[O-cha]

Originally Posted by LACA335i

Im sorry you are not correct but close. please double check your calculate again? there some car mag reported that 335i stock got about 300 hp at the flywheel. We have tons of dyno result from dyno results was about 267 to 278 whp. is about 10%- 11 % loss dude to powertrain loss for the manual.. if you dont believe me, i will post my own dyno from my baseline. This is how to do this.. take 300 HP (advertised) x .10 or .11 = 267 (11%). Actual Flywheel is about 340 hp.. they dont published it due to profit margin from e46 m3 and 335i.

What the heck is wrong with your dyno? The car is overrated which is why it dynos so high, not because it has ridiculously low drivetrain loss. Correcting wheel dynos for the crank is a stupid practice anyway.

[Archibald Donnington]

<-----that white dude

Originally Posted by LACA335i

yah dude i remember u.. you are that white dude.. how are you bro.. sup sup.... we should hit up the next irwingdale speedyway.. lets run for fun bro

Hell yeah. Um...is that a strip or a track? No 1/4's for me yet, but I'm down to scramble some eggs :.
aaron

[BMWPower06]

nice, but it still looks like its NOT pulling all the way to redline...

[OC Guy]

Nice #s.

[Jonmartin]

Originally Posted by BMWPower06

nice, but it still looks like its NOT pulling all the way to redline...

The Turbos get tired up there no other tune pulls to redline either and even if they did they still would be making less power up there then this tune
cause at it's lowest peak it's still making 355whp at redline.I noticed some other folks only dyno to 6100rpm just so it's not visible on their tune.

[garyhgaryh]

Originally Posted by *****ed335BMW

Once again I will repeat what I said earlier

400WHP= A possibility of something breaking (please don't compare the 335i with other Evo's or 300z's because they are built by mitsubishi, also those 300z's had many issues with the increased power, plus these turbos are not popularly used throughout the turbo induction world, considering how tiny they are and EVO's do not run these turbos)

These are great numbers but nothing has been proven yet. Like Vishnu said it has been only 5 weeks of driving this car this way and I am guessing you do not drive on 98 octane 24/7 with this car especially with you using it as a loaner for clients………………

Everyone seems to jump on the band wagon to throw on a full exhaust system with down pipe and take out all of your cats and run a stage 2 tune with probably a race gas map, you need to comprehend that until I see this car ran for at LEAST 6 months, I will not believe that this car will blow something possibly (especially pushing the extreme limits day in and day out)

Also all of you guys with the AUTOMATIC transmissions, I would seriously hold your horses before slapping on every performance mod known to man kind onto this car just because he has broken the 400whp level, which I may add I am very happy about and must say congratualtions, wait for true longer term R&D before pushing these limits (my personal guess along with a few other well known tuner companies ICSPERFORMANCE) was predicting a lil bit over 400whp, maybe say ~415whp was the limit for this engine in the long term wear and tear as a daily driver and definitely taking a tole on the AUTOMATIC transmissions.

Flame suit on for everyone that is gung ho about making their car into a 400+whp car asap………………………………


(im talking about mainly the long run of this car not the immediate result of after 5 weeks of driving)

Again congratualtions, AND I WOULD PREFER TO BE PROVEN WRONG AND THIS CAR BEING CAPABLE OF HANDLING WELL OVER 500WHP IN THE LONG RUN!!!!!!

Gosh calm down dude. If you mod your car, you know the consequences.
I have an 87 Supra Turbo that puts out 220 crank HP stock. It now puts out around 400 rwhp and nothing has broken and I have taken it to the track many times (knock on wood).

I'm sure the 335i will fare a little better 300hp hp to 400rwhp. But you're
right, I'm a little worried about the auto guys.. Makes me wonder if I should change my auto 6sp order to a manual.
Gary

[Former_Boosted_IS]

Originally Posted by Jonmartin

The Turbos get tired up there no other tune pulls to redline either and even if they did they still would be making less power up there then this tune
cause at it's lowest peak it's still making 355whp at redline.I noticed some other folks only dyno to 6100rpm just so it's not visible on their tune.

Why would it be the turbos getting tired? They should be able to hold boost to redline with zero problem at 14 psi. I think what you are seeing is the hot side of the rpm and therefore the risk of detonation increases substantially. Every single tuner will back off timing and dump more fuel at high rpms to reduce the risk of detonation. It is safe tuning and nothing more.

Wow, as usual tons of speculation on how the engine will hold this. Just because BMW made this doesn't mean it will hold. The legendary 2JZ engine on the IS300 was cracking piston rings all over the place over 400 rwhp with a compression of 8:5-9.0:1. Let the experts speak on this because the speculation helps in no way. Also, walked is already reported a slipping clutch at his power level, so we are seeing the first stock part reaching its limit.

[LACA335i]

Originally Posted by Archibald Donnington

<-----that white dude

Hell yeah. Um...is that a strip or a track? No 1/4's for me yet, but I'm down to scramble some eggs :.
aaron

irwingdale speedyway is 1/8 mile

[scottp999]

Did the 50 v2's ship yet? Seriously, lets get some more v2's out there before you put out a v3. What are there, 30 v2's on the street and most of them are hand selected people for beta and a few lucky people? We have been waiting since early September.

Most of us will use 93 octane, with catback exhaust, and maybe catted dp's. You will lose alot of your customer base if you focus on race gas and offroad downpipes.

What do you think the % of customers is that are interested in race gas an offroad downpipe maps?

[RiXst3r]

since august we have *heard* about first v2 beta, then 2.00 production, 2.01, 2.02 beta, 2.02 production... now talk of downpipe and racegas versions.... no wonder they arent shipping them, they are still developing it. procede is definatly "bleeding edge"

[wahoo]

Great news. I anticipated this happening, just not sure this early. I am with the others in the long term R&D. 5 weeks is not long in the scheme of things.

Put it on a dyno and let it run for 24hr cycles, for 5 weeks. Everyone should chill and enjoy the R&D process. Too many people wanting to know what every little piece of the puzzle is.

Good job Shiv.

[Former_Boosted_IS]

Originally Posted by wahoo

Great news. I anticipated this happening, just not sure this early. I am with the others in the long term R&D. 5 weeks is not long in the scheme of things.

Put it on a dyno and let it run for 24hr cycles, for 5 weeks. Everyone should chill and enjoy the R&D process. Too many people wanting to know what every little piece of the puzzle is.

Good job Shiv.

The dyno and real world are night and day differences. The load on the dyno is vastly different than on a real world car running day in day out.

[1clean335i]

woot! i was right

[sflgator]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

The PROcede map we are using is very similar to the v2.0.2 map that we will be posting up later this week. It is even running the exact same default torque values (80-90% in the low end/midrange and 100% above 6000rpm). We did make some changes to account for the extra octane, among other things. FWIW, we are controlling engine function right now (more than just boost, afr target and timing). We have yet to determine if its necessary though. If it is, it'll be a simple firmware/wire loom update. If not, not. We still have more testing to do.

shiv

WOW!!!!! Congrats, Shiv, and kudos to you, Dustin, and all the guys at Vishnu! I love it...and that's with with stock DPs!!! Looking forward to updating my v2 with the v2.0.2 map; I'm very excited to run with this when we go to Moroso on 11/30!!!!!

[sflgator]

Originally Posted by RiXst3r

since august we have *heard* about first v2 beta, then 2.00 production, 2.01, 2.02 beta, 2.02 production... now talk of downpipe and racegas versions.... no wonder they arent shipping them, they are still developing it. procede is definatly "bleeding edge"

Maybe so, but nobody is forcing you to get PROcede v2 AND exhaust AND DPs AND use race gas. I'm very happy with just my PROcede v2 tune...and that's it (stock exhaust, stock DPs, running on 93 octane). However, some ppl like more options and want to mod their cars to the absolute max; having more options are good and kudos to Team Vishnu for doing the R&D to provide customers with more "bleeding edge" options.

[GreekMaverick]

Originally Posted by sflgator

WOW!!!!! Congrats, Shiv, and kudos to you, Dustin, and all the guys at Vishnu! I love it...and that's with with stock DPs!!! Looking forward to updating my v2 with the v2.0.2 map; I'm very excited to run with this when we go to Moroso on 11/30!!!!!

Am I going to be the slowest car with my SSTT on 11/30 ?

I am Jealous, no doubt about it, BUT seeing that ppl who order since summer are still waiting...
That tells me, If I place an order today,
I am looking into receiving the pkg by NEXT YEAR ????????

[stefano7171]

Congrats to Shiv and all the Vishnu team for the impressive results!!!!!

[Garrett]

Originally Posted by Archibald Donnington

We really don't have to worry about breaking anything with 400whp, honestly. Doesn't anyone remember Mitsubishi eclipses running 350fwhp with a stock tranny, and those nasty Supra TT's running over 500rwhp on stock tranny, or the sikko 300zxTT's with 400rwhp and stock tranny (had one personally). Once 400whp comes up, the only real possible concern comes from the clutch, and that just has to be proven, BIG DEAL. Our internals, drivetrains, and what-have-you can take it; it's just a matter if your wallet can when your warranty is voided.
FLAME SUIT ON $.02
Mad props to Vishnu for advancing the N54 to these remarkable levels. That said, personally, I am still going to have to wait for the warrantied tuners (DINAN/BMW performance) to step into the game. I do not have the time or money to waste on any issues that may arise from an outside tuner. If my car goes bust from an aftermarket something-or-other, who will give me a car to drive to get to work? Furthermore, who will pay for a new engine/turbo's/drivetrain or anything else for that matter? Nevertheless, this is some of the most fun I've had on the internet EVER! 400+rwhp is astounding from our lil' tt's, but there's bound to be more-to-come (ie 480hp out of a 3.8 liter V6 GT-R).
Let's see Vishnu get into one of those, hell yeah!
aaron

+10

Can u imagine how quick my stealthed-out metallic grey 135i is going to be...? Or an more agressive tune over the 340hp Tii...??

Insane..!

[Noize]

Originally Posted by Former_Boosted_IS

Why would it be the turbos getting tired? They should be able to hold boost to redline with zero problem at 14 psi. I think what you are seeing is the hot side of the rpm and therefore the risk of detonation increases substantially. Every single tuner will back off timing and dump more fuel at high rpms to reduce the risk of detonation. It is safe tuning and nothing more.

Wow, as usual tons of speculation on how the engine will hold this. Just because BMW made this doesn't mean it will hold. The legendary 2JZ engine on the IS300 was cracking piston rings all over the place over 400 rwhp with a compression of 8:5-9.0:1. Let the experts speak on this because the speculation helps in no way. Also, walked is already reported a slipping clutch at his power level, so we are seeing the first stock part reaching its limit.

I'm sorry, but you need to stop spreading misinformation and learn what the heck you're talking about.

First of all, nobody who tunes cars "backs off timing" at high RPM. If you're talking about offsets, you need to look at the actual values the car is seeing in the ECU. The risk of detonation as you put it is not highest at high rpm at all. Its variable depending on mapping and has nothing to do with high revs. At boost onset in low RPM, the values are low, but they increase substantially as the revs climb toward redline. Wanna knock? Run even half the timing at boost onset that you're running at 6500rpm. With interception, a tuner might reduce timing in offset values to offset the natural advance of timing since he is really tricking the engine's air flow sensors to think its running different than it really is. But those values are selected because he is trying to make the engine happiest in all rev ranges.

As far as enrichening at high RPM under load, yes that's a good thing as extra fuel is used for in cylinder cooling.

The main place where you're off base is with these tiny stock turbos. With race gas (more timing allowed) you can increase power earlier, but these tiny turbos will peak sooner. Every engine has a VE, and you can't overcome the size of the stock turbos. Put cams in this engine and you'll see it peak and fall sooner as well.

Your point that the stock snails can hold 14psi at redline is moot. Who cares what boost they can hold? The inportant question is: Are they efficient up there? Obviously not. Look at the stock curve and look at the modified curves. If you've tuned several turbo cars, you can take one look at those turbos and realize that each is being fed by 1.5 liter and know they are not designed to make big power at high rpm. BMW says the car in stock configuration can achieve peak torque starting as low as 1300rpm for crying out loud! What more evidence than that do you need? They are small to make the car seem NA and enhance drivability, not to rev and make power.

The IS300 thing is off topic, but still just full of wrong. You're comparing an iteration of 2JZ that was designed to be NA to the Supra engine. Get a grip, of course its not as internally robust! The compression ratio point is moot too, because our engine is direct injection versus the IS300 motor which was not.

No wonder people get confused or afraid reading car forums. There's more misinformation from bad posts like yours than help from knowledgable ones!

[Former_Boosted_IS]

Originally Posted by Noize

I'm sorry, but you need to stop spreading misinformation and learn what the heck you're talking about.

First of all, nobody who tunes cars "backs off timing" at high RPM. If you're talking about offsets, you need to look at the actual values the car is seeing in the ECU. The risk of detonation as you put it is not highest at high rpm at all. Its variable depending on mapping and has nothing to do with high revs. At boost onset in low RPM, the values are low, but they increase substantially as the revs climb toward redline. Wanna knock? Run even half the timing at boost onset that you're running at 6500rpm. With interception, a tuner might reduce timing in offset values to offset the natural advance of timing since he is really tricking the engine's air flow sensors to think its running different than it really is. But those values are selected because he is trying to make the engine happiest in all rev ranges.

As far as enrichening at high RPM under load, yes that's a good thing as extra fuel is used for in cylinder cooling.

The main place where you're off base is with these tiny stock turbos. With race gas (more timing allowed) you can increase power earlier, but these tiny turbos will peak sooner. Every engine has a VE, and you can't overcome the size of the stock turbos. Put cams in this engine and you'll see it peak and fall sooner as well.

Your point that the stock snails can hold 14psi at redline is moot. Who cares what boost they can hold? The inportant question is: Are they efficient up there? Obviously not. Look at the stock curve and look at the modified curves. If you've tuned several turbo cars, you can take one look at those turbos and realize that each is being fed by 1.5 liter and know they are not designed to make big power at high rpm. BMW says the car in stock configuration can achieve peak torque starting as low as 1300rpm for crying out loud! What more evidence than that do you need? They are small to make the car seem NA and enhance drivability, not to rev and make power.

The IS300 thing is off topic, but still just full of wrong. You're comparing an iteration of 2JZ that was designed to be NA to the Supra engine. Get a grip, of course its not as internally robust! The compression ratio point is moot too, because our engine is direct injection versus the IS300 motor which was not.

No wonder people get confused or afraid reading car forums. There's more misinformation from bad posts like yours than help from knowledgable ones!

First, if my info was bad, please let me apologize.

I am confused then if the turbo has no problem producing 14 psi at x rpm (say 1800), then how is that boost falling off at high rpms? The turbo is fully spooled and should never fall off in boost right? If it is beyond its effeciency range isn't that something completely different then saying the boost is falling off?

And my comment about the IS300 was simple, people do not know the limits of this engine and there is nothing more than speculation. If a tuner with a motor apart was commenting then it would hold water, but a lot of people are just using the "my feeling is".

[turbotko]

Originally Posted by Noize

I'm sorry, but you need to stop spreading misinformation and learn what the heck you're talking about.

First of all, nobody who tunes cars "backs off timing" at high RPM. If you're talking about offsets, you need to look at the actual values the car is seeing in the ECU. The risk of detonation as you put it is not highest at high rpm at all. Its variable depending on mapping and has nothing to do with high revs. At boost onset in low RPM, the values are low, but they increase substantially as the revs climb toward redline. Wanna knock? Run even half the timing at boost onset that you're running at 6500rpm. With interception, a tuner might reduce timing in offset values to offset the natural advance of timing since he is really tricking the engine's air flow sensors to think its running different than it really is. But those values are selected because he is trying to make the engine happiest in all rev ranges.

As far as enrichening at high RPM under load, yes that's a good thing as extra fuel is used for in cylinder cooling.

The main place where you're off base is with these tiny stock turbos. With race gas (more timing allowed) you can increase power earlier, but these tiny turbos will peak sooner. Every engine has a VE, and you can't overcome the size of the stock turbos. Put cams in this engine and you'll see it peak and fall sooner as well.

Your point that the stock snails can hold 14psi at redline is moot. Who cares what boost they can hold? The inportant question is: Are they efficient up there? Obviously not. Look at the stock curve and look at the modified curves. If you've tuned several turbo cars, you can take one look at those turbos and realize that each is being fed by 1.5 liter and know they are not designed to make big power at high rpm. BMW says the car in stock configuration can achieve peak torque starting as low as 1300rpm for crying out loud! What more evidence than that do you need? They are small to make the car seem NA and enhance drivability, not to rev and make power.

The IS300 thing is off topic, but still just full of wrong. You're comparing an iteration of 2JZ that was designed to be NA to the Supra engine. Get a grip, of course its not as internally robust! The compression ratio point is moot too, because our engine is direct injection versus the IS300 motor which was not.

No wonder people get confused or afraid reading car forums. There's more misinformation from bad posts like yours than help from knowledgable ones!

+1 on the 2JZ reference.

The only way a turbo supra 2JZ is breaking pistons at 400 hp is with a horrible tune.

[Former_Boosted_IS]

Originally Posted by turbotko

+1 on the 2JZ reference.

The only way a turbo supra 2JZ is breaking pistons at 400 hp is with a horrible tune.

Both the IS300 2JZ and supra 2JZ are the same short block minus the oil squirters which have been debated whether they are even worth it or not. The head design on the GE and GTE are vastly different though. The pistons and rods ultimately were different on the GE and GTE, but my point is that we don't know the durability on the engine until someone with expertise looks inside.