Hallo was wollt ihr mit der alpina ??
die ist für einen 3,2 l motor gebaut der auch nur bis 6500 u min drehen soll , und dazu noch eine schärfere nocke hat die allerdings auch nur bis 6500 agiert weil der Motor aufgrund des S50 LMM nicht weiter drehen kann !
Die Alpina brücke ist für dem B28 selbst mit 600 € die schlechteste überlegung !
Wenn ich davon ausgegehe das man eine M50 brücke für ca 80 - 100 € unbearbeitet kauft , diese dann in kunstoff schweissen lässt dann ist man ca bei gesamt bei 300 € , dann eine M50 datensatz für die M50 Brücke dazu, dann hat man für das gleiche geld zzgl neuer dichtungen noch eine standard Datenoptimierung dazu und der Motor läuft wenn alle Bauteile OK sind als wenn die M50 schon immer drauf gewesen wäre !!
http://sgs-software-solutions.net/ bietet nach meinen Infos mittlerweile auf anfrage auch solche Pakete mit kunstoff bearbeiten Brücken an, da hat man keinen ärger mehr mit ruckeln oder undichtigkeiten und die regelung funzt.
Dasfoto zeigt ein Brücke die ich habe umbauen lassen........
http://s1.directupload.net/file/d/2527/tvgs4gvq_jpg.htm[URL=http://s1.directupload.net/file/d/2527/tvgs4gvq_jpg.htm]
[/URL]
gruß pat
Hier nochmal ein auszug aus einem US forum, Leider gibts da keinen Alpina vergleich :
I put the M52 intake manifold on the flowbench today. Below are the results and the previous numbers I got from an M50 intake. All measurements were made on the 300cfm scale and at 28" of water. The unused runners were blocked off, so the numbers represent the flow from the throttle body opening to the port face.
............M50............M52 .............Schrick
cyl 1.....284cfm.....188cfm ..........243cfm
cyl 2.....276cfm.....191cfm ..........240cfm
cyl 3.....288cfm.....201cfm...........249 cfm
cyl 4.....288cfm.....195cfm ......... 246cfm
cyl 5.....276cfm.....194cfm ......... 243cfm
cyl 6.....284cfm.....191cfm ......... 243cfm
Today I flowtested a Schrick intake that belongs to Garrick Louie. Just like the M50 and M52 intakes that I tested, the unused runners were blocked off, and the measurements were taken at 28" of water on the 300cfm scale of the flowbench.
Observations:
A) The runner to runner balance is excellent.
B) The outlets of the runners (where they mate to the cylinder head) have been CNC'd to the same dimensions as the M50 intake (55mm x 25mm). The actual runners are slightly larger than these dimensions though.
C) The surface texture inside the runners is VERY rough (the factory plastic intakes are worlds better).
D) The plenum is about the same size as the M52 intake (ie, smaller than an M50 intake).
E) The Schrick intake flows between the M50 and M52, yet its port cross-sectional area is about the same as an M50 intake.
Comparison to M52 intake:
The Schrick has larger runners than the M52 intake, and more flow. I calculate the M52's port velocity to be roughly (and this is a VERY rough calculation, just for comparison's sake) 288 ft/sec, whereas the Schrick's port velocity is less than 273 ft/sec.
The lower port velocity of the Schrick would explain the loss of low-mid range torque versus the M52 intake, and the higher port volume and flow would explain the slight horsepower gains with it. If the plenum where larger, maybe it would pick up more power up top. Comparison to M50 intake: The Schrick's runners have the same outlet size as the M50's intake, but the M50 intake has about 40cfm more flow per runner. The M50's port velocity would be at about 315 ft/sec, much higher than the Schrick's. So the Schrick has less flow, less port velocity, a smaller plenum, and *slightly* larger runners than an M50 intake. (Gee, I wonder why it's said that the Schrick is worthless on an M50 engine?) Considering how rough of a surface they have, maybe some polishing of the Schrick's runners would help it, Only experimenting could answer that though. If anybody has some thoughts or corrections regarding my observations, please, speak up. I'm not a professor in intake manifold theory, just a student :) Nick
]
Bearbeitet von: pat.zet am 23.05.2011 um 07:44:53Bearbeitet von: pat.zet am 23.05.2011 um 07:46:47
