-------------------- 1 --------------------
#1. Re: Track pipe gains or dyno-foolery? - from Neil Maller
Top
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 15:17:42 -0500 From: Neil Maller <neil.maller@gte.net> Subject: Re: Track pipe gains or dyno-foolery? on 4/10/03 2:46 PM, Zack Steinkamp <edsarkiss@yahoo.com> wrote: > in looking at the graph linked to below, it seems odd > that at the highest revs, the "knee" then the big > power drop is in a different place on the red (old) > and blue (new) plots. > i understand that the track pipe would help the motor > exhale at higher revs, but to me it looks like the > blue line has ben transposed to the right by 100-200 > revs, possibly to exagerate the high-rpm gain? > wouldn't the rev limiter kick in at the same place, > regardless of the exhaust system? > i've taken the liberty of shifting the "post crack" > dyno run line back so the endpoints match the original > run. > images here ... > original plot: > http://nobot.2y.net/m3/dyno_orig.jpg > shifted back: > http://nobot.2y.net/m3/dyno_shifted.jpg > (if you load one then the other in your browser, you > can flip quickly between them with the 'Back' and > 'Forward' buttons) > am i the one on the crack pipe? > zs I think Zach has a sharp eye, and that the original dyno run plot is, being very charitable, erroneous. Just about every bump and feature of the blue curve is just like the red one, but shoved to the right. The corrected version shows much more minor gains. Neil 96 M3 - stock exhaust system
-------------------- 2 --------------------
#2. Re: [E36M3] track pipe gains or dyno-foolery? (was Re: 24lb injectors or something) - from mike
Top
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 17:32:14 -0400 From: "mike" <95m3ltw@charter.net> Subject: Re: [E36M3] track pipe gains or dyno-foolery? (was Re: 24lb injectors or something) It is possible that a chip change was also made at the same time. Which could have resulted in a 7200rpm redline vs the 7000rpm redline in the orginal test. The chip could have also resulted in the different numbers. In fact, 5hp difference between runs could just be % error, as my car with no changes has varied from 234-238rwhp. Like I said before, I have seen track pipes tested on a few different cars, they are a wash when comparing those dyno runs. Gained 3hp but lost 7 at 3500rpm. I would not trust AA about anything. I looked at buying a turbo system from them back in 98, was told something different everytime, their sales pitch sucked, they lied, and the kit looked like crap. Their current supercharger kit is questionable. JC tested it and did not speak fondly of it. Mike ----- Original Message ----- From: "Zack Steinkamp" <edsarkiss@yahoo.com> To: "E36M3" <e36m3@bmw-m.net> Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2003 2:16 PM Subject: [E36M3] track pipe gains or dyno-foolery? (was Re: 24lb injectors or something) > Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 11:11:25 -0700 (PDT) > From: Zack Steinkamp <edsarkiss@yahoo.com> > Subject: track pipe gains or dyno-foolery? (was Re: 24lb injectors or something) > > in looking at the graph linked to below, it seems odd > that at the highest revs, the "knee" then the big > power drop is in a different place on the red (old) > and blue (new) plots. > > i understand that the track pipe would help the motor > exhale at higher revs, but to me it looks like the > blue line has ben transposed to the right by 100-200 > revs, possibly to exagerate the high-rpm gain? > > wouldn't the rev limiter kick in at the same place, > regardless of the exhaust system? > > i've taken the liberty of shifting the "post crack" > dyno run line back so the endpoints match the original > run. > > images here ... > > original plot: > http://nobot.2y.net/m3/dyno_orig.jpg > > shifted back: > http://nobot.2y.net/m3/dyno_shifted.jpg > > (if you load one then the other in your browser, you > can flip quickly between them with the 'Back' and > 'Forward' buttons) > > am i the one on the crack pipe? > > zs > > > > > > > > > > Here's an interesting link to Bimmerforums, > > where > > > > someone did a before and > > > > after on a track pipe. > > > >http://www.bimmerforums.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=89528 > > > __________________________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more > http://tax.yahoo.com > > > ************************************************* > Please help support the E36M3 list by visiting our sponsors: > Taylor Autosport http://www.taylorautosport.com > Rogue Engineering http://www.rogueengineering.com > BMW M3 Specialties http://www.jt-designs.com > Bimmerworld http://www.bimmerworld.com > > DIGEST INFORMATION: > http://www.bmw-m.net/resources/digest_info.htm > ************************************************* > >
-------------------- 3 --------------------
#3. Re: [E36M3] track pipe gains or dyno-foolery? (was Re: 24lb injectors or something) - from DocWyte
Top
