Turbo M3 Track Day

Originally Posted by zcchen

This is unreal! Makes me wanna get a 2jz next

Nah...the S54 is a better engine!

Originally Posted by Jason@proefi

Nah...the S54 is a better engine!

It certainly should be, at least on paper. But why is the torque so low on every dyno that I see?? I would think that with a better head, variable cam timing and higher compression that it would kick a 2Js ass down low and in torque?

Originally Posted by Sound Performance

It certainly should be, at least on paper. But why is the torque so low on every dyno that I see?? I would think that with a better head, variable cam timing and higher compression that it would kick a 2Js ass down low and in torque?

When I overlay my dyno runs with the 2j dyno runs (and believe me...I have ALOT of 2j dyno runs). The S54 cars I have done kick the crap out of the 2j's.

Originally Posted by Jason@proefi

When I overlay my dyno runs with the 2j dyno runs (and believe me...I have ALOT of 2j dyno runs). The S54 cars I have done kick the crap out of the 2j's.

Maybe.... I was just comparing the car that Chris built to a car we did with a 6266. Granted we had a smaller turbo (6266 vs 6766) but we made 600 rwhp, 720 tq at 4000 compared to his 260 rwhp and 330 TQ. Both cars on E85. Ours was a 3.4 stroker though but still no variable valve timing. Quite a big difference there.

Originally Posted by Sound Performance

I have a M3 now at the shop where the customer wants to hit 1K with a billet 76. I am now slightly afraid of the HPF log type manifold as being a restriction that will prevent us from hitting our goal. After seeing the results of Chris's car with a 82mm turbo, I think that we may need to explore the realms of a custom tubular manifold.

We have hit 940whp at 29psi on a AA log manifold with an older 76. This setup can break 1k if we turn up the boost more which I usually do on the street.).

Originally Posted by TaZaM3

We have hit 940whp at 29psi on a AA log manifold with an older 76. This setup can break 1k if we turn up the boost more which I usually do on the street.).

How does that manifold compare to the HPF bolt together type as far as flow goes??

That torque number is unreal!!!

Originally Posted by 02black330ci

Chris,
What are your thoughts on the internals longevity with this amount of whp and torque? Even if its close to 700whp, I would love to do the set up since its hitting the Stage 2.5 and Stage 3 whp territory and all w/out the build. Maybe adding the ARP head bolts to assist in holding it together? I am looking for all sorts of options/ideas to push the stock engine further.



Really good feedback there Larry, was this on E85 also?

Well at this point its hard to say since we havnt put alot of har miles on it yet. The plan is to beat on it a whole bunch where its at now then start turning it up a little at a time until we break somthing. I'd say if it can hold this power under the abuse the whole shop will put it through then this power level is good to go .. Only time will tell for sure!! Obviously u should be prepared to loose a motor anytime your pushing this kinda of power over stock, if your not willing and prepared to loose a motor, then this probably wouldn'e be the best route to go.

Originally Posted by Sound Performance

Maybe.... I was just comparing the car that Chris built to a car we did with a 6266. Granted we had a smaller turbo (6266 vs 6766) but we made 600 rwhp, 720 tq at 4000 compared to his 260 rwhp and 330 TQ. Both cars on E85. Ours was a 3.4 stroker though but still no variable valve timing. Quite a big difference there.

Also my pulls were in 4th, 5th gear is closest 1:1 on the M3 apparently. I found this out after the dyno session .. That extra load may have given the turbo a little more time to spool and produce some better TQ #s. Next time on the dyno I'll see what I can do with more time and 5th gear.

Chris can we expect some videos and some drag time on this beast? Also still waiting on those pictures.
What problems did you encounter during the initial setup phase or is this pretty much a mimic of Jason@ProEFI's setup?
EML light still?
Controlling the cams or leaving that to the DME?

Larry, another thing to keep in mind is the cam profile is pretty aggresive twords top end power, that could account for some of the lackluster low end as well.

Originally Posted by TaZaM3

We have hit 940whp at 29psi on a AA log manifold with an older 76. This setup can break 1k if we turn up the boost more which I usually do on the street.).

Taza how would you "think" the AA log compares to the Steed Speed or the HPF Log?

Originally Posted by Commanderwiggin

Chris can we expect some videos and some drag time on this beast? Also still waiting on those pictures.
What problems did you encounter during the initial setup phase or is this pretty much a mimic of Jason@ProEFI's setup?
EML light still?
Controlling the cams or leaving that to the DME?

Yes, once we get it back together we'll take some vids on the dyno and at the track. There wern't really any issues other than the 6500 rpm factory limiter when only th rear wheels spin. Charles from topend told me how to defeat it the garunteed way to work every time and it did. I ususally just run cars like this in AWD, but his trick worked perfect so I didn't have to.

I did and have been playing with a number of different ideas and things to get the most out of the whole setup. We're in the process of fine tuning a flash for the DME that will "improve the experience" I can't give out details until its done. But it should be done a week or two after we get the new clutch in.. I had no EML light and the vanos was controlled by the stock ECU

I, for one am extremely happy you guys (Chris, Larry, Jason etc) have come on this forum and more over have started focusing on S54! As everyone said those tq numbers are UNREAL!
As far as Chris' motor sacrifice, thank you! At least from my side as I'm very interested in raising up the bar of the stock engine as it's certainly easier upgrade to our >St2 set-ups (in my case rather than shipping an entire engine over the Atlantic).
The only concern left is the endurance of the engine which I guess only time would tell and a few more brave e46fanatics.

My questions Chris is, do you think the same/similar output could be achieved on pump+meth or race+meth instead of E85 which is not available in certain parts of the world?

Also the fact that Larry and Jason insist that S54 is a better engine than 2JZ is quite amazing! as bringing current s54 performance even close to 2JZ in terms of power curve would be a HUGE achievement not to mention squeezing even more performance out of it... which brings me back to being thankful for having your focus nowadays on S54!

I have a feeling 1yr from now we'll be far off this point in terms of this motor's performance if interest in optimizing it is maintained.

P.S: Chris please put me also on the list of interested people in your work and eventually retail & please edit the title - this NEEDS more attention - I'm sure you can either do it or ask a mod to do it for all of us

Originally Posted by Bugermass

... but his trick worked perfect so I didn't have to.

I know is slightly off topic but please describe briefly the steps you did as I'm still having trouble lately (used to work before but now even after removing fuse 61 it's cutting at 6500)

thanks!

To get the car completely out of dyno mode, you can get the wheels up to speed in say 4th gear, then while the whiles are spinning turn the key off then back on, this will fail the wheel speed sensors and the car will rev to redline with no interfearance from the factory ECU..

Originally Posted by dragosid

I, for one am extremely happy you guys (Chris, Larry, Jason etc) have come on this forum and more over have started focusing on S54! As everyone said those tq numbers are UNREAL!
As far as Chris' motor sacrifice, thank you! At least from my side as I'm very interested in raising up the bar of the stock engine as it's certainly easier upgrade to our >St2 set-ups (in my case rather than shipping an entire engine over the Atlantic).
The only concern left is the endurance of the engine which I guess only time would tell and a few more brave e46fanatics.

My questions Chris is, do you think the same/similar output could be achieved on pump+meth or race+meth instead of E85 which is not available in certain parts of the world?

Also the fact that Larry and Jason insist that S54 is a better engine than 2JZ is quite amazing! as bringing current s54 performance even close to 2JZ in terms of power curve would be a HUGE achievement not to mention squeezing even more performance out of it... which brings me back to being thankful for having your focus nowadays on S54!

I have a feeling 1yr from now we'll be far off this point in terms of this motor's performance if interest in optimizing it is maintained.

P.S: Chris please put me also on the list of interested people in your work and eventually retail & please edit the title - this NEEDS more attention - I'm sure you can either do it or ask a mod to do it for all of us

Thanks for the comments. As far what what we an do on what fuel combinations, thats a tough one. Right now we are on E98 not E85. E98 has a significantly higher actual and effective octane rating. Right now we're finding the limits of the physical parts of the stock motor by removing octane as a limiting factor. So to anser your question, I'm not sure yet lol. We will keep making strides forwards and keep everyone posted to the progress.

Originally Posted by Sound Performance

Maybe.... I was just comparing the car that Chris built to a car we did with a 6266. Granted we had a smaller turbo (6266 vs 6766) but we made 600 rwhp, 720 tq at 4000 compared to his 260 rwhp and 330 TQ. Both cars on E85. Ours was a 3.4 stroker though but still no variable valve timing. Quite a big difference there.

Spool valve? another .15 liters as well....and as you know...turbo size dictates torque...smaller turbo = MUCH more torque.

Originally Posted by Jason@proefi

Spool valve?

No sir, just a 3.4 motor at 9.5-1 CR

Originally Posted by Sound Performance

No sir, just a 3.4 motor at 9.5-1 CR

Got a graph of that at like 15psi????

Another thing to remember is you are using a Mustang dyno...so it loads the car more (forcing boost earlier) than most of the dyno jets you compare to.