[CoffeeBean]

It's at 6:30.

[Tom Droze]

I watched the entire video and I respectfully disagree with Steve Dinan with respect to his view point on tuning a N/A car. I picked up almost 2 MPH of 1/4 mile trap speed after my tune, which equates to almost 10 horsepower, not earth shattering but still. . .

Also, the drivability of the car is vastly improved.

[Dlasko71]

Originally Posted by Tom Droze

I watched the entire video and I respectfully disagree with Steve Dinan with respect to his view point on tuning a N/A car. I picked up almost 2 MPH of 1/4 mile trap speed after my tune, which equates to almost 10 horsepower, not earth shattering but still. . .

Also, the drivability of the car is vastly improved.

All depends on what engine you had prior to the tune. Was it a stock N52, N51, or N52 with the 3 stage? I find it hard to believe that there truly is a difference between a stock N52 and one with just a tune..

[Fundguy1]

10 hp isn't worth the effort. Without a stopwatch you'd never know. If you can't do anything else then maybe but without picking up 50 hp what's the point. I advanced the timing on my armada. Got 10 hp. Never noticed.

[Tom Droze]

Originally Posted by Fundguy1

10 hp isn't worth the effort. Without a stopwatch you'd never know. If you can't do anything else then maybe but without picking up 50 hp what's the point. I advanced the timing on my armada. Got 10 hp. Never noticed.

Thanks for your input, but the fact of the matter is I did feel a difference, especially in the lower RPM range. With regard to it not being worth the effort, well that's only your opinion. Now if you were to tell us you've driven a N51 or N52 pre and post tune and felt this way about the tune, I'd be more inclined to listen to what you have to say. Oh by the way, how did you determine you picked up 10 horsepower in your Armada?

[justpete]

Unfortunately Steve's entirely correct here. Out of all the improvements in rear wheel horsepower I've been able to measure the three stage manifold _by itself_ and the headers picked up nearly all of it. The tune tweaked it all nicely, especially the headers as you'd expect. But it was the improvement in the throttle response that was the biggest improvement the tune provided.

To get any significant power out of this engine requires serious rework of the head, bottom end, cams, timing, etc., etc. A simple tune doesn't in and of itself provide a meaningful increase in rear wheel torque. Is a tune worth it then? Well, yeah, if only for the throttle response - makes a huge difference to perceived performance.

[chris82]

Originally Posted by justpete

Unfortunately Steve's entirely correct here. Out of all the improvements in rear wheel horsepower I've been able to measure the three stage manifold _by itself_ and the headers picked up nearly all of it. The tune tweaked it all nicely, especially the headers as you'd expect. But it was the improvement in the throttle response that was the biggest improvement the tune provided.

To get any significant power out of this engine requires serious rework of the head, bottom end, cams, timing, etc., etc. A simple tune doesn't in and of itself provide a meaningful increase in rear wheel torque. Is a tune worth it then? Well, yeah, if only for the throttle response - makes a huge difference to perceived performance.

I'm not quite following, is he/you saying the claimed and dyno proven HP gains we all get with the AA tune is just bogus? I had a stock car (hardware wise I hadn't touched anything), with an AA tune, and it did a solid 220whp/207wtq on a mustang. No way a non-tuned N51 is putting that down. What am I missing here lol

[justpete]

Originally Posted by chris82

I'm not quite following, is he/you saying the claimed and dyno proven HP gains we all get with the AA tune is just bogus? I had a stock car (hardware wise I hadn't touched anything), with an AA tune, and it did a solid 220whp/207wtq on a mustang. No way a non-tuned N51 is putting that down. What am I missing here lol

Gotta know the difference between no tune and tune to see if the torque curve is increased meaningfully across a useful band of rpm. The peak horsepower number is utterly meaningless in and of itself. As they say, horsepower sells cars, torque wins races.

I'm guessing the amount of available power with a simple tune is a function of the engine so the N51 may gain a bit more than an N52, dunno. I do know though that 21hp out of a total overall increase of 37hp (rear wheel) with my N52 was due entirely to the headers. The three stage manifold alone without a tune produced an additional ten horse. The tunes in total added at best six horse. The torque curve though was significantly improved below peak by the manifold and headers, not so much by the tune at all which did it's most work at higher rpm.

[chris82]

Originally Posted by justpete

Gotta know the difference between no tune and tune to see if the torque curve is increased meaningfully across a useful band of rpm. The peak horsepower number is utterly meaningless in and of itself. As they say, horsepower sells cars, torque wins races.

I'm guessing the amount of available power with a simple tune is a function of the engine so the N51 may gain a bit more than an N52, dunno. I do know though that 21hp out of a total overall increase of 37hp (rear wheel) with my N52 was due entirely to the headers. The three stage manifold alone without a tune produced an additional ten horse. The tunes in total added at best six horse. The torque curve though was significantly improved below peak by the manifold and headers, not so much by the tune at all which did it's most work at higher rpm.

I see what you're saying with functional power, but even if you're really conservative with my torque calculation, lets say 15% on top of the Mustang whp numbers, that's 238tq. Then again VAC had this car before me with plans to race it so they might have done all they could to get the most torque out.

[justpete]

Originally Posted by chris82

I see what you're saying with functional power, but even if you're really conservative with my torque calculation, lets say 15% on top of the Mustang whp numbers, that's 238tq. Then again VAC had this car before me with plans to race it so they might have done all they could to get the most torque out.

Yeah, no argument but the absolute numbers don't really mean anything. I've been able to measure the torque and hp independently while driving and they match the DynoDynamic numbers quite closely. I would be seriously surprised at anything over 200 ft-lb torque, max, as a real world number. That's why I only look at differences. Really easy to get misled otherwise.

[chris82]

Originally Posted by justpete

Yeah, no argument but the absolute numbers don't really mean anything. I've been able to measure the torque and hp independently while driving and they match the DynoDynamic numbers quite closely. I would be seriously surprised at anything over 200 ft-lb torque, max, as a real world number. That's why I only look at differences. Really easy to get misled otherwise.

What do you measure your torque numbers at?

[Ruddigger]

Arent somecars detuned from the factory? 325 vs 328 for example? Wouldnt a tune help in those situations?

[justpete]

Originally Posted by chris82

What do you measure your torque numbers at?

I think they're around 200 ft-lb, would have to dig up the paperwork to check. Seems to me the rear wheel hp and torque numbers were very close to the published BMW net crank numbers, I think.

[chris82]

Originally Posted by Ruddigger

Arent somecars detuned from the factory? 325 vs 328 for example? Wouldnt a tune help in those situations?

You'd think, but this thread has me questioning my basic math skills

[chris82]

Originally Posted by justpete

I think they're around 200 ft-lb, would have to dig up the paperwork to check. Seems to me the rear wheel hp and torque numbers were very close to the published BMW net crank numbers, I think.

Really? Hmm.....

[631twentyeighteye]

Originally Posted by chris82

You'd think, but this thread has me questioning my basic math skills

N51(and n52) are detuned in the US. n51 comes with 3 stage so a tune really opens it up versus the n52 which requires a manifold swap.

I assume Dinan is speaking terms of a NA designed to produce as much power as it can from the factory. For example: the 265HP variant of the n52 sold in the 330i and in europe. Now there's still gains to be had on that model but they're very very slight. He's also simply speaking in terms of A/F curve, that doesn't account for the various other changes available in more complex engines like the n52.

The x28i and x25i are detuned n52 variants, naturally there's power to be had by tuning them.

He does specifically state that there's nothing to be gained from a tune ALONE on an NA, but with hardware changes tunes are not just beneficial but necessary to reach the utmost gains.

FWIW my bone stock dyno's were 198/180, 3 stage and tune were 213/189, and catless headers 3stage and tune was 227/201. All RWHP all on the same dynojet. catless 3 stage and tune was also 227/207 on a mustang dyno on a colder day.

[justpete]

Originally Posted by 631twentyeighteye

N51(and n52) are detuned in the US. n51 comes with 3 stage so a tune really opens it up versus the n52 which requires a manifold swap.

I assume Dinan is speaking terms of a NA designed to produce as much power as it can from the factory. For example: the 265HP variant of the n52 sold in the 330i and in europe. Now there's still gains to be had on that model but they're very very slight. He's also simply speaking in terms of A/F curve, that doesn't account for the various other changes available in more complex engines like the n52.

The x28i and x25i are detuned n52 variants, naturally there's power to be had by tuning them.

He does specifically state that there's nothing to be gained from a tune ALONE on an NA, but with hardware changes tunes are not just beneficial but necessary to reach the utmost gains.

FWIW my bone stock dyno's were 198/180, 3 stage and tune were 213/189, and catless headers 3stage and tune was 227/201. All RWHP all on the same dynojet. catless 3 stage and tune was also 227/207 on a mustang dyno on a colder day.

There ya go. With the three stage and tune I was seeing what correlated to 255 net crank hp, close to the '06 330i spec. And by correlate I mean only that the first dyno, stock, was 80% of the 230hp spec so I've been using that multiplier as the "driveline efficiency" number. Doesn't mean a real world driveline efficiency, just a way to approximate net crank from dyno numbers, not to be taken seriously but it seems to be a decent way to make some rough comparisons. ymmv of course.

[Fundguy1]

The armada has electronic timing. By advancing it you gain 10hp. Dyno proved. But who cares. You're not feeling anything hp wise. Throttle response, shifting, maybe.

[631twentyeighteye]

Originally Posted by justpete

There ya go. With the three stage and tune I was seeing what correlated to 255 net crank hp, close to the '06 330i spec. And by correlate I mean only that the first dyno, stock, was 80% of the 230hp spec so I've been using that multiplier as the "driveline efficiency" number. Doesn't mean a real world driveline efficiency, just a way to approximate net crank from dyno numbers, not to be taken seriously but it seems to be a decent way to make some rough comparisons. ymmv of course.

