My Dyno Chart (336whp)

[Petros]

Had the car on a dyno recently. Here is what I got. 240 lb torque and 336 hp. Car is stock with 240E software and running 91 Octane. It was a Dyno Dynamics that was used.

[BPMSport]

Looks good.

Some of the DD dynos are heartbreakers

[pbonsalb]

Compare to other dyno dynamics dynos in the dynodatabase. Not as many DD as dynojet but still enough to give you a range.

[Amirsm3]

Originally Posted by Mike Benvo

Looks good.

Some of the DD dynos are heartbreakers

Yeah...mine was 327whp on a 100 degree day in Phoenix, lol.

[duk]

That's about right for stock

[BESTNDA416]

Dyno done at Eurocharged Canada. What day was this done at?

[checkmate]

Wait-240E software and still only 336rwhp?? I had 336 rwhp before I had the 240E update on Dyno Dynamics.

Something's not right, I had my car updated to 240E and I'm pulling 365wrhp now. My car is bone stock.

[whats77inaname]

Originally Posted by checkmate

Wait-240E software and still only 336rwhp?? I had 336 rwhp before I had the 240E update on Dyno Dynamics.

Something's not right, I had my car updated to 240E and I'm pulling 365wrhp now. My car is bone stock.

What octane rating? 91 or 93?

[Petros]

Originally Posted by checkmate

Wait-240E software and still only 336rwhp?? I had 336 rwhp before I had the 240E update on Dyno Dynamics.

Something's not right, I had my car updated to 240E and I'm pulling 365wrhp now. My car is bone stock.

Well I checked the dyno database http://www.bmwdynodatabase.com/DynoD...ype=1&dynoID=4

It seems most cars dyno about the same range as mine, between 330 and 340 whp. Your 365 whp is a crazy high output! Which octane did you use anyway? Mine was on 91.

[regular guy]

Originally Posted by Petros

Well I checked the dyno database http://www.bmwdynodatabase.com/DynoD...ype=1&dynoID=4

It seems most cars dyno about the same range as mine, between 330 and 340 whp. Your 365 whp is a crazy high output! Which octane did you use anyway? Mine was on 91.

Many dyno operators know that Dyno Dynamics give much lower results than Dynojet. Let's face it, number sell products and services. People don't like dynos that give low results. To counter this, many shops add an automatic correction factor to allow the dyno to appear more like a Dynojet. 11% is a typical correction factor on Dyno Dynamics to make the results appear more like a Dynojet. That's one thing that really screws up comparisons when you're talking about Dyno Dynamics.

[BPMSport]

Originally Posted by checkmate

Wait-240E software and still only 336rwhp?? I had 336 rwhp before I had the 240E update on Dyno Dynamics.

Something's not right, I had my car updated to 240E and I'm pulling 365wrhp now. My car is bone stock.

Dynos have huge variations.

You really can't compare one dyno to another with 100% accuracy, even if it's the same dyno manufacturer.

Strap down tension, temperatures, wheel and tire sizes, humidity, fuel quality/octane, spark plug condition, and altitude, are some of the variables that come in to play, not to mention dyno calibration, dyno software, etc..

You might dyno 330 on one and 360 on another one 20 miles away. Aside from that, you're usually going to see a higher intake temperatures in the plenum on a stationary dyno as opposed to being on the road. Adaptations are a further factor on top of what I've already listed. The best comparison based on the charts out there would be an average of runs recorded under similar conditions.

[checkmate]

Originally Posted by whats77inaname

What octane rating? 91 or 93?

Originally Posted by Petros

Well I checked the dyno database http://www.bmwdynodatabase.com/DynoD...ype=1&dynoID=4

It seems most cars dyno about the same range as mine, between 330 and 340 whp. Your 365 whp is a crazy high output! Which octane did you use anyway? Mine was on 91.

93 Octane.

[Gfunk720]

Originally Posted by Mike Benvo

Dynos have huge variations.

You really can't compare one dyno to another with 100% accuracy, even if it's the same dyno manufacturer.

Strap down tension, temperatures, wheel and tire sizes, humidity, fuel quality/octane, spark plug condition, and altitude, are some of the variables that come in to play, not to mention dyno calibration, dyno software, etc..

+1

Not to mention that many operators will apply different correction factors on Dyno Dynamics. I'm not surprised by his numbers at all if it is an uncorrected DD.

Saying one car made more HP on a different dyno, on a different day, with different modifications, really means nothing

[regular guy]

Originally Posted by Gfunk720

+1

Not to mention that many operators will apply different correction factors on Dyno Dynamics. I'm not surprised by his numbers at all if it is an uncorrected DD.

Saying one car made more HP on a different dyno, on a different day, with different modifications, really means nothing

-1

Most people understand you can't compare two different dyno brands and get any meaningful results. So let's take that off the table and concentrate on the other things like weather correction and calibrations.

There's two types of dyno correction we're talking about here. 1) Weather correction (SAE-J1349), and 2) An added "fudge factor" by the dyno operator to increase the output. The SAE dyno correction for weather is very good. In fact a study was done and white paper written. I know I've linked the white paper before, but I can't find that link right now. The white paper compared SAE-J1349, SAE-J607, DIN-70020, and maybe one other with different weather conditions. The study concluded that SAE-J1349 was indeed very accurate for correcting NA dyno results for weather within its operating parameters of the SAE.

The Dyno Database is pretty full of nearly 700 S65 dyno's, and I don't see this big variance that the posts above would lead you to believe. In fact, I specifically remember one vendor claiming a 60whp difference between two Dynojet dyno's only a few miles apart. I didn't believe it. So I took my car to both dyno's on the same tank of gas and measured within 2-5 whp of each other. On a 600whp car, that 2-5 whp difference means the results were effectively identical. So can we please quit talking about the inaccuracy of dynos and weather as long as we're talking about corrected results (which we almost always do)?

Next let's talk about calibrations. On a roller dyno such as Dynojet, as far as I know, the only calibrations are the exact weight of the drum (down to a few grams). Dynapack operates on a different principle and doesn't need to be calibration. The Dyno Dynamics uses a strain gauge, and has got to be one of the worst designs and least accurate because of it (IMO).

Next let's talk about the fudge factor corrections. Dynojet and Dynapack don't have them. Dyno Dynamics does -- and dyno operators often use them because big numbers sell products and services.

The rest of the stuff about wheel size/weight, strapping tensions, that's all true. Setting the strapping tension is almost done by muscle memory for the dyno operators. Only when they are intentionally trying to manipulate the results of before/after tests have I seen this been a factor. But the other stuff mentioned about weather and calibrations seems pretty far off the mark. Spend some time in the Dyno Database. Start by assuming the most dyno operators don't try to manipulate the results. Make an attempt to compare and correlate like kind results. When you do, I don't think you'll see as big a variance as you think.

[dmk08]

Originally Posted by checkmate

Wait-240E software and still only 336rwhp?? I had 336 rwhp before I had the 240E update on Dyno Dynamics.

Something's not right, I had my car updated to 240E and I'm pulling 365wrhp now. My car is bone stock.

You expect ppl to believe that you picked up 30rwhp from 240E? I was born but it wasn't yesterday.

[M3PO]

Originally Posted by dmk08

You expect ppl to believe that you picked up 30rwhp from 240E? I was born but it wasn't yesterday.

I picked up 20 WHP from 231E (old software was 100E). Car didn't leave the dyno.

[SenorFunkyPants]

In a couple of weeks I'm getting an update from my 2010 software to the latest...so it will be interesting to see how much butt dyno difference it makes.

[BPMSport]

SAE correction doesn't 'completely' account for the change in ignition timing advance called for by the DME due to temperature variances. It's better to accept that there are too many variances to make this a 'scientific test'.

[regular guy]

Originally Posted by Mike Benvo

SAE correction doesn't 'completely' account for the change in ignition timing advance called for by the DME due to temperature variances. It's better to accept that there are too many variances to make this a 'scientific test'.

Mike you make it sound like SAE correction is intended to produce an equal outcome. That's not its purpose or intent. And nobody is trying to use a dyno for scientific tests. But when used correctly, they are very good for correlation (something I mentioned before).

[checkmate]

Originally Posted by dmk08

You expect ppl to believe that you picked up 30rwhp from 240E? I was born but it wasn't yesterday.

Here's my buddy's video where he picked up 358hp after 240E. 93 Octane. DCT.

He did another run where he got to 365whp.

[biglare]

OP, at least you have a baseline at that location for your future dynos. Remember as others have mentioned that if you go to another facility it is very difficult to compare back to this dyno, even if it is the same type. Time for some mods on that thing!