[Anthony1s]

Originally Posted by ZM2

Already have curves higher than that.

Like I said, post them. I'm happy to be proved wrong. Our cars making over 500hp with stock turbo, a fuel pump, and ethanal would be pretty cool.

[ZM2]

Originally Posted by Anthony1s

Like I said, post them. I'm happy to be proved wrong. Our cars making over 500hp with stock turbo, a fuel pump, and ethanal would be pretty cool.

I’m not stock turbo. The Dinan is giving me a little peak bump and a little more upper RPM under the curve gains vs stock.

The stock turbo guys will hit the the numbers you’ve stated but with more upper RPM under the curve than the Stg 2 maps, as AmuroRay said.

Even if a particular stock turbo car only makes 20-25whp over their Stg 2 93 numbers, it’s a lot faster in the real world than just the 20-25whp peak delta bc in upper RPM’s they’re gaining 30-45whp. Just ask any of the guys running the map how those upper rev’s feel and how their 100-200 & 1/4mi times are improving.

Add something like a decat and stock turbo whp numbers will be just as good as my car. And, the Race Gas 2+ map is looking even quicker than the 2+ E30 map.

So yeah, there will be plenty of stock turbo cars making 500 engine hp.

[5w20]

Originally Posted by Anthony1s

That's what I've been telling him, but he continually claims that you cannot compare different cars with the same setups if they were on different roads.

And I never claimed I am calculating engine horsepower by a single parameter, though it's certainly possible to estimate that. I, in fact, specifically mentioned multiple parameters that I am taking into account and comparing between tunes. boost pressure, fuel pressure, IAT, MAF lb/min, and timing. You can definitely look at those numbers and go "Hmm, these numbers aren't that much different than the 93 tune, so I really doubt he's making 20% more power" And when you relate all of that to the tons of M2 93 dyno graphs available, you can guess with fair certainly the power he is making.

I guarantee his car is making 420-430hp (probably closer to 420 or less) and that is certainly not the 50hp over the e30 tune he claims, nor is it 75hp over the 93 tune. If anyone actually believes his car is making over 500hp, after seeing those logs, they're nuts.

420-430rwhp is about what a stock turbo N55 will pull with the stage 2+ E30 map on a F3x car. It could be higher on a M2. I don't know how much better the manifold is, or even if it is better on a M2 over a F3x chassis car, but I will say that there is about a 60-70rwhp difference between the BM3 stage 2 93 OTS map and the BM3 stage 2+ E30 OTS map. There is enough power difference to pick up a clean 5.5-6mph in the 1/4 mile.

An interesting note that I didn't think about, is how some people are claiming that power holds on better into the 6000-7000 RPM range. I believe there is some truth to that. I was accustomed to shifting at 6000-6300 (depending on the gear) on the regular E30 map, the two times I held it out to about 6500 on the stage 2+ my trap speeds were higher than when I shifted at 6000-6300.

Honestly when comparing this tune to say a custom tune, there isn't much to be gained on a custom tune. These new tunes and features that are soon to be released, is a blessing. The N55 could've been left behind and forgotten about. I am happy Halim is continuing to support our engine platform.

[ZM2]

Originally Posted by 5w20

420-430rwhp is about what a stock turbo N55 will pull with the stage 2+ E30 map. I don't know how much better the manifold is, or even if it is better on a M2 over a F3x chassis car, but I will say that there is about a 60-70rwhp difference between the BM3 stage 2 93 OTS map and the BM3 stage 2+ E30 OTS map. There is enough power difference to pick up a clean 5.5-6mph in the 1/4 mile.

An interesting note that I didn't think about, is how some people are claiming that power holds on better into the 6000-7000 RPM range. I believe there is some truth to that. I was accustomed to shifting at 6000-6300 (depending on the gear) on the regular E30 map, the two times I held it out to about 6500 on the stage 2+ my trap speeds were higher than when I shifted at 6000-6300.

The OTS Stg 2 93 map for the M2 make 385-405whp on a Dynojet, depending on the particular dyno & car.

I'm not familiar with the OTS EWG N55 Stg 2 93 map power output, but if Stg 2+ E30 is putting down 60whp more, that's a hell of a jump for you guys!

It would be very interesting to see the difference in dyno curves and gains for the EWG N55 & M2 Stg 2 & 2+ maps. I'm pretty sure the N55 EWG & M2 Stg 2+ maps are the same, but the Stg 2 maps were different and the M2 was able to make a little more power on 93.

