S54 Dyno Database

[maupineda]

your curves look fine tbh. flat and no dips, and dyno power charts don't the whole story. I hope I could do a dyno run soon, but TBH I fear to read "low" and start chasing ghosts, my car drives fine and is plenty quick for me as it is right now

[gorilla69]

Here's a graph from when I first bought my car, '05 M3 ZCP package, EU spec, stock, with 195.000 kms on the clock.
2 runs, the one after the other, during September with 38C room temperature. Mustang dyno shows whp.
Trying to solve some VANOS issues and I will repeat the dyno; She's currently running eventuri intake, 100 cell cats, ss non-res and ss street.

[Anri]

^^^^ Nice results man, and thanx for providing the detailed info!

Stash,

I think he is a bit down on power, 340 on 91 with ported head and same cams as yours is bit low..

I have a local tuner who did 339 on fresh std S54 engine put on Haltech Standalone which it
does not matter for power vs std DME.

DynoJet variation do exist but its minimal. Anyway, there is gain before and after which is most important.

From around 2500k rpms up to about ~6600rpm there is avarage around ~5-9rwhphp gain thru the curve
at 6300rpm there is 0 gain. It seems very little considering the long list of parts.

Regards,
Anri

[stash1]

^^^^ Nice results man, and thanx for providing the detailed info!

[duracellttu]

Finally getting around to posting my results to this thread. My build thread LINK

Here is a summary of the mods:

2005 ZCP w/ 155k miles at the time of the build.

Karbonius CSL Airbox (OEM trumpets) w/ OEM Snorkel and operational flap
Lang Stage 2.5 head w/ Supertech valves and springs
Schrick 280/288 cams, 12.5mm lift w/ DLC rockers
Port exhaust side of head
SS V1 stepped headers
SS catted section 1
SS resonated twin pipe section 2
SS race mufflers
Kassel Performance CSL ECU conversion
Kassel Performance MAP sensor
TMS underpower pulles, water pump and power steering
SPAL electric fan conversion
Turbo Toys V3 exhaust hub
Custom tune by Paul Claudes
91 octane pump gas

TLDR version; 340 rwhp / 247 rwtq on a Dynojet w/ 91 octane pump gas. More power on the table once I get 93 octane gas.

-- Dyno Curves --
Blue: Mostly stock, aFe Stage 2 intake, Borla V2 midpipes and mufflers
Red: aFe Stage 2 intake, AP V2 headers, CPI Euro section 1 w/ resonators, OEM section 2, Borla mufflers
Green: Final tune results from CSL airbox conversion, custom head build, and full SS exhaust (full list above)

[paulclaude]

Adding mine to the new database!

base run specs:

• Stock US spec engine w/ mechanical fan
• Stock US spec exhaust
• 91 octane pump gas
• Epic Motorsports tune
• 281.87 WHP, 231.42 ft/lb

Modded run specs:

• Karbonius CSL intake w/ snorkel and factory plastic trumpets
• Kassel MAP & intake air temp sensor kit
• Mechanical fan
• Paul Claude Tune
• Euro headers & cats, stock section 2 & 3
• 91 octane pump gas
• 331.57 WHP, 254.26 ft/lb

https://youtu.be/d_eMOxGe-hU

Nice result and great sound! 😁

[2004LSB]

Adding mine to the new database!

base run specs:

• Stock US spec engine w/ mechanical fan
• Stock US spec exhaust
• 91 octane pump gas
• Epic Motorsports tune
• 281.87 WHP, 231.42 ft/lb

Modded run specs:

• Karbonius CSL intake w/ snorkel and factory plastic trumpets
• Kassel MAP & intake air temp sensor kit
• Mechanical fan
• Paul Claude Tune
• Euro headers & cats, stock section 2 & 3
• 91 octane pump gas
• 331.57 WHP, 254.26 ft/lb

https://youtu.be/d_eMOxGe-hU

[stash1]

^^^^ Nice Kareem, thanx for contributing to the database!

[x Spades x]

So many of you know me as I'm one of the 288/280 "God Fathers" (the title is a work in progress damnit, lol). Anyway, my mods for both graphs (taken at the introduction of cams) are the same. The ONLY DIFFERENCE is the CF box (Evolve vs Karbonius w/CSL flap). I had a HUGE write up on M3forum about the differences (sound and feel). The last two dyno'd were BACK TO BACK)...


Engine 172k miles
Schrick 288/280 came
Schrick coated followers
Evolve airbox
Euro headers
Euro sec 1 (400 cell CATTED)
OEM Sec 2
Scorza exhaust (Oakville)
HP: 334
TQ: 247


Mods:
Engine 176k miles
Schrick 288/280 cams (normal lift)
Schrick coated followers
Evolve vs Karbonius w/ CSL flap airboxes
SSV1 headers
SSV1 Spipe (200 cell CATTED)
OEM Sec 2
Scorza exhaust (Oakville)

Evolve: 353hp, 246tq
Karbonius w/ CSL flap: 347hp, 260tq

Toss 15-20hp on top of both for NON-CATTED folks.

