I saw this on another site, thought I would pass it along to you guys:

http://forum.e46fanatics.com/showthread.php?threadid=50286

sounds expensive, sounds like Dinan. But 28hp is pretty good.

the 3.91 differential is what I would be interested in.

I personally think that is too steep of a price for such little power gains.

Should be able to pick and choose what you want. I'm most likely going with the gearing, air intake and throttle body.:redspot

Originally posted by MCJ
Should be able to pick and choose what you want. I'm most likely going with the gearing, air intake and throttle body.:redspot

Remember, we have 6 thorttle bodies... and as a side note. I had a friend of mine who tried to install a DINAN throttle body on his E36 M3 and the damn throttle body would not work without the DINAN software... it kept throwing a cE light and putting the car in limphome mode.

Looks like DINAN has a way of making you buy everything. :rolleyes: I would personally look to other places before supercharging the engine to gain, 28hp.

28 hp gain at the crank!!! I would not pay any more than 1-2k for this mod.

21 ft-lbs, that a 9.1% increse, coupled with the 3.91 diff which is a 7.4% change. leads to about 16.5% more rear wheel torque.

And since torque is what accelerates cars, it should accelerate 16.5% faster assuming you can get enough grip.

Remember the Dinan S2 M5 is a 4.1 0-60 car, the M3 version looks like it could get close to 4 flat based on the dyno sheet and 3.91 rear.

Originally posted by Pinecone
21 ft-lbs, that a 9.1% increse, coupled with the 3.91 diff which is a 7.4% change. leads to about 16.5% more rear wheel torque.

And since torque is what accelerates cars, it should accelerate 16.5% faster assuming you can get enough grip.

Remember the Dinan S2 M5 is a 4.1 0-60 car, the M3 version looks like it could get close to 4 flat based on the dyno sheet and 3.91 rear.

In that case, count me in for the diff, exhaust, intake, software, and throttle bodies :)

21 ft-lbs, that a 9.1% increse, coupled with the 3.91 diff which is a 7.4% change. leads to about 16.5% more rear wheel torque.

And since torque is what accelerates cars, it should accelerate 16.5% faster assuming you can get enough grip.

Remember the Dinan S2 M5 is a 4.1 0-60 car, the M3 version looks like it could get close to 4 flat based on the dyno sheet and 3.91 rear.

:scratchchin: Interesting.

Last night I did an Excel spreadsheet of Dinan versus Stock Rear Wheel Torque (RWT).

The Dinan setup in 1st gear gives as much RWT at 2000 RPM as the stock setup does at 4500 RPM (torque peak). :redspot

This seesm to hold true across the gears. So imagine that your car at 2000 RPM accelerates like it does now at 4500 RPM and then IT GETS BETTER. :redspot :clap:

Oh, and at 7500 RPM it will still be accelerating like it does now at 4500 RPM (RWT about the same). :biglaughb

Sign me up. :b_blue:

Wow. I'm convinced!

Originally posted by Pinecone
21 ft-lbs, that a 9.1% increse, coupled with the 3.91 diff which is a 7.4% change. leads to about 16.5% more rear wheel torque.

And since torque is what accelerates cars, it should accelerate 16.5% faster assuming you can get enough grip.

Remember the Dinan S2 M5 is a 4.1 0-60 car, the M3 version looks like it could get close to 4 flat based on the dyno sheet and 3.91 rear.

I still think 21 tq gain "at the crank" is way too minimal for what it costs to get there. On top of that I would not count on that relatively small 21 tq number as Dinan claimed either. Yes they provided a dyno sheet. But my experience with Dinan has not been consistent with their claim so far. Since there are many E46 M3 owners in my area so I am sure I will get a chance to see it with my own eyes.

On the other hand, I do believe 3.91 upgrade will make noticeable difference. My 3.46 upgrade yielded about 10% increase and the difference was enough to be felt.

I'm kinda curious what a 3.64 to a 3.91 is going to do for the RPMs on the highway...

Originally posted by Kevlar
I'm kinda curious what a 3.64 to a 3.91 is going to do for the RPMs on the highway...

Well we are probably looking at a 3 mpg loss, and being about 1000 rpm higher then usal or thereabout.

1000rpm higher at same speed? that's 'bout 4000rpm in 6th gear on highway..... plus that means ave. 16.x mpg! now, i might think twice again for the rear end upgrade then.....:rolleyes:

Originally posted by LandShark
1000rpm higher at same speed? that's 'bout 4000rpm in 6th gear on highway..... plus that means ave. 16.x mpg! now, i might think twice again for the rear end upgrade then.....:rolleyes:

Come on, did you buy an m3 or a civic? :evil2

If I lose 3mpg on average, that means I'll be going to the gas station every other day instead of every third or fourth day now.

Originally posted by Kevlar
I'm kinda curious what a 3.64 to a 3.91 is going to do for the RPMs on the highway...

Increase it by 7.4%

So if you cruise at 3000 RPM now, the same speed would require 3222 RPM.

Or easier, add 74 RPM for every 1000 RPM you are running.

Originally posted by 00MRoadster
I still think 21 tq gain "at the crank" is way too minimal for what it costs to get there. On top of that I would not count on that relatively small 21 tq number as Dinan claimed either. Yes they provided a dyno sheet. But my experience with Dinan has not been consistent with their claim so far. Since there are many E46 M3 owners in my area so I am sure I will get a chance to see it with my own eyes.

On the other hand, I do believe 3.91 upgrade will make noticeable difference. My 3.46 upgrade yielded about 10% increase and the difference was enough to be felt.

Well we can only go on what they say, until they are proven wrong. And conasidering Nowack charges $12,000 to get the engine up by 40 HP on pump gas (60 with race gas), cost per additional HP on these engines (without going forced induction) is not going to be cheap.

If I lose 3mpg on average, that means I'll be going to the gas station every other day instead of every third or fourth day now.

I'm sure they will love the added business! It doesn't sound worth it unless you seriously track your car. For a daily driver it just doesn't seem worth it.

Originally posted by MDriver315
I'm sure they will love the added business! It doesn't sound worth it unless you seriously track your car. For a daily driver it just doesn't seem worth it.

Will be when a guy in an 03 cobra pulls up next to you and revs and you are able to keep pace with him :buttrock

Originally posted by Pinecone
Well we can only go on what they say, until they are proven wrong. And conasidering Nowack charges $12,000 to get the engine up by 40 HP on pump gas (60 with race gas), cost per additional HP on these engines (without going forced induction) is not going to be cheap.

Yeah, you are right. I am sure it will be HARD to squeeze any significant hp gain out of S54 in N/A route. In my opinion, modding the car in N/A route poses as much risk as FI route for S54s. Keeping the 11.5 CR in N/A or reducing it to 10.6 for FI. Which will be safer? Only time will tell.

However, I got 150+ rwhp gain on a Mustang dyno (about 400 rwhp now compare to stock's 253 rwhp before. And this translates to approximately 500 hp at the crank, and that's 180+ hp gain at the crank). So, to me, 28 hp gain at the crank does not sound impressive at all with that kind of price tag.

Hey, sticky2. I doubt "28 hp gain at the crank" will be enough advantage for E46 M3 to run against 03 Cobras. If I have to make a bet, I would put my money on 03 Cobras. Plus, all 03 cobra owners I've talked to, they all had at least pulley upgrade. We all know what that can do to 03 cobra. I love BMWs but they are losing their edge on performance area at this time. Will there be more competitive M cars? I sure hope so. But in meantime, American muscle cars are hitting back very strong in my opinion.

Originally posted by sticky2
Will be when a guy in an 03 cobra pulls up next to you and revs and you are able to keep pace with him :buttrock

I don't think that will be enough to run with a cobra either. :(

Well, you could also do the Evosport pulley upgrade to the S54, unless the Dinan kit includes that. :)

If you only got 253 RWHP stock, I wonder about your engine. S52 MZ3s have gotten around 240 RWHP. 253 with a 15% driveline loss is something like 297 crank HP.

As for your 500 crank HP, I seriously doubt your car has 20% driveline loss. 17% is about as high as it gets, and BMWs tend to be lower driveline losses.

I will be interested in how your car lasts. What boost are you running? 10.6 is still pretty high for a blown motor.

As for running with '03 Cobras, the entire package should put you in the ballpark of them. 0 - 60 in 4 flat is getting close to playing with ZO6s. :)

Originally posted by 00MRoadster
I love BMWs but they are losing their edge on performance area at this time. Will there be more competitive M cars? I sure hope so. But in meantime, American muscle cars are hitting back very strong in my opinion.

When did BMW ever have a competitive drag car?

As long as BMW continues to make cars with all the characteristics that they have up to this point I'll be happy.

Brian

Originally posted by MDriver315
I don't think that will be enough to run with a cobra either. :(

just being optimistic guys

I love BMWs but they are losing their edge on performance area at this time

I don't think that are losing their performance, but I do know what you mean. Where is the lightweightness (is that a word?) of the E30? I would like to see an E46 M3 model that could be ordered in a much lighter weight, with cloth seats, no radio, no climate control, no A/C.... etc. I think the CSL would be very nice, just give me a 6-speed.

Originally posted by Pinecone
Well, you could also do the Evosport pulley upgrade to the S54, unless the Dinan kit includes that. :)

If you only got 253 RWHP stock, I wonder about your engine. S52 MZ3s have gotten around 240 RWHP. 253 with a 15% driveline loss is something like 297 crank HP.

As for your 500 crank HP, I seriously doubt your car has 20% driveline loss. 17% is about as high as it gets, and BMWs tend to be lower driveline losses.

I will be interested in how your car lasts. What boost are you running? 10.6 is still pretty high for a blown motor.

As for running with '03 Cobras, the entire package should put you in the ballpark of them. 0 - 60 in 4 flat is getting close to playing with ZO6s. :)

Yes, my S54 could be the weakest S54 ever produced. But your speculated numbers are way too optimistic. Have you ever dyno your M3 yet? If you have, did you dyno it on a dynojet or Mustang? What did it put down?

S52 M Roadster with Shark injector put down around 210 rwhp on the same dyno machine (Phillip's M Roadster aka ///M Roadster). If you have any S52 M Roadster/Coupe putting down as much as 240+ rwhp, either that dyno machine is way too encouraging or you got a freak S52 motor.

Since you live in MD, I suggest you to put your car on a "Mustang" dyno at Curry's and tell us what you put down (just in case you haven't dynoed your car and imagining all these high numbers). For your information, Viper GTS put down 370 on the same dyno machine.

I've put down 253 with supersprint and Dinan Stage I software. That's about 20% loss for me. So when I put down 400 rwhp, I speculate 500 at the crank naturally. I haven't seen any E46 M3 dyno numbers on a Mustang dyno yet. So I will be very intersted.

I hope you are not just imagining all these optimistic numbers with bolt ons as they are advertized by manufacturers. I will trust that our members here have at least one or two dyno readings to make a such bold claim to back it up?

Originally posted by 00MRoadster
Yes, my S54 could be the weakest S54 ever produced. But your speculated numbers are way too optimistic. Have you ever dyno your M3 yet? If you have, did you dyno it on a dynojet or Mustang? What did it put down?

S52 M Roadster with Shark injector put down around 210 rwhp on the same dyno machine (Phillip's M Roadster aka ///M Roadster). If you have any S52 M Roadster/Coupe putting down as much as 240+ rwhp, either that dyno machine is way too encouraging or you got a freak S52 motor.

Since you live in MD, I suggest you to put your car on a "Mustang" dyno at Curry's and tell us what you put down (just in case you haven't dynoed your car and imagining all these high numbers). For your information, Viper GTS put down 370 on the same dyno machine.

I've put down 253 with supersprint and Dinan Stage I software. That's about 20% loss for me. So when I put down 400 rwhp, I speculate 500 at the crank naturally. I haven't seen any E46 M3 dyno numbers on a Mustang dyno yet. So I will be very intersted.

I hope you are not just imagining all these optimistic numbers with bolt ons as they are advertized by manufacturers. I will trust that our members here have at least one or two dyno readings to make a such bold claim to back it up?

No, I have not dyno'd either car, yet. :) I am basing it on info from this and other boards. But I will see about getting both cars to Curry's this spring. That is one of the big problems with dyno numbers, you can't really compare one to another.

I have seen a bunch of posts, from people who are not BSers that got around 240 RWHP from S52 MZ3s. AFAIK they were mainly Dynojet runs.

BTW did you dyno before any mods?

You are correct. Mustang dyno machine shows less power than dynoject. It should not matter too much as long as you dyno your car from one shop though. After all, the whole point of modding our cars is to see/feel the difference. So as long as we use the same dyno machine, we should at least see the difference in power after each mod.

I hope you will come prepared when you come to Curry's for dyno. ;) It just may read lower numbers than you expected as all other cars did.

I did one dyno with Dinan Stage I software upgrade, Super Sprint exhaust, and 3.46 gear upgrade. I got something around 253 rwhp then. But as far as dynoing the car completely stock, it has not been done. It is true that my mods were costing hp instead of yielding at the point. :dunno

But hey, nothing wrong with being optimistic, dude, as long as you keep things in perspective and real. :buttrock

No problem. I understand all that. Al mods have to be tested on the same dyno to see what they really do. Or at least do a run before and after any mod on a single dyno to make sure you see what you are really getting.

Too bad it is so hard to pull the engine to do a real dyno run. :)