Pros: Measurable performance improvement and great sound
Cons: I can’t think of any
Cost: $225 plus shipping from East Coast Intake Systems

I monitor the M3 bulletin boards regularly for news and opinions on performance modifications which might apply to my M Roadster, and there I saw quite a bit of favorable comment on the ECIS cold air intake system. ECIS stands for East Coast Intake Systems, and their product is called the Evolution Air Intake System. Common unshielded open air intakes seek to increase air flow by providing a larger air filter, but often produce less power than the factory air box because of the twin problems of turbulent fan wash and underhood heat. ECIS insures that the larger filter receives only cool, non-turbulent air by constructing a shield which completely isolates the filter from the engine compartment, receiving air from the same source as the factory filter box. They offer both their complete Evolution Air Intake System; consisting of their custom heat shield, mandrel bent inlet tube, 6″ K&N cone filter, brackets, silicone connection hose, clamps and detailed instructions for $225; or the heat shield alone for $70. The heat shield can be used with a number of aftermarket open filter systems available from BMP Design, Bavarian Autosport, and Turner Motorsport, as well as other aftermarket suppliers.

At the time I first read about ECIS they offered only systems for the M3, but I e-mailed them and quickly received a return message from Sean Cain at ECIS informing me that the M Roadster system was in the design stage and due out soon. Then, 45 days later, I got another message from Kenny Bernatsky of ECIS to let me know that the M Roadster system was now complete, with details available on the ECIS web page. Their web page provides just about all the info you need; photos, dyno runs, testimonials, an FAQ, and ordering information. The web page does not support on-line product ordering, but they have a handy order form which you can fill out and print, then mail with your check. I sent my order in that day and several days later received an e-mail from Kenny citing a delivery date and Airborne Express tracking number. My shipment arrived as promised, neatly packed. My relations with ECIS couldn’t have been better. Sean and Kenny answer inquiries promptly and keep in touch, qualities often absent with other web merchants. As I was writing this, I got a Christmas card from them. How’s that for customer service?

When I unpacked my carton from ECIS, I found the ECIS custom shield, the K&N filter, still packed in its original box, the various bits and pieces to attach the filter to the air flow meter, and a colorfully illustrated set of installation instructions. I was impressed to find that the silicone connection hose was in place on the inlet tube, held on by the loosely tightened hose clamps. No possibility that this amateur mechanic won’t know where the parts fit. More impressive still, a bolt which is required to attach the inlet tube support to a bracket on the inner fender of the car was carefully taped to the end of the support. For sure, this bolt isn’t going to be thrown out in the trash! The shield itself is a really neat piece. Constructed from lightweight, slightly flexible material which I believe is sheet fiberglass. The fiberglass was obviously cut from a single sheet, then folded and riveted into its final shape. The outside is finished with insulation which matches the car’s underhood finish, and the inside is sprayed with undercoating. The top edge of the shield is weather stripped to seal against the underside of the closed hood, fully enclosing the filter. Three holes are provided in the shield at the points where the shield mates to the air flow meter, the air inlet flange, and the car’s rubber air box support grommet. No holes need be drilled in the car in order to install the ECIS system. I had expected to provide a step-by-step installation guide, but ECIS’s instruction sheet is so well presented, and the installation so easy that I’m going to dive right into my driving impressions and performance testing.

On my first drive, my admittedly inexperienced butt dyno couldn’t detect any obvious performance improvement, but the engine seems to run smoother and, though not loud, the intake makes a low, pleasant moan which sure makes the car sound more powerful. My wife—she of the exquisitely sensitive hearing—approved of the new sound. More driving convinced me that, though not dramatic, the car did accelerate more forcefully, especially as it approached redline. I decided then to go back and perform before and after objective tests to validate the performance improvement my butt told me I had achieved.

The almost trivial installation procedure made returning the stock air box to the car a matter of, perhaps, ten minutes. Not wanting to torture the clutch, skin the rear tires, or invite the unwanted attention of the sheriff, standing start tests wouldn’t do. I decided to perform acceleration tests in second gear, timing from 1000 rpm to 6500 rpm. This test had the advantage of testing almost the entire rpm range, without having to exceed the speed limit. I drove the car hard for about 100 miles to insure that the ECU had readapted to the stock air box, then took the car out to a straight, flat section of country road nearby. I let the car settle at 1000 rpm in second, then started my watch as I floorboarded the accelerator, stopping my watch as the tach reached 6500 rpm. I timed eight runs, four in each direction, discarded the fastest and slowest times, then averaged the remaining six times. My average time for this series of tests was 5.71 seconds. I then reinstalled the ECIS intake, another ten minute job, and again drove the car hard for 100 miles to readapt the ECU. Another trip to the country road, using the same timing techniques as before, yielded an average time of 5.55 seconds, an improvement of .16 seconds.

So is the ECIS Evolution Air Intake System a worthwhile performance modification? For my money, the sound alone is worth the price of admission. Dealing with Sean and Kenny made the purchase really pleasant and I’m particularly impressed with the clarity of the instructions they provide. The system itself is well designed, with high quality construction. That it provably provides a small but measurable performance improvement is icing on a very large cake.

 
Pros: Improve sound and performance, carbon fiber components and shield to hinder recirculating hot air intake
Cons: Vague installation instructions, intake system enclosed in engine compartment
Cost: $348

Despite the discontinued sales of the 1.9 Z3 in the US, there are many 1.9 owners who want added performance and most of all who still love their cars. With this in mind, there has been a slow start of third party manufacturers that offer upgrades and modification(s) to these loved but not forgotten Z3s.

Presently, there are a few manufacturers who offer an ‘air-intake’ solution to the 1.9 Z3. According to a previous article on the MZ3.NET, the K&N filter charger has some inconsistent performance results. THe K&N filter charger successfully addressed the restrictions in the stock intake allowing more volume of air to enter the engine. However the flaw with the K&N filer charger system was that the source of intake air was the (hot) air trapped under the hood of the Z3. While the intake was allowing more air volume to enter the 1.9 engine, the actual air mass varied greatly depending on the air temperature under the hood. Because of this flaw it was actually possible to loose engine power. (In case you haven’t caught on, cold air has more mass than hot air). Because of this, many Z3′ers (especially those living in hotter climates) avoid in installing such a design in their vehicles.

Since I received the DINAN UPGRADE for my 7/97 build 1.9, there has been no answer as of yet for the release of the DINAN COLD AIR INTAKE SYSTEM for the 1.9 since its debut for the 6 cylinder Z3s. Because of this I wanted to see if there are any third party companies that offer such a system for the 1.9 besides the K&N filter charger. I came across a company called “ROAR” (www.roarfilter.com) that offers such a system for most BMWs including the 1.9 Z3. Though fairly new to the name I decided to call and investigate what this company offers and stands for: I called the company and left a voice mail message with them explaining my interest in their air-intake system for my 1.9 Z3. Two days later I received a call back and spoke to a very nice and enthusiastic sales manager of Roar named Scott. He was very friendly and excited to explain to me how their air-intake system functioned and how it was designed. He welcomed the challenge of putting the ROAR air-intake system against any other system designed for the BMW Z3.

The ROAR intake system is similar to the K&N filter charger system in that it addresses the air flow restriction of stock BMW airbox. Where the ROAR system differs is that it also addresses the problem of air intake temperature, by providing a carbon fiber shield that helps reduce the engine’s intake of hot air from inside the engine compartment. The construction of the Roar air intake system is mostly comprised of carbon fiber due to its low relative heat absorbence.

Review: After installing the Roar “Ram-Air” Intake System to the DINAN equipped 1997 1.9 we put it up against a 1998 1.9 which only consisted of an exhaust upgrade (Supersprint). Both Z3s being tested are manual and had no passengers in the vehicle. The test consisted of both 1.9s cruising head-to-head at 50mph in 5th gear. Once each front nose were equal we then cued each other to accelerate without downshifting. Both of the 1.9s remained head-to-head up until we hit 60 mph (3600 rpm) and the 1997 DINAN equipped with Roar system pulled out ahead of the 1998 Supersprint exhaust 1.9 by almost half a car length. This concluded that the ROAR system with the DINAN upgrade improves performance at higher RPM.

Other test(s) included 0-60mph runs recorded before and after the installation of the ROAR system. With a passenger operating the stopwatch, four runs were record before the installation and four runs after the installation. The results showed that after installing the ROAR system with the DINAN upgrade, the 0-60mph timing was reduced almost 3/8 of a second.

Note: testing in this manner resulted in extra weight due to the timekeeper sitting in the passenger seat. It should also be noted that potential human error is possible, due to the time it takes a human hand to start and stop the stopwatch.

Stock 1.9Roar Intake Installed

6 month update

With the Roar Ram Air System installed and after few thousand miles later, I have concluded that I am quite happy with my investment. The performance gain is a plus as well as the sound. The sound will be noticed when the engine is at load as opposed to a constant, maybe annoying, low resonance sound.

The journey of the Roar installation

After leaving several messages with Scott at Roar and no return calls, I received the package on the very day that was discussed during the sales transaction. With the help of Carter Lee (CTG) and Fred Byrom (Teachum) we immediately looked at the contents within the package and read the instructions. Let me first tell you that the instructions were vague and offered no pictures of installation. This is not a plug-n-play upgrade for those who are not ‘handy’.

Fortunately, with the help of Carter and Fred, the three of us made the installation procedures a lot easier. The first step is to remove the stock air box: unlatch four(4) clips which removes the cover and after doing so the box itself is only held down by two(2) 10mm bolts. For more detailed instructions on the removal of the stock BMW airbox, please see this article on MZ3.Net.

Tools Needed:

* 10mm socket and wrench

* 10mm bolt

* 2.5 in drill bit and drill

After complete removal of the stock air box:

* The next step is to mount the mounting bracket (a) to one of the existing posts where that previously held the stock air box. You can use either the same bolt that held the stock airbox in place or use another one.

* Take one of the filter(s) provided and spray oil on the outer shell. The oil is located in the white aero-spray can that is provided. Do not spray the inside of the filter. After spraying the filter, place it within the funnel system and tuck the filter underneath the carbon fiber nose to hold it in place.

* Get ready to drill a 2.5in. hole into the air-intake system (b) for the temperature sensor location. There should be a rubber boot for allowing the temp sensor to be inserted. The boot acts as a tunnel/bridge connection from the air-intake system to the temperature sensor.

* After mounting part (a) you then will need to install two (2) rubber washers (provided) to size match the filter system (b) prior to installing it. After this, you can insert the filter system onto the the Z3′s hose intake located where (b) is on the picture. Once installed (remember it is going to be a tight fit so you can use water to moisten the rubber washer for easier slip) you want the mounting bracket (a) to have its clamp to hold the very end (located where the Roar filter system and the Z3 intake meets) of the filter system.

* Once the clamp is successfully holding the system (do not tighten at this time) take (c) vacuum/valve cover and insert it to the air pressure vacuum hose located where (c) is on the picture. Position the vacuum/valve cover opening tilted opposite from engine (there will be a filter opening and you want it position towards the driver’s side opposite from engine). After the above steps are installed, tighten the clamps just enough so its stays in place (do not overtighten).

* Next step is to locate the temp sensor. After completing the drill, making sure it will be snug, plug the temp sensor into the rubber boot on the air-intake system that was placed.

Taking out the stock box Stock box removed Roar Bracket

Discuss this article and other Performance upgrades in the

///MZ3.Net discussion forum.

 
Pros: Increased Performance, Proven Results, Retains Stock Airfilter
Cons: The stock airbox is expensive to replace, so don’t mess up
Cost: Roughly $20, and 3 to 4 hours of your time

In the year and a half since I first posted the DIY instructions to modify the M44 Z3s airbox I’ve found that I get the same sorts of questions. I figured a document that tied all the info together would help me and those also interested in the modification. This primarily deals with the Fogged Airbox mod for the M44 but also talks about how the fuel injection system on the Z3s works as well as alternate intake products that are available and my thoughts on them. The instructions are slightly updated from my original plans to make assembly easier and to add an optional safety step.

Engine and Fuel Injection:

The fuel injection in the Z3s is a mass air fuel metering system. What this means is your car directly measures the weight of the air being draw into your engine and injects an appropriate weight of fuel (in the ratio of 14.7 parts air to each part of fuel) which it then ignites through your ignition system. Under cruising conditions and light acceleration your cars computer (DME) uses feedback from the oxygen (O2) sensors to fine tune the mixture.

The DME measures the weight of the air using a sensor called the Hot Film Meter. (HFM) The HFM is basically a film through which a current is passed to heat it. If you were to look at the inside of your HFM you will see that the film is very small and it actually only samples a small fraction of the air that passes through the meter. By measuring the temperature change of the film (and knowing the intake air temperature) the DME is able to calculate the mass (weight) of air that is flowing over the film. It can then calculate the total mass of air flowing through the HFM. This works if the airflow through the meter is smooth and evenly distributed, in other words laminar flow. The DME then uses this to determine how much fuel needs to be injected to keep the AFR at 14.7/1, also called Lambda=1. An AFR of 14.7/1 results in the most complete combustion of your fuel which gives you the least emissions. If an engine is running rich OR lean (more or less fuel to air) the engines emissions will increase. At full throttle the DME runs the engine richer for more power.

Now a key point… if you increase the airflow into your engine, the DME will measure it using the HFM (assuming smooth airflow) and will increase the fuel injected to compensate. The DME must do this or your engine would run leaner which would increase emissions. If you increase the amount of air, to keep the ratio between air and fuel at 14.7/1, the DME must add more fuel. If you increase airflow and burn more fuel you have increased your power output.

Problem:

As delivered from BMW the M44 engine in the Z3s really is not as rev happy as say the engine in a Miata. Above 5000 rpm the power feels like it has reached a plateau and there isn’t much more to be gained by revving the engine higher. The reason for this is because up high your engine’s ability to breathe is being restricted. I wanted to see if I could correct this and verify an improvement.

After looking into the intake systems that were on the market or known to be ‘in the works,’ I determined that there was nothing out there that I would put on my car. The following are a few of the setups I found and some of my reasons for rejecting them:

Drop in K&N filter ($40): in my opinion, K&N filters do not filter as well as your stock paper filter. I will not put one on my car. Your filter is the first and only line of defense against letting dirt into your engine. The K&N is made from an oiled cotton gauze, if the oil dries out the ‘filter’ basically stops all filtering. I have heard it said that when a K&N filter gets wet the water can ‘wash’ the previously filtered dirt right through it and into your engine. The person who told me this raced motorcycles and said that when he switched from K&Ns back to paper filters his engines lasted much longer between rebuilds. Lastly, Greg Hudson had performed dyno tests comparing a new stock paper filter against a new drop in K&N filter… the result was a LOSS of power with the K&N. That demonstrates that the paper filter isn’t what is limiting airflow as the paper filter has a huge amount of surface area for the size of our engine. Swapping filters does nothing to address the real source of restriction in your intake.

K&N Filtercharger cone filter ($149): Has a lot of problems. It has the same filtering concerns as the drop in filter and the rest of the setup adds a few more problems. The cone filter can suck in hot radiator air which will hurt performance. This is because cooler air is denser air (heavier), the more air weight you can get into your engine the more fuel will be injected and the more power you will get out of your engine. The circular shield that some sell might help a little but it will also increase restriction as it blocks the filter somewhat. It still doesn’t get all that great of a source of cold air either. As with most other cone setups the tube that connects the filter to the HFM changes diameter at the cone filter and at the HFM. Those ‘adapters’ are not a good idea. When they increase or decrease in size it will cause turbulence and restrictions in the airflow. For the HFM to meter the air weight properly it needs a smooth flow of air through it. The connecting tube changes size right at the start of the HFM, this could cause turbulence which would result in improper metering by the HFM. If the HFM isn’t able to properly measure the airflow into the engine the DME is going to be injecting the wrong amount of fuel. This will keep the engine from running optimally and won’t be making the power it should. Additionally, the filter is right in front of the HFM and the airflow doesn’t have much space to ‘settle down’ so it will still be turbulent from passing through the filter itself when it hits the HFM. There will be more on this later.

Art of ROAR cone filter (~$200): Mostly the same problems as the K&N setup above.

ECIS (~$200, when available): Uses a K&N cone filter so it has all the same filtering concerns and most of the other problems except it has a shield behind/besides the filter to block off the filter from the rest of the engine compartment to help with the heat problems.

Dinan Cold air intake ($299): uses a K&N cone filter so it has all the same filtering concerns. It positions the filter behind your foglight to avoid the hot engine air problem but exposes it to more water. Has the same type of ‘adapters’ and the problems they can cause that all the above cone filter setups share.

What I was looking for was a setup that kept the paper filter (they filter well.. even when wet) that had a smooth airflow to the HFM for proper metering, and had a good source of cold air but that allowed the engine to breathe better.

Factory airbox setup:

On the stock M44 airbox the air intake is in a snorkel between the passenger side headlight and the edge of the radiator. The snorkel has a fairly narrow opening which may limit airflow somewhat plus it isn’t in a direct path of air, the hood support blocks it somewhat. From the snorkel the air flows through a 2 5/8″s insulated hose over the top of the radiator then down the other side where it connects to a plastic funnel on the airbox itself. Each turn causes restrictions.That funnel has a 1 3/4″ opening into the airbox itself and is ,IMO, the biggest source of restriction in the intake.

After the air is inside the airbox it has a good amount of area to expand to evenly pass through the filter then changes over to the HFM as BMW designed for proper air metering.

The solution… aka the ‘Fogged Airbox’:

It increases the air intake hose into the airbox to a 4″ diameter hose. That is about a 700% increase in surface area for air to flow through easier. The setup grabs its air from behind the foglight for a good source of cold air. It keeps the paper filter for maximum engine safety and the flow to the HFM is exactly as BMW designed it. In my opinion, it addresses the real problems with the factory airbox and doesn’t create any additional problems like the other setups do. It costs around $20 and takes about 3-4 hours or so to build and install.

Testing, Does it work?:

Instead of using formulas and/or a flow bench I tested the best way possible, the actual DME measured airflow into my engine. This is the ideal way to test because if your intake/engine has a bigger restriction elsewhere the formula/flow bench methods will give you misleading numbers that won’t be realized in the real world.

As was mentioned above the DME in the Z3s has a hot film sensor to calculate the actual mass (weight) of the air flowing across it based on the temperature of the film. The cooler the film is the more air mass that has passed over it. If the airflow is smooth through the HFM it will be metered properly. From this and a few other sensors the DME can calculate the mass of the air being taken into the engine. In other words, your DME knows exactly what the airflow is… all I need to do is have the DME tell me that information on before/after runs and compare the two.

Getting that data is actually very easy, provided you have the proper tools. OBDTOOL plugs into the OBDII port on your car and can grab data directly from the DME. For this test I need to grab airflow (expressed as pounds per minute) and engine RPM and log that, in real time, to a file.

Grabbing the data is easy. You set OBDTOOL to log the data to a file, drive at about 1000rpm in second or third, then just floor it till redline. When you are logging two data points (airflow + RPM) OBDTOOL is able to receive 2-3 updates per second. To get more data points (for more accurate airflow curves) I made multiple runs and merged the data points together. The higher the gear you are in the more data points you receive as well.

For the first set of data I made 3 runs with my car in its normal modified state. That includes the Fogged airbox , a +3mm big bore throttle body and a Remus exhaust. My car is a ’96 without traction control so it doesn’t have the secondary throttle body in the air stream.

Since I’m interested in just the effect of the airbox mod that is all I changed for the second set of runs.

