RomRaider

Hi! im currently installing m54b30 intake on my m52b28 With m54b30 inletcam.

Having som issues With "muffler flap" output. Table is modified as Close to DISA map as it gets . the problem is when the I start the car and let it Idle, output in RRlogger sets to 0 , touching the throttle once, output goes to 1 (active) . table is TPS 0 on Idle.

is it possible that the defined table is not correct?

30% in map is 375mg/str as DISA light throttle sets to 0 under this threshold

Table wrong way? Try >100% at idle and 0 at full revs.

Yes... that was the problem. reverted table , Works Perfect. thanks !

i am also working on a m52 stroker engine, i'm curious what maps did you tune ? and what did you change to adapt the new crank/cams ?

gr richard

He is on M41.2 ...

Hei. 41.2 .
This was not as easy as it would be .
M52 throttle body , shortened the linkage
Rotated tps 180 degrees , modified inside tps
Longer throttlecable (540, I have an e34)
Bended waterpipe
Re ordered dipstick
Removed bracket holding wiringharness
Blocked waterline to throttlebody

And also, you can not use m52tu fuelrail , because it's to long on the left side and touching crankcase ventilation
. Currently I have started the car , not running well because it's leaking air in one of the tubes on the head .

I'll keep you updated

Hi again. secured intake ports With RTV silicone on the Outer side of the gasket. seems that the gasket is a little bit small for the port on the head.

The car feels a lot different. HUGE gain in low mid range, and cant feel anything lost on the top.

checking the logs after a drive , gained 50(!) mg/str before 4k rpm (compared to m50 manifold) and lost 20+- mg/str from 5k-6k rpm
DISA valve shut off at 4k (chocking engine after this)

consider the lost on top, I am not changing back to m50 manifold due the gain on low-mid range.


cheers .

Cool project, thanks for coming back with the results.

I believe the m50 manifold is working when is bored to 80mm with 80mm throttle + s52 cams.
I have made with only 21 degrees ignition advance due a faulty crank sensor 254hp but at 6500 rpm (false knock reading) and 12.2 afr (11.5 afr on top after 6500rpm ) ) to keep the engine safe until the crank sensor will arrive.

3.0 Stroker
2.0 iron block bored to 84mm
1.8mm shaved block
M54b25 pistons
B30 crank
S52 cams
M3 euro airbox
3.0 m54 maf

It doesn't.... Or well works, but with m52, or m52tu intake, there would be lot more low end torque, with very minor top hp loss. As Aneshen just posted.

But Wow! That's unnatural amount of measured drag. The dyno probably measured that totally wrong. The number you need to check every time is the power measured from wheels. It's quite comparable between dynos of same type (roller, hub, etc). You have 184.5 hp measured from wheels. Normal drag amount would be 30-40 hp, which would mean about. 230-240 hp, which the expected hp level for your setup. (That hp level has been measured from many many cars with s52 cams in reputable dynos). With more ignition advance, your engine will probably make +240hp, but I highly doubt that it will make +250hp. For example my car made 192hp from wheels and 36hp of drag which is 228hp from crank. (M52b28, s52 cams, m50 intake, big bore throttle-body +e85). The real number in my should have been 240~is hp from crank, but something broke from the engine just before the dyno, and it was bit low on power and the torque curve looks like roller coaster ride:

(the torque is too much in the sheet. The dyno measured engine RPM wrong and it calculates torque from measured kW and RPM. So real peak torque is about 300Nm.)

But even with broken engine, my car would have unnatural amount of hp, if the drag power would be that 70hp

BTW that bigger airbox and MAF is quite useless for s52 cams. I tested in my engine with all stock b28 parts (paper filter etc.) and then with bigger MAF and just straight CAI without filter and there was zero difference in airflow/load curves between those. Just more intake noises with CAI. So I kept all stock m52 parts in my car

Thank you Pazi. Good to know!

I will do another run.

No prob. I mistyped bit and I meant that it now has about 210-220 hp in reality. But you will get that 230-240 when it's running properly. It missing like 3-6 degrees of timing currently. Maybe that +240 if you are lucky and everything works out.

Those s52 cams seem to be the #1 limitation to get more hp, so I'm probably ditching those for my upcoming engine and getting more aggressive ones. I just need to hunt down which would be the cheapest ones, because I don't want to spend +1000 €/usd for pair of cams.

Check out koed.dk. they have aggressiv cams , high price though .

It's a nice drivable car with 240 cams on intake and exhaust and m54 intakemanifold, but it would be cool to see the comparison between that setup and just some aggressive cams (more than s52)

I dont really agree with what you guys are saying. M54B30 intake is a whole lot more restrictive than the m50b25 one and the only restriction on the latter is the edge forming due to the intake ports being smaller than the b25 manifold runners. .
US M3 cams on a b28 engine are capping off at ~6900RPM on my setup. And so far i have achieved a healthy 250HP on the crank on pump gas and mild advance.

No it's not. The m54b30 intake has quite big runners. But not that big as m50 intake yeah. But It's all about air velocity in the intake runners. And the m50 runners are too big for optimal airflow speed in this kind of power level. You would need +350hp NA engine to make use of all that flow area m50 intake has. Also for optimal air velocity you need long runners. Which the m52, m52tu and m54 intakes have. Read this for example: http://racehead.com.au/designing-perfor ... uld-i-use/

as said there 40mm runner will support up to 360hp in 6 cyl NA engine and without more complex calculations, the area on m50 intake runner matches about that 40mm round runner. So it's way too big. Plotting that RHD estimates to excel gives that 35mm runner would be enough for 250hp. Which is roughly the m52 intake runner size which is the smallest of the m5x ones.

And that's true that there is edge where the intake meets head, but it doesn't really matter because it's in the way that you have small runner opening to bigger hole in head. Other way around would be problematic. And the intake hole in the head is too big from factory. b20 head has lot more reasonable port size, but too bad, it has smaller valves also.

EDIT and small footnote. The m50 intake has some weird resonance at 6000RPM-ish so in stock m52b28 it gives quite high hp numbers, because the stock cams choke the engine just before that. But with more aggressive cams you move the best hp RPM higher from that 6000RPm resonance point and in that point the m50 starts to restrict the engine hp. So with s52 cams or agressive cams, the m50 intake is not very good anymore. The reason why some engines with aggressive cams make lot more hp with ITB's than with m50 intake is not that the ITB's are so great. But it's just that the m50 intake doesn't perform well from 6500 RPM up. It should start working from 7500 upwards, but you need something like +300 degree cams to move peak hp RPM to there.