[M3 Number 86]

Originally Posted by M3 Adjuster

I think that the pull was so looooooong that the overboost feature probably ended during the pull and torque fell off substantially.

Hp follows torque naturally ... So the top end fell flat. It's not called a " heartbreaker " Dyno for nothing. It's that particular type of Dyno.

More Dyno tests will come. I personally prefer Dynojet.

I like dynapak and mustang. You know your power levels are awesome when you get them on a mustang dyno

[JoeFromPA]

So many things wrong with this thread - why are so many well educated owners/enthusiasts so delusional when it comes to dynos?

Dynos are only good for one thing. ONE THING. That is measuring a delta when modifying a vehicle when running the same car, on the same dyno, and either on the same day or on a day with nearly identical conditions.

Other than that, the average hub or wheel dyno produces very noisy data. Taking any given dyno and saying, let me add 10, 15, 20% and that's my engines output is a useless exercise.

If you want to know how much power a car makes, look at quarter mile trap speed, times, and similar results as the most consistent and applicable indicator.

[zenmaster]

Originally Posted by tibookM3

I'm surprised at how bothered some people are by the results.

Found a bunch of posts on the subject. For example, a 2008 135i:
Dyno Dynamics (shop on the OP video used this) pull: 353.5hp/431.6tq.
Dynojet pull: 404hp/461tq

So you see, not useless number, but f**ing meaningless w/o reference for comparison (i.e. other cars, or before/after mods).

http://www.superstreetonline.com/fea...ent-technique/

http://www.e90post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=891691

http://www.1addicts.com/forums/showthread.php?t=214597

http://www.corvetteforum.com/forums/...-dynamics.html

http://www.evolutionm.net/forums/ven...s-dynojet.html

http://mbworld.org/forums/c32-amg-c5...r-results.html

http://www.gtrlife.com/forums/topic/...cs-vs-dynojet/

http://www.camaro5.com/forums/showthread.php?t=352839

[tibookM3]

Originally Posted by zenmaster

Found a bunch of posts on the subject. For example, a 2008 135i:
Dyno Dynamics (shop on the OP video used this) pull: 353.5hp/431.6tq.
Dynojet pull: 404hp/461tq

So you see, not useless number, but f**ing meaningless w/o reference for comparison (i.e. other cars, or before/after mods).

http://www.superstreetonline.com/fea...ent-technique/

http://www.e90post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=891691

http://www.1addicts.com/forums/showthread.php?t=214597

http://www.corvetteforum.com/forums/...-dynamics.html

http://www.evolutionm.net/forums/ven...s-dynojet.html

http://mbworld.org/forums/c32-amg-c5...r-results.html

http://www.gtrlife.com/forums/topic/...cs-vs-dynojet/

http://www.camaro5.com/forums/showthread.php?t=352839

I guess my point being missed...track times show it's very capable and not far off from the M3/4, so why get worried/upset? Dyno numbers are rather useless to everyone other than the owner .i

[Jaymax85]

One of the draws of the m2 is that it isn't as overpowering as an m4.... I don't get why people are so concerned about ultimate power and upgrading turbos etc.. I don't think that's the point of this car.. Plus if u want ultimate power the s55 with all its cooling is a far better choice ....

[zenmaster]

Originally Posted by JoeFromPA

If you want to know how much power a car makes, look at quarter mile trap speed, times, and similar results as the most consistent and applicable indicator.

Yes, and we already have at least 2 professionally conducted dragstrip measurements conforming (unsurprisingly) to BMW's advertised power numbers.

[zenmaster]

Originally Posted by tibookM3

I guess my point being missed...track times show it's very capable and not far off from the M3/4, so why get worried/upset? Dump numbers are rather useless to everyone other than the owner .

Yep, but not a single customer or even HEA car has been magazine tested correct? We don't know until we test.

[Sleeper]

The indignation in this thread is priceless.

[CanAutM3]

I'll repeat it again here. Chassis dynos are inherently inaccurate at producing absolute power numbers. This is what counts:

M2 6MT: http://media.caranddriver.com/files/...rbmwm22016.pdf

[Powaup]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

I'll repeat it again here. Chassis dynos are inherently inaccurate at producing absolute power numbers. This is what counts:

Agreed

Is that DCT or 6MT?

Edit: nvm 6MT, interested in the DCT number though..

[OrangeCrush]

Originally Posted by ASAP

there is only one result of 113 from motortrend w dct i believe... and they are always the fast guys

Originally Posted by z335is

No, highest I've seen is 113 with the DCT. So prob in the 110-114 range once all is said and done, which is perfectly fine given its specs.

Nope, Car and Driver got the 12.7@113 with a 6mt which matches exactly Car and Drivers time for a 2014 911 that weighs about 350lbs less than the M2.

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...ll-test-review

http://www.caranddriver.com/comparis...e-specs-page-4

[JoeFromPA]

Originally Posted by OrangeCrush

Nope, Car and Driver got the 12.7@113 with a 6mt which matches exactly Car and Drivers time for a 2014 911 that weighs about 350lbs less than the M2.

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...ll-test-review

http://www.caranddriver.com/comparis...e-specs-page-4

That's because these motors offer a much better AUC than historical turbo and every NA motor.

[pruettfan]

If we are to believe these numbers it makes the M2's performance awfully impressive. Motor trend did a track race with the M2 versus the M4, same driver, the M2 turned faster laps. Also the M2 was within a 1/10 in 0-60. Both cars effectively weigh the same so something doesn't add up.

[kovsky]

Guys, the car is quick. It feels great and is almost certainly a little underrated according to my highly sophisticated but dyno. My 3300lb wrx put down 354/381 on an AWD dyno and it's very similar to that. I do have a DCT though..

This car with a tune and downpipe will be pretty beastly I'm thinking. I will dynotune it once I have 1k miles, not that it will mean anything! I'd just do it to see the gains over stock.

[zenmaster]

Originally Posted by OrangeCrush

Nope, Car and Driver got the 12.7@113 with a 6mt which matches exactly Car and Drivers time for a 2014 911 that weighs about 350lbs less than the M2.

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...ll-test-review

http://www.caranddriver.com/comparis...e-specs-page-4

At Laguna Seca, didn't BMW provide DCTs for the track and 6MT's for the highway. And didn't C&D simply use that provided 6MT to conduct their tests?

[OrangeCrush]

Originally Posted by zenmaster

At Laguna Seca, didn't BMW provide DCTs for the track and 6MT's for the highway. And didn't C&D simply use that provided 6MT to conduct their tests?

Yes, I don't know why they didn't test the DCT but their test says it was the 6mt.

[zenmaster]

Originally Posted by OrangeCrush

Yes, I don't know why they didn't test the DCT but their test says it was the 6mt.

They (and others) were not provided with a DCT, as those were strictly for track use. I'd like to see C&D do a follow up with the DCT.

[OrangeCrush]

Originally Posted by zenmaster

They (and others) were not provided with a DCT, as those were strictly for track use. I'd like to see C&D do a follow up with the DCT.

Ah...I wonder why?

[zenmaster]

Originally Posted by OrangeCrush

Ah...I wonder why?

Good question. I think BMW wanted driving reports to be consistent and they had limited testing time. They had a set of 6MTs and a set of DCTs. They picked DCTs for the track because the 6MTs would have gotten more beat up.

[VCP]

[desertfox73]

Originally Posted by Sleeper

The indignation in this thread is priceless.

It's hilarious. Like watching someone measure the size of Trump's fingers.

[Jaymax85]

Originally Posted by pruettfan

If we are to believe these numbers it makes the M2's performance awfully impressive. Motor trend did a track race with the M2 versus the M4, same driver, the M2 turned faster laps. Also the M2 was within a 1/10 in 0-60. Both cars effectively weigh the same so something doesn't add up.

The m4 and m2 are nowhere close in a straight line... 0-60 mph is useless as the m4 fights for traction.. look at 0-100 and 0-130.. 8.6 vs 10.0 .. 14.6 vs 18

Not even close