Here's the video of a 320i with an s42
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8_usOvpbz8

And here's a lotus exige with an s42 in it that must be a f^cking beast
http://www.genmay.com/showthread.php?t=674545

that lotus must have f'd up wieght balance now...

the s42 can't weight that much more than the toyota engine

Sweet thanks for the vid! Btw, do you have any info on that paint you were talking about.. I am thinking of using it for a hot rod like job on the 2002.

yeah no problem, If you want a cheap and good paint then try this company. Lots of easy one stage paints that come as a kit with a gallon of paint a reducer and a hardener for about $100

http://www.tcpglobal.com/kustomshop/ksgate.aspx

I'm going with a blitz black, it's hard to find in CA but great for cars that you don't really care about having a show paint on and super easy to spray yourself. I'm torn between that and some of the colors on the kustoms site. The link I gave you above will give you other easy and cheap options.

that dog box is soooo loud. :buttrock

:eyecrazy lol my dad heard this motor as he was passing by my room and took a seat to watch the video, Red Ribbion Army you have inspired him :buttrock.

it's the least I could do, I owe you for your wheels inspiring me lol

thats not an e21 right?

still, bad ass driver, god damn!!!

it's the least I could do, I owe you for your wheels inspiring me lol

Are you getting a set? if so which color and what size. Im not trying to thread jack but I would like to head over to the meets you have in the area just to hang out. Im feeling better now I can be myself rather then the quiet person you met at dromo.

Nope, that is an e36 320i IIRC (doubt it was e46...). It has a sequential tranny, S42 (Motorsport version of the M42 that never made it into a road car but was used for racing), and one kick ass driver. There were some posts by the driver on one of the car vid sites where this was hosted, but I've long since lost the link.

yeah wow. totally insane. really incredable... gotta love that tranny whine haha. mmm straight cut gears....

Interesting. The production E36 320i had a 2.0L M50 6-cyl engine in it (not sold in the US). Are you sure it's not just a modified version of that?

Yup

THat guy can drive damm!!! Looked like he was going to run into everyone and he just went by them.

Man, that guy can drive!

the car is an E36 with the S42 motor so still a 4 cyl. This is how the 320i's came in europe (///M version), but never made it over seas :(

...uhh....I thought the S42 never made it into ANY road going car sold through a dealership. I thought it was only available through the Motorsport division as a racing motor. ...but I've been wrong in the past, so...

that is a touring 320i with an s42. It was made in very limited numbers for motorsports only. No road car came with that engine.

It's an e36 with a sequential straight cut transmission. It was a beast and did very well in racing.

If you ever get a chance to buy one which you most likely never will sell a kidney to get one lol.

The m42 has a lot of NA potential. There's a member on this forum (the one with decked pistons I was talking about in the other thread) That has a built M42 and in it's early stages made over 160WHP without any head work and I think now has over 200whp. I plan on swapping an m42 and eventually building it as close to his as possible since in a lightened e21 it will be a blast and NA.

I can only imagine what that exige is like with that motor, must be a f^cking rocket since it's lightened to less than 1700lbs


Cruz-I plan on getting some but not too soon. I'll be painting soon so I'll photoshop some options. I'm thinking a gun metal or maybe even a gold since I have an extreme gold wheel fetish

Found a bit more info on the S42 from another forum...

Information from the internet:
"The S42 engine was a 2.0L touring car engine with a 86.5mm bore and around a 85mm stroke, which shared the same block as the street going M42. Unlike the common M42, the S42 had a more sophisticated engine management system, and had individual throttle bodies. The S42 unfortunately did not share the same valvetrain as the M42, and is a solid lifter valvetrain (possibily from the S50Euro) fully capable of over 9000rpm, but was limited to a 8500rpm redline, as dictated by touring car rules. It was mounted upright in the bay, not slanted, and ran on a full dry sump oiling system. The pistons had a static compression ratio of around 12:1, and running on pump gas, the S42 made around 280hp."

S42/95 FIA 2.0 L 300 hp - 255 Nm
S42/96 FIA 2.0 L 308 hp - 260 Nm
S42/97 FIA 2.0 L 315 hp - 260 Nm


Those are FIA regs for that year. All years they were conforming to a 2.0L displacement and the factory made tweaks here and there taking the motor from 300hp up to 315hp by the end of the FIA racing career of the motor. So you're looking at the same hp as a road going e46 M3 (ok, down a hair) out of a motor with 2 less cylinders and 1.2L less displacement. Granted that is in race tune, but you get the idea of what this beast is capable of.

...I've got a floppy at home that has the full engine specs and the parts list needed to convert a M42 into a S42....might be time to break that sucker out and see who needs/wants what...

yeah it's a beast. It's nearly impossible to make an s42. Sliding ITB's an impossible to find engine management along with a few parts you can't get.

You can make a pretty close copy out of the m47 crank, M3 pistons, solid lifter conversion etc. you also get into a big problem with the crankshaft pulley since once you get near 8k rpms it can break a forged crank

ITB's you can source off of a euro S50B30, so technically you can get them from BMW (or eBay, or someone selling the conversion here). Engine management you cango stand alone. Keep the revs below 8K and you're probably in business. Might not get 300hp like the race cars did, but you will get a fair bit above 200hp.

an imitation yeah but not a replica. Slide ITB weren't on the euro M3. Like shown before it'd be cheaper to get ITB's from a sport bike. None the less, Eventually I will have a project like this

Wow, that engine really is a monster then!

Btw, for what it's worth, there was a E36 320is sold only in Italy with a 2.0L S14 engine. Notice that the "is" spec was not used in Europe to denote a coupe like the US E36s, but rather a "sport" model - like it was on E21s and E30s. The rest of the E36 320i production models had a 2.0L M50 and later a M52 (both 6-cyl engines).

It's really a shame that that S42 (that I had never heard of before) never made it to street production.

How does that race transmission work? Is there a clutch? I'm pretty new to standard transmissions, so sorry for the n00b question.

How does that race transmission work? Is there a clutch? I'm pretty new to standard transmissions, so sorry for the n00b question.
I think it doesn't have a clutch (if it's like the SMG - and like F1 transmissions) it has an automatic clutch operated by the computer. You just tell it when to shift.
Or could it be like motorcycle transmissions that are sequential but still have a clutch?

Sequential boxes have a foot clutch when it comes to racing. But when you're blazing through the gears you can reduce it's use if not delete using the clutch all together. You can do similar things in an H pattern car ("crash boxing"). From what I understand the time it takes to shift an H pattern car allows the gears to slow and causes damage overtime. H pattern cars are usually linkage controlled, while racing sequential boxes are hydraulic (read: "Shifts REAL fast"), not all, but most. If you can keep the gears moving at the same speed the need for a clutch isn't there. You just need to rebuild a tranny after every season.

I think it doesn't have a clutch (if it's like the SMG - and like F1 transmissions) it has an automatic clutch operated by the computer. You just tell it when to shift.
Or could it be like motorcycle transmissions that are sequential but still have a clutch?

The Neek is correct. F1 cars do have clutch pedals. Also to give people another idea of sequentials, motorcycles have sequential trannys

I just read on wikipedia that F1 cars have an electronically-actuated clutch with a manual override lever on the steering wheel for use when starting from a standstill (but not when shifting gears).

But the fact that those race cars in the video (and other videos that I've seen) have a clutch pedal is actually pretty cool. I've always been hearing about how SMG is faster on the track, but I really don't like the idea of losing control of the clutch... so this is actually the best of both worlds.

Motorcycles can shift without a clutch as well. You can shift any car without using the clutch. The time it takes to slot an H pattern car into the next gear is longer than it takes to pound the sequintal stick forward. Upshifts that are in a straight line, like the 1-2 shift for us normal tranny guys, or 3-4 are easier to do without the aid of the clutch. Let off the gas like you normally would and pop the gear. The edge for sequential shifting transmissions is that most sequential race car boxes work on electronics. From what I've read the stick is not cabled to the tranny, the stick just pushes an "up" or "down" button. The switch then triggers a hydraulic solenoid to pop the tranny forward or backwards a gear. The solenoid is so fast and strong that the gears stay lined up. Does SMG work on a similar principal, but with clutch control as well?

I could have sworn I saw a video of a WRC driver literally break the shifter off his car by hitting it so hard. He proceeded to throw the stick in the back of the car and reach into the dash and push the buttons with is finger. Finished the stage without using a stick.

Couple thing, the Italian 320is was an e30 car. Pretty sure they stopped making them once the e30 M3 went away so there wouldn't have been any e36 320is cars with the S14B20. I could be wrong Todor, but I know that is was built with that engine config first as an e30 (well documented, never seen anything about the e36 like that).

SMG is similar to the sequential gear boxes in theory, in that there is a clutch but it is 100% controlled by the tranny computer. Basically you are pressing a button (whether on the steering column or the stubby shifter) to tell it which direction to shift the gear. SMG I in the e36 M3 (euro Evo) had issues, but was a good first run. SMG II that we got in the e46 M3 was better. I've driven one and it shifted VERY well for spirited driving once you got used to how to operate it (you want to lift a tad as it is shifting gears to not jerk the tranny). SMG III is what a lot of the newer cars have (Z4's), no experience with them yet. Nice, but only needed on a street car if you have no idea how to drive stick. If you are building a race car, you want a VERY strong tranny and that is the after market straight-cut gearboxes. No need to worry about a SMG at that point. It is a way to market higher end performance cars to people who can't drive a stick.

Couple thing, the Italian 320is was an e30 car. Pretty sure they stopped making them once the e30 M3 went away so there wouldn't have been any e36 320is cars with the S14B20. I could be wrong Todor, but I know that is was built with that engine config first as an e30 (well documented, never seen anything about the e36 like that).
Yeah, you're right about the Italian 320is... i thought I had seen pics of a E36 with the S14B20, but it was probably a transplant. That engine seems to have been put in E30s from the factory, like you said. Makes sense, since it's the same engine family as the E30 M3, nothing to do with an E36.

Motorcycles can shift without a clutch as well. You can shift any car without using the clutch. The time it takes to slot an H pattern car into the next gear is longer than it takes to pound the sequintal stick forward. Upshifts that are in a straight line, like the 1-2 shift for us normal tranny guys, or 3-4 are easier to do without the aid of the clutch. Let off the gas like you normally would and pop the gear. The edge for sequential shifting transmissions is that most sequential race car boxes work on electronics. From what I've read the stick is not cabled to the tranny, the stick just pushes an "up" or "down" button. The switch then triggers a hydraulic solenoid to pop the tranny forward or backwards a gear. The solenoid is so fast and strong that the gears stay lined up. Does SMG work on a similar principal, but with clutch control as well?

I could have sworn I saw a video of a WRC driver literally break the shifter off his car by hitting it so hard. He proceeded to throw the stick in the back of the car and reach into the dash and push the buttons with is finger. Finished the stage without using a stick.
Interesting. I need to read some transmission theory before discussing anything further, but it seems to me that it would be impossible to shift without using a clutch, unless you put it in neutral first, then match the revs exactly for the new gear, then put the lever into the new gear. I've done that with my car, but it's very difficult to match the revs exactly. So the way I understand it, the input shaft of the transmission needs to change its speed of rotation while the shift is happening. Hence, the faster the shift is, the more difficult it would be to do that. So according to my (meager) knowledge on the subject, it would be impossible to take the transmission out of, say, first gear and slam it directly into second, even if you're lightning-fast with the movement. Especially if you're lightning-fast with the movement. The presence of the clutch allows you to disengage the tranny's input shaft from the engine, so that the synchros can cause that input shaft to rotate at the right speed for the selected gear. Then as you release the clutch with the tranny already in gear, the clutch causes your engine to rotate at the speed of the input shaft, which is now connected directly (but at a specific ratio) to the wheels.

What am I missing?

Also, I have no idea how transmissions like VW's DSG work... but that's a whole other story.

....well, now that you mention JUST the e36 and the S14....

The first e36 M3 produced by the factory back in mid '90s was a 1-off car. It had the S14 under the hood since that was what they had been running in DTM prior to that. But as the project was developing the DTM rules changed and BMW dropped the factory DTM program anyway. So the INITIAL reason for building the 1st gen M3 had now gone away (DTM and the homologation regs). So BMW then focused on building a better road car out of the e36 M3. If it didn't need a 2.5L 4 banger under the hood, they could build a better M50 and throw THAT in there! :D

Damn it...I've done away with my VCR so Ican't capture the vid I have of the S14 powered e36 M3 playing ON the BMW test track. I'll see if I can't find it online though once I get home and dig up the name of the vid.

But this probably was where the idea came from for the S42 anyway. The engine group at Motorsport had gone with a 4 banger in the first place for the e30 M3 since they knew it was going to have a hard racing life and already knew about the problems the M88/S38 cranks were having at high rpms. So they went with a 4 cylinder design to cut down on crank length (totally seperate of throw), and made a high revving monster 4. The S42 (and M42 it was based on) wasn't as large in displacement, but took a lot of the knowledge gained from racing the S14 and continued in that tradition.

actually the euro S50 (real S50) isn't really based off of the M50 like the USDM S50 is. If I remember correctly it's completely made by the M division and the engines are almost nothing alike.

Also you can change gears w/o a clutch, As long as the gears are spinning at the same speed it'll be ok. The grinding you get from changing gears w/o a clutch comes from when the gears are spinning but engine speed has dropped making you try and force the transmission and input shaft together while they're spinning at different speeds. If they were at the same speed then there is no need for a clutch.

Also the idea of the S42 came from them being in different classes. The same way the 320 currently racing will still race when the M3 comes along. The M3 and 320i were in different classes and the S42 was just a race motor the same way the motor in an e36 M3 and e36 M3 GTR are not the same at all.


Also SMGs on road cars ARE NOT SEQUENTIAL.

They are not in a straight pattern like a true sequential. They're like a normal transmission but change electronically. Motorcycles however do have sequential set ups.

Pros to straight cut gears
Strong
Less drive train loss

Cons
Loud
Expensive

Ok, I've just read everything I could find on the net about sequential transmissions and I'm still not clear on how it's possible to shift any transmission without a clutch and without rev-matching. Are you saying you're relying on the synchros inside the transmission to bring the engine up or down to the correct RPM? But from what I read, most race transmissions are not even synchronized... And yet, somehow, the engine speed has to be lowered or increased according to the gear shift (while the wheels are spinning at a roughly constant speed during the shift). If you use a clutch, the synchros make the input shaft spin at the right speed for the new gear (while the clutch is disengaged), then the the clutch makes the engine rotate at the same speed as the input shaft as you re-engage the clutch. How is it possible to surmount that?

I'm not saying it's impossible - all articles that I read say that you can shift a motorcycle without the clutch... but HOW DOES IT WORK???

(and sorry, I didn't mean to thread-jack... hopefully the issue of sequential transmissions is interesting to other people here too)

Ok, I've just read everything I could find on the net about sequential transmissions and I'm still not clear on how it's possible to shift any transmission without a clutch and without rev-matching. Are you saying you're relying on the synchros inside the transmission to bring the engine up or down to the correct RPM? But from what I read, most race transmissions are not even synchronized... And yet, somehow, the engine speed has to be lowered or increased according to the gear shift (while the wheels are spinning at a roughly constant speed during the shift). If you use a clutch, the synchros make the input shaft spin at the right speed for the new gear (while the clutch is disengaged), then the the clutch makes the engine rotate at the same speed as the input shaft as you re-engage the clutch. How is it possible to surmount that?

I'm not saying it's impossible - all articles that I read say that you can shift a motorcycle without the clutch... but HOW DOES IT WORK???

(and sorry, I didn't mean to thread-jack... hopefully the issue of sequential transmissions is interesting to other people here too)

syncros were designed so you didn't have to rev match/double clutch. it's why you can just put the clutch in and shift.

It's already been explained, but if the gears are spinning at the same speed then you can just shift gears as long as you don't let the revs drop. In the video you notice how fast he shifts, with a sequential you shift so fast that the revs don't drop so you don't need to clutch although it does reduce the life.

Also to see what I mean. Next time you're in your car push your stick like you were going into gear with the clutch out. Don't force it but push it against it. Then slowly rev your engine up. The stick will move at a certain rpm almost like it's going to go in. At that rpm you can shift without the clutch. Try it even if you find that rpm while rolling.

Thanks for the info guys. I think I'll stick to the clutch though. My swap is costing me enough as it is, without rebuilding a tranny every few years.

It's already been explained, but if the gears are spinning at the same speed then you can just shift gears as long as you don't let the revs drop. In the video you notice how fast he shifts, with a sequential you shift so fast that the revs don't drop so you don't need to clutch although it does reduce the life.
But the thing is, the gears are NOT rotating at the same speed. You're just repeating the same thing that you've already said, but it doesn't explain how it's possible to shift without a clutch. Here's the picture from wikipedia:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/0/0f/Manual_transmission_clutch_GEAR_1.JPG/800px-Manual_transmission_clutch_GEAR_1.JPG
The gray gears are fixed to their shaft, but the orange gears rotate freely around their shaft, except when the blue or purple lever moves and couples a specific orange gear to its shaft. When that happens, all other orange gears will be rotating at different speeds around the yellow shaft because they have different diameters and are matched to different-diameter gray gears. All the gray gears rotate at the same speed, so all the orange gears must rotate at different speeds. So how can you, then, slide the lever from first to second gear without matching the revs of the engine such that the "2nd" gear now rotates at the speed at which the "1st" gear was rotating before the shift?

Also to see what I mean. Next time you're in your car push your stick like you were going into gear with the clutch out. Don't force it but push it against it. Then slowly rev your engine up. The stick will move at a certain rpm almost like it's going to go in. At that rpm you can shift without the clutch. Try it even if you find that rpm while rolling.
Yes, I've tried that (as I've said earlier in this thread) and it works. But it works only if you carefully match the RPM of the engine to the current wheel speed and the desired gear. You can't just jam it from, say, 3rd to 4th without doing anything else, even if your movement is lightning-fast. For the reasons I've explained above.

So, obviously, I'm wrong somewhere because all sources say you can indeed shift a motorcycle transmission without using the clutch. But please don't just tell me that I'm wrong without explaining where exactly my logic is failing. The picture above, as well as my logic, is from a conventional (non-sequential) transmission. But all sources I read told me that the sequential transmission is the same thing, except that the gear shift levers are actuated by a rotary mechanism that makes it impossible to select random gears, but rather only the "next" or "previous" gear.

two words - BAD ASS!

OK, think back to the olden days. BEFORE there were synchro's (they are fairly modern). You had a clutch, but had to match the engine speed more closely to the desired gear speed as you were getting into it, otherwise even with the clutch in it didn't always want to let you into the gear. I've had friends who killed their clutch completely to the point of having the pedal to the floor but it was still allowing power to the drive wheels when in gear. They managed to drive the car home that way (late at night, slowly rolling through stop lights and signs after making sure nobody was coming). There was some grinding involved since it wasn't not something they were used to doing, but it IS possibly to drive the car without the clutch.

As for sequential gear boxes...All of the gears are on the same shaft (think of the orange shaft above). They are all set in line numerically (1, 2, 3, etc) and hitting the shift mechanism take you up or down one gear. There is no randomly going from 5th to 3rd because you want to, you have to go to 4th, then 3rd. Again, if you match the engine speed with the speed of the gear you are trying to go into, there isn't as much of a need for the clutch.