F82 M4 JB4 vs E92 M3 1/4 Mile

[Wolfinwolfsclothing]

Originally Posted by Roman@ESS

F8X needs race / E85 fuel, max power tune with downpipes to run with a standard VT2-585/625 supercharged E9X on pump gas. I have an M4 that is tuned and it does not have enough top end power to beat our SC E9X cars at high speed. The F8X actually has too much power at lower RPM's that causes traction issues when you crank the boost up. I detuned mine below 4.5k RPM's with our tune and ran close to stock boost so I can get better traction under WOT. Once you upgrade the turbos in the F8X and if the motor can handle it then you will see the F8X get to that next performance level.

+1. That car is going to need bigger turbos to see real power results. At least from where I've seen, all these guys putting down 500-550 rwhp hasnt equated to much higher trap speeds...or should I say trap speeds that would be consistent with the amount of hp. I think Terry's car at 550 rwhp could only manage 125 on a vbox, which is like what 123 at the strip. Not where I'd peg a car making that much power and tq.

[Longboarder]

Originally Posted by Wolfinwolfsclothing

+1. That car is going to need bigger turbos to see real power results. At least from where I've seen, all these guys putting down 500-550 rwhp hasnt equated to much higher trap speeds...or should I say trap speeds that would be consistent with the amount of hp. I think Terry's car at 550 rwhp could only manage 125 on a vbox, which is like what 123 at the strip. Not where I'd peg a car making that much power and tq.

Uploading a vbox file to vboxtools.com will give you both 1/4 terminal speed and 1/4 trap speed. The difference is about 1mph. Last weekend my 1/4 mile trap speed was 135.787 and terminal speed 136.8299 and on another run the 1/4 mile trap was 134.643 vs terminal speed of 135.7627.

By the way there is a forum member MasterC17 who put down only 436 wheel HP on a mustang dyno yet did a 126.51mph trap with JB4 beta, downpipes and MS109. How's that?

http://f80.bimmerpost.com/forums/sho....php?t=1047179

[Wolfinwolfsclothing]

Originally Posted by Longboarder

Uploading a vbox file to vboxtools.com will give you both 1/4 terminal speed and 1/4 trap speed. The difference is about 1mph. Last weekend my 1/4 mile trap speed was 135.787 and terminal speed 136.8299 and on another run the 1/4 mile trap was 134.643 vs terminal speed of 135.7627.

By the way there is a forum member MasterC17 who put down only 436 wheel HP on a mustang dyno yet did a 126.51mph trap with JB4 beta, downpipes and MS109. How's that?

http://f80.bimmerpost.com/forums/sho....php?t=1047179

I did see that one, but that was on a Mustang Dyno which reads 10-12% lower than a dynojet. So on a dyno jet he would have been 480-488, which is still a low trap speed based on that rwhp number. He was also using race gas too, no?

[AreOut]

dynojet reminds me of those chinese 5000W PMPO PC speakers, good for boosting the ego of car owners

anywayz M4 will need more than just FBO to beat SCed E92 and at the end it can add up to be even more expensive than just slamming the SC on E92, especially if you want it tuned properly to be streetable

stock for stock E92 is no match for M4 though, boosted car is a boosted car

[Sered]

Originally Posted by AreOut

dynojet reminds me of those chinese 5000W PMPO PC speakers, good for boosting the ego of car owners

anywayz M4 will need more than just FBO to beat SCed E92 and at the end it can add up to be even more expensive than just slamming the SC on E92, especially if you want it tuned properly to be streetable

stock for stock E92 is no match for M4 though, boosted car is a boosted car

Actually, dynojets tend to read pretty consistently and there are some arguments made that the power readings it makes are more accurate for actual street use and accuracy.

One thing that hurts the image is Mustang dynos getting put into 'dynojet' mode. People see this and see a huge number change and assume that dynojets just read too high. Where in reality, the Mustang dyno is reading far higher than a normal dynojet would.

Other dynos are better for tuning than the dynojet, especially with the loading aspect; but you never know what kinds of times it will run until you put it on the track because they read so inconsistently. You can look at a dynojet graph and immediately tell what trap speeds the car is probably going to run.

And no, as much as I enjoy my blown S65; a bolton S55 is going to beat most S/C E92s. Wider powerband and more power.

[AreOut]

I'm not sure the equation is that simple. At 1/4 mile wider powerband means relatively nothing since except the start where you can't transfer the full power to the tarmac anyway you are always going at high rpm.

Also even on street if you compare DCT cars they will quickly downshift and that will negate any wide powerband advantage, but yes it's different with 6MTs where wide powerband will allow you for much more relaxed driving with less shifting.