[The Nightman]

Originally Posted by ornicar

Do you know why 1 series E82 don'h have this V black bracing?

My idea is that maybe we (1 serie owners) could fit the thorough M3 Reinforcment plate (without cut). It would be great

Thanks

Likely due to cost cutting. For example, the E90 doesn't have any rear subframe reinforcement like the E91, E92 or E93.

[autoart]

I have often wondered if the rear brace from a M3 would make much of a difference.

[The Nightman]

Originally Posted by autoart

I have often wondered if the rear brace from a M3 would make much of a difference.

I fitted the E9x M3 rear subframe brace onto my E90 and it helped the chassis feel much more solid:



Info here: https://www.e90post.com/forums/showp...postcount=4300

[autoart]

Thank you

[Phil325i]

A word of warning. Having just attempted the 'freedomfries' double bar brace solution, anyone from the UK or Europe, be aware. If your car is fitted with electric steering, the rack is about double the size in circumference (due to the electric motor) and sits below the line taken by the nearside brace.

I had to make cut-outs in the bar and insert packing pieces between the brace and subframe to create the necessary clearance. I guess the same clearance issues would also apply if trying to fit the M3 alloy reinforcing panel. It will foul on the steering rack. Just so you're aware...

[ornicar]

Originally Posted by Phil325i

A word of warning. Having just attempted the 'freedomfries' double bar brace solution, anyone from the UK or Europe, be aware. If your car is fitted with electric steering, the rack is about double the size in circumference (due to the electric motor) and sits below the line taken by the nearside brace.

I had to make cut-outs in the bar and insert packing pieces between the brace and subframe to create the necessary clearance. I guess the same clearance issues would also apply if trying to fit the M3 alloy reinforcing panel. It will foul on the steering rack. Just so you're aware...

Thanks a lot for your feedback and warning!

So i am going to have some issues to fit the M3 reinforcement plate that i just come to buy....

do you have some photos maybe?

[Phil325i]

Originally Posted by ornicar

Thanks a lot for your feedback and warning!

So i am going to have some issues to fit the M3 reinforcement plate that i just come to buy....

do you have some photos maybe?

I didn't go for the reinforcement plate but the 'two bar' alternative. I think you will need to cut away a portion of the plate to avoid fouling the steering rack motor. How much that will weaken the plate I don't know.

[Biginboca]

Originally Posted by Phil325i

I didn't go for the reinforcement plate but the 'two bar' alternative. I think you will need to cut away a portion of the plate to avoid fouling the steering rack motor. How much that will weaken the plate I don't know.

That M3 plate does have a big area impressed into it that hangs lower to make clearance under the steering rack. I haven’t seen the steering rack motor you speak of but it’s possible the M3 plate will fit over it, or fit with only minor material removal because the plate isn’t flat over that area.

[Phil325i]

Originally Posted by Biginboca

That M3 plate does have a big area impressed into it that hangs lower to make clearance under the steering rack. I haven’t seen the steering rack motor you speak of but it’s possible the M3 plate will fit over it, or fit with only minor material removal because the plate isn’t flat over that area.

You could be right. This might give you an idea how much bigger the electric rack is than the hydraulic one:

[ornicar]

Originally Posted by Phil325i

You could be right. This might give you an idea how much bigger the electric rack is than the hydraulic one:

Attachment 2380703

another one in place on the subframe.

[Phil325i]

Originally Posted by ornicar

another one in place on the subframe.

Thanks ornicar. When fitting the 'two bars', I found it's the bulky area to the left in the picture (above what looks like a drain plug) that sits below the subframe by about 3cm. However if you're trying to fit the reinforcement plate, I think the whole of the motor would foul the plate. Hence my comment about possibly risking the integrity/strength of the plate by the amount of material you would have to remove.

Hopefully someone will try this soon and let us know what happens...

[ornicar]

Originally Posted by Phil325i

Thanks ornicar. When fitting the 'two bars', I found it's the bulky area to the left in the picture (above what looks like a drain plug) that sits below the subframe by about 3cm. However if you're trying to fit the reinforcement plate, I think the whole of the motor would foul the plate. Hence my comment about possibly risking the integrity/strength of the plate by the amount of material you would have to remove.

Hopefully someone will try this soon and let us know what happens...

It's going to be very, very tight

I will do a test in September.

opening a small "window" around the motor is going to be mandatory I think and maybe add a stiffener to compensate.

Which tool did you use to put in place the M10 inserts?

[Phil325i]

Originally Posted by ornicar

Which tool did you use to put in place the M10 inserts?

I used this method:

but it takes some muscle power!

Good luck with the install.

[ornicar]

Originally Posted by Phil325i

Thanks ornicar. When fitting the 'two bars', I found it's the bulky area to the left in the picture (above what looks like a drain plug) that sits below the subframe by about 3cm. However if you're trying to fit the reinforcement plate, I think the whole of the motor would foul the plate. Hence my comment about possibly risking the integrity/strength of the plate by the amount of material you would have to remove.

Hopefully someone will try this soon and let us know what happens...

So you were 100% right @ [Phil325i] (contact: 157271) I did a dry fit, and the M3 brace is bumping into the steering motor in a large area

Photos will follow.

I'm afraid that opening the plate to such a large area will weaken it too much and that in the end it has no interest.

in addition the 2 fixing points at the rear are slightly offset.

Are you satisfied with the 2 bars solution from an NVH reduction point of view?

I may also consider fitting the E88 bars again.

The M reinforcement plate will be for when I mount my M hydraulic rack one day maybe

[Phil325i]

Thanks for the update. Sorry it didn't work out. Yes I'm pretty satisfied with the 'two bars'. Didn't notice any change in NVH to be honest, but front grip has improved I feel and the car seems to corner flatter.

In future I might fit another bar which will be a single diagonal from the top of one bar to the bottom of the other (the diagonal between the two bars which doesn't foul on the steering motor).

Interesting that you're thinking about converting to hydrualic steering. Do you really find the electric system so bad..?

[ornicar]

Originally Posted by Phil325i

Thanks for the update. Sorry it didn't work out. Yes I'm pretty satisfied with the 'two bars'. Didn't notice any change in NVH to be honest, but front grip has improved I feel and the car seems to corner flatter.

In future I might fit another bar which will be a single diagonal from the top of one bar to the bottom of the other (the diagonal between the two bars which doesn't foul on the steering motor).

Interesting that you're thinking about converting to hydrualic steering. Do you really find the electric system so bad..?

Thanks for your feedback about the "two bars".

Maybe that the NVH reduction, that many have observed, is function of the spring rate.

To me the EPS is OK, no problem with the feeling, but what i would really like is the shorter ratio from the M rack.

In the canyon and spin it would be great!

[feuer]

Originally Posted by freedomfries

Likely due to cost cutting. For example, the E90 doesn't have any rear subframe reinforcement like the E91, E92 or E93.

Chassis is stiffer, all 4 vs 2 doors are, due to spacing from pillar to pillar, thus engineers deemed them not needed.

[ornicar]

Originally Posted by ornicar

Thanks for your feedback about the "two bars".

Maybe that the NVH reduction, that many have observed, is function of the spring rate.

To me the EPS is OK, no problem with the feeling, but what i would really like is the shorter ratio from the M rack.

In the canyon and spin it would be great!

E88 bars are in place!

It is not P&P you have to shorter the bars and had a fixing point in the rear location.

E88 undertray is necessary too.

Very happy with this mod. Better steering feel (a little more direct), The front of the car is more solid on bumps (better NVH). the front suspension seems to do a better job.

IMO it is the way to go when you have an EPS & that you can't fit the M3 structural plate reinforcement.

[M43S7RO]

Can you state a source for making this claim?

Originally Posted by feuer

Chassis is stiffer, all 4 vs 2 doors are, due to spacing from pillar to pillar, thus engineers deemed them not needed.

[feuer]

Originally Posted by M43S7RO

Can you state a source for making this claim?

Are you hurt because you have a coupe?
Source is BMW:
Sedan (w/o folding seats) 18000Nm/deg of torsion
Sedan (w/folding seats) 13000Nm
Sport wagon (w/folding seats) 14000Nm
Coupe (w/folding seats) 12500Nm
Convertible 10500Nm
All coupes came with folding rear seats, which makes the sedan either 4% or 44% stiffer.
These apply to pretty much all make and models, not only BMW e9x platform.
Why do you think they reinforce the coupe and convertible? For fun?

[M43S7RO]

Not hurt, you just make generalizations and speak on behalf of engineers like you know for fact. It's obvious you are the one who is defensive. Chill out.

You still don't provide the source, copying and pasting information that has been copied and pasted many times on the internet is not BMW sourced.

Anyway, don't care that much, carry on.

Originally Posted by feuer

Are you hurt because you have a coupe?
Source is BMW:
Sedan (w/o folding seats) 18000Nm/deg of torsion
Sedan (w/folding seats) 13000Nm
Sport wagon (w/folding seats) 14000Nm
Coupe (w/folding seats) 12500Nm
Convertible 10500Nm
All coupes came with folding rear seats, which makes the sedan either 4% or 44% stiffer.
These apply to pretty much all make and models, not only BMW e9x platform.
Why do you think they reinforce the coupe and convertible? For fun?

[feuer]

Originally Posted by M43S7RO

Can you state a source for making this claim?

Originally Posted by M43S7RO

Not hurt, you just make generalizations and speak on behalf of engineers like you know for fact. It's obvious you are the one who is defensive. Chill out.

You still don't provide the source, copying and pasting information that has been copied and pasted many times on the internet is not BMW sourced.

Anyway, don't care that much, carry on.

Well is a fact. Source is BMW. I wrote that in my original reply to you. Look it up. Do some work. Because as per you recommendation I need to chill.