[teknochild]

Originally Posted by e46hijinks

Oh yeah -- one-wheel-drive owns j00!

if your spinning your wheels enough for the lsd to come into play... then the lsd aint going to save you anyway

[musc]

Impressive indeed, but probably a little inflated. The older G-tech isnt quite as good as the newer one.

The trap speed will always be higher on these types of meters because on a true 1/4 mile, you actually trip the mph beam at 1254 feet, 66 feet before the end of the quarter mile. The G-tech takes the speed at 1320 feet. The difference can be significant (5-10+mph). The last car I tested with this same type of meter was about 6 mph faster than actual recorded trap speed. I think 112-117 is realistic for an Xede 335i. Power to weight, 12.44 probably isnt THAT far off. Mid 12 to high 12s are realistic.

There is an easy way to get a more accurate estimate. Simply run the car with the xede, cool down, then run the car without the xede. Subtract the ET difference and mph difference, then you have a more realistic 'gain'. You could then subtract from the numbers the magazines have listed (13.5/13.6 105-106mph). Certainly if you will know the G-tech isnt accurate if you run 12.90 stock. By running it with and without the xede within a short time frame, the only variable is the xede

I think i have one of those G-techs in my closet. I may try it on the M3 tonight.

On another note, I wish I could spend 1300 bucks on the M3 and see this kind of improvement. I'd have to sell a kidney to get those kind of gains. My hats off to Shiv. The Xede looks extremely promising.

[picus]

Inflated or not, this thread makes a Xede all that more tempting.

[cobradac]

Also when using g-meters you are most likely on some public road with many unknowns, including level and wind direction. To help negate possible irregularities you should always pair runs back to back in opposite directions and take an average. If you can find a spot try to repeat over a period of different days at least two opposite direction runs or 2-pairs if you can do it.

I also agree with catm3 in doing with and w/o xede. Then using the meter as a common reference point you can more readily believe the “difference” measurements which should only be fractions of a second and a few mph.

I have nearly 100 runs using my gtech pro and do get an outlier now and then. But there are times when the butt dyno really compares well twith some really good run and you just know its right. That comes with many runs, however. In any case very promising results

[2007/335i/coupe]

Pssshh... whatever!























Ahhhh.... you know how I really feel sflgator Thanks for taking the time to make this run. :rocks:

[sflgator]

Originally Posted by 2007/335i/coupe

Pssshh... whatever!

Ahhhh.... you know how I really feel sflgator Thanks for taking the time to make this run. :rocks:

No problema...it was a lot of fun!!! Besides, even if I still don't have definite, 100% accurate 0-60mph and 1/4 mi. run times, I still know that this Xede-equipped 335i is MUCH FASTER than before (not that it was slow by any means)! I'm sure it won't be too long before we get to see some other Xede-equipped 335i drivers post some more times...the natives are getting restless.

Let the games begin!

[2007/335i/coupe]

^^^
Yep! Seriously, folks out there need to know you don't need numbers to quantify how much faster the car feels/is with the Xede... and I'm speaking from experience now

[roller84]

You should try a few runs with the car stock, Xede removed or switched to the stock map if it was programmed/installed that way. I'd be curious to see if the G-tech puts out similar times to what has been reported.

[herbz]

i'd like to jump in here and correct some misinformation in this thread.

first of all, power to weight ratio is NOT the only factor in acceleration. almost everyone here fails to mention GEARING. i'm no expert on gearing but i have heard from people who know their shit, that it is more significant than power to weight when it comes to acceleration.

second of all, numbers don't mean everything. also, take into consideration WHEN the power is available. sflgator has 372 lb/ft of torque available at only 1500 rpm, not 6000rpm like most other performance cars.

i don't see the results as surprising. a 335i with engine management/exhaust is basically as fast as a base c6. as more people get xede i believe we'll be seeing more of this, and this "skepticism" will dissapear altogether.

[sflgator]

Originally Posted by herbz

i'd like to jump in here and correct some misinformation in this thread.

first of all, power to weight ratio is NOT the only factor in acceleration. almost everyone here fails to mention GEARING. i'm no expert on gearing but i have heard from people who know their shit, that it is more significant than power to weight when it comes to acceleration.

second of all, numbers don't mean everything. also, take into consideration WHEN the power is available. sflgator has 372 lb/ft of torque available at only 1500 rpm, not 6000rpm like most other performance cars.

i don't see the results as surprising. a 335i with engine management/exhaust is basically as fast as a base c6. as more people get xede i believe we'll be seeing more of this, and this "skepticism" will dissapear altogether.

Interesting notation, herbz. Thanks. btw - according to the dyno's, my TQ w/ the Xede is up to 378 lb./ft. wheel TQ. I'm looking forward to seeing other Xede-equipped 335i numbers!

[teknochild]

someone just go to the fing track already

[e36jakeo]

I have a G-timer (that can store up to 10 acceleration runs) and it is dead accurate compared to the published results for magazines. You have to make sure the road you are using for the test is perfectly level and then you have to press calibrate before taking off.

I've used it in 4 cars and run the tests in 2 directions. 0-60s and 1/4 mile time and trap speeds are perfect.

Did you calibrate the G-Timer on a perfectly flat road?

Given the fact a C6 Corvette with 400 HP and 400 lb/ft torque (at relatively low RPMs) weighing 3300 lbs does the 1/4 mile in 12.7 at 112 or so, I'd say a 335i with similar power and torque (weighing 200-300 lbs more) will be very similar to this.

[musc]

I don't think this model has a calibrate button. I used it tonight and essentially you still have to find a flat surface and tilt the unit until the reading is .00 If you are on an incline or decline, this number will not be zero. Then you just hit the start button and it gives you a 'go' signal.

Sflgator - I also had trouble with the 0-60 reading when doing the full quarter mile. I think it flashes the result quickly, but when you are concentrating on a 1/4 run, its hard to notice. It wouldn't show the 0-60 after the quarter was complete, just some kind of error. The 0-60 will work if you make a run up to 60 and then let out. It will flash the 0-60 time. Based on your run, you'd be in the low 4s for sure.

[ChestaCoppapot]

Great news!!!

Thanks for doing this man! I know a lot of us have been dying to see a 1/4 mile time. Next time im in SoFla maybe ill PM ya if your willing to take me for a ride in that beast

[canuck335i]

Originally Posted by teknochild

someone just go to the fing track already

instead of giving orders, why don't you go yourself?

[bnj]

Not knowing anything about measuring the quarter mile times, are the reaction times taken into account by magazines or in this experiment? If yes, how?

[Driver72]

I am also skeptical of those times....both ET and trap speeds.

However, why doesn't the OP just "remove" the Xede and then run the car again in stock mode to see what that particular older G-Tech says the stock car is doing.
If it's any better than say 13.4 @ 106 than it's clear that G-Tech is reading wrong.

Gaining 55rwhp and 70-80 rwtq I would think the 335i would pull
high 12's @ 112 mph range.

To the OP, thanks for sharing your results.
Give it a run in "stock" form and let us know what that G-Tech says.

[Driver72]

Originally Posted by bnj

Not knowing anything about measuring the quarter mile times, are the reaction times taken into account by magazines or in this experiment? If yes, how?

Reaction times don't mean a thing in measuring 1/4 mile times.
They are only important when "first to the stripe" drag racing is the name of the game.
When the green light goes, you could sit there for 5 seconds and then launch and still get the same time if you nailed a .001 reaction time.

[sflgator]

Originally Posted by Driver72

I am also skeptical of those times....both ET and trap speeds.

However, why doesn't the OP just "remove" the Xede and then run the car again in stock mode to see what that particular older G-Tech says the stock car is doing.
If it's any better than say 13.4 @ 106 than it's clear that G-Tech is reading wrong.

Gaining 55rwhp and 70-80 rwtq I would think the 335i would pull
high 12's @ 112 mph range.

To the OP, thanks for sharing your results.
Give it a run in "stock" form and let us know what that G-Tech says.

First of all, why do we really need stock runs when the car mags and others already did independent runs with the stock 335i???? Most got ~ 0-60mph in 4.8-4.9 sec., 0-100 in 12.1 and 1/4 mi. in 13.6 @ 105mph. After the XEDE install, I gained 57WHP and 92 wheel TQ...this car is much faster than before!

Second of all, after seeing Shiv install the XEDE and not having the DIY install video, I'm really not inclined to uninstall and then re-install the XEDE at this time.

So, my advice is this...we need more ppl who have XEDE-equipped 335i's (I guess the guys in TX, CA, and in Canada) to do test runs with a G-Tech timer and/or go to the track for run times and post them HERE. If my brother and I get a chance, we'll do it again to verify my times and trap speeds, but for now, this is all I can say. Again, I'm not sure why the trap speed said 122.8mph...unless this was my top speed (if it shows that)????

btw - for those skeptics out there -- think about it this way...a stock 335i does 0-60mph in 4.8 sec. and the 1/4 mi. in ~ 13.6 sec. So an XEDE-equipped 335i with ~ 379BHP and ~445 lb./ft.TQ should do 0-60mph in ~ 4.3 sec. (~ 1/2 sec. faster) and the 1/4 mi. in ~ 12.6 sec. (~ 1+ sec. faster)...wouldn't you think?

[CASHBY]

well put it this way...if my wagon that weights more and makes about 330awhp ran 12.6 consistantly.

this car is going to run just as fast if not faster.

if i had the chip, i would have been at the track already to find out exactly what this beast can do.

[sdiver68]

One thing to keep in mind, anyone North of the Mason-Dixon line probably does not have the weather or open tracks yet...For instance, Gateway International here in St. Louis does not re-open until March.

[13307]

Originally Posted by teknochild

yea i said that, just FYI an lsd doesnt do shiet in a straight line, and 12.4 is good but im 100% sure he can run faster (or atleast someone with a stick) that trap speed shows that

I'm assuming you're kidding, because if you think LSD doesn't do anything for you in a straight line you must have never drag raced anyone?! Without LSD, you cannot ensure that both wheels receive full power. Yes, the 335 is well balanced and will have a tendency to spin both wheels, assuming traction is well matched, but you won't get full power to the wheel with greater traction. And that's on a track, the streets are so much worse that the problem is magnified(at least out here in PA where the streets suck!). As someone pointed out, if that were true, drag racers would not run LSD's or full locked axles(depends on the class and modified levels). And if you think this is just a bmw thing, as in it's only bmw's that don't need lsd's, I'll point out the fact that all M's get a locking diff. And before someone says it, yes I think it was crazy that this thing didn't come with one, my G35 6mt had one(OK, it was viscous, but still better), and at 45k, this thing should have but that has been BMW's trend for the last decade or so, it's one of the justifications for the M's higher price. Thanks for the laugh, everyone here in the shop got a good laugh over this one!