F80 M3 vs E92 M3 Dyno Numbers by Motortrend

[FogCityM3]

Ridiculous...Only two dynos I'd trust at this point are Rototest or Dinans.

[tdizzle]

Originally Posted by JoeFromPA

They are using E30, not E85. Pretty big difference.

Which is just saying they used a mix of e85 to achieve a 30% mix of ethanol in the fuel no?

[Never Convicted]

Originally Posted by FogCityM3

Ridiculous...Only two dynos I'd trust at this point are Rototest or Dinans.

Your sustained level of denial is admirable. Ok, a little sad, but admirable nonetheless.

[gthal]

Originally Posted by FogCityM3

Ridiculous...Only two dynos I'd trust at this point are Rototest or Dinans.

So every dyno that shows a similar spread between the E9X and F8X is wrong... DENIAL!!!

[FogCityM3]

Defensive are we and reading WAY too much into my comments. I don't know if the spread is wrong (probably is as a % of base power, or the E9x is the fastest 300 whp car in history), but absolute level of both are wrong. My history calling into question veracity of dyno results goes a long way back. Just relaxxxx no one's taking the keys of your car away from you lol

Originally Posted by gthal

So every dyno that shows a similar spread between the E9X and F8X is wrong... DENIAL!!!

[6underpressure]

This was off a mustang dyno calibrated to show dynojet numbers (car was stock)

[FogCityM3]

?????????????????????????????????

what are you talking about?

Originally Posted by Never Convicted

Your sustained level of denial is admirable. Ok, a little sad, but admirable nonetheless.

[e39>all]

I'm not sure what the "true" power of the f8x is, but it seems every dyno so far that has tested both the e9x/f8x shows a fairly significant disparity in favor of the f8x.

So one of two things is possible.

1) the f8x is underrated.

2) the e9x is overrated and BMW has fooled us during the entire life cycle of the car and faces a huge class action lawsuit.

Hmmm, I'm gonna wing it and go with door #1

[JoeyLeeBMW]

Not bad!

[ASAP]

The spread is accurate, the numbers are laughable at best.

[Rupes]

Holy crap, we've all been bamboozled! My e92 is only putting down 300 whp?! How come this took 7 years to surface?

I want a refund.

[gthal]

Originally Posted by FogCityM3

Defensive are we and reading WAY too much into my comments. I don't know if the spread is wrong (probably is as a % of base power, or the E9x is the fastest 300 whp car in history), but absolute level of both are wrong. My history calling into question veracity of dyno results goes a long way back. Just relaxxxx no one's taking the keys of your car away from you lol

I'm relaxed I was being a bit dramatic for dramatic purposes.

[dlbrooks18]

This is the lowest reading dyno I've seen yet, but as many have said the main thing here to look at is the disparity between the two generations. Also a lot of other cars are tested at this dyno and published results in mags or youtube so good comparison for future reference.

[E36toF30]

Originally Posted by Rupes

Holy crap, we've all been bamboozled! My e92 is only putting down 300 whp?! How come this took 7 years to surface?

I want a refund.

[M3ryder55]

The best thing to do is take an average of 3 independent dynos to get a rough idea. That's the lowest I've seen on a stock e9x m3... Usually the dynos I've seen range from about 330-360 stock, more so around 330-345.

U also gotta remember eas's dyno reads generous

But despite the numbers.. At 4500rpm the s55 makes more
Power than the s65 at 8k... Haha.. but wait the sound but the sound the sound!! Come on already haha this is wonderful

[Transfer]

Poor little S65. It tries so hard but those 4 liters of NA goodness just can't compete on the dyno, even at 8400 rpms.

[N.S.A]

Just for peoples information K&N store where they dyno this is in riverside county in a town near colton its like 90 to 100 degrees there so probably that's why it majors low on this turbo engine. But then again they dyno an 2014 M5 during this weather and got 630hp and 530lbs of torque.

[GrussGott]

Originally Posted by N.S.A

Just for peoples information K&N store where they dyno this is in riverside county in a town near colton its like 90 to 100 degrees there so probably that's why it majors low on this turbo engine. But then again they dyno an 2014 M5 during this weather and got 630hp and 530lbs of torque.

It's the boost supposed to vary to account for that? keep in mind I have no idea what I"m talking about.

[N.S.A]

Originally Posted by GrussGott

It's the boost supposed to vary to account for that? keep in mind I have no idea what I"m talking about.

I have no idea. They showed this on a episode of ignition on you tube vs. a E63 amg

[M3 Esq]

So just to sum up this thread, a newer FI engine was compared to an older NA engine and the new FI engine made a lot more power. Shocker!

[Eddien123]

I won't deny the spread. I think we can all agree it's way faster than the E92 however I'm calling bullshit that the E92 only puts down 300 and that the f82 only puts down 350 when I've seen many many other dyno charts to counter that

[solstice]

Both cars are low about 30-40hp on this dyno compared to other numbers we've seen. It doesn't really matter what the numbers are or what the reasons are, temperature, poor calibration, poor fans or whatever. Again the important thing is that the new car makes 70hp more than the old. So whatever hp you think the S65 make, say 420 hp at the crank the S55 make 490 hp... craaaazy.