The BMW UUC Digest Volume 2 : Issue 703 : "text" Format Messages in this Issue: Re: car's black box admissible in court Re: car's black box admissible in court Re: car's black box admissible in court car's black box admissable in court <E90> Interesting info USGP F1 aka: Birdgestone Tire Test Re: USGP F1 aka: Bridgestone Tire Test Black Box Re: Black Box Re: car's black box admissible in court Re: car's black box admissible in court Re: <e30> speaking of torque Re: <e30> speaking of torque Re: blackbox data
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 19:34:47 -0400 From: "Gary Derian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Rob Levinson * UUC Motorwerks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[email protected]> Subject: Re: car's black box admissible in court Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Rob, you say many things well. Gary [sucking up to the list owner] Derian >I wish I had said it that well. > > - Rob > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Gary Derian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> You can't be in favor of black boxes "in this case" because the > consequences >> were tragic. You have to always be in favor of them because you believe >> their contents are public domain. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 19:40:04 -0400 From: "Gary Derian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Bruno" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "UUC Digest" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: car's black box admissible in court Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> The main point is the right of police to seize your property to use against you. Sure, most of the time it will be for the public good, but what about those times when you piss off the commissioner and he wants to get even? The black boxes get their speed info from the wheels. If you spin your wheels on ice, then crash, it will record a very high speed. They record at the impact, and a few seconds before. Say you roll over a few times, then whack a tree. By the time data is recorded, the wheels have stopped. Just two examples. Having the data can be helpful, but not reliable by itself. Gary Derian ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruno" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Gary Derian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "UUC Digest" <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, June 20, 2005 5:49 PM Subject: Re: [UUC] car's black box admissible in court > So if you can reconstruct the accident (which you can in most cases), why > being so upset about revealing your speed and if you were braking or > not... > What is so secret about it? What is in the black box that you want to > hide? > The way I look at it, if you want to speed and take risks then you should > be > ready to pay the price. > > What kinf of rights do you have in the black box? > > If they aren't reliable I do agree that they shouldn't be used, but with > today's technology I don't see how they wouldn't... > > Bruno > Webmaster of the BMW E34 Website: www.bmwe34.net > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Gary Derian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Bruno" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[email protected]> > Sent: Monday, June 20, 2005 5:31 PM > Subject: Re: [UUC] car's black box admissible in court > > >> So its OK to violate someone's rights if you have already found them > guilty? >> >> You can't be in favor of black boxes "in this case" because the > consequences >> were tragic. You have to always be in favor of them because you believe >> their contents are public domain. >> >> Besides, black boxes aren't reliable. As I noted, a good reconstruction >> will determine speeds without them. >> >> Gary Derian >> >> >I think you are missing the point... At the end two people died because > of >> > two young punk who were thinking that public roads are like race > tracks... >> > I am in favour of black boxes in this case. If you are willing to break >> > the >> > law and kill innocent people then you should pay for it. >> > >> > Imagine if it was your wife and your kid in the car and two young kids >> > wanted to play and killed them both, what would you think about black >> > boxes? >> > >> > Bruno >> > Webmaster of the BMW E34 Website: www.bmwe34.net >> > >> > ----- Original Message ----- >> > From: "Rob Levinson * UUC Motorwerks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> > To: <[email protected]> >> > Sent: Monday, June 20, 2005 4:46 PM >> > Subject: Re: [UUC] car's black box admissible in court >> > >> > >> >> The solution is quite simple. >> >> >> >> BMW has explosive connections on the positive battery terminal to >> > disconnect >> >> the battery in a crash and eliminate the possibility of a fire caused > by >> > an >> >> electrical short. Hook up a similar explosive device to the black >> >> box. >> > Car >> >> operates normally, and in the case of an accident your private >> >> information >> >> is kept private by destroying it. If it's my car, I own the parts, I > own >> >> any data, and I have the right to build in whatever explosive safety >> > devices >> >> I feel are required to protect me from crooked law-bending judges. >> >> >> >> - Rob >> >> >> > > 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: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 16:57:55 -0700 From: "Paul M. Moriarty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [email protected] Subject: Re: car's black box admissible in court Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Brian Daley writes: [...] > nearly every day. How long do you think it would be before the system > got hacked and was used for carjackings, etc? A day? > or dealing with the jerk who cut you off while talking on the phone? :) :) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 18:12:32 -0700 From: Tom Kosmalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [email protected] Subject: car's black box admissable in court Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Rob said (in part): > Taking this hysterical example of "what if it was your wife and kid" > to the > extreme, why don't we just upgrade the black boxes to control the car? > Make > speed limit signs broadcast their value via radio and have the black > box > limit the maximum speed of the vehicle. Let the police have remote > shutdown > capability of your car so that they may inspect your private property > at any > time. Put a tracking device that reports your whereabouts of your car > at > all times to the Central Police Authority. Man, if (when?) this happens, I'm investing in a race track and/or a driving school. Attendance at track days would skyrocket! Tom K. Going too fast in Hood River, OR (when nobody else is around) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 18:19:00 -0700 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [email protected] Subject: <E90> Interesting info Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> In picking up a part recently at the dealer, I also picked up the BMW magazine. It had an article about the new (N2?) motor and indicated that it will have roller bearings on the valve train. I guess the earlier versions on the 7's didn't have this. I wonder why on this new motor the differences in thermal coefficient of expansion between the Aluminum and Magnesium don't create problems at the interface of the two metals. The Magnesium alloy is of a special type, but stresses and crystal defects can migrate to the interface of the two alloys. Also, our local CCA news magazine indicated that BMW will probably drop the SMG in favor of the Borg Warner double clutch set up as found in the Audi TT. Apparently it's fast and smooth. -Kevin ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 18:36:56 -0700 From: "Phil Bell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Subject: USGP F1 aka: Birdgestone Tire Test Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Did you see this charade on Sunday? Michelin says that if the teams they supply tires (9 of the 14 teams) the cars will suffer catastrophic failures and my seriously injure the drivers. I can't believe the ego of Bernie. Gee, drivers might die, make 'em race anyway?!?! So everyone starts, does the warm-up lap, then all of the Michelin supplied-teams roll into the pits. Cars are pushed into the garages and they're done for the day. FIA just blew off the US market. If I was at Indy on Sunday, I would of demanded a refund!! You wonder why F1 doesn't have a bigger following in the U.S.? They really hurt themselves now!! Phil Bell '02 540i ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 21:08:44 -0500 From: "David R. Low" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'Phil Bell'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[email protected]> Subject: Re: USGP F1 aka: Bridgestone Tire Test Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Unfortunately, I was one of the approximately 100,000 fans that paid good money to attend Sundays 'race'. I left early rather than watch Ferrari 'win' the 'race'. After think clearly about the issue, I personally think that FIA made the right choice, in not deciding to accommodate teams who were fielding inferior equipment. If the issue was with Bridgestone tires, I doubt there would have been as much of an issue if the race was only run with the Michelin shod cars. The teams had an equipment failure, plain and simple. Just because the equipment failure affected a majority of the teams does not mean that rules should be bent or broken, or that the teams who are fielding the correct equipment should be penalized. Roan. > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:bmwuucdigest- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Phil Bell > Sent: Monday, June 20, 2005 8:37 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [UUC] USGP F1 aka: Birdgestone Tire Test > > Did you see this charade on Sunday? Michelin says that if the teams they > supply tires (9 of the 14 teams) the cars will suffer catastrophic > failures > and my seriously injure the drivers. I can't believe the ego of Bernie. > Gee, drivers might die, make 'em race anyway?!?! So everyone starts, does > the warm-up lap, then all of the Michelin supplied-teams roll into the > pits. > Cars are pushed into the garages and they're done for the day. > > FIA just blew off the US market. If I was at Indy on Sunday, I would of > demanded a refund!! You wonder why F1 doesn't have a bigger following in > the U.S.? They really hurt themselves now!! > > Phil Bell > '02 540i > > > 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: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 18:54:04 -0700 (PDT) From: kjk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [email protected] Subject: Black Box Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> This is why those older //M cars look better and better. Why not use the black box to issue tickets to speeders? No reasonable expectation of privacy, correct? I will simply tear the bloody thing out of any new car I buy. The real litigation will start when they mandate them in every car. Kevin Kelly P.S. String those little twits up by their cajones. Given the speeds involved, I agree with Gary, the black box is nice but not required. ____________________________________________________ Yahoo! Sports Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 00:39:31 -0700 From: Norm Reini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Black Box Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> The next event that the black box will be used for is when a car has a mishap at a DE Day. (There have been several case in the NW, where the driver need to hire legal help to get his insurance to cover their vehicle for an accident on a DE Day) The lawyer or adjuster for the insurance company will ask for the information from the black box to determine if and/or how much of the vehicles damage will be covered. -norm kjk wrote: > This is why those older //M cars look better and > better. Why not use the black box to issue tickets to > speeders? No reasonable expectation of privacy, > correct? I will simply tear the bloody thing out of > any new car I buy. The real litigation will start when > they mandate them in every car. > > Kevin Kelly > > P.S. String those little twits up by their cajones. > Given the speeds involved, I agree with Gary, the > black box is nice but not required. > > > > ____________________________________________________ > Yahoo! Sports > Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football > http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com > 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: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 21:56:57 -0400 From: "Stan Jackson Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Subject: Re: car's black box admissible in court Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> There have been a number of spot on comments by Rob, Gary, and others. I'll add a few of my own thoughts. The end never justifies the means, regardless of the *apparent* tragedy or miscarriage of justice. I won't go into details, but we citizens are being run roughshod over enough by various arms of the government for you to all understand... Better a 10 guilty people go free than 1 innocent person be convicted (especially if you are the 1 innocent person). Black box data should never be admissable, whether reliable or not, unless it is agreed to by the driver. BTW, I have *heard* that black boxes are not always reliable. They certainly are not regularly tested for accuracy -- at least radar guns are supposed to be. This was a tragic accident -- but we do not know the details and it *could* have been the Jeep driver's fault. I make mention of that specifically because the prosecutor made particular note of the Jeep driver's decision to pull out into the road. The prosecutor *might* (and I stress *might*) be defending a stupid move by the Jeep driver. There are plenty of stupid drivers out there. High gas prices are appropriate in this day and age (WHAT you think gas should be cheaper than crappy bottled water??), and help to allow us enthusiasts to pay a bit more for what we appreciate, while getting those who don't really care into economy cars or public transportation. Stan ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 22:53:23 -0400 From: "Dennis Liu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Subject: Re: car's black box admissible in court Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> First, ditto Rob's praise of Gary's eloquence. Second, I must say that I am a little amused at all of this vociferous backlash against black boxes from the denizens of the UUC list, without anyone making the point that having a black box on board could very well BENEFIT you, if the data prove that you were NOT speeding or at fault in an accident. I guess I know how UUC members all drive (in other words, exactly like *ME*). :-) Third, and more to the point, I'll wager $10 that once black boxes become more widespread, it will be only a short period of time before some technical wizard with crypto experience, like, oh, Jim Conforti, develops an injectable software patch that will cause all accumulated data to be wiped AUTOMATICALLY and CONTINOUSLY (once the car itself no longer needs the data for feedback on operation). I would add that this software would likely NOT be construed as tampering with evidence, as the "policy" of not retaining info is put into place before any "underlying" criminal act took place. E.g., while it's tampering to shred papers that you know document a criminal act, it's not criminal to have a policy in place to shred all documents after, say, 3 weeks. vty, --Dennis -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rob Levinson * UUC Motorwerks Sent: Monday, June 20, 2005 5:46 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [UUC] car's black box admissible in court I wish I had said it that well. - Rob ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gary Derian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > You can't be in favor of black boxes "in this case" because the consequences > were tragic. You have to always be in favor of them because you > believe their contents are public domain. 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: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 22:37:24 -0700 From: "Scott & Charlotte Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "UUC Digest" <[email protected]> Cc: "John Bolhuis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: <e30> speaking of torque Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> John, a few comments for whatever they're worth: 1. The M50 is really not quite the "drop-in" that you suggest. Bolting the E30 bell housing to the M50 will leave the shift linkage doing strange things. Using the transmission from the M50 donor vehicle will fix the shift linkage oddities, but then you're running a 1:1 5th gear instead of the overdrive gear in the box that came in the E30. So you need to change the diff ratio to compensate. So you need a whole driveline, not just an engine. 2. Why bother with an M50 transplant when an S50 is just as much work, but gives you more power? Of course, you'll want suspension and brake upgrades to go with the engine. What was our budget again? :^) 3. V8 conversions should not be dismissed. The guys at Edge Motorworks in Dublin (CA) have put a V8 from a 540i into their E36. There is no reason to believe that a similar conversion couldn't be done in the E30 chassis. 4. My biggest problem with these types of conversions is that, after dropping countless thousands of dollars into the car, the insurance company still insures it based on the VIN. Scott Miller GGC BMW CCA 1990 325i >Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2005 12:11:06 -0700 >From: John Bolhuis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: [email protected] >Subject: Re: <e30> speaking of torque >Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >On Fri, Jun 17, 2005 at 06:56:54PM +0000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> Advancing the cam timing does increase the bottom, but the engine will >> ping easier. Better solution with those motors was to retard the cam >> 3 to 6 degrees, which then allows more spark advance down low. Barry > > Yeah, it always boils down to something like that, doesn't it. A >couple hundred here for the part, a few to several hundred or more for >having a custom chip made to adjust spark as you mention... And in no >time at all, you're left scratching your head wondering why you didn't >just do the M50 drop-in upgrade. :) > > I really like the way the m20 motor sounds. It sings! It's a shame >that there isn't much to be done in the way of cost-effective tinkering. >How hard is it to convert to a chebby smallblock? > >/ducks the slings and arrows of the purist crowd ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 01:36:15 -0400 From: Ben Keyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [email protected] Subject: Re: <e30> speaking of torque Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Scott wrote: > 1. The M50 is really not quite the "drop-in" that you suggest. > Bolting the E30 bell housing to the M50 will leave the shift linkage > doing strange things. Using the transmission from the M50 donor > vehicle will fix the shift linkage oddities, but then you're running a > 1:1 5th gear instead of the overdrive gear in the box that came in the > E30. So you need to change the diff ratio to compensate. So you need > a whole driveline, not just an engine. not true. many people have bolted the stock M20 trans up to their M50's. there is a mod required to the trans mounts & the shift linkage, but neither are at all challenging. > 2. Why bother with an M50 transplant when an S50 is just as much > work, but gives you more power? Of course, you'll want suspension and > brake upgrades to go with the engine. What was our budget again? you'll want brakes for any M50 conversion you do I'd think. figure an S50 is another $1500 over an M50. or save the money up front & add the S50 cams/HFM/etc to the M50 and make nearly the power the S50 does. > 3. V8 conversions should not be dismissed. The guys at Edge > Motorworks in Dublin (CA) have put a V8 from a 540i into their E36. > There is no reason to believe that a similar conversion couldn't be > done in the E30 chassis. sure, but it's not a bookshelf solution, nor is there a clear path for how to handle the oil pan/subframe interface. > 4. My biggest problem with these types of conversions is that, after > dropping countless thousands of dollars into the car, the insurance > company still insures it based on the VIN. nope. declared value w/a professional appraisal means you can insure for your "investment" in the project. I've done it twice. of course in Kalifornia you have to worry about making it CARB legal. Ben ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 01:15:09 -0500 From: "Matt Evans" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Subject: Re: blackbox data Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Here in ND, we recently had a legislative ruling on black boxes. http://www.state.nd.us/lr/assembly/59-2005/bill-text/FALO0500.pdf It said, more or less "black box data is the sole property of the owner of the vehicle. No insurance company can require its disclosure, and no legal entity can seize it without proper authorization" Although they're not specific about what that "authorization" is, its at least nice that you could pretend this was legislation created in the public interest. Oh - Barry - on the subject of our current presidency destroying this and that, and the "other foreign democratic governments" seeing things the "right" way... Which of those reprehensible laws did the president draft, exactly? And which of those foreign democractic governments do you think understands personal freedoms (especially w.r.t. driving and privacy!) more than the US ? I'm of course being rhetorical. Please do not reply on-list, if you feel the need to reply at all. We can all agree that our current government, in general, is sub-optimal. OTOH, as far as general political discussions go - if you think you know the cause of the problems, or that you've got better ideas than our current elected officials, I look forward to reading about your policy/platform somewhere else, leading up to the election for which you're going to establish candidacy. Otherwise, on the topic of non-driving related politics, please STFU :) Matt E28 M5 (black box not intelligent enough to guarantee smooth idle, much less show my innocence or guilt in court) B3 90 Quattro (black box has just enough intelligence to keep me from buying another 80s VAG product) B5 Passat Wagon (your honor, why don't you ask the _black box_ how I got into the drivers seat of my wife's car? :) ------------------------------ End of [bmwuucdigest] digest(14 messages) **********
