MyE28.com

What's the best engine and head combination with a tcd head gasket to handle 20+ psi?

a thought about my m30b34 with a m30b35 head and a tcd head gasket.

Or is can a m106 handle more boost? maybe with a m30b35 head to have more torque???

or is it better to buy a complete m30b35 engine also with tcd head gasket?

plannind to trow as much boost at it as possible and then install a tec3r system to finetune the system. also tcd clutch stage 3 and lighter flywheel.

m30b34 low compression bottom end/pistons with a b35 head will yield a static compression ratio slightly under 8:1. 7.8:1 or so IIRC. Perfect if you're planning to throw a large amount of boost at it. The m30b35 engine has a static compression of 9:1, so that would limit the amount of boost you could throw at it with pump gas.

Hope that helps.

jeremy

I'm plaaning to buy a m30b35 head to place on my b34 with a tcd head gasket that also lowers the compression. I've heard that a better head gasket is necessairy, some guy blew up his gasket at 20psi with a stock b34 engine

that guy was todd when the e28 was a test mule and he beat the ever licing shit out of the motor.

Actually, he didn't blow the head gasket at 22psi . . . he cracked the ring land. All the fire rings were pushed out on the headgasket when he removed the head though, so it wasn't long for this earth.

Jeremy

The CR of a stock M30b34 with b35 head is under 7.5:1. Chis Graff and others did the calculation a while back.

RussC

[QUOTE="Jeremy"]m30b34 low compression bottom end/pistons with a b35 head will yield a static compression ratio slightly under 8:1. 7.8:1 or so IIRC. Perfect if you're planning to throw a large amount of boost at it. The m30b35 engine has a static compression of 9:1, so that would limit the amount of boost you could throw at it with pump gas.

Hope that helps.

jeremy[/QUOTE]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the ultimate "stock" setup would be a b34 bottom end, b35 head and intake manifold and b33 camshaft!

I would be tempted to use the b35 head on my e28 (less detonation prone) even though I would lose some low end torque. Would it be worthwhile to run that setup or won't the stock pistons be able to support the extra boost thus negating the advantage of the mod?

If by lowering the c/r we could get away without switching to forged pistons (for a realistic hp goal), I will happily accept a loss of low rpm torque in favor of reliability! My old turbocharged car had a c/r of 7.8:1 and only 2.0L of displacement so maybe I won't be really affected by the little lag in throttle response

If by lowering the c/r we could get away without switching to forged pistons (for a realistic hp goal), I will happily accept a loss of low rpm torque in favor of reliability!

You cant look at it like this. You dont change heads so you dont have to get forged pistons. You are lowering the c/r so that you can force more boost in there and crack the pistons open under more boost levels. Whether you crack them open on the B34 @ 15psi or the B35 @ 22psi. You are lowering the c/r, but upping the boost. A fair trade later when you are pushing sooooo much air in there that you dont blow up that b34 head at the lower levels.

what flowes better? a m106 manifold or the tcd one
tcd is 500+
745i is ???

is it possible just to place a bigger turbo and intercooler on the 745i setup?

what flowes better, a 106 head or a b35?
a 106 with a b35 head would have a cr of 7 or somthing like that.
think that's to low for optimal power. (stock m106 cr is 8:1)

accota wrote:what flowes better? a m106 manifold or the tcd one

TCD should, but neither has been benched. TCD won't crack as easily as the 745i one is known to.

is it possible just to place a bigger turbo and intercooler on the 745i setup?

You can't change the turbo on a 745i without cutting and welding different flanges onto the turbo. A dicey proposition. Bigger intercooler, sure.

what flowes better, a m106 head or a b35?

m106 = m30b34 The m30b35 head flows much better than the b34 head, so is therefore also much better than the m106 head. Those who have dropped the compression using the b35 head haven't noticed any comprimises in low end torque to my knowledge.

a 106 with a b35 head would have a cr of 7 or somthing like that.
think that's to low for optimal power. (stock m106 cr is 8:1)

I don't know what you mean by "optimal" power. Being able to run more pounds of boost through a head that flows better equals more power every time. Dinan's e28 M5 turbo motors used a static compression somwhere in the 7s, and I haven't heard anybody say that they're any more gutless down low than a regular s38.

Jeremy


[Edit by Jeremy on [TIME]1132858188[/TIME]]

m106 = m30b34 The m30b35 head flows much better than the b34 head, so is therefore also much better than the m106 head. Those who have dropped the compression using the b35 head haven't noticed any compromises in low end torque to my knowledge.

The real M106 head is different than the m30b34 head. A real M106 head will have "TURBO" cast into the driver's rear side roughly between #5 and #6 cylinders. I think some of the confusion is because other heads have been swapped onto M106 blocks after there has been a problem with the original head. A couple of years ago I found some info that talked about the "TURBO" heads being ported and polished at the factory (as a side note of the article I found). The article didn't really address the differences in the heads, but, why would BMW go to the trouble of marking the heads "TURBO" if they are the same? The exhaust valves are made of a nimonic alloy with a high nickle content to help cope with high heat.

I'm hoping to finally open up my M106 this winter and get it ready for transplanting into me car. It will be interesting to see if there are any differences between the two.

Damon in STL

Damon, now that you mention it I do remember the m106 head having special exhaust valves for the heat. My mistake. That's the first I've heard of any differences in the ports, however. The m106 cam has a different part number as well, but nobody's ever really figured out why to my knowledge.

Jeremy

First, The M106 cam is not different enough to be considered and upgrade. That I know, and Scott Sharpe who host the www.745i.com site will confer.

While the "turbo" head is different, theres no way just by bolting it on there'll be a NOTICEABLE upgrade in power, no way no how. And, no one has ever found a M106 "tubo" head that has the special exhaust valves in them. Not one to date, that I've heard of, and Ive been on the RoadFly and here since day one. I also monitor the 745i.com website enough to know theres not one with the exhaust valves also.

Your better off with a b35 head any day than a stock M106.

RussC

The real M106 head is different than the m30b34 head. A real M106 head will have "TURBO" cast into the driver's rear side roughly between #5 and #6 cylinders. I think some of the confusion is because other heads have been swapped onto M106 blocks after there has been a problem with the original head. A couple of years ago I found some info that talked about the "TURBO" heads being ported and polished at the factory (as a side note of the article I found). The article didn't really address the differences in the heads, but, why would BMW go to the trouble of marking the heads "TURBO" if they are the same? The exhaust valves are made of a nimonic alloy with a high nickle content to help cope with high heat.

I'm hoping to finally open up my M106 this winter and get it ready for transplanting into me car. It will be interesting to see if there are any differences between the two.

Damon in STL

Make your own turbo head.

Have any head rebuild - ceramic coat the combustion chambers and valve faces. Have the exhaust ports ceramic coated also and walla - a turbo head.

I took it a step further (of course) by starting with a Hartge H6S head that already had the bigger valves and porting.

I used a E34 3.5L 264 CAM.


[Edit by Duke M535Ti on [TIME]1132968086[/TIME]]

Of all the real M106 heads I've had my hands on (upwards of 10), they all had "turbo" cast into them. They also all had 10mm exhaust manifold studs in them to handle the heavy, high-nickle content cast turbo manifold of course. They also all had the special sodium-filled exhaust valves in them. Because they are sodium-filled for better heat transfer, they have a larger stem diameter and therefore different valve guides on the exhaust side only. The intake guides and valves are the same as ANY other M30 motor as far as I know. Now as far as I can tell; and I've carefully measured and studied these heads side by side; I can see no difference in the head casting itself. I have wondered for years why they made a different casting just to add the word "turbo" onto it, but the Germans are FAMOUS for stuff like that. It is rumored that they do/did things like that to propagate their economy, but that is just a rumor. I assume that it was just to avoid part confusion. Also, I've never been able to tell the difference between an M106 cam and a regular M30 3.5 cam in physical camparison or in drivability (I've run them both in N/A M30's for curiosity sake). I've also never noticed, under careful study once again, any difference between the ports in size or preparation (polish, etc).

Also, lowering compression ratio obviously lowers your N/A performance. How much can you lower it before you really notice a difference in drivability? I have no idea. From what you guys are saying, it does not appear to make much difference. It does however allow higher boost pressures and that is obviously why it has been done in the past. Personally, I think 8.5:1 is a great place to be with these engines. The engine can only take so much regardless of how you get there.

From what people's experience has been, I think the ideal setup is the b35 head/b34 bottom end with a b33 cam. Now if it lowers the compression ratio that much, I'd try to deck the head to get the ratio back up because I do a lot of around town driving, and I think I notice a difference down low.

Won't the best be a complete m30b35 with costum forged pistons cr 8:0??? stock 9:0
better then a b34 bottom with a b35 head. the b35 parts are made to go together, think that's the best solution, a b35 bottom doesn't cost that much. whatever you i do, i will use forged pistons and cr 8, they handle boost much better, thinking of pauter connecting rods too.
it's kind of costly but it's something that's amusing and stock 400 or 500 hp car are much more expensive, and not that exclusive.
there's no price on love,............ love for your bimmer :p

is it possible to place the tcd m30 kit on the s38 but with a turbo like a GT35R or a gt40?

[QUOTE="accota"]is it possible to place the tcd m30 kit on the s38 but with a turbo like a GT35R or a gt40?[/QUOTE]

Anything is possible. You would need a different exhaust manifold due the duel exhaust ports per cylinder and spacing and you would need different intake piping.

But why FI a fragile S38??... it will just make it grenade all the sooner.

i've been learing the garret turbo tech, now i finally understand everything

What would be the best single turbo

a gt35r with A/R 0.63, 0.82 or 1.06
1.06 is more for racing applications and 0.63 is good for low rpm boost so i think 0.82 would be best

would the engine still have it's peak at 5000rpm and it what rpm would the turbine spinn up?

.82 seems to be the best all around street turbo f the 3. i dont know anyone using the .63a/r but i know a few people using the .82 and the cars just pull like mother fuckers. they said that the hp limit for the gt35r with .82 housing was 600 hp but my buddy recently pulled 635 rwhp so these things can make huge power. the 1.06 housing lives for the redline. i got a ride in a car equipped with one of these and i have never been in anything that fast in my life. thing didn'y reach full boost unit like 4400 RPM but it was also smoking the tires at the top of third gear! the car was torn apart and now sports a t71gtq turbo and made a best of 811 rwhp. back to the point.........so for a street application, .82 is probably the best to get.

What injectors should i use?

What is the brake Specific Fuel consumption of a m30 20 and 25psi??
What is the intake manifold temperature? 130f??

I've calculated some figures and seems i need 40psi boost , I used some figures i found but they're from another engine.
The intake airflow should be between 51lb/min and 80lb/min, looking for a presicer solution???

[QUOTE="accota"]What injectors should i use?

What is the brake Specific Fuel consumption of a m30 20 and 25psi??
What is the intake manifold temperature? 130f??

I've calculated some figures and seems i need 40psi boost , I used some figures i found but they're from another engine.
The intake airflow should be between 51lb/min and 80lb/min, looking for a presicer solution???[/QUOTE]

65lb injectors will be plenty. If you plan on using one of our kits it will be equipped with a straight T4 GT35R. You can order it will the ball bearing package and .58 exhaust housing if you want something very similar to the T3 .82 housing.

Todd

damn! where was this gt35r option when i got my kit!

So the 1.06 has full boost at 4400rpm, when does it starts producing boost? rpm?

at what rpm does the 0.82 has full boost?

Can the tcd ic handle the pwoer of the gt35r? say like 500-600hp
TCD said it only could handle 400hp

[Edit by accota on [TIME]1133799379[/TIME]]

well that full boost at 4400 RPM was at something like 24 psi. not sure but the full boost might have been sooner since those ball bearing turbos spool up so fast! not sure where the .82 hit full boost but i think it was something like 3400-3600 and that was 20 psi at the time. the guy runs 27 psi now and actually ran 30 psi the other night at the track when he trapped 135 mph!

Want to go for the 1.06 that way you can drive very smoothly and stay in low revs, and when i need power, just drive in high rpm.

problem is, cr at 8.0:1 at low rpm, there isn't much torque and hp, less then with cr 9:1
don't want to give up low rpm torque and power.

do you have some dynos from that 0.82 and 1.06? Or people that can give me some?

I don't think you have it quite right . . . My limited experience tells me that the 1.06 will indeed make boost a little later, but it will come on HARD. Todd's first turbo setup was like this. It was a real experience to get slammed back by full boost coming on, but I can't imagine it's good for the rest of the car. .82 will come on sooner AND smoother than the 1.06.

I'm not entirely certain, but I think either will reach full boost at around the same rpm, but the .82 will make more boost in lower revs before it reaches full potential, therefore resulting in smoother power delievery overall. If you're concerned about power down low and in the middle for daily driving (as you seem to be), the .82 is the way to go.

Somebody PLEASE correct me if any of this is wrong.

You should be able to find the compressor map for this then use it and the exhaust flow numbers to find your boost pressure at certain rpm. I did the calculations (rough) for exhaust flow for different m30s if you need them.

[QUOTE="accota"]So the 1.06 has full boost at 4400rpm, when does it starts producing boost? rpm?

at what rpm does the 0.82 has full boost?

Can the tcd ic handle the pwoer of the gt35r? say like 500-600hp
TCD said it only could handle 400hp

[Edit by accota on [TIME]1133799379[/TIME]][/QUOTE]

Yes you can send them to me to by email if you want.

Love the project of a m30 biturbo cs
Please post pictures!!!
think the 3.0cs is a beauty, love more the 507 but that's unaffordable.
that biturbo cs is a wonderful car, want to see m3 and m5 drivers if they see a cs fly by

I was also thinking of a biturbo, but single is simpler and seems you get more power with it and there's almost no lag.
you can buy a b10 biturbo engine if you want to keep it simple.

[QUOTE="Jeremy"]I don't think you have it quite right . . . My limited experience tells me that the 1.06 will indeed make boost a little later, but it will come on HARD. Todd's first turbo setup was like this. It was a real experience to get slammed back by full boost coming on, but I can't imagine it's good for the rest of the car. .82 will come on sooner AND smoother than the 1.06.

I'm not entirely certain, but I think either will reach full boost at around the same rpm, but the .82 will make more boost in lower revs before it reaches full potential, therefore resulting in smoother power delievery overall. If you're concerned about power down low and in the middle for daily driving (as you seem to be), the .82 is the way to go.

Somebody PLEASE correct me if any of this is wrong.[/QUOTE]

sounds about right to me. for dyno graphs, check out the ics website. they should have some there.