Leaderboard

White 330ci. Owns the "fast lane" at 95kph all day!

Another new car added to the garage. 1989 635csi Highline. Here's a few pics for now..

I just did the cap and rotor myself. Idk who is trying to sell it for $350 but I bought it for USD $67 and the rotor was USD $23. This was from bma autoparts. Shipping was a killer though. Just look around. Edit: Genuine Bosch too.

http://www.bmwarchiv.de/vin/jr02361.pdf all checks out clear, market is really slow.

back of the cylinder head #13

'tis true - too much time spent looking at the speedo and not enough at the road. There was a Rentokill sign-written soft-roader on SH1 this morning who narrowly managed to miss the wire barriers on a number of occasions. Heading south through TK, there have been at least 3 cases in as many weeks where people lost concentration (or whatever) and have taken the wire ropes out. Road sense and awareness is far more relevant than obsessively sticking to a speed limit. Unfortunately while you can teach people what number they are allowed, you can't help them learn to actually drive properly.

A new tyre is bigger than a used tyre. A smaller tyre will show a higher speed on the speedo in the car. So if your car is showing (say) 5% over - displaying 105km/h when the vehicle is actually moving at 100km/h - then when the tyre is worn and the tyre diameter potentially reduced by up to 10mm, the speedo will (perhaps) show 106km/h when travelling at an actual 100km/h. (I've not done the maths to work out the exact figures, but you get the idea.) Essentially, the speedo does become more inaccurate as tyres wear, but it does it in a way that protects you against speeding. In Australia, legislation says newly introduced vehicle models are required to have speedos that always read on the safe side of whatever the vehicle speed is: the speedo must not indicate a speed less than the vehicle’s true speed, or a speed greater than the vehicle’s true speed by an amount more than 10 percent plus 4 km/h - at 100km/h the speedo must read between 100 and 114km/h. The other side of this is that at an indicated speed of 100km/h, the vehicle's true speed must be between 87.3 and 100km/h. This is for new vehicles. How enforceable a marginal allowance for speed is when applied to older vehicles is tricky. Then try to apply a 4km/h margin to a performance car built pre-1976 and which only has the speedo marked in mph. Here's one from an old Tatra: Anyone fancy trying to pick 4km/h out of that?

Was following two cops (one in morning, one in evening) doing well over the 104km/h tolerance last Thursday.

Ok, not pointing the finger at you suggesting you were endorsing, merely it was being somewhat shrugged off. Yes, I also agree on people covering up other potential hazards, but again -that is another issue. Things need to be cleared up as they become apparent. Yes in certain circumstances an Air Bag system can be removed from a car, but in this case - the COMPLETE system must be removed. Yes correct BUT - being that it is intended as replicating a part, there is a potential for discrepency & cause the system to shutdown. No different to any other fault in the system I agree, but IMO (as is the law) the system should be bought back to factory spec

Nice car but always makes me laugh when sellers come up with the comments "top spec, all options" For a start - no sunroof, no TV/Nav Would be interesting to see the build sheet against the available options...

A much better representation of the facts, at least, as far as we know them. Unfortunately while people like Knackstedt hold any sort of influence (I'm not saying he does - only people like him) there will never be any real attempts to improve road safety. If the entire population stuck to 100km/h, and the number of road casualties didn't change, they'd cite increased numbers of motorists meaning a percentage reduction in numbers, rather than an actual one. The MoT data is probably the most accurate available. That they are confident enough to say that the vast majority of fatalities are not related to excessive speed, says a lot. However, it is a stat that will be ignored in the drive for revenue and sensational headlines. "Land Transport Safety Authority spokesman Andy Knackstedt said there was "a wealth of evidence" that showed even very small reductions in speed led to reductions in fatalities and serious injuries, and that lowering the enforcement tolerance meant lower mean speeds." This is interesting, not only because of no listed supporting documentation around the "wealth of evidence", but also because the LTSA was disbanded in 2004. Poor reporting, perhaps? Regardless, the quote from Knackstedt has been proven false in so many countries, so many times, as to make it nonsensical. In some circumstances it may be true - outside schools during term time, for example - but reducing the average speed of traffic on the roads by a few percent is unlikely to make any difference. If accident reduction is the aim, why do the camera vans park in locations where accidents rarely, if ever occur? As I said, this appears a much better report. But sadly it isn't one that will kickstart any policy changes. I'm not sure that with the incumbent government, anything will.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/9515660/Speed-limit-tolerance-cut-not-yet-a-lifesaver A bit more balanced.

That's not a Motorsport car, looks to be an SE. Well overpriced considering the condition and k's.

Far out, you did well.

a lot of e34 stuff here mate

I asked a question regarding legality

I can't wait until these arrive... A few more press shots to whet the appetite.. M4 in blue for me I think, might just order one "by mistake"..