[MT6]

     Featured on BIMMERPOST.com

The dyno results on stock G80 cars are amazing both run with full tank of 98 octane fuel

M3 is making 503 bhp
M3 Competition is at 545 bhp

[Forzanerazzurri]

That's crazy. The torque figure is a two generation delta too.

[forcefed]

Its funny how artificial this dyno graph looks, bmw is controlling every little bit of boost to get the dyno graph to look a certain way.

[Hit_Apex]

I think that's 98 RON - about 93 in the US - making this all that more impressive. Old news though but a nice setup for their future turbo upgrade vid.

[Mac Daddy]

On the other hand:

[Emtoo]

I want to see a M3 CS on the same dyno

[B_davis]

Why do they even attempt to show BHP... it's entirely interpolation

[T0RM3NT]

I may be wrong, but we're also talking metric hp too, right? He mentions expecting 510 hp from BMW, which is 503 hp non-metric here in the U.S. So, 545.6 metric hp = ~ 538 hp.

Please let me know if I'm wrong here...still learning.

Still, 35 hp more than claimed is alright with me!

[chris719]

Wake me up when someone runs one on an engine dyno to get a real number, not some estimated number with huge correction factors.

[thespeedy2series]

bmw just loves to understate their power figures which is better than other brands overstating them, so I don't mind. I wonder what my m240i will make

[samuraifuria]

Originally Posted by chris719

Wake me up when someone runs one on an engine dyno to get a real number, not some estimated number with huge correction factors.

Ok,i will wake you up...

[dbvallett]

Originally Posted by T0RM3NT

I may be wrong, but we're also talking metric hp too, right? He mentions expecting 510 hp from BMW, which is 503 hp non-metric here in the U.S. So, 545.6 metric hp = ~ 538 hp.

Please let me know if I'm wrong here...still learning.

Still, 35 hp more than claimed is alright with me!

The 2023’s were listed at 503hp from BMW, the 2024’s at 510ho (m3 Comp in both cases)

[TractionControlDelete]

I had assumed BMW was reporting WHP as the official numbers but clearly they’ve way beyond even that mark. Wow.

[DisonKlaud]

a genuine fking beast which i like very much

[Fugly M3]

So, they’re pulling higher than crank-rated at the wheels or at the crank? If the latter, those numbers aren’t that impressive.

[TJR_///M3]

EU Type Approval regulations have a conformity of production requirement. This is what it says for engines:
“During the tests to verify conformity of production, the power shall be measured at two engine speeds S1 and S2, corresponding respectively to the measurement points of maximum power and maximum torque accepted for type approval. At these two engine speeds, which are subject to a tolerance of ± 5 per cent, the net power measured at least one point within the ranges S1 ± 5 per cent and S2 ± 5 per cent shall not differ by more than ± 5 per cent from the approval figure.”

Non-compliance can result in withdrawal of type approval, which precludes sale of the vehicle:
“The approval granted in respect of a drive train type pursuant to this Regulation may be withdrawn if the requirements set forth above are not met or if a drive train bearing the approval mark does not conform to the type approved.”

So… do we really think BMW is consistently producing engines that are significantly (more then 5% ) above their type approval rating?

[chris719]

Originally Posted by TJR_///M3

EU Type Approval regulations have a conformity of production requirement. This is what it says for engines:
“During the tests to verify conformity of production, the power shall be measured at two engine speeds S1 and S2, corresponding respectively to the measurement points of maximum power and maximum torque accepted for type approval. At these two engine speeds, which are subject to a tolerance of ± 5 per cent, the net power measured at least one point within the ranges S1 ± 5 per cent and S2 ± 5 per cent shall not differ by more than ± 5 per cent from the approval figure.”

Non-compliance can result in withdrawal of type approval, which precludes sale of the vehicle:
“The approval granted in respect of a drive train type pursuant to this Regulation may be withdrawn if the requirements set forth above are not met or if a drive train bearing the approval mark does not conform to the type approved.”

So… do we really think BMW is consistently producing engines that are significantly (more then 5% ) above their type approval rating?

Exactly. It's far more likely that these chassis dynos are applying too much correction. They are good for relative numbers only IMO. It's also possible that BMW test conditions are not 25 C at sea level etc.

The turbo BMWs always perform very well in real drag races also, but this is plausibly explained by the fact that they have excellent area under the power curve. Peak torque and peak horsepower don't tell much of a story.

[DravitM3]

Big Power!! Keys coming very soon.

[OUGrad05]

Originally Posted by chris719

Exactly. It's far more likely that these chassis dynos are applying too much correction. They are good for relative numbers only IMO. It's also possible that BMW test conditions are not 25 C at sea level etc.

The turbo BMWs always perform very well in real drag races also, but this is plausibly explained by the fact that they have excellent area under the power curve. Peak torque and peak horsepower don't tell much of a story.

This guy horsepowers…

[Info@mad-us.com]

That curve is a thing of beauty.

[Higgs Boson]

BMW rates their engines using static point dyno testing

sweep tests give higher numbers

BMW doesn't underrate their numbers, the aftermarket consistently performs the test differently giving a different result

[eddj]

how come, according to this dyno, the M3 Comp is rated at the same whp rating as the g87 M2 based on previously run other dyno figures and the M3 base even at lower whp than the g87 M2 which is rated officially at 453 bhp by BMW.
Correct me if I am wrong, the g87 M2 was tested at around 460-470 whp right ?