Advice requested from those of you who have successfully che

[Scott Dorsey]

John Harmon <HarmonJohn@example.com> wrote:

I have multiple vehicles.

My japanese vehicle never breaks.
My bimmer always breaks.

I work on both of them just the same.

The japanese vehicle you can drive and drive without doing any maintenance and
it won't break until all of a sudden everything fails. The BMW requires a lot
of very specific maintenance, and you need to keep on top of that maintenance,
and if you do not do it, it will break. But, you can drive it for a long, long
time before everything fails.

Maintenance is better than repairs any day, though.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

 

[nospam]

In article <o2evkp$hl2$1@news.mixmin.net>, John Harmon
<HarmonJohn@example.com> wrote:

My japanese vehicle never breaks.

buy another

My bimmer always breaks.

sell it or give it away

My japanese vehicle is sort of like Android; it just works.
The bimmer is more like my iPad; it constantly can't do basic stuff.

only because you're too stupid to figure out how, particularly after
people repeatedly explain to you exactly how.

 

[Michael Black]

On Fri, 9 Dec 2016, amdx wrote:

On 12/9/2016 7:47 AM, pfjw@aol.com wrote:
On Thursday, December 8, 2016 at 7:54:19 PM UTC-5, John Harmon wrote:

So now what's 1/60th of a degree, in millimeters?

You are now proven stupid, as well as being a true idiot.

Hey Peter, why all the hate?
How is the rest of your life, do you treat everyone this way?
I think I have posted a pretty good explanation to try and give him the
understanding he is missing.
I did it without one vile word.
In fact, I enjoyed it. How joy did you have in your response?
None, you were mad. Huh! How silly. If you are not happy making
a response, why do it.
Mikek

Come on, the original poster, whatever he's talking about, cross posted
this to
comp.mobile.android, rec.autos.tech, alt.home.repair,
sci.electronics.repair

Only one seems directly applicable, maybe alt.home.repairs is valid
(though I thought that was about repairing homes, not doing repairs at
home), but comp.mobile.android and sci.electronics.repair have nothing to
do with auto repair, despite a fairly regular strain of people
crossposting between the latter and the home repair newsgroup.

Anyone so clueless to post to this bunch of newsgroups is starting out
with a problem.

Michael

 

[amdx]

On 12/9/2016 11:20 AM, John Harmon wrote:

clare@snyder.on.ca actually said:

You REALLY need to study your high-school math.

This off-topic confusion is all my fault.

I should never have brought toe into this discussion because toe is easily
done at home when you have specs that are in linear dimensions such as
inches but not so easily understood when you have toe specs in angles.
http://i.cubeupload.com/RubZhV.gif
http://i.cubeupload.com/cfaDWp.jpg

Clearly I'm confused how to do the conversion.

Ya, I am to. But first let me say this, The first spec you posted,
0* 14' plus or minus 10', seems this isn't as critical as some posters
are making it.
For toe, it is still a trig problem, but the problem is defining,
side b (a reference point).

> http://www.carbidedepot.com/formulas-trigright.asp

I wonder do the shops attach a laser and measure on a wall scale a
defined distance away?

I don't know this, is it a single adjustment that moves both wheels or
do you adjust both wheels separately? (makes a reference even more
important)
Sorry just thinking on the keypad.

You have a trig problem and a measurement problem.
The measurement problem is more difficult.

It is not be hard to convert the 14 minutes to inches using the wheel
diameter as one line.
The angle is how much more is the front of the wheel turned
in more than the rear of the wheel. I'll call the wheel 16"
from front to rear. (just realized this almost the same trig problem for
camber, just rotated 90*)

I'm using the trig calculator above, this time the orientation is correct.
Put the following numbers in, (side c) = 16, (angle A) = .233. The angle
is .233 because 14min/60min = .233.
Your answer is (side a) which is 0.065". So, you want the rear of a 16"
wheel stick out 0.065" more than the front.
Not real easy to measure, But, if you could extend the 16" to 12 ft
(192") with a laser pointer, then (side a) is 0.781".
The laser must be perfectly square with the wheel.
Just some thinking. Hope it makes some sense.
Mikek

 

[amdx]

On 12/9/2016 3:53 PM, jurb6006@gmail.com wrote:

"You have a trig problem and a measurement problem.
The measurement problem is more difficult. "

I was wondering when someone was going to mention trig.

