Advice requested from those of you who have successfully che

[John Harmon]

nospam actually said:

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

nospam,

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

Yet, nospam, you pollute the thread nonetheless.

 

[John Harmon]

Tekkie? actually said:

> The BMW sounds like a great value... Have you considered having it bronzed?

Tekkie,

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

Yet, you pollute the thread nonetheless.

 

[John Harmon]

amdx actually said:

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.

I think you're one of the few people who are actually *thinking* about what
they are saying on this thread, and for that, I very much appreciate your
sugestions.

It seems, from what Andy Burns intimated, that the smart phones use
gravity-based accelerometers (with the compass) and not inclinometers, so,
while they can be used for camber, the accuracy will be about plus or minus
six minutes.

However, to use them for toe (as I think it was tlvp who suggested that),
would be folly, I think, simply because toe is in a different plane where
gravity isn't different for various angles of toe.

However, the laser beam is in the right plane for toe measurements!
So is the centerline of the car.

So it should, in theory, be easy to do something like this:
a. Attach a laser to the car centerline and mark where it hits a wall.
b. Attach that laser to the wheel and mark where it intersects.
c. That's the triangle!
https://s18.postimg.org/fq07txfih/11_toe_is_a_triangle.gif

NOTE: I haven't calculated yet the *distance* it would take for the
centerline and tire to hit the wall, which could be prohibitive.

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

That level is "accurate to 1/10th of a degree" (six minutes) so that must
be the standard accuracy of the inclinometers in digital levels.

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.

I think you hit upon a good idea which is to use the laser as the straight
line for the vehicle centerline and for the tire angle, because where they
intersect will be the triangle we need to measure.
http://i.cubeupload.com/BzNqBY.gif

The only problem may be the length of the Adjacent (centerline) mark.

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.

The trig is easy. soh cah toa.
What's hard is figuring out what the triangles are for "total toe":
https://s23.postimg.org/ajrtf269n/10_total_toe_angles.gif

Most people here don't even understand the question because they keep
saying it's a math problem. But the math is trivial. My confusion is how on
earth do they specific total toe in degrees when total toe is simply the
difference in toe from the rear to the front of the tire/wheel but toe
angles are the *same* at the rear and front of the wheel!

I'm sure the answer to that question is simple but everyone says it's a
math trig issue but it's really a conceptual misunderstanding on my part.

 

[John Harmon]

Andy Burns actually said:

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.

Thank you Andy for staying on topic and helping to increase the tribal
knowledge here with respect to the accuracy that a smartphone has for
measuring angles.

Apparently a smartphone accelerometer is used for measuring angles, which
fits a camber measurement application, but for the life of me, I don't see
how a smarphone accelerometer can fit a toe-angle application.

Can you?

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.

Thanks for explaining that the accuracy of the MEMS inclinometer in digital
levels is six to twelve minutes.

This Home Depot blurb says a common 10-inch Husky is "Accurate to 1/10 of a
degree", which is in the range you stated.
http://www.homedepot.com/p/Husky-10-in-Multi-Function-Standard-Digital-Level-THD9403/205999357

 

[John Harmon]

tlvp actually said:

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 .

I think you (yet again) completely missed the point.

The math for single-wheel toe is trivial which even you seem to understand.
https://s18.postimg.org/fq07txfih/11_toe_is_a_triangle.gif

However, I said I was confused about total toe.

The toe in the front of a wheel/tire combination is the same in degrees as
the toe at the rear of that same wheel/tire combination (and, in fact, no
matter what size the wheel/tire combaination, the toe is the same degrees
of angle).

Yet, total toe is merely the difference in toe from the rear of the
wheel/tire to the front.

And total toe is specified in degrees.
https://s23.postimg.org/ajrtf269n/10_total_toe_angles.gif

 

[John Harmon]

Scott Dorsey actually said:

> Yes, you need to change your brake fluid

Hi Scott,

In the case of the brake fluid, most of us use the ATE super racing blue
stuff (even though blue is not an official DOT color) and then the "amber"
ATE DOT4 where we alternate from non-DOT blue to DOT-amber.

