View Single Post
      10-28-2009, 04:02 AM   #9
Lemans_Blue_M
Automotive Industry Insider
 
Lemans_Blue_M's Avatar
 
Drives: Lemans Blue M3
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Texas

Posts: 1,948
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by M3_WC View Post
Read the beginning of his sentence. It says his baseline was done on a Dynojet. Look at the Dyno sheet, it is a Mustange dyno. Two different dynos.

Like he said wait until he dynos on his local Dynojet.
Yes, I know it's a Mustang dyno. That's what AA has used for years now.

I saw that he stated his 340rwhp baseline pull was done on a dynojet, and that still doesn't explain the disparity in power here. 340rwhp on a Dynojet is LOW to begin with, and adding all those aftermarket mods, while having it all custom dyno tuned should have increased his power by 30hp easy. (effective gains with all those parts working together)

The baseline run on the dyno chart shows 338rwhp, which is very close to what he claims his STOCK engine dynoed.

Dynojets are traditionally VERY generous in the HP/TRQ numbers they measure.

None of these numbers make any sense, and a E92 M3 modded in this manner should produce a lot more power on 93 octane premium unleaded.

Something on his car is not functioning correctly. His car should easily be in the upper 360's or low 370's rwhp wise, and the torque should be 10+ lb/ft. higher as well.

This car is under-performing, based on the evidence provided by a large cross-section of M3 owners in the dyno database.

If you do the math, (and you believe these dyno numbers are NORMAL), his drivetrain loss would have to be over 25%.

We know this car does not have drivetrain losses that high, and he has under drive pulleys that are reducing the accessory DRAG on the motor by 16%.

The numbers just don't add up, so something else is going on with his car...

Hmm...

I wonder what Pencilgeek's take will be on this issue...
__________________
The best is yet to come...
Lemans_Blue_M is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote