Jump to content
EUROPAS GROßE
SPORTWAGEN COMMUNITY

How/where to get more power for 1995 M3 3.0L?


douglas-BR

Empfohlene Beiträge

Hello Guys!

I'm new here but I won't waiter longer to ask.. :)

I would like to know which is the best way (but not too expensive) to make my M3/95 3.0L faster (0-60mph) then the German 3.2L.

Thank you very much in advance!

Douglas-BR

Jetzt registrieren, um Themenwerbung zu deaktivieren »

Do you have a Euro spec M3 or a US spec M3? If you have the US spec there is no way you can match the power of the German spec 3.2 motor without forced induction.

Boltons like exhaust and intake and chip will give you a little more punch and throttle response, but Euro spec E36 m3's had 320 hp -- A cam kit and a track pipe and the Euro HFM would give your 3.0L a great deal more power, but still not enough to compete with the eurp spec car.

i disagree, and would argue that with a set of cams, a chip, intake manfiold, exhaust, intake set, perhaps porting and polishing the heads, you could get pretty damn close to the kind of power the euro-spec was pushing. 300 at least.

I don't see why you wouldn't be able to crank power from the U.S. spec engine comparable to that of the Euro spec. Even factory M tuning is not as extreme as aftermarket tuning you could perform on your own. And the E36 M3 is good in that way, lot's of room to stretch it's legs.

The Euro-spec S50B32 is a completely different beast compared to the US S52. The 2 engines don't share any parts, and the only thing that they really have in common is the displacement, and number of cylinders. The main difference between the 2 really lies in the head design. The US spec is only single VANOS while the euro-spec is dual VANOS. Add to that the better flowing individual throttle bodies as well as all the other small details that the boys at BMW M Division are known for and you end up at 321HP (for the 3.2L).

Anzeige eBay
Geschrieben
Geschrieben

Hallo douglas-BR,

 

schau doch mal hier zum Thema Zubehör für BMW M (Anzeige)? Eventuell gibt es dort etwas Passendes.

  • Gefällt Carpassion.com 1

Emissions could be one thing, but I think the primary reason for the "detune " was that it was cheaper. I read a claim that the M3 would have cost about $14,000 more had they imported it as it was. For a grand total of 55-60k. Why it's cost effective to leave it alone now is anyone's guess.

The Euro spec engine is definitely highly tuned, with the individual throttle bodies and all. But rarely is a factory motor maxed out, there is usually room for more, as in the case of the U.S. spec S50.

you shouldn't have trouble getting atleast 280-300 naturally aspirated horses from that engine. There is room to increase flow through a number of means. The individual throttle bodies do more for responsiveness than anything else, the lacking dual vanos can be compensated for with the more aggressive cams. They share quite a few parts. The S50 and S50B2 are the same block, and their heads share a number of parts. Some things are a bit different between them, the B2 has a few things differently, but a lot is the same. A lot.

I'm new here as well. Just came across this site and couldn't resist joining and jumping in. I'm in California just down the road from Dinan's shop. I have a 97' M3 that dyno's at 407hp/333ft lbs @ crank. I started with Dinan's supercharger which dyno'd at 315hp not the 341 or so they claim. Next I added an RMS intercooler, Dynospot cams and incresed boost to 10lbs. This got me to where I am. The car runs smoother than stock and meets California smog. The problem is this set up cost a whole bunch. I'd recommend you check out dynospotracing.com. On the website go to "BMW dyno tests" and check out 95' mods. These both have software and the cams and produce 277-296hp. Pretty sure the cost is under $2000 US. The "Dinan SC with DSR cams" is my car showing what the cams added to the basic Dinan supercharge kit. This was before the intercooler and added boost. By the way, forget the "RMS 12psi superchraged 3.2L". 460hp, stock CR...bad idea!!!!

you shouldn't have trouble getting atleast 280-300 naturally aspirated horses from that engine.

are you talking at the crank or the rw's? At the crank it's possible -- like I said the best of the best can't get much more than 260 to the rear wheels

Bill -- sounds like a hell of a car you have there. If you dont mind me asking, how much did all that cost you?

I don't have the dyno printout here at work but it's right about 346hp at the rear wheels which computes to 407 at the crankshaft. I guess I've spent around $15,000-20,000 on it but it sure is a great car. Check out Dynospot's website. All kinds of dyno charts there.

Everytime I do this I feel like a leader at an AA meeting, but anyway, Hello Bill, Welcome to Carpassion! :) We try to have quality content in our forums, and it's cool when people can't resist joining in. That means we're doing a good job. This is a good cozy outfit we have here, so feel free to join in whenever you like.

Thats' a pretty monster M3, you say it runs smoother than stock? Do you have any performance numbers?

Here lies the problem: The car also has a 3.64:1 diff so it takes a better man than me to figure out how to launch without going sideways...same problem with the 1-2 shift. Dick at Dynospot thinks the car will run low 12's but again I couldn't do it. The folks at Dinan recommended Kumho v700 Ecsta tires which I'm having installed tomorrow. Hoping that will help. Passing speeds work fine though.

Why the steeper than stock differential, BIll?. Would have been easier to launch with the stock 3.23..

Fox I was asking you if the 300 NA hp you think you can get out of the US motor is at the crank or the wheels?

Takes me back to college..."seemed like a good idea at the time". I built the car to be a passing monster which it is. I just didn't realize how much adding near 100ft/lbs of torque would affect traction. If I had it to do over I'd of kept the 3.23 diff. I still may do that though next item is to add an RMS oil cooler.

What rpm are you at when cruising in 5th at 75 mph? I used to have a 3.91 in my 'cuda (before i put the 5 speed in) and I couldn't cruise any faster than 65 on the highway...

Have any pics of your car?

Just saw your post. The car runs 19.7 mph/1000rpm in 5th which works out to 3750 rpm...a little buzzy but you get used to it. The 3.64 really changes the character of the car. It feels more like a sports car compared to the 3.23 where to me it felt sort of "unhurried". I like it but that's just my preference.

Okay here's a topic that has me and Dinan stumped. I switched to synthetic 5W 30 motor oil and after a bit of commute driving the oil pressure light started to flicker at idle. Dinan checked it out and found that anything above idle and the pressure was fine. We replaced the oil pump thinking that the pressure release valve might be the cause. No change. Then replaced the pressure switch, checked the Vanos operation and cam journals. Nothing looked off. My theory is that the supercharger running 10psi generates lots of heat. The oil is getting too hot for 30W and if I switch to 15W 50 and add the oil cooler that will solve the problem. Thoughts out there? No oil temp guage in the car.

yes, they are VERY sticky, and there will be nothing left of them in no more than 15k miles no matter how you drive. my buddy had those on his jetta, they nearly melt off the rims, but they stick like glue on the way.

The shorter axle ratio out back works great for naturally aspirated cars, allowing them to capitalize more on the high end torque. With the charger, not so much a good idea, for obvious reasons.

And i think you could get 300na hp at the crank.gearing does all sorts of wierd thinks to power, so i always just talk from the crank

:wink:

Archiviert

Dieses Thema ist archiviert und für weitere Antworten gesperrt. Erstelle doch dein eigenes Thema im passenden Forum.


×
×
  • Neu erstellen...