E30 Zone

what is the highest power figure that has been recorded from an m20 2.7, obviously money is the deciding factor.

doesnt Oz's car produce 230-240 with a not to wild cam?

also i take it that the wilder the cam the more power produced but less dirveabilty,

also running ITB's is a must along with lightning an balencing along with strenghtning inside the block.

also exhaust systems are going to play a major part when tunning to a high n/a figure i.e straight through pipes, size of silencers etc?

and if im correct in thinking the best way to achieve a high power figure is to use a 324td crank as explained in 'Andyboys' 2.7 thread?

any suggestions are welcome

Depends on the budget...

You could probably get 300hp out of a 2.7 but it will cost a lot!

i understand that getting alot of power is going to cost alot but is 250 bhp easily done on an m20? would be 100bhp/litre

The only person on here I know running over 250hp on an M20 is Scot (player6) and thats a 2.8.

Which is 260hp so that's 92hp/l.

hmm, need some detailed information on how i could achieve 250 bhp on a 2.7m20, i.e cams, headwork, bottom end work etc. mapping,


as i wantg to start buying parts i.e cams etc and dont want to waste time and money, as they do it right the first time.

Why not just buy a proper engine in the first place?

Something with 4 valves per cylinder at least!

you saying an m50 Jamie, nah wanna keep the heart of my car as as bmw intended to a degree, i.e m20 not m50 after thinking about it for a while. plus i have a nice 2.5 to build from think why not, its all in the car and has cost me £50 so far so leaves me a nice wad of cash to spend on the m20 instead of what it would cost for an m50 conversion

I'm pretty sure Oakeys car won't be far off 250hp.

Bexleys built with M/S and ITB's.

but isnt oakeys an eta bottom end?

kinda confussed as to what builds what best etc.

i take it at that cams, and headwork will play a major part in what power is produced

Getting air/petrol and exhaust gases out is what it's all about.

Running a pretty high compression will be needed depending on what cams you use.

was thinking 288 cams driveabity wont be to good but once moving would be awesome.

nice Haywood and scott exhaust and manifold probally only consisting of just a rear silencer.

as you can tell quite new to how it all works etc

If your going to build a 250hp 2.7 then your about to spend so much money and getting so little in return.

T3 turbo setup and no 2.7 or any NA M20 will seem fun.
You should be looking into about 6-7-8psi on a T3 sized turbo(HX30/GT28RS/T28/GT25)
and lightning spool.

I can't see it effecting it that much as the M20's a pretty torquey engine.

For more power you need more revs. So everything will have to be lighter and balanced. And then will need a higher lift cam so the power doesn't drop off.

problem i have with dforced induction is i will break it! atleast staying n/a i will hold some reliabilty to a degree, alot of turbo cars ive read about and seen have had problems, i want to be able to get in it, rape it, lock it up, and then repeat. etc, obviously servicing etc.

also i want to do alot of the work myself something i cant do with a turbo set-up as i know even less about them than i do with n/a tunning.

An 8000 rpm 2.7 litre M20 that makes 250 bhp will never be as reliable as a stock M20B25 running 0.5 bar boost with a decently sized turbo, sans intercooler even. With the N/A option - the M20 valve train is a really weak link, a long with greater inertial loads.

Either way you look at it, you won't be running Motronic and either route requires tuning for longevity.

1an wrote:problem i have with dforced induction is i will break it! atleast staying n/a i will hold some reliabilty to a degree, alot of turbo cars ive read about and seen have had problems, i want to be able to get in it, rape it, lock it up, and then repeat. etc, obviously servicing etc.

also i want to do alot of the work myself something i cant do with a turbo set-up as i know even less about them than i do with n/a tunning.

you can just as easily destroy your NA car as a FI car.
There is no more reliability in 250hp 2.7 then a 250hp 2.5 turbo

250hp from a 2.7 is not going to leave anything in the low end.
nothing will be there. There is some left behind on a 4valve engine but not a 2valve engine. Why? Because you are going to have to shift the torque curve.
Any 2.7 should make at best about 300nm torque which in itself is really high for a 2.7, from there you have to get those 300nm´s to go higher to create the hp you want.



here max torque is at around 4k, with maximum power beeing at 5300.
That´s 268nm torque at 5,3k. to turn 268nm into 250hp you need it at 6700rpm. That´s a complete torque curve move of 1400rpms.
And if you look at the graph, torque at 2500rpm will not be at 3900rpm.
guess what the torque is going to be like below 3k?
This is not going to be a win win situation.

1an..i have all the parts required to build a 2.7 hi comp big hp engine. let me know if your interested

288 cams and mot's......

Simon13 wrote:288 cams and mot's......

Depends whether the probe goes up your car's exhaust, or one parked along side it!

Brianmoooore wrote:

Simon13 wrote:288 cams and mot's......

Depends whether the probe goes up your car's exhaust, or one parked along side it!

Gunni, i kinda understand what your saying

How deep is your pocket? 180-200bhp will cost around £2000.Each single bhp added to that will cost around £10. The best improvment to an M20 is to add capacity.Starting with a 325i the easiest way is to follow Jassman's lead. As Gunni has shown,when you get above 230ish bhp the car becomes difficult to drive on the road. 2.7/8s are all about drivability and torque,torque is what fires a car out of a corner,bhp is what you brag about down the pub. The difficult/expensive part of the Maxfield route is the exhaust and the electrical work,if you can fabricate your own exhaust manifold and solve the wiring you are home and dry....

there isnt a chance im going to build a 2.8, its 2.7 or nothing really to be honest, obviously the car will need a standalone which ill have done by Ant.

its not going to happend over night thats for sure it will be over a period hence why im findig out what parts etc to make a nice powerful 2.7,

Like I said above 1an.. I have all the parts you need bar the head, sump and ancilleries.

what are the parts you have then? 324td crank? pistons? con rods? how much would you be wanting?

The ETA crank is more then up to the job.

Have a read of this >> http://www.metricmechanic.com/pdfs/M20_ ... ochure.pdf

why not a 2.8 1an? its less work than a 2.7 for more power..

Jhonno wrote:why not a 2.8 1an? its less work than a 2.7 for more power..

thats what i was thinking,

m50 crank, some 320 rods and a crank spacer. bobs your mothers brother.

M52 crank

Shouldn't you get used to a standard 2.5 before you go for a tuned 2.7, after all i doubt the 1.6 set the world a light.

Also how do you expect to get insured on it at 18

got a standard 2.5 plusw getting insured isnt a problem,

and im not going the 2.8 way as from what ive thread its equally as much work to build an engine that wont rev like a 2.7,

Why won't it rev as well?

only from what ive heard,

2.8 has the same bore and stroke correct? so it's a square engine - i've never read anything about the character of this. Theres plenty to read on over or under square lumps

As to saying they don't rev like a 2.7 thats rubbish E30Adams 2.8 revved very well

if you can find some alpina pistons you can use these with an eta/td crank and 325i rods and off you go, no decking or vernier pulleys needed

If you got the bottom end lightened/balanced, it won't have any problems revving.

Simon13 wrote:2.8 has the same bore and stroke correct? so it's a square engine - i've never read anything about the character of this. Theres plenty to read on over or under square lumps

As to saying they don't rev like a 2.7 thats rubbish E30Adams 2.8 revved very well

if you can find some alpina pistons you can use these with an eta/td crank and 325i rods and off you go, no decking or vernier pulleys needed

not disbuting what your saying but how can a 2.7 and a 2.8 have the same bore and stroke?