S65 short on hp?

[JuniorB]

Hey guys, I don't have a m3,but I was I little shocked about the power a S65 had played down on a dyno yesterday. I was at an event at modified mechanics in Wareham Ma. yesturday and when I walked in,a gorgeous m3 was on the dyno,did 2 pulls, and layed down 308hp on a mustang dyno at 7k. Does this sound right? That think screams! Omg the feeling behind that,it goes right thru you. I'm so envy of you guys! Just looking for some feedback on this. What do you guys thin?

[fwrigley]

Sigh... #1 dyno numbers are only that, dyno numbers. One dyno to the next will read different based on the manufacturer, how it is setup, and what correction factors are applied. Were these numbers STD, SAE, etc.? What was the weather like? All will have an impact on the numbers it reports. #2 Mustang dynos usually read low.

EDIT: This might also be a troll post, but whatever.

[Nihilation]

Peak HP should be above 8k RPM so something doesn't sound right.

Also maintenance can make a huge difference. While I have zero dyno numbers to relay I can tell you my 118k mile M3 seemed to run perfectly fine but the butt dyno says I found 50+ tq and hp from new spark plugs.

[kb9uwu]

Car hits peak power at redline, not 7k. I think most stock s65's hit around 340 at the wheels.

But yeah, our cars suck man.

[Longboarder]

308 sounds a little low for a load mustang, but not too far off.

Stock on 91 octane mine did 365 on a dynojet. That would have been around 330 on a load mustang. I would think the average stock M3 does around 320 on a load mustang.

[BimmerRookie]

butt dyno > actual dyno

[JuniorB]

Well I did look up the specs,414 at 8k, he may have kept it under redline,there was a disclaimer they had to sign ,not responsible for damage,lol I may think that was this case,it wasn't at redline. Everyone was in disbelief it ran such a low number. That was the only bimmer on the list. It seems all bimmers need to redline for that power,even for the v10. I have to say,that m3 sound has nothing on those camaros! Thanks guys for your feedback, I really wish we had the road to run to 8k

[Flying Ace]

my head hurts reading this...

[wheatpaste]

414 hp is measured at the crank. WHP as measured on a chassis dyno will be 10-15% lower than this in the best case scenario. Most stock M3s seem to be towards the lower end of this on the dyno. And yes, the power difference from 7k-8k could easily by 20 WHP.

[L4ces]

Originally Posted by JuniorB

Well I did look up the specs,414 at 8k, he may have kept it under redline,there was a disclaimer they had to sign ,not responsible for damage,lol I may think that was this case,it wasn't at redline. Everyone was in disbelief it ran such a low number. That was the only bimmer on the list. It seems all bimmers need to redline for that power,even for the v10. I have to say,that m3 sound has nothing on those camaros! Thanks guys for your feedback, I really wish we had the road to run to 8k

Chevys produce but I still like wearing a tie and feeling classy once in a blue moon. I'd take less horsepower for that (I am over 40 so)... I can still wear my baseball cap backwards with my T-Shirt and still feel a little classy.

[xxxian08]

Originally Posted by L4ces

Chevys produce but I still like wearing a tie and feeling classy once in a blue moon. I'd take less horsepower for that (I am over 40 so)... I can still wear my baseball cap backwards with my T-Shirt and still feel a little classy.

Some days are baseball cap, t-shirt and shorts days; some days are jacket and slacks days. Every day is an M day. No day is a tie day.

[jphughan]

Yeah, the horsepower is lackluster, torque is non-existent, the high-revving, lower-displacement design means that when it's revved out it sounds more like a stupid V8-era F1 car than a proper muscle car like practically every other V8 car out there that's low-revving and high-displacement, it doesn't even make that cool turbo whoosh sound when you let off the throttle like you get on other cool cars these days, and on top of everything else you've got a ticking time bomb under the hood because your rod bearings are going to be spun at any moment and grenade the whole works. The S65 is really one of the most disappointing engines (or things) ever to come out of BMW. Avoid at all costs.

On the off chance that you're serious, did you consider searching for other dyno charts from stock M3s before posting a question like this to see if your experience was the norm rather than an anomaly? A quick Google would have turned up several results, including this one: http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=102981. And this one: http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=203239. And this one: http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=138475.

[L4ces]

Originally Posted by xxxian08

Some days are baseball cap, t-shirt and shorts days; some days are jacket and slacks days. Every day is an M day. No day is a tie day.

LOL! tie days = *ish happens; I've had 'tie moments' but not 'tie days'.

Elegance is never lost when in an M (you have to try really hard to do that and some have succeeded).

[kb9uwu]

Originally Posted by jphughan

Yeah, the horsepower is lackluster, torque is non-existent, the high-revving, lower-displacement design means that when it's revved out it sounds more like a stupid V8-era F1 car than a proper muscle car like practically every other V8 car out there that's low-revving and high-displacement, it doesn't even make that cool turbo whoosh sound when you let off the throttle like you get on other cool cars these days, and on top of everything else you've got a ticking time bomb under the hood because your rod bearings are going to be spun at any moment and grenade the whole works. The S65 is really one of the most disappointing engines (or things) ever to come out of BMW. Avoid at all costs.

On the off chance that you're serious, did you consider searching for other dyno charts from stock M3s before posting a question like this to see if your experience was the norm rather than an anomaly? A quick Google would have turned up several results, including this one: http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=102981. And this one: http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=203239. And this one: http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=138475.

Why do that when you can talk to pleb S65 owners on the intertubes!?!?!?!

[rjd598]

Originally Posted by Flying Ace

my head hurts reading this...

troll trolls hard

[Amirsm3]

Yeah, our cars suck balls.

[///M Power-Belgium]

Guys..
We need a Veyron in here ...

NOTE : "Power is nothing without control"

[e90///M3]

Don't get so caught up on numbers...
I had my Evo tuned on 2 different dynos, remember just tuning only
There was a 50 hp difference and the lower number felt way stronger.
There are the "feel good" and "heartbreaker" dynos... I rather take a low reading number and wow my passenger lol

[Rajmun340]

there is some truth about the s65 coming short of bmw 414 hp at the crank but not by much. On a dyno you measure wheel torque, not engine crank torque, should be 357 hp accounting for drivetrain loss. but what many dyno showed is that starting around 7000 rpm to redline there is a plateau that robs the engine from its capable peak hp. There is some speculation but combined AFR graph shows the ECU is inexplicably changing the mix to over rich and killing the torque near redline. Personally i suspect BMW has covertly reprogrammed some parameters directly in the ECU using wireless telemetry on all M3s in a shady attempt to curb the number of RB bombing engines cases they have to confront. The same as when Windows updates itself by default if will do so without asking you. Our cars are zombies still remotedly under the control of BMW. Illegal ? yes, but when nobody can prove it they can get away with it.

[to///m]

I always hear this "mustang dynos read low" and has never made sense to me... whats the point of having a machine that reads how much power is made to the wheels and it doesn't even do it???

Like saying well my watch normally runs 15 to 20 min behind... just set it to read the correct time!

[e90///M3]

Originally Posted by to///m

I always hear this "mustang dynos read low" and has never made sense to me... whats the point of having a machine that reads how much power is made to the wheels and it doesn't even do it???

Like saying well my watch normally runs 15 to 20 min behind... just set it to read the correct time!

It's a measuring tool for tuning and seeing your Gains or loss.
Just pointless to measure hp gains if they read differently.

Weather high reading or not, just stick with the same dyno so you know where your car stands.

[DSilk]

Consider a dyno like a scale. No matter how carefully you weigh yourself at the gym, the scale at the doctor's office will always read differently. It has a lot to do with calibration and test conditions, and the important thing is the A-B comparison on the same machine and under the same or similar conditions. That's why it's absurd to look at 0 to 60 mph timed runs in magazines beween different cars tested at different times. A 0 to 60 time of 3.9 seconds may be achievable (albeit with substantial abuse) given ideal temperature, track conditions, and elevation. That same car might post a 4.7 under less ideal conditions.