Regards,
Kareem

[x Spades x]

Just dyno'd and the dashboard is still lit up (after 30 miles of driving). Is this normal (SMG)?

[paulclaude]

i find the single larger roller to be more consistent due to the huge variables associated with the tyre interface being more controllable. Both Maha and DJ use a single roller. DD, mustang, DC, mainline use a twin roller although some brands have both twin and single rollers depending on model. i also have a theory that a 2WD dyno reads a bit more than a 4WD in 2WD mode.

Many years ago i tested within a couple days a DD, DJ and Maha (couldnt get a booking with a Mainline) on an old shit box ill see if i can dig out the results. DD i find inconsistent really need to stick to 1 dyno and operator on those.

Agree that a single roller system has it's benefits, however I think the consistency of the readout comes down to the setup of the dyno, how well balanced and aligned the rollers are etc. From what i've been told, the balancing and alignment of some roller sets can be poorly set from the factory, even from reputable dyno brands. My own is a 4-roller set, and I've had it all realigned and rollers balanced, and it's super consistent, usually within a couple of HP each pull.

I've used both the later digital type DD and earlier analogue (DOS based) systems, and definitely agree that the later digital controllers are nowhere near as repeatable as the older type.

[DESMDR3]

Nice, seems like solid numbers for those mods! Was the B-spec an OTS tune or custom? Thanx for posting up!

OTS tune. It’s been good, the car feels strong. I haven’t experienced any issues with drivability. When I get some more mods, I will definitely be going custom 👍🏼

[digger]

I think I’m following...so, his car made 378BHP, and 294WHP...based on a 22% driveline loss vs. the more normally accepted 14-15%—correct? So, if we extrapolate, and figure the WHP based on say 14%, his actual WHP would be closer to 325? That seems a bit low to me (for the mods) vs. what I’m used to seeing. Typically, cars w/cams air boxes & supporting mods are in the 340-350WHP SAE on a Dynojet.

the dyno is measuring the wheel hp and adding a correction, you cant say the bhp is correct and say the the losses should be 15% and therfore the whp is more like 325 thats kinda backwards. the rwhp should be the same sans assumption on inertia of machine plus vehicle drivettrain and physical losses due to different roller geometry and different CF standard..

the DJ losses are at most 15% often 13% at peak hp and more like 10% at peak torque assuming BMW RWD, MT. if you look at healthy examples of BMWs from the good ol days (no turbo nonsense) thats what i always came up with.

the issue is alot of the time peoples first stock baselines are rubbish so the delta is also rubbish obviously doesnt explain why some see 70whp gain and others 1/3rd of that

[digger]

Digger,

I always see them in the range of 272-282 at max put on pump 91 gas.

Again small variations may vary in the the settings which contribute what you are seen
or experienced.



Correct, exactly what I have calculated in previous post. 378crank HP or (BHP UK)
minus 22% which is Exact what this dyno calculates the losses in %

Dyno-Jet per my personal experience have done quite few test is about 14%
I never believed those who will put losses in 17%range..

There is also another very important factor that plays roll in the dyno testings.

- How low the car is, suspension changes can create losses, toe, axle changes due to
being lowered etc.
- After market wheels with much wider tires will also be considered as drag factor which
All of this will reflect the end of the hp number.

Regards,
Anri

i find the single larger roller to be more consistent due to the huge variables associated with the tyre interface being more controllable. Both Maha and DJ use a single roller. DD, mustang, DC, mainline use a twin roller although some brands have both twin and single rollers depending on model. i also have a theory that a 2WD dyno reads a bit more than a 4WD in 2WD mode.

Many years ago i tested within a couple days a DD, DJ and Maha (couldnt get a booking with a Mainline) on an old shit box ill see if i can dig out the results. DD i find inconsistent really need to stick to 1 dyno and operator on those.

[stash1]

Lets not start another dyno vs. dyno numbers debate - too many variables to compare from one to another. Numbers differ, dynos differ, they all have their positives and negatives. I personally prefer a braked dyno that can control ramp time to simulate actual road acceleration vs. a large inertial roller as per DJ which can't be controlled (on most DJ, anyway) - then you end up with acceleration times of the power run that differ from real world conditions. That load/acceleration difference can lead to inaccuracies in the tune when the car hits the road or track, especially for turbo/boosted setups. As for the coast down debate - it's exactly that, negative losses on coast down from ending RPM which is added to the curve to calculate for flywheel. How the dyno uses those measured losses can differ, but either way it's the most accurate way to determine transmission loss vs. a fixed correction factor.

Anyway, here's one from my own Dyno, on my own track car.

-Supercharged @ 10psi boost
-Schrick 288/280
-Euro Headers
-2.5" Dual Section 1, 2 - decat
-SS LWR rear silencer
-Shite local fuel
-AEM Infinity Standalone

575HP / 379lb/ft TQ

Nope, we’re def not going there! ...and nice Paul! Looks like a strong runner!