Sean and I dyno'ed our Euro 3.2s yesterday. His is an E36 with no mods other than a cat back I think. Mine is in an E30 with a cone filter and a header back exhaust (no resonator, dual 2.5s back to a Magnaflow), HOWEVER mine is a South African spec motor that has less compression 10.8 versus 11.3 and is rated at 311 rather than 321.

My run is in blue, Sean's is in red. These runs were back to back (my car first, his car 2nd).

I have more power than Sean does everywhere (about 10 hp it looks like) except when I hit 6400 rpms my motor falls on its face. Guessing some sort of Vanos issue?

My absolute numbers look good, but the curves kinda suck. If I get the curve fized I would guess I would have somewhere near 275 RWHP.

I am also less of a believer that the Euro 3.2 was underrated from the factory.

Comments?

Seans run looks way more consistent. Nice torque curve, no glitches, looks good.

Your run looks like you colored in the dyno graph, hehe. J/K but seriously that dosn't look right. I've never heard of a 10.8 CR Euro 3.2. Did they lower the compression because of the type of gas out there? At the end of your dyno the HP fell flat on its face. It should keep making power up to 7400.

All in all, I'm jelous because I want a euro.

Why does Sean have 60+ftlbs between 3-4Krpm? Did your AFRs look normal?

Bruce, not sure if you ever saw my dyno. I think you're right...the 3.2's may have been very underrated!!!

This was also on a dynojet. I'm going to confirm the numbers if there's a dynojet at NASA's VIR race coming up the end of this month.

I've got that ram air intake, 3 inch single exhaust from the headers and a magnaflow single chamber race muffler. This was with 93 octane.

Interesting that on my graph there's a noticeable gain in bhp's as I'm nearing redline. Kinda wish I'd taken it to redline to see what the number would've shown.

Ken Arutunian

Actually, I don't even play one on TV.

But, my opinion is that Bruces vanos unit is NOT functioning at all properly.

The curve his engine shows in the low RPM is more similar to a euro 3.0 engine that has no exhaust vanos active.

The curve at the top end to me, is also suggestive that the cams can not be moved to the high rpm settings they should have.

There is no way your engine is working properly from top to bottom, sorry to bring you my opinion.

I believe that if a real tuner would chime in, they would probably concurr that the difference in compression would not alter the curve in the fashion that it differs from the stock 3.2 with european, not SA compression and with vanos working properly.

As I said in my private email to you, you need to get on a GT-1 or Modic and track the vanos to make sure its swinging the cams around properly.

Alex.

Doesn't VANOS kick in much lower...like 4800rpm? Sure looks like a cam or mixture issue. Could it be that the ECU is pulling spark out at higher rpm? With all the flow work he's done, especially the exhaust, isn't it possible it's getting lean up top and pulling spark/advance to compensate?

Sorry, I should have included a graph with the AFRs. I am definitely lean up to 5500 rpms then it is fine. First thought was maybe my aftermarket fuel pump isn't up to snuff for the 5 bar that the motor requires.

I've never heard of a 10.8 CR Euro 3.2. Did they lower the compression because of the type of gas out there?

Yes. Actually I lied...compression on my motor is 10.5. See attachment.

Bruce, not sure if you ever saw my dyno. I think you're right...the 3.2's may have been very underrated!!!

I don't think they are underrated- I think they are properly rated. Your motor is just a freak like my 95 M3 that had 223 hp stock. 267 * 1.21 = 323.

But, my opinion is that Bruces vanos unit is NOT functioning at all properly.

I agree with Alex. it does appear that one cam is functioning properly. It is not noisy, so I am hoping that it is still good. I had another issue (crankshaft position sensor wire) with the wiring harness so maybe I have another one with one of the cam wires? I will take the wiring harness out in a few weeks if I can to get it looked at and sorted out.

Do you have a graph with smoothing at 0?

I have the data files so I can do anything I want with them.

Smooth = 0 makes my curve look better than Sean's (smoothness wise, still doesn't fix the problem).

Good luck Bruce. I hope you ultimately find it's a simple fix/solution.

Ken Arutunian

Odd thing is we had the same problem with the HP dip right after 6500rpm on one of our customer cars, and we even rebuild the vanos to BMW specs.

I would like more info on this power dip seeing that this is the only other time I have seen it happen.

It could easily be overheating of the intake manifiold or cats on the dyno.

This one of mine:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v240/Five_Aces/Dyno031.jpg

273 RWHP bone stock by the way :D

5 minutes later we did a second run and the result was a loss of 25 HP :eek: Also same symphton, HP graph going flat after 6500 and running a lot richer than before (normally around 1:12 now more like 1:11) which suggests airflow problem.

It could easily be overheating of the intake manifiold or cats on the dyno.

Numbers were consistent across all 3 pulls and I don't have cats. Temp was 57 degrees.

mine had a mix of 91 and 93 fuel in it, if it makes a difference.

My car is stock with a SS euro race cat back.

just for a comparison, this is a very healthy 3.2 S50B32 dyno dynamics graph, car has free flow exhaust, CAI and custom remapping. Multiply rwkw by 1.34 for hp (~252rwhp). typically stock they read 220-230rwhp on dyno dynamics


http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y171/morerevsm3/M3dyno-188kW-300x230.jpg

I am going to take apart the vanos and look for electrical shorts. wish me luck!

I am going to take apart the vanos and look for electrical shorts. wish me luck!

Good luck! Is the end goal a killer DE car, or any plans for GTS-X or CMod?

Good luck! Is the end goal a killer DE car, or any plans for GTS-X or CMod?

All of the above (car would be GTS4).

just for a comparison, this is a very healthy 3.2 S50B32 dyno dynamics graph, car has free flow exhaust, CAI and custom remapping. Multiply rwkw by 1.34 for hp (~252rwhp). typically stock they read 220-230rwhp on dyno dynamics


http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y171/morerevsm3/M3dyno-188kW-300x230.jpg

S50B32 (What Americans call the Euro 3.2 engine) dyno 220-230 rwhp on Dyno Dynamics .. I've seen it many times.

Seems like they dyno ~ 270 rwhp on DynoJet .. which is the magic 20% difference Dyno Dynamics <-> DynoJet that is accepted.

+1 on the vanos issue, Bruce.

BTW - can you send (or Sean) send me the dynojet data files? I'd like to overlay them on the existing S50 B32 data I have. My email is: benjiheran@gmailDOTcom

I can provide you (or anyone else here) a copy of the euro 3.0L ETM. I read that a few guys were interested in this in another thread. Unfortunately, the pdf files are too big to attach to an email so I need to figure out a way to share them (ie. file sharing site). Any ideas?

I can send you the files when I get home if you provide a copy of what you do with the data. :-)

I can host the ETM, but it would only be for a limited time (like a week or so). I can give you a user/password to FTP to. LMK.

I can send you the files when I get home if you provide a copy of what you do with the data. :-)Absolutely. ;)

I can host the ETM, but it would only be for a limited time (like a week or so). I can give you a user/password to FTP to. LMK.That would be great. I'll notify all members who showed interest in the 3.0L ETM that they only have a week to download it from your site.

Sent you an email.

I can provide you (or anyone else here) a copy of the euro 3.0L ETM. I read that a few guys were interested in this in another thread. Unfortunately, the pdf files are too big to attach to an email so I need to figure out a way to share them (ie. file sharing site). Any ideas?

would be very interested in that please :buttrock

A BIG thanks to Bruce (gobuffs) for hosting these ETM files that include the euro S50 B30 3.0L:

Vehicles produced 9/93 to 8/94 (http://heersink.org/bruce/M3/project/e36_94.pdf)
Vehicles produced 9/94 to 8/95 (http://heersink.org/bruce/M3/project/e36_95.pdf)
Vehicles produced 9/95 to 8/96 (http://heersink.org/bruce/M3/project/e36_96.pdf)

These files will be hosted until Feb 23 so make sure you download them ASAP.

Awesome, thank you very much BSH and gobuffs :urtheman

My pleasure. :)

Back to Bruce's issue. The power drop at 6500 RPM looks similar to an issue a few years ago with a S50 B32 powered M Roadster in WA state:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v420/trailerparkboy/DakarZ3_5.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v420/trailerparkboy/DakarZ3_4.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v420/trailerparkboy/DakarZ3_3.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v420/trailerparkboy/DakarZ3_2.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v420/trailerparkboy/DakarZ3_1.jpg

One difference with this motor is that it had Schrick 284 cams fitted. I'm not sure if this would impact the underlying issue, though. This motor had the following codes: "mass air flow meter" and "cam time out". The owner later said the problem was due to a "bad plug". :dunno I believe this car also had a "diff speed sensor" code at one time.

Have you had your motor scanned for error codes, Bruce?

Not recently, no. I scanned it a bunch of times when I was trying to get it started. Nothing out of the ordinary. I can scan it again but it probably won't happen for a few weeks. The big difficulty is trying to figure out what problem each code means. Anybody have any good tricks for that?

Bruce and/or Sean...what gear for these runs? 4th or 5th?

4th, I think.

Are y'all running 5 speeds? If so, 5th is 1:1.

I always heard you want to run in your 1:1 gear.

Are y'all running 5 speeds? If so, 5th is 1:1.

I always heard you want to run in your 1:1 gear.

i have a 6 speed, but the ratios are the same for the 5speed. My car would hit the speed limiter in 5th gear before redline.

i have a 6 speed, but the ratios are the same for the 5speed. My car would hit the speed limiter in 5th gear before redline.

Not an expert on this, but all the Euro's(5 or 6 spd.) I've seen dyno'd run 5th which is 1:1

YMMV

You want to dyno in your 1:1 gear because there is less power lost to the transmission. You cannot dyno on a Dyno Dyanamics machine in 1:1 gear because the maximum roller speed is 200 KPH. That is another reason why Dyno Dynamics will always read lower thatn DynoJet, et al.

i have a 6 speed, but the ratios are the same for the 5speed. My car would hit the speed limiter in 5th gear before redline.


Right. Even though you've got a 6 speed, your sixth gear is overdrive. Your 1:1 gear is 5th.

What's your diff ratio? Hitting your speed limiter before redline in 5th is beyond my scope of very limited knowledge.

I'm totally stock with my euro 3.2 and didn't hit my speed limiter while in 5th gear with a 3.91 diff and I was on my 17 inch rims (225/45/17 Hoosiers).
Granted, I didn't quite take my run all the way to redline. I think I stopped in the 7250-7300 rpm range.

I know you should dyno in 1:1.

3.15 is the current diff ratio. I've taken the car to 155 mph and I wasn't at redline, plus using a gearing chart you can see that it will hit the speed limiter before the redline.

The whole comparison was to compare his SA s50b32 to my UK s50b32, so it doesn't matter if we used 2nd gear for our use of the data.

I know you should dyno in 1:1.

3.15 is the current diff ratio. I've taken the car to 155 mph and I wasn't at redline, plus using a gearing chart you can see that it will hit the speed limiter before the redline.

The whole comparison was to compare his SA s50b32 to my UK s50b32, so it doesn't matter if we used 2nd gear for our use of the data.Sean's dyno above is in 4th gear. I verified that with a gearing/mph calculator.

Sean's dyno above is in 4th gear. I verified that with a gearing/mph calculator.


I guess like Sean said, it's a moot point. The issue is with what happened in Bruce's dyno session.

I guess like Sean said, it's a moot point. The issue is with what happened in Bruce's dyno session.

The intake vanos afaik changes the valve timing 2 times when going up the rev range; the timing is the same on idle and on maximum rpm and changes back and forth in the mid range to provide maxium torque. This means that you could just unplug the vanos and dyno the car. If the problem is vanos-related (like it only changes to increase output for midrange and doesn't return the timing to "normal" for the top end) you should have a lower power output across the midrange and the top end power should be normal.

vanos solenoid problems and vanos earthing problems are pretty common so I'd look into them first.

Yes the runs were made in 4th. My car has a 3.73 diff.

i have an e30 s50b32 swap but i paid a mechanic/electrician to do the job,
it revs to redline no problem, but before ~4500-5000rpm if i give it alot of throttle it bogs down after 5000rpm it takes off but it isnt as fast as its supposed to be, for instance 2 tweaked subaru sti's have spanked me by a couple car lengths (from a 2nd gear roll)... ive tried numerous mechanics but nobody is figuring it out..

i tried:
new crank sensor
new e30 stock fuel pump
new spark plugs

and tried parts from friends cars:
MAF
TPS
inlet/exhaust cam sensors
ECU
injectors
...

i put the car on 2 diagnostics but nothing showed up thats related..
btw car has no o2 sensors

i put a wideband on it once and at idle a/f is 14.6, under WOT its ~13, when i floor it below 4500rpm the a/f is bouncy and stuff
a mechanic checked the vanos solenoids and connections and removed valve cover etc. to see if something is jammed but he said its all right..

its been like this for 6 months!:/

JUST installed the weekend. The dyno was done by my Mechanic - Payet Motorsports - after a complete tear down and rebuild. Don't know what kind of dyno it was or what gear it was done in... but I'll ask.

http://rgbtvinc.com/jpegs/dyno.jpg

Do you have a dyno pull? They can tell a lot.

First thing is your fuel pump. The stock E30 system is a 3 bar system, the S50 B32 NEEDS 5 bar. What injectors did you put in? Stock injectors are 24 lbs. Have you had your injectors cleaned and blueprinted?

AFR at idle of 14.6 is ok. Wot at 13 is ok, but I would prefer to see an AFR graph from a dyno pull. Not an expert, but I think you still need to run the 02 sensors (it only has 2 and they are both in the headers).

JUST installed the weekend. The dyno was done by my Mechanic - Payet Motorsports - after a complete tear down and rebuild. Don't know what kind of dyno it was or what gear it was done in... but I'll ask.

Excellent numbers, excellent curve. I'm jealous.

Might be more power and the AFRs are bit lean-ish. Same thing I said to liquidtension- are you running a 5 bar pump?

JUST installed the weekend. The dyno was done by my Mechanic - Payet Motorsports - after a complete tear down and rebuild. Don't know what kind of dyno it was or what gear it was done in... but I'll ask.

According to the website on the dyno sheet, it's a DynoJet...either you have a very strong motor or their DynoJet is generous.

Don't know ANYTHING about the dyno unfortunately ( wasn't there )...

But with a complete and total rebuild, rings, pistons, bearings, rods, etc, it should be very very strong.

However, perhaps the Dynojet is "friendly"?

I've still got TONS to learn about this engine and the way it operates.

I'll be staying tuned.

Jonathan

Don't know ANYTHING about the dyno unfortunately ( wasn't there )...

But with a complete and total rebuild, rings, pistons, bearings, rods, etc, it should be very very strong.

However, perhaps the Dynojet is "friendly"?

I've still got TONS to learn about this engine and the way it operates.

I'll be staying tuned.

Jonathan


Your dyno looks very similar to mine. I'm assuming you're running the S50B32 with stock ecu, right?

Like these guys are saying, we've either had runs on generous dyno's or we in fact are making darn near 290 rwhp.

I'm headed to VIR for this weekends race and they will have a dyno available. I plan to take a couple of runs and see if it agrees with my runs done locally on a dynojet.
My engine is stock with roughly 23k miles.

The engine had less than 1000 miles on it after a rebuild when it hit the dyno...

Jonathan

:alright :alright :alright :alright :alright

Like these guys are saying, we've either had runs on generous dyno's or we in fact are making darn near 290 rwhp.A freak 290 rwhp monster would be sweet but I'm more inclined to believe it's a generous dyno since I doubt you guys are making 25-30 rwhp over other low mileage S50 B32's.

FWIW, ///Maniac's torque curve is consistent with other stock S50 B32 motors with peak torque at 3500 RPM.

A freak 290 rwhp monster would be sweet but I'm more inclined to believe it's a generous dyno since I doubt you guys are making 25-30 rwhp over other low mileage S50 B32's.

FWIW, ///Maniac's torque curve is consistent with other stock S50 B32 motors with peak torque at 3500 RPM.



Mine looks the same. Although, mine is showing a bit more torque.:D

Not to mention that this was actually my 5th run of the day. I have a feeling that if my throttle bodies had been properly set during the first three runs...my second (of the original 3 runs) would've yielded even better numbers.

The graph is from those last two runs after I adjusted my throttle. LOL

Kind of interesting that he's in GA and I'm in TN and our graphs look almost identical.

Benji, 25-30 rwhp difference? I was thinking it was more like 15-20 rwhp diff.

Other dynojet users have shown 273-275 rwhp. <dunno> But, hope to put an end to the speculation this weekend with another dynojet.

Mine looks the same. Although, mine is showing a bit more torque.:DBe sure to get a dyno plot over the entire RPM range at your next dyno session.

Kind of interesting that he's in GA and I'm in TN and our graphs look almost identical.If you're refering to the shape of the torque curve that's the same for all stock S50 B32s. Peak torque is achieved at approximately 3.5k and then it's a shallow slope downwards beyond that until 6.5k where it starts to fall off significantly.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v420/trailerparkboy/ATaur_vs_DBooth_4thGear_StockECU.jpg

Benji, 25-30 rwhp difference? I was thinking it was more like 15-20 rwhp diff.

Other dynojet users have shown 273-275 rwhp. <dunno> But, hope to put an end to the speculation this weekend with another dynojet.SAE corrected values on a Dynojet for all the stock S50 B32's I've seen are in the 260-268 rwhp range.

This is the S50 B32 dyno comparison I want to figure out...

Group N DME (red) vs Stock DME (blue):

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v420/trailerparkboy/GrpN_vs_Stock_ECU_DBooth.jpg

I want figure out if this difference in the torque shape is due to manipulation of the double VANOS. :confused

Gruppe N is in red? If so, it looks like they messed with cam timing a bit to move the torque curve up the power band.

Gruppe N is in red? If so, it looks like they messed with cam timing a bit to move the torque curve up the power band.That's correct, Gp N in red. The interesting thing is that David's AFR is consistently rich with the stock DME whereas it's closer to ideal with the Gp N DME.

Despite having practically identical torque curves, Sean's AFRs are right at 13 throughout the RPM range whereas David's (with stock DME) are rich.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v420/trailerparkboy/david_vs_sean_run2Medium.jpg

Any thoughts?

The intake vanos afaik changes the valve timing 2 times when going up the rev range; the timing is the same on idle and on maximum rpm and changes back and forth in the mid range to provide maxium torque. This means that you could just unplug the vanos and dyno the car. If the problem is vanos-related (like it only changes to increase output for midrange and doesn't return the timing to "normal" for the top end) you should have a lower power output across the midrange and the top end power should be normal.

vanos solenoid problems and vanos earthing problems are pretty common so I'd look into them first.Upon more research, I came across ///M3///M5's 'vanos on' vs 'vanos off' dyno of his US S52:

http://mthreemfive.com/Images/BATLDYNO1.sized.jpg

It's clear that vanos is no longer a factor above 5500 RPM. Another member wired a vanos light to detect when the solenoid was activated on his US motor and it was consistent with what's shown in the above dyno plot. Right off idle the light was on and then shut off around 5500 RPM.

I presume this is the same with a euro S50? If so, then Bruce may not have a vanos issue at all.

I presume this is the same with a euro S50? If so, then Bruce may not have a vanos issue at all.

I guessing that if I do have a Vanos problem a cam is stuck in one position. At least that is what I am hoping. Let me prove otherwise. ;-) Checking the elctrical connection in the Vanos is a fairly easy and cheap thing to do.

I guessing that if I do have a Vanos problem a cam is stuck in one position. At least that is what I am hoping. Let me prove otherwise. ;-) Checking the elctrical connection in the Vanos is a fairly easy and cheap thing to do.You may be right. It could still be a vanos issue. :dunno

Perhaps your cam timing is analagous to a US S50 intake cam being stuck advanced? I wonder what that dyno looks like above 5500 RPM?

BTW - How are the intake and exhaust cams of a double vanos setup advancing/retarding to achieve the "flat-as-Kansas" torque curve of a S50 B32?

That is an amazing graph Benji. No wonder everyone wants vanos working!

I don't understand why the Grp. N has the torque moved higher up in the rev's.

Maybe y'all can address this...I think I read that PTG did NOT use vanos. How did they overcome the loss of torque with rev's below 5k rpms?

I don't understand why the Grp. N has the torque moved higher up in the rev's.More usable power for a track setting, whereas the low-end torque with the stock DME is ideal for the street.

Maybe y'all can address this...I think I read that PTG did NOT use vanos. How did they overcome the loss of torque with rev's below 6k rpms?I believe it's a combination of very aggressive cams, staying at a high RPM window (ie. above 5000 RPM) that doesn't require the benefit of vanos (whose primary purpose is to boost low- to mid-range power), and perhaps reliability (less mechanical parts to fail).

I don't understand why the Grp. N has the torque moved higher up in the rev's.

To put more power into the rev range that is likely to be used on track...i.e. 4500+

Maybe y'all can address this...I think I read that PTG did NOT use vanos. How did they overcome the loss of torque with rev's below 5k rpms?

They rev the heck out of the motors, use more aggressive cams and create their power in a rev range that they then take advantage of with appropriate gearing. You don't need a wide band of torque if you can gear the car to always stay in the band where the power is. PTG has used VANOS on some motors and not on others, depending on the rules and the application.

More usable power for a track setting, whereas the low-end torque with the stock DME is ideal for the street.

I believe it's a combination of very aggressive cams, staying at a high RPM window (ie. above 5000 RPM) that doesn't require the benefit of vanos (whose primary purpose is to boost low- to mid-range power), and perhaps reliability (less mechanical parts to fail).


Gotcha.

Would staying up higher 5k rpm's as opposed to say 3k rpm's during the course of a race(s), pose more wear and tear on the bearings and such?

This is a really cool thread. Thanks Bruce!!!:D

Would staying up higher 5k rpm's as opposed to say 3k rpm's during the course of a race(s), pose more wear and tear on the bearings and such?

Without a doubt...besides heat, RPM's are probably the the top killer of engines. That doesn't mean that a motor can't be built to withstand high RPM's for a long time, only that the same motor would last longer if run at lower RPM's.

To put more power into the rev range that is likely to be used on track...i.e. 4500+



They rev the heck out of the motors, use more aggressive cams and create their power in a rev range that they then take advantage of with appropriate gearing. You don't need a wide band of torque if you can gear the car to always stay in the band where the power is. PTG has used VANOS on some motors and not on others, depending on the rules and the application.


OK, makes complete sense that a professional team would absolutely be working out their gearing for each and every track they raced on.

Not exactly practical for club racers, though I'm sure some also go through those calculations!:eyecrazy

Not exactly practical for club racers, though I'm sure some also go through those calculations!:eyecrazy

Well, we can only change the rear gear in most club racing classes...there's only so much you can do there. You can somewhat optimize for a given track, but not a lot...just depends on whether a certain gear puts you in a bad spot in the rev range in an important corner.

In various levels of Pro racing though, you may have the option of changing all 6 gears in the gearbox and the rear gear. In that scenario, you can afford to have a very small rev range because 1-6 are all usable on track, as opposed to 3-5 of a street transmission. If if they don't change the gearing for every track, they can still make use of a smaller power band as opposed to club racers who generally benefit from as wide of a power band as possible.

I believe most BMW folks run VANOS in World Challenge TC and Grand-Am Cup where you aren't allowed a custom gearbox. In series like World Challenge GT, ALMS and Rolex though, you often see the VANOS ditched for more reliability since the cars are allowed a custom gearbox.

Upon more research, I came across ///M3///M5's 'vanos on' vs 'vanos off' dyno of his US S52:

i'm not positive, but ru sure if u can relate that to your motor, b/c iirc the s50b32 has stepless (i think i'm using the correct term, i.e. continuously variable) vanos. does it do that throughout the entire rev range or just in the first half like US motors?

I presume this is the same with a euro S50? If so, then Bruce may not have a vanos issue at all.

The US and Euro VANOS systems are very different. Someone will have to correct me if I'm wrong, but on the S50B30, I believe one cam operates like the US system (on/off), while the other is infinitely variable. On the S50B32, both cams are infinitely variable.

S50B30 has one infinitely adjustable intake cam, whereas they are both infinitely adjustable on the S50B32.

Pro teams here ditch them as well but run up as high as 9500 RPM on them. You will almost never fall below 5500 anyway stock gearbox or not. However on the drenth ones for example they run a very long 1st up to 60-70 MPH and then 2-3-4-5 in very close ratio.

The US and Euro VANOS systems are very different. Someone will have to correct me if I'm wrong, but on the S50B30, I believe one cam operates like the US system (on/off), while the other is infinitely variable. On the S50B32, both cams are infinitely variable.I'm aware of the differences between the different variants of the "S50" motors:

S50 US B30 = single vanos; on/off intake cam
S52 B32 = single vanos; on/off intake cam
S50 B30 = single vanos; infinitely variable intake cam
S50 B32 = double vanos; infinitely variable intake and exhaust cam

What I'm trying to say is that the principle behind all the different versions of vanos is to provide a wider power band. Although the euro vanos systems are more sophisticated than the US vanos I think it's safe to say (correct me if I'm wrong) that the function is the same. In that case I would expect to see a similar drop in low- to mid-range torque if the infinitely variable single vanos of a S50 B30 was disengaged (ie. no advancement of the intake cam). I presume the low-end boost in torque with the double vanos is also achieved by advancing the intake cam - in addition to the movement of exhaust cam (I don't know what happens with the exhaust cam...anyone?) - then you can probably expect the same effect if the vanos of a S50 B32 was not functioning.

I plan to do what ///M3///M5 did and run a back-to-back dyno with the vanos on and off on my S50 B30 this summer. When (if? :stickoutt) I get my S50 B32 running this summer I'll do the same.

This is a really cool thread.I just love euro threads. :drink3

Vanos delete is done because most racecars run well over stock redline and have shorter gearing, so power 'down low' is still beyond vanos' capability. At that point it's just a parasitic drivetrain loss that robs HP when ripping 9k+rpm

The euro 3.0 has intake cont variable.

The 3.2 adds compression, larger intake valves, deletes ceramic insulators between TB and head, adds cont variable exhaust vanos. There are a few other minor changes too.

The Mclaren was a siamesed pair of 3.0's.

If you look closely at a 3.0 vs a 3.2, you'll see two of the rectangular housings on the vanos unit on the 3.2 version. Each of these rectangular boxes with allen screws on them houses a pair of solenoids for the vanos.

On the 3.0 engine, its just one of them for the intake cam, on the 3.2, there is one for each cam.

Alex.