Close

Activity Stream

Filter
Sort By Time Show
Recent Recent Popular Popular Anytime Anytime Last 24 Hours Last 24 Hours Last 7 Days Last 7 Days Last 30 Days Last 30 Days All All Photos Photos Forum Forums Articles Articles
Filter by: Last 30 Days Clear All
  • Irishace's Avatar
    Today, 11:28 AM
    Irishace replied to a thread I am Back! in N54
    I lurked but spent a lot of time in the S55 section. Now I am going to have to spend time back in both :)
    4 replies | 124 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    Today, 11:21 AM
    Earlier this month PorscheBoost took a look at the GIAC and Cobb software tuning options for the Macan Turbo 3.6 liter V6 model. The conclusion was that Cobb offered a substantial torque advantage. Well, now PorscheBoost will look at Cobb and GIAC ECU flash software for the Macan GTS and S with the 3.0 twin turbo V6. Let's start with the Macan S which in stock form offers 340 horsepower and 339 lb-ft of torque. GIAC gets a baseline of 266 horsepower and 261 lb-ft of torque on a Mustang dyno: You will notice horsepower increases 301 at the wheels but torque jumps up by 110 lb-ft for a huge gain. Again, the majority of the gain comes down low in the curve which is no surprise. Cobb's curve is similar: The main difference is that Cobb shows they also have 100 octane race gas tuning available. They also top 450 lb-ft of torque at the wheels but once again there is likely a correction factor at play. We wish Cobb just posted uncorrected and raw Mustang dyno graphs with the peak figures as their graphs are not as easy to read or anywhere near as useful. Regardless, here are the gains: MACAN S POWER GAINS Stage 1 91 Peak Gains : +9.43% HP, +21.24% TQ Stage 1 91 Max Gains : +37.30% HP, +37.29% TQ Stage 1 93 Peak Gains : +12.48% HP, +22.38% TQ Stage 1 93 Max Gains : +40.94% HP, +40.94% TQ Stage 1 100 Peak Gains : +14.56% HP, +26.28% TQ Stage 1 100 Max Gains : +41.73% HP, +41.72% TQ Let's take a look at the Macan GTS now which features the same 3.0 liter V6 engine as the S model except in a higher state of tune offering 360 horsepower and 369 lb-ft of torque. The baseline from GIAC shows the GTS is substantially stronger than the S with 302 horsepower and 314 lb-ft of torque at the wheels: The tuned figures are 334 horsepower and 413 lb-ft of torque at all four wheels. More power in tuned form than the S model. This is difficult to explain as the turbos are supposed to be the same between the two models. The GTS has different camshafts though, a revised intake, and stronger pistons. That is likely the reason for more power from a tuned GTS. Now let's look at Cobb's results. Once again, without the peak figures on the graph Cobb's data is not nearly as helpful: Their tuned GTS figures do show greater separation between 91, 93, and 100 octane race than they do on the S. On race gas they are approaching 500 lb-ft of torque at the wheels. MACAN GTS POWER GAINS Stage 1 91 Peak Gains : +5.25% HP, +15.74% TQ Stage 1 91 Max Gains : +34.72% HP, +34.81% TQ Stage 1 93 Peak Gains : +9.26% HP, +19.04% TQ Stage 1 93 Max Gains : +36.31% HP, +36.59% TQ Stage 1 100 Peak Gains : +9.26% HP, +23.86% TQ Stage 1 100 Max Gains : +41.77% HP, +42.07% TQ To summarize this comparison is not perfect as despite both companies utilizing a Mustang dyno Cobb looks to be correcting their figures which show substantially more torque. We much prefer the raw uncorrected graphs that GIAC presents and commend them for doing so. The only way to really see the difference is to put the same car on the same dyno with software from each. In the end, the choice likely will come down to cost, support, and the variety of fuels supported. In these areas, Cobb has GIAC beat especially when you factor in the utility offered by the Accessport.
    0 replies | 1 view(s)
  • AdminTeam's Avatar
    Today, 11:06 AM
    Welcome bnnattop3551, take a look around, I think you will like what you see.
    0 replies | 0 view(s)
  • SpeedLimit?'s Avatar
    Today, 11:00 AM
    Being that this is based on the 7series chassis tech, i highly doubt it will hit those weight goals...the new 7 is barely lighter than the S despite using all the cfrp tech. Just stop it with the lightweight talk BMW.
    8 replies | 271 view(s)
  • pits200's Avatar
    Today, 10:59 AM
    pits200 replied to a thread Vargas DI only testing part 2 in N54
    How is someone even going to test if the secondary pump becomes activated or not?
    58 replies | 2945 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    Today, 10:43 AM
    That's what they get for paying so much for an M5/M6. If you think that is bad look at what 65 AMG's depreciate to. From $200k to $100k in no time.
    8 replies | 271 view(s)
  • zeenon53's Avatar
    Today, 10:42 AM
    It's disgusting how fast these care depreciate. You can buy a 2013 M5/M6 for 60k now with 30-50k miles. Meaning the owner lost $20k/year!!!
    8 replies | 271 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    Today, 10:37 AM
    And it will be better to read than anything MotorTrend puts out.
    99 replies | 16336 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    Today, 10:34 AM
    Sticky replied to a thread I am Back! in N54
    So you get an M4 and you leave?
    4 replies | 124 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    8 replies | 271 view(s)
  • Newguy123's Avatar
    Today, 10:24 AM
    seriously. i ran a stock fmic with a CM10 nozzle at a 1/2 mile event where ambient was 85* never saw iats go above 120*
    21 replies | 1036 view(s)
  • mj6234's Avatar
    398 replies | 33710 view(s)
  • pobudz's Avatar
    Today, 09:38 AM
    pobudz replied to a thread M-Control arms rear. in N54
    Rogue toe arms and ecs trailing arms are a huge upgrade over flimsy stock crap.
    4 replies | 235 view(s)
  • Icewall's Avatar
    Today, 09:30 AM
    Icewall replied to a thread M-Control arms rear. in N54
    All i did was front and rear m3 control arms and whiteline subframe inserts. thats it and my car drives nice and straight with 650whp. Before I put the m3 arms my cars was scary in the rear.
    4 replies | 235 view(s)
  • straightboostin's Avatar
    Today, 08:41 AM
    Wanted to say thanks to Doc Race for a building a great kit. Finally got it on the track last night and had a blast. Little bit a learning curve between my old twins and the single. But once I got the tires warm she started hooking. All runs were done on 93 pump gas at 18psi cause I'm auto with no pi yet. Thanks again doc the car is a beast
    398 replies | 33710 view(s)
  • AdminTeam's Avatar
    Today, 08:39 AM
    Welcome to a real enthusiast forum bamilsqtts2200.
    0 replies | 78 view(s)
  • Irishace's Avatar
    Today, 08:16 AM
    Irishace replied to a thread I am Back! in N54
    I will shoot you a note, will likely head to the track with this car when I get the mods in to see how she does.
    4 replies | 124 view(s)
  • AdminTeam's Avatar
    Today, 08:05 AM
    Hey hoanphamkhong1: :text-welcomewave:
    0 replies | 85 view(s)
  • Msport335's Avatar
    Today, 08:02 AM
    Msport335 replied to a thread I am Back! in N54
    welcome back ....i recently stumbled across some old threads of yours on the other forum and was impressed at the times you ran back in 2010 or so. since your in tdot , and I'm on the way to the track, anytime your ready to hit the track ...i'm down!
    4 replies | 124 view(s)
  • Irishace's Avatar
    Today, 07:43 AM
    Irishace started a thread I am Back! in N54
    Happy to report that I have picked up a 2008 335xi in titanium silver metalic as a daily driver. I am not interested in driving my M4 in the winter so the only logical conclusion was to find a nice all wheel drive car. I could not for the life of me get into a garbage audi so my search for an N54 was on. I stumbled across a unicorn N54 while surfing Auto Trader. She only has 54,000 km on the clock and was driven by an elderly couple who recently traded it in for a Subaru. The interior and exterior condition is flawless, the engine bay is spotless and motor is virgin to any modifications. There is absolutely no evidence of even an intake being installed on this car. Car has had the HPFP recall and not a hint of wastegate rattle or any of the usual non-sense. Needless to say, I bought it on the spot and could not be happier. Only beef I have with the car is that it does not have the M-Sport package, ohh well, a minor nuisance. So in true Irish fashion, I have the following mods on order from my good buddy Mike@n54tuning.com: - CPE xi ********* - BMS DCI - AMS FMIC - DCAN cable for MHD flash I will drive it like this during the winter and will start the debate of going big single or an upgraded twin option when spring rolls around. Good to be back in this community, I really missed it
    4 replies | 124 view(s)
  • jt0407's Avatar
    Today, 06:37 AM
    jt0407 replied to a thread Vargas DI only testing part 2 in N54
    Would this replace of having to use a hobb switch to activate it?
    58 replies | 2945 view(s)
  • R.G.'s Avatar
    Today, 06:35 AM
    How heavy are these fucking ICs man? I'm going to co sign 135iDCT on this one
    21 replies | 1036 view(s)
  • R.G.'s Avatar
    Today, 06:28 AM
    R.G. replied to a thread M-Control arms rear. in N54
    Hydra made a good suggestion. Cheap and make a significant difference in that rear end slop. The M arms are also a great upgrade (I'm running them with upgraded bushings in the arms) but I felt the toe arms and sub frame bushings made the biggest impact.
    4 replies | 235 view(s)
  • hydra's Avatar
    Today, 05:39 AM
    hydra replied to a thread M-Control arms rear. in N54
    M arms are always a great upgrade handling-wise, but if you want your rear end to stop wiggling under WOT I suggest you replace your rear toe control arms with aftermarket adjustable units, as the M arms are too short and won't fit.
    4 replies | 235 view(s)
  • AdminTeam's Avatar
    Today, 05:26 AM
    Welcome domucin0125, take a look around, I think you will like what you see.
    0 replies | 175 view(s)
  • rac's Avatar
    Today, 02:55 AM
    rac replied to a thread Oil requirement for all VTT turbos in N54
    thought i'd tie-up this question if anyone is interested. i switched to motul 300v 10w-40 earlier this year and never had a vanos issue on track since. too bad i bought spare solenoids and in the end i didn't need them. not saying everyone's vanos issues are oil related, but if you only have issues when your at hot operating temperatures you could consider an oil that maintains its properties better at high temperatures before replacing the solenoids.
    149 replies | 9312 view(s)
  • AndersS's Avatar
    Today, 02:31 AM
    AndersS started a thread M-Control arms rear. in N54
    Hi I need some advice about bushings and M performance upgrades. The rear end of my car feels a little TO alive doing hard pulls/acc. Rear end is not as stable as i would like it to be, and I dont feel that the car is 100% in control. At the moment the rear bushings is still stock, but I have allready bought the Yellow Powerflex subframe bushings and the Mfactory Solid diff. Bushings. But I am not sure if that is enough to make the car more stabel during accelerations. I´ve been looking to upgrade my stock Upper Control arms rear to M-performance from ECS tuning. (I Already got the front kit mounted. ) https://www.ecstuning.com/BMW-E90-335i-N54_3.0L/Suspension/M_Upgrade/ES2622633/ But is this a ”complete” upgrade.? What about the Wishbones arm next to the controlarms. (link) http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/182224203710?clk_rvr_id=1082423874663&rmvSB=true Does it make sense to upgrade the control arms, and not the wishbones? And does the wishbones fit directly to the E91/E90 or must other changes be done? Not planning to take the car to trackways, and since it is my daily use I prefer not to make the car 100% a racecar but still keep some comfort if possible. :cool: Thanks Car E91 335i 2010 auto. Quife LSD KW V1 M3 front and rear Swaybar. M3 front controlarms and wishbones. Pure Stage 2 – Lpfp3 – EOS PI – 2” Inlets. And more.
    4 replies | 235 view(s)
More Activity