Other/Misc » MZ3.net

Model Year 2000 Observations

Other/Misc, Upgrades No Responses »

Apr 191999

The model year 2000 Z3s arrived in Dallas, after work I dropped by to take a look at them. The following article reviews my first hand observations and opinions of the differences I noticed. These are just my personal opinions, feel free to disagree with me, however the goal of this article is really just to point out the differences I noticed.

The most noticeable difference is the new back end. Personally I have mixed emotions about the new design, from the back I like the new “L” shaped tail lights. However from the side the new design makes the rear wheel wells appear larger, and with the standard 16″ wheels I personally don’t like the new look. The new design makes the wheels look small especially on the white Z3 I first observed.

The trunk gets the once optional (but very hard to install) trunk lifter ring now as standard equipment. Besides the obvious usefulness of this accessory, the additional chrome on the new trunk lid is eye catching. I especially liked the additional flash of chrome against the new Oxford Green metallic paint.

Inside the trunk I noticed that the trunk lid was redesigned, the new trunk lid design inhibits use of the BMW trunk organizer. So now the trunk organizer only works with 1996-1999 model year BMW Z3s.

This was the first time I had seen the new Oxford Green paint. It is very similar shade of green to the original Dark Green, except it is a metallic paint. I personally like the Oxford Green more than the original Dark Green, however I think I still prefer the original metallic Boston Green (which is now sadly discontinued). I noticed a new red reflective bumper marker on the corner of the bumper, but I don’t personally care for it.

This was also the first time saw the Impala Brown paint. Too dark to call gold, too metallic to call brown, its similar in color to a used (not new) US penny. I liked the color in general, but for some reason it just seemed out of place on a Z3. I bet it looks better out in the sun, but I shudder to think what it will look like when it is dirty.

The 3rd brake light is relocated further down on the trunk lid, more in the middle of the trunk as compared to the original design that was more towards the top of the trunk lid. Not sure if the average (non Z3 owner) would ever notice the difference, but I think I like the original position better just because I like the longer (more noticeable) indention it left in the trunk lid.

Walking around to the front of the car I noticed the new chrome ringed headlights. The difference is subtle, but really nice. I like the change, it especially blends nicely with the new clear/white turn signals which are now standard with the model year 2000 Z3. Of all the small changes BMW has made to the Z3 over the years, I think the clear turn signals are the one change I most wish was on my M roadster.

Looking inside the car I found even more changes. The AC controls now have chrome rings just like on the M roadster, the lower panel now has an additional chrome gauge that can either be an analog clock or the optional on board computer. It is my opinion that the clock is far more attractive, even if the on board computer were a free upgrade I think I would still choose the clock.

This Z3 had an optional wood package installed that was very attractive. The package now also includes a wood brake handle. The wood is lighter in color than the previous wood package and it has a different wood grain pattern in it. The kit looked very good with the tan interior however I’m not sure it will work with the black interior.

It appears that the Z3 no longer comes with the cassette holder. Of the model year 2000 Z3s I saw about half had the dealer installed armrest/cupholder (pictured above and too the right) and the other half didn’t have anything (pictured directly to the right). Current rumor is that starting 7/99 the factory will start including a armrest which may or may not be the one the dealerships have been installing for free.

Behind the armrest is a new set of knockout switch locations. Since this Z3 had the optional power top this is where the power top switch was located. I found this location to be very awkward to use when seated in the drivers seat. If this were my Z3 I think I would ask if the DSC switch could be mounted here and move the power top switch to a more convenient location. But that is only because I see myself using the DSC much less than a power top switch.

The impala brown classic leather was very nice, it didn’t have the polka-dot bumpy pattern that use to be on every leather Z3 seat. The color of the leather match the exterior and looked very sharp. This new leather was darker and more golden brown color than the previous tan/beige leather. According to the BMW color chart classic leather is available in this brown or a black color.

Behind the seats the rear speakers appear to be slightly larger. On close observation I noticed the entire rear console to be slightly different. While the plastic parts that make up the rear console didn’t change shape, the once smooth plastic now has a texture to it. However the new texture is only on the upper most parts of the console.

The other change to the stock rear console is the loss of the rear storage compartment. The stock stereo now includes a subwoofer, however it’s not the HK subwoofer. I sneaked a peak at the subwoofer by removing the grill and it looked quite different than the HK subwoofer. There was not a porting tube, and I saw one driver (there might have been another one hidden).

The top now has a liner, the liner is black (or really dark gray). The material has a slick sheen finish to it with a thin foam like backing. The thin material folds well when the top is down and pulls tight when the top is raised. The liner does not extend beyond the roll hoops when the top is up, so the area around the rear window is not covered by the liner.

Classic also had a couple model year 2000 M roadsters, including one unsold cosmos black/gray/black model that was going through dealer prep when I saw it. The 2000 M roadster has the same liner the 2000 Z3 has, as well as the new chrome ringed headlights. However with the exception of a new harmon/karmon label on the HK subwoofer grill, I did not see any other differences.

Speaking of the M roadster there is two other additions to the Z3 that I didn’t get a usable pictures of. The Z3 now has the ///M logoed sport steering wheel and the ///M logoed lighted shift knob which are nice additions, but I find the ///M logo use in a non M vehicle to be highly unstable.

In addition to the vehicles I took pictures of, Classic BMW also showed me a model year 2000 Z3 in steel gray and titanium silver. I was unable to tell a difference between the new titanium silver and the now discontinued arctic silver without the two cars sitting right next to each other. The titanium silver is one or two shades lighter, but in direct sunlight that difference is really hard to notice.

Valentine One Radar Detector

Other/Misc, Upgrades No Responses »

Feb 241999

A police officer had a perfect hiding place for watching for speeders and used it quite often. But one day the officer found traffic surprisingly tame. After a long while, the officer found the reason: a 10 year old boy was standing on the side of the road with a huge hand painted sign which said “RADAR TRAP AHEAD!”

A little more investigative work led the officer to the boy’s accomplice, another boy about 100 yards beyond the radar trap with a sign reading “TIPS” and a bucket at his feet, full of change.

I’ve been using a BEL 605 for about 5 years now and another BEL product for about 7 years. Both detectors have kept me out of trouble and both offer a good number of bells and whistles. I was, therefore, unhappy when my 605 stopped working. Since it was 5 years old and my original price was only $40, I figured I got my money’s worth out of it. Time to buy a new detector.

My criteria was pretty simple: I wanted to pay as little as possible for as much protection as I could get. I wanted to get the best deal. I did my homework and consulted Car & Driver’s detector comparisons. Of course, the leader is a V1 from Valentine Research. No big surprise. Everyone knows V1′s are the best. They are also the most expensive ($400). Looking at the figures, you can get about 3/4 the protection of the V1 for about 1/4 of the price. I therefore decided to check out the latest from BEL. I rejected the higher priced units, looking for something in the $100 to $150 range (heck, if I was going to spend real money, I’d buy a V1 and be done with it!). After some review (and finding a number of good prices combined with a $30 rebate) I chose a 846i.

The 846i has a lot of neat features – immune to VG2, good field of view for Laser (about the same as Valentine, and good sensitivity on K and Ka band. The best feature, however, is the display. It lights up and tells you what type of RADAR you’re dealing with. No need to squint at little LEDs. It has a digital voice, but you can disable it and just use tones. The 846i also includes Safety Warning System (SWS) detection – . This feature alerts you to the messages broadcast in K-Band by certain road signs (the system has not received wide acceptance or use, but is used on the Mass Turnpike).

The rest of the controls (mute/dark/city) all behave like my 605. The final cost (with a $30 rebate – only good till the end of December 98) was about $110. The unit worked well when I first tried it. The range, however, seemed somewhat shorter than I remembered compared to my 605. I soon encountered another, perhaps more serious problem: it’s not loud enough for top-down driving. If you look on the right of the unit, you can see a small speaker. This speaker actually points away from the driver when mounted in the center of the windshield (at least here in the US). When I dropped the top (on a chilly 32 degree day!) I found that even turning the volume all the way up, I had trouble hearing the warning. I totally gave up on the voice (which is kinda dorky anyway) and was just using the tone alerts. The major problem here is that they have used the most noticeable sounds for X band with K being the least distinctive. Since most highway RADAR is K, this left me somewhat exposed.

I was getting pretty discouraged at that point when I ran across another article which indicated that “except for the V1, all other detectors seem to have lost range over the venerable ESCORT and PASSPORT in the K and X range when wideband KA was added”. Suspicions confirmed – the unit did not perform as well as some older detectors. Darn!

OK. It’s been a good year. I had a big bonus coming and when you weigh the cost of increased insurance against the cost of a ticket (not to mention the ticket itself) you can easily start to talk yourself up to justifying the $400 cost of a V1 (OUCH! it still hurts even saying $400!). The clincher was an unexpected Christmas present (it was from my Mom…) of $100 (because she totally gave up trying to shop for me decades ago!). I picked up the phone and plunked down my four bills. A week later, a flimsy cardboard box arrives and I’ve joined the V1 set. Retrofitting the power took about 30 minutes. The V1 cord is a large, flat cord with RJ11 (telephone) jacks on either end. I elected to simply mount the unit where the BEL had been – secured to the top of the dash with velcro.

Initial Impressions:

Let’s just say that Mike Valentine clearly spent most of his R+D on the inside, rather than the packaging of this unit. It looks a little unfinished and really reminds me of my original FUZZBUSTER – big black box with a big knob and a big red light. It’s actually about half the size of the FUZZBUSTER and the technology involved is clearly as different as Voyager is from Capt. Kirk’s Enterprise . It just doesn’t look that way from the outside. The V1 kinda looks like it was designed by Dilbert.

Come to think of it, there is a vague resemblance.

The utilitarian black plastic housing of the V1 has very few curves and the display looks like it was something of an afterthought. The band indicators, small LEDs for X, K, KA and Laser, are a real letdown from the more sophisticated BEL display. Warnings are characterized by the “beep” and “braaap” system. If you’re good with music, they may be distinctive enough and if you can remember a “beep” means X band and a “braaap” means K, you may not have as many problems with the display as I do.

The unit itself is also gargantuan compared with my little 605. Granted, the 605 does not have LASER detection, nor does it offer a rear-facing detector.

The controls on the V1 are also a little hard to get used to. The big knob controls sound for “important alerts”. The “balance control”-like ring controls the sound for “muted alerts”. The BEL provides an auto mute feature which drops the volume of an alert to a series of “clicks” which can be silenced with a push of a button. If you press the big knob on the V1 during a full volume alert, it changes to the “muted” volume level, however, there is no way to totally silence the unit without a turn of a knob. It took a little getting used to.

So far, I’d still give the ergonomics prize to BEL.

I’ve already mentioned my lukewarm reception of the small K, KA, X and Laser LED’s, but I should temper this with a big, enthusiastic thumbs up for the RADAR locator display.

After couple of RADAR encounters, I cannot imagine how I’ve ever lived without this feature! I’ve got to hand it to Valentine – this has got to be the biggest innovation in detector history! (OK, the $400 is still smarting). Not only does the locator display tell you where the RADAR source is, it also tells you how many sources it is monitoring. This allows you to sniff out revenuers who sit in the shadow of another radar signature hoping you’ll get sloppy. Let’s say you always pass the Dunkin Donuts and it always makes your detector go off. One morning you’re rolling by, the detector goes off, your tendency is to ignore it, but instead of one source, it shows two so you hit the brakes! There, hiding behind that big jelly roll is Officer Bob Speed, hoping you’ll just fly on by, helping to fill his quota. The V1 has just earned it’s keep. There are a couple of other features I’ve discovered in the past week or so – The V1 actually includes a light sensor, so it automatically dims itself at night and brightens during the day. The unit is also upgradable – Valentine will upgrade both software and hardware as new features are added.

The V1 operates in three modes which are changed by pressing and holding the big knob when you’re not under fire:

A – “All Bogeys” mode. In this mode, the detector alerts you, at full volume, of every burglar alarm, automatic door, microwave dish or any other source of RADAR (including Police RADAR) in the vicinity. For those of us who live in the city. This mode will drive you stark raving mad in about a minute.

l – “Little L” Logic mode. In this mode the detector filters out what it does not think are “significant” sources of RADAR and only calls attention to them with the “muted” volume if they seem to increase in strength. If something seems really threatening, you get full volume. I’ve found this works well for me on my daily commute.

L – “Big L” Super Logic mode. In this mode the detector tries to make the most decisions for you. I’ve fundamentally never trusted computers, so I’m a bit leery of this mode and have not made a lot of use of it.

Nice features, but pretty much equivalent to BEL and other makers with advanced logic for signal processing.

The cost of the V1 still bothers me. Not so much for the cost itself, it’s more the responsibility of a $400 detector on my dash. The instructions even warn you about leaving it in plain sight – it’s an invitation to a break-in. I never had to worry about that with my $40 BEL – I simply left it on the dash. With the V1, there’s really no alternative, you disconnect the unit every time you get out of the car and hook it back up when you get in. That’s the main reason I chose not to use the mounting bracket. The velcro approach is a lot easier to deal with. I’ll save the windshield mount (which strikes me as kind of flimsy) for road trips where I need peak performance. I constructed a pocket in the trunk as a place for the V1 to sleep during the day when the car is parked at work.

The big test came when Cambridge decided to mount one of those dorky “The Speed limit is XX your speed is…” automated (self service?) RADAR signs on the way to work. The unit was mounted around a corner and up a hill. I could use the unit to test the various brands without annoying the cops. (Ever ask one of them if you can test your RADAR detector with their gun?). The V1 gave me consistent .2 mile warnings (even on “small L”). The BEL gave a respectable (but definitely shorter) .15 mile warning. Given some other encounters, I’d also predict the V1 would do better in a straight line-of-sight situation than the BEL (which is what Car +Driver said too). The sensitivity advantage clearly goes to the V1.

So. The $400 question – is it worth it?

At this point, after a few week’s use, I’d say “yes”, but it is a qualified yes. I still say you should buy what you need and for many people, the V1 is just overkill. If you can afford it, however, I can see no reason to spend your bucks on anything other than a V1, simply for the locator function alone. I’d like to see a better packaged V1, one with something other than those dorky RJ11 plugs for power cords, one which has a digital display of X, K, KA and L in big letters, but you certainly can’t fault the unit for performance. At an average of $100 per ticket with an insurance surcharge which can easily run into the 4 figures over 10 years (yes! MA counts those tickets against you for the next decade!) it becomes easy to justify the $280 increment over a competing brand. If you can afford the V1 – go for it! If not, be sure to test your choice with the top both up and down under your particular “normal driving conditions” before committing to the unit. It could save your hide in the long run.

Note: Images of BEL and V1, Mike Valentine and Dilbert were all yanked from various sites w/o anyone permission and are presented here merely for purposes of illustration.

Statistical Information

Detector	Price	Overall Score	X**	K	KA	Laser*
Car & Driver 4/97, Page 115, “Rating High End RADAR/LASER detectors” (Also the issue which compares the SLK, Z3 and Boxster)
V1	399	97	0.30	1.50	1.70	10
Bel 855STi	200	54	0.15	0.90	0.90	8
Escort Solo	230	48	0.10	0.65	0.15	8
Cobra RSA515	119	45	0.10	0.70	0.17	9
Whistler 1490	148	42	0.10	0.40	0.60	10
Uniden LRD 6399 SWS	83	41	0.05	0.70	0.70	9***

* Laser units in band detection spread @ 1000 ft, all other measures in miles
** X band City Mode, highway mode is much greater for all models
*** Rear detection did not work

Detector	Price	Overall Score	X**	K	KA	Laser*
Car & Driver 9/95, Page 87, “Five Budget Radar Detectors” (also the issue which “Reveals the 1996 Z3 Roadster”)Note: This comparison is now over 3 years old and none of the units listed (except the V1) are likely to still be on the market.
V1	399	97	1.00	2.40	1.10	19
Uniden LRD 220 SWS	86	89***	0.39	1.00	1.70	17
Fox	230	57	0.19	0.50	0.80	10
Whistler 1140	63	56	0.25	0.30	0.40	19
Bel 535i	93	54	0.25	0.41	0.80	16
Cobra RDL212	80	27	0.19	0.30	0.00	6

* Laser units in band detection spread @ 2000 ft, all other measures in miles

** X band City Mode, highway mode is much greater for all models

*** Looking at these older figures, it seems clear the Uniden models in subsequent years have gotten worse, not better

From the same issue:

Countries where US detectors will probably work:

Australia, Canada, China, Denmark, England, Finland, Israel, Japan, Kenya, Malaysia, New Zealand, Norway, Saudi Arabia, much of South America and Sweden.

Countries using bands not covered by US detectors:

Austria, Holland

Countries using US and other bands:

Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Mexico, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain and Switzerland.

(Source: RADAR 800-448-5170)

Used Airbags

Other/Misc, Safety and Security, Upgrades No Responses »

Jan 031999

I hope you never have to see your Z3 in this condition, but below are some pictures of a Z3 after its airbags had been deployed. I’m not sure whose Z3 this is; it was parked at a BMW dealership.

This first picture shows the passenger side airbag. It is much larger than I expected it to be. The fabric looks like a thick, almost canvas like surface.

The driver’s side airbag was much smaller, but it looked like someone has pushed part of the bag back into the steering wheel. Looking around the cabin, I expected to see some white powder, but the interior was clean.

What surprised me the most was how little damage there was to the front bumper. I expected to see a lot more damage if the impact was enough to set off the airbags. It is my understanding that the Z3 knows if you are wearing your seat belts or not and will deploy the airbags in a lesser impact if you are not wearing your seat belt. I don’t really know any details, just observing how little damage there was to the front bumper.

1998 Best Owner Designed Product Award

Other/Misc, Upgrades No Responses »

Jan 011999

In choosing the nominations for this award MZ3.Net decided that each nominated product needed to be a unique addition and/or upgrade for the BMW Z3. The product must be created by a Z3 owner and marketed by that owner to other Z3 owners. Most importantly, the product needed to receive positive feedback from the general Z3 audience.

Using these guidelines, MZ3.Net nominated six products and then asked its readers the following question…. “There have been several third party accessories made for the BMW Z3. What in your opinion is the best BMW Z3 owner designed product of the year?”.

The six nominations were….

Kathy’s Z Window Pillow, which helped keep the rear plastic window from getting crease/fold marks.

Greg’s Chrome Kidney grills, which added an additional flash of chrome to the vertical slats in the front kidney grill.

Keith’s Atomic Cupholder, initially cut from PVC pipe, the design was so good it was later sold to HMS motorsport.

Bill’s Bike Rack, because only a custom job would work with the Z3 bumper.

Carter’s Roadster Tonneau, which quickly covers the Z3 interior while leaving the top down.

Keith’s StoneGuards, which were thin magnetic strips designed to protect the rear fender flares from rock chips.

Voting went on for several months and ended on December 31, 1998. While all the nominations were outstanding products, in the end the voting revealed a clear winner.

StoneGuards	95(32%)
Roadster Tonneau	71(24%)
Chrome Kidney Grills	48(16%)
Atomic Cupholder	29(9%)
Z Window Pillow	27(9%)
Bike Rack	21(7%)

///MZ3.Net would like to thank all its readers for participating in the voting and congratulate all the nominations. The 1998 Best Owner Designed Product Award to Keith Shelburn for his Magnetic Stone Guards.

What is the Perfectly Equipped 2.3 Z3? Owner Survey Says….

Other/Misc, Upgrades No Responses »

Oct 251998

In the United States, BMW recently stopped selling the 1.9 Z3 and with the 1999 model year started offering a new 2.3 Z3. Despite the name, the new 2.3 Z3 actually has a 2.5 liter straight six cylinder engine. To keep the base price of the new 2.3 Z3 down close to where the previous 1.9 Z3 was selling, BMW started making some features optional that used to be standard. They also saved a few dollars changing the standard tires.

The 2.3 Z3 has a base price of $30,520 (with destination), which at first seems pretty impressive considering the 1.9 Z3 had a base price of $29,995 (with destination). But then you start going through the options and realize how many there are and how expensive a 2.3 Z3 can get. Fully loaded, the MSRP on a 2.3 Z3 can climb as high as $37,430. To help future 2.3 Z3 owners evaluate the cost/benefit of all the various options, MZ3.Net polled current Z3 owners to see what they thought of the various 2.3 options and if they where worth the upgrade price. Following are the results of that survey.


Is the premium package for the 2.3 (power top, leather seats, wood trim) worth the $2000 upgrade price? [37 votes total]
	Worth Every Penny	2(5%)
	Nice but too Expensive	24(64%)
	Waste of Money	11(29%)

Is the power top worth the $750 upgrade price? [49 votes total]
	Worth Every Penny	6(12%)
	Nice but too Expensive	9(18%)
	Waste of Money	34(69%)

Is the on board computer worth the $300 upgrade price? [44 votes total]
	Worth Every Penny	12(27%)
	Nice but too Expensive	17(38%)
	Waste of Money	15(34%)

Is the wood console for the 2.3 worth the $400 upgrade price? [34 votes total]
	Worth Every Penny	3(8%)
	Only with the Tan Interior	2(5%)
	Nice but too Expensive	12(35%)
	Waste of Money	17(50%)

Are the fog lights on the 2.3 worth the $260 upgrade price? [38 votes total]
	Worth Every Penny	10(26%)
	Nice but too Expensive	23(60%)
	Waste of Money	5(13%)

Is the in dash CD worth the $200 upgrade price? [31 votes total]
	Worth Every Penny	27(87%)
	Nice but too Expensive	3(9%)
	Waste of Money	1(3%)

Is the HK stereo upgrade worth the $675 upgrade price? [35 votes total]
	Worth Every Penny	3(8%)
	Nice but too Expensive	12(34%)
	Waste of Money	20(57%)

Are the heated seats worth the $500 upgrade price? [48 votes total]
	Worth Every Penny	29(60%)
	Depends on Climate	16(33%)
	Nice but Expensive	1(2%)
	Waste of Money	2(4%)

Are the sport seats worth the $400 upgrade price? [42 votes total]
	Worth Every Penny	31(73%)
	Nice but Expensive	8(19%)
	Waste of Money	3(7%)

Are the leather seats for the 2.3 worth the $1150 upgrade price? [38 votes total]
	Worth Every Penny	8(21%)
	Nice but too Expensive	24(63%)
	Waste of Money	6(15%)

Is the cruise control for the 2.3 worth the $475 upgrade price? [44 votes total]
	Worth Every Penny	8(18%)
	Nice but too Expensive	28(63%)
	Waste of Money	8(18%)

Is the chrome trim package for the 2.3 worth the $150 upgrade price? [35 votes total]
	Worth Every Penny	14(40%)
	Only with the Black Interior	7(20%)
	Nice but too Expensive	2(5%)
	Waste of Money	12(34%)

So from the survey results it appears the most desirable/cost conscience 2.3 Z3 would be a base model with heated sport seats, an in-dash CD, and maybe the chrome package. A Z3 equipped with these options would MSRP for only $31,770.

Not included in this survey were options like automatic transmission ($975), metallic paint ($475), and wheel upgrades ($500). Those options are more personal preference and really cannot be evaluated via a simple poll.

Babes in Toyland

Other/Misc, Upgrades No Responses »

Jun 151998

I’ve always had models of my current car. I started with a Renault R5, moved on to 2 VW Sciroccos, followed with a Miata and now that I have a Z3, I needed a suitable scale model to display with the rest. I had found a couple of models which were red 2.8′s or black 1.9′s, but I wanted a black 2.8. The Baba had suggested that I contact http://www.babybimmer.com.

I called the number on the page and started talking to Michael J. Izor – a self-confessed car model addict. Michael’s tastes in mini-cars is very narrow, he only collects BMW’s. However, he’s managed to collect over 4500 of them!

I think my request for a black 2.8 Z3 seemed sort of mundane to Michael. He’s used to harder challenges. He checked his inventory and told me it was mine for $28.50 plus tax plus shipping. Plus shipping! Hey! He’s only out in Natick! I could just drive out there and get it! Michael seemed amenable to a visit, so we set up a time.

It was a great day for a drive! The sky was blue, the sun was hot and the road was long and twisty! Michael lives in Natick, Massachusetts about a half hour from my home. Natick is a lovely town, filled with old trees and old victorians. Michael says he “lives in a beautiful, big old Victorian home, in a state of elegant decay (yes, both of us)”. We found the house without too much help (thank god for cell phones). Michael greeted us at the door as he picked up his mail – more toys, no doubt.

Michael took us on a guided tour through his wonderland of mini-cars, models and toys. Before seeing it, I could not imagine that there were 4500 different BMW models in existence. Michael has turned his home into a museum, devoted to miniature BMW’s.

There are several display cases in his office where he also has his computer. The cars are not arranged in any particular historical sequence, but they do tend to be grouped together by model or by size.

Leaving his office, there is a long hall lined with the smallest cars in his collection, the 1/87 scale models. Each one of those cases contains about a hundred cars! I immediately found the sections devoted to the Z1′s and Z3′s.

Michael’s collection runs from classic BMW’s to BMWs of the future, like the Alternative Fuel car (which never saw production as a real car, but, quite unusually, got to be a production model in 1/43rd scale.)

The crown jewel in Michael’s collection cases is this old display case from a dentist office. It houses some of his older collectibles, including a small silver 2002, his first miniature which he purchased, along with a full-scale 2002 in 1970. Michael paid $1 for the 2002 (the small one). It was only the first of a large number of dollars which have gone towards his “hobby”. Michael worked for many years as the CFO of a local television station, but has now decided that buying and selling model cars (mostly buying, he admits) is a much more fun way to make a living. We agree!

Michael’s collection rambles on from room to room. It includes memorabilia, much of it from his years as BMWCCA treasurer and president. He showed us this neat little gizmo which was designed by BMW engineers. It’s a miniature set of pistons which are driven by a solar panel – a remembrance of a particular conference held by BMW.

Although reception to the Z3-coupe has been somewhat lukewarm on the Z3 board, Michael had no hesitation adding one to his collection.

We had a great time at Michael’s. After the tour, he gave me my model 2.8 and we took the long way home, knowing we were driving not one, but two BMW Z3 2.8′s! If you’re in the Massachusetts area and are looking for a little bit of BMW to put on your desk or shelf you should be sure to give him a call. If you’re lucky enough to get an audience at casa-Izor, take him up on the offer of a tour!

However, it was time to go home and play with my new toy and add R281MNX(2) to the collection:

Ben Liaw’s / Short Shifter Conversion – Has your Z3 been BL/SS’d (Blessed: Get It?)

Other/Misc, Upgrades No Responses »

May 121998

After sitting in an M Roadster at the dealership one day, I notice that the shifter was much shorter than my ’96 M3. After some research, I discovered that all E36 cars can upgrade to this new, shorter, throw with this upgraded shifter lever. You are only replacing the lever itself, nothing else.

These detailed instructions will cover the procedure for the home mechanic, doing it him/her self. There is another procedure which is easier and quicker, but requires a lift and unique tools which is very expensive. Otherwise, this method works (I had to do it this way the first time) and should take about an 45 minutes. 60 minutes if you’re a klutz.

The coolest thing about this is that while the AC Schnitzer short shift kit is between $700-$1000, this conversion, which does the same thing, costs about $50. Please note that this is NOT the same as the $99 Autothority shifter kit as the AutoThority kit simply lengthens the distance from the ball to the lower linkage with a machined piece. This has known to shorten the shift, but also known to increase the sloppiness.

This has become a very hot upgrade as there are no shifters in the country at the moment. Just order it and be patient.

The Details

Shifter throw is reduced 31%.

Less slop than stock shifter.

Increased shifter effort decreases chances of mis-shift.

An upgrade that virtually no one can tell (UUC approved).

BMW Parts You Need

M Roadster Shift Lever (# 25-11-2-228-384) [required] – Part lists for $52.25

Nylon ball joint cup (# 25-11-1-220-600) or (# 25-11-1-469-397) these two parts are identical [recommend but not required] – Part lists for $14.87

Washers (2) (# 25-11-1-220-439) these parts can be damaged during the removal of the stock shift knob if you are not careful. [recommend but not required] – Part lists for $0.47

Circlip (# 25-11-1-220-379) this part can be damaged during the removal of the stock shift knob if you are not careful. [recommend but not required] – Part lists for $0.68

Carrier Bushing (# 25-11-1-221-822) [recommended if you have slop] – Part lists for $6.98

Tools You Need

Flat bladed screwdriver approximately 8 inches long

Grease (like white lithium)

Floor Jack

Jack Stands (2)

Step 1: Get the knob off

This procedure is best done while the car is cool and has not been running. Leave the car overnight and do this on a Saturday morning. After the front end of the car has been jacked up and supported with jack stands, you’re ready to start.

Pull off shifter knob (straight up, don’t hit yourself in the face). Do not try to twist the knob off, there are no threads on the shifter lever.

Step 2: Unhook the Shifter

Crawl under car and locate the end of the shifter lever. It is connected to a “linkage” arm with a circlip.

Remove circlip and yellow washer. On an older car, the circlip may be stubborn and you’ll ruin it taking it off. On newer cars, you can push it off with your fingers. Make sure you replace both yellow washers on either side of the bottom of the shifter lever.

Disconnect linkage arm from bottom of shifter lever.

Step 3: The Bitch of a Clip

The silver carrier which holds the ball joint of the shifter lever needs to come out. It has a “pointed” end which is facing towards the rear of the car…ignore that end. You want to focus your efforts on the FRONT of this carrier.

You’ll notice that the front of the carrier is buried above the tranny housing somehow. The carrier is secured to the car via a “pin” which is secured in a peculiar manner. Instead of a nut/bolt passing through the hole, there is a pin which is secured with a “latch” type of function. You’ll barely see it, but you can see the pin.

Once you locate the side which has the “latch”, use the side of the flat bladed screwdriver to pry up on the latch. You’ll need to get the latch to point upwards (it’s horizontal in the “lock” state). I found that if I kept prying upwards, pushing, more prying, the latch worked its way up slowly. When you’ve finally gotten the latch “up”, you can push the pin out, towards the latch direction.

Note for those with excessively sloppy shifting: If you notice, the pin comes out of a rubber bushing on the end of the carrier. If you have excessive play while the car is in gear, replace this bushing. Doing this BL/SS install will NOT fix sloppy shifting. You will have SHORT sloppy shifting. I don’t know the part number off hand, but Steve D. does. I’ll post the part number here and modify these instructions to include the bushing.

Step 4: Take Out the Carrier

You must remove the silver carrier/shifter lever assembly from the car now. I find that if you pushed the entire assembly forwards and backwards, you’ll be able to give enough room for the rear “pointy” part of the carrier to slip out, allowing the entire assembly to be then dropped down.

Step 5: Replace and Lube the New Lever

Once the assembly is out, you’ll have to remove the shifter lever from the aluminum carrier. It’s held in by a nylon cup. You have to get the cup out of the carrier, and I’ve found a screwdriver to work. Once you get the lever/cup out of the carrier, pull it straight off.

There is no incorrect way for the new shifter can be installed since it is perfectly straight, unlike the one you’re removing, which has a bend to it. Just be sure that the lower linkage hole is pointed in the correct direction. When you hook the linkage back up, it will be all lined up, ready for the shifter to be put on.

Replace new shifter lever into the cup, but make sure you lube it.

Press it back into the carrier, and make sure it has the “tabs” of the nylon cup sticking out of the slots on the side of the carrier.

Step 6: Reinstall

reinstall in reverse order

Final Notes:

You’ll notice and immediate difference in the shifting, not just in the throw, but also in the smoothness. I’m not sure why the factory doesn’t lube the nylon cup enough, but it sure does make a difference.

So, what do you do with this extra lever, you say? Well, it’s pretty much useless, unless you want to go back to long, sloppy shifts. They do fit in E30 cars, so be a pal and donate it to an E30 owner.

Enjoy your “blessed” shifter.

A Tale of Three Roadsters

Other/Misc, Upgrades No Responses »

Apr 111998

For the 1998 model year, the BMW roadster comes in three distinct configurations.

The Seriously Fun 1.9

The Seriously Quick 2.8

The Seriously Serious 3.2

I had the pleasure of driving a ’97 1.9 Z3 for 18 months, a ’98 2.8 Z3 for just over a week and my new ’98 3.2 MZ3 for four months now. All three of these cars are a ton-of-fun to drive and I would classify each configuration in the roadster/sports car class. I’m not going to get in a debate over the true definition of a roadster or a sports car. Some people hold a very firm definition on those categories, but the vast majority of the population would agree with my general classification.

Each Z3 configuration has it’s own strengths and weaknesses, owners can debate those individual issues for days and never come to agreement as to which configuration is the best. While debates like that can be a lot of fun in the end it is rare that anyone changed their mind. What I am offering is my own personal observations in comparing and contrasting the three different BMW roadster configurations, from an owners point of view.

The “Seriously Fun” 1.9

In October of 1996 I took delivery of a 1.9 liter BMW roadster. At that time car magazines were flocking to review BMW’s newest addition and most of the reviews were similar, “Great handling, very comfortable, but needs more power”. After spending 18 months with the 1.9 my review is slightly different. I think most of the “needs more power” comments came from the expectations people had of the car. To just look at it, it would appear to be a monsterly quick, five second zero to sixty rocket.

The first thing I had to do was learn how to drive it. The BMW 1.9 has power and torque but most of it is in the high RPM range. With the 1.9 you’re not going to squeal the tires at a stoplight, but once you get to 3,500 RPMs in 1st gear the fun really starts. Working the smooth shifting five speed was the trick to unlock the potential of the 1.9. Keeping the RPMs between 3500 and 5500 the 1.9 liter engine really responds. Once I learned this, it was really fun darting around Dallas, working the shifter up and down the gears.

Acceleration is just a small part of this car’s ability. Testing the roadster’s handling capabilities around corners a little faster each time, I started to build an almost invincible attitude. I found that speeding away from a traffic light was boring in comparison to making right hand turns at 30mph without touching the brakes. In fact I got so addicted to the roadsters ability to stick to the ground I started upgrading to 17″ wheels, fatter tires, thicker sway bars, anything I could find to further increase the mind sloshing turning ability.

The car’s design and setup are nothing short of amazing, driving it around town always left a smile across my face. But there were two distinct weak points that started to bug me after a month or two of ownership.

Exhaust: The stock exhaust is tinny and annoying, it was getting better as more miles were being put on it but it was just bugging me too much and I couldn’t put up with it. I visited the dealership to listen to other 1.9 Z3s to see if something was wrong. While mine seemed to have a little extra buzz, I accepted the dealerships point that nothing was wrong with mine. Three months after taking ownership I found myself researching solutions and purchasing an aftermarket exhaust that greatly improved the exhaust note, and gave a slight performance boost.

stereo: When you buy a $30,000 dollar car you just assume the stereo is good. Well let me tell you that assumption is false. The stock stereo was seriously under powered for a convertible, and the speakers sounded like something you would find at a swap meet. The stock head unit had some neat features like weather band radio and speed sensitive volume (which was very useful in a convertible). But it was confusing to have such a nice feature packaged matched up to such a cheap amp and speakers. Eventually I upgraded the amplifier and speakers to the level of quality you would expect from BMW. But it’s a shame I had to sink another $500 into the roadster to be able to hear CDs with the top down.

Even considering those two weak points the 1.9 liter BMW roadster is simply an amazing car. Before it’s popularity started to increase and the general public learned more about the car, people were asking me “how much”. Most were expecting $40,000 to $50,000 range a few thought it would be over $50,000. It was fun to see their reactions when I told them I paid under $30,000.

BMW will stop producing the 1.9 Z3 at the end of the 1998 model year. A 2.5 liter version will replace it at roughly the same entry price, but the 2.5 will not have as many standard features. The new 2.5 version will undoubtedly have more power than the 1.9, but I wonder if it will handle as well?

The “Seriously Quick” 2.8

Visual inspection of the 2.8 roadster doesn’t give you much indication that it is any different than its smaller brother other than the different wheel style. If you put the 1.9 and 2.8 side by side you will notice the 2.8 has a wider rear end, and a slightly different front spoiler. Really close observation will also reveal two smaller exhaust pipes rather than the 1.9′s single pipe. Inside the cockpit the interior has wood trim and leather seats standard (they were optional on the 1.9). Except for these small visual differences the two models seem nearly identical, well that is until you turn the key.

After starting the 2.8 liter straight six I was pleased to hear a nice “proper” sounding exhaust, a big improvement over the 1.9 exhaust note. Some owners might want a little more sound behind them but at least the current exhaust was not annoying like the 1.9. So BMW had addressed my first complaint with the 1.9, it was time to turn on the stereo and see if they had also addressed the second.

Salesmen are quick to point out that the 2.8 comes with an “HK” stereo. BMW markets that name like I should recognize and respect it but honestly I had never heard of it before. I hear it is made by Harmon Karmon, but for some reason I never see that full name in any BMW literature. This “upgraded” stereo claimed to offer better up front speakers, additional speakers behind each seat and a subwoofer. The subwoofer cost you a couple of storage spaces, one of which I had grown rather fond of. Turning on the stereo I noticed a more pleasant deeper sound. With the top up I could also make out a fuller sound stage with the rear speakers, but as soon as I dropped the top the rear speakers became inaudible.

The real test of the stereo was if I could hear it with the top down at hi-way speeds. After a week of listening to the HK stereo I will say that it is an improvement over the previous stereo, but still not as good as most factory stereos. For me it just crosses the line into the “good enough” range. I was initially let down when I discovered that the speed sensitive volume feature was somehow lost in the move to this HK stereo. However a service bulletin later came out revealing that BMW forgot to hook up the wire to activate that feature. After hearing a fixed HK stereo I remembered how much I truly enjoy the speed sensitive volume feature. Bottom line, if you really enjoy listening to music with the top down it’s probably only a matter of time before you visit an after market stereo shop to ask “how much to fix it”. I’ll let you hear the estimate and make your own decisions.

Despite the visual similarities, the 2.8 is a totally different creature to drive. Pressing the accelerator immediately pushes you back in your seat. It’s off the line acceleration is impressive. However after the first day of driving the 2.8, I wasn’t nearly as impressed as I thought I would be. It took me a couple days before I discovered I was driving the 2.8 wrong.

I had grown accustomed to driving the 1.9, where the priority was to get the roadster RPM’s up as soon as possible and keep it between 3500 and 5500 RPM. The torque curve is very different in the 2.8, it favors the lower RPM range. Once I learned this lesson the 2.8 actually became much easier to drive and I discovered how really quick you can get this thing up to 100mph (ah I meant to say 55mph). To some degree this took a little fun out of driving but the increased acceleration more than made up for it. What this lesson taught me is that just like the 1.9, the 2.8 has torque and power but not across the entire RPM range. The 2.8 initially throws you back in your seat pretty hard, but instead of steadily gaining power it seems to go flat after 3500 RPM. I’ve heard reports from 2.8 owners that adding aftermarket exhausts and air intakes increases the power in the higher RPM’s go I guess the stock 2.8 just needed more air. But don’t get me wrong, in either the stock or aftermarket configuration this car is very quick.

In the 1.9 I had become more addicted to handling than acceleration so I was interested to see if BMW had made improvements in this area as well. Strangely enough I don’t think so, the 2.8 does seem a little more solid but I couldn’t feel the road as much. Now don’t get me wrong you can still hopelessly pin your best friend to the passenger door on a hard left but I don’t think the 2.8 sticks as good as the 1.9.

Starting with the 1999 models the 2.8 gets double VANOS, which increases the horse power and moves the peak torque to a lower point on the RPM range. Not sure what kind of results this will transfer to the 0-60 and quarter mile times, but in theory the new 2.8 could be quicker. It will be interesting to see if there is a “seat of the pants” difference, but I doubt there will be. The 2.8 will also get a little more competition from its smaller brother, the 1.9 model is being replaced with a 2.5 double VANOS model that should be much closer to the performance numbers of the 2.8 model. It will be interesting to see which of these configurations sells better in 1999.

But despite what might happen in the future, the bottom line today is that the 2.8 is just a different car than the 1.9, and for different cars there are different drivers. Some will probably prefer the 1.9 with its lower price tag and around town tossability. In some aspects the 1.9 is more fun to drive. Personally, I like the extra kick in the pants the 2.8 offers and I think the price increase is worth it. But if you’re like me and favor the 2.8 over the 1.9, then you might be interested in BMW’s M roadster addition to the Z3 model line.

The “Seriously Serious” 3.2

BMW’s M addition to the Z3 roadster lineup is officially called the ///M roadster, although the name MZ3 seems more appropriate, and oddly enough M Roadster is a name Miata already uses to describe a version of their two seater. Well whatever you want to call it, at the very start of this article I said that when looking at the 1.9 BMW Z3 roadster it would appear it was a “monsterly quick, five second zero to sixty rocket”. Well that is exactly what BMW has delivered with the 3.2 liter Z3.

Visually the M roadster has several differences from its 1.9 and 2.8 siblings. The interior sports a retro two-tone look with lots of chrome. The seats are mega-comfortable wrap around two-color design. The steering wheel is a different design. The center dash/console area houses six chrome-ringed gauges with a chrome-ringed shifter. The instrument cluster also has chrome rings around all the gauges. (If you don’t like chrome this interior is not for you).

