OT: Our E46 M3 engine is being replaced
08-24-2002, 11:50 PM
#16
Pro
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 613
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chris and Steve,
On a positive note, if my M3 didn't have all those problems, I wouldn't have bought my 993.
I'd be driving the E46 M3 (at least until the engine grenades!).
FYI, most of the problems I had were electric/electronic related (ASC brain, ASC sensors, airbag sensors, sunroof motor, etc.).
Oh well, it's water under the bridge; knock on wood, the 993 has been great!
Thanks guys,
Chuck
On a positive note, if my M3 didn't have all those problems, I wouldn't have bought my 993.
I'd be driving the E46 M3 (at least until the engine grenades!).
FYI, most of the problems I had were electric/electronic related (ASC brain, ASC sensors, airbag sensors, sunroof motor, etc.).
Oh well, it's water under the bridge; knock on wood, the 993 has been great!
Thanks guys,
Chuck
08-26-2002, 07:55 PM
#17
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Left Coast
Posts: 282
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anir:
A friend of a friend of mine happened to be working as BMWNA technical rep. According to him the problem with regard to rod bearing is related to the to too tight of a clearance on the rod bearings. BMW apparently are changing the spec for clearance from 0.005mm to 0.006mm in order to prevent oil starvation to the rod bearings. Again this is according to this person (the BMW technical rep).
My take on this one is that BMW is simply pushing the envelope of the M3 engine power/reliability ratio a little too far with not enough testing.
A friend of a friend of mine happened to be working as BMWNA technical rep. According to him the problem with regard to rod bearing is related to the to too tight of a clearance on the rod bearings. BMW apparently are changing the spec for clearance from 0.005mm to 0.006mm in order to prevent oil starvation to the rod bearings. Again this is according to this person (the BMW technical rep).
My take on this one is that BMW is simply pushing the envelope of the M3 engine power/reliability ratio a little too far with not enough testing.
08-26-2002, 09:59 PM
#18
POACB
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
I too owned a 1998 E36 M3 for two years without any reliability issues. I really enjoyed it. Not sure where BMW have gone wrong - the European E36 M3 engine was reliably producing 100 hp/litre.
As for their engineering capabilities, look at the McLaren F1.
Anir,
Have you received your September copy of 911 & Porsche World yet...?
As for their engineering capabilities, look at the McLaren F1.
Anir,
Have you received your September copy of 911 & Porsche World yet...?
08-26-2002, 11:00 PM
#19
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Pram,
A friend at the BMW dealership (sales manager and overall car nut) tells a very similar story about the connecting rod bearing tolerances. He seems to feel that the new engine should be very reliable, but we're still giving some consideration to selling the thing. The novelty of SMG has worn off (it's too slow and clunky at low speeds, just like the 1st and 2nd generation Ferrari units), plus my wife would ideally like a bit more space and two more doors. Don't laugh, but we might sucker in for one of the 2003 Range Rovers. What a change, aye?! I guess there's no avoiding the yuppie moniker if you drive one of those preppy rides. An alternative would be the upcoming M5 with the 10-cylinder engine and 500 hp, but it won't be here for a while.
Paul,
I just received the 9/01 issue today!
A friend at the BMW dealership (sales manager and overall car nut) tells a very similar story about the connecting rod bearing tolerances. He seems to feel that the new engine should be very reliable, but we're still giving some consideration to selling the thing. The novelty of SMG has worn off (it's too slow and clunky at low speeds, just like the 1st and 2nd generation Ferrari units), plus my wife would ideally like a bit more space and two more doors. Don't laugh, but we might sucker in for one of the 2003 Range Rovers. What a change, aye?! I guess there's no avoiding the yuppie moniker if you drive one of those preppy rides. An alternative would be the upcoming M5 with the 10-cylinder engine and 500 hp, but it won't be here for a while.
Paul,
I just received the 9/01 issue today!