[5w20]

Originally Posted by ZM2

The OTS Stg 2 93 maps for the M2 make 380-400whp on a Dynojet, depending on the particular dyno & car.

I'm not familiar with the OTS EWG N55 Stg 2 93 map power output, but if Stg 2+ E30 is putting down 60whp more, that's a hell of a jump for you guys!

It would be very interesting to see the difference in dyno curves and gains for the EWG N55 & M2 maps. I'm pretty sure the N55 EWG & M2 Stg 2+ maps are the same, but the Stg 2 maps were different and the M2 was able to make a little more power on 93.

I'm relatively new to the BMW world, and always learning lol. There definitely seems to be a RWHP difference between a F3x and a M2 when on the dyno. My rough estimate from what I've seen is that the F3x chassis makes about 360rwhp on stage 2 93, 390rwhp on stage 2 E30, and should make 420rwhp on stage 2+ E30. Of course you can expect ±(5-10hp) for variables.

[ZM2]

Originally Posted by 5w20

I'm relatively new to the BMW world, and always learning lol. There definitely seems to be a RWHP difference between a F3x and a M2 when on the dyno. My rough estimate from what I've seen is that the F3x chassis makes about 360rwhp on stage 2 93, 390rwhp on stage 2 E30, and should make 420rwhp on stage 2+ E30. Of course you can expect ±(5-10hp) for variables.

Glad to see such a big jump for you guys! 6mph trap speed gain b/n N55 EWG Stg 2 and Stg 2+ E30 is serious!

The 2+ OTS is definitely closing the gap b/n the EWG N55 & M2 2+ maps. If they actually are different, it's not by much.

[AmuroRay]

Originally Posted by 5w20

I'm relatively new to the BMW world, and always learning lol. There definitely seems to be a RWHP difference between a F3x and a M2 when on the dyno. My rough estimate from what I've seen is that the F3x chassis makes about 360rwhp on stage 2 93, 390rwhp on stage 2 E30, and should make 420rwhp on stage 2+ E30. Of course you can expect ±(5-10hp) for variables.

Ehhh....Nothing consistent. The Stage 2 93 tune is good for a solid 375/380whp SAE. It does seem like its different for the M2 vs the rest, but I would have to compare logs.
The standard E30 tune doesn't really seem to do too much more, maybe 10 to 15whp more at peak, but the powerband doesn't really hold significantly better.

Does anyone have the actual post/statement or picture showing the M2's manifold vs the rest?

[AmuroRay]

Originally Posted by Anthony1s

That's what I've been telling him, but he continually claims that you cannot compare different cars with the same setups if they were on different roads.

And I never claimed I am calculating engine horsepower by a single parameter, though it's certainly possible to estimate that. I, in fact, specifically mentioned multiple parameters that I am taking into account and comparing between tunes. boost pressure, fuel pressure, IAT, MAF lb/min, and timing. You can definitely look at those numbers and go "Hmm, these numbers aren't that much different than the 93 tune, so I really doubt he's making 20% more power" And when you relate all of that to the tons of M2 93 dyno graphs available, you can guess with fair certainly the power he is making.

I guarantee his car is making 420-430hp (probably closer to 420 or less) and that is certainly not the 50hp over the e30 tune he claims, nor is it 75hp over the 93 tune. If anyone actually believes his car is making over 500hp, after seeing those logs, they're nuts.

16 PSI on a stock turbo is 370whp maybe (depending on timing)
16PSI on a PS2 is over 400whp
20PSI on a PS2 is almost 500whp

https://www.1addicts.com/forums/show....php?t=1405434

I get what you're saying, but it only works if your comparing cars with the same major mods - like a turbo.

With that said, I'm really interested in what the dyno shows. I can speculate all day, but I want something to sink my teeth into.

[ZM2]

Originally Posted by AmuroRay

16 PSI on a stock turbo is 370whp maybe (depending on timing)
16PSI on a PS2 is over 400whp
20PSI on a PS2 is almost 500whp

https://www.1addicts.com/forums/show....php?t=1405434

I get what you're saying, but it only works if your comparing cars with the same major mods - like a turbo.

With that said, I'm really interested in what the dyno shows. I can speculate all day, but I want something to sink my teeth into.

6speed_M2 may very well pull this off before I do. Keep an eye on his thread.

[ZM2]

Originally Posted by AmuroRay

Ehhh....Nothing consistent. The Stage 2 93 tune is good for a solid 375/380whp SAE. It does seem like its different for the M2 vs the rest, but I would have to compare logs.
The standard E30 tune doesn't really seem to do too much more, maybe 10 to 15whp more at peak, but the powerband doesn't really hold significantly better.

Does anyone have the actual post/statement or picture showing the M2's manifold vs the rest?

And on some M2’s Stg 2 E30 isn’t any better than Stg 2 93 v5.8.

The HPFP is close to max’ed out on Stg 2 93 v5.8, and if you have a weaker than average stock HPFP, Stg 2 E30 isn’t going to do better.

[AmuroRay]

Originally Posted by ZM2

And on some M2’s Stg 2 E30 isn’t any better than Stg 2 93 v5.8.

The HPFP is close to max’ed out on Stg 2 93 v5.8, and if you have a weaker than average stock HPFP, Stg 2 E30 isn’t going to do better.

Yup.

I just ran across this while searching - https://www.2addicts.com/forums/show....php?t=1490691

10whp difference from 93 to E30.

[ZM2]

Originally Posted by AmuroRay

Yup.

I just ran across this while searching - https://www.2addicts.com/forums/show....php?t=1490691

10whp difference from 93 to E30.

Amazing to see the evolution of N55 power & tuning starting with before the M2.

First it was find the fueling limit, now it's find the turbo limit, and then it's add some flow mods or a larger turbo for even more juice with the OTS!

[Anthony1s]

Originally Posted by AmuroRay

16 PSI on a stock turbo is 370whp maybe (depending on timing)
16PSI on a PS2 is over 400whp
20PSI on a PS2 is almost 500whp

https://www.1addicts.com/forums/show....php?t=1405434

I get what you're saying, but it only works if your comparing cars with the same major mods - like a turbo.

With that said, I'm really interested in what the dyno shows. I can speculate all day, but I want something to sink my teeth into.

Forum member cars aren't much different from each other. Stg 2 (intercooler, dp) doesn't really matter what ic and dp they have. Add e30 and look at that fuel pressure, quite comparable. Different pumps, don't matter, when there are logs showing exact fuel pressure used. Fuel pressure and AFR, quite relatable. Sure, you might not be able to say 2500psi of fuel is 400hp if AFR are different, because you don't know if it's lean or rich, but we have AFR in the logs to base off of... Same with turbo, we can see boost made and WGDC in the logs and compare that to existing M2 logs and dyno runs. Mods don't matter because people running the OTS tunes cars aren't drastically different from one another.

ZM2 is also flip flopping his statements depending on who he is trying to convince. One minute he says his Dinan turbo doesn't make a difference compared to stock turbo, maybe 5-10hp. Another minute he says his Dinan turbo make 60hp more than stock so he can't show me his dyno graphs because his turbo is too different to be comparable.

He says he had dyno graphs of his car, on the tune those logs go to, making over 500hp. So I think he should show them. That would resolve the discrepancy I had when I called out his logs for not making the power he claims his car is making. Without that, all his words are meaningless, because it's impossible for anyone to compute the value proposition in upgrading.

[ZM2]

"Another minute he says his Dinan turbo make 60hp more than stock so he can't show me his dyno graphs because his turbo is too different to be comparable." When did I ever say this?

At this point, holding out on updating my curves from beta to OTS for you is getting fun. Btw, all the Dynojet's around here are booked out for a few weeks.

[Anthony1s]

Originally Posted by ZM2

"Another minute he says his Dinan turbo make 60hp more than stock so he can't show me his dyno graphs because his turbo is too different to be comparable." When did I ever say this?

At this point, holding out on updating my curves from beta to OTS for you is getting fun. Btw, all the Dynojet's around here are booked out for a few weeks.

More lies. Like I said, you make up whatever you want to win whatever argument you're currently having.

This is in response to me questioning your claim that your car makes more than 500whp.

[ZM2]

Originally Posted by Anthony1s

More lies. Like I said, you make up whatever you want to win whatever argument you're currently having.

This is in response to me questioning your claim that your car makes more than 500whp.

In your post that you’re referring to you said 420-430hp and likely lower than 420hp. Not 500whp...

As I have said many times my curves are on beta maps, and they’re higher than your incredible log reading/dyno math abilities are stating.

I have not updated my curves with the OTS map yet, but the OTS does feel a little quicker. Once the Dynojet’s close by have availability, my OTS curves will get posted. But, it sounds like 6speed_M2 may get there first.

