What is under the bonnet of this car?

[m3ben05]

What du mean, there are tech specs on that thread. Im not a mechanic so i can only give you the details that i know!

We have done nothing to achieve the power output, its standard DTM spec from 92, i would have no idea how to build an engine like that

Im not bragging, i just thought ppl mite be interested, not trying to get into an argument about it

[Chaos]

But surely that kind of power will be at some really narrow band right at the top of the rev range with a spike of torque hiding elswhere????

Therefore driveability will suffer big style and popping down the shops will be a thing of the past???!!!!!

Or am i talking a big load of sh1te???

ur spot on m8.

to all intents an purposes itd be a race car engine and for the road itd be dog poo.

[Chaos]

Im not bragging, i just thought ppl mite be interested, not trying to get into an argument about it

and we are interested m8 - its fcuking stunning.

[chip-3door]

Awesome engine and i well believe the power figures as thats what they did make, its why the RS500's used to fly past them on the straights by so much, lol (but not the corners!)

Cant see why anyone would doubt it?


Make an utterly useless road car engine though of course!

[maxfield]

Yeah but M3's were the most succesful touring car.
I still really like cosworths ive liked them since i remember my dad had a choice betwen sierra cosworth or the M3.

[chip-3door]

Yeah but M3's were the most succesful touring car.
I still really like cosworths ive liked them since i remember my dad had a choice betwen sierra cosworth or the M3.

Not sure what you base that on, IIRC (i was young at the time) during the time the RS500's were in it they beat pretty much everything, or do you just mean the M3 was more successful cause it was there for longer as it never fell foul of any rule that disqualified it cause it was too much quicker than everythign else like having a turbo or anything.

To me the only way to prove you are sucessfull is to be so quick you get banned, not to be second to something that did then win when its gone.

But i dont claim to be an expert on ancient touring cars, i just know the rs500 were making 570bhp at times everyone else (due purely to no turbo, not cause of anything clever or impressive particuarly) was making sub 400

[maxfield]

I was very young when they race was born in 1990. But all i no is it was the most succesful touring car but i never knew much about it. thata alot of horsepower compaired to the M3

[chip-3door]

T4 turbo singing its guts out chucking more than a couple of bar of boost down the throat of the cosworth ford engine more than made up for any technical advantage the BMW lump had!

Definately not a fair fight at all!

[maxfield]

My dads getting a engine rebuild low compression turbo and everthing hopefully that will be over 400hp+ which will give cossies a run for there money

[chip-3door]

My dads getting a engine rebuild low compression turbo and everthing hopefully that will be over 400hp+ which will give cossies a run for there money

Only very tame basic tune cossies like mine mate, anything half decent these days is 600bhp+

My friends is currently over 700 off gas, 850 on gas, and with the new nitrous system ive outlined out for him should be 1000bhp

Crazy the figures some of these guys are getting!

[maxfield]

1000hp does seem pretty easy these days. Still not dast enough for me

[chip-3door]

VERY few cars that are as quick as Rods, just lots of people that make it sound like they are, LOL!

People bandy these figures about a lot but to the best of my knowledge the only genuine everyday road car to beat Rods so far in the UK at top speed is an 8 litre supercharged viper, any other car managing 200mph+ at brunters (or equivalent) is purely a company demonstrator vehicle not a daily driver by the owner.

[maxfield]

With 1000hp its gotta be pretty realiable which i guess i pretty hard.
When i was at torque developments there was a supra with 800hp+ and and 800ft lbs. and they said that was very realiable

[Chaos]

1000hp does seem pretty easy these days. Still not dast enough for me

easy to claim, not easy to actually make.

[Demlotcrew]

You guys crack me up, this comes to mind.

http://www.e30zone.co.uk/modules.php?na ... 010#256010

[Demlotcrew]

But surely that kind of power will be at some really narrow band right at the top of the rev range with a spike of torque hiding elswhere????

Therefore driveability will suffer big style and popping down the shops will be a thing of the past???!!!!!

Or am i talking a big load of sh1te???

ur spot on m8.

to all intents an purposes itd be a race car engine and for the road itd be dog poo.

How much experience of a S14 do you have?

Andrew

[Chaos]

How much experience of a S14 do you have?

Andrew

unless its an engine that defies the laws of physics then i dont need any real experience of it thanks andrew.
(oh and it wasnt just me who said itd be crap for the road)

the question asked was how to get an extra 65bhp from a 265bhp s14 2.3. This would mean a power output of 330bhp. From 2.5 litres (assuming part of the process was having it bored out to that size) that wud be asking for 132bhp per litre, if it was left as a 2.3 then itd be a little over 143bhp per litre

now if you can think of a way to do that (whilst keeping it n/a) without moving all the power up the rev range and giving it very little at lower revs then im sure you could make a shit load of cash from the idea - if you cant do that then do us all a favour and dont make sarcastic comments aimed at ppl who do know a bit about how engines work.

oh and what was your need in dissing the guys car in the first place ?
an ex group a race M3 with full dtm spec engine is awesome, and the only real reason for someone to diss it on an e30 forum seems to be plain and simple jealousy

[Demlotcrew]

plain and simple jealousy

Yeah im not building one myself

Andrew

[Chaos]

plain and simple jealousy

Yeah im not building one myself

Andrew

why diss his car then dude ?
genuine Group A M3 racer with history - surely its gotta be one of the ultimate e30's out there

[Demlotcrew]

It looks good no doubt, but i dont think its putting out 360bhp!
Some of the later 2.9l S14s were putting out around 400bhp and hes got a 2.5l? Which could be anything, he needs to ake it appart and see what parts they have used to build it to 360bhp.

Andrew

[chip-3door]

He said it revs to 10K didnt he?

You only need 185lbft or so at those revs to make 360bhp, seems pretty unlikely to me that it wont be making that sort of torque roughly, with probably a peak torque of 230 or so lower down the rev range.

That just basically what you would expect from any 16v motor of that displacement at those rpm, why does it surprise you?

[Chaos]

according to s14.net the Group A 2,5L cars were producing around 330bhp @ 8500rpm (and 215 lb ft @ 7500rpm)
its not too much of a stretch to go another 9% is it.
especially not if u supplement a few bits with more modern technology - ecu for example

[Demlotcrew]

That just basically what you would expect from any 16v motor of that displacement at those rpm, why does it surprise you?

Chaos, the engine was in a very high state of tune, to get another 30bhp out of it would have cost in excess of Ԛ£30k so i still stand by my comment. I know someone with state of the art parts in todays terms and his is the same spec and its making 290bhp so another 70 is a massive leap. Even if his engine is revving to 10k hes not making much power past 8.5 as everyone knows the 2.5l engines need some serious headwork to make anything past that. ThatÔš's why the 2l S14 rally engines revved to stupid speeds and had gears timing the cams not a chain.

Andrew

[Chaos]

That just basically what you would expect from any 16v motor of that displacement at those rpm, why does it surprise you?

Chaos, the engine was in a very high state of tune, to get another 30bhp out of it would have cost in excess of Ԛ£30k so i still stand by my comment. I know someone with state of the art parts in todays terms and his is the same spec and its making 290bhp so another 70 is a massive leap. Even if his engine is revving to 10k hes not making much power past 8.5 as everyone knows the 2.5l engines need some serious headwork to make anything past that. ThatÔš's why the 2l S14 rally engines revved to stupid speeds and had gears timing the cams not a chain.

Andrew

again the info comes form s14.net

"in 1991 the 2,5L E30 DTM cars had 360bhp."
so if they could find that power in 1991 why is it not feasible to have it now ?

[m3ben05]

Like i said i didnt want to start an argument, DTM spec 1992 is around 360bhp, may be a bit less, to be honest im not really fussed! Iv just bought a video converted, so il be posting some vids of it later on tonight. Watch this space

[chip-3door]

That just basically what you would expect from any 16v motor of that displacement at those rpm, why does it surprise you?

Chaos, the engine was in a very high state of tune, to get another 30bhp out of it would have cost in excess of Ԛ£30k so i still stand by my comment. I know someone with state of the art parts in todays terms and his is the same spec and its making 290bhp so another 70 is a massive leap. Even if his engine is revving to 10k hes not making much power past 8.5 as everyone knows the 2.5l engines need some serious headwork to make anything past that. ThatÔš's why the 2l S14 rally engines revved to stupid speeds and had gears timing the cams not a chain.

Andrew

Where on earth do you get that figure of an extra 30K from, what exactly do you think you would spend it on, or are you just plucking a figure out of the air becaues you havent got a clue, which is what it seems pretty obvious you are doing?

[m3ben05]

Where on earth do you get that figure of an extra 30K from, what exactly do you think you would spend it on, or are you just plucking a figure out of the air becaues you havent got a clue, which is what it seems pretty obvious you are doing?

Seems like he has no response for you there mate

Im converting some vids of the car when we took it to spa and croft earlier in the year, if anyone knows where to host large vid files please let me know, would be good if i could share them

[TommyC]

Just to add to this, the cav touring cars were just about managing 300bhp and that was from 2litres if my sources are correct (not sure of what rpm that was at though).

I do know they suffered power losses towards the end of some races because the inlet was on the back of the engine. This meant they were sucking in the heat genrated by the exhaust which was on the front.

They approached to Swindon race engines to re-engineer the heads so they could be fitted on the other way round to eliminate this (other teams weren't happy cos they thought this was giving an unfair advantage in the from of direct ram air. This which was never proved).

[chip-3door]

Yep the 20XE vauxhall engine happily makes well over 300bhp in race trim from 20% less capacity, so i find it hard to believe that the BMW lump is THAT much worse than the vauxhall one.

[m3ben05]

Yea, i was led to believe the same thing, all the other teams complained! To clear up the "most sucessful touring car" thing - The E30 M3 is the most sucessful based on number of race and championship victories however in most of the series that it raced head to head with the cossie it lost.

I believe that they were often in different classes though?

[chip-3door]

Its actually so easy to get to about 140bhp per litre from the XE that you can buy an off the shelf kit to do it:
http://www.sbdev.co.uk/Taper%20Kits/TP2 ... 90_Kit.htm


I just cant accept that BMW have designed the M3 engine which was intended for motorsport as wth less potential than the XE which was intended mainly for shopping at the time it first appeared in the astra in 1897!

[m3ben05]

The M3 was mainly designed with DTM rules in mind which were quite restrictive, i would guess that the XE engine was built with different rules in mind

[chip-3door]

The M3 was mainly designed with DTM rules in mind which were quite restrictive, i would guess that the XE engine was built with different rules in mind

it was made to go shopping, lol

[stevetigger]

The M3 was mainly designed with DTM rules in mind which were quite restrictive, i would guess that the XE engine was built with different rules in mind

it was made to go shopping, lol

Your obsessed with Vauxhall's and Fords

[chip-3door]

The M3 was mainly designed with DTM rules in mind which were quite restrictive, i would guess that the XE engine was built with different rules in mind

it was made to go shopping, lol

Your obsessed with Vauxhall's and Fords

LOL

Nah, i just find it funny the number of people on this site who:

A) belittle stuff like this DTM car

B) look down on the likes of vauxhalls and think bmw is all that matters


So i figured by pointing out that what they say cant be done easily can by a vauxhall engine, it would be food for thought for at least one of those groups, and epseically people in both groups at once, LOL