phillym5

Kelster....

I think you will be fine with that boost. I know of a couple/few M5's with 10psi running around. They don't post here. D/A has built a few. Stock internals. I have a feeling the S62 is a lot stronger than people believe. If you look at the M3's S54..... they are now pushing over 700rwhp(race gas) on the stock motor using turbo. There are dozens of 500+rwhp(pump gas) stock internal M3's running around. In the early days.. they all thought 10lbs was really pushing the limit. Well........ they were all wrong. They are at 22lbs of boost on 109oct. Pretty impressive. So really.... unless someone has pushed the S62 untill it popped... nobody will know until it happens. But I highly doubt 7.8 psi would do it.

Blue Thunder

Been there - done that
Expen$ive lesson.

The S62 has a weak block that flexes alot. The cylinders are also placed
very close together with very little material between the cylinders, not good.

__________________
1999 M5 Avus Blau Metallic
Twin Rotrex superchargers, Front mount intercooler, Steel sleeved block, Forged CP pistons, 10.5:1 compression, SS Headers, SS race cats, TUBI Rumore,
UUC 11" V12 cerametallic clutch + flywheel, UUC EVO3 SSK w/DSSR, Brembo GT4 brakes front/back, KWv3's, Angel Eyes + Angelibrights, Celis
19" Hamann PG2´s, Strongstrut front Strut Brace, BMW fire extinguisher, Phatbox MP3 player, CF interior trim, Voltphreaks battery
http://www.cardomain.com/ride/2417213/1

1989 E30 M3 White - track toy
S50B32 with a supercharger - 500+ hp, 1300kg rocket for the Ring

Kelster

I beg to differ. This is not a 'useful piece of technical information' but merely one person's observation. What about the fact that Atco is an approved NHRA venue? Do you really believe NHRA would sanction events at Atco if the track has the elevation differences you keep harping about?

It's one thing to be curious and quite another to appear to have an agenda. You have made your points and they have been responded to. You appear to ignore any data that doesn't fit your preconceived notions about Atco, a track you freely admit that you've never visited in person. 'A dog with a bone' would seem to characterize your obsession with the Atco grade issue.

If you are sincere about the forgoing the first thing you should do is to take a drive and visit the track. Bring someone along with you who has some knowledge of civil engineering. And respond to the fact that Atco appears to be an NHRA sanctioned venue.

Your so-called 'evaluation from a technical perspective' is a farce on a par with those who believe 'the earth is flat'. I suggest you go to the library and read up on 'the scientific method.' In of your December 15 post you flat out state And only later do you waffle and try to suggest that you were merely suggesting that the elevation differential was a 'possible' reason that Atco's ETs are so quick. Be objective and respond to data that doesn't agree with your position - don't just blissfully ignore it.

Rather than playing devil's advocate you come across as someone having a preconceived agenda. I would suggest that you re-read the entire thread and address those points which have been raised and that you have heretofore chosen to ignore, i.e., the matter of NHRA sanctioning the Atco venue and other readings of topo maps that contradict your contentions.

__________________

Lscman

Listen Kelster,

You are unfairly characterizing me in a negative way and making totally false accusations against me. I did not attack anyone here in a personal fashion & neither should you. I absolutely do not have a preconceived agenda. Initial information I found suggested the track was not flat & I posted it, including various track elevations that I found and other's did too that vary between 95' and 33'. I tried to search and solicit more technical information about the track and this was challenging. Spotty & sometimes divergent (contrary) information was collected from many sources. This is not grounds for a personal attack.

Your quotations of my posts are cleverly flopped out-of-order, so progress looks encumbered (duh). The fast track inquiries were posted first, followed by slope, prep, NHRA and site grading discoveries. In an ongoing effort to denigrate me, you "blissfully" ignore my prior reply to CSBM5 about track slope:

I still consider first-hand comments about uneven site grading near the traps to be useful information that suggests the track has been elevated to level on uneven site ground because this is NOT how tracks are built in my area. Around here, some farmer's corn field was turned into a track long ago and it is rarely level. AMAZINGLY, you selectively dismiss information that supports a level track scenario while attacking me for considering & acknowleging it. You really need to do a self-assessment before taking such a stance because hypocricy comes to mind. I am not going to visit ATCO to satisfy you.

NHRA track approval is impressive & indeed notable, but it may or may not be significant wrt level track. Do you know if NRHA tracks have a slope/level specification? After hours of searching, I am unable to effectively filter through the reams of NHRA safety guidelines to find ANYTHING relating to track construction/design wrt max slope specifications or anything remotely similar. How long have you spent searching for that? I do not know what technical guidelines the NHRA uses with respect to approving a track layout, but likely exist. These rules may include track surface type, runoff distance, timer accuracy and levelness, but this is purely a guess. All I can find is millions of rules relating to track safety and classes. Perhaps a NHRA rulebook needs to be purchased. Track design parameters are NOT contained in any pro or amateur racing rulebook I've owned, so this info may be difficult to get.

If you have ANYTHING to provide aside from personal attacks and the acronym "NHRA", why not share it? Technical information about superchharged M5's, ATCO or drag racing is appreciated and would seem to be on-topic. Attacking me is not on-topic.

__________________
Resolve never, screw genuine.

Lscman

I was only pointing out that speed density with marginal mixture control under boost may even work well on a drag strip while often failing miserably on a road course. There is more safety margin in drag racing for a given motor setup. As you noted, the drivetrain may take a greater beating in drag racing. Accurately guesstimating air flow through speed density algorithms is much more difficult than measuring actual air flow.

It's easier to maintain a safe mixture under a flat-footed drag racing sprint condition. Even if the mixture momentarily goes lean for a couple seconds, it's less likely to harm the motor compared to road racing where the throttle may be mashed for 5x as long and for periods of 30 minutes or more. Prolonged lean condition or pre-ignition is what tends to lift heads. As the pressure is increased, tolerance for timing error or lean condition approaches zero.

multiowner

Kelster and Lscman, why not have lunch together. Seems like you two have a great deal of time to kill. You can meet each other half way. I calcalated it to be exactly at Atco Raceway.

__________________
2009 MB CL63 Artic White Cashmere
2006 M5 Sapphirre BlacK/BlacK Traded 4/09
2007 MB SL550 Iridium Silver/Ash Traded 4/09
2008 335xi Alpine/Beige
2005 Porsche Cayenne S Gray/Black

THRILOS5

I say lets meet at Atco in March

__________________

e39 M5
Audi S4
300ZX tt 580hp@20psi
Mustang GT 5.0L
Suzuki GSXR750

M5 Dan

Some cracking times there, I bet you are very proud. Great News..

__________________
2002 Silver M5

Lscman

Your maturity and ego is beyond measure.

rneedham1979

I would have to agree.