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 7 Days Clear All
  • 07Tundra's Avatar
    Today, 04:39 PM
    I might have missed it but we all know how strong carbon fiber can be, it's used in many applications in all branches of the military but I don't see anything about weight savings vs oem?
    19 replies | 360 view(s)
  • veee8's Avatar
    Today, 04:36 PM
    SOLD!!
    4 replies | 818 view(s)
  • zeenon53's Avatar
    Today, 03:56 PM
    Poor Homo.... out 6-10 weeks http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/17404354/tony-romo-dallas-cowboys-broken-bone-back
    448 replies | 74699 view(s)
  • AdminTeam's Avatar
    Today, 03:53 PM
    Welcome arobertostxaxdy9248, take a look around, I think you will like what you see.
    0 replies | 0 view(s)
  • Alpine's Avatar
    Today, 03:05 PM
    I've never had an issue with the BMS bypass valve. I swap it out for the stock one during the winter (Colorado gets pretty effin cold) and haven't had any issues there either. Now if the AD valve actually has a temp it's set to open at, I'd consider it for winter use.
    152 replies | 9452 view(s)
  • Alpine's Avatar
    Today, 02:57 PM
    Jesus. You dropped damn near a solid 2 seconds over the course of the night. Congrats, I wish I could get mine to get the eff out of the hole like that.
    399 replies | 33740 view(s)
  • AdminTeam's Avatar
    Today, 02:44 PM
    Welcome Mario54, take a look around, I think you will like what you see.
    0 replies | 33 view(s)
  • BlackJetE90OC's Avatar
    Today, 01:55 PM
    They will be lucky to get under 4,300 lbs, especially if they are adding xdrive. The new supposedly "carbon core" 750xi weighs in at 4,395 lbs.
    10 replies | 294 view(s)
  • megaman416's Avatar
    Today, 01:55 PM
    Jake at what temp does the AD thermo open? Don't see anything on there site with details. Thought it was just a bypass like the bms version.
    152 replies | 9452 view(s)
  • zeenon53's Avatar
    448 replies | 74699 view(s)
  • Chris@VargasTurboTech's Avatar
    Today, 01:20 PM
    Thanks for the update. Good stuff!
    152 replies | 9452 view(s)
  • fmonteiro444's Avatar
    Today, 01:04 PM
    fmonteiro444 replied to a thread XDF Progress in N54
    These new tables kick ass. Temp was 93* in stop and go traffic. Non-oil cooled car. Coolant temps are usually over 200* and oil temps are usually right at 250*. Here is what I changed: Ambient Temp Threshold for High Mode changed from 32 to 23. Ambient Temp Threshold for High+KFT Mode changed from 37 to 28. Coolant Setpoint (Normal Mode) changed from 104 to 101. Coolant Setpoint (High Mode) changed last cell from 95 to 93.
    746 replies | 49481 view(s)
  • Chris@VargasTurboTech's Avatar
    Today, 12:41 PM
    You'll absolutely see it in logs showing fuel pressure. It's a bit of a step increase.
    59 replies | 3071 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    Today, 12:32 PM
    He's just distracting from losing the starting gig. On the other hand, the team needs him to get comfortable with sitting during key game moments.
    448 replies | 74699 view(s)
  • zeenon53's Avatar
    Today, 12:31 PM
    The team should suspend him. It's one thing if you want to make a twitter post on your own time. Your at work when on the field, you do what your told, stand the fuck up! SF doesn't need this distraction.
    448 replies | 74699 view(s)
  • zeenon53's Avatar
    Today, 12:26 PM
    It's crazy!!! I'm car shopping right now and l looking to spend around 60k. So many options like the gtr.
    10 replies | 294 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    Today, 12:11 PM
    All hail UGR (Underground Racing). The second generation Audi R8 is basically a Huracan with an Audi skin. It features the same engine as its Lamborghini brother as well as the same dual clutch transmission. UGR showed what they could do on the platform running 7.8 @ 187 in the 1/4 mile. It was only a matter of time before UGR would tackle the second generation R8 with their twin turbo kit which they announced a few months back. The results are predictably outstanding. 9.025 @ 160.00 in the 1/4 mlie. This is an elapsed time world record and just a hair off breaking into the 8's which will happen as temps drop. What are the full specs? Fuel, boost, etc.? We don't know. UGR did not provide them. Apparently this car is getting more power which implies engine and transmission builds. It would be nice to know if this was done the stock motor though.
    0 replies | 66 view(s)
  • Terry@BMS's Avatar
    Today, 11:53 AM
    Terry@BMS replied to a thread I am Back! in N54
    Nice!!
    6 replies | 321 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    Today, 11:52 AM
    The BMW N20 2.0 liter turbo four-cylinder gets a bad rap despite being a potent powerplant at least in stock form and highly underrated in its output. However, the BMW enthusiast community has witnessed many failures from this engine when tuned. Why is that? In theory, shouldn't it be 2/3's as capable as an N55 motor? Well, Pure Turbos has a car with their Stage 2 N20 turbocharger upgrade showing some serious power. This is a Brazilian car and a Brazilian dyno so 380 wheel horsepower will not translate exactly to Dynojet power that US enthusiasts are accustomed to. What one should take away is not just the peak figures but that the N20 is holding together with a substantial turbo upgrade: -N20 JB4 -N20 PURE Stg2 -E25 fuel (Pump gas with some E85 mixed) 387 Cv power = ~382whp 61 Kgm torque = ~440wtq @Pure Turbos is trying to get a baseline from this Dynotech dynamometer so we can better understand these numbers in context. What @Pure Turbos tells BimmerBoost is that failures on the N20 tend to come from oil pressure issues. It's clearly not a track motor but then again neither is the N54 or N55. Maybe with upgrades to the oil system the N20 can become an interesting tuning option. Then again, with the introduction of the B48 motor the N20 ship might have already sailed.
    0 replies | 161 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    Today, 11:46 AM
    The BMW N20 2.0 liter turbo four-cylinder gets a bad rap despite being a potent powerplant at least in stock form and highly underrated in its output. However, the BMW enthusiast community has witnessed many failures from this engine when tuned. Why is that? In theory, shouldn't it be 2/3's as capable as an N55 motor? Well, Pure Turbos has a car with their Stage 2 N20 turbocharger upgrade showing some serious power. This is a Brazilian car and a Brazilian dyno so 380 wheel horsepower will not translate exactly to Dynojet power that US enthusiasts are accustomed to. What one should take away is not just the peak figures but that the N20 is holding together with a substantial turbo upgrade: -N20 JB4 -N20 PURE Stg2 -E25 fuel (Pump gas with some E85 mixed) 387 Cv power = ~382whp 61 Kgm torque = ~440wtq @Pure Turbos is trying to get a baseline from this Dynotech dynamometer so we can better understand these numbers in context. What @Pure Turbos tells BimmerBoost is that failures on the N20 tend to come from oil pressure issues. It's clearly not a track motor but then again neither is the N54 or N55. Maybe with upgrades to the oil system the N20 can become an interesting tuning option. Then again, with the introduction of the B48 motor the N20 ship might have already sailed.
    0 replies | 15 view(s)
  • AdminTeam's Avatar
    Today, 11:39 AM
    Welcome to a real enthusiast forum banatjuniora5077.
    0 replies | 135 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    Today, 11:34 AM
    Sticky replied to a thread I am Back! in N54
    I don't want to hear any excuses. I expect you to post in the S55 and N54 sections. I also expect you to bring peace to the Middle East. Get to work.
    6 replies | 321 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    448 replies | 74699 view(s)
  • 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 :)
    6 replies | 321 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 | 87 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 | 138 view(s)
More Activity