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 Articles Clear All
  • Sticky's Avatar
    03-17-2014, 02:54 PM
    The California Air Resources Board (CARB or ARB) sent Burger Tuning a letter informing the company that they believe BMS is in violation of two California vehicle code sections dealing with anything that modifies a vehicle's emission control system. This includes downpipes, intakes, tuning boxes, exhaust systems, etc. CARB ordered an immediate cease and desist of sales and also requested three years of sales records including receipts and invoices. Whether BMS intends to comply with the records request is not known at this time but what that means for you if you live in California and bought BMS parts is that CARB could potentially acquire a list of names and addresses of people who own vehicles they know are likely in violation of California vehicle codes. What it means for BMS is a big problem regarding sales in California as CARB states BMS needs to apply for an exemption to allow sales even if parts are for off-road use. Why Burger Motorsports LLC is being targeted by CARB is unknown. We all know that as of right now hundreds if not thousands of companies are selling intakes, exhaust system, turbos, superchargers, etc., in California. BMS is being singled out here and it is quite possible a competitor made sure to point CARB toward BMS. California is the only state with a regulatory agency like CARB. The reason for this is because the agency existed before the federal Clean Air Act which is governed by the federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). One could argue that CARB is superfluous and that it is too much government control but the agency exists and wields strong authority giving California the most stringent emissions regulations in the nation. CARB essentially has the power to destroy an aftermarket performance automotive company's business in California. Considering California is the largest car market in the nation, that is about as big of a blow that can be levied. BMS is complying with CARB's request and halting sales of parts in California as the company explores its options. Terry Burger informed BimmerBoost he intends to make the off-road use warnings on BMS products more prominent. What this means for you, the enthusiast, is that the days of being able to modify your car are slowly coming to an end as CARB and the EPA clamp down. Even though we are in the golden age of horsepower and performance cars are becoming tuner dreams with turbo and supercharged cars coming from practically every manufacturer now you will have government agencies crack down and put an end to the fun as well as an end tremendous revenue and countless jobs. They do not want you modifying your car, period, and this is a gradual move in that direction. They also appear to be gearing up for going after people individually or why else request years of receipts, invoices, and transactions that would serve as implication? This unfortunately affects every one of us. Why BMS was targeted is unknown but what is known is that CARB has practically unlimited resources and can fine you into oblivion until you play the game the way they tell you to play it. Free market and free country? That it is not. CARB letter to BMS dated 3/10/14: Letter removed by request
    121 replies | 3305 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    04-09-2014, 05:20 AM
    Superchargers are yesterday's news for the S65 V8. Yes, of course supercharger kits will forever have a place in the E9X M3 aftermarket but after riding in Gintani's turbo E90 M3 I can not stop thinking about a turbo E92 M3. I have been in some very strong supercharged M3's but the twin turbos at just 6.5-7.0 psi of boost on 91 octane pump gas (no methanol injection) make the centrifugal systems feel weak in comparison. That is coming from someone with a supercharged M3. Perhaps I have not been in a fast car in a while but I have experienced supercharged S65 V8's and supercharged M156 63 AMG's in various states of tune from mild to wild and a turbo M3 on stock internals provided the best power delivery out of any of these cars. Plenty of torque down low and a relentless pull up top that just would not quit. Lag? What lag. The car just pulls. Unlike the superchargers that kill the S65 V8 throttle response and torque down low the turbos pull from any rpm. Alex at Gintani took me out on the streets of Van Nuys and he flogged it more than enough to hit the point home. Maybe it was the afternoon traffic, maybe it was the tight streets, but I asked him to back off at the top of fourth gear saying no more was necessary as I got it. I have never felt a stock internal M3 pull that hard. If you line a supercharger kit up at 7 psi and this turbo kit at 7 psi there is no doubt in my mind the turbos will crush the supercharged car. The turbos also do not drop off this thing just keeps on pulling so you are getting the best of both world's. Alex did more full throttle pulls than I needed for this to sink in. Does this all sound too good to be true? Think I'm exaggerating? Well I intend to vote with my own wallet and will be making the switch to turbos as soon as possible. If you doubt anything written here go stop by the Gintani facility and take a ride in the car for yourself. You will reach the same conclusion I did that superchargers are this platform's past unless looking at the dollar per horsepower argument. At $18k+ the turbo kit is the most expensive forced induction option and that does not include install. Reality is with tax and installation it will be well over $20k. It is interesting to note Gintani is the only company with a working twin turbo kit on an E9X M3 tuned on the stock DME. Where are the supposedly 'skilled' companies that early on called into question Gintani's reliability, tuning, and overall ability? Still scaring people with the same old stories just to sell kits to line their pockets. Still doing the community a disservice chasing the almighty dollar above all else. That, while Gintani is building cars that scare you with their acceleration and not with contrived forum stories to sway sales. Pictures of the installed kit (BimmerBoost is not allowed to post pictures of the manifolds and turbos at this time) are below. Unfortunately, I did not take the camera in the car during the test drive but I will do a more in depth visit next month with in car videos and hopefully some dyno numbers. I do have a video of the sounds which you simply have to hear the turbos whistling in person to fully appreciate. Eliminating the parasitic loss from driving the supercharger sure feels like it freed up a good amount of power. Honestly, you do not need more than this to have absurd amounts of fun in an M3 unless you have something to prove with huge raw numbers. Or are the administrator of BimmerBoost.com. Or both. Try the turbos and you will fall in love with the M3 all over again. I did.
    96 replies | 1392 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    03-25-2014, 04:42 PM
    AMS Performance released their ECU tuning for the updated E63 AMG. The new 4Matic all wheel drive E63 AMG's come with more aggressive software from the factory and it shows with Mercedes underrating the car. The stock output at the crank as measured by AMS shows 619 horsepower for the E63 AMG S and 598 horsepower for the standard E63 AMG. That certainly explains why the 4600+ pound E63 AMG S is able to run roughly 122 mile per hour trap speeds in the 1/4 mile. Despite the more aggressive tuning from AMG there is still plenty of power and torque left on the table. There are torque limits built into the ECU by AMG in order to protect the 4Matic drivetrain that have stumped tuners but AMS seems to have found their way around these limits. The result is an increase in horsepower to 700 at the crank and 830 pound-feet of torque for the E63 AMG S and standard E63. Both cars hit the same tuned figures as they should showing the differences in the models are artificially limited by software. The only reason to get the AMG S is if one is interested in preserving their warranty and not tuning the car. If you're reading this site that is not you so buy the standard E63 AMG and pocket the change. The difference in horsepower between the 2014 E63 AMG 4Matic and E63 AMG S 4Matic is 21 horsepower. Not much, right? Well, the torque figure is where the difference really lies as the S has an additional whopping 89 lb-ft of torque. There is a big difference in the mapping of both cars so Mercedes is not lying about the advantage of the S model. Pricing is $2995.95 and certainly worth every penny. AMS product page: http://tuning.alphaperformance.com/product/mercedes/2014-mercedes-e63-amg-4matic-biturbo/ Contact @ALPHA Performance with any questions. Dyno charts below. BenzBoost hopes AMS can show us charts with output at the wheels in addition to these crank numbers:
    71 replies | 2618 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    03-20-2014, 06:35 PM
    A Subaru going up against a Mercedes with an AMG and a BMW sporting an M badge? Hey, it does not sound as crazy as it once would have before BMW had a 2-Series and Mercedes-Benz produced a turbo 2.0 liter four-cylinder AMG model with all wheel drive. As the Germans move downscale these types of comparisons of brands not traditionally compared will becomes more common. How does the new Subaru WRX STI stack up to its German competition? Well, the first thing to notice is its the greatest value. A Subaru does not exactly have the brand appeal of a BMW or a Mercedes-Benz but that much is obvious. Starting at $38,190 and its as tested price of $38,190 makes that Mercedes badge lose some of its luster when the CLA45 AMG tested price comes in at an eye opening $60,625. If the CLA45 AMG loaded up with options is getting to $60k what will the new W205 C63 AMG go for? $80k? Probably. The M235i's tested price is $46,025 so it actually comes up in the middle between the STI and the CLA45 AMG. It also does not have all wheel drive or a turbo four-cylinder like the other two. It does offer the greatest displacement at 3.0 liter from its turbo inline-6 versus 2.5 liter for the STI turbo flat-4 and 2.0 liters from the AMG turbo inline-4. The WRX STI has the least amount of horsepower and torque at 305 horses and 290 lb-ft. It is outgunned by the 320 horse 330 lb-ft M235i and the 355 horse and 332 lb-ft CLA45 AMG. It shows in the acceleration figures: 1. CLA45 AMG - 12.7 @ 110.0 1/4 mile, 4.2 0-60 2. M235i - 13.0 @ 106.6 1/4 mile, 4.4 0-60 3. WRX STI - 13.1 @ 104.4, 4.6 0-60 The CLA45 AMG is the quickest and fast of the bunch, decisively. So the acceleration is quite clear but what about the handling performance? Interestingly all three cars pull a .97g skidpad. The skidpad does not tell the whole story and fortunately MotorTrend took all three cars for timed laps on the roadcourse. The result is quite interesting. The quickest car around the roadcourse? The WRX STI. Does the fact it has the lightest curb weight of the trio at 3367 pounds help? Certainly. It also seems to manage its nose heavy weight distribution of 59/41 front to rear better than the CLA45 AMG with its incredible 60/40 front to rear bias. It is clear which car here was designed as a front wheel drive originally. Streets of Willow laptime: 1. WRX STI: 1:26.12 2. CLA45 AMG: 1:26.20 3. M235i: 1:26.37 So the least powerful and cheapest car in the comparison has the best laptime. It also wins the comparison. The STI is said to just pack in a ton of fun into the package despite its understeer. The BMW unfortunately comes up short and the laptime likely shows that the tight Streets of Willow course does not favor an M235i without a limited slip differential and an automatic transmission. Whereas the STI has a sportier manual and the CLA45 AMG a technology advanced dual clutch the BMW is stuck with an automatic. What's going on here? Open diff, automatic, is this really a BMW? The STI wins and deservedly so. A great value and all around package. The CLA45 AMG shows it is the dragster of the group and very capable... but boring. MotorTrend cites the lack of emotion and so it finishes last. A Subaru going up against a BMW and a Mercedes? That thought certainly does not look so crazy in retrospect. 3rd Place: Mercedes-Benz CLA45 AMG Big on speed, style, and price; small on emotion. 2nd Place: BMW M235i A well-balanced rear-driver in need of options for pizzazz. 1st Place: Subaru WRX STI Launch Edition: Loud, fast, surefooted, amenity-packed—it typifies fun. 2014 BMW M235i 2014 Mercedes Benz CLA45 AMG 2015 Subaru WRX STI (Launch Edition) POWERTRAIN/CHASSIS DRIVETRAIN LAYOUT Front-engine, RWD Front-engine, AWD Front-engine, AWD ENGINE TYPE Turbocharged I-6, alum block/head Turbocharged I-4, alum block/head Turbocharged flat-4, alum block/heads VALVETRAIN DOHC, 4 valves/cyl DOHC, 4 valves/cyl DOHC, 4 valves/cyl DISPLACEMENT 181.8 cu in/2979 cc 121.5 cu in/1991 cc 149.9 cu in/2457 cc COMPRESSION RATIO 10.2:1 8.6:1 8.2:1 POWER (SAE NET) 320 hp @ 5800 rpm 355 hp @ 6000 rpm 305 hp @ 6000 rpm TORQUE (SAE NET) 330 lb-ft @ 1300 rpm 332 lb-ft @ 2250 rpm 290 lb-ft @ 4000 rpm REDLINE 7000 rpm 6250 rpm 6700 rpm WEIGHT TO POWER 10.9 lb/hp 10.1 lb/hp 11.0 lb/hp TRANSMISSION 8-speed automatic 7-speed twin-clutch auto. 6-speed manual AXLE/FINAL-DRIVE RATIO 3.08:1/2.05:1 2.44:1/1.17:1 3.90:1/2.94:1 SUSPENSION, FRONT; REAR Struts, coil springs, anti-roll bar; multi-link, coil springs, anti-roll bar Struts, coil springs, anti-roll bar; multi-link, coil springs, anti-roll bar Struts, coil springs, anti-roll bar; multi-link, coil springs, anti-roll bar STEERING RATIO 14.5:1 14.5:1 13.1:1 TURNS LOCK-TO-LOCK 2.2 2.7 2.5 BRAKES, F;R 13.4-in vented disc; 11.4-in vented disc, ABS 13.8-in vented, drilled, grooved disc; 13.0-in vented, drilled disc, ABS 13.0-in vented disc; 12.4-in vented disc, ABS WHEELS, F;R 7.5 x 18-in; 8.0 x 18-in, cast aluminum 9.0 x 19-in, cast aluminum 8.5 x 18-in, forged aluminum TIRES, F;R 225/40ZR18 88Y; 245/35ZR18 92Y Michelin Pilot Super Sport 235/40ZR19 91Y Dunlop Sport Maxx RT MO 245/40R18 97W Dunlop Sport Maxx RT DIMENSIONS WHEELBASE 105.9 in 106.3 in 104.3 in TRACK, F/R 59.7/60.4 in 61.3/61.4 in 60.2/60.6 in LENGTH x WIDTH x HEIGHT 174.5 x 69.8 x 55.2 in 184.7 x 70.0 x 55.7 in 180.9 x 70.7 x 58.1 in TURNING CIRCLE 35.8 ft 36.1 ft 36.0 ft CURB WEIGHT 3494 lb 3600 lb 3367 lb WEIGHT DIST., F/R 53/47 % 60/40 % 59/41 % SEATING CAPACITY 4 5 5 HEADROOM, F/R 40.1/36.5 in 37.0/35.6 in 39.8/37.1 in LEGROOM, F/R 41.5/33.0 in 40.2/27.1 in 43.3/35.4 in SHOULDER ROOM, F/R 54.4/53.4 in 56.0/53.2 in 55.6/54.2 in CARGO VOLUME 13.8 cu ft 13.1 cu ft 12.0 cu ft TEST DATA ACCELERATION TO MPH 0-30 1.7 sec 1.4 sec 1.3 sec 0-40 2.4 2.2 2.3 0-50 3.3 3.0 3.2 0-60 4.4 4.2 4.6 0-70 5.7 5.3 6.0 0-80 7.3 6.9 7.5 0-90 9.0 8.6 9.7 0-100 11.2 10.5 11.9 PASSING, 45-65 MPH 2.2 2.2 2.5 QUARTER MILE 13.0 sec @ 106.6 mph 12.7 sec @ 110.0 mph 13.1 sec @ 104.4 mph BRAKING, 60-0 MPH 103 ft 105 ft 108 ft LATERAL ACCELERATION 0.97 g (avg) 0.97 g (avg) 0.97 g (avg) MT FIGURE EIGHT 24.9 sec @ 0.78 g (avg) 24.6 sec @ 0.79 g (avg) 24.9 sec @ 0.79 g (avg) 1.6-MI ROAD COURSE LAP 86.37 sec 86.20 sec 86.12 sec TOP-GEAR REVS @ 60 MPH 1800 rpm 1500 rpm 2400 rpm CONSUMER INFO BASE PRICE $44,025 $48,375 $38,190 PRICE AS TESTED $46,025 $60,625 $38,190 STABILITY/TRACTION CONTROL Yes/Yes Yes/Yes Yes/Yes AIRBAGS Dual front, front side, f/r head Dual front, front side, f/r curtain, front knee Dual front, front side, f/r head BASIC WARRANTY 4 yrs/50,000 miles 4 yrs/50,000 miles 3 yrs/36,000 miles POWERTRAIN WARRANTY 4 yrs/50,000 miles 4 yrs/50,000 miles 5 yrs/60,000 miles ROADSIDE ASSISTANCE 4 yrs/unlimited miles Unlimited 3 yrs/36,000 miles FUEL CAPACITY 13.7 gal 14.8 gal 15.9 gal EPA CITY/HWY/COMB ECON 22/32/25 mpg 23/31/26 mpg 17/23/19 mpg ENERGY CONS., CITY/HWY 153/105 kW-hrs/100 miles 147/109 kW-hrs/100 miles 198/147 kW-hrs/100 miles CO2 EMISSIONS, COMB 0.76 lb/mile 0.75 lb/mile 1.01 lb/mile REAL MPG, CITY/HWY/COMB 22/29/25 mpg 23/30/26 mpg 22/25/23 mpg RECOMMENDED FUEL Unleaded premium Unleaded premium Unleaded premium
    42 replies | 5343 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    03-27-2014, 08:53 PM
    This is utter insanity. In case you are not familiar with it, the Isle of Man Tourist TT (Tourist Trohpy) is a motorycle race held on the Isle of Man which is considered a self-governing part of the British Crown. Basically, a bunch of riders which stupid fast bikes gather on a small island off the coast of Great Britain and race against the clock at full throttle. It is very dangerous, very fast, and arguably the most intense motorcycle race run in history. A look at this video and you will not be surprised that there have been 240 recorded rider deaths during the 100+ years (first race held in 1907) that the race has run. There are those who want to put an end to these races and this network's response is let people live and take the risks they want to take. It's hard to say this rider is not living to the fullest. (The video features champion Michael Dunlop on a CBR600 who holds multiple lap records and has won in multiple classes)
    48 replies | 4229 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    04-03-2014, 07:45 PM
    So remember all that marketing fluff about how light the new M3 and M3 would be? Yeah... go ahead and forget all that BS. It is true that the new 2015 F84 M4 convertible is lighter than the E93 M3 it replaces. It is also true that the difference in weight is less than 100 pounds. At 4055 pounds the car is 90 pounds lighter than the E93 M3. It is still over 4000 pounds and it is still fat. Compare the quoted 4055 M4 convertible curb weight to the quoted 3585 pound curb weight for the F82 M4 coupe. The drop top gains almost 500 pounds, ouch. Not that 3585 pounds is as light as we were led to believe anyway. How close these weights are to reality we will have to see as BMW figures often differ due to sometimes using EU weights with luggage and sometimes not (basically they choose the lightest figures they can when the marketing warrants it). It is possible that the cars weigh less than the given BMW figures but however you look at it the weight loss claims have been vastly overblown. The weight gain and the folding hard top are the main differences between the coupe and convertible. Everything else is the same including the 425 horsepower and 406 lb-ft of torque twin turbo S55B30. BMW's official specifications on the BMWUSA website show the bore and stroke figures as flipped from what was earlier reported. For some reason they also show the bore and stroke in inches but the bore and stroke as quoted is exactly the same as the N55. This may be a mistake or the previous reports of the S55 and N55 not sharing the same undersquare design are wrong. BMW's official stance seems to be that they are the same which is not good news (shared pistons, rods, torque drop off toward redline, high piston speeds, etc.). When something seems too good to be true... Pricing has yet to be announced and the official debut is later this month at the New York Auto Show. The New BMW M4 Convertible Legendary top-down motoring from BMW M Woodcliff Lake, NJ – April 3, 2014 6:00pm EDT/3:00pm PDT. . . The all-new BMW M4 Convertible arrives in US showrooms late this summer to join the M4 Coupe and M3 Sedan. The 2015 BMW M4 Convertible is powered by the same BMW M TwinPower Turbo 3.0-liter inline-six as its siblings. That engine produces 425 horsepower and 406 lb-ft of torque and can be mated to either a 6-speed manual or 7-speed M-DCT transmission. The new BMW M4 Convertible makes its world debut at the 2014 New York International Auto Show. The new inline-6 M engine: High-revving, turbocharged unit combines the best of both worlds. Like the new BMW M3 Sedan and new BMW M4 Coupe, the new M4 Convertible sees a return to an inline-six engine, as used on the second and third generations of this iconic open sports car. The new turbocharged engine combines the best of both worlds – reaching a maximum 7,600 rpm, it is unusually high-revving for a turbocharged engine, resulting in linear power delivery over a wide engine speed range and a soulful engine note, while M TwinPower Turbo technology ensures that peak torque is on tap over a broad rpm range. A further hallmark of this engine is its outstanding efficiency. The new engine sees a power upgrade over the previous V-8 to 425 hp, which is delivered between 5,500 and 7,300 rpm. Peak torque has been increased by roughly 40 percent to 406 lb-ft, and is maintained over a very wide rev band (1,850–5,500 rpm). The sprint from zero to 60 mph takes the new BMW M4 Convertible just 4.4 seconds with the 6-speed manual. Equipped with the 7-speed M Double Clutch Transmission, this number falls to 4.2 seconds. Top speed is 155 mph (electronically limited). The BMW M TwinPower Turbo engine hits maximum revs of 7,600 rpm, in keeping with the typically high-revving character of M engines. The M TwinPower Turbo technology comprises two fast-responding mono-scroll turbochargers, High Precision Direct Injection, Valvetronic variable valve timing and Double- VANOS continuously variable camshaft timing. Valvetronic and Double-VANOS work in tandem to seamlessly control intake valve lift. The result is smooth and efficient power delivery, very sharp response and reduced fuel consumption and emissions. The six-cylinder engine features a closed-deck crankcase design which is very rigid and allows cylinder pressures to be increased for improved power output. And instead of liners, the cylinder bores feature a twin-wire arc-sprayed coating, which results in a significant reduction in engine weight. Engine weight is further reduced by the forged, torsionally rigid crankshaft which, as well as saving weight, also provides increased torque-carrying capacity. This significantly reduces rotating masses, resulting in improved throttle response and acceleration. Innovative technologies delivering top-level performance. Power transfer in the BMW M4 Convertible is via a standard six-speed manual gearbox. Available as an option is the seven-speed Double Clutch Transmission M-DCT, which allows the driver to change gears not only using the selector lever in the center console but also via the shift paddles on the steering wheel. This transmission effectively combines two gearboxes, each with its own clutch. This means gear changes are executed with no interruption in the flow of power – and the shift processes are therefore shorter. Drivelogic allows the driver to select from different shift modes, which see the M4 Convertible adopting a particularly comfort-oriented, economy-focused or ultra-sporty approach to gear changes when in automatic mode. The Launch Control function also integrated into M-DCT enables optimum acceleration off the line. The standard Active M Differential optimizes traction at the rear axle. The electromechanical steering system, meanwhile, represents a new development from BMW M GmbH and is the critical component in the link between driver and car. It offers the gifts of direct steering feel and precise feedback. The integrated Servotronic function electronically adjusts the level of steering assistance according to the car's speed, providing optimum steering characteristics at all speeds. Three steering settings (COMFORT, SPORT and SPORT+) can be selected at the touch of a button to adjust the level of steering assistance to the situation at hand and to the driver's personal tastes. The optional Adaptive M suspension likewise comes with COMFORT, SPORT and SPORT+ modes. The BMW M4 Convertible is equipped as standard with M compound brakes, but customers can also order their car with even lighter and more effective M carbon ceramic brakes, which boast the additional visual highlight of gold-painted calipers. Lightweight design across the board: Shedding weight in all the right places. As well as outstanding dynamic qualities, intelligent lightweight design also allows the BMW M4 Convertible to claim exemplary efficiency. Its extensive weight-saving measures produce a curb weight of just 4,055 lbs – around 90 pounds less than its predecessor. Among the key contributors here are the aluminium front fenders and hood, with lightweight aluminium construction also a feature of the chassis. Extensive use is also made of a material that is both lightweight and extremely stiff, and therefore durable: carbon-fiber- reinforced plastic (CFRP). The new BMW M4 Convertible also features a CFRP drive shaft. The high rigidity and low weight of the CFRP tube mean that the drive shaft can be produced as a single-piece component, without a center bearing. This achieves weight savings of 40 percent over the previous model and a reduction in rotating masses, which in turn results in more dynamic powertrain response. The CFRP strut brace in the engine compartment is a further example of how all weight- saving measures on these vehicles have also been tailored to the improvement of driving dynamics. Weighing only 3.3 lbs, the strut brace offers superior rigidity to a comparable aluminum component and at the same time plays a key part in the excellent steering response and precision of both vehicles. The use of carbon is a reminder that BMW is a global leader in high-strength, lightweight CFRP construction, and that it was BMW who brought out the first mass-production vehicle with a body consisting entirely of this material – the innovative BMW i3. Design: the powerfully expressive face of BMW M. Viewed from the front, the BMW M4 Convertible stands out most prominently with its powerful contours and a strongly defined three-dimensionality, which lends it a powerfully expressive face. Characteristic design elements leave no doubt that this car is the work of BMW M. There is the modern take on the twin headlight arrangement (with optional LED technology), for example, not to mention the distinctive twin-bar kidney grille with black painted grille bars – which reflect the design of the characteristic BMW M double-spoke wheels and bear the M logo – and the powerfully designed front apron with its trio of large intakes supplying cooling air to the high-performance engine and brakes. Among the other hallmark BMW M design features on display is the characteristic power dome on the hood, which hints at the potential of the brawny M TwinPower Turbo engine and creates space for the intercooler. And the striking exterior mirrors, with their suggested twin-stalk mounts, optimize the aerodynamics of the new BMW M4 Convertible. The flanks: low-slung silhouette and dynamic lines. The profile of the M4 Convertible extends the dynamic impression created by its front end. The hallmark BMW proportions of a long hood, long wheelbase, set-back glasshouse and short front overhang are lent further emphasis by familiar M design elements. Those dynamics-accentuating details include likewise newly designed M gills, which perform both a stylistic and a functional role. Integrated into them are Air Breathers, which team up with the Air Curtains in the front apron to help optimize the airflow around the wheel arches and therefore improve aerodynamics. The interior design: flawless ergonomics in a sporting ambience. Climbing into the BMW M4 Convertible, drivers will be greeted by an interior architecture complete with unimpeachable ergonomics and clear driver focus. In keeping with its character, however, the interior fulfils an even more sharply defined sporting brief. To this end, the host of traditional BMW M equipment details includes M door sill finishers, an M driver's footrest, M gearshift lever, M-design circular instruments with white graphics, M leather steering wheel with chrome trim, color contrast stitching and electroplated-look shift paddles (if the M-DCT gearbox is specified). The front seats also represent an evocative expression of BMW M's motor sport genes. Taking visual inspiration from the bucket seats fitted in racing cars, the seats feature a full- size single-piece back panel. This means the construction of the seats is very flat, while the high, width-adjustable side bolsters and low-set seat surface allow an ideal seating position and provide excellent support. Despite their undeniably sporty design, the BMW M sports seats are equipped with comfort-enhancing features including electric adjustment and heating. On the seat surface, the stitching, upholstery segmentation and perforation lend the seats a slim-fitting feel. Illuminated for the first time, the BMW M logo on the seat backrests adds a new and exclusive highlight. Interior with exquisite materials and motor sport ambience. The BMW M4 Convertible stands out with an interior that is exclusive and functional in equal measure. For example, the M Sport leather multifunction steering wheel is standard, as are bucket-style M sports seats. New to this generation of Convertible are the available three-temperature neck warmers that allow for comfortable open-air driving at high speeds and low temperatures. Drivers of the BMW M4 Convertible can look forward to piloting their car from behind a double-spoke M leather steering wheel. The M logo, chrome trim and color contrast stitching are central elements of the cabin's racing ambience. The M4 Convertible comes standard with a 6-speed manual gearbox, while the 7-speed M Double Clutch Transmission is available as an option. M-DCT allows the driver to change gears using either the selector lever on the center console or the shift paddles mounted on the steering wheel. Three-piece retractable hardtop. Form and function. The BMW M4 Convertible offers outstanding everyday driving qualities and a dynamic design, with the top up or down. These seemingly contradictory qualities were already combined in the BMW M3 Convertible, the predecessor that set standards for premium mid-size convertibles. The hardtop of the BMW M4 Convertible features a number of design improvements that reduce noise levels for a much quieter interior ambience. The sound-absorbing headliner also reduces wind noise by up to 2 dB in comparison to the predecessor model. When the top is up, the luggage compartment has a volume of 13.0 cu. ft. (370 liters) – that is 0.7 cu. ft. (20 liters) more than available in the BMW M3 Convertible. All trunk volumes are based on ECE measures. Even bulky items can be transported with the BMW M4 Convertible. A flat and level storage area can be utilized when the backrest of the rear bench seat is folded down. The load-through feature, which is standard in the US, makes even more space available: Either a wide opening between the rear passenger compartment and the trunk, or a smaller opening, for skis for example, when four people are seated in the vehicle. All it takes is the push of a button to transform a dynamic coupe into an elegant, athletic convertible in a mere 20 seconds. The top can also be lowered when the vehicle is travelling at speeds of up to 18 km/h (approx. 11 mph). The redesigned windblock is standard in the US. The windblock is now smaller, lighter and easier to use, plus it is more effective than previous variants. When it is not needed, the windblock can be stored behind the rear seat to save space, which is also a new feature. The BMW M4 Convertible also has plenty of space in the trunk, even when the retractable hardtop is lowered. The new convertible offers wider access to the luggage compartment, and an electro-hydraulic loading assistance system raises and positions the folded hardtop in the trunk as needed to ensure maximum utilization of the 7.8 cu. ft. (220 liters) of storage space available. The loading assistance feature makes sure that there is always ample access to the trunk whether the top is up or down. Two storage compartments on the right and left of the main luggage area are also available for stowing small items when the retractable top is up. Optional equipment items provide comprehensive driver information. Needless to say, the BMW M4 Convertible is also available with the wide range of driver assistance systems and mobility services introduced under the BMW ConnectedDrive banner, some of which are already familiar from the BMW M3 Sedan and BMW M4 Coupe. Among the highlights are the new generation of the Navigation System offering extra capability, sharper graphics and 3D elements for the map display, Active Driving Assistant, which warns the driver of a looming collision with a pedestrian or vehicle, the full LED headlights and the intelligent High Beam Assistant. The optional Head-Up Display comes with additional, M-specific functions such as a gear display, rev counter and Optimum Shift Indicator. Hall of Fame: Open-top performance for over a quarter century The new BMW M4 Convertible builds on 26 years of tradition. A Convertible has lined up alongside its two-door Coupe sibling as a firm fixture of the BMW M3 in all four generations. First generation: the racing car with the soft-top. The launch of the first BMW M3 in 1986 served primarily to satisfy the homologation requirements for what was then the German Touring Car Championship (DTM). In order to take its place on the grid for this prestigious race series, BMW had to come up with a series- produced version of the competition car and build 5,000 examples of it for sale within a year. The road-spec BMW M3 was created with the demands of motor sport very much at center stage and there were no plans initially for an open-top version. However, after around two years of resistance, BMW eventually gave in to significant customer demand, and the BMW M3 Convertible was unveiled in 1988. It was based on the four-seater BMW 3 Series Convertible and powered by a four-cylinder engine initially producing 193 hp. In 1990, output was increased to 215 hp, enabling the open-top M3 to accelerate to a top speed of 148 mph – making it the world's fastest four-seater series-produced convertible at the time. The first generation BMW M3 Convertible was not offered in the US. Second generation: new advances in safety technology. The powers that be in BMW's motor sport department – now rechristened M GmbH – had planned an additional Convertible version of the second-generation BMW M3 (launched in 1992 globally and in 1994 in the US) from the outset. Based on the second generation 3 Series Convertible, the BMW M3 Convertible was launched in 1994 with a raft of innovative safety technology on board. For example, the rollover bars of the standard rollover protection system – positioned behind the rear seat head restraints – would spring up in an instant if the car was in danger of turning over, teaming up with the ultra-rigid windscreen frame to protect the passenger compartment. In the US, the second-generation M3 Convertible was powered initially by a 240-hp 3.0-liter inline-six that was later enlarged to 3.2-liters. Third generation: shining an even brighter spotlight on the car's sporting character. In spring 2001, almost exactly a year after the starting gun had been fired on the third generation of the BMW M3, M GmbH unveiled the Convertible variant to join its Coupe stablemate in the line-up. It was identical to the M3 Coupe up to the A-pillar, but a striking beltline gave the open-top model an even broader, more powerful appearance. The BMW M3 Convertible therefore cut a more muscular, broader, more hunkered-down figure than any BMW M3 before it. And it had the bite to back up the bark; hallmark M attributes such as a 333 hp high-revving naturally-aspirated engine, beautifully tuned M suspension, a variable M differential lock and M high-performance brakes enshrined the BMW M3 Convertible as an elite athlete. Fourth generation: giving the sporting character an even sharper edge. Less than a year on from the debut of the fourth-generation BMW M3 Coupe and the four- door Sedan that followed a little later, BMW stirred the fires of anticipation among open-air driving enthusiasts with the launch of the BMW M3 Convertible in spring 2008. A 4.0-liter eight-cylinder engine generating 414 hp – and sustaining around 85 percent of its 295 lb-ft peak torque across a rev range of 6,500 rpm – gave drivers of the drop-top four-seater an impressive armoury with which to sate their appetite for sporty, dynamic corner-chasing and relaxed cruising alike. The new BMW M4 Convertible The new 2015 BMW M4 Convertible will arrive in US showrooms in summer 2014, in time to capture ideal top-down weather. BMW Group In America BMW of North America, LLC has been present in the United States since 1975. Rolls- Royce Motor Cars NA, LLC began distributing vehicles in 2003. The BMW Group in the United States has grown to include marketing, sales, and financial service organizations for the BMW brand of motor vehicles, including motorcycles, the MINI brand, and the Rolls- Royce brand of Motor Cars; DesignworksUSA, a strategic design consultancy in California; a technology office in Silicon Valley and various other operations throughout the country. BMW Manufacturing Co., LLC in South Carolina is part of BMW Group's global manufacturing network and is the exclusive manufacturing plant for all X5 and X3 Sports Activity Vehicles and X6 Sports Activity Coupes. The BMW Group sales organization is represented in the U.S. through networks of 339 BMW passenger car and BMW Sports Activity Vehicle centers, 139 BMW motorcycle retailers, 119 MINI passenger car dealers, and 35 Rolls-Royce Motor Car dealers. BMW (US) Holding Corp., the BMW Group's sales headquarters for North America, is located in Woodcliff Lake, New Jersey. Information about BMW Group products is available to consumers via the Internet at: www.bmwgroupna.com.
    68 replies | 1740 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    03-22-2014, 06:28 PM
    Getting control of the BMW factory DME is a huge pain. With the F30 generation BMW upped their encryption and to this point nobody has cracked BMW's protection. What is one to do? Well, there are piggyback options but for those who want full control of their motor that will hardly do the trick. The Motec M182 standalone (takes the place of the factory ECU) is an option in these situations although at a pricey 4,552.00 Euros ($6200.00). The F30 335i you see below has its N55 turbocharged and direct injected 3.0 liter inline-6 controlled by the Motec M182. You will also notice it is a stripped out race car. So how does the M182 help a street application? Well, it does not help you if you want to retain all of your OEM electronic systems. However, a future answer for those who want to do turbo upgrades on the F30 335i and F32 435i may be relying on such an ECU run in conjunction with the factory DME. The Motec ECU in such a scenario would handle the engine management while the BMW engine computer would make sure all the factory electronics still play nice. This sort of dual ECU solution was employed on the E46 M3 early on with turbo kits and Motec ECU's are used in the high powered Lamborghini and Ferrari Underground Racing turbocharged street cars we all know and love. This may be the route tuning takes as it is just now the factory computer on the over a decade old E46 M3 is decrypted to the point of allowing turbo kits tuned on the factory DME. With F30 encryption being even more difficult to crack does anyone really want to wait around for 10+ years (could be far less, could be more) for factory DME tuning to evolve to the point of supporting a turbo upgrade? Fortunately companies like Motec continue to deliver engine control systems that can support modern engine management. It's up to the BMW aftermarket to figure out how to best integrate them. Look at this dyno of M182 controlled N55 with upgraded Borg Warner turbocharger (stock injectors and fuel pumps) versus OEM DME controlled N55 with the factory turbocharger. This previews what the N55 is capable of with a turbo upgrade. Horsepower is 599.4 with torque at 629 pound-feet: Pictures and specifications:
    52 replies | 2382 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    03-21-2014, 04:26 PM
    Yes, the E46 M3 can put out as much power and torque as the E92 M3. However, it takes the S54 quite a bit of work to get there. Regardless, the dyno overlay pictured shows a naturally aspirated S54 not only matching the larger S65 V8 all motor but exceeding it in both power and torque. What makes this impressive is that the S54 stroked to 3.5 liters is still giving up a half liter of displacement on the 4.0 liter S65 V8. This is an S54 that is definitely pushing the naturally aspirated envelope. 3.5 liters of displacement, Active Autowerke tune, Alpha-N intake setup, AC belt removed, and the engine fan clutch removed. The S65 V8 in the E92 M3 is completely stock as delivered from the factory. The S54 shows an incredible torque advantage especially in the mid-range. It hits a peak of 286 lb-ft at the wheels on the Active Autowerke Mustang Dyno compared to the S65 239 lb-ft at the wheels. More torque from less displacement is just incredible to see. The peak horsepower figure difference between the two is also in the S54's favor with it putting down 362 horsepower to the wheels against the S65 336. An advantage of 26 horsepower at the wheels for the S54. So which is ultimately more capable naturally aspirated? The S65 of course. This is a stock S65 as it comes from the factory with all accessories connected for a street car. This S54 verging out of streetable territory and is more of a race application. That said, the S54 can match and exceed the S65 V8's stock output. The advantage goes right back to the S65 V8 once it is tuned, modified, and especially if it is stroked out to its 4.6+ liter capability. A very interesting comparison of one of the best naturally aspirated inline-6's and V8's BMW M has ever created nonetheless.
    42 replies | 3317 view(s)
  • 5soko's Avatar
    03-24-2014, 09:21 PM
    Hey guys, just wanted to share a story and do a small write up on my friends experience with his M5 over the past few months. I have been there step by step with my friend while he has modded his M5. A nice experience to me aswell as I got to see what mods did what, and how this lovely V10 responded for my future reference when I mod. My friend isn't a forum type of guy, so I'm telling his story as he urged me to share it. So let's begin the story. About the car: 2010 M5 SMG 3x,000 miles ESS tune ESS SMG tune RPI oem catless headers with ceramic coating and wrap RPI oil cooler RPI scoops with BMC filters RPI GTS exhaust RPI pulley As you can see within a one year period he dropped a lot of money modding the car, also adding install prices, and maintenance like plugs, diff, tranny oil, etc. He was a true modding addict and enthusiast for this S85 beast. Tune wise, he started with ESS base tune only, then ESS+header tune, and finally ESS+header tune+ alpha N. Progressed nicely with the ESS tunes. His car worked very well through all the mods and being tune only, and FBO with header tune. The ESS tune didn't give him any issues through these mods and time that were directly related from what we could tell, power was OK, not the most consistent but OK. (really don't know how bad a tune is until you try a better tune, will get to that later) Where the issues started…. What to mod next? Alpha N seemed like a good next step. So my friend got the ESS alpha N hardware and alpha N software from ESS. Installed the hardware, and uploaded the software, and this is where all hell broke loose. Right after flashing the car, it began throwing 02 sensor codes, all kinds of codes for both top and bottom sensors but for mostly the pre-cat 02 sensors. WTF? I was confused as hell. Put some miles on the car thinking they might go away, cleared the codes multiple times, they just instantly kept coming back. Contacted ESS, they said cant be the tune, its programmed for catless headers and alpha N. OK, my friend tosses out the money for new pre-cat sensors on both sides and install even though the car never had this issue before and car has under 40K miles… Installed new 02 sensors, No change! We try uploading the stock file, tune only file, tune+header file, etc and nothing works, car stays in limp mode and runs horrible, continues to throw 02 sensor codes. Even going back to the old header tune with alpha N uninstalled we were getting the same issue now. OK I checked the 02 sensors fuses for him, checked the wiring, everything checks out. How can these codes just pop up out of no where right after the alpha N software upload on a 3XK mile car? Seems like the alpha N tune from ESS did something wrong. And all the hardware retaining to the 02 sensors is perfect, double checked by a mechanic. So after contacting ESS numerous times for help and suggestions throughout this ordeal, they would just keep giving generic answers like, not our tunes fault, it is a hardware problem, bring it to the dealer. They went as far as to say they don’t have time to troubleshoot this with him as hardware issues are time consuming for them! Go to the dealer again. Really I was in shock ESS didn’t try to send him another tune, or adjust the tune or give him suggestions on what to try via tuning. They left him high and dry! Really lost respect after seeing what they did to him, I felt my friends pain as he loves his M5 as I do and would hate to be in this situation. It seemed 100% tuning related since the issue popped up right after flashing it with the Alpha N tune. After researching on the forums, it seems this has happened before to a member as well with ESS, where he flashed his car via ESS and the codes that were thrown keep coming up even after going back to stock tune. My friend had to no choice except to find the best indy he can and leave his car with them to try to figure out what in the world is happening even if it means reverting the car back to 100 % stock. Fast forward 2 weeks later, trying to fix the issue at a mechanic shop. Went as far as changing some type of CAS computer and the alternator to no fixing of the issue. Just more money dumped after this mystery ESS alpha N flash tune made the car go nuts. Car was basically just a loss! So now the superhero comes into play. Sal and imran @ Evolve automotive and the evolve team.. I suggested to my friend he contact and try to get a tune from evolve since there so knowledgeable on the S85 platform and own one, and still to this day are tuning them. If anyone has most experience around the S85 ECU, how the ecu reacts and tuning them, its evolve. They would be able to solve this issue if its really tuning related. So with no other option then to sell the car or buy a new expensive ECU from bmw or who knows what else that would cost thousands. So he called evolve, told them his story and issues, got the evolve alpha N kit. They went above and beyond helping him, making him feel comfortable while explaining the process to him. They sent him a file to upload and then the alpha N tune upload and he loaded it up and Guess what? Not sure how he did it or what he changed but he works magic! NO CODES! Car was running flawless! No more limp mode, no 02 sensor codes, car was idling nice and smooth like stock. ESS idled high and rough. Throttle response in M mode is amazing! Just has such a great feeling putting your foot down, my friend was blown away by the drivability and response over the ESS tune. The midrange and top end power was down right scary. We took the car for a test drive last night so I can directly compare his old ess tunes vs this new evolve tune, and to say the least, the power was astonishing, I was so addicted! Car was just jumping and taking off like a rocket! The car was going by RPMS so much faster it was incredible! An important thing to also note was the consistency! Back to back runs, the car didn't even hiccup once, and gave the same exact hard pull each run with no variance which really shows how well a tune shines, ! My friend is just thrilled his car is in working order and now with even more power! Honestly, the ESS tune felt good, but you don’t really know how good a tune is until you try a tune that is better. Then you know what the other tune was lacking, in this case, drivability, midrange/top end power, and consistency. I'm not biased in anyway, I don't even own a tune, but I thought this story I would share to show Evolve passion, knowledge and customer service! Not sure if ESS has to re-evaluate their tuning and alpha N tuning, but also their customer support! My friend is beyond angry with ESS as he was a very loyal, pro ESS guy and thought they were top of the line in terms of BMW tuning, and was let down immensely, and left for dead by them. I know the E60 M5 is the older platform now but customer service shouldn't be put off because of this, especially when it’s a tuning issue. Anyways, it was a very expensive and tough ordeal for my friend, I tried my best to help him in diagnosing throughout this ordeal, but glad he finally got it fixed with the help of Evolve, he only regrets not going with them sooner. Here are some pics throughout his modding and issues: First test drive with the evolve tune: Evolve goodness Evolve owner happiness: ESS alpha N tune, high idle when fully warmed and stopped that ESS said was normal Vs EVOLVE stable, smooth nice idle under 1K Late night flashing ESS tunes to try and fix the issue after flashing ESS alpha N tune: RPI headers, coated and wrapped: BTW do not go to Autocouture in NJ to do installs on any of your cars.. There installs are very sloppy and not professional. They installed my friends headers and didn't put back the oem heat shields, the main wire of the car sat and got burned on the headers! My friend had to bring the car to another Mechanic, who had to cut away the burned wires and individually re-connect all the wires! Or replace the whole main harness of the car just because of the Autocoutures improper and sloppy/lazy work! They also do very sloppy job on car wraps! But that is another story! Find another place for car work! RPI oil cooler: Stock vs RPI pulley: RPI GTS exhaust: I know what tune i will be getting this spring now as well :)
    49 replies | 2271 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    04-11-2014, 05:00 AM
    The camera car in these two videos is the Burger Tuning F10 M5. This car has a BMS JB4 piggyback and downpipes. Some impressive output at the wheels has been shown from this car on a Dynojet in the in the ~630 wheel horsepower range. That is a tall order to overcome for a 335i even for one equipped with upgraded twin turbos. The 335i just is giving up too much power and torque to the M5 along with quicker shifts to the DCT. And the DCT is the key. The first video shows an E92 335i that has a manual transmission and it gets crushed. The second video has a similarly modded E92 335is with the RB turbo upgrades but the difference is that it is the 335is model that has the DCT transmission. Look at the results and see what a difference a dual clutch makes for yourself.
    61 replies | 715 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    03-20-2014, 11:47 PM
    A bunch of action in this video with the first run showing a stout stock bottom end Camaro on meth and race gas with an F1A Procharger go up against a built motor MKIII Supra on E85 and 33 psi of boost courtesy of a Precision 6766 turbocharger. The cars are pretty evenly matched and somewhere in the 8XX wheel horsepower range. The second set of runs show a stock MP4-12C against an ESS VT2 supercharged DCT E92 M3. The Camaro and Supra are both in a different league regarding roll on performance than the MP4-12C and the supercharged M3. That said, the MP4-12C leaves the M3 in its dust. It really is not even a race. The McLaren is stock with the 616 horsepower factory map but even when the M3 is given the hit it's still easily destroyed. Why the M3 owner would show up on pump gas without meth injection and a high boost pulley is anyone's guess. It just led to being embarrassed by bus lengths on video. If that M3 belonged to this writer that supercharger kit would already be off the car and listed for sale. Mod List: Mr.TORQ Camaro (Built & Tuned by LG Motorsports): - F1A Procharger - Stock Bottom End - H/C/I/E - Race Gas/Meth - M6 Sergio's MKIII Supra (Built & Tuned by DLT Performance): - 6766 Single Turbo (33 psi) - E85 - T56 Transmission - ~860whp Infamous Mclaren MP4-12C: - Bone-Stock - 616hp ESS Supercharged e92 M3: - ESS VT-625 Supercharger - Exhaust - DCT - Meth (not used) - 570whp
    53 replies | 1766 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    03-26-2014, 05:12 AM
    Is the Camaro Z28 overpriced at $75k? It has the venerable LS7 from the C6 Z06 at 505 horsepower clearly giving up power and torque to its German and Japanese rivals. It also has no turbos and no dual clutch transmission. Just a big 427 cubic inch naturally aspirated single overhead cam pushrod American V8 mated to the classic manual transmission. Is the Z28 in over its head against the $117,305 Nissan GT-R Track Edition and $182,050 911 Turbo S? Nope. And that $75k base price all of a sudden looks like a value in this company, doesn't it? What that money buys you is a Camaro that takes the roadcourse very seriously. 305/30/19 Pirelli Pzero Trofeo R tires are featured all around. Yes, 305's up front. There also are 15.5 inch carbon ceramic brakes rotors up front as well. The GT-R is the only one in this group without carbon ceramic brakes. The Camaro is clearly set up for roadcourse duty. It is also the slowest car of the group. A 12.3 @ 117.2 in the 1/4 mile certainly is not slow but it trails behind the GT-R with its 11.0 @ 125.1 run and the 911 Turbo S with its 10.9 @ 123.7. The 911 Turbo S again shows abnormally slow 1/4 mile numbers dying for some reason past 100 miles per hour despite being the first car to get there. Is the ECU cutting power? It sure looks like it. So the Camaro does not have a fancy dual clutch transmission, it does not have all wheel drive, and it isn't the most powerful. It isn't a lightweight either weighing 3857 pounds. 23 pounds lighter than the Nissan GT-R but 247 pounds heavier than the 911 Turbo S. That makes the Camaro beating the GT-R and the 911 Turbo S around the roadcourse all the more impressive because the car is doing it in the turns and not due to a power advantage. The cheaper rear wheel drive manual American car beats the more expensive dual clutch all wheel drive foreign robots that the automotive world seems to constantly rave about. There is some poetic justice in there somewhere. MotorTrend picks the Camaro as the best car in this test followed by the 911 Turbo S and then the GT-R. The GT-R is said to feel too controlled. In other words, it's boring. Who was it that told you it's a soulless robot? The 911 Turbo S also suffers from missing an 'X factor' in the driving experience. The GT3 would have been a better choice and addressed the driver involvement criticism. Now you likely understand why Porsche offers a GT3 and why horsepower is not everything. MotorTrend says the Camaro Z28 is GM at its best and it is tough to disagree. GM is definitely on a bit of a roll right now. A Camaro that is a better driver's car than a Porsche 911 Turbo and beats it around the roadcourse for $100k less is, well, unheard of until now. It is now the Porsche that is the dragster and the not the American 'muscle' car. Good for you GM. Way to beat the world's best without even needing to match the cost of entry. Thank you for building the Z28. 3rd Place: Nissan GT-R Track Edition Old soldiers never die, they just fade away. Still a monster, but long in the tooth. The 2015 refresh arrives none too soon. 2nd Place: Porsche 911 Turbo S One of the quickest production cars of all time, the Turbo S is caught in a weird space between grand touring and track attack. 1st Place: Chevrolet Camaro Z/28 Impressive. Most impressive. The General flexes its red, white, and blue muscles. Simply put, this is Chevy at its best. 2014 Chevrolet Camaro Z/28 2014 Nissan GT-R Track Edition 2014 Porsche 911 Turbo S POWERTRAIN/CHASSIS DRIVETRAIN LAYOUT Front-engine, RWD Front-engine, AWD Rear-engine, AWD ENGINE TYPE 90-deg V-8, aluminum block/heads Twin-turbo 60-deg V-6, aluminum block/heads Twin-turbo flat-6, aluminum block/heads VALVETRAIN OHV, 2 valves/cyl DOHC, 4 valves/cyl DOHC, 4 valves/cyl DISPLACEMENT 427.9 cu in/7011 cc 231.8 cu in/3799 cc 231.9 cu in/3800 cc COMPRESSION RATIO 11.0:1 9.0:1 9.8:1 POWER (SAE NET) 505 hp @ 6100 rpm* 545 hp @ 6400 rpm 560 hp @ 6500 rpm TORQUE (SAE NET) 481 lb-ft @ 4800 rpm* 463 lb-ft @ 3200 rpm 516 lb-ft @ 2100 rpm** REDLINE 7000 rpm 7000 rpm 7000 rpm WEIGHT TO POWER 7.6 lb/hp 7.1 lb/hp 6.4 lb/hp TRANSMISSION 6-speed manual 6-speed twin-cl auto 7-speed twin-cl auto AXLE/FINAL-DRIVE RATIO 3.91:1/2.46:1 3.70:1/2.95:1 3.44:1/2.14:1 SUSPENSION, FRONT; REAR Struts, coil springs, anti-roll bar; multilink, coil springs, anti-roll bar Control arms, coil springs, adj shocks, anti-roll bar; multilink, coil springs, adj shocks, anti-roll bar Struts, coil springs, adj shocks, anti-roll bar; multilink, coil springs, adj shocks, anti-roll bar STEERING RATIO 16.1:1 15.0:1 12.3:1-15.0:1 TURNS LOCK-TO-LOCK 2.5 2.5 2.5 BRAKES, F;R 15.5-in vented, drilled, carbon ceramic disc; 15.3-in vented, drilled, carbon ceramic disc, ABS 15.4-in vented, drilled disc; 15.0-in vented, drilled disc, ABS 16.1-in vented, drilled, carbon ceramic disc; 15.4-in vented, drilled, carbon ceramic disc, ABS WHEELS, F;R 11.0 x 19-in; 11.5 x 19-in, forged aluminum 9.5 x 20 in; 10.5 x 20 in, forged aluminum 9.0 x 20-in; 11.5 x 20-in forged aluminum TIRES, F;R 305/30R19 102Y Pirelli P Zero Trofeo R 255/40R20 97Y; 285/35R20 100Y Dunlop SP Sport Maxx GT600 DSST CTT 245/35R20 91Y; 305/30R20 103Y Pirelli P Zero DIMENSIONS WHEELBASE 112.3 in 109.4 in 96.5 in TRACK, F/R 66.1/64.7 in 62.6/63.0 in 60.6/62.6 in LENGTH x WIDTH x HEIGHT 192.3 x 76.9 x 52.4 in 183.8 x 74.6 x 53.9 in 177.4 x 74.0 x 51.0 in TURNING CIRCLE 37.7 ft (est) 36.6 ft 34.8 ft CURB WEIGHT 3857 lb 3880 lb 3610 lb WEIGHT DIST, F/R 53/47% 55/45% 39/61% SEATING CAPACITY 4 2 4 HEADROOM, F/R 37.4/35.3 in 38.1/- in 37.8/26.0 in LEGROOM, F/R 42.4/29.9 in 44.6/- in 66.7/26.0 in (est) SHOULDER ROOM, F/R 56.9/42.5 in 54.3/- in 53.4/47.3 in CARGO VOLUME 11.3 cu ft 8.8 cu ft 9.2 cu ft TEST DATA ACCELERATION TO MPH 0-30 1.7 sec 1.0 sec 1.0 sec 0-40 2.3 1.5 1.4 0-50 3.1 2.0 1.9 0-60 4.0 2.7 2.6 0-70 5.0 3.5 3.4 0-80 6.2 4.5 4.4 0-90 7.5 5.6 5.6 0-100 9.0 6.9 6.8 PASSING, 45-65 MPH 1.8 1.4 1.3 QUARTER MILE 12.3 sec @ 117.2 mph 11.0 sec @ 125.1 mph 10.9 sec @ 123.7 mph BRAKING, 60-0 MPH 97 ft 94 ft 100 ft LATERAL ACCELERATION 1.06 g (avg) 1.02 g (avg) 1.04 g (avg) MT FIGURE EIGHT 23.6 sec @ 0.84 g (avg) 23.4 sec @ 0.89 g (avg) 23.0 sec @ 0.93 g (avg) 2.3-MI ROAD COURSE LAP 96.17 sec 96.45 sec 96.34 sec TOP-GEAR REVS @ 60 MPH 1500 rpm 2150 rpm 1650 rpm CONSUMER INFO BASE PRICE $75,000 $117,305 $182,050 PRICE AS TESTED $76,150 $117,590 $199,065 STABILITY/TRACTION CONTROL Yes/yes Yes/yes Yes/yes AIRBAGS Dual front, front side, f/r rear curtain Dual front, front side, front curtain Dual front, front side, front curtain, front knee BASIC WARRANTY 3 yrs/36,000 mi 3 yrs/36,000 mi 4 yrs/50,000 mi POWERTRAIN WARRANTY 5 yrs/100,000 mi 5 yrs/60,000 mi 4 yrs/50,000 mi ROADSIDE ASSISTANCE 5 yrs/100,000 mi 5 yrs/60,000 mi 4 yrs/50,000 mi FUEL CAPACITY 19.0 gal 19.5 gal 16.9 gal EPA CITY/HWY/COMB ECON 13/19/15 mpg (est) 16/23/19 mpg 17/24/20 mpg ENERGY CONS, CITY/HWY 259/177 kW-hrs/100 mi (est) 211/147 kW-hrs/100 mi 198/140 kW-hrs/100 mi CO2 EMISSIONS, COMB 1.28 lb/mi (est) 1.05 lb/mi 0.99 lb/mi RECOMMENDED FUEL Unleaded premium Unleaded premium Unleaded premium *SAE certified **553 lb-ft w/temporary 20-sec overboost
    56 replies | 853 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    Yesterday, 07:20 PM
    BMW had the new 2015 F82 M4 out in Long Beach, California for the Grand Prix last weekend. Fortunately, someone was able to record the startup and exhaust note sounds along with a few revs. The engine noise is not exactly what we have come to expect from BMW M. You be the judge but this is not the best sounding inline-6 engine that the M division has ever produced, that much is certain. One of the onlookers yells 'Sounds like my Prius' which may be the best assessment yet.
    52 replies | 379 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    04-07-2014, 10:32 PM
    BimmerBoost would first of all like to state it appreciates that Steve Dinan and the employees at Dinan read and enjoy BimmerBoost. As the emphasis of BimmerBoost is BMW tuning and performance modification the work Dinan does falls under our niche. Recently, BimmerBoost raised the question of if there was hypocrisy on Dinan's part regarding criticism of piggyback tuning devices and Dinan releasing their own piggyback tuning devices. What you are about to read is Dinan's response to those questions. Additionally, BimmerBoost is not a BMW enthusiast website that shies away from strong opinions or raising awareness of controversial topics. That said, we also believe in providing the complete picture and that is why Dinan's request of being able to address the topic is gladly granted. You are an intelligent human being capable of deciding for yourself. BimmerBoost will strive to bring you all the information and sides to a story as we always have so you can come to an informed conclusion. Additionally, BimmerBoost is happy to take Dinan up on their generous offer of touring the Dinan facilities to see firsthand what takes place. These arrangements will be made in private and a report of BimmerBoost's visit to Dinan headquarters will be posted at some point later this year. Steve Dinan: Hi Joseph, We recently saw your post regarding our new Turbotronics project and wanted to clarify a few points to make sure your readers have the correct information. I stand by my comments on "Tech tip Tuesday". Even though we are making an ECU we are still believe software has superior performance and reliability when compared to an ad on ECU. Having said that the new Bosch ECU has proven more difficult to crack than previous models so we have been forced to go the ECU route. BTW this is Dinan's 16th Turbotronics ECU because we used to make them a long time ago but when we got very good at software we went away from them because of the obvious advantages. “Tech Tip Tuesday” was also referring to the existing piggy back boxes on the market. Our goal wasn’t to imply that a piggyback box wasn’t a viable tuning solution, but rather the current ones lack sophistication in which is why they make less power, have more drivability issues, are more prone to setting faults and are not emissions legal. I also mentioned that a box would have to be much more sophisticated in order to work properly and not risk any damage or malfunctions with the vehicle long-term. The reason our software is more expensive than current piggyback systems on the market is the level of work and research that is required to “crack” BMW’s factory computers, the additional cost of the 4 year 50k mile warranty and emissions certification. The cost our R&D, warranty and emission testing when compared to manufacturing the piggy back boxes I see on the market it is more likely they are making more money than Dinan soit is not about money as the person implied it's about doing it right. Most people assume that BMW gives us complete access to the computers, but that is not the case. We have a team of 5 engineers that do nothing but read through every line of code on each ECU to make sure that all of our software allows the car to function properly, doesn’t interfere with other electronics and keeps factory system safeguards in place. As far as the new “Turbotronics” units are concerned, (still in development) they essentially are more than a piggy back box they are a powerful ECU that has many more capabilities that the existing piggy back boxes. To help you understanding the additional capabilities as I said in "TECH TIP Tuesday" the existing boxes send a an adjusted signal to the BMWECU telling it he boost is too low and the ECU then raises the boost to what it thinks is the correct value as does ours. This false value creates errors in Fuel mixture and ignition timing. This can causesmore faults, high catalyst inlet temperatures and a loss of power.In addition when you increase power exhaust temperature will increaseand this must be countered with a slightly richer mixture. Our ECU will have the capability of setting a richer target lambda (fuel mixture) as well as correcting short term trip which is the difference between target and scheduled fuel mixture just to mention a couple of it's capabilities. By matching these two correctly we can reduce knock sensor activity which will make smother performance,protect the catalyst, increase power and allow us to make it emissions legal. We have a lot of exciting new product in the works for N55 powered cars along with products being created for the M235i. Keep an eye on our social media channels for announcements on sales, new products and more of our Tech Tip Tuesday series. Thanks again for your time and we hope this is helpful. If you’re interested, we would love to have you out to the facility to see our operation first hand. Sincerely, Steve Dinan
    50 replies | 933 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    03-17-2014, 10:03 PM
    Finally somebody got this right and invited all the forced induction V8 luxury sedan big boys to play. Every super sedan here is a twin turbocharged V8 except for the Jaguar XFR-S with its supercharged 5.0 liter V8. This comparison is practically perfect if not for the Panamera Turbo being chosen instead of the Panamera Turbo S. Despite being the most expensive car in the comparison the Panamera Turbo is over matched and the slowest car out of the five. Road and Track did not choose the standard E63 AMG 4Matic or the standard M5 but the highest performance versions of each so it should follow that the same be done with the Panamera. You will not see any complaining here as somebody finally managed to get these five together and do some proper testing. Let's start by pointing how the cars differ. The only dual clutch transmission cars in the comparison are the BMW M5 and the Porsche Panamera. The M5 routes its power to the rear wheels just like the Jaguar. The Panamera is the only all wheel drive and dual clutch car. The Audi RS7 and Mercedes E63 AMG S 4Matic both feature all wheel drive but route the power through a more conventional automatic gearbox. The Mercedes 7-speed features an MCT wet clutch packs in place of the torque converter whereas the Jaguar and Audi 8-speed automatics still have torque converters. Read that over a few times if you need to. Here is what the cars weigh in order from lightest to heaviest with front to rear weight distribution percentage following. How accurate these figures are is anyone's guess as the Jaguar XFR-S and BMW M5 are both stated as exactly 4300 pounds which is rather unlikely to say the least: 1. 2014 BMW M5 Competition Package - 4300 lb, 51/49% 1. 2014 Jaguar XFR-S - 4300 lb, 51/49% 3. 2014 Audi RS7 - 4420 lb, 55/45% 4. 2014 Porsche Panamera Turbo - 4440, 52/48% 5. 2014 Mercedes-Benz E63 AMG S 4Matic - 4640, 51/49% Despite the Mercedes-Benz E63 AMG S having the highest curb weight, significantly so, it maintains a respectable 51 to 49 percent weight distribution front to rear. The Audi RS7 on the other hand is the most nose heavy of the bunch and Audi still needs work in this area. It would be nice to get more accurate weight measurements going at least to the 1/10 value but we will take what we can get. The Mercedes 4Matic all wheel drive system adds considerable weight putting the car at roughly 340 pounds heavier than the M5. That said, it puts the power down well as the 3.2 second 0-60 sprint shows which is matched only by the RS7. This is a traction limited stat but that is also why so many cars are going to all wheel drive as power and torque numbers spiral out of control. Here are the cars ordered by their 1/4 mile trap speeds which this network feels is the best representation of straight line potential and prowess: 1. 2014 Mercedes-Benz E63 AMG S 4Matic - 123.1 2. 2014 BMW M5 F10 M5 Competition Package - 122.3 3. 2014 Audi RS7 - 120.3 4. 2014 Jaguar XFR-S - 118.3 5. Porsche Panamera Turbo - 114.4 What is interesting to note is the the E63 AMG S is the fastest car in this test. Why did MotorTrend get a higher trap speed for the F10 M5 Competition Package than the E63 AMG S than Road and Track? That is a good question and it may be due to different cars and different results. The cars are so fast and close to each other that fuel or even the break in can change the results. In this test, the E63 AMG S is the straightline champ both in elapsed time and trap speed. That is with the heaviest curb weight so it should be clear who is truly putting out the most power and torque stock. The objective numbers are what they are and you can see the full results below. The subjective qualities are where it gets interesting as the Jaguar is rated as having the best steering feel. It is followed by the F10 M5 which it is important to note that BMW addressed criticism about the M5's steering feel with the Competition Package. The RS7, E63, and Panamera Turbo all get lackluster ratings. Once all the subjective numbers were added up the M5 finished in first place followed by the E63 in second. The RS7 gets the third place nod with the Jaguar XFR-S interestingly coming in front of the Panamera Turbo which finishes in last place. The M5 wins because it is the most fun to drive. It gets your heart pumping and palms sweating. The E63, RS7, and Panamera Turbo may be great from a stop and getting a good 0-60 time but they are not quite as exciting. Regardless, there is a $100,000+ luxury sedan here to accommodate almost any taste.
    13 replies | 5079 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    04-02-2014, 09:41 AM
    It is getting really hard as an enthusiast to remain a fan of BMW and the M brand. At one time a shining symbol of the automotive enthusiast, the everyday supercar, the pinnacle of the Ultimate Driving Machine ideal, M and BMW as a whole have taken a tumble in the aforementioned areas. Yes, times change and companies need to evolve but there is no reason for a company that claims it 'only makes one thing' to abandon making that thing. Everyone is aware of the BMW i brand and its 'electric mobility' focus. You want to build cars with less horsepower than a blender and that offer an equally annoying aural experience? Go ahead BMW, knock yourself out. BMW is committing tremendous resources to this project and betting big the i brand will pay off. It just may do so but with 100,000 i3 units needing to be sold to break even and 10,000 a year for the i8 talk about a huge risk. Talk about a huge investment. If BMW is putting so many of their resource to work for the i brand why in the world is M not getting a chance to utilize this huge resource allocation and investment to its fullest? Why produce a lightweight halo sports car with tons of high-tech carbon fiber and aluminum only to avoid giving it to the division you already have with a storied history that could actually make the real Ultimate Driving Machine with the platform? BMW says an M version of the i8 does not make sense. M says they want a chance to build one. It seems there is an internal power struggle regarding BMW's philosophy and direction. Why is there a problem here? Let BMW i do their thing and let BMW M do its thing or why even have the two divisions? If BMW M uses the i8 chassis the BMW i8 does not become any less 'i' does it? Perhaps BMW is worried that people actually will opt for a high performance version of the car if given the choice as what other reason is there to not further utilize a platform when BMW is all about platform sharing and increasing sales volume these days? BMW is scared to give customers to the choice which means they may not even believe their own crap. They could but won't give customers an M option. You want to build a front wheel drive BMW and plaster M badged all over it? Fine. You want to race a car you do not even sell and look like complete hypocrites? Fine. You want to build big and heavy M SUV's to pad the bottom line? Fine. You want to add yet another and even bigger SUV to the lineup? Fine. You want to increase Mini and BMW platform sharing creating more front wheel drive BMW's? Fine. You want to kill off the bespoke M motor to share components across motors for maximum profit? Fine. You want to charge customers twice for engine software to unlock power already sitting there? Fine. You want to lock enthusiasts out of their cars with complex encryption so as to avoid the possibility of spending a single penny on additional warranty claims? Fine. You want to continue to push GT variants on us despite their failure in the marketplace? Fine. You want to cut enthusiast models or hardcore CSL variants of the M3/M4 out of the lineup? Fine. You want to abuse your most loyal US fans by refusing to bring over the M3 GTS / CRT / CSL models while having no problem milking us for SUV profits? Fine. You want to take advantage of US enthusiasts with marked up 'limited edition' M models that offer nothing more than cheap cosmetic changes? Fine. You want to avoid taking on Mercedes-Benz AMG Black Series models? Fine. You want to produce M cars without M motors? Fine. You want to dilute the M brand? Fine. You want to sell your soul? Fine. We can forgive this, ALL OF IT, if you just once, just once, didn't spit in enthusiast's faces while robbing them blind. BMW, if you never had the intention of producing a new M1 why in the world did you call the M version of the E82 1-Series the 1M specifically to not use the M1 moniker? Obviously you know what M1 means. Before the 1M ever was named or came out BimmerBoost wrote this about the name: By not naming this vehicle the M1, BMW would be making a stronger statement than simply taking the path that is easiest and most readily identifiable to the average person. By simply giving it a name that breaks the naming convention used for other numerically designated models, M3/M5, and naming it a 1M, they will be making a strong statement to their core audience. A statement which decisively tells the world BMW has not forgotten they once protected the M badge. BMW has not forgotten M1 belongs on the flagship Motorsport model. BMW has not forgotten they once stated SUV's were not fitting for the M division. BMW has not forgotten they once refused to take the path of least resistance with their motors. If they do not use the M1 namesake, it means BMW has not forgotten that their history means more than their marketing. BMW, you did the right thing in naming the 1M the way you did despite thinking the average buyer might not be intelligent enough to comprehend why you broke the standard M naming convention (and with all the people who call it an M1 that says a lot). It is time to do the right thing again and use the M1 name you protected for a reason. It is time to build the Ultimate Driving Machine. It is now or never, either you produce an enthusiast car or just admit you no longer build 'only one thing.' Build the i8 M or M1 as you have put your hardcore and loyal fans through enough and yet we are still here. If you do not, we won't be for much longer. That is absolutely fine. In 2014 the badge on the back of a German car representing the Ultimate Driving Machine says AMG Black Series, not M.
    41 replies | 1283 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    03-27-2014, 09:30 PM
    The new W205 C-Class is a beautiful design evoking many of the design elements of its more expensive lineup siblings. The C300 and C400 look great but what we are really waiting to see is the top of the line high performance C63 AMG variant. It's coming and it is looking quite aggressive. The styling changes of course include the AMG bodywork including the integrated rear diffuser featuring the AMG angled quad exhaust tips. The front gets the more aggressive AMG single bar style grille. The fenders for whatever reason are the only area lacking in increased aggression as there does not appear to be any additional flaring for bigger meat. Is Mercedes AMG saving that sort of aggression that for a Black Series variant? As reported dozens of times already expect the M177 4.0 liter twin turbo V8 under the hood mated to a rear wheel drive powertrain and an automatic transmission. Horsepower should be close to 500 but has yet to be finalized.
    33 replies | 2589 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    04-10-2014, 07:53 PM
    This W204 C63 AMG belongs to BenzBoost member charliekay. He took his car to the same drag strip when tuned both when naturally aspirated and when supercharged. Previously, he ran 11.8 @ 119 when naturally aspirated with an OE Tuning tune. With the addition of the Weistec Stage II 2.3 liter twin screw supercharger his elapsed time improved to 11.1 and his trap speed increased by eight miles per hour to 127.33. That is a solid difference right there especially considering the forced induction run was in warmer weather. @charliekay's full impressions below: Hello all, Last night I finally got around to running the car, after a couple of busy months. Very impressed with the times, and gain overs the N/A setup. The car has the following: - 2008 C63 with Original Tranny - Weistec Stage II Supercharger w/ Oil/Air Seperator - OEM multispoke 19s on front, w/ OEM Conti tyres - OEM 5-spoke 18s on rear, w/ MT ET Streets 265/40 - Full interior with no weight reduction - Pump Fuel - 98RON (equivalent to 93R+M/2) - I only ever use BP Ultimate 98 - iPE Full Valvetronic Exhaust N/A the fastest the car ran was 11.803, this was with the iPE Exhaust and OE Tuning Stage II tune. Unfortunately I cannot find the timeslip for the 11.80 run, but I have one for an 11.83 run I did, which was 1.849 60ft, and trap speed was 119mph For comparison reasons, I used the same car, same wheels (including rubber), same fuel, same track (Sydney Dragway), same exhaust, all with full weight. Obviously it was a different day so different temp, looking at the different time slips, looks like there was a 10 degree Celsius temperature difference between the runs, last night being hotter. Not sure how much time this equates to, but just trying to be 100% clear with the results. So last night after the Stage II was put on, I ran 11,205, 11.181, 11.184, 11.184 again and the last run was the fastest being 11.162. This mean the Weistec charger took a minimum of 6.5/10ths off the N/A time. The reason I say minimum is traction is a problem with that much power, you can feel the car hesitates and jumps a little when it hits second. I think some 16s or 17s with better rubber would be worth 1-2/10ths just in solving the jump into second, not to mention the gains in weight reduction and 60ft gains. Anyways here is the time slip.
    35 replies | 568 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    03-27-2014, 07:42 PM
    This would be funny if it was not so sad. BimmerBoost joked about BMW producing an M version of the 2-Series Active Tourer but things are getting absurdly close to that ridiculous notion coming true. Introducing the BMW 2-Series Active Tourer M Sport. This is your standard Active Tourer 225i but with larger wheels, a body kit, M colored stitching, and some M badging on the interior. You know, as a link to all of those front wheel drive M cars that do not exist. An M version is now closer to reality and the M division simply has lost its luster when you just plaster the M badge on anything, literally anything, in the lineup for extra cash. BimmerBoost would make a bigger of mockery of this if it was not so absurd to begin with. WTF happened to you BMW?
    27 replies | 1588 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    04-08-2014, 07:30 PM
    A 9-Series sedan definitely appears to be on the way with BMW debuting the concept car later this month at the Beijing auto show in China. This car will share the long wheelbase G11 platform that the next generation 7-Series expected to come in 2016 will use. Rolls Royce also will use this platform for the Ghost sedan which currently shares the F01 7-Series platform. The 9-Series will apparently try to bridge a gap between the Ghost and the 7-Series. Is there room in there for a more expensive BMW? Maybe. Mercedes did fail with Maybach when they tried to take the S-Class too far upscale. Rolls Royce is currently positioned as filling that high end sphere and doing well in that role. BMW is all about variants and squeezing out sales but how the 9-Series will differ exactly from the 7-Series and Rolls Royce Ghost remains to be seen. The one area we do know about is the styling which will be based on the Gran Lusso Concept. That concept car actually made a bit more sense as it was a coupe and if it were produced would fill the 8-Series gap. BMW does not have a competitor for the new S-Class coupe. If BMW is making a 9-Series though it is a fairly good bet that a new 8-Series will come as well on this same platform. Twin Turbo V12 power from the N74 seems certain. BMW would likely tweak the larger N74B66 for the 9-Series and leave the smaller N74B60 for the 7-Series to create a point of differentiation that is larger than just cosmetics. That would mean the Ghost and the 9-Series would share the 562 horsepower 6.6 liter version of the V12 which no BMW model currently utilizes. Will the 9-Series cannibalize Ghost sales? Will an 8-Series make a comeback? Is this even a good idea? We will have to wait and see how this all unfolds. Source
    34 replies | 595 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    03-28-2014, 07:03 PM
    General Motors caught the attention of enthusiasts by announcing the upcoming C7 Z06 would not only offer an automatic transmission but that it would shift faster than a dual clutch transmission. GM specifically mentions the Porsche PDK dual clutch shift speed as the target. Enthusiasts are debating whether this transmission can beat the Porsche PDK or if this is GM spin to make the automatic no look like a cost cutting measure. So who is right? Quite possibly everyone. The 8L90 8-speed is not exactly 'cheap' or solely a cost cutting measure for GM. Cost is obviously a factor and the 8L90 is designed to be compatible with the standard C7 torque tube. GM is killing two birds with one stone by having a new 8-speed that will plug right in where the 6-speed currently offered in the C7 fits. The 8L90 is the same physical size as the 6L80 6-Speed it will replace but also eight pounds lighter thanks to aluminum and magnesium components. A dual clutch that can handle the torque and fit in the same physical space is a tall order that would likely require a lot more work. GM could just keep the 6-speed and not do anything at all if they were trying to be cheap but they sure are putting in a lot of effort on the new transmission. The cooling system for example has two inlet ports to provide adequate flow on heavy load and acceleration. This system automatically switches to a single port under lighter load reducing drag for greater efficiency. The internals are stout considering the torque rating is 1000nm or 737 lb-ft. It will be able to in stock form support the LT1 and supercharged LT4. It should handle bolt on upgrades to the Z06 before needing to be internally reinforced. A supercharged 6.2 liter V8 is going to put out a quite a bit of torque. So, GM is not taking shortcuts here. Is it a cheaper route than developing a dual clutch that can handle the LT4 torque and fit their packaging requirements? Absolutely. Is it a shortcut? No. GM has a team dedicated to this transmissions development and it is essentially custom made for the Z06 before it will go in any other applications. This is a transmission designed with sports car performance in mind. That brings us to the question, can it actually shift faster than the Porsche PDK dual clutch transmission? Maybe. The transmission has five clutches. Proponents argue that means it can essentially have five gears pre-selected. However, only two clutches are available at any single time for gear changes. This is not unlike a dual clutch which by definition has two gears engaged. The DCT has the next gear pre-selected and the power flow changes as one clutch engages and the other releases which is limited only by the mechanical speed of the rods. Theoretically the GM 8L90 gearbox can match this aspect of the dual clutch transmission. The question becomes how GM is measuring the shift speed. A torque converter transferring rotational power is a bit 'sloppier' so to speak than a clutch until it locks up. Dual clutch transmissions do not use a torque converter with a wet fluid coupling to transfer power to the clutches meaning direct power application. The torque converter however makes torque application fairly smooth which is a benefit for GM in their four-cylinder deactivation fuel saving mode and when cruising. Both use hydraulic pressure to drive the gears and both can start building hydraulic pressure in anticipation of a gearshift. When it comes time to make a shift, hydraulic pressure is bled from the engaged clutch and applied to the next clutch. This is the exact same mechanism for the DCT or a wet plate multi-clutch automatic like the 8L90. Now, if GM is measuring the shift speed based on the internal gear change speed capability of the clutches, sure, the 8L90 can match a dual clutch as they are mechanically similar and basically doing the same thing. However, are they measuring this through the entire process of a request for a shift, torque application through the converter, and clutches engaging/disengaging to make the gear change? This is not clear and GM has not provided any actual support, numbers, or details on how they are measuring shift speed to back up their 'faster' claim. We will have to wait and see some test results to come to a definitive conclusion here but the GM 8L90 is hardly cheap or antiquated technology. There are similarities in its design to a dual wet clutch transmission system but the major point of divergence is the torque converter and the shift rods. General Motors Rear Wheel Drive Eight Speed Automatic Transmission Technical Paper 2014-04-01 James Michael Hart, Tejinder Singh, William Goodrich General Motors Rear Wheel Drive Eight Speed Automatic Transmission General Motors shall introduce a new rear wheel drive eight speed automatic transmission, known as the 8L90, in the 2015 Chevrolet Corvette. The rated turbine torque capacity is 1000 Nm. This transmission replaces the venerable 6L80 six speed automatic transmission. The objectives behind creation of this transmission are improved fuel economy, performance, and NVH. Packaging in the existing vehicle architecture and high mileage dependability are the givens. The architecture is required to offer low cost for a rear drive eight speed transmission while meeting the givens and objectives. An eight speed powerflow, invented by General Motors, was selected. This powerflow yields a 7.0 overall ratio spread, enabling improved launch capability because of a deeper first gear ratio and better fuel economy due to lower top gear N/V capability, relative to the 6L80. The eight speed ratios are generated using four simple planetary gearsets, two brake clutches and three rotating clutches. The resultant on-axis transmission architecture utilizes a squashed torque converter, an off-axis pump and four close coupled gearsets. The three rotating clutches have been located forward of the gearsets to minimize the length of oil feeds which provides for enhanced shift response and simplicity of turbine shaft manufacturing. The transmission architecture features a case with integral bell housing for enhanced powertrain stiffness. A unique pump drive design allows for off-axis packaging very low in the transmission. The pump is a binary vane type which effectively allows for two pumps in the packaging size of one. This design and packaging strategy not only enables low parasitic losses and optimum priming capability but also provides for ideal oil routing to the controls system, with the pump located in the valve body itself. The transmission controller is externally mounted, enabling packaging and powertrain integration flexibilities. The controller makes use of three speed sensors which provide for enhanced shift response and accuracy. Utilization of aluminum and magnesium components throughout the transmission yields competitive mass. The dedicated compensator feed circuit, used in GM six speed designs, was supplanted by a lube-fed design in order to simplify oil routing and enhance shift response. Packaging is within that of the GM 6L80 design, allowing for ease of application integration. The overall result is a robust, compact, and cost effective transmission which offers significant fuel economy and performance benefit, over its six speed counterpart, and shall provide an attractive balance of overall metrics in the automatic transmission market.
    26 replies | 780 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    04-02-2014, 12:43 PM
    Good to finally see some dragstrip results from turbocharged M113 5.5 liter V8 motors. The C219 CLS55 AMG originally comes from with a supercharged 5.5 liter V8 (M113K) from the factory. Powerhaus Performance ditched the factory 2.1 liter blower that is quickly pushed out of its efficiency range for a pair of turbochargers. They then sought out Eurocharged Performance to tune the turbo setup due to their proficiency with the M113K V8 engine as well as their experience tuning turbos on the motors. The end result is a 4300 pound CLS55 that runs 10's on 93 octane pump gas as the 10.9 @ 127.9 slip shows. Definitely impressive for pump fuel but people will now compare these results to what M113K's have shown with larger blowers namely the recent run of 10.3 @ 134 run for a supercharged car. It is important to note that was done in a much lighter CLK body so not exactly apples to apples and that this is a stock internal motor M113 V8. BenzBoost looks forward to seeing what this CLS can do on race gas with the boost turned up on the twin GTX 3076's if they intend to push it. For now, this is a great start for turbocharged M113 V8 performance especially considering the stock internals and 93 octane fuel.
    17 replies | 1921 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    03-18-2014, 08:22 PM
    It certainly looks like Cadillac has chosen their benchmark luxury sports sedan to beat and that would be the BMW F10 M5. The CTS-V is seen here testing with its main rival and the reason Cadillac likely chose the M5 is the CTS-V like the BMW will be rear wheel drive. Additionally, the M5 won the latest comparison of all the major luxury super sedans so the M5 is a logical target considering it basically invented the segment. What we know about the upcoming Cadillac CTS-V is that it will have a supercharged (likely utilizing the Eaton R1740 TVS blower) 6.2 liter direct injected V8 powerplant. This will be based on the engine in the upcoming C7 Z06 called the LT4. The main question mark is whether the engine for the CTS-V will again be detuned with the CTS-V getting the LSA V8 instead of the C6 ZR-1's LS9 the last time around. With how fast all of the twin turbo V8 sedans out of Germany are Cadillac needs to bring the heat. The car will likely share the upcoming GM 8L90 8-speed automatic going into the Z06 which GM claims shifts faster than the Porsche PDK transmission. That is a very bold claim and yet to be substantiated but if the gearbox does beat the Porsche PDK gearbox in shift speed and it also matches the stated of goal of 738 pound-feet of torque capacity then a tune and pulley CTS-V will likely eat up a tune only M5, E63, Panamera, RS7, etc. Considering the current CTS-V makes 556 horsepower a 50 horse boost at minimum seems within reason. 600 horsepower and roughly 600 pound-feet of torque with the power being routed to the rear wheels and shift speeds that do not give up much to a dual clutch transmission should make the last entry into the next generation luxury mid-size performance sedan battle the strongest. It is not like Cadillac is testing with an F10 M5 to make the CTS-V slower than it. Enjoy the photos below. It sure looks mean as hell:
    22 replies | 1446 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    03-22-2014, 08:43 PM
    You likely have heard of the Aston Martin and Mercedes-Benz technology sharing agreement. Essentially, Mercedes-Benz steps in to assist Aston Martin with their engine and driveline technology. This is the main area where Aston Martin is lacking with their archaic motors. Mercedes and Aston might get cozier though as Mercedes mulls whether an acquisition of the famed British mark is a good idea. Mercedes-Benz currently owns 5% of Aston Martin. Mercedes head Dr. Zetsche stated, “This is a fantastic brand, and we are willing to support its further development." Mercedes will already supply the next generation M177 4.0 liter V8 to Aston Martin. The question becomes whether Aston Martin will be able to stand on its own feet or if there is some traction to a buyout of the brand. The move would make a lot of sense. BMW has Rolls Royce and Volkswagen has the answer in Bentley among other premium brands. Mercedes could potentially add their own British automaker to the mix with the acquisition of Aston Martin. What will happen? Who knows. If Aston continues to struggle Mercedes could scoop the brand up at a bargain. Aston has the styling and brand name while Mercedes already has the technology. It sounds like the acquisition would work well certainly in theory. Source
    12 replies | 2511 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    04-01-2014, 06:32 AM
    Just how big of a restriction are the stock F10 M5 S63TU catted downpipes? Well, fairly large according to the dyno results courtesy of BMS (Burger Tuning) below. You will notice there are two dynographs from BMS F10 M5 with is running their Stage I piggyback tuning box. The lower wheel horsepower graph is in fourth gear and the higher graph is in fifth gear. This is a good illustration of how changing the gear you dyno in can affect the torque reading. Remember the Dynojet is an inertia dyno so it is essentially measuring how fast a set weight is spun. Faster speed (like a higher gear) will change the result and skew figures. Fortunately @Terry@BMS dyno'd the car in both 4th and 5th gear to show the difference the ER Racing catless downpipes provide. The 4th gear baseline shows 598 wheel horsepower and 589 lb-ft of torque at the wheels. This goes up to 623 horsepower and 626 lb-ft of torque for a gain of 25 horsepower and 37 lb-ft of torque at the wheels. In fifth gear the baseline is 628 horsepower 637 lb-ft of torque at the wheels. Essentially, 30 wheel horsepower higher. Be wary of tuners who use higher speeds to try to skew figures or those show will show you a fourth gear baseline and then a fifth gear tuned run. It's an old trick that basically every tuner knows. Regardless, the post ER Racing catless downpipes run shows a gain of 9 wheel horsepower and 15 lb-ft of torque at the wheels. So which is closer to the truth? Well this goes to show how much dyno numbers can vary. The baseline runs were done in cooler weather so that definitely can have an effect on the results. Heat soak should be worse and set in more quickly in warmer weather so that may explain why the 5th gear runs show a smaller difference in the peak figures although the real gains are in the mid-range torque. The main thing to focus on is there are large torque gains in both runs showing the factory catted pipes are a point of restriction and that a good set of catless downpipes is a solid power modification on the F10 M5 S63TU V8.
    17 replies | 1374 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    04-12-2014, 10:31 PM
    It appears the Porsche 991 GT3 engine fire saga due to faulty rod bolts is finally coming to an end. Porsche will replace all 785 991 GT3 3.8 liter flat-6 engines produced up to this point and the new motors will begin production later this month. Porsche is doing their best to appease 991 GT3 and in addition to the new motors will also provide an additional 12 months of warranty for the drivetrain once the original warranty expires which is a nice gesture. Porsche will also document the installation of the new motor and provide a certificate to owners that the car has been updated. This should at least somewhat help the value hit the cars would otherwise take on the secondary market. This is still a black eye but Porsche is doing their best to heal it as quickly and professionally as possible. Porsche notice: Dear Mr. : I am writing as promised to inform you about the current status of our solution to the issue with the Porsche 911 GT3 model you have purchased. We are aware that you are currently faced with an unsatisfactory situation. As a Porsche customer, you rightfully expect excellence in product and service performance. This particularly applies to you as a GT3 customer, as a brand ambassador with a shared passion for Porsche. We are in the final phase of logistics planning and technical validation for the optimized piston rod screw connection and we will start production of the new engines the week of April 22nd. These engines will be distributed worldwide for installation in all 991-generation GT3 models built to date. As soon as the new engine for your Porsche 911 GT3 is available, we will make contact with you again to make specific arrangements. Please be assured that we will document the installation of the new engine into your vehicle and will provide you with a certificate to this effect. Furthermore, as a gesture of our appreciation for your loyalty to Porsche, we will apply an additional 12-month Porsche Approved warranty to your 991 GT3 which will commence upon the expiration of the normal Porsche New Vehicle Limited Warranty. Additionally, we wish to compensate you for your inability to drive your GT3 during this time. Our GT3 Concierge will be in touch with you shortly to discuss the specifics and will also be at your service for any other individual assistance you may need. I apologize once again for the inconvenience caused by this issue and thank you for your patience. Yours sincerely, Tim Quinn Vice President, AfterSales Porsche Cars North America, Inc. Please do not reply to this e-mail. If you have questions, please contact 1-800-PORSCHE. Please read our privacy policy. If you would rather not receive future e-mails from Porsche Cars North America, Inc., please contact 1-800-PORSCHE, or use the manage subscriptions link at bottom. © 2014 Porsche Cars North America, Inc. Legal notice www.porscheusa.com.
    29 replies | 376 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    03-31-2014, 07:40 PM
    Here we have venerable naturally aspirated S85 5.0 liter V10 going up against the new twin turbo S63TU 4.4 liter V8. The convertible M6 is tuned by PP-Performance and the S85 V10 with bolt ons simply will not be able to match the power output and torque of a tuned S63TU. It shows with the M6 taking every run decisively although the M5 shows well considering its bolt on modifications (exhaust, pulley, filter, scoops) and no ecu tune or headers. Would the M5 do better with an aggressive tune and headers? Absolutely. Would the M6 do better with exhaust modifications other than being tune only? Absolutely. Keep in mind this is also the F12 M6 convertible and not the coupe which means the M6 is carrying roughly an extra 300 pounds. It is interesting to note that in the final run where they go up to what appears ~180 miles per hour the M5 inches back. Not nearly enough to make up the ground but it shows the top end strength of the S85 V10 even without forced induction. Still, bolt on S85's are not going to beat tuned S63TU's with the power, torque, and shift speed of the dual clutch transmission working against them. BMW M5 E60 (Mr boomerang) RPI GT Exhaust System RPI St Pully Kit RPI Block off plates RPI Scoops BMC Filter RPi SV1 Oil Cooler BMW M6 F12 PP-Performance 726hp
    15 replies | 1412 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    03-17-2014, 07:51 PM
    An excellent start to the 2014 Formula 1 season for Mercedes AMG. Lewis Hamilton took the pole position in qualifying for the Australian Grand Prix so Mercedes showed it once again has exceptional qualifying pace. Red Bull Racing qualified in second place with driver Daniel Ricciardo but Sebastian Vettel managed only the 13th the 13th position. With Rosberg qualifying in third Mercedes had very strong starting positions for both of its drivers. Unfortunately the race did not start well for Hamilton who was only on five cylinders. You should know by now the new 2014 cars have turbocharged 1.6 liter V6 motors. With Hamilton down on power Rosberg overtook him for first place. Rosberg never looked back and controlled the race. Defending champion Sebastian Vettel lost the KERS system and could not compete so he retired on the fifth lap. He apparently was not very pleased and it is interesting to see the practically invincible Red Bull Racing have such a degree of mechanical trouble. His teammate finished in second place but was disqualified due to exceeding the fuel flow limits. Red Bull Racing is appealing the decision and blaming the readings on faulty equipment provided by the FIA. Obviously this is just the beginning with 18 races remaining so we will have to see how things play out but all the teams should get stronger and solve any mechanical issues as things move forward. For now, Mercedes can feel confident they have a real shot at the title in 2014. Results below, 15 of the 22 starters finished the race. Mercedes Nico Rosberg, 1st "That was an incredible day for us. To start the season with a win is unbelievable and I have to say a big thank you to everybody who was involved in building our car over the winter. I always dreamed of having such a strong Silver Arrow and now it seems we are there. In the race, everything went perfectly for me. My start was great and I was able to push from there until the end, with our fuel consumption well under control. However, despite our success today, we also know that there is still some work to do. We saw over the weekend that reliability is still a concern and it prevented us from having a strong two-car finish. We have two weeks to improve that. I am very much looking forward to Malaysia and I would love to race again tomorrow!" Lewis Hamilton, DNF "My start didn't feel great today and I had a lot less power than usual when pulling away, so it was obvious immediately that something was wrong. It looks like we only had five cylinders firing and, while I wanted to keep going, we had to play safe and save the engine. It's unfortunate but that's racing and we will recover from this. We have a great car and engine, and the pace was really strong today as Nico clearly showed. Big congratulations to him and the team for achieving the win, it's a fantastic result for us. Of course I'm disappointed with my own race and when I think about all the work that has gone on back at our factories, it's tough to have a costly hiccup. However we have achieved an incredible amount to get here, to be at the front and to be so competitive; we will bounce back and learn from this. There is a very long way to go this season." Toto Wolff, Mercedes team executive director "It was a day of light and shadow for us. Nico did a perfect job this afternoon: a great start and a really controlled drive all the way to the final lap. He delivered the car's performance how he needed to, when he needed to, and took a very composed and deserved victory. On the other side, we were disappointed to lose Lewis so early after a misfiring cylinder forced him to retire. He had done everything right this weekend until that point and it was a situation beyond his control. We know that reliability will be crucial to this long season and we will be working hard to improve the situation for the race in Malaysia. Finally, this victory has a very special meaning for us, too. I would like to dedicate it to Michael, who has been in all our thoughts this weekend. He will keep fighting, as only he knows how, and we are sending all our strength to him today." Paddy Lowe, Mercedes team executive director (technical) "Today's race was all about delivering on the potential we had shown in testing and on the hard work that has been put into this project since its beginning. It was fantastic to get the win on behalf of the hundreds of people in Brackley, Brixworth and Stuttgart who have contributed to our performance over several years. A special mention must also go to Ross. I have come relatively late to this campaign and would like to thank him for the contribution he made in the years leading to this point, which we can now build upon. It was hugely disappointing for all of us that Lewis was not able to convert his pole position but this is a day to focus on our success rather than failures. We know that this season will be more of a marathon than a sprint and that reliability will play a decisive role. After taking a moment to savour this win, we will be hard at work to improve further for the next race in Malaysia." Sauber Adrian Sutil, 12th "It was an exciting race, and especially the start, but luckily I went through without any incidents. We had a few issues with the powertrain during the first stint, but after the pit stop that improved. Nevertheless this cost us a lot of time that we couldn't recover. I was on a two-stop strategy, but we switched to a one stop because of the safety car. This could have worked well, but the safety car phase didn't help us. In addition we were simply too slow, but we managed to finish the race, which was our goal. We came close to the points, but we need to improve our speed. There is a lot of data now to analyse and we can only improve. I hope that we will progress quickly." Esteban Gutierrez, 13th "It was a different kind of racing today, but definitely something we take as a reference. In general we are missing speed and it's a challenge to be able to compete at the front like this. As a team, we need to make sure we put everything together because the lack of speed we have on the straight is quite significant. However, we can be very happy that we both finished the race today. This means a step forward for the team and its reliability." Monisha Kaltenborn, Sauber team principal "Overall it was a positive start to the new Formula One era with a surprising result. We knew that our performance was not where it should be. Therefore we concentrated on finishing the race with both cars and being ready in order to take any opportunity, should there be one. Unfortunately we didn't make it into the points. However, we gained a lot of insight this weekend and we know what we need to work on in order to improve. We now take this experience into the next race weekend." Giampaolo Dall'Ara , Sauber head of track engineering "Esteban started on the harder tyres, but because of his incident on lap one he had to pit immediately. We took the opportunity to change to the soft tyres and split the remaining race in two sections. He was on the safe side with the fuel and was able to push, but in the end we were not fast enough. Adrian on his side had a problem with one of the electric motors in the first stint and lacked electric power. Finally, we managed to recover and re-activate the system. After the safety car period we reverted his strategy to a one stop race, but this didn't change much. Our main issue today was a lack of pace, and we know that we have to work on this." Force India Nico Hulkenberg, 7th "Seventh place is a positive way to start the season. I was very happy to see the chequered flag - the first time I've done so in Melbourne - and it's important to score some good points early on. I made a strong start and enjoyed good track position for the first two stints when I was running up in fourth. The only real issue I had was some front left graining on the soft tyres, which never really cleared up and that compromised my first two stints. It was a shame to lose two positions at my second stop but it looks like some of the cars around us have a bit more pace at the moment. I want to thank the team for the amazing job they've done over the winter and this weekend to get us to this point. It's been a great effort and it's nice to reward everyone with some points at the first race." Sergio Perez, 11th "I'm satisfied to finish the race, but disappointed not to score points. My race became very difficult on lap one when I got hit by the Sauber of Gutierrez at turn three. It gave me a puncture and I had to return to the pits very slowly, which dropped me to the back of the pack. After that I just tried to keep a consistent pace on the medium tyres and I was quite fortunate that the safety car came out, which helped me recover some positions. Points were close, but my progress was hurt by being stuck behind the Sauber of Adrian for such a long time. It's positive to finish the race because it gives the team lots of information and hopefully that will make us stronger for Malaysia." Vijay Mallya, Force India team principal and managing director "Starting the season with points is what we were aiming to do so we're happy with today's result. Nico drove an excellent race and was able to fight near the front for most of the race, eventually earning us six points. Sergio's race was much more challenging with a puncture on lap one making it difficult for him to show the pace of the car. The safety car allowed him to catch up, but he just missed out on reaching the top ten. Overall we are pleased to see both cars make the finish in this new era of Formula One and we have learned a huge amount. I congratulate everyone in the team for all their hard work over the winter and I look forward to Malaysia in two weeks' time where we will aim to build on what we learned this weekend." Toro Rosso Jean-Eric Vergne, 9th "This is obviously a good result, even though the car was very difficult to drive. We had problems with the brakes which made us lose a lot of time but at the end we are all satisfied to finish the race with two cars in the points. I'm very pleased with the overall three points especially for the team, more than for myself. After a long difficult time and so much hard work this winter, this is a great relief for all the guys in the garage and it's nice for us drivers to be able to give them something back. It looks like things are turning well and hopefully it will always be better from now on. As for my mistake in the last corner, I was trying to defend myself from Mercedes, looking for the best line to get a good exit, but I went on the grass and I was lucky enough not to spin the car. It's really a shame but it's just the first race and I'm sure we will have plenty of opportunities to score more points. Overall, it's a good result today." Daniil Kvyat, 10th "It was a very intense afternoon and finishing my first race with a point is a great feeling. It was a fantastic first Grand Prix weekend with the team, everyone worked really hard and scoring points was a great way to end it. So well done to everyone! The start was a bit messy, but after that I managed to get into a rhythm and the car seemed competitive compared to those around us. It was close at the end with Jev, but I had to save fuel towards the end, so I was not going to attack him. I never expected to score a point in my first race, so it feels amazing. It's a real boost for us and now we have to keep on working hard and if we keep on the way we are going, then we can look forward to a really positive season." James Key, Toro Rosso technical director "Melbourne likes us. We did a good qualifying session, finishing in 6th and 8th position and the team managed to finish the race with both cars in the points. This is really a good achievement, also considering that this was the first time for us to cover a full race distance. This is obviously the reward for a very good job done by both the team and Renault. I'm very happy for Daniil, who has just become the youngest driver to score a point in his first ever Formula One race. This is very promising and I'm convinced that this is the first of a long series. Now we have to focus on the next race in Malaysia, where we hope to continue working in the right direction and bring home some more points." Ricardo Penteado, Renault Sport F1 track support leader "A great start for the partnership with a double points finish. The cars ran reliably and were on the pace, so we can be really happy with the performance today. The energy and fuel management systems worked perfectly all weekend and we were able to extract close to the full potential from the Power Unit. We can still improve in some areas but it was a solid start and there is definitely more to come as we explore the limits of the PU as the season goes on." Lotus Romain Grosjean, DNF "In a way, it was a pretty positive day. I expected to do around 15 to 20 laps in the race after all the issues we've had this weekend, and we managed 45! We've learnt a lot today and all the changes made to the car have been positive. We still have a long way to go, but at least I know more about tyre usage, all my engineers know where we need to improve with the chassis, and we've learnt a lot about aero balance and fuel consumption. Of course there's more to do with the energy management and recovery and some work yet with the braking. We've still got lots of work to do, but we're definitely heading in the right direction." Pastor Maldonado, DNF "It was obviously very disappointing, but if you look at the positives we did more laps than in the pre-season which is quite encouraging as we have more data which is very important for making progress. We had a very negative free practice but we did plenty of laps during the race which is very positive for the team. I'm looking forward to the next race and we'll keep pushing." Federico Gastaldi, Lotus deputy team principal "Though the results do not show it, everyone in the team has done a fantastic job in very challenging circumstances. Both our cars finished with problems related to the same MGU-K component so we and Renault F1 Sport both know where we have to focus for our improvements heading to Malaysia. It's clear we also have other improvements to make, but the team spirit and resolve has not diminished. We know what we have to do and we will do it." Alan Permane, Lotus trackside operations director "In simple terms, we've finished a disappointing weekend with a disappointing race, with neither car finishing. However the 45 laps completed by Romain's car is the longest run completed by the E22 and while we accept we're way behind, we're working hard to catch up. It's not the way we want to go racing. We need to make a big leap forward in Malaysia and we're working every hour to ensure we make this leap. I'm very sure and very confident that we'll see a big improvement in two weeks' time." Julien Barbieux, Renault Sport F1 team support leader "After such a difficult built up to the race it was some sort of plus to get two cars to just under half distance, but shows we are still not at the level we want. We have struggled all weekend to find the right balance between reliability and performance, but we seemed to turn a corner today and Pastor and Romain were both on the pace of the top 10. Unfortunately both drivers suffered from a malfunctioning MGU-K and were forced to retire. We've learnt a huge amount from the running as it was the first time we have completed a longer run on both cars. We have improved operationally and there will be a huge combined effort from Viry and Enstone to improve on this performance in Malaysia and get closer to the full potential of the car." Marussia Max Chilton, 14th "Today's race was by no means perfect but we have started the season with a two-car finish, and on my side a 14th place as well, so we have to be pleased with that. The start was obviously extremely concerning. I was on the grid preparing for the formation lap with the usual procedures and suddenly everything just cut out. At that point I was worried that my race was already over, but the team did a fantastic job to push me off the grid and back to the garage where they reset the car and I was able to start the race from the pit lane. From that point on I knew we had an important job to do to get the car home, but at the same time do the hard work to we needed to be able to evaluate the car over a race distance. It was quite pleasing to be able to catch Ericsson in the process. We've learned an awful lot today that will stand us in good stead as we prepare for the next race in Malaysia and also to start developing the car for the longer term. After a tough time in testing when we did not achieve all the mileage we had hoped for, it's good to take home a 14th place finish from the first race of the season. It's a nice reward for all the hard work across the whole team." Jules Bianchi, NC "The problem at the start was really quite worrying and I did not expect to be able to race, but the team got me to the garage and fought hard to get me back on track. I was six laps down when I did rejoin and of course I was never going to recover from that, but that was not the point. Being in the race - and finishing it - enabled us to gather the maximum amount of information and test various strategies for maximising the power unit. In many ways it was more like a test than a race for me, which was far from ideal, but as is the case in testing, the mileage was important and this will be crucial for the engineers to start moving us forward. Hopefully I will be able to benefit from this next time around. I am pleased that we have some reward for all the hard work and we look forward to better things in Malaysia." John Booth, Marussia team principal "It was a heart-stopping start to our race, to say the least, but the way we recovered from the issues we experienced with both cars was very pleasing and ultimately we achieved our objective of a two-car finish, albeit Jules missed the first six laps. Our performance did fall shy of our overall target, due to the specific problems we encountered and, more generally, being a little on the back foot. Having said that, this race was by no means a reflection of our potential and we are encouraged by the feedback from both drivers, which points to very good signs for our development. We seem to have a car that is reliable for the race and as a result we leave Melbourne with a mountain of data for the engineers to pore over in order to begin the work of fully optimising our package. What this means is that from Malaysia we can start to focus a little more on extracting more performance from the car. It has been a tough journey to get to this point and today is actually a big achievement for the team and our partnership with Scuderia Ferrari. We can feel proud and positive for the season ahead." Claudio Albertini, head of customer teams power unit operations, Scuderia Ferrari "On balance the race debut for the partnership between Scuderia Ferrari and Marussia F1 Team was positive. We were able to get both cars to the finish in the first race of the season, which is an important achievement, but above all we have a good starting point for further improvement. It's a shame that neither Max nor Jules managed to start from the grid; the handicap for Max has not substantially affected his final position, but the same cannot be said for Jules, who saw his race compromised even before the start. The data that we could collect this weekend and, in particular, this afternoon will be very useful to improve the contribution to the performance of the team going forward." Caterham Kamui Kobayashi, DNF "That isn't how I wanted my first race back to go, and I'm sorry for the team and for Felipe (Massa) that both our races ended early. I had a really good start but then into turn one I made contact with Felipe. From the initial data it looked like I had a brake system issue which obviously meant I couldn't do much about the contact and when we got the car back and looked at the information in much more detail it was clear that was the problem. After the race I went to the stewards and they went through the data from the car and confirmed this was the case. We'll have a close look at what caused that problem and make sure we fix it. "It's been a tough weekend for us, but we still have a lot more data that will help us keep improving, and the really positive thing is that we were still quite competitive, even with the issues we had on Friday. Race two is Malaysia, one of our team's home races, and we'll keep pushing there, just as we will all weekend." Marcus Ericsson, DNF "Even though my first race in F1 ended with a DNF I'm still proud of the way we fought today. It's been a very difficult weekend overall, one of the hardest in my whole career, but we still showed a bit of the potential we have in the first laps of the first stint when I passed Sutil and was running well in twelfth. My first ever live pit stop a Grand Prix went really well but then unfortunately an oil pressure problem forced us to stop - we don't know what caused that yet but if we hadn't had that I think we'd have finished ahead of the Marussias as I was pretty comfortable ahead of Chilton until the issue. "Friday was tough, obviously, but we had a better Saturday and then today we started to show some of the race pace this car has. For the last few laps of the first stint I was driving with pretty flat spotted tyres but the rear was still behaving well and the Power Unit felt good. That's encouraging for the next race in Malaysia which is on a track I've raced at before and one I like, so I'm leaving Australia in a positive frame of mind and just want to get on with it again as soon as possible!" Cedrik Staudohar, Renault Sport F1 track support leader "It was a shame that Kamui retired so early on as we had a strong start but his accident was due to an issue with the rear brakes on the formation lap. After that we focused all our attention on Marcus and it was going well, running in the top 12 for much of the first stint. Then the engine oil level started to decrease dramatically, so to save the Power Unit for future races we stopped the car. We've learnt a huge amount from this weekend. We know the car is fundamentally OK and once we've looked at all the gremlins, we are sure we will come back stronger in Malaysia and get to the finish." Williams Valtteri Bottas, 6th "The car performed very well today which is looking encouraging for the season ahead, and on the whole as a team we can be pleased that we have made a good step forward from last season. I'm a little disappointed with myself because I was pushing a bit too hard and hit the wall which caused a puncture and put me back a long way. I spent the rest of the race trying to make up for that mistake and managed to make some good overtakes, but I need to learn from this and make sure it doesn't happen again. It felt great to be able to race hard with people around me and I want to say a big thank you to the race team and everyone back at Grove and Brixworth who have done a great job with this car. We should have finished higher today than we did with the pace we had and I'm looking forward to seeing what we can do in Malaysia." Felipe Massa, DNF "I'm obviously very disappointed as I had the sort of car capable of challenging for a podium today, but the incident in the first corner ruined my race. I tried to have a calm start and not take any risks, but was hit from behind after Kobayashi braked too late and there was nothing I could do to avoid being taken out of the race. It's a shame but there are a lot of positive things that the team can take from this weekend in terms of pace and reliability, so I'm just thinking about the next race and having a strong result there." Rod Nelson, Williams chief test and support engineer "Valtteri drove a fabulous race and the team worked really well together, handling some tricky situations that came our way. Valtteri managed his race well and had a strong start getting up to P6, but a mistake unfortunately forced him to pit for a tyre change and he had to overtake the same cars for a second time, showing some great race craft in the process. It was very unfortunate for Felipe to be knocked out of the race at the start and we can only wonder where he might have finished if that hadn't happened. On balance we leave Australia on a positive note. The car has performed well and the team has worked very well together on what proved a busy race for the pit wall, so we head into the next race with good momentum." Pirelli Paul Hembery, Pirelli motorsport director "In Melbourne, we've been very pleased with the performance of our tyres in the first race of a new era of Formula One. While the drop in temperature caused some previously unseen light graining issues on some cars' front-left tyres, it was not particularly severe and did not really affect the stint length. In most cases, it disappeared as the laps went on. The medium tyre, used largely at the end of the race, covered practically half the total distance for many drivers and performed in a very consistent manner. The teams of course all have the same challenge and we are still at the very outset of the season, where engineers work to maximise the chassis and tyre performance package." Ferrari Fernando Alonso, 5th “I’d have liked to start the season with a podium, but getting both cars to the flag is a good result, which can give us confidence, especially on the reliability front. I had some problems with the electric motor at the start and had to make a few changes from the steering wheel, but after the first ten laps everything went well. When I managed to pass Hulkenberg after the pit stop my pace was definitely better, although it was impossible to overtake. 35 seconds down on the leader is too big a gap and to work out what we need to do to close that gap, we will need to analyse the race, work out what are the strong and weak points on the car and with that in mind, the laps I did behind Nico can provide very useful information. We are a great team and I have total faith in our guys, because they did a great job today. We still have lots to learn about this new Formula One, as the race was very strange and very difficult. But it’s only the start. We must concentrate on doing better in Malaysia.” Kimi Raikkonen, 8th “That wasn’t a straightforward race. At the start, I managed to get away well and even though I was hit from behind by another car at the first corner, my car was undamaged. The speed was good, but at one point I was suffering with graining on the front tyres, I had very little grip and a lot of understeer. From then on, the car’s handling was not the same. When it was time for the first stop, we had to do a double stop and that cost me a place. It’s definitely too early to make any definite judgement, because even if at the moment we don’t seem to be in great shape, we still managed to finish the race, scoring valuable points. We can’t be pleased with this result and we know there are many areas where we need to improve. But I’m sure that analysing the data from this first race will give us a clearer idea of the direction to work in.” Stefano Domenicali, Ferrari team principal “The first race of the championship has provided a clear picture of the hierarchy at the start of season. It’s also shown which teams appear to have done the best job of dealing with these new regulations. Today, we achieved our objective in terms of reliability, but the gap we need to make up, especially to Mercedes, was clear to see. The information we have gathered this weekend clearly points to the direction we must take and what areas need the most work. It will be important to catch up as quickly as possible and react in the way this team has always proved capable of doing. Our engineers know what the priorities are and which areas need the most immediate attention.” Pat Fry, Ferrari chassis director “Going into this race, getting both cars to the finish seemed like the most difficult task, but in the end, we managed it. Today we saw how reliability can never be taken for granted: it caught some people out and it also affected our performance at some stages of the race. On both the F14 Ts, we had some electrical problems, especially on Kimi’s car, which meant he couldn’t use all the car’s potential. Fernando found himself behind Hulkenberg for many laps and he was only able to show what the car was capable of once he got ahead thanks to a spot on pit stop strategy. Kimi got a great start, but then for much of the race he suffered with graining on the front tyres and thus found himself having to defend, without being able to attack. There is much work ahead if we are to improve the car’s performance. We are up against several very strong opponents, but we have all the right tools to get the job done of closing the gap between us.” McLaren Kevin Magnussen, 3rd “It’s just fantastic to be on the podium! What happened today just feels surreal. Being on the podium in the first race of my Formula 1 career - it’s amazing. My ‘moment’ at the start was quite scary - I got on the power a bit too quickly, and nearly lost it. But the car was fantastic today - I was always able to place it exactly where I wanted, and I had the pace to fight the Red Bull. I had a bit of a go at Daniel towards the ends of the race, but didn’t quite have the speed to get past. I want to say a big congratulations to the team for doing such a good job over the winter and for working so hard to prepare me for this - it’s just crazy! Where do we go from here? Well, we need to continue improving. And I’m sure we will. I’ll try to learn as much as I can, and to carry this experience forward to Malaysia. It’s a completely different circuit, so there’s no guarantee we’ll have the sort of speed we showed here today, but I’m sure the team will keep pushing as hard as they’ve done already this year. I’m very happy, and I’m sure the guys are happy to be leading the constructors’ world championship, as indeed I am too. That’s a big boost, and the guys completely deserve it. Me? I’ll just keep pushing as hard as I can.” Jenson Button, 4th “It was a great drive by Kevin today - I had a lot of fun chasing him and Daniel down at the end of the race, but my tyres were several laps older than theirs, so it was always going to be tricky. Still, I had a good race - the car’s balance wasn’t quite right when I was in traffic - I struggled with understeer when I was behind people - but the car worked very well in clear air. For some reason, it seems to be more difficult to overtake now than it used to be, so we had to do it during the pit stops. During my second stop, we damaged the nose - which made it a bit cooler in the cockpit! - but the guys did a great job of putting me in the right place at the right time. When the Safety Car came out, I quickly dived into the pit lane at the last second - which gained me a couple of places. And then the second stop gained me a couple more. They were both great calls. As a team, I think we can be very proud of the job we did today. I don’t think we expected to be leading the constructors’ world championship at the end of this weekend, but I think the pace in the car is generally there: in clear air, we seem capable of fighting every team except one. I’m really looking forward to getting back in the car in Malaysia. It’s been an emotional day for me, but it’s been great to have my sister, my fiancée and lots of friends around me, so that definitely helped.” Eric Boullier, McLaren racing director “To be in first place in the constructors’ world championship is a very nice feeling, but let’s not forget that today’s race was only the first of 19, and I’ll be a lot happier if we’re still in first place in the constructors’ world championship after the 19th race! Having said that, I’m not making any predictions, and it’s clear that we’ve got a lot of work to do in order to close the performance gap between our car and the fastest car. Kevin scored 18 of the 33 constructors’ world championship points we racked up today, Jenson 15, and both guys drove superbly. Indeed, Kevin’s drive was one of the finest performances by a Formula 1 rookie in living memory. Despite his youth and inexperience, he drove like a man who’d notched up 100 grands prix already. It was a complex and challenging race, yet he managed those complexities and challenges faultlessly. Jenson recovered skilfully from his disappointing qualifying result, which was the result of his not being able to put in a final quick lap owing to inopportune yellow flags, and drove the sort of measured yet combative race that he’s become famous for. Finally, I want to give a huge amount of credit to the guys, not only here in Melbourne but also in Woking and Brixworth, who have done such sterling work to deliver such a solid and reliable car for Kevin and Jenson to race here today. Our next stop is Malaysia, which will be hot and hard. But we’re ready for the challenge.”
    16 replies | 1539 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    03-27-2014, 01:54 AM
    What you see is not a Halloween prank. Someone (plates appear to be Russian) thought it would be a good idea to make their F30 3-Series look like it had a few unfortunate high speed run ins with pedestrians. It is admittedly effective and attention grabbing but what is this person thinking? If you want to meet police officers this is one way to get to know your local law enforcement department. BimmerBoost would love to hear from the owner and his/her thought process. Preparing for the Zombie Apocalypse? Fan of Carmageddon?
    8 replies | 1910 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    03-25-2014, 05:37 AM
    Prior-Design has some excellent widebody options for European vehicles and they added to their catalog with the new PD6XX widebody kit for the F12 and F13 BMW M6 and 6-Series. The body kit package consists of a new front bumper, side skirts, rear bumper, diffuser, spoiler, fenders, and hood. The design definitely makes for a much more aggressive looking 6-Series than the OEM design and overall compliments the F12/F13 well. The transition from rendering to real life means Prior-Design ditched the ridiculous hood scoop on the computer renderings. The real life car actually looks better the pre-production computer models. The front fender work could be cleaner around the vents and the hood is a bit much but overall this is well done Prior-Design widebody work. - Prior-Design PD6XX Front Bumper - Prior-Design PD6XX Side Skirts - Prior-Design PD6XX Rear Bumper - Prior-Design PD6XX Rear Add-on Spoiler/Diffusor - Prior-Design PD6XX Front Wide Fenders - Prior-Design PD6XX Rear Widenings - Prior-Design PD6XX Bonnet/Engine Cover - Prior-Design PD6XX Rear Trunk Spoiler
    8 replies | 1894 view(s)
More Activity