Close

Activity Stream

Filter
Sort By Time Show
Recent Recent Popular Popular Anytime Anytime Last 24 Hours Last 24 Hours Last 7 Days Last 7 Days Last 30 Days Last 30 Days All All Photos Photos Forum Forums Articles Articles
Filter by: Popular Articles Last 30 Days Clear All
  • MM Performance's Avatar
    04-04-2015, 02:53 AM
    New stock turbo World Record! Got it done today as promised with Terry helping me dyno tune. 80F rainy and muggy outside, plenty of humidity, and it didn't matter, got the new WR thanks to the MMP turbo intakes! Will post more data later but here is the dyno picture for now. This was on my own personal daily driver car with 90k miles on it, 2007 6AT 335i coupe. Also ran leak down on it recently and 2 cylinders are at about 20% so not the most power producing engine out there. A healthier engine will definately see more power. Power mods: MMP turbo intakes JB4 custom tuning backend and user settings fuel it stage 2 LPFP dual meth injection DPs without cats Big Tom intercooler TFT charge pipe custom 3" intercooler up pipe NGK .022" gapped spark plugs fuel: straight E85 run 21 is 4th gear, run 23 is 5th gear. oh and this is on a 6AT with 3% more drivetrain loss than MT. Adjusted for MT drivetrain loss, this would be 512whp
    71 replies | 1830 view(s)
  • andy_divers's Avatar
    03-31-2015, 03:56 PM
    After many months of testing and thousands of miles now logged on our first few kits its into full production mode. We are also proud to announce a much lower price of $5999 for our 62mm "Hot Side" kit. A few things allowed us to do this... better buying and pricing on larger quantity orders have brought cost down, but the biggest change is the intake. The original kit included a high temp resin carbon fiber intake. However, the producer of the intake was not reliable and after not being able to find a new outlet to produce them we made the decision to step away. The intake is now a 6061 aluminum mandrel bent intake with the K&N filter still located behind the left headlight. I really wanted the CF intake, but it looks to be a blessing. No longer including a CF intake paired with parts savings has dropped the kits' price almost $900 without sacrificing quality, fit, or performance. http://www.ad-eng.net/store/p25/AD_Engineering_BMW_N54_Single_Turbo_Kit_%28_135i%2F335i_%29.html Keep an eye out as we add the AD Engineering Intercoolers and Catch Can over the next few weeks AD Engineering BMW N54 Single Turbo Kit ( 135i/335i ) $5,999.00 - $7,099.00 The AD Engineering BMW N54 Single Turbo Kit is now available for purchase. This kit starts with a ceramic coated sch10 stainless steel 6-2-1 tubular bottom mount manifold with T4 turbo flange and 44mm wastegate outlet. Attached to this high flowing manifold is a Tial MVR 44mm wastegate and Precision T4 CEA billet compressor turbocharger with a ceramic coated turbine housing for both heat barrier and corrosion resistance. Exhaust gas exits the turbine wheel into a 3" 304L stainless mandrel bent downpipe with interlocked flex coupler that merges into twin outlets allowing it to easily bolt to the factory or any aftermarket replacement exhaust system. Fresh air is fed to the billet compressor wheel via a 3" diameter 6061 aluminum intake after being filtered by a K&N high flow filter located behind the left headlight. Heat shielding is use on the intake tube to keep radiant heat from the turbo manifold from heating the air prior to reaching the compressor. The compressor outlet carries the charged air toward the intercooler where a 2.5" coupler is location at the OEM breakpoint allowing easy connection to an AD Engineering front mount intercooler or any other factory replacement intercooler you may already have. Additionally, the kit features a new left side utherane dampened engine mount to replace the weak OEM oil filled mount. The urethane mount provides a firm feel without the harsh vibrations of a solid mount. From the top, the kit appears to give the engine bay a stock look with only the air filter and heat shield being the only real visible changes. This Stainless steel heat shield is lined with a heat insulating weave protecting the valvecover, gasket, and wiring harness as well as keeping the underhood temperatures down. O-ring block fitting and one piece crimped line assure oil is fed and returned from the turbo leak free. O-ring fittings are also used to block off coolant holes in the block and a new aluminum coolant manifold is used to transfer coolant bwtween the waterpump and engine block. Key features: -Bottom mount design is both efficient and keeps heat away from temperature sensitive components -Precision turbocharger - highest power producing turbo per millimeter -All quality namebrand components -No cutting or need to relocate anything (i.e. coolant reservoir) -Downpipe outlet and compressor outlet are in stock locations so any stock or factory replacement exhaust and intercooler attach with no modifications needed -included urethane dampened engine mount (usually not included when comparing other kits) -all new gaskets, hardware, and hose to complete installation. No running to the auto parts store or dealership for the nickel/dime parts -detailed and illustrated install instructions Included in the base kit ( “Hot Side Kit” ) -AD Engineering Stainless Steel tubular manifold -Precision 6262 JB T4 Turbo -3" Stainless Steel Downpipe -Tial MVR Wastegate -1.75" Stainless Steel Dumptube -Turbo Hot Side Intercooler Charge Tube -3" 6061 Turbo Intake -K&N Air Filter -Stainless Steel and insulated Heat Shield -Urethane Engine Mount -Coolant Block Manifold and Pipe -Coolant Blockoff Plugs -Oil Drain Plug -Turbo Oil Feed Block Fitting and SS Braided Line -Turbo Oil Return Fitting and SS Braided Line -New OEM Exhaust Manifold Donuts, Studs, and copper nuts -All Necessary Couplers, Clamps, hoses, gaskets, and hardware Optional items: -Ball Bearing Turbo -PTE 6766 T4 turbo (JB or BB) -AD Engineering Intercooler (850HP or 1000hp) -Recirculated Wastegate Dumptube Note: Turbo kits are built to order and take 3-4 weeks to ship. Please call if you need quicker delivery. Carbon Fiber Intake is NO LONGER included
    71 replies | 2111 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    03-20-2015, 03:21 PM
    Magazine test numbers are becoming useless. Nevermind the fact some manufacturers like Ferrari hold magazines hostage if the numbers do not show what they want some of them just flat out cheat. Have you ever heard of press files being used in magazine test cars? What it means is that the car being tested is not the car you will be buying. BMW apparently had several press files for the F10 M5. This all really started with the turbo era as you could not play around with output using software back in the naturally aspirated M era the way you can now. So, some manufacturers turn up boost and disable certain safeguards (limp mode) in the ECU and send the car to be tested. It's a press beater car anyway so they do not care what happens to it. It makes sorting out what is real and fake incredibly difficult. For example, the fastest Lamborghini Huracan in the world runs the 1/4 mile in 10.59 @ 129.12 on a 1/4 mile drag strip. That is an aftermarket ECU tuned example mind you. So how does MotorTrend get 10.6 @ 132.8 out of it? What about Car and Driver's 10.4 @ 135? Somehow real world results on the drag strip do not match the magazines. This latest test is no exception as 12.0 @ 119 is indeed silly quick. That is not to say the F80 M3 and F82 M4 DCT can not replicate these numbers stock as they can. In negative density altitude with race gas. So owners need great weather and race gas to match Car and Driver. Or is it more likely that Car and Driver is not testing on a drag strip (they aren't) thereby inflating their numbers? Is it also possible BMW might be passing around press files again? Is it a combo? Who knows, but it is becoming increasingly difficult to trust magazine times as a realistic representation of what you can achieve yourself in the exact same car. P.S. For those interested in DCT vs. manual transmission discussion Car and Driver ran 12.3 @ 116 in their manual F80 M3 test car. P.S.S. The transmission isn't an automatic Car and Driver. Specifications VEHICLE TYPE:front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan PRICE AS TESTED:$84,325 (base price: $65,850) ENGINE TYPE:twin-turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 24-valve inline-6, aluminum block and heads, direct fuel injection DISPLACEMENT:182 cu in, 2979 cc Power: 425 hp @ 7300 rpm Torque: 406 lb-ft @ 1850 rpm TRANSMISSION:7-speed dual-clutch automatic with manual shifting mode DIMENSIONS: Wheelbase: 110.7 in Length: 184.5 in Width: 73.9 in Height:56.1 in Passenger/cargo volume: 96/12 cu ft Curb weight: 3613 lb C/D TEST RESULTS: Zero to 60 mph: 3.8 sec Zero to 100 mph: 8.5 sec Zero to 130 mph: 14.5 sec Zero to 160 mph: 25.8 sec Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 4.5 sec Top gear, 30-50 mph: 1.9 sec Top gear, 50-70 mph: 2.7 sec Standing ¼-mile: 12.0 sec @ 119 mph Top speed (governor limited): 163 mph Braking, 70-0 mph: 153 ft Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.99 g FUEL ECONOMY: EPA city/highway driving: 17/24 mpg C/D observed: 20 mpg
    58 replies | 3765 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    04-03-2015, 11:54 PM
    Precision turbochargers are fairly popular on the BoostAddict Automotive Performance Network although there are opinions on all sides. Some users point to previous issues Precision had with oil leaks but there is no denying there are many owners making some giant power numbers with Precision turbochargers. This second generation PT6062 CEA is going to be a very popular turbo however you look at it. It features a 60mm inducer and 62mm turbine wheel and is said to support at least 750 horsepower. The CHRA (center housing rotating assembly) is air cooled and features dual ceramic ball bearings. Precision's design seems to put an emphasis on a lightweight rotating assembly for spool. Why Precision did not provide a compressor map in addition to their press release is anyone's guess. We will see how the aftermarket responds to this $1750 turbocharger but there are likely a lot of guys here that will be giving it a look. Hebron, IN – April 1, 2015 – PRECISION TURBO AND ENGINE announced the addition of a new unit to its line of Street and Race turbochargers. The GEN2 PT6062 CEA® turbo features cutting edge technology and the latest in advanced aerodynamics. Featuring an exclusive 60mm inducer GEN2 CEA® (Competition Engineered Aerodynamics) compressor wheel machined from a 2618-aluminum forging and a 62mm CEA® turbine wheel, Precision’s GEN2 PT6062 CEA® turbocharger is rated to support up to 750 horsepower. PTE’s technologically advanced CEA® wheels are known for their unparalleled performance, greater efficiency at higher pressure ratios, less turbo lag, ability to handle higher boost, and offer massive power gains over older wheel designs of similar sizes With prices starting at $1,749.99, Precision’s GEN2 PT6062 CEA® turbo is also equipped with an air-cooled, dual ceramic ball-bearing center housing rotating assembly (CHRA) for faster transient response and added thrust capacity. Additionally, Precision’s GEN2 PT6062 CEA® turbocharger comes with a wide variety of turbine housings, including: • T3 .63 or .82 A/R with 4 bolt (2.5") discharge • T3 .63 or .82 A/R with 3" V-Band discharge • T3 .63 A/R with 5 bolt discharge (with or without wastegate hole) • T4 Divided .84 A/R with 3 5/8" V-Band discharge • T4 Tangential .58 or .68 A/R with 3 5/8" V-Band discharge • V-Band inlet/outlet .64 or .82 A/R • Mitsubishi .63 A/R • Buick .63 A/R • GMC Syclone/Typhoon .85 A/R • K26 .82 A/R Incredibly powerful yet relatively compact in size, Precision’s new GEN2 PT6062 CEA® turbocharger is sure to be a huge hit with the performance aftermarket and will be boosting vehicles to outstanding levels of greatness in no time. Precision customers have a history of setting records and getting noticed. They don't sit in the stands watching the action – they're the ones making it happen. Get involved and be a part of the action today with PTE. For more information regarding PTE’s GEN2 turbos, or to order, please contact Precision Turbo and Engine at (855) 996-7832. About Precision Turbo and Engine, Inc. Since 1987, Precision Turbo and Engine has been a leader in turbocharger technology for street and race applications. PTE offers a complete line of replacement, upgrade and custom turbochargers featuring the exclusive CEA® (Competition Engineered Aerodynamics) compressor and turbine wheels. Additionally, PTE manufactures its own line of intercoolers, boost control products, electronic fuel injectors, and is a top distributor for stand-alone engine management systems and fuel system components. Each sale comes with expert advice and support.
    55 replies | 3944 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    03-19-2015, 07:13 PM
    In November of last year Motiv became the first N54 tuner to break into the 800's and also set the N54 power record at 829 rear wheel horsepower on a Dynojet. That car featured the Motiv 900 turbo kit, port fuel injection system, AEM EMS, and of course their single turbocharger N54 conversion kit. Now, what is interesting here is the AEM computer is not being used. Motiv is stressing that the tuning setup in particular is important for this 861 rear wheel horsepower figure. This of course implies that the Haltech Platinum Sport 1000 is better suited to tuning. The reason the AEM was not used though is that the owner already had the Haltech unit. Still, the results using it and the stock DME stacked with Cobb are impressive. It is important to note as well that this a customized Fftec single turbo kit on the stock internal N54. So, although Motiv is involved in the tuning MK Performance changed the Fftec setup to a bigger turbocharger. That makes the record somewhat tricky to attribute to a single source and we do not need to do that. Everyone involved can share the spotlight like professionals. Certainly an interesting development though. Motiv: "The Platinum Sport 1000 was setup to control boost and secondary fueling. Josh's car is running the Fuel-It Stage3+ pump and the MOTIV Level 2 Port Fuel Injection System running straight e85."
