HorsepowerFreaks $16,000.00 !?!?!?!?

[E46S54]

:excited:couldn't believe the price tag. Grant it, it's all quality parts, but for 16,000.00 + the price of an E46 M3 (we'll say 2004+), couldn't you just by a used 335i coupe next year and make it just as fast?:hmm: Is it just me, or does this seem kinda steep?

[HAL78]

WHAT?! Do you mean extra hp for 16k???

[90PSI]

For a 700+ hp E46 M3 I would say that is a reasonable price. Ever look at pricing on forced induction for a P-Car? That will def. make you go :yikes: And you're not going to easily make a 335 "just as fast"...They are fast cars but getting past the 500 mark probably means upgrading the turbos which would mean $$$

[DBLAZE]

For 700+ HP I think its worth it...

90psi - your sig is awsome!!!!!

[///A]

16 grand could get me a beater :D

[dave12345]

i think once it hits 9999 they will get a lot of buyers, but they gotta write down some R+D, so give it 2 years

[90PSI]

90psi - your sig is awsome!!!!!

Thanks :thumbsup:

[JJR4884]

16 grand could get me a beater :D

or a turbo that will beat everything :eeps:

[Eazy-E46]

How come I never see all-motor M3's..?

[GodSendsDeath]

I think its a bit steep. But hey if they made it must be for a reason. People got cash to throw around so more power to them and the E46 M3.:str8pimpi

[TonyluvSilvia]

How come I never see all-motor M3's..?

What do u think the other 99.9% of M3's on the road, without Superchargers or Turbos are running.... :idea:

[pei330ci]

How come I never see all-motor M3's..?

Because dollar for dollar, they can't compete with FI.

You WILL see a lot of N/A S54s in pro and club racing series, because that is what the rules will allow. In these cases, some race teams have made over 400 hp with an S54, but with a very limited service life.

Evosport has done a few S54 packages. One in particular made over 350rwhp with a dry sump setup and an AEM EMS.

[MrBlonde]

For a 700+ hp E46 M3 I would say that is a reasonable price. Ever look at pricing on forced induction for a P-Car? That will def. make you go :yikes: And you're not going to easily make a 335 "just as fast"...They are fast cars but getting past the 500 mark probably means upgrading the turbos which would mean $$$
But the HPF750 kit makes 425 rwhp, right?

[kerisabe]

^^^

I think HPF St.1 is more like 667rwhp on pump gas. :pimpin:

[///M3-QTR]

But the HPF750 kit makes 425 rwhp, right?


425 rwhp with a cat ..450 rwhp without a cat on pump gas ..peak horsepwer #'s don't mean anything ..look at the power curve .

[plaroud]

425 rwhp with a cat ..450 rwhp without a cat on pump gas ..peak horsepwer #'s don't mean anything ..look at the power curve .

Actually it was 425 with cat at 90.5 pump. 450rwhp with cat @ 97 octane. 550?? @ 109 race

[steelgrey330ci]

plus you have to keep in mind what other companiers like AA and others charge for a supercharger kit. check those out as well

[///M3-QTR]

Actually it was 425 with cat at 90.5 pump. 450rwhp with cat @ 97 octane. 550?? @ 109 race

With Jim's custom tune ..97 octane ..the car makes 500 rwhp and 550 rwhp with 109 race fuel.. all his numbers with a catalytic converter .

On pump gas 91 = 425 rwhp with a cat ..without a cat = 450 rwhp .

http://forum.e46fanatics.com/showthread.php?t=472716&page=5

[plaroud]

With Jim's custom tune ..97 octane ..the car makes 500 rwhp and 550 rwhp with 109 race fuel.. all his numbers with a catalytic converter .

On pump gas 91 = 425 rwhp with a cat ..without a cat = 450 rwhp .

http://forum.e46fanatics.com/showthread.php?t=472716&page=5

Your right about the number but they never tested Jim's car without a cat. He always ran cats.

[eurotekm3]

you have pay to play.......

[TaZaM3]

^^^

I think HPF St.1 is more like 667rwhp on pump gas. :pimpin:

Not even close, too bad the stock motor cant do that on pump. However a built one can make that much on pump. :)

I believe the HPF kit is 415-420rwhp on 91 octane.

[helgo]

Not even close, too bad the stock motor cant do that on pump. However a built one can make that much on pump. :)

I believe the HPF kit is 415-420rwhp on 91 octane.

:yikes: 415-420rwhp is about the same as Vf or AA stge 1.5. For less money. Hmm.....

[///M3-QTR]

:yikes: 415-420rwhp is about the same as Vf or AA stge 1.5. For less money. Hmm.....


This might help :)



Just one note. Don't forget the total area under the curve. Peak numbers aren't the biggest thing here. It has been proven that a centrifugal superchager can easily make more peak power on a stock BMW engine than a turbo can on that same engine. This is because of the lower linear torque curve and completely linear hp curve the centrifual supercharger gives as well as the fact full boost is only achieved at or very near redline. The turbo can't be tuned that way because the area under the curve is so different and full boost is before 4k rpm to redline. there is an e36 with 100% stock longblock s52 motor making over 400whp (I think one is over 450whp) on pump fuel and the most a stock s52 can make with turbo on 91 pump fuel is about 314whp.

[KamPow3r]

:yikes: 415-420rwhp is about the same as Vf or AA stge 1.5. For less money. Hmm.....

True, but look at the torque curve which HPF's Kit makes compared to the S/C Kits. If torque isn't that important to you (which I think it should be cause it honeslty helps a lot) and just looking for high HP numbers, then AA and VF kits is what you should be deciding between.

[TaZaM3]

True, but look at the torque curve which HPF's Kit makes compared to the S/C Kits. If torque isn't that important to you (which I think it should be cause it honeslty helps a lot) and just looking for high HP numbers, then AA and VF kits is what you should be deciding between.


In that case you can just get nitrous for 1200 dollars and make more TQ at every point on the curve.

The HPF car on pump seems to make 310rwtq from 4-7k rpm, while a VF or AA car will make 10-20rwtq less, not much of a difference really. However the race gas mode is sure to be an advantage, its just going to cost you 7-6kore.

[KamPow3r]

In that case you can just get nitrous for 1200 dollars and make more TQ at every point on the curve.

The HPF car on pump seems to make 310rwtq from 4-7k rpm, while a VF or AA car will make 10-20rwtq less, not much of a difference really. However the race gas mode is sure to be an advantage, its just going to cost you 7-6kore.

True...what was your old setup running Vik and what were the numbers again? You had AA S/C w/ Nitrous, but I don't member the specs of it.

[TaZaM3]

When i was a stg3 AA car, i made 503rwhp/352rwtq on 100 oct. With a 50 shot nitrous shot i made 563rwhp/402rwtq, i later went to a 100 shot but didn't dyno it.

[MrBlonde]

425 rwhp with a cat ..450 rwhp without a cat on pump gas ..peak horsepwer #'s don't mean anything ..look at the power curve .
Thanks with the help on how to read a dyno of a turbo BMW, will bear that in mind.

[SinCityE46]

16k for a 425hp m3 is not worth it. I guess this is what they need to charge to regain their losses from R&D.

Tazam3 how much did your turbo setup from AA costed you?

[plaroud]

16k for a 425hp m3 is not worth it. I guess this is what they need to charge to regain their losses from R&D.

Tazam3 how much did your turbo setup from AA costed you?

Look again, that number is on pump gas, with cats on low boost. You can go close to 600rwhp with no cats race fuel high boost.

[HPF Chris]

16k for a 425hp m3 is not worth it. I guess this is what they need to charge to regain their losses from R&D.

Tazam3 how much did your turbo setup from AA costed you?

Here's a video from one of our customers with the HPF750 kit against the VF S/C kit.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QAe9B6cIuGA

The HPF750 kit has 415rwhp all the time on 92 octane pump and 600rwhp on race. Pump gas and high compression creates the 415rwhp limitation as the piston compresses the air 11.5 to 1 which heats up the air charge significantly allowing very little boost to be added without preignition. This will be the case for all kits running with the stock engine. When we release our stage 2 "methanol injection" add-on, 500rwhp+ will be possible on pump gas.

Here's a dyno graph and video of the last car we delivered to the customer.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AY8d4H-GLmI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7eC18Cuv9A

http://www.horsepowerfreaks.com/miscellaneous/m3turbokit/robertsm3/RobertsFinalDyno.gif

M3's in our shop getting the turbo kit installed.

http://www.horsepowerfreaks.com/miscellaneous/m3turbokit/robertsm3/HPFShopw4M3s_1.jpg

[turboaddiction]

16k for a 425hp m3 is not worth it. I guess this is what they need to charge to regain their losses from R&D.
Actually they are paying for 415-425whp(depending) on pump gas and 550-604whp(depending) on race fuel. No other turbo kit will ever make more power on pump gas with an unopened s54 no how no way Jose. The 11.5:1CR will not allow it period.
Tazam3 how much did your turbo setup from AA costed you?
Uh...well since HPF's is so overpriced it was probably less than $16k. :rofl:

[HPF Chris]

Superchargers are definitely an option (and have been the only option for years) for the M3 enthusiast to make considerably more power than stock. For the price, they still offer a great bang for the buck. Our turbo system is catered more to those that want more power throughout the entire rpm range, but also for those that have access to race fuel and with the flip of a switch want to lay down 600rwhp.

Here are power comparisons between two supercharger kits on the market and our turbo kit.

Chris.

http://www.horsepowerfreaks.com/miscellaneous/m3turbokit/dynos/HPF750PowerComparison.gif

[turboaddiction]

^^^^^I told all of you guys! Area uder the curve....mmmmmmmmmmmmmmkay! :str8pimpi

[tylor]

if you don't like the price, don't buy it.

nice stuff hpf - god robert's (?) car is LOUD

[tylor]

^^^^^I told all of you guys! Area uder the curve....mmmmmmmmmmmmmmkay! :str8pimpi

hpf, why would a turbo give you more area under the curve than a supercharger? or are you simply saying that your kit (which has a turbo) has more area under the curve than other kits (which have superchargers)...

[HPF Chris]

hpf, why would a turbo give you more area under the curve than a supercharger? or are you simply saying that your kit (which has a turbo) has more area under the curve than other kits (which have superchargers)...

Good question. If you take a look at the dyno graph of Robert's car, on pump gas full boost (5.5psi) is achieved at 3,700rpm. With the supercharger kits on the comparison graph, full boost isn't achieved until red-line. This is why the power difference is the greatest at 3,700rpm and slowly decreases until they're almost identical at 8,000rpm. The power differences below 3,000rpm between the HPF750 turbo system and the supercharger kits in the graph are due to changes we've made to the engine's operation through our engine management system.

Chris.

[tylor]

Good question. If you take a look at the dyno graph of Robert's car, on pump gas full boost (5.5psi) is achieved at 3,700rpm. With the supercharger kits on the comparison graph, full boost isn't achieved until red-line. This is why the power difference is the greatest at 3,700rpm and slowly decreases until they're almost identical at 8,000rpm. The power differences below 3,000rpm between the HPF750 turbo system and the supercharger kits in the graph are due to changes we've made to the engine's operation through our engine management system.

Chris.

just out of curiosity, which turbo does the hpf kit come with? you're the professional here, but i don't think the other kit peaking it's boost at redline has anything to do with it. i don't know much about superchargers, but i do know they're spun by the engine rather than exhaust.

now, in my mind, i think this would mean the supercharger kit would have more down low than the hpf. i think the "more under the curve" is simply due to either a better tune or a more aggressive tune, though in all honesty, i know very little about either kits.

[turboaddiction]

just out of curiosity, which turbo does the hpf kit come with? you're the professional here, but i don't think the other kit peaking it's boost at redline has anything to do with it. i don't know much about superchargers, but i do know they're spun by the engine rather than exhaust.

now, in my mind, i think this would mean the supercharger kit would have more down low than the hpf. i think the "more under the curve" is simply due to either a better tune or a more aggressive tune, though in all honesty, i know very little about either kits.
You are assuming things. This is Forced Induction 101 stuff. Extremely basic stuff. If you don't have the experience to know more than HPF, then please do not ask them a question and then question the validity of their answer.

The reasons why the power curves are different:

Centrifugal Supercharger:
-belt driven
-linear power due to being belt driven
-linear boost where full boost does not happen until redline

Turbocharger:
-exhaust gas driven
-non-linear power curve due to being exhaust gas driven (can depend since you can change tune and use different turbo sizes in order to change the shape of the curves)
-full boost well before redline (all depends on turbo sizing, motor and tuning-can be as low as 2500rpm or more)

These are facts.

Below are good reads for you:

How Centrifugal Superchargers Work (http://auto.howstuffworks.com/supercharger4.htm)

How Turbochargers Work (http://auto.howstuffworks.com/turbo1.htm)

[tylor]

You are assuming things. This is Forced Induction 101 stuff. Extremely basic stuff. If you don't have the experience to know more than HPF, then please do not ask them a question and then question the validity of their answer.

yes, it would be a real shame if they had to answer questions about their product or claims. if you do not like my questions, ignore them - they weren't directed towards you. i mentioned how they're the professionals and i'm discussing. i would e-mail them directly however this was an on topic question.

The reasons why the power curves are different:

we're not talking about why they're "different". i asked why they're saying a turbo will have more area under the curve than a supercharger. the hpf kit peaks at 5.5psi and i'm sure the turbo is capable of much more than that, i assume they keep it that low due to stock internals......

.....as i was writing this i believe i answered my own question. pressure is controlled on a turbo by bleeding off the exhaust through the wastegate, whereas, a supercharger, i guess you can't control peak psi? hmm... never thought about that.

nevermind, i understand it now hpf :hi:

[turboaddiction]

if you do not like my questions, ignore them - they weren't directed towards you.
I am sorry if it sounded that way. Anyone is free to ask questions. I am just saying that once they answered you didn't believe their answer.
we're not talking about why they're "different". I asked why they're saying a turbo will have more area under the curve than a supercharger.
More area under the curve is "different". That is what I meant by "different".
.....as i was writing this i believe i answered my own question. pressure is controlled on a turbo by bleeding off the exhaust through the wastegate, whereas, a supercharger, i guess you can't control peak psi? hmm... never thought about that.

nevermind, i understand it now hpf :hi:
This is true. People have tried to do the same with superchargers but there are two problems with doing this:
1) being belt driven you can only go to a certain speed before your belt slips, etc.
2) the centrifugal supercharger unit itself has a maximum amount of rpm that it can spin.

