CamB

I thought the main point of short runners - including/in particular on a turbo, was to increase the top end by allowing the engine to breathe up there, and that this comes at the expense of mid range torque (which longer, equal length runners give). On a turbo car this makes spool up worse. A standard NA manifold should spool better but may restrict top end. Is it different on an M3?

Hmmm, yeah. I never had a problem but the car I have (on the infrequent times I drive it) has something like 250hp/tonne so you just hang back far enough to see past then blast by ferociously telling yourself it was the only safe way, LOL.

"Look like Sportmax" - jeeez. Sportmax look like Watanabes, which look like Minilites. Sportmax most definitely came last. It is pretty cool looking! A discussion of LHD is on the LTSA website. Assuming no problem vinning (personally if I was keen I'd make that a condition of sale), LHD is no big drama except in a drive thru or parking building...

Yeah - just one of the springs needed. It's also short one of the allen bolts for holding the rotor on if you have a spare of that too.

You can see the Transmission Correction Factor (tcf) is 1.15, so you can work out the power to the hubs. To be honest for a 3 litre it looks high - even the before graph. But it could be true - I've heard/read the 3 litres often put out more than standard hp without mods... Running a carbon airboxes and a map sensor with standalone or add-on ECU seems to be a common mod in the UK for the track/race guys, and (a) the power claims are good plus ( the fast guys seem to have it ... so chances are it works, but its $$$$$ ---> airbox, ECU/piggyback, dyno will sure add up (ie towards $5k). If you can stomach the cost of a light flywheel and suitable clutch they make it heaps nicer to drive fast (and less likely to wear out the clutch), especially with a shorter diff ratio. Both are a bit of a compromise though (the diff on refinement and fuel economy, and the car I drove with the light flywheel had an uncivilised rattle at idle in neutral from the unsprung clutch).

Well I'm happy to agree if the well-funded race guys (those who can test and choose) choose the staggered setup then it must be better. It's not like I've tried it myself. It is definitely possible that most of the cars I've looked at/read about are restricted by rules. (to defend myself, I still think I'd run same front/rear, for several reasons already discussed).

An M3 of that age with an engine needing a rebuild isn't worth a dollar over $5k in my opinion. So I'd say you do have to be careful... (not saying it needs a rebuild, just saying I can imagine it not being worth $8k).

I agree it would hardly change the acceleration.

I dunno - if you could drop 100kg it would feel a lot better to drive (thet's 1.5 passengers and the weight is what I dislike the most in mine). Unfortunately it would be a different (unrefined) car...

It has a current reg and warrant - it also seems to have no SIN (so not likely to be repod). It might be damaged... but then I'd expect it to be in a damaged auction. Wierd...

I knew I recognised that driveway - the same guy sold a really nice non-Evo one about 6 months ago. I guess he upgraded to the Evo. From Classic Car website and its old so its probably sold so don't ring the poor guy and ask about it: I wonder if he's upgrading again ... to a red cabriolet?

I better not make any comments about this one. Maybe Rolland should buy it back to keep the values up.

Look, I'm not sure I can say this without it coming across aggressively, but find me an E36 racer using a staggered setup and I'll believe you. None of the guys racing here do that I am aware of. I'm pretty sure the factory race cars don't either (not that that is particularly relevant given how far away they are from street cars). I can see you've driven both and formed an opinion on this basis, but my observation is that you're a minority with this view. I think my point is that grip - both ends - would be maximised by having a balanced setup.

Man you guys are harsh. Some of the stuff he did looks to be reasonably well done.

From what I've read BMW didn't leave a lot on the table with the M3s. The guys in the link below, who appear to be one of the UKs foremost M3 specialists, basically offer a remap (which I am dubious about given you are supposed to use 98 anyway), or exhaust plus remap (showing a difficult to believe 10% increase), or big $$$, or really big $$$. http://www.thorneymotorsport.co.uk/tuning/E36_M3_Power.shtml They don't change the intake or anything else, and I do believe that they test everything and they only offer stuff that makes a difference. I don't feel a great desire to modify mine - its already fast and I don't think I could even tell the difference from an extra 5% (let alone actually use it!).

RG branded, and the date stamp is 1983 - they have more dish and finer spokes than E30 bottlecaps. In good condition - shame I was a bit lazy to clean the front ones before the photo They are 14x6, ET13 (about 20mm more than a bottlecap, so won't really fit on an E30). They fit an E21 properly, or a 2002 (what I had them on), although its a bit tight. Would look mint on a 2002 with turbo flares, but they won't fit over my new brakes. I'm after $300 for the set. http://www.bimmersport.co.nz/forums/index....st&id=16316

Non-Evo M3 came with same size front and rear - I don't see the problem. I do see the guys racing using same size - possibly because they're cheap (although racers with M3s usually aren't). Possibly because it handles better.

Pic of the wheels below - they're "RG" branded, and I can't find any reference to these ones (typ RGH- anywhere except the Trademe auction I bought them from.

Its a flex disk / driveshaft coupling (back of the gearbox). That one **looks** unused - if so they are somewhere towards $80 new (can't remember exactly, so could be so wrong). Well the second to last picture is an alternator bracket and is real purdy. I'm not sure what its worth though. Funny thing to have - I guess they often bend. I'd buy it for $10 (its nicer than the one I've got) but that's probably WAY under the new price. The handbrake surround doesn't have any 80's cellphone kit mounting holes in it, so it must be worth something to someone...

Pffttt - they'd DESTROY an E30s arches. They sit out 20mm more than an E30 bottlecap.

If I had to guess, hit a curb and lost the tyre, but kept driving (at least far enough to do that to it).

Or alternatively, run same size tyres front and rear like the guys who race them, and tune your suspension accordingly, if needed. Based on driving mine (staggered), I reckon I'd want same size front/rear at the track. Non-Evo M3's often/usually had staggered wheels with same size tyres front/rear - there is nothing wrong with staggered wheels/same size tyres other than the inconvenience of not being able to easily swap tyres front to rear. Personally for a track/race car I would track down a set of 17x7.5s with the correct offset, and as light/strong as possible.

I'll have to take some pics. I can't find any pics on google. Like E30 bottlecaps with finer spokes. No centre caps.

If you were paying someone by the hour, and had an intake manifold and plenum made, I bet it wouldn't be cheaper.

Yeah that bling comes up when you google what I said above. Awesome. There's a thread somewhere here with pics of someones setup on ITBs - I am sure of it. A car with heaps of fabrication. I've spent nearly 10 mins searching and am giving up.