[olaosunt]

Originally Posted by pikcachu

trap speed was 103.14... not sure what DA means

Density altitude
http://www.dragtimes.com/da-density-...calculator.php
My 60ft times on my stock runs sucked .2.0 to 2.1
I was using LC and trying figure it out.( don't use it anymore as just blows off the tires)
If your 60 ft was .1 better that could translate to 0.2 better ET.
As you know the trap speed is more reflective of horse power .

[pikcachu]

60ft was 1.934...

next time i will try COMFORT, DTC on, shifter in M2



Density Altitude: 1107 feet
Relative Density: 96.8 %

Stock and Mildly Modified Naturally Aspirated Engines
13.045 @ 104.336 MPH

Extensively Modified Naturally Aspirated Engines
13.137 @ 103.736 MPH

Extensively Modified Supercharged and Turbocharged Engines
13.159 @ 103.433 MPH

[olaosunt]

PB 12.39
Some cooler weather coming my way in next week so going to see what it does
May end up with down pipes and intake in my quest for an 11 second slip.

[olaosunt]

Originally Posted by pikcachu

60ft was 1.934...

next time i will try COMFORT, DTC on, shifter in M2



Density Altitude: 1107 feet
Relative Density: 96.8 %

Stock and Mildly Modified Naturally Aspirated Engines
13.045 @ 104.336 MPH

Extensively Modified Naturally Aspirated Engines
13.137 @ 103.736 MPH

Extensively Modified Supercharged and Turbocharged Engines
13.159 @ 103.433 MPH

DA of 1100 is pretty nice for running good times!
Would run 0.2 and 2-3 mph slowerat DA of 3000ft
My 12.3@112 would correct to 12.1@ 114-115 at that DA-not saying it would run that but would be close.

[m235boy]

Originally Posted by olaosunt

DA of 1100 is pretty nice for running good times!
Would run 0.2 and 2-3 mph slowerat DA of 3000ft
My 12.3@112 would correct to 12.1@ 114-115 at that DA-not saying it would run that but would be close.

That is pretty impressive, I wonder if the x-drive version will do any better? Extra traction from standstill VS carrying the extra ~200 lbs

[olaosunt]

Originally Posted by darocc

That is pretty impressive, I wonder if the x-drive version will do any better? Extra traction from standstill VS carrying the extra ~200 lbs

Yeah ,
I am also toying with the idea of the X drive.
I could then get rid of my "unmodable" 2014 Audi S4 that runs 13.4@ 104.lol
Car is fun though(especially in winter! lol)and still gives me my manual fix(About to put an auto in my mustang).
Went back to the track today all pumped as DA was about 500 ft with 55 degree temps...... Was disappointed!
Traction was worse being so cold but car picked up 1.5-2 mph on the big end.
I was hoping for at least a 12.2 but fastest(still PB) was 12.35.
I think the car had started slowing down cause it took about 5 passes for me to figure out how to get some traction and temps had picked up a bit so it may have a 114+ in it as it sits.
Still want to avoid a down pipe if I can,so may try some nitto's to see if I can get the 60ft down to a 1.7++ range which should get me an 11 second slip.
Smallest size they have is a 285/35 (18) which is 25.1(stock is 24.8) so I hope it will fit given I am lowered(will have to take out 20mm spacers ).

[FC4]

You're gaining 24 MPH on the big end. That's pretty strong.

I think a downpipe would provide significant gains at the level you are.

[daisy16905]

Nice work, putting down some good times!!!! What current tires are you running? LSD? You still just have JB4 (map 7 w/e30) and MPE correct.

Originally Posted by olaosunt

Yeah ,
I am also toying with the idea of the X drive.
I could then get rid of my "unmodable" 2014 Audi S4 that runs 13.4@ 104.lol
Car is fun though(especially in winter! lol)and still gives me my manual fix(About to put an auto in my mustang).
Went back to the track today all pumped as DA was about 500 ft with 55 degree temps...... Was disappointed!
Traction was worse being so cold but car picked up 1.5-2 mph on the big end.
I was hoping for at least a 12.2 but fastest(still PB) was 12.35.
I think the car had started slowing down cause it took about 5 passes for me to figure out how to get some traction and temps had picked up a bit so it may have a 114+ in it as it sits.
Still want to avoid a down pipe if I can,so may try some nitto's to see if I can get the 60ft down to a 1.7++ range which should get me an 11 second slip.
Smallest size they have is a 285/35 (18) which is 25.1(stock is 24.8) so I hope it will fit given I am lowered(will have to take out 20mm spacers ).

[olaosunt]

Thanks man.
Still running stock tires.stock diff.E30.stock down pipe/air filter.
Went back today and bam!
Lucky 13!


