-------------------- 1 --------------------
#1. Re: Rear sway bar reinforcing mounts - SURVEY - from Ron Katona
Top
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2001 20:47:43 -0400 From: "Ron Katona" <rkatona@bellatlantic.net> Subject: Re: Rear sway bar reinforcing mounts - SURVEY > From: "Michael Lawrence" <95m3ltw@home.com> > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Neil Maller" <neil.maller@gte.net> > > > - Spring rates as high as you use would be unacceptable for most people > > other than on a dedicated track car. > > > The rates Seth quoted are on Coil Overs, which does not translate directly > to stock type coil springs. His car was not as stiff as say my LTW with > H&R 29910 and Bilstein sports, which I think alot of people drive daily!!!! Now correct me if I'm missing something Michael, but if the springs are in the same location as the stock springs, then the effective wheel rates are the same for a given spring rate, coil-over or not. I believe there is the slightest tilt on the stock spring relative to the strut making the effective rate slightly different than a coil-over with perfectly concentric springs/struts, but the difference is so small that I never considered it worth worrying about. In the rear you're talking about an adjustable perch rather than a true coil-over anyway, so the rates are directly comparable. Having said that I feel my 500# f, 400# r setup is also less harsh than some M3s I've driven with the H&R-Bilstein Sport combo. There's something about the valving/spring rate combo on that setup that's a bit off IMHO. I've found that spring rate isn't as crucial (within reason) to ride harshness as is having well matched spring rate/shock valving. My car felt stiffer (subjectively) with softer springs and poorly match shocks prior to my current setup. Funny that the more subtle feeling suspension is also a lot faster. > A track M3 needs 1000lbs or higher spring rates on coil overs. Or atleast > that is what the class winners are using. That may be pushing "within reason". ;-) -- Ron Katona
-------------------- 2 --------------------
#2. CART @ Mid Ohio - from Kendall Broadbent
Top
Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2001 20:35:05 -0500 From: Kendall Broadbent <kbsport@netzero.net> Subject: CART @ Mid Ohio Need to Sale: 4 Reserved Grandstand Seats/Paddock Passes @ "SuperTicket" this weekend. http://www.midohio.com/finishlines/index.htm Respond: kendall@bridge.bellsouth.com ---------------------------------------------------- NetZero Platinum Sign Up Today - Only $9.95 per month! http://my.netzero.net/s/signup?r=platinum&refcd=PT97
-------------------- 3 --------------------
#3. Re: Rear sway bar reinforcing mounts - from Neil Maller
Top
Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2001 22:28:38 -0500 From: Neil Maller <neil.maller@gte.net> Subject: Re: Rear sway bar reinforcing mounts on 8/6/01 7:11 PM, "Michael Lawrence" <95m3ltw@home.com> wrote: > The rates Seth quoted are on Coil Overs, which does not translate directly > to stock type coil springs. Why not? The fronts are by definition still concentric with the struts as on the originals and therefore directly comparable. As far as the rear "coilovers" that I've heard of go, they are still not, merely having an adjustable spring perch but in the stock location (i.e. spring and shock separately mounted). Am I confused about that? Neil 96 M3
-------------------- 4 --------------------
#4. Re: The incredible sucking sound of your front splash shield - from Neil Maller
Top
Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2001 22:41:08 -0500 From: Neil Maller <neil.maller@gte.net> Subject: Re: The incredible sucking sound of your front splash shield heading south on 8/6/01 7:11 PM, "Dorffer, Rich" <RDORFFER@CleIndians.com> wrote: > I also read Neil Maller's instructions on using nutserts to attach the > bumper cover to the underpanel where the underpanel tucks up above the > bumper cover. Neil feels this is the primary source of problems on the > stock underpanel in the M3 coupe (particularly at high speeds). I did not > do this since I am not certain this is the weakest point on the underpanel > (although it is probably the second weakest point in my opinion). With > Neil's extensive experience, he will likely end up proving me wrong if I do > not go back and do this on my own. I think Neil's approach is particularly > beneficial in high speed situations. I feel what I did is more suitable for > those low speed impacts with animals, cones, small ditches, curbs, etc. > (which Neil also recommends). Do them both. If your underpanel still comes > off, than you obviously have much bigger problems (i.e., damage to your > beloved M3). Rich, you could be right about mounting weakness at high vs. low speed. I've had two shrouds on my car blow off at high speed, but I don't think that prior parking damage was too major a factor in their demise. However it's pretty hard to be sure after the fact. All I do know is that with the nutsert secured leading edge mounts my new shroud stayed on with repeated forays to 140 mph at the track. We'll have to see how the depredations of day-to-day parking scrapes may affect things further. Although I've extensively reinforced the porkchop mounts with sheet metal, I haven't yet done the same at the shroud's original mounting points. I do plan to though. Neil 96 M3
-------------------- 5 --------------------
#5. Re: [E36M3] Re: Sway bar link removal?? HELP!!! - from Joe Dyer
Top
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2001 20:52:46 -0700 From: "Joe Dyer" <joedyer@home.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] Re: Sway bar link removal?? HELP!!! Thanks, Neil! Where's my prize? :-) I also recommend that one buy the BMW supplied nuts for the swaybar if you lose one or remove one, which I did recently. The OEM ones have a crush shoulder and should not be reused! Joe ----- Original Message ----- From: "Neil Maller" <neil.maller@gte.net> To: "E36M3" <e36m3@bmw-m.net> Sent: Monday, August 06, 2001 7:41 AM Subject: [E36M3] Re: Sway bar link removal?? HELP!!! | Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2001 09:33:23 -0500 | From: Neil Maller <neil.maller@gte.net> | Subject: Re: Sway bar link removal?? HELP!!! | | on 8/5/01 6:41 PM, Michael Turgeon <turgeon1@yahoo.com> wrote: | | > I am trying to replace my struts on the M3 '95. When | > I tried to remove the sway bar links it seems that the | > nut and bolt are spinning, yet I cannot see anything | > on the back side to hold the bolt in position. | | From: Matt Henson <hensonator@yahoo.com> | > There's a 14mm head on that bolt. You have to use a | > reasonably skinny wrench between the bar and link. | | Bzzzzzt! Wrong! | | | on 8/5/01 11:41 PM, "Tom Tice" <tetice@triad.rr.com> wrote: | > Its actually 14mm flats on the link just inside of the sway bar. | | Bzzzzt! Still wrong! | | | on 8/5/01 11:41 PM, Chris wrote: | > I think it is 15mm. | | Bzzzzt! Wrong but getting warmer! | | | From: "Joe Dyer" <joedyer@home.com> | > 16 mm - open end - Thin | | Dingdingdingding! We have a winnah! | | | Yes, the wrench needs to be thin. A Craftsman Pro series wrench works fine, | regular Crapsman deosn't. I imagine those bike wrenches work too, but | they're not useful for much else on a car. | | And yes it does need to be 16mm. | | Neil | 96 M3 | | | | | ************************************************************* | 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 to the email address e36m3@bmw-m.net. | ************************************************************* | |
-------------------- 6 --------------------
#6. RE: [E36M3] Re: ETK Online - from Roman
Top
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2001 21:26:57 -0700 From: Roman <roman@arteuro.com> Subject: RE: [E36M3] Re: ETK Online Mel, I just checked, it is still there. Must be the Code Red Worm :P Cheers, Roman S. -----Original Message----- From: Mel Silva To: E36M3 Sent: 8/6/01 1:41 PM Subject: RE: [E36M3] Re: ETK Online Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2001 15:32:05 -0500 From: "Mel Silva" <mel.silva@pdq.net> Subject: RE: [E36M3] Re: ETK Online Too late. It's gone. Tried to look up pork chop pics today and "server not found". Dammit! Mel > -----Original Message----- > From: Ron Katona [mailto:rkatona@bellatlantic.net] > Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 9:42 PM > To: E36M3 > Subject: [E36M3] Re: ETK Online > > > Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2001 22:36:47 -0400 > From: "Ron Katona" <rkatona@bellatlantic.net> > Subject: Re: ETK Online > > > Hi All, > > > > I found this site where a fellow M3'er put the ETK online. You can > check > > it out at the URL below. > > Probably best to keep this one under the old hat... o'course it's a bit > late for that. Wonder how long it takes BMW NA to sick the black > helicopters on this? It is pretty cool... for now. > -- > 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 to the email address e36m3@bmw-m.net. > ************************************************************* > > ************************************************************* 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 to the email address e36m3@bmw-m.net. *************************************************************
-------------------- 7 --------------------
#7. Re: [E36M3] Re: Rear sway bar reinforcing mounts - from Michael Lawrence
Top
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2001 00:41:33 -0700 From: "Michael Lawrence" <95m3ltw@home.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] Re: Rear sway bar reinforcing mounts I dont know the exact reasons as to why. Logic would seem that it would be the same. But I have been told and read in several different places that the two arent comparable. This was a few years back when I was in the market for coil overs for my LTW. Ground control, a bilstein rep amoung others stated the same. I seem to remember them stating that you need to add or subtract about 100lbs in the rating between the two types. Also might have had something to do with one being linear and the other being progressive. I think most stock springs are progressive where as coil overs are Linear?? And I remember riding in cars that had coil overs and they did seam to be soft relative to the lb springs they were using. Like I said before, most racers are using some very high numbers, many over the 1000lb range. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Neil Maller" <neil.maller@gte.net> To: "E36M3" <e36m3@bmw-m.net> Sent: Monday, August 06, 2001 8:31 PM Subject: [E36M3] Re: Rear sway bar reinforcing mounts > Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2001 22:28:38 -0500 > From: Neil Maller <neil.maller@gte.net> > Subject: Re: Rear sway bar reinforcing mounts > > on 8/6/01 7:11 PM, "Michael Lawrence" <95m3ltw@home.com> wrote: > > > The rates Seth quoted are on Coil Overs, which does not translate directly > > to stock type coil springs. > > Why not? The fronts are by definition still concentric with the struts as on > the originals and therefore directly comparable. As far as the rear > "coilovers" that I've heard of go, they are still not, merely having an > adjustable spring perch but in the stock location (i.e. spring and shock > separately mounted). Am I confused about that? > > Neil > 96 M3 > > > > ************************************************************* > 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 to the email address e36m3@bmw-m.net. > ************************************************************* > >
-------------------- 8 --------------------
#8. Educated guess about rotor weight...(long) - from Jeremy Conners
Top
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2001 06:02:19 -0400 From: "Jeremy Conners" <JConners@columbus.rr.com> Subject: Educated guess about rotor weight...(long) Geof McLaughlin asked: "Anyone know weight of E36 M3 Euro floating rotors vs. stock?" Before I start with this one let's get it straight, I'm a little bored while watching Grand Prix on TNT ... I'm not sure about the exact weight of the two, but while doing the swap on Saturday I did the feel check in my hands. I don't think there is much difference. Let me try a quick calculation. I don't know the actual weight of either (and I don't have a scale at my disposal), but we can get a quick and dirty delta mass. Let me go to my garage and make some measurements on the old rotors... Okay, here we go...remember there are a lot of assumptions here but let's see if we can get a reasonable answer... Definitions: rhoCI = 7200 kg/m^3 (density of cast iron)(Grey Cast Iron @ 4.5% C) rhoAL = 2800 kg/m^3 (density of aluminium)(Alloy 7075-T6) t = 8 mm (thickness of top hat material) h = 35 mm (height of top hat inboard side) Ro1 = 82.5 mm (outer radius of top hat) Ro2 = 97.5 mm (radius where disc actually begins) Ri1 = 40.0 mm (radius of inner rotor hole) Rh1 = 7.5 mm (radius of lug bolt hole) Rh2 = 7.0 mm (radius of allen bolt hole) pi = 3.14159... M = mass V = volume We know this... M = rho * V Let's assume that the volume of the top hat is the same for both the Euro rotor and the US rotor. This isn't entirely true due to the finger relief cuts on the Euro rotor compared to the US rotor. I'm using approximate dimensions from the US rotor laying in my garage... So, let's calculate the volume of the top hat up to the vented disc... V = pi * (t * (Ro2^2 - Ri1^2 - 5 * Rh1^2 - Rh2^2) + h * (Ro1^2 - (Ro1 - t)^2)) I leave it to you to substitute... V = 3.3 E-4 m^3 Now, we can get the delta... MCI = rhoCI * V = (7200 kg/m^3) * (3.3 E-4 m^3) = 2.4 kg MAL = rhoAL * V = (2800 kg/m^3) * (3.3 E-4 m^3) = 0.9 kg DeltaM = MCI - MAL = 1.5 kg (3.3 lbm) Now, just for S&G let's try to calculate the mass of each rotor... Ro3 = 157.5 mm (radius to outer edge of the rotor) t2 = 28 mm (rotor thickness) ti = 14 mm (vent core thickness) Let's approximate the cast volume of the vented area of the rotor... X = (t2 - ti) / t2 = (28 mm - 14 mm) / 28 mm = 0.50 We need to account for the vanes in the rotor so let's add some more to this... X = 0.55 <- Percentage of cast iron vs. empty space in the vented area Now we can calculate the mass of the vented part of the rotor... MVP = rhoCI * pi * X * t2 * (Ro3^2 - Ro2^2) Again, I leave it to you to substitute... MVP = 5.32 kg (11.7 lbm) Now the total mass for each rotor... Meu = MVP + MAL = 6.2 kg (13.7 lbm) Mus = MVP + MCI = 7.7 kg (17.0 lbm) So, I calculate the difference in mass of the US and Euro rotor to be about 1.5 kg (3.3 lbm). Also, the mass of the Euro rotor is approximately 6.2 kg (13.7 lbm) and the mass of the US rotor is approximately 7.7 kg (17.0 lbm). Of course these last 2 numbers could vary greatly, the empty space in the vaned area was just an educated guess. I feel pretty confident about the delta though. Someone out there probably has the exact figures and can enlighten the group with them?! Jeremy Conners Dublin, OH 97 M3
-------------------- 9 --------------------
#9. Re: [E36M3] Educated guess about rotor weight...(long) - from Geof McLaughlin
Top
Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2001 08:09:34 -0400 From: Geof McLaughlin <gfmiiilist@usa.net> Subject: Re: [E36M3] Educated guess about rotor weight...(long) Jeremy, Your pretty close on the weight of the stock rotors (a little less than your calculation, but I don't have my ETK at the moment to check), but I think that you are off a bit on the Euro floating ones. I'd guestimate that they a little over 15 lbs. Anyone with a new Euro floating rotor and a scale? Geof At 05:11 AM 8/7/01 -0500, Jeremy Conners wrote: A long and lengthy discourse on calculating rotor weight...(snip) > >So, I calculate the difference in mass of the US and Euro rotor to be about >1.5 kg (3.3 lbm). Also, the mass of the Euro rotor is approximately 6.2 kg >(13.7 lbm) and the mass of the US rotor is approximately 7.7 kg (17.0 lbm). >Of course these last 2 numbers could vary greatly, the empty space in the >vaned area was just an educated guess. I feel pretty confident about the >delta though.
-------------------- 10 --------------------
#10. Re: [E36M3] Educated guess about rotor weight...(long) - from John Van Houten
Top
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2001 09:08:14 -0500 From: "John Van Houten" <jvanhouten@ix.netcom.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] Educated guess about rotor weight...(long) According to the ETK US Rotor: 7.569 kg or 16.687 lbm Euro Rotor: 7/023 kg or 15.483 lbm Delta is 1.204 lbm. Since this is rotating, unsprung mass, it makes a difference, but not nearly as much as a 1 lbm reduction in wheel/tire weight since the distance to the rotating axis is much lower. A 7% weight savings isn't too bad, especially considering the cost and less warp prone behavoir (lets not start that thread) of the Euro rotors. John