The BMW UUC Digest 
Volume 2 : Issue 2 : "text" Format

Messages in this Issue:
  Re: tire (dis)mounting
  WANTED:  e39 M5 DME control unit
  smaller pulleys for SCCA street prepared?
  Re: smaller pulleys for SCCA street prepared?
  Re: NY Times article on Bangle
  '93 E36 Failed Emissions Test
  E65 Front End.
  Re: E65 Front End.
  Re: Tire Mounting
  Update on tensioner pulleys exploding and a question
  FS: '95 LTW and '95 M3 (md)
  Re: Friends E36 M3
  Re: Friends E36 M3
  Re: X5 vs. Audi Allroad
  Re: Issuance of Thanks

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

Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 20:39:54 -0800 (PST)
From: John Bolhuis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: tire (dis)mounting
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

On Tue, 27 Jan 2004, Robinson, Lee wrote:

> Anyway, does anyone have a list of "must haves" to do this?  I.e.
> things we might not think of like the bead adheasive.  Maybe some
> tips for actually getting these on & off would be groovy too.

 The last 2 times I dismounted tires myself, I used a sawzall.  But
beware, steel belted tires are hell on even the toughest saw blades,
and you end up cutting way into the rim before the bead is cut.
 This is not a problem is you're just taking the rims to the metal
recycler though.
 On second thought, this is probably no help at all for you.

--
 "It is an honor to be Cookie Monster."
   -Sesame Street spokeswoman Audrey Shapiro


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

Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 21:37:11 -0800
From: "Chris Marino" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: WANTED:  e39 M5 DME control unit
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>



Anyone have a used DME for a 2001 M5?
 
Chris


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

Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 01:19:19 -0800
From: jkerouac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: bmw digest <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
   "[uucdigest]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: smaller pulleys for SCCA street prepared?
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

smaller pulleys for SCCA street prepared:

Are smaller diameter a/c, water pump, and alternator pulleys legal in 
SCCA street prepared?
tia,

Barry


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

Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 08:10:26 -0500
From: "Karl Zemlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: smaller pulleys for SCCA street prepared?
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Why would you want to go smaller?  A larger pulley will reduce the required
torque and run these devices at a lower speed meaning less power from the
engine.  I believe smaller pulleys would be bad in all respects, except
inertia - and compared to everything else I would not expect the inertia of
the pulleys to be very significant.  Larger, aluminum pulleys with the swiss
cheese treatment would probably be the best of both worlds - lighter, lower
inertia, and less power pulled from the engine.  Know a good machinist?

SCCA limitations?  No clue.



-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of jkerouac
Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2004 4:19 AM
To: bmw digest; [uucdigest]
Subject: [UUC] smaller pulleys for SCCA street prepared?


Search the ARCHIVES:http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]


smaller pulleys for SCCA street prepared:

Are smaller diameter a/c, water pump, and alternator pulleys legal in 
SCCA street prepared?
tia,

Barry

__________________________________________________________________________
In memory of Michel Potheau - friend, enthusiast, founder of the BMW CCA.

UUC Motorwerks - BMW Performance Fine-tuning and home of the Ultimate Short
Shifter - accept no substitutes! 908-874-9092 . http://www.uucmotorwerks.com




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

Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 23:03:06 -0500
From: Phil Marx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: NY Times article on Bangle
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Ever seen an E30 M3 with the rear spoiler removed? But then it WAS an 
afterthought---and with a purpose that didn't include golf!

-Phil

Greg Cagle wrote:
>IMHO it's possible to "raise the trunk" and not make it look like
>it was a glued on afterthought.

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

Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 08:56:05 -0500
From: Michael Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: '93 E36 Failed Emissions Test
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

My '93 325iS just failed the state emissions test. The HC was 1.91 with a
limit of 2.25, the CO was 56.74 with a limit of 23.74, the NOX was 1.10
with a limit of 3.25, and the CO2 was 988.33 with no limit.

The graphs that came from the emissions test show the speed as a bell curve
that peaks at 30 MPH and 18 seconds into the test. All of the tested
emissions show a peak centered at 22 MPH and 11 seconds into the test. The
CO and CO2 went over the limit at 15 MPH and 10 seconds and went back below
the limit at 22 MPH and 12 seconds.

The helpful hints from the emissions test say check the Cat, and all of the
sensors.

The car has 93,000 miles on it. I replaced the plugs and the air filter a
few thousand miles ago. It runs fine, gets over 32 MPG on the highway, and
has no fault codes. The thermostat is new and the temperature is in the
middle of the guage. I replace the oxygen sensor about 25,000 miles ago
when it failed.

The only thing that I haven't fixed is the cam cover gasket that leaks a
little oil into the spark plug wells. The idle control valve is probably a
little sticky because it sometimes races when I start it on a cold day.

Its cold and snowy outside and I don't have an exhause sniffer so it is
difficult for me to fix it myself this time. The local independant shop
wants to clean the throttle body and measure the temperature of the
catalytic converter.

Any idea what I should check and what might be broken?

Michael Thompson
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


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

Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 06:39:25 -0800 (PST)
From: Neil Deshpande <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: E65 Front End.
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

John:

I agree.  The rear is growing on me, but the
downturned mouth front-end that is propogating through
the entire line-up, including the 3-series is pretty
off-putting.  Other aspects of the front even I'm
getting used to slowly.  Those directionals are taking
time though.

I prefer the Volvo rear-end treatment, however.

Neil Deshpande

***

John Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
It's the E65's front end that's the grotesque part.

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

Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 10:48:15 -0500
From: "Rob Levinson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: E65 Front End.
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Funny thing about the whole styling issue, and what was quoted from
Bangle in that NY Times article.

I remember seeing the unveiling of the Z9 at the NY Auto Show a few
years ago, and three things struck me (and stuck with me):

1) The overall shape looked like a fresh direction.

2) That central control thingy could never catch on.

3) The nose must be typical showcar camouflage to hide the
good-looking stuff that is kept under wraps until the production
version is revealed in a couple of years.

Oops.  Hindsight is 20/20, as they say.

1) On the 6er, the shape is okay.  Not great, just okay.  At least
there's a big coupe in the lineup again.  The tail treatment blends
and gives a hint of 996 rear end with built-up spoiler.  I can take
that.  I don't believe that the it was an afterthought on the E65 as
Bangle was claiming in an attempt to get more trunk room.  No
designer worth his salt who talks about "flame surfacing" and other
esoterica would turn a blind eye toward a tack-on.  Many additional
man-hours would have been spent redesigning the entire rear.  That
was not the case, so one can only assume there is something in that
design that he (and I now use the direct "he" as Bangle has been
taking direct credit, despite my previous beliefs that there must
have been more comittee-think going on) likes quite a bit.  That's
perfectly acceptable when he's building a car for himself alone.  The
E60 has had some overall modification that as a fix, works to my eye
about as well as applying the PhotoShop "smudge" tool to the E65.

2) i-Drive.  Enough has been said about "fixing things that ain't
broken" already.

3) That nose is an abomination to the traditional "shark nose" theme
that made BMW the styling icon that it is.  I wasn't tired of it, and
I don't know anybody who was.  Best-selling years were completely
filled with that theme.  The new "guppy nose" design has such a
temporary "flavor of the day" feel to it that I would expect it from
Hyundai or Kia, companies that have no long-term design themes to be
proud of.  Sadly enough, I could deal with the rest of the body on
the E65, E60, and Z4.  It's just the nose that is so bland as to be
offensive.  The Z4, in my opinion, would be beyond "acceptable" - it
would be a fine-looking car with a proper nose.  Picture a Z1/E31
style nose on the Z4.  I'd be at the dealership tomorrow checking out
payment options.

- Rob


---- Original Message ----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [UUC]  E65 Front End.

>John:
>
>I agree.  The rear is growing on me, but the
>downturned mouth front-end that is propogating through
>the entire line-up, including the 3-series is pretty
>off-putting.  Other aspects of the front even I'm
>getting used to slowly.  Those directionals are taking
>time though.
>
>I prefer the Volvo rear-end treatment, however.
>
>Neil Deshpande
>
>***
>
>John Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>It's the E65's front end that's the grotesque part.



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

Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 10:56:53 -0500 (EST)
From: Mark Andy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Tire Mounting
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Howdy,

On Tue, 27 Jan 2004, Gary Derian wrote:
> You will not be able to mount low profile tires with tire irons.  Get a
> good tire machine and learn how to use it.  Bead adhesive?  That stuff
> is bead lubricant.  You can use Murphy's oil soap for that.

I'll pile on here.

IMHO, but mounting even a regular non-DOT R tire without a machine is a
_huge_ PITA.  As for DOT-Rs, the stiffer sidewalls that some use (Hoosier,
for instance) make them often times a large PITA even _with_ a machine (in
particular, holding the bead down into the wheel relief with one
hand/prybar while the other works a prybar at the tool head while
simultaneosly getting the machine to turn can sometimes be interesting).
Couple in any kinda smaller rim width than the tire really likes or
difficult to mount rims or whatever and I think you're just pissing in the
wind thinking that you'll do it manually.

