E36 M3 poer output : I WAS RIGHT ALL ALONG

[CA Automotive UK]

HI

for the past few years I have been upsetting E36 M3 owners ( myself included at first ) who enquire about power upgrades that their evo never produced 321 bhp or anywhere near , and that they are lucky to get 285 out of a standard motor , and that yes this is VERY close to the 3. 0 litre car .

No one knows why this is , we all know true power figures are normally down on manufacturer claims but this one is a bit excessive . And as I know from experience , a standard Evo will not really pull away from a 3.0 litre , usually .

As you can imagine this has often caused arguments and hurt pride in fellow owners ,most of them refusing to believe it , Ostrich - like .Even within CA's own "camp" , where one of the guys had an evo smg with chip , de kat , exhaust and filter and a certain local very well known rolling road was showing the car at 343 bhp . Me and the owner have been arguing ever since about the innacuracy of this , as you just cant get 60 bhp from such minor mods .

Well , again I have been proved right :cool: , if you see latest issue of TOTAL BMW magazine you will see a number of tuned and standard evo and non - evo cars have been dyno'd ...not one standard one got over 285 bhp and not one tuned one got over 305 bhp . I rest my case .
Now when you consider that at lowest boost my e36 m3 evo turbo produced 390 ish bhp , that does not seem so bad now that you realise it represents + 110 bhp over standard .

so there .... :o :D

[Durgesh]

Nice One!

Its always going to be a hard one, as everyone uses value's from different Dyno's and weather conditions etc.

Takes a feature like this, all done on the same day at the same place, to really set things straight.

Durgesh

[CA Automotive UK]

....and dont even get me started on E46 M3 and CSL ..... ;)

[adood84]

so which is accurate manufacturer's claims or dyno tests ?I would think manufactures have state of the are equipment
I r remember somebody on here that the new M5 was dynoed and actually produced 533PS or something .

[CA Automotive UK]

the e36 m3 is a particularly bad ( good ?/) example of manufacturer power figures not matching real world .

There is a rumour among german tuners that the S52 engine probably did reach 321 bhp ...once ; on a BMW bench dyno in a super chilled room , with a blueprinted zero- tolerance build engine with no pumps or attachments fitted , and running avgas :) true ....

[InvIs Inc]

hmmmm i scared to ask about the e46 m3

[Jazz]

Roy Evo's August edition has a article about tuning an e36 M3 to do the ring in 8 mins. They opted for a 3.0l as the experts they consoulted (Munich Legends & Powerstation)said the evo's never make close to there quoted 321 and the non evo engines are more stronger & reliable. The 10year old M3 GT that they got in the end produced 305bhp & 234lb at Powerstation

I have heard the same regarding the e46 power out puts and I recall Kelleners or Nowack claimed only 10% of all e39 M5 make the manufactures figures.

I don't think BM are the only manufacture who are guilty of this though.

Real world performance is always the way to go over engine dyno & RR flywheel figures. Power at the wheels is what important and thats what the rr is actually measuring. However people love the bigger flywheel figure as a) you can say how much over stock your making and b)it makes better pub talk.

Tell me more about your turbo :cool:

[CA Automotive UK]

agree with all that Jazz .

Just to throw more petrol in the fire , try this one , that I have also argued about for ages :
It is physically and mathematically impossible to accutately measure drivetrain resistance ( transmission loss ) on a rolling road and thus come up with accurate " at flywheel " corrected figure ...whatever mathematical formulas are used it is all just best guess .

I know this is a provocative statement , but true nonetheless ; Forgive me if I rant on abit here ( got some time on my hands :))
...remember on another post I told you we are fitting a csl type airbox and management system to a University of London professors E46 M3 , and that his job is to develop super diesel engines for merc and BMW ? Well we had this very conversation just a few days ago ( I love geeks , i dont care :)) and he agreed 100% . Its not that I am am a qualified dyno technician or anything , but I have researched this obsessively and seeked advice from highly qualified experts in this field ( and , with no offence I am sorry to say many dyno operators do NOT fall into that category ) .

There are a number of reasons why you cant accurately calculate transmission loss on a road dyno , but here is the main crunch , in relatively simple terms :

Power loss is normally measured at the end of a power run by disengaging the clutch and measuring the run down resistance and then applying a correction formula to get flywheel power . Just one thing ...when you depress the clutch you have disconnected the drive train from the engine, clutch and flywheel , the latter two of which form part of the drivetrain in the first place . So you are no way measuring power loss of the engine and drivetrain together , as one unit , which is what would be required .
Difficult to explain clearly in these short terms , but hope you get the idea .

A stripped engine on a bench dyno is the only way to truly measure flywheel or crank output .

Personally I prefer to compare the "at wheel " power figures , they are more real world and not subject to different dyno operators ' correction factors etc .

So ..dont pay too much attention to dyno corrected or flywheel figures , no guarantee as to accuracy .

Also watch out for the old trick of placing the ambient air temp sensor near the engine bayduring runs .....this gives impressively high "corrected " power figures cos the dyno "corrects " the power figure upward ,thinking it is an unusually hot day leading to some power loss .

also agreed that 3.0 l M3 cars seem stronger than evo models

[alpina527]

Good work Roy. Glad to see some real world figures.

[CA Automotive UK]

thanks Ian , I take that as a real compliment from you sir ;)

Jazz , for details on my e36 m3 turbo please see "customer gallery " on my website and the e36 M3 turbocharging section
let me know if you are after more info.

[Jazz]

I agree with you on calculating transmission loss and flywheel figures, they are guessitmates and should be taken with a pinch of salt. As you mention there are to many variables and it also makes comparing rr from different places a minefeld. The same car will produce a different result on the same rollers on differnt days, and will most diffently on different rollers.

I am also dubious of flywheel rr's provided by turners as they have a vested interest in providing the best possible figures. Seen guys go to a rr day and come back with mods as the demo car made xbhp, not calling anyone a crook but it can be used as a marketing tool.

Also I have found if you don't make the figures you where after, for whatever reason, you suddenly become unhappy with your car even though you were perfectly happy with it on the drive up. Seen people become obessed to obtain more power just because a graph on a slip of paper.

Think rr's have their place as digaonistic and mapping tools and punters shouldn't get hung up on the just the peak figures, real world performance is more than that.

Had a look at your M3 and very impressed with the specs :cool:

How is the car set up? For 1/4mile, track, fast road or the most difficult a good all rounder. What kind of boost you running and whats the boost threashold like?

I see have quite a lot of CF body panels, have you also stripped the interior?

[peppernick]

Can I add my ICE output to engine output? :D ....Reckon I would have 400BHP :cool: :cool:

[CA Automotive UK]

no Nick you cant ..what you need is to open that wallet and cough up for a supercharger conversion :)

Jazz , the turbo was a work in progress , we were going to try for 20 psi boost , bought all the pistons , steel rods etc ,but put it on back burner to get Alex s E46 M3 done .

Engine management were the biggest problems we had at first , and for along time we had a big stonking flat spot a full throttle coming on boost ; would almost headbutt windscreen at times :) Finally traced it to as simple a matter as the fact we had the fuel presure regulator mounted 90 degrees off vertical , causing a momentary cavitation when car suddenly demanded huge gobs of fuel .

Mid range was just like warp drive ...to me anyway :)

i may well be selling her whole or for parts , i am sad to believe me , but want to concentrate on other stuff , so anyone interested please pm me .

roy