-------------------- 1 --------------------
#1. Re: [E36M3] big boy clutch stop on 97 m3 - from Ben Liaw - UUC Motorwerks
Top
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 08:04:11 -0500 From: "Ben Liaw - UUC Motorwerks" <ben@shortshifter.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] big boy clutch stop on 97 m3 actually, it's pretty easy. however, there is a catch. if you have cruise control, and you want it to continue to work properly, you can't really disable the "feature". the clutch arm switch is actually a solid state, two position switch. if you manuver the switch so that it always stays "on", you don't have to push the clutch in to start. however, chances are, you cruise control (if you have it), won't activate, since it sees the clutch "all the way down" (which cuts off the cruise in normal driving). ymmv. ben ------------------------------------------- ben liaw - ben@shortshifter.com http://www.uucmotorwerks.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Carey Probst" <hcprobst@alum.mit.edu> To: "Ben Liaw - UUC Motorwerks" <ben@shortshifter.com>; "E36M3" <e36m3@bmw-m.net> Sent: Friday, January 12, 2001 7:50 AM Subject: Re: [E36M3] big boy clutch stop on 97 m3 > The real question I've been wondering about is > > How can I disable this 'feature' since I know how to drive? > > There are times I want to start or nudge the engine without being in the > car. > > > > 'some late model cars require the clutch > > > be completely depressed in order to start the engine' > > > > > Carey Probst, '99 M3/2, BMW CCA Patroon and Genesee Valley Chapters > > A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, > the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. > >
-------------------- 2 --------------------
#2. High flow cats - from Ed Tang
Top
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 05:15:36 -0800 (PST) From: Ed Tang <etangf1@yahoo.com> Subject: High flow cats --- Chester wrote: > If all along people are saying that SuperSprint > headers are useless without > taking out the cats, then why haven't people used > high flow cats? What would > be the benefit if we just replaced the OE cats with > high flow models? I think the limiting factor is $$$. That's probably why most people just remove the cats (especially on those Civics). It really depends on how desperate you are to get every hp out of the motor. Forced induction is the way the go if you want a quick fix, otherwise, spending big bucks for minimal gains will force you to be creative and see where else you can extract more juice. Ed Tang 95 Cosmos M3 __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Photos - Share your holiday photos online! http://photos.yahoo.com/
-------------------- 3 --------------------
#3. unsprung weight - from lee.leslie@firstunion.com
Top
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 09:27:32 -0500 From: lee.leslie@firstunion.com Subject: unsprung weight Now that this thread has surfaced again.. how about the weight of the rubber? I just put the RE730's on the M.. they weighed 26 lbs each.. I never see any talk of what the tires weigh.. what's the norm?
-------------------- 4 --------------------
#4. Re: [E36M3] Smoothing/Polishing inside header surfaces - from Dorffer, Rich
Top
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 10:27:08 -0500 From: "Dorffer, Rich" <RDORFFER@CleIndians.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] Smoothing/Polishing inside header surfaces Skip talking about X-pipes and Crossovers..... I have a crossover header on my Suzuki GSXR 750. Obviously this technology "crosses over" too ;-) My header looks something like this: ___ _________ Cylinder Head _________ ___ | | | | | | | | | |_________| | | |_________| | | _________ | | _________ | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Continues to Exhaust 4 - 1 Sorry for the off thread but the technology does work (at least the dyno said so for my Suzuki). It also changes the sound of the exhaust as you can hear the exhaust gasses tumbling around (or rattling) in the crossover pipes (for lack of a better description). Best regards, Rich
-------------------- 5 --------------------
#5. E36 Want to Buy M wheel - from Christopher J. N. Kolaitis
Top
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 09:27:13 -0600 From: "Christopher J. N. Kolaitis" <chrisjnk@ix.netcom.com> Subject: E36 Want to Buy M wheel Want to Buy BMW M double spoke polished, forged wheel, 17x7.5. Style 24 M, for E36 M3. BMW part number: 36 11 2 227 850. Looking for the wheel in your trunk that is in perfect condition. Please email me to save BW. TIA Chris, Windy City Chapter
-------------------- 6 --------------------
#6. Re: [E36M3] Re: AA Turbos - Was 99t - from Matt Henson
Top
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 07:39:20 -0800 (PST) From: Matt Henson <hensonator@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] Re: AA Turbos - Was 99t Jason, Let's just agree to disagree. -Matt --- Jason Leung <jleung20@flash.net> wrote: > Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 22:47:11 -0600 > From: Jason Leung <jleung20@flash.net> > Subject: Re: AA Turbos - Was 99t > > Jason, > >I've never heard of a real AA OBD-II setup. If > they > >are doing it now then it's really new. > > Its new. Just look at the webpage. Its been there > for at least 2 months. > > >Now, for spreading misinformation, maybe there are > >real OBD-II M3's out there and, if so then I'll > admit > >that I was wrong. > > Yup. > > >But as far as being wrong that's a > >speeding ticket compared to the murder that AA has > >committed. > > That's some pretty big hyperbole. That's some > pretty serious > accusations. I wouldn't be too happy if someone > called me > a murderer. > > >First, Spending 6k+ on a Stage 1 turbo is hardly > >cheaping out. > > If you've spent any time dealing with forced > induction on engines > that are naturally aspirated to begin with, I think > 6K is really really > cheap. Particularly considering the high > compression ratio > of the M50/S50US motor, and particularly considering > the > thin cylinder walls of the motor. AND the small > head bolt > diameter. You *did* think about all this, didn't > you? You > *did* compare, oh, say, the "weak" construction of > your > motor compared to even BMWs old and robust M30 > motors > not to mention Toyota Supra Turbo motors (also > straight-6), > didn't you? > > > Okay so we agree that the Stage 1 is a POS. > > No, I said spending 6K is cheaping out. > > >Some of us have spent many hours doing the > engineering work > >that Karl should have done on this system. We've > even > >figured out how to fix it. And we told Karl. > > So does your system not perform as advertised? If I > remember > correctly, a few months ago, on the BigBoostGruppe, > you > were upset AA. Then Karl responded and explained > how > your kit met all advertised claims, and you replied, > VERBATIM, > > "Okay this explains a lot. I'd like to apologize to > Karl and AA. It seems clear that the data I > collected > is consistant with AA's performance claims. The kit > does exactly what they said that will do." > > If I also remember correctly you got something like > 280 hp and > 280 lb-ft to the wheels, or around those > whereabouts. That's > not bad. That's more torque than a SC system will > put out. > > I think its also pretty presumptuous of you also to > think that > you and Nick have "spent many hours doing the > engineering work > that Karl should have done on this system" > > >And > >what did he say? "Send your car down to FL and > I'll > >tune it for you." BS. > > If you have spent any time modifying cars, you will > realize > that each car is different, particularly when you go > to > forced induction and turbos. It would behoove you > to get custom tuning done on your car, unless you > are trying > to cheap out. Again: > > Cheap, Reliable, Fast. Pick any two. > > OR: > > Speed costs money, how fast do you wanna go? > > > > If he knew how to tune it he > >should have sent the right chips in the first > place. > >Plus half the problem is using the wrong (and not > >necessarily cheaper) components. The data that we > >collected suggests that this GenII kit wasn't > >engineered at all. Engineering suggests doing a > >calculation, making something, measuring the > results > >and repeat till it's done. A good turbo system > should > >have minimal drop across the pipes and IC. Maybe 1 > >PSI is okay for a 7PSI system. Ours has 6PSI drop. > > Well, I've talked with Karl and he doesn't > understand how you > got your results. He's told me that he gets 1 PSI > of drop between > the outlet of the turbo and manifold pressure. I'd > question your > measurement techniques as a DIYer first before I'd > question > Karl's measurement techniques, in a close to 10,000 > sq ft shop that > has been servicing BMWs for 20 years. > > >He either never measured that or he didn't care. > Not > >exactly the "upgrade to supercar status" that he > >adertises. How much pressure is dropped in your > stage > >2+ setup? > > A little over 1 psi from the turbo outlet to the > intake manifold. > > > It's okay that you don't know but I'll bet > >that Karl doesn't even know.. > > > > >Are the stage 2 - ++ kits better? Well, in a way - > >they lower the compression so there's more margin > for > >error. More margin for Karl to mask his mistakes. > If > >he can't make decent software for the stage 1 > system > >hy can he do it for the more $ ones? > > Does lower compression allow for a greater margin > of error? Sure, but ONLY if you run the same boost. > I run anywhere from two the THREE times the amount > of boost you run, so my compression, lower by 1.7 > points than yours, isn't exactly going to "mask > mistakes" > > Karl makes excellent software for *my* car. I don't > have > pinging, I don't have detonation, I have run the car > at full boost > before for 30 seconds in a row (impossible to do for > any longer...run out of road), and I drive in > anything from > -15 F to 110 F weather. My boost is rock steady. > > Now, I can't say about your car, I don't have your > kit, > and I don't have your car. But on MY car, my kit > from > AA works terrific! > > >Easy, he can't - > >he just throws more $ hardware at the problem to > >compensate. > > That's some pretty serious accusations again. > > >So, yea, you're really happy with your > >stage 2 kit. But it was still poorly engineered. > > I see. How were you able to arrive at this > conclusion, > particularly since you don't own a stage 2+ kit? > Through > improper methods of BS perhaps? > > I've never said your stage 1 is well or poorly > engineered... > do you know why? > > === message truncated === __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Photos - Share your holiday photos online! http://photos.yahoo.com/
-------------------- 7 --------------------
#7. Re: [E36M3] unsprung weight - from Daniel
Top
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 07:41:50 -0800 (PST) From: Daniel <m3_driver@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] unsprung weight I guess the reason tire weight does not come up often is becasue that information is not always available...Here is what I found out after pouring through all the tire manufacturer's web sites: Bridgestone S02 PP 1) 225/45/17 = 24lbs 2) 235/40/17 = 25lbs 3) 245/40/17 = 26lbs 4) 245/20/17 = 27lbs NOBODY ELSE had tire weight listed...Michelin had the least amount of technical info on their site. Dan --- lee.leslie@firstunion.com wrote: > Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 09:27:32 -0500 > From: lee.leslie@firstunion.com > Subject: unsprung weight > > Now that this thread has surfaced again.. how about > the weight of the > rubber? I just put the RE730's on the M.. they > weighed 26 lbs each.. I > never see any talk of what the tires weigh.. what's > the norm? > > > ************************************************************* > 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. > ************************************************************* > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Photos - Share your holiday photos online! http://photos.yahoo.com/
-------------------- 8 --------------------
#8. RE: [E36M3] Smoothing/Polishing inside header surfaces - from Mount, Mike
Top
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 07:47:35 -0800 From: "Mount, Mike" <JMMn@pge.com> Subject: RE: [E36M3] Smoothing/Polishing inside header surfaces Rich (and all), interesting thing here, this idea first appeared on british bikes in the'50's IIRC. At the time, no one could quite explain why it worked. Oddly enough, the 'fishtail' appearing tailpipes (seen on '60's era choppers) added horsepower compared to conventional designs, but we haven't seen that design in the catalogues in some time... There's a book called 'Scientific Design of Intake and Exhaust Systems' that describes in detail some of the principles behind intake and exhaust header length, intake pulse timing, etc. If I remember, it gives some idea about tuning intake length, headers and placement of crossover pipes for specific rpm tuning. It's a great read for insomniacs. Mike '95 M3 drive it like you just stole it <snip> From: "Dorffer, Rich" <RDORFFER@CleIndians.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] Smoothing/Polishing inside header surfaces Skip talking about X-pipes and Crossovers..... I have a crossover header on my Suzuki GSXR 750.
-------------------- 9 --------------------
#9. RE: [E36M3] Smoothing/Polishing inside header surfaces - from Dorffer, Rich
Top
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 10:56:31 -0500 From: "Dorffer, Rich" <RDORFFER@CleIndians.com> Subject: RE: [E36M3] Smoothing/Polishing inside header surfaces Mike (and all), I remember reading once that the technology works as it reduces back pressure by allowing the exhaust gas pressure to equalize between the two headers. I can visualize it by thinking of how the exhaust gas would be pumping through the headers and since the cylinders are timed or fire at different times, the pressure would crossover or equalize between the two headers during the different points in the stroke or cycle. I know this is a poor explanation but give me a break, I am a finance guy. Best regards, Rich -----Original Message----- From: Mount, Mike [mailto:JMMn@pge.com] Sent: Friday, January 12, 2001 10:48 AM To: 'Dorffer, Rich'; 'e36m3@bmw-m.net' Subject: RE: [E36M3] Smoothing/Polishing inside header surfaces Rich (and all), interesting thing here, this idea first appeared on british bikes in the'50's IIRC. At the time, no one could quite explain why it worked. Oddly enough, the 'fishtail' appearing tailpipes (seen on '60's era choppers) added horsepower compared to conventional designs, but we haven't seen that design in the catalogues in some time... There's a book called 'Scientific Design of Intake and Exhaust Systems' that describes in detail some of the principles behind intake and exhaust header length, intake pulse timing, etc. If I remember, it gives some idea about tuning intake length, headers and placement of crossover pipes for specific rpm tuning. It's a great read for insomniacs. Mike '95 M3 drive it like you just stole it <snip> From: "Dorffer, Rich" <RDORFFER@CleIndians.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] Smoothing/Polishing inside header surfaces Skip talking about X-pipes and Crossovers..... I have a crossover header on my Suzuki GSXR 750.
-------------------- 10 --------------------
#10. Old Helmets - from Darling Christopher Maj AMC/CEXR
Top
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 10:16:43 -0600 From: Darling Christopher Maj AMC/CEXR <chris.darling@scott.af.mil> Subject: Old Helmets Jim Powell wrote: Does anyone even have a '90 helmet with an intact liner? Ewwww! Jim-----------snip Yeah, I do, and it's in great shape. I wear my old nomex skull cap under my helmet so I don't sweat all over everything! 'Course some of the crusty old hero racers out there will argue they NEVER sweat before a run! "Only then, a Jedi will you be!" ------------------end Cod Major Chris Darling HQ AMC/CEXR DSN 779-0698, Comm (618) 229-0698