[tangsuva]

Originally Posted by nyt

Soon, when I get some time to drive to my friends shop with a dyno I'll strap it down and post the numbers.

Any update?

[Rule1977]

Originally Posted by tangsuva

Any update?

+1

[addictedtoboost]

Originally Posted by Rule1977

+1

I have Pure600s and they've been super solid so far 0 complaints about them.

[nyt]

too beaucoup. Spun a bearing. The 600s were great, they were hitting 600whp and 700ftlbs of torque around 4200rpm


new engine on the way with the works from top to bottom and a 6466g2.

[BrutalN54]

Originally Posted by nyt

too beaucoup. Spun a bearing. The 600s were great, they were hitting 600whp and 700ftlbs of torque around 4200rpm


new engine on the way with the works from top to bottom and a 6466g2.

Ouch! Was this ur daily? How often did u mash on it?

[nyt]

Originally Posted by BrutalN54

Ouch! Was this ur daily? How often did u mash on it?

I don't really daily drive anything, I've prob put 12k miles on it over 5 years. Hard miles, though. Previous oil analysis was showing signs of bearing wear and I had some tapping I thought was just a loud injector. Turns out it was likely the bearing/rod on the way out.

I'll start a thread for the teardown and new build at some point.

[WoodE30]

Originally Posted by nyt

too beaucoup. Spun a bearing. The 600s were great, they were hitting 600whp and 700ftlbs of torque around 4200rpm


new engine on the way with the works from top to bottom and a 6466g2.

Why do I find it hard to believe 700 ft lbs? How much were you boosting?

[nicky dj]

Originally Posted by WoodE30

Why do I find it hard to believe 700 ft lbs? How much were you boosting?

I could believe it at 28-29psi and e60 to full e85. What's the size of the 600 turbo billet?

[WoodE30]

Also show me one Dyno or vehicle specs that has that more torque than horsepower. Horsepower is almost always higher then torque, except Diesel engines.

[nyt]

Originally Posted by WoodE30

Why do I find it hard to believe 700 ft lbs? How much were you boosting?

A bit over 30psi. I backed it off below 4000rpm because the torque was out of control.. Apparently not enough, though.

I was expecting more power up top, but couldn't chase down the cause before I killed the engine.. Possibly related to the bearing issue, but who knows. There's no way the pure 600s were going to hit 700whp, but they can easily make that much torque.

[nicky dj]

Originally Posted by WoodE30

Also show me one Dyno or vehicle specs that has that more torque than horsepower. Horsepower is almost always higher then torque, except Diesel engines.

What, wait? How long have you been on this platform; that is not the case at all with turbo cars especially tuned ones, only naturally aspirated. If we are talking stock maybe but even all the newer AMG bi-turbos are higher in torque.

[WoodE30]

Originally Posted by nicky dj

What, wait? How long have you been on this platform; that is not the case at all with turbo cars especially tuned ones, only naturally aspirated. If we are talking stock maybe but even all the newer AMG bi-turbos are higher in torque.

I've been around cars for awhile. Ok, you talking large displacement engines, yes I could see that.

Here's a car with 630 hp and 570 tq, no where near 700.

https://www.***********.com/content.php?11813-RB-Game-Finisher-N54-hybrid-turbos-hit-630-rwhp-on-100-E85-with-a-VTT-shotgun-equipped-E92-335i

Even b_mase_monkey 1000 hp engine only has 824 tq.

Please I'd like to see a N54 with 100 more tq than horsepower. BTW I'm talking FT lbs not NM.

[nyt]

Originally Posted by WoodE30

I've been around cars for awhile. Ok, you talking large displacement engines, yes I could see that.

Here's a car with 630 hp and 570 tq, no where near 700.

https://www.***********.com/content.php?11813-RB-Game-Finisher-N54-hybrid-turbos-hit-630-rwhp-on-100-E85-with-a-VTT-shotgun-equipped-E92-335i

Even b_mase_monkey 1000 hp engine only has 824 tq.

Please I'd like to see a N54 with 100 more tq than horsepower. BTW I'm talking FT lbs not NM.

I literally just posted a graph for you.

[WoodE30]

Originally Posted by nyt

I literally just posted a graph for you.

Yes I see that, but why do you have so much more torque than horsepower? Don't you want higher hp than torque? Something seems off.

[nyt]

Originally Posted by WoodE30

Yes I see that, but why do you have so much more torque than horsepower? Don't you want higher hp than torque? Something seems off.

This is how the N54 is with smaller turbos. The new build will have cams and a ported head with a 6466g2.

[WoodE30]

Originally Posted by nyt

This is how the N54 is with smaller turbos. The new build will have cams and a ported head with a 6466g2.

Wow, I'm not doubting you but man I find that hard to believe that much of a difference.

So you weren't happy with the twins?

[nicky dj]

Originally Posted by WoodE30

Yes I see that, but why do you have so much more torque than horsepower? Don't you want higher hp than torque? Something seems off.

No you don't - especially on these cars because the drivetrain (and suspension) isn't adapt to handling the power down low; its impossible to get power down on the ground without so much more required and even then some, as well as the Z6AT doesn't have the true ability to launch control. This platform excels with lineal power through the rev range. Aside from the X guys have you ever noticed that any race in "Mexico" you see is usually highway or a 30 roll? These cars always get smoked off the line even if you're running in the 11's.

[WoodE30]

Originally Posted by nicky dj

No you don't - especially on these cars because the drivetrain (and suspension) isn't adapt to handling the power down low; its impossible to get power down on the ground without so much more required and even then some, as well as the Z6AT doesn't have the true ability to launch control. This platform excels with lineal power through the rev range. Aside from the X guys have you ever noticed that any race in "Mexico" you see is usually highway or a 30 roll? These cars always get smoked off the line even if you're running in the 11's.

Yeah I noticed that these cars sucks from a dig, never really understood why besides the suspension setup but what you explained makes sense. Thanks

[nyt]

Originally Posted by WoodE30

Wow, I'm not doubting you but man I find that hard to believe that much of a difference.

So you weren't happy with the twins?

The twins were good, but too much for the stock bottom end at those boost levels. I'll be selling my 600s for fairly cheap soon. Keeping the boost lower at lower rpms would have kept things alive a bit longer, but we knew this already.

I'm looking forward to the simplicity and benefits of a single now.

[WoodE30]

Originally Posted by nyt

The twins were good, but too much for the stock bottom end at those boost levels. I'll be selling my 600s for fairly cheap soon. Keeping the boost lower at lower rpms would have kept things alive a bit longer, but we knew this already.

I'm looking forward to the simplicity and benefits of a single now.

Yeah I hear you. I'm about to install a set of upgrade twins but don't plan to push them much pass 20-22psi

[nyt]

Originally Posted by WoodE30

Yeah I noticed that these cars sucks from a dig, never really understood why besides the suspension setup but what you explained makes sense. Thanks

IRS and open diffs do not make for good launching. Never mind that all the suspension bits in the rear are pressed steel (weak).

My 335 is x-drive, so it can launch fairly decently.

my other drag cars with proper 4 links are a world better on the track but have no chance of keeping up with the x-drive on the street.

[nicky dj]

NYT - you ever do any quarter mile slips? Interested to see if you got into the 10's.