08-26-2002, 11:53 PM
#20
Instructor
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Singapore
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[quote]Originally posted by Anir:
<strong>Pram,
.......The novelty of SMG has worn off (it's too slow and clunky at low speeds, just like the 1st and 2nd generation Ferrari units), plus my wife would ideally like a bit more space and two more doors..... </strong><hr></blockquote>
Anir,
I am really sorry to hear about the troubles you are having with the E46 M3. Oddly enough, it does seem as if the majority of the problems with the E46 M3 engine are surfacing in America. I wonder whether the very(too?) fine engineering tolerences combined with the slightly lower grade American fuel is proving to be the culprit.
On another note, I agree with you about SMGII. When the car was first launched here, I tried both versions and couldn't for the life of me figure out what the fuss about the system was all about. Especially here is Singapore, which is full of high rise buildings and multi-storey carparks, a SMG system makes negociating stop-start traffic in an inclined carpark queue an absolute nightmare! I suspect that the vast majority of people when test driving the car just try it at 10/10 and don't slow down enough to realise that the system is acutally a little too clumsy at anything less than 8.5/10.
On the issue of the wife needing more space, it does look like you might end up with a chillipepper in the garage real soon!
<strong>Pram,
.......The novelty of SMG has worn off (it's too slow and clunky at low speeds, just like the 1st and 2nd generation Ferrari units), plus my wife would ideally like a bit more space and two more doors..... </strong><hr></blockquote>
Anir,
I am really sorry to hear about the troubles you are having with the E46 M3. Oddly enough, it does seem as if the majority of the problems with the E46 M3 engine are surfacing in America. I wonder whether the very(too?) fine engineering tolerences combined with the slightly lower grade American fuel is proving to be the culprit.
On another note, I agree with you about SMGII. When the car was first launched here, I tried both versions and couldn't for the life of me figure out what the fuss about the system was all about. Especially here is Singapore, which is full of high rise buildings and multi-storey carparks, a SMG system makes negociating stop-start traffic in an inclined carpark queue an absolute nightmare! I suspect that the vast majority of people when test driving the car just try it at 10/10 and don't slow down enough to realise that the system is acutally a little too clumsy at anything less than 8.5/10.
On the issue of the wife needing more space, it does look like you might end up with a chillipepper in the garage real soon!
08-26-2002, 11:56 PM
#21
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Irvine, CA
Posts: 424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have to side with Chuck here. I too dumped my '98 E36 M3 after owning it for only 20 months. This coming from a diehard M3 fan...you know it got to be serious.
I've owned an E30 M3 prior to the E36. That one I kept for 9 years ('88-'97) The car was such a delight to drive...power wise, it's no match to the straight-six but it absolutely shines in the handling department. I really missed that go-kart.
On the other hand, the E36 was smoother, much more comfortable (more GT-car like), more powerful but it lacked the finesse in connecting the car with its driver. But this alone is not enough of a reason to dump a car. What prompted me to part with my E36 was the major disappointment in the built quality of the car. Like Chuck, my E36 was in and out of the shop more than I can ever remembered. Although no major faults but little fit&finish problems along with small electronic glitches (and perhaps one trip too many to the dealership for warranty work)had pushed me over the edge to decide to get rid of the car.
In hindsight, it may have been a blessing in disguise...If it's not for that poor E36, I might have never gotten into my 993 and discover what a wonderful car it is.
Cheers, <img src="graemlins/beerchug.gif" border="0" alt="[cheers]" />
PK
I've owned an E30 M3 prior to the E36. That one I kept for 9 years ('88-'97) The car was such a delight to drive...power wise, it's no match to the straight-six but it absolutely shines in the handling department. I really missed that go-kart.
On the other hand, the E36 was smoother, much more comfortable (more GT-car like), more powerful but it lacked the finesse in connecting the car with its driver. But this alone is not enough of a reason to dump a car. What prompted me to part with my E36 was the major disappointment in the built quality of the car. Like Chuck, my E36 was in and out of the shop more than I can ever remembered. Although no major faults but little fit&finish problems along with small electronic glitches (and perhaps one trip too many to the dealership for warranty work)had pushed me over the edge to decide to get rid of the car.
In hindsight, it may have been a blessing in disguise...If it's not for that poor E36, I might have never gotten into my 993 and discover what a wonderful car it is.
Cheers, <img src="graemlins/beerchug.gif" border="0" alt="[cheers]" />
PK
08-27-2002, 01:13 AM
#22
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
[quote]Originally posted by leslie:
<strong>Anir, On the issue of the wife needing more space, it does look like you might end up with a chillipepper in the garage real soon! </strong><hr></blockquote>
LOL! I'm sure that we are exactly the target demographic that Porsche is aiming for with the new SUV (or tall station wagon or whatever it is!), but Porsche brass may have forgotten that some of us are still interested in the actual appearance of a vehicle.
Power and handling and all that is fine, but it's the design that initially starts your heart racing, or screaming in pain in the case of the Cayenne.
After discussing the situation tonight, my wife and I plan to place a deposit on the next generation M5 tomorrow. A sedan with a normally-aspirated V-10 putting out 500+ hp sounds like a "burden" I could get used to.
<strong>Anir, On the issue of the wife needing more space, it does look like you might end up with a chillipepper in the garage real soon!
</strong><hr></blockquote>LOL! I'm sure that we are exactly the target demographic that Porsche is aiming for with the new SUV (or tall station wagon or whatever it is!), but Porsche brass may have forgotten that some of us are still interested in the actual appearance of a vehicle.
Power and handling and all that is fine, but it's the design that initially starts your heart racing, or screaming in pain in the case of the Cayenne.
After discussing the situation tonight, my wife and I plan to place a deposit on the next generation M5 tomorrow. A sedan with a normally-aspirated V-10 putting out 500+ hp sounds like a "burden" I could get used to.
08-27-2002, 04:07 AM
#23
Instructor
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Singapore
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anir,
Glad to report that you have passed the 'test' with flying colours......I too would choose the new M5 over a Chillipepper anyday. (As long as they leave out the damn clamshell trunk cover from the current 7 series) <img src="graemlins/beerchug.gif" border="0" alt="[cheers]" /> <img src="graemlins/beerchug.gif" border="0" alt="[cheers]" />
Glad to report that you have passed the 'test' with flying colours......I too would choose the new M5 over a Chillipepper anyday. (As long as they leave out the damn clamshell trunk cover from the current 7 series) <img src="graemlins/beerchug.gif" border="0" alt="[cheers]" /> <img src="graemlins/beerchug.gif" border="0" alt="[cheers]" />
08-27-2002, 06:14 AM
#24
Intermediate
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's the problem Anir. You wouldn't let me take it over 130 mph or 4500 RPM and see what happened 
. Do Greg and I a favor, don't even think about bringing that M-5 around until 2000 miles. That way I can blow out all the carbon deposits your wife has gathered from going to the mall.
. Do Greg and I a favor, don't even think about bringing that M-5 around until 2000 miles. That way I can blow out all the carbon deposits your wife has gathered from going to the mall.
08-27-2002, 11:20 AM
#26
Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Anir,
You are not thinking right Anir. You NEED the chili pepper so you can tow your track car to the track. I guess I haven't taught you anything...
Greg
You are not thinking right Anir. You NEED the chili pepper so you can tow your track car to the track. I guess I haven't taught you anything...
Greg
08-27-2002, 12:51 PM
#28
Rennlist Member
The longest thread on the 993 forum is about BMWs.
My other car is also an M3 (E36), and it's been very good to me, as was my previous BMW. I'm sorry that we don't all have such good luck. My BMWs seemed to be very well designed and built. I do wonder why the E36 M3 wasn't given adjustable front camber and caster without having to install camber plates, however.
My other car is also an M3 (E36), and it's been very good to me, as was my previous BMW. I'm sorry that we don't all have such good luck. My BMWs seemed to be very well designed and built. I do wonder why the E36 M3 wasn't given adjustable front camber and caster without having to install camber plates, however.
08-27-2002, 07:50 PM
#29
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
[quote]Originally posted by Greg Fishman:
<strong>Anir,
You are not thinking right Anir. You NEED the chili pepper so you can tow your track car to the track. I guess I haven't taught you anything...
Greg</strong><hr></blockquote>
Greg and EJ,
Oh, but I have been listening. That's why I've spent the past few days reviewing GMC trucks with a gooseneck set-up!
And, I stopped by Dan's shop today to check out Gary's 968 Club Racer. A 968 might be a nice choice for a first track car, given the price and my relative lack of experience (i.e. propensity for saying hello to the wall at Madness).
You're not getting rid of me that easily. I just skipped VIR this year to give ya'll time to polish your skills a bit before my return. 
<strong>Anir,
You are not thinking right Anir. You NEED the chili pepper so you can tow your track car to the track. I guess I haven't taught you anything...
Greg</strong><hr></blockquote>
Greg and EJ,
Oh, but I have been listening. That's why I've spent the past few days reviewing GMC trucks with a gooseneck set-up!
And, I stopped by Dan's shop today to check out Gary's 968 Club Racer. A 968 might be a nice choice for a first track car, given the price and my relative lack of experience (i.e. propensity for saying hello to the wall at Madness).
You're not getting rid of me that easily.
I just skipped VIR this year to give ya'll time to polish your skills a bit before my return.
08-28-2002, 08:54 AM
#30
Three Wheelin'
[quote]Originally posted by PK:
<strong>I have to side with Chuck here. I too dumped my '98 E36 M3 after owning it for only 20 months. This coming from a diehard M3 fan...you know it got to be serious.
I've owned an E30 M3 prior to the E36. That one I kept for 9 years ('88-'97) The car was such a delight to drive...power wise, it's no match to the straight-six but it absolutely shines in the handling department. I really missed that go-kart.
On the other hand, the E36 was smoother, much more comfortable (more GT-car like), more powerful but it lacked the finesse in connecting the car with its driver. But this alone is not enough of a reason to dump a car. What prompted me to part with my E36 was the major disappointment in the built quality of the car. Like Chuck, my E36 was in and out of the shop more than I can ever remembered. Although no major faults but little fit&finish problems along with small electronic glitches (and perhaps one trip too many to the dealership for warranty work)had pushed me over the edge to decide to get rid of the car.
In hindsight, it may have been a blessing in disguise...If it's not for that poor E36, I might have never gotten into my 993 and discover what a wonderful car it is.
Cheers, <img src="graemlins/beerchug.gif" border="0" alt="[cheers]" />
PK</strong><hr></blockquote>
Hi Pk
Perhaps you can help settle 'performance discussion!' I've got with a colleague who's got an E30 M3, I've got a 1990 964 C4 Coupe.
His is a 1989 E30 M3 Johnny Ceccotto? He claims 0-60 in less than 6 seconds whereas the period mags I've seen suggest 6.7 to 6.9
Whats your view?
Thanks
Piers
<strong>I have to side with Chuck here. I too dumped my '98 E36 M3 after owning it for only 20 months. This coming from a diehard M3 fan...you know it got to be serious.
I've owned an E30 M3 prior to the E36. That one I kept for 9 years ('88-'97) The car was such a delight to drive...power wise, it's no match to the straight-six but it absolutely shines in the handling department. I really missed that go-kart.
On the other hand, the E36 was smoother, much more comfortable (more GT-car like), more powerful but it lacked the finesse in connecting the car with its driver. But this alone is not enough of a reason to dump a car. What prompted me to part with my E36 was the major disappointment in the built quality of the car. Like Chuck, my E36 was in and out of the shop more than I can ever remembered. Although no major faults but little fit&finish problems along with small electronic glitches (and perhaps one trip too many to the dealership for warranty work)had pushed me over the edge to decide to get rid of the car.
In hindsight, it may have been a blessing in disguise...If it's not for that poor E36, I might have never gotten into my 993 and discover what a wonderful car it is.
Cheers, <img src="graemlins/beerchug.gif" border="0" alt="[cheers]" />
PK</strong><hr></blockquote>
Hi Pk
Perhaps you can help settle 'performance discussion!' I've got with a colleague who's got an E30 M3, I've got a 1990 964 C4 Coupe.
His is a 1989 E30 M3 Johnny Ceccotto? He claims 0-60 in less than 6 seconds whereas the period mags I've seen suggest 6.7 to 6.9
Whats your view?
Thanks
Piers