[CaryTheLabelGuy]

Originally Posted by sahyoun

Because if everyone new that the two motors shared the same bottom end except the m2 has cast in iron sleeves and a closed block, people would realize the m2 actually has a stronger motor. Look at the n54 scene, all the big turbo builds are going to closed decks. It is likely that they use the same casting as they do with the S55 considering the motors share the same external architecture, alloy, bore, stroke, and just about everything else that interfaces with the block. They likely cast a bare block and either LDS coat it for the s55, or hone and cast/press in the iron sleeves for the m2. Switching from open deck to closed deck isn't nearly as much retooling as you would expect. You would be insane to think that the conrods are different considering they have the exact same part number. As for the closed deck question, its definitely closed deck. If bmw states it numerous times in numerous places, then its a closed deck. There is not a single reputable source that says its an open deck. Not to mention the N55 in the m2 is taking significantly more power than the N55 in the 435/335/etc. People complained that the 1M used the same motor as the 135i, maybe bmw heard them out and actually changed the motor. Regardless, the m2 motor's internals are already anticipated to be stronger based off the information BMW has provided.

The S55 and N55 blocks look nothing alike from the outside. The castings are totally different. The M2 doesn't use a S55 block as verified by looking at the castings from under the hood.

That being said, nobody is arguing the merits of closed-deck vs. open-deck. Obviously closed-deck is stronger.

And what makes you believe the M2's N55 is stronger than the S55?!?!? Cast iron sleeves? Lol. Ok.

[CaryTheLabelGuy]

Originally Posted by shivaswrath

And spin crank hubs too, don't forget that!

They make it easy at a cost, so how stupid is that statement? Not very at all.

The funny thing is that the N55 uses the EXACT same crank hub assembly as the S55.

[N54B30A]

Originally Posted by CaryTheLabelGuy

The S55 and N55 blocks look nothing alike from the outside. The castings are totally different. The M2 doesn't use a S55 block as verified by looking at the castings from under the hood.

That being said, nobody is arguing the merits of closed-deck vs. open-deck. Obviously closed-deck is stronger.

And what makes you believe the M2's N55 is stronger than the S55?!?!? Cast iron sleeves? Lol. Ok.

Hah, the LDS coating is somewhere between .3 to .5 mm thick. Its a twin wire arc spray versus a cast in iron sleeve that is significantly thicker around 3 to 5mm. Basic material science tells us more of a stronger material will only make the block more rigid. How do you think all these n54's are making so much power on stock internals? The pressure cast blocks along with the cast in iron sleeves allow for considerably better heat extraction over a pressed in sleeve. If the m2's casting is similar to the n54/n55, its not too involved of a process to change the mold to a closed deck one especially when the engine is going to be used on multiple models other than the m2. There is far more information supporting that it is a closed deck than not. You think this LDS coating is going to last long on the higher mileage and higher powered S55s? What do you think will happen to that paper thin coating when the cylinders start to oval as we've seen in other BMW turbo I6's? Just look at the GTR, it has the LDS coating and people doing builds at 60k notice the coating is non-existent. Why do you think they press in iron sleeves instead? This LDS coating is just sprayed on iron that allows bmw to not have to change pistons since its still technically iron on aluminum. While it offers a weight reduction and slightly less coefficient of drag it does not last nearly as long as a cast in sleeve of the same material. So yes, I do believe the M2's bottom end is significantly stronger than the m4. You have nothing to back up your open deck claim or skepticism, I have the manufacturer of the engine to back up mine.

[Jadar]

Originally Posted by CaryTheLabelGuy

The funny thing is that the N55 uses the EXACT same crank hub assembly as the S55.

And not a single failure to mention. That we know of. At lease I have never seen a post anywhere.

However a friend of mine is a master mechanic at Knauz Bmw and he just told me he did a complete rebuild on an N55 on an x3 I believe none stock motor spun bearings...so go figure. Shit happens.

[Jadar]

Originally Posted by CaryTheLabelGuy

The S55 and N55 blocks look nothing alike from the outside. The castings are totally different. The M2 doesn't use a S55 block as verified by looking at the castings from under the hood.

That being said, nobody is arguing the merits of closed-deck vs. open-deck. Obviously closed-deck is stronger.

And what makes you believe the M2's N55 is stronger than the S55?!?!? Cast iron sleeves? Lol. Ok.

Exactly my point, the F80/82 bring more technology to the table and will boast more power period because of the twin snails.

I own neither M3 nor M4 and would equally take either the both bring something amazing to the table, but I slightly like the look of the M3 and those arches and the 4 doors is my kinda thing.

Bottom line is asking yourself what route you want
Pushing the living shit out of the M2 or slightly pushing the M3. In either case it's the owners choice and there's no Wright or wrong. We all do what works for us and what we like and enjoy. It's a personal preference.

[BruceM]

Originally Posted by dd1981

Exactly my point, the F80/82 bring more technology to the table and will boast more power period because of the twin snails.

I own neither M3 nor M3 and would equally take either the both bring something amazing to the table, but I slightly like the look of the M3 and those arches and the 4 doors is my kinda thing.

Bottom line is asking yourself what route you want
Pushing the living shit out of the M2 or slightly pushing the M3. In either case it's the owners choice and there's no Wright or wrong. We all do what works for us and what we like and enjoy. It's a personal preference.

Decisions based on paper don't really do either car justice. Drive both, then decide which one you'd like. My own preference was for the M3/M4 before I got in and drove. But it was so very clear to me after my drives that the M2 was far closer to what an M3 used to be, and that's the feel I like, four doors ,"technology" or special colors notwithstanding. YMMV!

[ashburyn54]

Originally Posted by StatenEye

Christ, less than a set of wheels and some carbon fiber bits. This is a steal. Now I'm intrigued by this car.

Edit... This price is impossible. Dps and tune alone would be 2k.. no? Has to be at least 8k.

No the turbo is 2500, DP can be had for $200-300. PI for just over $1000 and tune for $600ish. LPFP would be you deciding factor. Stage 1 for cheap or a drop in for something around $500 with lines right?

[ashburyn54]

Originally Posted by zenmaster

How much would it cost to match what the M4 does stock?

Jb4 and e30 gets you there. Based on videos. Tune vs stock

[CaryTheLabelGuy]

Originally Posted by sahyoun

Hah, the LDS coating is somewhere between .3 to .5 mm thick. Its a twin wire arc spray versus a cast in iron sleeve that is significantly thicker around 3 to 5mm. Basic material science tells us more of a stronger material will only make the block more rigid. How do you think all these n54's are making so much power on stock internals? The pressure cast blocks along with the cast in iron sleeves allow for considerably better heat extraction over a pressed in sleeve. If the m2's casting is similar to the n54/n55, its not too involved of a process to change the mold to a closed deck one especially when the engine is going to be used on multiple models other than the m2. There is far more information supporting that it is a closed deck than not. You think this LDS coating is going to last long on the higher mileage and higher powered S55s? What do you think will happen to that paper thin coating when the cylinders start to oval as we've seen in other BMW turbo I6's? Just look at the GTR, it has the LDS coating and people doing builds at 60k notice the coating is non-existent. Why do you think they press in iron sleeves instead? This LDS coating is just sprayed on iron that allows bmw to not have to change pistons since its still technically iron on aluminum. While it offers a weight reduction and slightly less coefficient of drag it does not last nearly as long as a cast in sleeve of the same material. So yes, I do believe the M2's bottom end is significantly stronger than the m4. You have nothing to back up your open deck claim or skepticism, I have the manufacturer of the engine to back up mine.

Lol. Where do I start?

Twin-wire arc sprayed cylinder liners are actually extremely strong and effective. The lattice they build is lighter, thinner and has less drag than cast iron sleeves and is just as strong. Also, the LDS liner transfers heat much better than cast iron sleeves and If you're caught up on thickness, you're missing the point. You can loosely compare Twin-wire arc sprayed cylinder liners to carbon fiber. CF has a strength comparable to steel but lighter than aluminum. Is CF a joke to you too? It operates on somewhat of the same premise and is a far superior technology. So you can stop going on and on about how superior cast iron sleeves are, they are FAR from bullet proof, especially when combined with a open-deck block.

The biggest reason the N54/55 used cast iron sleeves is because twin-wire arc sprayed cylinder liner tech wasn't readily available or proven (N54) and cast iron sleeves were the industry standard and were cheap (N55).

The S55 is a closed-deck block and was designed as a closed-deck block from the start. Twin-wire arc spraying wasn't a very advanced technology back when the N54 was designed and the N55 was designed during a time of financial crisis and BMW admitted they took shortcuts in its design and manufacture. The new B-series engines are ALL closed-deck with twin-wire arc LDS cylinder liners and by all accounts are stronger than all of the previous engines. The N54/55 blocks were poorly designed as open-deck blocks used for turbocharged applications. Which brings me to another point you made, about other BMW i6's cylinder's ovaling. They were open-deck with cast iron sleeves! A closed-deck design is FAR less susceptible to cylinder ovaling.*

While it is true that Nissan used LDS liners in the GT-R's TTV6, the technology wasn't nearly as advanced than it is now. Nissan and BMW aren't the only ones using this technology now, either. LDS coating has grown in popularity and is quickly becoming the new industry standard in high-performance engines and for good reason.*

Now as for the N54 making great power on the stock bottom end, that has very little to do with the cast iron sleeves and the open-deck block. I can make 1200whp with a Honda K20 (2.0, cast aluminum block, cast iron sleeves, open deck) but that doesn't mean the bores won't oval or the sleeves won't crack, eventually. Most open-deck blocks are usually braced for added strength when attempting to make that kind of power. Cast iron sleeves can crack even on a closed-deck block (happens all the time). The N54/55 has had its share of cylinder ovaling, you know that.*

And my last point is in regards to BMW giving conflicting info on the open/closed-deck N55 in the M2. BMW has made some pretty large mistakes in literature and tech manuals before. For instance BMW describes and illustrates the M2's N55 as being open-deck in the M2's ETK.*

I suggest you start reading here:
http://f87.bimmerpost.com/forums/showthread.php?p=19757959

[Jadar]

Originally Posted by BruceM

Decisions based on paper don't really do either car justice. Drive both, then decide which one you'd like. My own preference was for the M3/M4 before I got in and drove. But it was so very clear to me after my drives that the M2 was far closer to what an M3 used to be, and that's the feel I like, four doors ,"technology" or special colors notwithstanding. YMMV!

Totally. It's all about emotion. When I stand in front of an M2 I get overtaken by this insane craze like I have to have this car. I like it, it's wide its aggressive. I get the same feeling when I see M3 hips... I guess you can classify me as an ass man

[N54B30A]

Originally Posted by CaryTheLabelGuy

Lol. Where do I start?

Twin-wire arc sprayed cylinder liners are actually extremely strong and effective. The lattice they build is lighter, thinner and has less drag than cast iron sleeves and is just as strong. Also, the LDS liner transfers heat much better than cast iron sleeves and If you're caught up on thickness, you're missing the point. You can loosely compare Twin-wire arc sprayed cylinder liners to carbon fiber. CF has a strength comparable to steel but lighter than aluminum. Is CF a joke to you too? It operates on somewhat of the same premise and is a far superior technology. So you can stop going on and on about how superior cast iron sleeves are, they are FAR from bullet proof, especially when combined with a open-deck block.

The biggest reason the N54/55 used cast iron sleeves is because twin-wire arc sprayed cylinder liner tech wasn't readily available or proven (N54) and cast iron sleeves were the industry standard and were cheap (N55).

The S55 is a closed-deck block and was designed as a closed-deck block from the start. Twin-wire arc spraying wasn't a very advanced technology back when the N54 was designed and the N55 was designed during a time of financial crisis and BMW admitted they took shortcuts in its design and manufacture. The new B-series engines are ALL closed-deck with twin-wire arc LDS cylinder liners and by all accounts are stronger than all of the previous engines. The N54/55 blocks were poorly designed as open-deck blocks used for turbocharged applications. Which brings me to another point you made, about other BMW i6's cylinder's ovaling. They were open-deck with cast iron sleeves! A closed-deck design is FAR less susceptible to cylinder ovaling.*

While it is true that Nissan used LDS liners in the GT-R's TTV6, the technology wasn't nearly as advanced than it is now. Nissan and BMW aren't the only ones using this technology now, either. LDS coating has grown in popularity and is quickly becoming the new industry standard in high-performance engines and for good reason.*

Now as for the N54 making great power on the stock bottom end, that has very little to do with the cast iron sleeves and the open-deck block. I can make 1200whp with a Honda K20 (2.0, cast aluminum block, cast iron sleeves, open deck) but that doesn't mean the bores won't oval or the sleeves won't crack, eventually. Most open-deck blocks are usually braced for added strength when attempting to make that kind of power. Cast iron sleeves can crack even on a closed-deck block (happens all the time). The N54/55 has had its share of cylinder ovaling, you know that.*

And my last point is in regards to BMW giving conflicting info on the open/closed-deck N55 in the M2. BMW has made some pretty large mistakes in literature and tech manuals before. For instance BMW describes and illustrates the M2's N55 as being open-deck in the M2's ETK.*

I suggest you start reading here:
http://f87.bimmerpost.com/forums/sho...php?p=19757959

ETK's diagrams are meaningless, they're off in multiple instances. Name one scenario where BMW's actual engine documents or literature in general was inaccurate. They simply can't advertise a closed deck block directly on their site and not provide it. There is absolutely no documented conflicting info between the engine literature and the actual motor.

Regarding the LDS, yes I know its thinner, lighter, with a lower coefficient of friction and allows for higher fuel efficiency which are all things BMW tends to care about over actual engine strength. The LDS is nowhere near the strength of a cast in iron sleeve thats an order of magnitude thicker. There is no iron or steel alloy or manufacturing process that can provide a stronger cylinder at ~1/10 of the thickness, this is basic material science. When you have a sleeve, you can have the metal undergo a completely different cooling process without effecting the block in anyway such as undoing any heat treating that the aluminum block may undergo. The nice thing about grey cast iron is that it also acts as a damper that is literally over 100 times greater than the damping capacity of aluminum. Grey cast iron is also notorious for its stiffness. You'd be insane to think that an LDS coating has nearly the same rigidity as grey cast iron. There is not a single LDS/PTWA provider that even mentions any increase in strength. This is simply BMW's cost cutting at work, LDS means less friction, better fuel economy, less stress on the connecting rod/main bearings which means they can continue down the road of under square cylinder design.

Considering you have absolutely no material property information on LDS/PTWA its hard, if not impossible to support your claims. Lets imagine they use the same material which they likely don't, now lets say you coated the inside of a tube with a generous .7mm LDS coating and then took another tube and cast in a 4mm sleeve of the same material, I would bet the cast in sleeve would be significantly more rigid as well as have superior compressive and tensile strengths. In terms of heat transfer, the thicker the iron, the worse the transfer properties, theres no getting around that. I'm sure manufacturer's love LDS. By the time the coating is worn, which it certainly will be given the data that's been provided by GTR forums, the car will be out of warranty. If LDS is so superior, why is it wearing away within 100k miles on GTRs? Why is it that when it does wear away, its replaced with sleeves? The open deck design allows for additional cooling on the N54/N55 something thats not necessarily crucial in the S55 with its numerous radiator setup. In terms of sleeve cracking, please find me a picture of a cracked n54 sleeve.

And no CF and LDS are nothing similar. The reason carbon, Kevlar, and glass fibers have nice strength to weight ratios is strictly because its a composite material. If you increase the matrix content of CF it can be just as useless as plastic, and if you increase the fiber content, you get the same result. The reason it's so popular is because you can adjust the number of plys, ply angles, matrix and fiber content to suit the specific application. Generalizing carbon fiber as "stronger" than steel without knowing fiber content, matrix content, ply angle or the steel alloy in specific is just plain dumb. "Strength" is broken up into multiple categories, tensile, compressive, torsional, and many other categories. In many cases CF is the better option in strength to weight compared to steel, however that is not always the case. Carbon fiber is known for its strength to weight and not necessarily for its shear strength.

[CaryTheLabelGuy]

Originally Posted by sahyoun

ETK's diagrams are meaningless, they're off in multiple instances. Name one scenario where BMW's actual engine documents or literature in general was inaccurate. They simply can't advertise a closed deck block directly on their site and not provide it. There is absolutely no documented conflicting info between the engine literature and the actual motor.

Regarding the LDS, yes I know its thinner, lighter, with a lower coefficient of friction and allows for higher fuel efficiency which are all things BMW tends to care about over actual engine strength. The LDS is nowhere near the strength of a cast in iron sleeve thats an order of magnitude thicker. There is no iron or steel alloy or manufacturing process that can provide a stronger cylinder at ~1/10 of the thickness, this is basic material science. When you have a sleeve, you can have the metal undergo a completely different cooling process without effecting the block in anyway such as undoing any heat treating that the aluminum block may undergo. The nice thing about grey cast iron is that it also acts as a damper that is literally over 100 times greater than the damping capacity of aluminum. Grey cast iron is also notorious for its stiffness. You'd be insane to think that an LDS coating has nearly the same rigidity as grey cast iron. There is not a single LDS/PTWA provider that even mentions any increase in strength. This is simply BMW's cost cutting at work, LDS means less friction, better fuel economy, less stress on the connecting rod/main bearings which means they can continue down the road of under square cylinder design.

Considering you have absolutely no material property information on LDS/PTWA its hard, if not impossible to support your claims. Lets imagine they use the same material which they likely don't, now lets say you coated the inside of a tube with a generous .7mm LDS coating and then took another tube and cast in a 4mm sleeve of the same material, I would bet the cast in sleeve would be significantly more rigid as well as have superior compressive and tensile strengths. In terms of heat transfer, the thicker the iron, the worse the transfer properties, theres no getting around that. I'm sure manufacturer's love LDS. By the time the coating is worn, which it certainly will be given the data that's been provided by GTR forums, the car will be out of warranty. If LDS is so superior, why is it wearing away within 100k miles on GTRs? Why is it that when it does wear away, its replaced with sleeves? The open deck design allows for additional cooling on the N54/N55 something thats not necessarily crucial in the S55 with its numerous radiator setup. In terms of sleeve cracking, please find me a picture of a cracked n54 sleeve.

And no CF and LDS are nothing similar. The reason carbon, Kevlar, and glass fibers have nice strength to weight ratios is strictly because its a composite material. If you increase the matrix content of CF it can be just as useless as plastic, and if you increase the fiber content, you get the same result. The reason it's so popular is because you can adjust the number of plys, ply angles, matrix and fiber content to suit the specific application. Generalizing carbon fiber as "stronger" than steel without knowing fiber content, matrix content, ply angle or the steel alloy in specific is just plain dumb. "Strength" is broken up into multiple categories, tensile, compressive, torsional, and many other categories. In many cases CF is the better option in strength to weight compared to steel, however that is not always the case. Carbon fiber is known for its strength to weight and not necessarily for its shear strength.

Congrats, you managed to type four paragraphs of non-sense. It is obvious you don't really have a clue or you are too blinded by the N54/55 fanboism and can't see how ridiculous you sound as you've contradicted yourself several times.

Your rants about how terrible LDS cylinder linings are fly directly in the face of what others are saying about wear and durability. I've yet to find any solid evidence that points to your theory being correct, beyond more conjecture. One of your biggest contradictions is the fact that LDS liners wear out quickly, but at the same time have low friction? How's that work? If they have very little to no friction, why are they wearing out so fast (according to you)?

Nissan used the Ford PTWA process on the GT-R's engine. There are several different process for LDS/PTWA cylinder linings, just keep that in mind. You can't automatically paint LDS linings as trash based on a few points on conjecture on the GT-R forums.

Furthermore, I'm going laugh directly into your face (figuratively speaking) IF we find out the M2's N55 is an open-deck, just like every other N55.

Out of respect to Jesse's thread, this will be my last off-topic post in his thread.

[raysspl]

Is there a way you can hit 500whp on 91 oct. I think you can!

[kovsky]

Originally Posted by kong24680

I wonder how the DCT transmission is gonna hold up with 500+whp. The 335is dct seems to start slipping right past the 500whp+ mark

I can confirm this. It is slipping a bit so I'll probably be getting the Dodson clutch packs installed. Why stop spending now?

I wanted to run the car on a 50/50 blend of 91/e85 for simplicities sake. I live within a mile of an e85 station. Running more e85 would not benefit anything as the octane levels are good for this power level. Actually I'd just be reducing the range of the car and overly taxing the fuel system. Also, the 19psi tune is perfect for a road course the iat temps stay low after repeated runs and there is a plenty of grip at those levels. It's around 480whp.

I have 295/30 tires on the stock rear rims and I put the stock rears on the front. Looks kind of pudgy on the rear rims I'll probably replace them with 285's next time. They rubbed once on a really nasty bump, the kind with gouge marks in the road from cars bottoming out.

I'll be taking some vids soon.

As far as the M3/4 comparisons go.. Different strokes for different folks.

[ABPReader]

Do the M2 and 335is have the same gearbox ? I thought that 335is has Getrag 7DCI600 (as e9x M3) and M2 Getrag 7DCI700 (as the others F8x)

[Jadar]

Originally Posted by ABPReader

Do the M2 and 335is have the same gearbox ? I thought that 335is has Getrag 7DCI600 (as e9x M3) and M2 Getrag 7DCI700 (as the others F8x)

Good question, I think the M2 is directly out of the F80/82 so it'll probably be revised and updated. But I'm not a 100% on the differences myself maybe someone can chime in and explain.

[N54B30A]

Originally Posted by CaryTheLabelGuy

Congrats, you managed to type four paragraphs of non-sense. It is obvious you don't really have a clue or you are too blinded by the N54/55 fanboism and can't see how ridiculous you sound as you've contradicted yourself several times.

Your rants about how terrible LDS cylinder linings are fly directly in the face of what others are saying about wear and durability. I've yet to find any solid evidence that points to your theory being correct, beyond more conjecture. One of your biggest contradictions is the fact that LDS liners wear out quickly, but at the same time have low friction? How's that work? If they have very little to no friction, why are they wearing out so fast (according to you)?

Nissan used the Ford PTWA process on the GT-R's engine. There are several different process for LDS/PTWA cylinder linings, just keep that in mind. You can't automatically paint LDS linings as trash based on a few points on conjecture on the GT-R forums.

Furthermore, I'm going laugh directly into your face (figuratively speaking) IF we find out the M2's N55 is an open-deck, just like every other N55.

Out of respect to Jesse's thread, this will be my last off-topic post in his thread.

Wow, they don't have "little to know friction" they have considerably less friction than cast iron liners. There are multiple ways of making cast in sleeves, just keep that in mind. Yes, it has a lower coefficient of friction but that doesn't mean it'll last long. It still wears, and guess what, theres a hell of a lot less material to wear through than with the cast in sleeves. Actually its a fraction of the thickness. Notice that none of the LDS/PTWA companies post any comparison information showing the friction coefficients. You'd be insane to believe that the coating's friction coefficient is small enough, relative to cast iron, to outweigh a massive thickness disadvantage. In terms of a stock application with low mileage the LDS is great, but for people who want to run bolt-ons, turbos, etc. the cast iron will last far longer.

I have not heard of a single LDS/PTWA coating that does not use an atomizing gas, plasma gas, and molten particles. Yeah they can change the gas which they have in past which has made little to know difference.

I'm not a fanboy, I'm just attracted to good engineering.

[Ghent]

Originally Posted by dd1981

Ekkkkk yeah I did not consider that factor. The damn taxes in some countries are just insane! From that perspective yeah makes sense.

Taxes here are ludicrous... thats why I ended up with a 135i. I couldn't justify the price of an M3 (the e92 at the time) considering that most of my driving is on the road going to and from work. Trips to the track are limited these days

[Fuman]

Originally Posted by Nine Lives

Impressive !

I'm not sure if this has been covered but I'd be interested to know if it's possible just to have an upgraded turbo with a flash tune without JB4 running normal pump gas between 91+93 octane.I'm not interested in ethanol mixes or meth.

If so, what sort of power @ psi would this yield.

Thanks.

Ditto to nine lives. I ended with a full e85 setup on my n54 (previously 60/40 mixed with 100% meth), and if it's not a track car, I'm not too keen on mucking with a mix on a daily drive.

I'm keen to know if there a full e85 solution around the corner?

[C230AMG]

Originally Posted by Fuman

Ditto to nine lives. I ended with a full e85 setup on my n54 (previously 60/40 mixed with 100% meth), and if it's not a track car, I'm not too keen on mucking with a mix on a daily drive.

I'm keen to know if there a full e85 solution around the corner?

Agreed on both of you, not practical for everyday driving mixing fuels. Like to know the HP figures on pump gas for this upgrade.

[FSociety]

Nobody is really Pure Stg2 for pump gas gains lol, if you upgrading turbo you def want to take advantage of the extra power coming from port injection or meth (fueling)

[Bimmer28312]

The DV+ is that also compatible for our n55 ?