Overboost Function

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

Don't get blinded by trying to win the argument, you are missing the point I am trying to make .

This isn't happening.

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

The power graph cartoon you drafted is just that, a cartoon; let's leave it at that. Inputing it in your advanced simulation tools requires a multitude of assumptions that go well beyond the point of this discussion. Let's just focus on the physics concepts.

That is actually the exact reason to use simulation, everything is absolutely identical between comparisons except the hp curve.

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

Arguing that only peak power matters for an engine is a mistake.

It is more important than any other factor (power to weight of course...). Yes the shape of the power curve also matters. This in fact is a great case to show that for some contests a car with significantly less peak power can be close to or exceed the car with a better (peak) power to weight.

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

Going back to the cartoon, the red and purple cars (with the same gearing that uses the RPM band between the two black lines) will have very similar performance. Sometimes the red car at an advantage and sometime the purple car at an advantage despite the purple car having a much higher peak power output (and I am talking all out performance here, not lazy acceleration). This is because they produce the same average power in the critical RPM band (defined by the two vertical black lines on my edited cartoon).

You reasoning is mostly correct here. What you are missing is that plotting something vs. rpm (dyno) is not at all the same as plotting it vs. time or vs. speed at that is what counts. Power must be averaged in TIME during the actual acceleration run and because acceleration tapers in each gear mostly due to losses and falling torque a longer amount of time is spent a the higher rpms!

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

Increasing the average power produced in the crtical RPM range will improve all out performance, even if it is done at the expense of reducing the power peak. That is a physics fact.

Again depends on your definition of average. Average across a power vs. rpm curve no, average in time, yes.

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

Going back to the overboost discussion, increasing torque below the critical RPM band will not improve ultimate performance, only lazy acceleration. However, if the overboost increases torque/power within the critical RPM band, it will improve ultimate performance. This even if peak power is not increased.

Agree and this is the basis of my criticism of overboost as implemented by BMW it favors low and mid rpms (<5000 rpm) and thus improves 0-60 and 1/8th mile type of contests. It makes cars a bit better at drag racing and abandons BMWs motorsport principles in the tradeoff where high rpm peak power suffers.

Cheers.

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by swamp2

That is actually the exact reason to use simulation, everything is absolutely identical between comparisons except the hp curve.

Have you matched the gearing and the power curves of the red and purple cars so that the average power in the critical RPM range is the same? If so, and you do a single gear pull in that RPM range, the red car will come ahead in distance travelled. If not, someting is wrong in the simulation parameters.

Originally Posted by swamp2

It is more important than any other factor (power to weight of course...). Yes the shape of the power curve also matters. This in fact is a great case to show that for some contests a car with significantly less peak power can be close to or exceed the car with a better (peak) power to weight.

Bingo! Exactly the point I am trying to make all along

Originally Posted by swamp2

You reasoning is mostly correct here. What you are missing is that plotting something vs. rpm (dyno) is not at all the same as plotting it vs. time or vs. speed at that is what counts. Power must be averaged in TIME during the actual acceleration run and because acceleration tapers in each gear mostly due to losses and falling torque a longer amount of time is spent a the higher rpms!

I did say my argument was over simplified for the sake of keeping it succinct. Agreed that plotting against time is the way to go. However, for two cars with the same gearing, plotting vs RPM or plotting vs speed will yield the exact same result.

There are also many other factors that impact this, with aero drag being an important one. The faster you travel, the more power (at the cube of speed) is required to overcome drag and less is available for acceleration.

Originally Posted by swamp2

Again depends on your definition of average. Average across a power vs. rpm curve no, average in time, yes.

Agreed . The car that produced the most average power over an acceleration run (time defined) is the one most likely to have the better performance. But not always the case though, depending on when the power was produced.

Originally Posted by swamp2

Agree and this is the basis of my criticism of overboost as implemented by BMW it favors low and mid rpms (<5000 rpm) and thus improves 0-60 and 1/8th mile type of contests. It makes cars a bit better at drag racing and abandons BMWs motorsport principles in the tradeoff where high rpm peak power suffers.

Cheers.

We seem to be pretty much in agreement. Always fun chatting with you

[jtvr4]

Originally Posted by ///ADMAN

Here you go...

I'm not sure if your trying to troll me or if you're really having a hard time with this concept. The fastest 0-60 time I can find for the 335IS is 4.7.

Were going to use the 1m as an example. It takes 2.7 seconds for the 1M to reach 40 mph and only 2.4 for the M3 to reach 40. That's .3 difference between the two. At 50 the difference is now only .1. Now we know for a fact that the 335is runs a 0-60 in 4.7.

In short, what are you talking about when you say you're beating M3's and that a 335IS is faster from a stop light? Do you have an anti lag kit installed on your 335is? Are the M3 drivers you're racing completely incompetent?





1M M3 335IS
0-30 1.7 1.7
0-40 2.7 2.4
0-50 3.3 3.2
0-60 4.2 4.2 4.7
0-70 5.6 5.2
0-80 7.0 6.6
0-90 8.5 8.1

12.8 sec @ 109.6 mph 12.6 sec @ 113.4 mph

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...n/viewall.html

[ozinaldo]

Originally Posted by jtvr4

I'm not sure if your trying to troll me or if you're really having a hard time with this concept. The fastest 0-60 time I can find for the 335IS is 4.7.

Were going to use the 1m as an example. It takes 2.7 seconds for the 1M to reach 40 mph and only 2.4 for the M3 to reach 40. That's .3 difference between the two. At 50 the difference is now only .1. Now we know for a fact that the 335is runs a 0-60 in 4.7.

In short, what are you talking about when you say you're beating M3's and that a 335IS is faster from a stop light? Do you have an anti lag kit installed on your 335is? Are the M3 drivers you're racing completely incompetent?





1M M3 335IS
0-30 1.7 1.7
0-40 2.7 2.4
0-50 3.3 3.2
0-60 4.2 4.2 4.7
0-70 5.6 5.2
0-80 7.0 6.6
0-90 8.5 8.1

12.8 sec @ 109.6 mph 12.6 sec @ 113.4 mph

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...n/viewall.html

Is this the base of your unnecessary choice of words and sarcasm in your 59th ever post in this Forum? A "motor trend" data assuming a 4 mph difference between these cars? Seriously, this is the best you could come up and you call this a data we have to take as a given? No one ever told you that it is the garbage of automotive media and proved themselves totally worthless so many times that it is a miracle that they are still in this business. If you read that often and find yourself illuminated my friend you need detox. Let me show you how worthless their data are and who knows you may start reconsidering: Go for their own video precisely from the same times in the following link, go for 3 minute, 52 sec point to see that this time they claim (show) that 1M is trapping 12.8 sec (again!) but guess what at 110.2 mph. Maybe a third time, after learning to launch it properly, they could do it in 12.7 at 111 something, who knows!

About my aero difference comment that you found laughable for no practical reason I have provided "real" data above without making any comments and swamp2 admitted that it was different enough to make a difference, 1M struggles with the aero deficiency, more so after really high speeds. Of course, you chose to stay silent when a real data contradicted you, very mature!

Believe it or not there is less than advertised difference in power and in performance between these two cars, most honest and well informed enthusiasts are not even arguing over this anymore but hey, how would you know, they also don't follow Motor Trend. Any choice between a 1M and M3 is a choice of likes and preferances. I respect anyone who chose M3 sincerely, could do the same myself and find it let's say not-so-well-informed when some M3 owners try to imply a superiority over 1M based on myths and selected data in its best which at the end is absurd. They have their own strengths and weaknesses and they are both great cars, this is still so difficult to admit for some, it really amazes me.

At the end, M3 trap speed is higher and that is normal and expected, just not as high as you claimed without quoting any source, like the Prophet has spoken (and now you quoted motor trend, thank you very much) and also called other people being anectodal and knowing less than yourself, you even suggested that we should all go to a new lowly subforum (can we call it Auschwitz?) so we don't bother you anymore which practically gives you a Forum Nazi status while all we were trying to do was reminding that there are other factors, many factors worth taking into consideration and not only the peak power in evaluating a car's overall performance. It doesn't seem to me that singling out just one factor, even if it is the most important one, and reaching conclusions from there and building a whole theory is the right thing to do. It is just an indicator, nothing more nothing less.

