AA TS vs. ESS TS

[david05111]

Hey Gents-

Does anyone know of any third party group that is doing or is going to do an independent review of the TS systems offered by AA and ESS?

If there isn't, does anyone have any contacts with any groups such as Car and Driver, Eurotuner, etc. that would be able to do a comparison?

Lets get a clean thread in here that lists the available stages from each company, including power numbers and prices. This would be a great way to organize the data in one place so that tons of searching wouldn't be required.

[chisau]

Good thread. I would bet that more and more info will be released early in the year. Both kits are so new at this point and as we all see, the new 335i is now in the spotlight for alot of tuners. Hopefully we'll here good reviews from both tuners. Have you seen Todd's review @ my330i.com? He's an excellent resource for ESS with his diy and reviews of their products. It's too bad AA doesn't have something similar. I think they have quite a bit of catching up to do this year in that regard.

Happy New Year!

[Active Autowerke]

Happy New Year guys

Please make a list of questions you would like answered and I will do my best to cover them in this thread.

[BF330ci]

What stages do you offer and what are the prices for them? :hi:

[azzy989]

subscribing :D

[sidetracked3]

Yea I am in limbo about which kit to get too. I am ready to buy but trying to decide which one. Any advice?

[Active Autowerke]

What stages do you offer and what are the prices for them? :hi:

As of right now we will only be offering a Level 2 Twin Screw kit. The pricing will be the same as our E36 Twin Screw as of right now. $8500 List price and $7900 will be the intro price.

We currently have 3 MS45 cars that are running our twin screw kits. Two of them also upgraded to cams later on with upgraded software.

[02BMW330ci]

when can you guys turbocharger or supercharge my Z4 ///M... :excited: :excited: :excited: :excited: :excited: I will be in florida next week, maybe I can swing by.

[MarvelPhx]

While not a magazine comparison, we can prob get the different mechanical comparisons here. I am basing this info on what I have seen and read about the AA system here and at their website and what I know of my TS and at ESS's website.

Active, please fill in the blanks or correct me where wrong regarding your system.

For Stage 2 on a 330i/ZHP:

COMPRESSOR TYPE
ESS - 1.6L Lyhsolm
AA - 1.7L Autorotor

MAX BOOST PRESSURE
ESS - 8psi
AA - 9psi

MANIFOLD
ESS - One-piece dual layer Casted long runner with integrated intercooler core chambers
AA - One-piece Casted short runner with seperate two-piece intercooler core chambers

COOLING
ESS - Three 500mm Laminova Cores
AA - Two or Three ___mm? Laminova Cores

BYPASS VALVE
ESS - CNC throttle-body (butterfly type)
AA - AA Race Bypass (diaphragm type)

WATER PUMP
ESS - Johnson Pump from Sweden
AA - Johnson Pump from Sweden

MOUNTING
ESS - Manifold mounts to head with no auxilary brackets, manifold supports itself and compressor
AA - Snout bracket required, appears to be another support bracket under the manifold as well

IDLERS
ESS - CNC Machined idler pulley bracket w/ OEM rollers, stock tensioner retained
AA - CNC Machined snout bracket supports idlers and AA supplies a different belt tensioner

POWER STEERING
ESS - New custom aluminum PS Tank in OEM location
AA - OEM PS Tank moved to different location

CRANKCASE VENTILATION
ESS - OEM BMW Crankcase valve built into TS intake elbow
AA - Appears to be a aluminum catch can near the TS snout?

INTAKE
ESS - Stock MAF and MAF location/Stock airbox, filter, and location
AA - New 3.5" MAF and mandrel bent tube in-bumper intake with seperate K&N filter

FUEL SYSTEM
ESS - New 30# red injectors
AA - They are blue, unknown flow, AA?

SOFTWARE
ESS - New in-DME software, 7000rpm redline, removed top speed limiter
AA - New in-DME software, _____rpm redline, top speed limiter?

ADVERTISED POWER
ESS - 321RWHP, 286RWTQ on a DynoJet (link (http://www.esstuning.com/admin/upload/20061222030733.jpg))
AA - 332RWHP, 282RWTQ on a Dynojet (link (http://www.aatuning.com/dyno/03_330i_TwinScrew.cfm))
ESS uses 91 octane for all dynos on their site. AA's Florida locale would suggest the use of 93.
FYI: A simple 2-point octane change (91 to 93) can account for over 15rwhp and 10rwtq on the same car if tuned for it.

PRICE
ESS - Normally $7995, intro $7495
AA - Normally $8900, intro $7900

AVAILABILITY
ESS - MS43 330i, MS45 330i/ZHP, MS45.1 Z4, other E36/E46 models to follow
AA - MS45 330i/ZHP, E36 M3, other E46 models to follow

UPGRADABILITY
ESS - Stage 2+ rated at 361RWHP/325RWTQ available (headers/cams required) (link (http://www.esstuning.com/admin/upload/20061222030907.jpg)), Stage 3 coming
AA - None announced

[M3_Jaydee]

^^Looks like lotta work Todd :)

[rlee02135]

the AA TS is also availible for the MS43, right?

[david05111]

Hey Active I've got a question...

Whats the install cost on one of the TS kits?

[Active Autowerke]

Hey Active I've got a question...

Whats the install cost on one of the TS kits?

12-15 hours.

[GodSendsDeath]

Hey active what do you guys charge by the houre when putting one of the TS systems on.

[Kwanghyun Chi]

Hi, I was surprised that there're a participants from active autowerk.
I sent e-mail several times to Active autowerk, and heard nothing yet. :yikes:

I had asked about their header for E46 325. I saw the product on their website, but still wondering how much horsepower and torque gain will be expected from the kit on supercharged 325. :hmm:

Plus, what about cat converter? I tried to ask about cat converter, but did not hear about it at all. Do you have a well matched catalytic converter for your header system? Or does anyone know about it?

:bump:

[MachRc]

^^Looks like lotta work Todd :)


+1:thumbsup:

[MarvelPhx]

Happy New Year guys

Please make a list of questions you would like answered and I will do my best to cover them in this thread.

Can you fill in the missing information on my post above?

After speaking to Laminova, they said your cores were 330mm but did not know if you use 2 or 3. Just want to make sure I am not missing anything.

[Mike Benvo]

Personally I'd go with the ESS TS.. I'd feel much more comfortable with the ESS software over the AA software - I'll leave it at that.

I've spoken to Asbjorn several times and that kit was most definitely built with a fine tooth comb, sparing no expense.

[TaZaM3]

Id go with AA over ESS, no questions...

[M3_Jaydee]

Shocker! :rofl:

[TaZaM3]

Such a shock 140+ guys have AA SC's on their M3's...

Never hit the top speed, i did top out the speedo once but never did i record it with GPS or video.

Not hinting anything but alot of BS comes from that side. 212 MPH or a real 200MPH is plain BS. Drag will kill the car up that high, plus i think more power would be needed to overcome it. I would love to see his "WSM Technologie speedo" and what it looks like.

[jdm3]

He did have 8000RPM in 6th with 275/30/19 wheels, that calculates out to 201.8 REAL MPH! I think that is seriously cool! I would love to race a new Lambo with that M3! :)

[funkyman]

Would AA do pricematch by any chance and opt for a slightly more boost like 10-11psi.Can the TS put out 10-11psi or not?

P.S unless there is video evidence its all Bull.Alot of people talk out of their rear ends unfortunately.No one will believe it till they see it.

[BMWintoxication]

MarvelPhx, i truly appreciate your contribution to the forum!!!

thanks!

[TaZaM3]

He did have 8000RPM in 6th with 275/30/19 wheels, that calculates out to 201.8 REAL MPH! I think that is seriously cool! I would love to race a new Lambo with that M3! :)

Great, i did 250mph with a 9000rpm. :eeps:


Would AA do pricematch by any chance and opt for a slightly more boost like 10-11psi.Can the TS put out 10-11psi or not?

P.S unless there is video evidence its all Bull.Alot of people talk out of their rear ends unfortunately.No one will believe it till they see it.


Honestly contact AA, they are great people and probably would. Plus i love their customizability, they will do anything if needed.

P.S- Exactly.

[bigjae1976]

Good thread. I'm leaning towards AA.

[EIAlfonso]

Good thread. I'm leaning towards AA.

I prefer the ESS, but AA is also a good reputable company. I can see why someone would prefer the AA.

It's not like one kit, or company, is vastly superior over the other.

[kuksul08]

ESS>AA

I especially like the fact that ESS uses the proven stock airbox and filter and MAF location.




Why does AA need 1psi more to make almost identical power?

[funkyman]

Howmuch is shipping from Scandinavia to USA

[Maestroxl]

Why does AA need 1psi more to make almost identical power?

They don't even know exactly how much boost they are running 8-9 psi??

I say ess are just a bit better in their overall package

[stimpee]

I have stayed out of this thread, and watched it from afar for a while. I hesitate to respond, since I guarantee it is going to turn into a big e-pissing contest. I don't want to make too many counterpoints, since unlike other companies, I really don't wish to try to sell my product by slinging mud at my competition. Hence why I have been slow to respond to this thread. Anyway, get out the fire hydrants, cause the dogs are going to start trying to mark their turf! :D

Let me just make a couple of points:

1) The AA kit is based on a proven design developed over the past 6 years. It has been extensively tested, on a variety of platforms, and the basic hardware design has a lot in common with the E36 kits.

2) ESS has a nice manifold design. The use of the longer cores is a plus, however they were not available when our manifold was developed. Calling any of these manifolds a "long runner" design, is rather amusing. Perhaps by comparison, it is "less short", however both manifold designs have runners significantly shorter than the stock manifold. Again though, our manifold has proven to flow more than adequately, and provide extremely efficient and repeatable cooling without heat soak in applications at ~400 whp. Testing is underway at higher power levels as well. Any differences in low end torque between the kits, based on our experience with the E36 applications, is unlikely to be due to the manifold design, regardless of runner length. Feel free to argue this point, but it is unlikely I will respond to it.

3) Our manifold has been extensively tested, and proven to develop all but identical flow in all 6 cylinders, contrary to what others may try to tell you based on their perception of the positioning of our (3x332mm) Laminova cores.

4) The inlet housing design to the compressor, and the air intake configuration, is based on extensive testing over many years of development. We tried other approaches, and configurations, and what you see provided the best performance, with the least compromise, of all of the possible setups. In addition, the design of the inlet allows larger compressors to be fitted to the kit for the insane among us, without any other modifications or interferences. I will be anxious to see the performance of the 1.6L compressor in applications shooting for over 425-450 whp if they exist.

There are plenty of places where I could make detailed comparisons of the selection and quality of components in the kit. However, I hesitate to do so, since it will add fire to the E-pissing contest noted above.

Do your homework. If you are interested in upgradeability, look at the chosen injectors, HFM, etc. Look at the sizing, design, and quality of the heat exchanger, which is often the limiting factor in the overal heat rejection capability of air-water intercooler systems.


A few other details:

There is no additional support bracket underneath the manifold, the manifold itself is a structural component. The front snout bracket provides additional support/stabilization of the compressor snout/pulley.

AA supplied belt tensioner is a factory BMW mechanical tensioner, that has proven more reliable and effective than the stock tensioner in our testing.

I will let someone else from Active fill in more detail if necessary...

[stimpee]

One more thing, making comparisons based on 1 set of dyno curves from 1 car, or drawing conclusions based on how we present our "boost level" vs others, is laughable.

It is difficult to compare cars on the SAME dyno on different days, let alone different dynos in different locales. A difference of 10-15hp is literally in the noise!

Similarly with claimed boost levels. Boost is NOT constant, even on a TS. It varies somewhat. It will also vary based on specifics of exhaust, weather conditions, what gear you are in, etc. That is why we list peak boost as a "range". 9 psi at redline and 8psi at peak torque is likely "safer" for your engine than 8.5 psi at peak torque, and 8 psi at redline. Not claiming what anyone's boost curve actually looks like here, just making a point.

Steve

[ritos530i]

Steve where the hell have you been and what are you working on now.

good to hear from you.

Great points and l like how you went thru every precautions not to cause offense.

Nice write-up

[stimpee]

Steve where the hell have you been and what are you working on now.

good to hear from you.

Great points and l like how you went thru every precautions not to cause offense.

Nice write-up

Yes, I wrote a bunch of things I had to modify or delete, but hopefully nothing I left behind is incendiary! :banghead: :banghead:

I have been traveling a lot lately, so trying to get settled back in and get caught up!

:D

Steve

[ritos530i]

Great, Good to hear from you!

[MarvelPhx]

Unfortunately, too many opinions have polluted this thread. This is always the case anytime "VS" is in the thread title, isn't it? While "reputation" and "proven" and "experience" get used by both sides and their supporters, they are not measureable by any means. Let's try to stick to the material facts. I have updated this with some of your facts Stimpee (I'll take out the runners since it is debatable conjecture and add the heat exchangers). Thank you.

I am still waiting on AA to provide information about the Power Steering Tank, PCV, Injectors, new HFM, software, and now the Heat Exchanger as well.

For Stage 2 on a 330i/ZHP:

COMPRESSOR TYPE
ESS - 1.6L Lyhsolm
AA - 1.7L Autorotor

MAX BOOST PRESSURE
ESS - 8psi
AA - 9psi

MANIFOLD
ESS - One-piece dual layer Casted with integrated intercooler core chambers
AA - One-piece Casted with seperate two-piece intercooler core chambers

COOLING
ESS - Three 500mm Laminova Cores
AA - Three 332mm Laminova Cores

BYPASS VALVE
ESS - CNC throttle-body (butterfly type)
AA - AA Race Bypass (diaphragm type)

WATER PUMP
ESS - Johnson Pump from Sweden
AA - Johnson Pump from Sweden

MOUNTING
ESS - Manifold mounts to head with no auxilary brackets, manifold supports itself and compressor
AA - Snout bracket required

IDLERS
ESS - CNC Machined idler pulley bracket w/ OEM rollers, stock tensioner retained
AA - CNC Machined snout bracket supports idlers and a different BMW belt tensioner is included

HEAT EXCHANGER
ESS - Setrab (I'll get measurements on mine)
AA - Unknown Type/Size?

POWER STEERING
ESS - New custom aluminum PS Tank in OEM location
AA - OEM PS Tank moved to different location?

CRANKCASE VENTILATION
ESS - OEM BMW Crankcase valve built into TS intake elbow
AA - Appears to be a aluminum catch can near the TS snout?

INTAKE
ESS - Stock MAF and MAF location with Stock airbox, filter, and location
AA - New 3.5" MAF and mandrel bent tube in-bumper intake with seperate K&N filter

FUEL SYSTEM
ESS - New 30# red injectors
AA - They are blue, unknown flow, AA?

SOFTWARE
ESS - New in-DME software, 7000rpm redline, removed top speed limiter
AA - New in-DME software, _____rpm redline, top speed limiter?

ADVERTISED POWER
ESS - 321RWHP, 286RWTQ on a DynoJet
AA - 332RWHP, 282RWTQ on a Dynojet
ESS uses 91 octane for all dynos on their site. AA's Florida locale would suggest the use of 93.
FYI: A simple 2-point octane change (91 to 93) can account for over 15rwhp and 10rwtq on the same car if tuned for it. Also, I completely agree with Stimpee, variables such as different cars on different dynos in different environments pretty much make posted dyno comparisons unrealistic at best. So take that into account. We need to get one of each kit on the same car/dyno and test that!

PRICE
ESS - Normally $7995, intro $7495
AA - Normally $8900, intro $7900

AVAILABILITY
ESS - MS43 330i, MS45 330i/ZHP, MS45.1 Z4, other E36/E46 models to follow
AA - MS45 330i/ZHP, E36 M3, other E46 models to follow?

UPGRADABILITY
ESS - Stage 2+ rated at 361RWHP/325RWTQ available (headers/cams required), Stage 3 coming
AA - None announced

As with any big purchase, do your research before spending this kind of money. It will pay off in the long run to invest a little time on things like this. Look at the differences, ask yourself: is there a difference, why, what affect it will be, if any, and do you accept it. Then, come to a decision you are happy with and buy it. Don't let me or anyone else make that decision for you regardless of our opinions.

It is your money, your car, and your choice.

[M3_Jaydee]

:werd:

[stimpee]

Unfortunately, too many opinions have polluted this thread. This is always the case anytime "VS" is in the thread title, isn't it? While "reputation" and "proven" and "experience" get used by both sides and their supporters, they are not measureable by any means. Let's try to stick to the material facts. I have updated this with some of your facts Stimpee (I'll take out the runners since it is debatable conjecture and add the heat exchangers). Thank you.

I am still waiting on AA to provide information about the Power Steering Tank, PCV, Injectors, new HFM, software, and now the Heat Exchanger as well.


You say that opinion has polluted the thread, however I would like to point out that, at least in my opinion, your biased presentation of the "facts" can somewhat be labeled as "opinion" as well. Please don't take that the wrong way, as I am not attacking you, just trying to point out that the WAY you present the information, in my opinion, shows strong bias towards ESS. THAT is the reason why I took so long to even reply to this thread.



MOUNTING
ESS - Manifold mounts to head with no auxilary brackets, manifold supports itself and compressor
AA - Snout bracket required


This illustrates my point. You give detailed description of the ESS setup, which you obviously know well, and then give a one liner which in my opinion was placed as a "negative". I know plenty of engineers that, regardless of the intake manifold design, would consider the presence of the secondary snout support as a "positive", so opinion can swing either way can it not?



HEAT EXCHANGER
ESS - Setrab (I'll get measurements on mine)
AA - Unknown Type/Size?


Approx (don't have the exact dimensions handy) 24"x6.5"x2.5" aluminum heat exchanger designed specifically for water-air (not oil) heat exchange with integral end tanks.


POWER STEERING
ESS - New custom aluminum PS Tank in OEM location
AA - OEM PS Tank moved to different location?


True

The rest of the questions I will defer to Active to respond to directly, since I don't want to screw anything up.

Steve

[funkyman]

You say that opinion has polluted the thread, however I would like to point out that, at least in my opinion, your biased presentation of the "facts" can somewhat be labeled as "opinion" as well. Please don't take that the wrong way, as I am not attacking you, just trying to point out that the WAY you present the information, in my opinion, shows strong bias towards ESS. THAT is the reason why I took so long to even reply to this thread.




This illustrates my point. You give detailed description of the ESS setup, which you obviously know well, and then give a one liner which in my opinion was placed as a "negative". I know plenty of engineers that, regardless of the intake manifold design, would consider the presence of the secondary snout support as a "positive", so opinion can swing either way can it not?




Approx (don't have the exact dimensions handy) 24"x6.5"x2.5" aluminum heat exchanger designed specifically for water-air (not oil) heat exchange with integral end tanks.



True

The rest of the questions I will defer to Active to respond to directly, since I don't want to screw anything up.

Steve

Hear hear!!Very well put.The guy is clearly an ESS fan and user,not an objective approach to description at all.Both systems are good.:eeps:

[MarvelPhx]

You say that opinion has polluted the thread, however I would like to point out that, at least in my opinion, your biased presentation of the "facts" can somewhat be labeled as "opinion" as well. Please don't take that the wrong way, as I am not attacking you, just trying to point out that the WAY you present the information, in my opinion, shows strong bias towards ESS. THAT is the reason why I took so long to even reply to this thread.

My point is to be unbiased. And I openly admit I know the ESS system better as I have seen it personally. I also openly stated in the beginning that the information is based on AA's posts here at E46f and their website along with what I know of my kit and ESS's website. Again, to be as truthful as possible.

Is any of it incorrect? I am trying to put as much fact here as possible. I have asked numerous times for AA to update missing or incorrect data.

This illustrates my point. You give detailed description of the ESS setup, which you obviously know well, and then give a one liner which in my opinion was placed as a "negative". I know plenty of engineers that, regardless of the intake manifold design, would consider the presence of the secondary snout support as a "positive", so opinion can swing either way can it not?

And that is your "opinion", not fact. Keep the opinion out of this. To keep the facts correct, I removed the part about the support bracket since you said it is not needed. Is it now true or false?

Again, let the people decide if a support bracket or lack thereof matters to them. I am stating the actual differences just like the OP requested with as little interpretation as possible. The prospective buyers can draw their own conclusions.

Approx (don't have the exact dimensions handy) 24"x6.5"x2.5" aluminum heat exchanger designed specifically for water-air (not oil) heat exchange with integral end tanks.

Since you think it makes a difference enough to include the fluid distinction in this paragraph, what exactly is the difference between a water/air heat exchanger and a oil/air heat exchanger? If relevant, I will include this in the listing.

[stimpee]

Again, MarvelPHX you are stressing to me to base things on fact, but then you are trying to control the words, and what is OK to say and what is not. If you cannot see that the WAY in which you are presenting certain things you state as "fact", just due to your personal choice of wording, or lack thereof, is biased, then as I mentioned initially, this will simply degrade into a pissing contest and a back and forth volley of information of limited use to the potential customers that could truly benefit from it.

YOU cannot be the keeper, or presenter, of this information, without it being biased. I could not do it either.

The reason I chose not to respond to this thread for so long, and avoided an attempt to correct your "assumptions" gleaned from the AA web site, is that I knew it would be an uphill battle to appropriately make my point.

I did not say that our snout support was not necessary. Engineering still typically involves some OPINION on the part of the Engineer. Engineer's make decisions based on their experience, assumptions, and the supporting science. If there is no judgement or "opinion" involved, then it is either just a "guess" or on the other end of the spectrum, it is simply pure science. I am an Engineer. I engineered the original and unique (at the time) basic design of the BMW twin screw configuration that is now manifested in AA's kit. I engineered the kit as a SYSTEM. I cannot make statements at a component level for things like a snout support as to whether it is "necessary" or not. As the original engineer of the system, I deemed it "necessary". Could you take it off, and would the kit still function adequately? Very possibly. Could it possibly have a negative impact to remove it? Possibly.

I am not going to go into a full justification on why the kit was engineered in the manner it was. However I can say it was engineered well. Am I biased in saying that without specific engineering backup and peer review? Of course I am. So be it. I am not into trying to "wow" everyone with pseudo-engineering blahblahblah to try to impress.

As for the differences between air-water, and air-oil heat exchangers, feel free to research it yourself. One is designed for efficient heat exchange with oil, and one is designed for efficient heat exchange with water. Each will work in the other application, but typically not as well as one engineered for the appropriate working fluid. I am not a heat exchanger engineer, we relied on the appropriate experts for that based on our system specifications and geometric envelope. If you wish to not accept that explanation since I did not provide full engineering justification, and don't include it in the comparison, then I guess my point about the bias in your presentation of the "facts" will be more than validated. :D :D

[TxZHP04]

Good, now we know that everyone is biased and that we won't be discussing anything remotely useful in this thread.

[TaZaM3]

Wow this always happens with ESS threads. First off we all know MarvelPHX is somewhat of an employee of ESS's. Anytime anything involving ESS comes about i see funny things going on. In this case like most others, AA was takled about and ofcourse the company was quickly shot down by a few of the ESS guys.

Some guys just cant take competition even if its from a company doing it for over 20 years.

[Maestroxl]

^^^blabla Mr AA just can't help himself.
Try something new or usefull to say.
You are always steering the tread in this direction.
We all know that you like AA over just about everything else.
You are the reason why I went ESS. Thank you.

[kidplatinum]

Thanks MarvelPhx for putting something together for those of us who wanted to compare the systems but are to lazy to do so.

Stimpee I see your point on being partial towards a particular product when originating a comparison. In all fairness though MarvelPhx is listing facts about the ESS and AA kit that he is aware of. I believe he stated that if someone knows different to add what they know, so with that being said.....just fill in the blanks for the AA kit.....its really that simple. I dont think MarvelPhx will be offended by it, and that will help us who are wanting to compare the kits.

Stimpee fill in the AA info...with pros and cons to the methods used....dont bash comp!
MarvelPhx fill in the ESS info....with pros and cons to the method used....dont bash comp!

The result will be a nice comparison of both kits by speakers from both sides. So that way no one kit is being misrepresented...unless done by the speaker for the kit.

Those of us who are interested will read it. Once educated on the product research can be done by the buyer and a decision made based on info.

So Stimpee please fill in the AA info so the confusion can be cleared.

Thank you both for assisting in this matter!:thumbsup:

[Maestroxl]

^^ +1

[bigjae1976]

I like the fact that both guys state the pros and cons. I like comparison. For the most part, the discussion was pretty mature.

I have gained a lot of knowledge from both MarvelPhx and Stimpee.

I am in no way qualified to say one is better than the other but I still favor AA mostly because I've seen more of their kits in magazines and websites. I know that doesn't necessarily make a certain product better or worse.

[chisau]

Everyone can go back and forth on these kits all day long. I say we need one of these mags that we all subscribe to to run an full on test like I've seen done for VW's & Hondas. Thaty would be more interesting to me. Each co. would offer up one of their customers vehicles TS - Vortech, ASA, whatever and the mag would take them through the paces.

I believe that there would be more than enough info for a good article. Heck, we can even throw in the 335 and E36 cars for comparison. An all out 3 series battle.

Based on what I have seen on these forums, both Stimpee and Todd are stellar individuals. But they both have an interest in either company selling these kits. As eloquent as they may be in this e-convo, there will always be a hint of bias on either part and no real answer as to which kit is better or worse. I guess all else being somewhat equal, it will come down to which co. you feel deserves your support.

[BayerischeMW]

with fear of sounding arrogant, Taza, both you and Marvel are thought to be with a company on this site, AA and ESS. that isn't negative, it means we need to read both of your opinions with objective/unbiased glasses.

"Wow this always happens with ESS threads."
is AA not in this thread title as well? statements like this is of no use directed towards either AA or ESS. forum members know you push AA in front of you, and ESS behind you.

"First off we all know MarvelPHX is somewhat of an employee of ESS's."
likewise we "know" you're somehow affiliated with AA, Marvel has stated his position with ESS.

i have nothing but respect for both of you, your cars and accomplishments with the E46 chassis. but i get tired of seeing one attack the other and vice versa, likewise with ESS vs. AA. threadtitles like this one is the perfect battleground and should be avoided.

[bigjae1976]

Everyone can go back and forth on these kits all day long. I say we need one of these mags that we all subscribe to to run an full on test like I've seen done for VW's & Hondas. Thaty would be more interesting to me. Each co. would offer up one of their customers vehicles TS - Vortech, ASA, whatever and the mag would take them through the paces.

I believe that there would be more than enough info for a good article. Heck, we can even throw in the 335 and E36 cars for comparison. An all out 3 series battle.

Based on what I have seen on these forums, both Stimpee and Todd are stellar individuals. But they both have an interest in either company selling these kits. As eloquent as they may be in this e-convo, there will always be a hint of bias on either part and no real answer as to which kit is better or worse. I guess all else being somewhat equal, it will come down to which co. you feel deserves your support.

If only I had $16,000?

[funkyman]

Actually lets do away with both AA and ESS and just get a VF SC or ask Stillen to make a monster kit heheh.I`m sure they would make a better job than both since its their area of expertise.Ohhhhhhh yeah:woot: :shhh:

[GodSendsDeath]

MarvelPhx is very honest and isnt bias as far as i know. True he uses ESS stuff but he never as far as I remember said in any thread don't use AA or what not. Where Taz here is a total AA FANATIC and if you say anything not AA he comes and jumps your throat. Either way I will end up going AA not because Iam scared for my life of Taz lol, its cuz i live in Florida and i think both companys i just as good. So i guess which ever is close to you.

[stimpee]

I never said MarvelPHX said anything bad about Active, only that his presentation of the "facts" appeared biased in my opinion, just purely based on the details of his wording and his presentation of the information. He clearly tried to imply "superiority" of certain things, without actually saying so. These are things that many might not catch.

He should either make it totally unbiased, which I propose he cannot do given his loyalties, or he should clearly state where he thinks things are superior, and then allow an opportunity for response.

However in any case, I think it would end up going back to a bit of a pissing contest.

Also, I would put our (AA) kit up against the Stillen kit, or anything Stillen could/would do for a BMW, any day of the week.

Most of their kits are not even twin-screw compressors, but Roots based designs. Their marketing department however seems to not understand the difference...

[ttran]

I never said MarvelPHX said anything bad about Active, only that his presentation of the "facts" appeared biased in my opinion, just purely based on the details of his wording and his presentation of the information. He clearly tried to imply "superiority" of certain things, without actually saying so. These are things that many might not catch.

He should either make it totally unbiased, which I propose he cannot do given his loyalties, or he should clearly state where he thinks things are superior, and then allow an opportunity for response.


i don't think you're qualified to make that assessment since you're biased towards AA. both of you have obvious ties to your respective companies so your interpretation of each other is clearly skewed.

my viewpoint, as an "outsider", is that MarvelPHX did an adequate job presenting the specs as they were available to him. he obviously knows more about the ESS kit, so that accounts for the more detailed descriptions on the ESS side. i don't think he was trying to tout any one point of the ESS kit as being superior over the AA kit. AA can easily add what they feel is relevant to that list (waiting...).

both of you can go back and forth all day, but it'd just be a waste of time. so please spare us the "quotes" and just present facts, not ya'lls analysis of each other.

[jeremysmith1967]

Ok, i think that we have established that MarvelPHX and stimpee have ties to their respective companies, but why does that matter? in anything car related it is natural for an individual to be partial to the company that sells the products they use on their cars. so why dont we just listen to what each of them have to say and take it for what it is, an opinion. both MarvelPHX and stimpee know what they're talking about so both of them should be taken into consideration.

[chisau]

Ok, i think that we have established that MarvelPHX and stimpee have ties to their respective companies, but why does that matter? in anything car related it is natural for an individual to be partial to the company that sells the products they use on their cars. so why dont we just listen to what each of them have to say and take it for what it is, an opinion. both MarvelPHX and stimpee know what they're talking about so both of them should be taken into consideration.

FYI Stimpee designed what is now the AA TS on his personal car, with his own funds. Then he partnered w/ AA to market the kit utilizing their software. Steve was 'just another enthusiast' before this TS came about.

[stimpee]

As I said originally, while MarvelPHX did a good job comparing the kits in some aspects, the way in which he did it, and the text he chose for certain things was, IN MY OPINION, biased. I have clearly stated during all of my posts in this thread what my position is, and that I AM biased. I have yet to see him admit that, he simply states that the things he "missed" were due to his lack of knowledge of the AA kit. I am just stating, that in my opinion, that is BS. I will give him credit as being smarter than that.

Also, if you want a "head to head" comparison, while I think the performance testing part (acceleration times, dyno numbers, etc) can be objective, certain other things would most certainly NOT be objective. The perception of the kit, the judgement of installation ease, the assessment of quality of the instructions, and MOST importantly the assessment of the quality of the engineering and production of the kit components and systems, would NOT be objective, they would be subjective.

Who is qualified to make those assessments? Who is qualified to make an engineering comparison of the kits from the standpoint of design, and execution, materials, etc? Certainly not most, if any magazine editors/writers that I am aware of. Not without injecting large quantities of OPINION or doing WAY more research than anyone would ever invest in such a story. So, which way would their opinion sway, and why? Or would they just avoid those subjective assessments?

Just a question for all of you to think about.

Also, people keep hinting that I need to still provide more information about our kit. As far as I know, the only things I have not addressed are the injectors, PCV, and rev limit. I am not sure there is anything else in the list that I have not hit, and I think I have perhaps even added one or 2 things. Am I missing something? I said I would not address those 3 issues, since I don't want to make an incorrect statement. I am not 100% sure of the answers to those 3 offhand, so I don't want to say anything...

[stimpee]

Sorry, double posted due to impatience with my computer!!

[Tyler@UniqueDesign]

For Stage 2 on a 330i/ZHP:

COMPRESSOR TYPE
ESS - 1.6L Lyhsolm
AA - 1.6L Lyhsolm (at least on our car...?)

MAX BOOST PRESSURE
ESS - 8psi
AA - 9psi (AA would have to verify this)

MANIFOLD
ESS - One-piece dual layer Casted with integrated intercooler core chambers
AA - One-piece Casted with seperate two-piece intercooler core chambers (I believe this is correct)

COOLING
ESS - Three 500mm Laminova Cores
AA - Three 332mm Laminova Cores

BYPASS VALVE
ESS - CNC throttle-body (butterfly type)
AA - AA Race Bypass (diaphragm type) (don't know again)

WATER PUMP
ESS - Johnson Pump from Sweden
AA - Johnson Pump from Sweden

MOUNTING
ESS - Manifold and Compressor mount only to (and are thus only supported by) the head.
AA - Manifold mounts to head and has an additional snout support bracket to help stabilize the system and prevent long term failure.

IDLERS
ESS - CNC Machined idler pulley bracket w/ OEM rollers, stock tensioner retained
AA - CNC Machined snout bracket supports idlers and a different BMW belt tensioner is included

HEAT EXCHANGER
ESS - Setrab (I'll get measurements on mine)
AA - 24"x6.5"x2.5" aluminum heat exchanger designed specifically for water-air

POWER STEERING
ESS - PS tank replaced with non OEM tank
AA - OEM PS Tank relocated

CRANKCASE VENTILATION
ESS - OEM BMW Crankcase valve built into TS intake elbow
AA - Appears to be a aluminum catch can near the TS snout? (Not sure)

INTAKE
ESS - Stock MAF and MAF location with Stock airbox, filter, and location
AA - New 3.5" MAF and mandrel bent tube in-bumper intake with seperate K&N filter

FUEL SYSTEM
ESS - New 30# red injectors
AA - They are blue, unknown flow, AA? (I forget this one, I'll update when I get reassurance though)

SOFTWARE
ESS - New in-DME software, 7000rpm redline, removed top speed limiter
AA - New in-DME software, 7000rpm redline, removed top speed limiter

ADVERTISED POWER
ESS - 321RWHP, 286RWTQ on a DynoJet
AA - 332RWHP, 282RWTQ on a Dynojet
ESS uses 91 octane for all dynos on their site. AA's Florida locale would suggest the use of 93.
FYI: A simple 2-point octane change (91 to 93) can account for over 15rwhp and 10rwtq on the same car if tuned for it. Also, I completely agree with Stimpee, variables such as different cars on different dynos in different environments pretty much make posted dyno comparisons unrealistic at best. So take that into account. We need to get one of each kit on the same car/dyno and test that!

PRICE
ESS - Normally $7995, intro $7495
AA - Normally $8500, intro $7900

AVAILABILITY
ESS - MS43 330i, MS45 330i/ZHP, MS45.1 Z4, other E36/E46 models to follow
AA - MS45 330i/ZHP, E36 M3, other E46 models to follow?

UPGRADABILITY
ESS - Stage 2+ rated at 361RWHP/325RWTQ available (headers/cams required), Stage 3 coming
AA - Stage 2+ (I'll get permission to post the dyno at some point, but our car has FI cams and headers and made a lot).





I edited a few things, obviously in an attempt to illustrate bias towards AA. Not because I feel there is a "superior" kit, but to show exactly what Steve was referring to in Todd's postings. I actually agree with Steve that there is going to be a lot of subjectivity when comparing the advantage of some of these things (like the support bracket).

I'm sorry I didn't have time to see the ESS kit on Todd's car when I wass in Phoenix, I barerly had time for sleeping though. I would have LOVED to make a comparison.

I was honestly skeptical of AA's kit initially, but they have more than proven themselves with the kit.

[stimpee]

Tyler,

I am all but certain that you have the 1.7L Opcon Autorotor compressor on your car. If not, I would be shocked.

Also, we use 42lb injectors on the E36 cars, however as I said previously, I am not certain about the E46. I would think that 30lb injectors would be pretty close to running static at >350whp, but maybe I am missing something.

Steve

[Asbjorn@ESS]

Instead of guessing, I feel it is better if each manufacturer explain why they designed the systems the way they did and what benefits they see of doing that. Here is my take on it as one of the ESS engineers on the M54 TS project, I welcome AA/Stimpee to fill out their section with their info and thoughts.

COMPRESSOR TYPE
ESS - ESS Spec high speed 1.6L Lysholm, capable of 14500RPM = 23200L max cap.
AA - Standard 1.7L Autorotor (or LYS OA SR4 1.7L as it is called now after Lysholm took over Autorotors automotive TS production), capable of 13000RPM = 22100L max cap.

ESS Advantage : Faster boost spoolup due to less internal leakage and higher maximum power capacity due to optimized porting and increased RPM capacity.

AA Advantage : (AA Please fill in)

MAX BOOST PRESSURE
ESS - 8psi
AA - 9psi (AA would have to verify this)

MANIFOLD
ESS - One-piece, high strength dual layer casted aluminium. Maximum length runner design with integrated intercooler core chambers for 3X500mm Laminova. Full length cooling with equal air distribution to all 6 cylinders.
AA - One-piece, short runner casted aluminium with separate intercooler core chambers, 3x332mm laminovas covering 4 cylinders width.

ESS Advantage : Maximum runner length and equal cylinder balance due to full length direct integrated runner cooling, results in superior bottom and mid range torque. V-shaped runners for optimal high RPM efficiency as well. 3X500MM laminovas capable of up to 450rwhp effective cooling with minimal pressure drops. Our high-strength, dual layer casting is designed to be extremely rigid and supports the TS unit without additional support.

AA Advantage : (AA Please fill in)

COOLING
ESS - Three 500mm Laminova Cores
AA - Three 332mm Laminova Cores

ESS Advantage : Minimal pressure drops, equal cylinder distribution and maximum flow capacity for future upgrades.

AA Advantage : (AA Please fill in)


BYPASS VALVE
ESS - CNC throttle-body (butterfly type)
AA - AA Race Bypass (diaphragm type) (don't know again)

ESS Advantage : A butterfly type bypass valve is the only vacuum assisted valve that works properly in a 3 side vacuum operation condition. We used this since it is a must in any Roots or TS application with the throttle body ahead of the blower.

AA Advantage : (AA Please fill in)


WATER PUMP
ESS - Johnson Pump from Sweden
AA - Johnson Pump from Sweden

MOUNTING
ESS - Manifold and Compressor mounts only to the head.
AA - Manifold mounts to head and has an additional snout support bracket to help stabilize the system and prevent long term failure.

ESS Advantage : Dual layer, high strength and precision machined aluminium manifold removes the need for complex auxillary mounting points to align belt drive and support structure. This results in easier installation and serviceability.

AA Advantage : (AA Please fill in)

IDLERS
ESS - CNC Machined idler pulley bracket w/ OEM rollers, stock tensioner retained
AA - CNC Machined snout bracket supports idlers and a different BMW belt tensioner is included

HEAT EXCHANGER
ESS - ESS S54 VT3 spec Setrab custom water element.
AA - 24"x6.5"x2.5" aluminium heat exchanger designed specifically for water-air

ESS Advantage : Oversized and bullet-proof liquid heat exchanger from world renowned Swedish Setrab tested to perform excellent with TS3 @ 500HP/13-14PSI, no need to change if upgrading to TS2+/TS3. This is the same element used in the worlds fastest E46 M3 to ever circle the “Ring” - “Loaded CSL”. It cooled a 600HP ESS VT3 S54 engine to a record lap time of 7.32 around the Nordschleife with optimal and stable IC cooling throughout several consecutive maximum speed laps!

AA Advantage : (AA Please fill in)


POWER STEERING
ESS - New CNC aluminium tank in OEM location and height. OEM filler cap and ventilation system.
AA - OEM PS Tank relocated

ESS Advantage : Power steering tank is left in OEM location with OEM height and fill quantities. Easier access during maintenance and proper fill rate for power steering pumps due to original height and angle in relation to pump inlet.

AA Advantage : (AA Please fill in)



CRANKCASE VENTILATION
ESS - OEM BMW Crankcase valve built into TS intake elbow
AA - Appears to be a aluminium catch can near the TS snout? (Not sure)

ESS Advantage : Emissions legal OEM solution.

AA Advantage : (AA Please fill in)


INTAKE
ESS - Stock 3.5" MAF and MAF location with Stock airbox, filter, and location
AA - New 3.5" MAF and mandrel bent tube in-bumper intake with separate K&N filter

ESS Advantage :

-Stable MAF operation with OEM airflow path through it, eliminates many driveability problems found in "MAF on tube/cone filter" type kits since it eliminates any possibility for MAF turbulence.
-Greatly extended MAF lifespan and accuracy, due to non-oiled factory filter.
-Superior TS noise insulation from OEM airbox.
-Superior hydrolock prevention.
-Easily serviceable with OEM filter.
-OEM filter has the best filtration capacity which is very important since the tight-tolerance TS internals is very sensitive to air pollution. Intake air pollution will greatly reduce efficiency and lifespan of your TS unit.
-Wash your car like normal, no need to fear chemicals entering your air filter and contaminating your MAF.
-Stock MAF sensor is capable of reading over 500HP worth of airflow if ECU is programmed correctly. Since MAF sensors are prone to failure with time, it is easy to go to BMW and just buy a new OEM one if ever needed.

AA Advantage : (AA Please fill in)

FUEL SYSTEM
ESS - New 30# Bosch injectors, 42# in TS3
AA - They are blue, unknown flow, AA? (I forget this one, I'll update when I get reassurance though)

SOFTWARE
ESS - New in-DME software, 7000rpm redline, removed top speed limiter
AA - New in-DME software, 7000rpm redline, removed top speed limiter

ESS Advantage : Perfectly smooth operation from idle to 7K RPM, optimal AF ratios and optimal fuel consumption under all conditions. Torque limitation removed and maximum airflow limitation reprogrammed without the use of MAF signal massagers or a different MAF with lower signal output. Massive torque increases from 1500-1800RPM with no restricted "flat" torque spot in the mid-range.

AA Advantage : (AA please fill in)

ADVERTISED POWER
ESS - 321RWHP, 286RWTQ on a DynoJet
AA - 332RWHP, 282RWTQ on a Dynojet
ESS uses 91 octane for all dynos on their site. AA's Florida locale would suggest the use of 93.
FYI: A simple 2-point octane change (91 to 93) can account for over 15rwhp and 10rwtq on the same car if tuned for it. Also, I completely agree with Stimpee, variables such as different cars on different dynos in different environments pretty much make posted dyno comparisons unrealistic at best. So take that into account. We need to get one of each kit on the same car/dyno and test that!

PRICE
ESS - Normally $7995, intro $7495
AA - Normally $8500, intro $7900

AVAILABILITY
ESS - MS43 330i, MS45 330i/ZHP, MS45.1 Z4, other E36/E46 models to follow
AA - MS45 330i/ZHP, E36 M3, other E46 models to follow?

UPGRADABILITY
ESS - Stage 2+ rated at 361RWHP/325RWTQ available (headers/cams required), Stage 3, 400+RWHP coming
AA - Stage 2+ Info please?

[stimpee]

COMPRESSOR TYPE
ESS - ESS Spec high speed 1.6L Lysholm, capable of 14500RPM = 23200L max cap.
AA - Standard 1.7L Autorotor (or LYS OA SR4 1.7L as it is called now after Lysholm took over Autorotors automotive TS production), capable of 13000RPM = 22100L max cap.

ESS Advantage : Faster boost spoolup due to less internal leakage and higher maximum power capacity due to optimized porting and increased RPM capacity.

AA Advantage : We have tested both the 1.6L lysholm, and the Opcon 1.7 back to back on the same system, on the same, car, at the same boost level. As said previously, the Lysholm had a very slight advantage below about 3500 rpm in torque production (single digits), while the Opcon compressor had less boost dropoff and less heat at higher rpm, and utimately, on the E36, produced approximately 15 more peak whp.

MAX BOOST PRESSURE
ESS - 8psi
AA - 9psi

MANIFOLD
ESS - One-piece, high strength dual layer casted aluminium. Maximum length runner design with integrated intercooler core chambers for 3X500mm Laminova. Full length cooling with equal air distribution to all 6 cylinders.
AA - One-piece, short runner casted aluminium with separate intercooler core chambers, 3x332mm laminovas covering 4 cylinders width.

ESS Advantage : Maximum runner length and equal cylinder balance due to full length direct integrated runner cooling, results in superior bottom and mid range torque. V-shaped runners for optimal high RPM efficiency as well. 3X500MM laminovas capable of up to 450rwhp effective cooling with minimal pressure drops. Our high-strength, dual layer casting is designed to be extremely rigid and supports the TS unit without additional support.

AA Advantage : System tested to 400whp with existing Laminova setup with proven uniform airflow and cooling efficiency, with less than 0.75psi maximum pressure drop. Plenum design provides for even air distribution to all 6 cylinders regardless of intercooler placement on plenum

COOLING
ESS - Three 500mm Laminova Cores
AA - Three 332mm Laminova Cores

ESS Advantage : Minimal pressure drops, equal cylinder distribution and maximum flow capacity for future upgrades.

AA Advantage : Pressure drop noted above. Uniform cylinder distribution proven in testing. Flow capacity adequate for over 400whp, instrumented testing underway for >450whp.


BYPASS VALVE
ESS - CNC throttle-body (butterfly type)
AA - AA Race Bypass (diaphragm type) (don't know again)

ESS Advantage : A butterfly type bypass valve is the only vacuum assisted valve that works properly in a 3 side vacuum operation condition. We used this since it is a must in any Roots or TS application with the throttle body ahead of the blower.

AA Advantage : Extensively tested both butterfly type Lysholm supplied valve and Active Autowerke racing bypass valve. Experienced multiple failures of bypass valve system in testing. Interesting claim that the Diaphragm valve will not "work properly", Asbjorn should come drive one of our cars. Driveability is excellent, no issues, and bypass valve is bulletproof.


WATER PUMP
ESS - Johnson Pump from Sweden
AA - Johnson Pump from Sweden

MOUNTING
ESS - Manifold and Compressor mounts only to the head.
AA - Manifold mounts to head and has an additional snout support bracket to help stabilize the system and prevent long term failure.

ESS Advantage : Dual layer, high strength and precision machined aluminium manifold removes the need for complex auxillary mounting points to align belt drive and support structure. This results in easier installation and serviceability.

AA Advantage : Hanging the entire manifold/blower/inlet off of the cylinder head results in over 60lbs in total weight being cantilevered off of the cylinder head mounting points. ALL forms of aluminum have limited fatigue life, and can experience cracking under high cycle count repeated loading. The front snout support stabilizes the compressor snout and reduces high rpm vibration. It also changes the load paths in the system and significantly reduces the peak stresses at the root of the intake runners where they meet the head flange. The reduced stresses will provide a greater safety margin in resisting fatigue of the aluminum manifold.

IDLERS
ESS - CNC Machined idler pulley bracket w/ OEM rollers, stock tensioner retained
AA - CNC Machined snout bracket supports idlers and a different BMW belt tensioner is included At higher boost levels, mechanical OEM tensioner has proven to more consistently provide adequate tension to resist belt slippage.

