325is hp question

BlueM3Racer · #1 (**permalink**) 02-06-2002, 06:34 PM

what does a 1993 325is have for stock HP numbers at the crank? and what about at the wheels?...thanks guys. i was thinking 175 at the crank..am i close?

HB 325 · #2 (**permalink**) 02-06-2002, 06:46 PM

Actually the hp number is 189, im not sure about the torque or what either is from the rear wheels, but i would like to know about rear wheel hp.

Baby M3 · #3 (**permalink**) 02-06-2002, 10:29 PM

The European version had 192hp.

Jon

Quote:

Originally posted by BlueM3Racer
what does a 1993 325is have for stock HP numbers at the crank? and what about at the wheels?...thanks guys. i was thinking 175 at the crank..am i close?

HAN Oli · #4 (**permalink**) 02-07-2002, 06:19 AM

yes, i got 192ps. but i think, "hp" is not the same as "ps", or?
the euro-version has 141kW (kilowatt)=192ps.

and the us-m3 is only a blasted 325 on 3l, less ps than the euro-version and much slower (220kmh), that means, that i would be faster in my euro325 (233kmh) than all the us-m3's (surly only in highspeed, not in accelleration).

but someday, i will visit the states, to drive a bimmer on highways.
cu
HAN Oli

Granty ('92 325 · #5 (**permalink**) 02-07-2002, 11:25 AM

The US M3 (E36) has the same engine block as the Euro M3 but a different cylinder head. This was done by BMW NA to reduce cost. The US M3 has a much higher (or is it lower?) final drive ratio to give it comparable acceleration to the Euro M3.

As for the 325is, the US spec vehicles have 189hp and 181lb/ft both at the crank. The Euro spec 325 has 192hp at the crank. I believe torque is the same. Remember from 1993 onwards the 325 has VANOS which just lowers the torque curve down the rev range. I have a 92 pre-VANOS 325is - has anyone driven both to compare them?

Ive heard that the pre-93 cars have a more fiery top end. Mine certainly goes after 4000rpm!

Baby M3 · #6 (**permalink**) 02-07-2002, 01:38 PM

The reason why U.S. M3 only goes 220km is that BMW placed a speed limitor on all U.S. version cars. But keep in mind that the rev limitors can be overridden with either chips or software upgrades. Which means that without speed limitor, the U.S. M3s can easily hit 150MPH.
That should beat the European 325's 145MPH top speed.

By the way, the U.S. 325s have been reported hitting in the 140MPHs without speed limitor as well.

Jon

Quote:

Originally posted by HAN Oli
yes, i got 192ps. but i think, "hp" is not the same as "ps", or?
the euro-version has 141kW (kilowatt)=192ps.

and the us-m3 is only a blasted 325 on 3l, less ps than the euro-version and much slower (220kmh), that means, that i would be faster in my euro325 (233kmh) than all the us-m3's (surly only in highspeed, not in accelleration).

but someday, i will visit the states, to drive a bimmer on highways.
cu
HAN Oli

Baby M3 · #7 (**permalink**) 02-07-2002, 01:40 PM

I've driven both pre and post 92 325s. To be honest they felt pretty much the same when you drive them around.

But yeah you're right, the non vanos do seem to pull a bit harder in the high RPM range.

Jon

Quote:

Originally posted by Granty ('92 325
The US M3 (E36) has the same engine block as the Euro M3 but a different cylinder head. This was done by BMW NA to reduce cost. The US M3 has a much higher (or is it lower?) final drive ratio to give it comparable acceleration to the Euro M3.

As for the 325is, the US spec vehicles have 189hp and 181lb/ft both at the crank. The Euro spec 325 has 192hp at the crank. I believe torque is the same. Remember from 1993 onwards the 325 has VANOS which just lowers the torque curve down the rev range. I have a 92 pre-VANOS 325is - has anyone driven both to compare them?

Ive heard that the pre-93 cars have a more fiery top end. Mine certainly goes after 4000rpm!

HAN Oli · #8 (**permalink**) 02-08-2002, 02:42 AM

hi,

i drive both versions to of the 325.
i got (only) the version without vanos (i think so). by 4000rpm he goes like the hell, there is a really fat punch, which press you in the seat (yeah, sorry for my englisch, school is long away).
the newer version is torque-optimized, he goes earlier, but softer i mean.

the same you got with the e36 m3's: the older 3l/286ps is much more aggressive than the 3.2l version.

cu
HAN Oli

autobahn4ever · #9 (**permalink**) 02-08-2002, 03:17 AM

Hi HAN Oli,

wo man sich so alles wiedertrifft...
Hast Du mal die Fotos hier durchgestöbert, sind interessante Sachen dabei (hab mir jede Menge Anregungen geholt

).

Viele Grüße, Marcel (der beim bmw-treff "Dresches" heißt)

Granty ('92 325 · #10 (**permalink**) 02-08-2002, 04:58 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Baby M3
I've driven both pre and post 92 325s. To be honest they felt pretty much the same when you drive them around.
But yeah you're right, the non vanos do seem to pull a bit harder in the high RPM range.

Jon

Hmm strange that! If you look at car-stats.com they have 0-60 and 1/4 mile times for virtually every car within last 10-15 years or so. It gives the 0-60 of a 93 325 as 7.4 but a 92 325 gets 6.5 and the 1/4 mile times are 15.7 and 14.3 respectively.

Maybe I will have to give a post-92 car a race. Anyone in the Detroit area wanna prove this one out...?

Baby M3 · #11 (**permalink**) 02-08-2002, 05:29 AM

Actually, even though the Pre 93 325s pulled harder in the top end, the 0-60mph acceleration between all E36 325s should be pretty close. The inconsistencies can be due to driver's skills, weather/road conditions, and the car itself.
By the way, Car Stats is never really too accurate in my opinion.

Jon

Quote:

Originally posted by Granty ('92 325

Hmm strange that! If you look at car-stats.com they have 0-60 and 1/4 mile times for virtually every car within last 10-15 years or so. It gives the 0-60 of a 93 325 as 7.4 but a 92 325 gets 6.5 and the 1/4 mile times are 15.7 and 14.3 respectively.

Maybe I will have to give a post-92 car a race. Anyone in the Detroit area wanna prove this one out...?

Granty ('92 325 · #12 (**permalink**) 02-08-2002, 06:04 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Baby M3
Actually, even though the Pre 93 325s pulled harder in the top end, the 0-60mph acceleration between all E36 325s should be pretty close. The inconsistencies can be due to driver's skills, weather/road conditions, and the car itself.
By the way, Car Stats is never really too accurate in my opinion.

Jon

Fair enough. I did wonder what sort of median of control car stats had for getting accurate measurements. Probably find they times the runs with a casio watch...

I'll still have to get a ride in a VANOS car tho - just to see the difference. Mind you - ive heard enough horror stories about VANOS getting rattly (read: expensive)

Seth Thomas · #13 (**permalink**) 02-08-2002, 06:52 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Granty ('92 325
The US M3 (E36) has the same engine block as the Euro M3 but a different cylinder head. This was done by BMW NA to reduce cost. The US M3 has a much higher (or is it lower?) final drive ratio to give it comparable acceleration to the Euro M3.

Wrong answer. The US block is a different block than the Euro motor. Yes it is similar but there differences. And the internals are totally different. And the Euro and the US cars did have the same final drive from 93-95 but the Euro had a slightly different final drive in the 96+ cars. US had a 3.23:1 and the Euro had 3.25:1

Granty ('92 325 · #14 (**permalink**) 02-08-2002, 07:02 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Seth Thomas

Wrong answer. The US block is a different block than the Euro motor. Yes it is similar but there differences. And the internals are totally different. And the Euro and the US cars did have the same final drive from 93-95 but the Euro had a slightly different final drive in the 96+ cars. US had a 3.23:1 and the Euro had 3.25:1

Why? What is different with the block and why are the internals "totally different"? Capacity is the same therefore there would be no reason to change pistons/con rods etc. Dont see why they'd change the crank.

Why go to the expense of building an engine and then competely changing its internals for another market? From a manufacturing/supplier standpoint, that would be a very expensive and time consuming modification to something that is fundamentally the same. Curious...

Seth Thomas · #15 (**permalink**) 02-08-2002, 08:09 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Granty ('92 325

Why? What is different with the block and why are the internals "totally different"? Capacity is the same therefore there would be no reason to change pistons/con rods etc. Dont see why they'd change the crank.

Why go to the expense of building an engine and then competely changing its internals for another market? From a manufacturing/supplier standpoint, that would be a very expensive and time consuming modification to something that is fundamentally the same. Curious...

Why don't you tell me why you think they are the same?

Now let me explain why both the Euro 3.0L and 3.2L are different from their US counterparts. First off they are both hand assembled motors. The US is not as it is machine assembled. The Euros have different compression ratios than their US siblings. Both the US 3.0L and 3.2L have a 10.5:1 compression ratio, Euro 3.0L has a 10.8:1 and the 3.2L has 11.3:1. Then the pistons are different because of the compression and the difference in valves from the Euro head. Then we have the difference in the bolts on the head and the way the heads mount. Okay and the rods are different rods to hold up to the higher revving Euro motor. But you are right in that the Euro stroke and bore is the same as the US motor but that is all they have in common.

And if you want the answer to your second question then think about why we didn't get the Euro motor. It never was because of emissions but cost.