Home Forums Articles How To's FAQ Register
Go Back   Xoutpost.com > BMW SAV Forums > X5 (E53) Forum
Fluid Motor Union
User Name
Password
Member List Premier Membership Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Xoutpost server transfer and maintenance is occurring....
Xoutpost is currently undergoing a planned server migration.... stay tuned for new developments.... sincerely, the management


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 05-01-2020, 03:06 PM
andrewwynn's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Racine, WI
Posts: 10,869
andrewwynn will become famous soon enough
I was surprised at the far diffrerent final drive ratio based on the much higher RPM at highway speeds.

I typically get the best mpg at 70-75 mph at 25-2600 RPM. With this swap from 4.10 the RPM will still be higher I never knew the manual transmission had such high ratio.

As far as 1-2-3-4 it will loose wheel torque so acceleration but at highway speed I'd be willing to bet better mpg though only a test drive after and before will tell.
__________________
2011 E70 N55 (me)
2012 E70 N63 (wife)
Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links

  #42  
Old 05-02-2020, 04:11 PM
bcredliner's Avatar
Premier Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Little Elm,Texas. (40 minutes North of Dallas)
Posts: 8,108
bcredliner is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by RocketyMan View Post
I cannot find it...but there's an article I read where it compared a Prius and a Corvette fuel economy first to 100mph. At full throttle for both Prius and Corvette, the Corvette got better mileage first to 100 mph than the Prius!

Both vehicles have very similar drag coefficients...I think like .29 and .28 respectively. And it talked about how the Prius took more fuel because it was constantly trying to accelerate at full throttle and took FOREVER to get to 100 mph. Versus the Corvette got there in like 8 seconds or something? Very interesting even tho the vette engine was like a 6.2L I think.

I cannot find the article!
Even if you find it I wouldn't post it.
__________________
X5 4.6 2002 Black Sap, Black interior. 2013 X5M Melbourne Red, Bamboo interior
Dallas
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 05-02-2020, 04:25 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 1,429
oldskewel is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by RocketyMan View Post
I cannot find it...but there's an article I read where it compared a Prius and a Corvette fuel economy first to 100mph. At full throttle for both Prius and Corvette, the Corvette got better mileage first to 100 mph than the Prius!

Both vehicles have very similar drag coefficients...I think like .29 and .28 respectively. And it talked about how the Prius took more fuel because it was constantly trying to accelerate at full throttle and took FOREVER to get to 100 mph. Versus the Corvette got there in like 8 seconds or something? Very interesting even tho the vette engine was like a 6.2L I think.

I cannot find the article!
Interesting. But not so surprising if you think about it. Basically since the Corvette gets to 100 mph much more quickly, it travels a lot less distance during that time. So the Prius will have done a lot more work by the time it gets to 100.

I bet if you compared gas used for the Corvette to get to 100 ASAP and then hold 100 until it goes as far as the Prius does while getting to 100, the Prius would be more efficient.
__________________
2001 X5 3.0i, 203k miles, AT, owned since 2014
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 05-03-2020, 01:53 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 300
e39_touring is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by RocketyMan View Post
Curious...I measured the carrier cv axle flanges. They appear to be 103mm.

I also confirmed that this was out of an '02 4.4L not a '03. But should be close enough and hopefully not have any problems. There's no witness marks for the drain bolt being opened--so I think it still has diff lube in it when the dismantler pulled it.

On that note, the spiders seem VERY "ratchety" and "articulatey" when differentiating the carrier. From my research, there was never an "LSD" option for rear carriers, but wow are these spiders "tight" then...otherwise it acts like a worn LSD almost. The backlash on the drive gear seems very good and tight on the ring. Maybe the cold gear oil is helping with that. No visual leaks anywhere.
You won't have problems, but you will have to pop out those axle flanges and use your old ones. (good time to replace the seals as well).

