Guys let's get this sub-forum rolling! :buttrock

These are the Power/Torque curves of the Eurospec M3 3.0 and 3.2 overlayed; Power is in KW, (to convert to HP multiply by a factor of ~1.34) / Torque is in Nm, (to convert to Lbf-Ft multiply by a factor of ~0.74)

http://www.m-power.ru/text/tehdan/powerm3.jpg

Both are excellent engines, however you can clearly see that the exhaust vanos on the 3.2 is in fact doing its job and allowing an earlier rise in the torque output.

Guys let's get this sub-forum rolling! :buttrock

These are the Power/Torque curves of the Eurospec M3 3.0 and 3.2 overlayed; Power is in KW, (to convert to HP multiply by a factor of ~1.34) / Torque is in Nm, (to convert to Lbf-Ft multiply by a factor of ~0.74)

http://www.m-power.ru/text/tehdan/powerm3.jpg

Both are excellent engines, however you can clearly see that the exhaust vanos on the 3.2 is in fact doing its job and allowing an earlier rise in the torque output.

I can't see shit:confused

no problem buddy ill point it out to you, if you notice in the "flat range", the torque difference is around 25Nm, assuming that is due to the +0.2L the S50B32 has over the S50B30,
while the torque is climbing up before the "flat range", there is almost 65Nm difference @2000rpm, it is obvious the exhaust vanos is really helping the low-end torque. Don't you agree ?
If you drive both you will know what i mean, in real-life it is obvious as well that the B32 at the low-end has alot more torque.

no problem buddy ill point it out to you, if you notice in the "flat range", the torque difference is around 25Nm, assuming that is due to the +0.2L the S50B32 has over the S50B30,
while the torque is climbing up before the "flat range", there is almost 65Nm difference @2000rpm, it is obvious the exhaust vanos is really helping the low-end torque. Don't you agree ?
If you drive both you will know what i mean, in real-life it is obvious as well that the B32 at the low-end has alot more torque.

No man, what I meant was that I can't see the dyno pic:eyecrazy

hehehe, ok then ill upload it to another host, but it's showing up fine here, did you try the old "right click > show picture" trick ?

try clicking here: http://www.m-power.ru/text/tehdan/powerm3.jpg

also try this: http://www.geocities.com/lte112/powerm3.jpg

hehehe, ok then ill upload it to another host, but it's showing up fine here, did you try the old "right click > show picture" trick ?

try clicking here: http://www.m-power.ru/text/tehdan/powerm3.jpg

also try this: http://www.geocities.com/lte112/powerm3.jpg

Thanks:D

I thinks the above is an 'apples - oranges' comparison. You would be able to better evaluate the effectiveness of an infinitely variable exhaust cam by comparing a stock S50 B32 vs a single vanos S50 B32 or a S50 B30 stroked to 3.2L.

I am doing a "single vanos conversion" of my S50 B32 so it would be a good comparator if I kept the stock cams. However, I will most definitely be upgrading to wilder cams. :devillook

you're right, im assuming many factors negligible when i compared earlier,
anyways i dont really understand the operation of the inf. var. dual VANOS.
like where and when exactly each VANOS is modifying the valve timing..
i wish we had access to a VANOS map, like timing vs load vs rpm ? is that how it works ? or only rpm ?
if i can better understand how things are going down maybe i can figure out why my car bogs at WOT below 4500rpm then takes off after that rpm, under no loads it doesnt bog at all.. and fueling is spot on so it's either ignition timing or vanos.
apparently it's common here amoung E30 B32 swapped vehicles. :/

Nice comparison graphs.

I read somewhere that the s52 isn't a direct swap into the '95 US spec M3 like the s50.

Does anyone know if this is correct?

Thanks

the 3.2 certanly has more torque in the mid range. The 3.2 also has more torque limiting devices if everything is not in perfect condition so they can feel a little flat if u dont look after them. The 3.0 is probably a better proposition to run big rpm from it due to its shorter stroke

Nice comparison graphs.

I read somewhere that the s52 isn't a direct swap into the '95 US spec M3 like the s50.

Does anyone know if this is correct?

ThanksIt depends on the build date of the 95 M3. It's not a DIRECT swap if your car isn't wired for EWS II

BTW - the euro 3.2 is NOT a S52. It's a a S50 B32.

It depends on the build date of the 95 M3. It's not a DIRECT swap if your car isn't wired for EWS II

BTW - the euro 3.2 is NOT a S52. It's a a S50 B32.

Thanks, Im a newbie still.

My build date is like 4/94 I think, it was very early production.

Do you mind explaining to me what EWS 1 and 2 are?

EWS1 and EWS2 are BMW security features.

EWS2 is an evolution of EWS1 and it requires the key, EWS2 module and DME to "recognize" each other in order for the engine to start.

04/94 production is EWS1 so you will have to retrofit the EWS2 components, which are the EWS2 module (behind the glovebox), key ring and small module (found at the steering column) and key. You should try to get these parts, as well as the wiring harnesses, with the S50 B32 that you plan to purchase. You can still use your existing key as long as you tuck the key of the euro motor behind the dash somewhere.

usually people just put the key chip inside that ring thing and tape around it (i guess it's an antenna?).. so you'd need the rectangular EWS box, the ring, the key, & the ECU it came from. If you dont do the EWS thing .. the engine will start for like 1sec then shut off automatically... if you want i could check the exact wires that are coming from the wiring harness to the EWS box ... they are only like 6 or 7 the rest are cut off and not in use.

i guess alternatively you could send your ECU to someone and they could disable the EWS or work around it

Cool, thanks guys.

Yeah, I should definitely try to get those components with the engine if I ever decide to do the swap.

Don't worry about the exact wires now, I was just wanting to clarify a few of my concerns for the future!

Thanks

Are you sure you have no issues with the VANOS oil pressure accumulator or inlet filter?

@JamesM3M5 (http://forums.bimmerforums.com/forum/member.php?u=1103) vbmenu_register("postmenu_9700909", true); : i tried driving the car with no filter and the bogging remained
about the VANOS oil pressure accumulator.. i have no idea how to test it etc.
but for what it's worth, 5-10diagnostic scans at different INDY friends over a period of 6months and nothing shows up except a/c relay,no o2 sensors/relays, fuel tank breather, etc.

the 3.2 certanly has more torque in the mid range. The 3.2 also has more torque limiting devices if everything is not in perfect condition so they can feel a little flat if u dont look after them. The 3.0 is probably a better proposition to run big rpm from it due to its shorter stroke

I've read before that the 3.2's have a restriction mechanism of some sort in which it doesn't allow the engine to really produce the actual 320bhp it's supposed to. And there's something that has to be modified in order to let the engine really produce it?

check the "traction control" thread.. it supposedly has an electronic nanny but its a great big mystery ...
S50B32's on the dyno make ~320bhp when rev'd high enough and well maintained..