My second E53! STICK SHIFT

[AV8R4AA]

Adding to the Imola red, black interior 2003 4.6 comes a 2003 MANUAL SHIFT E53. Bought it from a wonderful gentleman here on the website. I have a quick question for the 3 pedal guys. I ask these questions because I have a automatic 525 wagon from the same years
.
The RPM in cruise is MUCH HIGH than my E39 525. The MPG is still very good on my newer X5. I’m asking if the other 3 pedal guys experience the higher RPM.
Thank you

[andrewwynn]

X5 RPM is darn high. The V8 models have a lower ratio rear end to help lower the RPM but with 5 speed it's still pretty high.

I don't think the auto had overdrive just lock so depending the top gear ratio it could be the same as auto.

I seem to recall 2600 RPM at 75 on the speedo 72 actual just as a baseline of m54 e53.

[workingonit]

Originally Posted by andrewwynn

X5 RPM is darn high. The V8 models have a lower ratio rear end to help lower the RPM but with 5 speed it's still pretty high.

I don't think the auto had overdrive just lock so depending the top gear ratio it could be the same as auto.

I seem to recall 2600 RPM at 75 on the speedo 72 actual just as a baseline of m54 e53.

With a final drive ratio of 4.1, my '01 M54 automatic runs about 2525 rpms on the 17 inch tires (29" tall) at 75 mph, in 5th gear. My '04 Chevy 2500HD, also with 4.10 gearing, but with 245/75-16 (30.5" tall) tires, goes 2450 rpms at 75 mph. My wife's '98 GMC, with 28" tall tires and 2.73:1 final drive, is great for cruising on the highway, though, as it lopes along at 1800 rpm. Tire height and gearing makes a lot of difference.

I don't consider those rpm's so high, after years of driving vehicles with 2 or 3 speed transmissions, with no overdrive. But, those vehicles started out with higher final drive gearing (lower numerically), as low as 2.29:1 on one of my cars, so you could achieve very high speeds only if you had the horsepower (my '67 Dodge Monaco 500, with 14" diameter tires, had a modified 383, and the 2.29 gearing, with lotsa horsepower, and I often drove it over 100 mph).

On the other hand, the final drag race configuration, on my '66 Chevelle, had a final drive of 4.88:1, a 2-speed Powerglide race transmission (1:1 ratio at top speeds), and 28" tall MT slicks (which would grow in diameter a bit, at top speed). At 75 mph, the 427/441 c.i. engine would be turning around 4500 rpm, at 80 it would be around 4700 (IIRC), and at 125 mph (at the 1/4-mile finish line), it would be at a screaming 7400 rpms. I doubt that any M54 could survive that.

[Factory6speed]

With the manual gearing the m54 lives between 3000 to 5000 RPM. At 80 mph on the highway it's right around 3200-3500 or something which is not far off from my other cars at that speed. Just getting going from stops and everything you really got to wind it out every single time. And do have to downshift to fifth from time to time on the highway. Another 80 horsepower some more low end and a 7500 rev limit would be great.

[Happy]

Originally Posted by Factory6speed

Another 80 horsepower some more low end and a 7500 rev limit would be great.

A 7500 redline might be a stretch for a stock M54. But with a bump up to 6950, with that 80 hp (about roughly what my stage 1 setup was) created an all around solid drive without being over done.

I highly recommend the vanos upgrade. It restored the low end to its original spec when the engine was first built. Once those seals fail, the loss is noticeably there.


E53 RiPPeR
XOuTPoST jUNkiE
ReVELaTiON 22:21

[Factory6speed]

Originally Posted by Happy

A 7500 redline might be a stretch for a stock M54. But with a bump up to 6950, with that 80 hp (about roughly what my stage 1 setup was) created an all around solid drive without being over done.

I highly recommend the vanos upgrade. It restored the low end to its original spec when the engine was first built. Once those seals fail, the loss is noticeably there.


E53 RiPPeR
XOuTPoST jUNkiE
ReVELaTiON 22:21

Please tell me more. What is this stage one, and vanos upgrade.

That might really be all I need. It doesn't need to be fast it would just be nice to get out of the way a little bit better and not wind out to 5-6k every 3 seconds.

Longer term I would like to pull the motor and completely rebuild it for the supercharger, but maybe that's just not necessary. It was rather sludgy and the cam lobes were worn, so I would like to do some heavier work on it at some point. Soon I will be ripping the e36 m52 head apart to fix the lifters and timing chain so we'll see how that goes.

That uuc clutch is pretty good. I smoked it in reverse a couple times already. It really requires a good bit of focus and is touchy but it is very nice. There was a week or so I was getting a lot of chatter but that was driver error.

[workingonit]

Originally Posted by Factory6speed

Please tell me more. What is this stage one, and vanos upgrade. ...



That might really be all I need. It doesn't need to be fast it would just be nice to get out of the way a little bit better and not wind out to 5-6k every 3 seconds.

Of course, coming from a drag-racing and vintage muscle car background, the term "stage one" brings two things to mind: 1) the Buick GSX 455 "Stage One"... "For 1971, Buick added the brand new*455 cu*in engine into its restyled GS. The Stage 1 package had an even hotter cam, bigger valves in special high-compression heads, a distributor with a different timing curve and a modified Rochester carburetor." It was a beast of an engine in a great looking car, that I admired and actually trained working on in '72, at the GM Training school (under Buick auspices), and raced against several times in my highly-modified '66 Chevelle. I had more horses, but the Buick had more style!

and 2) a Nitrous Oxide "Stage 1" injection kit. Which usually means a single stage of Nitrous squirted into the carburetor or into the manifold runners (in 50 to 150 HP-adding blasts). Some racers used several "stages" of injected Nitrous, but many went too far and blew their engines. My personal experience with Nitrous was with a 50-hp "top shot" kit, that I configured to squirt down from my air cleaner into the carburetor secondaries at wide-open throttle. I used it for a very short time on my early 327-400 HP street-strip engine, and it certainly would up performance instantly. I loved the increased performance, so much, that I went to a big-block 427 for the next racing season (sans Nitrous). If I had the money, I might try a 50- hp Nitrous kit on the M54, but my budget precludes buying spare engines.

Also, motordavid stated that he had "opened the moon roof maybe a half dozen times; don't care about it but the point is the less a moon or panorama roof is opened/closed the less likely it is to every leak, imo"
which I agree with, wholeheartedly. In fact, I disabled and sealed mine (using clear Paint Protection Film), so I'd never have to worry about sunroof leaks again. The clear film isn't noticeable, and lasts for years, even exposed 24-7-365 to Texas weather, but I check it every time I go out to the X5, just in case.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[Happy]

Originally Posted by Factory6speed

Please tell me more. What is this stage one, and vanos upgrade.

That might really be all I need. It doesn't need to be fast it would just be nice to get out of the way a little bit better and not wind out to 5-6k every 3 seconds.

Longer term I would like to pull the motor and completely rebuild it for the supercharger, but maybe that's just not necessary. It was rather sludgy and the cam lobes were worn, so I would like to do some heavier work on it at some point. Soon I will be ripping the e36 m52 head apart to fix the lifters and timing chain so we'll see how that goes.

That uuc clutch is pretty good. I smoked it in reverse a couple times already. It really requires a good bit of focus and is touchy but it is very nice. There was a week or so I was getting a lot of chatter but that was driver error.

The reference to stage 1, was when the my supercharger kit was set at 6 lbs. (which is roughly 84 hp if tuned properly). My tune at the time was for pump gas, at 91 octane. The stage 1 setup in my opinion, made the manual SAV very capable at that point. You could have a couple of passengers, or some weight without feeling like something was holding you back. Had I had the 8 lb. flywheel installed during this period, it probably would have been all that was needed to get the tank moving proper. But I ended up at stage 2 (10 lb. boost with water/meth injection) prior to my flywheel, short shifter, DSSR, clutch upgrade, and especially the CDV delete.

I had my vanos seals upgraded, and that brought back a decent amount of missing low end power. Even with horsepower upgrades it is in my opinion VERY important to make the necessary repairs to the receiving M54 power plant. Otherwise you’re working backwards, and starts really adding up!

Do you have the 8 lb. flywheel? There are two different weights. I have never smoked the clutch, (mine is Kevlar) but I have stalled it a hand full of times. LoL.. The UUC equipment really cleaned up the sloppy factory 5 speed setup my X had. It was a night and day transformation!


E53 RiPPeR
XOuTPoST jUNkiE
ReVELaTiON 22:21

[Factory6speed]

Just went out to grab something and checked, 80 mph equals appx 3100 RPM. 03 .. yours might be the five speed which could be different. Would be probably totally different actually.
235 65 17 stock tires

This is really the same on my other bimmers, 80 mph is above 3K. Pretty sure my Subaru WRX it was like two and a half.

[andrewwynn]

My '95 Z28 ran about 1300 turns per mile (rpm at 60 mph).