Close

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 34
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    90
    Rep Points
    409.0
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5


    5 out of 5 members liked this post. Yes Reputation No

    New COBB Hard Parts for N54 1-Series and 3-Series!

    We are excited to bring you our latest product offerings for the BMW N54 1-Series and 3-Series!! With the release of our N54 Catted Downpipes we are now able to offer a Turbo-Back Exhaust and Stage 2 Power Package for all N54 powered 135i and 335i vehicles! Find these parts and more at cobbtuning.com!



    BMW N54 Catted Downpipes

    Click here to enlarge
    Features
    CAD Designed Cast Turbo Outlets for Maximum Flow
    Dual 200 Cell High Flow Catalytic Converters
    3" 304 Stainless Steel Construction
    Works with Stock or COBB Cat-back
    Compatible with COBB Accessport OTS Maps

    Click Here for More Information



    BMW 135i/135is Cat-back Exhaust
    Click here to enlarge
    Features
    3" 304 Stainless Steel Construction
    CNC Mandrel Bent Tubing with TIG Welds
    V-Band Clamp Connections for Infinite Adjustability
    Dual 3.5" Slash Cut Tips
    Helmholtz Chamber to Reduce Resonance

    Click Here for More Information




    BMW 1-Series N54 Turbo-Back Exhaust
    Click here to enlarge
    Includes
    COBB N54 Catted Downpipes
    COBB 1-Series Cat-Back Exhaust

    Click Here for More Information



    BMW 3-Series N54 Turbo-Back Exhaust
    Click here to enlarge
    Includes
    COBB BMW N54 Catted Downpipes
    COBB BMW 3-Series Cat-Back Exhaust


    Click Here for More Information




    N54 Stage 2 Power Package
    Click here to enlarge
    Includes
    COBB V3 Accessport
    COBB High Flow Filter
    COBB N54 Catted Downpipes
    COBB Vehicle Badge

    Click Here for More Information



    Click here to enlarge

    BMW EXPERT GROUP
    -
    JARED BRONSON | JASON GABOURY | JOSH DANKEL | MARSHALL GLASGOW
    PORSCHE EXPERT GROUP - JOE GRAHAM
    | MITCH MCKEE | TIM WEISS | MARSHALL GLASGOW
    Click here to enlarge
    COBBTUNING.COM | LIKE US ON FACEBOOK | SEARCH KNOWLEDGE BASE | EMAIL CUSTOMER SERVICE

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    180
    Rep Points
    175.0
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    Yes Reputation No
    Hmmm, that catback system looks pretty nice. How is the drone on it? Has it been tested on vehicles with catless downpipes?

    Any videos at all?
    Stuff

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    2,098
    Rep Points
    2,488.2
    Mentioned
    155 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    25


    Yes Reputation No
    Yea subbed for more info on that 135i exhaust. Vids w/ catless downpipes would be great. Anyone on here running it?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    71
    Rep Points
    112.9
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    6 out of 6 members liked this post. Yes Reputation No
    dude the stage 2 package is ridiculous! if i didn't already have an AP and DPs i'd be all over this. there's some serious savings in that package...I'M ABOUT IT. I'd green-thumb this post but apparently I'm not cool enough (not enough rep myself to rep others hahaha)

    Also, those DPs look legit. Excited to hear people posting up about fit/function/sound. Click here to enlarge
    COME AT ME BRO

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    90
    Rep Points
    409.0
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5



    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by froop Click here to enlarge
    Hmmm, that catback system looks pretty nice. How is the drone on it? Has it been tested on vehicles with catless downpipes?

    Any videos at all?
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by jyamona Click here to enlarge
    Yea subbed for more info on that 135i exhaust. Vids w/ catless downpipes would be great. Anyone on here running it?

    I had a prototype version of this exhaust on my 135i with catted downpipes and loved it. It was a bit louder on cold-start, but pretty much all exhausts on these cars are. After the car warmed up it was very tame with no drone, passed the "girlfriend test" with flying colors.

    Marshall@COBB
    Click here to enlarge

    BMW EXPERT GROUP
    -
    JARED BRONSON | JASON GABOURY | JOSH DANKEL | MARSHALL GLASGOW
    PORSCHE EXPERT GROUP - JOE GRAHAM
    | MITCH MCKEE | TIM WEISS | MARSHALL GLASGOW
    Click here to enlarge
    COBBTUNING.COM | LIKE US ON FACEBOOK | SEARCH KNOWLEDGE BASE | EMAIL CUSTOMER SERVICE

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    119,425
    Rep Points
    32,105.3
    Mentioned
    2106 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    322


    Yes Reputation No
    Vids and dynos guys!!

    Stage 2 or 2.5 E9X M3 S65 V8 supercharger kit for sale
    : http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...r-kit-for-sale

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    GA
    Posts
    47
    Rep Points
    158.3
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Manhattan, KS
    Posts
    207
    Rep Points
    244.8
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    3


    Yes Reputation No
    Too bad the pipe is 3" and not 3.5", that rules me out. I don't know why anyone hasn't produced a quality 3.5" piped catback. Flows more then a pair of 2.5 pipes, fits, and is lighter. 3" just handicaps power output too much.
    08' 135i - Cobb Custom E70, FBO, LSD, Suspension stuff... FOR SALE
    LSXOCET - 550hp LS3 @ 1600 lbs curb weight... being built
    (OLD) 11 Camaro SS - 10.20@135 naturally aspirated @630rwhp.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    666
    Rep Points
    1,745.2
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    18


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Dietcoke Click here to enlarge
    Too bad the pipe is 3" and not 3.5", that rules me out. I don't know why anyone hasn't produced a quality 3.5" piped catback. Flows more then a pair of 2.5 pipes, fits, and is lighter. 3" just handicaps power output too much.
    Depends on the application.

    Relevant:
    http://www.modified.com/tech/modp-11...ust-test-tech/


    Good deal on the cobb stuff! I would like to see some dyno results.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Cleveland TN
    Posts
    542
    Rep Points
    555.0
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    6


    Yes Reputation No
    I'd like to see real world testing with 3 vs 3.5 on stock frame N54. Since the huge bottleneck is at the manifold I'd like to see if there is any difference at all at the 450-550WHP dynojet range.
    2008 135i - Cobb AP, JB4 G5 w/2Step&FSB, MS DP's, Berk street exhaust, AMS IC, VTT Inlets, UR Intake, ER CP w/Tial BOV, Spec 3+ & Steel FW, CDV delete, Quaife LSD, DSS Axles, M3 control arms, M3 rear SF bushings, M3 Trans bushings, SS brake lines. Pics

  11. #11
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Manhattan, KS
    Posts
    207
    Rep Points
    244.8
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    3


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by SCGT Click here to enlarge
    Depends on the application.

    Relevant:
    http://www.modified.com/tech/modp-11...ust-test-tech/


    Good deal on the cobb stuff! I would like to see some dyno results.
    527rwhp turned into 600+ rwhp just going from 3 to 3.5" in the supra application, which is similar to ours, if slightly more flow in and out. Same displacement, however - and comparable to an RB'd setup. Larger point to be made is that the 3.5" exhaust will always make more power, and will never give up anything to a 3" in this application --- so why not make it 3.5 to begin with.
    08' 135i - Cobb Custom E70, FBO, LSD, Suspension stuff... FOR SALE
    LSXOCET - 550hp LS3 @ 1600 lbs curb weight... being built
    (OLD) 11 Camaro SS - 10.20@135 naturally aspirated @630rwhp.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    666
    Rep Points
    1,745.2
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    18


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Dietcoke Click here to enlarge
    527rwhp turned into 600+ rwhp just going from 3 to 3.5" in the supra application, which is similar to ours, if slightly more flow in and out. Same displacement, however - and comparable to an RB'd setup. Larger point to be made is that the 3.5" exhaust will always make more power, and will never give up anything to a 3" in this application --- so why not make it 3.5 to begin with.
    Our gains with stock frame turbos will not be that large, period. That said, you asked why not make it 3" in lieu of 3.5". Simple answer: cost, fitment, loudness. That said, yeah, I'd like to see some N54 specific data for sure.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Cleveland TN
    Posts
    542
    Rep Points
    555.0
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    6


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Dietcoke Click here to enlarge
    527rwhp turned into 600+ rwhp just going from 3 to 3.5" in the supra application, which is similar to ours, if slightly more flow in and out. Same displacement, however - and comparable to an RB'd setup. Larger point to be made is that the 3.5" exhaust will always make more power, and will never give up anything to a 3" in this application --- so why not make it 3.5 to begin with.
    That is not a fair comparison, you'd need to find a similar HP output engine running tiny exhaust housed turbos.
    2008 135i - Cobb AP, JB4 G5 w/2Step&FSB, MS DP's, Berk street exhaust, AMS IC, VTT Inlets, UR Intake, ER CP w/Tial BOV, Spec 3+ & Steel FW, CDV delete, Quaife LSD, DSS Axles, M3 control arms, M3 rear SF bushings, M3 Trans bushings, SS brake lines. Pics

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    3,309
    Rep Points
    1,439.3
    Mentioned
    54 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    15


    Yes Reputation No
    yeah, to be fair that's in cars where the POST turbo exhaust is the restriction, not the housing, or pre-turbo... Would still like to see the difference between 500RWHP+ stock housing dynos, back to back stock DP-back to full twin 3" DP-back or 4" single (slightly higher flow there).
    boop

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    71
    Rep Points
    57.8
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Looks very nice! These will be next on my shopping list for sure.

