The BMW UUC Digest Volume 2 : Issue 215 : "text" Format Messages in this Issue: Re: clutch install e28 535i Re: Trade Mag. Question Re: Wired News: "Drivers Want Code to Their Cars" Re: Wired News: "Drivers Want Code to Their Cars" Re: Wired News: "Drivers Want Code to Their Cars" Re: Wired News: Re: OBD-II codes, idiot dealers disabling CEL? How do I straighten my E30's crooked trunklid? Re: Stealth install of the Valentine 1 radar detector Re: Still more E36 suspension questions E30: Should I replace my cap? UUC - e36 M3 shock questions Re: S54 shim kit Re: S54 shim kit
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 31 May 2004 20:49:12 -0400 From: "Chris Pawlowicz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: clutch install e28 535i Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Randy asks > To remove shift lever unlock bearing retaining ring by a quarter turn > cc. I get an eighth turn using long > needle nose pliers then hit the wall. What has to happen to create success. the shift lever is removed UP into the car you can turn the plastic ball-and-socket piece from inside the car (or underneath) by using a couple of screwdrivers across each other.. turn and pull up.. it's only a 1/8 or 1/4 turn to release it you have to remove the circlip holding the bottom of the shift lever to the connecting rod (which goes forward to the transmission) first chris pawlowicz '89 325i '99 Z3 2.8 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 May 2004 21:33:33 -0400 From: "KMS - Brett Anderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "UUC Digest" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Trade Mag. Question Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Not that I know of. If you find one, let me know. Brett Anderson KMS > -----Original Message----- > This may be a stupid question, but is there a good trade magazine for > subscription with regards to BMW? > > Thanks > Art --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.690 / Virus Database: 451 - Release Date: 5/22/2004 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 May 2004 20:01:01 -0700 From: "Scott & Charlotte Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "UUC Digest" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Wired News: "Drivers Want Code to Their Cars" Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I understand the need for, and support the legislation mentioned in the article, but I do have to ask this question: After twelve check engine lights for a loose gas cap, why doesn't she just screw it on tight to begin with? Scott Miller GGC BMW CCA >Drivers Want Code to Their Cars >By Julia Scheeres > >02:00 AM May. 31, 2004 PT > >Rachel Seymour, a college student from Portland, Oregon, has had her 2002 >Kia Spectra serviced 12 times for a Check Engine light problem. Each time, >she's forced to take it to a Kia dealership, where a technician hooks her >car up to a computer, runs a battery of tests and charges her $120 to >diagnose and repair the same problem: a loose gas cap. <snip> ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 May 2004 22:49:13 -0400 From: "KMS - Brett Anderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "UUC Digest" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Wired News: "Drivers Want Code to Their Cars" Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > -----Original Message----- > I understand the need for, and support the legislation mentioned in > the article, but I do have to ask this question: After twelve check > engine lights for a loose gas cap, why doesn't she just screw it on > tight to begin with? Because the gas cap is not loose, and the dealer sucks dogs balls. There is obviously a problem in the evap emissions system that the dealer doesn't have the brains to diagnose. It's no wonder the government want's more independent shop action in the repair world. Brett Anderson KMS --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.690 / Virus Database: 451 - Release Date: 5/22/2004 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 May 2004 22:56:40 -0400 From: "Rich Dorffer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Scott & Charlotte Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "UUC Digest" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Wired News: "Drivers Want Code to Their Cars" Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Scott & Charlotte > Miller > > > I understand the need for, and support the legislation mentioned in > the article, but I do have to ask this question: After twelve check > engine lights for a loose gas cap, why doesn't she just screw it on > tight to begin with? Maybe because the problem isn't the gas cap...but a problem with the emissions system or something else... The real issue is...why did she buy a Kia? ;-) Later, Rich ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 May 2004 23:06:06 -0400 From: "Rob Levinson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Wired News: Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> What Brett said - bingo. The "faults" that trigger that particular code could be any one of a number of things. It's literally a case of the system designed to solve problems actually causing a new kind of problem. We were tracing a problem in my OBD-II truck all over the place (same code that is triggered by a "loose gas cap") and the damn problem turned out to be a dead spider in one of the ****ing OBD-II sensors! Normal shop diagnostics would have been at least 6-8 hours for the multiple attempts, plus a new gas cap, O2 sensor, pulling the evap canister out, etc., until inspecting the innards of one "properly working" sensor and discovering dried-up Boris in there. OBD-II is our tax dollars at waste, more forced technology that we pay for over and over. HAving legislators determine what goes on in the technical realm is like having an electrical engineer decide foreign policy. Actually worse, you know the engineer possesses something resembling intelligence. - Rob ---- Original Message ---- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> -----Original Message----- >> I understand the need for, and support the legislation mentioned in >> the article, but I do have to ask this question: After twelve >check >> engine lights for a loose gas cap, why doesn't she just screw it on >> tight to begin with? > >Because the gas cap is not loose, and the dealer sucks dogs balls. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 May 2004 23:45:47 -0400 From: ben keyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: OBD-II codes, idiot dealers Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> this really does sound like a seriously dumb-ass dealer. I worked in the plant with the engineering group responsible for current model quality on Explorers when we made the switch to OBD-II in the 96 model year. for the next 3 years after that "check engine light" was our #1 quality issue when taken as a whole. once you worked a bit of detail into what the codes were, things broke out into all sorts of different and traceable problems. sometimes they were simple items like the gas cap (the ECU was updated to not leave the light lit for this problem after xx start-up cycles, I think BMW's current logic also does this, later a specific warning light was added to alert the customer that they had left it loose), other times something more esoteric like a clogged valve or a previously unknown problem with a supplier's process on a part or a specific problem traceable to a bad installation procedure on a particular shift or whatever. there was (and likely still is) a constant task force to investigate these, not a fun job by any means. I think it's really stupid for the manufacturers to not release a list of codes to the general public or at least to independent dealers. the woman in the story should have refused to accept the line of BS that the dealer was feeding her, esp if she could get the fault to occur when leaving the dealer after it was cleared & the gas cap clearly tightened. her going back more than twice when she knew the gas cap wasn't loose and accepting the charges makes her a sucker for not fighting back with the dealer rather than paying the "diagnostic" charge to re-set the light. in my experience the Ford warranty covered the cost to reset the CEL, regardless of what it was triggered by, clearly Kia has decided to optimize their dealers cashflow by making that change to their warranty policy. the differences in the prices charges to independent shops (or owners if you wanted to pay it I guess) for access to technical information is interesting across different car companies : http://www.nastf.org/accesssummary.pdf makes you wonder why everyone but Honda/Toyota and a few others (Kia is one of them interestingly enough) feels that their information is sooo valuable. Ben ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2004 10:19:30 -0400 From: "Dennis Liu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: disabling CEL? Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Here's the follow-up question, I guess. It sounds like the OBD-II system primarily benefits dealers that charge to service the system. So what's the downside of just pulling the plug (or using a piece of electrical tape) on the check-engine-light? If the car is running otherwise fine, what's the penalty? Just curious.... vty, --Dennis -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Rob Levinson Sent: Monday, May 31, 2004 11:06 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [UUC] Wired News: What Brett said - bingo. The "faults" that trigger that particular code could be any one of a number of things. It's literally a case of the system designed to solve problems actually causing a new kind of problem. We were tracing a problem in my OBD-II truck all over the place (same code that is triggered by a "loose gas cap") and the damn problem turned out to be a dead spider in one of the ****ing OBD-II sensors! Normal shop diagnostics would have been at least 6-8 hours for the multiple attempts, plus a new gas cap, O2 sensor, pulling the evap canister out, etc., until inspecting the innards of one "properly working" sensor and discovering dried-up Boris in there. OBD-II is our tax dollars at waste, more forced technology that we pay for over and over. HAving legislators determine what goes on in the technical realm is like having an electrical engineer decide foreign policy. Actually worse, you know the engineer possesses something resembling intelligence. - Rob ---- Original Message ---- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> -----Original Message----- >> I understand the need for, and support the legislation mentioned in >> the article, but I do have to ask this question: After twelve >check >> engine lights for a loose gas cap, why doesn't she just screw it on >> tight to begin with? > >Because the gas cap is not loose, and the dealer sucks dogs balls. Search the ARCHIVES:http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] __________________________________________________________________________ In memory of Michel Potheau - friend, enthusiast, founder of the BMW CCA. UUC Motorwerks - BMW Performance Fine-tuning and home of the Ultimate Short Shifter - accept no substitutes! 908-874-9092 . http://www.uucmotorwerks.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 May 2004 23:27:09 -0400 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: How do I straighten my E30's crooked trunklid? Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I just replaced the trunk shock in my 325iC, but now, presumably due to the increased upward pressure, the left side of the trunklid sits noticeably higher than the right side. I tried putting some of the factory shims on the right side in hopes of raising it, but it had little effect. What other methods of adjustment are there? TIA, Mike Kozitka ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 May 2004 22:49:39 -0500 From: Dennis Wynne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Stealth install of the Valentine 1 radar detector Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I found this site a while back and you are correct that it is cool. You are also right that nothing beats a V1. I picked up an Escort 8500 cheap to use on the motorcycles and while it does have great range and fewer falses - with no arrows it just is not as good. I never did get the point of the mirror display V1 mod - that is not too stealthy at night, is it? The remote display box is very small and can be double sticky taped to the dash in most cars in a number of places - and you still have to mount the detector some place. I decided the risk of hooking up a 3rd party item into the car like this box was just not worth it. The ability to mute with the wheel controls would be nice, but the real V1 remote display does a better job of informing than the StealthOne as well. Still, it is a wow product - but not for me. Dennis 01 M5 silver/black At 10:04 AM 5/31/04 -0400, Dennis Liu wrote: >I looooove my Valentine 1. I humbly think it's the best radar detector in >the world, no contest. The downside for some people is that it's not >particularly stealthy, especially compared to the fully "installed" option >offered by a couple of competitors. One alternative for a couple of years >was to have the V1 remote display module installed in the rear view mirror. >Nifty concept, but expensive and (IMHO) didn't do a lot for stealthiness, as >it merely relocated the display module from the detector to the mirror - a >shift of a few inches at best - because the detector still needed to be high >mounted on the windshield. A slightly better alternative was to mount the >optional V1 remote display module down low, near the steering column or in >the dash, so that at least the person following wouldn't see the lights at >night. > >Well, I just stumbled across this for modern-ish BMW instrument clusters: >http://www.jaricdesign.com/products.htm >http://store.stealth-one.com/index.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 01 Jun 2004 08:17:15 -0500 From: Neil Maller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Still more E36 suspension questions Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 5/30/04 9:20 PM, Brian Ruiz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > All, > I am still putting together my suspension on my 93 > 325, and I have yet one more question. As I mentioned > before, I think I am going to use a set of 98 M3 front > upper strut mounts, dependent on one thing: camber. I > also plan to change the control arm bushings later to > the solid offset E30 M3 bushings (For the usual > reasons: better turn-in & feel). I am wondering if > the combination of the 98 M3 mount and the E30 M3 > bushings will put in too much negative camber. With > the car stock, the built-in negative camber was plenty > for me, since I don't track or auto-x the car, only > take a few spirited canyon runs every once in a while. > Extensive tire wear is my enemy - I would hate to > have too much camber that the tires would wear out in > 15-20,000 miles (or less, even). > > Brian > 93 325 Brian, The 96+ E36 M3 strut bearing plate (aka "hat") arrow points forward, with the R and L indicating passenger and driver sides respectively (assuming a left hand drive car). Your 325 hats have no shaft offset. If you look at one of the 96+ hats you'll see that the strut shaft axis is offset both to the rear (for more caster) and to the outside (for less negative camber). So if you install these on the normal side and orientation you'll get a bit more steering self-centering effect and feel but less negative camber than you have at present. If you instead install the R hat on the left side and vice-versa, still with the arrows to the front, the lateral offset will now be toward the inside, for added negative camber. The rear offset is quite marked, but the lateral more modest. Using offset control arm bushings will also increase caster, but leave camber essentially unchanged. If you think your present amount of negative camber is about right for you, then you'd be better off with 95 M3 hats. These have some rearward offset (not as much as the 96+) but zero lateral. Neil 96 M3 - swapped hats ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2004 10:08:25 -0400 (EDT) From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (bmw list) Subject: E30: Should I replace my cap? Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Tell me a tale of vacuum leaks, 16 year old rubber, and oil caps... I am wondering if I should replace my oil fill cap... I have the classic E30 slight stumble at idle (not detectable on the tach, but you can feel it). My oild consumption is a little bit higher than I would like, but there are mitigating circumstances on that front. I have heard that a vacuum leak will cause both increased oil consumption and idle problems. I took a look at the oil cap (which I always found to be rather east to remove) and notice that after 16 years on the engine, there is a nice little groove pressed into the rubber (which isn't the most pliable stuff anymore either). Is it new cap time? Will it fix my idle? How about oil consumption? P.S. The mitigating circumstances on oil consumption are that I live close to work and doubt the oil gets up to temperature before I get there and there is a big hill that I have to climb/descend. On the highway the consumption drops to a little less than a quart/3k mi. -- Joe -- Joseph M. Krzeszewski Network Operations [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jack of All Trades, Master of None... Yet ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2004 09:10:03 -0500 From: "Batt, Jeff (MED)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: UUC Digest <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: UUC - e36 M3 shock questions Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Hello all, A few questions regarding replacing shocks on my M3. After reading several posts from this board, I have to admit, I'm a little confused. The majority of posters here seems to recommend the blistein sport shock/strut or the koni set up. I was looking at the blisteins...but when I looked at various on line stores to purchase a set, some shops mention these shocks being the perfect match for 'low travel' suspensions with shorter sport springs installed. In fact, I think the Pelican shop mentions they are ONLY for cars with shorter springs? - maybe I'm misreading? Can someone confirm if I can use Blistein sports with stock 1995 M3 springs? Additionally, I don't have much (ok any) experience changing struts...do I need to get a $100 BMW alignment after changing my shocks/struts? Thanks! Battman ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 01 Jun 2004 09:16:20 -0500 From: Neil Maller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: S54 shim kit Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 5/29/04 8:20 PM, "Marco Romani" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Anyone know where one can obtain the shims required for doing a valve > adjustment on the S54 engine? Amazingly the BMW parts folks I've talked to > look at me like I'm from Mars when I ask the question. > Marco Then tell those clueless gits to look at: Diagrams 11_3006 Valve timing Gear - Cam Shaft in the parts system, which lists the shims ("adjusting plates") in 21 different thicknesses by 0.04mm increment. Part numbers start with: 11 34 7 832 270 for 1.72mm thickness and increment by 1 in the last p/n triplet for each 0.04mm up to 11 34 7 832 290 for 2.52mm. I don't find a complete shim kit listed, although there may well be one. These shims are used only in the S54 engine, both Euro and US versions. Neil 96 M3 - we don't need no stinkin' shims! ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2004 07:35:21 -0700 From: "Marco Romani" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: S54 shim kit Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you the man! Marco -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Neil Maller Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2004 7:16 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [UUC] S54 shim kit on 5/29/04 8:20 PM, "Marco Romani" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Anyone know where one can obtain the shims required for doing a valve > adjustment on the S54 engine? Amazingly the BMW parts folks I've talked to > look at me like I'm from Mars when I ask the question. > Marco Then tell those clueless gits to look at: Diagrams 11_3006 Valve timing Gear - Cam Shaft in the parts system, which lists the shims ("adjusting plates") in 21 different thicknesses by 0.04mm increment. Part numbers start with: 11 34 7 832 270 for 1.72mm thickness and increment by 1 in the last p/n triplet for each 0.04mm up to 11 34 7 832 290 for 2.52mm. I don't find a complete shim kit listed, although there may well be one. These shims are used only in the S54 engine, both Euro and US versions. Neil 96 M3 - we don't need no stinkin' shims! Search the ARCHIVES:http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] __________________________________________________________________________ In memory of Michel Potheau - friend, enthusiast, founder of the BMW CCA. UUC Motorwerks - BMW Performance Fine-tuning and home of the Ultimate Short Shifter - accept no substitutes! 908-874-9092 . http://www.uucmotorwerks.com ------------------------------ End of [bmwuucdigest] digest(15 messages) **********
