E36 racks: let's settle it once and for all.

[E30STU]

Subscribed.....

[FLG]

Bump...can anyone confirm my suspicions?

[FLG]

Question (sorry if its been answered),

I understand the 95 m racks are progressive, i also understand that the travel was limited as compared to the e36 rack. But wasnt the travel only limited due to the e36m inner tie rod locks?

As you can see here

http://www.fcpeuro.com/products/bmw-...FahlOgod5QgASA


The locks have a small raised area which will cause the rack to lock sooner then it normally would (when it bottoms out on the tie rod) wouldnt running a e36m rack with standard locks or no locks then cause it to have the same lock to lock as a standard rack and then the only difference being that its progressive?

[Bearmw]

This is all speculation as of now until I track down hard information, not just hearsay[/quote]

That is in short supply on R3V;)

[JinormusJ]

Do you remember the model year?

So far I'm piecing together information that 2.7 L2L racks came in 95-97 Z3s as long as they kept the original racks, but I am scared to claim anything until I have definitive proof due to the nature of BSery I've been reading all over the web on this. However, one thing I have come across is that BMW did supercede the original 2.7L2L part number purging it from the original BMW catalogs due to safety concerns, and started fitting Z3s with 3.2L2L racks


This is all speculation as of now until I track down hard information, not just hearsay

[Todd Black 88]

Hmm, I don't know what to tell you.

I pulled my ZF z3 rack from a 1.9l z3 that was hit in the drivers side. It was the original rack to the car. It had a part number that had been superseded by a new number, both of which I don't have now, as I sold the car. I measured the L2L at 2.7 when out of the car and once installed. I also measured the distance the inner tierods traveled per revolution of the input shaft, and it was around 55 mm iirc.

[JinormusJ]

E36 racks: let's settle it once and for all.

Bumping this as I have a question about z3 racks and there seem to be no definitive information and a lot of people talking out of their ass.

I just bought a 1996 Z3 1.9 rack. I assumed from initial studies because it was the 1.9, it would be the 2.7L2L model. The more I read up on it however, the more conflicting information is out there regarding these racks, leaving me MORE confused, and just downright frustrated. My observations have lead me to a certain batch of information that people are claiming are true without definitives. (Quoted from e30tech)

Does anyone know which Z3 rack is the 2.7 linear rack? I have heard too much conflicting information.

Some say...
A. Make sure to Check all Z3 racks cause not all are 2.7
B. All Z3 non M racks are 2.7
C. Only the 1.9 racks are 2.7
D. 2.8L Z3 96+ had a 2.7
E. There was a very limited amount of 2.7 racks made (around 2500)

Anyone can confirm which of these is correct?

Thanks!

Now, the main smartass from BF.C who posted the original conflicting information regarding these new racks remanufactured by a company called Maval drops a huge bomb, and then leaves it at that.. Without sources, data.. Even model years of the cars he tested. Just "BOOM. Here's 5% of the information you need that I've collected. Go screw yourselves trying to find more information on it". Worse comes to worse, he hasn't logged in since April, so good luck catching him now

This is what makes matters worse, because no one has any definitive information regarding the racks, and no one has put to rest any of the above rumors, I have no idea ifthe rack I've ordered is true 2.7L2L, or a plain 3.2L2L Z3 rack. All we know is he mentions Maval, and them having a specific gold finish, not the typical aluminium that the ZF racks have. That being said more questions come up such as, which cars actually CAME with the Maval units? It just kind of seems to me he just did half the research and left it at that, and that really pisses me off

Further researching the Maval rebuilds themselves has revealed, from multiple sources, that the racks are complete garbage and are poorly re-manufactured (play after only 1000 miles, leaky fittings unless over-torqued). I've called RyanGMW and they've said to avoid them unless it is remanufactured by ZF themselves.

So.. Gathering all the information that SHOULD be believed? ZF made racks that were 3.2 and had a silver-aluminum finish for the Z3s, but somehow some of them needed remanufacturing and were sent to an outside company (Maval) where they changed the ratio to 2.7 and added a gold-aluminium finish, and some Z3s got them, but some didn't, so I have to check every single one just to be sure? That's bullshavek; there has to be some hard facts on this subject and some people are talking just to talk

At this point, I really don't know what to believe




EDIT:
I have called the yard company I bought the rack from and they said they have not yet pulled the part but that they will be able to send me pictures and more information about it on Monday. While this may not exactly immediately help the general rumor situation, it will allow me to know which rack I am getting and may shed more light on the misinformation that seems to be rampant about these racks.

[tonytony]

Bimmerguy, when you say 02+ e46, am I correct to assume you mean non m3?

[Bimmerguy91]

I understand I was just providing what I could. Its difficult to get more information on these things.

[R3Z3N]

Just a heads up, stating the ratio IE 12.5:1 still does not give quite enough information, as it is dependent on the steering joint mount distance from hub pivot point, which may or may not change in each chassis. That number (12.5:1) means that in the car it came in, it takes 12.5º of steering wheel rotation to steer the wheels 1º. A better measurement is the milimeters/revolution of the input to rack ratio to measure the racks against each other.

Edit: I am guilty of this too.

[Bimmerguy91]

Just throwing this out there for you guys. The quickest rack you can buy is a Z4M Coupe rack which is 12.5 to 1. You can also buy a E46 ZHP or Z4M Roadster rack which are 13.5 to 1. Then your next option is a 02+ E46 rack which is 15.4 to 1 Good luck finding a M Coupe rack though there were only 1815 made. So realistically getting a ZHP,Z4M roadster, or Z3 rack will be the best bet and just buy which ever is cheapest they are all essentially the same. Bang for the buck IMO is a 02+ E46 rack. Atleast if you're buying a reman. (Check Rack Doctor for good pricing) If you are buying used just go to pull-a-part and buy a regular e36 rack for $50 bucks.

[Hayden78]

Yes

And it would be a 2.7 l2l?
And thanks by the way man.

[Todd Black 88]

Yes

[Hayden78]

Does anyone know if a 01 z3 3.0l rack would fit?

[Solarian]

I've been looking at the 330i ZHP rack, but after a bit of research the Z3 rack is still the quickest option. And much, much cheaper.

Three years later and the opposite is true for pricing, Z3 racks are at least twice as expensive as a ZHP rack. Has anyone looked into the ZHP rack more? It seems like a really attractive option now that prices have gone down so much (and gone up for the Z3 rack)

Edit: I decided to look around and found this:

http://forums.bimmerforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1654735

Describes pretty well the differences between all the racks that the 330 got, and that the "good" one is the 712 part number one.