There is one slight problem though… I can’t get my airbox back to exactly stock as I modified my personal airbox. The factory stock setup has that 1 3/4″ diameter inlet into the airbox which is the largest source of the restriction in the intake system. So I made a 4″ diameter plate (size of the Fogged’ airbox inlet) that has a 1 3/4″ hole in the center to simulate having the stock inlet in the airbox. This plate fits right in front of the rodent screen on my inlet and is held in place by it with tape around the outside edges to seal better. Because the airflow on the incoming side of the restrictor plate is still less restrictive (because it is still attached to the 4″ hose of my setup vs. a 2 5/8″ hose and the stock snorkel ) the airflow numbers recorded are probably higher then if the airbox was fully a stock setup. Still, the test will give a fairly accurate result of the real world results of opening up that stock 1 3/4″ inlet to 4″s.

Looking at the graph (click on the picture to the right for a larger view), at low RPMs the Fogged’ box seams to flow a bit better than stock. In the midrange the flow is basically stock, then at 4000 rpm or so the difference begins to grow and above 4800 it grows very quickly. The difference is about an 8.5% increase of air flow at 6400 RPM. That means your engine is burning about 8.5% more fuel there too… which also means you are producing about 8.5% more power! In fact because you are getting more air in the cylinders at higher RPM (increased volumetric efficiency) you will have a higher effective compression ratio and you will extract slightly more power from the air and fuel you were already burning before the mod in addition to the extra power for the extra air and fuel.

Now my thoughts as to why the ‘Fogged’ midrange flow is nearly stock. Simply because in that range the stock airbox is not the limiting factor. I assume if there is a problem (the cylinders could be filling to capacity) that it is the intake manifold in that range. Above 4800 rpm the DISA setup has changed over the butterfly in the manifold and the stock airbox was limiting flow again.

As an aside I also tested the intake air temperature. According to my center console computer it was 70 degrees during the test. The intake air temp. (as read from the DME using OBDTOOL) was 75 degrees while just cruising around and when I floored it for a few seconds it dropped to 73 degrees and stayed there.

I’ve tested a similar mod on a 318ti and recorded about a 5% airflow increase. That car was a ’97 with the additional throttle body in the airflow (read extra restriction) and it the rest of the engine was totally stock.

I’ve also done before/after 0-60mph runs using a G-Tech Pro. With just the Remus exhaust I was able to get a best time of 8.1 seconds. After the airbox, throttle body and Garrett Lim’s software (with stock 6500 rpm rev-limiter) my best times dropped to 7.45 seconds. My software was overwritten last December, by the way. Since then I have run stock software with the box.

Tools you need to build it:

Something to cut a hole in the plastic airbox. You could use a 4 1/8″ hole saw, reciprocating saw, Dremel or whatever else you feel comfortable with.

A Dremel with a heavy duty cutting wheel, a grinding stone and if you are using it to make the main hole the dime sized metal bladed circular saw and one of the grinding stones.

Eye protection (you are going to need it!)

10 mm socket and socket wrench

Hot glue gun with extra strength glue

Regular screwdriver

Permanent marker

Scissors and Wire cutters

Optional but recommended: Propane torch and plumbing solder, only needed if you are going to install the rodent screen in the inlet

Stuff to buy:

Go to the nearest Home Depot or the like and in the ventilation section get an aluminum 5″ to 4″ duct adapter. This is a tubular piece to allow a 5″ hose to plug into a 4″ hose and should cost about $3.

Optional but recommended: While at Home Depot in the ventilation department you need a ‘Rodent Blocker’ which is just a square piece of heavy mesh which is meant to go on your clothes dryers exhaust to keep mice from getting into you house. Figure a buck or two for this.

Go to a Pep Boys or whatever and in their ventilation section they should have a 4″x72″ air intake type of plastic hose for under $15. Anything similar should work OK but make sure it’s flexible. The stuff at Pep Boys worked really well and is very smooth on the inside for better air flow. Also get a 4.25″ hose clamp for a buck.

Very optional: can of flat black spray paint… high temperature outdoor gas grille paint works OK

Making the inlet:

First thing you need to do is to make the 4″ inlet out of the adapter you bought at Home Depot. To do this on the expansion funnel (between the 4″ and 5″ tubes) you need to cut/drill the two rivets. This lets you separate the adapter into 3 pieces, the 4″ tube, the expansion funnel and the 5″ tube. We only need the 4″ tube with the ‘rib’ on the side that was connected to the expansion funnel which opened up to the 5″ piece. The 4″ diameter tube will become your inlet into the airbox.

Optional but recommended: Cut down the ‘Rodent Blocker’ to a circle that will just barely fit inside the ‘rib’ on the inlet and solder it in place. This is a safety step to be sure a rodent doesn’t climb up your airhose and decide to make a nest in your airbox.

Very optional: spray paint the intlet. Paint doesn’t stick very well so it will take multiple coats. I’ve found that it helps if after each coat of paint you ‘bake’ it on with a hot air gun but even then it can come off fairly easily.

Completed inlet along with the airhose and hose clamp. This is all the parts required for the Fogged airbox.

Adapting the airbox:

It would be helpful if you have the car up on ramps or jack stands but it isn’t required. You need to get the bottom half of the airbox out of the car. To do that release the four clips holding the top of the airbox on and move the top aside. Take out the air filter and put it somewhere clean till you are done. On the fender side of the airbox there are two 10 mm nuts holding the air box in place. Remove them.

Above the radiator is the big black plastic box which holds the stock intake hose. Take the cover off of this by removing the (4) 10 mm bolts. Two are right in front of the plastic box in plain sight, the other two are right behind the plastic box. Lift the cover of that off and put it out of the way. You will now see the stock hose and where it connects to the snorkel on the airbox. Just pull that hose off and the bottom of the airbox can be removed from the car. While you are at it disconnect the other end of the stock hose and remove it from the car as it’s not needed.

Now with the bottom half of the airbox out of the car remove the external snorkel from the box. There is a clip on it that will let the snorkel slide off the box. Notice how tiny the hose is at the end of the snorkel! Next the internal funnel needs to be removed. There is a clip on the top of that and another clip on the opposite side of the box that lets you take the plastic frame out along with the sound deadening material. Don’t worry if you break some of the plastic frame pulling it out… I left mine out and it’s not a problem.

Now comes the fun part, you need to cut a 4″ hole where the stock hole is. Put the 4″ side of the inlet over the hole, on the outside of the airbox, and draw a new circle on it with the marker. Don’t center the new hole over the old one. You basically want the new hole to be as far forward on the airbox as you can make it. You need the inlet to be forward so it can clear your steering reservoir when you reinstall the box.

Now PUT ON YOUR EYE PROTECTION!!!!! – Using whatever method you decided on, cut out that 4″ circle. This is the most time consuming part of the project as hot, nearly liquid plastic is going to be flying around so be careful! Be sure to also look inside the airbox as in a couple of places there are plastic ribs and such that you need to cut from the inside for the hole to come out. After you get the hole cut out test fit the inlet into it. The inlet should fit through the hole but stop at the ‘rib’ on the inlet. For the test it is easier if you just put the 4″ side through the air box from the outside but this isn’t how it will be when you are done. If you can’t get it to fit use the grinding wheel to smooth and enlarge the hole. It should be as tight a fit as you can make it without distorting the inlet. After you have the inlet fitting in the hole remove the inlet from the airbox. Scrub out the inside of the air box with a brillo pad or something similar to remove all the plastic bits that got thrown around when you cut the hole. After you get it all cleaned out dry it.

Now put the inlet into the airbox for real. The side with the rib goes inside of the box with the 4″ tube pointing out the hole. Only have the tube protrude from the box up to the rib on the tube hitting the inside of the airbox. The rib will keep the inlet from pulling through the box if you cut the hole properly. Now from the outside of the box seal the inlet to the box with the hot glue.

A slight air leak here isn’t critical, as it’s still before the air filter, but do the best you can. Do NOT use a silicone glue as it could cause problems with your O2 sensors.

After the glue has set, slide the 4″ air intake hose over the inlet protruding from the airbox. It is a very tight fit but if you take your time and work it around the inlet you will get it on. Secure it in place with the hose clamp. Do not overtighten the hose clamp as you could deform the inlet. You could cut the length down to about 3-4 feet now or you can wait till it’s installed then cut it.

Now reinstall the airbox into the car. The tube and hose should just fit into the car but it will fit if you cut the hole in the proper position. You can either put the old air intake cover back over top of the radiator and put back in the (4) 10 mm bolts or pull the bottom half of the plastic assembly off of the fan shroud and out of the car. I took it out of my car but if you want your intake to look stock leave it all in place.

Reattach the (2) 10 mm nuts holding the airbox in place. Put the air filter back into the airbox and secure the cover with the 4 clamps. Be sure you get a good seal. Now would be a good time to replace your air filter if you haven’t in 10k miles or so.

Route the hose pretty much straight down along the side of the radiator. This is easier to do from under the car but is manageable from above. Run the hose into the opening that leads into the front bumper, right in front of the wheel and place the hose opening behind the foglight. Trim the hose as needed to do this. You may want to disconnect your battery for a few minutes to reset the long term fuel trim (adaptation) that occurs in your DME but it isn’t really needed.

At this point you are done. You too now have a Fogged Airbox. Go take your car for a spin and run it up to redline a few times! You are going to love it!

Fogged Airbox FAQ:

(Q) Why not put the hose in front of the radiator or below the car or add a scoop or where ever?

(A) I’ve tried a scoop and it resulted in no measured airflow increase. It also greatly increases your chances of hydro-lock. Putting the hose behind the fog light gives good airflow and you would need to drive through a VERY deep puddle (several feet) before you would have a problem. Hydro-lock occurs when you fill your combustion chamber with enough water to stop the piston on its compression stroke. When this occurs you cause major damage to your engine. Even if you submerged your hose in water I don’t think the M44 creates enough vacuum to suck water up the 4″ diameter hose, then fill the airbox and finally draw it into the combustion chamber. If it was 1″ diameter hose, yes but not the 4″ hose. Your airbox has a drainage hole in it that would act as a vacuum relief if the main hose was submerged. Having said that it doesn’t mean I recommend that you drive through very deep puddles. You are not a U-Boat captain after all. You also want to limit the number of bends the hose needs to make as each bend will cause some restriction. Keep it simple and put the hose behind the foglight, it works.

(Q) Won’t rain get behind the fog light and get into the intake?

(A) Yes, but small amounts of water isn’t a problem. This can happen on the stock setup during driving in the rain or on very foggy nights. It basically wets your filter and since it is still a paper filter there is no problem.

(Q) Won’t I get check engine lights? IE… Dinan says that if the mod worked it would cause Check Engine lights as the DME won’t know how to deal with the airflow. They also claim the engine will run lean with any air intake on it and no ‘Stage II’ software in the car.

(A) Simple answer: No

Much longer answer: I’ve put around 15k miles on my car and never had a Check Engine light. No other Z3 owner that has done the mod has had lights that were caused by the Fogged airbox either. Remember how your fuel injection works, the HFM directly measures the airflow into your engine and injects the appropriate amount of fuel. It ‘knows’ how to deal with the increased airflow. This is assuming proper air mass metering by the HFM. I have done wide open throttle (WOT) runs recording my O2 sensor data vs. RPM to see what mixture I’m running at. At WOT my engines goes rich (O2 data at 0.8v) from right off idle and stays very consistent (+/- 0.05v) all the way to the rev-limiter. IOW, with the Fogged airbox the HFM is properly metering the airflow increase and the DME is adding fuel as needed throughout the rev range. This is with stock BMW software in my DME. If this was not the case the O2 voltage would drop off (go leaner) as I got above 4k RPM where the airflow increase occurs. On other types of fuel injection: air-flow metering or speed/density the DME would NOT be able to measure the additional air and they would need a ‘chip’ or ‘software’ to properly deal with the increase flow. On our cars this is NOT the case.

Even IF what Dinan claims was true (in that it applies to ALL intakes, it is not true) why wouldn’t the ‘Stage I’ software (which makes your engine run slightly richer at WOT and slight advances your timing) be enough? A theory on that: Assume for a second you have two intakes.. their actual airflow into the engine is the same. But one intake has smooth laminar flow at the HFM and the other intake has turbulence at the HFM. What would happen when you put them on your engine? Again, if you look at the inside of your HFM you will see that it actually only samples a small fraction of the air that passes through it. Based on that small sample it calculates the total air mass. This works fine if the airflow through the HFM is nice and smooth. In the case of the intake with smooth airflow through the HFM if you increase the airflow through the HFM your DME will properly measure the airflow increase and add fuel as required. In it’s maps it says for ‘A’ amount of air inject ‘X’ amount of fuel. Because the metering is accurate you are running at the proper air to fuel ratio.

Now what happens if you put on the intake that flows the same amount of air but causes turbulence at the HFM? Because the HFM only samples a small part of the airflow if the airflow through the HFM is turbulent the HFM will NOT properly meter the mass of air flowing through it and the DME will inject fuel based on the INCORRECT metering. You could end up running richer or leaner depending upon which direction the metering was off. The DME reads that you are taking in ‘B’ amount of air so it injects ‘Y’ amount of fuel. Since you are actually injesting ‘A’ amount of air (it was just mis-metered by your HFM because of turbulence) you should be injecting ‘X’ amount of fuel. But because it is in fact injecting ‘Y’ amount of fuel you are NOT running at the proper air to fuel ratio.

So, what can you do about this? Either smooth out your airflow for proper metering OR add a ‘correction’ (re-calibration) into the DMEs maps so that when it meters ‘B’ amount of air (still actually flowing ‘A’ amount) it in fact injects ‘X’ amount of fuel. This would result in you running at the proper air to fuel ratio.

If you ran that ‘correction’ on a car that meters its air properly (say a stock airbox, or an intake with smooth airflow that metered properly) you would end up running at the wrong air to fuel ratio. Hence, ‘Stage I’ and ‘Stage II’

(Q) What is laminar airflow and why is that important to your HFM?

(A) This is an attempt to explain it, not the best example but it was all I could think of. Picture six lines of people all running parallel to each other waiting to get on a subway.

Subway

A B C D E F

A B C D E F

A B C D E F

A B C D E F

A B C D E F

A B C D E F

A B C D E F

A B C D E F

RULE: When lines C and D move forward 1 person lines B and E move forward 1/2 a person and lines A and F move forward 1/4 of a person. Knowing this and starting at the front of the lines by watching the people in any single row (A,B,C,D,E or F) you can determine how many people total have gotten on the subway. For example if the first person from row A just got on the subway you can calculate that a total of 14 people have boarded the train. You use a small sample to determine the total knowing the ‘flow’ characteristics. This is what your HFM does but for air mass flowing into your engine.

(Q) Will I really feel the difference? Can it really work that well for so little money?

(A) Yes!!!

I have a very hard time convincing people that this works as well as it does. I’ve never heard from a person that has done it and not been thrilled at the difference. Above 5000 rpm it feels like a totally different engine. Now your engine pulls HARD all the way to redline. You might even hit the rev limiter a few times while you get accustomed to the difference.

(Q) Do you really think BMW screwed up on the airbox design that much?

(A) I think they met their design goal, so in that sense they didn’t screw up at all. Their engineers had to make a compromise between noise and airflow. The stock airbox acts like a ‘muffler’ for intake noise. Just like any other muffler this limits airflow somewhat in the pursuit of reduced noise. The Fogged mod is sort of like putting on a straight pipe for your intake. It lets air in easier but it also lets intake noise out easier. Under acceleration you will get a little bit of an intake roar but it sounds great and is perfectly appropriate in a sports car.

(Q) What do you get out of all of this?

(A) Besides the satisfaction of helping out other M44 Z3ers, nothing. ;) To that end if you do Fogg your airbox please e-mail me or preferably post a message on the z3 message board with your opinions on it.

(Q) But xxxx tried a K&N and noticed a huge difference in performance, why?

(A) Most of the people I’ve talked to that tried a K&N decided to give it a try when it was time to replace their paper filter. The reason they felt the increase in performance wasn’t from the K&N itself but because their paper filter was clogged and needed to be replaced. If they had just put in a new paper filter they would have felt the same thing. I replace my filters every 8-10k miles, I can tell when they need to be replaced as my gas mileage starts to drop.

Photographs courtesy of Rich Carlson, Robert Leidy and Tom Mosteller, thanks guys!

The Fogged airbox is copywritted by Shawn Fogg and is for individual use only.

Discuss this article and other Performance upgrades in the

///MZ3.Net discussion forum.

 
Pros: Performance, Exhaust Sound
Cons: Not a “Do It Yourself” Install
Cost: $400

BabyZ wanted to get her exhaust modified for two basic reasons. One for increased performance and two, so she would sound like the high performance sports car she is. Three things hindered performance of the OEM exhaust system. First of all the OEM unit is very heavy (approximately 30 lbs.). The reason it is so heavy is that there is a lot of baffle material in it to make the engine very quiet. This results in the second performance problem that this material creates a large backpressure that reduces engine horsepower. The third problem is an additional source of backpressure in the exhaust pipe. Where the pipe goes under the rear axle it has a large kink put in it to apparently increase the clearance from what look to be quite ample with a full diameter pipe to an even greater clearance.

The kink is not easily seen in this picture of the OEM system as it is right behind the massive hangar and in front of the shinny resonator (close-up of this kink follows in a bit). The second basic desire was to hear the engine. BabyZ didn’t like being a wolf in sheep’s clothing. She’s bad and doesn’t mind anyone knowing it!

Well we have a pretty good idea why BabyZ wants new pipes now, so the next problem is deciding what to put on instead. The first requirement was the system had to be all stainless like the OEM one. In some areas this may not be as important as it was to me but with the rain, humidity and chemicals present in Houston, this was a must. This eliminated the Remus as it is not stainless, a nice sounding unit for sure, but not stainless. The stainless units available were Supersprint, B&B and Borla. With Supersprint and B&B you can get a cat back bolt on system that uses the OEM hangars while the Borla is a weld up modular system. If you want to do this all yourself, and assuming you aren’t a stainless welder, you would not be able to do the Borla. This however may not be a total disadvantage if you don’t mind letting a muffler shop in on the fun. Two reasons balance out the ability to do it yourself are the cost of the system and the sound. Borla is cheaper even after the shop install and gives more sound with a deeper tone than either the Supersprint or B&B (IMHO). Based on the extremely detailed research done by theBaba, where he determined that the Borla did make a muffler (PN 40651) that fit the system and satisfied all BMW requirements (even though they did not list the Z3 on their application list) and testing out his fine ride, Hans, this was the system decided on for BabyZ. Another advantage for BabyZ is that she could keep the resonator which was felt desirable given her automatic tranny (of course you can drop the resonator for a manual if you like).

In the photo of the OEM and Borla mufflers on the ground the difference in size is apparent, but what you see is only part of the story. The weight difference is incredible with Borla weighing in at well under half of the OEM. The smaller size should also help with heat dissipation and reduce the heat exposure to the floor of the trunk and the battery. You can also see that the inlet and outlet to the muffler line up around the centerline of the muffler exactly at the same points as the OEM so the tips will line up with the bumper cut out without any modification.

This is a close up of the infamous “kink”. It actually is more of a smash. The pipe looses fully half of its diameter to go under the rear axle and meet the BMW engineers specified clearance. This smashed pipe is eliminated in BabyZ’s new pipe. In over 2 years of operation since installing the Borla with a full diameter pipe I do not see any indication on the pipe that it has ever been hit by the axle. This includes street, cross-country, track and autocross driving.

This shows the full diameter pipe going under the axle and you can hopefully see that there is plenty of clearance. Also, a new hanger was used on the pipe and attached to the original mounting point. (Note. The second OEM mounting point on the left of the muffler was also used but the third on the right rear of the muffler was not used.)

The shop foreman fabricated the stainless steel “Y” for the dual tips. It was quite a battle to see who would get to install the muffler on BabyZ, I guess this proves that “Rank Has It’s Privileges”. The tips are Borla Turbo Intercooled (PN 20102) and are also stainless steel.

The tips are staggered at the ends to follow the contour of the bumper. This is a personal preference as theBaba and others have theirs straight across and both ways look fine. Another thing to note is that the tips are not positioned on the centerline of the opening in the bumper cover but are moved toward the right side of the opening. This was done to give the maximum room for the tips to move left as the exhaust pipe warms up and expands. This will prevent the tips from touching and melting the surrounding bumper material. The tips are also positioned close together to further maximize the safe area for tip movement.

The finished product is and all stainless steel system with the resonator left in place to compensate for the low rpm preference of the automatic transmission. The Borla is the easiest available system to customize this way and can be installed with or without the resonator (true cat back) as per your preference.

Borla is also the loudest of the systems and depending on your desires this is either a positive or a negative. One drawback is that it is the loudest at 2300 to 2800 rpm’s. This equates to 50 to 60 mph and can resonate quite a bit with the top up. There are two other things wrong with that scenario in the first place; i.e. why is the top up and what are you doing going less than 60mph for any way, so it isn’t much of a consideration for me.

Installation of the Borla resulted in a nice performance boost that was most noticeable in the low rpm range especially in accelerating. The Borla was the first performance upgrade on BabyZ so there were no other mods that could have interfered with the effect of the exhaust upgrade. Since this time the chip has been upgraded with Dinan programming and the airbox has been “Fogged”. Each of these upgrades had an additional effect and I recommend that the full trifecta be done to get the maximum effect from all of the upgrades. One interesting side effect of the addition of the airbox upgrade is that the tone of the exhaust changed and a particular resonate tone was eliminated. I take this as an indication that a definite restriction in airflow was eliminated with this upgrade and that the exhaust was happy to accommodate the additional airflow.

One other benefit is that you won’t need “no stinkin stereo upgrades” when you are listening to the sweet Z3 engine music played through a Borla.

Cost of the muffler and tips is about $300. Installation, including all the needed pipe was $100 and it took about an hour and a half even with a substantial amount of discussion and picture taking. . The Borla is made of T-304 stainless and has a one million mile warranty. Borla’s website is at http://www.borla.com.

Discuss this article and other Performance upgrades in the

///MZ3.Net discussion forum.

 
Exhaust Articles

  • 1.9 Remus
  • 1.9 Borla
  • 1.9 Supersprint
  • 2.8 Supersprint
  • 3.2 Tri-Flo
  • 3.2 Supersprint
  • 3.2 Remus
  • Exhaust Articles

    1.9 Remus

    1.9 Borla

    1.9 Supersprint

    2.8 Supersprint

    3.2 Tri-Flo

    3.2 Supersprint

    3.2 Remus

    Performance Exhausts for the BMW Z3

    May 31, 1999

    By: Robert Leidy

    Inside each cylinder, the BMW Z3′s electronic control module injects a calculated mixture of air and fuel. This mixture is then ignited which produces power. However a by-product is also produced from this process which is commonly referred to as exhaust. The burnt gas fumes (exhaust) exit the cylinder and travel through a pipe commonly referred to as a header. The header pipes from each cylinder are then combined and channel the exhaust fumes from the engine into a catalytic converter. The catalytic converter is a device filled with a metallic-mesh-like filter that removes some of the pollution from the exhaust fumes. Once the exhaust has passed through the catalytic converter, it is channeled through a single pipe to an exhaust resonator, which reduces some of the sound produced by the engine. Once the exhaust has passed through the resonator it is channeled to a muffler to “muffle” additional sound from the exhaust. Once the exhaust travels through the muffler it exists the Z3 via tail pipe(s) under the rear bumper.

    The theory behind performance exhausts is that each device that the exhaust fumes pass through cause resistance, which in turn increases the amount of air pressure inside the exhaust. The pressure built up also effects the cylinder because “back pressure” from the exhaust is putting additional effort on the cylinder as it is handling the next mixture of air and fuel. A performance exhaust is designed to reduce the amount of resistance in the exhaust making the exhaust flow more freely and reduce and amount of “back pressure”. In order to accomplish this, those devices within the stock exhaust that cause resistance can either be removed or redesigned to be less restrictive. However each component of the stock exhaust is there for a reason. The muffler is designed to remove sound at the cost of exhaust resistance. You can redesign a muffler to have less resistance but in general you will also be decreasing the mufflers ability to “muffle” sound. As with most things in life it is a give and take relationship. Finding the correct balance of give and take is a judgment call, so it can be different for different personal tastes.

    There are varying degrees an owner can take to reduce the pressure in the exhaust and increase performance of the engine. Perhaps the easiest way is to just replace the muffler. Or for a little more performance, replace the muffler and resonator. Professional racers like Mark Hughes remove all of these resistance-causing devices. However removing the catalytic converter would keep a Z3 from being street legal (which is not a problem for the Z3 Race Team). The most common after-market exhaust systems are called “cat-back exhausts”. With the design of the Z3 these “cat-back” systems bolt right onto the stock catalytic converter and replace everything “back” from there (keeping the Z3 street legal). The new pipes are larger, the resonator is removed and the muffler is less restrictive, so exhaust can exit the engine/exhaust with less resistance. This has two effects on the Z3, it increases the performance and it makes the Z3 louder (more sound from the exhaust).

    So now that we’ve covered the theory behind performance exhausts lets look at the type of decisions an owner would need to make in evaluating after-market performance exhaust systems:

    Stock Engine/Exhaust Design:

    The theory behind performance exhausts is that reducing the amount of pressure increases performance. So it only makes since that the amount of potential performance gain is directly related to the amount of resistance/air-pressure-buildup in the stock exhaust. In other words if the stock exhaust is very restrictive then there is a lot of potential performance gain.

    Assuming that between the different Z3 engine configurations the restrictiveness of the various BMW stock exhausts components is roughly the same, we can make some general observations looking at the different designs. The 1.9 Z3 is a 4-cylinder engine, the exhaust output from all four cylinders is combined before entering the single catalytic converter. So roughly 1.9 liters of exhaust output is sent through the stock exhaust each time the gas inside the cylinders is ignited.

    Compare that to the 6-cylinder 2.8 Z3, which has the exhaust output from all six cylinders combined before entering the single catalytic converter. So roughly 2.8 liters of exhaust output is sent through the same pipe. Comparing these two it would appear that the 2.8 would benefit more from a performance exhaust than the 1.9 would since 47% more exhaust is traveling through the exhaust.

    To continue the comparison, the 3.2 Z3 is also a 6-cylinder engine. However the exhaust output is split in half, the output from three cylinders is sent to the first catalytic converter, with the exhaust output from the other three cylinders is sent to a second catalytic converter. The exhaust output from each half is never mixed so in reality the each exhaust is only handling 1.6 liters of exhaust output. Comparing this output it would appear the 3.2 engine would benefit the least from an after-market exhaust.

    Metal Used:

    There are also differences in the type of metal used in exhaust systems, the big differentiation is it, or is it not stainless steel. The big advantage to stainless steel is its durability. If you live in an area where salt is used on roads then you know that rust can eat up car parts. For these areas stainless steel will last a lot longer so the increased price is easily justified. The other advantage to stainless steel is that it conducts 2/3 less heat than mild steel, which helps to keep temperatures in the exhaust to a minimum. However stainless steel also expands 40-45% more than mild steel when heated so fitting a stainless steel exhaust is slightly more difficult. (The stock exhaust system is not stainless steel).

    Exhaust Tips:

    Choosing exhaust tip style is usually a 90% cosmetic decision. However the type of exhaust tips also effect how the exhaust will sound. If the exhaust tip is angled up the sound will generally be louder, if the exhaust tip is angled down the sound will generally be quieter. Most exhaust tips point straight back just like the stock exhaust does.

    In the United States, five different engine configurations have been built in the Z3:

    M44: model year 1996-1998

    The M44 1.9 liter engine was the first Z3 sold in the United States. Several companies make performance exhausts for this Z3. However this engine configuration is no longer being made for the US market so it is doubtful that any additional aftermarket performance exhausts will be added to the list.

    Borla

    Remus

    Supersprint

    M52: model year 1997-1999

    The M52 2.8 liter engine was the second Z3 engine configuration to be sold in the United States. Several companies make performance exhausts for this Z3. However this engine configuration is no longer being made. BMW now has a new M52TU 2.8 liter engine that is different in design, so exhausts for the M52 Z3 will not work on the M52TU Z3 and via-versa.

    Borla

    Remus

    Supersprint

    S52: model year 1998-2000

    The S52 3.2 liter engine was the third Z3 engine configuration to be sold in the United States. Several companies make performance exhausts for this Z3 (officially called the M roadster and M coupe).

    Remus

    Supersprint

    Tri-Flo

    MXXTU: model year 1999-2000

    The MXXTU 2.3 liter engine is the forth engine configuration to be sold in the United States. MZ3.Net does not know of any M52TU Z3 “cat-back” performance exhaust systems at this time.

    M52TU: model year 1999-2000

    The M52TU 2.8 liter engine is the most recent engine configuration to be sold in the United States. Supersprint is the only company that MZ3.Net has heard that currently has a cat-back exhaust ready for the new 2.8 liter engine. Supersprint’s part numbers for the new exhausts are 78.67.06 or 78.67.66. I assume the two different numbers are for different exhaust tip options.

    Discuss this article and other Performance upgrades in the

    ///MZ3.Net discussion forum.

     

    Discuss this article and other Performance upgrades in the

    ///MZ3.Net discussion forum.

     

    B&B Triflo Exhaust

    April 28, 1999

    By: Robert Leidy

     
    Pros: Better Performance, Great Sound, Stainless Steel
    Cons: Expensive, Installation
    Cost: $614 (from BMP Design)
    $563 Straight Tips with free shipping (from HMS)
    $649 DTM Tips with free shipping (from HMS)

    In the never ending quest to find more power and otherwise tinker with my car, I decided to put a new Supersprint catalyst-back (cat-back) exhaust on my beloved BMW Z3. I have a ’97 model with the M52 2.8 liter engine.

    The upgrade had three desired goals/expectations

    I was looking to improve the sound of the exhaust. The stock exhaust didn’t sound “bad”, it was just too quiet for my taste. I had previously heard other 2.8 liter Z3s with the Supersprint exhaust so I was quite confident that I would be pleased with the sound.

    I was hoping to improve performance of the Z3 as well. This goal was questionable, several had speculated that there wouldn’t be an improvement in performance. However there were even more saying there would be. In order to satisfy my own curiosity I decided to do before and after dynamometer (dyno) runs on the car to measure before and after rear wheel horsepower and torque.

    The final expectation was purely cosmetic. I had already added chrome tips to the stock 2.8 exhaust (picture above) but after seeing the larger turned up DTM tips available on the Supersprint exhaust I decided I liked the looks of them much better (right picture).

    With these goals in mind I enlisted the help of Robert Leidy, who had already found a reputable dyno shop when he measured the power output from his M roadster. Since Robert and the dyno shop (Alamo Autosports) were both located in the greater Dallas/Fort Worth, Texas (DFW) area, and I was located in Houston, there was a bit of a logistical problem. Answer: Roadtrip!

    To ensure a proper installation, Larry Nissen from Moritz BMW in Arlington was invited. To ensure accurate dyno tests the following “recommended” process was used. We first backed the car onto Alamo’s dyno rack to get a baseline HP for the car. We then used the very same dyno lift to install the supersprint exhaust. Once the exhaust was installed the car was then re-dynoed to measure the change.

    Installation

    Prior to installing the Supersprint exhaust, three “before” or baseline dyno tests were preformed. The results of those test will be compared to the results from the “after” dyno tests in the next part of this article. But for now let me explain the installation process that took place between the before and after dyno tests.

    The keen eye will notice that the pictures on this page are from two different vehicles. Prior to my installation, another Z3 owner had installed a Supersprint exhaust on his Z3 and Robert was there to take pictures of that installation as well. The only difference between the two Supersprint exhausts were the type of exhaust tips. Chris got the straight tips and I got the turned up or DTM style tips. Since the type of tips on the end of the exhaust have very little impact on installation the two sets of pictures could be used together.

    The first step was to remove the stock exhaust, problem was we had just completed the first set of dyno tests so the stock exhaust was hot. After the stock exhaust cooled down to a point where we were able to hold it (15 minutes) we were able to remove it.

    The exhaust is held in place in four places (pictures below). The first (front most) connection is where the exhaust bolts onto the flange of the catalytic converter via two 2 13mm nuts and bolts. The middle connection is actually just a safety/backup connection, but it uses a rubber belt (attached to the vehicle) around an additional bracket (attached to the exhaust) to catch the exhaust if the rear mounts fail.

    Towards the rear bumper, two additional rubber rings support and attach the rear of the exhaust to the vehicle. In order to remove them we sprayed the rubber muffler hangers with lubricant and then popped them loose using a pry-bar. The actual order we used in removing the exhaust was to loosen the front bolts, unbolt/remove the middle bracket. Then with someone holding the front of the exhaust, the rear connections were worked loose. With a person holding either end the removal was easily accomplished, however it would have been rather difficult with only one person. trying to juggle both ends.

    After removing the stock exhaust it was time to unpack the Supersprint exhaust. I purchased this exhaust from BMP, it came very well packaged, the entire exhaust was wrapped in thick shrink wrap with additional padding covering the exhaust tips. Not sure if this is something BMP does or if all Supersprint exhausts come this way. The packaging provided a very effective protective layer over the exhaust, however the shrink-wrap was so tight one of the support brackets was bent. We didn’t realize this at the time, but later it was easy to fix by just bending the support back to its normal position, the catch of course being that you won’t know what the “normal” position is until you’ve got the exhaust installed and you’re trying to put the rubber hangers on.

    There is one important part I should point out, you better get a friend to carry the new and old exhaust for you. The exhaust is rather large and does not fit in the trunk (not even close). You could carry the new exhaust up front with you but the used/stock exhaust will be very dirty. For this installation Nancy carried my exhaust along with Alan’s two exhausts in her SUV. Once the stock exhausts were removed we wrapped them in trash bags and duct tape for the drive home.

    Comparing the stock and Supersprint exhaust side by side was interesting. The Supersprint exhaust looked quite handsome with its black-crackle finish and polished stainless steel tips. It also looked much more svelte and linear than the stock exhaust. The stock exhaust had 4 diameter changes in just the piping alone. The resonator and the garbage-can-sized muffler looked like something off of a truck when compared with the Supersprint. There was a brief moment where I thought BMP had shipped me the wrong exhaust. The muffler part of the exhaust was smaller so the rear support arms were longer (to make up the difference). But what concerned me was how much different the connection from the catalytic converter to the muffler was. The Supersprint still had the crimp in the exhaust but the path seemed much straighter. However my concerns of receiving the wrong exhaust were removed when we stacked the two exhausts on top of each other and noticed the mounting locations were the same.

    Mounting the new exhaust was a definite two-man job. The “safety hanger” was reinserted into the rubber hanger/bracket, and the flange-end of the exhaust was fitted to the catalytic converter, loosely fitting the nuts. We then re-popped the muffler hangers on to the Supersprint, and VOILA!, it didn’t fit. We stepped back to analyze the situation and found immediately that the hanger brackets on the Supersprint had been bent somewhere along its route from Italy to Texas. Using the biggest pair of channel-locks we could find, we adjusted the brackets to proper alignment, and VOILA!, it still didn’t fit.

    We has been warned by other Z3 exhaust upgraders that the tight fit of the exhaust tail pipes had previously led to some bumper trim scarring/melting. Because of this warning we were paying very close attention to how the tips fit in the cutout. Ahead of time we were warned that the exhaust tips will move towards the drivers side of the cutout when the exhaust gets hot and back towards the passenger side when it cools back down. So our goal was to get the exhaust tips to hang towards the passenger side of the cutout as much as possible (exhaust was cold as we were mounting it).

    The problem we ran into was after installing the exhaust we noticed the tips were already off center towards the drivers side. We knew that this was going to be a problem because once the exhaust got hot it would push even further towards the drivers side and probably scar/melt the bumper trim. Further analysis indicated that the “safety hanger” on the Supersprint was too far to the passenger side of the car. After inspecting how the bracket worked we determined that the sides of the bracket serve very little purpose because the support loop uses the top of the bracket. We were also told that this bracket is just a backup bracket in case the rear ones fail.

    For a brief moment we considered removing it all together, but then we thought of a better plan. We decided to modify the safety bracket, since it appeared cheaper to replace than the exhaust if we screwed it up (Supersprint has been informed of the problem and is investigating a solution). The bracket pictured to the left is after the modification (compare it to one of the pictures at the top of this page and you will noticed the removed metal). The fine folks at Alamo ground off one side of the bracket, and after we re-installed everything the exhaust was no longer being pushed against the drivers side of the rear bumper apron.

    All that remained was to fine-tune placement of the tips within the rear bumper apron. This was accomplished using the aforementioned massive channel-lock pliers to tweak the muffler hanger brackets. We aligned the exhaust to “dress to the right” when cold, as 2.8 Supersprint exhausts are known to shift left about one-half inch at operating temperatures. It looked fantastic.

    Update: Supersprint is modifying all current and future 2.8 Z3 exhaust systems to correct for the safety bracket misalignment. Supersprint is also adding side-to-side adjustable hangers to allow for precise fitting of the exhaust tips in the cutout.

    Performance

    Now that the Supersprint exhaust was installed, it was time to dyno again. When we first ran the car on the dyno, (pre-exhaust) I was nervous to say the least. My car already had the Dinan High Flow Cold Air Intake System and Dinan ECU upgrade (not really a “chip” anymore) and I had heard ad-nauseum about how the adaptive nature of the OBD II ECU software would show no power gains no matter what.

    Running your car on a dyno is one of those surreal experiences you have to do once in your life. On a lift dyno, your car is roughly four feet in the air strapped to the lift, going 70+ mph The image of the car shooting off the lift keeps popping up in one’s mind. Anyway, we do three baseline runs. They are all pretty consistent, with the best being 167.6 hp and 175.5 ft lbs of torque. Remember that this it rear-wheel horsepower and torque, not the crankshaft horsepower and torque as quoted by the factory.

    After we installed the Supersprint we fired up the engine to warm it up, and it sounded fantastic, too. Stock, the car just didn’t have a sporty-enough sound. With the addition of the Dinan Intake and ECU upgrade, it had a very feral howl, but only on wide-open throttle. The Supersprint exhaust added a “bass track” to the sound, sounding it out nicely. Now, full throttle applications combine the howl with a deep growl, making for a formidable sounding beast.

    Below is an amusing animated picture Robert created from a couple still pictures his camcorder recorded. The first frame is from the “before” dyno test with the stock exhaust. The second frame is hours later from the “after” dyno test with the Supersprint exhaust (with turned up DTM style exhaust tips). I’m sure the angle of the exhaust tips had more to do with it than the amount of exhaust, but notice the Dynojet banner in the background. Now that’s what I call a free flowing exhaust :)

    Once we warmed up the car, it was time to dyno. The sound of the car running up to over 70 mph in what was essentially a one-car garage was a sound not easily forgotten. One alarming note, though, was the plumes of smoke emanating from the rear of the car. Turns out that it was the exhaust burning off coatings, grease, and other contaminants. It had a mighty stench as well, which I was told would linger for about 500 miles. I was glad I had a long roadtrip home.

    Once again, we do three runs, and they are again very consistent. This time the best one is 171.7 hp and 181.1 ft lbs of torque. Click on the small portion of the graph to the right to see the full size before and after comparison of the torque curve. At the peak torque values, the Supersprint exhaust gained 5.6 ft/lbs of torque. Looking at the entire RPM torque curve and measuring the differences every 50 RPM the Supersprint exhaust averages a gain of 4.3 ft/lbs of torque between 2000 and 6200 RPM.

    It would appear that this is an apples and oranges comparison, and it is somewhat. However, there are correction factors, and the one we’ll use here has been ascribed to a well known Utah-based chip tuner, but I can’t confirm that origin. This correction factor to convert rear wheel HP to crank HP is 1.21, or about a 17.2% loss. Given that, my numbers would work out as follows using the equation RW * CF = C, where RW is rear wheel HP or Torque, CF is the above correction factor, and C is the crank HP or Torque.

    Stock 1997 2.8 – factory specs

    189 HP

    156.2 HP – converted to rear wheel

    203 ft-lbs Torque

    167.8 ft-lbs Torque – converted to rear wheel

    With Chip & Intake:

    167.6 * 1.21 = 202.8 HP

    175.5 * 1.21 = 212.4 ft-lbs Torque

    Chip & Intake gain over stock:

    13.8 HP – estimated @ crank

    11.4 HP – estimated @ rear wheel

    9.4 ft-lbs Torque – estimated @ crank

    7.7 ft-lbs Torque – estimated @ rear wheel

    With Chip, Intake & Exhaust:

    172.6 * 1.21 = 208.9 HP – estimated @ crank

    181.1 * 1.21 = 219.1 ft-lbs Torque – estimated @ crank

    Chip, Intake & Exhaust gain over stock:

    19.9 HP – estimated @ crank

    16.4 HP – estimated @ rear wheel

    16.1 ft-lbs Torque – estimated @ crank

    13.2 ft-lbs Torque – estimated @ rear wheel

    Chip, Intake & Exhaust gain over Chip & Intake:

    6.1 HP – estimated @ crank

    5.0 HP – measured @ rear wheel

    6.8 ft-lbs Torque – estimated @ crank

    5.6 ft-lbs Torque – measured @ rear wheel

    So what does this tell us? Well, if we believe in rear wheel measurements only, I got a 5 HP, 5.9 ft-lbs, increase in overall power. Examining the dyno curves, this really makes itself known over the 3000 – 5500 rpm range. I am happy, and I can feel a difference.

    Sound

    Bryan: One month after install

    Living with the exhaust has been a pleasant experience. I had to first get over the feeling that someone was following me, as I wasn’t used to the subtle tone of the exhaust coming from the rear at all RMPs. Next, I was worried about the much larger exhaust melting the rear bumper fascia. I’ve seen some exhaust applications that have eaten holes in the fascia, but that hasn’t been a real problem. There has been a little scorching on the inside lips of both sides of the fascia, but nothing to be concerned about. One very unexpected benefit is that my gas mileage has increased by 1-2 miles per gallon. Bottom line: would I do it again? Yes. What would I change? the safety bracket

    Chris: 1 month after install

    Chris Bull checked the rear apron around his Supersprint exhaust installation with straight tips and reports that no melting or scarring has taken place. He is VERY pleased with the upgrade and highly recommends the Supersprint exhaust to other 2.8 Z3 owners.

    Spence: 1 month after install

    Chuck Spensor checked the rear apron around his Supersprint exhaust installation with DTM style tips and reports that there is some melting on the drivers side. However the scarred area is not very noticeable and the exhaust tip hides most of the damage. He is VERY pleased with the upgrade and highly recommends the Supersprint exhaust to other 2.8 Z3 owners.

    Update from Supersprint:

    There are two different 2.8 Z3 exhausts, one for the ’99 on Z3 2.8 coupe and roadster, and one for the ’98 and before Z3 2.8 roadster. The part number for the 99 is 78.67.06 or 78.67.66 (I guess one is straight tips and the other is dtm–don’t know which is which). Supersprint experimented with a ’99 Z3 2.8 coupe and moved the center bracket approximately 6-8 mm towards the driver’s side of the car to give it a perfect fit. They did many runs to get the exhaust up to temperature and verified that it did not come into contact with the apron even under hard cornering. One point to note is that the ’99 models apparently have a bigger cutout in the rear apron than the ones before that. For the ’98 and before 2.8 roadster, Supersprint is modifying all current and future stock to have a side-to-side adjustable hanger to allow for precise fitting.

     
    Pros: Great Sound, Increased Performance, Visually Striking, 100% Stainless Steel
    Cons: Cost, Installation
    Cost: $1,402 (from BMP Design)
    $1,339 with free shipping (from HMS Motorsport)

    The M roadster has a fairly impressive stock exhaust–quad polished tips exit from dual mufflers and emit a mellow note. However, like anything in life, even something good can be improved. Supersprint has made aftermarket exhaust systems for BMWs for years, has been making high-quality exhaust systems since 1955, and is highly regarded. In fact, the quality of the exhaust meets TUV standards for construction and is treated as if it were an OEM exhaust in Germany, which typically is very picky about aftermarket modifications to cars.

    Supersprint is based in Italy, and their official U.S. Importer is BMP Design, based in Texas. BMP carries the full Supersprint line, including the 100% stainless steel dual M roadster exhaust with quad DTM tips. The exhausts arrived in perfect condition (a feat in itself given that the shipment consisted of two 6-foot-long boxes that had to travel from Italy to BMP in Texas, and then from there to the reviewer). The packaging is first-rate, with the exhausts themselves being sealed in plastic, with special packing around the tips to preserve them, and with plenty of paper padding protecting the exhausts inside the boxes.

    The pictures above exhibit the external differences between the Supersprint exhaust (left) and the stock exhaust (right). The tips are larger and upturned, the muffler itself is smaller, and the whole system is bead-polished to a high shine. As the arrow shows, the Supersprint exhaust also features straighter pipe between the fitting (which will be attached just behind the catalytic converter) and the muffler.

    A side note: When arranging for a place to install the Supersprint exhaust, it may be best to also arrange for a friend with either a sports utility vehicle or a pickup truck to be available to help you transport the new exhaust to the installation location, and to help you transport the old exhaust home.

    Installation

    The exhaust is held in place with bolts just aft of the catalytic converters (red arrows), and a set of brackets/rubber attachment points (second picture) at the rear of the car. The the middle there is a safety/backup hanger (blue arrow) which has a rubber belt around the middle of the exhaust.

    Some spray silicone lubricant on the middle bracket may make it easier to slide the belt holding the exhaust off the support. Once this middle connection is free you can remove the front bolts to break the connection to the catalytic converter. Lastly remove the bolts attaching the rubber hangers at the rear of the car.

    After removing the stock exhausts, it is time to mount the new Supersprint exhausts. The best way to do this is to first guide the main support into the rubber hanger (blue arrow above) and then to loosely fasten the remaining brackets and bolts. Then, with a couple of people helping, you can align the exhaust and tighten the bolts. (Note that in most cases, we do not recommend hanging from the new exhaust as an alignment method.)

    Take your time while adjusting the new exhausts. Even when everything looks fine from under the car, you may still want to tweak the alignment. You want to make sure that the tips are not in contact with the plastic of the rear bumper. Maintain about a finger’s width clearance between the tips and the lower lip of the bumper. Also, stand behind the car and check that each side is symmetrical. As you can see from the picture above, the right tips are slightly rotated clockwise, and need to be adjusted for a better match with the left side.

    There were only two negatives to the installation. The first is just due to the inexperience of the reviewer–alignment took a long time. If you have an exhaust shop install your exhaust, this is a non-issue. The second negative is that the new exhausts did not come with 4 necessary nuts and washers. The stock exhaust has nuts integrated into its brackets which bolts go into, while the Supersprint exhaust just has holes in its brackets which bolts go through. This necessitated a quick trip to a hardware store, and cost about $1.00. It is not clear if the missing nuts were an oversight or if they must always be purchased separately, but Supersprint has been notified of this slight glitch and is looking into the issue.

    Overall, the installation was uneventful, and took about 2 hours–not bad for a do-it-yourself job. A muffler shop would probably knock out the job in less than half the time. The final result is a set of 4 gleaming tips which emit a healthy growl.

    Ok, so it looks and sounds great. Now you want to know about the performance:

    Performance

    Note: Alamo Autosports is recommended to those in the North Texas area for dyno testing. $60 buys you 3 runs on a Dynojet Dynamometer, worth it just for the experience of seeing and hearing your car dynoed. Contact Brice, Steve Pak, or Steve Webb at

    Alamo Autosports

    1218 Colorado Ln.

    Arlington, TX 76015

    817-860-4300

    There is a lot of discussion over whether you can improve a car’s performance by replacing the stock exhaust with a “free-flow” aftermarket exhaust. How best to come up with a quantitative answer? With before and after dyno runs, of course.

    A day on the dyno at Alamo Autosports in Arlington, TX was scheduled.

    Three stock dyno runs were done. They were all close, but the best and worst were thrown out for the purposes of this article. The M roadster, with stock exhaust and no performance modifications, reached a peak rear-wheel horsepower of 217 between 6150 and 6250 RPM. Peak rear-wheel torque was measured at 217 ft./lbs. between 4000 and 4150 RPM. At the bottom of this section of the article is a chart with the full numbers, and the full-size graph of the stock HP and torque curves may be seen by clicking on the small graph at right.

    How might an aftermarket exhaust improve performance? By freeing the exhaust flow. This picture shows one way the Supersprint exhaust improves over the stock exhaust. The pipes shown go between the connection at the rear of the catalytic converter and the muffler. The Supersprint exhaust is on top, and the stock exhaust is on bottom. Notice how the Supersprint exhaust pipe takes a straighter path. Also notice how the stock exhaust is somewhat crimped in the middle (to clear a chassis cross-member, which the Supersprint avoids by routing the pipe slightly lower).

