Quote:
Originally Posted by Boss330
Would like to know the reasoning behind adding SAE correction on a engine that, according to what BMW have told us, is capable of correcting itself for "non SAE" conditions... You just can't add SAE correction if the engine already has corrected for the "non SAE" conditions!
I'd say the case isn't closed quite yet. Just in the SAE corrections that has been done here, there is potentially a substantial error in the claimed "facts"!
As you said; Garbage in, Garbage out...  |
first of all, there is no guarantee that the m4 's adaptation actually works to correct to exactly 100% of stated power in any conditions.
second of all, based on the observed temperatures, the SAE correction factor is 1.011. not enough to make a difference. That's a 1.1 percent adjustment.
http://wahiduddin.net/calc/calc_cf.htm
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by alex07
Is the 480-500whp JB4 tune used in your test's the same as the one used by this M4 that seem to be about equal with a stock 460bhp Stingray!?
http://f80.bimmerpost.com/forums/sho....php?t=1020694
Just wondering cause I was expecting tuned M4s to be much faster then stock Stingrays as the trap speeds suggest, 123-125mph(JB4 M4) vs 118-120mph(stock Stingray)! |
1) stingray got the jump, which makes a big difference
2) the m4 had 300+ extra lbs of passenger weight according to OP
To me, the results fit.