[Daleb]

Originally Posted by Anthony1s

Forum member cars aren't much different from each other. Stg 2 (intercooler, dp) doesn't really matter what ic and dp they have. Add e30 and look at that fuel pressure, quite comparable. Different pumps, don't matter, when there are logs showing exact fuel pressure used. Fuel pressure and AFR, quite relatable. Sure, you might not be able to say 2500psi of fuel is 400hp if AFR are different, because you don't know if it's lean or rich, but we have AFR in the logs to base off of... Same with turbo, we can see boost made and WGDC in the logs and compare that to existing M2 logs and dyno runs. Mods don't matter because people running the OTS tunes cars aren't drastically different from one another.

Genuine question here, how are you determining power from fuel pressure? What if an upgraded HPFP car is targeting 2400/2500 psi but could easily run at say 2800 psi, would that change things at all?

It’s already been noticed by a few that my WGDC is slightly lower and I’d attribute that to the pure turbo inlet and running a decat. I know from my previous cars (n55 ewg stock turbo) testing that adding a turbo inlet allowed me to run more boost due to WGDC being lowered. So based on that I feel like mods will matter once you run the 2+ maps.


On another note it’s a bit of a let down that people are trying to tear apart these new maps. Halim, myself, zm2 and the other guys didn’t need to spend our own time and money to help develop the maps.

It’s almost as if the n55 has been around a while people think they know the limits and aren’t open to further development because they think it isn’t possible. I mean I had a guy dispute that the stock turbo couldn’t do 20 psi to redline, I provided the log and he still didn’t believe it 🙃. We’ve then got the bench racers that use every online calculator possible and completely ignore the provided real world evidence I.e. me shaving 1.2s off my 100-200, someone gaining 6/7 mph trap speeds.

When the b58 got the 2+ maps and they seen these kind of real world gains everyone was for it, they certainly didn’t get questioned because someone punched a few numbers into a calculator and said it wasn’t possible 😂.

[designatedposter]

i appreciate the work done to continue to provide new OTS maps for the n55. OTS maps cover nearly all popular fuel and mods for the platform. i have wmi and have been running race gas tunes without issue for a while now.

also excited for the ongoing development of OTS maps for better driveability for manual cars. i hear this is coming out any moment now.

i just reflashed stage 2 race gas, coming from stage 2+ race gas since it was released. while i did not feel the stage 2+ was a HUGE power increase from stage 2, i can certainly feel that stage 2 is a significant power decrease from stage 2+. funny thing that you don't know what you have until.. you don't.

[JKen_0115]

Hi Guys, I keep learning the good data and result from this forum. ZM2 has been the most upfront and willing to share the result as well as help this community. Again, I'm not technical expert here but I really appreciate ZM2's contribution and share in this community. Nothing is perfect in this world, at least I'm the one of many to appreciate his great help and sharing here.

[ZM2]

Originally Posted by JKen_0115

Hi Guys, I keep learning the good data and result from this forum. ZM2 has been the most upfront and willing to share the result as well as help this community. Again, I'm not technical expert here but I really appreciate ZM2's contribution and share in this community. Nothing is perfect in this world, at least I'm the one of many to appreciate his great help and sharing here.

Kind words!

I’ve learned from many folks here over the years, so just trying to pay it back. Let us know where you are with your build JKen_0115 and we’ll all try to help!

[Anthony1s]

Originally Posted by Daleb

Genuine question here, how are you determining power from fuel pressure? What if an upgraded HPFP car is targeting 2400/2500 psi but could easily run at say 2800 psi, would that change things at all?

It’s already been noticed by a few that my WGDC is slightly lower and I’d attribute that to the pure turbo inlet and running a decat. I know from my previous cars (n55 ewg stock turbo) testing that adding a turbo inlet allowed me to run more boost due to WGDC being lowered. So based on that I feel like mods will matter once you run the 2+ maps.


On another note it’s a bit of a let down that people are trying to tear apart these new maps. Halim, myself, zm2 and the other guys didn’t need to spend our own time and money to help develop the maps.

It’s almost as if the n55 has been around a while people think they know the limits and aren’t open to further development because they think it isn’t possible. I mean I had a guy dispute that the stock turbo couldn’t do 20 psi to redline, I provided the log and he still didn’t believe it 🙃. We’ve then got the bench racers that use every online calculator possible and completely ignore the provided real world evidence I.e. me shaving 1.2s off my 100-200, someone gaining 6/7 mph trap speeds.

When the b58 got the 2+ maps and they seen these kind of real world gains everyone was for it, they certainly didn’t get questioned because someone punched a few numbers into a calculator and said it wasn’t possible 😂.

Not once have a tried to tear apart new maps or developers. I said that ZM2's datalogs do not match the HP gains he claims to make. Which is true. I've also said that the cost and hassle to run ethanol mixes isn't worth it for the HP gains.

[ZM2]

Originally Posted by Anthony1s

Not once have a tried to tear apart new maps or developers. I said that ZM2's datalogs do not match the HP gains he claims to make. Which is true. I've also said that the cost and hassle to run ethanol mixes isn't worth it for the HP gains.

Have you analyzed my Stg 2 E30 logs?

You’ve just been adding my car’s 50whp gain bn Stg 2 E30 and Stg 2+ E30 to other M2 dyno’s.

There are other factors at play that I’ve been hinting at.

[Anthony1s]

Originally Posted by ZM2

Have you analyzed my Stg 2 E30 logs?

You’ve just been adding my car’s 50whp gain bn Stg 2 E30 and Stg 2+ E30 to other M2 dyno’s.

There are other factors at play that I’ve been hinting at.

You claimed to have dyno graphs on the Stg2+ tune disproving everything I've claimed, yet won't show them.

The points I've made are still 100% valid. Your datalogs do not show anything worth spending $2500+ in upgrades for, let alone $4500, while also adding the inconvenience of mixing fuels.

[ZM2]

Originally Posted by Anthony1s

You claimed to have dyno graphs on the Stg2+ tune disproving everything I've claimed, yet won't show them.

The points I've made are still 100% valid. Your datalogs do not show anything worth spending $2500+ in upgrades for, let alone $4500, while also adding the inconvenience of mixing fuels.

I’ve already said the Dinan turbo is only good for a few more peak and upper RPM hp. That’s been on my car for years since the Dinan Stage 4 upgrade. Never said spend money on it with these new maps, quite the opposite. You’re the one that said I was somehow going to get 500whp from it. Spend that turbo cash on a PS2, and you’ll get there.

So, $2500 is if you pay retail and pay a shop for installing an HPFP. $1500 is if you get it on sale in a couple weeks and spend a few hours installing yourself, which many guys here are perfectly capable of doing. You’re mostly just going on about how ethanol pump math is too inconvenient for you. Lazy.

Ssome people choose ethanol, as it’s a great summer track fuel, but if you want to putt around on 93, cool. Stick with what you have, and quit complaining about how it’s too expensive/hard/inconvenient for you.

However, I’ve also given you an out and said Stg 2+ Race Gas is looking quicker. Yet, you’ll still complain about MMT or 100 octane gas prices (which is why I go ethanol).

[Anthony1s]

"I’ve already said the Dinan turbo is only good for a few more peak and upper RPM hp."

Exactly, so there is no reason for you to not release your dyno curves to prove your claim of more than 50-75hp gains in the Stg2+ tune. Anyone can compare them to the stock turbo 93 tune perfectly well. But no, you gotta continually intentionally mislead people. So much so that now you have to put a once-a-year sale into the equation to rationalize your claims. A 0.2% occurrence is not a justification for an action. Would you pull the plug on a coma patient with a 0.2% chance of dying?

[ZM2]

Originally Posted by Anthony1s

"I’ve already said the Dinan turbo is only good for a few more peak and upper RPM hp."

Exactly, so there is no reason for you to not release your dyno curves to prove your claim of more than 50-75hp gains in the Stg2+ tune. Anyone can compare them to the stock turbo 93 tune perfectly well. But no, you gotta continually intentionally mislead people. So much so that now you have to put a once-a-year sale into the equation to rationalize your claims. A 0.2% occurrence is not a justification for an action. Would you pull the plug on a coma patient with a 0.2% chance of dying?

Like I’ve said, only dummies add dyno deltas on a particular car to absolute values on another car. You continue to show your lack of knowledge or understanding, despite your continuous rambling.

You still haven’t figured out what’s going on with my car (and many other N55’s) on the E30 maps. I’ve hinted at it more than once, so take a less than educated guess and I’ll let you know if you’re right or not.

The answer was going to be part of a completely different thread once I updated my curves, but I’ll entertain you in the meantime.

[Anthony1s]

Originally Posted by ZM2

Like I’ve said, only dummies add dyno deltas on a particular car to absolute values on another car. You continue to show your lack of knowledge or understanding, despite your continuous rambling.

You still haven’t figured out what’s going on with my car (and many other N55’s) on the E30 maps. I’ve hinted at it more than once, so take a less than educated guess and I’ll let you know if you’re right or not.

The answer was going to be part of a completely different thread once I updated my curves, but I’ll entertain you in the meantime.

Yea, sorry, not gonna accept that argument. It invalidates literally every single dyno chart and datalog for every car in the world. You 100% can compare dyno graphs on different model cars to get a quite accurate idea of the cars power and power band. And you can even more-so do that with the same model car with similar enough mods.

And this is coming from someone how, just in his previous post, said his dinan turbo doesn't affect things that much. Like I said, you make up whatever you want to win whatever argument you are trying to make

RELEASE YOUR GRAPHS. BACK YOUR CLAIMS!

[ZM2]

The stock HPFP’s on many N55’s can’t fully max out the Stg 2 E30 map. Some cars can, some cars can’t. Mine fell into the later, hence the large delta bn the Stg 2 on stock HPFP and Stg 2+ (beta) plus Dorch on my particular car—not compared to other cars!

Never did I say, if you run this map, you’ll make 50whp more than some other random M2 (which is what you said). I said for my car, I made 50whp more, which was the reality for me and likely a lot of guys running ethanol on the stock HPFP.

So then you’ll come around to asking why run the Stg 2 E30 map on a stock HPFP, vs 93? Because it’s much better on track for the air to air cooled N55. As soon as IATs go above 100F, 93 octane absolutely falls on it’s face. It’s not enough octane for our cars when pushing them and the power drop is well below running a Stg 2 E30 map on a weaker HPFP. Dig up all my track threads and you’ll find that info.

But, if you want to putt around town on 93, cool. For those of us pushing our cars, an aftermarket HPFP and the Stg 2+ E30 map turns into a much bigger power bump under extreme conditions and high RPMs than just the the 20-35whp peak gains most stock turbo guys are going to see on the dyno, which is still missing the point.

Peak whp that you’re focused on doesn’t mean jack. Guys are improving their 100-200 times by >1-sec, adding 6mph to their 1/4 trap speeds, and what will be >1sec gain on a 1:30 track bc of the total under the curve gain of these maps (again, see my previous track threads).

And, you’re still completely discounting that if you add a PS2 to the mix, you’re making 100whp more than Stg 2 93 with this map. That is a very real upgrade path for a lot of guys.

You only think about peak hp and cruising around on 93 on the stock turbo, and not the real world where some of us are pushing our cars.

[Anthony1s]

Originally Posted by ZM2

The stock HPFP’s on many N55’s can’t fully max out the Stg 2 E30 map. Some cars can, some cars can’t. Mine fell into the later, hence the large delta bn the Stg 2 on stock HPFP and Stg 2+ (beta) plus Dorch on my particular car—not compared to other cars!

Never did I say, if you run this map, you’ll make 50whp more than some other random M2 (which is what you said). I said for my car, I made 50whp more, which was the reality for me and likely a lot of guys running ethanol on the stock HPFP.

So then you’ll come around to asking why run the Stg 2 E30 map on a stock HPFP, vs 93? Because it’s much better on track for the air to air cooled N55. As soon as IATs go above 100F, 93 octane absolutely falls on it’s face. It’s not enough octane for our cars when pushing them and the power drop is well below running a Stg 2 E30 map on a weaker HPFP. Dig up all my track threads and you’ll find that info.

But, if you want to putt around town on 93, cool. For those of us pushing our cars, an aftermarket HPFP and the Stg 2+ E30 map turns into a much bigger power bump under extreme conditions and high RPMs than just the the 20-35whp peak gains most stock turbo guys are going to see on the dyno, which is still missing the point.

Peak whp that you’re focused on doesn’t mean jack. Guys are improving their 100-200 times by >1-sec, adding 6mph to their 1/4 trap speeds, and what will be >1sec gain on a 1:30 track bc of the total under the curve gain of these maps (again, see my previous track threads).

And, you’re still completely discounting that if you add a PS2 to the mix, you’re making 100whp more than Stg 2 93 with this map. That is a very real upgrade path for a lot of guys.

You only think about peak hp and cruising around on 93 on the stock turbo, and not the real world where some of us are pushing our cars.

You've made these claims multiple times. Stop gaslighting me with stuff I never said. Conversation has also been about BM3 Stg2 93, vs Stg2 e30, vs Stg2+. Not some random M2 tune.

I disagree with your incredulous claims, (which you claim to have data that proves you're correct yet refuse to release it).

[ZM2]

Originally Posted by Anthony1s

You've made these claims multiple times. Stop gaslighting me with stuff I never said. Conversation has also been about BM3 Stg2 93, vs Stg2 e30, vs Stg2+. Not some random M2 tune.

I disagree with your incredulous claims, (which you claim to have data that proves you're correct yet refuse to release it).

Already been over this, you didn’t read your own post correctly. You said 420-430hp, likely less than 420. I said I already had curves over that, and it doesn’t help that you don’t distinguish bn hp vs whp and I do.

[Daleb]

Originally Posted by Anthony1s

Not once have a tried to tear apart new maps or developers. I said that ZM2's datalogs do not match the HP gains he claims to make. Which is true. I've also said that the cost and hassle to run ethanol mixes isn't worth it for the HP gains.

Can you elaborate on how you are determining power gains through logs? As I said before I’m genuinely interested in how to do this and you seem to be the only one that can.

[Anthony1s]

Originally Posted by Daleb

Can you elaborate on how you are determining power gains through logs? As I said before I’m genuinely interested in how to do this and you seem to be the only one that can.

Made an entire post about it in this thread. Happy to answer questions, or even be told how I can't estimate power that way, but not gonna type everything out again.

[Anthony1s]

Originally Posted by ZM2

Already been over this, you didn’t read your own post correctly. You said 420-430hp, likely less than 420. I said I already had curves over that, and it doesn’t help that you don’t distinguish bn hp vs whp and I do.

No, you are gaslighting me. Read the entire conversation before that. It is of you claiming to make 50-75hp more than Stg2 93. Your comment isn't in reference to 420hp. 420hp is not the context of the conversation. The entire conversation after that as well as your previous comment just now says the same thing. Context matters. Why twist everything around?

I explained my position and how I'm coming to those conclusions very clearly. Instead of telling me where I'm wrong, you insult me. 100% on you. Forum rules do not give you permission to speak like that. There is no annotation that details justifications for it.

And no, you aren't stating reality, you are gaslighting. Literally everything you say you taken out of context and pretend actual conversations never happened, and twist around all of the screenshots I show that prove otherwise.

You can't accuse me of not providing data of your personal car. That's an unreasonable request. However, you claim to have on hand dyno graphs to prove your car is making over 500hp on the Stg2+ tune. Perfectly reasonable for me to ask you to back up those claims with the dyno data you claim to already have.

[ZM2]

“It is of you claiming to make 50-75hp more than Stg2 93.” I never said this, you said I said this.

“You claim to have on hand dyno graphs to prove your car is making over 500hp on the Stg2+ tune.” Never said this either. You’re confusing yourself with your own numbers and not distinguishing bn hp & whp in your own posts.

[Anthony1s]

Originally Posted by ZM2

“It is of you claiming to make 50-75hp more than Stg2 93.” I never said this, you said I said this.

“You claim to have on hand dyno graphs to prove your car is making over 500hp on the Stg2+ tune.” Never said this either. You’re confusing yourself with your own numbers and not distinguishing bn hp & whp in your own posts.

Like I said, you keep gaslighting. I've posted the screenshots and anyone is free to go back in your post history. Two threads. This one and the 91oct one.

You guys are also arguing with how I'm reading datalogs because I said your datalogs do not show you make 50-75hp more than 93Oct tune and over 500hp. Why would you argue that I'm not reading the datalogs correctly to make that claim, if you didn't believe your car was making those numbers??

If you can agree to stop saying your car makes 50-75hp more than the 93oct tune and over 500hp on the Stg2+ tune, then we can drop all of this.

[ZM2]

You still haven’t shown where I said this: “If you can agree to stop saying your car makes 50-75hp more than the 93oct tune.”

That’s bc I never said it. The mistake you made is assuming my car made more power on the Stg 2 E30 map than the Stg 2 93 map, bc you believe you can compare different cars and different dynos across the internet. Your credibility dropped significantly at that point.

And then you can’t even share with us your magical log reading hp calculator. Cred down a couple more notches...

And then then you’re still confusing yourself between hp and whp numbers in your own posts, when I stated whp and engine hp in mine. ~425whp is ~500 engine hp (which I’m above on the beta map) and I distinguished that difference in my posts.

[Anthony1s]

Originally Posted by ZM2

You still haven’t shown where I said this: “If you can agree to stop saying your car makes 50-75hp more than the 93oct tune.”

That’s bc I never said it. The mistake you made is assuming my car made more power on the Stg 2 E30 map than the Stg 2 93 map, bc you believe you can compare different cars and different dynos across the internet. Your credibility dropped significantly at that point.

And then you can’t even share with us your magical log reading hp calculator. Cred down a couple more notches...

And then then you’re still confusing yourself between hp and whp numbers in your own posts, when I stated whp and engine hp in mine. ~425whp is ~500 engine hp (which I’m above on the beta map) and I distinguished that difference in my posts.

I'm not going in circles with you anymore in all of this. You literally made the damn claim just above this post. Like I said, if you stop making those false claims, everything is good. Or you can release your dyno charts backing your claims, everything is good then too.

[Daleb]

Originally Posted by Anthony1s

Made an entire post about it in this thread. Happy to answer questions, or even be told how I can't estimate power that way, but not gonna type everything out again.

Could you quote your original post?