M54B28 using long rods - E46Fanatics 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

Go Back   E46Fanatics > Tuning & Tech > Driveline, Engine & DME Tuning

Driveline, Engine & DME Tuning
Talk about driveline improvements, NA tuning and DME tuning your E46 BMW here. This includes diffs, intakes, exhausts, chips, software and OBD tuning.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Rating: Thread Rating: 2 votes, 5.00 average. Display Modes
Old 07-18-2015, 01:09 AM   #1
bayern_munchen
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Seattle
Posts: 56
My Ride: E46 325ci
M54B28 using long rods

Here is what I am after: an M54B28 block using the longest connecting rods possible to improve the Connecting rod ratio and lower piston speeds over traditional setup of 135mm rods and 2.8l pistons.


M54 allow block, 211mm deck height.

M52B28 Crankshaft 84mm
M50B25 connecting rods 140mm
M54B25 Pistons, 27.75mm Compression height




So, on paper it looks like this:


84/2 =42 + 140 + 27.75 = 209.75




The M54B25 block using the 75mm crankshaft, 144mm connecting rod and, 27.75 CH pistons come to 209.25mm.




So, if I went w/ the 84 crank route with the long 140mm rods then, the M54B25 piston CH would change by 0.5mm. What do you think the compression ratio would yield with something like this? I'd say, it would go up by a full point..? 11.2:1
Do you think, there would be issues with piston\valve contact because of the additional 0.5mm in Compression height?
bayern_munchen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2015, 01:36 AM   #2
daniel_f.
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Germany
Posts: 3,106
My Ride: 330iC
Instead of messing around with hardware for several months without knowing if that Frankenengine will run, give it some boost
daniel_f. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2015, 02:01 AM   #3
bayern_munchen
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Seattle
Posts: 56
My Ride: E46 325ci
Quote:
Originally Posted by daniel_f. View Post
Instead of messing around with hardware for several months without knowing if that Frankenengine will run, give it some boost
nah, man...! I hear ya about the boost but, I am "up to something" on the NA side lol!
bayern_munchen is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 07-18-2015, 02:28 AM   #4
daniel_f.
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Germany
Posts: 3,106
My Ride: 330iC
Thats fine unless you trying to build something thats not worth the hassle.

I hear you wanna use longer rods to reduce friction etc... Have you ever taken a look at asien high revving engines? They have bore/stroke ratios and conrod/stroke ratios that actually shouldnīt even work and they revv like hell and produce power and torque without taking care about those "magical" numbers.

If you wanna build it to say you build it, then thats fine. If you wanna build it to get power gains, donīt be a fool

You want N/A?

-> !!!
daniel_f. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2015, 01:42 PM   #5
bayern_munchen
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Seattle
Posts: 56
My Ride: E46 325ci
Quote:
Originally Posted by daniel_f. View Post
Thats fine unless you trying to build something thats not worth the hassle.

I hear you wanna use longer rods to reduce friction etc... Have you ever taken a look at asien high revving engines? They have bore/stroke ratios and conrod/stroke ratios that actually shouldnīt even work and they revv like hell and produce power and torque without taking care about those "magical" numbers.

If you wanna build it to say you build it, then thats fine. If you wanna build it to get power gains, donīt be a fool

You want N/A?

-> !!!
You are probably referring to Honda's K20/K24 platform. Hey, you brought up HONDA and, not I...

I actually happen to have a fair amount of experience with the K24 block. With it's 87mm bore and 99mm (!) stroke, the 2.4l K24 will rev 8000 rpm with factory internals and close to 9000 with aftermarket lightweight rods. This, btw in a street-tune configuration. At 8500rpm, piston speeds will be over 8000fps. These motors make power all the way to red-line or about 8200-8500 rpm with a fairly flat torque curve from 2500 to 5000rpm. Speaking of pistons, a typical 'street tune' setup consist of 12.5:1 compression ratio running US pump gas 91 octane. I know, in Germany and central EU, 91 octane is used for cleaning your tools and such.. lol! But hey, that's all we get here in the States 91 on a good day.

My thinking is that, if the notorious BMW crank harmonics can be sorted out then, you might be able to raise the rev limiter to about 7800rpm, picking up more power on top. The head flows nicely, a nice port and polish, oversized intake valves, lightweight lifter buckets and you should be able to support 7800, no problems.
IMHO, the 84mm crank is just about perfect. I have yet to hear anyone blowing up either a 2.5 or 2.8l crank in their motors, unlike the 3.0.
Using the long rods will drop piston speeds and side loads and less pounding on the crankshaft. Furthermore, using the M54B25 pistons should help as they are probably lighter than the b30 (haven't confirmed this yet)


Anyhow, I am after more revs. More revs should yield more top end power. 7800 is reasonable.

