Close

    • PRO TUNING FREAKS Cobb AP tuned upgraded turbo and ported cylinder head N54 E90 335i hits 553 wheel horsepower 631 wheel torque on pump gas and meth - N54 Twin Turbo World Record

      Last night I hit the dyno to see what the car can do with the new ported N54 cylinder head, RB turbos, 3.5bar TMAP sensor from the new BMW N20 four-cylinder motor, FBO (catless), pump 94 octane and meth, stock turbo inlet pipes. Key thing here, this is with a tune that sees ZERO timing corrections everywhere on all cylinders and timing that is set right at MBT for this level of boost and this car's given octane. I've run the car on the street with this exact setup this morning, number of pulls, it's pretty ridiculous.

      553WHP/631WTQ - PUMP GAS (94 Octane) + METH


      In terms of the tune, it was running more than 22.5psi in midrange, 19.7psi peak at 6k rpm, 17.5-18psi at redline. Logs of actual boost in midrange aren't available as I found out that ATP's datalogging needs to be updated to accomodate the 3.5bar scaling. I was going off my p3 gauge for midrange boost when pushed past the 22.5psi datalogging limit. I don't recommend this to anyone before ATP is updated for 3.5bar datalog scaling, it just had to be done last night and I decided to push on as I get to do what I feel is best for my car LOL and that's make some power

      No leanouts or fuel issues. LTFTs goes down to zero during the pull, STFTs trend to high negative 20s with meth. The car was running close to if not 100% meth, three 1.0mm nozzles, two of them in the FMIC outlet silicone coupler and another up in the ER charge pipe past the elbow.

      I'll be fine tuning things over the coming days but to be perfectly honest and blunt, last night was about turning things UP and NOT fine tuning. It was to find MBT and push boost as far as it can go while limiting wastegate duty cycle to about 73-74% everywhere especially past 6k rpm. It was also to experiment with various VANOS changes. I experimented with higher wg duty cycles before and RBs didn't like it. It also introduces too much backpressure into the system even fully catless that the car doesn't like it.

      So, is there more power left here. We'll see when the intake pipes are swapped for something better flowing. @George Smooth reported +19whp at his high altitude in South Africa so possibly another 20 in there without any changes. Then there's mixing race gas or E85 into it to see if there's anything there in terms of additional power through more timing. All out its very possible this will be a 575-585whp setup once all is said and done, dare I say 600 LOL

      Other runs from last night:


      By the way, on Smoothing of zero the car made 555WHP Nice even number easy to remember

      When that torque hits it feels like a big turbo came on!! Swoooooosh!

      Specs:

      PTF Cobb AP Tune
      PTF Ported Cylinder Head w/ +1mm enlarged Super Alloy Exhaust Valves
      RB Turbos
      3.5bar BMW N20 engine TMAP sensor
      Aquamist HFS-4 Methanol Injection (100% meth, three 1.0mm nozzles, Howerton 2.2gal trunk mounted tank)
      AR Catless Downpipes
      HKS Legamax Exhaust
      Custom Mr.5-like intake
      KL Racing (aka Big Tom) FMIC
      ER 3" post FMIC piping (up pipe, charge Pipe) + Tial BOV
      Okada Plasma Ignition Coils + OEM Plugs
      HPF Stage 2 Feramic Clutch + OEM Dual Mass Flywheel
      DSS 1000hp rear axles
      Rear m3 suspension bits
      2.56 Quaife LSD
      17x9 APEX ARC-8 wheels
      Nitto 555 245/45/17 front, Nitto 555R 275/40/17 rear tires
      Vorsteiner Carbon Fiber hood (single sided, vented)
      Carbon Fiber trunk
      Sunoco (Petro Canada) pump 94 Octane




      EDIT: Some people asked to see the conditions from the dyno, STD correction factor as well as the same run but in SAE. Here they are below:

      CONDITIONS AND STD CORRECTION (i.e. STD resulted in 1.00 correction, so no correction basically):



      SAE numbers for the same run (SAE correction was 0.97, so 3% lower than STD):


      This article was originally published in forum thread: PTF UPDATE: 553WHP 631WTQ - N54 TwinTurbo World Record started by dzenno@ProTUNING Freaks View original post
      Comments 217 Comments
      1. dzenno@PTF's Avatar
        dzenno@PTF -
        Yes, OEM everything except exhaust valves/retainers/guides
      1. lamia2super's Avatar
        lamia2super -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Itsbrokeagain Click here to enlarge
        @dzenno are you still using OEM headbolts? I wonder if I should put a call into ARP to see if they would make headstuds?
        i think my shop called them and they wanted to much $$$
      1. Bleep's Avatar
        Bleep -
        Can't believe this 1:1 dyno gearing myth is still being perpetuated, especially here. That's E90Post stuff
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Bleep Click here to enlarge
        Can't believe this 1:1 dyno gearing myth is still being perpetuated, especially here. That's E90Post stuff
        What gear do you dyno in? Please, elaborate.
      1. BoostAddict's Avatar
        BoostAddict -
        Food for thought

      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by BoostAddict Click here to enlarge
        Good post! http://www.bimmerboost.com/content.p...ls-on-the-dyno
      1. rudypoochris's Avatar
        rudypoochris -
        I mean, they lost 20hp... that makes sense simply from the inertia alone. Those rear tires and wheels are so much heavier and have so much wider of a contact patch. The graphs are offset because they are scaling in mph and not rpm. No clue why they would scale in MPH since the dynojet doesn't require ratios as an input...

        This may be of some use:

        http://forums.corvetteforum.com/c5-t...o-numbers.html
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        This seems to be a very good explanation:

        Higher ratio gears will give you lower chassis dyno numbers for a strange, but logical reason. In essence, the DynoJet calculates hp based on the time it takes to spin up the 2800lb roller assembly. It's basically work divided by time and rpm. Think about this: If you car is at idle in neutral and you stab the throttle, it will take time to accelerate to redline...let's say 1.1 seconds. Now let's say it takes 8.2 seconds for your car to accelerate the DynoJet from low speed to top speed with 3.23 gears and 7.3 seconds with 3.73 gears. Dyno printout says 355 rwhp with 3.23 gears and 346 rwhp with 3.73 gears...why?

        Think aabout this: In the 8.2 seconds it takes to spin the rollers with 3.23 gears, it would still take the motor about 1.1 seconds to overcome its own inertia (idle to redline). There's about 13.4% of the work used just to accelerate the motor itself. With 3.73 gears, the time to reach redline decreases to 7.3 seconds. Divide the 1.1 seconds into the 7.3 seconds and you will see that overcoming the internal engine inertia costs 15.1% of the work with 3.73 gears. There is less hp available during this time period to spin the rollers so the DynoJet will read a slightly lower hp figure. Make sense, or did I lose you?"
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by rudypoochris Click here to enlarge
        I mean, they lost 20hp... that makes sense simply from the inertia alone. Those rear tires and wheels are so much heavier and have so much wider of a contact patch. The graphs are offset because they are scaling in mph and not rpm. No clue why they would scale in MPH since the dynojet doesn't require ratios as an input...

        This may be of some use:

        http://forums.corvetteforum.com/c5-t...o-numbers.html
        Very nice post, reading it, learning. Good stuff.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        This seems to be a very good explanation:

        [/I]
        What I'm trying to understand here is how does he calculate the 1.1 seconds to overcome its own inertia?
      1. JC335xi's Avatar
        JC335xi -
        Its not calculated. The 1.1 sec figure was just made up for the sake of making the example.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by JC335xi Click here to enlarge
        Its not calculated. The 1.1 sec figure was just made up for the sake of making the example.
        Well how do you calculate it?
      1. JC335xi's Avatar
        JC335xi -
        Think about this: If you car is at idle in neutral and you stab the throttle, it will take time to accelerate to redline...let's say 1.1 seconds.
        From this it appears to be a measurement you would take for your engine not a calculated value.
      1. nafoo's Avatar
        nafoo -
        Do mustang dynos calculate differently? Most AT cars put out more TQ than 6MT on any given dyno. When I swapped my rear diff from 3.08 to 3.46 my TQ increased.

        I thought it was common knowledge that higher gear ratio (3.46) increases TQ?
      1. Flinchy's Avatar
        Flinchy -
        Shorter gears read lower horsepower due to some magic mumbo? Thats not how it actually works though!

        it just proves again that dyno horsepower figures are total bs for comparing anything other than your car pre-mod to your car post-mod... Assuming your mod isn't changing your gewr ratios

        and if i'm to understand this correctly, dzennos car gets free dynojet horsepower from simply having longer gearing?

        ed: and it's pretty common knowledge that bigger+heavier wheels and tires reduces power seen at said wheels.. Want to go for max hp numbers? Fit skinny 17's lol
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Flinchy Click here to enlarge
        and if i'm to understand this correctly, dzennos car gets free dynojet horsepower from simply having longer gearing?
        That would be correct on an inertia based dyno it seems.
      1. Flinchy's Avatar
        Flinchy -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        That would be correct on an inertia based dyno it seems.
        Wow.. Well i guess that's why dyno dynamics/ mustang (same type correct? We only really get DD over here) are considered 'more accurate' ?

        ed: ok dynojet are more consistent between dynos, but dyno dynamics are easier to compare when used on the same dyno
      1. rudypoochris's Avatar
        rudypoochris -
        Shorter gearing costs you power. Greater changes in ratio require more effort to turn. Additionally larger ratios means one shaft is turning faster than the other, friction increases with V^2. This is a big reason why you can dyno a car like an S2000 and end up with less HP than a 225hp Mustang 5.0. The drive train consumes much more energy due to the higher ratios. Some of this is mitigated by weaker input components if they are used.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Flinchy Click here to enlarge
        Wow.. Well i guess that's why dyno dynamics/ mustang (same type correct? We only really get DD over here) are considered 'more accurate' ?
        They aren't more accurate as much as for tuning load based dynos are preferred.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by rudypoochris Click here to enlarge
        Shorter gearing costs you power. Greater changes in ratio require more effort to turn. Additionally larger ratios means one shaft is turning faster than the other, friction increases with V^2. This is a big reason why you can dyno a car like an S2000 and end up with less HP than a 225hp Mustang 5.0. The drive train consumes much more energy due to the higher ratios. Some of this is mitigated by weaker input components if they are used.
        There's truth to this but you do get a mathematical torque increase which has to translate.