Login






BMW Garage  BMW Meets  Register  Search  Today's Posts  Mark Forums Read 

BMW 3Series (E90 E92) Forum
>
Dyno'd!? V2.02 22608 + UR Catback


04012008, 07:17 PM  #23 
Major
33
Rep 1,220
Posts
Drives: 2014 435i
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: SLC

Vishnu looked at my graphs and told me I have 400BHP!!!
It seems like the general consensus is around 12%15% difference between the two dynos and if that is true I am pretty satisfied. Also the guys at COBB were really cool, and I think 2 of them drove BMW's (the other 10 or so cars were Subarus, 350Z's, and a G37). They seem like they make a great product! I wish their CAI fit our cars I was the second 335i to have ever been dynod there, so they did not have any other data. Although the other car had a Vishnu tune and cat back and had about 330 hp and 377 tq. on 1.47. Not sure what settings he was running, but they did have his boost recorded at 15psi max. Anyways. All in all I am very happy with the cars performance, even if these numbers seem a little low. I have had 0 problems with either of my mods so far, and am excited to get a CAI on here to see how it changes these numbers. Not that cool but here is a pic from my iPhone (they made me sit in a glass room )
__________________

Appreciate
0

04012008, 07:20 PM  #24 
Colonel
59
Rep 2,626
Posts 
15% is a little on the high side, but not inacurate! I tend to stick to 12%, but either way the numbers are pretty darn good for 91 octane at elevation.

Appreciate
0

04012008, 07:23 PM  #25  
Several N54 cars, V1,3, V2.0.2, and V3.1
8
Rep 778
Posts 
Quote:


Appreciate
0

04012008, 07:29 PM  #26 
General
213
Rep 18,171
Posts 
If this were true, then our cars would be faster than cars at sea level. Which is not true.
__________________

Appreciate
0

04012008, 07:32 PM  #27 
"posting from my recliner"
76
Rep 7,241
Posts 
hell IM going to run my car at 11,000 feet to beat all the 1/4 mile drag times.
__________________
Ping Golf Club demo tech 
Appreciate
0

04012008, 07:40 PM  #28 
Lieutenant Colonel
28
Rep 1,714
Posts 
M&M, at 5500 ft. trapped 113mph using PRocede V 1.47
Engine Power's relationship to air density is less than linear. Drag's relationship to air density is exponential. At lower speeds, it won't make much of a difference, but as you go faster and faster, the "advantage" of being at high altitude becomes more obvious. 
Appreciate
0

04012008, 07:41 PM  #29 
Several N54 cars, V1,3, V2.0.2, and V3.1
8
Rep 778
Posts 

Appreciate
0

04012008, 07:42 PM  #30 
Tuner
871
Rep 17,616
Posts 
The biggest issue with that dyno run is that the car is still making power when the test ends at 6600rpm. There's more power by just expanding the test RPM range and nothing else.
shiv 
Appreciate
0

04012008, 07:45 PM  #31 
Captain
11
Rep 604
Posts 
I didn't mean to start anything, but this STILL seems low to me. I guess some can be accounted for by the Mustang dyno. I just did a quick search and came up with relatively higher numbers on others running V2 or V1.47 on a Mustang.
Here you go... http://www.e90post.com/forums/showth...t=mustang+dyno 
Appreciate
0

04012008, 07:45 PM  #32 
Several N54 cars, V1,3, V2.0.2, and V3.1
8
Rep 778
Posts 

Appreciate
0

04012008, 07:49 PM  #34  
Team Zissou
223
Rep 9,039
Posts 
298whp on that link... which is lower than the OP's
Quote:
__________________
2016 340i xDrive
www.datazap.me  fast, free, interactive data log viewing 

Appreciate
0

04012008, 08:03 PM  #36 
Captain
11
Rep 604
Posts 
Maybe so but Darrin posted
"I have aa exde and ur catless dp plus agency power exhaust,I have 328 whp and 374 tq and mustand dyno with 91 oct.Good luck u,I hope u get more than me." AND the OP had 361 WTQ without exhaust,...only V2 and CAI. RWHP wass minimally different without exhaust that this threads OP has. I know exhaust may not make up that much difference but it should account for some of the HP difference. 
Appreciate
0

04012008, 08:09 PM  #38 
Captain
11
Rep 604
Posts 

Appreciate
0

04012008, 08:13 PM  #39 
Major
20
Rep 1,169
Posts
Drives: 67 GT500,69 Boss 429, 335i
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Houston,TX

From what I have seen 1215% is about the difference on the mustang dyno. BUT there looks like there is an issue with this guys dyno... why did the run stop at 6600? Also was this a auto or manual?
__________________
Mat
Tuned E92 335, Riss Racing downpipes! And hopefully over 400RWHP!! 
Appreciate
0

04012008, 08:20 PM  #40 
******
102
Rep 1,715
Posts 
Hmm, a Helix customers car put down 340/346 on a mustang dyno. Using the logic from this thread, they made 391/397!

Appreciate
0

04012008, 08:36 PM  #41 
General
213
Rep 18,171
Posts 

Appreciate
0

04012008, 09:03 PM  #42 
Dancing Machine
23
Rep 1,419
Posts 
different octane, different altitude, different supporting mods, different dyno (more significant on a load dyno than on a dynojet as mustang/dynamic require calibration and a dynojet is just spinning a heavy drum).
__________________
2007 e90 & 1981 Corvette Predecessors: 2007 BMW 335i E92, 2006 M5, 2008 Viper SRT10 Coupe, 2005 Viper Yellow, 2006 Corvette Z51, 2009 Challenger SRT8, 2006 S4, 2001.5 Nogaro Blue S4, 2006 GTI w/ DSG, 06 Evo IX, 04 S4, 04 911x51, 03 Evo VIII, 98 Eclipse GSX, 96 GST, 92 Galant Vr4, '70 Grand Prix Model J, '70 Nova, '68 Firebird

Appreciate
0

04012008, 09:36 PM  #43  
Modder Raider
375
Rep 8,633
Posts
Drives: M3
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Surf City, HB

Quote:
Do mustang dynos have SAE or STD correction factors? If so, did the OP use these factors? If so, then the elevation should have no affect on this dyno then.
__________________
e36 M3 Coupe, e36 325i Sedan
e90 335iSOLD Best 601309.15 SecondsWWW.MR5RACING.COM 

Appreciate
0

04012008, 09:38 PM  #44 
Major
36
Rep 1,215
Posts 

Appreciate
0

Bookmarks 
Thread Tools  Search this Thread 

