-------------------- 1 --------------------
#1. Re: M3 on three legs :( - from Neil Maller
Top
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 23:05:50 -0500 From: Neil Maller <neil.maller@gte.net> Subject: Re: M3 on three legs :( on 1/28/03 5:23 PM, "Michael Michalski" <mmichalski@leaselink.com> wrote: > The drivers side front tire took all the impact and shifted > the tire back a good five to six inches into the fender and wheel liner. It > appears the A arm is twisted. You'll certainly have a bent control arm, and probably the wheel. These are the first things to give. After that it's the shock shaft, tie rod, and steering knuckle. This last is hard to check, since it's irregular in shape and bending isn't obvious. Not that I know from bitter personal experience or anything. Neil 96 M3
-------------------- 2 --------------------
#2. RE: ripping E36M3 floors (was: Please help me choose a daily driver) - from Ron Katona
Top
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 23:23:08 -0500 From: Ron Katona <rkatona@cox.net> Subject: RE: ripping E36M3 floors (was: Please help me choose a daily driver) Scott wrote: > sure, the E36M3 is reinforced there, but that just doesn't cut it in a > race environment. I personally know of 4 cars (well 5, now including > mine) that have the cage extended to the front subframe mounts, ^^^^^ I've heard of the front subframe mounts having problems on serious track cars. I believe the Euro Car reference was to the rear subframe mounts. Anyway, thanks for the data point for those who track their cars heavily with sticky tires and stiff suspensions. -- Ron Katona
-------------------- 3 --------------------
#3. Re: [E36M3] Thompson BMW Sertvice NIGHTMARE (very long) - from DocWyte
Top
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 20:27:18 -0800 (PST) From: DocWyte <josh_wyte@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] Thompson BMW Sertvice NIGHTMARE (very long) I've had nothing but good experiences with the BMW Gallery in Norwood, MA. They quickly diagnose the problem(s), give me an accurate quote for time and money and stick to both. They don't have a problem dealing with my aftermarket warranty. They also actually call me to give me updates and tell me the car is done! I know, a rarity, but if you're in the Boston area, they're a decent dealer to deal with. --- Zack Steinkamp <edsarkiss@yahoo.com> wrote: > Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 16:31:39 -0800 (PST) > From: Zack Steinkamp <edsarkiss@yahoo.com> > Subject: Re: [E36M3] Thompson BMW Sertvice NIGHTMARE > (very long) > > --- Chris Conner <chris@digital7.com> wrote: > > second call, the next morning: > > they say they will not fix or replace the tranny, > he > > says this, and I > > quote: "there was no fluid in the transmission"=20 > > me: "no fluid, in the transmission?"=20 > > them: "yes, and it is the wrong kind too"=20 > > that's my favorite part of the story -- first > there's > no fluid, then the fluid is the wrong kind!!! which > is it? can't be both... > > anyhow, sorry to hear about this Chris. is there > another dealer in the area you can take the car to? > > i've never had a really great dealer service > experience. the element of competition really isn't > present for most of them -- i think that may have > something to do with the $125/hr shop rate at my > local > $tealer. > > i'm kind of glad my car is out of warranty now, so > that i can justifiably go to one of the several good > indie BMW shops in my area. just hope nothing big > breaks anytime soon... > > zs > f*** crooked dealers and moron service depts. > > > ************************************************* > Please help support the E36M3 list by visiting our > sponsors: > Taylor Autosport http://www.taylorautosport.com > Rogue Engineering http://www.rogueengineering.com > BMW M3 Specialties http://www.jt-designs.com > Bimmerworld http://www.bimmerworld.com > > DIGEST INFORMATION: > http://www.bmw-m.net/resources/digest_info.htm > ************************************************* > > ===== Josh Wyte Momentum Motorsports 508-833-3024 After 5 pm EST __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com
-------------------- 4 --------------------
#4. Re: [E36M3] 95 M3 failed emissions - from NickG
Top
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 23:36:11 -0500 From: "NickG" <nick@tech-nick.net> Subject: Re: [E36M3] 95 M3 failed emissions High HC content is usually due to a misfire. How old are your spark plugs? Ever run any injector cleaner (the kind that connects to the fuel rail)? Nick > Well, my '95 M3 failed emissions today in Washington state. > > When I bought it almost 2 years ago, the owner had it checked.. failed > the first time, $15 test. Then he took it to a shop, spent $100, they > told him nothing was wrong (oxygen sensor had been replaced a year > before). He re-tested it (second test is free I think) and it passed. > > Unfortunately I am not with my car, so someone is testing it for me. > It was well warmed up, but who knows. > > it failed the idle hydrocarbon test, with 289ppm, which is higher than > the 220ppm limit. Here's the thing -- the tech said the idle was too > high. BS. That car sits DEAD on 700. not sure if maybe his crappy > testing failed it. > > I do know that the O2 sensor is suspect -- I got an error code for it > precisely once in 30k of driving it, and it was the 1 year anniversary > of when I bought it. The error never came up again. > > But I think if you spend $150 in washington state trying to fix it, you > get passed automatically. so I see no reason to spend $100 to be told > nothing is wrong, only to test it and have it pass. Or fail. I'm > thinking of just re-testing, and THEN if it fails, spend the $150 > getting the O2 sensor replaced (is this cost about right?) and get a > passing grade. > > Sound good? what can I do to increase the likelihood of it passing the > idle hydrocarbon test? The car has mostly sat for the past month, it's > been driven once 2 weeks ago, and now again for errands, then a run on > the highway before testing.. Any specific advice for pre-test warmup? > > - reid
-------------------- 5 --------------------
#5. Re: ripping E36M3 floors (was: Please help me choose a daily driver) - from Ron Katona
Top
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 00:13:44 -0500 From: Ron Katona <rkatona@cox.net> Subject: Re: ripping E36M3 floors (was: Please help me choose a daily driver) Scott Smith wrote: > This says some tracked-but-not-raced M3's have had it... > > http://member.rivernet.com.au/btaylor/BMWText/technical/DiffSubframeRippingOutE36.html I'm not 100% sure. The thread starts out with non-M E36s ripping out the rear subframe (a known weakness). Then someone says they repaired their non-M E36 rear subframe mounting points with M parts and it's been fine since. Then someone else says no, it happened to their M (and a buddy's). Then a final post agreeing with them, but going on to explain the rear trailing arm mount failure! So are we talking apples and oranges again? Did the rear subframe actually fail on the M cars, or was it the trailing arm mount and people are getting the two confused? Here's what I know: The rear trailing arm mounts on all E36s *will* fail eventually if worn bushings are not replaced and the car is driven hard at all - street or track. The fix is to keep the bushings fresh, or if it's a raced or tracked vehicle, weld up seams of the mount area on the body. The GC inserts also seem to help. The rear shock towers on all E36s *will* crack if worn rear upper shock mount bushings are not replaced and the car is driven hard or the roads in your area suck. The fix is to keep the bushings fresh, use the Z3 rear shock mount reinforcement plates, or if it's a raced or tracked vehicle, consider welding the BMW replacement shock tower on as a cap over the existing tower (also the fix for a cracked tower). Aftermarket shock mounts with more durable bushings seem to help as well. The front shock towers on all E36s are prone to developing cracks if the stock suspension, and especially the stock strut bearing, are replaced with stiffer aftermarket pieces. A big help here is to use the front strut tower reinforcement plates from the 96+ M car. The rear suspension/differential carrier/subframe on non-M E36s fail occasionally. Failure mode is ripping one or more of the four attachments points from the floor of the car. It's rare, but it happens. Don't know the exact circumstances, but I'd have to believe the pattern of having worn bushings as a precursor also applies here. M cars are reinforced in this area and it's debatable whether there are documented M car failures in this area. Might want to replace these bushings every other time you replace RTABs. The front frame rail/suspension subframe interface has been known to fail on E36 cars that see a lot of track time and are highly modified. I don't know a lot about this mode of failure, but it's a fact - it happens. More of a race car issue it would seem. -- Ron Katona P.S. Hey Lee, bet you didn't know you were buying such a POS car!
-------------------- 6 --------------------
#6. Re: [E36M3] Electric Fan Conversion (Long) - from andy radin
Top
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 22:15:56 -0800 From: "andy radin" <fourfa@fourfa.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] Electric Fan Conversion (Long) Some things I'll add to the discussion so far. I removed my main fan last year, along with installing a 80C thermostat and a seperate water temp gauge (sensor tapped into an aluminum thermostat housing, hot side). #1 - the thermostat IIRC is in the cooler return path, not the hot supply side. So the 80C temp corresponds to a higher block outlet temp. In my opinion this is why the stock 88C or 92C thermostat works with the 91/99C switch - it probably corresponds to a hot side temp of 95C or so. So we'd guess with a 80C thermostat and an 80/88C switch, you'd have something like 85 or 87 on the hot side. #2 - Around the SF Bay Area in summer and winter, my car runs 190-210F with no engine fan. When stationary or in traffic, the front aux fan clicks on. While moving it seems to click off. #3 - mounting. What I did was use their mounting kit to attach the fan via bolts running through holes drilled in the upper and lower flanges of the radiator. Put the fan such that it only contacts dense EPDM foam, not the radiator itself, hopefully to damp some vibration. 7-8 months later and I still haven't bothered to wire the thing in and turn it on as the temps are fine. I'll get to it before the summer. andy r.
-------------------- 7 --------------------
#7. electric fan - from Kit Wetzler
Top
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 22:56:37 -0800 From: Kit Wetzler <kitwetzler@mindspring.com> Subject: electric fan I replaced my crank driven fan with a midline 16" spal. It runs on a switch, I can switch it on or it comes on with the low temp side of the electric fan in front of the a/c condenser. (as a failsafe) This required hooked it up with a fairly large diode. Definitely run the fan on a relay. It will blow a 15 amp fuse with some regularity on startup. I had to run a 20 amp fuse and a 20 amp relay. Result? car runs cooler, even in 110 degree weather. -kit
-------------------- 8 --------------------
#8. Re: [E36M3] Electric Fan Conversion (Long) - from LoweSeaton@aol.com
Top
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 02:53:32 EST From: LoweSeaton@aol.com Subject: Re: [E36M3] Electric Fan Conversion (Long) This is going to get real long if I quote everything Neil and Alex wrote so I'll edit where I can. I just can't pass up the chance to debate two of my friends and tell them both they're wrong. :-) Alex lives about 10 miles from me yet he has had greatly different experiences with overheating. When did we (Suzy's list) start talking about removing the engine fan? 2+ years ago? At first I thought it was kind of a neat idea but better not pull that stunt in Texas with our hot summers. I live in Dallas - typically we have 15+ days over 100 degrees and another 50+ that are over 95 degrees. However, I couldn't resist. :-) The engine fan obviously takes available engine HP. It doesn't spin on its own. How much HP is debatable but it most definitely is positive. So, late summer of 2001 I took the plunge and removed my engine fan with no additional electric fan installed. My experiences and comments on this deletion are spliced in between Neil's and Alex's comments below: neil.maller@gte.net writes: > > >>(Note that since > >>this car is a daily driver I don't want to eliminate the fan completely.) Why not? I did. No problems. (Note: I won't recommend this but it seems to be doable based upon my experience) > >Neil, > >You do know that you have the auxiliary electric fan on the car already, > >right? > > Umm, yes Alex, I'd noticed that! > > >I don't know how long it will last if you make it one and only fan on your > >car, but that's only money. Alex is talking about the fan in front the A/C condenser which is in front of the radiator. This fan runs whenever the A/C is turned on, which is most of the year for my M3. If we are worried about wearing out the stock auxiliary fan when used in our fanless M3, then we need to worry about it on cars that run with the A/C on a lot too. This fan does indeed wear out. I've replaced it on several other cars. However, it should be cheap and easy to replace. > > (However see below for indications that the existing aux fan alone will not > be adequate.) So far it has worked fine alone for me. Last summer was relatively cool for Dallas - only two 100 degrees days but about sixty 98-99 degree days. The summer of 2001 it worked fine on several 100+ days. > > >You are assuming that the engine will NOT overheat without the main fan > and > >with the electrical fan off. Since BMW seen fit to put in two (2) fans in > >there, the above assumption seams shaky. > > No, we actually know that for sure, because some people have removed the > main fan altogether. What happens then is that if the car keeps moving it's > fine, but when stuck in traffic on a hot day with the A/C on it will start > to overheat. Everybody gets this wrong. Why would turning on the A/C make the engine overheat or even make it hotter? Answer: Because the engine has to work harder to move the car AND power the A/C? Nope. Sure the engine has to work a little harder but not that much. 2-3 HP (maybe less) at idle. If producing 2-3 more HP causes your engine to overheat, then you have other problems too. Remember the auxiliary electric fan comes ON when the A/C is switched on. This little fan more than compensates for the little extra engine heat. I have observations to prove it. My commuter car does not have a fully functioning electric fan. (It only comes with one.) It doesn't come on when engine temperature exceeds a certain level. It only comes on with the A/C. [It has a bad switch or relay somewhere]. Anyway, my commuter car never wants to overheat in the summer time no matter how slow rush hour traffic is moving. However, it does want to overheat in the winter time! Why - because the electric fan is off. If I turn on the A/C for a few seconds, water temperature drops back to normal. So, if you are stuck in traffic and water temperature is rising, turn on the A/C. The auxiliary electric fan will turn on. And if you really want to lower engine temperature, turn the cabin temperature to full hot. Now you are drawing a little heat from the engine (and making it unbearable inside the cabin). > > >It may well be that you HAVE to run your electric fan ALL the time if you > >remove the main viscous clutch fan. > > From the experience of the fanless guys we know that turns out not to be > the > case, but on the other hand the stock aux fan alone isn't enough either. Just the auxiliary fan is all I have needed, even in the hottest weather in Texas. > > So it seems clear that for everyday street use something beyond the aux fan > is needed, but not that much. I'll agree to this. I have not needed anything more but to be on the safe side, another electric fan won't hurt. Nothing else, it is a back up to the stock auxiliary fan. If it goes out, you are without any fans. > >IIRC, the cooling mixture's boiling point is above 100C (normal water > >boiling point) under pressure. But how much higher is it? > > Don't know that either, but the electric fan should be at least as capable > as the stock mechanical fan. Neil! You are a mechanic engineer. Have you forgotten all of your thermodynamics? You should know how to calculate this. :-) But I just so happen to have a jug of antifreeze next to me. It has a little chart on the back that shows the boiling temperature with various mixtures of antifreeze/water. A 50/50 mix has a 265 degree Fahrenheit boiling point. A 60/40 antifreeze/water mixture has a 270 degree Fahrenheit boiling point. Both have an asterisk on them referring to a note below the table. The notes says "using a 15 psi radiator cap." So assuming a 50/50 mix and 15+ psi cap, boiling temperature is 265 degrees. And no need to dig out one of my old thermodynamics text books! > >>This allows for 3-stage operation and an 11C differential: - With engine > >>"cold" (below 88C) the thermostat is closed and the electric fan off. - > If > >>the engine is "warm" (above 88C but below 99C) the thermostat is open and > the > >>electric fan off. - When the engine is "hot" (above 99C) the thermostat > is > >>open and the electric fan on. I did the preventive maintenance water pump/thermostat/thermostat housing/hoses/belts replacement later summer 2001. Shortly afterwards I removed the engine fan and it hasn't been on my engine since. I carried the fan around in the trunk for 2 months worried that I might have to stop on the shoulder and screw it back on. Never did. Now it is gather dust someplace in the garage. I'm not sure where you guys are coming up with this 88C thermostat, let alone the 80C some guys are using. I got my parts from Bimmer Parts aka Zygmunt like many others. However, I was shipped a 92C thermostat - a HOTTER thermostat. I tore my car apart and removed the stock thermostat. It was clearly marked 88C. I called Zygmunt to complain. I was told that the 92C thermostat has superseded the 88C thermostat which is no longer available. I said OK. I didn't see how 4 degrees Celsius (7.2 degrees Fahrenheit) would make that big of a difference so I installed the 92C thermostat. So, not only do I not have an engine fan nor auxiliary electric fan but I also have a HOTTER thermostat. Maybe that is the secret to living without an engine fan - raise the coolant temperature? Whatever, I have not had a lick of problems in almost 2 summers. Plenty of stop and go rush hour traffic in there. Bottom line, I have had a successful experience removing the engine fan. No additional fan. I'd easily recommend removing the fan for people in the north. I think it very doable even in the south. Just remember to run your A/C. Good luck Neil! I know your "simple" mod will take two weeks labor and look like a million bucks. :-) Lowell Seaton '95 M3 Dallas, Texas
-------------------- 9 --------------------
#9. Re: Electric Fan Conversion - from JUSTIN GERRY
Top
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 10:16:02 -0500 From: "JUSTIN GERRY" <JGERRY@butchers.com> Subject: Re: Electric Fan Conversion Neil, Almost ALL electric fan conversions that eliminate the engine fan need to adjust the water temp switches a bit colder to have the fan work correctly. As I understand it the electric fan is an on/off setup, so either the fan is on or off, you either drawing air into the radiator or not. The mechanical engine fan is always be working at lower speeds, as the heat regulates the fan clutch which adjusts the rotation speed of the fan and will in turn draw some air across the radiator. You can get away with higher auxilary fan temp switches because of this. Also, the location of those temp switches affects the operation of the electric fan. The coolant temp throughout the engine is never a constant with hotter pockets around the cylinders (for obvious reasons), temps go down from there. Also, once you are up to speed you don't need ANY fan at all to cool the car. It really does not take much to keep the temps in check (assuming you have enough coolant capacity). Above about 30mph or a running electric fan (or mechanical, unless it has clutch) will actually reduce the amount of airflow going into the radiator. SPAL fan at 2400cfm? As a datapoint, I have a Permacool 14" (also a 16" and other sizes available all at summitracing.com) mounted as a pusher in the nose of my 2002 that moves 2950cfm!! No more overheating problems in traffic. It is reversible as well (I could use it as a puller if I had the room). Also I would not be comfortable mounting the fan directly to the radiator with zip ties (you want the water jackets supporting the weight of a fan?!??) Making a set of brackets would probably be the safest bet although I don't know how much room you have to play with. Personally if I went ahead with a electric fan conversion. I'd use one puller and one pusher (I'd dump the stock aux fan with something that has a higher cfm) as I always NEED some redundancy (nothing like a $80 fan ruining an expensive motor) and set it up for the worst possible situation (100F+ and high humidity and stop and go traffic). My 02c. -Justin -- '76 02 (Whimsical........ with all kinds of cooling mods) '97 M3 (Orion....... stock for now...will need a new radiator as I am sure its days are numbered at 80k miles) BMW CCA#77056 check out http://users.vei.net/jgerry
-------------------- 10 --------------------
#10. Re: Failed Emission Test - from The Buch
Top
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 07:57:17 -0800 From: The Buch <the_buch@telus.net> Subject: Re: Failed Emission Test Reid ... try again first with a very thorough warmup ... it takes these cars at least 40 minutes to get oil temp up to an acceptable range, and the cat has to be extremely warm ... plus if you have to wait in line at the testing station the cat will cool down substantially - pick a time with no lineup, or keep the revs >2,000rpm while you wait ... sure you'll sound like a knob, but who cares .... Doug Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 20:01:33 -0800 From: Reid Conti <reid@conti.net> Subject: 95 M3 failed emissions Well, my '95 M3 failed emissions today in Washington state. When I bought it almost 2 years ago, the owner had it checked.. failed the first time, $15 test. Then he took it to a shop, spent $100, they told him nothing was wrong (oxygen sensor had been replaced a year before). He re-tested it (second test is free I think) and it passed. Unfortunately I am not with my car, so someone is testing it for me. It was well warmed up, but who knows. it failed the idle hydrocarbon test, with 289ppm, which is higher than the 220ppm limit. Here's the thing -- the tech said the idle was too high. BS. That car sits DEAD on 700. not sure if maybe his crappy testing failed it.