# engine question for E46



## NP2004 (Feb 5, 2004)

Ive always wondered why when the E36 M3 engine with 240hp was replaced with the E46 M3 engine with 333hp the 240hp engine wasnt put into the E46 330 instead of using the 225hp engine. Is there a major reason why it wasnt used?


----------



## Alex Baumann (Dec 19, 2001)

Because M engines are only for M cars. They are being produced exclusively in Garching at the M-Motorsport GmbH under supervision (BMW's Motorsport Division)


----------



## Kaz (Dec 21, 2001)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the (US) S52 have single VANOS, whereas the M52TU that was introduced with the E46 has double-VANOS? Rather than continue to reuse an old engine, I think it made sense to move forward. And if the 3.2l S52 did continue, I think it would create some marketplace confusion with the introduction of the S54 which is also the same displacement.

But a few parts, like the S52's forged crank, DID make it into the M54B30.


----------



## Alex Baumann (Dec 19, 2001)

That's correct, Kaz. The S52 has single VANOS (which is actually the Alpina B3 engine is based on)


----------



## Plaz (Dec 19, 2001)

Alex Baumann said:


> That's correct, Kaz. The S52 has single VANOS (which is actually the Alpina B3 engine is based on)


 What's the difference? Intake adjustments only, vs. intake and exhaust adjustments?


----------



## Kaz (Dec 21, 2001)

Single-VANOS only works on the intake cam. If you look at a single-VANOS engine, you can see the actuatin module on the front of intake side of the engine.


----------



## NP2004 (Feb 5, 2004)

Yeah it might be older technology but just a shame that the newer technology cant make as much horsepower or even more for the 330.


----------



## Kaz (Dec 21, 2001)

NP2004 said:


> Yeah it might be older technology but just a shame that the newer technology cant make as much horsepower or even more for the 330.


That's not true. bhp/l for the S52B32US and the S54B30 are basically identical. There is a 0.2l displacement difference and a 15bhp power difference. And I'm willing to bet the power curve of the S54 is WAY fatter. And it likely gets better mileage and lower emissions.


----------



## MicahO (Apr 19, 2004)

Kaz said:


> That's not true. bhp/l for the S52B32US and the S54B30 are basically identical. There is a 0.2l displacement difference and a 15bhp power difference. And I'm willing to bet the power curve of the S54 is WAY fatter. And it likely gets better mileage and lower emissions.


All of this is true, and the m54b30 is a ULEV motor (interestingly, the M54B25 is only LEV).


----------



## andy_thomas (Oct 7, 2002)

NP2004 said:


> Ive always wondered why when the E36 M3 engine with 240hp was replaced with the E46 M3 engine with 333hp the 240hp engine wasnt put into the E46 330 instead of using the 225hp engine. Is there a major reason why it wasnt used?


Well, two main reasons:

1) the 240 bhp engine was for the North American markets only
2) It would not achieve the kinds of emissions required for it to be a "world" engine

There's no doubt that the engineering know-how garnered from building and maintaining the 240 bhp US/Can M3 engines would be put to use elsewhere, mind.


----------



## andy_thomas (Oct 7, 2002)

NP2004 said:


> Yeah it might be older technology but just a shame that the newer technology cant make as much horsepower or even more for the 330.


The emissions are lower. Might not mean much to you, but it does to the wider BMW market. The S50/S52 engines where only for a couple of markets, whereas the M54B30 is for about 60 markets. A 15 bhp drop with 0.2 litre capacity loss (vs S52B32) and lower emissions for every eventuality is pretty good going.


----------



## GregD (Feb 5, 2003)

andy_thomas said:


> The emissions are lower. Might not mean much to you, but it does to the wider BMW market. The S50/S52 engines where only for a couple of markets, whereas the M54B30 is for about 60 markets. A 15 bhp drop with 0.2 litre capacity loss (vs S52B32) and lower emissions for every eventuality is pretty good going.


Also, if you get the ZHP option, it's only a 5 bhp drop, so the hp/l is actually better than the old M3 engine.


----------



## rkahn (Feb 11, 2004)

GregD said:


> Also, if you get the ZHP option, it's only a 5 bhp drop, so the hp/l is actually better than the old M3 engine.


Speaking of LEV vs. ULEV, when I bought my 04 330Xi, the salesman told me it was a ULEV. But that's not mentioned in any brochure or on the window sticker. The sticker showed emission equal to the average car, which didn't make me think of ULEV either.

Is the 225hp engine LEV, ULEV or what?

rkahn


----------



## Kaz (Dec 21, 2001)

rkahn said:


> Speaking of LEV vs. ULEV, when I bought my 04 330Xi, the salesman told me it was a ULEV. But that's not mentioned in any brochure or on the window sticker. The sticker showed emission equal to the average car, which didn't make me think of ULEV either.
> 
> Is the 225hp engine LEV, ULEV or what?
> 
> rkahn


M54B25 is LEV
M54B30is ULEV
M56B25 is SULEV

I'd like to point out that the Ford Expedition is rated as a LEV.


----------



## GregD (Feb 5, 2003)

Kaz said:


> M54B25 is LEV
> M54B30is ULEV
> M56B25 is SULEV
> 
> I'd like to point out that the Ford Expedition is rated as a LEV.


I saw there was another thread where someone was saying that the SULEV (M56B25) engine doesn't perform as well as the LEV (M54B25) engine. Anyone know if this is true? I believe the factory HP and torque ratings are the same. :dunno:


----------



## Kaz (Dec 21, 2001)

GregD said:


> I saw there was another thread where someone was saying that the SULEV (M56B25) engine doesn't perform as well as the LEV (M54B25) engine. Anyone know if this is true? I believe the factory HP and torque ratings are the same. :dunno:


I saw that too. I don't know if I believe it. AFAIK there isn't some mandate, even here in California, that a manufacturer must sell SULEV cars. So if it's not mandatory, why would BMW bother designing it? And if the M56 was such a POS, I would expect a flood of complaints from folks here in CA.

I just took a really quick look in the ETK, and it seems the heads, valves, cams, rods are the same, but with a different block and pistons, and I know it has a different intake and M54M30 airflow sensor, and stuff like that.


----------



## GregD (Feb 5, 2003)

Kaz said:


> I saw that too. I don't know if I believe it. AFAIK there isn't some mandate, even here in California, that a manufacturer must sell SULEV cars. So if it's not mandatory, why would BMW bother designing it? And if the M56 was such a POS, I would expect a flood of complaints from folks here in CA.
> 
> I just took a really quick look in the ETK, and it seems the heads, valves, cams, rods are the same, but with a different block and pistons, and I know it has a different intake and M54M30 airflow sensor, and stuff like that.


In the last month I've driven a 525i and an X3 2.5, both with automatics. In both cases, I was surprised with how well both cars seemed to accelerate and run. I expected them to feel much slower being relative heavy vehicles with automatics. Just a seat of the pants reaction though.


----------



## Kaz (Dec 21, 2001)

GregD said:


> In the last month I've driven a 525i and an X3 2.5, both with automatics. In both cases, I was surprised with how well both cars seemed to accelerate and run. I expected them to feel much slower being relative heavy vehicles with automatics. Just a seat of the pants reaction though.


Keep in mind those still run M54B25s.


----------



## rkahn (Feb 11, 2004)

Kaz said:


> M54B25 is LEV
> M54B30is ULEV
> M56B25 is SULEV
> 
> I'd like to point out that the Ford Expedition is rated as a LEV.


As a newbie, which one do I have in a '04 330Xi not in California. Thanks.


----------



## NP2004 (Feb 5, 2004)

I got another basic question about engines whats the major difference between the Inline 6 Versus the V6 aside from the configuration of the engine? Pros and Cons?


----------

