First off, I have an E30, not an '02. I just figure you guys would know more about getting power out of an NA M10 and carbs than the guys in the e30 forum do.

I am up in the air at the moment on what to do to power my M10. I originally wanted to do a small turbo to get around 200hp, but now I am considering doing an old school NA setup (cam, exhaust, ITBs or twin sidedrafts) like the 2002s. I saw 2002 touring in the February 2006 Total BMW that had 195bhp! What would you guys do for my faux Hartge?

E 30 with with carbs would sure make people look 2x under the hood!

E 30 with with carbs would sure make people look 2x under the hood!

No doubt, but a pair of Webers sure is a mean sight!

I voted turbo. But really, screw webers. A velocity stack ITB setup would make people look twice.

I voted turbo. But really, screw webers. A velocity stack ITB setup would make people look twice.

Ah, screw it ITBs
Keep it old school!

Why not something like this!

http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/3615/tbucketams5.th.jpg (http://img204.imageshack.us/my.php?image=tbucketams5.jpg)

But seriously, sidedrafts would be cheaper than ITBs, but yes ITBs would be friggin SWEET! I am still up in the air on what to do. A low mounted turbo would be cool, but the NA would be more of sleeper, even with the hood opened. Yes, it would be less powerful to run NA, but it would be so cool! But it will also be more difficult and expensive as there are less people going this route.

how much power are you trying to get?

how much power are you trying to get?

Just more. If I go turbo, I want around 200hp, if NA I would be happy with 150-160hp. I'm still trying to keep it realistic.

I voted turbo, imo theres a reason that the switch to efi was made.. because its just that much more precise and better. You'll be doing alot of tuning with twin sidedrafts, but to each his own. Also, for the cost of twin sidederafts you could probably build your own itb setup with a megasquirt controller. With a turbo you can easily make the hp amount that you seek to get.

Hey-

If you decide to go turbo I have the perfect turbine housing for you. Initially I installed the pictured .40A/R turbine on my car but it stopped making power at around 270BHP to the rear wheels. Installed on a stock displacement M10 this would be a great match. My engine has been bored and stroked to almost 2.3 liters and I have since upgraded to a larger turbine housing.

The Rotomaster housing was purchased new, sent to Extrude Hone for passage cleaning and ceramic coated black.

Let me know if you are interested.

Kurt

N/A all the way sounds so much better than a turbo

N/A all the way sounds so much better than a turbo

LIES!!!!

N/A all the way sounds so much better than a turbo

I agree - the sound of all four butterflies wide open gulping air on a pair of sidedrafts is sweet music...

what kind of power could be seen from a pair of carbs?

what kind of power could be seen from a pair of carbs?

Back in the day, the Alpina A3 model with dual Webers was advertised as making 157.5 bhp & 144 lb ft torque, whereas their A4S motor, which was spec'ed the same as the A3 throughout, but had the Kugelfischer/Alpina FI fitted to it, was advertised as making 168 bhp & 146 lb ft torque.

You can get more than this nowadays, but from what I've seen, practicality kicks in to limit NA 2-liter M10's to typically under 200 bhp max. For more than 200 bhp - one typically has to go to some form of air compression (turbocharging or supercharging).

ITB's with turbo setup ... make sure you have a CF surge tank fabbed up for that mug.

I think what's more important is the power curve and what your intended purpose is. To get anywhere close to 200whp na, will probably have a peaky curve where as forced induction can give you a more broader curve generally.

FYI - Alpine is all over this thread like a rash.

Not to sound like a pompus ass or anything but I have tried just about everything with the M10. I had a POS Korman Stage IV motor that was advertised to make 205 HP and lasted about 10K miles. It was in no way comparable with the streetability or performance of my current turbo setup.

After the Korman boat anchor was removed I built a more conventional big bore, 304 deg camshaft dual 45 DCOE set up that was fun at WOT on a track, but once again a bit of a pain on the streets.

Next I modified a tii mechanical injection setup to use EFI with a Haltech ECU and evolved from NA, to supercharged and eventually landed where I am today. I am making close to 350 BHP at the crank and my car is just as tractible as the original 2002 if not even more refined. Eventhough I have a 284 duration cam she idles relatively well and boost comes on very low.

I would venture any amount of cash there is not a NA M10 motor on the planet that is more fun to drive than a properly engineered turbo motor. Yes, the cost is most definitely higher to do it correctly, but you cannot even get close to these power output levels without going to forced induction.

can you post your specs kpolito?

I'm going to turbo mine with a 318i manifold & megasquirt, I have the manifold & fuel rail already

the engine is tired and needs rings, it's a korman stage 2 with a 300 duration cam, I hope it's ok, I dont mind a lumpy idle too much

9.5:1 though, so I"m limited on boost, but that's ok these things are so light if I can get 300 at the crank I'm good, if I need more I'll drop comp next year

FYI - Alpine is all over this thread like a rash.

...but you cannot even get close to these power output levels without going to forced induction.

Ummm --- that was my Alpina HP quote, the only one in the thread - not very rash-like to me. I was only pointing that that Carb vs. Fuel Injection (mechanical, as was originally used) have some rough equivalency, with the slight nod to FI in HP for an equal set-up. I used the Alpina numbers because it was a true comparsion of equal motors with ALL else being equal.

I also went on to point out (as I voted) that turbocharging or supercharging will get you more HP than NA ever will. ??

Ummm --- that was my Alpina HP quote, the only one in the thread - not very rash-like to me. I was only pointing that that Carb vs. Fuel Injection (mechanical, as was originally used) have some rough equivalency, with the slight nod to FI in HP for an equal set-up. I used the Alpina numbers because it was a true comparsion of equal motors with ALL else being equal.

I also went on to point out (as I voted) that turbocharging or supercharging will get you more HP than NA ever will. ??

Hey -

My comment was not in regard to the Alpina quote, but the latest response from Alpine003. The term all over it like a rash was a term of support or agreement with his comment in favor of FI.

I didn't mean ruffle your feathers or to sting anyone in particular. It just seems like some people are vascilating over the benefits of going one way or the other.

Fact of the matter is that torque moves your car and makes driving fun. Two major ways to increase torque.

1) No substitute for cubic inches! But the M10 can only be increased so far before you destroy the engineering intent of a low mass and high revving powerplant. Buzziness of the S14 is a great example. It is hard to believe but the 94 mm pistons make the S14 seem to buzz a lot more than the 92 mm
slugs in my M10 which shares the S14 crankshaft.

2) Forced induction to impart greater loads on the crankshaft flowing greater volumes of air and fuel through the same displacement engine. Increasing the power loads has limitations as well. Heat management becomes and issue and major cooling upgrades are required to keep everything operating happily.

I have tried to document most of my mods on the web page www.myturbo2002.com. It needs ot be updated once I finish tuning for the latest changes.

Recently I reduced the diameter of the discharge tube between the turbo and A/L intercooler, installed a new billet throttle body, made an adapter to increase the plenum volume to match the engine displacement, rotated the throttle door precisely horizontal to promote even cylinder distribution and installed a larger turbine housing.

Boost comes on very soon and I have to return to the Mustang chassis dyno to safely monitor AFR and increase boost past the current set point of 15 psi.
The .40 A/R Rotomaster turbine housing crapped out at roughly 272 RWHP. Since installing the .58 A/R Garrett housing and making the other changes the EGT is reading cooler and allegedly this turbocharger can support upwards of 500bhp. I don't intend to try and generate that kind of power because I definitely do not want to toast my motor, but I would like to acheive the 300 RWHP mark!

Sorry to jack this thread if we are getting to far of topic. It is just my humble opinion that boost is really fun! It needs to be implemented correctly to be durable and booth the turbine and compressor need to be optimized for your particular engine and intended use.

can you post your specs kpolito?

I'm going to turbo mine with a 318i manifold & megasquirt, I have the manifold & fuel rail already

the engine is tired and needs rings, it's a korman stage 2 with a 300 duration cam, I hope it's ok, I dont mind a lumpy idle too much

9.5:1 though, so I"m limited on boost, but that's ok these things are so light if I can get 300 at the crank I'm good, if I need more I'll drop comp next year

Go to Cometic in Atlanta and buy an MLS head gasket. They will fabricate an M10 gasket for you so that you can meet jsut about any desired static compression ratio. I think the last time I purchased one it was $135 shipped to my door. You get a slight discount if you have a garage order it for you.

Hey -

My comment was not in regard to the Alpina quote, but the latest response from Alpine003. The term all over it like a rash was a term of support or agreement with his comment in favor of FI.

I didn't mean ruffle your feathers or to sting anyone in particular.

No offense taken, I mistook your Alpine003 comment to be about my Alpina info... I don't have any disagreements with the FI or forced induction info and advantages, even if I'm personally very happy with my NA rig.

Those are some SERIOUS numbers you're already getting from your Turbo set-up, and it's obvious you've got a ton of boosting experience - but I can see you won't be sated until you get the magic 300. ;-)

Cool, didn't intend to dis anything Alpina. I have great respect for all the euro tuning companies. While in europe for work I got to visit a small town near Salzburg where ACS Schnitzer and their BMW dealership is head quartered. Very cool old museum with tons of trophies and 2002 racing history.

PS - I forgot one more method for making power. Supposedly Nitrous is the most inexpensive method for making big power gains. Not much extra hardware, just good old chemistry in action accelerating molecular activity in the combustion chamber. Never really had the balls to play with laughing gas but it may be a good test case for someone to identify a middle ground between the big cam/side draft/header gains found with NA and FI.

Kurt get that thing to the dyno!!!!!!!!!! I just need to upgrade the clutch and hit the rollers in search of 400rwhp.:devillook

Kurt get that thing to the dyno!!!!!!!!!! I just need to upgrade the clutch and hit the rollers in search of 400rwhp.:devillook

Otis -

I think you need to get the exhaust fumes under control brother! Are you seriously approaching 400 RWHP? That is incredible! How big of a nitrous shot are you using now?

Thanks for the spark plug recommendation back in the day. I am currently using BP8ES gapped at .035 and they read very clean with no sign of detonation.

The effort spent extending and rotating the throttle body was well worth it. I used to have to run different temperature plugs in the rear 2 cylinders to keep all the plugs burning clean.

If I cannot achieve 300 RWHP with the cast manifold and decide not to sell my 2002 I may have to invest in a tubular exhasut manifold one day.

check the e21 forums, there's a guy there making a top mount tube mainfold

I'll prolly be getting one from him

Otis -

I think you need to get the exhaust fumes under control brother! Are you seriously approaching 400 RWHP? That is incredible! How big of a nitrous shot are you using now?

Thanks for the spark plug recommendation back in the day. I am currently using BP8ES gapped at .035 and they read very clean with no sign of detonation.

The effort spent extending and rotating the throttle body was well worth it. I used to have to run different temperature plugs in the rear 2 cylinders to keep all the plugs burning clean.

If I cannot achieve 300 RWHP with the cast manifold and decide not to sell my 2002 I may have to invest in a tubular exhasut manifold one day.

I made 340rwhp @24psi and 359rwhp with a 75 shot, clutch was slipping and oversped the turbo. Here's the dyno sheet you can see where the turbo runs out of breath then sprayed it at 6500rpm. That's roughly 420flywheel HP.
Let me know if you want me to make you a tubular manifold.

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y83/lisaotis/20psidyno.jpg

What kind of clutch are you planning to install? Have you had any driveline failures?

I try not to make it a habit to dump the clutch off the line. Roll-on accelartion produces a ton of tire spin through second gear and part of third.

Curtis (Inka 02) in Orlando tells me that he has trashed a bunch of diffs with his turbo M20.

What kind of clutch are you planning to install? Have you had any driveline failures?

I try not to make it a habit to dump the clutch off the line. Roll-on accelartion produces a ton of tire spin through second gear and part of third.

Curtis (Inka 02) in Orlando tells me that he has trashed a bunch of diffs with his turbo M20.
I was planning on swapping in the M30 flywheel and use the E28 M5 pressure plate with a 3 puck disk, but found a flywheel and 3 disc clutch pack on e-bay.
Flywheel weighs 9 lbs.
Good for 1000hp:lol
No driveline failures yet.

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y83/lisaotis/IMG_0037.jpg
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y83/lisaotis/IMG_0034-1.jpg

"Let me know if you want me to make you a tubular manifold."

warm up the welder otis

That is one hell of a clutch! Guess you will not have any trouble hooking up that beast. What size wheels and tires do you have on the rear? Are you using the standard driveline components other than the heavier duty clutch?

Thanks, but no need for a tubi manifold yet. If I cannot generate 300 RWHP when I return to the dyno I may be in contact.

That is one hell of a clutch! Guess you will not have any trouble hooking up that beast. What size wheels and tires do you have on the rear? Are you using the standard driveline components other than the heavier duty clutch?

Thanks, but no need for a tubi manifold yet. If I cannot generate 300 RWHP when I return to the dyno I may be in contact.
Running 195/55/14 Toyo proxes ts-1. Stock driveline,

Here's one of the manifolds.
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y83/lisaotis/IMG_0891.jpg

Nice clutch and manifold. Are there any support brackets holding that manifold?

Otis -

I think you need to get the exhaust fumes under control brother! Are you seriously approaching 400 RWHP? That is incredible! How big of a nitrous shot are you using now?

Thanks for the spark plug recommendation back in the day. I am currently using BP8ES gapped at .035 and they read very clean with no sign of detonation.

The effort spent extending and rotating the throttle body was well worth it. I used to have to run different temperature plugs in the rear 2 cylinders to keep all the plugs burning clean.

If I cannot achieve 300 RWHP with the cast manifold and decide not to sell my 2002 I may have to invest in a tubular exhasut manifold one day.

You could switch to a volvo 8 valve 2.3l turbo motor. They can make 300rwhp on stock exhaust manifold. You just need a better cam and port the head.

:redspot

You could switch to a volvo 8 valve 2.3l turbo motor. They can make 300rwhp on stock exhaust manifold. You just need a better cam and port the head.

:redspot

Why?:confused You could do a lot of things but that doesn't mean you should. If I had the bucks, I suppose I could try to stuff the Ligenfelter tt 8 into my ride too.

BTW, I almost did the Northstar conversion on my Fiero when I used to have it back in the day. I was also contemplating on the Old's HO4 motor for lighter weight at the time too. Never did get around to upgrading my suspension components w/88 parts due to totalling the car.

I really don't think 300 rwhp is going to be an issue. The smaller turbo simply ran out of volume, the egt went high and the .4 A/R housing was simply too small for my 2.3 liter.

Thanks for the suggestion but I want to stay Bavarian under the hood!

Ah, screw it ITBs
Keep it old school!

Why not something like this!

http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/3615/tbucketams5.th.jpg (http://img204.imageshack.us/my.php?image=tbucketams5.jpg)

But seriously, sidedrafts would be cheaper than ITBs, but yes ITBs would be friggin SWEET! I am still up in the air on what to do. A low mounted turbo would be cool, but the NA would be more of sleeper, even with the hood opened. Yes, it would be less powerful to run NA, but it would be so cool! But it will also be more difficult and expensive as there are less people going this route.

Side drafts are not cheaper than ITBs. If you source the right parts and do the labor yourself, your looking at a 200-300 MAX project.

I encourage anyone thinking of buying sidedrafts to stop and investigate aftermarket EFI. Carbs are really old school and the Haltech system I am using is very easy to learn. I struggled a little at first because the idiot who sold me the system provided a fuel map that was insanely rich... .. . I am talking big block V8 rich!

If you can operate a laptop and run common MS Office Apps I am confident you can tune your car. The only critical part is getting the high lload RPM band mapped correctly so that you don't lean out and hurt your motor. I strongly recommend locating a chassis dyno and a tuner nearby with experience. I drove around making adjustments for a few hours each evening for a couple weeks and by the time I got my car on a dyno it was fairly close to being tuned.

Oh yeah, most EFI is completely self correcting for barometric fluctuations that commonly occur with changes in weather and altitude.

Side drafts are not cheaper than ITBs. If you source the right parts and do the labor yourself, your looking at a 200-300 MAX project.

I just picked up ITB's shipped for $120. Another $250 for my MSII EMS and I'll have itbs and efi. Thats cheap.