Jump to content
  • When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Creating Low End Power In A 2002?


76ohtwo

Recommended Posts

I'm sure rustproofing will help but it's not a cure-all. My tii was rustproofed 6 months after new and still needed rockers and fenders, um, 22 years later. And it was not driven on salted roads.

 

GL,

Ray

Stop reading this! Don't you have anything better to do?? :P
Two running things. Two broken things.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 years is not bad life span for such abused parts of a car, rust proof and not driven in snow or not. Heck I've seen 6 year old cars rusting out horribly (think hyundais).

Heck even contaminated steel can start degrading before it's even painted at the factory. Fiat x1/9's were made from old tanks and were left outside for months at a time in bare steel, almost all are rusted out these days.

Regardless save the classics from harsh conditions, the last thing you want is rust or your own/or someone else's mistake causing a crash to such an awesome car. Save the 02 for better conditions and let cheap civics take winter abuse

1974 2002 - M20/Getrag 260 swap underway

Link to comment
Share on other sites

that would be downdraft..singular.  two barrels feeding 4 cyl.  better is sidedrafts...plural.  four barrels...each feeding a cyl.

 

M: Worthy of discussion is the downdraft carb on a plenum intake manifold with (factory) long runners can provide equal if not superior torque in the lower and 'mid' range (as compared side-draft carbs). -KB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 years is not bad life span for such abused parts of a car, rust proof and not driven in snow or not. Heck I've seen 6 year old cars rusting out horribly (think hyundais).

Heck even contaminated steel can start degrading before it's even painted at the factory. Fiat x1/9's were made from old tanks and were left outside for months at a time in bare steel, almost all are rusted out these days.

Regardless save the classics from harsh conditions, the last thing you want is rust or your own/or someone else's mistake causing a crash to such an awesome car. Save the 02 for better conditions and let cheap civics take winter abuse

If I bought a 2002, I wouldn't have the ability to buy another car for the winter. 

 

Rustproofing is good for holding moisture in and out of sight while the metal rots away unseen.

Couldn't the underside/body/chassis be washed before hand, to eliminate anything in there that could cause rust, carefully dried, and then rust proofed? If we made sure that everything was clean before rust-proofing, wouldn't there be 

 

M: Worthy of discussion is the downdraft carb on a plenum intake manifold with (factory) long runners can provide equal if not superior torque in the lower and 'mid' range (as compared side-draft carbs). -KB

Interesting thought. I think that the idea of having one barrel per cylinder (two 2-barrel downdrafts) seems more logical - each of the carburetors having one barrel pumping fuel into a cylinder. However, Ireland Engineering recommended downdraft - which is why I originally had them on my list. However, if it will perform better, a 38 downdraft carb as opposed to two 40 DCOE sidedrafts remains an option. I'll have to look at them again. I've also thought about using Megasquirt fuel injection - but I don't know how well that performs or if it's a reliable system. I'll probably (90% sure) use carbs. 

Edited by mattio523

-Mattio523

 

1976 BMW 2002

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Couldn't the underside/body/chassis be washed before hand, to eliminate anything in there that could cause rust, carefully dried, and then rust proofed? If we made sure that everything was clean before rust-proofing, wouldn't there be 

 

Unfortunately there is no such thing as rust-proofing, only rust prevention. And being in Connecticut, what happens is the road salt in solution works its way down into your car, you can never get it out, and the salt vastly accelerates the beginning and rapid continuation of rust. Now maybe if you fully stripped and blasted the body, then had it dipped in a galvanizing solution, then painted the whole thing with POR-15 it might last a bit longer. But every scratch and paint chip becomes a rust seed.

 

So, if you buy or want a NICE 2002, don't drive it in the salt. If you want a 2002 and want to drive it in the winter, buy one that is not in such nice shape and drive it. I had a lot of fun in my 2002 in the winter when I lived in Boston, four Nokia Hakkepeletta (sp?) snow tires and 3 bags of sand under the rear seat. Did ice racing every year and generally blasted around in the snow. The rust eventually became structural and required significant surgery to address. Once rust starts, the only cure is to cut it out and weld in fresh metal.

 

BTW, my 2002 had the factory "automatic rustproofing" feature, at least on the front underside. --FB

Edited by FB73tii

--Fred

'74tii (Colorado) track car

'69ti (Black/Red/Yellow) rolling resto track car

'73tii (Fjord....RIP)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

M: Worthy of discussion is the downdraft carb on a plenum intake manifold with (factory) long runners can provide equal if not superior torque in the lower and 'mid' range (as compared side-draft carbs). -KB

yes, that would be interesting discussion sometime...so many variables.  the exact setup and conditions would need to be clarified (like the sidedrafts being properly set up for low end response....no big venturi's)

2xM3

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yeah, I hate to pee on the M42, since I think it's a brilliant motor for what it is, but what it doesn't have is torque.  

 

3500, it wakes up and goes >>ZING<< but getting there, I'd be surprised if the stock M10 doesn't equal or better it.

 

But the M10 is actually a torquey little engine for being as oversquare as it is.  It's a good fit for the 2002.

 

And I was serious about the S14 crank- that would add both cubes and stroke, and both are good for torque.  It's

been done more than a few times- see if you can chat wiith/get a ride with someone who's done it.

 

Never drove an M42 in the less-weighing 02 body but only in E30. To me for sure has only minor low-end torque, I totally agree.

 

For a stroker with S14 parts better take the whole cylinder block from the M3. M10 cylinder blocks do not always stand the big bores needed to really reach 2,3Liter for a longer time. Friend has M3 block combined with M10 head, 304 Schrick, 45 Webers and gets out 207hp at 6650rpm with torque of 241Nm at 5200. Some things like fitting pistons, block milling etc. to keep an eye on though. 2,5Liter from Sport Evo is an option but even more expensive (2,3Liter block can be rebored so that you will only need 2,5Liter crank to save some $) and there are also custom-made 2,7Liter cranks available (S14 not M20).

 

have you ever driven a 2002 before? is this your first car? i would suggest to put your location in your profile and see if there are other 2002's around you can ride in or drive. the spec you described is pretty common for a 2002. the must be someone near you that can show you what it feels like. don't commit to any build until you are familiar with what the "feel" you want feels like.

S14's are stupid expensive (a rebuildable core costs more than a built M10..), getting rare to find and all the power is above 6k rpm. it is wonderous on a race track, which is where mine spends 80% of its life. around town?

 

100% +1 on that. Drive yourself first to get the feeling. If possible just try to compare a stock engined 2002 with the factory 3,64 differential and then switch to a similar car just with the short 4,11 from 1600-2 mounted. This small change already makes a quite big difference in car´s behaviour.

 

+1 on the S14, too. To me also has no real low-end torque, have driven myself in both E30 and 02.

 

Oh good, I was wondering if I'm just crazy, and wondering why the M42 was even being discussed for torque.  I've only driven one stock 318is with an M42, and it had no torque at all.  Sure, it revs smoothly at the high rpms and sings like my miata, but no balls.  My stock M10 felt better at the bottom end.

The M42 is a 16-valve engine (like many modern 4 cylinders), so they have twice the number of valve springs to compress and stuff to spin, and that just robs power at the bottom end, but allowing more fuel to flow at high RPMs.

 

More valves, springs and stuff with the forces needed for it are not really the cause why a small 16V 4-cylinder is not torquie at low end without supercharging. Not easy for me to explain in english and to be honest I´m too lazy to do the whole "translate with dictionary" thing now. There are other relevant technical reasons, maybe a native english speaker is willing to explain.

 

I don't think that 7 seconds are THAT hard to get in a 2002. The turbo is a bad example, all the lag killed it's acceleration times.

 

Here is an example of a 7second 0-100kph (0-62mph) car.

 

Was still a 2.0 (89/80 bore stroke), it had 10.5:1 comp ratio (could have been hemi pistons, i'm not sure), a 300' motorsport cam (similar to a schrick 292' I've been told, but would love to see the actual rates), definitely a worked head, 2 DCOE 45's, A 3.64 diff, and a close ratio gearbox.

 

That 2002ti made its peak torque at 5000rpm, but I would bet it made more torque throughout the rev range compared to a stock 2002.

 

The main reason why turbo´s acceleration isn´t that impressive is its long 3,36 differential and not the turbo lag.

 

The Alpina car in the test is definitely equipped with high compression Mahle hemi pistons. I wouldn´t call the BMW factory 300 cam Motorsport as Motorsport GmbH wasn´t even founded when its production started. And the car in the test does not have a BMW 300 but an Alpina 300 which makes a bit of a difference (look at the tech specs on the right of the article). These two 300s are close but not equal. And you cannot compare a Schrick 292 with those, what comes close is a Schrick 304.

 

Schrick 292: inlet opens 36, inlet closes 76 / outlet opens 76, outlet closes 36 / spreading 110

BMW 300: 45-75 / 75-45 / 110

Alpina 300: 40-80 / 80-40 /110

Schrick 304: 44-80 / 80-44 / 108

 

Alpina has 20mkg of torque at 5000, stock TI has 17mkg at 3600. Alpina is at appr.185 at 3600. BUT: The additional punch the Alpina developes in the higher rpms often leaves the unexperienced driver with the subjective feeling the non-stock engine might be a bit tired at the low end. In fact it is definitely faster than stock even there but the asskick at high rpms outshines everything else.

 

Last I don´t really understand how "Motor Rundschau" got their 7,0 sec for 0-100 km/h. About a year earlier "Auto, Motor und Sport" tested a practically indentical Alpina car at 7,8 sec.

 

Best regards, Lars.

Edited by LarsAlpina

Ei guude wie? (Spoken as "I gooooda weee" and hessian idiom for "Hi, how are you?")

 

Já nevím, možná zítra.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

More valves, springs and stuff with the forces needed for it are not really the reason why a 16V is not torquie at low end without supercharging.

I'll try-

it's displacement and engine geometry.  You CAN build a torque- monster 4v/cyl engine, but what you end up with is something that

runs at relatively low revs, has long rods, a large crank, and doesn't really NEED the flow efficiency of a 4v head.   

A 4v head flows really well, and is a good mate to a high rev limit.  But a high rev limit is usually associated with a shorter stroke

engine, which makes its power as horsepower more than torque.  So while you'll certainly find 4v engines with good torque,

the advantage of the 4v head is to be found at high flow rates.  And thus, often, high rev limits.  Which is at odds with long

stroke and long rods.

 

In the case of the M42, it's a small- bore, short stroke engine.  I was about to say it has short rods- turns out, though, it

has 140mm rods, (longer than the M10) meaning that, at least, the bottom end is set up pretty well.  And in searching,

http://www.e30zone.net/e30zonewiki/index.php/M42#Block

I discovered it can be bored and stroked out past 2l.  Which makes me think of the S42.  

 

Which makes me drool...

 

hee

 

t

 

you can 

"I learn best through painful, expensive experience, so I feel like I've gotten my money's worth." MattL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • BMW Neue Klasse - a birth of a Sports Sedan

    BMW Neue Klasse - a birth of a Sports Sedan

    Unveiling of the Neue Klasse Unveiled in 1961, BMW 1500 sedan was a revolutionary concept at the outset of the '60s. No tail fins or chrome fountains. Instead, what you got was understated and elegant, in a modern sense, exciting to drive as nearly any sports car, and yet still comfortable for four.   The elegant little sedan was an instant sensation. In the 1500, BMW not only found the long-term solution to its dire business straits but, more importantly, created an entirely new
    History of the BMW 2002 and the 02 Series

    History of the BMW 2002 and the 02 Series

    In 1966, BMW was practically unknown in the US unless you were a touring motorcycle enthusiast or had seen an Isetta given away on a quiz show.  BMW’s sales in the US that year were just 1253 cars.  Then BMW 1600-2 came to America’s shores, tripling US sales to 4564 the following year, boosted by favorable articles in the Buff Books. Car and Driver called it “the best $2500 sedan anywhere.”  Road & Track’s road test was equally enthusiastic.  Then, BMW took a cue from American manufacturers,
    The BMW 2002 Production Run

    The BMW 2002 Production Run

    BMW 02 series are like the original Volkswagen Beetles in one way (besides both being German classic cars)—throughout their long production, they all essentially look alike—at least to the uninitiated:  small, boxy, rear-wheel drive, two-door sedan.  Aficionados know better.   Not only were there three other body styles—none, unfortunately, exported to the US—but there were some significant visual and mechanical changes over their eleven-year production run.   I’ve extracted t

  • Upcoming Events

  • Supporting Vendors

×
×
  • Create New...