The BMW UUC Digest 
Volume 2 : Issue 588 : "text" Format

Messages in this Issue:
  Re: [Fwd: Re: [SVBC] Crashing more safely into pedestrians
  Re: [Fwd: Re: [SVBC] Crashing more safely into
  Re: [Fwd: Re: [SVBC] Crashing more safely into
  Re: [Fwd: Re: [SVBC] Crashing more safely into
  Re: e36 brake torque specs
  Re: e36 brake torque specs
  Re: e36 brake torque specs
  Re: e36 brake torque specs
  Re: e36 brake torque specs
  Re: Brakes, E36 and otherwise
  Re: Brakes, E36 and otherwise
  Re: Parking Brake Pedals
  Re: GTO
  Re: CTS-V comments was GTO
  Re: Pontiac GTO and BMW suspension musings

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

Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 15:55:26 -0500
From: "Robinson, Lee SEA" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: [SVBC] Crashing more safely into pedestrians
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

>  
> "If seatbelts, airbags, antilock brakes, and other features 
> have made motorists worry less about crashing into things, 
> will this new feature make motorists worry less about 
> crashing into pedestrians and cyclists?"
> 
> That's a pretty big "if".  Is there evidence that people 
> worry less about crashing because of safety devices?  Seems 
> unlikely to me.
> 
> Reed/Seattle

Yea, who'd a thought that "A Nice Morning Drive" would ever come true.......

Lee->Rush fan from time to time......

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

Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 21:05:24 +0000
From: Nick Brearley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: JKerouac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "[uucdigest]" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: [SVBC] Crashing more safely into
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

At 12:02 15/03/2005 -0800, you wrote:
>This thread comes from a bicycling digest.    I checked the date of the 
>original posting, and it wasn't April 1 (<:
>Anyone know more about this, maybe some European list subscribers?
>tia,
>Barry
>
>Re: [SVBC] Crashing more safely into pedestrians]
>
>If seatbelts, airbags, antilock brakes, and other features have made
>motorists worry less about crashing into things, will this new feature
>make motorists worry less about crashing into pedestrians and cyclists?
>
>Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 05:53:30 GMT
>Subject: Re: [SVBC] SUV versus compacts
>
>Beginning in late year 2005, European Union Regulators will require all
>new cars to meet standards protecting pedestrians and bicyclists against
>head and leg injuries. These standards become more stringent in 2010.
>The safety mandates affect all manufacturers, including North American
>and Asian manufacturers who sell new vehicles in Europe.

Bit of background here:

http://uucurl.com/x.jsp?p=821

and some specifics here:


http://uucurl.com/x.jsp?p=823

Speaking as one who hopes never to benefit from this legislation but is 
very glad to see it happening I say " More power to their elbow". Probably 
one of the more worthwhile things the EU has done for us.

I would not agree with the idea that it may make motorists not worry about 
hitting pedestrians and cyclists. That type of argument has been used 
against ABS, seat belts and IMO doesn't stand up to examination.

Maybe things will be seen differently the other side of the pond...

Nick Brearley


 

 


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

Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 16:18:29 -0500
From: CsWs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: UUC List <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: [SVBC] Crashing more safely into
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

I know that when I hit someone with a car, that was specifically
designed not to hurt them as much, I will FEEL better about it. Either
that, or I am going to have to drive a bit faster. <VBG>

I have found though scientific research that my cars throw people over
the hood causing too much damage to the car. Trucks and SUV's hit
people squarely and they either collect on the front or slide nicely
underneath the vehicle.


Karl Rentler
87 E30 
91 535
95 GM K2500 (AKA the Ped. wacker)

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

Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 14:24:05 -0800 (PST)
From: Richard Dorffer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: [SVBC] Crashing more safely into
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

--- Nick Brearley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

(a bunch snipped)

> I would not agree with the idea that it may make motorists not worry about 
> hitting pedestrians and cyclists. That type of argument has been used 
> against ABS, seat belts and IMO doesn't stand up to examination.

That is akin to the anti-gun lobby claiming that allowing the concealed gun 
carry permits in Ohio
starting about a year ago would result in an increase in gun related crimes.

To the contrary, small firearm related crimes have decreased since the permits 
were established...

Later,

Rich

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

Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 13:07:43 -0800
From: Raza Uddin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: e36 brake torque specs
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 12:37:44 -0800 (PST), Jim Bassett
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, March 15, 2005 11:27 am, Jim Bassett said:
> > Rotor set screw:
> > some small value <g>, I usually get it as tight as I can by hand.
> 
> I should clarify: I'm a 133lb-weakling <g>, and although I tighten this
> screw with an allen socket on my 3/8" ratchet, I don't generate all that
> much torque :-)
> 
> Someone should probably supply the correct torque spec, though. :-)
> 
> Cheers,
> Jim Bassett

Jim is dead-on with the torque values except the Bentley suggests 50
ft-lb for the rear caliper carrier and suggests 12 ft-lb for the rotor
mounting screw.  I usually do the rotor mounting bolt hand tight as it
is a pain if it somehow seizes and you then proceed to strip it to
oblivion and then have to eazy-out it.  Ask me how I know.

On my last E36, I had the bottom front caliper carrier mounting bolt
come out on me which let the caliper pivot on the top mounting bolt
and scrape the inside of one of my wheels.  Since then, I've always
made sure I put a bit more torque on any mounting bolt just so it is
nice an tight.

Drive Safely,
Raza

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

Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 14:39:22 -0800 (PST)
From: "Jim Bassett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: e36 brake torque specs
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

On Tue, March 15, 2005 1:07 pm, Raza Uddin said:
> Jim is dead-on with the torque values except the Bentley suggests 50
> ft-lb for the rear caliper carrier

<Shrug> I was close :-)

> On my last E36, I had the bottom front caliper carrier mounting bolt
> come out on me which let the caliper pivot on the top mounting bolt
> and scrape the inside of one of my wheels.

Scrape? SCRAPE?!? Pfft. That's nothing, when you've had REAL caliper/wheel
issues come talk to me:
http://www.jimbassett.com/images/uglywheel.jpg

(1. I'm just poking fun, Raza;
2. I was NOT the one responsible for the caliper removing itself from the
bracket :-) It wasn't even *tightened*, let alone properly torqued.)

Jim Bassett


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

Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 16:44:43 -0800
From: Raza Uddin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: e36 brake torque specs
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 14:39:22 -0800 (PST), Jim Bassett
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, March 15, 2005 1:07 pm,
> Scrape? SCRAPE?!? Pfft. That's nothing, when you've had REAL caliper/wheel
> issues come talk to me:
> http://www.jimbassett.com/images/uglywheel.jpg
> 
> (1. I'm just poking fun, Raza;
> 2. I was NOT the one responsible for the caliper removing itself from the
> bracket :-) It wasn't even *tightened*, let alone properly torqued.)
> 
> Jim Bassett

Ha!
You must have really hated that wheel considering you took solid
chunks out of it.  Was the damage limited to the wheel?

My scrape:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v489/ruddin3/DSCN0025.jpg

Luckily my "damage" was on one of my 328 sport package wheels (not an
expensive M Contour :) ).  When the caliper pivoted, it caught the
wheel weights and did what you see.  And it only cost me $50 to fix.

Drive Safely,
Raza

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

Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 17:01:57 -0800 (PST)
From: "Jim Bassett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: e36 brake torque specs
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

On Tue, March 15, 2005 4:44 pm, Raza Uddin said:
> Ha!
> You must have really hated that wheel considering you took solid
> chunks out of it.

*I* didn't do anything, it was all the *caliper's* fault. Although I was
travelling at ~70mph at the time :-)

> Was the damage limited to the wheel?

Completely flat-spotted the tire and severed the brake line, IIRC.

Jim Bassett


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

Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 14:17:18 -0800 (PST)
From: Richard Dorffer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: e36 brake torque specs
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

And I recommend even less torque and using some anti-seize on that screw.  
Having that screw fall
out is the least of your worries, I haven't heard of one serious issue from the 
loss of that
screw, I can't tell you how many issues I have heard about one seizing though.

Later,

Rich - was surprised to see new set screws supplied with the E30 325is Brembo 
rotors I bought.


--- Reed Nicholson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The torque for the rotor mounting screw is 16Nm (12ft-lb). 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jim Bassett
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2005 12:38 PM
> > To: [email protected]
> > Subject: Re: [UUC] e36 brake torque specs
> > 
> > On Tue, March 15, 2005 11:27 am, Jim Bassett said:
> > > Rotor set screw:
> > > some small value <g>, I usually get it as tight as I can by hand.
> > 
> > I should clarify: I'm a 133lb-weakling <g>, and although I 
> > tighten this screw with an allen socket on my 3/8" ratchet, I 
> > don't generate all that much torque :-)

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

Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 13:44:09 -0800
From: John Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Brakes, E36 and otherwise
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

> Lee, I've driven many of these cars with so called "better brakes" and 
> the simple fact is they don't really work much better, if at all. Pedal 
> feel improvement??? The brakes on my old e36 M3 still have better feel 
> than any CTS-V, GTO, AMG, STI, or EVO I've ever test driven.

Which may be true in that application, but I find the brakes in my E39 
M5 to be one of the real weak points of the car.  The feel is not good 
and I've cooked the things repeatedly and with great vigor at Laguna 
Seca.  I've got the factory blocked-off ducts opened, and that helped a 
little, and they could probably use some air ducted directly to them 
(not entirely practical in this application, I think.)

I know for a fact that the CTS-V's setup is a hell of a lot better.

I've got some Stoptechs sitting on the shelf waiting for me to get off 
my backside and order new wheels.

John.

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

Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 14:01:02 -0800
From: "Marco Romani" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Brakes, E36 and otherwise
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

I found it somewhat ironic that the Caddy's brake ducting wasn't blocked off
from the factory, but the m5's is.

go figger

Marco

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of John Miller
Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2005 1:44 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [UUC] Brakes, E36 and otherwise


> Lee, I've driven many of these cars with so called "better brakes" and
> the simple fact is they don't really work much better, if at all. Pedal
> feel improvement??? The brakes on my old e36 M3 still have better feel
> than any CTS-V, GTO, AMG, STI, or EVO I've ever test driven.

Which may be true in that application, but I find the brakes in my E39
M5 to be one of the real weak points of the car.  The feel is not good
and I've cooked the things repeatedly and with great vigor at Laguna
Seca.  I've got the factory blocked-off ducts opened, and that helped a
little, and they could probably use some air ducted directly to them
(not entirely practical in this application, I think.)

I know for a fact that the CTS-V's setup is a hell of a lot better.

I've got some Stoptechs sitting on the shelf waiting for me to get off
my backside and order new wheels.

John.
Search the ARCHIVES:http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]


__________________________________________________________________________
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, 15 Mar 2005 19:12:14 -0500
From: "Gary Derian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Marco Romani" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Parking Brake Pedals
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Easy, a length of hose slit lengthwise.
Gary [learned front and rear 180s in a Lincoln] Derian

> hmmmm
> 
> 
> Marco wrote:
> 
> "Makes e-brake turns a bit interesting."
> 
> My friend in high school had a Dodge Monaco 440 and
> rigged up the parking brake pedal so it didn't lock
> and would return to off position. Way better than a
> handle and great for quick parallel parking jobs.
> 
> Kevin Kelly

Gary Derian


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

Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 19:15:20 -0500
From: "Gary Derian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Ben Keyes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: GTO
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

What?!?!?!
Gary Derian

> 
> I'm sure they are annoyed & that they don't use them.  most people
> don't need 330hp to get to work either, but they buy it.  it's all
> about marketing & it doesn't make sense.  it's not supposed to.
> 
> it's a mistake trying to apply logic to a situation like this.
> 
> 
> 
> Ben
> frequently illogical and knows it



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

Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 21:35:34 -0500
From: Dave Meyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: CTS-V comments was GTO
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Here's your link:
www.eurosporthighperformance.com/supercharger.html
As Ben said, Neil's done this.
If you go this route, let us know how it turns out.
The M coupe is pretty sweet just the way BMW built it though.

Dave Meyer
99 M coupe
Stafford VA

>I'd trust JimC an order of magnitude more than I would
>ERT or AA.  I believe we have at least one of the
>owners of said blown Coupes here on this list.  at
>least he used to be - the non-playwright Neil Simon.
>perhaps he'd like to chime in on how reliable it's been.
>
> > > $20k S52 M coupe + Conforti supercharger kit + big brakes.
> > > faster than an S54 car by a good bit, plenty of torque.
> >
> > This is interesting, and I'd bet you could get the M coupe for under $20.
> > But how reliable do you REALLY think this is going to be.  I've seen 2
> > supercharged S52 cars.  One ERT & one AA, and both have been
> > complete nightmares.  This would be a good option if you could have
> > confidence in the reliability which is difficult due to the relatively low
> > number of production units.



-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.7.2 - Release Date: 3/11/2005



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

Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 21:40:42 -0500
From: Dave Meyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Pontiac GTO and BMW suspension musings
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Agree Completely.

Dave Meyer
99 M coupe
Stafford VA

Ben Keyes wrote:
><generic comment, not directly at Andre, just this subject>
>buy the car you want, for the reason you want, enjoy it the
>way you want & quit looking over at the guy in the next stall
>to make yourself feel better about yourself.
>Ben



-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.7.2 - Release Date: 3/11/2005



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

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

Reply via email to