Stock vs JB3 2.0 Dyno

a32guy · 03-13-2010, 05:46 PM

You guys weren't kidding, 2.0 is much improved from 1.4 firmware. Much much smoother. Dyno results are +59whp and +87wtq over stock on map 3.

Kinda hard to read, heres the PDF.

Is 15.0 AFR safe at 367wtq? Granted its probably a bit richer as the tailpipe sniffer isn't so accurate at low RPM. Would love to hear from some tuners.

Heres the datalog of the dyno run:

Chris

bma · 03-13-2010, 05:51 PM

Nice. 91 oct?

nerdhotrod · 03-13-2010, 05:53 PM

I should have stuck around.... So its safe to say that the JB doesnt do much from a fuel tuning prospective?

a32guy · 03-13-2010, 06:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bma

Nice. 91 oct?

Thanks, 93 Octane.

Quote:

Originally Posted by nerdhotrod

I should have stuck around.... So its safe to say that the JB doesnt do much from a fuel tuning prospective?

Thanks for letting me use your dyno!

Mike@N54Tuning.com · 03-13-2010, 06:15 PM

Looks good for map 3 @ 12psi peak. With the default maps the higher the map the richer the air/fuel ratios.

Also keep in mind the tailpipe reading will be slightly inaccurate for the first 1-2k RPMs. Its reading past two sets of cats.

Mike

Blaizon · 03-13-2010, 06:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by a32guy

Thanks, 93 Octane.

Thanks for letting me use your dyno!

Edit:
Nvm, I can't read.

Any other mods?

vtec96 · 03-13-2010, 06:31 PM

Hmm...
the dyno result looks more like a JB+ result....(+59whp and +87wtq over stock)

SteveMD · 03-13-2010, 06:45 PM

I assume that the basline was done first and then Map 3?

Would it be better to drive the car around on map 3, do some pulls and then bypass the JB3 (map 0) to get a base run?

Just wondering. I'm sure the car can't adapt in a pull or two.

I too would expect a better delta from JB3..

Syndicategt · 03-13-2010, 06:50 PM

You should try running on map 5. Using 91 oct here with supporting mods and it runs great! I 100% agree. . . such a HUGE HUGE HUGE improvement over v 1.4 When I first had the 2.0 in I thought I was lost HP because it's so smooth, until the time I punched it and was losing mad traction in 3rd. Another great benefit, my exhaust has mellowed out and is definiatly quieter, which I LOVE!!!

a32guy · 03-14-2010, 08:18 AM

I was quite satisfied for the improvements on a completely stock car. I'll switch to map 5 when I do some downpipes and intake.

SteveMD · 03-14-2010, 09:35 AM

Gets out back of an envelope....

Drivetrain losses on base run were 37hp or 12.3%

322/.877 = 367 crank hp.

Erring in the low side cuz we know the stock car has more than 300 crank HP

5soko · 03-14-2010, 09:46 AM

I think that just around what anyone and everyone should expect from Map 3 on a stock car.

To goes to most people, run the stock dyno run, as your last run. as doing a stock run then switching to JB3 map, there isnt enough adaption, the car will pikc up some power in this period and everything will smooth out a bit from what i have heard.

335e92tx · 03-14-2010, 07:06 PM

Its also a mustang eddy current type dyno which tend to be 15 percent lower than a DJ

03-13-2010, 05:46 PM	#1
a32guy First Lieutenant 31 Rep 374 Posts Drives: AW 335i Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: CT iTrader: (2)	Stock vs JB3 2.0 Dyno You guys weren't kidding, 2.0 is much improved from 1.4 firmware. Much much smoother. Dyno results are +59whp and +87wtq over stock on map 3. Kinda hard to read, heres the PDF. Is 15.0 AFR safe at 367wtq? Granted its probably a bit richer as the tailpipe sniffer isn't so accurate at low RPM. Would love to hear from some tuners. Heres the datalog of the dyno run: Chris
	Appreciate 0 Tweet Quote

03-13-2010, 05:51 PM	#2
bma Private First Class 22 Rep 164 Posts Drives: G05 X5 Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Newfoundland iTrader: (3)	Nice. 91 oct?
	Appreciate 0 Quote

03-13-2010, 05:53 PM	#3
nerdhotrod New Member 0 Rep 14 Posts Drives: Mini's, 996tt, Cayman, URQ Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: CT iTrader: (0)	I should have stuck around.... So its safe to say that the JB doesnt do much from a fuel tuning prospective?
	Appreciate 0 Quote

03-13-2010, 06:15 PM	#5
Mike@N54Tuning.com Joint Chiefs of Staff 5042 Rep 116,174 Posts Drives: 2007 335i, 2015 M3 Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: N54tuning.com iTrader: (89)	Looks good for map 3 @ 12psi peak. With the default maps the higher the map the richer the air/fuel ratios. Also keep in mind the tailpipe reading will be slightly inaccurate for the first 1-2k RPMs. Its reading past two sets of cats. Mike Last edited by Mike@N54Tuning.com; 03-13-2010 at 06:53 PM..
	Appreciate 0 Quote

03-13-2010, 06:31 PM	#7
vtec96 Second Lieutenant 26 Rep 286 Posts Drives: E89 Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Canada iTrader: (2)	Hmm... the dyno result looks more like a JB+ result....(+59whp and +87wtq over stock) __________________ CURRENT: 2009 E89 35i Dinan Stage 2 PAST: 2008 E92 335xi
	Appreciate 0 Quote

03-13-2010, 06:45 PM	#8
SteveMD Colonel 202 Rep 2,485 Posts Drives: 2016 F10 535i MSport Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Raventown! iTrader: (3)	I assume that the basline was done first and then Map 3? Would it be better to drive the car around on map 3, do some pulls and then bypass the JB3 (map 0) to get a base run? Just wondering. I'm sure the car can't adapt in a pull or two. I too would expect a better delta from JB3.. __________________ 2006 E90 330i (retired) 2009 E90 335i (retired) 2012 E70 X5 50i M Sport (retired) 2016 F10 535i M Sport
	Appreciate 0 Quote

03-13-2010, 06:50 PM	#9
Syndicategt Brigadier General 164 Rep 3,730 Posts Drives: 335i Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Nor Cal iTrader: (11)	You should try running on map 5. Using 91 oct here with supporting mods and it runs great! I 100% agree. . . such a HUGE HUGE HUGE improvement over v 1.4 When I first had the 2.0 in I thought I was lost HP because it's so smooth, until the time I punched it and was losing mad traction in 3rd. Another great benefit, my exhaust has mellowed out and is definiatly quieter, which I LOVE!!! __________________ 2008 BMW 335i e90 - Sold - Rob Beck Turbos / PROcede V5 / Aquamist HFS-4 / AR Downpipes / AE Exhaust / ER Comp FMIC / ER CP / TiAL BOV / Custom Intake / RPI Scoops / Quaife LSD / Swift-Koni Coilovers / DSS HS / Morr VS8.2 Sig Black / Michelin PSS / P3 Boost Guage / M3 body / M3 steering wheel / Adam's Rotors / Hawk HPS / SS lines /
	Appreciate 0 Quote

03-14-2010, 08:18 AM	#10
a32guy First Lieutenant 31 Rep 374 Posts Drives: AW 335i Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: CT iTrader: (2)	I was quite satisfied for the improvements on a completely stock car. I'll switch to map 5 when I do some downpipes and intake.
	Appreciate 0 Quote

03-14-2010, 09:35 AM	#11
SteveMD Colonel 202 Rep 2,485 Posts Drives: 2016 F10 535i MSport Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Raventown! iTrader: (3)	Gets out back of an envelope.... Drivetrain losses on base run were 37hp or 12.3% 322/.877 = 367 crank hp. Erring in the low side cuz we know the stock car has more than 300 crank HP __________________ 2006 E90 330i (retired) 2009 E90 335i (retired) 2012 E70 X5 50i M Sport (retired) 2016 F10 535i M Sport
	Appreciate 0 Quote

03-14-2010, 09:46 AM	#12
5soko Brigadier General 351 Rep 4,633 Posts Drives: M5 Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Brooklyn, NY iTrader: (4)	I think that just around what anyone and everyone should expect from Map 3 on a stock car. To goes to most people, run the stock dyno run, as your last run. as doing a stock run then switching to JB3 map, there isnt enough adaption, the car will pikc up some power in this period and everything will smooth out a bit from what i have heard.
	Appreciate 0 Quote

03-14-2010, 07:06 PM	#13
335e92tx ahat 1073 Rep 2,592 Posts Drives: Was '07-335e92 - Now '13-335IS Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Texas iTrader: (6)	Its also a mustang eddy current type dyno which tend to be 15 percent lower than a DJ __________________ '13 335IS N54 (1 of 373 LeMans Blue out of 3597 total production e92)- Grey interior (1 of 24 in LMB with any trans- 1 of 14 with DCT)-MODS -MFactory LSD/MHD-BQ custom Tune/ATM-IC/AFE Momentum GT Intake/Konis/Mfront&HeimJoint Rear rods&arms/Brembos. https://photos.app.goo.gl/Lo6aHZRo7XqtPkhL8
	Appreciate 0 Quote