    62 replies | 1727 view(s)
  • jputtho2's Avatar
    03-21-2015, 03:49 PM
    Just the other day a new N54 horsepower record was announced. Some confusion arose as to what turbo kit, what modifications, and whose tuning was employed on the car. The owner of the car came on BimmerBoost to share the details of his build. What better source for details than him? Congratulations to @jputtho2 and we appreciate his additional insight below: First off, I owe HUGE thanks to Jake and the guys at Motiv Motorsports with all of their help with pointers on the tuning side of this and the very high quality products they offer. Also Huge thanks to Chad and Ryan Modified by KC who did the install and tuning on my car. Mike and Aaron and the guys at FFTEC for a very well made turbo kit, and last but not least Steve at Fuel-It taking care of me and my last minute change to the Stg 3+ lpfp! I wouldn't have been able to do this with my life's schedule being so busy with my rapidly growing business and my family. Anyone that knows me knows I'm extremely anal about my cars and in fact was the first time in 10 years that I have trusted someone to work on my cars other than myself. (My cars prior I did all of the assembly, fab work, tuning, etc). This setup is fairly simple as far as mods go and can be replicated easily now that there is a growing support in this community of quality vendors such as the ones I listed above. It's a 100% stock unopened 64k mile long block. It's what I consider a bolt on car. Still has every single creature comfort as one that came from the factory minus the windshield washer reservoir. Well the reservoir is still there the full neck is removed but A/C, heat, cruise, Nav, etc, etc, is still all there and functional. Fuel was 100% e85. To be exact it was e70 winter blend from the pumps that I blended e98 in to bring it up to ~e82. The pumps here should be switching to the summer blend e85 here in a month or so. Injector duty cycle on the port injection was 80% and I can't remember exactly what the DC was for the direct injection but it was roughly the same. I would say its safe to assume 900whp on 100% e85 with this fuel system isn't an issue. MODS: - FFTEC twin scroll Top Mount Precision billet dbb 6466 T4 1.0ar divided, twin Tial MVS WG's - Motiv Motorsports PI-1000 kit - Fuel-It "Hulk"Stg. 3+ lpfp - Cobb AP (Controls the DME/DI) - Haltech Platinum Sport 1000 (controls the PI and boost) - Custom harnesses made by Chad at Modified by KC - Clutchmasters FX850 twin disc - VRSF 7" IC - VRSF charge pipe - Tial Q bov - 4" to dual 3" exhaust The final number was 861whp at 250-255KPA or a peak of 36psi. We were having interference on the rpm pick up for the dyno so I'll post two graphs, one over vehicle speed and the other with engine speed but the engine speed is going to be pretty erratic due to the interference on the pick-up and lost signal. Exact TQ is unknown on the 800+ pulls because of this. It's around 750-760wtq which is low because we had to ramp boost in to keep torque lower due to a "Too Much Torque" limp mode if we gave it all right away on basically anything over 775whp. Otherwise, following what it was was making for tq I would guess it would be around 800wtq and spool would have been about 300-500rpm quicker. The car has A LOT more left in it and this number can easily be broken. My goal today was to make big power but also be able to enjoy after the dyno. I plan on pushing it again this winter until I run out of turbo or the motor lets go and then it'll be a fully forged bottom end, possibly a Motec m142 to simplify the tuning side, and try and do something with the head to make it more rev happy because it really could use another 500-1000rpm. I wouldn't be surprised if the n54 could handle 900-915whp stock. For how long though is the question. I didn't want to be the test mule for the limits of the motor right now. Anyway, we made I think 75-80 pulls on e85 alone, half of those were well over 700whp and I think 5 pulls over 800whp (805, 813, 832, 858, 861). Pull after pull it just wanted more and never showed any signs of slowing up. Here is the 861whp and 832whp graph over vehicle speed. We did make an 858whp pull but the boost control was unhappy bouncing all over hitting target then falling on it's face. This is the 861whp graph with tq reading over engine speed and also showing the dyno losing signal because of the RF interference with the pick-up lead. And then same graph over vehicle speed showing the erratic tq readings again from the reason above. Here is the video of the 861whp pull. (excuse the mismatched wheels, I have new DPE wheels that I was waiting till after the dyno to put on)
    35 replies | 4735 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    04-13-2015, 12:13 PM
    What a difference a different dynamometer can make. For forum bragging, there is no better dyno than the Dynojet. It is consistent and tends to produce the highest numbers which owners of course love to dyno race with. The Mustang being a load bearing and not an inertia based dyno functions differently and also provides different numbers. People get caught up in the numbers and attempting to explain that different machines can produce wildly different results even on the same car is often a lost cause. The average person will see figure X, see it is higher than figure Y, and leave it at that without delving any further into it. What you are about to see is just how much the numbers can vary and why dyno racing should be not be taken seriously. This 6-speed manual F10 M5 features the following modifications and was run on 93 octane pump fuel: - Undercover Performance 3 inch catless downpipes - Undercover Performance catless exhaust - BMS JB4 tuning Dynojet figures 620 lb-ft of torque and 659 whp: Mustang figures 553 lb-ft of torque and 544 whp: That is a spread of 115 horsepower at the wheels and 67 lb-ft of torque at the wheels on the exact same car with the only difference being different dyno machines. The output never changes. The way it is displayed to you is the only change. Does the Mustang deserve its reputation as being a conservative dyno in comparison to the Dynojet? It sure does. But do not get too caught up in its figures either. It can easily be messed with to display whatever the operator wants it to display. When used properly dynos are great tools. It's the tools running around with inflated graphs for frum bragging rights that one has to worry about.
    39 replies | 1102 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    04-08-2015, 08:02 AM
    Mid 10 second stock internal supercharged E92 M3's are becoming more common as more owners take them to the strip. The record currently is 10.46 @ 135.13 but that is from a heavily stripped out car running in negative density altitude with some question marks regarding the fuel and boost used. Regardless, mid 10 second performance is about what one can expect on a well prepped strip from a supercharged DCT M3 pushing 8+ psi on drag rubber. This car ran 10.5 - 10.6 all day but in the process broke its driveshaft. Things break on the strip, that is how it is. The better prepped it is the better the chance is of something breaking as the torque has to go somewhere if the tires are hooking and not spinning. The 60 foots for the most part are in the 1.7X range which makes it somewhat surprising that the driveshaft gave as nobody else who has launched in this range has broken one. It could be a bad shaft or it could just be time for an upgrade to a DSS carbon unit. Based on the 60 foot it does not look like launch control (capable of 6200 rpm launches) was used. With a supercharger 1.5X-1.6X 60 foots should be possible as bolt on cars have done 1.7X's. The car was not pushed as hard as it could and should be out of hole. The car is running Dodson upgraded clutches and Dodson is the only company to have a real working solution for the BMW M3 DCT. The proof is in the 1/4 mile results. The claim is the car ran on 93 octane but when people claim pump it is best to assume race gas or some kind of octane boost (possibly from meth injection). If trying to set records why run pump gas unless you want to act like there is soooo much more in it? Undercover Performance prepped the car and plans to retune it. There will probably be more boost and some more octane with a more aggressive file if some of these things did not already take place. Regardless, mid 10's are essentially the norm now. There is room to hit low 10's. It's a shame more supercharged cars do not hit the strip but most M3 owners tend to be the kinds of people who are afraid of breaking things instead of pushing things. The runs were done at ATCO (one of the fastest East Coast strips) in negative density altitude up to -470 on.
    28 replies | 1313 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    03-27-2015, 10:40 PM
    The S54 remains the BMW inline-6 power king going into 2015. Well, the S38 may have something to say about that but that is a discussion for another day. Sound Performance built the E46 M3 S54 motor and Saad Racing provided a turbo kit utilizing a Precision 6766 turbocharger. The result? 859 wheel horsepower pushing 29 psi of boost on a Mustang Dyno. Here are the numbers at the various boost levels tested: 678whp @ 18psi 740whp 624wtq @ 23psi 859whp 710wtq @ 29psi On a Dynojet this should be breaking 900 whp. They of course also have 1000+ whp M3's but this shows what is possible with a Precision 6766, a ProEFI 128 ECU, and a built motor. Specs: SP Built 10:1 CR Engine Saad Racing Turbo Kit w/ SP 3" Boost Activated Exhaust Cutout Saad Racing E85 Fuel System Saad Racing Intake Manifold w/ LS3 DBW Throttle Body SP Direct-Port Nitrous Kit ProEFI Pro128 Flex Fuel Standalone EMS OS Giken Twin Disc Clutch They plan to test the Precision 6870 CEA GEN2 turbocharger next. 9XX whp on the Mustang? We will have to wait and see.
