Activity Stream

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: Forums Last 7 Days Clear All
  • 135pats's Avatar
    Today, 01:08 PM
    135pats replied to a thread VTT 2+ Results - WIP in N54
    IMO you should get the boost where you want it, and more or less call it a day on the advance front. No reason for everyone to be pushing 15 degrees of advance just becuz. If the car makes boost and power with a 4-7 curve, that's great. No reason for excess pressure to enter the equation with stock frames. People chase aggressive timing like heroin on this platform. Good to see this moving along quickly OP.
    125 replies | 5900 view(s)
  • rader1's Avatar
    Today, 01:08 PM
    rader1 replied to a thread JMARS - Photo Build Thread in N54
    I don't want to speak for someone else but there should be no interference or heat issues as far as the engine cover is concerned.
    105 replies | 2647 view(s)
  • Terry@BMS's Avatar
    Today, 01:06 PM
    Terry@BMS replied to a thread VTT 2+ Results - WIP in N54
    It looks like FF needs to learn down but otherwise seems to scale pretty well. Sooner or later we'll I expect we'll need to do a custom FF profile for these things. We started it on Tony's but never finished. MBT is really low with higher boost levels. I wouldn't be surprised to see you wind up at 4 degrees up to 8 degrees at redline.
    125 replies | 5900 view(s)
  • Slicksilver's Avatar
    Today, 01:05 PM
    Slicksilver replied to a thread VTT 2+ Results - WIP in N54
    Brian May at TFT already proved that by changing intakes to optimal and tuning 100% E85, 640whp is possible on RBs. See my other post that explains it. According to compressor map for 15T, 640whp is probably the max for RBs, VTT stage 2s as the map won't allow for more. with these 2+, I think the max power with optimal intakes and 100% e85 and maximum cooling from meth to ambient IATs on a cold 50F day, max power is probably 750-785 whp at 30psi, which is PR of 2.9 at 540 CFM, max of the 20T compressor map. Also with max timing for E85 which can get significantly higher than 15* approaching redline. This hasn't been done but I think it's totally possible and where the future will lead us with these 2+ once ALL the plumbing issues are addressed. For this the compressor hot side needs to be 2", the intercooler needs to have 3" inlets and outlets, the piping to the TB needs to be at leat 3" and something like TFT intakes are required.
    125 replies | 5900 view(s)
  • 135pats's Avatar
    Today, 01:03 PM
    135pats replied to a thread JMARS - Photo Build Thread in N54
    Lol it's all good brotha. @JMARS is the engine cover off due to the turbo swap just getting wrapped up? Or is there a fitment/heat concern? Just curious.
    105 replies | 2647 view(s)
  • Slicksilver's Avatar
    Today, 01:02 PM
    Replace all bolts, nuts, and gaskets, don't do the lines unless one is damaged. Should only be $130 for all bolts and gaskets you need, all PNs are on spreadsheet on and you can get on or local BMW, or just buy the kit from Vargas or RB.
    14 replies | 142 view(s)
  • rader1's Avatar
    Today, 12:59 PM
    What your research fails to take into consideration is the turbine side of the turbo and that's where the major restriction is found with the OEM turbos. When Dz made ~550whp wih his RBs and set the record it was done at ~30psi peak and tapered on it's own to ~18psi because the turbine wheel was choked. You will probably pick up decent power at the same boost level but you will not pick up 80whp-90whp running less boost.
    6 replies | 128 view(s)
  • AlexQuattro's Avatar
    Today, 12:57 PM!!!-You’ll-Shoot-Your-Eye-Out Looks like you are 2 days late for a discount, but maybe Tony can give you a good will? ;)
    14 replies | 142 view(s)
  • colivera001's Avatar
    Today, 12:18 PM
    Thank you all for your quick replies. Tony, i'm about to order. Any xmas discounts i can use before i pull the trigger ? :D
    14 replies | 142 view(s)
  • The Ghost's Avatar
    Today, 12:02 PM
    The Ghost replied to a thread VTT 2+ Results - WIP in N54
    I'm running just screens at the moment, but IATs are captured in the logs. I'm running meth (CM10 x2 now) and e50 so temps should stay low). I agree. I'm curious to see how RBs would do like this. You can source silicone and aluminun bends and couplers on eBay. Once I have it all complete (the picture above is just the filters mounted without full piping) and if the inlets show gains over stock, I will post my parts list and links. Thanks
    125 replies | 5900 view(s)
  • DavidV's Avatar
    Today, 11:57 AM
    DavidV replied to a thread JMARS - Photo Build Thread in N54
    What has everybody done during Christmas that they all push the wrong thumb :D Corrected. OP, great news. Looking forward to the write down of your experience wit this kit.