Not all superchargers are like this. A positive displacement supercharger such as a twin screw will see instant full boost in lower rpms like a turbo and there is much more area under the curve to prove that the earlier amount of full boost in the rpm range helps cause this. I have ridden in a centrifugal supercharged BMW and it felt pretty stock until 4k or so. I rode in a twin screw supercharged BMW and the power hit hard down low and then pulled hard throughout the rest of the rpm range. If you want more power under the curve than the HPF turbo you would need to go with VNT turbo, then after that for even more area under the curve you'd add hydraulic assistance to that VNT turbo.

It is all associated with how immediate boost comes on which is what helps cause more torque in the lower rpms. So yes, boost response is a cause for more area under the curve.

[TaZaM3]

From having both setups, i must say the supercharger setup was very fun to have. The linear power was very smooth and it felt very nice.

Turbo power is alot of fun as well. Its not linear like the SC, and its sure as hell not as smooth but its brutal.

Thats my experience comparing a 500rwhp-600rwhp SC car to a 650rwhp-840rwhp turbo car.

[MrBlonde]

From having both setups, i must say the supercharger setup was very fun to have. The linear power was very smooth and it felt very nice.

Turbo power is alot of fun as well. Its not linear like the SC, and its sure as hell not as smooth but its brutal.

Thats my experience comparing a 500rwhp-600rwhp SC car to a 650rwhp-840rwhp turbo car.
Vik your experience with a turbo car is with a 74mm turbo .. that's a big turbo for a 3.2 litre engine. It's going to make good peak power numbers .. it
s also going to lag a lot and come on very hard when it spools!

turbos can be setup to be more linear or more lightswitch .. it all depends on how you design them.

The HPF705 kit is the best KIT available for the E46 M3 at this point in time and is far better than any AA supercharger kit.

[travisbickle]

Vik your experience with a turbo car is with a 74mm turbo .. that's a big turbo for a 3.2 litre engine. It's going to make good peak power numbers .. it
s also going to lag a lot and come on very hard when it spools!

turbos can be setup to be more linear or more lightswitch .. it all depends on how you design them.

The HPF705 kit is the best KIT available for the E46 M3 at this point in time and is far better than any AA supercharger kit.

Evidence of how tuning the boost profile affects torque is seen with the N54 motor in the 335i. The torque curve is rediculously flat with nearly 300ft-lbs of torque at the wheels at 2,000 rpm and never dropping below 250ft-lbs up to 6,000rpm. That flat torque curve is the result of a tuned boost profile.

With regards to whether the HPF kit or an AA S/C kit is "better" is rather subjective and depends on what your goals are. If you're talking about peak numbers and area under the curve, then yes, the HPF kit appears to be the best in that regard. It's also obvious what the extra $9500 you need to spend on the HPF kit actually gets you for your money.

Looking at the horsepower curve of the HPF car tells me that the boost and torque on race gas comes on HARD from 4Krpm to 5Krpm. I'd love to hear from HPF how much time it takes to go from 4K to 5K on the road in second or third gear. I'd bet in a second or less. While I'm sure it will put a big poo eating grin on your face while travelling in a straight line, frankly that kind of power delivery isn't where the joy in driving the M3 comes from, at least not for me.

While I don't do it very often, I like to track my car. I think driving a car equipped with the HPF750 kit at high boost on a road course would be scary. With the traction control turned off it would require the kind of attention and focus that most HPDE drivers are not capable of sustaining for 20-30 minutes at a time. Personally I wouldn't feel comfortable driving my daily driver at those boost levels on a road course or the street. As a result I'd never being using the full potential of an HPF kit and the marginal power increase (relative to the kit costing nearly double) just wouldn't be worth it for me. IMO, if you're not looking win dildo contests but rather "modernize" the E46 M3s power output levels to bring it up to snuff with more "modern" cars, the HPF kit is overkill.

Bear in mind that I'm not disputing the overall value of the kit. I've assembled and tuned a turbo set up basically from scratch so I fully appreciate the "turnkey" nature of the HPF kit, but for me I don't need that much kit. I'd rather spend the extra on a BBK and Moton coilovers. :craig:

[MrBlonde]

Evidence of how tuning the boost profile affects torque is seen with the N54 motor in the 335i. The torque curve is rediculously flat with nearly 300ft-lbs of torque at the wheels at 2,000 rpm and never dropping below 250ft-lbs up to 6,000rpm. That flat torque curve is the result of a tuned boost profile.

With regards to whether the HPF kit or an AA S/C kit is "better" is rather subjective and depends on what your goals are. If you're talking about peak numbers and area under the curve, then yes, the HPF kit appears to be the best in that regard. It's also obvious what the extra $9500 you need to spend on the HPF kit actually gets you for your money.

Looking at the horsepower curve of the HPF car tells me that the boost and torque on race gas comes on HARD from 4Krpm to 5Krpm. I'd love to hear from HPF how much time it takes to go from 4K to 5K on the road in second or third gear. I'd bet in a second or less. While I'm sure it will put a big poo eating grin on your face while travelling in a straight line, frankly that kind of power delivery isn't where the joy in driving the M3 comes from, at least not for me.

While I don't do it very often, I like to track my car. I think driving a car equipped with the HPF750 kit at high boost on a road course would be scary. With the traction control turned off it would require the kind of attention and focus that most HPDE drivers are not capable of sustaining for 20-30 minutes at a time. Personally I wouldn't feel comfortable driving my daily driver at those boost levels on a road course or the street. As a result I'd never being using the full potential of an HPF kit and the marginal power increase (relative to the kit costing nearly double) just wouldn't be worth it for me. IMO, if you're not looking win dildo contests but rather "modernize" the E46 M3s power output levels to bring it up to snuff with more "modern" cars, the HPF kit is overkill.

Bear in mind that I'm not disputing the overall value of the kit. I've assembled and tuned a turbo set up basically from scratch so I fully appreciate the "turnkey" nature of the HPF kit, but for me I don't need that much kit. I'd rather spend the extra on a BBK and Moton coilovers. :craig:
However since you own an AA supercharger kit your comments are not independent.

For drag racing a BMW street car, the HPF kit shits on all other options currently available for E46 M3s as a kit. I see your point in regards to your comemnts about circuit racing.

[travisbickle]

However since you own an AA supercharger kit your comments are not independent.

For drag racing a BMW street car, the HPF kit shits on all other options currently available for E46 M3s as a kit. I see your point in regards to your comemnts about circuit racing.

My comments may not be unbiased with regards to supercharging an M3 but my past experience includes extensive seat time in both turbocharged and supercharged vehicles that I've owned over the years. I think that qualifies me to at least express an opinion regarding the merits of each approach.

As I said in my previous post, I don't dispute the value of the HPF kit for what it produces in terms of all out performance on a stock bottom end. I can't wait to see what their advanced stages put down. Regardless, for me and many of those like me, the added expense of the HPF kit is not worth the money since it will rarely be used.

[autobred]

Superchargers are definitely an option (and have been the only option for years) for the M3 enthusiast to make considerably more power than stock. For the price, they still offer a great bang for the buck. Our turbo system is catered more to those that want more power throughout the entire rpm range, but also for those that have access to race fuel and with the flip of a switch want to lay down 600rwhp.

Here are power comparisons between two supercharger kits on the market and our turbo kit.

Chris.

http://www.horsepowerfreaks.com/miscellaneous/m3turbokit/dynos/HPF750PowerComparison.gif

Chris could you post the torque #s in a graph that coincide with this HP graph

[autobred]

My comments may not be unbiased with regards to supercharging an M3 but my past experience includes extensive seat time in both turbocharged and supercharged vehicles that I've owned over the years. I think that qualifies me to at least express an opinion regarding the merits of each approach.

As I said in my previous post, I don't dispute the value of the HPF kit for what it produces in terms of all out performance on a stock bottom end. I can't wait to see what their advanced stages put down. Regardless, for me and many of those like me, the added expense of the HPF kit is not worth the money since it will rarely be used.

Safe to say it would be used just as much or more than a full moton and BBK kit being fully utilized as if someone going to a track with those upgrades or strip (occasional stoplights:4ngie:with HPF upgrade. Which one is more accessible.:hmm:

[Evil Twin Rob]

While I don't do it very often, I like to track my car. I think driving a car equipped with the HPF750 kit at high boost on a road course would be scary. With the traction control turned off it would require the kind of attention and focus that most HPDE drivers are not capable of sustaining for 20-30 minutes at a time. Personally I wouldn't feel comfortable driving my daily driver at those boost levels on a road course or the street. As a result I'd never being using the full potential of an HPF kit and the marginal power increase (relative to the kit costing nearly double) just wouldn't be worth it for me. IMO, if you're not looking win dildo contests but rather "modernize" the E46 M3s power output levels to bring it up to snuff with more "modern" cars, the HPF kit is overkill.

I agree, this kit may not be for everyone. I you like to track your car, this is not the kit you want. My car is still great fun on a windy road, but there's no way in hell i'll whip around corners without the traction control on anymore. Drifting will definetly take more practice, and I wouldn't try that with race gas. If you like to get out on a smooth road through the wheat fields, and feel some serious pin you against the seat acceleration, this is your kit. On the freeway, this car will rarely lose.

[Rayce185]

About half of an M3 price tag for over double the performance... I cannot see a problem with these numbers.

[ice330ci05]

so CHRIS you guys still goin to make the 330 kit? :D

[TaZaM3]

An AA customers stg 1 kit just put down 430rwhp, they are conservative company advertisers. When i plotted those lines, they are very close to the HPF lines, with the AA kit excelling 7-8k rpm. And when you are racing its all about 6500-8000rpm in these cars.

[autobred]

Very good point:thumbsup:

[BoostAddicted]

sorry bro.. they got a Stage 3 Kit coming out that is going to womp on everything.. !! 900rwhp.. For about 25k but its worth every penny bro!!

[MrBlonde]

sorry bro.. they got a Stage 3 Kit coming out that is going to womp on everything.. !! 900rwhp.. For about 25k but its worth every penny bro!!

Don't tell me, show me.

[Evil Twin Rob]

:yikes:sorry bro.. they got a Stage 3 Kit coming out that is going to womp on everything.. !! 900rwhp.. For about 25k but its worth every penny bro!!

who is?

[TaZaM3]

A troll.

[VTECtoVANOS]

Evil Twin Rob, is yours the first kit in WA? I am jealousy...

[Evil Twin Rob]

Evil Twin Rob, is yours the first kit in WA? I am jealousy...

Yep. There's not many e46 M3s in Spokane anyway, so mine stands out a little more. Not bad for living in "The Kan" eh?

[mik3 agby]

i havent really followed up on the HPF kit but i have a question about the race gas key. say that you have race gas in it but don't have the key on, will you get pump gas results?

[Saintly]

Superchargers are definitely an option (and have been the only option for years) for the M3 enthusiast to make considerably more power than stock. For the price, they still offer a great bang for the buck. Our turbo system is catered more to those that want more power throughout the entire rpm range, but also for those that have access to race fuel and with the flip of a switch want to lay down 600rwhp.

Here are power comparisons between two supercharger kits on the market and our turbo kit.

Chris.

http://www.horsepowerfreaks.com/miscellaneous/m3turbokit/dynos/HPF750PowerComparison.gif

Shame I'm in Aus, as i'd love to have a crack at the title with my AA on race fuel verse a HPF flip of the switch..would be fun:excited:

[Asbjorn@ESS]

I do feel that the HPF stock comparison numbers are very misleading as the torque band looks more like a stock 325 until 6K. Attached is a more normal comparison between a bone stock US M3, the HPF Turbo on pump fuel and the ESS CFR550 SC kit on pump fuel to better illustrate the real differences people can expect from these kits on a normally operating M3 (CFR550 running Euro type headers and cats).

Feel free to correct me if any of my data is wrong, but I believe this to be the most accurate comparison stock/HPF turbo/sc around. The HPF Turbo looks like a great product, but lets try to keep the comparison data as real as possible shall we?

[HPF Chris]

I do feel that the HPF stock comparison numbers are very misleading as the torque band looks more like a stock 325 until 6K. Attached is a more normal comparison between a bone stock US M3, the HPF Turbo on pump fuel and the ESS CFR550 SC kit on pump fuel to better illustrate the real differences people can expect from these kits on a normally operating M3 (CFR550 running Euro type headers and cats).

Feel free to correct me if any of my data is wrong, but I believe this to be the most accurate comparison stock/HPF turbo/sc around. The HPF Turbo looks like a great product, but lets try to keep the comparison data as real as possible shall we?

Our dyno graphs were done on our Dynojet Dyno. The vendors dyno graphs used were from their own web-site. I would like to think this would illustrate the "real" power produced in each case.

If those at ESS want to claim to make 478rwhp on 91-92 octane with stock internals and their S/C kit, so be it. It is our experience that this is not possible without pre-ignition if the motor is not altered in any way. The ESS pump gas dyno graph posted emulates our race fuel curve which is where we added a ton of timing. Unless a higher grade of fuel is used this will create pre-ignition and knock and destroy the motor quite quickly. I say bring it. Our customers will be racing plenty of other M3's on pump gas and hopefully some with ESS kits on them. :)

Take care,
Chris

[Asbjorn@ESS]

Our dyno graphs were done on our Dynojet Dyno. The vendors dyno graphs used were from their own web-site. I think that justifies "real".

If you want to claim to make more power than ours with the ESS S/C kit on 91-92 octane with stock internals, so be it. It is our experience that this is not possible without pre-ignition if the motor is not altered in any way. I say bring it. Our customers will be racing plenty of other M3's on pump gas and hopefully some with this ESS kit. :)

Take care,
Chris

Your stock comparison dynos shows a 25-35% lower bottom and mid range torque than normal M3's dynoed on many identical DynoJet's worldwide, but you still get normal top end power and torque which is very strange. It is also a bit strange that your turbo curves gains that same 25-35% torque over your stock curves even before the boost comes in which is completely impossible to achieve in tuning alone as the S54 is tuned very close to perfection from the factory. I suggest you research your dyno material as it does not make any sense and most likely you have an error in your original comparison dyno.

And as you are already aware of both AA, VF and ESS E46 M3 SC kits makes considerably more power than 415rwhp on pump fuel so it is indeed possible. If you do not believe it you are welcome to join us for some dyno and track testing of the CFR systems.

You have a great looking kit Chris and I wish HPF all the best, just make sure that the comparison material is presented correctly so that potential customers can base their decisions on correct data..