    After the three “before” runs were completed, the car was driven off of the dyno and allowed to cool. After cooldown, the car was put back on the dyno (used as a lift), and the Supersprint exhaust was installed. After installation was complete, three “after” dyno runs were conducted. Peak torque gain was 6 ft./lbs., and peak HP gain was 5 HP. Since the dyno runs were conducted immediately after the exhaust installation, the numbers reported are for a non-broken-in exhaust. A follow-up set of dyno runs is planned to acquire HP and torque curves for the exhaust after break-in.

    Click on the left picture below to hear and see one of the dyno runs after the Supersprint exhaust was installed. The video is of the Supersprint run that produced the highest HP value. Please note that the numbers below are from the middle stock dyno and the middle Supersprint dyno, so the peak HP below is 1 less than the peak HP mentioned in the video.

    Click on the right graph below to see the full-size comparison of before and after torque curves. As you can see from the graph, there is a definite increase in torque (important for acceleration) in the entire midrange.

    Sound

    The Supersprint exhaust produces a deeper and slightly louder sound than the stock exhaust. Do not take this to mean that it is overwhelmingly loud. The Supersprint exhaust meets tough European TUV standards for sound levels. The second-best way to describe the sound is that it makes the M roadster sound like it should sound. The best way to describe the sound, of course, is to let you hear it for yourself. You will need the RealPlayer to hear the audio, if you don’t have the RealPlayer the good news is it is free!.

    The sound recordings were made during dyno runs of the stock exhaust and the Supersprint exhaust. A Hi8 camcorder was used to capture the audio, and was placed about 6 feet to the side of the car and slightly behind the car. RealAudio is by no means a crystal clear audio media, but comparing the sound files (Stock vs Supersprint) is a really good comparison of the real life difference. Once the Supersprint exhaust is fully broken in, a “run through the gears” sound sample will be added to this page.

    Stock M roadster

    Supersprint M roadster

     
    Pros: Better Performance, Improved (Lower) Sound, Easy Installation
    Cons: Expensive, Not Stainless Steel
    Cost: $801 (includes shipping) from MG Racing

    The stock exhaust on the M roadster is pretty good, however I was always wanting a little more rumble and sound. Previously I owned a 1.9 Z3 and had upgraded its exhaust using the Remus brand. I was very pleased with the results and when the itch to upgrade the M roadster exhaust hit me I decided to try the Remus M exhaust.

    After placing my order and waiting a week the doorbell finally rang. It was the UPS delivery man with two very large boxes for me. Just like the 1.9 exhaust the new Remus exhaust was packaged without any padding inside the cardboard box, one of the boxes was fairly chewed up the other one only had slight damage. I didn’t notice it at the time, but one of the supports on the passenger side exhaust had been slightly bent. Let me just get this complaint out of the way, would it kill them to package these things in Styrofoam or something. Just like the 1.9 exhaust this one had become damaged (support rod bent) in shipping, the damage is easily repairable but it sure would be nice if I didn’t have too.

    The good news was that the chrome tips on each exhaust arrived unharmed. Measuring the exhaust tips I found that the inside diameter was the same as the stock exhaust, but the thickness of the exhaust tip was 5mm bigger making the overall outside diameter of the Remus exhaust 10mm bigger than the stock exhaust. On the top of each chrome tip is an engraved Remus name logo. Once the exhaust is installed both the name and the logo can be seen. The shipping weight on the Remus exhaust was 70lbs total (35 per side), while I have not weighed the stock exhaust myself I remember BMW saying it weighed roughly 100lbs.

    Installation

    The hardest and longest part of the installation was the first step, getting both the Z3 and the new exhausts to the installation location was more difficult than I thought it was going to be. There was no way these big things were going to fix in the Z3. They also did not fit in the trunk of my wife’s 318i, luckily I found a way to fit one in the back seat and another in the passenger seat. I ended up having to drive the 318i (carrying the exhausts), then drop off the exhaust, then return home, then drive the M roadster to the shop, install the exhausts, drive the M roadster home, return with the 318i, load up the stock exhausts and them drive them home. I probably spent more time driving cars around than it took to actually install the exhaust.

    The actual installation process was very easy, but before I could start I needed to let the exhaust cool off. During the installation process you will be holding some parts of the car (like the muffler) that get quite hot while the car is running.

    Once it had cooled down the first step was to remove the stock exhaust. There where 10 bolts in total (5 per side) holding the stock exhausts in place. On each side there are two bolts mounting the exhaust to the catalytic converter (top right), two bolts holding the rear of the exhaust in place (bottom right), and one bolt in the middle (middle right).

    I should point out that the exhaust is actually held in place via some rubber hangers that allow the exhaust to slight move and adjust in normal operation. The bolts I’m referring to attach the rubber hangers to the car.

    Instead of removing the rubber ring that was holding the middle of the exhaust in place, I decided to remove the bolt that holds the bracket that the rubber ring is mounted on. This made lowering the exhaust a little easier. I started by removing the rear bolts first, then the middle, and then the front. But I had someone holding the rear (muffler) exhaust while I was doing this.

    The only part I replaced (at the advice of Larry Nissen – BMW tech) was the ring seal that fit between the cat-back exhaust and the catalytic converter. Larry didn’t think this was “necessary”, but it was possible that a exhaust leak might occur using the old rings, so we decided to replace them just in case.

    After one last side by side comparison it was time to install the Remus exhaust. I was quite impressed at how easily and precisely the Remus exhaust fit into place. Starting with the rear bolts first (while someone held the front of the exhaust) the new exhaust was put into position. The first pass the bolts were left loose, a second pass tightened them all down. The only part of the installation that wasn’t smooth was the support that had become bent in shipping. But after a few whacks with a hammer it was bent back into position and the installation was complete.

    Once the Remus exhausts were installed I took a look at the exhaust tips to see how centered they were in the cutouts of the rear bumper. I was concerned that an off center exhaust tip might melt some of the rear bumper because I have seen that happen with some aftermarket exhaust. But I was relieved to see that the exhaust tips were perfectly centered in the cutouts. The Remus exhausts really were a direct replacement, practically plug-and-play. They fit precisely in place of the stock exhaust without any modification. But now that they were installed the next question was, “what will this do to the M roadster’s performance?”

    Performance

    I always liked the Remus exhaust I put on my previous 1.9 Z3, but I regretted not doing “before” and “after” dynos on the car to see how much of a performance gain the aftermarket Remus exhaust gave me. I didn’t make that mistake this time, a “before” dyno was recorded with the M roadster in stock condition after it was broken it (click on the graph for a larger view).

    After the installation the car felt quicker and it seemed to run through the upper RPM range faster. In fact I even bounced it off the rev-limiter a few times on accident until I got use to the new tach speed. But all this was just non-scientific (what some people call the “butt-dyno”) data. I knew the car felt quicker but what I needed was a real dyno to prove it. I returned to the same place where I had my M roadster dynoed before to see just how much of a gain the Remus exhaust gave me (click on the graph portion to the right for a full screen view).

    What the dyno did was prove what I was feeling, the Remus exhaust boosted the torque across nearly the entire RPM range. The biggest gains were found in the range between 3500 and 5100 with a peak gain of 13 ft/lbs of torque at 3800 RPM. The only exception was the RPM range between 2300 and 2500 which showed no gain. A few skeptics said that an aftermarket exhaust might gain power in one area but then loose it in another. What the dyno showed me was that the Remus exhaust never hurt performance, improved the performance across most of the RPM range, and even smoothed out some of the torque curve where dips in power occurred on the stock dyno.

    I was hoping to back up the dyno data with performance timing, so I purchased a GTechPro which measures 0 to 60 and quarter miles times. I took several measurements before the exhaust upgrade and several measurements afterwards. However I don’t think that data can be trusted because what the GTechPro really did was teach me how to drive the car faster. In between the before and after testing I had improved my driving skills enough to make those tests invalid. I also didn’t pay much attention to the temperature variations which might also explain the gains I was seeing. So really the only thing I got out of the timing tests for this article is this fairly cool real video.

    Sound

    The Remus makes the exhaust note lower and slightly louder, but rather than have me try to describe the sound in words check out the sound files below. You will need the RealPlayer to hear the audio, if you don’t have the RealPlayer the good news is it is free!.

    For the following sound recordings two ’98 M roadsters were put side by side. A Hi8 camcorder was used to capture the audio, I was standing about 10 feet behind the two roadsters and did not move between recordings. RealAudio is by no means a crystal clear audio media, but comparing the sound files (Stock vs Remus) is a really good comparison of the real life difference.

    Stock M roadster

    Remus M roadster

    Long Term Update

    4/30/99:

    I think my initial figures are incorrect, especially after looking at the other exhausts articles and comparing the results. When I initially posted the article I used before and after dynos taken on different days. I think the ODBII adaptation caught me, because if you look at the numbers it would appear that I had a peak gain of 7 ft/lbs, average gain of 5.8 ft/lbs across the entire RPM range, 7.8 ft/lbs gain in the 3k to 5k range (driving range). The 7.8 ft/lbs of additional torque is roughly a 4% gain in power in the highly used 3k to 5k RPM range.

    What’s interesting is if you compare Alan and my “after” dynos you see that they are practically identical. How can the Remus give me a 4% gain and the Supersprint give Alan a 2% gain, but we end up at the same numbers? I think the answer is that my original “before” dyno is questionable. What I did to try and “fix” this error was take the two different “before” dynos and combine them by using the high points from each graph. I then used this new line and compared it back to Robert’s original “after” dyno.

    Looking at the “fixed” comparison, I think these figures are more correct. Peak gain of 4 ft/lbs, average gain of 2.9 ft/lbs across the entire RPM range, 3.7 ft/lbs gain in the 3k to 5k range (driving range). The 3.7 ft/lbs of additional torque is roughly a 2% gain in power in the highly used 3k to 5k RPM range.

    © 2012 MZ3.net Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha