rxsumo

I'd be checking the car out for a blown headgasket or another cooling issue. Our 535 manual, runs at the halfway mark regardless of whether its sitting idling in traffic, towing a 2 ton trailer or running at normal road speeds. That includes sitting in traffic taking 2.5 hours to get to Waikanae from Wellington at XMAS running the air-con on full the entire way. The vicous fan might be a red herring as the air con radiator fan would also cool the engine You might also want to check the header tank cap....there was a recall on these, I assume the car you are looking at is an English one, so it may not have had the cap replaced?

I know a little bit about this, as Ive been involved from a Car Club perspective in workshops with the LTSA. The master plan is to cap the level of all emissions at a given point some time in 2011? This is ALL emissions of which vehicle emissions is only a sub-component. The targets include emiisions from Home Heating...industrial....aviation..etc etc. The current import regime only restricts cars for frontal impact, and some structure standards stuff, and nothing is in place regarding emission control. This means that cars dont have to comply with any emission standards whether they are new or used. For SUVs and Trucks we can import and register stuff that doesnt comply with any regulations (with the exception of the visable smoke rule). To my knowledge the rule change will address this. From sometime next year?, all cars (except for vehicles meeting the 20 year rule) coming across the border will have to comply with the a minimum emission standard....this will be the minimum of one of the international standards that are currently in place. This means that if the car arrives in NZ as a "street" racer without its emission controls in place or they are worn out, then before the car is complied, these will need to be back to the specifications set by the standard. The emission controls will need to remain to this standard for the lifetime of the car for the car to remain road worthy. There is no intention to retrofit emission controls into cars that are already on the road. Within a couple of years of the cars regulations being in place, the Truck regulations will also be introduced. This stuff is being introduced for the better health of the population. The emissions from cars alone in CBD Auckland, and on some intersections in Wellington exceed WHO standards currently, and in low lying towns during winter the "smog" from home heating also exceeds the WHO standards. The intention is to clean up the air we are breathing and the vehicle stuff is a smallish component of the big picture.

Our 535 lives outside, so its not unusual for it to be condensated up on the chilly mornings, as well as the standard "frosting" up when the weather is humid...we use the A/C all the time to keep the car's screens clear and the interior dry. A/C used to be a luxury item, now I see it as a safety feature as it insures that your screens are clear when the weather aint so flash.

Its all really "horses for courses", I've got a few cars, and I've rated the 535 according. The only car that I've owned that had a heavier and more differcult clutch, was my S1 RX7 with a heavy duty "puck" clutch. I'm not saying its bad, its just that 535 comes into its own once you are out of town and not having to work the clutch every 10-20 seconds while inching in traffic. My ideal car would probably be a E34/E39 (non V8) automatic 5 series or E32/E38 7 series. And leave the manuals for Touring.

We are using the 535 or the 2800 as daily drivers. The 535 is just fine with its creature comforts, but loses points as the gearbox and clutch are a dog, so anybody that is suggesting running a E34 M5....has to be kidding. Our run is a 20 minute one with usually no stop-go running (albeit fairly slowly). If we have to travel north on or around XMAS eve, I'll forgo the creature comforts if the driving means 2 hours of stop-go motoring to get to Waikanae. My left calf is usually in pain by 5the time I get there The 2800 is fairly basic, but the clutch is light, and the old ZF box is a pleasure to drive with...very positive gear change!. The minus is...no air con (to demist the windows), and no power steering. If these get too much, then we use the ute.....V8 with a slushbox, nice braindead driving for the commute (and better fuel economy than the 535!)

The clown that oversees the crap in the D&L Guide, drives a 1950's Morris Oxford. He has the cheek to put down relatively good late model euro cars, yet he favours a poorly assembled, poor handling (probably rusty as), under powered English POS. That pretty much sums up how I rate his opinion on how good cars are...... Morris Oxford good....BMW bad......I see a Tui Ad here somewhere

