[uucdigest] Wednesday, February 16 2000 Volume 03 : Number 277 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ | 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] <E28> Hotter after Sharking Re: [uuc] <FS> '95 LTW wheels [uuc] e34 Thrust Rod Bushings [uuc] Metallurgy no BMW content Re: [uuc] <OT> Rod Ratio Re: [uuc] <OT> Rod Ratio [uuc] <E28> emblem removal - done, w/pictures! Re: [uuc] <E28> emblem removal - done, w/pictures! [uuc] Plane Mistakes [uuc] <E28> eta won't start Re: [uuc] e34 Thrust Rod Bushings [uuc] I know it makes you feel better - ie - 80's Cars Are Best Re: [uuc] Plane Mistakes [uuc] Re: '98 M3 for sale ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2000 14:29:37 EST From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [uuc] <E28> Hotter after Sharking Just had Service 2 performed, and installed a JimC chip. The water temp, alwaysreliably at 10:30 or 11:00 position, is now almost always straight up (12:00). Other than the normal Service 2 items, the only other variable introduced was the JimC chip. Has anybody else experienced hotter running after Sharking, or should I look somewhere else? Thanks Clark 87 535is, 135K ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2000 11:36:04 -0800 (PST) From: Chester Wong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [uuc] <FS> '95 LTW wheels - --- ben keyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > isn't the '95 M3 same size wheels front to rear ?? not that I need more > wheels or > anything, just curious. > > the specs on the LTW are not my area of expertise tho... Nope, the LTW had 8.5" wheels in the back and 7.5" wheels in the front....or so I'm told. I'm not an expert with them LTWs either ;) > I'm still pissed that the guy that was selling a _new_ set of M coupe wheels > ended > the auction 30 hours early and let them go for $620 !!! That's a big time bummer! ttyl, Chester ===== __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2000 11:34:12 -0800 From: "KKiely" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [uuc] e34 Thrust Rod Bushings Anybody know or can confirm that the E34 (M5) thrust rod (upper control arm) bushings are beefier than even the stock E32 (750) bushings? Thanks- Kevin ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2000 11:39:09 -0800 From: "KKiely" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [uuc] Metallurgy no BMW content I think there are a few Mat Sci. types or even Metallurgists on the Digest. Can anyone tell me why the large nut on the "Jack screw" of the MD80's is made of Brass. Isn't brass relatively soft? Why not steel or Titanium? Just curious. - -Kevin ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2000 14:43:27 -0500 From: "Gary Derian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [uuc] <OT> Rod Ratio My understanding is any rod of finite length introduces the second order term, mrw^2(r/l)cos2a, where m=reciprocating mass, r = 1/2 stroke, w = angular velocity, l = rod length, which causes a difference in TDC and BDC acceleration. Shorter means more 2nd order. A rod that is too long results in a tall and heavy engine. Also rod weight increases as it gets longer, so there are diminishing returns with long rods. The second order term is reduced with small m,r,w, and r/l. I don't understand the 2r=2/sqrt(l) you described. That reduces to r*sqrt(l)=1. This gives a rod less than half the stroke. Racing engines have a rod length 2 to 2.5 times the stroke. F1 Ferrari is 2.43 times. Gary Derian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Well put. Also notice that the second order term is minimized when > taking stroke equal 2 divided by the sqrt of rod length. Something seen > in F1 motors. Yes that's also an extreme case, but the diferences allow > the harmonics throuout the length of the crank to be minimzed so they > can turn high revs. You can directly minimize the rod deviation, > altough you have to use the trick that X is a minimum when 1/X^2 is a > maximum. The rod deviation angle is defined as 1/2*acos(1-(sin^2 crank > angle*stroke/2 rod length)). > > Now looking at the piston acceleration at the extreme cases (0 and 180 > degrees) you see that the differnece is BDC and TDC accelerations are > minimized for the minimum rod deviation case. > > Andrew ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2000 14:18:21 -0500 From: "Gary Derian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [uuc] <OT> Rod Ratio If you are dealing with an existing engine, there are several courses of action. For maximum power, a long stroke will increase displacement and override rod angularity issues. Run as long a stroke as you can stand, as short a piston pin height as you can stand, and use the remaining distance for the rod. A rod about 1.6 times the stroke is pretty short. Some powerful engines go as low as 1.5. If you have a fixed stroke, then use as long a rod as will fit with the short piston. 