Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 76 to 100 of 119

Thread: Best range / MPG you have done?

  1. #76
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    NW Indiana
    Posts
    190
    My Cars
    2000 BMW Z3 M Roadster
    I am anal about mileage in my Hybrid, and only check it on the M Roadster out of curiosity.
    but the only way to accurately calculate MPG, as others have said, is to start with a full tank, record miles driven and gallons at fill up and calculate from that (miles/gallons = MPG).

    The only variable in this method is trying to "fill" the same way every time. Not all gas pumps cut off exactly the same, so there can be some variation.

    i am curious about what sort of impact 93-octane premium fuel vs 89-octane mid-grade fuel has on fuel economy (and performance for that matter). I ran low when I first got the roadster, still understanding the fuel gauge idiosyncrasies, on the Illinois Toll System and could not bring myself to pay $3.60 a gallon for premium.

    Filled up today, and got 23.9 MPG. Worst mileage yet, but the more I drive it, the more aggressive I get.
    Tally Ho


    http://wcwebs.net/johnson
    1988 O'Day 322 sailboat - (unlimited mpg)

    2000 BMW Z3 M Roadster (25 mpg - but who cares)

    2019 Subaru Outback
    (30+ MPG)

  2. #77
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Location
    Suburbadelphia, PA
    Posts
    458
    My Cars
    1997 Z3 2.8 Roadster
    I just discovered an old DIY thread that describes how to re-calibrate your OBC to more accurately account for your fuel consumption:

    https://www.bimmerforums.com/forum/s...ghlight=DIY%3A

    Having given it a try after last night's refill, I will be interested to see if I got the adjustment correct.
    Brad

  3. #78
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    hickory, nc
    Posts
    55
    My Cars
    2000 bmw z3 M
    in '81 11.7mpg in f250 4x4 at 65 mph interstate all the way.
    5.9- 6.26 mpg in freightliner, kenworth, etc.
    21mpg in my m roadster driving like a teenager 93 octane ethanol free usually

  4. #79
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Redding Calif
    Posts
    4,131
    My Cars
    1999 Z3 2.5L 5sp
    I'm going to have to update my best... did RandyW's fan delete this last week when I replace the waterpump: and I picked up what appears to be 3mpg (+/-)... before just barely over 30 was my best, and that was with E0 Arizona gas, on long straight interstates... but this last weekend, did a 530 miles round trip long day down to the Bay Area and back.. yes there were new plugs in the M52TUB25, but in the past they've never been worth any mileage increase (just smoother running)... but averaged 34.4 mpg on the way down [using mileage from odometer and gallons from the pump]; and then on the way back, 33.9 mpg (and that means a slow climb up 800 ft, and in 30degF warmer air than in the morning]. ... I'm keeping a careful log to see if this continues. But this would be sweet - and extra 30-40 miles per tank [which is in fact what I saw in terms of when to gas up timings].

  5. #80
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Location
    Suburbadelphia, PA
    Posts
    458
    My Cars
    1997 Z3 2.8 Roadster
    Quote Originally Posted by gmushial View Post
    I'm going to have to update my best... did RandyW's fan delete this last week when I replace the waterpump: and I picked up what appears to be 3mpg (+/-)... before just barely over 30 was my best, and that was with E0 Arizona gas, on long straight interstates... but this last weekend, did a 530 miles round trip long day down to the Bay Area and back.. yes there were new plugs in the M52TUB25, but in the past they've never been worth any mileage increase (just smoother running)... but averaged 34.4 mpg on the way down [using mileage from odometer and gallons from the pump]; and then on the way back, 33.9 mpg (and that means a slow climb up 800 ft, and in 30degF warmer air than in the morning]. ... I'm keeping a careful log to see if this continues. But this would be sweet - and extra 30-40 miles per tank [which is in fact what I saw in terms of when to gas up timings].
    That's fantastic. Glad to learn those mods have produced better mileage. (And I wish I could find ethanol-free gas in my region!)

  6. #81
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Redding Calif
    Posts
    4,131
    My Cars
    1999 Z3 2.5L 5sp
    Quote Originally Posted by gmushial View Post
    I'm going to have to update my best... did RandyW's fan delete this last week when I replace the waterpump: and I picked up what appears to be 3mpg (+/-)... before just barely over 30 was my best, and that was with E0 Arizona gas, on long straight interstates... but this last weekend, did a 530 miles round trip long day down to the Bay Area and back.. yes there were new plugs in the M52TUB25, but in the past they've never been worth any mileage increase (just smoother running)... but averaged 34.4 mpg on the way down [using mileage from odometer and gallons from the pump]; and then on the way back, 33.9 mpg (and that means a slow climb up 800 ft, and in 30degF warmer air than in the morning]. ... I'm keeping a careful log to see if this continues. But this would be sweet - and extra 30-40 miles per tank [which is in fact what I saw in terms of when to gas up timings].
    Doing some rough numbers to see if this even makes sense... a Z3 with top up requires roughly 17hp to maintain 70mph [assuming Cd .34, A 19sqft, 2600lb, Rr .008, 90degF sealevel etc]... where a 3mpg improvement is roughly a 10% increase, which flipped over says that there was a 10% decrease on engine load, ie, the fan as eating roughly 1.7hp ... which seems a little high, but isn't entirely out of range... so will have to track the mileage over time and see how it compares to all the existing data I've collected.

  7. #82
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    Eastern Shore, Virginia
    Posts
    139
    My Cars
    '01 BMW Coupe 3.0 manual
    Quote Originally Posted by gmushial View Post
    Doing some rough numbers to see if this even makes sense... a Z3 with top up requires roughly 17hp to maintain 70mph [assuming Cd .34, A 19sqft, 2600lb, Rr .008, 90degF sealevel etc]... where a 3mpg improvement is roughly a 10% increase, which flipped over says that there was a 10% decrease on engine load, ie, the fan as eating roughly 1.7hp ... which seems a little high, but isn't entirely out of range... so will have to track the mileage over time and see how it compares to all the existing data I've collected.
    This may not be high, did you see the video posted here somewhere of some fans on a V8 'eating' 10-12hp?
    Jim

    '16 BMW X5 3.5i
    '15 GMC 2500
    '01 550 Maranello
    '01 BMW Z3 Coupe 3.0 manual 5sp
    '97 Land Rover Defender 90

  8. #83
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    10,982
    My Cars
    Coupes...
    I have no fan, a 3.15 final drive, and a .83 overdrive.

    I still get shit mileage, I blame the faulty accelerator pedal.
    White is Right, Steel Grey is OK, but Estoril is the only color that truly matters.

    I like Coupes.

  9. #84
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Redding Calif
    Posts
    4,131
    My Cars
    1999 Z3 2.5L 5sp
    Quote Originally Posted by ixlr08 View Post
    This may not be high, did you see the video posted here somewhere of some fans on a V8 'eating' 10-12hp?
    No, I hadn't seen that... but I was just thinking about around the house fans and what they need in terms of a motor to drive them.. thank for the post - I like the confirmation... .. do you have a link to the video?

    I'll continue to log mileage and see if it continues.

  10. #85
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    New England, USA
    Posts
    543
    My Cars
    2000 2.3 Z3, 2007 328xi
    Quote Originally Posted by gmushial View Post
    I'm going to have to update my best... did RandyW's fan delete this last week when I replace the waterpump: and I picked up what appears to be 3mpg (+/-)... before just barely over 30 was my best, and that was with E0 Arizona gas, on long straight interstates... but this last weekend, did a 530 miles round trip long day down to the Bay Area and back.. yes there were new plugs in the M52TUB25, but in the past they've never been worth any mileage increase (just smoother running)... but averaged 34.4 mpg on the way down [using mileage from odometer and gallons from the pump]; and then on the way back, 33.9 mpg (and that means a slow climb up 800 ft, and in 30degF warmer air than in the morning]. ... I'm keeping a careful log to see if this continues. But this would be sweet - and extra 30-40 miles per tank [which is in fact what I saw in terms of when to gas up timings].
    nice, back in the day right before ethanol was forced down our throats around here, with 16 inch wheels and not too sticky tires, and not exceeding 75, I was able to get 31-32 mpg. Did not have fan delete back then..

    now with fan delete, 17 inch wheels, E10, I can't seem to break 30 mpg. My rough guessestimate when doing the fan delete was maybe 1 mpg.

    maybe I should check the gap on my plugs!

    you have cracked the code with 33 mpg E10 - my congratulations, perhaps you had good tailwinds?

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Watch Carefully View Post
    ..I wish I could find ethanol-free gas in my region!)
    don't we all, me too, grr

    I would say E10 vs E0 (5 %) > fan delete (2%)

    I should note that fan delete has been AOK for me for years now..
    Last edited by ZGator; 08-22-2017 at 10:09 PM.

    “Great wisdom is generous; petty wisdom is contentious.” 无为

  11. #86
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Redding Calif
    Posts
    4,131
    My Cars
    1999 Z3 2.5L 5sp
    Quote Originally Posted by ZGator View Post
    nice, back in the day right before ethanol was forced down our throats around here, with 16 inch wheels and not too sticky tires, and not exceeding 75, I was able to get 31-32 mpg. Did not have fan delete back then..

    now with fan delete, 17 inch wheels, E10, I can't seem to break 30 mpg. My rough guessestimate when doing the fan delete was maybe 1 mpg.

    maybe I should check the gap on my plugs!

    you have cracked the code with 33 mpg E10 - my congratulations, perhaps you had good tailwinds?

    - - - Updated - - -



    don't we all, me too, grr

    I would say E10 vs E0 (5 %) > fan delete (2%)

    I should note that fan delete has been AOK for me for years now..
    5% on E0 is probably not a bad number... and as such is the context when I reported my previous best...

    But Saturday, it was still air, down and back the same route: the only differences I can think of being a 800ft elevation drop (over approx. 100 mi) going south, and 85F air; and on the way home, a 800 foot climb and 100F air. ... and I'm pretty sure in CA nobody sold me some E0 without knowing it [I can buy it here: it's sold as yard equipment gas: 93 octane, E0, and $5+/gal]. ... will be interesting to see how this continues, or doesn't. ... but like you, I had thought about 30 or 30.2 or .3 was about the upper limit. ... as much as I suspect you offered it jokingly: maybe the E10 crap really does better with the wider plug gaps, in the goal there is to provide an extra 20% initial arc length - maybe it is more difficult to ignite and like that???

  12. #87
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    Eastern Shore, Virginia
    Posts
    139
    My Cars
    '01 BMW Coupe 3.0 manual
    Quote Originally Posted by gmushial View Post
    No, I hadn't seen that... but I was just thinking about around the house fans and what they need in terms of a motor to drive them.. thank for the post - I like the confirmation... .. do you have a link to the video?

    I'll continue to log mileage and see if it continues.
    Here is the link to the discussion. Video is a U-tube video in the first post.
    https://www.bimmerforums.com/forum/s...mechanical-fan!
    Jim

    '16 BMW X5 3.5i
    '15 GMC 2500
    '01 550 Maranello
    '01 BMW Z3 Coupe 3.0 manual 5sp
    '97 Land Rover Defender 90

  13. #88
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    tempe, az
    Posts
    2,695
    My Cars
    1998 Z3M, 2006 330i
    1998 Z3M s52 stock with CAI and fan-delete. Consistently 19 around town, about 1/3 on the hwy. I use the gas pedal a lot, but don't take it above 5000 rpm.

  14. #89
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Location
    Suburbadelphia, PA
    Posts
    458
    My Cars
    1997 Z3 2.8 Roadster
    Quote Originally Posted by Watch Carefully View Post
    I just discovered an old DIY thread that describes how to re-calibrate your OBC to more accurately account for your fuel consumption:

    https://www.bimmerforums.com/forum/s...ghlight=DIY%3A

    Having given it a try after last night's refill, I will be interested to see if I got the adjustment correct.
    Brad
    Hmmm...not sure I did it right when I recalibrated, though I beleive I was careful to follow the guide.
    My OBC was off by 1.0 MpG when I reset it...today it was off 1.3 MPG (still on the optimistic side). I'll have to give it another go!

  15. #90
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    Vanderbijlpark, ZA
    Posts
    246
    My Cars
    '99 Z3 2.8 Roadster
    I can't give my personal record yet as I'm still on my first full tank (picked the car up on Tuesday with ZAR100 put in by the dealer, filled up yesterday, and I now have 71km on this tank), but I do have a related question.

