Close

Results 1 to 12 of 12
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    290
    Rep Points
    333.1
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    4


    Yes Reputation No

    Bmw N55 LPFP for high G force track use?

    Is there any chance anyone could work on an LPFP for us track guys? In the F series n55 if you're running on low fuel at the track (increased weight savings, and it's safer than running a full tank) the fuel pump would be starved on high G force corners causing the car to die or stumble. Maybe someone can make in tank baffles or a larger external fuel filter that spans the tank and works with the bucketed design (unless someone makes a bucketless version). It'd be really help for us track guys.

    Cheers

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    2,185
    Rep Points
    1,625.1
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    17


    Yes Reputation No
    Fuel It might be bake to help.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    290
    Rep Points
    333.1
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    4



    Yes Reputation No
    I doubt it, I love fuel it but they already declined me in the past. Their T filters are for bucketless applications where fuel starvation is a bigger issue. and most of the bmw guys are straight line only guys so not muh demand flr a pump like this.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Posts
    14
    Rep Points
    34.0
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    2 out of 2 members liked this post. Yes Reputation No
    Radium engineering released a nice surge tank setup for the E9X series a few weeks back. I’m pretty sure that’s only solution for fuel starvation so far. Anyhow, I’m not sure it will fit F-series.
    Take a look: http://www.radiumauto.com/Fuel-Hanger-Surge-Tank-BMW-P1542.
    Click here to enlarge
    2011 E92 N55 AT | ABR N55 Built Motor | ABR 6hp19 Built Trans | BB 3.4 Turbo Kit | JB4 + MHD | xHP Stg 3 | Fuel-It Stg 3 LPFP + PI + BMS PI Controller | COBB Exhaust | 100% E85 |

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    137,649
    Rep Points
    40,991.2
    Mentioned
    2418 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    410


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ap485 Click here to enlarge
    Radium engineering released a nice surge tank setup for the E9X series a few weeks back. I’m pretty sure that’s only solution for fuel starvation so far. Anyhow, I’m not sure it will fit F-series.
    Take a look: http://www.radiumauto.com/Fuel-Hanger-Surge-Tank-BMW-P1542.
    Click here to enlarge
    Looked at that and am wondering why there isn't more press?

    Or have we accepted BMW guys don't even track any longer and it's all straightline now?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Location
    Phoenix AZ
    Posts
    11
    Rep Points
    34.0
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    A surge tank is the right way to do this, like the great Radium solution posted above. On a more reasonable budget with modest track goals though, you could take a different approach.

    As it is most upgrades size the fill such that when the pump is running at max capacity it slowly fills the bucket, and most of the time that's good enough, but it's not a big deal to resize the orifice for greater flow, as long as you understand it'll come at the expense of ultimate flow capacity. On a N55 in particular, that may work very well. Feel free to shoot me an email if you'd like to discuss this further, chris@performancefuelingsolutions.com

    Chris

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    290
    Rep Points
    333.1
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    4



    Yes Reputation No
    Thanks for the reply guys I don't know why my previous reply didn't save but maybe I closed the tab too quick.

    The only issue with the radium solution is that it's not for the F series.

    Yup now a days BMW M owners only care about straight line speed, that's a reflection in the parts available.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    290
    Rep Points
    333.1
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    4



    Yes Reputation No
    Also I doubt radium would make it for the F series, again for the reason people are buying this for high acceleration drag racing and since the n55 isn't making n54 power levels it'll take awhile until this makes it to the F series. Likely the only saving hope would be the s55 brining it to the F series if it is even compatible with the n55.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    66
    Rep Points
    96.0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by F87Source Click here to enlarge
    Is there any chance anyone could work on an LPFP for us track guys? In the F series n55 if you're running on low fuel at the track (increased weight savings, and it's safer than running a full tank) the fuel pump would be starved on high G force corners causing the car to die or stumble. Maybe someone can make in tank baffles or a larger external fuel filter that spans the tank and works with the bucketed design (unless someone makes a bucketless version). It'd be really help for us track guys.

    Cheers
    The weight savings is NOT huge and Id rather have a full tank than a 1/4 tank as far as safety goes.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    290
    Rep Points
    333.1
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    4



    Yes Reputation No
    52L of fuel in the m2 at 0.75kg/L of fuel is 39kg, at 1/4 of a tank which is 13L and 0.75kg/L it is 9.75kg that is a weight savings of 29.25kg or 64.5lbs. If that is not a huge weight savings I don't know what is....

