[uucdigest]         Monday, February 3 2003         Volume 03 : Number 6085



_________________________________________________________________
|
|  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:

       [uuc] Source of noise elusive
       [uuc] NEED CARFAX RUN!!!!!!  PLease respond to me not BB
       Re: [uuc] '00 240HP vs '01 315HP Engines - Mod's and Limitations
       [uuc] Re: Fuerst Choice Auto Repair (was Old Laing's Eye)
       [uuc] Re: [uucdigest] V3 #6084
       Re: [uuc] DOT 5 Braking Fluid
       Re: [uuc] '00 M Roadster Questions
       [uuc] <OT> Silicone brake fluid/military @ South Pole
       RE: [uuc] <OT> Silicone brake fluid/military @ South Pole
       [uuc] 6 throttle conversions for the 240 hp //Motor?
       Re: [uuc] 6 throttle conversions for the 240 hp //Motor?
       [uuc] Feb Roundel 5er Fest write-up
       RE: [uuc] 6 throttle conversions for the 240 hp //Motor?

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2003 09:32:22 -0800
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [uuc] Source of noise elusive

Some of you may remember (or if you're lucky you've forgotten) that I had a
noise that took a while to track down.  At one point I had my friend Bill
(hi Bill) ride along on a test drive and we tried all kinds of things to
isolate the noise.  At one point Bill said it was coming from the back, and
I said it was coming from the front.  Or was it the other way around?

Anyway, eventually I isolated the noise to the right front wheel bearing.
Upon replacement, the car ran much more quietly, so I thought the operation
was a success.  But here I am weeks later and there is still a noise.  It
is not as loud as before, but it is sililar in nature.  It does not get
louder or softer in turns (which the front wheel bearing did).  And it sure
sounded to me like it was coming from the back.

This weekend I put the front up on jack stands and rotated the wheels while
listening and feeling with fingers on springs.  Nothing unusual that I
could tell, so I lowered the front.  Then I put the back up on jack stands,
started the engine and drove it up throught the gears.  And there was the
noise.

So I'm guessing it is diff-related.  Gears?  Bearings?  Any better
diagnostic methods out there?  Or should I just keep driving until it get
worse so I can further isolate it?  That worked well with the front.

And Bill, now we know why we heard noises from both the front AND back.

TIA,

Scott Miller
GGC BMW CCA
1990 325i

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2003 12:38:27 EST
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [uuc] NEED CARFAX RUN!!!!!!  PLease respond to me not BB

 

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2003 12:09:09 -0600
From: Jay Quinn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [uuc] '00 240HP vs '01 315HP Engines - Mod's and Limitations

There will be more to come!

marco wrote:

> proverally?
>
> Marco
> likes to learn one new word a day
>
> Jay Quinn wrote:
> > You say so much faster as though the E46 can pass it like it's painted on  the
> > road.  Surely it's not that more proverally faster.  I would think that
> > HP/Torque improvements alone could make it an even match in a straight line...
> >

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2003 10:16:19 -0800
From: "KKiely" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [uuc] Re: Fuerst Choice Auto Repair (was Old Laing's Eye)

"old Laing's Eye"????
The myth begins it's magical journey.

- -Kevin

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2003 13:38:19 -0500
From: Bill Ballon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [uuc] Re: [uucdigest] V3 #6084

At 12:26 PM 2/3/03 -0500, Stan wrote:
>Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2003 12:23:50 -0500
>From: "Stan Jackson Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: [uuc] DOT 5 Braking Fluid

Stan,

Silicone fluid was developed for the Military.  For storing trucks and 
tanks in cold environments such as the South pole where they are stored

I know of nobody who uses Dot 5 for racing.  It is very compressible and is 
not appropriate for racing.  Dot 5.1 fluids such as Motul synthetic 5.1 is 
very appropriate for racing use.  Again, it is synthetic and not silicone 
based.


>My understanding of silicon based DOT 5 fluid is that it is used exclusively
>for certain special applications and for racing.  With the improvement in
>the boiling resistance of Dot 4 fluid, Dot 5 is used less in racing.  I
>doubt there are many if any BMW Club Racers who use DOT 5.
>
>And just to make the whole thing moot ...

I would agree with you on that.

>I can't possibly imagine any mechanic putting DOT 5 silicon based fluid in a
>street car -- except by customer request, major mistake, or serious
>cluelessness.  But maybe there is something I don't know.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2003 13:46:19 -0500
From: "Gary Derian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [uuc] DOT 5 Braking Fluid

DOT 5 is not THAT bad.  Its good for garage queens and show cars.  DOT 5.1
is good for high performance use.

Gary Derian


> My understanding of silicon based DOT 5 fluid is that it is used
exclusively
> for certain special applications and for racing.  With the improvement in
> the boiling resistance of Dot 4 fluid, Dot 5 is used less in racing.  I
> doubt there are many if any BMW Club Racers who use DOT 5.
>
> And just to make the whole thing moot ...
> I can't possibly imagine any mechanic putting DOT 5 silicon based fluid in
a
> street car -- except by customer request, major mistake, or serious
> cluelessness.  But maybe there is something I don't know.
>
> Stan

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2003 15:11:46 -0500
From: Thomas Philip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [uuc] '00 M Roadster Questions

On Monday, Feb 3, 2003, at 12:19 US/Eastern, Dorffer, Rich wrote:

> Tom says >
>> The Gary Hansel mirror adapter is a great help.  The smaller mirror
>> really improves visibility to the front right quarter if you are more
>> than 5' 8" tall.
>
> Where can you get it?  I have tried to contact Gary to no avail.

The results of a quick google:
<http://www.z3mirrors.com/>

I've never tried to order one as I don't have a Z3.

tom

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2003 14:09:06 -0600
From: Sean Cordone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [uuc] <OT> Silicone brake fluid/military @ South Pole

Minor (but important) point: In accordance with international treaties, 
no weaponry is kept on the Antarctic continent (besides, tanks at the SP 
would have no one to attack but a bunch of scientists.) The military 
does provide airlift and supply functions; transportation equipment is 
subject to very harsh temperatures when supplying/transporting 
scientific personnel - but no tanks.

- --SC
- --(see http://topweb.gsfc.nasa.gov/  for info on our experiment that was 
launched from Antarctica.)

Bill Ballon wrote:

> Silicone fluid was developed for the Military.  For storing trucks and 
> tanks in cold environments such as the South pole where they are stored

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2003 13:05:15 -0800
From: "Marco Romani" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: [uuc] <OT> Silicone brake fluid/military @ South Pole

Yeah, but the steppes of Russia get pretty darn cold.  Ask Napoleon and
Hitler ;-)

Marco

- -----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Sean Cordone
Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 12:09 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [uuc] <OT> Silicone brake fluid/military @ South Pole


Minor (but important) point: In accordance with international treaties,
no weaponry is kept on the Antarctic continent (besides, tanks at the SP
would have no one to attack but a bunch of scientists.) The military
does provide airlift and supply functions; transportation equipment is
subject to very harsh temperatures when supplying/transporting
scientific personnel - but no tanks.

- --SC
- --(see http://topweb.gsfc.nasa.gov/  for info on our experiment that was
launched from Antarctica.)

Bill Ballon wrote:

> Silicone fluid was developed for the Military.  For storing trucks and
> tanks in cold environments such as the South pole where they are stored

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2003 13:30:24 -0800
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [uuc] 6 throttle conversions for the 240 hp //Motor?

240 hp. with intake from 6 throttle 3xx hp //Motor.

So far the discussion had been comparing apples and oranges, single 
throttle versus 6 throttle.  What about the genetic crossbreed that some 
people are putting on their engines?  Could there be a nice middle 
ground that would make our lighter E36 as fast as the heavier more 
powerful E46?

     What kind of torque and horsepower results from the 6 throttle 
intake conversions that are available for the 240hp version?
     Might the power band continue increasing up to a conservative 6750 
redline?
     Assume a Euro HFM with correct injectors and fuel pressure 
regulator are installed with it.
Does the Euro fuel pressure regulator install to the fuel rail the same 
as the US spec one?  What pressure does it run?

I see BMP sells a lot of these conversions, anyone have a rear wheel 
dyno test of such a setup?

     Would a 25% increase, or up to about 300hp and 290 pounds of 
torque, be a realistic minimum guess?
     This percentage is consistent with converting, for example, 
sidedrafts on a 2002, Alpina injection on a tii, or the 80's //M5/6 
versus the big block 3.5.     This would be nearly as much improvement, 
half the cost , with considerably greater reliability and engine life, 
than putting on a blower.

What are the other internal differences between the 6 throttle versus 
single throttle //Motors?

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2003 16:59:34 -0500
From: ben keyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [uuc] 6 throttle conversions for the 240 hp //Motor?

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> 240 hp. with intake from 6 throttle 3xx hp //Motor.

I see this as a huge waste of money & massive amount of
added work for minimal benefit.

just buy the complete euro motor for $7k, then sell the US
motor for $3-4k & be done with it.

you're going to have to take the motor out of the car, but
other than that the job isn't going to be much harder & it's
a factory application rather than some cobbled together
conversion.



Ben
S50 B30 E30
S52 B32 E30
S38 B35 E28
13 throttle bodies, no waiting :-)

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2003 14:22:14 -0800 (PST)
From: Brad Couvillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [uuc] Feb Roundel 5er Fest write-up

This information being mentioned on the E30 list made
me go ahead and post it on this list, too : -)

5er Fest 2002 -- which was an e12/e28-only event in
October of last year -- finally made the Roundel this
month.  The write-up was done and the pictures were
taken by Shawn Doughtie, owner of an '85 535i.

All of us met on the Roadfly e28 board and the
mye28.com board, and it was absolutely wonderful to
meet all of the guys whose cars I had seen but faces I
hadn't.

If you missed this issue of Roundel, you can read the
article online here:

http://www.mye28.com/5erfest/article/

The highlight of 5er Fest and the article in Roundel
for me was, of course, the Duke vs. Brad footrace.  :
- -)

To see how the race got started:

http://bimmer.roadfly.org/e28/messages/archive/msgsy2002w06/99440.html

You can see more pictures of the event, including a
video of how badly I beat Duke (too bad he's not on
this list for me to talk smack to him) on the official
5er Fest 2002 website:

http://www.fatdaddybmw.com/5erfest/2002

This year's 5er Fest will be held on the weekend of
August 15 - 17 in Spartanburg, SC.  We're in the very
preliminary stages of planning, but if you're an e12
or e28 owner and are interested in attending, surf on
over to this year's site:

http://www.fatdaddybmw.com/5erfest

No matter where you're located in the US, there will
be SOMEONE coming from that area; there are California
guys that vow they'll never miss a 5er Fest, including
this year's which is thousands of miles away from
their home!

Thanks for the bandwidth!

Brad "Shifty" Couvillon
'87 528e <-- hopefully fixed this week
www.fatdaddybmw.com

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2003 17:16:46 -0500
From: "Matt Malfa * UUC Motorwerks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: [uuc] 6 throttle conversions for the 240 hp //Motor?

Most people approach the concept of dual throttle bodies for the US S50/S52
the wrong way; you cannot base your expectations on the S50B30 and S50B32
Euro motors, as they share little in the way of block or head architecture
with their US counterparts.

I can't imagine where you came up with a number like 290ft-lb. The high and
mighty S54 comes no where near that. Instead, let's compare your M10 and M30
examples to the 100hp/liter you are hoping to get out of a US 3.0 S50... How
easy is it to get 200hp out of an M10 with NO internal engine work, i.e.
stock compression, stock cam? How about 350hp out of an M30, again without
opening the engine?

Now consider that an intake, 3.5" HFM and cat-back exhaust has been shown to
yield as much as 40rwhp* on a 1995 M3. Combined with a properly designed
header/collector system, you have nearly achieved that magic 300hp.  All
while using that low-tech single throttle body.

Please note that I am not interested in getting into an argument. I am also
not interested in discouraging anyone from experimenting with a multiple
throttle intake. I just think it is important to recognize the law of
diminishing returns, and to clearly identify your goals - is it the 100hp/L,
or do you just want those sexy throttle bodies?

The package you described already included a larger HFM, larger injectors,
and altered fuel pressure. These aren't dirt cheap items to start with, but
they pale compared to the cost of the multiple throttle intakes that are
commercially available. Even camshafts would be a more financially viable
avenue.

Beyond that, I would tend to agree with Ben, although buying someone else's
(ab)used and expensive engine sight-unseen from another continent is not my
idea of fun. Then consider that US motors are damn reliable, and don't
require valve adjustments, or specially trained techs to work on them... and
you want to pay lots of money for the privilege of giving all that up?

My $.02.

- - -Matt
S50USB30
S54B32

*This number is based on my own first hand experience, with dyno sheets and
witnesses. If you don't agree, I don't want to hear about it. Really.


- -----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

240 hp. with intake from 6 throttle 3xx hp //Motor.

     Would a 25% increase, or up to about 300hp and 290 pounds of
torque, be a realistic minimum guess?

------------------------------

End of [uucdigest] V3 #6085
***************************

|
| In memory of Michel Potheau - friend, enthusiast, founder of the BMW CCA.
|________________________________________
| Please visit these UUC-approved BMW parts vendors/service providers:
|          (listed alphabetically)
|
| Autoscope-Motorsports - http://www.autoscope-motorsports.com
|
|====================================================
|
| 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
|__________________________________________

Reply via email to