• Name (DDB).  The person's name, along with the Dyno Database entry.  If you click on the link for the name, you'll be taken directly to the Dyno Database entry.  From within the DDB entry, you can download the Dynojet dyno files and dyno chart.  In the case of the Dodge Challenger, clicking the name will download the dyno files and dyno chart.
• Temp(F) = Temperature (Farenheit)
• RelH = Relative Humidity
• Pressure(Hg) = Barometric Pressure
• DA(ft) = Density Altitude
• WHP(unc) = Uncorrected wheel horsepower
• WTQ(unc) = Uncorrected wheel torque
• WHP(djc) = Dynojet corrected wheel horsepower
• WTQ(djc) = Dynojet corrected wheel torque
• WHP(act) = Actual wheel horsepower
• WTQ(act) = Actual wheel torque

However, Steve and I ended up speaking for about 15 minutes. I've got to tell you guys, I was very impressed -- VERY impressed. The knowledge he rattled off of the top of his head was very vast and broad. We talked quite a bit about what it would be like to add a supercharger to a 4.6L stroker -- and all of the "issues" that would certainly come up. He had no way of knowing that we've already encountered these issues. But the whole conversation served as a way of demonstrating (to me) that his knowledge was very impressive -- and his analysis of the types of "issues" that we might run into was perfectly accurate. He had no way of knowing that we have run into (and solved) the many of issues he was talking about.

So now that we've chatted for nearly 15-20 minutes, it's time to pop my real question: "Steve, I've heard that you've got some roads that you use for testing...where are they?" Without hesitation, Steve offers to take me for a drive -- in MY CAR -- to show me. Without hesitation, I handed him the keyfob. Since I had my video vBox hooked up to the car (ever since the Mojave Mile), I turned it on and captured the whole thing. First we went on some freeway clover-leaf onramps so Steve could check out the handling of the car. Right out of the box, he was at least 5MPH faster than I could ever do -- and he said my set up was at least 5MPH slower than the suspension on his stroker M3. We finally ended up on that lonely test road (I already knew where it was anyways) with Steve driving the supercharged stroker. I can definitely say that Steve has far bigger balls than I do. His experience as a former race car driver really shows.

After it was all over, we went back to Dinan and we talked briefly about suspension modifications. Steve already knew that we would encounter some back-end instability on the M3 at high speeds (we experienced this mostly at the Texas Mile). To fix the problem, Dinan offers some rear-end suspension links. I'll be at Dinan shortly to pick those pieces up.

Steve knew I lived in town with my supercharged stroker. I thought he was an incredibly gracious man, never bothered that I was at the business he built with almost entirely competitor's products on my car (I do have Dinan throttle bodies on the motor). Before I left, he offered to have me come back and take a ride in his stroker -- the same circuit -- so I could feel the difference in the suspension set up.

I always knew and respected Dinan for the types of engineering they have done on the BMW's. Many of you have visited Dinan and decided to purchase many products. As I said, I've always respected the work Dinan does, and after talking with Steve today and seeing how gracious and personable he is, I very much respect him as well.

Great meeting you today Steve...I'll be back in soon to take you up on the offer for the drive in your stroker, and to get those suspension pieces.

To see what I mean, look at the product matrix below.  ESS offers three basic kits:  VT1, VT2, VT3.  Some of the customization hardware may be provided by ESS (such as higher boost pulley), but the customizations are not supported by ESS and at the end of the day are the customer's responsibility to install and support.  Customer-installed customizations options include more boost, nitrous, stroker motors, or even a custom methanol kit.  The combinations seem endless:  three different kits, and many different options translates into hundreds of different possible combinations. 

There are a few items in the product matrix that need further explanation.  Even though each kit has a pre-set boost level, ESS is always willing to give the customer a higher boost pulley (under the right circumstances).  The customer must live in an area where the appropriate gasoline is available to meet the higher demands of the higher boost.

ESS is a reasonably large company and sells hundreds of supercharger kits.  Because of their large volume, ESS has the clout to have custom-made Vortech blowers with different housing and impeller designs.  I was offered a custom-made blower for a very reasonable price, but we decided that I didn't need it (yet).  I didn't need it because I was not even exceeding the volume output of our existing blower.  It just goes to show you:  bigger is not always better (or even necessary).  As far as I know, these custom-blower options are not available to any other Vortech-based kit on the market -- which means a custom-made Vortech blower for the S65 motor would only be available through ESS.

ESS does not offer a methanol injection kit nor Nitrous Oxide option.  However, both are included in this product matrix to show what is possible without changing any of the ESS hardware design.

Pricing

I've seen the rumors that I received my ESS kit for free as some type of quid-pro-quo.  There were three people who knew beforehand exactly how much I paid for my kit (I personally told each of them) -- and these were the same three people who started this rumor.  For a while, I was willing to let the rumors circulate because I wanted to see how far they would let this go.  One of the guys immediately stopped his participation after I confronted him (he didn't remember discussing the price with me), but the other two never stopped in spite of being confronted.  Since the rumors seemed to take hold among a select group of people, I think it's time to address them directly. 

It was never really a secret how much I paid.  In fact, the exact price was contained in the following statement in the opening post of my Mojave Mile thread:

I knew tuning the stroker was going to be expensive -- probably $3000 expensive. So at that point, I honestly figured I might as well spend the extra $10k and get the blower as well and be done with it. 

In other words, I purchased an ESS VT2 kit for $13,000 (MSRP $13,500)  -- only $500 below list price.  At this point in time, the only difference between my VT2 kit and one that you can buy directly from ESS -- is the ECU tune for the Stroker+Supercharger.  Everything else in the kit -- all of the components are the same ones available to any VT2 customer.

Performance Efficiency

The Performance Efficiency (PE) of the ESS-46 kit is one of the highest if not THE highest on the market.  The PE of this kit is between 5.41 - 5.48.  The PE rates the kit's ability to produce power and factors out displacement, boost, and gasoline.  This article provides a description and the formulas for calculating the PE of a supercharger kit.

Performance (Driving)

While driving the car home, I began the drive rather gingerly -- trying to reacquaint myself with the car and all of its power.  For the first 150-200 miles, I didn't exceed 75MPH.  But after driving 200 miles towards home, 75 soon turned into 80; 80 turned into 90; 90 turned into 100; and 100 eventually turned into 105 MPH.  These weren't short excursions into these speeds -- these were prolonged distances at these speeds.  Luckily Interestate-5 was completely deserted that night, and I always slowed down when I approached other cars.  For some reason a Lincoln Continental and Mitsubishi Mirage wanted to hang with me at these speeds.  Both cars followed me all the way to Highway 101 in Gilroy California.

The only way I can describe how the car ran -- was simply amazing.  The sound of the motor was so intoxicating that I blame it for my upward speed ventures.  Throttle response was instant and telepathic.  The car knew exactly what I wanted it to do -- and was always willing to give it.  The ECU tuning in the car is superb and the sound of the engine sublime.  The car idles perfectly; it doesn't hunt or search for an idle speed.  The car starts perfectly every time.  There are never any limp modes, engine stalls, etc.  It's a far cry from the problems I had with the "custom tune" I had put on the stroker.  In fact, the tune on the car is night and day different -- and I think runs better than the factory ECU tune.

I am running on Michelin PS2 street tires -- nothing exotic or sticky.  So at times under hard acceleration, I can feel the back-end getting a little squirrely.  Recently I took my 17 year-old out for a drive (his first since the supercharger was installed).  He wanted to "feel" the extra power.  I told him he had better bring a diaper change -- and he informed me that he already relieved himself!  Once we found our "lonely road" I opened up third gear.  Within 3-4 seconds, I was already at 110 MPH.  Not wanting to go any faster (with my son in the car), I slowed down -- the ride was over.  I asked him if he could tell it was faster.  I don't think he could get the grin off of his face -- and  all he could say was "uh...yeah!"

So after seven months out of my possession, I finally had a chance to drive my car back home.  I'm currently using it as my daily driver.  I'm driving around with my mid-boost 613whp configuration.  I get far more looks, thumbs-up, and general "atta-boys" now, than I ever did before.  Maybe people are seeing the roll cage and Sparco seat in the car and realize this is one serious, mean, and nasty machine.

Performance (Track Driving)

The car has been in two standing mile competitions, and the M-Fest track event.  The first standing mile -- Mojave Mile -- we ran 181.8 MPH.  In the Texas Mile, we increased the boost and ran 186.1 MPH before fouling our oxygen sensors two days before the end of the event.  After changing the O2 sensors, we put our lowest (6PSI) boost pulley back on the car, drove it to Las Vegas for M-Fest and drove the track event.  While at MFest, we tracked the car for six full track sesssions -- which if I (and others) counted correctly was -- exactly twice as many sessions as any other supercharged E9x M3 at the event. The car ran absolutely flawlessly while the ambient temperatures climbed to the mid to upper 80's.  The motor's water temperature never exceeded 107 degrees (C).  The first session was also my first time on a real track in 25 years.  We were running on 20" Michelin PS2 street tires that were over pressurized by more than 10 PSI (stupid tire shop).  Thankfully one of our guest driver's -- Earl -- checked the tire pressure and noticed it was way too high.  He lowered the pressure and I immediately picked up 10+ seconds per lap on my next time out on the track.  As the lap times below show, the performance was very consistent -- lap after lap -- usually within 1/2 second of each other.

Performance (Power)

By now, we've performed three different dyno runs at three different boost levels.  The first dyno runs at 6PSI demonstrated 561whp (SAE corrected.)  At 6.25 boost, we achieved 601whp (SAE corrected).  The final results are harder to pin down.  We know the final results were 50-55whp higher than our previous runs at the Arizona dyno, but we never ran this boost on our home dyno.  Our home dyno has the boost gauge and is the dyno we use for published results.  So if 601whp (SAE, 613whp STD) was our previous baseline, then our final results were probably somewhere around 650-655whp (SAE, 665-670whp STD).  But we will never know for sure because we don't ever plan to get back to measure this configuration on our home dyno.

The BOOST

The large pulley (shown in the graph below) demonstrates that we are right at 6 PSI as the car was delivered from ESS. The smaller pulley was just barely smaller. As you can see from the graph, the trend line shows boost near 6.25 PSI -- again, very modest and very conservative setting.

BOOST: 6.0 PSI

BOOST: 6.25 PSI

Low Boost (6.0 PSI), 91 Octane, STD Correction

Low Boost (6.0 PSI), 91 Octane, SAE Correction

Higher Boost (6.25-6.5 PSI), 91 Octane, STD Correction

Higher Boost (6.25-6.5 PSI), 91 Octane, SAE Correction

Here are the ESS-46 vs. RS-46 vs. Stock comparison dyno charts. Unfortunately, these are the only Dynojet graphs I have of the RS-46 stroker on this same dyno. It's unfortunate because these were some of the very first dyno charts taken, when the ECU was untuned by ESS, and we still had the nasty torque dip. But nonetheless, they are good for a relative comparison.

ESS-46 vs. RS-46 vs. Stock Comparison, 91 Octane, STD Correction

ESS-46 vs. RS-46 vs. Stock Comparison, 91 Octane, SAE Correction

Videos:

I took some videos with the iPhone. There's not the best quality, but they are something.

605 whp run

612 whp run

Gas Mileage

Life before the stroker motor was simple.  I achieved 16.5 MPG in the city, and up to 21.7 MPG on the highway.  Adding the stroker motor changed all of that.  I was down to 14.5 MPG in the city, and 16.5 MPG on the highway.  Changing my differential increased my mileage substantially -- and adding the supercharger increased it a little more.  Now, I'm back to 21-22 MPG on the highway.  Since I rarely (never) have my car at home any longer, I do not have any in-city driving MPG specifications.

Oil Consumption

I was always a little disappointed with my oil consumption.  Before the supercharger, my stroker motor was consuming one quart of oil per 1600-2000 miles.  That is well within BMW specifications, but too much for my happiness.  However, while installing the supercharger, we did perform a leakdown test on my motor -- just to be safe.  All of my cylinders were well within normal leakdown ranges -- in fact the leakdown numbers were very low.  Adding the supercharger has substantially decreased my oil consumption.  Now I'm consuming 1-quart of oil per 3000-4000 miles.  My belief is that the positive pressure inside the cylinder is not allowing the oil (under the vacuum of an NA motor) to get past the rings.  Basically it's the difference between positive pressure in the cylinder (FI) versus a vacuum in the cylinder (NA).

Problems

We have been hard on O2 sensors -- VERY hard on them.  In Texas, we blew through a set of O2 sensors when we ran Q16 leaded gas at some pretty high boost.  After getting home, we swapped the O2 sensors, put on our lowest boost pulley, and drove the car to MFest to have some fun at the track event.  However as soon as we got back, we had some unfinished business to attend to:  we wanted to know exactly how much power we were making in our Texas Mile configuration.  So, we put on our high boost pulley, filled her up with MS109 and started driving the car around really hard.  Within 100 miles, the DME started cutting spark just like it did when we fouled the O2's with Q16.  So we took her to the dyno anyways to see if we could get a better picture of what was going on.

But while at the dyno, I learned something very interesting about the MSS60 DME.  When an O2 sensor fails, the DME does not reduce redline, but it does enter a safe mode of sorts.  After the first run, I noticed that the car seemed to take longer to rev between 2000-8400 RPMs, and we were down 100whp on power from what I expected.  Then when I looked closer, I saw the AFR and SPARK data at a constant fixed amount -- meaning it didn't change all the way from 2000-8400 RPMs.  So I called Asbjorn @ ESS and told him what I saw (this was before we knew we had an O2 sensor problem).  He immediately knew we had entered a special type of safe mode because he informed me that the DME will set a constant spark and AFR target without reducing the redline.  So we left the dyno without any results.

Once we ran some diagnostics on the car, we discovered that we had a faulty O2 sensor on bank-1.  We went to the BMW dealership to pick up another set (even though only one was malfunctioning) and asked the dealer if the O2 sensors have a warranty.  We knew the standard response would be that electronic devices do not have a warranty -- and this is exactly what we were told.  However, if the CAR is under warranty and a replacement O2 sensor fails -- even though it may have been replaced by a non-BMW service center -- then the part would still be covered.  All we had to do was bring in the car to BMW.  They would look over the car; make sure it had not been modified or raced; and then proceed to cover the warranty for the O2 sensors.  At that point Sam@AutoTalent and I looked at each other and said "we're screwed."  On the way out, we joked that we wouldn't even bother trying to get them replaced under warranty.  But after replacing the faulty O2 sensor, the car has run absolutely flawlessly.

Customer Service

ESS has been amazing to work with.  They have been fast and responsive with every request I've made.  The car has been to their Arizona facility twice -- once for the initial kit installation, and once for an upgrade tune before heading out to Texas.  Today I'm still running that same tune.  ESS set me up with three different pulleys:  low, low-medium, and medium-high boost.  The tune they created in the ECU will accommodate all of these boost configuration without reflashing -- provided I increase the octane rating of the gasoline to match the boost level.  That special ECU tune was a special request of mine -- no "map switching" required -- because I didn't want to ship the ECU back to Arizona for reflashing every time I changed pulleys.  So, Asbjorn pulled the rabbit out of his hat and figured out a way to program the ECU for multiple boost levels.  It's worked:  the tune on the motor is amazing.

