Close

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 159
  1. #51
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    847
    Rep Points
    176.3
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by tron Click here to enlarge
    Please attach dyno. I would also like to know what you consider reliable, as you had a decent amount of HG issues IIRC.


    I really would rather not make this a pissing match. Back on bfc you always seemed like an amiable guy. Over here if its not one thing its another. Did GG and Milkt really piss you off that much that you now harbor resentment towards everyone with a chassis produced before 2001? FWIW, I agree with SmallSnails. By and large, E46 HPF guys are really not that knowledgeable. It is proven thread after thread after thread. You don't have an HPF kit. Why even defend them?
    I have to ask AA for my 900whp dyno, but I will get it tomorrow.

    Yes my car is reliable, it HAD headgasket issues a long time ago and was fixed. It was down for 2 months then back. Try running 30+psi and have a more reliable car.

    I am in amiable guy, YES GG and Milkt pissed me off to this point. Not so much Milkt but GG is incredibly childish. Hes on E46f right now talking crap like crazy. Hes calling me a tool when you looks like the biggest douche on the forums. I dont harbor resentment towards everyone with E36's (i owned one for a year, 97 M3) but some of these guys are making this argument sound very stupid. They are making it sound like the E36 is the greatest car on earth and for some reason making it their mission to crap on the E46 guys. Nobody was saying anything about E36's until a couple of the guys came on crapping on them. There really is nothing negative that can be said towards the E46 compared to the E36, simple as that. The E46 can do anything the E36 can (well mostly)...

  2. #52
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,762
    Rep Points
    31,552.6
    Mentioned
    2064 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by tron Click here to enlarge
    You tell me, o haloed one.


    You set the precedence.
    Sure do: http://www.bimmerboost.com/showthrea...se+focus+older

    I suggest you at least attempt to make accurate references instead of just blindly and inaccurately stereotyping.

  3. #53
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,762
    Rep Points
    31,552.6
    Mentioned
    2064 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by TaZaM3 Click here to enlarge
    Hes on E46f right now talking crap like crazy. Hes calling me a tool when you looks like the biggest douche on the forums.
    Exactly, you can't please that kid, don't try. He comes here and sucks up trying to be a moderator (hahahah! like that would ever happen) and then goes and bashes everyone on fanatics when he gets thrown in timeout when he earns it.

  4. #54
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,762
    Rep Points
    31,552.6
    Mentioned
    2064 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by milkt Click here to enlarge
    Wow,
    all those words for little old me?
    That's right, read them. You know, since I take the time to explain the situation like a good admin should. Unfortunately, you are not what I would characterize as a good member. Still, no one can say I did not make an effort. I don't see you two changing your pattern, so what happens, happens.

  5. #55
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    4,608
    Rep Points
    3,236.6
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    33


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    That's right, read them. You know, since I take the time to explain the situation like a good admin should. Unfortunately, you are not what I would characterize as a good member. Still, no one can say I did not make an effort. I don't see you two changing your pattern, so what happens, happens.
    This reminds me of an old adage,

    When someone goes out on the dance floor and can't dance, they say that the floor is crooked.

    If one or two members are failing, fault is then the entire forums inadequacies...? Right, how about we all take a look at ourselves before pointing the finger at everyone else (the floor).
    Last edited by DBFIU; 10-03-2010 at 09:31 PM.
    Some people live long, meaningful lives.

    Other people eat shit and die.

    I'm not racist, I hate everybody equally; especially fat people.


    Click here to enlarge

  6. #56
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    176
    Rep Points
    36.7
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by TaZaM3 Click here to enlarge
    I have to ask AA for my 900whp dyno, but I will get it tomorrow.

    Yes my car is reliable, it HAD headgasket issues a long time ago and was fixed. It was down for 2 months then back. Try running 30+psi and have a more reliable car.

    I am in amiable guy, YES GG and Milkt pissed me off to this point. Not so much Milkt but GG is incredibly childish. Hes on E46f right now talking crap like crazy. Hes calling me a tool when you looks like the biggest douche on the forums. I dont harbor resentment towards everyone with E36's (i owned one for a year, 97 M3) but some of these guys are making this argument sound very stupid. They are making it sound like the E36 is the greatest car on earth and for some reason making it their mission to crap on the E46 guys. Nobody was saying anything about E36's until a couple of the guys came on crapping on them. There really is nothing negative that can be said towards the E46 compared to the E36, simple as that. The E46 can do anything the E36 can (well mostly)...
    I would agree that an E46 can do almost anything as well as an E36 if not better, when disregarding cost. Its a newer platform and the S54 is a better *better* engine than than a S50/52.

    Regardless, I do not bash E46's. I like them. I always liked your car too. I still think its way more bad ass than any HPF car out there.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    Sure do: http://www.bimmerboost.com/showthrea...se+focus+older

    I suggest you at least attempt to make accurate references instead of just blindly and inaccurately stereotyping.
    I don't see what you posting some pics has to do with anything. You have said before an E36 M3 would probably not pull on a E92 M3 with similar WHP. Obviously power/weight ratio does not exist in your universe.

  7. #57
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,762
    Rep Points
    31,552.6
    Mentioned
    2064 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by tron Click here to enlarge
    I don't see what you posting some pics has to do with anything. You have said before an E36 M3 would probably not pull on a E92 M3 with similar WHP. Obviously power/weight ratio does not exist in your universe.
    Why don't you directly reference what it is you are saying instead of just putting words into my mouth? You are completely ignoring the gearing as well as the DCT which does not make it quite as black and white as you are trying to portray it.

    What that shows is that I want to build up a larger E36 and just older BMW presence in general so I'm doing what I can to set that precedent. Weren't you alluding to it starts at the top? Well, I have fully embraced the E36 and older BMW's in general by adding sections to accommodate them that did not exist when we first started. I was hoping you would get the point there.

  8. #58
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Encino, CA
    Posts
    1,161
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    No time to read all this, but it's not always about JUST power to weight ratio. Gearing, shifts, power curve, redline, torque curve, driver; all these play huge rolls as well....

    There are COUNTLESS times where a car with a better power to weight ratio has lost. A local example is many of Drew's runs, both in his e46 and e92.

  9. #59
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,762
    Rep Points
    31,552.6
    Mentioned
    2064 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by MSpiredM3 Click here to enlarge
    Gearing, shifts, power curve, redline, torque curve, driver; all these play huge rolls as well....
    Exactly.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by MSpiredM3 Click here to enlarge
    There are COUNTLESS times where a car with a better power to weight ratio has lost. A local example is many of Drew's runs, both in his e46 and e92.
    And good real world proof. How about that, a heavier car with less torque beating lighter cars with more torque? Try explaining that to Tron though, seems he lives in a parallel universe that is devoid of reality.

  10. #60
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    4,608
    Rep Points
    3,236.6
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    33


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    Aerodynamics play a huge role too..
    Some people live long, meaningful lives.

    Other people eat shit and die.

    I'm not racist, I hate everybody equally; especially fat people.


    Click here to enlarge

  11. #61
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,762
    Rep Points
    31,552.6
    Mentioned
    2064 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by DBFIU Click here to enlarge
    Aerodynamics play a huge role too..
    Yep, many factors, it isn't black or white.

  12. #62
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Encino, CA
    Posts
    1,161
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by DBFIU Click here to enlarge
    Aerodynamics play a huge role too..
    Absolutely!

  13. #63
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    847
    Rep Points
    176.3
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by tron Click here to enlarge
    I would agree that an E46 can do almost anything as well as an E36 if not better, when disregarding cost. Its a newer platform and the S54 is a better *better* engine than than a S50/52.
    Here is my old dyno as promised, about 30psi, unfortunately no TQ or RPM because its very difficult to tap into my ignition and get a good reading. I dont even think this dyno goes to redline, unfortunately cant be 100% sure. Using a mph to rpm calculator with tire diameter (26.6) and gear ratio (final drive: 3.62:1, gear: 1.00:1) it shows 160 at 7300rpm.

    Click here to enlarge
    Last edited by TaZaM3; 10-05-2010 at 02:28 PM.

  14. #64
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    885
    Rep Points
    8.0
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    No torque or RPM...


    Ok... I see where this is going.

    Would you like me to fill in the blanks for toque given your details? I am not sure you're going to like the results Click here to enlarge
    Last edited by 5mall5nail5; 10-05-2010 at 03:20 PM.

  15. #65
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Encino, CA
    Posts
    1,161
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by TaZaM3 Click here to enlarge
    Here is my old dyno as promised, about 30psi, unfortunately no TQ or RPM because its very difficult to tap into my ignition and get a good reading. I dont even think this dyno goes to redline, unfortunately cant be 100% sure. Using a mph to rpm calculator with tire diameter (26.6) and gear ratio (final drive: 3.62:1, gear: 1.00:1) it shows 160 at 7300rpm.

    Click here to enlarge
    Fawk! Look how long you are making over 800rwhp!!!!

  16. #66
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    847
    Rep Points
    176.3
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by 5mall5nail5 Click here to enlarge
    No torque or RPM...


    Ok... I see where this is going.

    Would you like me to fill in the blanks for toque given your details? I am not sure you're going to like the results Click here to enlarge
    You still hating over there?? I can care less, i dont hide my numbers or details. It was 90 degrees and im not even running full boost on this dyno.

    Care to post one of your dyno's?

  17. #67
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    885
    Rep Points
    8.0
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by MSpiredM3 Click here to enlarge
    Fawk! Look how long you are making over 800rwhp!!!!
    Don't get too excited bud. Here's what it turns out to be:

    Click here to enlarge

    Based on his inputs he is doing 5500 RPM @ 120 mph. That means between 7300 and 5500 I calculated his torque. That also means that his total power pull here is only over 1,800 RPM. Talk about narrow power band!

    So then when we focus on the 800 rwhp amazement, as I've been commenting elsewhere... we realize that he's only making "over 800 hp" for 1,300 - 1,400 RPMs. During which is torque is falling off RIGHT AWAY, which is exactly what he was criticizing other motors for. One might be confused as to why the motor wasn't revved out higher, but whoever was tuning it was smart - the torque is falling off relatively rapidly as it approaches only 7300 RPM and the horsepower was too.. really no point in revving this particular setup higher if power is falling off, its better to just shift and get back into the peak power points, as this dyno CLEARLY shows (even if you ignore my math, which is correct).

    SO, here we are AGAIN, talking about gearing being the key to success. His car is dropping torque, horsepower, and the peak power band is about 1,400 RPM wide.. MAX. I am fairly certain that the 26.6 tire size is mathed out based on the tire dimensions and not the ACTUAL tire. As for picking up RPM, its extremely easy, but it's obvious this dyno wasn't setup to show torque vs RPM. HP vs road speed looks better.

    Again this is not a bad curve, but it coincides with the same thing you see with a turbo S52 or so on. The S54 allows for higher RPM but not every setup benefits from it. You can see the torque falling off as RPMs go up (rapidly) and thus HP falls off as well. If you want we can continue the conversation in a more technical environment and maybe get some engineers to comment (like say on BF.C:FI and have Mike McCoy comment).

  18. #68
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    847
    Rep Points
    176.3
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by 5mall5nail5 Click here to enlarge
    Don't get too excited bud. Here's what it turns out to be:

    Based on his inputs he is doing 5500 RPM @ 120 mph. That means between 7300 and 5500 I calculated his torque. That also means that his total power pull here is only over 1,800 RPM. Talk about narrow power band!

    So then when we focus on the 800 rwhp amazement, as I've been commenting elsewhere... we realize that he's only making "over 800 hp" for 1,300 - 1,400 RPMs. During which is torque is falling off RIGHT AWAY, which is exactly what he was criticizing other motors for. One might be confused as to why the motor wasn't revved out higher, but whoever was tuning it was smart - the torque is falling off relatively rapidly as it approaches only 7300 RPM and the horsepower was too.. really no point in revving this particular setup higher if power is falling off, its better to just shift and get back into the peak power points, as this dyno CLEARLY shows (even if you ignore my math, which is correct).

    SO, here we are AGAIN, talking about gearing being the key to success. His car is dropping torque, horsepower, and the peak power band is about 1,400 RPM wide.. MAX. I am fairly certain that the 26.6 tire size is mathed out based on the tire dimensions and not the ACTUAL tire. As for picking up RPM, its extremely easy, but it's obvious this dyno wasn't setup to show torque vs RPM. HP vs road speed looks better.

    Again this is not a bad curve, but it coincides with the same thing you see with a turbo S52 or so on. The S54 allows for higher RPM but not every setup benefits from it. You can see the torque falling off as RPMs go up (rapidly) and thus HP falls off as well. If you want we can continue the conversation in a more technical environment and maybe get some engineers to comment (like say on BF.C:FI and have Mike McCoy comment).
    All right, lets play....

    First off, do not be a hypocrite. Since you criticize everyone's dyno graph's where are yours? Please post your dyno so we can evaluate it. You have the same turbo as me. You only post OTHER people's dyno's. Why is this?

    All your calculations above are inaccurate. I thought you were more intelligent then this.

    I make 800whp at roughly 6200 all the way to 8200 on this dyno graph. Thats 2000k worth of powerband. Not 1300-1400 rpms. Lets not forget after I shift the next gear starts at 6000+ rpm. Lets also not forget boost comes on harder/faster on the street then this dynojet. I see full boost by 5500 rpm. This dyno was done in 5th gear, boost seems to have come on very late on the dyno. I am also raising my redline to 8500 and swapping my crappy Greddy boost controller to a AMS 1000 this week.

    My TQ does fall off you are right, I never argued that. This is a single big turbo obviously its going to fall off. The HPF cars with smaller turbo's definitely hold better TQ, better then the S52's ive seen. That was more of the argument. But honestly you E36's and older guys are the ones coming on E46 threads and crapping on them. Nobody ever attacked E36's and laughed at them like some of you guys are doing.

