BMW Battle

Tim - You know, if you had mounted a set of R-S4's rather than those Vrededstein's (300 treadwear), I'll bet you could have made up those 4 seconds.

Also, there had to be something more cost effective than 120 hp for $8500.

This is one of those posts I will never understand ... 

Its like cryptic. To the point that it might as well been a private message. 

You gotta read the BMW article in the latest GRM.  

I see ...

I guess I should explain for those of you who haven't read the latest issue that arrived in my mailbox yesterday. Tim has been leading up to an epic battle between his rebuilt 318is and a 1st-gen M3 for many issues now, intimating that he could match the performance of the M3 for 1/4 of the cost.  Well, the race finally took place, and (spoiler alert) he couldn't.  The M3 had more power and more grip.  I was questioning some of his more expensive decisions, namely the costly engine rebuild and the way costly wheels mounted with regular street tires.  In my opinion, some more performance-oriented tires could have made up the difference.  Also, in this age of plentiful turbo 2 liter engines, I thought that something out of a wrecked modern vehicle would have cost less than that rebuild and netted 250 plus horsepower.  Although I do understand his penchant for originality.

In reply to jstein77 :

But turbos don't deliver the driving experience of a nice naturally aspirated engine.  And that $8500 wasn't "for 120 horsepower", it was whileyou'reinthere-osis on an engine rebuild/swap that would have already consumed most of that ticket anyway.  (Even cheap German cars can be frightfully expensive to repair - there's a good reason why it was keeping the weeds down behind a towing yard)

I have an idea in the back of my mind for a K24 engined E30, if the engine will fit (K24s are tall), but at the same time, I wouldn't expect it to be inexpensive either, by the time you make headers for it and an exhaust system that sounds BMW-appropriate and adapting the power steering and air conditioning and everything else.

Modern turbos have very little lag, so I don't believe the driving experience would be diminished.  And these can be obtained for $3k or so, and even if you figure in another $3k for the conversion process, you still end up spending less for double the horsepower.

Wrecked X1's are numerous, and their 2.0 turbo motors put out 228 hp and 258 ft-lbs of torque.  And that's one of the less stressed engines - many are over 300 hp.

In reply to jstein77 :

It's not about lag, it's about response, in both directions of travel.  A 2 liter engine responds differently to tickling the throttle at 3000rpm than it does at 5000rpm.  More RPM means finer control.  It also sounds better, and the whole point is to widen the smile, yes?

300 hp would widen my smile even further.  In fact, my 350 hp reduces me to incoherent giggles pretty much every time. 

In reply to jstein77 :

Yes, but you have all wheel drive and a bunch of computers to handle all the stuff.

Don't get me wrong, I love my AWD car that makes all the mid range boost.  18psi in a 2.5l package is a wonderful thing if you have the grip to exploit it.  But the engine is not what I would want in a substantially lighter, substantially more rear wheel drive car.  Different tools for different problems...

Of course, there's someone who would throw an LS in it, so there's also that.

It may have lost that battle, but the war's far from over. :)

Jordan Rimpela said:

It may have lost that battle, but the war's far from over. :)

Oh, that's interesting. I thought the series was over. Looking forward to the next installment.

jstein77 said:

Tim - You know, if you had mounted a set of R-S4's rather than those Vrededstein's (300 treadwear), I'll bet you could have made up those 4 seconds.

Also, there had to be something more cost effective than 120 hp for $8500.

I think it was only 48hp......

Cost-effective would be the ~$1000 to swap an M50TU out of a junkyard e36 or e34, which would gain about 70hp, but there's nothing new or interesting about that I guess - it's been done hundreds of times. As have most other BMW engines into an e30. Pretty sure nobody has ever put $20k into a 318i just to make it as fast as a stock 325is :)

I know the premise was to keep the car lightweight and balanced as the 318 was intended, and for 7 years of racing an M42 318i myself, that's what I would CONSTANTLY say to people who asked me why I kept the 4-cylinder ("oh, it's all about the balance and lightness!").... But now having finally given in and done the M50 swap myself and adjusted my spring rates to suit, I've found that it really didn't substantially affect handling much at all (and the power more than makes up for it), and all my worries were generally for naught and the car still handles great. And, torques. I'm pretty sure a well-setup M50-swapped e30 could beat an e30 M3 around a big track as well (not mine, but it's a rally car).......

I think it was a cool project in terms of keeping the 318is a 318is, but faster, and to show the concepts behind how it was done -  But yeah, I saw the total cost and was a bit shocked. I have to hope GRM didn't pay full-price since many of the companies that contributed are GRM advertisers and it was to tell a story.  

Also, $80 for two BMW roundels? you guys are true ballers! :)  I got two mint roundels off one of the forums for $10 shipped last year :)

that does make me think of what could make this "battle" even better:

Make it a Melee!

e30 M3

vs.