    Catted DP's are only option for me. We have emission tests once a year and the car cannot be driven hard enough on winter time to pass the test with secondary cats only.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    2,098
    Rep Points
    2,488.2
    Mentioned
    155 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    25


    Yes Reputation No
    3.5" vs 3" will not matter on N54 cars running stock / stock frame turbos, plain and simple. The turbine housings and the bottleneck in this scenario. The only people who will see a useful gain from switching to 3.5" will be the single turbo crowd.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Manhattan, KS
    Posts
    207
    Rep Points
    244.8
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    3


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by jyamona Click here to enlarge
    3.5" vs 3" will not matter on N54 cars running stock / stock frame turbos, plain and simple. The turbine housings and the bottleneck in this scenario. The only people who will see a useful gain from switching to 3.5" will be the single turbo crowd.
    I disagree, especially given the gains from 3" vs 2.5" downpipes. I'm going to fab a 3.5 catback with ARD flanges and a burns 2-1 collector and see how it dynos vs stock exhaust.
    08' 135i - Cobb Custom E70, FBO, LSD, Suspension stuff... FOR SALE
    LSXOCET - 550hp LS3 @ 1600 lbs curb weight... being built
    (OLD) 11 Camaro SS - 10.20@135 naturally aspirated @630rwhp.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    119,425
    Rep Points
    32,105.3
    Mentioned
    2106 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    322


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by jyamona Click here to enlarge
    3.5" vs 3" will not matter on N54 cars running stock / stock frame turbos, plain and simple. The turbine housings and the bottleneck in this scenario. The only people who will see a useful gain from switching to 3.5" will be the single turbo crowd.
    You've established the 3.5 vs. 3 bottleneck at what then? And based on what?

    Stage 2 or 2.5 E9X M3 S65 V8 supercharger kit for sale
    : http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...r-kit-for-sale

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Cleveland TN
    Posts
    542
    Rep Points
    555.0
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    6


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Dietcoke Click here to enlarge
    I disagree, especially given the gains from 3" vs 2.5" downpipes. I'm going to fab a 3.5 catback with ARD flanges and a burns 2-1 collector and see how it dynos vs stock exhaust.
    DP size is another argument that's been brought up several times. Some people said their testing showed no difference between the two. I think Terry did some testing on that. @Terry@BMS
    2008 135i - Cobb AP, JB4 G5 w/2Step&FSB, MS DP's, Berk street exhaust, AMS IC, VTT Inlets, UR Intake, ER CP w/Tial BOV, Spec 3+ & Steel FW, CDV delete, Quaife LSD, DSS Axles, M3 control arms, M3 rear SF bushings, M3 Trans bushings, SS brake lines. Pics

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    2,098
    Rep Points
    2,488.2
    Mentioned
    155 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    25


    2 out of 2 members liked this post. Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Dietcoke Click here to enlarge
    I disagree, especially given the gains from 3" vs 2.5" downpipes. I'm going to fab a 3.5 catback with ARD flanges and a burns 2-1 collector and see how it dynos vs stock exhaust.
    This is an incorrect comparison. The stock catback has 2 cats, a resonator, and big restrictive muffler. The correct comparison would be between a 3" straight pipe after the downpipes, vs. a 3.5" straight pipe.

    I have catless dps, and am currently running a 3" custom single midpipe (catless / no resonators), with a nice custom Y merge right after the downpipes. The burns stainless pre-made merges aren't really the best option, fab a smoother merged one yourself.

    With the axle back section removed to eliminate it as a factor, my car was ran with "open mid-pipe", vs. "open downpipes" back to back. Differences were negligible. Thus at my current power level (414whp), there is no benefit running a larger diameter midpipe / exhaust. After all, you can't have a wider diameter midpipe than "no midpipe" Click here to enlarge

    One look at the turbine housings of our stock turbos should tell you 3.5" is overkill. Plus, our motors do not rev that high either. There are also higher revving motors out there with much better VE overall, boosted, that do not need a 3.5" until they are making serious power. Stock frame options on our cars do not make serious power.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    2,098
    Rep Points
    2,488.2
    Mentioned
    155 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    25


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    You've established the 3.5 vs. 3 bottleneck at what then? And based on what?
    Meant to say "are the bottleneck" in my OP, not "and the bottleneck".

    But, to better answer, see my response above.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Manhattan, KS
    Posts
    207
    Rep Points
    244.8
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    3


    Yes Reputation No
    You aren't making a lot of power, either. I didn't make a comparison, other then 3.5 vs 3" midpipe, and there is certainly nothing incorrect about the 3.5 making more power, ALWAYS (much more so in many cases)
    08' 135i - Cobb Custom E70, FBO, LSD, Suspension stuff... FOR SALE
    LSXOCET - 550hp LS3 @ 1600 lbs curb weight... being built
    (OLD) 11 Camaro SS - 10.20@135 naturally aspirated @630rwhp.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    2,537
    Rep Points
    1,743.7
    Mentioned
    44 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    18


    Yes Reputation No
    I would go with the 3.5 so I don't have a restriction when I go ST and need to replace it.

    3 vs. 3.5 will be very small difference in terms of output and weight on stock frames I'm going to guess. We are all guessing as nothing has been proven.

    If the cobb offered a 3.5 I would pick it up. Instead i'm waiting on the VRSF redesign.
    E92 Bren Tune / E90 PTF Tune / E70 Twin Turbo Diesel JBD

    Got Boost?

    Click here to enlarge

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,927
    Rep Points
    1,376.8
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    14


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by jyamona Click here to enlarge
    This is an incorrect comparison. The stock catback has 2 cats, a resonator, and big restrictive muffler. The correct comparison would be between a 3" straight pipe after the downpipes, vs. a 3.5" straight pipe.

    I have catless dps, and am currently running a 3" custom single midpipe (catless / no resonators), with a nice custom Y merge right after the downpipes. The burns stainless pre-made merges aren't really the best option, fab a smoother merged one yourself.

    With the axle back section removed to eliminate it as a factor, my car was ran with "open mid-pipe", vs. "open downpipes" back to back. Differences were negligible. Thus at my current power level (414whp), there is no benefit running a larger diameter midpipe / exhaust. After all, you can't have a wider diameter midpipe than "no midpipe" Click here to enlarge

    One look at the turbine housings of our stock turbos should tell you 3.5" is overkill. Plus, our motors do not rev that high either. There are also higher revving motors out there with much better VE overall, boosted, that do not need a 3.5" until they are making serious power. Stock frame options on our cars do not make serious power.
    You cannot just compare 3" vs 3.5" straight pipes if you are running mufflers. A 3.5 inch muffler flows a lot better than the 3" muffler of the same brand. That's why in the real world comparison 3.5" exhaust outflows 3" exhaust. The benefit of a 3.5 inch exhaust is its ability to run 3.5" muffler. Your test ignored this.

    Another thing is that some people are running 100+ whp more than you with their stock frame upgrades. More flow requires larger exh. diameter.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    2,098
    Rep Points
    2,488.2
    Mentioned
    155 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    25


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by 654 Click here to enlarge
    You cannot just compare 3" vs 3.5" straight pipes if you are running mufflers. A 3.5 inch muffler flows a lot better than the 3" muffler of the same brand. That's why in the real world comparison 3.5" exhaust outflows 3" exhaust. The benefit of a 3.5 inch exhaust is its ability to run 3.5" muffler. Your test ignored this.

    Another thing is that some people are running 100+ whp more than you with their stock frame upgrades. More flow requires larger exh. diameter.
    I disagree. The point of the comparison was a 3" midpipe vs. a 3.5" midpipe. Bringing the muffler section into the equation adds even more variables. Just because the piping into the muffler is 3.5" does not mean it will flow more. That solely depends on the muffler in question. There are 3" straight through mufflers that will flow better than some 3.5". Also, by the time the exhaust gas reaches the muffler section, it's velocity is at it's lowest point and less susceptible to a .5" difference in piping diameter difference.

    I do agree though, that if a user plans to go single turbo eventually, then going 3.5" now would be worth it do avoid "buying twice." As for the people w/ 100whp+ more than me, I would definitely like to see them run a similar test to the one I did! The more real world results, the better =) Down the road, whether I switch to ST or RB's etc I will gladly do it again.

Page 1 of 2 12 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
  •