BMW E36 (ITS) Ring sizes?

Banzai240

Banzai240

New member
Since you guys are the experts, would someone be willing to tell me what the stock piston ring sizes are for the ITS E36 325i/is (92-95)??

Feel free to e-mail me privately if you prefer: [email protected]

Thanks!
 
Originally posted by Joe Harlan@Nov 7 2005, 05:06 PM
Deves rings has the same specs for OE replacments.

http://www.deves.com/devesrings/cars_BMW.html
[snapback]64790[/snapback]​
Click to expand...

I've recieved a message that states that these specs are not accurate for this car... I'm still working of finding some official documentation to show one-way or the other... BMW of North America doesn't have this information available, and they suggested getting in touch with a BMW Service Department and looking it up in a Service Manual...

I will keep searching...

One would suspect that for every E36 out there in ITS, there would be the REQUIRED service manual, so someone out there must have this information... Otherwise, how would they be able to e-mail me and tell me these specs are "wrong"???

With some cars, I guess part of the "mistique" is the mysteriousness of the specs... :rolleyes:

I find it odd that some of the most prominant piston ring manufacturers in the nation would have the "wrong" sized factory replacement piston ring sizes...

Smells a little like Pike Place Market around here... <_<

And people wonder why some of these things take on the apperence of a "witch hunt"...

I will find this information...
 
Originally posted by Banzai240@Nov 9 2005, 11:22 AM
I've recieved a message that states that these specs are not accurate for this car...  I'm still working of finding some official documentation to show one-way or the other...  BMW of North America doesn't have this information available, and they suggested getting in touch with a BMW Service Department and looking it up in a Service Manual...

I will keep searching...

One would suspect that for every E36 out there in ITS, there would be the REQUIRED service manual, so someone out there must have this information...  Otherwise, how would they be able to e-mail me and tell me these specs are "wrong"???

With some cars, I guess part of the "mistique" is the mysteriousness of the specs...  :rolleyes:

I find it odd that some of the most prominant piston ring manufacturers in the nation would have the "wrong" sized factory replacement piston ring sizes...

Smells a little like Pike Place Market around here...  <_<

And people wonder why some of these things take on the apperence of a "witch hunt"...

I will find this information...
[snapback]65033[/snapback]​
Click to expand...
Ok if the person sending you the information knows the specs are wrong then why are they not providing the proper specs or a link to them?
 
Originally posted by Joe Harlan@Nov 9 2005, 06:28 PM
Ok if the person sending you the information knows the specs are wrong then why are they not providing the proper specs or a link to them?
[snapback]65035[/snapback]​
Click to expand...

Don't know... I asked the same thing...

I suppose there is a fear that I'll use this information for some kind of protest or something like that... Seems silly really... If the information is available to verify the data, and it's all on the up-and-up, then one really shouldn't have anything to hide... RIGHT?? :blink:

All I'm trying to do is get the correct information so the ITAC can properely respond to a letter from a BMW owner who has made a request to the CRB concerning BMW over-bore pistons and the factory ring sizes...

Like I said, it's not a big deal... I'll find the information we need eventually...
 
OK guys... So which is correct??? Or is the answer "Both"???

Thanks,

From the DEVES catalog:



Model Years Num. of Cyls. Bore 1 2 3 Set No.
325i, 525i 5/92- 6 84.00 1.50 1.50 2.00 2659
2.5l, 4V, M50


325i, is, Cabriolet,
2494cc 1987-95 6 84.00 1.50 1.75 3.00 2297
 
Originally posted by Banzai240@Nov 9 2005, 12:21 PM
OK guys...  So which is correct??? Or is the answer "Both"???

Thanks,

From the DEVES catalog:



Model        Years      Num. of Cyls.    Bore        1          2        3          Set No.
325i, 525i          5/92-              6              84.00    1.50      1.50    2.00        2659
2.5l, 4V, M50
325i, is, Cabriolet,
2494cc          1987-95            6              84.00    1.50      1.75      3.00        2297
[snapback]65039[/snapback]​
Click to expand...

Depends if I order a set of custom race pistons from weisco,JE or somebody deved would make a set of thin rings and list them in their catalog. Check the Nissan section I think you find simlar results. A FSM or a factory part is the only way to get the answer.
 
