cam upgrade & big bore throttle body

[Simon13]

i love talking to myself!



waiting for pizza on a friday night on here

[M5pilot]

Here's something that was done not so long ago:

First graph is of a 325i with Schrick 284/272 cam and the old style BTB manifold, BBTB.

Compression ratio of 8.8:1

Second graph is as above but with Mass air conversion and ITG Filter:



The conversion was improved upon with a Sebring exhaust the the current BTB manifold and we got to around 196 bhp but I don't have the graph for that anymore.

This car was well good to drive!

I'd like to do the same conversion to a high comp 2.5, I think the 200bhp barrier could just be broken.

Sal

[fowler]

there are print outs i am sure the owner of the car will post them up soon enough !!! head work my arse, Oz your engine will make more power on squirt just purely map it to complement all mods
i am highly serious about this claim i would not make it if i did not have proof
but all this BBR is 20 + years ago technoledgy has moved on since then.
All will become clear just wait

[DaveD]

not much torque though and what was the bhp at the wheels

[fowler]

bh- 172@wheels.
so !!

[Gunni]

So is this engine still a STOCK engine.

Technology may have moved on but not the M20

[reggid]

there are print outs i am sure the owner of the car will post them up soon enough !!! head work my arse, Oz your engine will make more power on squirt just purely map it to complement all mods
i am highly serious about this claim i would not make it if i did not have proof
but all this BBR is 20 + years ago technoledgy has moved on since then.
All will become clear just wait

you should probably clarify yourself.......are you saying that if you take a low comp 325i add only MS and coilpacks and you get get 200bhp or are there other bolt on mods aswell?

[DaveD]

bh- 172@wheels.
so !!

22bhp loss!!!???...and pigs fly

[fowler]

if you read i did not stat where the figure was taken from the crank . stock crank power being wha 165 on good day from a low comp.
all the car has is a free flow back box and sligthly larger injectors, squirt and coil pack all internal are stock no cams etc and all that no head work, no manifolds it can be done

[reggid]

not much torque though and what was the bhp at the wheels

its still only a 2.5 so its never going to make the numbers that a 2.7 will

[fowler]

imagine on a good 2.7 oguz where are you need your car and a 1K

[DaveD]

not much torque though and what was the bhp at the wheels

its still only a 2.5 so its never going to make the numbers that a 2.7 will

i agree but was looking at the figures sal put up above..have a look at daimlermans figures with a miller maf and a 2.7

http://www.e30zone.net/modules.php?name ... highlight=

[M5pilot]

Guys,

you cannot compare figures from a different dyno!

Fowler , are you talking about a certain red car that made some unusually high BHP this week?

Sal

[Kos]

but all this BBR is 20 + years ago technoledgy has moved on since then.
All will become clear just wait

but head work but a skilled engineer is the same. not many people who can port a head very well.

as for getting 200bhp on an m20 by pissing more fuel into it, and mappiing it will multi spunk with a coil pack is BS

if the engin isn't breathing any better then it will struggle to get 10bhp increase. it commn knowledge that bigger injectors are not needed even in a 2.7 conversion. i reacll a few year back whne AMD were doing a lot of bmw work that they remapped a late m20 in a 325i sport, its power was down to 162bhp ot there abouts, it then got bushed up to 182, with a similar increase in torque. the car in question was featuerd in bmw car magazine ( it was avery rare granit silver (which looks grey ) tech 2.

having seen lots of m20's on the rollers with various mods, i doubt that any m20 with no internal mods will ever make 200bhp with stand alone of any sort. stand alone does give you greater control over what you have done to the engine with mods to fine tune it basically map it to your specific requierments and tune it to a safe level when OE systems are limited or if the application requiers it ( eg engine swop , turbo charging etc )

to extract significant power from an m20 you need to let the engine breath or have a capacity incrase.

[reggid]

not much torque though and what was the bhp at the wheels

its still only a 2.5 so its never going to make the numbers that a 2.7 will

i agree but was looking at the figures sal put up above..have a look at daimlermans figures with a miller maf and a 2.7

http://www.e30zone.net/modules.php?name ... highlight=

look at Oz's 2.7 plot at bexleys (same machine)..........

http://www.e30zone.net/modules.php?name ... &start=150

same basic charactristics except + 20tq down low and 30tq up high for 2.7 with fresh rebuild and higher compression.

[M5pilot]

Kos,

A good healthy 2.5 with a Schrick 288/288, BTB and MAF conversion will make 200 bhp.

I'm assuming everyone is going to agree with you on the fact that standalone will not give you more power over any other system that removes the AFM.

[daimlerman]

One of the reasons I am going to the rolling road day at Sal's on the 24 Nov 07 is to get an opinion from Sal and his crew as to the effectivness of the Miller MAF and their take on my zone chip.Those of you with long memorys will remember that Miller wanted my ECU and chip to modify to accept their unit.This did not make Ant a happy bunny at the time,but if my engine is running to the best of it's ability then that is the price that I have to pay. On the other hand,if Sal and co. can convince me that I require a setup session to make my engine even better,I will give it some proper thought.In any case,what I have learnt from building this engine is freely available to everyone else...

[M5pilot]

daimler,

we can have an open discussion about what's the most cost effective way is on here.

No matter what system you go with the aim is to remove the AFM and replace it with a more efficient air metering device.

The one thing no one can run away from is that a rolling road remap of some sort is going to be required. It doesn't have to be the balls out "every load point" remap which could be expensive, it could be just live remapping the full throttle and then doing a general percentage change on part throttle for ignition timing and fuel. This would be far less time consuming and cheaper. Atleast the full throttle will be fully optimised here.

I think it's important that as many different type of options are given to people as everyone has a different budget.

Sal

[DaveD]

its still only a 2.5 so its never going to make the numbers that a 2.7 will

i agree but was looking at the figures sal put up above..have a look at daimlermans figures with a miller maf and a 2.7

http://www.e30zone.net/modules.php?name ... highlight=

look at Oz's 2.7 plot at bexleys (same machine)..........

http://www.e30zone.net/modules.php?name ... &start=150

same basic charactristics except + 20tq down low and 30tq up high for 2.7 with fresh rebuild and higher compression.

very nice but I think I prefer the nearly flat line of torque from daimlermans engine...This thread was about (if anyone can remember that far back)the benefits of different mods..especially a new cam and it comes down to what do you want...peaky power or low down grunt...

you pays your money and takes your choice.....grunt

[fowler]

remove MAF just an obstruction for the air to get to the engine.
But as you say SAL the orginal BMW AFM is a bit naff but i was designed in the 80's
as for BBTB good exhaust . PITA to FIT , but i love the noise of the X pipe that on a 2.7 is a a fantastic noise.

[DaveD]

remove MAF just an obstruction for the air to get to the engine.
But as you say SAL the orginal BMW AFM is a bit naff but i was designed in the 80's
as for BBTB good exhaust . PITA to FIT , but i love the noise of the X pipe that on a 2.7 is a a fantastic noise.

was it a good night last night

[fowler]

nope stone cold sober last night

[Simon13]

this thread is a time bomb until it all kicks off.....

[fowler]

is it thought it was a discussion simon

[daimlerman]

I will see what my motor makes on the 24th,and listen to the advice that will come my way.Hope that the OP has gained something from the way this thread has evolved....certainly if I was to start again I would look at the 2.8 options in a different light,I may well use an autobox as well,as that would take best advantage of the flat tourque 'curve' that the Dunstable machine showed.The way that I can overtake in 5th gear from only 2000rpm still impesses me,holding 3rd to 5000rpm produces a fantastic howl that yesterday afternoon saw off a Saab turbo...

[fowler]

2.8 engine is 2 sqaure it works but not efficient as a very hot 2.7.

[DaveD]

2.8 engine is 2 sqaure it works but not efficient as a very hot 2.7.

how do you come to that,

it must be more efficient on the bang to buck ratio which is equally important

[M5pilot]

Fowler,

There are 2.9's out there putting down some very very big horsepower.

Sal

[Kos]

Kos,

A good healthy 2.5 with a Schrick 288/288, BTB and MAF conversion will make 200 bhp.

I'm assuming everyone is going to agree with you on the fact that standalone will not give you more power over any other system that removes the AFM.

i'm not saying its not, i recon it is possible with a cam btb and head work. but bens ( fowlers) claim of 200bhp on a standard engine with only MS and injectors is a joke

[fowler]

no its not Kos its at the crank i will prove it when the paperwork comes through
What power would a de-cated M50 make ?

[Kos]

yes it is, you you atre saying that a 2.5 m20 with bigger injectors MS and coil packs maked 200 bhp at the crank . NO other mods ?

as for m50 what engine ??

[fowler]

the 2.5 24v decated ??
just an idea i have thats all
Kos believe me what i am saying is true !!!

[Simon13]

the cam on a standard 2.5 M20 is "lawnmower spec" they are 252/252 for gods sake how it's going to make 200bhp seriously with that and a log manifold fitted to it? Getting air in and out with that spec is a feet in itself!

[Kos]

i've never looked into the m50 2.5, but a removing a cat from stanard engine will not do a great deal on its own. it has been known for cars to loose power as they are set up from the factory to run with them.

[fowler]

si i have a consistant 6 runs with the power between 195-202 gaining on each run some else has the paper workbut as soon as it is up you will see what i mean
but i can't understand that you still use AFM's and maf's why for the same mone as a maf and piggy back chip you can run standalone
Standalone is what you make it.
you have to understand that all air goesthromaf etc and gets distorotred air flow i mean and the venturrie effect of the TB open is not efficient. but whe you have a open hole with no distortion. flow is no corrupted. that why thermal ellements are used instead. just wait for the hard evidence before you put water on the flames of progress