E46 BMW Social Directory E46 FAQ 3-Series Discussion Forums BMW Photo Gallery BMW 3-Series Technical Information E46 Fanatics - The Ultimate BMW Resource BMW Vendors General E46 Forum The Tire Rack's Tire Wheel Forum Forced Induction Forum The Off-Topic The E46 BMW Showroom For Sale, For Trade or Wanting to Buy

Welcome to the E46Fanatics forums. E46Fanatics is the premiere website for BMW 3 series owners around the world with interactive forums, a geographical enthusiast directory, photo galleries, and technical information for BMW enthusiasts.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

Go Back   E46Fanatics > Tuning & Tech > Motorsports & Track Forum > Spec E46 racing class forum

Spec E46 racing class forum
Official Spec E46 racing class forum.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 12-17-2013, 02:07 AM   #1
Rob43
Hates Low RPM !
 
Rob43's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Richmond VA
Posts: 4,325
My Ride: 03 331Ci 5spd R1200R
SpecE46: Harmonic Time Bomb Disaster

First I want to say I love the idea of this SpecE46 class, and big thanks to Jason Tower & James Clay for getting this going.

As a racer (SCCA) I have a few different concerns on a few things, but one major concern in particular; Harmonic Oil Pump Failure. I believe the first year or two will be a Very Expensive learning curve for both the racers & promoters in this new class.

From personal experience I can tell you that the aluminum block M54B30 is NOT well suited to long duration RPM pulls down a straight away in stock (SpecE46) trim as the current rule book is written. There is a well known & documented high RPM issue concerning Harmonics & Oil Pump Failure in the M54B30, that mostly happens in the 6700 to 6800 RPM range. This Harmonic OPF is greatly exacerbated by three (3) different issues.

1) A light weight flywheel & clutch, instead of the stock 38.5lbs (heavy) Dual mass flywheel & clutch. (the stock dual mass flywheel acts as an Extra Damper on the back of the motor)
2) Any ECU "tune" that extends RPM past the stock 6500 RPM limit. Namely a tune that goes to 6800 to 7200 RPM.
3) Any race track with a long straight away that allows the motor to sustain the dangerous 6700 to 6800 RPM Harmonic failure range. Typically multiple 8 to 12 second (or more) pulls in any gear, (namely 4th) that allows the motor to "stay" in this dangerous 6700-6800 harmonic window.

As the rulebook is currently written, the SpecE46 race community will probably see many Harmonically caused OPF engine failures.

SpecE46:
"Specifications & Rules"

Engine: Stock M54 motor, "flywheel and clutch may be upgraded". This rule should be changed to: Stock flywheel & clutch.

"A custom ECU tune may be specified in order to ensure compliance and maximize power/reliability." This rule should be changed to either: 1) A stock ECU must be used with NO tuning software.
Or 2) A custom "Tune" may be used, but with a Maximum 6500 RPM limit.

I would Strongly suggest a change to the rulebook allowing the use of either or both:
1) An upgraded oil pump, in the stock location.
2) The use of an upgraded engine balancer.

The money that would've been spent on a LTW Flywheel & Clutch, and the money that would've been spent on the ECU "Tune" would be much better spent on the upgraded Oil Pump & Engine Balancer. This change in thinking will not only provide the SpecE46 racer with a more sustainable motor, but will provide a more level playing field for every entrant. That of course is because the "guy" with the biggest bank account will be able to afford a custom Ultra LTW Flywheel & Clutch, not to mention the use of a "Super Tuner" that can extract every last ounce power out of his motor,.....at any cost.

Some things for SpecE46 to consider.......


Good luck,
Rob43
__________________



Rob #43 ITS/ITR/STU, BMW 325I, STU LAP RECORD
SUMMIT POINT WV 1:24:229 S.C.C.A.
(DynoDynamics https:vimeo.com/8486878 Dyno Video)
"Chance Favors The Prepared Mind"

Need Help With Your Nitrous Ambitions ?.....PM ME
Quote:
Originally Posted by RacerX View Post
Nitrous is a little trickier than boost, but it's not the spray that kills motors, it's STUPIDITY!!

Last edited by Rob43; 04-11-2014 at 03:41 PM. Reason: Auto-save 1397245314
Rob43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Ads by Google

Guests, get your FREE E46Fanatics.com membership to remove this ad.
Old 12-17-2013, 11:59 AM   #2
jtower
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: raleigh, nc
Posts: 54
My Ride: spec e46
appreciate the feedback rob. let me address your two concerns as best i can:

1. there are several reasons we may utilize a spec ecu tune (ensure compliance, fix various electronic issues, make more power, richen the mixture for safety, etc) but raising the rev limit is not one of them. engine longevity is absolutely something we're trying to preserve so a 6500 rpm limiter (6700 tops) is all this class will see.

2. we've gone back and forth on the flywheel/clutch multiple times, right now we've permitted light flywheel/clutch to make the cars as fun to drive as possible. we're expecting that the conservative rev limit will keep the motors in their safe range, and we are allowing oil pump modifications (and harmonic balancer replacement may be permitted in the future as well). plus the light flywheel is optional, not required. the performance gain is minimal, it's mostly about making rev matching easier. with a 3.46 diff i don't think these cars will spend any significant time banging against the limiter in 5th.

finally, i want to point out that Evan Levine has been part of the Spec E46 team from day one, in fact it was his suggestion to use the E46 platform (my original proposal was to use the E36 M3). he's in the final stages of buying a new house and hasn't been quite as active on the public side of things but he's as much a driving force behind se46 as james or myself.

Last edited by jtower; 12-17-2013 at 11:59 AM.
jtower is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2013, 01:05 PM   #3
JamesClay
Sponsor
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: BimmerWorld
Posts: 188
My Ride: Any BMW with 4wheels
Thanks for the post and concerns - certainly well-presented and well-received. A few points (repeating Jason in some cases):
  • The software will have a conservative rev limit to prevent exactly the problem you mention. The rules have a big nod to enforcable compliance. We could say no software, but that is not something you can police and you just widen the gap from those that follow the rules (I know - all of us) and those that still have the money for custom tuning. We will improve the performance of the car to make people spending the money for it happy that they are getting something, but the reason this made the cut was purely for the compliance aspect.
  • The V2 rules do allow oil pump modification - agreed on this point.
  • Agree on the harmonic range and track issues - have experienced it a lot before. The stock piece is great, but the goal was light (you can drop 25# here) and fun (a revvy motor is fun - as is a clutch that doesn't break). I was on the side of keeping the stock flywheel and allowing a performance clutch (that is about $600). We discussed normal lightweight flywheels and I agree that is not appropriate or not what I would use because of the clutch demands and loss of damping (which also cushions the clutch). Then I worked with a company to come up with a true race clutch, aluminum solid basket, 7.25", 0.236" discs (5 year typical service life), steel flywheel but light and low MOI, and all for about $1250 - same price as the aluminum flywheel/stock-style clutch on the table. When you get that end of the engine light things get better that they are when they are a little lighter than stock (minus the DM). This should be a solid, cost-effective solution.
  • The balancer is on the table, but we think we can avoid the expense in the rules by containing the issue with the above steps. I am working hard on our car and it will be the test dummy. The goal is to have a solid, robust driveline and if we have issues after some hard running, we will take this step. I think everyone hates adding to the build price by adding it now, but I suspect that is still debatable.

At the end, Jason and Evan are making the decisions and I helping to provide answers and options, so this is one for them to expand on or discuss as needed.
__________________
James Clay
Race Proven Performance
www.bimmerworld.com
www.bimmerworldracing.com

Bimmer World
JamesClay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2013, 01:54 PM   #4
evanlevine3233
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: NC
Posts: 25
My Ride: Racecars
Agreed - Excellent feedback thanks. I hope the considerations we've made will address this, and I think we all support a low enough rev-limit to avoid problems. That extra couple hundred RPM really don't make the cars faster enough to justify it in a Spec class, especially if not having them makes the cars more reliable.

The balancer is really the only remaining piece, and it's not off the table as James mentioned. But my hope is that we get a few test cars running, built by people willing to experiment a bit, and see if that's truly necessary. Prices on these things have crept up and anywhere we can help keep that down would be preferable at this point. Ultimately though we won't sacrifice reliability if it comes to that.
evanlevine3233 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2013, 04:26 PM   #5
Rob43
Hates Low RPM !
 
Rob43's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Richmond VA
Posts: 4,325
My Ride: 03 331Ci 5spd R1200R
I'm very happy with these excellent responses, they show that all of you are on top of these issues & are open minded to addressing this "Harmonic" problem.

I really like the idea of the LTW flyweel & clutch James Clay has come up with, it will make the SpecE46 car more fun to drive and add definite life to the clutch package simply because it won't wear out quickly.

I also really like the Idea of "Spec" software that everyone would use. I do believe that a maximum of 6500 RPM should be utilized, this 6500 RPM limit really will help with motor longevity, and will offset any negative effects of using a LTW flywheel & clutch.

On to the Damper; As an owner of a highly modified N/A 2003 330Ci that currently has a ATI Super Damper mounted on it, all I tell you is there is a VAST difference in the amount of harmonic (Greatly Reduced) vibration in the 6700 to 6800 RPM range. Now when I run my Bimmer at the track, or down some empty highway in 4th gear between 6600 to 7000 RPM the "Buzz" or Harmonic vibration is virtually gone. My thought on something like the ATI Super Damper is this: BimmerWorld would purchase a large supply (10-20) of these from ATI at a discounted rate, and then pass the savings on to the SpecE46 racers. I am a FIRM believer that this one piece will add great longevity to any M54B30 race motor.

The oil pump: There's a reason why BMW sells a $3000 dollar oil pump upgrade kit for a racing M54B30, that's to solve the issue of the aluminum block vibrating like a tuning fork at 6700 to 6800 RPM and in some form or another destroying the stock oil pump. I certainly don't think anyone should spend 3K to help solve this issue, but I do believe the SpecE46 rulebook should be written to allow either:

1) A stock oil pump with a welded or wire tied oil pump nut.
2) A stock oil pump with a VAC Motorsports oil pump kit installed. (about $200)
3) A "Super" oil pump like the one I run. Cost is about $750, its a TC Kline/ Greg Smith - vaio76109 pump. There are several threads on this pump, here's a link
http://forum.e46fanatics.com/showpos...56&postcount=1 lots of pictures thanks to Adam (PEI330Ci).

Again, Good luck,
Rob

PS, Jason I responded to your PM.
__________________



Rob #43 ITS/ITR/STU, BMW 325I, STU LAP RECORD
SUMMIT POINT WV 1:24:229 S.C.C.A.
(DynoDynamics https:vimeo.com/8486878 Dyno Video)
"Chance Favors The Prepared Mind"

Need Help With Your Nitrous Ambitions ?.....PM ME
Quote:
Originally Posted by RacerX View Post
Nitrous is a little trickier than boost, but it's not the spray that kills motors, it's STUPIDITY!!

Last edited by Rob43; 12-17-2013 at 05:52 PM.
Rob43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-2013, 12:26 AM   #6
Rob43
Hates Low RPM !
 
Rob43's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Richmond VA
Posts: 4,325
My Ride: 03 331Ci 5spd R1200R
Two more very inexpensive motor saving/longevity aids should be added to the list of helping a M54B30 race motor stay together.

1) S54 Timing Chain Tensioner.
This M3 timing chain tensioner is a Direct fit and will "firm up" the timing chain from thrashing around as much as it currently does with the stock M54 part. The motor will feel smoother at high RPM with this tensioner.

2) INA (Over-Running) Alternator Clutch Pulley.
Again, this will help smooth out the motor. With the stock M54 solid Alt. pulley, the ribbed belt "whips" back & forth under deceleration from high RPM causing a lot of unneeded vibration.

Both of these parts are Super easy to install, and are cheap insurance at holding a M54B30 motor together under the extreme environment of racing.

Good luck,
Rob
__________________



Rob #43 ITS/ITR/STU, BMW 325I, STU LAP RECORD
SUMMIT POINT WV 1:24:229 S.C.C.A.
(DynoDynamics https:vimeo.com/8486878 Dyno Video)
"Chance Favors The Prepared Mind"

Need Help With Your Nitrous Ambitions ?.....PM ME
Quote:
Originally Posted by RacerX View Post
Nitrous is a little trickier than boost, but it's not the spray that kills motors, it's STUPIDITY!!

Last edited by Rob43; 12-18-2013 at 01:31 AM.
Rob43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-2013, 06:55 AM   #7
rsrdan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Wmtn
Posts: 52
My Ride: 1988 BMW M3
Does the m54b25 suffer from harmonic balance issues?? I plan on tracking my 2001 325ci in nasa time trial 2014.thx
__________________
2001 325CI

1988 M3

1989 951

rsrdan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2013, 01:15 AM   #8
TerraPhantm
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Mountain Top
Posts: 5,997
My Ride: 2005 M3 Coupe
Worth noting 2003 M54s have a different harmonic balancer (albeit also a smaller rib count). From what I understand, these don't fail as frequently. Maybe best to just have everyone run the 2003+ damper?
__________________
TerraPhantm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2013, 09:17 PM   #9
Harry330
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: In the USA
Posts: 80
My Ride: 330Ci
Is this harmonic issue really true?

Should i be worried if i supercharge or chip my 330 for street driving.
__________________
One Of Many Goals.

Last edited by Harry330; 12-30-2013 at 03:49 PM.
Harry330 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2014, 04:58 PM   #10
KCPBMW
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: C Chase
Posts: 33
My Ride: 02 330ci
Whats the Official ruling on the use of the ATI damper?
Is it legal or is it illegal?
KCPBMW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2014, 09:07 PM   #11
jtower
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: raleigh, nc
Posts: 54
My Ride: spec e46
not legal
jtower is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2014, 11:02 AM   #12
KCPBMW
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: C Chase
Posts: 33
My Ride: 02 330ci
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtower View Post
not legal
Why ????

Quote:
Originally Posted by jtower View Post
my own *personal* definition is:

performance advantage = lower lap times
competitive advantage = enhanced durability/reliability


in spec e46 any modification that provides a competitive advantage without a performance advantage is fine, and will generally be permitted provided it has no other negative impact. the current rules permit many parts to be replaced for this very reason. in other series like chumpcar (which i am also intimately familiar with) where races are much longer and durability plays a larger role, such a modification may not be allowed or will affect your valuation. however, a modification that increases both performance and competitiveness is far less certain and will be rigorously scrutinized by the rules committee.
I find it absurd that the ATI damper in deemed illegal in se46. There is NO performance advantage to this device, it just keeps motors together.

KCPBMW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2014, 12:43 PM   #13
jtower
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: raleigh, nc
Posts: 54
My Ride: spec e46
multiple cars have raced in long endurance races this year (from memory there were a few at a six hour in the PNW, 4-5 at the portland eight hour, three cars at the 25hr of thunderhill) plus several weekends of racing on the east coast with 3-4 cars each. to my knowledge there has not been a single engine failure attributable to the harmonic balancer, therefore no reason to change the rules.
jtower is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Censor is ON





All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:05 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
(c) 1999 - 2011 performanceIX Inc - privacy policy - terms of use