| 09-17-2012, 09:01 AM | #1 |
|
New Member
4
Rep 6
Posts |
List of best BMW tuners out there?
Hi there,
Who would you say are the best and most reliable tuners out there for BMW ? 1) AC Schintzer 2) Hamann 3) Alpina . . . ? |
| 09-17-2012, 09:47 AM | #2 |
|
Driver
94
Rep 636
Posts |
Here are some that come to my mind:
DESIGN (I believe design companies don't do performance tuning themselves, but buy from other dedicated companies instead. Any info?) Hamann AC Schnitzer Lumma Hartge 3D Design Hennesy Mansory PERFORMANCE G-Power Dinan Evolve Noelle Evotech PP-Performance Manhart racing Kelleners Sport EXHAUST Eisenmann Akrapovic Meisterschaft RPi Supersprint Kreisegg Magnaflow Tubi Last edited by singularity; 09-18-2012 at 04:53 AM.. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
| 09-18-2012, 05:01 AM | #4 | |
|
Driver
94
Rep 636
Posts |
Quote:
I see lots of awesome cars and drags in Baku  |
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
| 11-21-2012, 03:06 AM | #5 | ||
|
New Member
8
Rep 27
Posts |
Quote:
|
||
|
Appreciate
0
|
| 01-19-2013, 02:10 PM | #6 |
|
Private First Class
 28
Rep 129
Posts |
Does anyone have a piggyback systrem yet which can not be detected by bmw? Im looking for something on my F13 M6? K&N air intake + akropovic only gave me 20hp 40nm. I want 650hp 800nm.
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
| 01-20-2013, 06:30 AM | #7 | |
|
Major General
 
1712
Rep 5,109
Posts |
Quote:
1: Difference in WHP is roughly 15HP on the before and after dyno runs 2: Difference in drivetrain losses is roughly 16HP (89HP vs 105HP) on the before and after dyno runs. The same car looses 16HP more through the drivetrain on the second run... 3: The uncorrected HP reading on run 1 is 551HP and corrected is 583HP - A correction of 32HP 4: The uncorrected HP reading on run 2 is 580HP and corrected is 639HP - A correction of 59HP 5: The intake temperature is 52deg C on run 1 and 72deg C on run 2 Point #5 above explains the larger correction factor on run 2 and, if temperature reading is correct, also is supposed to be fairly accurate. Correction is done according to a EU directive and is mathematically correct. Point # 2, 3 and 4 alone gives a correction difference of 43HP between run 1 and 2... (in favour of increased engine HP in run 2). Combined with the 15HP gain in WHP the 43 "correction" HP gain accounts for all of the difference between engine HP on run 1 and 2. Meaning that 43HP out of the 56HP gain (from 583HP to 639HP) comes from mathematical corrections and increased transmission losses... However, my view is that the two runs really aren't comparable as they have so many different parameters, leaving questionmarks to it's accuracy. I'm NOT saying that anyone has done something wrong here, but it has been known that the tuning industry has used parameters such as intake temperature (moving the temp sensor to a hotter place...) and altering transmission losses to boost engine HP numbers. That the info is put on display here kind of suggests that they have nothing to hide. But I would have preferred a dyno run with similar input parameters for comparison. The corrected engine HP is just a calculation and does not represent a measured value on the dyno. The only "real" measurement on a dyno like this is WHP. The dyno then calculates engine HP based on input parameters such as ambient temperature, intake temperature, altitude etc. Change those parameters and the calculation changes as well. As input parameters are so different, it leaves some uncertainty as to the comparability of the two runs IMHO. On a dyno like this, WHP is really the most reliable source of comparison IMHO. In this case, there is a gain of roughly 15HP on the wheels. Am I completely off the mark and how is the different parameters explained on these dyno runs? Last edited by Boss330; 01-20-2013 at 09:40 AM.. |
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
| 01-20-2013, 10:16 AM | #8 |
|
Major General
1712
Rep 5,109
Posts |
The point of corrected HP is obviously to get comparable HP figures between different engine measurements.
"Official HP" is measured at a given set of values for many different parameters, like temperature, altitude, barometric pressure etc. If your dyno run is taken at different values (like altitude or temperature) there is a mathematical correction that calculates what your engine THEORETICALLY would make at the "correct" values. The point being that if you live at a higher altitude or a warm climate, your engine won't make more HP than what the uncorrected figures show. The corrected figure is supposed to show what a engine, under ideal circumstances, would make. So, if a higher boost pressure leads to that much increase in intake air temperature, you will never actually have all that corrected power at disposal. The dyno figures above say that the engine, on that day, actually made 15HP more on the wheels but that it THEORETICALLY can have a 56HP corrected engine HP gain (under ideal circumstances). My questions are related to the fact that some very important parameters are different between the two runs. What is the cause for this? If the tune leads to more stress on the driveline, resulting in 16HP more drivetrain losses as indicated, and higher intake temperatures. Then you will never, in real life, get more than 15WHP extra... |
|
Appreciate
0
|
| 05-01-2013, 11:36 AM | #10 | |
|
Registered
0
Rep 2
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
| 05-01-2013, 02:38 PM | #12 | |
|
Major General
1712
Rep 5,109
Posts |
Quote:
PERFORMANCE G-Power Noelle PP-Performance Manhart Racing (MHR also does styling with a carbon bonnet, splitter and rear spoiler) + Hartge AC Schnitzer EXHAUST Eisenmann Akrapovic Meisterschaft RPi Supersprint + Remus |
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
| Bookmarks |
|
|