The video you posted is some Swedish BMW cup car build. Don't know much about it but sounds nice nevertheless.
I am more familiar with WTCC as we have a friend who drives for Honda but used to drive for BMW. Also, a good friend of mine owns a team in Le Mans. They are based out of Switzerland.

Last edited by bayern_munchen; 07-18-2015 at 01:44 PM.
bayern_munchen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2015, 09:06 PM   #6
Rob43
Registered User
 
Rob43's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Richmond VA
Posts: 8,016
My Ride: 03 331Ci 5spd R1200R
Trust me when I say I have done NO research on your subject of installing long rods, I happened to be shopping on Ebay & came across these.

I saw "BMW" and a rod length of "140mm & 142mm", the rest is up to you.....

http://www.ebay.com/itm/131497838771...e&talgo=origal

http://www.ebay.com/itm/131499014116...e&talgo=origal


Rob43
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



Rob #43 ITS/ITR/STU, BMW 325I, STU LAP RECORD
SUMMIT POINT WV 1:24:229 SCCA
(DynoDynamics
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Dyno Video)
"Chance Favors The Prepared Mind"

I BUILD SUSPENSIONS (Consult) FROM MILD TO WILD FOR RWD & Xi E46's
Quote:
Nitrous is a little trickier than boost, but it's not the spray that kills motors, it's STUPIDITY!!
I Know How To Fix The Rear "Bouncing" Problem On Your Cheap Coilovers Like: Jom RL FK SE & RK.
Rob43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2015, 06:40 PM   #7
Hobbit382
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Az
Posts: 717
My Ride: 99-328i 00-323i
Quote:
Originally Posted by bayern_munchen View Post
You are probably referring to Honda's K20/K24 platform. Hey, you brought up HONDA and, not I...

I actually happen to have a fair amount of experience with the K24 block. With it's 87mm bore and 99mm (!) stroke, the 2.4l K24 will rev 8000 rpm with factory internals and close to 9000 with aftermarket lightweight rods. This, btw in a street-tune configuration. At 8500rpm, piston speeds will be over 8000fps. These motors make power all the way to red-line or about 8200-8500 rpm with a fairly flat torque curve from 2500 to 5000rpm. Speaking of pistons, a typical 'street tune' setup consist of 12.5:1 compression ratio running US pump gas 91 octane. I know, in Germany and central EU, 91 octane is used for cleaning your tools and such.. lol! But hey, that's all we get here in the States 91 on a good day.

My thinking is that, if the notorious BMW crank harmonics can be sorted out then, you might be able to raise the rev limiter to about 7800rpm, picking up more power on top. The head flows nicely, a nice port and polish, oversized intake valves, lightweight lifter buckets and you should be able to support 7800, no problems.
IMHO, the 84mm crank is just about perfect. I have yet to hear anyone blowing up either a 2.5 or 2.8l crank in their motors, unlike the 3.0.
Using the long rods will drop piston speeds and side loads and less pounding on the crankshaft. Furthermore, using the M54B25 pistons should help as they are probably lighter than the b30 (haven't confirmed this yet)


Anyhow, I am after more revs. More revs should yield more top end power. 7800 is reasonable.

The video you posted is some Swedish BMW cup car build. Don't know much about it but sounds nice nevertheless.
I am more familiar with WTCC as we have a friend who drives for Honda but used to drive for BMW. Also, a good friend of mine owns a team in Le Mans. They are based out of Switzerland.
get a vac/ati dampener, problem solved. but fyi just because you rev a motor to 10k wont automatically make more power. the intake, head, cams, exhaust all have to be able to flow that well also. so lets think about this...

porting head 1500-3k
highly aggressive cams 1500
springs retainers lifters 2k
ati dampener 1k
exhaust 1k
intake setup 1k

so what 8k+? for tops 350whp and an engine that wont last long?

money is better spent elsewhere.
Hobbit382 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2015, 08:12 PM   #8
zander271
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 4,042
My Ride: 6spd ZHP/5sp XI
Quote:
Originally Posted by daniel_f. View Post



-> !!!

Good lord that car sounds sick!
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
zander271 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-2015, 09:35 PM   #9
bayern_munchen
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Seattle
Posts: 56
My Ride: E46 325ci
Quote:
Originally Posted by bayern_munchen View Post
Here is what I am after: an M54B28 block using the longest connecting rods possible to improve the Connecting rod ratio and lower piston speeds over traditional setup of 135mm rods and 2.8l pistons.


M54 allow block, 211mm deck height.

M52B28 Crankshaft 84mm
M50B25 connecting rods 140mm
M54B25 Pistons, 27.75mm Compression height




So, on paper it looks like this:


84/2 =42 + 140 + 27.75 = 209.75




The M54B25 block using the 75mm crankshaft, 144mm connecting rod and, 27.75 CH pistons come to 209.25mm.




So, if I went w/ the 84 crank route with the long 140mm rods then, the M54B25 piston CH would change by 0.5mm. What do you think the compression ratio would yield with something like this? I'd say, it would go up by a full point..? 11.2:1
Do you think, there would be issues with piston\valve contact because of the additional 0.5mm in Compression height?


I collected all the parts, dropped in hte new crank and rods and; it's not going to work! I am actually PO'd about it too.
Was my mistake of relying on forum data lol!

Anyhow, as it turns out, the M54B25 Connecting rod length is NOT 144mm rather, 144.98.

I measured the factory setup on the 2.5 block. The Piston Deck height came to 1.07mm below deck.

When using the 84mm crankshaft, 140mm connecting rods and, the original 2.5l pistons, the piston will sit 1.54mm below deck. A frickin 0.54mm difference. Great for Turbo build but, that's not what I am after.

Here is the math for comparison:

M54B25 block: 75mm crank : 2 = 37.5mm + rod length at 144.98mm (instead of 144) = 182.48mm

My Hybrid build using M54B25 pistons: 84mm crank : 2 = 42mm + rod length at 140mm = 182

So, I need to gain 0.05mm to maintain the 10.5:1 CR. How can I do this without going custom parts? By using the M54B30 piston.

M54B30 piston compression height: 28.32mm
M54B25 piston compression height: 27.75mm (currently using)

As you can see, teh difference is 0.57mm


So, with all this being said, I am currently looking for a low mile B30 piston set. If you have them available, let me know please. thanks
bayern_munchen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-2015, 09:41 PM   #10
reggid
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: .
Posts: 84
My Ride: .
you will never notice the difference with the longer rod ratio. a small change just doesnt make much difference. some basic calculations will make this evident.

as for adjustments, machining some off the block, different thickness head gaskets can give some adjustments, a piston that sits slightly proud can have the crown machined to suit

Last edited by reggid; 09-23-2015 at 09:44 PM.
reggid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-2015, 10:02 PM   #11
bayern_munchen
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Seattle
Posts: 56
My Ride: E46 325ci
Quote:
Originally Posted by reggid View Post
you will never notice the difference with the longer rod ratio. a small change just doesnt make much difference. some basic calculations will make this evident.
do you have any data on this or know anyone who has already built such setup and can provide feedback? thanks!
bayern_munchen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-2015, 10:23 PM   #12
reggid
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: .
Posts: 84
My Ride: .
Quote:
Originally Posted by bayern_munchen View Post
do you have any data on this or know anyone who has already built such setup and can provide feedback? thanks!
no but if you plot out piston motion (displacement, velocity, acceleration) vs crank angle for the stock rods and longer ones, you can barely differentiate the two curves....

it makes about a 0.6 degree difference in rod angularity which is a slope of 1 in 100...

Last edited by reggid; 09-23-2015 at 11:48 PM.
reggid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-2015, 11:37 PM   #13
bayern_munchen
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Seattle
Posts: 56
My Ride: E46 325ci
Quote:
Originally Posted by reggid View Post
no but if you plot out piston motion (displacement, velocity, acceleration) vs crank angle for the stock rods and longer ones, you can barely differentiate the two curves....
The M54B30 connecting rod ratio is a whooping 1.50. The OEM 2.8 liter block checks in at 1.60, where as the M54B25 has a rod ratio of 1.93 (almost Formula-1 territory) My hybrid setup will yield 1.66 which isnt as bad as the 3.0 block. Kinda right in the middle there, lol!
The S54 blocks are notorious for blowing #2, #5 rod bearings as well as destroying #1 main. The B30 blocks are also known for rod failure issues and the notorious #1 main getting annihilated when revved over 6500. (see Worschlag's build) Anything after the M30 engine BMW built, are undersquare, all dealing with the same issue. bearing failure, crank harmonics and oil pump sprocket failure, in this order. The only BMW engine that seem to be able to withstand all of the above is the oversquare, M54B25 with the crazy long rod. In the matter of fact, BMW is now figuring it out as, all the new 4cyl turbo engines are built with long rods to prevent the issues listed above.

Anyhow, I am buying the M30 pistons but of course, this will not be a straight swap either. (why would it be, ey? Nothing ever goes easy... ) It looks like I will have to have the valve pockets machined to clear the valves on a 9.7mm lift.
bayern_munchen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-24-2015, 04:19 AM   #14
Davconelectric
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,927
My Ride: 2 dog powered sled
Click image for larger version

Name:	ImageUploadedByBimmerApp1443086328.873141.jpg
Views:	432
Size:	64.9 KB
ID:	613377
Did someone say bearing failure?
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Davconelectric is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-24-2015, 04:41 AM   #15
reggid
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: .
Posts: 84
My Ride: .
S54 has a much bigger stroke and more revs. Loads are rpm^2 and stroke also has a non-linear effect....so a very different beast.

The harmonic issue is basically stroke and rpm related it has very little to do with rod ratio. it so happens that the engines with the issue have a poor rod ratio but this is a byproduct when using a given deck height the longer the stroke the shorter the rod to achieve the same stack height and the engine will still shake itself to bits even with a 10mm longer rod in an M54B30. An ATI Damper is one of the fixes for this it seems

Let’s put some numbers to this

At 7500rpm m52B28 with 135mm rod vs a 142mm rod

135mm/142mm/% diff

Peak Acceleration TDC (g’s)
3463/3422/-1.2%

Peak Acceleration (near BDC g’s)
1890/1905/+0.8%

Mean Piston Speed (m/s)
21.0/21.0/0%

Maximum Piston Speed (m/s)
34.6/34.4/-0.6%

Peak Rod Angularity (degrees)
17.28/16.48/0.8

it will make so little difference in your particular case its not worth doing for the rod ratio reason.

For sure if youre getting custom slugs then opt for the longest rod that gives the best compression height (shorter the better to a point) but dont be afraid of a shorter rod if you have a long stroke engine, inherently you're going to be revving the engine less anyway all else being equal

Last edited by reggid; 09-24-2015 at 04:55 AM.
reggid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-18-2015, 07:17 PM   #16
wazzu70
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Bellevue, WA
Posts: 10
My Ride: e30
Keep in mind the bore/stroke ratio and rod ratio of the M54b30 would be fine on the 4cyl. Having a long crank is where the issue is. The less the main and rod journals overlap on the crank the more probounced the issue is which is why the 75mm cranks fare much better.

Even in Grand Am they were replacing dampers frequently because the OEM damper cannot handle the abuse (but is required by regs). Switching to a proper damper is the most effective way to solve the issues.

The problem only really goes away with less cylinders/shorter crank
wazzu70 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2015, 01:02 AM   #17
bayern_munchen
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Seattle
Posts: 56
My Ride: E46 325ci
Quote:
Originally Posted by wazzu70 View Post
Keep in mind the bore/stroke ratio and rod ratio of the M54b30 would be fine on the 4cyl. Having a long crank is where the issue is. The less the main and rod journals overlap on the crank the more probounced the issue is which is why the 75mm cranks fare much better.

Even in Grand Am they were replacing dampers frequently because the OEM damper cannot handle the abuse (but is required by regs). Switching to a proper damper is the most effective way to solve the issues.

The problem only really goes away with less cylinders/shorter crank

Yes, I understand and, I agree. BMW guys don't like when I bring this up but, a Honda K24A2 block with an insane 1.44 rod ratio can spin 8k in race configuration and make power all the way to redline. No issues with the crank, ever.
That being said, not all 6cyl engines have the issue the BMWs have. Just look at the RB26DETT. Its a 6cyl block, punks spin that motor to 9 grand without any failure

I finally figured out my build. Here it is:

84mm crankshaft
140mm connecting rod
M54B30 pistons, OEM spec. This will yield about 11:1 CR

You could use the M54B25 pistons as well however piston squish isn't exactly perfect as the piston sits 1.5mm down the sleeve. Still, though, this setup would provide you with about 10.5:1 CR, which isn't bad.

I am putting this project on hold until next spring, as I am in the process of moving. In addition, I really need to finish up my Pro3 first before I start messing with my E46.

I was actually thinking of selling my build as is. if you are interested I can hook you up, man!
bayern_munchen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2015, 01:51 AM   #18
Rob43
Registered User
 
Rob43's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Richmond VA
Posts: 8,016
My Ride: 03 331Ci 5spd R1200R
Quote:
Originally Posted by bayern_munchen View Post
Yes, I understand and, I agree. BMW guys don't like when I bring this up but, a Honda K24A2 block with an insane 1.44 rod ratio can spin 8k in race configuration and make power all the way to redline. No issues with the crank, ever.
That being said, not all 6cyl engines have the issue the BMWs have. Just look at the RB26DETT. Its a 6cyl block, punks spin that motor to 9 grand without any failure

I finally figured out my build. Here it is:

84mm crankshaft
140mm connecting rod
M54B30 pistons, OEM spec. This will yield about 11:1 CR


You could use the M54B25 pistons as well however piston squish isn't exactly perfect as the piston sits 1.5mm down the sleeve. Still, though, this setup would provide you with about 10.5:1 CR, which isn't bad.

I am putting this project on hold until next spring, as I am in the process of moving. In addition, I really need to finish up my Pro3 first before I start messing with my E46.

I was actually thinking of selling my build as is. if you are interested I can hook you up, man!

So let me get this straight, you're proposing a 2.8L motor with a slightly longer rod to bump compression up a little bit ? All this in an attempt to get a higher revving motor that makes decent HP without suffering the well documented "Evil" Harmonic issue that comes in after redline on a M54B30 ??

Why go to ANY of this trouble, as I've stated in countless threads & Hobbit382 stated in this thread,........Get an ATI Damper for a M54B30 & your high RPM problem is solved.

https://forum.e46fanatics.com/showthread.php?t=1017883

Everything being somewhat equal, a 2.8L motor will make 15 crank HP LESS than the same motor with 3.0L's. I personally don't believe a .8 compression bump on a 2.8L motor will yield an equal 15 crank HP gain, I'd like to hear what other E46F motor heads (Smart Guys) say about trading negative 200cc's for a .8 bump up in compression.....



Rob43
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



Rob #43 ITS/ITR/STU, BMW 325I, STU LAP RECORD
SUMMIT POINT WV 1:24:229 SCCA
(DynoDynamics
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Dyno Video)
"Chance Favors The Prepared Mind"

I BUILD SUSPENSIONS (Consult) FROM MILD TO WILD FOR RWD & Xi E46's
Quote:
Nitrous is a little trickier than boost, but it's not the spray that kills motors, it's STUPIDITY!!
I Know How To Fix The Rear "Bouncing" Problem On Your Cheap Coilovers Like: Jom RL FK SE & RK.

Last edited by Rob43; 10-19-2015 at 01:53 AM.
Rob43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2015, 06:07 AM   #19
SoloII///M
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Columbia, MD
Posts: 811
My Ride: Many
A damper is not going to magically allow you to spin an M54B30 to 7800RPM without harmonics causing problems.
__________________
John V
No more BMWs...
SoloII///M is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2015, 12:26 PM   #20
bayern_munchen
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Seattle
Posts: 56
My Ride: E46 325ci
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoloII///M View Post
A damper is not going to magically allow you to spin an M54B30 to 7800RPM without harmonics causing problems.

The ATI damper will be part of my build. IMO, it's a no brainer. In the matter of fact, I am thinking of just sticking with the OEM dual mass flywheel as well. Yes, I'd like to have a bit better T response due to lighter Rotating assembly but the dual mass isn't that bad -for me, at least. Plus, it will help with countering harmonics.

To be honest, I probably wouldn't be worrying about this particular build, had I bought a 330 from the get go, instead of a 325ci. But, what's done is done; for now, going to stick with it.


IMHO, the 89.6 crank puts enough side load on the pistons as well as the rod journals that, by dropping the stroke and going longer rods and lighter pistons, over all it would make a difference. I am not shooting for only Peak HP, rather, drivability and reliability and, a flatter torque curve.

Looking at the head, it should flow nicely. Not sure how much but, 200-220cfm is reasonable.. (?) Once the bottom end is sorted out, the engine co9uld potentially make power all the way up to about 6800, I think (?)

Someone mentioned about money being better spent elsewhere.
Well, depending on how you look at it but, in general, I agree! I could have bought 8000 shares of KERX at 3.75 last Wednesday and sell off this morning at about 5.10 a share. That's over 1.25\share gain. Or, instead of spending money on the engine, I could buy TESLA (Nasdaq) January-2016 $270 call options, there's a huge open interest there. currently pretty cheap at 5.27 a call. I bet, those calls will double once TSLA is in the money.
Better yet, since Hilary is openly attacking the Banking sectors as well as Healthcare, might as well just go short on both. The bottom line is; Each to their own.. For time being, though, this project is on hold until next spring. But, if I ever get this engine done, I will definitely share and provide you with a feedback even if it result in a "I told you so" scenario...

BTW, I am thinking of selling my PRO3 build. I should probably list it under the classified. on the meantime, if you are interested, just shoot me a pm. thanks,
bayern_munchen 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 Off
Censor is OFF



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:27 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
(c) 1999 - VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.