[HPF Chris]

Your stock comparison dynos shows a 25-35% lower bottom and mid range torque than normal M3's dynoed on many identical DynoJet's worldwide, but you still get normal top end power and torque which is very strange. It is also a bit strange that your turbo curves gains that same 25-35% torque over your stock curves even before the boost comes in which is completely impossible to achieve in tuning alone as the S54 is tuned very close to perfection from the factory. I suggest you research your dyno material as it does not make any sense and most likely you have an error in your original comparison dyno.

And as you are already aware of both AA, VF and ESS E46 M3 SC kits makes considerably more power than 415rwhp on pump fuel so it is indeed possible. If you do not believe it you are welcome to join us for some dyno and track testing of the CFR systems.

You have a great looking kit Chris and I wish HPF all the best, just make sure that the comparison material is presented correctly so that potential customers can base their decisions on correct data..

Here's VF engineerings dyno graph. Their stock dyno #'s are the same as what we're getting. Our power gains down low are from our engine management system.

http://www.vf-engineering.com/images/kit/bmw/e46_m3/dyno1.gif

[Asbjorn@ESS]

Here's VF engineerings dyno graph. Their stock dyno #'s are the same as what we're getting. Our power gains down low are from our engine management system.

http://www.vf-engineering.com/images/kit/bmw/e46_m3/dyno1.gif

The VF curves are much higher in the bottom and mid range and more correct compared to reference M3 dynos worldwide, even if the VF to is a bit on the low side of normal.

HPF Stock hp - VF Stock hp

2K : 57 - 80
3k : 115 - 125
4k : 150 - 170
5k : 195 - 210
8k : 265 - 260

I am very sorry to say this Chris, but after tuning 1000's of BMW's I can tell you there is nothing you can change in the operation of the S54 engine to gain 25-35% torque on a stock S54 without boost, period. The maximum gain you will see on pump fuel and stock engine is 2-5% torque and power no matter what you do. The S54 is a piece of tuning art from the factory, and there are very little gains to be had. The original MSS54 engine management system is also one of the most capable and powerful engine control systems the world has ever seen. In order to extract 17 extra top end horsepower (+4.9%) from this engine BMW had to install a massive 5" direct induction system, significantly hotter cams, different headers/cats and a very sophisticated map sensor based tune on an even faster version of the MSS54 ECU.

[Asbjorn@ESS]

Here is another one of your comparison dynos with even larger discrepancies..

HPF Stock hp - VF Stock hp

2K : 44 - 80
3k : 87 - 125
4k : 105 - 170
5k : 160 - 210
8k : 265 - 260

You do realize something is wrong with your comparisons? 0PSI boost and over 81% more power vs "your" stock at 2K RPM, but identical to VF's stock at 2K?

[Obioban]

:hmm: That does seem pretty suspect.

Chris?

[M3_Jaydee]

auch...

[mik3 agby]

wow the CFR systems look very promising. any word yet on when the release date will be and price for each kit? The VF Stage 2 kit looks promising as well.

[TaZaM3]

Not to cause anymore drama but i wanted to show what an SC kit can do as well.

This is my VERY old dyno on AA's kit on 100 oct gas. Again this is not a different tune or software just 100 oct in the tank. I know its not 100% fair comparo but there is no increased tuning or anything on this mode. Whereas HPF's race gas mode requires 110 + oct gas and its on a race tune with very aggressive tuning.

My old dyno on boost and on a 50 shot nitrous (i later upgraded to a 100shot).


http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d197/tazavik/vicm33-11.jpg

[Saintly]

For comparison this is my AA race fuel vp109. My dyno would be the closest to use for comparision race fuel to race fuel although it is on a Dynodynamics so readings are a lot lower. Most stock are 240-260rwhp here in Aus on 98octane. None the less you can see the difference and the power line race is smooth and goes straight up:thumbsup: just my 2cents...

[autobred]

I do feel that the HPF stock comparison numbers are very misleading as the torque band looks more like a stock 325 until 6K. Attached is a more normal comparison between a bone stock US M3, the HPF Turbo on pump fuel and the ESS CFR550 SC kit on pump fuel to better illustrate the real differences people can expect from these kits on a normally operating M3 (CFR550 running Euro type headers and cats).

Feel free to correct me if any of my data is wrong, but I believe this to be the most accurate comparison stock/HPF turbo/sc around. The HPF Turbo looks like a great product, but lets try to keep the comparison data as real as possible shall we?

thanks for posting the torque #s, exactly the type of graph I wanted to see:thumbsup:

[Obioban]

The VF curves are much higher in the bottom and mid range and more correct compared to reference M3 dynos worldwide, even if the VF to is a bit on the low side of normal.

HPF Stock hp - VF Stock hp

2K : 57 - 80
3k : 115 - 125
4k : 150 - 170
5k : 195 - 210
8k : 265 - 260

I am very sorry to say this Chris, but after tuning 1000's of BMW's I can tell you there is nothing you can change in the operation of the S54 engine to gain 25-35% torque on a stock S54 without boost, period. The maximum gain you will see on pump fuel and stock engine is 2-5% torque and power no matter what you do. The S54 is a piece of tuning art from the factory, and there are very little gains to be had. The original MSS54 engine management system is also one of the most capable and powerful engine control systems the world has ever seen. In order to extract 17 extra top end horsepower (+4.9%) from this engine BMW had to install a massive 5" direct induction system, significantly hotter cams, different headers/cats and a very sophisticated map sensor based tune on an even faster version of the MSS54 ECU.

Here is another one of your comparison dynos with even larger discrepancies..

HPF Stock hp - VF Stock hp

2K : 44 - 80
3k : 87 - 125
4k : 105 - 170
5k : 160 - 210
8k : 265 - 260

You do realize something is wrong with your comparisons? 0PSI boost and over 81% more power vs "your" stock at 2K RPM, but identical to VF's stock at 2K?

Chris :hi:

Not responding isn't going to work out as a strategy :hi:

[T0NT0N]

Chris :hi:

Not responding isn't going to work out as a strategy :hi:

relax... some people DO have jobs and can't be on the computer every minute of the day... give it at least a day before giving Chris crap for not responding

[T0NT0N]

Not to cause anymore drama but i wanted to show what an SC kit can do as well.

This is my VERY old dyno on AA's kit on 100 oct gas. Again this is not a different tune or software just 100 oct in the tank. I know its not 100% fair comparo but there is no increased tuning or anything on this mode. Whereas HPF's race gas mode requires 110 + oct gas and its on a race tune with very aggressive tuning.

My old dyno on boost and on a 50 shot nitrous (i later upgraded to a 100shot).


http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d197/tazavik/vicm33-11.jpg


your car really can't be used as a comparison as ur car was ungodly fast... not to mention all the discrepancies between the AA kits which i still can't figure out... maybe someone can explain why all the AA kits produce so many different dyno numbers


also...if im not mistaken jim's car on 97 octane (with cats) produced the same numbers as ur car on 100 octane....does AA provide a custom tune for higher octane?

[Mike Benvo]

I'm very curious about these discrepancies in the dyno readings.. Hopefully Chris will chime in soon.

