[uucdigest] Thursday, June 26 2003 Volume 03 : Number 6509
_________________________________________________________________ | | 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] Mini Cooper S driving impressions [uuc] Re: Mini Cooper S driving impressions [uuc] Re: plug wire prices [uuc] re: Turpentine or Silicon RE: [uuc] re: Turpentine or Silicon [uuc] Can anyone suggest an auto transport company on the east coast? [uuc] Re: Trophies (was RE: Thanks) Re: [uuc] Mini Cooper S driving impressions ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 23:53:49 -0500 From: Mark and Heather Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [uuc] Mini Cooper S driving impressions I agree with your synopsis of the Mini Cooper S in most ways except the following.. Both Mini and Mini Cooper S have minimal torque steer, but it does indeed have some torque steer... The seat controls are quirky.. With regards to mods.. I have had the chance to drive a friend's car on several occasions on both an autocross and/or track after he has done *each* of the following mods... ( he likes to share! :-) 1) got rid of the yukky run flat tires - he used 17" Yoko parada Spec 2 - - they are ok.. 2) upgraded rear sway bar 3) aftermarket springs 4) super charger pulley upgrade 5) free flowing exhaust by far... the rear sway bar has made the biggest difference in removing the FWD feel from the car and improving it's performance.. I agree the Mini Cooper S has *serious* potential as an autocross and track car and is a great street car... I am really hoping my friend Greg gets track tires and lightweight wheels for it.. then the car would be an autocross sleeper! Mark Williams Dallas, TX 91 ///M3 2.5L ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 22:06:13 -0700 From: Bora Akyol (BMW) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [uuc] Re: Mini Cooper S driving impressions On Wednesday, June 25, 2003, at 09:53 PM, Mark and Heather Williams wrote: > > > I agree with your synopsis of the Mini Cooper S in most ways except > the following.. > > Both Mini and Mini Cooper S have minimal torque steer, but it does > indeed > have some torque steer... > > The seat controls are quirky.. > With regards to mods.. I have had the chance to drive a friend's car > on several > occasions on both an autocross and/or track after he has done *each* > of the > following mods... ( he likes to share! :-) > > 1) got rid of the yukky run flat tires - he used 17" Yoko parada Spec > 2 - they are ok.. I thought I mentioned this, but yes this is the tops. > 2) upgraded rear sway bar Would be nice, esp. on a daily driver car. Hard to install since it requires dropping the sub-frame. Which one did he install? > 3) aftermarket springs Not interested in this as the car is stiff enough for me as a daily driver. > 4) super charger pulley upgrade Voids factory warranty. > 5) free flowing exhaust > Comes with JCW kit. The JCW kit is 6K installed but comes with a new supercharger, new cylinder head (complete), new headers, and new cat back exhaust and is backed by the full factory warranty and makes 200HP and 177 ft*lbs without putting on an intake. I presume the intake would add another 7-8 HP. So this would bring the car to 208 HP and probably around 180 ft*lbs of torque. Not bad for a 2670 lb car. Should be faster than my E36 M3. Putting on real wheels and tires on the car saves another 10 lbs per corner of rotating mass too. > by far... the rear sway bar has made the biggest difference in > removing the FWD > feel from the car and improving it's performance.. I agree the Mini > Cooper S has > *serious* potential as an autocross and track car and is a great > street car... > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 22:54:16 -0700 (PDT) From: John Bolhuis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [uuc] Re: plug wire prices On Wed, 25 Jun 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > From [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > >I can understand the expense of these wires if there were a coil attached for > >each cylinder. But these prices seem really whacked. Why are they so costly? > >Are they made from woven gold? > >Steve > > > > I'm tellin' ya... hand twisted by little German gnomes. The gnomes must have a helluva union. But seriously, does anyone know for real why the crazy prices on some wire sets? - -- "It is an honor to be Cookie Monster." -Sesame Street spokeswoman Audrey Shapiro ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 23:02:48 -0700 From: jkerouac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [uuc] re: Turpentine or Silicon re: Turpentine or Silicon: Yo Brett, You been breathin' in too much of that turpentine? Your usually spot on tech tips make it sound like an imposter used your name, someone who maybe really thought the teacher believed it when they used the excuse that a dog ate their homework back in elementary school. Spring rate affected by using an inert substance on a bushing, at a horizontal mounting point where there is _no body weight loaded on it? If there is sufficient tension by the rubber on