|
|
|
|
|
|
BMW Garage | BMW Meets | Register | Today's Posts | Search |
|
BMW 3-Series (E90 E92) Forum
>
Dyno Results
|
|
10-24-2011, 02:17 PM | #1 |
Private
9
Rep 79
Posts |
Dyno Results
I had my car dynoed earlier this week (Saturday the 22nd) at Moore's Automotive in Fairfax, VA. The car put down good horsepower numbers, however the technicians there were not able to get a torque reading as they could not pull an RPM signal. Three runs were conducted using a DynoJet dynamometer. All readings were done in 4th gear. Mods to the car are JBD set at 100% and intake with heat shield.
Run 1: 319.27 WHP Run 2: 328.27 WHP Run 3: 328.61 WHP In order to get a torque reading, I took the car today to Mach V motorsports in Sterling, VA. They use the same DynoJet however they were able to pull a RPM signal from the ECU. We ran the car in both 5th and 4th gear, same car mods aside from one run done with the JBD set a 0%. 5th gear: Run 1: 296.88 WHP, 474.31 WTQ Run 2: 299.58 WHP, 468.57 WTQ Run 3: 299.01 WHP, 465.29 WTQ 4th gear: Run 1: 300.17 WHP, 445.08 WTQ Run 2: 301.51 WHP, 442.44 WTQ Run 3: 267.16 WHP, 415.57 WTQ (JBD set to 0%) Ignoring the 5th gear runs (comparing directly to the 4th gear runs at Moore's Automotive), there was a ~28 WHP difference. I'm not sure why there is such a big difference, and its not clear which reading was the most accurate. Since the results were measured on the same machines, Mach V generally attributed the horsepower difference to the car itself (i.e. ECU adjusting fuel/timing differently today than on the previous run). However, I can say that I'm pretty happy with a wheel torque of 474 ft/lb. It is interesting to note that the car makes substantially more torque in 5th gear vs. 4th gear - this being attributed to more engine load in the higher gear. I dont have a scanner, so I cant upload the printouts. I'll try to get them scanned in soon so that you guys could actually see the HP/TQ curves. |
10-24-2011, 02:23 PM | #2 |
Resident Diesel Junkie
56
Rep 1,070
Posts |
These are some of the highest whp numbers I've seen on a D, both with JBD and without (your 267whp with JBD set to 0% is pretty spectacular). How much of that do you attribute to your custom intake?
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-24-2011, 02:44 PM | #3 | |
Major
14
Rep 1,203
Posts
Drives: '11 STI, '90 325iS
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
|
These numbers please me. How's your fuel economy with your mods compared to bone stock?
Quote:
__________________
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-24-2011, 02:52 PM | #4 | |
Resident Diesel Junkie
56
Rep 1,070
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-24-2011, 02:54 PM | #5 | |
Major
14
Rep 1,203
Posts
Drives: '11 STI, '90 325iS
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
|
Quote:
Now please, BMW. Give me a 320/330dT in a 6MT config. kkthxbai.
__________________
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-24-2011, 02:59 PM | #6 |
Speed Demon
205
Rep 3,690
Posts |
Stock, my car pulled 245hp, just FYI. No torque number, as the dyno we used didn't have the capability.
__________________
Current: '21 M5C, '15 X6 50i Previous: '18 M550i, '16 550i, '11 335is, '09 E93 M3 DCT, '10 E90 335d, '07 E90 328i |
Appreciate
0
|
10-24-2011, 03:13 PM | #7 |
Private
9
Rep 79
Posts |
Unfortunately, its hard to tell if the intake has any effect on dyno numbers. The best thing to have done would have been to re-install the factory intake box, but my dyno time was limited. Regardless of whether any gains are to be had, I can guarantee you that the car sounds 100x better with the intake - and that was my primary motivation.
