[uucdigest] Thursday, July 3 2003 Volume 03 : Number 6539
_________________________________________________________________ | | 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] Re: Change of plans...Maybe a new M3... [uuc] Re: Change of plans...Maybe a new M3... [uuc] Ellipsoids -> Hellas? Re: [uuc] Re: Change of plans...Maybe a new M3... RE: [uuc] Re: E55 v M5, M3 v S4, etc [uuc] Re: E30 - High NOx, Failed Emissions Testing Re: [uuc] Re: E55 v M5, M3 v S4, etc Re: [uuc] Re: E55 v M5, M3 v S4, etc [uuc] squeaky E36 clutch pedal RE: [uuc] E30 - 02 Sensor Wire Coding - Need Help! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2003 10:53:46 -0400 From: ben keyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [uuc] Re: Change of plans...Maybe a new M3... Gary Derian wrote: > A twin turbo V-8 E30 is just about right. 800 hp would be easy to make. and when can we expect to see this emerge from the new garage & roll smartly down the new driveway at Casa Derian ? Ben ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2003 08:07:11 -0700 (PDT) From: Neil Deshpande <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [uuc] Re: Change of plans...Maybe a new M3... Gary: It is not like you to forget the S70/1 in the 850CSi, which had 4V/cyl, did it not? Neil Deshpande *** "Gary Derian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> There is little to justify more than 8 cylinders in a passenger car. Sure 12 is nice and smooth, but it is also large and heavy. For BMWs, the 12 only has 2 valves per cyl, unless you have a 760iL, McLaren F1 or one of the LMR engines. 4 valves per cylinder in the V-8 has much better combustion characteristics. The downside to a BMW V-8 is the extra width. A twin turbo V-8 E30 is just about right. 800 hp would be easy to make. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2003 11:10:23 -0400 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [uuc] Ellipsoids -> Hellas? I've got an E34 with ellipsoids and an E28 with Hella H4s. I have 80/100 bulbs in the Hellas and 65w 9005 bulbs in the ellipsoids rather than the usual 55w 9006 bulbs. (See http://www.bmwe34.net/e34main/upgrade/more_light.htm for the 9006->9005 procedure) The ellipsoids have a sharper cutoff than the H4s. Other than that, the H4s and ellipsoids have very similar patterns and intensity. . . . and if you decide to sell the Hellas, let me know. My brother-in-law wants a set for his 633. Drew Zacharda '94 540iT/6 '87 528eA In a message dated 7/3/2003 6:58:25 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > From: "Karl Zemlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [uuc] Ellipsoids -> Hellas? > > I'm considering the purchase of an e34. I currently have an e28 equipped > with Hella headlamps. Will the Hellas drop into the Ellipsoid buckets? If > not, how 'bout just the H1 High beams? > > Or are the ellipsoid lights good enough that I should just > sell the Hellas > with the e28? > > Thanks folks ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2003 11:18:53 -0400 From: "Gary Derian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [uuc] Re: Change of plans...Maybe a new M3... Who knows. I may have to put the turbos in the back seat. :-). Does anyone have an E30 body with no sunroof to donate? Gary Derian > Gary Derian wrote: > > > A twin turbo V-8 E30 is just about right. 800 hp would be easy to make. > > and when can we expect to see this emerge from the new garage & roll > smartly down the new driveway at Casa Derian ? > > > Ben > ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2003 11:23:43 -0400 From: "Robinson, Lee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: [uuc] Re: E55 v M5, M3 v S4, etc > > Almost all the MBZs I've driven have seemed > > underpowered and heavy compared to Bimmers. > > I was surprised to see that the RS6 is actually > _lighter_ than the E55 (by ~160 lbs) in an R&T > comparison I read today. at 4k+ neither one > is anything approaching light tho. And the E39 M5 (or any M5 for that matter) is? :) I'd still like to have ANY M5. > > I doubt BMW will be able to extract the 500+ ft-lbs of > torque that the E55 has currently from a NA V-10, no > matter how many revs it spins. I do bet it will be a better > overall drive tho, as the current M5 is bested by the E55 > by virtue of the Merc's overwhelming pace & vastly > improved manners over the prior generation. MB's gotten serious about the HP wars haven't they. All the AMG products are seriously juiced up with ground-pounding supercharged monsters. Even at the bottom end there's the C230Kompressor for under $30k (including the sport package & 17" wheels). BMW had better think of something. I don't know who would buy a 325 when you can blow the doors off it for less with a 190hp 6-speed, better looking Benz. I have to agree with Neil about the new Benz's designs. They've gone from good looking, but conservative to absolutely striking. The C class is the best looking car in the entry lux segment. And the new SL......droooool. Saw an SL55 yesterday, man is that a great looking car--even as agressive as it is, it still looks great. > > > And, keep in mind, BMW doesn't support forced > > induction for gasoline motors (Cooper S aside) > > and in their diesels. and in the rumoured ~3.5l > twin-turbo V6 for the new 5'er. I don't know why BMW won't consider forced induction. I think it's great. A turbo makes an engine more fuel-efficient, more powerful, more flexible and because you can use a smaller engine, it can be lighter. My 9-3 with the High Output Turbo makes as much torque & almost as much power as a 330i--from a 2.0L 4!!! And it gets 30+ mpg. Drove all the wat from Atlanta to the north side of Cinncinnati without refueling at an average speed of 86mph. That's great range for a 17 gal tank. People complain about turbo lag, but this isn't really as much of a concern with newer cars. Most people never drive a car hard enough to even notice anyway. Saab's been using turbos for 30 years & I know of many, many cars north of the 300, 400, 500k mileage so reliability isn't an issue either. > > none. it has been stated that the current S54 is the > absolute limit on how large BMW will make the motor. Whammo! Ow, was that a wall we just hit. Damn, now we're going to have to design something new. > > > before it makes a lot more sense to > > stuff the corporate 4.4/4.6/5.0 liter V-8 into it? > > it already made sense for the E46 from a weight (V8 is lighter) > balance (V8 is more compact, can be mounted farther back > in the chassis) and driveability (more torque, less need to rev > the balls off of it) but they decided that the heritage of the > ///M brand needed the 6. forgetting of course that the original > M3 was a 4 :-) Heritage smeritage. I think they used what they had available. The current 3.2 is just a development of the previous euro engine. It only produces 10 extra hp at that. If BMW had followed the homologation rules requirements for ALMS, the M3 WOULD have a V8....and would have actually been based on a competition car like the original M3. Of course, this is probably something the marketing types have nightmares about. It just so happens in the mid-80's the M group's engineers/designers won over the marketing guys. > > Ben > waiting for the M2 based on the new 1-series. or a good deal > on an CPO'ed 740iS... Lee ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2003 08:30:42 -0700 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [uuc] Re: E30 - High NOx, Failed Emissions Testing Chris, did you warm up the cat first? I mean, REALLY warm it up? Before I smog any car more than a few years old, I go for a nice long drive. Then, if the shop can't do the test immediately, I sit in the parking lot with the engine running to keep some heat in the cat until the test. Most of the other possible causes you mentioned would set a check engine light. No light probably means it is the cat. HTH, Scott Miller GGC BMW CCA 1990 325i >Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2003 18:10:58 -0700 >From: Chris Baisley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: [uuc] E30 - High NOx, Failed Emissions Testing > >My 1990 325is (with JimC chip) failed the British Columbia emissions test >this afternoon (it passed last year). It failed on oxides of nitrogen >(NOx), a reading of 1020 ppm, the maximum allowed is 1007 (d'oh! so >close!). The results can be seen here: > ><http://www3.telus.net/baisley/results.htm> >http://www3.telus.net/baisley/results.htm > > >Even last year the NOx seems high at 854, the average of all vehicles >passing is 211 according to the test facility. Tech said he knew something >was wrong because the dyno computer forced him to hold the 40km/h test for >the maximum 90 seconds - I guess usually once the vehicle is up to speed >the NOx drops quickly and they stop the test. > >The brochure they provided suggests the following possible culprits, with >my brief thoughts on each: > >EGR system - car doesn't have EGR I don't think >lean air/fuel ratio - runs fine, if anything runs cool not hot >02 sensor malfunction - check engine light would tell me, but it hasn't >catalytic converter malfunction - i hope not! heat shield has been >removed, could this be problem? >excessive spark advance - not possible? >AFM - again, runs fine, I doubt this... > >The main difference between this year and last year is that the heat shield >on the cat has been removed. The front part of it (but not the back half!) >was there last year. I am hoping that the small bit of insulation that the >shield provides is not enough to cause my problems. My thoughts are to >check my 02 sensor output, check for vacuum leaks, then perhaps try again >after giving the car a good hard run (and remove chip??). > >Any ideas appreciated. My car for whatever reason will not read out it's >computer codes with the good old "hit the accelerator 9 times quickly >trick" as my 89 e30 would :-(. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2003 11:41:12 -0400 From: "Gary Derian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [uuc] Re: E55 v M5, M3 v S4, etc Turbos don't have the immediate response of an atmo engine. A small turbo engine doesn't work for me, but a large turbo engine with obscene power is worthwhile. Then you actually need the lag to prevent frying tires all the time. Gary Derian > > I don't know why BMW won't consider forced induction. I think it's great. > A turbo makes an engine more fuel-efficient, more powerful, more flexible > and because you can use a smaller engine, it can be lighter. > > My 9-3 with the High Output Turbo makes as much torque & almost as much > power as a 330i--from a 2.0L 4!!! And it gets 30+ mpg. Drove all the wat > from Atlanta to the north side of Cinncinnati without refueling at an > average speed of 86mph. That's great range for a 17 gal tank. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2003 12:41:38 -0400 From: "Michael McCoy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [uuc] Re: E55 v M5, M3 v S4, etc > Turbos don't have the immediate response of an atmo engine. A small turbo > engine doesn't work for me, but a large turbo engine with obscene power is > worthwhile. Then you actually need the lag to prevent frying tires all the > time. > > Gary Derian define *large engine* and *obsene power*. also, a turbo will have an instant response if sized properly and within the proper RPM range. only "lag" would be off the line, and as you said, you need that to keep from just spinning the tires. after you leave the line, as long as you keep the RPM's above 2000 or so (again, depending on the size of the turbo) you'd never experience any lag. this has been my experience with a single properly sized turbo on an M20. I'm all for BMW making a turbo car. even if its a low displacement one. sequential turbos on a 2L would be fine by me. 2.5L or above would probably have enough torque that you wouldn't need but one big turbo. - -Michael McCoy > > > > I don't know why BMW won't consider forced induction. I think it's great. > > A turbo makes an engine more fuel-efficient, more powerful, more flexible > > and because you can use a smaller engine, it can be lighter. > > > > My 9-3 with the High Output Turbo makes as much torque & almost as much > > power as a 330i--from a 2.0L 4!!! And it gets 30+ mpg. Drove all the wat > > from Atlanta to the north side of Cinncinnati without refueling at an > > average speed of 86mph. That's great range for a 17 gal tank. > > ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2003 11:44:58 -0500 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [uuc] squeaky E36 clutch pedal Folks, My E36M3 clutch pedal is squeaking every other time I depress it. After some digging, I think I had traced the source to the plastic piston inside the metal pedal return spring (right behind the pedal). Otherwise, the clutch works/engages great. Liberal application of lubes only quiets it down for a day or two at most. Than the squeaking returns. I'm about to order a replacement spring/piston assembly and start figuring out how to swap them out. Has anyone BTDT? Any other suggestions? TIA, alex f ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2003 10:12:57 -0700 From: "Brant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: [uuc] E30 - 02 Sensor Wire Coding - Need Help! Chris - Do it the easy way. You have a 4-wire sensor. Two of those wires are for the heater. They will be connected to each other through a resistor (the heater). Check all pairs with an ohm meter. The only connected pair are the heater wires. One wire will be connected to ground (the O2S case). That is the sensor ground wire. The other wire will appear not to be connected to anything. That is the signal wire. Try back-probing rather than cutting. Or use an insulation penetrator, being certain to repair the damage after your work. Brant Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2003 19:25:20 -0700 From: Chris Baisley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [uuc] E30 - 02 Sensor Wire Coding - Need Help! I'm trying to check my 02 sensor as per Bentley. The sensor has been replaced by a "generic" Bosch sensor I just learned, and the nice wiring connector has been discarded making it necessary to cut wires to do the tests. Grrrrrrr. In any case, on BOTH sides of the splice I have 1 grey wire, 1 black wire, and 2 white wires. The Mitchell wiring diagram I have says the wires on the harness side should be yellow, black, brown and green-blue! Anybody know which wires are which in my grey/back/white array? Thanks. ------------------------------ End of [uucdigest] V3 #6539 *************************** | | 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 |__________________________________________________________
