580 wheel hp M5 Twin Charged - Page 2 - The Unofficial BMW M5 Messageboard (m5board.com)

wilsodh · 6th August 2007, 19:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Turbo M3

challenges: we do not know if the alumunium block with sleeves will endure.

Should be ok here if our D/A experience is any indication. Pistons have been the only notable failure mode with a high-boost S62. Be careful with mapping and detonation with those high compression pistons. Do you have a water injection system?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Turbo M3

80k $$$ is not cheap. You are right. When you add up all the litte, middle, and big details, the cost of this project is high.

From screws to head studs, from bigger valves to NEW VANOS, all engine is rebuilt. This kit comes with 2 new vanos, may seem strange, but the complete engine is rebuilt with new timing chains, tensioners... we did not want the customer to come back some time later due to vanos.

At the end of the day, all OEM parts and modified parts and labor and know how make the kit cost 80K.

+1. It may be shocking to some, but this price is not out of line for a fully prepped, nth-degree, one-off engine. (Not sure I'd call this a 'kit' though!) Sounds like the objective here is to push the envelope on output rather than offer an affordable assembly-line s/c option. Looking forward to hearing more.

As Blue and Ard have mentioned, lack of intake communication between cylinder banks is something you might look more closely at.

Dave

FSAEracer03 · 6th August 2007, 21:20

Just a piece of constructive criticism... for the cost of the kit, and the sheer confusion and debate regarding the chassis dyno, why not pull the motor and get some engine dyno time in? You can tune the motor even more accurately that way, and get real numbers for your customer and third party on-lookers.

gsfent · 7th August 2007, 00:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by FSAEracer03

Just a piece of constructive criticism... for the cost of the kit, and the sheer confusion and debate regarding the chassis dyno, why not pull the motor and get some engine dyno time in? You can tune the motor even more accurately that way, and get real numbers for your customer and third party on-lookers.

Good point for bragging rights and some comparisons. The problem here is the variance in different brand dynos giving different readings. I assume an engine dyno wouldn't have that variance.

But of course, at the end of the day, it is actual rwhp that matters!

Regards,
Jerry

FSAEracer03 · 7th August 2007, 01:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by gsfent

Good point for bragging rights and some comparisons. The problem here is the variance in different brand dynos giving different readings. I assume an engine dyno wouldn't have that variance.

But of course, at the end of the day, it is actual rwhp that matters!

Regards,
Jerry

I agree, Jerry, that the rwhp is what matters for the real-world experience... but the problem in question here is whether or not the rwhp is accurate in this case, as there was no baseline done, and the main variance in dyno comparisons is the difference in chassis dyno types and brands. Engine dyno's really take that variable and beat it into submission

Also.. the tuning is easier and more efficient on a constant-load engine setup.

A fringe benefit of this would be a linear and direct comparisson of the Dyno Dynamics to actual motor bhp, as specific to the M5/E39 driveline. I'm really curious as to how much is actually lost, and I'd place a significant bet that it isn't over 20%.

TurboM3, what do you say? $80,000 for a turbo kit... the customer would looove you if you tossed the beast motor onto an engine dyno, I'm sure!

Turbo M3 · 7th August 2007, 02:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by FSAEracer03

Just a piece of constructive criticism... for the cost of the kit, and the sheer confusion and debate regarding the chassis dyno, why not pull the motor and get some engine dyno time in? You can tune the motor even more accurately that way, and get real numbers for your customer and third party on-lookers.

My point and logic is: tune the motor and all of the system before and after on the same dyno. This will give accurate results.

I live in Istanbul, where only we as DA own a load type dyno, bought it just for our tuning and testing purposes. What I am trying to say is that there is no engine dyno here and I am the only one with a load type.

As many know, Dynamics is very well known dyno.

Many top tuners do tune on chasis dynos.

What I do, i tune on dynamics, then check on the autobahn for air fuel ratios. No engine dyno and no chasis dyno will be as accurata as autobahn tuning. I set the Air fuel ratios on the road for 100% accuracy.

Once again, as long as the tests and measurements are done on the same dyno, it indicates the increase in power.

Turbo M3 · 7th August 2007, 02:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by wilsodh

Should be ok here if our D/A experience is any indication. Pistons have been the only notable failure mode with a high-boost S62. Be careful with mapping and detonation with those high compression pistons. Do you have a water injection system?

+1. It may be shocking to some, but this price is not out of line for a fully prepped, nth-degree, one-off engine. (Not sure I'd call this a 'kit' though!) Sounds like the objective here is to push the envelope on output rather than offer an affordable assembly-line s/c option. Looking forward to hearing more.

As Blue and Ard have mentioned, lack of intake communication between cylinder banks is something you might look more closely at.

Dave

Dave, at 1.1 bar to be on the safe side, we decided to use 2 bosch motorsport fuel pumps.

each fuel pump has its own line untill the fuel rail. so two fuel lines, for the left and right banks of S62.

fuel return line is getting changed as well.

so the work continues. i want to see how the baby works. may fail or work very well. so far we have a smile on our faces. each day we go further.

This is the BIG KIT for S62, on september we will welcome a M5 from germany for stage 1, 4 psi. even that kit will have the individual intake manifolds, bosch motorsport... thanks for the nice words.

FSAEracer03 · 7th August 2007, 16:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by Turbo M3

My point and logic is: tune the motor and all of the system before and after on the same dyno. This will give accurate results.

I live in Istanbul, where only we as DA own a load type dyno, bought it just for our tuning and testing purposes. What I am trying to say is that there is no engine dyno here and I am the only one with a load type.

As many know, Dynamics is very well known dyno.

Many top tuners do tune on chasis dynos.

What I do, i tune on dynamics, then check on the autobahn for air fuel ratios. No engine dyno and no chasis dyno will be as accurata as autobahn tuning. I set the Air fuel ratios on the road for 100% accuracy.

Once again, as long as the tests and measurements are done on the same dyno, it indicates the increase in power.

Oh, I must have missed the "before" testing. What did this car pull before mods?

Turbo M3 · 7th August 2007, 23:05

288 whp up to 292 whp bone stock.

now, the exhaust is removed, propeller shaft is removed, a totally separate new fuel feed line, custom made, is being installed.

2 separate fuel lines, each for each cylinder bank. Even this takes 3 to 4 days. Fuel rails are getting modified as well.

This is a project, not tested fully, i am living every phase of the project and T R Y I N G to solve minor and major problems.

FSAEracer03 · 8th August 2007, 00:14

292whp.... OUCH!

E55AMG2 · 8th August 2007, 00:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by FSAEracer03

292whp.... OUCH!

add ~12% to that to get normal #s. Those eddy current machines always read low. That makes ~332whp.