Since this is about BMWs and none of the others....... Currently around the House 1990 E34 535iS 1972 E3 3.0S 1970(ish) E3 2800 parts cars 1972 E3 3.0Sa 1971 E3 2500a Have owned 1969 E3 2500 1974 E3 3.0Si (x2) 1972 E3 3.0Si 1974 E12 525a 1981 E12 520/6a Have wrecked (parts cars for my own use!) 1974 E12 525 1975 E21 320 1972 E3 2800 1984 E28 525 1981 E23 735 and since the major vote has their others listed....... in the fleet at the moment...... 1998 Falcon XhII XR8 1994 Euno Roadster RS Limited 1973 Mazda RX3 Coupe Previously owned.... 1990 Falcon Xf Ute 1988 Fairmont (x2) Ford Anglia's (at least 10) 1976 Humber Sceptre Estate 1970 Hillman Hunter GL Humber Sceptre Sedan (x3 parts) 1969 Sunbeam Rapier Fastback (parts) Hillman Hunter (x2 parts) Hillman Imp (at least 10), including... 1968 Sunbeam Stiletto (x2) Hillman Imp Californian Mk2 and Mk3 Singer Chamois Coupe (parts) Commer Cob (van) 1973 Toyota Corolla Coupe Deluxe (KE25) 1969 Toyota Corona MkII 1976 Honda Civic 1991 Lotus 91T Supermarket Display Car I think thats all of em............

Have a look at one of the online manuals....this sounds to me like the one of the clutch packs in the auto is on its way out (or gone). I'd phone your local Auto transmission speciallists, they could probably give you some idea of the problem and the likely cost to fix. I would be guessing that it would probably be cheaper to find a used transmission, and since a few of the people on here have done the auto-manual conversions....you might find somebody has a good transmission they no longer require.....

The only problem is that they get the last laugh....guess whos paying for the towie....guess who is paying for the car to be fixed You and I through our taxes And whats worse is that the more cars that some of these dumb asses break, the less time and money will be spent solving real crimes....like getting all the w#*kers that are breaking into and stealing our cars!

1.It's not the vehicle power source that is the issue but the snitch power source is good for approx 14 days 2.Seeing satellites is not an issue as the mob. phone can be tracked by vodafone although not as accurately 3.Coverage is constantly being up graded While the snitch power supply can last 14 days, does this include when the unit is "hunting" for satelites (and cellular coverage) As the cellular component is essentially a GPRS cellphone...there arent too many phones that will last 14 days without a recharge? On of the current units on the market, battery drain is substantially increased when the unit cannot see either satelites and/or cellular coverage (typical of a car sitting in a garage), is that the case with the Snitch? While Vodafone may be able to trianglate the cars location, is this service done automatically if the phone is activated, with no GPS co-ordinates? If it has to be manually invoked....the cars gone! Vodafone coverage being upgraded......yeah right! I would suggest that you are right....their coverage is constantly being upgraded, but this doesnt mean that their coverage is actually being expanded. While the Auckland regional coverage may be ok, after 5 years of Vodafone supplied work handsets, I have seen virtually no improvement in the Wellington coverage in that time. I would suggest that in any other area other than CBD Auckland and perhaps Christchurch, within 30 minutes you could have the car in a no coverage area for Vodafone. Dont get me wrong, I think the whole idea of a GPS Tracking Alarm System is a great idea, but for me to go out and splash the dosh, I want a system that I can fit and forget, that isnt going to drain my car's battery while its parked in my garage for a month or so at a time, and that when its required, the thing will work as intended.

The additional features look useful, but the website makes some rather "ballsy" claims regarding the unit's anti car theft capability. Words implying that you WILL recover your stolen car, if fitted with the unit, is absolute BS. GPS tracker units require 3 elements to be in place, before they could guarentee this. 1: The Tracker unit has power.....what is the power consumption of the unit.....ie how long does the car's standard battery last once the unit with a vehicle is in storage....some of the other units I have investigated is lees than a week. 2: The Tracker unit can "see" some satelites....steel covered trailers....luton bodied trucks....garages block the units ability to see the satelites. 3: The tracker unit has cell phone coverage......Cellular Coverage, because of NZ's geography can be challenged. I have a few friends in the alarm industry, and at least one of them wouldnt activately sell a GPS tracker as the "be all to end all" alarm system, as they are so easy to circumvent once the thieves know they are dealling with a tracking alarm system. The early HSVs were candidates for some of the early systems, and one of the ways to get around the alarm was to steal the car directly from the covered carpark/garage the vehicle was parked and into a covered trailer. The car was then put into a rented garage ...generally close to where the car was originally stolen from, and left for a week or so to let the battery go flat, once the battery was flat then you are free to rip the tracker out (or it doesnt matter as the tracker couldnt report home because it had no power). Best idea is to keep quiet about exactly what the security arrangements are on your vehicle. As for the other features for the unit.....it looks rather cool.....what the unit really needs, is an additional output, so that over speed warnings......speed camera locations etc, can be displayed directly within the car, rather than sending to a cellphone. over speed warning comes in at 140kmh.....cellphone goes off...you run off the road checking your messages....seems like a dumb idea to me.

