3.5l transplant from a 1989 E34

C

cs1971

Member
Messages
34
Reaction score
0
Hi to All,
I am just getting back from a long vacation. I put my 2800cs away when I had my first son.(Make no mistake I still call my CS , MY FIRST BORN). Now 14 years later I decided to bring it out again and so much has changed. I have been browsing this site for 4 months and decided to join a group of great enthusiast. When I first started, it was just a couple of locals: Maximillian in his basement with Paul, Terry and Neil of Rockville,MD and Korman Auto. I am sorry, just took a trip down memory lane. Let me get to my interest. I just purchased a 1989 E34 and would like to install it in my coupe. I want to get away from the carb set up and go FI. So I am in need of links, articles, advice etc. from start to finish to complete this project. Oh Yeah, I want the pleasure of doing it myself. I would like to make this transplant simple as possible. THANKS

Here's what I had in mind, let me know what you all think.

1. swap oil pump and pan
2. swap motor mounts
3. relocate battery to rear
4. extend the brake booster where the battery seats( I removed the brake booster and linkages from a 540 that mounts up front. Not sure how this is going to work yet but it's an idea. I search low and high for the Tii booster, no luck).
5.mount cpu in glove box
6. wiring I have no clue
7. need to find 3 piece trans.
 
This transplant is fairly straight forward. An excellent opportnity to upgrade a CS Coupe.

You'll need adapter plates for that engine as motor mounts on the block are in a different location. These are available from Koala Motorsport www.koalamotorsport.com

This engine has it's pulse generator on the crankhub, not on the flywheel. I have several transmissions & bellhousing that fit this application, and we can set you up with any parts new and used that you might need.

Brakes . . it is typical to use a Tii booster . . but I have seen it done with a smaller stock 2002 booster . It will work fine. We are presently working to identify a differnt booster for this need as tii parts cost big dollars and are scarce. This is also a good time to switch to a rear disc brake set up.
The alterantive to modifying the brake booster is to swap to an older CS / Bavaria manifold retainng your original booster. This does require some adation of injectors and fuel rails . .

From the donor car save the fuel pump wiring harness, this provides you the plugs and dust boots, and enough length to the wiring to make your splices in a dry location.

Your engine set up uses a AFM, to clean up the installation we sell a MAF conversion for this engine. Easy install.
 
cs1971 said:
Hi to All,
I am just getting back from a long vacation. I put my 2800cs away when I had my first son.(Make no mistake I still call my CS , MY FIRST BORN). Now 14 years later I decided to bring it out again and so much has changed. I have been browsing this site for 4 months and decided to join a group of great enthusiast. When I first started, it was just a couple of locals: Maximillian in his basement with Paul, Terry and Neil of Rockville,MD and Korman Auto. I am sorry, just took a trip down memory lane. Let me get to my interest. I just purchased a 1989 E34 and would like to install it in my coupe. I want to get away from the carb set up and go FI. So I am in need of links, articles, advice etc. from start to finish to complete this project. Oh Yeah, I want the pleasure of doing it myself. I would like to make this transplant simple as possible. THANKS

Here's what I had in mind, let me know what you all think.

1. swap oil pump and pan
2. swap motor mounts
3. relocate battery to rear
4. extend the brake booster where the battery seats( I removed the brake booster and linkages from a 540 that mounts up front. Not sure how this is going to work yet but it's an idea. I search low and high for the Tii booster, no luck).
5.mount cpu in glove box
6. wiring I have no clue
7. need to find 3 piece trans.
Click to expand...

Having done this job, your list is pretty accurate in terms of the major issues. I'm not sure how the 540's Goldbergesque setup will work in the E9 engine bay, as it is much more curved outwards than the E34's bay. (From the top down, the E9 engine bay has a trapezoidal shape, while the E34's is much more rectangular) In principle, however, it should work reasonably well.

Al alternative is to modify the B35's intake manifold, as others have done. There was a thread recently that showed the process. You have to lob off the lower part of the manifold that interferes then weld up a plate to re-seal the manifold. Looked like it would work quite well.

In terms of the wiring, you will be able to use the entire B35 engine harness, as the harnesses in E34 cars are distinct from the overall chassis harness. You will also need to use the harmonic balancer from the B35, as that is how Motronic 1.3 gets its crank position information, rather than from the flywheel. You will also need to weld in an O2 sensor bung on one of the downpipes so the car won't be running in open-loop mode (no feedback) all the time. It will give you improved gas mileage and better overall performance.

For the trans, I take it the reason you want a Getrag 265 (the three part trans you were talking about) is to use the speedo. There are a few shops that can convert the speedo to an electric signal, running off the differential. The Getrag 265 is the preferred option, though. Metric Mechanic has an excellent transmission application guide (what transmissions were used in what cars when) in their catalogue to give you an idea of where to start looking.

Like you mentioned, you will need an E9 pump and pan set to clear the front subframe. I'd just get a new oil pump, as that would be one less thing to worry about failing. Besides, taking off the oil pan is such a pain you don't want to have to do it twice.

If you are interested in rodding it up, Miller makes some good aftermarket components for the M30, as does Ireland Engineering.
 
x atlas0,
I just retrieved an IM and 5 speed trans from a 1981 633csi. I think it's a 265 based on info at Metric Mechanics. I don't think the bel housing fit the 3.5l motor. So , I think now I need a bel housing that works. I am going to give Mario L. a call

cs1971
 
cs1971 said:
x atlas0,
I just retrieved an IM and 5 speed trans from a 1981 633csi. I think it's a 265 based on info at Metric Mechanics. I don't think the bel housing fit the 3.5l motor. So , I think now I need a bel housing that works. I am going to give Mario L. a call

cs1971
Click to expand...

All M30 bellhousings work on any other M30. It should work just fine with the 3.5 if you are running a fuel system other than Motronic 1.0, which does require a special bellhousing.
 
bellhousings

What you'll need for a bellhousing, if you use the e-34 oilpan is a 1985 bellhousing, as the bolt spacing and configuration on the bottom part of the oilpan is different than the earlier 3.5's. I used a 85 bellhousing to mount my dogleg 5 speed to my 91 m5 engine in my coupe. On the other hand, if you use the earlier oilpan and oilpump from the 3.0 then you can use the early bellhousing. Good luck, Leroy
 
X Atlas0,
Are you saying whether I use the oil pan from the 3.5l (E34) or the 3.0l (E9), the transmission should fit? I thought the E34's oil pan would not work on the 2800cs. I would like to do less changes as possible. I anticipated on using the fuel management and fuel pump from the 1989 E34. Is this a problem? I would like to use everything I can from the 1989 E34 be for I part it out to retrieve some of my money back.

cs1971
 
cs1971 said:
X Atlas0,
Are you saying whether I use the oil pan from the 3.5l (E34) or the 3.0l (E9), the transmission should fit? I thought the E34's oil pan would not work on the 2800cs. I would like to do less changes as possible. I anticipated on using the fuel management and fuel pump from the 1989 E34. Is this a problem? I would like to use everything I can from the 1989 E34 be for I part it out to retrieve some of my money back.

cs1971
Click to expand...

Exactly, the E34 oil pan will not clear the front subframe, so you have to use the E9 oil pan and oil pump, as the later pump has a different pickup depth. With this setup, you can use any Getrag 265 box you find, if you are going to use the Motronic 1.3 system from the E34.

The other, major thing you will need from the E34's M30 is the harmonic balancer, as it is the crank sensor trigger in the Motronic 1.3 system.
 
x_atlas,
I have seen Elrey's post of shaving the IM and using 325ix brake booster. I thought it was a great idea. However, have you heard that changing the air volume would burn some cylinders or something because of the alteration. This I was told when I presented the idea to La Jolla Independent. I am wondering if Elrey is having any problem's. I have already sent my IM to the welder. Is there any additional information out there on this?

cs1971
 
I haven't cut open a Motronic manifold before to see how it is inside, but I'll wager it looks like a vertical stack of tubes, 3 on a pair of opposite sides of a box. Cutting the bottom will reduce the plenum volume and possibly reduce the intake charge to the 1st and 6th cylinders, based on Carl Nelson's suggestion, as they are the lowest intake runners on the manifold.

However, the amount of volume reduction has got to be quite small compared to the total plenum volume. If the actual runner openings inside the plenum are untouched, I can't really see it having any ill effects.
 
Hope I'm not butting in here... I have done 3 engines in the last few months and could not be convinced to use the later intake manifold. It just does not look like it belongs in the car.
528i manifolds are plentiful and dirt cheap in the boneyards and Carl has the injector adapters available.
I see so many e32's in the yards now that the next 2 engines will be e32 based with 528i manifolds. Motronic 1.3 is wonderful to work with and the performance is great.
You can also get a little imaginative and go with m30 b35 bottom end with m30 b34 head with cam and springs from m30 b35 hooked to 528i intake manifold with 320i runners.
That is almost 10:1 compression and Motronic 1.3 for cheap.......


sfdon
 
sdfon

I have an intake manifold from an 81 633csi. This s/b the same as the early 528i manifold , correct? I was told that the modifications was very expensive. I am not sure what all need to be done. I know alot of splicing into the e34's wiring harness for injectors, everything else am not sure. If you have a simple and not too expensive method, I am all for it.

Also , I have access to whatever I need from the 81 633csi. This car has the b34 head , correct?

cs1971
 
Do I use the fuel rail from the e24 or this is part of the adapter Carl sells. Wondering if the color code the same on the injectors wiring?

I am wondering how the 10:1 compression is created from a head that has smaller intake valve and ports and less cc

cs1971
 
cs1971 said:
Do I use the fuel rail from the e24 or this is part of the adapter Carl sells. Wondering if the color code the same on the injectors wiring?

I am wondering how the 10:1 compression is created from a head that has smaller intake valve and ports and less cc

cs1971
Click to expand...

That's the thing, it has less clearance volume for the same displacement volume. Compression ratio is:
CR=(Vc/(Vc+Vd))
where Vc is the clearance volume, and Vd is the displacement volume. Firstfives.org has an excellent comparison of the B34 and B35 heads in their tech section.

I wouldn't use a B34 head, however, for the reasons you mentioned, namely the smaller valves and poorer flow characteristics. Plus, to get all you can from a 10:1 M30, you would need to use premium gas and get a custom Motronic 1.3 tune. Honestly, the bump in power from increasing the CR by about 1 is about 5%. (the stock B35 CR is 9:1 US) I'd rather have the safety of not having a pinging engine and being able to run on mid or regular.

If I was going for a hot coupe, I'd use a M90 with a B35 head and custom pistons.
 
Nice discussion!

Questions though- why change the m90 pistons?
How much do you drive your coupe that you would need to save on gas cost?
 
sfdon said:
Nice discussion!

Questions though- why change the m90 pistons?
How much do you drive your coupe that you would need to save on gas cost?
Click to expand...

It isn't so much about the gas cost, it is about the quality of acceptable gas. If I'm driving along, and I get to a po-dunk gas station that only has regular or mid-grade, I don't want to be hosed.

I'd need to change the M90 pistons as they were designed with the B34 clearance volume in mind. If I just dropped on a B35 head, the CR would drop, causing the tune to be off. Plus, the aftermarket pistons are stronger and lighter than stock. Reducing the rotating mass will make the engine rev more freely. I'd tie it in with a lightweight flywheel (or a stock CS one, since they weigh in at about 15lbs, compared to later dual mass units weighing 30+lbs) and call it a day.
 
Last area of interest- AFM,MAF or MAP???

I hate to be the Beta boy on the MAP and my install a couple of months ago of a turbo on a e32 735i with with a well known chip was a pain in the ass.

What do you like?
 
sfdon said:
Last area of interest- AFM,MAF or MAP???

I hate to be the Beta boy on the MAP and my install a couple of months ago of a turbo on a e32 735i with with a well known chip was a pain in the ass.

What do you like?
Click to expand...

I generally prefer the MAF, because it is a direct sensor. The thing the DME needs is the mass of air entering the engine at any given time. The MAP sensor does this by providing the manifold average pressure, which can then be derived into the mass present in the manifold. The AFM provides a measurement of the air flow through the manifold, (namely, the volume of air, not the mass of air) which, when combined with the temperature of the air, is translated into the mass of air in the manifold. The MAF takes a direct measurement of the mass moving through it by finding the amount of power to keep a wire, or film at a certain temperature. The heat transfer through convection is dependent on the mass flow of air (namely by the velocity and density of the air through a set aperture) which is why it doesn't have to go through a bunch of signal conditioners and complex calculations to get the data the DME needs.

In terms of performance, the AFM is generally seen as the worst option, as it has poor throttle response and cannot be re-scaled very easily if you go turbo. (the door inside it will bang open, causing a temporary lean condition, other bad things) The MAP provides a nice balance of accuracy, cost, and transient response. The MAF is more accurate and has better responsiveness, but it is more costly and has a fairly set lifespan.

With the turbo 7-er, did you go with an aftermarket kit, (Miller, TCD, Cartech) or was it a 745 mash-up?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top