250whp N/A possible?

[MarkkyyMan]

Originally Posted by TheAxiom

Found the dyno - A normal 328i baseline is 170whp BTW...

Niice. That's a mustang dyno too, so those numbers are very conservative.

[flinchy]

Originally Posted by TheSt|G

Just no.

because !logic! and !physics!

if you can't provide a reasonable thought out argument and only say 'no' you've lost the argument. sad people have to be told that.

Originally Posted by tuphdc

2010 vipers have 345s rear with 560 ft-lb torque....it seems reasonable then that 285s might be a tad narrow for that powerband

gearing, the fact the torque is on tap from practically idle.. totally different cars.

Originally Posted by Kgolf31

I had 265s Hankook RS3s on 9" wheels for my Z4M with stock power (330 Crank @ 280 ft-lbs).

Even when they were at full operating temperature, it was still very easy to spin the rears in 2nd gear at WOT in a corner and loop the car.

There is no way 285s would work on a car with much, much more power

just need a steadier right foot and to know you can't floor it halfway around a bend :/

i have no trouble with the RFT's in the 135i... it's not fantastic, and the rear end just sucks ass in 2nd most other ways, but really, no major control problems.

[ASAP]

I don't think anyone here understands what determines tire traction.

[MarkkyyMan]

[Obioban]

A 700 hp 135 is going to be a terrible and unrealible track car. Hell, 1M's have overheating issues on track bone stock.

Flinchy: have you actually done any tracking?

[TheSt|G]

Originally Posted by flinchy

because !logic! and !physics!

if you can't provide a reasonable thought out argument and only say 'no' you've lost the argument. sad people have to be told that.

You seem to be confusing people getting tired of you talking with a lack of counter point.

So lets play a different game, name a 700whp car that ships with 285s or less in the rear.

[ASAP]

Do people here understand the difference between tire wear, compound, width and its relation to traction? I somehow don't think so.

[ilikebmxbikes]

Originally Posted by TheSt|G

Exactly.

It's a trend you see all the time on car forums. Party X buys car. Party X than massively mods car for epeen forum love. 1x-3x the value of the car is spent modding it. People lose interest in Party X's car fairly quickly. Party X sells the car for less than the rest of the market, let alone the mod cost.

Its easy to make a high output HP car for internet bragging and it is a good marketing opportunity for companies. People tend to think more is better and HP is an easy way for a company to quantify more in a way that translates well on paper or on the internet. Making a faster car doesnt always mean making the most HP. Most times it doesn't. But making a faster more balanced 1 series, likely around 400-450hp doesnt have the headline appeal of a 700hp one and requires lots of not so sexy mods.

Will a 700hp 1er be fun? Probably. Can you post dynos online and get a lot of attention? certainly.

But my main point was a 700hp 1 series will not be a good track car. It will generate a lot of heat, have tons of unusable HP, require a lot of throttle modulation and certainly have traction problems.

[TheSt|G]

Originally Posted by ilikebmxbikes

Its easy to make a high output HP car for internet bragging and it is a good marketing opportunity for companies. People tend to think more is better and HP is an easy way for a company to quantify more in a way that translates well on paper or on the internet. Making a faster car doesnt always mean making the most HP. Most times it doesn't. But making a faster more balanced 1 series, likely around 400-450hp doesnt have the headline appeal of a 700hp one and requires lots of not so sexy mods.

Will a 700hp 1er be fun? Probably. Can you post dynos online and get a lot of attention? certainly.

But my main point was a 700hp 1 series will not be a good track car. It will generate a lot of heat, have tons of unusable HP, require a lot of throttle modulation and certainly have traction problems.

I would go so far as to simplify it to:

A 700hp 1er is just worse/ruined.

[flinchy]

Originally Posted by TheSt|G

You seem to be confusing people getting tired of you talking with a lack of counter point.

So lets play a different game, name a 700whp car that ships with 285s or less in the rear.

I've given counterpoints, you haven't

have you managed to confuse yourself?

i wouldn't think any car ships with 285's or less at that power level, because their suspensions aren't suited for it, and they ship with pure street tires - you CANNOT compare production to aftermarket.. production cars are compromised, aftermarket ones don't need to be.

you're making a ridiculous argument (well, what little flimsy stuff you're saying that is)

now if you ask me to name >700whp aftermarket built cars that race in classes with 285 tires, you're asking a sensible REALISTIC question... hell i know 1000+whp cars that run 285-295 and are still some of the fastest cars in the world ffs. (or 265, if you really want to go extreme on the AWD cars)

ED: oh, sorry, street legal R-comp tires too, not slicks, not race spec only.. semi slicks that can be used on the street.

Originally Posted by Obioban

A 700 hp 135 is going to be a terrible and unrealible track car. Hell, 1M's have overheating issues on track bone stock.

Flinchy: have you actually done any tracking?

why would it be terrible and unreliable?

upgrade radiator, upgrade oil cooler

the 1M has overheating issues because it doesn't have any better cooling than a 135i.. it's a non-issue, it's been sorted in the aftermarket for YEARS.

and again, 700whp will be less strain on EVERYTHING (other than fuel system.. and even then, the HPFP is happier at higher RPM than mid-lower) than 500whp stock frame. a 700whp 1er has no reason to be less reliable, in fact it's probably going to be more reliable.. lower cylinder pressures, less clutch wear, gentler on the diff, halfshafts, stronger aftermarket turbo/wastegate/fuel pump/EVERYTHING.

hell, given at 700hp+ many will run E85, there's even less strain on the cooling system, lower EGT's, lower cylinder temps... turbos not spinning as hard as the stock twins...

yes i have, why do you ask?

I've driven more powerful cars with higher revving setups with less torque but more power than an N54, that's so much easier to drive hard purely because it's setup better.

Originally Posted by TheSt|G

I would go so far as to simplify it to:

A 700hp 1er is just worse/ruined.

as i've already stated.. it sure is, if you set it up wrong or lack the talent to control it.

saying '700hp' just shows how far off the mark you really are, understanding wise, on the physics side of it.. like i said, it's TORQUE that matters, not POWER.. a 700hp N54 135i will have less torque, and be easier to control with a more linear power band, than a 500whp stock frame one... if you want the ultimate in smooth, easy to control, low torque N54's.. just fit a smaller single turbo, shoot for high 5xx, low 6xx hp moderate boost 5858 or something, and don't laugh at everyone who wants more power..?

in FWD cars, it's called 'torque steer' not 'power steer' for a reason.

I can't think of a way a 700whp 1er isn't BETTER than a hi-po stock frame 1er.

Originally Posted by ilikebmxbikes

But my main point was a 700hp 1 series will not be a good track car. It will generate a lot of heat, have tons of unusable HP, require a lot of throttle modulation and certainly have traction problems.

as i've said a few times, that's the opposite of reality

just to say it again,

you're confusing torque with power.. a 700whp N54 1er will have less torque at the flywheel and at the road than a 500whp one... this means less heat, more usable hp, less throttle modulation, less traction problems.

there's even proof of this, AK335i's single turbo unopened 6AT didnt break until what's probably 700whp+, 34psi... with just upgraded mounts... that's LESS wear on the transmission for a given power level!

just look at your S65.. it produces less torque, revs higher, makes more power.. that's what the single turbo N54's are like compared to the stock twins.. less torque, more revs, more power, easier to control.

[JimD]

The only 700+hp I have ridden in is a friend of my son's Trans Am. It has a vette aluminum block V8 and a turbo. The body twists when he gets on it. It will spin the tires in at least the first 3 gears. It has broken the teeth off two rear ends, so far. Those rear ends are MUCH bigger and sturdier than what's in a 1 series. The manual transmission needs a rebuild now because it can't handle the power.

I believe I understand the point about making a turbo somewhat mimic a NA motor where the huge hp is at high rpm and torque at normal rpm is no more than a stock 135i. At least that is what I think is being discussed. There is a point that the peak power would only be used occasionally. But I am sure the stock clutch cannot hold 700 hp, even occasionally. I really doubt the transmission can hold it and I am sure the rear end cannot. You put that much power in a 1 and you will start breaking things. American cars are much more overbuilt than a BMW. The rear end that is breaking in the Trans Am also goes under pickups. BMW doesn't build extra weight into these parts. They won't take it.

The other issue is the level of boost you will be at. 3 liters is about 180 cubic inches. So you're talking nearly 4 hp per cubic inch of displacement. That is only possible with a lot of boost. To help the engine survive, you need to drop the compression. When you do that, it will be sluggish until the boost kicks in. You could also just run race gas all the time, I guess.

There just isn't any way to dramatically alter the hp and expect everything in the car to handle it. No car will. You'll be chasing the weak link for years. People have done it but they've completely redone the cars. If you are prepared to replace the entire drive train and beef up the frame, it could work. But a big turbo kit will just start to show you the weak links in the vehicle.

[TheSt|G]

One final game.

Does anyone here actually agree with with Flinchy? Has his argument provided enough data to change or confirm you opinion on the subject where you feel a 700hp 1 Series will be both comfortable to drive and competent on the track?

[flinchy]

Originally Posted by JimD

The only 700+hp I have ridden in is a friend of my son's Trans Am. It has a vette aluminum block V8 and a turbo. The body twists when he gets on it. It will spin the tires in at least the first 3 gears. It has broken the teeth off two rear ends, so far. Those rear ends are MUCH bigger and sturdier than what's in a 1 series. The manual transmission needs a rebuild now because it can't handle the power.

You need to remember the relationship between torque and horsepower

That trans am is not only higher torque to make that power (lower revs), it’s an older, less sturdy chassis.

It’s not the power that’s chipping teeth, spinning tires, wrecking transmissions.. it’s the torque.

To get a lower revving V8 to make massive power, you're quite often talking 800+ ft-lb.. hell 900+ isn't unheard of.

Originally Posted by JimD

I believe I understand the point about making a turbo somewhat mimic a NA motor where the huge hp is at high rpm and torque at normal rpm is no more than a stock 135i. At least that is what I think is being discussed. There is a point that the peak power would only be used occasionally. But I am sure the stock clutch cannot hold 700 hp, even occasionally. I really doubt the transmission can hold it and I am sure the rear end cannot. You put that much power in a 1 and you will start breaking things. American cars are much more overbuilt than a BMW. The rear end that is breaking in the Trans Am also goes under pickups. BMW doesn't build extra weight into these parts. They won't take it.

It’s about controlling the torque curve.. if you only want 500ft-lb of torque peak, but you can control that to redline (7000-7200rpm) you will have a near 700whp car, and you’ll probably make that torque at what.. hair above 4000rpm, tops?
No, the stock clutch wouldn’t take 500ft-lb, I think it dies around 450 (400?)? Which would be 600whp odd.

The transmission already has… totally bone stock (internals, not clutch obviously) has held in excess of 650ft-lb on RB’s, and 750+whp on upgraded turbo/s… same with the rear end and halfshafts, not even M3 items, not DSS, not even a quaife core.. stock stock stock stock. Yeah people have broken halfshafts, a few have broken their diffs.. wheel hop.

Originally Posted by JimD

The other issue is the level of boost you will be at. 3 liters is about 180 cubic inches. So you're talking nearly 4 hp per cubic inch of displacement. That is only possible with a lot of boost. To help the engine survive, you need to drop the compression. When you do that, it will be sluggish until the boost kicks in. You could also just run race gas all the time, I guess.

Volumetric efficiency, octane.. balance the stress of the torque with the stress of revs.

E85 is common in enough of the world to make it realistic.. compression doesn't need a drop until likely 800+.. even then, it's been shown the stock head is bad enough, that upgrading it could take a 750hp car to 800+... so compression drop only for 800+++. Direct injection is magic.

Over 600hp has already been done on pump and stock compression as far as I know.. probably with meth, which is common enough even though I don’t want it.

I don't think F1 motors are a really good example, but you're talking 700whp or whatever out of a 1.6 in that case.

what you're saying would have been totally true 10-15 years ago... 700whp isn't unrealistic in any respect in 2014.

Originally Posted by JimD

There just isn't any way to dramatically alter the hp and expect everything in the car to handle it. No car will. You'll be chasing the weak link for years. People have done it but they've completely redone the cars. If you are prepared to replace the entire drive train and beef up the frame, it could work. But a big turbo kit will just start to show you the weak links in the vehicle.

Again, learn, or remember if you already have, the relationship between torque, HP and RPM.
Also look at what people have already done on this platform, as I said above, people have WELL exceeded the numbers we’re talking about, long term, and bits have survived… the 6MT is surprisingly stout, the diff too, even the halfshafts.. 1000hp DSS ones will still break with 600ft-lb+ of wheel hop. It's like an impact gun on your driveshafts. This car isn't as weak as people think it is

years ago, if you look back at threads here, people were saying the motors would blow up at 400+.. 450+.. 500+.. hell, mr TheSt|G has argued for years that the N52 can't handle boost.. look how he's been proven wrong just recently?

Originally Posted by TheSt|G

One final game.

Does anyone here actually agree with with Flinchy? Has his argument provided enough data to change or confirm you opinion on the subject where you feel a 700hp 1 Series will be both comfortable to drive and competent on the track?

It doesn't really matter if anyone disagrees or agrees, you can't change reality.

all you have to do is talk to owners of single turbo N54's, and every single one has said it's easier to drive. It's even come up today on the other forum, that the reality is, it's easier and more predictable to drive than high power stock frames.

ED: i'm not disagreeing that wider tires would be better.. but seriously, can only work with what we've got, it's not that big a deal.

comparing XYZ car to this... without taking into consideration weight, wheelbase, suspension design, geometry, tread compound, torque delivery, redline, gearing... Pointless.

[ilikebmxbikes]

Originally Posted by flinchy

I've given counterpoints, you haven't

have you managed to confuse yourself?

i wouldn't think any car ships with 285's or less at that power level, because their suspensions aren't suited for it, and they ship with pure street tires - you CANNOT compare production to aftermarket.. production cars are compromised, aftermarket ones don't need to be.

you're making a ridiculous argument (well, what little flimsy stuff you're saying that is)

now if you ask me to name >700whp aftermarket built cars that race in classes with 285 tires, you're asking a sensible REALISTIC question... hell i know 1000+whp cars that run 285-295 and are still some of the fastest cars in the world ffs. (or 265, if you really want to go extreme on the AWD cars)

ED: oh, sorry, street legal R-comp tires too, not slicks, not race spec only.. semi slicks that can be used on the street.

why would it be terrible and unreliable?

upgrade radiator, upgrade oil cooler

the 1M has overheating issues because it doesn't have any better cooling than a 135i.. it's a non-issue, it's been sorted in the aftermarket for YEARS.

and again, 700whp will be less strain on EVERYTHING (other than fuel system.. and even then, the HPFP is happier at higher RPM than mid-lower) than 500whp stock frame. a 700whp 1er has no reason to be less reliable, in fact it's probably going to be more reliable.. lower cylinder pressures, less clutch wear, gentler on the diff, halfshafts, stronger aftermarket turbo/wastegate/fuel pump/EVERYTHING.

hell, given at 700hp+ many will run E85, there's even less strain on the cooling system, lower EGT's, lower cylinder temps... turbos not spinning as hard as the stock twins...

yes i have, why do you ask?

I've driven more powerful cars with higher revving setups with less torque but more power than an N54, that's so much easier to drive hard purely because it's setup better.

as i've already stated.. it sure is, if you set it up wrong or lack the talent to control it.

saying '700hp' just shows how far off the mark you really are, understanding wise, on the physics side of it.. like i said, it's TORQUE that matters, not POWER.. a 700hp N54 135i will have less torque, and be easier to control with a more linear power band, than a 500whp stock frame one... if you want the ultimate in smooth, easy to control, low torque N54's.. just fit a smaller single turbo, shoot for high 5xx, low 6xx hp moderate boost 5858 or something, and don't laugh at everyone who wants more power..?

in FWD cars, it's called 'torque steer' not 'power steer' for a reason.

I can't think of a way a 700whp 1er isn't BETTER than a hi-po stock frame 1er.

as i've said a few times, that's the opposite of reality

just to say it again,

you're confusing torque with power.. a 700whp N54 1er will have less torque at the flywheel and at the road than a 500whp one... this means less heat, more usable hp, less throttle modulation, less traction problems.

there's even proof of this, AK335i's single turbo unopened 6AT didnt break until what's probably 700whp+, 34psi... with just upgraded mounts... that's LESS wear on the transmission for a given power level!

just look at your S65.. it produces less torque, revs higher, makes more power.. that's what the single turbo N54's are like compared to the stock twins.. less torque, more revs, more power, easier to control.

I'm still sticking too it being a poor road track car. 700hp on the chassis would not be a balanced car on the track. I don't see it tuning times any faster than a 450hp counterpart. I do not see the full HP being used. The car would likely be drivable if the driver didn't take advantage of all of the power.

Not trying to discourage anyone from making one or saying those who made one wasted their time. The thing is probably a total blast to drive and would be a good rolling airstrip car.

[Obioban]

^yep. Anyone who thinks this will be a good track car hasn't spent any serious time on the track.

The important thing, though, is that flinchy has himself convinced :P

[MarkkyyMan]

Originally Posted by Obioban

^yep. Anyone who thinks this will be a good track car hasn't spent any serious time on the track.

The important thing, though, is that flinchy has himself convinced :P

[Suprgnat]

Originally Posted by flinchy

a 700whp 1er has no reason to be less reliable, in fact it's probably going to be more reliable.. lower cylinder pressures, less clutch wear, gentler on the diff, halfshafts, stronger aftermarket turbo/wastegate/fuel pump/EVERYTHING.

a 700hp N54 135i will have less torque, and be easier to control with a more linear power band, than a 500whp stock frame one...

a 700whp N54 1er will have less torque at the flywheel and at the road than a 500whp one... this means less heat, more usable hp, less throttle modulation, less traction problems.
.

Um, no.

HP = Torque X RPM / 5252 therefore Torque = HP X 5252 / RPM

An engine that produces 500 HP at 7000 RPM is producing 375 lb/ft of torque at 7000 RPM. An engine that produces 700 HP at 7000 RPM is producing 525 lb/ft of torque at 7000 RPM.

It's how a dyno works. Measure the torque and compute the horsepower.

[JimD]

The 700hp Trans Am I've ridden in doesn't break things right away. If the owner is careful with it, he gets a few years out of a rear end. That might work on a bimmer at 700hp but I think you'd have to really baby it. We have tiny rear ends with almost no fluid in them. I've seen a you tube, not sure if it is still there, of a M3 spinning the teeth off the axles drag racing. Drag racing is a little abusive but he didn't wind it to 5K and dump the clutch, I think it was 2K or maybe 2500. Not that much worse than a normal quick start. And it broke things. So with 700hp, you can never start hard from a stop it always has to be a rolling start or you break the rear end? Slow deliberate shifts or you break the transmission?

I am not arguing that the car will instantly break. I am saying that it cannot be driven hard without something breaking. Who wants to be constantly fixing things? That is where the 700hp trans am is. It runs and often for quite awhile. But when he races it or just drives it hard, sometimes something breaks. I don't see that a fun.

The other issue with bimmers is where do you go when you get tired of breaking things? You can put a 12 bolt rear end under the trans am and hold 700hp. Where do you get the equivalent for a bimmer?

I also know that one of the makers of a V8 kit for a Miata says to use the stock rear end with a mustang V8. Claims it will work. That's what flinchy sounds like. They can point to examples where it has worked. I also bet it breaks sometimes and it doesn't take anything super unusual to break it. (The other maker offers new rear ends for their conversions).

As to your oft repeated HP and torque comments you are effectively only noting that the engines you are talking about have high rpm torque peaks that are not super high torque levels. I will concede that will help avoid breakage. But I think a key reason it will do so is the max power will very seldom be used. I don't rev to red line very often and I suspect others do not either. But the real question is whether the car can handle the power and that is only answered when you use the power. I do not think you will use 700hp in a 1 series very many times before you are fixing something.

My son sometimes calls his friends car a dyno queen. That is because it's owner seldom drives it and almost never races it. That's because breaking it is expensive. I think a 700hp 1 series is going to be a dyno queen of the highest order. Excellent bragging rights but not excellent to drive.

[flinchy]

Originally Posted by ilikebmxbikes

I'm still sticking too it being a poor road track car. 700hp on the chassis would not be a balanced car on the track. I don't see it tuning times any faster than a 450hp counterpart. I do not see the full HP being used. The car would likely be drivable if the driver didn't take advantage of all of the power.

Not trying to discourage anyone from making one or saying those who made one wasted their time. The thing is probably a total blast to drive and would be a good rolling airstrip car.

(no offence intended here btw) Before commenting again, just run through the physics... it's not a complicated thing to work out.

remember, compare it to the stock frame turbo boost/power curve. for the same torque peak, it will make more power, accelerate faster, be easier and smoother to drive.

a 450hp stock frame car given the torque required to make 450hp, will be less drivable than a 650-700rwhp single turbo N54 (lets go 650whp, it's closer to the same torque required by the stock frames at 450hp), because the 650-700rwhp one takes longer to make peak torque (from start of boost to full boost takes longer, the stock frame one makes peak torque at like 2500-3000rpm, after hitting full boost almost instantaneously at that point), which means it has less traction issues.

power does not ruin the balance, torque and the way the torque comes on (ie, boost coming on) ruins the balance. You will have less throttle modulation issues, less traction issues, less reliability issues, on the higher power single.

all you have to do is look at any other turbocharged car... are properly built/tuned/sized/setup larger turbo cars slower on ANY other platform? the answer, MOST of the time, is no. I'm not talking about a GT45 on an RB26 or something btw, proper turbo sizing that still makes more peak power than the factory turbos can.

Originally Posted by Obioban

^yep. Anyone who thinks this will be a good track car hasn't spent any serious time on the track.

The important thing, though, is that flinchy has himself convinced :P

i think the important thing in this debate, is it highlights the people that have absolutely no clue

anyone who things a single turbo N54 making the same torque (just, if you can't understand it, ignore power, think about torque numbers) as the stock twins or RB/VTT2's will be slower or harder to drive is simply wrong+uninformed.. or like you say, hasn't spent any time on the track

anyone who has spent time on the track should KNOW how torque effects traction, not power. Or they should get off the track.

there's no 'has himself convinced'

there's the real world physics of the topic, that i'm thinking about

then there's everyone else off in some magic land, where less torque coming on over more RPM is less reliable and more difficult to control than more torque more suddenly, and power magically breaks things all by itself.

Originally Posted by Suprgnat

Um, no.

HP = Torque X RPM / 5252 therefore Torque = HP X 5252 / RPM

An engine that produces 500 HP at 7000 RPM is producing 375 lb/ft of torque at 7000 RPM. An engine that produces 700 HP at 7000 RPM is producing 525 lb/ft of torque at 7000 RPM.

It's how a dyno works. Measure the torque and compute the horsepower.

uhhh wtf are you disagreeing with? that's EXACTLY what i'm saying ffs.

re-read the part you quoted... more importantly 500hp STOCK FRAME.. you know, where to get 500hp, it's making that at maybe 5000rpm, which means, it's making 525ft-lb~... which is 700whp at 7000rpm if that's from a single.

case in point.. if you want a 500hp stock frame setup, you're making 525ft-lb which isn't TOO MUCH... if you want a 500hp single, at redline, you're making 375 ft-lb. the single is in this case, irrevocably, without a doubt, easier to drive and gentler on every part of the car.

again, the 700hp one is NO MORE hard on the car than a 500hp stock frame setup.

Originally Posted by JimD

So with 700hp, you can never start hard from a stop it always has to be a rolling start or you break the rear end? Slow deliberate shifts or you break the transmission?

stop talking about power, start talking about torque -_-

Originally Posted by JimD

The other issue with bimmers is where do you go when you get tired of breaking things? You can put a 12 bolt rear end under the trans am and hold 700hp. Where do you get the equivalent for a bimmer?

M3 LSD's of various generations have taken far more power than we're talking, even to 1000+hp and a few hundred more ft-lb of torque.

Seriously, again, stop talking about power, talk about torque... If you want to make more than 800hp on the N54, it's likely going to have to start raising the redline to save the driveline, you'd be correct when talking about that level.. if fuelling/building it lets it hit 8000rpm, you don't even have to make more torque! magic, right?

If the diff internals are the weak point... drexler, OSG, any good custom shop.. much stronger cores.

halfshafts? DSS axles or with the M3 diff, M axles are thicker too.

Originally Posted by JimD

I also know that one of the makers of a V8 kit for a Miata says to use the stock rear end with a mustang V8. Claims it will work. That's what flinchy sounds like. They can point to examples where it has worked. I also bet it breaks sometimes and it doesn't take anything super unusual to break it. (The other maker offers new rear ends for their conversions).

Nope, absolutely not what i'm talking about because V8's, for the power, make more torque than what we're talking about
3rd time, torque, not power.

Originally Posted by JimD

As to your oft repeated HP and torque comments you are effectively only noting that the engines you are talking about have high rpm torque peaks that are not super high torque levels. I will concede that will help avoid breakage. But I think a key reason it will do so is the max power will very seldom be used. I don't rev to red line very often and I suspect others do not either. But the real question is whether the car can handle the power and that is only answered when you use the power. I do not think you will use 700hp in a 1 series very many times before you are fixing something.

yeah, i'm confused as to why having a rightward power band is a bad thing... on the street, just shift down and floor it, helps you keep your license too :P
The only reason most people don't redline the N54 is any gear above 2nd you should shift at like.. 6200rpm tops. there's just no acceleration due to the torque dropoff.
again, there's no reason at the torque levels to hit 700whp, anything will break in the 1er, they have CONSISTENTLY AND RELIABLY taken more.

Originally Posted by JimD

My son sometimes calls his friends car a dyno queen. That is because it's owner seldom drives it and almost never races it. That's because breaking it is expensive. I think a 700hp 1 series is going to be a dyno queen of the highest order. Excellent bragging rights but not excellent to drive.

You can only think that, if you ignore everything i say and don't actually think through the real world physics of the matter.

I'm not sure if you guys are all just trolling or what, at this point, given you're ignoring all logic.

I hope it's trolling.

[timbo_3101]

Originally Posted by ilikebmxbikes

Making a faster car doesnt always mean making the most HP.

+1

Originally Posted by TheSt|G

Does anyone here actually agree with with Flinchy?

Have a look back two years ago to see why this member lost all credibility on the Australian and the 1M forums, and has been ostracized ever since.

[flinchy]

Originally Posted by timbo_3101

+1



Have a look back two years ago to see why this member lost all credibility on the Australian and the 1M forums, and has been ostracized ever since.

wait.. what happened two years ago? I'm honestly curious if there's something you can point out to me?.. regardless.. seriously, 2 years ago, a lot has changed in 2 years.. a LOT.

i've never done anything to lose any kind of credibility lol.

I've never done anything to be ostracised, except call out the idiots/trolls..

regardless of 'credibility'... i don't think i should need credibility in this discussion when it's simple physics.

ED: i just went back through my own threads/some posts... yeah nothing.. what gives? This forum has probably the most toxic attitudes i've ever encountered, and that includes OCAU -_-.

[ilikebmxbikes]

Originally Posted by timbo_3101

+1

Have a look back two years ago to see why this member lost all credibility on the Australian and the 1M forums, and has been ostracized ever since.

I personally think flinchy is great. I don't agree with him on this but I do like the guy and his project.