วีดีโอ

@@swagonwheelselites6365 they don’t sound alike at all 😂

It is tune and turbo dependent. For my particular setup, it was 5900-6100 depending on the gear.

@@Woo.f32 That one is back up.

@@sunbish thanks for putting it back up bro🙏🙏

@@championraul It allows the DME to see boost over 21.7psi, it does nothing else. It isn’t necessary for the OTS tunes.

Oh okay, gotcha. Thanks

@@championraul No worries 👍🏽

@@lsxracing7744 6000-6200

@@sunbish thanks ,ever planning on working on m3/m4 s55 ? My buddy has 340i mhd e40 but he shifting at 7k plus rpm i gotta let him know

@@lsxracing7744 7k is waaaay too high if he’s on ots e40 with an upgraded hpfp. His dyno curve and power should be very similar to what I did. I’ve thought about it, not too sure yet. I’ve been contemplating a G87 😈

Thanks! I try to spread some knowledge or at least try to help the community have a better understanding on some things that I think might not be spoken about much or explained. I’m by no means an expert, but I am always trying to learn more myself. On my 435i I tried the CTS intake, but the car was not any quicker 60-130 nor did it make a difference time or trap speed wise in the 1/4 mile. I took it off and put the stock air box back on with the drop in filter. I honestly think the front mount intakes work, but they need a custom tune that’s tailored for it. On my 340i, I did remove the stock air box and stock paper filter in favor for a RK Tunes front mount intake. I sadly didn’t get any back 2 back comparisons, as the silencer broke on the stock one so it went into the garbage. The car did previously do a 7.7-7.8 60-130 and was right at 130 in the 1/4 mile on the stock setup, and with the RK tunes setup it did 7.4-7.5 and the trap speed went up to 131. I want to say the stock setup was in -500ft to -800ft DA while the RK tunes was right at sea level. I don’t think that was solely the intake setup though, as I wasn’t previously using drag mode on xHP but I did have that active when the RK tunes setup went on.

@@sunbish I appreciate the info my dude. Maybe after the flex fuel sensor (I’m stage 2+ but run the 93 map using 93/2gal E85 right now) I’ll get the front mount. As long as it doesn’t LOSE power like some intakes seem to, I wouldn’t mind hearing the turbo more. It also looks aggressive af to the eyes looking for that type of thing. I think Stage 2+ with a higher ethanol content and I should be able to drop from 10 flat to mid 8s (1k+ DA) 60-130. That’s my goas. Your car proves it’s in reach with even more meat left on the bone. I just want to stay with a stock 707 Hellcat. That will bury anything but the most modified cars below that level. God these cars are such a good tuner special… they’re really cheap for 500hp and stealthy comfort when you want.

The stock turbo is small.

Be patient 🙂

I went 10.2 with 505whp in a very similar car. It would be a sad day for me if I could only do a 10.8 with 530whp in these cars.

@@sunbish don't get me wrong I've seen lower HP cars in the 10s but they are cutting 1.4 sec 60ft but only trapping 98mph. Looking at your videos your 418whp car is around 2.1 sec from 1/8 mile to 1000ft your 500 whp car is 2 sec. How do you explain that

@@Madmalchen you’re looking into at what you want to see. Compare them everywhere 330’ 4.64--4.23 difference of .41 4.63*--.40 660’ 7.08--6.56 difference of .52 7.10*--.54 1000’ 9.19--8.58 difference of .61 9.24*--.66 1320’ 10.98--10.29 difference of .69 11.06* --.77 * = sea level DA The 340i incrementally was steadily pulling away while in DA that was 1800ft or so worse and with zero to minimal wind speed. The 435i had a good tail wind behind it, at least 10-15mph and slightly higher gusts. The difference would be larger if it had equal conditions, which would be more prominent at higher speeds which I just showed above.

@@Madmalchen Here’s how much of a difference the wind speed, and direction along with DA made. 435i in sea level DA with a 5-10mph head wind was trapping a best of 123.58 a week before. All others from this same day were 123.34, 123.38 and 123.36. It went 11.06 in this weather but with a better 1.68 60’. This track bites better, as was consistently doing 1.67-1.71 60’s. Now with a tail wind and -1800ft DA, it did a worst of 125.12 and a best of 125.89, which roughly equates to a 2mph trap speed difference. This track definitely doesn’t bite as good as the other. The 60’ ranged from a best of 1.71 and one other 1.79 which resulted in a 11.05, while the rest were 1.8+. The DA and the wind direction and speed made all the difference. Put the 340i in similar -1800ft DA and with a tailwind, I’m sure the trap speed would be a consistent 132+ and it would ET slightly better as well.

th-cam.com/video/l8Vzn2rSVUE/w-d-xo.htmlsi=ZnF9j5lWFE20v-xe That was on E30, it definitely is making more now with a higher ethanol content.

Yes 🙌🏼

I’m going to address this with a video and offer some explanations so it can be understood better. There’s many variables to this.

Stock LPFP Stage 2 HPFP

The recipe is all there in the description. You miss one ingredient don’t expect the same results.

Definitely uninformed or commenting and trying to tying to cope. Which one is it?

@@sunbish Bro it's obviously nitrous, no hate just a fact

@@Miclyricz Fact? You took my car without me knowing and installed a nitrous kit for me? When did you install the nitrous? Who tuned it for you? How big of a nitrous shot did you install? Big thanks my guy. It is tough to complain when you get free mods that you don’t even know about. 🤣🤣

Yes, for the 435i.

Spool is probably a little quicker More power down low and midrange (2k-4K) Doesn’t fall off up top nearly as quick. (5k+)

@@sunbish So basically a little faster everywhere haha.

@@foxxrider250r yeah, but it’s most noticeable at higher RPMs. This doesn’t taper off up top nearly as bad as the N55. I have dyno sheets of both in the dyno videos and on my IG if you want to compare.

@@sunbish Awesome! Thanks for the insight sir. I imagine a hybrid or aftermarket turbo on the n55 would solve that issue.

@@foxxrider250r Yeah, at least a n55+, pure750, F55, or a full frame kit like speedtech or 4N.

I thought about it, but it seemed to repetitive and it was making this video too long IMO as I was trying to knock them out together.

@@sunbish with your setups, do you find they have similar shift points?

@@Oscarrsaa The same variables apply. With my particular setup 6000-6100 seems to work the best.

What is your local gasoline octane? Fortunately I’m lucky enough to have 93 as the base fuel, and with the 50/50 blend of 93/E85 I never had timing corrections. So if you’re getting timing corrections, you may want to add a little more ethanol to see if that helps as long as you don’t have hpfp pressure drop. With the flex fuel setup, so far I haven’t seen any timing corrections. It does have this spot on E60+ where it’ll hiccup, but if I bypass that RPM in that one gear (3rd) it has no other issues. I haven’t tried to launch or run it up in the higher gears, so no data on that yet. I’ve yet to see any solid results from the pure500, but the little that I’ve seen it seems like a small bump over the stock ewg turbo in terms of peak power. Where it looks to show some benefit, is holding power better in the upper range 6k+.

@@sunbish am in Stockton California so my base fuel is 91acn. But I also have e85 from Pearson fuels that always test 83%. I have tested the e85 for the last 6 months and it’s always 83-85%. Also across town in South Stockton theirs a trucking scale/ gas station that has 100 octane race fuel. I sometimes mix 2.5gallons of 91acn with 1.5 gallons of 100 octane. And it gives me very clean timing. Also am not sure if it matters or not but my elevation is 108 feet above sea level and temperature is always in 60s. It must because am about 60 miles from the San Francisco Bay Area. I purchase the pure 500 because I want to hold the power better to redline and also I know for a fact the pure500 can pass smog emissions with the stock tune and I just spent $1900 on my hpfp from dorch and just don’t have enough money for a bigger turbo . I have a coworker with that turbo upgrade that recently pass smog emissions. I don’t mind swapping out my dorch stage 2.5 hpfp and catless downpipe every 2 years for smog, after all I did all the work myself. And again bro thank you for all the knowledge you share with us TH-cam people

Thanks

This will apply to all EWG N55’s. PWGs will make less whp, but the shape of the curve will essentially be the same if their tune is pushing the turbo.

@@sunbish thx sir!

Thanks

😂

oh but it runs 10.98 sec and runs 125 mph even more amazing almost a miracle

I know welded differentials work, but that isn’t my cup of tea.

Thanks I would first go with the hpfp. If you can do both, that would be much better. When you install the upgraded hpfp flash over to the dedicated OTS map for it. Both MHD/BM3 offer one for it. That’s if you do it by itself. If you feel like you need more power, then get a custom tune if you’re not yet ready to install the upgraded turbo. If you install both get a custom tune. It’ll be a night and day difference.

@@sunbish so I should be making a pretty big increase with the hpfp ?before I add a turbo which I’m hoping to do down the line eventually thanks for this gives me some insight on what to do next

@@JustLuuchi I don’t know what you would consider a huge gain, but it is a noticeable difference even on the upgraded hpfp OTS map. With a spicy custom tune the difference is a little bit bigger. Stock hpfp ots e blend maps for an F3X make about 390-410whp and 400-450wtq. They’ll trap about 115-118 at or near sea level in a full weight car. The BM3/MHD OTS hpfp maps will make 420-430whp and 470-500wtq. They’ll trap around 119-122 in your average F3X in similar conditions as above. (As you seen I made 418/491 with the static bm3 stage 2+ e30 map in 5th gear in the dyno. 6th gear will dyno slightly higher numbers since it is closer to a true 1:1 transmission gear ratio. With BM3, a higher ethanol content with a flex fuel sensor and any of the dedicated flex fuel hpfp maps would make even slightly more power as it will increase timing but it keeps boost at the same level because it would have the ability to read the ethanol content. - the MHD e40 map should dyno the highest according to MHD themselves. They reduce boost but add timing when you go higher than E40 with the FF sensor.) A custom tune should make another 20-30whp and 30-50wtq above the hpfp OTS maps. A strong custom tune should have no problem making 435-450whp and 500-550wtq.

@@sunbish sweet thanks for this information that’s a pretty good Increase just with hpfp and with custom tune you can squeeze out even more and then later down the track I can add upgraded turbo as well!

In Australia our fuel is different so I’m hoping it’s the same numbers with stock hpfp and upgraded hpfp we mainly use e85 in Australia to

Yes, all 4 series in the US are EWG.

No, a custom tune with a dedicated ethanol blend that’s higher (e40+) should net higher results. The tune I put the car on the dyno was made for E30.

Able to launch harder. 1st gear is extremely short.

@@sunbish ahh true. is it bad for the trans ?

i'm selling my dorch stage 2 if interested !

I personally think it would be okay. A stage 1 hpfp flows slightly more than a TU.

Capable of spinning rod bearing at stock power 😂😂😂

I feel ya, N55 always gets a bad rep. It has much more potential than people think.

@@sunbish What do you think you'd be running on a 93 map? Around 380-400?

@@BlvckPapa 330-350