The BMW UUC Digest 
Volume 3 : Issue 606 : "text" Format

Messages in this Issue:
  Re: <e36> Michellin PS2's
  Re: <e36> Michellin PS2's
  Re: <e36> Michellin PS2's
  Re: <OT> Tow Beast Mileage
  Re: <OT> Tow Beast Mileage
  Re: E46 transmissions
  Re: E46 transmissions
  Re: <e36> Michellin PS2's
  Re: <e36> Michellin PS2's
  Tow Mileage
  Re: <OT> Tow Beast Mileage
  Re: <OT> Tow Beast Mileage

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 22:41:37 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Jim Bassett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: <e36> Michellin PS2's
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

On Thu, November 1, 2007 6:26 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> These tires don't "feel" like the Pilot Sports. To describe it as best I
> can they're "bouncy". The back end does not seem as settled.

About the only thing I can suggest is that they are new tires. New tires
have full tread and big tread blocks, especially compared to your old,
worn tires. Under certain circumstances, even in street driving, you'll
experience tread squirm. That's possibly what you are feeling.

I too went from Pilot Sports to PS2s on my M3. Took a few weeks of driving
for them to settle down.

Jim Bassett
1998 M3/4
1993 325is #44 JP


------------------------------

Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 08:35:01 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
From: Chet Dawes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: <e36> Michellin PS2's
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

>"Anyone running the Michellin PS2's?" <snip>

I hate to get into yet another tire debate.......but, I'm also running PS2's.  
Currently on the 2nd set I've purchased and I've run them on 3 different BMW 
cars (e46 sedan, e36 M3 and e36 318ti).  I love this tire!
I've not had ANY noise from either set, and I'm super picky about that.  I had 
the opposite experience actually that my Pirelli's were loud (as were Yokos, 
BFG's, etc) and the PS2's dead quiet.  The various Continental tires I've run 
have also been very quiet, but not nearly as grippy, especially when it's wet 
out.  Grip is excellent with the PS2's, especially in the rain.  Far better 
than any street tire I've tried. (Various BFG, Goodyear, Pirelli, Conti, Yoko, 
Kumho street tires)

The price delta depends on the size, but I'd buy them again in the 235/40-17 
size I use.  No 'bounciness' here either, I've been very happy with the tire.

Cheers,
Chet

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 05:58:25 +0000
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: "Digest" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: <e36> Michellin PS2's
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Is the rear end hopping, or are you realizing toe changes with new tires?  How 
old are your trailing arm bushings?  Do you feel the squirminess under hard 
acceleration?

Marc plante
E36 m3/4/5
Buying tires soon

Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 18:26:35 
To:[email protected]
Subject: [UUC]  <e36> Michellin PS2's



Anyone running the Michellin PS2's? I replaced the tires on the rear of the
M3 with the PS2's (from Pilot Sports). I know Gary, they'll go on the front
this weekend, but the installer's didn't want to futz with the spacers.
(Dinan 17 x 8.5)
These tires don't "feel" like the Pilot Sports. To describe it as best I
can they're "bouncy". The back end does not seem as settled.

Anyone else experience this with these tires?

I did have to take the pressure down to 36psi as the installers had it at
40. This improved things, but the backend still seems to "hop" under
certain conditions.

-Kevin





 ---------------------------------------------------------------- 
 This  e-mail  communication is confidential and is intended only 
 for  the individual(s) or entity named above and others who have 
 been  specifically  authorized to receive it. If you are not the 
 intended  recipient,  please  do not read, copy, use or disclose 
 the  contents of this communication to others. Please notify the 
 sender  that  you have received this e-mail in error by replying 
 to  the e-mail.  Please then delete the e-mail and any copies of 
 it. Thank you.                                                   
 ---------------------------------------------------------------- 




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: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 01:29:44 -0700
From: Wendall Siemens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: <OT> Tow Beast Mileage
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Hi Paul,

I previously towed my 28ft Travel trailer (6000lb) with a 99 K2500 5.7L 
suburban and switched to a 02 duramax 2500 4x4 crew longbox truck. The 
difference is night and day. With my wife driving (babying) the sub 
around, she would get 15 Canadian MPG. Towing we would get around 11 
CMPG. Best on highway was 17 CMPG (4.10 gearing). With the truck I get 
about 19/20 CMPG around the city as long as you don't jump into the 
torque and towing we get 15/16 CMPG. Best highway mileage was 23 
unloaded with cruise locked on 110 km/hr. You don't want to drive it 
over about 120 km/hr as it'll start to drink the diesel.

The extra mileage doesn't pay for the extra cost of the diesel engine, 
but the easy of towing does. Throw the cruise on and relax. Pass when 
needed.

I have heard to stay away from the 6.5L diesels of the 90s but I don't 
have any direct experience.

Wendall (Great "little bit of White" North)
04 MDX - baby & boat hauler
02 Duramax - Torque monster
92 325i - Electrical nightmare, fun daily driver & winter car (skid steer)

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 11:50:58 -0700
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: <OT> Tow Beast Mileage
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


Paul,
On my Sierra C3 with the Vortech 6.0 I'm getting about 14.45mpg with mixed
city and highway.

-Kevin



 ---------------------------------------------------------------- 
 This  e-mail  communication is confidential and is intended only 
 for  the individual(s) or entity named above and others who have 
 been  specifically  authorized to receive it. If you are not the 
 intended  recipient,  please  do not read, copy, use or disclose 
 the  contents of this communication to others. Please notify the 
 sender  that  you have received this e-mail in error by replying 
 to  the e-mail.  Please then delete the e-mail and any copies of 
 it. Thank you.                                                   
 ---------------------------------------------------------------- 





------------------------------

Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 09:07:53 -0400
From: rmplum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: E46 transmissions
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

so, would a 2001-2003 ish 325Xi Touring be a safe choice to avoid the
bummer transmission?

Ryan

On Nov 1, 2007 4:38 PM, Chet Dawes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bill,
> I may be wrong, but I'm pretty sure there were two different auto 
> transmissions used in the e46 323i.  Easiest to discern is via model year 
> probably.  They have a different shift surround as a visual aid.  The 1999 
> (sedan only, coupe was an e36) I think was the transmission you mentioned.  
> The 2000 model year had what I think is a ZF auto and is a steptronic.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 08:43:25 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
From: Chet Dawes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: rmplum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [email protected]
Subject: Re: E46 transmissions
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Ryan,
Should be a safe bet, but refer to the .pdf with the build date info to be sure.
Cheers,
Chet

-----Original Message-----
>From: rmplum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sent: Nov 2, 2007 8:07 AM
>To: [email protected]
>Subject: Re: [UUC] E46 transmissions
>
>so, would a 2001-2003 ish 325Xi Touring be a safe choice to avoid the
>bummer transmission?
>
>Ryan
>

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 09:30:09 -0400
From: "KC Boyce" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: <e36> Michellin PS2's
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

"Anyone running the Michellin PS2's?" <snip>

I've got PS2s on my M3, and haven't experienced the "bounciness" you
describe.  I'm running 40 psi front, 45 psi rear.

They are significantly noisier than the PZero Neros they replaced, and seem
to have more sidewall compliance (less harshness over minor road
imperfections).  But they stick a whole lot better than the PZeros did.

Overall, not sure I'd go with PS2s again given the price delta.

KC Boyce
'97 M3 crew cab



------------------------------

Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2007 09:31:28 -0700
From: Kazuto Okayasu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: <e36> Michellin PS2's
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>"Anyone running the Michellin PS2's?" <snip>

I've known a number of people who've run and love these, so when I 
had a chance to get a barely-used set for a song, I snatched them 
up.  I originally had some low-grip issues on the street (but not the 
track), but I learned that unlike any other tire I've had before, 
these things are VERY sensitive to tire pressure changes.  WIth other 
tires, 'tuning' using tire pressures was something that escaped me 
for the most part, but with the PS2s, it's become an art, even for 
me.  They are slightly on the noisy side, but are quite compliant for 
a well-performing tire.  They don't have the best break-away 
characteristics, but then again that might be a pressure-tuning 
thing.  And we'll see how long they last.

It's a beautifully-made tire (look at the way the inside is 
finished), doesn't lose air on its own, and are very round; none of 
my wheels has more than 2 weights on em with these tires, which I've 
never seen.  They ARE rather pricey, but there's the occasional kid 
on some forum who 'needs money for books' and is selling them for 
cheap, though.


Kazuto Okayasu  Manager, Desktop Support Services
Administrative Computing Services, University of California, Irvine
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


------------------------------

Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 12:01:52 -0700
From: Tom Viers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Tow Mileage
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

My 95 Bounder 32' gets 7.2 mpg cruising at 70-75 pulling an 8x18 enclosed 
trailer.  Before I put the Banks Stainless Headers and exhaust (I kept the 
factory Cat) on it I was getting about 5.2 mpg.  That's a whopping 38.5% 
increase.  They claimed huge power gains and I must say I'm a believer now.  
Banks FTW!!  BTW this is a Chevy C30 Chassis with the TBI 454 V8.

My 04 Chevy 2500 Duramax was getting about 11 mpg under the same conditions, 
but I traded it for a 97 540i 6 speed. :)


Tom

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 16:58:41 -0400
From: "Joe Elwell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: <OT> Tow Beast Mileage
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

In my 2003 F250 Diesel, I get 16mpg not towing, and around 10mpg when towing 
a 24' enclosed trailer with 3000lb car + tools/tires/etc.  Can't beat a 
diesel for ease and comfort of towing - you almost forget the trailer is 
back there. But factor in the approx 15% extra you'll pay per gallon. And 
can someone explain why diesel, which requires less refining, is so much 
more than gas??

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Paul Craven" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2007 4:43 PM
Subject: [UUC] <OT> Tow Beast Mileage


> Hi all,
> I know some of you all run some heavy duty trucks to tow you BMW's so I
> thought I'd inquire as to gas mileage.  I currently have a 1996 Suburban
> 2500 that I bought for towing and use more and more for family trips.  I
> love the thing for this stuff but with the 7.4 liter chebbie inhaling
> $2.75 per gallon at 10 mpg (8 when towing, best  tank ever at 13mpg),
> I'm looking for a better plan.  I'd like to get a diesel, but the last
> diesels in Suburbans were built in 1999.  I may still go there since I
> should be able to manage 15-20 mpg.  My other thought is to spend
> similar money and buy a 2000-2002 2500 series Suburban with the 6 liter
> or the 8.1(yikes!).  This at long last brings me to my question, can
> anyone advise real world mpg figures for either of these motors in a
> 2500 series Sub or pickup?  Any hope of 15 or better?
>
> Regards,
> Paul Craven
> 1991 M5
> 1999 528iT
> 1996 K2500 Suburban - OPEC support vehicle - has towed BMW's, but not
> these two
>
> 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: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 17:15:35 -0400
From: "Gary Derian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Joe Elwell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: <OT> Tow Beast Mileage
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

I think it requires a lot more refining, especially to remove the sulphur. 
Plus it weighs more per gallon, so you are getting more energy per gallon.
Gary Derian

. And
> can someone explain why diesel, which requires less refining, is so much
> more than gas??


------------------------------

End of [bmwuucdigest] digest(12 messages)
**********

Reply via email to