New HPFP Upgrade - SpoolPerformance Helix
- Thread starter doublespaces
- Start date
Rob@RBTurbo
Lieutenant
While it is never fair to compare a new product to one that has been in the trenches for months and/or years, it is also fair to deduce that IF the integrity and design of the internals of this device are well designed it would be far superior to the Belt driven method of doing things.
Case in point and something that you are often plagued with is the broken brackets for the Single Barrel. Starting with the version 1 brackets and even through the version 2, it is just something that seems to keep happening. Now surely this is something that can be blamed on a ton of variables, but the point is that it still is happening and it maybe entirely avoidable with a different concept. There lies the big difference in this design is that in itself is something that would be entirely eliminated, in every possible way, by simply bolting in this more centric sandwich style overdrive adapter. Of course there is still that big IF, as noted above, time will have to tell on that one.
Rob
My experience mostly in endurance road racing (not drag), Rob, is that one pushes one engineering envelope to another. Don't believe that by removing one problem with Design A one doesn't then realize another problem in Design B. At least for me, that's is contrary to a lot of performance development experience I've had, at the outer edge of abuse (which is where many of the failure stories originate). That said, I like what I think I see going on in this design ... but that's about as speculative as Mueller's burden of innocence argument 
.
No point in speculating and comparing to other solutions at this point: we know that just devolves into more useless mud slinging in which no one here benefits. Gotta wait and see.
The other part with this platform - is that testing/announcement to availability is rarely weeks, sometimes months, and OFTEN 1+ years. Gotta let the process work its way through. And then ... and I've seen this on this platform now a few times ... the cinderella arrives, but in reality it has to go through its larger real-life revisions. Flexfuel is about the only "new tech" solution I've experienced that was unapologetic out of the box.
Filippo
.No point in speculating and comparing to other solutions at this point: we know that just devolves into more useless mud slinging in which no one here benefits. Gotta wait and see.
The other part with this platform - is that testing/announcement to availability is rarely weeks, sometimes months, and OFTEN 1+ years. Gotta let the process work its way through. And then ... and I've seen this on this platform now a few times ... the cinderella arrives, but in reality it has to go through its larger real-life revisions. Flexfuel is about the only "new tech" solution I've experienced that was unapologetic out of the box.
Filippo
Last edited:
Rob@RBTurbo
Lieutenant
My experience mostly in endurance road racing, Rob, is that one pushes one engineering envelope to another. Don't believe that by removing one problem with Design A one doesn't then realize another problem in Design B. At least for me, that's is contrary to a lot of performance development experience I've had, at the outer edge of abuse (which is where many of the failure stories originate). That said, I like what I think I see going on in this design ... but that's about as speculative as Mueller's burden of innocence argument
No point in speculating and comparing to other solutions at this point: we know that just devolves into more useless mud slinging in which no one here benefits. Gotta wait and see.
The other part with this platform - is that testing/announcement to availability is rarely weeks, sometimes months, and OFTEN 1+ years. Gotta let the process work its way through. And then ... and I've seen this on this platform now a few times ... the cinderella arrives, but in reality it has to go through its larger real-life revisions. Flexfuel is about the only "new tech" solution I've experienced that was unapologetic out of the box.
Filippo
I do not disagree and there's a lot still left unknown with what has been presented. But I do agree in that on the surface this thing looks like gold in comparison to the alternative, we just need to confirm it is the simple and effective part that it appears to be... unfortunately that may take a year or more to know for sure and possibly never if things are swept up under the rug as is typical in this platform.
Rob
Why does everyone jump on a bandwagon without knowing anything about it?
Seemed to me that simplicity vs power option would be the S55 setup that was being played with. No special parts to replace/break and readily available.
It's just the tuning side that was a hold up IIRC.
When everyone seems to be wanting more power, the latest and greatest ... try future proofing your setup. Save money in the long run *to buy something actually fast).
Seemed to me that simplicity vs power option would be the S55 setup that was being played with. No special parts to replace/break and readily available.
It's just the tuning side that was a hold up IIRC.
When everyone seems to be wanting more power, the latest and greatest ... try future proofing your setup. Save money in the long run *to buy something actually fast).
The piezoelectric injectors aren’t the issue. They are like 3300cc injectors. The problem has always been having HPFP capable of fueling the injectors.
The problem has been their cost and tendency to fail when pushed toward that theoretical limit.
So this is just a way to overdrive the pump not a pump upgrade ?
Last edited:
Injection window is the big limiter to the stock di setup. At some point, that window closes and the only way to inject more fuel without fully wetting the cylinder walls comes by way of pi.
There is 2-3 long discussions sprinkled across the internet dating back to when that one person actually managed to contact the engineer who worked on the fuel system and obtained those cc numbers. Probably a good discussion for another thread, although I think one of those threads is here somewhere.
Made a new thread for it: https://bmw.spoolstreet.com/threads/n54-piezo-fuel-injector-limits.5181/
Made a new thread for it: https://bmw.spoolstreet.com/threads/n54-piezo-fuel-injector-limits.5181/
This.
The upfront investment is huge. I’ve probably got well over 10k in standalone and custom wiring harness, id1300 port injectors, intake manifold for PI, billet hats, triple walbro 525’s, dual bpm4 controllers, lines, tuning, etc. maybe it’s over 15k. I quit keeping track.
(Edit: I’ve kept DI in addition to PI, but I’ve probably got enough fuel to run PI only theoretically)
Last edited:
I agree with you about everyone jumping on the bandwagon. Alot of unknowns with this, and no test data, flow numbers or lifecycle testing presented. I find it funny how venders on here claim " we have X many people running our product " . That is not testing. I could drive like a grandma for 3 years on one product and claim it lasted x amount of time, yet keep it at a high sustained rpm where the overdriven pump will be stressed and it will last a very short time. This is why you see a year or so later things failing. As an engineer it amazes me how this gets by time and time again on this platform. I hope that this isn't the case with this product and it has the data to back it.
As far as the s55 pump goes, It is a completely different pumping concept compared to the n54 pump. The s55 style pump needs the solenoid timed in relation to the pumps stroke. It is timed in a way that it acts like a variable displacement pump.This is why it has a dedicated position sensor on the side of the pump. To work on the n55 or n54 that use the other style pump, it will need a dedicated controller to time the intake solenoid on the pump and translate the pwm signal from the dme. The s55 style pump has better control and simplicity mechanically when compared to the n54 one but it is a much more complicated style pump electronically to retrofit. I could go on and on about the advantages and disadvantages of one style versus the other. Most OEM's are moving to the lobe driven pump because of their simplicity and tighter control of the pumps output.
I've seen this on instagram, priced 850$ + shipping with a lifetime warranty.
Not sure if it's true though!
Not sure if it's true though!
I'm probably speaking out of line here, but I can say the way this has occurred is not the way it was intended. Apparently someone posted on Instagram they were selling this product without actually having the product in their possession or even the authorization to do so. And by that I mean, once the company found out the post was deleted immediately.
To prevent confusion as to who is actually behind the product they made their own post and here we are. If you are someone who wants X number of confirmations and more data, that is perfect because more testing is exactly what they were trying to do. Unfortunately that process has been sped up for reasons outside of their control because of what appears to be third party leakage.
As an engineer, you are likely aware of the cost of testing. It's a double-edged sword: a more likely reliable product released later at a higher cost. The market pushes toward low-cost solutions. Let's be straight up - they push for it unapologetically. Vendors test enough that they believe they have a working product. As guys that build things, we have the proclivity to believe in our limited test experience ("ok it's good enough"), that it will extrapolate to a more general experience (yet most often incurs "ah ha" moments). We frequently repeat inflicting hope in our new creations, in spite of having the experience of knowing it is not true. And the social media world is a brutal place to watch that play out.
Fictitiously say this product were to release at $2,900 instead of $1,500 because of far more extensive testing (not a bunch of yahoos using it, but real testing ... we are engineers right ... to include real test plans, by real test professionals, measured stress testing, disassembly, analysis, etc ... after all that's what the auto industry guys do which have the reliability we are all alluding to), what would it do in the market? I think we often make this all about the vendor, yet there are two sides to that story.
Like most products, I suspect this one will come to market with a best test effort against cost and to-market constraints. It will hopefully be flawless and, if like most other products (wow ... do we want to list the names) have some teething pains. Hopefully, not catastrophic. Wish them the best but appreciate both sides of that problem!
Filippo
Last edited:
N54 talk
Alpha=pre order
Beta=revision one
Final=2021 revision
And to doublespaces I remember that with the engineer it was when Terry was working around fuel limits on the low side and the engineer states they designed the engine to run on 72 psi in case of failure so they had to oversize injectors by a large margin.
Alpha=pre order
Beta=revision one
Final=2021 revision
And to doublespaces I remember that with the engineer it was when Terry was working around fuel limits on the low side and the engineer states they designed the engine to run on 72 psi in case of failure so they had to oversize injectors by a large margin.
Similar threads