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 14:51:40 -0700 (PDT) From: DocWyte <josh_wyte@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] track pipe gains or dyno-foolery? (was Re: 24lb injectors or something) Or maybe the sampling for the second run just went a little longer. Pretty harsh words for AA based on what? My friend has their SC system on his M coupe and it everything they claim. It dynoed on an independent dyno at 300hp at the wheels. He's had zero reliability issues with it, even tho he's flogged it at 2 track events. It's just as fast as another friends RMS S/C w/aftercooler M3. I talked with Josh@Eurosport and he told me they tested the rotrex s/c years ago. That's a far cry from saying they've tested the AA kit, rotrex has made significant changes to the s/c. Oh, and JC has no vested interest, of course. -josh --- mike <95m3ltw@charter.net> wrote: > Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 17:32:14 -0400 > From: "mike" <95m3ltw@charter.net> > Subject: Re: [E36M3] track pipe gains or > dyno-foolery? (was Re: 24lb injectors or something) > > It is possible that a chip change was also made at > the same time. Which > could have resulted in a 7200rpm redline vs the > 7000rpm redline in the > orginal test. The chip could have also resulted in > the different numbers. > In fact, 5hp difference between runs could just be % > error, as my car with > no changes has varied from 234-238rwhp. > > Like I said before, I have seen track pipes tested > on a few different cars, > they are a wash when comparing those dyno runs. > Gained 3hp but lost 7 at > 3500rpm. > > I would not trust AA about anything. I looked at > buying a turbo system > from them back in 98, was told something different > everytime, their sales > pitch sucked, they lied, and the kit looked like > crap. Their current > supercharger kit is questionable. JC tested it and > did not speak fondly of > it. > > Mike > ===== __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more http://tax.yahoo.com
-------------------- 4 --------------------
#4. Re: [E36M3] track pipe gains or dyno-foolery? (was Re: 24lb injectors or something) - from mike
Top
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 18:03:09 -0400 From: "mike" <95m3ltw@charter.net> Subject: Re: [E36M3] track pipe gains or dyno-foolery? (was Re: 24lb injectors or something) Harsh words based on what? Well for one, my experience with them and the snake oil sales pitch they were using. When I was looking to buy, they were hacking the wiring harness, using extra boxes to control the fuel etc etc etc. A total hodge podge system. Granted the kit now is not like that, but why bring a kit to market that is not fully developed to begin with. Plus, they spent more time bashing the ERT system than answering my questions about their system. Just not good salesmanship IMO. Then after all of that, the demo car was not available because it looked like it was going to rain, haha. Funny, me and about 5 others there, never saw it run, just pushed around. Just did not have a good experience at all. Plus, never saw a rain drop either I have been at Sebring on 2 seperate occasions and seen a AA car parked due to mechanical issues. Owners on this board have slammed them aswell. Also, I did not mean to imply JC tested a AA kit, but just the supercharger. Since he was not in the business of selling superchargers 2 years ago, I respected his opinion. Good for your friend, hopefully it will never have problems. Mike ----- Original Message ----- From: "DocWyte" <josh_wyte@yahoo.com> To: "mike" <95m3ltw@charter.net>; "E36M3" <e36m3@bmw-m.net> Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2003 5:51 PM Subject: Re: [E36M3] track pipe gains or dyno-foolery? (was Re: 24lb injectors or something) > Or maybe the sampling for the second run just went a > little longer. > > Pretty harsh words for AA based on what? My friend > has their SC system on his M coupe and it everything > they claim. It dynoed on an independent dyno at 300hp > at the wheels. He's had zero reliability issues with > it, even tho he's flogged it at 2 track events. It's > just as fast as another friends RMS S/C w/aftercooler > M3. > > I talked with Josh@Eurosport and he told me they > tested the rotrex s/c years ago. That's a far cry > from saying they've tested the AA kit, rotrex has made > significant changes to the s/c. > > Oh, and JC has no vested interest, of course. > > -josh > > > --- mike <95m3ltw@charter.net> wrote: > > Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 17:32:14 -0400 > > From: "mike" <95m3ltw@charter.net> > > Subject: Re: [E36M3] track pipe gains or > > dyno-foolery? (was Re: 24lb injectors or something) > > > > It is possible that a chip change was also made at > > the same time. Which > > could have resulted in a 7200rpm redline vs the > > 7000rpm redline in the > > orginal test. The chip could have also resulted in > > the different numbers. > > In fact, 5hp difference between runs could just be % > > error, as my car with > > no changes has varied from 234-238rwhp. > > > > Like I said before, I have seen track pipes tested > > on a few different cars, > > they are a wash when comparing those dyno runs. > > Gained 3hp but lost 7 at > > 3500rpm. > > > > I would not trust AA about anything. I looked at > > buying a turbo system > > from them back in 98, was told something different > > everytime, their sales > > pitch sucked, they lied, and the kit looked like > > crap. Their current > > supercharger kit is questionable. JC tested it and > > did not speak fondly of > > it. > > > > Mike > > > > ===== > > > __________________________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more > http://tax.yahoo.com
-------------------- 5 --------------------
#5. Re: Who wants to go in on a 24lb injector buy? - from William T. Wallace
Top
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 18:15:18 -0400 From: "William T. Wallace" <daddy30@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: Who wants to go in on a 24lb injector buy? Very informative thread. But no one answered the original question: Does anyone want to go in on a group buy? :-) Just adding a little humor. Sincerely, William T. Wallace
-------------------- 6 --------------------
#6. Re: [E36M3] Re: Who wants to go in on a 24lb injector buy? - from DocWyte
Top
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 16:28:17 -0700 (PDT) From: DocWyte <josh_wyte@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] Re: Who wants to go in on a 24lb injector buy? Yeah, tell me about it! :-) -josh --- "William T. Wallace" <daddy30@earthlink.net> wrote: > Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 18:15:18 -0400 > From: "William T. Wallace" <daddy30@earthlink.net> > Subject: Re: Who wants to go in on a 24lb injector > buy? > > Very informative thread. But no one answered the > original question: > Does anyone want to go in on a group buy? :-) > > Just adding a little humor. > > Sincerely, > > > William T. Wallace > > > > > > > ************************************************* > Please help support the E36M3 list by visiting our > sponsors: > Taylor Autosport http://www.taylorautosport.com > Rogue Engineering http://www.rogueengineering.com > BMW M3 Specialties http://www.jt-designs.com > Bimmerworld http://www.bimmerworld.com > > DIGEST INFORMATION: > http://www.bmw-m.net/resources/digest_info.htm > ************************************************* > > ===== __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more http://tax.yahoo.com
-------------------- 7 --------------------
#7. Re: [E36M3] track pipe gains or dyno-foolery? (was Re: 24lb injectors or something) - from DocWyte
Top
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 16:33:10 -0700 (PDT) From: DocWyte <josh_wyte@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] track pipe gains or dyno-foolery? (was Re: 24lb injectors or something) I totally agree with you, a company shouldn't bring a product to market without it being thoroughly tested. However, that seems to hardly ever happen. Adding forced induction to a factory naturally aspirated car is difficult. I'm not surprised at all to hear of AA cars being parked at track days. When the envelope is pushed that far, things are going to break. I've broken the weirdest things at track days on *stock* cars, let alone ones with double their factory hp. I hope my friend has no issues with his kit as well, he's running One Lap with it! I'm going to be watching his car carefully over the next year or two and seeing how it does. If there are no hiccups in that period of time with his car and the other AA cars on the forums, then I think it's a good setup to get. As of right now, the only FI setup I'd put on my car is Dinan. -josh --- mike <95m3ltw@charter.net> wrote: > Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 18:03:09 -0400 > From: "mike" <95m3ltw@charter.net> > Subject: Re: [E36M3] track pipe gains or > dyno-foolery? (was Re: 24lb injectors or something) > > Harsh words based on what? Well for one, my > experience with them and the > snake oil sales pitch they were using. When I was > looking to buy, they were > hacking the wiring harness, using extra boxes to > control the fuel etc etc > etc. A total hodge podge system. Granted the kit > now is not like that, > but why bring a kit to market that is not fully > developed to begin with. > Plus, they spent more time bashing the ERT system > than answering my > questions about their system. Just not good > salesmanship IMO. Then after > all of that, the demo car was not available because > it looked like it was > going to rain, haha. Funny, me and about 5 others > there, never saw it run, > just pushed around. Just did not have a good > experience at all. Plus, > never saw a rain drop either > > > I have been at Sebring on 2 seperate occasions and > seen a AA car parked due > to mechanical issues. Owners on this board have > slammed them aswell. > > Also, I did not mean to imply JC tested a AA kit, > but just the supercharger. > Since he was not in the business of selling > superchargers 2 years ago, I > respected his opinion. > > Good for your friend, hopefully it will never have > problems. > > Mike > > ===== __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more http://tax.yahoo.com
-------------------- 8 --------------------
#8. JC intake vs euro airbox (or more on mods and dynos) - from DocWyte
Top
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 16:42:01 -0700 (PDT) From: DocWyte <josh_wyte@yahoo.com> Subject: JC intake vs euro airbox (or more on mods and dynos) Guys, This is the real first season of owning my '95 M3. I have a jc chip, cai and euro hfm on the car now, along with a borla exhaust. On the way is a euro airbox and a borla track pipe. I plan on putting on the borla track pipe with my stock rear muffler and throwing in the euro airbox just for kicks to see if I can see/feel a difference. I'm curious if anyone has ever dynoed their car with the euro airbox and the jc intake. What were the results? Did the jc intake make more power than the euro airbox, jc chip and euro hfm? If so, was it repeatable? Or is it really the chip and hfm that provide the majority of the hp gains and the intake just looks and sounds good? I'd love to dyno all my combos, but I doubt I'll have the free time to dyno everything. Any dyno charts out there showing this stuff? TIA! -josh ===== __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more http://tax.yahoo.com
-------------------- 9 --------------------
#9. Re: [E36M3] JC intake vs euro airbox (or more on mods and dynos) - from mike
Top
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 20:20:05 -0400 From: "mike" <95m3ltw@charter.net> Subject: Re: [E36M3] JC intake vs euro airbox (or more on mods and dynos) 2 things, 1st, Just do timed runs to see what improvement, if any, the airbox, exhaust, track pipe etc will give. do 3rd gear runs, average out the runs, full tank of gas, same temp etc Would be interesting to see the comparison of the timed runs vs dyno comparisons. Know what a 20hp improvement means when accelerating to 100mph? about a car length or two. 2nd, I have been a track junkie for years now, have raced my LTW in club racing and co-driven B mod M3s, H preppared LTWs and the only part I have ever seen break, which didnt stop us from racing or winning, but did cause us to short shift at 6krpm was a melted diff speed sensor. I have seen more FI cars than I can count on 2 hands parked at a track weekend. Belts breaking, overheating or blown head gaskets. They just have a much higher rate of failure. None of it is due to the higher HP, as the HPrepared and Bmod cars are using the same coolant systems, drivetrain systems as a stock car. Brakes and suspension are about the only things different. So a 330hp big braked, stiffly sprung B mod car racing for the overall win is going to be much harder on its equipment than a driver school FI car most likely. Also just look at the number of FI race cars from the late 90's vs today, people have gotten faster, while at the same time, using NA motors. IMO, for the track NA is the way to go for speed and duriability. FI is fun on the street as it is not strained as much and nothing feels better than a nice kick in the back when boost hits. If I were to build a FI M3, it would have a Supra motor dropped in and tuned to about 550-600HP, I would not even bother with any of the current kits out there. Downing Atlanta was working on a kit, but the last I heard, it has been on the back burner due to the amount of business they have with the HANS device. Mike ----- Original Message ----- From: "DocWyte" <josh_wyte@yahoo.com> > Subject: JC intake vs euro airbox (or more on mods and dynos) > > Guys, > > This is the real first season of owning my '95 M3. I > have a jc chip, cai and euro hfm on the car now, along > with a borla exhaust. > On the way is a euro airbox and a borla track pipe. I > plan on putting on the borla track pipe with my stock > rear muffler and throwing in the euro airbox just for > kicks to see if I can see/feel a difference.
-------------------- 10 --------------------
#10. Turn Signal problem - from Chad Milam
Top
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 19:20:09 -0700 (PDT) From: Chad Milam <m_three99@yahoo.com> Subject: Turn Signal problem Groupe- Sorry for the mundane query... But I am having a rather annoying problem with my turn signal on the passenger side of the car. The thing blinks really fast, and it is rather annoying to say the least. I checked the bulbs, all look to be good. The front passenger side indicator seems to behave differently from the front drivers side. With the parking lights on, the drivers side front indicator goes from dim to bright and so on. The passenger side goes from bright to off, istead of just dim. Not sure what to do. I tried cleaning up the contacts on the bulb, socket and base with no luck... Any ideas? Should I be replacing the flasher unit? If so where is the thing? And what is its part number? Thanks for the help Chad 99 m3/2 __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more http://tax.yahoo.com