JUST kidding! Lol but a 1.4 60 ft would see me in the low 11's lol.
Did run a PB in the 5.0(49)
Should run deep into 10's or high 9's once I do the auto swap!

[Jeff@TopGearSolutions]

Good to see people posting times!

[G-Mann]

Originally Posted by alz0rz

So I am back on Map 1 until I get and install the flex fuel harness. I had been having some lean conditions and I was getting bumped down to the stock-like map (map4). With the EWG harness apparently it is recommended to also run the flex fuel harness to get a better HPFP reading and to allow for finer AFR control. While I'm at it I think I will premix my local 93 with ~2 gallons of E85 to give me a net 95 octane.

I am now looking to dyno this setup next week. I plan on taking 6-7 runs on a dyno. 1 or 2 stock (jb4 completely disabled), 1 or 2 at Map 1 and a few at Map 2 - not necessarily in that order to really capture mod gains before heatsoak can start to set in.

Just noticed your post. I have pretty much the same setup minus MPE without EWG and FF and just sent some logs off to Terry for analysis. It will be interesting to get the results. I never saw boost over 13.5 and AFR was between 13 and 14.9 with spikes on gear shifts.

Nice numbers by the way. I sure hope I can stay on map2.

JB4 Off w/ ER DP, BMS Intake, BMW MPE: 325whp/364wtq.
JB4 Map 1 w/ ER DP, BMS Intake, BMW MPE: 336whp/363wtq.
JB4 Map 2 ER DP, BMS Intake, BMW MPE: 351whp/390tq.

[alz0rz]

Originally Posted by G-Mann

Just noticed your post. I have pretty much the same setup minus MPE without EWG and FF and just sent some logs off to Terry for analysis. It will be interesting to get the results. I never saw boost over 13.5 and AFR was between 13 and 14.9 with spikes on gear shifts.

Nice numbers by the way. I sure hope I can stay on map2.

JB4 Off w/ ER DP, BMS Intake, BMW MPE: 325whp/364wtq.
JB4 Map 1 w/ ER DP, BMS Intake, BMW MPE: 336whp/363wtq.
JB4 Map 2 ER DP, BMS Intake, BMW MPE: 351whp/390tq.

Map 2 should peak at 14.5 psi, so that is where the EWG harness would come in to help you meet that.

I had the EWG harness from the get-go, however, as you saw I was leaning out considerably. So much so that the JB4 kicked out to Map 4 (stock map). Terry suggested the FF harness (and later recommended to everyone, I was the one that started the discussion that forced him to update the website) as that would allow precision fuel control as well giving the JB4 a true reading of the high pressure fuel pump for an overall better and accurate tune.

So, to summarize, you'd be fine with the JB4 SII alone on Map 2 (though you'll never reach the target boost). If going with the EWG you will definitely get peak boost on Map 2 but it is highly recommended to also do the flex fuel wiring at the same time.

Btw, I no longer have a JB4 on the car.

[G-Mann]

Originally Posted by alz0rz

Map 2 should peak at 14.5 psi, so that is where the EWG harness would come in to help you meet that.

I had the EWG harness from the get-go, however, as you saw I was leaning out considerably. So much so that the JB4 kicked out to Map 4 (stock map). Terry suggested the FF harness (and later recommended to everyone, I was the one that started the discussion that forced him to update the website) as that would allow precision fuel control as well giving the JB4 a true reading of the high pressure fuel pump for an overall better and accurate tune.

So, to summarize, you'd be fine with the JB4 SII alone on Map 2 (though you'll never reach the target boost). If going with the EWG you will definitely get peak boost on Map 2 but it is highly recommended to also do the flex fuel wiring at the same time.

Btw, I no longer have a JB4 on the car.

Gotcha, did not realize you had EWG. That falls into line with what Terry told me is that with the EWG I would get more boost and the FF would be needed to deliver the necessary fuel. Since I don't have EWG I never saw the 14.5 boost ergo no extra fuel needed. I basically picked up 1 peak boost over map 1.

I might have to dyno this thing after all, I certainly won't hit the numbers you saw but should be in the ball park. The important thing is Terry has reviewed my data log and said it looked great and I really like how the car pulls now.

I have noticed in other threads that you pulled it. Its like you have been to the mountain top. I'm like 2/3 up that mountain and I don't think I could ever go back. I am cool with where I have the car at, exhaust is the only thing left on my list.

[alz0rz]

I'd be very curious to see what you dyno as well. I also pulled the downpipe because 'olasunt' hit 400 whp with the stock cat still on... I was not a fan of the smell and the little range where there was raspiness.

[olaosunt]

Originally Posted by alz0rz

I'd be very curious to see what you dyno as well. I also pulled the downpipe because 'olasunt' hit 400 whp with the stock cat still on... I was not a fan of the smell and the little range where there was raspiness.

Hey alz0rz,
Went back to the Dyno at Fathouse and as I expected based on my trap speeds there were no gains with the down pipe -exact same numbers on a colder day.
Only difference I can tell is car does not heat soak after 1-2 passes( ran it again last weekend -another 12.0 at only 113 mph but it was hotter than when I ran 114 mph previously).
Would an open intake help?
Got yours to sell?
Lol
I assume not so just ordered one .
This will be my "last mod"

[FC4]

Quite surprised at the downpipe not showing any gains, although your trap indicated no change as well.

Any change in the curve at all?

[rosenbergendo]

What mode in the AT are you guys using to launch. Launch control I have heard causes to much wheelspin. Just brake torquing on Sport?

[olaosunt]

Below are the slips when I ran a 12.001 and then 11.94.
I had the down pipes then but it was the sticky tires/improved 60 ft that got me there and not the down pipes since it trapped no higher.I did add a can of Torco to E30 in the tank in desperation after the 12.001 run .Not sure if it had any effect as car and weather had cooled considerably as well.Trap was highest ever to date.


I went back to the same dyno and like I said before the numbers were identical.
I sent logs to Terry at BMS but have not heard back

I dropped in a K& N filter and ran it again last weekend.
Another 12.01@112, even lower trap but I am sure DA was worse.
I have ordered a BMS filter just to see if it improves but that will be my last mod and I may be getting bored with it if the only way to go faster us aftermarket turbos.lol

[olaosunt]

Originally Posted by rosenbergendo

What mode in the AT are you guys using to launch. Launch control I have heard causes to much wheelspin. Just brake torquing on Sport?

After the JB4 the tires would just spin the stock tires using LC so I would foot brake.
With the Mickey thompsons at even 30+ psi and little burn out they dead hook.
Car just squats and goes-No drama.lol
I leave it in sport mode.Never going to be able to shift quicker than the computer even if it revs above the power band,

[rosenbergendo]

V box test of my new M235 showed 0-60 4.5 without only mild brake torque at 2200 RPM in Sport Plus and S for my auto. Temp was 77 and 83% Humidity at sea level and flat.

[olaosunt]

Originally Posted by BimmerEngineer

Also, why dd you take time to cut out the other vehicle off your slip? Seems a bit silly and suspicious.

Not sure how to start respond to your ramblings.
May be I should start by asking you to post your time slips.
I posted slips of MY times, often several slips with the same number.I may have folded the slip for convenience or the slip was already cut in half(see below for reasons).
What is "silly and suspicious" about at that? why do you need to know what the other car ran?.... that is if there was another car.

Also not sure how much drag racing you have actually done but I often go to a strip where a lot of grudge cars run . You NEVER get to see their times on your slip(or displayed) as it is torn in half and you are giving only your half
For example:

[olaosunt]

Originally Posted by BimmerEngineer

Best acceleration times in most vehicles with launch control are without using launch control. Do some research. And no need to rev past 6500 rpm, power falls off above that and you'll just go slower, not faster. Today's autos are faster in a handful of cars, but not all. The M235 AWD is 1/4 of a sec faster than the regular rwd auto... At least to about 80, after that, the AWD weight slows it down. It should take about 450 crank hp to get the AWD 235 to 60 mph in 3.7 sec. I'm waiting on the 375hp 150 lb lighter M2 and it's 7 spd DCT.

Rather than quote times from magazines,while accusing some of being "paid"
why don't you go out yourself and do some real world testing.I stated that with the stock tires I was quicker not using launch control because it would just spin the tires,at least after the JB4.With drag radials it works better and I have been able to cut 1.75 60 ft times.
Now if you can foot brake and get better 60 ft times than that with a drag radial-please provide a time slip as evidence.
Not sure what kind of research you have done but I can tell you from my experience with high powered mustangs, todays autos will run consistently and quicker than manual cars with the same power.
In some cases often depending on driver by as much as a whole second.
Contrary to what you say 1-2/10ths of a second in drag racing is a BIG deal
Look on the drag times posted for the cars you say you drive.
There are no manuals in the top times.
I am quite aware of my cars power band per the dyno .However unless you can launch in manual mode/M2,which requires a kick down blocker(tried it at did not help the launch) and hit the shifts perfectly each time I doubt you are going to run any quicker than allowing the computer to over rev a bit but shift for you.

Regarding fluctuating times with DA.I have had real world experience with my car and I am not just not quoting "DA calcuator" .
The trap speeds with similar mods/same track were within 1 mph in 500 ft DA and 3000 ft DA.