Bimmerworld x-pipe gains over test pipes dyno

[azndrunk74]

Runs 0 and 5 were from July 3rd. Run 0 was on Chevron 91 octane, Run 5 is 91 + 2 gallons E85. Both in 4th gear. Temps were around 80 degrees F. Didn't hook up the RPM wire during those runs.

Runs 6,7,8 were from today all on strictly Chevron 91 octane . Runs 6,7 were 4th gear and run 8 was in 5th gear. Temps were around 78 degrees F. I did have a run 9 which was the highest in HP and torque but consider it a glory run and won't use it for comparison.

Since the July 3rd runs I've replaced pre-cat O2s, replaced the test pipe+OEM x-pipe combo with the resonated bimmerworld x-pipe, and added a new K&N intake filter.

With the new setup there is definite improvement across the rev range (red/blue lines versus black/green lines). This dyno is known to give low numbers so I'm not concerned about the peak numbers. The deltas are what I care about.

edit: I've added picture comparison of the bimmerworld x-pipe versus test pipe + OEM x-pipe. the forward location of the "X" added power across the board. My bimmerworld x-pipe also has additional HFCs welded in after the "X" to eliminate smells associated with running catless.

[Browntrash]

wow looks great...

so 502 with:

1. no cats
2. updated 02 sensors
3. K&N filter
4. Bimmerwold x pipe
5. tune...?
6. e85

[theBRUDDHA]

Originally Posted by Browntrash

wow looks great...

so 502 with:

1. no cats
2. updated 02 sensors
3. K&N filter
4. Bimmerwold x pipe
5. tune...?
6. e85

I believe he is ESS Supercharged?? 513whp

[LatifE90]

His bio says ESS 625 kit

[Browntrash]

Originally Posted by theBRUDDHA

I believe he is ESS Supercharged?? 513whp

Originally Posted by LatifE90

His bio says ESS 625 kit

ha, i was thinking that had to be the case but didn't see that detail

[azndrunk74]

Yes, sorry I should have stated I have an ess 625 kit.

To summarize-

July 3rd runs:
491.85whp on 91 octane, 4th gear
513.95 whp on 91 octane + 2 gallons e85, 4th gear

August 17th runs (addition of Bimmerworld resonated x-pipe, new O2s, new filter):
508.20 whp 342.73 tq 91 octane, 4th gear
500.93 whp 341.00 tq 91 octane, 4th gear (bad run?)
512.82 whp 343.32 tq 91 octane, 5th gear
514.62 whp 354.76 tq 91 octane, 5th gear (not pictured)

There are gains across nearly the entire RPM range, looks like roughly +15whp to 20whp from eyeballing it. My butt dyno did tell me it felt better after the x-pipe and the dyno confirmed it.

For reference, a FBO CLS63 (6.2L V8) did 440whp (forget TQ number, it was above 400) right before me.

[theBRUDDHA]

Originally Posted by azndrunk74

Yes, sorry I should have stated I have an ess 625 kit.

To summarize-

July 3rd runs:
run 0 491.85whp on 91 octane, 4th gear
run 5 513.95 whp on 91 octane + 2 gallons e85, 4th gear

August 17th runs (addition of Bimmerworld resonated x-pipe, new O2s, new filter):
508.20 whp 342.73 tq 91 octane, 4th gear
500.93 whp 341.00 tq 91 octane, 4th gear (bad run?)
512.82 whp 343.32 tq 91 octane, 5th gear
514.62 whp 354.76 tq 91 octane, 5th gear (not pictured)

There are gains across nearly the entire RPM range, looks like roughly +15whp to 20whp from eyeballing it. My butt dyno did tell me it felt better after the x-pipe and the dyno confirmed it.

For reference, a FBO CLS63 (6.2L V8) did 440whp (forget TQ number, it was above 400) right before me.

Interesting how you saw more power in 5th gear as opposed to 4th. Isn't 4th gear supposed to be closest to1:1 ratio and suggested for dyno pulls?

[azndrunk74]

Originally Posted by theBRUDDHA

Interesting how you saw more power in 5th gear as opposed to 4th. Isn't 4th gear supposed to be closest to1:1 ratio and suggested for dyno pulls?

yeah, I wasn't too clear on that so I just asked for a couple 4th gear runs and a couple 5th gear runs. at least gains can still be seen in the 4th gear run comparisons (apples to apples).

[azndrunk74]

here's a slightly less confusing chart.

old runs (black & green) versus new runs (blue & red). the green line peaks higher due to the e85.

[azndrunk74]

added a x-pipe comparison photo in the 1st post so you can compare the locations of the "X".

[Richbot]

Wait does yours have 200cell cats in it after the x? I don't see that configuration on BW's website maybe I'm missing it

EDIT: Derp, nevermind. what kind of HFC did you use/manufacturer? Xpipe is on my list for after my next emissions inspection, and I like the BW setup but I think I want to at least attempt an HFC in the stock location

[azndrunk74]

Originally Posted by Richbot

Wait does yours have 200cell cats in it after the x? I don't see that configuration on BW's website maybe I'm missing it

EDIT: Derp, nevermind. what kind of HFC did you use/manufacturer? Xpipe is on my list for after my next emissions inspection, and I like the BW setup but I think I want to at least attempt an HFC in the stock location

i'll need to check, i actually bought the x-pipe lightly used locally. i believe they are magnaflow cats. i'll get back to you on exact specs.

the HFC in the stock location may hinder any HP gains you'd expect. i'd put them further downstream after the "X" like mine if possible.

[Iyzmi]

Originally Posted by azndrunk74

This dyno is known to give low numbers so I'm not concerned about the peak numbers.

Why is this the case? I know Mustang dynos are known to read low but wouldn't think any Dynojet would read significantly lower than any other Dynojet.

[azndrunk74]

Originally Posted by Iyzmi

Why is this the case? I know Mustang dynos are known to read low but wouldn't think any Dynojet would read significantly lower than any other Dynojet.

it's all relative, even among dynojets. the shop told me stock e9x m3's dyno starting around 330whp there. my friend with full bolt ons (pulleys, intake, tune x-pipe) did around ~370whp. another guy with a LS1 camaro did 387whp there, but 419rwhp (unsure of correction factor) on another dynojet.

this all leads me to believe that this particular dyno is a bit of a heartbreaker dyno, but i rather be underrated than overrated in power. i will be going back to the same dyno since my baselines are there.

[Iyzmi]

That makes me feel a little better about my low Dynojet results with my ESS 550 (450whp/300wtq). I have yet to go back with my 625 to see what the delta is. I understand some difference among equal Dynojets is expected, just wouldn't expect so much.

[pbonsalb]

There really should not be much difference from one Dynojet to another.

[Iyzmi]

Originally Posted by pbonsalb

There really should not be much difference from one Dynojet to another.

This is my understanding as well. The tech who dyno'd my car said they are all calibrated the same way and take variables like air temp and elevation into account so results should be very close. Reading 5-7% low seems like an unacceptable degree of variance to me.

[pbonsalb]

Here are some possible explanations that I can rhink of. SAE vs STD is 2.5% (STD is 2.5% higher). Drum weights could vary. Weather station should equalize conditions but if one day is stinky hot the car may pull timing and the dynojet won't compensate for that. Fans on the motor/intake make a difference and vary from shop to shop.

[Iyzmi]

Originally Posted by pbonsalb

Here are some possible explanations that I can rhink of. SAE vs STD is 2.5% (STD is 2.5% higher). Drum weights could vary. Weather station should equalize conditions but if one day is stinky hot the car may pull timing and the dynojet won't compensate for that. Fans on the motor/intake make a difference and vary from shop to shop.

The SAE vs STD thing is actually a good point, I just noticed OP's charts are STD. With SAE his numbers would be even lower. Around 500whp SAE with an ESS 625 and xpipe is definitely too low, you're missing 40-50hp.

OP, have you considered taking the car to another dyno?

[azndrunk74]

Originally Posted by Iyzmi

The SAE vs STD thing is actually a good point, I just noticed OP's charts are STD. With SAE his numbers would be even lower. Around 500whp SAE with an ESS 625 and xpipe is definitely too low, you're missing 40-50hp.

OP, have you considered taking the car to another dyno?

i may take it to a more professional shop later down the line. the current one is literally 5 minutes from my house but has a bit of a "backyard tuner" feel to the place. i wouldn't be surprised if their dyno isn't calibrated correctly. the dynosheets never record the temps and humidity which makes it seem like it's not connected to a weather station.

[Iyzmi]

Originally Posted by azndrunk74

i may take it to a more professional shop later down the line. the current one is literally 5 minutes from my house but has a bit of a "backyard tuner" feel to the place. i wouldn't be surprised if their dyno isn't calibrated correctly. the dynosheets never record the temps and humidity which makes it seem like it's not connected to a weather station.

FWIW, I just looked at my dyno sheets and they also don't show temp and humidity.

[azndrunk74]

Originally Posted by Iyzmi

The SAE vs STD thing is actually a good point, I just noticed OP's charts are STD. With SAE his numbers would be even lower. Around 500whp SAE with an ESS 625 and xpipe is definitely too low, you're missing 40-50hp.

OP, have you considered taking the car to another dyno?

Just found out my water pump hasn't been working and temps have been 50 degrees above ambient. After I fix it I'll go redyno. Hoping this will push the numbers into 520+whp SAE on 91 and 540+whp with e85.