# guys&gals see this: JConforti's OBD2 cam kit came out for S52....



## blackdawg (Jan 4, 2002)

had not idea until i saw it on the coupe board the .org.

it seems unlikely to be CA emissions friendly, but it would be interesting to see if the kit can really put out the 300hp (crank) and 270ft#'s.

there are dyno numbers and everything at www.eurosportperformance.com

miniM or whoever said it was about $3k.

and the upside? it will work on the S52'd e36M3s. it is a very alluring option. removing weight is expensive, but pretty key for performance parameters. so if one could get that much HP and torque from an S52 engine but at the 2990lbs......it would offset the HP advantage the 3410lb. E46M3 has for a track car. (a more inexpensive option, naturally).


----------



## blackdawg (Jan 4, 2002)

*oops.*

sorry, the URL is incorrect:

http://www.eurosporthighperformance.com/cams.html

there.


----------



## nate (Dec 24, 2001)

blackdawg said:


> *and the upside? it will work on the S52'd e36M3s. it is a very alluring option. removing weight is expensive, but pretty key for performance parameters. so if one could get that much HP and torque from an S52 engine but at the 2990lbs......it would offset the HP advantage the 3410lb. E46M3 has for a track car. (a more inexpensive option, naturally). *


Doesn't the E46 M3 still have a performance advantage over the 321hp and slightly lighter E36 M3 Evo?

Since when have E36s weighed under 3000lbs? Maybe the LTW edition

Looks like a great upgrade though :bigpimp:


----------



## JST (Dec 19, 2001)

*Re: oops.*



blackdawg said:


> *sorry, the URL is incorrect:
> 
> http://www.eurosporthighperformance.com/cams.html
> 
> there. *


I think I've found the first thing I'm going to buy when my CPO warranty expires.


----------



## nate (Dec 24, 2001)

*Re: Re: oops.*



JST said:


> *
> 
> I think I've found the first thing I'm going to buy when my CPO warranty expires. *


You should put a roll bar in there for track events before the cams


----------



## blackdawg (Jan 4, 2002)

*nate & the weight....*

when bmw quotes the weight, i think it's for car, tank o gas and driver.

and at that point, the e36m3 was about 3195? maybe a tad lower?

anyway, i think some people put their car on the scales and it's more akin to 2990 or so. anyway, the ballpark is a 400 pound differential.

and those 400 pounds would (theoretically) be damn expensive to shed. hood? body paneling? wheels? back seat? seats? a/c unit? that stuff isn't cheap, and then you dial in some weight for the cage.

anyhow.

it's real power. unlike supercharging, which varies a lot with OBD2 adaptation and the weather, this is true, n/a power.


----------



## nate (Dec 24, 2001)

*Re: nate & the weight....*



blackdawg said:


> *when bmw quotes the weight, i think it's for car, tank o gas and driver.
> 
> and at that point, the e36m3 was about 3195? maybe a tad lower?
> 
> ...


I don't think so :dunno:

Last time that I was at the track, I put my car on the scales. BMW rates the 328Ci at 3197(?), mine should be heavier because of the sunroof. It came in at 3220lbs. I talked to someone that had a track only E36 M3 with a cage and some stripped out bits, seemed like no back seats and carbon fiber interior paneling. Hers was 20lbs more than my car. Both without driver :dunno: Also, check out the differential between "weight" and "test weight" in R&T test summaries. I am almost certain the quoted weight is without driver, maybe with gas...

I don't understand this notion that it is a light car :dunno:


----------



## dakarm (Apr 1, 2002)

Many M coupe owners have had their car weighed. Most come out to 295x or less. Some have been with full tank of gas other with less then 1/2.


Also the information about the weight is in the M coupe manual. It clearly states that the total published weight include the weight of the driver and it is full wet weight. The weight of the driver is a bit of a gray area. I've heard from 150 to 180 but I tend to believe the 180lb.


----------



## Guest (May 17, 2002)

BTW, installing this cam kit disables the traction control.

That might be a relevent factor for some who would otherwise be interested.


----------



## blackdawg (Jan 4, 2002)

*ASC+t.*

that's the second thing i do when i get in the car. okay, third. seatbelt. starter. disable ASC+T.

seems that the butterfly valve (ASC actuator) is pretty constraining on the air flow feeding into the engine.

even when "off".


----------



## JST (Dec 19, 2001)

TD said:


> *BTW, installing this cam kit disables the traction control.
> 
> That might be a relevent factor for some who would otherwise be interested. *


I was actually reading through a long thread on bimmerforums on the cam kit (in the E36 M3 section, here) and the consensus was that if you wanted to leave the stock throttle-body (with ASC+T on it) in place, you could. According to one poster, swapping in the non ASC TB that comes with the kit is good for about 4 hp, so it looks like you don't lose that much.

Somewhere in that thread is an interesting overlay of dyno graphs of the cam kit, the Euro motor, the OBD I conversion, and the E46 M3.

Apparently the Racelogic traction control that Alan Taur runs on his car only works with non-OBD II engines, so that isn't a solution.


----------



## blackdawg (Jan 4, 2002)

*thanks, JST, for the link.*

these sort of data almost make me want to cancel the e46m3 order and just tinker (to death, as i'm wont to do) with an e36m3.

my curiosity is killing me, and on principle, i feel as though i MUST complete the order, form my own impressions of the car, compare it to my empirical knowledge of my prior e36m3 and my e36/8 and then decide, though.

not like the e36m3's are going anywhere. they made plenty of them. now, e30m3's are a real pain in the a$$ to get ahold of with low mileage.


----------



## Guest (May 17, 2002)

JST said:


> *
> 
> I was actually reading through a long thread on bimmerforums on the cam kit (in the E36 M3 section, here) and the consensus was that if you wanted to leave the stock throttle-body (with ASC+T on it) in place, you could. According to one poster, swapping in the non ASC TB that comes with the kit is good for about 4 hp, so it looks like you don't lose that much.
> 
> ...


I spent more time than I should have reading through a cam thread at bimmerforums after a link was posted in reply to your question at the E36 M3 board at the Org. However, I missed the part about leaving that in and sacrificing 4 HP.

Where would one find a shop they'd trust to do this?


----------



## Guest (May 17, 2002)

JST said:


> *
> Somewhere in that thread is an interesting overlay of dyno graphs of the cam kit, the Euro motor, the OBD I conversion, and the E46 M3.
> *


FYI, this graph is on PAGE 3 of the thread.


----------



## blackdawg (Jan 4, 2002)

*shouldn't be too difficult.*

any indy tuner local shop who could do suspension work or fix an engine which has overrev'd could do this simply.

it almost looks like fun. to put in new cams. and the intake manifold.

the rest is just plumbing crap.

what i'm most amazed at mostly with the intake manifold and cams, in the past, the main criticism is that you lose low-end power but gain in the uppity-up range.

and the dyno does not bear this out at all. still hard to believe. i'm not a humongous, drooling JimC sycophant, but you have to admire a man who does this as his hobby and kicks DINAN's buttocks all over the place.


----------



## nate (Dec 24, 2001)

TD said:


> *
> 
> FYI, this graph is on PAGE 3 of the thread. *


what's up with the graph?

shouldn't the graphs always cross at 5252? They don't

That DINAN S/C E36 is the best up there. Lots of torque everwhere and the most hp


----------



## JST (Dec 19, 2001)

nate328Ci said:


> *
> 
> what's up with the graph?
> 
> ...


HP/torque graphs only cross at 5252 when they're calibrated on the same scale, no? The hp axis is on one side and the torque axis is on the other. If you plotted them on the same axis, they'd cross.

Forced induction is obviously the way to go if what you care about is big power, but in the BMW application I prefer the linearity of NA. Moreover, I'd feel better about long-term durability of a NA cam kit than a supercharger install. Plus, the cams are cheaper, and are much stealthier.

TD, as for your question, I'm sure Curry's could do this job in a snap; I've heard good things about their work, although I gather they're pricey. For something like this, though, I wouldn't mind paying a bit more.


----------



## nate (Dec 24, 2001)

JST said:


> *
> 
> HP/torque graphs only cross at 5252 when they're calibrated on the same scale, no? The hp axis is on one side and the torque axis is on the other. If you plotted them on the same axis, they'd cross.
> 
> ...


ah, true....forgot about the scaling...

well, for N/A, the the S54 is king...

The Cam upgrade looks great. Conforti better get a 2.8L kit :eeps:


----------



## Guest (May 17, 2002)

nate328Ci said:


> *
> 
> ah, true....forgot about the scaling...
> 
> ...


Yeah. You should be happy about this since you have an M52TU in your car and this kit is for the S52 with which it shares it's architecture. I imagine a kit for the M52 could be achieved with minimal changes to this kit.


----------



## nate (Dec 24, 2001)

TD said:


> *
> 
> Yeah. You should be happy about this since you have an M52TU in your car and this kit is for the S52 with which it shares it's architecture. I imagine a kit for the M52 could be achieved with minimal changes to this kit. *


That would be nice


----------



## blackdawg (Jan 4, 2002)

*tangential points to add:*

JST:

it's not that supercharging is not linear, it still is and highly proportional to engine rpms. i do not mind that part of supercharging at all. what i do mind, though, are the other side issues. the kit cost me $6900 (dinan now sells for $5995 to be competitive) and the oil cooler cost me a fat $1800 or so. and i still have problems in hot weather recouping my HP. intercooling as a one-off option is rather expensive.

so, for $3k, plus whatever labor, and damnit get a flywheel whilst you're at it!, you're getting power which is very real and much more reliable. compression won't suffer at all.

'am surprised it's not closer to $4k, actually. the schrick cams and the s50 runners are most of the cost...and JC usually prices to recoup his R&D a la his shark injector which is expensive.


----------

