Close

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 113
  1. #26
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    119,483
    Rep Points
    32,156.3
    Mentioned
    2110 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    322


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Abid@ASR Click here to enlarge
    We have the dyno sheets for the airbox testing from our TT upgraded vehicle and have posted them on E90post through Shiv. As a matter of fact, Got PSI was at the dyno watching us do the testing while we were tuning. I'm sure he would have no problem chiming in on the subject from a third party perspective. We would be more than happy to post results backing up our data. It just wouldn't make much sense nor would it be very wise for us to design and develop a product for production with false data. It would only be a matter of time before customers start posting real world results. It would also be very hard for any company to refute if everyone is posting something completely different than what a product is supposed to be capable of performing.
    I'm not accusing you of false data, just asking for the data that you are willing to release or show at this point.

  2. #27
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    8,130
    Rep Points
    9,123.4
    Mentioned
    644 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    92


    Yes Reputation No
    On the dyno tuning I know I would insist the lid be removed, hard to imagine Shiv feeling any differently about it. Are you sure the lid was in place when you made 530rw?

    In our testing we found the snorkel to be the largest problem with the factory airbox. Drilling holes in the side of the airbox under the filter delivered similar performance to the dual intake, which led to a few revised lid designs with add on filters which also delivered DCI type performance. After doing some VBOX testing 40-120 using a cold air tube from the lid to a stand alone filter, similar to DINAN, we didn't see enough improvement to justify the cost, and kept with the open element intake. This is at only ~420whp. With 100whp more its hard to imagine that snorkel is keeping up with the flow requirements.

    So while I don't agree with the analysis, if nothing else you're offering something no one else is offering and can appreciate the value in that.

  3. #28
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    MIAMI
    Posts
    462
    Rep Points
    199.0
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    Yes Reputation No
    As abid mentioned above, I was there from the minute the car was strapped on the dyno to the end of the night when everything was said and done. Not only were they tuning for power, but along the way, they were doing several tests on the car and trying different things to find possible restrictions/faults in the system that may suppress power. One of the tests that were performed, was to remove the inlets right off the turbos as mentioned above. I remember it clear as day because abid squeezed under the car while it was strapped on the dyno. Keep in mind that this was using the upgraded turbos which would have shown an immediate loss of HP if indeed the inlets were a restriction. It just so happened that I went to the shop to visit the owner when I noticed the 135 being strapped onto the dyno. Abid was nice enough to let me stick around and watch. (Offtopic) There have been several posts on bimmerpost suggesting foul play or inaccurate dyno results on ASR's part. This is completely UNTRUE on all fronts.

    They did a $#@! load of dyno pulls and documented all data on each run for R & D purposes. The data was indeed obtained and recorded while on the dyno. As far as ASR releasing it, I can't speak for them.

  4. #29
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    119,483
    Rep Points
    32,156.3
    Mentioned
    2110 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    322


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Terry@BMS Click here to enlarge
    On the dyno tuning I know I would insist the lid be removed, hard to imagine Shiv feeling any differently about it. Are you sure the lid was in place when you made 530rw?

    In our testing we found the snorkel to be the largest problem with the factory airbox. Drilling holes in the side of the airbox under the filter delivered similar performance to the dual intake, which led to a few revised lid designs with add on filters which also delivered DCI type performance. After doing some VBOX testing 40-120 using a cold air tube from the lid to a stand alone filter, similar to DINAN, we didn't see enough improvement to justify the cost, and kept with the open element intake. This is at only ~420whp. With 100whp more its hard to imagine that snorkel is keeping up with the flow requirements.

    So while I don't agree with the analysis, if nothing else you're offering something no one else is offering and can appreciate the value in that.
    You didn't see enough improvement but was there improvement vs. the open element design?

  5. #30
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    119,483
    Rep Points
    32,156.3
    Mentioned
    2110 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    322


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Got PSI Click here to enlarge
    As abid mentioned above, I was there from the minute the car was strapped on the dyno to the end of the night when everything was said and done. Not only were they tuning for power, but along the way, they were doing several tests on the car and trying different things to find possible restrictions/faults in the system that may suppress power. One of the tests that were performed, was to remove the inlets right off the turbos as mentioned above. I remember it clear as day because abid squeezed under the car while it was strapped on the dyno. Keep in mind that this was using the upgraded turbos which would have shown an immediate loss of HP if indeed the inlets were a restriction. It just so happened that I went to the shop to visit the owner when I noticed the 135 being strapped onto the dyno. Abid was nice enough to let me stick around and watch. (Offtopic) There have been several posts on bimmerpost suggesting foul play or inaccurate dyno results on ASR's part. This is completely UNTRUE on all fronts.

    They did a $#@! load of dyno pulls and documented all data on each run for R & D purposes. The data was indeed obtained and recorded while on the dyno. As far as ASR releasing it, I can't speak for them.
    Well, first hand accounts are great and I appreciate your input but the dyno graphs themselves would offer far more support. If ASR does not want to release certain things at this point due to development, I understand of course. Some info would be great but maybe we are getting too far off topic.

    Maybe we can settle this very easily, would I be able to get an ASR intake and a DCI intake? I could do the dyno pulls and post the results, at no charge to anyone.

    Are there any specifics on bimmerpost regarding dyno talk you want to address? You won't have mods bullying the thread in a certain direction here.

  6. #31
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    8,130
    Rep Points
    9,123.4
    Mentioned
    644 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    92


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    You didn't see enough improvement but was there improvement vs. the open element design?
    With the correct closed air design, e.g. not relying only on the factory snorkel, but the factory snrokel + a 2.5" cold air pickup, we observed maybe a .05 second advantage 40-120 in back to back runs at times. Not much at all. And there were runs it was also slower than the DCI. So we decided to call it not significantly improved @ 420whp level.

  7. #32
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    8,130
    Rep Points
    9,123.4
    Mentioned
    644 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    92


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    Well, first hand accounts are great and I appreciate your input but the dyno graphs themselves would offer far more support. If ASR does not want to release certain things at this point due to development, I understand of course. Some info would be great but maybe we are getting too far off topic.

    Maybe we can settle this very easily, would I be able to get an ASR intake and a DCI intake? I could do the dyno pulls and post the results, at no charge to anyone.

    Are there any specifics on bimmerpost regarding dyno talk you want to address? You won't have mods bullying the thread in a certain direction here.
    Of interest would be 3 runs with lid on, and 3 runs with lid off, all with 2 min cool downs and no other changes between them.

  8. #33
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    119,483
    Rep Points
    32,156.3
    Mentioned
    2110 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    322


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Terry@BMS Click here to enlarge
    Of interest would be 3 runs with lid on, and 3 runs with lid off, all with 2 min cool downs and no other changes between them.
    Deal.

    There will be significant cool down when the intakes are switched however and a baseline will be made with the stock intake.

    Sound fair?

    Now waiting for Abid's response.

  9. #34
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    8,130
    Rep Points
    9,123.4
    Mentioned
    644 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    92


    Yes Reputation No
    Love it. We can even test hood fully closed. I'd suggest also to include VBOX testing as that is most telling with an intake, with full airflow, etc.

  10. #35
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,079
    Rep Points
    1,142.0
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    12


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    Deal.

    There will be significant cool down when the intakes are switched however and a baseline will be made with the stock intake.

    Sound fair?

    Now waiting for Abid's response.
    The intakes are for the N54 right? I might have missed something, but I assume you have an n54 at your disposal? Or do the intakes also fit the S65?

  11. #36
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    119,483
    Rep Points
    32,156.3
    Mentioned
    2110 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    322


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by DarkPhantom Click here to enlarge
    The intakes are for the N54 right? I might have missed something, but I assume you have an n54 at your disposal? Or do the intakes also fit the S65?
    Yes, I have an N54 at my disposal.

  12. #37
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    119,483
    Rep Points
    32,156.3
    Mentioned
    2110 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    322


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Terry@BMS Click here to enlarge
    Love it. We can even test hood fully closed. I'd suggest also to include VBOX testing as that is most telling with an intake, with full airflow, etc.
    Damn are you demanding! If Abid wants the Vbox testing as well I will do it. I don't mind hood fully closed, that is up to the both of you but I do think it is the best way to do it.

    Would anyone argue that a tune test is necessary to see if they flow at higher horsepower levels as well?

  13. #38
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Miami, FL.
    Posts
    1,888
    Rep Points
    771.0
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    8



    Yes Reputation No
    a vbox is actually necessary, or any form of datalogging, only reason is the dyno wont show the performance of the intakes design. dont forget you need the scoops as well, as it comes with the intake and is part of the flow design. good luck!
    Click here to enlarge
    2007 335i Coupe
    Mods: Check the Garage

  14. #39
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,079
    Rep Points
    1,142.0
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    12


    Yes Reputation No
    Nice can't wait to see the results! Click here to enlarge Might convince me to buy one or the other...

  15. #40
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    70
    Rep Points
    9.7
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Terry@BMS Click here to enlarge
    On the dyno tuning I know I would insist the lid be removed, hard to imagine Shiv feeling any differently about it. Are you sure the lid was in place when you made 530rw?

    In our testing we found the snorkel to be the largest problem with the factory airbox. Drilling holes in the side of the airbox under the filter delivered similar performance to the dual intake, which led to a few revised lid designs with add on filters which also delivered DCI type performance. After doing some VBOX testing 40-120 using a cold air tube from the lid to a stand alone filter, similar to DINAN, we didn't see enough improvement to justify the cost, and kept with the open element intake. This is at only ~420whp. With 100whp more its hard to imagine that snorkel is keeping up with the flow requirements.

    So while I don't agree with the analysis, if nothing else you're offering something no one else is offering and can appreciate the value in that.
    We didn't do just one 530+whp run, as a matter of fact we did quite a few at that hp level both with the lid on and off.

    The method of testing you did is looking at the factory intake design 1 dimensionally, which is why the assumption is that the factory snorkel is the culprit in regards to airflow volume restrictions. We did similar testing as you, but took it a step further and looked at the limitations of the factory airbox surface area. What we deduced is that the factory airbox's limitation of surface area outweighed the limitations of the snorkel tube. At that point we designed an airbox with almost 3 times the volumetric surface area of the factory airbox. The factory snorkel tube is a 4" x 3" inlet which mathmatically is enough to support a mass flow rate of 56lb/min or after conversion a volumetric flow rate of 736cfm averaging 600flywheel hp conservatively.

    The purpose behind the design was to create a larger abundance of airflow to support the additional airflow volume required of the larger turbos without running into cavitation issues. The dyno testing was proof postive that even with 538whp , intake lid on or off, we had not experienced any fluctuaction in power or torque curves. Had we seen any fluctuation in those values with the lid on, it would have been a direct result of cavitation from the restriction of the factory snorkel tube. You know as well as I do that the dyno fans don't even come close to flowing the volume of air needed to support real world results. Even with that in mind, we still did not run into a choke point with the factory snorkel tube and our airbox design.

    I don't dispute the results from your testing of the stock airbox and the DCI. What I am disputing though is your claim that the factory snorkel is a choke point, because it just doesn't make sense mathematically.

  16. #41
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    70
    Rep Points
    9.7
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    Deal.

    There will be significant cool down when the intakes are switched however and a baseline will be made with the stock intake.

    Sound fair?

    Now waiting for Abid's response.

    This would not be a viable option for us since you can not just fit our intake on with a stock chargepipe or even most other chargepipes on the market for that matter. To make the volumetric area larger for the airbox, we had to make as much use of the engine bay area as possible by redesigning a chargepipe and BOV location to work specifically with our airbox. This is why our airbox, chargepipe kit with Tial valve, and airscoops are sold in package form. This intake package was never orginally intended for stock turbo customers. It was specificially designed to meet the demands of our turbo upgrade package. Since many customers with stock turbos were interested in the product and were willing to pay for the complete package, we decided to offer it for stock turbos customers as well. Another vendor of ours in California by the name BR Racing, has sold many of these intakes to their stock turbo customers as well as their own road race 135i.

    We are more than capable of doing this testing on a stock turbo vehicle since we have many to chose from here locally. The testing can also be done on a third party vehicle who is not a customer of ours, so as not have any biasy towards the results.