The exterior has a few visual clues to indicate it’s the 3.2 version. The front spoiler is slightly different and does not have fog lights. The signature Z3 side gills have been replaced with a different design that is more similar to the original BMW roadster from the 50s (I guess more of that retro look). I don’t mind the loss of fog lights too much, but I think I prefer the original Z3 side gill design, especially after close inspection of the new MZ3 design.

Most of the external visual differences are in the trunk area of the M roadster. Four large exhaust pipes stick out from a slightly shorter rear apron. The license plate is relocated from the bumper to the trunk and the trunk itself had its BMW logo moved from the back to on top of the trunk. The Z3 logo on the trunk has been replaced by a single ///M logo, and the trunk lock was moved from the right to the left side. From this perspective any respectable motor head is going to recognize that this is the M roadster.

Visual difference aside the other way to differentiate the 3.2 from its 1.9 and 2.8 siblings is to slip into the drivers seat and turn the key. The exhaust sound has a lower pitch with a little more “serious” tone to it. It’s still the “quieter than you would expect” BMW exhaust. Initially I was hoping for a little more sound but I knew exhausts notes change after a thousand miles or so. I was expecting a little improvement over time and sure enough I got it (but still want more).

Putting the car into gear the astute roadster owner will notice the shorter throw on the smooth shifting 5 speed shifter. The clutch is not really any heavier than the 2.8 but appears to be a little more sensitive. The brakes have a much different feel to them, and are much more powerful. First couple days I was snapping my head forward every time I touched them (yes they are that sensitive). After I got use to them they were just fine, but then I had a problem driving my wife’s 318i. Switching back and forth between cars is still a problem for me.

But now for the real fun, pressing the throttle down we find out that the 3.2 is quite a bit different than the 2.8. The 2.8 has plenty of torque in the low-end range that can really snap your neck back if you try. To be honest I’m not sure if the 3.2 is any faster than the 2.8 for that first 30/40 yards. But about the time the 2.8 torque starts to peak, the 3.2 torque curve really kicks in and pulls like a freight train. In many ways the appropriate driving style for the 3.2 will more closely resemble the high rev style of the 1.9 then the low rev grunt acceleration of the 2.8. I think for a few seconds several 2.8 owners would feel a little let down in the initial “off the line” performance of the 3.2. But then they would realize they are sinking even deeper in their seat as the 3.2 continues through the RPM range. When my M roadster was new I did my best to follow the break-in procedure, during that break in time I didn’t realize how much more pull the 3.2 engine had over the 2.8 because I didn’t want to rev the engine. But from the few times I cheated I could tell that there was a surprise waiting for me after I had completed the 1,200 mile break in procedure. Now that I’ve got 5000+ miles on the M I get to enjoy that surprise every day.

The suspension setup on the M roadster is quite a bit different than the 1.9 or 2.8 models. They say that an M roadster takes twice as long to build because of all the extra framework and welds they’ve built into the chassis design. This seems to transfer into a very tight and responsive handling convertible. The M roadster doesn’t necessarily handle substantially better than the 2.8 model. I think all the extra framework is to combat the extra power the 3.2 motor can deliver. While tossing the M roadster around a few corners I started to notice it required more precise throttle control. With the extra power you can spin the tires and drift out the rear end without very much effort. So it would appear that the M roadster has better handling potential, but in the hands of an average driver such as myself I can’t make the handling work any better than the 2.8 or 1.9. I think the handling on the M roadster is slightly handicapped by the standard Dunlop SP8080E tires which don’t seem to stick as good as the Michelin tires that come standard on the 1.9 and 2.8 model.

False Advertising: When BMW loans the M roadster to any big car magazine for an official test, it always has the Michelin pilot tires. Yet to my knowledge every M roadster delivered has come with lessor Dunlop tires (something fishy is going on here). There are a couple other areas that the delivered M roadster differed from the advertised, displayed and promised one. BMW proudly displayed an airbag cutoff switch in all the brochures and car shows. Even down to the day I bought mine, my salesman told me it had an airbag cutoff switch in it as standard equipment. But once the car was delivered all that was there was an ugly solid blank plastic disk and the promise “you’ll get it later, I promise”. Latest rumor says all the M owners will be receiving a letter in August updating us on the airbag switch we were all promised and sold, so we’ll just have to wait and see. The other difference involves the “M mobility system”, which apparently is German for “air compressor with fix a flat”. The M roadster does not have a spare tire, to make up for this and to help reassure potential buyers that they wouldn’t get stranded on the side of the road BMW showed us pictures of this mobility system and told us it was standard equipment. Well something happened in between the time I signed the paperwork, and the time I took delivery of the M roadster. The M mobility system had been removed and replaced with a hollow promise of “lifetime roadside assistance”. Lot of good lifetime roadside assistance is going to do me stuck with a nail in my tire half way between Dallas and Little Rock without a cell phone.

Conclusion?

The three different BMW roadster configurations each have their own strengths and weaknesses. Despite the visual similarities, they really are three different automobiles in three distinct price ranges. The price distinction alone might making picking between the three models an easy decision. Just pick the one you can afford, because all three models are worth the money and all three will leave you with a permanent grin on your face no matter which engine you’re sitting behind. But what good is this article if I don’t come up with some kind of conclusion, so here’s my opinion.

Looking at the three from a “price for performance” standpoint, I think most would conclude that the 2.8 is probably the best value. It’s raw, grunt, in-your-face power off the line is very impressive. If the 2.8 has a performance weak spot, it would be its high-end torque. However 2.8 owners are starting to figure out ways to open up the high-end torque with new exhausts, air filters and performance chips. Now with the new double VANOS 2.8 coming out in 1999 it would appear the 2.8 is going to deliver a little more performance for the same price.

Look at the three from a “price for handling” standpoint, and the 1.9 is my clear-cut winner. With just the stock configuration the 1.9 will out perform most vehicles in its class at an autocross. In fact depending on the autocross layout the 1.9 might even beat the 2.8. With just a little aftermarket help the 1.9′s handling breaks into a “race car” like performance range that will have you feeling immune to the affects gravity and inertia. It’s sub $30,000 base price is really hard to beat and with the reports of a 2.5 liter model falling into the same price range I suspect BMW is going to be selling every Z3 it can make.

So where does the M roadster fall in these specific comparisons? Looking at handling I can’t really say its any better than the 1.9 (at least for a driver of my capabilities). Looking at performance I know the 3.2 is faster than the 2.8, but the 2.8 is already pretty darn quick. The real value of the M starts to come into focus when you start adding up all the little extras you get with it. To start with there are the things you can actually put a dollar value on like the 17″ tires ($1125 option on the 2.8), heated sport seats ($900 option on the 2.8), power top ($750 option on the 2.8), metallic paint ($475 option on the 2.8) and the chrome package ($150 option on the 2.8). Add to that some things inside the cabin that are not offered on the 2.8, like the better leather, slightly more leather, and additional chrome gauges. Suddenly the price gap between the two models becomes pretty narrow and when you start to think about the bigger engine, additional chassis framework, and possibly better resale value you start to realize what a bargain the M roadster is in comparison.

So for me it the decision became much easier once I started breaking down all the little things. But that was because I wanted all the little things. There are enough differences between the three models that no one could successfully debate why one model is better than another. Although the debate itself would be fun I doubt that in the end anyone would have changed their mind. Each configuration offers a great value for the price, and it will be interesting to see how BMW tries to keep the separate configurations unique now that the performance gap between the models is narrowing with the new 2.5 and 2.8 double VANOS models.

BMW Trunk Mat

Other/Misc, Upgrades No Responses »

Dec 121997

Pros:	Neat Looking
Cons:	Doesn’t really do anything
Cost:	$39

BMW Trunk Mat #82-11-1-470-160

Your local BMW Parts department offers this trunk mat for around $50. It fits very nicely into the trunk and covers most of the usable area. There is not much benefit to having this, it just looks nice. I wish it would have been the same shade of gray as the trunk liner and the trunk organizer. The flash in my camera gave a couple of the pictures on the left a reddish tint. However the mat is actually black, the picture above is the most accurate.

There are two designs for this trunk mat depending on the location of the battery. Early ’96 model Z3s should use a different part number (Your BMW Parts department will make sure you get the right one).

APE Short Shift Kit

Other/Misc, Upgrades No Responses »

Aug 081997

Pros:	Very short shift throws
Cons:	Hard to install, made my shifter sloppy
Cost:	$99

However the installation procedure was long and painful, mainly because the installation instructions were not only bad THEY WERE WRONG. If I knew what it was going to take I probably would have passed on this kit. I guess the point I’m trying to make here is if you want a short shift kit, have a garage mechanic install it. He’ll have a lift so he won’t have to lay on his back, and he probably has tools designed to work in cramped spaces. Print out the installation webpage and hand it to him, he can probably do it within an hour (where it took me over 3).Yet another example of “You get what you pay for”. Once I got the APE short shift kit installed I was somewhat pleased with the results. Given the relatively low price I initially thought I got $99 worth of satisfaction out of AutoThority’s product.

The shift is definitely shorter and more comfortable, however there seems to be a little more wiggle/looseness in the stick when the car is in gear (especially 3rd). This is hard to describe but when the transmission is in 3rd gear I can move the stick left and right about three-quarters the distance of the shift knob. At first this slightly annoyed me but now I’m really bugged by it. The shift just doesn’t feel right, I would prefer the shift be tighter, enough so that I actually crawled back under the car and removed the entire assembly to see what stock felt like again. Once I felt the longer but tighter stock shift I decided to leave the short shift kit off. After talking to a few others that have the APE short shift kit it appears that a few owners (but not the majority) developed the same sloppy feel that mine did.

I guess the bottom line is I wish I never would have wasted my time and money on this kit.

Installation

For $99 I got a sheet of paper, a metallic purple aluminum piece, a bolt, a washer, and a c-clip. So I definitely did not receive $99 worth of parts, I’ll have to wait until it’s installed to see if I got $99 worth of convenience.

Step 1 of the instructions said, to lift the car so that you can work under it. This is harder than it sounds but I managed to get the car up on some jack stands that left just enough clearance room to slide under the car.

Step 2 of the instructions said, LOCATE THE SHIFT LEVER UNDERNEATH THE CAR – it is located directly below the shift knob, underneath the car along the centerline. It is just above the driveshaft. This picture is deceptive because I was able to stick a camera into this area, in reality you will never get this good a look at the connection. The shift lever is directly above the catalytic converter (which would have been a useful addition to the instructions). Between the catalytic converter and the shift lever is a heat shield and the drive shaft. Because of this you have very little room to maneuver. Basically I had enough room to get one hand into this area, and then I couldn’t see what I was doing. But get use to this, 90% of this installation will have to be done by touch alone. You can get a little extra room if you unscrew the six circle looking screws that are holding the heat shield in place. You can’t remove the heat shield but this will lower it an extra inch or so and make installation much easier.

Step 3 of the instructions said, SLIDE THE SNAP RING OFF AND REMOVE THE YELLOW WASHER. This was very difficult to accomplish, I ended up loosing the C-Clip and cutting two of my fingers trying to pull it off, and carefully removing the yellow washer (which is plastic). The instructions don’t tell you to do this but your going to half to any way. Go ahead and carefully pull the shift rod towards the passenger side. BE CAREFUL there is a plastic yellow washer on that side too and you don’t want to loose it.

Apparently what has happened here is the creator (Authority Performance Engineering) thought the shift link (the gold rod) was designed to enter the shift rod on the drivers side (maybe that’s the way it is in a 3 series). However as you can see from the picture above, the rod is on the passenger side. Because of this you will need to reverse what the instructions say to do to keep the rod on the passenger side.

I found that it was much easier to install the adapter if I removed the entire rod and do some of the work outside of that cramped space. (This was not included in the instructions). Follow the gold shift link rod forward until you find where it connects to the transmission. You wont be able to see it but in this picture I held a mirror up so you can see that it attaches just like the rear with a C-Clip and two plastic yellow washers. Remove the clip (which is on the driver side and one of the plastic yellow washers. Then slide the gold shift link rod towards the passenger side and free it from the link BE CAREFUL there is also another plastic yellow washer on the passenger side to.

At this point the entire gold shift link rod is loose and you can remove it. Once it is removed we can easily install the short shift kit. Honestly I don’t think I could have installed these parts in that tight enclosure. On one end of the gold shift link rod put on one of the plastic yellow washers, then the purple aluminum piece, then the other plastic yellow washer, then the C-Clip that came with the kit. The direction you install the purple piece makes a difference, make sure the more open (machined out) end is facing away from the 90 degree joint in the gold shift link rod. (Just look at the picture). At this point we’re half done, take a break, give your hands a rest and have a beer.

Okay crawl back under the Z3 and reattach the gold shift rod at the front (transmission). Remember to insert the rod from the passenger side (opposite what the instructions tell you to do) with a yellow washer on each side and then use the C-Clip on the driver side. Once this is done reposition yourself to stick you hand back to the rear link and reinstall the rod on that end. This is going to be very frustrating, but the purple piece will go on the passenger side and a bolt and washer will be installed from the driver side. The problem I ran into hear is trying to tighten the bolt. I barely had enough room for my hand, the combination of my hand, a socket wrench was nearly impossible. I could feel my way to put the socket on the bolt, but then I had to move my hand back to the socket wrench handle and half the time the socket ended up dropping off the bolt. When I got it too stick I could only turn the bolt one click on the ratchet. Basically it took 30 minutes (no kidding) to tighten this bolt. I almost gave up to and buy a slim power socket but my determination prevailed.

Page 2 of 3«123 »

MZ3.net

Model Year 2000 Observations

Valentine One Radar Detector

Used Airbags

1998 Best Owner Designed Product Award

What is the Perfectly Equipped 2.3 Z3? Owner Survey Says….

Babes in Toyland

Ben Liaw’s / Short Shifter Conversion – Has your Z3 been BL/SS’d (Blessed: Get It?)

A Tale of Three Roadsters

BMW Trunk Mat

APE Short Shift Kit

Shopping Cart

Slideshow

Translator