[M3_Jaydee]

your car really can't be used as a comparison as ur car was ungodly fast... not to mention all the discrepancies between the AA kits which i still can't figure out... maybe someone can explain why all the AA kits produce so many different dyno numbers


also...if im not mistaken jim's car on 97 octane (with cats) produced the same numbers as ur car on 100 octane....does AA provide a custom tune for higher octane?

the different numbers are bc of the ballfrictiondrive rotrex SC, I tried 3 of them, all put out different, I also have a friend with AA kit, his car makes alot less than mine did with the same hardware :eek: all on the same dyno btw

[billetboy]

I think you guys are missing an important point. This kit can obviously make a lot more power than the output it is advertised at. Injectors, engine management, big turbo, free flowing exhaust components. If you build your motor with forged internals you can go way past any of the supercharger kits. It is the ease with which a turbos output can be increased that makes it a better choice than SC systems. More boost and some dyno tuning time with the AEM and none of these numbers quoted here are relevant anymore. Centrifugal blowers tend to be a little weak at the bottom end too. With a ceramic wheel you could easily gain some more bottom end with this kit.

$16,000 Does it look like it was built down to a price?

Not to me!

Looks like quality all the way.

[Obioban]

Chris :hi:

Not responding isn't going to work out as a strategy :hi:

:hi: Bump on this :hi:

[HPF Chris]

I am very sorry to say this Chris, but after tuning 1000's of BMW's I can tell you there is nothing you can change in the operation of the S54 engine to gain 25-35% torque on a stock S54 without boost, period. The maximum gain you will see on pump fuel and stock engine is 2-5% torque and power no matter what you do. The S54 is a piece of tuning art from the factory, and there are very little gains to be had. The original MSS54 engine management system is also one of the most capable and powerful engine control systems the world has ever seen. In order to extract 17 extra top end horsepower (+4.9%) from this engine BMW had to install a massive 5" direct induction system, significantly hotter cams, different headers/cats and a very sophisticated map sensor based tune on an even faster version of the MSS54 ECU.

Asborn...

For starters, this is beginning to feel like the same comments we heard on m3forum for the past year. As a forum sponsor, I would appreciate you showing me the same respect that I have shown you by not going on threads about your products and say you couldn't possibly accomplish what you did. Your only analysis is to continue to show dyno graphs of your new kit making 478rwhp (not yet released and not in any customer vehicles). To state that because of your vast experience "tuning 1,000 BMW's" that you know for sure that our results can't be done even though you have never been to our facility, have no idea what our engine management system entails, no idea of our tuning methods, and no idea how we accomplished that feat (because that is the some of only information we've withheld so our competitors couldn't try to copy it) etc. etc.

The dyno graphs are what they are. Whenever someone does something really innovative, people poke holes at it. In this case, the holes they are poking at our kits is not how much power, reliability and consistency we've been able to maintain on the 5 M3's we've completed, not how our customers are destroying nearly everything on the road, but that our baseline dyno (which we don't care about whatsoever) is slightly lower than what they've observed in their experience.


Chris

Not responding isn't going to work out as a strategy

I got married, and just got back from my honeymoon in Cabo, Mexico today. I did check the internet a few times to see what people are doing, but the continued attacks for no reason (especially by other forum sponsors) are quite honestly not worth my time and energy especially when I'm trying to relax.

To those that are "really" concerned about the baseline dynos we have measured on some of the M3's we've had in our shop, we will take more baseline dynos from the next few M3's we do and will publish the average of them for consistency with our results.

Take care,
Chris.

[MarvelPhx]

I don't think posting the truth about the MSS54 and the engine with facts to back it up is an attack... you shouldnt take it as such.

And it's really funny that you question the 478hp dyno from ESS... hereby quoting your OWN words... "even though you have never been to [their] facility, have no idea what [their] engine management system entails, no idea of [their] tuning methods, and no idea how [they] accomplished that feat (because that is the some of only information [they]'ve withheld so [THEIR] competitors couldn't try to copy it) etc. etc."

That's simply priceless...

Grats on the wedding!

[tankm3]

I don't think posting the truth about the MSS54 and the engine with facts to back it up is an attack... you shouldnt take it as such.

And it's really funny that you question the 478hp dyno from ESS... hereby quoting your OWN words... "even though you have never been to [their] facility, have no idea what [their] engine management system entails, no idea of [their] tuning methods, and no idea how [they] accomplished that feat (because that is the some of only information [they]'ve withheld so [THEIR] competitors couldn't try to copy it) etc. etc."

That's simply priceless...

Grats on the wedding!
He wasnt questioning their kit or their #'s, only stating that they only post their dyno graphs and nothing else! :hmm:

B.t.w. Congrats Chris. Keep an eye on the incoming mail addressed to you and David.

[MarvelPhx]

Actually, I have seen numerous posts of the CFR product installed photos, numerous youtube vids of it on the race track (not trolling a parking lot or jaunting up a city street), and more... right here on E46... its far from "just a dyno". Remember, the HPF was just a "dyno" in the very beginning as well.

Regardless, it's not the point. I took the posts as that the stock to HPF comparison dyno was off by quite a large margin compared to almost every stock M3 dyno I have ever seen and Asbjorn pointed it out. Most people may not have even noticed. Pointing out the truth is never a bad thing, I do it all the time and get flamed for it. So be it.

[M3_Jaydee]

^^werd, BTW congrats chris!

[HPF Chris]

^^werd, BTW congrats chris!

Thx guys. We look forward to cranking out some more kits and we'll have some stage 2 kits installed in customers cars next month!

Take care,
Chris.

[m3yal8r]

Did I miss the product launch? I know VFE is out with Stage 1 and 2 coming, HPF continues to build the fleet of turbo option, and ESS is out in Europe, but when or is it avail now in the US?

[MachRc]

check the mid first page of FI forum.

lets keep this on track yo.:excited:

damn weddings race fuel in-house programming headz, teh drama.. :thumbsup:

[Rider Ryuga]

Thx guys. We look forward to cranking out some more kits and we'll have some stage 2 kits installed in customers cars next month!

Take care,
Chris.


Stage 2 :excited:

[MarvelPhx]

Just to illustrate the point and stop the arguing...

I have overlaid the VF and ESS stock lines, averaged them, and highlighted the difference to what HPF shows as stock.

Turns out, the turbo makes stock power with no boost, which is exactly logical.

Compared to real stock, it just makes real sense. Does the HPF make power, sure, but it doesn't do anything special without the boost.

http://www.my330i.com/images/alvinvsstock.gif

[MachRc]

hpfs proved to the world with data

that whoever owns that Dinan Intake ITB Exhaust Chip w/ -.36 boost

has a really sucky car.


hhmpt.last time I'll ever think about getting Dinan Intake w/ ITB exhaust and chip.
I always knew dinan sucked.

[HPF Chris]

Just to illustrate the point and stop the arguing...

I have overlaid the VF and ESS stock lines, averaged them, and highlighted the difference to what HPF shows as stock.

Turns out, the turbo makes stock power with no boost, which is exactly logical.

Compared to real stock, it just makes real sense. Does the HPF make power, sure, but it doesn't do anything special without the boost.

http://www.my330i.com/images/alvinvsstock.gif

I absolutely agree, the torque and power on this particular car (before our kit) was significantly less than average. The before dyno graph of this M3 was done with the $14,000 Dinan upgrade. I would have expected bigger numbers (before our kit), but I'm not going to rule out that the ECU reflash or some other reason caused the numbers to be less. The dyno's on this particular graph we're all done on the same car.

We used the baseline from my M3 in our promotional dyno graphs which shows significantly more power in the low and midrange than the stock power of Alvin's M3 and slightly less than the dyno graphs that were added to this image, but we will need to take some more baseline tests from other M3's on our dyno to be a bit more conclusive. I will do this over the next month.

P.S. All of these dyno graphs are done with SAE correction turned on. Turning it off could very easily result it a greater or lesser dyno result.

Take care,
Chris.

[MarvelPhx]

Chris:

When I asked in another thread why a HPF turbo'd car made almost twice the power at 2k with no boost, you responded with "...The power gain at low rpm is very significant. I'm not going to explain exactly how we did it, but it is noticeable...". No mention of a magical stock dyno power discrepancy. And if I can find it, I remember you attributing that gain to the superior ability of the AEM over the DME... bah

It turns out the turbo'd car made exactly what normal stock M3s do when not under boost... and the stock dyno is off from the norm. No magic there.

Make all the power you can, but please keep it real.

[HPF Chris]

Chris:

When I asked in another thread why a HPF turbo'd car made almost twice the power at 2k with no boost, you responded with "...The power gain at low rpm is very significant. I'm not going to explain exactly how we did it, but it is noticeable...". No mention of a magical stock dyno power discrepancy. And if I can find it, I remember you attributing that gain to the superior ability of the AEM over the DME... bah

It turns out the turbo'd car made exactly what normal stock M3s do when not under boost... and the stock dyno is off from the norm. No magic there.

Make all the power you can, but please keep it real.

Here's a before and after dyno of my M3 (with specifics). We made some changes to get the power and torque improved at low rpm as reflected in the dyno graphs. Like I said before if we get more cars that don't have the drop in torque at 2,000rpm, I'll use those instead.

http://www.horsepowerfreaks.com/miscellaneous/m3turbokit/dynos/HPFM3-634rwhpCorrected.gif

[Evil Twin Rob]

Chris:

When I asked in another thread why a HPF turbo'd car made almost twice the power at 2k with no boost, you responded with "...The power gain at low rpm is very significant. I'm not going to explain exactly how we did it, but it is noticeable...". No mention of a magical stock dyno power discrepancy. And if I can find it, I remember you attributing that gain to the superior ability of the AEM over the DME... bah

It turns out the turbo'd car made exactly what normal stock M3s do when not under boost... and the stock dyno is off from the norm. No magic there.

Make all the power you can, but please keep it real.

Part of that quote may belong to me. As I said before, there IS a noticable difference in power @ 2k. It's true that my car was not dyno'd before the turbo install, but I can't imagine my stock power would vary much from Chris' car. Maybe both our cars where made less power than most stock M3s, but I doubt it. So let's say the HPF dyno is showing a lower number than what the car is really putting out. Maybe the power numbers after the install are actually higher too. I think if you use the same dyno before and after, then the difference in power numbers will still reflect the added gain. Just a theory, as I can't explain why other dynos are showing higher stock numbers. I just know what my car felt like @ 2k before and what it feels like now.

[turboaddiction]

The e36 guys have more experience with all this drama than the e46 boys and have figured out what needs to be done here.

It comes down to every dyno will show different numbers and the same dyno will show different numbers even due to barometer, temperature, rug fans, no fan, etc. A dyno is to help safely tune a car and is also just to measure a before and after for one car with a new modification. That's it!

What we found out is:

THE BIG BLACK DYNO NEVER LIES!

Once some HPF guys, some VF guys, some AA guys, some ESS guys and some whatever else guys go to the drag strip (no offense to those who already have...you rock!) and run all out with similiar elevation and temperature...log all of the trap speeds. The trap speeds will tell you the power and to be more accurate if guys got on the scale and weighed your cars, that plus the trap would tell you a very accurate power rating!

DO EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEET! :thumbsup:

[autobred]

The e36 guys have more experience with all this drama than the e46 boys and have figured out what needs to be done here.

It comes down to every dyno will show different numbers and the same dyno will show different numbers even due to barometer, temperature, rug fans, no fan, etc. A dyno is to help safely tune a car and is also just to measure a before and after for one car with a new modification. That's it!

What we found out is:

THE BIG BLACK DYNO NEVER LIES!

Once some HPF guys, some VF guys, some AA guys, some ESS guys and some whatever else guys go to the drag strip (no offense to those who already have...you rock!) and run all out with similiar elevation and temperature...log all of the trap speeds. The trap speeds will tell you the power and to be more accurate if guys got on the scale and weighed your cars, that plus the trap would tell you a very accurate power rating!

DO EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEET! :thumbsup:

Saintly has got game,:4ngie: props to him without a doubt:str8pimpi

[billetboy]

Well said!

1320 will tell the boys from the men.:read:

[thekubiaks]

The e36 guys have more experience with all this drama than the e46 boys and have figured out what needs to be done here.

It comes down to every dyno will show different numbers and the same dyno will show different numbers even due to barometer, temperature, rug fans, no fan, etc. A dyno is to help safely tune a car and is also just to measure a before and after for one car with a new modification. That's it!

What we found out is:

THE BIG BLACK DYNO NEVER LIES!

Once some HPF guys, some VF guys, some AA guys, some ESS guys and some whatever else guys go to the drag strip (no offense to those who already have...you rock!) and run all out with similiar elevation and temperature...log all of the trap speeds. The trap speeds will tell you the power and to be more accurate if guys got on the scale and weighed your cars, that plus the trap would tell you a very accurate power rating!

DO EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEET! :thumbsup:


I AGREE 100%, traps speeds and unbiased dyno's. After two superchargers and 6 dyno run sessions, I've learned that you need to see unbiased dyno charts from the end user. The dyno charts can be signifigantly "altered" with various tricks, OAT, baro pressure, IAT mods, heat soak, ultra cold intake charge, pressure altitude manipulations, the list is extensive.... For me, once I see a group of 3 or more dyno sheets from the end users that have no affiliation with the manufacturer will I accept the numbers.

:str8pimpi

[Saintly]

Saintly has got game,:4ngie: props to him without a doubt:str8pimpi

Thanks and I agree with Turboaddiction. I did something similar out here after people doubted my 500+ break through, so I attended a dyno day with the BMW club and the result speaks for its self.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzsQFsZrl1s

HPF, AA ESS cars should all turn up to one dyno, same time, back to back 3 pulls race fuel and have it out. The numbers then are the numbers. But at the end of the day someone will still question it.:banghead: But so long as the person/customer who bought and paid for the kit is happy does any of this really matter.:hmm: Dyno numbers are important to some but not others to me I'd want driveability and reliability over a short lived high dyno number. Only time and miles will tell.:thumbsup:

[TaZaM3]

I wish all of us could get on the same dyno.

I am really looking forward for an HPF car in Los Angeles. We have plenty of different SC'd M3's and my Turbo M3 here. Imagine a nice dyno day with different brand SC M3's (VF stg 2, AA stg 1,2,3), a built turbo M3 and HPF's turbo M3 kit.


1320 times can very plenty as well, if i lived on the East Coast you guys would be seeing insane numbers even with my old kit.

[rage2]

1320 trap speeds can be pretty off based on temperature, elevation, barometric pressure, humidity... etc.

[turboaddiction]

I wish all of us could get on the same dyno.

