changing a non vanos to vanos conversion - United Bimmer Community

**cabrit** · 04-01-2006, 06:40 PM

is it possible to put a vanos on a non vanos engine

**doughboyea** · 04-01-2006, 07:42 PM

Umm, do you really want to go through that hassel?

I'm going to answer that with a no, not that I have any experience in it, but, to me, being somewhat of a n00b in this, aren't they two completely differnt engines....? I could be wrong, that's just my guess.

Dough

drz · 04-01-2006, 07:54 PM

My understanding is that they are indeed very different. Furthermore, you can get more power out of a non-vanos, from what I understand.

**doughboyea** · 04-01-2006, 08:01 PM

Now that I cannot confirm... vanos controls the intake to such a degree that it will help "improve performance" both in HP figures and in fuel consumption by adjusting the whacha-ma-call-it. At least according to BMW.

Oh, and btw, a new vanos control unit, alone, will cost you $630 in parts, tack on another $500 for install (and those figures are on the cheap end assuming of course you can even install that on it. I know because my E46 had a faulty vanos.

Dough

**94bmw325i** · 04-01-2006, 08:38 PM

You must need a different motor...

**xsperf** · 04-01-2006, 11:37 PM

yep, need a new engine, i did the swap.. i dont know if its possible to do it on a non-vanos engine, youd probably have to get a whole new head and ECU

but, as I thought the same thing as you, you should really appreciate your non-vanos for what it is, honestly, i felt that the non-vanos was MUCH more responsive and had much more power, because you know, vanos isnt only designed for power, its designed for fuel consumption too

**c1apton** · 04-01-2006, 11:41 PM

VANOS (Variable Valve Timing) to convert would be an intense & expensive project with no real benefit. It's a slightly different head, camshafts, timing gears, chains, some oil line plumbing, a solenoid and a new DME. The only thing a VANOS system does is it adjusts intake camshaft timing based on engine load, engine speed & temp. You'ld only gain a smoother "mid range" in simple terms.
If you want Vanos get a motor already equipped with it. As "Dough" mention in his case to repair would be $630 but he has all the original parts - you would be looking close to 2k to convert. FI would be a better choice for power/torque etc.

**Rob** · 04-02-2006, 12:00 AM

Don't even think about it. A non-vanos M50 will destroy any other M50 out there with what it has. There is no need to add a vanos unit to the mix. You would have to upgrade the DME to 413, in which the vanos was accepted. You then would need a new MAF, new empty head, new head cover, and so on. You are crazy to even think to add vanos. That engine is built for performance, and if you want something that saves on fuel, get a civic and continue life. I would much rather have a non-vanos with dual valve springs, hotter cams, and NO vanos then have what I have right now, but then again, what I have right now isn't so bad anyway.

Storamin · 04-02-2006, 01:01 AM

Every now and then somebody starts saying that non-vanos is actually better. It isn't better... it's not the end all be amazing engine people make it sound to be.

**cabrit** · 04-02-2006, 01:21 PM

thanks guys the project started already i do have both engines the vanos and the non vanos, the reason for this swap is because the person the 525i belong to blew the engine would have love to use the non vanos engine which i got for free, but the car i`m using it for is a 94 525i which has vanos and the ecu is 413 this is why i wanted to know if its possible so far i changed the cams the head the oil pan the only thing istaht the vanos is not connected because something broke in there(another one on the way) the engine turns but does not start if the vanos is connectedc is it possible that this frankeistein might work

**xsperf** · 04-02-2006, 01:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Storamin

Every now and then somebody starts saying that non-vanos is actually better. It isn't better... it's not the end all be amazing engine people make it sound to be.

right, b/c youve obviously had expierience w/both engines in the same car.. and btw, "better" is an opinion, no vanos is more responsive, and therefor i felt that the non-vanos had much more power, def. towards the lower end of the spectrum, while vanos was weak until the very upper end of the spectrum.. but really, why should i question your authority even though you havent had expierience w/both(in the same car, to keep all the other factors constant)

but either way, vanos or non vanos, Manual tranny FTW!

**Rob** · 04-02-2006, 01:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Storamin

Every now and then somebody starts saying that non-vanos is actually better. It isn't better... it's not the end all be amazing engine people make it sound to be.

You are so wrong, it's not even funny. The hot cams and dual valve springs allow for a lot quicker response, a lot more power/torque in the lower RPMs, and so on. The point of vanos in the first place is to adjust the intake cam to breathe more at higher RPMs when it is triggered. The non-vanos already does that, but throughout the RPMs, starting at idle. You may be able to achieve better gas milage with a vanos version because of the cams and vanos, but in no way will you be able to compete with the power provided through the setup on a non-vanos one. I forgot to mention that even the block has better components in it. The connecting rods are a lot beefier then most of the other M50 versions out there, which include the M50tu, M52, S50US, and S52US. The stock form of the motor is a great platform for FI already, just think of what some simple headgasket and ARP studs could do with it. Before you start talking, make sure you know what you are talking about and have the ability to back it up. Thanks.

**tomctx** · 04-02-2006, 02:02 PM

Actually, according to the Bentley, VANOS is there to enhance mid-range performance. To quote from the book:

"At low speed, the intake valves open late to ensure smooth engine operation. At mid-range speeds, the valves open early, for increased torque, improved driveability, and reduced emissions. And at high speeds, the valves again open late for optimum power and performance."

The horsepower and torque figures for both engines are exactly the same, 189hp@5900, 181ft/lbs@4700. What I would like to see is a graph with the hp and torque curves for both engines. That might lay this controversy to rest. But then again, probably not.

**xsperf** · 04-02-2006, 02:10 PM

yep, they both have the same peak horsepower, but just like you said, it doesnt show you the graph, but speaking from personal expierience, trust me you wanna go non-vanos

**Rob** · 04-02-2006, 07:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomctx

Actually, according to the Bentley, VANOS is there to enhance mid-range performance. To quote from the book:

"At low speed, the intake valves open late to ensure smooth engine operation. At mid-range speeds, the valves open early, for increased torque, improved driveability, and reduced emissions. And at high speeds, the valves again open late for optimum power and performance."

The horsepower and torque figures for both engines are exactly the same, 189hp@5900, 181ft/lbs@4700. What I would like to see is a graph with the hp and torque curves for both engines. That might lay this controversy to rest. But then again, probably not.

The non-vanos has always been a torquey engine off bat. The graph would definately help solve all this. Thanks for the info on the vanos setup. I knew I was close, but you defined it perfectly. Thanks.