BMW M3 Forum (E90 E92)

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


Go Back   M3Post - BMW M3 Forum > E90/E92 M3 Technical Topics > Engine, Transmission, Exhaust, Drivetrain, ECU Software Modifications
 
Steve Thomas BMW
Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      06-30-2013, 05:15 PM   #1
Brian_VACsales
Captain
 
Brian_VACsales's Avatar
 
Drives: E92 M3 VF Supercharged, 135i
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Posts: 951
iTrader: (0)

Post S65 n/a Dyno Results - Mustang vs. Dynojet



We built this E92 M3 track day car for a client and its FAST. Car has has 1 full season of track days.

Power mods:
Active Autowerke Software
Fabspeed primary catbypass
Fabspeed non-resonated x-pipe
Fabspeed MaxFlo mufflers

We ran it on our heartbreaker Mustang AWD500 and a Dynojet for NASA Time Trial qualification. Same car, same mods, it was a bit colder when we ran it on the Mustang.

VAC Mustang:
334hp 247tq

Dynojet SAE:
378hp 272tq

Dynojet STD:
390hp 280tq





__________________
Brian Casella
Sales Representative, VAC Motorsports
Office: 215.462.4666 | Fax: 215.462.4667 | Email: brian@vacmotorsports.com

Last edited by Brian_VACsales; 06-30-2013 at 05:26 PM.
Brian_VACsales is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      06-30-2013, 05:21 PM   #2
Mike Benvo
BimmerPost Supporting Vendor

 
Mike Benvo's Avatar
 
Drives: Harrop SC M3 / E46 M3 / 7Turbo
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: SoCal

Posts: 4,700
iTrader: (7)

Garage List
2008 BMW M3  [5.00]
1990 BMW 735i Turbo  [5.00]
2004 BMW M3  [0.00]
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Benvo
Very cool illustrating the variances between different dynos on the same car. Thanks for sharing!!
__________________

-----| Like us on Facebook | Instagram || Tuning Information | Remote Coding |-----
----Visit us at www.BPMSport.com - Emotion. Driven. | Toll Free: (888) 557-5133----
Mike Benvo is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      06-30-2013, 05:22 PM   #3
THE-FN-MAN
Captain
 
Drives: E92 M3 x2
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: the wood

Posts: 845
iTrader: (0)

Wow, that's a solid difference and the air was cooler for the mustang
THE-FN-MAN is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      06-30-2013, 05:23 PM   #4
Sal@Evolve
BimmerPost Supporting Vendor

 
Drives: Slow
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Luton, Bedfordshire

Posts: 1,063
iTrader: (0)

Very nice Mike.

The uncorrected graph reading would be another 1% higher than STD correction.

Can you please post the conditions of the Mustang run?

This would give us a much more accurate comparison between the two. If the air was cooler on the Mustang the correction factor would be more negative.
Sal@Evolve is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      06-30-2013, 05:28 PM   #5
Brian_VACsales
Captain
 
Brian_VACsales's Avatar
 
Drives: E92 M3 VF Supercharged, 135i
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Posts: 951
iTrader: (0)

I will get the Mustang conditions tomorrow. It was probably 30F colder or better.
__________________
Brian Casella
Sales Representative, VAC Motorsports
Office: 215.462.4666 | Fax: 215.462.4667 | Email: brian@vacmotorsports.com
Brian_VACsales is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      06-30-2013, 06:30 PM   #6
bblefas
Private First Class
 
Drives: 2011.5 M3 COUPE ZCP
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: BOSTON MA

Posts: 172
iTrader: (0)

I wish my s65 can produce rwhp like that! Last monday i had my car put on the dynojet dyno for the first time to get a baseline HP=TRQ numbers. I replaced all the performance mods back to stock except for the BMW M3 Performance rear exhaust (pita without a lift-and BMW doesnt quote any HP gains) so i figured if it does its probably +2 or 3 HP over complete OEM. Finally car strapped in and ready to go!!! Im expecting at least 350-360 HP stock, but my results were completely different!!! PULL #1- 329.80hp and 291.43 trq, in 4th gear. 1:20 p.m.( 99.32*F) humidity 31%
PULL #2 326.68hp and 278.64 trq in 5th gear. 1:22:18 p.m.(98.84*F) humidity 31%
PULL #3 319.40hp and 297.02 trq in 3rd gear. 1:22:56 p.m.(100.69*F)humidity 31%
All pulls were SAE: 1.03 & CF: SAE Smoothing: 5
It was very hot so that didnt help also the car has DCT and i didnt know what setting to activate for dyno testing... (M-drive , traction control etc) and what gear is best i think 4th but can be wrong!! HELP!! Any advise or info any one has with what went wrong or is it a weak engine from Munich.. Thank you Its a 2011 coupe with DCT, Comp Pack. (ZCP) with 14,500 Miles!
bblefas is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      06-30-2013, 08:35 PM   #7
Alex07M3
Banned
 
Drives: e92 m3
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Gatineau

Posts: 1,972
iTrader: (1)

Garage List
2008 e92 M3  [5.00]
Exactly why I don't put my car on the dyno, every shop use a Mustang dyno around here!
Alex07M3 is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      06-30-2013, 08:52 PM   #8
Alex07M3
Banned
 
Drives: e92 m3
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Gatineau

Posts: 1,972
iTrader: (1)

Garage List
2008 e92 M3  [5.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by bblefas
I wish my s65 can produce rwhp like that! Last monday i had my car put on the dynojet dyno for the first time to get a baseline HP=TRQ numbers. I replaced all the performance mods back to stock except for the BMW M3 Performance rear exhaust (pita without a lift-and BMW doesnt quote any HP gains) so i figured if it does its probably +2 or 3 HP over complete OEM. Finally car strapped in and ready to go!!! Im expecting at least 350-360 HP stock, but my results were completely different!!! PULL #1- 329.80hp and 291.43 trq, in 4th gear. 1:20 p.m.( 99.32*F) humidity 31%
PULL #2 326.68hp and 278.64 trq in 5th gear. 1:22:18 p.m.(98.84*F) humidity 31%
PULL #3 319.40hp and 297.02 trq in 3rd gear. 1:22:56 p.m.(100.69*F)humidity 31%
All pulls were SAE: 1.03 & CF: SAE Smoothing: 5
It was very hot so that didnt help also the car has DCT and i didnt know what setting to activate for dyno testing... (M-drive , traction control etc) and what gear is best i think 4th but can be wrong!! HELP!! Any advise or info any one has with what went wrong or is it a weak engine from Munich.. Thank you Its a 2011 coupe with DCT, Comp Pack. (ZCP) with 14,500 Miles!
By the way, your torque numbers are really impressive for a stock engine!!
Alex07M3 is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      06-30-2013, 09:07 PM   #9
Longwong
Banned
 
Drives: e92 m3 catless
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: USA

Posts: 371
iTrader: (0)

What performance mods did you pull off? You can't just take off a tune or a catless setup and than dyno as the computer had probably significantly adjusted itself for those variables. Did you run the car stock for a few hundred miles to let it recalibrate?

319 is way too low for any dyno though
Longwong is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      07-01-2013, 02:32 AM   #10
bblefas
Private First Class
 
Drives: 2011.5 M3 COUPE ZCP
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: BOSTON MA

Posts: 172
iTrader: (0)

thanks
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex07M3 View Post
By the way, your torque numbers are really impressive for a stock engine!!
bblefas is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      07-01-2013, 02:53 AM   #11
bblefas
Private First Class
 
Drives: 2011.5 M3 COUPE ZCP
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: BOSTON MA

Posts: 172
iTrader: (0)

