F80 m3 vs c63 tune and exhaust
07-17-2014, 06:11 PM
#126
MBWorld Fanatic!
Yea... I'd definitely listen to Dads.
Numbers are good for perfect situations. An infinite number of things play into everything so while numbers can be drawn up even those numbers aren't always accurate based on the environment.
Ing definitely has a way of making a point though.
I'm looking forward to seeing what happens with time as more people get their hands on the m3/m4 and then those who get into the w205 c63. Unfortunately we have to wait well over a year for this all to come to fruition.
Numbers are good for perfect situations. An infinite number of things play into everything so while numbers can be drawn up even those numbers aren't always accurate based on the environment.
Ing definitely has a way of making a point though.
I'm looking forward to seeing what happens with time as more people get their hands on the m3/m4 and then those who get into the w205 c63. Unfortunately we have to wait well over a year for this all to come to fruition.
07-17-2014, 06:41 PM
#127
MBWorld Fanatic!
Listen man I don't know you or care about your opinions. Just because he uses a lot of his equations for arguments sake doesn't make them wrong.
07-17-2014, 06:44 PM
#128
Super Member
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 572
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
'14 C63 507, '11 C300, '96 Cobra, '91 Mr2
Actually, Yes!
OK, what exactly am I claiming that I need to prove with dyno and track testing? That FI engines take better to mods than N/A? Isn't that a given? Head over to the e55 forum, why is it the first mod everyone wants to do is headers, tune and a pulley (I've done headers/tune at least) 
What worked for the N54/N55 works for the S55 and any turbo'ed car out there. It's not a new formula or anything.
Better yet, after installing the mods on the C63 have YOU dyno tested and track test them? You claim a lot that very few on this forum actually have first real world knowledge of. Unless you put in time and $$ to really see what the C63 can do. I cant take your statements seriously.
What worked for the N54/N55 works for the S55 and any turbo'ed car out there. It's not a new formula or anything.
07-17-2014, 07:07 PM
#129
MBWorld Fanatic!
Yea... I'd definitely listen to Dads.
Numbers are good for perfect situations. An infinite number of things play into everything so while numbers can be drawn up even those numbers aren't always accurate based on the environment.
Ing definitely has a way of making a point though.
I'm looking forward to seeing what happens with time as more people get their hands on the m3/m4 and then those who get into the w205 c63. Unfortunately we have to wait well over a year for this all to come to fruition.
Numbers are good for perfect situations. An infinite number of things play into everything so while numbers can be drawn up even those numbers aren't always accurate based on the environment.
Ing definitely has a way of making a point though.
I'm looking forward to seeing what happens with time as more people get their hands on the m3/m4 and then those who get into the w205 c63. Unfortunately we have to wait well over a year for this all to come to fruition.
I also agree there are infinite numbers of things that can play a role in a number, having said that and if we agree on that then I can't see you disagreeing that if there are infinite, then there are infinite to the 10th power things that play into how a dyno reads, hell you can't get 2 mustang dyno's or dyno jet dyno's side by side to read the same damn thing.
Come on guys you know those who don't like Ingeneuir have at one time been put in your place by him.....
And to take this one step further. For every infinite thing out there playing a role in the in accuracy of numbers, there is another algorithm to take it into consideration.
Last edited by Autosport7; 07-17-2014 at 07:26 PM.
07-17-2014, 07:08 PM
#130
MBWorld Fanatic!
So show us some of your mods and what you have done to the C63.
With Tune + Headers and Secondary cat deletes the M156 are known to do 500+ WHP.
Most Non P31 C63's baseline at 370-380 (same as a stock M4). So were talking easily 120+ WHP and 60-80 TQ with these relatively straight forward bolt ons on the C63. Dollar for dollar lets say 5K in mods for the C63. For the same 5K I can almost guarantee you the M will gain roughly the same amount of power reliably.
Sure BMS may have spiked over 500 Wheel on a beta tune. I can almost guarantee you won't see that type of power out of a mass produced canned tune.
