[Fasteddy1]

Completely stock except for an M2 Exhaust. I don't know that the exhaust gains it any power at all though.

This is in the winter, 30 degrees outside on snow tires.

I have to say I am pretty impressed.

Pat

[Joe240]

I'd take those results with a grain of salt. Not sure how accurate the app truly is.

[bimmerfile]

I gotta get me a set of those snow tires...

[Kolyan2k]

Originally Posted by Joe240

I'd take those results with a grain of salt. Not sure how accurate the app truly is.

+1000

[Fasteddy1]

Why all the skepticism? BMW claims it will do 4.2. I used this app on my 2016 M235i and got consistent 4.4 times. My 240 feels quite a bit quicker than the 235 was.

Pat

[Kolyan2k]

Originally Posted by Fasteddy1

Why all the skepticism? BMW claims it will do 4.2. I used this app on my 2016 M235i and got consistent 4.4 times. My 240 feels quite a bit quicker than the 235 was.

Pat

Well 4.4 is the BMW claimed time for M235. I just dont see 3.8 happening on 240 with winter tires. If you got 3.8 on 240 then 235 should've been 4 flat

[Viffermike]

Originally Posted by Kolyan2k

I just dont see 3.8 happening on 240 with winter tires.

I do. Colder air is more dense, meaning the fuel/air mix will likely run more rich, heat soak is much less of an issue, and since the M240i is basically new the ECU hasn't 'learned' the driver's behavior well enough to adjust detrimentally to a launched run ...

... and these days, winter tires can be pretty darned grippy when warmed up and on dry pavement. They can be far better in those conditions than even the best A/S performance tire; that's been proven by independent testing. It's all about the ambient temp that the rubber performs best in.

[Kolyan2k]

Originally Posted by Viffermike

I do. Colder air is more dense, meaning the fuel/air mix will likely run more rich, heat soak is much less of an issue, and since the M240i is basically new the ECU hasn't 'learned' the driver's behavior well enough to adjust detrimentally to a launched run ...

... and these days, winter tires can be pretty darned grippy when warmed up and on dry pavement. They can be far better in those conditions than even the best A/S performance tire; that's been proven by independent testing. It's all about the ambient temp that the rubber performs best in.

Usually new cars post slower times then some with more miles. Air density is less of an issue on turbo cars unless he tested his m235i at 5k altitude Yes, performance winters are decent, ice/snow ones are pretty bad even for spirited driving

[Joe240]

I'm not doubting the rubber. I launched with my 240 on the DWS06 and had zero tire spin. Granted I'm on 235/265 so I'm sure it's a significant difference than his snow tires, but the xDrive system is quite amazing with putting the power down.

What I'm doubting is the 3.8 Seconds only because an app is never 100% accurate when it's relying solely on GPS coordinates and the algorithms because the gps is accurate to say 100ft or something like that. That means that it could easily be a difference of .2 seconds or more and it also depends on the signal strength (remember gps on a phone is based on towers, not satellite).

I'd be much less skeptical if this was through OBDII connection and monitoring like through JB4 or something, or maybe if it was trap speeds at a drag strip because those are using more accurate sensors (speedometer reading through OBDII or set distance and measuring time between 2 specific points).

I'm not trying to knock on your time OP, I'm just trying to be a little more reasonable about what could influence that time. I have a xDrive 240 and I want it to do 3.8 stock so bad, but I just don't feel it's there. Even knowing that the xDrive is putting 308whp down with just below freezing temps (my insoric dyno run).

JB4, I could definitely see pushing closer to 4seconds for sure. Other mods on top definitely hitting 3.8

[Fasteddy1]

Originally Posted by Viffermike

I do. Colder air is more dense, meaning the fuel/air mix will likely run more rich, heat soak is much less of an issue, and since the M240i is basically new the ECU hasn't 'learned' the driver's behavior well enough to adjust detrimentally to a launched run ...

... and these days, winter tires can be pretty darned grippy when warmed up and on dry pavement. They can be far better in those conditions than even the best A/S performance tire; that's been proven by independent testing. It's all about the ambient temp that the rubber performs best in.

I think you are absolutely right on the colder dense air and winter tires having good traction at that temp.

I wish I had done a run before I put on the M2 exhaust, That might be a bigger factor than I think. I can't say I noticed more power after putting that in, though it clearly is a little louder and looks less restrictive.

This photo shows the M2 exhaust on top of the M240, More bends and a longer resonator in the 240 exhaust.

[Fasteddy1]

Originally Posted by Joe240

I'm not doubting the rubber. I launched with my 240 on the DWS06 and had zero tire spin. Granted I'm on 235/265 so I'm sure it's a significant difference than his snow tires, but the xDrive system is quite amazing with putting the power down.

What I'm doubting is the 3.8 Seconds only because an app is never 100% accurate when it's relying solely on GPS coordinates and the algorithms because the gps is accurate to say 100ft or something like that. That means that it could easily be a difference of .2 seconds or more and it also depends on the signal strength (remember gps on a phone is based on towers, not satellite).

I'd be much less skeptical if this was through OBDII connection and monitoring like through JB4 or something, or maybe if it was trap speeds at a drag strip because those are using more accurate sensors (speedometer reading through OBDII or set distance and measuring time between 2 specific points).

I'm not trying to knock on your time OP, I'm just trying to be a little more reasonable about what could influence that time. I have a xDrive 240 and I want it to do 3.8 stock so bad, but I just don't feel it's there. Even knowing that the xDrive is putting 308whp down with just below freezing temps (my insoric dyno run).

JB4, I could definitely see pushing closer to 4seconds for sure. Other mods on top definitely hitting 3.8

Usually when BMW quotes times in literature it seems like most tests later are a little quicker. They quote 4.2 for the x240i xdrive so I was expecting around 4.0.

I tend to think that this is a very accurate system for 0-60. It knows when you take off and when you hit 60 MPH from in car sensors. I don't think it needs to use GPS for that. Are you saying the speedometer is based on gps readings?

Pat

[Fasteddy1]

One other thing to note is that BMW speedometers are known to read high. So a 0-60 run is likely only a 0-58 run....

Pat

[Joe240]

Originally Posted by Fasteddy1

Usually when BMW quotes times in literature it seems like most tests later are a little quicker. They quote 4.2 for the x240i xdrive so I was expecting around 4.0.

I tend to think that this is a very accurate system for 0-60. It knows when you take off and when you hit 60 MPH from in car sensors. I don't think it needs to use GPS for that. Are you saying the speedometer is based on gps readings?

Pat

No I didn't realize it interfaces with the car. I never used it before, but other apps use gps on the phone to track speed.

[Benandluna]

Hmm. 3.8 seems a little iffy. If you had a track slip I'd believe it.

[ny176]

Dang 3.8!! Auto or MT?

[Kolyan2k]

Originally Posted by ny176

Dang 3.8!! Auto or MT?

If it was anywhere near 4, it's obviously Auto

[Mr Carrots]

Originally Posted by Joe240

I'm not doubting the rubber. I launched with my 240 on the DWS06 and had zero tire spin. Granted I'm on 235/265 so I'm sure it's a significant difference than his snow tires, but the xDrive system is quite amazing with putting the power down.

What I'm doubting is the 3.8 Seconds only because an app is never 100% accurate when it's relying solely on GPS coordinates and the algorithms because the gps is accurate to say 100ft or something like that. That means that it could easily be a difference of .2 seconds or more and it also depends on the signal strength (remember gps on a phone is based on towers, not satellite).

I'd be much less skeptical if this was through OBDII connection and monitoring like through JB4 or something, or maybe if it was trap speeds at a drag strip because those are using more accurate sensors (speedometer reading through OBDII or set distance and measuring time between 2 specific points).

I'm not trying to knock on your time OP, I'm just trying to be a little more reasonable about what could influence that time. I have a xDrive 240 and I want it to do 3.8 stock so bad, but I just don't feel it's there. Even knowing that the xDrive is putting 308whp down with just below freezing temps (my insoric dyno run).

JB4, I could definitely see pushing closer to 4seconds for sure. Other mods on top definitely hitting 3.8

Joe Achilles claims to hit 60 in 4 flat stock RWD with stock 245s on the back, but he also says xdrive would be slower to 60 which obviously isnt true.

[DS_BMW]

Yeah here is the video! Very quick!

[DS_BMW]

Im waiting to see a JB4 dyno on an m240. Can the auto be coded to launch at bit higher RPM?

[SCCThree]

Originally Posted by Benandluna

Hmm. 3.8 seems a little iffy. If you had a track slip I'd believe it.

I think a time slip will show you time to 60 foot but doesn't show 0-60mph. It's been a while since I have hit the drag strip though.

[Joe240]

Originally Posted by DS_BMW

Im waiting to see a JB4 dyno on an m240. Can the auto be coded to launch at bit higher RPM?

Once I get my Remus exhaust in a couple weeks, I'll be doing another dyno run with all my mods and will post it up. Going to be running CAI, JB4 map 2, VM Catless DP, and Remus nonresonated catback exhaust. Got 308 stock whp (xDrive) so I'm hoping to be around 380 whp with everything.

[3.0L]

Originally Posted by Fasteddy1

One other thing to note is that BMW speedometers are known to read high. So a 0-60 run is likely only a 0-58 run....

Pat

This ^^^

The speedometer in my M235i consistently reads about 2 miles per hour on the optimistic side when compared to those roadside radar signs. Consistently.