No announcement yet.

E30 M3 US Weight & Power-to-weight possible

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • E30 M3 US Weight & Power-to-weight possible

    I was wondering what the weight really is on a US M3? Is there a FAQ with this? I suspect its 2950-3000 pounds?

    Also, I see a lot of info on modded engines that have power outputs of 200-235 at the wheels. If you'll willing to spend $10-15,000 on the engine what can you expect at the limit for a streetable motor (streetable for motorheads isn't the same as streetable for normal people., so I don't mind a rumpy or high idle or loud motor. don't even care too much about emmissions.)

    Lastly, I have spent a lot of time working with turbocharged motors in the past 5 years. While I don't think the S14 looks like too good a candidate to turbocharging, has anyone put a roots type supercharger on one? If you put in slightly lower compression pistions at 9:1 or so, I would think you could run 6-8 psi safely. Anyone got any thoughts on this?

    I would like to make 250-275 rwhp or enough to get the 0-60 times down into the 5.5 range and the quarter mile time into the 13's. Can anyone comment?


  • #2
    I can't answer all of your questions, but I think the stock EVO III does 0-60 in about 6 flat with around 238 FLYWHEEL horsepower.

    I think the US cars weigh slightly over 3000 pounds in stock trim. 3025 seems to ring a bell with me....I have a book on the M3s that lists the US model at 2735 pounds but for some reason I think they are in reality heavier than that.

    The $10-$15K 2.5 liter motors typically put out around 225-235 rear wheel horsepower with streetable cams.


    • #3
      Thanks, Iroad. I have the same books avariously quote weights from 2650 tp 2850 or so, but I have US road tests that show it at about 3050 or so, like you suggest. So, with 235+ rwhp, I should be in the mid 5's 0-60. Any idea about quarter mile times? It would seem that with 240 rwhp and 200 foot pounds of torque, the car should turn 13's at about 100 mph, which would make it a reasonably fast car by modern standards. Plus it would stil have the vitues of the its small size and light weight.

      Something I don't understand. The new M3 is supposed to weigh around 3400 pounds, yet it seems absolutely huge next to an E30 M3. Same was true of the E36 body. I just don't get how an E36 weighs only 250 pounds more than an E30 and an E46 weighs only 400 pounds more.I've seen the E30 next to E36 and E46 and it looks far lighter than these figures would suggest. (Maybe its just "denser" mechanichally?)


      • #4
        No, the E30 M3 isn't in the 3000 lb weights. It depends on the options that the car has, but I've seen anywhere from 2700-2900lbs from different manuals. I'm guessing there are differences between dry weight, etc, but I think most of the differences between weight issues are with the options that the car came with. I'll guess that a stock E30 M3 is probably somewhere around 2730lbs and that is by the weights that I've heard mostly.
        Bryan K.
        Texas A&M Formula SAE


        • #5
          I weighed my car (stock US): 2788 lbs. with a full tank of gas.


          • #6
            2,735 #'s



            • #7
              Are you going to drag race this car???

              Why are you so worried about 0-60 times and 1/ mile times?

              If you must have power....then put an S52 in there...its cheaper..

              The e30 m3 weighs less than 2800 while the e36 weighs over 3200 and the e46 weighs over 3400....


              • #8
                My reason for asking about quarter mile times has nothing to do with drage racing. Perhaps I should simply have aked what the 0-100 times were? Its just that 0-60 is a very gear and traction-oriented measure, whereas the quarter mile and 0-100 are more a true measure of accelerative ability. You're hooked up and its a much better measure of power and acceleration. There are cars that can do 0-60 in 5.5 and yet still have 14.5 quarter mile times. I actually care less about the 0-60 times and am more interested in the quarter mile times being in the 13's or the 0-100 times being in the 11-12 second range.


                • #9
                  Then why are you so worried about quater mile times if you arent drag racing :rolleyes:


                  • #10
                    I hope I didn;t entirely waste that last post... As I said, I am interested in midrange acceleration from a normal driving speed of say 60-75 mph to 100-110 or so. So, quarter mile or 0-100 times give me a good sense of how fast the car will be. My 1995 single turbo Mazda, which I track at Summit point, VIR, and Pocono, does 0-100 in about 9 seconds and the quarter mile in 11.2 @ 129. The M3 will not be as fast, but it should be able to do 0-100 in the 13 second range and the quarter should be the same.


                    • #11
                      Sure you could turbocharge if you built the engine for it. The S14 would be just fine. It has a *very* strong bottom end. An easy 300-350 HP with a set-it-and-forget-it rig. Loads more if you get into it and give up low end and response.

                      I have some figures for you for a tuned, naturally aspirated 2.3 litre S14. I have made some more mods since the testing, which added enough power to require more fuel than the stock injectors / FPR could deliver run wide open.

                      0-60: 5.75 best run, before various more recent mods such as a CF intake which adds mid and high end. It accelerates harder in gear than S2000s. Crummy launches. Reasonable launch RPM - 2500 Rs. Potentially a few tenths quicker now. Especially with more off-the-line traction. With the same crummy traction, around 5.6 0-60 seems doable now. With no practice and average launches repeatable 5.8s are no problem. To get the best time you need an awesome launch and a perfect 1-2 shift. My 1-2 shifts take around 0.4 seconds! During which you are not accelerating. S2000s can do it in 0.2 seconds.

                      1/4 mile 14.17 @ 99.x with a slow 2.26 second 60 foot time. (Before mods as above and with 300 treadwear street tires) High 13s seem within reach.

                      0-100 MPH: Low 14s achieved about a year ago.

                      60-100 MPH: 8.1 seconds

                      50-80 MPH in 3rd gear: 4.8X seconds. The only figures I have seen for a built 3.2 in an E30 M3 were around 4.5 seconds. Stockish M3s = over 6 seconds.

                      30-50 MPH 2nd gear: Best - 1.96 seconds.

                      60-80 MPH in 3rd gear: 3.1x-3.3 seconds

                      I should rerun these tests! I have grippier tires and more oompth now. The above times are much better than stock, and faster than many 2.5s.

                      Last edited by Stan; 03-25-2003, 03:16 AM.


                      • #12
                        Thanks, Stan. This is just what I wanted to know. It seems to me that 13's for quarters and 0-100 are reasonable and where I'd like to be. The in gear numbers for 60-100, etc, look very good as is. This means it will be a very quick car and will hold up well for track days with the guys I drive with. Thanks.


                        • #13
                          I think the reason he is asking about 1/4mile times is because it gives a very good indication of how well the car is accelerating and tells you what mods actually make a difference on the car and by how much, instead of just going by theory and here-say.

                          If you can get a good launch, you should be able to run 13s at around 100mph on a 2.3ltr with all the basic mods(chip, e2 intake, exhaust, etc...) and a good set of cams.
                          I was able to run a best of [email protected] with just a chip and e2 airbox, but I also removed my power steering belt, a/c belt, and engine fan, along with my spare and jack. I will be taking my car again once I've finished up installing my ported head and e3 cam to see what kind of gains they made.