That said, here's a link to a cheapo tire machine:
http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/ctaf/Displayitem.taf?itemnumber=45656

This is an example of a bottom of the line machine (note that its 220V 
btw) with no features.  Its similar (at least in specs) to my tire 
machine.  It'd probably be fine for a home user.  The only thing it 
doesn't have that would be really handy is bead inflator jets.  These 
shoot a large amount of air into the tire to pop the bead out onto the 
rim.  Ironically, you basically never need this with race tires, its only 
floppy sidewall street tires (particularly snow tires, which tend to be a 
bit narrow for their rim) that have this issue.  You can get external air 
blast inflators, but they're $300+ (Cheetah makes some).

If you do decide to buy a tire machine, ensure that it'll handle the 
tire/wheel sizes you care about.  The original poster mentioned 315's on a 
17" rim.  Lots of used machines won't handle that.

Then you've got balancing.  I autocross, so I don't balance my race tires.  
Street tires I balance at a friend's shop with a real balancer.  Here's 
another bottom of the barrel one:
http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/ctaf/Displayitem.taf?itemnumber=47211

Note that unlike a tire machine, a balancer is actually a precision piece 
of equipment.  I dunno if this particular balancer is worth a crap or not.

I've never used a static balancer for car wheels, so I have no idea how 
well that works.  For motorcycle wheels it seemed to work fine at racing 
speeds (back in the day I was a motorcycle roadracer).

All that said... I _really_ like having the ability to mount my own tires.  

Mark


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

Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:05:14 -0500 (EST)
From: Mark Andy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Update on tensioner pulleys exploding and a question
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Howdy,

So I got the tensioners/tensioner/aux pulleys and both belts changed on 
my fiancee's '93 325is last night.  Ended up taking out the aftermarket 
intake on the left side (Not sure whose it is...  Confortti maybe?) and 
working around the fan/rad.  Not too bad, but required some fiddling.  It 
_might_ be easier to pull the rad, but then you've got potential troubles 
with hoses & re-filling the system to deal with...

Anyway, everything is working again.  The top tensioner pulley was locked
up solidly, which is probably what kicked off the whole mess.

The car also didn't have the plastic underside piece that shields the 
belt area back to the swaybar, so we put one of those on.  One question on 
that though...  It looks like the piece should bolt up to the frame rail 
on both sides, but the slots in the frame rail didn't have any type of 
nylon insert or show signs of ever having any...  Is that a factory 
connection point?  What type of fastener?  Right now its held in place by 
the front bumper/rad under-panel along with some slip clips on the bottom 
of the piece to the side underbody panel "wings" under the foglight 
area...  Its in there pretty solidly, but I figure it should actually get 
some bolts or push pins or something similar...

Anyway, thanks for the pointers on the pulleys, that this isn't an 
abnormal failure, etc!  Gotta get the tranny & diff fluid changed next.  
:-)

Mark


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

Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:12:45 -0500
From: Rich Beebe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: FS: '95 LTW and '95 M3 (md)
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

In case someone here is interested, or they may know someone
who might be interested, I'm posting 2 of my cars for sale.

See below for info on both and please email with any
additional questions. Purchase of a new house is the reason
for the sale(s). I'm not 100% on prices yet, but will discuss
it with interested parties - they will be 'reasonable'. Feel
free to email offers - within reason. <g> Just haven't had
time to nail down the price issue yet.

Both cars are located near Westminster, MD (Baltimore).

Rich Beebe
410.876.8786

----

'95 BMW M3 LTW
56K miles
2nd owner car (1st owner in California)

- New Kumho 712 tires (235/40-17 fronts, 245/40-17 rears),
  less than 100 miles.
- Original forged LTW rims, staggered.
- New OEM splitter, perfect condition. Original available.
- New Motorsport strut brace. Originally ordered w/o brace.
- New Rear Trailing Arm bushings with Ground Control shims.
- New 96+ OEM swapped strut hats.
- UUC short shift kit.
- UUC Tranny mount enforcers (TMEs)
- UUC Clutch stop.
- JT Designs rear shock mounts.
- New exhaust hangers, original muffler or UUC TSE.
- Stock, Conforti and Dinan chips available.

This car comes with a in-dash CD player installed (by original
owner) and Clifford alarm. The original owner also opted against
the GT/LTW oil pan, so the car does not come with that LTW item.
The rear factory wing/spacers and front splitter are in place.

The car can be bought with one of 2 suspensions or both. The
car currently has a Koni Double Adjustable strut/H&R sport
spring suspension on it. The car will also come with the
complete original LTW suspension (specific LTW springs, boge
struts & sways - front struts still complete).

The car also has a new water pump, idler pulley, adjusting
pulley, thermostat, thermostat housing, belts and plugs.
An alignment was also recently done.

Other than what is listed, this is a clean, stock LTW with
complete records from the original owner on. The car is not
perfect, but it is a very clean driver. All VIN stickers
match and all paint, etc. is original. The car is 'tight'
and runs great. Needs nothing.

Many photos available, if interested. If you'd like to see
specific shots, let me know and I will get them to you.

----

'95 BMW M3
White/Gray leather
98K miles
IIRC, 3rd owner car (bought from Mike Fennell)

- Newer Kumho 712 tires (235/40-17 fronts, 245/40-17 rears)
- Forged LTW rims, staggered (original with car).
- New Rear Trailing Arm bushings with Ground Control shims.
- New 96+ OEM strut hats.
- UUC short shift kit.
- UUC Tranny mount enforcers (TMEs)
- UUC Clutch stop.
- E46 rear shock mounts/Z3 plates.
- New exhaust hangers, stock (LTW) muffler or UUC TSE.
- Stock, Conforti and Dinan chips available.
- 6 CD changer
- Single adj. Konis
- H&R springs

Very good records with the car. Very well kept car - all
matching VINs, original paint, etc., etc., but still a 9
year old car. Runs great. Never any problems.

Photos available upon request.

Please call/email with any specific questions.

----





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

Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 08:18:14 -0800
From: "Marco Romani" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Friends E36 M3
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

That's happened to M3 since about day 4 ;-)  Usually I just would slam it
into second and then it would subsequently go into first.
Now that it's a race car I don't use first much....

Marco

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2004 3:19 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [UUC] Friends E36 M3


Search the ARCHIVES:http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]


Gents,

I have a friend with a '98 M3 that is having problems getting to dealer to
acknowledge a problem of getting 1st gear engagement (5spd).
At full stop, engine running after coming out of neutral it is often
difficult to engage.
The car is at 60k miles and will soon come out of warranty and the dealer
is saying there is no problem even though the service writer acknowledges
experiencing it.

-Kevin

__________________________________________________________________________
In memory of Michel Potheau - friend, enthusiast, founder of the BMW CCA.

UUC Motorwerks - BMW Performance Fine-tuning and home of the Ultimate
Short Shifter - accept no substitutes!
908-874-9092 . http://www.uucmotorwerks.com


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

Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 09:33:06 -0800
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Friends E36 M3
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Kevin, has your friend changed the trans lube?  A different lubricant might
improve the shifting.  If that does not fix the problem, how about the BMW
CCA ombudsman?  Your friend is a BMW CCA member, right?

Scott Miller
GGC BMW CCA

>Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 15:19:07 -0800
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: Friends E36 M3
>Message-ID:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>Gents,
>
>I have a friend with a '98 M3 that is having problems getting to dealer to
>acknowledge a problem of getting 1st gear engagement (5spd).
>At full stop, engine running after coming out of neutral it is often
>difficult to engage.
>The car is at 60k miles and will soon come out of warranty and the dealer
>is saying there is no problem even though the service writer acknowledges
>experiencing it.
>
>-Kevin



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

Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 09:04:22 -0500
From: Phil Marx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: X5 vs. Audi Allroad
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

I believe it was AutoWeek that reported the AllRoad is to be 
discontinued for the US market, if new is your goal. Otherwise the 
traditional abysmal Audi resale value is your friend. Personally, if 
I were looking at a V8 X5, wanted performance as well as decent AWD 
performance, I'd seriously look at the 2004 model with xDrive and the 
7 Series' Valvetronic motor. If you're considering either for their 
utility of space, the Audi third seat is a joke so neither really 
offers a decent use of space. If you are considering new purchases, 
don't "invest" in an Audi, you're better off with a short-term lease 
and complete warranty and maintenance. If used is your meat then the 
Audi is cheaper, and I didn't say a "better deal".

Since neither is a real off-roader, why wouldn't a normal Quattro 
model be on your short list? You like cladding?

And to the contrary, the new 2004 X5 is an amazing handler, for what 
it is (heavy!!). I suspect a drive in each will render your questions 
moot.

-Phil

>John Kjos replied:
>
>I hear the new Audi Allroads will have a V8. I had a 2.7L twin turbo S4
>(same engine setup as the Allroad) and had the turbos go out after 10K
>miles. I had to fight for months to get Audi to replace them under warranty.
>I'm not a fan of the V6/2xturbo combo. Now the V8 seems like a different
>story. It is already on Audi's web page. his is a much better handling car
>than the X5 I'm told.

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

Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 10:07:50 -0800
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Issuance of Thanks
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Brad says:
"I usually wear long sleeves in
anything below 60, but that's probably just because
I'm cold natured. . .  or because I'm 6'0" 140lbs.
:-)"

Yea, I a few of us caught your lack of wind resistance in the 5er Fest in
last year's Roundel. Good show on your run and fun read.

-Kevin


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

End of [bmwuucdigest] digest(15 messages)
**********

Reply via email to