[SeanWRT]

Originally Posted by ///cbrash

Oh! Excuse me, somehow I missed that.

Didn't find your STG1, mind if share results here? Dyno plot if possible. Could be interesting Thanks.

[///cbrash]

The pictures are on page 8 of this thread:
http://f87.bimmerpost.com/forums/sho...1367346&page=8


The numbers were:
Modifications previously done:
- Dinan Res Delete
- Dinan Cat-back Exhaust

Otherwise completely stock car running CA 91 octane.

Wheel horsepower - 340
wheel ft/lbs torque - 376

After stage one software

Wheel horsepower - 372
wheel ft/lbs torque - 428

[SeanWRT]

STG1 number in your case indicate a 32whp gain from tune alone over FBO baseline.
STG2+FBO+100OCT in OP makes 48whp over a complete stock car on 91.
In this sense, difference in peak power between STG1 and 2 is actually less than 16whp as these tests show.

Power curves are similar between two stages as well, pushing hard at down low to middle and fall hard at top end. In conjunction with dialed up throttle sensitivity, the tune is programmed to feel strong and alive on the street, rather than open road WOT pulls.

I reviewed and compared VF datalogs(from a friend) to other tunes. The reasons of power tapering up top (like most tunes out there do) aren't precisely as explained. And there are a few more in it that has been unspoken of, which is understandable. Overall, I'll say VF M2 tune is a sophisticated and good product, in term of making outright power and drama VF-Engineering

Originally Posted by ///cbrash

The pictures are on page 8 of this thread:
http://f87.bimmerpost.com/forums/sho...1367346&page=8


The numbers were:
Modifications previously done:
- Dinan Res Delete
- Dinan Cat-back Exhaust

Otherwise completely stock car running CA 91 octane.

Wheel horsepower - 340
wheel ft/lbs torque - 376

After stage one software

Wheel horsepower - 372
wheel ft/lbs torque - 428

[///cbrash]

Thanks Sean, very knowledgable as always!

I installed the CSF intercooler and will be going to stage two here soon.

I wonder how it'll run a second time around. Ill be sure to post my dyno when I do.

[RedCarrot]

Originally Posted by SeanWRT

STG1 number in your case indicate a 32whp gain from tune alone over FBO baseline.
STG2+FBO+100OCT in OP makes 48whp over a complete stock car on 91.
In this sense, difference in peak power between STG1 and 2 is actually less than 16whp as these tests show.

Considering the hardwares themselves are partially responsible for the 16 peak hp gain between stg1 and stg2, the gain from software is even more minuscule. I know it's not a direct comparison since they are different cars on different dynos, but the takeaway is it shows just how tapped out the M2's fueling system is right at around the 390 to 400 whp level

[SeanWRT]

Do not overestimate fueling.

And oh...VF tune for M2 isn't even trying to be easy on fueling

[ZM2]

Originally Posted by SeanWRT

Do not overestimate fueling.

And oh...VF tune for M2 isn't even trying to be easy on fueling

Sean, how would you compare the power curve on your car with the Stage 1 turbo compared to this tune?

We’re all dealing with the fuel limitations, but I’d like more power up top for when on track.

[VF-Engineering]

Originally Posted by SeanWRT

STG1 number in your case indicate a 32whp gain from tune alone over FBO baseline.
STG2+FBO+100OCT in OP makes 48whp over a complete stock car on 91.
In this sense, difference in peak power between STG1 and 2 is actually less than 16whp as these tests show.

That's an interesting observation, but not a realistic comparison
for Stage ONE upgrading to Stage TWO, as RedCarrot mentioned,
different cars with different hardware combinations, on different
dynos, under different conditions.


Here is a much more accurate example which removes all of those
possible variable. Same car, same dyno, same fuel, with detailed
hardware/software changes between runs.

[ ▉] = Stock

[ ▉] = Stage ONE

[ ▉] = Stage TWO

Stage ONE Gains
Peak Gains: 19HP / 53TQ (at the wheels)
MAX Gains: 41HP @ 3,900rpm / 53TQ @ 3,050rpm

Stage TWO Gains
Peak Gains: 56HP / 83TQ (at the wheels)
MAX Gains: 65HP @ 4,500rpm / 86TQ @ 3,300rpm


Stage ONE -to- Stage TWO Gains
Peak Gains: 37HP / 30TQ (at the wheels)
MAX Gains: 40HP @ 5,600rpm / 36TQ @ 5,500rpm




For the naysayers who will inevitably point out that these are
"marketing plots", we've proven time and time again that our
advertised gains are on the conservative side, and independent
dyno results will (more often than not) meet or exceed our own
posted results.

This is by design as we believe that in the long run,
realistic claims + proven results will ultimately win
over optimistic claims + glory runs

[///cbrash]

Another tuning company got to the ~400hp level... But it got there around 5,600 rpm. By the time it got to 6,400 rpm, the horsepower was down to 360hp.

In the stage two car here, there is also has a horsepower dip because of fueling. But personally, I would rather have a 15-20hp decrease instead of a 40hp decrease toward the top end.

[RedCarrot]

It's worth noting that VF is in CA and they dyno on 91 gas. For those that are not in gas purgatory, the peak should be approaching 400 whp, which is where other stg2 OTS maps top off as well.

[dr.roro]

Originally Posted by VF-Engineering

That's an interesting observation, but not a realistic comparison
for Stage ONE upgrading to Stage TWO, as RedCarrot mentioned,
different cars with different hardware combinations, on different
dynos, under different conditions.


Here is a much more accurate example which removes all of those
possible variable. Same car, same dyno, same fuel, with detailed
hardware/software changes between runs.

[ ▉] = Stock

[ ▉] = Stage ONE

[ ▉] = Stage TWO

Stage ONE Gains
Peak Gains: 19HP / 53TQ (at the wheels)
MAX Gains: 41HP @ 3,900rpm / 53TQ @ 3,050rpm

Stage TWO Gains
Peak Gains: 56HP / 83TQ (at the wheels)
MAX Gains: 65HP @ 4,500rpm / 86TQ @ 3,300rpm


Stage ONE -to- Stage TWO Gains
Peak Gains: 37HP / 30TQ (at the wheels)
MAX Gains: 40HP @ 5,600rpm / 36TQ @ 5,500rpm




For the naysayers who will inevitably point out that these are
"marketing plots", we've proven time and time again that our
advertised gains are on the conservative side, and independent
dyno results will (more often than not) meet or exceed our own
posted results.

This is by design as we believe that in the long run,
realistic claims + proven results will ultimately win
over optimistic claims + glory runs

Dyno looks good. Can you provide more details on the car used, mods between stages, and conditions?

[VF-Engineering]

Originally Posted by dr.roro

Dyno looks good. Can you provide more details on the car used, mods between stages, and conditions?

2016 BMW M2, DCT.
Stock runs are completely factory stock.
ALL runs were on the same tank of Shell V-Power 91 Octane.

Stage ONE represents "Tune Only", absolutely no additional mods.
Stage TWO represents "Tune + Downpipes" only.



Our advertised power gains represent the "low-average" from
3 - 5 consecutive pulls. This allows us to offer an accurate range
of power; with 91 Octane representing the lower number, and
93 Octane representing the higher number.

For Example:
A typical 91-Octane Stage ONE will be closer to the 20HP/50TQ
range, at the wheels.
A typical 93-Octane Stage TWO will be closer to the 60HP/90TQ
range, at the wheels.


'Peak values' should always come second to 'delta gains', and even
more import is examining the 'area under the curve'. It's smarter to
be cautious when people advertised based on peak numbers versus
advertising based on delta gains.

When properly tested and validated, a solid tune should provide very
similar delta gains regardless of the type of dyno. A good example of
this is when we run the exact same car on our Mustang AWD-500-SE
(four wheel drive) and compare it to our DynoJet 224 (two wheel drive).

The Mustang dyno is indeed a "heartbreaker" if you look at the peak
power figures, but the delta gains are nearly identical when compared
to the DynoJet.

[Spartan King]

Originally Posted by brooke1972

I'm scheduling another session next week and will post up. Mods include Wagner Comp IC, Drop In Filer, Dp, and CP. Had the mhd tune but it was nothing compared to the VF Tune.. Would have gone bm3 but they do way too much hating on everyone else's thread on this forum..

This is almost the same exact setup I am planning on doing. Can't wait to see your results.

[///cbrash]

Originally Posted by brooke1972

I'm scheduling another session next week and will post up. Mods include Wagner Comp IC, Drop In Filer, Dp, and CP. Had the mhd tune but it was nothing compared to the VF Tune.. Would have gone bm3 but they do way too much hating on everyone else's thread on this forum..

Prodigal son has returned! haha awesome

[switlikbob]

Originally Posted by brooke1972

I'm scheduling another session next week and will post up. Mods include Wagner Comp IC, Drop In Filer, Dp, and CP. Had the mhd tune but it was nothing compared to the VF Tune.. Would have gone bm3 but they do way too much hating on everyone else's thread on this forum..

I really like your way of thinking...

[SUB-ZERO]

I have a stage 1 VF tune and a bmw performance exhaust. The difference in power is very obvious. I have a few high-end cars, my tuned M2 is probably the most fun to drive.