-------------------- 1 --------------------
#1. Re: [E36M3] Ignition coils gone bad (was Re: o2 sensor fault) - from Joe Tan
Top
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 17:20:09 -0800 (PST) From: Joe Tan <mailjtan@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] Ignition coils gone bad (was Re: o2 sensor fault) I am pretty sure he meant $500 in parts plus what ever the labor costs. Althou it still seems a bit high. But it's Dinan, If you go to them you better have some Vaseline in hand ready... ;) ------------ $500 for labor? To replace the coils? So if someone were to replace your spark plugs, they'd charge you $500 labor to remove the coils to get at the plugs?!?!?!! I think it was either Neil Maller or NickG who wrote about his coils going bad. You would be able to notice a crack on the body or something like that. If so, you could theoretically just replace the bad one. Chester --- Juan Bruce <jbrucebmw@hotmail.com> wrote: > ignition coils gone bad causing the car to run rich. Additionally the > Catalytic converter is shot. They replaced all of the Ignition coils ($500+ > labor) and they say that the problem is solved. Has anyone else had this > problem? Does this sound reasonable. I would have thought that I would > notice a misfire if this was the case and I am skeptical that it could ruin > the cat so fast? I'm wondering if the damage to the coil might have > occurred during the valve cover gasket replacement or spark plug change. ===== __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Movies - coverage of the 74th Academy Awards(r) http://movies.yahoo.com/
-------------------- 2 --------------------
#2. Re: Visiting San Juan - from Darling Christopher Maj AMC/CEXR
Top
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 19:27:29 -0600 From: "Darling Christopher Maj AMC/CEXR" <Christopher.Darling-02@scott.af.mil> Subject: Re: Visiting San Juan Sounds like an interesting trip. Your wife must be pretty understanding to allow you to bring your girlfriend. ;-) Cod Major Chris Darling HQ AMC/CEXR DSN 779-0698, Comm (618) 229-0698 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 19:58:15 -0500 From: "Carey Probst" <hcprobst@alum.mit.edu> Subject: WOT: Visiting San Juan PR in May Sorry for the WOT post but I believe there are some members from there. I will be visiting San Juan with my family on May 4 and 5th and would like some ideas of things to see and do. We arrive at noon and depart the 5th about 5 PM. It will be me, my wife, 2 sons 23 and 26 and 1 girlfriend, 25. OBMWC, my M3 will be safely parked in my garage while I'm away. TIA Carey Probst, '99 M3/2, BMW CCA Patroon and Genesee Valley Chapters Sharked, Stressed, Schrothed, Gauged, Hitched, X-Braced
-------------------- 3 --------------------
#3. 245s on 8.5s up front? - from Paul Elliott
Top
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 20:38:28 -0500 From: "Paul Elliott" <elliott.paul@worldnet.att.net> Subject: 245s on 8.5s up front? >>Only benefit I see of having rear good tires vs poor fronts is to prevent tail slides? etc? Which is only relative to ones driving ability. Give me tail happy any day over understeering straight off<< Dont evenly worn rear tires provide MORE dry traction, due to more rubber on the road? I would tend to agree with you...I would think that, especially in the wet, that youd want the more tred on the front, due to the risk of hydroplaning on bald fronts... Paul Elliott --------------------------------------------------------- '99 White M3; < 40K miles; Dinan stage II SC kit with 6" RMS crank pulley: 11 psi; AA Water Injection; Rotex pads;X-Brace; Dinan Koni Suspension; Stygar SS and Clutch Stop; Sound by Polk, Excelon, JLAudio
-------------------- 4 --------------------
#4. Fikse durability (was 245 on 8.5's up front) - from The Abels
Top
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 19:46:06 -0600 From: "The Abels" <aAbel@austin.rr.com> Subject: Fikse durability (was 245 on 8.5's up front) >For those concerned about Fikse bending, > they told me that theyve gone to a heavier rim aluminum which cuts back > substantially on the bending risk in street use...Of course, if you hit a > curb hard, or a building, well forget it...But for typical street pothole > obstructions, it shouldnt be as much of an issue. > > Paul Elliott In a recent thread about SSR comps, a former Fikse engineer and racer chimed in. Thought you might like to hear his thoughts: Jeff --------------- I don't have any personal experience with the SSR wheels but I did work in the wheel industry for Fikse wheels for 3 years so I have a lot of knowledge about wheel construction and durability. From what I understand the SSR wheels weight about 2-3pounds less than a Fikse wheel which IMHO is a pretty damn light wheel. The only way that you can build a wheel lighter is to give up strength. When I worked at Fikse, we could have built a lighter wheel but then we would be facing durabilty and strength issues. To get a gain in one area (weight) you have to give up something in another area (strength). I have had 2 sets of Fikse wheels on my racecar, and have probably 60 SCCA races on them and 10-20 track days and the only time I had a problem was when I dropped a wheel of the track into a huge sharp rutt and bent a rim half. I worked with a number or race teams when I was at Fikse and the only time I saw a damaged wheel was in an accident or an impact that would damage any wheel. I have always questioned the strength of a wheel that was signifigantly lighter than a Fikse or a BBS Magnesium race wheel. Technomagnisio came out with a wheel that was around 3-5 pounds lighter than the Fikse and several of the teams I was working with in the IMSA Toyo Street Stock Series (todays GrandAm Cup)started using them. After 2-3 enduro races (of aprox 3 hours length) they started to actually crack and one car had a wheel break and put it off the track into the barriers. Needless to say, those teams quickly changed back to the Fikse wheels I always respect Mel's opinion, but he may not be running them in the same conditions that Turner did. A wheel should be able to take a certain ammount of abuse (ie: curb hopping, dropping a wheel of track etc) without damage. Also World Challenge is running at a variety of tracks, a number of them rather bumpy. I worked with Turner when I was at Fikse and he is a very savvy guy and would not bad mouth a product unless he had genuine reason to do so. Just my 2 cents
-------------------- 5 --------------------
#5. I need a good laugh! - from Sue Kraft
Top
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 20:21:56 -0600 From: Sue Kraft <suekraft@new.rr.com> Subject: I need a good laugh! Seen any good car humor lately? Send it to me! I'm looking for more content for the car humor page on bmw-m.net. http://www.bmw-m.net/Humor/index.htm Also links to funny car sites if you know of any. If it makes me laugh, I'll post it on the web site. Thanks! Suzy suekraft@new.rr.com
-------------------- 6 --------------------
#6. Re: [E36M3] Ignition coils gone bad (was Re: o2 sensor fault) - from Juan Bruce
Top
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 18:18:32 -0800 From: "Juan Bruce" <jbrucebmw@hotmail.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] Ignition coils gone bad (was Re: o2 sensor fault) I should have been more specific. Ignition Coil $80.48 x 6 = 482.40 3 hours to diagnose the problem @ $100/hour = $300 1 hour to replace the coils and confirm the problem is solved $100 Add in some other random stuff and it comes aout to around $900. It adds up fast. If only I had been able to diagnose the problem I could have replaced the coils at $50 each in under an hour. Live and learn. Juan Bruce '85 M635CSi '95 M3 >-------------------- 6 -------------------- >Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 16:11:13 -0800 (PST) >From: Chester Wong <chester_p_wong@yahoo.com> >Subject: Re: [E36M3] Ignition coils gone bad (was Re: o2 sensor fault) > >$500 for labor? To replace the coils? So if someone were to replace your >spark plugs, they'd charge you $500 labor to remove the coils to get at the >plugs?!?!?!! > >I think it was either Neil Maller or NickG who wrote about his coils going >bad. > You would be able to notice a crack on the body or something like that. >If >so, you could theoretically just replace the bad one. > >Chester > _________________________________________________________________ Join the world's largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com
-------------------- 7 --------------------
#7. Re: Commercial Posts - from Neil Maller
Top
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 21:25:12 -0500 From: Neil Maller <neil.maller@gte.net> Subject: Re: Commercial Posts on 3/21/02 8:13 PM, Sue Kraft <suekraft@new.rr.com> wrote: > If you're in the business, it isn't a "friendly offer" to find someone a car. > And what do you call the bottom of his post listing his phone number and > several cars he has for sale, including prices? Suzy's list. Suzy's call. Neil 96 M3
-------------------- 8 --------------------
#8. Re: Valentine One Install - from andy radin
Top
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 18:28:08 -0800 From: "andy radin" <fourfa@mindspring.com> Subject: Re: Valentine One Install "Let me add to your drawbacks: - Expensive, you must now buy JP's InV1-si Mirror ($200 but it used to be more IIRC)" the V1 remote display is only $40. you can even get clever and hide it in the center air vent (pictures soon)...
-------------------- 9 --------------------
#9. RE: Valentine One Install - from Wesley A. Nicolas
Top
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 21:44:58 -0500 From: "Wesley A. Nicolas" <wes@nicolas.org> Subject: RE: Valentine One Install >Rich Writes< >- Radar attenuation is reduced by more than 1%. How can the entire >front of the radar detector be covered with the front of the brake >light housing and moved to the rear of the car (front seats and >vehicle pillars block the field of view) only be reduced by 1%. >Yes, I know radar bounces around and can penetrate matter, but 1%, >I don't think so. Radar Engineers feel free to correct me though. My father is a radar "expert" for the Navy and so long as the material is not metal, signal loss is negligible. The rear deck is cardboard with carpet and the 3rd brake light housing is all plastic. I took it all apart so I know. Granted, the 3rd brake light position is not *as good* as up high on the windshield, but I am still able to get ample warning to slow down given the quality of the V1. >- Reduction (via miniature bulb) or complete elimination of your >third brake light. Yes, unless you somehow rig a light in there, you're gonna have to put on a rear (LED) wing to take the place of the brakelight like I did. >- Expensive, you must now buy JP's InV1-si Mirror ($200 but it used to be more IIRC) I agree about the expense, I wouldn't have done it if I didn't live in VA and drive into D.C. every day. Also, I park in a parking garage. It's a pain to take it on and off the windshield. I would also hate to have someone break into the car and steal it from the glove box, insurance definitely won't cover it...especially in Virginia where they are illegal. A thief (or cop) definitely won't find it where it's located. >- You lose the ability to maintain control of the sound, mute, >adjustments, etc. as far as I can tell No, actually I can still adjust the sound, mute, power, etc. I purchased a "Remote Audio Adapter" from Valentine which allows me to control all the functions that the knob has (even mute volume). Additionally, Jim installs a mute button on the actual mirror so you can mute it if you want. The Remote Audio Adapter is mounted in the center console under the armrest...fits perfectly. >- A hell of a lot of additional wiring to run. Agreed, but again, I wouldn't have done it if I didn't live in VA. Good luck!! Wes '95 M3 V1 and InV1-si Mirrored
-------------------- 10 --------------------
#10. [E36M3] Re: Commercial Posts - from Sue Kraft
Top
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 21:42:35 -0600 From: Sue Kraft <suekraft@new.rr.com> Subject: [E36M3] Re: Commercial Posts Neil Maller wrote: > Suzy's list. Suzy's call. Thanks, Neil. I don't mean to be heavy handed about commercial posts, just want to be fair to all the vendors on the list who follow the rules. Suzy