However, this is normal maintenance for any car, since brake fluid is
hygroscopic,

The bimmer has 6 brake hoses though, two of which fray because they're too
close to the exhaust manifold on the I6 (just behind the ABS control
module, which is also too close to the exhaust manifold, even with the heat
sheild that BMW added), so *they* have to be periodically replaced.

Again, I do appreciate that you are one of the very (very) few people on
this newsgroup who know what you're talking about.

Many of the others (e.g., nospam, Tekkie, Jeorg, etc.) are clueless fools
who wouldn't know a bimmer from a beemer if it hit them.

 

[John Harmon]

Bill Vanek actually said:

Toe *is* an angle, but if you know the outside diameter of
the tire, it can also be spec'd in inches, or any other linear
measure. The conversion involves only the measure of sides of a
triangle, which is really basic math.

I had/have no problem with the trigonometry, since it's simple soh cah toa
stuff, these triangles.

My main problem is where was the triangle.

It seems to me that, if toe is specified in inches, then the triangle
should be specified at some known point off from the center of the wheel to
the centerline of the car.

If they specify toe at any other point than a known point off from the
center of the wheel, then they have to specify how far they are from that
known point for any inches-to-degrees conversion to apply.

Isn't that right?

Inches depends on the outside diameter of the tire:
https://robrobinette.com/ConvertToeDegreesToInches.htm

I completely understand that measuring inches from the tire tread to the
centerline of the car and then using that as the "opposite" in the
trigonometric soh cah toa, will come up with the wrong angle which will be
more and more wrong the further the measurement is taken from the center
point of the wheel.

When they specify toe in inches, why don't they just specify it from the
rim of the wheel (instead of from the tread of the tires?)

Minutes to degrees can be found here:
http://zonalandeducation.com/mmts/trigonometryRealms/degMinSec/degMinSec.htm

I can convert with basic sohcahtoa trig but I need to visualize the
triangles first.

Regarding the needed accuracy, it depends on exactly what you are
trying to achieve. There is a wide range in camber that will not cause
any meaningful tire wear.

I have learned a lot about this accuracy problem since I opened this
thread, which I can summarize as no basic home tool will get the accuracy
specified by BMW (which is 1 minute for camber).

However, you really don't *need* that accuracy (which is what you are
saying).

An inclinometer will get us to about 1/10th of a degree (six minutes) of
accuracy as stated on thisadvertising blurb:
http://www.sears.com/craftsman-10-in-digital-lasertrac-reg-level/p-00948292000P

A typical smartphone apparently uses either a gyro or a magnetic compass
and accelerometer, which can't get to the same accuracy (it seems) as an
inclinometer can (or so I'm told).

However, in the end, a "smidge" of negative camber (about a degree or so)
is probably in the accuracy range we really need, which a smartphone can
do.

Toe is much more critical, including for
overall feel at higher speeds, but you are also dealing with runout,
and there really isn't any good way to adjust for that at home.

Static toe is actually easier to measure and harder to measure than camber,
it seems.

It's easier because it's easy to measure distances and then convert those
distances to degrees using basic sohcahtoa trig.

It's harder because you can't easily measure degrees of toe with a typical
inclinometer level or smartphone gyro/compass/accelerometer because they're
based on gravity which is in a different plane for measuring camber angles
as it is for measuring toe angles.

The overall point is that even if you are off with the camber, the
tires are not going to be worn out all that much earlier, so close can
be good enough, especially if you bother with rotation.

BMW does not recommend ever rotating tires, but they don't care about tire
wear. The camber is only adjustable in the rear and it's pretty high (I
forget but it's at least 2 degrees negative camber for each rear wheel).
That wears out the inner edge like you can't believe.

Me? I'm ok with zero camber but that can't be obtained (the last alignment
proved that). But I think 1.5 or 1 degrees was what the guy was able to get
me.

So, for me, the camber setting would be to simply put it at the lowest it
will go (least negative) for the bimmer but for the toyota I have a wider
range (where only the front camber can be set because the toyota has a
solid rear axle so nothing is settable).

As for wear, it seem everything goes in this direction:
1. caster
2. camber
3. toe

In that caster is done first, then camber, and then toe, and in that wear
is least with caster and then more with camber and then even more with toe
(under typical settings).

It's just x y z planar stuff.

Toe is much
more important, and if you want that exactly right, pay someone to do
it right. You can get it close at home, but it's just luck if it's
exactly right.

I have done my toe when I replaced tierod ends, pitman arms, and idler
arms, and then when I took the cars for alignment, the toe was spot on.

So I think toe is easy, compared to caster and camber.

You also have to keep in mind that a rear drive car's toe out will
increase with speed, and a front drive car will do the opposite.

I'm an old man who has never had a FWD car and I hope that I die before I
ever stoop that low.

So all my questions are for RWD vehicles.

There
is plenty of slop in steering & suspension, and you will get varied
readings, especially if you are not using turntables. Sometimes trying
to save money is not such a good idea.

The simple test is to set the alignment at home, and then take it to the
shop for double checking. Many shops offer free tests if nothing needs to
be changed; but I would hesitate to take them up on that only because they
can always find something so I suspect that's just a gimmick.

Has anyone here ever gotten the "free test" actually for free if there was
nothing to change? Or do they always find "something"?

At the same time, finding someone to do the job right can be a
challenge, too. There's plenty of hacks out there.

Never in my life (and I'm an old man) have I seen a mechanic install a tire
correctly (I use Tire Rack authorized installers), so I suspect it's the
same with alignment.

For example, I had to bring 500 pounds of my own weights to my last
alignment. The alignment guy *knew* how to do it right, he just knew that
most of this customers don't have a clue.

It's the same with the tire mounting shops. They *know* how to do it right,
but they also know most of their customers don't have a clue so they get
lazy.

I doubt a single car tire is installed correctly, by the book, on any car
taken to the typical tire shops (wheel works, goodyear, midas, etc.).

If all you care about is getting things close enough that there won't
be ridiculously excessive tire wear, then have at it. But if you are
trying to get things just right, both for handling and tire wear
purposes, pay someone.

I think the summary is this simple.

A. Check the alignment at home for the things that can be adjusted.
For my Toyota, that's only caster, camber, and toe in the front, and for my
bimmer, that's only camber and toe on the rear and toe on the front.

B. Adjust if necessary (using a smart phone or inclinometer for camber, and
a tape measure for toe). I'm not sure how to do caster in the toyota since
I only just found out that the caster is adjustable on the toyota.

C. Take it to one of those "free if it's ok" shops, and see what they get
for measurements.

If I'm perfect, it's free (I assume); if it needs adjusting, then I learn
what can and can't be done.

 

[John Harmon]

Bill Vanek actually said:

> That is not at all what total toe means.

If I misunderstand what "total toe" means, then that is probably the root
of my confusion that toe at the front of the wheel is the same angle as toe
at the back of the wheel, yet total toe is specified in angles and (I
thought) that total toe is the difference in toe from the back to the
front.

0 degrees of toe for a wheel
is when the tire is exactly parallel to the centerline of the car
(that is a simplification, but it's usable here).

I don't understand why that is a *simplification* because it seems to be
true by definition that if the wheel/tire angle to the centerline of the
car is zero, then there is zero static toe.

Dynamic toe might be difference because a suspension uses complex geometry.

Toe is a measure of
the variance in degrees from straight ahead.

Yup. Toe is the angle difference that the wheel/tire is pointing versus
where the centerline of the car is pointing.

Total toe is merely the
sum of the toe in degrees of both the left and right sides.

Ah. If *that* is "total toe" then that's a completely different story!

If "total toe" is simply the toe at the front driver's wheel plus the toe
at the front passenger-side wheel, then that is trivial to understand.

But that's not what others said "total toe" was.
But, you must be right because if total toe was what others said it was
(which is the difference in toe from the back and front of any one wheel),
then it can't possibly be specified in degrees.

So what you explain is "total toe" makes far more sense than what others
explained as total toe.

