[uucdigest] Tuesday, February 15 2000 Volume 03 : Number 269 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ | For all available Digest commands including unsubscribe/subscribe, | visit the BMW UUC Digest page: http://www.uucdigest.com | Send SUBMISSIONS to [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Complaints? Send 'em to [EMAIL PROTECTED] if you must. | Visit http://www.bubbaclub.com | www.bimmers.com - "serving enthusiasts on the 'net" | Visit http://www.bimmer.org - ultimate BMW bulletin boards! | Subscribe to the Zionsville Autosport Parts Digest: | http://www.zionsvilleautosport.com/majordomo.htm ����������������������������������������� In this BMW UUC Digest: [uuc] <WOB> 80's Cars Are Best Re: [uuc] <WOB> 80's Cars Are Best [uuc] Re: M3 shirt(funny story) Re: [uuc] <All> Helmets and Test Drivers [uuc] E28> Removing Rear Emblems Re: [uuc] <E28> Removing Rear Emblems Re: [uuc] Re: <E28 M5> my weekend - long [uuc] <OT> Rod Ratio [uuc] Video camera mount Re: [uuc] <All> Helmets and Test Drivers RE: [uuc] <OT> Rod Ratio Re: [uuc] <OT> Rod Ratio Re: [uuc] <WOB> 80's Cars Are Best [uuc] How to identify where a driver is from ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 15:49:53 -0500 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Fluharty) Subject: [uuc] <WOB> 80's Cars Are Best (Inspired by Mike Miller's comment: "Must we befuddle the last BMW part free of electronics? Is it that "analog" mufflers don't break often enough? Or does the existence of one simple, functional part with no wiring harness just keep you up at night?") There are enthusiasts who greet each new model year with glee. They see only progress: improvements in power, handling, features; in short, a better car. Those people are wrong. Then there are those who feel the classic age of automobiles was the 50's and 60's, before oil shortages, before government regulation. Those people are wrong. New cars are amazing. More computing power than an Apollo mission. More plastic than Hollywood. Digital this. Programmable that. Like a Microsoft product, the modern vehicle tries to guess what you're going to want next and give it to you. But if it guesses wrong, you spend twice the time undoing it, and lose concentration and interest in what you were doing. Should anything malfunction, an army of high-priced techs with a warehouse of equipment will interpret the computer's cryptic utterings. Once in a while they'll get it right. If you can afford it, maybe they'll fix it. 50s/60s cars are amazing. All that power, all that chrome, all those fins. They move with dignity and grace, and some are works of art. But they are undersuspended, unsafe, shortlived, and environmentally disastrous. What's important in a car? What really matters, and what's just suckerbait (that is to say, ///Marketing)? The essential pieces, those which make a car *better*, were in place by the early 80's. Most of what's come along since qualifies as useless trouble-prone distractions to the driving process. My '87 325is has all the important environmental features (emission controls, unleaded gas, fuel injection, long life) and all the important safety features (good brakes, 3-point seat belts, controlled-crumple design). It has no air bags or daytime running lights or traction control. Its handling is within a whisker of today's best, and certainly exceeding my own capabilities. It does what I tell it to; it doesn't try to outthink me. It's kinda boxy; at 6-2 I can sit up straight. It's going strong with no rust at 13 years/135k, and will not consume landfill space for many years. Mechanically it's sophisticated without being ridiculously complicated. When I lift the hood I see an engine, not a plastic pretend-manifold or a plumber's nightmare. Even a hack like me can maintain/fix most of it. So I'm sorry to tell you, you Old Salts who can't get over your '57 Chevy or your '66 'Stang. Hate to ruin your day, you backwards-ballcap-wearin', rap-listenin' Z3-drivin' gen-Xers. But you guys are driving the wrong cars. 80's cars are best. Bob '87 325is - the perfect car (Is it possible there are dissenting opinions?) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 16:08:49 EST From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [uuc] <WOB> 80's Cars Are Best In a message dated 2/15/2000 2:57:55 PM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << 80's cars are best. >> Hey Bob, I really think you would be even happier with a car from the 20s. They didn't even have most of that "garbage" that the 80s cars had. Hmmm....? Don't you think? LOL Cheers, Ben (tongue in cheek) White/Ocean Springs, MS ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 16:25:43 -0500 From: "VITOLO_JONA"@LNMTA.bentley.edu Subject: [uuc] Re: M3 shirt(funny story) Hey Well, to answer your question-I can t afford an M3. My parents bought the car for me(hold on before you flame) I discovered the M3 back in 1995 and my dad made a deal with me that if I got straight A's I could get the car. Well come graduation, I had a good gpa and my dad said I could get one. It was 1999(four years later) And i acheived my goal. The car was my graduation gift, 18th birthday, etc etc also-its the gift that keeps on giving!!! I know i seem like a spoiled brat, but I can assure you that I appreciate the car more and more everyday. I realize how fortuante I am to have it and I cherish it everyday. I am an avid car enthusiast and I know just as much about the car as anyone. Coming from a racing background(i can tell you that if you follow CART you know who my father is-hint hint) i have learned many driving skills and i respect the car, something many teens who have M3's do not do. The car os my pride and joy and I love more than anything(next to my family) Flame if you like but then you have to face the list mistress =) (hi suzy!) Jonathan V. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 16:40:45 -0500 (EST) From: Moe Drippins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [uuc] <All> Helmets and Test Drivers dstevenson writes: > I do not know the details of this tragedy but it did get me > thinking. I have never noticed any auto journalists that they show > pictures of at speed in their magazines at race tracks testing fast > cars wearing helmets. Am I wrong? I'm new to this, but it has struck me as odd that I've never seen any reviewers wear helmets either, what with the emphasis on safety at driver schools that I have witnessed. - -- Just Moe '95 540 6 speed, BL/SS BMWCCA Peachtree Chapter ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 16:49:16 -0500 From: "Phemister, George" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [uuc] E28> Removing Rear Emblems <<<<<Darrel & Kalmia" asks Subject: [uuc] <E28> Removing Rear Emblems Greetings, Has anyone had experience with removing the 535i emblem from the trunk? If so, how is it attached? It is glued on, or attached with studs like the front and rear Roundel?>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dental floss will cut them off, but I doubt you could remove the shadow on a 13 year old paint job.. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 13:52:04 -0800 (PST) From: John Stoj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [uuc] <E28> Removing Rear Emblems I think others on this list taught me this trick: just "saw" it off with some dental floss (the emblem should be attached only with adhesive). Then clean and re-wax the area. - - John _______________________________________________________ Get 100% FREE Internet Access powered by Excite Visit http://freeworld.excite.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 14:06:46 -0800 From: Jim Powell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [uuc] Re: <E28 M5> my weekend - long Judging from my performance at Sega, you won't see me on the road, unless you have a fascination with your rear view mirror :( Jim Matthew Yip wrote: > > Ahem - a lack of common sense does NOT indicate a lack of > intelligence - not that would know. BTW, it's not my fault that you > and Herr Powell suck at motorcycle games. Remind me never to see > either of you on the road either... > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 14:08:50 -0800 From: Gustave Stroes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [uuc] <OT> Rod Ratio Gary and Patrick. Thank you for your responses. My comments are included below... > Actual dwell time at TDC is zero but piston acceleration is > reduced. Dwell at TDC is not an advantage per se but slower piston velocity > means that optimum ignition timing is later with a long rod and that > reduces negative work done during compression. I should have said that the dwell time "near" TDC is increased. Certainly the piston is only "at" TDC for an instant. But if a longer rod leads to lower piston accelerations at TDC then by direct implication this means the piston is "hanging around" near TDC for a longer time (or for more crankshaft rotation). In terms of the reduction in negative work, I would say there is a similar gain in positive work. Since the spark can be timed later in the stroke, then the mechanical advantage of the rod on the crank is greater when peak pressure is achieved (since the crank has rotated farther away from TDC). Sort of a 6 of one, half dozen of the other analogy. > A long rod more closely approximates pure sinusoidal motion. > As the rod is shortened, the acceleration and force at TDC is increased but > these are reduced at BDC. I would say that since the shape of the piston location vs. time plot is similarly shaped at TDC and BDC that the reduced piston acceleration due to a longer rod happens at BOTH TDC and BDC. But I may be missing something. > What formula(s) are you using? The formula is difficult to > program into a single column. I always split it out in several columns so I > can see the changes in the different parts of the equation as crank angle > changes. This is how I did mine. > > Column Formula > A angle > B stroke/2 * cosine column A > C stroke/2 * sine column A > D column C squared > E rod length^2 - column D > F square root of column E > G column B + column F (this is the position of the piston) > H column G - stroke/2 - rod length (this makes the position > 0 when the angle is 0) > Gary Derian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> OK your formula is the same as mine, save for the definition of zero on the crankshaft rotation. Patrick as well as Jim Butterworth have also independently developed the same formula. So as I suspected, the formula is straightforward and I was not missing some significant detail. That brings me to my dilemma. Within reason, I can see no advantage to going with a longer rod. I mean to go, say, from a 140 mm rod to a 150 mm rod yields piston location curves of almost exactly the same shape. And therefore the piston acceleration is relatively unaffected. Still, everything I have read says to go with the longest rod possible when rebuilding an engine. And I believe it, since intuition says it would be better. But if I look at the plots I ask: Where is the advantage? Gustave http://e30m3performance.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 17:14:26 EST From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [uuc] Video camera mount Does anyone know where I can get a video camera mount that mounts to the dash or windshield. I started autocrossing my M3 (<BMW content) and I want to tape my runs, but don't want a roll cage or harness brace. I've seen the ones that stick to the window using locking suction cups, but I don't know where to get them. Any info? Thanks, Tony '95 M3 '00 Explorer ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 17:20:12 -0500 From: ben keyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [uuc] <All> Helmets and Test Drivers Moe Drippins wrote: > dstevenson writes: > > I do not know the details of this tragedy but it did get me > > thinking. I have never noticed any auto journalists that they show > > pictures of at speed in their magazines at race tracks testing fast > > cars wearing helmets. Am I wrong? > > I'm new to this, but it has struck me as odd that I've never seen any > reviewers wear helmets either, what with the emphasis on safety at > driver schools that I have witnessed. Likely just that the pictures of the cars we see are taken for the magazine layouts - they may not be the actual testing of the cars. often the people in the cars look nothing like the writers, tho R&T does seem to have more shots of the editorial staff than random people. I have seen some pictures of drivers with helmets on, tho not always. the UK mags seem to have a fair amount of opposite locking pictures in cars with pretty high grip on what appear to be public roads. on the other hand they also put cars int he ditch everyonce in a while too. Jason barlow, when whe wrote for the now defunct "Performance Car" (now re-born as "evo") put a very new 911 into a nice English ditch while doing photos for the magazine, which they published. you alwyas hear about the "other guy" that wrecks/spins/mangle tranmission/etc on a press introduction, but it's never a named party (unless it's Motor Trend, then they name names ;-) Ben Keyes reads too many car magazines ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 15:57:14 -0700 From: "vanderHeide, Alain" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: [uuc] <OT> Rod Ratio - -----Original Message----- From: Gustave Stroes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2000 3:09 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [uuc] <OT> Rod Ratio [snip] That brings me to my dilemma. Within reason, I can see no advantage to going with a longer rod. I mean to go, say, from a 140 mm rod to a 150 mm rod yields piston location curves of almost exactly the same shape. And therefore the piston acceleration is relatively unaffected. Still, everything I have read says to go with the longest rod possible when rebuilding an engine. And I believe it, since intuition says it would be better. But if I look at the plots I ask: Where is the advantage? Gustave http://e30m3performance.com/ OK, I'm guessing here, but at high RPM, we are talking about some pretty high acceleration numbers every time the piston changes direction, no? And a piston weighs something, so even if the curves aren't all that different, might not the load on the rod change pretty significantly as a result of only a minor change in the shape of the curve? It might be an interesting exercise (but beyond my meager math skills) to plug in some real piston weights and real RPM numbers to calculate these loads. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 18:57:30 -0500 From: Patrick Burns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [uuc] <OT> Rod Ratio Gustave Stroes wrote: > That brings me to my dilemma. Within reason, I can see no advantage to going > with a longer rod. I mean to go, say, from a 140 mm rod to a 150 mm rod > yields piston location curves of almost exactly the same shape. And > therefore the piston acceleration is relatively unaffected. You're talking about a race engine, correct? This is the very definition of most development work; finding small gains. Playing with rod length is pretty far into the realm of diminishing returns. If you could spend X number of dollars on 5mm longer connecting rods, or dyno tuning the mixture and spark curves, it's a no brainer. > And I believe it, since intuition says it would be > better. But if I look at the plots I ask: Where is the advantage? The advantage is in power output, which is pretty damned difficult to predict, as you saw in my previous post. Who cares what the piston acceleration is as long as you're not tossing rods, ovaling wrist pins, or cracking piston skirts down a long straight? You might use the position or velocity functions to help you out in choosing a cam, but that's getting pretty esoteric also. What is the stroke radius and available length rods for your engine, and how much do the pistons and wrist pins weigh, in kg? I'll do a quick force calculation, neglecting connecting rod mass and pressure above and below the piston. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 19:05:55 -0500 (EST) From: Moe Drippins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [uuc] <WOB> 80's Cars Are Best Bob Fluharty writes: > There are enthusiasts who greet each new model year with glee. > They see only progress: improvements in power, handling, features; > in short, a better car. > > Those people are wrong. > > Then there are those who feel the classic age of automobiles was > the 50's and 60's, before oil shortages, before government > regulation. > > Those people are wrong. There are two kinds of fool. One says, 'This is old, and therefore good.' And one says, 'This is new, and therefore better.' > New cars are amazing. More computing power than an Apollo mission. > More plastic than Hollywood. Digital this. Programmable that. Like > a Microsoft product, the modern vehicle tries to guess what you're > going to want next and give it to you. Except it won't explode on you daily. Hopefully not, at least. - -- Just Moe '95 540 6 speed, BL/SS BMWCCA Peachtree Chapter ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2000 11:32:57 +1100 From: "Thomas, Andrew j" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [uuc] How to identify where a driver is from Chester ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) writes: > 1. One hand on wheel, one hand on horn: CHICAGO > 2. One hand on wheel, one finger out window: NEW YORK > 4. One hand on wheel, one hand on newspaper, foot solidly > on accelerator: BOSTON > 5. One hand on wheel, one hand on nonfat double decaf > cappuccino, cradling cell phone, brick on accelerator, gun in > lap: LOS ANGELES He heh. Haven't been to the other states, but can well imagine it. Here's some others: One hand on wheel, head out of window shouting obscenities, and slipping the clutch: LONDON Accelerator strapped to the floor, horn taped down, drafting cars on peripherique: PARIS One foot from car in front at regulation 155 mph, full-beam, blinker on: BAVARIA Right foot on accelerator, left hand on "Egyptian brake pedal" (horn): CAIRO Housewife calmly drifting Volvo 240 in the snow at 100 km/h: SWEDEN (seen it) Andy T "This email is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above and may contain information that is confidential and privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this email is strictly prohibited. When addressed to our clients, any opinions or advice contained in this email are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing KPMG client engagement letter. If you have received this email in error, please notify us immediately by return email or telephone +61 2 9335 7000 and destroy the original message. Thank you." ------------------------------ End of [uucdigest] V3 #269 ************************** _________________________________________ | Please visit these UUC-approved BMW parts vendors/service providers: | (listed alphabetically) | Bonneville Motorwerks . http://www.bonnevillemotorwerks.com | Circle Tire Co. (used & classic BMW parts) e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Curry's Auto Service . http://www.currysauto.com | Eurosport . http://www.eurosport-hp.com | Koala MotorSport . http://www.koalamotorsport.com | Taylor BMW - http://www.taylorbmw.com - Doc Bimmer! | The Ultimate Garage . http://www.ultimategarage.com | UUC Motorwerks . http://www.uucmotorwerks.com | Zionsville Autosport . http://www.zionsvilleautosport.com ����������������������������������������
