Mustang Dyno Tested - Stock 2011 M3 7M-DCT

[Veritable]

The BMW Car Club of BC hosted a Dyno Day this past weekend. Since this 2011 E90 M3 7M-DCT is not only my 2nd one, but it's also the last of its kind, it will be a keeper and will probably end up getting modded. So, I registered it to do a couple of pulls now that it's all broken in and still bone stock.

Time and Date: 12:10PM - 12:15PM, 2011/11/12
Location: Miller Performance Ltd., Abbotsford, BC
Vehicle: 2011 BMW E90 M3, completely stock
Mileage: 5690km
Weather and Temperature: Drizzling, 5C
Dyno Type: Mustang
Gearbox and Gear: 7-speed M-DCT, both runs done in 4th gear
Gas: Chevron 94 Octane (no ethanol) for every tank of the car's lifetime
Rear Tires: Continental Extreme Contact DWS 275/35R19, 40psi cold

Dyno sheet in JPG:



Dyno sheet in PDF:

http://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6lk...FjNzkyMGVhYjdl

The scale is not that great, but looks like 360whp @ 8000rpm and 264ft.lb. @ 3960rpm.

I asked the dyno operator to take it all the way up to the fuel cut-off if he wanted to, but he said that from looking at the graph, since the power output started levelling off after 7600rpm, he didn't feel the need to keep going beyond the 8200rpm as shown on the graph. He also decided on 2 runs for the newer cars there instead of the customary 3, because the outputs were quite consistent so there was no need to beat on them that much.

Finally, a couple of pictures from my Canon EOS 50D + Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM:




...and a video from my Samsung Galaxy S2:

I'll post the rest of the pictures of the other cars over in the Pictures / Videos section, and I'll cross-link the 2 threads. The day started out as a grudge match between my car and an ESS VT1-445 supercharged Z4M Roadster, which his won with a couple more horses and about 20ft.lb. more torque and everything coming in a bit earlier under the curve. Then both of our cars were handily trumped by a turbocharged fully-built E36 M3 that was slipping on the rollers until 2 guys sat in the trunk 470whp and 570ft.lb. tends to do that....



Rest of the pictures are in this thread: http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=613120

[IMG]

Here's your Dyno Database entry. Go take a look.
http://bmw.pencilgeek.org/showDyno.php?recID=441

[Veritable]

Originally Posted by img

Here's your Dyno Database entry. Go take a look.
http://bmw.pencilgeek.org/showDyno.php?recID=441

Thanks buddy! Forgot to mention that the car has always had Chevron 94 Octane (no ethanol) for every fill-up in its lifetime so far.

[Mahmood07]

Nice numbers! Isn't that a bit high for a stock M3?? My car ran 336 rwhp with air filter and Eisenmann muffler on a dynodynamics

[VegasEgg]

Def nice #'s! Mine dyno'd at 336.44 HP 246.53 tq on a dyno jet

[pbonsalb]

It is higher than any stock E9x M3 has dynoed before on any dyno according to the dyno database. And no turbo M3 will do 470 rwhp and 570 lbs rwtq. About the best they do is equal rwhp and rwtq, and usually it is a little more rwhp than rwtq. Not sure what the issues were, but mustang dynos are not consistent among one another and certainly no with dynojets. Great tuning tools and good for seeing your gains if you return to the same one and it is set up the same way.

[PhillyNate]

This is encouraging. I have run Citgo 93 from the jump and nothing but.

[Veritable]

My understanding is that S65B40 M3s puts down on average 350whp so I'm not quite surprised at my result. I've attached the dyno sheet that I received from the ESS Z4M, and that looks to be on par with what that kit is billed to do. His run was 2 cars ahead of mine, with obviously very similar conditions.

Besides, Edmunds Inside Line's long-termer put down 376whp and 274ft.lb. on a Dynojet, albeit some have questioned the correction factor the dyno operator used. Article linked here: http://blogs.insideline.com/roadtest...yno-music.html

I can also point to the quite-cold temperatures (specified in the original post), a diet of nothing but 94 Octane for this car for its entire lifetime so far, and maybe even the relatively spirited break-in played a role.

(200km to 1000km on the odometer, went on a driving trip and chased a 997.1 C2S on day 1, then chased 25 motorcycles on day 2, on twisty mountain and coastal roads. I observed break-in with the 5500rpm limit and no full-throttle, but there were LOTS of compression and varying revs)

Finally, it's entirely possible for a turbo'ed BMW to make more torque than horsepower. Here's Edmunds' 1M Coupe vs. 135i dyno graph:



If you ask the turbos to boost early, then they run out of breath in the end and top-end power suffers....

I will e-mail the shop to ask about the correction used, but I recall that the lightly-tuned E36 M3 peaked at ~210whp, a stock Z4M Coupe was about 275whp, the 335i was the same thing, so everything seemed in line with what I've read elsewhere.

Hey, this 2011 uses 10% more gas than my 2008 ever did, so it's allowed to have a few more horses

[Ateam]

The operater did not know wh he is talking about given peak power always happens at 8300. Look at others dynos who ran them properly.

And as for an inflated number, a simple setting that is off correction wise could easily inflate. I think everyone feels each car dynos "differently" but fact is most are probably putting out exactly 350 whp which is exactly 15 percent drivetrain loss which may even be conservative.

[VegasEgg]

Why didn't they take it to redline?

[datbimmerdoe]

sweet #'s

[pbonsalb]

Originally Posted by Veritable

My understanding is that S65B40 M3s puts down on average 350whp so I'm not quite surprised at my result. I've attached the dyno sheet that I received from the ESS Z4M, and that looks to be on par with what that kit is billed to do. His run was 2 cars ahead of mine, with obviously very similar conditions.

Besides, Edmunds Inside Line's long-termer put down 376whp and 274ft.lb. on a Dynojet, albeit some have questioned the correction factor the dyno operator used. Article linked here:

I can also point to the quite-cold temperatures (specified in the original post), a diet of nothing but 94 Octane for this car for its entire lifetime so far, and maybe even the relatively spirited break-in played a role.

(200km to 1000km on the odometer, went on a driving trip and chased a 997.1 C2S on day 1, then chased 25 motorcycles on day 2, on twisty mountain and coastal roads. I observed break-in with the 5500rpm limit and no full-throttle, but there were LOTS of compression and varying revs)

Finally, it's entirely possible for a turbo'ed BMW to make more torque than horsepower. Here's Edmunds' 1M Coupe vs. 135i dyno graph:

If you ask the turbos to boost early, then they run out of breath in the end and top-end power suffers....

I will e-mail the shop to ask about the correction used, but I recall that the lightly-tuned E36 M3 peaked at ~210whp, a stock Z4M Coupe was about 275whp, the 335i was the same thing, so everything seemed in line with what I've read elsewhere.

Hey, this 2011 uses 10% more gas than my 2008 ever did, so it's allowed to have a few more horses

About the best a stock M3 does on 93 or 94 octane is 350 rwhp on a dynojet (and most people say dynojets read higher than mustangs). The dyno database supports this -- copy attached. If your car is doing 15 rwhp better, there is probably something wrong with the dyno or the way the dyno results are calculated. We would all like our cars to be special, but this is rarely the case. There is one outlier mustang dyno showing 360 rwhp in the dyno database, so you are not far from that.

A turbo E36M3, such as the one tested on the same day as your car, does not make 100 lbs rwtq than rwhp. I know the parts on that car. There is an issue with the dyno results. Might be wheelspin related.

Any dynos for the 135/335 are totally irrelevant to why your results may not be accurate. I do agree that small single or twin turbos may make a lot more torque than rwhp.