GRM built 318is

vs.

Stock late 325is e30

vs.

e30 with M50 swap (likely the most popular "grassroots" e30 swap,

put them all on equivalent/similar tires, go 4-on-4. 

it would be easy to find the other two cars "off the shelf" - probably on this forum or any BMW club/forum.....

Some of you guys are missing the point...there was a previous discussion about what Tim was going to do with this car; various alternative engines were discussed, but he finally decided to leave it essentially stock, but optimized.  You just don't find nice 318is cars anymore, particularly with a slicktop.

stuart in mn said:

Some of you guys are missing the point...there was a previous discussion about what Tim was going to do with this car; various alternative engines were discussed, but he finally decided to leave it essentially stock, but optimized.  You just don't find nice 318is cars anymore, particularly with a slicktop.

I get the premise of keeping the M42 (after all, I've owned multiple M42 cars, including one swapped into an e21). But.... "essentially stock?" IDK.....it has a built engine, nothing much in the suspension is stock, exhaust isn't stock, wheels aren't stock,.....Really, only the bodywork and interior are stock. This build is a perfect "sleeper" or "substantially modded" - "stock" would not be part of the description of anything other than its visual appearance.

Anyhow, I still love the article and the build, and the love for the M42. The finished product is amazing and since it's not my money, I'm all for it. But it does feel decidedly un-Grassroots and somewhat laughable to put on the cover "our low-buck 318is takes on the legendary e30 M3....."

and if, as Jordan notes "the war is far from over" that would tend to suggest that they're going to keep throwing money at it until it can beat the M3, presumably with some really high-performance tires.  

irish44j said:

stuart in mn said:

Some of you guys are missing the point...there was a previous discussion about what Tim was going to do with this car; various alternative engines were discussed, but he finally decided to leave it essentially stock, but optimized.  You just don't find nice 318is cars anymore, particularly with a slicktop.

I get the premise of keeping the M42 (after all, I've owned multiple M42 cars, including one swapped into an e21). But.... "essentially stock?" IDK.....it has a built engine, nothing much in the suspension is stock, exhaust isn't stock, wheels aren't stock,.....Really, only the bodywork and interior are stock. This build is a perfect "sleeper" or "substantially modded" - "stock" would not be part of the description of anything other than its visual appearance.

Seems pretty stock to me.  It still has a BMW 4 cylinder, it still has the original drivetrain, they didn't re-engineer the suspension at ALL except for some generic boltonables, the interior is still all present and accounted for, etc.  Basically just mild bolt-ons to restify what is becoming a classic.

Knurled. said:

irish44j said:

stuart in mn said:

Some of you guys are missing the point...there was a previous discussion about what Tim was going to do with this car; various alternative engines were discussed, but he finally decided to leave it essentially stock, but optimized.  You just don't find nice 318is cars anymore, particularly with a slicktop.

I get the premise of keeping the M42 (after all, I've owned multiple M42 cars, including one swapped into an e21). But.... "essentially stock?" IDK.....it has a built engine, nothing much in the suspension is stock, exhaust isn't stock, wheels aren't stock,.....Really, only the bodywork and interior are stock. This build is a perfect "sleeper" or "substantially modded" - "stock" would not be part of the description of anything other than its visual appearance.

 

Seems pretty stock to me.  It still has a BMW 4 cylinder, it still has the original drivetrain, they didn't re-engineer the suspension at ALL except for some generic boltonables, the interior is still all present and accounted for, etc.  Basically just mild bolt-ons to restify what is becoming a classic.

I suppose our definitions of "stock" are different. I tend to consider "stock" as in "it has what it came with from the factory." As the term is used in almost any kind of racing or competition. 

By your definitions, about 95% of car "builds" are 'stock" lol.

Just in case, I give you a 1992 Non Vanos M50 in my 1988 E30 325.  The car was built to the NASA GT2 specs and finished in 2010.  Currently I am refreshing the car to drive it on the track, have been using Auto Crossing to get some seat time and find the ongoing list of things that need to be fixed.  

This has turned out to be a great driving combination.  I did not do any of the hard work getting it running, but I'm really enjoying it.

In 1991 my dad purchased a new 318i, 4 door with a 5 speed. He drove the car and sold it at 125,000 miles five years later.  Having owned a 1969 2002 for years he enjoyed the AC  in the E30 but it was heavy and until you got it above 3500 rpm it had a hard time getting out of the way in traffic. 

Knurled. said:

Seems pretty stock to me.  It still has a BMW 4 cylinder, it still has the original drivetrain, they didn't re-engineer the suspension at ALL except for some generic boltonables, the interior is still all present and accounted for, etc.  Basically just mild bolt-ons to restify what is becoming a classic.

Yes, that was what I meant.

jr02518 said:

Just in case, I give you a 1992 Non Vanos M50 in my 1988 E30 325.  The car was built to the NASA GT2 specs and finished in 2010.  Currently I am refreshing the car to drive it on the track, have been using Auto Crossing to get some seat time and find the ongoing list of things that need to be fixed.  

 

This has turned out to be a great driving combination.  I did not do any of the hard work getting it running, but I'm really enjoying it.

In 1991 my dad purchased a new 318i, 4 door with a 5 speed. He drove the car and sold it at 125,000 miles five years later.  Having owned a 1969 2002 for years he enjoyed the AC  in the E30 but it was heavy and until you got it above 3500 rpm it had a hard time getting out of the way in traffic. 

Since arguing semantics of the word "stock" is pointless, I'll see your M50TU and raise you M50TUV ;), also in a 318, which I did do the (not really that hard) work to swap in a couple months ago.

It amuses me that you have the same strut tower bar (the M42 one), which also clears the M50, as well as the same cone filter as I do (mine is hidden in that "box")

irish44j said:

Knurled. said:

irish44j said:

stuart in mn said:

Some of you guys are missing the point...there was a previous discussion about what Tim was going to do with this car; various alternative engines were discussed, but he finally decided to leave it essentially stock, but optimized.  You just don't find nice 318is cars anymore, particularly with a slicktop.

I get the premise of keeping the M42 (after all, I've owned multiple M42 cars, including one swapped into an e21). But.... "essentially stock?" IDK.....it has a built engine, nothing much in the suspension is stock, exhaust isn't stock, wheels aren't stock,.....Really, only the bodywork and interior are stock. This build is a perfect "sleeper" or "substantially modded" - "stock" would not be part of the description of anything other than its visual appearance.

 

Seems pretty stock to me.  It still has a BMW 4 cylinder, it still has the original drivetrain, they didn't re-engineer the suspension at ALL except for some generic boltonables, the interior is still all present and accounted for, etc.  Basically just mild bolt-ons to restify what is becoming a classic.

I suppose our definitions of "stock" are different. I tend to consider "stock" as in "it has what it came with from the factory." As the term is used in almost any kind of racing or competition. 

By your definitions, about 95% of car "builds" are 'stock" lol.

I'm being a bit tongue in cheek... I know it doesn't come across so good sometimes

I did spend much of yesterday assisting in putting a Ford rearend with a 4 link, and a Jeep front end with leaf springs, under a car that used to contain Porsche running gear and a Subaru engine, and all this felt completely normal, so I also freely admit that my modification scale is skewed.

All the same, reinstalling an engine of the same family as what came out, while not "stock", is pretty noninvasive as far as these things go.  

Knurled. said:

irish44j said:

Knurled. said:

irish44j said:

stuart in mn said:

Some of you guys are missing the point...there was a previous discussion about what Tim was going to do with this car; various alternative engines were discussed, but he finally decided to leave it essentially stock, but optimized.  You just don't find nice 318is cars anymore, particularly with a slicktop.

I get the premise of keeping the M42 (after all, I've owned multiple M42 cars, including one swapped into an e21). But.... "essentially stock?" IDK.....it has a built engine, nothing much in the suspension is stock, exhaust isn't stock, wheels aren't stock,.....Really, only the bodywork and interior are stock. This build is a perfect "sleeper" or "substantially modded" - "stock" would not be part of the description of anything other than its visual appearance.

 

Seems pretty stock to me.  It still has a BMW 4 cylinder, it still has the original drivetrain, they didn't re-engineer the suspension at ALL except for some generic boltonables, the interior is still all present and accounted for, etc.  Basically just mild bolt-ons to restify what is becoming a classic.

I suppose our definitions of "stock" are different. I tend to consider "stock" as in "it has what it came with from the factory." As the term is used in almost any kind of racing or competition. 

By your definitions, about 95% of car "builds" are 'stock" lol.

I'm being a bit tongue in cheek... I know it doesn't come across so good sometimes

 

I did spend much of yesterday assisting in putting a Ford rearend with a 4 link, and a Jeep front end with leaf springs, under a car that used to contain Porsche running gear and a Subaru engine, and all this felt completely normal, so I also freely admit that my modification scale is skewed.

 

All the same, reinstalling an engine of the same family as what came out, while not "stock", is pretty noninvasive as far as these things go.  

oh sure, there are definitely different levels of modding, ranging from "stock-plus" to "sleeper" to "batE36 M3 crazy" lol

Re-read the article. We put both cars on the same tires for the test, not the Vredesteins. 

And just because the turbo engine out of an X1 is cheap, it completely ignores the amount of custom to work to put it in, get gauges working, etc.