[nicknaz]

i'm not a pro with automatics either but that "stall speed" (the RPMs you can brake torque to) is defined by the physical characteristics of the torque converter.

[Callsign_Jester]

Originally Posted by Arustik1

1.7 is nearly impossible with RWD, add the fact that he isnt running DRs...theres noway.

I have seen big turbo cars pull high 1.7's on street tires. Granted a different animal because of the power band. If he had better tires I don't think it would be unobtainable but I am no pro on the N54 or automatic transmissions.

I have built my fair share of 12 second FWD cars, but to me anything under a 1.7 60' is practically unheard of given my platform. So most of my time comes with a large snail with a moderate hotside to spool in the upper midrange and pull through redline.

I'd be inclined to think with DR's he could pull a 1.7X 60' but hey, like I said I am not as familiar with this platform as I should be. A bold statement for me to think that he could with stock tires though, maybe.

http://www.dragtimes.com/BMW--335i-Drag-Racing.html

Looked through there and there are a few guys with 1.7X's on stock/aftermarket tires. *Not DR's* So it can be done, but yea not likely. I guess I overestimate the RWD > FWD

[Doc GTO]

Originally Posted by The HACK

Why not? I'm not personally familiar with the automatic...Is there something specific that prevents the Steptronic from brake torquing to a higher RPM?

With the auto the converter will have a stall of some sort. With my 4000 stall I can only brake torque to about 3100 before the car wants to surge forward.

[elwoodwffw]

there is no way i could get my (auto) to get to 3500rpms even pressing the brake as hard as i could... i would roll right past the start line. highest i have seen it is some where around 2700 and that was pushing it... 2000-2300 would be the norm.
and yeah with dr's you can see 1.7 isnt that hard, i have done it a couple of times. 1.6 have been done also.

op, its all about traction but i think you can see that. run out your fuel, put in ms109 on an empty tank, better tires and you have it. keep your engine cool and take your traction control completely off. there are lots more but those would be the cheaper routes then say, adding full bolt ons and what not.
ms109 and dr's

[Lowcruzr]

Originally Posted by tjnptel1

brake torqued it to 1500 rpms and then just mashed the trottle. downshifted to M1, and then I let the transmission do the shifting.

Just an FWIW, I ran a 13.2@107 bone stock with a 2.1 60' time. (I've already been flamed for having such a fast stock time so don't bother... :finger: Right there to all the haters.) I acheived this time by letting the tranny do the shifting from first to second, but then I manually short-shifted the 2-3 and 3-4. Pull the paddles around 5700/5800 which shifts you at almost 6 grand. This puts you into a much fatter part of the N54 torque curve. I ran my fastest trap speeds by doing this method. Letting the tranny do the 2-3 and 3-4 shifts resulted in 103ish mph and high 13.4's ET's.

[elwoodwffw]

Originally Posted by Lowcruzr

Just an FWIW, I ran a 13.2@107 bone stock with a 2.1 60' time. (I've already been flamed for having such a fast stock time so don't bother... :finger: Right there to all the haters.) I acheived this time by letting the tranny do the shifting from first to second, but then I manually short-shifted the 2-3 and 3-4. Pull the paddles around 5700/5800 which shifts you at almost 6 grand. This puts you into a much fatter part of the N54 torque curve. I ran my fastest trap speeds by doing this method. Letting the tranny do the 2-3 and 3-4 shifts resulted in 103ish mph and high 13.4's ET's.

your not the first person i have heard to do that... but i have heard it helps your traps not so much your times... congrats.. and some people also state that the paddles might not react as quick as the actual shifter does.
also some say they run faster leaving it in d mode instead of ds mode. like .2 sec faster.. but everyone is different