It has begun.....

[chilliwilli]

Impressive data indeed...

However, can't help but wonder that while all tunes carry potential risk of user/manufacturer error, i'd prefer the less worrisome if error were to ever present itself.

I found the below regarding dyno accuracy to be interesting...

Originally Posted by Stive Dinan

By far the most significant criticism I have for many dyno facilities is the use of fans that are simply too small for the job at hand. The fan size is so significant that we employ a very large unit that was actually designed for ventilation systems installed in high rise buildings! This powerful fan produces 38,000 cfm of air flow @ 75 MPH, which is still less than the 150 MPH air that a modern BMW might see at redline in 5th gear, but it certainly provides a closer to real-world scenario than the more common fans I have seen used in dyno facilities. It should be noted that 5th gear is used for our dyno testing because it is one to one, meaning that the input and output shafts are connected, reducing power losses and transmission wear. I have seen many examples of dyno facilities where low flow fans obtained from the local hardware store are employed, and even situations where there was no fan at all. A minimum of 15,000 cfm and preferably 40,000 cfm of air flow is required for proper heat exchanging. This type of fan will produce a 40-80 mph air discharge velocity.

A lack of air-flow during dyno testing will almost always alter the fuel mixture in the rich direction as the radiator cannot exchange enough heat, resulting in the computer compensating by retarding timing and richening the fuel mixture to prevent the engine from overheating and detonating. In addition, the intake air sensor will read substantially higher temperatures than that seen on the road with proper airflow. This issue is particularly important to address when testing high output cars like the M5 or M3, and even more so on forced induction cars with intercoolers as the heat exchanger is not able to cool as efficiently because of the reduced air flow. The engine compartment is normally flushed with air driving down the road, particularly at speed, cooling the manifolds and other associated engine components. Cooler engine components and lower air intake temperatures will result in a leaner air/fuel mixture and ignition timing will be advanced, invariably resulting in greater power on the road than on the dyno. In simpler terms, accurate measurements can only be achieved when the dyno tests are conducted in a manner that simulates the car driving down the road, in as much as is possible.

From 13:00 mark:

[donho]

Incrementals:


Can someone try the Dinan??? I would love to see if they make all the power they claim.

[TahoeM3]

What was the 0-100 time on that run? It would be nice to see it break 9 seconds, although realistically it's probably a bit higher than that.

[donho]

Originally Posted by TahoeM3

What was the 0-100 time on that run? It would be nice to see it break 9 seconds, although realistically it's probably a bit higher than that.

i will check it later. The passport saves all the runs. I will post all incrementals

what I do not get is I was reading about the Hamman Tycoon with supposedly 720HP???
It only ran 0-62 in 3.7 secs. I think they are full of shit.

[TahoeM3]

Well Hamann claims 670 hp for the Tycoon and Flash, with 0-62 of 4.2...but that is on those ridiculous 23" rims. So...with lighter, smaller wheels it would likely do better.

[donho]

Originally Posted by TahoeM3

Well Hamann claims 670 hp for the Tycoon and Flash, with 0-62 of 4.2...but that is on those ridiculous 23" rims. So...with lighter, smaller wheels it would likely do better.

my fault.

It was a PPP stage 3 with a claimed 720hp. and it looks like the road is slightly downhill.
BMW X6 M TTR PP-Performance Stage 3 in action - YouTube

[TahoeM3]

Did you get a chance to track down the incremental times?

[donho]

Not yet. We just had 2 days of non stop thunderstorms.
I will check it today.

[TahoeM3]

That's very impressive again and very useful info. Thanks for posting. That 0-100 time of 8.85 seconds is amazing and puts it ahead of some serious competition...that's getting close to 997.1 turbo and Z06 territory...and faster than all of the naturally aspirated Carrera/Carrera S models (minus GT3 and GT3RS), plus the M3, M5, R8 4.2, CTS-V, JKR, etc. Amazing for an SUV.

[donho]

This truck is a brute low end and mid range. that is why it can compete with all those other cars. But most cars with incrementals like this truck, have alot faster(MPH) trap speeds in the 1/4. I think maybe the AWD kills the top end?? The trick would be to put this engine into a car and see how it runs.
Oh wait??!! The new M5 has this engine. and thats what just might replace my E63. Unless the 2012 E63 twin turbo is impressive