-------------------- 1 --------------------
#1. Re: [E36M3] Something is probably not working right, huh? - from Som Naderi
Top
Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 15:29:21 -0700 From: "Som Naderi" <som@dimensionracing.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] Something is probably not working right, huh? >> From: "Som Naderi" som@dimensionracing.com >> >> A couple months ago, somehow, a few random blades broke off my fan. >> Don't know how. Not really thinking much of it, I unintentionally >> ran it lopsided for about a month > >That was really not a very smart thing to do, it would have been much >smarter to immediately remove it and run without it. First off, the >unbalanced assembly will ruin the water pump quickly and the remaining >blades could fly off breaking other items, hitting the radiator of >coolant hoses, denting the hood, whatever. Nothing really stood out as being damaged, but I'll look again. >> Saturday morning at Thunderhill I notice my car is leaking water/coolant. >> Crap. Yes, yes, I should have done something at this point, but I >> didn't. > You ran at the track with a fan with blades missing? No, I have been running without a fan for almost a month now. I even ran the car without the fan at Willow Springs 3 weeks ago -- no leaking problems noticed. >> Sunday evening - my planned trip back down to San Diego. I fill up >> the reservoir. As I'm leaving the paddock, I'm noticing the leaking >> seems worse. Almost a steady (yet thin) stream. >> >> I figured I'd give it a go. Rationale: I suspected that, possibly, >> when the thermostat opened that the *flowing* water/coolant would >> actually be easier on the water pump seal. > > No, not really. Still not sure about this, though. I mean, the car did manage to go about 400 miles before I really started losing too much water. Maybe a combination of flowing water *and* having *some* of the water leak out reduced the pressure on the seal? >> I have an oil temp gauge. I figured I could keep a precise eye on the >> engine temp with this so if I noticed any temperatures out of the >> ordinary I could catch them quickly and pull over. > Nope, if the coolant isn't flowing (or is missing), areas of the head > and block can get extremely hot way before it might be reflected in > elevated oil temps. True... I guess I was anticipating that I wouldn't lose water that fast and that I would see the oil temp start to rise. I had planned on giving up if I saw temps get higher than 180 degrees Fahrenheit (since I've never had temps that high while at highway speeds). It never got past 175. >> Also, I had a friend to shadow me for about the first 50 miles in >> case something went wrong. > The only thing he could do is give you a lift home as soon as the car > breaks completely. That would have been the point. :) Actually, moreso that I would have given up had I seen any unusually high oil temps. Again, my oil temp gauge never saw temperatures above 175 degrees during the entire trip. >> My conclusion: the oil temperature sensor isn't isolated enough to >> give an accurate oil temperate reading. While the smooth cylindrical >> part of the sensor fit inside the JTD oil distro block, I wasn't able >> to get all the threads to screw in. However, since it never leaked >> oil, I never concerned myself with it. Well, I'm guessing that >> having the threads of the sensor exposed is allowing heat to >> dissipate from the sensor metals and resulting in a low reading. Only thing is. again. 100 degrees off?? >> I'm almost thinking the sensor (or gauge?) is busted, period. > You don't want the oil temp sensor "isolated", you want it where there > is good flow of oil. > Your oil temps seem very low. What do you mean you couldn't get all > the threads to screw in, threads of what (a banjo bolt, a sensor)? I don't mean isolated from the oil flow, I mean isolated from the external elements. I'm wondering if air flowing into the engine bay (past the radiator) was hitting the exposed threads of the oil temp sensor and cooling down the metal -- causing a lower-than-actual reading. Better explanation: the oil temp sensor screws into a thread converter then into the JTD block. The sensor is this shiny brass/gold/whatever little cylinder piece and at the bottom it has several threads. I screwed it into a thread converter and then into the JTD block, but it didn't go all the way into the thread converter -- some of the threads were left exposed. It never leaked, so I never really concerned myself with the fact that it didn't screw in *all the way*. I'm wondering if those exposed threads are acting like a heatsink. With the moving air in the engine bay, I'm wondering if the threads are cooling down the sensor metal. So, yeah, I meant isolated from outside airflow as opposed to isolated from the good oil flow. :) >> - how much disparity can one expect between the oil temperature and >> the water temperature? > A lot. The coolant system can warm up pretty quickly, the oil is much > slower. I guess what I was more curious about was the "steady state" temperatures. Once everything has warmed up, how different would the two temperatures be? The water absorbs heat faster, but it also has a huge radiator to cool it down. I could see the water being overall hotter than the oil, but 100 degrees seems like a lot. >> - with the amount of movement I described on the water temp gauge, >> have I put my engine (head gasket) at any significant risk? Again, >> it never made it close to the red, but it did move significantly from 12 o'clock. > Yes, running the way you did (broken fan ruining the water pump) was > quite frankly, really stupid. Hopefully, the water pump kept fluid > circulating, if not, your head could definitely be warped. I didn't run it like that for long. Maybe a month or so... maybe five hundred miles or so (I have a motorcycle as a daily driver/rider). It didn't dawn on me right away that the broken fan would run so lopsided -- I only made the correlation when I noticed my engine had been running "rough" at idle for a few weeks dating back to roughly the time when the blades broke. --- As for the trip down, each time I pulled over there was a significant amount of water that poured all over the ground under the car. Between my first stop and the second stop, I had driven for about 3 hours. If the flow from the water pump seal had been the same throughout those 3 hours as it was when I'd stopped, there's no way I would have had *any* water in the system. The only time I didn't leak *much* water when I pulled over was when I had my hand over the heater to sense when the heater core had cooled off. I pulled over right away at that point on the freeway and refilled. Also, something else I'm thinking about. I only poured water into my system. The dilution would have slowly lowered my boiling point. Meaning the fluid would expand to gas form (increasing pressure, exacerbating the leak problem) at closer to the 212 degree temperature than the 265 (or so) temperature that 50/50 coolant is supposed to have. So while I was losing water faster than normal, my responses to it were likely happening when the engine was at lower temperature as well. Who knows. Got the water pump ordered. Since I'm running without a fan, I've got room for a DC motor in there, too... so I'm considering looking into designing an electric water pump for the M3. I have the perfect guinea pig car. Heh... - Som
-------------------- 2 --------------------
#2. Re: [E36M3] [OT] - My New M Roadster Pics - from Michael Michalski
Top
Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 17:39:18 -0500 From: "Michael Michalski" <m.michalski@comcast.net> Subject: Re: [E36M3] [OT] - My New M Roadster Pics Jamie, Looks like that 2000 M5 might get neglected now with the new addition to the family. Since I also live in Illinois I would be happy to "M sit" it for you while you and the roadster get better acquainted :-) If that takes a few months no big deal. It's the least I can do. ;-) Michael Michalski 97 ///M3 Windy City Chapter ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jamie Howton" <jhowton@gmail.com> To: "E36M3" <e36m3@bmw-m.net> Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2006 5:25 PM Subject: Re: [E36M3] [OT] - My New M Roadster Pics > Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 17:19:22 -0500 > From: "Jamie Howton" <jhowton@gmail.com> > Subject: Re: [E36M3] [OT] - My New M Roadster Pics > >> Beautiful car - great color. >> >> (Although the tan top & wood interior detracts a bit :-)) >> >> Jim Bassett - just jealous, that's all :-) > > Man, you are about the tenth guy to say they didn't like the wood > trim. I love it, but then again that's why I bought it... BTW, the > car had its 1200 mile service this morning so it is officially out of > the break-in period. Let the fun begin. > > Regards > > -- > Jamie Howton > 2006 M Roadster > 2000 M5 > 1995 M3 > Hampshire, IL > > > ************************************************* > Please help support the E36M3 list by visiting our sponsors: > > Bimmerworld http://www.bimmerworld.com > Turner Motorsport http://www.turnermotorsport.com > Eurosport High Performance http://www.eurosporthighperformance.com > Rogue Engineering http://www.rogueengineering.com > Treehouse Racing http://www.treehouseracing.com > Elephant Motorsports Inc. http://www.elephantmotorsports.com > > DIGEST INFORMATION: > http://www.bmw-m.net/resources/digest_info.htm > ************************************************* > >
-------------------- 3 --------------------
#3. Re: [E36M3] [OT] - My New M Roadster Pics - from Mdriver13@aol.com
Top
Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 20:50:36 EDT From: Mdriver13@aol.com Subject: Re: [E36M3] [OT] - My New M Roadster Pics In a message dated 5/30/2006 6:25:38 PM Eastern Standard Time, jhowton@gmail.com writes: Man, you are about the tenth guy to say they didn't like the wood trim. I love it, but then again that's why I bought it... Jamie, I saw this color at my Dealer about three weeks ago, but the interior was solid black. To me it lacked contrast and interest...I like the wood! Then again, that's why I bought my M3 Lux ;-)) enjoy! Bob Gill 97 ///M3 coupe (sponsored by WCC & JT-Designs) Philly Region SCCA 2005 Philly Region BSP Champion
-------------------- 4 --------------------
#4. Re: [E36M3] [OT] - My New M Roadster Pics - from Jamie Howton
Top
Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 20:19:34 -0500 From: "Jamie Howton" <jhowton@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] [OT] - My New M Roadster Pics > Looks like that 2000 M5 might get neglected now with the new addition to > the family. Since I also live in Illinois I would be happy to "M sit" it > for you while you and the roadster get better acquainted :-) If that takes > a few months no big deal. It's the least I can do. ;-) That's very kind of you Michael, but the M5 won't be lacking attention. My co-workers are demanding that I drive it to work at least a couple of times per week so that I can stay in the rotation for lunch outings. For some reason they like riding in the M5... -- Jamie Howton 2006 M Roadster 2000 M5 1995 M3 Hampshire, IL
-------------------- 5 --------------------
#5. Re: Something is probably not working right, huh? - from david kroth
Top
Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 18:26:33 -0700 (PDT) From: david kroth <david_kroth@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: Something is probably not working right, huh? > No, not really, the oil distribution block works as > a method of getting a > proper oil temp. I'm with Marco on this one. The sensor should go in the oil pan or filter can. The oil distribution block does not allow significant flow of oil over the sensor resulting in sluggish readings (it takes time for heat to propagate to the sensor). As a warning signal, absolute temperature is not as important as variance from "normal". David Kroth david_kroth@yahoo.com __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
-------------------- 6 --------------------
#6. Re: [E36M3] [OT] - My New M Roadster Pics - from david kroth
Top
Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 18:33:55 -0700 (PDT) From: david kroth <david_kroth@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] [OT] - My New M Roadster Pics Jamie, You should check that. I thought new M cars had a dual break-in period, eventually ending at something like 3500 miles. > BTW, the > car had its 1200 mile service this morning so it is > officially out of > the break-in period. Let the fun begin. David Kroth david_kroth@yahoo.com __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
-------------------- 7 --------------------
#7. RE: [E36M3] [OT] - My New M Roadster Pics - from Scott
Top
Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 18:39:51 -0700 From: "Scott" <stiles_s@hotmail.com> Subject: RE: [E36M3] [OT] - My New M Roadster Pics So what's it like to drive compared to your M3? -----Original Message----- From: Jamie Howton [mailto:jhowton@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2006 6:25 PM To: E36M3 Subject: Re: [E36M3] [OT] - My New M Roadster Pics Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 20:19:34 -0500 From: "Jamie Howton" <jhowton@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] [OT] - My New M Roadster Pics > Looks like that 2000 M5 might get neglected now with the new addition > to the family. Since I also live in Illinois I would be happy to "M > sit" it for you while you and the roadster get better acquainted :-) > If that takes a few months no big deal. It's the least I can do. ;-) That's very kind of you Michael, but the M5 won't be lacking attention. My co-workers are demanding that I drive it to work at least a couple of times per week so that I can stay in the rotation for lunch outings. For some reason they like riding in the M5... -- Jamie Howton 2006 M Roadster 2000 M5 1995 M3 Hampshire, IL