As for fuel economy, I havent seen any decrease. I drive 90% city and 10% highway, so its hard for me to really pin down a good highway MPG. I've taken a few long distance trips (about 300 miles) and based on my calculations still average around 40mpg highway. In the city, I get between 30-35mpg depending on how aggressively I drive. I wish I could have gotten a torque reading on my first dyno day. Based on the later numbers, it looks like I could have potentially broken the 500 ft/lb mark. |
Appreciate
0
|
10-24-2011, 03:23 PM | #8 |
Major
14
Rep 1,203
Posts
Drives: '11 STI, '90 325iS
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
|
Good to know about the mpg, I drive about 90-95% city and have considered getting the JBD next year in the spring.
__________________
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-24-2011, 04:36 PM | #10 |
Brigadier General
208
Rep 3,175
Posts |
Nice results and closer to what I would expect of the JBD albeit maybe on the low side. The disparity between the machines is interesting. Certainly it can be due to several factors including what Mach V stated not to mention how each machine is calibrated etc.
It's worth noting that on the same machine neovb dyno’d his car, I dyno'd my car about an hour after he did with the JBD set approx 2 1/2 clicks down from 100% and my car dyno'd at 293.7 rwhp (no intake or other work), down 34 hp from neovb's result! I should preface by saying that our d's were the first Moores' ever dyno'd and their software wasn't current, so I am not sure how much that influenced the results. What is strange is, if there is an 8% loss between the two machines (Mach V and Moores) and if that 8% was applied to my dyno results from Moores of 293.7 rwhp, that would translate into roughly a 24.9 rwhp loss on Mach V's dyno, resulting in a dyno of 268.8 rwhp, which is close to the setting at 0, which I don’t believe to be the case. At 2 1/2 clicks from 100% I am putting out way more than 268 rwhp. Guess I need to take my car to Mach V now to compare and at least get torque numbers. Sicne my car doesn't have an intake I am really interested to see what if any benefit the intake provides. Shit after neovb's first dyno I couldn't get home fast enough to order and install one of those intakes! Last edited by cssnms; 10-24-2011 at 04:42 PM.. |
Appreciate
0
|
10-25-2011, 12:07 PM | #11 | |
Major
128
Rep 1,362
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-25-2011, 01:31 PM | #12 |
Private
9
Rep 79
Posts |
Not sure exactly which wire, but they tapped into a wire leading out of the ECU that carried the RPM signal. You may want to reach out to Mach V, they might be able to help you out.
The other option was to use a DynoJet module that accessed RPM through OBD2. |
Appreciate
0
|
10-25-2011, 01:49 PM | #14 |
Major
128
Rep 1,362
Posts |
I took signal from injector
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-25-2011, 02:08 PM | #15 |
Private
9
Rep 79
Posts |
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-26-2011, 05:51 PM | #17 |
Private
9
Rep 79
Posts |
The car was ran with the transmission in DS mode, with DSC/DTC off. If it was downshifting, then perhaps you did not have the transmission set in DS mode.
We would start in 1st, shift manually to 2nd, shift manually to 3rd, shift manually to 4th, shift manually to 5th and then WOT from about ~1500rpm. |
Appreciate
0
|
10-26-2011, 06:14 PM | #18 |
Speed Demon
205
Rep 3,690
Posts |
The car is best tested in 4th, in manual (M4). It provides more control and consistency in the test. Testing in 5th is a waste of time, not to mention, I question whether or not it skews the #'s.
__________________
Current: '21 M5C, '15 X6 50i Previous: '18 M550i, '16 550i, '11 335is, '09 E93 M3 DCT, '10 E90 335d, '07 E90 328i |
Appreciate
0
|
10-26-2011, 08:04 PM | #21 |
Speed Demon
205
Rep 3,690
Posts |
Floor it, but not to the point that you push the kick-down button. That's probably what's tripping the downshift.
__________________
Current: '21 M5C, '15 X6 50i Previous: '18 M550i, '16 550i, '11 335is, '09 E93 M3 DCT, '10 E90 335d, '07 E90 328i |
Appreciate
0
|
Bookmarks |
|
|