I am really looking forward for an HPF car in Los Angeles. We have plenty of different SC'd M3's and my Turbo M3 here. Imagine a nice dyno day with different brand SC M3's (VF stg 2, AA stg 1,2,3), a built turbo M3 and HPF's turbo M3 kit.


1320 times can very plenty as well, if i lived on the East Coast you guys would be seeing insane numbers even with my old kit.
Very nice! I have a plan.:str8pimpi
1320 trap speeds can be pretty off based on temperature, elevation, barometric pressure, humidity... etc.
Very valid...that's why all of them there battling it out at the same track on the same day...:pimpin:

So...here are the two plans:

Plan A:
Dyno session with:
AA car
VF car
ESS car
HPF car
whatever car
same fuel...
race gas for shizzles and gizzles

Plan B:
Schedule a day that a track is open or rent a track for a day. This was done on the east coast with a ton of highly modded MB, P-car, exotic and BMW guys in Maryland. There is another event coming up there that will be insane and I am flying out for it. We could do this in Arizona or in SoCal as well at some track! This gets my vote because I still believe that trap speed is the end all be all measure of power, where ET is the main factor inhibited by temperature, elevation, barometric pressure, humidity... etc.. All those inhibitors are out the window anyway when you are talking same track, same day. :thumbsup:

[DLSJ5]

Very nice! I have a plan.:str8pimpi

Very valid...that's why all of them there battling it out at the same track on the same day...:pimpin:

So...here are the two plans:

Plan A:
Dyno session with:
AA car
VF car
ESS car
HPF car
whatever car
same fuel...
race gas for shizzles and gizzles

Plan B:
Schedule a day that a track is open or rent a track for a day. This was done on the east coast with a ton of highly modded MB, P-car, exotic and BMW guys in Maryland. There is another event coming up there that will be insane and I am flying out for it. We could do this in Arizona or in SoCal as well at some track! This gets my vote because I still believe that trap speed is the end all be all measure of power, where ET is the main factor inhibited by temperature, elevation, barometric pressure, humidity... etc.. All those inhibitors are out the window anyway when you are talking same track, same day. :thumbsup:

No doubt that would be alot of fun. :thumbsup:

Both ET and Trap are affected by the conditions you laid out, I think that's what you meant Bro.

Also as you know, all those inhibitors will have a much more negative impact on NA and Supercharged cars in comparison to a Turbocharged car, as the TC'R has a wastegate to compensate for the thinner air. Gotta be at sea level, so Socal it is. :D

[Evil Twin Rob]

Plan B:
Schedule a day that a track is open or rent a track for a day. This was done on the east coast with a ton of highly modded MB, P-car, exotic and BMW guys in Maryland. There is another event coming up there that will be insane and I am flying out for it. We could do this in Arizona or in SoCal as well at some track! This gets my vote because I still believe that trap speed is the end all be all measure of power, where ET is the main factor inhibited by temperature, elevation, barometric pressure, humidity... etc.. All those inhibitors are out the window anyway when you are talking same track, same day. :thumbsup:

Sounds like a blast. I'll bring the potato salad!

[turboaddiction]

No doubt that would be alot of fun. :thumbsup:

Both ET and Trap are affected by the conditions you laid out, I think that's what you meant Bro.

Also as you know, all those inhibitors will have a much more negative impact on NA and Supercharged cars in comparison to a Turbocharged car, as the TC'R has a wastegate to compensate for the thinner air. Gotta be at sea level, so Socal it is. :D
Yes, they inhibit both but if you point your car in one direction and go full throttle then even with a crappy short time, the trap stays very close to the same run for run on, same track, same day. In fact, there are online calculators if you get the exact weight of the car on a scale and plug in the trap speed.

SoCal it will have to be because after all this the last thing I need to hear is someone *****ing about the air and a turbo car having an advantage over their car.

[rage2]

Also as you know, all those inhibitors will have a much more negative impact on NA and Supercharged cars in comparison to a Turbocharged car, as the TC'R has a wastegate to compensate for the thinner air. Gotta be at sea level, so Socal it is. :D
Actually, it depends on how the boost control system regulates boost. Most controls reference ambient pressure and open the wastegate based on x times the ambient pressure, so as you move up in elevation, absolute pressure will drop along with it. Meaning you can run more "boost" at higher elevation to make up for it. The 911 turbos are an exception, the boost control system controls the wastegate based on absolute pressure from the MAP sensor, which makes them retarded fast here (I'm at 3700ft elevation) compared to anything else.

Most of the turbo Hondas here run ridiculously high boost pressures compared to the sea level guys to hit pre-ignition limits of the fuel, but when they bring their cars to sea level, it pings like a mofu :).

Kinda curious how HPS's AEM system does it.

[DLSJ5]

Actually, it depends on how the boost control system regulates boost. Most controls reference ambient pressure and open the wastegate based on x times the ambient pressure, so as you move up in elevation, absolute pressure will drop along with it. Meaning you can run more "boost" at higher elevation to make up for it. The 911 turbos are an exception, the boost control system controls the wastegate based on absolute pressure from the MAP sensor, which makes them retarded fast here (I'm at 3700ft elevation) compared to anything else.

Most of the turbo Hondas here run ridiculously high boost pressures compared to the sea level guys to hit pre-ignition limits of the fuel, but when they bring their cars to sea level, it pings like a mofu :).

Kinda curious how HPS's AEM system does it.

Good info.:thumbsup:

There's always variables with different setups, etc. but in general TC'd cars do not suffer as much as NA or SC'd, good question on the HPF system and how it adjusts.

[MarvelPhx]

Since we seem to have a bunch of variety here in AZ, I say we get a VF Stage 1 (2 if avail by then), AA Stage 2, HPF-T, ESS CFR, whatever else together (whatever is the highest stage people can get for pump fuel on a production kit) and run the same dyno... a couple runs each on pump to compare, then people can go get race fuel if they want and run again for S&G... I can easily arrange this... just dont know of any AA M3s here.

[turboaddiction]

Since we seem to have a bunch of variety here in AZ, I say we get a VF Stage 1 (2 if avail by then), AA Stage 2, HPF-T, ESS CFR, whatever else together (whatever is the highest stage people can get for pump fuel on a production kit) and run the same dyno... a couple runs each on pump to compare, then people can go get race fuel if they want and run again for S&G... I can easily arrange this... just dont know of any AA M3s here.
That would be the easiest! Great idea! What would really be nice is to overlap all the different dynos on one dyno sheet after they all finish. :str8pimpi

[MarvelPhx]

That would be the easiest! Great idea! What would really be nice is to overlap all the different dynos on one dyno sheet after they all finish. :str8pimpi

Also easily done. What is not easy is Jim (the HPF-T) car here doesnt have a tune for pump. We need that or another pump-setting HPF car to get straight comparisons. Also, anyone in AZ with an AA M3?

[turboaddiction]

Also easily done. What is not easy is Jim (the HPF-T) car here doesnt have a tune for pump. We need that or another pump-setting HPF car to get straight comparisons. Also, anyone in AZ with an AA M3?
If we can get an HPF customer with a 91 map near Socal...maybe we can talk him into coming out to AZ for this when I and a few other S/C e46 guys come out. :idea:

[M3_Jaydee]

Wish I could be there... :(

[Saintly]

Wish I could be there as a contender..:bawling: