[uucdigest] Wednesday, March 15 2000 Volume 03 : Number 449 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ | 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] Re: Carbotech Panther pads for E36 M3 Re: [uuc] Radar Detecting Through M5 Logo. (WOB) Re: [uuc] Status of S52 Engine in M Coupe Re: [uuc] Status of S52 Engine in M Coupe [uuc] Radar Detecting Through M5 Logo. [uuc] FWD car with wheelie bars! [uuc] FS: Borla exhuast [uuc] Re:Heathkit and V1 [uuc] <MISC> BMW Rover latest news [uuc] Dream States [uuc] <E30 > Bilstein Shocks, Suspension Questions ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2000 16:38:14 -0500 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [uuc] Re: Carbotech Panther pads for E36 M3 "These pads are highly recommended by me. I am currently using the Panther's up front and in the rear the lower-temp green "kelated-metallic" Carbotech's on my Z3 coupe. They have awesome grip/modulation ratio; a bit dusty and occasional squeal for everyday use. Max trailbraking is a cinch with them; makes you look like a pro. M Sipe" I'll second this opinion, although I don't have anywhere near the experience of Mr. Sipe. I put these on my '95 M3 in preparation for driver's school at Sebring, and once I learned how to brake at the track, they were awsome. Went three 1/2 hour sessions on Sunday and at the end of the day thay stopped as well as the first lap. On the street they work very well when cold, and are even better when warm, much more stopping power than stock. Oh yeah, after a weekend at the track, they looked brand new. The downside? (There's always a downside.) VERY dusty IMO, squeal even with generous amounts of goop applied. A worthwhile tradeoff for me. Eric 95 M3 95 325i ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2000 15:48:41 -0600 From: Luis Marques <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [uuc] Radar Detecting Through M5 Logo. (WOB) I don't know where this started, but it's full of misinformation. I guess all those radomes they put over radars don't let any radar signal thru. It must go around it. But, wait a minute, aren't radars typically completely enclosed inside a radome??? Then how does the RF energy get out??? Or in??? How does the Velentine-1 receive any radar signals? There is no exposed antenna! The answer is they do actually go thru plastic. In fact, they don't have much difficulty unless you load the material with some exotic absorber as in the stealth fighter or bomber. Radars aren't low frequency at all. They are relatively high. About 10 GIGA Hertz for X band, over 30 GHz for Ka band. Wavelengths are inversely proportional to frequency, so they are small. Radar definitely won't 'wrap' around a plastic object, it will go straight thru (although a little weaker). Think about the plastic headlamp covers in a late BMW. Light doesn't 'wrap' around. The covers are transparent, so light goes straight thru. Well, plastic is generally more or less 'transparent' to radar. Now, any metallic object, _that_ will cause radar to bounce off exceptionally well just like a mirror reflects light. The reasons you can get away with using a mesh for a dish antenna are that: 1)the mesh is metallic, and 2)the mesh is tight enough (relative to the wavelength) that effectively no RF energy can leak thru the holes. So lower frequency systems can get away using a light mesh, but high frequency systems need a tighter mesh (or solid metallic surface). You can paint them all, it doesn't change much of anything. The thickness of the paint is just a small fraction of the wavelength and, like plastic, is more or less transparent to radar; the signal will bounce off just the same from the metallic surface below. So, in summary, radar won't have much trouble going thru plastic, as long as it's not nickel or chrome plated (or any other metal). If it is, it will bounce right back and you won't receive anything at the other side. - -Luis Marques '97 328i "Neil Deshpande" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Alex: > > Radar waves are very low frequency and high wavelength waves and are > able to 'wrap' around small obstacles easily the wave visible light > (the same electro-magnetic radiation) cannot. > > This is why dish antennae can be made of either mesh or matte finish > painted surfaces, but mirrors cannot. In the case of dish antennae, > this is kind of cool (no pun intended) because you can focus the > satellite signal without focussing the heat and frying the electronics > at the receiver! > > For a sound related analogy think of bass and how omni-directional it > is and treble and how directional it is. > > So, the radar is not going through the plastic (it most certainly > cannot), but around. To go through plastic you would need x-rays > (very high frequency very short wavelength) that would go in between > the molecular spaces(?). ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2000 13:47:37 -0800 From: Aleksandr Milewski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [uuc] Status of S52 Engine in M Coupe At 15:18 -0600 on 000315, you commanded the electrons to create a missive titled "Re: [uuc] Status of S52 Engine in M Coupe": |On Wed, 15 Mar 2000, Aleksandr Milewski wrote: |> Per bmw.de vs. bmwusa.com, the Euro car does 0-62 in 5.4, the US does |> 0-60 in 5.1. | |I vaguely recall that this was due to the fact that to actually reach |100 km/h in the Euro car required a shift to 3rd, which was not |required to reach 60 in the US car -- i.e. gearing again. Of course, |I could be wrong.... Probably not. I can't find the Euro gearing online anywhere, but the Euro gearing is supposed to be taller, and the Euro redline is higher. I have to believe that the Euro car is capable of 60 in 2nd. - -Zandr - --------------------------------------------------------------------- Aleksandr Milewski BMWCCA #166568 SysAdmin, 530i.org '95 540i/6spd [EMAIL PROTECTED] '00 740i Sport Ben Lomond, CA '00 M Coupe ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2000 16:50:21 -0500 From: "Pat Donahue" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [uuc] Status of S52 Engine in M Coupe I know from experience that many cars seem to top out in 2nd right at 60. I assume they're designed that way to minimize that 0-60 time. It would seem likely that BMW would build it's cars for that 0-100km dash so they wouldn't require that shift but perhaps that says something about market targeting. Does it say we're the more important market or does it say Germans know a good car when they see one without dwelling on drag racing times? Note that my '91 M5 was good for a few above 60 in second. Perhaps that was to make it quick to 100km/hr? Might be a clever way to make a distinction between it and lesser cars that were nearly as quick. Geeeze http://patdonahue.com/forsale - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jefrem Iwaniw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Aleksandr Milewski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2000 4:18 PM Subject: Re: [uuc] Status of S52 Engine in M Coupe > On Wed, 15 Mar 2000, Aleksandr Milewski wrote: > > Per bmw.de vs. bmwusa.com, the Euro car does 0-62 in 5.4, the US does > > 0-60 in 5.1. > > I vaguely recall that this was due to the fact that to actually reach > 100 km/h in the Euro car required a shift to 3rd, which was not > required to reach 60 in the US car -- i.e. gearing again. Of course, > I could be wrong.... > > -jefrem > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2000 17:16:31 -0500 From: "Joe G. Thompson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [uuc] Radar Detecting Through M5 Logo. There is a lot of wrong or misapplied information here. Rather than launching into a pedantic lecture, I simply ask you to consider the following: You can receive radio and radar signals inside your home and car, so they are clearly capable of penetrating glass, wood and plaster. Why would you expect plastic to behave differently? Radar signals will easily penetrate plastic, but the plastic (or any dielectric material) will induce a phase shift. If only part of the antenna is covered by plastic, the phase-shifted signal can combine with the in-phase signal and create a cancellation effect. Having said that, I doubt that the M5 badge in question is thick enough to cause this problem. If the badge is metallized, it will block most of the signal in the area it covers. It would be unusual for this to be desirable. - -- Joe Thompson > Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2000 13:35:36 -0500 > From: "Neil Deshpande" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [uuc] Radar Detecting Through M5 Logo. > > Alex: > > Radar waves are very low frequency and high wavelength waves > and are able to 'wrap' around small obstacles easily the wave > visible light (the same electro-magnetic radiation) cannot. [Snipped] > So, the radar is not going through the plastic (it most > certainly cannot), but around. To go through plastic you > would need x-rays (very high frequency very short wavelength) > that would go in between the molecular spaces(?). > > Neil Deshpande > 1988 325 iS > 1989 325 iC ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2000 14:25:31 -0800 (PST) From: John Bolhuis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [uuc] FWD car with wheelie bars! I recall someone awhile back ranting about how you might even spot wheelie bars on a spiffed-up Honda Civic. I too smirked at the thought. Then I saw Horsepower TV on TNN last weekend - they had a piece on FWD drag racers. These are the cars that that your local coffee-can tailpipe crowd aspires to emulate. I was duly impressed. A FWD Honda running the quarter at just under 10 seconds. Those wheelie bars are there for a reason! They keep weight from shifting off the drive wheels. One guy even had smart bars that practically jacked the rear wheels off the pavement for takeoff, then lifted themselves up at speed for greater stability. Weird lookin', but pretty amusing nonetheless. - -- 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, 15 Mar 2000 14:33:50 PST From: "Tim Gergen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [uuc] FS: Borla exhuast I have a Borla exhaust for sale off of my 95 M3. Exhaust was bought from TMS about one year ago and is in excellent condition except for a few minor dings on the tips (read: small dings). I am selling the car and thus all aftermarket parts must go first. I have had several interested parties inquire about the exhaust, but no committed buyers as of yet. Therefore, it is still for sale! First $350 takes it...new was over $550. E-mail me if interested as I am a bit too busy to check the digest this week. Tim Gergen -- 95 M3 -- for now. ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2000 17:35:46 -0500 From: Chris Skene <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [uuc] Re:Heathkit and V1 - --============_-1258962748==_ma============ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" >Subject: [uuc] [WOB]Heath Kit (was Re: first radar detector) > >Jeff B. wrote: >> >>Don, Please don't say it was that Heathkit type crap. SNIP(I >>think they all went out of business by the mid 70's) > >Heath Kit <http://www.heathkit.com/> is still in business though >their primary focus has changed to training PC technicians. They were >still doing kits in the early 90's though--I stopped in at one of >their stores at that time. > >I used a Heath Kit audio amplifier--originally built by my Uncle and >"serviced" by me for years. Okay, it wasn't (quite) up McIntosh or >Crest Audio standards, but it worked just fine--bench and "ear" >tested better than a lot of the "modern" stuff available in the early >80's. (Certainly much better than anything I could afford at the >time--I think I was 12 when I took possession.) I later passed it >along to someone in need and as far as I know it's still going strong. I was thinking of building a Heathkit power amp to use with my first electric guitar way back. My now late father, former RAF and RCAF bomber pilot during WWII (the Second World War as we say in Canada) asked me if I knew what the first Heathkit was. Guess what - the Heath Parasol, a homebuilt aircraft kit. I'm not sure whether it was pre- or post-war. Dad flew one and thought it was just fine. I don't think it used a BMW engine... I decided to save my pennies and bought a Fender amp at wholesale and tax-free through the NATO airbase PX in Europe. Wish I could still do that with such things as cars... My father did. On topic - I bought a Super Snooper radar detector in the early 70's from a local auto parts store. I clipped it on the passenger sun visor in my '70 911E. It did sort of work, until, when going for a ride, my mother decided to lower the visor and snapped off the the protruding plastic probe from the unit against the windshield. Actually, it continued to work, so I think the probe was window dressing. I've since moved from a 70 P car to a 72 2002 (it took 30 years), and from a Super Snooper to a V1. The V1 works - period, and I don't have the latest software. Anecdotes and installation suggestions on request. Burn this message before reading. C PS - Detectors are illegal in Ontario. Detector detectors don't detect my detector. - -- Chris Skene For voice services check http://skene.org/chris - --============_-1258962748==_ma============ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" <!doctype html public "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN"> <html><head><style type="text/css"><!-- blockquote, dl, ul, ol, li { margin-top: 0 ; margin-bottom: 0 } --></style><title>Re:Heathkit and V1</title></head><body> <blockquote type="cite" cite>Subject: [uuc] [WOB]Heath Kit (was Re: first radar detector)<br> <br> Jeff B. wrote:<br> ><br> >Don, Please don't say it was that Heathkit type crap. SNIP(I<br> >think they all went out of business by the mid 70's)<br> </blockquote> <blockquote type="cite" cite>Heath Kit <http://www.heathkit.com/> is still in business though<br> their primary focus has changed to training PC technicians. They were<br> still doing kits in the early 90's though--I stopped in at one of<br> their stores at that time.<br> <br> I used a Heath Kit audio amplifier--originally built by my Uncle and<br> "serviced" by me for years. Okay, it wasn't (quite) up McIntosh or<br> Crest Audio standards, but it worked just fine--bench and "ear"<br> tested better than a lot of the "modern" stuff available in the early<br> 80's. (Certainly much better than anything I could afford at the<br> time--I think I was 12 when I took possession.) I later passed it<br> along to someone in need and as far as I know it's still going strong.</blockquote> <div><br></div> <div><x-tab> </x-tab>I was thinking of building a Heathkit power amp to use with my first electric guitar way back. My now late father, former RAF and RCAF bomber pilot during WWII (the Second World War as we say in Canada) asked me if I knew what the first Heathkit was.</div> <div><x-tab> </x-tab>Guess what - the Heath Parasol, a homebuilt aircraft kit. I'm not sure whether it was pre- or post-war. Dad flew one and thought it was just fine. I don't think it used a BMW engine...</div> <div><x-tab> </x-tab>I decided to save my pennies and bought a Fender amp at wholesale and tax-free through the NATO airbase PX in Europe. Wish I could still do that with such things as cars... My father did.</div> <div><br></div> <div><x-tab> </x-tab>On topic - I bought a Super Snooper radar detector in the early 70's from a local auto parts store. I clipped it on the passenger sun visor in my '70 911E. It did sort of work, until, when going for a ride, my mother decided to lower the visor and snapped off the the protruding plastic probe from the unit against the windshield. Actually, it continued to work, so I think the probe was window dressing.</div> <div><x-tab> </x-tab>I've since moved from a 70 P car to a 72 2002 (it took 30 years), and from a Super Snooper to a V1. The V1 works - period, and I don't have the latest software. Anecdotes and installation suggestions on request.</div> <div><br></div> <div align="center"><font size="+2" color="#FF0000"><u><b>Burn this message before reading.</b></u></font></div> <div>C</div> <div><br></div> <div>PS - Detectors are illegal in Ontario. Detector detectors don't detect my detector.</div> <div>-- <br> Chris Skene<br> For voice services check http://skene.org/chris</div> </body> </html> - --============_-1258962748==_ma============-- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2000 22:59:07 GMT From: "John G.Burns" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [uuc] <MISC> BMW Rover latest news It seems BMW will keep Land Rover, the Mini and the MGF but will dump the saloon production at Longbridge. Three directors BMW directors who don't agree with the plan are rumoured to have been fired. Personally I think they're making the best out of a bad job. Longbridge will cary on with new British owners. - -- 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, 15 Mar 2000 15:12:03 -0800 From: "KKiely" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [uuc] Dream States John, Only a thousand womenz. No....... different dream. - -Kevin ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2000 15:14:34 -0800 From: "Scott D Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [uuc] <E30 > Bilstein Shocks, Suspension Questions Eric Ingraham and I have been having a running discussion (is it still a "discussion" when it is e-mail?) about Bilstein shocks/struts for E30s. The issue, to summarize from an earlier post, was whether the M3 and non-M3 E30s use the same, or different, shocks and struts. I was misled by the BMP catalog, which lists the same stock numbers for both cars. Eric contacted Bilstein (doh!, why didn't I think of that?) and came up with the answer, for which I thanked him profusely and offered him beer, assuming, of course, that he is of legal drinking age. OK, here goes: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Here's the final word: 1) E30 325i Sports are 16mm shorter than HDs. 2) E30 M3 Sports are 16mm shorter than HDs. 3) Rear shocks are the same for each car, HD or Sport. (B36-2028 HD, B36-2027 Sport) 4) Early E30s had a 45mm O.D. strut housing, and use smaller shock inserts. (P30-0128 HD, P30-0334 Sport) 5) 325i's, 325is's, and M3's use a 51mm O.D. strut housing, and can accept a larger shock insert. However, the earlier (smaller) strut insert will also work. (P36-0136 HD, P36-0335 Sport) BTW, the first two numerical digits of the part number have something to do with the shock/rod diameter. Not sure if they are it exactly though (in mm). That all make sense? The real sticking point is that the later cars *can* accept the earlier strut insert, which is what mail order places usually will sell you. However, the later, larger shock is the one you really want. Conversely, the earlier cars can only accept the smaller shocks (P30s). If you press the boot in on the early vs. later shocks, you can really feel the difference in shaft diameter. I did this between the first set I got and the second set. Big difference. Now, as far as ride height goes, I think this proves that it is only preferable, but NOT critical, that you use Sports for lowered springs. Next question (in order to beat this discussion into the ground) is how the stock M3 ride height compares to the stock 325i ride height. Since there are way too many variables to determine a statistically valid answer, I would say that perhaps shock rod length is a guideline at best. Eric >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So apparently I could get away with keeping my HDs and installing the M3 springs, which some Digestors said they have done and like. While this would keep the cost down, my preference would be to get the Sports, which will push back my target installation date while I come up with the cash. Then there is the matter of front camber. Keep my offset upper strut bearings? Get adjustable camber plates? (More $$$ here again.) If I knew lowering with M3 springs would push camber past neg 2 degrees, I'd reverse the offset upper bearings to get back to my target, which is between 1.5 and 2 degrees negative. This would not be so complicated if I wanted to experiment. But I only want to do this once. Oh well. And then Steve, the same guy that "sold" me the springs, offered me his old M3 sway bars, too, for a rediculous price. Now, everyone says the front attachment point is different for an M3 than on a plain 325i, but Steve thinks the bars are pretty much the same shape, and that the difference is in the end links. Anyone know for sure? Now all I need to do is get the rest of my parts (spring perch pads?, what else?) and schedule an installation date. This should be fun. Scott Miller GGC BMW CCA #44977 1990 325i/isH ------------------------------ End of [uucdigest] V3 #449 ************************** _________________________________________ | 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 ����������������������������������������
