1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

BMW and M Power Owners

Discussion in 'Motors' started by panthro, Apr 12, 2012.

  1. Squidward

    Hitman

    Joined: Apr 27, 2018

    Posts: 527

    The N54 is a solid engine, its just all the stuff around it that is notorious for failing, namely the fuel injectors, high pressure fuel pump, turbo wastegates, oil filter housing gasket, ac pulley, valve cover, engine mounts (which can cause pulleys to bounce off the subframe).

    Other than that, it is rock solid lol
     
  2. hurfdurf

    Sgarrista

    Joined: Dec 17, 2009

    Posts: 8,727

    This has made me feel better about my car choice.
     
  3. Alex_6n2

    Mobster

    Joined: Jan 24, 2007

    Posts: 2,801

    Location: Bristol

    See below.

    Based on your ability to spell "They're" and your affinity for "My tuned bimmer is faster than a super car lolz" I'm going to assume you have a full set of blinkers on about your engine. Tried racing a re-mapped M2 Comp yet? Bet you'd win that too :D

    [​IMG]
     
  4. Smokey26

    Hitman

    Joined: Apr 18, 2010

    Posts: 925

    Location: West Midlands

    You've lost me......

    No blinkers, the S55 is better in every way, it should be its over 10 years newer. Not really getting the point though are ya? the engine doesn't "go bang" and a mapped S55 is a totally different ball game, but that was my point pages and pages ago, its better than the N55 IMO, so thanks for proving my point a bit more.
     
  5. Squidward

    Hitman

    Joined: Apr 27, 2018

    Posts: 527

    Huh? It was late. Also, I don't even have an N54 anymore lol? Just stating the engine is actually rock solid. No one has mentioned any super cars in here? Unless you somehow think an M2 is a supercar. lol
     
  6. [TW]Fox

    Man of Honour

    Joined: Oct 17, 2002

    Posts: 155,570

    Rock solid? When I had an N54 every other thread on forums was about warranty claims and fuel pump recalls and that was when they were new!
     
  7. Squidward

    Hitman

    Joined: Apr 27, 2018

    Posts: 527

    Yeah that's just the all the crappy ancillaries around it lol
     
  8. [TW]Fox

    Man of Honour

    Joined: Oct 17, 2002

    Posts: 155,570

    Pretty fundamental to its troublefree operation though, no? :p
     
  9. M1k3H

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Jul 6, 2010

    Posts: 1,461

    I can attest to that, as a relatively new (approaching a year, although only 4 months of trouble free operation) owner of an N54.
    I had the fuel pump and injectors changed, but since then it is running great. It puts a smile on my face every day. In terms of speed, I’ve been in faster cars, but I would not trust myself to floor them for longer than it takes to do 0-60, at least not outside a track.
     
  10. wingman

    Mobster

    Joined: Dec 27, 2011

    Posts: 4,887

    And a tuned M2 would spank an N54, lol.
     
  11. Smokey26

    Hitman

    Joined: Apr 18, 2010

    Posts: 925

    Location: West Midlands

    3 years here beating Audi R8's, Gallardos, M3's, AMG's at the drag strip with a change of plugs and coils the only maintainence.

    A tuned M2C....yeah. A tuned N55 M2. Behave treacle.
     
  12. 9designs2

    Mobster

    Joined: Jan 5, 2003

    Posts: 3,418

    Location: Somewhere in the middle

    Reading back struggling to see the debate, except I think some are talking about power and the feeling of quick, which has little to do with each other. Currently own a Z4 35is and a Mk3 Focus RS. The Z4 is stock, just not felt the need for more, but the RS runs a map giving around 400. It also produces more torque and has better traction and is quicker on paper. BUT, the Z4 "feels" quicker of the two, reason is simple and perhaps is what some are missing above. Torque and where the peak is and how flat the curve is. To be technical, it's the area under the curve that is important. The Z4 hits peak torque and holds it from about 1800 rpm, then is flat, matched to a 7 speed box not a 6 as in the RS, a lower final drive ratio it pulls early and hard and doesn't let off. The RS torque is more progressive and builds, so feels less urgent, even if it's actually the quicker car.
    My Z has done 76K miles, I have most of the history, seems to have been well behaved, it is a glorious engine, in sport mode and box in sport it is relentless and savage, in comfort it purrs and burbles like a little puppy. Truth is the RS would be in the next county given a few twisty bends before the Z could get it's nose pointing in the right direction, but then very little will keep with an RS on the twisties, less so a mod'd one. ( I am lucky to to own two great cars, love them both).
     
  13. TomO

    Mobster

    Joined: Oct 28, 2002

    Posts: 3,281

    Stage 1 remap on my M3 - done literally just a couple of times with draggy (on less than ideal surfaces) and got 3.80s 0-60 and 7.78s 0-100, 1/4 mile 11.77@ 127.xx . Big difference to the standard car and that's just a map with no bolts on crank bolts still in one piece :p

    had a Z4 35iS and it sounded better than the S55, but in particular felt breathless earlier in the rev range as well as obviously less power throughout. (stock vs stock)
     
  14. Simon

    Capodecina

    Joined: Oct 21, 2002

    Posts: 23,025

    Location: Berks / Moscow

    Those M3/M4s are brutally quick. 125mph quarter miles are insanely quick. How much power is a stage 1? 500?
     
  15. Ryan-3

    Sgarrista

    Joined: Sep 14, 2009

    Posts: 8,088

    Location: Northumberland

    But did the block itself crack in half? No. So therefore, reliable. :p

    I have no idea why people have such an interest in remapping a car to simply drag race somebody on a strip or from a set of lights. Straight lines are dull. I guarantee there's more driving pleasure in a stock E30 M3 down a good B road than with a remapped M2 down a drag strip. Plus, try and enjoy 500bhp in the pouring rain..
     
  16. Will Gill

    Don

    Joined: Oct 18, 2002

    Posts: 55,163

    Location: Cornwall

    Mine dyno'd 515, but yeah 500 is probably more accurate :)
     
  17. Simon

    Capodecina

    Joined: Oct 21, 2002

    Posts: 23,025

    Location: Berks / Moscow

    Think this is why the E92 is a good one, not as fast as the F8x cars but has good traction, linear power and handles well.

    Of course you can still go around B roads when you have remapped :p

    Also look on YouTube for a video of a 1000hp GTR being hammered down a B road, its insane :D
     
  18. Smokey26

    Hitman

    Joined: Apr 18, 2010

    Posts: 925

    Location: West Midlands

    Yeah there a beast, which is why id have the M2C anyday over the N55 M2.
     
  19. Ryan-3

    Sgarrista

    Joined: Sep 14, 2009

    Posts: 8,088

    Location: Northumberland

    Totally agreed. With it requiring revs you have to wring it out for the performance, rather than a big lump of torque like a boosted engine.

    I can imagine that being quite insane. There's a guy near me who runs an import company who has a GTR that I think pushes 2000hp now, as well as a twin-turbo Huracan. I've seen both going for it in various states of tune. :D
     
  20. TomO

    Mobster

    Joined: Oct 28, 2002

    Posts: 3,281

    the 11.7x time was with a 4.0 0-60, so reckon with some more runs and a better surface, 11.6x @ 128+ would be quite doable. Have also now had the GTS software for traction control and diff installed, which is supposed to make launch control more effective, don't know if its a noticeable amount though. I think with semi slicks or similar, could probably shave a few more tenths off, as very traction limited.

    I was told stage 1 was around 500-520bhp. Keep thinking about doing stage 2, as its just downpipes and a tune ( and I already have an OTS stage 2 map on BM3 included, or spend more on a custom map for even more) - that would make it around 540-560bhp, but equally seems very unnecessary given how traction is already at stage 1!