E82 135i "build" by JD

[JD75]

Originally Posted by BMW86

I bet it sounds intoxicating anyway!

Yes, it most certainly does, in particular at WOT.

It develops an almost "ferrotic" roar, as the engine speed builds.

It also has a very nice presence at idle.

However at partial throttle, the exhaust produces a little too much drone for my liking.

This is especially so in the 1500 - 2500 RPM range.

Which is a real shame, because if not for the drone I would love it.

I suspect the Berk Technology Street Performance rear muffler, would be perfect when bolted up to an otherwise stock exhaust.

As I have both catless downpipes and midpipes, the rear muffler section could do with a little more noise and resonance suppression.

A "cold start" is interesting to say the least.

I think I will refit the stock rear muffler and see whether or not the exhaust note retains a reasonable amount of bark and volume, without the excessive drone.

[JD75]

Originally Posted by DMM

Justin with the bigger turbo's im sure you will see the benefits of the new exhaust! The turbos right now are spinning way out of their efficiency range. The extra decrease in back pressure from the new exhaust is making them huff and puff way out of their league

Looking forward to seeing how much rubber has been left in the rear gaurds after your weekend orientation

Yes, I suspect that may be the case Dale.

As I mentioned, I think I will go back to the stock rear muffler.

Perhaps I will try the Berk Technology rear section again, following the installation of the RB turbos.

Hopefully there is not too much rubber in the rear guards, though at times wheel spin was prolific.

[JD75]

Originally Posted by adrian@vishnu

As for the meth %, I though Dale indicated the mixture was the other way around... 60% water, 40% meth. I am sure that is what he said. Either way, since mixtures are suffering, I would be moving towards 70% meth.

Hey Adrian,

I checked this with Dale, he is quite certain we have been running a 60/40 Meth to water ratio mix.

With the next batch he mixes up, we will look at going to a 70/30 mix.

However my only concern is that the Coolingmist flow sensor I currently use, is actually designed to run on a 50/50 mix, hmmm...

[adrian@vishnu]

I will have some solutions to get more fuel into it when you do the turbos. In the meantime, just enjoy it as is!! I hope to have a fuel system upgrade for low pressure, and also some Procede tune changes to push a little more in there. As your car is flowing as much air as any N54 I have worked on, it was always going to be a challenge to get the fuel into it.

[JD75]

Originally Posted by JB4135

Hey JD,

The new FCB (Fault Control Box) from coolingmist allows for a higher mix of meth. It's stated that the FCB is for users that want to run more than 70% meth. Check it out, it's the latest System X.

Yeah,

thank you.

I have been following the development of that product.

However I suspect the better system, will be one that retains the flow sensor and utilizes the new FCB.

Also I would much prefer to see AFR targets meet, via increasing the fuel supply from the DI system.

As apposed to spraying an ever increasing amount of Meth into the engine, at higher and higher concentrations.

[JD75]

Originally Posted by DMM

Give us some more results Justin!!

Unfortunately there's nothing more the meth will do - the engine is almost getting over satured now! The fuel curve you see is the best it will get without going to a standalone management system.

Hey Dale,

sure mate, more than happy to do so.

I mentioned previously that I would produce a dyno graph illustrating both power and torque, pre and post catless downpipes.

FYI,

this was with the PROcede on Map 4, whilst spraying Meth and peak power on both pulls was attained at 17 psi.

The ar design catless downpipes certainly provide a noteworthy increase in both power and torque, across the entire rev range.

However what I have found to be very surprising, is the "delta" obtained when running a lower boost target and also taking Meth out of the equation.

More to come on that shortly...

[JD75]

Originally Posted by adrian@vishnu

As your car is flowing as much air as any N54 I have worked on, it was always going to be a challenge to get the fuel into it.

Well as far as problems go Adrian, it is a nice problem to have.

[JD75]

OK,

throughout the week the following components were installed on the vehicle.

- ar design oil catch can.

- ar design clutch delay valve.

- M3 E93, 28 mm front sway bar.

- HPF anodized intercooler, with quick release disconnects.

Lastly I had Dale remove the Berk Technology rear muffler section and reinstall the factory muffler section.

Suprisingly enough the little 1'er was back on the dyno again.

Looking at the graphs below, run 004 was the "stock'ish" baseline run.

Whilst run 095 represents the culmination of the build thus far.

FYI,

Run 004 had a peak power of 191.9 rwkw, peak torque was close enough to 4,600 Dyna Newtons.

Run 095 illustrates a peak power figure of 308.0 rwkw, whilst peak torque is now a dimension twisting 7,200 Dyna Newtons.

As it currently stands, the power "delta" is 116.1 rwkw.

Based on a drivetrain power loss of 15%, crank power is a NOT so inconsiderable 363 kw.

Lastly if you were to loosely calculate engine torque, based upon the 63.8% increase on the dyno and a factory torque measurement of 400 Nm, we are now looking at a peak figure of 655 Nm.

Cheers,

JD.

[MrBlonde]

Justin, great info!

Can we conclude the Berk exhaust loses us power compared to the stock system?

[JB4-335]

Once again nice job Justin. That is one strong 1er you have there. Can't wait to see your numbers with RB's. I think the stock exhaust does a great job it's just the downpipes as we all know that are the important key element in N54's. What if you remove your other two cats on the stock midpipes and run the car completely cat-free. Yes I know it would reek but would be interesting to see.

[adrian@vishnu]

Nice work Justin!! Interesting to see that the stock rear produces as much power as the Berk exhaust, but not sure if we can conclude the Berk exhaust is worse?? Maybe it is?

When you get a chance, it would be great if we can create a table of some description that lists all mods and before and after power with delta to determine which mods are the most effective. Maybe also put some sort of $$ index in there and you can then make a bang per buck index. I know the tune will win, but interested in where other things come in. To me it looks like you could do alot worse than to spend $2k on tune and meth and leave the rest stock. You would achieve a car that sounds and looks stock, and can drive stock if desired with tune settings, but is a monster when required!!

Adrian

[JD75]

Originally Posted by MrBlonde

Justin, great info!

Can we conclude the Berk exhaust loses us power compared to the stock system?

Hey Kenny,

I do not believe that power was lost, following the installation of the full downpipe back system.

However it's clear that there is very little to be gained with the aftermarket exhaust, at least at these power levels.

I suspect a high flowing exhaust without midpipe cats, will come into its own when used in conjuction with "upped" turbos.

[JD75]

Originally Posted by JB4135

Once again nice job Justin. That is one strong 1er you have there. Can't wait to see your numbers with RB's. I think the stock exhaust does a great job it's just the downpipes as we all know that are the important key element in N54's. What if you remove your other two cats on the stock midpipes and run the car completely cat-free. Yes I know it would reek but would be interesting to see.

Cheers mate,

it would indeed appear to be a stout N54.

The Berk system I am using, does in fact delete the midpipe cats. The secondary cats are replaced with resonators.

As the such the vehicle is completely "cat-free".

When standing outside the car you can most definitely smell the difference, however inside the cabin I can honestly say I cannot detect anything.

I should note this is also whilst sitting stationary, in the crap Sydney traffic.

[JD75]

Hey Gents,

as I alluded to before.

"However what I have found to be very surprising... running a lower boost target and also taking Meth out of the equation."

FYI,

All pulls were with "Full bolt-ons", save the stock rear muffler section.

Pull 095 is with the PROcede on Map 4, whilst spraying Meth.

Pull 096 was on Map 1, with a reduced boost target of 12 psi.

Lastly pull 102 was on Map 0, which is essentialy passthrough on the tune.

All pulls were done within the same dyno session, on the same day.

As such the tie down tension was unchanged, in lieu of the car remaining on the rollers throughout the entire afternoon.

The ambient temp in the cell was initially a cool'ish 20 degrees Celsius but quickly rose to 25 degrees Celsius within a few minutes.

[adrian@vishnu]

Was meth spraying for all those runs?

[JD75]

Originally Posted by adrian@vishnu

Was meth spraying for all those runs?

Hey Adrian,

no mate, it was not.

Only on pull 095 which is the Map 4 run.

[JD75]

Adrian,

FYI.

With the PROcede on Map 2, we actually put down a little over 290 rwkw IIRC.

I meant to include the Map 2 pull in the above overlay, but I forgot, doh!

I will dig it up and post it when I get a chance.

Unfortunately my fueling issue is apparent, when boosting to 15 psi with Full bolt-ons.

AFR's hit 13:1, however they remained at 13:1 for the entire pull.

They did not dip down into the mid to low 12's, as was the case when running a lower boost target (such as Map 1) or with the assistance of Meth on Map 4.

[adrian@vishnu]

I thought that map 0 (valet) may have had meth as it richer than I expected down low, and it falls over up top, but it is probably just the bolt ons causing the stock map to be unhappy.

I do have solutions for the fuel, and we can do them come RB turbos time.

Cheers,

Adrian

[janus77]

sweet sheebas, what a beast.

[JD75]

Originally Posted by adrian@vishnu

Nice work Justin!! Interesting to see that the stock rear produces as much power as the Berk exhaust, but not sure if we can conclude the Berk exhaust is worse?? Maybe it is?

When you get a chance, it would be great if we can create a table of some description that lists all mods and before and after power with delta to determine which mods are the most effective. Maybe also put some sort of $$ index in there and you can then make a bang per buck index. I know the tune will win, but interested in where other things come in. To me it looks like you could do alot worse than to spend $2k on tune and meth and leave the rest stock. You would achieve a car that sounds and looks stock, and can drive stock if desired with tune settings, but is a monster when required!!

Adrian

Hey Adrian,

thanks mate.

I will more than likely refit the Berk Technology rear, once the RB's are dialled in.

If there is still no clear power gain with the Berk, we can definitely conclude that the factory rear muffler section is a nice piece of work.

With regards the most cost effective mods, you are correct in that the PROcede is the "bang for your buck" winner, 'nuff said!

Methanol injection is a very clear second.

Based on the dyno testing I have done, a well configured Meth kit will yield similar or better results than a vehicle with "full bolt-ons".

With respect to a bang for buck index, I believe Kenny has "been there, done that".

Although my results when going from "tune" only to full bolt-ons (no Meth) did differ, so as an exercise it may be worth crunching the numbers.

At the end of the day when referencing a dollar cost, for every kw attained over stock, the PROcede on Map 4 whilst spraying Meth, is most certainly rockin' it.

[JB4-335]

Hey Justin, how much is the shipping for the rb's?
Will you be sending your cores back to Rob?
Have you had a quote from Advan to install them?

[JB4-335]

One more thing, when are you gonna get that thing done the quarter. I see 11.7 ET with your setup unless your sporting runflats.