M30vM50 traffic light grand prix,what would win???
Moderator: martauto
-
maggspower
- Turbo Farmer Tractor Driver
- Posts: 2376
- Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2005 11:00 pm
- Location: Nowhere near South Wales, ok butt
I reckon the m30, although its only about 15 bhp more but in the torque stakes it got a big advantage. More power, more torque and a little more weight
-
leeparkes
- Married to the E30 Zone

- Posts: 9538
- Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 11:00 pm
- Location: Black country
Out of the trap id say the M30 due to plentiful torque,
round a track may be a different story!
round a track may be a different story!
Cypriotgeeza wrote:I done both my mates in my old 318is
felt so proud,even tried it with a E30 325i and got put in my place..
-
maggspower
- Turbo Farmer Tractor Driver
- Posts: 2376
- Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2005 11:00 pm
- Location: Nowhere near South Wales, ok butt
Thrers only one way to find out............................FIIIIIIIIIIIGHT 
-
Ziggy
- E30 Zone Team Member

- Posts: 11534
- Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 11:00 pm
- Location: floating round my tin can...
218bhp vs 192. 229lb/ft vs 181. Quoted weight difference is 7kg. Although I suspect it's significantly more than that, an m50 isn't as light as some would have you believe! Heavier than an m20 for example, according to any figures I've found...
M52 vs M30 is a different matter, but a healthy (plenty aren't!) m30 vs a healthy m50 on the same gearing, I can't see it going anything other than the m30's way every time.
The M50's better for most things, but not for straight line acceleration.
M52 vs M30 is a different matter, but a healthy (plenty aren't!) m30 vs a healthy m50 on the same gearing, I can't see it going anything other than the m30's way every time.
The M50's better for most things, but not for straight line acceleration.
E30 in need of wiring loom smoke since April '11...
+1Ziggy wrote:218bhp vs 192. 229lb/ft vs 181. Quoted weight difference is 7kg. Although I suspect it's significantly more than that, an m50 isn't as light as some would have you believe! Heavier than an m20 for example, according to any figures I've found...
M52 vs M30 is a different matter, but a healthy (plenty aren't!) m30 vs a healthy m50 on the same gearing, I can't see it going anything other than the m30's way every time.
The M50's better for most things, but not for straight line acceleration.
E30 325is with M20B31
-
Ziggy
- E30 Zone Team Member

- Posts: 11534
- Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 11:00 pm
- Location: floating round my tin can...
Pass - mine was broken this year & it's a lardy cab anyway! Martins was there this year (maybe '07) wasn't it? Would be an interesting comparison. What were the m50s & m20b27s making?Jhonno wrote:What times have standard M30's got at the 'Pod?
I seem to remember Karan's verdict after driving Will's m50, GUG & Toby's m30 (before it was rather more than standard!) was that the m30 felt noticably quicker...
E30 in need of wiring loom smoke since April '11...
-
town325i
- E30 Zone Team Member

- Posts: 7050
- Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 11:00 pm
- Location: cannock staffordshire
see all the excuses are coming out already why do an engine transplant for an engine that isnt running properly seems pointless to me!oakey wrote:If I had to put money on it it would be the m30. Only if it was running properly. Alot of m30's seem to be down on power

-
fuzzy
- He who sleeps with "Gingers"
- Posts: 14351
- Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2005 11:00 pm
- Location: melbourne Australia
but its the ones that dont have them that usually make these claims. like the 'is' owners who claim all 2.5's are worn out and down on power whilst all standard 'is' have more power than bmw originally claimed.town325i wrote:see all the excuses are coming out already why do an engine transplant for an engine that isnt running properly seems pointless to me!oakey wrote:If I had to put money on it it would be the m30. Only if it was running properly. Alot of m30's seem to be down on power
-
Rav335uk
- E30 Zone Meets/Events Team

- Posts: 27985
- Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 11:00 pm
- Location: Mad mad mad
- Contact:
I'd say the M30, would like to see this develop a bit more.
I've beaten many various cars now off the lights, but what -60 times do the m50 and m52 have????
And i'd agree with the choice of diff too, that would make a difference too.
I've beaten many various cars now off the lights, but what -60 times do the m50 and m52 have????
And i'd agree with the choice of diff too, that would make a difference too.

If you Got "Haters",Then your doing something Right!
CR24v??? Where's it all gone?? LOL
I dont own an m30. I dont own an m50. I'm pretty neutral tbh.town325i wrote:see all the excuses are coming out already why do an engine transplant for an engine that isnt running properly seems pointless to me!oakey wrote:If I had to put money on it it would be the m30. Only if it was running properly. Alot of m30's seem to be down on power
I personally would go for an m50 over an m30 though.

What we need is a rolling road day with a selection of both transplants so we can pair up an M30 & M50 that are putting out as close to what they had when new and give this a proper test. 
My next conversion (maybe in the G/F's tourer) will be an M50B25
My next conversion (maybe in the G/F's tourer) will be an M50B25
BMW E30 344i track car 
BMW F31 335d xdrive
BMW F31 335d xdrive
what is the weight difference between the two?e36boy wrote:Ive voted M50 because the M30 isnt likely to be producing the 218 bhp like when it was new and wouldnt the M50 be lighter ?
also if the two engines were from roughly the same year (91) they will have both lost power
plus ive read the M30 is tougher than the M50!
-
town325i
- E30 Zone Team Member

- Posts: 7050
- Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 11:00 pm
- Location: cannock staffordshire
yes they would but they are a lot newer and have had less time to be neglected like the m30cracker wrote:the M50 could go through neglect,wouldnt the M50 also lose power?town325i wrote:general wear and tear and lack of maintenance from tight ownerscracker wrote:what causes the M30 to lose power?

-
12345kevin
- E30 Zone Camper

- Posts: 1161
- Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2005 11:00 pm
- Location: Essex
If both engines are in good order and standard, then I would put money on the M30 as long as it's a straight line !!!
Any corners involved then it will be the M50
Any corners involved then it will be the M50
M30 is 12v sohc (211PS) @ 5700 - (225 ft·lbf) @ 4000
M50 is 24v dohc (189 hp) @ 5900 - (184 ft·lbf) @ 4200
Look at all the extra air the M50 can force into the chambers than a M30, saying that M30 are fast in a straight line because of the torque, especially in an E30. But when your ragging out a 24v engine they do have alot more poke.
Its really hard to tell, i want to say M30 but im not sure
Whats a usual M30-E30 time down the pod?
M50 is 24v dohc (189 hp) @ 5900 - (184 ft·lbf) @ 4200
Look at all the extra air the M50 can force into the chambers than a M30, saying that M30 are fast in a straight line because of the torque, especially in an E30. But when your ragging out a 24v engine they do have alot more poke.
Its really hard to tell, i want to say M30 but im not sure
Whats a usual M30-E30 time down the pod?
- Bavarian_Autotech
- E30 Zone Newbie

- Posts: 117
- Joined: Wed Jul 05, 2006 11:00 pm
- Location: Forest of Dean
why would you be using the low end ?Simon13 wrote:no way M30's don't have the low end torque people seem to think they do! A good 2.7 will better one
surely blasting from standstil you will be using the top end of the revs.
-
town325i
- E30 Zone Team Member

- Posts: 7050
- Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 11:00 pm
- Location: cannock staffordshire
wont you need low end tourqe to move away?Bavarian_Autotech wrote:why would you be using the low end ?Simon13 wrote:no way M30's don't have the low end torque people seem to think they do! A good 2.7 will better one
surely blasting from standstil you will be using the top end of the revs.