319 is the new world record for lowest hp for all s65!!! Way to low is right!! The mods i had on there was The Dinan carbon cold air intake with Dinan air filter which retains the stock air box and the sprint booster which doesnt improve power at all, and its off for good i hate the thing way to sensitive! i switched back to stock air setup the night before and drove about 60 miles to get to the shop where the dyno was!! As for the MPE thats been on there for about 4500 miles of driving. sorry it sounded like i had a ton of mods prior to the dyno. But after i get some more stock runs at cooler days instead of the 100*F im going to go with turner test pipes and a stg 2 tune along with the dinan intake.. But u might be right the amount of air it was used to seeing with the dinan to less with the stock air Could be playing a role with the low hp #"s >.. I heard it takes a few hundred miles so the ca can adjust to the different amount of air its getting must b the mass air flow sensor! Thanks for ur help totally forgot about that time adjustment will post next dyno this week since the car now has 400 hundred miles on it with stock form since the dyno Maybe now the HP will go up some more!! And the torque too wondering why it has such high trq numbers for stock Stay tuned
Quote:
Originally Posted by Longwong View Post
What performance mods did you pull off? You can't just take off a tune or a catless setup and than dyno as the computer had probably significantly adjusted itself for those variables. Did you run the car stock for a few hundred miles to let it recalibrate?

319 is way too low for any dyno though
bblefas is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      07-01-2013, 02:56 AM   #12
bblefas
Private First Class
 
Drives: 2011.5 M3 COUPE ZCP
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: BOSTON MA

Posts: 172
iTrader: (0)

Whats the norm for the HP for dynojets?
bblefas is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      07-01-2013, 03:00 AM   #13
Mike Benvo
BimmerPost Supporting Vendor

 
Mike Benvo's Avatar
 
Drives: Harrop SC M3 / E46 M3 / 7Turbo
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: SoCal

Posts: 4,700
iTrader: (7)

Garage List
2008 BMW M3  [5.00]
1990 BMW 735i Turbo  [5.00]
2004 BMW M3  [0.00]
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Benvo
Quote:
Originally Posted by bblefas View Post
I wish my s65 can produce rwhp like that! Last monday i had my car put on the dynojet dyno for the first time to get a baseline HP=TRQ numbers. I replaced all the performance mods back to stock except for the BMW M3 Performance rear exhaust (pita without a lift-and BMW doesnt quote any HP gains) so i figured if it does its probably +2 or 3 HP over complete OEM. Finally car strapped in and ready to go!!! Im expecting at least 350-360 HP stock, but my results were completely different!!! PULL #1- 329.80hp and 291.43 trq, in 4th gear. 1:20 p.m.( 99.32*F) humidity 31%
PULL #2 326.68hp and 278.64 trq in 5th gear. 1:22:18 p.m.(98.84*F) humidity 31%
PULL #3 319.40hp and 297.02 trq in 3rd gear. 1:22:56 p.m.(100.69*F)humidity 31%
All pulls were SAE: 1.03 & CF: SAE Smoothing: 5
It was very hot so that didnt help also the car has DCT and i didnt know what setting to activate for dyno testing... (M-drive , traction control etc) and what gear is best i think 4th but can be wrong!! HELP!! Any advise or info any one has with what went wrong or is it a weak engine from Munich.. Thank you Its a 2011 coupe with DCT, Comp Pack. (ZCP) with 14,500 Miles!
It would be helpful to share the graphs if you have them. Are you positive the car was pulled all the way to redline?

I've seen two stock M3's on the same dyno, same day, have a 50whp variance. Focusing on numbers is not the proper philosophy to take. The methodology applied in testing as well as logging variables (i.e ignition timing and intake air temperature) are paramount to drawing any type of accurate conclusion based on results presented. I think that 60-130 pulls on the track are a much better indicator of performance than any dyno would be able to afford.

People should not be depressed or discouraged by seeing X or Y figure on Z dyno. Real world results hold much more significance and are more accurate given the environmental drawbacks and variables that coincide with conventional dyno testing.
__________________

-----| Like us on Facebook | Instagram || Tuning Information | Remote Coding |-----
----Visit us at www.BPMSport.com - Emotion. Driven. | Toll Free: (888) 557-5133----
Mike Benvo is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      07-01-2013, 10:57 AM   #14
s65e90
Banned
 
Drives: 2009 e90
Join Date: May 2013
Location: SoFlo

Posts: 513
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex07M3 View Post
Exactly why I don't put my car on the dyno, every shop use a Mustang dyno around here!

if you're looking for just #s then yes I agree on a Dynojet; but from a tuning standpoint IMO a Mustang is a better tool that more simulates "real world" by placing a load on the car.
s65e90 is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      07-01-2013, 11:43 AM   #15
Longwong
Banned
 
Drives: e92 m3 catless
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: USA

Posts: 371
iTrader: (0)

I understand every dyno is different but come on, there is a pretty normal range in which virtually every healthy m3 puts down which seems to be in the 340-350 on a dynojet. 319 is just way too far out of the bell curve to be considered normal.

With that said it could be something like old plugs or way hot IAT's from lack of a good fan etc. Still seems fishy.

Yes a Dinan intake should not make a huge difference but who knows how the computer adapts when you pull it off. It might just have that adjustment period and could account for 10-20 hp who knows. If you had 15 extra hp you would be much closer to the average at 335-340
Longwong is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      07-01-2013, 12:14 PM   #16
Sam@Alekshop
 
Sam@Alekshop's Avatar
 
Drives: BMW M3
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Alekshop

Posts: 147
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by bblefas
Whats the norm for the HP for dynojets?
Hi, our shop has run many dyno days and seen every type of mod you can think of. We've probably dyno'd 50-60 E9x M3's. All of our results are put in the Dyno Database.

So the first thing you should do is go find the Dyno Database.
There's over 600 dynos from our M3's in there. If you want to compare Mustang vs. Dynojet, it's easy to do.

All Dynojet Dynos (all cars):
http://www.s65dynos.com/DynoDB.php?dynoID=2

All Dynojet Dynos (only STOCK cars):
http://www.s65dynos.com/DynoDB.php?d...unknownOpts=38

All Mustang Dynos (all cars):
http://www.s65dynos.com/DynoDB.php?dynoID=3

All Mustang Dynos (only STOCK cars):
http://www.s65dynos.com/DynoDB.php?d...unknownOpts=38

Next if you want to see how much variance there is in stock cars, it's very easy to do from the DynoDB. After you have all of the bone stock entries on the screen, type "91US" in the search window. This will reduce the gasoline choices only to 91 octane. You can also type in "93US" or "94US" to see 93 octane and 94 octane as well.

How much variance have we seen? Nowhere near 50whp, that's for sure. The most variance we've seen on two different stock cars on the same dyno on the same day as part of the same dyno day was about 10-12 whp. Here's the variance I find when I look in the DynoDB for all stock cars.

Dynojet:
91 Octane: 312whp - 343whp (31whp delta, Avg 331whp)
93 Octane: 333whp - 350whp (17whp delta, Avg 339whp)
94 Octane: 343whp - 352whp (9whp delta, Avg 348whp)
Sam@Alekshop is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      07-01-2013, 12:39 PM   #17
THE-FN-MAN
Captain
 
Drives: E92 M3 x2
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: the wood

Posts: 845
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Benvo
Quote:
Originally Posted by bblefas View Post
I wish my s65 can produce rwhp like that! Last monday i had my car put on the dynojet dyno for the first time to get a baseline HP=TRQ numbers. I replaced all the performance mods back to stock except for the BMW M3 Performance rear exhaust (pita without a lift-and BMW doesnt quote any HP gains) so i figured if it does its probably +2 or 3 HP over complete OEM. Finally car strapped in and ready to go!!! Im expecting at least 350-360 HP stock, but my results were completely different!!! PULL #1- 329.80hp and 291.43 trq, in 4th gear. 1:20 p.m.( 99.32*F) humidity 31%
PULL #2 326.68hp and 278.64 trq in 5th gear. 1:22:18 p.m.(98.84*F) humidity 31%
PULL #3 319.40hp and 297.02 trq in 3rd gear. 1:22:56 p.m.(100.69*F)humidity 31%
All pulls were SAE: 1.03 & CF: SAE Smoothing: 5
It was very hot so that didnt help also the car has DCT and i didnt know what setting to activate for dyno testing... (M-drive , traction control etc) and what gear is best i think 4th but can be wrong!! HELP!! Any advise or info any one has with what went wrong or is it a weak engine from Munich.. Thank you Its a 2011 coupe with DCT, Comp Pack. (ZCP) with 14,500 Miles!
It would be helpful to share the graphs if you have them. Are you positive the car was pulled all the way to redline?

I've seen two stock M3's on the same dyno, same day, have a 50whp variance. Focusing on numbers is not the proper philosophy to take. The methodology applied in testing as well as logging variables (i.e ignition timing and intake air temperature) are paramount to drawing any type of accurate conclusion based on results presented. I think that 60-130 pulls on the track are a much better indicator of performance than any dyno would be able to afford.

People should not be depressed or discouraged by seeing X or Y figure on Z dyno. Real world results hold much more significance and are more accurate given the environmental drawbacks and variables that coincide with conventional dyno testing.
+1
THE-FN-MAN is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      07-01-2013, 04:48 PM   #18
FogCityM3
Lieutenant Colonel
 
FogCityM3's Avatar
 
Drives: M3 (E90)
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: San Francisco

Posts: 1,565
iTrader: (0)

After reading Dinan's Dyno whitepaper (and the fact they actually do engine dyons), all the research (and results) that Rototest of Sweden has done, and several interesting Eurotuner articles from the past, and the huge variance in results seen by so many people on here, getting a "proper" dyno to reflect the exact hp you are producing (vs focusing on deltas) is probably an exercise in futility. Tire size can even make a difference on a rolling dyno. It appears that to get closest to the "truth", you should use a dyno at the hub (rototest, dynapack), have a true vehicle speed simulated wind effect given the significant heat exchange required by the S65 (Rototest actually uses a wind tunnel and Dinan a quasi-wind simulator), ambient temperature not affected by the dyno itself and use the same octane that BMW uses to rate the engine (93 octane). Hub dynos using these methods from the sources produce around 365-370 "hub" hp stock, or 10-11% drivetrain loss, which actually is quite good vs other F/R drive cars (except P-cars, which have very low drivetrain losses).


Quote:
Originally Posted by bblefas View Post
I wish my s65 can produce rwhp like that! Last monday i had my car put on the dynojet dyno for the first time to get a baseline HP=TRQ numbers. I replaced all the performance mods back to stock except for the BMW M3 Performance rear exhaust (pita without a lift-and BMW doesnt quote any HP gains) so i figured if it does its probably +2 or 3 HP over complete OEM. Finally car strapped in and ready to go!!! Im expecting at least 350-360 HP stock, but my results were completely different!!! PULL #1- 329.80hp and 291.43 trq, in 4th gear. 1:20 p.m.( 99.32*F) humidity 31%
PULL #2 326.68hp and 278.64 trq in 5th gear. 1:22:18 p.m.(98.84*F) humidity 31%
PULL #3 319.40hp and 297.02 trq in 3rd gear. 1:22:56 p.m.(100.69*F)humidity 31%
All pulls were SAE: 1.03 & CF: SAE Smoothing: 5
It was very hot so that didnt help also the car has DCT and i didnt know what setting to activate for dyno testing... (M-drive , traction control etc) and what gear is best i think 4th but can be wrong!! HELP!! Any advise or info any one has with what went wrong or is it a weak engine from Munich.. Thank you Its a 2011 coupe with DCT, Comp Pack. (ZCP) with 14,500 Miles!
FogCityM3 is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      07-02-2013, 10:35 PM   #19
Dave07997S
Colonel
 
Drives: 2013 BMW M3 ZCP Coupe
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Playa del Rey, CA

Posts: 2,519
iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam@Alekshop View Post
Hi, our shop has run many dyno days and seen every type of mod you can think of. We've probably dyno'd 50-60 E9x M3's. All of our results are put in the Dyno Database.

So the first thing you should do is go find the Dyno Database.
There's over 600 dynos from our M3's in there. If you want to compare Mustang vs. Dynojet, it's easy to do.

All Dynojet Dynos (all cars):
http://www.s65dynos.com/DynoDB.php?dynoID=2

All Dynojet Dynos (only STOCK cars):
http://www.s65dynos.com/DynoDB.php?d...unknownOpts=38

All Mustang Dynos (all cars):
http://www.s65dynos.com/DynoDB.php?dynoID=3

All Mustang Dynos (only STOCK cars):
http://www.s65dynos.com/DynoDB.php?d...unknownOpts=38

Next if you want to see how much variance there is in stock cars, it's very easy to do from the DynoDB. After you have all of the bone stock entries on the screen, type "91US" in the search window. This will reduce the gasoline choices only to 91 octane. You can also type in "93US" or "94US" to see 93 octane and 94 octane as well.

How much variance have we seen? Nowhere near 50whp, that's for sure. The most variance we've seen on two different stock cars on the same dyno on the same day as part of the same dyno day was about 10-12 whp. Here's the variance I find when I look in the DynoDB for all stock cars.

Dynojet:
91 Octane: 312whp - 343whp (31whp delta, Avg 331whp)
93 Octane: 333whp - 350whp (17whp delta, Avg 339whp)
94 Octane: 343whp - 352whp (9whp delta, Avg 348whp)
Cool, my car was #4 on that list with 93 octane for stock cars....
__________________
2013 M3 Coupe-MR/BLK ZCP, ACM test pipes, BPM Stg2 dev. tune and Megan catback, AFE Stg2. with C/F elbow
Previous rides: 2011 M3 Coupe-MR/Blk
2007 Porsche 997C2S Speed Yellow/Blk sport seats
2004 BMW M3 Imola/Blk
Dave07997S is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      07-03-2013, 07:52 AM   #20
leigh
Major
 
leigh's Avatar
 
Drives: 2011 e92 zcp m3
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: melbourne

Posts: 1,091
iTrader: (0)

the mustang dyno would be correct. all the dynos over there in the US read high as
leigh is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      07-03-2013, 09:44 PM   #21
bblefas
Private First Class
 
Drives: 2011.5 M3 COUPE ZCP
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: BOSTON MA

Posts: 172
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam@Alekshop View Post
Hi, our shop has run many dyno days and seen every type of mod you can think of. We've probably dyno'd 50-60 E9x M3's. All of our results are put in the Dyno Database.

So the first thing you should do is go find the Dyno Database.
There's over 600 dynos from our M3's in there. If you want to compare Mustang vs. Dynojet, it's easy to do.

All Dynojet Dynos (all cars):
http://www.s65dynos.com/DynoDB.php?dynoID=2

All Dynojet Dynos (only STOCK cars):
http://www.s65dynos.com/DynoDB.php?d...unknownOpts=38

All Mustang Dynos (all cars):
http://www.s65dynos.com/DynoDB.php?dynoID=3

All Mustang Dynos (only STOCK cars):
http://www.s65dynos.com/DynoDB.php?d...unknownOpts=38

Next if you want to see how much variance there is in stock cars, it's very easy to do from the DynoDB. After you have all of the bone stock entries on the screen, type "91US" in the search window. This will reduce the gasoline choices only to 91 octane. You can also type in "93US" or "94US" to see 93 octane and 94 octane as well.

How much variance have we seen? Nowhere near 50whp, that's for sure. The most variance we've seen on two different stock cars on the same dyno on the same day as part of the same dyno day was about 10-12 whp. Here's the variance I find when I look in the DynoDB for all stock cars.

Dynojet:
91 Octane: 312whp - 343whp (31whp delta, Avg 331whp)
93 Octane: 333whp - 350whp (17whp delta, Avg 339whp)
94 Octane: 343whp - 352whp (9whp delta, Avg 348whp)
thanks going to look at the DB. anyone know why my trq #s are high?..
bblefas is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
Post Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
dyno, dynojet, mustang, s65, vac motorsports

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:00 AM.




m3post
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST