[dxb335d]

what tha best time anyone has got with v1.47 and with what trap?

i think with v2 a very low 12 is possible not trapping more than 112 tho

[hotrod182]

Originally Posted by dxb335d

what tha best time anyone has got with v1.47 and with what trap?

i think with v2 a very low 12 is possible not trapping more than 112 tho

And 0-100 in 9.8 second range is pretty good too. I don't think a modded 335i will easily beat it in a top end roll on. Maybe I will be getting the new M3 next spring after all. 0-150 beats the 06 400HP C6. I wonder if the 7 speed smg will be quicker/faster, just as it is in the M5.

[normtrum]

Originally Posted by hotrod182

And 0-100 in 9.8 second range is pretty good too. I don't think a modded 335i will easily beat it in a top end roll on. Maybe I will be getting the new M3 next spring after all. 0-150 beats the 06 400HP C6. I wonder if the 7 speed smg will be quicker/faster, just as it is in the M5.

I agree with your comment on the top end roll. I'm thinking the dual clutch will even out perform the smg...time will tell. Maybe a lot of time, since the dual clutch might be the last to come out.

[grkm3]

looks like BMW new what they were doing with the 335/M3 if a bone stock M3 can trap higher than a modded 355,it will def destroy the plain unmodded 335.

chip,intake,exh on the M3 and it will be a drivers race for modded 335s,untill someone throws on bigger turbos.

fun times to come

[Driver72]

I guessed quite some time ago the C63 was going to take the e92 M3 in staight line.
But I didn't know it was going to be that fast!!
12.3 @ 116 mph is 2008 LS3 436 hp Corvette times.

I'm sure the c63 is underrated by 20-30 hp to "protect" the CLK and E Class cars.
The 7 speed auto helps a bunch too. Close ratios and super fast shifts.

The M3's times are good.
What I don't get is why it's only getting a 12.8 ET with trap speeds of 113 mph. I guess it's just like the M5 and really just starts to scream when it gets into triple digits.
I'd of expected a 12.5 with 113 mph trap speeds.

Either way, it's still a fast car.
The upcoming DSG tranny model should have launch control too and faster shifts, so I'd expect it too be a bit quicker.

Man we are all nuts.
I remember growing up when a car that ran in the high 14's @ 90+ mph was considered fast and you'd be lucky to have a car that ran in the 15's
Then only exotics ran in the 13's at over 100 mph.

Now if you have a car that runs in the 14's and under 100 mph we consider it slow. LOL

Lastly, I know I personally get passionate about drag racing times myself. I've been a car nut since I was 14 and started racing my cars the day after I got my driver's license.
But in the grand scheme of things, a couple tenths here or a mph or two there is NOTHING. It's a blink of an eye.
I apologize if I get caught up over drag racing times, it's just been in my blood for nearly 20 years.
I've beat cars with more power than me and have been beaten by cars with less.
20 hp here and there in our cars don't mean a whole lot really.
We all have fast cars whether it's a stock 335i or it has a PROcede, TT, JB2, Xede, or whatever.
Each car is a little different and each car will react to the different tunes a bit differently and perform a bit differently too.

As it seems on a completely STOCK car in every other respect, on 91 and especially 93 Octane, it doesn't matter which tune we have (PROcede v1.47, JB2, TT, Xede), our cars seems to run in the high 12's at 107-109 mph.

As for v2.01 who knows yet, it's only gotten a few runs and not under the best of conditions yet. But even if it runs .2 seconds and 2 mph faster than v1.47 on a completely stock car, it doesn't appear to be enough to hang with the new M3 once rolling for sure. But regardless, it's a FAST car and we need to enjoy that and keep that into perspective.

Sorry so long, take it easy.

[per]

I did some pulls this evening against a friend of mine and his Procede 1,47 (only) ,the difference was only 2-3 car lengths from 50-200 km/h..
I was surprised, I thought the V2 would be a lot faster.
Any comments?

[zenmaster]

Originally Posted by per

I did some pulls this evening against a friend of mine and his Procede 1,47 (only) ,the difference was only 2-3 car lengths from 50-200 km/h..
I was surprised, I thought the V2 would be a lot faster.
Any comments?

Everything else being equal, like intake temp, if you look at the dyno graph comparison between v1 and v2, it seems you'd need to keep v2 car in the higher RPM range to get noticeably more power.

[bmwzimmer]

2-3 cl is pretty good I think. What were your tq settings?

[per]

Originally Posted by bmwzimmer

2-3 cl is pretty good I think. What were your tq settings?

I run 100% all over, but i was close, this could be a driver issue.

[Panoz]

Originally Posted by scottp999

I think it's too early to say what a procede v2 can do, with them saying the first map is conservative, I think there is more to get out of it. By the time the 2008 m3's are produced in December, ship out, and arrive, hopefully we will go from having a conservative map, to mild, or even an agressive option.

It will be fun to watch the first race videos that come out. Me, I am just trying to keep up with my brother's Firebird boltons. I need my v2, exhaust, and intake to arrive.

A friend of mine has already delivered his M3 . I could post videos but where is my V2 ????? :sad0147:

[catdog]

Well it looks like within measurement variability, my 335xi JB2 is about dead even with C&D's M3 acceleration numbers. Below is their test sheet for the M3 and enclosed is my Gtech graph. The 0-120 mph are virtually identical...

14.3 sec for M3 vs. 14.6 for my caaaahhh

[catdog]

Originally Posted by per

I did some pulls this evening against a friend of mine and his Procede 1,47 (only) ,the difference was only 2-3 car lengths from 50-200 km/h..
I was surprised, I thought the V2 would be a lot faster.
Any comments?

Haha, a good question to Shiv; let me guess, v2 is really meant to improve driveability not just raw power....humm

V2 is the most overrated and overhyped upgrade i have ever seen in any field, kind of like Vista, late to the scene, and not as explosively exciting as initially suggested, YAWN!

Wait till v2.01, v2.02low boost, then v2.03no-cel, then ... blah blah blah

[hotrod182]

Originally Posted by catdog

Haha, a good question to Shiv; let me guess, v2 is really meant to improve driveability not just raw power....humm

V2 is the most overrated and overhyped upgrade i have ever seen in any field, kind of like Vista, late to the scene, and not as explosively exciting as initially suggested, YAWN!

Wait till v2.01, v2.02low boost, then v2.03no-cel, then ... blah blah blah

When you have a 2.0 low boost, doesn't that kind of defeat the purpose of the upgrade??

[Driver72]

Originally Posted by catdog

Haha, a good question to Shiv; let me guess, v2 is really meant to improve driveability not just raw power....humm

V2 is the most overrated and overhyped upgrade i have ever seen in any field, kind of like Vista, late to the scene, and not as explosively exciting as initially suggested, YAWN!

Wait till v2.01, v2.02low boost, then v2.03no-cel, then ... blah blah blah

Man you JB2 guys take right after the maker.

2-3 CL is about 25 rwhp difference.
That's pretty significant. When you consider the original PROcede v1.2 would pull about 4-4.5 CL on a stock 335i in the same period! The a v1.47 car would pull maybe 1/2 CL on a v1.2 car.
Adding 2-3 CL for $150 is a bargain upgrade, not too mention all the other v2.01 and future benefits.

To get that kind of performance with any other tune, you need to spend an additional $40 every fill up (9 gallons of race gas at $7.50 per gallon instead of 9 gallons of 91 at $3.10 a gallon) and deal with the hassle of always having to find one of the few stations that sells 100 Octane race gas.
To get the highest level of performance on 91 octane pump gas is a beautiful thing. And get better gas mileage than any other tune to boot.
All that, plus user adjustable power ratings and valet mode and so forth...doesn't sound overrated or overhyped to me.
Oh, and unlike what your post said Vishnu's PROcede/Xede was first to the party, followed by AA's Xede, followed by the Turbo Tuner, followed by RD Black Box Xede, last came the JB. Just to clear that up for you since your a bit new to this party yourself.

[normtrum]

Originally Posted by catdog

Haha, a good question to Shiv; let me guess, v2 is really meant to improve driveability not just raw power....humm

V2 is the most overrated and overhyped upgrade i have ever seen in any field, kind of like Vista, late to the scene, and not as explosively exciting as initially suggested, YAWN!

Wait till v2.01, v2.02low boost, then v2.03no-cel, then ... blah blah blah

Waaaay to early to tell imo. We need to get some info from a much larger pool of v2 users...although that's currently tough to do, for obvious reasons.

Like mentioned above, it's more then just raw power numbers that we need to look at. Driveability, distribution of power, stuff like that.

Within the next 3-4 weeks we should have enough feedback to be able to create a better understanding of what we're looking at.

[vbb]

That quartermile time on the C63 AMG is quite impressive. 12.3?! Wow.

I guess a Procede V2 335i will probably be slightly faster in a straight line than the new M3, not that it really matters.

[catdog]

Originally Posted by Driver72

Man you JB2 guys take right after the maker.

2-3 CL is about 25 rwhp difference.
That's pretty significant. When you consider the original PROcede v1.2 would pull about 4-4.5 CL on a stock 335i in the same period! The a v1.47 car would pull maybe 1/2 CL on a v1.2 car.
Adding 2-3 CL for $150 is a bargain upgrade, not too mention all the other v2.01 and future benefits.

To get that kind of performance with any other tune, you need to spend an additional $40 every fill up (9 gallons of race gas at $7.50 per gallon instead of 9 gallons of 91 at $3.10 a gallon) and deal with the hassle of always having to find one of the few stations that sells 100 Octane race gas.
To get the highest level of performance on 91 octane pump gas is a beautiful thing. And get better gas mileage than any other tune to boot.
All that, plus user adjustable power ratings and valet mode and so forth...doesn't sound overrated or overhyped to me.
Oh, and unlike what your post said Vishnu's PROcede/Xede was first to the party, followed by AA's Xede, followed by the Turbo Tuner, followed by RD Black Box Xede, last came the JB. Just to clear that up for you since your a bit new to this party yourself.

Some of us have 93 all the time...
I have followed this scene early on though not as closely as you and i realize the jb is latest on scene, i got the first batch of the jb2...
Just giving you guys back the stuff you shovel at jb fans, no hard feelings.
We just need to see v2 vs. jb2 on a drag strip
C63 is very impressive, including the engine sound...
M3 is coming and so is gt-r so good times for all!

[FirstClass]

One big thing to remember is tires/track. I think the C&D people get their times on a road track/runway right? Not a prepped drag strip like many of the 335 times. Also, you have to look at stock RFTs or DRs. If the DR times are under the M3's time, then the 335 is screwed with just a chip, but if the RFT times are under then switching to better tires may give the 335 a chance. Only time will tell, especially since it's only one set of numbers.

[catdog]

Originally Posted by FirstClass

One big thing to remember is tires/track. I think the C&D people get their times on a road track/runway right? Not a prepped drag strip like many of the 335 times. Also, you have to look at stock RFTs or DRs. If the DR times are under the M3's time, then the 335 is screwed with just a chip, but if the RFT times are under then switching to better tires may give the 335 a chance. Only time will tell, especially since it's only one set of numbers.

Dude got my times on stock 17" with rft's so what's your point?
I am sure the michelin ps2's on the m3 are stickier but i have awd and an extra 300 lbs of weight...

[FirstClass]

Originally Posted by catdog

Dude got my times on stock 17" with rft's so what's your point?
I am sure the michelin ps2's on the m3 are stickier but i have awd and an extra 300 lbs of weight...

My point is that if times are on RFTs there is time to be gained with better tires, I think I stated that pretty clearly in my first post.

[Crazy Bimmer]

Originally Posted by sajakh

Now that we have some offiical 1/4 mile times for the M3 from Car and driver, what times are we going to see (or seeing) now for the Proceded 335i.

http://www.caranddriver.com/comparis...08-bmw-m3.html

M3: 0-60 (4.3sec), 12.8 @ 113 mph

The article was written in the future. December 2007?

[Nyulak]

It's the article for the December issue of the print magazine. Information and reviews are obtained much sooner than the print date. The real time nature of the web pretty much means there is no reason to wait for a magazine anymore.