Confirmed: Next-Gen M3 to have TTI6, M5 to get TTV8.
04-21-2009, 09:27 AM
#51
Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
335i
Props for you keeping up with the C6, I know those are really fast. I also know that Mario said his car was running very poorly lately. Was it running terribly when you walked him also? I honestly can't tell you. But I would hope that you would beat him. Any race against the 335i should only be fair from a dig, and with you on regular street tires. You SHOULD walk a boosted 335i any day.
It has been disclosed first thing in all the threads regarding my runs that my race weight was about 3500lbs. I didn't go into all the details of every little detail of how much each wheel weighs, how much the seats weigh, etc, etc. Obviously a 335i with a driver generally weighs around 3700 lbs or so. The only reason I had to do any lightening was to be on even turf with the other Vishnu BMWs which set the records with their weight removal. (And who did NOT disclose it initially). My race weight also makes it a little closer to a 135i for comparison sakes. I can, and have turned very impressive times, and run in the 11's without ANY weight removall too. So again, if you look at most of my claims, I have stated, Tune/tires/gas/3500lbs. Because essentially, that is all! Everything could be changed to totally stock with virtually no tools besides a tire wrench,and screw/nut driver. No wrenches, ratchets would even be needed. Besides the wheels/tires. Total cost of modifications would be about $579, and could be done in less than 1 hour. That is what is impressive about the 335i, wouldnt you say?
Given the facts that your engine is about twice the displacement and also a twin turbo, you might argue your car is heavier. Is it TWICE as heavy also? Not even close. Your car does not weight 7000 lbs, LOL. So on paper you should have a clear advantage. Why then would you only challenge me on a roll-on? That is crazy. STIs, Evos, Etc, should have the advantage of me from the dig. Yet I have no problem racing with them from a dig, (or a roll on). You see, when you have the HP, and displacement/weight advantage, you should be the one with the race handicap, not me!
And just as we welcome discussion in 335i forums with friendly competitors, this is always relevant. If it isn't why would people post about beating certain other cars in their forums. Because people are interested. I definitely want to hear about 335i vs 370Z, Aston Martin, Evos, STIs/ Cobras/ Camaros/SRT8s, etc, etc. They ARE people I will encounter on the road, and thus will be of interest to me. Now it would be frivilous if I had a alcohol, blown dragster and I was gloating about my times being quicker than yours, but that is not the case here. I hope you can relate to that logic.
I agree your car is very fast. And I am actually very afraid of racing you in the 1/4 mile. But as your car is set up now, I would still be curious. Racing from a roll is really a lame contest given the factors. Again, you are the one with the displacement/weight advantage.
Again, I have been known to back up all my claims with testing and facts. And again, I think most people looking at all the facts would probably have to agree that your accusations are baseless.
It has been disclosed first thing in all the threads regarding my runs that my race weight was about 3500lbs. I didn't go into all the details of every little detail of how much each wheel weighs, how much the seats weigh, etc, etc. Obviously a 335i with a driver generally weighs around 3700 lbs or so. The only reason I had to do any lightening was to be on even turf with the other Vishnu BMWs which set the records with their weight removal. (And who did NOT disclose it initially). My race weight also makes it a little closer to a 135i for comparison sakes. I can, and have turned very impressive times, and run in the 11's without ANY weight removall too. So again, if you look at most of my claims, I have stated, Tune/tires/gas/3500lbs. Because essentially, that is all! Everything could be changed to totally stock with virtually no tools besides a tire wrench,and screw/nut driver. No wrenches, ratchets would even be needed. Besides the wheels/tires. Total cost of modifications would be about $579, and could be done in less than 1 hour. That is what is impressive about the 335i, wouldnt you say?
Given the facts that your engine is about twice the displacement and also a twin turbo, you might argue your car is heavier. Is it TWICE as heavy also? Not even close. Your car does not weight 7000 lbs, LOL. So on paper you should have a clear advantage. Why then would you only challenge me on a roll-on? That is crazy. STIs, Evos, Etc, should have the advantage of me from the dig. Yet I have no problem racing with them from a dig, (or a roll on). You see, when you have the HP, and displacement/weight advantage, you should be the one with the race handicap, not me!
And just as we welcome discussion in 335i forums with friendly competitors, this is always relevant. If it isn't why would people post about beating certain other cars in their forums. Because people are interested. I definitely want to hear about 335i vs 370Z, Aston Martin, Evos, STIs/ Cobras/ Camaros/SRT8s, etc, etc. They ARE people I will encounter on the road, and thus will be of interest to me. Now it would be frivilous if I had a alcohol, blown dragster and I was gloating about my times being quicker than yours, but that is not the case here. I hope you can relate to that logic.
I agree your car is very fast. And I am actually very afraid of racing you in the 1/4 mile. But as your car is set up now, I would still be curious. Racing from a roll is really a lame contest given the factors. Again, you are the one with the displacement/weight advantage.
Again, I have been known to back up all my claims with testing and facts. And again, I think most people looking at all the facts would probably have to agree that your accusations are baseless.
Last edited by hotrod182; 04-21-2009 at 09:31 AM.
04-21-2009, 05:15 PM
#52
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern, CA.
Posts: 9,155
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes
on
17 Posts
V12-Biturbo
Props for you keeping up with the C6, I know those are really fast. I also know that Mario said his car was running very poorly lately. Was it running terribly when you walked him also? I honestly can't tell you. But I would hope that you would beat him. Any race against the 335i should only be fair from a dig, and with you on regular street tires. You SHOULD walk a boosted 335i any day.
It has been disclosed first thing in all the threads regarding my runs that my race weight was about 3500lbs. I didn't go into all the details of every little detail of how much each wheel weighs, how much the seats weigh, etc, etc. Obviously a 335i with a driver generally weighs around 3700 lbs or so. The only reason I had to do any lightening was to be on even turf with the other Vishnu BMWs which set the records with their weight removal. (And who did NOT disclose it initially). My race weight also makes it a little closer to a 135i for comparison sakes. I can, and have turned very impressive times, and run in the 11's without ANY weight removall too. So again, if you look at most of my claims, I have stated, Tune/tires/gas/3500lbs. Because essentially, that is all! Everything could be changed to totally stock with virtually no tools besides a tire wrench,and screw/nut driver. No wrenches, ratchets would even be needed. Besides the wheels/tires. Total cost of modifications would be about $579, and could be done in less than 1 hour. That is what is impressive about the 335i, wouldnt you say?
Given the facts that your engine is about twice the displacement and also a twin turbo, you might argue your car is heavier. Is it TWICE as heavy also? Not even close. Your car does not weight 7000 lbs, LOL. So on paper you should have a clear advantage. Why then would you only challenge me on a roll-on? That is crazy. STIs, Evos, Etc, should have the advantage of me from the dig. Yet I have no problem racing with them from a dig, (or a roll on). You see, when you have the HP, and displacement/weight advantage, you should be the one with the race handicap, not me!
And just as we welcome discussion in 335i forums with friendly competitors, this is always relevant. If it isn't why would people post about beating certain other cars in their forums. Because people are interested. I definitely want to hear about 335i vs 370Z, Aston Martin, Evos, STIs/ Cobras/ Camaros/SRT8s, etc, etc. They ARE people I will encounter on the road, and thus will be of interest to me. Now it would be frivilous if I had a alcohol, blown dragster and I was gloating about my times being quicker than yours, but that is not the case here. I hope you can relate to that logic.
I agree your car is very fast. And I am actually very afraid of racing you in the 1/4 mile. But as your car is set up now, I would still be curious. Racing from a roll is really a lame contest given the factors. Again, you are the one with the displacement/weight advantage.
Again, I have been known to back up all my claims with testing and facts. And again, I think most people looking at all the facts would probably have to agree that your accusations are baseless.
It has been disclosed first thing in all the threads regarding my runs that my race weight was about 3500lbs. I didn't go into all the details of every little detail of how much each wheel weighs, how much the seats weigh, etc, etc. Obviously a 335i with a driver generally weighs around 3700 lbs or so. The only reason I had to do any lightening was to be on even turf with the other Vishnu BMWs which set the records with their weight removal. (And who did NOT disclose it initially). My race weight also makes it a little closer to a 135i for comparison sakes. I can, and have turned very impressive times, and run in the 11's without ANY weight removall too. So again, if you look at most of my claims, I have stated, Tune/tires/gas/3500lbs. Because essentially, that is all! Everything could be changed to totally stock with virtually no tools besides a tire wrench,and screw/nut driver. No wrenches, ratchets would even be needed. Besides the wheels/tires. Total cost of modifications would be about $579, and could be done in less than 1 hour. That is what is impressive about the 335i, wouldnt you say?
