BMW Z3 3.0L

[billz]

The 2.8 don't fetch the same money. Still a great drive with plenty of power tho. I would not know, i have not been over 5mph!

Dave i have adjusted it for you

 

[Grumps]

I have to admit i do prefer the wide body styling of the pre face lift Z . As i said in the post it's probably the extra 50BHP

You can add an M50 inlet manifold for £200 and remap a 2.8 and get 3.0 power for considerably less money.

 

[Roger George]

Really!!! i was under the impression the rear differential was geared differently , but hey i could be wrong

 

[Grumps]

There's threads on here about the M50 conversion. Its on my list to do. You can usually get one off ebay for £150-200 then you'll need a conversion kit which is around £80. Well worth doing on a 2.8.

 

[Roger George]

More to the point , the 2.8 on ebay only made a smidge under £2400 with a hard top , so my guestimate on £2000 without a hard top will be nearer than the £4000 some on here suggest , it's definitely a put off over that 100,000 miles.

 

[Dino D]

I have to admit i do prefer the wide body styling of the pre face lift Z . As i said in the post it's probably the extra 50BHP

231 - 192 = 50bhp??!!

 

[Roger George]

Ish!

 

[Dino D]

Really!!! i was under the impression the rear differential was geared differently , but hey i could be wrong

Yes the 3.0l has a slightly longer final drive
I'm manual form 3.07 vs 3.15 for the 2.8

For the autos the 3.0 is 3.46 vs 4.10 for the 2.8
I'm assuming the gearbox ratios would be quite different as that is a big jump.

 

[Roger George]

As we all know , we loose a few horses with milage

 

[Roger George]

Yes the 3.0l has a slightly longer final drive
I'm manual form 3.07 vs 3.15 for the 2.8

For the autos the 3.0 is 3.46 vs 4.10 for the 2.8
I'm assuming the gearbox ratios would be quite different as that is a big jump.

Yes that was my thoughts , so not quite as straight forward as one might guess , but no harm in trying it out ,

 

[Roger George]

231 - 192 = 50bhp??!!

As we all know , we loose a few horses with milage

 

[billz]

Everyone mentions that the Manifold conversion is equivalent to the 3.0 yet i have never seen any figures from a dyno run to confirm this, so it would be good for anyone who has done this mod to post up the true facts and figures as i would presume the 3.0 would still have a lot more torque over the 2.8 with conversion

 

[Grumps]

Theres plenty online Bill stating it gives an extra 30bhp and a remap and decent pipe gives an extra 15-20. It's as near as makes no difference and if your on a budget then surely a 2.8 with the bits done is a worthy contender. As you say tho these are not dyno figures. I'm sure Ash bless him had all these figures as his goal was to get the max possible out of his 2.8. I dont know if @Lee did any of this on his 2.8?

 

[billz]

I know there is lots of info on the Web. But where is the dyno's to back the figures up.
I could start things by saying a scorpion exhaust and remap and cone filter give me + 30 bhp but unless I can back it up with a dyno showing the figures then anything claimed is make believe

 

[billz]

@Twin Turbo has made his claims and backed them up with dyno runs. All I am saying is where are the dynos for this modification

 

[Grumps]

Dont know if @Antm72 can help with this as he did this on his first 2.8

 

[Dino D]

Everyone mentions that the Manifold conversion is equivalent to the 3.0 yet i have never seen any figures from a dyno run to confirm this, so it would be good for anyone who has done this mod to post up the true facts and figures as i would presume the 3.0 would still have a lot more torque over the 2.8 with conversion

@deni2s did some dyno runs on the same dyno when he did his I think.

I don't think I've seen dyno runs for just the manifold but have seen manifold + cams + exhaust etc and some very good numbers but the cams and proper set up added a lot I believe.

The 3.0l has a lot more torque than the 2.8 single vanos. The double vanos creates infinite adjustment so boost torque throughout rev range but the single vanos is only on/off at around 3,5k rpm.
I've. It driven a 2.8 with dual vanos to compare but comparing my single vanos 2.8 to a 3.0l the 3.0l pulls more but because it's so linear felt different without that switch point (no 'vtec yo' moment and I had a great 2.2vtec before my 330 and I really missed the 'vtec yo' moment (and the gearshift) but not the FWD!)

 

[deni2s]

@deni2s did some dyno runs on the same dyno when he did his I think.

Same dyno, first is m54 3.0 stock z3 coupe, second - m52b28 with s52 cams, alpina manifold and Simota CAI, some chiptune, stock exhaust.

 

[deni2s]

@deni2s did some dyno runs on the same dyno when he did his I think.

Same dyno, first is m54 3.0 stock z3 coupe, second - m52b28 with s52 cams, alpina manifold and Simota CAI, some chiptune, stock exhaust.

We also did some side by side runs, 3.0 goes first at the start, but after first few seconds distance doesn't change much and stays the same. 3.0 still has a lot more torque, but 2.8 has higher rpm.

 

[billz]

So is it a case then just doing the manifold swap would not take it to the 3.0 values. You would then need to do other additional mods to get to this ?