Close

Page 3 of 12 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 282
  1. #51
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,848
    Rep Points
    31,576.4
    Mentioned
    2066 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by mazdaspeed6 Click here to enlarge
    lets make a list on bottlenecks on the n54
    -turbos
    -inlet pipes
    -small 2.5 inch at its largest intercooler pipes
    -no fuel to support 500+
    -no serious turbo kit
    Heads, valvetrain, cams.

    Anyway, the N54 has a long bright future ahead but let's get this back to HPF turbos and such.

  2. #52
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    847
    Rep Points
    176.3
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by SlicktopTTZ Click here to enlarge
    Cool, they swapped the injectors out and ran a $#@! load of race gas and meth with a turbo that doesn't spool till 4500RPM. What was the cost of that? How much custom tuning had to be done for that to happen? How quick have the S54 M3s been getting through the 1/4 mile?

    6-7 years ago my Supercharged bolt on S54 made over 500whp and ran a 11.9 @ 123mph at one of the worst tracks to have ever existed. I haven't gone back to a 1/4 mile track ever since but my S54 makes 940whp at 29psi currently. Traction is the only issue and trying to come up with a solution for a track day.


    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by SlicktopTTZ Click here to enlarge
    Lol you are talking about a sleeved iron block I6 with a drag turbo, stand-alone ECU, factory relatively high RPM head and tons of development time vs a stock internals, stock turbos N54 with a piggy-back tune and fueling limits that need to be worked around.

    Do you see why it's ridiculous to bash the N54 so bad?

    We haven't even seen a bigger turbo setup on it yet and we're stuck on factory injectors! I think 500+WHP/500+ft-lb on STOCK FRAME turbos, internals and STOCK injectors, full torque by 2500-3000RPM is pretty damn good! The N54 doesn't have a HUGE aftermarket like the some of the other brands.

    The N54 is fighting an uphill battle because of new technology and building an aftermarket from scratch. So what!? I'm not even saying one is better than the other, it's just ridiculous to act like it's a complete joke, which is how you portray it!
    So what is your argument here? Sticky is saying the S54 is a superior motor, that is the truth. The S54 flows incredibly well, with just a lowered compression piston/rod setup (and L19 head studs) you can make 800+whp safely all day long (I did it). As far as your TQ argument you are comparing a high revving motor with 1 turbo, against a low revving twin turbo motor. Another factor is that the N54 comes boosted already, whereas the S5 does not.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    You don't understand, development time for the N54 won't mean anything. IT WILL NEVER EQUAL OR SURPASS THE S54. The S54 is far too efficient to begin with. This is why boosted M motor are so much stronger per PSI of boost.

    Taza is making what, 950 whp? I mean that's insane whp and you think time will change things? It isn't a question of time, the S54 is a better power platform due to the design of the motor.
    Exactly..

    My 940whp at 29psi is a daily tune (granted on race gas). It was not a dyno tune, or dyno number setting. We could have easily put more timing, less fuel and more boost to achieve 1100whp but we did not. Im not after marketing. Click here to enlarge

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    The N54 fueling limit is just one problem it faces. The S54 isn't running any stand alone ECU, piggyback as well.

    Nobody is bashing the N54. The N54 simply is not an S54 and never will be. A bigger turbo won't change the fact the torque falls off hard. A bigger turbo won't change the block. A bigger turbo won't change the lower redline. A bigger turbo won't change the valvetrain. A bigger turbo won't change the displacement disadvantage. Honestly, for a factory turbo motor I would have expected much bigger things by now. The S54 has made 1000 whp. The S65 is making much more power with less boost using SC's. You can't compare it with the NA M motors because they flow so well to make their WHP per liter. Uphill battle, like I said.

    The N54 has a bigger aftermarket than the S54 ever had.

    It isn't a complete joke, I respect it. What is funny is how some 335 owners call the motor the new Supra, please, that's a joke.
    This is true although HPF is making the S54 sort of like a 2JZE market now that they are releasing pieces of their kit. More people are experimenting with the S54 now as well, ProEFI, Maximum PSI etc... Remember for years the S54 was dubbed the "blow up" motor and many people were scared to touch it! The N54 started off on a much easier foot!
    Click here to enlarge

  3. #53
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,848
    Rep Points
    31,576.4
    Mentioned
    2066 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by TaZaM3 Click here to enlarge
    Remember for years the S54 was dubbed the "blow up" motor and many people were scared to touch it! The N54 started off on a much easier foot!
    Of course I remember the bearing recall fiasco, I had a 2001 E46 M3. The motor got a bad rep but that was soon put to rest. The N54 started out easier being boosted but it just goes to show how what matters is the design of the motor to begin with and the S54 is just insanely efficient. BMW's best work, IMO.

  4. #54
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Bay Area
    Posts
    977
    Rep Points
    779.1
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    8


    Reputation: Yes | No
    i got this vid along with an invoice...can't get away...guess i'll watch it.....












    ...meh

    i don't see whats wrong with refering to the s54 as the german 2jz

  5. #55
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Corpus Christi, Texas, United States
    Posts
    3,053
    Rep Points
    1,236.6
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    13


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Didn't mean to take attention away from HPF. The video was badass! Nothing beats some high-quality track footage with a car like their modified M3.

    The S54 is definitely on my list of favorite motors. I wonder what HPF could do with an e46 M3 focused on strip duty....

    Their best passes so far were set with their orange shop-car, right?

  6. #56
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Corpus Christi, Texas, United States
    Posts
    3,053
    Rep Points
    1,236.6
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    13


    Reputation: Yes | No
    You have to admit the CAN-bus setup for the N54 is pretty cool though. It's response time and the way it controls throttle, a/f ratio and ingition timing to keep itself near the limit makes it almost hard to blow up.

  7. #57
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,848
    Rep Points
    31,576.4
    Mentioned
    2066 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by SlicktopTTZ Click here to enlarge
    Their best passes so far were set with their orange shop-car, right?
    Yes, they have been trying hard for 10's with it. They even changed the turbo, etc.

  8. #58
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,915
    Rep Points
    1,353.6
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    14


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    The S54 had to be dropped, the M50 line reached the end of its evolution and was no longer competitive in racing.
    I think this sums it up kind of. S54 is not competitive any more. Not in racing but neither in the market place. Ford T-model received a lot of prizes, but it's engine is not good in today's standards.

  9. #59
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,915
    Rep Points
    1,353.6
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    14


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    There is no question the S54 is a more efficient motor.
    S54 is very inefficient in comparison. Efficiency is the ratio of output to input. N54 is way ahead S54 which is showing its age. NA engines are not competitive or efficient. Have a look at the new F10 M5. Now that is efficient high tech modern engine technology.

  10. #60
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,915
    Rep Points
    1,353.6
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    14


    Reputation: Yes | No
    I don't know how you define an engine, but to me it is not the iron block to which you upgrade all the internals and slap a huge aftermarket turbo...

  11. #61
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,915
    Rep Points
    1,353.6
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    14


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    Which N54 product? They only offer a couple things. What was the issue?
    HPF 335/135 oil catch tank
    It is a joke.

  12. #62
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    le Paris
    Posts
    6,653
    Rep Points
    -224.0
    Mentioned
    48 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by 654 Click here to enlarge
    S54 is very inefficient in comparison. Efficiency is the ratio of output to input. N54 is way ahead S54 which is showing its age. NA engines are not competitive or efficient. Have a look at the new F10 M5. Now that is efficient high tech modern engine technology.
    it depends on your definition of efficiency. if you mean HP/Liter, S54 is ahead.
    give it the same boost as N54 and the HP will be doubled.

  13. #63
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,915
    Rep Points
    1,353.6
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    14


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sorena Click here to enlarge
    it depends on your definition of efficiency. if you mean HP/Liter, S54 is ahead.
    give it the same boost as N54 and the HP will be doubled.
    Efficiency has nothing to do with displacement. It is output/input ratio.

  14. #64
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    le Paris
    Posts
    6,653
    Rep Points
    -224.0
    Mentioned
    48 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by 654 Click here to enlarge
    Efficiency has nothing to do with displacement. It is output/input ratio.
    How Can you measure the input ?

  15. #65
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,915
    Rep Points
    1,353.6
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    14


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Chemical potential energy contained in fuel.
    Output is kinetic energy or work.
    The ratio is called the efficiency of an engine.

  16. #66
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    le Paris
    Posts
    6,653
    Rep Points
    -224.0
    Mentioned
    48 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    ^ no man, you'll never be able to measure the input properly.

  17. #67
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Corpus Christi, Texas, United States
    Posts
    3,053
    Rep Points
    1,236.6
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    13


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Couldn't you do lbs fuel/HP output or something like that? Brake Specific Fuel Consumption is what you are referring to, no?

  18. #68
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    847
    Rep Points
    176.3
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by 654 Click here to enlarge
    S54 is very inefficient in comparison. Efficiency is the ratio of output to input. N54 is way ahead S54 which is showing its age. NA engines are not competitive or efficient. Have a look at the new F10 M5. Now that is efficient high tech modern engine technology.
    LMAO, how is the S54 inefficient? How is the S54 showing its age? Age of making 4 digit power?
    Click here to enlarge

  19. #69
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Corpus Christi, Texas, United States
    Posts
    3,053
    Rep Points
    1,236.6
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    13


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    Yes, they have been trying hard for 10's with it. They even changed the turbo, etc.
    Maybe they should get in touch with Boost Logic down here in Texas?

    They have run 8's @ 180+MPH with a 6-Speed Supra. Stock Independent Rear Suspension and transmission too.

    Actually, I think they even cracked 7's with that 6-Speed.....

  20. #70
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,915
    Rep Points
    1,353.6
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    14


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sorena Click here to enlarge
    ^ no man, you'll never be able to measure the input properly.
    You have 34.8 MJ/liter in gasoline.

  21. #71
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,915
    Rep Points
    1,353.6
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    14


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by TaZaM3 Click here to enlarge
    LMAO, how is the S54 inefficient? How is the S54 showing its age? Age of making 4 digit power?
    Just compare the dyno graphs of the new F10 M5 and the old M3 and remember that it gets all the HUGE increase in the power curve with less energy input - despite the new M5 being a big boat.

    That is efficiency by definition.

  22. #72
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    le Paris
    Posts
    6,653
    Rep Points
    -224.0
    Mentioned
    48 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by SlicktopTTZ Click here to enlarge
    Couldn't you do lbs fuel/HP output or something like that? Brake Specific Fuel Consumption is what you are referring to, no?
    it's much much much more complicated than it seems, you have to do the math about all the factors in firing.
    ask a Physicist, he will why it's really hard.
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by 654 Click here to enlarge
    You have 34.8 MJ/liter in gasoline.
    lol, man as i said it's far harder than it seems.

  23. #73
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,584
    Rep Points
    2,017.3
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by SlicktopTTZ Click here to enlarge
    Wait a second... don't you have to build a S54 to take a lot of boost? Last time I heard the S54 is relatively high compression and Port Injection so it can't take much cylinder pressure without detonation..... not to mention it is EXPENSIVE and a pain in the ass currently to get it ready.....


    Prove to me that the maximum stress limit of the S54 is higher than the N54. Even then, does that alone make it a "Better" motor?

    In my opinion, no.

    Look at engineering - look up the BSFC for this engine, its absolutely insane - even for an "old 2001 engine". You are talking apples and oranges. One engine is basically a race engine (from the factory) and one is a generalized engine used in at least 5 different car applications. There is no comparison between these engines. The S54 breathes incredible well - give it more air, and it will respond AMAZINGLY to that air. It is a wonderful piece of engineering. There is no question here. It has nothing to do with age - it just took a LONG time for someone to actually crack the ECU and do it "right".

    Yes, it is a very high compression engine - that's where the tuning comes in. No one is saying these 1000 HP engines are stock - by no means... But you cannot possibly think that an S motor is equivalent to a standard BMW motor. Apples and oranges. When you can spin your N54 up to 8200 on stock internals and still create power (boost or no boost) everyday - all the time, without it exploding - then you can say the N54 is close... You are comparing a normally aspirated 3.2 liter engine that creates much more average power than a turbocharged 3.0 liter - they aren't comparable.

    In fact, I would even say they aren't meant to be compared - one was made for motorsport, the other was meant for sports sedans.

  24. #74
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,584
    Rep Points
    2,017.3
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21


    Reputation: Yes | No
    I missed the part about BSFC before even posting - this is where the S54 shines... Look it up - grams of fuel per kilowatt of power; engineers still today say this engine is amazing...

    The S54 is inefficient? That's the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard.

  25. #75
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,848
    Rep Points
    31,576.4
    Mentioned
    2066 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by 654 Click here to enlarge
    S54 is very inefficient in comparison. Efficiency is the ratio of output to input. N54 is way ahead S54 which is showing its age. NA engines are not competitive or efficient. Have a look at the new F10 M5. Now that is efficient high tech modern engine technology.
    What are you talking about? Output to input? Power per drop of fuel? Uh, I'm going by thermal and volumetric efficiency.

    The N63 and N54 and nowhere near the S85 and S54 and you can tell by seeing how well they pump air without it being forced in. The S54 and S85 are WAY more efficient in comparison, almost a joke.

Page 3 of 12 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •