if you do not have a BMC filter get one RIGHT NOW.
08-06-2009, 03:20 PM
#51
Senior Members
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 609
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Alpine White Girl' post='967982' date='Aug 6 2009, 05:36 PM
i figured your stupid proposal needed a stupid response 
out of curiosity, is a 535 that much faster than 530? after all, today's 535 is yesterday's 530, right?
to be honest, i don't know how much the filter was. I know the K&N is about $60... as I posted earlier, since i would have had to order the K&N, i opted to buy the "packaged" scoop and filter from trinity. I guess ultimately, if I was concerned about the $50 difference, I wouldnt be driving a car that stickered for $64k.
im tempted to record the before and after sound from inside the car... the car may not have more horsepower, but it feels and sounds different.
maybe there was something wrong with my original filter and the effects of the bmc filter on my car is greater than that of others...
08-06-2009, 03:21 PM
#52
Contributors
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 754
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Ride: A Car faster than yours.....
Here is the low down, so forget everything that was posted above. Mr. E is about to speak.
The k&n has a thinner surface which allows for great flow rate. When we dyno tested the stock vs. k&n vs. bmc, the k&n unit had been broken in. The bmc filter was brand new. Since the bmc is pre-oiled some of the oil can cause a restriction. Stock vs. K&N and BMC would show little gains (1-3whp). When coupled with the ram air, we were able to see a higher average (2-4whp). This was done on SEVERAL dyno runs. The K&N had always shown a higher number than the BMC. I didnt know why since the BMC did have a wider filter surface area. I put the BMC on the car anyways and had the car driven for about 1 month. After about 1500 miles, we tested it again. This time, the BMC showed a 1-3whp gain over the K&N. We were able to switch back and forth while the car was on the dyno and the gains were pretty consistent. This test was done on Kennys car. Since we were testing for the stage 3, I didnt label the individual dyno runs so Im not sure which runs there were. Kenny might have the print out still and can post it. We have ran his car over 170 times on the dyno so there are TONS of files. So, the BMC does require a break in period. The reason we use the BMC filters have more to do with the flange material though. I really like the flange material used in the BMC filters better than the flimsy black rubber on the k&n. Ive seen quite a few fall apart where the top of the air box meets the bottom box. This has yet to happend hundreds of E60s that i have worked on.
Oil based filters are fine and have been used for a long time. The problem is over oiling of the filters especially when it comes to filter maintenance. Aftermarket filters like k&n and bmc, have a red look to it. The k&n for example, has a white/greyish filter material. The red color is from the oil used on the filter. When the filter does its job, which is to filter out dirt, etc. it becomes black. Its SUPPOSED to look like this and NOT red. People start to clean them and over oil them to get that "new filter look". This is where oil vapors can get to the airflow meters and cause problems.
Here is an example of a popular k&n filter that we sell.
k&n makes great performance replacement filters and we have been selling both k&n and bmc for years. We chose bmc for our ram kits because they have worked well for us and I like the build quality better.
The k&n has a thinner surface which allows for great flow rate. When we dyno tested the stock vs. k&n vs. bmc, the k&n unit had been broken in. The bmc filter was brand new. Since the bmc is pre-oiled some of the oil can cause a restriction. Stock vs. K&N and BMC would show little gains (1-3whp). When coupled with the ram air, we were able to see a higher average (2-4whp). This was done on SEVERAL dyno runs. The K&N had always shown a higher number than the BMC. I didnt know why since the BMC did have a wider filter surface area. I put the BMC on the car anyways and had the car driven for about 1 month. After about 1500 miles, we tested it again. This time, the BMC showed a 1-3whp gain over the K&N. We were able to switch back and forth while the car was on the dyno and the gains were pretty consistent. This test was done on Kennys car. Since we were testing for the stage 3, I didnt label the individual dyno runs so Im not sure which runs there were. Kenny might have the print out still and can post it. We have ran his car over 170 times on the dyno so there are TONS of files. So, the BMC does require a break in period. The reason we use the BMC filters have more to do with the flange material though. I really like the flange material used in the BMC filters better than the flimsy black rubber on the k&n. Ive seen quite a few fall apart where the top of the air box meets the bottom box. This has yet to happend hundreds of E60s that i have worked on.
Oil based filters are fine and have been used for a long time. The problem is over oiling of the filters especially when it comes to filter maintenance. Aftermarket filters like k&n and bmc, have a red look to it. The k&n for example, has a white/greyish filter material. The red color is from the oil used on the filter. When the filter does its job, which is to filter out dirt, etc. it becomes black. Its SUPPOSED to look like this and NOT red. People start to clean them and over oil them to get that "new filter look". This is where oil vapors can get to the airflow meters and cause problems.
Here is an example of a popular k&n filter that we sell.
k&n makes great performance replacement filters and we have been selling both k&n and bmc for years. We chose bmc for our ram kits because they have worked well for us and I like the build quality better.
08-06-2009, 03:22 PM
#53
Super Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: So. Cal (SFV)
Posts: 17,508
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
My Ride: 2011.5 Alpine White E90 M3 | Black Novillo Leather | Carbon Fiber Leather Trim | ZCP | ZP2 | M-DCT | Navigation | Moonroof | 6FL Mods: TMS 12.5mm spacers all around l Hawk HPS Brake Pads l OEM M3 Edition Grills l Paint Matched Side Gills l Key Hole D
Originally Posted by e6t' post='968012' date='Aug 6 2009, 04:20 PM
out of curiosity, is a 535 that much faster than 530? after all, today's 535 is yesterday's 530, right?
have a look here: https://5series.net/information/options/engines/
08-06-2009, 03:24 PM
#54
Contributors
Join Date: May 2009
Location: SoCal
Posts: 10,496
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
My Ride: 2008 550I LOADED, all options except HUD and NV
Originally Posted by e6t' post='968012' date='Aug 6 2009, 04:20 PM
out of curiosity, is a 535 that much faster than 530? after all, today's 535 is yesterday's 530, right?
Well depending on the model year 530 (04-05 have 225HP/06-07 255HP) then there is still a pretty large difference with the 535 (300HP) so yes, the difference is more than you'd expect.
08-06-2009, 03:29 PM
#55
Contributors
Join Date: May 2009
Location: SoCal
Posts: 10,496
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
My Ride: 2008 550I LOADED, all options except HUD and NV
I dunno, I have had about a dozen K&N filters in my cars and never had one break on me. Even if they did, they are warrantied for 1 million miles so the replacement wouldn't be too hard I suppose (not sure, never had to use it).
08-06-2009, 03:32 PM
#56
Senior Members
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 609
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by GENEaTALS' post='968016' date='Aug 6 2009, 06:22 PM
the 535i/N54 motor has these 2 little extra things called "turbos" in them that the 530i does not..
have a look here: https://5series.net/information/options/engines/
have a look here: https://5series.net/information/options/engines/
one thing that i learned from that (very cool) link is that the 535d has a TRUCKLOAD of torque.
08-06-2009, 03:41 PM
#57
Contributors
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 754
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Ride: A Car faster than yours.....
Originally Posted by pjinca' post='968020' date='Aug 6 2009, 04:29 PM
I dunno, I have had about a dozen K&N filters in my cars and never had one break on me. Even if they did, they are warrantied for 1 million miles so the replacement wouldn't be too hard I suppose (not sure, never had to use it).
08-06-2009, 03:53 PM
#58
Contributors
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: MPLS, USA
Posts: 5,765
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Ride: 10 Honda Fit Sport, 10 Honda Pilot Touring
Originally Posted by RPIpower' post='968013' date='Aug 6 2009, 06:21 PM
Here is the low down, so forget everything that was posted above. Mr. E is about to speak.
The k&n has a thinner surface which allows for great flow rate. When we dyno tested the stock vs. k&n vs. bmc, the k&n unit had been broken in. The bmc filter was brand new. Since the bmc is pre-oiled some of the oil can cause a restriction. Stock vs. K&N and BMC would show little gains (1-3whp). When coupled with the ram air, we were able to see a higher average (2-4whp). This was done on SEVERAL dyno runs. The K&N had always shown a higher number than the BMC. I didnt know why since the BMC did have a wider filter surface area. I put the BMC on the car anyways and had the car driven for about 1 month. After about 1500 miles, we tested it again. This time, the BMC showed a 1-3whp gain over the K&N. We were able to switch back and forth while the car was on the dyno and the gains were pretty consistent. This test was done on Kennys car. Since we were testing for the stage 3, I didnt label the individual dyno runs so Im not sure which runs there were. Kenny might have the print out still and can post it. We have ran his car over 170 times on the dyno so there are TONS of files. So, the BMC does require a break in period. The reason we use the BMC filters have more to do with the flange material though. I really like the flange material used in the BMC filters better than the flimsy black rubber on the k&n. Ive seen quite a few fall apart where the top of the air box meets the bottom box. This has yet to happend hundreds of E60s that i have worked on.
Oil based filters are fine and have been used for a long time. The problem is over oiling of the filters especially when it comes to filter maintenance. Aftermarket filters like k&n and bmc, have a red look to it. The k&n for example, has a white/greyish filter material. The red color is from the oil used on the filter. When the filter does its job, which is to filter out dirt, etc. it becomes black. Its SUPPOSED to look like this and NOT red. People start to clean them and over oil them to get that "new filter look". This is where oil vapors can get to the airflow meters and cause problems.
Here is an example of a popular k&n filter that we sell.
k&n makes great performance replacement filters and we have been selling both k&n and bmc for years. We chose bmc for our ram kits because they have worked well for us and I like the build quality better.
The k&n has a thinner surface which allows for great flow rate. When we dyno tested the stock vs. k&n vs. bmc, the k&n unit had been broken in. The bmc filter was brand new. Since the bmc is pre-oiled some of the oil can cause a restriction. Stock vs. K&N and BMC would show little gains (1-3whp). When coupled with the ram air, we were able to see a higher average (2-4whp). This was done on SEVERAL dyno runs. The K&N had always shown a higher number than the BMC. I didnt know why since the BMC did have a wider filter surface area. I put the BMC on the car anyways and had the car driven for about 1 month. After about 1500 miles, we tested it again. This time, the BMC showed a 1-3whp gain over the K&N. We were able to switch back and forth while the car was on the dyno and the gains were pretty consistent. This test was done on Kennys car. Since we were testing for the stage 3, I didnt label the individual dyno runs so Im not sure which runs there were. Kenny might have the print out still and can post it. We have ran his car over 170 times on the dyno so there are TONS of files. So, the BMC does require a break in period. The reason we use the BMC filters have more to do with the flange material though. I really like the flange material used in the BMC filters better than the flimsy black rubber on the k&n. Ive seen quite a few fall apart where the top of the air box meets the bottom box. This has yet to happend hundreds of E60s that i have worked on.
Oil based filters are fine and have been used for a long time. The problem is over oiling of the filters especially when it comes to filter maintenance. Aftermarket filters like k&n and bmc, have a red look to it. The k&n for example, has a white/greyish filter material. The red color is from the oil used on the filter. When the filter does its job, which is to filter out dirt, etc. it becomes black. Its SUPPOSED to look like this and NOT red. People start to clean them and over oil them to get that "new filter look". This is where oil vapors can get to the airflow meters and cause problems.
Here is an example of a popular k&n filter that we sell.
k&n makes great performance replacement filters and we have been selling both k&n and bmc for years. We chose bmc for our ram kits because they have worked well for us and I like the build quality better.
08-06-2009, 03:59 PM
#59
Contributors
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 754
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Ride: A Car faster than yours.....
Originally Posted by DRANGED' post='968034' date='Aug 6 2009, 04:53 PM
The Shaolin Monk has spoken. End of discussion!
Haha, I lost my monkhood when I shaved the fumanchu.
08-06-2009, 05:00 PM
#60
Senior Members
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 609
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
im going to attempt to capture the difference in sound with my video camera. i dont know if the mic on my camera is sensitive enough or not, but i'll try.
back in a little while.
this could end in jail.
back in a little while.
this could end in jail.