-------------------- 1 --------------------
#1. Re: [E36M3] Failed Emissions Testing with JC Chip - from LoweSeaton@aol.com
Top
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 16:41:27 EDT From: LoweSeaton@aol.com Subject: Re: [E36M3] Failed Emissions Testing with JC Chip Martin writes: Had my '95 M3 in for annual rolling road emissions testing here in PA, only to find that the car failed with the JC chip installed. After I reinstalled the stock chip, it passed, with no other changes. Martin, Jim Conforti is not on this list anymore but I bet he will confirm. The computer chip (stock or JC) has very little to do with passing the emissions test. The catalytic converter is probably 95% of passing. Was your engine and catalytic converter good and hot when you tested with the JC chip? I'm guessing your catalytic converter was a lot hotter when you tested with the stock chip and (barely) passed. Yes, you just barely passed even with the stock chip. I think your original catalytic converter is about dead. Chances are next year you will not pass no matter what. 10 years is about the life of any catalytic converter. For comparison, my '95 M3 with JC chip and Euro HFM passed the Texas emissions test in July. My results are different but you can look at the magnitude and get some idea. While your best results were 50 to 80 percent of the maximum allowed, mine were all less than 25% of maximum. HC (ppm) Limit: 124 JC: 21 CO (%) Limit: 0.69 JC: 0.10 NOx (ppm) Limit: 937 JC: 248 My '95 M3 had 79,377 miles at the time. I don't think my engine was particularly hot. I think I had just driven 3-4 miles to the test facility and then I know my car sat with the engine off for 20 minutes before the test. I was surprised my M3 passed so easily because I expect my catalytic converter to die soon. Lowell Seaton '95 M3
-------------------- 2 --------------------
#2. Re: [E36M3] Failed Emissions Testing with JC Chip - from Martin Bullen
Top
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 17:13:57 -0400 From: Martin Bullen <vze322dw@verizon.net> Subject: Re: [E36M3] Failed Emissions Testing with JC Chip Nick, The shop claimed that it was thoroughly warmed up, which was my first thought. In PA it's hard to get an immediate test. I'm at the mercy of the shop's schedule. I have no reason tho think the before test warm-up, etc. was different, one chip to the other. I wondered about adaptation too, but I did around 50 miles with the stock chip, before the retest. Anyway, with adaptation, wouldn't the car learn to run better? i.e. it should have been cleaner with the JC chip? Martin On Oct 10, 2004, at 1:14 PM, NickG wrote: > I'm betting the reason you passed with the stock chip instead of the > JC chip > is because of adaption. When you removed your DME to reinstall the > stock > chip, you cleared the adaption values. The DME probably didn't have as > much > running time with the stock chip to settle back into the same amount of > learning as the JC chip had. It's very possible that with more > 'learning > time', the stock chip will provide the same test results as the JC > chip. > > Also, is it possible that when you took the emissions tests with the JC > chip, the cats weren't fully warmed up? Was the car sitting for a > prolonged > time at idle or with the engine off just before the test? > > Nick > >> Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 12:51:12 -0400 >> From: Martin Bullen <vze322dw@verizon.net> >> Subject: Failed Emissions Testing with JC Chip >> >> Had my '95 M3 in for annual rolling road emissions testing here in PA, >> only to find that the car failed with the JC chip installed. After I >> reinstalled the stock chip, it passed, with no other changes. Here >> are >> the results for comparison: >> >> CO % x liters >> JC 1.71 >> Stock .48 >> Limit 1.1 >> >> HC ppm x liters >> JC 465 >> Stock 135 >> limit 275 >> >> NO ppm x liters >> JC 5463 >> Stock 2997 >> Limit 3600 >> >> Last year, with the stock chip it passed without issues. Car has 69k >> miles, original catalysts and exhaust, and fairly recent O2 sensor and >> spark plugs. Only other mod is a cone K&N air filter installed by the >> PO at least 4+ years ago (and which I clean at least annually). >> >> I was a little surprised, since I'd thought the JC chip was designed >> to >> maximize performance with 93 octane fuel, but still stay emissions >> legal. My only uncertainty is the provenance of the chip, which I >> bought used from a fellow lister. However, the car runs really well >> with the chip installed, and it came in a bona fide box with a Turner >> Motorsports sticker. >> >> At this point I'm a little reluctant to put the chip back in. >> Partially because I'm already breaking the sealing tabs on the DME, >> and >> partially because I'd really rather have a clean high-performing car. >> >> Any wisdom on my predicament? >> >> Martin Bullen >> '95 M3 >> '97 Z3 2.8 > Martin Bullen '95 M3 '97 Z3 2.8
-------------------- 3 --------------------
#3. Head Gasket R&R Notes (Long) - from Neil Maller
Top
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 16:18:57 -0500 From: Neil Maller <neil.maller@gte.net> Subject: Head Gasket R&R Notes (Long) Last month I changed my head gasket after finding nasty oil/coolant emulsion inside the oil filler cap while at Mid Ohio. The car seemed to run fine otherwise. I decided to do the job myself, since there's an awful lot of labour involved. Here are some notes on things I found out, in random order.. - I rented the special tools from Brett Anderson at <http://koalamotorsport.com> for a very reasonable $75, including outbound shipping. For that you get the camshaft locking tool, the exhaust cam sprocket turning tool, the flywheel locking pin, the primary cam chain tensioning tool, the head bolt special socket/extension and a couple of other odds and ends, plus how-to printouts from the TIS. It's a good deal. - I also found a reasonably priced source to buy many of the special tools if you want, <http://samstagsales.com/>. It's kind of a clunky web site and you have to order via email, but they're responsive and prompt. - If you want to do this job without too much flailing around you do need a comprehensive set of mechanic's tools, in particular standard and deep pattern sockets in both 1/4" and 3/8" drive, universal joints and multiple extension lengths. Clearance is often tight, and having the right tool combination helps. - A lot of stuff needs to come off the car for access, including the X-brace and the cabin air intake plenum (under the wipers), plus of course the intake, engine covers, various electrical connectors, coolant hoses, etc. - My six exhaust flange nuts came off with no problem, but not everyone is as lucky. Use good penetrating oil (Würth, Kroil, PB Blaster) as necessary. I had ordered replacement bolts just in case, and the required new copper-flashed nuts, and got caught in the $19/each bolt trap that others have already reported. Ouch! My advice would be to buy regular M10x40 stainless steel bolts instead, around $2-3 each at the hardware store. My stock headers had weld studs instead of loose bolts, so in order to replace them it would have been necessary to cut of the heads with a power tool. For reassembly it's handy to have one longer bolt for temporary use to pull the exhaust flanges into alignment. - However I took this opportunity to treat myself to a set of Jet-Hot Shorty Headers from Bimmerworld, see separate post. - The stock exhaust manifolds stay on the head. It's easy to lift it free, but it takes two people. - Draining coolant via the engine block bolt is necessary and very messy. But you all knew that. Fluid management and cleanup were a major timewaster.. - Taking the top end apart was straightforward, more so if you're already familiar with the component layout. - The top end gasket set cost some $330 (discounted) and had almost all the required gaskets, and then some (valve stem seals, numerous mystery O-rings). Missing however were the secondary air injection valve to air injection manifold gasket and the two air injection manifold to exhaust manifold gaskets, so I had to reuse my old ones. I also bought new exhaust manifold studs and nuts, and the required new headbolts. Figure on $400 or more for parts, plus new oil and BMW coolant. So it's basically a $500 parts job. - To aid in timing the VANOS on reassembly I wiped the parts clean before taking them off and made alignment marks with a Sharpie on the VANOS gear cup and on one of the VANOS housing bolts next to it. While not precise enough to allow skipping over the proper assembly timing procedure, it was good enough to verify that I'd done that correctly. - The special head bolt socket/extension is slender enough to fit into the narrow space beside the camshafts, meaning they can stay in place. There's also clip on the socket which holds the headbolts for insertion and withdrawal. You REALLY want to use this tool. - Figure on an hour or so to scrape the gasket mating surfaces. I had bought a set of plastic paint scrapers to use on the soft aluminum head. - My valves looked pretty clean. The pistons had a decent layer of carbon on them which I didn't attempt to remove. - You obviously have to be careful when repositioning the head for assembly.. We rolled up a couple of towels into sausages and draped them over the block and lowered to head roughly into position. It was then easy to slide it into exactly the right alignment, lift each end slightly, and pull the towels free. - The rest is just work, albeit lots of it. - Talking to my friendly and helpful dealer mechanic afterwards he told me that he removes a minimum of other stuff from the intake manifold and bungee-cords the whole thing off to one side while taking the head off. Wish I'd thought of that (or asked him first...). Neil 96 M3
-------------------- 4 --------------------
#4. Re: [E36M3] Failed Emissions Testing with JC Chip - from Martin Bullen
Top
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 17:19:42 -0400 From: Martin Bullen <vze322dw@verizon.net> Subject: Re: [E36M3] Failed Emissions Testing with JC Chip Lowell, Last year, around 8k miles ago, and with a then-new O2 sensor, the readings were lower than this year. I was surprised to see they were as high as they turned out to be, even with the stock chip in place. I can't be sure about the car being hot enough, but it was my first question when they told me it had failed the first time. I hope I can eek a few more years out of the cats. 69k miles isn't many miles, and I know lots of our cars go further before needing replacement. There are no rattles or other signs that they're on their last legs. Do you know if there's part number on the chip (or the box for the chip) to confirm it's the correct one for my car? The box is marked as being the chip for a non-EWS car (like mine), with the Euro HFM, but this latter portion is crossed out, apparently by Turner or JC. Thanks for the input. Martin Martin writes: Had my '95 M3 in for annual rolling road emissions testing here in PA, only to find that the car failed with the JC chip installed. After I reinstalled the stock chip, it passed, with no other changes. Martin, Jim Conforti is not on this list anymore but I bet he will confirm. The computer chip (stock or JC) has very little to do with passing the emissions test. The catalytic converter is probably 95% of passing. Was your engine and catalytic converter good and hot when you tested with the JC chip? I'm guessing your catalytic converter was a lot hotter when you tested with the stock chip and (barely) passed. Yes, you just barely passed even with the stock chip. I think your original catalytic converter is about dead. Chances are next year you will not pass no matter what. 10 years is about the life of any catalytic converter. For comparison, my '95 M3 with JC chip and Euro HFM passed the Texas emissions test in July. My results are different but you can look at the magnitude and get some idea. While your best results were 50 to 80 percent of the maximum allowed, mine were all less than 25% of maximum. HC (ppm) Limit: 124 JC: 21 CO (%) Limit: 0.69 JC: 0.10 NOx (ppm) Limit: 937 JC: 248 My '95 M3 had 79,377 miles at the time. I don't think my engine was particularly hot. I think I had just driven 3-4 miles to the test facility and then I know my car sat with the engine off for 20 minutes before the test. I was surprised my M3 passed so easily because I expect my catalytic converter to die soon. Lowell Seaton '95 M3
-------------------- 5 --------------------
#5. E36 Shell Need - from Stan.Shaw@Excell.Net
Top
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 17:28:03 -0400 From: <Stan.Shaw@Excell.Net> Subject: E36 Shell Need A club racer is looking for a E36 shell to repair his M3 damaged in a racing incident. If anyone has one, or knows of one, please contact John Loiodice at jloiodice@benta.com Regards, Stan Shaw Stan.Shaw@Excell.Net Phone: (413) 599-0399 Fax: (413) 599-0421 Excell.Net Owner/Operator http://www.Excell.Net/ 928 Owners Club President http://www.928OC.org/ 928Racing.net Team Member http://www.928Racing.net/ "Liberty once lost is lost forever." - John Adams
-------------------- 6 --------------------
#6. Bimmerworld Jet-Hot Shorty Headers - from Neil Maller
Top
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 17:00:37 -0500 From: Neil Maller <neil.maller@gte.net> Subject: Bimmerworld Jet-Hot Shorty Headers Since I had to do the headgasket job anyway, I thought I'd turn some of those lemons into lemonade and treat myself to a set of headers. I chose the Jet-Hot Shorty Headers from Bimmerworld, mostly because of the very reasonable $599 price. They come both in OBD-I and OBD-II (with air injection and O2 sensor ports) versions. The only thing you seem to give up with these vs. others on the market its that they're not stainless steel. However you do get the proprietary coating, see <http://jet-hot.com/pages/techinfo.html> which is claimed to provide various benefits. Like everything else I've ordered from Bimmerworld the headers arrived quickly and were packed securely. They have a very sexy bunch o' snakes appearance and are well finished in a soft silver colour with the Jet-Hot Sterling coating. We installed them on the bench while the head was off the car. The headers fit and bolted up to the head very nicely. However the curved pipes