SWAP Thread: '91 325i Sedan - S50b30us

[hwy84]

No i mean move it farther away from the manifold.

I apparently don't understand English - are you suggesting that I move the BOOSTER further to the driver's side of the car, or leave the booster where it is now, and move the CLEVIS closer to the driver's side of the car?

I assume you mean the latter ('cause the further I move the booster, without moving the clevis, the less aligned the rod will be with the booster).

That picture above is horrifying.

...However, I considered something like it, but with a hole through the pedal arm, and a lock pin/bolt through the entire assembly. Too stupid/unsafe?

[328ijunkie]

If you move it closer to the drivers fender then you can arrange the clevis like i showed allowing it to be positioned perfectly straight. Yes the mounting to the pedal could use some work but it works ;)

[hwy84]

If you move it closer to the drivers fender then you can arrange the clevis like i showed allowing it to be positioned perfectly straight. Yes the mounting to the pedal could use some work but it works ;)

EDIT: I made this work: http://www.r3vlimited.com/board/showthread.php?t=250474

Understood - Actually, my clevis WANTS to be where yours is pictured, but i angled it way over to the side to get it on the bracket.

I'll move it, and figure out a solution that will secure it in between the bracket and the arm... maybe zip ties.

Maybe.

;)

[Mr.SWISS]

Would really suck to slam into the ass end of a Windstar because you got shitty brakes and lose it all.

Order a treehouse booster or one from Dave (Markert MW) and make it right.

[hwy84]

Would really suck to slam into the ass end of a Windstar because you got shitty brakes and lose it all.

I could not agree more. And epic choice on the Windstar in your example. Way more hilarious than a Town and Country.

In any case, I too consider brake operation critical. It really helps with my lap times. :)

That's why I went with stock booster: Known braking power and effort, minimal changes to the hard lines, stock master to go with my stock calipers, and generally no worries about compromises in the system.

However, I was under the impression that the linkage would work on the stock pedal bracket without binding. Since that is not the case, I am going to weld up a new bracket on the pedal arm that DOES line up. This will require drilling a hole into the passenger side of the pedal arm, to allow the pin to pass through it.

I realize this will weaken the pedal arm, however, I will be welding a big ass piece of steel to the side of it anyhow, which will negate the impact of the drilling.

The side of the pedal arm, thusly strengthened and built to snugly fit within the clevis of the stock booster rod, will perform exactly as the previous bracket did - using pressure from the steel bracket inside the clevis to compress the brakes, and only relying on the pin to pull the booster rod BACK when releasing the pedal.

Design and function will be no different from stock in any practical way, and I will retain the "belt and suspenders" approach that combines a shear pin with the clevis to ensure redundancy.

[Mr.SWISS]

That's why I went with stock booster: Known braking power and effort, minimal changes to the hard lines, stock master to go with my stock calipers, and generally no worries about compromises in the system.

I think the ix booster is fine and I have had a swap car with an e21 modded boster before. Besdies, it was made like that from the factory in that configuration as well of course, and it clears the 24V.

[328ijunkie]

I never run stock boosters or IXs on customer cars the boosters I use flushmount with the firewall and don't require remote resivors

[hwy84]

Booster follow-up

So, it turns out that my BOOSTER wasn't binding at all.

However, the PIN in the clevis had enough sideways force on it, due to the angle of the clevis, that it created a ton of friction, and wouldn't allow the linkage to freely move. This friction was enough to a) make pedal drag, and b) prevent me from removing the pin without MAJOR force, fiddling, and swearing.

I finally got it all out. Without the pin, the whole assembly moved nice and smooth, and the pedal (and booster rod) returned just fine.

I therefore had a choice:

- Make the pin slightly less thick, so it wouldn't bind, and reassemble...

OR

- Do it right. http://www.r3vlimited.com/board/showthread.php?t=250474


In the meantime, I have the linkage half-assed, and it works fine, but I don't trust it for the track. However, I have been able to drive the car "with intent"... and holy shit... What a blast!!!

[328ijunkie]

Good to hear you did the smart thing ;)

[Mr.SWISS]

I sense a shift in the force of this thread....



Win?!?!? :weak:

[hwy84]

I sense a shift in the force of this thread....

Win?!?!?

Damn straight, win...


...Finally.:up:

[R3Z3N]

Congrats!

[Mr.SWISS]

So you want to post your thoughts of your current ix/e32 setup vs. stock? I think the bigger master makes it more touchy personally.

[hwy84]

So you want to post your thoughts of your current ix/e32 setup vs. stock? I think the bigger master makes it more touchy personally.

Will do. Booster is in a box on my desk as I type this... so I can't compare yet.

[hwy84]

BAR Referee and SMOG (California)

For California People:

I took the car to the BAR Referee today. I went to the Evergreen Valley College location in San Jose.

Short version: Passed visual, failed sniffer. Questions at end of post.

Long version:

The guy there was pretty "by the book" and did the entire visual inspection and smog test without saying a word. It was clear that I wasn't going to get a chance to discuss any mods, tweaks or stories with him during the inspection.

I have a fairly stock S50, with a stock 95 M3 center section, including cats. The only potential worries were:

- S52 Manifolds
- K&N Cone Air Filter
- Dinan Chip
- Lightened Flywheel (Machined M20)
- M20 Evap Cannister (Not S50)

Before the inspection, I discussed the Cone Air filter with the guy, and he said that as long as the MAF and intake BEHIND the filter were stock, he had no problems with it.

I passed "visual" - and he took his time. Mirrors, flashlights, the whole nine. He probably spent 15 minutes poking around the car.

Then he did the SMOG test. I am fortunate to live in a rural part of the bay area (yes, they still exist) so I don't have to pass on the rollers - just the old school idle and 2500 RPM test, and only tests HC and CO. (No specific NOx test).

I failed the test, on HC at idle. Everything else passed fine.

Idle: HC MAX = 100, HC MEASURED 110
2500: HC MAC 120, HC MEASURED 14

I need to make sure my TPS is actually registering closed when the throttle is closed, check my ICV, and run out some old gas still left in the tank. I am also going to run some fuel injector cleaner through the next tank of gas, in case my unknown injectors were sticky and leaky... though the clean-ass 2500 RPM number seems to indicate that isn't the problem.

My idle is a little "lopey" with the light fly... is it possible that the ECU is adding fuel to try to smooth out the dips at idle? Seems unlikely, but possible.

Thoughts are welcome. Overall, I am pretty happy with the results, since now I just need to focus on SMOG, and not worry about the equipment.