Japandrew73's OEM Euro Restore

[Iain]

Dude, I'm bald. Unless you're talking about my back hair???

Considering I've never met you, I didn't want to lead off with a sasquatch call, mate.

[george graves]

What did I miss?

[Stephen]

What did I miss?

hai guize will my right handed torque wrench work on these? i cant just check the muffler bearing bolts, theyre old too


To...



Dont talk down on my build, people only hate out of jealousy.

[Mtriple]

Considering I've never met you, I didn't want to lead off with a sasquatch call, mate.

Thanks, you're a true gentleman.

[TwoJ's]

I'm not retarded, you're trying to make a suttle joke I won't catch.

This is by far the best thing I've read on here in a long time.

[Farbin Kaiber]

Yes, yes it is.

[TwoJ's]

Jean & Ben both have valid points about the appearance of the cat. You have a high probability of passing the visual BAR inspection with the BMW logo on the cat.

I would be more concerned about the actual tail pipe emissions (sniff test) not passing. Think about it, the M3 is 2500cc 4 cyl, vs. your transplant at 3500cc 6 cyl. That's a 29% bigger (& all the combustion gas volumn etc.) motor (yea!!) - but you trying to put all the combusted volume through a cat that is made to function correctly (convert NOX) at @ 30% less volume. I'm sure the manufacturer overbuilt the cat somewhat - but the exotic materials inside it are very expensive so I question if they put 30% more than it needed. Said another way - if you have a 100,000 gal pool & put a filter on it that is for a 70,000 gal pool, it's not going to get out all the gunk.

Not really. This is correct, but smog tests aren't done at redline, are they? A 2.3L @ 7800 rpm flows about 9 m^3 per minute. For a 3.5L to exceed that flow, it will have to be spinning over 5,125 rpm. I doubt they test that high.

Those calcs were very rough, and done disregarding stuff like VE.

Jack, after researching, I have no doubt the m3 exhaust system will be great to match up with the m30. The center section is actually from a standard e30 m3 (2.3 liter) instead of a sport evo (2.5 liter), but besides the fact, you have to take into account many different things. The s14 and the m30 are two VERY different engines, one revving to 7.8 RPM and the other revving to 6.2K. The s14 turns at a much faster rate than the m30 and with this among many other factors the e30 m3 center section was designed to withstand more than it's engine could put out. Another supporting argument towards that is (if I believe correctly) the standard e30 m3 (2.3 liter) had the same cats as the e30 m3 sport evo (2.5 liter) and so this somewhat proves the manufacturers put more than enough materials into the cat to make it withstand a higher power engine. All in all, I believe it will pass smog fine with the center section on, it will sound great, and flow nicely. I'm not planning on turboing the m30 anyways, the cats will be able to handle a stock m30.

You are right kind of. Cats are spec'd for a certain volume flow rate. The m30 does exceed the flow rate of the stock s14, but not until you get up in the rev range. But past that you will be creating excessive backpressure and heat.

[CorvallisBMW]

Not really. This is correct, but smog tests aren't done at redline, are they? A 2.3L @ 7800 rpm flows about 9 m^3 per minute. For a 3.5L to exceed that flow, it will have to be spinning over 5,125 rpm.

Engineering FTW.

[TwoJ's]

Engineering FTW.

lol, I couldn't agree more. That's high school level shit though.

[netcsk]

I have been working on building myself a large tool kit, but using all (mostly) new parts. As known, the e30 foam pieces are NLA for the large kit. I looked around and found that the M6 pieces are still available. I rolled the dice and it paid off (for only a few bucks). The bulb foam has a different layout, but holds all the same bulbs. I'll be getting bulbs and fuses soon.

I just wanted to update everyone since this is where I got some of the info to build my kit.


Foam for trunk lid:

Tag for the trunk foam:


Foam for the bulb/fuse holder:

Tag for the bulb foam:

[Jparkr]

Last page is clean. Im not going to go through every page and weed it out. If you have positive things to say then do so. But there is no need in beating a dead horse.

If he wants to continue he will do so on his own accord.

[gstuning]

Not really. This is correct, but smog tests aren't done at redline, are they? A 2.3L @ 7800 rpm flows about 9 m^3 per minute. For a 3.5L to exceed that flow, it will have to be spinning over 5,125 rpm. I doubt they test that high.

Those calcs were very rough, and done disregarding stuff like VE.

The VE is important as that is the fundemental to air flow.
I can´t even believe you made such a crude statement.

The VE on the M30 starts falling at 4k and hard.
Calculatable to about 60-65% VE at 6k. This is the same airflow at 6k as a 2.3 engine at 90-98% VE.

Engine displacement is not an indicator of airflow without talking about it´s VE curve.

[TwoJ's]

The VE is important as that is the fundemental to air flow.
I can´t even believe you made such a crude statement.

The VE on the M30 starts falling at 4k and hard.
Calculatable to about 60-65% VE at 6k. This is the same airflow at 6k as a 2.3 engine at 90-98% VE.

Engine displacement is not an indicator of airflow without talking about it´s VE curve.

Believe it. As I said:

Those calcs were very rough, and done disregarding stuff like VE.

If we were actually engineering something, the VE would be significant. But it is definitely not a matter of concern in this situation. Do you even realize the context of this conversation? What does 6000 rpm have to do with an emissions test? NOTHING. The tests aren't performed at that engine speed -- or anywhere near them. And no one is trying to be precise or engineer anything here... we're just talking about whether or not the cats would work.

Also, can you back up your "calculatable to about 60-65% @ 6000 rpm" statement with actual data? I highly doubt it. First of all, that statement is foolish, because if this VE data for the m30 that you speak of does exist , it is likely going to be empirical and not calculated. Second of all, the cats that were used for the US s14 were designed for use on a 2.5L engine with a higher VE than the US 2.3L version. So, they probably have a "factor of safety" of at least 1.5.

So, I can't believe that you can't believe I would make "such a crude statement".

[Jesse30]

bump, wyatt haters check this thread instead

[Stephen]

http://www.r3vlimited.com/board/showthread.php?t=163291