whole time though. The last 2 oil changes I have been finding a lot of metal on the magnetic plug and now have smoking issues I never had before. I think the new 6466 is smoking (Miss the reliability of garrett) but could be other things with my more recent findings. Here is a vid of the last race I ran with a ess e92 m3. The car ran fine before this but I did just recently add a cm10/12 setup instead of the single cm14 I was running and bumped boost from 24# to 27#. I was getting tons of wheel spin even with 295 r888's and then towards the end of the run the dreaded subbie sound. I can usually just restart the car or clear the codes in the jb4 but this time it would not go away and along with limp code was cyl 6 misfire. Limped the car home and pulled the plugs to find this on 6 all the rest were fine. Replaced all the plugs with m4 plugs gapped to .022 and now started getting misfires on other cylinders. Thinking it may be coils now. Did a compression test and got 180,120,150,150,150,150. Didn't see and obvious piston damage with scope. I have never had a misfire on cyl 2 as long as I've had the car now timing drops on 2 (normally its 5).lThe big problem is ever since I ran stocks my car would rarely throw to safety map even when I'd have obvious issues, sometimes it would just backfire and restart the jb4 destroying the log as well. Whenever I did post logs I was told that they were fine from multiple sources. I'm guessing the problem may be from the recently installed port injection and larger meth concentration. I was under the impression that 0 on afr with integration disabled PI when in actuality it just turns it down.(That's what I get for assuming)
    57 replies | 1753 view(s)
  • Sam@ActiveAutowerke's Avatar
    02-03-2016, 03:59 PM
    Hi, my name is Sam Morgan and have recently joined the salesteam at Active Autowerke. Active leads the industry in service and modifying your BMW. I drive a 2008 135i named Nancy. Almost every turbo setup available to the public has been on my car giving me an edge the competitors simply cannot match. You can contact me at Sam@activeautowekre.comor 305-233-9300 ext. 229. Or you canjust call and ask for Sam! I will beglad to connect you with some of the best BMW performance engineers in the country.
    55 replies | 950 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    01-18-2016, 11:58 AM
    Sticky started a thread Ghost cam? in N54
    Care to explain in more detail BoostAddict?
    44 replies | 1419 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    01-11-2016, 10:11 PM
    Ouch. An impressive pull here by BimmerBoost member @///Monst3r's manual E92 335i. His car is upgraded with a JP Works single turbo N54 kit and uses a Precision 6466 turbocharger. Dyno numbers and pictures are one thing but seeing the kit in action is another. You see it in action here against an ESS-Tuning supercharged E92 M3. We do not know if this is a VT2-625 setup or what pulley is being used. What we do know is that ESS is cited often on forums as a strong performance option for the E92 M3 yet at BimmerBoost we see race after race of their cars getting cleaned up. What makes this run impressive is you visibly see the E92 335i lose traction from the M3 camera car's perspective. The M3 gets a lead yet the 335i regains traction and quickly closes the gap and pulls. That is a massive power disparity right there. Excuse the poor video quality at night time but you can still easily see what happens.