    At what RPM would you more experienced Z owners suggest shifting and cruising in a duel VANOS 2.8, for good fuel economy? I didn't buy the car to drive like a hooligan, I just want to enjoy top-down driving and putting it on shows. Fuel economy is also a factor for me, as evident from this post.

    I might be able to top it up tomorrow after some local car club activities, and get an initial not-too-accurate measurement. Keep in mind though the car is not in top condition, I still need to get it there.
    1999 BMW Z3 2.8 Roadster - show project
    1970 VW 411L Auto - show/restoration project (sold)
    1982 BMW 518i E12/8 - stolen
    1987 Mazda 323 1.5 SL - daily driver, backup show car

  16. #91
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Redding Calif
    Posts
    4,131
    My Cars
    1999 Z3 2.5L 5sp
    Quote Originally Posted by JKuhn View Post
    I can't give my personal record yet as I'm still on my first full tank (picked the car up on Tuesday with ZAR100 put in by the dealer, filled up yesterday, and I now have 71km on this tank), but I do have a related question.

    At what RPM would you more experienced Z owners suggest shifting and cruising in a duel VANOS 2.8, for good fuel economy? I didn't buy the car to drive like a hooligan, I just want to enjoy top-down driving and putting it on shows. Fuel economy is also a factor for me, as evident from this post.

    I might be able to top it up tomorrow after some local car club activities, and get an initial not-too-accurate measurement. Keep in mind though the car is not in top condition, I still need to get it there.
    I tend to shift btwn 4500 and 5000, or 4000 and 5000, for casual driving.

  17. #92
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    Eastern Shore, Virginia
    Posts
    139
    My Cars
    '01 BMW Coupe 3.0 manual
    Quote Originally Posted by JKuhn View Post
    I can't give my personal record yet as I'm still on my first full tank (picked the car up on Tuesday with ZAR100 put in by the dealer, filled up yesterday, and I now have 71km on this tank), but I do have a related question.

    At what RPM would you more experienced Z owners suggest shifting and cruising in a duel VANOS 2.8, for good fuel economy? I didn't buy the car to drive like a hooligan, I just want to enjoy top-down driving and putting it on shows. Fuel economy is also a factor for me, as evident from this post.

    I might be able to top it up tomorrow after some local car club activities, and get an initial not-too-accurate measurement. Keep in mind though the car is not in top condition, I still need to get it there.
    I have a 01 3.0 Coupe, when I am just putting around town I shift at about 2300 rpm and shift 1->3->5, I don't bother with 2nd or 4th gears. I haven't finished my first tank so I don't know true mpg's, but the computer is showing 26.8mpg so far on this tank. I haven't taken the car on any road trips yet, so I have no idea what highway mileage will be like. When I am having fun on the back roads... I don't pay attention to the tach... I just have fun.
    Jim

    '16 BMW X5 3.5i
    '15 GMC 2500
    '01 550 Maranello
    '01 BMW Z3 Coupe 3.0 manual 5sp
    '97 Land Rover Defender 90

  18. #93
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Redding Calif
    Posts
    4,131
    My Cars
    1999 Z3 2.5L 5sp
    Quote Originally Posted by ixlr08 View Post
    I have a 01 3.0 Coupe, when I am just putting around town I shift at about 2300 rpm and shift 1->3->5, I don't bother with 2nd or 4th gears. I haven't finished my first tank so I don't know true mpg's, but the computer is showing 26.8mpg so far on this tank. I haven't taken the car on any road trips yet, so I have no idea what highway mileage will be like. When I am having fun on the back roads... I don't pay attention to the tach... I just have fun.
    By my book you're shifting way too early... way before even max torque - which is where the engine is most efficient... but my concern also is: as engines get older, ie, more miles, they develop more slop in the bearings, and are more vulnerable to damage from lugging the motor. ... now, yes, if you're making zero demands on the motor, then fine at 2k; but the first time you put your foot into it at those revs: you're doing it big time no favors. [What keeps the bearing journals from smashing into the bearing surfaces, is oil; oil under pressure. At 2300 rpm you're probably running 20-25psi oil pressure; yet the motor, to protect the bearings, would like to have 50-60 psi - so at those rpms you're asking oil at 40% of nominal pressure to do the work of full pressure oil... tough task :-( ].
    Last edited by gmushial; 08-25-2017 at 08:31 PM.

  19. #94
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    Eastern Shore, Virginia
    Posts
    139
    My Cars
    '01 BMW Coupe 3.0 manual
    Quote Originally Posted by gmushial View Post
    By my book you're shifting way too early... way before even max torque - which is where the engine is most efficient... but my concern also is: as engines get older, ie, more miles, they develop more slop in the bearings, and are more vulnerable to damage from lugging the motor. ... now, yes, if you're making zero demands on the motor, then fine at 2k; but the first time you put your foot into it at those revs: you're doing it big time no favors. [What keeps the bearing journals from smashing into the bearing surfaces, is oil; oil under pressure. At 2300 rpm you're probably running 20-25psi oil pressure; yet the motor, to protect the bearings, would like to have 50-60 psi - so at those rpms you're asking oil at 40% of nominal pressure to do the work of full pressure oil... tough task :-( ].
    Whether the oil pressure is 30 psi or 60 psi, it doesn't matter much. The bearings are not running on oil at that low a pressure. If they were, they wouldn't last 20 minutes. Due to hydrodynamic forces the actual pressure on the oil during rotation typically climbs to over 25000 psi. This is what the bearings are "floating" on and what reduces the friction so they don't destroy themselves. There is only a small window during the rotation where the pressure in the bearing is low enough for the oil from the car to actually enter the bearing area. Below is a curve of the hydrodynamic oil pressure in the bearing as a function of angle of rotation, the blue line is the one I am referring to. For referance 250Mpa = 36250 psi. I have seen a curve that demonstrates this better and is easier to understand.. but I can't find it at the moment. But you are correct in that hydrodynamic pressure is a function of rpm and the higher the rpm the higher the pressure and the more protection there is for the bearing. Lugging an engine is a bad thing. When driving around town, I don't push it, I don't lug the engine, I am very light on the throttle. When I am enjoying the car on open back roads, I rarely drop below 3K rpm, there is a smile on my face and there is plenty of hydrodynamic oil pressure to ensure my engine will be happy and run a long time.
    Jim

    '16 BMW X5 3.5i
    '15 GMC 2500
    '01 550 Maranello
    '01 BMW Z3 Coupe 3.0 manual 5sp
    '97 Land Rover Defender 90

  20. #95
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Redding Calif
    Posts
    4,131
    My Cars
    1999 Z3 2.5L 5sp
    Sorry, but it does matter - unless you've invented perpetual motion... even from your graphs: when the oil film is down to a handful of molecular diameters (polymer strand diameter), you're that close to having nothing in between the journal and the bearing surface, and without oil pressure to keep more oil coming in to replace what's being chased out by the crushing motion between the journal and Babbitt, then it's toast. ... take a look at an engine that has always been short shifted, or when oil pressure had gone low: ablation of the Babbitt surface, and matching galling on the journal surface. Otherwise engines wouldn't waste the energy on pumping oil to higher pressures, likewise over pumping the oil and bleeding off excess with pressure release devices. ... oil pressure => oil flow; oil flow => replacement oil for bearings where previous load has chased the previous oil out and back into the sump. And please don't confuse oil pressure as somehow supporting the journal load: oil pressure is about rate of replacement flow and not allowing the residual in a bearing to go to zero. ... thus the definition of lugging a motor: inducing sufficient load on the bearings to crush out/evacuate the existing oil, and while having insufficient flow to provide replacement for the next load interval.

    BTW the bearings aren't floating in anything: the bearings are either carried by the conrods or rod caps; or the block or main bearing caps, and the journals are riding on a long strand film, which because of the rotational nature of the load is squeezed out; and if not replaced, results on journal meetings Babbitt, and friction heating induced ablation.

  21. #96
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    Vanderbijlpark, ZA
    Posts
    246
    My Cars
    '99 Z3 2.8 Roadster
    I'm planning to get a first (partial tank) result this week.

    For now though, I'm sitting at about 150 km (mixed highway and city, and experimenting with shift point and cruising gear), with the guage showing just over 3/4 left. For a 2.8 roadster that hasn't had an initial post-purchase service yet (and clearly needs a full service) that doesn't seem bad at all.

    The Mazda however can give me 11.5-11.7 km/l with almost no open road driving, while outrunning almost all the other cars off the line.
    1999 BMW Z3 2.8 Roadster - show project
    1970 VW 411L Auto - show/restoration project (sold)
    1982 BMW 518i E12/8 - stolen
    1987 Mazda 323 1.5 SL - daily driver, backup show car

  22. #97
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    Vanderbijlpark, ZA
    Posts
    246
    My Cars
    '99 Z3 2.8 Roadster
    I just refilled the Z3, and got 7.6km/l on the first tank. That's with a mixture of top up/down, and also experimenting with different engine speeds.

    I reckon I can get it to 8.x easily, but after that the engine condition (not going to fix every little thing) and repeated starts to chase the shade will become limiting factors.
    1999 BMW Z3 2.8 Roadster - show project
    1970 VW 411L Auto - show/restoration project (sold)
    1982 BMW 518i E12/8 - stolen
    1987 Mazda 323 1.5 SL - daily driver, backup show car

  23. #98
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Location
    Suburbadelphia, PA
    Posts
    458
    My Cars
    1997 Z3 2.8 Roadster
    I did pretty well on a tank this week. Filled it while away on business, drove home, then back out of town--mostly highway and rural miles with just a bit of in-town driving.
    I used 89 octane, and have my 16" wheels with all-season rubber on. (FWIW, it was a mix of driving with soft top up, top down and hard top on--probably quite a good balance).
    Result:
    332.9 miles traveled
    11.535 gallons used (13.5 gal tank, right?)
    28.86 mpg

    My OBC was telling me I had ~50 miles range left on the tank, but the needle was looking low (in that ominous lighted portion) so I pulled over to refuel. With about 2 gallons in reserve, and getting about 30mpg on the highway, I probably could have made it another 50. This distance of 333 miles is the farthest I have gone in my Z3; I've had one instance of better fuel economy (325 miles, 11.14 gal, 29.2 mpg) but haven't pushed the distance envelope near to running dry...yet.
    Last edited by Watch Carefully; 08-21-2018 at 10:22 AM.

  24. #99
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Posts
    3,444
    My Cars
    1999 Z3M, 1999 2.8 Coupe
    Filled up at 255 miles in the Coupe the other day and the fuel light hadn't even come on yet. Put in a just a tad over 9 gallons. I was shocked. I usually run around 22mpg with the 3.46 diff. I don't feel like I drove any differently.
    Nathan in Denver

    1999 M Roadster, VFE V3 S/C, Randy Forbes Reinforced, Hardtop, H&R/Bilstein, Apex PS-7, Supersprint
    1999 Z3 2.8 Coupe, Headers, 3.46, Manual Swap, H&R/Koni, M Geometry/Brakes, M54B30 Manifold, Style 42

  25. #100
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    Vanderbijlpark, ZA
    Posts
    246
    My Cars
    '99 Z3 2.8 Roadster
    The best I've done so far in the Z (mixed use, still not running perfectly) was 10.64km/l, over a distance of 311km. Longest distance: 439km (9.26km/l).
    1999 BMW Z3 2.8 Roadster - show project
    1970 VW 411L Auto - show/restoration project (sold)
    1982 BMW 518i E12/8 - stolen
    1987 Mazda 323 1.5 SL - daily driver, backup show car

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Best mod you have done??
    By MBimmer182 in forum 1992 - 1999 M3 (E36)
    Replies: 49
    Last Post: 12-18-2003, 09:31 AM
  2. Best License Plate you have seen.
    By rmn in forum Off-Topic
    Replies: 52
    Last Post: 08-29-2003, 10:08 AM
  3. The best mod you have done to your car?
    By vapor in forum General BMW and Automotive Discussion sponsored by Intercity Lines
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 08-05-2003, 02:31 PM
  4. Replies: 25
    Last Post: 12-26-2002, 06:19 PM

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
  •