[uucdigest] Tuesday, April 1 2003 Volume 03 : Number 6268
_________________________________________________________________ | | 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] <E36> Draining coolant Re: [uuc] <E36> Draining coolant Re: [uuc] RE: Totalled my 528e Saturday. . . Re: [uuc] rear rotors for 328i? RE: [uuc] RE: Totalled my 528e Saturday. . . [uuc] WOB, RANT: I'm gonna kill me a redneck. [uuc] WANTED: BMW Factory Instructions E30 A/C Installation RE: [uuc] RE: Totalled my 528e Saturday. . . [uuc] <OT> Collisions Re: [uuc] WOB, RANT: I'm gonna kill me a redneck. Re: [uuc] <OT> Collisions ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 10:13:50 -0800 From: "Brant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: [uuc] <E36> Draining coolant Marc - You can create a funnel from an old PVC bottle (milk, OJ, Clorox, etc.) and wedge it between the frame and engine below the drain. That will control the flow of most of the coolant into a drain pan. Much less mess, but probably more net bother. Do remember that coolant is both attractive to and poisonous to pets and small children. Brant <<<<From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [uuc] <E36> Draining coolant Are there any tricks to getting coolant drained from an E36 without making a mess below?. . . . Marc Plante E36 325i, 212k Vienna, VA>>>>>> ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2003 12:16:00 -0600 From: Sean Cordone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [uuc] <E36> Draining coolant I made an incredible mess doing this on the 540. Post hoc, I came up w/ a plan to leave the system sealed next time (cap, all hoses on), then have a rubber hose with about the right OD ready to jam into the threads when the plug comes out - then take the cap off. A rubber stopper with a big aperture in the middle and a hose attached would be slicker. Dunno - might help confine the mess a little. --SC [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >Are there any tricks to getting coolant drained from an E36 without making a mess >below? My current >understanding is that it tracks along the engine block and really can't be >controlled, so you should >plan on mopping up a fairly significant mess after you're done. I figured I'd check >to see if >anyone has come up with any alternatives. @ 212k, I figure my car could use new >hoses, waterpump, >etc. > > > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 14:22:25 -0500 From: "Gary Derian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [uuc] RE: Totalled my 528e Saturday. . . Yes. Conservation of energy is a pain in the butt as all energy must be accounted for. The energy dissipated as noise is ignored :-). Momentum and energy are distinctly different. You meant to say that no energy was dissipated by the object hit. In Brad's case, the energy absorbed my the Lincoln is important. Also momentum transferred to it causing it to slide sideways. Gary Derian > That must assume no momentum was transferred to the object that was hit > (i.e. a brick wall). In this case it depends on the weight and > orientation of the other car as well. At any given speed, that Town car > will leave more of a mark on the 5er than a Geo Metro or a Vespa. --SC > > Neil Deshpande wrote: > > >Gary: > > > >Is it not true that car companies or someone else > >publish crush vs speed tables for their cars? So, if > >you mashed the front end in 2 ft, you were doing such > >and such speed. I seem to recall a back-of-the-mag > >article in one of the trade magazines. Of course, it > >is more complex that that, but that is a good start. > > > >Neil Deshpande > > > > > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 15:20:06 -0500 From: "James Clay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [uuc] rear rotors for 328i? My 328ic had solid rears. I doubt your caliper would accept the wider vented rotor - you would need to replace those as well *I think*. The dust shield in the rear also mounts your e-brake. Burning up rear brakes usually isn't an issue, I would leave it unmodified on anything but a track car. James James Clay http://www.bimmerworld.com Engineered BMW Performance 540.639.9648 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 13:28:38 -0700 From: "KKiely" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: [uuc] RE: Totalled my 528e Saturday. . . Brad, Why's the damage a total? I've seen worse that was repaired to just as good as original. - -Kevin ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 14:53:35 -0600 From: Robert Phelan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [uuc] WOB, RANT: I'm gonna kill me a redneck. Dec. 2002: While I'm waiting to go out into traffic from a parking lot, some redneck turns left into the parking lot across my nose (no signal) and continues around until he hits my left-rear quarter. He scrapes along it for a few feet and then stops. Police are called, guy is at fault, etc etc etc. The total is about 490$ which is under my deductible, so I have to go after the other insurance company myself. Dec. 2002-March 2003: Thanks to a less than informative police report, I have to call redneck to get the phone number of his insurance company.. the company is "National Ins" according to the report and no one, not even USAA has a clue who that is. Fifteen or so calls, I finally pin redneck down and he tells me. I report the incident to his insurance company thinking everything will be OK now. (Redneck never bothered to call insurance company) April 2003: After waiting a week for redneck's insurance company to call, I call them. Got bounced around a lot and finally got the adjuster. "Oh we called him, but we can't admit liability... he says you hit him!" Luckily for me, the police report is clear and I filled out a sworn statement within an hour of the incident. Faxed it to his insurance company, hopefully they'll drop him like a bad habit. If I EVER find this guy on the street again, he's gonna need more than CAR insurance. </rant> Later, Robert - -- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2003 21:16:57 +0000 From: "Gregory Bradbury" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [uuc] WANTED: BMW Factory Instructions E30 A/C Installation To the lucky UUC subscribers in North America who won't have to do this. My lucky find of last November, a 1990 325 touring with only 72.000 km and very clean condition (relax, I live in Switzerland) is slowly growing options it didn't have from first build (cruise, Motorsport dead pedal, UUC shifter, rear headrests, interior mirror with map lights, etc.). I am about to embark on a long weekend project, out of the challenge and desire to keep a cool head, to add factory air conditioning. Yes, many BMW's of this vintage did NOT come with A/C, not a major problem depending on where you live, but something appreciable to have. To simplify the great memory test (many parts have come from other Swiss donor cars from a local yard), I am looking for a copy of the BMW factory installation instructions (EBA or Einbauanleitung in German). Any language is fine, copies are OK vs. originals. Can anyone help? My understanding is that the ETK/EBA CD's may not cover the E30. TIA, Gregory in Geneva _________________________________________________________________ STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 15:17:23 -0600 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [uuc] RE: Totalled my 528e Saturday. . . KKiely <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Why's the damage a total? I've seen worse that was repaired to > just as good as original. Because the value of a 15+ year old non-exotic is next to zero. The smallest of the accidents requiring paintwork is very likely to total any E28/E30. Ask me how I know. mike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > As to your car and selling parts etc, you MIGHT not be able to > touch it if they declare your car a total loss. It is then the > property of the insurance company depending on where the car is, > you might not even be able to touch anything except personal > items in the car. Not true. You still own the car up and until the moment You decide to accept the total loss settlement. An which point you exchange the car's title for the insurance company's check. In theory, the insurance company's settlement offer is based on the exact condition of the wreck. In practice the exact mix of aftermarket or variation of stock parts will have little if any effect on the offer. alex f ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2003 15:32:16 -0600 From: Sean Cordone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [uuc] <OT> Collisions Well, relativistically they're not really distinct at all, but I suppose we know they weren't going fast enough for that to matter. I was talking about kinematics to illustrate the point, because it just involves the masses of the objects (Geo vs. Town Car). Energy dissipation is messy and complicated, and I know nothing about how those cars crumple. To be precise I meant "no momentum was transferred and no energy was dissipated by the second object". Only then is all of the kinetic energy of the car in motion dissipated in that car on impact, and only then do you get a calibrated crumple zone. Again to illustrate, if you're unlucky enough to hit a giant steel ball, to a good approximation "no energy will be dissipated in the object hit", but some energy will be carried away in the momentum transfer. So, both requirements are necessary. A far as speeds and skid marks go, this is a momentum problem since it's thoroughly inelastic. Why the focus on energy? You need detailed knowledge of the dissipation process for the accounting to work out. --SC Gary Derian wrote: >Momentum and energy are distinctly different. You meant to say that no >energy was dissipated by the object hit. > > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 15:38:48 -0600 From: "Ben White" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [uuc] WOB, RANT: I'm gonna kill me a redneck. Hey Robert, I wish you the best in your quest for justice. I had a somewhat similar experience about a year ago except that a pointy headed liberal 'the government owes me a living' type hit me. We're running short on rednecks in these parts though we do have a useless "Mandatory Liability Insurance" law in this state. I never did collect from her because she lied to the police that her policy (with a similar sounding ins. co.) was current and never ponied up to mine or received a fine from the state. Fortunately my 'uninsured motorist' coverage kept me mostly whole. Ben White/Ocean Springs, MS ____________ - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Phelan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2003 2:53 PM Subject: [uuc] WOB, RANT: I'm gonna kill me a redneck. > Dec. 2002: While I'm waiting to go out into traffic from a parking > lot, some redneck turns left into the parking lot across my nose (no > signal) and continues around until he hits my left-rear quarter. He > scrapes along it for a few feet and then stops. Police are called, > guy is at fault, etc etc etc. The total is about 490$ which is under > my deductible, so I have to go after the other insurance company > myself. > > Dec. 2002-March 2003: Thanks to a less than informative police > report, I have to call redneck to get the phone number of his > insurance company.. the company is "National Ins" according to the > report and no one, not even USAA has a clue who that is. Fifteen or > so calls, I finally pin redneck down and he tells me. I report the > incident to his insurance company thinking everything will be OK now. > (Redneck never bothered to call insurance company) > > April 2003: After waiting a week for redneck's insurance company to > call, I call them. Got bounced around a lot and finally got the > adjuster. "Oh we called him, but we can't admit liability... he says > you hit him!" > > Luckily for me, the police report is clear and I filled out a sworn > statement within an hour of the incident. Faxed it to his insurance > company, hopefully they'll drop him like a bad habit. > > If I EVER find this guy on the street again, he's gonna need more > than CAR insurance. > > > </rant> > > Later, > Robert > -- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 16:50:33 -0500 From: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [uuc] <OT> Collisions LMAO! Here's what went through my head when I read Sean's post: "So, I was rigidly fixed (infinite-point harness) in my giant steel ball the other day, and I was driving along, minding my own business. I had no way of knowing which way I was going, or how fast -- save for the juice swirling around in my ears. Then suddenly, out of nowhere, I hit this other giant steel ball! Or he hit me. We think. Neither of us is really sure, because there were no witnesses, and without friction, it took a really long time to get stopped and get out of our balls to check out the non-damage that resulted from the perfectly elastic collision. Sheesh. Wait 'til I try to explain this to the adjuster..." - -N. Jay <--amused > Well, relativistically they're not really distinct at all, but I > suppose we know they weren't going fast enough for that to matter. > > I was talking about kinematics to illustrate the point, because it just > involves the masses of the objects (Geo vs. Town Car). Energy > dissipation is messy and complicated, and I know nothing about how those > cars crumple. To be precise I meant "no momentum was transferred and no > energy was dissipated by the second object". Only then is all of the > kinetic energy of the car in motion dissipated in that car on impact, > and only then do you get a calibrated crumple zone. Again to illustrate, > if you're unlucky enough to hit a giant steel ball, to a good > approximation "no energy will be dissipated in the object hit", but some > energy will be carried away in the momentum transfer. So, both > requirements are necessary. > > A far as speeds and skid marks go, this is a momentum problem since it's > thoroughly inelastic. Why the focus on energy? You need detailed > knowledge of the dissipation process for the accounting to work out. --SC > > Gary Derian wrote: > > >Momentum and energy are distinctly different. You meant to say that no > >energy was dissipated by the object hit. > > > > > > ------------------------------ End of [uucdigest] V3 #6268 *************************** | | 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 |__________________________________________
