BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   6Post.com | BMW 6-Series Forum > BMW 6 Series Forum > BMW M6 Forum (F12 / F13)

Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      04-24-2014, 04:18 PM   #23
Tom C
Captain
45
Rep
646
Posts

Drives: M8 GC Comp, Shelby GT500
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Maryland

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by mr-karim View Post
That's all I got from Dynojet

Quote:
Originally Posted by LSM View Post
These SAE corrected numbers? The non corrected numbers are higher than SAE which is what the dyno jet should be corrected to
You can ask the Dyno operator for the drf file for you dyno runs. You can download the WINpep software from Dynojet's website and you can toggle the correction factors and smoothing yourself on the dyno runs...along with a bunch of other information that was datalogged.

It looks like the STD correction factor was close to the uncorrected (raw) dyno #'s as the correction factors were 1.00 (no correction) and 1.01 (1% correction). I don't imagine in this instance the SAE correction #'s would be more than 5whp difference.
Appreciate 0
      04-24-2014, 05:27 PM   #24
JoeyLeeBMW
Second Lieutenant
JoeyLeeBMW's Avatar
United_States
20
Rep
260
Posts

Drives: 2014 BMW ///M6 Alpine White
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Los Angeles, CA

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
I will be dynoing my car again at EAS to compare it against my stock base line dyno chart.

See the thing is with these piggyback units the hp + torque numbers are all over the place being inconsistent.

579 to 622 is a 43 hp in power difference not only that the torque going from 520 to 576 alone is a 56 lb difference and that was shown on not even the highest hp read.

Karim try next time with full MS109 Octane from VP Fuel you get from a 5 gallon can like I did.

Are you also running the older software before March 3rd release or new?

The older software 1 psi over = 1.44 just so you know.

So when I did my dyno run on MS109 I was at 4.5 max which equivalents to 6.48 lol *DOH*
__________________
Joey Lee BMW l ///M Power l IG: JoeyLeeBMW

2014 BMW ///M6 Coupe "Competition Package" CLICK: Intro Thread Pictures

l Vorsteiner CA Demo Car l Toyo Tires l Trinity Autosport l Targa Trophy l Shift S3ctor
Appreciate 0
      04-24-2014, 05:28 PM   #25
JoeyLeeBMW
Second Lieutenant
JoeyLeeBMW's Avatar
United_States
20
Rep
260
Posts

Drives: 2014 BMW ///M6 Alpine White
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Los Angeles, CA

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
LSM - Unfortunately the STD #'s already read higher on dynojets lol
__________________
Joey Lee BMW l ///M Power l IG: JoeyLeeBMW

2014 BMW ///M6 Coupe "Competition Package" CLICK: Intro Thread Pictures

l Vorsteiner CA Demo Car l Toyo Tires l Trinity Autosport l Targa Trophy l Shift S3ctor
Appreciate 0
      04-24-2014, 07:43 PM   #26
mr-karim
Lieutenant
mr-karim's Avatar
Canada
61
Rep
549
Posts

Drives: F13 M6 (Fully Modded)
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Canada, Ancaster

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeyLeeBMW View Post
I will be dynoing my car again at EAS to compare it against my stock base line dyno chart.

See the thing is with these piggyback units the hp + torque numbers are all over the place being inconsistent.

579 to 622 is a 43 hp in power difference not only that the torque going from 520 to 576 alone is a 56 lb difference and that was shown on not even the highest hp read.

Karim try next time with full MS109 Octane from VP Fuel you get from a 5 gallon can like I did.

Are you also running the older software before March 3rd release or new?

The older software 1 psi over = 1.44 just so you know.

So when I did my dyno run on MS109 I was at 4.5 max which equivalents to 6.48 lol *DOH*
I use older BMS firmware, so 2.5 is fine. New update changes the value, +3psi on the new one = +2.5 on the older one.
__________________

"The best things in life are free. The second best are very expensive." - Coco Chanel.
Appreciate 0
      04-24-2014, 08:21 PM   #27
LSM
Lieutenant Colonel
LSM's Avatar
No_Country
1118
Rep
1,808
Posts

Drives: 2024 Porsche 911 GTS Cab
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: United States

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom C View Post
You can ask the Dyno operator for the drf file for you dyno runs. You can download the WINpep software from Dynojet's website and you can toggle the correction factors and smoothing yourself on the dyno runs...along with a bunch of other information that was datalogged.

It looks like the STD correction factor was close to the uncorrected (raw) dyno #'s as the correction factors were 1.00 (no correction) and 1.01 (1% correction). I don't imagine in this instance the SAE correction #'s would be more than 5whp difference.
It is a big difference. I hit 590Whp and 545 wlb/ft SAE corrected. Uncorrected the HP at the wheels was 604, dont remember what the torque was..This was with only BMS set at 2.25 and charcoal filter delete, no mods other than that. I believe uncorrected is 3% higher or thereabouts
__________________
2024 Porsche 911 GTS Cabriolet
Appreciate 0
      04-24-2014, 08:37 PM   #28
turbo8765
Captain
61
Rep
776
Posts

Drives: very fast
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: US

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by LSM View Post
It is a big difference. I hit 590Whp and 545 wlb/ft SAE corrected. Uncorrected the HP at the wheels was 604, dont remember what the torque was..This was with only BMS set at 2.25 and charcoal filter delete, no mods other than that. I believe uncorrected is 3% higher or thereabouts
~4% is common
Appreciate 0
      04-24-2014, 11:46 PM   #29
Tom C
Captain
45
Rep
646
Posts

Drives: M8 GC Comp, Shelby GT500
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Maryland

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by LSM View Post
It is a big difference. I hit 590Whp and 545 wlb/ft SAE corrected. Uncorrected the HP at the wheels was 604, dont remember what the torque was..This was with only BMS set at 2.25 and charcoal filter delete, no mods other than that. I believe uncorrected is 3% higher or thereabouts
Look at the dyno coefficients he just posted.. It is only correcting 1% for the STD correction. Look at the ambient conditions 57 deg, 29.41 barometer and 31% humidity. The SAE correction deviation in this instance should be minimal. STD correction layers elevation on top of the SAE correction and is an input by the dyno operator. Normally it could lead to a couple of % difference, but in this instance the ambient temps are very mild and I doubt that SAE numbers will be more than 5whp.It isn't a constant difference that you are alluding to. If you dyno on a particularly cold day, (colder than the "ideal" target of SAE correction) the uncorrected dyno numbers will be higher than SAE and vice versa on a warm day. But the biggest factor will be what the dyno operator input for the elevation. Some use that to pump up the #'s to keep customers happy, but that is only for the STD #'s and has no bearing on the SAE #'s. I believe the OP is in a low elevation area (under 1k'), so unless the dyno operator tried to fudge the elevation, the numbers wont be all that different.

Last edited by Tom C; 04-25-2014 at 12:02 AM..
Appreciate 0
      04-25-2014, 11:35 AM   #30
LSM
Lieutenant Colonel
LSM's Avatar
No_Country
1118
Rep
1,808
Posts

Drives: 2024 Porsche 911 GTS Cab
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: United States

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom C View Post
Look at the dyno coefficients he just posted.. It is only correcting 1% for the STD correction. Look at the ambient conditions 57 deg, 29.41 barometer and 31% humidity. The SAE correction deviation in this instance should be minimal. STD correction layers elevation on top of the SAE correction and is an input by the dyno operator. Normally it could lead to a couple of % difference, but in this instance the ambient temps are very mild and I doubt that SAE numbers will be more than 5whp.It isn't a constant difference that you are alluding to. If you dyno on a particularly cold day, (colder than the "ideal" target of SAE correction) the uncorrected dyno numbers will be higher than SAE and vice versa on a warm day. But the biggest factor will be what the dyno operator input for the elevation. Some use that to pump up the #'s to keep customers happy, but that is only for the STD #'s and has no bearing on the SAE #'s. I believe the OP is in a low elevation area (under 1k'), so unless the dyno operator tried to fudge the elevation, the numbers wont be all that different.
Thanks for the info, I didnt know the majority of what you said in this post ...In my instance the uncorrected was much higher than the SAE corrected. I saw the uncorrected is like 101% and SAE was either 97 or 98%. I was at low elevation and similar temps and the difference was 3% with the numbers I posted being SAE, 3% lower than uncorrected
__________________
2024 Porsche 911 GTS Cabriolet
Appreciate 0
      04-26-2014, 10:22 PM   #31
BTF13M6
First Lieutenant
BTF13M6's Avatar
United_States
44
Rep
339
Posts

Drives: 2013 BMW M6 Coupe
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Overland Park, KS

iTrader: (0)

I talked with a tuner today about their program.

He said that they have returned 530-545 WHP off of every M5 or M6 that they have dynoed prior to tuning.

Has anyone here dynoed prior to mods to see if this is a fair number?

Has anyone on here used ECU Tuning Group?
__________________
2013 F13 ///M6 Coupe - Singapore Grey


20" ADV.1 5.0 MV1SL with Pirelli Pzero's
Custom Painted Grill, side markers and tinted front reflectors, Dinan Stage 1.
Appreciate 0
Post Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
bms tune, dyno, f13 m6

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:40 PM.




6post.com
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST