Mustang dyno results

[boxsterSF]

Long time lurker with some useful information to post. It's hard to compare numbers people post on the Internet because they use varying fuels, tunes, mods, or they're just trying to sell you something. I like to do my own research and get an idea on a relative basis of what we're dealing with, in terms of incremental performance.

The new M3 is a very strong performer, even on California 91 octane gas like many of us have to use. It made 354 WHP and 354 WTQ on the first pull. It made 360 HP and 349 WTQ on the second pull. These aren't sensational numbers but they're quite realistic and imply EXACTLY 425 HP as BMW advertises (425 * .85 = 360).

To put that in perspective, we had an E90 M3 on hand. It made 305 WHP and 221 WTQ consistently, with a torque curve that looked like a flatline. So the F80 makes 20% more horsepower and 60% more torque over the outgoing model. I sort of wonder if that old S65 needs a carbon cleaning or something.

I didn't have access to a 335i but we did put a well tuned Audi S4 on dyno. It made 365 WHP and crested at 315 WTQ. Clearly a turbo is going to produce more torque than a supercharger, and that shows here as the S4 has a lot less torque than the M3. A tuned M3 is going to be a monster for sure.

Details:

We did the dyno runs on a well calibrated, 1 year new mustang dynomometer at Griffin Motorwerke in Berkeley. The F80 and the S4 were both 6MT; the E90 is a DCT. We did the runs in 3rd gear because the dyno had a safety limit of 120 MPH, which means 4th gear could not get to redline. The 3rd and 4th results looked the same anyway, just 4th was incomplete. The E90 was stock. The S4 has software, a smaller pulley, exhaust.

[solstice]

Anyone who has owned the E9X M3 and F8X can tell you that the power of the S55 is on a whole different level whatever the official numbers say. I'm not saying the S55 is overall a better engine but in regards to power there is no competition. The S55 is a great FI engine.

[8600RPM]

S65 is port injected car and carbon cleaning is not relevent. Clearly dyno reads about 40 whp low

[boxsterSF]

Originally Posted by 8600RPM

S65 is port injected car and carbon cleaning is not relevent. Clearly dyno reads about 40 whp low

Why would exactly the number BMW provides be 40 HP low? The training and calibration that went into engineering, assembling and operating that dyno was quite thorough. Race cars have been certified on it.

The number has 0% inflation on it. It's not lower than normal. It's accurate.

[Ian1973]

Why would a turbo offer more torque than a supercharger?

Was the S4 modded?

[8600RPM]

Originally Posted by boxsterSF

Why would exactly the number BMW provides be 40 HP low? The training and calibration that went into engineering, assembling and operating that dyno was quite thorough. Race cars have been certified on it.

The number has 0% inflation on it. It's not lower than normal. It's accurate.

Because an e90 puts down 340hp very consistently snd almost every other f80 puts down 390 to 400 whp.

[FC4]

Originally Posted by 8600RPM

S65 is port injected car and carbon cleaning is not relevent. Clearly dyno reads about 40 whp low

"40 WHP low"? Compared to what?

Not only are you unaware of what a dyno is used for, but you've also never heard of a Mustang dyno before.

[FC4]

Originally Posted by boxsterSF

The number has 0% inflation on it. It's not lower than normal. It's accurate.

LOL. You don't get it, either. It's accurate based on what? Because someone told you that 15% is some magic number to estimate "drivetrain loss?" What if the drivetrain loss is not 15%? Is the dyno no longer accurate?

People here really don't know the purpose of a dyno...

[Maddict3]

Originally Posted by solstice

Anyone who has owned the E9X M3 and F8X can tell you that the power of the S55 is on a whole different level whatever the official numbers say. I'm not saying the S55 is overall a better engine but in regards to power there is no competition. The S55 is a great FI engine.

Couldn't have said it any better

[manticor]

Typical of a mustang dyno. For some reason I believe mustangs offer a more realistic number. Although heartbreaking to see 50-60 hp less than a dyno jet in this case... My stage 2 Sti made 285hp 325tq on a mustang and I was like wtf lol...

[YasM3]

Originally Posted by 8600RPM

Clearly dyno reads about 40 whp low

The mustang dyno is not reading 40HP low. You need to understand that all dynos are different. They all read different. There is no set # to convert a mustang dyno to read like a dynojet and vice versa. Mustang Dynos are known to read lower than dynojets and other dynos alike. HOWEVER a mustang dyno, and other dynos for that matter can be manipulated to give out different #s based off of how it is calibrated, correction factors, load values etc etc etc. This dyno is reading correct. Not LOW. Most people on this site use dynojets which traditionally read HIGHER so everyone uses those #s as a standard which is furthest from the truth. A dyno is used as a tuning tool.

I have used tons of dynos over the years. Many dynojets, dynapacks, dynacoms, and mustang dynos. All read different based on how they are calibrated etc. They are solely to be used as a tuning tool. Meaning, you make your baseline on that dyno and you go back to the same dyno when you mod the car.

You cannot go to a Dynojet when your car is stock. Make 430rwhp then slap a JB4 on it and go to a Mustang Dyno and Make 425rwhp then come on here and make a post "whats wrong with my car" Whats wrong is you used a different dyno, on a different day, with different calibrations, with different conditions etc etc etc.

I had a customer who was hell bent on making 700rwhp on his Mustang. We tuned the car on a Mustang Dyno, the car made around 660rwhp. He was not happy. He drove about an hour to a dynojet to make pulls WITH NO CHANGES to the car on the same day. The car layed down around 740rwhp on the dynojet. Nothing changed, nothing wrong with either dyno.

Mustang dynos have an infinite amount of variables that can be changed to give different #s. Its no 40HP low

[saxon]

I will be doing a similar test with my car comparing it to my old 2011 s4 dsg that was tuned. On a mustang the s4 made 350awhp

[boxsterSF]

I think consistency is important. You can drive to any other Mustang dyno in the bay area and they've all been calibrated to read the same numbers by techs who work for the company.

I'm sure you could find some secondhand old mustang dyno somewhere that isn't calibrated well. Not the case here.

I really couldn't have asked for a better outcome than what we got yesterday. We got the same benchmark as the manufacturer and have a basis of comparison for when that car gets DINAN tuned. When you start with an inflated number, it's hard for anyone to make sense of what your mods did. I don't say the M3 is 425 HP to imply that it is slow or deficient. No one who takes a ride in it thinks that. I think it gives us more credibility when we start here.

The S4 is tuned, and it made 270 AWHP stock (just happens 340 HP * .8 = 270). Getting to 365 AWHP took a lot of modding. The torque differential between the F80 output and the S4 output might actually just be the quattro system robbing it. The motors might actually have near equal output, in these examples.

[Myaddiction]

Doing the pulls in third gear is hurting as well. More so for the S55 but for the other cars as well. The higher the ratio, (the lower the gear you use) the more loses there are through the interaction of the gears. Plus turbo cars need a load on them to build boost (why you can't hit boost just revving the car in neutral) so lower gears do not load the turbo the same as higher gears and give lower readings and appear to have slower boost response.

If all gears worked the same dynos would be done in 1st gear for safety reasons. I've seen 200 mph limits on dynos but not 120mph. It's a software setting that he can change.

Interesting comparison none the less.

[TheRealOrosie]

Originally Posted by solstice

Anyone who has owned the E9X M3 and F8X can tell you that the power of the S55 is on a whole different level whatever the official numbers say. I'm not saying the S55 is overall a better engine but in regards to power there is no competition. The S55 is a great FI engine.

Exactly.

[8600RPM]

Originally Posted by boxsterSF

I think consistency is important. You can drive to any other Mustang dyno in the bay area and they've all been calibrated to read the same numbers by techs who work for the company.

I'm sure you could find some secondhand old mustang dyno somewhere that isn't calibrated well. Not the case here.

I really couldn't have asked for a better outcome than what we got yesterday. We got the same benchmark as the manufacturer and have a basis of comparison for when that car gets DINAN tuned. When you start with an inflated number, it's hard for anyone to make sense of what your mods did. I don't say the M3 is 425 HP to imply that it is slow or deficient. No one who takes a ride in it thinks that. I think it gives us more credibility when we start here.

The S4 is tuned, and it made 270 AWHP stock (just happens 340 HP * .8 = 270). Getting to 365 AWHP took a lot of modding. The torque differential between the F80 output and the S4 output might actually just be the quattro system robbing it. The motors might actually have near equal output, in these examples.

How does matching bmws known underrated # give uou more credibikity? Forget dynos. The f80 traps at speeds of 118 to 119 which for its weight means it's pushing around 475bhp to get those numbers. so you can believe whatever you like but your dyno is reading lower than is accurate if you look at actual performance.

[8600RPM]

Woops, didn't mean to input thread jacked lol

[boxsterSF]

Originally Posted by 8600RPM

How does matching bmws known underrated # give uou more credibikity? Forget dynos. The f80 traps at speeds of 118 to 119 which for its weight means it's pushing around 475bhp to get those numbers. so you can believe whatever you like but your dyno is reading lower than is accurate if you look at actual performance.

Anything is possible, I suppose. But I know the S4 is not making over 500 HP so I'm inclined to believe my readings are accurate and comparable.

A back of the envelope calculation for peak horsepower to 1/4 mile times shouldn't be greater evidence than what I've submitted here. For one, area under the curve is more important in achieving that time than the peak number. Both the S4 and the E90 drew VERY smooth lines on the dyno plot, without any smoothing applied. The F80 chart was oscillating as it achieved its power.

[gtrsam]

a lot of people on this forum seem way too caught up in dyno numbers. I dynoed 3 times on a dyno jet and got so many mixed results with diff fuels.494whp but who cares it's a dyno jet. just a number and the most important thing is the car performing on the street or track. I'd rather have an 11 sec time slip than a 500 whp dyno sheet

and yes mustang dynos do read lower. those numbers seem right

[8600RPM]

Originally Posted by boxsterSF

Anything is possible, I suppose. But I know the S4 is not making over 500 HP so I'm inclined to believe my readings are accurate and comparable.

A back of the envelope calculation for peak horsepower to 1/4 mile times shouldn't be greater evidence than what I've submitted here. For one, area under the curve is more important in achieving that time than the peak number. Both the S4 and the E90 drew VERY smooth lines on the dyno plot, without any smoothing applied. The F80 chart was oscillating as it achieved its power.

As much as people love to talk auc, it really has little to do with performance full out except auc in the last 2k of the rpms as that's where you are full throttle

[Mike@N54Tuning.com]

Originally Posted by Maddict3

Couldn't have said it any better

+2

Mike

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by boxsterSF

These aren't sensational numbers but they're quite realistic and imply EXACTLY 425 HP as BMW advertises (425 * .85 = 360).

Funny

How do you know it has EXACTLY 15% drivetrain/inertial/rolling losses ?