[SQUAWK3274]

[Finally got a chance to test RaceChip. The “butt dyno” felt like it was quicker than stock, but wanted to verify. So, bought a Dragy device and did some pulls. Huge improvement. All runs done with 93 octane (EDIT: 93 octane + STP OCTANE BOOSTER..no conclusive evidence it helped, but I was not able to repeat the times without it) , 1/4 tank and >1% uphill slope. Definitely want to see how low she’ll go on level ground.

PS Sorry for the YUGE pics. Don’t know how to resize from my iPad here..



Stock:








RaceChip (Level 7):

[elite-fusion]

This is great!
Wish you can get your hands on a JB4 to compare the results between the two units to see which one is in fact better when it comes to run times etc in the same exact environment as the RC was tested in

[XxChiliPalmerxX]

[QUOTE=SQUAWK3274;29453557]Finally got a chance to test RaceChip. The “butt dyno” felt like it was quicker than stock, but wanted to verify. So, bought a Dragy device and did some pulls. Huge improvement. All runs done with 93 octane, 1/4 tank and >1% uphill slope. Definitely want to see how low she’ll go on level ground.

PS Sorry for the YUGE pics. Don’t know how to resize from my iPad here..



WHOA!! Cannot wait to install mine!

[scungilio]

Huge thanks and a thumbs up to the OP here. Great numbers.
Keep in mind these runs are all up hill. You would have been about 4 flat and 3.5 in the 0-60 comparisson if on dead level ground.
Been on the fence about this mod, you made up my mind.

[mmm50i]

Wow that's really impressive, your car is a BEAST!

[scungilio]

3 or 4 tenths of a second when a vehicle is already sub 4 seconds 0-60 is absolutely huuuuuge and should really move the SOTP meter which is important to me.

[SQUAWK3274]

Originally Posted by scungilio

Huge thanks and a thumbs up to the OP here. Great numbers.
Keep in mind these runs are all up hill. You would have been about 4 flat and 3.5 in the 0-60 comparisson if on dead level ground.
Been on the fence about this mod, you made up my mind.

Thanks! I was surprised by the numbers to be honest. Haven’t ran it on flat ground w the Dragy still but excited to see what she can do. Go for it! I remember spending hundreds on parts on my older Honda/acuras for a few hp. Gotta love being a performance car person these days!

[SQUAWK3274]

Originally Posted by mmm50i

Wow that's really impressive, your car is a BEAST!

Thanks - Definitely got a strong one. Encroaching on X5M numbers

[scungilio]

Originally Posted by SQUAWK3274

Thanks! I was surprised by the numbers to be honest. Haven’t ran it on flat ground w the Dragy still but excited to see what she can do. Go for it! I remember spending hundreds on parts on my older Honda/acuras for a few hp. Gotta love being a performance car person these days!

Are you feeling the 100 lb.ft. or so bump on part throttle. I would guess that it is noticeable but just wondered. This 4.4L TT delivers its full boat of torque at around 1800rpm and carries it to the mid 5000s. Beautiful broad flat torque curve that anyone in the know on this stuff wants to see. 100 on top of that probably explains much of the significant 0-60 gains. Tenths don't come easy under 4 seconds.

[SQUAWK3274]

Originally Posted by scungilio

Are you feeling the 100 lb.ft. or so bump on part throttle. I would guess that it is noticeable but just wondered. This 4.4L TT delivers its full boat of torque at around 1800rpm and carries it to the mid 5000s. Beautiful broad flat torque curve that anyone in the know on this stuff wants to see. 100 on top of that probably explains much of the significant 0-60 gains. Tenths don't come easy under 4 seconds.

It feels stronger and that it just pulls steadily a little more than stock. I’ll be honest, I thought I would feel the 100lb/ft more than I do, especially, like you said at partial throttle. I notice how quickly the Speedo is ticking up with ease. The most noticeable difference, imo, is how hard it launches w RC. It throws you back off the line. That part IS very noticeable.

