• Vargas Stage III Turbo upgrade for 335/135 N54 motor hits 572 wheel horsepower on 91 octane pump gas (no meth injection) with Cobb flash

      Well here are some results for the Vargas Stage III upgrade that has caused the N54 forum section to basically be engaged in chaos for the past few months. From accusations of vaporware, to comparison to single turbo upgrades, to countless other arguments the day has come and the Stage III Vargas Turbo upgrade dyno'd on 91 octane with no meth 572 horsepower to the rear wheels. This is with a Cobb flash tuned by BimmerBoost vendor Pro-Tuning Freaks.


      Impressive? Yep, sure is and this seems to also be a 91 octane pump gas only world record for the N54. Now keep in mind this is just the beginning. What will it do with meth? What will do on E85? What will it do with race gas and big boost? What about different turbos? Sky appears to be the limit but for now this kind of performance on pump gas sure is a big boost (hah, get it?) to the N54 scene.

      Congratulations to all involved, Vargas Turbo Tech, Pro-Tuning Freaks, Cobb, and just the N54 community as well. The impossible just became possible. Pictures, video, and dynograph below.



      This article was originally published in forum thread: 572WHP 537WTQ - ACN 91 Octane, no meth - VTT Stage 3 Early Dynos PTF / COBB Protune started by VargasTurboTech View original post
      Comments 575 Comments
      1. GetSomeE92's Avatar
        GetSomeE92 -
        I am really interested to see what the pricing is going to end up being on this stage three kit. May end up keeping the 335 long term after all. I have several E85 stations within a mile of my house. Would be awesome.
      1. V8Bait's Avatar
        V8Bait -
        I got what I wanted out of this.... a power curve with a relatively flat said boost curve. And a nice $#@!storm at the post that I sadly missed watching. If you aren't starting a $#@!storm then you aren't doing it right on this platform.

        It's kinda like filling in the gaps of the stock VE curve to determing the effect of head, cams, intakes, and exhaust. You don't need everything, just enough. I've seen stock turbo's running X boost flat, stock frame turbo's (RB) run flat boost, ported head dyno's (D's car), man (ST) turbo's with ramping boost, and man (vargus) turbo's with flat boost. All that's needed now for a complete data set would be a non turbo dyno.

        I love complete data sets.
      1. klipseracer's Avatar
        klipseracer -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by V8Bait Click here to enlarge
        I got what I wanted out of this.... a power curve with a relatively flat said boost curve. And a nice $#@!storm at the post that I sadly missed watching. If you aren't starting a $#@!storm then you aren't doing it right on this platform.

        It's kinda like filling in the gaps of the stock VE curve to determing the effect of head, cams, intakes, and exhaust. You don't need everything, just enough. I've seen stock turbo's running X boost flat, stock frame turbo's (RB) run flat boost, ported head dyno's (D's car), man (ST) turbo's with ramping boost, and man (vargus) turbo's with flat boost. All that's needed now for a complete data set would be a non turbo dyno.

        I love complete data sets.
        The N52.

        Attachment 28007
      1. Flinchy's Avatar
        Flinchy -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by klipseracer Click here to enlarge
        not very useful as a comparison i wouldn't think?
      1. klipseracer's Avatar
        klipseracer -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Flinchy Click here to enlarge
        not very useful as a comparison i wouldn't think?
        Why not? He wanted a nonturbo dynobfor his dataset. Just about as close as he's gonna get unless I'm misunderstanding the request.
      1. Flinchy's Avatar
        Flinchy -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by klipseracer Click here to enlarge
        Why not? He wanted a nonturbo dynobfor his dataset. Just about as close as he's gonna get unless I'm misunderstanding the request.
        totally different heads, 10.7:1 CR, valvetronic probably has an effect
      1. VargasTurboTech's Avatar
        VargasTurboTech -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by dzenno@ProTUNING Freaks Click here to enlarge
        This.

        To clarify though, we made 582whp once meth was turned on for the same map that made 572whp on just 91 octane. The 602whp pull where Tony lifted had a new map with just 2deg extra timing on top of 91 and smoothing changes to boost control to lift the bump you saw at 4500-5k rpm.

        Its just work in progress and lots more to follow. Don't be too hard on us for showing you preliminary results guys. Its easy not to show anything until its all perfect but that'd mean no fun on the forums Click here to enlarge I know how much I anticipate seeing results out there but let's try not to nitpick just yet. Once we say that's all we can do then we can all nitpick heh
        You know what D, you are right. I thought the one where I lifted was the first run as it was the first run where I had the dyno button, all those runs started blending together at the end when the Dyno op decided to take a phone call and handed me the button. So I was logging, starting and stoping the dyno, watching all the gauges, and trying to talk to you. Needless to say after that last hour. My brain was fried.
      1. VargasTurboTech's Avatar
        VargasTurboTech -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by benzy89 Click here to enlarge
        Actually, not so much. What @LostMarine , myself & a few other people were asking for were for the results to not be dependent on 9x octane + meth runs, but instead for a combination of dynos, specifically strict Pump Gas numbers, Pump with Meth numbers, and finally Race Gas/E85 + Meth numbers. This way, it illustrated what the setup was capable of for people who don't run meth and/or how much power you have if you were out of meth.

        Here are the two most important quotes that illustrate WHY there was a substantial power increase when meth was added:





        SO big surprise, the 602 WHP pull (91 + Meth) was NOT the same tune that produced the 572 WHP (strict 91 pump gas). I have nothing against the ProTuning Freaks guys and Tony, but you can see how Tony's post was a little misleading. Myself included, some people could've read that post & been lead to believe that both runs were done on the same tune with meth being the only new variable added into the mix, thus being the only reason for the additional HP.
        I got the runs mixed up, as at the end things were getting hetic as $#@! as we were running out of time. The runs were back to back and both numbers were up on the screen. Yes the person who has been the most transparent, and honest of just about any vendor in regards to what is going on with his products is going to mislead everyone for 17 hp. As the actaul run with no tune changes was 585, and something like 560 tq. I would have to look back to confirm tq. This, isn't a court case or trial. Your bolding of statements isn't evidence of anything, except you have too much time on your hands.
      1. lulz_m3's Avatar
        lulz_m3 -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by VargasTurboTech Click here to enlarge
        I got the runs mixed up, as at the end things were getting hetic as $#@! as we were running out of time. The runs were back to back and both numbers were up on the screen. Yes the person who has been the most transparent, and honest of just about any vendor in regards to what is going on with his products is going to mislead everyone for 17 hp. As the actaul run with no tune changes was 585, and something like 560 tq. I would have to look back to confirm tq. This, isn't a court case or trial. Your bolding of statements isn't evidence of anything, except you have too much time on your hands.
        QFT
      1. Sered's Avatar
        Sered -
        Why do people on this board auto-assume a conspiracy or someone being misleading when it's quite possible it's just a mistake? Holy $#@! people, at least give them a chance to address it before running off with your strawman.

        Tony has been up-front and the epitome of transparent since the beginning. He and DZ are pushing the platform forward while everyone kicks and screams like little babies (I'm guilty of it myself too). How about we just give Tony some slack eh?
      1. Legionofboom's Avatar
        Legionofboom -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by benzy89 Click here to enlarge
        Actually, not so much. What @LostMarine , myself & a few other people were asking for were for the results to not be dependent on 9x octane + meth runs, but instead for a combination of dynos, specifically strict Pump Gas numbers, Pump with Meth numbers, and finally Race Gas/E85 + Meth numbers. This way, it illustrated what the setup was capable of for people who don't run meth and/or how much power you have if you were out of meth.

        Here are the two most important quotes that illustrate WHY there was a substantial power increase when meth was added:





        SO big surprise, the 602 WHP pull (91 + Meth) was NOT the same tune that produced the 572 WHP (strict 91 pump gas). I have nothing against the ProTuning Freaks guys and Tony, but you can see how Tony's post was a little misleading. Myself included, some people could've read that post & been lead to believe that both runs were done on the same tune with meth being the only new variable added into the mix, thus being the only reason for the additional HP.

        Are you seriously complaining about this? I can't believe this.

        Of course the meth run was a different tune! Look at the lack of "dip", that both Tony and Dzenno said that would be tuned out, and it shows in their last dyno.

        Buy your own set and test them however you please, or don't complain how the tuner and fabricator test them, everyone will get the numbers THEY THINK are the most useful, if thats No meth, or with meth, or with oxygenated e85 or with C16 or with E50 or whatever, just be patient.
      1. GG///M3's Avatar
        GG///M3 -
        Any graphs with RPM's instead of MPH?
      1. themyst's Avatar
        themyst -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by benzy89 Click here to enlarge
        Actually, not so much. What @LostMarine, myself & a few other people were asking for were for the results to not be dependent on 9x octane + meth runs, but instead for a combination of dynos, specifically strict Pump Gas numbers, Pump with Meth numbers, and finally Race Gas/E85 + Meth numbers. This way, it illustrated what the setup was capable of for people who don't run meth and/or how much power you have if you were out of meth.

        Here are the two most important quotes that illustrate WHY there was a substantial power increase when meth was added:





        SO big surprise, the 602 WHP pull (91 + Meth) was NOT the same tune that produced the 572 WHP (strict 91 pump gas). I have nothing against the ProTuning Freaks guys and Tony, but you can see how Tony's post was a little misleading. Myself included, some people could've read that post & been lead to believe that both runs were done on the same tune with meth being the only new variable added into the mix, thus being the only reason for the additional HP.
        What you're not getting is the 91 octane number is simply that, 91 octane. Takes time to properly dial everything in for different fuels, setups, etc.

        What I want to see is an E85+meth dyno sheet. 700 whp should come easy assuming you can crank the boost properly.
      1. V8Bait's Avatar
        V8Bait -
        Nope N52 is way too different from our engine, night and day really. From what I can tell the biggest killers of VE on this platform at high RPM are the stock turbo manfold and intake ports in the head. After that cams are the limiting factor, possibly equal to the intake ports in the head, but I can't say if the head or the cams are keeping the redline down yet since there is insufficient data (only the ST and Vargus would be capable of breathing that high to begin with, also assuming DI limitations are not exceeded with RPM). Exhaust ports don't seem like much of a concern for our VE, nor does the induction system for the most part (intake manifold). Not many surprises there but it's nicely backed up by real world examples now thanks to Vargus and others being open with their dyno's. Props for that.

        There has been a power vs rpm graph posted around somewhere in this thread or over on n54tech iirc. But on an interia dyno spool time (especially for big turbo's) isn't very accurate, probably off a few hundred RPM with slower ramp up.
      1. LostMarine's Avatar
        LostMarine -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by rader1 Click here to enlarge
        Weird how that's exactly the opposite of what you was arguing a couple a couple weeks ago when I said 93 + meth was what I was interested in seeing. Ohh and the DME pulls timing in response to CATs without it being corrections, you can easily lose several degrees of timing advance in response to CATs and not have a single correction. That's how the DME can compensate for a fairly aggressive tune and it still be safe in hot weather.
        weird, how I said 91 octane is where it should start and then move to 93, 93+meth, and 100, 100+meth, as I ALSO said its what most people, myself included run.. interesting turn of events, or just trying to puff your chest..?

        not sure about your cats comment.. dont see that holding value here..
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by dzenno@ProTUNING Freaks Click here to enlarge
        This.

        To clarify though, we made 582whp once meth was turned on for the same map that made 572whp on just 91 octane. The 602whp pull where Tony lifted had a new map with just 2deg extra timing on top of 91 and smoothing changes to boost control to lift the bump you saw at 4500-5k rpm.

        Its just work in progress and lots more to follow. Don't be too hard on us for showing you preliminary results guys. Its easy not to show anything until its all perfect but that'd mean no fun on the forums Click here to enlarge I know how much I anticipate seeing results out there but let's try not to nitpick just yet. Once we say that's all we can do then we can all nitpick heh
        DZ, not being hard, just open and had a thought about it. adding timing back in certainly explains the massive bump and defunks my thought process, but we didnt know that at the time. Keep up the good work Click here to enlarge
      1. themyst's Avatar
        themyst -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by LostMarine Click here to enlarge
        weird, how I said 91 octane is where it should start and then move to 93, 93+meth, and 100, 100+meth, as I ALSO said its what most people, myself included run.. interesting turn of events, or just trying to puff your chest..?

        not sure about your cats comment.. dont see that holding value here..


        DZ, not being hard, just open and had a thought about it. adding timing back in certainly explains the massive bump and defunks my thought process, but we didnt know that at the time. Keep up the good work Click here to enlarge
        Cats = charge air temp. It completely holds value based on the DME logic... unless you were thinking about catalytic converters.
      1. LostMarine's Avatar
        LostMarine -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by E90SoFlo Click here to enlarge
        Of course the meth run was a different tune! Look at the lack of "dip", that both Tony and Dzenno said that would be tuned out, and it shows in their last dyno.
        \increase your knowledge first.

        if that was truely a no $#@! no changes tune, then my comment about timing being pulled would be spot on.. have you seen dyno runs that were too aggressive for the octane, and then octane added? it would look like what was posted.

        again, not faulting anyone, a simple observation, and an easy correction.

        you fuksticks are quick to troll someone for asking questions, your newb status shows very clearly when anyone questions VTT.
        believe me, you would rather these questions, be asked here, and by me, rather than anyone else.
      1. LostMarine's Avatar
        LostMarine -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by themyst Click here to enlarge
        Cats = charge air temp. It completely holds value based on the DME logic... unless you were thinking about catalytic converters.
        well, yes, i thought about convertors in the comment, but again, charge air temps, induce timing corrections-which is still rectified by octane, which still supports overly advanced timing.. dme of piggy tuned makes no difference. and that would have thought more efficient turbos would not have such an issue at that boost, but i guess im wrong. once again for trolls, thats not a "knock", just an assumption i made, and obviously an incorrect one.
      1. Legionofboom's Avatar
        Legionofboom -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by LostMarine Click here to enlarge
        \increase your knowledge first.

        if that was truely a no $#@! no changes tune, then my comment about timing being pulled would be spot on.. have you seen dyno runs that were too aggressive for the octane, and then octane added? it would look like what was posted.

        again, not faulting anyone, a simple observation, and an easy correction.

        you fuksticks are quick to troll someone for asking questions, your newb status shows very clearly when anyone questions VTT.
        believe me, you would rather these questions, be asked here, and by me, rather than anyone else.
        Telling me to "increase my knowledge" While you're complaining that you're assumption about not changing the maps is kinda absurd.

        I will jump on, and point out the face that people like you that are trying to "smear" something, when they don't have all the details.

        You did or didn't know if the maps were changed?

        When I seen the graph originally posted, than Tony overlapped the ladder graph over top, I immediately knew uhh.. (ASS U ME) it was a different tune, why anyone would assume that adding meth, to the same tune would add 30whp. is beyond anyone's comprehension.

        My guess is for whatever reason you thought the opposite, and with all your superior knowledge I don't know how thats possible.
      1. DefactoM6's Avatar
        DefactoM6 -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by themyst Click here to enlarge
        What you're not getting is the 91 octane number is simply that, 91 octane. Takes time to properly dial everything in for different fuels, setups, etc.

        What I want to see is an E85+meth dyno sheet. 700 whp should come easy assuming you can crank the boost properly.
        Def agree on the first statement. However, I think people are going to be a bit disappointed by e85 in this application, at the very least with e85 used by itself (e85+enough meth might bandaid it temporarily). If the HPFP is running out of volume on 91 octane pisswater, it's really going to struggle with a fuel that is significantly less energy dense. IMHO, MS109/GT260P+meth is what will allow this setup to shine brightest until either an HPFP upgrade or some form of supplementary injection comes around.