BMW M5 Forum and M6 Forums banner

301 - 320 of 337 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
59 Posts
You know, I've been a bit curious about the head, as the builder stated that he noticed a 1994 casting date on it. The previous owner mentioned that the car had B38 cam gears, but nothing about an entire B38 head replacement, and I didn't find any evidence of such in the documentation that he provided me, although he didn't strike me as the most organized guy, or even that informed about his own car. Can you tell me the filename of the photo that you are referencing? The direct link that you used is not working.

In any case, the head has been reworked to accommodate oversized valves, which showed a 9% increase in air flow according to flow bench testing.
Excuse the bad link.
It is 20180127_141725.552-622.jpg with the casting number 1 317 830 which identifies the S38B38 head.
S38B36 have 1 306 853.

So you have something extraordinary after all these painful years.

"congratulation":goldcup:

So it should be something special under Chris hands. I love him He is a great Man, I have many learned from him.

Now it only takes one euro headers (or special manifold) and the B38 intake throttle to get the maximum Power.

S38B38 Trottle bodies: Inlet flaps are 50mm opposite 46mm.
S38B38 Headers: Primary outlet diameter is 41.5mm instead of 39.5mm and secondary diameter is 55mm instead of 48mm.

But ... that will still be retrofitted later :devil
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
906 Posts
Tom,

Please understand I am not trying to rain on
your project with my points bellow but things
to look over and consider as constructive.
I am only suggesting, I am not criticizing.
The great thing is we all are different
from each other and we do things all differently
and that divides the good from compromise..

Many thanks for sharing the project process
as well now I am glad you are in a good
hands. Chris will help I am sure with a lot of
overtime with lots of love towards turn key and
go drive it Tom.

I can see the previous engine builder has
some basic idea of upgrading better parts
but the package was not completed thus
will not have the full potential from parts.

Light weight pistons are good I do use them
on all my engines I put together but
one very critical point must be altered...and
I am not sure if its done..

FSR Asymmetrical Piston design is good
light weight etc etc but always remember
there is no free lunch !!! reducing the piston
skirt is great less friction etc. but with the
given stroke then less stability in work out
at 7000rpm plus. And why I say a very critical
part must be altered to have the package
completed..


Based on what the previous engine builder
raised the CR so much ? we can see how flat
the top piston is at the face. I measured based on
std. 10CR oem you have raised the piston
face by nearly 2.34mm that is a lot, why ?
Do you remember what CR this pistons are ?
Are you planing to drive on 110 Octane ?
very critical......point.

Raising the compression is the last thing on the
list to add power to the S38 using pump gas.
I have proved this zillion times that using std
10:CR I can make power just as those FF or MM, P.B
engines with raised compression ratios to the moon....
it does nothing but pings detonate and destroy the piston
side skirt...unless planned to use all the time
100 Octane gas.
@Chris, a suggestion. Given the hi CR please don't
drive the engine under load I assume you are
planing to start the engine with the OEM ECU
in order to brake-in the engine ? You can make the
rings sit without driving the car for the initial and the
most critical part when new pistons are fitted.

Then, aftermarket ECU ? Just be careful because
we don't want to granate another engine. Drain
the old 5 years old gas and put fresh gas and if
drive to brake-in the motor then hi octane gas
must be used, or lots of octane booster.
No errors must be allowed here.

Tom, the previous builder was more concentrated on
clean parts and DLC (Dimond Like Coating) rather
then very major and critical points I can see they are
not altered.

Why MLS was choice of HG ? If one understands
how things are working will change quickly the
concept. A potential upcoming issues.

I am giving you only hints, I am not giving you details
with technical explanation with proof for previous
engine builder choices he made.

One needs to understand that Area 51 is not in the parts
only ! It's in the DNA, and I am not willing to
share on public, unless my customer.


Regards,
Anri.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
59 Posts
Tom,

Please understand I am not trying to rain on
your project with my points bellow but things
to look over and consider as constructive.
I am only suggesting, I am not criticizing.
The great thing is we all are different
from each other and we do things all differently
and that divides the good from compromise..

Many thanks for sharing the project process
as well now I am glad you are in a good
hands. Chris will help I am sure with a lot of
overtime with lots of love towards turn key and
go drive it Tom.

I can see the previous engine builder has
some basic idea of upgrading better parts
but the package was not completed thus
will not have the full potential from parts.

Light weight pistons are good I do use them
on all my engines I put together but
one very critical point must be altered...and
I am not sure if its done..

FSR Asymmetrical Piston design is good
light weight etc etc but always remember
there is no free lunch !!! reducing the piston
skirt is great less friction etc. but with the
given stroke then less stability in work out
at 7000rpm plus. And why I say a very critical
part must be altered to have the package
completed..


Based on what the previous engine builder
raised the CR so much ? we can see how flat
the top piston is at the face. I measured based on
std. 10CR oem you have raised the piston
face by nearly 2.34mm that is a lot, why ?
Do you remember what CR this pistons are ?
Are you planing to drive on 110 Octane ?
very critical......point.

Raising the compression is the last thing on the
list to add power to the S38 using pump gas.
I have proved this zillion times that using std
10:CR I can make power just as those FF or MM, P.B
engines with raised compression ratios to the moon....
it does nothing but pings detonate and destroy the piston
side skirt...unless planned to use all the time
100 Octane gas.

@Chris, a suggestion. Given the hi CR please don't
drive the engine under load I assume you are
planing to start the engine with the OEM ECU
in order to brake-in the engine ? You can make the
rings sit without driving the car for the initial and the
most critical part when new pistons are fitted.

Then, aftermarket ECU ? Just be careful because
we don't want to granate another engine. Drain
the old 5 years old gas and put fresh gas and if
drive to brake-in the motor then hi octane gas
must be used, or lots of octane booster.
No errors must be allowed here.

Tom, the previous builder was more concentrated on
clean parts and DLC (Dimond Like Coating) rather
then very major and critical points I can see they are
not altered.

Why MLS was choice of HG ? If one understands
how things are working will change quickly the
concept. A potential upcoming issues.

I am giving you only hints, I am not giving you details
with technical explanation with proof for previous
engine builder choices he made.

One needs to understand that Area 51 is not in the parts
only ! It's in the DNA, and I am not willing to
share on public, unless my customer.


Regards,
Anri.
Wow many words, and yet a few words too little, you're good at unsettling :eek
I always thought the board is there to help others
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
290 Posts
How long have you owned the car? I was going through the pictures to see the paint after Chris IDd the car as being Macao, and think I recognize this car as having been for sale in North Carolina in 2010 or 2011? I remember a friend from Bimmerforums going to look at it and sending me pictures.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
300 Posts
Discussion Starter #306 (Edited)
It is 20180127_141725.552-622.jpg with the casting number 1 317 830 which identifies the S38B38 head.
S38B36 have 1 306 853.

Now it only takes one euro headers (or special manifold) and the B38 intake throttle to get the maximum Power.

S38B38 Trottle bodies: Inlet flaps are 50mm opposite 46mm.
S38B38 Headers: Primary outlet diameter is 41.5mm instead of 39.5mm and secondary diameter is 55mm instead of 48mm.

But ... that will still be retrofitted later :devil
Yeah, great... another thing to add to the list, lol. Not sure if I'll be keen to get new headers any time soon, considering the ceramic coating and removal of the inlet tubes for the secondary air system. B38 throttle bodies might be easier.


Light weight pistons are good I do use them
on all my engines I put together but
one very critical point must be altered...and
I am not sure if its done..

FSR Asymmetrical Piston design is good
light weight etc etc but always remember
there is no free lunch !!! reducing the piston
skirt is great less friction etc. but with the
given stroke then less stability in work out
at 7000rpm plus. And why I say a very critical
part must be altered to have the package
completed..
And what critical part/modification needs to be installed/done to complete the package in this case?


Based on what the previous engine builder
raised the CR so much ? we can see how flat
the top piston is at the face. I measured based on
std. 10CR oem you have raised the piston
face by nearly 2.34mm that is a lot, why ?
Do you remember what CR this pistons are ?
Are you planing to drive on 110 Octane ?
very critical......point.

Raising the compression is the last thing on the
list to add power to the S38 using pump gas.
I have proved this zillion times that using std
10:CR I can make power just as those FF or MM, P.B
engines with raised compression ratios to the moon....
it does nothing but pings detonate and destroy the piston
side skirt...unless planned to use all the time
100 Octane gas.
11.2:1, if I recall correctly. I'm planning to run 93 or even 91, builder assured me that he could tune it for pump gas and that it would be well-behaved. Somewhere back in the thread I believe AseanAero calculated the dynamic compression ratio based off some other information that I provided, and if memory serves, the determination was that it made sense/was reasonable. I'm not going to go digging for that conversation arc, but others are welcome to.

Then, aftermarket ECU ? Just be careful because
we don't want to granate another engine. Drain
the old 5 years old gas and put fresh gas and if
drive to brake-in the motor then hi octane gas
must be used, or lots of octane booster.
No errors must be allowed here.
This is still a bit up in the air; I was thinking to try a Miller W.A.R. Chip.

Tom, the previous builder was more concentrated on
clean parts and DLC (Dimond Like Coating) rather
then very major and critical points I can see they are
not altered.
Which? Not all of the work is pictured, not nearly. If you specify what you're referring to, I might be able to comment.


Why MLS was choice of HG ? If one understands
how things are working will change quickly the
concept. A potential upcoming issues.
The MLS gasket was taken into account in terms of how it would modify certain specifications, but again I'm not sure if they're the ones that you're referring to. If you're willing to specify further, I might be able to comment.


How long have you owned the car? I was going through the pictures to see the paint after Chris IDd the car as being Macao, and think I recognize this car as having been for sale in North Carolina in 2010 or 2011? I remember a friend from Bimmerforums going to look at it and sending me pictures.
I bought it in 2013, and it did indeed come from North Carolina; Greensboro in fact.


.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,725 Posts
11.2:1, if I recall correctly. I'm planning to run 93 or even 91
The M5 manual says you can limp home on lower grade fuel providing rpm is kept below 4,000 but I wouldn't want to do it

Don't push your luck with 91, what's the point of having a great engine then putting marginal fuel into it

93 proceed with caution

You can also incorporate water or water/methanol injection as an anti-detonate on HC NA cars

If this is a weekend only car just run the best fuel you can buy locally at sensible prices
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
906 Posts
Tom,

The engine is already put together and
there is no return, again the Area 51 is
not in the custom stainless steel valves,
nor in the Asymmetrical pistons...its in the
DNA, you left your basket with eggs in that
shop so let's follow his concept.

The Builder assured you that he is going to
complete the car how many times by a certain
date....?
So if he fails to guarantee a very simply thing
how one could thrust he is doing something
very responsible, tunning ?

Given your set up I can see you are going to
run is stock engine management. I assume the
Builder will Custom burn you Eprom Chip
done on Dyno and adjust the Ignition Map
and fuel ratio etc...?

AseanAero calculated the dynamic compression ratio based off some other information that I provided, and if memory serves, the determination was that it made sense/was reasonable.
So let me understand the how this works...? So you have
Tony who gets in to a Web Page with those Automatic
calculators and they give you a reference of the fuel
could be used at say the given compression ratio....
that is great Reference but that's it ? ! But when you
add the rest then that electronic calculator goes
in the trash bin...

The New Honda I forgot the model is running 12.5CR
and still runs the 91 Octane crappy California gas...
S65 runs 12.0 CR, S54 runs 11.5CR all these engine have
something you will never spent money on.
A Factory level engine management system.

Engine management works so well with Knock
Control system which is developed to the absolute
edge of performance as a package.

Don't get me wrong I am all about going to higher
compression ratio but when the package is put together.

Our ECU, and the rest of the engine management
is so dated and it does not fit your 11.2 CR put on
91 Octane gas.

Engine builder can convince you that he is going
to retard the timing so you don't get pinging/detonation
but that is not how things are working....

Tom, things are not easy as they look or one
initially could think of...

Anyway, the concept of how this engine is put
together is already sealed and there is no return.
Your toy will be completed shortly so you can enjoy it.

Keep us posted.

Regards,
Anri
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,725 Posts
So let me understand the how this works...? So you have
Tony who gets in to a Web Page with those Automatic
calculators and they give you a reference of the fuel
could be used at say the given compression ratio....
that is great Reference but that's it ? ! But when you
add the rest then that electronic calculator goes
in the trash bin...
Anri, I totally agree with you

The calculators say it 'should be' okay but it's really high level and there's MANY variables

The S38 doesn't have a knock sensor and it only takes one bad batch of fuel ....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
906 Posts
Anri, I totally agree with you

The calculators say it 'should be' okay but it's really high level and there's MANY variables

The S38 doesn't have a knock sensor and it only takes one bad batch of fuel ....

Tony,

I am avoiding to go in very anal and critical
explanations of how the package works and
I am just giving hints.

Again will repeat myself, to make power from
S38 raising the CR ratio is the very last thing
on my list and I have proved that many times...
all these $20-$25 grand special builds, blue printed
engines still struggling to make 305-310 rwhp
on pump gas....lol I know at least 10 people
in E24 E28 E34 S38 powered community.

I have proved many times with ~10.X CR I can
make more power than those 11.5CR builds...

@ Tom regarding the headers coating ? this here
is the one that you want the rest is compromise...

https://www.instagram.com/p/BmroclalPlT/?taken-by=euroclassicmotors

Regards,
Anri
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,725 Posts
Tony,

I am avoiding to go in very anal and critical
explanations of how the package works and
I am just giving hints.

Again will repeat myself, to make power from
S38 raising the CR ratio is the very last thing
on my list and I have proved that many times...
all these $20-$25 grand special builds, blue printed
engines still struggling to make 305-310 rwhp
on pump gas....lol I know at least 10 people
in E24 E28 E34 S38 powered community.

I have proved many times with ~10.X CR I can
make more power than those 11.5CR builds...

@ Tom regarding the headers coating ? this here
is the one that you want the rest is compromise...

https://www.instagram.com/p/BmroclalPlT/?taken-by=euroclassicmotors

Regards,
Anri
Again agree , I wouldn't go more than 10.5 to 1 on an S38 street build to allow for real world variance and the ancient Motronic DME
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,038 Posts
Glad this thread has been reborn, Tom has his car back and Chris is back in the world of S38s.......

But I am struck by the relative charitable posts regarding the original builder (OB). Whilst job may look a goodun, it is still a fact that he took years to do something that should have taken months, and was less than transparent with Tom regarding the parts used on *his* car. Add to that stuff like the valve cover repaint.

As Anri said, we can only judge this guy on his previous promises, and I would not be at all optimistic of him remedying any mistakes without Tom losing access to the car until somehere around 2024. I'd be amazed if Tom would be willing to let his car anywhere near that shop ever again, I know I wouldn't. That said, I realise there may be some negotiation with the OB that we are not aware of, and I respect Tom's right to make his own decision. So I genuinely hope Tom ends up with a useable car at the end of this, and wish him all the best.

The thread was, after all, started to get our advice. So to sum up mine would be to only pick a rebuild shop that has worked on that precise type of engine before, has reviews from the owners of those engines, and pick one local enough such that you can visit frequently.

Tom & Chris - pls do keep us informed - it's always so good to see the final stages of a rebuild charted before the big turn on......
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,725 Posts
With Chris in there I'm confident the car will be okay

They can always count on us for honest opinions even if it stings a bit :)

We have the best intentions
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,109 Posts
Thanks Tony, and Gosch, and Matt, and others, for their input. Gosch, thank you for noticing the casting / part number on the head - I'd have NEVER caught that! Wonder where that head came from?


I'd also wonder whether that B38 head, or even the non-stock head gasket might have an effect on the effective compression ratio. (Yes, well, of course it might)



I freely admit that I couldn't possibly compute the compression ratio by looking at photographs of a piston. Of course, nor would I declare every exhaust coating but my own to be inferior, or say Frank Fahey and Jim Rowe are stupid.


I'm just going to leave it at that, for the night.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,725 Posts
I'd also wonder whether that B38 head, or even the non-stock head gasket might have an effect on the effective compression ratio. (Yes, well, of course it might)
.
This could be the missing piece of the puzzle

Does anyone know the combustion chamber volume of the B38 vs stock B36 head ?

If it's a larger volume (which it should be) and the head gasket is thicker it will result in a lower compression ratio

Update :

S38B36 combustion chamber volume = 65.5 cm3

S38B38 combustion chamber volume = 66.6 cm3

65.5/66.6 = 0.98348

So approx 1.7% drop in CR due to a larger combustion chamber (11.5 x 0.98348 = 11.31)

The CR is heading in a safer direction for a street M5 on pump gas

,
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
906 Posts
Hi Powell,

I freely admit that I couldn't possibly compute the compression ratio by looking at photographs of a piston
Chris, lets walk together all of the Technical
how one can determine from the picture.

Open the trunk of Tom's M5 and take the original
piston form the box with all his old parts.

Then simply put a Straight Edge on top of the
piston deck. Take a Caliper Gauge and measure the
massive amount of gap from the Dish/Face and
measure all the way were the bottom of the
straight edge is.

Then you will find that the distance is ~2.34mm
on a bone stock 10:CR. I did measure this few
days ago in order to determine approximate
what CR Tom's piston looking at his CP piston/picture
I knew it was min 11CR...

So going back to the picture we can see his
CP pistons are Flat Dish at the top and the valve
relief are cut inside the dish/face.

~2.34mm is a lot of free space my man !!!,
to fill that with aluminum and make the dish
flushed with the top edge of the piston it
speaks thousand words.

2 days later Tom replied that the pistons
have 11.2 CR.

So now you can see how such a dramatic
difference of 2.34mm can be seen in the
picture.

IF the CR is let say 10CR and the
dish was raised by .1 sure no human eye
will ever catch that...


I'd also wonder whether that B38 head
Come on Gosh, Powell, Tom E34M5 lovers,
Part Number, Casting # numbers....all is Irrelevant
source to determine either the cyl is B36 or B38.

Let's learn this by the DNA...not by part numbers nor
date of productions and lame assumptions.....

S38-B38 head was Design to accept the 50mm
ITB thus the Gasket between the Head and the ITB
is Re-design via a Rubber ring which goes inside
the Engraved Grove around the cylinder head port
done from the Factory.

From the Picture I am not sure about Chris Powell or others
but "I" can see Tom's Cyl head Does not have the
Engraved grove around the cyl ports and it uses Paper
3.6 gasket thus confirms that Tom's Cyl head is 3.6.

I don't know what year is Tom's M5 but Indeed if
car is let say 1992 and the Head has 1994 Year.
indeed that head was replaced due to failure or
what ever reason.

Of course, nor would I declare every exhaust coating but my own to be inferior, or say Frank Fahey and Jim Rowe are stupid.
I am not sure what you are all about this statement
above...but, BMW Motorsport GmbH and Team Schnitzer
were using the White Thick coating on all their E9 CSL M30/M49
massive headers, also on some the DTM S14 headers,
E26M1 ProCar series on all their headers, list continues...

BMW Motorsport GmbH (Paul Rosche) vs. Jim Rowe ? lol.

Enjoy the pic, Chris, on all my customers cars I have
this coating rather than the ceramic...

Regards,
Anri
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
59 Posts
Come on Gosh, Powell, Tom E34M5 lovers,
Part Number, Casting # numbers....all is Irrelevant
source to determine either the cyl is B36 or B38.

Let's learn this by the DNA...not by part numbers nor
date of productions and lame assumptions.....

S38-B38 head was Design to accept the 50mm
ITB thus the Gasket between the Head and the ITB
is Re-design via a Rubber ring which goes inside
the Engraved Grove around the cylinder head port
done from the Factory.

From the Picture I am not sure about Chris Powell or others
but "I" can see Tom's Cyl head Does not have the
Engraved grove around the cyl ports and it uses Paper
3.6 gasket thus confirms that Tom's Cyl head is 3.6.

Regards,
Anri
http://i1117.photobucket.com/albums/k600/Harald_G/s38b38 1.jpg
http://i1117.photobucket.com/albums/k600/Harald_G/DSC_0046.jpg
B36 gasket on Cyl
http://i1117.photobucket.com/albums/k600/Harald_G/DSC_0047.jpg
Where are the engraved Grove?
B36 gasket on ITB
http://i1117.photobucket.com/albums/k600/Harald_G/DSC_0048.jpg

I quote from a document known to us all

3.5 Cylinder Head
From the outside, the cylinder head look to be unchanged fromthe last modell.
The diameter of inlet ports has been enlarged to 29,2mm, up from 28mm.
The new head features improved coolant flow around the combustion cambers and spark plugs.

3.6 Camshafts
The diameter of the inlet valves has been increased from 37mm to 38.5mm
The diameter of the exhaust valves has been encreased from 32mm to 32.5mm
For better cooling the exhaust valves are sodium filled
:wink
 
301 - 320 of 337 Posts
Top