03-23-2018, 05:23 PM | #67 | |
Brigadier General
1938
Rep 3,297
Posts |
Quote:
__________________
Eendraght Maeckt Macht
FOF82,3pedals,MPE,CCBs,Multicams, CarbonStrucktureAnthracite, CF_Everything BMWPhotoVin, 01of01, GTS DCT, EPS, MDM, CS EDC,Analog Dip ,GTS parts. Euro Vin e30 M3, FIA cage / 14.7 p / w ratio. Euro E30 touring G30 MSport i3s LBB X5M 3.2carrera https://www.youtube.com/channel/UClRTsfNzuz_EjUBu59UCykA |
|
Appreciate
1
DINMANN222.00 |
03-23-2018, 06:16 PM | #69 |
Major
446
Rep 1,300
Posts |
Damn Noobs!
This is a Real* Mustang Dyno! In short, My M6 f12 with Catless DP, Intake and Tune (23psi) made 533whp on a mustang Dyno and did 683 on a dynojet. Car dynoed very strong WHP numbers. Also... that torque looks funny... so max torque is 1-3k lol... if tuned lol... I don't see to much hope for this car with bolt on and Tune lasting to long. |
Appreciate
1
Brake_Late1937.50 |
03-23-2018, 06:25 PM | #70 |
Major
1030
Rep 1,190
Posts |
I'm convinced that chassis dyno tests performed by aftermarket companies are quickly becoming obsolete.
The VW diesel scandal showed the challenges: the ECU recognized that it was in the dyno and ran a different calibration. I believe that so many factors are taken into consideration today that a cars power output cannot be measured simply and assumed to be consistent and representative on a dyno. For example, maybe this M5 wasn't getting enough cooling air and dialed the tune back. Maybe the car detected some conflicts between various sensors because it wasn't actually moving.
__________________
2015 M3, 2005 330i ZHP, 2015 228i 6MT Track Handling Pack, 2007 M Coupe (Sold)
|
Appreciate
0
|
03-23-2018, 06:33 PM | #71 | ||
Enlisted Member
18
Rep 31
Posts |
Quote:
|
||
Appreciate
1
Brake_Late1937.50 |
03-23-2018, 06:37 PM | #72 |
Major
686
Rep 1,002
Posts |
I read the first page, and jumped to the fourth page.
Still arguing about meaningless shit. |
Appreciate
2
Brake_Late1937.50 F80Bowman18.00 |
03-23-2018, 06:44 PM | #73 | |
First Lieutenant
233
Rep 354
Posts
Drives: 335XI MPerformance edition
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Québec Province
|
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
03-23-2018, 06:57 PM | #74 | |
Major
967
Rep 1,080
Posts |
Quote:
Car did not dyno very strong numbers for a 127-129 MPH Trap speed. Also WHP should have read higher than WTQ. The test is odd for multiple reasons. Last edited by vtknight; 03-23-2018 at 07:03 PM.. |
|
03-23-2018, 07:02 PM | #75 |
Major
967
Rep 1,080
Posts |
There have been entire articles written on the conversions - and there is no exact number. It all depends how each dyno is configured.
I can only tell you from personal experience the differences on my car were about 6% between Mustang to Dynojet. I have seen as high as 10% - but upper end is usually 8% on average. |
Appreciate
0
|
03-23-2018, 07:06 PM | #76 | |
Lieutenant Colonel
824
Rep 1,584
Posts |
Quote:
Their estimation of the Mustang reading about 12% lower than a Dynojet is spot-on in my experience but I think the car would put down more power if fed a supply of fresh air like it would encounter in a real acceleration run. These new ECUs work very quickly to dial back power when they sense IATs rising. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
03-23-2018, 07:07 PM | #77 | |
Major
967
Rep 1,080
Posts |
Quote:
While I agree dyno's are just tools for before and after mods - and Trap speed is the only true test - I am interested to see how much BMW is lying about its HP figures. The fact that RWD tests only showed mid 11's at 123-124 - maybe it is close. We know AWD is the main reason for the quick ET. But 127-129 MPH traps - on magazine tests no less - are pretty strong for that advertised 600/533 numbers. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
03-23-2018, 07:13 PM | #78 | |
Major
967
Rep 1,080
Posts |
Quote:
It still doesn't explain why WTQ is showing higher than WHP overall though - as the 509 WTQ with the same 12% conversion to Dynojet and the 15% drivetrain loss is 670 lb ft. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
03-23-2018, 07:23 PM | #79 |
Brigadier General
2255
Rep 3,622
Posts |
I guess everyone knows what power to expect during break in
__________________
BMW CCA Member #516012
2016 340i, Estoril Blue, Manual Transmission, MPE, MPBBK, HRE FF04 Instagram: @brandons340i |
Appreciate
0
|
03-23-2018, 07:40 PM | #80 |
Lieutenant General
4972
Rep 10,200
Posts
Drives: 2024 Golf R / 2022 718 Spyder
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Dallas, TX
|
It sounds really good.
__________________
Past rides: 2016 981 BGTS, 2020 MINI JCW, 2017 F80, 2015 981 CS, 2014 F22 235, 2011 E82 135, 2008 E82 135, 2007 E92 328, 2007 E92 328 (My lady drives an OG M2. So does my dad)
|
Appreciate
0
|
03-23-2018, 08:28 PM | #83 |
;)
587
Rep 898
Posts |
Yes please, I'd love to take a look
__________________
BM3, MHD, ECUTek Calibrator | N55/S58 specialist | 2023 X5 45e Frozen Marina Bay Blue
|
Appreciate
0
|
03-23-2018, 08:58 PM | #84 |
Captain
399
Rep 647
Posts |
|
Appreciate
1
classyfast670.50 |
03-23-2018, 09:05 PM | #85 |
Lieutenant
58
Rep 496
Posts
Drives: 2023 CP XDrive G82 M4 - SSG
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Mars
|
Complete your break-in period and complete your first service, then do another dyno session. My F10 M5 and M4 did not produce full power until my break-in service was completed.
|
Appreciate
0
|
03-23-2018, 09:24 PM | #86 | ||
Major
1030
Rep 1,190
Posts |
Quote:
Quote:
Are the reported numbers corrected in any way? If it was cold and rainy, they the numbers would likely be corrected down. I believe the F80's ECU corrects for atmospheric conditions itself though to guarantee rated power under all conditions (I would assume the F90's would do the same). So if the ECU is correcting the power level and the dyno operator applies another correction factor, the final number will over-corrected downward.
__________________
2015 M3, 2005 330i ZHP, 2015 228i 6MT Track Handling Pack, 2007 M Coupe (Sold)
|
||
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
|
|