-------------------- 1 --------------------
#1. RE: [E36M3] Am I destined to hate my car? [long] - from Sean Hester
Top
Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2001 08:50:19 -0800 From: "Sean Hester" <seanh_race@hotmail.com> Subject: RE: [E36M3] Am I destined to hate my car? [long] > > "the 996 has some truly sphincter-clenching oversteer characteristics at >the > > limit because it's motor is hangin' out there aft of the rear wheels, >where > > the trunk should be" > >bah! the oversteer of a 993 is sooooo easy to handle. The 996 has >even less oversteer, so I've read. It only took me 2 spins to learn >how to control it (or at least slow down enough so it wouldn't happen >:-) how come oversteer is "handled" (in a "manly" fashion i uspect) while understeer is "hated". let's say we have two cars. a stock 1997 M3. and a stock 1977 911. we put a "normal" driver in each. (by "normal" i mean not a racer or someone who's been to lots of driver schools) and we tell them to take a corner faster and faster (no looking at the speedo) until they skid. then ask for opinions. here's what happens with the M3. they go faster and faster until they eventually get understeer. let's pretend they could take the corner at 85 mph before the skidding started. now they go at it with the porsche. they go faster and faster and evertually get OVERsteer. for the same corner they probably only got to 80 before the rear end broke loose. those skinny 1977 era tires just don't grip worth a damn. so... the M3 handled "better" (meaning it could go faster without skidding). but now let's interview our driver. me: "how was it?" driver: "well... the M3 plowed like a pig, something's gotta be done about that understeer. the porsche went faster and i could "handle" the oversteer with no problem" me: "you know, of course, that your speed was higher in the M3" driver: "well... uh... really?" ------------ here's what i think people who think their M3 "plows" too much should do... put really skinny, crappy tires on the rear. why? becuase this will increase the oversteer alot. to the point where you could just as easily get oversteer as understeer. and then you could "handle" the oversteer and be "manly". you'd also retain the smooth almost perfect feel from the suspension. no "ultra stiff" rides here. no "dartyness". no "dragging over speedbumps". of course... you'd do nothing to actually make the car handle better. and might even make it worse. but that's obviously not what we're going for here. i mean... the M3 handles better then all but about a dozen cars on the planet already. that can't be the problem. the problem was the damn understeer that makes it impossible to be "manly". P.S. i actually acheived a neutral handling M3. (without the tire trick) with a few carefully chosen and carefully (anally) tuned mods. (adjustible camber plates, adjustible shocks, strut braces) and i did it with stock springs so no stiff ride or lowering problems. but... my car didn't go through corners any faster. just more neutrally. but... it did wear the insides of my tires. and it did make the car a it darty. you can't get something for nothing. ;-( _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
-------------------- 2 --------------------
#2. RE: [E36M3] Am I destined to hate my car? [also long] - from Peter H Reinhart
Top
Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2001 14:03:11 -0500 From: Peter H Reinhart <reinhart@neuro.duke.edu> Subject: RE: [E36M3] Am I destined to hate my car? [also long] Hey Sean: >how come oversteer is "handled" (in a "manly" fashion i uspect) while >understeer is "hated". >let's say we have two cars. a stock 1997 M3. and a stock 1977 911. we >put a "normal" driver in each. (by "normal" i mean not a racer or someone >who's been to lots of driver schools) and we tell them to take a corner >faster and faster (no looking at the speedo) until they skid. then ask >for opinions........... SNIP............ Can't quite go along with this one. Let's assume both cars are being driven competently, ie proper line and throttle application. Oversteer vs understeer is determined by whether the front tires or the back tires first step over the 6-10% slip angle we normally aim for. For every type of car MANY factors go into determining at what speeds this limit occurs (ie car weight, tire size, rubber compound, weight distribution, center of gravity, amount of body roll, suspension geometry, temperature, road camber, etc, etc....). So you're probably right to say that on average, the overall cornering speed limit of a '97 M3 is higher than that of a '77 911. The fact that the limit is the rear wheels on the 911 vs the front wheels on the M3 is not really important (for this discussion). The M3 has a higher limit (no big surprise....). So let's change the scenario a bit to make it fairer, and more relevant...... Two guys (or guyettes) start pushing their cars a bit on the track, say a '97 M3 and a '95 911. After say 30 or 40 driving schools they are running neck and neck on most tracks. The M3 driver *consistently* runs into one or two corners on each track where *finally* the handling of the car, rather than the operator, is rate-limiting. So what to do? You'd like to go faster through that corner, but the M3 will only hang in there for so long before the front starts loosing traction. Lets say at this stage you make a single change - put bigger tires on the front. This raises the traction limit of the front a tad.... enough to give you another 4-5 m.p.h. through the corner before traction again becomes limiting (either at the front or the rear). Now a magical thing happens. Your buddy can no longer keep up with you. Changing the limit of the car through 1 or 2 corners has lowered your overall lap times. It's not just a feeling, its measurable. To my mind the goal of any of these mods in never to achieve a neutrally handling car. As you correctly point out you could do this by *decreasing* traction at the back of the car (now your lap times are slower, but boy she's neutral.....). The goal should be to raise the handling limits of the car even further. As always, you don't get something for nothing, but putting more rubber up front comes pretty close..... Cheers, Peter Reinhart - http://www.neuro.duke.edu/phr/m3.html
-------------------- 3 --------------------
#3. Bilstein E36 travel - from TFRM3@aol.com
Top
Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2001 14:21:52 EST From: TFRM3@aol.com Subject: Bilstein E36 travel All e36 Monotube Bilsteins are on the bump stop when the chrome portion of the shock shows 7/8 of an inch from gland nut to shoulder. Very often, especially on a 95, this can be at ride height. Go to www.ground-control.com, click on "tech talk", read " bottoming front suspension" Jay Morris
-------------------- 4 --------------------
#4. RE: [E36M3] Am I destined to hate my car? [also long] - from Sean Hester
Top
Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2001 13:03:02 -0800 From: "Sean Hester" <seanh_race@hotmail.com> Subject: RE: [E36M3] Am I destined to hate my car? [also long] >Lets say at this stage you >make a single change - put bigger tires on the front. This raises the >traction limit of the front a tad.... enough to give you another 4-5 m.p.h. >through the corner before traction again becomes limiting (either at the >front or the rear). having owned a pair of 95s (and no other M3s) i always forget that you 1996+ people have smaller front tires, AND larger rear tires then i did. why did bmw do this? probably because the lawyers told the designers that too many people spun their 1995s and they needed a "safer" car. "safer" meaning more understeer. ;-P you're very right. having all 4 tires the same size IS a GOOD way to cut understeer pretty much for free (meaning no downsides) on those 1996+ cars with smaller fronts. and... it's probably a big factor in how i was able to get my M3 to be pretty much neutral handling without much effort. if i'd had those tiny front tires, and huge rears, like most M3 owners have, i'd have had a much harder time achieving that goal of neutral handling. i suppose if you have a 1995 you're out of luck on the "larger front tires" upgrade. unless you want to look really silly with fronts larger then the rears. ;-( _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
-------------------- 5 --------------------
#5. Re: [E36M3] Bilstein E36 travel - from LoweSeaton@aol.com
Top
Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2001 19:01:49 EST From: LoweSeaton@aol.com Subject: Re: [E36M3] Bilstein E36 travel Jay writes: > Very often, especially on a 95, this can be at ride height Wow!! I never would have suspected this. But I can believe it. My M3 sure feels like it is riding on the bump stops. What idiot designed the M3 shock? I take every thing back regarding Bilstein quality. They are crap if they are improperly designed. I'll trim the bump stops and report back. I can care less about the warranty. They are useless as is. Thanks for the advice! Lowell Seaton '95 M3 Dallas, Texas
-------------------- 6 --------------------
#6. Re: [E36M3] Bilstein E36 travel - from Sean Hester
Top
Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2001 16:24:52 -0800 From: "Sean Hester" <seanh_race@hotmail.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] Bilstein E36 travel > > Very often, especially on a 95, this can be at ride height > >Wow!! I never would have suspected this. But I can believe it. My M3 >sure >feels like it is riding on the bump stops. What idiot designed the M3 >shock? > I take every thing back regarding Bilstein quality. They are crap if >they >are improperly designed. > >I'll trim the bump stops and report back. I can care less about the >warranty. They are useless as is. Thanks for the advice! if people with bilsteins are "very often" riding around on the bump stops (thereby basically completly removing the entire suspension from the car, making it a big go-cart) how can they not notice something is wrong? are people so used to "stiff is good" that they think it's normal to have abolutely no bump (compression) in the supension, and absolutely no weight transfer? i guess riding around town, rattling over every rock your tires hit, might seem "cool", but it's gotta be damn scary to go into turn one, at your local race track, at 100mph, and have the car not take a set at all. how cold this be considered "normal"? how could this not require a recall of these parts? how could so few people know about it? _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
-------------------- 7 --------------------
#7. RE: [E36M3] Bilstein E36 travel - from MDadgar@handspring.com
Top
Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2001 16:37:14 -0800 From: MDadgar@handspring.com Subject: RE: [E36M3] Bilstein E36 travel Sean wrote: > are people so used to "stiff is good" that they think it's > normal to have abolutely no bump (compression) in the supension, > and absolutely no weight transfer? There is weight transfer. There's ALWAYS weight transfer - suspension does not affect that. What suspension does is alter the RATE of weight transfer. Stiffer suspension (or no suspension, in the case of a car resting on the bump stops) just means that the weight transfers more quickly. - Mark '95 M3 '97 528i 5-spd '88 M3, Hennarot ---- Mark Dadgar - Product Manager, Peripherals (650) 230-5037 voice - (650) 230-2100 fax mdadgar@handspring.com - Handspring, Inc. Check out Visor at www.handspring.com!
-------------------- 8 --------------------
#8. Re: [E36M3] Bilstein E36 travel - from Jim Powell
Top
Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2001 18:14:25 -0800 From: Jim Powell <jsp98m3@apexcone.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] Bilstein E36 travel It should be interesting. Mine aren't trimmed. No problem. H&R and Eibach told me NOT to trim them. Bilstein DEFINITELY says don't trim them LoweSeaton@aol.com wrote: > Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2001 19:01:49 EST > From: LoweSeaton@aol.com > Subject: Re: [E36M3] Bilstein E36 travel > > Jay writes: > > > Very often, especially on a 95, this can be at ride height > > Wow!! I never would have suspected this. But I can believe it. My M3 sure > feels like it is riding on the bump stops. What idiot designed the M3 shock? > I take every thing back regarding Bilstein quality. They are crap if they > are improperly designed. > > I'll trim the bump stops and report back. I can care less about the > warranty. They are useless as is. Thanks for the advice! > > Lowell Seaton > '95 M3 > Dallas, Texas > > ************************************************************* > List Commands > UNSUBSCRIBE - (in subject line) unsubscribes you from the mailing list. > DIR - sends a listing of files available in the list's GET directory. > GET filename1.ext,filename2.ext - sends the requested file(s). > > To issue a command/request to the server: > Send a message with the command you wish executed as the > subject of the message. > *************************************************************
-------------------- 9 --------------------
#9. foggy windows? - from David Michael
Top
Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2001 21:27:45 -0500 From: "David Michael" <carieanddavid@mediaone.net> Subject: foggy windows? With the arrival of wet, sloppy weather, I once again face the = challenge of driving my m3. No, its not snowy or ice roads (I have Nokian snow tires for that). It's not the cold (heated seats for that). Its the = #@$% windows which fog up with the slightest hint of moisture in the air. It is especially bad if it is snowing. But any time its even misty out, = and the temperature is around freezing, I have to turn the defroster on = full just to see out, but the side windows still fog up. =20 I do not think its a leaky heater core; there is no trace of a coolant smell. I keep the recirc button un-pressed. My preference is to not blow ANY air on the windshield when it is snowing so as to keep the windshield cold. This prevents the snow from sticking, and as long as you moving, allows one not use the wipers. But in my m3 (as opposed to other cars I have owned), this is not possible, since I have to turn = the defrost to full so I can see out.=20 =20 Has any one ever experienced anything like this? Any solutions? =20 On a more positive note, even though my car has only 39,000 miles on = it, the windshield was quite pitted. I called a local glass place that I have used before and liked to ask them the cost of a non-insurance windshield. The price for factory oem (ppg I think - it said the same thing as the bmw windshield)? $150.15 INSTALLED. I brought the car in the next day. Perfect fit. Perfect seal. AND I CAN SEE. Whoooohooo!=20 =20 Thanks in advance for any suggestions. You all have been very helpful the times I have asked question before. =20 Dave 98 m3/4 Boston =20 =20
-------------------- 10 --------------------
#10. San Diego Driver's School correction BURP! - from Jim Powell
Top
Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2001 18:34:29 -0800 From: Jim Powell <jsp98m3@apexcone.com> Subject: San Diego Driver's School correction BURP! Well its not my day or something. I made another mistake (Hi Donna!) I posted last night that the San Diego Chapter was accepting Driver's School applications. Well I'm wrong. At the last board meeting we talked about accepting them on the 5th. But it just ain't so. Applications will be accepted on the 15th of January. My fault. I had to wrestle with the application form that somehow was allowed to pass through the innards of a Macintosh. That's always bad Ju-Ju :) That, and I went out with half the sales guys in my corporation. They owed me for a year's worth of favors and well.... You know paybacks like that ALWAYS involve rather large amounts of <insert your debauchery here, I sure did>. So your friendly neighborhood Webmeister was ummmmm, well, uhhhh, well, I was something or another. Careful or correct wasn't it though. So send those apps in on the 15th. Got it? Good. First round of drinks is in me. I mean, on me. Jim Powell Webmeister, San Diego Chapter Quarterly Sales Meeting, Day 3