Thats what I am talking about, you cannot look at the M4 and the W204 C63 in the same light. They are 2 different animals. But when you compare mod for mod, the M156 has a heck of a lot of tuning options as well. You can't knock the fact that we are very lucky to be able to obtain the kind of power / tq out of a NA application as simply as we do with the M156.
I am eager to see what the M3/4 does in the aftermarket. Im sure many will get solid numbers out of the car with simply a tune and better cooling. Its a great car and I will always be an M Fan. But I like to be subjective when looking at mods. Remember the great emphasis on the F series M's are how much more torque they have down low in the power band. In reality they are only catching up to there competitors.
With Tune + Headers and Secondary cat deletes the M156 are known to do 500+ WHP.
Most Non P31 C63's baseline at 370-380 (same as a stock M4). So were talking easily 120+ WHP and 60-80 TQ with these relatively straight forward bolt ons on the C63. Dollar for dollar lets say 5K in mods for the C63. For the same 5K I can almost guarantee you the M will gain roughly the same amount of power reliably.
Sure BMS may have spiked over 500 Wheel on a beta tune. I can almost guarantee you won't see that type of power out of a mass produced canned tune.
Thats what I am talking about, you cannot look at the M4 and the W204 C63 in the same light. They are 2 different animals. But when you compare mod for mod, the M156 has a heck of a lot of tuning options as well. You can't knock the fact that we are very lucky to be able to obtain the kind of power / tq out of a NA application as simply as we do with the M156.
I am eager to see what the M3/4 does in the aftermarket. Im sure many will get solid numbers out of the car with simply a tune and better cooling. Its a great car and I will always be an M Fan. But I like to be subjective when looking at mods. Remember the great emphasis on the F series M's are how much more torque they have down low in the power band. In reality they are only catching up to there competitors.
Actually, Yes!
OK, what exactly am I claiming that I need to prove with dyno and track testing? That FI engines take better to mods than N/A? Isn't that a given? Head over to the e55 forum, why is it the first mod everyone wants to do is headers, tune and a pulley (I've done headers/tune at least)
What worked for the N54/N55 works for the S55 and any turbo'ed car out there. It's not a new formula or anything.
OK, what exactly am I claiming that I need to prove with dyno and track testing? That FI engines take better to mods than N/A? Isn't that a given? Head over to the e55 forum, why is it the first mod everyone wants to do is headers, tune and a pulley (I've done headers/tune at least)
What worked for the N54/N55 works for the S55 and any turbo'ed car out there. It's not a new formula or anything.
Last edited by Kriston; 07-17-2014 at 08:03 PM.
07-17-2014, 07:12 PM
#131
MBWorld Fanatic!
Actually, Yes!
OK, what exactly am I claiming that I need to prove with dyno and track testing? That FI engines take better to mods than N/A? Isn't that a given? Head over to the e55 forum, why is it the first mod everyone wants to do is headers, tune and a pulley (I've done headers/tune at least)
What worked for the N54/N55 works for the S55 and any turbo'ed car out there. It's not a new formula or anything.
OK, what exactly am I claiming that I need to prove with dyno and track testing? That FI engines take better to mods than N/A? Isn't that a given? Head over to the e55 forum, why is it the first mod everyone wants to do is headers, tune and a pulley (I've done headers/tune at least)
What worked for the N54/N55 works for the S55 and any turbo'ed car out there. It's not a new formula or anything.
07-17-2014, 07:34 PM
#132
Former Vendor of MBWorld
I'm stoked to see what Burger gets out of this car with some catless or highflow downpipes with the tune and full E85. I don't think 600 whp is going to be hard to achieve with basic bolt on mods. Once new or modified turbos are available these things are going to be rockets.
07-17-2014, 07:42 PM
#133
Super Member
Thread Starter
Leg humpers? You're the only tool sticking up for his dumb *** equations. No one here cares about you or him on this forum. Stop blowing him so hard
07-17-2014, 07:43 PM
#134
MBWorld Fanatic!
I'm stoked to see what Burger gets out of this car with some catless or highflow downpipes with the tune and full E85. I don't think 600 whp is going to be hard to achieve with basic bolt on mods. Once new or modified turbos are available these things are going to be rockets.
07-17-2014, 07:47 PM
#135
MBWorld Fanatic!
I'm not sticking up for "his" equations, they are the equations that make the world go round as well as give you the dyno results you all swear by.
Care about me...? Why would I care about that, your opinions of me mean nothing to me. Lol
07-17-2014, 07:49 PM
#136
Super Member
Thread Starter
So dont reply when my posts aren't to you, it was for maroon63 not you. Simple!
07-17-2014, 08:14 PM
#137
MBWorld Fanatic!
07-17-2014, 08:27 PM
#138
Super Member
Thread Starter
Listen, I'm not trying to argue. I was merely stating that numbers are numbers, they don't lie unless the mathematician makes an error. I wasn't trying to make you angry. I apologize if I offended you. All here with our own thoughts and opinions and experiences. Sometimes we hit a nerve, it is a public forum and is no dif than the next one, feelings get involved. Again I apologize. All friendly here.
07-17-2014, 09:06 PM
#139
Super Member
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 572
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
'14 C63 507, '11 C300, '96 Cobra, '91 Mr2
What kind of conversation is this? 
You asked for a list of mods not related to NA cars, and I gave you a list of mods showing how FI cars benefit a lot easier from a greater variety of mods (all related to boost). Now you are asking for a list of mods for the c63. 
And that's pretty much it for easy mods. Whereas an FI car you can continue to do more and as long as there is enough fuel, heat control (IAT/EGT) -- that upside is greater.
Guarantee is a pretty strong word. Show me this $5k shopping list for the M3/M4 that will only make the same amount of power increase as your headers/tune M156?
You asked for a list of mods not related to NA cars, and I gave you a list of mods showing how FI cars benefit a lot easier from a greater variety of mods (all related to boost). Now you are asking for a list of mods for the c63. Most Non P31 C63's baseline at 370-380 (same as a stock M4). So were talking easily 120+ WHP and 60-80 TQ with these relatively straight forward bolt ons on the C63. Dollar for dollar lets say 5K in mods for the C63. For the same 5K I can almost guarantee you the M will gain roughly the same amount of power reliably.
07-18-2014, 03:36 AM
#141
Senior Member
So show us some of your mods and what you have done to the C63.
With Tune + Headers and Secondary cat deletes the M156 are known to do 500+ WHP.
Most Non P31 C63's baseline at 370-380 (same as a stock M4). So were talking easily 120+ WHP and 60-80 TQ with these relatively straight forward bolt ons on the C63. Dollar for dollar lets say 5K in mods for the C63. For the same 5K I can almost guarantee you the M will gain roughly the same amount of power reliably.
Sure BMS may have spiked over 500 Wheel on a beta tune. I can almost guarantee you won't see that type of power out of a mass produced canned tune.
Thats what I am talking about, you cannot look at the M4 and the W204 C63 in the same light. They are 2 different animals. But when you compare mod for mod, the M156 has a heck of a lot of tuning options as well. You can't knock the fact that we are very lucky to be able to obtain the kind of power / tq out of a NA application as simply as we do with the M156.
I am eager to see what the M3/4 does in the aftermarket. Im sure many will get solid numbers out of the car with simply a tune and better cooling. Its a great car and I will always be an M Fan. But I like to be subjective when looking at mods. Remember the great emphasis on the F series M's are how much more torque they have down low in the power band. In reality they are only catching up to there competitors.
With Tune + Headers and Secondary cat deletes the M156 are known to do 500+ WHP.
Most Non P31 C63's baseline at 370-380 (same as a stock M4). So were talking easily 120+ WHP and 60-80 TQ with these relatively straight forward bolt ons on the C63. Dollar for dollar lets say 5K in mods for the C63. For the same 5K I can almost guarantee you the M will gain roughly the same amount of power reliably.
Sure BMS may have spiked over 500 Wheel on a beta tune. I can almost guarantee you won't see that type of power out of a mass produced canned tune.
Thats what I am talking about, you cannot look at the M4 and the W204 C63 in the same light. They are 2 different animals. But when you compare mod for mod, the M156 has a heck of a lot of tuning options as well. You can't knock the fact that we are very lucky to be able to obtain the kind of power / tq out of a NA application as simply as we do with the M156.
I am eager to see what the M3/4 does in the aftermarket. Im sure many will get solid numbers out of the car with simply a tune and better cooling. Its a great car and I will always be an M Fan. But I like to be subjective when looking at mods. Remember the great emphasis on the F series M's are how much more torque they have down low in the power band. In reality they are only catching up to there competitors.
But what happens after those mods? Let's say wmi...Never tested it but it has always shown better gains on forced induction cars as opposed to N/A.
Once you get passed tune, headers and exhaust, the power gains start to slow down on the C63 with each mod.
07-21-2014, 11:24 AM
#143
I dont get why ING was suspended? The mods were baiting him, and then suspend him? Lol what? If it wasn't for the mods the new accounts popping up stirring trouble would of never happened.
He might be a narcissistic a-hole, but he does know his stuff, and he brings more facts and proven numbers and quotes to this forum then half that are on here to learn about plastidipping and vinyl wrapping. Nonsense. Very disappointed in whats become of this forum.
On topic, The new M3/M4 is a lovely car, test drove one, never liked the old generation m3 but the new one was pretty fun. Can't wait to see what AMG puts up to fight the new competition.
He might be a narcissistic a-hole, but he does know his stuff, and he brings more facts and proven numbers and quotes to this forum then half that are on here to learn about plastidipping and vinyl wrapping. Nonsense. Very disappointed in whats become of this forum.
On topic, The new M3/M4 is a lovely car, test drove one, never liked the old generation m3 but the new one was pretty fun. Can't wait to see what AMG puts up to fight the new competition.
I agree with the a-hole portion but narcicist?
I'm a slob and have 0 concern re: personal appearance!
all is good
07-21-2014, 11:33 AM
#144
not 'mad' per se, but a bit frustrated 
until someone shows me a steady state dyno test, as was used to actually RATE the M3/4, I'm going with BMW's numbers
a REAL dyno test, pick 10 or 12 points 500 RPM apart
2000, 2500, 3000...
run the car up to 2000 increase the dyno load until 100% throttle is required to hold rpm
hold/stabilize and then record for 5 seconds
do the same for each point
that is the only valid way to rate power
a car with more power (according to one test 500 HP / 500 lb ft), 400 lbs lighter, better tranny, wider tire, etc. running the same time does not make sense
as far as getting 600 WHP out of this package, not for long BANG!!!
that is ~ 480 lb ft of torque at HP peak! at the wheels!
out of a 3 liter
I guess anything can be done with enough boost and octane rating
in the 80's BMW got 1200 HP out of 1.5 liter stock block
1600 HP in quali trim, they drew straws, short one had to run the dyno since the engine fragg'ed frequently
the fuel was developed during WW2 for high altitude use in fighter planes, extremely toxic
until someone shows me a steady state dyno test, as was used to actually RATE the M3/4, I'm going with BMW's numbers
a REAL dyno test, pick 10 or 12 points 500 RPM apart
2000, 2500, 3000...
run the car up to 2000 increase the dyno load until 100% throttle is required to hold rpm
hold/stabilize and then record for 5 seconds
do the same for each point
that is the only valid way to rate power
a car with more power (according to one test 500 HP / 500 lb ft), 400 lbs lighter, better tranny, wider tire, etc. running the same time does not make sense
as far as getting 600 WHP out of this package, not for long BANG!!!
that is ~ 480 lb ft of torque at HP peak! at the wheels!
out of a 3 liter
I guess anything can be done with enough boost and octane rating
in the 80's BMW got 1200 HP out of 1.5 liter stock block
1600 HP in quali trim, they drew straws, short one had to run the dyno since the engine fragg'ed frequently
the fuel was developed during WW2 for high altitude use in fighter planes, extremely toxic
i think he's just mad ya'll arent listening.
400lb heavier car with less hp runs the same if not faster time. It doesnt add up. All dyno's are different i dont care if some dyno showed a stock m3/4 making 420whp or 800whp. It's all b.s. , dyno's can intentionally be calibrated to read however the operator wants them to. I've personally seen a friend dyno his 90 awd turbo eclipse. He went to a honda dyno day at a honda shop known for putting out some absurd dyno numbers. He made 530whp... highest of the day, he then proceeded to argue and tell them they are dumbasses and fudging the numbers. His bsfc (brake specific fuel consumption) meant his car didnt even have enough fuel to make near that much power at the crank much less the wheels. Later that week without any changes went to a mustang awd dyno and made 405whp.
380whp sounds reasonable, but considering the 425 crank rating 45whp loss is about 12% loss through the drivetrain, 15% is is about the normal for a manual transmission which a DCT is. Our cars even the MCT is still a regular automatic transmission with a pump that causes alot more power loss. Considering the MCT does 100% lock vs torque converter the converter will lose even more but the mct is no where near a dct. So saying its very under-rated is quite an exaggeration. I have nothing against the m's This new one sounds badass and surely a tuners dream like our new 4.0L tt will be but lets be realistic about things.
400lb heavier car with less hp runs the same if not faster time. It doesnt add up. All dyno's are different i dont care if some dyno showed a stock m3/4 making 420whp or 800whp. It's all b.s. , dyno's can intentionally be calibrated to read however the operator wants them to. I've personally seen a friend dyno his 90 awd turbo eclipse. He went to a honda dyno day at a honda shop known for putting out some absurd dyno numbers. He made 530whp... highest of the day, he then proceeded to argue and tell them they are dumbasses and fudging the numbers. His bsfc (brake specific fuel consumption) meant his car didnt even have enough fuel to make near that much power at the crank much less the wheels. Later that week without any changes went to a mustang awd dyno and made 405whp.
380whp sounds reasonable, but considering the 425 crank rating 45whp loss is about 12% loss through the drivetrain, 15% is is about the normal for a manual transmission which a DCT is. Our cars even the MCT is still a regular automatic transmission with a pump that causes alot more power loss. Considering the MCT does 100% lock vs torque converter the converter will lose even more but the mct is no where near a dct. So saying its very under-rated is quite an exaggeration. I have nothing against the m's This new one sounds badass and surely a tuners dream like our new 4.0L tt will be but lets be realistic about things.
Last edited by Ingenieur; 07-21-2014 at 01:11 PM.
07-21-2014, 11:42 AM
#145
This forum is actually more about learning about the car and learning how to modify it more than anything. You're talking about facts from a guy who still has a stock 63. How much can he possibly know about this car when all he does is turn the key and hit the gas. If it were hagi, dodger or dads talking about the c63, then you listen, but not from someone who is clearly in love with numbers and algorithm.
whether you believe it or not, a car (or any machine, system, etc.) is a complex set of equations
how do you think people can quantify/document this stuff?
try building something without drawings
or a bill of material
or calculations to design/size everything
a machines performance can be accurately predicted, you do not tool up and build it (investing billions) on a whim or 'feeling'
hey let's build an airplane and see if it flies!!! they KNOW it will fly
in fact this is done BEFORE they build it
everything is done on paper first
I've never flown: but I know about lift
never jumped off a building: but can tell you how long it would take and how fast
why do people think there is some sort of 'magic' or 'mystery' involved?
do you think M, AMG, quattro GmbH, et all design these cars by 'feel'?
or do they use engineers, computers, etc.
this mode of thinking does not bode well for US in the world system
while other countries are emphasizing math, physics, etc., we concentrate on subjective 'feeling' rather than objective 'fact'
we need more engineers/teachers/skilled craftsmen and less lawyers/politicians/preachers
perhaps if people 'ran the numbers' BEFORE modding the money would be better spent (or not spent)
but that would not really help the industry now would it?
this is not Chuck Yeager pushing the envelope type stuff
Last edited by Ingenieur; 07-21-2014 at 11:54 AM.
engineering poetry.
