M42club.com - Home of the BMW E30/E36 318i/iS
DISCUSSION => Swaps, Turbos, Buildups => Topic started by: lambertius on August 20, 2014, 06:51:19 PM
-
Note: I don't make the kit, I helped design and test it. This thread contains all the info on the development. If you want to buy the kit, you can get it here! https://devil.design/product/bmw-m42-complete-itb-kit-for-e30/
Just a quick update!
(http://i.imgur.com/8GAWUBA.jpg?1)
I also thought I would post all the videos I've made for my car on the front page! :) There is a lot of stuff here so I thought I would make an 'index' of sorts so that people don't need to read 23 pages to work out whats going on...
The epsiode on my car:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8Ay1x_H-9k
How an LSD Works
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3PZIn-3wXsM
All the fluid simulations:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pppv26PsPj0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WqDgjP0j7w0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLPiHUe0wx0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYytaUj-ihc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WbrzmInXX0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SDHJF4_CFhA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGDdkidqnHI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ve8q1MZdnGA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yt_wX7nyR44
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxgBQGg5Odw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AfJGrTRx-q8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Re81nyTM8Uc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5B0CFqaDhcM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pieu--Byb1Q
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dYOxCz8qSAY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OScp517Z05o
All videos of testing:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SB5N4OrAX4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1BT3hd-f6w
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0nysqbIuXJY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5W_ObbncUls
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3sGQyz84uY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PS8GGwnq6M
And page 15 on the forum has the full breakdown of dyno results:
http://www.m42club.com/forum/index.php?topic=18442.msg130221#msg130221
The assembly guide:
http://www.m42club.com/forum/index.php?topic=18442.msg129970#msg129970
Lightweight flywheel discussion:
http://www.m42club.com/forum/index.php?topic=19030.msg130544#msg130544
Discussion on mufflers, headers and drone
http://www.m42club.com/forum/index.php?topic=18442.msg128939#msg128939
http://www.m42club.com/forum/index.php?topic=18442.msg129182#msg129182
http://www.m42club.com/forum/index.php?topic=18442.msg129843#msg129843
Info on assembling your own OEM small case LSD
http://www.m42club.com/forum/index.php?topic=18442.msg132308#msg132308
(http://i.imgur.com/JW3YYQc.jpg?2)
*************************************************************************************
Okay, I've had a chat with Rama regarding pricing of the kit. With the assumption that the current number of people who want to get in with the bulk order commit to the purchase , the prices will be (in USD, and they are subject to change):
Carbon Fiber Kit - $1500
Fiberglass Kit - $1400
Flywheel - $195 (He will do this price for JUST the flywheel as well if there is enough interest)
If you have an E30, as part of the bulk order Rama will modify the airbox for clearance if you want. All E30 kits will be supplied with the Carbon Fiber curved trumpet for cylinder 4 clearance.
Group buy ends on the 31st of May 2016 so message me if you haven't already!
Make sure you let me know what you want, what model your car is, the driving side and where you are!
****************************************************************************************
The final episode is up! I hope you enjoy it, I start talking about the kit about half way through. We tried to be as gratuitous as possible with the induction and exhaust sounds!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8Ay1x_H-9k
************************************************************************************************
I'm currently organising a group buy Please PM me if you're interested. Price will depend on the number of serious purchases. Let me know you car and driving side, whether you want the CF of FG airbox, what country you're in and if you want a flywheel as well. Cut-off date is the 31st of May 2016
************************************************************************************************
The kit DOES fit the E30 cars, but it requires some slight modification from standard so you will need to notify RHD that you want the kit for an E30 at purchase. The details are here at this post.
http://www.m42club.com/forum/index.php?topic=18442.msg130923#msg130923
So with nothing but good news for fitment, Rama has said that he is happy to take on a group purchase. Let me know if you're interested!
************************************************************************************************
The kit will fit LHD E36 cars and should fit the LHD E30 cars
***I've had to update this as I mistakenly stated that it had been fitted to an LHD E30***
This is one of the items that has come up in the survey, so I've gotten a bunch of photos of it fitted in a LHD car (E36, but it will should fit an E30). I've decided to post this on the front page as an update so that people will see it without having to go through the whole thread since it is a key thing people have raised.
We need someone to test fit the LHD E30 please PM me if you're interested. You will get some pricing perks, but will need to be willing to take photos to put up in the forum, and have some patience in case there are any clearance issues and the airbox needs to be modified. In all likelihood it should be a straight fitment.
If you haven't filled out the survey, please do - I know for sure that Rama will make a few adjustments based on the current feedback, so the more the better!
http://goo.gl/forms/qx17FaMQ7E
The kits getting packaged to ship
(http://i.imgur.com/9RSLbsq.jpg)
The kit comes apart in a modular fashion to suit your purpose I don't recommend smoking in your engine bay...
(http://i.imgur.com/0suRAgt.jpg)
Production model LHD fitment
(http://i.imgur.com/7e2t4nG.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/4l3wnBC.jpg)
UPDATE
If you've been following this thread, or even if you haven't - could you please help me help out Rama - since it was him who made all this possible - and follow this link?
http://goo.gl/forms/qx17FaMQ7E
It will help him decide on what projects to follow up on in the future - like CAM & Stroker kits for example (you can even talk about different engines). There are only a few questions and I would really appreciate it!
EDIT: I can tell from some of the responses some of you would like me to know who you are - so if you would like me to be able to respond to you directly, please include your email!!!
***************************************************************************************************************************************
I HOPE YOU ENJOY THIS TEASER
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4kZcENnW_c
(http://i.imgur.com/c6Lfo98.jpg)
***************************************************************************************************************************************
THE KIT IS FINALLY READY TO PURCHASE
After more than a year in development, the kit is finally available to purchase!
http://racehead.com.au/products-page/bmw/bmw-m44-m42-complete-itb-kit/
http://racehead.com.au/products-page/bmw/bmw-m44m42-complete-itb-kit-carbon-fiber-airbox/
http://racehead.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/BMW-M42-44-itb-kit-instructions.pdf
http://www.m42club.com/forum/index.php?topic=18442.msg129970#msg129970
(http://racehead.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/1446475470221.jpg)
At the time of this post 01/12/2015 There are currently kits in stock, so if you want to get one without having to wait now would be the time! Prices are in USD.
I'm still continuing the RnD to test a few variations for my own personal satisfaction, but you're ready to rock with this as it is and it offers substantial headroom for other modifications! So you don't have to spend ages looking, here is the dyno results of just the ITB kit below:
(http://i.imgur.com/6iA1gHX.jpg)
There will be a couple more important updates to this first post, this is just the beginning! :D
***********************************************************************************************************************************************************
So I've wanted to put a set of ITBs on my car for a while as a fun project, and have been reading up on the options for a while. As far as I could tell there are 4 possible options:
1. The most common is to buy M3 ITBs, make an adapter plate for the port face and hook it all up. The pros to this is that the parts are easily available, and it has a vacuum bypass for the ICV and different vacuum lines already built which makes adaptation a bit easier. However you will still need to fabricate/alter an airbox as well as points for some of the vacuum lines.
2. There is an off-the-shelf kit made by dbilas dynamics which will fit with no effort, and accounts for all the peripherals and air lines no worries. It does cost more than common sense allows, considering the M42/4 engines aren't exactly power houses, so the incentive to spend heaps for not a whole lot of power isn't high. There is also a kit by extrudabody and GT Technic but they don't appear to be as complete.
3. Purchasing another brand of ITBs like Jenvey, and making an adapter plate for the kit. However, this is a bit more of an unknown and could require a fair bit of screwing around to make the kits fit.
4. Fully fabricate a custom kit which requires time and effort - and skills with metalwork...
There is one other big point which I haven't raised yet, and that is the dimensions of the ITBs that are used. I'm not an automotive engineer, and I haven't worked directly with engine design. I have done some analysis of fluid dynamics for different purposes, and through reading I have a fair general understanding of engine design. While trying to see what people had done with ITBs for this engine previously, I found that a lot of people had attempted it, but the threads I found never posted the results from the conversions. Considering the effort required to do this, I wanted to be sure that what I was doing was going to pay off. I had a suspicion that the M3 ITBs and the dbilas dynamics ITB kit were too large in diameter and would most likely result in a loss in power across the rev range rather than a gain. I also suspected that the runner length for both options was too short to suit the engine dynamics. Not being familiar enough with what was happening I decided to contact a race engineer and ask some questions.
After getting some answers and getting a bit more of an idea what I was looking for, I decided to run some very basic CFD analysis on different ITB diameter arrangements. Even with the basic set up that I used, it was immediately obvious that ITBs larger than 45mm would significantly under perform on the M42/4 engines. The pictures below show some low velocity analysis through the a number of different profiles - the further back the higher velocity profile sits within the ITB the better the cylinder filling characteristics will be (provided you don't choke/restrict the airflow) due to the higher air velocity carrying more momentum as well as having better resonance characteristics. The poorest performing ITB is a simplified model of the S50 ITBs on the M42 ports.
(http://i.imgur.com/jQm4SPN.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/6MHaOMw.jpg)
After a bit more back and forth with the engineer, he decided that he wants to make a properly engineered bolt-on kit for the M42/4 engines that will accommodate all the vacuum lines, have the correct dimensions, dyno charts to prove its efficacy and be affordable. He is okay with me sharing some of the progress as it happens, and I'll be contributing my car to the cause for testing. At the moment, we're designing parts to test fit and make sure all the dimensions are correct, as well as preparing flow simulations for real velocities and to model fuel mixing from different manifold shapes. Right now I'm preparing a few different manifold shapes for CFD analysis to best improve fuel mixing, below is a shot of the model for the manifold casting. This casting will be the basis for whatever the final version will be, but for the moment it will be analysed and altered according to the findings we make. I still need to model up the trumpets and the airbox, but I'm hoping to do a full transient analysis on the system provided I can find all the information I need. From the engineer's previous experience and my findings we're going for 42mm ITBs as they should line up well for the engine's parameters.
(http://i.imgur.com/lZNmZSI.jpg)
If people are interested in this project I'll update it with results as we get them and show why the decisions were made for different selections. And for anyone who is interested, I could probably use a hand obtaining any information as there are a few key things I've been searching for answers to.
(http://i.imgur.com/S7PAN9F.jpg)
These are the dimensions of the M42/4 port face that we measured, however if anyone could be so obliging as to measure their own engine port profile to let us know if they get the same values it would be a great help. Dimensions are in mm. Edit: We're pretty confident these values are correct now.
(http://i.imgur.com/rHkIOYu.jpg)
This is a simple sketch of the lower half of the intake manifold and its arrangement in the engine bay. The M42/4 is tilted at 30 degrees from vertical, however the port face is slightly recessed into the head. I believe the recess is at an angle of 5 degrees (35 degrees from vertical), however my engine is still in the car making it a bit awkward for me to measure so if anyone has an engine out and can confirm the measurement that would be great. I also measured the angle the injectors run into the manifold at 25 degree from vertical which was a bit easier because I had a spare manifold out of the car. Edit: We've revised the port face angle to be 40 degrees from vertical.
Anyway, that is the story so far and I hope people find this interesting! One of the cool things about this, is that this is all being done via telecommunication - I've never met the race engineer I'm dealing with in person as he is currently in a different country. I find that quite interesting that something like this can be done with such a significant physical separation. At some point I'll be getting sent test parts to fit and run and hopefully some good results!
-
Hi
Great idea building a dedicated kit for a m42, I will be watching closely.
The s50 itbs will fail because of cylinder capacity, but when you get your cylinder volume up they work quite well.
Cheers
-
Hi
Great idea building a dedicated kit for a m42, I will be watching closely.
The s50 itbs will fail because of cylinder capacity, but when you get your cylinder volume up they work quite well.
Cheers
Oh yeah, I could've probably been a bit more implicit in what I wrote - but you are correct, the M3 ITBs will work when *conditions* are met for them to work, but as a bolt on modification they are most likely detrimental. From what the engineer I was talking to was saying, there engine would need to be stroked and have the rev limit raised as well as having the ITBs on a thick adapter plate for them to work most effectively. What we're aiming for is a kit that suits people like me, who want to tinker on their own car but not necessarily putting in heaps of work. The idea being that you can swap this manifold in, adjust the slotted cam gears, exhaust and a tune and be done with it. Getting the most out of your engine without having to do an engine build!
I'm getting a simplified model ready at the moment for instantaneous flow analysis to make sure the flow characteristics are ideal, but in the meantime I do have a render of a draft/concept of the manifold. I always like the way renders look even when its a draft, so pro!
(http://i.imgur.com/nxFkfL3.jpg)
-
Please keep this updated. 42mm sounds spot on. Most kits are too big like you say.
-
That's interresting! And I like the way you do it.
I've never been too interrested by ITBs as they often lack engineering/design but if you come out with a solution matched to our engines that could be tempting...
May I ask you what do you intend to do for engine managment? Because most ITBs setup are poorly designed and the rest poorly managed....
Do you plan to go stand alone (MAP/MAF/ALPHA-N?), keep the stock management and provide a chip?
-
Sounds interesting Lambertius. Unfortunaltly I cannot see your Pictures (may be me) But am looking forward to seeing you CFD results. Extremly good results can come from a optimised system.
-
Sounds interesting Lambertius. Unfortunaltly I cannot see your Pictures (may be me) But am looking forward to seeing you CFD results. Extremly good results can come from a optimised system.
I had some issues uploading them imgur yesterday, any better now?
-
Hi
Pictures are working now, and are awesome too.
Cheers
-
Yup pictures are now working. (I miss SW render package haha)
It looks like you have focused on various approaches to adapting a round TB of various sizes to port shape? The analysis appear show the criticality of transition change from one shape to another.
Have you considered taper over the length of runner? Viscous losses along the wall appear to be creating an increasing boundary layer tapering your velocity zone toward the port.
-
Yup pictures are now working. (I miss SW render package haha)
It looks like you have focused on various approaches to adapting a round TB of various sizes to port shape? The analysis appear show the criticality of transition change from one shape to another.
Have you considered taper over the length of runner? Viscous losses along the wall appear to be creating an increasing boundary layer tapering your velocity zone toward the port.
You're correct in your observations about what that initial simulation was, as well as the transitions and tapers affecting the flow characteristics. I'm actually in the process of running a new bunch of more 'realistic' simulations now with the primary purpose being to determine the most effective geometry of the taper and internal geometry so that there is the highest possible velocity profile. By changing the internal shape of the runner I've been able to add a few % higher velocity to the intake without reducing the cross-section or changing the length. Pictures will go up once it is ready to show!
-
That's interresting! And I like the way you do it.
I've never been too interrested by ITBs as they often lack engineering/design but if you come out with a solution matched to our engines that could be tempting...
May I ask you what do you intend to do for engine managment? Because most ITBs setup are poorly designed and the rest poorly managed....
Do you plan to go stand alone (MAP/MAF/ALPHA-N?), keep the stock management and provide a chip?
There really shouldn't be a reason to move away from the standard DME in either the E30 or E36 cars. The computer is versatile enough and is easily tuned by any reputable company. Dyno results will be part of this when it is done, so we'll be able to see for sure if the OEM computer is up to the task.
-
That's interresting! And I like the way you do it.
I've never been too interrested by ITBs as they often lack engineering/design but if you come out with a solution matched to our engines that could be tempting...
May I ask you what do you intend to do for engine managment? Because most ITBs setup are poorly designed and the rest poorly managed....
Do you plan to go stand alone (MAP/MAF/ALPHA-N?), keep the stock management and provide a chip?
There really shouldn't be a reason to move away from the standard DME in either the E30 or E36 cars. The computer is versatile enough and is easily tuned by any reputable company. Dyno results will be part of this when it is done, so we'll be able to see for sure if the OEM computer is up to the task.
so you plan to keep the AFM on M42 and MAF on M44 and provide chips for both?
it will be interresting to see the results!
-
An interesting point was mentioned about transitioning from the round throttle shape to the oval inlet shape. Most of the throttles are based off the old Weber side draft carb setup....but you would think by now oval throttles would be more available since most engines made in the last 20 years have this port shape.
-
That's interresting! And I like the way you do it.
I've never been too interrested by ITBs as they often lack engineering/design but if you come out with a solution matched to our engines that could be tempting...
May I ask you what do you intend to do for engine managment? Because most ITBs setup are poorly designed and the rest poorly managed....
Do you plan to go stand alone (MAP/MAF/ALPHA-N?), keep the stock management and provide a chip?
There really shouldn't be a reason to move away from the standard DME in either the E30 or E36 cars. The computer is versatile enough and is easily tuned by any reputable company. Dyno results will be part of this when it is done, so we'll be able to see for sure if the OEM computer is up to the task.
I don't think the guy who will be selling it will include a chip - I think that you will need to get it tuned in order to get optimal results, but by providing dyno charts he will be able to demonstrate the efficacy of the design and the gain by tuning the car for it. The E30/6 cars are easily flashed with a new tune so it will be something you will be able to get done anywhere there is a reputable tuner. This would be easier than a chip anyway since you won't need to install anything.
An interesting point was mentioned about transitioning from the round throttle shape to the oval inlet shape. Most of the throttles are based off the old Weber side draft carb setup....but you would think by now oval throttles would be more available since most engines made in the last 20 years have this port shape.
It is interesting that you mention that. If you have a look at the below image, the second flowsim from the top has a circular profile that has the same CSA as the oval profile, but in the isosurface image, the higher 4m/s air velocity doesn't extend back into the circular profile. I'm not 100% sure how to describe the effect, but the reason the ports are oval is that it increases the velocity with a minimal impact on drag - it basically improves cylinder filling. I'm not sure what the effect of having the butterfly being an oval shape would be though; I imagine that there would be a point where having the thinner profile too long would reduce flow by more than the increase in velocity (and therefore momentum) is worth. That is something for a Formula 1 team to investigate I suspect...
(http://i.imgur.com/4RtwIBW.png)
-
So I've been running simulations since before I started this thread, but I now have enough to make an interesting enough post that will actually demonstrate in an empirical way the kind of benefits you could potentially see.
The simulation I ran was of a slightly different shape to the sand-cast manifold that will be needed to mount the kit. There are no injectors in the model as that wasn't what I was analysing at this point. There are two simulations I ran; one to assess a sharper curve in the manifold (which would give more hood clearance) and one that is steeper but gives less clearance. The results of interest are peak velocities around the valve, the mass flow through the valves, and visual observations of flow separation and turbulence within the casting.
This first images displays the boundary conditions, environmental pressure at the trumpet and a static pressure at the valve openings. These values at the valves were taken from experimental values and represent the kind of peak instantaneous pressures you would see when a cylinder is at the bottom of it's stroke.
(http://i.imgur.com/cZZ4QSP.png)
Let's have a look at the steeper manifold:
(http://i.imgur.com/TtKju9v.png)
The interesting things to note is that there actually quite a high peak velocity, and there is a good even flow through the manifold. However, you will notice that just after the transition into the ports there is a flow separation that takes place as the air is diverted into on of the two valves. This phenomenon doesn't occur in a shallower manifold:
(http://i.imgur.com/pO4U0el.png)
You can actually see the turbulence clearer with this cut plot through the valves:
Steeper manifold:
(http://i.imgur.com/kTxvEW5.png)
Shallower manifold:
(http://i.imgur.com/NZu7lwr.png)
So the question is; how much does this affect the Air Mass Flow Rate?
Well the shallow manifold allows a flow rate through the valves of 0.1667 kg/s while the steeper manifold allows only 0.1649kg/s. Empirically the difference is only 1%, which is negligible - unless you're trying to optimise a system, which is kind of the point of doing this. However, the reason I'm showing you this isn't because of the difference it makes between two designs that we have, it is the difference between these designs and the stock manifold. Anyone who has seen the OEM manifold knows it is an Octopus, long, and with sharp curves - significantly more so than what is modelled here. The point of showing these results is that short of modelling the OEM manifold from scratch, this should illustrate that on the lower half of the manifold alone, there is the potential for ~5% better air flow since this is so much more direct than the OEM parts. The largest arc these models moved through was 35 degrees, the largest the manifold moves through is closer to ~120 degrees.
For me the real interest is the spot of stagnant air before the flow separates into the valves. It is indicates to me that it will be worth fidgeting with hood clearances to make the flow more direct so that fuel doesn't get stalled in dead air in front of the valves!
Another interesting thing you can see in these images the shock-wave that forms from the actual throttle butterfly. I'm currently playing with the design of the butterfly at the moment, but believe it or not - using the same diameter butterfly, but changing the way it interacts with the flow stream has so far yielded a 5% improvement in mass flow rate. I'm playing with alterations to that at the moment, but it will be the most interesting butterfly valve around!
-
Subscribed!
-
Interesting results!
I looked at the atpower website www.atpowerthrottles.com and saw a lot of their kits put the throttles as close to the head as possible. Wonder if that works a lot better than putting the throttle on the end of a manifold?
Maybe worth looking into on CFD to see if this is a viable alternative. It would be much cheaper to just make an inlet flange and adapt individual throttles to it and make the inlet trumpets have the shape to clear the hood.
Just throwing another option out there. I love the ATPower stuff, but its $$$$!
-
Interesting results!
I looked at the atpower website www.atpowerthrottles.com and saw a lot of their kits put the throttles as close to the head as possible. Wonder if that works a lot better than putting the throttle on the end of a manifold?
Maybe worth looking into on CFD to see if this is a viable alternative. It would be much cheaper to just make an inlet flange and adapt individual throttles to it and make the inlet trumpets have the shape to clear the hood.
Just throwing another option out there. I love the ATPower stuff, but its $$$$!
Whenever someone equips ITBs they always talk about how the throttle feel is "better". The reason people have this perception is because of a transient effect between opening the throttle and the air reaching the engine. The lower you are in the RPM the more obvious this effect is, which means that even if ITBs are poorly set up they can still improve the 'connectivity' a driver can experience. The major reason for this effect is the distance ITBs are placed from the ports - rather than actually being ITBs.
I'm going to use some exaggerated numbers to explain the effect just because it is easier to visualise.
Imagine a situation where you have a throttle 100m from a port, and another where you have the throttle 1m from the port. In both situations the throttle is closed, and then instantaneously opened. In both cases there is negative pressure on the engine side of the throttle which pulls air in at 100m/s. You can see that it would take a full second for the longer runner to reach the engine before providing power, whereas the the 1m port would take 10ms (actually in both cases it would take longer, but the actual effects aren't really worth discussing, I'm just making a point).
Now keeping in mind that there is a massive time difference before the power comes on; let us assume that the 100m throttle is actually better set up and creates more power and torque. You can see that even if an ITB is poorly set up in terms of power, it can have a very real effect on drive-ability. This is why even in poorly set up systems people will still talk about how much better the throttle feels. This 'feel' literally comes from the distance you place the throttle from the valve opening. It also has more of an effect at lower RPM because the intake velocity is lower and takes longer to traverse the distance. Closer may be better for feel, but there is more than one effect at play.
There are other considerations, such as injector placement, throttle by-pass and vacuum lines that need to be accommodated on the manifold. And then there is the fact that this is intended to be useful on road cars as well. In terms of flow, the longer the distance you have to transition from a circular butterfly to the port shape the more laminar the flow will be which will improve cylinder filling characteristics. The analysis I've shown only shows the butterfly at WOT, but if it is partially open there can be significant turbulence which reduce fuel vaporisation, so if you place very close to the oval port you will induce even more turbulence in the profile transition. The manifold we're designing is to be part of a tuned-length intake as well, so the whole system should resonate with the RPM to assist in sucking in more air.
The 'ideal' ITB set up is very extensive. You would have dual stage injectors, with one on the port side of the butterfly, and one on the intake side. You can generate significantly more power by injecting fuel further from the port, but this only works at WOT and high RPM otherwise the fuel won't get carried all the way into the engine and you can get a flame-out into the engine bay. You would place your ITBs with about 100~150mm distance from the valve to allow a smooth laminar transition into the valve profile.
This smooth transition is very very important, and it should highlight why I'm not keen on products like the dbilas ITBs. In the simulations I just posted up, a change in curvature that changed dimensions only a few mm results in a 1% reduction in efficiency. If you look at dbilas their kit has a sharp kink with no curved transition, which would have a very significant effect (I'd be willing to wager 10% or more) on reducing mass flow. You encounter the same issues when using an adapter plate. You would need to make an adapter plate 25~50mm thick to get an appropriate transition to maintain laminar flow - which would end up having defeated the purpose of putting the ITBs close to the port in the first place. It would be different if the butterfly was the same shape as the port, but it is circular and you need to accommodate that change in profile.
-
Just bumping the thread to let people know that it is still alive and things are still going on in the background! I also thought I would share something else I work on in my spare time with a friend:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PG4aVv9Qcg (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PG4aVv9Qcg)
I know it is a bit off topic, but we're planning to do a video on the ITB kit when we're done so I thought I would show you our latest video!
-
The Dbilas kit does leave a bit to be desired. The 'adaptor' does change angle quickly but does it over approx 60mm, the internal surfaces are ok but can use shaping, somthing i may look at later. The other aspect of the Dbilas kit which is less than ideal is the air box.
Do you intend to include an airbox in your kit?
-
The Dbilas kit does leave a bit to be desired. The 'adaptor' does change angle quickly but does it over approx 60mm, the internal surfaces are ok but can use shaping, somthing i may look at later. The other aspect of the Dbilas kit which is less than ideal is the air box.
Do you intend to include an airbox in your kit?
Yes we do! And that airbox will be modelled up and simulated just like everything else to show you that it is worthwhile!
-
I got an email from the engineer I'm working with yesterday that I thought I would share:
"I have progressed on and fitted fuel rail mounts and reworked the injectors to push them in a bit further, somehow we got the flange thickness a bit wrong too but all looking good now. I used the +5 model for now. Its basically ready to get a 3d print made!"
So we're 3D printing a test fit model soon, to make sure everything fits together so things are progressing!
-
Thats awesome!
-
will this kit fit E30 m42 or just E36, i have an E30 IS, and have be researching ITB and its a mind field an would love a kit i can just bolt on.
-
I got an email from the engineer I'm working with yesterday that I thought I would share:
"I have progressed on and fitted fuel rail mounts and reworked the injectors to push them in a bit further, somehow we got the flange thickness a bit wrong too but all looking good now. I used the +5 model for now. Its basically ready to get a 3d print made!"
So we're 3D printing a test fit model soon, to make sure everything fits together so things are progressing!
Awesome!!! This is exciting!!!
-
will this kit fit E30 m42 or just E36, i have an E30 IS, and have be researching ITB and its a mind field an would love a kit i can just bolt on.
The port profile for the M42 and M44 is the same, so there is no reason it shouldn't fit. Part of the reason this is getting done is that it will apply to a whole range of different cars!
-
will this kit fit E30 m42 or just E36, i have an E30 IS, and have be researching ITB and its a mind field an would love a kit i can just bolt on.
The port profile for the M42 and M44 is the same, so there is no reason it shouldn't fit. Part of the reason this is getting done is that it will apply to a whole range of different cars!
exciting news, i mite of missed it, will this be available in the uk?
at a rough guess when do you think it will be on sale?
-
will this kit fit E30 m42 or just E36, i have an E30 IS, and have be researching ITB and its a mind field an would love a kit i can just bolt on.
The port profile for the M42 and M44 is the same, so there is no reason it shouldn't fit. Part of the reason this is getting done is that it will apply to a whole range of different cars!
exciting news, i mite of missed it, will this be available in the uk?
at a rough guess when do you think it will be on sale?
I won't be involved with selling them, but the engineer who is working with me will. He will sell them through his company and will ship them globally. The good news for you is that because we're Australian, everything will in effect be half-price due to our exchange rate. The aussie dollar is about to tank as well (major economic shit is going down yo!) which sucks for us, but good for you. It will be about ~6 months away. If everything goes perfectly, sooner, if it doesn't, later.
-
This is awesome . Any idea on price? Or still to far away to tell?
Keep us updated!
-Tg
-
Excellent project. When you have your final product ready, will you be publishing flow bench information and such? Dyno plots from M42's in various states of tune? Although I dropped $ on a fancy resonance-chamber M42 intake manifold when I had my 2.1L engine built, I have sort of been wanting to look into ITBs. My main concern was that they would hurt mid-range power, but it looks like you are addressing that! The engine pulls well from 2000RPM, and solidly from 3500-7700RPM as it is, and if these could open it up a little more in the top without hurting lower RPM torque (when I am in traffic) that would be excellent! And...the sound ITBs make is just the best thing ever.
-
This is awesome . Any idea on price? Or still to far away to tell?
Keep us updated!
-Tg
I asked but he isn't sure yet. I'm sure he will know soon enough though.
Excellent project. When you have your final product ready, will you be publishing flow bench information and such? Dyno plots from M42's in various states of tune? Although I dropped $ on a fancy resonance-chamber M42 intake manifold when I had my 2.1L engine built, I have sort of been wanting to look into ITBs. My main concern was that they would hurt mid-range power, but it looks like you are addressing that! The engine pulls well from 2000RPM, and solidly from 3500-7700RPM as it is, and if these could open it up a little more in the top without hurting lower RPM torque (when I am in traffic) that would be excellent! And...the sound ITBs make is just the best thing ever.
We'll be testing it on my car which has the M44 engine - but the point will be to prove that there is an improvement, and that will be relevant for the M42 also. That said, I think we will test it on an M42 as well. I don't know if he will show flow bench results, but Dyno plots will be part of it as well.
As for Mid-Range, Rama used some simulation software for cam timing and showed me that the default cams will apparently generate most of the power in the mid-range due to some magical resonance thingy... We won't know for sure till it is tested though. From previous results on his other engines he has made across the board improvements due to good design, and Rama is fairly confident that he will see gains like that again.
If you head over to http://forums.bimmerforums.com/forum/showthread.php?2124470-M42-M44-ITB-Kit I've been running a clone thread, and that one has some dyno charts from one of his other engines, and you can see the way everything improved. Most of the good information is here though, but yeah I never posted the Dynos here.
There is also a dyno a user put up of his Dbilas ITBs which showed an across the board loss, so if you were ever wondering how those performed, now we know!
Some good news as well, we have ordered some 3D-printed parts for test fitting, provided everything goes well with that we'll move onto the first castings!
-
Which dbilas itbs did he use the standard or the race version? What kind of plenum did he use? Which injector set up? and what tuning? The only way i could see an across the board loss is if every thing was set up very poorly.
-
SNIP
The 'ideal' ITB set up is very extensive. You would have dual stage injectors, with one on the port side of the butterfly, and one on the intake side. You can generate significantly more power by injecting fuel further from the port, but this only works at WOT and high RPM otherwise the fuel won't get carried all the way into the engine and you can get a flame-out into the engine bay. You would place your ITBs with about 100~150mm distance from the valve to allow a smooth laminar transition into the valve profile.
This smooth transition is very very important, and it should highlight why I'm not keen on products like the dbilas ITBs. In the simulations I just posted up, a change in curvature that changed dimensions only a few mm results in a 1% reduction in efficiency. If you look at dbilas their kit has a sharp kink with no curved transition, which would have a very significant effect (I'd be willing to wager 10% or more) on reducing mass flow. You encounter the same issues when using an adapter plate. You would need to make an adapter plate 25~50mm thick to get an appropriate transition to maintain laminar flow - which would end up having defeated the purpose of putting the ITBs close to the port in the first place. It would be different if the butterfly was the same shape as the port, but it is circular and you need to accommodate that change in profile.
Hi there,
Im currently building (well since 5 years) my m42 with ITBs. I only used the dbillas intake flange as I preferred other brand itbs for personal reasons. The interesting thing is is that both the flange as the itbs have openings for injectors. I was planning on custom ecu to get ride of the barndoor air meter. This would allow me to use dual injectors per itb. One close to the butterfly and one close to the intake valves. Can you/anybody calculate (is that possible) from which starting point the programmer should start opening and closing each injector per rpm?
Im using catcams which open sooner and lift more
itbs are 45 mm
total lengt intake per itb is 250mm from intake port to cone trumpet
1st injector is at 10mm from intake port
2nd injector would be at 110mm distance
butterfly is at 120mm distance
-
I just went and looked at your other thread and read about the guy who posted those dbilas number's. I wouldn't put to much stock in them as they are very unscientific. He guessed on most of the variables! You really need to go to a real dyno and take a before and after run On that dyno the same day with the same/similar atmospheric conditions/temp's. And then if he showed a loss after that one would also need to know the things i posted above ^^. It is a good point though if the data is correct. Poorly set up ITBS will only Shift your power band with out gaining you bhp. They must be properly tuned with a properly set up plenum that is resonance tuned to the engine & proportionate to its flow characteristics .
-Tg
-
With ITBs you can really see the effect of inlet track on the torque curve, you'll see that an incorrect length causes the curve to take on a sinusoidal character as the engine responds to the harmonics of the inlet tract.
-
Something a good dynoguy/enginebuilder will sort out while making a ecu depending on a variety of different variables the engine at hand has
-
So, yeah... I guess this means people are reading the thread!
Something a good dynoguy/enginebuilder will sort out while making a ecu depending on a variety of different variables the engine at hand has
Not really, a good dyno guy might be able to smooth the curve, but that would just mean you're writing off power peaks as well as having a terribly inefficient intake. If your hardware isn't working, it isn't working and software can't fix that.
With ITBs you can really see the effect of inlet track on the torque curve, you'll see that an incorrect length causes the curve to take on a sinusoidal character as the engine responds to the harmonics of the inlet tract.
Exactly! Rama ran a simulation and I could see some of the effects he was talking about in that. We'll be testing a range of trumpet lengths for this reason.
I just went and looked at your other thread and read about the guy who posted those dbilas number's. I wouldn't put to much stock in them as they are very unscientific. He guessed on most of the variables! You really need to go to a real dyno and take a before and after run On that dyno the same day with the same/similar atmospheric conditions/temp's. And then if he showed a loss after that one would also need to know the things i posted above ^^. It is a good point though if the data is correct. Poorly set up ITBS will only Shift your power band with out gaining you bhp. They must be properly tuned with a properly set up plenum that is resonance tuned to the engine & proportionate to its flow characteristics .
-Tg
Yeah I'm not sure what the deal is with the dyno plots the guy was using - really weird.
A few thoughts though:
-I know for sure that the kink in the Dbilas manifold will have a significant negative effect on VE, from the simulations that I ran I know that for sure.
-Rama has convinced me that the ITB diameter is too large for the engine, so I am willing to believe for the moment that it at best won't help.
-Even if the absolute values are incorrect, the shape of the curve is terrible which does show it dropping power later in the curve
-Poorly setup ITBs won't just move the curve, they will lower the power and torque output
-So far as I can find, this is the only dyno of the Dbilas ITBs, so as bad as it is it is at least something. At its best it indicates there is room for improvement, at its worst it indicates they are damaging engine output. From what I've learned doing this, I would be inclined towards the latter.
SNIP
The 'ideal' ITB set up is very extensive. You would have dual stage injectors, with one on the port side of the butterfly, and one on the intake side. You can generate significantly more power by injecting fuel further from the port, but this only works at WOT and high RPM otherwise the fuel won't get carried all the way into the engine and you can get a flame-out into the engine bay. You would place your ITBs with about 100~150mm distance from the valve to allow a smooth laminar transition into the valve profile.
This smooth transition is very very important, and it should highlight why I'm not keen on products like the dbilas ITBs. In the simulations I just posted up, a change in curvature that changed dimensions only a few mm results in a 1% reduction in efficiency. If you look at dbilas their kit has a sharp kink with no curved transition, which would have a very significant effect (I'd be willing to wager 10% or more) on reducing mass flow. You encounter the same issues when using an adapter plate. You would need to make an adapter plate 25~50mm thick to get an appropriate transition to maintain laminar flow - which would end up having defeated the purpose of putting the ITBs close to the port in the first place. It would be different if the butterfly was the same shape as the port, but it is circular and you need to accommodate that change in profile.
Hi there,
Im currently building (well since 5 years) my m42 with ITBs. I only used the dbillas intake flange as I preferred other brand itbs for personal reasons. The interesting thing is is that both the flange as the itbs have openings for injectors. I was planning on custom ecu to get ride of the barndoor air meter. This would allow me to use dual injectors per itb. One close to the butterfly and one close to the intake valves. Can you/anybody calculate (is that possible) from which starting point the programmer should start opening and closing each injector per rpm?
Im using catcams which open sooner and lift more
itbs are 45 mm
total lengt intake per itb is 250mm from intake port to cone trumpet
1st injector is at 10mm from intake port
2nd injector would be at 110mm distance
butterfly is at 120mm distance
Sorry man I can't help you with placing a second fuel rail. I only know the rules in the 'general' sense. What I know is that they are usually put on the intake side of the butterfly and not the port side, and they are usually placed one of the resonant lengths away from the valves for the RPM of interest. On the default unmodified M44 that is ~13inches from the port for ~5500~6500 RPM. The intake you have is too short for that anyway, so I doubt you would see any real improvement by implementing dual injection.
Which dbilas itbs did he use the standard or the race version? What kind of plenum did he use? Which injector set up? and what tuning? The only way i could see an across the board loss is if every thing was set up very poorly.
As I said earlier in the post - from everything I've learned so far, I would be inclined to believe that the Dbilas kit could institute an across the board loss. I can't confirm it, and I'm not pretending I know the answer definitively, but I would be inclined to believe that there would be very high vorticity in that manifold among other issues.
The most interesting item in that thread is the dyno chart where reducing ITB diameter for an M20 engine improved output across the board, but otherwise there is a lot more genuine interest and discussion here.
-
This is my favorite thread on any forum FYI. I love the research instead of just slapping things together and hoping for the best.
I have always wanted ITBs, but with a standalone I was running the stock TB with just a filter which I figured was nearly as good for next to 0 cost. I always though the options available were not good enough to show any improvement...you have me rethinking that!!!
-
Well I hope we get some results to back up the work! Rama seems to think 15% is a reasonable expectation for crank power, and that would be something that you would notice. Hopefully it works out!
Anyway, I have some new pictures for you - Rama has received some 3D-printed parts for testing hood clearances as well general spacing. Now before anyone comes in with 3D printing accuracy remarks, these prints are accurate +/- 0.1mm which is enough to let us know whether or not we're on track or really messed up, and this is a lot cheaper than making that mistake with a cast!
Enjoy!
(http://i.imgur.com/1i7PpRK.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/JoMAGjH.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/XbfC56e.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/SXyZZEX.jpg)
Also, I feel like sharing this image because the results are silly. One of my friends (in the picture) was teaching me how to detail and glass-coat my car. The results are ridiculous, my car's paint was not in spectacular condition when we started...
(http://i.imgur.com/n1dy4YW.jpg?1)
-
Nothing wrong with additive manufacturing/3d printing. I can't tell what method you used for the proto, but some materials available for SLS machines are used to make motorsport manifolds. Some of the windform materials are used for the manifolds.
-
How close are my drawings for the M4x ports? They should have been +1mm smaller than the ports so that the head bloke could port match when he did the porting.
-
WOW! me want!!! :o
keep on guys you're doing a great job!
-
3D prints look good, did you test hood clearance yet? What volume for airbox (if any) are you going to use?
-
How close are my drawings for the M4x ports? They should have been +1mm smaller than the ports so that the head bloke could port match when he did the porting.
Rama ended up making his own measurements from a wrecking yard, and verified them with yours as well as some others I found lurking on the web. In general we found them withing a fairly tight range so we figured it was fair to assume that it was withing the variance in manufacturing+human error in measurement. He has experience with sand-casting so he would've adjusted them to his expectations for casting tolerance. From memory that 1mm was nearly the variance on the intake port sizes, which is apparently to be expected for cheaper mass-production castings. Thanks for the drawings though, I wouldn't have started up this project at all without them!
3D prints look good, did you test hood clearance yet? What volume for airbox (if any) are you going to use?
I haven't received the parts yet, Rama is overseas from me so this is entirely being done via correspondence until he returns to Australia sometime next year... The parts are still on their way to me, and I will be trying to convince a wrecking yard to let me test fit them onto a range of wrecked models so that I can make sure clearances match across a range. Plus, I would seriously like to avoid dismantling my car just to check if it fits...
On that note... if anyone in Sydney has an M2/4 engine wreck I can test fit some parts on, let me know!
-
If not and I dont know where your buddy is shipping from, Im in EU and happen to have an engine installed without the intake side fitted since Im going the ITB route as well....
dont have the degrees of the DBilas flange here, you probably do know, but with some maths you could calculate the clearance from what I have....ill be using a 20L airbox.
again Im only using the dbilas intake flange and not their tb's or airbox
-
If not and I dont know where your buddy is shipping from, Im in EU and happen to have an engine installed without the intake side fitted since Im going the ITB route as well....
dont have the degrees of the DBilas flange here, you probably do know, but with some maths you could calculate the clearance from what I have....ill be using a 20L airbox.
again Im only using the dbilas intake flange and not their tb's or airbox
He is in Malaysia at the moment, but they arrived last Friday in Sydney.
So here are some pics of the 3D printed test parts!
(http://i.imgur.com/Kd3kaRF.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/qqnfK34.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/TaF45g1.jpg)
I had to print a spacer part on our real crappy work printer, but the manifold print was done elsewhere and is a really accurate model!
Now just get a chance to check it against some hood clearances and the fuel rail mounts!
-
that's nice!
I understand your setup is designed for a stock engine, would it be affected adversely by a wilder cam and or a higher Cr (anything else being stock)?
or would it only be a matter of tuning by adjusting the spacer length?
-
Cams should be a matter of inlet tract length adjustment.
-
that's nice!
I understand your setup is designed for a stock engine, would it be affected adversely by a wilder cam and or a higher Cr (anything else being stock)?
or would it only be a matter of tuning by adjusting the spacer length?
MrPhatBob has it; the length of the intake is tuned to the cam duration for a specific RPM. The diameter relates to the volume airflow. They don't work in isolation, that is changing one will affect the other, but changing the cams will see more results from changing the runner length, and stroking/boring (which makes a larger MAF difference than just a cam) will see better results porting the head and increasing the intake diameter.
-
alright that's what I was expecting.
so, is the spacer you fab'd part of the kit? if yes do you think you will do different spacers for different camshafts (let's say the more common: 262,274,280° with 11mm lift) or will you offer a database of spacer length matched to cams so that end user can get a spacer machined to his need?
that is if hood clearance allows longer spacer... which you will tell us soon!
by the way: would you need a longer or shorter spacer with a wilder cam? I guess longer to save low end torque...
as you did not come back on the higher Cr thing I was talking about I guess it doesn't change anything, right?
thanks and sorry for the noobs questions...
-
^^ Good idea. As the only thing holding me back from purchasing this was that i was going to be running a much wild'er cam then stock
-
alright that's what I was expecting.
so, is the spacer you fab'd part of the kit? if yes do you think you will do different spacers for different camshafts (let's say the more common: 262,274,280° with 11mm lift) or will you offer a database of spacer length matched to cams so that end user can get a spacer machined to his need?
that is if hood clearance allows longer spacer... which you will tell us soon!
by the way: would you need a longer or shorter spacer with a wilder cam? I guess longer to save low end torque...
as you did not come back on the higher Cr thing I was talking about I guess it doesn't change anything, right?
thanks and sorry for the noobs questions...
I test fitted the printed kit yesterday, so I have plenty of pictures to show you what is going on, but it is mostly good news! Will put them up later.
A higher CR will only happen if you stroke an engine so it will affect ITB diameter more than anything.
You can have any length intake you want, what it will effect is at what RPM (related to the CAM) the engine will run most efficiently.
Rama sells a range of trumpet lengths, so if you're running an aggressive CAM you would be better off deleting the 50mm spacer (as it is just there to hold on the airbox) and using just trumpets and trumpet filters which is cheaper. If you're running a particularly aggressive engine this would make more sense because you would really need to get a new computer and run it in Alpha-n for the best results. Off-hand though I would think if you're moving to a more aggressive CAM you would want to shorten the intake so that the power band is at the end of the RPM so that it matches the CAM - no point trying to improve low-end when you put in a CAM that abandons low end, better off making the high-end worth losing the low-end for.
The current scope is to make a kit suitable for street cars, in that you can put it on without going to huge efforts and run the rest of the car unmodified. If people want to modify their car more significantly, the kit will still work but you would need to make some more adjustments. However, I have been considering talking to Rama about increasing the scope to include a new Computer to run the engine in Alpha-n and a CAM. First though, we will get this kit fitted to my car, running, and prove that it does what we want it to do - it will be a finished working prototype so that you know exactly what you'll be getting. Once that is done though, I was thinking of doing a kickstarter. Would anyone be keen on that? That way he can ensure he will have the capital to develop further, better polish off the current design as well as extend the scope. I was thinking that a kit with a CAM and pre-setup Alpha-n computer + ITB kit would be the logical next step. Something a bit more hardcore, but would mean you wouldn't have to modify anything yourself to get it going. A kit like that would be properly expensive though, so a kickstarter would be a safe bet since we would know if people wanted to buy it... No promises this will happen, just gauging interest.
-
A higher CR will only happen if you stroke an engine so it will affect ITB diameter more than anything.
that's not 100% true as M42/44 pistons are dished (approx 7cc) and M52B28 pistons which are 99% plug and play are flat top, so you can actually raise the Cr to 12ish:1 only with a pistons replacement. not even talking about using thinner headgasket.
same bore - same stroke.
but a higher Cr won't actually impact VE, it will only squeeze a little bit more the same amount of air the intake/exhaust system managed to suck in. ****correct me if I'm wrong****
If you're running a particularly aggressive engine this would make more sense because you would really need to get a new computer and run it in Alpha-n for the best results.
I totally agree a new computer would be needed even so I don't think alpha-N is the best route to go, for a street engine.
My idea is to build a 12:1 stock M42, based on E36 unit fitted in a E30, with a mild cam and few little mods such as fan delete, underdrive pulleys, total seal piston rings, single row timing chain, etc... and, may be, the nice ITB setup you are designing. that would make a nice hi-perf M42 E30 street car at better cost than a stroker/turbo/supercharger.
so as a street car I don't think alpha-N is best, it may be for a race car...
but, once again, thank you for all the info given in previous post!
-
Alright, so some 3D printed parts arrived for test fitting. So I measured up the parts to account for any shrinkage from the printing processes, and then went at it. I went to Parramatta Prestige, a wrecker in Sydney with a pretty cool owner. He let me tear up an engine bay for a while in the yard to test some parts, and then let me take a fuel rail and injectors just to confirm things in CAD when I got home! I'll probably head back this Monday to check a few more things too, but looking pretty good!
The short version - results are good, Rama wants to make some adjustments and go to the cast and fit. I'm a little more reserved, I would like to see another 3D print just to confirm but it is fairly low risk. So yeah, good news, we're progressing!
We have the port size correct, though it would appear that the injector size was off. I collected an injector and it was quite a bit larger than what Rama said was a standard fit, and compared to the manifold that he had collected in Taiwan. Does anyone know if the injectors for the Earlier M42 engines (pre-1994) are 14mm diameter or 16.5mm like the later models? If they are we will cast the manifolds for 14mm injectors, and then bore the injector hole out on request.
(http://i.imgur.com/RM8Fctm.jpg)
Plenty of hood clearance, but we're going to curve the manifold a bit more so that we can run longer trumpets and spacers and still have room for the airbox!
(http://i.imgur.com/6cDLua5.jpg)
All sitting in the engine bay
(http://i.imgur.com/3QnZ0Jj.jpg)
Checking out the injector mounts and injector placement against the fuel rail. Its very close, but now I have made a very precise CAD model of the fuel rail, so the mounts will be absolutely correct for the final model.
(http://i.imgur.com/Ba54MR5.jpg)
A real pain in the arse this one... The dipstick sits right in fron of where the airbox goes. I spoke to a friend at a place called Brintech (he will be helping fit the whole kit since he can help modify it on site if we missed anything) and he assures me it is easy to bend the dipstick tube without breaking it. It is a bit gay, but nothing we can do about that!
(http://i.imgur.com/nYpGCmd.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/Nr6Kr5S.jpg)
Last one, just showing you the variance in the manifold casting compared to the port face.
(http://i.imgur.com/bYmX2qF.jpg)
-
Since this is where all the cool cats are, I thought I would upload this render I made recently. I'm trying to convince Rama that red aluminium velocity stacks is the solution... I think the picture speaks for itself...
(http://i.imgur.com/49z6t7P.jpg)
-
Looks like you used an e36 to test fit, on the e30 the dip stick is on the front of the engine.
-
Hayden, thinking about your injector question. If someone is going for a high end kit like this, they will be needing to go to an aftermarket ECU (or you're going to have to start some CFD work on an air box fed via a MAF) and using old injectors would be a false economy, I'd suggest using a standard Bosch/Pico injector, and then we could look to see which spray pattern would best suit the setup.
-
Hayden, thinking about your injector question. If someone is going for a high end kit like this, they will be needing to go to an aftermarket ECU (or you're going to have to start some CFD work on an air box fed via a MAF) and using old injectors would be a false economy, I'd suggest using a standard Bosch/Pico injector, and then we could look to see which spray pattern would best suit the setup.
I agree with you on that, I agree that the best results would almost certainly be seen by running an aftermarket ECU (probably in Alpha-n) with new injectors. One the other hand it also has to suit people who don't want to go the whole hog and are looking for a bolt-on modification for the car. The simplest setup is maintaining as much of the OEM setup as possible, and then from there developing more. We'll get it running as a basic kit first, and then move it forward if there is demand to do it. That's why I think a kickstarter would suit this.
-
The kit looks really nice!
Do the inlet runners have a nipple to run a vacuum line off of? I know I would want to do alpha-n in the low rev range blended with MAP compensation. Many people also just run a MAP based system off a vacuum log which seems to work OK too.
Just making sure you have thought about it!
-
Will there be enough space for the trumpet and air box on LHD cars?
Also worth mentioning, some rhd cars have the battery in the corner next to the fuse box. Not a biggie to move, there is a very simple neat mod for this, but limits space if left in position.
The dbilas air box is a poor design but had to fit within these constraints hence its shape. I have pics somewhere to show this if interested.
-
I agree with you on that, I agree that the best results would almost certainly be seen by running an aftermarket ECU (probably in Alpha-n) with new injectors. One the other hand it also has to suit people who don't want to go the whole hog and are looking for a bolt-on modification for the car. The simplest setup is maintaining as much of the OEM setup as possible, and then from there developing more. We'll get it running as a basic kit first, and then move it forward if there is demand to do it. That's why I think a kickstarter would suit this.
If you're going to stick to a standard ECU it has to have an airbox that will work with a MAF, there no other way of metering the air, and it works well with the M3!
-
The kit looks really nice!
Do the inlet runners have a nipple to run a vacuum line off of? I know I would want to do alpha-n in the low rev range blended with MAP compensation. Many people also just run a MAP based system off a vacuum log which seems to work OK too.
Just making sure you have thought about it!
All the air lines are being accounted for. There is a point on the bottom of the manifold for throttle bypass for the ICV, as well as hooking up the airlines to a common point. for vacuum assist.
Will there be enough space for the trumpet and air box on LHD cars?
Also worth mentioning, some rhd cars have the battery in the corner next to the fuse box. Not a biggie to move, there is a very simple neat mod for this, but limits space if left in position.
The dbilas air box is a poor design but had to fit within these constraints hence its shape. I have pics somewhere to show this if interested.
There should be, Rama has been taking that into account where he is, and has looked at the brake-booster and fuse box and whatever else is in the way. I can only look at the RHD stuff obviously, but it should be all worked out. It is making the airbox probably less than ideal, but its gotta fit!
-
what's up? ;D
-
Hey guys, I've been mega super busy, but just to keep you informed, things are still progressing!
I believe there is a casting being made at the moment, but in the meant time, enjoy some transient analysis videos of airbox designs!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WbrzmInXX0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYytaUj-ihc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLPiHUe0wx0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WqDgjP0j7w0
Still a lot to learn, but they are just a handful of ~ 50 different designs I did in an effort to try and equalise flow between the cylinders!
-
Outstanding work as usual mate.
Looking at the spiralling around cylinder number 4... Do you see if there's a pressure drop in the port/trumpet area? Would vanes in the chamber or raising the floor help counter the spiralling?
-
Very cool!
-
Outstanding work as usual mate.
Looking at the spiralling around cylinder number 4... Do you see if there's a pressure drop in the port/trumpet area? Would vanes in the chamber or raising the floor help counter the spiralling?
I learned a fair bit from this process, but there are also a bunch of limitations that I encountered, as well as a few things that relate to Rama's tried and tested experience.
Without bludgeoning people with Excel spreadsheets - which is fun for no one - there are a few rules I learned from reading theory, Rama's experience and from the simulations:
From Theory:
- Until you hit ~ 10 000 RPM, airboxes almost certainly improve engine performance in all cases
- Tapered designs always perform better
- 40mm of clearance from the trumpet to the airbox results in relatively equal mass flow to each cylinder (usually less than 5% variance)
In Rama's experience these points are all true, and since he is a racing engineer I will take it his word for it.
From the simulations:
- I learned that vorticity is the bane of flow rate. If significant vorticity forms around a particular cylinder its performance will drop catastrophically. This makes sense since the air will carry high kinetic energy to move 'out' rather than in (centripetal forces)
- Baffled design massively outperform non baffled
Now that said, Rama isn't keen to experiment with a baffled design and I can understand why. He is keen to use the 'best performing' non-baffled design, since it fits with his experience and the performance difference can be illustrated through the simulation. He is (understandably) concerned about any simplifications made in the simulations that don't reflect reality, as well as it being an extra cost for him to implement and then to test. He also pointed out, that it hadn't been done previously - however I believe that to be more related to the fact that high performance low RPM NA intake design were becoming redundant by the time advanced CFD was available at a price to be justified on anything other than F1. I believe that the model I made was sufficiently advanced enough to warrant physical investigation, but cost is always a prohibiting factor so I can't hold that against him. I might try and investigate it personally though.
To illustrate some of what is going on, the below video is of a standard design Rama uses that sees good performance. I ran a simulation over 24 hours and generated ~500Gb of data for that 17s clip...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLPiHUe0wx0
Basically, what you're seeing is that the air loses momentum (and thus reduced velocity) by the time it reaches cylinder 4 reducing its MAF rate by ~5% compared to cylinder 2. The curved end of the plenum actually generated a small vortice as well, which contributed to the loss.
When you compared it to this video, which pulled in nearly ~10% more air overall:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WbrzmInXX0
The differences are very pronounced. The first thing you should notice is there is a much higher average velocity in the chamber, and much less dead space. Almost the entire volume of the plenum is air in motion. Regarding the vortice at the end of the chamber, you will see a small baffle I placed to break it up - that on its own massively improved the airflow in every design to cylinder 4. However, one major issue is that this flies against the conventional wisdom that 40mm clearance is essential for equalised flow rates, which is why it I don't think it will get made.
For the record the 'optimal' intake plenum without baffles uses a funky shape where the intake point follows a slightly curved path to aim between cylinders 3 and 4 while sitting a bit further away from cylinders 1 and 2. I didn't make an animation of it, but it looks very similar to the model with the baffles. It comes in at a funny angle, but I will have to dig around a bit to find where the model is. When I find it again I will post it up!
I'm keen to make a full intake simulation, though I haven't yet put aside the time to do it!
-
I was talking about your flow models with a guy I know who does race heads, and the point he made was that normally the "trumpets in the box" design will have more flaws than if the bell mouths are on the floor of the air box.
Is there a reason that you have the trumpets sitting so proud into the airbox?
-
The bellmouths pretty much have to be off the floor of the airbox to be effective. The air along the edges of the box are more stagnant and that is not where you want to pull air from for that reason. When the inlet is closer to the center of the box, you get the air thats moving and not "attached" to the walls.
If you look at pretty much any performance OEM or race setup the bellmouth is close to the center of the box. The only reason not to is to reduce the cost of a casting or make the fabrication easier.
One trick also is to use trumpets with a smooth large radius turn more toward the inlet on a side feed airbox.
I used to work with crash simulation and fatigue analysis of vehicle structures. We would send the meshed/constrained models over to India to run on a supercomputer for days. If you get CFD/FEA results back quickly....its probably not a very realistic analysis :) I know what you mean about generating a ton of data for a short video clip!!
FWIW, I think you are located in Aus? I had a major part in developing the cab structure for the new Kenworth Austraila cabs :)
-
For the record the 'optimal' intake plenum without baffles uses a funky shape where the intake point follows a slightly curved path to aim between cylinders 3 and 4 while sitting a bit further away from cylinders 1 and 2. I didn't make an animation of it, but it looks very similar to the model with the baffles. It comes in at a funny angle,
Just wondering how "optimal" it is considering that the Dbilas airbox they use on their ITB kit is made in exactly that manner. It brings in air exactly between cylinders 3 & 4.
Cheers,
~Ralph
-
I was talking about your flow models with a guy I know who does race heads, and the point he made was that normally the "trumpets in the box" design will have more flaws than if the bell mouths are on the floor of the air box.
Is there a reason that you have the trumpets sitting so proud into the airbox?
The bellmouths pretty much have to be off the floor of the airbox to be effective. The air along the edges of the box are more stagnant and that is not where you want to pull air from for that reason. When the inlet is closer to the center of the box, you get the air thats moving and not "attached" to the walls.
If you look at pretty much any performance OEM or race setup the bellmouth is close to the center of the box. The only reason not to is to reduce the cost of a casting or make the fabrication easier.
One trick also is to use trumpets with a smooth large radius turn more toward the inlet on a side feed airbox.
I used to work with crash simulation and fatigue analysis of vehicle structures. We would send the meshed/constrained models over to India to run on a supercomputer for days. If you get CFD/FEA results back quickly....its probably not a very realistic analysis :) I know what you mean about generating a ton of data for a short video clip!!
FWIW, I think you are located in Aus? I had a major part in developing the cab structure for the new Kenworth Austraila cabs :)
wazzu is on the money with this one. Every bit of theory that I read stated that you should have the trumpets centred in the box so that you don't lose flow due to transition layer effects. Further, in my own personal experience I've seen these effects when I was designing a wind tunnel, and it is part of the design rules with HVAC. It will depend on lots of different things, but very generally speaking, only 2/3rds of the cross-section of any 'duct' or 'tube' will be flowing without any boundary effects.
To answer your question more directly, they were set at that height by Rama since the design is based on his 'proven' airbox that he uses. I didn't see a reason to change that particular aspect since it doesn't conflict with anything I've learned or found from the simulations.
For the record the 'optimal' intake plenum without baffles uses a funky shape where the intake point follows a slightly curved path to aim between cylinders 3 and 4 while sitting a bit further away from cylinders 1 and 2. I didn't make an animation of it, but it looks very similar to the model with the baffles. It comes in at a funny angle,
Just wondering how "optimal" it is considering that the Dbilas airbox they use on their ITB kit is made in exactly that manner. It brings in air exactly between cylinders 3 & 4.
Cheers,
~Ralph
It is actually a fair bit different from the Dbilas airbox, and there are a number of things going on. I'm actually making some more animations for you guys now so that I can show you some cool stuff later. Basically the difference is that the incoming air never needs to change direction to reach cylinder 1 and 2 but for now this is the only new one completed!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SDHJF4_CFhA&feature=youtu.be
This animation shows you the way the turbulence generates around cylinder 4, you can even see it going down the trumpet which makes it harder to start drawing air again. This isn't the most optimal airbox (without baffles that is), but you can effectively see that cylinders 123 with cylinder 4 are all fed relatively directly by the shape of the box, mainly being hampered by turbulence . In the Dbilas kit, the air needs to turn around to reach cylinder 123, and would heavily favour cylinder 4, as well as generating a lot more turbulence.
If I'm honest, with the airbox I don't think the real world difference would be huge, but it is interesting to see the way a more 'direct' design operates. The exact airbox in that new link animation actually favours cylinder 3 because the angle of the incoming air ends directly at it, and then chokes cylinder 4 a bit with turbulence. Hopefully when I eventually get to animate the better box, you'll have a point of reference to see why it is better!
-
Hi lambertius
Any reason why you haven't included trumpets in your simulations?
Wazzu
Theres a kenworth factory near me in kilsyth, Melbourne. I think they make cabs there is that where your referring too?
Cheers Rohan
-
Hi lambertius
Any reason why you haven't included trumpets in your simulations?
Wazzu
Theres a kenworth factory near me in kilsyth, Melbourne. I think they make cabs there is that where your referring too?
Cheers Rohan
They're in the simulation, everything is transparent so you can actually see the flow lines!
-
Sorry my bad didn't see them on my phone!
-
Hi lambertius
Any reason why you haven't included trumpets in your simulations?
Wazzu
Theres a kenworth factory near me in kilsyth, Melbourne. I think they make cabs there is that where your referring too?
Cheers Rohan
Yep, thats the Bayswater facility where the Australian Kenworths are made. It will probably be a few years until you see the new cabs on the road :)
-
Hey Lambertius,
as said via PM in bimmerforums.com...
I absolutely follow this Threads as i'm going to build up my own itb's.
my idea with the 35mm ITBs wasn't that good, so now i'm heading forward to create my own ones.
But there is one simple issue at the moment.
My intake manifold is in my garage, 50km away from me and i'm not willed to go there in the next weeks.
So could anyone please give me an exact measurement of the port face and the bolt distances at the head/intake flange?
Thx in advance!
-
Hi Guys, just bumping the thread to let you know I'm still alive!
I had a simulation crash when I was trying to do a good animation, but I've been running it again over the weekend to show you what we've decided to go with. Heads up, it isn't perfect, but it really isn't feasible to get it perfect. I would feel confident saying though, that it is a better than typical setup.
The casting is apparently due back from machining mid-December, so I may even receive the kit before Christmas. No promises, but here is hoping!
Hey Lambertius,
as said via PM in bimmerforums.com...
I absolutely follow this Threads as i'm going to build up my own itb's.
my idea with the 35mm ITBs wasn't that good, so now i'm heading forward to create my own ones.
But there is one simple issue at the moment.
My intake manifold is in my garage, 50km away from me and i'm not willed to go there in the next weeks.
So could anyone please give me an exact measurement of the port face and the bolt distances at the head/intake flange?
Thx in advance!
http://i.imgur.com/KM2SCQn.png
http://i.imgur.com/kGnksc4.png
Those are the dimensions for the port face, good luck! As I said before, 35mm ITBs are far too small though. They will choke the engine, they have a smaller area than the port itself!
-
This kit will definitely be the go to kit when its done. It will be far better than the Dbilas kit! You won't ever get it perfect, but you actually did more than slap some ITBs on and connect them with a manifold so its already better than the current commercially available options.
Ramas site has lots of good information on it. I am confident he will produce a great product!
-
This kit will definitely be the go to kit when its done. It will be far better than the Dbilas kit! You won't ever get it perfect, but you actually did more than slap some ITBs on and connect them with a manifold so its already better than the current commercially available options.
Ramas site has lots of good information on it. I am confident he will produce a great product!
The airbox is a nightmare to be honest. Every combination that flows really well is unreasonably difficult to build, or impossible to fit. We have a 'best resort' option at the moment, but I'm still working on designs to see if I can get a really good option under the hood!
Also, on a completely unrelated note, some of you may be aware that I make some car videos with a friend https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCWUP1B1CN0WXN_tALe6RzGg That is my channel there. We only have one camera, sometimes other friends have helped us or we borrow gear, but we don't have much. My mate who does the filming with me has entered a competition to win $10k by making a car insurance commercial http://www.justcarinsurancereeldeal.com.au/view/5482f806edfc18ec40000052 that is his entry.
We have some cars lined up for next year, and we're trying to organise some sponsorship for equipment, but it would really help us out to win the competition as well so we can get some new gear and make some better videos. We'll be making a video on my car once the kit is fitted, so that is one of the episodes due for next year! Anyway, I would appreciate it if you could like his entry and help us win! You enter by liking it on facebook so it is pretty straight forward! Oh, and subscribe to us on youtube! :P
-
Are you guys going to 3D print the airbox?
-
Great work so far! I'll be following for my M42 2002 swap & M47 crank upgrade!
lambertius- What power range do you see your setup accommodating? If my goal is essentially 2/3rds of a Euro S50 motor (200hp), will 42mm breathe enough considering the intake optimizing you are working on?
-
Just an FYI - things haven't stopped though it has been quiet!
Things slowed while we were waiting for things to get manufactured, and I've been in the process of relocating from Sydney to Perth. I've got a massive write up for you guys once I get a chance, but it is still a couple of weeks away!
In the meantime, here is a teaser for you guys :)
(http://i.imgur.com/rMaRcZU.jpg)
-
Any plans on these reaching the US?
-
Any plans on these reaching the US?
With the Australian dollar taking a nose dive, it will basically be 50% off after the conversion rate and all you have to do is pay for shipping. http://www.racehead.com.au/ :) That is the guy who will be selling the kit when it is done!
-
Sydney to Perth is a big move! Unfortunately there is not much inbetween them east of Melbourne from what I hear.
Hope the move goes well
-
Any updates?
-
Any updates?
Yeah, real estate agents in Perth suffer from pretty severe NEVERCALLYOUBACK Syndrome...
And CEVA logistics damaged my girlfriend's car and then refused to pay, even though (I'm not making this up) they documented the damage in their own transport logs...
But I'm pretty sure you mean, with the kit... Well, we've got a lease on the horizon, which means odds are I'll be back in Sydney in 2-3 weeks to finish this up :)
I've also written a 5 page monstrosity that summarises all the stuff I've learned along the way that has influenced the design (rather than the disorganised ramblings of this thread, where I'm like 'oh! check out this new thing I did!'). I won't post it yet though. I want the dyno results, and to collect some simulation data on specific scenarios to match the dyno. Hopefully I'll have a few suprises for you when I get there!
So yeah, Rama is coming to Sydney in ~2 weeks, so will I and we'll get to work finishing the kit and running it!
-
Cool, I might be up for one of these when they are ready?
Have we organised a pre-order / group buy yet ;)
-
Any updates?
Yeah, real estate agents in Perth suffer from pretty severe NEVERCALLYOUBACK Syndrome...
And CEVA logistics damaged my girlfriend's car and then refused to pay, even though (I'm not making this up) they documented the damage in their own transport logs...
But I'm pretty sure you mean, with the kit... Well, we've got a lease on the horizon, which means odds are I'll be back in Sydney in 2-3 weeks to finish this up :)
I've also written a 5 page monstrosity that summarises all the stuff I've learned along the way that has influenced the design (rather than the disorganised ramblings of this thread, where I'm like 'oh! check out this new thing I did!'). I won't post it yet though. I want the dyno results, and to collect some simulation data on specific scenarios to match the dyno. Hopefully I'll have a few suprises for you when I get there!
So yeah, Rama is coming to Sydney in ~2 weeks, so will I and we'll get to work finishing the kit and running it!
Sorry to hear about your moving troubles. That stuff never seems to go smoothly and damage to your stuff is to be expected. Hopefully it all smooths out soon and its not a bother anymore!
Good news about Rama coming to Sydney. Looking forward to any progress you make!
-
Brief update guys:
I'm back in Sydney and met Rama today. I've seen the kit and it will start getting fitted tomorrow. First thing in the morning I'm heading to a dyno to get a stock setup power run, and then to Rama to get the ITB kit fitted. After the kit is fitted I will get an exhaust fitted as well and then the car will get a tune.
I wanted to go Power Run>Exhaust>Power Run>ITB Kit>Tune but I can't afford it :( The tuner I'm going to is overpriced - but they have a hub dyno which is more accurate and more reliable - especially since I will be coming back at a later date for the comparison run. They are also set up to tune the OEM ecu directly which the cheaper dyno places aren't set up to do. So instead of $60 for a power run it is $220! I'll try and negotiate with the guy a bit more tomorrow to see if he will come down to a round number for the whole lot, but I doubt it. So far I've kept costs on my car very low by striking deals that any work performed would be featured in a video for my youtube channel. Brintech and RHD liked the idea and have been helping me out along the way, but I haven't been able to find a dyno to come onboard.
Its a bit of a setback that we won't see the ITB kit run on its own, but we will be able to see an overall result!
Anyway, if someone knows a tuner in Sydney let me know asap otherwise I'm off tomorrow to get the power run and the install started!
-
Excellent news. Really looking forward to the results. Hoping for a significant improvement!!
-
So yesterday ended up being a bit of an annoying adventure. The guy with the hub dyno ended up misrepresenting a few things about pricing and tuning so I had to bail on my plans. I ended up spending most of the day trying to find new quotes for an exhaust and dyno runs. I ended relying on one of Rama's friends for the Dyno run - apparently not accurate (supposedly off by 10%) but reliable (gets the same results every run). So I can't say for sure if the power is exactly what the car makes, but I can say whether or not there is a gain or a loss. Because is is much cheaper, I will do runs between every upgrade!
Perhaps someone here can help me?
Apparently there is reasonable power to be had changing the exhaust - in particular the muffler with the M42/4 engines? Does anyone have any experience with this?
From what I can discern, even if the exhaust is the same diameter a sports exhaust is enough to unlock some power - does anyone know if this is to be true? I've been told a few times, that for the engine displacement, a 2.25" exhaust would be as large as one should go, so I'm wondering what people have done regarding exhausts, and what noise/performance they saw?
Anyway some picture!
(http://i.imgur.com/RMu4KTr.jpg)
The assembled kit (getting installed today)
(http://i.imgur.com/cxTwFsD.jpg)
The Dyno results. EDIT I graphed the results incorrectly and have since corrected them
Some notes on the Dyno
- I compared it to my friend's car (different dyno and time, 2001 Honda Prelude 2157cc) just out of interest.
- The results do clearly demonstrate the DISA actuating - as well as the engine 'choking' above ~4750RPM, which are all things that I experience while driving.
- The car was totally stock during this run.
EDIT: Rama got the car running today, and there is a short video of it on his facebook! https://www.facebook.com/rama.rhdengineering?fref=ts Just have to get the airbox done and back on the dyno!
-
I don't have any experience with the stock exhaust system as my 318is came with an 2.5" aftermarket system when I got the car. I can say that for a stock engine, the 2.5" is definitely too large. I've been playing with different layouts the past few weeks and found that the 2.25" is much better suited to an internally stock street car. Bottom end response is much improved and by going by the mileage displayed on the econometer, it takes the engine much less effort to get up to speed. The upper end of the rev range feels like it may have suffered a little bit, but that's probably placebo because with the oversized tubing there was no bottom end power and then it suddenly jumped into the power once it hit 4-5k rpm. I wouldn't be surprised if the stock exhaust was much more restrictive, but I'm not the person to be able to give you any factual data in that respect.
Looking forward to seeing this kit go up on the market. I've been debating between Rama's kit and the Dbilas race kit, but I've been wanting to see what kind of results you guys end up with and what the pricing is going to be like. Also looking forward to seeing all of your findings throughout this process if you're still planning on publishing that.
-
Yeah I will be, I have a 5000 word monstrosity plus simulation results which I wrote a while back, but I decided to hold off till the whole kit was completed!
What you're saying seems to confirm some things that Rama and I suspected, as well as other rumours I had heard. For the displacement, we thought that a 2" exhaust with a sports cat and muffler would be more than enough, since the car originally has a 1 7/8" exhaust and restrictive exhaust and cat. I had read people bitching about 2.5" and even some about 2.25", but as usual no dyno results.
Because its so expensive I want to have at least an idea before I go for it. My two options were to go to a full 2.25" system, or used the current system with a new muffler and cat. I thought I would get some ideas, and wait to see what the results are for the itb kit. If the kit behaves as it should and opens up the top end, I'll go to a 2" exhaust which should free the top end a bit more - but if there is a significant loss in the low end, then I would keep the stock diameter otherwise I would risk dropping it further. Anyway, thats what I'm thinking. We should know in a couple of days :)
-
Hi
Nice itbs
I received my car rhd e30 318is with a stock engine but chipped and with twin 2 inch.
Again it suffered down low until it got to at least 3500 rpm
But then I changed to a twin 1.75 this improved bottom end dramatically, top end there was little change.
However While doing this I noticed the shocking rhd e30 m42 exhaust manifold and after adapting a lhd manifold and getting rid of steering knuckle there was a large improvement across the rpm range.
Hope this helps
Rohan
-
I don't think the cat or the tubing diameter is restrictive. Like most systems the OEM muffler is the problem. If you just replace that, you will be in good shape IMO.
-
Thank for the feedback guys!
I went and had a fiddle with the car today and got a clear video of it running.
We're still working out the throttle position and making the intake plenum. There are a few little things to work out, but for the most part the factory ECU seems to handle running without the MAF quite well considering the difference in components! Should be back on the dyno early next week!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SB5N4OrAX4
-
+1 for wazzu70.
My experience with the S14 shows the exact same thing unless you're doing a stroker motor. My stock S14 motor with just a chip, colder plugs and a muffler gained 22HP at the crank. I then changed to Schrick cams with nothing else and gained another 24HP at the crank. So the engine went from 192HP to 238HP with cams, plugs, chip and a muffler on an otherwise stock internal motor. I did this all on the same dyno too. Keeping the stock exhaust with header and swapping mufflers to something less restrictive is the biggest bang on the system. I'm guessing the stock M42 header can handle at least 205HP at the crank but that's about it. Then you'll need something bigger.
So.....any muffler other than stock will most likely help it breathe better. Opening up the exhaust too much without the rest will def change how the car drives in your rpm range. Remember that the head is still between the ITB's and the exhaust. (Compression and cams play a huge role). Removing the MAF or AFM is the biggest and best thing you could do to a stock motor and will definitely have a large improvement all around but not enough to change your pipes to a larger diameter just yet without any other internal changes. Tuning will be very important. This is just my opinion and observation as well as testing all these years on the S14 and now on the M42.
I think this a phenomenal job you're doing with this project lambertius!!!
Cheers,
~Ralph
M42 Stroker 2.045L with ITB's and a 666Fab header with E30M3 exhaust and a bunch more....LOL
Heading to the dyno for a complete tune 4/28/15. Looking for great torque for street driving not high HP numbers. 250* w/ 10.3mm lift Cams will be the limiting factor for HP on this motor.
-
Thanks Warsteiner! Its more or less what I thought, so its good to have someone talking about actual results.
This kit will actually be able to run off the MAF, and I will be running mine off the MAF for a number of reasons (I'll elaborate in a later post). At the moment the kit is fully fitted with the throttle linkage all working, the only thing that it is waiting on is the intake plenum. Rama has been working on it for a few days so that he can replicate it for sales later.
(http://i.imgur.com/gYUN7fg.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/iYJhipY.jpg)
The dent in the back of the box is required to clear the wiring loom. Unfortunately in our efforts to get the straightest possible intake track, it impinges slightly on the loom bound under the window scuttle. Fortunately it is only a tiny obstruction so other than being a fiddly design effort for Rama there will be nothing wrong with it. It won't infringe on the trumpet.
