RE: Jim C 2.8 dyno results (from Z3 list?)

[Land Shark <lndshrk@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

SOMEONE wrote ;)

(I can't tell which of this is Michael Greto and which
is the original poster.)

>Someone with a Z3 2.8 posted the following to the Z3 message board after
>upgrading to Jim C. software.  I think the Dinan intake is hurting and not
>helping as I know people are getting much better results than this with
>stock intake and exhaust. Also based on these tests it seems he has gotten
>~30HP from the intake and exhaust, I know that is pure BS.  Any other
>comments?

  Sure.. lots of them.. BEYOND the fact that I have repeatedly said
  that owners cannot reliably dyno an OBD-II upgrade because of the
  adaption concerns (and no one seems to listen to me.. they just 
  keep wasting money.. and the dynojet operators keep making money)

       What were the conditions of the original test.. because the
       "stock" HP is showing around 227HP.. a bit much for a 2.8l
       emissions motor rated out of the box at 190ish
   
       Well, totally unrealistic.. because we KNOW the exhaust doesnt
       do very much if anything on an OBD-II car besides sound.

       And I'll be nice and reserve comment on the intake *grin*

       What were the EXACT conditions of each test.. temp, pressure,
       etc etc.. are these actual or corrected #'s..

       Also, as had been made perfectly clear, the upgrade is designed
       for a (very close to) stock vehicle.. not a modified one..

       When we develop a "package" it's tested.. to work together!

>Assuming 15% drivetrain losses 223.8 hp and 236 ftlbs. 

  .... drivetrain losses are 21%.. not 15.. 

  (which makes your "stock" power some 227 HP)

>I have never trusted hp numbers with ECU upgrades in non turbo
>cars, and this only strengthens my doubts.

  Well, *my* ECU upgrades DO work.. and well..

  ("ECU upgrades" in turbo cars are a nobrainer.. you can raise boost
   with a mechanical mod on the wastegate!)

  Considering that they've been tested 100's of times and the large
  majority of tests show good and real gains, you'd be contradicted
  by the test data..

>I also expect that the other ECU's (Autothority, Dinan, etc) will 
>fair just as well on the dyno.

  Here, you'd not only be contradicted by the test data, but also
  by the race results..

  Anthony Cafik
  Manny Kruger
  Bob Tunnel
  TC Kline
  Carl Buckland
  Todd Green
  Dan Martinez
  Will Turner
  Ken Goldberg

 
  Of course, Bob T's only a three time SCCA champion in Sharked M3's
  (both OBD-1 and II!) so what would he know, right?!?

  Hint, they don't run on APE or Dinan software..

  Then there's that unamed (well, Josh knows who it is, I forgot)
  racer in the OBD-II M3 that was taking out SUPERCHARGED M3's with
  his sharked M3.. somewhere in CO I think..

>As you see, at no point did the post curve dip under the pre curve and also
>that the most notable gains were up to about 4400 rpms. ( also the worthless
>gains above 5500 rpms ).

  Worthless gains above 5500?? (the words "agent provocateur" comes to mind!)

  Post the numbers above 6000, wouldja...

  Because those "worthless gains" will save significant time off your
  0-60...

  On a BMW, the revs above 5500 aren't there to LOOK AT.. they are there
  to DRIVE..every day..

  Try this: 1st.. redline.. 2nd.. redline.. 3rd.. 

  Then get back to us....

  Jim C.

------------------------------