E36 M3 Dyno Sheet Library

[FAST98]

Well, if that's the case, perhaps he should contact AA to find out why the tune is causing the motor to run lean.

I would also suspect the oxegen sensors as possible culprites too, on an OBD1 car they are very important as they do most of the fuel mapping off of them. If you have over 50-75k miles on them its time for some new ones!

[ganseg]

This is in 5th at 80 degrees and 60% humidity. Stock tire size and gearing. Shark and possibly a special airbox. I don't see the airhorn that some have talked about removing from the US airboxes. Anyone have a pic of a Euro airbox that I could see if that is what i have?

[eurrofreak]

Year: 1995 (120k)
Mods: S52 obd1 with Dinan cai, stromung exhaust, software, 24 pound injectors, 540 mass air, RR throttle body, AA ssk and UUC underdrive pulleys.
Dyno Type: Dynojet
Dyno Conditions: 77F
Gear Dynoed: 4th
Peak HP: 235.6 rwhp
Peak Torque: 225.1 lbft

[HolmeSiR]

Year: 1995 (122k)
Mods: UUC System U,AA Track Pipe, Euro Header, Turner Chip
Dyno Type: Dynojet
Dyno Conditions: 103F
Gear Dynoed: 3rd
Peak HP: 209rwhp
Peak Torque: 195 lbft

[HolmeSiR]

Seems a bit on the low side....other than temp any other clues on why?

[eurrofreak]

The gear might have been wrong, My car had 225 in 3rd gear, but it still would be too low.

[HolmeSiR]

I tried 4th first and it was lower i think i've got an 02 sensor issue as the CEL likes to go on and off for some reason and came on for the 1st time since chip installation on the way to the dyno

[MIKe30]

this thread depresses me.

[eurrofreak]

swap time, sexy e30

[1sloE36]

1996 OBD II S52, CAI, Pullies, BBTB, M50, LTW Flywheel, Dinan Stg 3 Tune, Headers, "Track pipe", AA Gen III catback.
Done on a dynocom "Mustang" dyno, about 70 outside.

[czynot]

Year: 1999 M3 (36K miles)
Build date: 10/98
Mods: M50 Mani, CAI and Stromung
Dyno Type: Dynojet
Dyno Conditions: 89.94*F
Gear Dynoed: 3rd
Peak HP: 234.12 rwhp
Peak Torque: 222.92 lbft

[nathanh]

wow... not going to lie, most of you have dumped some good money into your cars and i'm not seeing much improvement off stock. f/I is starting to look really nice.

[Timmy67]

wow... not going to lie, most of you have dumped some good money into your cars and i'm not seeing much improvement off stock. f/I is starting to look really nice.

No doubt! I'm fortunate enough to have bought mine with all the extras... it feels good - but for the $, I would have just gone FI. Maybe I will yet.

[ganseg]

What A/F ratio should I be shooting for? I see other lightly modified cars look like mine - around 13.

[MIKe30]

swap time, sexy e30

yes, yes it is. currently working on it

wow... not going to lie, most of you have dumped some good money into your cars and i'm not seeing much improvement off stock. f/I is starting to look really nice.

you're not kidding. but it does seem that most of the posters in here are without aggressive cams. from what i've been reading it makes a hell of a difference...

[Hova]

wow... not going to lie, most of you have dumped some good money into your cars and i'm not seeing much improvement off stock. f/I is starting to look really nice.

its been said time and time before, the only mods worth it for a S52 would be a M50 manifold. Past that, maybe a CAI (but for free just debaffle it), and MAYBE a exhaust, and a LTW flywheel. Past that, yes almost anything is $$$$$$ for just 2hp increases.

[switlikbob]

its been said time and time before, the only mods worth it for a S52 would be a M50 manifold. Past that, maybe a CAI (but for free just debaffle it), and MAYBE a exhaust, and a LTW flywheel. Past that, yes almost anything is $$$$$$ for just 2hp increases.

Wow, you have no idea what you are talking about. There are endless possibilities for making an S52 car faster. You know, horsepower numbers don't always equal faster car. There are other ways to make your car "Faster", depending on what you want to make it "faster" for.

[dos Santos]

Year: 1998.5 M3 (109K miles)
Build date: 06/98
Mods: Cosmo Short Ram Intake & Borla Gen II Catback
Dyno Type: Land-And-Sea All-Wheel Drive (AWD) 2500 Pro Chassis Load Bearing Dyno ($110k, one of three in USA)
Dyno Conditions: low 80s
Gear Dynoed: 5th
Peak HP: 227 rwhp
Peak Torque: 239 lb/ft

[cky751]

this thread depresses me.

word, n/a e36 m3's are just not that fast. too bad F/I cost an arm and a leg. . my buddies e30 m50 is looking better everyday.

[rpm620]

M52 E30 is still not fast compared to a M3.

[Corky325]

M52 E30 is still not fast compared to a M3.

um, I pulled a stock M with my car. Im sure an e30 would also.

[cliffhopper]

Year: 1998.5 M3 (109K miles)
Build date: 06/98
Mods: Cosmo Short Ram Intake & Borla Gen II Catback
Dyno Type: Land-And-Sea All-Wheel Drive (AWD) 2500 Pro Chassis Load Bearing Dyno ($110k, one of three in USA)
Dyno Conditions: low 80s
Gear Dynoed: 5th
Peak HP: 227 rwhp
Peak Torque: 239 lb/ft

Are those your only mods? That seems a little high...

[dos Santos]

Are those your only mods? That seems a little high...

only mods. it's a beast. the dyno is the most accurate one you can buy too apparently.

for what its worth:

a) there is another guy on the GA forum who has a higher number from same mods. i think +3 hp or something like that. less torque though.
b) the other m3s done in the same week as my dyno were pulling 200/215, 215/220 type numbers using the same parameters as mine. so they weren't all pulling my numbers if you want to attribute it to the dyno.

[cliffhopper]

thats pretty crazy, are you the original owner or what, have you done all your maint?

[dos Santos]

thats pretty crazy, are you the original owner or what, have you done all your maint?

3rd owner, but i've had it for over 3 years. First owner was a radiologist, second was a psych grad student. Yeah, all the belts, pulleys, cooling, plugs, filters, etc. Also, I only run 5w30 oil. Never synthetic. Changed every 3k exactly. And everyone says that my engine runs much quieter than average.

But yeah, i'm in grad school (limited funds), so instead of engine mods, i do religious engine maintenance. For most people on here, it's opposite unfortunately.