M30 Dyno Graphs

[Rebel635csi]

yea, i'm aware its wheel HP, thats why i hoped its infront of an autobox...i've been in the car stuff for a long time.

what i'm talking about is the performance mods and how little is gained from them...

i mean, different heads and cam with miller MAF conversion and all u're seeing is 20hp? i don think these engines take well to N/A mods....

stick to boost....

other than that, they are great engines!

for instance my 87 5.0 was putting down 249whp and 301 torque with get this, timing advance, fuel pressure regulator and larget TB and full headers back exhaust. they are rated at 225 hp and usually put down 205 whp.

[clevertd]

What other parts do you need? I am starting all over with my build. Hit 26 psi and now I am going to maximize for max air flow. Selling everything on the 15 psi setup and going for the moon...

Well, right now I've got a TCD manifold and a 38mm tial wastegate. So... that leaves me short quite a bit. If I can find someone that will weld in a bung for me this weekend, MS2 is going in on my N/A engine. After road tuning it, I do plan to put on a dyno and compare the results to the Miller set-up as well as having a baseline once it's boosted.

[E34nication]

yea, i'm aware its wheel HP, thats why i hoped its infront of an autobox...i've been in the car stuff for a long time.

what i'm talking about is the performance mods and how little is gained from them...

i mean, different heads and cam with miller MAF conversion and all u're seeing is 20hp? i don think these engines take well to N/A mods....

stick to boost....

other than that, they are great engines!

for instance my 87 5.0 was putting down 249whp and 301 torque with get this, timing advance, fuel pressure regulator and larget TB and full headers back exhaust. they are rated at 225 hp and usually put down 205 whp.

These motors were tuned better from the factory... I mean 205whp from a 302ci v-8 is pretty conservative. Those motors wake up with simple mods. And I thought those cars made 205 @ the crank?

looked it up... 225@ the crank (i assumed an owner would know)... How does that work since the 94+ 5.0 mustangs had 215hp as well as the 4.6's that came later on?

[Hari]

yea, i'm aware its wheel HP, thats why i hoped its infront of an autobox...i've been in the car stuff for a long time.

what i'm talking about is the performance mods and how little is gained from them...

i mean, different heads and cam with miller MAF conversion and all u're seeing is 20hp? i don think these engines take well to N/A mods....

stick to boost....

other than that, they are great engines!

for instance my 87 5.0 was putting down 249whp and 301 torque with get this, timing advance, fuel pressure regulator and larget TB and full headers back exhaust. they are rated at 225 hp and usually put down 205 whp.

Actually I DON'T have the MAF in that dyno; that dyno is with the restrictive stock AFM. On next Thursday I will have a dyno with the MAF however. Clevertd gained 26rwhp from just the MAF on a bone stock engine.

The example of the 5.0 Ford engine is not a good comparison though. That engine is choked to death from the factory... I mean 225HP from a 5 liter V8! Anything you do to open it up will bring about great gains.

[xatlas0]

Indeed. This engine got pretty close to the 1 in.^3=1 hp for a daily back in 1968, for crying out loud! They tuned this engine for 25 years and weren't able to get much more out of it.

Well, I shouldn't say that. They got more than 300rwhp out of it when they put a DOHC on it. (M88/S38)

I think Hari's results are pretty low because of the tune, not because of the AFM. Paul Cain's 3.8L M30 layed out ~280 with similar mods, so there's a lot left to be optimized there.

[clevertd]

Do you have any details on the 3.8 M30? I agree, Hari's engine definitely has something hiding somewhere

[xatlas0]

Do you have any details on the 3.8 M30? I agree, Hari's engine definitely has something hiding somewhere

http://www.38csi.com/

[screwbiedoo15]

Hari, i'm definitely excited to see what numbers you're gonna be putting down with the MAF

[E34Mekanik]

Oh well, nonetheless I still take pride in owning one of the best engines ever made

absolutely without question!

I echo that boys! If the steering wheel aint vibratin', it aint on!

[lughed]

bring it on... they're f'n torque monsters.

Exactly! The m30 wasnt built for hp they were built for torque. The s38's were built for hp. but the m30 is a much more brutal motor.

[Rebel635csi]

earlier 5.0's were underrated....as in they made more power then what it was said...just like later on the LS series of chevy motors.

the later 93+ and early 4.6 modular engines were tuned to shit because of higher emmissions standards. and they started to use hiperutentic (SP?) pistons vs forged....dont take well to FI.

all i'm saying is, dont waste your money on a cam and head porting with these engines...just BOOST IT!!!

lol.

and i know all about the m30b35, i loved it a lot more than the m60b30. for two engines that are rated at same hp, they work in totally different way

[clevertd]

http://www.mail-archive.com/bmwuucdi.../msg00993.html

1. Larry Franks '95 e34 540 6 spd., 99k miles, JC chip, otherwise stock
HP peak 250
Torque peak 265

2. Greg Hutchisons '95 e34 540 6 spd., 38k miles. Dinan cat-back
exhaust, Dinan intake, JC chip.
HP peak 253
Torque peak 265

A note here, those 540's are pretty impressive, the torque curve is very
flat. Both the above cars did a 4th gear run as well, so the
transmission countershaft was turning. That ate about 5 HP in both
cars.

None of the cars below have had any internal motor work regardless of
miles.

3. Roger Runacres '89 e34 545 automatic, 89k miles, Dinan chip and
Dinan cat-back exhaust
HP peak 178
Torque peak 194

4. Eric Rayls '87 535is 5spd, 194k miles, Stahl headers, no cat,
otherwise stock exhaust, JC chip
HP peak 169
Torque peak 190

I was very pleased to get as close as I did to the e34 with my above
mods, given 2x the miles on the motor, lower compression, milder cams,
smaller valves, etc., although the automatic in the e34 may have eaten a
few horses, don't know. The run above was with the elbow between my air
filter and the AFM removed, so no filter at all. My 2 previous runs
were with the filter on and had peak HP about 1.5 HP lower, so there's
your answer on the K & N question for these cars. Hood was open so
inlet air temp. was the same in both cases.

5. Walt Sumans '88 e28 535i 5 spd., 102k miles, JC chip, otherwise
stock
HP peak 159
Torque peak 184

Conventional wisdom is that opening up the exhaust can sacrafice low end
torque. In the case if the 2 cars above it did not. My torque curve
was typically about 7 ft-lbs higher all the way from 2500 to 6300 RPM.
The curves got close at 3500 RPM then separated again. Walts peak HP
was at 5050 RPM, mine was at 5200.

Walt did a run with a stock chip as well, and as I recall it was about
6-8 HP lower across the whole curve than with the chip.

6. John Cox '86 e28 535i 5 spd. 194k miles, JC chip
HP peak 144
Torque peak 176

Several interesting notes here-First, I think the numbers above do not
represent a completely healthy motor. John first ran with a stock chip,
then he subbed in a "JC chip" that he bought at e-bay, and got the exact
same result. Then he plugged in my ECU and the results jumped up as
expected with a chip. We concluded the e-bay "JC chip" was bogus, so
watch out out there.

7. Kevin Kalawsky '88 535i 5 spd., 153k miles, JC chip, K & N filter in
stock airbox.

HP peak 141
Torque peak 175

Again, I don't think these numbers represent a completely healthy motor.

Now for a question, both Kevin's car (on all runs) and Walt's car (on 2
of the runs) showed a jagged sawtooth pattern torque curve, esp. up to
about 4500 RPM. The amplitude of swings was about 10 ft-lbs, and
frequency about .3 seconds. Clearly this was not missing, and looked
more like the Motronic was hunting. Any theories? In Walt's car and
perhaps Kevins too it *may* have been releated to higher operating
temperatures.

[screwbiedoo15]

Cool addition. Nice to have more comparisons. I really want to dyno my car once I get the headers on

[E34nication]

why the hell is my m60 down on torque is what i want to know... i see all these guys dynoing 265-268... i was 254whp 258wtq on a dynojet 246c w/ just a j.c. chip.

[clevertd]

Well, it's nothing like the 540i Craig S had, be thankful for that!

[E34nication]

well that's looking at the positives for sure...

[clevertd]

Found another (on mye28). Bored .50, has a schrick 284 cam, set of Paul Ladue's headers and some custom exhaust work

[screwbiedoo15]

Found another (on mye28). Bored .50, has a schrick 284 cam, set of Paul Ladue's headers and some custom exhaust work

Those are pretty good numbers. I'm hoping JCB's car will beat them though

[slocar]

My god, a e28 w/ 220whp has to be pretty damn quick!

[Jcbe34]

Where is the info on this car? Any headwork to speak of? Running a chip?

I just acquired a Stahl header, and bought some 24lb injectors.. I'm planning to install both this weekend and have the cat removed. I don't really expect any changes until megasquirt though. I would be extremely happy if my car made 230whp

[clevertd]

Where is the info on this car? Any headwork to speak of? Running a chip?

I just acquired a Stahl header, and bought some 24lb injectors.. I'm planning to install both this weekend and have the cat removed. I don't really expect any changes until megasquirt though. I would be extremely happy if my car made 230whp

http://mye28.com/viewtopic.php?t=9364

It was an old thread and the picture links still work, so I saved the dyno one. Looks like he's got motronic on it. Figure out when you're gonna get MS?

[Jcbe34]

http://mye28.com/viewtopic.php?t=9364

It was an old thread and the picture links still work, so I saved the dyno one. Looks like he's got motronic on it. Figure out when you're gonna get MS?

Hmm.. That's encouraging. Might wait until I get my taxes back for MS, unless business picks up (I work for Chrysler/Dodge)

[Cell]

Hi folks!

Just thought I'd post my graphs, as a tribute to M30 and to show the old lady still has a lot of potential, it just needs the right parts

http://i245.photobucket.com/albums/g...5/BMW/dyno.jpg

Graph has a stock 535i dyno result for comparison. My car is totally streetable, actually behaves better than stock. This was evo1, more updates coming next summer in the quest for streetable 300hp N/A. Only modification you can tell from looking under the bonnet is AFM missing (replaced with a pipe) and S38B38 header

[Gazman]

The 'stock 535i dyno result' .... please say you are not talking about the 209whp one? Most stockers are like 170whp I would say.

Still, niice figures

[Cell]

It's flywheel hp.

Whp isn't always the best, you can gain few whp by just changing to a smaller diff.

edit: whatever the exact power figure is, the point is that on the same dyno we saw an increase of about 54hp compared to stock.