E36 3.0 M3 Performance Gains

[mr E34 11]

Sorry mate, but the only way to know flywheel power is if you remove the engine & place it on a bench engine dyno.

Those dyno calculations are way out, thats what all the guys in the know told me.

[10hove 0]

Sorry mate, but the only way to know flywheel power is if you remove the engine & place it on a bench engine dyno.

Those dyno calculations are way out, thats what all the guys in the know told me.

Very true but thats why a base run will still give a comparison of the gains as long as the car is run on the same dyno even if its not a 100% correct figure I have dynoed over over 10 race cars on the same dyno most many times over so have a pretty good idea, anyway the point wasnt to argue horsepower theres plenty of that on the web as the say when the green flag drops the bullshit stops (but I suppose now its red lights that go out for the race start)

By the way the BMW race club in Britain runs the a class based on weight and dynoed horespower (same dyno) and the figure they produce are for M3s are from 270-360hp

The point of this post was performance mods for M3 anyway not dyno figures so I dont intend to get into that, the real point is you need some form of measurement.

cheers

Hove

[CamB 48]

You can see the Transmission Correction Factor (tcf) is 1.15, so you can work out the power to the hubs.

To be honest for a 3 litre it looks high - even the before graph. But it could be true - I've heard/read the 3 litres often put out more than standard hp without mods...

Running a carbon airboxes and a map sensor with standalone or add-on ECU seems to be a common mod in the UK for the track/race guys, and (a) the power claims are good plus ( the fast guys seem to have it ... so chances are it works, but its $$$$$ ---> airbox, ECU/piggyback, dyno will sure add up (ie towards $5k).

If you can stomach the cost of a light flywheel and suitable clutch they make it heaps nicer to drive fast (and less likely to wear out the clutch), especially with a shorter diff ratio. Both are a bit of a compromise though (the diff on refinement and fuel economy, and the car I drove with the light flywheel had an uncivilised rattle at idle in neutral from the unsprung clutch).

[Guest SamSpargo]

Just get a 3.2 if you are not happy

The 3.0 actually made their powers claims, show me a 3.2 that did

Edited September 6, 2008 by SamSpargo

[chase 0]

You can see the Transmission Correction Factor (tcf) is 1.15, so you can work out the power to the hubs.

To be honest for a 3 litre it looks high - even the before graph. But it could be true - I've heard/read the 3 litres often put out more than standard hp without mods...

Running a carbon airboxes and a map sensor with standalone or add-on ECU seems to be a common mod in the UK for the track/race guys, and (a) the power claims are good plus ( the fast guys seem to have it ... so chances are it works, but its $$$$$ ---> airbox, ECU/piggyback, dyno will sure add up (ie towards $5k).

If you can stomach the cost of a light flywheel and suitable clutch they make it heaps nicer to drive fast (and less likely to wear out the clutch), especially with a shorter diff ratio. Both are a bit of a compromise though (the diff on refinement and fuel economy, and the car I drove with the light flywheel had an uncivilised rattle at idle in neutral from the unsprung clutch).

Just out of interest you can see the effect of the custom tuned chip in the diffrence between the runs , this chip was custom tunned by emailing the lambda data back and modifiyng the map and dynoing again,this car was running rich at the top end so we had to lean it off at the top end

[crazyarab 6]

$1085 divide by

.46

=$2350 approx, depends on the exchange every day.

Mmm not cheap is it (not that I was expecting it to be).

There was a nice yellow Hamann e36 M3 on trademe recenly with this setup, If I knew it cost that much to install the intake.... I would have taken it more seriously!

Some really good advice flying around here guys, cheer!

As mentioned, I think get a full checkup and dyno is probably the best place to start the endeavor.

[morerevsm3 7]

E46 M3 crank pulley is direct bolt on, and underdrives everything, US spec pullies do not fit.

I also have 3.64 diff in mine, and ACS short shifter

airbox came from US ebay and was a lot cheaper than quoted above, but only made small hp gain from it over raid maxflow enclosed pod with standard plenum, but looks and sounds great, and is ~ 4kg lighter

[hybrid 1043]

Holy crap that thing is awesome, I must find out if it can handle boost...

no ..

Your stock cast intake will handle about 800odd bhp before it will inplode. This has been tested on other turbo s50b30.

Turbo plenium design is quite different from the N/A versions. Pleniums are like exhaust systems, They can look good but infact cause HP loss when buying into cheaper look good options.

The intakes runner length play a big part in torque and power levels. Turbo pleniums are usually a lot shorter to help with compressor spool up times and also made from materials such as steel/stainless.

Check out some of the designs from the s54 version from Horse power freaks

[ecko_complex 3]

no ..

Your stock cast intake will handle about 800odd bhp before it will inplode. This has been tested on other turbo s50b30.

Turbo plenium design is quite different from the N/A versions. Pleniums are like exhaust systems, They can look good but infact cause HP loss when buying into cheaper look good options.

The intakes runner length play a big part in torque and power levels. Turbo pleniums are usually a lot shorter to help with compressor spool up times and also made from materials such as steel/stainless.

Check out some of the designs from the s54 version from Horse power freaks

Awww what a kill joy, we all know looks > performance... Just kidding, the plenum is the least of my worries, it's 2g I'd much rather spend on a bigger churbo. HPF are my heroes, my clutch will most likely come from them, along with my e46 stage 3 turbo kit . Edited September 7, 2008 by ecko_complex

[CamB 48]

The intakes runner length play a big part in torque and power levels. Turbo pleniums are usually a lot shorter to help with compressor spool up times and also made from materials such as steel/stainless.

I thought the main point of short runners - including/in particular on a turbo, was to increase the top end by allowing the engine to breathe up there, and that this comes at the expense of mid range torque (which longer, equal length runners give).

On a turbo car this makes spool up worse. A standard NA manifold should spool better but may restrict top end.

Is it different on an M3?

Edited September 7, 2008 by CamB

[crazyarab 6]

Righto, phase 1 has been initiated.

I took the car in for a benchmark dyno run and ran the following (images attached).

Note: the power reading is actually at the wheels NOT the flywheel as suggested in the title as tcf is set to 1.0.

I also had the air/fuel ratio measured and it seems that she is running a bit lean (according to the guy), you guys can judge for yourselves from the graphs. He suggested that this may be due to a faulty sensor or something... any ideas?

So the plan from now is to try and find the fault that is bunging up the a/f ratio and getting it running spot on, this should hopefully pull it closer to the factory numbers which is around 200kw?

Finally, I am still very newbie when it comes to these numbers but to be honest I was expecting a bit more.

[mr E34 11]

You are putting approx 230hp down at the wheels, 172kw x 1.34 = 230hp.That is pretty good, other 3.0 M3 owners would be similar over a small range + or -

If you guess ( & that is all you can do) 20% max drivetrain losses, 20% + 230hp = 276 hp @ flywheel.

Factory claim 286hp don't they, so that is within range.(morerevsm3 in Aussie started with 170kw on roller dyno)

Edited September 14, 2008 by mr E34

[crazyarab 6]

You are putting approx 230hp down at the wheels, 172kw x 1.34 = 230hp.That is pretty good, other 3.0 M3 owners would be similar over a small range + or -

If you guess ( & that is all you can do) 20% max drivetrain losses, 20% + 230hp = 276 hp @ flywheel.

Factory claim 286hp don't they, so that is within range.(morerevsm3 in Aussie started with 170kw on roller dyno)

Yeh, good point.

I suspected it's not tooo shabby.

At least now I have a platform to get going from !

[mr E34 11]

Alpina Australia has a good range of dyno graphs for comparison.

http://www.alpinaaustralia.com.au/dyno/dyno_main.htm

[mr E34 11]

Didn’t the US cars only have like 190 KW?

Don't know if anyone is interested but i found the BMW Car Mag article on the super rare US E36 M3 Lightweight.

It was based on the US M3.............ONLY 125 LIGHTWEIGHTS WERE BUILT........................"At the end of the year the lightest & most powerful engines had been set aside for the lightweight project"

Engine was standard 240 bhp S50 B30 USA unit but hand picked...BMW M oil pan & dual-pickup oil pump.

I could scan & post if interested in this rare car.(current prices $40,000 for a good one)