Vanos M50 to 3.0L (Stu?)

[Jon325i]

The NV block has thicker cylinder walls, stronger, better to bore.

Its valvetrain compoments are also a tad more robust than the Vanos motors. Some other info I found....

http://forums.bimmerforums.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-131421.html

http://forums.bimmerforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=680302&highlight=vanos

I'm sure there's more out there. The suggestion of the M54 rotating assembly is a new one I hadn't heard about - might be able to that one for a little less since it isn't sourced from an ///M car.

Jon :-D

[Jean]

And another good read as well - http://forums.bimmerforums.com/forum...d.php?t=681445

[PiercedE30]

Eh. We can go on and on about the non-vanos motors being "better" than the vanos motors, but it's been gone over many, many times before.
The safest that you can probably bore the block to, for an NA motor, would be 86.5-87mm. But you would need a custom HG (talk to Ulyssess aka CardCounter on BF.c about it, he had some GOOD copper gaskets made up with built in teflon seals for water jackets and oil passages), and of course pistons. You would have VERY little material between the cylinders. Now, if you think you may eventually go FI, then stay with 84.5mm or 85mm, max.
Now, the valvetrain. Either get some aftermarket dual springs, or get a new set of S52 "beehive" springs.

[Gray S.]

This maybe a stupid question but if you wanted to run the 84x84 3.0 setup with the m54 internals, as well as have a vanos motor, could you not just bolt a vanos head onto the m50NV block? I was under the impression that the head castings for the whole m50 family were identical and just the valves/springs/cams were different between motors?

[PiercedE30]

You can. The only point that the motors changed was when they made the M52TU. It's an aluminum block with dual vanos. The oil passages and water passages changed slightly.

[matt]

The NV block has thicker cylinder walls, stronger, better to bore.

No it doesn't. No they aren't. No it's not. The block is the same. No thickness difference. No strength difference.

And another good read as well - http://forums.bimmerforums.com/forum...d.php?t=681445

Good link. Techno550 is right about all that, of course. The rod/piston in the M50TU is light years ahead of the M50.

Its valvetrain compoments are also a tad more robust than the Vanos motors. Some other info I found....

If by robust you mean heavier, then yes.

Your links were mostly bullshit also.

[Jean]

Eh. We can go on and on about the non-vanos motors being "better" than the vanos motors, but it's been gone over many, many times before.
The safest that you can probably bore the block to, for an NA motor, would be 86.5-87mm. But you would need a custom HG (talk to Ulyssess aka CardCounter on BF.c about it, he had some GOOD copper gaskets made up with built in teflon seals for water jackets and oil passages), and of course pistons. You would have VERY little material between the cylinders. Now, if you think you may eventually go FI, then stay with 84.5mm or 85mm, max.
Now, the valvetrain. Either get some aftermarket dual springs, or get a new set of S52 "beehive" springs.

I am not. Just a good read that's all. I am just trying to put all my options in front of me from the most basic (combination of various off the shelf oem rods/pistons/crank with basic or no block/head work required) to the most expensive (custom rods and pistons + work to block and head that I don't want to do at this point).

Basically in the very early stage of gathering as much info as possible.

[nando]

there's not going to be any appreciable difference in cylinder spacing at 86mm - if BMW did 86.4mm with the same cylinder spacing as the good old' M20, why would an M50 block be dangerous at 86mm?

I like the idea of the M54B30 bottom end though. I've always wished for a longer stroke..

[SpecM]

-Ok, what was the CR of a stock m54b30? It would maintain the same CR in a m50nv block/head arrangment, right?

[PiercedE30]

m54b30 is 10.5:1 CR.

[z31maniac]

there's not going to be any appreciable difference in cylinder spacing at 86mm - if BMW did 86.4mm with the same cylinder spacing as the good old' M20, why would an M50 block be dangerous at 86mm?

I like the idea of the M54B30 bottom end though. I've always wished for a longer stroke..

My question is how much longer is the stroke of M54B30 crank compared to the S52?

A way to get more than 3.1L out of an M20 possibly.....

[SpecM]

My question is how much longer is the stroke of M54B30 crank compared to the S52?

-The same.

[Jean]

When the dispacement is increased to a 3.0L, would the stock ignition and fuel delivery system be OK with it? This question is for Stu and others who've done this and put te car on a dyno to see what the A/F ratio is like? Or did you guys have to switch to a bigger tb/maf/fpr/injectors as well?

My goal is 240whp, if I have to feed it 91 that's fine too. Good luck or do-able?

[matt]

The stock ignition and fuel system does just fine on a whole bunch of 3l motors... S50s.

As always, if you calibrate the DME properly for your motor, your results will be better.

[Jean]

The stock ignition and fuel system does just fine on a whole bunch of 3l motors... S50s.

As always, if you calibrate the DME properly for your motor, your results will be better.

That's good to hear. Back to the drawing board :)