Xede - Texas Tune Results

335i=:) · 12-03-2006, 11:58 PM

Maybe this is a silly question but I'm wondering......the reason for the lower HP numbers is simply because it an AT? But in the real world, in a straight line, the AT and MT have the same 0-60 and 1/4 mile, right?

OpenFlash · 12-04-2006, 12:32 AM

Thanks for the write-up William. And yep, the other two cars put down some impressive numbers. They baselined, stock, at 280whp/280lbft and 287whp/287lbft. On the baseline Stg 0 XEDE map, they did 330whp/360lbft and 348whp/378lbft. They were both 6 speed manuals and they were both run in 4th gear, from 2000rpm to 7000rpm. William's Steptronic'd car was run in 3rd gear and only from 4000rpm to 7000rpm as he mentioned earlier. All in all, all 3 cars did really well and it was a pleasure to meet all you guys. Thanks for making the looong drive

Dyno graphs to come soon...

William and Jay-- Check your PMs!

Cheers,
shiv

aris214 · 12-04-2006, 12:39 AM

348whp/378lbft!!!!!

arcrox · 12-04-2006, 12:41 AM

almost as much torque as an M5

335i=:) · 12-04-2006, 12:47 AM

almost as much torque as an M5

I think it's about the same torque. m5 is 400? 378 at the wheels is at least 415 torque at the crank, probably more.

aris214 · 12-04-2006, 12:53 AM

M5 has 500 hp/383 ft-lbs. at the CRANK.

This 335i has 378lbft at the WHEELS, which is 454 at the crank (20% drivetrain loss). I would love to see a video of this car vs. the M5.

PresaMat · 12-04-2006, 01:07 AM

hey all I am posting from my cell phone. it has definitely been very interesting out here. shiv really knows his stuff and the setup is Amazing. my car put down 348rwhp and 378rwtq. the car really feels completely different... kinda like going from a reserved car to an all out badass. with dtc off you easily can lose the rear in 2nd and a bit of 3rd on these crappy roads. definatly fast... I don't think any of us will be able to give accurate 0-60 times until we get beter traction (biger wheels and tires) since right now all it does is spin and fishtail.

daisy16905 · 12-04-2006, 01:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PresaMat

hey all I am posting from my cell phone. it has definitely been very interesting out here. shiv really knows his stuff and the setup is Amazing. my car put down 348rwhp and 378rwtq. the car really feels completely different... kinda like going from a reserved car to an all out badass. with dtc off you easily can lose the rear in 2nd and a bit of 3rd on these crappy roads. definatly fast... I don't think any of us will be able to give accurate 0-60 times until we get beter traction (biger wheels and tires) since right now all it does is spin and fishtail.

:rocks: Great #'s!!!!!!!!! Was this on 93 octane or higher??

doctordel · 12-04-2006, 02:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PresaMat

hey all I am posting from my cell phone. it has definitely been very interesting out here. shiv really knows his stuff and the setup is Amazing. my car put down 348rwhp and 378rwtq. the car really feels completely different... kinda like going from a reserved car to an all out badass. with dtc off you easily can lose the rear in 2nd and a bit of 3rd on these crappy roads. definatly fast... I don't think any of us will be able to give accurate 0-60 times until we get beter traction (biger wheels and tires) since right now all it does is spin and fishtail.

Hearing someone with your garage, PresaMat, call his tuned 335 "badass" is truly inspiring. GT500, Boss 429...and your BMW is "badass"? Damn. Christmas comes December 18th this year...

dmeyer · 12-04-2006, 06:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aris214

M5 has 500 hp/383 ft-lbs. at the CRANK.

This 335i has 378lbft at the WHEELS, which is 454 at the crank (20% drivetrain loss). I would love to see a video of this car vs. the M5.

Actually if you were figuring 20% loss you'd be at 473 tq crank. (378/.8)

Makes me want to see 100 octane map with exhaust

adriver · 12-04-2006, 06:13 AM

maybe im the only one, but I dont think driveline loss is the standard 20%. Id guess closer to 15% or less, because of the electric water pump.

dmeyer · 12-04-2006, 07:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by adriver

maybe im the only one, but I dont think driveline loss is the standard 20%. Id guess closer to 15% or less, because of the electric water pump.

Right...either way we are just ballparking. I had personally been figuring for 18% loss as thats what I've heard other 3 series with similar drivelines were showing. The OP was figgerin' based on 20% so thats what I did.

sdiver68 · 12-04-2006, 07:56 AM

As demanding as this forum can be, I'm surprised no one has yet demanded the engine to be removed so it can be run on a crank dyno

PresaMat · 12-04-2006, 08:00 AM

everything was done on 93oct. for anyone interested I did the drive hard have fun style breakin... which I think helped the car put down good stock numbers... so yall don't be afraid to occationally wind your cars up.

NaViT · 12-04-2006, 08:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aris214

348whp/378lbft!!!!!

lol omg thats a beast right there...

russ_777 · 12-04-2006, 09:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by adriver

maybe im the only one, but I dont think driveline loss is the standard 20%. Id guess closer to 15% or less, because of the electric water pump.

There was another thread about a month ago (I think it had to do with someone who took his car in for assessing power losss after a SW flash) in which BMW told him that the drivetrain loss for a 335 with a manual is 13% and for a step is 15%.....fyi.

Weedo · 12-04-2006, 10:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

Thanks for the write-up William. And yep, the other two cars put down some impressive numbers. They baselined, stock, at 280whp/280lbft and 287whp/287lbft. On the baseline Stg 0 XEDE map, they did 330whp/360lbft and 348whp/378lbft. They were both 6 speed manuals and they were both run in 4th gear, from 2000rpm to 7000rpm. William's Steptronic'd car was run in 3rd gear and only from 4000rpm to 7000rpm as he mentioned earlier. All in all, all 3 cars did really well and it was a pleasure to meet all you guys. Thanks for making the looong drive

Dyno graphs to come soon...

William and Jay-- Check your PMs!

Cheers,
shiv

Shiv,

I ordered the Xede from you for 91 Octane (Arizona). I do have 100 at the pump about 3 miles from my house. I'm considering having you do the 93 Octane map if it produces enough of a power difference. I don't mine tossing in a couple gallons of 100 in with my 91 for a "significant" gain. Any thoughts??

On a seperate note: did either or both of these cars (manuals) have the Dealer ECU flash done before the Xede?

PresaMat · 12-04-2006, 10:34 AM

as for the software update... my car has a late oct build date... I got it mid nov.. no cold start issues so I assume it has the update. I don't thik the update is anything to worry about

aris214 · 12-04-2006, 12:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dmeyer

Actually if you were figuring 20% loss you'd be at 473 tq crank. (378/.8)

Makes me want to see 100 octane map with exhaust

thanks for the correction, i did (378)(1.2) oops.

sflgator · 12-04-2006, 03:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PresaMat

as for the software update... my car has a late oct build date... I got it mid nov.. no cold start issues so I assume it has the update. I don't thik the update is anything to worry about

Yeah, as I recall your car and my car were on the same boat over from Germany. I took delivery of my car on 11/11/06, and I don't have any problems with start-up either. Plus, I also did a "hard" type break-in; it will be interesting to see what my AT 335i dyno's at for a baseline, and then what I get after Shiv installs the Xede on my car in 2 weeks.

Thanks to all you TX guys who got the Xede installed. The Xede is looking very, very good for our 335i's right now...very impressive, even with the stock exhaust.

vanillarice19 · 12-04-2006, 09:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PresaMat

everything was done on 93oct. for anyone interested I did the drive hard have fun style breakin... which I think helped the car put down good stock numbers... so yall don't be afraid to occationally wind your cars up.

You know, this comment plus the test car in the edmunds review below really leads me to believe that breaking the car in hard really does yield more hp. (at the expense of long term reliability???) The guys at edmunds somehow managed to Dyno the Steptronic without any issues....

http://www.edmunds.com/apps/vdpconta...9/pageNumber=1

PresaMat · 12-04-2006, 10:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vanillarice19

You know, this comment plus the test car in the edmunds review below really leads me to believe that breaking the car in hard really does yield more hp. (at the expense of long term reliability???) The guys at edmunds somehow managed to Dyno the Steptronic without any issues....

http://www.edmunds.com/apps/vdpconta...9/pageNumber=1

Actually from what I hear edmunds did have some issues keeping it in gear on the dyno... Im not sure what they did to solve it though.

Mat

12-03-2006, 11:58 PM	#23
335i=:) Second Lieutenant 27 Rep 290 Posts Drives: 335i sedan-blk/blk-Poplar Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: utah iTrader: (0)	Maybe this is a silly question but I'm wondering......the reason for the lower HP numbers is simply because it an AT? But in the real world, in a straight line, the AT and MT have the same 0-60 and 1/4 mile, right?
	Appreciate 0 Quote

12-04-2006, 12:32 AM	#24
OpenFlash 1737 Rep 17,960 Posts Drives: A Lot Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: SF Bay, CA iTrader: (0) Garage List 2018 Ducati Panigal ... [0.00] 2016 Mazda CX5 [0.00] 2017 Aprilia Tuono ... [0.00] 2019 BMW M2 Competi ... [0.00] 2015 BMW M5 Competi ... [10.00] 2016 Ducati XDiavel S [0.00] 2016 AMG GT S [0.00] 2011 Ferrari 458 It ... [0.00] 2017 Charger Hellcat [0.00] 2015 KTM Super Duke ... [0.00] 2016 KTM RC390 [0.00]	Thanks for the write-up William. And yep, the other two cars put down some impressive numbers. They baselined, stock, at 280whp/280lbft and 287whp/287lbft. On the baseline Stg 0 XEDE map, they did 330whp/360lbft and 348whp/378lbft. They were both 6 speed manuals and they were both run in 4th gear, from 2000rpm to 7000rpm. William's Steptronic'd car was run in 3rd gear and only from 4000rpm to 7000rpm as he mentioned earlier. All in all, all 3 cars did really well and it was a pleasure to meet all you guys. Thanks for making the looong drive Dyno graphs to come soon... William and Jay-- Check your PMs! Cheers, shiv
	Appreciate 0 Quote

12-04-2006, 12:39 AM	#25
aris214 Private 2 Rep 73 Posts Drives: 1993 325i Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Chicago iTrader: (0)	348whp/378lbft!!!!! __________________ 1993 325i
	Appreciate 0 Quote

12-04-2006, 12:41 AM	#26
arcrox E90post addict 17 Rep 489 Posts Drives: 2024 G20 M340i Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Scottsdale, AZ iTrader: (0) Garage List 2006 325i [0.00]	almost as much torque as an M5
	Appreciate 0 Quote

12-04-2006, 12:47 AM	#27
335i=:) Second Lieutenant 27 Rep 290 Posts Drives: 335i sedan-blk/blk-Poplar Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: utah iTrader: (0)	almost as much torque as an M5 I think it's about the same torque. m5 is 400? 378 at the wheels is at least 415 torque at the crank, probably more.
	Appreciate 0 Quote

12-04-2006, 12:53 AM	#28
aris214 Private 2 Rep 73 Posts Drives: 1993 325i Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Chicago iTrader: (0)	M5 has 500 hp/383 ft-lbs. at the CRANK. This 335i has 378lbft at the WHEELS, which is 454 at the crank (20% drivetrain loss). I would love to see a video of this car vs. the M5. __________________ 1993 325i
	Appreciate 0 Quote

12-04-2006, 01:07 AM	#29
PresaMat Major 35 Rep 1,169 Posts Drives: 67 GT500,69 Boss 429, 335i Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Houston,TX iTrader: (0) Garage List 1967 Shelby Mustang ... [0.00]	hey all I am posting from my cell phone. it has definitely been very interesting out here. shiv really knows his stuff and the setup is Amazing. my car put down 348rwhp and 378rwtq. the car really feels completely different... kinda like going from a reserved car to an all out badass. with dtc off you easily can lose the rear in 2nd and a bit of 3rd on these crappy roads. definatly fast... I don't think any of us will be able to give accurate 0-60 times until we get beter traction (biger wheels and tires) since right now all it does is spin and fishtail.
	Appreciate 0 Quote

12-04-2006, 06:13 AM	#33
adriver Enlisted Member 2 Rep 43 Posts Drives: soon to be Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: soon to be back iTrader: (0)	maybe im the only one, but I dont think driveline loss is the standard 20%. Id guess closer to 15% or less, because of the electric water pump.
	Appreciate 0 Quote

12-04-2006, 07:56 AM	#35
sdiver68 Expert Road Racer 59 Rep 1,329 Posts Drives: 07 335i e90, 09 335i e93 Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: St. Louis, MO iTrader: (3)	As demanding as this forum can be, I'm surprised no one has yet demanded the engine to be removed so it can be run on a crank dyno
	Appreciate 0 Quote

12-04-2006, 08:00 AM	#36
PresaMat Major 35 Rep 1,169 Posts Drives: 67 GT500,69 Boss 429, 335i Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Houston,TX iTrader: (0) Garage List 1967 Shelby Mustang ... [0.00]	everything was done on 93oct. for anyone interested I did the drive hard have fun style breakin... which I think helped the car put down good stock numbers... so yall don't be afraid to occationally wind your cars up.
	Appreciate 0 Quote

12-04-2006, 10:34 AM	#40
PresaMat Major 35 Rep 1,169 Posts Drives: 67 GT500,69 Boss 429, 335i Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Houston,TX iTrader: (0) Garage List 1967 Shelby Mustang ... [0.00]	as for the software update... my car has a late oct build date... I got it mid nov.. no cold start issues so I assume it has the update. I don't thik the update is anything to worry about
	Appreciate 0 Quote