-------------------- 1 --------------------
#1. Re: 300hp e36 M3 Kit - from Joe Tan
Top
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 14:51:35 -0800 (PST) From: Joe Tan <mailjtan@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: 300hp e36 M3 Kit Hey cool name! For those who are a bit rusty w/ their Spanish, "Rueda" means "wheel" in Spanish:) Joe. --------------- "Luis Rueda" <Luis_Rueda@INTERLIANT.COM> wrote: Please post more info, I'm also VERY interested in this kit. Thanks, Luis BMWCCA member '95 M3 '88 M5 __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
-------------------- 2 --------------------
#2. Re: Front tires rubbing strut housing - from Neil Maller
Top
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 17:55:57 -0500 From: Neil Maller <neil.maller@gte.net> Subject: Re: Front tires rubbing strut housing on 3/20/01 5:17 PM, BobTunnell@aol.com wrote: > Dave, saying whether it's safe to run a tire that rubs *slightly* on the > strut is too subjective for me to say. It's obviously better if it doesn't > rub. But I'll tell you this... I've done it and had no problems. However my > attorney forbids me to say it's safe for you to try it. I always think of this as the self-adjusting feature. Neil 96 M3 - "It's not a bug, it's a feature"
-------------------- 3 --------------------
#3. [E36M3] Water Wetter - from David Hogg
Top
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 17:52:50 -0800 From: "David Hogg" <springwood@blazenet.net> Subject: [E36M3] Water Wetter PTG runs Water Wetter and glycol antifreeze in combination for extra cooling capacity, so their tech told me at the NCC open house. He said they work better in combination than either one alone. The conversation arose when I saw him pouring raglir old antifreeze into the #6 car. It was news to me, too. FWIW. Dave Hogg
-------------------- 4 --------------------
#4. Re: 300 HP Cams/Valvetrain - from Neil Maller
Top
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 17:58:10 -0500 From: Neil Maller <neil.maller@gte.net> Subject: Re: 300 HP Cams/Valvetrain on 3/20/01 5:17 PM, RogRacer@aol.com wrote: > With all this talk about this aggressive cam retrofit, it really makes me > wonder about the claims of the stock valve springs/retainers/keepers being > "adequate". Given that the stock cams max out the valve train at 7500 rpm > (maybe less), I wonder what the margin of safety is with the new cams. If, > indeed, there is any margin left at all? Roger, Not damn' much would be my guess. I think that this would be an excellent opportunity to lighten the valve train with titanium retainers just to get a little rpm headroom. Neil 96 M3
-------------------- 5 --------------------
#5. Re: 95 Shocks/Springs on 96+? - from Neil Maller
Top
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 18:09:15 -0500 From: Neil Maller <neil.maller@gte.net> Subject: Re: 95 Shocks/Springs on 96+? on 3/20/01 5:17 PM, "Ahmad Lutfeali" <m3_racer99@hotmail.com> wrote: > <html><P>Can a set of Bilstein and H&R from a 95 LTW run on a 98M3? I was > told mixed stuff from different vendors. I am assuming I can run the shocks > but not the springs. Whats the word can I run both/either or > neither?<BR>TIA<BR>Ahmad</P> <P> </P><br clear=all><hr>Get your FREE > download of MSN Explorer at <a > href="http://explorer.msn.com">http://explorer.msn.com</a><br></p></html> Ahmad, The 95 M3 front springs are larger in diameter at the top than the 96+ versions. However the upper spring perch is a separate part, so by substituting the appropriate perch and its rubber seat, 95 springs can be used on a 96+ and vice versa. Now - please would you reconfigure your mailer to use text only so that we don't have to pick through the HTML (see above). Thx. Neil 96 M3
-------------------- 6 --------------------
#6. SuperSprint Headers and Center Resonator - from dHoleman@spooze.com
Top
Date: 20 Mar 2001 16:20:49 -0800 From: dHoleman@spooze.com Subject: SuperSprint Headers and Center Resonator The main point of the resonator is to act like a primary muffler. This is only for track use as it is a replacement for the catalytic converter. David www.racepad.com www.racepad.com
-------------------- 7 --------------------
#7. Re: [E36M3] Re: 300 HP Cams/Valvetrain - from Skip Bogard
Top
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 20:06:22 -0500 From: Skip Bogard <skip.bogard@alumni.duke.edu> Subject: Re: [E36M3] Re: 300 HP Cams/Valvetrain From everything I've ever read, sources claim you get about 300 RPM added to your mechanical red-line with Ti retainers. - Skip '95 M3 with Ti retainers & head work, but no trick cam, maybe on the next longblock rebuild! > ............................... I think that this would be an excellent > opportunity to lighten the valve train with titanium retainers just to get a > little rpm headroom. > > Neil > 96 M3 >
-------------------- 8 --------------------
#8. Look what Gene's up to - from Chester Wong
Top
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 18:35:55 -0800 (PST) From: Chester Wong <chester_p_wong@yahoo.com> Subject: Look what Gene's up to Didn't know he was working on something like this... http://www.evotuners.com/racem3.htm Chester ===== __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
-------------------- 9 --------------------
#9. Factory parts - from Bill Lackey
Top
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 18:57:45 -0800 From: "Bill Lackey" <btlackey@hotmail.com> Subject: Factory parts Where is the best place to buy factory parts? Bill Lackey _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
-------------------- 10 --------------------
#10. Re: [E36M3] 300hp e36 M3 Kit - from Ron Buchalski
Top
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 03:24:39 From: "Ron Buchalski" <rbuchals@hotmail.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] 300hp e36 M3 Kit Words from a man with a 400+ hp "Green Machine"... ;-) -rb >Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 10:37:21 -0800 >From: Jim Powell <jsp98m3@apexcone.com> >Subject: Re: [E36M3] 300hp e36 M3 Kit > >Why? I would ask myself a question about the tuners. None of this stuff >is sold for on road use. None of it. Every tuner has a disclaimer that >it's for off road use only. So in my opinion there should be two classes >of mods. One for road cars and everything stays compliant. The other >class is off road and you the consumer get nailed by the authorities if you >get caught. Pussyfooting around the OBDII code and what is to come is a >waste of time. Either you are Green or you are Mean. Middle ground is >useless. I wouldn't even bother trying to crack OBDII if I had the >abiulity of JC and Dinan. I'd just blow the crap away and be done with it >for those that want real performance. The ignition timing maps can still >be fiddled for the timid or environmentally minded. > >Jim > >TheBrinkmans@aol.com wrote: > > > OBD II really sucks! > > > > Ken Brinkman > > 97 M3 _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com