BimmerFest BMW Forum banner

335d JBD Quarter Mile results

48K views 157 replies 29 participants last post by  Snipe656 
#1 ·
I had a chance to take the 335d to the drag strip recently after installing the JBD. I only got 3 runs in since it was so busy at the track. I was planning on testing the car with and without JBD, but didn't get the chance. All 3 runs are with the JBD at 100%. My car has 19" 313 wheels with non-rft contisportcontact 3 tires which throws a variable in to the mix. The weather was around 78 F. The car has about 10k miles.

Best run:

13.4 @ 103
1.99 60'

The car weighed in at 3965lbs with me in it! I had about a quarter tank of diesel in the tank. When the car was stock with the sport 18" wheels and michelin RFTs it ran a 14.0@100 with about 2k miles on the odometer in cooler weather.

I expected a low 13 and higher trap, but until I test the car without the JBD on the 19"s I don't know how much the wheels affected the time.

 
See less See more
1
#3 ·
:rolleyes:

First off - Edit your post to get rid of the ridiculous quote. There was no need to quote my entire post or any of it for that matter. It just clutters the thread.

Second - People don't go to the quarter mile track to get their 0-60 time! People also don't measure power gains by just 0-60 times. Thus, 0-60 is pretty irrelevant to me. ET and especially trap speed tell much more about how fast a car is.
 
#5 ·
Second - People don't go to the quarter mile track to get their 0-60 time! People also don't measure power gains by just 0-60 times. Thus, 0-60 is pretty irrelevant to me. ET and especially trap speed tell much more about how fast a car is.
Agreed, if anything 0-100-0 is more relevant than just 0-60. It's a standard test for euro car magazines. Give you an idea on overall performance ( acceleration & braking ).

HIREN, thanks for the results on the JBD, any feedback or data helps people make their decisions on future upgrades. Straight up, thats dam impressive for a diesel. :thumbup:

And TForan I think your right, more favorable temps and less rotational mass could drop you down to low 13's.
 
#97 ·
Looks pretty good to me. To think that a 183 cubic inch diesel could beat 95% of all the old muscle cars is impressive. Drop the temp 20 degrees and run 17s, it would be close to 13 flat.
Agreed, if anything 0-100-0 is more relevant than just 0-60. It's a standard test for euro car magazines. Give you an idea on overall performance ( acceleration & braking ).

HIREN, thanks for the results on the JBD, any feedback or data helps people make their decisions on future upgrades. Straight up, thats dam impressive for a diesel. :thumbup:

And TForan I think your right, more favorable temps and less rotational mass could drop you down to low 13's.
I haven't done 1/4 mi. runs in my d, but with 17 inch HRE C70s (16 lbs per corner) and Michelin PS2s (non-RFT), I am gaining 4 mpg. The stock wheels are f*cking heavy.
 
#7 ·
I am not sure of the cetane rating of the diesel, but I am betting it is at least 48. After some research online I came to find out my county and many surrounding counties have laws in place requiring a minimum cetane rating of 48 for diesel fuels distributed and sold in the area.
I always fill up at the same HEB store.
 
#8 ·
HIREN, thanks for posting the results - good job. Can you elaborate on your technique a little - thanks.
ZQQM, you know 0-100-0, is in km :) 0-60-0 would be almost as relevant if you care about breaking...
 
#11 ·
ZQQM, you know 0-100-0, is in km :) 0-60-0 would be almost as relevant if you care about breaking...
Actually thats not true, I'm referring to AUTOCAR ( a large British publication ) in which they've been quoting 0-100-0 ( MPH ) for years. They use MPH in England as apposed to KPH. So this is a great indication of a cars' overall performance, Acceleration / stability / Braking.

Shortly after I start modding my cars for more speed, I also address the braking ability of the car. Some cars have wicked acceleration, but can't pull off a full on stop from 100mph without lots of length and drama.

Either way, Im impressed with HIREN's low et, looking forward to more runs/data.
 
#13 ·
My technique:
I kept it in DS and turned off DSC, then power braked it through first gear to clean off and warm up the rear tires, not enough to cause smoke. Then I just punched it, no brake torque as that caused too much spin off the line.

I still haven't met a 335i on the road or track that wanted to run, but judging from the numbers it should be somewhat close with the stock 335i pulling on the top end. I don't think the 335d would have a chance against a JB 335i.
 
#15 ·
First off, as was mentioned, you need to calm down. Nice that you provided results, but no need to be a dick to people who've been around here and contribute quality to this forum and the diesel community.

Second, your launch technique needs a bit of work, but since you've only had the opportunity to do 3 runs, you're forgiven this time. :)

1. Don't start in DS, start in manual, shifted to 2nd (first gear launches are strongly ill advised)
2. Brake boost to about 2k RPMs
3. Make sure that all forms of traction control are off.
4. Don't warm up your tires, unless you either have DRs or you're planning on swapping them out a whole lot sooner than their expected life. On street RFTs (or non RFTs, even), you're really not doing yourself a big favor by spinning in the box.

If you want better times, the above will assist in that. Your wheels are going to spin no matter what you do, so do what you can to mitigate (2nd gear launches are a must for the car).
 
#16 ·
Stugots,

I would have thought starting in 2nd would just slow the car down. I'm assuming you've tried both 1st and 2nd gear starts at the drag strip? Also what are your reasons for not recommending 1st gear starts besides wheel spin?
Also I don't get the tires wet or spin in the box. I just spin them after avoiding the box before l get to the line. This doesn't really warm the tires, but gets all the debris off them.

The next time I take the d to the track I'll try the 2nd gear launch, manually shifting earlier, reducing rear air pressure to 30 if needed, and also a run without the JBD if I get the chance.
 
#17 · (Edited)
Stugots,

I would have thought starting in 2nd would just slow the car down. I'm assuming you've tried both 1st and 2nd gear starts at the drag strip? Also what are your reasons for not recommending 1st gear starts besides wheel spin?
Also I don't get the tires wet or spin in the box. I just spin them after avoiding the box before l get to the line. This doesn't really warm the tires, but gets all the debris off them.

The next time I take the d to the track I'll try the 2nd gear launch, manually shifting earlier, reducing rear air pressure to 30 if needed, and also a run without the JBD if I get the chance.
The other reason for the non-first gear starts is because you'll trip so fast through first that you won't be able to time your shifts. Also, make sure to time your shifts at right around 4k through 3rd to get the most out of the transitions.

If you're running RFT's, reducing tire pressure will not increase traction (the stiffer sidewall prevents that), so if you have them, don't waste your time doing that (I'm mentioning this since you obviously don't have RFT's). Reducing tire pressure for runs is a common way to assist in traction.
 
#28 ·
They all will shift out at 4600 rpm regardless of the mode.

Here's how I do it.

Start in first with all nanny boxes off.
Brake torque the car to around 2K
Release the brake and hit second immediately, then short shift when the tach hits 3600 RPM through the rest of the gears.
It will shift at about 4000 rpm and I see no reason to rev higher.
I have an Innovative OT-2, so I'll make some runs at different shift points to see what the differences might be.
 
#30 ·
They all will shift out at 4600 rpm regardless of the mode.
That is an assumption, not fact. My car's behavior seems to disprove your theory.

It will shift at about 4000 rpm
I do not intend to argue with you, but I do think you just contradicted yourself. Typo?

I see no reason to rev higher.
Agreed. Except for maybe a situation where you are holding speed through a curve around which you don't want to upshift.

BTW, in case it should be explicitly stated, thanks for joining and contributing to the forum.
 
#43 ·
Interesting, all of it. I think I'm with the OP when he says he'd like to see a comparison with non-JBD times. While he wants to compare them with a smaller wheel size, I wouldn't mind keeping the same setup to minimize variables in the comparison. I'm not one to drag or track, but to see what the 335d is capable of doing and what one can setup for street use is beneficial (to me at least). Picking up my D on 9/20...finally!

Stay thirsty my friends.
 
#44 ·
I've dragged a lot of cars as well over the years. I probably have over 500 runs at the track I frequent! The 335d I would also consider easy, there really isn't much you can mess up with an automatic. There are many more variables with a standard transmission car. My times can spread more than a second between runs in my STi due to bad launch, missed gear, boost cut, etc.

Stugots, thanks for chiming in, I know you were speaking with many tuners and trying to get your car dynoed again, I didn't know you had taken your car to the drag strip, I must have missed that thread or it slipped my mind! Don't you wish they had quarter mile tracks in your area! Thanks for your contribution.

I plan to go back and test the car without the JBD and with again on the same day, same setup as I've stated earlier. I have sold my stock wheels and tires so all runs will be on the 19s.
 
#49 ·
I just back from making a half a dozen and this is first time I've done this since having the JBD at 100%. Second gear starts are indeed a little tidier. There is quite a bit more wheel spin at 100%. I also have the rears at 42 lbs, so that didn't help.

One other observation, is how hard this must be on the drivetrain. The tranny's at it's limit and it just feels like it could get very expensive!
 
#54 ·
You can only go "so fast" without destroying something, that is just part of it all. You either get content with a certain amount of power or you keep going for more. Seems most people after they do one mod that adds significant power will end up looking for more mods to do like it is a drug. Many years ago I used to be friends with someone who had one of the fastest AWD Eclipses in the country, he was like number five or something. It was his only car and he raced it all the time between the drag strip events and street racing. That guy was replacing transmissions all the time but was the price he was willing to pay so he could blow the doors off all sorts of unsuspecting cars.

If you think brake boosted launches are fun then try out a boosted car with a trans brake sometime ...
 
#60 · (Edited)
I suppose I made a mistake in saying rear wheels. I meant to say the engine is generating that much torque, but the math still translates to the wheels. :) Edited my above post to reflect as such. :)

EDIT: I was right the first time. What the engine creates is then magnified by gear ratio. The #'s are correct.
 
#68 ·
Slam me if this is a stupid question:

The chart is on a dyno, so rear wheels are free to spin (rotate).

If you are doing a brake boost, the rear wheels are stopped, but you are revving the engine to whatever higher RPM. Who knows what the torque really is at that moment?:dunno:

If the wheels are stopped, no work is being done, so all the energy being put out by the engine has to be consumed in the Tranny (i.e. heating up the Tranny oil).

I'm just saying I doubt we know what the torque really is at that moment in time when you release the brakes. We should know engine torque.

Am I missing something?
 
#71 ·
Here is what happened. In the first few posts of this thread some overly aggressive language was employed when not called for. After that we've had, shall I say strained, dialog that IMO is uncharacteristic for this forum. Now there is a bad vibe attacking typos and poor use of superlatives.
 
#73 ·
Stock M57Y reportedly produces 580 Nm (428 ft-lbs) @ 1750 rpm.

The 335d's ZF 6 speed transmission is rated for 650 Nm (480 ft-lbs). That is a buffer of 52 ft-lbs.

The newer ZF 8 speed GA8HP70Z is rated for 700 Nm (516 ft/lbs).

Be careful revving the engine, in M1 or M2, while holding the car stationary, with or without JBD.
 
#75 ·
Stock M57Y reportedly produces 580 Nm (428 ft-lbs) @ 1750 rpm.

The 335d's ZF 6 speed transmission is rated for 650 Nm (480 ft-lbs). That is a buffer of 52 ft-lbs.

The newer ZF 8 speed GA8HP70Z is rated for 700 Nm (516 ft/lbs).

Be careful revving the engine, in M1 or M2, while holding the car stationary, with or without JBD.
I once read an article explaining how Tremec standard transmissions were rated for power. Two key things always stuck out in my head: a) the rating is based on the weight of the vehicle and b) the rating is for the power at the engine. Those stuck out in my head because the particular transmission from them I was looking at was rated in a vehicle that was a good 1500-2000lbs heavier than mine. Makes me wonder about these transmissions in our cars, if the rating is done in a similar fashion and if so since some say that transmission came from V8 cars then were they heavier cars.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top