[fedinand]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

My turn...

Wow, the first time I actually laughed out loud while reading the forums.

[e90AW335i]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

You are reading what you want to read. There was no point in any of my posts that i was trying to pick a fight. Just stated fact.

shiv

OK Shiv..... I guess I just read it as an argumentative post because every mod was stated and fully disclosed. Sorry guys, back on topic....

(you can respond to have the last word Shiv...)

[OpenFlash]

Originally Posted by kyleh4852

OK Shiv..... I guess I just read it as an argumentative post because every mod was stated and fully disclosed. Sorry guys, back on topic....

(you can respond to have the last word Shiv...)

[can't talk... mouth full of popcorn]

[e90AW335i]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

[can't talk... mouth full of popcorn]

[Ruff Rider]

where can I buy stock in the company that makes Internet popcorn?

[Kbueno]

Good God! Remind me never to be a sponsor/vendor!

[slubu]

Will we ever get that torque back down low?

[LambOfGod]

Originally Posted by Evo8MRto335I

WOW, what is happening at the exact 530rpm mark?, it clearly looks like the tide changes directions. The dyno shows how one maps is superior to the other from iddle to 5300rpm then the other map takes over and is superior from 5300rpm and up.

The only way I see it is that the v1.47 is just vastly better until 5300rpm than the v2.02 then from that point on from that point on the roles reverse. Would you agree?

This is better that the torque increases abot 5300 rpm because of the shift points. Low RPM torque is great when off the line but I think the guys that are racing will have an advantage because they are using the higher rpm's.

[adc]

Originally Posted by Driver72

I admire that he's taking the cautious route with the v2 first and protecting us all from destroying or damaging our trannys.

Are you suggesting that v1.47 has a risk of destroying or damaging the trannys? Or did Vishnu imply it? There are quite a few 1.47 users out there and I think they would like to know...

[Driver72]

Originally Posted by adc

Are you suggesting that v1.47 has a risk of destroying or damaging the trannys? Or did Vishnu imply it? There are quite a few 1.47 users out there and I think they would like to know...

No, not at all.
v1.47 levels of torque (360-370 rwtq depending on whether you're on 91 or 93 Octane) is perfectly acceptable on our transmissions.
Hundreds of people (including me) have been running that level for months now some abusing the heck out the transmissions at road courses, drag strips, mountain roads, etc with NO issues whatsoever.

What I meant is, Shiv has said he limited torque values on v2 to 400 lbs-ft at the wheels and lowered the torque levels a bit from v1.47 levels in the name of having a smooth linear power delivery down low instead of the big burst of boost and torque that v1.47 provided, but was not smooth or linear at all.
By doing so, he was taking the responsible route to protect our transmissions from people running 96+ Octane and setting the values at 100% across the board and making well over 400 rwtq.

With v2 on a race gas map (100% settings across the board) on 96+ Octane, you'd see 400 rwtq without any other mods and probably somewhere in the 370 rwhp mark, again with no other mods

[CaptOz]

Having gone from 1.45 to 2.02, this is the same level of performance I am experiencing. My car is a stock Steptronic running on 93 (USA) octane with default torque settings.

These are the points I would like to raise:

• The acceleration advantage of V2 occurs mainly in the final 2,000 rpm. Hence to experience the acceleration improvement in V2 always relies on me having to rev my car to its redline. As a result, I am always revving the crap out of my engine with V2.
  
• As my 335i is a steptronic, having low down power is preferable because to induce high revs requires full accelerator travel to induce kick-down.
  
• I really miss my 1.45’s torque boost. I know a lot of people prefer the smoothness of V2 but I (also having a LSD) really loved that kick in the pants feel and the slight rear drift it produced. If we could have the low down torque boost kick in safely in 1.47, why not also 2.02?

I plan to hook up my laptop this weekend to see if my current boost levels permit me to raise the torque settings.

I am praying that V2.03 will adress this issues.

Cheers,

CaptOz
(Soon to be Shiv's mate for life)

[stillclaimndp]

Originally Posted by CaptOz

Cheers,

CaptOz
(Soon to be Shiv's mate for life)

lol

[ontopofm]

Originally Posted by CaptOz

[LIST][*]The acceleration advantage of V2 occurs mainly in the final 2,000 rpm. Hence to experience the acceleration improvement in V2 always relies on me having to rev my car to its redline. As a result, I am always revving the crap out of my engine with V2.

CaptOz
(Soon to be Shiv's mate for life)

+100
there is no point for me to rev the engine past 5k at every stop. i'd love to have that torque back down low.

[DreX3M]

Originally Posted by CaptOz

Having gone from 1.45 to 2.02, this is the same level of performance I am experiencing. My car is a stock Steptronic running on 93 (USA) octane with default torque settings.

These are the points I would like to raise:

• The acceleration advantage of V2 occurs mainly in the final 2,000 rpm. Hence to experience the acceleration improvement in V2 always relies on me having to rev my car to its redline. As a result, I am always revving the crap out of my engine with V2.
  
• As my 335i is a steptronic, having low down power is preferable because to induce high revs requires full accelerator travel to induce kick-down.
  
• I really miss my 1.45’s torque boost. I know a lot of people prefer the smoothness of V2 but I (also having a LSD) really loved that kick in the pants feel and the slight rear drift it produced. If we could have the low down torque boost kick in safely in 1.47, why not also 2.02?

I plan to hook up my laptop this weekend to see if my current boost levels permit me to raise the torque settings.

I am praying that V2.03 will adress this issues.

Cheers,

CaptOz
(Soon to be Shiv's mate for life)

You could try downpipes.. Even the catted one by UR bumps up the torque quite significantly.

[turbocoins]

Originally Posted by dre335

You could try downpipes.. Even the catted one by UR bumps up the torque quite significantly.

True, but why do you have to add another mod when the power has already been available in v. 1.4x?

[Driver72]

Originally Posted by CaptOz

Having gone from 1.45 to 2.02, this is the same level of performance I am experiencing. My car is a stock Steptronic running on 93 (USA) octane with default torque settings.

These are the points I would like to raise:

• The acceleration advantage of V2 occurs mainly in the final 2,000 rpm. Hence to experience the acceleration improvement in V2 always relies on me having to rev my car to its redline. As a result, I am always revving the crap out of my engine with V2.
  
• As my 335i is a steptronic, having low down power is preferable because to induce high revs requires full accelerator travel to induce kick-down.
  
• I really miss my 1.45’s torque boost. I know a lot of people prefer the smoothness of V2 but I (also having a LSD) really loved that kick in the pants feel and the slight rear drift it produced. If we could have the low down torque boost kick in safely in 1.47, why not also 2.02?

I plan to hook up my laptop this weekend to see if my current boost levels permit me to raise the torque settings.

I am praying that V2.03 will adress this issues.

Cheers,

CaptOz
(Soon to be Shiv's mate for life)

First, if you are on 93 Octane, you could raise your torque settings to 94% EASILY, with no problems.
Doing that alone should give you equal torque down low as what we see on v1.4x PLUS give you another 10 rwhp in the higher range from what you see in this dyno chart of mine.

If that still doesn't satisfy you, upload v2.0.1
I am currently running that map right now.
It feels MUCH stronger than v2.0.2 at 92% settings down low.
But it's not quite as strong up top.

I am going to probably dyno the v2.0.1 on Tuesday and compare it to my v2.0.2 dyno you see here.
Then I may upload v2.0.2 again and put the settings at 93% and see how that compares.

So you have two choices right now:

v2.0.2 set at 94% (but having to deal with the big power drop in the last 300 rpms of the rev range) or

v2.0.1 for the big power it has (probably has equal torque to v1.47 at it's peak of 3200 rpms, but unlike v1.47 which drops off significantly after that, I'm sure v2.0.1 hold power MORE than v1.47 above 3500 rpms, but drops off a bit more than v2.0.2 above 5000 rpms)

[CaptOz]

That's very good advice Driver72. Thank you.

I re-cehecked and our 98 RON octane here is more like your 91.5 AKI octane level in the U.S.A.

I did some data logging yesterday and I have a feeling that I am already very close to the 15psi maximum. I'll post up the graphs later today.

Cheers,

CaptOz

[orionredwing]

I didn't want to hi-jack the BMC thread, nor was I interested in getting into a 'which is better' filter war discussion. So I figured the best place to post was driver72's original thread where he published some good dyno comparisons.

I got my K&N directly after reading this thread. I chose K&N because I have used it on my previous 2 cars, so it was a 'proven' brand for me. From my earlier post in this thread, people have also addressed my concerns about fouling up the MAF sensor by over oiling the filter.

I was also confident that the K&N would provide a HP increase, but I didn't care which drop-in filter would squeeze that extra HP or 2. So the cheaper $48 Amazon price appealed a lot to me (especially if future upgrades will result in a cone filter replacement anyways).

Sorry, sure sounds like a lot of disclaimers, but I didn't want to get into a BMC vs ITG vs K&N war. Bottom line is I'm a believer of drop-ins, no matter the brand.

IMPRESSIONS:

Just like all my previous cars w/ K&Ns, the car felt more aggressive afterwards, even on top of the Procede. The best way to describe is that before the K&N, my car was a silent killer waiting to strike; after K&N, there was barely suppressed confidence waiting to happen.

However, I have to note something strange. In regular 'D' in 6th gear, the car still felt muted. But as soon as I switched to 6th in manual (DS) , the car felt more alive, even though it's still in 6th. It felt like the ECU had different profiles for D & DS in the same gear.

But in the absence of facts, I will just chalk it up as a psychological effect, as opposed to any real technical reason. However, I will note that I formed this impression after driving 350 miles from the Bay Area to LA and toggling back and forth.

Bottom line, very satisfied w/ the K&N as always.

P.S. Not sure how many others ordered K&N after Drive72's excellent thread, but as I placed my order right after he posted, I'm sure others will be getting theirs from amazon soon. I'm looking forward to hearing your K&N impressions.