BMW M5 Forum and M6 Forums banner

1 - 20 of 23 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
932 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
First two runs
E39M5runs1and2.jpg

Third run
E39M5run3.jpg

E92 M3 runs
E92M3runs.jpg

E90 M3 run
E90M3run.jpg

Here are the runs from an E46M3 with lots of bolt ons
E46M3runs.jpg

My three runs from last June
613dynop1.jpg
613dynop2.jpg

First, I had been contemplating replacing my CPSs because I thought they were shot. But, based on the HP numbers, the engine does not appear to be down on power. Second, the car stumbled on the third run, but the other cars did not (and neither did mine last June). Third, my AFRs varied more than the other three cars. All of the AFRs were in the 13.1 range, but mine was the only one that dipped below 13 (the 12.8 in my third run). My understanding is that my AFRs should be around 12.8. Does anyone know if the S65 AFR should be in the mid to high-12s, too? Also, my car was the first one dynoed that day. I thought that my HP was down, but throughout the day, a lot of folks were commenting on lower than expected numbers. The dyno is new and people were saying that it is not dialed-in yet. So, what do you guys make of my numbers? For my dyno runs last June, I had the Jailbreak tune, but the new runs are with my CAI added. I sent the dyno numbers to Matt because I thought it was running lean, but I am not so sure now. Maybe the increased air volume of the CAIs is leaning things out? Finally, it looks like I have a valve cover gasket leak from the passenger side. Any input is appreciated.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,777 Posts
First two runs



First, I had been contemplating replacing my CPSs because I thought they were shot. But, based on the HP numbers, the engine does not appear to be down on power. Second, the car stumbled on the third run, but the other cars did not (and neither did mine last June). Third, my AFRs varied more than the other three cars. All of the AFRs were in the 13.1 range, but mine was the only one that dipped below 13 (the 12.8 in my third run). My understanding is that my AFRs should be around 12.8. Does anyone know if the S65 AFR should be in the mid to high-12s, too? Also, my car was the first one dynoed that day. I thought that my HP was down, but throughout the day, a lot of folks were commenting on lower than expected numbers. The dyno is new and people were saying that it is not dialed-in yet. So, what do you guys make of my numbers? For my dyno runs last June, I had the Jailbreak tune, but the new runs are with my CAI added. I sent the dyno numbers to Matt because I thought it was running lean, but I am not so sure now. Maybe the increased air volume of the CAIs is leaning things out? Finally, it looks like I have a valve cover gasket leak from the passenger side. Any input is appreciated.
Dyno numbers are not absolutes, they are comparisons on the same dyno. Good operators can reduce the dyno to dyno variation, but there will always be some. So don't be too concerned with absolute numbers.

The setup understates bhp a little. It looks like the operator is using about 13% reduction factor, most use more like 15%.

Focusing on wheel hp, I would say you are towards the bottom of the normal range. Lean makes more power up to a point....the point the engine goes BOOM. 12.8 is plenty safe on a NA car, 13.1 is about where you should be (although different tuners have different thoughts on that). A little rich is much safer.

Heat soak will change the readings, so earlier (cooler) runs will show better results. The computer is very sensitive, you need some really big fans to try to replicate real world air moving over the front of the car. Without that, your power is probably a little better than you think.

All in all, I don't think your numbers look bad at all. When you make changes. go back to the dyno and do the comparison. That will give you real world gains.

Regards,
Jerry
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
405 Posts
Every motor makes different power (Even if it's the same type). It plays a huge role on how it was treated from day 1, broken in ,and the way the rings seat in the pistons.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,632 Posts
What dyno (brand) were they using?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
932 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
Focusing on wheel hp, I would say you are towards the bottom of the normal range. Lean makes more power up to a point....the point the engine goes BOOM. 12.8 is plenty safe on a NA car, 13.1 is about where you should be (although different tuners have different thoughts on that). A little rich is much safer.
I am still awaiting all of the datalogging points. I want a clearer picture of the fuel trims before I touch base with Jailbreak again about any tweaks to my tune.

All in all, I don't think your numbers look bad at all. When you make changes. go back to the dyno and do the comparison. That will give you real world gains.
Thanks, Jerry. This dyno is 2 hours away, so I will be using a closer one (dynojet) for future runs. At this point, I plan on doing three pulls (with AFRs) on the closer dynojet as another baseline in a couple of weeks.


Every motor makes different power (Even if it's the same type). It plays a huge role on how it was treated from day 1, broken in ,and the way the rings seat in the pistons.
Yeah, I am not chasing HP. As long as the engine is running in a healthy fashion, I will be content.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,014 Posts
I spoke with Frank after I talked with you, that dyno was giving people "low" numbers all day. The correction factor was 2%.






PLEASE NOTE THAT I DO NOT OWN AN M5 AND THIS POST IS NOT INTENDED TO BE ARROGANT. PLEASE READ THE IMPORTANT REVISED DISCLAIMER THAT APPLIES TO THIS POST
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
932 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
Thanks, all. So no one is overly concerned with my AFRs? I am still awaiting the full datalog with the fuel trims, but below are my Torque results from last June (with the Jailbreak tune, but not the CAIs). I do not know how to interpret these, but all tests were passed.

TID:$01 CID:$01
- Rich to Lean sensor threshold voltage(constant)
Test incomplete or dependant test failed
--
TID:$01 CID:$02
- Rich to Lean sensor threshold voltage(constant)
Test incomplete or dependant test failed
--
TID:$02 CID:$01
- Lean to Rich sensor threshold voltage(constant)
Max: 3,000
Test result value: 996
PASS
----
TID:$02 CID:$02
- Lean to Rich sensor threshold voltage(constant)
Max: 3,000
Test result value: 1,006
PASS
----
TID:$02 CID:$03
- Lean to Rich sensor threshold voltage(constant)
Min: 200
Test result value: 996
PASS
----
TID:$02 CID:$04
- Lean to Rich sensor threshold voltage(constant)
Min: 200
Test result value: 1,006
PASS
----
TID:$02 CID:$05
- Lean to Rich sensor threshold voltage(constant)
Max: 384
Test result value: 73
PASS
----
TID:$02 CID:$06
- Lean to Rich sensor threshold voltage(constant)
Max: 384
Test result value: 67
PASS
----
TID:$02 CID:$07
- Lean to Rich sensor threshold voltage(constant)
Max: 384
Test result value: 79
PASS
----
TID:$02 CID:$08
- Lean to Rich sensor threshold voltage(constant)
Max: 384
Test result value: 77
PASS
----
TID:$03 CID:$01
- Low sensor Voltage for switch time calculation
Max: 350
Test result value: 350
PASS
----
TID:$03 CID:$02
- Low sensor Voltage for switch time calculation
Max: 350
Test result value: 350
PASS
----
TID:$05 CID:$02
- Rich to Lean sensor switch time(calculated)
Min: 46
Test result value: 84
PASS
----
TID:$05 CID:$07
- Rich to Lean sensor switch time(calculated)
Min: 2,445
Test result value: 2,446
PASS
----

End of report.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
13,589 Posts
Those results dont necessarily mean anything as there is no frame of reference. What you're looking at are adaptations (adaptative to multiplicative it seems). I'm not sure why you think the s65 and S62 are comparable. Your AFRs are what most S62's are (ie, richer as RPM rises). The S65 is a factory alpha N NA screamer...the S62, well, isnt.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
932 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
I'm not sure why you think the s65 and S62 are comparable.
Was not comparing them, per se. Was really using the S65 as a baseline as to where my numbers should fall (comparable HP, but more torque from the S62). The numbers bear this out for the most part.


Your AFRs are what most S62's are (ie, richer as RPM rises). The S65 is a factory alpha N NA screamer...the S62, well, isnt.
Thanks, I was not sure how my AFRs should have read as compared to the S65. I do not think that the S65 AFRs varied much between the runs, but mine trended downward. So, I was not sure if that was normal, i.e., if my AFRs should have remained more constant, too.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
13,589 Posts
Was not comparing them, per se. Was really using the S65 as a baseline as to where my numbers should fall (comparable HP, but more torque from the S62). The numbers bear this out for the most part.




Thanks, I was not sure how my AFRs should have read as compared to the S65. I do not think that the S65 AFRs varied much between the runs, but mine trended downward. So, I was not sure if that was normal, i.e., if my AFRs should have remained more constant, too.
The tuning strategies between the two DMEs is night and day. Our S62's were designed when 400hp from 5 liters was "enough" as the competition was still stuck in the mid 3's. They lost a liter and gained 15hp with the S65 (and STILL managed to leave some headroom).

Our DME is notorious for doing that with AFR's. You really dont want it any other way w/o headers anyway.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,918 Posts
And with headers??
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,531 Posts
If you're looking for comparisons, you need to compare to another E39 M5 on the same exact dyno, on the same day, with the same operator.

Compared to the other cars that ran at Timmayfest, I think you're down on power, but you could just be on the low-end of the power range for our cars.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
932 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
If you're looking for comparisons, you need to compare to another E39 M5 on the same exact dyno, on the same day, with the same operator.
That was the plan. A car with similar mods dynoed right after me. Unfortunately, he could not get in three WOT runs that were suitable for comparison.

That particular dyno reads HIGH. stock hardware e46 M3 got 328rwhp on it, for context.
The one that the posted runs is from is still being dialed in. An E46 M3 with bolt-ons did not even get close to 328rwhp.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,189 Posts
That was the plan. A car with similar mods dynoed right after me. Unfortunately, he could not get in three WOT runs that were suitable for comparison.



The one that the posted runs is from is still being dialed in. An E46 M3 with bolt-ons did not even get close to 328rwhp.
This was at ttfs, yes? If so, yes it has (not saying it happened the day you were there, btw).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
932 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
This was at ttfs, yes? If so, yes it has (not saying it happened the day you were there, btw).
Yes, it was at ttfs. There were a lot of E46 M3s in attendance and several were dynoed. I only saw the numbers from the one with the bolt-ons, though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
55 Posts
Hi Op, I had the pleasure of meeting you this past Saturday at the Dyno Day, & we had a brief discussion around your car and the dyno in general. (Your car was very, very nice BTW.) I'm not only a customer of TTFS, but a close personal friend of Frank's as well, and I helped w/the dyno operations that day...I've been around them for the better part of my adult life.:M5thumbs: I just wanted to come in here and clear up a few things about the dyno numbers that day, and also wanted to address a few speculative statements that have been tossed around...I'll get to them in a minute.

First of all, you can't possibly compare HP figures from one type of dyno to the next, and sometimes not even between the same type of dyno...depending on dyno conditions and other variables/factors such as how the car is strapped down. A dyno is a tool for measuring gains/losses...nothing more, nothing less. The most imortant aspect of 'dyno'ing' is to have a dyno that produces repeatabile results, & to have a dyno operator that is consistent in his methods.

The dyno pulls from this event were conducted on a brand new state of the art Dynocom AWD (w/data linking capability) dyno. An engineer from Dynocom was present, and personally conducted all of the dyno pulls that day. The dyno has not been 'calibrated' to approximate Dynojet numbers-yet. It was not run at reduced load as it requires the vehicle to actually power the front wheels as well...most Dynojets do not. (It probably produces HP numbers more closely associated w/Mustang dyno's.) This better approximates actual HP on the street, and it was why the numbers (as reported that day), are probably somewhere between 8-10% lower than what one would expect on a Dynojet. We arrived at that % based on previous known vehicles, and speaking w/customers that day that had previously dyno'd on Dynojets. Now, oddly enough, the torque figures appeared to be running approximately 2-3% high (again, as compared to a Dynojet)...still working that one w/the engineer. However, the dyno produced consistent numbers all day, and runs from individual cars were consistent from run to run as well.

That particular dyno reads HIGH. stock hardware e46 M3 got 328rwhp on it, for context.
Now to address the speculative statement(s): Ian is well known on other forums for being extremely biased against TTFS, and any statements about dyno's reading "HIGH" are opinions at best. For ex., the car in question above (while retaing factory headers), was hardly stock...as it had aftermarket exhaust pieces fitted, intake panel filter, IAT relocation & topped off w/a TTFS cutome tune. The car was a factory freak to begin with, and consistenly put down much higher numbers than more heavily modified M3's from day 1. Also the 328whp figure was not produced on this Dynocom AWD dyno, so the statement of this particular dyno reading "HIGH" is false.

Alright, carry on gents, hope this clears some things up! OP, feel free to PM me w/further questions or concerns.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
932 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
Thanks for posting, Khan. It was nice to meet you, too, man. Frank and you guys put on a great event and I have already told him so. About to shoot you a PM because I have a few things in the works and may be down that way soon.
 
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
Top