I was just thinking about N/A tuning potentials of a 3.0L as compared to 3.2L.

I read in EVO (or CAR, I am not sure - where they had an M3 special together the the E90 M3 feature) magazine that they prefer the 3.0L models because of its reliability over the 3.2L VANOS issue.

But I also hear that since the 3.0L has shorter stroke, it can take more RPMS...anyway, I haven't started tuning my 3.0L engine, but I wanted to ask the experts out there what their experience is, the pros and cons of each engine, and the mods and power that you have achieved.

Also advice on what is the best bang for the buck that you have experienced...Thanks!

well over here the mpower tuners go 3.0, i cant tell you how many tuners told me to steer clear of the m3 3.2.. but no i had to be the stubborn idiot i am :D

now it's been since last summer that the engine hasn't run right.. it's weird i've gotten so used to it driving like it is .. its like having a monster version of the S14, if u got WOT below 5000rpm it feels like a toyota echo ...after 5000rpm it pulls like crazy on this lighter chassis, but still was ALOT faster when it was running right, thing is, whatever happens to it, its still faster than any daily driven cars on my commutes so thats why ive been able to handle living with this fucked engine for all this time

but given another chance i'd go m3 3.0 in a heart beat, none of the 3.0 guys have to deal with this crap ... the m3 3.2 is notorious for its vanos and mystery problems... either runs great, or runs like total shit.

anyways once uni is over i got no choice but to go to a bmw tuner that has been known to fix the m3 3.2 issues.. but he charges a leg and an arm :/

i guess i could always trade my engine for a m3 3.0 engine easily since the 3.2 costs more ..but im too greedy to give up the extra vanos and 0.2L

More RPM's are not always better. The cams and gearing are ideal for the (7000?) redline. Revving it higher with the stock stuff does not make MORE power, it will just rev longer and cause the valve shim job to wear out faster. You'll have to modify the car to run better in the upper revs which will sacrifice low end. Think of the engines as a big air pump, a 3.2 will be pushing more air (and thus more power) at the equivalent RPM vs. a 3.0. To make similar power you'd have to rev the 3.0 more just to be even.

So Yes the 3.0 can rev higher but the 3.2 is more powerful to begin with. The 3.2 is not as 'tunable' partly because it is more tweaked from the factory, which leaves less on the table to gain from upgrades. 3.0 is more mod-friendly since it was not maxxed to its potential..

Ive been waiting for a thread to come up about this.

Ive read that the US 3.0L with hot cams and all the other common bolt-ons becomes quite peaky and almost unpleasant to drive on the street. Is the same true for the Euro 3.0L with cams and intake/exhaust? I suppose adding AlphaN would help mitigate the loss in lowend some.

What are typical numbers for a S50B30 with cams, carbon box and AlphaN?

I know you have VANOS to deal with but on the S14 these mods are all possible to DIY. Is the same true for the S50B30?

It's true with any motor and the thing most people forget regarding the factory tune - the way it comes is the best compromise between low and top end(not to mention cost and reliability!). BMW M GmBH knows what they are doing.

Sacrifice must come from somewhere. One must decide what the application is (street or track/race) and build accordingly. Going for peak #'s will move the powerband into a higher RPM range. Ask yourself where do you drive your car?

I think this topic is one of the hottest on the euro M3 E36 forums, there are good things on both sides, the B32's are more refined engines, with more electronic controls, stock for stock there is very little difference on 0-100 kmh acceleration times for example, and most of the times its a drivers race, the B32 is more civilized, due to its torque curve, I personaly enjoy more the "raw" power of the B30, it feels like a turbocharged car once it reaches 4K on the tach, the B32 is more linear...

Well, I think theyre both awesome engines, but from experience, id have to say, the S50B30 its a bulletproof engine, and ill stay with it.

I would have to agree with Vitolo...the 3.2L is more tuned from the factory, compared to 3.0L...the reason I say this is because the 3.0L has 95.33 HP per liter, while the 3.2L has 100.31 hp/liter.

When I mentioned being able to rev higher, I assumed it would be with cams that cam make use of it too. I guess, the question is, with the same money, and limited to N/A tuning only. Would one be able to get a better engine for racing...and daily driving (because that is really what M is about) with the 3.0L or the 3.2L?

For sure the 3.2L has an edge over daily driving and useability because of its higher torque...and out of the factory, I am sure the 3.2L will be a better engine overall. But what about after tuning? Would it still have the edge?

It's true with any motor and the thing most people forget regarding the factory tune - the way it comes is the best compromise between low and top end(not to mention cost and reliability!). BMW M GmBH knows what they are doing.

Sacrifice must come from somewhere. One must decide what the application is (street or track/race) and build accordingly. Going for peak #'s will move the powerband into a higher RPM range. Ask yourself where do you drive your car?

Maybe for the purposes of this topic, lets stick with 80% road use, and 20% track use...so that we can be more specific...as I think most people with performance cars like these follow that ratio?

Ive been waiting for a thread to come up about this.

Ive read that the US 3.0L with hot cams and all the other common bolt-ons becomes quite peaky and almost unpleasant to drive on the street. Is the same true for the Euro 3.0L with cams and intake/exhaust? I suppose adding AlphaN would help mitigate the loss in lowend some.

What are typical numbers for a S50B30 with cams, carbon box and AlphaN?

I know you have VANOS to deal with but on the S14 these mods are all possible to DIY. Is the same true for the S50B30?
I have around 300 dynojet rwhp, on stock cams

vitolo, for your engine issue it could just be matter of replacing the solenoid valves on your vanos. ;) there is now a few guys doing it in france for $600 or so.

any way to check if they are bad ? thing is, i was told the solenoids were checked and are working, but id like to see for myself

I have around 300 dynojet rwhp, on stock cams

Wow! :eek: What mods did you have to do to attain this power?! That is my dream to have about as much power as you have N/A of course! What octane are you running the car on? How high do you rev the car to?

My car dynoed at 220 whp on the dyno machine in the shop across my office...not sure what brand it was though...which seemed kinda low for my car.

Alan are dynojets overly optimistic or something ?
cuz with 17% losses that means you have ~360bhp ..(120bhp/L specific output)
isn't that a bit high ? (not saying you're a liar or it's not reachable with the s50b30 or anything .. it's just not adding up in my head having carbon plenum,alpha-n chip, and custom exhaust, giving that much more bhp..)

ps: what is the custom exhaust ? dual 2.5" ? i want to fix up mine soon ;)

both engines are able to be tuned for more power. The 3.2 has more mid range torque, but less ppl seem to tune the shit out of it and extract its full potential. the 3.0 with its shorter stroke will stress the engine less at high rpm.

both mine and al's Morerevsm3 run around 270rwhp on dyno dynamics, where standard ones 220-240rwhp. IMO the eurospec m3 engines could run over 280rwhp with all the bolt on mods done to optimum. with some dirty big cams prob 300rwhp on dyno dynamics shootout mode is possible

last time on dyno, before carbon plenum and alpha N chip, I had 199.6rwkw (267.69rwhp) on dyno dynamics dyno, here is a converter program from a US supra forum - http://www.to4r.com/calcs/pwtq.php
according to that, I have nearly 315rwhp on dynojet
according to hp calculators from drag figures
http://www.tciauto.com/Products/TechInfo/Calculators.asp
3195Lbs, best trap of 106.48mph, still around 300rwhp, US based calculator, so assume dynojet guesstimate

my exhaust is twin 2.5" all the way through, no baffles in muffler, just perforated tube with expansion area in middle, I gained 20rwkw from exhaust and alloy flywheel (171rwkw - 191rwkw) then another 8rwkw with previous chip, and I am guessing another 10 -15rwkw from plenum, Alpha N, and crank pulley

ok question, looks and marketing aside, do you think it would be better to go single pipe exhaust ?

i think making the dual 62mm exhaust will be a headache incase i want to go turbo in the future, since there will be only 1 big downpipe and exhaust system is made of two dual pipes...

for n/a is it better to have dual 62mm or 1 big pipe ? i read somewhere that single exhaust would be better (especially for exhaust scavenging)
what do u think ? and how big should the pipe be ?

i wanna do the exhaust soon to see if it improves (still running e30 m3 dual ~42mm pipes)

vitolo, for your engine issue it could just be matter of replacing the solenoid valves on your vanos. ;) there is now a few guys doing it in france for $600 or so.

Me? I'm not having any issues... I haven't even finished this swap yet! :embarrasm

i think he meant it for me

It's true with any motor and the thing most people forget regarding the factory tune - the way it comes is the best compromise between low and top end (not to mention cost and reliability!). BMW M GmBH knows what they are doing..

Couldn't have said it better myself. ;)

Sacrifice must come from somewhere. One must decide what the application is (street or track/race) and build accordingly.

How can you guys not be satisfied with the stock power these engines are making? Unless you live near an airstrip or something it's hard to imagine a situation on public roads where you would feel a want for power in this car. :confused

I think this topic is one of the hottest on the euro M3 E36 forums, there are good things on both sides, the B32's are more refined engines, with more electronic controls, stock for stock there is very little difference on 0-100 kmh acceleration times for example, and most of the times its a drivers race, the B32 is more civilized, due to its torque curve, I personaly enjoy more the "raw" power of the B30, it feels like a turbocharged car once it reaches 4K on the tach, the B32 is more linear...

Well, I think theyre both awesome engines, but from experience, id have to say, the S50B30 its a bulletproof engine, and ill stay with it.

I like the fact that the S50B30 is the motor the E36 M3 was born with. It's without question the motor that belongs in my car. :D

Me? I'm not having any issues... I haven't even finished this swap yet! :embarrasm

Yeah, at least wait until he's had a chance to break it in and break it! :devillook

ok question, looks and marketing aside, do you think it would be better to go single pipe exhaust ?

i think making the dual 62mm exhaust will be a headache incase i want to go turbo in the future, since there will be only 1 big downpipe and exhaust system is made of two dual pipes...

for n/a is it better to have dual 62mm or 1 big pipe ? i read somewhere that single exhaust would be better (especially for exhaust scavenging)
what do u think ? and how big should the pipe be ?

i wanna do the exhaust soon to see if it improves (still running e30 m3 dual ~42mm pipes)


eq x section for 62mm dia twins is a single 88mm (say 3.5"). ground clearance would be an issue. theoretically with a large single u have less velocity pressure so u may be able to go a tad smaller, but 3" would be a big reduction in x-sect area

Hi guys.

I hope you will understand me. I don’t speak English as well as I wish.

I’ve never had European version of E36 M3 3.2, so I will be talking only about E36 M3 3.0. As we know the S50B30 engine is extraordinary engine thanks to the head and the intake manifold. We must be sensible and careful, when we want to upgrade something in this engine. Any upgrade must be well-considered.

There is a quite big “reservoir” of horsepower in an exhaust, especially in an rear exhaust. In my opinion this is one of the most restrictive constructions in the S50B30. Kicking out a catalytic converter is also profitable. My M3 is a good example.

My M3 S50B30 (euro version) had/has:

256.1 HP & 298.1 Nm - soon after buying
283.1 HP & 314.4 Nm - new lambda sensors, new MAF, SuperSprint front exhaust without catalytic converter, air filter
(+27 HP & +16.3 Nm)

Before I did any changes in my M3 I had done a quarter of a mile in ~14.3s. Now I do in ~13.9s. I don’t know if it is understandable (I mean a grammar).

In summary:
before – 14.3s
now – 13.9s

A friend of mine also has the E36 M3 3.0 (euro version). He has done a custom exhaust.

245 HP & 298 Nm – before
266 HP & 350 Nm - after
(+21 HP & +52 Nm)

In my opinion upgrading of a air filter, the exhaust & the DME (remap, chip, etc.) could let us to do the ¼ mile in over 0.5s less.

Cheers.
Maleckis.

what are the specs (diameter mainly) of your friend's custom exhaust ?

A diameter is the same as the stock one has. He has two mufflers instead of catalytic converters. He has an rear exhaust much more cruising than it's in stock. I don't know how this kind of muffler is called in USA.

There is a picture of this exhaust:

http//img208.imageshack.us/img208/9573/15591548hx3.jpg

Put ":" between "http" and "//".

This will surely be one of the hottest topics on this forum.

Any modification done to a 3.0 mechanically would also benefit the 3.2

The 3.2 is probably a slightly more "stressed" engine from the factory because of its inherent higher compression, longer stroke, more aggressive cams enabled by dual vanos etc. It also generates more heat in its head due to more power, and breaths better due to larger intake valves.

I think its fair to say that even if all you did was swap out a 3.0 crank for a 3.2 crank, put in higher compression pistons to match the 3.2 that you'd be close, but not quite as powerful as a 3.2 in its stock state, but it would be awefully close. For track use, if you also modified the redline to match the 3.0, I don't think you could tell the difference.

Electronically it is surely more difficult to tune the 3.2 engine if you want to maintain the factory DME.

Power is area under the curve in my opinion, so that if you do raise the engine's programming to allow a higher redline, you really do have more power available to the driver. It may or may not increase the top HP, that is dependent on the curve, programming and a multitude of factors.

PTG's incredible engines as far as I recall seeing in photographs and in person used the single vanos heads, either locked or active. I doubt they used stock valve sizes and I doubt they relied on Motronic.

When you start closer to the limits of reliability, ie the 3.2 engine, it is more risky to improve on performance. If you start with a less stressed engine, and stess it more, make it less reliable, you'll see incrementally larger gains than doing the same things to the initially more tuned engine.

Alex Lipowich