So if the
left is +2 degrees, and the right is -2 degrees, the total toe is 0
degrees.

That makes sense if we use a definition of total toe which adds up the toe
of each tire on the axle instead of calculating the difference of toe
between the front and back of any one wheel on the axle.

So probably I was misled by someone's (I forget who) explanation that total
toe was the difference in measured toe from the back of the wheel to
centerline and the front of that same wheel to centerline.

That means minimum tire wear (theoretically), but the
steering wheel will be a bit off-center.

The steering wheel is (mostly) unrelated to alignment but I know what you
mean when you say that. I also know that you were using theoretical numbers
which make sense.

In the real world, the toe is generally similar (if not the same) between
two wheels on the axle (such as 1/32nd of an inch for each wheel, for a
"total toe" using your definition of total toe, of 1/16th of an inch).

The difference between the front and back of the tires is used only
for distance measure, not angles.

That statement makes sense because the angle at the front of the tire with
respect to centerline is the same as the angle at the back of the tire with
respect to centerline - which is why they put individual toe in angles -
because angles are independent of wheel/tire size.

In summary, I was misled by someone's definition of total toe being the
difference in distance between the front and back of a tire to centerline.

If total toe is defined as the combined toe of both wheels on the axle,
then total toe can easily be defined in either inches or in angles.

Now it makes sense.
Thanks!

 

clare@snyder.on.ca posted for all of us...

On Fri, 9 Dec 2016 15:14:35 -0000 (UTC), John Harmon
HarmonJohn@example.com> wrote:

tlvp actually said:

You need a cataly$t, and a good front end man. Bring your vehicle to the
front end man, lubricate him with your cataly$t ($100 should do nicely),
and he'll perform the conversion for you, even adjusting things to the
result you would desire (key word or phrase: "wheel alignment").

Anyone can catalyze a reaction, but the catalyst remains unchanged.

That is, if I do that, I learn absolutely nothing.

I remain as uneducated as before.
You can educate youself on what an alignment consists of, and
understand what is involved, without doing it yourself. I think your
problem is you have a fear of mechanics - an ingrained mistrust -
combined with a very tight grip on your money (although how that goes
along with driving a wiener wagon, I cannot for the life of me figure
out)

+1 and gaining BMW=$$$

--
Tekkie

 

[John Harmon]

John Harmon actually said:

However, if you have ever attempted to check your camber at home using a
smart phone angle measuring tool, your insight, hints, and advice would be
greatly appreciated (and would be generally useful to many people).

Maybe the SCIENCE guys can help in interpreting these specs?
http://www.st.com/en/mems-and-sensors/l3gd20h.html

One thing I've found out that is new is that the angle measurement on many
mobile devices (e.g., iPads and iPhones) is the off-the-shelf ST
Microelectronics L3G4200D (apparently rebranded the STMicroelectronics AGD1
2022 FP6AQ for Apple products).
http://forums.appleinsider.com/discussion/110992/iphone-4-gyroscope-x-rayed-likely-to-be-added-to-future-ipad

Do you know if Android devices also have that same gyro?
If so, that MEMS chip will be the ticket to us figuring out the angle
accuracy.

On the ST web site, they list the "resolution" as "lower than 0.01 dps/yHz
for zero-rate level", which I'm not sure how to translate into degrees of
accuracy.
http://www.st.com/en/mems-and-sensors/gyroscopes.html?querycriteria=productId=SC1288

Another spec they use for the L3GD20H MEMS gyro is:
plus or minus 2000/ plus or minus 245 full scale typ (degrees/s)

Do you SCIENCE guys know how to interpret those specs so that we can get an
idea of the resolution of the chip in terms of degrees of accuracy?

Do the Android guys know if that chip is also in Android devices?

 

clare@snyder.on.ca posted for all of us...

On Thu, 8 Dec 2016 21:13:33 -0000 (UTC), John Harmon
HarmonJohn@example.com> wrote:

amdx actually said:

That's excellent advice. Since the tire bulges, I wonder if it's best
to use the wheel lugs to mount a jig which is what we measure to?
A jig, if you can't use the actual wheel.

I agree that, for our purposes, we should assume I jury rig a jig of some
sort so that there is a flat completely perpendicular plate bolted onto the
axle somehow (probably placed on the outside of the wheels using the lug
bolts or lug nuts).

Does anyone here know how to convert the 1 and 2 minutes to inches?

No, But 30 min is equal to 0.5 degrees.

Right. And the 1 and 2 minutes are 1/60th and 1/30th of a degree
respectively.

But what is 1/60th of a degree in inches?
That depends whether it is at 12.5 inches, 12.5 feet, or 12.5
miles.......
You REALLY need to study your high-school math.

+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.

Drive it to the BMW shop and tell them you want it set to the preferred
settings. Make certain all your bushings and arms and their esoterically
named crap is brand new because as it wears it will change. Don't hit any
curbs, potholes, driveways, obstructions of any sort, or drive it period.
Better get new springs too as they will sag and take everything out of the
trunk. If it's a convertible weld some stiffeners along the top. Have your
partner and you control their weight. Fill up with gas first. Get all
pebbles, stones and other safarcus out of the treads. Make certain the tire
pressure is within a 10/th of a pound. I am sure I am forgetting
something...

--
Tekkie

 

[Bill Vanek]

On Sat, 10 Dec 2016 16:25:35 -0500, TekkieŽ <Tekkie@comcast.net>
wrote:

clare@snyder.on.ca posted for all of us...



On Thu, 8 Dec 2016 21:13:33 -0000 (UTC), John Harmon
HarmonJohn@example.com> wrote:

amdx actually said:

That's excellent advice. Since the tire bulges, I wonder if it's best
to use the wheel lugs to mount a jig which is what we measure to?
A jig, if you can't use the actual wheel.

I agree that, for our purposes, we should assume I jury rig a jig of some
sort so that there is a flat completely perpendicular plate bolted onto the
axle somehow (probably placed on the outside of the wheels using the lug
bolts or lug nuts).

Does anyone here know how to convert the 1 and 2 minutes to inches?

No, But 30 min is equal to 0.5 degrees.

Right. And the 1 and 2 minutes are 1/60th and 1/30th of a degree
respectively.

But what is 1/60th of a degree in inches?
That depends whether it is at 12.5 inches, 12.5 feet, or 12.5
miles.......
You REALLY need to study your high-school math.

+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.

Drive it to the BMW shop and tell them you want it set to the preferred
settings. Make certain all your bushings and arms and their esoterically
named crap is brand new because as it wears it will change. Don't hit any
curbs, potholes, driveways, obstructions of any sort, or drive it period.
Better get new springs too as they will sag and take everything out of the
trunk. If it's a convertible weld some stiffeners along the top. Have your
partner and you control their weight. Fill up with gas first. Get all
pebbles, stones and other safarcus out of the treads. Make certain the tire
pressure is within a 10/th of a pound. I am sure I am forgetting
something...

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

 

Ed Pawlowski posted for all of us...

On 12/8/2016 12:00 PM, John Harmon wrote:

The amount of useless responses to this thread can be minimized simply by
asking those who don't care to or who haven't ever successfully checked
their camber at home to NOT respond (they're not going to be able to tell
us anything we don't already know - all they're going to do is clutter up
this thread to make it harder to be useful to others).


New to USENET?
I've done wheel alignment in my garage but given your arrogant attitude
I prefer not potentially clutter things here.

FYI, you won't be the first to call me an asshole today so don't be so
proud when you do so.

Aw shucks, I wasn't even thinking of doing that... It's Saturday so should I
just do it to keep the quota?

--
Tekkie

 

[nospam]

In article <ooso4ctsk0s8n1f861cesgal13ufn35hf7@4ax.com>, Bill Vanek
<bilvanek2@invalid.com> wrote:

But what is 1/60th of a degree in inches?
That depends whether it is at 12.5 inches, 12.5 feet, or 12.5
miles.......
You REALLY need to study your high-school math.

+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.

Drive it to the BMW shop and tell them you want it set to the preferred
settings. Make certain all your bushings and arms and their esoterically
named crap is brand new because as it wears it will change. Don't hit any
curbs, potholes, driveways, obstructions of any sort, or drive it period.
Better get new springs too as they will sag and take everything out of the
trunk. If it's a convertible weld some stiffeners along the top. Have your
partner and you control their weight. Fill up with gas first. Get all
pebbles, stones and other safarcus out of the treads. Make certain the tire
pressure is within a 10/th of a pound. I am sure I am forgetting
something...

I too am starting to wonder if this guy is nuts, or maybe just a
troll.

could be both.

> There is some very simple math involved here.

and some common sense.

 

clare@snyder.on.ca posted for all of us...

On Fri, 9 Dec 2016 15:14:34 -0000 (UTC), John Harmon
HarmonJohn@example.com> wrote:

tlvp actually said:

Sheesh, you don't translate angular measurements into linear ones.
An angle isn't a length. Cheers, -- tlvp

I agree that I'm confused (which is why I am hesitating to respond because
I don't wish to muddy the technical issue further for everyone).

The problem with doing camber at home is different from the problem of
doing toe at home.

For my bimmer, the camber is specified in degrees, and the measurement
tools we're exploring measure in degrees.

We just have to solve the conceptually simple problem of
a. Accuracy to 1 minute of angular measurement
b. Creating a wheel plate that meets that accuracy
c. Measuring to that accuracy with a mobile device

The problem, for my bimmer, is that the manufacturer specifies the toe in
degrees, yet we measure in inches. The conversion confuses me to no end
(which is obvious to all).

However, that specific translation problem may be solved if I trust this
layman's chart, for a similar vehicle:
http://www.bmwdiy.info/alignment/index.html

Which puts the toe-in in inch measurements of:
Front toe (left): Minimum = 1/32", Maximum = 3/32"
Front toe (right): Minimum = 1/32", Maximum = 3/32"
Front toe (total): Minimum = 1/32", Maximum = 3/16"

As with all specs written by laypeople, I can't tell if that toe is to the
centerline of the bimmer or wheel to wheel but since they specify a
single-wheel toe, can I safely presume that the spec is to the *centerline*
of the vehicle?
No you can not. Total toe iis the difference between the track at the
front of the tire and the track at the rear of the tire. devided by 2.
The specification on the Bimmer and most cars today is given as the
toe PER SIDE, which theoretically is 1/2 of the total toe.. The toe
per wheel is measured to the parallel longitudinal axis of the vehicle
and is given per wheel to enable centering of the steering linkage so
the car goes straight when the wheel is centered.

The reason the measurements are given as an angle is because that is
essentially what you are setting. You are setting the angular
relationship between the wheel and the longitudinal axis of the car. A
linear measurement is not an accurate specification because differen
diameter wheels can be used on vehicles, and the displacement of the
neasurement from the rolling axis of the tire affects the linear
measurement, but not the angular measurement.
If you are not using professional equipment and you are depending on
calculated linear measurements the ONLY way to aproach the accuracy
BMW is specifying is by extending the measurement to at least 3 feet,
prefferably 6 to 10, and calculatinf the offset at that point.

But I'm wasting my breath - You've been told this several times and it
has not gortten through to you. Stop being a cheap-assed wannabee,
find a good mechanic - and TRUST HIM. Pay him what the job is worth.
If you can't afford to proain a bimmer, drive a bloody Chevy!!

Letz see up to +127 ?

--
Tekkie

 

nospam posted for all of us...

In article <o2ercj$8g5$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

Yeah, some single mother needs this to stimulate the economy.

--
Tekkie

 

John Harmon posted for all of us...

Scott Dorsey actually said:

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.

To put the difference more honestly, I've had both vehicles for more than
15 years each so I know their personalities well.

The Toyota almost never breaks down, but when it does, the fix is generally
simple and easy to do where parts are easy to find and relatively
inexpensive. Yet, it doesn't handle as well (although it's a different type
of vehicle altogehter).

But here are the "problems" I've had with the Toyta:
1. The transmission shift lever uses idiotic plastic bushings (replaced 2x)
2. The sway bar used buna rubber bushings (replaced with poly bushings)
3. The electrical antenna keeps breaking (I finally gave up on it)
4. The torsion clutch pedal spring is stupid (replaced with linear spring)
5. The digital clock digits go out (gave up after fixing it twice)
6. The oil filter housing gasket leaks (fixed by replacing it)
8. The door opening mechanism failed (replaced with OEM)
9. The front shocks were toast within five years (replaced w Bilsteins)
10. The rear brakelight stopped working (sanded a few times & is now fixed)
Plus assorted standard maintenance (belts, clutch, fluids, brakes, etc.).

The bimmer constantly breaks down, but its handling is nice. However, it's
important to know that the bimmer I have is the E39 which has about 20
items made like crap, where *everything* else is rock solid.

So the twenty items made like crap on the E39 are, offhand:
1. The cooling system (mostly the idiotic plastic expansion tank)
2. The DISA valve (mostly an idiotic plastic flap pin)
3. The window regulators (two idiotic plastic rollers)
4. The Bosch ABS control module (an idiotic internal wire badly mounted)
5. The seats twist (idiotic sleeves on the many motor control cables)
6. Instrument cluster pixels die (idiotic pink stickytape connectors)
7. The headlight adjustment (idiotic plastic adjustment pins break)
8. AC control (idiotic FSU/FSR blows its mosfets time and time again)
9. CCV (aka PCV) (idiotic design creates mayonaise in cold weather locales)
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.).

My summary, after owning both from new for over fifteen years each is that
the BMW is a pain in the ass to repair whenever something does go wrong,
and things go wrong a lot because BMW doesn't know how to design a complete
car but the handling is phenominal and the engine is bulletproof.

Meanwhile, the Toyota is a dream child to repair when something does go
wrong (which is almost never) simply because Toyota knows something BMW
doesn't know, which is how to design a complete vehicle.

But all this is OT.

The BMW sounds like a great value... Have you considered having it bronzed?

--
Tekkie

 

[Scott Dorsey]

=?iso-8859-15?Q?Tekkie=AE?= <Tekkie@comcast.net> wrote:

The bimmer constantly breaks down, but its handling is nice. However, it's
important to know that the bimmer I have is the E39 which has about 20
items made like crap, where *everything* else is rock solid.

So the twenty items made like crap on the E39 are, offhand:
1. The cooling system (mostly the idiotic plastic expansion tank)
2. The DISA valve (mostly an idiotic plastic flap pin)
3. The window regulators (two idiotic plastic rollers)

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.

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

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.

> 8. AC control (idiotic FSU/FSR blows its mosfets time and time again)

There's an aftermarket retrofit for this also.

> 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.

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.

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 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.

My summary, after owning both from new for over fifteen years each is that
the BMW is a pain in the ass to repair whenever something does go wrong,
and things go wrong a lot because BMW doesn't know how to design a complete
car but the handling is phenominal and the engine is bulletproof.

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.

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.

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

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

 

[John Harmon]

Bill Vanek actually said:

Toe is actually the angle to the thrust angle, but if the thrust angle
is not aligned with the center line, there is something wrong with the
geometry of the car. It's easier for this discussion to just simplify
it.

Oh. OK. You actually understand this stuff.
Thanks for explaining that the thrust angle isn't necessarily the
centerline, but, for our purposes, we'll assume they're one and the same.

 

[John Harmon]

Vic Smith actually said:

I've never changed brake fluid in 50 years of car/truck ownership.
So it's not "normal" to me.

We're delving off topic, but if you live in a wet or dusty clime, your
brake fluid will "suck up" water and dust, which, on a 10-mile long
mountain pass, might make a difference in not so good a way.

Even if it doesn't, the alcohol in the fluid will slowly erode your gaskets
in your master cylinder (and slave cylinder if you have a hydraulic
clutch).

It will likely still work all dusty, wet, and black; but it won't work as
well if you live in the mountains.