[zenmaster]

Sick! almost 100whp over bone stock w/ DP. How are temps?
Do you have any idea what is possible for bone stock w/ tune only?

[BimmerPowered]

that is quite the torque curve....

[Vtec Abuser]

Originally Posted by TTFS

Here is our most recent dyno done last night with 21 Psi on 93 pump gas with downpipe and ECU tuning. We plan on upgrading the intercooler and perhaps turbo later. The first run were done back to back starting with green, light blue, and last run was orange.

These are WHP figures?!?!? Seriously?

How has this car gone from initially seeing little gains when tuned (Terry's initial findings), to now making over 100bhp gains (albeit you have a DP added also)?

You guys seem to get seriously high WHP figures in the States compared to us in the UK (must be something in the water over there ), as this must equate to high 400's at the flywheel yes?
I would be over the moon of this were to be the case from a tune and DP on pump fuel, but I am a little sceptical at the minute that we will see anywhere near these sort of figures in the UK tbh.

[zenmaster]

Not sure how you can conclude UK numbers vs US numbers. At this point, tuners are still testing. I don't see any reason why UK numbers would be different on 98 RON.

I'm also surprised at the lack of responses?

[PeterPure]

The dyno does not say its whp numbers. Looks like similar crank numbers for ewg 35i vehicles to me. Which makes sense as the turbo is the same.

[zenmaster]

Originally Posted by Darkiedm4

The dyno does not say its whp numbers. Looks like similar crank numbers for ewg 35i vehicles to me. Which makes sense as the turbo is the same.

Have you not bothered to read this thread?

[paradoxical3]

Originally Posted by TTFS

Here is our most recent dyno done last night with 21 Psi on 93 pump gas with downpipe and ECU tuning. We plan on upgrading the intercooler and perhaps turbo later. The first run were done back to back starting with green, light blue, and last run was orange.

How safe do you consider this tune on the track? Would you recommend a more conservative one?

These numbers are so good that I might consider driving my M2 to you to have it tuned (8hr drive), but I need a setup that will work on the track SAFELY without me worrying about blowing it up. I already have an intercooler, downpipe, and chargepipe.

[paradoxical3]

Originally Posted by Darkiedm4

The dyno does not say its whp numbers. Looks like similar crank numbers for ewg 35i vehicles to me. Which makes sense as the turbo is the same.

It's not the same turbo and his dyno is WHP, and baselined at 330-340whp just like all the other dynos.

[PeterPure]

Originally Posted by zenmaster

Have you not bothered to read this thread?

Ha my bad. So its whp numbers. Seems very high for the stock turbo but anything is possible. What does it do 60-130 with this tune? That would put the dyno numbers in perspective.

[PeterPure]

Originally Posted by paradoxical3

It's not the same turbo and his dyno is WHP, and baselined at 330-340whp just like all the other dynos.

It is the same turbo

[TTFS]

Originally Posted by paradoxical3

How safe do you consider this tune on the track? Would you recommend a more conservative one?

These numbers are so good that I might consider driving my M2 to you to have it tuned (8hr drive), but I need a setup that will work on the track SAFELY without me worrying about blowing it up. I already have an intercooler, downpipe, and chargepipe.

I will Pm you.

[Nine Lives]

Originally Posted by paradoxical3

It's not the same turbo and his dyno is WHP, and baselined at 330-340whp just like all the other dynos.

Originally Posted by Darkiedm4

It is the same turbo

I can see both sides of the coin here,but it's getting confusing after seeing big figures here.

Has it been officially verified that the turbo is different to that of the ewg 35i yet and if so what are the differences ?

[PeterPure]

Originally Posted by Nine Lives

I can see both sides of the coin here,but it's getting confusing after seeing big figures here.

Has it been officially verified that the turbo is different to that of the ewg 35i yet and if so what are the differences ?

I have seen it first hand and have pictures of both turbine / compressor side. It has indeed a different part number but flow should be the same.

I asked for 60-130 numbers so this puts the dyno numbers in perspective.

My 2 cents.

[FSociety]

Curious on the Torque figures ? anyone else ?

[ashburyn54]

Originally Posted by TTFS

I will Pm you.

Wow guys. That's impressive. So 2psi peak over the stock tune but tapering much less to redline? Unbelievable results!

[JTO24]

Those curves are nice! Looks like it pulls nicely all the way to redline.

[zenmaster]

Originally Posted by ROBNYC

Curious on the Torque figures ? anyone else ?

Looks like they were able to hold boost much longer than prior runs, hence the higher hp. But peak torque was reduced some presumably to address heat.

[paradoxical3]

Originally Posted by Darkiedm4

I have seen it first hand and have pictures of both turbine / compressor side. It has indeed a different part number but flow should be the same.

I asked for 60-130 numbers so this puts the dyno numbers in perspective.

My 2 cents.

Uh, I have also seen it firsthand on my car and also have pics. And Pure Turbos is on record saying there are some differences.

[PeterPure]

Originally Posted by paradoxical3

Uh, I have also seen it firsthand on my car and also have pics. And Pure Turbos is on record saying there are some differences.

Yes there are minor differences. But flow is the same. Eg turbine / compressor side.

See what Terry said? Believe what you want to believe. I wouldnt want to track it at 93 octane and 430 whp.

[PeterPure]

I would track a pure stage2 n55 at 430 whp on 93 though

I am sure on a M2 it is a fun car.

[zenmaster]

Originally Posted by Darkiedm4

See what Terry said?

Terry also got a lot of heat and timing pull at upper RPM, bone stock w/ 91oct. I can see why it was suggestive of the same M235i setup, albeit with somewhat improved flow. A week prior, another party documenting their completely stock dyno pull got even worse results, with no increase in power past 5800 RPM, but published them anyway. So expectations were set low, which may discourage investigation.

Originally Posted by Darkiedm4

Believe what you want to believe. I wouldnt want to track it at 93 octane and 430 whp.

thing is, these numbers don't lie. If AIT can be kept below a threshold, I don't see why not. These results indicate at a 15% whp increase over an equivalent M235i setup. The M2's increased flow can't be accounted for in stock intake/exhaust design alone, which is like perhaps 5%. Do you not agree?

The M2 stock DP should not be more restrictive than the M235i's stock DP. Therefore, bone stock 93oct, tune-only whp should also be 10-15% over a stock 93oct, tune-only M235i.

[PeterPure]

Originally Posted by zenmaster

Terry also got a lot of heat and timing pull at upper RPM, bone stock w/ 91oct. I can see why it was suggestive of the same M235i setup, albeit with somewhat improved flow. A week prior, another party documenting their completely stock dyno pull got even worse results, with no increase in power past 5800 RPM, but published them anyway. So expectations were set low, which may discourage investigation.

thing is, these numbers don't lie. If AIT can be kept below a threshold, I don't see why not. These results indicate at a 15% whp increase over an equivalent M235i setup. The M2's increased flow can't be accounted for in stock intake/exhaust design alone, which is like perhaps 5%. Do you not agree?

The M2 stock DP should not be more restrictive than the M235i's stock DP. Therefore, bone stock 93oct, tune-only whp should also be 10-15% over a stock 93oct, tune-only M235i.

If proven by 60-130 racelogic pbox data i will believe

I need hard data before believing. After all its same turbo as m235i or 335/435i. The 15% higher stock numbers come from increased stock tune. Jb4 logs showed 16-18 psi stock. Hence the higher stock numbers.