-------------------- 1 --------------------
#1. engine and rear subframe - from jeffrey Lin
Top
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 09:47:05 -0700 (PDT) From: jeffrey Lin <jeffreywlin@yahoo.com> Subject: engine and rear subframe --- e36m3@bmw-m.net <e36m3@bmw-m.net> wrote: > ************************************************************** > E36M3 List - Forum for Discussion of E36M3 Series Automobiles > ************************************************************** > BMWMPower on the Web: http://www.bmw-m.net > ************************************************************** > > This digest contains the following messages: > > 1. Check Engine Codes? > by: Stan Shaw <Stan.Shaw@Excell.Net> > 2. FS: Rogue Octane SSK - $225 > by: <mikeymaigs@comcast.net> > 3. Independent Service in IL > by: Roan Low <low.d@comcast.net> > 4. blown head gasket woes > by: Brad DeMotte <brad@demottearchitects.com> > 5. <WTB> Passenger side Vader seatback in black leather > by: Matt Weimer <mjweimer@yahoo.com> > 6. Re: [E36M3] blown head gasket woes > by: Chester Wong <chester_p_wong@yahoo.com> > 7. Mike Miller's Roundel Ravings > by: Patrick Kelly <pkelly@agincourtcapital.com> > 8. RE: [E36M3] blown head gasket woes > by: Matthew Teel <mteel@beluga.com> > 9. Re: [E36M3] Mike Miller's Roundel Ravings > by: Walter J <m3gtr@adelphia.net> > 10. RE: [E36M3] blown head gasket woes > by: Andrew Kalman <aek@pumpkininc.com> > > -------------------- 1 -------------------- > Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2005 18:51:36 -0400 > From: "Stan Shaw" <Stan.Shaw@Excell.Net> > Subject: Check Engine Codes? > > Thank you Jeremy. > > 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 > > > > > -------------------- 2 -------------------- > Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2005 22:54:16 +0000 > From: mikeymaigs@comcast.net > Subject: FS: Rogue Octane SSK - $225 > > Gruppe, > > 25k mile old Rogue Engineering Octane Short Shift Kit. > > http://forums.bimmerforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=412841 > > Please e-mail me if interested. Located in Santa Clara, CA. > > Thanks, > Mike > > > -------------------- 3 -------------------- > Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2005 22:43:36 -0500 > From: "Roan Low" <low.d@comcast.net> > Subject: Independent Service in IL > > > The IAIBMWSP has only 3 shops listed for IL, and only 1 near me. > > Does anyone have any opinion regarding Euroquipe in St. Charles, IL or any > other recommendation for someone in the NW Suburbs of Chicago? > > Thanks, > Roan. > 99 M3 > Hoffman Estates, IL === Message Truncated ===
-------------------- 2 --------------------
#2. Re: Mike Miller's Roundel Ravings - from Steve Walsh
Top
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 09:50:34 -0700 From: Steve Walsh <stevewalsh@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: Mike Miller's Roundel Ravings >The "Tech Talk" columnist in Roundel, Mike Miller, keeps harping on the >"rear subframe failure" of E36's, as if every car is on the verge of >dropping its rear end. > > Is there anyone here who has actually experienced, first-hand, this? I >don't recall it EVER coming up on this list, at least in the last five >years. It happened on my 93 325is back in 96. This was before I started doing track events. I was the second owner but I suspect the previous owner was more poseur than driver, given the 'tasteful' stereo upgrades and ///M3 badge I had the dealership remove. After 200K of mixed street and track driving, my conclusion is that worn RSMs, RTABs and rear subframe bushing will lead to subframe failure. Keep those bushings in good order, and you'll be fine. So, get 'em checked, people...
-------------------- 3 --------------------
#3. engine and rear subframe - from jeffrey Lin
Top
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 09:49:42 -0700 (PDT) From: jeffrey Lin <jeffreywlin@yahoo.com> Subject: engine and rear subframe on head gasket...do a leak down test...it might just be better to replace the motor. a full motor swap is easier than pulling the head and rebuilding the top end on rear subframe, yes they rip out all the time in race cars....also happens in e30 race cars....
-------------------- 4 --------------------
#4. engine and rear subframe - from jeffrey Lin
Top
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 09:50:53 -0700 (PDT) From: jeffrey Lin <jeffreywlin@yahoo.com> Subject: engine and rear subframe on head gasket...do a leak down test...it might just be better to replace the motor. a full motor swap is easier than pulling the head and rebuilding the top end on rear subframe, yes they rip out all the time in race cars....also happens in e30 race cars....
-------------------- 5 --------------------
#5. Re: RE: [E36M3] blown head gasket woes - from Andrew Kalman
Top
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 09:54:41 -0700 From: Andrew Kalman <aek@pumpkininc.com> Subject: Re: RE: [E36M3] blown head gasket woes Jack wrote: > > I chose not to use the >> Cometic all-stainless gasket because it seems that it'll only work if >> you freshly cut/shave the head. M3 heads allow for 0.012" removal, >> and I didn't want to start removing material if I didn't have to. >> If/when the head fails again, then I will probably shave it and go >> with a Cometic (which is +0.012" thick), which expects you to take >> the full 0.012" off ... > >That's not true. The thickness of the Cometic is 1.8mm vs. the >stock size of 1.74mm. The extra 0.06mm (mm, not " as you indicate >above) is part of the compression of the gasket. Note that the head >should be shaved a touch, a minimal touch, simply to have a clean >surface. The 0.012" (0.3mm, that's a lot!) you speak of I don't >understand at all, that's not what Cometic says and it's not the >thickness the standard gasket comes in. Also not that Cometic will >make the gasket any thickness you want pretty much so if you do have >a thin head already you could help make up for this. The Cometic C4329-071 is the M3 (3.0l & 3.2l) gasket -- it's 0.071" thick, which is 1.80mm. BMW specs that the minimum head height is to be 139.7mm, from 140.0mm. That's 0.3mm, or 0.012". I can't say how much the Cometic crushes -- I have one here that failed to seal the oil and water passages, but did seal the combustion chambers. This was without any head machining on a 17,000 mile head that measured perfect. The important thing is that some cleanup is absolutely necessary, as the Cometic simply will not seal on anything but a freshly machined head, or perhaps one that already was machined for the Cometic. Jack and the other engine builders will have more data on that (and the Cometic appears to have a good reputation as well, so don't discount it because of my experience). Just make sure you find someone who can really do the cut well (e.g. with a fly cutter or a head machine), not someone who will put it on a horizontal belt sander! For some reason the +0.012" and the Cometic thickness were tied together in my head. Sorry to mislead anyone on that. -- ______________________________________ Andrew E. Kalman, Ph.D. aek@pumpkininc.com
-------------------- 6 --------------------
#6. Re: [E36M3] engine and rear subframe - from Chester Wong
Top
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 09:59:32 -0700 (PDT) From: Chester Wong <chester_p_wong@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] engine and rear subframe The only qualms I have is using an engine with no known history. Was it ever overrreved? Was it abused? Etc, etc... --- jeffrey Lin <jeffreywlin@yahoo.com> wrote: > on head gasket...do a leak down test...it might just > be better to replace the motor. a full motor swap is > easier than pulling the head and rebuilding the top > end >
-------------------- 7 --------------------
#7. engine and rear subframe - from jeffrey Lin
Top
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 10:14:35 -0700 (PDT) From: jeffrey Lin <jeffreywlin@yahoo.com> Subject: engine and rear subframe on head gasket...do a leak down test...it might just be better to replace the motor. a full motor swap is easier than pulling the head and rebuilding the top end on rear subframe, yes they rip out all the time in race cars....also happens in e30 race cars....
-------------------- 8 --------------------
#8. RE: blown head gasket woes - from Burgess, Kim L
Top
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 10:17:45 -0700 From: "Burgess, Kim L" <kim.l.burgess@boeing.com> Subject: RE: blown head gasket woes To which I'll add: Cams and pistons are marginally different, larger bore may also bump compression with a reduction in compression height. ------- "marco" <m3driver@iname.com> mentioned: ....which is interesting since the heads are _practically_ identical. So are the blocks. ----- David Ngo <rudngo@yahoo.com> responded: For the 3.2L motors, the TIS says that you should not machine the head at all. There is no such warning for the 3.0L motors. --- Andrew Kalman <aek@pumpkininc.com> wrote: (95)M3 heads allow for 0.012" removal, and I didn't want to start removing material if I didn't have to.
-------------------- 9 --------------------
#9. [E36M3] RE: blown head gasket woes - from marco
Top
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 10:31:31 -0700 From: "marco" <m3driver@iname.com> Subject: [E36M3] RE: blown head gasket woes BTW - in about a month I should have a complete set of shrick cams, bigger injectors, bigger HFM, valve springs, etc for an S50 for sale. Run for about 12 race weekends. Maybe 20 hours total run time. Replaced by a bunch of custom stuff. So if anyone is interested give me a yell. Marco -----Original Message----- From: Burgess, Kim L [mailto:kim.l.burgess@boeing.com] Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2005 10:25 AM To: E36M3 Subject: [e36m3] [E36M3] RE: blown head gasket woes Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 10:17:45 -0700 From: "Burgess, Kim L" <kim.l.burgess@boeing.com> Subject: RE: blown head gasket woes To which I'll add: Cams and pistons are marginally different, larger bore may also bump compression with a reduction in compression height. ------- "marco" <m3driver@iname.com> mentioned: .....which is interesting since the heads are _practically_ identical. So are the blocks. ----- David Ngo <rudngo@yahoo.com> responded: For the 3.2L motors, the TIS says that you should not machine the head at all. There is no such warning for the 3.0L motors. --- Andrew Kalman <aek@pumpkininc.com> wrote: (95)M3 heads allow for 0.012" removal, and I didn't want to start removing material if I didn't have to. ************************************************* 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 Treehouse Racing http://www.treehouseracing.com Elephant Motorsports Inc. http://www.elephantmotorsports.com DIGEST INFORMATION: http://www.bmw-m.net/resources/digest_info.htm *************************************************
-------------------- 10 --------------------
#10. Re: [E36M3] Mike Miller's Roundel Ravings - from Peter
Top
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 11:43:52 -0500 From: Peter <JPWheelr@dakarm3.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] Mike Miller's Roundel Ravings I have experienced a rear subframe failure, on a 1993 325is, and the only other car I have seen it on in person is a 92 325i. Both manuals (I think that had a lot to do with it in both cases...) My is was nearly beyond repair - had to order the factory reenforcement kit, and about 10 hours of cutting, welding, and aligning The 92 needed some welding and sheet metal. Anyway, 95+ cars (especially M's) are so reenforced that it seems dang near impossible to happen. The only e36 issue I've seen on an M was a 97 M3 4 door where a shock had shot through the shock tower because the tower gave (negligent owner sold car to less negligent owner that was told "That's a normal noise") I only see about 200 e36's / year in the shop here, so I might be taking from too small a sample. Peter Ex Club Member Blood Pressure much lower since leaving Roundel in plastic bag (never reading), and refusing to go to chapter meetings...