You just haven't read all the posts, I have at least 3 maybe 4 posts
that mention trig and I posted a calculator, with the problem to solve.

What he needs is something to act as a really huge caliper. Looking at the bottom of most cars there is no centerline to be found.

I mentioned finding the reference is the hardest part.

Actually is you can be absolutely sure the car is on a level surface, something like a plum bob could work.

Measuring it accurately is still a problem, from the rim to a string ?
And adjusting to minutes with only like 16" to work with ? No thanks.


I also mentioned if you could mount a laser square to the wheel, then
you could measure at 16ft on a wall and use 0.781" instead of 0.065".
I said 12ft in my post, that was wrong.

But the good news is that you don't need the BMW alignment machine, they are not really brand specific.

That means he does not have to go to the dealer and pay three times what
an independent would charge.

On older cars I did set the toe in a few times. There was enough clearance to measure underneath wheel to wheel.

Whaddya think the odds of that are here ? Did Slim leave town ? I never
set camber or caster in the old backyard, but usually you don't have to,

even after replacing ball joints. They have to pretty far out of spec to
affect it enough, really. Still, usually I would just pay the damn forty

bucks and have it aligned. Of course that forty bucks is now a hundred,
but how much is a set of tires ? A nice set of Dunlops or Michelins

is worth the cost of an alignment, plus the car handles better. Plus
with really good tires it rides better and quieter.

But some people are penny wise and pound foolish.

And sometimes people are penny wise and also pound wise.
It really ads up over 30 years.
Mikek

 

[John Harmon]

amdx actually said:

Ya, I am to. But first let me say this, The first spec you posted,
0* 14' plus or minus 10', seems this isn't as critical as some posters
are making it.

Now that I've done some more research, I have a better handle on 'toe' so
I'm going to agree with you that getting toe precise to 2 minutes isn't all
that important, in all likelihood.

For *setting* toe, especially in the rear, it could easily be that 0 toe
(degrees or inches) would be just fine, or, maybe, to take up some
suspension slop, a "smidgeon" of toe (maybe 1/16th of an inch or less in
linear dimension no matter what the wheel/tire diameter).

This is to take up the slop in the suspension (perhaps slightly more in the
front if it's a typical RWD like all my vehicles are).

For toe, it is still a trig problem, but the problem is defining,
side b (a reference point).

http://www.carbidedepot.com/formulas-trigright.asp

I'm still confused how to convert toe from degrees to inches, but luckily,
there are web sites that will do it for us.
https://robrobinette.com/ConvertToeInchesToDegrees.htm

I wonder do the shops attach a laser and measure on a wall scale a
defined distance away?

Interesting you mention that, because the reason for the *far away* wall is
simply that the angle is small, right?

I don't know this, is it a single adjustment that moves both wheels or
do you adjust both wheels separately? (makes a reference even more
important)
Sorry just thinking on the keypad.

If you are talking about toe, I'm no expert, but the way I understand it is
that you lock the steering wheel in the center position first (which has
nothing, per se, to do with alignment but with esthetics) - and then - you
pick a side, and twist a tie-rod ever so slightly - which - depending on
the direction of twist, moves the front of the wheel in toward the
centerline of the vehicle - or outward.

So it's one wheel at a time, measured to the centerline.

Of course, you can assume all sorts of symmetries and do both wheels at the
same time, but conceptually I think of toe as a wheel-to-centerline thing,
to be done one at a time.

You have a trig problem and a measurement problem.
The measurement problem is more difficult.

That's an interesting observation that the measurement problem is more
difficult, but I think only if we try to measure degrees of toe.

If we measure inches of toe, the measurement problem is conceptually
trivially simple.

It is not be hard to convert the 14 minutes to inches using the wheel
diameter as one line.

I'm trying to find the triangle in the equation of toe in order to figure
out how to convert the distance measurement to an angle.

Here I just drew what is my first pass guess at where that triangle lies:
http://i.cubeupload.com/ZmdfeN.gif

Is *this* the trigonometric angle everyone is talking about?

