The BMW UUC Digest Volume 1 : Issue 44 : "text" Format Messages in this Issue: Re: Diff recommendations for my 325e 3.46 or 3.73 Re: Reference Only E36 95' Avus Blue M3 w/66K for $7250.00 Re: Reference Only E36 95' Avus Blue M3 w/66K for $7250.00 Re: intermittent shimmy (even) with new tires? Re: Does Shell Gas contain ethanol? Re: Does Shell Gas contain ethanol? Re: [e36] Still E30 fuel woes Re: <E36> M52 air pump <E36> M52 air pump Re: [E36 and E46] Seeking informed opinions Re: 330 E46 vs 96-99 E36M3 Re: '95 slam Re: [E36 and E46] Seeking informed opinions E36 M3 vs Re: Reference Only E36 95' Avus Blue M3 w/66K for
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 12:55:02 -0500 From: "Chris Pawlowicz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Carey Probst" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Diff recommendations for my 325e 3.46 or 3.73 Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Carey asks > I want to swap the differential for lower gears and want some advice. I'm thinking of either the 3.46 or 3.73 ratios. >...will be using the 325e for track, occasional local driving, and trips to the airport (about 30 miles) for business trips. > With the Conforti chip, the rpms are about 5300. > > Is the 3.73 too deep for my use? I calculated the top speed with different ratios using the following (from European Car article dec '97) theoretical top speed = ( tire diameter (inch) * max rpm (5th gear)) / (diff gear ratio * 336) where diff gear ratio is ring:pinion ratio * 0.81 (overdrive) so for 195/65-14 tires that means tire diameter of 23.9 inch and using 5300rpm max I get ratio top speed* [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2.93 160 2200 3.25 142 2400 3.46 135 2600 3.73 125 2800 4.10 115 3000 for my 325i I went from a 3.73 to a 4.10 and loved the change 3.73 [EMAIL PROTECTED] mph [EMAIL PROTECTED] mph 4.10 [EMAIL PROTECTED] mph [EMAIL PROTECTED] mph and of course the 'top speed' is theoretical.. I don't think you can flog an E30 above ~130mph without serious horsepower (mine flat out couldn't pull to redline in 5th with the 3.73, but does pull with the 4.10 and was clocked via laser doing 215 km/h 135mph @ ~6300 rpm (speedo indicated 225 km/h) after a looooooong straightaway) so the numbers say a 3.73 is ok, you won't really lose any performance.. and I know a local club member with a 3.73 on his eta and he finds it ok.. but just be prepared to have the rpm up there alll the time you might also think about whether you want to be using 5th gear at your local track..? with 4th gear (1:1 ratio) and 5300rpm, a 3.73 will be maxed out at 100 mph.. a 3.46 will get you 110mph in 4th.. hope this helps Chris Pawlowicz Stebro Stainless Performance Exhaust http://cpcperformance.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 12:06:15 -0500 From: "Lorenzetti, Peter - BLS CTR" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Reference Only E36 95' Avus Blue M3 w/66K for $7250.00 Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Kirk and Neil, I respect your 'not wanting' an e36 M3. For those of us who do: I am curious about the problems associated with the '95 model year as that is the first to become affordable and it has OBD-I. I thought the motors were bulletproof after the water pump has been replaced. Is the valve spring retainer problem limited to the '95? After failure, is it a valve train rebuilt or pistons/head too? What else to worry? These cars are in my price range and appeal to me as an everyday replacement to my e28 M5. Thanks, Peter ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 11:08:39 -0800 From: Bora Akyol (BMW) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Lorenzetti, Peter - BLS CTR" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Reference Only E36 95' Avus Blue M3 w/66K for $7250.00 Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> There are no problems with the 95 M3, I have driven one well past 100K miles. Just change the water pump, and get a good inspection. Bora On Thursday, Dec 4, 2003, at 09:06 US/Pacific, Lorenzetti, Peter - BLS CTR wrote: > Search the > ARCHIVES:http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Kirk and Neil, > > I respect your 'not wanting' an e36 M3. For those of us who do: I am > curious about the problems associated with the '95 model year as that > is the > first to become affordable and it has OBD-I. I thought the motors were > bulletproof after the water pump has been replaced. Is the valve > spring > retainer problem limited to the '95? After failure, is it a valve > train > rebuilt or pistons/head too? What else to worry? These cars are in my > price range and appeal to me as an everyday replacement to my e28 M5. > > Thanks, > Peter > > _______________________________________________________________________ > ___ > In memory of Michel Potheau - friend, enthusiast, founder of the BMW > CCA. > > UUC Motorwerks - BMW Performance Fine-tuning and home of the Ultimate > Short Shifter - accept no substitutes! > 908-874-9092 . http://www.uucmotorwerks.com > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 22:30:23 -0500 From: "Gary Derian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Herman Chan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: intermittent shimmy (even) with new tires? Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sounds like a dynamic imbalance. The front tires try to shake side to side. When they are in phase, they add together and you feel it. When the shakes are opposite, they cancel in the steering rack and you don't feel it. One thing I always do when fitting new tires is to measure the wheel runout, then mount the tires so the harmonic mark is at the low spot of the wheel runout. Gary Derian > > I just had a set of new BS RE750 tires installed on my E36 coupe, but > something doesn't seem right. > > Despite repeated attempts at rebalancing by two different shops (in > the same chain), they can't seem to get rid of a slight shimmy in the > steering wheel at highway speeds, particularly in the 65-75 sweet > spot. Slower or faster is no problem, and I think I've isolated it > to one pair of tires by rotating front to back. This shop doesn't > use the GSP9700 balancing machines, so they can't take road force > measurements. > > All front suspension parts, aside from tie rods, are relatively > fresh. There weren't any problems with the old tires that were just > replaced; the only variable that has changed is the tires. > > What I can't figure out is why the shimmy seems to come and go. It > may be fine on one stretch of road, but throw in a few turns, and it > comes back strongest in mid bend, the goes away again, maybe as the > phase of the wheels change. Or perhaps old tie rods are amplifying a > slight balance problem? How much vibration is officially/typically > acceptable anyway? > > Any suggestions? I can probably make use of the 30 day satisfaction > guarantee, but I'm otherwise happy with the tires so far. > > Herman > __________________________________________________________________________ > In memory of Michel Potheau - friend, enthusiast, founder of the BMW CCA. > > UUC Motorwerks - BMW Performance Fine-tuning and home of the Ultimate > Short Shifter - accept no substitutes! > 908-874-9092 . http://www.uucmotorwerks.com > ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 08:10:45 -0800 From: Bora Akyol <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Scott & Charlotte Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "UUC Digest" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Does Shell Gas contain ethanol? Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> All 76 stations have ethanol gas. The funny thing is that we (as in state of CA) can actually meet the emissions requirements without any oxygenates in the gasoline. But Federal Government insists on the oxygenates to the severe pressure from the Midwestern corn farmers. Ethanol is made from corn. Oxygenated gas actually results in more green house gas emissions due to the lower fuel economy with oxygenates. Bora On Wednesday, Dec 3, 2003, at 20:55 US/Pacific, Scott & Charlotte Miller wrote: > Search the > ARCHIVES:http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Just to clarify, California law requires that gasolines include an > oxygenate. MTBE and ethanol are oxygenates. As Mike said, MTBE has > contaminated many ground water sources and cannot be cleaned up. It is > suspected of being a carcinogen. > > When Davis was still Governor (since recalled and replaced by the > Governator), he signed an order requiring that MTBE be phased out. The > deadline passed but was extended, supposedly because the gas companies > cannot generate enough ethanol to replace all the MTBE right away. So > for > now, some California stations sell gas with MTBE, and some sell gas > with > ethanol. > > Scott Miller > GGC BMW CCA ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 14:05:47 -0500 From: Steve Stoner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: UUC Digest <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Does Shell Gas contain ethanol? Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Bora writes <Oxygenated gas actually results in more green house gas emissions due to the lower fuel economy with oxygenates.> Not to mention the fuel, fertilizer, pesticide and energy to grow, harvest and process the corn into alchohol..... Steve Stoner ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 11:28:21 -0800 From: Kit Wetzler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [e36] Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>Actually, many agree that the late 1995 model year production were the best. >>BMW fixed the valve-spring retainer issue in August 1995, I think. >>The OBD1 3.0 liter engines were the most tunable with their larger intake >>rails. Come on guys, this is totally not true. OBD-1 ecus are easier to tune, simply because they use a replaceable eprom chip and because OBD-1 is less picky about closed loop driving conditions. That said, (and we've had this argument many many times,) you can make just as much power with more midrange out of the 3.2l motors. before I pulled some parts off of it, my 97 was making 240 rwhp, without opening up the motor. full obd-2 intact, etc. (not exactly emissions legal, but... whose modified car is?) -kit 97 m3 04 s2000 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 14:56:35 -0500 (EST) From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (bmw list) Subject: Still E30 fuel woes Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Did I mention that I hate intermitent problems? Good. I swapped out the main and fule pump relays last night. It all looked good. Got the car home thought it was fixed. Went out again last night and it quit again. No restart. I was able to get it to catch briefly by cycling the ignition key between off and run several times. I was able to roll down a hill to a parking lot and there it restarted and got me home. Given the symptoms that I noticed when it quit (kept trying to recover and barely kept idling for several seconds while I was bouncing down the road) the behavior while "dead" (I could build up enough pressure for a start by cycling the ignition) and that bouncing it over a sidewalk to get into a parking lot caused the problem to go away (for now) leads me to believe that my main pump is failing in a strange goes/doesn't go sort of way. Almost like a small fan with bad bearings. If it starts it is Ok for a while. Sometimes it bogs down and a good whack can get it moving again. Who was it that suggested wacking the pump as a test? I think you may be the winner here. -- Joe, not fixing anything till I am done with the flu. -- Joseph M. Krzeszewski Network Operations [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jack of All Trades, Master of None... Yet ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 13:57:04 -0600 From: "Malcolm Reitz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: <E36> M52 air pump Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Kevin, I assume you are referring to the unit that sits up next to the passenger-side firewall? Mine died about a year ago. Yours will set the CEL when it goes completely dead, as the pump is an emissions control device. As for the water, is your pump's intake a long hose that ends up behind the headlight? I'll bet the original water baffle on the hose inlet is missing. Malcolm '88 M5 '98 328i -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin Jay (Mr.Fabulous) Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 9:04 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: <E36> M52 air pump Search the ARCHIVES:http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] So it seems the air pump on my M52 motor is dead. Strange death, too... it spins, but very slowly. I pulled the inlet hose off, & found a bit of water? Not sure if that's a cause, effect, or ulrelated artifact... but it's odd (how did water get in here?). Are there any dire consequences of having this not run for an extended period of time (will this chew up my cats, etc)? Any tips/BTDTs y'all could share for replacing this would be appreciated. - Kevin Jay '96 328is, red/tan, usual suspension tricks, dead air pump ________________________________________________________________________ __ In memory of Michel Potheau - friend, enthusiast, founder of the BMW CCA. UUC Motorwerks - BMW Performance Fine-tuning and home of the Ultimate Short Shifter - accept no substitutes! 908-874-9092 . http://www.uucmotorwerks.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 12:15:47 -0800 (PST) From: Neil Deshpande <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: <E36> M52 air pump Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Kevin: Just helped Mr John Stoj replace the air pump on his 97 M3 last weekend. It is quite easy, HOWEVER, be very careful when dealing with the 3 rubber mounts (rubber cylinders with threaded rods moulded in at each end) that hold the pump to the mounting ring. John sheared one and it was $17 at the dealer with discount! The pump is around $200 or so. So, just those three tiny grommets are $21 each list! We walked into the dealer thining we'd replace all three just for the heck of it. We walked out with one! When we got home, we washed and cleaned the other two, cradling them carefully. <grin>. The mounts have hex ends that you can hold in a wrench while loosening the nuts that hold the to the pump or mounting ring. The air pump sucks air through a small air filter. If you drive enough water into the engine bay, it could suck it in. Also, it could be condensate from humid air. There should be little/no consequences of not having this part working. AFAIK, it just accelerates catalyst light-off when the engine is cold. The one on my M5 (driven off the engine and $900!) runs for only 180s max and does not run at all in the summer other than the overnight cooling morning start. Neil Deshpande *** "Kevin Jay (Mr.Fabulous)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> So it seems the air pump on my M52 motor is dead. Strange death, too... it spins, but very slowly. I pulled the inlet hose off, & found a bit of water? Not sure if that's a cause, effect, or ulrelated artifact... but it's odd (how did water get in here?). Are there any dire consequences of having this not run for an extended period of time (will this chew up my cats, etc)? Any tips/BTDTs y'all could share for replacing this would be appreciated. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 16:01:17 -0600 (CST) From: "Kevin Jay (Mr.Fabulous)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [E36 and E46] Seeking informed opinions Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> My '96 E36 has been through seven Wisconsin winters. The undercarriage isn't as pristine as when the car was new, but beyond that I haven't noticed any discernable winter wear. YMMV... but from what I've seen, these cars just don't seem to rust (I don't know that I've ever seen a rusted E36). - k (but I hear you about airdamn problems, I mashed the front end of my VR6 Corrado on a snowbank pretty badly around 10 years ago) --- original message --- From: "Chris Pawlowicz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [E36 and E46] Seeking informed opinions Andrew says > You made a point about not storing the car for winter. I think the risks in using > modern passenger cars all year round > are exaggerated. [... snip] except for the fact that lots of places dump tons and tons of salt on the roads.. and as good as modern cars are, 5 year old ones used all winter often need new fenders.. new rockers.. 10 year old ones need new floorpans.. plus other body repair (inside wheel wells, trunk lid and rear license plate area, gas filler area) also, when you lower a car or buy one already pretty low, you do have to worry about front air dam damage and getting high-centred on snowdrifts BMWs are pretty poor quality-wise when it comes to electronics.. winter salt and slush work it's way into lots of connectors wreaking havoc on many systems - and the newer the car, the more electronic gizmos. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 17:20:00 -0500 From: "Gaudio, Stefano" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: 330 E46 vs 96-99 E36M3 Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I had the same dilemma in 2001. I drove them both, asked around, researched, etc... What it came down to was that I just fell in love with the M3 driving experience. The 330 coupe had sport pkg with conti tires and handled great but just not as well as the M3. Both are excellent choices. The choice YOU have to make is: are you more of a GT or Sports Car kind of a guy? I bought a stock black '98 M3 fully loaded and put her through: autoXs (very successfully) track events (loads of fun!!!) a few 400mile trips (nothing crazy but enough to get intimate w the suspension/potholes) snow blizzards (with snows tires obviously) ...all very happily. Good luck. Stefano _________________________________________________________________ This e-mail and any attachments may be confidential or legally privileged. If you received this message in error or are not the intended recipient, you should destroy the e-mail message and any attachments or copies, and you are prohibited from retaining, distributing, disclosing or using any information contained herein. Please inform us of the erroneous delivery by return e-mail. Thank you for your cooperation. _________________________________________________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 18:29:30 -0500 From: "Jason O'Dell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: '95 slam Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Fella's, with all this banter about the 95's going, is there a good website about the production date info?, are any past 1/95 the best?, I am considering one in the near future. Jason _________________________________________________________________ Take advantage of our best MSN Dial-up offer of the year � six months @$9.95/month. Sign up now! http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/dialup ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 15:43:33 -0800 From: Jim Bassett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Peter Guagenti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [E36 and E46] Seeking informed opinions E36 M3 vs Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> At 06:53 PM 12/3/03, Peter Guagenti wrote: > > Unless you just want the status of an M car, sounds like the E46 non-M > > would be the right car for you. > >My 330iPP is the best of both worlds -- just as quick as a luxo-M3 sedan but >more comfortable, smoother ride, a better stereo, and much better looks. So why aren't we taking the the 330iPP up to Thunderhill this weekend? <big grin>. You still owe me a ride (drive?) in it. (Peter & I are crewing for a team in the 25-Hour Enduro at Thunderhill. I'm picking him up and driving to the track in the '98 luxo-M3 sedan. :-)) Jim Bassett 1998 M3/4 - non-Lux luxo-sedan :-) 1993 325is #44 JP/A5 - attachment points for a cup holder and Sony Discman & speakers, apparently a luxo-racecar :-) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 15:52:09 -0800 From: Jim Bassett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Lorenzetti, Peter - BLS CTR" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Reference Only E36 95' Avus Blue M3 w/66K for Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> At 09:06 AM 12/4/03, Lorenzetti, Peter - BLS CTR wrote: >I respect your 'not wanting' an e36 M3. For those of us who do: I am >curious about the problems associated with the '95 model year as that is the >first to become affordable and it has OBD-I. I thought the motors were >bulletproof after the water pump has been replaced. They generally are, unless you mis-shift. >Is the valve spring >retainer problem limited to the '95? Yes. >After failure, is it a valve train >rebuilt or pistons/head too? Generally just the valve train, but depends on how severe the incident was. I mis-shifted the race car (4th to 1st - ouch!) which only required valve work. >What else to worry? These cars are in my >price range and appeal to me as an everyday replacement to my e28 M5. They are great daily-driving cars, but do have a few things that need to be addressed. Primarily rear shock mounts (replace with Ground Control or JTD), stock shocks which wear out fairly early, and radiator necks that tend to break around 50,000 miles. Power steering hoses are also a weak point. But there are a lot of resources out there for repairs, and all lot is DIY. Cheers, Jim Bassett 1998 M3/4 - ~137,000 miles, BTDT (in some cases, twice), still the best car I've ever owned 1993 325is #44 JP/A5 - at times, more fun than the M3 :-) ------------------------------ End of [bmwuucdigest] digest(15 messages) **********
