-------------------- 1 --------------------
#1. [E36M3] Koni installation tips? - from Robert Liu
Top
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 07:07:40 -0700 (PDT) From: Robert Liu <bob_a_liu@yahoo.com> Subject: [E36M3] Koni installation tips? I'm getting ready to install Koni shocks on my car this week or weekend. Any installation suggestions or tips? I'm going to get the new E46 M3 rear shock mounts and Z3 reinforcement plates while I'm at it. TIA! Bob ===== ------------------------------------------------------------ Robert Liu bob_a_liu@yahoo.com ICQ# 22765210 __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
-------------------- 2 --------------------
#2. Re: [E36M3] Re: What about the S54? - from Ron Buchalski
Top
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 14:48:31 From: "Ron Buchalski" <rbuchals@hotmail.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] Re: What about the S54? Luis, Another data point... I spoke with a local shop owner, who installed an AA kit for one of his customers. When he saw the sandwiched head gasket (to lower the compression), he told the customer that he didn't want to install the poorly engineered solution. The shop owner also insisted that he should replace the stock connecting rods with stronger rods. The customer insisted on installing the kit "as shipped", so the shop installed it. The customer ended up blowing his engine. The shop owner showed me the bent connecting rods and burnt pistons. Fugly! The shop built a new engine for the customer, adding a turbo and doing it the "right way". The car dynoed now dynos at over 420 hp, and has been flawless. The shop owner said he'd never install another AA kit for a customer. -rb >Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2001 19:58:20 -0400 >From: "Luis Veras" <veras@tricom.net> >Subject: Re: [E36M3] Re: What about the S54? > >Hey, AA's turbo is not an improvised cheap modification. It's based on the >mods that the world's fastest M3 is made of, and it is in fact a very >reliable car. >Check out http://www.advancedgeneration.com/turboM3.htm and read all about >it. As for the AA turbo, you can get more info at >http://www.activeautowerke.com/turbo/OBD2-E36Turbo.asp. For $10,400 you can >get 398 HP in your car, 0-60 in 4.4 seconds and 1/4 mile in 12.55 secs. Of >course, you will then have to install a heavy duty clutch to support all >that power, which will set you back an additional grand. _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
-------------------- 3 --------------------
#3. Re: '95M3 Electrical Help - from Ron Buchalski
Top
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 14:39:44 From: "Ron Buchalski" <rbuchals@hotmail.com> Subject: Re: '95M3 Electrical Help Daniel, Check the flasher, it's probably bad. It's located inside the fuse box under the hood. -rb >Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2001 15:53:22 -0700 (PDT) >From: Daniel <m3_driver@yahoo.com> >Subject: '95M3 Electrical Help > >Asking for a friend of mine. >His '95M3 loss all the functions of the 'orange' >lights (eg. turn signals, hazard lights) >I checked the fuse and its ok... >Any help would be appreciated > >Daniel _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
-------------------- 4 --------------------
#4. Re: people DO stink . . . - from Ron Katona
Top
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 11:59:20 -0400 From: "Ron Katona" <rkatona@bellatlantic.net> Subject: Re: people DO stink . . . John Bergstrom wrote: > >>>I am sorry for the title but I just don't understand how people can do > some things that they do. On Friday night, I parked my car on the > streets of NYC<<< > > Wayne, really sorry to hear about the break-in. Hope you can get it all sorted > out soon . . . Ditto. I got a big dent from some careless door-flinger-opener a couple months ago and was beside myself! I can't imagine what Wayne's feeling. -- Ron Katona
-------------------- 5 --------------------
#5. Re: Butt's in the air after new bushings - from Ron Katona
Top
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 12:18:58 -0400 From: "Ron Katona" <rkatona@bellatlantic.net> Subject: Re: Butt's in the air after new bushings Not sure I understand your description of the bushing orientation. Are we talking about the bushing at the front of the trailing arm? The one that then attaches to a carrier that bolts to the bottom of the car just ahead of the wheel and is slotted for toe adjustment? How can that bushing be "angled back?" It's circular and the carrier has to be flush with the bottom of the car when tightened down, so what are we trying to measure here? There are instructions to measure the location laterally in its fitting, but even that's overkill IMHO. If you are off a mm or two, you'll just need an alignment rather than being able to mark the location of the carrier and replace it back to that same spot and have the alignment be correct. Since I aligning after replacing stuff like this anyway, I just pushed my new bushings in until they bottomed out (there's a lip). Now you can get the carrier rotated slightly since there are three mounting holes and as I remember at least two if not all three are slotted. However, with the bushing in the trailing arm, and the carrier bolted into the bushing, the carrier will take natural set... that's where you want to leave that angle and move the whole arm to set toe (if that makes any sense). Now you certainly could have preloaded something else which is what I'd suspect. Did you unhook a sway bar or anything else while you did this job and tighten it back up with the suspension unloaded? Same thing for the carrier. Did you tighten it with the suspension at full droop? If so, loosen the mounting bolts with the car on the ground and then just tighten them back up. That should release any preload without screwing up the toe setting (a lot <g>). You'll need an extension for your ratchet and maybe a mirror. -- Ron Katona Matt Henson wrote: > Hey Y'all, > I replaced my rear TA bushings a few weeks ago. Since > then the rear of the car has been higher than normal. > I was unable to measure the angle of the old bushing > since it was completly separated. Anyway, I made sure > that I put the new one in so that it was angled back > (the back of the carrier is lower than the front). Is > this necessarily a pre-load problem? Does anyone know > what the proper carrier-TA angle is supposed to be? > What else could this be? -- Ron Katona
-------------------- 6 --------------------
#6. Re: [E36M3] Re: Butt's in the air after new bushings - from Chester Wong
Top
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 09:27:33 -0700 (PDT) From: Chester Wong <chester_p_wong@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] Re: Butt's in the air after new bushings The only other thing is if the spring kinda fell out and didn't fully seat. But for it to make a noticeable height difference, that would be tough. Chester --- Ron Katona <rkatona@bellatlantic.net> wrote: > Not sure I understand your description of the bushing orientation. Are > we talking about the bushing at the front of the trailing arm? The one > that then attaches to a carrier that bolts to the bottom of the car just > ahead of the wheel and is slotted for toe adjustment? How can that > bushing be "angled back?" It's circular and the carrier has to be flush > with the bottom of the car when tightened down, so what are we trying to > measure here? > > There are instructions to measure the location laterally in its fitting, > but even that's overkill IMHO. If you are off a mm or two, you'll just > need an alignment rather than being able to mark the location of the > carrier and replace it back to that same spot and have the alignment be > correct. Since I aligning after replacing stuff like this anyway, I just > pushed my new bushings in until they bottomed out (there's a lip). > > Now you can get the carrier rotated slightly since there are three > mounting holes and as I remember at least two if not all three are > slotted. However, with the bushing in the trailing arm, and the carrier > bolted into the bushing, the carrier will take natural set... that's > where you want to leave that angle and move the whole arm to set toe (if > that makes any sense). > > Now you certainly could have preloaded something else which is what I'd > suspect. Did you unhook a sway bar or anything else while you did this > job and tighten it back up with the suspension unloaded? Same thing for > the carrier. Did you tighten it with the suspension at full droop? If > so, loosen the mounting bolts with the car on the ground and then just > tighten them back up. That should release any preload without screwing > up the toe setting (a lot <g>). You'll need an extension for your > ratchet and maybe a mirror. ===== __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
-------------------- 7 --------------------
#7. S54 engine - short block price - from nabli@attglobal.net
Top
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 13:30:54 -0400 From: nabli@attglobal.net Subject: S54 engine - short block price I remember a thread discussing whether or not it was worth getting this engine etc... FYI: The short block lists for $15,825 and I can get it for around $11,900 + ship. Cheers, Jim E.
-------------------- 8 --------------------
#8. Re: [E36M3] Re: Butt's in the air after new bushings - from Matt Henson
Top
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 10:31:39 -0700 (PDT) From: Matt Henson <hensonator@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] Re: Butt's in the air after new bushings Hi Ron, I'm talking about the angle of the carrier wrt the arm. There is a bolt that goes through the carrier and the bushing. Before the bolt is tightened you can adjust its angle. If the angle is off then the bushing will be twisted. I don't think that there's any way for the traling arm to rotate when the suspension moves except to apply a torque on the bushing itself. This may be why these bushings fail all the time - they are constantly stressed by the suspension movement. So I'm wondering if the bushing is just being twisted all the time when the car is on the ground. If this is then case then I should expect it to fail pretty quickly. Your idea about having a second preload point is pretty good. I only disconnected the shocks and parking brake cables for this job. I think that Chester mentioned that maybe a spring didn't seat. That was a thought I had also so I felt and it seemed to be okay. Thanks guys, Matt --- Ron Katona <rkatona@bellatlantic.net> wrote: > Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 12:18:58 -0400 > From: "Ron Katona" <rkatona@bellatlantic.net> > Subject: Re: Butt's in the air after new bushings > > Not sure I understand your description of the > bushing orientation. Are > we talking about the bushing at the front of the > trailing arm? The one > that then attaches to a carrier that bolts to the > bottom of the car just > ahead of the wheel and is slotted for toe > adjustment? How can that > bushing be "angled back?" It's circular and the > carrier has to be flush > with the bottom of the car when tightened down, so > what are we trying to > measure here? > > There are instructions to measure the location > laterally in its fitting, > but even that's overkill IMHO. If you are off a mm > or two, you'll just > need an alignment rather than being able to mark the > location of the > carrier and replace it back to that same spot and > have the alignment be > correct. Since I aligning after replacing stuff like > this anyway, I just > pushed my new bushings in until they bottomed out > (there's a lip). > > Now you can get the carrier rotated slightly since > there are three > mounting holes and as I remember at least two if not > all three are > slotted. However, with the bushing in the trailing > arm, and the carrier > bolted into the bushing, the carrier will take > natural set... that's > where you want to leave that angle and move the > whole arm to set toe (if > that makes any sense). > > Now you certainly could have preloaded something > else which is what I'd > suspect. Did you unhook a sway bar or anything else > while you did this > job and tighten it back up with the suspension > unloaded? Same thing for > the carrier. Did you tighten it with the suspension > at full droop? If > so, loosen the mounting bolts with the car on the > ground and then just > tighten them back up. That should release any > preload without screwing > up the toe setting (a lot <g>). You'll need an > extension for your > ratchet and maybe a mirror. > -- > Ron Katona > > Matt Henson wrote: > > Hey Y'all, > > I replaced my rear TA bushings a few weeks ago. > Since > > then the rear of the car has been higher than > normal. > > I was unable to measure the angle of the old > bushing > > since it was completly separated. Anyway, I made > sure > > that I put the new one in so that it was angled > back > > (the back of the carrier is lower than the front). > Is > > this necessarily a pre-load problem? Does anyone > know > > what the proper carrier-TA angle is supposed to > be? > > What else could this be? > -- > Ron Katona > > > ************************************************************* > 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!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
-------------------- 9 --------------------
#9. Re: [E36M3] S54 engine - short block price - from nabli@attglobal.net
Top
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 13:48:37 -0400 From: nabli@attglobal.net Subject: Re: [E36M3] S54 engine - short block price One clarification. BMW calls it a short engine but they picture it with the cylinder head. Jim E. nabli@attglobal.net wrote: > Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 13:30:54 -0400 > From: nabli@attglobal.net > Subject: S54 engine - short block price > > I remember a thread discussing whether or not it was worth getting this > engine etc... > > FYI: The short block lists for $15,825 and I can get it for around > $11,900 + ship. > > Cheers, > Jim E. > > ************************************************************* > 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. > *************************************************************
-------------------- 10 --------------------
#10. Rotex VS Porterfields R4S- was Street/Light Autox Brake pads? - from DASGUNZZ@aol.com
Top
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 14:04:56 EDT From: DASGUNZZ@aol.com Subject: Rotex VS Porterfields R4S- was Street/Light Autox Brake pads? I'm just curious if anyone has tried both of these pads an can give me a comparison. I'm looking for low dust and good performance but *do not* want to drive a squealing pig. Thanks in advance, Tommy '99 M3 NY Chapter CCA