    Next we talk about safety which is another factor, the less fuel in the car the less chance there will be a spill or a flame in the event of a crash or roll over. So not sure why you would rather have a full tank vs. a 1/4 for safety, that's pretty illogical.... In terms of running out of fuel that's not likely unless you're on a huge track like the ring which is 26km, and at a really crappy fuel economy of 30L/100km (the worst I've seen on track is ~25L/100km) you would need 7.8L to complete the track, so 13L of fuel at 1/4 tank is more than sufficent and almost enough to make the run twice.

    Some people even run 1/8 of a tank of gas for even more weight savings on smaller tracks, it all depends on how long the track is and what your average fuel economy is. Most people would fill their car to the bare minimum required to do the lap (or how ever many laps you require) and add 1-2L of extra fuel for a warm up and cool down lap. I just did the calculations based on your suggested 1/4 tank.

    So those are two pretty significant advantages of running less fuel at the track, I'm not sure why you would say otherwise without any proof or background context.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    66
    Rep Points
    96.0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    64 lbs is weight, but hardly enough to make a DRASTIC change in time. More fuel in a tank = less fumes. Fumes is what actually ignites in most accidents. More fuel = more fuel to feed the fire, not how the fire actually starts. Feed a motor too much fuel, what happens ? It FLOODS. It does not ignite. Why ? Not enough oxygen. Same with a gas tank. 1/4 tank has more air vs full tank. Which is most likely to ignite ?

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    290
    Rep Points
    333.1
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    4



    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Urmom Click here to enlarge
    64 lbs is weight, but hardly enough to make a DRASTIC change in time.
    Do you realize how hard it is to pick up even a tenth of a second on the track? Every bit of weight savings counts. The more weight that is saved the more balanced the car feels in corners, the easier it is to transition apex to apex without feeling like the car is fighting back due to the less mass being tossed around. 64lbs is a huge weight savings for a car, where else can you pull 64lbs? That's more weight savings than a full titanium exhaust, or a back seat delete in some cases. You seriously don't understand the whole point of weight savings and how hard it is to lose any time on the track as indicated when you wanted a "DRASTIC" change in time.

    If you don't think that 64lbs is a significant weight loss what do you propose (1 item) to remove from the car to get an equivalent weight loss? Why else would every car manufacturer be concerned with weight when you act like weight won't cause any performance increase on the track. The way you talk leads me to believe you have no experience driving an extremely light weight car on the track. If you have ever driven an MX5 you would understand the value of having a light car. I've seen testers out lap a hellcat with an mx5, so that should show you weight is very important vs just having outright power and ignoring weight. I believe the hellcat even has a better power to weight ratio than the mx5 (i might be wrong), but there is no ignoring that mass around corners.


    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Urmom Click here to enlarge
    fuel in a tank = less fumes. Fumes is what actually ignites in most accidents. More fuel = more fuel to feed the fire, not how the fire actually starts.
    That's why fuel tanks have charcoal filters so the fumes do not escape into the environment. It's not the fumes in the tank that ignites in an accident it's what happens when the fuel escapes into the environment. When gas spreads over the track or any surface it increases the surface area of the fuel and thus allows increased evaporation making it easier to ignite. When the larger the pool the more gas evaporates in a larger area making it easier for any spark to ignite.[/QUOTE]

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Urmom Click here to enlarge
    a motor too much fuel, what happens ? It FLOODS. It does not ignite. Why ? Not enough oxygen. Same with a gas tank. 1/4 tank has more air vs full tank. Which is most likely to ignite ?
    Again the risk isn't a fire starting in the gas tank if the tank isn't breached or no fuel is leaking you'll be fine. It's when the fuel spills out, in a crash you have exposed electrical wires, hot brakes, etc. The fuel tank is designed to hold fuel safely so there isn't a huge risk there, it's when the car rolls over and the fuel can escape from the breather (if there is no roll over valve), damaged fuel lines etc. You can't compare a cylinder bore to this either because there is limited oxygen inside of a cylinder bore compared to the amount of oxygen in the environment when there is a spill.

    Overall when fuel is contained in the tank there is a very low risk of combustion as there are not many sources to ignite it. The issue is when it escapes, and guess what if you have a full tank of gas spewing fuel and some of that fuel spewing out catches on fire, where do you think the fire is going to head next? That's right your full tank of gasoline...

    Better to have 6.5L - 13L of gas than 52L.



    Now if you don't have anything to contribute to the fuel starvation issue on the track, please refrain from cluttering the thread since this is an issue that track guys (the low number of us that are present) actually face.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •