Close

Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 133
  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    740
    Rep Points
    453.1
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5


    3 out of 4 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No

    Billet DBB 6765 S54 @ 28 PSI Results

    I felt obligated to at the very least share the results of the re-build of my HPF Stage 3. As many are aware I was not satisfied with the results of my HPF Stage 3. I felt it had a weak power band and more importantly I come to believe HPF wasn't the capable tuner they claimed to be. Having a 800WHP car that can't break 11's is pathetic IMHO.

    AS everyone is aware, I felt the HPF power band was the major hindrance in achieving good ET's. There just didn't seem to be enough power under the curve. The car felt very sluggish off the line. The turbo felt very laggy and the power came on very abruptly which caused problems with the chassis. Simply put.. the HPF Stage 3 didn't have what I felt was a complimenting power band.

    Anyways, here are Jason's comments and the Dyno results as posted on another forum.

    805 WHP and 692 WTQ. 150+ more HP through 7,000 RPM and a lot more torque versus the HPF tune on a PT67 versus a PT71.


    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Jason@proefi Click here to enlarge
    This dyno is from a 6765 turbo with 3/4 of a tank of gas, and 3 gallons of race gas added. The dip at 6k was tire spin, the tune is still conservative because of the back pressure from the billet manifold. Nearly 700ft lbs of torque and over 800whp...what a nice combination for the street. It's on traction control through 3 gears! Click here to enlarge

    Click here to enlarge

    Click here to enlarge

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Encino,CA
    Posts
    7,989
    Rep Points
    5,690.9
    Mentioned
    173 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    57


    Reputation: Yes | No
    They need to use better turbo's with faster spool time.
    Burger Motorsports
    Home of the Worlds fastest N20s, N54s, N55s, S55s, N63s, and S63s!

    It is the sole responsibility of the purchaser and installer of any BMS part to employ the correct installation techniques required to ensure the proper operation of BMS parts, and BMS disclaims any and all liability for any part failure due to improper installation or use. It is the sole responsibility of the customer to verify that the use of their vehicle and items purchased comply with federal, state and local regulations. BMS claims no legal federal, state or local certification concerning pollution controlled motor vehicles or mandated emissions requirements. BMS products labeled for use only in competition racing vehicles may only be used on competition racing vehicles operated exclusively on a closed course in conjunction with a sanctioned racing event, in accordance with all federal and state laws, and may never be operated on public roads/highways. Please click here for more information on legal requirements related to use of BMS parts.

  3. #3
    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
    A twin-scroll manifold and EFR turbo could really wake that motor up!

    Good results! What's your best time at the strip? Probably has a killer 60-130!

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,823
    Rep Points
    31,567.0
    Mentioned
    2065 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ccsykes Click here to enlarge
    I felt it had a weak power band and more importantly I come to believe HPF wasn't the capable tuner they claimed to be.
    What made you say this?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,823
    Rep Points
    31,567.0
    Mentioned
    2065 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ccsykes Click here to enlarge
    805 WHP and 692 WTQ. 150+ more HP through 7,000 RPM and a lot more torque versus the HPF tune on a PT67 versus a PT71.
    HPF posted a dyno comparison earlier with the AEM vs. the Pro-EFI and the Pro-EFI showed a loss of power. Why are your results different?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    San Antonio
    Posts
    455
    Rep Points
    278.8
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    3


    0 out of 2 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by SlicktopTTZ Click here to enlarge
    A twin-scroll manifold and EFR turbo could really wake that motor up!

    Good results! What's your best time at the strip? Probably has a killer 60-130!
    he doesnt have a best time.......he doesnt run the car, just his mouth
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by TwinturboM3
    I bang the chickens on my farm 60-130 times a day.
    Click here to enlarge

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,823
    Rep Points
    31,567.0
    Mentioned
    2065 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Funkboy316 Click here to enlarge
    he doesnt have a best time.......he doesnt run the car, just his mouth
    He's posting solid data, be cool.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    San Antonio
    Posts
    455
    Rep Points
    278.8
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    3


    Reputation: Yes | No
    np...........just sayin............someone else ran the car the other night and it made an 11.25 pass @133mph.....i guess that 10 second pass he was dying to rub in didnt happen
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by TwinturboM3
    I bang the chickens on my farm 60-130 times a day.
    Click here to enlarge

  9. #9
    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
    It still amazes me that these M3 with that power/weight ratio aren't running quicker. Does the tuning allow for no-lift shifting? What are the 60' like?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    740
    Rep Points
    453.1
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    What made you say this?
    ET says it all..

    At 22 PSI first pass with a pump gas race fuel mix, with a driver that had never driven my car.. ran a 11.25 @133MPH in a car that is 300-350lbs heavier than most coupes. Just to give some comparison, the HPF cars that run low 11's are doing so on 24PSI with a PT71 (I'm running a PT67) with race fuel and methanol.

    I think that says is all.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    740
    Rep Points
    453.1
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Funkboy316 Click here to enlarge
    np...........just sayin............someone else ran the car the other night and it made an 11.25 pass @133mph.....i guess that 10 second pass he was dying to rub in didnt happen
    Hey dip $#@!.. it's a convertible and was running 8 PSI less than what it dyno'd at. Yeah, anyone with any brains can do the math and realize the car pretty much preforms better than any HPF car.. including their shop car.

    Comparing my heavy convertible to the HPF shop car which is also running a PT71.. not the PT67 I'm running..

    I proved my point with the PT67.. I'm running as fast as the PT71 cars in a much heavier car.. PWND..

  12. #12
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    740
    Rep Points
    453.1
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    HPF posted a dyno comparison earlier with the AEM vs. the Pro-EFI and the Pro-EFI showed a loss of power. Why are your results different?
    Because Jason tuned my car.. not HPF. There should be a video up on the 11.25 run monday..

    Again.. I want to stress, my car has a full interior.. full 10 point cage and is a convertible with a hard top... just to give a weight comparison.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    San Antonio
    Posts
    455
    Rep Points
    278.8
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    3


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ccsykes Click here to enlarge
    Hey dip $#@!.. it's a convertible and was running 8 PSI less than what it dyno'd at. Yeah, anyone with any brains can do the math and realize the car pretty much preforms better than any HPF car.. including their shop car.

    Comparing my heavy convertible to the HPF shop car which is also running a PT71.. not the PT67 I'm running..

    I proved my point with the PT67.. I'm running as fast as the PT71 cars in a much heavier car.. PWND..
    Click here to enlargeowned how? because you spent twice as much and went slower........yeah you sure showed me..............
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by TwinturboM3
    I bang the chickens on my farm 60-130 times a day.
    Click here to enlarge

  14. #14
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    740
    Rep Points
    453.1
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Funkboy316 Click here to enlarge
    Click here to enlargeowned how? because you spent twice as much and went slower........yeah you sure showed me..............
    Well whatever you might think, this entire debacle with my car just shows there might be a better turbo tuner on the scene now for E46 M3's instead of HPF. The top dog appears to be having it's crown threatened.

    I'm sure I spent no less on my car than HPF did on theirs. The difference is my car is heavier, has smaller tires and a smaller turbo and with just one pass, already 2 tenths from HPF's fastest time... ever.

    I know it's hard for you to admit.. but I wasn't running my mouth. I have results to back up my comments.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    florida
    Posts
    143
    Rep Points
    97.8
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    sometimes one has to spend a lot to find answers. I know i spent more than an HPF built engine setup delivers. I make less power. I will not be trapping 136+. 133, maybe. But I do have a wider powerband, with a lower-revving engine with hydraulic lifters. And I learned a lot building my own engine and kit. There were multiple revisions of every part of the setup.
    Some people are chasing trap speed, some are chasing usable power. To me, trap speed means a lot more than et. But a balance must be had.
    I salute Chad for essentially developing something new and by most means, better. If it were kitted, I'm sure it would be a lot less than Chad had to spend to develop something in part original.
    Click here to enlarge

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    San Antonio
    Posts
    455
    Rep Points
    278.8
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    3


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by bluejeansonfire Click here to enlarge
    sometimes one has to spend a lot to find answers. I know i spent more than an HPF built engine setup delivers. I make less power. I will not be trapping 136+. 133, maybe. But I do have a wider powerband, with a lower-revving engine with hydraulic lifters. And I learned a lot building my own engine and kit. There were multiple revisions of every part of the setup.
    Some people are chasing trap speed, some are chasing usable power. To me, trap speed means a lot more than et. But a balance must be had.
    I salute Chad for essentially developing something new and by most means, better. If it were kitted, I'm sure it would be a lot less than Chad had to spend to develop something in part original.
    the difference is your not on every forum spewing about how you use to be a racecar driver and you made a million dollar investment so now im here to make you eat crow, look at me i can write a check to pro efi......i use to be a commercial plumber so i know how to build a turbo kit.............im gonna run 10's my first time on the track, oh wait i didnt run a 10 so HPF sucks and im going to show them how to build a turbo.....yada yada yada
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by TwinturboM3
    I bang the chickens on my farm 60-130 times a day.
    Click here to enlarge

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    San Antonio
    Posts
    455
    Rep Points
    278.8
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    3


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ccsykes Click here to enlarge
    Well whatever you might think, this entire debacle with my car just shows there might be a better turbo tuner on the scene now for E46 M3's instead of HPF. The top dog appears to be having it's crown threatened.

    I'm sure I spent no less on my car than HPF did on theirs. The difference is my car is heavier, has smaller tires and a smaller turbo and with just one pass, already 2 tenths from HPF's fastest time... ever.

    I know it's hard for you to admit.. but I wasn't running my mouth. I have results to back up my comments.
    i assure you nobody at HPF gives twoshits about your car
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by TwinturboM3
    I bang the chickens on my farm 60-130 times a day.
    Click here to enlarge

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    North Jersey
    Posts
    893
    Rep Points
    440.2
    Mentioned
    34 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5


    Reputation: Yes | No
    What other differences between the two setups besides tuning and turbo? It's always good to have options, competition between shops/tuners/enthusiasts tends to bring out the best in this hobby.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    canada
    Posts
    522
    Rep Points
    122.9
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Blaizon Click here to enlarge
    What other differences between the two setups besides tuning and turbo?
    +1

  20. #20
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    740
    Rep Points
    453.1
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by black bnr32 Click here to enlarge
    +1
    The major changes made were a new full size 4" intake and full size filter. The HPF unit has a very small filter and restrictive intake design. I do not have A/C so that does offer more room for a better design. The only other modification made was a true gravity drain design for the oil return line off the turbo. The HPF system was based on basically scavenging oil out with a pump.

    Other than the above, the only difference was the tune and turbo. Everything else is basically HPF design.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Funkboy316 Click here to enlarge
    i assure you nobody at HPF gives twoshits about your car
    Seriously man. I did a full build journal when I completely built my car the first time, I posted several DIY articles as well as reviews. I spent the money to do something nobody else has done and now people can learn from what I did and improve the concept even more..

    What exactly have you done for the BMW community besides running around shooting off at the mouth about how bad ass your HPF car is and how much everything not HPF sucks? You've given nothing to the community..

    I can leave and never be heard from again, but people will remember my car. The same can't be said for you..

    As for what the folks over at HPF think.. I really could care less, just like I could care less what you think.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,823
    Rep Points
    31,567.0
    Mentioned
    2065 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ccsykes Click here to enlarge
    ET says it all..

    At 22 PSI first pass with a pump gas race fuel mix, with a driver that had never driven my car.. ran a 11.25 @133MPH in a car that is 300-350lbs heavier than most coupes. Just to give some comparison, the HPF cars that run low 11's are doing so on 24PSI with a PT71 (I'm running a PT67) with race fuel and methanol.

    I think that says is all.
    I think this is an interesting area to explore but it doesn't mean HPF can't tune. The setup, conditions, transmission, etc., all play a role.

    The back to back tuning comparison I saw that was posted showed the AEM making more power.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,823
    Rep Points
    31,567.0
    Mentioned
    2065 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ccsykes Click here to enlarge
    Because Jason tuned my car.. not HPF. There should be a video up on the 11.25 run monday..

    Again.. I want to stress, my car has a full interior.. full 10 point cage and is a convertible with a hard top... just to give a weight comparison.
    I understand the weight.

    Who drove it?

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,823
    Rep Points
    31,567.0
    Mentioned
    2065 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ccsykes Click here to enlarge
    Seriously man. I did a full build journal when I completely built my car the first time, I posted several DIY articles as well as reviews. I spent the money to do something nobody else has done and now people can learn from what I did and improve the concept even more..
    I assure you true enthusiasts appreciate detailed build journals and understand the challenges involved in doing things differently.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,823
    Rep Points
    31,567.0
    Mentioned
    2065 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ccsykes Click here to enlarge
    The major changes made were a new full size 4" intake and full size filter. The HPF unit has a very small filter and restrictive intake design. I do not have A/C so that does offer more room for a better design. The only other modification made was a true gravity drain design for the oil return line off the turbo. The HPF system was based on basically scavenging oil out with a pump.
    Do you still have your AEM setup and HPF turbo? It would be interesting to see a back to back comparison of the two overlaid on a dyno.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    740
    Rep Points
    453.1
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    Do you still have your AEM setup and HPF turbo? It would be interesting to see a back to back comparison of the two overlaid on a dyno.
    It did about 100 ftlbs more and over 120+ HP across the entire band up to about 7,000 RPM. You can compare to one of the Stage 3 dyno's on their web site. They are all about the same.

Page 1 of 6 123 ... 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
  •