Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Seeking CSL knowledge.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • glendog74
    replied
    I believe anything i am told... :whistle:

    Leave a comment:


  • Rutkowski
    replied
    Originally posted by shimmy View Post
    100




    You are a mentalist
    yes. :whistle:

    Leave a comment:


  • shimmy
    replied
    100




    You are a mentalist

    Leave a comment:


  • Rutkowski
    replied
    Originally posted by The Gorilla View Post
    Hi,

    I have always maintained on many posts
    that to get much above 360 BHP on a S54
    is really big money for maybe 20/30 BHP
    if your really lucky.

    People seem to forget that some of
    these Race engine numbers are not
    only 50k plus in parts, but they are around
    1500/2000 Km in life.

    Many stock S54's do not even make
    320 BHP from the factory, and CSL's
    are more like 330-340 than its claimed 360.

    To get an alleged 360 BHP on standard Cam profile
    with a better volume intake and N type map
    is not living in the real world.

    A N type map and a carbon box is not 40bhp on
    a stock S54, well only if your selling them.

    Dyno figures have so many variables that
    there almost irrelevent.

    4.1 Diff suits the engine rev band/ Gearbox ratios
    a little better, but does not really make the car a lot quicker.

    There's a Drexler diff in my CSL, while its very good for Track
    its not really suited to everyday driving.


    Regards,

    The Gorilla.
    My M3 made close to 340bhp proven with well over 100 dyno tests and over a course of 3 years. I added carbon airbox and a remap from Evolve. I believe the 360bhp power figure. :thumbs:

    Another good power improver would be the 'Okada' stuff and power pulleys perhaps?

    Leave a comment:


  • shimmy
    replied
    Power pulleys :smokin:


    Nuff said!

    Leave a comment:


  • The Gorilla
    replied
    Hi,

    I have always maintained on many posts
    that to get much above 360 BHP on a S54
    is really big money for maybe 20/30 BHP
    if your really lucky.

    People seem to forget that some of
    these Race engine numbers are not
    only 50k plus in parts, but they are around
    1500/2000 Km in life.

    Many stock S54's do not even make
    320 BHP from the factory, and CSL's
    are more like 330-340 than its claimed 360.

    To get an alleged 360 BHP on standard Cam profile
    with a better volume intake and N type map
    is not living in the real world.

    A N type map and a carbon box is not 40bhp on
    a stock S54, well only if your selling them.

    Dyno figures have so many variables that
    there almost irrelevent.

    4.1 Diff suits the engine rev band/ Gearbox ratios
    a little better, but does not really make the car a lot quicker.

    There's a Drexler diff in my CSL, while its very good for Track
    its not really suited to everyday driving.


    Regards,

    The Gorilla.

    Leave a comment:


  • Rutkowski
    replied
    Losing some weight is always a winner and this includes the driver. :thumbs:

    I am begining to think that Carbon Airbox and 100cell cats are the only things worth doing to S54... anymore and it is a big £££ for a few BHP...

    To make a better use of what you already have is to upgrade suspension and brakes... and Drexler LSD?

    Leave a comment:


  • The Gorilla
    replied
    Hi,

    Quote-

    from the s54 ...

    of course many so called tuners may claim hp gains on the dyno ... but on the road you would probably go even slower than stock !!!

    we have checked nearly ALL available n/a methods from nearly ALL "tuners" ...

    lately we have even checked a heavily modified s54 with higher compression , pistons , numerous Schrick camshafts (from 288 up to 304) , Schrick retainers , strengthened valve spinrgs , csl airbox etc ...

    the results is that even that will go head to head with mine which is just an "alpha-n" with an MK airbox and 1460 kg ...

    as for csl's in my current "specs" I must say that I am quite faster ... on a straight line that is !!!

    the only modification that I would suggest for a "regular" M3 after all that testing for the last 3 years is

    shedding weight , a shorter final diff and a lightweight flywheel ... the "alpha-n" conversion and a higher rev limiter is of course not a bad idea as well


    Not sure I follow what your saying here.

    You posted your concerns that your ECU was not making
    fuel adaptions / trimming which would be required in
    order to make real gains with the S54 Vanos optimised,
    as in the CSL, and now your saying that even highly
    tuned cars are not as fast as yours ?

    While I believe that tunning the S54 to some of the alleged
    numbers is cloud cuckoo land, its on par with saying that a
    N type Map with a Carbon Airbox and nothing else produces
    a S54 that is better than a CSL ?

    Correct me if I am wrong, but that is what you are saying.

    Where did BMW go so wrong, I mean all they had to do
    to go racing themselves was take a stock S54, fit an
    MK Carbon Airbox, a bastardised N Type Map, leave the stock
    cams in there, not even optimise the Vanos, and hey presto they
    have a winner !!

    This is just pure Monkey business to a primate.

    Regards,

    The Gorilla.

    Leave a comment:


  • _Nathan_
    replied
    Kms get good power out of them, 420bhp NA, problem is the warranty / rebuild interval is measured in hours.

    Leave a comment:


  • EVANGELOS
    replied
    my 2 cents after literally 100ths of straight line "races" is that as far as power is concerned there is NO WAY to gain a significant amount of power from the s54 ...

    of course many so called tuners may claim hp gains on the dyno ... but on the road you would probably go even slower than stock !!!

    we have checked nearly ALL available n/a methods from nearly ALL "tuners" ...

    lately we have even checked a heavily modified s54 with higher compression , pistons , numerous Schrick camshafts (from 288 up to 304) , Schrick retainers , strengthened valve spinrgs , csl airbox etc ...

    the results is that even that will go head to head with mine which is just an "alpha-n" with an MK airbox and 1460 kg ...

    as for csl's in my current "specs" I must say that I am quite faster ... on a straight line that is !!!

    the only modification that I would suggest for a "regular" M3 after all that testing for the last 3 years is

    shedding weight , a shorter final diff and a lightweight flywheel ... the "alpha-n" conversion and a higher rev limiter is of course not a bad idea as well

    Leave a comment:


  • ///Max
    replied
    Originally posted by The Gorilla View Post
    Hi,

    I would not bother with the CSL Exhaust valves.

    So long as your existing S54 Exhaust Valves are in
    good condition, I would have them triple cut and the
    results would be the same if not better.

    The CSL Exhaust valves were 'optimised' ie cut/shaped
    to allow better exhaust flow for the slightly longer
    duration CSL Cams.

    Rather than the CSL Cams why not go for Schrick Cams
    at 288/280 with the 1mm longer duration which would
    allow the retention of the Vanos, set of solid lifters, nice
    set of uprated valves springs to stop valve float, with
    well matched Titanium Retainers to lighten up the valve
    train and see a true real world 360 BHP + rather than
    all these mythical Dyno ones.

    Downside is you have to add about another
    7/8000 USD to your project build.

    Regards,

    The Gorilla.
    Hmmm, very interesting. I will definitaley put this into consideration and have a look into it. Thanks for the advice. :beer:

    Leave a comment:


  • The Gorilla
    replied
    Hi,

    I would not bother with the CSL Exhaust valves.

    So long as your existing S54 Exhaust Valves are in
    good condition, I would have them triple cut and the
    results would be the same if not better.

    The CSL Exhaust valves were 'optimised' ie cut/shaped
    to allow better exhaust flow for the slightly longer
    duration CSL Cams.

    Rather than the CSL Cams why not go for Schrick Cams
    at 288/280 with the 1mm longer duration which would
    allow the retention of the Vanos, set of solid lifters, nice
    set of uprated valves springs to stop valve float, with
    well matched Titanium Retainers to lighten up the valve
    train and see a true real world 360 BHP + rather than
    all these mythical Dyno ones.

    Downside is you have to add about another
    7/8000 USD to your project build.

    Regards,

    The Gorilla.

    Leave a comment:


  • ///Max
    replied
    Originally posted by rutkowski View Post
    happy modding then max!! :thumbs: :supz:
    Yes sir! Don't mind if I do. And with this post I'm officially Mode S1 - Starting Out.

    Leave a comment:


  • Rutkowski
    replied
    Originally posted by ///Max View Post
    You are correct. The exhaust valves are different but the intake valves are the same according to realoem.com. Refer to parts 6 and 7.

    CSL's valve train:


    M3's valve train:


    Thanks for the help. :thumbs:
    Happy modding then Max!! :thumbs: :supz:

    Leave a comment:


  • ///Max
    replied
    Originally posted by double_r View Post
    Sorry Max, I got the info mixed up between which valves were different
    No need to apologize, brother. I know you were trying to help me out. It's all good.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X