HEAT EXCHANGER
ESS - ESS S54 VT3 spec Setrab custom water element.
AA - 24"x6.5"x2.5" aluminium heat exchanger designed specifically for water-air

ESS Advantage : Oversized and bullet-proof liquid heat exchanger from world renowned Swedish Setrab tested to perform excellent with TS3 @ 500HP/13-14PSI, no need to change if upgrading to TS2+/TS3. This is the same element used in the worlds fastest E46 M3 to ever circle the ***8220;Ring***8221; - ***8220;Loaded CSL***8221;. It cooled a 600HP ESS VT3 S54 engine to a record lap time of 7.32 around the Nordschleife with optimal and stable IC cooling throughout several consecutive maximum speed laps!

AA Advantage : AA heat exchanger designed specifically for the twin screw application and the specifications of the system by a well known leader in heat exchanger design and production. Originally used Setrab oil cooler in prototype kits but exchanged that cooler for existing setup which based on calculations provides >2x cooling capacity. For those that are interested, the Active heat exchanger also resembles a front mount intercooler in the front bumper, or it can be "disguised" in black to make it nearly invisible.


POWER STEERING
ESS - New CNC aluminium tank in OEM location and height. OEM filler cap and ventilation system.
AA - OEM PS Tank relocated

ESS Advantage : Power steering tank is left in OEM location with OEM height and fill quantities. Easier access during maintenance and proper fill rate for power steering pumps due to original height and angle in relation to pump inlet.

AA Advantage : Active Autowerke retains the OEM power steering tank. No impact on power steering system during testing, and reduces installation labor by avoiding the draining and replacement of the tank.



CRANKCASE VENTILATION
ESS - OEM BMW Crankcase valve built into TS intake elbow
AA - Aluminium catch can near the TS snout

ESS Advantage : Emissions legal OEM solution.

AA Advantage : Active Autowerke "catch can" reduces contamination of the inlet system with blow-by oil which can reduce efficiency of the intercooler system.


INTAKE
ESS - Stock 3.5" MAF and MAF location with Stock airbox, filter, and location
AA - New 3.5" MAF and mandrel bent tube in-bumper intake with separate K&N filter

ESS Advantage :

-Stable MAF operation with OEM airflow path through it, eliminates many driveability problems found in "MAF on tube/cone filter" type kits since it eliminates any possibility for MAF turbulence.
-Greatly extended MAF lifespan and accuracy, due to non-oiled factory filter.
-Superior TS noise insulation from OEM airbox.
-Superior hydrolock prevention.
-Easily serviceable with OEM filter.
-OEM filter has the best filtration capacity which is very important since the tight-tolerance TS internals is very sensitive to air pollution. Intake air pollution will greatly reduce efficiency and lifespan of your TS unit.
-Wash your car like normal, no need to fear chemicals entering your air filter and contaminating your MAF.
-Stock MAF sensor is capable of reading over 500HP worth of airflow if ECU is programmed correctly. Since MAF sensors are prone to failure with time, it is easy to go to BMW and just buy a new OEM one if ever needed.

AA Advantage : HFM is a bosch OEM part available from any company that carries BOSCH components. HFM has been proven, and used, in systems making well over 600whp. No "chemicals" enter filter and no contamination of MAF. Design and placement of intake chosen as the "minimum compromise" setup to provide optimal airflow into the back of the compressor. Lower turbulence and reduced pressure drop at blower inlet due to more gradual flow transition. General layout of inlet and filter is the same setup used supercharger systems from both Active Autowerke, ESS, Dinan, RMS, Technik, and others, with thousands of systems on the road for many many years. No cases of Hydrolock ever reported at Active with well over 600 centrifugal systems with similar filter placement on the road. No driveability issues with filter and HFM placement. Design of inlet system also allows fitment of larger compressors without any redesign or intereferences with underhood components.

FUEL SYSTEM
ESS - New 30# Bosch injectors, 42# in TS3
AA - They are blue, unknown flow, AA? As I mentioned, I think they are 42# (440cc) in all systems. No need to change injectors to upgrade system.

SOFTWARE
ESS - New in-DME software, 7000rpm redline, removed top speed limiter
AA - New in-DME software, 7000rpm redline, removed top speed limiter

ESS Advantage : Perfectly smooth operation from idle to 7K RPM, optimal AF ratios and optimal fuel consumption under all conditions. Torque limitation removed and maximum airflow limitation reprogrammed without the use of MAF signal massagers or a different MAF with lower signal output. Massive torque increases from 1500-1800RPM with no restricted "flat" torque spot in the mid-range.

AA Advantage : I will have to let Karl or someone else chime in on this, however I can attest to "perfectly smooth operation from idle to 7k RPM" in our system.

ADVERTISED POWER
ESS - 321RWHP, 286RWTQ on a DynoJet
AA - 332RWHP, 282RWTQ on a Dynojet
ESS uses 91 octane for all dynos on their site. AA's Florida locale would suggest the use of 93.
FYI: A simple 2-point octane change (91 to 93) can account for over 15rwhp and 10rwtq on the same car if tuned for it. Also, I completely agree with Stimpee, variables such as different cars on different dynos in different environments pretty much make posted dyno comparisons unrealistic at best. So take that into account. We need to get one of each kit on the same car/dyno and test that!

PRICE
ESS - Normally $7995, intro $7495
AA - Normally $8500, intro $7900

AVAILABILITY
ESS - MS43 330i, MS45 330i/ZHP, MS45.1 Z4, other E36/E46 models to follow
AA - MS45 330i/ZHP and MS45 325 available, Other E46 models (MS43) in process, E36 kits for 3.2, 3.0, 2.8, and 2.5L engines have been in production and installed in customer vehicles for over 8 months.

UPGRADABILITY
ESS - Stage 2+ rated at 361RWHP/325RWTQ available (headers/cams required), Stage 3, 400+RWHP coming
AA - Stage 2+ Info please? I cannot comment on upgrade plans at this point.

[silver330ciman]

I like how both systems have Johnson pump from Sweden:eeps:

[Asbjorn@ESS]

COMPRESSOR TYPE
ESS - ESS Spec high speed 1.6L Lysholm, capable of 14500RPM = 23200L max cap.
AA - Standard 1.7L Autorotor (or LYS OA SR4 1.7L as it is called now after Lysholm took over Autorotors automotive TS production), capable of 13000RPM = 22100L max cap.

ESS Advantage : Faster boost spoolup due to less internal leakage and higher maximum power capacity due to optimized porting and increased RPM capacity.

AA Advantage : We have tested both the 1.6L lysholm, and the Opcon 1.7 back to back on the same system, on the same, car, at the same boost level. As said previously, the Lysholm had a very slight advantage below about 3500 rpm in torque production (single digits), while the Opcon compressor had less boost dropoff and less heat at higher rpm, and utimately, on the E36, produced approximately 15 more peak whp.

ESS Comment :

We are practically neighbours with Lysholm which now has taken over production of the Autorotor lineup under a new name so we have access to all factory flow testing equipment and expertise. The new custom spec Lysholm 1600 high speed unit provides better bottom and mid range torque + similar top end with even more air capacity due to higher speed limitation of the new bearing design of our Lysholm unit.

MAX BOOST PRESSURE
ESS - 8psi (capable of over 14PSI on M54B30)
AA - 9psi

MANIFOLD
ESS - One-piece, high strength dual layer casted aluminium. Maximum length runner design with integrated intercooler core chambers for 3X500mm Laminova. Full length cooling with equal air distribution to all 6 cylinders.
AA - One-piece, short runner casted aluminium with separate intercooler core chambers, 3x332mm laminovas covering 4 cylinders width.

ESS Advantage : Maximum runner length and equal cylinder balance due to full length direct integrated runner cooling, results in superior bottom and mid range torque. V-shaped runners for optimal high RPM efficiency as well. 3X500MM laminovas capable of up to 450rwhp effective cooling with minimal pressure drops. Our high-strength, dual layer casting is designed to be extremely rigid and supports the TS unit without additional support.

AA Advantage : System tested to 400whp with existing Laminova setup with proven uniform airflow and cooling efficiency, with less than 0.75psi maximum pressure drop. Plenum design provides for even air distribution to all 6 cylinders regardless of intercooler placement on plenum

COOLING
ESS - Three 500mm Laminova Cores
AA - Three 332mm Laminova Cores

ESS Advantage : Minimal pressure drops, equal cylinder distribution and maximum flow capacity for future upgrades.

AA Advantage : Pressure drop noted above. Uniform cylinder distribution proven in testing. Flow capacity adequate for over 400whp, instrumented testing underway for >450whp.


BYPASS VALVE
ESS - CNC throttle-body (butterfly type)
AA - AA Race Bypass (diaphragm type) (don't know again)

ESS Advantage : A butterfly type bypass valve is the only vacuum assisted valve that works properly in a 3 side vacuum operation condition. We used this since it is a must in any Roots or TS application with the throttle body ahead of the blower.

AA Advantage : Extensively tested both butterfly type Lysholm supplied valve and Active Autowerke racing bypass valve. Experienced multiple failures of bypass valve system in testing. Interesting claim that the Diaphragm valve will not "work properly", Asbjorn should come drive one of our cars. Driveability is excellent, no issues, and bypass valve is bulletproof.

ESS Comment :

As far as I know, Lysholm has never offered a bypass valve of any kind. Our bypass valve is a very high quality unit sourced from a OEM supplier. There is an extremely good reason no positive displacement SC system with full vacuum on both sides of the SC unit should use a diaphragm type bypass valve, I can elaborate on this if you want?

WATER PUMP
ESS - Johnson Pump from Sweden
AA - Johnson Pump from Sweden

MOUNTING
ESS - Manifold and Compressor mounts only to the head.
AA - Manifold mounts to head and has an additional snout support bracket to help stabilize the system and prevent long term failure.

ESS Advantage : Dual layer, high strength and precision machined aluminium manifold removes the need for complex auxillary mounting points to align belt drive and support structure. This results in easier installation and serviceability.

AA Advantage : Hanging the entire manifold/blower/inlet off of the cylinder head results in over 60lbs in total weight being cantilevered off of the cylinder head mounting points. ALL forms of aluminum have limited fatigue life, and can experience cracking under high cycle count repeated loading. The front snout support stabilizes the compressor snout and reduces high rpm vibration. It also changes the load paths in the system and significantly reduces the peak stresses at the root of the intake runners where they meet the hed flange. The reduced stresses will provide a greater safety margin in resisting fatigue of the aluminum manifold.

ESS Comment :

Our manifold is manufactured by the OEM Volvo engine foundry, and it has been tested by them and us to sustain much more stress than it is currently under in our application. We over-dimensioned it with a 2.3L SC and massive boost in mind, but since the high speed 1600 design is now a reality we no longer need the heavier 2.3L SC unit to achieve our HP goals since a bigger blower turning at a lower speed also results in less efficiency due to compression leaks. A separate support bracket that bolts to the block is available, but not required.


IDLERS
ESS - CNC Machined idler pulley bracket w/ OEM rollers, stock tensioner retained
AA - CNC Machined snout bracket supports idlers and a different BMW belt tensioner is included At higher boost levels, mechanical OEM tensioner has proven to more consistently provide adequate tension to resist belt slippage.

HEAT EXCHANGER
ESS - ESS S54 VT3 spec Setrab custom water element.
AA - 24"x6.5"x2.5" aluminium heat exchanger designed specifically for water-air

ESS Advantage : Oversized and bullet-proof liquid heat exchanger from world renowned Swedish Setrab tested to perform excellent with TS3 @ 500HP/13-14PSI, no need to change if upgrading to TS2+/TS3. This is the same element used in the worlds fastest E46 M3 to ever circle the "Ring" - "Loaded CSL". It cooled a 600HP ESS VT3 S54 engine to a record lap time of 7.32 around the Nordschleife with optimal and stable IC cooling throughout several consecutive maximum speed laps!

AA Advantage : AA heat exchanger designed specifically for the twin screw application and the specifications of the system by a well known leader in heat exchanger design and production. Originally used Setrab oil cooler in prototype kits but exchanged that cooler for existing setup which based on calculations provides >2x cooling capacity. For those that are interested, the Active heat exchanger also resembles a front mount intercooler in the front bumper, or it can be "disguised" in black to make it nearly invisible.


POWER STEERING
ESS - New CNC aluminium tank in OEM location and height. OEM filler cap and ventilation system.
AA - OEM PS Tank relocated

ESS Advantage : Power steering tank is left in OEM location with OEM height and fill quantities. Easier access during maintenance and proper fill rate for power steering pumps due to original height and angle in relation to pump inlet.

AA Advantage : Active Autowerke retains the OEM power steering tank. No impact on power steering system during testing, and reduces installation labor by avoiding the draining and replacement of the tank.


CRANKCASE VENTILATION
ESS - OEM BMW Crankcase valve built into TS intake elbow
AA - Aluminium catch can near the TS snout

ESS Advantage : Emissions legal OEM solution.

AA Advantage : Active Autowerke "catch can" reduces contamination of the inlet system with blow-by oil which can reduce efficiency of the intercooler system.


INTAKE
ESS - Stock 3.5" MAF and MAF location with Stock airbox, filter, and location
AA - New 3.5" MAF and mandrel bent tube in-bumper intake with separate K&N filter

ESS Advantage :

-Stable MAF operation with OEM airflow path through it, eliminates many driveability problems found in "MAF on tube/cone filter" type kits since it eliminates any possibility for MAF turbulence.
-Greatly extended MAF lifespan and accuracy, due to non-oiled factory filter.
-Superior TS noise insulation from OEM airbox.
-Superior hydrolock prevention.
-Easily serviceable with OEM filter.
-OEM filter has the best filtration capacity which is very important since the tight-tolerance TS internals is very sensitive to air pollution. Intake air pollution will greatly reduce efficiency and lifespan of your TS unit.
-Wash your car like normal, no need to fear chemicals entering your air filter and contaminating your MAF.
-Stock MAF sensor is capable of reading over 500HP worth of airflow if ECU is programmed correctly. Since MAF sensors are prone to failure with time, it is easy to go to BMW and just buy a new OEM one if ever needed.

AA Advantage : HFM is a bosch OEM part available from any company that carries BOSCH components. HFM has been proven, and used, in systems making well over 600whp. No "chemicals" enter filter and no contamination of MAF. Design and placement of intake chosen as the "minimum compromise" setup to provide optimal airflow into the back of the compressor. Lower turbulence and reduced pressure drop at blower inlet due to more gradual flow transition. General layout of inlet and filter is the same setup used supercharger systems from both Active Autowerke, ESS, Dinan, RMS, Technik, and others, with thousands of systems on the road for many many years. No cases of Hydrolock ever reported at Active with well over 600 centrifugal systems with similar filter placement on the road. No driveability issues with filter and HFM placement.

ESS Comment :

Well, since you use us for a reference, I can tell you that 95% of the problems we have had with our systems throughout the years is MAF contamination and failure due to the contamination and turbulence issues mentioned above.This is the main reason along with TS sound insulation, serviceability and hydrolock prevention that we designed the TS system compact enough to fit the OEM intake assembly. All aftermarket CAI's that fit a stock car will also fit our TS system, but we strongly advice against it for reasons given above.

FUEL SYSTEM
ESS - New 30# Bosch injectors, 42# in TS3
AA - They are blue, unknown flow, AA? As I mentioned, I think they are 42# (440cc) in all systems. No need to change injectors to upgrade system.

SOFTWARE
ESS - New in-DME software, 7000rpm redline, removed top speed limiter
AA - New in-DME software, 7000rpm redline, removed top speed limiter

ESS Advantage : Perfectly smooth operation from idle to 7K RPM, optimal AF ratios and optimal fuel consumption under all conditions. Torque limitation removed and maximum airflow limitation reprogrammed without the use of MAF signal massagers or a different MAF with lower signal output. Massive torque increases from 1500-1800RPM with no restricted "flat" torque spot in the mid-range.

AA Advantage : I will have to let Karl or someone else chime in on this, however I can attest to "perfectly smooth operation from idle to 7k RPM" in our system.

ADVERTISED POWER
ESS - 321RWHP, 286RWTQ on a DynoJet
AA - 332RWHP, 282RWTQ on a Dynojet
ESS uses 91 octane for all dynos on their site. AA's Florida locale would suggest the use of 93.
FYI: A simple 2-point octane change (91 to 93) can account for over 15rwhp and 10rwtq on the same car if tuned for it. Also, I completely agree with Stimpee, variables such as different cars on different dynos in different environments pretty much make posted dyno comparisons unrealistic at best. So take that into account. We need to get one of each kit on the same car/dyno and test that!

PRICE
ESS - Normally $7995, intro $7495
AA - Normally $8500, intro $7900

AVAILABILITY
ESS - MS43 330i, MS45 330i/ZHP, MS45.1 Z4, other E36/E46 models to follow
AA - MS45 330i/ZHP and MS45 325 available, Other E46 models (MS43) in process, E36 kits for 3.2, 3.0, 2.8, and 2.5L engines have been in production and installed in customer vehicles for over 8 months.

UPGRADABILITY
ESS - Stage 2+ rated at 361RWHP/325RWTQ available (headers/cams required), Stage 3, 400+RWHP coming
AA - Stage 2+ Info please? I cannot comment on upgrade plans at this point.

[stimpee]

Swedish + Johnson + Pump in the same sentence = :lmao:

As for the meat of this thread, I will not try to continue the back and forth. Based on watching this forum for quite some time, I am quite certain that no matter what information I provide, there will be an answer as to why the alternative is superior. In the end, the systems are more similar than ESS will ever care to admit, and the decision in the end for the buyer should be based on many factors in addition to just the hardware, engineering, and objective performance of the kit.

Hopefully, at a minimum, the information provided by MarvelPHX, Asbjorn, and myself, should serve to assist people in comparing the systems, and provide some of the input required for folks to make an informed decision.

:woot:

[chisau]

Always the professional. I'm actually quite impressed that there are so many similarities for 1 'lowly engineer' that does not have Lysholm as a neighbor. Pat yourself on the back Stimp. You've done good.

Summary: 2 more great kits for us enthusiasts to choose from...

[MarvelPhx]

As much as it appears to be, this is far from the "e-pissing" contests Ive witnessed here and on other forums, we are all learning here.

The end result is positive, we are seeing good information on both kits.

[chisau]

I agree

[EIAlfonso]

Looks like two very even kits.

I believe the only way to settle this is for one company to drop their price by a couple of thousand dollars.:eeps:

[stimpee]

Looks like two very even kits.

I believe the only way to settle this is for one company to drop their price by a couple of thousand dollars.:eeps:


:excited: :excited:

Would love to, but considering what goes into the production of either of these kits, that would be a money losing proposition for the kit producer.

These bad boys are EXPENSIVE to engineer and produce.

But the results are worth it!

[Asbjorn@ESS]

:excited: :excited:

Would love to, but considering what goes into the production of either of these kits, that would be a money losing proposition for the kit producer.

These bad boys are EXPENSIVE to engineer and produce.

But the results are worth it!

I would love to see an intercooled M54 TS sell for 6K, but it is probably never going to happen due to the very high costs involved in the production of these kits.

I am 100% with Stimpee on this one though, the end results are absolutely worth the extra $!:woot:

[Lemonsqr]

This thread is great. Props to both of the folks from the two companies for keeping it VERY civil and not turning it into a chest beating contest...yeah, "swedish" and "pump" in the same sentence, haha, "yeah baby" (Austin Powers)

[Limited_Slip]

since both kits looks competitive, I will buy which ever is cheaper

[Tyler@UniqueDesign]

since both kits looks competitive, I will buy which ever is cheaper
As I've said for a while with mods. Get a kit that provides the best lifelong use. A local shop familiar with it, better tech support, or other things all would be helpful long term. Those in Florida would be fairly nuts to not go AA. As would someone in Scandinavia be nuts to not go with ESS. Its a matter of servicing and keeping everything in check.

I've said before that I thought both kits would be pretty equal, after seeing the stage 2+ numbers from our car, I can say that it seems AA has the hp edge (again....). That means nothing big picture, if two cars with different kits raced it would be close enough that the speed of shifts on a rolling start would likely have a bigger effect than the difference in power.

Just my .02, glad to see the responses, and I think the addition of "advantage" under differences is good, I'd like to see AA respond where Stimpee hasn't.

[Asbjorn@ESS]

As I've said for a while with mods. Get a kit that provides the best lifelong use. A local shop familiar with it, better tech support, or other things all would be helpful long term. Those in Florida would be fairly nuts to not go AA. As would someone in Scandinavia be nuts to not go with ESS. Its a matter of servicing and keeping everything in check.

I've said before that I thought both kits would be pretty equal, after seeing the stage 2+ numbers from our car, I can say that it seems AA has the hp edge (again....). That means nothing big picture, if two cars with different kits raced it would be close enough that the speed of shifts on a rolling start would likely have a bigger effect than the difference in power.

Just my .02, glad to see the responses, and I think the addition of "advantage" under differences is good, I'd like to see AA respond where Stimpee hasn't.


You are aware that 361rwhp/325wtq is what the TS2+ makes at only 8.5PSI? With the cams and headers in the TS2+ it's a piece of cake to make 380+rwhp with good fuel and more boost (9-10PSI) with the ESS TS, the problem is that our extensive durability testing shows that our current TS2+ power and boost level is the maximum stock pistons on stock CR can take over time without cracking the piston ring separator section of the piston. This is why we reserve power over TS2+ 8.5PSI levels to customers with the TS3 lowered compression, forged pistons installed. The ESS TwinScrew system is capable of delivering over 450rwhp, the problem is how much a stock engine can take over time. Therefore we see no point in pushing power levels on stock internals over what the engine can sustain, even if our setup is capable of more. Instead we put focus on optimizing the available torque band and make the most of the boost the engine can sustain in the long run. If we loose a HP battle due to this, then so be it. If customers want a stock piston 380+rwhp ESS TS2+, then simply put on a smaller pulley on the SC unit to boost 9-10PSI, but don't come complaining to us if/when your pistons break:(

[ritos530i]

What pistons the stock E46 have in the 3.0 engines. Anyone know for sure?

[Tyler@UniqueDesign]

You are aware that 361rwhp/325wtq is what the TS2+ makes at only 8.5PSI? With the cams and headers in the TS2+ it's a piece of cake to make 380+rwhp with good fuel and more boost (9-10PSI) with the ESS TS, the problem is that our extensive durability testing shows that our current TS2+ power and boost level is the maximum stock pistons on stock CR can take over time without cracking the piston ring separator section of the piston. This is why we reserve power over TS2+ 8.5PSI levels to customers with the TS3 lowered compression, forged pistons installed. The ESS TwinScrew system is capable of delivering over 450rwhp, the problem is how much a stock engine can take over time. Therefore we see no point in pushing power levels on stock internals over what the engine can sustain, even if our setup is capable of more. Instead we put focus on optimizing the available torque band and make the most of the boost the engine can sustain in the long run. If we loose a HP battle due to this, then so be it. If customers want a stock piston 380+rwhp ESS TS2+, then simply put on a smaller pulley on the SC unit to boost 9-10PSI, but don't come complaining to us if/when your pistons break:(
Without upping the boost (adding cams, headers, and a retune) AA got more out of our car.

I don't want to get into reliability issues - unless you've tested 100+ cars to failure and 100+ cars to survival, I doubt any statistician would back your claims, they are just your opinions (although I do agree 9 psi is about the limit for a turbo or TS setup on stock internals).

[stimpee]

Boost doesnt typically, in and of itself, break things.

The BMW engines can take insane amounts of boost pressure, and make insane amounts of power, without failures of any major components. However there are limits to what can be done on pump fuels, and proper tuning is quite important.

More often than not, on boosted engines, broken ring lands are the result of detonation. Obviously, various combinations of fuel octane, boost pressure/air flow, heat, as well as fuel and timing advance, can make this either be a problem, or not a problem. Ultimately, there are still limits, however no-one can say that a specific boost pressure will be a threshold above which problems will occur. There are WAY too many other factors in play that would determine reliability, and power output.

Further making those claims in half psi increments seems a bit funny to me, and claiming that a certain setup makes a certain "absolute" amount of manifold pressure that never changes (under various weather conditions, temperatures, etc) is rather inconsistent with all of my experience.

Again, just to make sure I am not misunderstood here, this not meant as aggressive or defensive, just my opinion!

In the end, as was said previously, if someone makes their decision on a kit such as these, for anything as simple as 10-15hp on a dyno chart, or even as a single deciding factor, a few hundred bucks, in either company's favor, is really missing the point, and doing themselves a disservice.

[Sales@ESS]

Without upping the boost (adding cams, headers, and a retune) AA got more out of our car.

I don't want to get into reliability issues - unless you've tested 100+ cars to failure and 100+ cars to survival, I doubt any statistician would back your claims, they are just your opinions (although I do agree 9 psi is about the limit for a turbo or TS setup on stock internals).

I am not saying this is the universal rule, these facts are what ESS engineers concluded was the maximum safe limit on stock pistons (they are casted and coated Mahle's btw). We have seen piston problems during very hard, extended driving at 10PSI and we like to keep a substantial safety margin to avoid any kind of problems. The kit is however engineered with the potential to boost higher, and we have software that will allow more boost/power in the TS2+ configuration so it's the customers choice if they want to stretch the limit on their own.

If AA has more top end in normal stage 2 and if they have more top end with cams/headers and if these numbers are verified on the same dyno for both kits on similar cars, I am willing to bet you a substantial amount of cash they boost higher as this is virtually the only way to get more power than us up top since all facts indicates we have a better flowing manifold design with less pressure drop and the SC units are tested to virtually the same top end efficiency. Our torque is however significantly better, and much better below 3000RPM which is exactly why we designed our TS manifold the way we did. We wanted a V8'ish feel of the M52TU/M54 and this is exactly what we got, using a safe 8.5 PSI maximum boost.

If you want serious M54 power, you will be very pleased with our upcoming TS3, pushing the high speed 1600AX and 3x500mm Laminovas to the limit with extremely good results! :excited:

[Sales@ESS]

Boost doesnt typically, in and of itself, break things.

The BMW engines can take insane amounts of boost pressure, and make insane amounts of power, without failures of any major components. However there are limits to what can be done on pump fuels, and proper tuning is quite important.

More often than not, on boosted engines, broken ring lands are the result of detonation. Obviously, various combinations of fuel octane, boost pressure/air flow, heat, as well as fuel and timing advance, can make this either be a problem, or not a problem. Ultimately, there are still limits, however no-one can say that a specific boost pressure will be a threshold above which problems will occur. There are WAY too many other factors in play that would determine reliability, and power output.

Further making those claims in half psi increments seems a bit funny to me, and claiming that a certain setup makes a certain "absolute" amount of manifold pressure that never changes (under various weather conditions, temperatures, etc) is rather inconsistent with all of my experience.

Again, just to make sure I am not misunderstood here, this not meant as aggressive or defensive, just my opinion!

In the end, as was said previously, if someone makes their decision on a kit such as these, for anything as simple as 10-15hp on a dyno chart, or even as a single deciding factor, a few hundred bucks, in either company's favor, is really missing the point, and doing themselves a disservice.

I completely agree with Stimpee on this one, and all my information is based on 91-93 octane US fuel (95-98Euro) as this is what we design kits for. If using high octane or race fuels you can increase the boost substantially. Our findings during durability testing TS2+'s at 10PSI using 91 octane (without detonation) is that broken pistons can occour and we do not want to take this chance which is why we restricted boost to 8.5PSI max on stock pistons. I am not saying 9-10PSI will break your engine, we just don't want to take that chance with our production kits.

[norwE46ian]

If looks matters, ESS>AA

[MarvelPhx]

I wrote Laminova to see if we could get some more data. Just FYI, interpret how you wish:

===================

Mr. Antonsson:

I am looking for some information you may be able to provide.

In a forced induction automotive application, how much cooling capacity would (3) three 330mm cores on a 1.7L Autorotor at 8psi have on a 3.0L engine turning max 7000rpm with a 22L/m pump? What is the cooling capacity of (3) three 500mm cores after a 1.6L Lyhsolm in the same engine/rpm/pump? Is there a rating system for the cores?

Any assistance you can give would be appreciated.

Thank you in advance for your time.

Todd

===================

Hi Todd:

Based on the two options you specify, of course the larger intercooler option will cool better. The difference between the two superchargers is relatively small (based on the air flow alone) compared to the differences in intercooler sizes.

If we compare the two intercooler options with the same engine and supercharger, the results are approx (based on a coolant temperature into the IC of 30ºC):

3 x IC39,5-332P 330mm (Serial coolant flow routing):
Outlet temperature IC: 58ºC (136ºF)
Heat transfer IC: 13.5 kW
Pressure drop – air side (IC): 7 kPa/1.02psi (losses over the cores only, not incl. Manifolds and inlet- and outlet losses)

3 x IC39,5-500P 500mm (Serial coolant flow routing):
Outlet temperature IC: 50ºC (122ºF)
Heat transfer IC: 16.4 kW
Pressure drop – air side (IC): 4.5 kPa/0.65psi (losses over the cores only, not incl. Manifolds and inlet- and outlet losses)

The predictions above are based on serial coolant routing through the IC (due to the low coolant flow rate). Another option could be to route it first through one core, turns and flows in parallel over the last two cores. This will give about 2-3 °C higher outlet air temperature from the IC, but generates of course lower coolant pressure drop.

Best regards,

Mattias Antonsson
R&D/Projects

Laminova Production AB
Värmdövägen 120
SE-131 60 Nacka
Sweden

[KOTHB]

Can someone translate that for those of us who were liberal arts majors?

[chisau]

I read that he's trying to show that ESS' cooling setup has less pressure drop across the system and therefore better cooling capacity w/ the ESS unit than the AA kit. Good info. I'd still be interested in seeing an independant test of both. I'm willing to bet one would be hard pressed to see a noticeable difference.. Heck, ESS should have the better setup w/ Laminova down the block from them! Stimpee is just a 'lil' old engineer' who 'threw this kit together' in his garage!(No offense Stimp!;)

[pei330ci]

Can someone translate that for those of us who were liberal arts majors?

The larger cores cool the charge more and have less airflow restriction.

For what it's worth, I just about flunked out of Highschool.

[EIAlfonso]

... Stimpee is just a 'lil' old engineer' who 'threw this kit together' in his garage!(No offense Stimp!;)


That's the same thing they said about that Gates kid.

Wiiliam /Bill/Bob.. can't recall his first name right now.

[KOTHB]

The larger cores cool the charge more and have less airflow restriction.

For what it's worth, I just about flunked out of Highschool.

Yes. Thanks. 3 x 335 is smaller than 3 x 500, thus less cooling with more restriction for the smaller and more cooling with less restriction for the larger. duh. My bad for asking too general a question.

He talks about the pressure drop as a "loss". Also, he first indicates that this loss is "air side", but then talks about a pressure drop in the coolant flow. Curiously, if the second flow through the cores is in parallel, the coolant drop is less than if it's in series--that seems backwards. In any event, what is this "loss?"

If I'm looking at Mr. Antonsson's note correctly, the significant issue is whether there's any real-world difference in a heat transfer of 13.5 @ 1.02 psi vs. one of 16.4 @ .65 psi. Or, if there's any real-world difference in any of the predictions.

It's possible to get lost in the minutiae. I'm just trying to figure out what's significant and what isn't.

[chisau]

Yes. Thanks. 3 x 335 is smaller than 3 x 500, thus less cooling with more restriction for the smaller and more cooling with less restriction for the larger. duh. My bad for asking too general a question.

He talks about the pressure drop as a "loss". Also, he first indicates that this loss is "air side", but then talks about a pressure drop in the coolant flow. Curiously, if the second flow through the cores is in parallel, the coolant drop is less than if it's in series--that seems backwards. In any event, what is this "loss?"

If I'm looking at Mr. Antonsson's note correctly, the significant issue is whether there's any real-world difference in a heat transfer of 13.5 @ 1.02 psi vs. one of 16.4 @ .65 psi. Or, if there's any real-world difference in any of the predictions.

It's possible to get lost in the minutiae. I'm just trying to figure out what's significant and what isn't.


My thoughts exactly...

[MarvelPhx]

He talks about the pressure drop as a "loss". Also, he first indicates that this loss is "air side", but then talks about a pressure drop in the coolant flow. Curiously, if the second flow through the cores is in parallel, the coolant drop is less than if it's in series--that seems backwards. In any event, what is this "loss?"

If I'm looking at Mr. Antonsson's note correctly, the significant issue is whether there's any real-world difference in a heat transfer of 13.5 @ 1.02 psi vs. one of 16.4 @ .65 psi. Or, if there's any real-world difference in any of the predictions.

It's possible to get lost in the minutiae. I'm just trying to figure out what's significant and what isn't.

I'll see if I can help explain the lingo.

All things considered equal such as engine size, airflow, water pump flow rate, rpm and coolant temp being being 30ºC (86ºF)...

The 332mm units will cool 8psi of TS heated air to 136ºF with 1.02psi pressure drop across the cores.

The 500mm units will cool the same air mass to 122ºF with .65psi pressure loss across the cores.

This is regardless of the who makes the kits, simply which cores are used. However, manifold design and inlet/outlet restrictions on both kits will affect the cooling ability and pressure drop variables.

The forward heat exchanger element size doesnt matter as much as the actual Laminova core surface area and how it is exposed to the heated air mass. Since the forward element can only try to get the coolant passing through it to the ambient air temp outside (which if it did is actually 100% efficiency and impossible), you get diminishing returns by making it larger and larger. For example, if you have 72 sq in of surface area element and you double it to 144sq in, you don't see twice the ability to cool. You may see a 25% increase. Double it again and only get 25% more again. I can look up the actual mathematics on it if anyone is interested; I have them here somewhere. The same applies to air/air intercooler design. So in the end, it makes logical sense to size an element that applies the maximum cooling for the smallest package and cost. Also, the larger the element, the more coolant needed to fill the circuit and this slows the response time of the entire intercooler system. It is a careful tradeoff negotiation deciding on which heat exchanger to use correctly.

In your reference to the pressure drop of the coolant flow, he is referring to how the coolant is pumped through the three cores:

If it is series, it is fed to one end of the manifold and through the first core, then backtracks through the second core, and finally, returns again through the third core. This design means the first core is the coldest, but the second provides less cooling as it is heated by the first. Then the third provides even less cooling.

In parallel design, the coolant is pumped across all three cores at the same time in one shot. Due to packaging and pump size, it doesn't appear that either kit runs parallel cooling. It seems you need a pretty strong coolant pump to support this design.

I don't know which coolant flow design ESS or AA uses, maybe they can both chime in and answer.

[ice330ci05]

You are aware that 361rwhp/325wtq is what the TS2+ makes at only 8.5PSI? With the cams and headers in the TS2+ it's a piece of cake to make 380+rwhp with good fuel and more boost (9-10PSI) with the ESS TS, the problem is that our extensive durability testing shows that our current TS2+ power and boost level is the maximum stock pistons on stock CR can take over time without cracking the piston ring separator section of the piston. This is why we reserve power over TS2+ 8.5PSI levels to customers with the TS3 lowered compression, forged pistons installed. The ESS TwinScrew system is capable of delivering over 450rwhp, the problem is how much a stock engine can take over time. Therefore we see no point in pushing power levels on stock internals over what the engine can sustain, even if our setup is capable of more. Instead we put focus on optimizing the available torque band and make the most of the boost the engine can sustain in the long run. If we loose a HP battle due to this, then so be it. If customers want a stock piston 380+rwhp ESS TS2+, then simply put on a smaller pulley on the SC unit to boost 9-10PSI, but don't come complaining to us if/when your pistons break:(


so is TS3 in development??? will there be a TS4.... i'm thinging of getting a TS since my dream of a Turbo has gone to ****!!!:banghead:


450whp+ is what i'm looking for....with built motor.....sorry if this was coverd in the thread, i didn't read all the pages....

[ritos530i]

Another point to cooling you might add is the difference in the Cold air intake and the stock air intake. Which would give a balance in cooling. I mean it may or not off set the cooling efficiency of the system overall performance.

[MarvelPhx]

Another point to cooling you might add is the difference in the Cold air intake and the stock air intake. Which would give a balance in cooling. I mean it may or not off set the cooling efficiency of the system overall performance.

I dont think there is actually a better intake for "cold air" than the stock airbox. It pulls air from right behind the kidney grilles and some have an extra port behind the headlight/hood seam. Where are you going to find colder air?

[GodSendsDeath]

Well what would really rock my world, is one of these TS systems for a nice 05 M3 manual. You know just throwing it out there.

[stimpee]

I will make one, and probably only one, comment on this. As I said in my ORIGINAL post in this thread:


2) ESS has a nice manifold design. The use of the longer cores is a plus, however they were not available when our manifold was developed.

In the end, according to my sources, the 500mm cores are not even available in the US now. Kudos to ESS for securing them and designing around them. My manifold was designed around the 332mm cores, and my personal car was running on that manifold before ESS even started their twin screw development (since when they originated their original thread, they said they had been working it for about 3 years). Too late to change.

Thanks to MarvelPhx for pointing out the obvious :D

To discount the cooling capacity of the front heat exchanger is rather funny, since the calculations above ASSUME a coolant temperature into the laminova cores. That coolant temperature is DIRECTLY a function of the front mount heat exchanger efficiency. Although I would bet that our heat exchanger IS more efficient, I do not know if it is adequately more efficient to make up the difference in the Laminova size.

If that were the only criteria on which to base a purchase of a kit, then the ESS kit would win.

[Asbjorn@ESS]

Our front mount heat exchanger is actually significantly larger than required for TS2 and TS2+ operation. We chose it based on TS3 requirements, and it has proven to work excellent in our 600hp VT3 S54 kits during severe extended racing conditions. We did not see any point of increasing it further since cooling efficiency gains were minimal and the extra weight and reduced air flow to engine radiator is not something we wanted.

The 500mm Laminovas are custom made for ESS btw, that's why it's not available:)

The not so great part is that they cost 3X more than off-the-shelf 332's:banghead:

[stimpee]

So more is better, but only when it is to your advantage. Got it. I'll be sure to consider that in my future responses.

As for your OEM arrangement with Laminova :bow:

[ritos530i]

I dont think there is actually a better intake for "cold air" than the stock airbox. It pulls air from right behind the kidney grilles and some have an extra port behind the headlight/hood seam. Where are you going to find colder air?
so why do the cold air intakes increase performance by say 5-7hp.

Maybe less.

Not having any sides or anything i was just thinking to myself if it made any differents. There are alot of poeple upgrading their intake manifolds for some reason and it is not just for looks all the time.

[Asbjorn@ESS]

So more is better, but only when it is to your advantage. Got it. I'll be sure to consider that in my future responses.

As for your OEM arrangement with Laminova :bow:

You make it sound like our front mount heat exchanger is small, it is actually quite massive. I have never seen your exchanger, but I doubt you will see any significant benefits of doing it larger than ours. The downside if you do is extra weight of water at the front of the car and less airflow through to the engine radiator which we found was critical during extreme racing to avoid overheating problems.

When it comes to the Laminova sizing this is much more critical as we have 0.4PSI less pressure drop @8PSI boost + significantly better heat transfer which translates to more power with potential for even more power + better engine safety and lower emissions/consumptions which is very important for CARB/TÜV certification. This is a major reason why we did use 3X500mm despite the very heavy cost of custom Laminovas and huge minimum purchase orders to start a custom production with them.

[Asbjorn@ESS]

so why do the cold air intakes increase performance by say 5-7hp.

Send me an intake for a Z4 3.0 or E46 330 that provides an honest extra 7HP on our dyno and I will give you a free TS1 kit to play with!:4ngie:

We have tested a wide variety of intakes, and even with nothing on the MAF or just a 4-5" long 3.5" dia straight tube we got absolutely no gains over the stock airbox during any condition. Most setups actually lost considerable power due to airflow turbulence. The BMW engineers are IMO masters of the airbox art:bow:

[stimpee]

:rolleyes:

You have interesting answers for everything. If nothing else, you are quite creative.

EDIT: I am finished responding to the "back and forth" portion of this thread, since it will only go downhill from here. If anyone has any legitimate questions for me about the Active kit, or other related things. Feel free to post, email, or PM me...

[Asbjorn@ESS]

:rolleyes:

You have interesting answers for everything. If nothing else, you are quite creative.

Not interesting, it's just the facts we learned through over 3 years of full-time M54 TS R&D. They may not be correct, but it's what our engineers, Lysholm and Laminova found to be the most accurate data. If we felt otherwise this would be reflected in our kit design..

[OCswedishM3]

I wrote Laminova to see if we could get some more data. Just FYI, interpret how you wish:

===================

Mr. Antonsson:

I am looking for some information you may be able to provide.

In a forced induction automotive application, how much cooling capacity would (3) three 330mm cores on a 1.7L Autorotor at 8psi have on a 3.0L engine turning max 7000rpm with a 22L/m pump? What is the cooling capacity of (3) three 500mm cores after a 1.6L Lyhsolm in the same engine/rpm/pump? Is there a rating system for the cores?

Any assistance you can give would be appreciated.

Thank you in advance for your time.

Todd

===================

Hi Todd:

Based on the two options you specify, of course the larger intercooler option will cool better. The difference between the two superchargers is relatively small (based on the air flow alone) compared to the differences in intercooler sizes.

If we compare the two intercooler options with the same engine and supercharger, the results are approx (based on a coolant temperature into the IC of 30ºC):

3 x IC39,5-332P 330mm (Serial coolant flow routing):
Outlet temperature IC: 58ºC (136ºF)
Heat transfer IC: 13.5 kW
Pressure drop – air side (IC): 7 kPa/1.02psi (losses over the cores only, not incl. Manifolds and inlet- and outlet losses)

3 x IC39,5-500P 500mm (Serial coolant flow routing):
Outlet temperature IC: 50ºC (122ºF)
Heat transfer IC: 16.4 kW
Pressure drop – air side (IC): 4.5 kPa/0.65psi (losses over the cores only, not incl. Manifolds and inlet- and outlet losses)

The predictions above are based on serial coolant routing through the IC (due to the low coolant flow rate). Another option could be to route it first through one core, turns and flows in parallel over the last two cores. This will give about 2-3 °C higher outlet air temperature from the IC, but generates of course lower coolant pressure drop.

Best regards,

Mattias Antonsson
R&D/Projects

Laminova Production AB
Värmdövägen 120
SE-131 60 Nacka
Sweden


Haha that line reminds me of Mert from DA

[ritos530i]

Send me an intake for a Z4 3.0 or E46 330 that provides an honest extra 7HP on our dyno and I will give you a free TS1 kit to play with!:4ngie:

We have tested a wide variety of intakes, and even with nothing on the MAF or just a 4-5" long 3.5" dia straight tube we got absolutely no gains over the stock airbox during any condition. Most setups actually lost considerable power due to airflow turbulence. The BMW engineers are IMO masters of the airbox art:bow:

Asbjorn i am from the old school and I know that any bolt on part such as a air box would not increase the horsepower on a dyno. What i do know is it has a direct affect on how the throttle responds, just like a better flowing exhaust with some power increase. Dyno only give you a rough figure at what margins your car is performing at but the real test in on the road. And a TS1 kit would not satisfy my appetite, so you can keep it. To be frankly with you, I have always agree with the concept of the stock air box and was not arguing that point. However, i am sure that AA is not putting an after market air box on their kits just to lose power, so you can take that theory somewhere else. Again I have to agree with you when comparing the two. Why waste $400 dollars on a non power added product. I have also rosin this with Omar but i did not think he had any interest in a performance idiot like myself giving him pointers.

IMHO, Both company's have a good marketable product and there is no need for comparing the two at this point. If you live in Florida your best thing is to go with AA if you want to do this yourself ESS is the better product because it offers a good DIY. The TS kits are by far the most impressive superchargers out there for now.

[ice330ci05]

so is TS3 in development??? will there be a TS4.... i'm thinging of getting a TS since my dream of a Turbo has gone to ****!!!:banghead:


450whp+ is what i'm looking for....with built motor.....sorry if this was coverd in the thread, i didn't read all the pages....

:hmm: :idea:

[stimpee]

IMHO, Both company's have a good marketable product and there is no need for comparing the two at this point. If you live in Florida your best thing is to go with AA if you want to do this yourself ESS is the better product because it offers a good DIY. The TS kits are by far the most impressive superchargers out there for now.

I think saying the ESS is a better product for DIY is a bit of a disservice to AA. We have a great DIY instruction set with tons of pictures, and have had a lot of E36 customers do their own installations. There are sometimes issues with DIY, since there are a lot of minor details, and the install can be quite involved for the novice. AA has a proven forced induction history in the US including both a well established dealer network, and great technical support. The support for this kit is excellent through Karl, Barry, and Craig at AA, and I offer myself up as well to provide any installation support necessary. Ask JMC from Bimmerforums about that support if you are curious.

I am sure in time we will have some good DIY write-ups done as well, we just don't happen to have our own version of MarvelPhx lined up with an E46 kit.

[ritos530i]

I think saying the ESS is a better product for DIY is a bit of a disservice to AA. We have a great DIY instruction set with tons of pictures, and have had a lot of E36 customers do their own installations. There are sometimes issues with DIY, since there are a lot of minor details, and the install can be quite involved for the novice. AA has a proven forced induction history in the US including both a well established dealer network, and great technical support. The support for this kit is excellent through Karl, Barry, and Craig at AA, and I offer myself up as well to provide any installation support necessary. Ask JMC from Bimmerforums about that support if you are curious.

I am sure in time we will have some good DIY write-ups done as well, we just don't happen to have our own version of MarvelPhx lined up with an E46 kit.

Steve, my comment was by no means to discredit AA for there product nor your DIY instructions. I have spoken personally with Omar and Karl about the TS kit and the only problem i have every had with the kit, was they have not made one for a 530i E60 which would be the same for ESS. At this point it really is not a problem, i had my hopes up for the kit and no one would work things out for me so i moved on. I still think the kits are get to have.

[TRR330xi]

I am sure in time we will have some good DIY write-ups done as well, we just don't happen to have our own version of MarvelPhx lined up with an E46 kit.

Why don't you send me one of those kits and I will do a DIY for you? :)

[ritos530i]

Why don't you send me one of those kits and I will do a DIY for you? :)
hell me too!

[funkyman]

so why do the cold air intakes increase performance by say 5-7hp.

Maybe less.

Not having any sides or anything i was just thinking to myself if it made any differents. There are alot of poeple upgrading their intake manifolds for some reason and it is not just for looks all the time.


They are waisting their money big time thats what there is 0 gain,no proven gain,all talk.Maybe 1% if any,total waist of money.BMW has engineered the stock intake as perfect right infront of the air duct,front grill etc.Yes certain filters allow more air to pass through ,but need to be located away from the engine bay area and have direct exposure to cold air as in lower end of the bumper like Ingen air intakes on GT cars totally isolated and not being affected by the heat of the engine bay.There is no point blowing warm air into the intake by placing an expensive filter that is not isolated and sealed from the engine heat with direct cold air suction.

