[E92Fan]

Well, my dad has a faster car than your dad, so ner ner ner ner ner...

For god's sake, GROW UP

[Yellow Snow]

Jules.

I am also puzzled by your claims.

I still haven't seen any evidence of your 13.2062 run, along with 3 others in the 13.2's, with a further 10 at 13.3 Where are the scans?

You say that the Evolve map has moved the game on. DMS were selling these maps on 2007. They were never putting out 255hp as you claim

Bigamos had his DMS mapped 335d dynoed on an independent rolling road at 291hp. ie, the same figure as yours that was dynoed by the same company who sold you the map. Not suggesting any foul play on the dyno of course, but it is strange.

I have never been to Santa Pod, but I have owned an E46 M3. I would say that my current mapped 335d is definitely a fair bit quicker. It looks from the earlier video that you were pretty much neck and neck. Hardly conclusive!

[mikem]

Originally Posted by smiffy335

Jules.

I am also puzzled by your claims.

I still haven't seen any evidence of your 13.2062 run, along with 3 others in the 13.2's, with a further 10 at 13.3 Where are the scans?

You say that the Evolve map has moved the game on. DMS were selling these maps on 2007. They were never putting out 255hp as you claim

Bigamos had his DMS mapped 335d dynoed on an independent rolling road at 291hp. ie, the same figure as yours that was dynoed by the same company who sold you the map. Not suggesting any foul play on the dyno of course, but it is strange.

I have never been to Santa Pod, but I have owned an E46 M3. I would say that my current mapped 335d is definitely a fair bit quicker. It looks from the earlier video that you were pretty much neck and neck. Hardly conclusive!

Smiffy the mapped 335d might "feel" quicker and its certainly much, much easier to extract all the performance from but the quickest N/A M3 that day also ran a 13.2 and in the states stock M3`s have run sub 13 s.

I didn`t see Jules 13.2 run but I did see him run 13.3 and twice a 13.4 with at least 1 of those runs being over 107 mph.

All the results for the Sun are published on the Ultimate BMW show RWYB table anyway, so all you have to do is ask Jules what No he was running.

[Yellow Snow]

Thanks for the reply Mike.

To be fair to carlos, I think the scans should be shown. Jules is claiming that he got 13.2062 and 3 other runs in the 13.2's. He has shown no evidence of this and is claiming to be .18 seconds quicker over the quarter than Carlos.

Its not much to ask for him to scan all 4 time slips.

[Hotcoupe]

Originally Posted by Turkish

My god, all this and I only asked for some info on whp figures on mapped 335d & 335i's

I really did open a can of worms...

Great banter though

It could have been worse believe me!

Just for a laugh, post the same question on Pistonheads

[Jude1]

Originally Posted by smiffy335

Jules.

I am also puzzled by your claims.

I still haven't seen any evidence of your 13.2062 run, along with 3 others in the 13.2's, with a further 10 at 13.3 Where are the scans?

You say that the Evolve map has moved the game on. DMS were selling these maps on 2007. They were never putting out 255hp as you claim

Bigamos had his DMS mapped 335d dynoed on an independent rolling road at 291hp. ie, the same figure as yours that was dynoed by the same company who sold you the map. Not suggesting any foul play on the dyno of course, but it is strange.

I have never been to Santa Pod, but I have owned an E46 M3. I would say that my current mapped 335d is definitely a fair bit quicker. It looks from the earlier video that you were pretty much neck and neck. Hardly conclusive!

Right then, I was just going to ignore this thread but I hate being doubted even if it is by the minority and whilst I believe I have nothing to prove, I'll post up some facts anyway.

DYNO FIGURES

If you read back through my previous posts I have mentioned that when I said that Tuning has moved on another level I state this because I believe that more owners now get a map that really does offer 340bhp. There will still be a few cars that don't reach this figure and this is normal as all cars respond slightly differently to a similar map. Most Tuners advertise what gains they can give and this varies from 334bhp up to 350bhp, in my experience this was not always achieved and this is based on figures from my own car and from talking to others who have had their car rolling roaded. The only way of knowing for sure if your car does have the quoted figure is to have it rolling roaded before and after and not all Tuners offer this, this may also prove inconclusive as a car can record a different figure on a different type of rolling road, so having it done before and after will show what gains have been made, for me I would be looking for a gain of approx 60bhp.

Over the last year and a half I have seen and have discussed with owners what gains they have had from a remap on the 335d and some have mentioned that theirs is only at 320bhp or 250-270 at the wheels......most of the graphs we now see show figures consistently higher than this, hence me stating that tuning has moved on a level.....more so in consistency than overly high power figures given. This is not meant to be a dig at any tuners in particular as I always recommend to owners asking advice on a remap to go to DMS, EMAPS and now Evolve, so give them 3 options, if you take time to read back through some of my posts you will see this and not just on this forum. My comment of Tuning moving on another level was also there as a means to goad Carlos.....it worked but i wish I hadn't done it now as it backfired slightly and was taken out of context, my apologies for this.

So coming back onto tuning, my 335d has ran 3 different companies maps, Chipped UK, DMS and now Evolve. Below is a graph of some of the maps I had applied to my car, please note the date of these graphs:



This graph shows the following:

Line 02 - Chipped UK
Line 07 - Chipped UK
Line 10 - Chipped UK
Line 13 - DMS

The early Chipped UK maps were applied for me to run at Fighting Torque in 2007, the idea was to have lots of low down torque to allow a blistering standing start and it worked, I then went and had this map removed and had another map applied that was just as strong but without the low down torque, after two maps this was achieved but was obvious was that the peak bhp had fallen from around 262 at the wheels to 253-255 hp. At this point I did a bit of research including talking with another RR based down south and they commented that they had had quite a few 335d's on the RR (this is now mid to late 2007) and the best they had seen at that time was 269 hp at the wheels with most of the others anywhere between 255 and 265 hp, I had this graph sent so that I could compare against mine and here it is:



A few of you will know of this car/owner as it was Peppernick's graph and I believe the map was applied back in May 07 approx and this was pretty much the benchmark for a strong graph.

I then contacted DMS as I wasn't entirely happy with my previous map and wanted something smoother as I drive lots of motorway miles, so they installed a new map which was great and very smooth but felt a bit sluggish, they were surprised and said that it's a pretty strong map but said they would put a stronger map on which was much better and just as smooth, a cracking map. Here is the graph.



Power wise this map was on a par with all the graphs from the Surrey Rolling Road Day that Carlos attended with some guys from here I think? A few 335d's hit the rollers and the results were very positive, Carlos had a similar DMS map to mine so I was happy to see him yield some of the best results from that dyno day.

I went to Evolve as I had met Sal and Imran at Fighting Torque 2007, they were running a Z3MCoupe there at the time, I then noticed that they posted on here so pm'd to say hello. I work from time to time near where they are based so asked if I could pop by to do dyno run to compare the figures I had been getting to what I would get on their dyno (both dynos are Dyno Dynamics Dynonmometers), I know these dynos fairly well from the work I had had done on my previous car so I insisted on how I wanted the car setting up, Sal was absolutely fine with this so we ran the car, it gave figures of about 274bhp which is around 1% different the other figures I had so was more than happy that the figures were correct, I then asked Sal what he though of the graph in comparison to what he offered and he stated that it is an excellent graph and would recommend that I leave it as is.....you can't say fairer than that! I then mentioned that I would like to see the best map Evolve offer on my car so away he went, applied the map and ran the car again on the rollers (car had not been moved)the runs showed that the car had made a few gains throughout the power and torque curves, so I was impressed, he then applied the level 2 map, which yielded more bhp, but lower low down torque. I had a map installed and off I went. As my car was strapped down very tightly (not ideal but done at my request to allow minimal varience in before and after figures) it is difficult to say what the bhp at the wheels is, but on the day strapped down it was 282bhp, on another dyno this could be 270 or even 300 such is the varience. As I have stated in my previous post / thread I am not too worried about the figures I am more interested in the percentage gain. The only way you can possibly get a fair reflection between cars is to have them on the same dyno on the same day and strapped down in the same manner.

A bit of background about me and tuning / development work:
I used to a bit of a TVR Cerbera nut for a few years and owned a couple of beauties, here is my first one a 4.2:



and here is my pride and joy, my old 4.5



in action

Mullering an M3 (CSL?)


I've done a fair bit of develoment work on this car and this includes, tuning (Emerald ECU mapping), redesigning of Induction, development of new air filter, redesigning of exhaust etc, some of this is now in full production and provides a nice little bit of extra income, see here:

http://www.trackcarsolutions.net/sho...d&productId=59
http://www.trackcarsolutions.net/sho...d&productId=67

Petrolhead yes, like to tinker...yes.

Finally then onto Santa Pod, I really begrudge being doubted and only went to Santa Pod to see what the car would do. I was hopefull that if it would be as quick as Carlos's car as it previously had the same map (albeit with lower recorded figures) and now had one a touch stronger, if not then a touch quicker. It proved to be just that on it's first run. I ran a few times as the strip was virtually empty early on 0930am and thereafter tried running with DTC on/off, in D/DS/DS manual and launching at idle, 1000rpm, 1500rpm, 2500rpm etc, I DID do over 20 runs as I said and this was more as the was a small hitch early on. I feel I have written more than enough here and to be honest the last couple of days of reading these threads has made re-think about posting on performance etc again on here, but for the record did I say 10 runs in the 13.3's so here goes

Believe what you want.....












Jules.

[Yellow Snow]

Jules.

Thanks for posting up the slips, but I still see no sign of a 13.2062 run, let alone the other 3 runs in the 13.2's. I hope they haven't been mislaid!

I also note that in an earlier thread, you claimed that the Evolve map was .5 to .7 quicker over the quarter than the DMS map. It seems that you were perhaps slightly optimistic there. Both you and Carlos are in the 13.3's at 106. Pretty close I would say.

It has already been established that the peppernick graph isn't a true reflection of how the car performs on the road. If you read the posts when it was dyno'd you will see that the car wasn't strapped down, which caused the dyno to drop off at 3,900rpm and only record the 269hp figure. On the road that car still pulled hard to 5k.

There was a post somewhere on this forum where Evolve explained the pro's and cons of strapping differences on the dyno.

The simple fact as far as I can see it is that anyone with the correct software can push a 335d to stupid levels of power quite easily. It's knowing where to call it a day on the map to stop it going into limp mode that is the talented part.

Mine is apparently giving 290hp without ever seeing limp mode. I reckon I am just inside the safety parameters of the box. If I wanted more power, I can just request it from whoever is mapping it, be it DMS, Emaps, Chippeduk (whoops sorry, strike that one) or Evolve. No one has a magic wand. Limp mode is there for a reason.

[dxb335d]

I have not read any post here since my last one, I will read them in my own time and them post my comments....

Regarding a question from jules directed to me about how long it took me to do a 13.3.

I ran 7 times thats all, one with DTC left on so ruined that complete run. So 6 runs with the best of 13.3. There is more to come out of my stock set-up.

You run in excess of 20 times, reording several 13.3's and a few 13.2's

If i had run another 13 times, im sure i too could have matched or even beaten a 13.2.

[Jude1]

Originally Posted by smiffy335

Jules.

Thanks for posting up the slips, but I still see no sign of a 13.2062 run, let alone the other 3 runs in the 13.2's. I hope they haven't been mislaid!

No not mislaid, but keep doubting me please, you've already said you didn't believe i did 10 runs in the 13.3's so I posted them......now you want more , well here's a bit more......a 13.2 but I really now couldn't give a flying f*ck so you'll never know about the rest.....becaue it obviously matters so much to you

Originally Posted by smiffy335

I also note that in an earlier thread, you claimed that the Evolve map was .5 to .7 quicker over the quarter than the DMS map. It seems that you were perhaps slightly optimistic there. Both you and Carlos are in the 13.3's at 106. Pretty close I would say.

Read above, not optimistic, fact, it's quicker. MY CAR IS NOW QUICKER WITH MY CURRENT MAP THAN MY LAST MAP. MY SEAT OF THE PANTS DRIVING EXPERIENCE TELLS ME THIS AS DOES MY VISITS TO FIGHTING TORQUE, VMAX AND SANTA POD. There you go

Originally Posted by smiffy335

It has already been established that the peppernick graph isn't a true reflection of how the car performs on the road. If you read the posts when it was dyno'd you will see that the car wasn't strapped down, which caused the dyno to drop off at 3,900rpm and only record the 269hp figure. On the road that car still pulled hard to 5k.

Really???

So the official explanation as to why the car stopped pulling wasn't because the gearbox nanny kicked in (limpus modus) ??????????? If the car hadn't been strapped down properly then why did this not occur on his "BEFORE RUN" ??

See Here -

Originally Posted by smiffy335

There was a post somewhere on this forum where Evolve explained the pro's and cons of strapping differences on the dyno.

Yes there is and it was ME, yes ME, would you believe it who bought this subject up based on previous experiences with certain rolling roads. If you read my threads carefully then you would have known this.

Originally Posted by smiffy335

The simple fact as far as I can see it is that anyone with the correct software can push a 335d to stupid levels of power quite easily. It's knowing where to call it a day on the map to stop it going into limp mode that is the talented part.

Mine is apparently giving 290hp without ever seeing limp mode. I reckon I am just inside the safety parameters of the box. If I wanted more power, I can just request it from whoever is mapping it, be it DMS, Emaps, Chippeduk (whoops sorry, strike that one) or Evolve. No one has a magic wand. Limp mode is there for a reason.

Agree and correct in most cases except some of the Tuners will not publically admit they they will give you a map that exceeds the various safety parameters. The most obvious place where a mapped 335d will go into limp will be on a track where it is being pushed hard, as not many 335d's do track days (prob less than 5 or 10%) then this is never likely to be seen that often. My current map has not had any issues with limp mode, the only one I had limp mode with was the last DMS map and that was only during and after a VMax event, on the road it was perfect.

Jules

[Yellow Snow]

Sorry to have upset you old Son, but I still see no sign of the scan of a 13.206 run. Can you kindly direct me to where I said I didn't believe you. I have simply been asking for proof.

You have quoted that you ran 4 times in the 13.2's with one at 13.2062. I just want to see all four scans.

[misterS3]

I don't get it. Why the fixation with 7/100th of a second?
Couldn't that be accounted for by the reaction time off the line ? Or even wind (both the driver and the weather)?

[Yellow Snow]

Originally Posted by misterS3

I don't get it. Why the fixation with 7/100th of a second?
Couldn't that be accounted for by the reaction time off the line ? Or even wind (both the driver and the weather)?

I agree mate, but when someone derides a fellow member with a specific time, I would like to see some proof.

It would also be nice to see the top of the timeslip where it states the car number

I have no problem at all with anyone who can back up their claims with positive proof. If they can't then so be it. All respect has been lost.

[Jude1]

Originally Posted by smiffy335

I agree mate, but when someone derides a fellow member with a specific time, I would like to see some proof.

I have no problem at all with anyone who can back up their claims with positive proof. If they can't then so be it. All respect has been lost.

Derides another member?? I don't think so. If you read the original thread - Jude1? - I posted the following -



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by mikem
Were you running at Santa pod today ?

Hi Mike,

Yes it was me running at Santa Pod yesterday.

I hadn't really planned on going as I was at birthday bash on Saturday night and didn't get in til 2.30am . However, on Sunday morning despite feeling like sh*t I decided to drive down to the Pod just to have a few runs. I knew some of you guys were there but was feeling a little sorry for myself so couldn't be arsed to track you all down

I was a bit disappointed with my times as I expected to hit 13.0, and I put this down to the lowering springs which as I've mentioned before seem to be making the car squirm a little from a standing start, definitely different from before and makes the car harder to launch consistently, squirm = excess slip = autobox changes gear prematurely. I will be keeping them on though as the car sits much better on them.

D mode on the strip was definitely worse than running manual DS, this is different to my experiences on concrete strips (Fighting Torque etc.), the best set-up appeared to be as Carlos had run recently in DS. Didn't have a chance to try all the running set-ups I wanted to as I ran out of time (only there for a few hours) and it was very hot so times may have been distorted.

Most of my runs were in the 13.2-13.3, with the odd 13.4/5 where I tried different set-ups.

Best time was:
13.2063 @ 106.48mph

Got to run a couple of times against one of the V8 M3's (slower one of the two with manual box)and beat him both times, he ran a 13.7 and 13.5 against me, I think he was a bit disappointed with his times especially as the other white V8 M3 was running 12.9-13.0 but was the dual clutch version. He says that he posts on here from time to time but can't remember his log-in name, pleasent young chap though.

Managed to catch up with Sal and Imran from Evolve just before I left and it was good to hear that all of the Evolve cars were running very good times indeed

Some nice cars there and the event was certainly not as "chavtastic" as some had made out.

Highlight of the day for me was seeing a friends LS powered Cerb running mid 11s, but I would say that as my previous car was a Cerb that ran 11.7-11.9 1/4s.

Marlie, did you run your 335i??

Jules.



Where have I derided another member? Read the rest of that thread and tell me.

If anything it is you and Carlos who have doubted me with the following (some inference):

I only ran once at Santa Pod
I only ran one time in the 13.2's
I had a special map put on
I run a car with lots of development work
I wasn't at the Pod
I didn't run 10 times in the 13.3's
I didn't run 4 times in the 13.2's

Carlos's gripe seems to be my quote about "taking tuning onto another level" and I have explained that this was part joke and partly because I believe that more cars now get maps with closer to quoted figures, if you and any others don't agree then that is fine, it's just my opinion.

If anyone goes back to the pod and runs 13.2 or below then bloody fantastic I will be chuffed to bits for them, will I believe them then yes, why not? I don't care that much about othe people's cars and their figures / times, I am more interested in my own. When Carlos did the Redline shootout I was proud of the figures his car posted and commented to that effect, I didn't start saying that it should've have got faster figures etc.

I am really not bothered if I have lost your respect (who are you ), I've repeatedly answered your questions and in most cases corrected you, but you seem oblivious to this and I have all but given you all of my figures for Santa Pod, but the pity is you'll not see what you want to see....more fool me eh

Jules.

[dxb335d]

Hi Jules,

Ive Read that very last post of yours.

Your best to date is 13.2, mine is 13.3. Not much in it im sure you would agree. Considering Ive run much less than you then i would say its pretty even. Both maps are similar and are giving similar times.

I need to get few more runs under my belt to make it even for sure.

Carlos

[Jude1]

Originally Posted by dxb335d

Hi Jules,

Ive Read that very last post of yours.

Your best to date is 13.2, mine is 13.3. Not much in it im sure you would agree. Considering Ive run much less than you then i would say its pretty even. Both maps are similar and are giving similar times.

I need to get few more runs under my belt to make it even for sure.

Carlos

Carlos,

I've never said there was a massive gap, someone else applied a bit of science and said 8.5 metres, which is what 2 car lengths? I don't even think you've questioned my times? But you have said things that are totally wrong, which p*sses me off. I don't know where you were getting this info from but it was quite clearly wrong, and hopefully you agree now.

If you get down to 13.2 then great, I will be happy for you.

Your car may even have more power, who knows?

Jules.

ps read the rest of thread please.

[dxb335d]

Hi Jules,

Still confused how its 8m, as you calculated it for your run, there was no 0.1 tenth involved etc. Not even my time involved.

Sorry if ive pissed you off with things you feel ive said which are ''totally wrong'' as you say.

I am Sorry, i must reiterate that.

I really wish i could have made the event now as it would have been great to have run up the strip with you, now that would have made a great spectacle for 335d lovers.

Point is, the 335d is a cracking car which can be tuned to embarrass E46 M3's. Cuz if i owned a M3 and got pipped by a diesel i would be embarrased.


The fastest M3 on that very day is a friend of mine. Baris. On the road recently i pulled upto him pretty well. He two did a 13.2 that day.


Best regards

Carlos

[Jude1]

Originally Posted by dxb335d

Hi Jules,

Still confused how its 8m, as you calculated it for your run, there was no 0.1 tenth involved etc. Not even my time involved.

Sorry if ive pissed you off with things you feel ive said which are ''totally wrong'' as you say.

I am Sorry, i must reiterate that.

I really wish i could have made the event now as it would have been great to have run up the strip with you, now that would have made a great spectacle for 335d lovers.

Point is, the 335d is a cracking car which can be tuned to embarrass E46 M3's. Cuz if i owned a M3 and got pipped by a diesel i would be embarrased.


The fastest M3 on that very day is a friend of mine. Baris. On the road recently i pulled upto him pretty well. He two did a 13.2 that day.


Best regards

Carlos

Hi Carlos,

The calculation was for a car travelling at 106mph and at that speed what distance is created for a 0.18sec gap, it equates to 8.5m.

Apology accepted.

There was another M3 in the 13.2's, he ran against me twice and it was 1-1, he was the only car to beat me! His was a silver E46 M3 Convertible with what looked a carbon fibre bonnet, I think it may have been running nitrous or had some mods, I think he posts on evotecnik so you may know him? Baris ran some good times, I think he has ran those sorts of times before and isn't his M3 modified? The std M3's were running highish 13's. Our D's really come into their own once rolling.

Jules.

[dxb335d]

Baris M3 has 100cell cats, Full zorst system, Re-map and pulleys on the engine. It may have a filter too.

So quite a modded one.

I agree. Rolling 60-160 ours are quick. Standing starts there not built for although relatively easy to launch.


Baris best before, when it wasnt so modded was a 13.5.

Carlos

[Jude1]

Originally Posted by dxb335d

Baris M3 has 100cell cats, Full zorst system, Re-map and pulleys on the engine. It may have a filter too.

So quite a modded one.

I agree. Rolling 60-160 ours are quick. Standing starts there not built for although relatively easy to launch.


Baris best before, when it wasnt so modded was a 13.5.

Carlos

Bet he is happy with the improvements then?

Do you know the other M3?

[mikem]

Originally Posted by Jude1

Do you know the other M3?

I`ve not seen him on EvoT but its running the VF stage 1 supercharger. I saw it run a 13.8 then 13.2 but didn`t see the run against yours.

[Jude1]

Originally Posted by mikem

I`ve not seen him on EvoT but its running the VF stage 1 supercharger. I saw it run a 13.8 then 13.2 but didn`t see the run against yours.

Hi Mike,

Not sure if he posts on there but saw pics of his car on there, thought it might have been charged by the way it accelerated, almost in lunges. He ran a 13.38 v 13.37 for me, but I was 4/10ths better at the 60ft, then he ran a 13.24 v my 13.36 with me having a 2/10ths better 60ft, with agood start he could have got under 13.

Jules.

[mikem]

Thats esentially the same problem I have Jules, my best 60`s are 2.2s. If I could drop another 0.2s off the 60` it would be around 0.5s off the full 1/4.