AA Tuning E46 M3 Supercharger

[thepolarfoxqx]

supercharging just isn't a good solution for a number of reasons on an E46 M3, the engine's characteristics aren't suited very well at all to it. You should work off a car's natural characeteristics to enhance it. Dinan, schnitzer, a number of people have solutions for you. If you REALLY wanted to, a Hartge M3 with a schnitzer or Dinan engine kit would get you 470 naturally aspirated hp, but that would be very expensive.

[Anzeige eBay]

Hallo g-unit marko,

 

kennst du schon AA Tuning E46 M3 Supercharger (Anzeige)? Dort ist vieles zu finden.

 

BMW M Ersatzteile (Anzeige) | BMW M Tuning (Anzeige) | BMW M Uhren (Anzeige)

[reggid]

i would wait for the E90 let BMW do all the tuning and R&D work for you. its much simpler this way and results are always better, maybe not as fun though. BMW have more skill and resources than any other aftermarket tuner so from the factory is best.

FI is possible on an M3 anyone who says it not is wrong, it just costs a lot. But why would you want to change the power delivery characteristics of an NA M engine. i drive a 2.5L i6 and its power delivery is much more enjoyable than any big V8 or SC engine even though it has far less power.

jmick5, you could get a coupe which is about 200kgs lighter which would feel like you've added another 30kw or 40hp to your converible. But you probably bought a convertible for a reason.

[thepolarfoxqx]

i didn't say it wasn't possible. i said it wasn't practical, nor was it a good idea. The M3's engine has been optimized in every way to be a high-winding, naturally aspirated motor. The valve angle, the manifold design, head shape, to get a supercharger on there, you'd have to get lower compression pistons (there isn't even a question there), the engine just wouldn't do as well supercharged. An engine that is left fairly unoptimized for one given thing will do any fairly well, an engine like one from saab or volvo or porsche that has been designed for a turbocharger on it will do better with a turbo, just how it is. You can put a supercharger on an M3, but it loses all it's top end, and will probably cut the engine's lifespan a lot. 400hp is possible naturally aspirated from the 3.2. It's hard, but it can be done, and it is a better solution, and also weight reduction is huge. The E90 will be lighter (we hope), and will be over 400hp, that might be a good solution.

I just don't know any credible tuners who know BMWs that put a blower on the E46 M3, and that says something to me.

But i'll agree, it can be done, i just think it's impractical and a bad idea. You have to rebuild to bottom end to get a blower on it.

[jmick5]

Its a bloody shame that the engine can't be modified to produce this kind of power, guess its because as you say the engine is already highly tuned.

This doesn't stop me dreaming however and Im sure this need is going to get the better of me sooner rather than later and Im going to get some mods.

thepolarfoxqx you seem to know what your talking about but seem to be at odds with what gladiator and aa tunning are saying. Why is this ? Have you worked for BMW or are you a mechanical engineer with experiance of this engine? Whay are your credentials ? I say this with respect.

What do you think the specs for power, 0-60, 1/4 mile etc are for his SC CSL. Theres a video on the site of his car beating a SL55 AMG. Do you think this is possible. It makes me very interested in SC my own car when I see this.

As he hasn't posted regarding my earlier question to him what in your opinion are the specs for his car and would it compete with a SC AA tunning car.

Anyway Im getting the European Car magazine delivered tomorrow that reviews the AA SC car. Ill scan it and post it if you want. In the snippets on the AA web site it states that the reviewer said

"AA has developed a supercharger system for the current generation BMW 3 Series that is quite possibly the best tuner program this writer has experienced. Powerful, smooth, quiet, AA's supercharger has the refinement BMW owners expect and deserve"... Les Bidrawn, EC

Its very difficult to know what to believe !!!

Wish I didn't like this car so much !!!!!!!

Apologies for the spelling its late and Im pissed.

[skyline_r34v]

Well paying $40-$60 for your M3 I'd surely hope you enjoy and love the hell out of your car. It would be a waste of money if you didn't.

[jmick5]

$40 - $60K ?. I wish ! . As with everything in the UK we pay through out teeth. I paid 46000 uk pounds for my car. That's roughly 82k dollars. As for your comments of course I am very happy with the car.

I live in London and its cool when you see other M3's around in the city. I just want ( and will get ) slightly more power.

My Europe car magazine didn't turn up this morning with the AA TUNNING article so still in the dark about it however.

Is anybody able to answer my questions regarding its performance. Im getting so pissed off with trying to get the info regarding this I think its almost worth just getting it shipped over and fitted.

Then Ill go test it and tell you all one way or another.

[thepolarfoxqx]

great britain really does pay severe prices for cars, as do many places. My understanding is scandanavia is even worse. It is sad, but we americans buy jaguars, aston martins, volvos and saabs than do people in the countries in which they are built. We are pretty on parity with prices of german made cars sold in germany. nearly no japanese car models come to america that are also sold in japan, so comparison there is hard, but my understanding is we pay proportionately less for their cars than they do. And then american made cars here are cheaper yet. we have it good in that respect.

[Thunf]

great britain really does pay severe prices for cars, as do many places. My understanding is scandanavia is even worse. It is sad, but we americans buy jaguars, aston martins, volvos and saabs than do people in the countries in which they are built. We are pretty on parity with prices of german made cars sold in germany. nearly no japanese car models come to america that are also sold in japan, so comparison there is hard, but my understanding is we pay proportionately less for their cars than they do. And then american made cars here are cheaper yet. we have it good in that respect.

Man, I tell you. I'm living in scandinavia (if you can say Finland belongs to that). I'm looking at the pricelists of all cars now... 1 euro is near 1 dollar.

Audi RS6 Avant 150.460

Audi A8 L 6.0 quattro A - 185.300

BMW M3 Coupé - 92.000

BMW Z4 3.0i - 68.500

BMW 760 iAL - 209.000 (did I have to mention!)

Chevrolet 5.7i V8 YBRA Coupé - 109.300

Ferrari 360 Modena F1 - 221.100 (A stupid car, I'd take the one two steps up waaaay before this one). Ferrari is only living on the F1 marketing where they are favoured - then people buy it and buy a Ferrari thinking they then got something)

Ford Focus 2.0i Ghia S 5D - 25.900

Lexus IS 200 - 37.600

Mercedes C 270 CDI A - 58.050

Mercedes E55 AMG A - 148.000

Mercedes S500 A - 139.000

Mercedes S600 Lang A - 214.000

Mercedes SL65 AMG A (450 kW) - 327.000 (what a car to care about... NOT!) For people who's got so much money they don't know how to get rid of them.

Porche 911 Turbo - 213.400

Subaru Impreza 2.0 WRX-STI - 51.900

VW Phaeton V10 TDI A - 158.500

Volvo V70 T5 - 52.800

I know a guy who knows a guy who's owning a big imperium over here... he's driving in a S500

In the capital I saw a Ferrari 360 Spider... yay.

However this country is the least corrupted country in the world and there are no people living in the street - or in housecars. I like our way of living and the system over here. But there are ofcourse the costs. Americans should stop complaining about expensive fuel - I hear that all the time. We pay 1.150 euro a litre (4.35 dollar a gallon!).

[thepolarfoxqx]

that's awful expensive. Actually, a euro is nearly a $1.25 here now. To give you back what we pay for those here compared to you:

the left hand column is what we pay in the US, the right is how many USD it would be in finland:

Audi RS6 Avant: $80,250------$188,075

Audi A8L-6.0 Quattro: $103,500(est)-----$231,635

M3 Coupe: $47,000-----$115,000

Z4 3.0i: $41,000-------$85,625

BMW 760iL $117,000------$261,250

Chevrolet Corvette 5.7i: $43,500-------$136,625

Ferrari F360 F1: 163,000-------$278,750

Lexus IS300/200: $30,000-----$47,000

Mercedes E55 AMG: $78,500-----$185,000

Mercedes S500: $90,000-----$173,750

Mercedes S600: $123,000------$267,700

Mercedes SL65 AMG: $179,000----$408,750

911 Turbo: $119,000-----$266,650

Impreza WRX-STi: $29,000----$63,750

VW Phaeton V10 TDi: $57,800-----$198,125

Volvo V70 T5: $39,000-----$66,000

That's really sad.

[LateNightCable]

That's really sad.

Whats' more sad than that, is living in a country that sells premium cars as cheap as they come, while others live on the street or in " housecars ".

If U.S. prices went through the roof like the rest of the world market, it would be okay, as long as the extra " proceeds " went towards making sure everyone is taken care of. Speaking as an American, about America, this country is very self indulgent. If people are too cheap to spread their wealth wisely, someone should do it for them. Make them pay more for their luxuries, and reward them for giving.

[Anzeige Amazon]

Hallo g-unit marko,

 

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

 

Der V16 Motor zum Selberbauen (Anzeige) ist auch genial.

[thepolarfoxqx]

are you familiar with adam smith?

America has the most powerful economy in the world. In fact, per person we have the most powerful economy in the world still. We did not get to being the supreme economic power by taking away the incentive to work harder, and punishing success. We have to take care of our citizens, that's only common sense, but you have to draw a line between taking care of people and intentionally targetting those who have done the best with what they had and suceeded the most. I understand the most succesful amongst us are the most capable to give, and rightly should, since america has given them the most, but that's what a stepped income tax is for. Ok, say you are one of the more succesful in america, you earn more money, of that higher amount you earn, you pay the highest percentage of it, say you go buy a luxury item with it, you pay proportionally more on it because of sales tax. Say you buy a nice house in a nice community, your income taxes are going to be a higher percentage of a higher value. Are you aware of the fact that in the United States, the top 10% of wage earners pay 90% of all taxes? So the succesful of us more or less shoulder the nation's tax burden. Taxing people under the 90% income bracket serves little purpose. The oppurtunity to succeed is here in the United States as much as anywhere in the world. You are what you make yourself.

See, look at it this way, we pay 2 out of every 5 dollars to federal income tax, another 1 in 5 to the state, city, medicare, and Social security (things I'm never going to use), of the 2 in 5 dollars i earned that i still have, i pay a combined greater than $40,000 in property taxes a year on our houses, everything I buy I pay 6.5% sales tax on, 50% of what i make in capital gains (stocks, bonds, mutual funds, real estate investments), and then inheritance, that gets gutted too (unless you are smart and set up a system of trusts and off-shore investments to protect it). The well off in the united states pay our fair share of the tax burden. It needs to be spent better, yes. Wellfare confuses me. Money that could be invested in created jobs and training people for these jobs is instead turned into handouts? That calls to mind an old japanese saying: Give a man a fish, feed him for a day, teach a man to fish, feed him forever.

Cars are inexpensive here because our system is powerfully efficient, we are not protectionist with our trade tariffs, we don't tax things like cars exorbently, because in america, having a car is a fact of life. I love people wanting to fix systems that aren't broken on high standing ideological reasons. It's that thinking that leads to billions of dollars of mis-spending by our government. Do you have any idea how many people work to pay even one billion dollars in taxes, much less the tens of billions we just throw around on interesting, ideological proposals? That to me is a travisty.

[LateNightCable]

No I don't know Adam Smith, it sounds like a very common name anyway. But penalizing those who make good is not what I meant, mandatory civic philanthropy from those who can comfortably afford it makes perfect sense to me. Because many people seem to have a problem with giving of themselves. The top 10% in the income bracket may pay 90% of all taxes, but its' still all reletive. It's not about penilization, just pay your share according to what one can give. They are not being driven to the poor house. In the U.S., income is potentially high, and many goods are fairly cheap. An expensive car is going to cost you the same no matter how much you make. It is not taxed according to your income.

What I'm getting at, and what you pointed out, is that money here should be spent better. Not enough money is spent on enriching the lives of the people, in a solid way. High income and cheap goods should make it much easier to give back, and invest in the people, for those who can afford to.

As far as government assistance goes, wellfare gets a lot of press because it has the reputation of enabling the lazy. Some are, some aren't. But disability benefits are probably worse off in that way, because many of those on it, may be a little off, but they are still physically able people - and many do nothing, and get payed lavishly every month in return. Wellfare is not living high off the hog, especially in the state of Indiana for example. But no one wants to pick on the " disabled ".

[thepolarfoxqx]

adam smith, the founder of captialism, whose "invisible hand theory" is what ours, and most other modern captialist economies are based on, said "the greater good best served by each individual pursuing his own self interest". He said by everyone doing what was best for themselves and competing,the world overall would be greatest served.

you can't force philanthropy. Did you know that with the money we are spending on the iraqi campaign alone, we could end all childhood hunger within the united states. How embarassing that we even have childhood hunger. The measure of fair income distribution within a country is the devaition of its average income from it's GDP per capita. Average income here is roughly 19k a year ,wheras GDP/capita is 38k, you do the math. It's sad. We need to invest in strengthening our economy, not jacking up import tarriffs or luxury taxing items. Also, 16% of our budget is paying interest on our debt. Interestingly, if the chinese government capitulates and a democratic regime comes from it, and the Saudi royal family is finally ousted from power, we could repudiate debt to both of them, which could save us hundreds of billions, if not trillions of dollars. It appears we have a conflict of interest in international relations. The danger of buying too much american debt is that then we want you gone.

[skyline_r34v]

you can't force philanthropy. Did you know that with the money we are spending on the iraqi campaign alone, we could end all childhood hunger within the united states. How embarassing that we even have childhood hunger.

That's pathetic, I've always opted out of helping everybody else and focus mainly on our society. Do they help pay for our shit or our debts? Not that I know of, it's stupid that we help everybody else when we have so much shit we need to get out of ourselves. I believe in helping people out but not until we have everything controlled on our end first.

[Thunf]

This went a bit off-topic, but obviously you guys have all something good to say...

[skyline_r34v]

I was just thinking how WAY off-topic we are but it happens.

[LateNightCable]

"the greater good best served by each individual pursuing his own self interest". - Adam Smith

That is all fine and well, but it easily turns into " the greater good best served by each individual pursuing his own selfish interest ". It's simple to disassociate one's self from humanity by saying that. But the truth is, we all have a responsibility to one another in some way. Like the saying goes, no man is an island.

Philanthropy is forced all the time, thats' what taxes are. Mandatory philanthropy to the government. My feeling is that it should be used more for focused humanitarian good works ( preferably at home before anywhere else ) instead of reckless spending on who knows' what.

Off topic, but this topic isn't without value.

[thepolarfoxqx]

smith argued that it should be selfish. You would do what was best for you, and in doing so, what was also best for the economy. John Forbes Nash revised Smith a number of years ago (there is a movie about him, "A Beautiful Mind"), his "Game Theory" stated, essentially, that the greatest good is served by doing what is in your best interest, while doing what was best for everyone else. The movie gives a great vision of his "blonde" example. All the same, what you are talking about is social democracy, like what sweden, denmark, finland, norway, and to a lesser extent - holland, germany, and france have. America has remained more purely captialistic, and we have prospered in it, so I would have trouble changing our fundamental ideology of economy.

[LateNightCable]

America has succeeded in becoming a very, very wealthy and powerful nation because of it's capitolism. As a bi-product, it has also become one of the most willful, and self absorbed. No plan is perfect, pure capitolism would work fine - if everyone as a whole could blend their selfish wants and needs, which everyone has, with a sense of community. Otherwise, it breeds corruption and social favoritsm very easily. Which - ta da! - the U.S. is very good at conceiling, or making seem normal.

The American system is pretty well oiled all considering, but I just wonder how sound it's reasoning remains, in a era of such drasticaly wide ranging living standards. It used to be that most of us were all just a bunch of farmers trying to make it. Life is not nearly as hard now, for most, due in part to capitolism. But in all the glory, don't forget the people still trying to make it.

[thepolarfoxqx]

we upper middle and upper class americans forget the way the rest lives. The power rests with us, we make the decisions, and we forget that the little guy just trying to get by is the average american. The thing is, the average american has it within themself to go to boundless limits within this country. America doesn't treat its citizens like six year olds, set up every detail for them to live happy, succesful lives, but if you can pick yourself up from the bootstraps, you can vault yourself up into a world hard to imagine. It's a trade-off. If you can hack, if you are willing to hack it, americans have no limits.

[g-unit marko]

back to the topic of the aa tuning sc M3.. The official time obtained from car and driver magazine for the quarter mile is:

1/4-mile: 13.1 sec @ 109 mph Embarrasing

Now we have a problem. The 13.1 sec quartermile time can be obtained from an almost stock M3 with just minor mods(exhaust) which has 333hp at 7900rpm. AA tuning M3 which has around 440hp at 7600rpm does the time of 13.1 sec. I dont know but I would not pay around $9000us to have my car still in the low 13's. Hp is not everything but when 100hp is added to the car I would at LEAST expect the mid 12's.

The driver which tested the car had to be a good driver because it was a big event which had many tunner cars that were competing in the supercar challenge.

[skyline_r34v]

Bwah hahahahaha that's INCREDIBLY pathetic. Only 1/5th of a second faster than stock, yeah that's a great deal!!!!

[zit]

better off making it lighter its cheaper and greatly increases accelaration.also that extra power is probably hampering ur start off traction on a quarter mile run

[imported_BillCA]

I believe AA is running 6 lbs. of boost. If that's the case I really doubt that the car is producing 110 hp over stock. I put the Dinan supercharger kit on my E 36 which runs 6 lbs of boost. Dinan claims around 341 hp or so at the crank but on the dyno it only showed about 314 or plus 74 hp. After adding cams, an intercooler and raising the boost to 10 lbs it showed 407hp. My guess is the AA car is running about 70-80hp over stock and probably wasn't a strong M3 to begin with.