Dyno'ed BMS Piggyback vs Stock - real world results - not impressive at all

[LSM]

So I dyno'ed my stock M6 on a Mustang Dyno a couple weeks ago. The results were 545 wheel horsepower and 496 wheel Lb/Ft. with 15% correction that translated to 627HP and 570 lb/ft at the crank. A BMS piggy back was installed. I drove the car 400 miles for adaptation and retested. The test was done on the exact same dyno, around the same time of day, same dyno operator. The temps were the same. The gas used 91 Octane Premium (thats all we have in Cali) was also the same. My best run rendered 562 wheel horsepower and 524 lb/ft at the wheels, with 15% correction that translates to 646HP and 603 Lb/Ft at the crank. A gain of only 17Whp and 28 Wheel lb/ft (at the crank this is a gain of 19hp and 33lb/ft) I dont know if different cars will yield different results. These are my results and they are disappointing when claims are made of 50hp.

In my opinion for those gains this chip with all its risks of voided warranty is just not worth it at all. I will be getting a dinan flash. Erik from Autohaus Frankfurt has been in contact with them and they are close to releasing it. They have been doing a ton of R/D on M5's and M6's in all conditions including two different track days.

Dyno Result BMW M6 with BMS Piggy Back





Dyno Result BMW M6 Stock VS BMS Piggy Back Dyno

[Northern X5M]

I'd take dyno results with a grain of salt.
Real world track numbers are looking like 0.4 seconds and about 6MPH in the 1/4 mile, which is relatively impressive considering we are willing to pay $4000-$8000 for exhaust that has almost zero performance gains.

[LSM]

Originally Posted by Northern X5M

I'd take dyno results with a grain of salt.
Real world track numbers are looking like 0.4 seconds and about 6MPH in the 1/4 mile, which is relatively impressive.

Dyno is tangible...Real world is as well, I would venture to say more hp and torque translates to faster real world numbers. The car doesnt feel much faster barely noticed so wasn't really that surprised by dyno results

[DrKevM5]

BMS promises better maps in the future. I've been really happy with bang for the buck. I didn't really notice a difference until about 750 miles.

[Tom C]

Originally Posted by LSM

Dyno is tangible...Real world is as well, I would venture to say more hp and torque translates to faster real world numbers. The car doesnt feel much faster barely noticed so wasn't really that surprised by dyno results

I know someone who datalogged their F10 M5 with BMS tune to a 7.9s 60-130mph vbox run which was .6s better than without the tune. And the run with the tune was on a 1% greater incline than the other run. Maybe you need to do do more full throttle runs before the computer will adapt. Particularly useful might be doing the full throttle runs in the gear you are dynoing in.

[gmd2003]

Originally Posted by LSM

Dyno is tangible...Real world is as well, I would venture to say more hp and torque translates to faster real world numbers. The car doesnt feel much faster barely noticed so wasn't really that surprised by dyno results

LSM do you have a CP car by chance ?

[gmd2003]

Originally Posted by Tom C

I know someone who datalogged their F10 M5 with BMS tune to a 7.9s 60-130mph vbox run which was .6s better than without the tune. And the run with the tune was on a 1% greater incline than the other run. Maybe you need to do do more full throttle runs before the computer will adapt. Particularly useful might be doing the full throttle runs in the gear you are dynoing in.

I'll be a devils advocate . I've run 7.9 60-130 on my CP M6 with SS catted DP's with no slope advantage and matched the best GPS trap of Terry's test car by Vbox of 128+ and had a better ET 11.4 . I haven't seen enough to make me want to install one personally , and certainly not to be a guinea pig on a CP tune car . The one BMS data point that does impress me is Greenturboboost's runs on 91 octane . At least Terry actually is testing on the car now . Hopefully more options to come , but too many unknowns to risk a 40k motor for minimal gains in my car . I doubt id pick up much over the CP tune .
George

[URBAN LEGEND]

Originally Posted by Northern X5M

considering we are willing to pay $4000-$8000 for exhaust that has almost zero performance gains.

Not me. NEVER.

[DrKevM5]

^This^

[Mike@N54Tuning.com]

91 octane is fairly awful stuff. To gain 17whp on a mustang load dyno isn't bad at all. As was stated some of those exhaust systems (that you can't remove at home and really will void your warranty) add zero hp. Also keep in mind the DME has various protections built in and will lower boost and/or timing if the octane is not sufficient for the targeted power levels, if not enough air is flowing across the cooling system, etc.

I saw another Stage1 owner just ran 11.3@127 in socal over the weekend. The difference is he spiked his fuel with higher octane I think.

Mike

[greentrbo95gst]

Originally Posted by Mike@N54Tuning.com

91 octane is fairly awful stuff. To gain 17whp on a mustang load dyno isn't bad at all. As was stated some of those exhaust systems (that you can't remove at home and really will void your warranty) add zero hp. Also keep in mind the DME has various protections built in and will lower boost and/or timing if the octane is not sufficient for the targeted power levels, if not enough air is flowing across the cooling system, etc.

I saw another Stage1 owner just ran 11.3@127 in socal over the weekend. The difference is he spiked his fuel with higher octane I think.

Mike

Yes, 17 whp on a mustang dyno is closer to 30 whp on a dynojet. With that said, BMS is really all you need to be happy.
If you are referring to my run, I was planning to run 109 octane, but ended up running 3/4th of a tank of 91 and at that point it was not worth wasting money on race gas. I needed to get a run on 91 so I have a reference point when I go back. I probably did 8 runs total with the main purpose of finding the best technique.
I am going back on 109, Mickey Thompsons Et streets and RPI scoops.

[Tom C]

Originally Posted by gmd2003

I'll be a devils advocate . I've run 7.9 60-130 on my CP M6 with SS catted DP's with no slope advantage and matched the best GPS trap of Terry's test car by Vbox of 128+ and had a better ET 11.4 . I haven't seen enough to make me want to install one personally , and certainly not to be a guinea pig on a CP tune car . The one BMS data point that does impress me is Greenturboboost's runs on 91 octane . At least Terry actually is testing on the car now . Hopefully more options to come , but too many unknowns to risk a 40k motor for minimal gains in my car . I doubt id pick up much over the CP tune .
George

But you would see gains IN ADDITION to your CP tune as it would just be increasing whatever boost you have. Honestly, 2 to 3 psi of boost is very little over stock compared to what other tunes are doing on other platforms.. Your car is very fast but you also have an M6 which has been shown to be faster than an M5 stock for stock. So it doesn't make sense for you to directly compare the two. There is an M6 (non-CP) running downpipes and BMS tune trapping 128mph at the track which is probably a 130mph GPS trap (just the other day my GPS traps were 1 to 2 mph higher than the timeslips for the same lane).

[gmd2003]

Originally Posted by Tom C

But you would see gains IN ADDITION to your CP tune as it would just be increasing whatever boost you have. Honestly, 2 to 3 psi of boost is very little over stock compared to what other tunes are doing on other platforms.. Your car is very fast but you also have an M6 which has been shown to be faster than an M5 stock for stock. So it doesn't make sense for you to directly compare the two. There is an M6 (non-CP) running downpipes and BMS tune trapping 128mph at the track which is probably a 130mph GPS trap (just the other day my GPS traps were 1 to 2 mph higher than the timeslips for the same lane).

He has full catless DP's and is running a Custom aggressive map on the BMS with race gas ... . Not apples to apples either . The CP is running more boost than stock and is def holding it out sig longer than stock , there is no telling what would happen tricking it into running more . It may make more , it may not , depends on the nature of the changes to the CP tune vs OEM . We've seen traps creep up on the 2014's CP's already . M5 CP's trapping 125 and M6 CP's trapping 126 stock . Im not doubting there is a gain , its just the risk/benefit isnt there for me given how fast my car already is .

[LSM]

Originally Posted by gmd2003

LSM do you have a CP car by chance ?

No standard M6...NO CP

[LSM]

Originally Posted by greentrbo95gst

Yes, 17 whp on a mustang dyno is closer to 30 whp on a dynojet. With that said, BMS is really all you need to be happy.
If you are referring to my run, I was planning to run 109 octane, but ended up running 3/4th of a tank of 91 and at that point it was not worth wasting money on race gas. I needed to get a run on 91 so I have a reference point when I go back. I probably did 8 runs total with the main purpose of finding the best technique.
I am going back on 109, Mickey Thompsons Et streets and RPI scoops.

The thing is my car is already about 20hp higher than most readings on a mustang dyno when it was stock. I used the same exact dyno at same time, same temp, same gas...I feel 17hp is pretty pathetic. Add to that I dont feel a huge difference in performance i really dont. Thats as honest as I can be...And yea I run 91 octane and did for both runs when stock and tuned...

[mwlmd]

Exhaust is all about sound. Performance not so much.

[gmd2003]

Originally Posted by LSM

The thing is my car is already about 20hp higher than most readings on a mustang dyno when it was stock. I used the same exact dyno at same time, same temp, same gas...I feel 17hp is pretty pathetic. Add to that I dont feel a huge difference in performance i really dont. Thats as honest as I can be...And yea I run 91 octane and did for both runs when stock and tuned...

The fact you use 91 makes sense, tricking the car inti running more boost puts it into a situation where there may be a LOT of knock going on limiting gains . It seems the HP numbers on newer M6's has been creeping up as well as their performance. As of now it would seem running a BMS with 91 octane is not a great idea . The weird thing is Greenturbos M5 , runnning well on 91 at the strip with BMS .

[Mike@N54Tuning.com]

Originally Posted by greentrbo95gst

Yes, 17 whp on a mustang dyno is closer to 30 whp on a dynojet. With that said, BMS is really all you need to be happy.
If you are referring to my run, I was planning to run 109 octane, but ended up running 3/4th of a tank of 91 and at that point it was not worth wasting money on race gas. I needed to get a run on 91 so I have a reference point when I go back. I probably did 8 runs total with the main purpose of finding the best technique.
I am going back on 109, Mickey Thompsons Et streets and RPI scoops.

Crazy! I wonder how much faster it would have been with race gas mixed in.

Looking at OP's dyno again it appears at around 5300rpm closer to 30whp over stock was gained. BMS says on 91 octane around 30whp on a dynojet is expected. So this doesn't seem completely off base to me. Especially considering MD brand dynos are not known for day to day consistency. The tuning will work even better with reduced exhaust back pressure so if more power is needed downpipes is the next mod to add. Using NOS octane booster to get up to 93 octane would also add another 10-15hp I bet.

I know OP has high hopes for Dinan tuning. Maybe they will come through for him. But if anyone here has been watching Dinan's N63 stuff it's been very disappointing. So much so that some N63 Dinan customers are now using the BMS Stage1 on top of it to add another 1psi or 1.5psi just to wake it up a bit.

Mike

[greentrbo95gst]

Originally Posted by Mike@N54Tuning.com

Crazy! I wonder how much faster it would have been with race gas mixed in.

Looking at OP's dyno again it appears at around 5300rpm closer to 30whp over stock was gained. BMS says on 91 octane around 30whp on a dynojet is expected. So this doesn't seem completely off base to me. Especially considering MD brand dynos are not known for day to day consistency. The tuning will work even better with reduced exhaust back pressure so if more power is needed downpipes is the next mod to add. Using NOS octane booster to get up to 93 octane would also add another 10-15hp I bet.

I know OP has high hopes for Dinan tuning. Maybe they will come through for him. But if anyone here has been watching Dinan's N63 stuff it's been very disappointing. So much so that some N63 Dinan customers are now using the BMS Stage1 on top of it to add another 1psi or 1.5psi just to wake it up a bit.

Mike

People really have to look at how much they are spending per 1hp gained. Value wise BMS is the best mod out there. It is conservative, but that speaks highly of Terry's wanting to keep our cars safe without knowing our platform. Now that he has one he will open it up a little more, but honestly if we mix a octane booster with 91 and we get a gain of 70 whp that sounds good to me for $449. Even 30whp for $449 is great.

[LSM]

Originally Posted by gmd2003

The fact you use 91 makes sense, tricking the car inti running more boost puts it into a situation where there may be a LOT of knock going on limiting gains . It seems the HP numbers on newer M6's has been creeping up as well as their performance. As of now it would seem running a BMS with 91 octane is not a great idea . The weird thing is Greenturbos M5 , runnning well on 91 at the strip with BMS .

Agree ....I wouldnt do it again. I am taking it off in a week. It s not worth the potential bad issues it may cause for such a small gain I can barely feel

[LSM]

Originally Posted by greentrbo95gst

People really have to look at how much they are spending per 1hp gained. Value wise BMS is the best mod out there. It is conservative, but that speaks highly of Terry's wanting to keep our cars safe without knowing our platform. Now that he has one he will open it up a little more, but honestly if we mix a octane booster with 91 and we get a gain of 70 whp that sounds good to me for $449. Even 30whp for $449 is great.

The question is ...Value Wise if something goes south, is it worth the 17hp if something goes wrong with the car. I say no way even if it was free

[greentrbo95gst]

Originally Posted by LSM

The question is ...Value Wise if something goes south, is it worth the 17hp if something goes wrong with the car. I say no way even if it was free

What do you mean? At 2.2 psi increase nothing will go south. If you take your car in, it takes 3 minutes to remove the piggyback.
We definitely take a big risk with modifying these cars when it comes to warranty, but her, we have a choice.