-------------------- 1 --------------------
#1. HELP ME!!!!!! - from B Horlacher
Top
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 10:38:56 -0400 From: "B Horlacher" <Horlacher@carrindustries.net> Subject: HELP ME!!!!!! I swapped my strut bearing a few months ago, my tires cupped. I just had my new AVS Sports mounted and had an alignment done as well, guess what my tires are cupping again..... What is causing me this frustration? Should I just swap the bearings back? I really like the crisp turn that I get with the hats swapped, but I am getting tired of a constant vibration due to the tires cupping... Please email me with your comments and opinions, Sincerely, Bill Horlacher
-------------------- 2 --------------------
#2. Re: [E36M3] Wheel question IFG s weight??? - from Ron Buchalski
Top
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 07:44:24 PDT From: "Ron Buchalski" <rbuchals@hotmail.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] Wheel question IFG s weight??? My observation... My '95 M3 has the standard 10 spoke 17x7.5" Motorsport wheels and 235/40ZR17 Michelin MXX3 tires for the street. http://www.michelin-us.com/us/eng/tire/catalog/pmxx3.htm I purchased 17x8" IFG wheels and shod them with Toyo Proxes RA1 tires, size 235/45ZR17. http://www.ifgwheels.com/wheels.htm http://www.toyo.com/tires/tire_lines/high_perf/specs/ra1.html While swapping tires, I weighed both combinations, and found that the track tire combination weighed 1.5 pounds less than the street combination. I guess the four+ pound savings in wheel weight (IFG versus Motorsport) is almost made up by the larger tire (235/45ZR17 versus 235/40ZR17). -rb >Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 17:44:44 -0700 (PDT) >From: Gerry Miranda <gerry_miranda@yahoo.com> >Subject: Re: [E36M3] Wheel question IFG s weight??? > > >i'm also running 8x17 ifg on 235 40 17 a032r, and >these are great for the street. they stick great in >the dry and WET. it's been raining in chicago lately >and i can run faster on these than my old pilot sport. >the only negative is the howl between 35-50 mph. its >mostly quiet out of those ranges. and the engine loves >the lighter weight and smaller tire diameter. > >i've had a chance to weigh the IFG before i had the >tires mounted and they came in at 18,5 lbs for 17x8??? >this surprised me since every web site i've visisted >and magazines mentioned the 17x9 weighing in at 17.5 >lbs. how can the 8s be more than the 9s. the only >place else i saw them weigh in at 18.6 lbs was at >suzy's gallery from jim powell...can i now consider >hardware specs in ths ame category as "claimed" hp >gain... anyone has actual weights for these. >i know the a032r comes in at 23 1/4 lbs... ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
-------------------- 3 --------------------
#3. Re: [E36M3] Wheel question IFG s weight??? - from Seth Thomas
Top
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 11:25:10 -0400 From: "Seth Thomas" <porsche993@mindspring.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] Wheel question IFG s weight??? That is interesting. I will weigh my BBS RCs with 245/40/17 BFG KD street tires and then weigh my track BBS RCs and Hoosier 245/40/17 track tires. I think that the difference here will be more than just 1.5lbs. I can tell that the Hoosiers are a very light tire when compared to the A032R tracks tires I had before. Seth Thomas www.m3power.com www.m3ltw.com ----- Original Message ----- From: Ron Buchalski <rbuchals@hotmail.com> To: E36M3 <e36m3@bmwmpower.com> Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2000 10:49 AM Subject: Re: [E36M3] Wheel question IFG s weight??? > Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 07:44:24 PDT > From: "Ron Buchalski" <rbuchals@hotmail.com> > Subject: Re: [E36M3] Wheel question IFG s weight??? > > My observation... > > My '95 M3 has the standard 10 spoke 17x7.5" Motorsport wheels and 235/40ZR17 > Michelin MXX3 tires for the street. > > http://www.michelin-us.com/us/eng/tire/catalog/pmxx3.htm > > I purchased 17x8" IFG wheels and shod them with Toyo Proxes RA1 tires, size > 235/45ZR17. > > http://www.ifgwheels.com/wheels.htm > http://www.toyo.com/tires/tire_lines/high_perf/specs/ra1.html > > While swapping tires, I weighed both combinations, and found that the track > tire combination weighed 1.5 pounds less than the street combination. > > I guess the four+ pound savings in wheel weight (IFG versus Motorsport) is > almost made up by the larger tire (235/45ZR17 versus 235/40ZR17). > > -rb > > >Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 17:44:44 -0700 (PDT) > >From: Gerry Miranda <gerry_miranda@yahoo.com> > >Subject: Re: [E36M3] Wheel question IFG s weight??? > > > > > >i'm also running 8x17 ifg on 235 40 17 a032r, and > >these are great for the street. they stick great in > >the dry and WET. it's been raining in chicago lately > >and i can run faster on these than my old pilot sport. > >the only negative is the howl between 35-50 mph. its > >mostly quiet out of those ranges. and the engine loves > >the lighter weight and smaller tire diameter. > > > >i've had a chance to weigh the IFG before i had the > >tires mounted and they came in at 18,5 lbs for 17x8??? > >this surprised me since every web site i've visisted > >and magazines mentioned the 17x9 weighing in at 17.5 > >lbs. how can the 8s be more than the 9s. the only > >place else i saw them weigh in at 18.6 lbs was at > >suzy's gallery from jim powell...can i now consider > >hardware specs in ths ame category as "claimed" hp > >gain... anyone has actual weights for these. > >i know the a032r comes in at 23 1/4 lbs... > > ________________________________________________________________________ > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com > > > ************************************************************* > List Commands > UNSUBSCRIBE - (in subject line) unsubscribes you from the mailing list. > ************************************************************* > >
-------------------- 4 --------------------
#4. No grinding in popping gear - from Ed Tang
Top
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 08:40:36 -0700 (PDT) From: Ed Tang <etangf1@yahoo.com> Subject: No grinding in popping gear > I traced it back more to personal error. In the > heat of running up the > gears, I would not fully engage the gear and the > moment I got off the clutch > it would make a scary grinding-like noise and pop > out of gear. VERY bad. I know I had the gear engaged because it would happen at strong acceleration out of a corner. I'm on the brakes and into gear before turn in. It's after the apex where I accelerate strongly for about two seconds and it would pop out. The car does pull for a couple seconds during the turn so I know there is a connection from the tranny to the engine. No grinding noise. Just a serious pop. It's never happened at the track, just the autocrosses. I'm assuming that the sharper turns associated with them would be the cause. Otherwise, I couldn't really say. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send instant messages with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com/
-------------------- 5 --------------------
#5. Re: [E36M3] Wheel question IFG s weight??? - from Gerry Miranda
Top
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 09:22:23 -0700 (PDT) From: Gerry Miranda <gerry_miranda@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] Wheel question IFG s weight??? The Hoosiers , I think comes in at 17 lbs, and the KD should be in the 23 lb range....assuming same wheel you should see a 6 lb diff. Gerry --- Seth Thomas <porsche993@mindspring.com> wrote: > Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 11:25:10 -0400 > From: "Seth Thomas" <porsche993@mindspring.com> > Subject: Re: [E36M3] Wheel question IFG s weight??? > > That is interesting. I will weigh my BBS RCs with > 245/40/17 BFG KD street > tires and then weigh my track BBS RCs and Hoosier > 245/40/17 track tires. I > think that the difference here will be more than > just 1.5lbs. I can tell > that the Hoosiers are a very light tire when > compared to the A032R tracks > tires I had before. > > Seth Thomas > www.m3power.com > www.m3ltw.com > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Ron Buchalski <rbuchals@hotmail.com> > To: E36M3 <e36m3@bmwmpower.com> > Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2000 10:49 AM > Subject: Re: [E36M3] Wheel question IFG s weight??? > > > > Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 07:44:24 PDT > > From: "Ron Buchalski" <rbuchals@hotmail.com> > > Subject: Re: [E36M3] Wheel question IFG s > weight??? > > > > My observation... > > > > My '95 M3 has the standard 10 spoke 17x7.5" > Motorsport wheels and > 235/40ZR17 > > Michelin MXX3 tires for the street. > > > > > http://www.michelin-us.com/us/eng/tire/catalog/pmxx3.htm > > > > I purchased 17x8" IFG wheels and shod them with > Toyo Proxes RA1 tires, > size > > 235/45ZR17. > > > > http://www.ifgwheels.com/wheels.htm > > > http://www.toyo.com/tires/tire_lines/high_perf/specs/ra1.html > > > > While swapping tires, I weighed both combinations, > and found that the > track > > tire combination weighed 1.5 pounds less than the > street combination. > > > > I guess the four+ pound savings in wheel weight > (IFG versus Motorsport) is > > almost made up by the larger tire (235/45ZR17 > versus 235/40ZR17). > > > > -rb > > > > >Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 17:44:44 -0700 (PDT) > > >From: Gerry Miranda <gerry_miranda@yahoo.com> > > >Subject: Re: [E36M3] Wheel question IFG s > weight??? > > > > > > > > >i'm also running 8x17 ifg on 235 40 17 a032r, and > > >these are great for the street. they stick great > in > > >the dry and WET. it's been raining in chicago > lately > > >and i can run faster on these than my old pilot > sport. > > >the only negative is the howl between 35-50 mph. > its > > >mostly quiet out of those ranges. and the engine > loves > > >the lighter weight and smaller tire diameter. > > > > > >i've had a chance to weigh the IFG before i had > the > > >tires mounted and they came in at 18,5 lbs for > 17x8??? > > >this surprised me since every web site i've > visisted > > >and magazines mentioned the 17x9 weighing in at > 17.5 > > >lbs. how can the 8s be more than the 9s. the only > > >place else i saw them weigh in at 18.6 lbs was at > > >suzy's gallery from jim powell...can i now > consider > > >hardware specs in ths ame category as "claimed" > hp > > >gain... anyone has actual weights for these. > > >i know the a032r comes in at 23 1/4 lbs... > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________ > > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at > http://www.hotmail.com > > > > > > > ************************************************************* > > List Commands > > UNSUBSCRIBE - (in subject line) unsubscribes you > from the mailing list. > > > ************************************************************* > > > > > > > ************************************************************* > List Commands > UNSUBSCRIBE - (in subject line) unsubscribes you > from the mailing list. > ************************************************************* > > ===== Gerry 97 M3/4 __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send instant messages with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com/
-------------------- 6 --------------------
#6. Re: [E36M3] M3 vs. Z 0-60 - from Daniel Smith
Top
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 09:29:17 -0700 From: Daniel Smith <dls@daniel.org> Subject: Re: [E36M3] M3 vs. Z 0-60 At 7:30 AM -0500 6/21/00, Jeremy.Thissell@USPTO.GOV wrote: > Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 08:21:13 -0400 > From: Jeremy.Thissell@USPTO.GOV > Subject: M3 vs. Z 0-60 > > I would be willing to bet that > the M3 rotates on it's central axis (read: squats) more during acceleration > than the Z models, just because of it's high center of gravity (relatively > speaking). Wouldn't this be a function of overall suspension stiffness, regardless of height? (I don't know for sure, that's my layperson's guess) Daniel -- Daniel L. Smith - dls@daniel.org - Sonoma County, CA
-------------------- 7 --------------------
#7. RE: [E36M3] M Roadster wheels - from Sean Hester
Top
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 10:28:52 PDT From: "Sean Hester" <seanh_race@hotmail.com> Subject: RE: [E36M3] M Roadster wheels at least it's the inside rim. noone will see the scratches there. ;-) >Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 16:13:32 -0700 (PDT) >From: Daniel <m3_driver@yahoo.com> >Subject: RE: [E36M3] M Roadster wheels > >Those were my first thoughts too...sheesh > >Dan > > >--- Chester Wong <chester_p_wong@yahoo.com> wrote: > > Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 20:42:32 -0700 (PDT) > > From: Chester Wong <chester_p_wong@yahoo.com> > > Subject: RE: [E36M3] M Roadster wheels > > > > Maybe many people aren't as anal as I am, but what > > idiot would intentionally > > set aluminum wheels against concrete and brick? > > > > Chester > > > > --- Sean Ganess <Sean.Ganess@lostcluster.net> wrote: > > > Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 20:57:26 -0400 > > > From: Sean Ganess <Sean.Ganess@lostcluster.net> > > > Subject: RE: [E36M3] M Roadster wheels > > > > > > A shame... This looks like a steal: > > > > > > > > >http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/aw-cgi/ebayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=359347061& > > > r=0&t=0 > > > > > > ===== > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Send instant messages with Yahoo! Messenger. > > http://im.yahoo.com/ > > > > > > >************************************************************* > > List Commands > > UNSUBSCRIBE - (in subject line) unsubscribes you > > from the mailing list. > > >************************************************************* > > > > > > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Send instant messages with Yahoo! Messenger. >http://im.yahoo.com/ > > >************************************************************* >List Commands >UNSUBSCRIBE - (in subject line) unsubscribes you from the mailing list. >************************************************************* > > ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
-------------------- 8 --------------------
#8. BFG G-Force R1A - 2nd Gen tires - results? - from vernon@sprynet.com
Top
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 13:29:09 -0400 From: vernon@sprynet.com Subject: BFG G-Force R1A - 2nd Gen tires - results? Has anyone tried the "new" generation of G-Force tires? My A032R's won't last for too much longer and I'm looking at the new G-Force R1A's as an option. I had the old G-Forces last year but I hated them - I had all of the problems that the Tire Rack describes in their article (difficult to properly set up, not forgiving, "on-the-edge" feeling, etc.) The Yok's on the other hand, feel like a nice, friendly sticky street tire, but I'd like more grip than they offer.
-------------------- 9 --------------------
#9. Rear pads and rotors - how difficult to DIY? - from vernon@sprynet.com
Top
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 13:38:35 -0400 From: vernon@sprynet.com Subject: Rear pads and rotors - how difficult to DIY? How difficult is it to change the rear rotors and pads on my 98 M3? I've already done the fronts, but my rear rotors and pads need some attention and I just wanted to ask the group if there's any tricks or things to watch out for. I'm hoping it'll be as simple as the fronts, but it never hurts to ask! Thanks in advance! Vern Anderson 98 M3/2 Bone stock But trying desperately to upgrade and improve the car's driver (currently the weakest link....)
-------------------- 10 --------------------
#10. RE: M3 vs. Z 0-60 - from david tow
Top
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 10:48:16 PDT From: "david tow" <david_tow@hotmail.com> Subject: RE: M3 vs. Z 0-60 Interesting theory, Jeremy! I, however, always thought that the older semi-trailing arm design of the Z3 is more prone to squatting and axle-tramp when accelerating from stand-still, which should hurt the time. In other words, the multi-linked setup on the M3 should really be more efficient in handling as well as acceleration compared to the Z3, which still has the modified E30's suspension setup. So it's got to be the weight and the exhaust system that helped the Z3... Please correct me if I am wrong. David Tow JeremyThissell wrote: Besides the exhaust and of course the weight, one other major difference I can see between the MZ3/MCoupe and the M3 is that the Z models have a lower center of gravity. Now I don't know if this helps or hurts 0-60 times, but it IS a major difference between the models. I would be willing to bet that the M3 rotates on it's central axis (read: squats) more during acceleration than the Z models, just because of it's high center of gravity (relatively speaking). Now I would think that this would actually HELP acceleration, ala. the 911's having good acceleration due to heavier rear end and good weight transfer back there. But who knows, maybe something about keeping the car flatter (less squat) HELPS acceleration. Maybe on launch the energy is transmitted into linear movement rather than rotational movement. In other words, if the M3 does squat more, the first split second of the launch will rotate the wheels relative to the chassis, but the tires remain stationary whereas the chassis is actually rotating about the axle. In the Z cars (assuming they squat less) the wheels rotate relative to the chassis, and the chassis stays still rotationally. This means the wheels' rotation causes the car to move forward. This difference might be small, but we're only talking about a couple tenths of a second. This is all a guess though. I'd be interested to here what other subscribers think about this theory. ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com