[AmuroRay]

Originally Posted by Anthony1s

Forum member cars aren't much different from each other. Stg 2 (intercooler, dp) doesn't really matter what ic and dp they have. Add e30 and look at that fuel pressure, quite comparable. Different pumps, don't matter, when there are logs showing exact fuel pressure used. Fuel pressure and AFR, quite relatable. Sure, you might not be able to say 2500psi of fuel is 400hp if AFR are different, because you don't know if it's lean or rich, but we have AFR in the logs to base off of... Same with turbo, we can see boost made and WGDC in the logs and compare that to existing M2 logs and dyno runs. Mods don't matter because people running the OTS tunes cars aren't drastically different from one another.

ZM2 is also flip flopping his statements depending on who he is trying to convince. One minute he says his Dinan turbo doesn't make a difference compared to stock turbo, maybe 5-10hp. Another minute he says his Dinan turbo make 60hp more than stock so he can't show me his dyno graphs because his turbo is too different to be comparable.

He says he had dyno graphs of his car, on the tune those logs go to, making over 500hp. So I think he should show them. That would resolve the discrepancy I had when I called out his logs for not making the power he claims his car is making. Without that, all his words are meaningless, because it's impossible for anyone to compute the value proposition in upgrading.

Well, not to get in the middle to the argument, I’m way too busy, lazy and tired to read all of that right now, I DO know he’s mentioned that his turbo doesn’t make much more PEAK power, just more high RPM power.

So while this tune may allow a stock turbo make 420whp, and maintain 390whp up to 6500rpm, his turbo may allow for 435whp (15 peak) and maintain 420+whp over that same area.

[ZM2]

Originally Posted by AmuroRay

Well, not to get in the middle to the argument, I’m way too busy, lazy and tired to read all of that right now, I DO know he’s mentioned that his turbo doesn’t make much more PEAK power, just more high RPM power.

So while this tune may allow a stock turbo make 420whp, and maintain 390whp up to 6500rpm, his turbo may allow for 435whp (15 peak) and maintain 420+whp over that same area.

I’ve got more delta drop than that between peak hp and 6500 on the beta map, but the OTS feels better up top.

Your peak number looks right, but still don’t think I’ll see 420whp at 6500 on the OTS. That’ll take something a little bigger than the Dinan like a TTE460.

[AmuroRay]

Originally Posted by ZM2

I’ve got more delta drop than that between peak hp and 6500 on the beta map, but the OTS feels better up top.

Your peak number looks right, but still don’t think I’ll see 420whp at 6500 on the OTS. That’ll take something a little bigger than the Dinan like a TTE460.

Honestly, I dont think so either, but I was doing it for the sake of example. Most (if not all) OTS maps and even retunes don't even make 350whp at 6500RPM. I thought it was a limitation of the stock turbo and fueling, but maybe not:

https://f30.bimmerpost.com/forums/sh...1622618&page=3
CJ Tune - 440Whp at peak - 355whp@6500RPM.


FBO M235i - note SAE correction 350whp@6500RPM

(Note, this is Stage 1 apparently)

[AmuroRay]

https://www.e90post.com/forums/showt...ighlight=m235i

Found more -
Stage II
2016 M235i auto M performance exhaust and AFE cold air intake (stock downpipe)

355whp@6500RPM

"No downpipe, just muffler and intake. Downpipe doesn't really net much to anything on these cars at that power level. I've posted a 2015 335i (makes less than the m235i b/c it has a more aggressive tune from the factory) With just our stage 2 tune and downpipe.

EDIT: I posted the timestamp to show we did this all in the sameday."


https://www.e90post.com/forums/showt...8#post24041118

[AmuroRay]

aFe Intake
ER FMIC
ER Chargepipe
ER Downpipe
M-Performance exhaust
JB4 +FF + EWG Wires + E35 fuel mix + Map 6 (16 psi)

Got to eat my words -

385whp@6500RPM! (STD - 2.2% = SAE)

https://www.2addicts.com/forums/show....php?t=1031832

"Current mods: aFe Intake, ER Chargepipe, ER Downpipe, M-Performance exhaust and JB4. I used ~95 octane fuel by mixing my current 91 octane with 5 gallons of Sunoco 100 octane at a local 76 gas station."

361whp@6500ROM (STD - 2.2% = SAE)

https://www.2addicts.com/forums/showthread.php?t=983353

[ZM2]

Yeah, 420whp at 6500 is a big ask unless you’ve got a larger turbo. A TTE460 probably isn’t even enough.

But, initial point well taken. Thanks for the posts!