What's Next

Now that I have a high performance clutch to install on the car, I plan to have the car sent back to Auto Talent in a few weeks.  We'll install the clutch and figure out ways to tweak the aerodynamics of the car for our Mojave Mile and Texas Mile events.  After seeing "trauma" those types of events put on the car, I'm not so sure I want to compete at Bonneville.  Bonneville would certainly cause a bit more trauma to the car.  I would need to install a fuel cell, fuel cut-off, electrical cut-off, and 6-point roll cage (cutting into the dash board).  I'm just not willing to tear up the car to that extent.

So for now, my car has two seats:  Sparco with 6-point harness in the driver's side, and OEM and seat belt on the passenger side.  The car is loud inside and is unsuitable for talking on the cell phone above 45 MPH.  But when I step on the gas, the roar of that motor comes to life.  It is the meanest sounding beast on the road I've ever heard.  While cruising around it sounds very tame -- but when you hit the gas and go through a few gears, the tame pussycat turns into a full-on beast.

Hitler responds to PencilGeeks BMW dyno from Skoot3r on Vimeo.

Can you provide more information about OE tuning's abilities on locked ECU's? While I'm not 100% sure, at Bimmerfest (only 5 days ago), I believed they turned people away asking to tune their locked ECU's.

It was an innocent question and so I was shocked when I recieved the following response:
 

Be careful what incorrect information you may spread, publically, PM's are one thing.

Personally OE had the lock figured out, and a patch for it many weeks ago ready to go, on my personal vehicle as well.

One person was turned away due to vendor conflict - as others tuners turned away this customer too. The conflict you may know as ess's test drive turned sour. Well that customer wanted OE to do it. The answer was no. Lots of history behind the customer. So the reason wasn't due to a locked DME.

Brian (SC E90 black) has an updated locked DME, his car is running fine right now isn't it ?

I wondered -- is this kid really threatening me?  How foolish must a person be to threaten a moderator of a car forum when he's possibly breaking the rules of the forum by posting information on behalf of somebody who isn't even a sponsor (OE Tuning)?  So I shot back the following:
 

Could you please give me an explanation of what that means? There seems to be something "behind" that statement -- and I'd like to know what it is. Why are you issuing me some type of warning? If we want to issue warnings here, I'd warn you not to post information on behalf of a vendor if you are not a paid sponsor. So please explain why you appear to be threatening and warning me.

And this is what I received in return:
 

The sponsor, Gintani, who the tuning is down for and through pays here as a sponsor, I do not work for them directly but I can carry along information for them if I'd please as it benefits you, and others in that thread that seem to be confused. OE and Brian are not adding to this PM at this time. You asked me, I answered.

I'm advising you nicely, that all posts, PM's, blogs are being closely monitored for slander, libel, and/or defamation of character. All correspondence will go to Alex and OE for review. Hope that answers your original PM.

OK, now I completely understand.  Bren seems to be saying that OE Tuning works for Gintani -- and Gintani is a paying sponsor.  And since OE Tuning is not a paying sponsor, Bren is posting this on OE's and Gintani's behalf -- thinking that Gintani's sponsorship will give him immunity from breaking forum rules.  Well Bren I've got some bad news for you -- it won't -- and you just admitted to violating multiple forum rules. 

By his own admission, the kid has been sent onto the forums to act as a proxy for an unpaid sponsor (OE Tuning).  He does not "work for them directly, but (he) can carry along information for them."  Well, thanks for clarifying that Bren:  you just admitted that Gintani doesn't pay you (directly), but you do "work" on their behalf.  It's the same thing Sticky told me about all of the other people -- just like you -- sent to the forums by these guys to create trouble and intimidate people.  But what about that threat at the bottom -- what's that all about?  Let me explain to the people who don't know:  Bren was sent to the forum to deliver that message too.  He's basically saying that he and the other forum agitators have been sent on a mission -- to collect information that they've been (erroneously) told could be used against me.  It's a mission that all of these ghetto fan boys think will help their cause.  But in reality, they're so ignorant of the law and what they're doing that they don't even realize how much it's hurting their cause -- not helping it.

Truthfully, I feel pretty sorry for this kid.  His head has been filled with all kinds of mush from a guy who thinks that threatening people is the best way to grow his business.  This kid is so misguided that he now thinks he knows the legal definition and what constitutes slander, libel, and/or defamation of character.  He's obviously very confused and needs a little help understanding it.  So let me help Bren and all of the other wanna-be e-thugs and ghetto fan boys by explaining a few things to them.

First let me tell you what does NOT constitute libel, slander, and/or defamation, and then let me tell you what does.  Stating opinions on the internet is not slander, not libel, and does not constitute defamation of character; however, what they have done to me (and apparently continue to do to me) -- is.  You see Bren, I'm free to state opinions, analyze products, and to post my analysis.  That's not slander, libel, or defamatory.  However, making up stories about me that are knowingly false, putting them in print, and then sending people onto forums to spread the stories is all of the above:  slander, libel, and defamation.  Bren, I've already showed lawyers copies of all of the correspondence, threats, and thefts of my intellectual property that have occurred over the past 9-12 months.  The lawyer agrees I have been slandered, libeled, defamed, and my intellectual property stolen.  They have assured me that everything I showed them is actionable (a legal term meaning I can sue them and collect damages).  But there's one thing I lack in order to sue this misguided vendor and his mindless "unpaid" minions -- they haven't yet cost me any money.  Rest assured Bren -- as soon as they do cost me money (such as attempting a frivolous lawsuit, or even sending me a legally threatening letter) -- then I will own them -- and their business.  The lawyers already have everything they need -- except standing (another legal term which means that I must be able demonstrate that I've been damaged and therefore have a basis to sue).  So you see, that's where costing me money comes in -- it gives me standing.

In the meantime while I patiently wait for them to do something stupid enough to give me legal standing, every time one of you little twerps think that you're brave enough to make threats like this -- you can be assured I will post your threats here on this Blog for everybody to read -- and for everybody to know who sent you.  If I believe you broke the law, I will call the police and report you.  So you might want to think twice before doing it.  You see guys, if a lawsuit ever occurred, you will need to answer interrogatories and you will be deposed.  You will need a lawyer -- and you will have to pay for it (somehow) -- and it won't be cheap.  You'll wrack up thousands of dollars of lawyer time just answering interrogatories.  But wait...there's more!  For the deposition, you'll get the privilege and honor to fly yourself and your lawyer (and don't forget Mommy and Daddy) all the way to sunny Northern California -- all the while your lawyer is on the clock and getting paid from the moment you pick him up until the moment you drop him off.  Your stupidity will easily cost more than your car.  I would also worry that you're breaking criminal law too.  It's entirely possible that sending these types of threats -- and sending them electronically -- is a criminal law violation.  That means your stupidity could also send you to jail.  I realize that wherever you live -- this may be a badge of honor -- a rite of passage.  So if you get to the "big house" -- be sure to open wide for Bubba as you bend over to pick up the soap.

Here's one final warning:  before you think you're brave enough to play your role as a pretend electronic hit man, think about the legal and financial trouble you could be getting yourself into.  Alex and Sticky will not pay your legal bills.  I hope you're at least getting some type of substantial sponsorship for your car in exchange for your services.  If you didn't at least get a free supercharger kit out of your services -- then you're pretty dumb (as if you didn't already demonstrate how dumb you were by sending the threats in the first place).

And here's a message to you Alex.  Don't ever send these little kids to threaten me again.  I'm not intimidated nor amused by this.  This is America Alex -- not some third-world country.  In America, people go to jail for these things.  Every time I receive one of these threats, I promise I will post it here.  People will know exactly where they originated.  You've got to admit Alex, your little fan boy was pretty dumb tying you directly to the threats he made.  Did you at least give him a free supercharger for his services?

