Rpi scoop and afe intake..

Here's another graph showing the Air-Fuel Ratios that I recorded with the Ramcharger II mod. The blue line represents the stoichiometric value of 14.7 : 1 (air:petrol). When the engine is idling (305secs - 317secs) the AFR is at stoichiometric levels and when the car accelerates in 1st gear (317secs) the AFR immediately drops (i.e. the AFR becomes richer) but then it returns to stoichiometric values. This seems to be written into the ECU software as part of the traction control system to prevent wheel spin when accelerating from rest. When the car accelerates in 2nd and 3rd gears (at 323secs and 327secs, respectively) the AFR drops to around 13:1 (i.e. fuel richens). On lifting-off and decelerating (332secs - 348secs) the throttles close to their minimum opening and the AFRs lean right out to a recorded value of 29.26 : 1 (stoich x 2) to maintain engine tick-over. The same scenario occurs when my Z4MC is in OEM state, therefore, I've concluded that the ECU can easily accommodate the increased mass airflow that my Ramcharger mod is designed to achieve without any need for remapping.

Some have suggested that increasing the airflow will cause the AFR to become lean. Lean AFR's under WOT will cause "knock" and engine damage but, clearly, the evidence provided by the ECU to my datalogger is that this does not happen and that the OEM fuel maps are sufficiently "broad" to accommodate changes in the order that I'm able to achieve with an improved ram intake. 8)



RamchargerIIAFRs15-2-2013_zpsfb378055.jpg
 
Exdos, what are your thoughts on the S65 intake, obviously it has 2 inputs, one behind the grill and the other through the bonnet scoop, but how does it compare?

http://www.realoem.com/bmw/showparts.do?model=WD92&mospid=50361&btnr=13_1243&hg=13&fg=20
 
daz05 said:
Exdos, what are your thoughts on the S65 intake, obviously it has 2 inputs, one behind the grill and the other through the bonnet scoop, but how does it compare?

http://www.realoem.com/bmw/showparts.do?model=WD92&mospid=50361&btnr=13_1243&hg=13&fg=20
Click to expand...
Daz,

I think that the S65 intake is superb, but I reckon that I could possibly improve it some more, dependent upon the figures that datalogging would show in OEM state. I had a good look at this intake in 2010 and it's an evolution on what BMW started with the Z3MC ->E46 M3 -> E92 M3 (S65). It's clear that BMW really believes in the ram effect for NA cars by continuing the development of ram intakes throughout the M series. Interestingly, the CSL airbox has not appeared in any other car since the CSL; I could speculate the reason why (it's not as effective as a ram intake).
 
exdos said:
daz05 said:
Exdos, what are your thoughts on the S65 intake, obviously it has 2 inputs, one behind the grill and the other through the bonnet scoop, but how does it compare?

http://www.realoem.com/bmw/showparts.do?model=WD92&mospid=50361&btnr=13_1243&hg=13&fg=20
Click to expand...
Interestingly, the CSL airbox has not appeared in any other car since the CSL; I could speculate the reason why (it's not as effective as a ram intake).
Click to expand...

Or it's not financially viable?
 
harry3747 said:
Or it's not financially viable?
Click to expand...

Here's the air intake of the M3 GTS and it's exactly the same as the E92 M3 base model except for the orange colour over the intake manifold.

attachment.jpg

Here's a very attractive aftermarket one of exactly the same design made in Kevlar by Tecnocraft which costs $1,699.99 (£1,080)

18_L.jpg


Bearing in mind the considerably higher price of the GTS above the base model M3, and that the GTS is an "ultimate" performance model like the M3 CSL is to the E46 M3 and the relatively small cost of the Kevlar aftermarket version, I would've thought that if a CSL airbox produced better results BMW would've made one and "lost" the increased production cost within the purchase price. Everyone loves the CSL airbox and it would've really added "something" to the GTS if they'd used it, and anyone who can afford a new GTS wouldn't have batted an eyelid if it had put a few £,000s on the price.
 
I've done a further mod to the silencers and refitted them to the car and since the roads are still dry, I went out this afternoon and did some more datalogging. Below is a screenshot of one of the dyno runs from this afternoon displayed in the PC software which comes with the DashDyno. The car was fitted with the Ramcharger II and gutted silencers MkII. There was a cross wind of around 15mph

Z4MCSouthRun21-2-2013_zps174e56e0.jpg



Below is the same dyno run, saved as a .csv file and a graph from it in Excel.


Z4MCDynoRamchargerIIwithModdedsilencers21-2-2013copy_zps60dcf7b4.jpg


The fitting of the gutted silencers seems to have reduced the dip and spike in torque that had been appearing in earlier dyno plots with the Ramcharger II in conjunction with OEM silencers. This has also made the torque curve much flatter and where the peak torque at 4,600rpm is not much greater than the torque that occurs at 7600rpm in this graph. The peak torque has increased by 2.4 ft/lbs, but because there's no sudden spike in torque at around 7500rpm, the peak power is less than shown with the Ramcharger II and OEM silencer combo. The long and flat torque plot has always been my aim, and so I think I've achieved what I set out to do.

Interestingly, by fitting the gutted silencers with Ramcharger II, I've also seen a further small increase in maximum airflow through the MAF, so that with the Ramcharger II and gutted silencer combo, there is now an 11.39% increase in maximum airflow above what flows in OEM format. I've also managed to get my Z4MC to have a slightly higher maximum airflow than I've been able to achieve with my Z3MC due to the different layouts between the cars.

As an aftermarket solution, I think that I've taken this about as far as is practical although I think that there are a few minor gains to be had from the silencers. As we all know the Z4M is no slouch, but my Z4MC now feels even more responsive and livelier. It's also much noisier with crackles and pops from the silencers and there's much more "theatre" to it. :D

I now seriously need to decide what I'm going to do with this. :scratchhead:
 
In all seriousness, you now need to consider testing in 'the real world' as defined above, if only to put the naysayers in their box ?
 
Bing said:
Build it

Sell it

Retire (again ?) to the Seychelles :D
Click to expand...

My preferred option would be to license the invention to a manufacturer for new vehicles.

Bing said:
In all seriousness, you now need to consider testing in 'the real world' as defined above, if only to put the naysayers in their box ?
Click to expand...

If I opt to go down the aftermarket route, I'll enlist the help of an engineering faculty so that all evidence is irrefutable.

In the meantime I'm happy to bring the car to a forum meet and do some comparison datalogging with other members' Z4M cars. :thumbsup:
 
exdos said:
Bing said:
Build it

Sell it

Retire (again ?) to the Seychelles :D
Click to expand...

My preferred option would be to license the invention to a manufacturer for new vehicles.

Bing said:
In all seriousness, you now need to consider testing in 'the real world' as defined above, if only to put the naysayers in their box ?
Click to expand...

If I opt to go down the aftermarket route, I'll enlist the help of an engineering faculty so that all evidence is irrefutable.

In the meantime I'm happy to bring the car to a forum meet and do some comparison datalogging with other members' Z4M cars. :thumbsup:
Click to expand...

We could just have a race??
 
exdos said:
Woots said:
We could just have a race??
Click to expand...
When, where? :wink:
Click to expand...

In all seriousness we should somehow find a way of testing your mods in real world...can't use my car as its a roadster so unless we put 100kgs of concrete in the boot it will naturally be faster so it's unfair.... :lol:

Actually if a your car pulls away from a roadster we can confirm your mod a success :thumbsup:

That's prob the best way of testing?
 
Woots said:
In all seriousness we should somehow find a way of testing your mods in real world...can't use my car as its a roadster so unless we put 100kgs of concrete in the boot it will naturally be faster so it's unfair.... :lol:

Actually if a your car pulls away from a roadster we can confirm your mod a success :thumbsup:

That's prob the best way of testing?
Click to expand...

I'll happily let a member of the forum sit in the Px seat of mine at a meet and observe the datalogging procedure and we can datalog both mine and theirs using the same car profile set up in the DashDyno. Provided they're running OEM wheels with good rear tread, we'd be comparing apples with apples. BTW, I've been running ordinary supermarket 95RON fuel too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom