BSR & Rubbish power at the wheels

[t5_monkey]

I got my car dynoed yesterday.

It's a stage 3 BSR tune (downpipe, sports cat, high quality Bell intercooler, k&n air intake.)

Dyno readout is below - made 229 bhp at the wheels.

Quoted figure for BSR stage 3 is 278bhp at the flywheel, bear in mind i have a really good intercooler on too - is anyone else thinking BSR is full of *** to be claming that?


Not a mod done on the cheap and my car is Full main dealer service history, carefully maintained and 40,000 on the clock.

It's in perfect health and the dyno guy said that it was doing an occasional 'knock' in the midrange so this power curve is probably at the top end of what you can expect in its current configuration.

Was on a dyno with a good reputation for being reasonably accurate, 97 Ron fuel, 4 Degree ambient air temp.

http://i795.photobucket.com/albums/yy236/s40t5_ben/dyno_reading.jpg

Pencil etchings is Torque at the wheels.

Expert opinions appreciated!

[Yosser]

First off, I've read good and bad about AVA - but that can be said about pretty much every tuner.

Second, every rolling road will give differing results.

Third, overly optimistic power claims seem stock in trade for most ecu software suppliers/tuners.

Fourth, using the broad rule of thumb formulas for converting flywheel power to wheel power (from here (http://www.pumaracing.co.uk/POWER3.htm)) I calculate your wheel power should be 240.2 so you aren't that far away.

[p fandango]

i agree with Yosser i don't think your far off at all, BT lost 53bhp thru the transmission between crank & wheel bhp

i am curious about your intercooler. Although it may be a high quality one but is it a universal one you've made to fit or specially for your Volvo? I've seen people put expensive universal intercoolers on & had to almost double the pipework & twists to plumb it in which i think loses as much as they gain

[t5_monkey]

i agree with Yosser i don't think your far off at all, BT lost 53bhp thru the transmission between crank & wheel bhp

i am curious about your intercooler. Although it may be a high quality one but is it a universal one you've made to fit or specially for your Volvo? I've seen people put expensive universal intercoolers on & had to almost double the pipework & twists to plumb it in which i think loses as much as they gain

It's a bell intercooler - import from the USA and designed specifically for the car.

http://www.bellintercoolers.com/

good for 325bhp - the garage who fitted it commented it was a nice piece of kit.

The intercooler made a massive difference to the power at the top end when fitted (felt way quicker) so really I should be making the 278bhp at the flywheel pretty easily if the BSR figures hold up...

[Yosser]

The Bell intercooler is a proper kit for the car, see here (http://www.bellintercoolers.com/pages/S40Main.html).


From the same page you can also see their own dyno results which show a wheel figure of around 224, and that is on a car with (quote) " Running 15 psi of boost, ECU upgrade, 3.0” downpipe, lower restriction exhaust and cone-type air filter.."

Looks like your results are pretty much in line with theirs.

[t5_monkey]

The Bell intercooler is a proper kit for the car, see here (http://www.bellintercoolers.com/pages/S40Main.html).


From the same page you can also see their own dyno results which show a wheel figure of around 224, and that is on a car with (quote) " Running 15 psi of boost, ECU upgrade, 3.0” downpipe, lower restriction exhaust and cone-type air filter.."

Looks like your results are pretty much in line with theirs.

Ah cool - didn't remember that graph - been a fair while since I put the intercooler on.

The spec of the Bell test car is similar to mine (aside from an extra PSI or two)

that makes me feel a lot better - thanks!

[Wobbly Dave]

I've seen better results on remaps alone for the new 2.5L engine (just with a panel filter replacement)

Is this remapped yet?

One other thing - why does the graph start at 0 rpm?

[t5_monkey]

I've seen better results on remaps alone for the new 2.5L engine (just with a panel filter replacement)

Is this remapped yet?

One other thing - why does the graph start at 0 rpm?

you've seen better than 230bhp at the wheels on just a remap?

0rpm quotes 0 power, i think it's just the start value for the x axis - you'd have to ask AVA

Specs are quoted in the string

[Wobbly Dave]

250 - 260 crank - not sure of the whp. I will look into it and let you know.

[smithy]

you've seen better than 230bhp at the wheels on just a remap?

0rpm quotes 0 power, i think it's just the start value for the x axis - you'd have to ask AVA

Specs are quoted in the string

if i was you i would get intouch with bsr with your rr report.with the money you have spent you should have alot more power than that.my old 940t with a 15g fitted and chiped would be pushing those figuares just costing 350 pounds .seriously get intouch with bsr

[t5_monkey]

if i was you i would get intouch with bsr with your rr report.with the money you have spent you should have alot more power than that.my old 940t with a 15g fitted and chiped would be pushing those figuares just costing 350 pounds .seriously get intouch with bsr

I'll be in touch with BSR,

Ultimate power isn't the main thing as my business clients often see my car etc... however, I dislike being fed poor info from suppliers.

your 940 did have a bigger turbo fitter :) that will make quite a big difference!

However Don of Kalmer Union said he's never seen a focus ST (same engine) with more than 285 on the stock turbo (with good A/F ratios)... so I can live with 10bhp short of perfect - it's more the highly optimistic claims from BSR that dissapoints.

[Yosser]

the dyno guy said that it was doing an occasional 'knock' in the midrange.......

97 Ron fuel



Whay aren't you using 99 or 100? - I haven't used anything apart from V-Power since I got the car remapped.

As regards Dave saying he's seen 260 at the crank, that would likely equate to around 234 at the wheels so whats the problem?

Bear in mind (as per my first post) all rolling roads are not equal, and tuners will invariably publish a power figure that is optimistic.

Don't get distracted by the numbers. The shape of the curves and the way the car drives are the most important things.

[t5_monkey]

Whay aren't you using 99 or 100? - I haven't used anything apart from V-Power since I got the car remapped.

As regards Dave saying he's seen 260 at the crank, that would likely equate to around 234 at the wheels so whats the problem?

Bear in mind (as per my first post) all rolling roads are not equal, and tuners will invariably publish a power figure that is optimistic.

Don't get distracted by the numbers. The shape of the curves and the way the car drives are the most important things.

Dave said he'd seen 260 at the crank for a software remap - quite different from my specs (see top of the string.)

The problem is to do with the credibility of BSR - although there is always considerable room for interpretation, rules of thumb, fudges etc.. on dyno figures - it seems that on the balance on probabilities, BSR stage 3 for the S40 simply doesn't deliver what it claims to under ideal and/or BSR spec conditions. If I'd seen that dyno run before I'd purchased the BSR kit... would I have gone ahead? probably not - that's what it boils down to for me personally.

BSR recommends 97+ ron fuel for your car with a chip, I don't live near a Shell garage you can get to conveniently at the times I'm free to fill the car up so it's an occasional treat :)

[j@mie]

My V50 T5 made:

http://www.vpcuk.org/forums/showthread.php?t=25888

All i've done is panel filter and just the PPC upgrade.

I'd love a new intercooler, but can't find any to fit the s40/ v50... where did you gets yours from?

[t5_monkey]

My V50 T5 made:

http://www.vpcuk.org/forums/showthread.php?t=25888

All i've done is panel filter and just the PPC upgrade.

I'd love a new intercooler, but can't find any to fit the s40/ v50... where did you gets yours from?

What was your power at the wheels?

Bell intercoolers - the link is up in the thread - made a big big difference to the power at the top end on mine, would deffo recommend it.

[gmain1967]

Erm, I can't see these anywhere, so out of curiousity, what was the car delivering, on the same rolling road, as standard? Unless you genuinely know the "base" or start figure, then it's impossible to know what any chip/remap/mod has done, or not, as may be the case...

[Yosser]

The previous poster makes a reasonable comment about having a set of 'base' figures to start from.

I have this for my own car - i.e. RR data in standard trim, then remapped etc. All data gathered on the same RR so even if the actual figures are questioned then they are still relevant when viewed in relation to each other.

I understand that you feel misled by BSR, and if thats the case the you should contact them to see what they say. Their response would be interesting.

In reality, if you want a higher power output then keep going to different dynos until you get a result you like. I'm not being flippant or dismissive of your feelings, I just believe that unless you actually feel dissatisfied in the actual real world performance of the car then you shouldn't feel too deflated by these results. If you feel that the car isn't quite right, then you absolutely should pursue BSR for answers.

As an example, at the RR day in Manchester this time last year my car ran 267 @ the wheels. I don't believe for one minute that that is an accurate figure. My previous run (on another dyno) was about 20hp less, which is a bit more plausible.

Finally, if the car is knocking then you are losing performance so I would fill it up on V-Power (or equivalent) when you're near an appropriate filling station, or perhaps carry a bottle of a good quality octane booster to add to your regular fill ups.

[t5_monkey]

The previous poster makes a reasonable comment about having a set of 'base' figures to start from.

I have this for my own car - i.e. RR data in standard trim, then remapped etc. All data gathered on the same RR so even if the actual figures are questioned then they are still relevant when viewed in relation to each other.

I understand that you feel misled by BSR, and if thats the case the you should contact them to see what they say. Their response would be interesting.

In reality, if you want a higher power output then keep going to different dynos until you get a result you like. I'm not being flippant or dismissive of your feelings, I just believe that unless you actually feel dissatisfied in the actual real world performance of the car then you shouldn't feel too deflated by these results. If you feel that the car isn't quite right, then you absolutely should pursue BSR for answers.

As an example, at the RR day in Manchester this time last year my car ran 267 @ the wheels. I don't believe for one minute that that is an accurate figure. My previous run (on another dyno) was about 20hp less, which is a bit more plausible.

Finally, if the car is knocking then you are losing performance so I would fill it up on V-Power (or equivalent) when you're near an appropriate filling station, or perhaps carry a bottle of a good quality octane booster to add to your regular fill ups.

When I get around to another project I'll get it Rolling Roaded before I start (you live and learn - this is my first car, never got around to getting a car till I was 27)

The car runs fine and is seriously quick compared to most things on the road, especially in the midrange - however, I guess when you pay top dollar you want it do to "what is says on the tin" so to speak.

I went to the shell station today after work, I'll see how it feels on V-power

[gmain1967]

Well put yosser.

The other thing that should be taken into consideration IMO, is that even if you know the actual bhp/torque figures for the car prior to any work, the increase is likely to be proportional on that figure. That is to say that if a chip says "+35bhp", you need to equate that to the figure for the vehicle.

Taking my T4 as an example and assuming it puts out stock "200bhp", then the percentage increase would be 17.5%. So if the car was in fact only putting out say 185bhp, accounting for wear etc, then the realistically expected figure would be +32bhp. So instead of expecting to see 235bhp modified, a more realistic figure, assuming all other things equal (which they are not) would be 217bhp, quite a difference...

Personally, I have only had one car dyno'd, and that was because the tuner did it as part of a remap. Other than that, I have let my own judgement decide and how it feels to drive. That's the bottom line for me!

[siamblue]

As some others have aready stated, it's how the car performs, i bought my car with a dyno sheet that said 268 whp the car seemed quick but since then 6 months have passed and it has been slightly modded higher, now it feels a whole lot quicker and i still haven't a clue what the power it puts out, but i am very pleased with the way it performs on the butt dyno.
You will find in the car world people can say anything to sell things, but i go on reputation rather than the bull from the companies.
Gary

[Wobbly Dave]

Main thing is - are you happy with it? If not then there must be things that can be done. Look at weak actuator (incorrectly set ) - AFR running to hot? Who knows - I think it warrants further investigation.

[smithy]

I'll be in touch with BSR,

Ultimate power isn't the main thing as my business clients often see my car etc... however, I dislike being fed poor info from suppliers.

your 940 did have a bigger turbo fitter :) that will make quite a big difference!

However Don of Kalmer Union said he's never seen a focus ST (same engine) with more than 285 on the stock turbo (with good A/F ratios)... so I can live with 10bhp short of perfect - it's more the highly optimistic claims from BSR that dissapoints.

sorry mate im rubbish at writing my car has a different spec to this 1 im refering too this 940t has a t5 15g fitted .i only said get intouch with bsr for false advertsising in the power figuares .but at the end of the day as long as your happy that is what counts

[johnm]

1 thing for sure mate... Ur's doesn't hang around.. I really need to get mine dyno'd now to see what it acctually puttin out not just with the other guy's claim it put out last time it was dyno'd.

Thanks for making mine now feel sooooo slow lol :frown:

I'll be back though. i will beat you at some point!!!

[stevie69]

pretty much stayed with mine to..

[t5_monkey]

pretty much stayed with mine to..

I eased off when I was following you up the slip road at 70 *cough* cause I realised I was probably going the wrong way to calledar!


1 thing for sure mate... Ur's doesn't hang around.. I really need to get mine dyno'd now to see what it acctually puttin out not just with the other guy's claim it put out last time it was dyno'd.

Thanks for making mine now feel sooooo slow lol :frown:

I'll be back though. i will beat you at some point!!!

If you come back after I get a Focus RS.2 Turbo on it, I'll have another 40bhp at the wheels :)

[LeeT5]

BSR recommends 97+ ron fuel for your car with a chip, I don't live near a Shell garage you can get to conveniently at the times I'm free to fill the car up so it's an occasional treat :)

Once BSR ppc is installed then you should be running at least 97 octane fuel 100% of the time not mixing it with 95 ron. Fill up at a Tesco garage with 99 octane 'Super unleaded', i bet any money you like your figures will go up. The engine will not knock or pink for a start. Pre detonation is really not good and WILL adversely affect your results. It will suck power if knocking, guaranteed!
Always use the same grade, never mix.

[t5_monkey]

Once BSR ppc is installed then you should be running at least 97 octane fuel 100% of the time not mixing it with 95 ron. Fill up at a Tesco garage with 99 octane 'Super unleaded', i bet any money you like your figures will go up. The engine will not knock or pink for a start. Pre detonation is really not good and WILL adversely affect your results. It will suck power if knocking, guaranteed!
Always use the same grade, never mix.

I always run 97+ the mention of Shell referred to the 99 octane they have there. (shell optimax I think) - never run a tank of 95 since I had the car modified.

The knocking reference reffered to when it was Dynoe'd running 97 octane.

I tried Shell optimax recently and it seems to pull more strongly than with regular 97, I didn't think there'd be much difference but was advised to use Shell optimax & its definitely noticeable between 97 and 99 - so will be using Shell optimax wherever possible in future!

[LeeT5]

I always run 97+ the mention of Shell referred to the 99 octane they have there. (shell optimax I think) - never run a tank of 95 since I had the car modified.

The knocking reference reffered to when it was Dynoe'd running 97 octane.

I tried Shell optimax recently and it seems to pull more strongly than with regular 97, I didn't think there'd be much difference but was advised to use Shell optimax & its definitely noticeable between 97 and 99 - so will be using Shell optimax wherever possible in future!

Of course you will notice a difference! It's 99 octane for a reason. Ferrari wouldn't have poured millions into developing it for their F1 cars if it wasn't gonna make any difference. Hense also why it's so expensive at the pumps. Anyway, you get what you pay for. I only use V-power or Tesco super unleaded if i can't get to a Shell. Also i have just been upgraded to Shell V-power club, so double the points and double the rewards :)

[Chad]

shell v-power would be best to run it on, and you will find a difference between the tesco 99ron and the v-power.

[LeeT5]

shell v-power would be best to run it on, and you will find a difference between the tesco 99ron and the v-power.

Really? I don't. Maybe on paper i suppose.

[t5_monkey]

The difference between 95, 97 and 99 seems to be more noticeable the higher the state of tune - never tried comparing types off 99ron.

I remember seeing something on 5th gear where they did compare all of the fuels on a Subaru STI on the treadmill - 95 to 97 gave a big power hike, 97 to 99 a little, and shell got another 2-3% torque in the midrange compared to the others.

[jardon]

Ben, I agree with all the posts about your dyno plot. It doesn't mean a lot without a "before" to compare with. If your car feels quicker and drives nicely then don't get to hung up on the numbers. A nice way of gauging how well you've done is to attend a dyno day and compare your self to similar spec vehicles.

The BSR numbers quoted are optimistic.

Knock is an issue for many people on dynos as your intake air temperature will rise sharply - no fan is going to supply cool air fast enough to mirror what happens on the road. It may be worth investigating whether this occurs on the road but I'm out of my depth on what bit of kit you'd need (VCT/VIDA?). My car performs significantly better if I run 100% meth injection rather than diluting it with water. The higher octane is more knock resistant and i get the benefit of all the ignition advance my car is mapped for. So yes, run super unleaded - I find no difference between brands.

[Chad]

Really? I don't. Maybe on paper i suppose.

you will find a difference if the car is remapped...............my car wouldnt hit past 1.0bar when my dad forgot to fill up from shell and he had to fill up using tesco 99ron.

As soon as he got back to birmingham, it only had approx 30 miles left in the tank as he only put enough in to get back and fill up with shell v-power. A soon as i put shell v-power in my car hitting the 1.35bar peak again and wouldnt drop below 1.2bar.

quite a few others have noticed a difference, on other forums too....

hardly noticable on a standard car.....

[t5_monkey]

you will find a difference if the car is remapped...............my car wouldnt hit past 1.0bar when my dad forgot to fill up from shell and he had to fill up using tesco 99ron.

As soon as he got back to birmingham, it only had approx 30 miles left in the tank as he only put enough in to get back and fill up with shell v-power. A soon as i put shell v-power in my car hitting the 1.35bar peak again and wouldnt drop below 1.2bar.

quite a few others have noticed a difference, on other forums too....

hardly noticable on a standard car.....

I noticed a big difference when I put in Shell V-Power - definitely pulls harder, esp lower in the rev range.