-------------------- 1 --------------------
#1. RE: [E36M3] Coilover ??? - from Mel Silva
Top
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 21:05:27 -0600 From: "Mel Silva" <melsilva@mindspring.com> Subject: RE: [E36M3] Coilover ??? Personal note of interest to those in the SF Bay Area; Joe Silva, no relation, the owner of Custom Alignment in Mountain View has been a VMOA (Vintage Mustang) and Nor-Cal Shelby Club member for longer than I can remember. He has done all of my alignments on my track cars and street cars when I lived in CA. He is anal retentive, meticulous, and not cheap. These are all good things in my book when it comes to setting up a car. When I say he is not cheap, I mean that you get value for every dollar you spend there, but you will not get a $29.95 alignment. Also note that Custom Alignment accepts shipments from Tirerack. I had a set of heat cycled R1's delivered to his shop (obviously several years ago) and he took care of everything, my track wheels were already there when the tires arrived. Can't say enough about the place, all good. Get to know the guys there, it will be worth your while. Tell Joe I said "Hi"! Mel -----Original Message----- From: tom eby [mailto:thomaseby@hotmail.com] Sent: Monday, January 14, 2002 5:45 PM To: E36M3 Subject: [E36M3] Coilover ??? Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 15:30:48 -0800 From: "tom eby" <thomaseby@hotmail.com> Subject: [E36M3] Coilover ??? Bob, thanks posting the data point to the list. I live in Sunnyvale and have been looking for a decent, near-by, alignment shop. Have you been satisfied with the service and quality of alignments at Custom? Any recomendations? TIA, tom eby 96 m3 74 02 -- >-------------------- 2 -------------------- >Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 12:36:42 -0800 >From: "Bob Lenarcik" <lenarcik@pacbell.net> >Subject: RE: [E36M3] Coilover ??? > >I've got the H&R "coilover" package on my 97 M3 and had it corner >balanced at Custom Alignment in Mt. View. The charge was $55 to set up >of the scales and check the corner weight and $127.50 to make the >adjustments. That's $182.50 and their shop rate is $85/hr. The cross >weight came out to 50/50 on the nose. _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp. ************************************************************* 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. *************************************************************
-------------------- 2 --------------------
#2. Re: [E36M3] Air filter test? - from The Abels
Top
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 21:05:52 -0600 From: "The Abels" <aAbel@austin.rr.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] Air filter test? > There was a test done sometime ago (I think it was Jim C.?) on air filters > between OEM, ITG & K&N. I seem to recall that the ITG was better then both > and also filters dust particles better. I can't seem to find the result > anywhere. > Does anybody know where can I find it or have an archive of it? > > Thanks a lot. > > Alex > > PS. Trying to prove I am right to my friend. > I hope the following nets you some cash, or at least will require your friend to do something embarrassing in full public view. The text below is from an email Jim C. sent me: Jeff 97 M3/4, with a crappy K&N filter ---------------------- It was because we discovered the shortcomings of the K&N style oiled cotton gauze filter that we started looking for another and found ITG. Without me repeating what I've said 100 times (I simply don't have the time as I'm headed to Las Vegas for SEMA this AM) I'll summarize simply: People who use cotton-gauze filters simply haven't done the scientific tests to know what they REALLY do. We have.. They don't perform anywhere near as well as the "ads" would have you believe. If you want to look at all the scientific data, go to: http://www.bonnevillemotorwerks.com/dynocharts/intake/KN/kntest.pdf This test was done (without me asking, mind you) by a fellow BMWCCA'er who also happens to be a filtration scientist in CT. He tested K&N Panel vs Paper BMW Panel. The results are astounding in that the K&N continues to let thru more dirt than paper even when it flows LESS than paper. Filtration/Flow tests by MIRA (the English version of the SAE) showed that the ITG filter did much better. Hence we started using them. That's the short of it. Jim -------------------------------------- To complete the string of correspondence, after reviewing the test data and Jim's email, I shot off this note to Jim, which received no response (note, not hammering on Jim C., but I thought my question was a fair one considering the representation that the ITG filter is superior to K&N's): Thanks Jim. How much better did the ITG filter fare against paper in the MIRA tests? I don't mean to bother you, it is just that I'm trying to get to the bottom of this somewhat murky topic. BTW, here's what K&N said in relation to foam filters: Our filters are tested by 2 outside, independent laboratories. They have been proven to stop at least 97% of particles on a SAE fine dust test. This test uses mostly particles in the 0 - 5 micron range but goes up to 20 microns. For comparison, a paper filter stops 98% on the same test and the OEM minimum standard is 95%. Foam is generally the worst media with a typical efficiency rating of 75%. To get higher ratings, the foam must be more dense and therefore way more restrictive. Many thanks! -------------------------- I received no response. Jeff 97 M3/4 with crappy K&N filter
-------------------- 3 --------------------
#3. [E36M3] Coilover ??? - from Alan Taur
Top
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 19:46:11 -0800 From: "Alan Taur" <alantaur@yahoo.com> Subject: [E36M3] Coilover ??? S'up, Tom? Custom Alignment is the best wheel install/alignment shop in the Bay Area. Not the cheapest, but you won't find a more competent shop. Estimates are very fair and reliable. It's the only place I'll bring my cars to. Also, you can have Tire Rack drop ship tires there for an install/balance. Take care! -Alan 95 M3 _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
-------------------- 4 --------------------
#4. Coilover??? - from Lew Becker
Top
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 20:39:10 -0800 From: "Lew Becker" <lmbeckercfls@earthlink.net> Subject: Coilover??? Dinan's setup (which I have on my 97 M3/2), which is generally regarded as one of the most streetable suspensions out there (in terms of comfort), uses linear rate springs. Dinan used to offer Bilsteins custom valved, to his spec, with the bump stops trimmed (which is what I've got, and am very happy with -- firm, but by no means harsh); I put this set-up on my car with less than 10,000 miles on the stock suspension (i.e., the stock struts/shocks were still good), and was struck by how it was more compliant over irregular pavement than stock (which I attributed to the Bilsteins). As I recall, the word at the time was that Dinan's switch to exclusively Koni's (he used to offer both) was prompted by profit/sponsorship considerations. Lew Becker ----- Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 12:14:38 -0800 (PST) From: Chester Wong <chester_p_wong@yahoo.com> Subject: RE: [E36M3] Coilover ??? Everyone, Please keep in mind that a "coilover" kit is really no different than the stock suspension with the exception of ride height adjustment. The rear suspension setups of most "coilover" kits is not a coilover at all. If you were to put a spring on a shock and mount it back there, you'd break your rear shock towers in no time flat. True rear coilover kits have a disclaimer that you need a rollcage installed in order to distribute the load. The bottom line: the rear shock towers were not meant to support the weight of the car. The stock front suspension is "coilover" like, but just not height adjustable. I think when people are saying that a coilover kit is not streetable, they are talking about linear spring rates as some of the coilovers come that way. Yes, the H&R coilover kit includes progressive rate springs, so it's nice and comfy. Chester
-------------------- 5 --------------------
#5. RE: M3 Alignment Setting Help! - from Bob Stommel
Top
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 09:05:30 -0500 From: Bob Stommel <rstommel@iquest.net> Subject: RE: M3 Alignment Setting Help! Mark: I've set up a few E36 M3s for the track and here's what works well: Front toe: 1/8 inch total toe out Rear toe: 1/16 inch total toe in These alignment settings are for track performance, not for the street. If you want even tire wear and more comfortable handling on the street, use the factory settings. On a 95 M3, if you use fixed camber plates and camber washers in conjunction with springs that lower the car 1-1.5 inches, you can get around 2.5 degrees negative camber in the front. The ideal front camber for an E36 M3 on the track is 3 degrees negative, but you'll have to use adjustable camber plates to get there. Try to get the rear camber as close as possible to 2 degrees negative. Raising the rear end with the use of thicker spring pads or spacer plates will reduce the rear negative camber caused by shorter "sport" springs. Bob Stommel Monkey Wrench Racing Indianapolis > Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 23:14:38 +0000 > From: "Mark Radelow" <radelow@hotmail.com> > Subject: M3 Alignment Setting Help! > > Taking my car in for an alignment tomorrow. I want a sporty alignment but > nothing that will require adding crash bolts, camber plates or anything > hokey. I do drive some long distance but this is mainly a weekend car will > occasional track time. Thanks! > > Need figures for both front/rear toe/camber/caster. Thanks!!!! > > This is a 95 M3 BTW. > > Mark Radelow
-------------------- 6 --------------------
#6. Air filter test? - from Dorffer, Rich
Top
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 09:54:31 -0500 From: "Dorffer, Rich" <RDORFFER@CleIndians.com> Subject: Air filter test? Alex asks > > There was a test done sometime ago (I think it was Jim C.?) on air filters > between OEM, ITG & K&N. I seem to recall that the ITG was better then both > and also filters dust particles better. I can't seem to find the result > anywhere. > Does anybody know where can I find it or have an archive of it? This is the link I think you are looking for: http://www.bonnevillemotorwerks.com/dynocharts/intake/KN/kntest.pdf Here are some other links I have found as well on foam filters versus K&N filters: www.seansa4page.com/resource/airfilter.html www.ibmwr.org/otech/airfilter.html www.unifilter.com/performance-facts.htm www.unifilter.com/whyfoam.htm www.realbig.com/miata/miata/1994-02/412.html > PS. Trying to prove I am right to my friend. That is what I was doing as well and probably what the Landshark was doing when he initiated the original email below ;-) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2000 20:02:50 -0700 From: Land Shark <lndshrk@xmission.com> Subject: [uuc] K&N's ("proof") Firehawked@aol.com writes: > Well don't hold back show us some of the scientific data tellin us how bad > the K&N is. I for one use them in my cars and have seen no adverse reaction > or dirt in my intakes. Umm.. ME.. HOLD BACK.. LOL (Rob, he don' know me very well.. do he ;) This has been available for WELL over a year and when I got tired of emailing personal copies, I put it on my website: http://www.bonnevillemotorwerks.com/dynocharts/intake/KN/kntest.pdf These are the ACTUAL TEST SHEETS from an ACTUAL FILTER LAB showing exactly what was up.. not my interpretations, but SCIENCE. Testing done in an independent lab, by professionals, with no one trying to "get a conclusion" out of them. Testing, that had we the BMW community had to pay for, would have cost BEAUCOUP bucks! (Luckily someone who works there is an all around nice guy and BMW nut and got the lab guys to agree to a test as a "favor") They show the passage of more dirt into the motor, and eventually flow WORSE than paper filters.. I think that's simple enough. Jim PS: Swimming in a reactor spent-fuel-rod pond shows no immediate "adverse reaction" either.. it takes a while. I still try to avoid it, no matter how pretty the blue glow is!
-------------------- 7 --------------------
#7. JTD Panel - from DiVincenti, A.J.
Top
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 10:15:46 -0600 From: "DiVincenti, A.J." <ADiVin@lsuhsc.edu> Subject: JTD Panel If one would want to get technical and it mattered to them, I don't believe the JTD panel would be legal in SCCA Street Prepared - definitely not in Stock class. AJ
-------------------- 8 --------------------
#8. Black bottom lip attachment - from Robert Manger
Top
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 11:27:14 -0500 From: "Robert Manger" <Robert_Manger@Mastercard.com> Subject: Black bottom lip attachment Good morning fellow listers. I have possible the easiest question for the part guru's. I have the LTW side lower air dams, for lack of a better term. and want to attach them to the lower black lip. The screws that are used in conjunction with the plastic pins to hold the lip on are just too short for the threads to grab. Is there a part number for a longer, same type screw, that I can go to the dealer with to get the parts? I have been looking in Home Depot and Lowes for a similar item with no success. Thanks, Rob
-------------------- 9 --------------------
#9. Piston Slap - from McCarthy, Brian
Top
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 08:30:55 -0800 From: "McCarthy, Brian" <Brian.McCarthy@intermec.com> Subject: Piston Slap Greetings everyone! It's been great reading and learning over the last 4 months. Now I'll ask my first question. I have a '95 M3 with 27K miles, just recently purchased from digest member Don Wentz. The car is great, and I'm looking forward to the track events! Here's my question; The engine makes noise when cold. For the first 10 minutes, at low rpm (2000 to 2500rpm), under low to mild acceleration (10mpg on the fuel consumption gauge), there is a rattling/knocking noise. The noise is loud when driving. The noise is present when in neutral if I bring the rpm up, but not as loud. I've listened under the hood, the noise definitely seems to be coming from inside the engine - it's not a rattle of exhaust shields, loose parts, etc. It sounds more like a diesel engine. The noise is slightly clearer & louder on the exhaust side of the engine (ie: passenger side). I suspect piston slap. Why? The sound is lower than valve train noise. The noise goes away after the car is warm. The noise is sensitive to engine load (piston load). And a friend once had warranty work done to address piston slap on his M3. I searched the digest, and found very little on piston slap. (lots & lots on caliper pistons!) Any ideas? Is this a common problem, and should I take action to fix this? I'm bringing the car to the dealer in two days, I'd like to be knowledgeable and prepared. Thanks! Brian McCarthy Brian.McCarthy@intermec.com '76 2002 '95 M3
-------------------- 10 --------------------
#10. Re: [E36M3] Black bottom lip attachment - from Chester Wong
Top
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 08:55:09 -0800 (PST) From: Chester Wong <chester_p_wong@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] Black bottom lip attachment You can try 51 11 2 268 818 Hex bolt 5x25 (qty 4) 51 11 2 268 817 Hex bolt 5x20 (qty 2) I think the screws used for the regular black lip without the extensions is 4.8x19 so the first part number is 6 mm longer. HTH, Chester --- Robert Manger <Robert_Manger@Mastercard.com> wrote: > I have possible the easiest question for the part guru's. I have the LTW > side lower air dams, for lack of a better term. and want to attach them to > the lower black lip. The screws that are used in conjunction with the > plastic pins to hold the lip on are just too short for the threads to grab. > Is there a part number for a longer, same type screw, that I can go to the > dealer with to get the parts? I have been looking in Home Depot and Lowes > for a similar item with no success. ===== __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail! http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/