0-60mph times

[fabianyee]

On my E30 with E36 M42 engine using G-Tech Pro meter.

1. Tried with the 4.10 open diff : 8.8 sec average
2. Tried with 3.73 LSD : 8.6 sec average

[Jand3rson]

Re: 0-60mph times

On my E30 with E36 M42 engine using G-Tech Pro meter.

1. Tried with the 4.10 open diff : 8.8 sec average
2. Tried with 3.73 LSD : 8.6 sec average

If you have an E36 318i motor, it would be an M44, not an M42.

[graphik]

Re: 0-60mph times

On my E30 with E36 M42 engine using G-Tech Pro meter.

1. Tried with the 4.10 open diff : 8.8 sec average
2. Tried with 3.73 LSD : 8.6 sec average

If you have an E36 318i motor, it would be an M44, not an M42.

the early e36 318i motor is the m42 (1.8l OBDI) the later model e36 318i motor is the m44 (1.9l OBDII).

[e9nine]

How many runs did you use to calculate your average speed? Same conditions for each run or the 4.10 open run was earlier before some other mods? I am just a little curious about the accuracy of the g-techs...

[Hortos]

Were you launching because LSD make a big difference in tossing your car off the line not to mention the increased shifting of a 4.10 over a 3.73 do a 0-100 run :)

[fabianyee]

Re: 0-60mph times

On my E30 with E36 M42 engine using G-Tech Pro meter.

1. Tried with the 4.10 open diff : 8.8 sec average
2. Tried with 3.73 LSD : 8.6 sec average

If you have an E36 318i motor, it would be an M44, not an M42.

the early e36 318i motor is the m42 (1.8l OBDI) the later model e36 318i motor is the m44 (1.9l OBDII).

Yes it's the M42... NOT the M44... I know my stuff... Even the E36 M42 got the earlier batch and the later batch.... The M44 came about pretty late, should be post 96... so from 92 to 96, all the E36 318is uses the M42 with forged crankshaft....

How many runs did you use to calculate your average speed? Same conditions for each run or the 4.10 open run was earlier before some other mods? I am just a little curious about the accuracy of the g-techs...

It's a string of few runs at the same time... all times were quite close to the average time... it's a matter of launch and shifting...

[fabianyee]

Were you launching because LSD make a big difference in tossing your car off the line not to mention the increased shifting of a 4.10 over a 3.73 do a 0-100 run :)

Take off is cleaner and oso with the 3.73, the car can almost reach 60mph in 2nd gear, eliminating the need for a 2nd - 3rd shift...

[e9nine]

Take off is cleaner and oso with the 3.73, the car can almost reach 60mph in 2nd gear, eliminating the need for a 2nd - 3rd shift...

Interesting, sounds very close to the way my 2.7i felt when I had the 2.93 in it. The car did run outta steam in the top end though, no power to take advantage of the longer gearing.

Would you consider a 3.91 over a 3.73 or do you think the difference would be more in favor of a 3.73 for a modded m42?

[fabianyee]

Interesting, sounds very close to the way my 2.7i felt when I had the 2.93 in it. The car did run outta steam in the top end though, no power to take advantage of the longer gearing.

Would you consider a 3.91 over a 3.73 or do you think the difference would be more in favor of a 3.73 for a modded m42?

You're spot on with the "out of steam" issue in 4th and 5th...
the pull in the top 2 gears are much lesser than with the 4.10...

Am thinking to add piggyback chip (UNIChip and throw in a MAF) to boost the M42 further... So will stick to the 3.73...
So I'm pushing up the power to cater to the 3.73..hahah... Rather than getting a 4.10 or 3.91 LSD...
Giving myself excuse to some power mods.

[e9nine]

You're spot on with the "out of steam" issue in 4th and 5th...
the pull in the top 2 gears are much lesser than with the 4.10...

Am thinking to add piggyback chip (UNIChip and throw in a MAF) to boost the M42 further... So will stick to the 3.73...
So I'm pushing up the power to cater to the 3.73..hahah... Rather than getting a 4.10 or 3.91 LSD...
Giving myself excuse to some power mods.

Would the gains from the MAF and UNIChip be enough to compensate for the power craving at higher rpms? When I went from the 2.93 to 3.73 I never even thought about swapping back to a 3.73. I thought internal work or significant bolts-ons were in need to help with high rpm power needs? Granted there is a steeper difference from a 2.93 to 3.73 vs 3.73 & 4.10 comparison, I know this is not totally parallel for comparison's sake.

Based on that experience, I am tempted to stay with a 3.91, 4.10, 4.27 or 4.45 in order to
'scurry" through gears with the most power possible :twisted: with an SMT-6 and MAF

[fabianyee]

Would the gains from the MAF and UNIChip be enough to compensate for the power craving at higher rpms? When I went from the 2.93 to 3.73 I never even thought about swapping back to a 3.73. I thought internal work or significant bolts-ons were in need to help with high rpm power needs? Granted there is a steeper difference from a 2.93 to 3.73 vs 3.73 & 4.10 comparison, I know this is not totally parallel for comparison's sake.

Based on that experience, I am tempted to stay with a 3.91, 4.10, 4.27 or 4.45 in order to
'scurry" through gears with the most power possible :twisted: with an SMT-6 and MAF

LSD is hard to come by where I am now...
So will be sticking to the 3.73. I think a few more horsies at the upper RPM range will help a bit. Now my 5th gear stay at 5000rpm at speedo indicated 200kmh...

[Bryson]

hehe, somebody needs a six.....

[e9nine]

hehe, somebody needs a six.....

:blowup: :finger: took u 3 motors to make up your mind, hopefully you're satisfied now : :ohsnap: you want a v8 now .....

[Bryson]

if you count the stroker 2.7i I built but never installed, it makes four...

[a3ternus]

"...eliminating the need for a 2nd - 3rd shift..."
OR you can just overrev your engine a bit...My M10 goes just over 7000rpm (just a hair under the rev limiter!) and the speed is exactly 100Km/h or 62mph.
My 0-100km/h is around 12s,but thats just an amateur estimate based on a cell phone stopwatch (operated by a friend).
Anyway,I know its harmfull to the engine (I dont do it often) but thats my .2c ;)
A3TeRnuS[/b]