[Dynamic_m235]

I've been trying to search through the forums for an answer of what a stock AWD m235 puts to the wheels, does anybody know? I have an AWD m235 myself and yet to dyno it, just wondering what they make to the wheels. Thanks

[bryan_G01]

depends on dyno, fuel, air temp etc... but right around 285 on a dynojet, with 93, std with smoothing 5.

RWD is right at the 300 mark with 93.

A m2 is 325 with 93.

[jmwilson125]

Originally Posted by bryan_f22

depends on dyno, fuel, air temp etc... but right around 285 on a dynojet, with 93, std with smoothing 5.

RWD is right at the 300 mark with 93.

A m2 is 325 with 93.

Good info. Do you think that forthese specific cars the 15% loss rule is accurate for rwd?

[bryan_G01]

do the math...

What is the percentage increase/decrease
from 320 to 300 6.25% for rwd
and roughly 11% loss for awd best case.

I have seen up to 18% loss for awd in some cases. Again all depends on the variables.


It's usually 10-12% for rwd and 15-18% for awd.

When you add in a cold day vs hot and humid and different octanes if skews the numbers.

[Dynamic_m235]

Originally Posted by bryan_f22

depends on dyno, fuel, air temp etc... but right around 285 on a dynojet, with 93, std with smoothing 5.

RWD is right at the 300 mark with 93.

A m2 is 325 with 93.

Wow I was expecting between 240-260awhp, thank you!

[XutvJet]

Keep in mind these cars are underrated significantly. The N55 in the M235 is making more like 360hp/370tq vs the 320hp/330tq paper rating.

[aozer]

Originally Posted by XutvJet

Keep in mind these cars are underrated significantly. The N55 in the M235 is making more like 360hp/370tq vs the 320hp/330tq paper rating.

damn, is it that high? i was thinking maybe 340.

[3.0L]

For what it's worth:

[CAMOETO]

Originally Posted by 3.0L

For what it's worth:

That's not a WHP number is it? Is Dinan extrapolating HP at the crank?

[Dynamic_m235]

Originally Posted by 3.0L

For what it's worth:

This definitely helps lol, and that's for AWD?

[crabu2]

Originally Posted by 3.0L

For what it's worth:

I wanna see dyno numbers for another brand of vehicle done on the same dyno, on the same day to see how that car's numbers compare to what their manufacture advertises.

I say that because everyone says BMW ... these days European brand ... always underrates their power. I also only see before and after mod dyno numbers for the same vehicle. Which is good because it gives a reference point on how the mod did. But what it doesn't show is how accurate the dyno might be. For all we know, that dyno might be inflating power number by 10, 20%... So every time it makes people think ... whatever brand of car they test on it ... that their power numbers are underrated by the manufacture.

I guess I'm saying it's hard to believe that the 235, on that dyno, on that day, was producing more whp (340), than what BMW says is bhp. I could see whp match bhp because I figure a drivetrain loss of around 10%, but bmw underrating by about 10%, but to have a higher whp number? I find it hard to believe in this day and age...

But then again .... maybe it's like tow ratings were on trucks where manufactures basically made up number until a few years ago...

[3.0L]

Originally Posted by crabu2

I wanna see dyno numbers for another brand of vehicle done on the same dyno, on the same day to see how that car's numbers compare to what their manufacture advertises.

I say that because everyone says BMW ... these days European brand ... always underrates their power. I also only see before and after mod dyno numbers for the same vehicle. Which is good because it gives a reference point on how the mod did. But what it doesn't show is how accurate the dyno might be. For all we know, that dyno might be inflating power number by 10, 20%... So every time it makes people think ... whatever brand of car they test on it ... that their power numbers are underrated by the manufacture.

I guess I'm saying it's hard to believe that the 235, on that dyno, on that day, was producing more whp (340), than what BMW says is bhp. I could see whp match bhp because I figure a drivetrain loss of around 10%, but bmw underrating by about 10%, but to have a higher whp number? I find it hard to believe in this day and age...

But then again .... maybe it's like tow ratings were on trucks where manufactures basically made up number until a few years ago...

I don't think the chart mentions rear wheel HP, so I assume they are referring to HP at the flywheel.

Other supporting points include several, supposedly reputable, automotive magazines who were consistently seeing somewhere around 4.4 seconds 0 to 60 times; better than the factory claimed 4.8 seconds.

All of the above tends to support the notion that the N55 does indeed produce a bit more power than advertised. The stock power curve of 340 HP (at the crank) on the Dinan chart seems to support the better than expected track numbers. The ^20 HP and ^6 ft. lb. increases above factory are not huge, but very satisfying to know. And as I mentioned, the track performance seems to prove it.

[bryan_G01]

your posting crank numbers, not wheel.

my numbers are verified.

[bryan_G01]

Originally Posted by XutvJet

Keep in mind these cars are underrated significantly. The N55 in the M235 is making more like 360hp/370tq vs the 320hp/330tq paper rating.

Wrong. If that was the case, FBO with a tune people would be dynoing 450hp+.

[3.0L]

Originally Posted by XutvJet

Keep in mind these cars are underrated significantly. The N55 in the M235 is making more like 360hp/370tq vs the 320hp/330tq paper rating.

Uh, I don't think so. Dinan says they're seeing 340 HP and 336 lb. ft. at the crank, up slightly from the factory numbers. That 360 number is more like the M2.

[XutvJet]

Originally Posted by bryan_f22

Wrong. If that was the case, FBO with a tune people would be dynoing 450hp+.

No, I'm right. A Dynojet is exceptional at measuring power reliably and consistently. Dyno a car on Dynojet in Seattle and the same car on a Dynojet in Dallas and assuming the similar conditions (i.e., correction factors are the same), fuel, and gear, the numbers will be within a percent or two. Dynojets are incredibly simple measuring devices. Simply strap the car to the dyno, install the rpm pickup on a coil pack, put it in a higher gear, get up to 2000rpms and let her rip. There's no easy way to bias the numbers like you can on a load/brake type dyno like a Mustang dyno. Mustang dynos are great for tuning and Dynojets are great for measuring power.

SO, based on everything I've research, read, and seen since following the M235 in 2014, the M235 6MT will typically put down around 305-310whp and 320-325wtq stock on the Dynojet. There are many printouts of these dynos on the internet. Most gearheads consider a 15% drivetrain loss for a RWD manual. So simple math shows 305/.85= 359hp at the flywheel and 320/.85 = 376tq at the flywheel. So yes, BMW has underrated this motor significantly. It also explains why turbo BMWs tend to be quite a bit quicker than their paper rating suggest.

Mags have tested the 3,450lb M235 6MT to consistently run 13.3-13.4@106-107mph and these runs are on cars that had less than 2,000 miles. With some mileage, the cars would have certainly been even quicker and faster. The 1999-2002 Camaro Z28/SS was rated at 305hp/340tq however that car actually made around 305whp/330wtq at the wheels. So, basically the same power as the M235. Guess what, those F-Body cars weighed incredibly close to an M235 and pulled off eerily similar 1/4 mile ETs and MPHs.

The M2 is the same way. That car consistently shows 335whp/360wtq stock on the Dynojet. So it's actually making around 395hp/420tq. The 3,400lb 6MT M2 consistently tests in the 12.7@113mph range. It basically runs the same 1/4 mile ET and MPH as 435hp/400tq Mustang GT (current gen) that weighs a couple hundred pounds more.

A typical FBO M235 will see around ~360-370whp and ~390-400wtq. So yeah, it's about 425hp/465tq. It's not shocking seeing that those cars can run deep deep 12s at 115+mph.

[XutvJet]

Originally Posted by 3.0L

Uh, I don't think so. Dinan says they're seeing 340 HP and 336 lb. ft. at the crank, up slightly from the factory numbers. That 360 number is more like the M2.

Dinan's numbers are crank calculations and are conservative......just like BMW's.

[bryan_G01]

Only marketing ppl talk about crank hp which this thread is not.

We are talking about wheel hp.

That being said, why are you arguing and bringing up crank numbers?

[XutvJet]

Originally Posted by bryan_f22

Only marketing ppl talk about crank hp which this thread is not.

We are talking about wheel hp.

That being said, why are you arguing and bringing up crank numbers?

Go back and read my posts. I responded to a question about how BMW underrates the power. I quoted crank because that's what most people understand. You start talking about wheel power numbers and eyes go crossed as you try and explain what it means, different dynos, density altitude, etc.

I fully understand the correlation between crank number and wheel power numbers. I'm a numbers guy through and through and spent more time (and money) racing at the strip and on dynos with prior cars than I care to admit. It began back in the mid-1990s for me

I've provided my experience with Dynojets and other dynos, wheel power numbers, and how correlates to crank numbers and 1/4 mile numbers to provide clarity to the discussion. You can take it or leave it.

[3.0L]

Originally Posted by XutvJet

Dinan's numbers are crank calculations and are conservative......just like BMW's.

Maybe. But do remember Dinan is in business... to sell horsepower.

On the other hand, and as I mentioned previously, the numbers that stock M235i's lay down at the track tend to support the 340HP at the crank number for the weight of the car. Frankly, I'm not too interested in all of the claimed, tested or theoretical HP. I believe it's the timed 0 to 60 and 1/4 mile times that tell the final story.

[Mr Carrots]

I'm curious if there are numbers for the Xdrive m240i to compare. The B58s a little a stouter stock but I have no idea what the actual WHP numbers are.

[3.0L]

Originally Posted by Mr Carrots

I'm curious if there are numbers for the Xdrive m240i to compare. The B58s a little a stouter stock but I have no idea what the actual WHP numbers are.

Ha! At the end of the day, what really matters is who wins the race, whether it be 0 to 60 or the 1/4 mile. THAT is what counts. Right? Folks can play with HP or torque numbers all day, but... go to the track and read the numbers.