    18 replies | 2093 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    03-25-2015, 06:47 PM
    This is not the first time we have seen something like this. Anyone remember the marketing material for the E82 BMW 1M showing it driving around with the E30 M3? This got people saying the 1M was a return to the BMW driver's car producing fun and cheap lightweight models. This despite the fact the E30 M3 has absolutely nothing in common with the E82 1M and it will also have nothing in common with the F87 M2. This is what BMW head of design Adrian van Hooydonk stated, "The E30 M3 has a really big fan base, and we are going to be taking cues from it for a future product." Not really saying much there, now is he? Perhaps he will incorporate something from a styling standpoint that serves as some kind of homage or link to the original E30 M3. From an actual M car standpoint the M2 and 1M are nothing like the E30 M3. The cars are not built for DTM homologation purposes. They do not have naturally aspirated motors. They do not have four-cylinder high revving naturally aspirated M motors designed for racing. In the case of the 1M that particular car does not even have an M motor under hood. Once you factor in the weight difference between the E82 1M at 3339 pounds and E30 M3 at 2857 pounds and that the original was actually built for DTM competition you realize this is nothing more than marketing speak. The 2016 F87 M2 is expected to come with a tweaked N55 engine offering 370 horsepower and likely will have a DCT option. Considering the F22 M235i weighs 3494 pounds do not expect some new E30 M3. It won't even be a new E46 M3. Expect an M235i with some minor tweaks. Just like how the 1M was a 135i with some minor tweaks (and no M motor). Bringing up the E30 M3 is just marketing speak. Nothing more, nothing less. Source
    15 replies | 2227 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    03-29-2015, 03:25 AM
    Nobody loves the BMW N52 motor. If someone has a 328i or 128i model equipped with the N52 and asks about more power they are told to trade it in for an N54 or N55 based car. Even the aftermarket basically abandoned it and there are no production forced induction kits for the engine. It's rough being an N52 when the N54/N55 exist. Even BMW themselves replaced it with the N20 2.0 liter four-cylinder which is a far more tuner friendly motor. If you love your N52 relax, Active Autowerke has you covered with some performance parts. On a BMW E82 128i 6-speed manual Active Autowerke picked up just under 40 whp on a Dynojet with the following modifications: 1) Active Autowerke N52 exhaust headers installed 2) Stage 3 intake manifold with charcoal air filter removed 3) K+N drop used 4) stock exhaust system from the header back. Meaning that the secondary cats were still in place along with stock rear muffler BLUE line- stock 128 6 speed 208.48 whp - 207.63 wtq GREEN line- AA Header, 3 stage manif, K&N drop-in with No charcoal filter, stock exhaust 248.02 whp - 225.15 wtq Not bad, right? Now let's look at Mustang numbers from an automatic E9X 328i with the Active Headers and tune but without the intake manifold: 1) stock intake manifold with charcoal air filter removed but stock factory paper filter ( we did not have a K+N drop in at the time to use) 2) stock exhaust system from the header back. Meaning that the secondary cats were still in place along with stock rear muffler Bottom line- stock 328 auto 175 whp - 161 wtq Middle line- AA Header, charcoal filter delete 198 whp - 179 wtq Top line- AA header, AA software and charcoal filter 207whp - 192 wtq So with the full gamut of Active Autowerke N52 products one can expect roughly 40 wheel horsepower gains and roughly 30 lb-ft of torque gains at the wheels. That is about the best anyone is going to do on this motor without forced induction. Which at that point it makes sense to go to an N54/N55 or even N20, doesn't it?
    16 replies | 2205 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    03-21-2015, 04:51 PM
    Where are the 4.0 TFSI V8 turbocharger upgrades? We do have an AudiBoost member who has upgraded the turbos on his RS7 with a pair of Garrett GTX28's and has received custom tuning from APR to make it work. But even APR themselves does not offer a turbo upgrade and why are they doing custom turbo tuning work overseas but not at home? So what gives? Well not everyone has the deep pockets of that particular member (@Ghost.) but there is still a noticeable absence of 4.0 TFSI upgrades even for the stock housings let alone going to bigger turbos. Is he running an aftermarket ECU to make it work? Loba Motorsport teased this picture of their 4.0 TFSI turbo upgrade as coming soon... back in 2013. Well it isn't here yet so once again, what gives? Perhaps the tuning ability is overstated on the stock DME. Guys are raising boost and so forth but control seems to still be in its infancy or wouldn't turbocharger upgrades be all over the place? The BMW S63TU also does not yet have any successfully running turbo upgrades but they are expected to come now as the ECU has recently been cracked. Why the 4.0 TFSI still does not have anything available despite hardware having already been developed remains a mystery.
    11 replies | 2751 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    03-25-2015, 11:15 PM
    The 'professionals' at MotorTrend often amuse this network with their work. For a big name that has been doing this for decades it is mind boggling how the magazine simply can not understand that crank ratings do not mean much of anything. Seriously, does anyone think the S55 engine the F80 M3 and F82 M4 is actually putting out 425 horsepower? It takes just a basic google search to get a dyno of the new M car and see its output at the wheels exceeds the crank HP rating on a Dynojet. We are seeing many high performance cars underrated and BMW has routinely been doing this with their turbo motors. So why does this fly over the heads of the geniuses at MotorTrend? "At 464 hp, the ATS-V has 39 hp and 38 lb-ft on the BMW M3 and M4, which make 425 hp and 406 lb-ft from a twin-turbo 3.0-liter I-6." There is no doubt the ATS-V is putting out 464 horsepower and 444 lb-ft of torque. The thing is, the F80 M3 is also matching that output and then some. Shouldn't a publication like MotorTrend understand their statement based on paper figures is misleading and uninformed? It's hard for enthusiasts to take the big publications seriously when they make basic mistakes and comparisons like this that do not delve even slightly beyond the superficial. I suppose that says something about the writer and the target audience. P.S. This was the power rating Cadillac claimed at the LA Auto Show for the ATS-V: Source
    31 replies | 508 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    04-15-2015, 04:52 AM
    This is not a new story but the only way to combat ignorance is with knowledge and data. Fortunately, there are members in the BimmerBoost community who provide quality data such as what you are about to see below and thanks to them we can differentiate between marketing and reality. The marketing is that the F82 M3 as well as the F80 M3 weigh 3306 pounds. What BMW left out was this weight comes from a European spec F82/F80 (they have different crash test standard affecting whether seats with side impact airbags are used) that is a 6-speed manual without any fluids whatsoever. In other words, it's a bunch of BS. Almost exactly one year to the day BimmerBoost posted an indepently weighed figure for an F80 6-speed manual M3 and it came in at 3562 pounds: This year thanks to member @DD GT3 RD (who also weighed his 991 GTS while he has was it) we have an independent weight figure for an F82 M4 DCT and it is 3661 pounds: Does the DCT add weight? Yes. It is not almost 100 pounds though but the difference between the lighter 6-speed F80 M3 and the DCT F82 M4 can be attributed to the transmission as well as fuel. The rule of thumb for fuel is about 6 pounds per gallon of gas. So how do the F80 M3 and F82 M4 compare to a DCT E92 M3? The previous generation car comes in as lighter than either of them at 3549 pounds. Yes, turbochargers, intercoolers, and plumbing add weight so BMW's hype was nothing more than hype. The aluminum-silicon S65 V8 block in the E92 M3 is very light and compact and this also leads to the previous generation car having better weight distribution. Do not believe everything you read. Especially if it's marketing from BMW.
    23 replies | 821 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    03-20-2015, 03:51 PM
    The Audi S8 is an impressive piece of machinery. Despite weighing 4620 pounds it puts up solid performance numbers. How about 10's on the drag strip with just a tune? That was with the previous version of the APR ECU tune software and APR has now released version 1.1 that improves performance further. What is interesting to note is APR claims they are now doing OBD-II flashing of the ECU. That is a fairly large development. What is a nice cherry on top is that the 1.1 version of the software is a free upgrade for whomever has 1.0. Nice touch APR. So how does output change with 1.1? Well, let's compare the numbers to version 1.0. 91 octane was previously 530 awhp and 602 awtq. It is now 572 awhp and 605 awtq: 93 octane was previously 573 awhp and 624 awtq. It is now 595 awhp and 645 awtq: 100 octane was previously 610 awhp and 623 awtq. It is now 620 awhp and 657 awtq: With 620 all wheel horsepower the vehicle is comfortably over 700 horses tune only. Beast? Yes, it's a beast. Nice work on the 1.1 software and solid gains at each level showing further refinement.
    11 replies | 2468 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    03-27-2015, 06:07 PM
    That is the rumor going around. We have no official source on this but apparently there was some Audi employee meeting in the USA and the RS3 was confirmed for the USA at that meeting. It is really no surprise as we always expected to get the sedan. The hatchback we knew was out of the question based on precedent. Audi already sells an RS3 Sportback in Europe based on the 8V platform. So, expect that same drivetrain to make its way into the 8V A3 sedan. That means a 367 horsepower and 343 lb-ft of torque 2.5 liter turbocharged and direct injected inline-5 sending its power to all four wheels courtesy of a 7-speed dual clutch transmission. Now the 2.5 TFSI motor can put out a heck of a lot more power than that. Remember the 525 horsepower A3 Clubsport concept car from last year? That is what the RS3 should be but it would eat everything else in the Audi lineup alive. That's ok, that is what tuning is for. The most obvious competition for this car would be from the Mercedes CLA45 AMG. The RS3 should be able to out-muscle it though. Whatever happened to Audi's high output EA888 that was supposed to go in the RS3 anyway? Hopefully we can get more concrete details and not just some rumor someone supposedly overheard somewhere. The chances of an RS3 in the US are the best they have ever been though. The sedan seems like a certainty.
