Dynojet results with my baseline

forza1976 · 10-03-2010, 12:38 PM

So, first disclaimer. This shop likes to have their dyno calibrated particularly high. So keep in mind of my baseline versus my current result.

I'm afraid to post these results because of the drama that seems to ensue.

Anyway, baseline was about 3 months after I took delivery of the car and yesterday I made it to the exact same dyno but less optimal conditions (warmer weather, etc.)

Baseline and current were on strict 91 octane. DA was approximately 7100.

My mods (v4, forge IC & DVs, AR CL DPs, BMS drop in, Rennart 3rd section)
Secondary cats are still in place and DA was approximately 7200.

highest logged psi was 14.3psi

NiVeDh · 10-03-2010, 01:20 PM

Nice numbers!

forza1976 · 10-03-2010, 04:05 PM

I realize this dyno reads high, was more interested in the delta between the baseline and yesterdays run.

BrianMN · 10-03-2010, 07:27 PM

Deltas seem to be in order....stock torque seems quite high..and that'd explain the high torque numbers modded too.

OpenFlash · 10-03-2010, 07:35 PM

Keep in mind that, at 7000' altitude, the dynojet applies a ~1.25% correction to the results. This correction is appropriate for naturally aspirated/supercharged cars that don't run more boost to make up for the low barometric pressure. But not necessarily for turbocharged engines that can, to some degree, adjust boost pressure to (partially, at least) compensate for altitude. For that reason, you will often see high altitude turbo cars put down some big corrected numbers. Not a big deal if you compare applies and applies (tune vs baseline) but can lead to problems when comparing sea level results to high altitude results

Sniz · 10-03-2010, 07:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

Keep in mind that, at 7000' altitude, the dynojet applies a ~1.25% correction to the results. This correction is appropriate for naturally aspirated/supercharged cars that don't run more boost to make up for the low barometric pressure. But not necessarily for turbocharged engines that can, to some degree, adjust boost pressure to (partially, at least) compensate for altitude. For that reason, you will often see high altitude turbo cars put down some bit corrected numbers. Not a big deal if you compare applies and applies (tune vs baseline) but can lead to problems when comparing sea level results to high altitude results

good post

forza1976 · 10-03-2010, 07:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

Keep in mind that, at 7000' altitude, the dynojet applies a ~1.25% correction to the results. This correction is appropriate for naturally aspirated/supercharged cars that don't run more boost to make up for the low barometric pressure. But not necessarily for turbocharged engines that can, to some degree, adjust boost pressure to (partially, at least) compensate for altitude. For that reason, you will often see high altitude turbo cars put down some bit corrected numbers. Not a big deal if you compare applies and applies (tune vs baseline) but can lead to problems when comparing sea level results to high altitude results

Totally agree, just wanted to see the improvement from stock. Very happy with the end result.

Brey335i · 10-03-2010, 10:23 PM

Delta is all that matters when you keep the other variables constant. And they are looking great, even if the dyno reads high

ar design · 10-04-2010, 10:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brey335i

Delta is all that matters when you keep the other variables constant. And they are looking great, even if the dyno reads high

Bingo. I dont think Matt is trying to claim that peak HP number - he is looking at the delta - which looks GREAT! Some of the comments around here really make me LOL

Bimmer This · 10-04-2010, 11:06 AM

no love for you Matt.

forza1976 · 10-04-2010, 11:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ar design

Bingo. I dont think Matt is trying to claim that peak HP number - he is looking at the delta - which looks GREAT! Some of the comments around here really make me LOL

you bet Andrew, though I wish that I had 380hp to the wheels I know that isn't the case. Hence me not putting "world record" or "high altitude record" in my post. Just wanted to see the gains.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bimmer This

no love for you Matt.

Yeah, V... I guess these gains are pretty vanilla. But still not too shabby

I can't wait to see your gains when we do a dyno day.

Bimmer This · 10-04-2010, 11:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by forza1976

I can't wait to see your gains when we do a dyno day.

Me too. I would really like to know where it's at.

10-03-2010, 12:38 PM	#1
forza1976 Major General 3399 Rep 6,589 Posts Drives: BMW Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: 49417 and 60610 iTrader: (13) Garage List 2022 BMW M3X [10.00]	Dynojet results with my baseline So, first disclaimer. This shop likes to have their dyno calibrated particularly high. So keep in mind of my baseline versus my current result. I'm afraid to post these results because of the drama that seems to ensue. Anyway, baseline was about 3 months after I took delivery of the car and yesterday I made it to the exact same dyno but less optimal conditions (warmer weather, etc.) Baseline and current were on strict 91 octane. DA was approximately 7100. My mods (v4, forge IC & DVs, AR CL DPs, BMS drop in, Rennart 3rd section) Secondary cats are still in place and DA was approximately 7200. highest logged psi was 14.3psi Last edited by forza1976; 11-19-2010 at 09:49 AM.. Reason: added logged psi
	Appreciate 0 Tweet Quote

10-03-2010, 01:20 PM	#2
NiVeDh Major General 422 Rep 8,003 Posts Drives: '08 E90 335i, '99 E36 M3 Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Houston, TX & Atlanta, GA iTrader: (132) Garage List 2008 BMW 335i Sedan [8.66]	Nice numbers!
	Appreciate 0 Quote

10-03-2010, 04:05 PM	#3
forza1976 Major General 3399 Rep 6,589 Posts Drives: BMW Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: 49417 and 60610 iTrader: (13) Garage List 2022 BMW M3X [10.00]	I realize this dyno reads high, was more interested in the delta between the baseline and yesterdays run.
	Appreciate 0 Quote

10-03-2010, 07:27 PM	#4
BrianMN Banned 114 Rep 2,428 Posts Drives: 4 Door Family Sedan Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Minneapolis iTrader: (7)	Deltas seem to be in order....stock torque seems quite high..and that'd explain the high torque numbers modded too.
	Appreciate 0 Quote

10-03-2010, 07:35 PM	#5
OpenFlash 1737 Rep 17,960 Posts Drives: A Lot Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: SF Bay, CA iTrader: (0) Garage List 2018 Ducati Panigal ... [0.00] 2016 Mazda CX5 [0.00] 2017 Aprilia Tuono ... [0.00] 2019 BMW M2 Competi ... [0.00] 2015 BMW M5 Competi ... [10.00] 2016 Ducati XDiavel S [0.00] 2016 AMG GT S [0.00] 2011 Ferrari 458 It ... [0.00] 2017 Charger Hellcat [0.00] 2015 KTM Super Duke ... [0.00] 2016 KTM RC390 [0.00]	Keep in mind that, at 7000' altitude, the dynojet applies a ~1.25% correction to the results. This correction is appropriate for naturally aspirated/supercharged cars that don't run more boost to make up for the low barometric pressure. But not necessarily for turbocharged engines that can, to some degree, adjust boost pressure to (partially, at least) compensate for altitude. For that reason, you will often see high altitude turbo cars put down some big corrected numbers. Not a big deal if you compare applies and applies (tune vs baseline) but can lead to problems when comparing sea level results to high altitude results Last edited by OpenFlash; 10-03-2010 at 07:40 PM..
	Appreciate 0 Quote

10-03-2010, 10:23 PM	#8
Brey335i Banned 112 Rep 4,771 Posts Drives: e46 ///M3 Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Austin, TX iTrader: (11)	Delta is all that matters when you keep the other variables constant. And they are looking great, even if the dyno reads high
	Appreciate 0 Quote

10-04-2010, 11:06 AM	#10
Bimmer This Major General 99 Rep 6,473 Posts Drives: 2007 BMW 335i Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Westminster iTrader: (3)	no love for you Matt.
	Appreciate 0 Quote