Given the facts that your engine is about twice the displacement and also a twin turbo, you might argue your car is heavier. Is it TWICE as heavy also? Not even close. Your car does not weight 7000 lbs, LOL. So on paper you should have a clear advantage. Why then would you only challenge me on a roll-on? That is crazy. STIs, Evos, Etc, should have the advantage of me from the dig. Yet I have no problem racing with them from a dig, (or a roll on). You see, when you have the HP, and displacement/weight advantage, you should be the one with the race handicap, not me!
And just as we welcome discussion in 335i forums with friendly competitors, this is always relevant. If it isn't why would people post about beating certain other cars in their forums. Because people are interested. I definitely want to hear about 335i vs 370Z, Aston Martin, Evos, STIs/ Cobras/ Camaros/SRT8s, etc, etc. They ARE people I will encounter on the road, and thus will be of interest to me. Now it would be frivilous if I had a alcohol, blown dragster and I was gloating about my times being quicker than yours, but that is not the case here. I hope you can relate to that logic.
I agree your car is very fast. And I am actually very afraid of racing you in the 1/4 mile. But as your car is set up now, I would still be curious. Racing from a roll is really a lame contest given the factors. Again, you are the one with the displacement/weight advantage.
Again, I have been known to back up all my claims with testing and facts. And again, I think most people looking at all the facts would probably have to agree that your accusations are baseless.
I acknowledge the benefit of hearing what other cars run, Mario & I haven't run in about 9+ months, but he was running J3 Race Map w/additional mods Intercooler/CAI scoops filters/etc..He ran neck to neck w/Sg2 E55 Kompressor that day..
It's def a bit of deception claiming ONLY Tune/Gas/Tires, Most of us including me don't know the exact curb weight of stock 335i.
I Emailed Terry Burger, he filled in the blanks a bit better: Using a special tune I made for him. He has 105 octane race fuel tune, racing rims and tires (frnt/rear), and removed his seats for those runs. (Excluding Drivers seat)From Terry Burger...
So obviously running a Special Map in Beta testing (Not yet available to rest of public) & removing nearly entire interior, plus running very lightweight racing wheels frnt/rear, is quite a bit different than Just Tune/Gas/Tires
If those weight savings alone would've been noted I'd never said a word (I know how beneficial they can be URnext's SL55 only removed pass seat weighed 89lbs & ran 2+mph faster than any SL to that date @ 126+mph etc)
As I said before, prop's on the latest 1/4 mile 120+ trap's
04-21-2009, 06:00 PM
#53
Administrator
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: THE Orange County, California
Posts: 11,921
Received 796 Likes
on
495 Posts
2020 Audi R8 V10, 2016 AMG GTS, 2018 E63S Edition 1, 2018 Porsche GTS Cab, 2012 C63 BS
And this differs from any high end brand in which way???
Louis
Gucci
Armani
Versace
Dolce
They all have outlet stores and they are all worn by douches TOO (I say too because there are good people out there). The same goes for cars, alot of douches drive BMW's but that doesnt mean every owner is a user of Massengil or Summers Eve does it.
04-21-2009, 06:01 PM
#54
Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
335i
No prob. When the run was posted, it actually was disclosed "gutted interior". It was really the passenger seat which is 65lbs, and the rear seat cushions/backs. Doorpanels, side panels, carpeting, etc, are still intact. So really, still a quiet, and comfortable car to be in, just a really easy weight reductiion. So really, nothing that couldn't be done quickly. And again, when you are vying to the top time, I have to be on even ground with the other top 3 quickest BMWs. The best you can really hope for is about 1mph per 100lbs if that. And again, I have run in the 11's at 117+ mph with the OLD tune many months ago with absolutely no weight savings. So the car would still be impressively fast/quick with no weight reduction. With the advent of new turbos, flashes, etc, there will be a whole new chapter. I am just glad to have done fairly well with the simplist, quickest, and least expensive modifications.
And I have feared the SL600 ever since that Car and Driver article which had the thing running faster than the Dodge Viper, Corvette, etc.
And I have feared the SL600 ever since that Car and Driver article which had the thing running faster than the Dodge Viper, Corvette, etc.
Last edited by hotrod182; 04-21-2009 at 06:03 PM.
04-21-2009, 07:01 PM
#55
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 7,213
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
into things
You have ZERO reason to be afraid of my SL w/19" heavy aftermarket wheels/tires down the 1/4, roll-on be a different story...
I acknowledge the benefit of hearing what other cars run, Mario & I haven't run in about 9+ months, but he was running J3 Race Map w/additional mods Intercooler/CAI scoops filters/etc..He ran neck to neck w/Sg2 E55 Kompressor that day..
It's def a bit of deception claiming ONLY Tune/Gas/Tires, Most of us including me don't know the exact curb weight of stock 335i.
I Emailed Terry Burger, he filled in the blanks a bit better: Using a special tune I made for him. He has 105 octane race fuel tune, racing rims and tires (frnt/rear), and removed his seats for those runs. (Excluding Drivers seat)From Terry Burger...
So obviously running a Special Map in Beta testing (Not yet available to rest of public) & removing nearly entire interior, plus running very lightweight racing wheels frnt/rear, is quite a bit different than Just Tune/Gas/Tires
If those weight savings alone would've been noted I'd never said a word (I know how beneficial they can be URnext's SL55 only removed pass seat weighed 89lbs & ran 2+mph faster than any SL to that date @ 126+mph etc)
As I said before, prop's on the latest 1/4 mile 120+ trap's
I acknowledge the benefit of hearing what other cars run, Mario & I haven't run in about 9+ months, but he was running J3 Race Map w/additional mods Intercooler/CAI scoops filters/etc..He ran neck to neck w/Sg2 E55 Kompressor that day..
It's def a bit of deception claiming ONLY Tune/Gas/Tires, Most of us including me don't know the exact curb weight of stock 335i.
I Emailed Terry Burger, he filled in the blanks a bit better: Using a special tune I made for him. He has 105 octane race fuel tune, racing rims and tires (frnt/rear), and removed his seats for those runs. (Excluding Drivers seat)From Terry Burger...
So obviously running a Special Map in Beta testing (Not yet available to rest of public) & removing nearly entire interior, plus running very lightweight racing wheels frnt/rear, is quite a bit different than Just Tune/Gas/Tires
If those weight savings alone would've been noted I'd never said a word (I know how beneficial they can be URnext's SL55 only removed pass seat weighed 89lbs & ran 2+mph faster than any SL to that date @ 126+mph etc)
As I said before, prop's on the latest 1/4 mile 120+ trap's
Last time I took my car to the track with weaker map tune JB3 map 8 (15 psi as opposed to 18 psi in hotrod's tune)/100 octane gas (instead of 104 octane)/no weight reduction/Nitto drag radials (not as good as Hoosier), I was able to get 116+ mph trap speeds. You can check my time and drag slips on dragtimes (http://www.dragtimes.com/BMW-335i-Timeslip-18147.html). Heck I live in hot and humid FL so I'm still impressed to pull times like that. I will head to the track again with better launching skills and tires, as I was spinning very badly on every launch including the one I posted above, to get better times.
Regarding times from other cars with PROcede, I would disregard them. I have never seen a PROceded car with very minimal modifications such as tires, Dual Cone Intake, and high octane gas get above 111 mph or below 12.7 sec on a consistent basis. JB3 tuned cars tend to get much better times especially with the newer 1.3 maps. Terry has really cracked the tuning on the N54 engines.
04-21-2009, 07:13 PM
#56
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern, CA.
Posts: 9,155
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes
on
17 Posts
V12-Biturbo
No prob. When the run was posted, it actually was disclosed "gutted interior". It was really the passenger seat which is 65lbs, and the rear seat cushions/backs. Doorpanels, side panels, carpeting, etc, are still intact. So really, still a quiet, and comfortable car to be in, just a really easy weight reductiion. So really, nothing that couldn't be done quickly. And again, when you are vying to the top time, I have to be on even ground with the other top 3 quickest BMWs. The best you can really hope for is about 1mph per 100lbs if that. And again, I have run in the 11's at 117+ mph with the OLD tune many months ago with absolutely no weight savings. So the car would still be impressively fast/quick with no weight reduction. With the advent of new turbos, flashes, etc, there will be a whole new chapter. I am just glad to have done fairly well with the simplist, quickest, and least expensive modifications.
And I have feared the SL600 ever since that Car and Driver article which had the thing running faster than the Dodge Viper, Corvette, etc.
And I have feared the SL600 ever since that Car and Driver article which had the thing running faster than the Dodge Viper, Corvette, etc.
You should be very proud of your accomplishments, sorry I came out swinging
You just made it sound like ANY 335i w/J3/gas/drag tires is capable of running those times...A race map set for 105 octane alone does wonders vs reg Ca 91 tree hugger special or even mix to hit 93+ Oct...I know the rule of thumb is about 1mph or 10HP every 100lbs but on the track it equates to much more, as I said member here w/SL55 removed pass seat @ 89lbs & gained 2+mph, not to mention the excellent gains to be had from lightweight wheels Unsprung weight reduction is even better...As you already know
Sorry about the drama, just needed the whole story. For giggles strap on the upgraded Intercooler, could put you mid 11's
04-21-2009, 07:18 PM
#57
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern, CA.
Posts: 9,155
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes
on
17 Posts
V12-Biturbo
Since I have recently moved into the 335i world, I've been following hotrod182's results for quite a while now. His 120mph trap with tune/104 octane/weight reduction/Hoosier tires is quite believable after taking my own car to the track with minimal modifications.
Last time I took my car to the track with weaker map tune JB3 map 8 (15 psi as opposed to 18 psi in hotrod's tune)/100 octane gas (instead of 104 octane)/no weight reduction/Nitto drag radials (not as good as Hoosier), I was able to get 116+ mph trap speeds. You can check my time and drag slips on dragtimes (http://www.dragtimes.com/BMW-335i-Timeslip-18147.html). Heck I live in hot and humid FL so I'm still impressed to pull times like that. I will head to the track again with better launching skills and tires, as I was spinning very badly on every launch including the one I posted above, to get better times.
Regarding times from other cars with PROcede, I would disregard them. I have never seen a PROceded car with very minimal modifications such as tires, Dual Cone Intake, and high octane gas get above 111 mph or below 12.7 sec on a consistent basis. JB3 tuned cars tend to get much better times especially with the newer 1.3 maps. Terry has really cracked the tuning on the N54 engines.
Last time I took my car to the track with weaker map tune JB3 map 8 (15 psi as opposed to 18 psi in hotrod's tune)/100 octane gas (instead of 104 octane)/no weight reduction/Nitto drag radials (not as good as Hoosier), I was able to get 116+ mph trap speeds. You can check my time and drag slips on dragtimes (http://www.dragtimes.com/BMW-335i-Timeslip-18147.html). Heck I live in hot and humid FL so I'm still impressed to pull times like that. I will head to the track again with better launching skills and tires, as I was spinning very badly on every launch including the one I posted above, to get better times.
Regarding times from other cars with PROcede, I would disregard them. I have never seen a PROceded car with very minimal modifications such as tires, Dual Cone Intake, and high octane gas get above 111 mph or below 12.7 sec on a consistent basis. JB3 tuned cars tend to get much better times especially with the newer 1.3 maps. Terry has really cracked the tuning on the N54 engines.
04-21-2009, 09:03 PM
#58
MBWorld Fanatic!
I think what Sean is trying to say is that. When people come and try and make hefty claims. Then act like it was nothing. When it actually took some effort. It draws suspicion... Like, what are you trying to imply? If its nothing and no big deal, why was the car on a beta race (17-20 psi) turbo melting map, race gas, drag radials, ultra light front and rear wheels, and partially gutted interior. Just the race gas alone means someone is not messing around in my book.
I get it, I can see where both sides are coming from. 11.7 is quick and 120mph trap is fast. I give credit where its due. My hats off to the owner of the car in question.
Now, if he ran those times with stock wheels and just drag radials, with a shelf tune that anyone can purchase, and using pump gas. Well that deserves a lot of credit!
I have witnessed what a set of light weight rear wheels with dr can do compared to a set of stocks with dr on the same day. How does going from 11.7- 11.4 grab you guys? Imagine with lighter front skinny wheels and tires, a custom race tune, ridiculously oversized pulley, race gas, partial interior gut. See where i'm going with this? It's all relative... I hope I have not offended anyone. Just my 2 cents.
I get it, I can see where both sides are coming from. 11.7 is quick and 120mph trap is fast. I give credit where its due. My hats off to the owner of the car in question.
Now, if he ran those times with stock wheels and just drag radials, with a shelf tune that anyone can purchase, and using pump gas. Well that deserves a lot of credit!
I have witnessed what a set of light weight rear wheels with dr can do compared to a set of stocks with dr on the same day. How does going from 11.7- 11.4 grab you guys? Imagine with lighter front skinny wheels and tires, a custom race tune, ridiculously oversized pulley, race gas, partial interior gut. See where i'm going with this? It's all relative... I hope I have not offended anyone. Just my 2 cents.
04-21-2009, 09:48 PM
#60
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern, CA.
Posts: 9,155
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes
on
17 Posts
V12-Biturbo
I think what Sean is trying to say is that. When people come and try and make hefty claims. Then act like it was nothing. When it actually took some effort. It draws suspicion... Like, what are you trying to imply? If its nothing and no big deal, why was the car on a beta race (17-20 psi) turbo melting map, race gas, drag radials, ultra light front and rear wheels, and partially gutted interior. Just the race gas alone means someone is not messing around in my book.
I get it, I can see where both sides are coming from. 11.7 is quick and 120mph trap is fast. I give credit where its due. My hats off to the owner of the car in question.
Now, if he ran those times with stock wheels and just drag radials, with a shelf tune that anyone can purchase, and using pump gas. Well that deserves a lot of credit!
I have witnessed what a set of light weight rear wheels with dr can do compared to a set of stocks with dr on the same day. How does going from 11.7- 11.4 grab you guys? Imagine with lighter front skinny wheels and tires, a custom race tune, ridiculously oversized pulley, race gas, partial interior gut. See where i'm going with this? It's all relative... I hope I have not offended anyone. Just my 2 cents.
I get it, I can see where both sides are coming from. 11.7 is quick and 120mph trap is fast. I give credit where its due. My hats off to the owner of the car in question.
Now, if he ran those times with stock wheels and just drag radials, with a shelf tune that anyone can purchase, and using pump gas. Well that deserves a lot of credit!
I have witnessed what a set of light weight rear wheels with dr can do compared to a set of stocks with dr on the same day. How does going from 11.7- 11.4 grab you guys? Imagine with lighter front skinny wheels and tires, a custom race tune, ridiculously oversized pulley, race gas, partial interior gut. See where i'm going with this? It's all relative... I hope I have not offended anyone. Just my 2 cents.
(if someone only notes new tires/drag rad's we assume their on factory wheels, they do come in 18" sizes) Super lightweight Front & Rear racing wheel combos have been shown to free-up 25-30 rwhp on the Dyno, not to mention benefits from reduced Unsprung weight...
04-21-2009, 11:05 PM
#62
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern, CA.
Posts: 9,155
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes
on
17 Posts
V12-Biturbo
Are you kidding me
You said it was 104 octane, I corrected you that both Terry Burger tuner of JuiceBox & driver Hotrod182 Warren noted the tune was set for 105 octane. I don't see where you previously noted anything about MS109/105 octane? You ONLY misquoted the tune setting to 104 octane
What a waste of time...
I only replied because you sideline cheerleaders keep trying to lesson details of actual mods in question.
You said it was 104 octane, I corrected you that both Terry Burger tuner of JuiceBox & driver Hotrod182 Warren noted the tune was set for 105 octane. I don't see where you previously noted anything about MS109/105 octane? You ONLY misquoted the tune setting to 104 octaneWhat a waste of time...
I only replied because you sideline cheerleaders keep trying to lesson details of actual mods in question.
04-21-2009, 11:44 PM
#63
Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
335i
I really need to emphasize the streetability of this car, and how amazingly stock it really is. People ARE hitting 11's on the stock RFTs and heavy factory wheels. Don't attribute 11's at close to 120mph just because of lighter wheels and seat removal. Remember, this car has the stock, quiet, fully catted, heavy factory exhaust system. Special, fantastic race map? It should be noted that I achieved the 11.829 @ 117.91mph run on dragtimes.com with the map #7 of a standard JB3 1.22 unit after removing my higher boost race turbomelter JB3.
Additionally, how terribly radical was my race turbomelter JB3? I have posted time after time. I made the 800 mile round trip on the full tilt race map turbomelter on 91 octane. Got great gas mileage when cruising, and raced people numerous times on this map. Left it on for weeks after coming back, driving fast normal style. So a far cry from mega boosting a supercharged car with pulleys boosting so much you wouldn't dare race around on 91 octane.
The point is, this car runs absolutely smooth, and quiet, and is ready to run 11's in the qtr mile within minutes. And in that 11 second configuration, it would pass any visual smog check requirements.
How much did the wheels and tires help my traps? Not as much as you would think. And additionally, there were times when I was disappointed the traps didn't go up at all! I have done many tests. Yes, I know, theoretically, lighter wheels/tires should always help, but with all the variables involved, the results are kind of surprising. I set out determined to find the advantage in traps with the 17" Hoosiers over my 19" Generals. Even though the temps were similar, you can see the variables of the conditions more than masked the advantage of the tire/wheel change:
(Same gas, similar temps, etc, etc)
JB3 1.3 Beta II 3/4/09
48F, 91 octane, 19" Generals
Map#6
Run#1 DS Mode (trans shifted into 2nd at 3800 rpm)
¼ mile: 12.7 at 115.2mph
60ft: 2.2 sec
1/8 mile: 8.4 sec at 91.9 mph
0-60mph: 4.4 sec
Run#2 DS Mode (trans shifted into 2nd at 5000 rpm)
¼ mile: 12.8 at 115.0 mph
60ft: 2.2 sec
1/8 mile: 8.4 sec at 91.5 mph
0-60mph: 4.6 sec
Run#3 DS Mode (trans shifted into 2nd at 5000 rpm)
¼ mile: 12.7 sec at 115.2 mph
60ft: 2.1 sec
1/8 mile: 8.3 sec at 92.0 mph
0-60 mph: 4.4 sec
JB3 1.3 beta II 3/4/09
91 octane, 19" Generals
JB3 1.3 Beta II 3/05/09
52 F 91 octane. 17" Kosei/Hoosiers
Map#6
Run#1 DS Mode
¼ mile: 12.4 sec at 114.7 mph
60ft: 2.0 sec
1/8 mile: 8.1 sec at 92.4 mph
0-60mph: 4.0 sec
Run#2 DS Mode
¼ mile: 12.5 sec at 114.6 mph
60ft: 2.0 sec
1/8 mile: 8.1 sec at 91.8 mph
0-60mph: 4.1 sec
Run#3 DS Mode
¼ mile: 12.5 sec at 114.8 mph
60ft: 2.1 sec
1/8 mile: 8.2 sec at 92.0 mph
Again, I was expecting to see a big gain in traps with the 17" wheels and DRs, just didn't happen in this test. And again, I have made dozens and dozens of runs testing for any kind of improvements. So whatever the DA difference between the 2 successive nights, etc, somehow nullified the measurable advantage of the wheels.
Additionally, how terribly radical was my race turbomelter JB3? I have posted time after time. I made the 800 mile round trip on the full tilt race map turbomelter on 91 octane. Got great gas mileage when cruising, and raced people numerous times on this map. Left it on for weeks after coming back, driving fast normal style. So a far cry from mega boosting a supercharged car with pulleys boosting so much you wouldn't dare race around on 91 octane.
The point is, this car runs absolutely smooth, and quiet, and is ready to run 11's in the qtr mile within minutes. And in that 11 second configuration, it would pass any visual smog check requirements.
How much did the wheels and tires help my traps? Not as much as you would think. And additionally, there were times when I was disappointed the traps didn't go up at all! I have done many tests. Yes, I know, theoretically, lighter wheels/tires should always help, but with all the variables involved, the results are kind of surprising. I set out determined to find the advantage in traps with the 17" Hoosiers over my 19" Generals. Even though the temps were similar, you can see the variables of the conditions more than masked the advantage of the tire/wheel change:
(Same gas, similar temps, etc, etc)
JB3 1.3 Beta II 3/4/09
48F, 91 octane, 19" Generals
Map#6
Run#1 DS Mode (trans shifted into 2nd at 3800 rpm)
¼ mile: 12.7 at 115.2mph
60ft: 2.2 sec
1/8 mile: 8.4 sec at 91.9 mph
0-60mph: 4.4 sec
Run#2 DS Mode (trans shifted into 2nd at 5000 rpm)
¼ mile: 12.8 at 115.0 mph
60ft: 2.2 sec
1/8 mile: 8.4 sec at 91.5 mph
0-60mph: 4.6 sec
Run#3 DS Mode (trans shifted into 2nd at 5000 rpm)
¼ mile: 12.7 sec at 115.2 mph
60ft: 2.1 sec
1/8 mile: 8.3 sec at 92.0 mph
0-60 mph: 4.4 sec
JB3 1.3 beta II 3/4/09
91 octane, 19" Generals
JB3 1.3 Beta II 3/05/09
52 F 91 octane. 17" Kosei/Hoosiers
Map#6
Run#1 DS Mode
¼ mile: 12.4 sec at 114.7 mph
60ft: 2.0 sec
1/8 mile: 8.1 sec at 92.4 mph
0-60mph: 4.0 sec
Run#2 DS Mode
¼ mile: 12.5 sec at 114.6 mph
60ft: 2.0 sec
1/8 mile: 8.1 sec at 91.8 mph
0-60mph: 4.1 sec
Run#3 DS Mode
¼ mile: 12.5 sec at 114.8 mph
60ft: 2.1 sec
1/8 mile: 8.2 sec at 92.0 mph
Again, I was expecting to see a big gain in traps with the 17" wheels and DRs, just didn't happen in this test. And again, I have made dozens and dozens of runs testing for any kind of improvements. So whatever the DA difference between the 2 successive nights, etc, somehow nullified the measurable advantage of the wheels.
Last edited by hotrod182; 04-21-2009 at 11:49 PM.
04-21-2009, 11:57 PM
#64
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern, CA.
Posts: 9,155
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes
on
17 Posts
V12-Biturbo
I really need to emphasize the streetability of this car, and how amazingly stock it really is. People ARE hitting 11's on the stock RFTs and heavy factory wheels. Don't attribute 11's at close to 120mph just because of lighter wheels and seat removal. Remember, this car has the stock, quiet, fully catted, heavy factory exhaust system. Special, fantastic race map? It should be noted that I achieved the 11.829 @ 117.91mph run on dragtimes.com with the map #7 of a standard JB3 1.22 unit after removing my higher boost race turbomelter JB3.
Additionally, how terribly radical was my race turbomelter JB3? I have posted time after time. I made the 800 mile round trip on the full tilt race map turbomelter on 91 octane. Got great gas mileage when cruising, and raced people numerous times on this map. Left it on for weeks after coming back, driving fast normal style. So a far cry from mega boosting a supercharged car with pulleys boosting so much you wouldn't dare race around on 91 octane.
The point is, this car runs absolutely smooth, and quiet, and is ready to run 11's in the qtr mile within minutes. And in that 11 second configuration, it would pass any visual smog check requirements.
How much did the wheels and tires help my traps? Not as much as you would think. And additionally, there were times when I was disappointed the traps didn't go up at all! I have done many tests. Yes, I know, theoretically, lighter wheels/tires should always help, but with all the variables involved, the results are kind of surprising. I set out determined to find the advantage in traps with the 17" Hoosiers over my 19" Generals. Even though the temps were similar, you can see the variables of the conditions more than masked the advantage of the tire/wheel change:
(Same gas, similar temps, etc, etc)
JB3 1.3 Beta II 3/4/09
48F, 91 octane, 19" Generals
Map#6
Run#1 DS Mode (trans shifted into 2nd at 3800 rpm)
¼ mile: 12.7 at 115.2mph
60ft: 2.2 sec
1/8 mile: 8.4 sec at 91.9 mph
0-60mph: 4.4 sec
Run#2 DS Mode (trans shifted into 2nd at 5000 rpm)
¼ mile: 12.8 at 115.0 mph
60ft: 2.2 sec
1/8 mile: 8.4 sec at 91.5 mph
0-60mph: 4.6 sec
Run#3 DS Mode (trans shifted into 2nd at 5000 rpm)
¼ mile: 12.7 sec at 115.2 mph
60ft: 2.1 sec
1/8 mile: 8.3 sec at 92.0 mph
0-60 mph: 4.4 sec
JB3 1.3 beta II 3/4/09
91 octane, 19" Generals
JB3 1.3 Beta II 3/05/09
52 F 91 octane. 17" Kosei/Hoosiers
Map#6
Run#1 DS Mode
¼ mile: 12.4 sec at 114.7 mph
60ft: 2.0 sec
1/8 mile: 8.1 sec at 92.4 mph
0-60mph: 4.0 sec
Run#2 DS Mode
¼ mile: 12.5 sec at 114.6 mph
60ft: 2.0 sec
1/8 mile: 8.1 sec at 91.8 mph
0-60mph: 4.1 sec
Run#3 DS Mode
¼ mile: 12.5 sec at 114.8 mph
60ft: 2.1 sec
1/8 mile: 8.2 sec at 92.0 mph
Again, I was expecting to see a big gain in traps with the 17" wheels and DRs, just didn't happen in this test. And again, I have made dozens and dozens of runs testing for any kind of improvements. So whatever the DA difference between the 2 successive nights, etc, somehow nullified the measurable advantage of the wheels.
Additionally, how terribly radical was my race turbomelter JB3? I have posted time after time. I made the 800 mile round trip on the full tilt race map turbomelter on 91 octane. Got great gas mileage when cruising, and raced people numerous times on this map. Left it on for weeks after coming back, driving fast normal style. So a far cry from mega boosting a supercharged car with pulleys boosting so much you wouldn't dare race around on 91 octane.
The point is, this car runs absolutely smooth, and quiet, and is ready to run 11's in the qtr mile within minutes. And in that 11 second configuration, it would pass any visual smog check requirements.
How much did the wheels and tires help my traps? Not as much as you would think. And additionally, there were times when I was disappointed the traps didn't go up at all! I have done many tests. Yes, I know, theoretically, lighter wheels/tires should always help, but with all the variables involved, the results are kind of surprising. I set out determined to find the advantage in traps with the 17" Hoosiers over my 19" Generals. Even though the temps were similar, you can see the variables of the conditions more than masked the advantage of the tire/wheel change:
(Same gas, similar temps, etc, etc)
JB3 1.3 Beta II 3/4/09
48F, 91 octane, 19" Generals
Map#6
Run#1 DS Mode (trans shifted into 2nd at 3800 rpm)
¼ mile: 12.7 at 115.2mph
60ft: 2.2 sec
1/8 mile: 8.4 sec at 91.9 mph
0-60mph: 4.4 sec
Run#2 DS Mode (trans shifted into 2nd at 5000 rpm)
¼ mile: 12.8 at 115.0 mph
60ft: 2.2 sec
1/8 mile: 8.4 sec at 91.5 mph
0-60mph: 4.6 sec
Run#3 DS Mode (trans shifted into 2nd at 5000 rpm)
¼ mile: 12.7 sec at 115.2 mph
60ft: 2.1 sec
1/8 mile: 8.3 sec at 92.0 mph
0-60 mph: 4.4 sec
JB3 1.3 beta II 3/4/09
91 octane, 19" Generals
JB3 1.3 Beta II 3/05/09
52 F 91 octane. 17" Kosei/Hoosiers
Map#6
Run#1 DS Mode
¼ mile: 12.4 sec at 114.7 mph
60ft: 2.0 sec
1/8 mile: 8.1 sec at 92.4 mph
0-60mph: 4.0 sec
Run#2 DS Mode
¼ mile: 12.5 sec at 114.6 mph
60ft: 2.0 sec
1/8 mile: 8.1 sec at 91.8 mph
0-60mph: 4.1 sec
Run#3 DS Mode
¼ mile: 12.5 sec at 114.8 mph
60ft: 2.1 sec
1/8 mile: 8.2 sec at 92.0 mph
Again, I was expecting to see a big gain in traps with the 17" wheels and DRs, just didn't happen in this test. And again, I have made dozens and dozens of runs testing for any kind of improvements. So whatever the DA difference between the 2 successive nights, etc, somehow nullified the measurable advantage of the wheels.
Why are you trying to downplay the added benefits of weight reduction & Super lightweight racing wheels now???
04-22-2009, 12:15 AM
#65
Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
335i
Im just saying, some things like putting in race fuel vs 91 octane will always make a noticeable difference. But the difference between my 17's and 19' don't make as big of a difference as one might think. The Vbox is very very consistant. I have done numerous comparisons with the drag strip. I like the fact that by the time I am at the end of the strip, I already know what my ET is before I even drive up to the time slip booth. I have even been able to detect differences between race tracks, and lanes! As long as you start and end at the exact same spot, the Vbox will detect differences in performance very accurately.
04-22-2009, 12:27 AM
#66
MBWorld Fanatic!
Hotrod182: I hear what you are saying. I don't think anyone is doubting the drivability of your car or your impressive achievements. Turbo melter race maps, and 105 octane is still not something the average enthusiast is going to do.
If you really expect us to believe that those mods don't add much power over an off the shelf tune and pump gas. Well, that is pretty diluted to say the least... I hope that's not the case. To say that ultra light smaller diameter race wheels don't help much is in the same boat IMO. I have seen drag wheels help quite a bit with my own eyes on countless occasions. Are you stating that reducing rotational mass and dropping overall weight from the car doesn't significantly lower ET and raise MPH? I have seen people drop 3 tenths from removing parts at the track.
Everyone is entitled to opinions and I respect your views. But, I disagree with some of what you say. If you think that those mods did not significantly help your cars performance, then why do it? Why not run your car with a regular jb3 and drag radials mounted on stock wheels?
I know what it's like to go for records and push into the grey area. So, I can understand your methods and point of view. I hope your car goes faster and I wish you the best of luck! Most people will read this thread and not care or even notice. But, there are hardcore drag junkies lurking in here that can pop out at a moments notice when summoned
. Some food for thought. No hard feelings man.
If you really expect us to believe that those mods don't add much power over an off the shelf tune and pump gas. Well, that is pretty diluted to say the least... I hope that's not the case. To say that ultra light smaller diameter race wheels don't help much is in the same boat IMO. I have seen drag wheels help quite a bit with my own eyes on countless occasions. Are you stating that reducing rotational mass and dropping overall weight from the car doesn't significantly lower ET and raise MPH? I have seen people drop 3 tenths from removing parts at the track.
Everyone is entitled to opinions and I respect your views. But, I disagree with some of what you say. If you think that those mods did not significantly help your cars performance, then why do it? Why not run your car with a regular jb3 and drag radials mounted on stock wheels?
I know what it's like to go for records and push into the grey area. So, I can understand your methods and point of view. I hope your car goes faster and I wish you the best of luck! Most people will read this thread and not care or even notice. But, there are hardcore drag junkies lurking in here that can pop out at a moments notice when summoned
. Some food for thought. No hard feelings man.
04-22-2009, 12:44 AM
#67
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern, CA.
Posts: 9,155
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes
on
17 Posts
V12-Biturbo
Im just saying, some things like putting in race fuel vs 91 octane will always make a noticeable difference. But the difference between my 17's and 19' don't make as big of a difference as one might think. The Vbox is very very consistant. I have done numerous comparisons with the drag strip. I like the fact that by the time I am at the end of the strip, I already know what my ET is before I even drive up to the time slip booth. I have even been able to detect differences between race tracks, and lanes! As long as you start and end at the exact same spot, the Vbox will detect differences in performance very accurately.
Add to that Unsprung weight savings = HIGHER Traps quicker ET's Your V-box data is obviously skewed...However it is your opinion so carry on.
Last edited by Thericker; 04-22-2009 at 12:51 AM.
04-22-2009, 04:37 AM
#68
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern, CA.
Posts: 9,155
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes
on
17 Posts
V12-Biturbo
No prob. When the run was posted, it actually was disclosed "gutted interior". It was really the passenger seat which is 65lbs, and the rear seat cushions/backs. Doorpanels, side panels, carpeting, etc, are still intact. So really, still a quiet, and comfortable car to be in, just a really easy weight reductiion. So really, nothing that couldn't be done quickly. And again, when you are vying to the top time, I have to be on even ground with the other top 3 quickest BMWs. The best you can really hope for is about 1mph per 100lbs if that. And again, I have run in the 11's at 117+ mph with the OLD tune many months ago with absolutely no weight savings. So the car would still be impressively fast/quick with no weight reduction. With the advent of new turbos, flashes, etc, there will be a whole new chapter. I am just glad to have done fairly well with the simplist, quickest, and least expensive modifications.
And I have feared the SL600 ever since that Car and Driver article which had the thing running faster than the Dodge Viper, Corvette, etc.
And I have feared the SL600 ever since that Car and Driver article which had the thing running faster than the Dodge Viper, Corvette, etc.
Seems like you've fallen back into the original reason this infantile thread got started? (You keep denying the necessity of your weight reduction mods to get the 335i into the 11's @ 118-120mph)
You're now saying the weight reduction is ONLY a "Seat" vs previously stated Frnt pass Seat + rear seat cushions/backs & Braile lightweight battery. You're spinning it into "people" (Plural) running 11's on Fact Runflats? w/heavy OEM Fact wheels. Where are these "people's" Slips/records??
I really need to emphasize the streetability of this car, and how amazingly stock it really is. People ARE hitting 11's on the stock RFTs and heavy factory wheels. Don't attribute 11's at close to 120mph just because of lighter wheels and seat removal. Remember, this car has the stock, quiet, fully catted, heavy factory exhaust system. Special, fantastic race map? It should be noted that I achieved the 11.829 @ 117.91mph run on dragtimes.com with the map #7 of a standard JB3 1.22 unit after removing my higher boost race turbomelter JB3.
Additionally, how terribly radical was my race turbomelter JB3? I have posted time after time. I made the 800 mile round trip on the full tilt race map turbomelter on 91 octane. Got great gas mileage when cruising, and raced people numerous times on this map. Left it on for weeks after coming back, driving fast normal style. So a far cry from mega boosting a supercharged car with pulleys boosting so much you wouldn't dare race around on 91 octane.
The point is, this car runs absolutely smooth, and quiet, and is ready to run 11's in the qtr mile within minutes. And in that 11 second configuration, it would pass any visual smog check requirements.
How much did the wheels and tires help my traps? Not as much as you would think. And additionally, there were times when I was disappointed the traps didn't go up at all! I have done many tests. Yes, I know, theoretically, lighter wheels/tires should always help, but with all the variables involved, the results are kind of surprising. I set out determined to find the advantage in traps with the 17" Hoosiers over my 19" Generals. Even though the temps were similar, you can see the variables of the conditions more than masked the advantage of the tire/wheel change:
(Same gas, similar temps, etc, etc)
JB3 1.3 Beta II 3/4/09
48F, 91 octane, 19" Generals
Map#6
Run#1 DS Mode (trans shifted into 2nd at 3800 rpm)
¼ mile: 12.7 at 115.2mph
60ft: 2.2 sec
1/8 mile: 8.4 sec at 91.9 mph
0-60mph: 4.4 sec
Run#2 DS Mode (trans shifted into 2nd at 5000 rpm)
¼ mile: 12.8 at 115.0 mph
60ft: 2.2 sec
1/8 mile: 8.4 sec at 91.5 mph
0-60mph: 4.6 sec
Run#3 DS Mode (trans shifted into 2nd at 5000 rpm)
¼ mile: 12.7 sec at 115.2 mph
60ft: 2.1 sec
1/8 mile: 8.3 sec at 92.0 mph
0-60 mph: 4.4 sec
JB3 1.3 beta II 3/4/09
91 octane, 19" Generals
JB3 1.3 Beta II 3/05/09
52 F 91 octane. 17" Kosei/Hoosiers
Map#6
Run#1 DS Mode
¼ mile: 12.4 sec at 114.7 mph
60ft: 2.0 sec
1/8 mile: 8.1 sec at 92.4 mph
0-60mph: 4.0 sec
Run#2 DS Mode
¼ mile: 12.5 sec at 114.6 mph
60ft: 2.0 sec
1/8 mile: 8.1 sec at 91.8 mph
0-60mph: 4.1 sec
Run#3 DS Mode
¼ mile: 12.5 sec at 114.8 mph
60ft: 2.1 sec
1/8 mile: 8.2 sec at 92.0 mph
Again, I was expecting to see a big gain in traps with the 17" wheels and DRs, just didn't happen in this test. And again, I have made dozens and dozens of runs testing for any kind of improvements. So whatever the DA difference between the 2 successive nights, etc, somehow nullified the measurable advantage of the wheels.
Now you think the factory exhaust system is HEAVY, how would you know since you haven't touched it vs aftermarket? Describing it this way must mean you think it's holding the car back some? But you're NOW stating Lightweight wheels & Interior removal have little to NO advantage due to your expert V-Box data?
Describing it this way must mean you think it's holding the car back some? But you're NOW stating Lightweight wheels & Interior removal have little to NO advantage due to your expert V-Box data?
The point is, this car runs absolutely smooth, and quiet, and is ready to run 11's in the qtr mile within minutes. And in that 11 second configuration, it would pass any visual smog check requirements.
How much did the wheels and tires help my traps? Not as much as you would think. And additionally, there were times when I was disappointed the traps didn't go up at all! I have done many tests. Yes, I know, theoretically, lighter wheels/tires should always help, but with all the variables involved, the results are kind of surprising. I set out determined to find the advantage in traps with the 17" Hoosiers over my 19" Generals. Even though the temps were similar, you can see the variables of the conditions more than masked the advantage of the tire/wheel change:
(Same gas, similar temps, etc, etc)
JB3 1.3 Beta II 3/4/09
48F, 91 octane, 19" Generals
Map#6
Run#1 DS Mode (trans shifted into 2nd at 3800 rpm)
¼ mile: 12.7 at 115.2mph
60ft: 2.2 sec
1/8 mile: 8.4 sec at 91.9 mph
0-60mph: 4.4 sec
Run#2 DS Mode (trans shifted into 2nd at 5000 rpm)
¼ mile: 12.8 at 115.0 mph
60ft: 2.2 sec
1/8 mile: 8.4 sec at 91.5 mph
0-60mph: 4.6 sec
Run#3 DS Mode (trans shifted into 2nd at 5000 rpm)
¼ mile: 12.7 sec at 115.2 mph
60ft: 2.1 sec
1/8 mile: 8.3 sec at 92.0 mph
0-60 mph: 4.4 sec
JB3 1.3 beta II 3/4/09
91 octane, 19" Generals
JB3 1.3 Beta II 3/05/09
52 F 91 octane. 17" Kosei/Hoosiers
Map#6
Run#1 DS Mode
¼ mile: 12.4 sec at 114.7 mph
60ft: 2.0 sec
1/8 mile: 8.1 sec at 92.4 mph
0-60mph: 4.0 sec
Run#2 DS Mode
¼ mile: 12.5 sec at 114.6 mph
60ft: 2.0 sec
1/8 mile: 8.1 sec at 91.8 mph
0-60mph: 4.1 sec
Run#3 DS Mode
¼ mile: 12.5 sec at 114.8 mph
60ft: 2.1 sec
1/8 mile: 8.2 sec at 92.0 mph
Again, I was expecting to see a big gain in traps with the 17" wheels and DRs, just didn't happen in this test. And again, I have made dozens and dozens of runs testing for any kind of improvements. So whatever the DA difference between the 2 successive nights, etc, somehow nullified the measurable advantage of the wheels.
& you want us to believe a standard JB3 1.22 unit /fact runflats/heavy oem wheels/full interior will easily hit the 11's because as you said & I quote
"People ARE hitting 11's on the stock RFTs and heavy factory wheels."
I seriously don't believe a single word you say about any of your mods anymore, you keep changing your story...Peace Out!!
Last edited by Thericker; 04-22-2009 at 04:57 AM.
04-22-2009, 09:15 AM
#69
Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
335i
Seriously, are not reading the information that is available out there? Obviously some of the people on here totally understand and agree with what I have been discussing here.
I am only presenting the facts through hundreds of 1/4 mile runs and my testing. Sure, my quickest times/speeds are with the lighter weight combo. But, I can am just presenting to you the fact that just testing on the next night with lighter wheels gave me slower traps. So obviously other variables can come into play that offset those advantages. Thats all. I am not trying to say that I can defy physics, lol.
When I was talking about the ability of a N54 equipped car to hit 11's on stock RFTS, I was referring to the 135i that I already referenced. Same representative weight as my car, same exact engine, same tune. Stock mufflers, airbox, intercooler, down pipes, etc. (had a mid pipe). Read his thread again and I think you will get the point. 11's, almost 120 mph, stock tires/wheels, starting off in 2nd gear. Look at those factors and do you really think there is any doubt my car should be hitting 120mph with no ENGINE work besides tune/gas?
I think you are taking the whole thing out of context by focusing on my weight reduction as being the reason for absolutely spectacular performance with such minimal, non invasive mods. As I said before,
tune/gas/wheels/3500lbs=11's at 120mph. I guess to clarify it for you I could state: Tune/Gas/Tires (+wheels)/3500lbs(3700 stock). Nonetheless pretty impressive anyway you put it.
Again, I will restate, my 11.991 at 117.524 mph run on my sedan was done last year, on an old tune and absolutely no interior weight reduction.
And on those runs on the old turbomelter map, after driving around for a week on 91 octane, racing around, etc, there were no CELs, no limps, no superknock faults, nothing. So I just want to emphasize, a totally streetable set up.
Again, here is the 11 second nearly stock 135i I was referencing: http://www.n54tech.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3601
I try to back up all my claims with facts. I have pictures to show the Vbox with spot on ETs, hundreds of 1/4 mile tests, etc, etc. I apologize if you didn't missed some of the factors in the hundreds of posts regarding my runs. You are absolutely right though, my car has put up the best numbers while being the most stock. The other top 3 cars had way more mods PLUS weight reductions. Go figure. And no, its not the nitrous! LOL. So again, read the following thread of this guy starting off in 2nd gear even, and I think it should clarify things for you. Also if you were referring to shorter gearing with the DRs, its the absolute opposite. My DRS are taller and register slower on the vbox at given speedo reading. The Vbox is accurate regardless (It is GPS based). If there is anything that doesnt make sense here that I haven't already covered just ask me. I try to be one of the most factual posters on the car forums. I also back up my findings (Vbox, etc) at the track rather than just armchair racing.
PS. Sean, it really would nice to see what your car will do stock in the 1/4 mile before you modify it. Hit me up if you want to Vbox it down here. You are only about 30 minutes away from here. We could see not only how your 1/4 mile compares with my car, but also the trap speeds. Like I said before, the SL600 should run monster numbers.
Quote from the 135i driver on stock wheels/tires:
Well, previously I thought that 2.040 60’ was the limit for stock RFTs
Previously, I thought that 12.307 was pushing it with stock wheels and RFTs
I’m here to say that is no more.
Todays info:
Sunny, low 70’s/high 60's
Passes:
EVERY pass was done in 2nd gear.
EVERY pass was done with full traction control off
Run 1 LANE 1 (the one WITH traction and better prep)
60’ 2.139
¼ 12.332
mph 118.34
Pull up to the ticket booth:
"uhmm, our printer isn’t working right now?"
"what!?, you kidding me"
"you can go upstairs and ask for a hand written copy"
"you can make sure you get the printer fixed before my next pass"
Run 2 LANE 2 (****ty lane)
60’ 2.122
¼ 12.380
mph 119.04
So here is were the cheating started.
Lowered rear tire pressure 2 psi
NEVER, NEVER had the tires been turned over. Not even on the old 12.30 pass
This time, just gave them a quick turn over, not really a spin.
Run 3 LANE 1
60’ 1.943
¼ 12.049
mph 118.16
Hmmm, this tire spinnin kinda works.
Ok, let’s turn them over a little more…
Run 4 Lane 1
60’ 1.908
¼ 11.993
mph 118.26
Two things went wrong on the 5th and final run
Lane 2 again…
and brake boosted too much
The RFTs said, "hey remember what you did to me last time last time" **** YOU"
60’ 2.274
¼ 12.666
mph 119.59
I am only presenting the facts through hundreds of 1/4 mile runs and my testing. Sure, my quickest times/speeds are with the lighter weight combo. But, I can am just presenting to you the fact that just testing on the next night with lighter wheels gave me slower traps. So obviously other variables can come into play that offset those advantages. Thats all. I am not trying to say that I can defy physics, lol.
When I was talking about the ability of a N54 equipped car to hit 11's on stock RFTS, I was referring to the 135i that I already referenced. Same representative weight as my car, same exact engine, same tune. Stock mufflers, airbox, intercooler, down pipes, etc. (had a mid pipe). Read his thread again and I think you will get the point. 11's, almost 120 mph, stock tires/wheels, starting off in 2nd gear. Look at those factors and do you really think there is any doubt my car should be hitting 120mph with no ENGINE work besides tune/gas?
I think you are taking the whole thing out of context by focusing on my weight reduction as being the reason for absolutely spectacular performance with such minimal, non invasive mods. As I said before,
tune/gas/wheels/3500lbs=11's at 120mph. I guess to clarify it for you I could state: Tune/Gas/Tires (+wheels)/3500lbs(3700 stock). Nonetheless pretty impressive anyway you put it.
Again, I will restate, my 11.991 at 117.524 mph run on my sedan was done last year, on an old tune and absolutely no interior weight reduction.
And on those runs on the old turbomelter map, after driving around for a week on 91 octane, racing around, etc, there were no CELs, no limps, no superknock faults, nothing. So I just want to emphasize, a totally streetable set up.
Again, here is the 11 second nearly stock 135i I was referencing: http://www.n54tech.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3601
I try to back up all my claims with facts. I have pictures to show the Vbox with spot on ETs, hundreds of 1/4 mile tests, etc, etc. I apologize if you didn't missed some of the factors in the hundreds of posts regarding my runs. You are absolutely right though, my car has put up the best numbers while being the most stock. The other top 3 cars had way more mods PLUS weight reductions. Go figure. And no, its not the nitrous! LOL. So again, read the following thread of this guy starting off in 2nd gear even, and I think it should clarify things for you. Also if you were referring to shorter gearing with the DRs, its the absolute opposite. My DRS are taller and register slower on the vbox at given speedo reading. The Vbox is accurate regardless (It is GPS based). If there is anything that doesnt make sense here that I haven't already covered just ask me. I try to be one of the most factual posters on the car forums. I also back up my findings (Vbox, etc) at the track rather than just armchair racing.
PS. Sean, it really would nice to see what your car will do stock in the 1/4 mile before you modify it. Hit me up if you want to Vbox it down here. You are only about 30 minutes away from here. We could see not only how your 1/4 mile compares with my car, but also the trap speeds. Like I said before, the SL600 should run monster numbers.
Quote from the 135i driver on stock wheels/tires:
Well, previously I thought that 2.040 60’ was the limit for stock RFTs
Previously, I thought that 12.307 was pushing it with stock wheels and RFTs
I’m here to say that is no more.
Todays info:
Sunny, low 70’s/high 60's
Passes:
EVERY pass was done in 2nd gear.
EVERY pass was done with full traction control off
Run 1 LANE 1 (the one WITH traction and better prep)
60’ 2.139
¼ 12.332
mph 118.34
Pull up to the ticket booth:
"uhmm, our printer isn’t working right now?"
"what!?, you kidding me"
"you can go upstairs and ask for a hand written copy"
"you can make sure you get the printer fixed before my next pass"
Run 2 LANE 2 (****ty lane)
60’ 2.122
¼ 12.380
mph 119.04
So here is were the cheating started.
Lowered rear tire pressure 2 psi
NEVER, NEVER had the tires been turned over. Not even on the old 12.30 pass
This time, just gave them a quick turn over, not really a spin.
Run 3 LANE 1
60’ 1.943
¼ 12.049
mph 118.16
Hmmm, this tire spinnin kinda works.
Ok, let’s turn them over a little more…
Run 4 Lane 1
60’ 1.908
¼ 11.993
mph 118.26
Two things went wrong on the 5th and final run
Lane 2 again…
and brake boosted too muchThe RFTs said, "hey remember what you did to me last time last time" **** YOU"
60’ 2.274
¼ 12.666
mph 119.59
Last edited by hotrod182; 04-22-2009 at 09:31 AM.
04-22-2009, 09:59 AM
#70
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Seattle
Posts: 6,732
Received 562 Likes
on
372 Posts
'19 E63S, ‘16 CLS63 RIP, '09 E63 Gone, '06 M5 Gone, '97 Supra TT Gone
Wow this thread has officially become an N54 d!ck swinging contest. Come on guys, this thread is about how future M3's are going to absolutely pee on the 335, intercoolers, JB3's and all.
04-22-2009, 02:58 PM
#71
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: California, USA
Posts: 9,137
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
E63 P30, CL500 Sport
I know this thread has deviated way off topic, so let me ask this:
How fast exactly can a 335i with just tune and gas (stock wheels, stock tires or similar street radials, and stock weight)?? Warren, did you ever try that?
How fast exactly can a 335i with just tune and gas (stock wheels, stock tires or similar street radials, and stock weight)?? Warren, did you ever try that?
04-22-2009, 02:58 PM
#72
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern, CA.
Posts: 9,155
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes
on
17 Posts
V12-Biturbo
WORD! OT: Did you watch that Silva fight entirely? 1 of the worst most boring fights evaaar, that kick combo was the highlight of the 5 round fight they barely even exchanged (Silva got so frustrated he started beatig the opponents feat, he kept dropping to gaurd)
04-22-2009, 03:29 PM
#73
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Seattle
Posts: 6,732
Received 562 Likes
on
372 Posts
'19 E63S, ‘16 CLS63 RIP, '09 E63 Gone, '06 M5 Gone, '97 Supra TT Gone
Honestly though Anderson had a gameplan, and executed, and that's what it's about. He DEFENDED his title, it was up to Leites to take it from him, and all he did was lay down and do crunches.
And don't even mention a Silva vs. GSP fight. Anderson is bigger, a world away in the striking department, a great wrestler who won't be take down easily and CERTAINLY won't be held down for any period of time, and would just plain kill GSP.
04-22-2009, 04:09 PM
#74
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern, CA.
Posts: 9,155
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes
on
17 Posts
V12-Biturbo
Yes I watched the fight, and I was way upset at what a wimp Thales was. He was in survival mode the entire time, never tried to take the belt. That'll be the last time you see him fight for the title in the coming years. There's nobody in that division left for Anderson to kill, so he's probably going to fight some 205 pounders. I personally really liked those side-kicks to the knee, like he wanted another Cote or something.
Honestly though Anderson had a gameplan, and executed, and that's what it's about. He DEFENDED his title, it was up to Leites to take it from him, and all he did was lay down and do crunches.
And don't even mention a Silva vs. GSP fight. Anderson is bigger, a world away in the striking department, a great wrestler who won't be take down easily and CERTAINLY won't be held down for any period of time, and would just plain kill GSP.
Honestly though Anderson had a gameplan, and executed, and that's what it's about. He DEFENDED his title, it was up to Leites to take it from him, and all he did was lay down and do crunches.
And don't even mention a Silva vs. GSP fight. Anderson is bigger, a world away in the striking department, a great wrestler who won't be take down easily and CERTAINLY won't be held down for any period of time, and would just plain kill GSP.
I meant Silva was beating Thales actual feet since he was mostly in guard postion, @ 1 point Silva grabbed his foot in the air & dropped an elbow on it I wouldn't be surprised if Thales can't wear shoes for a week 
I agree GSP is not in Silva's class even if GSP came up in weight. Chuck L. is finished his chins NO good anymore, there's just a certain amount of fights left in a fighter & I believe he's reached it. Too bad...
Last edited by Thericker; 04-22-2009 at 04:17 PM.
04-22-2009, 04:58 PM
#75
Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
335i
So in this C&D article, 11.9 sec at 120 mph, 0-60 in 3.6 seconds for the SL600. You are saying that was not stock?
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...take_road_test
Well I'm sure it didn't have DRs either. From the looks of it, you would give me all I could handle in the 1/4 mile on your street tires! There is absolutely no reason to only race me in a roll-on with these kind of specs.
The 335i weighs a little over 3500lbs, my race weight is right about that, or closer to the 135i. The little things like the battery could be wiped out with just the difference in weight between a 150lb vs 185lb driver. The wheels/tires should obviously help, but it has been shown many times, that they don't always make up for the difference that one would think.
You are NOT going to get a 30hp average increase on a dyno with wheels that are lighter in our case.
So as far as running 11's on RFTs, it can and has been done. I have never really tried it, and don't want to spend my RFTs on warm up burnouts/drag strip runs. But again, my 11.783 was with absolutely no warm up burnout and no limited slip. So it is possible, but I haven't tried it, no reason to. As I said, I could run very good times without lightening at all, but since I am vying for the top times, I have to at least have the weight mods the other top 335i BMWs are running. But then compared to those cars, I don't have the supporting engine/exhaust mods. That is where my runs shine. But not to the point of being that unusual when you reference what that 135i ran on stock RFTs, and 2nd gear launches!
If you look at the facts, you will see everything here is reasonable. That 135i and my record runs were in mid 60F deg temps. Mine in very strong sunlight. Had it been cold ,or negative DA, these turbo cars as you know pick up amazing HP. Probably enough to offset any weight advantage I have over a stock 335i. So where would that leave me...with a very very minimally modified 335i. I have picked up regularly 1mph/10hp/10degrees cooler.
If you don't believe what I claim is possible with all the facts I have presented, just give it time, and there will be more and more evidence to disprove your skepticism. When I ran in the 11's at 117.5 mph on the old tune, last year, forum members were there to inspect the car etc. Just tires(wheels)/tune/gas. Nothing else. The new maps are much different than they were last year, and offer even more HP. Hope this helps to clarify the facts for some of the skeptics.
As far as the new M3, I tried hard to justify buying one. It would have been my 3rd M3 (I already am on my 3rd 335i), but the M3 just didn't have to power that I wanted. Couple that with the 335i superior low end torque, excellent fuel economy, and sleeper status, it was a no brainer. If the new M3 TT gives spectacular performance, then it will probably be my next car!
Also, quick question. These E55s that trap at 120mph+, what kind of boost are they running? Are they doing this on crappy 91 octane? If so, Im very impressed.
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...take_road_test
Well I'm sure it didn't have DRs either. From the looks of it, you would give me all I could handle in the 1/4 mile on your street tires! There is absolutely no reason to only race me in a roll-on with these kind of specs.
The 335i weighs a little over 3500lbs, my race weight is right about that, or closer to the 135i. The little things like the battery could be wiped out with just the difference in weight between a 150lb vs 185lb driver. The wheels/tires should obviously help, but it has been shown many times, that they don't always make up for the difference that one would think.
You are NOT going to get a 30hp average increase on a dyno with wheels that are lighter in our case.
So as far as running 11's on RFTs, it can and has been done. I have never really tried it, and don't want to spend my RFTs on warm up burnouts/drag strip runs. But again, my 11.783 was with absolutely no warm up burnout and no limited slip. So it is possible, but I haven't tried it, no reason to. As I said, I could run very good times without lightening at all, but since I am vying for the top times, I have to at least have the weight mods the other top 335i BMWs are running. But then compared to those cars, I don't have the supporting engine/exhaust mods. That is where my runs shine. But not to the point of being that unusual when you reference what that 135i ran on stock RFTs, and 2nd gear launches!
If you look at the facts, you will see everything here is reasonable. That 135i and my record runs were in mid 60F deg temps. Mine in very strong sunlight. Had it been cold ,or negative DA, these turbo cars as you know pick up amazing HP. Probably enough to offset any weight advantage I have over a stock 335i. So where would that leave me...with a very very minimally modified 335i. I have picked up regularly 1mph/10hp/10degrees cooler.
If you don't believe what I claim is possible with all the facts I have presented, just give it time, and there will be more and more evidence to disprove your skepticism. When I ran in the 11's at 117.5 mph on the old tune, last year, forum members were there to inspect the car etc. Just tires(wheels)/tune/gas. Nothing else. The new maps are much different than they were last year, and offer even more HP. Hope this helps to clarify the facts for some of the skeptics.
As far as the new M3, I tried hard to justify buying one. It would have been my 3rd M3 (I already am on my 3rd 335i), but the M3 just didn't have to power that I wanted. Couple that with the 335i superior low end torque, excellent fuel economy, and sleeper status, it was a no brainer. If the new M3 TT gives spectacular performance, then it will probably be my next car!
Also, quick question. These E55s that trap at 120mph+, what kind of boost are they running? Are they doing this on crappy 91 octane? If so, Im very impressed.
Last edited by hotrod182; 04-22-2009 at 05:18 PM.