severely limit access to two or three of the exhaust stud nuts, to the point that they were tricky to secure even off the car. You also want to be sure to tighten down as many of the nuts as possible before installing the secondary air injection manifold. That's when a fitment problem came to light. The air injection manifold has mounting flanges which fit into machined recesses in the exhaust manifold flanges. The Jet-Hot had these recesses too, but they were both too small and the wrong shape. I had to grind quite a bit of material off the air injection flanges for them to fit, and because they're thick stainless steel you'd better have power tools available. A hand file isn't going to do the job in this lifetime. On my car there's a spring steel clip bolted to the back of the cylinder head that routes the O2 sensor cables. I had to cut some of the clip off for clearance. I also thought it advisable to fabricate a bracket to keep the cables clear of the headers near the sensor locations. This bracket is a simple sheet-metal finger that I bolted to the side of the engine block using one of the surplus threaded holes that's there. The header flanges aligned nicely with the rest of the stock exhaust and bolted up cleanly. I guess that it would be very difficult indeed to install headers like these with the head in place, although doubtless not impossible. I wouldn't want to do it. However once installed they tuck very nicely in place, with adequate clearance everywhere. There's a distinct performance pull above about 4K rpm with these headers. However my car also has the Eurosport Cam Kit, so it was probably just waiting for some better breathing on the exhaust side too. The car has never been dyno'd, so I have no hard numbers to support this seat-of-the-pants impression. For those considering headers I'd definitely recommend the Jet-Hots, with the proviso that you be prepared to grind the air injection manifold mounting flanges for proper fit. And of course Bimmerworld is always a reliable vendor, as well as a long-time List sponsor. Neil 96 M3
-------------------- 7 --------------------
#7. Re: Need O2 sensor - from Thomas E. Tice
Top
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 22:30:46 -0400 From: "Thomas E. Tice" <tetice@triad.rr.com> Subject: Re: Need O2 sensor "I strongly advise you to disconnect and replace them one by one to avoid any wrong connections. Please don't make me confess why..." Neil 96 M3 Hi Neil, Sounds like good advice. Unfortunately, a little too late for me as my cylinder head and exhaust manifold have been off the car for a few weeks now. I'm close to reinstalling which means all I have now is two O2 sensors on the manifolds with loose wires and I have no idea which one plugged in where. Can you share with the group which one goes to which connector. Thanks, Tom Tice '98 M3/4 '99 540/6 '98 328iC '02 325iC
-------------------- 8 --------------------
#8. RE: [E36M3] Bimmerworld Jet-Hot Shorty Headers - from Thomas E. Tice
Top
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 22:44:05 -0400 From: "Thomas E. Tice" <tetice@triad.rr.com> Subject: RE: [E36M3] Bimmerworld Jet-Hot Shorty Headers Neil, Thanks for the interesting write up on the headers. I have considered this option as well but have been advised by some that no exhaust upgrade/modification will give a significant improvement in power as long as you have a cat in the system. Your experience certainly seems to suggest otherwise...But before I bolt my stock manifold system back into place, I like to hear from anyone with any data (dyno before and after, etc.) that can back up Neil's seat of the pants dyno. TIA, Tom Tice '98 M3/4 '99 540/6 '98 328iC '02 325iC
-------------------- 9 --------------------
#9. RE: [E36M3] Master cylinder? - from Jeremy Conners
Top
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 22:52:08 -0400 From: "Jeremy Conners" <jeremy.conners@comcast.net> Subject: RE: [E36M3] Master cylinder? I should clarify my previous posting: In the industry, this noise is known as 'whoosh'. It is the noise made by air rushing from the cabin area into the brake booster. During operation a vacuum is created in the brake booster from the intake. This vacuum is held due to a check valve between them. When the brakes are applied a set of valves open that channel atmospheric pressure into the booster. The pressure difference in the booster, the number of stages in the booster, the diameter of each stage, and the rate tuning of the valving defines the supplemental boost applied to the master cylinder in addition to the driver applied force. After turning off the ignition you will get a few applies to the brake pedal with decreasing brake boost. The system will be boosted until atmospheric pressure is realized on both sides of the booster stage(s). This noise is not usually apparent when the engine is running; however, if you were in your garage after a drive with the windows down, the engine off, etc. you can probably hear it easily. Jeremy 97 M3 // -----Original Message----- // From: Jeremy Conners [mailto:jeremy.conners@comcast.net] // Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2004 11:56 PM // To: E36M3 // Subject: RE: [E36M3] Master cylinder? // // Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 23:49:10 -0400 // From: "Jeremy Conners" <jeremy.conners@comcast.net> // Subject: RE: [E36M3] Master cylinder? // // By "loss of air", I assume you're meaning a noise perceptible from the // driver's seat. // // You're probably hearing the bellows from around the master cylinder input // rod. They expand and contract when you press and release the pedal, // respectively. // // Jeremy // 97 M3 // // // -----Original Message----- // // From: Shelhart2@aol.com [mailto:Shelhart2@aol.com] // // Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2004 10:16 PM // // To: E36M3 // // Subject: [E36M3] Master cylinder? // // // // Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 22:08:04 EDT // // From: Shelhart2@aol.com // // Subject: Master cylinder? // // // // I rebuilt the rear calipers and put them back on tonight. I bled the // // brakes // // with my home made bleeder RR,LR, RF and finally the closest to master // // cylinder. I am getting good pedal put hear a faint "loss of air" when // // depressing // // hard. I don't feel any loss in pedal and it remains firm. The brief // // sound // // goes away abruptly. I have yet to test drive it. I don't recall // // hearing this // // before, however, may not have paid attention. // // // // BTW, I only ran a max of 14 PSI through my bleeder. TIA. // // // // Shel // // 1998 M3 // // 2002 996 // // // // // // ************************************************* // // Please help support the E36M3 list by visiting our sponsors: // // // // Bimmerworld http://www.bimmerworld.com // // Turner Motorsport http://www.turnermotorsport.com // // Eurosport High Performance http://www.eurosporthighperformance.com // // Rogue Engineering http://www.rogueengineering.com // // // // DIGEST INFORMATION: // // http://www.bmw-m.net/resources/digest_info.htm // // ************************************************* // // // // // ************************************************* // Please help support the E36M3 list by visiting our sponsors: // // Bimmerworld http://www.bimmerworld.com // Turner Motorsport http://www.turnermotorsport.com // Eurosport High Performance http://www.eurosporthighperformance.com // Rogue Engineering http://www.rogueengineering.com // // DIGEST INFORMATION: // http://www.bmw-m.net/resources/digest_info.htm // *************************************************
-------------------- 10 --------------------
#10. Re: [E36M3] Failed Emissions Testing with JC Chip - from LoweSeaton@aol.com
Top
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 01:40:46 EDT From: LoweSeaton@aol.com Subject: Re: [E36M3] Failed Emissions Testing with JC Chip Martin writes: I hope I can eek a few more years out of the cats. 69k miles isn't many miles, and I know lots of our cars go further before needing replacement. There are no rattles or other signs that they're on their last legs. Martin, Like everything, life expectancy of cats varies greatly for different people. If you started your car up and drove non-stop back and forth across the country on the Interstate, you would get a lot more miles out it than somebody who drives 2 miles at a time in the winter. The life probably depends on the quality of gas and amount of oil your car burns. I do know from experience that ethylene glycol (i.e., antifreeze) will quickly ruin a cat [You listening Neil?]. Rattles and squeaks have nothing to do with the performance of the cat. What you are worried about is "fouling" the metals (or whatever) inside the catalytic converter. Do you know if there's part number on the chip (or the box for the chip) to confirm it's the correct one for my car? The box is marked as being the chip for a non-EWS car (like mine), with the Euro HFM, but this latter portion is crossed out, apparently by Turner or JC. If your chip came from Turner Motorsport, then you can rest assured it is genuine. My Euro HFM chip also came from Turner. It is labeled T413-301 on the box the chip came in. Mine is for an EWS model. I'm going to guess based on the literature I have that your non-EWS chip should be labeled T413-300. However, if you are at all concerned about the authenticity of your chip, contact Josh at _eurosprt@xmission.com_ (mailto:eurosprt@xmission.com) You could probably mail your chip to him to absolutely confirm what you have. Lowell Seaton '95 M3