    Here is my graph with TQ and RPM done the right way.

    Click here to enlarge
    Click here to enlarge

  19. #69
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    885
    Rep Points
    8.0
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Taza. I am not incorrect. YOU are incorrect. Let me show you how.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by TaZaM3
    Here is my old dyno as promised, about 30psi, unfortunately no TQ or RPM because its very difficult to tap into my ignition and get a good reading. I dont even think this dyno goes to redline, unfortunately cant be 100% sure. Using a mph to rpm calculator with tire diameter (26.6) and gear ratio (final drive: 3.62:1, gear: 1.00:1) it shows 160 at 7300rpm.
    Sooo.... which is it? 160 @ 8000 RPM or 160 @ 7300 RPM? Because you are either lying or completely clueless about your own dyno.

  20. #70
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Encino, CA
    Posts
    1,161
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Snail, you call that torque a RAPID drop off? That is a very gradual drop off if you ask me. You want to see what a rapid drop off of torque looks like? Go look at the dyno you posted on e46fanatics.

  21. #71
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    847
    Rep Points
    176.3
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by 5mall5nail5 Click here to enlarge
    Taza. I am not incorrect. YOU are incorrect. Let me show you how.



    Sooo.... which is it? 160 @ 8000 RPM or 160 @ 7300 RPM? Because you are either lying or completely clueless about your own dyno.
    The car went to 8100 rpm on this dyno, i was mistaken with my previous 160 at 7300 figure. I was not using the proper calculations at first glance but I am now. I stumbled upon a nice calculator online as well. I think you should be able to understand now since I made a detailed chart and dyno graph in my recent post.

  22. #72
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,762
    Rep Points
    31,552.6
    Mentioned
    2064 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by 5mall5nail5 Click here to enlarge
    So then when we focus on the 800 rwhp amazement, as I've been commenting elsewhere... we realize that he's only making "over 800 hp" for 1,300 - 1,400 RPMs. During which is torque is falling off RIGHT AWAY, which is exactly what he was criticizing other motors for. One might be confused as to why the motor wasn't revved out higher, but whoever was tuning it was smart - the torque is falling off relatively rapidly as it approaches only 7300 RPM and the horsepower was too.. really no point in revving this particular setup higher if power is falling off, its better to just shift and get back into the peak power points, as this dyno CLEARLY shows (even if you ignore my math, which is correct).
    I really am not sure what your hang up on torque is?

    His hp is almost table top flat from 5500~ to redline. No point in shifting early, he is making power to the very end. The torque curve is flat enough that that the rev multiplication works quite well for him. That is the strength of M motors anyway.

    Of course the torque will start falling off at redline, and? The hp doesn't. Those are stocks heads and cams...

  23. #73
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    847
    Rep Points
    176.3
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by MSpiredM3 Click here to enlarge
    Snail, you call that torque a RAPID drop off? That is a very gradual drop off if you ask me. You want to see what a rapid drop off of torque looks like? Go look at the dyno you posted on e46fanatics.
    Oh well, they will downplay anything to try to make themselves look better. They don't take facts into consideration, they say whatever they can to make themselves feel better. IMO the dyno I posted is not a good representation for my car, but guess what I can care less. It was done in 5th gear, 90 degree temps, 30psi, sleeved motor, stock cams, stock head, crappy Greddy boost controller that cant hold boost well etc...

    Its odd since he doesn't even have a dyno to compare himself.

  24. #74
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,762
    Rep Points
    31,552.6
    Mentioned
    2064 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by MSpiredM3 Click here to enlarge
    Snail, you call that torque a RAPID drop off? That is a very gradual drop off if you ask me. You want to see what a rapid drop off of torque looks like? Go look at the dyno you posted on e46fanatics.
    It is gradual and to be expected. It makes for a beautiful hp curve. Why is this even being argued?

  25. #75
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,762
    Rep Points
    31,552.6
    Mentioned
    2064 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by TaZaM3 Click here to enlarge
    Oh well, they will downplay anything to try to make themselves look better. They don't take facts into consideration, they say whatever they can to make themselves feel better. IMO the dyno I posted is not a good representation for my car, but guess what I can care less. It was done in 5th gear, 90 degree temps, 30psi, sleeved motor, stock cams, stock head, crappy Greddy boost controller that cant hold boost well etc...
    Downplay this for what? To prove what exactly? There isn't even a comparison being made here. The S54 is the best BMW power platform in existence today until someone is able to stick turbos on the S85 (in a road car).

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... 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
  •