M50 vanos vs non-vanos

[I3uller]

What's better? I'm going to be doing a swap into an e30. What's the upside and downside to each?

[hellrot325]

Vanos motors will perform slightly better, and you can add the M3 cams and chip for even more performance. Non-Vanos motor obviously doesn't have the expense of maintaining or future replacement of said.

[beatniks325]

to add to what hellrot said, the non-vanos engine is going to have "hotter" cams stock then the vanos version. it will also have a beefier build, ie the lifters, etc. (which is good for really winding the car out to redline or FI).

there is plenty of info on this topic, i'm sure we didn't mention all the things.

[Mini4x]

Vanos engines have flatter torque curves. Even though the peak outputs are near identical.

[Ratt]

How do I know if ive got Vanos? Ive got a 94 325is built in July.

[Phlemm92]

You've got vanos.

[bungy42]

I find that non-vanos motors tend to breathe a bit better (in stock trim) at high RPM than vanos motors. I have one of each and it's a whole lot more satisfying to wind out the non-vanos motor.

[I3uller]

I actually am planning on a FI down the road. So the non vanos would probably be better than huh?

[Gofast]

I actually am planning on a FI down the road. So the non vanos would probably be better than huh?

The non-vanos will stand up to more abuse without crapping out, if that's what you mean.

[bungy42]

The non-vanos will stand up to more abuse without crapping out, if that's what you mean.

That's an understatement. I drive my car pretty hard over 100 miles/day and it's still running strong after 13 years and 268k miles. I'd say it'll stand up to some abuse. :)

[Phlemm92]

Bungy-

Have you replaced anything on your engine? I've got 175K on mine and it's still running pretty stong on a 90 mile/day abuse.

[roundel325i]

the engine on my 92 325i with 168,000 is BULLETPROOF. It LOVES to be run hard. I've even noticed that if i go too long without really running through the gears it seems to get slower. Non vanos severly lacks torque under 3k, but who cares when it sings so purdy up high

[Spennie]

Yeah, the big prob is no torque in the low end, I find.

I think the non-vanos M50 has the following things that the VANOS version doesn't have:

- Hotter cams stock
- stock double valve springs
- mechanical (as opposed to hyrdaulic) lifters, so valves won't float as easy at high rpms
- beefier connecting rods
- beefier block, so more room to bore
- No VANOS!
- Can handle (apparently) up to 10psi boost stock.
I'm sure I'm forgettin' some stuff....

[tomas3314]

My 92 non vanos just hit 109K miles..lets hope to see 200K. :stickoutt I got it 3 yrs ago w/ 63K. Hits 6K on the revs daily.....still going.

[KBtoys]

dont be afraid, just go non-vanos!!!! its OBDI and loves to rev!!

[Matt M.]

How many valve adjustments has your M50 needed?


mechanical (as opposed to hyrdaulic) lifters, so valves won't float as easy at high rpms

This is not true. Among modern BMW sixes, only the S50B30, S50B32, and S54B32 have solid lifters. All other M50/M52/M54 variants have hydraulic valve clearance compensators.

You can add to your list that the M50 has thicker valve stems than the M50TU. Also, it has Bosch M3.1 engine management (shared with S50B30 and S38B38) with hot wire mass air sensor and no knock sensors. The M50TU brought with it M3.3.1 with built in VaNoS control, along with knock sensors and a hot film mass air sensor.

My first E36 was a 92. While I agree that the shape of the power curve is fantastic, BMW clearly changed their mind about all that extra valvetrain mass that the M50 carried.

Never heard that comment about the block before. No experience with or interest in the boost comment either, but that's just me.

--Matt

[hellrot325]

Hits 6K on the revs daily.....still going. Isn't this well below redline?

[Serious]

honestly it would be hard to tell the difference if u didnt know which was which b4 driving them back to back.

i drove a 92 and a 94 back to back b4 knowing about differences and felt no difference at all.

M50 is garbage anyways get a motor with some balls. 2.8 odb1 at least. id suggest 3.2!

[I3uller]

A bit too rich for my blood. I think an M50 e30 is plenty fast enough. ;)

[Serious]

2.8 is nearly as cheap as 2.5 then;)

[KBtoys]

2.8 is nearly as cheap as 2.5 then;)

but 2.8's aren't as cool..... or rare, or awesome, or magnificent, or awesome sounding with stock exhaust.....

oh, and yea.... whats with this "torque" thing the 2.8's have?? ......pssshhh ..... :devillook

[Doug001]

No regrets with my M50, but I have casually considered a chip/CAI combo... I don't really need the extra temptation though. :D

[sendittoryan]

I would love to supercharge my non-vanos engine... it's begging for it..

[I3uller]

I would love to supercharge my non-vanos engine... it's begging for it..

Dooooo it.

[DTM Driven]

i vouch for the bullet proofness. My engine is always reving high. i hit about 6000 on the revs with everything stock.

[bungy42]

Bungy-

Have you replaced anything on your engine? I've got 175K on mine and it's still running pretty stong on a 90 mile/day abuse.

Well, at the moment I'm in the middle of diagnosing a low rpm stumbling problem. :( But it still sings above 3k! :) Anyway, I've replaced the valve cover gasket twice. In an attempt to fix this stumbling I've replaced the injectors and the coils to no avail. I have never touched the timing chain or any tensioners, so I suppose I could be having some kind of timing issue. It feels more like a fuel related problem, though. I think the next thing to try is the cam/crank position sensors, then possibly the MAF sensor and maybe the idle control valve. I suppose I ought to check the compression and leak down, but I can't imagine that would be the problem. It idles fine and pulls hard, it just stumbles a bit if I lug it. Time will tell...

[zeit00]

Yeah, the big prob is no torque in the low end, I find.

I think the non-vanos M50 has the following things that the VANOS version doesn't have:

- Hotter cams stock
- stock double valve springs
- mechanical (as opposed to hyrdaulic) lifters, so valves won't float as easy at high rpms
- beefier connecting rods
- beefier block, so more room to bore
- No VANOS!
- Can handle (apparently) up to 10psi boost stock.
I'm sure I'm forgettin' some stuff....

Where are you getting that the M50 has mechanical lifters? They are hydrolic. This is like the third time I have seen this posted. :dunno