[uucdigest] Wednesday, January 8 2003 Volume 03 : Number 6005
_________________________________________________________________ | | Search the ARCHIVES: | http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] | | Visit Richard Nott's Ultimate BMW Database: | http://www.bmwdatabase.com | | 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. | Technical Problems? Send 'em to [EMAIL PROTECTED] |__________________________________________________________________ In this BMW UUC Digest: RE: [uuc] January Roundel RE: [uuc] Alternator placement... [uuc] E30 SS Brake lines 86' vs 89' Re: [uuc] Alternator placement... [uuc] CSL alternator placement Re: [uuc] Alternator placement... RE: [uuc] Alternator placement... RE: [uuc] Re: Nashville or bust Re: [uuc] Alternator placement... Re: [uuc] Alternator placement... RE: [uuc] Redman CSL Re: [uuc] Alternator placement... Re: [uuc] Alternator placement... [uuc] pressure washers to wash BMW's Re: [uuc] Vehicle History - defect codes Re: [uuc] What's the difference between 5HP30 & 5HP24 trans? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 22:54:29 +0100 From: "Ulf Bertilsson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: [uuc] January Roundel I got the Nov issue a few days ago ;D - -- Ulf Far far away.. - -----Original Message----- From: Dorffer, Rich [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 5:21 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [uuc] January Roundel I usually receive my Roundels within the first few days of the month. IIRC, January's issue is typically a few days later than my normal delivery the other 11 months. If history prevails, I should get my January issue this week. I don't know when your normal delivery is but I would give your January issue a few extra days. I have always assumed the delivery of the January issue is delayed somewhat for one or more of the following reasons: - - New year so typically any new changes to the format or magazine layout are implemented, - - Most challenging time to get all the writing submissions in from all the contributors in December, - - Holiday delays at the printers, advertisers, etc., - - Postal crunch of the season. I am just guessing at the above. Later, Rich ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 14:13:10 -0800 From: "Marco Romani" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: [uuc] Alternator placement... I still don't get it unless you're saying that you're using a completely different alternator with less power requirements. Lets say we have a 300hp engine with no accessories. We add an alternator with 5hp power requirement for 295hp before the drivetrain. Drive train loss is 15%. Power to wheels 250.75hp= (300-5)*.85 Now lets put the same alternator at the rear of the car driven off the diff or driveshaft with the same 300hp engine. I would argue that the drive train loss now goes up, but for arguments sake lets say it's still 15% you get 250hp= (300*.85)-5=250 the above says driving the same alternator off the diff would be marginally worse. Some one explain the error of my ways ;-) Marco - -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Eurowerks Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2003 1:00 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [uuc] Alternator placement... The fewer accessories that the engine has to run, the more power it can produce. It has nothing to do with alternator output. This also had nothing to do with weight distribution. Kirk A. Gilchrist EURO-WERKS / Mercedes-Benz, BMW, Volvo Service and Repair 8 South Highland St. / Winchester, KY 40391 / 859-745-0125 [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 888-522-0271 toll free ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 17:13:22 -0500 From: "Dorffer, Rich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [uuc] E30 SS Brake lines 86' vs 89' Gary said > > SS brake lines should be replaced periodically as dirt gets in the braid and > wears it out. Also the braid wears against itself. Neil said > > That's why I like the Earl's lines: they have vinyl sleeves over the braid > to exclude grit. A least one UUCer besides me has also applied his own heat > shrink sleeving over otherwise naked SS lines. I have, as has Gary and a few others on this list since I sent them some of my clear heat shrink tubing (yes, I have one individual that I need to send it to but have been incredibly slow getting it to them...thanks for their patience). Gary was being somewhat short in his response as he has made efforts to protect the braiding on his stainless steel lines on his E34 M5 :-) The clear heat shrink tubing works well. I was test fitting some wheels recently and looked over my powder coated calipers and heat shrink tubing on the stainless steel lines. Everything is holding up well and this is in a cold and salt/snow environment. I wiped the calipers and lines down with a damp rag and they still look the same as the day I installed all of it. I recommend the shrink tubing protection and the Fischer stainless steel lines (Steve D at Ultimate Garage). Regards, Rich ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 17:10:11 -0500 From: "Gary Derian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [uuc] Alternator placement... The engine runs it no matter where its mounted, even on the roof and driven by a propeller. Gary Derian > The fewer accessories that the engine has to run, the more power it can > produce. It has nothing to do with alternator output. > This also had nothing to do with weight distribution. > > Kirk A. Gilchrist > EURO-WERKS / Mercedes-Benz, BMW, Volvo Service and Repair > 8 South Highland St. / Winchester, KY 40391 / 859-745-0125 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 888-522-0271 toll free > > > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 18:07:09 -0500 From: "Walter Fields" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [uuc] CSL alternator placement If memory serves, the alt. was moved to the rear of the factory cars specifically because of weight. Coupes are terribly nose heavy and BMW was having a terrible time with front tire wear early on. This lead to a campaign of shifting as much weight as possible off the nose and eventually to the wide and even wider tires used on the group 4 and 5 cars. This included relocating the alt., fire systems, dry sump tanks, battery, and anything else they could find to the rear. I recall that the alt. was belt driven from the left halfshaft. My peresonal experience with racing a coupe verifies the weight/tire wear problem. But my budget to take those extream measures just isn't quite what the factory budgets were in those days. Perhaps Arthur Porter or Richard Conway or someone who has had a racing original could verify my recollections. Walter Fields 72 3.0 CS (CSL group 4 replica) 73 3.0 CS (garage queen-for sale) 85 745i -the original 745 91 318is -wife's car [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2003 17:04:46 -0600 From: Sean Cordone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [uuc] Alternator placement... This is misleadingly stated - and suggests violation of conservation of energy. An engine produces a given amount of power. Any accessory driven by the engine, no matter where it is, consumes some fraction of the available power, making less torque available at the rear wheels. If the same two pulleys are used to drive the alternator, and the assembly is moved to the back, 1) the drive speed is now dependent on road speed instead of engine speed, and 2) the drive speed is necessarily lower because of the gearing. Point 2) could realize some efficiency gains if the alternator has sufficient output at low speeds - but the same thing could be realized by just leaving the alternator crankshaft driven and making the slave pulley diameter bigger. Point 1) would be very bad for a stop-and-go driven road car. I think it's there to give us something to talk about. --SC Eurowerks wrote: >The fewer accessories that the engine has to run, the more power it can >produce. It has nothing to do with alternator output. >This also had nothing to do with weight distribution. > > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 17:51:29 -0500 From: "Andrew-Taylor Autosport" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: [uuc] Alternator placement... > I still don't get it unless you're saying that you're using a completely > different alternator with less power requirements. > > Lets say we have a 300hp engine with no accessories. We add an alternator > with 5hp power requirement for 295hp before the drivetrain. Drive train > loss is 15%. Power to wheels 250.75hp= (300-5)*.85 > > Now lets put the same alternator at the rear of the car driven > off the diff > or driveshaft with the same 300hp engine. I would argue that the drive > train loss now goes up, but for arguments sake lets say it's still 15% you > get 250hp= (300*.85)-5=250 > > the above says driving the same alternator off the diff would be > marginally > worse. > > Some one explain the error of my ways ;-) > Well, drivetrain loss is not a straight percentage. It will in reality be something like 40hp + 1.4% for an avg BMW. Most of the drivetrain loss can be explained as a zeroeth order intercept. There are a few linear and second order contributions, however (like increased shear from the result of increased torque on the gears). The reason that driving it off of the diff would be better in lower gears where the gearbox provides torque multiplication. If mounted to the engine, the alternator loss is multiplied through the gears. If driven at the back, it is only lost once. Andrew ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 15:05:27 -0800 From: "KKiely" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: [uuc] Re: Nashville or bust Not normally prone to getting into these discussions, but from the deepest reserves of the memory vault, weren't the rooms for the local organizers who even though living "locally" could crash en-masse and save the commute times on top of the otherwise very long hours they were putting in? Can that really be be-grudged? - -Kevin ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 17:48:47 -0500 From: "Eurowerks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [uuc] Alternator placement... How can you say the engine runs it if it is driven by the drivetrain? The explanation I think you are going to give is not valid. (Because the engine runs the drivetrain. The same theory that they used applies to underdrive pulley's and this is also the reason why alot of newer cars use an electric fan (to gain engine HP) Kirk A. Gilchrist EURO-WERKS / Mercedes-Benz, BMW, Volvo Service and Repair 8 South Highland St. / Winchester, KY 40391 / 859-745-0125 [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 888-522-0271 toll free ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 17:51:16 -0500 From: "Eurowerks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [uuc] Alternator placement... On the other hand- You are right, those people that put that car together must have been idiot's, surely they did not know what they were doing ?!?!?!? (Sarcasm :)) If it didn't work for them to gain power, they would not have done it! Kirk A. Gilchrist EURO-WERKS / Mercedes-Benz, BMW, Volvo Service and Repair 8 South Highland St. / Winchester, KY 40391 / 859-745-0125 [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 888-522-0271 toll free ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 15:13:00 -0800 From: "KKiely" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: [uuc] Redman CSL Michael, Huhhh, the parasitic drag is the same no matter where you put it. The RPM is different off the driveshaft but the net loss remains the same. - -Kevin ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2003 17:13:16 -0600 From: Sean Cordone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [uuc] Alternator placement... Ah, that would be one mod that could be set up so that it's more efficient to drive *into* a headwind ;) --SC Gary Derian wrote: >The engine runs it no matter where its mounted, even on the roof and driven >by a propeller. > > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 18:06:23 -0500 From: "Eurowerks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [uuc] Alternator placement... This topic sounds as though there is alot of theory going around. I just so happen to have some really old (some handwritten) literature on old BMW factory race cars that I have collected over the years. I am sure that I will have to dig and knock the dust off, but I will look and see if I do not have some info on the old CSL's. Kirk A. Gilchrist EURO-WERKS / Mercedes-Benz, BMW, Volvo Service and Repair 8 South Highland St. / Winchester, KY 40391 / 859-745-0125 [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 888-522-0271 toll free ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 19:23:29 -0500 From: "Mike Gambini" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [uuc] pressure washers to wash BMW's slightly off topic--I'm thinking of buying one of the small electric pressure washers to rinse the cars off during the winter--you know the $150 ones sold in Costco/Wal-Mart do they do a reasonable job without hand scrubbing and how much water do they use? mikeG ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 20:16:36 -0500 From: "KMS - Brett Anderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [uuc] Vehicle History - defect codes You can ask a really friendly service advisor at your dealer, or email them to me and I'll give you an idea, but not necessarily exact answers. - ----------------------------------------------------- BMW Special Tool Rentals Pay per incident tech support - ----------------------------------------------------- Brett Anderson KMS (440) 338 1650 www.koalamotorsport.com OSS committee member - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Yates" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > I have a BMW Vehicle History Report for a 740i that my father may purchase. > Where can identify the defect codes listed. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 20:29:20 -0500 From: "KMS - Brett Anderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [uuc] What's the difference between 5HP30 & 5HP24 trans? The 5HP30 was a much heavier trans, both in capability, and in physical weight. There's problably 80lb in weight difference between the two. The last 3 digits of the BMW designation, 560 or 440, are the Nm (x10) of torque that the trans can reliably handle. BMW decided that the 5HP30 (560) was over kill for the V8, so replaced it with the 5HP24 (440) - ----------------------------------------------------- BMW Special Tool Rentals Pay per incident tech support - ----------------------------------------------------- Brett Anderson KMS (440) 338 1650 www.koalamotorsport.com OSS committee member - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard Vaughn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > I have noticed several sites that list the transmission fluids for the > different model BMW/GM transmissions, show a 5HP30 (A5S 560Z) transmission > used in the earlier E38 (740 & 750) and a different model, 5HP24 (A5S 440Z) > for the '96 & later 740's. However the 750's still used the 5HP30 till the > end of that model E38 (2002). The specs show the earlier transmission > holding 13.1 liters, where the 5HP24 (4.4L) only holds 9 liters. Was the > 5HP30 a 'heavier duty' transmission or what? Can anyone shed any light on > this for me? ------------------------------ End of [uucdigest] V3 #6005 *************************** ________________________________________ | Please visit these UUC-approved BMW parts vendors/service providers: | (listed alphabetically) | | Autoscope-Motorsports - http://www.autoscope-motorsports.com | Camptown Automotive - http://www.camptownauto.com | Circle Tire Co. (used & classic BMW parts) e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] | |==================================================== | | Koala MotorSport . BMW technical information, special tool sales/rental | http://www.koalamotorsport.com | |==================================================== | | Taylor BMW - http://www.taylorbmw.com - Doc Bimmer! | UUC Motorwerks . http://www.uucmotorwerks.com |__________________________________________
