Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 33

Thread: Difference between '95 and '96+ E36 M3 spindle?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Orange County, CA
    Posts
    831
    My Cars
    '00 M coupe / '95 M3 S54

    Difference between '95 and '96+ E36 M3 spindle?

    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

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    742
    My Cars
    95E36
    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?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Santa Cruz, CA
    Posts
    612
    My Cars
    e36 325is/350z
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike S View Post
    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
    Isnt the hub shaft where the wheel bearing slides over a different mm diameter? I had the differences somewhere on my comp but i cant find the document.

    -Tim

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Orange County, CA
    Posts
    831
    My Cars
    '00 M coupe / '95 M3 S54
    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

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    3,196
    My Cars
    95 M3, 98 M3, 08 M3
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike S View Post
    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
    Right. The outer ball joint location on the '96+ control arm is different so I aSSume the spindle accounts for that. I've never verified what the dimensional difference is though. Maybe someone like BW who may have both parts on the shelf could verify for you.

    Carlos.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    1,646
    My Cars
    E30 & E36
    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

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Orange County, CA
    Posts
    831
    My Cars
    '00 M coupe / '95 M3 S54
    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.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Tempe, AZ
    Posts
    3,870
    My Cars
    95' M3, 98' M3/4
    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.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    4,369
    My Cars
    M Coupe
    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.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    5,775
    My Cars
    99 M3

    Difference between '95 and '96+ E36 M3 spindle?

    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.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Orange County, CA
    Posts
    831
    My Cars
    '00 M coupe / '95 M3 S54
    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

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    North Andover, Mass
    Posts
    602
    My Cars
    1997 bmw M3 IP #008
    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.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    No. VA (Police state)
    Posts
    1,677
    My Cars
    '95 M3, '94 325is
    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

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    85
    My Cars
    1994 325is, 2006 A4
    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

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Orange County, CA
    Posts
    831
    My Cars
    '00 M coupe / '95 M3 S54
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris@RRT View Post
    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

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Holland
    Posts
    2,280
    My Cars
    '97 Hellrot euro M3 SMG & '93 dakar yellow euro M3
    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

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    H-town, TX
    Posts
    5,488
    My Cars
    95 m3, 03 X5, 06 X3
    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.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    85
    My Cars
    1994 325is, 2006 A4
    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

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    563
    My Cars
    95 M3
    What are you having done to them? (Steering arms shortened?)
    Matt Nucci
    6/94 E36 M3 Cosmos CP

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Orange County, CA
    Posts
    831
    My Cars
    '00 M coupe / '95 M3 S54
    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

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Sachse, TX
    Posts
    393
    My Cars
    1995 M3
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris@RRT View Post
    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
    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

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    3,196
    My Cars
    95 M3, 98 M3, 08 M3
    Quote Originally Posted by rarudduck View Post
    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 believe in your case the wheel will be pushed forward in the wheel well. So the front of your tires will have less clearance to the bumper cover and may in fact rub.

    I kept my car's geometry stock and adjust via CC plates.

    Carlos.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    7,260
    My Cars
    are a waste of money
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike S View Post
    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
    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.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Orange County, CA
    Posts
    831
    My Cars
    '00 M coupe / '95 M3 S54
    Quote Originally Posted by Brent 930 View Post
    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?
    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.


    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.
    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.

    Mike

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    5,775
    My Cars
    99 M3
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike S View Post
    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.
    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.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •