Zorg Guru (III)
3rd Party Trader
- Dec 8, 2011
Hey. Is the strengthening the only difference with the M/non-M. Geometry the same?
Adding steel to the outside will be effective probably more so than that odd internal piece. Did you consider straigthening the old beam? You could have tried my press.
Standard beam has no internal reinforcement that I can see. The reinforcement on the M-beam is visible through the drain hole, but I also had a look using a boroscope to see where to cut the beam.Gary does the standard non m car beam definitely not have the additional internal brace.
Obviously you have cut open a damaged one. I take it m beam hes different part number from say a 2.8/ 3.0 one.
I can totally understand that it would be beefed up as the original was never designed to run with the forces the m power plant provides.
Yes, everything looks the same - and I've had my M arms bolted to the beam, so it all fits together.Knowing you i thought you would have properly investigated it.
I was just trying to glean some more information on the subject as it is always good to know this stuff.
I take it the arm mounts on the beam are in the same position on m and non m beams and its just the arms themselves that are different.
Honestly, I don't think it is necessary to strengthen the beam. The additional strengthening inside is so marginal that it probably only adds a few percent to the strength.@Pingu
Gary was thinking about this last night @Delk would be a guy to speak to about the durability of the stock beam.
His car started as a stock 2.8 dont know if Delk has done any mods to his beam he would be able to tell you but his turbocharged 2.8 is putting out 100bhp more than your M is .
I have, but not as standard.Isn't there some strengthening in the floor and chassis box section too? There was an episode of wheelerdealers where they were doing a z3. Wotsis name (the tall one) welded in an additional layer of steel to that box section.