I did a search and understand that it would take 3.0L m3 pistons and rods (s50/s52 rods are the same) + 3.0L crank. If a 3.2L crank is used then piston work is needed correct?
What other BMW pistons/rods/cranks can I use to accomplish this as well?
Thanks.
-----
"Stock C/R on all US M/S50's is 10.5:1, with the exception of the Non-VANOS 2.5 which is 10:1.
Both Alex and I had out motors built (Thanks Dad!) from '91 525i blocks, and 3.0 M3 pistons which were at our availability. Alex sprung for the 3.2 crank, so decided to go with a .040 overbore on the 525 block to fit the 3.0 pistons and 3.2 crank. As you can picture, the 3.0 pistons need to be machined down due to the stroke difference, but 86x89.6 was achieved with high-compression. It's a pretty straight-forward recipe for a lot of torque and HP--though not quite the CC's of a standard 3.2 bottomend (I believe they use 86.4 on the pistons, marginal difference).
The only 24v E30's I've driven have been mine and his, my dads 2.9, and a friends 2.5. I can tell you that the 3.2 crank makes a MASSIVE difference in the 2000-4000 range. While my 86x86 3.0 pulls well and makes plenty of torque, it doesn't really start to haul ass until 4000revs.
Any nicely setup M/S50 will pull well at high revs, but that is only used when you're racing somebody, or are on-track. If you plan to use your car for a lot of around-town driving, a 3.2 crank is a really good way to go. (PM Jason89i for more insight)
I can't say whether an 86.4x89.6 will make more power than a high c/r 86x89.6, but either setup with the right bolt-ons will make more power/tq than our brakes need!"
What other BMW pistons/rods/cranks can I use to accomplish this as well?
Thanks.
-----
"Stock C/R on all US M/S50's is 10.5:1, with the exception of the Non-VANOS 2.5 which is 10:1.
Both Alex and I had out motors built (Thanks Dad!) from '91 525i blocks, and 3.0 M3 pistons which were at our availability. Alex sprung for the 3.2 crank, so decided to go with a .040 overbore on the 525 block to fit the 3.0 pistons and 3.2 crank. As you can picture, the 3.0 pistons need to be machined down due to the stroke difference, but 86x89.6 was achieved with high-compression. It's a pretty straight-forward recipe for a lot of torque and HP--though not quite the CC's of a standard 3.2 bottomend (I believe they use 86.4 on the pistons, marginal difference).
The only 24v E30's I've driven have been mine and his, my dads 2.9, and a friends 2.5. I can tell you that the 3.2 crank makes a MASSIVE difference in the 2000-4000 range. While my 86x86 3.0 pulls well and makes plenty of torque, it doesn't really start to haul ass until 4000revs.
Any nicely setup M/S50 will pull well at high revs, but that is only used when you're racing somebody, or are on-track. If you plan to use your car for a lot of around-town driving, a 3.2 crank is a really good way to go. (PM Jason89i for more insight)
I can't say whether an 86.4x89.6 will make more power than a high c/r 86x89.6, but either setup with the right bolt-ons will make more power/tq than our brakes need!"
Comment