2.0 or 2.1 times the stroke is nice and long. Gary Derian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Gary Derian wrote: > >Yes you are missing something. A short rod increases acceleration at TDC > >and reduces it at BDC. Consider the extreme case where the rod is 1/2 the > >stroke. The piston will dwell at BDC for 180 degrees. > > Excellent analogy Gary! Now I see. The problem was that the piston position > curves I was looking at were so similar that I did not see this distinction. > I should have examined the limiting case as you do above. This is a so often > a useful trick. > > >Play with the numbers on your > >spreadsheet and you will see it. Make graphs of position, velocity and > >acceleration and adjust the rod length. You can do this by merely taking > >the change in position to be velocity and the change in velocity to be > >acceleration. No calculus required, > > Yes, I should just take the derivatives and be done with it. I know Patrick > has already done it (thanks Patrick) but I will re-do it myself just so I > can see what's going on. > > Patrick: I realize lengthening the rod a bit is a second order type > improvement, but since I am having rods and pistons made in any case, then > the only cost is a little pencil pushing to yield a better design. So why > not at least look at it right? > > Andrew T: Remember I'm just an engineer, not a physicist like you 8^) > Seriously though, I will look at the terms you mention when I take the > derivatives and see if I can understand what it is you are referring to. > > Thanks to all, > > Gustave > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2000 11:44:21 -0800 (PST) From: John Bolhuis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [uuc] <E28> emblem removal - done, w/pictures! OK, I took the suggestions to heart and have done some more work on the car. I put up a web page to show my progress. I elected to use a plasma cutter instead of a torch for a cleaner edge. Also, whether using the hole saw or plasma cutter, I touched up the metal edges afterwards with a little flat black paint to make it blend a little nicer. See the results at http://www.extricity.com/bolhuijo/emblem.html - -- John Bolhuis | "In America it is not considered to be mentally ill bolhuijo | when a woman advances on her prey in a discotheque @bolhuijo.com | setting with hardy cocktails present." | -Madonna ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2000 15:06:05 -0500 From: "Pat Donahue" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [uuc] <E28> emblem removal - done, w/pictures! You're a sick man. I like that. Geeeze '99 F250 PSD SC SD 4x4 OR "4GTFUL" - ----- Original Message ----- From: John Bolhuis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > OK, I took the suggestions to heart and have done some more work on > the car. I put up a web page to show my progress. I elected to use a > plasma cutter instead of a torch for a cleaner edge. Also, whether > using the hole saw or plasma cutter, I touched up the metal edges > afterwards with a little flat black paint to make it blend a little > nicer. > > See the results at http://www.extricity.com/bolhuijo/emblem.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2000 12:13:58 -0800 From: "KKiely" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [uuc] Plane Mistakes Steve, I think you meant to indicate the MiG27 or the MiG29 not the Su31. The 27 or 29's are high performance jet fighter/interceptors capable of certain performance not matched by even US fighters. Which is why our boys have to have superior long range stand-off capability. The Sukoi is a prop plane. - -Kevin ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2000 20:27:30 GMT From: "John G.Burns" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [uuc] <E28> eta won't start Just sold a mate my '87 525e (same as 528e) with 160K which has always run perfectly. Car was doing 30mph and just plain stopped, no ignition. I've replaced the main and fuel pump relays which didn't help. Car IS getting fuel. If I plug a spark plug into the #1 wire I get a pretty weak spark. Plugging it in HT lead from coil gets a very good spark. Distributor cap and rotor were ORIGINAL ITEMS with 160K! I fitted a new rotor but can't get a new cap until tomorrow. Old cap is badly pitted. If I'm getting a spark is there anything that might stop the injectors firing? Car doesn't even try to start, it just turns over quickly. I hope it's just a bad dist cap but why would the car run perfectly then die so suddenly because of a bad cap? All ideas welcome! Even with an AFM or ICV problem the car should at least stumble a little and try to start? - -- Who needs a life when you've got Unix? :-) Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED], John G.Burns B.Eng, Bonny Scotland Web : http://www.unixnerd.demon.co.uk - The Ultimate BMW Homepage! ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2000 15:15:32 -0500 From: "Gary Derian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [uuc] e34 Thrust Rod Bushings My microfiche, dated 12/93, shows the same aluminum control arm for all E34 models. That must mean the M5 uses the standard E34 bushing. It also appears that the bushing is only available for the steel arm. Does this mean the aluminum arm bushings are not replaceable? Gary Derian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Anybody know or can confirm that the E34 (M5) thrust rod (upper control arm) > bushings are beefier than even the stock E32 (750) bushings? > > Thanks- Kevin > > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2000 15:38:57 -0500 From: Don Eilenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [uuc] I know it makes you feel better - ie - 80's Cars Are Best Derek gives the latest in the testiments to primative cars: >Hear hear, Bob! > >Although my 325is is a 1990 model, it is technically an '80's car as it was >built in 1989 (got to love that model year vs. manufactured year >dichotomy--proof that time travel *does* exist). The only "modern" >conveniences it has are the electric windows/doorlocks/mirrors/antenna, OBC, >ABS and SRS. I could do without the SRS as it makes the steering wheel >really clunky, but it does serve a purpose. The rest of the car is simple >and straightforward. You can actually see the spark plug wires and the >intake runners--nothing is covered up by plastic/carbon fiber/aluminum/etc. >Replacing the rotors and pads on all four wheels is a 3-hour job at most >that can be done in the garage. Timing belt changes, oil changes, valve >adjustments, etc. are all things I can do without needing a workbench full >of specialized tools or an advanced degree in engineering. OK - hate to burst bubbles here - and I *know* you feel *good* about owning an '80's car.. but: I've been around and owned cars for roughly 4 decades (prolly longer than 1/2 of this list has been alive) - and I have seen nothing but improvement in cars over that timeframe. You mentioned above: >>You can actually see the spark plug wires and the >>intake runners--nothing is covered up by plastic/carbon fiber/aluminum/etc. >>Replacing the rotors and pads on all four wheels is a 3-hour job at most >>that can be done in the garage. Timing belt changes, oil changes, valve >>adjustments, etc. Ummm... M50 engine: no plug wires to worry about or replace (or distributor cap or rotor), no timing belt to change, no valve adjustments. Changing the oil is about the same (no more difficult) and changing the plugs (a 50,000 mile item) - takes a tiny bit longer - but bet I can do it in less than 20 minutes). Overall winner on maintanence - the newer engine, and so far I have not heard of any definative 'lifetime' for the M50 engine, so we haven't lost anything in longevity.. Rotors and pads? No difference I've seen between an E30/E34/E36/E39.. all doable in the garage. >Most importantly, I *understand* how everything works on this car. We also >own a '94 Toyota Corolla, and I wouldn't try to work on it to save my >life--there are too many things that inspire the question, "What is that >doo-hickey for?" This is not the case on the modern BMW engines - at least the M50/52 based ones. If anything - they are lots simpler to understand than the earlier engines. No mystery doo-hickey's under my hood.. >If I want to increase performance in my 325, I can buy a >chip, replace the differential, slap in a new camshaft, or a myriad of other >things without having to take my car to a specialized shop and have insanely >large amounts of cash removed from my wallet. What's different between your 325 and my M-Coupe? Except I don't need to replace the differential (the ratio is about ideal for the US), or need a new camshaft (the double-vanos optimises what is there) and a new chip is as easy as plugging a programmer into the built in port and flashing the ECU. As far as 'insanely large amounts of cash' - heck, any BMW performance mods are gonna very quickly lead to rapid wallet depletion.. >I think the best things about '80's cars is that they have enough of the >residual "gearhead" in their design to allow people to do their own thing, >while still having most of the modern technology that makes them reliable, >relatively clean, and downright fun. Sure.. but as I've grown up (not fully there YET - and actually hope NOT to be) - I keep other toys to wrench on (real BMW's - 2 wheeled ones) and like my car to be something I just enjoy the heck outta using. There is nothing wrong with liking to wrench at all (I've been doing it for the aformentioned 4+ decades) - and earlier cars are easier to do it to since there is lots of ROOM for improvement, but this doesn't make them the 'best' by far. The *best* car is one you like - for whatever reason. Age, ease of working on it, maintanence - whatever - but it may only be right for you - not everyone. >- -Derek > '90 325is ____D_o_n__________S_p_r_i_n_g__L_a_k_e__H_t_s____________�1946________ Don Eilenberger, Spring Lk Hts, NJ http://www.monmouth.com/~deilenberger ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2000 13:01:18 -0800 From: Jim Powell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [uuc] Plane Mistakes True. In many confrontations it has been shown that the Russian planes can attain speeds unattainable by American aircraft. And they make such pretty splashes in the ocean immediately afterward just to finish the display. Jim Purely political ranting will now follow: In a recent war exercise the Israeli air force defeated the USAF 40-1. Clinton is an idiot. He's an idiot to the point of treason through carelessness. KKiely wrote: > > Steve, > > I think you meant to indicate the MiG27 or the MiG29 not the Su31. The 27 or > 29's are high performance jet fighter/interceptors capable of certain > performance not matched by even US fighters. Which is why our boys have to have > superior long range stand-off capability. The Sukoi is a prop plane. > > -Kevin ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2000 16:06:26 EST From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [uuc] Re: '98 M3 for sale In a message dated 2/16/00 12:38:30 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2000 08:02:12 -0800 (PST) > From: Chester Wong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [uuc] FS: '98 M3 Coupe > > > '98 M3 Coupe, 5-sp, Red w/light grey leather, heated power seats, no > sunroof, > > cruise control, factory alloys, factory rear wing, OBC, Harmon-Kardon > stereo > > and factory CD changer, Koni single-adjustable shocks, 19k miles, $33,500. > > Isn't that kind of high considering the amount of damage to the car and > miles > on the clock? > > FWIW, > Chester Perhaps. My dilemma in picking an asking price is that the car's chassis and drivetrain were undamaged; it would make a fine autocross or track car for someone who was not concerned that it once was in an accident. However, the fact that it_was_damaged cosmetically and repaired is a larger issue for many folks when buying a BMW, even if the repairs were of high quality. I certainly won't be upset or insulted if someone offers me less for the car. Pricewise, I had to start somewhere.<g> Perhaps I should have clearly stated that in my original post. GH ------------------------------ End of [uucdigest] V3 #277 ************************** _________________________________________ | 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 ����������������������������������������
