-------------------- 1 --------------------
#1. Re: [E36M3] Aluminum Pedals - from Jeff A
Top
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2002 20:10:13 -0500 From: "Jeff A" <aabel@austin.rr.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] Aluminum Pedals > Gruppe, > > BMW sells an aluminum pedal kit for E46 cars. Has anyone confirmed whether > this kit will fit on an E36 M3 (1995 model)????? > > Thanks, > > Cod FWIW, I purchased a set of the srp pedals shown here: http://www.srpracing.com/page7.html I went for function over form. . . I wanted more real estate on the accelerator pedal w/o spending a fortune or waiting an eternity for a set (bmp and skaggs respectively). They fit the bill. A throttle blip and a smooth downshift is just *right there*. (well, in theory, sometimes my motor skills leave a bit to be desired) Jeff
-------------------- 2 --------------------
#2. modified E36 M3 in Bergen county area - from Pilewan23@aol.com
Top
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2002 22:58:11 EDT From: Pilewan23@aol.com Subject: modified E36 M3 in Bergen county area <PRE>Does anyone in the Bergen county area with a modified E36 M3 want to let a fellow 95(new owner) meet up? I am primarily interested in suspension mods, then the intake, exhaust, followed by UUc short shift. Has anyone seen the Angel eyes on the E36? Does it look nice or tackey?
-------------------- 3 --------------------
#3. sign of a bad shock? - from Mdriver13@aol.com
Top
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2002 23:29:23 EDT From: Mdriver13@aol.com Subject: sign of a bad shock? Guys, Just replaced my OEM rear shocks, and I noticed that when I compressed the shock by hand (off the car), the shaft did not rebound on its own. It just stayed down inside the shock housing. Seems odd??? Only 31K on the car, but many autox's ;-)) regards, Bob Gill 97 ///M3 coupe Philly Region SCCA AS Champion 1997 & 2000 BSP Champion 2001
-------------------- 4 --------------------
#4. Diff and Tranny Temps? - from Andrew E. Kalman
Top
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2002 20:56:49 -0700 From: "Andrew E. Kalman" <aek@pumpkininc.com> Subject: Diff and Tranny Temps? Hi All. Any of you have temperature readings for E36 M3 diffs and trannies under racing conditions? I noticed that VDO makes a 400F electrical temperature gauge labelled "trans". Thanks, -- ______________________________________ Andrew E. Kalman, Ph.D. aek@pumpkininc.com
-------------------- 5 --------------------
#5. Rough Running/Power Cutoff: HELP! - from Foley, Brian
Top
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2002 05:31:10 -0400 From: "Foley, Brian" <bfoley@cmpd.org> Subject: Rough Running/Power Cutoff: HELP! Okay, I am beginning to see a trend here with at least two other people experiencing the same problem I have with my 1997 M3/4. I have now experienced this three or four times. While in motion, and usually at slower speeds or in slow turns, the whole drivetrain jerks, as if the clutch was suddenly pushed in and released or the motor nearly stalls. This is occasionally accompanied by the check engine light flashing for a tenth of a second. The car then runs as if on 3 or 4 cylinders. Acceleration causes bad bogging, but still runs at idle. If the car is allowed to coast to a stop and turned off, re-cranking the motor totally eliminates the problem. So far I've heard five possible causes: 1) bad fuel level sender, 2) bad fuel pump, 3) bad fuel or DME relay, 4) Mass airflow sensor fouled due to over-oiled K&N, and 5) bad flywheel crank position sensor. I am meeting a friend with a code reader this weekend to see if this can assist in diagnosis. The only other options I have are to cart it off to the dealer and leave it for them to comb through. Anyone have any advice or information concerning this problem? Many thanks in advance, Brian Foley Charlotte, NC '97 M3/4 (stock)
-------------------- 6 --------------------
#6. Re: [E36M3] Bumpstops are [not] springs! - from Colin_S_Whelan@rrfc.raytheon.com
Top
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2002 08:09:32 -0400 From: Colin_S_Whelan@rrfc.raytheon.com Subject: Re: [E36M3] Bumpstops are [not] springs! Hi everyone, Well, I decided to go try a little experiment on the rear bumpstops last night, after all the talk on the list. I have a '98 M3 coupe, with a Dinan Stage 1 (Dinan springs 150#/in front, 400#/in linear spring (1/2" drop) and Koni SA set to 1.125 turns from full soft) that I just installed a month ago. Front has - 1.4 degree of camber, the rear -1.7. I initially installed the stock rear bumpstops with 1" trimmed off. Street tire pressures (RE730) are 34 psi/32psi front/rear. The car has bunch less understeer than stock, in fact, it's so neutral, it can feel a bit twitchy setting it into a corner. So, last night, I installed a set of stock rear bumpstops (about 3.5" long, part #1 138 109) and took the car around my favorite twisties. Overall, no change in normal ride comfort, and the car feels like it *may* set into a corner a bit faster than before. Was it worth the 40 minute install time? Not really. The next autocross will tell for sure. Thanks, Colin '98 M3 (Dinan Stage 1, JC intake + soft, X-brace, R4S + Euro rotors, ....)
-------------------- 7 --------------------
#7. Re: MPG - from shane.a.kleinpeter@accenture.com
Top
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2002 09:02:49 -0400 From: shane.a.kleinpeter@accenture.com Subject: Re: MPG Reid is right. This is basic physics. Force increases with the SQUARE of velocity. The faster you go, the force the wind imparts on the car (in the opposite direction) increases exponentially. There's a reason the gov't changed the speed limit to 55 during the oil shortages of the '70s and it had nothing to do with ticket revenue. Shane K. '96 M3 '94 325i KP #335 >Bumping it up to 75 or 80 will KILL your mileage. Even not using >cruise will hurt you. >If you cruised at 60mph you could destroy the 30mpg barrier in your m3 >I bet.. >And this has almost nothing to do with gas. The mileage on a >non-chipped car on 91 octane gas versus 94 octane Sunoco would be nil. >For fun, download the DOS-based cartest program. Look at vehicle >mileage versus speed/gear.. it's incredible. This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain privileged, proprietary, or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Any other use of the email by you is prohibited.
-------------------- 8 --------------------
#8. Steering rack question - from Chester Wong
Top
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2002 07:36:25 -0700 (PDT) From: Chester Wong <chester_p_wong@yahoo.com> Subject: Steering rack question Just curious...if one were to replace the steering rack on the E36M3, would there be a better replacement? ...that is, a tighter ratio? TIA, Chester ===== __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! News - Today's headlines http://news.yahoo.com
-------------------- 9 --------------------
#9. Gas Mileage - from Dorffer, Rich
Top
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2002 10:44:38 -0400 From: "Dorffer, Rich" <RDORFFER@CleIndians.com> Subject: Gas Mileage Reid says > > this depends SO much on speed. Coming back across the mountains from > eastern washington, I probably pulled 27-28mpg in my 95. Of course, I > had the cruise set on 70 (in a 70 zone) because cops were EVERYWHERE > and I'm paranoid after lots of tickets recently.. Another major variable here are the mountains. Mileage over the same distance when traveling in mountainous or hilly areas will be much worse than driving the same speed on flat terrain. Speed is certainly a factor too, a major factor. > Bumping it up to 75 or 80 will KILL your mileage. Even not using > cruise will hurt you. Even more so in the mountains. Bumping up from 70 to 80 in Kansas will have much less effect but the effect is greater as you continue to add speed. Cruise isn't really relevant, it does not hurt or help per se but simply maintains a somewhat constant speed. A person that maintains speed as well as cruise will do just as well. A person who decreases their speed up hills and increases speed down hills could arrive at the same point as someone traveling a constant speed and do it using less fuel. > If you cruised at 60mph you could destroy the 30mpg barrier in your m3 > I bet.. Maybe, I don't think I would use the term destroy. You might be able to reach it or eek over that threshold. There is a specific speed where mileage is the best in top gear. Drop your speed too much and you could actually use more fuel. > And this has almost nothing to do with gas. The mileage on a > non-chipped car on 91 octane gas versus 94 octane Sunoco would be nil. I think what you wanted to say is that the difference in mileage would be 'nil'. I believe that your mileage would actually improve a little with a chipped car on 94 octane with absolutely all other parameters being equal. The point about gas was that quality non-reformulated gas will provide better gas mileage than RFG which just doesn't pack the same punch. > For fun, download the DOS-based cartest program. Look at vehicle > mileage versus speed/gear.. it's incredible. I will have to try it some time. Best regards, Rich
-------------------- 10 --------------------
#10. Aligned... Finally! - from twisty M3
Top
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2002 08:13:29 -0700 From: "twisty M3" <twistym3@hotmail.com> Subject: Aligned... Finally! Not that anyone other than me really cares much about this, but here goes anyway... ;) Finally found someone who could align my car with a fancy new Hunter machine. Even this place tried to tell me that the rear camber on E36 cars wasn't adjustable. He even showed me in their little manual. I told him that it was, and maybe it's just different on M3s, but it certainly IS adjustable. That was just the guy at the desk... luckily the alignement guy knew what I was talking about as soon as he got under the car. Here are some before/after measurements for anyone with a curious mind: * BEFORE (measurements listed left/right) Front Camber: -3.4°/-3.1° Front Caster: 7.9°/7.8° Front Toe: 0.66°/0.71° Total Front Toe: 1.36° Rear Camber: -1.9°/-1.5° Rear Toe: 0.06°/-0.03° Total Rear Toe: 0.03° Thrust Angle: 0.05° * After (measurements listed left/right) Front Camber: -3.3°/-3.1° Front Caster: 7.9°/7.8° Front Toe: 0.06°/0.04° Total Front Toe: 0.1° Rear Camber: -2.0°/-2.0° Rear Toe: 0.10°/0.12° Total Rear Toe: 0.22° Thrust Angle: -0.01° I can't say how accurately the "before" measurements really are, as the guy who was under there on Wednesday was tinkering around trying to get things visually, since he couldn't get accurate readings. Friggen' Bozo! ;) The guy who didn't get anything done still charged me $65 for wasting two hours of my life (though I would've paid him *something* for his time anyway) and the guy who actually got everything pretty much exactly where I requested only charged $69.95. Great, considering the last alignment I had cost me $125! The front camber is pretty much exactly where I wanted it, based on how I liked from when I had the camber plates rather than swapped strut hats. The caster is the only thing that really changed. I did have 7.0° previously, so it went up almost a full degree. Rear camber is maxed out for what we could get from the factory. Glad to have it all squared away, Jonathan L. _________________________________________________________________ Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com