[uucdigest]          Thursday, June 19 2003          Volume 03 : Number 6487



_________________________________________________________________
|
|  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] Brake upgrades for E34 525
       RE: [uuc] Programmable effects on E-39 (and alarm keys)
       Re: [uuc] Brake upgrades for E34 525
       [uuc] <E34> touring cargo net
       Re: [uuc] using AOL for OS-X (was MS Outlook 2000?)
       [uuc] Re:  installing gauges in an E30
       RE: [uuc] Programmable effects on E-39 (and alarm keys)
       Re: [uuc] <E30> Wheel questions
       Re: [uuc] Re:  installing gauges in an E30

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

Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 16:57:39 -0400
From: "James Moran" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [uuc] Brake upgrades for E34 525

From: "Michael McCoy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

> well, if you're braking hard enough to reach the limit of adhesion... rather
> hard. in fact, that would be the hardest you could brake. (or rather the
> fastest you could stop. you could brake harder, but that would just result
> in locked tires... not stopping too well that way.)
> I was saying that I would want there to be a braking force that, when
> applied, reached the limit of adhesion of the fronts at the same time it
> reached the limit of adhesion at the rears. this of course would be speed
> dependent as to what the force would be, but the balance front to rear would
> be relatively consistent. the car doesn't generate any downforce (not a
> horrible amount of lift either thankfully) so the max attainable
> decelerative G's is within a relatively narrow region. so weight transfer is
> within a relatively confined region as well.
>
> balanced at the limit is ideal. anything less than that and the balance
> won't really be noticed anyway.

You don't want the front and rear brakes to be on the limit of adhesion.  For
stability reasons, you want the fronts to lock first.  A car with locked rears
is unstable.  Even if the ABS is activated in the rear only, the car is
unstable.

> needs are more excessive than what a street car would see. the weight
> contributes less to the equation than the speed squared part.
> a 3400 lb car (E34 525?) going 100 mph has the same energy as a 1500 lb LMP
> car going 150 mph. so both coming to a stop will generate the same amount of
> heat in the brakes. that same LMP car (LMP-675) also makes 550+ hp. so it
> gets to that 150+ mph much faster (as well as much more frequently) than the
> 3400 lb street car would (unless said street car is making well over 1000
> hp). so the LMP car makes the same or more heat, in less time, with less
> time to dissapate that heat, and the 330 mm rotors work for it. thats why I
> was questioning the use of something larger.

I'm guessing there is a rule that limits wheel diameter, hence the size of the
brakes are limited.  LMP cars also have carbon-carbon brakes and more rearward
weight bias so their brake set-up has little comparison to a street car.

I'm going to recommend you read Fred Puhn's "Brake Handbook".  The answers you
seek lie within.

Jim Moran
'88 M6

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

Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 17:11:05 -0400
From: "Dennis Liu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: [uuc] Programmable effects on E-39 (and alarm keys)

Thanks Gary...

Dumb-a** question of the day.  What is TIS?

vty,

- --Dennis

- -----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Gary Derian
Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 10:48 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [uuc] Programmable effects on E-39 (and alarm keys)


I believe these features are programmed via the diagnostic computer at the
dealership.  The TIS has some information on programming those functions, as
well as one touch up/down windows and perhaps other stuff.

Gary Derian


> The manual is silent on exactly what functions are programmable; it
suggests
> that you consult with your dealership.  Arggh.
>
> From what I've read in the manual, the "key memory" can be programmed to
> run:
> 1.  seat position
> 2.  mirror position
> 3.  steering wheel position
>
> Does anyone know how to use this feature?  And what other things can be
> programmed???
>
> Specifically:
>
> how do I DISABLE the daytime running lights?
> how do I DISABLE the automatic locking feature (the doors lock when we
drive
> off; have to manually unlock later)?
> how do I DISABLE the automatic steering wheel "comfort ease/exit" feature?
>
> THANKS IN ADVANCE,
>
> --Dennis
>
>
>

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

Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 17:25:28 -0400
From: "Michael McCoy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [uuc] Brake upgrades for E34 525

- ----- Original Message ----- 
From: "James Moran" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 4:57 PM
Subject: Re: [uuc] Brake upgrades for E34 525


