The BMW UUC Digest Volume 3 : Issue 549 : "text" Format Messages in this Issue: Re: 1992 BMW 325is to M3 Motor Swap 1991 Z1 on ebay Re: 1991 Z1 on ebay Re: 1991 Z1 on ebay Re: 1991 Z1 on ebay Re: 1991 Z1 on ebay Re: 1991 Z1 on ebay Re: 1991 Z1 on ebay Re: 1991 Z1 on ebay Re: 1991 Z1 on ebay Re: 95 vs 96-9 E36 //M3 control arms and bushings Re: 95 vs 96-9 E36 //M3 control arms and bushings Re: 95 vs 96-9 E36 //M3 control arms and bushings
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 06:11:20 -0500 From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Subject: Re: 1992 BMW 325is to M3 Motor Swap Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Yeah... 92 harness and DME will not work on the 3.0l. Well... I guess I shouldn't say WON'T - That's one of our specialties, making things that "don't" work, WORK. But it's not what you want. You'll need aither a 413 or a 506 DME and matching harness from a 325i or 95 M3. ______________________________________________ Jon Siccardi - DM #053 TreehouseRacing.com M50conversion.com 615.333.9118 ______________________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Dadgar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, August 19, 2007 10:28 PM Subject: Re: [UUC] 1992 BMW 325is to M3 Motor Swap > On Aug 19, 2007, at 6:06 PM, Marco Romani wrote: >> If you go with a M3 tranny you will need a different drive shaft also. >> I'm >> not sure if a M3 diff will fit in a 325 rearsubframe but my guess is it >> will. > > It's the same diff - it will fit fine. > >> However - putting a M3 engine in a 325 opens you up to a higher risk of >> having the rear subframe mounts rip out. An M3 came with beefier >> mounting >> points for the rear subframe. > > The reinforcements are about $25 from BMW. It's the labor that's a > killer. Figure $700-1000 for the install, but well worth doing. > > Reinforce the rear trailing arm mounts while you're back there. > >> One other thing I'd do a bit more research on the 92 ecu and engine >> harness >> being compatible with an M3 motor. The 92 IIRC did not have vanos so I >> doubt the wiring harness on a 92 has the appropriate connectors to >> control >> the vanos of the M3. Starting in 93 all E36s had Vanos. > > This is probably going to be an issue, for the reasons that Marco listed. > > - Mark > ----- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Check out my JustRacing homepage at: > http://www.justracing.com/homepage/mdadgar > > > > Search the ARCHIVES:http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] > > > __________________________________________________________________________ > 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, 22 Aug 2007 07:56:30 -0400 From: johngrills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: bmwuucdigest list <[email protected]> Subject: 1991 Z1 on ebay Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Found this from a post on the yahoo iC forum item: 140149358400 pretty nice collector! cheers! John Grills National Capital Chapter BMWCCA ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 08:17:24 -0500 From: "Alex Cagann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Subject: Re: 1991 Z1 on ebay Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> He wants over $60k for this car. Wow. Seems they made about 8,000 of these things. Makes me wonder why nice E28 M5's aren't trading for much more money than what they bring. They made only about 2,000 of those, and they were also hand built. I know a guy in town here that has an 88 M5 with 15k miles on it. Unfortunately, he will not part with it right now. Damn him. :-) Alex Cagann ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 08:36:59 -0400 From: "Jason Kay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [email protected] Subject: Re: 1991 Z1 on ebay Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I think he's trying to get that $$ figure b/c the Z1 was never imported into the US... which leads me to question if its got a "show and display" provision, how many miles can you put on it? -Jason '86 951 "Sparky" '70 240Z "Dusty" '03 325xi "Daisy" '06 Mini CooperS > He wants over $60k for this car. Wow. Seems they made about 8,000 of these > things. Makes me wonder why nice E28 M5's aren't trading for much more money > than what they bring. They made only about 2,000 of those, and they were also > hand built. I know a guy in town here that has an 88 M5 with 15k miles on it. > Unfortunately, he will not part with it right now. Damn him. :-) > > Alex Cagann ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 13:51:15 -0400 From: "Jason Kay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [email protected] Subject: Re: 1991 Z1 on ebay Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I don't think that anyone here on this list would do something as illegal as tamper with the odo... however that being said, I know of many older 944s that have had their nylon odo wheel break... it does some strange things as its about to go... like jump 20K mi in the 3 mi commute to work... but I digress and the point was made :) -Jason '86 951 "Sparky" '70 240Z "Dusty" '03 325xi "Daisy" '06 Mini CooperS > I think the first five words below could be key :-) > > "The odometer must not register more than 2,500 miles in a 12-month > period." > > Malcolm > > -----Original Message----- > From: Steve [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, 22 August, 2007 08:43 > To: Malcolm Reitz > Subject: Re: [UUC] 1991 Z1 on ebay > > Unless you don't get caught. Can't tell if that's high or low > profile... with the top up, it could pass for an RX-7 almost. With > the top down and the doors fluffed, its too unique. > > - Steve > > On 8/22/07, Malcolm Reitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > 2500 miles every 12 months is the cap. > > > > > http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/import/ShowDisplay/howtosd072003.htm > l > > > > Malcolm > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jason Kay > > Sent: Wednesday, 22 August, 2007 07:37 > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [UUC] 1991 Z1 on ebay > > > > I think he's trying to get that $$ figure b/c the Z1 was never > imported into the US... which leads me to question if its got a "show > and display" provision, how many miles can you put on it? > > > > -Jason > > '86 951 "Sparky" > > '70 240Z "Dusty" > > '03 325xi "Daisy" > > '06 Mini CooperS > > > > > > > He wants over $60k for this car. Wow. Seems they made about 8,000 of > these things. Makes me wonder why nice E28 M5's aren't trading for much > more money than what they bring. They made only about 2,000 of those, > and they were also hand built. I know a guy in town here that has an 88 > M5 with 15k miles on it. Unfortunately, he will not part with it right > now. Damn him. :-) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 11:33:23 -0700 (PDT) From: P Kroon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [email protected] Subject: Re: 1991 Z1 on ebay Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> On a tangetially related note, I know that Deloreans are VERY prone to the odo wheel breaking and that this one reason why you see so many very low mileage Deloreans. From what I understand, it is VERY difficult to keep the odo working properly, and most owners simly give up. Back to more BMW related teach, my concern (if I owned such that Z1 and disabled the odo) is NOT the Federal Government, but rather my insurance company. I'm SURE they would have something to say about it if the car was ever in an accident. -Paul 95 M3 98 Panoz (never owned a Delorean) ----- Original Message ---- From: Jason Kay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [email protected] Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2007 1:51:15 PM Subject: Re: [UUC] 1991 Z1 on ebay I don't think that anyone here on this list would do something as illegal as tamper with the odo... however that being said, I know of many older 944s that have had their nylon odo wheel break... it does some strange things as its about to go... like jump 20K mi in the 3 mi commute to work... but I digress and the point was made :) -Jason '86 951 "Sparky" '70 240Z "Dusty" '03 325xi "Daisy" '06 Mini CooperS > I think the first five words below could be key :-) > > "The odometer must not register more than 2,500 miles in a 12-month > period." > > Malcolm > > -----Original Message----- > From: Steve [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, 22 August, 2007 08:43 > To: Malcolm Reitz > Subject: Re: [UUC] 1991 Z1 on ebay > > Unless you don't get caught. Can't tell if that's high or low > profile... with the top up, it could pass for an RX-7 almost. With > the top down and the doors fluffed, its too unique. > > - Steve > > On 8/22/07, Malcolm Reitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > 2500 miles every 12 months is the cap. > > > > > http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/import/ShowDisplay/howtosd072003.htm > l > > > > Malcolm > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jason Kay > > Sent: Wednesday, 22 August, 2007 07:37 > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [UUC] 1991 Z1 on ebay > > > > I think he's trying to get that $$ figure b/c the Z1 was never > imported into the US... which leads me to question if its got a "show > and display" provision, how many miles can you put on it? > > > > -Jason > > '86 951 "Sparky" > > '70 240Z "Dusty" > > '03 325xi "Daisy" > > '06 Mini CooperS > > > > > > > He wants over $60k for this car. Wow. Seems they made about 8,000 of > these things. Makes me wonder why nice E28 M5's aren't trading for much > more money than what they bring. They made only about 2,000 of those, > and they were also hand built. I know a guy in town here that has an 88 > M5 with 15k miles on it. Unfortunately, he will not part with it right > now. Damn him. :-) Search the ARCHIVES:http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] __________________________________________________________________________ In memory of Michel Potheau - friend, enthusiast, founder of the BMW CCA. UUC Motorwerks - BMW Performance Fine-tuning and home of the Ultimate Short Shifter - accept no substitutes! 908-874-9092 . http://www.uucmotorwerks.com ____________________________________________________________________________________ Luggage? GPS? Comic books? Check out fitting gifts for grads at Yahoo! Search http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=oni_on_mail&p=graduation+gifts&cs=bz ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 08:39:03 -0500 From: "Malcolm Reitz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Subject: Re: 1991 Z1 on ebay Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2500 miles every 12 months is the cap. http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/import/ShowDisplay/howtosd072003.html Malcolm -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jason Kay Sent: Wednesday, 22 August, 2007 07:37 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [UUC] 1991 Z1 on ebay I think he's trying to get that $$ figure b/c the Z1 was never imported into the US... which leads me to question if its got a "show and display" provision, how many miles can you put on it? -Jason '86 951 "Sparky" '70 240Z "Dusty" '03 325xi "Daisy" '06 Mini CooperS > He wants over $60k for this car. Wow. Seems they made about 8,000 of these > things. Makes me wonder why nice E28 M5's aren't trading for much more money > than what they bring. They made only about 2,000 of those, and they were also > hand built. I know a guy in town here that has an 88 M5 with 15k miles on it. > Unfortunately, he will not part with it right now. Damn him. :-) > > Alex Cagann Search the ARCHIVES:http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] __________________________________________________________________________ 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 This e-mail, including any attached files, may contain confidential and privileged information for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, use, distribution, or disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to receive information for the intended recipient), please contact the sender by reply e-mail and delete all copies of this message. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 08:46:19 -0500 From: "Malcolm Reitz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Subject: Re: 1991 Z1 on ebay Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I think the first five words below could be key :-) "The odometer must not register more than 2,500 miles in a 12-month period." Malcolm -----Original Message----- From: Steve [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, 22 August, 2007 08:43 To: Malcolm Reitz Subject: Re: [UUC] 1991 Z1 on ebay Unless you don't get caught. Can't tell if that's high or low profile... with the top up, it could pass for an RX-7 almost. With the top down and the doors fluffed, its too unique. - Steve On 8/22/07, Malcolm Reitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 2500 miles every 12 months is the cap. > > http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/import/ShowDisplay/howtosd072003.htm l > > Malcolm > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jason Kay > Sent: Wednesday, 22 August, 2007 07:37 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [UUC] 1991 Z1 on ebay > > I think he's trying to get that $$ figure b/c the Z1 was never imported into the US... which leads me to question if its got a "show and display" provision, how many miles can you put on it? > > -Jason > '86 951 "Sparky" > '70 240Z "Dusty" > '03 325xi "Daisy" > '06 Mini CooperS > > > > He wants over $60k for this car. Wow. Seems they made about 8,000 of these things. Makes me wonder why nice E28 M5's aren't trading for much more money than what they bring. They made only about 2,000 of those, and they were also hand built. I know a guy in town here that has an 88 M5 with 15k miles on it. Unfortunately, he will not part with it right now. Damn him. :-) > > > > Alex Cagann > > > Search the ARCHIVES:http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] > > > ________________________________________________________________________ __ > 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 > > This e-mail, including any attached files, may contain confidential and privileged information for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, use, distribution, or disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to receive information for the intended recipient), please contact the sender by reply e-mail and delete all copies of this message. > > Search the ARCHIVES:http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] > > > ________________________________________________________________________ __ > 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, 22 Aug 2007 14:38:53 -0400 From: Ed MacVaugh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [email protected] Subject: Re: 1991 Z1 on ebay Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Why do you say this? On all the recent cars, the odo is digital and if the accident is any degree of seriousness, the tow operator or the body shop unhook the battery, doing the same thing . . . . Ed P Kroon wrote: > Back to more BMW related teach, my concern (if I owned such that Z1 and > disabled the odo) is NOT the Federal Government, but rather my insurance > company. I'm SURE they would have something to say about it if the car was > ever in an accident. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 13:55:52 -0500 From: "Malcolm Reitz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Subject: Re: 1991 Z1 on ebay Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Now, now - I wasn't advocating tampering. Perhaps you could simply drive in reverse? Of course, if the Z1 has the same type mechanical odo as my E28, the gears are probably missing a few teeth already. Malcolm -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jason Kay Sent: Wednesday, 22 August, 2007 12:51 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [UUC] 1991 Z1 on ebay I don't think that anyone here on this list would do something as illegal as tamper with the odo... however that being said, I know of many older 944s that have had their nylon odo wheel break... it does some strange things as its about to go... like jump 20K mi in the 3 mi commute to work... but I digress and the point was made :) -Jason '86 951 "Sparky" '70 240Z "Dusty" '03 325xi "Daisy" '06 Mini CooperS > I think the first five words below could be key :-) > > "The odometer must not register more than 2,500 miles in a 12-month > period." > > Malcolm > > -----Original Message----- > From: Steve [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, 22 August, 2007 08:43 > To: Malcolm Reitz > Subject: Re: [UUC] 1991 Z1 on ebay > > Unless you don't get caught. Can't tell if that's high or low > profile... with the top up, it could pass for an RX-7 almost. With > the top down and the doors fluffed, its too unique. > > - Steve > > On 8/22/07, Malcolm Reitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > 2500 miles every 12 months is the cap. > > > > > http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/import/ShowDisplay/howtosd072003.htm > l > > > > Malcolm > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jason Kay > > Sent: Wednesday, 22 August, 2007 07:37 > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [UUC] 1991 Z1 on ebay > > > > I think he's trying to get that $$ figure b/c the Z1 was never > imported into the US... which leads me to question if its got a "show > and display" provision, how many miles can you put on it? > > > > -Jason > > '86 951 "Sparky" > > '70 240Z "Dusty" > > '03 325xi "Daisy" > > '06 Mini CooperS > > > > > > > He wants over $60k for this car. Wow. Seems they made about 8,000 of > these things. Makes me wonder why nice E28 M5's aren't trading for much > more money than what they bring. They made only about 2,000 of those, > and they were also hand built. I know a guy in town here that has an 88 > M5 with 15k miles on it. Unfortunately, he will not part with it right > now. Damn him. :-) Search the ARCHIVES:http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] __________________________________________________________________________ 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 This e-mail, including any attached files, may contain confidential and privileged information for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, use, distribution, or disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to receive information for the intended recipient), please contact the sender by reply e-mail and delete all copies of this message. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 09:40:29 -0400 (GMT-04:00) From: Chet Dawes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: bbarry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "[uucdigest]" <[email protected]>, bmw digest <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: 95 vs 96-9 E36 //M3 control arms and bushings Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Barry, A little history as I know it (please feel free to correct!) which will help explain my 'summary' below: In '95 US spec M3's, BMW added positive caster in two forms. First with the upper strut mount moved rearward as much as practical yet with a centered for camber geometry. Second with an offset in the lower control arm bushing on otherwise 'standard' geometry control arms. Note: caster induced from the upper strut mount is virtually identical to '96+ type strut mounts, only the camber position changed. In '96+ US spec M3's, BMW replaced the offset control arm bushing with a centered style solid bushing (better all-round performance than the offset design) while changing the geometry of the control arm to maintain the same/similar total caster. Also, the upper strut mount was changed to allow a slight positive direction camber offset perhaps to counter the control arm change, or perhaps for other reasons. This is why you hear of people exchanging the '96+ M3 upper mounts side for side to increase negative camber. One of the differences in the control arms is the geometry between the outer ball joint and the control arm bushing. The '95 type has less built-in caster than the '96+ type. So, to retain BMW intended caster and camber settings of an e36 M3, the three components work as a set. I.E. keep all components either from a '95 M3 or from a '96+ M3. If you want to change the settings from what BMW intended (could be many justifiable reasons why) you could mix-and-match these components to alter caster/camber within factory available parts. But that's for you to experiment with. If you put '95 M3 offset bushings in the proper orientation on a '96+ M3, you'll have an increase in caster (don't forget also an effect on toe and perhaps camber). If you put '96+ control arms on an otherwise '95 M3 front end, you'll increase caster likely in a similar magnitude (also with an effect on toe/camber). Summary: As far as "What is the best set-up?". Of the two you described, I would expect a negligible difference in geometry with slightly (perhaps not even noticable) better ride and performance of the '96+ type set-up due to the centered bushing. It might also be less expensive? Hope that helps. Cheers, Chet Dawes -----Original Message----- >From: bbarry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: [UUC] 95 vs 96-9 E36 //M3 control arms and bushings > > Been ordering up a bunch of 135k mile items to replace, and there >are different front control arms listed for 95 vs 96-9 //M3. Also on >another parts site, it states that the centered bushing only should be >used with the 96-9 arms. > What is different between the two arms? I'm already switching to >adjustable upper strut mounts, so what is the best setup? 95 arms w/ >offset bushings or 96-9 arms with centered? >tia, >Barry ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 10:38:19 -0400 From: Neil Maller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: 95 vs 96-9 E36 //M3 control arms and bushings Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 8/22/07 2:21 AM, bbarry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Been ordering up a bunch of 135k mile items to replace, and there > are different front control arms listed for 95 vs 96-9 //M3. Also on > another parts site, it states that the centered bushing only should be > used with the 96-9 arms. > What is different between the two arms? I'm already switching to > adjustable upper strut mounts, so what is the best setup? 95 arms w/ > offset bushings or 96-9 arms with centered? The 95 M3 has offset CA bushings and a strut shaft that's longitudinally centred in the bearing plate (hat). These combine to establish the specified caster angle. The 96+ M3 has centred CA bushings (reduces caster) and a rearward offset strut shaft axis in the hat (adds caster) for a net increase in caster. However this newly centred CA bushing would also have the effect of moving the road wheel slightly rearward, so the 96+ CA incorporates a dimensional change to compensate for that. I've never measured them, but I've read that it's on the order of 10mm at the wheel. Normally it would seem a good idea not to mix and match these components between the years, but of course one might choose to do so to achieve a particular result. For instance most adjustable camber plates are forced to sacrifice some caster in order to allow more negative camber. I suppose that on a 96+ you could get some amount back by adopting the 95 offset CA bushings plus the 95 CA's. Note that using offset bushings with 96+ CA's tends to move the wheel far enough forward to cause clearance problems, especially with aftermarket brake ducting. Ask me how I know... Neil Fort Wayne, IN 96 M3 - Bastard child 03 525iT - Sterling Grey Metallic 05 Mini - Cooper S with LSD ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 12:00:08 -0400 From: "Gary Derian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Subject: Re: 95 vs 96-9 E36 //M3 control arms and bushings Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> How much caster do you want? How much is optimal? From the various posts here, it seems like the '96+ has trail offset in the strut to allow a lot of caster angle without too much trail. Seems to me the '95 got the quick fix, and the '96 got the better solution. I'd have to think seriously about mucking about with BMW's design. So far no one has offered a reason to deviate. Gary Derian >> What is different between the two arms? I'm already switching to >> adjustable upper strut mounts, so what is the best setup? 95 arms w/ >> offset bushings or 96-9 arms with centered? ------------------------------ End of [bmwuucdigest] digest(13 messages) **********
