[Dawgz]

Originally Posted by Schulminator

Haven't really seen anyone go this route yet? Spool looks to be the only ones offering this setup. You have any examples of this setup, as you've noted it in a few different threads.

Spool has horrible after purchase customer support.

[mike@x-ph.com]

Originally Posted by Dawgz

Spool has horrible after purchase customer support.

Im not familiar with customer support issues with Spool. We have been offering their parts for some time, and aside from the longer wait times, I have not had any problems.

[Mapper]

Originally Posted by Dawgz

Spool has horrible after purchase customer support.

Any examples? What product? When?

[Froz3n_M]

E60 your stock fuel system taps out. Your stock LPFP can handle the E85 up to 100%, your HPFP's cannot and neither can your injectors. With that said, you have guys saying go PI! But as mentioned here by some members, now youre introducing another computer not running through your DME. Best route if you want full E85 is Injector and HPFP's. I have spoken to Tuner and top shop here in SFL for the info.

[TKT2SPEED]

Originally Posted by Mapper

Because one can forgo doing any PI and separate controller and just upgrade the DI injectors and HPFPs (conveniently controlled by the ECU) as an alternate to go up in power beyond the OE configuration limits.
So yes your specific approach , youdont need to upgrade the HPFPs because YOU are adding fuel through a separate system.

I'm in for these results....I've been thinking of going upgraded hpfp and upgraded di injectors. I prefer less systems to fail and control of the fueling within the factory ecu.....Lots of company's make claims so looking to see some results before moving forward...would be sweet to be able to make 850 to 900 on high content without port

[Froz3n_M]

Originally Posted by TKT2SPEED

I'm in for these results....I've been thinking of going upgraded hpfp and upgraded di injectors. I prefer less systems to fail and control of the fueling within the factory ecu.....Lots of company's make claims so looking to see some results before moving forward...would be sweet to be able to make 850 to 900 on high content without port

You will bend the rods at over 750 ish TQ. HP is a derivative of TQ, so unless youre RPMs go higher than 8k redline with modified heads, youre blowing up your stock internals.

Longevity for these is around the 700-730 WHP/WTQ mark, anything above that youre in the upper limits and danger zones.

Now, if youve got a built engine, then youre good. But I dont see your stock turbos being effcient past 33-34 pounds, so you will need Pures/Vargas...

Oh, dont forget transmission, youll be slipping around that 750 ish WTQ mark, not immediately but youre definitely over that 30% buffer they have.

[PoweredbyDarkSide]

Originally Posted by Froz3n_M

You will bend the rods at over 750 ish TQ. HP is a derivative of TQ, so unless youre RPMs go higher than 8k redline with modified heads, youre blowing up your stock internals.

Longevity for these is around the 700-730 WHP/WTQ mark, anything above that youre in the upper limits and danger zones.

Now, if youve got a built engine, then youre good. But I dont see your stock turbos being effcient past 33-34 pounds, so you will need Pures/Vargas...

Oh, dont forget transmission, youll be slipping around that 750 ish WTQ mark, not immediately but youre definitely over that 30% buffer they have.

So people making 830-850rwhp are on borrowed time?

[Mapper]

Originally Posted by Froz3n_M

You will bend the rods at over 750 ish TQ.

Is this actually true? The odd post mentions this but never any actual shop or tear down to be heard of...
Even the 2 redbull cars with 100% stock internals with 1000hp and 900ft lbs beat on for over 2 years ... no bent rods. Shrug.

[Higgs Boson]

Originally Posted by Mapper

Is this actually true? The odd post mentions this but never any actual shop or tear down to be heard of...
Even the 2 redbull cars with 100% stock internals with 1000hp and 900ft lbs beat on for over 2 years ... no bent rods. Shrug.

Is that at the wheels? Because 900 ftlbs at crank is more like 750 at the wheels.

[ChrisM4]

Originally Posted by porchekiller

Getting my g87 next week looking into tuning it like I did my 340i, anyway what’s the stock fuel system support hp wise I’m assuming somewhere in 700-800 but can it support more?

I’ve heard the base manual G80/G82 has less headroom fueling wise than the comp…I’m not sure how accurate that is but given the G87 is rated for lower power than the base manual G80 I’d find a way to verify the fuel systems are identical or creep up on the power when you’re tuning. (and put in safeties to see where you start to see the limit fueling wise)

[Mapper]

Originally Posted by Higgs Boson

Is that at the wheels? Because 900 ftlbs at crank is more like 750 at the wheels.

Its actually more : 1285nM / 948ftlbs which would be what to the wheels? (Choose your formula). What % do you use?
A bit higher than your threshold.. but around there.
Regardless. Where are the bent rods posts?

Ref
https://www.bmw-m.com/en/topics/maga...tbrothers.html

[SwankPeRFection]

Originally Posted by ChrisM4

I’ve heard the base manual G80/G82 has less headroom fueling wise than the comp…I’m not sure how accurate that is but given the G87 is rated for lower power than the base manual G80 I’d find a way to verify the fuel systems are identical or creep up on the power when you’re tuning. (and put in safeties to see where you start to see the limit fueling wise)

Same injectors and same fuel pump to my knowledge. It’s all strictly ECU calibration differences. The engine designation code is all the same… waste of time and money for BMW to do otherwise.

[SwankPeRFection]

Originally Posted by Mapper

Its actually more : 1285nM / 948ftlbs which would be what to the wheels? (Choose your formula). What % do you use?
A bit hugher than your threshold.. but around there.
Regardless..where are the bent rods posts?

Ref
https://www.bmw-m.com/en/topics/maga...tbrothers.html

The biggest differentiator on that build is the Motec M ECU and the calibration on it. The M 140 and 150 ECUs from them are no joke and have super granular control of damn near everything.

What’s puzzling is the documented 9.1 vs 9.3 compression ratio on that engine… where the heck did they get the drop from?… I don’t think they ran a different gasket.

[TopJimmy]

Originally Posted by SwankPeRFection

The biggest differentiator on that build is the Motec M ECU and the calibration on it. The M 140 and 150 ECUs from them are no joke amazing as super granular control of damn near everything.

What’s puzzling is the documented 9.1 vs 9.3 compression ratio on that engine… where the heck did they get the drop from?… I don’t think they ran a different gasket.

The minor head work that Drift Bros did would drop compression ratio a little.

[SwankPeRFection]

Originally Posted by TopJimmy

The minor head work that Drift Bros did would drop compression ratio a little.

They only touched intake and exhaust ports. That’s outside the valves.. That doesn’t change the combustion chamber and shouldn’t touch the compression ratio. I took that into consideration.

[forcefed]

Originally Posted by SwankPeRFection

They only touched intake and exhaust ports. That’s outside the valves.. That doesn’t change the combustion chamber and shouldn’t touch the compression ratio. I took that into consideration.

Looks like headwork to me.

[Mapper]

Originally Posted by SwankPeRFection

They only touched intake and exhaust ports. That’s outside the valves.. That doesn’t change the combustion chamber and shouldn’t touch the compression ratio. I took that into consideration.

no, the head porting includes changing the geometry of the combustion chamber on the heads - this in turn changes the quench and the added volume drops the static compression.

[SwankPeRFection]

Originally Posted by forcefed

Looks like headwork to me.

That is definitely head work. It’s been a few weeks since I’ve see the video they did on this. My bad… I would have worded the damn article to include the verbiage, but that’s just me. Maybe it should have been assumed like Mapper said that with intake and exhaust porting additional head work is needed, but I’ve seen that done in the past and the head dome was never touched… maybe due to types of engines, not sure. Good info to know, so thanks Mapper.