> From: "Michael McCoy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > well, if you're braking hard enough to reach the limit of adhesion...
rather
> > hard. in fact, that would be the hardest you could brake. (or rather the
> > fastest you could stop. you could brake harder, but that would just
result
> > in locked tires... not stopping too well that way.)
> > I was saying that I would want there to be a braking force that, when
> > applied, reached the limit of adhesion of the fronts at the same time it
> > reached the limit of adhesion at the rears. this of course would be
speed
> > dependent as to what the force would be, but the balance front to rear
would
> > be relatively consistent. the car doesn't generate any downforce (not a
> > horrible amount of lift either thankfully) so the max attainable
> > decelerative G's is within a relatively narrow region. so weight
transfer is
> > within a relatively confined region as well.
> >
> > balanced at the limit is ideal. anything less than that and the balance
> > won't really be noticed anyway.
>
> You don't want the front and rear brakes to be on the limit of adhesion.
For
> stability reasons, you want the fronts to lock first.  A car with locked
rears
> is unstable.  Even if the ABS is activated in the rear only, the car is
> unstable.
>

that sounds an awful lot like the marketing *information* they used for the
FWD cars. for stability reasons, you don't want all 4 locked...
also for stability reasons you generally don't want the rears locked (the
car may try to swap ends). you also don't want the fronts locked (you won't
be able to steer).
see where this is going? yes, locked is bad.

> > needs are more excessive than what a street car would see. the weight
> > contributes less to the equation than the speed squared part.
> > a 3400 lb car (E34 525?) going 100 mph has the same energy as a 1500 lb
LMP
> > car going 150 mph. so both coming to a stop will generate the same
amount of
> > heat in the brakes. that same LMP car (LMP-675) also makes 550+ hp. so
it
> > gets to that 150+ mph much faster (as well as much more frequently) than
the
> > 3400 lb street car would (unless said street car is making well over
1000
> > hp). so the LMP car makes the same or more heat, in less time, with less
> > time to dissapate that heat, and the 330 mm rotors work for it. thats
why I
> > was questioning the use of something larger.
>
> I'm guessing there is a rule that limits wheel diameter, hence the size of
the
> brakes are limited.  LMP cars also have carbon-carbon brakes and more
rearward
> weight bias so their brake set-up has little comparison to a street car.
>

the rules govern both wheel diameter as well as brake rotor size, caliper
size, etc...
not all LMP cars have carbon carbon brakes.
the weight bias is rearward slightly. but its *balanced* in that they try to
have the force per square inch of tire contact area close to equal front to
rear (usually including some amount of downforce). they try to keep the
downforce front to rear proportionally equal as well. they then look at
suspension travel/load as well as tire temp and use that data to further
balance the loads on the tires. they also look at brake rotor temp to
balance brake bias. (though the driver's preference tends to overrule the
engineers suggestions.)

> I'm going to recommend you read Fred Puhn's "Brake Handbook".  The answers
you
> seek lie within.
>

I shall try to locate a copy. (apparently its out of print now.) thanks for
the suggestion.

- -Michael McCoy

> Jim Moran
> '88 M6
>
>

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

Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 16:50:23 -0500
From: "Alex Cagann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [uuc] <E34> touring cargo net

Greetings all. I took a 525iT in, 1993, and it has the rear cargo
retractable 'net' behind the rear seats. It is supposed to pull up to the
headliner and slip into some type of gizmo attached to the roof. There are
two nets, therefore, it should have two slots. The dealership has no parts
fiche showing this thing and, thus, can't order the part for me. Anyone know
what part I'm talking about and know where to get it?

In other news, I did sell my perfect 88///M5 to fellow lister Geoff Garrett.
He flew in from California and bought it on the spot. Nice guy. He'll love
it. I'm sorry to see it go. You guys can all kill me, but I want a 911
again.  Perhaps this isn't the best place to proclaim that :-)

Alex Cagann
http://www.autoconsortium.com

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

Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 17:47:18 EDT
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [uuc] using AOL for OS-X (was MS Outlook 2000?)

Since Rob brought up the subject, anybody have information on AOL for Mac 
OS-X?  I'm pretty much in lurk mode most of the time anyway (most of the time I 
when I catch up with reading digests someone smarter has the right answer 
already), but since I moved to OS-X, I can't post to the digest either.  I suspect 
I can't turn off html and that's the problem, but maybe there's someone wiser 
than me with an answer or workaround other than fighting with my wife to use 
her computer.  

Off-line responses welcome :-)

Martin Bullen
'95 M3
'97 Z3 2.8

In a message dated 6/18/03 6:59:35 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

>Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 00:48:18 -0400
>
>From: "Rob Levinson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>Subject: [uuc] using MS Outlook 2000?
>
>
>
>Is anyone here using MS Outlook 2000 to post to the digest?
>
>
>
>If so, can you please email Brett Anderson
>
>([EMAIL PROTECTED]) directly, to assist in getting him back
>
>on this digest. He's recently changed to Outlook from Outlook Express
>
>and has not been able to post since.
>
>
>
>No comments are necessary on the virtues of the various email
>
>softwares, let's just save the bandwidth.
>
>
>
>- - Rob

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

Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 14:51:03 -0700
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [uuc] Re:  installing gauges in an E30

Well, I don't know how much of this applies to an E46.  But I had the drain
plug sender when I had gauges on my '87 325is.  The wires hang low and
could get caught on high obstacles as you drive over them.  Every time you
remove the plug to drain the oil, you have to deal with the wires.  After a
few years the wiring might have to be re-done.  I've heard there are issues
with not being able to the sufficient torque on the fragile plug to crush
the crush washer.

Unfortunately, I have no idea if there is a "hollow bolt" trick for the
E46.

Scott Miller
GGC BMW CCA

>Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 12:01:13 -0700 (PDT)
>From: Andre Yew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: [uuc] Re:  installing gauges in an E30
>
>On Thu, 19 Jun 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> Yes Joe, I had my hollow bolt tapped.  But just in case, buy an extra
one
>> as a back-up.  The temp sender has not leaked.  The drain plug is a poor
>> place for a sender, IMHO.
>
>Scott, I'm getting ready to install similar senders on my E46 328Ci.  Why
>is the drain plug is a poor location for the temperature sender?  Thanks.
>
>- --Andre

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

Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 14:55:41 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mike Hsu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: [uuc] Programmable effects on E-39 (and alarm keys)

Ohh ohhh.... I know the answer to this.  It is
Technical Information System.  It is basically a shop
manual on a CD.

Mike

- --- Dennis Liu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks Gary...
> 
> Dumb-a** question of the day.  What is TIS?
> 
> vty,
> 
> --Dennis
> 
>

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com

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

Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 14:55:59 -0700
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [uuc] <E30> Wheel questions

Bob said:

>Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 20:12:56 +0000
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: [uuc] <E30> Wheel questions
>
>On the treet, I use BBS RS Classic 7x15 3-piece gold center wheels with
>Yokohama AVS ES100 225/50-16 tires.  They're beautiful but hard to clean.
<snip>

I'd imagine they're also hard to keep air in, given the 1 inch gap between
the tire and the rim.

Scott Miller
GGC BMW CCA

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

Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 15:37:23 -0700 (PDT)
From: Andre Yew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [uuc] Re:  installing gauges in an E30

On Thu, 19 Jun 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> Well, I don't know how much of this applies to an E46.  But I had the drain
> plug sender when I had gauges on my '87 325is.  The wires hang low and
> could get caught on high obstacles as you drive over them.  Every time you
> remove the plug to drain the oil, you have to deal with the wires.  After a
> few years the wiring might have to be re-done.  I've heard there are issues
> with not being able to the sufficient torque on the fragile plug to crush
> the crush washer.

Scott, thanks for the info --- that makes a lot of sense.  Does anyone
know where the senders for the S52 and S54 engines live?  That may be more
relevant for later models. 

- --Andre

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

End of [uucdigest] V3 #6487
***************************

|
| 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!
|
|====================================================
| Turner Motorsport Inc . The Ultra-High Performance BMW Specialist
| 207 Elm Street, Amesbury, MA 01950
| 978-388-7769 / fax 978-388-4202
| http://www.turnermotorsport.com
|
|====================================================
|
| UUC Motorwerks - BMW Performance Fine-tuning
| and home of the Ultimate Short Shifter - accept no substitutes!
| 908-874-9092 . http://www.uucmotorwerks.com
|__________________________________________________________

Reply via email to