The ratchety spiders are normal, too. And you are correct in that there is no LS in these D's.
__________________
2012 xDrive35d
2001 BMW X5 3.0i 5MT
and two 1987 Corvettes - Callaway Twin Turbo and Guldstrand Grand Sport 80
Block Tester
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 05-03-2020, 01:59 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 300
e39_touring is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy View Post
E39_touring, I overlooked your post stating that you had already done the swap.

What were your results regarding acceleration and fuel consumption with the lower diff ratio?

Also, did you go with a lightweight flywheel, and what type of clutch did you go with? And if memory serves me, you have an intake, headers, exhaust, and a tune?
My acceleration results are subjective as I didn't do any before/after timed runs. As expected, it feels a little slower in gear/around town, but you don't have to shift as much. I bet 0-60 is not changed because I can hold a lower gear longer and not make as many shifts getting there.

I didn't end up with a lightweight flywheel, but I did convert to single-mass stock weight using the Valeo conversion kit. I have headers with 4.6is exhaust and the EU2 tune. Everything else is stock. I get a little over 22 mpg by the computer on the highway if I keep it around 70 mph. Going a lot faster hits the fuel consumption pretty noticeably. Before I did all the mods, I got about 20.5 indicated mpg on the highway under similar conditions.
__________________
2012 xDrive35d
2001 BMW X5 3.0i 5MT
and two 1987 Corvettes - Callaway Twin Turbo and Guldstrand Grand Sport 80
Block Tester
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 05-04-2020, 02:23 PM
Happy's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Golden Coast/Lake Houston
Posts: 1,493
Happy is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by e39_touring View Post
My acceleration results are subjective as I didn't do any before/after timed runs. As expected, it feels a little slower in gear/around town, but you don't have to shift as much. I bet 0-60 is not changed because I can hold a lower gear longer and not make as many shifts getting there.

I didn't end up with a lightweight flywheel, but I did convert to single-mass stock weight using the Valeo conversion kit. I have headers with 4.6is exhaust and the EU2 tune. Everything else is stock. I get a little over 22 mpg by the computer on the highway if I keep it around 70 mph. Going a lot faster hits the fuel consumption pretty noticeably. Before I did all the mods, I got about 20.5 indicated mpg on the highway under similar conditions.

Thanks for the info.

Yeah, I am glad I went with the single-mass flywheel. I like it better. I want to do headers also, I bet it cleans up the sound up nicely.

22 mpg is really good in my opinion. I was doing the same as you, 20 stock, 20.5 - 21 with a cold air intake and exhaust. 22 mpg supercharged at 6 lbs, and then when I stepped it up to 10 lbs with the meth injection, I started seeing 24 mpg.

The way I have the meth setup progressively, allows injection at freeway speeds. Not constant, but with just a slight bit of throttle Ill get a small percentage of pump pressure. For me with 4.10s with the rpms being between 3500 and 4000, I think it builds just enough steam in the head along with the boost to assist with mpgs. And I believe because it creates a richer environment, it requires less throttle resulting in mpgs.
__________________
02 BMW 5 Speed Supercharged Ethanol Burnin Meth Injected E53

Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 05-04-2020, 03:17 PM
RocketyMan's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: PNW
Posts: 553
RocketyMan is on a distinguished road
Thrust rods re-bushed

As a side note, here are the thrust arms that I pushed out the old rubber mounts in. I didn't know they were hydraulic filled--a bunch of oil came gushing out when I pushed out the rubber. I then had to heat/pound out the metal sleeve. Hasn't been changed since '02.

Anyway, I pushed in the new ones with the indicator arrows pointing correctly. Then I just re-sprayed all the areas where I heated up the arm. It came out nice I thought.
Attached Images
   
__________________
2003 BMW X5 3.0i -- MT5, 3.64s final gears, H&R lowering springs, K-Mac bushing kit
2007 BMW X3 3.0Si -- MT6
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 05-04-2020, 03:53 PM
RocketyMan's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: PNW
Posts: 553
RocketyMan is on a distinguished road
Rear diff swap

So I have to say, the rear diff swap was definitely more straight forward. A couple of lessons learned from this is that it seems WAY easier to remove the rear diff to take out both cv-axles if I ever need to change them or when I do my rear wheel bearings in the near future. That way I'm not potentially messing with my alignment via lower control arms and what not.

At any rate, I had to remove the exhaust, but only at the balljoint flange then just let them hang. Also, remove the heatshield. Only the rear fasteners need to be removed and that can hang as well--no point removing it completely.

Getting to the input flange was pretty easy.
* Set park brake
* Loosen the three accessible stud-nuts
* Reset park brake after relocation of next set of 3 stud-nuts
Once the input flange is loose for the driveshaft cv-joint, it won't move much at all--this is okay as it will move out of the way once the three fasteners to the carrier are loosened/removed.

Next I did the same scenario of removing the e-torx bolts on the cv-axles. E-12 sized. These were in there tight, but nothing a breaker bar couldn't easily handle. Once the both sides of the cv-axle were all loosened, there was enough play for these to get out of the way easily for the output flanges.

Next was loosening and removing the upper carrier oil-pan fastener. 21mm I think and had enough room to remove the bolt and nut easily. At this point I already had the trans-jack in position to cradle the carrier, which was very convenient. Then removing the two torque-thrust fasteners was pretty easy. The driver-side bolt had the least of throw for a ratchet, but just enough. Wiggling the trans jack to get extra relief off of the fasteners proved useful. Once the last two-of three fasteners were removed, it was as simple as de-elevating the assembly down via according-trans-jack.

Oh don't forget the carrier vent tube when pulling the assembly down. There's easily enough length and room to get your hand in there to remove.
Attached Images
  
__________________
2003 BMW X5 3.0i -- MT5, 3.64s final gears, H&R lowering springs, K-Mac bushing kit
2007 BMW X3 3.0Si -- MT6
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 05-04-2020, 03:59 PM
RocketyMan's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: PNW
Posts: 553
RocketyMan is on a distinguished road
Here are the two carriers side by side. As stated above, the two output axle flanges are different sizes. It was easy enough just to pop them out to the swapped carrier using a dead blow and chisel.

I know it might go without saying but, make sure to hit on the flange and NOT the dust cover.
Attached Images
  
__________________
2003 BMW X5 3.0i -- MT5, 3.64s final gears, H&R lowering springs, K-Mac bushing kit
2007 BMW X3 3.0Si -- MT6
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 05-16-2020, 01:16 PM
RocketyMan's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: PNW
Posts: 553
RocketyMan is on a distinguished road
Here is an update after installation

I have to say, wow! 1st gear is now totally more usable. I can get up to about 20mph before upshifting into 2nd gear. As a side effect, the car is less "jerky" when on and off load in 1st gear.

Now when I cruise around town I can easily do it in 4th gear at 40ish mph and it is just less high strung. The fun part is at highway speed, 70 mph is an easy 3000 rpms! Right where I wanted it! I've been apprehensive about updating this post in terms of reporting mileage because I have an emissions related fault code I'm trying to solve now. It popped up halfway through my 150 mile trip I took it on. :/

In addition, I'm going to order a new front drive shaft. I'm gonna lose sleep on the splines becoming looser in the T-case as I just checked it last night.
Attached Images
  
__________________
2003 BMW X5 3.0i -- MT5, 3.64s final gears, H&R lowering springs, K-Mac bushing kit
2007 BMW X3 3.0Si -- MT6
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On





All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:41 AM.
vBulletin, Copyright 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0
2017 Xoutpost.com. All rights reserved. Xoutpost.com is a private enthusiast site not associated with BMW AG.
The BMW name, marks, M stripe logo, and Roundel logo as well as X3, X5 and X6 designations used in the pages of this Web Site are the property of BMW AG.
This web site is not sponsored or affiliated in any way with BMW AG or any of its subsidiaries.