    105 replies | 2647 view(s)
  • DavidV's Avatar
    Today, 11:48 AM
    I might have overcompensated the neg, but it is corrected :D OP, nice post! Informative.
    6 replies | 128 view(s)
  • Slicksilver's Avatar
    Today, 11:15 AM
    Well there is some weird rule that you can only edit 10min after post so I forgot to mention this techmaster05 its already been tried and proven on the Dyno with Brian May's e90!! That was the very first link in my first post, it links to the YouTube video in the other post with 600-640whp with RBs from 20-24 boost pressure. See video proving it below.
    6 replies | 128 view(s)
  • AdminTeam's Avatar
    Today, 11:08 AM
    Welcome to a real enthusiast forum supercompact.
    0 replies | 32 view(s)
  • Ingeniator's Avatar
    Today, 11:02 AM
    Ingeniator replied to a thread Turbo Balancing. in Advanced Tech
    This is good info. Thanks. I find some of this response to the thread in E90 very misleading. My understanding from turbo machinery operation is that outside of critical frequencies imbalance should be consistent at similar loads independent of rpm.
    11 replies | 726 view(s)
  • Slicksilver's Avatar
    Today, 10:54 AM
    According to the results above and compressor map points for both cases, Brian May at 20psi and PR of 2.4 in 70% efficiency island is stressing the turbos a lot less than at the results above from the 530whp run, just like Brian claimed. I'm pretty sure Brian understood everything above and came to the same conclusion, which is why he said it and referenced Corky Bell's book, Maximum Boost, which is the best at explaining how all this works in turbo systems. according to the map, these turbos should last a very long time at this operating point. Brian did a great job of applying good turbo principals to make max power safely and everyone here just ripped him without bothering to understand, sad really. the equations for CFM required to make power and also boost required never takes into acount which turbo you have, that doesn't matter, what matters is where you fall on the compressor map to make that CFM and PR (TQ/power) with that turbo. Now if you are operating at very low inefficiencies then you take a negative power hit from the temperature rise from the turbo. When you go to a bigger turbo at the same CFM and boost, it's operating in its higher efficiencies (if chosen properly bc too big is also very inefficient) and therefore temp rise is not near as bad so more powah!
    6 replies | 128 view(s)
  • techmaster05's Avatar
    Today, 10:40 AM
    13 replies | 500 view(s)
  • techmaster05's Avatar
    Today, 10:35 AM
    Not sure how this is possible but I'm in for results on whoever tries this. How would you say the longevity would be though??? People have lost there rb and vtt turbos with under 10k miles on them.
    6 replies | 128 view(s)
  • dustz's Avatar
    Today, 10:17 AM
    Bump price drop 15,000$ !!! Cash !!! need it gone to work on e30 project. Car is currently at dealership just to double check everything before warranty is up.
    4 replies | 205 view(s)
  • Njz's Avatar
    Today, 09:43 AM
    Njz replied to a thread VTT 2+ Results - WIP in N54
    Where did you get these intakes? I want to get on this as well, sorry if it was mentioned already I am mobile and searching the thread isnt ideal. Thanks!
    125 replies | 5900 view(s)
  • Jewber's Avatar
    Today, 09:11 AM
    Jewber replied to a thread VTT 2+ Results - WIP in N54
    Thanks for the good data OP. You shouldn't have had to do this test but I'm glad you did. Now I'm curious what RBs would make with just screens/better intakes.
    125 replies | 5900 view(s)
  • AdminTeam's Avatar
    Today, 07:56 AM
    jinn135, we appreciate you taking the time to join.
    0 replies | 40 view(s)
  • lfelunden's Avatar
    Today, 07:33 AM
    The XDF is not the final one - I got the one with defined tables, fuel scalar etc - not giving it away like that, sorry. The difference is not only timing, I have reduced timing on my car as I'm running fairly high boost now. I think it lies in the VANOS tables, not sure if they are defined correctly or not. Again, you can copy over tables, but if you change the ROM on your car - it will not run or boost properly (LIMP all the way). No CEL though. If anyone needs any help regarding the IF60S B3S flash, let me know! I spoke with an engineer at Alpina regarding the B3S this is what he told me: "Crankcase, pistons, cooling and the whole intake system is different. Also the data for the DME. Best regards Axel Rimpler Leiter Produktion / Head of Production Leiter Kundendienst / Head of Customer Service"
    72 replies | 4480 view(s)
  • M10whore's Avatar
    2 replies | 92 view(s)
  • AdminTeam's Avatar
    Today, 06:18 AM
    Welcome to a real enthusiast forum monglong33244.
    0 replies | 21 view(s)
  • SCGT's Avatar
    Today, 05:56 AM
    SCGT replied to a thread VTT 2+ Results - WIP in N54
    Any idea how your charge temps have behaved since changing your inlets, particularly up top?
    125 replies | 5900 view(s)
  • fastgti69's Avatar
    Today, 05:14 AM
    Accidently neg repped from my phone. Can you guys fix him up for me
    6 replies | 128 view(s)
  • Slicksilver's Avatar
    Today, 04:49 AM
    we all remember this thread, right? ok so I have been studying this and I think it is totally possible Brian May's numbers are achievable on RB turbos according to thermodynamic equations and compressor maps for 15T turbos. by the way, all these equations are from Garrett's website, advanced expert white papers, link below also there is an easy calculator garrett has to crunch all these formulas which I will use below. Here is the link to the calc so that you can crunch it yourself. So I was going to write all the equations here and show you how to solve for airflow and pressure ratio required to make 689hp with 100% E85 on our engine, but seems like a waste when we have a perfectly good Garrett calc to use above, so lets use it! So let start first with the results reported by TFT/Brian May: 600whp @ 20.5 psi with 13% drivetrain loss is 689 crank HP 100% E85 at 7.8:1 AFR/lambda .8 as shown on log so assuming the following: VE = .95 as has been shown previously for the N54 BSFC = .6, common for E85 turbo engines pressure drop across Intercooler and piping from turbo to manifold, 1psi at max power RPM intercooler effectiveness = .7 (normal for air to air cooler as reported by Garrett) Barometric pressure and temp the day of the Dyno - ok so I dont know this but lets assume it was an exceptionally high DA day so barometric pressure would be 14.94psia and ambient temp 61 deg F in the dyno bay and sucking into the intakes a few more inputs to make sure you get the same result in the calc mid range engine RPM 3500 (does not affect the answer at all) peak power engine RPM 6500 (very important and does affect the number, this is taken from Brian May's Dyno chart showing Peak Power at around 6500 rpm) plug and chug in the calculator and we get the following From this result we get that required air flow is 26.26 lb/min (or 380 CFM) @ PR of 2.44 which gives 20.5 psi boost gauge pressure Now lets take a look at the MHI published 15T compressor map and see where this point lands on the map. It lands in the 70% efficiency island at an optimal point in the map and at a PR of 2.44 the turbos are not being worked overly hard, everything checks out and the reported Dyno results looks credible according to the laws of physics and thermodynamics for turbo chargers. Not only that, the compressor map shows us that there is still more room for more HP which is why Brian was able to get up to 640 whp without running the turbos off the map at high inefficiencies. *ignore the rpm lines, VEs and boost pressures on the graph in colors, they are for a twin turbo dodge stealth, sorry it was the only map I could find quickly with google. So now some people may be scratching their heads and saying, "F*** that Garrett Calc, it dont know sh*t, I know RBs and the N54 cant do that sh*t bc no one else has done it with that same boost and timing curve" Well if someone could provide me a dyno with a complete log for the 530 whp run that is the supposed limit of RBs, I would be happy to crunch and compare those numbers. Until someone posts that, I will make some assumptions about the 530whp Dyno run and why it was perceived to be the limit of Rb turbos. So let begin with the assumed 530 whp run 530whp with 13% drivetrain loss is 609 crank HP now lets assume this run was done on 93 octane pump gas so assuming the following: VE = .95 as has been shown previously for the N54 BSFC = .46, common gas turbo engines pressure drop across Intercooler and piping from turbo to manifold, 1psi at max power RPM intercooler effectiveness = .7 (normal for air to air cooler as reported by Garrett) Barometric pressure and temp the day of the Dyno -assume the same 14.94psia and 61F as above (pretty high DA but common for high dyno numbers) a few more inputs to make sure you get the same result in the calc mid range engine RPM 3500 (does not affect the answer at all) peak power engine RPM 5400 rpm plug and chug and we get the following result: WOW! this result says 28.46 lb/min (or 411 CFM) @ PR of 3.29 with boost pressure of 33.25 psi! not only that, we need to adjust for the highly restrictive intake tubes as mentioned in Garretts white paper factored into P2c in the pressure ratio calc. If we assume a 2 psi loss in the pressure intake tubes vs the optimized TFT intakes Brian May used, than the adjustment to the pressure ratio is