-------------------- 1 --------------------
#1. Re: : [E36M3] Re: 0-60 times - from david tow
Top
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 11:25:00 PDT From: "david tow" <david_tow@hotmail.com> Subject: Re: : [E36M3] Re: 0-60 times Engine variations, temperature, humidity, track conditions, etc. all have some effect on the results, Paul. David Tow >From: "Paul Elliott" <pelliott@rcn.com> >To: <david_tow@hotmail.com> >CC: "E36M3" <e36m3@bmwmpower.com> >Subject: : [E36M3] Re: 0-60 times >Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 23:06:34 -0400 > >David, > > >Just for the record; Car and Driver's quickest M3 was recorded as 5.3 >seconds from zero to 60, and 14 seconds flat (at 100 mph) on the quarter >mile run. It was featured in a comparison test with a 300ZX, a Supra, and >a >VR4. The article was named, I believe, "Mid-life Crisis". >The 95 yellow M3 there, of course, won the gold with ease. >Road & Track recorded a best of 5.4 and 14.1 in a comparison test with the >Mercedes C36. That was also a 95 M3.< > >Thanks for the info. I thought 5.1 was a tad too fast. But, apparently >not >for the M roadster....I still dont understand how the roadster consistantly >pulls 5.0 - 5.2 times, then the M cpe falls in a couple tenths behind, >followd by the M3. All with same tires, engines, gear ratios, and weight >too close to account for even a fraction of a tenth. Wind resistance? >Different rear suspensions? Who knows.... > >_____________________________ >Paul Elliott >'99 Alpine White M3; <15000 mi; Forged M dbl-spokes; Rotex pads; Dinan >Stage >II Supercharger > > >_____________________________ >Paul Elliott >'99 Alpine White M3; <15000 mi; Forged M dbl-spokes; Rotex pads; Dinan >Stage >II Supercharger > > ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
-------------------- 2 --------------------
#2. Re: [E36M3] Let's throw out the Vanos! - from Land Shark
Top
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 12:29:03 -0600 (MDT) From: Land Shark <lndshrk@xmission.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] Let's throw out the Vanos! On Fri, 16 Jun 2000, mill wrote: > I didn't say that Vanos sucks. Vanos is a great thing for street > driving, but on a race track, where spend 98% of the time in the 4000+ > rpm range it really doesn't do much. It doesnt?? I'll be sure to call the Fiz at BMW in Munich and inform them of your findings. What I'm trying to say in a nice way, is that your so off base, it's time to close your mouth because what your tasting is toes The vanos is active until 52-5400 rpms. Just having the transition off a few 100 rpms is good for an 8-10 HP loss at 4800 rpms. I'd call that significant. Jim
-------------------- 3 --------------------
#3. Re: [E36M3] Let's throw out the Vanos! - from mill
Top
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 21:18:32 +0200 From: mill <mill99@gmx.net> Subject: Re: [E36M3] Let's throw out the Vanos! Hi Jim, > What I'm trying to say in a nice way, is that your so off base, >it's time to close your mouth because what your tasting is toes Why do I always have the impression, that you get personally offended, if someone doesn't share the same view towards technical stuff as you? Same thing on the bimmer.org board, when someone wants to know why your products are better than your competitor's (*your chips are good, no doubt*), you talk those people down with your technical insider knowledge, without really answering the questions. I don't find that really helpful. You DO know lot's about bimmers and those mystical "black box" things, but share your wisdom with the bimmer-community in a way, that we "normal" people don't have to think, that we are all idiots and have to shut our mouth when you are speaking. Mill (who doesn't shut up)
-------------------- 4 --------------------
#4. Re: [E36M3] Let's throw out the Vanos! - from Ken Robb
Top
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 12:07:36 -0700 From: Ken Robb <kenrobb@willisallen.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] Let's throw out the Vanos! Thanks for this info. I too thought our vanos only boosted low rpm power. I gather what it does is allow more radical cams without the severe low rpm penalty we would otherwise experience. When my 92 325i was stock I thought it ran great at high rpm but was very weak below 4,000rpm. I drove identical cars w/Dinan chips and found them quicker about 1 car-length in 2nd and also 3rd gear but could not feel any difference in the butt dyno. Carl Nelson got a chip of murky parentage from Pete McHenry for me to try---oooh baby. The car pulled much better down low, better throttle response,screamed[relatively speaking] to 7100rpm and got 10% better mileage. When I drove the newer 325i w/vanos I thought it was better than my old stock-chipped car at low rpm and about the same above 4,000rpm. but not as strong anywhere as my chipped 92. Hardly scientific but that's why I thought vanos in our cars did not boost high rpm power. Ken Robb Land Shark wrote: > Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 12:29:03 -0600 (MDT) > From: Land Shark <lndshrk@xmission.com> > Subject: Re: [E36M3] Let's throw out the Vanos! > > On Fri, 16 Jun 2000, mill wrote: > > > I didn't say that Vanos sucks. Vanos is a great thing for street > > driving, but on a race track, where spend 98% of the time in the 4000+ > > rpm range it really doesn't do much. > > It doesnt?? > > I'll be sure to call the Fiz at BMW in Munich and inform them > of your findings. > > What I'm trying to say in a nice way, is that your so off base, > it's time to close your mouth because what your tasting is toes > > The vanos is active until 52-5400 rpms. > > Just having the transition off a few 100 rpms is good for an > 8-10 HP loss at 4800 rpms. > > I'd call that significant. > > Jim > > ************************************************************* > List Commands > UNSUBSCRIBE - (in subject line) unsubscribes you from the mailing list. > ************************************************************* -- ----------------------------------------------------- Click here for Free Video!! http://www.gohip.com/freevideo/
-------------------- 5 --------------------
#5. Re: [E36M3] E36M3 #244 - from Paul England
Top
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 15:19:35 -0400 From: "Paul England" <ettsn@mindspring.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] E36M3 #244 I would never buy used seat belts. Nor would I sell mine to anybody. You cannot know their true condition or age (why do you think real harnesses have date codes?) and we are talking about your safety. Like life and death kind of safety. Do you really want to save a few bucks on something like seatbelts? Find a good deal online somewhere or respond to me and I'll help you find a deal. Just lookin out for ya, bro! -Paul > From: "George M. Kofman" <sdg2@execpc.com> > Subject: [WTB] Schroth Rallye 3 harness(es) > > looking for a used [but in good working order] Rallye 3 to fit my E36 M3/4 > Please reply via private email to sdg2@execpc.com > > GMK > '97 M3 sedan
-------------------- 6 --------------------
#6. Re: Ground wires - from Paul England
Top
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 15:30:46 -0400 From: "Paul England" <ettsn@mindspring.com> Subject: Re: Ground wires A few other possible solutions are to relocate the ground point even a few feet somewhere else. Electricity does indeed travel paths and you might have tapped into a real nasty semi-AC return. DC does get 'dirty' and begin to oscilate a bit which causes havoc agogo in 12V systems. Another trick from my past life as an IASCA guy is to wire a 1/4 to 1/2 Farad (250-500mF) capacitor parallel to your battery. Yes, you read that correctly. I know, caps are usually placed near a heavy draw like an amp, but we're using it for something different here. It serves to help the battery 'condition' the power in your car, and eliminate much or all power garbage in your electrical system. We used to do this often on VWs with whine and buzz and all manners of evil nasties that made aftermarket systems noisy. Ever wonder why old (<94) VW radios don't power on with the car? Even VW had trouble with AC noise in their audio. I'll stop here, 'cause I hate long posts, but let me know if you want more tips... -Paul > -------------------- 8 -------------------- > Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 12:08:55 -0400 > From: "Eric Gravengaard" <elg@alum.mit.edu> > Subject: Ground wires.. > > My bad. I forgot I was talking to car guys. When I said I ran a separate > power wire for the head unit, I meant both the +12V and the GND. I guess it > was too much working on cars where the electrical system isn't grounded to > the chassis (solar-electric's). When you have a 140V DC system capable of > 100+ Amps you don't want to drop a wrench and accidentally ground a power > line so you let the whole chassis float and run an equal amount of power and > ground lines. > > Thanks for all your advice and several offers to take a look. I'm going to > try a new activation for the amp/crossover, as well as a different ground > point to try to tie everything together. I'm pretty sure that its not the > speaker wires b/c why would it start now, it didn't do this with the stock > system, and everything else is my own wires. > > Thanks, > > Eric > '95 M3/2
-------------------- 7 --------------------
#7. Re: [E36M3] SuperSprint Header Questio - from andy radin
Top
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 12:56:19 -0700 From: "andy radin" <fourfa@mindspring.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] SuperSprint Header Questio >> Has anyone tried the SuperSprint header on an OBDII M3? Is there a >> noticeable difference? Are there any problems with the Jim C. software? Is >> the install a PITA? > Putting headers on OBD-II cars is not recommended for many reasons: > Examples: > 1) It's illegal as all hell > 2) It's illegal as all hell. > Not to mention that headers do almost nothing if the cats are left > in place and removing the cats well.. that's even more "no-no" I've also heard recently that the Supersprint headers (a new product I believe) actually DO make power with the stock cat, unlike the Motorsport headers. Have never seen dyno graphs from either to support that. If anyone has more info, I know I'd like to see it. As examples 1) and 2) above, I believe the same applies to lots of other common modifications here, like intakes and software. I don't see mention of any CARB EO numbers at the relevant websites, except Dinan's supposed supercharger EO. Headers do affect the cold-start emissions somewhat, as it can delay the cat light-off. This may or may not be a concern for you. I don't know exactly how closely the M3's system monitors the catalyst temperatures and other factors, but I'd love to hear more details than "don't do it." As for "Putting headers on OBD-II cars is not recommended," I'll assume that you don't mean this literally and are just talking about the M3, because that's clearly not true for ALL makes and models.
-------------------- 8 --------------------
#8. Camber vs. Toe - from Wayne Miller
Top
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 16:21:18 -0400 From: "Wayne Miller" <m3@waynemiller.com> Subject: Camber vs. Toe >> Can you quantify the alignment change after adjusting the camber? Unfortunately, I can't quantify the difference but it does look like it would be a very small amount. Since the strut top would be moving towards the outside of the car, the toe-in would increase. The shop that put everything together was specifically telling me about having an alignment done each time I adjust the camber (i.e., before a track event) so I fall into the category of needing an alignment when using the adjustments. -Wayne
-------------------- 9 --------------------
#9. Re: [E36M3] Let's throw out the Vanos! - from Land Shark
Top
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 14:22:14 -0600 (MDT) From: Land Shark <lndshrk@xmission.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] Let's throw out the Vanos! On Fri, 16 Jun 2000, mill wrote: > Why do I always have the impression, that you get personally offended, > if someone doesn't share the same view towards technical stuff as you? Mill.. I'm not offended.. what offends me is the unwillingness to say "Gee Jim, I'm wrong, sorry.. " Let me show you why you were wrong: 1) The 92 brain (PN 0-261-200 402/403/405) is M3.1 You lose your knock sensors as well as the ability to use an HFM, as M3.1 uses a hot WIRE meter.. no easy retrofits, and the meter is too small for an M3 Further, M3.1 uses a different type of CAM SENSOR than M3.3.1 so you need to retrofit/machine for the new sensor. 2) Vanos is active until 5400(ish) rpms and is significant in producing power up to that point. Loss of vanos will SIGNIFICANTLY affect your lap times in most courses 3) If it were a prudent thing to "remove" you'd need to machine some sort of hardware replacement for the existing intake gear, remove the vanos unit (oil slave) and floating gear.. replace with your new one, remove the oil control solenoid and spool valve, and program the DME to ignore the lack of the solenoid (for faults) and not actuate the vanos at all, since it switches maps when vanos is on/off. You'd need to do all this in a current 0-261-203-506 or 0-261-200-413 (pre-EWS or EWS) brain. With stock cams this wouldn't gain you a thing other than you'd have yourself a slug of an M3 with no midrange whatsoever. The real problem here, or on bimmer.org is that people who THINK they know something have a real problem when someone wants to tell them they're WRONG without wasting bandwidth explaining all the whys and wherefores as to WHY they are wrong. I do take offense when I see someone trying to defend their sending other Bimmerphiles down a road of wasted time and money trying theories that won't work. In what I do for a day job, you learn one thing when you deal with me. Listen to what I say, it's the truth don't ask too many questions, just nod and things always work out. Sometimes the questions that people ask, I can't answer in open because of "secrecy".. I don't think my competition wants me explaining the inner workings of why their stuff might be "inferior" and I certainly don't if it gives them (and in many cases it does) the idea of how to improve their product to meet mine. See, I'm not trying to PROVE anything at all.. I'm giving you information. If you listen and follow what I say, it will benefit YOU and if you don't it won't. It doesn't really hurt or help me in either case. I'll lead you to fresh cool water.. YOU have to drink it. Jim
-------------------- 10 --------------------
#10. Re: [E36M3] Tire choices - from LoweSeaton@aol.com
Top
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 16:36:31 EDT From: LoweSeaton@aol.com Subject: Re: [E36M3] Tire choices In a message dated 6/15/00 2:03:26 PM Central Daylight Time, m3@mybimmer.com writes: > It is getting close to the time to replace the tires on my 99 M3. The car > saw some heavy commuter action prior to moving and now boasts almost 24K on > the original Michelins. > > <snip> > > Don't even suggest Michelin's. I went through 2 sets faster than you can > type (no alignment problems/air pressure problems). They just wore out quick Keith, No offense, but 24K is excellent mileage for the stock Michelin tires. I routinely get 12-14K miles out of my Michelin Pilot SX MXX3 tires. And how did you wear out 2 sets of tires when you are still on the originals? Must be talking about your '97 Z3? You won't like my tires then :) I just started running R compound tires full time. I bought a set of brand new Toyo R compound tires from Turner for $100 each and a set of used R compound tires from TC Kline for $20 each. I may only get 6K miles out of the tires but that is no more costly than Michelin MXX3 tires every 12K. I'll post my results. Lowell Seaton '95 M3/2 Dallas, Texas BMW CCA #131505
-------------------- 11 --------------------
#11. Re: [E36M3] SuperSprint Header Questio - from Land Shark
Top
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 14:36:39 -0600 (MDT) From: Land Shark <lndshrk@xmission.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] SuperSprint Header Questio On Fri, 16 Jun 2000, andy radin wrote: > I've also heard recently that the Supersprint headers (a new product I > believe) actually DO make power with the stock cat, unlike the Motorsport > headers. Have never seen dyno graphs from either to support that. If > anyone has more info, I know I'd like to see it. Andy, supersprint headers have been around since 1996ish. We tested them "in front of the cat" on a 95LTW and they produced ZERO power gain over the stock manifolds. > As examples 1) and 2) above, I believe the same applies to lots of other > common modifications here, like intakes and software. I don't see mention > of any CARB EO numbers at the relevant websites, except Dinan's supposed > supercharger EO. Headers do affect the cold-start emissions somewhat, as it > can delay the cat light-off. This may or may not be a concern for you. I > don't know exactly how closely the M3's system monitors the catalyst > temperatures and other factors, but I'd love to hear more details than > "don't do it." > > As for "Putting headers on OBD-II cars is not recommended," I'll assume > that you don't mean this literally and are just talking about the M3, > because that's clearly not true for ALL makes and models. It's true LEGALLY for any car that is certified without them if the part isn't emissions certified, because mucking with the emissions certification of an OBD-II car is a bit "worse" than with the previous cars. You don't need a "CARB EO" to be emissions legal, you just have to not effect emissions, and headers unfortunately DO, so they need to quantify how much, which requires testing, which of course costs $$$. Jim