My Stock E92 M3 Dyno Test Result

[KSAF]

Hi,

I ordered the Kelleners tuning kit for my e92 m3 and will receive it next week before new year. They reflash the ecu and delete the first set of cat's "the one after the headers" and replace the second set with 100 cel racing cat's. They claim 40 hp from there kit. I dynoed my car after the 2000 km "1200 m" service and before sending them the ecu to know exactly how much more power i will gain. The test was don on a dynojet dyno and i was runing 98 roz octane fuel "93 ron in the us"

http://www.kelleners-sport.com/engli.../e90_motor.htm

[jtown]

Look at that torque curve.

[NavM3]

Thanks for posting. So, roughly 15% drive train loss. And yes, that is one flat torque curve.

[ruff]

Originally Posted by jtown

Look at that torque curve.

Flat as a table top. The M boys did a fantasitic job with this motor. I am glad they made the compromise they did of reducing some torque in order to make it broader and more linear across the rev range.

[ChitownM3]

Wasn't there another graph claiming much higher numbers than this???

[///M3]

First thing I noticed too, nice job BMW M!

[ChitownM3]

The flat torque curve is real nice and all, but I was really hoping this engine was underrated as originally thought...

[ruff]

Originally Posted by ChitownM3

The flat torque curve is real nice and all, but I was really hoping this engine was underrated as originally thought...

Wouldn't it be dishonest for BMW to underate it? Kidding aside, I agree with you, but I don't think many people ever thought it was underrated.

[JEllis]

Fabulous information... really no need to worry about torque with a graph like that....

[swamp2]

Wow, indeed the torque curve is phenomenal. This will contribute to the car feeling less fast as well. But in this way we get decieved. The smooth linear power esp. with DCT will feel just like a freaking gas turbine (of course not in magnitude, just in character).

These figures show a 17% hp loss and 14% torque loss. Not too bad but we did see a 385hp/270 ft lb result here. These translate to only 8% losses. This is just the nature of the beast. Wheel/hub dynos are not absolutely accurate at all but better for A-B comparisons.

6,000 euro for 40 hp, 3,500 of which is for the software. It sure does look even more pathetic on the price when you can get 40 hp for <$200 and 60 hp for <$300 for the 335i here: http://www.bmwjuice.com/ . Granted I know the huge difference between tuning for FI vs. NA but still the price is awfully steep.

[T Bone]

Hey KSA, thanks for posting mate.


I will play devil's advocate here.... It think BMW M made the wrong trade off here. I recognize a flat torque curve is good engineering and makes driving the car on a daily basis a good thing but Ms should have all the torque in the last 2000-3000 RPM, screw the rest of the power band.

The last 2000-3000 rpm is where all the action happens. The S65's torque falls off precisely where you want it to be peaking.

I am a big boy, flame away.

[JEllis]

Originally Posted by T Bone

Hey KSA, thanks for posting mate.


I will play devil's advocate here.... It think BMW M made the wrong trade off here. I recognize a flat torque curve is good engineering and makes driving the car on a daily basis a good thing but Ms should have all the torque in the last 2000-3000 RPM, screw the rest of the power band.

The last 2000-3000 rpm is where all the action happens. The S65's torque falls off precisely where you want it to be peaking.

I am a big boy, flame away.

Interesting opinion....although 20-30ftlbs is hardly falling off....

[footie]

Originally Posted by T Bone

Hey KSA, thanks for posting mate.


I will play devil's advocate here.... It think BMW M made the wrong trade off here. I recognize a flat torque curve is good engineering and makes driving the car on a daily basis a good thing but Ms should have all the torque in the last 2000-3000 RPM, screw the rest of the power band.

The last 2000-3000 rpm is where all the action happens. The S65's torque falls off precisely where you want it to be peaking.

I am a big boy, flame away.

If you feel that way I reckon you should try a Honda S2000, it does exactly what you are looking for in an engine and if you happen to live in the UK you could get yourself a TVR Cerbera 4.2 which again does exactly what you are looking for but on both counts you will be throwing away a more drivable car.

Each to there own I say.

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by footie

If you feel that way I reckon you should try a Honda S2000, it does exactly what you are looking for in an engine and if you happen to live in the UK you could get yourself a TVR Cerbera 4.2 which again does exactly what you are looking for but on both counts you will be throwing away a more drivable car.

Each to there own I say.

Good observation. Perfect suggestion. However, like nearly all engines with their redlines placed far from the very conservative side, the torque curve will always fall off near the redline and the S2000 is not different is just falls only for about 500 rpm from redline whereas the M3 falls for about a full 2k. The engine just can not breath this quickly at its given size and hence the fall.

Originally Posted by T Bone

Hey KSA, thanks for posting mate.


I will play devil's advocate here.... It think BMW M made the wrong trade off here. I recognize a flat torque curve is good engineering and makes driving the car on a daily basis a good thing but Ms should have all the torque in the last 2000-3000 RPM, screw the rest of the power band.

The last 2000-3000 rpm is where all the action happens. The S65's torque falls off precisely where you want it to be peaking.

I am a big boy, flame away.

The minimum rpm and shape on this dyno biases the apperance of the sharp drop off as well. In reality the engine drops off (or builds depending on which way you trace the curve) from 1k to 3.5k as well. Most of this part of the curve is missing from this dyno. You can see the one that looks more similar to the reported dyno from BMW here.

Last but not least, one reason is to save some room for the CSL! This V8 is not maxed out.

[T Bone]

Originally Posted by swamp2

Good observation. Perfect suggestion. However, like nearly all engines with their redlines placed far from the very conservative side, the torque curve will always fall off near the redline and the S2000 is not different is just falls only for about 500 rpm from redline whereas the M3 falls for about a full 2k. The engine just can not breath this quickly at its given size and hence the fall.



The minimum rpm and shape on this dyno biases the apperance of the sharp drop off as well. In reality the engine drops off (or builds depending on which way you trace the curve) from 1k to 3.5k as well. Most of this part of the curve is missing from this dyno. You can see the one that looks more similar to the reported dyno from BMW here.

Last but not least, one reason is to save some room for the CSL! This V8 is not maxed out.

I really don't understand why BMW M made this trade off though. If you look at the torque curves for the M5 / M6 V10, it is not linear and has a VTEC like hit at 5000 rpm+.....when mated with a 7 speed SMG box...that is a great combo.

When the M-DCT comes out, they are going to keep the engine in the part of the torque curve that is falling....it doesn't make sense to me. I realize it is not much but it is 10% plus.

[JEllis]

Originally Posted by T Bone

I really don't understand why BMW M made this trade off though. If you look at the torque curves for the M5 / M6 V10, it is not linear and has a VTEC like hit at 5000 rpm+.....when mated with a 7 speed SMG box...that is a great combo.

When the M-DCT comes out, they are going to keep the engine in the part of the torque curve that is falling....it doesn't make sense to me. I realize it is not much but it is 10% plus.

The lack of a VTEC (VANOS) like hit you are talking is considered a good thing rather than bad. Sure its fun but linear is better and a significant engineering feet especially since the engine has VANOS...

Jason

[T Bone]

Originally Posted by JEllis

The lack of a VTEC (VANOS) like hit you are talking is considered a good thing rather than bad. Sure its fun but linear is better and a significant engineering feet especially since the engine has VANOS...

Jason

I do understand that it is difficult for a linear torque curve for a normally aspirated engine but to get there, BMW M engineers made design decisions to affect the engine's volumemetric efficiency to be better below 6000 rpms....decisions from intake runners, cam shafts, timing etc.

I would prefer that they didn't get this linear curve and opt for the VTEC like bump after 5000 rpm as it would be better for acceleration. I would sacrafice drivability (which is best with flat torque curves) to get faster acceleration.

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by T Bone

I do understand that it is difficult for a linear torque curve for a normally aspirated engine but to get there, BMW M engineers made design decisions to affect the engine's volumemetric efficiency to be better below 6000 rpms....decisions from intake runners, cam shafts, timing etc.

I would prefer that they didn't get this linear curve and opt for the VTEC like bump after 5000 rpm as it would be better for acceleration. I would sacrafice drivability (which is best with flat torque curves) to get faster acceleration.

Absolutely, but again CSL???

[Stahlgrau]

Gonna be interesting to see what kind of aftermarket gains can be found for this car. Especially what can be done with software alone. KSA has stated that he'll be dyno'ing again after the ECU tune and again after the cat replacement.

[MrHarris]

i like the torque curve, i wish there was less than a 15% drivetrain loss like the 335i, but maybe it's because of this type of dyno i hope.

[T Bone]

Originally Posted by swamp2

Absolutely, but again CSL???

Yes lots of room for tuning.

Originally Posted by Stahlgrau

Gonna be interesting to see what kind of aftermarket gains can be found for this car. Especially what can be done with software alone. KSA has stated that he'll be dyno'ing again after the ECU tune and again after the cat replacement.

You will need new camshafts to get any power up top. Also tuner companies will need to play around with the intake runner lengths and obviously play around with the computer.

[bullmrkt]

Beautiful torque curve, as flat as Kansas. The only problem is that its too low!

I was a die hard NA guy for a while but once I got a taste of turbo torque and tunability there was just no going back. Apparently the same thing happened to the BMW M folks with rumors of M5 TT's and now even the M3 may get a couple small snails.

My $0.02