The Raven e9 project

[autokunst]

“Only those who attempt the absurd can achieve the impossible”.
-Albert Einstein

I thought it would be helpful for me to begin this project with a clear mission statement. I may need to refer back to these goals as time elapses to stay on course. This is going to be a long journey.

The parameters of this project were formed based on the idea that I am not a wealthy man, and I don’t have a lump sum of funds available to invest in a well sorted, “original” dry car. This is a fact. The second fact: Given the e9’s well documented history and propensity for rust in hidden and concealed areas, I don’t know that any amount of money can buy a car that I would know with certainty is completely rust free and sound. So another important aspect of this project is the pride and sense of accomplishment that the process of this project will provide. My goal is to take this car apart and put it back together in a manner that at least meets, or dare I say exceeds the way BMW put it together - more structurally sound than when it rolled off the assembly line in Munich. More important, I will be aware of every single centimeter of the car. No hidden cavities will have been untouched. I will know and have documented the status of all of these bits. In the end, I may not spend any less, but I feel the results will be more personally rewarding.

Through this process, I hope to prove to myself that every aspect of this car again has integrity. And by posting the process on the forum, perhaps this will be discernable to others as well. After all, if you are reading this, you are inevitably a part of the process. Thank you!

 

[autokunst]

About the car. Make no mistake – this car is rough. Worse yet, it is also fairly incomplete. I am missing some exterior trim and bits, and a fair amount of interior bits. And, and, - I am sure there’s a lot more missing – we’ll build the list as we learn more (and with the forum’s input). But despite all of this, I believe this car should be saved. I am a saver (and/or a glutton for punishment).

Here’s some photos starting with the requisite receiving the car in the dead of night off the trailer photos. A few in the shop, and finally at home in the garage. You will see that Halloween is big in our house. Fortunately, my wife put some plastic skeletons in the car to keep everyone safe. Neighbors have reported seeing these guys joy riding when we’re not there.

 

[Bejoe16]

This is the exact reasoning behind my restoration. Although I am getting a professional to do the vast metal work and paint. Looking forward to it!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[autokunst]

This is a 1973 3.0 CS US, VIN 2240723. According to the BMW archive group, it was manufactured on April 10, 1973 and delivered on April 17, 1973 to Hoffman Motor Corp. in New York City. The original color was Polaris metallic, paint code 060.

I personally prefer the ‘73’s and earlier for the smaller bumpers. And it is a sunroof car – another preference of mine. I am keenly aware that the sunroofs add to the rust issues. But what’s a little more rust between friends. We’ll be welding plenty of new metal onto this chassis – might as well enjoy some daylight and fresh air overhead.

 

[autokunst]

Although I am getting a professional to do the vast metal work and paint.

That is probably a much more time efficient approach to the project. I should mention that this project will take a L - O - N - G time for me. But maybe the forum members can help nudge the progress through public shaming and the like.:eek:

 

[Bejoe16]

The body man has had the car over a year and no new metal has been welded on yet. But soon! I’m expecting mine to be 3-5 years. Depending on finances and my ability to spend time on it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[autokunst]

As you can see, a PO painted it black- appears to be rattle can at best. There are several places where the black is peeling off to reveal the Polaris beneath. Not exactly a quality job. I can only imagine the condition the original paint was in before this “make over”.

But that crappy paint job led to the name: “The Raven”.

In our house, every vehicle has a name. This is something my wife and I have developed over the years. It helps to express the vehicle’s… personality – or at least the personality we’ve decided it has. She named The Raven, and it stuck immediately. This was before I noticed the pealing rattle can black paint and the Polaris underneath. This is also before I wrote the archive group to learn that the original color was Polaris. Which is to say, this “name” we’ve given the car makes it difficult to return the car to its original color. That combined with the fact that black is pretty much my favorite color for a car (that is, if you consider black a color – that’s another debate).

 

[Wladek]

I guess that driver and passenger are previous owners

 

[Gransin]

Great! Another project I'll follow! Doesn't look to be soo rusty?

 

[autokunst]

Well... I think it is rustier than it looks. My wife jumped into the passenger seat so we could take a lap around the neighborhood before taking it apart (open header - it sounds awesome!!!). A section of the floor beneath her feet was promptly left on the floor below.



Sure, this is "only the floor". Old car floors rust. But I know that the rear wheel arches are toast, and suspect the front inner fender wells will be pretty gone, too. I am planning for the absolute worst. So anything better will have a positive effect on my motivation and emotional sensibilities. Anyway, I hope you are right.

 

[autokunst]

A little bit about the current status of the drive train. Although I was led to believe the car already had a newer 3.5 liter engine dropped in, that does not appear to be true. A quick look at the stamp on the block illustrates that this is the original, numbers matching block. Also on the stamp is “3 . 0”. However, there is currently a newer head that would likely be a B34 head, stamped “1 277 358”, and “82”, it likely came out of a 1983 vehicle. Running, it sounds like it has a larger cam, although I have not pulled the front cover off yet to determine if it is marked as such.

I threw a set of (too large) triple Weber side drafts on it to get it running. The original dual Zeniths were pretty cruddy and I didn’t want to invest in the cleaning of them. By the way, I’ll likely want to send those to a good home soon.

The Weber carbs are 45’s, which are probably too large for this 3.0 engine (better sized for the 3.5 I thought it was). But I have not learned what the story is with this engine yet. Was it rebuilt? Bored out? Different pistons/compression? Or just a frankenengine? We will see. I plan to reach out to SFDon for some sage advice. J

On the exhaust side, it has an original set of Stahl long pipe headers. They are rusty, but I have not prodded too much to see if they could be cleaned and coated. Else, I may use them as templates to make a new stainless steel set of the exact same dimension.

The engine is mated to a Getrag 265 dogleg 5-speed transmission. I have not investigated the final drive yet. Hoping for an LSD – we will see...

 

[autokunst]

I feel that it is worth mentioning that there was a fair amount of "temporary" work under the hood - especially the carburetor linkage setup. Admittedly, it is a bit of a mess under there. I wanted to confirm that the car started, ran, moved, and stopped before embarking on the chassis phase of the project. Which is probably a bit backwards, right? The mechanicals are the easy part. Having a solid chassis to put them in seems to be the larger challenge.

Anyway, I now know that I have some mechanicals that seem to work. For now, they will provide a platform to build from. Next step, take it all apart.

 

[HB Chris]

The 82 casting date could still be a B30 or B32, just made after those motors were discontinued.

 

[Markos]

Very cool! I’m excited to see the process. I like to drive mine despite the ability to see the ground when I drive.

Take some digital calipers to the Stahl primaries to see what diameter they are.

As far as the engine goes, I don’t think you have much wiggle room in the 3.0 block for oversized pistons. I guess my first question would be if the larger bore CSL engine started with the same 3.0 block. The experts will know.

The same thing goes for stroking the motor. As far as I know the 3.0 block does not have the releifs cast into the block to clear longer throw rods. I believe that started with the M30B32, or the block used for the 3.3LI (there is some overlap there I think). Just thinking out loud, others may chime in with details.

A good option IMO is to swap the motor but keep the short block. If your car will never be stock again as far as chassis as motor mods go, you can probably pitch the original block. I believe that at some point in the next 20 years or so, original motors will become a thing again - much like europe...

 

[Kizilsakal]

Great to see a project with aim similar to mine. I am also doing a restoration where no metal on the car is left untouched. Hopefully at the end it will be better than when it left the factory.

Good luck

also love the names for the cars

 

[autokunst]

A good option IMO is to swap the motor but keep the short block... original motors will become a thing again...

I had lived under the assumption for a while now that the engine was already swapped. At first that bothered me, but then it became a point of freedom. I can do anything I want under there, I thought.

When I wiped off the block stamp and snapped a photo of it so I could read what it said, I was actually disappointed when I recognized the VIN. I told my wife about this with a look of disappointment and she said "isn't that a good thing? You go on and on about 'numbers matching this and numbers matching that'". Ha ha, she had me dead to rights.

That was about a week ago, and since then I started to think that maybe having the original block is a benefit. Clearly I have mixed feelings on this. :confused:

I really do look forward to better understanding my options with this block, or with the benefits of swapping it out completely for something with a larger bore and/or a stroked scenario. Expert opinions are welcomed! Needed!!!

 

[autokunst]

The 82 casting date could still be a B30 or B32, just made after those motors were discontinued.

This is something I need to learn more about. Does anyone have a definitive method of determining exactly what this head is? A measurement, a different casting or stamp?

 

[autokunst]

I finally got back to the car late yesterday. The car is about 2 hours from our house, at a "weekend cabin" that we don't seem to get to often enough. This distance equation will further extend my already slow timeline, as well as the velocity of my postings.

Take some digital calipers to the Stahl primaries to see what diameter they are.

The Stahl header feels pretty solid even though the pipes look rusty. I may try to clean it through electrolysis and coat them with ceramic paint.

There are two flanges and they appear to be identical. Each one is stamped with "STAHL" between the first two pipes, and "878" "952" between the second two. I assume these are part numbers either for the flange, or the entire header.

When I measure the pipes in a straight section, the measurements are coming in the 1.365 range at the outside diameter. This is a bit less than 1 3/8", and I wonder if these are 1 1/4" primaries. At the bends where the tubes have been drawn out, the measurements are closer to 1.320 +/-.

I love that I learn something new about this car every time I look at it...

 

[autokunst]

I haven't started the "restoration" just yet. My hesitation is this - the moment I start taking the car apart is the moment I can't start it up and drive it around. So I continue tinkering as I get to know the car more. And the mystery continues:

I thought it would be beneficial to better understand the engine that is in this car. The block appears to be the original 3.0, matching numbers. The head, however, appears to be a B34 head - not sure why. I haven't pulled the front cover off to investigate the cam, but it sounds/feels like it has a bigger geometry. So It thought I'd get a look at the pistons and check the compression. Pretty interesting that it has piano top pistons! I don't think these would have been original to the engine. So was it built at some point??? One wonders...

Then the compression tests - which seem to be much lower than I'd expected. Especially given the evidence of the higher compression piano top pistons.?. I don't know what to think at this point.

Cylinder #1 = 117
Cylinder #2 = 124
Cylinder #3 = 122
Cylinder #4 = 131
Cylinder #5 = 128
Cylinder #6 = 133

I had a heck of a time getting the boroscope in there just right. And I wasn't able to get a nice view of the entire piston tops in one shot. The following are a handful of views that clearly show these are, in fact, piano top pistons. I did not see any markings on the pistons other than the little dimple in the middle and the concentric circles.

I don't know what other monkeying around I can or should do at this point (that allows me to keep the car operable). Feel free to make suggestions of things that will better identify this pig. Otherwise I guess I'll have to switch gears and start taking some things apart, and eventually open up the motor and get a look in there.

 

[HB Chris]

Well, a b34 would have been Motronic 1.0 with the Dizzy on the front of the head. It could have been converted back. And 82 was the first year of the improved b30 head with smaller water passages vs. the peanut shaped passages which would make sense, at least to me. I think the piano tops would be 9:1 compression, US got 8:1, rest of world 9:1.