BMW 328i engine more powerful than BMW says - dyno results [video]

Within some industry circles, it's quite known that the German auto makers underrate the power output of their engines. There are many theories as to why this is done. Some refer to it as "over-engineering" while others may consider it a marketing tactic. For most enthusiasts, it can be a bragging point, but for the owner of this brand new 2012 328i sedan it seems the intention was to establish a baseline for future performance tuning projects.

Equipped with BMW's new twinpower twin-scroll turbo 2.0-liter 4-cylinder N20 engine, BMW specifies its power rating in North America at 240 bhp (179 kW / 243 PS) and 260 lb-ft (350 Nm).

Using an EAS (European Auto Source) Dynojet 224xLC, the 328i produced 226 hp (169 kW) and 230 lb-ft (312 Nm) torque measured at the wheels with 91 octane gasoline. This equates to a crankshaft horsepower rating of approximately 265-272 hp (198-203 kW) / 270-277 lb-ft (366-376 Nm) torque - an increase of 25-32hp (19-24 kW) and 15-22lb-ft (20-30) over the official figures. This calculation assumes a 15-17% drivetrain loss.

The same N20 engine in the 2012 BMW Z4 was also found to have increased numbers although slightly higher than the 328i seen here.

Source: f30post.com

Add a Comment

Comments (25)

Subscribe to comments
 mgmt585 mgmt585
BMW are always known for under selling themselves, where as Volkswagen/Audi Group oversell themselves - that is why I have more respect for them (BMW). The new m5 typically has 580PS instead of 560PS, another example of this. Mini cooper S R56's generally put out around 195bhp instead of the quoted 175bhp. If you look at audi, on the other hand, check out "MRCtuning" on facebook. If you look at any of their typical dyno runs for a 2.0tdi 170 audi or vw (stock), they typically put out more like 155bhp. There's also a run of a golf gti where it puts out around 190bhp at the crank stock. And their dynos are accurate. https://www.facebook.com/mrctuning?ref=ts Check for yourself...
+3
February 15, 2012 3:27 pm
 mgmt585 mgmt585
https://www.facebook.com/mrctuning?ref=ts#!/photo.php?fbid=312863018755959&set=a.207397125969216.47444.154822821226647&type=1&theater Audi photo proof "3rd or 4th all the same" if you look at comments
February 15, 2012 3:30 pm
 Julle85 Julle85
So do u have any proof of that, M5 has 580ps?. Or are u only speculation ;)
+1
February 16, 2012 2:15 am
 mgmt585 mgmt585
http://www.worldcarfans.com/111122239237/bmw-m5-f10-first-independent-dyno-results-videos
+1
February 16, 2012 4:57 am
 CReeds CReeds
So it scan also be construed as equipping your car with more power to claim the achievements than advertised. Which is to say that the car actually requires more power to put down the 0-60 and 1/4 times they have claimed.
February 16, 2012 10:10 am
 mgmt585 mgmt585
Not really, BMW undersell their 0-60mph/0-100km/h figures too, to try and give "real world, real driver" acceleration figures. I guess I'll have to go reference that too... Here we go:- http://www.worldcarfans.com/111102737698/bmw-f10-m5-has-new-0-to-60-mph-time-of-37-seconds
February 16, 2012 12:38 pm
 LostPassword LostPassword
http://www.superchips.co.uk/curves/VAG20TDiCR170ps.pdf http://www.superchips.co.uk/curves/VAGV6TDI240bhp.pdf http://www.superchips.co.uk/curves/VAG20TSi211ps.pdf http://www.superchips.co.uk/curves/VAG%201.8%20TSi%20160.pdf Underated are they?
February 16, 2012 1:26 pm
 mgmt585 mgmt585
P.S is this the 2.0L saab engine that BMW got in the engine sharing agreement?
-2
February 15, 2012 3:35 pm
 dbehmoaras dbehmoaras
Not a chance in hell. If anything, Saab got the good end of the deal by receiving a BMW engine. But then again, I'm one that's quick to defend BMW in that respect, so who knows. But Saab definitely benefits from this agreement more than BMW does, engine wise.
February 16, 2012 6:38 am
 moodyaaa moodyaaa
Thats why i will be always in love with BMW
+6
February 15, 2012 3:51 pm
 out4ride out4ride
Funny thing is that nobody says what octane fuel did BMW used to get the numbers and what is this one filled up on the dyno with? It's easy to get different numbers from turbo engines using different fuel but I'm pretty sure everyone knows that:)
-2
February 15, 2012 4:33 pm
 AlikMalix AlikMalix
I have owned 3 BMW's in my life so far, always used 91 octane on my 5-series but my first Bimmer a 94 318 was run on 87. BTW, I knew about the BMW underselling their output, lots of new BMW's dyno'd at the local shop, frequently surprising their owners.
+2
February 15, 2012 9:20 pm
 effington effington
I'm going to go right ahead here and assume you didn't actually watch the video. It states 91 octane.
February 15, 2012 11:21 pm
 BrianWCF BrianWCF
Says it in the article too.
February 16, 2012 10:14 am
 Sacto8780 Sacto8780
Indeed, this engine will likely see a LOT of application on US-market BMW models, especially given the pretty good fuel economy of this engine on the 328i sedan: 24 mpg city, 36 mpg highway with the 8AT automatic. Don't be surprised that we'll see it on the X3 SUV, the next-generation 128i coupe, and even the X1 SUV due in the US market early in 2013.
+2
February 15, 2012 6:39 pm
 Zix Zix
0-100 km/h is still the same right?! If you say that its faster from 0-100, as higher top speed, better recups...thats something. Sayin that has more hp, but the dynamic numbers r the same....whatever
February 16, 2012 4:38 am
 SainUK SainUK
BMW figures are quoted using 98RON (with 90% full tank, 68kg driver and 7kg luggage.......)
February 16, 2012 5:38 am
 MariusAndreiRaducanu MariusAndreiRaducanu
What importance does the weight have when the article is only about the power of the engine ??
February 16, 2012 7:23 am
 Julle85 Julle85
@mgmt585.. I hardly think thats not true. BMW know, if they get 580ps or more.
February 16, 2012 6:15 am
 dbehmoaras dbehmoaras
Allow me to explain these discrepancies. It is largely due to scientific error. Obviously, every run on the dyno is different. Take the M5, for instance. BMW extensively tests their cars, as we all know. They probably did a number of dyno runs, with results ranging from 560PS to 580PS. To be on the safe side, they quoted the engine at the lowest consistent result they achieved. This is probably to avoid flak for overrating their engines. And isn't it a good thing, when a car promises a certain amount of power but ends up delivering more? To me, that's like opening up a box of chocolate to find out they're filled with rum and cherries. Who's with me?
February 16, 2012 6:37 am
 norther norther
as much as i respect the brand... hey WCF, did bmw payed u to post this article? i mean common, who cares if it has 700 horses at the crank, but by the time they get to the wheels, u only have 200. of course this isnt the case. but pls... i am almost suffocating because from all the "snob"-stink air created by all these so called "world car fans". this isnt bmw understating themselves, this is just a video with a stock bimmer, showing its true power to the wheels. which isnt at all bad for a 2 l turbo, but nothing special. most european brands have a similar engine: a 2 l turbo with power btween 200-275. i really dont get whats withh all this a$$ kissing.
+1
February 16, 2012 9:57 am
 AlikMalix AlikMalix
That's right, you just don't get it...
March 6, 2012 8:16 am
 Dolomight 74-86 Dolomight 74-86
It would be cool if they had a Club Racer version of this. 2 Doors, recaros, a LSD and some Bilsteins. I would but that sh*t on the spot!
February 16, 2012 9:57 am
 shirazi shirazi
This article is trying to boost the prestige of the 4 cylinder engine replacing the smooth inline 6 cylinder which is considered by many to be a bad change. If you want a 6 you have to buy the 335 which is 6-7k more money.
February 17, 2012 6:36 am
 progressive progressive
Well Audi, how you doing now :) Maybe you should make another commercial showing how bad BMW is. I just love BMW.
February 17, 2012 8:08 am