Ditto, it works out perfectly with my numbers as well. I've ran tune alone on my car and i can say i really didn't notice a different. A tad more grunt down low but nothing groundbreaking what so ever. Once I had the 3 stage on it was a much more noticeable different.

Conveniently my friend has a bone stock 128i(albeit auto) that I've driven for comparison. Certainly a large difference below 3K rpm.

[hassmaschine]

Dinan is saying that you can't gain any power on any N/A engine (not specifically the N52) by tuning. This is of course flatly wrong. Factory tunes are not set for maximum performance - they have to compromise the longevity of the engine, fuel economy, emissions, and people putting in 87 octane when it says all over the place to only use premium (that would apply to the N52). No one is claiming you will gain 50hp from a tune. of course not - if you did, that would mean the factory tune was atrocious. it doesn't mean the engine is bad, it means that the engineers did their jobs.

the 328i/325i doesn't even come set with valve lift maxed out from the factory. All N52s have less ignition advance than what makes the most power (it really is tuned to run on 87 octane just fine). Cam timing can actually increase the VE of the engine when tweaked for maximum power (rather than for emissions). Then there's cat overheat protection, which dumps fuel to protect the cats, but kills power. I could go on and on.

We know for a fact you can gain power with just a tune on the N52 - the 325i and 328i differ by 15hp with no changes to the actual motor at all. It's all the factory tune.

Fundguy, you only care about FBO N54s with 400-500hp, so I don't even know why you're here. there's nothing special about your Armada - cars have had electronic ignition for decades, and almost all of them will gain some power by simply advancing the ignition a bit. Some more than others. Your example doesn't mean much other than your Nissan was pretty well maxed out stock.

Pay attention to what the S54 guys are doing. of course the N52 is not the S54, but it wasn't that long ago that 300whp all motor was rare. Now they are pushing 340-350, some of it is due to headers but those were always around - a lot of it is just due to refinements in tuning.

Now what you really could say for certain is you won't gain much power with a Dinan tune. Those have typically been known for a small gain at full throttle, and everything else being left stock. Mostly Dinan has been overpriced crap for a long time but I'm probably preaching to the choir.

Finally, what a lot of you are talking about is peak to peak gains. That is silly. There's a lot of drivability and area under the curve to be gained elsewhere, not just peak power. Peak power is mostly determined (but not entirely) by the physical characteristics of the engine (size, piston speed, and VE), so of course gains will be smaller there than elsewhere. If all you care about is peak power you're missing the forest for the trees.

[chris82]

Originally Posted by hassmaschine

Dinan is saying that you can't gain any power on any N/A engine (not specifically the N52) by tuning. This is of course flatly wrong. Factory tunes are not set for maximum performance - they have to compromise the longevity of the engine, fuel economy, emissions, and people putting in 87 octane when it says all over the place to only use premium (that would apply to the N52). No one is claiming you will gain 50hp from a tune. of course not - if you did, that would mean the factory tune was atrocious. it doesn't mean the engine is bad, it means that the engineers did their jobs.

the 328i/325i doesn't even come set with valve lift maxed out from the factory. All N52s have less ignition advance than what makes the most power (it really is tuned to run on 87 octane just fine). Cam timing can actually increase the VE of the engine when tweaked for maximum power (rather than for emissions). Then there's cat overheat protection, which dumps fuel to protect the cats, but kills power. I could go on and on.

We know for a fact you can gain power with just a tune on the N52 - the 325i and 328i differ by 15hp with no changes to the actual motor at all. It's all the factory tune.

Fundguy, you only care about FBO N54s with 400-500hp, so I don't even know why you're here. there's nothing special about your Armada - cars have had electronic ignition for decades, and almost all of them will gain some power by simply advancing the ignition a bit. Some more than others. Your example doesn't mean much other than your Nissan was pretty well maxed out stock.

Pay attention to what the S54 guys are doing. of course the N52 is not the S54, but it wasn't that long ago that 300whp all motor was rare. Now they are pushing 340-350, some of it is due to headers but those were always around - a lot of it is just due to refinements in tuning.

Now what you really could say for certain is you won't gain much power with a Dinan tune. Those have typically been known for a small gain at full throttle, and everything else being left stock. Mostly Dinan has been overpriced crap for a long time but I'm probably preaching to the choir.

Finally, what a lot of you are talking about is peak to peak gains. That is silly. There's a lot of drivability and area under the curve to be gained elsewhere, not just peak power. Peak power is mostly determined (but not entirely) by the physical characteristics of the engine (size, piston speed, and VE), so of course gains will be smaller there than elsewhere. If all you care about is peak power you're missing the forest for the trees.

What he said ^^^^^

[David0ff]

Hass for Prez