[Bee Pee]

Originally Posted by pikcachu

that's why i like the K/N dry version...

Didn't know K&N did a dry drop-in filter for our cars - Part number ??

[Bee Pee]

Originally Posted by allthatisntnow

Would be interesting to see dyno results to see how much of a bottleneck (if any) the stock filter actually is. The thing with reduced resistance filters like K&N is that they let some pretty sizeable (comparatively speaking) particles into the engine that can significantly increase engine wear for very little gain. They tend to only be used in the racing scene due to the frequency of engine rebuilds and the fact that they'd run with no filtration at all if they could get away with it for max performance.

Plus as mentioned, oiled filters can interfere with the maf sensors if not done spot on. For street applications and engine longevity, increasing the surface area of a fine pore paper filter (like the stock) would provide increased flow still but also protect the engine and give some peace of mind.

There's a member on here [Chaddy74] from Oz who has done some intake comparisons. If you PM him and I'm sure he will share his findings / views with you.

I have used K&N/BMC/Jetex/ITG filters on an assortment of road cars for lots of years and many '000's of miles - no issues in terms of increased wear.

[PeterPure]

Honestly I have tried a lot of things on my car. I am now running stock intake system (now with upgraded inlet pipe to match stage2 turbo compressor housing). But thats just my personal experience. Enough said

[pikcachu]

Originally Posted by Bee Pee

Didn't know K&N did a dry drop-in filter for our cars - Part number ??

Sorry. I meant afe

http://afepower.com/shop/details_new...0L&&brandID=59

[Bee Pee]

I've been running with AFE pro dry S for ~ 12 months now - no problems

[FSociety]

Originally Posted by AlexGT

Hey Rob, well, I actually have a drop-in from K&N on my daily drive (E90 LCI 320d) but sometime ago I did some research and found out (from people reviews) that the BMC was better in therms of airflow and performance, so I gave it a try

thank you i searched and found a lot of M users preferring BMC too

Originally Posted by pikcachu

link for the BMC filter ?

http://www.bimmerzone.com/mm5/merchant.mvc?Screen=SRCH
They sell best price in US, I ordered mine for $70 shipped.
I think they are a dealer for europeanautosource.com because my tracking says its coming from Cali and bimmerzone is in PA either way is cool great price.
Btw since the M235 is not listed there like my car, I opened a chat window and asked about it, they gav eme a link to open and enter the detail to order the precise one for me.

Originally Posted by Bee Pee

Guys - need to be cautious with oiled filters [BMC/K&N etc] as when you clean/re-oail and overdo the oil, excess can get onto MAF and cause problems. That said, BMC was oem by BMW on e46 BME M3 CSL.

I'm running AFE dry drop-in filter - no complaints and works well with AFE ram air scoop.

+1

[pdawg]

Originally Posted by ROBNYC

Thoughts on this 42pilot opasha pdawg Trojanlaw

I threw an MAF code at S1=5; at 4 no codes at all.

[M2-BM35i]

Originally Posted by Delnari

If you are not hearing or feeling a different in acceleration your unit is not working. Again this is the best Stage 1 piggyback I have installed to date. The difference with the RC Ultimate is tuning the faster processor can give compared to similar MAP sensor only units. They claim boost is not as high as competitors. They can manipulate signal adjustments faster with the more powerful computer. I'm a believer!

Hi Delnari

Have you managed to do any new RC tests on higher settings as yet

Would be great to hear some feedbackr?

Thanks

[AlexGT]

Originally Posted by pdawg

I threw an MAF code at S1=5; at 4 no codes at all.

Thanks for this. Could you also share how do you feel the car with S1=4? Way better than the default setting? Your response will be appreciated! Cheers.

[pdawg]

Personally I like it. Not the smoothest setting but the most powerful.

[AlexGT]

Originally Posted by pdawg

Personally I like it. Not the smoothest setting but the most powerful.

Sorry again man, could you elaborate more? Not the smoothest as in: too aggressive? Noisy?

And about power, did you have the chance to compare default setting with #4 setting? 0-60?

Sorry but this information will be very useful for all of us. I'm not changing my default settings due to my fuel type in Guatemala and also because I would like to know how noticeable are the power gains on higher settings.

Thanks again

[moldcad]

Originally Posted by chaddy74

My only concern with the graph is that the scale of the RPM looks rather dodgy !! 4000 max power ??? look closely !! I was like Hmmmmm..... could just be a misprint

Don't want to piss on your parade, but all "dyno chars" haha from those made in China "German" tuner look the same. And since they are just copied one from another (keeping the axes scale, only arbitrarily "scaling" the "actual curves" - they all have just 4k rpm max on the X-axis.

I had the same with my RC Ultimate N20 piggy-box.

[moldcad]

Originally Posted by Delnari

Okay, I did an Internet search and Guatemala is using RON method for Octane Rating. So as comparison, 95 RON is about 90.25 AKI (USA scale). I would leave your setting at "B1" with this grade of fuel. If you can find 98 RON Octane then you might want to try the "E1 or E2" setting to avoid engine knock and/or CEL.

B1, E1, E2... Are you guys really sure what you're talking about? The second potentiometer is ONLY for diesel engines;, for petrol the only adjustment is done with the first (left) one. A through F followed by 1-x (Don't remember now what the x value is - anyway it's the max setting).

So B, E, F or 0 - yes, these are typical settings for petrol engines. But not E1 - this is for diesel, and I thought we're talking M235i here?

[FSociety]

Originally Posted by pdawg

I threw an MAF code at S1=5; at 4 no codes at all.

I haven't tested past 4 yet, when I was on 4 for a month I lowered it to F because of all the snow week after week and I didn't want to have all that power available. It was def the fastest and it was still smooth, actually felt like the 35i on steroids so thats a good feeling. Of course I prob go back down to C,D,E,F range for a balance of MPG improvement and still enough performance gain.

[pdawg]

Originally Posted by AlexGT

Sorry again man, could you elaborate more? Not the smoothest as in: too aggressive? Noisy?

And about power, did you have the chance to compare default setting with #4 setting? 0-60?

Sorry but this information will be very useful for all of us. I'm not changing my default settings due to my fuel type in Guatemala and also because I would like to know how noticeable are the power gains on higher settings.

Thanks again

I mean the power comes on hard, not linear like stock. I wouldn't say it's any noisier other than the fact that you can hear the turbos more than stock. Also my fast 0-60 as measured by Dash commander was 5.4 secs. No other mods other than the RC.

[FSociety]

Fully stock F25 X3 xDrive28i N20 engine only using Valero 93 octane (less than half tank), waiting to get the Corrected & Smoothing 5 chart.

First run : baseline with the dummy plug (so car is stock)
Second run: RC on stock setting
Third run on E or F (can't recall)
Fourth run on 1
Fifth run on 3

And I've yet to test setting 4,5,6,7 on the Dyno.. So far I've reached driving & 0-60 race against my N55 (X3 35i) stock friend on setting 2 I was side by side but he led 3-5ft after 60mph due to using 76Gas (not the best) and he was on BP. Then a few days later I was on Shell on setting 2, 3, 4 and it was different this time. Setting 2 he only led by 1 ft. Setting 3 i was side by side and almost ahead and setting 4 i was winning =D (video link in my signature i was on 3 and 4 against various 28i/35i stock) and 28i w/ Dinan.

[pikcachu]

Originally Posted by ROBNYC

Fully stock F25 X3 xDrive28i N20 engine only using Valero 93 octane (less than half tank), waiting to get the Corrected & Smoothing 5 chart.

First run : baseline with the dummy plug (so car is stock)
Second run: RC on stock setting
Third run on E or F (can't recall)
Fourth run on 1
Fifth run on 3

Nice... that drop at 2.6k rpm on the last run looks really odd though.... wonder what happened

[FSociety]

Originally Posted by pikcachu

Nice... that drop at 2.6k rpm on the last run looks really odd though.... wonder what happened

Yea the owner of the shop was in full discussion with me he was saying he really liked it at the first 2 runs above baseline, but the last 2 runs looked like it needs some help to maintain it. His senior guy that was inside the car said each setting felt more and more power but that the last 2 runs it felt like the car couldn't put all the power down. (Big Surge)
This is where we came into discussion of what supporting mods will help and smoothen everything. He even said it looks so much easier to live with than JB4 if I had a obd2 reader and using 93 octane. First time at that performance shop, the guy has been in the business for 20yrs and was a racer himself (Supra and other cars).

[pikcachu]

Originally Posted by ROBNYC

Yea the owner of the shop was in full discussion with me he was saying he really liked it at the first 2 runs above baseline, but the last 2 runs looked like it needs some help to maintain it. His senior guy that was inside the car said each setting felt more and more power but that the last 2 runs it felt like the car couldn't put all the power down.
This is where we came into discussion of what supporting mods will help and smoothen everything. He even said it looks so much easier to live with than JB4 if I had a obd2 reader and using 93 octane. First time at that performance shop, the guy has been in the business for 20yrs and was a racer himself (Supra and other cars).

What would an obd2 reader do to help?

[FSociety]

Originally Posted by pikcachu

What would an obd2 reader do to help?

Datalogging basically
Reading/Clearing codes if needed

[M2-BM35i]

Originally Posted by pikcachu

What would an obd2 reader do to help?

As far as I've heard the obd2 port readers ( Like the bt isaddle ) cannot work in conjunction with piggy back tunes ?

Ie the piggy back tunes interfere with the obd2 readings info so accuracy is out
-Can anyone who knows more about this confirm? Or perhaps explain further?

[pikcachu]

Originally Posted by M2-BM35i

As far as I've heard the obd2 port readers ( Like the bt isaddle ) cannot work in conjunction with piggy back tunes ?

Ie the piggy back tunes interfere with the obd2 readings info so accuracy is out
-Can anyone who knows more about this confirm? Or perhaps explain further?

Well the obd2 will read the values from the Ecu which are already tampered by the tune. So most the values you get are not the real values coming from the sensors but the values manipulated from the tune