Neither the World itself nor the roads are made of straight lines friends. You got to slow down and take a turn time to time, that's when overboost could come handy...or if you can't handle it you could ruin everything and crash to something or someone

[///ADMAN]

Somehow I knew the GT-R would come in first...
But, I thought the Mustang would be last. Poor M1.

[swamp2]

There is a very nice "database" of M3 and competitors performance here on the forum. Link. It helps show the large variation that occurs in real world test and to identify typical, top notch and outlier types of results.

[pkimM3r]

Originally Posted by ///ADMAN

...and means everything from stoplight to stoplight.






I love being the red car right now.

admitting you are the average grocery getter.

[pkimM3r]

Originally Posted by Robin_NL

Anyway, I have to go and make some money.

Nice thread, and also for the non believers and don't get me wrong : My favourite car atm is a 458. Simple as that.

But I find the 1M way sportier as a whole package than the E9x M3. Sorry.
Overboost or not it's a blast. Power to weight(important for a sporty car) , steering, swb.




See you.

Cheers
Robin

i have an e90M but love the 1m coupe....too bad they are no longer available or, ppl really think they can sell it to make a profit

what do you think of the throttle response? thats the one thing that i cannot stand with turbo cars. (i also drive 135i on a daily basis).

ADVEVO - his videos are awesome.

[///ADMAN]

Originally Posted by pkim1079

admitting you are the average grocery getter.

I have a dedicated track car. 335is is just for groceries.

[ozinaldo]

Originally Posted by swamp2

There is a very nice "database" of M3 and competitors performance here on the forum. Link. It helps show the large variation that occurs in real world test and to identify typical, top notch and outlier types of results.

Thanks for that link It indeed is very nice to see those variations in such a compiled list, good for you E9X M3 owners. We should do the same and make a tidy list of various performance data regarding the 1M which is all around the place at the moment but still recorded in there, admittely in a bit chaotic fashion, at the 1M Forum. I may do that myself at first opportunity since I was among the most active members to collect test reviews and post in the Forum.

[pkimM3r]

Originally Posted by ///ADMAN

I have a dedicated track car. 335is is just for groceries.

Haha awesome. Is your track car turbo too?

[ozinaldo]

Originally Posted by pkim1079

i have an e90M but love the 1m coupe....too bad they are no longer available or, ppl really think they can sell it to make a profit

what do you think of the throttle response? thats the one thing that i cannot stand with turbo cars. (i also drive 135i on a daily basis).

ADVEVO - his videos are awesome.

Hi, Robin himself should reply it too but since I was here posting something else, thought that I could comment on this since it is not too distant from our thread topic. It is indeed a valid concern for M3 guys who plan to buy the F80/82.

Bad news is I don't think you will have it as good as you have it now with the S65, with its individual throttle body engineering, the sensation is best out there imo.

My take is there is still lag there with the 1M but it is much better than most other turbo cars. Back to back, from a M3 to 1M you may notice the lag, especially in default setting (M button not pressed), so if anyone tells you that it is totally lag free that person is either lying or his previous cars were STIs and EVOs. I find the default setting more natural in daily driving and I go for the M (sport) button only when I am in the mood and benefit from conditions for a spirited ride.

With the M button pressed there is hardly any lag to talk about but then the throttle can be slightly jerky at times, over sensitive if I may call it. Most people love it though and wish that it could be the default setting every time they started the car.

Bottomline is, 1M is virtually with a minimal lag that can be largely cured by some easy mods that helps other stuff as well; first is exhaust, especially down pipes but even with a catless mid pipe you have a nicer throttle. Second is a good intake or a slightly better air filter but this is a bit controversial mod since lots of people think stock intake is sufficient enough (myself included). Lastly, a better charge pipe with or without BOV/aftermarket DVs helps noticeably. I have a ER charge pipe, aFe dry drop-in filter and N55 catless mids with a rear muffler and nothing else (stock engine tune, stock DPs, stock DVs, stock intercooler, stock intake); I feel that the lag is virtually disappeared with this set up which was already not a big deal.

Some reputable tuners like GIAC and HP Autowerks commented in our Forums that factory 1M already has the best (most crisp) throttle of any N54/N55 that they tested, stock or even tuned cars. Member Advevo whose videos you say you like commented in our forum on this very subject once that for him important thing is when he drives the 1M 10/10 on a track where he noticed no lag and he said that it got better even just with the N55 mids installed, his remark was on/off/on again throttle was slightly more immediate with the catless mids. I agree totally and feel that the engine is breathing better on high revs. On the other hand, he admitted that there is always a slight lag when you make a straight line acceleration.

So, M division did a decent job with the 1M in terms of throttle response, but the stock car has some less than perfect parts, exhaust and charge pipe being most obvious and I bet it will be even better with the F80 and will leave less to be desired. However, it is unlikely that it will equal or get better than what you enjoy with the E90 M3.

Hope this helps.

[pkimM3r]

yes unfortunately there will be no beating the throttle response of the current m3. i personally do not enjoy using the twitchy pedal button

that being said, its good to know that throttle response is improved in the m cars. I also read somewhere that the m5/6 also have great throttle response. to me, its just hard to believe because like you said, coming from the s65 but I will have to test drive one. the n54/5/20 are just horrible. anyone who says that there is no lag in response is just bs-ing like you said, or do not know what instant throttle response is. seriously, this debate is ongoing in all of the other forums that its ridiculous.

thanks for your honest nonbiased response!

its funny because i left the evo world because i was sick of driving turbo cars and modding the hell out of one, to go back to na, to now having to be forced back to going to turbos and modding the hell out of one

[///ADMAN]

Originally Posted by pkim1079

Haha awesome. Is your track car turbo too?

No. Supercharged. We have a lot more small road course tracks out here.

[pkimM3r]

Originally Posted by ///ADMAN

No. Supercharged. We have a lot more small road course tracks out here.

Supercharged is better. Its still belt driven so throttle response is there. Or am i wrong?

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by ozinaldo

Thanks for that link It indeed is very nice to see those variations in such a compiled list, good for you E9X M3 owners. We should do the same and make a tidy list of various performance data regarding the 1M which is all around the place at the moment but still recorded in there, admittely in a bit chaotic fashion, at the 1M Forum. I may do that myself at first opportunity since I was among the most active members to collect test reviews and post in the Forum.

The "database" has served me well both for improving my understanding and also winning a bunch of debates... It shows the really large natural variation due to a plethora of random and deterministic variables - different testing standards (1 foot drag roll out in US), different weather, different drivers, different states of vehicle break in, different tires, varying road grades, etc.

A similar database for the 1M would be a very valuable addition to that section of the forum.

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by ozinaldo

My take is there is still lag there with the 1M but it is much better than most other turbo cars.
...
Hope this helps.

Great information. I would really like to drive a modded 1Ms where there is agreement that its mods provide the best throttle response out there.

I think most folks at all "in the know" expect BMW to make an improvement on top of all other M cars and the 1M in terms of throttle response and turbo lag in the M3/4. It seems less and less likely that we will get a triple turbo and/or a system with one electric turbo which in theory could completely eliminate lag. I'll certainly be a bit disappointed if it is a turbo system very similar to the twin turbos on existing BMWs.

[pkimM3r]

Originally Posted by swamp2

Great information. I would really like to drive a modded 1Ms where there is agreement that its mods provide the best throttle response out there.

I think most folks at all "in the know" expect BMW to make an improvement on top of all other M cars and the 1M in terms of throttle response and turbo lag in the M3/4. It seems less and less likely that we will get a triple turbo and/or a system with one electric turbo which in theory could completely eliminate lag. I'll certainly be a bit disappointed if it is a turbo system very similar to the twin turbos on existing BMWs.

Nothing worse than pressing the gas pedal and nothing happening - and then lurking forward with boost! Haha

I would ask m5/6 owners in their section of the forum but they just belittle the m3 guy

Its just a bunch of m5s will destroy an m3 around the track heresay and launch control videos