-------------------- 1 --------------------
#1. Re: [E36M3] brake question - from Ahmad Lutfeali
Top
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 11:34:31 -0400 From: "Ahmad Lutfeali" <m3_racer99@hotmail.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] brake question >ps. Also, one of the guys at the track told me Turner Cool Willys are >rebadged Porterfield R4s. Anybody know if that's true.. The above statement is _not_ true. Cool Willys were formerly known as Cool Carbons. The Cool Carbons were discontinued and Will Tuner had the exact same formula (produced for him by the manufacturer) with his name. The Porterfield R4 is a completely different brake pad. Ahmad
-------------------- 2 --------------------
#2. Re: [E36M3] factory speed limiter - from LoweSeaton@aol.com
Top
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 11:37:39 EDT From: LoweSeaton@aol.com Subject: Re: [E36M3] factory speed limiter George, I think Dave said this earlier but there are TWO obvious limiters. Actually, according to Jim Conforti, there are THREE limiters but somebody more knowledgeable than me will have to describe this third hidden limiter. JimC claimed at one time to be the only one who raised or removed all three limiters. The top speed and rpm limiter are the obvious ones. They are totally different and completely separate. Top speed limiter is totally removed (or defeated). If you could get enough power out of your engine and install higher gearing, you could go 200+ mph. The rev limiter is retained, albeit at a higher rev limit. Stock rev limit is (I think) 6300 rpm for 1st and 2nd gear and 6500 rpm for 3rd to 5th gears. Jim Conforti bumps that up to 7000 rpm for all gears. Now this third limiter I think is a fuel cut off. I think with the stock programming, if you hit the rev or speed limiter, the fuel is completely cut off. JimC programs a much softer cut off. You can actually drive at max speed sitting on 7000 rpm (7200 rpm in my case - I think JimC quietly gave the Euro '95 HFM chip a slightly higher rev limit) all day long. I don't lose power or speed at the rev limit. I've read about some of these car magazines top speed runs and the trouble they have measuring it. Some cars, once you hit the speed/rev limit, the gas is cut off so hard and for so long that the speed drops 5 mph. The car rags have to time when they hit the rev limit so it is right at the spot they are measuring the speed. It has been so long since I had the stock chip in my car that I forget how it acted when I hit the speed/rev limit. It very well could have been a hard fuel cut off. All I know is my JimC chip has a very smooth fuel cut off at the 7200 rpm rev limit. Lowell Seaton '95 M3/2 Dallas, TX - lots of good roads to test top speed in west Texas ------------------------------------------------- georgercarrjr@earthlink.net writes: > It is my belief that we do not have a "speed limiter" except via the rev > limiter. >
-------------------- 3 --------------------
#3. Re: Factory speed limiter - from Neil Maller
Top
Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2003 10:38:15 -0500 From: Neil Maller <neil.maller@gte.net> Subject: Re: Factory speed limiter on 6/9/03 10:22 AM, George R Carr Jr <georgercarrjr@earthlink.net> wrote: > It would be a mistake because the accurate meaning of the words (per > dictionary of choice) is that the rev limit has been eliminated. Jim's > software modifies the rev limit. With Jim's software you still have a rev > limit to protect you and your engine from some methods of destroying your > engine. Gearge, I think you're mis-reading the responses. Or maybe we didn't understand your question? The US M3 has both an engine rev limiter (varies depending on gear selection) and a road speed limiter, set to 137 mph. Conforti software both raises the engine rev limit slightly and eliminates the road speed limit completely. Neil 96 M3
-------------------- 4 --------------------
#4. Re: Harbor Freight aluminum jack - from Neil Maller
Top
Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2003 10:41:36 -0500 From: Neil Maller <neil.maller@gte.net> Subject: Re: Harbor Freight aluminum jack on 6/9/03 10:22 AM, DocWyte <josh_wyte@yahoo.com> wrote: > HF has lowered their price on this jack, it's $149 > now. I'm very tempted to get it. Anyone have one and > can post their opinion of it? I've been using mine since last season with satisfaction. However I will point out to other HF owners that I found a loose bolt in it at my last track event. I checked the others at home and found almost every one was starting to back out. A little Loctite took care of that. Neil 96 M3
-------------------- 5 --------------------
#5. For your viewing pleasure - from Steve Hazard
Top
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 11:25:57 -0400 From: "Steve Hazard" <SHazard@nhboston.com> Subject: For your viewing pleasure It's a large file so beware! If your into AutoX at all check it out :-) http://www.nlprod.com/videos.htm Steve
-------------------- 6 --------------------
#6. Re: [E36M3] Re: Factory speed limiter - from George R Carr Jr
Top
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 10:00:23 -0600 From: George R Carr Jr <georgercarrjr@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: [E36M3] Re: Factory speed limiter >Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2003 10:38:15 -0500 >From: Neil Maller <neil.maller@gte.net> >Subject: Re: Factory speed limiter > >on 6/9/03 10:22 AM, George R Carr Jr <georgercarrjr@earthlink.net> wrote: > >> It would be a mistake because the accurate meaning of the words (per >> dictionary of choice) is that the rev limit has been eliminated. Jim's >> software modifies the rev limit. With Jim's software you still have a rev >> limit to protect you and your engine from some methods of destroying your >> engine. > >Gearge, > >I think you're mis-reading the responses. Or maybe we didn't understand your >question? > >The US M3 has both an engine rev limiter (varies depending on gear >selection) and a road speed limiter, set to 137 mph. Conforti software both >raises the engine rev limit slightly and eliminates the road speed limit >completely. > >Neil >96 M3 It appears my understanding on the limiters was in error. -- =========================== georgercarrjr@earthlink.net
-------------------- 7 --------------------
#7. [E36M3] Front Strut Question-long - from Ahmad Lutfeali
Top
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 11:58:46 -0400 From: "Ahmad Lutfeali" <m3_racer99@hotmail.com> Subject: [E36M3] Front Strut Question-long >So on to the questions: >1) After trimming bumpstops, is the Bilstien sport for an M3 (as appear on >Turners site) compatible with the stock springs? I don't want to lower the >car and can't swing the cost of springs anyway. Steve, Bilsteins were valved for the M3s based on the Euro Spring (rates). US M3 springs rates are lower. Since Bilsteins are non adjustable, you would be running them "over damped" (a little bit) with your stock springs. On my 98, I decided to run the Bilsteins with stock springs; and it raised the front of the car by 1.5 inch. It felt great but it sat higher than any E36 I have ever seen. I did my research (and based on my past experience with running H&R Sports/Bilsteins on my 97), I went with the Eibach Spring (closest to the Euro Spring rates and hence matches the shock's dampening/valving). There is not need to trim the bump stops with either the stock springs or the Eibachs. On my 97, with the H&Rs, I had to trim the bumpstops. I barely noticed any difference between the stock springs and the Eibachs in terms of ride quality. The H&Rs were definatley lower and stiffer. I thought many times before going with Konis, quite frankly I have a compulsive obsessive (and modification) disorder when it comes to cars (hey at least I admit it ;) and with my RX7 TT I played with the adjustable GAB shocks ever day for 3 years. My life is a lot better now that I have non adjustable shocks (and no boost controller);) but if you don't have the same problem I have, I would go with the Konis (especially since you are running stock springs) since you can fine tune it them to match and wont have any ride height issues either. >2) The Bently says remove the strut with the steering knuckle/hub intact. >Looking under there it sure looks like you could remove three bolts holding >the strut to the steering arm/hub, two at the bottom, and one up higer and >leave the hub/rotor etc. there. Am I missing something here? There must >be some good reason to remove the whole thing, anybody know of one? Well, I just unbolted the swaybar link, 2 bolts at the bottom of the strut and one bolt at the middle of the strut (along with the 3 bolts on the strut tower) and those puppies came right off. No need to remove the whole nine yard (in my opinion). And guess what? My alignment was not off at all after the R&R of Eibach springs 2 weekends ago (-camber went up evenly -.5 with an even toe out but still within spec). Hope this helps. Ahmad Lutfeali 98 M3/2 Atlanta
-------------------- 8 --------------------
#8. Re: [E36M3] factory speed limiter - from Ahmad Lutfeali
Top
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 12:13:25 -0400 From: "Ahmad Lutfeali" <m3_racer99@hotmail.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] factory speed limiter It is my belief that we do not have a "speed limiter" except via the rev limiter. George, that is not correct. I have had some experience owning M3s (my 4th one currently), and all of them cut-off around 140MPH in 5th while I still had about 1000 or so RPMs more to squeeze out before hitting redline. I have used both Dinan and JC (on different cars) and had the needle bumping on the rev limiter in 5th (which was a bit past the 160MPH mark on the speedometer) with the software flash. Hence "speed limiter" removed. Ahmad
-------------------- 9 --------------------
#9. factory speed limiter - from Dorffer, Rich
Top
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 12:31:36 -0400 From: "Dorffer, Rich" <RDORFFER@CleIndians.com> Subject: factory speed limiter > It is my belief that we do not have a "speed limiter" except via the rev > limiter. It is my belief that your belief is inaccurate, we have both a rev limiter (limiting the rpms) and a speed limiter (limiting the overall). Jim C's chip raises the rev limiter and eliminates/defeats/erases/negates/whatever the speed limiter. Both have been tested. Regards, Rich
-------------------- 10 --------------------
#10. oil filter p/n!!!! - from Dorffer, Rich
Top
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 12:35:51 -0400 From: "Dorffer, Rich" <RDORFFER@CleIndians.com> Subject: oil filter p/n!!!! > My big question is whether I remove the paper wrapping around the filter? > Sometimes I don't, other times I do. I have no idea what it does and don't see > any reason for it. Don't remove it. It is there to keep the pleats spaced properly, encouraging maximum flow. > Oh! I will recommend you really tighten down the bolt holding the filter cap > on. I don't know what the torque requirement is but I doubt you have a > torque wrench that small. Just make it good and tight by hand. Probably tighter > than you first want to believe. I was afraid of overtightening it one of my > first oil changes and the oil leaked out. No need to overtighten, just replace the o-rings and crush washers properly. Aluminum likes to strip easily, especially such fine threads with minimal thread engagement. I have stripped an oil filter housing (the stock oil pressure light port), trust me, it doesn't take much to strip aluminum. > I do have some personal experience. I know the bolt was torqued WAY MORE > than 18 lb-ft from the factory because I was the first person to loosen it when I > changed the oil at 2,000 miles. Umm, the factory didn't tighten it that tight, the mechanic at the dealership that delivered your car probably did (pre-purchase inspection). Those dealership mechanics love those pre-purchase inspections as they make good money and zip through the process pretty quickly with air tools. Regards, Rich - watched a number of pre-purchase inspections at my local dealer hanging out in the garage.