-------------------- 8 --------------------
#8. Re: [E36M3] [OT] - My New M Roadster Pics - from Jamie Howton
Top
Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 20:42:32 -0500 From: "Jamie Howton" <jhowton@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] [OT] - My New M Roadster Pics > You should check that. I thought new M cars had > a dual break-in period, eventually ending at something > like 3500 miles. Yes, it does: No sustained maximum speed until 3,100 miles and increase engine speeds gradually during that period. I'm behaving myself mostly... -- Jamie Howton 2006 M Roadster 2000 M5 1995 M3 Hampshire, IL
-------------------- 9 --------------------
#9. Re: [E36M3] Re: Something is probably not working right, huh? - from Mark Dadgar
Top
Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 19:18:39 -0700 From: Mark Dadgar <mark@pdc-racing.net> Subject: Re: [E36M3] Re: Something is probably not working right, huh? On May 30, 2006, at 6:35 PM, david kroth wrote: >> No, not really, the oil distribution block works as >> a method of getting a >> proper oil temp. > > I'm with Marco on this one. The sensor should go in > the oil pan or filter can. The oil distribution > block does not allow significant flow of oil over > the sensor resulting in sluggish readings (it takes > time for heat to propagate to the sensor). > > As a warning signal, absolute temperature is not > as important as variance from "normal". You can argue this one the other way, too. The oil sits in the pan too long, with too much airflow over a large metal surface area, to give a realistic reading of oil temps. Which one is right? Who knows. I think for our purposes both are accurate enough. - Mark ----- mark@pdc-racing.net Check out my JustRacing Home Page at: http://www.justracing.com/homepage/mdadgar
-------------------- 10 --------------------
#10. Re: [E36M3] [OT] - My New M Roadster Pics - from Jamie Howton
Top
Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 22:08:31 -0500 From: "Jamie Howton" <jhowton@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [E36M3] [OT] - My New M Roadster Pics > So what's it like to drive compared to your M3? Here are some random and maybe incoherent thoughts: Well, it seems a lot faster for one, it has noticably more torque lower in the power band and it is far more comfortable than my M3. To qualify, though my M3 has a suspension that is so stiff that it is very uncomfortable on the street and doesn't have much of the interior still in it. I haven't had the opportunity to drive the Roadster at full track speeds yet, but I know from the Performance Center that it exhibits some understeer when pushed although not as much as the M5. That is certainly as a result of the staggered tire sizing though, so I am hoping it will handle pretty neutrally when I get some equal width track rubber on it. The stock suspension on the roadster is very comfortable over bumps, yet seems to provide a very stable ride, the car doesn't roll much in the turns and it feels very balanced in street driving, it's easy to control weight transfer. The clutch is about the same feel-wise M3 to Roadster, both are considerably lighter than the M5. The shifter in the roadster is almost perfect in terms of height, length of throw and lack of rubbery feel. I have installed short shifters in my other BMWs because I have always hated the lack of precision, I think that the Roadster is perfect right out of the box. The roadster feels very tossable, it has a similar feel to the M3 in that respect. The M5 feels like a bloated pig of a car in comparison, oh wait, it is. One thing that suprised me about the Roadster though is the headroom, there is a good 6" of headroom for me in the roadster, in my M3 I have less than an inch and really have to cinch myself down with my harnesses so that my helmet isn't hitting the headliner at the track. I am 6', 215lbs and have a hard time fitting in the E36/7 too, that is completely changed with the E85. Anyway, that's all for now as I am being summoned for dinner... -- Jamie Howton 2006 M Roadster 2000 M5 1995 M3 Hampshire, IL