Page 2 of 41 FirstFirst 12345678910111227 ... LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 1015

Thread: my build thread, e30 with a 9 inch

  1. #26
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Posts
    17,072
    My Cars
    SR-71 Blackbird
    Great build and inspiring as well.



  2. #27
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Minnesota eh?
    Posts
    6,155
    My Cars
    86 325es
    little update, I found a new door on craigslist for $35 to replace my fubared drivers door. This body shell is in miserable shape body wise. the panels don't line up at all and there is quite alot of bondo. It was wrecked pretty badly sometime in its past and somebody cut out the core support and part of the drivers front frame horn and wheel well and grafted a new one on from another car. Of course I didn't know about any of this when I bought it. I've already replaced both front fenders, the hood, and now the drivers door. The drivers door was filled with like 5 pounds of bondo, in some places an inch thick, so the door skin was beyond hope. New door was white so I had to strip the trim and all the guts out of it to repaint.



    Now listen up kids,I'm about to teach you everything you need to know about body repair.

    First find a nice dusty area to spray. This way instead of just getting a spec or two of shit in the paint it will be everywhere for a nice consistent look. Also paint prep is for weenies. Brakleen and paper towels is all you need. If the paint you bought tells you to use stuff like tack cloth or wax remover then you paid way too much money for it. Semi gloss Rustoleum is what you need. You could spray that shit on a mound of dirt and it will stick.

    If you're like me, digging out your spray gun is way too much work, so rattle can is the way. Here's the trick, get whatever kind of paint you want with the small style spray tip and throw the tip away. Go on ebay and look for what poeple call "fat caps". These are special spray tips that shoot out a very wide and fine spray pattern. They will dump a whole can of paint in like 90 secounds and spray about 5 times wider than a normal cap. The quality of the spray is nearly equal to a cheap siphon spray gun. Honestly.



    there, looks like total ass, which is great because it matches the rest of the car



    even panel gaps are for loosers. Go make it faster. Oh and if the rear pillar of your door doesn't line up with the B pillar did you know you can just grab it and bend it by hand? Mine was like a 1/4" out before bending. Thats about it for bodywork, the fenders are off just to keep the from getting gouged while leaning on them all the time.



    Oh and if you break one of your door locks this is the proper way to fix it. Still going after 7 years.



    Its sad that I've been working on this car for so long that I look at this and say to myself, wow, I'm allmost done!



    Mmmmmm, meat



    Both my front frame horns have been smashed in so many times that they are nearly unusable, plus I hate the way they look when the bumper is off.



    Meet my friend Mr portaband. I'll be making a new set of plates to cover the holes and mount the bumpers when I get my tig back from repair. Also for you e30 people you might have noticed my radiator support is missing. Unlike the e36, the e30 core support is welded on and not removable so on an e30 you have to lift the motor and trans up over the top which sucks. I cut it out to make pulling the motor easier. I will be making the top part that holds the hood so it can just be bolted on and off, and welding in a new stronger lower radiator support.


    Last edited by someguy2800; 07-12-2018 at 11:41 AM.


    86 325es, 2.8L m50, S476sxe, ProEFI 128 ecu, e85, solid rear axle, TH400 trans, 28x10.5w slicks, zip ties, popsicle sticks, tape
    best time 9.06 @ 151.8 mph, best 60 foot 1.30

  3. #28
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Kingsport,TN,United State
    Posts
    148
    My Cars
    2006 BMW X3 3.0i
    this car gonna have horserpowwwaa , great build


  4. #29
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Posts
    17,072
    My Cars
    SR-71 Blackbird
    The right side picture shot kind of resembles like a 69 mustang. I do like the rear end looks though.



  5. #30
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Minnesota eh?
    Posts
    6,155
    My Cars
    86 325es
    Here's a quick shot of the t56 vs the original getrag g260 next to each other. Except for being much longer they are very similar in size. From this view its not hard to see why the t56 fits so perfectly in the stock tunnel.



    At first glance its surprising that the much smaller and lighter G260 (it weighs about 50 lbs less then the t56) seams to have a case size very similar to the T56. So why is the t56 magnum rated nearly 3 times the torque? Well first lets look at a t56 magnums gear set vs a standard t56. The main difference in strength is the width of the gears. The diameter of the gears is the same, and they actually use the same case, but the t56 magnum's gears are much wider than the originals. Take a look at a magnum input shaft on the left and standard t56 on the right. Also notice how much larger the bearings are.



    Now take another look at the t56 vs the g260, and notice the distance from the front bearing plate to the midplate, which is the part of the case that holds 1-4th gears. The g260 looks large from the outside because of its large bellhousing and long input shaft, but the actual gear case is tiny by comparison. Certainly some of that difference is because of the size of the sincro assemblies but you do the math.

    Last edited by someguy2800; 07-12-2018 at 11:42 AM.


    86 325es, 2.8L m50, S476sxe, ProEFI 128 ecu, e85, solid rear axle, TH400 trans, 28x10.5w slicks, zip ties, popsicle sticks, tape
    best time 9.06 @ 151.8 mph, best 60 foot 1.30

  6. #31
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Location
    Posts
    7,440
    My Cars
    F150, Suburban, M3
    Like this thread!

    "It's not the people who vote that count, it's the people who count the votes."
    -DNC

  7. #32
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Phillipsburg, NJ
    Posts
    97
    My Cars
    '88 E30 M50 Turbo
    Awesome work and build! So was the original drivetrain breaking from launching or no?

  8. #33
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Minnesota eh?
    Posts
    6,155
    My Cars
    86 325es
    My wife graduated with her doctorate in pharmacy this past weekend so I've been too busy to do anything. I sold my old turbo system so now its time to build a new one. Ordered a new manifold flange and pipe elbows yesterday. I'm switching to a borg warner s366, or 91/79 whichever you prefer. Got my driveshaft and as expected it had the wrong trans yoke on it so I also ordered a new Mark Williams billet yoke. Still trying to decided on a wastegate. Probably either a JGS or precision, or I might try to save a few and pick up a used tial 44.

    Quote Originally Posted by lumbergh17 View Post
    Awesome work and build! So was the original drivetrain breaking from launching or no?
    correct
    Last edited by someguy2800; 11-15-2017 at 02:40 PM.


    86 325es, 2.8L m50, S476sxe, ProEFI 128 ecu, e85, solid rear axle, TH400 trans, 28x10.5w slicks, zip ties, popsicle sticks, tape
    best time 9.06 @ 151.8 mph, best 60 foot 1.30

  9. #34
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suffolk, Virginia
    Posts
    5,294
    My Cars
    35D X5, 335d
    Quote Originally Posted by someguy2800 View Post
    My wife graduated with her doctorate in pharmacy this past weekend so I've been too busy to do anything. I sold my old turbo system so now its time to build a new one. Ordered a new manifold flange and pipe elbows yesterday. I'm switching to a borg warner s366, or 91/79 whichever you prefer. Got my driveshaft and as expected it had the wrong trans yoke on it so I also ordered a new Mark Williams billet yoke. Still trying to decided on a wastegate. Probably either a JGS or precision, or I might try to save a few and pick up a used tial 44.
    Sounds great, Perry! I cannot wait to see your track videos... Going to be so nasty!
    OLD
    E30

    636whp
    1/4 mile: 10.91@144.38
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_f7fUVqblI

    NEW BUILD
    335d

    520whp
    635wtq
    120.51mph trap speed




  10. #35
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Minnesota eh?
    Posts
    6,155
    My Cars
    86 325es
    here's hoping for wheelies!


    86 325es, 2.8L m50, S476sxe, ProEFI 128 ecu, e85, solid rear axle, TH400 trans, 28x10.5w slicks, zip ties, popsicle sticks, tape
    best time 9.06 @ 151.8 mph, best 60 foot 1.30

  11. #36
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    PEI, Canada
    Posts
    2,817
    My Cars
    2001 330i
    Love the spray painting!

    Good to see someone doing "real" hot-rod work...as in ultimate performance.

  12. #37
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suffolk, Virginia
    Posts
    5,294
    My Cars
    35D X5, 335d
    Quote Originally Posted by someguy2800 View Post
    here's hoping for wheelies!
    Definitely!
    OLD
    E30

    636whp
    1/4 mile: 10.91@144.38
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_f7fUVqblI

    NEW BUILD
    335d

    520whp
    635wtq
    120.51mph trap speed




  13. #38
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Minnesota eh?
    Posts
    6,155
    My Cars
    86 325es
    Quote Originally Posted by PEI330Ci View Post
    Love the spray painting!

    Good to see someone doing "real" hot-rod work...as in ultimate performance.
    Thats one of the best compliments I've ever gotten. I really miss seeing cars like Ulysses's lil 2.8, Mike Radowski's e36, and Donovan's e30. I don't know what happened to the hot rod spirit in this group. Its like everyone forgot you can build a car with your hands and not a damn credit card. Thank you sir.


    86 325es, 2.8L m50, S476sxe, ProEFI 128 ecu, e85, solid rear axle, TH400 trans, 28x10.5w slicks, zip ties, popsicle sticks, tape
    best time 9.06 @ 151.8 mph, best 60 foot 1.30

  14. #39
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    5,436
    My Cars
    none
    If I would just stop building cars for other people I'd be done with my pile of junk... I'm too broke to turn down work that pays the bills... ohh the dream!

  15. #40
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suffolk, Virginia
    Posts
    5,294
    My Cars
    35D X5, 335d
    Quote Originally Posted by Colby Colbs View Post
    If I would just stop building cars for other people I'd be done with my pile of junk... I'm too broke to turn down work that pays the bills... ohh the dream!
    You need to start posting pictures of the car you've been building.... The world wants to see
    OLD
    E30

    636whp
    1/4 mile: 10.91@144.38
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_f7fUVqblI

    NEW BUILD
    335d

    520whp
    635wtq
    120.51mph trap speed




  16. #41
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Joliet, IL
    Posts
    8,848
    My Cars
    Out of Service
    Quote Originally Posted by futureroadracer View Post

    You need to start posting pictures of the car you've been building.... The world wants to see
    +1

  17. #42
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Bellingham, WA
    Posts
    3,372
    My Cars
    e30
    Perry, this thread delivers!

    Also agree its nice to see people actually be innovative and not just use all off the shelf stuff. Unfortunately the ratio of credit card builds to DIY builds is way out of balance!
    -Nick
    91 E30 M42 on VEMS

    Turbo Camshaft Thread

  18. #43
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Minnesota eh?
    Posts
    6,155
    My Cars
    86 325es
    Now that the bellhousing is done I finally started work on the motor again.

    I set a personal challenge for myself to build a motor to make as much power as possible while using all production components, and also without using any M parts. Also I had to be able to do it all the work myself without cashing in any favors from my former engine building life. I love backyard engine building. After reviewing all my options for stock components I decided the best option would be to build a high rpm 2.5 liter motor. I have allways aspired to the short stroke high rpm Kenny Duttweiler school of engine building. To learn more look up the motor duttweiler built for the poteet and main LSR car, stunning feet of engineering.

    Since this is a street/strip car it only needs to have enough manors to drive to work and get down the track. No consideration will be given to low rpm power, the goal is a 5000-8000 rpm power band and a turbo I can spool out of the hole. So lets pick a piston. I've got 5 sets of pistons here to pick from. I've compiled some data so hopefully someone else can make use of this for there own concoctions.



    M50b25 (m50 non vanos)





    This is piston is unique to all the 24v 2.5 and 2.8 pistons in that it has a dished top. It is a conventional cast piston as identified by the cast in steel struts on the inside of the skirts and made by mahle. This piston uses a rather outdated 360 degree skirt. The added material is pointless as it contributes no real bore stability and very little structural integrity to the skirts. The skirts adjacent to the pin will never touch the bore as they are machined in an oval shape. Its an outdated design that was fazed out of most engines in the late 80's. Interestingly this is the only bmw piston I have ever seen that actually has a proper quench built into it. Most other bmw motors run way too much quench clearance which renders it useless. This piston sits about .023" up out of the bore which gives it a nice piston to head clearance of .047". The dish in the center more than cancels this out as I measured this piston as having a dish volume of 5.35 cc at top dead center.



    The rod is 135mm forged steel with a very wide and fairly narrow beam. Excellent load transferring design. I do have an issue with the rod bolts. Notice the necked down area just bellow the head? They taper down to a 7.7mm shaft diameter, why would they do that?

    Height at TDC = +.023"
    dish volume = -5.35cc
    piston weight = 519 grams (with pin, rings, clips)
    crown thickness at center = .280"
    top ring land thickness = .356"
    pin length = 2.125"
    Pin weight = 104 grams
    rod weight = 653 grams
    small end weight = 160 (approximate)
    Measured stock compression ratio = 9.87:1

    I must admit that I have spoken out against the 2.5 non vanos bottom end in the past, but after reviewing the data further I think the thick crown and excellent quench clearance would make the 2.5NV an excellent bottom end for high boost despite is outdated 1970's design, and I would pick it over the m50 vanos. Just don't ruin the quench by putting in a .140 mls. Do to the very heavy weight and poor rod bolt design I would recommend a rod bolt upgrade for high rpm use. Removing foot from mouth now.

    M50b25TU (m50 vanos)






    When the m50 vanos was introduced they updated the piston skirt design to a more modern semi skirted design which is not only stronger, but much lighter. They carried over the old constuction though as this agian is a simple cast piston with cast in steel struts. The valve releafs are very small which will severely limit cam timing changes. For some reason they abandoned the dished top and tight quench clearance for a flat top design, probably to reduce cost. In stock form the quench clearance is about .067" which is on the outer limit of what is actually effective. Pretty blocky outdated design, probably wern't doing any computer stress analysis.



    One interesting thing to note is that for some reason they bored out the pin boss to add a big wide oiling pathway on either side of the pin. Here is proof that even companies with many million dollar R&D budgets still make stupid desisions. Never assume that because the factory did it, it is a good idea.



    Rod is pretty much identical to the non vanos except for the 140mm length. The outer beams are a bit thicker. Same rod bolts.

    Height at TDC = +.003"
    dish volume = .3cc (valve releafs)
    piston weight = 467 grams (with pin, rings, clips)
    crown thickness at center = .230"
    top ring land thickness = .347"
    pin length = 2.125"
    Pin weight = 104 grams
    rod weight = 671 grams
    small end weight = 165 (approximate)
    Measured stock compression ratio = 10.94:1

    M52B28





    Now we get to a fully modern piston design. Similar in design to the m50 piston but now they are cast without the steel struts which tells me these are likely a hypereutectic alloy. The advantage is they are much stronger and will tolerate higher operating temps. The disadvantage is they are brittle and will not tolerate detonation, so ya gotta be careful. These have even smaller valve releafs than the m50tu. They appear to have mahle's typical phosphate coating but are missing the skirt coating that engine guys are used to seeing.



    The rod is another basic steel forging. The beam is much more narrow but significantly wider. A decent design for low power applications if the goal is to make it light. As we have seen time and time again the rod beam does not have sufficient structural integrity to withstand extreme cylinder pressure. Other than being too light, its a good design with no stress risers which is why they usually bend but very rarely break. I don't think I have ever seen a broken m52 rod.

    Here are the specs I measured when using these with the stock 84mm forged crank.

    Height at TDC = -.055" (this gives a piston to head clearance of .125" which is well outside the effective quench range. They have literally zero quench effect at all)
    dish volume = .2cc (valve releafs)
    piston weight = 463 grams (with pin, rings, clips)
    crown thickness at center = .255"
    top ring land thickness = .327"
    pin length = 2.325"
    Pin weight = 118 grams
    rod weight = 601 grams
    small end weight = 160 (approximate)
    Measured stock compression ratio = 10.4:1

    If using these pistons with a 75mm crank and 140mm m50tu rods the results are as follows
    Height at TDC = -.027"
    measured compression ratio = 10.1:1

    M52B28TU (E46 dual vanos)





    These are basically identicle to the m52B28 piston except for some small details. We now have Mahle's trademark coatings that they use on most of there aftermarket pistons. The skirts have a thin slip coating and the whole thing has mahle's phosphate surface coating. Not sure what the purpouse of the coating is but it seams to be effective at keeping carbon from sticking to the top. Engine guys should recognize these instantly. The pin is a bit shorter which is good as it moves the bearing surface in towards the rod instead of being leveraged out toward the end of the pin. Also the valve releafs are much bigger to accomodate the double vanos. Rods are identicle to m52B28




    Height at TDC = -.055" (this gives a piston to head clearance of .125" which is well outside the effective quench range. They have literally zero quench effect at all)
    dish volume = .8cc (valve releafs)
    piston weight = 454 grams (with pin, rings, clips)
    crown thickness at center = .262"
    top ring land thickness = .330"
    pin length = 2.200"
    Pin weight = 108 grams
    rod weight = 601 grams
    small end weight = 160 (approximate)
    Measured stock compression ratio = 10.3:1 (with M50 head)

    If using these pistons with a 75mm crank and 140mm m50tu rods the results are as follows
    Height at TDC = -.027"
    measured compression ratio = 10.0:1

    M54b25



    Lastly I have a set of m54b25 piston I bought from another member. I assumed they would have a 140mm rod but they are actually a 145mm much to my suprize, so they are useless to me, but I thought I would post them anyway. They are shockingly light and short. This is a very aggressive piston design for a stock application with very short skirts, very thin ring lands and thin 1.2mm top rings as opposed to most earlier 6 cyl rings which are 1.5mm. This would be a fantastic piston for a high RPM N/A motor but will likely lack the heat capacity and structual integrity for a high boost forced induction application. I don't have the rods but from pictures they are even thinner and more spindly than m52 rods. The later models apear to come with cracked cap rods which look to be powdered metal rather than forged.

    piston weight = 414 grams (with pin, rings, clips)
    crown thickness at center = .235"
    top ring land thickness = .204"
    pin length = 2.200"
    Pin weight = 108 grams

    compared to m52 piston on the left



    Here's me getting the data











    By the way, the head I measured came out to 31.3cc's

    So whats my pick? I might change my mind but I'll likely choose the M52B28 piston. I am getting the itch to try a high compression motor since I'm running E85. I want to bump the compression and get some quench in the motor so I'm leaning toward milling about .040-.050" off the block which will put the compression in the 11.4-11.8:1 range. It would be a shame to mill this block though as it the best condition I've ever seen.
    Last edited by someguy2800; 07-12-2018 at 11:56 AM.


    86 325es, 2.8L m50, S476sxe, ProEFI 128 ecu, e85, solid rear axle, TH400 trans, 28x10.5w slicks, zip ties, popsicle sticks, tape
    best time 9.06 @ 151.8 mph, best 60 foot 1.30

  19. #44
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Bellingham, WA
    Posts
    3,372
    My Cars
    e30
    Very cool and informative post.I had no idea the M54b25 rods were 145mm. Never knew the NV pistons were a full 360* skirt either.
    -Nick
    91 E30 M42 on VEMS

    Turbo Camshaft Thread

  20. #45
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Posts
    17,072
    My Cars
    SR-71 Blackbird
    Just to clarify, are you building a NA engine or a FI engine?
    Last edited by auaq; 05-17-2013 at 11:45 PM.



  21. #46
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Minnesota eh?
    Posts
    6,155
    My Cars
    86 325es
    I've been doing some more thinking and research on this trying to decide where I want to be for quench height and compression ratio. If I allowed myself to order custom pistons my choice would be simple. I would run a dish with about .040" piston to head which would put me within about .005-.010" of kissing the head at high rpms, and idealy around 11.5:1 compression. Running a really tight quench makes the motor much less prone to detonation. I have no doubt that e85 would be enough to control combustion at that compression, I've worked with NA motors running as high as 14.5:1 on e85. With the factory flat tops if I were to run that tight it would put me around 12.2:1 which is a bit more than I would be comfortable with without alot of meth or air to ice intercooling. Even loosening up the quench to say .060" that would push the compression down to 11.45:1 but the quench effect will be much less effective do to the tiny quench pads in the stock head. Since the quench pads are so small, I will need to run it really tight to get any affect. I'm not certain the tiny stock pads are adequate enough to get the job done unless I could run the motor at .040" or less clearance.

    So the tricky thing is there is kind of a sweet spot with quench that when you loosen up the clearance past a certain point, the motor becomes more prone to detonation because of the loss in evaporative cooling, even though the compression is going down. So you pretty much either have to go to a no guts no glory approach, or play it safe and lower the compression and get past the dead zone. This would be an easy decision if I could spec my own forged pistons. The tuning window would be very narrow and if you make a mistake or something goes wrong you'll detonate a hole right through a cast piston in no time. The other thing to consider is peak cylinder pressure vs mean effective pressure. The idea of course behind a turbo motor is to create the highest possible mean effective pressure and the lowest peak pressure. Since the weak point in this motor is the pistons I need to be especially careful to limit peak cylinder pressure. I'm not honestly sure what will accomplish this goal, lower compression and more boost, or less boost and more compression. Both have the net effect of producing higher cylinder pressure at ignition, but the tight quench also has the effect of producing a more stable combustion, and the lower compression has the effect of lowering charge temp at ignition. I did some playing with my engine simulation software and it predicted a 45 hp loss by going from 11.5:1 to 10:1 compression at 30 psi boost. The software predicted it would take an extra 5 psi of boost to gain that power back, which will also put more heat into the charge. Then the extra mass flow will push my compressor and my turbine housing to the limit of their flow. I could recover much of that lost power by running a larger turbine housing to lower the back pressure at the sacrifice of spool.

    I know exactly how I want to build this motor, but the question is whether I can get the stock pistons to survive. decisions, decisions... So right now the debate is do I run the motor tight quench, high compression and pump it full of methanol in addition to e85 to keep the pistons alive, or do I puss out and stay in the 10:1 range on straight e85 and sacrifice alot of power and spool. Right now I'm leaning toward the safe route of 10:1. I have had a detonation prone motor and its just not fun. I really don't want to add the cost and complexity of meth injection.
    Last edited by someguy2800; 05-19-2013 at 12:08 AM.


    86 325es, 2.8L m50, S476sxe, ProEFI 128 ecu, e85, solid rear axle, TH400 trans, 28x10.5w slicks, zip ties, popsicle sticks, tape
    best time 9.06 @ 151.8 mph, best 60 foot 1.30

  22. #47
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Saskatoon, SK, Canada
    Posts
    2,678
    My Cars
    m3, gtr
    I believe stock quench on my Nissan rb26 is 40 thou, fwiw.

  23. #48
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Bellingham, WA
    Posts
    3,372
    My Cars
    e30
    Meth injection is great, until there is a failure in the system which then destroys your motor. Personally I think the meth injection is a nice safety measure on a track car (circuit), but relying on the system for your standard tune is just a time bomb!

    I'd like to see the tighter quench, higher compression. Its easy to say though since I wouldn't have to rebuild the motor if it went sour

    Either direction will be interesting!
    -Nick
    91 E30 M42 on VEMS

    Turbo Camshaft Thread

  24. #49
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Minnesota eh?
    Posts
    6,155
    My Cars
    86 325es
    Yeah thats exactly my thoughts on the subject. Just one more thing to mess up. I don't really care what happens to the motor. It only needs it to survive mabey 10-15 dyno pulls, 30-40 drag passes, and a couple thousand street miles. Then it can shit its guts out and I'll build a built motor. My only hope is it doesn't take the head and turbine wheel with it.


    86 325es, 2.8L m50, S476sxe, ProEFI 128 ecu, e85, solid rear axle, TH400 trans, 28x10.5w slicks, zip ties, popsicle sticks, tape
    best time 9.06 @ 151.8 mph, best 60 foot 1.30

  25. #50
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    norcal
    Posts
    5,881
    My Cars
    a few e30s
    For being just 'some guy', you're pretty smart. I'll be tuning in for the build.

Page 2 of 41 FirstFirst 12345678910111227 ... 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
  •