    18 replies | 1559 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    03-22-2015, 05:59 PM
    The BMW and Toyota technology sharing agreement has been a bit confusing its application. We know Toyota and BMW agreed to partner up on certain things and share technology back in 2013. Since then there has been a lot of speculation on what this agreement would bring. That speculation has been all over the place. MotorTrend stated the cars would have carbon technology from the 'i' series and be very small and expensive hybrids with the BMW version coming in at around $70,000. Car Magazine then reported we would get mid-engine hybrid sports car with $100k price tags to take on the 911. Maybe they were just pulling things out of thin air to sell magazines, who knows. Now Autocar who is not exactly a bastion of solid automotive reporting states the partnership will spawn two all wheel drive hybrid sports cars that are different sizes targeting different demographics. This is supposed to result in a next generation Z4 as well as a Toyota Supra revival. BMW's Ian Robertson stated, “The one thing we’re clear on now is that a platform for both companies can work. The cars in themselves don’t actually need to be positioned the same. The platform can spawn two positionings. The concept works, the platform can deliver and now we have two proud sets of engineers - one group German, one group Japanese - who are each fighting and arguing for the car they want.” That is about all we have to go on. That the platform can be used to create two cars that are different enough from each other to not simply be the same car with a Toyota or BMW badge being the main point of differentiation. Beyond that everything is still speculation and who knows what the result will be. We only know they are still working on it and that hybrid technology is a certainty. Source
    5 replies | 3117 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    03-26-2015, 07:21 PM
    Not much can play with a BMW S1000RR in stock form. The bike is flat out absurdly fast. When tuned? Well, it takes something pretty damn special to run it. An 1100+ horsepower Boost Logic Nissan GTR may just qualify as something up to the task. The thing is though these two S1000RR's in the video are tuned. The camera bike has a Brentuning ECU tune in addition to a full Akrapovic exhaust system. The other S1000RR just features a full exhaust and a PCV (Power Commander V). The Brentuning ECU tune makes a large difference as the camera bike destroys the other S1000RR and the GTR. They do three runs and in all three it pulls pretty hard. Thank you to BimmerBoost member @Czero for the video.
    7 replies | 2298 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    04-13-2015, 11:42 AM
    This is a very odd result. It does not even make much sense really. Yes, the Porsche 991 generation Porsche 911 Turbo is slightly more powerful at 530 horsepower and 483 lb-ft of torque from its 3.8 liter twin turbo flat-6 than the AMG GT S with its 510 horsepower and 479 lb-ft of torque 4.0 liter twin turbo V8 M178 powerplant. Recently, we witnessed the AMG GT S just easily pull away from a Porsche 911 Carrera 4 GTS as it should considering the 911 GTS is just overmatched. Based on the specifications alone the 911 Turbo and AMG GT S should be a pretty close fight considering the the power is very close between the two and the AMG GT S is sending its power to the rear wheels and not all four. It is also a brand new chassis and also features a dual clutch transmission. 0-60 figures of course will favor the all wheel drive 911 Turbo and they do at 2.9 seconds to the AMG GT S 3.7 second sprint. What is truly is puzzling is the 911 Turbo is just over a full second faster to 124 miles per hour than the GT S. It is almost a full second faster to 100 miles per hour as well (.9) so its advantage is actually increasing with speed. What else is odd here? The 911 Turbo is lighter. Autobild weighs it at 3567 pounds and the AMG GT S at 3679 pounds. Why the AMG GT S is that heavy when it is rear wheel drive and fairly compact is a mystery to us. Ok, fine, but what about performance around the track? The AMG GT S is absolutely destroyed on the Nurburgring Nordschleife turning a 8:10.10 minute laptime compared to the 991 Turbo 7:59.20. Keep in mind these are not hired guns from the manufacturer extracting laptimes but a difference of over 10 seconds between the cars? Really? It's not just the Nurburgring either, the Sachsenring time for the 911 Turbo is seconds ahead as well: This test just does not feel right. We're not saying Autobild is misleading anyone or anything of that sort but we definitely want to see more comparisons from other sources. Vehicle data Mercedes-AMG GT S Porsche 911 Turbo Motor V8 Biturbo Six-cylinder, turbo Mounting position forward along backward along Valves / camshaft 4 per cylinder / 4 4 per cylinder / 4 Camshaft drive Chain Chain Capacity 3982 cc 3800 cc kW (hp) at 1 / min 375 (510) / 6500 383 (520) / 6500 Nm at 1 / min 650/1750 660/1950 Vmax 310 km / h 315 km / h Transmission Seven-speed dual clutch Seven-speed dual clutch Drive Rear-wheel drive Four-wheel drive Brakes, front / rear Discs / wheels Discs / wheels Test car tires v 265/35 R 19 Y -. h 295/30 ZR 20. v 245/35 R 20 Y -. h 305/30 R 20 Y. Tire Type Michelin Pilot Super Sport Pirelli PZero Wheel Size v. 9 x 19 "- h 11 x 20". v. 8.5 x 20 "- h 11 x 20". Exhaust CO2 219 g / km 227 g / km Consumption * 12.2 / 7.8 / 9.4 l 13.2 / 7.7 / 9.7 l Fuel capacity 65 l / Super Plus 68 l / Super Plus Refrigerant R134a R134a Pass-by noise 74 dB (A) 73 dB (A) Trailer weight braked. / Unused. no no Boot volume 285-350 l 115-375 l Length Width Height 4563 / 1939-2075 ** / 1288 mm 4506 / 1880-1978 ** / 1296 mm * City / highway / total 100 km; ** Width with door mirrors Readings Mercedes-AMG GT S Porsche 911 Turbo Acceleration 0-50 km / h 1.8 s 1.1 s 0-100 km / h 3.7 s 2.9 s 0-130 km / h 5.4 s 4.5 s 0-160 km / h 7.5 s 6.6 s 0-200 km / h 11.4 s 10.3 s Intermediate sprint 60-100 km / h 1.9 s 1.5 s 80-120 km / h 2.0 s 1.8 s Empty weight / payload 1669/221 kg 1618/372 kg Weight distribution v. / H. 48/52% 39/61% Tropic left / right 11.7 / 11.8 m 10.4 / 10.3 m Braking distance from 100 km / h cold 35.8 m 33.3 m from 100 km / h hot 34.5 m 32.5 m Interior noise at 50 km / h 66 dB (A) 64 dB (A) at 100 km / h 70 dB (A) 72 dB (A) at 130 km / h 75 dB (A) 76 dB (A) Test consumption - CO2 14.5 liters - 344 g / km 12.6 liters - 300 g / km Reach 440 km 530 km
    19 replies | 617 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    03-20-2015, 11:45 PM
    Remember last month when the 2015 Nissan GT-R Nismo edition spanked the brand new 2015 Chevrolet Corvette Z06 around the Big Willow Springs roadcourse? It was not even close despite the Z06 pulling more on the skidpad, having more power, more torque, weighing less, and offering better braking. It certainly made everyone scratch their heads as the result did not make sense based on the specifications as well as the performance figures recorded by MotorTrend themselves. Every aspect on paper favors the Z06. Yet the GTR has two big aces up its sleeve with all wheel drive and its dual clutch transmission. Not to mention despite the power, torque, and weight not being in the GTR's favor it accelerates faster. So what gives? What happened? The rear suspension was significantly out of alignment. Yep, that's all it took to skew the results. Here, Motortrend explains it: "It was supposed to be running 0 degrees of rear caster. Instead, it was running positive 2 degrees. This made the rear dampers less effective at controlling the rear suspension and as a result made it more difficult for the Z06 to put power down. This is exactly what Randy Pobst complained about during our test." The Z06 suspension allows you to tweak basically everything for track duty including the rear caster. Does it make a difference? How about a 2.1 second difference around Big Willow? From 1:27.10 to 1.25.00. That's huge. That is night and day. It also puts the Z06 ahead of the GTR as its specs already told us it should be. Part of the problem as well is that Big Willow is not as forgiving as other tracks. Chevrolet intends to offer a mode now softens the dampers in a Rough Track Mode. That says a lot about Big Willow. It also says a low about how Chevrolet engineers are not sweeping this under the rug but fixing the car's teething issues. Ferrari they are not. What about another big point? Well, it was suggested that the manual transmission was part of the problem. Automatic Z06's were scarce last month and they still are but MotorTrend did get one to test. It somehow put up a slower lap than the manual car at 1:25.76. This may be due to the gear ratios in the manual favoring a track like Big Willow. There is still a problem with this do-over if you will. The GT-R did not get another shot and Nissan was not allowed to look over its car and send it in again. Additionally, this was not done on the same day in the exact same conditions. So, there are flaws here and we will have to wait for more data. We have a long way to go before the dust settles.
    21 replies | 736 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    03-29-2015, 01:51 AM
    You are going to see these cars compared frequently. They are not exactly the same thing but they represent tremendous performance cars from their respective countries. You are smart enough to know what those countries are so we do not need to go over the basics here and can get right down to the meat and potatoes. The Chevrolet Corvette Z06 is the newest of the trio. The GTR at this point is riding the most dated platform but it can not be overstated just how admirable of a job Nissan has done in continually updating the GTR. The Porsche 991 Turbo S of course is the highest performance turbocharged 911 available these days. All of these cars have forced induction powerplants but the GTR and 911 Turbo S have all wheel drive and dual clutch transmissions. Major factors admittedly versus the 7-speed manual rear wheel drive Corvette Z06. Now, on paper, the Z06 should demolish these cars. Z06 performance has been very perplexing though as MotorTrend learned when they compared the Z06 to the Nismo GTR. Well, now it is Car and Driver's turn. The Z06 is the lightest car here at 3530 pounds. It offers the most power and torque with its 650 horsepower and 650 lb-ft of torque supercharged LT4 V8. So why is it the slowest in a straight line? It isn't surprising the Z06 can not win 0-60 sprints against all wheel drive competition but trailing 0-150? And in 1/4 mile trap speed? The 991 Turbo S beats both but that also raises questions as Car and Driver previously got a 10.8 @ 126 out of the Turbo S in a 1/4 mile. Is this car a ringer? Or did Car and Driver suddenly master the ever so complicated PDK? Something already stinks here. Regardless, the 991 Turbo S with its 10.6 @ 130 is the quickest and fastest car. The Nismo brings up the middle with an 11.0 @ 128. The Z06 trails with an 11.5 @ 125. Maybe Car and Driver needs the automatic Z06? Is it the drag of the Z07 package that is an issue again? Acceleration isn't everything, right? The Z06 brakes better than the other two. It is better balanced being the closest to 50/50. Its skidpad number is an insane 1.15g. It has the best slalom speed. It has everything going for it. So what wins on the roadcourse? We don't know. Car and Driver is 'saving' themselves for their Lightning Lap comparison. What is this, a freshman cheerleader on prom night? Give us the goods. MotorTrend put out, why can't you? Instead we get a bunch of talk from Car and Driver regarding which car they liked the best. It turns out the Z06 is the car they liked the best. Its handling is described as next level and indeed it is. The Z06 is amazing when you do things other than accelerate which is why this network is pissed off we have no laptimes. The GTR finishes in last and is said to feel dated. It is dated. That does not mean it still is not a hell of a performance car but when a Corvette Z06 feels more refined there are problems. The 911 Turbo S finishes in the middle of the pack and perhaps it is time too for Porsche to re-evaluate this whole the 911 has to be the top of the food chain mentality. It did finish last in the slalom and perhaps having all that weight over the rear end is not the best for handling transitions. What would happen if they gave the Cayman the 911 Turbo S engine? Yeah, we all know what would happen. Porsche does too. So, an interesting comparison despite Car and Driver not giving us the real goods. These days though, we don't like to be teased. We want to come away satisfied. This comparison does not provide that satisfaction. COMPARISON TESTS VEHICLE 2015 Chevrolet Corvette Z06 2015 Nissan GT-R NISMO 2014 Porsche 911 Turbo S BASE PRICE $78,995 $151,585 $183,695 PRICE AS TESTED $102,120 $151,880 $195,175 DIMENSIONS LENGTH 177.9 inches 184.3 inches 177.4 inches WIDTH 77.4 inches 74.6 inches 74.0 inches HEIGHT 48.6 inches 54.2 inches 51.0 inches WHEELBASE 106.7 inches 109.4 inches 96.5 inches FRONT TRACK 63.5 inches 63.0 inches 60.6 inches REAR TRACK 62.5 inches 63.0 inches 62.6 inches INTERIOR VOLUME F: 52 cubic feet F: 53 cubic feet R: 26 cubic feet F: 50 cubic feet R: 17 cubic feet CARGO 15 cubic feet 9 cubic feet 13 cubic feet POWERTRAIN ENGINE supercharged pushrod 16-valve V-8 376 cu in (6162 cc) twin-turbocharged DOHC 24-valve V-6 232 cu in (3799 cc) twin-turbocharged DOHC 24-valve flat-6 232 cu in (3800 cc) POWER HP @ RPM 650 @ 6400 600 @ 6800 560 @ 6750 TORQUE LB-FT @ RPM 650 @ 3600 481 @ 3200 516 @ 2100 REDLINE / FUEL CUTOFF 6500/6700 rpm 7000/7000 rpm 7000/7200 rpm LB PER HP 5.4 6.5 6.4 DRIVELINE TRANSMISSION 7-speed manual 6-speed dual-clutch automatic 7-speed dual-clutch automatic DRIVEN WHEELS rear all all GEAR RATIO:1/ MPH PER 1000 RPM/ MAX MPH 1. 2.29/9.8/66 2. 1.61/13.9/93 3. 1.21/18.5/124 4. 1.00/22.4/150 5. 0.82/27.3/183 6. 0.68/32.9/185 7. 0.45/49.8/175 1. 4.06/5.3/37 2. 2.30/9.4/66 3. 1.60/13.6/95 4. 1.25/17.3/121 5. 1.00/21.6/151 6. 0.80/27.2/191 1. 3.91/5.9/42 2. 2.29/10.0/72 3. 1.58/14.6/105 4. 1.18/19.4/140 5. 0.94/24.4/176 6. 0.79/29.2/198 7. 0.62/36.9/180 AXLE RATIO:1 3.42 3.70 3.44 CHASSIS SUSPENSION F: control arms, leaf spring, anti-roll bar R: control arms, leaf spring, anti-roll bar F: control arms, coil springs, anti-roll bar R: multilink, coil springs, anti-roll bar F: struts, coil springs, anti-roll bar R: multilink, coil springs, anti-roll bar BRAKES F: 15.5-inch vented, cross-drilled, ceramic disc R: 15.3-inch vented, cross-drilled, ceramic disc F: 15.4-inch vented, cross-drilled disc R: 15.0-inch vented, cross-drilled disc F: 16.1-inch vented, cross-drilled, ceramic disc R: 15.4-inch vented, cross-drilled, ceramic disc STABILITY CONTROL fully defeatable, traction off, competition mode, launch control fully defeatable, competition mode, launch control fully defeatable, launch control TIRES Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2 ZP F: P285/30ZR-19 (94Y) R: P335/25ZR-20 (99Y) Dunlop SP Sport Maxx GT 600 DSST CTT F: 255/40ZRF-20 (97Y) R: 285/35ZRF-20 (100Y) Pirelli P Zero F: 245/35ZR-20 (91Y) R: 305/30ZR-20 (103Y) C/D TEST RESULTS ACCELERATION 0–30 MPH 1.6 sec 1.2 sec 1.0 sec 0–60 MPH 3.3 sec 2.9 sec 2.5 sec 0–100 MPH 7.5 sec 6.6 sec 6.2 sec 0–150 MPH 17.9 sec 15.8 sec 14.9 sec ¼-MILE @ MPH 11.5 sec @ 125 11.0 sec @ 128 10.6 sec @ 130 ROLLING START, 5–60 MPH 4.0 sec 3.8 sec 3.4 sec TOP GEAR, 30–50 MPH 13.9 sec 3.8 sec 2.1 sec TOP GEAR, 50–70 MPH 10.8 sec 3.0 sec 2.3 sec TOP SPEED 185 mph (drag ltd)* 191 mph (redline ltd) 198 mph (drag ltd, mfr's claim) CHASSIS BRAKING 70–0 MPH 135 feet 152 feet 145 feet BRAKING 100–0 MPH 261 feet 275 feet 291 feet ROADHOLDING, 300-FT-DIA SKIDPAD 1.15 g 1.02 g 1.07 g 610-FT SLALOM 50.1 mph 48.2 mph 48.1 mph WEIGHT CURB 3530 pounds 3894 pounds 3590 pounds %FRONT/%REAR 50.3/49.7 54.3/45.7 38.8/61.2 FUEL TANK 18.5 gallons 19.5 gallons 18.0 gallons RATING 91 octane 93 octane 93 octane EPA CITY/HWY 15/22 mpg 16/23 mpg 17/24 mpg C/D 450-MILE TRIP 13 mpg 12 mpg 14 mpg SOUND LEVEL IDLE 60 dBA 54 dBA 55 dBA FULL THROTTLE 93 dBA 90 dBA 83 dBA 70-MPH CRUISE 77 dBA 75 dBA 73 dBA *C/D estimated. tested in California City, California, by K.C. COLWELL and TONY QUIROGA Final Results VEHICLE RANK Max Pts. Available 1 2015 Chevrolet Corvette Z06 2 2014 Porsche 911 Turbo S 3 2015 Nissan GT-R NISMO DRIVER COMFORT 10 8 10 7 ERGONOMICS 10 9 9 8 REAR-SEAT COMFORT 5 0 1 1 CARGO SPACE* 5 5 4 2 FEATURES/AMENITIES* 10 9 10 7 FIT AND FINISH 10 8 10 8 INTERIOR STYLING 10 8 9 7 EXTERIOR STYLING 10 9 9 8 REBATES/EXTRAS* 5 0 0 0 AS-TESTED PRICE* 20 20 2 8 SUBTOTAL 95 76 64 56 POWERTRAIN 1/4-MILE ACCELERATION* 20 16 20 18 FLEXIBILITY* 5 3 3 3 FUEL ECONOMY* 10 9 10 8 ENGINE NVH 10 8 10 7 TRANSMISSION 10 9 10 7 SUBTOTAL 55 45 53 43 CHASSIS PERFORMANCE* 20 20 17 15 STEERING FEEL 10 10 9 9 BRAKE FEEL 10 10 9 8 HANDLING 10 10 9 8 RIDE 10 8 10 6 SUBTOTAL 60 58 54 46 EXPERIENCE FUN TO DRIVE 25 24 24 20 342352234 203 195 165
    18 replies | 781 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    03-31-2015, 06:11 PM
    We have already seen over 600 wheel horsepower from the Pure Turbos Stage 2 BMW S55 engine turbo upgrades. That 632 rear wheel horsepower figure they hit was not on pump gas but on race gas. So what can one expect with the Pure Turbos Stage 2 on an F80 M3 or F82 M4 with pump gas? Well thanks to BMS we have the answer to that question. BMS used their F80 M3 for testing and compared the results to the stock turbos. The BMS M3 with a JB4 tune on the stock turbos put down 479 RWHP on pump gas. The number goes to 518 with the Pure Turbos Stage 2 turbochargers. Now 91 octane pump fuel in California is not exactly boost or tuner friendly. To see the most of this upgrade on 91 octane pump one will need to utilize methanol injection. The result with methanol injection is 579 wheel horsepower and a gain of 62 lb-ft of torque at the wheels over straight 91: Of course people will also mention ethanol but E85 is not a reality for everyone. Not to mention this is still early in S55 tuning and we all know how many fueling issues there have been with direct injected turbocharged BMW motors and ethanol. For those who do have E85 available at the pump it should be looked into if they intend to tune the S55. For those on 91 octane pump though, these 91 + meth injection results are promising.
    9 replies | 1601 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    04-09-2015, 09:03 AM
    Interesting run here between two very different cars. The Mustang Cobra you see here is the 1999-2001 model that came with a naturally aspirated 4.6 liter V8 offering 320 horsepower. This preceded the bad boy Terminator with a supercharged 4.6 liter that escalated the pony car wars to new heights (and the war is still raging). The Nissan GTR everyone knows and loves but this is a fairly modest example. It has the stock turbos, a Pro EFI ECU, Undercover tuning, and is running E85. It is of course also on the stock motor. So, stock motor tuned all wheel drive GTR on E85 versus a built motor 6-speed manual rear wheel drive Cobra with a 2.3 liter Whipple twin screw. What happens? The Cobra gets destroyed. Running a GTR from a stop on the street in a rear wheel drive supercharged manual 99-01 Cobra is suicide. No matter how good the driver is he will not hook like the GTR and he will not out shift the GTR dual clutch transmission. The mildly modified GTR makes easy work of the built motor Cobra. It's not even a race.
    18 replies | 261 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    04-10-2015, 09:41 PM
    Slowly but surely the BMW N55 motor is coming into its own. We saw very impressive results last month of a Pure Turbos Stage 2 upgraded N55 put up an incredible fight against a 695 wheel horsepower single turbo N54. It is becoming increasingly apparent that Pure Turbos N55 work is the top of the game right now. The modifications to the car are below. 523 wheel horsepower and 498 lb-ft of torque at the wheels makes this F30 mean business: Mods: JB4 PURE stage 2 turbo EvolutionRacewerks CP, DP, IC BMS intake Meth
    11 replies | 1159 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    04-07-2015, 10:18 PM
    The 991 Turbo and Turbo S continue to show numbers all over the place in tests. Why is this? Conditions? Fuel quality? The computer pulling timing? Who knows, but the numbers are everywhere from 123 miles per hour in the 1/4 mile from MotorTrend to over 130 by Car and Driver recently. The 911 Turbo S convertible obviously weighs a bit more than the coupe at 3741 pounds. Car and Driver weighed the coupe version at 3590 pounds so the difference is 151 pounds. That is not nearly enough of a weight difference for a trap speed spread of 6 miles per hour. Making this more perplexing is Car and Driver themselves earlier got a 10.8 @ 126 out of the Turbo S coupe which certainly is about the difference one would expect 151 pounds to make versus the heavier convertible going 11.1 @ 124. That also was the fastest time out of any major US magazine up until recently when the Turbo went against the GTR and Z06. To further muddy the waters Road and Track tested the Turbo S coupe at 10.9 @ 124.4 with a curb weight of 3600 pounds. So how in the hell does Car and Driver suddenly get a massive acceleration spike when the Turbo S is being compared to the Nissan GTR and Corvette Z06? You figure it out. Because we certainly can't. SpecificationsVEHICLE TYPE:rear-engine, 4-wheel-drive, 2+2-passenger, 2-door convertible PRICE AS TESTED:$210,620 (base price: $195,895) ENGINE TYPE:twin-turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 24-valve flat-6, aluminum block and heads, direct fuel injection DISPLACEMENT:232 cu in, 3806 cc Power: 560 hp @ 6750 rpm Torque: 553 lb-ft @ 2200 rpm TRANSMISSION:7-speed dual-clutch automatic with manual shifting mode DIMENSIONS: Wheelbase: 96.5 in Length: 177.4 in Width: 74.0 in Height:50.9 in Passenger/cargo volume: 70/13 cu ft Curb weight: 3741 lb C/D TEST RESULTS: Zero to 60 mph: 2.8 sec Zero to 100 mph: 7.0 sec Zero to 150 mph: 17.8 sec Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 3.6 sec Top gear, 30-50 mph: 2.2 sec Top gear, 50-70 mph: 2.3 sec Standing ¼-mile: 11.1 sec @ 124 mph Top speed (drag limited, mfr's est): 197 mph Braking, 70-0 mph: 151 ft Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 1.00 g FUEL ECONOMY: EPA city/highway: 17/24 mpg C/D observed: 15 mpg
    19 replies | 354 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    04-08-2015, 01:21 AM
    It is going to be interesting to see how the AMG GT and Porsche 911 are matched up. The GT S with its 510 horsepower 479 lb-ft of torque M178 powerplant has more power and torque than any Porsche 911 in the lineup other than the 911 Turbo and 911 Turbo S. The 530 horsepower and 483 lb-ft of torque Porsche 911 Turbo starts at $151,100 though. The AMG GT S on the other hand starts at $129,900. That puts it much closer to the $121,895 Porsche 911 Carrera 4 GTS based on pricing but the 3.8 liter flat-6 naturally aspirated mill has 'onlyl 430 horsepower and 324 lb-ft of torque. A mismatch? You bet it is if you are going by raw grunt. The only advantage the 911 GTS has in this comparison is its all wheel drive which will help with traction off the line and the testers at MotorSport magazine in France state the 911 is 176 pounds lighter than the GT S which is hard to believe. The race goes as one would expect with the Porsche taking the lead and the AMG GT S quickly reeling it in and passing it. The 0-400 meter numbers given show the AMG GT S completing the sprint in 11.8 seconds to the 911 Carrera 4 GTS 12.3 seconds. The French being the piss poor drag racers they are do not show any trap speeds, 60 foot or 0-60 figures to indicate the launch quality, or 0-100 numbers. Essentially all we get is elapsed time which is just one part of a much larger puzzle. At least we get something useful out of this but what is clear is that the AMG GTS S is quicker and faster than the Porsche Carrera 4 GTS. With the even more affordable AMG GT model coming it is safe to say the 911 is finally feeling some serious pressure.
    15 replies | 649 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    03-20-2015, 10:39 PM
    That was pretty fast! SeriousHP deserves a lot of credit as they seem to be the very first in the aftermarket to tune the Hemi Hellcat V8. The stock 707 horsepower motor is underrated a bit and shows 642 horsepower to the wheels and 573 lb-ft of torque to the wheels in stock form. So tune only on pump fuel they managed to raise this to 706 rear wheel horsepower. Torque goes up to 629 lb-ft of torque at the wheels. This is without a pulley change and through the stock exhaust system. Now keep in mind since the 6.2 liter Hellcat Hemi V8 uses a bypass valve raising boost is possible through the ECU which is part of the reason how the red/black keys with different horsepower profiles function. SeriousHP does state they raised boost as well as having adjusted the air/fuel ratio and timing. They are planning on adding E85 and changing the pulleys soon. It will be interesting to see what that yields but it looks like we are well on the way to 800 wheel horsepower already. All without even touching the exhaust, heads, or cam.
    17 replies | 488 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    04-08-2015, 09:11 AM
    Well, the cat is finally out of the bag on this one. It was in that bag for a quite a while. Now, you obviously know that Weistec is already doing M133 turbo upgrades for the 45 AMG models and this is something that they announced themselves. The M177/M178 upgrades were supposed to remain under wraps. Just how long have they remained under wraps? How about since June of 2014. Don't believe me? I managed to find these picture on a Polish website way back on June 26, 2014: Ok, this is really weird. This should not be possible and due to that I discount this but I'm having trouble putting my finger on what motor this is. It clearly is a V8 with top mount turbochargers, that much is certain. That means likely the Audi 4.0 TFSI or the BMW N63. I was browsing some Polish website and came across this engine labeled as an M177 and for sale. Sounds just like a scam but what motor is this? Every diagram I'm looking at it doesn't quite match up. Edit: Unedited photos removed by request I posted that thread and it got very little attention. Hell, the cars were not even on the road so who knew what this was? Well, Weistec knew. How did they know? This was their development motor they procured in shipment. Yes, they managed to get an M177/M178 before the cars were even for sale. Why is this a big deal? It shows just how far Weistec's reach has gotten and how far they plan in advance. Also, not to toot BenzBoost's own horn, but it shows just how good this website is as finding things few others do. Weistec did not want others knowing they were already developing turbocharger upgrades and the thread was removed as a professional courtesy. When this network says there are things that can not be shared when it would love to be able to share them, it means it. If you guys only knew some of the things out there that can not be posted due to the high stakes involved. Well, with a recent thread on BenzBoost regarding Weistec M177/M178 upgrades we can finally come clean without any repercussions. Below you will find pictures of Weistec working on the motor except that the the turbocharger portion is blocked out. You can probably surmise why. Weistec does not want anyone to know what they are doing, what turbos they are using, how they are mounted, what impellers, etc. Basically, no info given as this is a highly competitive sphere. Enjoy this interesting look behind the scenes though.
    14 replies | 585 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    03-20-2015, 08:11 PM
    With Texas2K15 entering full swing we are going to get several videos like this where heavyweights slug it out on the highway. Those heavyweights being the Nissan GTR and Lamborghini Gallardo which are currently the two main platforms vying to be kings of the highway. We have seen this rivalry go back and forth but as of late power levels are nearing astronomical numbers. Switzer showed a somewhat sandbagged (partially due to wheelspin) graph of 1865 horsepower at all four wheels from their Goliath. As for how much power the UGR 2R+ Gallardo is making that is a good question as UGR also sandbags quite a bit. What we do know is that it is making 1800+ to the wheels and that the last time a battle similar to this took place the UGR 2R+ Gallardo laid waste to everything on the highway. Not this time though. The Gallardo jumps twice and as soon as it is beginning to be reeled in he gets off the gas. The third time is the charm but the horrible filming and camera angles do not give us a look at what happens although clearly the GTR pulls that time. Why the split view showing two forward views? Why no rear or side view? We do not know. But we do know this is far from over although the GTR's have gotten much stronger.
    13 replies | 491 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    03-20-2015, 05:18 PM
    AMS Performance continues to boost (heh, get it?) their product offering for the 4Matic M157 cars. As you well know the E63 AMG got a 4Matic all wheel drive drivetrain for the 2014 model year and that changed a few things regarding aftermarket part fitment. The AMS exhaust is a lightweight steel system and of course compatible with the AMS M157 downpipes which are available in catted or catless versions: 3" (76mm) throughout entire system. Does not "neck down" like other systems Big increases in power throughout the entire power band Quiet at cruising speed. Deep, exotic exhaust note under heavy throttle Double slip fits ensure perfect seal and fitment Works with factory or Alpha Series Downpipes Unrivaled fit and finish Includes ALL necessary parts and hardware for installation Specifications 100% low carbon 304 Stainless Steel construction 3" (76mm) piping with .065" wall thickness Applications W212 2014+ Mercedes-Benz E63 AMG AMS did not provide a dynograph but as this is a rear section this is mostly about improving sound quality and the exhaust aggression. Check out the sound clip below to hear for yourself that it does exactly that: $3295 retail: http://www.amsperformance.com/cart/2014-mercedes-benz-5.5l-biturbo-alpha-series-performance-exhaust-system.html
    7 replies | 1294 view(s)
More Activity