The angle is how much more is the front of the wheel turned
in more than the rear of the wheel. I'll call the wheel 16"
from front to rear. (just realized this almost the same trig problem for
camber, just rotated 90*)

You make a good point here in that we really have a 3-dimensional X, Y, and
Z axis, each of which is rotated by 90 degrees (caster, camber, and toe).

I'm using the trig calculator above, this time the orientation is correct.
Put the following numbers in, (side c) = 16, (angle A) = .233. The angle
is .233 because 14min/60min = .233.
Your answer is (side a) which is 0.065". So, you want the rear of a 16"
wheel stick out 0.065" more than the front.
Not real easy to measure, But, if you could extend the 16" to 12 ft
(192") with a laser pointer, then (side a) is 0.781".
The laser must be perfectly square with the wheel.
Just some thinking. Hope it makes some sense.
Mikek

Just to ask to get me more firmly grounded, is *this* the triangle everyone
is talking about?
http://i.cubeupload.com/ZmdfeN.gif

 

[Joerg Lorenz]

Am 09.12.16 um 20:46 schrieb nospam:

In article <o2evkp$hl2$1@news.mixmin.net>, John Harmon
HarmonJohn@example.com> wrote:


My japanese vehicle never breaks.

buy another

My bimmer always breaks.

sell it or give it away

My japanese vehicle is sort of like Android; it just works.
The bimmer is more like my iPad; it constantly can't do basic stuff.

only because you're too stupid to figure out how, particularly after
people repeatedly explain to you exactly how.

*FACK*

--
http://www.albasani.net/index.html.de
Ein freier und kostenloser Server fuer Usenet/NetNews (NNTP)

 

[tlvp]

On Fri, 9 Dec 2016 17:58:43 -0000 (UTC), John Harmon wrote:

... certainly I am confused about how to
convert a toe specification that is given in degrees to a toe measurement
which will be made in inches.

Same here, but about temperatures using wall thermometers: people always
spec out temperature in degrees but all I see is how many inches the column
of mercury is, no idea how to convert degrees into inches here either .

Can you help ? Cheers, -- tlvp
--
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP.

 

[tlvp]

On Fri, 9 Dec 2016 15:14:34 -0000 (UTC), John Harmon wrote:

The problem, for my bimmer, is that the manufacturer specifies the toe in
degrees, yet we measure in inches.

So don't measure in inches. If you have tools to measure camber in degrees,
you can surely repurpose them to measure toe-in in degrees also, no? HTH.

Cheers, -- tlvp
--
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP.

 

[Joerg Lorenz]

Am 09.12.16 um 20:11 schrieb John Harmon:

nospam actually said:

My japanese vehicle never breaks.

buy another

My bimmer always breaks.

sell it or give it away

My japanese vehicle is sort of like Android; it just works.
The bimmer is more like my iPad; it constantly can't do basic stuff.

The problem is obviously not the hardware; it is the user.
*SCNR*

--
http://www.albasani.net/index.html.de
Ein freier und kostenloser Server fuer Usenet/NetNews (NNTP)

 

[pfjw@aol.com]

After all this - consider the implication: An individual with the comprehension of the common garden slug has taken tools to the suspension of a heavy machine capable of significant speed and will then put it on the road amongst similar machines. Worse, that same slug will likely be operating the machine, perhaps with others in it.

Anyone here wish to be on the road nearby? Not I, certainly.

Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA

 

[Andy Burns]

tlvp wrote:

John Harmon wrote:

I am confused

Same here, but about temperatures using wall thermometers: people always
spec out temperature in degrees but all I see is how many inches the column
of mercury is, no idea how to convert degrees into inches here either

Smartphones contain 3-axis accelerometer chips and magnetic compass
chips, but AFAIK (unlike digital levels) they don't contain an
inclinometer chip, so the accuracy from a phone is not likely to be
high, the "bubble level" apps you can get for phones are a bit of a
joke, they'll probably be influenced by large chunks of metal nearby.

The spec of the MEMS inclinometers in digital levels seems to be +/-6
minutes when measuring horizontal or vertical and +/-12 minutes for
other angles, so even they would be marginal.

 

[Xeno]

On 10/12/2016 5:17 AM, John Harmon wrote:

nospam actually said:

But angles are the units that the manufacturer provides for toe while I'm
almost certainly going to measure toe with a distance measurement.

not if you want to do it correctly, you won't.

This article states that you can get as accurate at home as you need to:
http://www.superstreetonline.com/how-to/wheels-tires/modp-1010-diy-wheel-alignment/

Here's how they measured toe-in, for example:
http://image.superstreetonline.com/f/30286048+w+h+q80+re0+cr1/modp_1010_06_o%2bdiy_wheel_alignment%2bstring_box.jpg

Notice they measured toe in linear measurements.

You might find these links useful

http://tinyurl.com/jdas8oy
http://tinyurl.com/jud2p3b

Note, if you alter camber, toe will alter and you will need to check and
adjust if required.

HTH

--

Xeno

First they ignore you,
Then they ridicule you,
Then they fight you,
Then you win.

Mahatma Ghandi

 

[amdx]

On 12/9/2016 12:14 PM, John Harmon wrote:

clare@snyder.on.ca actually said:

The accuracy of the level application on my one phone is out bt over
7 degrees. That is a simple "level" app..

This is the first indication of what's possible out of a mobile device in
this thread, so I thank you for figuring out that your level app has an
accuracy of plus or minus 7 degrees (if I understood you correctly).

How did you find that out though?

The "rigid" level
application on my Blackberry PlayBook is very accurate - How you
reference it to the wheel will be the biggest variable that can
through your accuracy off. A trammel type setup made from a straight
bar of metal (or "straight" hardwood) with 2 screws protruding to
reach the edge of the rim, adjusted to be identical in protrusion,
will transfer the wheel angle accurately to the "level". You can
determine if the rim is true to the spindle by checking the level with
the bar upright with the wheel turned 180 degrees to make sure the
reading is the same with the wheel turned.

I agree that the jig attached to the wheel has to be exactly on target
(within the stated accuracies, all of which add up).

Here's an example of a camber jig for home use:
http://i.cubeupload.com/XocXQ9.jpg

Here's an even better camber jig setup for home use:
http://i.cubeupload.com/J0UuYd.png

If either of those devices had a laser pointer in them that point
up, you could do a trig problem using the ceiling for camber, and on the
front wall by rotating the device 90* for toe.

Hey, just noticed your link,
http://i.cubeupload.com/XocXQ9.jpg
has the sears level shown here,
http://www.sears.com/craftsman-10-in-digital-lasertrac-reg-level/p-00948292000P?sid=BVReview

The Sears level does have a laser in it.
That will do what I suggest, rotate it 90* and point it forward to see
a spot on the wall. Find the centerline of your car and then it's a
simple trig problem.
The hard part, finding the centerline of your car.
I'm not sure this helps you though, I saw no evidence that you
understood how the trig solves turning the angle into inches.
Mikek

WITH CARE you can check your camber to a reasonably high level of
accuracy. To get the camber "normalized" you need to roll the car
back and forth a few feet so the car "settles" on it's suspension.

This is good practical advice that you need to both roll the car back and
forth to let it settle on the suspension, and you need to add slip plates
under the wheels so that they slip nicely when adjusted.

A
professional setup uses a "slip plate" that allows the wheels to slide
in and out with little resistance. Normal procedure is to bounce the
car on the slip plates to "normalize" the suspension.

This is also good advice to bounce the car and to use slip plates for
measuring and adjusting toe so that the wheels move freely.
http://www.gnttype.org/techarea/suspension/alignpics/align3.jpg

I've done it long pre-smart-phone using a simple bubble level to
verify the alignment was "close enough" afterr an accident in central
Africa severely damaged the front of my Peugeot.

The really good news is that, like in your case, a simple bubble level
might suffice simply because a decent rear camber spec is zero degrees
anyway, which is the easiest angle to measure.
http://i.cubeupload.com/J0UuYd.png

In summary, what I've learned in the past day are a few things:

1. A practical value for rear camber is 0 degrees to a smidge negative
2. A practical value for toe-in is 0 inches to a smidge positive (inward)

Both those are so close to zero that I can check that they are zero, and
then I can tweak them to a "smidge" inward.

But that is a different problem from checking them, which seems to be
easily doable using a few common tools based on my googling today:
http://www.tomhoppe.com/index.php/2009/02/cheap-digital-camber-gauge/

 

[John Harmon]

Tekkie? actually said:

+5 and high school math... He could go back to school and learn all this for
less bux than he wasted-not to mention our time.

