S2000 Street Encounters Stories of on-the-road exploits and encounters.

me vs 135i

Thread Tools
 
Old Dec 13, 2008 | 10:34 PM
  #51  
JHooby's Avatar
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,763
Likes: 3
From: 310 SoCal
Default

Originally Posted by joeking1978,Dec 13 2008, 10:31 PM
I have to call BS on this one.


I've owned my 135 for about a month now... and my s2k was no where near this in speed. A new 135 without an ECU upgrade will hit 0-60 in about 5.0 vs. 5.4 (maybe a 5.2 if well launced s2k). Still... in the top end... there is no way you pulled on him that easily.

My guess is he really was not on it.

Add the ECU upgrade (like the juice box 3 which I will be getting this week) and you are looking at 380hp at the wheels. Better hp to weight ratio then the e92 M3, c6 z51 vette, ect...
uhhhh



you must be lost.
his s2000 is either turbo/sc.
it's not n/a , and the brand new 135i was probably stock.
Reply
Old Dec 14, 2008 | 12:09 AM
  #52  
DeadZero's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,896
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by JHooby,Dec 13 2008, 11:34 PM
uhhhh



you must be lost.
his s2000 is either turbo/sc.
it's not n/a , and the brand new 135i was probably stock.
it was cuz it still had no license plates yet. i'm s/c as well
Reply
Old Dec 14, 2008 | 08:17 AM
  #53  
freshs2k's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,664
Likes: 0
From: No va
Default

with just an intake on a dynapack someone local here put down 340whp in a 335i
Reply
Old Dec 14, 2008 | 11:19 AM
  #54  
joeking1978's Avatar
Registered User
Gold Member (Premium)
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,744
Likes: 0
From: Livonia
Default

Originally Posted by JHooby,Dec 14 2008, 02:34 AM
uhhhh



you must be lost.
his s2000 is either turbo/sc.
it's not n/a , and the brand new 135i was probably stock.
you apparently didn't see my post immediately after...



I had a small jaunt in naples today with a red s2j with silver flames from the front bumper and fenders to the hood and exhaust.... and I had to feather the gas to keep from rear ending him.


I wanted him to run again but he turned into a sub
Reply
Old Dec 14, 2008 | 11:55 AM
  #55  
fusionchickenleg's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,367
Likes: 6
From: SoCal
Default

having closely followed the n54 and its response to mods, i think the dyno numbers tend to read too optimistically...440whp with just chip and bolt-on's? don't think so...lol

unless it's a sky high reading dyno to which 440whp = 115mph trap lol
Reply
Old Dec 14, 2008 | 01:45 PM
  #56  
joeking1978's Avatar
Registered User
Gold Member (Premium)
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,744
Likes: 0
From: Livonia
Default

Originally Posted by fusionchickenleg,Dec 14 2008, 03:55 PM
having closely followed the n54 and its response to mods, i think the dyno numbers tend to read too optimistically...440whp with just chip and bolt-on's? don't think so...lol

unless it's a sky high reading dyno to which 440whp = 115mph trap lol
not really.

Here is a 335 with JUST a juice box 3 ecu piggyback. 93 octane. (both cars have the exact same engine and set up)



375hp at the wheels on a dynajet.

Now here's a 135 with the JB3 ecu, Riss Racing downpipes, Riss Racing Catback, Cone intake and code3 intercooler



422hp

here's a 335i with that setup

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31GYfuHV_Zs

(how do you embed on s2ki?)

so yes... just a chip and 3 bolt on's. Due you care to dispute it further?
Reply
Old Dec 14, 2008 | 01:49 PM
  #57  
DeadZero's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,896
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by fusionchickenleg,Dec 14 2008, 12:55 PM
having closely followed the n54 and its response to mods, i think the dyno numbers tend to read too optimistically...440whp with just chip and bolt-on's? don't think so...lol
i call that optimistic numbers Church Automotive
Reply
Old Dec 14, 2008 | 01:54 PM
  #58  
joeking1978's Avatar
Registered User
Gold Member (Premium)
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,744
Likes: 0
From: Livonia
Default

Originally Posted by DeadZero,Dec 14 2008, 05:49 PM
i call that optimistic numbers Church Automotive
see above.
Reply
Old Dec 14, 2008 | 02:58 PM
  #59  
DeadZero's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,896
Likes: 0
Default

ya its impressive stuff. I'm not surprised tho...there motor has 2 more cylinders then we do anyway. plus they come stock with a turbo.
Reply
Old Dec 14, 2008 | 03:14 PM
  #60  
joeking1978's Avatar
Registered User
Gold Member (Premium)
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,744
Likes: 0
From: Livonia
Default

Originally Posted by DeadZero,Dec 14 2008, 06:58 PM
ya its impressive stuff. I'm not surprised tho...there motor has 2 more cylinders then we do anyway. plus they come stock with a turbo.
disputing the comparative potential of the engines was not the purpose of my post. It was only to note the potential of the engine... based off a post earlier in the thread.

It takes very little to get a lot. That's all.


Having owned a s2k for 4 years... it is still one of my favorite cars. I just wish it was more practical for day to day use sometimes, or came with a bit more power without going FI
Reply



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:22 AM.