BMW M3 Forum (E90 E92)

BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Go Back   M3Post - BMW M3 Forum > E90/E92 M3 Technical Topics > Engine, Transmission, Exhaust, Drivetrain, ECU Software Modifications
 
Alpine HID
Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      11-06-2008, 07:34 AM   #89
lucid
Major General
 
lucid's Avatar
 
Drives: E30 M3; Expedition
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: USA

Posts: 8,034
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by exdos View Post
I don't claim to be a professional engineer or have any specialist qualifications in this field. However, I have a specialist science-based degree and am able to teach myself about scientific principles which interest me. If you haven't already deduced from my postings, I am probably the Number 1 fan of the BMW air-intakes and from my data-logging and graph preparations, I am able to get my head around how these air-intakes work, because nobody at BMW will ever tell us.

I find it totally bizarre that people like Mishchievous M (and there are plenty like him) choose to ditch their OEM air-intakes for something like his new GruppeM "thing" . I notice from visiting his link to their website, that GruppeM are now describing their product as a "Ram Air System" when they do NOT utilise ram -effect at all: as I described in an earlier posting, these "things" are normally called CAIs. Obviously, a little bit of "rebranding" helps to sell them!

I have spent no more than a total of $50 (UK equivalent) on modding my air-intake/exhaust system. All my mods are essentially "tweaks" to the OEM system. You've seen the photo of my "brake duct" blocker, which converts the part into an air scoop - this cost me nothing, but permanently increases ram-pressure within the air intake system at all speeds and at all times. If I didn't understand what was going on in the sytem, then I wouldn't have worked this out.

My exhaust mod, again, cost me nothing. I was given a pair of OEM silencers by someone who was ditching them to buy an aftermarket set for $1600 (UK equivalent). I saw, not one, but two different purposes in modding a pair of rear silencers. I stripped them out and made them free-flowing, but I also resculpted them and converted them into part of a rear diffuser design that I've made, as per the photo below. I know that this diffuser works because I've measured the air pressures around the car in "real world" driving conditions and obtained dyno figures from my DashDynoSPD. I also obtained a free pair of catalytic converters for my MC which I partially stripped out, but when I looked at the data I obtained when driving the car, I actually lost performance so I had to remove them, even though a lot of work went into that project. I only keep the mods that provably work.

Likewise, fitting a pair of front flippers to my car has not only increased front downforce, but it also increases the air pressure above which directly feeds into my front brake duct/air scoop. So I've obtained more ram pressure and consequently more engine power.

I don't claim any expertise in this field, but by properly measuring, monitoring and logging, I know what works and what doesn't because I've got the figures to prove it to myself.
I wasn't criticizing your or anyone else's interest in understanding how their car works and tweaking things here and there for performance gains. I have the same interest. I am simply saying that if one ends up tweaking the car in a way that increases performance, one has simply undone a trade-off that has been done by M engineers. Noise, efficiency, durability, cost, drivability are all constraints the designers need to deal with. I am speaking about a highly optimized design like the E9X M3. I don't know how well optimized your M is. Some people on this forum think that they can actually find ways to increase performance that the M engineers were not aware of, and don't really understand how complex products are developed by world-class product development teams, and that there is a reason why most things are the way they are in stock form. Others just make false claims.

The most entertaining one was by the scoop manufacturer, when they claimed that the car has a poor cooling system because coolant temp went up in dyno runs. Pure BS (not the temp going up part). As if M engineers are simply incapable of measuring and tracking a vital performance parameter, and this scoop manufacturer all of a sudden discovered a significant flaw in the design when they stuck the car on their dynojet. As if the car was designed to sit on a dyno and deliver 414hp. Of course, there is nothing wrong with the cooling system of the car. I've driven it pretty hard for 45 minutes non-stop on the track 3 times in one day, and for 30 minutes non-stop several times on really hot summer days, and there were no signs of overheating. Others have reported similar experiences. Regardless, it is a street car, not a race car, and if someone wanted to do more with it, it might need an extra oil cooler, but that is beside the point.
__________________
lucid is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      11-06-2008, 08:04 AM   #90
exdos
Second Lieutenant
 
