Randy:

After five minutes of squinting, It looks in the range of 20 or so.........regardless of other people's supposed agendas, even a 15 ft-lb. increase would raise my eyebrows.

Were there multiple pulls done? If so, did they also show sizeable gains between 2500 and 2800 rpms?

 

Before a war of words is started...may I ask this please.

Can the sheet be recreated using say Red/Blue for the Super AGS run and 2 contrasting colors to the Red/Blue for the stock run.

I think with both runs being the same colors there is a bit of confusion as to how all this is to be read.

I drew 2 lines on the existing graph above, A and B

What is being compared. Is A the delta or is B the delta.

 

Seriously? A is the torque delta B is stock HP and torque. Look at the graph, there's a key.

 

Yes, seriously..I'm old and this is small stuff to see. The lack of contrast between the lines exp in the 5-6k RPM range confuses me. I'd imagine others are having similar issues seeing the differences with the way the data is provided.

No conspiracy here...just trying to make it an easier to read tool for all.

 

delete

 

You may want to check that again. I see a gain of about 25 ft/lbs at both 2700 and 2800.

 

Thanks e30r56, I did notice a big decrease in low end torque. That was the only thing I didnt like. so I think their results may be real???

 

my question about the graph is up top about where tq and hp cross. it's hard to tell which line is which after that (before below after or after below before)

 

delete

 

I agree with you . Was not our choice .

Randy
M7 Tuning

 

Torque is the top 2 curves hp is the bottom 2. Look at the key.

 

yeah, we got that. that's not what I'm talking about. red touches red and blue touches blue (or maybe crosses it). Gnatster asked for a new graph showing four color resolution, not two colors as shown. As Randy said, not possible.

 

cartar was referring to the fact that Randy was accidently reading the bottom curves as the tq curves rather than the top curves.

I agree though....using the same colors makes it a bit hard to read when they overlap. The dyno guy should probably rethink that

 

ahh! time for bed for me apparently. us old farts turn into pumpkins at midnight

 

Randy:

It's more in the range of 25. At roughly 2700 rpm, I'm getting about 165 stock and 190 modified.

Again, not to be a broken record, but it would help to see the second and third pulls to see if this is a trend or an anomaly.

 

It is in the 25 range (a little more it seems) at 2800....I threw it into a graphics program and did the measurements to just check it out.

 

You are correct. I am so used to seeing my low torgue figures I thought the higher of the two were HP. Good pickup. I will remove those posts .So now we are back to the 25 ft lb gain at 2800. Well we all know dynos can never lie so it has to be true.

Randy
M7 Tuning

 

Dyno's don't lie when the testing conditions are the same. It's not far fetched to see 25 lb-ft from a tune, it's pretty far fetched to see it from an intake. As I said, you could run no intake and you're still not going to see those kind of numbers. Try the runs again with overboost on in the baseline.

Most of the benefits of having a free flowing intake are at high RPM's where the additional airflow actually matters. The car isn't even sucking enough air in at 2800 RPM's to see those kinds of gains. Interestingly enough, where you SHOULD be seeing gains (High RPM's, where the engine is ingesting exponentially more air as the RPM's rise) the stock intake actually seems to be outperforming your unit.

 

Reading is really hard

 

I read it just fine. There are 4 possibilities here:

1) They're Lying... or at best using deceptive marketing to sell their products

2) The Dyno was run wrong, why they didn't do more than one run I can't say...

3) The car is a statistical anomaly (rather like the RMW cars that gain 50 whp from a tune, or 2-3 whp)

4) BMW/Peugeot completely dropped the ball with the R56 and left 25+ lb-ft of torque off the table because they didn't want to make the air filter slightly larger (That sounds much more plausible).

If M7 figured out some insane backdoor into the R56 via sticking an air filter on the car, I think it deserves more explanation (If they wish to be taken seriously) than just "Woo, here's our graph" at 1997 CRT screen resolution with every plot line the same color...

Every time I do something to MY car that I pay for I'm shilling (Because I found a vendor that sells parts that actually work, I track my car, I know they work!).

Every time I ask questions about radical claims of power from seemingly insignificant parts (Plasma booster? Throttle Body? Air filters? Spark plug wires?) I'm stirring up trouble. God forbid I don't believe everything every vendor says after spending close to 8k with installation at various vendors and "Tuners" and making less than 190 whp.

I've given up trying to post about things anymore, people can spend their money on whatever they want. Maybe after wasting as much as I did on things that don't do anything they'll start reading old posts...

 

Only one of those even has to do with the overboost that you were claiming was on....and I know Nardo, he has zero reason to lie about this and lying isn't in his personality at all. And yet....you just go ahead and tell them to turn it on this time as if it were proven fact that they hadn't turned it on the first time......I'd expect more from the BS police.

I don't believe the huge dyno numbers either.....but I'm not gonna just jump to the conclusion that Nardo must be lying and start posting it here as a "fact".

What a novel idea....allowing people to make their own decisions and ask their own questions about the products that they purchase for their own car....I commend you

 

Come on now...that was on the R53. The R56 is a new beast and the old axioms may or may not hold true. I'm as skeptical as anybody here but I think it's clear something is off with the numbers without going so far at to call anybody here a liar. Time will tell if the gains M7 has shown as the 'official' numbers are accurate.

 

I took off the Super-AGS to put my Homemade CAI during this weekend (Americade Weekend here in upstate NY) and noticed that the Super-AGS was rubbing on the bottom and also had some serious heat soak. I had to let it cool for about 10 minutes to remove it (too hot to touch) outside temp was in the low 90's. Anyone that installed their Super-AGS have this problem

 

Did you notice a loss of 25 lb-ft of low end torque?

 

From the Super-AGS to my Homemade CAI I did notice some low end torque loss via my butt dyno, but the sound from the Homemade CAI was five times louder than the Super-AGS and fifty times louder than stock