-------------------- 1 --------------------
#1. aiya - from Kit Wetzler
Top
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2001 15:56:59 -0800 From: Kit Wetzler <kitwetzler@mindspring.com> Subject: aiya > it's the damn computer. the "more advanced" computer on the 3.2 engines is > programmed to make 240 hp. so when you "upgrade" something, the computer > compensates DOWN in an effort to keep the car producing 240 hp. This is not totally true. the 3.2l has a more advanced and sensitive knock sensor program and is more aggressive about pulling timing out than the OBD-1 motor, as well as having more long term fuel/spark trims than the old motor. Also, there is no way to make 365 or 380 horsepower out of a stock block/stock head US M3 motor without forced induction. My 3.2l dyno's at low 230s, with dinan cai, shark injector, UUC exhaust and TC Kline flywheel. That means high 270s or so at the crank. I pulled my UUC exhaust and put the stocker on. Hm. Car definitely feels slower. Guess I should re-dyno it to find out. Anyone want to trade a quieter exhaust for the UUC? :) Supersprint or? -kit 97 m3/4 with stuff
-------------------- 2 --------------------
#2. Re: [E36M3] Oil temps and pressures on track? - from John Van Houten
Top
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2001 17:56:59 -0600 From: "John Van Houten" <jvanhouten@ix.netcom.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] Oil temps and pressures on track? Sounds about the same as I saw. Note that the oil temp is on the high side (should be more like 220-230). Hence, an oil cooler is going on the new motor... John ----- Original Message ----- From: "Scott Chan" <scottch@juniper.net> To: "E36M3" <e36m3@bmw-m.net> Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2001 5:33 PM Subject: [E36M3] Oil temps and pressures on track? > Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2001 15:24:38 -0800 > From: Scott Chan <scottch@juniper.net> > Subject: Oil temps and pressures on track? > > What kind of oil temps and pressures are normally-aspirated E36 M3s > generating on track? > I am seeing 60psi at full rev, 28psi at idle, and temps up to 250F > (ambient 65F). > Water temp gauge is locked at the straight-vertical mark. > This is with synthetic oil, no oil cooler. > > -- > Scott > > > ************************************************************* > 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. > ************************************************************* > >
-------------------- 3 --------------------
#3. Re: Oil temps and pressures on track? - from Ron Katona
Top
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2001 19:54:27 -0500 From: "Ron Katona" <rkatona@bellatlantic.net> Subject: Re: Oil temps and pressures on track? It's been a while since I tracked the car, but I was right there with you on the oil pressure. I think 60's about max for the M3. As far as oil temperature, I never saw over 240, but that was fairly common in long sessions... also no oil cooler. The water temp gauge is about brain dead. It's non-linear and set up to show dead center over a wide acceptable range of temps. Only when things are almost to disaster stage will it move significantly. Track cars _need_ an oil temp gauge. -- Ron Katona > From: Scott Chan <scottch@juniper.net> > Subject: Oil temps and pressures on track? > > What kind of oil temps and pressures are normally-aspirated E36 M3s > generating on track? > I am seeing 60psi at full rev, 28psi at idle, and temps up to 250F > (ambient 65F). > Water temp gauge is locked at the straight-vertical mark. > This is with synthetic oil, no oil cooler.
-------------------- 4 --------------------
#4. 3.0 intake on 3.2 engine & why 3.2 so limited in power - from Dorffer, Rich
Top
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2001 20:51:34 -0500 From: "Dorffer, Rich" <RDORFFER@CleIndians.com> Subject: 3.0 intake on 3.2 engine & why 3.2 so limited in power Josh asks> There was ....a lot snipped....On a related note, why is the 3.2 less responsive to bolt on upgrades than the 3.0? I've heard that with a 3.0, 380 bhp is achievable with an intake, exhaust, MAF, and chip, while with a 3.2, 365 can be expected. Is this because of the more restrictive intake found on the 3.2? Any other reasons? Two primary issues as I know it. The 3.2 liter motor ('96 - '99 models) has a more restrictive intake and no amount of miracles prior to the intake (MAF, filter, air box, etc.) will overcome the intake restriction due to the old adage "A chain is only as strong as the weakest link". In addition, the 3.2 motors are all OBDII which has adaptive technology and it is not as conducive to changes from the stock set-up. The 3.0 liter motor also can have the Euro HFM installed which helps considerably (along with a JC chip and JC intake) from the OE HFM. I assume you mean 280 hp and 265 hp above rather than the figures you quoted. Those figures are only possible with some forced induction. I have a 95 M3 with JC chip, JC Intake and Euro HFM and would guestimate 275 hp at the crank. A UUC exhaust may get me to 280 hp but that would probably be tops. Best regards, Rich
-------------------- 5 --------------------
#5. Re: [E36M3] TC Kline Rollbar - from Bill Lackey
Top
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2001 18:00:03 -0800 From: "Bill Lackey" <btlackey@hotmail.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] TC Kline Rollbar I canceled the order. I just ordered a autopower. not as nice, but available. Bill From: ERogers005@aol.com Reply-To: ERogers005@aol.com To: E36M3 <e36m3@bmw-m.net> Subject: [E36M3] TC Kline Rollbar Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2001 22:32:49 -0600 Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2001 23:25:50 EST From: ERogers005@aol.com Subject: TC Kline Rollbar Bill, don't feel too bad!! I ordered my rollbar in May, '00 and I'm still waiting with no delivery date yet. Around November Brian Lieb mentioned he was moving the rollbar fabrication unit to the Canoga Park facility with the intent to improve production and significantly reduce the waiting period. He mentioned he would contact customers with delivery dates once production ramped up again. That communication never happened and Brian has subsequently moved to greener pastures. Hope you do get your bar in April. Good luck. Ed Rogers 95 M3 and still waiting >>>>>>> In a message dated 3/6/01 10:50:42, e36m3@bmw-m.net writes: << Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2001 22:20:02 -0800 From: "Bill Lackey" <btlackey@hotmail.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] Re: TC Kline rollbar to cage conversion Don't feel too bad, I ordered my rollbar in December I won't get it until late April at the earliest. That will put me out of 3 races. Anybody want to sell their TCKline rollbar? Bill Lackey >> ************************************************************* 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. ************************************************************* _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
-------------------- 6 --------------------
#6. Re: [E36M3] Re: Oil temps and pressures on track? - from Bill Lackey
Top
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2001 18:13:13 -0800 From: "Bill Lackey" <btlackey@hotmail.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] Re: Oil temps and pressures on track? I see 20 psi cold and 60-70 psi warm. On the road I see about 230 max. At the track I've seen 260 before letting it cool... This was on a cool (58F) day at Laguna. I'm not even sure the Eoro oil cooler is going to be enough at Thuderhill on warn days... This is on a Dinan Supercharged 95. Oil cooler is in the garage waiting for someone to install it... Bill Lackey _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
-------------------- 7 --------------------
#7. Re: Wheel Offset Question - from Lew Becker
Top
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2001 18:20:24 -0800 From: "Lew Becker" <lmbeckercfls@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: Wheel Offset Question You may want to consider 235/35-18's -- although the sidewall will be a bit shorter (not necessarily a bad thing, although watch out for badly broken pavement), the diameter/circumference of this size is closer to stock. The 235/40's are ~3% bigger than stock, and will detract from acceleration. I'm running 235/35-18's with no problems on BBS RC's (38 mm offset, I believe). Lew Becker ----- Original Message ----- > > -------------------- 1 -------------------- > Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2001 08:15:13 -0600 > From: "Brian Liau" <bliau@hotmail.com> > Subject: Wheel Offset Question > > I will be getting a set of 18" Mas Sagitta wheels with 235/40 tires. The > offset of these wheels are +35mm. The stock rears are 41mm offset. I am > currently running 245/40-17 on the rears (stock). > > I don't predict any fender rubbing since I will be getting a narrower tire > (by 10mm) with these new wheels, but will that negate the 6mm offset > difference? > > Bottom line, will I experience any rubbing on the fender wall? > > Please cc: directly to me. > > Thanks for the help. >
-------------------- 8 --------------------
#8. Re: rims and tires sizes - from Lew Becker
Top
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2001 18:29:07 -0800 From: "Lew Becker" <lmbeckercfls@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: rims and tires sizes I'm running 18x8.5's with 235/35's. I went with the 8.5's to get as wide a rim as possible -- among other considerations, I recalled Carl Buckland's post to the old Welty Digest where he commented on what a difference wider rims made. I went with the 235/35's to maintain the stock gearing (i.e. wheel/tire diameter) -- this size is within 1% of stock. I'd prefer 245's, but passed last time to avoid any rubbing issues; inasmuch as tire widths vary among brands (even when sized the same), I may look for a "narrow" 245 or a "wide" 235 next time around. FWIW: I'm very happy with this upgrade, functionally as well as visually. Lew Becker ----- Original Message ----- > -------------------- 9 -------------------- > Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2001 17:56:46 EST > From: M3240hp@aol.com > Subject: rims and tires sizes > > i have a 1999 m3 and i wanted to step up tp 18in rims and tires. > what > size rims and tires sould i be looking for. > thank you > mike gladczuk > 99 m3 > scca
-------------------- 9 --------------------
#9. Re: [E36M3] 3.0 intake on 3.2 engine & why 3.2 so limited in power - from John Van Houten
Top
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2001 20:29:11 -0600 From: "John Van Houten" <jvanhouten@ix.netcom.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] 3.0 intake on 3.2 engine & why 3.2 so limited in power > I assume you mean 280 hp and 265 hp above rather than the figures you > quoted. Those figures are only possible with some forced induction. Not necessarily. Those numbers, at least that neighborhood, are possible with cams, valves, high-comp pistons, lots of internal work, etc. Just ask Stickley ;-) Of course those numbers are only _easily_ reached with forced induction, especially for a street motor. John 95M3 - Ice9 - new motor being built now 97M3/4 - Hers/Daily Driver
-------------------- 10 --------------------
#10. Re: [E36M3] JTD Strut Tower Brace - from Chester Wong
Top
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2001 18:41:08 -0800 (PST) From: Chester Wong <chester_p_wong@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] JTD Strut Tower Brace > Funny you should ask. <g> Its called a "monkey wrench." Use an adjustable > wrench, aka Crescent Wrench. That'd be what I used too =) > There is no open end wrench that fits the JTD nut. 30 mm is too big. 29 mm > is too small. 1 1/8" is too small. 1 1/4" is too big. I am loathe to use > an adjustable wrench. In fact, I didn't own one until after I bought my JTD > strut brace. It's so big and you aren't applying humongoug amounts of torque so I don't think using an adjustable wrench is all too bad =) > Don't get me wrong, I like the JTD strut brace but I have some nits. Jim > Midahl machined his strut brace to ZERO tolerances. Zero tolerance may sound Zero tolerances are awesome! > good but practically speaking, nothing in this world is perfect. You need a > little "slop" to make things fit. Not if things like the cap covers are a structural part of the entire unit, no? > My JTD strut brace was a PITA to install. Took me over 2 hours. I've since > learned some tricks but it still isn't easy. First off, the cover caps are > machined to ZERO tolerance. They are very hard to get on and off. > Especially without scarring them up. Then the 3 strut tower nuts are next to > > impossible to get on without scarring up the strut brace. The supplied acorn > nuts have ZERO tolerance. They barely fit in the holes. But no strut hat > perfectly matches the holes in the strut brace so you have to bend the studs > to fit. And last but not least is that "no size" adjustable nut. I think > Jim M was trying to make it 1 1/8" but goofed and made it just a tiny bit too > large. The cap covers come off and on with a little coaxing. Getting them off is probably the hardest once everything is installed, but putting it in requires that you go absolutely straight up and down...if you're tilting it, you're gonna get grief. Also, about the acorn nuts and not having them fit, I found the key thing is to have the whole assembly loose. The cinch down bolts that clamp the cross bar should be untightened, the width of the crossbar to be in the ballpark. Then you start each acorn nut and ya barely engage the first one and start the next one. While doing this, wiggle the strut caps....make sure everything is going in nicely. Then you tighten each one a little until all are snug at the same time. Then you torque it down. Chester ===== __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/