VID - Supercharged E46 M3

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old May 14, 2004 | 05:46 PM
  #1  
Chaptorial's Avatar
Thread Starter
Race Director
 
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 18,552
Likes: 4
From: Long Island, NY
VID - Supercharged E46 M3

To do this you'll first actually need an E46 M3 of course.



The E46 M3's S54 motor was inspired by design along the lines of the typical BMW Motorsport engines that pre seeded it. With multiple throttles to increase volumetric efficiency and high RPM thresholds to facilitate breathing, the traditional "raspy" exhaust is inherent in the nature of the beast. It is truly a wonderful work of engineering at it's best, and is also one of the few motors in the world that can produce more than 100 HP per liter of displacement.

AA Tuning has spent many hours researching how we could improve on this by way of forced induction and at the same time meet the following criteria:

1. Maintain the stock engine configuration without opening the engine.

2. Make it a true bolt on system that is available in "kit" form, whereby most all parts are "plug and play".

3. Add 100 more HP at the flywheel without any "excessive damaging" stress on the engine.

4. Do all this at an even lower engine speed to further increase reliability of the engine and the supercharger, which will decrease heat and friction on all moving parts as well.

5. Be able to run pump fuel with as low a fuel as 91 octane.

6. Do all this with the lowest boost level as possible.

7. Be gentle on the driveline.

8. Maintain the same "M Style" powerband, and at the same time enhance it.

9. Keep it affordably priced.

10. Be able to fit all versions around the world. (except CSL at this time)

We achieved these goals by using the Rotrex C38 supercharger, which gives the motor a gentle 5.5psi air-to-air intercooled push. The result is an astonishing 32-35% increase in power at a lower RPM limit of 7600 RPM vs 8000 RPM from the stock configuration. This just goes to show how well a heavy breathing motor like the M3's responds so wonderfully to a gentle bit of forced induction.

The system can be installed in approximately 10-14 hours and is easily reversible back to stock in less than one day.

















And this is only at the base 5.5psi level of boost. Just imagine the possibilities.


VIDEO
Reply
Old May 14, 2004 | 06:47 PM
  #2  
bkknight369's Avatar
Safety Car
20 Year Member
Liked
Loved
 
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,001
Likes: 17
From: Renton, WA
365 hp? what does a stock m3 get at the wheel? isnt it above 300? doesn't sound like a 100 hp gain to me...
Reply
Old May 14, 2004 | 07:46 PM
  #3  
Zapata's Avatar
Cost Drivers!!!!
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 19,392
Likes: 1
From: burbs of philly
Chap,
nice find!

why not a turbo setup would've increased the trq a bit more as well. NOt a fan of the centerfugial blowers on anything but v8s.
Reply
Old May 14, 2004 | 07:47 PM
  #4  
Crazy Bimmer's Avatar
Senior Moderator
 
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 34,937
Likes: 638
From: Chicago Burbs
Stock M3 puts about 275-280HP and 230-240 LBS/FT Torque to the rear wheels
Reply
Old May 14, 2004 | 07:48 PM
  #5  
srika's Avatar
Moderator Alumnus
20 Year Member
Community Influencer
Loved
Top Answer: 1
 
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 64,124
Likes: 14,273
365hp at the wheels = 427hp at the flywheel, figuring a 17% drivetrain loss.. that is just about 100 more hp than stock
Reply
Old May 14, 2004 | 07:56 PM
  #6  
pimpscls's Avatar
THE SILVER BULLET
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,659
Likes: 0
From: socal
that is a dream car, but i never seen a T/C on the e46, that would be even better.

Ive seen the video b4 on bimmerforums, the owner got it a few months back
Reply
Old May 14, 2004 | 08:01 PM
  #7  
mattg's Avatar
Senior Moderator
 
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 22,909
Likes: 388
From: OR
some pics i took last year.








Reply
Old May 14, 2004 | 08:05 PM
  #8  
Zapata's Avatar
Cost Drivers!!!!
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 19,392
Likes: 1
From: burbs of philly
worst video evar.....
Reply
Old May 14, 2004 | 08:07 PM
  #9  
pimpscls's Avatar
THE SILVER BULLET
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,659
Likes: 0
From: socal
mattg that is very nice, where'd you take em
Reply
Old May 14, 2004 | 08:09 PM
  #10  
mattg's Avatar
Senior Moderator
 
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 22,909
Likes: 388
From: OR
import drags last year at woodburn, oregon.
Reply
Old May 14, 2004 | 08:21 PM
  #11  
goldmemberer's Avatar
goldmemberererer
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,736
Likes: 0
From: West Hills, CA
Holy moly

That's some crazy shit, I didn't think an engine that has such high output for its displacement already could have a "cheap & reliable" F/I application.

The M3 tranny causes about an 18% loss from the crank to rear wheels, (stock dyno) The HP number is real nice, about 110 hp over stock, but the torque, much like the stock M3, leaves a lot to be desired. There's only a 40 lb/ft or 15% increase in torque with the S/C, so if a (reliable) turbo could be made, that would rock ass.

Of course, I didn't expect the torque to improve by much, 3.2 liters can only develop so much.
Reply
Old May 14, 2004 | 09:09 PM
  #12  
Zapata's Avatar
Cost Drivers!!!!
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 19,392
Likes: 1
From: burbs of philly
Re: Holy moly

yea but see that's the problem with centerfugal blowers. A turbo would be perfect.

Originally posted by goldmemberer
That's some crazy shit, I didn't think an engine that has such high output for its displacement already could have a "cheap & reliable" F/I application.

The M3 tranny causes about an 18% loss from the crank to rear wheels, (stock dyno) The HP number is real nice, about 110 hp over stock, but the torque, much like the stock M3, leaves a lot to be desired. There's only a 40 lb/ft or 15% increase in torque with the S/C, so if a (reliable) turbo could be made, that would rock ass.

Of course, I didn't expect the torque to improve by much, 3.2 liters can only develop so much.
Reply
Old May 14, 2004 | 09:09 PM
  #13  
YuppieCL's Avatar
Moderator Alumnus
 
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 4,493
Likes: 0
From: NY
in love w that car.
Reply
Old May 14, 2004 | 09:43 PM
  #14  
goldmemberer's Avatar
goldmemberererer
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,736
Likes: 0
From: West Hills, CA
Re: Re: Holy moly

Originally posted by Zapata
yea but see that's the problem with centerfugal blowers. A turbo would be perfect.
Not that I know much about turbos, but isn't it the same case with the CL? A turbo could be made to yield more power, but in the end be less reliable?
Reply
Old May 14, 2004 | 09:54 PM
  #15  
Zapata's Avatar
Cost Drivers!!!!
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 19,392
Likes: 1
From: burbs of philly
Re: Re: Re: Holy moly

Originally posted by goldmemberer
Not that I know much about turbos, but isn't it the same case with the CL? A turbo could be made to yield more power, but in the end be less reliable?

nah absolutely not. Turbo's can get peaky if boost pressure isn't watched carefully but the same can happen with a SC.
Reply
Old May 14, 2004 | 11:04 PM
  #16  
scalbert's Avatar
Suzuka Master
 
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,431
Likes: 0
From: Woodstock, GA
Re: Holy moly

Originally posted by goldmemberer
Of course, I didn't expect the torque to improve by much, 3.2 liters can only develop so much.
3.2L can develop more torque than that. I made more with less added to the engine. The presented vehicle did not just have the SC installed. That plenum is not stock nor do I expect the outlet flow to be stock.

First thing though, I would trade my CL-S6SC for that M3 any day. I sometimes wish I had taken my wife's E46 328i and worked it over. The E46 M3 is just so much grander...

This is not meant to take away from that car as it is extremely impressive. I just want to harp on how well the J32A2 is and if mated to a worthy chassis would probably be more acknowledged.

That M3 was making 5.5 PSI of intercooled boost and made that power. A blown J32A2 at the same boost will make nearly the same, if not more, torque but cannot rev as high to produce the same power numbers. It will come up about 40 WHP short.

I have no questions that with the IC the J32A2 would make nearly the same power, at lower revs, while making noticeably more torque. I suspect that 300 lb/ft and 350 WHP would be realized once intercooled. And you can easily run a little more boost to get even more power. This will be seen in the next coming weeks once the new pulley is in.

The problem is that the chassis paired to the J32A2 is not up to par to put down that power making the production worthless. The M3, on the other hand, can utilize the power much greater making it a better power platform irrelevant of the significantly greater handling capability.
Reply
Old May 14, 2004 | 11:18 PM
  #17  
scalbert's Avatar
Suzuka Master
 
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,431
Likes: 0
From: Woodstock, GA
Originally posted by mattg



Am I imagining things but does the SC outlet go right into the plenum?? If so, why is there an unused FMIC??
Reply
Old May 15, 2004 | 12:17 AM
  #18  
goldmemberer's Avatar
goldmemberererer
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,736
Likes: 0
From: West Hills, CA
Re: Re: Holy moly

Originally posted by scalbert
3.2L can develop more torque than that. I made more with less added to the engine. The presented vehicle did not just have the SC installed. That plenum is not stock nor do I expect the outlet flow to be stock.

First thing though, I would trade my CL-S6SC for that M3 any day. I sometimes wish I had taken my wife's E46 328i and worked it over. The E46 M3 is just so much grander...

This is not meant to take away from that car as it is extremely impressive. I just want to harp on how well the J32A2 is and if mated to a worthy chassis would probably be more acknowledged.

That M3 was making 5.5 PSI of intercooled boost and made that power. A blown J32A2 at the same boost will make nearly the same, if not more, torque but cannot rev as high to produce the same power numbers. It will come up about 40 WHP short.

I have no questions that with the IC the J32A2 would make nearly the same power, at lower revs, while making noticeably more torque. I suspect that 300 lb/ft and 350 WHP would be realized once intercooled. And you can easily run a little more boost to get even more power. This will be seen in the next coming weeks once the new pulley is in.

The problem is that the chassis paired to the J32A2 is not up to par to put down that power making the production worthless. The M3, on the other hand, can utilize the power much greater making it a better power platform irrelevant of the significantly greater handling capability.
Oh god yes, I agree with everything you said. In terms of chasis and drivetrain, the CL is nothing compared to the M3. When it comes to engine, though, the CL can hang with the best. And Acura obviously knows that, the TL's still using the J32... I really don't know how much better the chasis is.

The upcoming AWD TL sounds good, though.

Back to the M3:
Reply
Old May 15, 2004 | 09:27 AM
  #19  
Type S Lady's Avatar
Drifting
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,073
Likes: 0
From: Tallahassee, Florida
I feel sick! That red Bimmer makes me drool.
Reply
Old May 15, 2004 | 06:11 PM
  #20  
darrinb's Avatar
///M POWER
 
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 15,299
Likes: 1
From: West Bloomfield, MI
wow that car is def hot

i have never seen a f/i m3 before
Reply
Old May 15, 2004 | 06:26 PM
  #21  
Chaptorial's Avatar
Thread Starter
Race Director
 
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 18,552
Likes: 4
From: Long Island, NY
Originally posted by Zapata
worst video evar.....
No arguments here but that's the only one they got. :P
Reply
Old May 15, 2004 | 07:27 PM
  #22  
Zapata's Avatar
Cost Drivers!!!!
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 19,392
Likes: 1
From: burbs of philly
Originally posted by Chaptorial
No arguments here but that's the only one they got. :P

no worries


M3 exhaust sounds like a fart passing through a tin can and how much can you put up with the dude saying WOOOOOHOOOOO, OMG, WHOOOOOOOOHOOOOOOOOO....Life is good......douche
Reply
Old May 16, 2004 | 03:40 AM
  #23  
yi_yi's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 334
Likes: 0
From: IRVINE, CA @ UCI
lolololol
Reply
Old May 16, 2004 | 07:46 AM
  #24  
Ray Khan's Avatar
Pro
 
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 524
Likes: 0
From: Stoneham MA
Originally posted by scalbert
Am I imagining things but does the SC outlet go right into the plenum?? If so, why is there an unused FMIC??
haha.....good eye
Reply
Old May 16, 2004 | 07:59 AM
  #25  
dallison's Avatar
registered pw
20 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 38,859
Likes: 366
From: south central pa
Originally posted by Zapata
worst video evar.....
the rims on the red m3 are hot
Reply
Old May 17, 2004 | 10:05 AM
  #26  
Chaptorial's Avatar
Thread Starter
Race Director
 
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 18,552
Likes: 4
From: Long Island, NY
Bump for the Monday crew.
Reply
Old May 17, 2004 | 10:07 AM
  #27  
bigman's Avatar
'Big Daddy Diggler'
 
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 11,016
Likes: 4
From: Yonkers NY
Originally posted by Chaptorial
Bump for the Monday crew.
good looking
Reply
Old May 17, 2004 | 08:09 PM
  #28  
red6speed's Avatar
Instructor
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 165
Likes: 0
From: Jacksonville, FL
I've seen WAY worse videos, at leat that one is long enough to see the car's performance, even though they didnt get it on the outside in motion
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
IBankMouse
1G TSX (2004-2008)
8
Jun 13, 2020 12:53 PM
Joe Avesyan
3G TL Performance Parts & Modifications
9
Sep 29, 2015 03:57 PM
k6biv
Car Parts for Sale
45
Sep 22, 2015 02:06 PM
Chief F1 Fan
Motorsports News
6
Sep 21, 2015 09:39 AM
simplyjayyy
2G TSX Performance Parts & Modifications
4
Sep 2, 2015 12:57 PM




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:02 AM.