Close

    • ICS Performance E36 M3 with built S52 twin turbo six-cylinder hits an astounding 1142 horsepower to the wheels

      Wow, simply wow. Congratulations to ICS Performance for raising the bar considerably in the M50/S50 engine game. ICS was able to hit 1142 horsepower to the wheels and 1042 pound-feet of wheel torque on a dynojet in SAE correction. This is with a twin turbo forged internal built motor low compression setup running twin GT3076r turbos and custom camshafts. The car was tuned by Vic Sias of Sias Tuning.

      This is the same car that set the BMW standing mile record running 223 miles per hour although likely with less power than it now has. Additionally, ICS plans to change out the turbos for larger twin GT35r units. Who knows how far they can take it but this is a wonderful achievement and congratulations to ICS Performance and Vic Sias.



      This article was originally published in forum thread: ICS Performance E36 M3 with built S52 twin turbo six-cylinder hits an astounding 1142 horsepower to the wheels started by Sticky View original post
      Comments 49 Comments
      1. inlineS54B32's Avatar
        inlineS54B32 -
        Looking at both power curves, I would love to see a roll race... I think ICS would win - for sure, but am now very curious after looking: http://www.horsepowerfreaks.com/imag...HPF/Stage4.gif
      1. rt turbo's Avatar
        rt turbo -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by inlineS54B32 Click here to enlarge
        I have two points here - the torque curve is astounding in that it creates an AMAZING amount of torque for a long time, but it's very unnatural. In other words, the idea is that a torque curve is flat - no one is shooting for this type of power curve unless it's for a glory pull in my opinion.

        The second would be - compare the area under either curve with the highest of HPFs. It's not about peak torque, it's about total area under the curve. The S54 revs about 1k higher than this dyno shows, for every single RPM the S54 revs over the other engine matters a LOT. HP = ((TQ x RPM )/ 5252) - meaning that 1000 RPM difference makes a HUGE amount of difference (torque and RPM are equal in their contribution to HP) - and as @Sticky said, this extra RPM can be used for further TQ multiplication.
        I see your point, but there is still more area under the ics curve, even low reving lower. Also, 1000+ rwtq vs. 680? Not even a race. THough, that figure is for 916 whp on the hpf car. I think when over 1k its nearing 720 wtq. Extrapolating, if the hpf car nets 1150 rwhp, the tq will be upper 700-low 800's. my money's on the ics car.
      1. rt turbo's Avatar
        rt turbo -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        Why would revving higher make for lower torque figures? It should just make for more torque multiplication.

        What can be done to the block to make it handle this level of power? Sleeves?
        I know this has been discussed on this forum before, there was a big forum fight between m50 guys and s54 guys years ago. But basically, hp is nothing more than a multiplication of torque and RPM. You rev higher and hp figures increase. My point is that the s54's make big hp numbers but lower torque numbers than m50 based motors because the m50s run out of revs quicker and s54s can rev higher. an m50 must make x amount of torque more than the s54 to make the same peak hp figure because it revs lower. its math. If the m50s rev to 8400 rpm, the higher torque figure that it made would allow it to produce a much higher hp figure than the s54 (if it stays the same). But the m50s tend to produce more torque, while s54s sing up top. I prefer the wider torqier band of the s52 over s54.
        So, the math is point 1, the second point is that the m50 based engines tend to have greater torque to hp ratio than the s54, or other inline 6s such as the 2jz. just me, but given what ICS has done, I just dont think the s54 is capable of producing that much torque to hp ratio.


        On the block, sleves can strengthen the walls, but not necessarily the integrity of the block itself. a girdle locking the mains to the block really would stop alot of the block movement under extreme loads. This is nothing new and is partly why we see those crazy bimmers in Sweeden.
      1. inlineS54B32's Avatar
        inlineS54B32 -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by rt turbo Click here to enlarge
        I know this has been discussed on this forum before, there was a big forum fight between m50 guys and s54 guys years ago. But basically, hp is nothing more than a multiplication of torque and RPM. You rev higher and hp figures increase. My point is that the s54's make big hp numbers but lower torque numbers than m50 based motors because the m50s run out of revs quicker and s54s can rev higher. an m50 must make x amount of torque more than the s54 to make the same peak hp figure because it revs lower. its math. If the m50s rev to 8400 rpm, the higher torque figure that it made would allow it to produce a much higher hp figure than the s54 (if it stays the same). But the m50s tend to produce more torque, while s54s sing up top. I prefer the wider torqier band of the s52 over s54.
        So, the math is point 1, the second point is that the m50 based engines tend to have greater torque to hp ratio than the s54, or other inline 6s such as the 2jz. just me, but given what ICS has done, I just dont think the s54 is capable of producing that much torque to hp ratio.


        On the block, sleves can strengthen the walls, but not necessarily the integrity of the block itself. a girdle locking the mains to the block really would stop alot of the block movement under extreme loads. This is nothing new and is partly why we see those crazy bimmers in Sweeden.

        I hear your point - loud and clear. Repped for it.

        However, I think that power under the curve is all that maters. You can "create torque" through gearing - yes the M50 has a fatter but shorter torque curve, yes - it would be more tractable than the S54 assuming both are geared equivalently. However, because of the extra revs, the S54 can take the mechanical advantage by multiplying torque for a longer period of time. Just going another ratio up in the rear end for example, would get the levels of torque (across the curve) at the ground very close to where the M50 would be - the M50 COULD do the same thing, but given it's lower RPM limit - it would be very short.

        It's like the diesel argument - just because a CAT tractor creates a few thousand ft-lbs of torque doesn't make it fast. It can rev to 2500 RPM - keeping it's power relatively low.

        However, in this case - both dynos are so "crazy" - I still think it would be a great race. I wouldn't bet money on either unless I knew one driver could drive, and the other couldn't. Click here to enlarge
      1. Twin Turbo BMW's Avatar
        Twin Turbo BMW -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by inlineS54B32 Click here to enlarge
        I hear your point - loud and clear. Repped for it.

        However, I think that power under the curve is all that maters. You can "create torque" through gearing - yes the M50 has a fatter but shorter torque curve, yes - it would be more tractable than the S54 assuming both are geared equivalently. However, because of the extra revs, the S54 can take the mechanical advantage by multiplying torque for a longer period of time. Just going another ratio up in the rear end for example, would get the levels of torque (across the curve) at the ground very close to where the M50 would be - the M50 COULD do the same thing, but given it's lower RPM limit - it would be very short.

        It's like the diesel argument - just because a CAT tractor creates a few thousand ft-lbs of torque doesn't make it fast. It can rev to 2500 RPM - keeping it's power relatively low.

        However, in this case - both dynos are so "crazy" - I still think it would be a great race. I wouldn't bet money on either unless I knew one driver could drive, and the other couldn't. Click here to enlarge
        This car pulls incredible, the turbo's have been swapped out from GTX3076's .63 Hot Housings to GTX3576 .82 Hot Housings.

        This car made 820 RWHP on 21-22 PSI - With the upgraded Turbo's and a plenum box fabricated to the original manifold with the tune UN-touched in put down 941 RWHP on 21-22 PSI and did not loose the spool up and carried the power band 500-600 RPM's to the right before flattening out.

        1250 - 1300 RWHP is the plan once dialed in and boost is cranked up.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Twin Turbo BMW Click here to enlarge
        This car pulls incredible, the turbo's have been swapped out from GTX3076's .63 Hot Housings to GTX3576 .82 Hot Housings.

        This car made 820 RWHP on 21-22 PSI - With the upgraded Turbo's and a plenum box fabricated to the original manifold with the tune UN-touched in put down 941 RWHP on 21-22 PSI and did not loose the spool up and carried the power band 500-600 RPM's to the right before flattening out.

        1250 - 1300 RWHP is the plan once dialed in and boost is cranked up.
        This is George from ICS, isn't it?
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by rt turbo Click here to enlarge
        My point is that the s54's make big hp numbers but lower torque numbers than m50 based motors because the m50s run out of revs quicker and s54s can rev higher. an m50 must make x amount of torque more than the s54 to make the same peak hp figure because it revs lower. its math.
        Of course, the M50 has to make more torque to match the S54. But that doesn't stop the S54 from being able to make an equal amount of torque and therefore much more HP.

        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by rt turbo Click here to enlarge
        On the block, sleves can strengthen the walls, but not necessarily the integrity of the block itself. a girdle locking the mains to the block really would stop alot of the block movement under extreme loads. This is nothing new and is partly why we see those crazy bimmers in Sweeden.
        We may be getting to the point of custom blocks. Darton could certainly accommodate.
      1. Twin Turbo BMW's Avatar
        Twin Turbo BMW -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        This is George from ICS, isn't it?
        Yes Click here to enlarge
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Twin Turbo BMW Click here to enlarge
        Yes Click here to enlarge
        Why are you using a new name?