Herbmiester

Yep that's what I thought as well, nice sound but biased toward luxury rather than handling, not really fast either. Plus its a Benz so if maintenance costs on BMWs are scary prepare to be terrified. Doesn't help either that late 90s early Noughties Benz's were a low point for the brand as far as quality went, a fact Benz themselves acknowledged.

Fumy on the Us forums they say that 150k miles is when you need to start worrying.

If you want a seriously quick car then 335i. You can get one for 10k with reasonable kms and they are quick. Much quicker than a 330 or 130i, the torque especially on tuned cars is huge. The 130i has slightly sharper handling than the 335i but having driven both there is very little in it and its only when your balls out you will notice and at that stage the 130i can become a bit nervous. Tyres and suspension setup will make a noticeable difference and of course you can do the M3 control arm upgrade to really sharpen things up. All that said your torque out of corners will put car lengths on a 130i. 335i reliability can be an issue but it is overstated and the common issues are not expensive, yes replace the charge pipe especially if you intend to tune it, because it is a tuners wet dream, cheap power is only a phone app away. The big issues are the high pressure fuel pump and the injectors. It seems we have far fewer injector issues in NZ possibly because many of our cars come from Japan with their clean fuel and NZ's gas is better quality wise than a lot of US gas. (I used to work for Mobil). I have owned my 335i for 4 years now and at 104kms its running beautifully. I see your in Kapiti, come over to the Hutt Valley and have a drive in my 335i.

After trying some Hankook Ventus Prime 3's I put a set on the back of my E36. They are a touring tyre rather than an outright performance tyre but they are progressive as they start to let go, braking performance is pretty good and they are good in the wet. I got 2 x 245 40 17's for less than $400 from Cannon Point Motors in Upper Hutt. I normally just look for the deal on RE003s as they are a really good tyre for the money but I had 3 vehicles to buy tyres for so the Hankooks won the cheque book race.

Yep that's a fair comment.

My opinion on how he answered questions, the length of the auctions and changing buy now pricing upwards during the auction.

I would have bought this for 16k when it was initially offered. But because he was a bit of dick I bought two other cars, pisses me off as I really wanted it but now the money is spent.

I got to have a short drive in an M3 about a year ago, I was well impressed, my short drive made me realise that its streets ahead of my e92, similar to how my e92 is ahead of my E36. Excellent car I am sure you will be happy.

I cant say I have done it, but I have removed my intake manifold. I removed the intake manifold when I was investigating a few other issues and now that I have done it my estimate for removing it would be 1 to 1.5 hours. The blasting using the correct grit walnut should take about the same 1 to 1.5 hours. Then another hour to put it back together. So 5 hours should cover it. I have a wee bit of experience with Walnut and Vapour blasting and the carbon will move easily in my opinion. You will need to buy a blasting kit and having used a gravity fed unit I could not see why it wouldn't work in this application.

My understanding is that IRS Cars have both rear wheels with some toe in from the factory as this promotes straight line stability, I believe this depends on how much geometry change there is as the suspension moves through its travel. Solid axle cars obviously have the rear axle to keep the wheels neutral but on occasion the axle location needs to corrected so both rear wheels pointing straight. Front wheels usually have some toe in as well, again this promotes straight line stability at the cost of directional change speed/feel. Some track cars will run no toe in and some even run a very small amount of toe out to make them super responsive to direction changes at the expense of stability. So as far as toe angle goes the rear is more important (Toe in) for stability with an IRS car. the fronts will generally have some toe in again for stability but you can go neutral or less toe in for improved steering. BTW toe in is a contributor to tire wear in some cases it can be as bad for wear as excess Camber.

Sorry had it in my mind it was an E46. Strange however that they refused to doe the rear.

The rear Toe angle looks wrong. There is a bracket that holds the rear arm in place and inside it is the rear trailing arm bush. That barcket needs to be adjusted to doe the rear toe angle. It is common for E46 RTAB's to fail just like on an E36. Anyway that's the main issue I can see with that alignment. If it is the RTAB's then its a pretty straight forward fix, you can replace with standard bushes, Standard with lateral limiters, M3 bush's or Poly bush's. If they are originals its like they are pretty stuffed.

Message sent.

https://www.trademe.co.nz/motors/car-parts-accessories/wheels-tyres/alloy-wheels/listing-2623569212.htm

Sorry only picked this up now. Check you PM.

Yes have working cable.

A Staggered set with 8.5 rears like a style 23, 24 or 32 will look good. Rears on an 8.5 will be 245 40 17 and will fill the rear out nicely.

Would go well with an M54 rotating assembly. I might know where one is.

I love it, its boring when you worry about every little thing that can wrong.

Yep have to agree.

I thought you might like it. ?

Yes good point now you mention it.

UK and Canada are ridiculously slow at present.

Wow that is impressive, I feel so sorry for the rear tires.