The problem I have is confusion about where the triangles are for toe, and
it has absolutely nothing to do with high school math since the trig
involved is easy (soh, cah, toa) if we only knew where the triangles are.

For example, total toe is specified in *degrees* of all things.
http://i.cubeupload.com/cfaDWp.jpg

Yet, total toe is simply the toe measured at the back of the wheel/tire
combination minus the toe measured at the front of the wheel/tire
combination, both of which are *linear* measurements.

Since toe angles are the same no matter what size the wheel/tire
combination, how can total toe be specified in degrees when it's measured
in inches?

Since the tire has the same angle the entire time, there is absolutely no
difference in angle between a toe measured at the front of a wheel/tire and
a toe measured at the back of that wheel/tire!

So, sure, I'm confused because total toe is specified in degrees.
But the confusion has nothing to do with high school trig.

Summarized, if total toe is the difference between toe at the rear of the
tire and toe at the front of the tire, yet, the angle of the wheel/tire
combination to the centerline of the vehicle is the *same* no matter how
large a wheel/tire combination is, then how the heck can total toe be
specified in degrees?

https://s23.postimg.org/ajrtf269n/10_total_toe_angles.gif

 

[John Harmon]

Bill Vanek actually said:

I too am starting to wonder if this guy is nuts, or maybe just a
troll. There is some very simple math involved here.

Hi Bill,

If you can answer this question then it will show that you actually
understand what you call *simple math*.

Here is the question:
https://s23.postimg.org/ajrtf269n/10_total_toe_angles.gif

Summarized, that says: If total toe is the difference in toe between the
rear and front of the tire, and if the difference in angles between the
rear and the front of the tire are exactly the same (by definition, since
the angle of the wheel/tire combination to the centerline of the car is the
same no matter what size the wheel/tire combination is!), then how the heck
can total toe be specified in degrees?

 

[John Harmon]

Xeno actually said:

You might find these links useful

http://tinyurl.com/jdas8oy

That is a nice total-toe-in-inches to degrees calculator, which takes into
account wheel size, but I'm still a bit confused how total toe can *ever*
be an angle, when the angle at the front of the wheel is exactly the same
as the angle at the rear of the wheel?
https://s23.postimg.org/ajrtf269n/10_total_toe_angles.gif

It's not the math (the math is easy); it's the concept of total toe having
anything whatsoever to do with degrees when it's merely the difference in
toe between the front and rear of the tire when the angle at the front and
the rear is (by virtue of straight lines) exactly the same!

> http://tinyurl.com/jud2p3b

In this case of converting toe angle to inches, it's much easier to
visualize why single-wheel toe is specified in degrees.

Here's a diagram I made which shows that concept, which I agree is very
simple trig (soh cah toa):
https://s18.postimg.org/fq07txfih/11_toe_is_a_triangle.gif

Note, if you alter camber, toe will alter and you will need to check and
adjust if required.

Thanks. It seems that the order is "caster, camber, and then toe", in so
much as the two vehicles I have (toyota, bmw) both specify that you adjust
in that order.

Caster affects camber which affects toe so that's why you do it in that
direction.

Intererstingly, from the standpoing of tire wear in normal settings, the
same curve applies which is that caster affects tire wear less than does
camber which affects tire wear less than does toe.

So the order to think of the 3D axis are caster, camber, and toe (in that
order) for the x, y, and z axis.

 

[John Harmon]

tlvp actually said:

So don't measure in inches. If you have tools to measure camber in degrees,
you can surely repurpose them to measure toe-in in degrees also, no?

Let's think about what you just suggested.

While what you said sounds easy, which is that if you can measure camber in
degrees, why can't you measure toe in degrees, your truism ignores the
simple unalterable but very basic fact that the tool uses *gravity* to
measure angles.

That is, gravity-based tools work fine for measuring camber.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3027/3025271110_ffee13e89e.jpg

But how are you going to shift gravity by 90 degrees in order to measure
toe the same way?

 

[John Harmon]

Scott Dorsey actually said:

Many of these are known problems. Things like the cooling system you need
to plan to replace, and not just the expansion tank but also the thermostat
body. You may want to consider one of the aftermarket water pumps that do
not fail also, when it comes time to do your next water pump replacement.

Hi Scott,

I'm extremely familiar with the BMW, but only you and I seem to know what
we're talking about here.

Unlike Tekkie, nospam, & Jeorg Lorens (who can only troll), I'm intimately
familiar that the cooling system overhaul is a standard maintenance item on
the E39, E38, and E46 (all of which use essentially the same Meyle and
Nissan components) and I am also intimately familiar with the metal-vaned
(petersburgh) water pumps.

The gasket-less MAP thermostat isn't all that bad, but since the water pump
has to be removed anyway, we replace them as a matter of course during the
overhauls (I've done about four overhauls of my entire cooling system
myself).

We all have the special counterholding tools for the fan clutch removal and
we often replace the mechanical or hydraulic tensioners (it's arbitrary
which any one bimmer has) and serpentine belt at the same time since all
that stuff has to come off anyway.

We have it down to a science. In fact, most of us have replaced the
expansion tank cap (I think the ORM is 1.2 bar but I'd have to look that
up) with a lower pressure cap, which doesn't prevent anything from
happening *other* than when it blows, it blows out the cap at a lower
pressure so the expansion tank seams don't split.

We also all know to keep the coolant level LOW (at or below the max at all
times) since too many people overfill the expansion tank. Admittedly, when
it's full, it *looks* empty but that is the way it was designed.

If you haven't replaced your air plenum, you're probably about time for
doing that to do. Do it before it fails.

I appreciate the advice, but offhand I'm not sure what you're calling the
"air plenum", but if you're talking about that idiotically designed DISA
valve which moderates the intake manifold harmonics, I'm completely
familiar with the DISA valve engineering flaws and have long ago replaced
the innards with re-engineered ones from Gary at German Engineering
(replace the plastic pin with titanium).

These are _maintenance_ items that you know are going to fail, not
_repair_ items that you fix when they break. You know it's going to happen,
deal with it before it fails.

Again, you and I are probably the only people on this thread who understand
what we're talking about so I'm extremely familiar which what breaks on the
typical E39, E38, and E46 (which are all essentially the same depending on
the years designed).

8. AC control (idiotic FSU/FSR blows its mosfets time and time again)
There's an aftermarket retrofit for this also.

There are *tons* of aftermarket FSUs, but I'm not aware of any design
change to any other component than the FSU itself.

9. CCV (aka PCV) (idiotic design creates mayonaise in cold weather locales)

There'a sheet on that one. you're supposed to clean it when you change your
oil. And yes, you're supposed to change your oil often. Follow the extreme
service schedule in the book or get the "old school maintenance" schedule
from the BMWCCA.

This one I'm also intimately familiar with, simply because, if you know the
bimmer, you know one of the most difficult standard jobs is to overhaul the
CCV because it's in the middle of the engine so to speak.

What we have all done is we have modified our oil dipstick tubes, because
the CCV dumps cold oil into the dipstick tube, which hardens with contact
with water vapor into the extremely badly designed teeny tiny
concentric-circle space in the two-tubed dipstick.

Also we've all changed the CCV components into the modified cold-weather
ones (insulated) but they're a bear to put in because they're fatter and
there's precious little room in the first place.

Suffice to say that you and I are the only two people here who actually
know what we're talking about (Tekkie, nospam, Jeorg, and a bunch of the
other fools don't have a clue what we're talking about when they bash BMW).

It's nice to know that there are some intelligent people here.
Thanks for being intelligent!

10. Doors leak water (idiotic lack of glue in the vapor barrier adhesive)
11. Trunk wiring (utterly idiotic design has no concept of opening flex!)
12. Temperature (idiotic placement of the ambient temperature sensor)
13. Windshiled washer system (the entire design is idiotic)
14. Jack pads (idiotic lack of a center pin was replaced under TSB)
15. AC odors (idiotic lack of a way to vent collected water)
16. The cupholders (idiotic design can't be fixed - just throw it away)
17. Wood trim (idiodic material was never tested for lifespan)
18. Windshield molding (idiotic use of recycled rubber was a disaster)
19. Power steering leaks (idiotic design of the I6 hoses & V8 brackets)
20. The front shocks were toast within its first year (warranty fix)
Plus assorted standard maintenance (belts, clutch, fluids, brakes, etc.).

Again, a lot of these are maintenance items, others (like the wood trim)
I haven't heard of.

I left off a few things because that was an ad-hoc list, but just like the
fact that *all* the cluster and MID pixels go bad, all the wood trim
cracks.

It's not actually the wood that cracks; it's the super thick coating of
varnish on the outside that cracks. It's a warranty repair and I had all my
wood trim replaced under warranty, but the replacement wood trim cracked
just the same.

It's a manufacturing and design flaw that they all have.

You should be on your third set of windshield molding by now if you are
replacing it according to normal schedule and keeping the car outside.

The good news about the windshield molding is that it doesn't affect
anything other than looks and noise. It's not a weather item so it doesn't
keep out water.

The bad news is that the Germans use too much recycled rubber, which is the
problem with that windshield molding.

Again, I'm impressed that you're the only one on this newgroup who knows
what he is talking about with respect to bimmers. You'll find I know my
model extremely well (probably better than almost any non mechanic you have
ever met).

That's because I "think" about what I'm doing.
And I collaborate with others to learn from them.

Which is the reason, after all, for this thread.

The power steering leaks again are what you get if you don't purge the
system annually like the manual says and don't change the hoses when they
start to fail. By now you should have replaced every rubber part under
the hood at least once. If you haven't replaced the pads in the shock
towers and the differential mount, do them now.

I have done an overhaul of the rubber from buna to viton long ago, and the
worst were the SAP/SAS valves in the back of the intake manifold. They're
impossible to get to under the best of circumstances.

The power steering isn't so bad if you clean the power steering reservoir
filter once every few oil changes with gasoline (most people don't know
that it's even there) and if you replace the oetiker (sp?) clamps with
standard hose clamps and replace the hoses.

The V8 has special problems with the power steering pump bracket breaking,
so a standard maintenance item is to check the bolts every oil change.

The I6 isn't bleedable so you have to suck the fluid out the reservoir with
a turkey baster, but it's not all that bad to do. It's just ATF Dexron IV
(now Dexton VI since Dexron IV lost its copyright long ago).

Most of these things that went wrong are things that a mechanic familiar
with the vehicle should have expected to go wrong and should have taken
care of before they went wrong.

I learned of all the issues by running into them and then learning how to
re-engineer them. My point is that most of these known problems span
models, so, BMW *knows* that they build crappy components but they don't
fix them. So that's just bad engineering on BMW's part.

All BMW cares about is the handling and performance, and, those components
are engineered fantastically well.

Yes, there's a lot of stuff to do every 3,000 miles including checking
the rubber parts. Yes, there's a transmission fluid change and differential
fluid change every 30,000 miles. Yes, you need to change your brake fluid
every two years and your coolant every fall. There is a _lot_ of maintenance
on these cars.

I disagree with *some* of what you just wrote.

Most bimmer owners have learned NOT to change the "lifetime" transmission
fluid for two key reasons. The first is that many people have had failures
just *after* changing the fluid where the hypothesis is that "stuff" got
mixed up and moved about (like crud). The second is that it's actually not
trivial to change the transmission fluid because of the specific
temperature requirements (which most people skip).

Just like most people skip the 500 pounds of weight to set the ride height
to "normal" when aligning the car, most people skip steps when changing the
transmission fluid - and problems arise as a result.

But I do agree that BMW used crappy BUNA rubber for things that get hot,
such as the valve cover gasket (which fails on almost every engine!). BMW
has since replaced BUNA with Viton but they didnt' tell their customers
that so for years customers were replacing the buna VCG with another crappy
buna VCG.

Do maintenance and you will not have to do so many repairs.
--scott

BTW, are you the "Magnum" "Scott" of BMW fame?
If so, we actually know each other and we have common friends who have both
beemers and bimmers.

Either way, it's a *pleasure* to speak with someone who is not only
intelligent, but who knows what he's talking about (which most of the fools
in this thread don't).

 

[John Harmon]

Joerg Lorenz actually said:

> The problem is obviously not the hardware; it is the user.

Jeorg Lorenz,

Why do you pollute this thread with your worthless OT drivel?
You don't know the answer to *any* question asked.
Not one.

Yet, Jeorg Lorenz you pollute the thread nonetheless.