    I know you are asking for results for our intake box, but I don't know what more you want than the dyno sheets that have been already posted on the forums. The car was dyno'd with the same exact airbox that you see here. We have no reason not to provide results of all our dyno runs. We just thought it was a bit redundant since their all over the internet already. Would you like for me to post the same dyno sheets back up again?

  17. #42
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    8,130
    Rep Points
    9,123.4
    Mentioned
    644 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    92


    Yes Reputation No
    Airflow is a factor, and we did not work out the potential flow of the snorkel. Simply observed the huge power gains and reduction in waste-gate duty cycle when augmented with additional airflow paths. A dyno chart with a few runs lid on and a few runs lid off would make analysis much easier. Just my $.02.

  18. #43
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    119,483
    Rep Points
    32,156.3
    Mentioned
    2110 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    322


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Abid@ASR Click here to enlarge
    This would not be a viable option for us since you can not just fit our intake on with a stock chargepipe or even most other chargepipes on the market for that matter. To make the volumetric area larger for the airbox, we had to make as much use of the engine bay area as possible by redesigning a chargepipe and BOV location to work specifically with our airbox. This is why our airbox, chargepipe kit with Tial valve, and airscoops are sold in package form. This intake package was never orginally intended for stock turbo customers. It was specificially designed to meet the demands of our turbo upgrade package. Since many customers with stock turbos were interested in the product and were willing to pay for the complete package, we decided to offer it for stock turbos customers as well. Another vendor of ours in California by the name BR Racing, has sold many of these intakes to their stock turbo customers as well as their own road race 135i.

    We are more than capable of doing this testing on a stock turbo vehicle since we have many to chose from here locally. The testing can also be done on a third party vehicle who is not a customer of ours, so as not have any biasy towards the results.

    I know you are asking for results for our intake box, but I don't know what more you want than the dyno sheets that have been already posted on the forums. The car was dyno'd with the same exact airbox that you see here. We have no reason not to provide results of all our dyno runs. We just thought it was a bit redundant since their all over the internet already. Would you like for me to post the same dyno sheets back up again?
    The reason I asked for the dyno sheets is that we do not have them here. Someone following this discussion then would be forced to go somewhere else to look for the info.

    Of course you can do the testing on your own, the idea was to have a third party comparison for bimmerboost which you as a supporting vendor would be helping to generate content as well as provide a comparison vs. the DCI. It would have been a great benefit to all parties involved and generate exposure.

    I see, so your intake is designed for people who have upgraded turbos primarily? If someone is not running an aftermarket BOV it should not be an issue. If you do not want to do it, no worries, that is your choice of course, would have been fun!

    Oh, and Abid, there is a lot of curiosity surrounding this intake: http://www.e90post.com/forums/showth...&highlight=ASR If you reconsider, let me know.

  19. #44
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    119,483
    Rep Points
    32,156.3
    Mentioned
    2110 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    322


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Terry@BMS Click here to enlarge
    Airflow is a factor, and we did not work out the potential flow of the snorkel. Simply observed the huge power gains and reduction in waste-gate duty cycle when augmented with additional airflow paths. A dyno chart with a few runs lid on and a few runs lid off would make analysis much easier. Just my $.02.
    3 runs lid on and 3 runs lid off would not be an issue Terry. Thanks for being a good sport!

  20. #45
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    70
    Rep Points
    9.7
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    The reason I asked for the dyno sheets is that we do not have them here. Someone following this discussion then would be forced to go somewhere else to look for the info.

    Of course you can do the testing on your own, the idea was to have a third party comparison for bimmerboost which you as a supporting vendor would be helping to generate content as well as provide a comparison vs. the DCI. It would have been a great benefit to all parties involved and generate exposure.

    I see, so your intake is designed for people who have upgraded turbos primarily? If someone is not running an aftermarket BOV it should not be an issue. If you do not want to do it, no worries, that is your choice of course, would have been fun!

    Oh, and Abid, there is a lot of curiosity surrounding this intake: http://www.e90post.com/forums/showth...&highlight=ASR If you reconsider, let me know.
    I think you may have misunderstood me. Our intake will not work with a stock chargepipe due not only to the shape, but also the stock BOV being in the way. Therefore, we would have to send you a Tial BOV, our chargepipe, scoops and inatke for testing. That scenario would not be feasable since we can have the testing done here maybe even on Got PSI's car if he's interested. He is a part of this board and does not have any ASR products on his car as of yet.

    I understand there is a lot of curiosity surrounding our intake. As I said before, this product was never designed or intended to compete with a DCI design since they work on completely different theories. Our system is what is considered a pressurized design vs. the DCI is considered a ram air design. In our opinion our inclosed airbox package not only performs to the standards it was designed for, it is also very esthetically pleasing and matches well with BMW in form and function.

    Here is a dyno graph wth the enclosed airbox design and our TT upgrades on pump gas and meth injection.
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  21. #46
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    119,483
    Rep Points
    32,156.3
    Mentioned
    2110 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    322


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Abid@ASR Click here to enlarge
    I think you may have misunderstood me. Our intake will not work with a stock chargepipe due not only to the shape, but also the stock BOV being in the way. Therefore, we would have to send you a Tial BOV, our chargepipe, scoops and inatke for testing. That scenario would not be feasable since we can have the testing done here maybe even on Got PSI's car if he's interested. He is a part of this board and does not have any ASR products on his car as of yet.

    I understand there is a lot of curiosity surrounding our intake. As I said before, this product was never designed or intended to compete with a DCI design since they work on completely different theories. Our system is what is considered a pressurized design vs. the DCI is considered a ram air design. In our opinion our inclosed airbox package not only performs to the standards it was designed for, it is also very esthetically pleasing and matches well with BMW in form and function.

    Here is a dyno graph wth the enclosed airbox design and our TT upgrades on pump gas and meth injection.
    If Got PSI would like to test, that would be great! A very nice offer indeed, thank you.

    I did not misunderstand, I would have asked for the charge pipe as well Click here to enlarge

    I appreciate the graph with the upgraded turbos and intake on meth, thank you. Pump is 93 octane, correct?

  22. #47
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    70
    Rep Points
    9.7
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Terry@BMS Click here to enlarge
    Airflow is a factor, and we did not work out the potential flow of the snorkel. Simply observed the huge power gains and reduction in waste-gate duty cycle when augmented with additional airflow paths. A dyno chart with a few runs lid on and a few runs lid off would make analysis much easier. Just my $.02.
    I did forget to mention both with the lid on and the lid off, we did not have to make any adjustments to WG duty cyle to produce consistant hp and torque figures. Altough, I do agree with you in regards to making a few passes with a customer's car both with the lid on and the lid off to prove our data is correct. Hopefully, Got PSI will oblige!

  23. #48
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    70
    Rep Points
    9.7
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    If Got PSI would like to test, that would be great! A very nice offer indeed, thank you.

    I did not misunderstand, I would have asked for the charge pipe as well Click here to enlarge

    I appreciate the graph with the upgraded turbos and intake on meth, thank you. Pump is 93 octane, correct?
    Yes, the pump gas is 93 octane.

    Whoops just noticed the image I attached was not correct. The previous image was 18psi on 100 octane + meth. We usually run 20psi on 100octane + meth which produces 538whp. I'll put the correct image up in a minute since I have to resize it.
    Last edited by Abid@ASR; 02-02-2010 at 07:48 PM.

  24. #49
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    119,483
    Rep Points
    32,156.3
    Mentioned
    2110 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    322


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Abid@ASR Click here to enlarge
    Yes, the pump gas is 93 octane.
    I'm going to promote the 500 wheel upgraded turbo graph as front page news unless you have any objections or want to throw in any other info?

  25. #50
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    70
    Rep Points
    9.7
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    I'm going to promote the 500 wheel upgraded turbo graph as front page news unless you have any objections or want to throw in any other info?
    I don't mind you posting the previous graph or this one. Just make sure you stipultae that the last graph was on 18psi 100octane/meth, and this one is 18psi 93 octane/meth. As I said before our 538whp run was done @ 20psi 100octane/meth.
    Attached Images Attached Images  

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... 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
  •