[ritos530i]

The point was how does the air box or cold air intake makes a differences with the TS kit. AA uses a after market air intake and ESS uses the stock air box.

I was trying to bring out the point from AA why they choose this route and not stay with the stock Air box. It was in direct response to the cooling of AA and ESS TS kit. This was a valid point and i still stand behind it. I know filters, cold air intakes, and bigger throttle don't have a significance in overall performance but they have to play a valuable role in the system.

[TxZHP04]

I was trying to bring out the point from AA why they choose this route and not stay with the stock Air box.

Since AA has not stated that the stock air box could be used in place of their CAI if the customer so desires, I'm guessing that the stock air box doesn't fit due to space issues related to the size and placement of the inlet housing, throttle body, etc and may also be related to the decision to reposition rather than replace the power steering reservoir. Again, this is pure speculation on my part, someone please correct me if I've drawn the wrong conclusion.

Now, I do remember a post from Steve over on bimmerforums last year where he mentioned that out of the 4 or so inlet housing designs they tested when developing the e36 kit, the final selection was based more on political issues than pure engineering (not that they felt they were compromising the design by choosing the inlet housing that they did). Anyway, if my previous speculation was correct, the decision to use the AA CAI instead of the stock air box on the e46 may have its roots in the politics of bringing the e36 kit to market as much or more so than in which intake is "best".

Even if I'm totally off base with the above, it's still a VERY valid point that all engineering design is tempered to some degree by business requirements. And with that said, perhaps AA simply chose to go with a CAI because they figured most of the tuner crowd would expect a CAI.

I suppose I'll quit with the conjecture now and invite Steve to give us the real answer. :)

[stimpee]

I don't want to get into too much here other than to say there were a number of reasons why we chose the approach we have. It is all about balancing compromises on a system level. No one solution is perfect.

We found that this setup had the best flow of everything tested. It also provides maximum clearance at the back of the compressor to allow fitment of larger compressors without modification to the overall system. There were also other business (or political if you wish to label them as such) reasons which factored into (but did not drive) the decisions.

And that's all I have to say about that!

[JCz04Bimmer]

Send me an intake for a Z4 3.0 or E46 330 that provides an honest extra 7HP on our dyno and I will give you a free TS1 kit to play with!:4ngie:

We have tested a wide variety of intakes, and even with nothing on the MAF or just a 4-5" long 3.5" dia straight tube we got absolutely no gains over the stock airbox during any condition. Most setups actually lost considerable power due to airflow turbulence. The BMW engineers are IMO masters of the airbox art:bow:


I think I have one. If you're serious about sending me a free TS1, send me a PM.

[pei330ci]

hell me too!


You just love playing in the engine bay, don't you. :D

[KOTHB]

MarvelPhx, Stimpee, and Asbjorn,

THANKS!

I realize that there have been several opportunities in this thread for the discourse to be less than cordial, and I very much appreciate the time and effort you have each put in to explaining the nuts and bolts of what is behind these outstanding kits.

What I'm seeing is that, to the average enthusiast, either company's offering will be a worthwhile upgrade. In fact, I'm not sure that either company's design choices, in and of themselves, represent a significant reason to pick one over the other. Instead, it appears to my eye that customer service would be at least as substantial a factor in picking a unit than anything else.

Again, thanks for your time and input.

[GodSendsDeath]

KOTHB said like it is.

[ritos530i]

You just love playing in the engine bay, don't you. :D
Adam
I do love playing, but you know the headache i am having now.
I will get the new fuel rail today should be finished tonight.
I went today to discuss tuning needed.

There are some other "stuff" :shhh: i am working in the back ground that i am not ready to disclose. If only I had Steve or Asbjorn working with me i would be further along in my project.

[ritos530i]

Since AA has not stated that the stock air box could be used in place of their CAI if the customer so desires, I'm guessing that the stock air box doesn't fit due to space issues related to the size and placement of the inlet housing, throttle body, etc and may also be related to the decision to reposition rather than replace the power steering reservoir. Again, this is pure speculation on my part, someone please correct me if I've drawn the wrong conclusion.

Now, I do remember a post from Steve over on bimmerforums last year where he mentioned that out of the 4 or so inlet housing designs they tested when developing the e36 kit, the final selection was based more on political issues than pure engineering (not that they felt they were compromising the design by choosing the inlet housing that they did). Anyway, if my previous speculation was correct, the decision to use the AA CAI instead of the stock air box on the e46 may have its roots in the politics of bringing the e36 kit to market as much or more so than in which intake is "best".

Even if I'm totally off base with the above, it's still a VERY valid point that all engineering design is tempered to some degree by business requirements. And with that said, perhaps AA simply chose to go with a CAI because they figured most of the tuner crowd would expect a CAI.

I suppose I'll quit with the conjecture now and invite Steve to give us the real answer. :)

I don't want to get into too much here other than to say there were a number of reasons why we chose the approach we have. It is all about balancing compromises on a system level. No one solution is perfect.

We found that this setup had the best flow of everything tested. It also provides maximum clearance at the back of the compressor to allow fitment of larger compressors without modification to the overall system. There were also other business (or political if you wish to label them as such) reasons which factored into (but did not drive) the decisions.

And that's all I have to say about that!


Hey guys this cleared things up for my point, which i can relate to. Sometimes you make the necessary adjustments for what you have at the time. As my grandfather use to say, "There is more than one way to skin a cat".

[chisau]

Send me an intake for a Z4 3.0 or E46 330 that provides an honest extra 7HP on our dyno and I will give you a free TS1 kit to play with!:4ngie:

We have tested a wide variety of intakes, and even with nothing on the MAF or just a 4-5" long 3.5" dia straight tube we got absolutely no gains over the stock airbox during any condition. Most setups actually lost considerable power due to airflow turbulence. The BMW engineers are IMO masters of the airbox art:bow:

Just curious, wern't you guys using K&N filters on all of your VT (Vortech) based kits prior to the TS intro?

[BayerischeMW]

yes they were due to the placement of the S/C unit. it's basically the only practical place to put the CF SC.

[zulu4]

Send me an intake for a Z4 3.0 or E46 330 that provides an honest extra 7HP on our dyno and I will give you a free TS1 kit to play with!:4ngie:
:

Asbjorn, you've got PM.

thanks

p.s. since you havent answered any of my posts in your other threads.... i'll ask it here. any dyno sheets of the 2.5L kit?

[Asbjorn@ESS]

Just curious, wern't you guys using K&N filters on all of your VT (Vortech) based kits prior to the TS intro?

Yes, but that was due to space restrictions as there were no room for factory airbox with ESS VT/TX kits.

The M54B30 and M54B25's have a very good stock airbox and it is hard to match it. M52TUB25/28's doesn't have as good stock airbox flow and here improvements can be made by opening up sections of the box or going CAI (or retrofitting a M54B25 airbox which is a direct fit).

[Asbjorn@ESS]

Asbjorn, you've got PM.

thanks

p.s. since you havent answered any of my posts in your other threads.... i'll ask it here. any dyno sheets of the 2.5L kit?

I am sorry, but I do not have authorization to disclose them until the kit is ready for release. I can however tell you that gains are similar to M54B30 TS1/TS2.

[ice330ci05]

I am sorry, but I do not have authorization to disclose them until the kit is ready for release. I can however tell you that gains are similar to M54B30 TS1/TS2.

whta about the TS3??? when is that coming out, is there are a TS4 too,,,, howmuch are they goin to run and what power are they goint to be making.. about???


thanx

[OZ!MSport]

Would it be fair to say that the 2.5L kit can expect ~15% less power/torque than the 3.0L?

[Asbjorn@ESS]

whta about the TS3??? when is that coming out, is there are a TS4 too,,,, howmuch are they goin to run and what power are they goint to be making.. about???


thanx

TS3 is currently undergoing final testing and will soon be released. We will take TS3 as far as our TS goes. We planned initially on separating the lowered compression version into TS3 and 4, but decided to just make one top level kit.

[Asbjorn@ESS]

Would it be fair to say that the 2.5L kit can expect ~15% less power/torque than the 3.0L?

That's not far off. In TS3 version for the M54B25, there will be a new 3.0L crankshaft and rods along with the M54B30 forged, lowered compression pistons and FI cams so a 325 TS3 will be equal to a 330 TS3. A 330 throttle body, MAF and Airbox is a neccessary extra purchase when opting for a 325 TS3.

[zulu4]

I am sorry, but I do not have authorization to disclose them until the kit is ready for release. I can however tell you that gains are similar to M54B30 TS1/TS2.

Asbjorn,

thanks for the prompt reply and your PM. that being the case, would it be safe to assume that the figures you previously quoted are no longer realistic for the 2.5L?



TS1 : 250rwhp
TS2 : 280rwhp
TS2+ 300rwhp

Give or take a few ponies.

original post can be found here: http://forum.e46fanatics.com/showthread.php?p=5194622&highlight=tingly#post5194622

[Asbjorn@ESS]

Asbjorn,

thanks for the prompt reply and your PM. that being the case, would it be safe to assume that the figures you previously quoted are no longer realistic for the 2.5L?



original post can be found here: http://forum.e46fanatics.com/showthread.php?p=5194622&highlight=tingly#post5194622

Yes, they are still realistic and not far off from ~15% less than the M54B30 which was the question I got in this thread. Final M54B25 TS numbers will be published once final durability testing it completed.

[zulu4]

250rwhp with 15% drivetrain loss amounts to 294hp at the crank.

percentage gains of the 3.0L kit are about 40% over stock. so similar gains on the 2.5L would see ~270hp at the crank

original advertised figures are also 270hp at crank +/- 3%

15% less than the 3.0L kit, as you mentioned above, also equates to ~270hp

imho, 290 and 270hp figures are rather far apart..........

nevertheless, my curiousity has been satiated for now and i will wait for the official release.

many thanks

[Asbjorn@ESS]

250rwhp with 15% drivetrain loss amounts to 294hp at the crank.

percentage gains of the 3.0L kit are about 40% over stock. so similar gains on the 2.5L would see ~270hp at the crank

original advertised figures are also 270hp at crank +/- 3%

15% less than the 3.0L kit, as you mentioned above, also equates to ~270hp

imho, 290 and 270hp figures are rather far apart..........

nevertheless, my curiousity has been satiated for now and i will wait for the official release.

many thanks

He asked if 15% would be a close estimate and I said yes, it is close. TS1 and 2 will be closer than 15% to 330 TS power, but TS2+ will not be since the cams open up the 3.0 more than the 2.5. So on average for all three TS stages 15% is not far off.

M54B30 TS1 makes around 280rwhp, M54B25 around 250 - 12% difference.
M54B30 TS2 makes around 310rwhp, M54B25 around 275-280 - 11-13% difference.
M54B30 TS2+ makes around 355rwhp, M54B25 around 300 - 18%

So I would say on average a 15% difference is not far from the thruth..

Also keep in mind that these M54B25 datas are preliminary, final production version power may vary from these R&D numbers.

[OZ!MSport]

Thanks for this info... I'm waiting anxiously for the 2.5L kit release :excited:

[zulu4]

M54B30 TS1 makes around 280rwhp, M54B25 around 250 - 12% difference.
M54B30 TS2 makes around 310rwhp, M54B25 around 275-280 - 11-13% difference.
M54B30 TS2+ makes around 355rwhp, M54B25 around 300 - 18%

Also keep in mind that these M54B25 datas are preliminary, final production version power may vary from these R&D numbers.

sweet! feb can't come soon enough for me (assuming things are on schedule)

[ice330ci05]

TS3 is currently undergoing final testing and will soon be released. We will take TS3 as far as our TS goes. We planned initially on separating the lowered compression version into TS3 and 4, but decided to just make one top level kit.

nice.... so can you give me a ball park number, whp? price??




thanx

[bigjae1976]

That's not far off. In TS3 version for the M54B25, there will be a new 3.0L crankshaft and rods along with the M54B30 forged, lowered compression pistons and FI cams so a 325 TS3 will be equal to a 330 TS3. A 330 throttle body, MAF and Airbox is a neccessary extra purchase when opting for a 325 TS3.

So with the 3.0L TS3, we'll need to get all of that stuff (crankshaft, rods, pistons, and cams)? Ballpark cost?

[Asbjorn@ESS]

So with the 3.0L TS3, we'll need to get all of that stuff (crankshaft, rods, pistons, and cams)? Ballpark cost?

No, not if you have a M54B30 to start out with, then you just need the ESS forged, lowered compression piston kit, hardware, gasket kit and FI camshafts.

If you have a M54B25 you will also need the M54B30 spec crank and rods + bearing and hardware kit for these. The nice bonus is that your 325 TS3 is now a 3.0L TS3!:4ngie:

TS3 power and details will be released in February/March, but I can tell you that power is significantly over the 400rwhp mark in our R&D cars:shhh:

[ice330ci05]

No, not if you have a M54B30 to start out with, then you just need the ESS forged, lowered compression piston kit, hardware, gasket kit and FI camshafts.

If you have a M54B25 you will also need the M54B30 spec crank and rods + bearing and hardware kit for these. The nice bonus is that your 325 TS3 is now a 3.0L TS3!:4ngie:

TS3 power and details will be released in February/March, but I can tell you that power is significantly over the 400rwhp mark in our R&D cars:shhh:


NICE!!!!! :excited:

[maxnathan]

Asbjorn, does the TS3 not need low cat headers/manifolds like the TS2+ ?

Also how much psi / boost will TS3 make?


Thanks

[Asbjorn@ESS]

Yes, it does. Each stage is a upgrade from and includes the lower stages.

[zulu4]

to add to this comparative discussion:

1) difference in warranty offered by either company? terms of such warranties?

2) perhaps an indication of difference in frequency, complexity, parts to be replaced and cost of rebuild for each of these kits may offer additional insight.

for the compressors themselves, i know ESS has indicated a rebuild interval of 100,000-150,000 miles as long as the stock filter is used. what about AA, since the stock filter isn't reused?

rotors aren't the only wear item in the compressor; after doing some research, i've also found out that once the seals (between the gear housing and rotor cavity) have been worn, the entire internals will have to be replaced by qualified techs. sounds pricey$$

other parts that need replacing and associated costs of parts and labour?

cheers
p.s. Asbjorn, i need the address you want me to send the stuff to. norway or US facility?

[WilliamLD]

Also what about authorized dealers or places that can do the install on either system in the case if we decide not to diy? I live in Pa. would that mean I have to send my car to Miami in order to have them work on it or what about ESS? where would I be able to send my car?

[lilbusa600]

to add to this comparative discussion:

1) difference in warranty offered by either company? terms of such warranties?

2) perhaps an indication of difference in frequency, complexity, parts to be replaced and cost of rebuild for each of these kits may offer additional insight.

for the compressors themselves, i know ESS has indicated a rebuild interval of 100,000-150,000 miles as long as the stock filter is used. what about AA, since the stock filter isn't reused?

rotors aren't the only wear item in the compressor; after doing some research, i've also found out that once the seals (between the gear housing and rotor cavity) have been worn, the entire internals will have to be replaced by qualified techs. sounds pricey$$

other parts that need replacing and associated costs of parts and labour?

cheers
p.s. Asbjorn, i need the address you want me to send the stuff to. norway or US facility?

^^^Can anyone answer these questions?

[Asbjorn@ESS]

to add to this comparative discussion:

1) difference in warranty offered by either company? terms of such warranties?

2) perhaps an indication of difference in frequency, complexity, parts to be replaced and cost of rebuild for each of these kits may offer additional insight.

for the compressors themselves, i know ESS has indicated a rebuild interval of 100,000-150,000 miles as long as the stock filter is used. what about AA, since the stock filter isn't reused?

rotors aren't the only wear item in the compressor; after doing some research, i've also found out that once the seals (between the gear housing and rotor cavity) have been worn, the entire internals will have to be replaced by qualified techs. sounds pricey$$

other parts that need replacing and associated costs of parts and labour?

cheers
p.s. Asbjorn, i need the address you want me to send the stuff to. norway or US facility?

All ESS systems carry a 2yr/unlimited milage warranty.

Our TS kit does not require any kind of maintenance. Change your engine oil and OEM air filter at BMW recommended service intervals. The 6PK drive belt should be replaced at least every 30.000 miles and that's it.

[TRR330xi]

What about the altitude? Will either kits compensate for driving say, a mile high above MSL?

[stimpee]

On any setup, you will lose power at higher altitude, however our tuning will compensate to allow the car to run properly. Just at a slightly lower power level due to the reduced air density.

[Tyler@UniqueDesign]

On any setup, you will lose power at higher altitude, however our tuning will compensate to allow the car to run properly. Just at a slightly lower power level due to the reduced air density.

Something I'd always wondered about (completely off topic here) is if a turbo car can compensate for lower atmospheric pressure and be tuned to run say 2 bar absolute boost instead of 1 bar relative boost. I think that would be awesome for mountain driving as you should never see a power loss ot anything but intake air temp.

[stimpee]

Keep in mind with a turbo, that although it can maintain the same boost PRESSURE at altitude, it will require higher compressor RPM to do it. And in addition, it will STILL lose power due to the higher altitude, however it does not lose AS MUCH power as an NA engine, or a supercharged engine.

That is assuming it can maintain the higher compressor rpm without grenading, and can run in that range efficiently.

[TRR330xi]

On any setup, you will lose power at higher altitude, however our tuning will compensate to allow the car to run properly. Just at a slightly lower power level due to the reduced air density.

Makes sense. Just making sure that nothing will hurt the engine. Would someone have to do a different map to the ECU to compensate for that? I've had someone with a supercharger have maps for sea level tuning and not be compensated for high altitude driving, causing misfires.

Something I'd always wondered about (completely off topic here) is if a turbo car can compensate for lower atmospheric pressure and be tuned to run say 2 bar absolute boost instead of 1 bar relative boost. I think that would be awesome for mountain driving as you should never see a power loss ot anything but intake air temp.

Keep in mind with a turbo, that although it can maintain the same boost PRESSURE at altitude, it will require higher compressor RPM to do it. And in addition, it will STILL lose power due to the higher altitude, however it does not lose AS MUCH power as an NA engine, or a supercharged engine.

That is assuming it can maintain the higher compressor rpm without grenading, and can run in that range efficiently.

That's good to hear. Are we talking about a T3/T4 turbo here? However, since there's always rumors of turbos for 330's but nothing surfaces, I will just always dream.

[Tyler@UniqueDesign]

That's good to hear. Are we talking about a T3/T4 turbo here? However, since there's always rumors of turbos for 330's but nothing surfaces, I will just always dream.
I was just talking turbo in general. I try to pick the engineer's brains on this stuff when I can (I find it easier to ask someone who knows than to spend a lot of my own money to find out :idea: )

It would work on any turbo but it would have to be setup that way. The boost pressure would have to be measured on an absolute scale instead of on a gage scale so you would need full vacuum apposing the wastegate spring/diaphram/etc. if I understand correctly.

I did a lot of mountain driving a couple weeks ago, had a 4-cyl dodge stratus that struggled at sea level (imagine 8,000 feet :() and was thinking creatively about turbo/SC system differences.

/threadjack (and thanks for the answer Steve - makes sense).

[kep2002]

I have enjoyed reading the information in this thread and chuckled several times in regard to the e-pissing content.

I would like to offer my services to end this debate once and for all by conducting a completely unbiased account of my impressions of both kits. I personally prefer turbocharging but have begun to consider a Twin Screw setup as both ESS and AA will soon be producing 2.5 liter kits.

For this comparison I am proposing that both companies send me a completed 2.5 liter kit at no charge which I will install and subsequently test on a nearby Mustang dyno. I am a degreed Mechanical Engineer with many years of engine building and fabrication experience. I will document and deliver a complete account of component quality, installation instructions and performance results.

So AA and ESS, are you willing to put your twin screw kits up for a head to head comparison to settle this debate?

[Tyler@UniqueDesign]

I have enjoyed reading the information in this thread and chuckled several times in regard to the e-pissing content.

I would like to offer my services to end this debate once and for all by conducting a completely unbiased account of my impressions of both kits. I personally prefer turbocharging but have begun to consider a Twin Screw setup as both ESS and AA will soon be producing 2.5 liter kits.

For this comparison I am proposing that both companies send me a completed 2.5 liter kit at no charge which I will install and subsequently test on a nearby Mustang dyno. I am a degreed Mechanical Engineer with many years of engine building and fabrication experience. I will document and deliver a complete account of component quality, installation instructions and performance results.

So AA and ESS, are you willing to put your twin screw kits up for a head to head comparison to settle this debate?
They won't both give you kits, I can almost gaurantee that.

[MarvelPhx]

Yeah, good luck with that.

[crazy01]

I have enjoyed reading the information in this thread and chuckled several times in regard to the e-pissing content.

I would like to offer my services to end this debate once and for all by conducting a completely unbiased account of my impressions of both kits. I personally prefer turbocharging but have begun to consider a Twin Screw setup as both ESS and AA will soon be producing 2.5 liter kits.

For this comparison I am proposing that both companies send me a completed 2.5 liter kit at no charge which I will install and subsequently test on a nearby Mustang dyno. I am a degreed Mechanical Engineer with many years of engine building and fabrication experience. I will document and deliver a complete account of component quality, installation instructions and performance results.

So AA and ESS, are you willing to put your twin screw kits up for a head to head comparison to settle this debate?

AA has already done my 2.5. I posted some pics a while back. I am loving every minute of it and its definately worth every penny.

[Brian N]

Wait I am confused now, I just went on the ess site and did they update the numbers? Because there 3.0L for the TS2 is now 303RWHP ? When the ZHP is still 320 RWHP. And now the regular 3.0L horsepower is 355 DIN but the ZHP readings are still in SAE (360). And toqure for the regular 3.0L is measured in NM while the ZHP's is still in ft/lbs. I remeber checking on the site before I remember ithe RWHP readings where higher, did they update the dyno for the regular 3.0L engine? I guess it makes sense when they tell you that it has a 15 percent powertrain loss, but wouldn't that mean that the ZHP should be making 306RWHP?

[Asbjorn@ESS]

The ZHP is a US specific model, that is why it is rated in SAE and ft/lbs.

The crank HP numbers listed in the product description is conservative worst case numbers. The rwhp dynos we post is real numbers we get on test cars. 2 330's don't always produce exactly the same number and fuel octane is very important. The rated 350HP crank number on the normal 330's are using 91 (US) octane and is typically the lowest number we have seen on our TS 330's. Normally they produce a bit more, especially on 93 (US) octane).

[Brian N]

Thanks for clarifying I am very interested in your kit. I was just confused on why you guys used different units. Makes much more sense now. I live in Orange County California so I will be using the 91 octane unfortunately so no extra HP for me :cry: . But I was wondering do you still have the San Diego location? And do you provide installs over there? Also side note can I run a TS2 on my steptronic transmission or would that be suicide. Thanks so much for your time, and for answering my questions.:)

[WilliamLD]

Are there any install locations on the east coast for ESS and any other locations except miami for the AA kit?

[ale]

Still no news on the TS for M52TU25?? Arrhhhh..........getting worried that I might give in to AA's current offer on the Rotrex C30-94 chargers!!

[Asbjorn@ESS]

Still no news on the TS for M52TU25?? Arrhhhh..........getting worried that I might give in to AA's current offer on the Rotrex C30-94 chargers!!

The M52TUB25 TS is actually ready for release. It will be available late next week. I will post up final dynos and specs as soon as the release is official.

[Asbjorn@ESS]

Are there any install locations on the east coast for ESS and any other locations except miami for the AA kit?


The ESS TS is 100% bolt-on and i can be installed by any competent auto mechanic. You can even DIY if you have basic mechanical knowledge.

It can be ordered directly from www.esstuning.com

Your nearest ESS authorized dealer is:

AI DESIGN
64 Marbledale Road
10707 Tuckahoe
US, UNITED STATES New York

Phone:914-779-9000 Fax:914-779-5889

[Asbjorn@ESS]

Thanks for clarifying I am very interested in your kit. I was just confused on why you guys used different units. Makes much more sense now. I live in Orange County California so I will be using the 91 octane unfortunately so no extra HP for me :cry: . But I was wondering do you still have the San Diego location? And do you provide installs over there? Also side note can I run a TS2 on my steptronic transmission or would that be suicide. Thanks so much for your time, and for answering my questions.:)

The San Diego location is our corporate main office in the US. It does not currently handle installations. for installation in your area I can recommend :

DAI MOTORSPORTS
27972 Forbes rd. Unit A
Laguna Niguel
California 92677

Phone:949-364-0954 Fax:949-364-5767

[ColdC]

Asbjorn@ESS,
I am on the order list for the TS2. Who do you recommend for install in SF Bay Area? Can you provide several to choose from? I would prefer a referral in the East Bay.
Thanks

[ale]

The M52TUB25 TS is actually ready for release. It will be available late next week. I will post up final dynos and specs as soon as the release is official.

Seriously good news! Would be great if, when you can, give me some quotes including shipping! Infact, think I should prob. send you an email with details!:banghead:

[330i ZHP]

Asbjorn, thank you for calling me the other day. I am going to order the TS2 but as I mentioned on the phone, I have to finish the bodywork on the rear fenders to fit the 10" LM's first. The wheels, tires, and Brembo's are paid off and all but installed...as soon as the bill is in and paid for the bodywork I will call you for my kit.

thank you...looking forward to the torque...

[ale]

The M52TUB25 TS is actually ready for release. It will be available late next week. I will post up final dynos and specs as soon as the release is official.

.........:hmm: was that said to delay my decision on getting AA's offer??
already past the last weeks's "available date".......let alone the "final dynos and specs"....

Obviously I understand that systems this new will need their tests b4 release.....and that as many others, I too would not want to buy 'early release just to get sales' products! But having said that, just don't want to be pissed later when I ended up missing the special offer and HAVE to stick back to the wait because of an empty promise........just a quick reply with current updates would be all is needed...:cry:

Thanks anyhow for all your hard work put towards this particular model of vehicle!:thumbsup:

[Josher323i]

its been said on this thread the kits are about the same horsepower on the ZHP, but from my research i found that the AA is said to produce 393 engine hp and the ESS only 360 engine hp. granted the stage two ess with cams puts it over 400 hp. but doesnt that explain what the extra psi with the AA does? more horsepower.

[ice330ci05]

As of right now we will only be offering a Level 2 Twin Screw kit. The pricing will be the same as our E36 Twin Screw as of right now. $8500 List price and $7900 will be the intro price.

We currently have 3 MS45 cars that are running our twin screw kits. Two of them also upgraded to cams later on with upgraded software.

are there any more stages for the future???:4ngie:

[stimpee]

That will depend on demand. We are working on Stage III for E36 cars right now, and depending on demand, and sales of the intercooled E46 kit, upgrade options may be available in the future. It is a bit too early to tell right now, and ultimately the folks in Miami will make the final decision on that.

But as with anything, if there is enough demand to make the development and testing worthwhile, then anything is possible...

[Nico3k]

AA or ESS:

Are there plans for releasing a lower powered non-intercooled (or passively cooled) system for us poor people? A stage0 TS running 4-6 psi at a significantly lower price would make it much more attractive. Also, it would almost guarantee the "hunger for more power" once the customer realizes that they really want a stage2.

[Asbjorn@ESS]

AA or ESS:

Are there plans for releasing a lower powered non-intercooled (or passively cooled) system for us poor people? A stage0 TS running 4-6 psi at a significantly lower price would make it much more attractive. Also, it would almost guarantee the "hunger for more power" once the customer realizes that they really want a stage2.

Our TS is already available in a non intercooled, but fully upgradeable TS1 configuration :

http://www.esstuning.com/default.asp?c=shop&cat=93&subcat=101&subcat2=114&id=

[Tyler@UniqueDesign]

AA or ESS:

Are there plans for releasing a lower powered non-intercooled (or passively cooled) system for us poor people? A stage0 TS running 4-6 psi at a significantly lower price would make it much more attractive. Also, it would almost guarantee the "hunger for more power" once the customer realizes that they really want a stage2.

Stage 1 doesn't have an intercooler, and the major expense on these kits is the cast intake manifold, the blower (and then the laminova cores). The software aint cheap, but the actual hardware is a bit tough to just throw together.

[Asbjorn@ESS]

.........:hmm: was that said to delay my decision on getting AA's offer??
already past the last weeks's "available date".......let alone the "final dynos and specs"....

Obviously I understand that systems this new will need their tests b4 release.....and that as many others, I too would not want to buy 'early release just to get sales' products! But having said that, just don't want to be pissed later when I ended up missing the special offer and HAVE to stick back to the wait because of an empty promise........just a quick reply with current updates would be all is needed...:cry:

Thanks anyhow for all your hard work put towards this particular model of vehicle!:thumbsup:

I can not guarantee you a delivery date of a 323 TS. First of all it is still not officially released, and we currently have a 3-4 week backlog of M54B30 kits to fill before we will start shipping other versions of our TS kits.

If you are in a rush to get SC'ed, then I am sorry we can not help you at the moment. The best case scenario for a 323 TS delivered from us is 5-6 weeks. IMO though, that wait is well worth it -and I have driven the 323 ESS TS:evil:

[elite53]

The M52TUB25 TS is actually ready for release. It will be available late next week. I will post up final dynos and specs as soon as the release is official.

Impatiently waiting......?????:)

[ale]

The M52TUB25 TS is actually ready for release. It will be available late next week. I will post up final dynos and specs as soon as the release is official.

I can not guarantee you a delivery date of a 323 TS. ........The best case scenario for a 323 TS delivered from us is 5-6 weeks. IMO though, that wait is well worth it -and I have driven the 323 ESS TS:evil:

Impatiently waiting......?????:)


:dunno:

[Asbjorn@ESS]

:dunno:

The 323 TS kits are ready for release, meaning they have passed all testing with success and will be released for sale shortly. The problem at the moment is the massive order load of M54B30 TS kits which makes it impossible to start shipping the 323 kits for another 5-6 weeks due to our current production capacity limit of ~15-20 TS kits pr week.

[330i ZHP]

Asbjorn, PM messages to you and a phone call on your VM...please respond. Thanks

I want to make the final decision between your TS2 and AA's TS kit.

[elite53]

The 323 TS kits are ready for release, meaning they have passed all testing with success and will be released for sale shortly. The problem at the moment is the massive order load of M54B30 TS kits which makes it impossible to start shipping the 323 kits for another 5-6 weeks due to our current production capacity limit of ~15-20 TS kits pr week.

Tease us with the numbers and dyno charts then. I need something to keep me interested while I wait so I don't go out and buy an M3 instead..:4ngie:

[ale]

Tease us with the numbers and dyno charts then. I need something to keep me interested while I wait so I don't go out and buy an M3 instead..:4ngie:

:werd:

[330i ZHP]

Asbjorn, PM messages to you and a phone call on your VM...please respond. Thanks

I want to make the final decision between your TS2 and AA's TS kit.

He called, emailed and PM'd me quickly and I have ordered the TS2. I was going to go ahead and order the TS2+ and cams, but decided since I am doing all the labor/install myself...I would like to see the various results and be able to help folks that are on the fence about ordering and at what level to order.

I have dyno time scheduled in two weeks to get baseline figures for the ZHP/6spd/3.46 LSD setup and will dyno again once the TS2 is installed. I will then do the headers, cams, TS2+ pulley and probably a clutch by then and provide more dyno results.