When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Thank you to Craig and Tony at B.I.P. for the excellent service. Car is running really strong and I'm amazed at what speeds my traction control light flashes now.
467WHP/554WTQ - Mods are:
84mm clutched blower pulley
Belt wrap kit (new S/C belt tensioner)
MBH headers
MBH 3" X-pipe mids
MBH Hi-flow cats
010 I/C pump wired to key
One step colder plugs
All else is stock...right down to the paper air filters. FYI, this DynoDynamics reads TQ like a Dynojet but is really stingy on the HP.
. FYI, this DynoDynamics reads TQ like a Dynojet but is really stingy on the HP.*
Umm.. A DD that reads the rwhp too low, but corrects rwtq to supposedly DynoJet levels at the same time on the same dyno reading hmm.. ok.. Is it in Santa's Cummins Diesel workshop? Now I've read it all...lol
HP is derived from your actual TQ reading, you multiply torque (in pound-feet) by engine speed (in RPM) and divide the product by 5,252, RPM is converted to "radians per second" and you can get from torque to horsepower.. If what BIP is saying about their DD? (I don't have the time to do the math or care to) the RWHP reading would be correct in balance to the RWTQ reading period. HP is just an equation of TQ.. Made up by Auto industries to sell more cars..
Since BIP's so concerned w/DJ numbers? Why not ditch this flawed DD & get them all done on a properly set DJ, apples to apples fellas.. All this assuming on what it'll make here? There? Means nada..
simple, my car, Jason's blown m5 and fasn8n all made 15% higher on the local mustang shops dynojet when compared to bips dynamics dyno. this result occurred more than once, so that is the comparison given. this was in the same weather conditions homey.
Last edited by chawkins2001; 11-10-2014 at 09:18 PM.
Looks like they forgot to adjust the fueling at 4k rpm no? (Not even kidding)
The AFR is fat at that spot. He reset adaptations but I don't know the result. The run right before it was on the same tune and didn't go flat there I'm use to Ford and LSx tuning where the AFR is board flat. Maybe that's more difficult on these.
The dyno the OP posted is jacked up. HP and Torque should always intersect at 5252. This one doesn't.
It looks like to me like the TQ is scaled, but the numbers are still the same at 5252 RPM. Reference the right side (TQ) at 5252, and then reference the left side at 5252. They both look to be approximately 460. This explains it much better:
It looks like to me like the TQ is scaled, but the numbers are still the same at 5252 RPM. Reference the right side (TQ) at 5252, and then reference the left side at 5252. They both look to be approximately 460. This explains it much better:
Nice link.. Agreed.. Though BIP's rationale that their DD's TQ #'s are adjusted to higher DJ % equivlent, while the HP was left 15% less/off isn't correct period. "HP is derived from your actual TQ reading"
Not doubting you made good gains after said work, just hit 1 of those DJ's on that list above in your area..
my bip tune afr is straight and flat and the other cars we tuned remotely are as well maybe because I take the air fuel readings from the street. I make 496hp on my dyno jet and on my buddies dyno dynamics 461hp
For a canned tune, the EC line is not bad at all. I haven't installed my tune yet, but if it comes out like that, I'll be pretty pleased.
What I find sorta difficult to wrap my head around is, that if all is the same, including AFR (say between 5250 and 5650), shouldn't the power be the same as well?
Nice link.. Agreed.. Though BIP's rationale that their DD's TQ #'s are adjusted to higher DJ % equivlent, while the HP was left 15% less/off isn't correct period. "HP is derived from your actual TQ reading"
I hear you my friend, and agree on how HP is derived from TQ.
I should clarify that at no time during my appointment did Buckhead mention DJ equivalents or conversions, nor did they try and make excuses for their dyno reading low HP. That was me speculating in my OP that their TQ readings are more inline with DJ. I don't think I had thought it through very well.
I had seen previously that stock E55s make 360-370 on this dyno, so wasn't concerned with my numbers as much as the tuning properties of the DD being a load based dyno.
my bip tune afr is straight and flat and the other cars we tuned remotely are as well maybe because I take the air fuel readings from the street. I make 496hp on my dyno jet and on my buddies dyno dynamics 461hp
For a canned tune, the EC line is not bad at all. I haven't installed my tune yet, but if it comes out like that, I'll be pretty pleased.
What I find sorta difficult to wrap my head around is, that if all is the same, including AFR (say between 5250 and 5650), shouldn't the power be the same as well?
Possibly better cool down (lower charge temp) or more spark?
11-10-2014, 12:52 PM
Now I've read it all...lol
that is a decent dip for nearly 500 rpm's
I'm use to Ford and LSx tuning where the AFR is board flat. Maybe that's more difficult on these.
Though BIP's rationale that their DD's TQ #'s are adjusted to higher DJ % equivlent, while the HP was left 15% less/off isn't correct period. "HP is derived from your actual TQ reading"
