[mike5809]

Hi All,

I just got back from the DYNO and my initial thoughts are that I am pretty disappointed with my DYNO numbers. I was on a MUSTANG 500 AWD DYNO - I do believe these produce "show" less power than a Dynojet, is that correct? Perhaps then that is why I am not too happy. If there is a variance is there a "rule of thumb" to equate the two - my assumption is no but I wanted to ask.

Best run was 318 HP and 427 TQ

Car: 2011 335i AT xDrive.
Mods: BERK 4in DP, ER CP, BMS Intake, VRSF 5in FMIC, Cobb AP V3, E50 + PTF Custom Map

A few notes;
- It was SUPER humid
- The run was done in 3rd gear, not 4th. The shop said they wanted to do it in 3rd because of the type of DYNO. They stated reasons why that were over my knowledge - but said the "1:1" doesn't really matter in this instance.

I wasn't able to be in the room when they ran the car - do you think that perhaps they didn't turn Traction Control off all the way? Also when I got in my car the AC was running (I forgot to turn it off when I gave it to them) - do you think they forgot to turn it off as well, or were just being nice and turning it back on for me?

Anyway, listed below are logs for review too.

Let me know what you guys think. For this type of DYNO how are the numbers?

For reference, I think their DYNO reads low - they have a ton of examples of full bolt on EVOs/ STIs with sub 400tq and had a 2015 GTR two days ago with Mid pipes/Intakes/Catback- on a COBB protune on 93 netted 510wtq, 490whp. To me that seems real low as well LINK / FBO STI running 21+psi at only 366tq LINK - or BRAND New EVO with COBB running 279/286 - LINK)


Log 1: http://datazap.me/u/mike5809/dyno-lo...=0&data=4-5-14

Log 2: http://datazap.me/u/mike5809/dyno-lo...=0&data=4-5-14

Log 3: http://datazap.me/u/mike5809/dyno-lo...=0&data=4-5-14

[Volrath]

Something seems off.. Possibly ac on. Where these guys familiar with bmw?

[mike5809]

Originally Posted by Volrath

Something seems off. You log shows 19.5 psi peak.

I am boosting at 19.5 - 19.8 peak - tapering down. The image was from the first Log / Link.

[Volrath]

Originally Posted by mike5809

I am boosting at 19.5 - 19.8 peak - tapering down. The image was from the first Log / Link.

Even with normal power loss from transfer case and AT these numbers seem low. Worth getting re-dynod elsewhere

[mike5809]

Thanks for the input! The AC was on when I got in my car - but I am not sure if they turned it on after the DYNO or kept it on from when I dropped it off. The shop is an EVO / GTR shop - but they do some high end Porsche and random exotics. They are not too familiar with BMW and were up front with that.

This makes me pretty upset - I really thought it would have done better. I have heard that the Mustang DYNO usually is between 12-15% lower than a dynojet, is that somewhat accurate or crap?

[Volrath]

Originally Posted by mike5809

Thanks for the input! The AC was on when I got in my car - but I am not sure if they turned it on after the DYNO or kept it on from when I dropped it off. The shop is an EVO / GTR shop - but they do some high end Porsche and random exotics. They are not too familiar with BMW and were up front with that.

This makes me pretty upset - I really thought it would have done better. I have heard that the Mustang DYNO usually is between 12-15% lower than a dynojet, is that somewhat accurate or crap?

Correct. Dynojet will be higher.

[mike5809]

Originally Posted by Volrath

Correct. Dynojet will be higher.

Then maybe my numbers are not too bad. I saw someone just the other day with similar mods (Less E85 than me) post a 330/440 on a dynojet.

I just added this to the original post ... For reference, the same shop and DYNO had a 2015 GTR two days ago - with Mid pipes/Intakes/Catback- on a COBB protune on 93 and it netted 510wtq, 490whp.

Do you think those numbers are log are pretty accurate? Just trying to see if their dyno leads low.

https://www.facebook.com/officialcbr...type=1&theater

[Volrath]

Well again for the gtr thats low too. So its probably consistent for all their dynos accross the board. I would redyno at a dynojet just to compare differences and get a good idea of power output

[mike5809]

Oops - I noticed that link was broken, just fixed it.

I thought those numbers were low too for a GTR. They have a ton of examples of full bolt on EVOs/ STIs with sub 400tq, so I am guessing their DYNO reads low. (IE: FBO STI running 21+psi at only 360tq LINK - or BRAND New EVO with COBB running 279/286 - LINK)

Will try to find a place with a Dynojet so I can get a different reading.

Thanks for the help!

[weehe126]

Why didn't you do a baseline? There is basically no point in getting a dyno done unless you have a baseline. But FWIW your numbers seem fine to me. I would only expect around 340-350whp on a dynojet since you are x-drive and on E30.

[mike5809]

Originally Posted by weehe126

Why didn't you do a baseline? There is basically no point in getting a dyno done unless you have a baseline. But FWIW your numbers seem fine to me. I would only expect around 340-350whp on a dynojet since you are x-drive and on E30.

I wish I would have - I am going to do a few adjustments, add a bit more E in then do some more DYNO runs. I will do a baseline with the COBB uninstalled. Then do a few more pulls with it installed. I probably won't get to that for a month or so.

I feel a bit better after seeing their DYNO readings on their GTR/EVO/STIs.

[wgknestrick]

I don't see an issue with that dyno. My STI with FP3065 (GT30R size) turbo put down 398whp on a mustang @ 22psi on 93oct. It was dynoed in York, PA (2005 ish) so it was probably the exact same dyno.

N55 turbo is much smaller. 4th gear would've shown more HP (maybe 10-15) and a little less torque IMO. If you want more HP, you need a turbo upgrade.

[Johnny Boost]

Those numbers seem extremely low for your mods. But like others have said, you did not baseline so the numbers are useless.

[f30luxline]

Here is my contribution....

Dynojet AWD dyno - 7/23/2015 (first mod’d run)
65% humidity
95 degrees

Mods:
VRSF catless DP
VRSF CP's
VRSF 7" IC
AP catback
BMS intake
JB4 - Map 5 w/e40 - Max boost was 17.5

Third gear is not a good gear for the dyno. Top speed is very low and the gear ratio too high. I achieved a lot better numbers in 4th and was most significant with torque. 4th gear put a lot more load on the motor and this is what is needed for an accurate as possible calculation from the dyno.

Dyno numbers are very subjective as there are too many variables involved. You cannot compare one person’s dyno results with another…..even if the scenario is exactly the same. Is Dynojet known in the industry to provide higher numbers? Yes. Is this difference minute? It can be, it comes back to all the variables involved as I have just mentioned. It’s very likely someone on the East Coast with the same exact mods with pull better numbers on a Mustang than someone on the West Coast running on a Dynojet. The whole conspiracy about dyno brands is b.s to me.

I have attached a chart that represents my baseline as well as my first mod’d pulls.

Did it just feel super humid or do you have numbers? When it was only 65% humidity on my day it felt a lot more than that. You are running more ethanol and boost which theoretically should give you more power depending on other conditions. On the other hand you also have AWD so you will have more power loss than RWD. With everything considered you may be right on with your numbers.

Dyno's are good for personal comparison only. This is why a baseline is a must and as I have already explained you can't compare your results with Billy Bob.

As stated previously, the n55 turbo’s are very small and max out quickly. Wanting more than 400hp will require an upgrade.

[mike5809]

Sounds like a mixed bag of thoughts. I know HP wouldn't be too high without a turbo upgrade - but with my mods and such I was expecting around 350/460... as you can tell I'm a good bit less than that at 19.5 psi. Just curious if it's a mechanical issue with the car or what.

Humidity was about 60-65% but did feel hotter. So I'm not sure what it is; this dyno having low results, it's a mustang dyno not dynojet, AT/AWD, or my car is just a turd? I will say the car ran very well, felt great - even the shop commented on how well it drove and how smooth it was and they are a GTR protune shop. So who knows.

Originally Posted by wgknestrick

I don't see an issue with that dyno. My STI with FP3065 (GT30R size) turbo put down 398whp on a mustang @ 22psi on 93oct. It was dynoed in York, PA (2005 ish) so it was probably the exact same dyno. .

CBRD? Awesome shop. That's interesting though - as they had a FBO STI running 21.5 psi and did 362/366 on the same dyno.

[kamfa39]

I would agree with all of the above-
I had virtually same set up, prior 2 different turbo upgrades.
Same car, stock turbo, Mustang dyno i was
348 whp and mid 400s in tq- something is off

[mike5809]

Hum, it really makes me wonder then. The car runs GREAT! Logs looked real good - so only thing I can think was they didn't fully take off TC/DSC and/or left the AC on.

Other than that I got nothing!

[wgknestrick]

So you possibly had AC on, TC still on, in the wrong gear, on a hot/humid day, on a low reading dyno, and you are worried why your car made 20-30 less HP than it should've?

Did you think your car magically made 20-30hp more than everyone else's to make up for all these "less-than-ideal" circumstances? Your car is only pushing 12-14psi at max HP RPM too. Your torque looks fine, and your car runs fine. Enjoy it. If you need more, get a Pure 2. That will hold 15psi to redline where you can make much more HP. 10psi at redline is sadtrombone.wav and you are giving up 5(psi)*15hp/psi there at least.

I was disappointed too when my STI didn't hit 400whp, but it still spanked many of cars that technically did hit 400+whp. It was also dynoed on their "old" blue mustang dyno. The dyno seems to be white now. It was when CBRD first moved in and merged with another tuning company.

[mike5809]

Originally Posted by wgknestrick

Your torque looks fine, and your car runs fine. Enjoy it. .

I plan to The car drives great - logs were good as well. I shared the logs and results with PTF and they were pleased with the numbers for a Mustang Dyno and said everything looked good.

I was a bit disappointed at first but in the end, it's just numbers that don't mean a lot. I know the car runs real well, is very smooth and is plenty quick for what I wanted. I don't need to show higher numbers to prove anything - really just wanted something to compare apples-to-apples as I see many people running stock turbo showing 340-350hp. My car may put down 350/470 on another DYNO on a different day - oh well, I have moved on Thanks All.

As far as CBRD - I didn't know they merged with another company. Either way, it was a great experience. Their shop is very nice and has some great cars. Everyone was super friendly as well. Hopefully soon they get more into the BMW game.

[proTUNING Freaks]

Dynojet for online comparisons, Mustang for tuning all day every day

Here's a funny number FWIW, 997.1 Porsche Turbo on our Mustang AWD dyno puts down 370awhp 370awtq stock. On our Dynojet it does 440awhp 440awtq bone stock, same day same car.

[wgknestrick]

Originally Posted by mike5809

I plan to The car drives great - logs were good as well. I shared the logs and results with PTF and they were pleased with the numbers for a Mustang Dyno and said everything looked good.

I was a bit disappointed at first but in the end, it's just numbers that don't mean a lot. I know the car runs real well, is very smooth and is plenty quick for what I wanted. I don't need to show higher numbers to prove anything - really just wanted something to compare apples-to-apples as I see many people running stock turbo showing 340-350hp. My car may put down 350/470 on another DYNO on a different day - oh well, I have moved on Thanks All.

As far as CBRD - I didn't know they merged with another company. Either way, it was a great experience. Their shop is very nice and has some great cars. Everyone was super friendly as well. Hopefully soon they get more into the BMW game.

This was about 10 years ago and CBRD was hardly where they are now. I wish I could remember the name of the place, but it certainly wasn't the same building that CB is in now. It was trash and several of the cars were recently vandalized outside before my appointment.

[chris82]

Originally Posted by mike5809

A few notes;
- It was SUPER humid
- The run was done in 3rd gear, not 4th. The shop said they wanted to do it in 3rd because of the type of DYNO. They stated reasons why that were over my knowledge - but said the "1:1" doesn't really matter in this instance.

I wasn't able to be in the room when they ran the car - do you think that perhaps they didn't turn Traction Control off all the way? Also when I got in my car the AC was running (I forgot to turn it off when I gave it to them) - do you think they forgot to turn it off as well, or were just being nice and turning it back on for me?

Anyway, listed below are logs for review too.

Let me know what you guys think. For this type of DYNO how are the numbers?

For reference, I think their DYNO reads low - they have a ton of examples of full bolt on EVOs/ STIs with sub 400tq and had a 2015 GTR two days ago with Mid pipes/Intakes/Catback- on a COBB protune on 93 netted 510wtq, 490whp. To me that seems real low as well LINK / FBO STI running 21+psi at only 366tq LINK - or BRAND New EVO with COBB running 279/286 - LINK)


Log 1: http://datazap.me/u/mike5809/dyno-lo...=0&data=4-5-14

Log 2: http://datazap.me/u/mike5809/dyno-lo...=0&data=4-5-14

Log 3: http://datazap.me/u/mike5809/dyno-lo...=0&data=4-5-14

They're correct that the gear doesn't matter afaik. I was at a dyno with a stock N55 135i and it put down 245whp on a mustang, and that was on a fall day, around 50 degrees

To get to dynojet, increase your numbers by 10%, mustangs read about that lower than dynojets.