Does anyone know the exact differences between a '95 and the '96-'99 M3 front spindles? I know they have different part numbers, but I know of other cases where the part numbers are different but the parts are physically identical.
I'm searching the archives on this too, but I'm trying to make a shipping deadline in the next 30 minutes so Bimmerworld can modify them in time for a deadline next week. I'll keep on eye out for helpful responses.
Mike
Oh man I'm I've been in the same boat as you.
Mine was for a rear trailing arm though before. Shows different # for 95 and 96+ but they are the same.
Now I'm also looking at an oil pan and also have different part #s. I needed a 95 but good thing the seller actually had a 95.
Hope you find what you are looking for.
FWIW, I know the control arms and the strut hats are different. Try calling a bmw parts department maybe they know?
Turner's front wheel bearing assembly fits virtually *all* E36s, so I don't think that dimension varies.
I'm more concerned about the geometry issues, like kingpin angle, and how that would affect handling. I know the '96+ cars had revised geometry to induce more understeer, but I don't know if that extended to the spindle as well as the control arms and bushings (centered instead of offset.)
Mike
The control arms fit no problem regardless of which, but I do believe the spindles are slightly different themselves. Not sure how though.
-Luke
EFFEKTIV Motorsport #189 GTS2 - Ground Control / Motorsport Hardware / Hawk Brakes
Visit us @ https://www.facebook.com/EffektivMotorsport
Unfortunately Bimmerworld doesn't have any '95 spindles on hand so they can't compare. Surely someone must from this forum must have compared them...
Mike
Last edited by Mike S; 12-02-2010 at 07:29 PM.
They have a different mounting points.
Ever compare max camber angles between 95's and 96'+? I find most 95's get around -3.0 degrees max vs over -3.5 degrees on the 96'+'s. Also caster is different due to mounting points on the front control arm to body and spindles.
Other then that they are the same.
Iirc, slightly different king pin inclination. Not sure if there is a castor difference as well. I think it was to compensate for a move to staggered tires in 96+ years.
- Ian
2000 M Coupe, stripped and DE prepped
46mm wheel bearing socket for rent - $30 deposit + $10 fee. PM for details.
All E30 models (including the E30 M3, with later years using aluminum control arms), E36 non-M3 models and the 95 E36 M3 use the same control arm geometry. In other words, the arms are geometrically/functionally interchangeable. For example; the 95 M3 or the E30 control arms can be used on the non-M3 E36 models in order to eliminate the rubber isolated outer ball-joints that are used on these models. NOTE: The Meyle Heavy-Duty control arms for the E36 models also eliminates the rubber isolated ball-joints. I also understand that all E36 specific CAs got a slightly larger inner ball joint to handle the additional chassis weight (or just internet lore?)
The 1996-99 E36 M3 control arms have different geometry than all of the other E30 and E36 models noted here. The outer ball-joint and spindle mount is 10mm forward of the positioning for the other 3-series models. Additionally the Spindle to Strut attach interface changed (boss for LWR attach for lower two bolts got thicker) resulting in the tire 'tilted' closer to strut body.
This change combined with the Upper Guide Support revisions aft/outboard and Centered FLCA Bushing yields more camber at full steering lock, and the strut in static position sits more upright.
Note that the (different part numbered) offset control arm bushings (CAB) that are used on the E30 M3 and the 1995 E36 M3 increase caster. The 1995M3 offset CAB can be found in the ETK as an option bushing for the 'Sport' versions of the 325.
The 1996-99 E36 M3 accomplishes additional by changing the Control Arm/Spindle/Guide Support geometry (as noted above) and using centered control arm bushings (CAB.) They also reduce Camber by moving the strut locating bearing of the Guide Support outboard.
Vorslag_1996E36M3_ControlArmCompare.jpg
http://vorshlag.smugmug.com/Projects...41_XKyDY-M.jpg
All p/n's pulled from realoem-dot-com
1995 Strut
LH STRUT 31312226987
RH STRUT 31312226988
REAR SHOCK 33522227794
1996+ Strut
LH STRUT 31312228007
RH STRUT 31312228008
REAR SHOCK 33522228415
95 M3 Spring “Hat”
UPR SPRING PLATE 31332227348
SPRING PAD UPR 3MM 31331128523
96+ M3 Spring “Hat”
UPR SPRING PLATE 31332227903
SPRING PAD UPR 3MM 31332227902
Canadian cars SPRING PAD UPR 9MM 31332227901
Bearing/Guide Support/LCA/LollyPop/LCAB p/ns -
95 M3
L/R GUIDE SUPPORT 31332228345
LH WISHBONE 31122227249
RH WISHBONE 31122227250
LH WISHBONE BRACKET 31121139789
RH WISHBONE BRACKET 31121139790
RUBBER MOUNTING F WISHBONE 31129064875
96+ M3
LH GUIDE SUPPORT 31332227897
RH GUIDE SUPPORT 31332227898
LH WISHBONE 31122228461
RH WISHBONE 31122228462
LH WISHBONE BRACKET 31121139789
RH WISHBONE BRACKET 31121139790
RUBBER MOUNTING WISHBONE 31129069035
Splindles
95M3
LH KING PIN 31212227357
RH KING PIN 31212227358
96+M3
LH KING PIN 31212227907
RH KING PIN 31212227908
325
Guide support 31336779613
UPR SPRING PLATE 31331135580
SPRING PAD UPR 3MM 31331128523
LH WISHBONE 31126758513
RH WISHBONE 31126758514
RUBBER MOUNTING F WISHBONE 31129059288
328
Guide support 31336779613
UPR SPRING PLATE 31331135580
SPRING PAD UPR 3MM 31331128523
LH WISHBONE 31126758513
RH WISHBONE 31126758514
RUBBER MOUNTING F WISHBONE 31129059288
Rear Spring Pads
SPRING PAD LOWER 33531135420
UPR SPRING PAD 5MM 33531136385
UPR SPRING PAD 7,5MM 33531136386
UPR SPRING PAD 10MM 33531136387
UPR SPRING PAD 15MM 33531094754
UPR SPRING PAD 21,5MM 33531091599
E30 including M3 Control Arms
Upper spring plate 31331128524
Spring pad upper 31331128523
LH ALUMINUM WISHBONE 31121130823
RH ALUMINUM WISHBONE 31121130824
LH Steel WISHBONE 31121127725
RH Steel WISHBONE 31121127726
Last edited by bluptgm3; 05-06-2022 at 02:59 PM.
The big question is which one has more King Pin Inclination (KPI)? If the '96+ has less, I simply can't fit my wheel and tire combo without going through all kinds of hassles.
Mike
My 2 cents.
I think the spindle geometry is different and it comes out the same using the correct control arms.
The 95 LCA only fits 95
The 96-99 LCA fits just that year.
As i know it the 95 has offset in the LCA mount, but equals the offset in the 96+ when using the offset bushing.
I have them both and there is a hugh difference in the LCA even though guys have argued the fact with me.
What am I trying to say? I think use either spidle then be selective as to what LCA goes with it for proper caster.
96+ got more caster and less camber through a combination of changes to the upper mounts, control arms, arm mounts and knuckles.
i have a 95 with aluminum front arms. same geometry as 95 m3 i'm told.
i've had both knuckles on the car. on a 95 with 96 knuckles, you get more camber if nothing else is changed. perhaps a small change in caster too, but i didn't measure that. i think it adds about .5 to 1 degree negative camber. they both work, but for a 95, i like the 96+ knuckles better.
Last edited by odortiz; 12-03-2010 at 09:04 AM. Reason: dyslexia
David Ortiz
KPI, as well as the outer control arm and tie rod end mounting points were revised on the '96+. So, they're definitely not 1:1 interchangeable. I measured it all a few years ago but I don't have the numbers right in front of me.
Chris
Sure, go ahead and taunt me some more Chris! When I saw your name I thought I'd finally have some factual info to work with.
For now, unless someone offers up the KPI numbers before tomorrow morning, I'll be ordering some '95 spindles and have them overnighted to Bimmerworld for the work.
Mike
With the 96+ M3, the top of the shock is placed more outward. So the car would have less negative camber, but the spindle is tilted extra to compensate for this. So it gets more negative camber from the spindle. This is why these cars have more problems with wheel to strut clearance and why they get more negative camber from a camber plate, simply more distance to travel the top of the shock inwards. Since the shock sits more upright in the lateral view, it will have less KPI as well.
Caster wise, they went back to a centered mount, but they altered the shape of the control arm to compensate for this.
I also believe the position of the tie rod is slightly different on a 96+ spindle (since the wheels on a 96+ sit slightly more forward)
If you swap a 96+ spindle on a 95 M3 the biggest difference you will see is in negative camber, you can suddenly get a lot more.
Last edited by =BA=; 12-03-2010 at 05:55 AM.
E36 M3 S50B32 daily - E36 M3 S54 trackcar
They Say Money Talks, All Mine Ever Says Is Goodbye
I did the 96+ spindle swap on my 95M3 a little while ago. there is a difference in thickness in the bottom mount points. I gained over 1deg of negative camber and I can now max out the camber to -4.1, where I could only get to -3.0 before with camber plates and shims. I also changed the control arms and bushing to 96+.
See my previous thread
http://forums.bimmerforums.com/forum...light=spindles
#71 SM
04 Silver Grey M3
95 Arctic Silver M3
03 X5 3.0L Titanium Silver
07 GX470- Silver
Molon Labe...
Excellence is a habit, not an act.
Right, you can definitely get more negative camber with the 96+ for a given strut mount position, but that is to the detriment of the strut-to-wheel clearance. This is probably the dominant effect for most situations.
Chris
What are you having done to them? (Steering arms shortened?)
Matt Nucci
6/94 E36 M3 Cosmos CP
I'm installing Bimmerworld's roll-center correcting arms and the Ground Control bump-steer correcting tie rod ends. The spindles have to be modified from the taper fit hole that receives the standard ball joint stud into a straight-through hole to accept Bimmerworld's mounting bolt.
Mike
So just to kind of finalize this are you saying that I can run the 96+ spindles on my 95 which has 95 arms and the offset LCA bushings and the only things I will see for the most part are a camber increase and strut to tire distance change? Can everything else be adjust out with CC plates?
The cheap bimmerworld price is very attractive (esp. for spares).
- Robert
I was looking into to those for increased performance. How low does your car need to be before it warrants the need for roll center correction?
I'm assuming you can drill the tapered hole out yourself with the right drill bit and therefor you don't need to send your spindle to BW.
You should probably speak with Bimmerworld about it. The bigger question is: are they legal in your class?
Rule of thumb for the ride height issue: if the angle between your control arms and struts drops below 90 degrees, you're in the "bad" part of the curve. This resolves that problem.
Others have done it, but I spoke with my machinist about getting it right and he was quite concerned about doing it accurately. After hearing how he was planning to do it, I decided to have Bimmerworld do the mod for me since they have all the tooling to ensure it's done right. They charged me $250 to drill out the tapered holes and weld the cones to the arms, and when I asked what it cost without the welding done they explained most of the effort is in properly drilling the hole.I'm assuming you can drill the tapered hole out yourself with the right drill bit and therefor you don't need to send your spindle to BW.
Mike
If I recall correctly, the incident angle between the strut and control arm increases as the car is lowered. The position of the control arm inboard mount is higher than the attach point at the spindle on a stock ride height car. Lowering the car moves the inboard mounting point lower. As result the control arm is becoming horizontal, increasing the angle between the control arm and strut. Once you are lowered passed horizontal, further suspension travel causes this angle to increase, opening the door for 'bump steer'.
Last edited by bluptgm3; 06-11-2020 at 03:50 PM.
Bookmarks