Drives: Z3 M Coupe(S54) and Z4 M Coupe
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK

Posts: 206
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by lucid View Post
I wasn't criticizing your or anyone else's interest in understanding how their car works and tweaking things here and there for performance gains. I have the same interest. I am simply saying that if one ends up tweaking the car in a way that increases performance, one has simply undone a trade-off that has been done by M engineers. Noise, efficiency, durability, cost are all constraints the designers need to deal with. I am speaking about a highly optimized design like the E9X M3. I don't know how well optimized your M is. Some people on this forum think that they can actually find ways to increase performance that the M engineers were not aware of, and don't really understand how complex products are developed by world-class product development teams, and that there is a reason why most things are the way they are in stock form. Others just make false claims. The most entertaining one by the scoop manufacturer, when they claimed that the car has a poor cooling system because coolant temp went up in dyno runs. Idiots. As if M engineers are simply incapable of measuring and tracking a vital performance parameter, and this scoop manufacturer all of a sudden discovered a significant flaw in the design when they stuck the car on their dynojet. Of course, there is nothing wrong with the cooling system of the car. I've driven it pretty hard for 45 minutes non-stop on the track 3 times in one day, and for 30 minutes non-stop several times on really hot summer days, and there were no signs of overheating. Regardless, it is a street car, not a race car, and if something wanted to do more with it, it might need an extra oil cooler, but that is beside the point.
I totally agree with you. The S54 engine in my Z3 MC is also fitted in the E46 M3, the M3 CSL and the Z4 MC, where it runs at higher engine revs and creates higher power/ torque outputs in all those other cars than it does in my MC. This tells me that my S54 engine in OEM is not performing optimally, and therefore it has been possible for me to add a few tweaks that have helped me obtain some genuine performance gains. Likewise, I wouldn't let anyone attempt to remap my ECU: the OEM ECU map, written by BMW experts, is proving more than capable of handling all my little tweaks, therefore clearly they've already considered the changes that I've made. I fully acknowledge that there are limits to how far or desirable you can go with tweaking/modding and that there are pros and cons to every change from OEM. Like you it never ceases to amaze me how people try to sell "snake oil" products based on silly claims.
exdos is offline   England
0
Reply With Quote
      11-06-2008, 11:46 AM   #91
ace996
NASA/PDA Instructor
 
ace996's Avatar
 
Drives: E92M3
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Long Island

Posts: 284
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by exdos View Post
I hate to tell you that you have just wasted your money by ditching a wonderful OEM air-intake system for something that will rob you of even more power in a hot climate. You've obviously not been keeping up with this thread.
Although I am not a fan of the Grouppe-M intake, your statement is not true.
It is modeled, from what I've seen, exactly like the stock box but it is carbon-fiber. It should behave exactly like the stock box.
Now, for the money...I wouldn't exactly buy it, although I am an old Ducati guy and carbon fiber bits took more than a pound of flesh from my finances before and that GM piece is quite beautiful, but saying he wasted his money on something that will rob him of power is not exactly true. At worst, it'll perform as the stock one does.
__________________

"Arcadian, I've fought countless times, yet I've never met an adversary who could offer me what we Spartans call "A Beautiful Death." I can only hope, with all the world's warriors gathered against us, there might be one down there who's up to the task."Μολὼν λαβέ!!
ace996 is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      11-06-2008, 11:51 AM   #92
ace996
NASA/PDA Instructor
 
ace996's Avatar
 
Drives: E92M3
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Long Island

Posts: 284
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by exdos View Post
Like you it never ceases to amaze me how people try to sell "snake oil" products based on silly claims.
Amen...

Quote:
Originally Posted by exdos View Post
Part 1 acts as an air-intake under WOT and a vent at lower throttle openings, and therefore it doesn't need a flap at all to operate. The M3's air intake design is ELEGANT.
That is the theory most believeable at this point. The flap would then, at best, help with cruising MPG...not something I'm really interested in addressing, though.

Now, if there was a hood scoop instead of a vent, then we would in effect be installing a stronger pump where a weak one exists (or where one does not exist) and would increase airbox pressure and thus VE.
The only issue with that is...aesthetics. I'm no designer, but I've a bitch of a time trying to figure out a way to elegantly add a scoop. I think the most acceptable addition would be a NACA duct, aiming in. And for symetery's sake, a reverse NACA could be added to the other (faux) side as a draw-out/vent of engine heat/air.

Will I do that?...the magic 8ball says no. But I think that would work.
__________________

"Arcadian, I've fought countless times, yet I've never met an adversary who could offer me what we Spartans call "A Beautiful Death." I can only hope, with all the world's warriors gathered against us, there might be one down there who's up to the task."Μολὼν λαβέ!!

Last edited by ace996; 11-06-2008 at 12:16 PM.
ace996 is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      11-06-2008, 12:47 PM   #93
exdos
Second Lieutenant
 
Drives: Z3 M Coupe(S54) and Z4 M Coupe
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK

Posts: 206
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ace996 View Post
Although I am not a fan of the Grouppe-M intake, your statement is not true.
It is modeled, from what I've seen, exactly like the stock box but it is carbon-fiber. It should behave exactly like the stock box.
Now, for the money...I wouldn't exactly buy it, although I am an old Ducati guy and carbon fiber bits took more than a pound of flesh from my finances before and that GM piece is quite beautiful, but saying he wasted his money on something that will rob him of power is not exactly true. At worst, it'll perform as the stock one does.
I've just taken another look since you've pointed it out and I'll stand corrected. I think you are right in that it only basically replaces the OEM black plastic bits with some very attractive carbon fibre bits costing a staggering $2741 equivalent and the kit doesn't seem to include a CF replacement for the Part 1, which is normally the most visible. There must be a better use for that amount of money, if only paying for the fuel to have fun in your car.
exdos is offline   England
0
Reply With Quote
      11-06-2008, 12:50 PM   #94
exdos
Second Lieutenant
 
Drives: Z3 M Coupe(S54) and Z4 M Coupe
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK

Posts: 206
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ace996 View Post
Amen...



That is the theory most believeable at this point. The flap would then, at best, help with cruising MPG...not something I'm really interested in addressing, though.

Now, if there was a hood scoop instead of a vent, then we would in effect be installing a stronger pump where a weak one exists (or where one does not exist) and would increase airbox pressure and thus VE.
The only issue with that is...aesthetics. I'm no designer, but I've a bitch of a time trying to figure out a way to elegantly add a scoop. I think the most acceptable addition would be a NACA duct, aiming in. And for symetery's sake, a reverse NACA could be added to the other (faux) side as a draw-out/vent of engine heat/air.

Will I do that?...the magic 8ball says no. But I think that would work.

I think we've now discussed this to death. The only thing left is for someone to produce some actual figures of the air intake in "real world" driving conditions. I'm afraid I can't do that due to lack of access to one of your M3s. Out of interest what do they cost in the USA and what is the present price of your fuel?
exdos is offline   England
0
Reply With Quote
      11-06-2008, 03:07 PM   #95
ace996
NASA/PDA Instructor
 
ace996's Avatar
 
Drives: E92M3
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Long Island

Posts: 284
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by exdos View Post
I think we've now discussed this to death. The only thing left is for someone to produce some actual figures of the air intake in "real world" driving conditions. I'm afraid I can't do that due to lack of access to one of your M3s. Out of interest what do they cost in the USA and what is the present price of your fuel?
To death, resurected, and slain again...but it was fun.

Ballpark figures are mid-sixties...fuel?...depends on the day and the location. Figure about $2.75/gal for 93octane...perhaps less...I try not to look, I need to buy it anyway.

