Seeking CSL knowledge.

[shimmy]

100




You are a mentalist

[Rutkowski]

100




You are a mentalist

yes. :whistle:

[glendog74]

I believe anything i am told... :whistle:

[EVANGELOS]

Hi,

Not sure I follow what your saying here.

You posted your concerns that your ECU was not making
fuel adaptions / trimming which would be required in
order to make real gains with the S54 Vanos optimised,
as in the CSL, and now your saying that even highly
tuned cars are not as fast as yours ? ...

As far as the hp gains on the "regular" S54

the no fuel trimming after the mafless (alpha-n) reprog and the airbox is just something that some aftermarket programmers seem to be doing so as I have explained in that post

http://www.cslregister.com/forum/showpost.php?p=87500&postcount=11

the main problem with "regular" M3's and maff-less proframming is that the dme takes into account on the fuel trimming adaption routine both the 02 sensors AND the maf ... so when u take out the maf it is probable that there is going to be a problem if u allow the dme to adapt ...

so they just bypass the fuel trimming ...

not the best of ideas but still u get a steady performance as long as the injectors , fuel pump etc are in perfect working condition

now on the other subject

I do not say that my car is faster than highly tuned cars

I am saying that THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A HIGHLY TUNED S54

The M3 can go faster but the S54 can produce at the most 370 hp on the csl and a few LESS on the M3

Now here is a video of my car vs a csl (alexk knows the owner) ... at that time my car WAS NOT lightened and had NO airbox or alpha-n reprog but I had installed a 3.91 diff , a lightweight flywheel and a full SS exhaust.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZ9mINH4zhY&feature

after the installement of the airbox and the alpha-n I gained a couple of a car lengths maybe more ... but mainly the engine is more consistence where as before there were various "ups and downs"

...While I believe that tunning the S54 to some of the alleged
numbers is cloud cuckoo land, its on par with saying that a
N type Map with a Carbon Airbox and nothing else produces
a S54 that is better than a CSL ?

Correct me if I am wrong, but that is what you are saying.

Where did BMW go so wrong, I mean all they had to do
to go racing themselves was take a stock S54, fit an
MK Carbon Airbox, a bastardised N Type Map, leave the stock
cams in there, not even optimise the Vanos, and hey presto they
have a winner !!

This is just pure Monkey business to a primate.

Regards,

The Gorilla.

Let me say it again ...

1) I do not claim any hp more than 360

2) What I "claim" as you say is backed by "racing" against other cars ON THE ROAD ... not by comparing hp dyno sheets on the internet

3)The main reasons that my car performs are

It Weighs aprox 1460 kg (no passanger) where as normal M3's are aprox 1570 (regardless that bmw claims that M3's weigh 1570 with 75kg passenger)

It actually produces 350-360 hp (close to a csl) where as normal M3's produce less than 330 at the best ... furthermore the dme is programmed to run up to 8400 rpm

It has a shorter rear diff 3.91 and with the csl wheels and tyre size the final drive is close to 4.00 in comparison to the 3.62 of the normal M3

It has a lightweight flywheel which as you know makes a big difference especially on the low gears due to the smaller EQUIVALENT weight

and some other smaller details

Νow the result is that the car can accelerate !!!

Some TRUE examples ...

my car vs a AA sta1.5 M3 E46 ... the s/c is of course EXTREMELY powerful ... It belongs to a close friend (alexk knows him as well) ... DUE TO EXTENSIVE wheel spinning as a result of the extreme power ... I am faster from a stand still (or from 30kph) up to 200 kph ... of course if we race from a higher gear (where the s/c does not spin) I am humiliated

my car vs 335 stage1 (380hp) ... (again alexk knows him) ... my M3 is faster all the way

etc etc ...

On the other hand we have many examples of "so called tuned" M3's that INSTEAD of weigh shedding and revving concentrate on POWER and the end result is sadly DISAPPOINTING ...

I really cannot understand how people believe that you can produce 390-400 etc hp from a 3.246cc n/a engine WITHOUT race components (like on the P54)

So NO the BMW has not failed ... all I claim is that a light normal M3 with a couple of correct modifications ca go fast on a straight line ...

[The Gorilla]

Hi,

Evangelos- but you did say-

''as for csl's in my current "specs" I must say that I am quite faster ... on a straight line that is !!!

So your view of tuning the S54 although very similar to what I
have always maintained, you are saying that your lightened
car even though still heavier than a std CSL, and with less power than
a ''good' CSL engine, some have made a tad above 360, is quicker.

As for the video of your car, if you watch very carefully you can
just see Stevie Wonder getting out of the other car's drivers seat.

Still a load of old Moneky business.

Regards,

The Gorilla.

[EVANGELOS]

Hi,

Evangelos- but you did say-

''as for csl's in my current "specs" I must say that I am quite faster ... on a straight line that is !!!

So your view of tuning the S54 although very similar to what I
have always maintained, you are saying that your lightened
car even though still heavier than a std CSL, and with less power than
a ''good' CSL engine, some have made a tad above 360, is quicker...

I am saying what happens on the road ... now the result of course is not MAGICAL !!! ...

Yourself , like a lot of people consider that the only way to go faster is to gain power !!!

On the other hand the experience has proven that especially for the s54 this is futile ... the ACTUAL gains from what I have described on my previous post are much more tangible ON THE ROAD compared with IMAGINARY hp gains

In my current setup I weigh 40-60 kg more than a csl (compared to 140-160 more of a fully stocked M3) BUT the gains from the diff , the rev limiter and the other mods are as it shows in real life bigger !!!

Now I really have no argument with you ... what I say is proven in real life situations with actual cars ... it's your choice to believe that I get my kicks by posting various imaginary situations ... the reason that I have posted the specific examples is that my friend Alexk actually knows ALL of them in person (since he too used to live in Athens)

...As for the video of your car, if you watch very carefully you can
just see Stevie Wonder getting out of the other car's drivers seat.

Still a load of old Moneky business.

Regards,

The Gorilla.

Now this is just pathetic !!!

The csl was owned by a close friend both of me and alexk's also named Alex ...

just because you have never bothered to actually try and test your car against other cars ... and choose to believe that things work one way just because the reasoning in your head say's so ... doesn't make everybody else a liar !!! ... on the other hand it is your prerogative to stay in the dark believing that csl's are magical cars that are impossible to out-accelerate ...

I have a tremendous respect for csl's and truly believe that their overall performance (especially on a track) is excellent ... but that has nothing to do with the topic in question

[The Gorilla]

Hi,

Evangelos- your now even speaking for me !!!!!

Quote-

''Yourself , like a lot of people consider that the only way to go faster is to gain power !!!''

It sure it does help though.

Regards,

The Gorilla.

[EVANGELOS]

csl is the epitome of the argument that you can go faster with less power ... I thought you would have grasped that point by now since you own one ...

anyway lets not make it into an argument and you start mentioning monkeys and blind singers again

[The Gorilla]

Hi,

Evangelos- your video shows 2 cars going under a
bridge with their lights on.
I do this many times some evenings.

So lets end this nosense and you stop making
claims about a 8400 rpm limit on a stock
S54 Valve train.

Regards,

The Gorilla.

[EVANGELOS]

Hi,

Evangelos- your video shows 2 cars going under a
bridge with their lights on.
I do this many times some evenings.

So lets end this nosense and you stop making
claims about a 8400 rpm limit on a stock
S54 Valve train.

Regards,

The Gorilla.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH this is funny !!!!

ok ok ... The only thing I can do is to tell you to ask my friends

nick///m3 http://www.cslregister.com/forum/member.php?u=512

and

alexk http://www.cslregister.com/forum/member.php?u=380

who both know exactly my car to ensure you that I do not lie !!!


hahahahahahha that's a first !!!! ...

it is very funny u know to have someone telling you that what has happened or is happening everyday with your car is actually NOT happening

because it changes his whole perspective on cars and (who knows) maybe life as a whole

hahahahhahahaha

grow up man ...

[glendog74]

There's clearly a misunderstanding here... Language barrier perhaps.

Lets all be friends! :smt055

[The Gorilla]

Hi,

Evangelos- 8400 rpm on stock S54 valve
train, super, please tell how this is possible ?

And more to the point what use it is on
a stock s54 ?

Stock S54 Torque curve is already falling away
quickly at 7000 rpm so what use is a 8400 rpm limit ?

BMW MS conceed that valve float will and
does occur at 8250 rpm on stock S54
Valve train, and if you don't belive me
Evangelos, then you can phone, or in
your case, ask a friend.

Regards,

The Gorilla.

[EVANGELOS]

I have nothing personal with Gorilla or anyone else ... anyway let me elaborate on ALL that is being asked/doubted

1)rev limiter ... there is no reason why I should lie about that ... the engine on my car is (apart from the airbox) stock ... valves , valve springs , retainers etc are all stock ... and still I rev it up to 8400 rpm

Now as far as WHY this is better ... most people think that the usable rev-width ends when power starts decreasing (like my friend Gorilla)

This is FAR FROM THE TRUTH ... the way to understand the best point of gear change and thus the usable rev width is the following:

You transform a simple "hp vs revs" dyno chart to a "hp vs speed" (for every gear)

as in the jpeg that follows

http://img855.imageshack.us/f/hpvsspeed.jpg/

Then u see where the power curve from a gear intersects with the power curve from the next gear ... and this is the optimum point of gear change ... and this defines the maximum revs that are "usable" at any gear ...

In the S54 although the power curve does not necessarily peak at the rev limiter the decrease is not enough so as not to change as high as possible ...

Of course this does NOT mean that if u could rev up to lets say 9000 or more it would still be usable ... but up to 8400 it sure is ...

Secondly ... is it safe to rev up to 8400 rpm on a stock valve train ???

Surely it less safe than the stock 8000 rpm ...

but 3 years and more of revving up to 8400 on occasion (of course I do not rev up to 8400 all the time) has proven pretty safe both on mine and MANY other cars that have presented no problems what so ever ... I would very much like to see though any official documentation verifying that above 8150 valve floating does occur

2)Claims of being faster than other cars ... My aim was not to gloat about my car ... it was simply to point out that there is NO reason to install very expensive aftermarket products on the s54 (like cams or valve springs or higher compression pistons etc) ... the end result has time and again proven to be NOT satisfactory since it is IMPOSSIBLE to raise significantly the specific hp output ratio of the s54 without using racing components (as in the p54 for instance)

All I tried to explain (using very true examples and videos of very true street racing with very true cars) was that the M3 CAN GO FASTER but the way IS NOT TO INCREASE POWER since this is limited to 360-370 hp at the most ...

Now since you don't know me and since what I say, I agree, is contrary to the common belief on various forums where the main discussion is "WANT TO GO FASTER = MORE POWER" , I expected that people would find it strange and out of place ...

[The Gorilla]

Hi,

Evangelos- I have no issues with you, but when
you start making assumptions about what I
do or have supposed to said or believe, then I do.

Its a know fact that to exceed the specificed
safe Rev limit of any engine will increase
dynamic load upon the componets.

A rule of thumb is that for every 250 rpm
over the specified rev limit you increase
component stress via load by a further 50%.

Thus at 8500 rpm your doubling the stress
factors into the components.

Therefore to rev a stock S54 given the Torque
drop off does not much more than radically increase
component wear.

There is nothing to gain in revving a stock S54 engine
from say 8 upto 8400 rpm, no matter what airbox or
software you have.

Regards,

The Gorilla.


cut

[shimmy]

I believe anything i am told... :whistle:

So does Matt!:whistle: