Supercharger

[pokeybritches]

I just found out my section 1 won't ship out until after I'm supposed to get the car back due to some delays on Supersprint's end. I can do a dyno of the car otherwise stock, and then again with the stepped headers / HJS cats once I figure out how I'll go about installing them. There are too many variables for me to assume everything will mate up, so I need a shop or person available just in case.

I purposely did not do a before dyno, because the car had the AA tune, which would distort the power delta. I have a friend that just purchased an M coupe, so we can do same dyno / same day but with a totally stock car for anyone interested. I don't think that going from an AA-tuned car to the G-Power car with catted headers will do the kit justice.

[mfanatic325]

Yeah that sounds awesome!

For me, I'm going to go back to where I did my baseline dynos, and I'll probably just lay the baseline graphs over the new SC'd graphs for comparisons sake. And I'll definitely try and get AFR readings as well this time around.

[Beedub]

Another reason I like the ess kit over the VF is the s/c is ess use the v3si trim unit flowing nearly t trim levels of air... VF use the sci trim unit..... Do a quick check of the vortech site to get the differences in specs.... the ess setup is moving more air with lower boost.... CFM figures dont lie.....

Either way ..... Both a great kits but for me in honesty, however Eas's recent actions said 1 millions words..... These guys are completely impartial and sell both kits........ I even asked the question and again the response was interesting....... checkout post 14/15

http://www.zpost.com/forums/showthread.php?t=818070

For me??? Ess and the a2a setup simply work, the simpler the better .... All day track days 15 times now and my 16 this Saturday :-)

At the end of the end of the day.... can you go wrong? not really i guess??

i like the a2w setups that have the giant tanks so you can put ice in them!

[mfanatic325]

I think EAS had problems with VF's tune originally; which has since been revised as far as I know. I've been in contact with Andrew in regards to this, as well as his on-track temps, etc. so hopefully everything will be fine for me

[gmd2003]

Originally Posted by seank

So, if you we're going to put a super charger on the z4m, which one would you install and why?

In order of importance:

-reliability, no over heating issues

-power

Thanks for your thoughts.

I would definitely go with ESS, they make an absolutely trackable kit. I have 7,000 HARD track miles in advanced open passing groups on R comps on a Vt-1 kit. Only modification I made was adding a larger oil cooler to reduce temps from 260's peak after a 25 min session to 230's on 90 degree SC days. This kit has been amazingly bullet proof, especially considering its a non intercooled kit for hard track use. I have taken it to 8100 rpm 100's of times on track.There is a big difference in going to the track and driving hard at the track and this can handle the later.I am upgrading to the 525 kit soon bc I want more consistent power during sessions on hot days, and who doesn't want more power! I haven't dyno'd my kit but I am hitting 148 mph GPS on the front straight at Roebling road, which is = to well driven GT3 Rs's at this track. So it has certainly made good power for a 5psi non intercooled kit . Sean I think you would be very happy with the ESS kit for your track use, which I know from your posts is your priority.
Cheers!
George

[seank]

Thanks for the thoughts. I will talk to my mechanic to see his thoughts and will keep you all updated.

[DRedman45]

As long as you upgrade your oil cooler, you shouldn't have issues with overheating....ess happens to include one with their kit, because the intercooler blocks the factory location

All of the supercharger available for our cars will do an adequate job cooling iat's, exception being the vt1 with no after/intercooler

[mfanatic325]

Originally Posted by DRedman45

As long as you upgrade your oil cooler, you shouldn't have issues with overheating....ess happens to include one with their kit, because the intercooler blocks the factory location

All of the supercharger available for our cars will do an adequate job cooling iat's, exception being the vt1 with no after/intercooler

Well yes, that's the theory. But ultimately it comes down to efficiency and actual real-world experience. Hence why we have to wait until further info becomes available from VF and G-Power supercharger owners

Otherwise as of right now, ESS seems to be the more reliable option available.

[GuidoK]

Originally Posted by Beedub

Do a quick check of the vortech site to get the differences in specs.... the ess setup is moving more air with lower boost....

euh wait... what?
You know that that's not important at all do you?
You match the supercharger to the needs of the engine, where you match it's efficiency with the flow& pressure needs of the engine through the revrange (for both engine and compressor).
Moving a lot of air with little boost at low efficiency still means low efficiency.
I'm not saying the sci is a better trim (because it probably isn't for the s54 but both have their strong points, but that would be a nice discussion between VF and ESS ), but I think there are different parameters to consider. The ability to move air you don't need has no plus side.

[seank]

So, with the knowledge here, other sites, and my mechanic, there seems to be a lot of similarities. The only thing in question that I can't figure out are the tunes and if any issues have been worked with VF tunes?

Does anyone have a concrete answer or was the whole thing a rumor?

[seank]

Originally Posted by GuidoK

euh wait... what?
You know that that's not important at all do you?
You match the supercharger to the needs of the engine, where you match it's efficiency with the flow& pressure needs of the engine through the revrange (for both engine and compressor).
Moving a lot of air with little boost at low efficiency still means low efficiency.
I'm not saying the sci is a better trim (because it probably isn't for the s54 but both have their strong points, but that would be a nice discussion between VF and ESS ), but I think there are different parameters to consider. The ability to move air you don't need has no plus side.

I understand your point, especially if you are referring to potential, but you can always squeeze in a little more air............can't you?

[pokeybritches]

My tear down commenced today. Really looking forward to see what G-Power can do

On a side note, my VF Z4 finally got its Supersprint race exhaust installed. It's pretty cool to hear the hiss of boost out of the back of the car too. I'll post videos soon.

[Beedub]

Originally Posted by GuidoK

euh wait... what?
You know that that's not important at all do you?
You match the supercharger to the needs of the engine, where you match it's efficiency with the flow& pressure needs of the engine through the revrange (for both engine and compressor).
Moving a lot of air with little boost at low efficiency still means low efficiency.
I'm not saying the sci is a better trim (because it probably isn't for the s54 but both have their strong points, but that would be a nice discussion between VF and ESS ), but I think there are different parameters to consider. The ability to move air you don't need has no plus side.

We'll agree to disagree :-)

if you can get one blower moving more air at a given psi surely it's a good thing, I.e lower boost levels, offering similar power outputs, IMO on a car that was never meant to be boosted... for me??? That's a parameter to consider.

[mfanatic325]

Originally Posted by seank

So, with the knowledge here, other sites, and my mechanic, there seems to be a lot of similarities. The only thing in question that I can't figure out are the tunes and if any issues have been worked with VF tunes?

Does anyone have a concrete answer or was the whole thing a rumor?

According to Andrew (Rated M Roadster), the lean issues were already fixed by VF. He found the issue during a dyno session, at high RPM. So he stopped the dyno slightly short of redline when he saw leaner conditions.

[Beedub]

fwiw i think g-powers option is right up their imo.... i like thats its the least popular of the kits and imo adds something id really like more of in my ///M, Midrange Tq!!

if i was to do this again id really consider the g-power option over ALL of them!!

[GuidoK]

Originally Posted by seank

I understand your point, especially if you are referring to potential, but you can always squeeze in a little more air............can't you?

No you cant. the engine has a fixed displacement. If you squeeze in more air, the pressure rises, and then it's not 'a lot of air at low pressure' anymore.
A lot of air@low pressure means that it is more suitable for bigger engine's.
It is the actual numbers that make it work; not the 'more is better' philosophy.
So you need a certain amount of air, at a certain rpm. And that at the highest possible efficiency, but also at the most consistent revrange. (so there is no 'perfect compressor', some are more consistent in a revrange (resulting in more torque over a different or longer powerband), and some have a higher efficiency, but over a smaller powerband (resulting in more peak performance) etc etc.
But it is a fact that all the air you're moving and is too much for the engine (regardless WOT or less throttle) is a loss, and a parasidic drag and is dumped/vented in case of a centrifugal setup. (volumetric compressors do not have this issue, but they have their own plusses and minusses).

In case you go for a g-power setup: be shure you buy/install through a reseller which has great service. Not that I'm saying anything goes wrong but where I live the smaller sets for m54 engines were populair but I have seen some of them go bad (compressor failure). Service has been great (free rebuilds afaik), and of course a s54 set uses an entirely different unit, but these ASA units are I think not serviced by regular/general servicing stations.
And of course G-power is (at least in europe/germany) a highly succesful bmw tuner.
What I mean is buy through an official US reseller and not some out of warranty kit off ebay you stumble upon.
With all these sets (ess-VF-Gpower etc): support is everything, because you will call them on some item (or at least your mechanic probably will if you don't install it yourself).

[Geauxkart]

I am still waiting for a new dyno / AFR chart on rated M's setup. I think I'd go VF if I could see that they really did get the bugs out of the tuning.
Not to mention the one that went for sale recently had the same upper RPM lean condition on his dyno sheet if I recall correctly.

[tikamak]

Originally Posted by GuidoK

No you cant. the engine has a fixed displacement. If you squeeze in more air, the pressure rises, and then it's not 'a lot of air at low pressure' anymore.
A lot of air@low pressure means that it is more suitable for bigger engine's.
It is the actual numbers that make it work; not the 'more is better' philosophy.
So you need a certain amount of air, at a certain rpm. And that at the highest possible efficiency, but also at the most consistent revrange. (so there is no 'perfect compressor', some are more consistent in a revrange (resulting in more torque over a different or longer powerband), and some have a higher efficiency, but over a smaller powerband (resulting in more peak performance) etc etc.
But it is a fact that all the air you're moving and is too much for the engine (regardless WOT or less throttle) is a loss, and a parasidic drag and is dumped/vented in case of a centrifugal setup. (volumetric compressors do not have this issue, but they have their own plusses and minusses).

In case you go for a g-power setup: be shure you buy/install through a reseller which has great service. Not that I'm saying anything goes wrong but where I live the smaller sets for m54 engines were populair but I have seen some of them go bad (compressor failure). Service has been great (free rebuilds afaik), and of course a s54 set uses an entirely different unit, but these ASA units are I think not serviced by regular/general servicing stations.
And of course G-power is (at least in europe/germany) a highly succesful bmw tuner.
What I mean is buy through an official US reseller and not some out of warranty kit off ebay you stumble upon.
With all these sets (ess-VF-Gpower etc): support is everything, because you will call them on some item (or at least your mechanic probably will if you don't install it yourself).

Once you push a lot of air at low pressure in a small displacement, this will result in higher pressure due to the volume of air being compressed, am i missing something?

[GuidoK]

You're missing something to a certain degree : a centrifugal compressor is not lineair. The ability to move a lot of air does not mean it can build pressure and vica versa.
You cannot say that if a centrifugal compressor can compress 1m³/s of air at 1psi above atm it can also compress ½m³/s of air at 2psi above atm (double the pressure at half the volume), and certainly not with the same efficiency. Therefor you (or a tuner) must match the compressor to the enigne's specific needs. So that means some compressors perform better for a smaller engine and others for a larger, some better at low boost, some at high, some are more lineair at a certain rev range etc. That is what a good compressor map can tell you. Some even have Isotherms (graphical info on what the compressed air temperature will be at certain flow/pressure/rev/etc range) I don't know if the vortech ones have that. So there are a lot of parameters to be considerd what a certain compressor makes a good match for a certain engine in a certain application.
And so some favour a different aspect than others, so it can even be a matter of taste (you want torque? you want peak performance? you want a bit of both but neither at maximum?).
The same goes for turbochargers. All the 'twinscroll' technology or variable geometry turbo's are not at all beneficial for the efficiency. If you look at stationary engines (like on ships etc) turbo's are way more efficient. But they only have to work at a steady rpm. Useless in a car though.

[mfanatic325]

Originally Posted by Geauxkart

I am still waiting for a new dyno / AFR chart on rated M's setup. I think I'd go VF if I could see that they really did get the bugs out of the tuning.
Not to mention the one that went for sale recently had the same upper RPM lean condition on his dyno sheet if I recall correctly.

Andrew said that after VF provided a new tune, he watched the AFRs as he was driving/testing out the car. From that, he knew the probłem was fixed. However, I understand the need for "proof"
I'm interested as well. I figure he just hasn't had time to go back for another dyno.

[GuidoK]

Doesn't VF have a z4m testcar for their kits or something like that?
I have no idea how those companies work and how they develop a kit for a new car but I don't know if I'd like to be a guinea pig with my own car.
On the other hand: you're always a guinea pig to some degree if you go for FI compared to stock
I have one of the most comprehensively tested kits and even that has it's own little quirks from time to time. It's never as reliable and user friendly as stock.

[Rated M Roadster]

Originally Posted by GuidoK

Doesn't VF have a z4m testcar for their kits or something like that?
I have no idea how those companies work and how they develop a kit for a new car but I don't know if I'd like to be a guinea pig with my own car.
On the other hand: you're always a guinea pig to some degree if you go for FI compared to stock
I have one of the most comprehensively tested kits and even that has it's own little quirks from time to time. It's never as reliable and user friendly as stock.

The test car was EAS's coupe; it started with the non intercooled kit and eventually received the 570 (I think they also have a test car in Europe, but I don't know much about that). The issue with my car being a second test car, is mine is unique in that I'm running at high altitude. My fuel adaptions are much different than most people who will be running the kit (the ECU pulls fuel to compensate for the altitude). At the same time though, during datalogging, I was seeing boost pressures way above what the kit was rated for (due to low ambient temps). I saw this during a 4th gear run at low temps:


gauge1 by M detaR, on Flickr

The AFR graphs I posted a long time ago in my thread reflected these conditions.

I have 3300 miles on my kit now and as my schedule clears up, I'll try to get more data for you guys.