    41 replies | 2285 view(s)
  • Terry@BMS's Avatar
    01-21-2016, 03:28 PM
    Hey guys, Due to increasing demand we've finally added 4bar support to the N54 JB4. This allows logging and control of up to 43.5psi. Perfect for those single turbo guys looking to break parts! We've sourced a Bosch sensor that is fully plug and play and made a PNP harness adapter for a simple direct fit. Each kit includes two orings. A smaller and a larger. We found the larger fits the CPE CP bung better. But other CPs may be tighter on the TMAP flange. So we'll just ship them with both orings. In addition we give you an extra 8x32-5/8" long screw to attach the sensor. This is the correct size for the CPE chargepipe. If your chargepipe uses a metric or different size you'll need to source your own 1/4" longer screw to accommodate the sensor. The 4bar requires the latest JB4 firmware (v126 for single turbo, v32.1 for hybrid turbos) and the latest JB4 interface. Donnie has added support to JB4 Mobile as well in the latest build. To enable you'll set 3.5bar TMAP to 2 as opposed to 1 for the 3.5bar N20 sensor. There is a chance we'll need to modify the IAT voltage tables within the back end flash for proper intake temperature reading although bench testing has shown the sensor appears to use the same intake temp profile as the factory sensor. So we should be good there. We'll need some logs from warmer climates to fully evaluate that aspect and if any back end flash map changes are required for reading intake temperatures we'll post them. The best news is we were able to buy the sensors in bulk to get the price down. The kit is $99 including the sensor. While it's mainly for large single turbo cars the 4bar can be used with OEM & hybrid turbos, if someone wants the convenience of buying a sensor & adapter harness in one shot. There is not much of a resolution drop between this sensor and the 3.5bar N20. We'll continue to support both the 3.5bar and this 4bar in all JB4 versions going forward. http://www.burgertuning.com/N54_JB4_upgrades.html
    46 replies | 1404 view(s)
  • jyamona@motiv's Avatar
    02-02-2016, 01:17 PM
    jyamona@motiv started a thread DI Tuning Discussion in N54
    Hey guys, moving the discussion to it's own thread, as it has the potential to be very beneficial :) Here's some data I have gathered, and a peek into some table data as well. As some of you know, the N54 as 3 different injections strategies, illustrated below: Mass Fuel Flow (MFF) into the cylinder is based off three things: fuel pressure, injector lift, and injector opening duration. Fuel Pressure: This is the HPFP rail pressure, essentially. It gets trickier due to the VCV (volume control valve) which is PWM controlled by the DME (may end up w/ a separate thread / topic for control of this). Skipping for now. Injector Lift: The DI injectors are Piezo. This means they have a stack of piezo crystals in them, which when energized, make the injection needle "lift" a certain amount. The amount of lift can vary, based on how much of the piezo stack is energized. From what I have seen, the N54 only uses two variations here, a low energy mode, and a high energy mode. I believe it uses these modes correctly already, so there is probably not much to be gained here. Injector Duration: The SOI / EOI (start / end of injection) is based on °KW, which is the German abbrev for degrees of crank rotation. They treat the full combustion cycle as 720°. To start this off, and keep it as simple as possible for now, I'll stick with single injection mode. Therefore injector duration calculation will be determined by 2 of 3 tables: Start of Injection #1 , then either the low energy or high energy opening duration pressure compensation table. The values for these can be seen below: Units for Start of Injection are X: RPM, Y: MFF (Load?), Z: °CRK Units for Injection Durations (low/high): X: mg/stk, Y: MPa (rail pressure?), Z: ms Do these values seem logical? The SOI seems reasonable to me. The only thing I'm questioning is the injection duration last two columns. Discuss!
    50 replies | 1237 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    01-15-2016, 11:13 AM
    F80 M3 and F82 M4 owners are already pushing their motors hard despite tuning on the platform being at a fairly early stage. More and more 700+ wheel horsepower examples thanks to turbo upgrades are hitting the roads and some guys have already hit some internal hardware limits. You can read the various forums and see that rods have given way and some guys have blown motors but is that due to the internals not being able to take it or the tuning? The answer is likely somewhere in the middle. Much like in the N54 world tuning will evolve and engines tuned early on let go at far less power than people are making on the stock motor these days. The S55 will evolve and make considerable power on the stock internals but for those who want peace of mind (and a bit of tuning leeway) upgraded internals are a must. TPG Tuning is putting together a built S55 with upgraded rods and pistons. There is another East Coast tuner that apparently ordered some of these same internals so people are pushing these cars hard already. We look forward to seeing the finished built S55 product,
    43 replies | 2004 view(s)
  • Tony@VargasTurboTech's Avatar
    01-27-2016, 03:14 PM
    To everyone waiting for the charge pipe to be done, we have test fit the 335, and /135/535/Z4 versions, and they fit great! :dance:The RHD is out for test fitting right now, and we expect the same results!The charge pipes are now LIVE on the website. Pricing is $249 MSRP, but we will do an intro price of $199 for 7 days, if you would like to purchase at this price, please use purchase code VTTSILCP, you must register for the website for the coupon to work! We are also doing an awesome bundle deal, Inlets, and Silicone CP for $499 total! This is a great price, and this will be a set bundle price, that will not go away! If anyone has any questions please let us know, 20 CP's are on order, and we expect them in 2-3 weeks. The site is accepting pre-orders now, so reserve your spot in the first batch! Thanks! VTT
    42 replies | 1148 view(s)
  • JerryT's Avatar
    01-17-2016, 03:25 PM
    JerryT started a thread 30 Psi 6466 Jpworks kit in N54
    So i think i found one of my problems with this car. Started throwing misfires in all cylinders on the dyno and put down a low 550whp at 24 psi but would not rev all the way to redline for some reason. So i decided to pull the NGK plugs and notice cylinder 5 plug. So i decided to throw the stock oem plugs back in. Car runs alot better than it did with NGK as you see in the logs below 30 psi runs great to redline BUT i still got a misfire in cylinder 5 i believe i have a bad injector for cylinder 5.
    38 replies | 1686 view(s)
  • Evan Patak's Avatar
    01-27-2016, 07:46 PM
    Greetings, I am installing this manifold on my buddies 6466 335xi. This PI-Manifold in conjunction with a Fuel-It Stg 3 LPFP, lines, and ethanol sensor will be responsible for fuel duty. I have heard positive feedback about the manifold and am excited to get it installed. When researching this product I didn't find an abundance of detailed pictures so hopefully people interested will find these helpful. Evan
    41 replies | 1204 view(s)
  • ///Monst3r's Avatar
    01-11-2016, 01:43 AM
    20 roll (m3 camera car) 26# pump+meth Got some crazy spinning even with 295 r888's but 295/30/19. Need more side wall so planing on running a 275/40-45/16 m/t setup. Feathered the throttle a little and got back in it, reeled him in easy and pulled hard from there.
    41 replies | 726 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    01-06-2016, 10:50 PM
    We like to see dyno results supporting a product. Maximum PSI provides said dynos for their S55 intake product here. However, when the data source is the party selling the part it is necessary to question their claims as the larger the gains appear the more it will drum up attention and sales. Some tuners abuse this aspect hand picking runs that portray their product in the best light and never post any dyno runs or data that does not. We are not saying that is happening here but some tempered expectations may be necessary. Is the S55 intake system employed from the factory on the F80 M3 and F82 M4 a major point of restriction? Perhaps but not to the degree in stock form that we see it portrayed here. The restriction will increasingly become a bottleneck as more air is moved such as in a tuned example. The F80 M3 test car is a tuned example. Let's get some of the details from Maximum PSI themselves: Maximum PSI on the BimmerBoost forums states they removed the claim of a 50 whp gain due to it potentially being misleading although as you can see from the direct quote the claim remains. Let's look at a graph comparing the OEM airboxes (blue line) to the Maximum PSI design (red): You will see gains through the curve but the meat of the gain is above 6000 rpm. So, for top end horsepower, the factory airbox is somewhat restrictive. With the S55 torque curve dropping hard gaining power up top is certainly appreciated and addresses a weakness of the stock curve. 50 rwhp although a peak gain on one run is not a realistic representation. However, what one sees will depend on supporting modifications, a tune, etc. There are definitely major gains to be had up top in the rev range and it will be interesting to see how other tuners address the S55 intake system. Keep in mind Maximum PSI changes the location of the intake as well. Here are their thoughts:
    21 replies | 3288 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    01-22-2016, 09:31 PM
    BimmerBoost member @cryptocar has a 2013 F30 335xi. These models are equipped with the N55 turbo motor. A fairly well known problem is the BMW oem charge pipe fails. It happens with stock boost and on stock cars and not just on modified examples. @cryptocar's car was modded with the Dinan Stage I tune. A weak tune, as we already demonstrated in an N55 tuning dyno comparison. Due to the Dinan tune on the car and their claim the charge pipe doesn't break unless messed with the dealer refused to warranty the charge pipe which is a $450 part and dealers charge up to $500 to replace it. @cryptocar could not get the dealer to warranty the part and Dinan was not any help. Here's a quick overview: Frustrating right? Dealer won't warranty the part as they can say the car is modded and Dinan refuses to help as they say this is a common failure on the N55. Let's get some more details: So he is out the money on the charge pipe and labor which he should not be. The illusion of the Dinan warranty safety net with BMW is exactly that, an illusion. It is a strong marketing ploy and that is primarily how they use it. The first thing BMW, Dinan, and basically any of these companies these days will do is try to get out of honoring a warranty. They have people and departments dedicated to this task. Ask yourself this question. What is the point of paying more for a Dinan product that is supposedly safer if Dinan will hang you out to dry blaming BMW and BMW will hang you out to dry for running the Dinan product? Even if it is a BMW dealer that sells Dinan parts? You would be in the same position with any other part from anyone else, wouldn't you? Ultimately, what wins out is not honoring if the warranty if they can get away with it. They got away with it.
    34 replies | 1566 view(s)
  • martial@mhd's Avatar
    01-07-2016, 10:29 AM
    While load target per gear / rpm works nicely on MT cars (see http://www.bimmerboost.com/showthread.php?70943-MHD-load-per-gear-per-RPM), AT and DCT required a different approach to limit power. The new table Boost limit multiplier per gear allows to cap the boost target using MAF req and gear as breakpoints: Because this is a firmware logic change, a semi-long write is needed (9 or 20min) to install it on first use. Subsequent map update will be short (2 min) as usual. Final testing must be performed on the 4 firmware versions. If you are willing to help testing, please drop me an email. I can produce a test map if needed, the only requirement for testing is owning the MHD flasher + monitor licenses.
    31 replies | 1217 view(s)
  • Artsoasis's Avatar
    01-27-2016, 02:43 AM
    Artsoasis started a thread DCT and High boost in N54
    I decided to make this post to keep DCT owners informed on what I have learned about running high boost on a DCT car. I currently own a 335is with Stage 2 +20T turbos, port injection, inlets, and supporting mods. Here is what I have found out so far: MHD currently has issues once you raise the boost ceiling on an INAOS map. This puts a cap on your boost level at 21 PSI. Below are data logs of my car with the stock boost ceiling increased. You can see my trans struggles to shift due to the issue with MHD. It even causes the car to lose boost on some shifts. This is not a mechanical slip and is directly being caused by MHD. http://datazap.me/u/artsoasis/bqe70-...og=0&data=4-23 http://datazap.me/u/artsoasis/bqe70-...og=0&data=4-21 http://datazap.me/u/artsoasis/inaos-...og=0&data=4-24 Martial is working on a fix, but no word on a release date. My trans has yet to slip at 535 whp level when I was using cobb. I'll keep pushing until I notice any slipping and dyno to get an estimate of what power level causes the stock trans to slip. I will wait a few more weeks, but I will go the JB4 route around mid February. Hopefully Terry can square me away. The only car I have seen running high boost with DCT is a euro 335i that has upgraded clutches, turbos and uses JB4+BEF. His car uses a custom tuned Trebila BEF and JB4. I think he is able to get away without any issues because it's using the stock boost ceiling and having JB4 control boost. Please post your experiences using DCT and high boost. I get the feeling the high HP cars with DCT will soon hold all of the 1/4 records.
    38 replies | 1018 view(s)
  • sA x sKy's Avatar
    01-15-2016, 12:17 AM
    Thought I'd post this here since TPG isn't on these forums:
    43 replies | 445 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    01-30-2016, 05:51 PM
    Many of you are wondering why someone would ditch the S62 5.0 liter V8 under the hood of the E39 M5 for a smaller BMW inline-6 motor. Well, these results make a strong argument for such a swap. This E39 M5 belongs to BimmerBoost member @Omni. You can read all about his decision to do the swap in a past article. Even at lower power levels than the car runs currently it was a beast. @Omni beat up on a tuned Cadillac CTS-V Wagon as well as a tuned F13 M6 Gran Coupe. With the car now making over 800 to the wheels it is safe to say he can take on even more stout competition. He is running a Precision 6266 turbocharger at 35 psi of boost. 100% methanol is injected in a direct port setup. A water and methanol blend is utilized as well before the compressor. Tuning is by @NickG of Technique Tuning and done on the stock DME no less. The result? 813 horsepower and 819 lb-ft of torque at the wheels which works out to comfortably over 900 at the crank. However you feel 800+ horsepower at the wheels is serious power and this may be the world's most powerful E39 at this point. Simply incredible results and props to @Omni for continuing to push the boundaries.
    27 replies | 1849 view(s)
More Activity