Why Dinan can't hide from the dyno any longer - Calling out Dinan's dynamometer hypocrisy

[Sticky]

Dinan is no stranger to hypocrisy. Remember when Dinan stated piggyback tuning was bad? Well, now it's suddenly good when Dinan is selling Dinantronics piggybacks. Speaking of which, Dinan specifically had a tester release a dyno graph of their W205 C63 AMG M177 tune.

That is odd for a company that took the position for decades that dynos are not useful as they claim they are easily manipulated and often lie. Dinan recently regurgitated on social media an ancient article from Car and Driver where Steve Dinan essentially misleads people into thinking dynamometers are not reliable and can not be trusted.

The article is a steaming load of crap.

Why? Because if you want to manipulate a dyno you certainly can. You can move fans around. You can play with correction factors. You can change sampling rates. You can go out of your way to make the data useless. You can also use it properly and have reliable data.

Why is it that Dinan went from never releasing chassis dyno graphs to now embracing them? Because in the turbo era they will not be able to sell products without them. Even in the turbo era they have fought being forced to release graphs. Why? Because they are not flattering.

For $2500 this is what a Stage I Dinantronics gets you on an F80 M3 and F82 M4 S55 motor:

That is a lot of money to pay for 20 whp. Especially considering a company like BMS offers much more power and torque for far less money. Additionally, BMS somehow knows how to use a dyno and releases their products with graphs. As do flash tuners. Dinan did not post that Dynojet graph of their box. Someone who bought their product went and got some dyno pulls. They probably cried afterwards. Who is going to buy the product after seeing that?

Dinan is attempting to adapt their Dinantronics piggyback to as many makes as possible. They are trying to enter the VW and Audi market but without dyno graphs they will not be taken seriously. APR provides dyno graphs. APR has independent results that verify their gains. Is Dinan saying APR knows how to use a dyno but they do not?

A company like Dinan could get away with not posting graphs in the naturally aspirated M era. People tried to eek out horsepower and would pay thousands for ported throttle bodies that maybe gave a few horses up in the rev range. Yes, seriously. Not enough power was gained to offset variances from run to run. A dyno would not help sales. It would do the opposite.

Look at this:

To prove his point, Dinan bolts to his Dynapack one of his 2003 Dinan M5s, heavily tweaked to make a claimed 470 horsepower at the crank (he expects about 415 at the wheels). With the hood closed and no external fan blowing air into the radiator, the car wheezes out just 334 horsepower at the wheels. An LCD data logger on the dashboard reveals the air-fuel ratio from the engine computer. Approaching redline, the BMW's computer richens the mixture all the way to 9.5:1 as the underhood temperatures soar.

Now Dinan opens the hood and turns on a small Home Depot shop fan blowing about 10 mph worth of air. The M5 is allowed to shed some excess heat and then run again. This time the computer finds another 37 horsepower, or 371. Things are looking up, but the M5's output is still nowhere near Dinan's expected number of 415.

"I can't claim something I can't measure," says Dinan, so the crew then wheels out the big gun: a $7000 electric fan that looks like it should be hanging on the wing of a Boeing 737. It blasts 38,000 cubic feet per minute of air at 75 mph down a narrow duct, right into the M5's radiator. The fan roars, the M5 howls, the computer twinkles, and the graph paper ticka-ticks out of the printer. It says 411.4 horsepower, the best run of the day.

"Basically, what horsepower would you like? I can give you anything from 330 to 420 with the same car," Dinan says. "

Seriously? This is the brilliant Steve Dinan? He provided proper airflow and the car produced what it was supposed to produce. He can not make it say whatever horsepower he wants to he can only slant output downward. What he is doing is purposely restricting airflow to skew the numbers. Notice how he can't deliver 800 horsepower on the dyno by playing with fans for example? He can only go from what it is making to less.

This is not evidence of a dyno not being reliable but operator error. What is truly humorous is Dinan is now marketing their C63 M177 tune with a Dynapack graph. What happened to it not being reliable? Why does Dinan even have a Dynapack in the first place?

Let's for a moment even indulge Dinan with this misleading dyno nonsense. Why do not they not provide 1/4 mile times then? Why do they not do GPS timed runs? Because none of this will help them get sales. Literally everyone else in the industry has a stronger product from a performance perspective.

We are not saying Dinan's product is bad. We are saying a dyno is a tool that when used properly is very useful for serious tuners. Those tuners know how to operate their dyno to get results.

Funny how in the real world Dinan's products perform exactly as you would expect based on independent dyno tests.

[maxnix]

"Dynographs?"

Perhaps you mean "dynamometer graphs"?

While you may be correct in general, you present little verified data. And you omit entirely that no one else warranties their tune and passes 50 state emissions testing.

Using the same kind of unsubstantiated claims that you assert Dinan does is a pathetically dishonest way of convincing anyone of anything in particular. Everyone one knows that in tuning data, almost everyone is guilty of some exaggeration. The relevant questions are by how much do they deceive and to what extent are OEM engine component's longevity compromised by each tune?

Most here will recognize glory runs for high dynamometer readings are only for short term losers.

[Sticky]

"Dynographs?"

Perhaps you mean "dynamometer graphs"?

I changed it to make it more clear for you but is dynographs a term you are not familiar with on a car site?

While you may be correct in general, you present little verified data. And you omit entirely that no one else warranties their tune and passes 50 state emissions testing.

Um I literally link you to two articles at the end showing Dinan's products being outperformed and reference Dinan's piggyback being outperformed with a graph inserted in the article. I also link to that article. So what are you talking about? Did you not even click the links to the data you are asking about?

As far as omitting nobody else warranties their tune, you are mistaken. APR does the same and many other tuners warranty their products. As a matter of fact, a Viper tuner offers a warranty on a twin turbo package. The idea that only Dinan warranties a product is part of how they market as few people know the truth. Plus that warranty process isn't all it is cracked up to be: http://www.boostaddict.com/content.p...e-pipe-failure

Additionally, Weistec provides CARB compliance and did so well ahead of Dinan who is still waiting on their CARB certificates last I checked: http://www.boostaddict.com/content.p...th-price-drops

Using the same kind of unsubstantiated claims that you assert Dinan does is a pathetically dishonest way of convincing anyone of anything in particular. Everyone one knows that in tuning data, almost everyone is guilty of some exaggeration. The relevant questions are by how much do they deceive and to what extent are OEM engine component's longevity compromised by each tune?

This is what making a claim without verified data looks like. Prove your point. How many independent dynos are there of Dinan tunes outperforming others? Can you show me even 1, one dyno, of a Dinan BMW product topping what is available elsewhere? Nope. Dinan even went so far as with the E46 M3 to say they could not get any gains as BMW maxed out the motor. We know that is that not the case. Dinan just had poor tuning.

Most here will recognize glory runs for high dynamometer readings are only for short term losers.

Which is why as mentioned in the article we also look for 1/4 mile runs and GPS runs. Dinan doesn't provide those either.

Did you even read the article?

[Eleventeen]

"Dynographs?"

Perhaps you mean "dynamometer graphs"?

While you may be correct in general, you present little verified data. And you omit entirely that no one else warranties their tune and passes 50 state emissions testing.

Using the same kind of unsubstantiated claims that you assert Dinan does is a pathetically dishonest way of convincing anyone of anything in particular. Everyone one knows that in tuning data, almost everyone is guilty of some exaggeration. The relevant questions are by how much do they deceive and to what extent are OEM engine component's longevity compromised by each tune?

Most here will recognize glory runs for high dynamometer readings are only for short term losers.

Are you seriously not familiar with the term dyno graph? Or are you just trying to wind Sticky up?

[m5james]

I've been saying $$Dinan$$ is a rip off for YEARS, but you've got these idiot fanboys who believe it must be better because they're raped on prices...not an exclusive club I want to be a part of.

[Sticky]

I've been saying $$Dinan$$ is a rip off for YEARS, but you've got these idiot fanboys who believe it must be better because they're raped on prices...not an exclusive club I want to be a part of.

Brings back memories. Dinan fanboy had a meltdown on M5board when my stock DCT M3 beat his Dinan everything E60 M5 in a drag race. Was hilarious.

[mave198]

Still boggles my mind there are people still fooled into buying anything from Dinan. I mean they've been shown as over priced and underperforming for years already......

[leveraged sellout]

Their stuff has been massively overpriced for a very long time. To be quite honest I'm not sure I'd buy anything from them apart from chassis stuff.

These tunes for turbo cars are just incredible...they're the most expensive by a space mile...and they're also the least effective by quite a bit. Clearly they don't belong in this market.

If I had money to light on fire, about the only part I'd buy from them for my engine would be the big-bore throttle bodies...but those are good for about 10 hp, at most.

[Sticky]

What you think about their products if you like them or not is not even really the point. I agree with those who say Dinan is overpriced and for way too long they have operated as if they are 'too good' to be criticized.

Implying dyno's are uselsss is misleading. If their products showed the greatest gains on the dyno, you better believe they would be posting graphs.

[inlineS54B32]

Yeah, I really don't understand Steve's logic on this one. His job as a professional should be to recreate the same conditions (or get as close as possible) between dyno tests... We have correction factors for the things we obviously can't control (the weather), but to shove what is basically a super-low-boost supercharger (high speed fan) near the intake - then remove the fan, and claim that's why the dyno is not a good tool to demonstrate gains is just nonsense.

I'm with you on the whole "piggy back tuning isn't the right way to tune" ... My thoughts are he couldn't crack the code (no pun int.), and wasn't able to do it right, so simply caved in to make his money. Not saying what he's doing is wrong - but if you are going to shoot your mouth off about something - and then do that same thing yourself.

Again, it's hard to take him seriously as a professional tuner. It's a shame to be honest.

[Sticky]

Yeah, I really don't understand Steve's logic on this one. His job as a professional should be to recreate the same conditions (or get as close as possible) between dyno tests... We have correction factors for the things we obviously can't control (the weather), but to shove what is basically a super-low-boost supercharger (high speed fan) near the intake - then remove the fan, and claim that's why the dyno is not a good tool to demonstrate gains is just nonsense.

I'm with you on the whole "piggy back tuning isn't the right way to tune" ... My thoughts are he couldn't crack the code (no pun int.), and wasn't able to do it right, so simply caved in to make his money. Not saying what he's doing is wrong - but if you are going to shoot your mouth off about something - and then do that same thing yourself.

Again, it's hard to take him seriously as a professional tuner. It's a shame to be honest.

Great post.

[BigM62]

Back in the day when Dinan was really the only game in town, I bought a 1995 540i Dinan 5. Everyting in the Dinan catalog was on that car ( I bought it like that with 50k miles). Unfortunately, I bought on a another persons recommendation. When I finally drove the car, it handled excellently, but did it feel like 420 hp? Ah, nope. And that had started my digging a very big financial hole, to bring the car to my liking. Dinan was lucky he was at the beginning of the BMW tuner scene, and had very little competition. Now we know better. The only thing Dinan left on my car is the suspension (just re-badged Koni) and 850sci BBK. And I even took off the Dinan 5 badge.

[zinner]

If you separate your feelings for Dinan from the point about the chassis dyno test. I think the point is a aftermarket company could dyno a stock car with a home depot fan and then with a uber fan and show gains regardless.

How many dyno's have I seen posted where they can't even bother to hook up tach or lambda sensors.

[Sticky]

I think the point is a aftermarket company could dyno a stock car with a home depot fan and then with a uber fan and show gains regardless.

How many dyno's have I seen posted where they can't even bother to hook up tach or lambda sensors.

Right but as stated this is operator error and not indicative of a dyno not being a valid tool.

[zinner]

Right but as stated this is operator error and not indicative of a dyno not being a valid tool.

When I see statements like this I chuckle. They system isn't setup to prevent errors. The software could insist on certain probes and parameters if it wanted to be fair. The chassis dyno is a marketing tool 1st, a testing tool a distant 2nd.

That is my point

[Sticky]

When I see statements like this I chuckle.

I'm kind of laughing at yours. How is intentionally restricting airflow not operator error?

The chassis dyno is a marketing tool 1st, a testing tool a distant 2nd.

I disagree. Ask any quality tuner about tuning on the dyno and they will tell you they get great results on eddy current dynos such as the Dyno Dynamics or Mustang.

I don't see it as a marketing tool first. You do.