CDV question

Angus McCoatup

Member
 Cumbria
Hello there - just a few things about the CDV issue which I'd be really grateful for opinions about.

I'm running a Z4M coupe with the standard CDV still in place. Having read about the benefits of removing/modifying it, and from my own experience of the standard CDV, I'm pretty keen to do something about it.

Spoke with a nearby independent BMW specialist the other day about having something done. He said he could do it but advised against it. His reason was that the Z4 clutch does not have springs in the plates and the CDV was there to prevent damage to it if the driver's foot slipped off the clutch pedal (presumably this must mean that the springs in the clutch plates of other cars prevent damage if feet happen to slip off) :? . Does this seem right? Can't say I've ever had a foot slip off a pedal, so I think I'd be prepared to take the risk.

The other thing is whether to put in a modified CDV (more likely modify the existing one and put it back) or just remove it completely and join the two ends of the hoses together. It seems to me that even a modified CDV would restrict the flow of clutch fluid more than having nothing there at all, so I was wondering if there would be a more noticeable difference by removing it altogether.

Then there's the warranty issue. I still have just over 2 years of the original warranty left on the car. I guess removing the CVD altogether would be pretty obvious during a check under the car and would give BMW a reason to reject future drivetrain related warranty claims. Has anyone thrown caution to the winds and removed the CDV altogether while their car was still well within the warranty period?

Many thanks for any views.
 
I put in the modified CDV on my previous Z4 3.0, and the difference was great.

I did NOT modify the CDV in my M, as to be honest, the M with CDV was not that much different to the 3.0 without. I also drove a M with the modified CDV and found it not different enough to warrant a change.

Just to emphasise again - the CDV difference with the 3.0 was significant, however it was much less so with the M. Just keep that in mind as I am sure there will be lots of people coming along saying how great it was, but keep an eye on M drivers only.
 
I was going to do the CDV delete, but after about 7 weeks and 4,000 miles I've got used to the action of the CDV and can drive around it in town traffic.

I didn't know that BMW put a non-sprung racing clutch in the car, but I'm sure it would be easy enough to confirm.

I'm not sure what damage it would cause as it'd ostensibly be no worse than a racing clutch which you just side-step when you gas it. The Z4M also has a flexible mount on the propshaft which is supposed to absorb any shunts anyway.

So, who's going to take their's off to check :poke:
 
There are no springs on the friction plate, but the dual mass flywheel has a sprung body anyway. It is essentially doing the job of the friction plate springs in itself... so there is no need to worry about the CDV function saving anything as the gearbox etc is already isolated from excessive load shock from the DMF.

Not sure on the M, I guess that has a sprung friction plate and no DMF, because a DMF is fairly heavy and not in the ethos of an M engine.

Proper racing friction plates with no springs, and without a DMF, makes for a very shaky move off from a standstill :D


I didn't notice the CDV on the cars I have driven, but I haven't done any really racey shifting yet. I did give the gearbox some use and it didn't feel laggy.

I actually like it as my current car has a low-sprung metallic friction plate on a solid flywheel and it's a bloody nightmare for road use relative to a nice setup like the Z4!
 
Twin mass flywheel on the Z4M, and on my 3.8 M5 (single on the 3.6).

The reasoning for doing the 'upgrade' on the M5 was to smooth out the transmission shake from the lumpy idle of the engine - which worked to an extent. I guess it might have the same function on the Z?
 
mmm-five said:
Twin mass flywheel on the Z4M, and on my 3.8 M5 (single on the 3.6).

The reasoning for doing the 'upgrade' on the M5 was to smooth out the transmission shake from the lumpy idle of the engine - which worked to an extent. I guess it might have the same function on the Z?

Ah ok.

I thought the sixes were harmonically balanced anyway, so no lumpyness to try smooth out?

As far as I knew the DMF's are there for drivetrain protection, because the engine can send vibrations through at the gearboxes natural harmonic frequency and high amplitudes and damage them?!
 
Mr Whippy said:
mmm-five said:
Twin mass flywheel on the Z4M, and on my 3.8 M5 (single on the 3.6).

The reasoning for doing the 'upgrade' on the M5 was to smooth out the transmission shake from the lumpy idle of the engine - which worked to an extent. I guess it might have the same function on the Z?

Ah ok.

I thought the sixes were harmonically balanced anyway, so no lumpyness to try smooth out?

As far as I knew the DMF's are there for drivetrain protection, because the engine can send vibrations through at the gearboxes natural harmonic frequency and high amplitudes and damage them?!

The normal sixes are smooth, the e34 M5 is not smooth at anything below about 1200rpm due to the 'sporty' cams they have. It almost sounds like a misfire at idle on an e34 M5.

Not noticed the same on the Z4MC though, but that's a completely different engine ancestry.
 
Huge difference - saves your clutch, assuming you can drive - use the modified BMW part and they'll never know to check.
 
Here is a pic of the clutch plate for a 2008 ///M from RealOEM..

http://www.realoem.com/bmw/showparts.do?model=BT93&mospid=49345&btnr=21_0179&hg=21&fg=05
 
Thanks for the replies everyone :thumbsup:

I'm hoping to have a go in a car with a modified CDV in the next few weeks - think I'll leave mine as it is until I see what it's like.
 
Back
Top Bottom