the metal arm, it will not slip, plain and simple. From frisbee competitions of long ago where silicon is sprayed onto the frisbee so that you can spin it on your fingernail and do all those kinky acrobatic moves and catches with a frisbee, I learned by lots of experience that silicon spray does dry and lose it slipperiness over time. A disc sprayed up the night before will not be nearly as slick as a disk sprayed and rubbed right before using it. Using a reactive solvent _does soften the rubber, thereby allowing greater deflection of the rear of the arm inward or outward. If the solvent bonds the rubber surface to the metal ( initially), and then from the increased deflection on the softened rubber the bond tears, now you have a surface that is not pressing with sufficient tension on the arm to not slip, so that the bushing will in fact eventually slip as the control arm rotates up and down, and also from the fore and aft thrusting that the bushing dampens. Its the fore and aft thrusting particularly that is why you do _not want the bushing bonded, since then the rubber can not roll forward or back the small amounts it needs to to dampen the linear thrusts. This digest originated from the desire to have open technical dialog free of beliggerent[sp] invalidation of other's views. If you wish to post that you prefer turpentine, that's great. To write an invalidating load of crap with arguments as transparent as the hogwash the American public gets on a daily basis from their elected official has no place on this digest. You are welcome to come and see my bushings, or have someone in your good graces in the Bay area come to my house and check them out for you. There is no slip or slide on my bushings despite having installed them with silicon spray. Niether is there any swelling or sponginess in the rubber contact ring, since the lube I use is inert with rubber, unlike petroleum based solvents such as turpentine. Maybe do yourself a favor and install a pair of bushings in a car you know you will see for a lot of miles, and use turpentine on one side, and silicon spray on the other. I once won a wager about braking by running one drum brake, and one disc brake, on the rear of an E30 318i. With properly adjusted brake shoes, the car stopped in a dead straight line. And I have one regular E36 front control arm, and one 95 //M lightweight arm, on my car. I did it to see if there was any difference in alignment, which there isn't, and eventually to find out if the //M ball joint will last longer than the standard. So a lighter tone on your part will be both consistent with your previous postings as well as continue to contribute to making this digest the generally amicable place it is. Your attack on using silicon to lube bushings is louder than the doomsday preaching claims against my engine for using my homemade larger AFM tube. Which you, or your designated party, are also welcome to check out and drive. Sincerely, 'jk ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 06:56:52 -0400 From: "KMS - Brett Anderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: [uuc] re: Turpentine or Silicon > -----Original Message----- > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of jkerouac > You been breathin' in too much of that turpentine? Your usually > spot on tech tips make it sound like an imposter used your name, someone > who maybe really thought the teacher believed it when they used the > excuse that a dog ate their homework back in elementary school. My tech tips are accurate, my suggestions are based on experience. Nothing I've ever seen in print with your name on it has ever made the slightest bit of sense. Most people here will realize that and hopefully have learnt to never follow any advice you've managed to come up with since you appeared here. Your comments generally tend to be so far off base as to make it unbelievable. Here's some more examples.... > Spring rate affected by using an inert substance on a bushing, at a > horizontal mounting point where there is _no body weight loaded on it? Umm, yeah. Why do you suppose BMW insists the bushing be in the normal vehicle position before it sets to the control arm? Why do you suppose same applies for all BMW control arms, and if you look at the E28/E34/E32 type units, there are serrations designed to dig in at the contact point of bushing to bracket, specifically to prevent the bushing from rotating. Go grab a big round slice of rubber. Lock the middle in a vice and try to rotate the outer diameter. Now tell me that it has nothing to do with spring rate. If you install any control arms/bushings and let them take a set with the suspension drooping, you will raise the ride height of the car. Ride height is primarily a function of the springs. Now that the ride height is higher, the bushing must be rotated even further to gain the same amount of suspension travel as before. This will take more effort from the forces involved. Therefore, it's increased the spring rate. > Using a reactive solvent _does soften the rubber, thereby allowing > greater deflection of the rear of the arm inward or outward. Momentarily, yes, it does, it melts it. Within a few seconds, the bushing will adhere to the arm so tightly that you have trouble even cutting it off. The removal tools work overtime on a properly installed bushing. > If the > solvent bonds the rubber surface to the metal ( initially), and then > from the increased deflection on the softened rubber the bond tears, now > you have a surface that is not pressing with sufficient tension on the > arm to not slip, so that the bushing will in fact eventually slip as the > control arm rotates up and down, and also from the fore and aft > thrusting that the bushing dampens. Its the fore and aft thrusting > particularly that is why you do _not want the bushing bonded, since then > the rubber can not roll forward or back the small amounts it needs to to > dampen the linear thrusts. The bushing will tear over time, that's why you replace them. There is enough diameter to the bushing to absorb the fore and aft movement, which is actually very minimal in a 3 series design, as having two ball joints on each arm translates almost all movement of the bushing to lateral deflection of the bushing. BMW says use turpentine. I *think* they did a little more research on the subject than you have. <bunch of garbage snipped> Brett Anderson KMS ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 08:10:35 -0400 From: "Binder, Larry - Spine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [uuc] Can anyone suggest an auto transport company on the east coast? I need to find a company to ship my 330i from Boston to Philly. I got a great deal on the car so I'd be willing to pay a little more for a company with a good reputation. Thanks, Larry ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 07:48:28 -0500 From: Neil Maller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [uuc] Re: Trophies (was RE: Thanks) on 6/25/03 11:04 PM, d seeley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I got my first trophy last year in a NASA enduro; it's an... ummm... > exuberantly illustrated plaque. When I got it home, I couldn't even bear to > put it in the garage. So I sent it to my parents with a sappy note presenting > them with my first racing trophy in gratitude for all their support. Moms can > display _anything_ their child sends them, right? Unfortunately there's no place to send those really fugly driver school shirts we all accumulate. Still, they give me something to wear in the garage while working on the car... Neil - with a collection of, ummm, exuberantly illustrated T-shirts 96 M3 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 08:48:56 -0400 From: ben keyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [uuc] Mini Cooper S driving impressions Bora wrote: > **flat** cornering I've run my wife's S on track for about 500 miles & while it's pretty tight, you can certainly get enough body roll that it's somewhat sloppy in transision. you'd have to try really hard to get it loose tho. I'd look into the rear sway bar if I didn't have the E30 to take to the track. > grip is very good despite not having a limited slip. I'm not that fast, but I found a couple places on each of the three tracks I've been at with it where you can feel the car looking for grip on corner exit, which is where it's my understanding that LSD will make the most difference. we removed the 17" runflats (Dunlop in our case) the day we got the car home & have been quite pleased with the 16" S-03's which replaced them. I rode with an instructor at Mid-Ohio who was in the process of killing off the Pirelli run-flats & he was quite quick. I suspect that with real rubber he would have been must quicker tho. > I think a JS mini cooper or a JP mini cooper will give the E30 M3 > a run for the money and probably be faster than an E36 325/JP. I dunno what's allowed in terms of mods for a JS Cooper S, but I know you would have to be completely hauling ass to have a chance to keep up with the fast JS guys in the Midwest, let alone the JP ones. the S has lots more low-end torque, but the level to which the JS package is developed and given that you have a car which is less than 100 lbs heavier, has 25% more power stock & has the handling advantages of RWD, I don't see there would be much of a race between the two. maybe the Mini would have a chance on a tight track, but I don't think so. > Less organized than BMW and no Dinan equivalent place that will > back up their products with a factory like warranty. On the plus > side, I will be getting the JCW package soon. the JCW package is even better in terms of support & warranty than anything Dinan does as far as I can see, so that's not an issue. it's wickedly expensive tho. I don't see a Cooper S with 208hp which costs almost $30k as being anything approaching good value. give me an Evo or with a slight stretch (~$2k) an STi. but that's just me, to each his/her own... Ben ------------------------------ End of [uucdigest] V3 #6509 *************************** | | 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 |__________________________________________________________