as follows: PR = P2c / P1c P2c = 33.25 + 14.7 = 47.95 psia P1c = 14.7 - 2 = 12.7 PR = 47.95/12.7 = 3.78 !! so lets see above on the compressor map where 411 CFM @ 3.78 PR falls...yeah, way off the map. Now more than likely the 530whp run was done with E50 and some meth for cooling which would bring it closer to the lowest efficiency circle on the compressor map but probably still pretty far outside and at the max of the turbos. So what did we learn from all this: 1) Tuning with 100% E85 is awesome because it lowers required turbo air flow rate significantly for more HP 2) Improving the turbo intakes has a significant effect on the pressure ratio the turbo needs to run at and addressing the issue with the intakes (and any other restrictive part of the pipework) pays huge dividends at higher horsepower levels/PRs Some other great features of 100% E85 tuning that contributed to Brian May's Dyno result: 1) Lowers EGT's. E85 will typically see EGT's 200c below pump gas at the same relative AFR (for instance 12.5:1 pump, 8.33:1 E85) 2) Octane rating of 105 with class 1 e85(raises detonation threshold significantly) 3) Very high vaporization cooling, much more than gasoline, which lowers mixture temps, thus increasing detonation threshold, along with increasing VE 4) Peak cylinder pressure are lower while maintaining a higher and longer overall cylinder pressure, thus raising detonation threshold and making more power due to increase in crank angle 5) E85 burns much more efficiently than gasoline, 27% more efficient 6) despite lower EGT's, E85 creates more exhaust gas volume, which helps with spool without added EGTs 7) E85 can take timing increases for days after max torque (peak VE). Lets say it takes 10* at max torque, after that it can ramp up to say 20* to redline and handle without a problem. On our engines it may not be so high due to CR and backpressure but I think somewhere between 17-20* at max rpm is very achievable with 100% E85. I got this from evolutionm forum which has many tuners with many years of experience tuning their Evos to 100% E85 and getting awesome results sorry for any Typos, It 2:41 in the morning! By the way, in case anyone is wondering, I am a mechanical engineer so these equations and thermodynamic principals are all stuff I learned in school that Garrett reminded me of :) I probably made some mistakes and or bad assumptions, so please I welcome any corrections or discussions regarding this post.
    6 replies | 128 view(s)
  • joseph's Avatar
    Today, 04:32 AM
    joseph replied to a thread Serpentine belt broke in N54
    On 135/335 p/s pulley can contact subframe causing shredded belt but i dont know if that can happen on e60. Check your front crank seal for leaks to make sure a piece of the belt didn't get sucked into the engine and cause the timing chain to jump teeth. Also check wiring for camshaft sensors and vanos solenoids for damage from belt. Also low voltage can cause random weird problems so check all pulleys, put on a new belt and check alternator.
    3 replies | 83 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    Today, 04:17 AM
    Here is the Audi RS7 we all know and love in action once again. The RS7 features upgraded Garrett turbochargers and APR tuning to make them work. Horsepower is quoted in this video at 900 and we see numbers all over the place for the car but it is somewhere in the 7XX wheel horsepower range. The first race has the RS7 go up against a bolt on tuned 997.2 Turbo. The Porsche is stated to have 600 horsepower so let's just assume it has an ECU tune and exhaust. The Porsche gets a huge jump but the RS7 is a second quicker through the 1/4 mile and traps 136.89 miles per hour compared to the 128.51 of the 911 Turbo. The RS7 is a much more powerful car and it shows. The second race has Porsche 997.2 Turbo go up against a foxbody Mustang with a claimed 1000 horsepower. The Mustang definitely has a ton of power as the driver struggles to keep it going in a straight line. He really, really, struggles with the car going all over the place. The 911 Turbo remains composed and takes the race but this is essentially a botched run for the Mustang. The final run features the 997.2 Turbo go up against... something. The video does not list what it is and it appears to be a Civic hatch although it could be a European hatchback of some kind. We do not know for sure and its result is not listed but what we do know is that it loses to the 997.2 Turbo but certainly looks quick. The 997.2 Turbo shows consistent performance running another 11.1 1/4 mile with a 128.2 trap speed. It would have been interesting to see a clean run out of the Mustang and have it go up against the RS7 but you can't always get what you want.
    0 replies | 12 view(s)
More Activity