[akkando]

Originally Posted by cntzl

Just for reference, below is the dyno chart from G-power's website that belongs to an S55 M3/M4 (probably non-comp). As you can see, M2C already making the same HP as a stock M3/M4 (and in fact with more torque). Obviously, these two cars weren't on the dyno same day but still a relevant comparison.
M3/M4: 439.6 HP, 551.7 Nm
M2C: 439.3 HP, 607.6 Nm
[PICTURE]

They said not much of an upgrade, they said. JUST 40 HP they said.

I said put it on a Dyno and we will see how much more power the MY19 M2 has I said.

[M-Pilot]

Originally Posted by akkando

They said not much of an upgrade, they said. JUST 40 HP they said.

I said put it on a Dyno and we will see how much more power the MY19 M2 has I said.

Of course I'd like to see OG M2 and M2C on the same dyno, same day and with the same fuel but I have been saying this from the very begining. Many forum members were making fun of me or didn't believe me when I said actual WHP difference between the OG M2 and M2C could be more than what's stated on paper (more than "only 40HP" as you mentioned).

[hellrotm]

Originally Posted by chris719

Yeah, it looks good! The dyno indicates max torque at 2700 RPMs approx also. So much for lag.

I think the dyno shows pretty clearly the lazy / linear feel is created via throttle sensitivity and not by lowering the torque output.

It also could be the Active M Diff and DSC retuning. What is being felt is actually improved traction and smoother power delivery. Dynos don’t lie, these cars have plenty of power. The CS M3 and M4 have similar reviews. The powerband and power delivery is more linear/smooth, even though it is putting down more power over a zcp M3/M4. The CS got similar diff retuning, the M2 Comp retuning is most likely an evolution of that development.

[ChrisK]

Originally Posted by chris719

Yeah, it looks good! The dyno indicates max torque at 2700 RPMs approx also. So much for lag.

I think the dyno shows pretty clearly the lazy / linear feel is created via throttle sensitivity and not by lowering the torque output.

That was my impression also.

[hellrotm]

Originally Posted by cntzl

Just for reference, below is the dyno chart from G-power's website that belongs to an S55 M3/M4 (probably non-comp). As you can see, M2C already making the same HP as a stock M3/M4 (and in fact with more torque). Obviously, these two cars weren't on the dyno same day but still a relevant comparison.
M3/M4: 439.6 HP, 551.7 Nm
M2C: 439.3 HP, 607.6 Nm
[PICTURE]

M2C (stock): 439.3 HP, 607.6 Nm
M2 (stock): 372.4 HP, 505.3 Nm
M2 (tune, exhaust): 412.2 HP, 570.9 Nm




M2C is a beast!

[pz619]

I’m a little skeptical that it’s putting 80hp (oops read that wrong) more than the bmw figures. Would be interesting to see if this is an outlier or if dynos are consistently showing that much more power.

Edit: Read it backwards as 493. I’m an idiot.

[tom @ eas]

Originally Posted by hellrotm

Someone in the US needs to get on a dynojet.

Anyone in SoCal, European Auto Source will gladly dyno your car.

+1. Bring it, I'd love to see one on the dyno.

[tom @ eas]

Anyone local to Anaheim, CA what would like to see what their M2C does on a dynojet, I'd be happy to sponsor a run.

[hellrotm]

Originally Posted by pz619

I’m a little skeptical that it’s putting 80hp more than the bmw figures. Would be interesting to see if this is an outlier or if dynos are consistently showing that much more power.

Typical BMW, underrated power figures. They do the same thing with the S63 in M5.

See this thread for comparison dynos. All G-power dynos of stock cars.

https://f87.bimmerpost.com/forums/sh....php?t=1539813

M3/M4: 439.6 HP, 551.7 Nm
M2C: 439.3 HP, 607.6 Nm
M2: 372.4 HP, 505.3 Nm

[BAN_M2C]

I love this thread!!

Reminds me of the multiple posts about the dreaded 150 more pounds that then resulted in being actually around 110 when a fellow member weighed theirs and an M2 back to back.. and the press had no complains about the added weight..

Love the idea of the back to back dyno!

I plan to dyno mine when it gets here!

[zenmaster]

wheel or brake HP?
https://f80.bimmerpost.com/forums/sh....php?t=1249883

[M-Pilot]

Originally Posted by zenmaster

wheel or brake HP?
https://f80.bimmerpost.com/forums/sh....php?t=1249883

Most likely BHP.

[zenmaster]

Originally Posted by cntzl

Most likely BHP.

If bhp, were both car's engines put on a bench? If not, was same whp->bhp coefficient used for both?

[M-Pilot]

Originally Posted by pz619

I’m a little skeptical that it’s putting 80hp more than the bmw figures. Would be interesting to see if this is an outlier or if dynos are consistently showing that much more power.

80HP? It's making 440 BHP according to the dyno chart. In other words, it makes 30HP more at the crank than what BMW claims.

[M-Pilot]

Originally Posted by zenmaster

If bhp, were both car's engines put on a bench? If not, was same whp->bhp coefficient used for both?

My guess would be the same coefficient for each and every model they put on their dyno, not just for M2, M2C, and M3/M4. I'm not sure if they are on the forum but maybe they may want to chime in. In any case, I think soon we'll see several back to back dyno runs comparing M2 to M2C and find out if they are inline with G-power's numbers. As I mentioned above, I expect more than 40whp difference between these two models on the same day, same dyno, same fuel.

[zenmaster]

Originally Posted by cntzl

My guess would be the same coefficient for each and every model they put on their dyno, not just for M2, M2C, and M3/M4. I'm not sure if they are on the forum but maybe they may want to chime in. In any case, I think soon we'll see several back to back dyno runs comparing M2 to M2C and find out if they are inline with G-power's numbers. As I mentioned above, I expect more than 40whp difference between these two models on the same day, same dyno, same fuel.

Agreed. Over 50 ppl on this forum have had their M2C for weeks to months, surprising this is the only dyno.

[pz619]

Originally Posted by cntzl

80HP? It's making 440 BHP according to the dyno chart. In other words, it makes 30HP more at the crank than what BMW claims.

Oops. Read it wrong.

Is this crank or wheel?

[FSU_Logan]

Originally Posted by cntzl

80HP? It's making 440 BHP according to the dyno chart. In other words, it makes 30HP more at the crank than what BMW claims.

This was not an engine dyno. These are RWHP figures. Through a RWD auto, assume about 15% loss or more. That would be 440*1.15 = 506bhp. Obviously this is a dyno...and no two dynos are the same. They are used as tools for measurement, not end-all-be-all measurements.

[M-Pilot]

Originally Posted by FSU_Logan

This was not an engine dyno. These are RWHP figures. Through a RWD auto, assume about 15% loss or more. That would be 440*1.15 = 506bhp. Obviously this is a dyno...and no two dynos are the same. They are used as tools for measurement, not end-all-be-all measurements.

No they are not WHP numbers and I know this isn't an engine dyno. These are calculated BHP values (by multiplying WHP with a coefficient). BHP is more commonly used in EU than WHP so that's why they always advertise BHP numbers. Also, these tests were on the same dyno per G-power's website. In other words, they dyno'ed M2, M2C, and M3/M4 on their shop dyno (aka same dyno). But obviously even on the same dyno you can get different results on different days depending on the fuel, temp, etc.

[hellrotm]

Originally Posted by tom @ eas

Anyone local to Anaheim, CA what would like to see what their M2C does on a dynojet, I'd be happy to sponsor a run.

Someone take this offer. Where are the Early SoCal owners at?

[FSU_Logan]

Originally Posted by cntzl

No they are not WHP numbers and I know this isn't an engine dyno. These are calculated BHP values (by multiplying WHP with a coefficient). BHP is more commonly used in EU than WHP so that's why they always advertise BHP numbers. Also, these tests were on the same dyno per G-power's website. In other words, they dyno'ed M2, M2C, and M3/M4 on their shop dyno (aka same dyno). But obviously even on the same dyno you can get different results on different days depending on the fuel, temp, etc.

Oh jeez... that is really lame lol. Only in Europe

Thanks for the information

[zenmaster]

Originally Posted by FSU_Logan

no two dynos are the same. They are used as tools for measurement, not end-all-be-all measurements.

Actually, all Dynojets are pretty much the same - as the drum weighs the exact same everwhere. http://imageftp.dynojet.com/CMD/Trut...Runs_Final.pdf Anecdotally, I've seen very consistent results over the years. The difference in metrics accuracy will be largely due to local air temp/humidity/pressure as correction factors.