Here's a rundown of the various ways to measure supercharger performance -- along with some pro's and con's. In all cases, the baseline must be true and correct, and no changes are allowed between the baseline and the final results.

One advantage of this formula is that it can't be cheated or manipulated by any vendor. It's just a number, and the number doesn't lie. A kit's performance efficiency will not depend on boost level, displacement, headers, exhaust, or any bolt-on items. Simply put, the kit efficiency will determine how well the kit performs -- and this number will remain relatively constant regardless of any changes -- except for octane rating.

To account for octane rating, I relied extensively on the Dyno Database. Using the results I had at my disposal, I calculated that each AKI point above 91, accounts for approximately 7.15whp of gain. Therefore, a 91 octane motor is the baseline, and anything above it will be adjusted by 7.15whp per AKI rating. There seems to be a ceiling on AKI rating. Tests have demonstrated that the MSS60 DME does not continue to increase performance above (approximately) 96 AKI octane gasoline. This was predicted by some M3Post forum members and then demonstrated in later tests.

Now that I know how much whp each point of octane adds or subtracts from performance, I can come up with a unified formula that accounts for baseline performance, displacement, boost, and gasoline. Here's what I came up with (version 3):

Efc = (Gain - (7.15*(Gas_AKI - 91)) / Displacement / Boost

• Efc = Efficiency
• Gain = Horsepower gain (whp)
• Gas_AKI = AKI Octane rating of gasoline used during testing
• Displacement = Motor displacement
• Boost = Boost PSI

Here's how it works:

Example-1:

• 367whp Baseline
• 517whp Results
• 91 Octane
• 8.0 PSI
• 3.996L displacement

Efc = ((517-357) - 7.15*(91 - 91)) / 3.996 / 8.0
= 150 - (7.15 * 0) / 3.996 / 8.0
= 150 / 3.996 / 8.0
= 4.69 Efficiency

Example-2:

• 409whp Baseline
• 601whp Results
• 96 Octane
• 6.25 PSI
• 4.619L displacement

Efc = ((601 - 409) - 7.15*(96-91)) / 4.619 / 6.25
= 192 - (7.15*5) / 4.619 / 6.25
= 192 - 35.75 / 4.619 / 6.25
= 156.25 / 4.619 / 6.25
= 5.41 Efficiency

Real World Examples

Now let's look at some more real world examples. The results below were taken from the Dyno Database -- all from independent dyno results. Not a single vendor dyno was used to compile the results below. You will quickly notice from these examples that the efficiency does not deviate very much for each vendor. There are no real statistical "outliers" here -- because all of the results regardless of the displacement, boost, or gasoline produce an efficiency in the same ballpark as each other (on a per-vendor basis). Without any "outliers" -- the results are very good proof that this formula works.

Applications

There are a few applications for this formula above. Primarily, it can be used to cross-check a vendor. If a vendor's kit produces an efficiency factor of 7.80, but the kit efficiency with verifiable dynos has demonstrated an Efc=4.92, then it would be a clear sign that the baseline was not correct, the boost was not being reported accurately, the gasoline was not the octane rating claimed...or many of these factors combined. The bottom line is that this number does not lie -- whereas vendors might. I've already used this formula to sniff out multiple instances where the baseline dyno was not taken from the same car. 

I've also used this formula for another very important purpose as well. If you know the baseline of the car and the final result -- this formula can be used to cross-check a vendor to prove how much boost they were running. The G-Power 9.0 PSI entry above was a great example. I knew the baseline, final result, gasoline octane -- but I didn't know the boost. Using this formula, I calculated the boost as 9.0 PSI and then wrote the vendor to ask. I didn't realize the vendor was a mathematician -- and he was impressed with the formula I presented. The vendor did confirm that the car was running 9.0 PSI -- and that my formula was used correctly to figure this out.

Finally, the efficiency factor can be used to rate a vendor's product. It's very clear from the table above which vendor creates a product with greater efficiency than the other. Whereas vendors are very emphatic about their products and always claiming to be better than their competitors -- this efficiency factor is a non-biased way to rate the products and compare the results. As more vendor products come to market (AA, VF, etc.), it will be interesting to see how they stack up against the vendors already established in the market.

Low Compression and Custom-Built Motors

Since there is no baseline with a custom-built or low-compression motor, the efficiency formula can be slightly modified. This is a case where MaxHP can be used instead of HP gain. This method comes with a negative side-effect: Now, the results are dependent on the dyno -- whereas the above method is relatively immune to dyno brands.

Efc = (MaxHP - (7.15*(Gas_AKI - 91)) / Displacement / Boost

Example-1:

• 517whp Results
• 91 Octane
• 8.0 PSI
• 3.996L displacement

Efc = (517 - 7.15*(91 - 91)) / 3.996 / 8.0
= 517 - (7.15 * 0) / 3.996 / 8.0
= 517 / 3.996 / 8.0
= 16.17 Efficiency

Example-2:

• 601whp Results
• 96 Octane
• 6.25 PSI
• 4.619L displacement

Efc = (601 - 7.15*(96-91)) / 4.619 / 6.25
= 601 - (7.15*5) / 4.619 / 6.25
= 601 - 35.75 / 4.619 / 6.25
= 156.25 / 4.619 / 6.25
= 19.57 Efficiency

Using the same exact DynoDB entries as above, but using MaxHP instead of "Gain" -- the results would be as follows. There's a few things of importance to point out from the results below. For the most part, the relative order of the entries did not change. Only the items highlighted in red have change their relative positions. Secondly, the method below shows the superiority of measuring against the baseline. In Efc-v3 the efficiency coefficients were all within a few percent of each other, whereas ignoring the baseline tends to spread out the results differently and with less accuracy. The G-Power SK2 kit at the bottom (listed in blue) because it shows the effects of a different dyno brand. All of the other entries were gathered using a Dynojet -- whereas the last entry was gathered with a Dyno Dynamics -- which definitely have a lower measuring scale than Dynojet.

The prototype (pictured below) was made for my car in preparation to the Texas Mile.  Unfortunately, the clutch arrived the day after we left, so we never had a chance to install it or test it.

The factory BMW clutch weighs just above 45 pounds, whereas the ACT clutch weighs a scant 27.6 pounds.

Specifications:

You knuckleheads at SS-Post had better pay attention for three minutes (if you don't all have ADHD).  If you look at the data below, you might learn something.  For some of you (JM), it might be the first thing you ever learned in your lives.

Once I returned from the Mojave Mile, I modified the CarTest data with the actual car and atmospheric specifications and re-ran CarTest:

• CarTest estimate: 181.74 MPH. Actual: 181.8 MPH.
• Removing 10 MPH headwind, CarTest estimates: 183.04 MPH.
• Removing 10 MPH headwind and 0.85% slope, CarTest estimates: 184.71 MPH.
• Removing headwind, slope, and running the test at Sea Level, CarTest estimates: 189.34 MPH.

The Results

These are just a few things to consider when looking at our incredible results:

• Stock wheels/tires
• Cold weather
• Even colder wind chill factor
• 15-20 MPH head/cross winds
• 2700 ft altitude
• Same boost as off-the-shelf kit (6.5 PSI)
• No custom hardware
• No custom tune for race gas

Based on what we learned, we plan to make some changes for the Texas Mile. I'm hopeful we'll break 190 at Texas.

When looking at the vBox data, it appears the braking distance is 4025 feet -- just over 3/4 of a mile. That should be plenty of distance to slow down after 180+.

Here's the vBox graphs.

Run-3 (181.8 MPH):

Run-4 (178.9 MPH):

Download the vBox files HERE.

MMile vBox Files.zip