-------------------- 1 --------------------
#1. Re: ] Eurosport OBDII Cam Kit gas mileage?? - from Paul Elliott
Top
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 20:56:55 -0500 From: "Paul Elliott" <pelliott@rcn.com> Subject: Re: ] Eurosport OBDII Cam Kit gas mileage?? Peter, I think I misread you...I was thinking you were referring to that immediate mode guage at the bottom of the tack, I think which reports estimated mpg at the moment.. This what got screwed up in mine...I think youre referring to something else...Forgive me.. --------------------------------------------------------- Paul Elliott '99 White M3; < 40K miles; Dinan stage II SC kit with 6" crank pulley: 11 psi; AA Water Injection; Rotex pads;X-Brace; Stygar SS and Clutch Stop; Sound by Polk, Excelon, JLAudio ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Elliott" <pelliott@rcn.com> To: <peter@guagenti.com> Cc: "E36M3" <e36m3@bmw-m.net> Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 8:51 PM Subject: ] Eurosport OBDII Cam Kit gas mileage?? > >>One thing that's annoying is, the trip computer doesn't work anymore after > installing the higher-rate injectors. It thinks I'm getting 30+mpg. :-(<< > > So THAT'S what's going on! I noticed that after they installed my Dinan SC > kit, the immediate mode mpg was way off....Way over reporting mileage...I > thought it was a vacuum issue or something...Of course, its reading the > injectors...And when we go to 24lb injectors, this is what happens...can you > imagine what it would read if we went to 30 lb injectors? We'd see 50 mpg > while standing still!! :--) > > Trust me, you'll get used to not using that silly thing anyway....They > should have put an oil temp or exhaust gas temp gage in their instead > anyhow. > > --------------------------------------------------------- > Paul Elliott > '99 White M3; < 40K miles; Dinan stage II SC kit with 6" crank pulley: 11 > psi; AA Water Injection; Rotex pads;X-Brace; Stygar SS and Clutch Stop; > Sound by Polk, Excelon, JLAudio > >
-------------------- 2 --------------------
#2. Aftermarket Exhaust Recommendations - from Clark Cook
Top
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 21:43:37 -0500 From: "Clark Cook" <cooksan@prodigy.net> Subject: Aftermarket Exhaust Recommendations I currently have a second generation Borla system on my '95 M-3 coupe-I say second generation because it does not have the turbine fins in the exhaust tips-Borla says they eliminated this feature some years back. My problem is that the first Borla installed fit perfectly with no rattles or clearance problems. Unfortunately it was damaged in a close encounter with some guardrail and had to be replaced. The replacement bumps in the differential area and the tips vibrate-hitting the plastic cut-out. We've tried refitting, making sure everything is tight etc.--no luck. Has anyone had similar problems--and what's the recommended aftermarket system now? Thanks Clark Cook
-------------------- 3 --------------------
#3. obc correction factor - from kit wetzler
Top
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 18:57:23 -0800 From: "kit wetzler" <kitwetzler@mindspring.com> Subject: obc correction factor > and change the "Correction Factor" in the Hidden Codes. heh. I wish this worked. unfortunately 1250 is the highest correction factor it'll take and it's not enough... -kit, whose supercharged M3 gets 26 mpg. Yah right. ;)
-------------------- 4 --------------------
#4. Re: [E36M3] Aftermarket Exhaust Recommendations - from The Abels
Top
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 21:47:06 -0600 From: "The Abels" <aAbel@austin.rr.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] Aftermarket Exhaust Recommendations >and what's the > recommended aftermarket system now? Your pick from a myriad of systems. Seem everyone likes Active Autowerke's exhaust. Not too loud, no droning, but not particularly deep. A lot of folks have UUC and triflow units, but they are too loud for my tastes. Supersprint has always been a wonderful exhaust; the industry standard IMHO. Rogue Engineering came out with a really unique dual exhaust. If I ever dump my quiet but heavy stock unit, I'll buy a Stromung. The lightest of the bunch, deep, moderately loud but not obnoxious. Check out TC Kline's site. Jeff 97 M3/4, quietly stock
-------------------- 5 --------------------
#5. Re: [E36M3] Aftermarket Exhaust Recommendations - from Chester Wong
Top
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 20:44:08 -0800 (PST) From: Chester Wong <chester_p_wong@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] Aftermarket Exhaust Recommendations Hmmm....well, not sure which AA one you're talking about, but my AA gen III is perhaps one of the loudest at the track. But it's not that loud in the car, however. I like how it's tucked in there and the new gen III tips...nice and fat. I just wish the can didn't come so close to the spare tire well. Chester > Your pick from a myriad of systems. Seem everyone likes Active Autowerke's > exhaust. Not too loud, no droning, but not particularly deep. A lot of > folks have UUC and triflow units, but they are too loud for my tastes. > Supersprint has always been a wonderful exhaust; the industry standard IMHO. > Rogue Engineering came out with a really unique dual exhaust. ===== __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com
-------------------- 6 --------------------
#6. picture of bad coil - from NickG
Top
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 23:47:00 -0500 From: "NickG" <nikog@MediaOne.net> Subject: picture of bad coil Below is a link to a picture of one of my old coils. I colored the top of the coil with a black marker to make the cracks more visible. http://www.pompano.net/~philippg/pics/badcoil.jpg Nick '95 M3 turbo
-------------------- 7 --------------------
#7. Re: [E36M3] Aftermarket Exhaust Recommendations - from The Abels
Top
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 07:17:23 -0600 From: "The Abels" <aAbel@austin.rr.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] Aftermarket Exhaust Recommendations > Hmmm....well, not sure which AA one you're talking about, but my AA gen III is > perhaps one of the loudest at the track. But it's not that loud in the car, > however. I like how it's tucked in there and the new gen III tips...nice and > fat. I just wish the can didn't come so close to the spare tire well. > > Chester > > > Your pick from a myriad of systems. Seem everyone likes Active Autowerke's > > exhaust. Not too loud, no droning, but not particularly deep. A lot of > > folks have UUC and triflow units, but they are too loud for my tastes. > > Supersprint has always been a wonderful exhaust; the industry standard IMHO. > > Rogue Engineering came out with a really unique dual exhaust. > I suppose that's the problem with trying to describe with words something as subjective as an exhaust note. I got a ride in a friends AA-equiped car. It sure didn't seem UUC-loud or Triflow-loud. I also went for a drive in a friends track prepped M3 with a Mozart. I'll call that one step louder than the UUC I heard, and label it 'freaking loud,' but it could have had something to do with the fact that the car had no interior. ;)
-------------------- 8 --------------------
#8. [E36M3] Retainer "float" (was Cam timing) - from Ward, Chris
Top
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 08:21:11 -0500 From: "Ward, Chris" <CWard@ContractLumber.com> Subject: [E36M3] Retainer "float" (was Cam timing) Matt, I can give you the name and number to the person that did the head work for my 95 M3. He installed a stiffer, shorter valve spring to reduce valve float. The downside to this is if I decide to run different cam shafts, the springs are too short. Allen Jenson (ARJ Enterprises) Delaware, Ohio (740)881-5291 Allen was recomended to me by T.C. Kline and did a great job. >>Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 13:56:49 -0800 (PST) >>From: Matt Henson <hensonator@yahoo.com> >>Subject: Re: [E36M3] Retainer "float" (was Cam timing) >>It's pretty easy to find the LTW Ti retainers but I've >>yet to locate any stiffer springs for the M3. I'm >>sure that you can get them if you know the right >>people but it's not clear where they can be had on the >>internet. From the sound of it all those folks with >>the hot cams would probably love another few hundred >>RPM. I'm sure that the SC guys would as well. I >>believe that the key to making a 400++HP turbo system >>without killing the driveline is through a higher RPM >>limit ( and the hardware to take advantage of it). >>-Matt
-------------------- 9 --------------------
#9. Re: [E36M3] Boost increase - from Matt Henson
Top
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 06:09:40 -0800 (PST) From: Matt Henson <hensonator@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] Boost increase Paul, I wouldn't feel right unless I spoke up and said that you're playing with fire.. 1) You need to check the air temps with the WI. They probably aren't much, if any cooler than they would be with a real IC. The turbo kits that use real ICs (BEGI, AA, etc) only recommend 6-7PSI with stock C/R, maybe 8 max under the right conditions. 2) Others have tried running 11PSI with their stock engines. I think that Jim Powell gets away with it because he runs nothing but 100+ octane race fuel. Unless you are willing to do this then you may not have an engine in 3 months. 3) It can be very hard to hear ping above 5K-6K. Most engine computers don't even try to listen for knock above the programmed torque peak (4500 or so). So it may not pull timing out for you. And you may not hear it over the racket of the SC and engine. 4) Your software was not designed to run 11psi. You need to get the A/F ratio checked at the least. How big are the injtors? 5) By using WI you cool down the air charge which, with the stock pully, should have lowered the boost a bit. You could have safely used a slightly larger pully to get that back, netting more total mass air flow. The difference in mass flow you've got now is much more than it was with just the SC due to the density increase of the WI. Hey, it's your car so do what you gotta do. I'd also love to be able to crank up the boost to 11PSI but without lowering the CR it almost always ends badly. Good luck, Matt --- Paul Elliott <pelliott@rcn.com> wrote: > Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 20:42:02 -0500 > From: "Paul Elliott" <pelliott@rcn.com> > Subject: Boost increase > > I know there must be other non intercooled SC M3 > owners out there who have > wondered what happens if you want more > boost....Dinan tells 'Dont Do It'! > But can you? > > I think, with certain precautions, you definitely > can...My precaution was > installing an Aquamist water/alcohol injection > system, courtesy of AA. > Today, we added a VDO boost gauge, and, an inch > larger crank drive pulley, > courtesy of RMS. No software changes. > > Results: I know most Dinan kits are making 6 psi at > redline...for some > reason, mine was reading 7.5-8 psi at redline...What > with the inch larger > drive pulley? It now registers 11 psi at redline. > > It was over 70 degrees today, and the engine was > HOT....And, strong pulls to > redline produced zero detonation. No CE > lights....It felt as solid and > bulletproof as it did before, only its making 3 more > psi...I'm estimating > about 400 crank HP. As we know, but seems more > emphasized with this new > boost, SCs do all their business up high...It > continually floors me that at > 3500 psi, youre making only about 2.25 psi....When > you double the rpms, you > triple the boost, so that at 7K near redline, its > producing 11 psi...But in > order to register it, you need to do a strong pull, > and not let up til > 7K...that's when the needle hits 11 psi > briefly...Actually, although I didnt > hit rev limiter and shut down at 7K instead of 7.2K, > it probably would have > hit 12 at rev limiter. > > Needless to say, I was pleased that there was no ill > effects of the extra > boost...I believe the Dinan software is programmed > very rich at hi load, in > an effort to cool the engine to avoid knock...With > the extra boost, what was > rich is probably now not. But, with the winjection, > it isnt required, and > more power is the result....Timing feels right > too...I'm very pleased with > the result. > > So if anyone's interested, I believe a bit of extra > boost IS possible on > these systems, but take some precautions first... > > --------------------------------------------------------- > Paul Elliott > '99 White M3; < 40K miles; Dinan stage II SC kit > with 6" crank pulley: 11 > psi; AA Water Injection; Rotex pads;X-Brace; > Stygar SS and Clutch Stop; > Sound by Polk, Excelon, JLAudio > > > ************************************************************* > 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. > ************************************************************* > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com
-------------------- 10 --------------------
#10. Re: Undertray - from Neil Maller
Top
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 09:22:52 -0500 From: Neil Maller <neil.maller@gte.net> Subject: Re: Undertray on 12/5/01 1:39 PM, Carl Stern <carl.stern@xilinx.com> wrote: > I lost my undertray about 1 week after I bought my car last May. > This was surprising since I bought a garage queen 95 w/ only 14k miles. > I guess some driveway scraping is enough to weaken it. Almost anything is enough to weaken it. > So the big question is: What is this thing designed to do? What harm/effect > can come from leaving it off? It appears to me designed to manage airflow through the radiator. Although not evident without disassembly - and certainly not evident if yours has blown off! - there's also another baffle that mounts inside the shroud. It also keeps road crud off the accessory drive belts and pulleys. > I've had my car on the track on 95 degree days and the temp needle > never moved above center. The E36 water temp gauge is rather deceptive in that the center position encompasses a wide range. On the track my oil temperature occasionally gets up as high as 260 deg, but the displayed water temp never varies. > I don't get over 100mph on the track, nor do I drive above that on the road. > Do the regular E36s have them? Not the same one. > Can I just forget about it? I drove without one for almost 2 years without apparent ill effect. But the question kept nagging at me. Why would BMW go to the trouble of designing and producing this large and by no means inexpensive plastic part if it serves no good purpose? Hell, unlike the rear wing whose function is mostly aesthetic, the shroud isn't even visible. So I concluded that the thing must serve some good purpose, even if I didn't fully understand what it might be. That's when I decided to figure out how to make the damn thing stay on the car. My logic, FWIW. Neil 96 M3 - fully attached shroud/undertray
-------------------- 11 --------------------
#11. Re: The incredible sucking sound of your front splash shield - from Neil Maller
Top
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 09:32:13 -0500 From: Neil Maller <neil.maller@gte.net> Subject: Re: The incredible sucking sound of your front splash shield on 12/5/01 1:39 PM, "Dorffer, Rich" <RDORFFER@CleIndians.com> wrote: > I beefed up the mounting areas of the new underpanel with some > aluminum and pop rivets. I bent the aluminum over to form a U shaped piece of > metal over the stock attachment point and used pop rivets to attach them > Also, I still used the stock fasteners (machine screws) and added a washer to > each screw. I took pictures of what I did and will post them to the Web if > anyone is interested (a picture is worth a thousand words). > > 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). Hey Rich, you won't get any argument from me. I think it's perfectly feasible either to reinforce the original centralized mounting points of the shroud as you did, or to come up with a distributed mounting system like mine. Or both! And you and I both came up with similar ways of riveting on light-gauge aluminum sheet to reinforce the various plastic mounts. The real question isn't which of our approaches is right, but why the hell BMW didn't do it right in the first place?! Neil 96 M3