Be good,
TomK
__________________

"Arcadian, I've fought countless times, yet I've never met an adversary who could offer me what we Spartans call "A Beautiful Death." I can only hope, with all the world's warriors gathered against us, there might be one down there who's up to the task."Μολὼν λαβέ!!

Last edited by ace996; 11-06-2008 at 04:59 PM.
ace996 is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      11-11-2008, 03:43 AM   #96
swamp2
Major General
 
swamp2's Avatar
 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Posts: 9,939
iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by lucid View Post
Also, do you know what kind of accelerometer the DashDyno unit is using to estimate torque?
Quote:
Originally Posted by exdos View Post
The DashDynoSPD doesn't use an accelerometer to compute torque.
...
To do a Power/torque calculation you first need to set up a profile of the car, where you need the frontal area of the vehicle, weight, Cd, tyre diameter, gear ratio, air temperature, altitude and humidity. The DashDyno software then makes its calculations based on vehicle RPM sensor. The figures that are given are "at the wheels" and are corrected for all the variables of environment (altitude, temperature and humidity) so that the figures are "standardised" and thus comparable for the same vehicle driven in widely differing conditions.
To more fully answer lucids question...

I looked at this unit a bit more and really like it. Definitely a great tuners tool as exdos has shown us.

Basically the unit gets around having to use an acclerometer by reading vehicle speed from the OBD. You can get from velocity to power with

P = F * v = m * dv/dt * v

dv/dt can come from numerically differentiating the veolcity vs. time curve. I'm not 100% sure this unit does this exact calculation but as you know by numerically integrating or differentiating can take you from a acceleration to speed to position or in the other direction. I'd pretty much be willing to bet this is the basics of the method it uses.

Now what would be really cool is a function that accounted for the vehicles changing mass as the tank emptied. An empty vs. full tank in our car does give rise to a 12 hp difference. I guess the lesson of that calculation is if you want really accurate and repeatable numbers with this system (as with a Gtech or any meter that requires vehicle mass) make sure you know it accurately and/or always test at the same fuel level.
swamp2 is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      11-11-2008, 05:34 AM   #97
exdos
Second Lieutenant
 
Drives: Z3 M Coupe(S54) and Z4 M Coupe
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK

Posts: 206
iTrader: (0)

Swamp2,

I think that the calculation performed by the DashDyno SPD would be simpler than that.
Torque=Force x Distance
In the DashDyno SPD you need to create a profile of the vehicle being tested for power and torque, which requires, gross vehicle weight (including driver/passengers), wheel diameter and gear ratio, and the "force" and "distance" in the above equation can be calculated from those two parameters when combined with the continuously monitored RPM and the time stamp.

In order to standardise the results, the DashDyno SPD also uses vehicle coefficient of drag and frontal area of the vehicle, plus the environmental factors of air temperature, ambient air pressure, humidity and elevation.

Therefore, if you wanted to get real accuracy, to replicate the actual weight of your vehicle then you could modify the vehicle profile before each dyno test to give the correct gross vehicle weight according to the amount of fuel in your tank.

As I see it, an "at the wheels" dyno calculation using a DashDynoSPD will be just as accurate as an "at the wheels" static dyno recording, and in many instances it will be better because there will be little/no wheel slip if the dyno run is performed in the correct gear for the vehicle and all results are standardise and even account for all the losses and aerodynamic effects in real world driving conditions.
exdos is offline   England
0
Reply With Quote
      11-11-2008, 03:21 PM   #98
swamp2
Major General
 
swamp2's Avatar
 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Posts: 9,939
iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by exdos View Post
I think that the calculation performed by the DashDyno SPD would be simpler than that.
Torque=Force x Distance
Not so sure. The above works but the force is mass x acceleration and as I posted above a=dv/dt can come from numerically differentiating the velocity vs. time curve. How else can you get F?
swamp2 is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      11-11-2008, 05:48 PM   #99
lucid
Major General
 
lucid's Avatar
 
Drives: E30 M3; Expedition
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: USA

Posts: 8,034
iTrader: (0)

I had also assumed that you would need to differentiate the vehicle velocity data to get at instantaneous acceleration, and use the mass info and add theoretical drag values at the given speed to arrive at torque at the wheels. The main piece of information one can get from the OBD tool is the vehicle velocity data. You need the RPM data to plot the obtained torque figures against the RPM range the data were collected in. If you know the gear and final drive ratios, the RPM data is linearly related to vehicle velocity data, so it is not a new piece of information. So, you can simply process the RPM data, but you'll still need to get at vehicle speed and differentiate to determine instantaneous acceleration.
__________________
lucid is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      11-12-2008, 05:38 AM   #100
exdos
Second Lieutenant
 
Drives: Z3 M Coupe(S54) and Z4 M Coupe
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK

Posts: 206
iTrader: (0)

Swamp2,

Yes you do need to calculate Force. Acceleration can be calculated from the recorded figures of RPM and the time stamp data, plus the wheel diameter and gear ratio in the vehicle profile and Pi as the constant. The mass is the vehicle weight in the vehicle profile.

That's how I can do it in Excel from a multipoint.csv file recorded by the DashDynoSPD.
exdos is offline   England
0
Reply With Quote
      11-12-2008, 07:23 AM   #101
lucid
Major General
 
lucid's Avatar
 
Drives: E30 M3; Expedition
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: USA

Posts: 8,034
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by exdos View Post
Acceleration can be calculated from the recorded figures of RPM and the time stamp data, plus the wheel diameter and gear ratio in the vehicle profile and Pi as the constant.
This is simply calculating vehicle speed based on RPM and gear ratio figures and then calculating average acceleration. I am assuming you are doing a basic delta v/delta t calculation. That would not yield instantaneous acceleration, and would be somewhat inaccurate, but I guess it depends on how close your time points are exactly. Plus, why not simply use the vehicle velocity data from the OBDII? Is it not as accurate?
__________________
lucid is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      11-12-2008, 05:11 PM   #102
exdos
Second Lieutenant
 
Drives: Z3 M Coupe(S54) and Z4 M Coupe
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK

Posts: 206
iTrader: (0)

Right guys, I decided to do a simple experiment for you all. I have a runabout car in the form of a Ford Fiesta 1.4litre which is normally aspirated and has a forwards facing air intake which lies behind the front grille and below the lip of the hood. I made a simple scoop device out of a piece of black plastic guttering which I moulded into shape with a a hot air gun and fixed it close to the OEM air intake aperture. It took me about 45minutes to make it and fix it and cost me NOTHING. Here's a photo of it:



I've taken the car for a dyno run in third gear and logged it with my DashDyno and I've prepared a graph from the collected data showing the torque and HP plots of the same car, with and without the scoop fitted, as below:



As can be seen there is an increase in "real world" on the road performance with this simple scoop which is an increase of an average of 5.25% (calculated from all the data points) across the full engine rev range. The speed of the car under test was from around 18mph to 68mph in the same (3rd) gear.

I would therefore suggest that the RPI scoops will also show a gain although I don't know by how much.

I would still want to see the on the road figures for the RPI scoop though.

Last edited by exdos; 11-12-2008 at 05:58 PM.
exdos is offline   England
0
Reply With Quote
      11-13-2008, 01:07 PM   #103
swamp2
Major General
 
swamp2's Avatar
 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Posts: 9,939
iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by exdos View Post
Right guys, I decided to do a simple experiment for you all.
Nice work. Thanks much. Might it also be that the gains (or the size of the gains) were realized because the entire system is so well below 100% VE? And despite beating the topic to death, I do believe the hood intake is significant. Your test only shows a gain for a closed type intake on a low VE design is possible.

Excellent car choice for testing as well :-).
swamp2 is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      11-13-2008, 02:07 PM   #104
exdos
Second Lieutenant
 
Drives: Z3 M Coupe(S54) and Z4 M Coupe
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK

Posts: 206
iTrader: (0)

Swamp,

I agree totally with your comments. My experiment was offered "as is" to illustrate the general principle only. Basically, I really wanted to simply show everyone just how simple it is to test anything by on-board data-logging and that folks selling stuff, such as companies like RPI and ASR Engineering can easily produce the data if they want to. The cynic in me says that if they did use on board datalogging to prove/ disprove their products, then at the same time they would highlight the fact that static dynos are not the place to test air-intakes and show their customers that they are wasting their money on static dyno testing, and that car owners would be better off and better informed by buying and using their own datalogging kit.
exdos is offline   England
0
Reply With Quote
      11-14-2008, 01:14 PM   #105
swamp2
Major General
 
swamp2's Avatar
 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Posts: 9,939
iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by exdos View Post
Swamp,

I agree totally with your comments. My experiment was offered "as is" to illustrate the general principle only. Basically, I really wanted to simply show everyone just how simple it is to test anything by on-board data-logging and that folks selling stuff, such as companies like RPI and ASR Engineering can easily produce the data if they want to. The cynic in me says that if they did use on board datalogging to prove/ disprove their products, then at the same time they would highlight the fact that static dynos are not the place to test air-intakes and show their customers that they are wasting their money on static dyno testing, and that car owners would be better off and better informed by buying and using their own datalogging kit.
Cheers. 100% in agreement. Again nice work and we appreciate it!
swamp2 is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      11-16-2008, 03:06 PM   #106
MrHarris
yodog
 
MrHarris's Avatar
 
Drives: '86 Corolla
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Diamond Bar, Ca

Posts: 5,035
iTrader: (5)

Garage List
2009 BMW  [5.00]
Send a message via AIM to MrHarris
The gains from the RPi scoops are definitely noticeable from 60mph+. Also past 7k rpm I pull much harder. When my car was completely stock, I raced my friends RS4 (intake, exhaust, filter) and I slowly pulled away from him. Now with the RPi scoops, I pull away from him about twice as fast, and I pull harder the faster I go.
__________________

2009 E92 M3 | Alpine White | Black Extended | Advan RS | Turner Test Pipes | Dinan Axle-Back | OETuning | Eibach Springs | UUC SSK | VRS Front Lip | VRS Type I Diffuser | Matte Black | RPi Scoops | MS Filter | Yokohama AD08 | F1 Pinnacle
Special Thanks: Gintani | OETuning | eAs
MrHarris is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      11-16-2008, 03:20 PM   #107
Speedtrap
Lieutenant Colonel
 
Drives: A very fast car :)
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: London

Posts: 1,800
iTrader: (0)

Thanks for sharing
__________________
Speedtrap is offline   United Kingdom
0
Reply With Quote
      11-16-2008, 03:21 PM   #108
Sticky
Banned
 
Drives: E92 Jerez DCT M3
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Anaheim Hills / Malibu

Posts: 2,244
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrHarris View Post
The gains from the RPi scoops are definitely noticeable from 60mph+. Also past 7k rpm I pull much harder. When my car was completely stock, I raced my friends RS4 (intake, exhaust, filter) and I slowly pulled away from him. Now with the RPi scoops, I pull away from him about twice as fast, and I pull harder the faster I go.
Which version of the scoops are you running?

Yep, highway speeds is where you really notice them.
Sticky is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      11-16-2008, 06:08 PM   #109
MrHarris
yodog
 
MrHarris's Avatar
 
Drives: '86 Corolla
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Diamond Bar, Ca

Posts: 5,035
iTrader: (5)

Garage List
2009 BMW  [5.00]
Send a message via AIM to MrHarris
I have the prototype version. It's a mod you can "feel" past 60mph. And I've measured good gains racing a buddies rs4
MrHarris is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
Post Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:20 PM.




m3post
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST