Rpi scoop and afe intake..

[SweetRide]

You're using a DASH-DYNO FFS. I'm saying: put your car on an ACTUAL dyno & record the AFR readings for our eager perusal (Of course before/after - as a snapshot from your graph is absolutely meaningless). I think your 370hp is completely and utterly misleading the sheep here.
I'm skeptic until you prove it otherwise - on a machine used by the rest of the performance world (NOT a pocket unit that plugs into our OBDII port).
What have you got to lose? It would back up your astronomical claims and I wouldn't be here playing devils advocate.
A 7-8.8% gain in RWTQ from an intake mod alone? Prove it.

I'll happily eat my shorts if that the case.

 

[mmm-five]

Surely a static dyno would not be able to replicate the ram-charging, as the car is not moving, and the fans they stick at the front of the car won't be pushing enough air to replicate a car doing 50-100mph on the road.

On the static dyno the engine is purely sucking air - on the road it's being shoved down it's throat!

 

[Bing]

Being a sceptic is good, it challenges people to prove themselves - others on this thread have contributed to the debate, and exdos' project, in a very positive way through their scepticism. Being offensive and repetitive makes you sound like a petulant child though sweetride, and it's borderline out of order.

 

[exdos]

You're using a DASH-DYNO FFS. I'm saying: put your car on an ACTUAL dyno & record the AFR readings for our eager perusal (Of course before/after - as a snapshot from your graph is absolutely meaningless). I think your 370hp is completely and utterly misleading the sheep here.
I'm skeptic until you prove it otherwise - on a machine used by the rest of the performance world (NOT a pocket unit that plugs into our OBDII port).
What have you got to lose? It would back up your astronomical claims and I wouldn't be here playing devils advocate.
A 7-8.8% gain in RWTQ from an intake mod alone? Prove it.

I'll happily eat my shorts if that the case.

The "snapshot" of the AFR in my graph was just a short section of a much lengthier recording (the clue lies in the timeline at the foot of the graph).

I'm wondering if you actually know how a genuine intake designed to harness the ram-effect operates? I'm not referring to those mandrel bent pipes with a cone filter stuck on the end or anything like a GruppeM. If you really did understand how ram effect increases dynamic pressure with increase in speed, you would have no difficulty in understanding how a static dyno with a fixed speed fan can never replicate the true performance of such an intake in REAL WORLD conditions. Therefore, putting my car on a static dyno would give me no enlightenment whatsoever.

It doesn't matter a jot whether my car in OEM format produces a torque figure which is exactly the same as the published or is ± 25% different to that figure. Likewise it doesn't matter a jot whether my DashDyno produces the same torque figure for my car in OEM format as it would on any specific static dyno, because I have never claimed any specific figures as being absolute.

What REALLY does matter is that I have used the SAME equipment and protocol throughout, so that all my figures are standardised, which they are. My results show a significant gain from modding both the air intake and exhaust silencers on any scale, in the REAL WORLD. You can use whatever values you like, but a gain is a gain on any scale: do you agree?

If you've read the whole of this thread, you'll see that I've come across people like you before, and I've previously taken my Z3MC onto 2 static dynos when challenged to prove the gains I've achieved from my modding. The results are published and in the open. I've already spelled out the action I will take over my developments .

I understand the scepticism but it doesn't concern me because I understand the science of how these gains are achieved and I've specifically harnessed certain phenomena to achieve them and I know that my recording methods follow the same protocol at all times. Who would've thought it possible for you in the US and me in the UK could communicate with each other using modified sand? :wink:

 

[Stuart Truman]

The mention of "ram-effect" seems to have this effect on some participants on every car forum I've ever read. Likewise, the mention of dynos seems to do the same. :roll:

Most people would admit that Japanese motorcycle engineers are at the top of their game on normally aspirated engines. Google Suzuki Ram Air and you'll find engineering similar to yours going back to 250cc two stroke engines up to GSX-R S-RAD

Nothing new under the sun...

 

[Bing]

Who would've thought it possible for you in the US and me in the UK could communicate with each other using modified sand? :wink:

Brilliant :lol:

 

[Woots]

I don't see why ppl are disputing this....
It doesn't take a genius to understand that ramming more ambient air into an engine theoretically gives more power, and if someone is spending their time and money researching then fair play. I hope it pulls off for everyone's enjoyment

 

[JaEdBa]

You're using a DASH-DYNO FFS. I'm saying: put your car on an ACTUAL dyno & record the AFR readings for our eager perusal (Of course before/after - as a snapshot from your graph is absolutely meaningless). I think your 370hp is completely and utterly misleading the sheep here.
I'm skeptic until you prove it otherwise - on a machine used by the rest of the performance world (NOT a pocket unit that plugs into our OBDII port).
What have you got to lose? It would back up your astronomical claims and I wouldn't be here playing devils advocate.
A 7-8.8% gain in RWTQ from an intake mod alone? Prove it.

I'll happily eat my shorts if that the case.

exdos doesn't have to prove anything, he has asked for nothing from you or anyone else.

 

[Woots]

Maybe just simple 50-150 mph timing runs of a stock vs ram air intake on the same car will put this to bed? Maybe we all chip in to get a runway for the afternoon

 

[original guvnor]

I don't see sheep on here. I just see people interested in seeing someone develop his ideas.

Be a sceptic by all means but do it with a bit more grace. Is that too much to ask ?

 

[Adam D]

Here here, the physicist in me is secretly hooked on these updates. I find it fascinating that someone is taking the time to take detailed measurements and explore how various controlled design changes can further optimise engine breathing to yield an improvement in torque relative to a baseline.

When BMW designed the intake performance, cost, packaging, noise and materials were all part of the brief - it's not unthinkable that further performance can be obtained by relaxing the constraints.

/impatiently awaits the next update


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[exdos]

Here here, the physicist in me is secretly hooked on these updates. I find it fascinating that someone is taking the time to take detailed measurements and explore how various controlled design changes can further optimise engine breathing to yield an improvement in torque relative to a baseline.

When BMW designed the intake performance, cost, packaging, noise and materials were all part of the brief - it's not unthinkable that further performance can be obtained by relaxing the constraints.

/impatiently awaits the next update

I'm really pleased that you and some others enjoy following this. I'm absolutely hooked on chasing after gains for the intellectual satisfaction that I get from researching the potential possibilities and then developing and fabricating the parts and going out testing my ideas to see if they perform as I expected. I then have loads of data to examine and work out exactly why and how the vehicle responds in the way that it does. It gives me an added dimension to owning fantastic ///M cars and more time involved with them.

The hardest part of all is having to design mods which can utilise the already confined space under the bonnet and I find that considering various options and the pros and cons of different possibilities takes quite a time to think through because I don't want to rush in and regret damaging OEM parts which would be expensive to replace. My other self-imposed constraint is that my mods are either free or cost relatively little to produce and that they are reversible without damaging the car. To this end, if I intend to cut an OEM part, I buy a secondhand part and use that and keep my original part as the OEM replacement. I've now got quite a selection of air-intake and exhaust parts for the Z3MC and Z4MC lying around.

I'm also really looking forward to refitting the the modded silencers and running them with the RamchargerII mod because I expect to see some further gains from this combination working together. As the comparison graph that I posted yesterday shows, individually, the exhaust mod and the RamchargerII mod show similar gains over OEM. When they are combined will these gains be additive or will the gains be a slight increase above one of them individually????????

 

[Stuart Truman]

Who's who?

 

[Woots]

Allan is the fat one in the middle :lol:

 

[Bing]

As a good friend of mine used to say, "Oi ! I resemble that !"

Just because you left your curlers in Woots :roll:

 

[exdos]

Who's who?

That's the "ram effect" for you.

 

[Bing]

 

[Woots]

Ahhahaha!!!!
Or bababababa!!

 

[aerobod]

Aerobod, thanks for your PM, I've sent you some data for you to play with. Enjoy! 8)

Thanks for that, I'll do some number crunching over the next week or so and see if I can provide any useful insight (unfortunately I don't have the luxury of retirement yet, so I don't have much spare time!).

So, I matched your data to a theoretical plot based on the following parameters, it came out quite close. I believe there is some ram effect from about 6500 to 7500 RPM in 3rd gear from 130 to 150km/h (80 to 95mph). Your data shows a shift into 4th gear at just under 150km/h, whereas I modelled all gear shifts at redline. Here are the input parameters:

Car mass 1520 kg (3350 lbs). Equates to 100kg of driver and payload plus 90% fuel in car.
Tyre rolling radius 0.319m
Driveline losses 18%
Rolling resistance 0.015
Frontal area 1.91m2
Cd 0.35
Air density 1.24 kg/m3 (Equates to 1.007 bar pressure, 10C temperature, 50m altitude)
Gear change time 1 second
Peak engine power at crank 252kW (338 HP, or 277 HP at wheels with 18% driveline loss). Engine power curve is digitised from 2 dyno plots from tuning vendors.

 

[exdos]

So, I matched your data to a theoretical plot based on the following parameters, it came out quite close. I believe there is some ram effect from about 6500 to 7500 RPM in 3rd gear from 130 to 150km/h (80 to 95mph). Your data shows a shift into 4th gear at just under 150km/h, whereas I modelled all gear shifts at redline. Here are the input parameters etc.

Aerobod,

Thanks for doing that! If my gear change times had matched those you've used, then the sloping parts of the plot of my car (i.e. in gear acclerations) would sit almost perfectly on the slopes for the theoretical values that you've plotted. I know that my data is recorded using a decent scientific method and thanks for taking the time and trouble to demonstrate to all that my information is "for real".