The BMW UUC Digest Volume 2 : Issue 715 : "text" Format Messages in this Issue: Re: <E46> Extended oil change interval? Re: <E46> Extended oil change interval? Re: <E46> Extended oil change interval? Re: E36, 39, 46 Microfilters Re: Bad Chip? Re: Bad Chip? Re: Bad Chip? Re: Bad Chip? Re: Bad Chip? Re: Bad Chip? Re: Any comments on AT Italia Wheels? Re: Any comments on AT Italia Wheels? Re: Bad chip - the folly Re: Bad chip - the folly
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2005 09:38:59 -0400 From: "Gary Derian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Bob Moore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[email protected]> Subject: Re: <E46> Extended oil change interval? Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Are you looking at engine parts or the baffle inside the fill hole? Pull the valve cover and look at actual engine parts before drawing a conclusion. Gary Derian > Looked at an E46 328i I was considering buying today...'99, 64K > miles...beautiful car...I was astounded after having looked under the > valve cover, through the oil filler hole. I couldn't believe the dark > brown, crusty residue all over everything I could see. This thing looked > like it had 164K neglected miles on it to me. Owner says he had the oil > changed at the dealer "about every 10K...though the recommended interval > is 15K". What's going on here? Is this typical of those cars that are > maintained according to BMWs recommendations? Wow. > > Bob > 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, 27 Jun 2005 10:14:54 -0500 From: Bob Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [email protected] Cc: Gary Derian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: <E46> Extended oil change interval? Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> That's a fair point...I just looked at whatever one can see through the fill hole and the bottom of the cap, of course...but it was really ugly (relative to what I expected). I'm still pessimistic...but maybe I'll be surprised. Bob Gary Derian wrote: > Are you looking at engine parts or the baffle inside the fill hole? > Pull the valve cover and look at actual engine parts before drawing a > conclusion. > > Gary Derian > > ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2005 11:49:58 -0400 From: "Gaudio, Stefano" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Subject: Re: <E46> Extended oil change interval? Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I know I'm going to get in trouble for this, but to be FAIR here is another data point: http://neptune.spacebears.com/cars/stories/mobil1.html Stefano '98 M3 with 95K miles stock engine still going strong ( did I mention ~5K miles oil filter changes and ~10K miles synthetic oil changes?) ;-) _____________________________________________________________ This e-mail and any attachments may be confidential or legally privileged. If you received this message in error or are not the intended recipient, you should destroy the e-mail message and any attachments or copies, and you are prohibited from retaining, distributing, disclosing or using any information contained herein. Please inform us of the erroneous delivery by return e-mail. Thank you for your cooperation. _____________________________________________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2005 09:06:46 -0500 From: Neil Maller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: E36, 39, 46 Microfilters Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 6/26/05 9:53 PM, Harvey Chao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > When I sent them [BMP Design] two successive e-mails about a week apart to > their customer service inquiring about this and asking about the charcoal > filters, I was totally ignored. > Buyer BEWARE!!!!!! > Harvey That's been my universal experience with BMP. I occasionally buy something from them when there's a compelling reason, but they're certainly not on my A List of online vendors. Neil Fort Wayne, IN 96 M3 - Bastard child 03 525iT - Sterling Grey Metallic 77 MGB - Original owner, need to sell 05 Mini - Cooper S with LSD! ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2005 09:07:19 -0500 From: Jamie Howton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Gary Derian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], UUC Digest <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Bad Chip? Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> On 6/27/05, Gary Derian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Engine wear is time dependent, not revolutions dependent. Using > non-scientific analysis to form scientific conclusions is folly. Maybe I don't understand what you are trying to say here Gary, but this doesn't make sense to me. A 20 year old engine that has never been started (0 revolutions) will be more worn than a one year old engine with 100K miles on it (or a two weekend old F1 engine)? Regards -- Jamie Howton 2000 M5 1995 M3 Hampshire, IL ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2005 10:21:20 -0400 From: "Gary Derian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Jamie Howton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "UUC Digest" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Bad Chip? Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Not calendar time, running time. Nearly all cylinder wear occurs during the first minutes after a cold start. Bearings don't wear unless the oil film is broken for some reason, like detonation, dirt or loss of oil. Mileage is a poor indicator of engine wear. Catastrophic blowups are generally caused by fatigue or overstress which is dependent on revolutions and rpm. Gary Derian > On 6/27/05, Gary Derian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Engine wear is time dependent, not revolutions dependent. Using >> non-scientific analysis to form scientific conclusions is folly. > > Maybe I don't understand what you are trying to say here Gary, but > this doesn't make sense to me. A 20 year old engine that has never > been started (0 revolutions) will be more worn than a one year old > engine with 100K miles on it (or a two weekend old F1 engine)? > > Regards > > -- > Jamie Howton > 2000 M5 > 1995 M3 > Hampshire, IL > > 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, 27 Jun 2005 09:29:23 -0500 From: Jamie Howton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Gary Derian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: UUC Digest <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Bad Chip? Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> On 6/27/05, Gary Derian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Not calendar time, running time. Nearly all cylinder wear occurs during the > first minutes after a cold start. Bearings don't wear unless the oil film > is broken for some reason, like detonation, dirt or loss of oil. Mileage is > a poor indicator of engine wear. > > Catastrophic blowups are generally caused by fatigue or overstress which is > dependent on revolutions and rpm. Again, I am not trying to be a smartass, just trying to learn something. What about the other example, an F1 engine with relatively few starts and pretty low running time but will be replaced after every two weekends presumably because it's shot. I always assumed that it was because the bearings, bushings, cylinder walls and piston rings were just worn out from such extreme service but what you are saying sort of indicates that it shouldn't be true. Regards -- Jamie Howton 2000 M5 1995 M3 Hampshire, IL ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2005 11:18:14 -0400 From: "Gary Derian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Jamie Howton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "UUC Digest" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Bad Chip? Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> An F1 engine is very far removed from the operating regime of an M20 <grin>. My take is part fatigue is the main reason for replacement, and then they design the wear items, rings and stuff for the short life in exchange for lower friction and lighter weight. Its not a wear out from friction thing. If you run your engine at very high rpm all the time, it will fail sooner, but not from wear. Forces increase with the square of the rpm. Something will fatigue and break, valve stem or spring retainer, rocker arm, etc. Think about cylinder wear for a moment. Figure 300,000 miles, times 3000 revolutions per mile, times 2 passes per revolution makes 18 billion passes. If the cylinder wears 3 thousandths of an inch in 18 billion passes. In round numbers, that is 10^-4 meters of wear in 2 x 10^10 passes, or 0.5x10^-14 meters of wear per pass. Considering the atomic diameter of iron is about 10^-10 meters, that is one atom every 20,000 passes. (check my math) It is unlikely that the cylinders wear one atom at a time, but rather in tiny multi-atom chunks every few million passes. One example to make a point. Back in the 1970's when I worked for a tire company, the test cars at the track in Texas were driven 1000 miles a day. They were used to about 400K miles then sold as well running vehicles. This was an era where normal street driven examples of the same cars barely got to 100K miles without severe wear. Of course, a cold start with a carburetor was far worse than a cold start with fuel injection. Gary Derian > On 6/27/05, Gary Derian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Not calendar time, running time. Nearly all cylinder wear occurs during >> the >> first minutes after a cold start. Bearings don't wear unless the oil >> film >> is broken for some reason, like detonation, dirt or loss of oil. Mileage >> is >> a poor indicator of engine wear. >> >> Catastrophic blowups are generally caused by fatigue or overstress which >> is >> dependent on revolutions and rpm. > > Again, I am not trying to be a smartass, just trying to learn > something. What about the other example, an F1 engine with relatively > few starts and pretty low running time but will be replaced after > every two weekends presumably because it's shot. I always assumed > that it was because the bearings, bushings, cylinder walls and piston > rings were just worn out from such extreme service but what you are > saying sort of indicates that it shouldn't be true. > > Regards > > -- > Jamie Howton > 2000 M5 > 1995 M3 > Hampshire, IL > > 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, 27 Jun 2005 08:48:12 -0700 From: "Scott & Charlotte Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "UUC Digest" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Bad Chip? Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> My understanding is that U.S. eta cars already came with the knob in the position that would yield the highest performance. I was told that the purpose of the switch was to retard timing and alter fuel delivery for markets where fuel quality is inferior to U.S. pump gas. If this is true, I fail to see how changing the position is going to yield higher performance. I can see someone like Dinan designing their mapping to work with a different setting than stock, but I was not aware that he or anyone else actually did that. Or I could be wrong, it wouldn't be the first time. Scott Miller GGC BMW CCA >Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2005 16:26:47 -0700 (PDT) >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >To: "JKerouac" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [email protected] >Subject: Re: Bad Chip? >Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >So turning the knob one or two clicks will have the same effect if I was >to install a chip? Sorry I am not getting this, I just have never heard >of it before (not that I doubt it). >Ryan- > >>Aftermarket US chips are based on the stock us spec position. >> You could try one click over w/ the Dinan chip but the results will >> be totally unpredicatable, since the switch already changes ignition and >> injector timing. >> Point of the mod is that aftermarket chips are not needed with ETA >> motors, except for the '88 SuperETA which doesn't have the switch. >> Barry >> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> >>>So rotating the knob does what exactly? And does it have to be rotated >>> for >>>the Dinan chip to work properly? >>>thanks, >>>Ryan- >>> ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2005 09:11:48 -0700 (PDT) From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "UUC Digest" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Bad Chip? Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Well I moved the knob one position and there is a noticeable difference. >From my understanding moving the knob would be similar to just advancing the distributor...If I could do it on this motor. I would think advancing the timing and installing a chip would be either dangerous or pointless. I don't know the answer to either one...just making an assumption based on practical reasoning not scientific. Ryan- My understanding is that U.S. eta cars already came with the knob in > the position that would yield the highest performance. I was told > that the purpose of the switch was to retard timing and alter fuel > delivery for markets where fuel quality is inferior to U.S. pump gas. > If this is true, I fail to see how changing the position is going to > yield higher performance. I can see someone like Dinan designing > their mapping to work with a different setting than stock, but I was > not aware that he or anyone else actually did that. Or I could be > wrong, it wouldn't be the first time. > > Scott Miller > GGC BMW CCA > >>Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2005 16:26:47 -0700 (PDT) >>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>To: "JKerouac" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [email protected] >>Subject: Re: Bad Chip? >>Message-ID: > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >>So turning the knob one or two clicks will have the same effect if I > was >>to install a chip? Sorry I am not getting this, I just have never > heard >>of it before (not that I doubt it). >>Ryan- >> >>>Aftermarket US chips are based on the stock us spec position. >>> You could try one click over w/ the Dinan chip but the results > will >>> be totally unpredicatable, since the switch already changes > ignition and >>> injector timing. >>> Point of the mod is that aftermarket chips are not needed with > ETA >>> motors, except for the '88 SuperETA which doesn't have the switch. >>> Barry >>> >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >>> >>>>So rotating the knob does what exactly? And does it have to be > rotated >>>> for >>>>the Dinan chip to work properly? >>>>thanks, >>>>Ryan- >>>> > > > > > 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, 27 Jun 2005 10:05:38 -0400 From: "Gary Derian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Any comments on AT Italia Wheels? Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> You can't make a bent rim run smoothly no matter how much weight you apply. Running relatively high inflation helps protect the rim from pot holes. I have no opinion on the wheels. Gary Derian > Three out of four of my current set of 17" Mille Miglias are bent, with > one > fairly bad off - it took quite a bit to balance this wheel/tire. I > wouldn't normally care so much, but I can now feel the effects rolling > down > the road. > > So Tirerack has a special on the AT Italia (17x7.5) Type 5 Sport Bright > Satin with Polished Stainless Lip (M Contour Style). I'm not overly > concerned with the weight on the wheels, but rather the quality - or > specifically how easy they are to bend. I realize this is also a function > of what I hit when I drive, but living in Baltimore this becomes tricky. > > Anybody heard good things or bad things about AT Italias? > > > > Phil > > > > > This e-mail message is confidential, may be privileged and is intended for > the exclusive use of the addressee. If the reader of this message is not > the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering > this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any > disclosure, distribution or reproduction of this e-mail message is > strictly prohibited. If the addressee cannot be reached or is unknown to > you, please inform the sender by return e-mail immediately and delete this > e-mail message and destroy all copies. > > Ce message, transmis par courriel, est confidentiel, peut etre protege par > le secret professionnel et est a l'usage exclusif du ou des destinataires > ci-dessus. Toute autre personne qui n'est pas le destinataire designe, un > employe ou un representant responsable de la livraison de cette > correspondance au destinataire(s) designe(s) est avisee qu'il lui est > strictement interdit de diffuser, distribuer ou reproduire ce message. > Si le destinataire ne peut etre joint ou vous est inconnu, veuillez en > informer immediatement l'expediteur par courrier electronique et detruire > ce message ainsi que toute copie de celui-ci. > > 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, 27 Jun 2005 11:11:26 -0400 From: marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Any comments on AT Italia Wheels? Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I bought four of those as wheel/tire package from TireRack a year and a half or so ago. They were 17x8.5, ~20m offset, for a 5 series. They are fairly heavy so it's good you're not terribly concerned about that. They weren't my first, or second, choice but I was in need of some new wheels and tires. It wasn't obvious from TireRack's picture but they were a bit too shiny/blingy for my taste. I never bent one, even on a 3,000 mile round-trip from VA to MN where some pretty treacherous roads were traversed. They look fairly easy to scratch as the outer edge is kinda exposed beyond the tire. At some point, one wheel developed a small chasm along the length of the metal surrounding one of the bolt holes. The metal sort of split and I could see light through it. I didn't notice any effect driving but saw it while cleaning them while removed from the car. I was replacing them with 16" OE wheels (thanks to Mr Keyes). I returned that wheel to TireRack and was issued a refund under warranty. They seem to be serviceable wheels unless the problem I encountered is at all common. The three remaining wheels are for sale in case any one is interested :-) hth, marty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >Three out of four of my current set of 17" Mille Miglias are bent, with one >fairly bad off - it took quite a bit to balance this wheel/tire. I >wouldn't normally care so much, but I can now feel the effects rolling down >the road. > >So Tirerack has a special on the AT Italia (17x7.5) Type 5 Sport Bright >Satin with Polished Stainless Lip (M Contour Style). I'm not overly >concerned with the weight on the wheels, but rather the quality - or >specifically how easy they are to bend. I realize this is also a function >of what I hit when I drive, but living in Baltimore this becomes tricky. > >Anybody heard good things or bad things about AT Italias? > > > >Phil > > ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2005 08:32:32 -0700 From: "T WALROD" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "bmw digest" <[email protected]> Cc: "Gary Derian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Bad chip - the folly Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> This statement could use some clarification. I won't be obtuse and pretend that you are saying that the dusty NOS engine sitting on the shelf is rapidly wearing out, and understand that boats, airplanes, and heavy equipment have hour meters. What is not obvious is why revolutions, which translate into distance that friction surfaces are dragged (bearings, rings/cylinder walls) and number of forces applied (piston direction changes), are not the better indicator. Does oiling become so inferior at idle? Rich friction enhancing mixture? Greater engine load climbing a grade at low rpms vs. zooming down the other side? Why is time the superior gauge? Tom (background music: Feeeelings, nothing more than feeeelings....) >Engine wear is time dependent, not revolutions dependent. Using >non-scientific analysis to form scientific conclusions is folly. >Gary Derian ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2005 11:42:54 -0400 From: "Gary Derian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "T WALROD" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "bmw digest" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Bad chip - the folly Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Let me prattle on a bit more. Warm and lubricated surfaces don't touch and don't wear. Of course, all cycles are not perfect, so there is some touching and wear, but for cylinder walls, the main wear action is from corrosion. After the power stroke, the high heat and pressure cause the piston rings to scrape the oil off the walls. They are then exposed to the corrosive combustion gases. On overlap, the lightly loaded piston returns and places a coat of oil on the cylinder wall stopping the corrosion. The exposure time depends only on the operating time, not the number of revolutions. Note that cylinders wear more at the top of the stroke where exposure time is longer. Gary Derian > This statement could use some clarification. I won't be obtuse and > pretend that you are saying that the dusty NOS engine sitting on the shelf > is rapidly wearing out, and understand that boats, airplanes, and heavy > equipment have hour meters. What is not obvious is why revolutions, which > translate into distance that friction surfaces are dragged (bearings, > rings/cylinder walls) and number of forces applied (piston direction > changes), are not the better indicator. Does oiling become so inferior at > idle? Rich friction enhancing mixture? Greater engine load climbing a > grade at low rpms vs. zooming down the other side? Why is time the > superior gauge? > > Tom (background music: Feeeelings, nothing more than feeeelings....) > >>Engine wear is time dependent, not revolutions dependent. Using >>non-scientific analysis to form scientific conclusions is folly. > >>Gary Derian ------------------------------ End of [bmwuucdigest] digest(14 messages) **********
