Dyno Results EAS Dyno Day: July 27, 2013
Vital Statistics
  • Vehicle / Motor
  • Dyno Type
  • Dyno Correction
BMW E9x M3 (S65 Motor)
Dynojet
SAE (J1349)
Dyno Database Dispute
Dispute Record:  100616 Dyno Database Entries Affected:
Received: 2013-09-06, 00:52:00 Disputed By: Mike "Benvo" Benveniste
Responsed: 2013-09-12 Dyno Database Response
Dispute Text Hi Robert,

I wanted to clarify a discrepancy I came across in your dyno database.
Please reference the link below.

http://www.s65dynos.com/showDyno.php?recID=616&vType=1&dynoID=2

I don't believe this is a dyno of anyone with our software, and believe this to be misleading especially since it was posted by a competitor of ours. If one of our customers lost that horsepower on the dyno, I would certainly know about it. Based on the date of entry, the person who entered it, the facility that the test was performed at. and the lack of dyno files or thread on the conditions surrounding this test, I can only determine that it was placed there with mal intent. Please remove it from your database or try to provide uniquely identifiable information that could help determine the accurateness of this entry.

I appreciate your attention regarding this matter.

Thank you,
Mike Benvo

CC: Tech, Cheryl
Dyno Database Response This issue was discussed and addressed on m5board.com within a few days of receipt.  The exact date of this exchange is unknown, but based on private messages received by Mr. Benveniste, the actual date appears to be on or before September 12th, 2013.  Mr. Benveniste was informed in that response that this dyno occurred at a public dyno day, in front of dozens of people -- all who witness the owner and his car.  The modifications list came from the owner, who claimed BPM Stage-1 software. 

Mr. Benveniste was directed to two public threads on m3post.com that contained details of the public dyno day, and where conditions were discussed in an open discussion.  Mr. Benveniste provided no evidence that the facility manipulated the results, nor can I find any record of such foul play ever occurring at this facility.  Mr. Benveniste has repeatedly used this dyno facility himself and has often used his results of this facility for his own product promotions.

Mr. Benveniste did not provide any evidence that such mal-intent ever occurred, nor any evidence of wrong results; he only provided an accusation without any proof.  The shop where the dyno occurred is EAS, which does not offer any ECU tuning services, nor does Mr. Benveniste own or offer any dyno services.  Therefore neither company offers any relevant overlapping services and can't be considered competitors of each other that give one company a motive to falsify the results in front of dozens of people all gathered around.  Furthermore, Mr. Benveniste has repeatedly used this dyno facility and used their results to promote his products; he obviously trusts them enough to use their services to promote his products.  His newfound claims of EAS being dishonest and untrustworthy not only contradict his own previous actions, but seem like they are only made to help him paint a false narrative that he's a victim of foul play.

It is the opinion of the Dyno Database administrator that the provenance of this entry is beyond reproach.  The Dyno Database also finds no proof to any of the allegation listed above, and no error in the Dyno Database presenting the results.

 

Received: 2014-06-17, 17:42:00 Disputed By: Mike "Benvo" Benveniste
Responsed: 2014-06-24, 22:30:00 Dyno Database Response
Dispute Text Mr. Collins,

...[Excerpts unrelated to Dyno Database removed]...

Furthermore, come (sic) of the entries in your dyno database related to our customer cars are not correct. We've brought this to your attention in the past and you have showed no willingness to enter the correct data, yet you continue to try to externally link others to this incorrect information.

...[Excerpts unrelated to Dyno Database removed]...

Thank you.

CC: Jason Forum Administrator

Dyno Database Response Before receipt of this message, the only prior allegation he sought to address and change in the Dyno Database was Dyno Dabase ID00616 on September 6th, 2013.  That item was immediately addressed and responded to Mr. Benveniste in a public forum on September 12th, 2013 at m5board.com.  At the time this message was sent, the Dyno Database administrator had received no other allegations or investigation requests of factually incorrect entries from Mr. Benveniste or any agents of his company or any of his customers.  This appears to be one of Mr. Benveniste's attempts to create a false narrative that only he can explain the motivation.

Mr. Benveniste also used this correspondence to file a formal complaint with the forum administrator with an apparent purpose of having any references to his product lackluster performance removed from the public record.  The forum administrator is an uninvolved third party and has no frame of reference for any of Mr. Benveniste's allegations and no way to fact check his story.  The forum administrator did not know that Mr. Benveniste's complaint was misleading and factually incorrect (he lied).

The day following this message, Mr. Benveniste sent a six-point message  to the Dyno Database administrator alleging factual errors in the Dyno Database.  This letter came a day after the allegations above stating that he had already sent these complaints (or something like these) before, and he alleged these fictitious complains were ignored by the Dyno Database administrator.

It is the belief of the Dyno Database administrator, that Mr. Benveniste brought this allegation up to an uninvolved third party for the purpose to mislead, request punitive action, and have factually accurate, scientifically accurate, but unflattering tests of his products removed from the public record.  It is further believed that Mr. Benveniste did not submit a multi-faceted complaint prior to making these comments, but did send one a day later in an attempt to write his own narrative and provide a false cover story.  The dates and timestamps of Mr. Benveniste's correspondence very clearly tell a different story than the one he writes.

 

Received: 2014-06-18, 01:18:00 Disputed By: Mike "Benvo" Benveniste
Responsed: 2014-06-25, 20:30:00 Dyno Database Response
Dispute Text 3. http://www.s65dynos.com/showDyno.php?recID=616&vType=1&dynoID=2
-You
 specified that you gave me the owners name - however, I don't recall you ever providing such information. I do recall asking THE TECH to message Longboarder who was apparently present at the event, but he replied that he did not have any specifics.
If you do have any information as to the owner of this vehicle, and according to you, you've previously provided it to me, I would be interested in that information.
-It's not possible for our software to lose power on the dyno as this shows, and this, given the location at which this dyno was performed, is cause for suspicion.
-Where are the dyno run files for this? Surely I would thing this is something you would have.
-Looking at how the AFR consistently rises from 7,000 RPM to redline, I'm confident that either this was not software obtained from BPM, or that there was manipulation involved (such as not being all the way down on the throttle). Our software is not calibrated to lean out as you approach maximum RPM.
Dyno Database Response This was point-3 of a six point message alleging factual errors to the Dyno Database administrator.  The Dyno Database will address each of these items separately.
 
Disputed point #1 You specified that you gave me the owners name - however, I don't recall you ever providing such information. I do recall asking THE TECH to message Longboarder who was apparently present at the event, but he replied that he did not have any specifics.  If you do have any information as to the owner of this vehicle, and according to you, you've previously provided it to me, I would be interested in that information.
Dyno Database Response Too long has passed to know with any certainty whether or not I provided the car owner name.  I believe I recommended THE TECH to contact Longboarder for the name of the car owner.  If Mr. Benveniste really wants the car owner's name, it doesn't involve the Dyno Database anyways.  The Dyno Database wasn't involved in this dyno day, and the Dyno Database administrator wasn't present at the event.  Whereas Mr. Benveniste has repeatedly used the EAS facilities, he should contact them regarding the name and contact information for the car owner.  The Dyno Database is not a social media network intended to hook people up:  Mr. Benveniste can use Facebook for that.
Disputed point #2 It's not possible for our software to lose power on the dyno as this shows, and this, given the location at which this dyno was performed, is cause for suspicion.
Dyno Database Response: This is not an allegation of factual error, and doesn't involve the Dyno Database; the Dyno Database administrator doesn't care.  But it's worth a little time to correct Mr. Benveniste misstated comments. 

Of course it's possible to lose power on the dyno with a software upgrade when the "tuner" doesn't know what they're doing.  In fact, Mr. Benveniste was involved in this exact situation once before and was on the "giving" end of the power loss claim.  In this thread on m3post, Mr. Benveniste while working at PowerChip alleged that Active Autowerke software lost power.
http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=296406.

As further illustration in Dyno Database entry ID00620, the car only gained 5whp from Mr. Benveniste's BPM Stage-2 software tune over a stock software tune.  In that Dyno Database entry, Mr. Benveniste corrected the record from BPM Stage-1 to BPM Stage-2.  In the Dyno Database experience, usually a stage-2 tune offers a few horsepower gain over a stage-1 tune.  Mr. Benveniste's stage-2 tune only offered 5whp over stock.  Therefore it is entirely possible had this car in ID00620 been outfitted with stage-1 software, it would have very likely lost power and contradicted Mr. Benveniste's own claims.  If it only gained 5whp over stock tune with stage-2 software, the car very likely would have lost power with his stage-1 software.

Disputed point #3 Where are the dyno run files for this? Surely I would thing this is something you would have.
Dyno Database Response It is always the policy of the Dyno Database to post all dyno files when they are available.  If these files were submitted, then they would be available.  Since this doesn't involve the Dyno Database, nor even allege a factual error, it's another waste of the Dyno Database administrator's time.  Mr. Benveniste knows where the dyno was conducted and he should contact that business and request copies of the files.  He's used that shop before and lives in their area.  There's no reason for the Dyno Database to be involved in this matter.
Disputed point #4 Looking at how the AFR consistently rises from 7,000 RPM to redline, I'm confident that either this was not software obtained from BPM, or that there was manipulation involved (such as not being all the way down on the throttle). Our software is not calibrated to lean out as you approach maximum RPM.
Dyno Database Response This is another perplexing allegation from Mr. Benveniste to the Dyno Database.  Unless Mr. Benveniste is alleging the Dyno Database manipulated or photoshopped the graph, there doesn't seem to be any legitimate reason to bring this to attention or request an investigation.  The Dyno Database has seen previous dyno files that show very inconsistent AFR's. They'll go in one direction on one run, and a completely different direction on the next. When you look at them all together, they look like a bunch of squiggly lines going in all different directions. None of them were programmed to behave that way.  The allegation itself shows Mr. Benveniste is far less experienced as a "tuner" and with the MSS60 (ECU) and S65 engine than he portrays if he has not seen this before nor able to explain how it occurs.

Here's some other examples from the Dyno Database to illustrate this phenomenon:


(Click to Enlarge)


(Click to Enlarge)


(Click to Enlarge)

These three sets of dyno graphs come from files in the Dyno Database and show the exact phenomenon on another product that Mr. Benveniste has claimed is impossible on his product.  Each of these results come from S65 engine with MSS60 ECU.  The results show multiple dyno tests, taken minutes apart, often times with less than two minutes between runs.  Mr. Benveniste seems to assume the MSS60 will always behave exactly as the tuner intended.  That assumption seems to be the basis of his comments that his software can't lean out above 7000 RPMs because it's not programmed to do so.  But these results also weren't programmed to lean after 7000 RPMs either, yet they did it anyways.  These results indicate to the Dyno Database administrator that Mr. Benveniste isn't nearly as knowledgeable of the MSS60 as he thinks he is.

Another thing to see from these results are the completely undeterministic nature of the AFR graph lines themselves.  Below 7000 RPMs, these AFR results seem almost as if they were random.  If Mr. Benveniste were correct in his knowledge of the MSS60, then this phenomenon wouldn't be possible either.

But once again, this is just a side-show and grandstanding by Mr. Benveniste.  There isn't even an allegation of a factual error in the Dyno Database, so even as misinformed and inexperienced as Mr. Benveniste appears to be, the topic is irrelevant to the Dyno Database and just another waste of the Dyno Database administrator's time.

Summary from the Dyno Database The Dyno Database finds the following with respect to this Dyno Database entry:
  • The dyno occurred during a public dyno event in front of dozens of witnesses.
  • The car owner discussed his car modifications, and those are now part of the public record.
  • The provenance of this Dyno Database entry is above reproach and can't be disputed without evidence.
  • Mr. Benveniste was made aware of these findings in September 2013.
  • Nine months later, Mr. Benveniste renewed his claims in front of a forum administrator (an uninvolved third party) for the purpose of having it removed from the public record.
  • Mr. Benveniste mislead the forum administrator and did not inform him of the prior complaint and the prior resolution.
  • Mr. Benveniste alleged to the forum administrator that multiple factual error allegations had been lodged previously, and that the Dyno Database administrator was unresponsive in addressing them.  Given the ample evidence to the contrary, AND the fact that Mr. Benveniste never filed any other factual disputes until a later time, his entire story of multiple requests being ignored is a fabrication that only Mr. Benveniste can explain.
  • Mr. Benveniste brought up numerous other factually incorrect statements such as AFR anomalies and loss of horsepower within this complaint.  The Dyno Database doesn't care about these matters or how well or how poorly his product performs.  The Dyno Database cannot investigate matters that Mr. Benveniste doesn't understand and can't explain himself.
Configuration (from Baseline)
  • 91 Octane (US), 95 Octane (RON)
  • Dual Clutch Transmission
Modification (since Baseline)
  • BPM Stage-1 Tune
  • The vendor/user has disputed the validity or accuracy of this Dyno Database entry.
Measured Results:
  • Torque
  • Horsepower
253 FT/LBS
335 HP
@ 3700 RPM
@ 8400 RPM
(343.0 NM)
(339.6 PS)
(34.98 KGM)
(249.8 KW)
Baseline Measurements:
  • Torque
  • Horsepower
257 FT/LBS
340 HP
@ 3700 RPM
@ 8225 RPM
(348.4 NM)
(344.7 PS)
(35.53 KGM)
(253.5 KW)
Performance Gains:
  • Torque
  • Horsepower
-4 FT/LBS
-5 HP
(-5.4 NM)
(-5.1 PS)
(-0.55 KGM)
(-3.7 KW)
Dyno Graphs:
Alternate Images:
Weather Conditions