2.0L valvetronic pushing 170hp?
- Thread starter beem
- Start date
Re: 2.0L valvetronic pushing 170hp?
Cool............
PM me when is the spin ya, if time permits i will join in......
cheers
pbear1973;569225 said:Hahaha jialat.. really wait long long liao lor..
Thanks bro! Looking forward to taking her out for a spin soon.
Cool............
PM me when is the spin ya, if time permits i will join in......
cheers
pbear1973
Well-Known Member
Re: 2.0L valvetronic pushing 170hp?
Hi bros,
As promised, the dyno chart. Gain of 16.6bhp/24.5Nm. Interestingly this is very, very close to what another tuner promised me, meaning that these figures are typical for a DI N46B20B engine. The torque now climbs quite a bit earlier. Interestingly the LCI engine apparently has built in throttle boost capability, so the tuner tweaked that for me too so I don't need to get SB or Pivot 3Drive.
In any case with the new Eisenmanns the engine seems to be more free-revving.. And the sound! My 4-potter no longer screams like a girl at high revs.
Ok, enough talk. Dyno chart time!!
Hi bros,
As promised, the dyno chart. Gain of 16.6bhp/24.5Nm. Interestingly this is very, very close to what another tuner promised me, meaning that these figures are typical for a DI N46B20B engine. The torque now climbs quite a bit earlier. Interestingly the LCI engine apparently has built in throttle boost capability, so the tuner tweaked that for me too so I don't need to get SB or Pivot 3Drive.
In any case with the new Eisenmanns the engine seems to be more free-revving.. And the sound! My 4-potter no longer screams like a girl at high revs.
Ok, enough talk. Dyno chart time!!
Last edited by a moderator:
wt_know
Well-Known Member
Re: 2.0L valvetronic pushing 170hp?
after looking at chersen and pbear1973 dyno chart, does that mean BMW cheats on their factory dyno?
i'm not refering to power loss. just comparing engine power the difference is > 25bhp ! it's like making a decision to buy 318 or 320 (1 notch up)
320i, 156bhp vs 128bhp (-28bhp)
318i, 136bhp vs 100bhp (-36bhp)
even after tuning (so called fully optimized) still not able to attain factory dyno result. some might say the difference could be due to climate but BMW factory test their car in a room with various climate setting from extreme cold to extreme hot, right.
ok. i'm naive to think that only japan/korea make cheats on their dyno but german marque?
furthermore, the variance is not just abit, it's out of acceptable range !
imagine that you bought a 1.25L coke and when you pour it out it is less by 18%
after looking at chersen and pbear1973 dyno chart, does that mean BMW cheats on their factory dyno?
i'm not refering to power loss. just comparing engine power the difference is > 25bhp ! it's like making a decision to buy 318 or 320 (1 notch up)
320i, 156bhp vs 128bhp (-28bhp)
318i, 136bhp vs 100bhp (-36bhp)
even after tuning (so called fully optimized) still not able to attain factory dyno result. some might say the difference could be due to climate but BMW factory test their car in a room with various climate setting from extreme cold to extreme hot, right.
ok. i'm naive to think that only japan/korea make cheats on their dyno but german marque?
furthermore, the variance is not just abit, it's out of acceptable range !
imagine that you bought a 1.25L coke and when you pour it out it is less by 18%
Last edited by a moderator:
Re: 2.0L valvetronic pushing 170hp?
So, based on dyno chart, we can conclude that it is N46B20 & not N43B20.
Factory number could be crank rather than wheel. If it is crank, it should be there about due to loss in long shaft & rear differential.wt_know;569351 said:
So, based on dyno chart, we can conclude that it is N46B20 & not N43B20.
chershen
Well-Known Member
Re: 2.0L valvetronic pushing 170hp?
as pointed out by wt, the crank power is the motor power on the chart. in my thread, i was quite shocked at the difference also. but looking at it from another angle, maybe the figures quoted by BMW is the theoretical figures based on their superb German engineering mathematics?
( :
but frankly, end of the day, the drive is what matters most. the drive now is really very enjoyable now, the tuning coupled with the eisenmann.
as pointed out by wt, the crank power is the motor power on the chart. in my thread, i was quite shocked at the difference also. but looking at it from another angle, maybe the figures quoted by BMW is the theoretical figures based on their superb German engineering mathematics?
( :
but frankly, end of the day, the drive is what matters most. the drive now is really very enjoyable now, the tuning coupled with the eisenmann.
wt_know
Well-Known Member
Re: 2.0L valvetronic pushing 170hp?
haha ... cannot use mathematic equation and based on theory to formulate the power la.
it must be qualified and measured by lab test to put numbers on the specs.
your last statement is poisonous ... protective suit on to avoid poison
haha ... cannot use mathematic equation and based on theory to formulate the power la.
it must be qualified and measured by lab test to put numbers on the specs.
your last statement is poisonous ... protective suit on to avoid poison
chershen;569397 said:
Last edited by a moderator:
Re: 2.0L valvetronic pushing 170hp?
Very suprised with the consistently higher BMW claimed engine specs vs actual Dyno measurement... We should pursue this with BMW AG.
Felt cheated...all the while we thought we have 156hp engine...(at crank). The ambient temp could play a big part..
Very suprised with the consistently higher BMW claimed engine specs vs actual Dyno measurement... We should pursue this with BMW AG.
Felt cheated...all the while we thought we have 156hp engine...(at crank). The ambient temp could play a big part..
Last edited by a moderator:
pbear1973
Well-Known Member
Re: 2.0L valvetronic pushing 170hp?
I think a lot of factors play a part. In my case the engine parts are probably still very tight, having clocked under 2,000 km on them, and still having a sucky average FC of 8.5 or so km/l. Other factors too might be different testing protocols. Like I said, they're "creative" and may follow protocols that lead to higher readings.
Nic told me the only engine he's ever seen that actually shows the paper bhp is the N54 engine. All the other engines.. like ours lor.. buy 1.2 liter bottle of coke, end up with only 900ml.
zorro;569405 said:
I think a lot of factors play a part. In my case the engine parts are probably still very tight, having clocked under 2,000 km on them, and still having a sucky average FC of 8.5 or so km/l. Other factors too might be different testing protocols. Like I said, they're "creative" and may follow protocols that lead to higher readings.
Nic told me the only engine he's ever seen that actually shows the paper bhp is the N54 engine. All the other engines.. like ours lor.. buy 1.2 liter bottle of coke, end up with only 900ml.
wt_know
Well-Known Member
Re: 2.0L valvetronic pushing 170hp?
engine dyno ? hmm, that should do the trick.
engine dyno (swee swee) -> chasis (loss power) -> wheel (loss power) --> on the road (loss power)
1.25L coke really left with 1L nia (intentionally) .... the 0.25L (20%) is for you to feel shiok only hahaha
engine dyno ? hmm, that should do the trick.
engine dyno (swee swee) -> chasis (loss power) -> wheel (loss power) --> on the road (loss power)
1.25L coke really left with 1L nia (intentionally) .... the 0.25L (20%) is for you to feel shiok only hahaha
Last edited by a moderator:
