Any interest in fabricated engine cradles with M/S5X mounts...

[bwh13]

After installing the S52 I ran across several companies that make kits to install different engines into all types of chassis. I wonder if a pre-made engine X-member with good mounts would be a worthwhile effort? The dimensions would be the same as the current setup using the E34 engine mounts, but perhaps with a different style mount to the X-member. A tubular design comes to mind as it would be lighter weight and stronger than the stamped/welded stock piece.

[Stu]

After installing the S52 I ran across several companies that make kits to install different engines into all types of chassis. I wonder if a pre-made engine X-member with good mounts would be a worthwhile effort? The dimensions would be the same as the current setup using the E34 engine mounts, but perhaps with a different style mount to the X-member. A tubular design comes to mind as it would be lighter weight and stronger than the stamped/welded stock piece.

Maybe, but you might not find the demand for it. The stock E30 crossmember can easily be reinforced and will accomodate pretty much any engine mount you need to run any M50 variant.

Aside from weight, what potential benefit is there?

[static]

weight is a big one as it's on the "nose", which is heavy as it is

demand will be determined by price + installation complexity i'd imagine

[Jason89i]

its not the weight, its the placement of the weight. your talking about 10lbs, low in the car, centered over the front axil. not a major concern. the real problem with the conversions is the added weight CANTILEVERED over the front axil. now if you committed to a package that would shift the engine back....that would be ideal. but then again you will need to cut the firewall / tunnel, new shift carrier, driveshaft. just a thought. cheers, jason

[BigD]

its not the weight, its the placement of the weight. your talking about 10lbs, low in the car, centered over the front axil. not a major concern. the real problem with the conversions is the added weight CANTILEVERED over the front axil. now if you committed to a package that would shift the engine back....that would be ideal. but then again you will need to cut the firewall / tunnel, new shift carrier, driveshaft. just a thought. cheers, jason

If it's such a big problem, just throw your S14 in the back seat and be done with it.

[PiercedE30]

Well, with a modified cross member, it would be easy to implement a different control arm pickup point (ie: raise the current point - ideal for lowered cars to help get the control arm geometry back to where it should be instead - and possibly raise the steering rack to help eliminate some bump steer or make it so an E36 rack wouldn't need any shims).
That would have to be about the only advantage of a tubular/aftermarket cross member.

[matt]

You won't be able to make anything out of tube stiffer, lighter, and stronger than the stock one.

[Jason89i]

.......it would be easy to implement a different control arm pickup point (ie: raise the current point - ideal for lowered cars to help get the control arm geometry back to where it should be instead - ...........).
That would have to be about the only advantage of a tubular/aftermarket cross member.

very good point. i dont know of ANY product that helps the e30 with lowered suspension geometry. (the e30m3's have roll center spacers that help with the camber curve / bumpsteer....but not for 4-lug) cheers, jason

[static]

its not the weight, its the placement of the weight. your talking about 10lbs, low in the car, centered over the front axil. not a major concern. the real problem with the conversions is the added weight CANTILEVERED over the front axil. now if you committed to a package that would shift the engine back....that would be ideal. but then again you will need to cut the firewall / tunnel, new shift carrier, driveshaft. just a thought. cheers, jason

i see your point about the weight being low, but somehow i doubt that piece #1 is 10lb

http://www.realoem.com/bmw/showparts.do?model=1113&mospid=47309&btnr=31_0261&hg=31&fg=05

not saying the whole idea is worth it either

[matt]

Weigh one some time... not much more than that.

[golde30]

Weigh one some time... not much more than that.

yeah, i have mine out of the car rite now, and without the sway bar attached, its pretty damn light.

[static]

cool! live and learn ;)

[surebimmer]

Well, with a modified cross member, it would be easy to implement a different control arm pickup point (ie: raise the current point - ideal for lowered cars to help get the control arm geometry back to where it should be instead - and possibly raise the steering rack to help eliminate some bump steer or make it so an E36 rack wouldn't need any shims).
That would have to be about the only advantage of a tubular/aftermarket cross member.

+1 If you could raise the control arm pickup point.

[BrandC]

I was cruising through pics of Jordan's old car, apparently he strut housing spacers to regain a more factory control arm geometry. I don't know what company made them, but they were very nice units.

[matt]

They only work with M3 struts.