Originally posted by Joe Harlan@Nov 9 2005, 07:37 PM
A FSM or a factory part is the only way to get the answer.
[snapback]65040[/snapback]​
Click to expand...

Exactly... That's what I'm now looking for...
 
Gooood Luck Darrin,

BMW is very stingy with their information. I've been searching for Z3 wheel option statistics to no avail. They'll gladly sell you the replacement wheel though for the right $$$$. And they'll gladly TELLl you they sold it. I haven't found any overbore pistons available for the m44 engine either (let alone rings). Apparently BMW doesn't believe in overboring the m44 motor if it has problems- they probably just sell you a new one!! (I wish I still had a small block chevy!!!)
I can't even find how many '04 e46 M3's were sold with black/natural color combination (which I own). Furthermore I can't even find out how many e46 M3's were sold in the US in '04. Porsche does a much better job with releasing this info.
If you can find a source for some of these stats. please let me know where.
Thanks
Rob
 
Originally posted by Doc Bro@Nov 10 2005, 04:48 PM
Gooood Luck Darrin,

BMW is very stingy with their information. 
[snapback]65093[/snapback]​
Click to expand...


Sounds like a trip to the tech shed could be VERY interesting for a BMW driver who is under protest for such things... :(

Unfortunatly, I'm not sure that aftermarket suppliers, or BMW Motorsports division, etc., can be used as definitive confirmation of the factory specs... I find it hard to understand how people are rebuilding these things if they don't have the factory specs... Surely you aren't just taking the word of Turner Motorsports or ??? are you??? I know their pistons say "Exact dimensions of the factory pistons except for bore diameter... Perfect for ITS"... But how can you be sure? How are THEY sure???

Interesting issue...
33.gif
 
Unfortunatly, I'm not sure that aftermarket suppliers, or BMW Motorsports division, etc., can be used as definitive confirmation of the factory specs... I find it hard to understand how people are rebuilding these things if they don't have the factory specs...



I've sort of resigned myself to the fact that I cannot have a legally prepped IT motor....at least not one with the information I've found so far. The IT legal parts that the Japanese guys have access to just don't seem to exsist for my particular application. My motor will remain untouched at this point, and I will probably always run a "bone" stock motor for this very reason. My opinion is that is why the BMWCCA rulebook is more liberal than the SCCA GCR.

I'm very curious to see what Sunbelt would say if I called stating that I wanted a potent, legal Z3 (m44) motor.....hmmmm........HOW MUCH ARE YOU WILLING TO SPEND?? I'm sure would be their response. I'm assuming it would be TOTALLY cost prohibitive ?20K? because of all the custom manufacturing of parts that would meet factory specs.

If this seems like hogwash to any lurking BMW guy then please point me in the direction of someone who has IT LEGAL parts/knowledge for the m44 motor.....We can't even purchase underdrive pulleys, chips..yeah right the car doesn't have any! Try a header....better off making one from scratch.(if not help me get the legal race weight at least down to the 2559lbs factory spec!!) Thanks in advance. (sorry for the bellyaching :blink: )

Rob
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Banzai240@Nov 9 2005, 12:21 PM
OK guys...  So which is correct??? Or is the answer "Both"???

Thanks,

From the DEVES catalog:



Model         Years       Num. of Cyls.    Bore         1           2         3           Set No.
325i, 525i          5/92-               6              84.00     1.50      1.50     2.00         2659
2.5l, 4V, M50
325i, is, Cabriolet,
2494cc           1987-95             6              84.00     1.50      1.75      3.00         2297
[snapback]65039[/snapback]​
Click to expand...

I'd say it depends....

Are you looking for ring specs for a M-50, or a M-50TU?
As for the shop manual, the one that everyone has, and it's the only one you can purchase at the dealer, is the one from Robert Bentley. If you cruze e-bay one might also find an etk C-D set for the later cars like the e-36/7. One may have the correct rings based on engine VIN#'s. That's how it appears by the overlap.

James

On second thought, looks like the 87-95 would be the M20 12valve motor. Probably what you have is the aftermarket applying the M20 piston to the M50 engine. Why make another piston when the one your making works just as well :bash_1_:

Well at least they make one for it :blink:
 
Originally posted by Z3_GoCar@Nov 10 2005, 09:04 PM
I'd say it depends....

Are you looking for ring specs for a M-50, or a M-50TU?As for the shop manual, the one that everyone has, and it's the only one you can purchase at the dealer, is the one from Robert Bentley.  If you cruze e-bay one might also find an etk C-D set for the later cars like the e-36/7.  One may have the correct rings based on engine VIN#'s.  That's how it appears by the overlap.

James
[snapback]65141[/snapback]​
Click to expand...


So what is the difference?
 
Originally posted by Doc Bro@Nov 10 2005, 12:59 PM

If this seems like hogwash to any lurking BMW guy then please point me in the direction of someone who has IT LEGAL parts/knowledge for the m44 motor.....We can't even purchase underdrive pulleys, chips..yeah right the car doesn't have any!  Try a header....better off making one from scratch.(if not help me get the legal race weight at least down to the 2559lbs factory spec!!)  Thanks in advance.  (sorry for the bellyaching :blink: )

Rob
Click to expand...

Not a clue on anyone who make IT legal parts for the M-44, pretty much an orphan in the auto-sports world. Although you can get one from Bavarian Engine Exchange, but it'll have teflon coated pistons for that race winning edge :P I also wouldn't be to sure that a fully developed header would help things as the stock manifold is about as good as it gets. The one that was racing in Sweeden had an S-14 in it. I'd think it's pretty much fixed to the stock hp numbers and not much can be done to move it.

James
 
Originally posted by Joe Harlan@Nov 10 2005, 09:11 PM
So what is the difference?
[snapback]65142[/snapback]​
Click to expand...
M-50 spec

It looks like the M50TU has Vanos variable valve timing introduced in '93 the earlier M-50 had fixed valve timing.

I suspect that the difference that Darin found was the pistons for the older M-20 12 valve engine.

James
 
Originally posted by Z3_GoCar@Nov 11 2005, 04:24 AM
I'd think it's pretty much fixed to the stock hp numbers and not much can be done to move it.

James
[snapback]65143[/snapback]​
Click to expand...

EXACTLY MY POINT!!
Let's be generous 137 stock (crank) HP
+2 for K&N
+6 to reflash the computer (given it matches to the ambient conditions every weekend)=
145 crank HP
-15 (conservative- driveline drag)
130 Rwheel hp.......2675 race weight?

I'm not slamming the ITAC on this as I think the new system will be fair once (IF) implemented however I think that the IT prep gains are overestimated in this case.
In the meantime the burden of proof is left on Z3 owners to show that the IT mods are unavailable or unrealistically attainable if at all.

How in the world does one go about showing that a car (especially a BMW) does not have the potential that it was estimated to have?

I guess this leaves me rather confused. No one will deny that the upgrades are simply not there. No one will deny that it is a BMW and therefore is viewed in the same performance light as the e36 325is. But will anyone agree, other than its owners, that the car is an orphan for BMW???? I am sure that no one will take my plight to hand...and I do expect to hear the exact opposite based mostly on marque...but, it is true.

My point is the ITAC is interested in 10/10ths cars being able to neutralize one another and let the race be a drivers race based on strengths of cars offsetting weakness of cars. I get it in principle. What I don't get though is what if it its assumed that 10/10ths is universally achievable but it really isn't. Unless the ITAC has done the research which time wouldn't permit the burden is left solely to the car owner.... it's hard (almost impossible) to prove something doesn't exist!! (images of an agnostic and a catholic having lunch come to mind :rolleyes: )

Sorry for the hijack on this thread...it is because I am struggling to find info from BMW too!!!!


Rob
 
Originally posted by Doc Bro@Nov 11 2005, 12:34 PM
EXACTLY MY POINT!!
Let's be generous 137 stock (crank) HP
+2 for K&N
+6 to reflash the computer (given it matches to the ambient conditions every weekend)=
145 crank HP
-15 (conservative- driveline drag)
130 Rwheel hp.......2675  race weight?

I'm not slamming the ITAC on this as I think the new system will be fair once (IF) implemented however I think that the IT prep gains are overestimated in this case.
In the meantime the burden of proof is left on Z3 owners to show that the IT mods are unavailable or unrealistically attainable if at all.

How in the world does one go about showing that a car (especially a BMW) does not have the potential that it was estimated to have?

I guess this leaves me rather confused.  No one will deny that the upgrades are simply not there.  No one will deny that it is a BMW and therefore is viewed in the same performance light as the e36 325is. But will anyone agree, other than its owners, that the car is an orphan for BMW????  I am sure that no one will take my plight to hand...and I do expect to hear the exact opposite based mostly on marque...but, it is true.

My point is the ITAC is interested in 10/10ths cars being able to neutralize one another and let the race be a drivers race based on strengths of cars offsetting weakness of cars.  I get it in principle.  What I don't get though is what if it its assumed that 10/10ths is universally achievable but it really isn't.  Unless the ITAC has done the research which time wouldn't permit the burden is left solely to the car owner.... it's hard (almost impossible) to prove something doesn't exist!!  (images of an agnostic and a catholic having lunch come to mind :rolleyes: )

Sorry for the hijack on this thread...it is because I am struggling to find info from BMW too!!!!
Rob
[snapback]65159[/snapback]​
Click to expand...


10/10th's IS achievable on every car. It just may be defined differently for every car. You have no adders in there for header/exhaust? Balance/blueprint? Head work? It's all perfect from the factory?

We have learned about Honda potential. We have learned about Porsche potential, we have learned about Rotory potential...build one, tell us the specs and we will have the info. If you are telling me that an optimized Z3 motor is all of a re-flash and a K&N...I would submit that you DO need to prove that conventional wisdom is wrong. The lack of a .040 piston is small potatos.

Just becasue you can't purchase something off the shelf doesn't mean it can't be made. Send your pullies to a machine shop and develop something. The header on my Miata project is being hand-made right now. Should cost me in the neighborhood of $550 by thetime it gets bolted on.

If you class a car based on 'what's available', then it comes in too light and people start making parts - and then you have an overdog. The hot set-up for a 13B ITS RX-7 is a home-grown and dyno-derived header/expansion chamber/mufler 'system' from an independent shop in Florida....see the issue?

I understand the frustration, but also understand the implication of not classing it at it's ultimate potential...some are just harder to get to...

AB
 
Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Nov 11 2005, 04:46 PM
10/10th's IS achievable on every car.  It just may be defined differently for every car.  You have no adders in there for header/exhaust?  Balance/blueprint?  Head work?  It's all perfect from the factory?

We have learned about Honda potential.  We have learned about Porsche potential, we have learned about Rotory potential...build on, tell us the specs and we will have the info.

AB
[snapback]65160[/snapback]​
Click to expand...

Andy, Please forgive me. And I do mean all of this with respect. My stance is that I own the burden of proof in all situations concerning the CRB and that is where my dilemma begins:
Are you suggesting that a competitor has to dyno and develop only to find that his or her initial suspicion was true. To rephrase using specifics. The Z3 has a darn good (great) stock header anyone will agree (that maybe why no one makes an aftermarket). Am I to design and build or have a new header built and dyno to find out what I had already (KNEW) suspected just to satisfy anyone who is skeptical on the CRB. How deep do your pockets have to be if that is the case???

As I see it if I dyno with a stock header (which I know is good) and go to the CRB/ITAC the first and standard response will be....yes but you have a stock header. This is similar to your response to my post. It seems so easy for the CRB or ITAC to continually say "yes, but you didn't do xxxxx" in almost any situation. How much REALISTIC gain will be felt from balancing/blueprinting? I mean I will do it but lets call a spade a spade.

I totally get that the CRB/ITAC has to protect the masses from the one guy who'll show up with a 75K ITA car, but is this a real threat. The Z3 is not an unpopular, one-off car. There are plenty out there, but...they are a BMW orphan- pieced together from some of the companies less desirable off the shelf parts (e30 rear suspension for example).

If my suspicion is true then the only reson to bring an new car to game is for uniqueness. It's classification process is to most on the forum "mysterious" and the $$$$burden of proof$$$ is on the competitor to say that there was an overestimation in the "mysterious" classification process. It'd be more fun, cheaper, quicker and easier to go to Anthony and say build me an Acura. We'd all have a shot at a win then. I'm not opposed to spending $$$-I'm not married and I have no kids....that's not the issue. The issue is eliminating the "yes, but xxxx" from the equation. A sincere effort should be viewed as such.
Rob
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top