[proflex957]

http://www.autoblog.com/2015/09/18/2...i-first-drive/

[MrBimmerM235i]

[3.0L]

Originally Posted by proflex957

http://www.autoblog.com/2015/09/18/2...i-first-drive/

Really disappointing numbers. 440 HP and 450 lb/ft. of torque produces only 0 to 60 in 4.4 seconds? Car & Driver got 4.3 seconds in a stock M235i during their testing.

It just doesn't add up.

[BarryJI]

That has got to be a mistake. The Dinan Stage 2 will get the M235i from 0 - 60 in ~4.0 sec flat and this is a Stage 3 tune. And they seem to be implying that the tune is an ECU replacement or flash, when I assume it's a piggyback.

[G-Mann]

Those estimates have got to be off. Who in their right mind would shell out 9k to shave .2? I would think this setup would get you close to 4 sec. Skeptical on stage 2 doing that.

I would hope this setup would beat an m2 in a straight line at least.

[uberspeed]

That's a good chunk of rolling coin...

[s1uma1]

That article has no solid data. The 0-60 time is what the writer thinks the time is.

Also scratching my head about the cost of turbo upgrade. Seems too cheap to me. I vaguely remember their rebuilt turbos for the one series being much more

Edit: Nm. Rebuilt turbos for 1M $2400.

[dan99]

Originally Posted by 3.0L

Really disappointing numbers. 440 HP and 450 lb/ft. of torque produces only 0 to 60 in 4.4 seconds? Car & Driver got 4.3 seconds in a stock M235i during their testing.

It just doesn't add up.

Hate these quotes..... Numbers are irrelevant bc of diff environment and driver

[racerstf]

The article said Dinan does not post 0-60 times... They were merely stating that it is much faster than the bone stock 4.4sec time

[dharo1]

Article is discussing Dinan's S3, but I believe Dinan has not released their Stage 3 kit yet. Interesting.

[s1uma1]

Originally Posted by dharo1

Article is discussing Dinan's S3, but I believe Dinan has not released their Stage 3 kit yet. Interesting.

Dinan's Facebook page said they invited autoblog to sample their prerelease s3... I guess its meant to be a teaser

[brocklanders]

I wouldn't put too much stock in numbers, Motorweek's best times for the M235i were 5.2 to 60mph and 14.0 in the quarter.

[3.0L]

Originally Posted by dan99

Hate these quotes..... Numbers are irrelevant bc of diff environment and driver

Oh, I get it. Bad numbers are irrelevant. Good numbers are relevant.

[BarryJI]

"Bad" numbers are bad in this instance because they are estimated. On the other hand, thank goodness 0-60 in 4.2 seconds is only an estimate here, because if that were a "good" number, I would feel very, very foolish to have paid this kind of money for a Stage 3 tune on an M235i that delivered such a number. To me, it is inconceivable that a Dinan S3 tune for the M235i would not produce a 0-60 time of 4.0 seconds, or a little less in the hands of a good driver. I believe the problem is that most people who test 8ATs do not know how to work the launch control.

[3.0L]

Originally Posted by BarryJI

"Bad" numbers are bad in this instance because they are estimated. On the other hand, thank goodness 0-60 in 4.2 seconds is only an estimate here, because if that were a "good" number, I would feel very, very foolish to have paid this kind of money for a Stage 3 tune on an M235i that delivered such a number. To me, it is inconceivable that a Dinan S3 tune for the M235i would not produce a 0-60 time of 4.0 seconds, or a little less in the hands of a good driver. I believe the problem is that most people who test 8ATs do not know how to work the launch control.

So, what kind of 0 to 60 numbers are you getting?

As to Launch Control, I seem to remember a number of reputable auto mag reviews where they got their best numbers not using Launch Control.

[nachob]

You can't say that, no one has seen the M2?? Again, it goes to the core of myopic numbers reading looking at horsepower. Just like people saying the 1M was just a 135i with a tune. There were significant changes from the different, quicker steering rack, lighter suspension components, composite brakes, lighter weight, full-lock (not limited) diff, lightened flywheel, etc etc.

The M235i is too heavy and soft no matter what you do to it. The goodness in the M2 will depend not just on horsepower but if they lighten it, sharpen it, stiffen it. My guess is that the M2 will also have a different steering rack too.

[BarryJI]

Originally Posted by 3.0L

So, what kind of 0 to 60 numbers are you getting?

Well, I only have a humble 228i but it's modded out with engine, suspension and exhaust tunes and this brings the 0-60 time down to about 4.8 sec. With that in mind, I'd be very surprised to see only 4.2 sec in an M235i with a much more extensive, S3 tune. The S2 should deliver 4.0 sec.

[BarryJI]

Originally Posted by nachob

You can't say that, no one has seen the M2?? Again, it goes to the core of myopic numbers reading looking at horsepower. Just like people saying the 1M was just a 135i with a tune. There were significant changes from the different, quicker steering rack, lighter suspension components, composite brakes, lighter weight, full-lock (not limited) diff, lightened flywheel, etc etc.

The M235i is too heavy and soft no matter what you do to it. The goodness in the M2 will depend not just on horsepower but if they lighten it, sharpen it, stiffen it. My guess is that the M2 will also have a different steering rack too.

These are very wise words, IMO.

[Dinan_Engineering]

While we don't measure 0-60 times there have been quite a few threads with independent sources citing the stage 2 setup is getting ~4.0 second 0-60 times. How accurate they are, who knows, but the point it the 0-60 in the article I can only assume is some random number pulled out of the air because it was not tested for in the reviewers test drive.

The stage 4 setup (S3) is a beast off the line--- the car is ridiculously quick. While I liked the Dinan 1M, ALOT, I find the tuned S3 M235i much more refined in its power delivery while being equally as powerful.

[BoomWasabi]

Originally Posted by dan99

Numbers are irrelevant bc of diff environment and driver

Could you elaborate on how a different driver will affect these numbers? It's an automatic with a launch control.

(Unless you mean "lighter driver" )

[brocklanders]

Originally Posted by BoomWasabi

Could you elaborate on how a different driver will affect these numbers? It's an automatic with a launch control.

(Unless you mean "lighter driver" )

Believe it or not there is some skill in driving in a straight line. But I would imagine the people who test these cars for the various auto mags and such possess these skills. Although I have heard that these cars are pretty sensitive to engine temp, ambient temp and altitude so I personally wouldn't put too much stock in test numbers.

[3.0L]

Originally Posted by brocklanders

Believe it or not there is some skill in driving in a straight line. But I would imagine the people who test these cars for the various auto mags and such possess these skills. Although I have heard that these cars are pretty sensitive to engine temp, ambient temp and altitude so I personally wouldn't put too much stock in test numbers.

I disagree. All of the test numbers from reputable automotive magazines should be averaged together. The results would likely reflect real world performance - the number we're interested in. After all, owner/drivers range from good to so-so, just like car testers, not to mention the disparity in driving environments.