Z4 E85 N52B25 performance upgrade

[Smartbear]

Indeed, 130kw is 177hp.
But what I dont understand is that your baseline already makes 200hp at only 6000rpm.

I think that figure was after intake & exhaust changes?
Rob

 

[GuidoK]

Yes probably. so there's no baseline for a stock car to reference the dyno.
The tune is especially above 6k rpm very effective as the lower curve just seems to flatten out (power wise)

Maha dyno's always read extremely low whp numbers so how they translate that in crank hp is always a mystery to me.

 

[Scarp]

As I found the N52B30 would be a good replacement they also make 4 versions of power but the 195 Kw would fit my car since it was mounted into E85/E86 2005-2008

 

[nanup]

i have the 192hp version (m54b25).. and believe me.. you can get 215hp with full exhaust line with non street manifolds (deCat) and repro.. maybe 10hp more with aggressive camshafts.
if you have the 177hp version (doesn't matter if m54, n52, etc) is IMPOSSIBLE get 200hp with only an air filter and an cheaper exhaust.
these graphs are "inflate".. the trick is measure the hp in 4th gear but telling the bank soft that the car is in 5th gear (for that the max speed is sooo low in your graph).
This is very common in east Europe countries, one Lithuanian friend with an E60 530D (remaped in his country) show me the graph showing 265hp and 570 torque.. but in real life from 70 to 130mph his car only take 10-15 meters from mine, while an e60 530 petrol (272hp) in the same conditions took a much bigger distance (maybe 60-70m)

Anyway.. your graph is totally different to the rest of m54b25 or n52b25 I have been watched.. (different torque curve)

But.. if you want get hp you need equilibrate your engine.. remember it is atmospheric.. so you can get HP only with revs.. and the revs are in concordance with your camshafts.
In your case I will do:
- dremel and polish intake ports
- racing camshafts
- strong valve springs
- straight manifold without catalyst
- repro to equilibrate all theses MODS

the camshafts are long.. so you need a good quality ones to can reach high revs (the same with the camshaft mounts)...
And after do all this things and spends a lot of money, your engine maybe can produce 30-35 hp more than stock.

Yo can go to the supercharger way and get easy around 80hp.. but, can you afford drop from 28-30mpg to 7-12 mpg?? is not better get directly a Z4M?
Regards

 

[nanup]

I was thinking in swap my engine by the 3.0SI version... but I don't know how to deal with the EWS yet.

 

[GuidoK]

^you think you'll do 7-12 mpg with a supercharger?

 

[nanup]

is that ESS staff told me about when asked for info...
But you are running one, what is the difference in real normal use and "pole position" use with your ESS?

 

[GuidoK]

Sure if I'm doing 175mph on the autobahn it'll consume some real fuel, but I have extensive experience with my car compared to other z4's and z3's as I do a lot of runs with other cars.
If I drive on the autobahn, crusing on cruise control at 80mph (long distance with constant speed), my car (380bhp/465Nm, so 150hp over stock) with TS2+tune and schrick cams, 200cel kats etc etc it is more efficient than a 2.8i Z3. I've checked that over multiple petroltanks on long vacation runs abroad (you drive the same piece of road, at the same time (behind eachother) and fill up at the same petrolstation so the comparison is 100%). My gut feeling is that the biggest difference is that that z3 has a 5 speed and that takes a little more fuel.
Compared to a stock 3.0i z4 (same engine, same gearbox) on a 40L petrol filling, I have to take about 1L extra on such stretches. So that is 2,5% more fuel.

On a high speed run, german autobahn, about 100miles with slow (restricted) sections and unrestricted sections, compared to a 3.0i z3 (same engine, but 5 speed box) my car is still more efficient where I drove 175mph and the z3 tops out at 155. Obviously where I do 175mph it'll probably consume more fuel as my injectors are bigger, but on the slower parts it apparantly makes up for it. (that amaized me too).
Mind you, these differences are not big. 0,5L per tank or so.

What makes my car take in massive amounts of fuel is my very heavy right foot :lol:

But on average my fuel consumption is about 11L/100km (about 25mpg), but that's more on how you drive than what hardware you have.
And the strange thing is, the ess tune is very rich. people complain about petrolstench when they drive behind me (especially on heavy throttle), but that doesnt really translate in a high mpg.

I have had my ESS twinscrew now for 6 years (about 25k miles/45k km) so this is not 1 comparison I made but what I've seen over multiple years. Its certainly more fuel efficient than a z4m, especially on normal cruising speed.

7mpg is of course possible; slow speeds with heavy acceleration over and over (like acending a mountain pass as fast as you can), but a normal z4 will also have very bad fuel economy on such stretches.