-
Some Progress Pics
(http://i.imgur.com/MDYplGB.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/EnLyhx7.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/8sOecTY.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/Lddt04k.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/yfPAQxe.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/tsTata8.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/JoWKxLI.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/Ngke4oI.jpg)
-
Nice work! Is there going to be a carbon option haha.
I have a 2.5 exhaust and dont suffer from torque loss. I changes alot of things (including equal length RHS headers) in one hit so cannot offer specific exhaust only results. Ralph though is correct IMO when he says the head is still the bit in the middle and from my experience and advice from tuners the exhust flow at the head is what impedes the engine and the resultant numbers. Your process of testing I think will put alot of this to rest and i look forward to your results.
Keep it up :)
-
Yes it will be available in CF :P
So, here are a few things:
- Fully installed and running today - not an ideal fitment yet, but that will come after fit is verified
- The stock ECU is learning the setup - from when I first started the car till I got home the power difference was substantial
- It hasn't visited the dyno yet, but will tomorrow
- I can conclusively say that ITBs wider than 42mm even for a racing version of this engine with nutty cams is seriously overdoing it
- Unless you have a power band from 6000-8000RPM make sure your intake length is at least 13"
Today driving around the power differences are truly perceptible, but the actual values need to be confirmed on the dyno - I'll elaborate more when I have numbers, but tomorrow we're going to lengthen the intake as much as we can with the space in the engine bay to try and get the most out of it. It is behaving as expected, but its not tuned for the right range yet.
The difference to the power curve is substantial to the point that its obvious without the dyno, but it will be good to have actual numbers. The power curve has flattened out massively, but its still climbing by the time I hit the rev limiter so the trumpets are still too short. I can say though from this experiment, that there is no reason to go for bigger ITBs for this engine - even the sim data I have (which I will bring to the surface eventually) showed that 42mm ITBs could handle nearly double [Note, this number is still under revision] the airflow before they cause as much drag as the stock manifold.
The solution hasn't been reached yet though, but hopefully we get the lengths right and get some more power!
-
Fantastic!!
-
Who wants to know the Dyno results!? Yeah, me too...
Yesterday the engine was running fine, and I've driven about 150km since the install, but the power band was way too late to be useful so today we extended the length of the intake to pull the powerband back into a useful range for a street user like myself (for a racing guy you would be ready to roll methinks). It starts pulling superhard at about 5500rpm, which is totally useless on the road, because you change gear a second later and you're back out of the power band... Anyway, my point was the engine was running fine, but not ideal so we popped off the airbox and extended the intake by 60mm for the dyno run and reassembled it, and the car just wasn't running at all so we missed the dyno run today.
Considering there are no electrical components in the trumpets and airbox that we made, we suspect that there was an extremely unfortunate coincidence that the Crank sensor died at the exact same time for absolutely no reason related to what we were doing. *sigh* Hopefully that is all it is so we can replace the part and get it back on the dyno tomorrow.
We're pretty sure that is the case, but if anyone has experienced the following before please share!
- All other functions as normal (engine cranks over, fuel pump injectors etc)
- Engine will not fire
- During cranking the fuel pump, injectors and coils aren't working (this seems consistent with the crank not 'seeing' the engine rotating - we tested the components all individually)
- Our scanner saw zero rpm during cranking
- Resistance between pins 1-2 and 3-2 on the CPS ~600 Ohms, while I'm lead to believe it should be 1k (If someone knows the answer to this it would be extremely helpful)
- No engine error codes
The engine is acting as if it has been immobilised, and though we're pretty sure it is the CPS (already have a replacement on the way) it would still be good to know if someone has had a similar experience. EDIT: If anyone wants to know for future reference, the above are the symptoms of a failed Crank Sensor
So yeah, I'm still not sure of the results yet. I can say for certain that it was down on power for a while, but I'm really quite impressed how the stock ECU learned the new setup - I reckon that there was at least a 10% improvement in power from when we completed the install to when I got home. The problem though, is that the power is coming on at 5500RPM which is just too late to be useful - the stock setup exists purely to generate torque as early as possible, which is does extremely effectively at the cost of choking out the top end as you can all see in the early dyno results. However, 5500RPM is too late as when you shift you're back around 4500RPM so you're out of the powerband. We've done out best to extend the intake into every available space in the engine bay to see if it will have street applications at all. When it comes on though its a real kick, you can tell there is more power (and its still pulling till the redline, definitely room for many more RPM). The other thing is the power delivery is very linear, not the hard rise of the DISA and then flat from the mid-onwards. I think that if we can get enough length to get the power on from that 4000~4500RPM point then we can make more power than we lose, and make the kit viable for street use, otherwise it will probably be a racing only setup for strokers and cams. I did learn from this that absolutely, other setups with large ITBs and short runners are the wrong way to go - and I haven't even gotten it on the dyno - for any M42/4 setup, and if it is a street setup you would absolutely be losing power. I have a whole bunch of theoretical stuff I wrote in Jan for this thread, but I've been holding off it till the dyno results so that I could support my points though everything I've experienced since then has confirmed my findings. Hopefully we will get some results tomorrow...
Some pics of the short setup, we added another set of 50mm spaces + a 10mm spacer, and if we can get it running tomorrow, we will try another 15mm of trumpet length inside the box!
(http://i.imgur.com/f3OJTM4.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/DV33fIQ.jpg)
-
So who wants to guess how it went?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0nysqbIuXJY
Is 42mm ITBs really to small, is 15" intake too long?
-
I'm going to say it went well since you got the car running!! 8)
All dyno manufacturers are different and there are so many factors to take into account. Things like altitude, temperature, barometric pressure etc....
My guess is a 17HP gain at the crank with nothing other than the ITB's changed and a tune for fuel. I hope it went better than that though ;D
I can't wait to hear what you came up with...the suspense is getting to me!
I would love to see your theoretical stuff too.
Cheers,
~Ralph
-
Dude, you're killing me with suspense here! :)
-
(http://i.imgur.com/VuhdgZW.png)
Well then, how does a 16% improvement (at the wheels) from about 4200 RPM onwards with no losses in earlier RPM sound? Or if the 103kW rating is to be believed - 119.48kW (160bhp) at max engine power?
Stock ECU, and it had been running less than 20 minutes before the dyno run and the ECU was still learning the trim. It has definitely gained more in the hours of driving since.
I just want to let you know a couple of things:
- The original trumpet length we used was 12" and resulted in the car's 0-100 dropping from 8.9s to 12.5s - so the short runners you see in kits like Dbilas will certainly gain you a net loss
- Even with the long 15" runners and 42mm ITB you can see no evidence of choking or restriction and the intake will still serve a much more aggressive engine still
I hope we're laid some myths to rest :)
I'll upload some more picks and videos later today!
[/list]
-
Awesome. :D
Are you planning to get the ecu tuned and re-dyno? Have you done anything with the stock cams and their (small) adjustment range to get the most power?
-
Awesome. :D
Are you planning to get the ecu tuned and re-dyno? Have you done anything with the stock cams and their (small) adjustment range to get the most power?
Not anymore. The stock ECU can clearly handle the intake, and has correctly adjusted for AFRs and ignition timing since the change - unless you're building a race engine there is no reasonable way to justify the cost. I didn't adjust the cams either since the power comes on in the right range and the curve only flatten within the last 400 RPM - nothing is to be gained by moving the curve forward, and since peak torque comes on higher and earlier than before there is nothing to be gained by moving it back.
-
Hi guys, this is the mad info splash that I've been promising for a while - I wrote this months ago except where is says Edit
Now the impending wall-of-text is a summary of everything I've learned over the last few months. I'm not going to cite everything, because no. I will tell you that google is not the answer though, this is the kind of stuff you find in old books in these things called “libraries”. What I'm writing will probably not be any better than any blog or opinion in the sense that I'm not writing a verifiable list of sources it’s too much effort, and I did this for fun! All I can say is that the information in books is significantly better than what you find on the web for this topic. I suspect because it represents true engineering complexity and is only really used in industry applications.
To begin with, I want to highlight a few myths that I now understand:
• ITBs improve power
• Shorter is better
• Bigger is better
• Open air reduces intake drag
The above points are the common myths I came across online before starting, and just… no. No.
ITBs Improve Power
The first, and arguably most important point, is that ITBs (in their own right) ARE NOT a performance part. They are part of a performance system, but they do not contribute to the power output of the system. Of all the things I learned this surprised me the most. It turns out that the real reason that ITBs exist was to allow aggressive CAM profiles to run without overlap.
If you have a single throttle body, you need to all the cylinders have to run to common point. This caused significant issues at idle (such as when there is an accident, or in the pits) where the cylinder cross-talk could stall the engine. By running ITBs, each cylinder could run to atmosphere (or usually a pair of cylinders with carbies!) meaning no cross talk. This allowed you to run extremely aggressive cam profiles without the engine cutting out at low RPM.
As a side effect, driver’s noted that the cars responded better to throttle changes. This happens because the butterfly sits in the high velocity airstream within the intake. This means that the air takes less time from when the butterfly opens to when the change is observed within the engine – in other words, you improve the responsiveness of the engine!
These reasons meant that ITBs became a critical component of performance intake design. They allowed you to run very aggressive CAMS without negative effects, and improved the engine feel, but they do not contribute any power to the system on their own; but you wouldn’t have a proper performance system without them!
Shorter is Better
Intuitively, the path of least resistance is into an engine cylinder is the shortest distance – and that is correct. So intuitively, a lot of people believe that shortening the intake in order to reduce intake drag will improve performance, and you would be catastrophically wrong.
NA engines are witchcraft. They are basically resonant boxes that exploit the natural frequency of everything in order to run.
I want you to understand that I don’t pretend to know everything, but I also want you to realise that fluids are a magical land of hate and pain and that NO ONE knows anything. It is all guess work and iterative design based on calculated guesses from past experience.
It turns out that the elasticity of air is a significant effector in intake design. Ever hear the term RAM intake? Well, it turns out the actual origins of the term are from some old Chevy Motor that had an air intake that looked like Ram horns. Basically for any given RPM, you want your intake to be a particular length to take advantage of resonant pulsing of the air along the length. This resonant pulse can force more air into a cylinder, because when it is timed correctly the pulse can travel down the length of the intake at the exact moment the valve is open. On this particular point I will actually expand later in regards to the OEM intake, because I actually understand the design now, and it is legitimately brilliant.
The origins of this pulsing behaviour is caused by the valves closing. When the valve closes on a cylinder, the air carries with it momentum, and keeps travelling forward. As the air hits the now shut valve, the incoming momentum compresses the air, which then decompresses sending a pulse back out the intake. If the intake is the correct length it will bounce from one end of the intake to the other. Designing your intake to take advantage of this is called ‘wave tuning’
Bigger is Better
Nope. This one is a bit easier to explain though. As I said before, the moving air carries with it momentum. Physics baby! If you make the intake the right diameter, you will solve a best balance point between intake restriction and maximum momentum which will add up to maximum cylinder filling. As the cylinder slows down when it approaches the bottom of the cycle, the only thing filling the cylinder is the momentum remaining in the air. Too small an intake and you will restrict the mass flow of the cylinder, too big and the volumetric efficiency will be low. And if you’re using ITBs you will also reduce the velocity profile over the butterfly and reduce the throttle response.
Open Air Reduces Intake Drag
Okay, this is seriously one of the more magical components of intake design.
Remember how I said the origins of ITBs was to allow aggressive CAM profiles to run to atmosphere? Well, it turns out that in reality, having groups of cylinders running to a plenum (which I will hence forth refer to as a pulse chamber and you will understand why soon) almost always performs significantly better than open atmosphere, especially with overlap. The only exception would be extremely high RPM motors (over 12 000 RPM) where it can be difficult to design an efficient pulse chamber for high velocity flow.
The reasoning behind the open air solution, is that there is less drag – again, this is true – but remember that magical resonant black magic thing? Yep.
Pulse chambers are too hard for me to properly understand in my short time learning, let alone to properly inform you of their operation – there is a lot going on.
- First, a pulse chamber can restrict the air flow, but increase air velocity (and hence momentum) contributing to cylinder filling. This works on the same principal described earlier.
- Next it acts as a resonant chamber with its own resonant modes to assist with cylinder filling. Like a RAM intake, pulsing within the chamber can send air back down the intake to an open cylinder with more momentum.
- Third it can provide a velocity over the intake trumpets which induces another resonant effect. Know how you blow over a bottle and it hums? That is Helmholtz resonance. The velocity stream (which you can see in the simulations once I do a proper write up on those) can induce resonance in the intake tract (if everything is perfect) assisting the RAM effect.
- And finally, it allows the backlash (the air sent back up the intake from a closing valve) to assist in filling an open cylinder. This works by briefly increasing the pressure inside the pulse chamber (hence why an intake plenum is actually a pulse chamber) when the positive pressure wave hits the chamber at the same time that another cylinder is partially open. The increased pressure is naturally sent down the intake with the negative pressure from the open valve.
Below are animations of the final design for the airbox that was used. The incoming airstream never has to sharply change direction to supply any of the cylinders and the momentum of the incoming air ensures that Cylinder 4 is not starved.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SDHJF4_CFhA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGDdkidqnHI
So What Happens if you Add it All up?
If you have lots of data on your engine, know all the different velocities, and understand your intake behaviour:
You will design your intake to be the correct length such that resonant pulses are combined with the correct volume for the pulse chamber so that it resonates at the same RPM meaning that the positive pressure pulses combine at the same time that another cylinder is opening, so that the whole intake is in positive pressure compared to atmosphere so that it slams down pressurised air to the open cylinder through the intake that is the right diameter ensuring high velocity ingestion for maximum cylinder filling. If you do this all perfectly, you can end up with anywhere between 2~10 PSI in your pulse chamber at the ideal RPM – you can actually run you engine intake at positive pressure by exploiting resonance even though it is entirely fed by the open atmosphere. The reason this works is that the momentum of the air heading into the pulse chamber via the MAF prevents the air escaping back to atmosphere allowing the pulse chamber to remain pressurised. Keep in mind, this is an ideal scenario made for one specific engine at one specific RPM.
It turns out that a real ITB kit is the cherry on top of a perfectly tuned induction system. If you made a perfect induction system, you would still benefit from having ITBs rather than a throttle between the MAF and the pulse chamber because your ITB kit will sit right inside the highest velocity profile.
So the OEM system…?
It’s all about torque, and it is genuinely brilliant. I actually went to the (considerable) trouble of modelling up the DISA intake for simulation, and I learned a lot from it.
The older M42 intake is designed to provide maximum power at ~7000 RPM by using an intake length of ~320mm. The throttle runs into the centre of the pulse chamber to try and reduce cylinder starvation. It’s simple, straight forward and top-end performance focused.
The DISA intake from the E36 cars – holy shit is that some brilliant design and is all about improving real-world driveability.
The DISA manifold has two pulse chambers. The first is the same 320mm (peak power, DISA valve open) and the second is at 800mm to create peak performance at ~2500rpm! It does this by isolating each cylinder entirely by closing the DISA valve so that each cylinder runs 800mm before it can cross-talk with the pulse from another cylinder. Even smarter, they utilise the firing order of the engine so that they only need two runners to service all four cylinders to the furthest pulse chamber!
Edit: Since I originally wrote this you can actually see when the DISA switches and prevent the power drop off after peak torque is reached. Just before 4750 RPM power starts to drop from intake drag until the valve switches and the resonance prevents further drop.
(http://i.imgur.com/VuhdgZW.png)
Even better, the design is equal length – so no cylinder starvation, and in the first chamber they put a golf ball pattern in the casting to assist the air with the sharp direction change from the throttle body. When I can animate the simulation results I will come back here and link it. In the simulation you can see that the golf pattern prevent all the air from the throttle running into just one runner by breaking up the flow. Very clever. This is the model I used to simulate the OEM behaviour.
(http://i.imgur.com/5ISeWPp.png)
All this combines to an extremely turbulent air flow which significantly assists fuel mixing at low RPM PLUS the air-bleed injectors to also assist fuel mixing all adds up to better low-down torque. Clearly, it was on BMWs mind that street comfort was a big issue for their sporty engines.
So what about Rama's kit?
Edit: I wrote this well before the results, and was too afraid to post it in case I was wrong – so now victory!
I don’t work for RHD. I’m designing this kit with Rama’s help because I wanted a decent ITB kit, and I wanted to learn something. I say this, because I just want you to realise that everything I say is honest because I have nothing to lose or gain on the success of the kit.
I have high hopes.
Rama, who has a lot more experience than I, is very confident that the kit will improve performance. I however, believe it will, but this is my first rodeo, so I am more just interested to see the results.
Our kit isn’t just an ITB kit, it is a properly designed, tuned-length induction system with a calculated guess at a pulse chamber volume, and all of it has been verified with CFD. I feel quite confident in saying that I expect there to be a significant improvement in top-end performance with this kit. The design is as smooth as possible for flow, and the castings are good quality. I honestly believe there will be a significant improvement in flow rate at the 4000+RPM range because of the much more direct intake design. Our intake should resonate between 6000~7000RPM utilising the same OEM 320mm short-path intake tract, but with MUCH less obstruction.
I think for the DISA intake, it is likely that there will be a loss in low-end torque, simply because it isn’t possible for us to replicate the 800mm length with all the convolutions that would increase fuel mixing down low. An interesting point though, our intake diameter is a few mm smaller than the OEM casting – but will be better matched to the cylinder head – which will affect the low RPM air velocity, which may mean that we don’t see much loss, or any
Edit: The tighter diameter prevented any loss from occurring!
Rama has selected the ITB diameter on his previous experience, and I’m not in a place to doubt it – though in time the Dyno will tell all!
I think that it is very likely that this kit will really open up the top end for the M42/4 engines, while doing very little to lose lower end performance. And I’m really looking forward to finishing up with the kit!
I’m anxious to see the results, because the design does follow everything I’ve learned (plus Rama’s experience) and I really do want to see positive results!
Below are the Dyno results on the day,
(http://i.imgur.com/6iA1gHX.jpg)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5W_ObbncUls
We used a massively long 15" intake to get the results we wanted, and you can see that the peak torque actually occurs earlier than in the OEM setup and still doesn't choke out the engine at any point.
(http://i.imgur.com/IRkvCX5.jpg)
So yeah that is pretty much it, it sounds wicked and added power without any losses by doing everything properly. We used a tight diameter butterfly, long runners and placed the trumpets at an ideal angle to the intake stream. The OEM ECU working in closed loop was completely capable of adjusting itself and it makes real street power and by simply shortening the runner this whole system would be easily adjusted for any race engine.
This should really put to rest any myths or uncertainty surrounding this much fantasised mod and it should also illustrate with evidence the problems with kits like the Dbilas and M3 ITB conversions DON'T DO IT!!! :P
I'll have a new muffler soon and we'll also see if that actually has any effect on power. I've heard claims that 15kW has been seen from just the muffler before, so here is hoping that I hit 95wkW!
-
The kit still needs to be finalised, but if you head over to http://racehead.com.au/ you can shoot Rama an email and ask him about pricing and ETA.
-
Awesome work lambertius!
Thoughts on intake runner length for different stages of tune?
-
Simply an amazing write-up! Any plans to make an air box that fits the E30?...in LHD? I might re-think using a DISA manifold.
-
Great information, thanks for taking the time to get into some of the technical details and dispel common performance myths. What are you using for your CFD simulations? It sort of looks like COSMOS.
Assuming that you have the time someday, would you ever consider running a simulation on the E30 M42 intake? I have one with Metric Mechanic's pulse chambers welded on and it makes a noticeable effect on air flow (confirmed with recordings of AFM output). I have an idea to put adjustable plungers on stepper motors so as to adjust the reflection tube length with RPM to optimize VE over more than just one point. Of course, it would be good to simulate the pulse chamber manifold as it is now to confirm things!
Anyway, great work on the ITB setup. It's very nice to see science-driven modifications taken to a professional level!
-
Awesome work lambertius!
Thoughts on intake runner length for different stages of tune?
You'll find some info on Rama's site about wave tuning for different RPM. His kits are modular so that you can just add or remove spacers to tune the intake.
Simply an amazing write-up! Any plans to make an air box that fits the E30?...in LHD? I might re-think using a DISA manifold.
The kit will work on any M42/4 engine car as far as I am aware, if you think there will be fitment issues your best bet is to email Rama through his website and send him pictures of anything you're concerned about clearing that is different in LHD models from RHD. I helped him out as his test car here, but obviously we don't have access to LHD cars.
Great information, thanks for taking the time to get into some of the technical details and dispel common performance myths. What are you using for your CFD simulations? It sort of looks like COSMOS.
Assuming that you have the time someday, would you ever consider running a simulation on the E30 M42 intake? I have one with Metric Mechanic's pulse chambers welded on and it makes a noticeable effect on air flow (confirmed with recordings of AFM output). I have an idea to put adjustable plungers on stepper motors so as to adjust the reflection tube length with RPM to optimize VE over more than just one point. Of course, it would be good to simulate the pulse chamber manifold as it is now to confirm things!
Anyway, great work on the ITB setup. It's very nice to see science-driven modifications taken to a professional level!
Thanks man, I appreciate that you appreciate it!
I'm running SolidWorks FlowSim - its a $30 000 add-on... :o
If someone wants to send me a Manifold I'll model it up and Sim it. I can't promise delivery immediately, but I'll give it a go. There are limitations in using FlowSim for this kind of analysis, and the results aren't 'real' they're 'indicative of', but that is a write up for another day. The problem is though, that I can't simulate resonance without knowing so much information that the simulation would be redundant. What I used FlowSim for in this project was to analyse entry angle and shape change to minimise turbulence and flow separation - I can't simulate the behaviour of the pulse chambers unfortunately. It does sound like a fun idea, Yamaha actually manually extends the length of their intakes, doing something similar to what you're describing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=60DjevarC6Q
-
Good to know, thanks. So resonance tuning really is a black art that requires a ton of personal experience and check-and-see! That Yamaha setup is interesting too.
Got a link to Rama's website?
-
http://racehead.com.au/
You'll find all his gear there.
And yeah, induction resonance is a dynamic system with multi-input multi-output (MIMO). It is basically impossible to solve without experimentation. At best, you can use theory to point you in the right direction.
-
Some audio for anyone who is interested :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3sGQyz84uY
-
Some audio for anyone who is interested :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3sGQyz84uY
You had me at 1st gear. Emailed.
A few questions:How is the stock M44 ECU adapting after a few days? Any check engine light?
Might I get 90 hp/L from all my mods?!?!?
-
very good job!
that's is so tempting....
May i just warn you against advertising your kit as being M42/44 compatible, or at least to restrict it to E36 as both don't use the same engine managment.
E36 use O2 sensor/knock sensing/MAF (motro 1.7 if my memory is right) while E30 use AFM and some of them are equipped with o2 sensor which means you won't be able to work in closed loop on all E30. and even so i'm not sure that the E30 ECU is as smart as E36 one. so be carefull
otherwise I was wondering if it would be possible to lenghten further the intake by 1 inch to drop the torque peak to around 3800rpm without running into clearance issues. as the power is not dropping at max RPM and to make it a little bit more street-friendly it could be interesting to shift a little bit lower and still fall in the power band...
thank you anyway for all you did so far!
-
very good job!
that's is so tempting....
May i just warn you against advertising your kit as being M42/44 compatible, or at least to restrict it to E36 as both don't use the same engine managment.
E36 use O2 sensor/knock sensing/MAF (motro 1.7 if my memory is right) while E30 use AFM and some of them are equipped with o2 sensor which means you won't be able to work in closed loop on all E30. and even so i'm not sure that the E30 ECU is as smart as E36 one. so be carefull
otherwise I was wondering if it would be possible to lenghten further the intake by 1 inch to drop the torque peak to around 3800rpm without running into clearance issues. as the power is not dropping at max RPM and to make it a little bit more street-friendly it could be interesting to shift a little bit lower and still fall in the power band...
thank you anyway for all you did so far!
You're correct about the differences in ECU. The 97-99 Model cars run the DME 5.2, the 91-96 DME 1.7, and I'm not sure about all the E30s. The stock ECU may not work for all the older cars, but for all the Z3s and 97+ E36s it definitely can.
However, it isn't a total loss - the older DME can be reflashed and piggy-backed much easier than the 5.2 since more people have played with the software. The 91-96 cars should be able to run with a gain because they are closed loop, and with the E30 cars the only way to be sure will be to hit up a dyno - but it wouldn't take much to get it all up to spec it anything at all.
As for extending the trumpets, Rama is adjusting the casting mold down a few degrees to allow a bit more clearance for intake length. That will allow people to run the trumpets right up to the strut mount. Though keep in mind, there are no low end losses so its perfectly streetable (but I agree, if I could get the power band to come on a smidge earlier that would be tops!).
Some audio for anyone who is interested :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3sGQyz84uY
You had me at 1st gear. Emailed.
A few questions:How is the stock M44 ECU adapting after a few days? Any check engine light?
Might I get 90 hp/L from all my mods?!?!?
No issues, idles smoothly at 600RPM and drives totally street.
I'm off to get an exhaust installed today.
I've heard many rumours, but never seen a before and after dyno - or even anyone saying they dynoed their car. I've heard people claim that the car sees 150-160bhp with just the muffler (which I sincerely hope is true), but I doubt it. I think about 5wkW is a more realistic estimate - if anything at all. If anyone has any experience of numbers with this let me know! Even with a conservative 5wkW estimate, that would equate to 170bhp at the crank which would be a very healthy NA improvement from bolt ons. So here is hoping!
-
So not everything went to plan today.
I got the exhaust installed, but I couldn't make the dyno. There were some logistical errors and it didn't work out, and I'm flying back to Perth tomorrow
Now just so that you know I love you, I'll be taking it back to Brintech (btw, when the kit becomes available, Laurence will be making a few adjustments so that it fits straight-off for road use. So if you're in Sydney and want it installed he will be the guy to talk to - but I suspect he will be re-selling a 'street' kit while I suspect Rama will be selling it with the intention for racing guys to fab up some stuff themselves. This is his website for future reference http://www.brintech.com.au/) and he will be putting a flange on the OEM muffler so that I can swap it back to stock easily. This means that I will be able to a before and after run on the same Dyno in Perth so that we can conclusively know if it works, or if the 15kW legend is true.
For the moment, my thoughts - it sounds terrible for road use, and I kept the stock diameter - jesus its just cabin noise to the extreme. If you're up in the rev range though it sounds like a race car. So if it does turn out to make more power, being able to swap out the parts for a track day will be kind of cool...
-Before putting the exhaust on I thought it would make barely any power if any at all - now I'm confused.
-The first weird thing I noticed is that the idle is 200RPM higher than before, which is very odd since the exhaust shouldn't affect idle.
-Next the muzzle velocity is extreme - I mean, its like being behind a desk fan. The exhaust is moving out of the system with an extremely high velocity.
-The exhaust note has changed the induction note significantly.
-The car is now backfiring and spitting fire out both end on overrun - its actually a bit terrifying. Intake flame-out is a side-effect from wave-tuning, since the pressure pulses can pull fuel out the intake, so it is normal and to be expected. It did it once or twice before, since opening up the exhaust though, its predictable when taking it WOT to the redline.
I believe the car is making more power, but I could just be "hearing" more power because of how overwhelming the exhaust note is from inside the cabin (seriously, it sound epic outside the car).
I have a theory:
If the stock cam timing has any significant intake-exhaust overlap, I may actually be witnessing a very aggressive engine being really opened up. Overlap allows scavenging - this is the process where the velocity of the exiting exhaust begins to draw in fresh air through the intake before the piston has even begun to descend. This explains all the observations.
-The higher RPM could be explained by the volumetric efficiency exceeding the duty cycle of the ICV - meaning the ICV can't operate slow enough to lower the idle further.
-High muzzle velocity increases the effect of scavenging, so if evidence that this effect is happening.
-The insane level of induction note change indicates that that the induction systems has a 'continuity' with the exhaust slightly beyond the bit in the middle.
-Backfiring would indicate that the Injectors may be operating at their limit for AFR
So back to the stock exhaust before I blow up the engine. I don't know if the exhaust makes any difference, but to me I was actually quite taken aback by how aggressive the car sounded and felt after the change. I'm really hoping it isn't in my head. The car was slipping the wheels while turning in 1st gear, something it has never done before.
Believe it or not, the car rumbles at idle like a V8 and it really screams when it revs out. It does not sound like its displacement anymore. Its like a motorbike more than anything.
I'm really curious now to anyone's experience with the M42/4 for the intake/exhaust systems...
-
May i just warn you against advertising your kit as being M42/44 compatible, or at least to restrict it to E36 as both don't use the same engine managment.
E36 use O2 sensor/knock sensing/MAF (motro 1.7 if my memory is right) while E30 use AFM and some of them are equipped with o2 sensor which means you won't be able to work in closed loop on all E30. and even so i'm not sure that the E30 ECU is as smart as E36 one. so be carefull
Excellent point. To extend on this there are still some odd ball e36's out there which have knock sensors but not O2 so not closed loop guaranteed. Not insurmountable but may catch the odd person out. Also not all E36's have a battery in the boot, some are up front and will require relocation to the boot to fit the air box. There is a very easy fix for this using existing battery tray, only hassle is running the wire. All easy fixes of course.
Good luck on the exhaust dyno runs on your return. Any thought about playing with the cam timing for further gains?
-
Excellent point. To extend on this there are still some odd ball e36's out there which have knock sensors but not O2 so not closed loop guaranteed. Not insurmountable but may catch the odd person out. Also not all E36's have a battery in the boot, some are up front and will require relocation to the boot to fit the air box. There is a very easy fix for this using existing battery tray, only hassle is running the wire. All easy fixes of course.
Good luck on the exhaust dyno runs on your return. Any thought about playing with the cam timing for further gains?
The O2 sensor is more for emissions than anything else. Just the MAF should be sufficient for sorting out an NA engine since flow:fuel should be a fixed rate no matter what, and the fuel map should be able to sort it out. However, on a more basic EMS there will be more gains available for tuning than with the DME 5.2.
Speaking of DME 5.2, that thing is a wizard - it has nearly brought the new idle back to 600RPM and the power delivery since putting the exhaust in again has changed.
As for the cams, there is really no incentive for me to play with it - for one I can't afford unlimited dyno runs. As it is, this has cost me more time than I intended with all the delays, and the effort to get a dyno run in Perth - as well as money. Also, looking at the dyno results, I really don't see any reason to play with it. The cam runs out at 6000+ RPM so adjusting the power curve up will gain a few kW at a point where they serve no use. The cam seems really well designed for stock RPM, and the ITB kit seems to match the gearing and and RPM very well also.
I went and recorded the exhaust using the pro-audio gear my mate has tonight, and the whole induction-exhaust system is definitely working together. He could see on the meter read out that the induction note was deeper - so something from the exhaust side is definitely affecting the intake side. The backfiring and overrun burble is also quite terrifying considering how benign the car was recently. I suspect that the full system has unlocked the potential of the bit in the middle... I know its not very scientific, but I tried a 0-100km/hr run to at least try and see if there is anything.
-When I had the totally stock setup - the 3.38 Open diff allowed a 9.0~9.5s
-With the 3.45 LSD and ITBS 10~10.3s when totally dry (The reason its slower is because first gear in particular puts a lot more power into spinning up the DMF rather than actual acceleration. F=ma, and since a is larger for the 3.45 the amount of force going into spinning up the DMF is greater for every gear - the taller the gear the less losses since a is smaller, so the early gear use a lot of power)
-Tonight is wet, I couldn't get a good start in first gear, it would break lose every attempt. That said, of the four attempts we had 9.8~10.3s - the car was making up time once the traction set in. I highly suspect the car will be in the low 9s again when it is dry - meaning in the taller gears there will be a real change.
I'll have to see if I can put the 3.38 gear on the LSD, 1st gear is nearly useless with the 3.45. Such a small change, but with the extra power it just kind of revs out.
-
Thoughts on installing an exhaust temp pickup for the new muffler? Maybe you're combusting a lot in the exhaust manifold... You should have a few degrees of cam timing to adjust, correct?
-
I've just headed from Sydney to Melbourne for a job interview, and will be back to Perth tomorrow. The project has now stalled until I get it back in a month or so.
However, Laurence at Brintech has my car at the moment (he fabbed up the exhaust) and is getting the stock back on there so I can dyno it in Perth. He will be fitting and selling the kits as a package in Sydney, and will probably provide kits with a few extra parts for street use (so if you want it on your road car, you will probably end up getting it from him). Before I left this morning I spoke to him briefly that if he wanted to dyno the car I didn't mind him taking it out after he refitted the stock for a base run, then re-fitting the new kit for the after run. He is keen to sell a whole intake/exhaust package once he knows the setup that works. He told me before he left that if there is any interest on his facebook post he will put in the time to do the runs to know for sure.
So, if you like the idea of buying an Intake kit with all the fittings for street use and and exhaust to compliment the setup - dash over to his facebook post now and let him know! https://www.facebook.com/BrintechCustoms/photos/a.582768531779373.1073741825.461395870583307/882526741803549/?type=1&permPage=1
Leave a comment asking how much for a full exhaust and intake setup installed/shipped to where ever you are in the world! Ask him how much more power you can get from an exhaust with it as well! ;) Let him know you want it, and he will finish the setup for us and take the guess work out of a full exhaust system!
-
thank you again for taking time to reply and keep us in the loop.
I'm glad to hear rama is going to modify the casting mold. it will make the kit more versatile (street, race, etc...)
I look forward the result of the dyno, before and after exhaust swap... that would definitely put numbers on a long time unanswered question.
keep on! ;)
EDIt: posted a comment on brintech's FB page... ;D
-
thank you again for taking time to reply and keep us in the loop.
I'm glad to hear rama is going to modify the casting mold. it will make the kit more versatile (street, race, etc...)
I look forward the result of the dyno, before and after exhaust swap... that would definitely put numbers on a long time unanswered question.
keep on! ;)
EDIt: posted a comment on brintech's FB page... ;D
Thanks man!
I want to know the answers to all this myself, and the only way I could see myself getting the answers was to do it. It is pretty expensive to outlay $$$$ for ITB kits you don't know will work, or exhausts that have no guarantee of making anything other than noise, so I wanted to know for sure. If the exhaust works out, then to get a full kit fitted for ~$2k that gives 20~30% more power is actually pretty good so having numbers helps everyone. As it is, the ITB kit on its own is pretty good value when you have a guaranteed return of 16% for 1/3rd the rev range.
I couldn't afford this myself, so I've gotten help from RHD and Brintech to make it happen. I've still fronted some of the costs - more than I would've liked - but not the majority. Letting them know that you're interested in the setup is basically why they've taken the risk in putting money into the development. Rama outlayed thousands for the casting molds which need to be adjusted still, and Laurence has done everything for me at low rates to make it affordable for me to follow up. I had to convince them that it was worth them taking a punt because these parts would sell, so you guys letting them know by contacting them with specific queries will go a long way to making sure the whole thing ends well.
Speaking of which, Rama spoke to me saying that he wants to modify his LTW flywheel kit to include a clutch and the correct ring-gear to directly bolt into the M42/4 cars. If that is something you want, let me know. He was saying if there was interest in it he would send me out one to test fitment to ensure it bolts in - no M20 starter motor or adjustments. Just straight-up clutch kit.
-
This kit is fantastic and an example of the good results you get when the parts are engineered and not just fabricated.
Honestly, this kit is making me reconsider the desire to turbo. Now I just need to get the car running again so I can put some money into it again :)
-
A direct bolt up clutch and flywheel kit would definatley be something I would consider. It would be worth the money if I don't have to source all the parts to do the conversion myself. I'm glad there are people out there that are developing good stuff for the m42 cars. Keep up the good work!
-
This kit is fantastic and an example of the good results you get when the parts are engineered and not just fabricated.
Honestly, this kit is making me reconsider the desire to turbo. Now I just need to get the car running again so I can put some money into it again :)
Well, if everything goes right with the exhaust, we may see at least 20% total gain from the setup. Its a lot easier than a turbo, and a pretty good return! Plus, there isn't any reason you couldn't be able to use the setup on a turbo anyway. The manifold itself would save a huge amount of effort for installing a turbo - and Rama will be extending this kit into some Turbo fittings anyway!
A direct bolt up clutch and flywheel kit would definatley be something I would consider. It would be worth the money if I don't have to source all the parts to do the conversion myself. I'm glad there are people out there that are developing good stuff for the m42 cars. Keep up the good work!
I'll make sure I keep the thread abreast of the situation with the clutch kit :)
-
Question of curiosity - is anyone actually planning to get this kit once it's rolled out?
-
I am, once I have enough funds that is :D
-
I would buy a kit if I knew it was compatible with a LHD e30.
-
I am very interested, Was going to go with dbilas but i would much rather support local members and as such have been waiting patiently! Your numbers sound good and the sound clip... sounds even better! :D
My only concern is that i have a LHD e36 and also an older 1.7 dme (1994). The dme isnt a big deal as i will be going to a full stand alone down the road, i also dont see lhd being to much of an issue but you never know?
-
Question of curiosity - is anyone actually planning to get this kit once it's rolled out?
I'm gonna save my pennies! I want an ITB kit for my M42 in my 2002 and this kit seems the best by far. Any plans on US distributors? Buying direct from Rama seems likely to be the best deal...
-
I would buy a kit if I knew it was compatible with a LHD e30.
We'll make sure it fits the LHD E30. Rama realises LHD are the majority of the cars out there so he will be looking into it.
The kit itself will definitely fit, though the airbox we made may not. It isn't hard to make a custom airbox out of fibreglass (you just need some foam and a few days of patience) so if you want to make it fit you will definitely be able to. It would be nice to have the whole thing completed, but that is Rama's call.
I am very interested, Was going to go with dbilas but i would much rather support local members and as such have been waiting patiently! Your numbers sound good and the sound clip... sounds even better! :D
My only concern is that i have a LHD e36 and also an older 1.7 dme (1994). The dme isnt a big deal as i will be going to a full stand alone down the road, i also dont see lhd being to much of an issue but you never know?
The Dbilas kit definitely isn't the solution. The intake is just too short, and too large in diameter and you would still have the same ECU issues no matter what. My inclination is that the DME 1.7 will still work simply because more air in = more fuel in, so even if it isn't in total closed loop like the DME 5.2 it should still work - just less refined. That said, I have a friend who has an E30 and if he decides not to sell his car, he may end up with one of the kits and I may be able to give you results on that - no promises though. With the DME 1.7, you do have more 'tuning' options that aren't there for the newer cars, so there will be some way to make it work no matter what.
Question of curiosity - is anyone actually planning to get this kit once it's rolled out?
I'm gonna save my pennies! I want an ITB kit for my M42 in my 2002 and this kit seems the best by far. Any plans on US distributors? Buying direct from Rama seems likely to be the best deal...
Still early days, but I suspect that Rama will sell the kit 'unsupported' for racing use (you buy the parts and fit it yourself) and Brintech will make a few alterations so that it bolts in properly and has instructions and what not - so you will probably end up just getting it shipped from one of them. It still isn't finalised for production, mine was the 'draft' so there are still a few changes to be made before its on sale. I don't know for sure if Brintech will get involved, but I know he is really keen to support them so as soon as Rama is ready they'll try and work something out.
-
I have a LHD E30 with a M42 in the US!
I will volunteer as tribute for test fittings!
Actually have been emailing Rama about the intake manifold. Was told by people who have more experience than me that the ITB's would be sort of irrelevant if I eventually want to go turbo? I had designed a sheet metal airbox to use the stock throttle body, but don't have the fancy solidworks add-on's to test flow :'(. This set up and the design work/testing that went into it made my efforts look silly now. I could run this set up on my relatively stock motor in the car while I build the turbo motor on the stand, then swap it to the turbo motor!
-
The ITBs will still work great with a turbo engine. Think of all the S14/S38/S54 ect engines that work fantastic with ITB.
-
lambertius, I seriously think about it too.
may be within 6-12 months If I can sort a few things out by then.
that's for an E30 LHD tho.
-
Hi
What was your cam duration, final length and stats and picture of the exhaust manifold?
Thanks
-
Hi
What was your cam duration, final length and stats and picture of the exhaust manifold?
Thanks
Everything internal to the engine is stock - including the cams. If you can find some information on the stock M44 cams then you will know more than me what the duration is!
As for the length to the valves - it is about 15", but I won't be able to tell you for sure till I get my car back. I will also be trying to make them a bit longer by reducing the size of the airbox, but that is a discussion for another day.
As for the exhaust...
So, I kept the stock diameter. Back of the envelope and Rama's experience said that the stock 2" diameter was more than enough. That plus a bit of feedback on this forum and some reading on other forums convinced me that the stock diameter was the go. So the setup from front to back is:
- OEM RHD 4-2-1 Headers
- Aftermarket CAT. It isn't a high-flow CAT, but its straight through so better than the OEM CAT anyway. As it turned out this was on my car anyway, I wasn't aware it had been replaced in the past but after looking at it, there was no reason to go to anything better
- Stock resonator since it is also straight through
- Straight through Muffler
So, literally, all I did was change the muffler - nothing else.
Who thinks that just a muffler that is the stock diameter will have an effect on wheel power?
Well, as it turns out, I wasn't imagining that it was improving performance - it added 6% more power through the entire rev range. Talk about bang for your buck, $160 muffler...
EDIT - It turns out that before ~3000 RPM the straight through muffler actually lost some power (which makes much more sense). I made the mistake in interpreting the graph since it was all in gray scale. The important thing to take from this is thatthere is absolutely no reason to go larger than the stock diameter. These results should demonstrate that it is evident that a larger diameter will lose exhaust velocity (and hence power) further up the rev range since the stock diameter already loses exhaust velocity down low. The only reason to go larger than stock would be to build a track only car where you don't care about the power curve before 4500RPM.
Now, I don't think it is a coincident that the power drops off before 3000RPM - before this RPM is when the exhaust drones (resonates). Rama was saying that drone is a reflection of the headers not working in their ideal range yet (not the correct tuned length for that RPM) - which seems logical since when the car was totally stock, about ~3500RPM was when the car felt strongest. If I get the side resonator right, it should theoretically improve the exit velocity marginally down low (thinking ~1%, so would only be observable on a hub dyno) as it will stop the pressure waves bouncing around in the exhaust.
/EDIT
Now, the Dyno that Laurence from Brintech used for this run was a different dyno than the previous one, and is reading 5kW lower. So I did it properly and paid to have a before and after run done on the same dyno - so on the same equipment, on the same day over multiple power runs - the new muffler improved power output by 6%!
By doing it in percentage points rather than talking about the dyno results themselves, we can see the total improvement even when using different dynos! :D When I get some time, I'll graph the new dyno with the old data by adjusting it for percentage change over the old graph so we can view it all on the same chart :) but for now, the raw data is below!
(http://i.imgur.com/mtHfCXD.jpg)
We're now at 22~23% total improvement over stock, and using the BMW power rating that would be going from 103kW (138bhp) to 126kW (170bhp)! It now has the same power output as a 323! with no internal modifications and the stock ECU!
Now I'm sure you all noticed the random spike in the dyno results
There are a couple of explanations, I'll list them from most probable to least:
- There is an issue with the dyno causing a data artefact at a particular power/torque/rpm
- There is an intermittent vacuum leak causing random spikes and odd behaviour. This is pretty damn likely considering that there was a slightly higher idle then when it was originally set up, and the amount of piping that has been altered. I even have a good guess to where it is, I think its where the injector shroud hose meets the airbox. This seems to be a reasonable explanation for everything
- The stock ECU/injectors are no longer up to the task. This is pretty unlikely since the injectors worked for the DASC kit, and that was good for 200whp
So to investigate it, I will run it on another dyno to be absolutely sure that its just an artefact.
However I've asked Laurence to look into a full aftermarket injector and ECU setup, something I know a lot of you are very keen to see.
So here is the thing, Laurence would be keen to get a proven setup going that he could sell to support the kit. The problem from my perspective is that I'm almost certain it will totally break my budget as there were overruns along the way, and there are still some things I want to do to finalise the setup.
So, how much do you really want to see this all working with an ECU alongside it?
-
If I ever have the bucks my plan is to use a megasquirt MS3X ECU. Cheapest/most capable ECU.
BUT I wouldn't go for a complete ITB + muffler + ECU kit as it would be to much to spend in one go. Plus my muffler is already doing the job.
But now that i think about it if you go megasquirt and provide a base map which close enough to a final tune then...
-
There are 2 features of interrest regarding your project (well, actually one as the second is for my project but can be interresting to others) on megasquirt 3 ECU:
1- there is an ITB mode which is a blend of MAP/MAF speed density algorithm. MAF is used at low RPM as ITB don't produce as much vaccum as OEM intake systems and make it difficult to tune the low RPM part of the map on MAP sensor, and MAP at HI RPM.
2- you just have to hook up a 50$ fuel composition sensor to make your car a flex fuel one. E85 can bring some more power....
I'm looking at e85 as I would like to raise Cr to 12.
Add all together and the 200hp mark may be reached!
-
Everything about the progress of this setup tells me that BMW made the M42/4 engines to be much more aggressive than what hit the shelves. It strikes me that somewhere late in the process they were told to restrict the engine's performance for some reason or another. Too much has been gained by fairly straight-forward modifications - and what I mean by that, is it was well within BMW's capability to make this intake even with a single throttle body on the end of the pulse chamber, but they didn't.
I think that emissions wasn't the primary focus, considering the age of the M42, I actually think that they held it back for marketability. This is totally wild speculation here, but I suspect that BMW may have seen the market fading for a noisy sports car and repurposed the engine late in the development cycle to be one of their low-powered economy offerings. The easiest way to do that is put on a massive muffler and choke the intake. This engine has made the 320i and 323i redundant which would be bad for product line marketability as well. All guess work, but I think that BMW saw a larger market for the more luxury oriented cars and repurposed the M42 late in the design stage to be more budget. To me that seems like the most reasonable explanation for why so much as been unlocked while still NA and stock internally.
If I ever have the bucks my plan is to use a megasquirt MS3X ECU. Cheapest/most capable ECU.
BUT I wouldn't go for a complete ITB + muffler + ECU kit as it would be to much to spend in one go. Plus my muffler is already doing the job.
But now that i think about it if you go megasquirt and provide a base map which close enough to a final tune then...
That is a valid point, I'll pass it onto Laurence.
-
So I spoke to Laurence, and he has found a place that can reflash the stock ECU.
This is pretty much the ideal solution. No wiring issues, keeps costs down, everything plays nice with everything else. However, this is Australia and cheap is a relative term, unlike some of the stuff in the US.
I've been quoted $2200 which is by far the cheapest solution I've encountered so far, but is at least $1200 more than I can reasonably afford - so that pretty much sinks my prospects of getting a tune. It is a bit disappointing to be so close to completion, but money doesn't just appear. A stand alone ECU and tune is much more expensive. Who wants to donate to the cause for the greater good? :P
In other news, I'm getting my final drive on the LSD changed from 3.45 to the stock open ratio of 3.38 because first gear isn't very useful anymore, but you still need it to take off. I'm hoping that it will bring the 0-100 down to the low 8s times as it is about 9.5s now, whereas it was 9.3s with the stock engine and final drive! Silly physics!
I'll also be making my own smaller volume airbox. This should suit street use better since it will increase the strength of the wave tuning and I'm not increasing displacement or RPM so it shouldn't run out of air. That will be a few months away though.
-
Hi
I'm suprised you used the oem e36 rhd oem exhaust manifold like this. Makes me wonder the % increase this kit would do on a lhd car, substantially more I suspect.
I'd be guessing, but there's another 6%. Rhd oem exhaust manifolds are really bad, the e30 one is even worse!
Cheers Rohan
-
Hi
I'm suprised you used the oem e36 rhd oem exhaust manifold like this. Makes me wonder the % increase this kit would do on a lhd car, substantially more I suspect.
I'd be guessing, but there's another 6%. Rhd oem exhaust manifolds are really bad, the e30 one is even worse!
Cheers Rohan
When Rama had a look at it, he said that it wouldn't be likely to see any gains for street use. Unless I went to the effort of making a 4-1 manifold, the RHD M44 manifold is all equal length and is much nicer than the image you've got there!
-
The euro S50 is what- 315hp? If an M42 is set up to be basically 2/3rds of a euro S50, wouldn't breaking the 200hp mark be readily achievable? I have an M42 on a stand here, along with the complete driveline to put it all in my 2002. I already have an M47 crank, so top end work including itbs is part of the plan. Megasquirt is local to me so that is a goal as well. It seems to me, at least with regards to runner length, that these itbs are more properly-sized than the euro S50.
-
Hi
Yes the euro s50 is up around the 300 hp mark but that's at 7000 rpm with 260 inlet cam duration. Which is screaming!
This is kit is designed for lower rpm but if you increase your cam duration then the itb effect will increase in relation to rpm. However if you increase cylinder volume it will decrease in the rpm band!
Cheers
-
I will be well keen to get my hands on a set of these for my e30 318is once its been proven on an e30. I have just recently received in the post a supertec 1mm oversized master valvetrain kit, so will be sending my head up to Rick at CNC heads in Manchester for the full CNC port and valve fitting. any ideas how this kit will work with the head after machining? as im guessing the ports will have been opened up a fair bit. it will be going on an m47 stroked bottom end.
-
The euro S50 is what- 315hp? If an M42 is set up to be basically 2/3rds of a euro S50, wouldn't breaking the 200hp mark be readily achievable? I have an M42 on a stand here, along with the complete driveline to put it all in my 2002. I already have an M47 crank, so top end work including itbs is part of the plan. Megasquirt is local to me so that is a goal as well. It seems to me, at least with regards to runner length, that these itbs are more properly-sized than the euro S50.
I take it you're in Atlanta as well? I bought all of my Microsquirt stuff directly from DIY Autotune and it was nice to not have to worry about shipping back and forth. Shoot me a PM if you're local, as I've also got an M42 2002.
-
I will be well keen to get my hands on a set of these for my e30 318is once its been proven on an e30. I have just recently received in the post a supertec 1mm oversized master valvetrain kit, so will be sending my head up to Rick at CNC heads in Manchester for the full CNC port and valve fitting. any ideas how this kit will work with the head after machining? as im guessing the ports will have been opened up a fair bit. it will be going on an m47 stroked bottom end.
These will work on the E30 M42s. If you're looking at building a stroker you'll need a dedicated computer no matter what so you shouldn't really need proof so much as apply them to your unique build. What I've been trying to prove is that on a stock internal engine there are still gains to be had with an induction kit.
What this kit does is match the engine dynamics for RPM and displacement. Due to the modular design of Rama's stuff, you can use this kit with a range of different ITB sizes if you wanted, as well as different length intakes. You can buy the manifold to fit and match it to larger ports and ITB sizes - but all of his butterfly sizes will match the mounting, and it will match the port face for mounting as well. You can use multiple spacers and trumpets to get exactly the length you want if you've modified the engine. All that said, from everything I've learned, I reckon that a 42mm kit would work with 2.5L right up to 7000rpm.
Also, as a point of interest, I've been given the impression that the M5X series engines are actually based on the M42. I'm lead to believe that at the end of life for the M20 they replaced it by tacking on two more cylinders and using stuff learned from the more modernised valve train from the S14. Now I can't confirm any of this, it is all rumour mill stuff I've heard, but this is where it gets interesting. The S14 M3 engine is the M88 engine with two cylinders chopped off. The modernised cheaper manufacturing for the M42 meant that the Euro S50 M3 engine was actually a developed using a combined knowledge of the M42 (cheap manufacturing) and M88 to make a modernised, cheap, light and powerful straight six. Now there is an extremely persistent and incorrect rumour that the BMW S70/2 featured in the McLaren F1 is a strung out version of the M70 found in the 850i - it isn't. The original idea was based on that engine, but it was too heavy and large to fit the specs laid out for the F1, but the S50 wasn't. So the S70 which was designed by bolting two M20s on a common crank became the starting point but the F1 engine ended up with only one thing in common with the S70 - it was designed by binding together a proven BMW engine, in this case the S50.
So if you're feeling liberal with your mental gymnastics, you could say that your M42 engine is the basis for the BMW S70/2 used in the fastest naturally aspirated production vehicle ever to hit the streets!
Thats right, you all own McLaren F1s! 8)
*Note: Don't assume any of this is true :D
-
Ta lambertius
can you explain the reasonings behind needing to go standalone management for my stroker? I'm good with the mechanical side of it all but I'm a complete novice when it comes to electronics/management etc
-
Ta lambertius
can you explain the reasonings behind needing to go standalone management for my stroker? I'm good with the mechanical side of it all but I'm a complete novice when it comes to electronics/management etc
An ECU at its simplest uses a single sensor to determine some environmental factors for an engine, which are then used to identify information on a lookup table to provide information on ignition timing and fuel. This information is referred to as a map, which is where you get expressions like a fuel map or timing map from. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engine_control_unit
At the most basic, the single sensor is usually a throttle position sensor because the type of sensor used is very reliable. However, when you only use one sensor, other aspects of your environment can change such as air temperature, density and humidity which will affect the accuracy of fuel and timing maps.
In order to improve engine performance and efficiency you can relay more information from more sensors. If you know the temperature of the air, and the velocity of the air entering the engine (via the MAF) you can work out the density of the air. This allows you to accurately gauge the amount of fuel and timing needed to optimise performance. Further, if you monitor the exhaust mix you can determine the efficiency of the burn as well as using knock-sensors to identify the quality of the fuel. A system that implements all of this information is running in 'closed-loop' since it is actively monitoring all inputs and outputs and adjusting the system on the fly.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-loop_controller
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PID_controller
Most engines run by referring to maps, including MIMO (multi-input multi-output) systems instead of 'true' closed-loop - this particular point is why you will need to change your computer. Our cars, despite taking in a huge array of information, don't actually dynamically adjust like in a real closed-loop system. They do adjust some items but most of it is gained via lookup.
Engineers will test engines exhaustively for months and create tables that have every possible condition they can think of, plus more. All the sensors will monitor what is happening and then that information will be found on a table, and the engine will run designated timing and fuel. By monitoring the AFRs you can effectively determine if your fueling is correct, and by monitoring engine knock you can determine if your timing is correct. If it is incorrect, the computer makes a note that that map it referred to was incorrect and moves onto the next most likely option. This isn't true closed-loop, but the loop is effectively closed provided the information required is already in the table. This should be how the DME 1.7 operates.
With the DME 5.2 it is slightly better than that. It is able to write its own maps rather than referring to an endless, and slow, supply of pre-written information. However it still relies on a 'safe' operating reference point, so that it won't blow the engine up. The more your drive it, the more 'refined' the reference map becomes as the map adjusts to local conditions and driving patterns.
The reason my car still works with the stock ECU and is making reasonable power gains is that I haven't changed the internal dynamics of the engine - it still has the same compression and cams, so the 'reference' point is still the same, just more conservative than it would've been on the stock setup. The changes made really only affect one sensor, and that is the MAF. The engine knows there is more air going in, and monitors the AFRs to confirm what is going on, so it all works.
For the same reason the kit should work on any stock M42 engine with its stock computer. BMW engineers would've programed more than 20% variance for MAF just based on the potential for air density changes in weather and altitude, so even on a lookup table the stock computer should just work but with a higher probability of not being perfect.
The problem with what you're wanting to do is that all of the default expectations that your computer has will be wrong so it won't be able to find a correct map. The computer has certain expectations and limitations it is working with which dictake how fuel and timing are controlled. For example, a longer cam duration would change when fuel can be injected, not just how much. Higher compression would alter the ignition timing from stock for the same mass flow rate. By getting a custom computer tuned specifically to your engine dynamics you can significantly increase performance. With everything stock, gains can be made but on a sophisticated NA engine they are very small unless something is actually wrong.
So the tl;dr version:
As long as you don't change the internal engine dynamics, the BMW engineers should've written enough information for NA mods to work cost-effectively.
-
Hey lambertius can you tell us more about the muffler you swapped to?
-
You should open a school mate, thanks for that really enlightening!
I'm glad you don't get the hate for asking "stupid" questions on this forum
thanks mate I'll be keeping an eye on this thread, love it
-
Hey lambertius can you tell us more about the muffler you swapped to?
I should actually work out what the brand is at some point.... But it is just a straight-through muffler.
Mufflers are loosely in three categories:
Baffled
(http://i.imgur.com/TNSiChk.jpg)
That is the inside of the OEM E36 328i muffler that I lifted from google. The way it works is it has a few chambers which resonate to cancel drone which someone at BMW would've spent a large amount of time working out. Looking at it you can see why the muffler was worth 6% more power. It forces the exhaust into one chamber through a sieve which then enters another pipe through a sieve to make it to the next chamber and so on till it finally exits. This would result in significantly back pressure the higher in the RPM you go, but is super effective at killing noise. When I finally can put up the new exhaust video to compare you'll see how loud this engine is now. Its V8 loud between the intake and exhaust.
Offset
Most mufflers you buy are like this. All those nice burbley ones by Borla and Remus use multiple chambers designed to resonate at a certain point to create burble and to cancel drone. It is why they sound epic but not loud - the problem is they don't flow very much better than stock, so they really are an aesthetic mod.
(http://i.imgur.com/1az5B6e.jpg)
You can see intuitively that the above will flow better, but it will still generate back pressure. The intake exhaust line is almost always offset.
(http://i.imgur.com/rxCQZdy.jpg)
Straight
It doesn't have to always be perfectly straight, but it basically means there are no baffles or chambers. The muffler is usually just a perforated straight pipe, and the muffler box is backed with glass to try and absorb some sound. This is what I have. A perfectly straight pipe with no muffler might be worth another 1% less drag, so this is about as good as it gets really. This is what you will find in race cars, but they will have small glass chambers (people call them hotdogs because of the thin long look) to minimise drag.
(http://i.imgur.com/IMJfoZs.png)
Mine is a center muffler straight through. The problem is that it changes the resonant characteristics and drones like a monster. I'm practicing some maths and will be installing a side resonator to cancel the drone. If that works then I will be able to keep it on the road, otherwise I'll be swapping between the new muffler for track days and the old for road use. If I get the maths right I'll write up the process as well so you can all have drone free cars no matter what diameter you use! The engine is small displacement, so even straight through it isn't particularly loud even though it is louder than before. What amazes me is the tone is so low that it actually sounds like a straight through LS Engine, just a bit smoother.
The muffler intake combo is brutal which was also unexpected. My mate has an audio recording which as soon as I get I'll post like I did the induction note earlier. The induction note is completely different with the new muffler, and whenever I let off the throttle the exhaust makes a massive crack and spits out hate and vengeance burbling like a brook that has been listening to death metal. It really sounds like a racecar - just down 200 horsepower...
I also had a chat to Rama about the RHD headers.
He has told me that unless I go to a 4-1 collector (which will need to be specifically tuned to a particular RPM) there won't be any gains to be had off the stock setup. He was saying that the 4-2-1 setup creates a broader performance range for torque, and that it is all roughly equal length should mean there aren't many gains. The headers are less sensitive to changes than the intake and BMW should've had its engineers test the 4-2-1 setup for a particular set of torque characteristics so the length should be as good as can be expected for road use. From what he was saying, a set of tuned and tested headers would see me 1~2% not enough to justify the cost for a stock internal car. He was also saying that a 4-1 collector would see losses outside its designated range, and you can't choke the diameter like you can on the intake side because you will definitely restrict the upper RPM flow as there is a much higher gas volume.
So for the E30 guys, from what I can tell, if your headers really do blow as much as you say, put the E36 headers on.
You should open a school mate, thanks for that really enlightening!
I'm glad you don't get the hate for asking "stupid" questions on this forum
thanks mate I'll be keeping an eye on this thread, love it
Cheers, I'm glad you're getting some value from it. If you want to see some 'hate', you should check out the sister thread I was running over at Bimmerforums. The first page was a few guys arguing with me about how ITBs suck and I would just lose power (all the common myths which my first post was entirely about dispelling *sigh*). At least a few people pointed out that I had already 'said that', and I guess the proof is there now.
If you can find a way for me to get paid and teach auto-engineering I'm all for it... I used to work at a Uni and did some lecturing, but that was a survival money gig, though, the work was interesting. It also sucks that there are no auto companies in Aus to work for. There are a few hack-n-slash tuning shops, but that clearly isn't what I'm doing. Aston Martin had their grad program open a little while ago, but there isn't even a point trying for that not being in the UK - plus being in Australia I have no "industry experience" with auto-engineering because there is no industry so I wouldn't have had a chance. Through a random turn of events I have the contact details for the managing director of BMW AU and BMW UK; I was thinking of shooting them off an email when this is totally finished and seeing what happens. For the moment I'll continue working in retail which pays about double what engineering pays here and will continue "teaching" people about why they need to get an extended warranty for that iPod until I can start working in an industry that isn't academic or engineering (hopefully soon!).
Oh, and who here plays Gran Turismo 6?
-
I have no cat, stock resonator, straight trough rear muffler.. and it gives a nice low sound below 3k rpm.. above that the open air filter screams everything away.
but then i have no interior, single skin carbon hood .. that amplifies the noise a bit i think :P
also a small pop from 1200rpm to 800rpm.. but no high rpm bangs unfortunately :(
-
I ordered a standard exhaust set up today, the chap that had my is before me put a straight through stainless system on followed by what looks like a massive back box from a 2.5, it sounds fucking horrendous. Should be interesting seeing what you come up with considering how impressively you followed the ITB project through.
-
E36 M42 RHD headers are not equal length - are M44 RHD equal? Im keen to see a pic of the RHD M44 headers if they are equal length. The m42 primary length ranges from 130mm to 420mm with 90degree intersections. Hardly optimal.
The difference is LHD vs RHD where RHD have too contend with a steering column and a compromised design.
-
E36 M42 RHD headers are not equal length - are M44 RHD equal? Im keen to see a pic of the RHD M44 headers if they are equal length. The m42 primary length ranges from 130mm to 420mm with 90degree intersections. Hardly optimal.
The difference is LHD vs RHD where RHD have too contend with a steering column and a compromised design.
They're not perfectly equal length - but I'm pretty sure that the difference between them isn't that severe. I'll measure them up when I get back to Sydney, however I'm pretty sure that cylinders 2-4 are the same length, and Cylinder 1 is longer.
And as promised, exhaust recordings!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PS8GGwnq6M
A comparison of before and after while stationary, and there is also a comparison of the change in the induction note from opening up the muffler.
-
This is really incredible work, Sir. I am working on a 318is that I hope will take me back to the summit of Pikes Peak next year, and this looks like exactly what is needed to get us to the power number we're looking for. I'll definitely be in touch with your friend to see about a kit and getting it shipped to the US.
Like you, I'm constantly being told to just do a swap, etc. But that's not at all what I want to do!
Genuinely looking forward to whatever it is that captures your interest next.
-
This is really incredible work, Sir. I am working on a 318is that I hope will take me back to the summit of Pikes Peak next year, and this looks like exactly what is needed to get us to the power number we're looking for. I'll definitely be in touch with your friend to see about a kit and getting it shipped to the US.
Like you, I'm constantly being told to just do a swap, etc. But that's not at all what I want to do!
Genuinely looking forward to whatever it is that captures your interest next.
Cheers man.
I would really like to make a set of Tuned Headers and an exhaust to get the most NA out of the car. The problem with exhausts though is it isn't modular like the Induction Kit, which means that the only way to get it right would to be to build one and then test it - then build another and test it. If you've read the whole thread, you can see that we needed to extend the intake length to get things in the right place - we won't be easily able to do that with a set of Headers. If I had $10k to blow I would do it for sure, but considering the costs to get it right if I don't get it right the first time, and the fact that it may be worth really only be worth a few % more overall makes it a bit difficult to do. If I got a set of RHD headers right, they would fit all the LHD cars as well since the clearance is easier, but I just can't see a way to get the budget to do it at this point :(
As for you;
I really do think now that 100hp/l (190bhp) on this car is reachable without cracking the case.
Using % and 'rated' figures the car is already at ~168bhp (138*1.22) which also lines up with the dyno runs which range from 160~170bhp assuming 30% transmission losses. So depending on which dyno you believe, the car is only 20/30bhp from that number at the moment anyway.
If you want to get it there on a budget you'll need to:
- Induction Kit
- Straight-through muffler and higher flow cat than OEM - I would also suggest wrapping the entire thing for that extra 1~2%
- New Cams (you need to make sure they start making power at 4500RPM or you'll bog down everytime you change gear)
- New Computer (if you raise your redline to 7000RPM you won't need to change anything internal to cope, and it will make it that much easier to get everything working at the right spot for gear changes)
I would think it likely that the right cams and right computer would net you 15~20bhp so you would be damn close to 100hp/l. I think if you made the right set of 4-1 headers to start working at 4500rpm also you would see another 5~10bhp with it.
It actually surprises me how close this car is to reaching this figure with just the induction kit and exhaust, and still knowing there is a bit more left on the exhaust side.
-
I agree with pretty much everything you've cited here! I have a few places where I can play and may even be able to reach my number without changing cams which, secretly, is one of my goals. Here's how:
E85 - Injectors are cheap and the stock rail can handle the additional fluid required to feed an E85 engine. I am already required to use a fuel cell and aftermarket pump, so that is already figured into the budget. I used E85 on my last Pikes Peak car and it works incredibly well (8-10%+). Octane through the roof, burns much cooler, which is a must at Pikes Peak, and has the added benefit of being about $10.00 per gallon less than race fuel!
Open Exhaust. I will use the stock header, at first, but fabricate a straight pipe exhaust all the way out the back. I'm not limited on noise. Some places where I test may have restrictions, but a high flow resonator will get me within regs. As sponsorship or other funding allows, I will design and build a 4 into 1 long tube step header with a high velocity collector. Definitely wrapping the system. That was something else we proved on the previous car.
A re-flash of the stock ECU will definitely accompany all changes, and will be the trickiest part of this. If I can avoid the expense of a new ECU, that would be best. It's one area where I used to have sponsorship, but no longer.
I was really curious what we might be able to expect from this engine and when I came across your thread it really gave me hope that we could reach our goal number without breaking the bank.
Thanks again for the most impressive work!
-
Hi Guys,
I realised I made a mistake in an earlier post and have edited it. It is kind of an important point for anyone trying to make a track engine so here is the edit. http://www.m42club.com/forum/index.php?topic=18442.msg128877#msg128877
2.25" would be the largest diameter this engine will support - and that would be explicitly for track use. If you check out the edited post, you will see that the point is supported with evidence.
-
I fully expected these results when I built my 2.25 exh: loss in low end, and little (if any) gains up top, esp with a tired engine. I didn't even bother trying a MAF signal comparison since those should have been the results. What I got, though, defied all stated logic. I gained significant torque in the 2,500-4k rpm range. Top end saw some, but less dramatic, improvement. I can't run a straight-through muffler where I live since I would be way too loud and I imagine even a good 2" baffled muffler on stock pipe would post lower gains. Now I don't have dyno results to show what I experienced but I wouldn't be afraid of running 2.25" exh for this engine on the street. I offer my keys to anyone who wishes to drive it to experience it for themselves. My guess is, that in order to get enough flow out of a 2" system, one needs to run a loud straight-through muffler. And I'm sure my new found torque would disappear if I installed one on the bigger pipe. With the more air that your engine is flowing, I'd be curious how it would run with a good 2.25 system and a quiet (ish) muffler choice.
-
Hey there!
Lambertius, do you know that the individual cylinder displacement of a M52B28 is only 3.6% more than that of a M42b18 (84×84 vs84×81mm), Cr are almost identical (10 and 10.2), cc vol are identical and I'm pretty sure you just have to add 2 cylinders to your manifold to make it fit a M52B28 (port must be identical as well as intake manifold "print")?
My point is that you can most probably reuse all you did on the m42 with the M52 and see a bigger gain as this engine is very well known to be choked and de-rated from factory. I bet you can yeld 20%, at least.
You would also hit a larger customer base...
what do you think anout it?
-
Hey there!
Lambertius, do you know that the individual cylinder displacement of a M52B28 is only 3.6% more than that of a M42b18 (84×84 vs84×81mm), Cr are almost identical (10 and 10.2), cc vol are identical and I'm pretty sure you just have to add 2 cylinders to your manifold to make it fit a M52B28 (port must be identical as well as intake manifold "print")?
My point is that you can most probably reuse all you did on the m42 with the M52 and see a bigger gain as this engine is very well known to be choked and de-rated from factory. I bet you can yeld 20%, at least.
You would also hit a larger customer base...
what do you think anout it?
It has come up with Rama before, but the issue is getting a donor car for testing.
-
I wish I could help... :(
-
Exhaust Drone
So as I said before, the exhaust drone was brutal.
(http://i.imgur.com/doBYCyI.jpg)
The red peak (125Hz @2900RPM) is what caused all the hell, nearly 30dB above the base line. Every octave (double the frequency) you see the same peak resurge.
The green line is @4000RPM where the headers are working correctly and the drone reduces. As weird as it sounds, the car was quieter while driving hard:
"Why were you speeding son?"
"I was trying to stop my brain being rattled out of my head - it's quieter this way!"
So I left my car with a friend who I trust when I went back to Perth and with his help I had Brintech install a side resonator. Other than installing it in the wrong spot, they did everything else I asked for - including making the length adjustable. This point is very important since you can only estimate the exhaust temperature and you will certainly be wrong, when calculating the length of the resonator.
The installation made immediate differences to the volume but wasn't perfect, but running another spectral analysis I was able to observer the target frequency clearly and re-do the calculations to infer the exhaust temp in the resonator and sort out the correct length.
(http://i.imgur.com/tgXfJ4W.jpg)
In this case you can see the green line is the volume after the resonator is installed. It becomes effective a little too early, wiping out nearly half of the noisiest spot, but missing the loudest peak. Doing the maths again resulted in a shorter resonator. After adjusting it again, the results are below:
(http://i.imgur.com/I2ej09u.jpg)
It totally wiped out the cruising drone, and the cabin volume dropped from a blistering 85dB to 75dB - which is now about as loud as a stock NB MX-5. The open muffler induces such a wide array of drone frequencies that the perfect solution would be three side resonators targeting just below the peak, just above the peak and the peak drone points. However, with the brutality knocked off it I will just spend ~$100 on some insulation and line the boot and under the rear seat. Another 5dB and it will sound like stock volume inside the car. The good news though is that there isn't any exhaust volume while crusing, it isn't till you open the throttle that it gets loud again.
Below are the pictures of the side resonator with a clamp that makes it adjustable:
(http://i.imgur.com/6XYHpjB.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/27TatwC.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/C7eZJlL.jpg)
I have some recordings that demonstrate the differences when I get a chance.
Good news for you LHD kids Rama has started fitting LHD parts!
(http://i.imgur.com/wHiqGMX.jpg)
I'll also be doing some experiments with tapered intakes and plenum volume to see if we can squeeze a bit more out of it :)
And one more thing...
Rama has started work on his straight replacement M42/4 LTW Flywheel. It will use an M20 clutch kit and that is it! He has offered me one to test-fit, but there is a slight problem. I have a brand new clutch and OEM flywheel (like ~1000kms ago) and I'm hesitant to pull the gearbox off again. The other issue is that I've spent more than I can reasonably at this point in time, especially if I want to do things properly. A lot of people would like to know the real world benefits of a light flywheel, as well as the driveability. I was thinking of installing it and running a before and after dyno run in 2nd gear to show how it affects transmission losses and wheel-power. I can't really afford the M20 clutch kit, installation and two more dyno runs...
So here are the questions, would anyone want to buy my slightly used clutch kit and flywheel?
Does anyone want the kind of numerical feedback you would see on a dyno?
And would anyone like to buy-in early? If Rama has some sales ahead of time, he may be a bit keen to invest a little further and assist me with doing detailed testing. I think by this point its clear that Rama isn't producing vapourware and these will be on the market soon - flywheels, ITB kits and everything else! I've been trying to prod him into giving people early access prices, so now would be a good time to show your support!
(http://i.imgur.com/eZ8i8Oh.jpg)
-
Does Rama have an estimated price point for the itb Kit? I would definatley be willing to buy in early, but I haven't heard a price yet?
-
Alright LHD! ;D 8)
-
I'm definitely interested in the ITB kit. Early group buy sounds good to me.
-
Does Rama have an estimated price point for the itb Kit? I would definatley be willing to buy in early, but I haven't heard a price yet?
I'm definitely interested in the ITB kit. Early group buy sounds good to me.
Rama is still working on suppliers for different parts, so I really don't know for certain what he intends to charge. He said that it is 2/3rds of his M20 kit, so it should be around 2/3rds the price which would put it around $1200USD. I don't know though, I'm just guestimating.
He did say that he would be interested in doing an early uptake pricing though, and I think he wants to sort a few things out then join the forums and get involved.
Also, I could use some help - how hard is it to remove the headers? Anyone have some DIY pics to help me get ready for the next project?
-
Its easy enough. Just takes patience and a bit of fiddling to get the right socket/ extension combination. The steering column can stay in place. Took me 2 hrs first time and 30 minutes the next time once I knew how to access each bolt.
If the next project is headers, don't underestimate the amount of fabrication effort to get your desired lengths.
-
Its easy enough. Just takes patience and a bit of fiddling to get the right socket/ extension combination. The steering column can stay in place. Took me 2 hrs first time and 30 minutes the next time once I knew how to access each bolt.
If the next project is headers, don't underestimate the amount of fabrication effort to get your desired lengths.
It isn't, I don't have the funds to justify making headers and testing them till I get them right. What I want to do is wrap the exhaust from the headers back to improve the thermal efficiency. For ~$30 of fibreglass wrapping it is worth the $$ for another 1~2%. Fabricating headers however... even if I got all of the lengths right the first time, I would still be out $$$$ for ~5% improvement. I was talking to Rama, and he was saying that with the interference headers that are used OEM, the secondary length makes more of a difference than the shorter primary lengths, so any gains in performance would be minimal. Don't get me wrong, I would love to work out the exact right solution and put it all together just so I could say I've optomised it as much as possible, but I can't do it on my own and Rama isn't interested in doing the headers. If people were really interested in it, I could probably convince Brintech to do them cheap enough for me to afford testing it, but he would only help me out if he knew he had sold some ahead of time.
Anyway, I just wanted to know if its possible/reasonable to get them on and off the car without a hoist?
-
Axel stands work. If you can get under the car then you have all the height you need.
-
You can get at everything on a LHD without a hoist. I have always just used a jack and stands as mentioned above.
Not sure about RHD setup but I am sure you can do it....just more of a pain than LHD.
-
RHD is fine on stands. Stands are preferable in some respects as you need to access from underneath and above in the engine bay.
Heat wrap may give more power but also increase the risk of cracking. I have had 1 crack in use and had to filter through a few spares to find an uncracked one. Welding is possible but not easy due to constuction. I would line up a spare manifold now and maybe wrap it at your leaisure before swapping it out. That way you have a spare and the car off the road for the least time. All depends on your situation really.
-
Hi Lambertius!
The M42's original plenum volume is ~2 L. As you leave the intake length almost the original 350mm (if I am not mistaken), did you leave the airbox volume the same? Or does this modification needs the bigger plenum volume?
-
RHD is fine on stands. Stands are preferable in some respects as you need to access from underneath and above in the engine bay.
Heat wrap may give more power but also increase the risk of cracking. I have had 1 crack in use and had to filter through a few spares to find an uncracked one. Welding is possible but not easy due to constuction. I would line up a spare manifold now and maybe wrap it at your leaisure before swapping it out. That way you have a spare and the car off the road for the least time. All depends on your situation really.
Yeah I've heard of the risks of cracking, though it should be pretty low in the real world. I was planning to wrap one and then just do a swap. Much easier that way, and no pressure on time or reassembly. I remember speaking to a wrecker and he was saying that the M44 headers were much better than the M42 and that he hadn't seen anyone come in to get new headers for a crack. Anyway, do what I can to squeeze out every little bit without opening the engine!
Hi Lambertius!
The M42's original plenum volume is ~2 L. As you leave the intake length almost the original 350mm (if I am not mistaken), did you leave the airbox volume the same? Or does this modification needs the bigger plenum volume?
This was a very coincidental question. I had just started analysing the different volumes of air boxes. The current air box is close to 8.0L due to restrictions with the parts Rama had available. Stuff that I read seems to suggest that 150~200% displacement boxes provide the best performance depending on RPM and intended use. Smaller airboxes improve low-end performance, larger ones open the higher end.
The current setup obviously improves performance, but I understand that like the throttle diameter, you basically want it as small as possible before the you 'choke' so I wanted to investigate smaller volumes. Going smaller should improve performance, but I also want to understand why. The simulation indicates that the smaller airbox was about 20% more efficient, but there are limitations with this kind of simulation though.
Anyway, it is enough for me to want to try it out for real, so I will be getting some parts made.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Re81nyTM8Uc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5B0CFqaDhcM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pieu--Byb1Q
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dYOxCz8qSAY
Visually it appeared that the smaller volume gives up less energy 'filling' the pulse chamber after each stroke.
One more thing I put up a new video on my YouTube Channel Yesterday https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJzrv2GfmiI
If you want to see a good video of the ITB kit, it will be going up on that Channel in a few months. Once I finish with the exhaust and airbox, everything that has been done will be turned into an episode on my channel! So Subscribe!
-
is the Rama m42/m44 flywheel for 215mm or 228mm clutch diameter?
I need flywheel with 228mm clutch diameter for my M42
thanks
-
Rama said:
"It has 228, but m20 clutch that sits on a basically flat surface not std e36 one which sits down in a recess"
-
That 3.5L box looks like it might have a better chance at fitting in an E30 LHD
-
Hi,
I just yesterday discovered this ITB kit here and I had to create an account here because this is just too awesome!! I was thinking about buying the Dbilas ITB kit but now after reading from page 8-13 of this topic in one night I realised that I it is not so well engineered at all. Thank you Lambertius for doing all the research and making this kind of proper kit to be available for us all, even though I live in Finland and I reckon the company that is now making them is in Australia I need this :D Some questions came to my mind when I read this topic, so here goes:
1. Will this kit fit bolt on to a Z3 with M44?
2.What happens to all the different sensors that are attached to the OEM intake manifold, for example DISA, and others?
(http://i58.tinypic.com/n1455t.jpg)
3. Do I need to lenghten the throttlecable on LHD Z3 because the throttle linkage is a bit more far away than normal?
4. Will the MAF go on to the kit as normal?
5. Someone asked the price of this kit in Brintech facebook page and they answered 1400 dollars but didn't say was it USD or AUSD, does anyone know if this is in USD or AUSD? (I asked them on the facebook page myself but didn't get an answer yet)
6. Does the kit contain everything to be a straight bolt on kit?
Thanks in advance! :)
Also I noticed that there has been a lot of conversation about exhausts. I have a 4-1 2 inch exhaust manifold and a sports catalysator (200 CPSI) in 2,5" and all the rest exhaust is 2,5" Simons catback. I know that it is a bit too large diameter but it gives a wonderful sound and even if I haven't been to the dyno, according to my ass dyno I haven't lost power in the low end so much that I would notice it. When I installed the 4-1 "Fulda steel" manifold and sports catalysator, (year after the catback installation) I think I noticed a slight improvement in midrange torque.
-
Hi,
I just yesterday discovered this ITB kit here and I had to create an account here because this is just too awesome!! I was thinking about buying the Dbilas ITB kit but now after reading from page 8-13 of this topic in one night I realised that I it is not so well engineered at all. Thank you Lambertius for doing all the research and making this kind of proper kit to be available for us all, even though I live in Finland and I reckon the company that is now making them is in Australia I need this :D Some questions came to my mind when I read this topic, so here goes:
1. Will this kit fit bolt on to a Z3 with M44?
2.What happens to all the different sensors that are attached to the OEM intake manifold, for example DISA, and others?
(http://i58.tinypic.com/n1455t.jpg)
3. Do I need to lenghten the throttlecable on LHD Z3 because the throttle linkage is a bit more far away than normal?
4. Will the MAF go on to the kit as normal?
5. Someone asked the price of this kit in Brintech facebook page and they answered 1400 dollars but didn't say was it USD or AUSD, does anyone know if this is in USD or AUSD? (I asked them on the facebook page myself but didn't get an answer yet)
6. Does the kit contain everything to be a straight bolt on kit?
Thanks in advance! :)
Also I noticed that there has been a lot of conversation about exhausts. I have a 4-1 2 inch exhaust manifold and a sports catalysator (200 CPSI) in 2,5" and all the rest exhaust is 2,5" Simons catback. I know that it is a bit too large diameter but it gives a wonderful sound and even if I haven't been to the dyno, according to my ass dyno I haven't lost power in the low end so much that I would notice it. When I installed the 4-1 "Fulda steel" manifold and sports catalysator, (year after the catback installation) I think I noticed a slight improvement in midrange torque.
Hey thanks!
I came on to update everyone on the next step in the project.
I'm heading back to Sydney in a few days, and part of the trip should involve finishing the fitment of the kit completely! I was intending to take some detailed photos of all the assembly, and show what happens to all the sensors and hoses. The kit will effectively be bolt on, but you will require at least some technical skills to install it.
1. Yes
2. Everything will be used except the DISA
3. No
4. Yes
5. The price is subject to change depending on final manufacturing costs. I believe that RHD will sell them at ~$1200USD but some costs are still pending.
6. No. There are too many variations in the cars that it will fit. It will contain almost everything, but there may be some specific changes that users will need to make for their own install. It should cover everything - but as it is not yet fully complete, I can't say for certain.
Also, if anyone wants to see what Britech actually does - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LT10-MJGitM - watch the video!
-
Ok, thanks. I am a automotive engineer student so I think I can figure it out even if it need a few minor modifications ;D I would possibly be interested in the light flywheel kit that you are planning on too ;)
-
An update for all you LHD folk out there ;)
(http://i.imgur.com/AFcW879.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/FsQuTsk.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/MM3NLjC.jpg)
Work is still ongoing, there will be more updates soon! :)
So who wants one now you've seen it fitted? :P
-
I want one!!! 8)
-
Did you have to compromise the runner length to make it fit? It looks shorter than the RHD version??
-
Registered here just to follow this thread. I'm putting an m42 into my 76' 2002. I'd love to add this sometime down the line.
-
Did you have to compromise the runner length to make it fit? It looks shorter than the RHD version??
This particular kit is shorter yes, he wanted to get it under the strut bar. It is only 50mm shorter than what I ran, but you would be able to extend out a bit further with some spacers. I'm sure you can see there is still room between the brake-booster and airbox! In other words, it will definitely fit at a useable length!
I'm testing a slim kit at the dyno tomorrow, if that works out you would be able to run a little bit longer as well.
There is a lot more to report on what's coming up, but I'll keep it till I have results!
-
That looks so awesome! ;D I want one badly, so when can we buy these works of art?
-
That looks so awesome! ;D I want one badly, so when can we buy these works of art?
This!
-
This looks promising for E30, I think we have more space to play on the firewall side. Any plans to test on one?
-
What was the outcome of the "slim kit" testing back in August Lambertius?
-
https://www.facebook.com/rhd.taiwan
Some final pictures and first pricing details (for Taiwan) can be seen on this facebook page. You do NOT have to have an facebook account to see the pictures!
I don't know if the prices convert directly from NTD to $, but if so, it ranges from about 1200$ (without airbox) to about 1650 (with carbon fibre airbox)
That's all I could find out so far.
-
Hi
It's all on Rama rhdengineering, including a version with 2 extra cylinders, yep m50!
Cheers
-
Hi guys!
Sorry about the huge delay, I've had a lot going on at the moment, another interstate move from Perth to Melbourne and more!
What was the outcome of the "slim kit" testing back in August Lambertius?
I'll get the results up when I get the chance, but it improved the low-end performance a significant amount with no affects on top end - so an all-round good result!
https://www.facebook.com/rhd.taiwan
Some final pictures and first pricing details (for Taiwan) can be seen on this facebook page. You do NOT have to have an facebook account to see the pictures!
I don't know if the prices convert directly from NTD to $, but if so, it ranges from about 1200$ (without airbox) to about 1650 (with carbon fibre airbox)
That's all I could find out so far.
I believe that should be correct, he said that he will be pricing it around that amount.
Hi
It's all on Rama rhdengineering, including a version with 2 extra cylinders, yep m50!
Cheers
http://racehead.com.au/
It will eventually show up.
However, for this thread you can expect in the new future:
- Sim videos on the slim kit
- Sim results
- Full assembly pictures
- More audio results on drone
- Final Dyno results
- A full video on my YouTube Channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCWUP1B1CN0WXN_tALe6RzGg Subscribe if you haven't already!
Till then, here are some pictures to keep you interested :D
(http://i.imgur.com/6X7kYz5.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/yo0QSUP.jpg)
And a high-quality engine audio sample from the upcoming video episode: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OScp517Z05o
-
Okay!
Exhaust drone post! (because its the easiest)
So I found a decent spectrometer app for my phone which made it a lot easier to analyse the sound of the exhaust in the cabin on the go. https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.nfx.specscope&hl=en
Because it was live I was able to pause the drone at the worst point which was much easier than trying to find it in a 20 minute recording after.
BEFORE
(http://i.imgur.com/kLdVCsX.png)
AFTER
(http://i.imgur.com/WVwzcCR.png)
As you can see I was able to wipe out the drone point very effectively, as well as the octaves as you go up the frequency.
Things get interesting here, I wrapped my exhaust from the headers to the tip. The reasoning behind this is that the hotter exhaust gases have a lower density and will evacuate much easier than colder gases. In reality you won't perceive this on a dyno - the real change may be ~1% or less - but what I did observe is it significantly reduced the effects of heat soak while on the dyno. Anyone who has been to a dyno knows that you tend to get 3~4 consistent runs then the heat sets in and performance begins to drop until it hits the 'soaked' equilibrium sets in. This can be as much as a 20% loss on a turbo car with no inter-cooler, so it can be very observable. On my little NA engine its not huge, but after a few runs we did see power drop by ~4~5%. After wrapping the exhaust this didn't happen at all. Every single run was the same value within 1kW of the last run, this was over about 20 minutes with about 10~15 runs. Not a bad result for $30.
There was one unexpected side-effect though...
I didn't know this till after, but hotter gasses are louder gasses. The temperature at the tip went from ~140C to about 260C after being wrapped and the cabin volume climbed from 80dB to about 90~95dB.
(http://i.imgur.com/IjoTWPa.png)
Things you learn... When its cold, so within half and hour of turning on the car its nice and quiet, but as it gets hotter it gets worse and worse. Free-way driving is totally intolerable with the exhaust just constantly belting out the same tone and being as hot as possible. I'll be switching out the muffler when I drive it down to Melbourne! Definitely something to keep in mind if you're doing something like this, it may not be acceptable.
Oh, and that volume was after insulation the car further than the factory standard.
-
Hi
So less insulation on the exhaust less noise in car. :-[
Where in Melbourne are you moving too? I'm in Vermont area.
Cheers Rohan
-
I've been following this project for a while, but until now I didn't have an account on this forum yet. This may be a crazy question, but is it possible to attach a supercharger to an m42 with an ITB kit like this installed? I've heard of ITBs + Supercharger before but I can't really imagine in my head how it would work, or what it would be like. Do you have any insight?
-
Hi
So less insulation on the exhaust less noise in car. :-[
Where in Melbourne are you moving too? I'm in Vermont area.
Cheers Rohan
I'm looking into Docklands/CBD/St Kilda and the surrounding areas. I'll be working in the CBD and the closer I am the better. I've done over a decade of 1.5 hour+ each way transit for work/study and I don't want to do it anymore. I'll be sure to show the car regardless though!
Removing the insulation is the obvious solution, but even without the insualtion on the freeway as the exhaust heats up it just becomes too much. I can swap the muffler easy enough as it is on a flange, and one day I'll get one of those fancy valve setups!
I've been following this project for a while, but until now I didn't have an account on this forum yet. This may be a crazy question, but is it possible to attach a supercharger to an m42 with an ITB kit like this installed? I've heard of ITBs + Supercharger before but I can't really imagine in my head how it would work, or what it would be like. Do you have any insight?
Yes you could, but I see a number of issues in doing so - throttle response would be epic though if you could solve the problems.
I'm not sure what would happen with the flow dynamics, it would be interesting. If you were driving along at partial throttle, you would have positive pressure on the butterfly side so you would be accelerating air quite significantly past them. You could potentially end up at supersonic velocities at partial throttle and normal velocities at WOT. Its not unheard of to arrange things like that way, but I would need to read up on it more.
-
Now that the kit is complete and up for sale, is it possible to do a recap post that covers all the important notes regarding this install? I would love to buy a set but I'm hesitant that the install may be too complicated. I'm just finishing an M10 -> M42 swap so my abilities are fine, what I'm worried about is possible fabrication work or similar custom work that might pop up once I already have the intake torn apart. I'm not a welder or an engineer so all of that stuff would have to be done if I were going to buy a kit.
-
WOOO! NEW EPISODE! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D8gdSZtLJQM
Guess which car is coming up next...? 8)
Now that the kit is complete and up for sale, is it possible to do a recap post that covers all the important notes regarding this install? I would love to buy a set but I'm hesitant that the install may be too complicated. I'm just finishing an M10 -> M42 swap so my abilities are fine, what I'm worried about is possible fabrication work or similar custom work that might pop up once I already have the intake torn apart. I'm not a welder or an engineer so all of that stuff would have to be done if I were going to buy a kit.
The kit would suit even a novice (though it would be a bit more stressful as a first job). I'll be doing a full write up on the install in the near future :D No fabrication required!
-
I've been following this project for a while, but until now I didn't have an account on this forum yet. This may be a crazy question, but is it possible to attach a supercharger to an m42 with an ITB kit like this installed? I've heard of ITBs + Supercharger before but I can't really imagine in my head how it would work, or what it would be like. Do you have any insight?
You may need to add something like this to keep temps down http://www.r3vlimited.com/board/showthread.php?t=191828
Might not be a bad idea on the standard NA setup either
-
I was getting super excited to order a kit until I took a closer look at the pictures and realized these are installed on a RHD car. Has anybody installed these onto a LHD model?
-
An update for all you LHD folk out there ;)
(http://i.imgur.com/AFcW879.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/FsQuTsk.jpg)
Work is still ongoing, there will be more updates soon! :)
So who wants one now you've seen it fitted? :P
It looks like it's possible, maybe you have to relocate your power-steering-pump-reservoir at e30s or something. What would be the car you're going to fit it?
-
I still don't see the kit in www.racehead.com.au website, well i guess it will pop up in time. But what I have understood is that the kit is now up for sale in some sort of RHDs re-sellers Taiwan page at http://www.alluringarage.com/products/rhd-for-bmw-m42m44-itb-kit
I have no clue what it says in Taiwan (or chinese whatever they speak in there, can someone translate? :D) in the page, but then somehow I bumped in to this in their page: http://www.alluringarage.com/rhdengineering/rhd-technical-documents/12284.html So does this mean that I have to buy a separate item for the kit to fit M44 because it has a different idle control than the M42? Is the Idle motor fitting piece already developed? I could use a little info here :)
-
I still don't see the kit in www.racehead.com.au website, well i guess it will pop up in time. But what I have understood is that the kit is now up for sale in some sort of RHDs re-sellers Taiwan page at http://www.alluringarage.com/products/rhd-for-bmw-m42m44-itb-kit
I have no clue what it says in Taiwan (or chinese whatever they speak in there, can someone translate? :D) in the page, but then somehow I bumped in to this in their page: http://www.alluringarage.com/rhdengineering/rhd-technical-documents/12284.html So does this mean that I have to buy a separate item for the kit to fit M44 because it has a different idle control than the M42? Is the Idle motor fitting piece already developed? I could use a little info here :)
I'll do a proper write up on the installation and all the parts soon :)
I've been pretty busy, in the process of buying my first apartment at the moment!
I'll ask Rama when he will list it on his main website, but from what I remember he has to organise a few things before it is actually available. Rama is based in Thailand, so it would make sense that he would test the release there first. He also just had his first kid, so he has been pretty hung up on that at the moment!
-
Ahh, okay well that explains a lot of things. I thought it was all happening in Australia :D But no rush, I'm just very curious. Thanks for all the info! :)
-
I still don't see the kit in www.racehead.com.au website, well i guess it will pop up in time. But what I have understood is that the kit is now up for sale in some sort of RHDs re-sellers Taiwan page at http://www.alluringarage.com/products/rhd-for-bmw-m42m44-itb-kit
I have no clue what it says in Taiwan (or chinese whatever they speak in there, can someone translate? :D) in the page, but then somehow I bumped in to this in their page: http://www.alluringarage.com/rhdengineering/rhd-technical-documents/12284.html So does this mean that I have to buy a separate item for the kit to fit M44 because it has a different idle control than the M42? Is the Idle motor fitting piece already developed? I could use a little info here :)
Try Google chrome and use the translate page option. Some things don't translate directly but you can work it out.
-
Hello guys!
So I've decided to make a post showing you how to assemble (or rather how I assembled) the kit! It will be slightly different for everyone depending on the level of work you do for your engine.
To begin with, I have my 3D printed small volume airbox. I had this printed at Shapeways out of ABS. In order to prevent any debris getting sucked into the engine I thoroughly cleaned it, sanded it, cleaned it sprayed with fill-primer, sanded it, primed it, sanded it and then eventually coated it with engine enamel. The airbox reaches about 60 degrees during heavy driving from radiated heat and ABS will remain rigid up until 180 degrees.
The bosses that you see on the part are mounting points for vacuum lines. These will not be on the product from Rama, these were something I did for myself personally because I wanted the kit to fit a certain way.
My only concern is the longevity of the product as it goes through heat cycling, but I made a very thick design to try to mitigate this. Only time will tell. The below photos show the unusual shape of the trumpets, placement relative to the inlet and significant change in volume from ~8 liters to ~2.9 litres. There was a noticeable change in torque and power which I will get onto later (short version is you may be interested in doing this if it's on the street, but not if its on the track). I have a bunch of sim results as well as animation regarding it.
(http://i.imgur.com/NGTxbwb.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/KWOzand.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/NliXUgL.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/RXayZiZ.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/ks0DDxi.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/5HawBvH.jpg)
Actually getting started with the install:
I will assume for the sake of this that you can remove your existing manifold or find a tutorial regarding that yourself. Just a tip for the E36 guys, getting the wiring off the alternator can be a pain. In this case we'll actually be removing and disposing of the little wiring box that sits in the manifold, so if you want to make it easier on yourself you can fully remove that part as part of uninstalling the original manifold.
Once it is all apart you will need to start by thoroughly cleaning the surface of the ports. Any garbage left on them from an old gasket or silicone will risk a vacuum leak. You can see the crud left on mine.
(http://i.imgur.com/RrcZBOn.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/Hig5sVJ.jpg)
In this photo you can see that I've exposed some wiring that runs to the ICV, Crank Sensor and Cam Sensor. I also have a lot of hoses to deal with. One of the particularly odd hoses is the hose that runs coolant into the PCV valve. The purpose of this hose is to prevent the valve from gunking up. It will no go unused, so I cut the hose to an appropriate length then joined both ends with a hose joiner.
(http://i.imgur.com/cmweUMT.jpg)
You can see the join made between cylinders 2 and 3.
(http://i.imgur.com/aiQ85HD.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/VJ5gZ76.jpg)
I covered the wiring in split tubing then electrical tape to prevent water ingress.
(http://i.imgur.com/Y5MqQqd.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/LiHPBji.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/wviPrmi.jpg)
One of the more fun parts was tapping a fitting for my brake booster. Originally we tapped this on the front side of the engine due to ease, but I didn't like how it looked so I moved it. There is no need to do this step, you could achieve the same thing by mounting the booster line very close to any cylinder (it won't work if you go into the vacuum block). This won't be tapped by from Rama unless you specifically request it - but its easy enough to do yourself with a hand drill and a NPT/BSP tap (depending on the hose fitting you use). I used an L-shaped fitting so that I could get the hose super snug in the back of the engine bay. In the photos below you can see how I ran the hose, and where I blocked off the old tap at the front of the engine.
(http://i.imgur.com/jNJm5Fe.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/0XshPE7.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/qh6PS6H.jpg)
Putting the manifold on itself is easy. The hardest part is getting the fuel hoses through the gap between cylinder 3-4. You will need to place stand-offs on for your fuel rails (some hollow pipe cut to size). Their length may vary depending on your purpose. The manifold fits both the OEM air-shroud injectors and standard injectors.
(http://i.imgur.com/8KFC3cE.jpg)
Be patient installing your injectors, and use some WD40 to help get everything in. This is probably the 'hardest' part of the install.
I removed all the original injector hoses because I wanted to run the air shroud to the other side of the engine bay. This was done to stay tidy, no other reason.
(http://i.imgur.com/PnuCDjO.jpg)
Getting your ITBs ready is a bit of a trick when you're using the vacuum bypass for the ICV. Here you will need to get a non-hardening silicone sealant and apply it around the edge of the butterfly. You will need to open and close it a few times to make sure you've covered the entire edge, which you can see from the marks where the edge hits the surface. You will also need to spray the surface with WD40 once the sealant is applied so that the throttle doesn't 'stick'. This is important, try and drive the car normally for a few days because the silicone will 'set' a bit over time with heat. While it's at its softest, you can actually ruin your seal from the high velocity air at high RPM. This will make your idle strange.
(http://i.imgur.com/Gra9TXr.jpg)
Getting the throttle bodies in is a fun game. There are all the levers and connectors which you can read about on Rama's site. In the below pictures you can see that I moved all the hoses so that I could neatly place the throttle cable (unlike with the prototype fitment). I've also place the TPS and attached hoses to the throttle bypass under the manifold into a vacuum block. I've also hooked up the FPR into the vacuum block. Rama has a few different designs of block, I liked this one purely for neatness.
(http://i.imgur.com/vsFIHuU.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/nvRcgQL.jpg)
I hooked up the crank vent to a catch can, and then I placed an in line PCV valve between the catch can and the vacuum block. Unfortunately this doesn't generate enough vacuum and my oil cover started leaking from the pressure. If you want to run your oil fumes back into the intake (you should because it prevents water getting into your oil, plus its illegal in a lot of areas) you will need to run the PCV valve directly into a cylinder like I did the brake booster.
You can also see the adapter block with the ICV in the bottom right. This is only relevant to the M44 guys since the M42 uses an inline ICV. My ICV adapter is different to the one Rama made since I had to get mine done before he started manufacturing the parts.
(http://i.imgur.com/Ss8HqgZ.jpg)
Getting all the spacers on is easy.
(http://i.imgur.com/0LJPJRL.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/p5wGiGh.jpg)
I measured the resistance of the DISA when I removed it and purchased a resistor which I placed in the DISA plug to make the computer think it is still there. You can see it wrapped in electrical tape in the above photo. You can see where I tapped the air fittings into my 3D printed parts, and ran the hoses to the ICV and the injector shrouds. You can also see a piece of rubber between my two plenum halves which I bought and cut to size as a gasket.
I tied the temp sensor around my air filter.
(http://i.imgur.com/o7fOcQS.jpg)
That is pretty much it. I've changed a few ways the hoses have run since then to make it neater, but otherwise its the same as this!
(http://i.imgur.com/8Q7jIuS.jpg)
Ask questions if you have any, and I'll start working on my next post.
-
When you get a chance, could you do a post that is an overview of the benefits of this kit, and summarizes the other upgrades (exhaust, muffler, side resonator, etc.) that should be done in order to have a proper setup and take advantage of the ITB kit and see gains in power?
Also, the thread is too long for me to find the post I'm thinking of, but is it true that the intake runners would have to be shorter for a LHD car? (e30) And if so how would that affect the performance?
I've been following the thread for quite a while but there's been so much information over such a long period of time and its difficult to keep track of everything that's been said.
Thanks
-
When you get a chance, could you do a post that is an overview of the benefits of this kit, and summarizes the other upgrades (exhaust, muffler, side resonator, etc.) that should be done in order to have a proper setup and take advantage of the ITB kit and see gains in power?
Also, the thread is too long for me to find the post I'm thinking of, but is it true that the intake runners would have to be shorter for a LHD car? (e30) And if so how would that affect the performance?
I've been following the thread for quite a while but there's been so much information over such a long period of time and its difficult to keep track of everything that's been said.
Thanks
You'll be pleased to know that I have been planning to do that for a while. The intention is that once I've completed the car I will be updating the original post with all the significant details.
The upcoming video https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCWUP1B1CN0WXN_tALe6RzGg will also have a lot of the details included into it.
To specifically answer your question about LHD- yes, they will be shorter, but they're still in the 'operational' range in that you will notice the improvement. I've extended the intake length and reduced my pulse chamber volume to suit my specific requirements. Basically LHD, the power will come on from 4500 RPM+, whereas I've pushed mine all the way down to 3000 RPM! To be clear, I've basically capped the top-end to achieve this, but my car is primarily street, so I wanted a less peaky power band. It will become clear when I post the dyno results from the last batch of testing!
-
Great work as always. I am really impressed by the quality of this kit and the fact Rama has actual maths behind what he does. I am dreaming of getting this kit on my own personal car, but I have to get it up and running again first :)
FWIW if the airbox you printed does not hold up, you can look at using "Windform" material from CRP. Its specifically made for this application and is commonly used in motorsport. Only catch is it requires an SLS machine which is less common than the FDM machines. Maybe you used this material because of Ramas MS experience, but I just assumed you used ABS from an FDM machine since that is standard :) Many teams print full intake manifolds from the windform material because its faster/easier/cheaper than casting.
-
Wow, great work! I've been researching into M50 ITBs and those guys doing kits or bolting on M3 ITBs onto their M5Xs don't even come close to what you've done here.
Anyone knows if a similar kit would be worthwhile to develop for the M5Xs? I'm referring to Lambertius' earlier comment that M50s were basically M42s with 2 extra cylinders tacked on.
Edit: Silly me it seems the M50 kit has already been done ! I'm heading down to Aus to take a look at it.
-
Wow, great work! I've been researching into M50 ITBs and those guys doing kits or bolting on M3 ITBs onto their M5Xs don't even come close to what you've done here.
Anyone knows if a similar kit would be worthwhile to develop for the M5Xs? I'm referring to Lambertius' earlier comment that M50s were basically M42s with 2 extra cylinders tacked on.
Edit: Silly me it seems the M50 kit has already been done ! I'm heading down to Aus to take a look at it.
I haven't played with the M50 kit personally, but I hear that the performance improvement is similar to what has been achieved here. Oh, and it does sound bullshit awesome as well :)
-
I would be putting it into an e21 so I would probably have to be the guinea pig :-\
-
I haven't played with the M50 kit personally, but I hear that the performance improvement is similar to what has been achieved here. Oh, and it does sound bullshit awesome as well :)
Rofl. Thank you. My Aus trip looks shaky now. Shame though because I had planned to hand carry the parts back to Malaysia to avoid the darned import taxes on car parts (this is to encourage local manufacturing).
-
Lambertius:
If you run into tuning issues, may I very highly suggest the under-rated Apexi SAFCII. Combined with some obd2 monitoring, you can enrichen the top end without affecting the closed-loop operation. My engine performs comparatively poor (with the expected basic maps) at light throttle apps because of the inefficiency of my cams and E30 intake. The DME learned this poor efficiency for the overall running. It's possible that your ITB's are less efficient at low rpm as well. If the DME Learns that, it will compound the issue with the more air avail at high rpm. Eg: stock eng at 0 fuel trim. ITB's are, say minus 3% less efficient (below 4K rpm) which is where the DME learns it. I believe that translates into a 3% lower fuel map at high rpm.
-
I've just updated the first post with some Christmas cheer, so check it out if you didn't notice it!
I also have a new post to complete for tomorrow that a lot of you will like ;D
-
Alright, so what happened with my reduced volume airbox?
Well, after the original results were so promising I couldn't just stop there... I did a bit of reading digging up some papers on plenum volume and found that generally speaking there seemed to be an 'ideal' volume for most engines. From what I could discern, it seemed that you can achieve maximum peak power running you intake into open atmosphere, and peak torque with an ideal volume pulse chamber. The only way to determine this is experimentally, though you could do a reasonable guess based on engine displacement.
I started by simulating the original pulse chamber - which had a volume of approximately 9 Litres. The main reason for the large volume was the size of the trumpets that Rama manufactures. They needed to fit inside the chamber, so they dictate the size of the chamber. The main issue with the box was fitment, I found it a pain in the ass to work with basically - so that was the tipping point for me to try and see if I could refine the design (keeping in mind mine was the prototype). I discussed the situation with Rama, and he had started manufacturing 30mm tall trumpets, so I decided to design my new intake chamber with maximum torque in mind. I decided to use the smallest trumpets he had, and use the extra space give to extend the length of the intake marginally.
The next question was how I would manufacture my airbox, and since 3D printing was the most cost-effective I decided to go with that. With the miracle of 3D printing and CAD I decided to go hardcore and try refining the trumpet shape as well.
In the below videos you can see the significant difference in intake velocity as air is ingested. This is due to seceral reasons:
- The reduced volume allows the intake stream to 'attach' to the flow into the trumpet, acting like a continuous inlet. This means that the velocity carried into the intake isn't lost but instead contributes its momentum to the intake cycle.
- The curvature significantly evens out the velocity profile down the intake. It is clearer on the 3D videos, where you can see the turbulence as the air spins down the trumpet.
- The larger volume has a tendency to fill the chamber rather than the cylinders, and the air that fills the cylinders is drawn from the free volume around it. If you look at the small box, you can clearly see (in the 3D simulations) that the air forms very direct paths into each cylinder. Its a small change, but in theory it should mean that the air entering the velocity stacks has a higher velocity (more momentum, better cylinder filling).
9.0L https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Re81nyTM8Uc
9.0L https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5B0CFqaDhcM
2.9L https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pieu--Byb1Q
2.9L https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dYOxCz8qSAY
So what are the results?
Well the sim results seemed to indicate that the small box would ingest more air:
(http://i.imgur.com/EzXAKqi.jpg)
There is a lot of nonsense in that picture due to the limitations of the software, but from iteration 500 onwards, you can see a slightly MAF for the smaller volume intake. So I decided to give it a try and see what happened!
(http://i.imgur.com/hMKUiHG.jpg)
So basically it was a successs!
You can see that even though it was months later, the results in peak power are almost identical, and there is a significant improvement in low-end torque. I promise you that I noticed it as soon as I got the car running.
Now there are two really interesting things to take from this:
- You can see that I've basically reduced the volume as much as I can without losing power. The telltale is that at Maximum RPM the power dips slightly which is what you would expect to see if there isn't enough air in the pulse chamber to continue feeding the cylinders. It is very likely that I have hit the maximum torque volume for the engine's current setup, without losing peak power. In short, this is the street option.
From these results Rama has actually reduced the volume of the original pule chamber so what you're buying will have a ~7.0L volume. This was done because the peak capabilities for that volume are much higher than what I've done (for people who want to race or implement further modifications) but the smaller volume significantly improved fitment. - The most interesting thing is easily the significance of the torque improvement. For those of you don't recall, the results from the exhaust swap basically swapped power from low down for power up top.
(http://i.imgur.com/mtHfCXD.jpg?1)
What is interesting is that it is in almost the exact same location as the improvement from the airbox. Because the muffler is too loud for street use, I'll be swapping it out with the OEM muffler for anything but track days. After the results though, I'm curious to see what happens - since it is reasonable to assume that the power from the airbox and the OEM muffler down low will add together. If this happens there should be a significant improvement in the street drivability of the car with ~12% improvement in in low end power and 16% increase up top. What gets me really curious though, is the now defunct DISA. I could conceivably use that to trigger a relay to open a valve in the exhaust so that I can get the extra torque from the OEM muffler, which will then switch to a straight pipe at high RPM for more power - all still while using the OEM computer and tune...
There is still more testing going on. Unfortunately I ran out of time last time I had access to my car to finalise the intake combinations. Rama also gave me a set of tapered trumpets and a few other shiny parts, which will hopefully be getting tested in January!
-
Nice researching :) But I must say that I'm wondering (don't kill me now) how the Max power is only 86 kW? Assuming that power comes from the rear wheels, quickly calculated with 15% drivetrain losses: 86kW x1.15=98,9 kW (or 132 hp) from the engine . I know that it might not be the most accurate calculation ever, but these engines (M42 & m42) are supposed to have 103 kW (140 hp) from the engine when new. What I'm saying is, it would be nice to know what was the power completely stock, and how many horsepower has been lost during the years and miles of use. (And yes I have read that the power increase is around 16% with these ITB:s) :P
-
Nice researching :) But I must say that I'm wondering (don't kill me now) how the Max power is only 86 kW? Assuming that power comes from the rear wheels, quickly calculated with 15% drivetrain losses: 86kW x1.15=98,9 kW (or 132 hp) from the engine . I know that it might not be the most accurate calculation ever, but these engines (M42 & m42) are supposed to have 103 kW (140 hp) from the engine when new. What I'm saying is, it would be nice to know what was the power completely stock, and how many horsepower has been lost during the years and miles of use. (And yes I have read that the power increase is around 16% with these ITB:s) :P
You're being a little too generous with the drivetrain losses - it is more realistic to expect 20~25% losses. The less powerful the engine, typically the greater percentage of performance is lost. Keep in mind I still have the OEM DMF. If you perform the original calculation with a 25% assumption it matches much closer to the OEM power rating. I actually expect very little power has been lost with this car, its had a very sheltered life!
-
I think Dyno Dynamics tends to be less "optimistic" than the more common Dynojet dynos.
-
Let's hope the drivetrain losses are greater than the 15% I assumed :D Anyway I'm studying automotive engineering at the moment and we have a lecture and laboratory dynotesting at our school next thursday and I get to dynotest my own Z3 there! I will post the results here, and I could also ask the teacher what are the expected drivetrain losses with these kind of power figures and drivetrain! :)
-
Let's hope the drivetrain losses are greater than the 15% I assumed :D Anyway I'm studying automotive engineering at the moment and we have a lecture and laboratory dynotesting at our school next thursday and I get to dynotest my own Z3 there! I will post the results here, and I could also ask the teacher what are the expected drivetrain losses with these kind of power figures and drivetrain! :)
That sounds pretty cool! I'm actually really keen to see it!
One of the other members here, MLM actually posted his dyno results - which are very similar to mine. The interesting thing here though is that he has an extensive list of modifications, including a custom tune.
http://www.m42club.com/forum/index.php?topic=18772.0
Now he is in a different country on a different dyno, however using this only as an indicative example you can actually see some characteristic differences between his setup and mine as well as it being interesting how similar our results are. He is using the Dbilas kit and a larger diameter exhaust with a larger airbox. His curve behaves exactly as I would expect, there appears to be less power down low, and less torque overall. Now that I'm so close to the end, I think I will send him a message to see how accurate the RPM readout is, and then plot his curve in excel against mine, it would be very interesting. Anyway, it would seem to indicate that there are probably about 25% drivetrain losses. Don't forget our gearbox was designed to cope with the much torquier 6cyl engines, so it is quite heavy.
If you can collect the RPM and road speed for your dyno test I'll plot your OEM against mine, as well as against my results. Again, it is only indicative but it will be interesting. It will make for a pretty chart!
-
colin86325 has a very valid point. All dynos are not the same and will read differently. The so called "standard", could be the DynoJet dyno. It's very common. I have been on Mustang, DynoJet and Dyno Dynamics dynos and they are very different. You can actually alter your numbers by the way you tie the car down!! But then you're not real anymore so what's the point.
Some dynos have programs in them to mimic other dyno numbers. This is how the Dyno Dynamics does it.
Dyno Dynamics RWHP 86kw(115HP) /.84 = DynoJet RWHP 102kw(137HP) / .85 = Crank HP 120kw(161HP). So the ITB kit and tuning gets you 20w(27HP) at the crank. Sounds about right.
Here is how one company claims their upgrades
ITBs and tuning software 116kw(156HP) at the crank.
ITBs and tuning software with sport cams 126kw(169HP).
ITBs and tuning software with sport cams and headwork 134kw(180HP)
ITBs and tuning software with sport cams and headwork with Alpha-N 142kw(190HP)
So all of these mods have to work with each other. You don't just keep adding up the numbers as bolt ons. LOL
Do I think the numbers are a bit optimistic?... Maybe a little but they are close. So now add a little more for a stroker and you're over the 200HP mark.
Remember that using more duration cams and higher lift will gain you HP and shift the curve to the right in the RPM range. The torque however might suffer in the curve to the left in the RPM range and that is daily driving. Unless you have a lead foot all the time! 8)
Adding one more thing....Using the 45mm Dbilas set up for a stroker motor is probably a good thing combined with all the other goodies! However....lambertius' 42mm set up for more stockish applications I think is the way to go. Especially with those awesome plenums.
My stroker is 2045cc's with 10.9:1, headwork and exhaust with headers, Alpha-N and MAP, 250* cams with Dbilas 45mm's on Megasquirt II.
Dyno Dynamics 151/.84 = DynoJet 180/.85 =212HP at the crank. There is a lot of work into this motor to get to this point. Now that's using about a 18% drivetrain loss. I'm not sure a 25% loss at 225HP figure would actually be right. If it is then WoooHooo! Even at 212HP I have still crested that 100HP/L !!
So Yes ...the ITB's open up the motor and let it breathe. They give the car a great sound with the FG or Carbon fiber plenum! And also give it a bunch of HP to play around with. I would totally recommend that everyone get a set! LOL
I like lambertius' throttle cable design way more than the one I have and I would totally sport the Carbon Fiber plenum.
Great job on the whole project lambertius!! :D
Cheers,
~Ralph
-
One more thing.... Do you think there is any possibility of making the plenums attach back to the stock airbox? As both bmwman91 and I have tested, the stock airbox flows plenty of air for 2.0/2.1L motors running with AFM or without, and would keep a stock look. It also keeps the incoming air cooler as well.
Just a thought...
Cheers,
~Ralph
-
colin86325 has a very valid point. All dynos are not the same and will read differently. The so called "standard", could be the DynoJet dyno. It's very common. I have been on Mustang, DynoJet and Dyno Dynamics dynos and they are very different. You can actually alter your numbers by the way you tie the car down!! But then you're not real anymore so what's the point.
This is exactly why I tested things the way I did. Even though every test hasn't been on the same dyno, every item tested has been on the same dyno for before and after results. Ultimately, I know what the improvements are as a relative percentage so it doesn't matter what the absolute number is.
The whole goal of this project was to track the progress in order to demonstrate the results.
I think another big thing to take from this is the benefits of optimisation. You can see that the correct choices can create very balanced performance results.
As for the magic 100bhp/l after doing all this I actually think it could be achieved without stroking the engine. I think port-matching the head with a properly tuned induction kit, the right headers, cams matched to the induction kit and a standalone ECU could see 100bhp/l (crank horsepower) in peak power. I also think you would be able to do it without making ridiculous trades in the lower RPM for more area up top. I think this is possible simply because I've seen how significant the differences can be through optimisation. I would really love to do this in the future.
Speaking of optimisation, I expect that if you dropped your ITB diameter to Rama's kit, with the longer runners and smaller volume you would probably gain more useable area under the curve than you would ever lose up top. Though I've done everything I can to make it 'street worthy' it definitely isn't even remotely close to choking. You would be able to run that diameter for ~550cc/cylinder before you really started to see issues. However, the kit is modular. What this means is that you could ask for Rama's 45mm ITBs with the manifold, then get it machined out to match. You can optimise the setup for your specific needs no matter what. You can adjust the intake length with 10mm spacers, use tapered spacers, change the length of the trumpets, change the volume and shape of the pulse chamber and change the ITB diameter and modify the RHD manifold to suit.
Great job on the whole project lambertius!! :D
Very much appreciated! I'm really looking forward to getting the video of the project up on youtube!
One more thing.... Do you think there is any possibility of making the plenums attach back to the stock airbox?
I actually wanted to keep my stock box, but I couldn't make it work with the prototype. I'll look into it a bit more when I get my car back. I suspect because I've lengthend the intake so much that I can't run the intake at a reasonable angle. I was thinking of placing the box, and then 3D printing a new top half so that it lines up with my new intake better!
-
Let's hope the drivetrain losses are greater than the 15% I assumed :D Anyway I'm studying automotive engineering at the moment and we have a lecture and laboratory dynotesting at our school next thursday and I get to dynotest my own Z3 there! I will post the results here, and I could also ask the teacher what are the expected drivetrain losses with these kind of power figures and drivetrain! :)
That sounds pretty cool! I'm actually really keen to see it!
One of the other members here, MLM actually posted his dyno results - which are very similar to mine. The interesting thing here though is that he has an extensive list of modifications, including a custom tune.
http://www.m42club.com/forum/index.php?topic=18772.0
Now he is in a different country on a different dyno, however using this only as an indicative example you can actually see some characteristic differences between his setup and mine as well as it being interesting how similar our results are. He is using the Dbilas kit and a larger diameter exhaust with a larger airbox. His curve behaves exactly as I would expect, there appears to be less power down low, and less torque overall. Now that I'm so close to the end, I think I will send him a message to see how accurate the RPM readout is, and then plot his curve in excel against mine, it would be very interesting. Anyway, it would seem to indicate that there are probably about 25% drivetrain losses. Don't forget our gearbox was designed to cope with the much torquier 6cyl engines, so it is quite heavy.
If you can collect the RPM and road speed for your dyno test I'll plot your OEM against mine, as well as against my results. Again, it is only indicative but it will be interesting. It will make for a pretty chart!
Hi Lambertius
I am more than happy for comparisons to be drawn and am interested also in dyno overlays also. Despite our approaches we have not ended up in too dis-similar places. Re rpm plot I have no reason to doubt their accuracy but cannot say how they were captured.
My modifications are:
- ITB with home made trumpets and airbox much like yours in terms of mod style though with different details.
- Aftermarket ECU for future flexibility - tuned for everyday 96ron with longevity in mind.
- 2.5 inch exhaust with 2 mufflers and a resonator, not straight through though less torturous than stock.
- equal length headers, again home made. A bitch on RHD cars BTW.
- That's it.
The engine is a M42 (not M44 designed for more torque) of 1992 vintage with 235,000km on it so far from fresh. Its has had 'good' use all its life.
Im an engineer but not automotive trained and have no automotive support other than the internet.
Ive been on two different dynos which both read similar 87.5Kw as per your link and an 89Kw elsewhere with no changes in between other than dyno.
I plan future expansion with cams, bore, compression hence my design choices as im not in a position to redesign/change decisions made today.
A good project you have undertaken - well done.
-
Let's hope the drivetrain losses are greater than the 15% I assumed :D Anyway I'm studying automotive engineering at the moment and we have a lecture and laboratory dynotesting at our school next thursday and I get to dynotest my own Z3 there! I will post the results here, and I could also ask the teacher what are the expected drivetrain losses with these kind of power figures and drivetrain! :)
That sounds pretty cool! I'm actually really keen to see it!
One of the other members here, MLM actually posted his dyno results - which are very similar to mine. The interesting thing here though is that he has an extensive list of modifications, including a custom tune.
http://www.m42club.com/forum/index.php?topic=18772.0
Now he is in a different country on a different dyno, however using this only as an indicative example you can actually see some characteristic differences between his setup and mine as well as it being interesting how similar our results are. He is using the Dbilas kit and a larger diameter exhaust with a larger airbox. His curve behaves exactly as I would expect, there appears to be less power down low, and less torque overall. Now that I'm so close to the end, I think I will send him a message to see how accurate the RPM readout is, and then plot his curve in excel against mine, it would be very interesting. Anyway, it would seem to indicate that there are probably about 25% drivetrain losses. Don't forget our gearbox was designed to cope with the much torquier 6cyl engines, so it is quite heavy.
If you can collect the RPM and road speed for your dyno test I'll plot your OEM against mine, as well as against my results. Again, it is only indicative but it will be interesting. It will make for a pretty chart!
Hi Lambertius
I am more than happy for comparisons to be drawn and am interested also in dyno overlays also. Despite our approaches we have not ended up in too dis-similar places. Re rpm plot I have no reason to doubt their accuracy but cannot say how they were captured.
My modifications are:
- ITB with home made trumpets and airbox much like yours in terms of mod style though with different details.
- Aftermarket ECU for future flexibility - tuned for everyday 96ron with longevity in mind.
- 2.5 inch exhaust with 2 mufflers and a resonator, not straight through though less torturous than stock.
- equal length headers, again home made. A bitch on RHD cars BTW.
- That's it.
The engine is a M42 (not M44 designed for more torque) of 1992 vintage with 235,000km on it so far from fresh. Its has had 'good' use all its life.
Im an engineer but not automotive trained and have no automotive support other than the internet.
Ive been on two different dynos which both read similar 87.5Kw as per your link and an 89Kw elsewhere with no changes in between other than dyno.
I plan future expansion with cams, bore, compression hence my design choices as im not in a position to redesign/change decisions made today.
A good project you have undertaken - well done.
Thanks man!
The only question I have with the RPM is that you seem to red-lining at ~6200, which seems a bit early - but close enough. If you think that is correct, I'll put it up against mine and we'll get to see some indicative differences!
-
OK....plot mine too please ;D
Cheers,
~Ralph
-
I believe it does red line early as the power dropping. It was not worth working the engine at high rpm. As I mentioned longevity was a consideration.
-
Alright boys, the results are in!
There are a few considerations while looking at these:
- The results are taken in different countries at different times under different conditions
- We're making a reasonable assumption on Dyno consistency based on brand (Dyno Dynamics)
- I have modified some of the results under reasonable
Keeping that in mind, we can get started!
The first issue I had to overcome is to express my OEM reading as if it was measured on the last dyno that I used (Dyno Dynamics).
I started by measuring the differences between the OEM manifold and the prototype:
(http://i.imgur.com/5L3KSeP.png)
I then used that to calculate the percentage improvement from the OEM behaviour:
(http://i.imgur.com/fbfYoc2.png)
I then had to remove the (as yet) unexplained kink in my results. I had to do this otherwise I couldn't use my percentages to extrapolate the results.
(http://i.imgur.com/34cWFLx.png)
After removing the kink in the curve, I was then able to extrapolate the OEM data to the Dyno Dynamics results. Using this I was able to plot the OEM results against the ITB (Prototype), Muffler, and 2.9L box:
(http://i.imgur.com/VfSa0bn.png)
It becomes immediately obvious how much any small losses from restricting the plenum volume are worth the trade for the extra torque from ~2500RPM
So how do I stack up against MLM and Warsteiner?
Well since it is obvious how much Warsteiner is ahead of us, I'll post this one with just MLM and my results:
(http://i.imgur.com/BD3UTJ5.png)
The interesting thing is the weird thing is the extra power MLM seems to have in the sub 3000 RPM range. After that however you can see more expected results with my car having better mid-range performance, and slightly lower top-end. A couple of interesting things to note, is that I don't have a computer supporting my car yet, it is still OEM. I also haven't done anything to the exhaust other than the muffler - but I have achieved near identical results with less modification. This probably due to a combination of the M44 being a torquier engine, and the more effort put into optimising my design. An interesting observation to point out here, was that with the smaller volume, you can hear the induction note change in the very high RPM and the engine feels like it is beginning to choke right at the end, but the car felt like it didn't have enough RPM with the larger box. It would be interesting to see what I could hit with a proper tune. I also have the tapered runner to test, and running them with a slightly higher rpm and larger plenum volume could be substantial.
I also want to remind anyway, that my drivetrain losses are very high as I still have the OEM DMF. Just remembered that, thought I would throw it in before I forget!
Now, Warsteiner:
(http://i.imgur.com/BPvTPp9.png)
Obviously his heavily modified engine demolishes our bolt-ons. It would be concerning if it didn't. It is still a bit unusual that MLM has that high torque spike at the very low RPM. At about 5750 RPM, Warsteiner has a jump in power - which I believe will be the resonant mode from the shorter Dbilas runners. I would be willing to bet that if you ran the 42mm ITBs with a 45mm tapered trumpet that was a bit longer, you would see a jump in power around 5000 RPM and a higher peak power.
If I had to draw any conclusions from all this - which is hard to do with any confidence since this is indicative at best - it would be that Rama's kit is very well optimised. It would appear to achieve significant results for less parts and effort than MLM's equivalent performance.
I really want to get my car tuned now![/list]
-
Would it be correct to say that MLM has the advantage down low due his exhaust manifold? Which is an excellent piece of kit. You have a oem exhaust manifold and I'm not sure what Ralph is using. Possibly super sprint.
All itbs
Ralph 45mm
Lambertious 42 mm
MLM ?
Nice comparison lambertius
-
Would it be correct to say that MLM has the advantage down low due his exhaust manifold? Which is an excellent piece of kit. You have a oem exhaust manifold and I'm not sure what Ralph is using. Possibly super sprint.
All itbs
Ralph 45mm
Lambertious 42 mm
MLM ?
Nice comparison lambertius
I wouldn't think so. His diameter is too large, and the collector is a short distance from the ports for it to be contributing to lower down torque. I would be inclined to think that it's responsible for the top end performance. Just going off the shape of his torque curve I would be guessing that the headers are operating ideally at 5000RPM, and that the 3500RPM represents one end of their tuned behaviour and that 6250RPM represents the other.
If you can give me the lengths and diameters MLM I can try and calculate it and see where they're supposed to perform 'academically speaking'.
If I had to take a guess, it would probably be something to do with the timing and/or a secondary resonant mode with his intake (he is using Euro ITBs I believe).
While I'm on the topic of anomalies, there are a few guesses for what causes the spike in my power:
- Related to the engine timing, due to the expectation for the DISA to open which no longer exists.
- It could be a secondary resonant mode - possibly a resonant mode with the pulse chamber or the pipe connected to the filter.
- It may be a 'timing test' that the engine runs to check fuel RON. It advances the spark until detonation then adjusts its timing that way.
- The stock map may just not be capable of handling the intake dynamics at that point for any or all of the reasons above.
Its pretty reassuring though with the results from Rama's kit. It really shows that it is well matched to the engine and that there is still a lot of headroom to play with.
Rama has actually started selling his own ECU with an adapter made for it so that no wire splicing needs to be done. Just plug and play swap into your car. I wouldn't mind doing that.
$1500~$2000 AUD for new headers
$1600 AUD for the ECU
Unfortunately there is going to be a very very long wait till I have the same mods as MLM :( It will be awesome to see what can be squeezed out though!
Oh, but unless something changes, I will be getting one of his LTW flywheels! :D
-
I wouldn't think so. His diameter is too large, and the collector is a short distance from the ports for it to be contributing to lower down torque. I would be inclined to think that it's responsible for the top end performance. Just going off the shape of his torque curve I would be guessing that the headers are operating ideally at 5000RPM, and that the 3500RPM represents one end of their tuned behaviour and that 6250RPM represents the other.
If you can give me the lengths and diameters MLM I can try and calculate it and see where they're supposed to perform 'academically speaking'.
If I had to take a guess, it would probably be something to do with the timing and/or a secondary resonant mode with his intake (he is using Euro ITBs I believe).
While I'm on the topic of anomalies, there are a few guesses for what causes the spike in my power:
- Related to the engine timing, due to the expectation for the DISA to open which no longer exists.
- It could be a secondary resonant mode - possibly a resonant mode with the pulse chamber or the pipe connected to the filter.
- It may be a 'timing test' that the engine runs to check fuel RON. It advances the spark until detonation then adjusts its timing that way.
- The stock map may just not be capable of handling the intake dynamics at that point for any or all of the reasons above.
Its pretty reassuring though with the results from Rama's kit. It really shows that it is well matched to the engine and that there is still a lot of headroom to play with.
Rama has actually started selling his own ECU with an adapter made for it so that no wire splicing needs to be done. Just plug and play swap into your car. I wouldn't mind doing that.
$1500~$2000 AUD for new headers
$1600 AUD for the ECU
Unfortunately there is going to be a very very long wait till I have the same mods as MLM :( It will be awesome to see what can be squeezed out though!
Oh, but unless something changes, I will be getting one of his LTW flywheels! :D
To be honest I cannot remember the lengths though primaries are similar to the longest oem primary length and the secondary's longer than oem. 1.5 inch primaries - 2 inch secondary's. For a quick calc you could probably use 450mm primary and 550mm secondary's as a starting point.
You can probably find more here http://bimmersport.co.nz/topic/28044-itb-m42/page-1 Its a 4-2-1 design as the stock RHD manifold is compromised. USA LHD wont have this issue. For ~ $450NZD Im happy with the result.
The low end torque is real and usable. In daily use this makes for a very drivable car. You can hear the engine note change for the torque curve on this dyno run as the engine heads for 5000rpm https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8SuUTX98qs . For a tired old M42 im quite happy with how it compares to the M44 plot. As we use the same chassis, drive line losses due to frictional losses and inertias will be virtually identical.
Would it be correct to say that MLM has the advantage down low due his exhaust manifold? Which is an excellent piece of kit. You have a oem exhaust manifold and I'm not sure what Ralph is using. Possibly super sprint.
All itbs
Ralph 45mm
Lambertious 42 mm
MLM ?
Nice comparison lambertius
45MM ITB
Thanks for your comments - The exhaust is home made and best guess. My target was better than oem with the knowledge I get one shot as modification for optimisation is beyond my budget.
-
Very nicely done lambertius!!
I am running the 666Fabrication custom header which is 44.45mm. My downpipe is custom which mates up to a complete E30M3 exhaust with a SuperSprint muffler.
I have no idea how long my intake runners are. They can actually be lengthened or shortened depending on how you fasten them. Not much room for adjustment though.
Cheers,
~Ralph
-
Hi,
I signed up just for this thread, theres some amazing work going on here and 100% respect to both of you involved. I was just wondering; I understand the purpose and benefit of the airbox but theoretically if you were to just bolt on the throttlebodies and leave them open to air with no MAF on the standard ECU, would you still see gains?
-
Hi
The ecu would probably go into limp mode without the appropriate air device.
On a standalone ecu it would work though, but that would take a lot of tuning.
Cheers Rohan
-
As it turns out the OEM ECU can run off any 2 of the 3 major sensors (O2/MAF/TPS). There are some issues as the engine will go into a 'safe' mode, but it operates pretty well. The big issue though is that the expected airflow for a given throttle position drastically changes, in particular at low rpm. I wouldn't try driving it without the MAF. In closed loop you honestly can't tell it isn't factory.
-
So today I Dynoed my Z3 at my engineering school! The dyno that was used was MAHA 3000, the teacher said that it gives fairly conservative power figures and that the indicated power from the engine is much more accurate than the indicated wheel horsepower because of the way it measures it. This dynometer measures all the losses occuring between the engine and the wheels independently after the dyno pull (you put the clutch in and keep it in gear) you can see it as the green line in the picture. I also asked about the DMF thing and the teacher said it shouldn't effect drivetrain losses, it simply changes the place where torque will occur.
Sorry that all the text is in finnish, there is a translation at the end of the pictures :D I also have an Excel file already made if you want to plot a comparison from it Lambertius!
If I forgot to mention something, ask away!
The mods that I have on my M44 Z3 (156 000 kms driven):
Fogged airbox mod
Fulda Steel 4-1 style collector 2"
2,5" Custom made mid-section pipe
2,5" Powersprint high flow catalysator
2,5" Simons catback exhaust
(http://i64.tinypic.com/13yo8o.jpg) Exhaust manifold
(http://i68.tinypic.com/287nr7m.jpg) Dynoresults
Translations:
Normaaliteho, Pnorm = The power from the engine that has been corrected with ETY-norms (so not the real one!)
Moottorin teho, Pmoott = The Engine power
Pyorateho Ppyora = The wheel horsepower (not to be blindly trusted according to the teacher)
Havioteho Phavio = The measured horsepower lost from the drivetrain, wheels etc.
Suurin teho = biggest power @ 6190/172 km/h
Vaantomomentti = The Torque (this is also corrected to the ETY-norms, so out calculating the norms the real torque is 189 Nm)
Suurin saavutettu RPM = The highest achieved RPM
-
I've put up another update on page one for you guys! :D
-
That engine note is to die for!!
To the Finnish guy, where do you go to school? Kippis :)
-
That engine note is to die for!!
To the Finnish guy, where do you go to school? Kippis :)
I go to Metropolia university of applied sciences! Are you from Finland also? :)
-
Hi Ralph
1.75 inch exhaust header is very large?
Cheers Rohan
-
Rohan,
I don't think so.....I'm not sure what the stock header is but It's not much different in size. Maybe someone has measured the stock header?
Cheers,
~Ralph
-
colin86325 has a very valid point. All dynos are not the same and will read differently. The so called "standard", could be the DynoJet dyno. It's very common. I have been on Mustang, DynoJet and Dyno Dynamics dynos and they are very different. You can actually alter your numbers by the way you tie the car down!! But then you're not real anymore so what's the point.
Some dynos have programs in them to mimic other dyno numbers. This is how the Dyno Dynamics does it.
Dyno Dynamics RWHP 86kw(115HP) /.84 = DynoJet RWHP 102kw(137HP) / .85 = Crank HP 120kw(161HP). So the ITB kit and tuning gets you 20w(27HP) at the crank. Sounds about right.
Here is how one company claims their upgrades
ITBs and tuning software 116kw(156HP) at the crank.
ITBs and tuning software with sport cams 126kw(169HP).
ITBs and tuning software with sport cams and headwork 134kw(180HP)
ITBs and tuning software with sport cams and headwork with Alpha-N 142kw(190HP)
So all of these mods have to work with each other. You don't just keep adding up the numbers as bolt ons. LOL
Do I think the numbers are a bit optimistic?... Maybe a little but they are close. So now add a little more for a stroker and you're over the 200HP mark.
Remember that using more duration cams and higher lift will gain you HP and shift the curve to the right in the RPM range. The torque however might suffer in the curve to the left in the RPM range and that is daily driving. Unless you have a lead foot all the time! 8)
Adding one more thing....Using the 45mm Dbilas set up for a stroker motor is probably a good thing combined with all the other goodies! However....lambertius' 42mm set up for more stockish applications I think is the way to go. Especially with those awesome plenums.
My stroker is 2045cc's with 10.9:1, headwork and exhaust with headers, Alpha-N and MAP, 250* cams with Dbilas 45mm's on Megasquirt II.
Dyno Dynamics 151/.84 = DynoJet 180/.85 =212HP at the crank. There is a lot of work into this motor to get to this point. Now that's using about a 18% drivetrain loss. I'm not sure a 25% loss at 225HP figure would actually be right. If it is then WoooHooo! Even at 212HP I have still crested that 100HP/L !!
So Yes ...the ITB's open up the motor and let it breathe. They give the car a great sound with the FG or Carbon fiber plenum! And also give it a bunch of HP to play around with. I would totally recommend that everyone get a set! LOL
I like lambertius' throttle cable design way more than the one I have and I would totally sport the Carbon Fiber plenum.
Great job on the whole project lambertius!! :D
Cheers,
~Ralph
Consumption km/l?
-
I go to Metropolia university of applied sciences! Are you from Finland also? :)
Unfortunately Im not Finnish :) Im from the US. My room mate in college was from Somero so I have been to Suomi a number of times to visit him and his family!
-
wladas47....
It's around 6km/l city driving. I have not had any highway driving yet.
Cheers,
~Ralph
-
wladas47....
It's around 6km/l city driving. I have not had any highway driving yet.
Cheers,
~Ralph
I wrote it wrong: D should be l/km
-
Hahahaha.....the math!! ::) It was just wrong from the start.
No wonder my M42 is making 500HP at the wheels 8)
wladas47.....it's about 1l/9.35km around town driving. and for the other folk it's 22MPG around town.
Cheers,
~Ralph
-
Has anyone bought the kit??? I've just checked out the website - looks superb!
My m42 is being rebuilt at this very moment, this is tempting as hell!
-
Kit looks great! would love to get one at some point in the future...
-
I am hoping for someone to post some experiences with this kit on a bored and stroked M42. The size of the airbox and diameter of the runners could choke the engine at high rpm (8000) I guess.
-
Has anyone bought the kit??? I've just checked out the website - looks superb!
My m42 is being rebuilt at this very moment, this is tempting as hell!
I don't know if its anyone off the forums, but he has sold some kits!
I am hoping for someone to post some experiences with this kit on a bored and stroked M42. The size of the airbox and diameter of the runners could choke the engine at high rpm (8000) I guess.
I know the thread is very long but I have covered those questions, but no - it will not choke out at higher RPM for several reasons:
- The supplied airbox is twice the volume of mine
- The diameter is large enough to support 2.5L
- If you end up with choking from the ITB diameter, then your restriction would actually be the port area which is slightly smaller than the ITB area
- If you open the ports, you can also open the RHD manifold, and buy 45mm ITBs (which will also fit)
- You can run any length runners you want, you can buy them in 50mm increments, with 30mm trumpets - so if you really wanted to you could run the manifold +80mm. Though if you look back you will see there is no reason to do this.
The kit is modular, you can basically set it up how ever you want by just swapping out different parts.
Puksuttaja
I have had a look at the data from your dyno day, I've just been running around for Christmas! I will get to it!
(http://i.imgur.com/egxF5DP.jpg)
-
Does that sticker really adds 5 bhp? If yes, I need - let me count - approximately 20 of them.:)
-
Does that sticker really adds 5 bhp? If yes, I need - let me count - approximately 20 of them.:)
It was my first mod - worth every penny!
-
Has anyone bought the kit??? I've just checked out the website - looks superb!
My m42 is being rebuilt at this very moment, this is tempting as hell!
I don't know if its anyone off the forums, but he has sold some kits!
I am hoping for someone to post some experiences with this kit on a bored and stroked M42. The size of the airbox and diameter of the runners could choke the engine at high rpm (8000) I guess.
I know the thread is very long but I have covered those questions, but no - it will not choke out at higher RPM for several reasons:
- The supplied airbox is twice the volume of mine
- The diameter is large enough to support 2.5L
- If you end up with choking from the ITB diameter, then your restriction would actually be the port area which is slightly smaller than the ITB area
- If you open the ports, you can also open the RHD manifold, and buy 45mm ITBs (which will also fit)
- You can run any length runners you want, you can buy them in 50mm increments, with 30mm trumpets - so if you really wanted to you could run the manifold +80mm. Though if you look back you will see there is no reason to do this.
The kit is modular, you can basically set it up how ever you want by just swapping out different parts.
Puksuttaja
I have had a look at the data from your dyno day, I've just been running around for Christmas! I will get to it!
I have an Excel file that the dyno made automatically which could possibly save you a lot of work. I can send it to you (translated to english) if you want to get a look at it. It lists all the power numbers every 5 rpm :D
-
Has anyone bought the kit??? I've just checked out the website - looks superb!
My m42 is being rebuilt at this very moment, this is tempting as hell!
I don't know if its anyone off the forums, but he has sold some kits!
I am hoping for someone to post some experiences with this kit on a bored and stroked M42. The size of the airbox and diameter of the runners could choke the engine at high rpm (8000) I guess.
I know the thread is very long but I have covered those questions, but no - it will not choke out at higher RPM for several reasons:
- The supplied airbox is twice the volume of mine
- The diameter is large enough to support 2.5L
- If you end up with choking from the ITB diameter, then your restriction would actually be the port area which is slightly smaller than the ITB area
- If you open the ports, you can also open the RHD manifold, and buy 45mm ITBs (which will also fit)
- You can run any length runners you want, you can buy them in 50mm increments, with 30mm trumpets - so if you really wanted to you could run the manifold +80mm. Though if you look back you will see there is no reason to do this.
The kit is modular, you can basically set it up how ever you want by just swapping out different parts.
Puksuttaja
I have had a look at the data from your dyno day, I've just been running around for Christmas! I will get to it!
I have an Excel file that the dyno made automatically which could possibly save you a lot of work. I can send it to you (translated to english) if you want to get a look at it. It lists all the power numbers every 5 rpm :D
I did it every 200 RPM, but having your actual output would be much better! Share it and when I get a chance I'll post it up alongside a few other results!
-
where you make a drawing or denounce lengths Intake?
-
Here is the link to the Excel file! http://www.filedropper.com/bmwz319simotaexcel
I added some of my own comments in there aswell.
When I was Dynoing my Z3 I did some "mythbusting" too. I wanted to see if there would be any differences between a normal paper panel filter and a "high flow" Simota panel filter. The results were expected: Only 1 hp "gain" for the Simota filter that could totally go in the error range of the dyno measurement. So not really any surprises there.
-
Quick question
What is the advantage of the airbox? Here in the uk in the rally scene i have never seen anyone run airboxes (but ive seen group a s14s and s42s running them) they always seem to run the long tube type air filter. These are cars running 300+bhp. Im just interested in how much gains there is.
-
Quick question
What is the advantage of the airbox? Here in the uk in the rally scene i have never seen anyone run airboxes (but ive seen group a s14s and s42s running them) they always seem to run the long tube type air filter. These are cars running 300+bhp. Im just interested in how much gains there is.
Torque, glorious GLORIOUS TORQUE.
Below is a comparison of the change in torque only due to the change in volume of the pulse chamber (no other modifications) with negligible differences in power.
(http://i.imgur.com/VnRJC8f.png)
If they're not running an airbox, they're losing peak power and useful torque response.
-
So today I Dynoed my Z3 at my engineering school! The dyno that was used was MAHA 3000, the teacher said that it gives fairly conservative power figures and that the indicated power from the engine is much more accurate than the indicated wheel horsepower because of the way it measures it. This dynometer measures all the losses occuring between the engine and the wheels independently after the dyno pull (you put the clutch in and keep it in gear) you can see it as the green line in the picture. I also asked about the DMF thing and the teacher said it shouldn't effect drivetrain losses, it simply changes the place where torque will occur.
Sorry that all the text is in finnish, there is a translation at the end of the pictures :D I also have an Excel file already made if you want to plot a comparison from it Lambertius!
If I forgot to mention something, ask away!
The mods that I have on my M44 Z3 (156 000 kms driven):
Fogged airbox mod
Fulda Steel 4-1 style collector 2"
2,5" Custom made mid-section pipe
2,5" Powersprint high flow catalysator
2,5" Simons catback exhaust
(http://i64.tinypic.com/13yo8o.jpg) Exhaust manifold
(http://i68.tinypic.com/287nr7m.jpg) Dynoresults
Translations:
Normaaliteho, Pnorm = The power from the engine that has been corrected with ETY-norms (so not the real one!)
Moottorin teho, Pmoott = The Engine power
Pyorateho Ppyora = The wheel horsepower (not to be blindly trusted according to the teacher)
Havioteho Phavio = The measured horsepower lost from the drivetrain, wheels etc.
Suurin teho = biggest power @ 6190/172 km/h
Vaantomomentti = The Torque (this is also corrected to the ETY-norms, so out calculating the norms the real torque is 189 Nm)
Suurin saavutettu RPM = The highest achieved RPM
There are a lot of interesting things to cover with your results, but before we get into that:
- The DMF will affect drivetrain losses, not because it is a DMF just because it is massive. I only raised it to illustrate that the low wkW from our cars is likely a result of the drivetrain designed for much torquier 6cyl engines
- According to your dyno results, the OEM drivetrain losses are ~25%. I'm going to work with that value in the future (until someone can demonstrate otherwise) simply because it is close to what we would expect.
- Different brand dyno, different country. I'm going to be making illustrative assumptions. If anyone takes the following as being tacitly true, don't.
Below are the wheel results from Puksuttaja's excel file:
(http://i.imgur.com/1HzqaqM.png)
Its hard to know how accurate any dyno readout is compared to another - but let's just for the sake of interest assume that this is accurate within a reasonable error range (<+/-2.5%), it makes the results more interesting.
We know from my own testing that the muffler being changed resulted in a 6% improvement in peak power, so it would stand to reason that a whole exhaust system could result in more. Since Puksuttaja hasn't fiddled with his intake, it is possible that he wouldn't see the low-end losses that I did initially (till I reduced the pulse chamber volume).
So assuming that his engine was making 98kW~103kW (assumed losses over time of 5% and OEM rating), and the dyno he used is accurate - then the peak power improvement for Puksuttaja would be 9%~14%. Now this is based on assumptions, but they aren't unreasonable when considered alongside my own recordings.
Below is a comparison against the results of my own car. Unfortunately I can't really correct the results from the two dynos because we don't have an OEM recording to try and draw a comparison with. What we can do is look at the behaviour of the curves, which we can learn from.
(http://i.imgur.com/QRY2dJw.png)
Ignore the numbers - they mean nothing in this case.
Puksuttaja's curve is actually very similar to my OEM curve in shape - with the notable exception of the large torque spike in the middle. This spike is exactly what I would expect to see from a 4-1 header. You should be able to see the point with the ideal torque response, and that is exactly what you see. Then like my OEM run (and unlike my ITB run) the power and torque begin to drop then level (presumably from the DISA). The restricted volume of my pulse chamber combined with the long runners in my ITB setup create a very flat torque curve - a friend who has been minding my car actually commented how linear the engine response was when he had to drive it the other day, that you could easily run it to the red line without realising it because it never feels choked.
Unfortunately there are a lot of assumptions involved with all this, but it doesn't seem to be unreasonable to me to assume that Puksuttaja's exhaust setup could be worth 9~14% improvements over stock on its own, simply because I know the muffler on its own is worth 6%. This of course leads to the potential for extraction + induction improvements in the range of 25~30% in peak power. The only thing I would be cautious of is with enlarging the exhaust diameter and running a large volume pulse chamber that you may be optimising the entire system for a rev range in may not ever reach. In Puksuttaja's case he still has the low volume of the OEM intake, which may compensate for lower end-losses from the enlarged exhaust diameter.
Regardless, I would really want to try a set of headers and a 2.5" exhaust with my induction kit - plus the lightened flywheel I'll be ordering soon! :D Should make a significant impact on drive train losses!
-
Very interesting comparison. :) If I just had the money I would order those ITBs and a lightened flywheel instantly, but being a student, some money saving must be done first :l
-
I got one of Rama's LTW flywheels recently - I thought I would write down my thoughts on it for you:
http://www.m42club.com/forum/index.php?topic=19030.msg130544#msg130544
(http://i.imgur.com/YRdQ07r.jpg)
This item complements any performance setups with our engines - definitely worth getting!
-
Hi Guys!
I hope everyone has had a good Christmas and New Year! I know mine has been busy, got engaged and moving from Perth>Melbourne tomorrow to start a new job on Monday! YEEEEEEEWWWW!
Anyway, if you've been following this thread, or even if you haven't - could you please help me help out Rama - since it was him who made all this possible - and follow this link?
http://goo.gl/forms/qx17FaMQ7E
It will help him decide on what projects to follow up on in the future - like CAM & Stroker kits for example. There are only a few questions and I would really appreciate it!
-
Survey taken!
-
Survey taken!
Thank you, and a bunch of you have already taken it as well so thank you! The more who do it the better so please do!
Also, I can tell from some of the responses some of you would like me to know who you are - so if you would like me to be able to respond to you directly, please include your email!!!
Thanks a bunch for the feedback!
-
Fun little update - I replaced my plugs the other day. I was having trouble starting the engine when it was cold and humidity was high (engine had been sitting 12+ hours near the beach or in rain). Decided to check my plugs. The gap is typically ~0.25mm whereas mine were about 1mm! I realised I hadn't changed them in ~60 000kms. Impressed they worked at all! Every plug was this worn, and there were no sharp edges left either which makes it harder for sparks to propagate.
(http://i.imgur.com/Q8ZR1iG.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/bbJr8lS.jpg)
-
We need someone to test fit the LHD E30 please PM me if you're interested. You will get some pricing perks, but will need to be willing to take photos to put up in the forum, and have some patience in case there are any clearance issues and the airbox needs to be modified. In all likelihood it should be a straight fitment.
-
I think I can help you out. Sent you a PM.
-
Hi guys
Lambertius came around to my house yesterday, first time I have met him, and we went for a nice little drive in the Dandenong mountains!
Itbs sound awesome, couldn't hear the light flywheel unless you opened the door or window even then you had to concentrate. In e36 though! Perhaps more insulation than a e30?
Could definitely hear the itbs though, very cool sound! 8)
The car could really move too possibly better than my other friends e36 323i (m52b25) and about the same as a 318is e30 even though e36s pack an additional ~300kg
Would love to see this in a e30 318is now we would be talking, sorry Hayden!
I guess I just prefer e30s. Less bus like. :P
Just thought I'd comment on this setup as I'm the only member near him.
-
Would love to see this in a e30 318is now we would be talking, sorry Hayden!
I guess I just prefer e30s. Less bus like. :P
It is a delicate balance - working out where you sit on the scale of 'Death-Trap' or 'Bus-Like'... I think the E36 sits nicely on 'We could possibly die, but the airbags will deploy late so it will be quick when I understeer off that cliff' with the E30 warmly in 'They'll inevitably have to cut us out of this when I forget that traction is a modern technology'.
-
So I finally got hold of Midnight Tuning, I tried reaching out to them really early on but they never responded to my emails. On Darky's suggestion I emailed them again, and they've responded!
I've been given an not unreasonable price to remotely tune the car on the OEM ECU, and I'm willing to give it a go. Though I do think it is likely the OEM tune is conservative, I don't think it particularly likely that some of his claims are realistic. I've heard people say good things about his products, but I was wondering if anyone here had any results/experience with it before?
-
interesting, will you please note those claims, also i would like to know more about the remote tuning he will offer, how are you going to do it, as i will be doing it soon
cheers
-
So I finally got hold of Midnight Tuning, I tried reaching out to them really early on but they never responded to my emails. On Darky's suggestion I emailed them again, and they've responded!
I've been given an not unreasonable price to remotely tune the car on the OEM ECU, and I'm willing to give it a go. Though I do think it is likely the OEM tune is conservative, I don't think it particularly likely that some of his claims are realistic. I've heard people say good things about his products, but I was wondering if anyone here had any results/experience with it before?
I just installed the 91oct flash on my engine and am very impressed with the results. I think the 18hp claim is pretty close at around the 5k rpm range. It pulls much harder from 2,500rpm up to 7k redline. Now, my engine is modified and I am also running an SAFC for some additional fuel trim needs due to cams and compression increases. But, the before/after of just having the flash only, made a fantastic difference in mid-range power. If you have good fuel there and a stock c/r, I'd consider the 94 oct flash, since, at least on 70deg days and 11:1, I have no detonation issues. Worth every penny, Imo.
-
Sent you a PM about the LHD ITB's on an E30
-
Would love to see this in a e30 318is now we would be talking, sorry Hayden!
I guess I just prefer e30s. Less bus like. :P
It is a delicate balance - working out where you sit on the scale of 'Death-Trap' or 'Bus-Like'... I think the E36 sits nicely on 'We could possibly die, but the airbags will deploy late so it will be quick when I understeer off that cliff' with the E30 warmly in 'They'll inevitably have to cut us out of this when I forget that traction is a modern technology'.
I thought that e30s have won more races than e36s, must of been doing that in the sand pits!
-
Hi Guys,
So its been a while - I recently moved from Perth to Melbourne for a new job, have been robbed (someone stole all the prototype parts, a used clutch and some tools from my apartment's storage cage) and found out that my landlord in Perth has tenanted the apartment I was renting there even though I still hold the lease and am currently paying rent.
Fun times.
In other news, please keep up with the survey - its good to see some more results coming through!
And stay away from Midnight Tuning.
To begin with, the guy is terrible at communicating - I first contacted him in April 2015, and didn't receive a response till February 2016.
I initially asked about remote tuning, which he was happy to provide at what seemed like a reasonable cost. I then told him that the ITB kit I was using is for sale, and asked if he would be interested in developing a tune for it, which he was. He asked for a kit, and I said that I don't sell it - but I can ask the retailer to give it to him on loan to develop the tunes that he can sell.
This was his response:
"Remote tuning is complicated and time consuming . I would only be interested if there is units sent out. I can be expected to ask people to use there cars for tuning. Not going to happen . Thanks"
I then asked if he would still remotely tune my car, and no response - again. I've since heard from others that he can implement potentially damaging tunes - but that is hearsay so I won't make that my primary concern. It seems like he was interested initially, and then decided to only work if he got free stuff too. If you were to deal with this retailer it is worth considering that he is disinterested in dealing with you, and only cares for selling his products. I personally wouldn't recommend it, if he doesn't care when you're still offering to pay him then he definitely won't care if something goes wrong.
I've got a lead to follow up in Melbourne, so I'll see what happens with that!
-
Hi Guys,
So its been a while - I recently moved from Perth to Melbourne for a new job, have been robbed (someone stole all the prototype parts, a used clutch and some tools from my apartment's storage cage) and found out that my landlord in Perth has tenanted the apartment I was renting there even though I still hold the lease and am currently paying rent.
Fun times.
In other news, please keep up with the survey - its good to see some more results coming through!
And stay away from Midnight Tuning.
To begin with, the guy is terrible at communicating - I first contacted him in April 2015, and didn't receive a response till February 2016.
I initially asked about remote tuning, which he was happy to provide at what seemed like a reasonable cost. I then told him that the ITB kit I was using is for sale, and asked if he would be interested in developing a tune for it, which he was. He asked for a kit, and I said that I don't sell it - but I can ask the retailer to give it to him on loan to develop the tunes that he can sell.
This was his response:
"Remote tuning is complicated and time consuming . I would only be interested if there is units sent out. I can be expected to ask people to use there cars for tuning. Not going to happen . Thanks"
I then asked if he would still remotely tune my car, and no response - again. I've since heard from others that he can implement potentially damaging tunes - but that is hearsay so I won't make that my primary concern. It seems like he was interested initially, and then decided to only work if he got free stuff too. If you were to deal with this retailer it is worth considering that he is disinterested in dealing with you, and only cares for selling his products. I personally wouldn't recommend it, if he doesn't care when you're still offering to pay him then he definitely won't care if something goes wrong.
I've got a lead to follow up in Melbourne, so I'll see what happens with that!
Sorry man, you're not the only one thats had a bad experience with Midnight Tuning though. I had bought a tune file from him about a year ago and was not happy with it in the slightest. I have a wideband in my car and the "tune" that i received was not safe in my mind. I actually ended up teaching my self to read the bin files with WinOLS to find all the maps that were missing and create a propper tune. I felt dumb giving him a couple hundred bucks for very slightly different files than the ones I had found online. Goes to show, if you want it done right, you gotta do it yourself! (Or find someone competent that you trust ;) )
-
Hi
I have seen this kit on eBay. Looks cool, check it out!
Cheers Rohan
-
It would be cool to see somebody develop variable-length trumpets using a stepper motor controlled by an Arduino device!
-
I've had a similar thought as well. Didn't Ferrari do something like this on their late v8's?. Back on topic, it seems odd that the m42 kit is more expensive than the m20 kit
-
Yea I noticed that too, but the m20 kit does not have a plenum!
-
Is this the kit?
http://www.ebay.com/itm/e36-BMW-m42-m44-ITB-complete-bolt-on-throttle-body-kit-Race-Hardware-/272141159380
-
Yes cristimm, this is the kit.
To all the e30 LHD guys out there:
I ordered the ITBs and the flywheel to testfit on e30 318is. In a few weeks, I will be able to give you some details and pictures!
-
I've had a similar thought as well. Didn't Ferrari do something like this on their late v8's?
Define late.. in the late '90's they already tested/used it on their F1 engines..not sure about their road going engines.
-
Is this the kit?
http://www.ebay.com/itm/e36-BMW-m42-m44-ITB-complete-bolt-on-throttle-body-kit-Race-Hardware-/272141159380
damn exchange rates.. i'll wait until the dollar/euro rate gets more interesting..
-
As did the Mazda r26b engine from 1991. Should be feasible now with the cheap microcontrollers available these days.
I've had a similar thought as well. Didn't Ferrari do something like this on their late v8's?. Back on topic, it seems odd that the m42 kit is more expensive than the m20 kit
-
It would be cool to see somebody develop variable-length trumpets using a stepper motor controlled by an Arduino device!
Totally unrelated to the kit: I have looked into this for my own purposes. One of my former colleagues was showing me a range of linear actuators that would be suitable.
I've got ridiculous dreams of building a 1.0L V16 Hybrid from scratch, and though it's easy enough to design I will never have the money to make it and test it. The variable length intake was part of that discussion.
The Yamaha R1 engine has it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c57p0-1F5u4
I've had a similar thought as well. Didn't Ferrari do something like this on their late v8's?. Back on topic, it seems odd that the m42 kit is more expensive than the m20 kit
The plenum, the M20 kits are a MAFless tune standard, ours isn't. So you need the box to get the bolt-on usability.
-
We have a new video out!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1GtUiV6KGJk
Not the one you're waiting for... but its coming out next! ;D Otherwise, this thing is legitimately one of the most fun cars I've driven!
-
Nice video, where was it filmed?
Which v8 has it got in it?
-
Nice video, where was it filmed?
Which v8 has it got in it?
We filmed it in North Western Sydney in January - as well as my car the next day.
The engine in that particular monstrosity uses a very heavily modified LS1 from an SS Commodore (not sure on the year). I believe it is putting out about 400~450kW (530~600BHP), which I believe. Acceleration is totally insane, and for obvious reasons we can't show off the crazy capabilities while filming on a public road. What I can tell you is that 3rd power pulls starting from 80km/hr will light up the rear wheels in the dry for a rather unreasonable amount of time...
On my end of things, I drove my car from Sydney to Melbourne in January. No issues. A few weeks after arriving, about the time I met up Darky, I started to notice a bearing like noise from the rear and figured it was a wheel bearing. Anyway, the sound got progressively worse. My fiance it to three local mechanics trying to get one of them to inspect the car. One kept forgetting what days he told her to come back, so she went to him twice and he told her 'oh I'm too busy at the moment, come back this day' both times. Another took it for a drive, and just said it was a wheel bearing and then said, 'It will be really expensive because its a BMW' without even inspecting the car on a hoist to try and identify the issue. A third was really nice and actually helped her, but said the noise was tyre noise. I was at work through all of this.
So on the weekend I had enough, I bought some jack stands (I live in an apartment so it really isn't practical for me to have lots of tools), moved the sway bar out of the way and ran the car with the wheels off the ground. The sound was clearly coming from the diff. A 5 minute diagnoses on a hoist took me half an hour of screwing around on my back!
So I bought some LSD oil and changed it, hoping the issue was just low oil. It wasn't.
So out came the old oil and lots of metal flecks.
(http://i.imgur.com/dTmm7d6.jpg?1)
So a bearing has disintegrated in there. I'm hoping its a case bearing because I have a spare diff case and its not hard to swap the diff center to the healthy case. If the diff center is dead that would be really really annoying...
Anyway trying to get someone to look at the diff was a battle as well! All these mechanics who do just one job?! What the hell... so weird... anyway, hopefully I've found someone and its just a simple/accessible bearing.
-
Many things!
First off, my diff was properly dead. The pictures below are of the last BMW OEM LSD that I had. The new one broke exactly the same way. I don't think I'll try an OEM diff again... :(
(http://i.imgur.com/cxu3AmI.jpg?1)
(http://i.imgur.com/AMOHnzj.jpg?1)
(http://i.imgur.com/eBVcsRg.jpg?1)
The next point - I can now answer the question:
Does the RHD kit fit the E30?
Yes BUT...
The brake booster for the E30 impinges on the standard kit. Since the kit is modular however, you can solve the problem multiple ways:
- You can simply run a shorter trumpet. this would be the ideal solution for a high-revving engine!
- You can modify the standard kit slightly. If you let Rama know that the purchase is for an E30, he will supply a curved trumpet to assist with the fitment, and you can easily modify the box to avoid the booster (see below).
- You can work with me and I will help you design a custom 3D printed air box solution like I did for my car.
On the last point, if someone wants to get a kit, and do all the measuring - I will design a 3D printed solution that I'll make available to everyone!
(http://i.imgur.com/EYHMG8S.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/r8rQCOq.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/rZF0B9v.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/6Als1kp.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/J89Amp2.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/8yr2ijb.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/0FpLbEJ.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/COAypkq.jpg)
And the last thing!
Who wants to get in on a group purchase?
Rama has said that he is happy to do a group order now that all fitment has been confirmed. If you want to do a group order, he will adjust the stock airboxes before shipping for the E30s, let me know if you're interested!
-
I would be interested in E30 Spec'd one depending on price :)
On a side note, i appreciate all the effort you & Rama put into developing these kits, its whats motivated me to build a 2.1L M42 for it.
Picked up a spare engine last night !!
-
I would be interested in the group buy for a e30 fitment also.
-
Is that baunGTs plenum?
-
I would be interested in E30 Spec'd one depending on price :)
On a side note, i appreciate all the effort you & Rama put into developing these kits, its whats motivated me to build a 2.1L M42 for it.
Picked up a spare engine last night !!
I would be interested in the group buy for a e30 fitment also.
Awesome, I think he wanted 4 as his minimum but I'll let him know that there is some interest!
Is that baunGTs plenum?
I actually don't know :-\ I know two people have been fitting this kit to an E30, one of them (in Germany) was happy to resolve fitment themselves and this one had a few other issues which is why it was sent back for Rama to work on. I'm not sure on the details, but I think that the owner lives in QLD...? Maybe? Anyway, I told him to take some pictures so that people could see what was involved in getting a clean fit in an E30 with the standard kit.
-
Interested in a group buy.
Any idea if a booster eliminator would allow the standard/unmodified airbox on a LHD e30?
-
I love the ITB kit and design and would possibly be interested in the kit. LHD e30 here. Love the RHD flywheel I have, think this would be a nice addition someday :)
-
Interested in a group buy.
Any idea if a booster eliminator would allow the standard/unmodified airbox on a LHD e30?
If you want to remove the booster you could quite possibly fit a small man playing a ukulele in the engine bay as well. So, yes. You could fit the standard kit!
I love the ITB kit and design and would possibly be interested in the kit. LHD e30 here. Love the RHD flywheel I have, think this would be a nice addition someday :)
I would be interested in E30 Spec'd one depending on price :)
On a side note, i appreciate all the effort you & Rama put into developing these kits, its whats motivated me to build a 2.1L M42 for it.
Picked up a spare engine last night !!
Alright that is four showing interest!
I've asked Rama how he wants to organise the group purchase for price and kit variations etc, in the meantime you can PM me with your fitment details and location! No commitment yet, just trying to get organised so message me and we'll see if we can make everyone happy with pricing and fitment etc.
I would be interested in the group buy for a e30 fitment also.
-
I'm really interested in this kit so I emailed info@racehead.com.au but I got a bounce back that the email didn't work.
I'm based in Canada and I have a LHD 1991 e30 318is so I'm very interested in this kit.
1) I'm in for a group buy but would also be happy to work with you on measuring for a custom 3d printed airbox.
2) What ECU should I run? Stock ok?
3) I need to replace my exhaust. Did you figure out what diameter works best?
Thanks for putting in the time to get this kit developed for us m42 guys
Jonny
-
I'm really interested in this kit so I emailed info@racehead.com.au but I got a bounce back that the email didn't work.
I'm based in Canada and I have a LHD 1991 e30 318is so I'm very interested in this kit.
1) I'm in for a group buy but would also be happy to work with you on measuring for a custom 3d printed airbox.
2) What ECU should I run? Stock ok?
3) I need to replace my exhaust. Did you figure out what diameter works best?
Thanks for putting in the time to get this kit developed for us m42 guys
Jonny
1) I'll let Rama know that you're interested in doing a custom airbox. Before you make up your mind, keep in mind that there will be a delay between you fitting the kit - then measuring up your airbox - posting me a foam plug - it getting modelled - you printing it - and then driving your car. It could be 1~2 months before you can drive the car again. It can be done though - I designed my 3D printed box while I was ~3000kms away from my car from pictures and measurements my friend sent me.
2) Stock ECU will work fine, a custom tuned ECU will work much better and a stand-alone ECU will be ideal.
3) If you're keeping it on the road - stock diameter (2" or 1.75" ID I think it was) is the most sensible choice. You will get much less drone, and a more usable power curve in the low RPM. If you go up, you will get a bit more peak power, but you will lose area under the curve in the low RPM. If you want more power but same street use, use the ITB kit as shipped, and the stock exhaust diameter with a straight muffler and high-flow cat, if you want more power and a peaky drive - go up half an inch from stock and shorten the ITB kit!
Send me a PM so that I know who to message once I get the group buy sorted.
-
Please PM me if you're interested. Price will depend on the number of serious purchases. Let me know you car and driving side, whether you want the CF of FG airbox, what country you're in and if you want a flywheel as well. Cut-off date is the 31st of May 2016
-
I just thought that I should update you on the kits reliability - only thought of it after I got a question in PM.
I've made this trip once, but will be driving back up to Sydney at the end of this month https://goo.gl/maps/7Ms9qQZKtst
And I've made this trip at least 6 times https://goo.gl/maps/mLTcNAdM8Pp
As you can see it is a very substantial distance. Other than having my ears bleed from the after market muffler until I put the stock one back on, there have been no issues. Fuel economy when driving normally is still the same as it had been previously (~6.5L/100km on the freeway, ~11L/100km around town ~9.3L/100km regular driving)
Since there is no where to legally test the top speed of a car on that trip, I can't really comment on whether it will crack 200km/hr and be limited by the final gear on top speed. If I were to ever drive to the Northern Territory however...
-
Alright - and interesting development on the tuning front.
I have finally found someone who seems interested in not only tuning my car, but writing a tune that can be sold. This isn't a certainty yet. Below is the email I sent them:
Thanks for the chat earlier.
You'll find the dyno with the AFR in the first post:
http://www.m42club.com/forum/index.php?topic=18442.0
It is quite long, so I'm not expecting you to read everything!
This post http://www.m42club.com/forum/index.php?topic=18442.msg130215#msg130215 compares a few other combinations with different cars. I also cover some of the assumptions made as it isn't a strictly 1:1 comparison, but it does demonstrate the overall improvements from the intake system.
I don't sell the kit and I don't have any financial interest in it. I'm friends with the manufacturer, and I worked with him to develop the kit for M42/4 cars. I sought out someone to help me design it because I don't like unproven parts. The same thing goes for getting a tune - which is why I haven't done it already.
I'm currently organising a group buy for the kit - some people have the M42 engine as well, and I know at least some of them would be interested in a matching tune.
My questions regarding the tune would be:
1. Can you test it to show me before and after results on my vehicle?
2. What do you change in a tune?
3. What differences would you have between your standard tune and customising it (this is assuming that the induction kit makes enough difference to make your standard tune non-viable)?
3. The ECU currently is quite capable of adjusting itself so that I can change muffler for a street and track muffler - will it still be able to do that?
4. And regarding others - will your tune be able to work with overseas models?
At this point, they seemed interested in looking into the details of the kit and the thread. No one ever responds to email, but I have finally found some time to call people and follow up. I thought that with organising a group buy I would put in some renewed effort as it would compliment a setup if a tune makes a demonstrable difference.
I'm generally pretty skeptical about chip tunes, especially regarding claims with stock NA motors. This guy seemed keen to demonstrate that his stuff worked so I'll at least follow it up!
-
The final episode is up! I hope you enjoy it, I start talking about the kit about half way through. We tried to be as gratuitous as possible with the induction and exhaust sounds!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8Ay1x_H-9k
-
I'm really interested in this kit so I emailed info@racehead.com.au but I got a bounce back that the email didn't work.
I'm based in Canada and I have a LHD 1991 e30 318is so I'm very interested in this kit.
1) I'm in for a group buy but would also be happy to work with you on measuring for a custom 3d printed airbox.
2) What ECU should I run? Stock ok?
3) I need to replace my exhaust. Did you figure out what diameter works best?
Thanks for putting in the time to get this kit developed for us m42 guys
Jonny
1) I'll let Rama know that you're interested in doing a custom airbox. Before you make up your mind, keep in mind that there will be a delay between you fitting the kit - then measuring up your airbox - posting me a foam plug - it getting modelled - you printing it - and then driving your car. It could be 1~2 months before you can drive the car again. It can be done though - I designed my 3D printed box while I was ~3000kms away from my car from pictures and measurements my friend sent me.
2) Stock ECU will work fine, a custom tuned ECU will work much better and a stand-alone ECU will be ideal.
3) If you're keeping it on the road - stock diameter (2" or 1.75" ID I think it was) is the most sensible choice. You will get much less drone, and a more usable power curve in the low RPM. If you go up, you will get a bit more peak power, but you will lose area under the curve in the low RPM. If you want more power but same street use, use the ITB kit as shipped, and the stock exhaust diameter with a straight muffler and high-flow cat, if you want more power and a peaky drive - go up half an inch from stock and shorten the ITB kit!
Send me a PM so that I know who to message once I get the group buy sorted.
Thanks for getting back to me on this. I've PMd you about my interest in the group buy. As the car is my daily, I think I'll just have to go with the modified stock airbox (FRP) with curved trumpet.
-
Hello everyone,
Im a newbie here, Im orginally from the 318ti.org group and found this forum with the itbs!
so have joined M42club forum to get more informations.
just wanna say that lambertius has done a great R&D work!!
I have read this forum over and over, which conveinced me to order the ITB kit from RHD engineering few weeks back from Rama.
first I will go with the original DME with MAF, even though my DME is tuned by Kelleners.
also I plan to install the Apexi AFC so can play with air/fuel mixtures.
eventually when I have enough money to spend, want to go with stand alone ECU and have no MAF and open throttle bodies for that roar sound!!
unfortunately when I recieved the kit, it had some packaging/shipping issues where the 2 trumpets were deformed.
and also found few defects and wrong parts so its on hold for now..... :'(
Rama is doing his best to provide me with correct and updated parts now, but abit unsatisfied since I had to pay for the return shipping costs.
Im a bit concerned once I install them for any other issues?
did anyone purchase and already installed them?
lambertius, I have few questions so I can be ready for installation once I get the parts.
1. do I need the synchronizer tool for adjustments?
as I look at the itbs, I do not see any individual adjustments.
only adjustments for each manifold so 2 itb at same time
2. where does the large vacuum hose coming from the valve cover connect to?
do I make a hole in the air box plenum?
3. also the vacuum hose coming from the fuel injectors, 4 into 1 large hose, where to connect?
do I make a hole in the air box plenum?
4. how do I connect the ICV vacuum hoses?
I got a block to fit the ICV with 2 holes, assume one is connected to the vacuum block but where does the other connect to?
5. biggest concern right now is the manifold ports in the fuel injector ports.
I have not confirmed with my car yet but I have one phenolic gasket in hand so confirmed the shape and alignments.
the ports align but the fuel injector ports are much smaller on your design so it will have a leak? maybe the phenolic gaskets could be wrong design but I will confirm once I get the BMW gaskets this weekend.
my car is '98 318ti M44 Right Hand drive so assume its same/similar as your 318is.
thanks,
-
Hello everyone,
Im a newbie here, Im orginally from the 318ti.org group and found this forum with the itbs!
so have joined M42club forum to get more informations.
just wanna say that lambertius has done a great R&D work!!
I have read this forum over and over, which conveinced me to order the ITB kit from RHD engineering few weeks back from Rama.
first I will go with the original DME with MAF, even though my DME is tuned by Kelleners.
also I plan to install the Apexi AFC so can play with air/fuel mixtures.
eventually when I have enough money to spend, want to go with stand alone ECU and have no MAF and open throttle bodies for that roar sound!!
unfortunately when I recieved the kit, it had some packaging/shipping issues where the 2 trumpets were deformed.
and also found few defects and wrong parts so its on hold for now..... :'(
Rama is doing his best to provide me with correct and updated parts now, but abit unsatisfied since I had to pay for the return shipping costs.
Im a bit concerned once I install them for any other issues?
did anyone purchase and already installed them?
lambertius, I have few questions so I can be ready for installation once I get the parts.
1. do I need the synchronizer tool for adjustments?
as I look at the itbs, I do not see any individual adjustments.
only adjustments for each manifold so 2 itb at same time
2. where does the large vacuum hose coming from the valve cover connect to?
do I make a hole in the air box plenum?
3. also the vacuum hose coming from the fuel injectors, 4 into 1 large hose, where to connect?
do I make a hole in the air box plenum?
4. how do I connect the ICV vacuum hoses?
I got a block to fit the ICV with 2 holes, assume one is connected to the vacuum block but where does the other connect to?
5. biggest concern right now is the manifold ports in the fuel injector ports.
I have not confirmed with my car yet but I have one phenolic gasket in hand so confirmed the shape and alignments.
the ports align but the fuel injector ports are much smaller on your design so it will have a leak? maybe the phenolic gaskets could be wrong design but I will confirm once I get the BMW gaskets this weekend.
my car is '98 318ti M44 Right Hand drive so assume its same/similar as your 318is.
thanks,
1. It won't hurt to try and get the plates as close together as possible for maintaining a smooth idle but it only essential on manifolds that don't have a throttle bypass. They're balanced in pairs, the manufacturing is precise enough that small variations over two throttle bodies is insignificant.
2. The Crank Case Ventilation does NOT run directly into the plenum, it will create a vacuum leak and the car will idle poorly and may cut out. On my car I run the CCV into a catch can currently, and the can is vented to atmosphere. I do have other plans, but I haven't committed to them yet. If you wish to run the CCV back into the intake, you will need to get a PCV valve and run it into one of the cylinders directly using the throttle bypass and a t-fitting - the same way you would the brake booster connection.
3. That is the air jacket for the injectors. You can see the hose running into the base plate in these pictures:
http://www.m42club.com/forum/index.php?topic=18442.msg129513#msg129513
These are pictures of my assembly, and you can see that I did a similar thing on my custom air box. http://www.m42club.com/forum/index.php?topic=18442.msg129970#msg129970
As I don't sell the kit I'm not 100% aware of what it comes with, you may need to drill a hole and get a barb fitting, some sealant and bolt it in place. A lot of people don't have the air jacket injectors, or would replace their injectors so Rama may not have included this by default. I will ask him though.
4. http://www.m42club.com/forum/index.php?topic=18442.msg129970#msg129970
You will need to scroll down a bit, you will need to connect all the throttle bypass to the vacuum block, then one side of the ICV to the vacuum block - and then the other side of the ICV to the air box. Again you may need to drill a hole and grab a barb fitting. I recommend drilling into the base plate as it is physically stronger and won't fail. A 90 degree fitting should make it easy.
5. Unfortunately the Phelonic spacer is over-sized. The original injectors were in a slightly different location than where they are now, but it was a bit difficult to get everything measured correctly for fitment so there are some variations. Your casting would've been in the same batch as mine so will be the same shape. I used the OEM gasket and have no issues. It is a bit bodge, but if you're intent on using the phelonic spacer you could fill the gap with a strong gasket maker.
A bit of a bummer with the trumpets being damaged - but keep in contact with RHD, he is a small company so his after sales support matters a lot to him.
A few people have purchased the kits, I don't know how many from the forums though. Being a small development there have been little things to overcome, like getting the E30 air box sorted and I think he has changed the throttle components from what I got - but otherwise it has been pretty good. Apparently some guy in Queensland got 89rwKw on his M42! As for any issues though, the only thing I've found is that because of the very direct intake design it is more susceptible (idles a bit low) to moisture during a cold start on a cold day - sometimes I rev it a bit when I turn it on to warm it up so that it idles smoothly and it disappears straight away.
Don't hesitate with any further questions!
-
Hello lambertius
thanks for the reply!
1. ok so no necessity to purchase the synchronizter tool.
2. so CCV can be left all alone open? or should I keep the original PCV valve on and leave it open?
guess best is to try to connect back to the manifold behind the throttle body, right?
3. ok
4. ok, does it matter wether the two ports goes to the vacuum block and to the airbox?
as I think the block I got is different from yours which has 2 separate holes not connected to each other, separate air space. which each holes goes directly to the each of the ICV holes so wondering if left/right holes has different functions or not?
as the original it is hooked up to the same open vacuum area.
5. ok, will just wait for the intake gasket and used manifold to arrive for checking.
NEW question
6. in your setup write up, the brake booster line needs to be connected separately to the one cylinder manifold.
should not be connected inline with the vaccuum block.
but Rama's instructions shows to connect inline to one of the 4 lines thats coming from each of cylinder manifolds to the vacuum block with the T fittings.
is this OK? since its connected to the one cylinder manifold and not to the end of the vacuum block?
cant wait to get the correct/updated parts!!
i guess I should dyno before the installations..... ;)
but I am more interested in high revving engine response and the sound of NA engine!
-
Hello lambertius
thanks for the reply!
1. ok so no necessity to purchase the synchronizter tool.
2. so CCV can be left all alone open? or should I keep the original PCV valve on and leave it open?
guess best is to try to connect back to the manifold behind the throttle body, right?
3. ok
4. ok, does it matter wether the two ports goes to the vacuum block and to the airbox?
as I think the block I got is different from yours which has 2 separate holes not connected to each other, separate air space. which each holes goes directly to the each of the ICV holes so wondering if left/right holes has different functions or not?
as the original it is hooked up to the same open vacuum area.
5. ok, will just wait for the intake gasket and used manifold to arrive for checking.
NEW question
6. in your setup write up, the brake booster line needs to be connected separately to the one cylinder manifold.
should not be connected inline with the vaccuum block.
but Rama's instructions shows to connect inline to one of the 4 lines thats coming from each of cylinder manifolds to the vacuum block with the T fittings.
is this OK? since its connected to the one cylinder manifold and not to the end of the vacuum block?
cant wait to get the correct/updated parts!!
i guess I should dyno before the installations..... ;)
but I am more interested in high revving engine response and the sound of NA engine!
2. I would suggest running the CCV into a catch can (with an air filter). It is the easiest solution depending on the modification laws in your country.
4. I think you're asking does it matter which port runs to the air box and which to the vacuum block? If so, the answer is no. You can run either end in either direction.
6. Following Rama's instructions is the easiest solution, it will achieve the same end result just using more hose. You want the brake booster to be hooked up as close to a cylinder as possible - otherwise your brakes may be a LOT harder to use...
Since you use the M44, if you were to dyno you should see very similar results for your improvement. You will definitely get a nice sound once you hook it up, that I can definitely promise you!
-
Hello lambertius,
thanks for the reply!
i think im ready to put them on!!
just need to wait for Rama to send out the replacements.....
i may ask more questions during the installations!?
its becoming somewhat a trend in my area to have AE111 itbs on 318is so i wanted somewhat different and love carbon stuff so this was the best way for me.
-
Okay, I've had a chat with Rama regarding pricing of the kit. With the assumption that the current number of people who want to get in with the bulk order commit to the purchase, the prices will be (in USD, and prices are subject to change):
Carbon Fiber Kit - $1500
Fiberglass Kit - $1400
Flywheel - $195 (He will do this price for JUST the flywheel as well if there is enough interest)
If you have an E30, as part of the bulk order Rama will modify the airbox for clearance if you want. All E30 kits will be supplied with the Carbon Fiber curved trumpet for cylinder 4 clearance.
Group buy ends on the 31st of May 2016 so message me if you haven't already!
Make sure you let me know what you want, what model your car is, the driving side and where you are!
Hello lambertius,
thanks for the reply!
i think im ready to put them on!!
just need to wait for Rama to send out the replacements.....
i may ask more questions during the installations!?
its becoming somewhat a trend in my area to have AE111 itbs on 318is so i wanted somewhat different and love carbon stuff so this was the best way for me.
Ask questions, post pictures and share you progress :) I'll answer anything I can. Your kit will be a bit different to mine since mine was a prototype, but if I can help I will.
-
Hello lambertius,
sorry one more question.
what size hose connector did you use to connect the coolant hoses from the pvc?
ID 16.0mm?
thanks,
-
A bit off topic - I'm selling the original intake from my car if anyone is interested http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/BMW-M42-M44-E36-Polished-Intake-Manifold-/162104853006? Message me on ebay if you're interested.
Also, a few people got the RHD kit in the group buy - hopefully there will be a few more pictures in the thread! :)
-
So continuing on with my little projects...
Latest thing is getting the LSD sorted out.
I originally purchased a used, OEM 168mm LSD inside the case for ease and just swapped the whole unit. I started having some issues with oil leaks and after opening the diff realise the top cap was broken. Figuring that it was most likely due to old age, I purchased another one new.
This new one only lasted a few thousand kms (fortunately I didn't pay much for it, having sourced it from a closing BMW dealership) before the same issue happened. So for the moment I have been driving with an open diff.
(http://i.imgur.com/aHVqxpE.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/AhCFkHT.jpg)
This issue occurs because the entire force of the springs/shims inside the carrier focus onto that point under the top cap, which is actually the thinnest point in the carrier.
(http://i.imgur.com/2F28pfh.jpg)
Below is the final spring in the system placed on the top cap, so that is the point where all the force is focused.
(http://i.imgur.com/i6pcAwo.jpg)
To give you an idea of how much force there is - the below image shows how much high the top cap sits before it is bolted down...
(http://i.imgur.com/yPDORxz.jpg)
Here are both diffs dismantled and getting cleaned
(http://i.imgur.com/eYAvA5M.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/HyAP8aX.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/At0U1EQ.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/jfPpmSZ.jpg)
Both diffs are getting billet top caps (I was going to design my own, but it turns out that it is common issue so a fair few people sell them), new end bearings and the older one will be getting brand new clutches!
(http://i.imgur.com/TqKLW8F.jpg)
One for me, and one for ebay! Hit me up if you want the other one!
-
I just started reading your post and immediately thought of the billet caps on ebay. Hope you found the inexpensive ones!
I am running the small case LSD, but mine is from some obscure early euro application that has a much more robust design. The "cap" is actually 1/2 the diff housing and the 2 halves are sandwiched together by the ring gear bolts. I'm running 265whp and 240ft/lbs torque (325n/m) and have been for approx. 19,000 miles with no failures. I wish I could recall what the application was. I believe it was some sort of early diesel 5 series.
-
I just started reading your post and immediately thought of the billet caps on ebay. Hope you found the inexpensive ones!
I am running the small case LSD, but mine is from some obscure early euro application that has a much more robust design. The "cap" is actually 1/2 the diff housing and the 2 halves are sandwiched together by the ring gear bolts. I'm running 265whp and 240ft/lbs torque (325n/m) and have been for approx. 19,000 miles with no failures. I wish I could recall what the application was. I believe it was some sort of early diesel 5 series.
I think I've managed to find the person who is manufacturing the part. They're charging me only ~ 30% of what an Australian retailer does. It has taken a bit of diffing around, but it looks like I have all the parts I need to get the diffs entirely rebuilt. New clutches and bearings, as well as a few new belleville washers and shims. I'll post links to the stores for other people's reference once I've received my parts and give some feedback!
They'll be brand new!
-
That's cool. Here are photos of my diff. I was just inside changing the pre-load. It seems the small belleville washers were inserted back to front. The cup facing the axle rather than the inside. Hope you don't mind me posting here.
(http://i392.photobucket.com/albums/pp10/jakermacdorey/FullSizeRender%2021_zpsxj5znepo.jpg) (http://s392.photobucket.com/user/jakermacdorey/media/FullSizeRender%2021_zpsxj5znepo.jpg.html)
(http://i392.photobucket.com/albums/pp10/jakermacdorey/FullSizeRender%2022_zpstbtarhbm.jpg) (http://s392.photobucket.com/user/jakermacdorey/media/FullSizeRender%2022_zpstbtarhbm.jpg.html)
(http://i392.photobucket.com/albums/pp10/jakermacdorey/FullSizeRender%2023_zpss5i39vr2.jpg) (http://s392.photobucket.com/user/jakermacdorey/media/FullSizeRender%2023_zpss5i39vr2.jpg.html)
(http://i392.photobucket.com/albums/pp10/jakermacdorey/FullSizeRender%2024_zpsvykjs6yo.jpg) (http://s392.photobucket.com/user/jakermacdorey/media/FullSizeRender%2024_zpsvykjs6yo.jpg.html)
(http://i392.photobucket.com/albums/pp10/jakermacdorey/FullSizeRender%2018_zpsh4ewlfqn.jpg) (http://s392.photobucket.com/user/jakermacdorey/media/FullSizeRender%2018_zpsh4ewlfqn.jpg.html)
(http://i392.photobucket.com/albums/pp10/jakermacdorey/FullSizeRender%2019_zps2xlbvtjb.jpg) (http://s392.photobucket.com/user/jakermacdorey/media/FullSizeRender%2019_zps2xlbvtjb.jpg.html)
(http://i392.photobucket.com/albums/pp10/jakermacdorey/FullSizeRender%2020_zpsj3sdtcqw.jpg) (http://s392.photobucket.com/user/jakermacdorey/media/FullSizeRender%2020_zpsj3sdtcqw.jpg.html)
-
Wow! That diff is completely different to anything else I've seen! I wouldn't be surprised if that is an aftermarket cap as well though...
The belleville washer should face out towards the wheel - so it sounds like it was in correctly. I found this guide today on the small case LSD which is probably the best pictures on our LSD specifically http://www.bmw2002faq.com/articles.html/technical-articles/engine-and-drivetrain/strongest-2002-limited-slip-differential-build-r74/?tab=comments
How are you intending to adjust the pre-load? These OEM diffs are self-adjusting so you shouldn't be able to unless you replace the clutches...
-
I'm not convinced that I have the wrong way around, as the diff has been opened at least twice (once for a full brand new parts rebuild and once by the shop that put the guts into my E36 Coupe housing) between the original factory assembly and my latest messing about. That article does not specifically state which way the washer goes, only to be certain you put it back in the same way it came out.
-
This is a medium case rebuild, but when I dismantled mine my washers were facing the same way.
http://buildraceparty.com/diy-tech-how-to-rebuild-a-bmw-e30-differential/
-
This is a medium case rebuild, but when I dismantled mine my washers were facing the same way.
http://buildraceparty.com/diy-tech-how-to-rebuild-a-bmw-e30-differential/
That's precisely what I mean. In this article, the author states: " The concave side of this and bigger bellevue washers face the spider gears."
I have now disassembled 3 of the small case diffs, and the large belleville washers in all 3 show wear patterns consistent with the small bellevilles being placed with the concave side facing the large belleville or the center of the diff.
The pre-load is adjusted by adding/removing spacers/shims to alter the pre-tightened gap between the LSD cover and housing. Before I opened the LSD, I had 28ft/lbs of pre-load - the force required to turn an unladen wheel when the other wheel is on the ground and the trans is in neutral. Now with the pre-load altered (an extra small belleville washer and the other 2 washers reversed), I have 87.5ft/lbs of pre-load. I'm told the OEM spec is 60ft/lbs.
-
Sweet, I must've just misinterpreted what you meant!
Wish I had gotten lucky and got your top cap when I set mine up, then I wouldn't be here rebuilding it... :-\
All my bits are starting to arrive... Not long now! Though I'm sure all the snow will be gone before I get to use it...
-
Shamelessly hawking my wares here!
I've rebuilt one of my LSDs which you can buy here if you're keen http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/162138184383?ssPageName=STRK%3AMESELX%3AIT&_trksid=p3984.m1555.l2649
I'm filming the process on the second one tomorrow and will be making a short episode on how LSDs work and the parts that go into making one! :)
I'm looking forward to it, they're actually a surprising simple bit of kit but at the same time aspects of how they work are quite clever.
-
I've got another video up on my youtube channel if anyone is keen!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yhst51n6TuQ
-
Nice video lambertius
What cams did it run?
Was it a s50b30 or 32?
A lot of people believe the b30 engine was a lot better.
Check out the engine whisperer site they pull apart a e36 race car with a s42b20 in it!
I shall call that car captain carbon.
Cheers Rohan
-
Nice video lambertius
What cams did it run?
Was it a s50b30 or 32?
A lot of people believe the b30 engine was a lot better.
Check out the engine whisperer site they pull apart a e36 race car with a s42b20 in it!
I shall call that car captain carbon.
Cheers Rohan
Its a very strung out b30, the 257kW sticker on the back was the wheel power when the owner had it dynoed!
I'm under the impression that the cams were sourced from AC Schnitzer, though I'm not sure. What I do know is that all the parts were used in the DTM cars and were from that parts bin.
The key thing to take away here is that it was epic to drive!
-
hello lambertius,
so finally I had some time to install my kit during my summer break!!
it took about 2.5 days working from 9am to 8pm.
most of the time was taken for the reworking wiring harness and thinking of the vacuum hose layouts.
and the last most difficult part was putting on the carbon airbox, the bottom and most rear bolts took me many hours to tightening down.
after confirming with rama, to take out the assembly and put the air box together then put everything back......thats the way I did initially not knowing but just couldnt do it so, anyways its all in there with right hand drivin 318ti which has the battery up front.
I really like the sound and the engine responses!!!!!
I have 2 questions.
1. I made extra vacuum block coming from each cylinder to attach the brake booster and the crankcase breather.
the crankcase breather I have attached PCV valve --> oil catch tank --> to the vacuum block
is this setup bad? or creating vacuum leak?
for past few days of driving, I do not have any oil leaks like your intial setup where pressure was build up.
reason why Im asking is I have very high lean air/fuel mixture during idle only.
Countermeasures
C/M1: should I delete the PCV valve and just connect with oil catch tank and to the vaccum block?
C/M2: keep current setup but instead of vacuum block (unstable vacuum?) go directly to the one of the manifold ports like you did with your brake booster?
C/M3: delete the PCV valve and after the oil catch tank put a small airfilter?
I would like to return the hose into the engine for regulations.....
I would appricate your advice ;)
thanks in advance,
-
hello lambertius,
so finally I had some time to install my kit during my summer break!!
it took about 2.5 days working from 9am to 8pm.
most of the time was taken for the reworking wiring harness and thinking of the vacuum hose layouts.
and the last most difficult part was putting on the carbon airbox, the bottom and most rear bolts took me many hours to tightening down.
after confirming with rama, to take out the assembly and put the air box together then put everything back......thats the way I did initially not knowing but just couldnt do it so, anyways its all in there with right hand drivin 318ti which has the battery up front.
I really like the sound and the engine responses!!!!!
I have 2 questions.
1. I made extra vacuum block coming from each cylinder to attach the brake booster and the crankcase breather.
the crankcase breather I have attached PCV valve --> oil catch tank --> to the vacuum block
is this setup bad? or creating vacuum leak?
for past few days of driving, I do not have any oil leaks like your intial setup where pressure was build up.
reason why Im asking is I have very high lean air/fuel mixture during idle only.
Countermeasures
C/M1: should I delete the PCV valve and just connect with oil catch tank and to the vaccum block?
C/M2: keep current setup but instead of vacuum block (unstable vacuum?) go directly to the one of the manifold ports like you did with your brake booster?
C/M3: delete the PCV valve and after the oil catch tank put a small airfilter?
I would like to return the hose into the engine for regulations.....
I would appricate your advice ;)
thanks in advance,
Ho-ho! Looking good! I'm glad that you like the drive ^_^ Its great fun having that little extra poke, and the the way the power curve comes on is satisfying!
I was wondering when I would start seeing other kits fitted!
To answer your questions to start with...
1. Your setup is fine, as long as you have the PCV valve there will be no vacuum leak. I would be interested to see a picture of your second vacuum block? Your setup may be generating enough vacuum to make the PCV work which it wasn't on mine.
C/M1: NO - this is introducing a vacuum leak. The car will run rough to about 1500RPM and may cut out under acceleration.
C/M2: I had thought about trying something similar like that. If you do it you will need to keep in mind that one cylinder will be running lean compared to the others. For this reason I would consider trying cylinder 4 since it is the most likely to be running slightly rich from a front feed box. That said, the PCV valve won't activate till higher RPM so it should only be a minor affect, but you should at least be aware. I have everything in place to try this... but I just haven't... I should really try this...
C/M3: I would suggest this option for ease - this is currently what I'm running.
If your engine is running lean at low RPM I would check the PCV valve your running isn't in backwards? When you have a vacuum leak you'll know though, at low RPM the engine will run like a dog and will cut out under minor throttle.
Now... as for C/M... I have a 'solution' that I want to implement that will keep the engine 'regulated' and won't need the PCV valve.
Please forgive the ghetto bucket - it is for test fitting before I 3D print something. I need to make sure it fits before I spend my $$$
(http://i.imgur.com/saiXqn4.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/Q3IVrzb.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/k4kTC4y.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/NCi6eYN.jpg)
I've been needing to make an intake shroud for regulation purposes so I figured I would make a cold air intake while I was at it. The ghetto bucket is shrouding the air filter and the air temp sensor (its making a difference, the exhaust smells less rich. Presumably because the ECU is less worried about detonation with a cooler air temp).
ANYWAY... if you look at the back of the engine bay you can see the air filter sitting on the top of my catch can. In most locations, an air filter is all that is required to be compliant but if it isn't the requirement is usually that it needs to be ducted into the engine intake. My solution would be to run the catch can into the ghetto bucket (with its own filter). The crank case would be ducted into the enclosed intake, and because it would be on the outside of the air filter it wouldn't be lining anything with oil. It would also be on the 'outside' of the MAF it won't introduce an air leak. Its an easy solution and it would be compliant almost everywhere.
For anyone who is interested, here is another kit being fitted in Melbourne on a different forum http://www.stanceworks.com/forums/showthread.php?t=80984
I'm still working on my LSD, I got all my new parts, clutches and bits but I had some issues getting shims and finding a competent mechanic to build it... You think it wouldn't be too hard, but it always is. I have the second one still listed on ebay for anyone who is keen http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/162169755041?ssPageName=STRK:MESELX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1555.l2649 I've filmed a video on the LSD as well, which I'll get up on youtube eventually :D
-
hello lambertius,
thanks for the reply.
I have followed your simple C/M by removing the PCV valve and the hose which was connected to my addtional vacuum block, then adding small air filter on the oil catch tank.
now its running like normal, idles fine and AF is jumping around 14.3 to 14.9, just like before.
no more rough idle and very high lean mixtures :)
so assume the PCV valve was not working well with this unstable/weak vacuum!!!
now I will drive for couple of days for my DME to reset and have it study the current setup.
after that I will read the A/F with innovate LM2 and play with air/fuel mixtures with AFC-neo, sub-computer thingy and hopefully make it much better, sort of like step 2 or phase 2.
here is my addition of the extra vacuum block
just adding extra ports on all ports
then adding extra aluminium block to attach now is only the brake booster as the breather hose w/pcv is removed
now that is working order, I may just follow Rama's instructions and delete the second vacuum block!?
and add a small sealed container to be added before the brake booster connection to make the vacuum stable? dont know if it will work or not?
so I believe now, this kit will fit the RHD with battery upfront, RHD and LHD M42/M44 vehicles!!!
ALL E36 318is/ti will fit!!! ;)
next I will paint the engine valve cover dark grey and hydrographic with carbon to match the carbon air box.
now while its still studying, under normal driving (small/half throttle) is kind of dull compared to before.....however when its WOT its a totally different engine!!
it feels more torque and power all thru the powerband
and anywhere its very very responsive engine, I need to adjust since its too responsive my driving feels jerky with throttle on/off......hahaha
I believe once Japan's hot summer ends and becomes more cooler it will be more lively engine
I am really satisfied with this kit!! ;)
-
I just made a quick post on the front page for anyone who is interested. I've indexed all the important stuff as this thread is approaching its end!
The last thing to do is a detailed write up on how LSDs work, and the people I dealt with to get mine rebuilt, but that can wait a little bit longer till it is back in my car...
-
I thought I would do a bit of an update on my car because a few things have happened.
Unfortunately my car was badly scraped a little while ago with a bit of paint transfer and scratches going into the metal.
(http://i.imgur.com/i4UFEvv.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/q29Oqju.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/0iliCtx.jpg)
I had to get some PDR to straighten the panel out before I started fixing the problem. Once the panel is straight, the first step is to clean it. Clay bar it first, and then hit the surface with at least 2000grit paper.
(http://i.imgur.com/zdVZj6w.jpg)
Make sure you clay bar the surface again, and then using thinned colour matched paint and a fine brush over the scratched surface.
(http://i.imgur.com/CJ9BeV2.jpg)
Once that is done let the paint dry. Then get a thin item like a tooth-pick or a skewer and progressively fill the deeper scratches to a point that you're happy with. This can take a few days to do properly, and since this is a daily car I didn't go nuts. The closer to a level surface that you get the harder it will be to spot the difference. You will need to intermittently wet-sand the surface as you paint to keep it level so you know what you're working on.
(http://i.imgur.com/tBLiEn0.jpg)
I used a fine grit paper so I was able to use a medium polish straight away. It took a bit of elbow grease but it came up very clear. You can see where I was lazy and didn't fill the deeper scratches enough - but I was lazy and the damage is very very well hidden. It would easily pass a 1 metre test.
The benefit of doing this as opposed to spraying and blending is you will have a much much smaller area where there are colour differences. It is a much better way of preserving the original paint by hiding minor or even medium paint damage. You won't have any blend lines and if the damage is small enough (and you're patient enough) you won't need to do the whole panel.
(http://i.imgur.com/9SFRF7r.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/4qOJN7s.jpg)
When I bought the car I sprayed all the sunburned bumpers gloss black with clear coat. I did this for two main reasons:
- Gloss surfaces are easier to keep clean
- The car had never been kept in a garage since it was built in 1997, and I didn't have a garage so any new bumpers would get sunburned within a year
Well, with a bumper broken and the car in a garage for the first time in its life I decided to get some new bumpers. I hadn't intended to get the M-kit bumpers, but I got them cheaper than the standard set as one of the bumpers had a scratch. I've very pleased with the look!
(http://i.imgur.com/XvhNpJA.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/r6AddAg.jpg)
And in other news...
More 3D printed parts!
The slit in the base is for pressure release to prevent sucking up water and to allow any water that is sucked up to drain - this is the same as the stock airbox.
(http://i.imgur.com/yfEvp00.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/o7J7IfD.jpg)
My favourite part was the satisfying *click* as the temp sensor went into place. It looks so much more complete just from that alone!
(http://i.imgur.com/V9NE8bD.jpg)
Here are some pictures of the box fitted.
(http://i.imgur.com/zl8YOOV.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/JclSXmZ.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/lVCKGEg.jpg)
Below are the CAD drawings. I placed a velocity stack inside the air filter like in the OEM design. This will improve the accuracy of the MAF readings.
(http://i.imgur.com/Glc4URm.png)
(http://i.imgur.com/IDBQjcA.png)
I'll paint the box and eventually get some perspex for the window over the filter. The next thing I'll be doing is replacing the centre vent on my car!
(http://i.imgur.com/3QTbzGM.jpg)
-
I felt like sharing this because I'm just so damn happy! The first time I've washed my car properly in over a year! After I moved to Perth the car was with friends, or in storage so never got washed. When I moved to Melbourne, because of my apartment block I hadn't washed the car because after all the effort I put into restoring the paint I couldn't bring myself to use a self-serve or auto car wash and scratch the paint. I tried to find a few different places to wash it, but in the end I just sucked it up and would fill buckets up in my apartment then take them downstairs to wash and rinse the car by hand. Though it was a massive pain, I'm very happy with the results and will keep on top of it again now.
(http://i.imgur.com/z9P38vD.jpg)
-
I took some photos with my proper camera. These are the first photos I've ever taken of my car that I've specifically driven out to take. I've taken a few photos after cleaning it but never anything intentionally like this, so I'm really pleased with the results!
(http://i.imgur.com/U2lwzG2.jpg?1)
(http://i.imgur.com/zqEjs3P.jpg?1)
(http://i.imgur.com/G9B7jvr.jpg?1)
(http://i.imgur.com/PclHsxQ.jpg?1)
(http://i.imgur.com/hpVCZoY.jpg?1)
(http://i.imgur.com/UURKtyy.jpg?1)
(http://i.imgur.com/oQZCS8T.jpg?1)
(http://i.imgur.com/LRtxjeH.jpg?1)
(http://i.imgur.com/26JivKF.jpg?1)
(http://i.imgur.com/zHpPQE4.jpg?1)
(http://i.imgur.com/NF13XSG.jpg?1)
(http://i.imgur.com/ZE2cMsx.jpg?1)
(http://i.imgur.com/PVG8dJU.jpg?1)
(http://i.imgur.com/OkE6m5Q.jpg?1)
(http://i.imgur.com/sSMDFSM.jpg?1)
(http://i.imgur.com/JCatTYQ.jpg?1)
I hadn't yet painted the last intake part which is why there isn't a full photo of the engine bay, but soon there will be!
-
This will be the last video on my car, and will be one of the last posts on this project. I have a two more things to finish up before I consider the whole thing completed, and they shouldn't be too far into the future!
In the meantime - this is a video on how the E36 small case (168mm) diff works: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3PZIn-3wXsM
The three companies that I dealt with in order to rebuild the two broken diffs I had were Bimmertune http://bimmertune.com/, ECS Tuning https://www.ecstuning.com/ and Thayer Motorsports https://thayermotorsports.com/
In all cases I found them easy to deal with, honest and helpful. They were well priced and provided feedback to my questions. I have dealt with ECS tuning several times, and they have made a few mistakes shipping. To their credit they rectified the issues almost immediately accounting for the fault and ensuring that I had no trouble - especially helpful considering I'm an international customer.
As for some info on the LSDs to help people in the future:
The top cap on ALL small case LSDs is a point of failure. A brand new LSD cap broke after ~1000km of driving. If you wish to run an LSD in your car I highly recommend replacing the top cap.
If you change the top cap you MUST get a new set of side shims in order correctly set the ring and pinion backlash. Though this is not a difficult task to do, you will require special tooling to set this up correctly so I recommend finding someone who specialises in diff assembly.
When assembling a new top cap, the cap tightening torque is 45Nm WITH Loctite. The bolts holding the ring gear in place are torqued to 80Nm WITH loctite
There are two types of internal components, which you can tell by the number of splines around the spider gears. When you order new clutches make sure you order the 21 tooth or 23 tooth clutches accordingly.
The bearing in the case and on the diff carrier are all a standard part that - you don't need to order them in from BMW. Any shop that is capable of pulling the bearings off the carrier will be able to inspect the part number and get them off their supplier. The part number for the carrier bearings (I don't know the pinion bearing though) are LM501349 LM501310 CUP & CONE.
If you pull the pinion out you MUST get a new crush sleeve 33121200259. You will also need tools to correctly set the preload here. Don't do it by feel, or by tightening to the previous location. If you pull the pinion out, have it reinstalled properly.
[/list]
http://www.realoem.com/bmw/enUS/showparts?id=BE72-EUR-03-1997-E36-BMW-318is&diagId=33_0372 The part number for the front flange shim kits can be found here.
http://www.realoem.com/bmw/enUS/showparts?id=BE72-EUR-03-1997-E36-BMW-318is&diagId=33_1968 The part number for the side flange shim kits can be found here.
Hope that helps some people in the future!
-
Any confirmation on whether or not this will fit LHD M42 equipped E30s?
-
Any confirmation on whether or not this will fit LHD M42 equipped E30s?
It does but you must let them know at purchase. Its a bit more work and you need some different parts to get it to fit. They'll be able to explain it all to you as I haven't had any experience fitting it myself.
-
Any confirmation on whether or not this will fit LHD M42 equipped E30s?
It does but you must let them know at purchase. Its a bit more work and you need some different parts to get it to fit. They'll be able to explain it all to you as I haven't had any experience fitting it myself.
Thanks for the heads up!!
-
Hello,
I was wondering if you were selling the Air Intake Box. If not, is it possible to get the necessary data so that I could have one 3D printed? I love the design of it.
Thanks,
Anthony
-
Hello,
I was wondering if you were selling the Air Intake Box. If not, is it possible to get the necessary data so that I could have one 3D printed? I love the design of it.
Thanks,
Anthony
Hey!
I can make the part available for you to 3D print if you want.
If you send me a PM I'll talk to you a bit more about the fitment as there are a couple of things you need to consider depending on your car.
-
it must cost a bomb to get something that big 3D printed? what is the material when you ordered from shapeways?
-
it must cost a bomb to get something that big 3D printed? what is the material when you ordered from shapeways?
Laser sintered nylon.
I think it was about $300-$400USD total. The pricing is actually okay, they calculate it on volume of material used and space taken up in the printing chamber. Since my parts were hollow they could print other things at the same time and its only 3mm wall thickness so not much material is used.
-
Hey , guys ,
more of you installed the kit ? Did any of you had any new issues after or during the installation ? I am asking because i am looking for reliability as well :) post more pics please ...
-
Hey , guys ,
more of you installed the kit ? Did any of you had any new issues after or during the installation ? I am asking because i am looking for reliability as well :) post more pics please ...
I'm still running the kit - I've driven from Melbourne to Port Macquarie a few times (about 1500km), I've taken it to a track day and a few skid pan days and still use it all the time. The tyres are worse for wear but the engine and drivability are as good as stock.
:)
-
Thank you for the response , that's great , a lot of miles with the kit :) what is the final setup and results (hp) that you managed to get ?
-
Thank you for the response , that's great , a lot of miles with the kit :) what is the final setup and results (hp) that you managed to get ?
Its all here http://www.m42club.com/forum/index.php?topic=18442.msg130221#msg130221
-
Thank you for the response , that's great , a lot of miles with the kit :) what is the final setup and results (hp) that you managed to get ?
Its all here http://www.m42club.com/forum/index.php?topic=18442.msg130221#msg130221
Yes i saw this , but if i am not mistaken , these results are before you tune the car ... did you managed to get it tuned ? :)
-
After all this time - I've still not found anyone who can reflash the ECU, and I can't justify the costs of a standalone ECU and tune!
Car is still running healthy after all these years, and it has done tens of thousands of kilometres since installation!
-
Great to hear that it's still running!
I sent you a private message back in Sept. Did you get it?
Cheers,
~Ralph
-
Great to hear that it's still running!
I sent you a private message back in Sept. Did you get it?
Cheers,
~Ralph
Just had a look! I'll add it to the list when I get a chance!
I haven't done much on my car for a few years so haven't been as active on the forums. I discovered a few days ago that C5 Corvette Calipers (available on Holden cars here) are a direct bolt on up front, so was going to give those a crack and jumped on to have a search and see if anyone had tried it.
-
Hello guys,
I decided to create a variable length ITB on my M42B18 (E36 318IS coupe EU version - I live in Hungary) with a little bit modifications. I ordered the intake manifold from RHD and I designed the rest of the parts. As you wrote I also put non-hardening silicone sealant and applied it around the edge of the butterfly valves. I wanted to keep my ICV so I connected it to the vacuum block. I also kept the PCV valve, that is connected to the vacuum block with an additional vacuum block adapter. DISA and carbon EVAC cansiter valves are not connected into the system right now (electric cables and vacuum lines are also disconnected).
My questions:
1. I wanted to synchronize the ITB-s with a synchrometer, but without airbox and air flow sensor the car idles rough, so it is not possible. It idles between 1200 and 2000rpm. Did you synchronize the throttle bodies or just put it together and it runs fine without synchronization?
2. The car starts usually only once without airbox and air flow meter. For second try it cranks but I can not start (after waiting a day, then start again for the first time). Injectors and plugs are ok. Did you have similar symptoms?
Thank you for your help! :)
-
Got more info on the variable length aspect? Did you repurpose the DISA valve in the plenum?
-
Got more info on the variable length aspect? Did you repurpose the DISA valve in the plenum?
Yes, I use the DISA valve, but it doesn't create enough power to move the 4 trumpets with the current design, so I redesign the construction right now. If you are interested I could post here when it is working properly.
-
I bought the ITB kit for my BMW E30 318is.
I have been trying to fit it, but my airbox won't fit as it hits the original brake booster.
Has anyone here had this issue? I can't really see any posts about it.
Should I put in a new brake booster? I read that a VW Polo 86c brake booster might work but I would like to hear it from you guys.
Other options are also welcome.
-
My questions:
1. I wanted to synchronize the ITB-s with a synchrometer, but without airbox and air flow sensor the car idles rough, so it is not possible. It idles between 1200 and 2000rpm. Did you synchronize the throttle bodies or just put it together and it runs fine without synchronization?
If those ITB's have air ports on them then you can use a manometer like for a motorcycle. That's what I use on my E30M3 S14 motor.
https://classiccarbs.co.uk/product/keihinmikuni-fzryzfcbrzxrgsxrzzrcbgsktm-4cyl-carb-synchronizer (https://classiccarbs.co.uk/product/keihinmikuni-fzryzfcbrzxrgsxrzzrcbgsktm-4cyl-carb-synchronizer)
Cheers,
~Ralph
-
I bought the ITB kit for my BMW E30 318is.
I have been trying to fit it, but my airbox won't fit as it hits the original brake booster.
Has anyone here had this issue? I can't really see any posts about it.
Did you use the RHD ITB's or the Dbilas ones?
I had the Dbilas on my car. The first plenum was used for an E36. I had to return that one and get the E30 specific one which was angled to clear the booster.
Cheers,
~Ralph
-
My questions:
1. I wanted to synchronize the ITB-s with a synchrometer, but without airbox and air flow sensor the car idles rough, so it is not possible. It idles between 1200 and 2000rpm. Did you synchronize the throttle bodies or just put it together and it runs fine without synchronization?
If those ITB's have air ports on them then you can use a manometer like for a motorcycle. That's what I use on my E30M3 S14 motor.
https://classiccarbs.co.uk/product/keihinmikuni-fzryzfcbrzxrgsxrzzrcbgsktm-4cyl-carb-synchronizer (https://classiccarbs.co.uk/product/keihinmikuni-fzryzfcbrzxrgsxrzzrcbgsktm-4cyl-carb-synchronizer)
Cheers,
~Ralph
Okay, thanks, now it idles just fine after running ~60 seconds after a cold start. I had to readjust the throttle bodies.
@PJH318is:
I wouldn't bother the brake booster. I designed a custom made intake piping for the ITB-s. I could keep the longer intake runners (for better low and mid RPM range) and the original brake booster.
You can see it on this video:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1LHIZCyCGEQiwrYKtbkF__l-QC458P53z/view
If you are interested, I can help you. Just send me a private message!
-
It's an RHD M42 ITB kit to be put in an LHD E30 318is.
-
I have also noticed that the fuel rail of an E30 M42 does not fit.
Do I need an E36 M42 or an E36 M44 fuel rail?
-
Are the mounting bolts/studs in the wrong location, or are the injectors too long?
-
De mounting points do not match up.
-
This kit was originally designed for the E36. The plenum also doesn't have the cut out for the brake booster just as my E36 Dbilas kit. I had to send it back to Germany and get the correct plenum for the E30. I'm assuming this is now the same for the fuel rail.
Cheers,
~Ralph
-
I contacted Rama to ask about this, and yes the kit is E36 specific. However, he did say this: "lots of people have modified it to fit the e30 , we sell some or can exchange the spacers for some slightly shorter ones and then the plenum needs a slight modification for everything to work".
-
Well it has been a while since I've looked at anything on this project, and I'm actually revisiting it!
I'm going to be redesigning the 3D printing intake, and so I'll be selling the 3D printed parts and the aluminum runners, if you're interested let me know!
I've also enquired about reflashing the ECU with different people over time and still haven't been able to find anyone who can guide me or do it. I tried Midnight Tuning some time ago, but that was a no. I contacted Powerchip (Wayne Besanko) but to be honest, I just never trusted the guy, and I'm trying one place in the UK that seems to have started doing it relatively recently but I'm not holding out much hope. I also ended up chatting with Bruno DaSilva (BDS Motorsport) and holy hell, what an absolute crack head that guy is! I don't know why these cars attract whackos to work on them but he is absolutely the worst I've come across, so if you ever risk dealing with the guy, don't!
I'm considering getting a stand alone ECU finally, and to justify it I'm wanting to get some cams or adjust the OEM cam. Has anyone done either of those and has any experience to share?
Keep track with what I'm doing on youtube! https://www.youtube.com/user/ShiftMotoring?app=desktop
-
Hey lambertius,
I would talk to Mark D'Sylva in Toronto, Canada! He was willing to work with me to tune my stroker with Dbilas ITB's on the stock E30 ECU. Not sure what he'll say about the E36 and reflashing but it's worth a shot.
http://www3.sympatico.ca/mdsylva/products.htm (http://www3.sympatico.ca/mdsylva/products.htm)
I would also talk to a new member apexspeedtech.com here on the forum and a master at tuning. He's in California, USA
Here is Neel's link
http://apexspeedtech.com (http://apexspeedtech.com)
I've done all the above you mentioned ;D
Going on info from an old timer in the mechanic field, I advanced the intake cam timing on a stock M42 motor and stock cams 3-5 degrees with a Jim C chip and I thought that it wasn't as good as the stock cam setting. So my suggestion would be to go with a stock manufacturer setting at first and then play around from there. When I built the stroker I had a friend design a custom cam profile that would give lots of torque across the rev range. The torque band was flat which is great for the street. The E30M3 S14 Evo2 came with a special exhaust cam gear to scavenge for more torque. When you changed cams it just wasn't worth it anymore so it may only have been good for stock cam purposes. You'd really have to play around with cam gears and cams to find the optimal tuning for your application.
I've also done a lot of cam work with the E30M3 S14 with a 2.3L and 2.5L. I've had stock and Schrick's and regrinds that mimic Dbilas or BMP cams(which were Dbilas cams). Schrick cams are like having an on/off switch, more raw; the power comes on hard. One sec it's not there and then you just take off. LOL
I now have a shim under bucket set up on my 2.5L S14 with 304*/296* regrind Dbilas cam set up. The motor makes 330+HP at the crank. These cams are so much more refined and progressive than the Schrick's. The power is so much more linear and it's very deceiving! I've heard Cat Cam could be another option but I have no experience with their cams. If I were to do cams for a M42 motor I would go Dbilas. They have great customer service as well!
That S14 motor also has a stand alone ViPec ECU on it. So much more control with a stand alone. My M42 stroker had MSII running Alpha N and MAP making 212HP at the crank with mild street cams. I would find out what your local tuner likes to use and go with that option. It will save you time, which is money, so they don't have to learn a new system. Remote tuning is also an option and requires buying a few toys to log your runs.
So you have lots of options to choose from and they're all great ones! bmwman91 is setting up a custom stand alone and then there is Neel who is a new member but known to some of us in the stand alone and BMW world as well for his masterful tuning expertise!
Here is the link that bmwman91 is working on with the stand alone project.
http://www.m42club.com/forum/index.php?topic=20113.0 (http://www.m42club.com/forum/index.php?topic=20113.0)
Hope this helps!
Cheers mate,
~Ralph
-
Thanks for all that! I'll contact all those people and go from there!
My whole reason for wanting to keep the OEM ECU is that just changing the intake and exhaust doesn't really justify buying a stand alone ecu and then paying for the tuning time. That said, the kit as you buy it plus a tune gets ~100wkW (I've seen the dyno results from Rama). But considering it will just be adjusting some timing being able to reflash the OEM ECU would be sufficient.
If I go standalone though I want to make it worth my while so yeah, may as well go some cams and get over that triple digit!
-
My recommendation is Sssquid Tuning here in the US. I have worked with the owner for a number of years on M42 tuning and Motronic reverse engineering, and I am confident that no other tuner knows the M42 better than Sssquid. He has also worked on numerous fully built engines, NA and FI, ITBs, etc.. M1.7.2 in the E36 is a little different in some ways to M1.7, but I am pretty sure he would have you covered. The main thing is that you at least have a wide band O2 sensor in there and can log it against RPM, and if you have EGT it is even better for doing remote tuning.
-
Yes! SSSquid is also a good one as bmwman91 mentions. I have spoken to them as well in the past. Jay is a good guy.
Cheers,
~Ralph
-
So I've been enquiring about different cam options, and I got to speak to a fellow who is running a car for a race series in Queensland and what he has done is counter to all the rumours and unfinished threads that I've seen around. He has 230whp - about 280 at the crank! He is running E85, with 10.5:1 compression with a 290 degree intake cam with 13mm of lift. I've seen a video and a dyno and the car is actually making that power and pulls hard. What surprised me is the head is stock springs and retainers and is redlining at 8200RPM. This runs pretty counter to everything I've heard about the building these engines.
I'm currently thinking of getting a cam for the intake and possibly leaving the OEM exhaust cam. Most of the 'sports cams' that I've looked at are either the same or less degree than the OEM exhaust cam, the only thing that changes is lift. This is where I really wish I had a bit more money to throw at a project, there will be an ideal point for exhaust lift just like there is with intake lift, but generally speaking it is less than the intake lift and I would just like to mix and match cams and get a result. There are pretty good odds the OEM exhaust cam is already close to ideal. I really wish there were a bit more info or dyno results on people trying these things, not just talk about what people have tried!
-
Those are impressive numbers for sure, especially based on what you say the general engine specs are. Honestly, I think that the M42 got much more of a negative reputation than it deserved. Early ones had issues with the profile gaskets and the timing chain tensioning system, but that was all worked out. The cheesy half-shell thrust bearing and upper oil pan bolts falling out were also sort of lame, but I am not even sure that the people making negative claims about the M42 were even aware of those! Really, I think that it was just overshadowed by the 6 cylinder models, and most of the aftermarket performance companies focused mainly on those since there were more of them (at least in the US), power gains were easier to realize, and I'd guess that more of those owners were interested in spending money on modifications (a LOT of E36 M42 owners were looking for an economical car that drove well, whereas a higher percentage of M5x owners were looking to go fast).
Cams...yeah, gotta be careful there. Too "much" cam and it'll only run well at high RPM, too little and...well, that's stock lol. It depends on what you are after. The grinds that MM has on mine are fantastic on the street. It makes totally usable torque at 2500RPM, feels good all the way to 4500RPM and then really takes off from there. I have the limiter set at ~7500RPM since at that point power has dropped off a little and I really don't need to run the engine any harder than that. See page 12 for some info on the grind they use. Actually, I think that they dialed back to a slightly less aggressive profile since they built mine, but I sure like them the way they are.
https://metricmechanic.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/M42-Engine-Booklet.pdf
-
You're exactly on point about my thoughts. It is all well and good to get a bit of gain, but at what cost? I mean that is why I did the ITB kit the way I did, I wanted a car that drove better overall.
I had a look at page 12 - are you running 11.4mm of lift with the OEM pistons?
The problem with cams is that there is no real academic way to predict the engine behaviour. There are good modelling and simulation tools these days but in reality they're an indication at best. As best I can tell, the OEM and aftermarket cams that are designed for the road are actually all relatively long duration, I stand by what I thought when I initially started this thread that BMW intentionally detuned this engine.
I think what catcams are doing with their sport cams is that they reduce the total duration on the exhaust, and increase it on the intake, but the ramp is increased so it has the same 'effective duration @1mm'. In that case they're making the cams more aggressive, but with less overlap so they're preserving idle and low end. If this is the case, the improvement comes mostly from higher lift from the intake cam. After speaking to cat cams, they have another set of cams they sell inbetween the sport and track cams, and the data sheet for is the only one of their street cams that has more overlap than the OEM cams, so I think that will be the one that takes off when it revs up with a bit of trade off in the low end since it is the only one that will crossflow more than the OEM. Because the OEM cam gears are slotted you could in theory run a couple of different combinations of cams and then change the timing anyway to change your torque curve. So again, I wish I could print some money like the reserve banks of the world and just do some testing!
I've asked catcams for a few more details about their cam setups, see if they have any modelling or results they can share, and then I'll make a decision. I'm leaning towards the more aggressive intake cam, and then clocking the OEM exhaust until I'm at a point where I'm happy with the amount of idle quality I'm sacrificing for the move in the power curve.
-
I have the 2.1L engine that Metric Mechanic builds, so yeah everything in there is totally different than stock. I am not sure how the increased lift would play out with the stock pistons & rods, that is a good point. I am also not sure if those are "too much" cam for a stock 1.8L.
Modelling can be pretty powerful, but chances are that the really good tools are all custom made by major car makers and used by engineers whose whole job is cam profile development. MM has developed their profiles over a bunch of decades of trial and error and testing, as do other engine builders I'd assume. Do let us know what Catcams says. Since the M42 was never a major source of interest in the performance parts world, I wonder how much development went into the profiles?
-
Sharing is caring, as soon as I get a response you'll know!
I needed to email them every day for a few days to get a reply, so I imagine it will be like that again.
I don't suppose anyone knows what the maximum lift the OEM M44 can handle before I start bending valves?
-
Got more info on the variable length aspect? Did you repurpose the DISA valve in the plenum?
It is working finally, but since I have a 1994 coupe with a DME 1.7 it cannot handle the new intake as well as the DME 5.2 so I have 3 options: 1. remap the factory ECU, 2. install a stand alone ECU, 3. sell my car and buy a newer car with an M44.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nU0JptwB2vw
-
Oh that is super cool!
Getting a stand alone ECU would probably be the easiest way forward. RHD also has a plug and play ECU kit, and you can get quite a lot from these cars with a tune!
-
Just out of curiosity I went to the dyno. The car made 150hp @ 6000 RPM with the OEM ECU. The graph shows a comparison between the OEM's and the variable ITB's setup.
-
Wow, that is super cool. Definitely an awesome project! Do you have any documentation for your project that you can post? Of course, if you are building a product then I understand if you can't share.
-
I've enjoyed reading this thread,
I recently bought a pretty trick M42 - spec below - and yesterday I ordered a set of ITB's from RHD!
Engine Head:
Commetic MLS Head Gasket
ARP Head Bolts
Supertech Valve Seals (from US)
Supertech Valves (1mm Oversize from US)
New BMW Cam Sprockets & Bolts
Cat Cams 290° intake & 275° Exhaust
Cat Cams Solid Followers & Double Stainless Springs & Shims
New Head to Bottom End Water Feed Plastic Pipe
New BMW Timing Chain and Tensioner
New BMW Thermostat
New BMW Water Pump
Engine Bottom End:
Crank, and Lightened Flywheel Balanced
CP Pistons (High Compression 11:1 from US)
ACL Big End Bearings
ACL Rod Bearings
New BMW Crank Seals front and back
New Sump & Magnetic sump plug
Ancillaries:
New Bosch starter motor
New alternator
New running belts
The car was originally mapped to 200 bhp and the rev limit was 8450 - but that was on dbilas ITB's so id expect to see a bit more from RHD's.
Once i get it all in, engine wiring loom made and have it mapped i will pop back with some pictures and the numbers from the Dyno.!
-
Once i get it all in, engine wiring loom made and have it mapped i will pop back with some pictures and the numbers from the Dyno.!
I'm looking forward to it!
I've been busy myself, I've got some cams, doing some work on a head and I've started rebuilding a bunch of small case LSDs! I'm redesigning parts for them to make them fully customisable!
-
So I got my ECU and cams installed and the power output was wild! I've got a bit more work to do before I share results, but damn, good fun!
-
Awesome!!! Can't wait to see them 8)
Cheers,
~Ralph
-
Cool, looking forward to some pics and videos!
-
Mucking around with the LSD, modifying it to fit 6 clutches up from 2 clutches!
Still working on the cams and ECU results, off to a dyno tomorrow!
-
Hey lambertius , how it went , don't keep us waiting :D , just kidding dude i am sure you have a lot of your mind ... Happy holidays to all !
-
Would 38mm throttle bodies be enough for a fairly stock m42?
-
Did anyone mounted the RHD ITB Kit on a stock LHD E30 318is ? Found a post where someone said that it does not clear the brake booster .
-
Did anyone mounted the RHD ITB Kit on a stock LHD E30 318is ? Found a post where someone said that it does not clear the brake booster .
It fits, you just need to let them know when you order.
-
I discovered a few days ago that C5 Corvette Calipers (available on Holden cars here) are a direct bolt on up front, so was going to give those a crack and jumped on to have a search and see if anyone had tried it.
Have you tried those C5 calipers? What is size of brake disc did you use?