[scungilio]

Originally Posted by SQUAWK3274

It feels stronger and that it just pulls steadily a little more than stock. I’ll be honest, I thought I would feel the 100lb/ft more than I do, especially, like you said at partial throttle. I notice how quickly the Speedo is ticking up with ease. The most noticeable difference, imo, is how hard it launches w RC. It throws you back off the line. That part IS very noticeable.

You are obviously getting a ton of torque right out of the hole and that is a hoot for sure.
The M50i is damn fast in factory trim, you probably need to be into it all the way to feel the bump.
Thanks for the report.

[Bigtop]

Just installed the RC GTS Black on my M50i.
Definitely noticed a difference in the default Sport setting. Tried the Race setting briefly but need to test some more to describe the difference.

Is the mapping for Sport putting the torque and power lower down in the power band, more suitable for street driving and Race focusing on the mapping higher up the rev range for more of a racing environment?

I had read somewhere that the difference between the X5M and M50i is the horsepower is obviously greater in the X5M but the torque curve and amount of torque is identical. So wondering if the RC is kind of doing the same thing?

[weinerbarn]

Originally Posted by Bigtop

Just installed the RC GTS Black on my M50i.
Definitely noticed a difference in the default Sport setting. Tried the Race setting briefly but need to test some more to describe the difference.

Is the mapping for Sport putting the torque and power lower down in the power band, more suitable for street driving and Race focusing on the mapping higher up the rev range for more of a racing environment?

I had read somewhere that the difference between the X5M and M50i is the horsepower is obviously greater in the X5M but the torque curve and amount of torque is identical. So wondering if the RC is kind of doing the same thing?

Difference is just the boost added. The curve should remain roughly the same with a gap between them based on what level is chosen. Higher levels require higher octane as well to avoid knock and thus timing pull.

On the X5M and M50i topic, they are totally different engines. There are many physical differences in the engine which contribute to the power band differences, not just a tuning change. You really can't compare them at all.

[Bigtop]

Originally Posted by weinerbarn

Difference is just the boost added. The curve should remain roughly the same with a gap between them based on what level is chosen. Higher levels require higher octane as well to avoid knock and thus timing pull.

On the X5M and M50i topic, they are totally different engines. There are many physical differences in the engine which contribute to the power band differences, not just a tuning change. You really can't compare them at all.

You are correct.

So got this from Racechip tech support.

Thank you for contacting the RaceChip Customer Service.

The chip only works in the rev range until 3000 rpm. The higher the mode, the more power and torque.

The rev range will be the same and will not change.

So the chip programming kicks in at 3000 RPM+. The different settings Eco, Sport and Race just incrementally increase the torque and power in the same area of the rev range.

[F82Tazmanian]

Are my eyes deceiving me or did you barely gain 1mph in the quarter mile. The chip barely added any power up top?

Bright side is 113.85 is a great trap Stock

[rikintpa]

I have a 2019 X5 50i with a RC Black installed My neigbor has a 2021 M50i and I am faster than him off the line (with and without Launch Control) to 60 and 105 mph (that's where he quits). At about 80 I am almost a full car length ahead, 93 Octane and just under half a tank of fuel. No other mods at all. That is why I am here I want to know is there anything else I can do to gain more HP and Tq without replacing T-bo's? The reason why is I found myself up against a new F-Pace 5.0 (that sounds absolutley fantastick BTW) and he had me by a half car length, or more, the entire run and I did not like it so I signed up here for some ideas. And did I mention the Jag sounded unbelievable!

[kfer]

Originally Posted by SQUAWK3274

Thanks - Definitely got a strong one. Encroaching on X5M numbers

Do you have a measurement without that big slope?
My friend's X5MC manages 11.5 on -0.4%. Yours should be better. In the end, you even braked...
I guess you now have about 650 hp. That's sick :O

[CT335xi]

Originally Posted by kfer

Do you have a measurement without that big slope?
My friend's X5MC manages 11.5 on -0.4%. Yours should be better. In the end, you even braked...
I guess you now have about 650 hp. That's sick :O

650 HP seems like a stretch it’s only 523 HP factory which we know is underrated , I would say probably 600 HP so close to a stock x5m . Though the torque probably 660 +

[Longboarder]

Originally Posted by F82Tazmanian

Are my eyes deceiving me or did you barely gain 1mph in the quarter mile. The chip barely added any power up top?

Bright side is 113.85 is a great trap Stock

100% correct. And his slope and DA were more favorable on the 1/4 mile with RC.

So it appears that the RC is giving a ton of torque down low (that helps with the launch) but nearly zero net peak HP gains. I had always suspected their HP numbers were massively inflated and estimate them in the real world to be maybe 20-25 on the X5M and a little less on the M50i. I am going off experience with having the RC on my former F85 X5M and current F95 X5M. It's a nice product - I've never had an issue with it, but the peak gains in the real world are next to nothing. Just like Dinan and most others piggys. Dyno gains are probably nice but once you get out of the metaverse into reality thing like heat soak come into play.

[kfer]

Originally Posted by Longboarder

100% correct. And his slope and DA were more favorable on the 1/4 mile with RC.

So it appears that the RC is giving a ton of torque down low (that helps with the launch) but nearly zero net peak HP gains. I had always suspected their HP numbers were massively inflated and estimate them in the real world to be maybe 20-25 on the X5M and a little less on the M50i. I am going off experience with having the RC on my former F85 X5M and current F95 X5M. It's a nice product - I've never had an issue with it, but the peak gains in the real world are next to nothing. Just like Dinan and most others piggys. Dyno gains are probably nice but once you get out of the metaverse into reality thing like heat soak come into play.

I don't quite agree with that. If you look at the RaceChip run, you can see that at the end either the brakes were applied or the accelerator pedal was released too early.
But the speed was also 184.51 km/h with +1.19% slope.
I think otherwise (I mean accelerating to the end) it would be at about 187km/h. Here are 3 screenshots from Dragy as compatison : his run, another M50i Stage 2 with downpipe and a lot of mods ( not racechip) and an X5MC. As you can see, the X5MC has also only about 190km/h at the end with a +0.12% slope.
And they should have about 650hp on dyno.
So I don't think he has no additional power at the top.

[Longboarder]

Originally Posted by kfer

I don't quite agree with that. If you look at the RaceChip run, you can see that at the end either the brakes were applied or the accelerator pedal was released too early.
But the speed was also 184.51 km/h with +1.19% slope.
I think otherwise (I mean accelerating to the end) it would be at about 187km/h. Here are 3 screenshots from Dragy as compatison : his run, another M50i Stage 2 with downpipe and a lot of mods ( not racechip) and an X5MC. As you can see, the X5MC has also only about 190km/h at the end with a +0.12% slope.
And they should have about 650hp on dyno.
So I don't think he has no additional power at the top.

Thanks for the detailed review. That is a good explanation as I saw his 1/8 mile trap speed did increase nicely but I suspected the gains lessened as speed increased. I do hope he did let off at the end.

It's tough to evaluate posts in the dragy leaderboard app because people are not always transparent with their mods so take them with a grain of salt.

The only way I am going to satisfy myself is take my X5M on a dedicated test where I run Map7 on a 1/4 mile and then wait a bit to cool back down and change to Map0 and run again in tbe same spot. My X5M has no other mods so should be a good test

[kfer]

Originally Posted by Longboarder

Thanks for the detailed review. That is a good explanation as I saw his 1/8 mile trap speed did increase nicely but I suspected the gains lessened as speed increased. I do hope he did let off at the end.

It's tough to evaluate posts in the dragy leaderboard app because people are not always transparent with their mods so take them with a grain of salt.

The only way I am going to satisfy myself is take my X5M on a dedicated test where I run Map7 on a 1/4 mile and then wait a bit to cool back down and change to Map0 and run again in tbe same spot. My X5M has no other mods so should be a good test

I don't know exactly what MAP7 means for an RC, or how many stages it actually has. But after the experience with my box I can say, that the higher level is not necessarily better. In principle I can go up to level 15, but I get the best results at level 8 when it's about 100-200 km/h. But with the elasticity, for example, I can drive a bit better values ​​with Level 10 . The reason is actually - as you mentioned above - that there is significantly more torque in the middle range possible, but it is already too much at the top and the DME regulates it back. I've heard the same experience from the JB4. So the right "map" has to be experimented.