I have a mainly Teng toolset, with Sidchrome, original Motogard (Japanese), Koken, Alltrade and Powerbuilt add-ons. I've found that most of the "cheaper" tools like Alltrade are ok for the likes of screwdrivers and sockets, but where they get let down is in things like their socket handles, of which I prefer a decent "name" brand. I would suspect if you really research the "name" brands a lot of the stuff comes out of similar factory's in China. The only stuff I would shy away from is the $30 no-name socket sets and $15 spanners set because some of the stuff is sh*t in the construction and the worst thing that can happen, is when you are really leaning on something....it breaking!

Dont take this the wrong way but...... You really want to research things like chips prior to shoving in the car and hoping they will work. By looking at the chip from the photo, Id be running away from putting anything in my car that labelled "race spec". To build a car to "race spec", generally involves a bucketload of machining, and a bucketload of improved new engine bits going into the car, and then generally you tune it with some form of aftermarket computer. If you are buying a chip described as "race spec" then I would expect that it would be supplied with some of the other engine components required to make the whole package work. A number of chips may not work for the car you have, depending on the which market the car was sold on, and which market the chip is designed to work for. And unless you know the chip is going to work, from either experience of friends, I would be doing the swapover in a controlled situation....on a dyno with A/F monitoring. I wouldnt buy a chip unless you can see what the expected dyno results are going to be like, and have a guarentee that if the chip doesnt perform then you get you money back. If you talk to some of the tuning/dyno companies, and read some of the magazine articles, you will find out that a lot of chips may only pull up red lines, and dump more fuel in, and in the end will cause the motor to die prematurely, and some chip actually either do nothing for the car's performance, or make it worse. If you really still want to put the chip in the car, you want to be looking at getting another ECU, so if this installation goes pear shaped, at least you will be able to drive the car on its original ECU

The problem with this 6 series, is that he ruined the pedigree [6's are cool, remember the Frank Gardiner JPS 6er driven by Jim Richards]we can all argue over the merits of [this engine or that engine etc]but you have to ask yourself if this swap is acceptable in this car,and who's going to buy it [an E30 with a Rotor is OK today, but try another 20years] Who cares....... Are you going to post over every 6 series that has gone to the scrapper in the UK because its gone rusty, especially due to the fact that is was not worth repair was due to the poor body protection from its Karmann assembly process ....or every E9 CSi/CSL thats gone the same way (and the E9 has a shitload more " racing pedigree" than the 6 series) There are an awful load of BMWs with racing pedigree, E3, E9, 2002, E12, E21 to name a few ...a 635 is no different to any other old BMW, unless somebody really wants a particular car, its another old gas guzzler that at the moment isnt worth too much, and if you arent careful with your choice will cost you a bucket load of money to keep on the road in time to come. What this guy has is a mutant, that will probably get sold for next to nothing when he gets bored of having no takers at $12K, or will die in a garage, when the guy realises the the 318 is worth more to a Chrysler enthusiast, than as a working car, and sells the motor and box out of the car.

While its not a car that I would consider buying, at the end of the day the guy owns the car and he's free to do what he wants with it. Before bagging the guy for the conversion, remember its not so long ago that the M30 engines were F#*king expensive to repair/replace. I remember when a friend of ours paid $6500 for a low km 525 engine for his E12, he went down this path as he was quoted around $10K to have his one rebuilt. There is no mention on when the conversion was done intially, obviously you would have to be a tad stupid to do it now, as the engines can be brought so cheaply now, and you wouldnt have to go through all of the crap associated with certifing the car. The cost of the "foreign"engines is why we saw all manner of "strange" converisons here....Chev powered XJ6s, Rover powered E12 5 series, Ford V6 powered Ro80's etc etc, hell a mate of mine was offered a Silver Shadow powered by a Ford Big Block Personally I think his price expectation is a little hopeful, in todays market I would imagine you would be hopeful to get much over $5K for a tidy early 635, especially when you see a tidy 540 6 speed only getting $13K.

Being a product of Ford, I'm assuming that they would be a similar stud pattern to current model other members of the Ford family.So watch out for the ex police AU Falcon with the huge wheel and tyre option Personally I'm a little surprised that the wheels didnt have some form of anti thief setup on them, and coupled with that the alarm the car alarm should have been screaming its lungs out.

Why not?I cant speak for the "7", but I can assure you that an E34, is one of the nicest car's I've ever had hanging it's ass out. Its predictable, and once its out there its extremely easy to control on the throttle, not quite what you would expect from 1600kgs of car....I'm guessing the 50/50 weight distribution helps.

Why not.......Rocky Mountain Radar have been suckering people for years, with a product that has less active components than that!

If it was that simple, how come all of these guys in the US with letters after their names, still try making boxes to jam radars, using precision ground aerials and lots of high powered chips.......It actually wouldnt be that hard to "hide" nowadays. Everybody is driving a bloody Japanese SUV, with monster foglights mounted on their nudge bars. As the RF is there regardless on whether the glass is uncovered, not, whats stopping you leaving the plastic foglight covers on......

I dont see that legally there is much difference.A jammer (in theory) would be a transmitting device that transmits at a specific frequency to "block" or "blind" or "scramble" Police radar. This can be to present a specific speed on the police radar, or prevent a Police radar getting a lock. It my understanding that both K and Ka radar sit within the radio frequencies used by HAM radio enthusiasts, and by having a HAM licence you can transmit on these frequencies legally. A scrambler sounds very much like the terminology used by "Passive" jammer marketers, and the reasons they dont work are listed on my previous novel. If your scrambler is a transmitter then its covered off by the radio transmission regulations Basically if its not a transmitter, I wouldnt be staking my licence on it.

A stealth bomber, for the road- Yeehaa! Just need to paint it matt black, that would really F$%K 'em! A stealth paint matt black paint lead sled Merc........yeehaQuick search on the net found a Ka Jammer that actually works..... www.scorpionjammers.com but at $US1500, you gotta be doing a whole swag of speeding...... Then another couple of lines down found this... http://www.1-radar-laser-jammers-detectors...50ae4b9284a92d7 If it doesnt really work with instant on, and it doesnt work under 700 feet.....it aint gonna save your licence in NZ.....and adding to that it might die and stop working after only a few months of operation.....it might be easier to save it for the race track and slow down on the roads......

Actually from the information given to me the Hawk is actually 60mw in power output, and that the new units are lower in power output, rather than higher The power output of the units needs to be relatively low as there are health and safety issues with the emissions of the units. I have more documention from the Guys at ARC regarding jammers, and their approach was that high output jammers dont necessarily work as the cop radar can effective detect high outlet splatter type jamming, if fact I think the new units will ignore the signals from this form of jamming. There approach to jamming was to replicate the incoming signal and vary the frequency of the "returning" signal to confuse the police radar. While the information is old, the principles havent really changed that much. If there are jammers out there that actually work, I'd like to see the road tests for them. A mate of mine was involved with testing the Hawk units with the Police at Ohakea. Depending on the car, depended on how soon the car was actually detected. One of the cars being used was an old Ferrari 400, on black number plates. This car was virtually invisable to the Hawk radar, down to a couple of hundred metres. Why?....nothing reflective of the front of the car. The radar relies on good reflection for a good lock......nice reflector number plates....big headlight assemblies and chrome grilles all help the cause.

I'm confused....how many "stock" E36 2.5 litre engines roll out of the factory with at least 230bhp. The RX8 N/A Renesis engine is around the 230bhp mark, and the most common motor, the FD or JC Cosmo 13Btt is somewhere between 250 and 280 BHP in stock trim. Obviously without the stock exhaust, the turbo engines would probably gain a few HP.

Heres some bits on jammer from the company that I brought my original jammer from, this might explain some stuff around the "passive" jammers........ We have received many calls from customers wanting to know the difference between an "active" radar jammer and a "passive" radar jammer. Why does an "active" jammer cost so much more than a "passive" jammer and why should someone buy an "active" radar jammer when "passive" jammers seem to offer more protection at half the price? These are very good questions and we will attempt to answer each one for you. Principles of Radar All radar guns use the Doppler principle to determine the speed of a moving automobile. What the Doppler principle states is that it is possible to determine the speed of a moving automobile by transmitting a signal from a radar gun at a known frequency. The signal being reflected off of the automobile and returned to the radar gun will be of a different frequency. The difference between these two frequencies is analyzed by the radar gun to determine the speed of the moving car which is then displayed on the radar gun's front panel. Passive Technology Marketers of "passive" radar jammers claim to alter the known signal from the radar gun by adding either "white noise" or "FM chirp" to the radar signal before the signal is reflected from the car to the radar gun. This altered signal they claim is enough to disrupt the radar gun from calculating the speed of the automobile thereby making the radar gun display a blank reading.>From Car Audio, March 1994 came the following regarding "passive" jammers. "If they worked, these jam-jammers would represent a remarkable feat of microwave engineering." "To even potentially work, the antenna would need to be at least equal in size to the vehicle's entire frontal area." "It would also need to be 1 00% efficient, an impossibility." The verdict of "several prominent microwave engineers-the same people responsible for creating most of the current police radar-passive radar jammers are a scam. "Other noteworthy independent results have been reported over the last year. Articles in Automobile, June 1993, Car & Driver, November 1993 and Truckers News, November 1993 compared different passive jammers and found passive units to be ineffective, while an article in the June 1993 BMW Roundel found these units to be as effective "as a box of Kleenex." A recent report in Radar Reporter, a nonprofit newsletter, states "the passive jammers had no effect whatever on any of the radar's (six different guns). With every model radar we could clock the target car at will." Finally, Car Audio, March 1994 reported the results of different types of passive jammers against six different radar guns. As stated, "in 65 passes, none had the slightest effect on any of the radars. For all the jamming they were doing, I might as well have placed jelly doughnuts on the dash. "What about the newer "passive" radar jammers currently being advertised in well known magazines? We have received many calls from customers who have purchased the newer "passive" radar jammers and tested these units. After testing, customers discovered, like the independent results reported in Autotronics, March 1995, the Phazer and Mirage 2001 are as ineffective as the older models they replaced and that "these newer models served no purpose whatsoever. "It appears this year's models of "passive" jammers are nothing more than lastyear's technology with newer names. The end result is the same-they just do not work! The marketers of these units are hoping you will not have access to a radar gun to test their unit and therefore, you will have no choice but to believe their test results. So why do independent reports and purchasers of "passive" radar jammers who have tested these newer "passive" jammers state these devices do not work while marketers of "passive" jammers state their units work and can prove it? Passive Jammer Testing Before understanding how "passive" jammers are tested, we need to tell you about mechanical interference, which is interference from the reflected signal of any moving object other than the signal reflected from a moving automobile. Radar measures the speed of moving cars. Tuning forks are used to measure how a radar gun responds to any other type of moving object other than a car. Let us explain by example. Imagine you are looking at a spring. Tuning forks vibrate at a specific frequency. Comparing this frequency to the spring, the spring would be in a stationary position. Doppler signals reflected from moving cars behave in a different manner. If a car is moving toward a radar gun the reflected signal would have a higher frequency, like a compressed spring. If a car is moving away from a radar gun, the reflected signal would have a lower frequency, like a spring being stretched. By testing a radar gun with a tuning fork, you can only confirm whether a radar gun is working by checking to see the gun's response to undesired mechanical interference. Mechanical interference is not a Doppler signal! How does a radar gun respond to mechanical interference? A tuning fork is sued to create a specific vibration. This vibration produces a signal of specific frequency. This specific frequency is not a Doppler signal like the signal being reflected from a moving car. Instead, this frequency is a constant frequency as described above. This constant frequency will cause a radar gun to display a reading and this is how an officer checks the operation of their radar gun. A tuning fork of specific frequency known to cause a specific speed reading to be displayed on the radar gun's front panel is used daily to check and calibrate a radar gun. What is important here is the following. To obtain the speed of a car, a radar gun responds to an altered frequency being reflected from a moving car(the Doppler principle). With tuning forks, the radar gun is responding to a constant signal or non-Doppler signal. Therefore, there are two different ways you can cause a radar gun to display a reading on the gun's front panel. One is using the Doppler principle and the other is by using a non-Doppler signal. So what does all of this mean? Marketers of "passive" jammers claim they test their units and "can prove ours works". But how do they do this when no one else can seem to get a "passive" jammer to jam anything? The answer lies in their method of testing. It would seem easy to mount a "passive" jammer in an automobile and start driving toward a radar gun-a real encounter like you want to avoid and why people buy a jammer in the first place. However, if a "passive" jammer is tested in this fashion, they will always fail! Instead, marketers of "passive" jammers test their jammers by using the second method discussed above, the tuning fork method. They place a "passive" jammer on a table or other suitable object, power the unit up and then stand some distance away from the unit and aim a radar gun at it. The radar gun cannot respond to a moving signal (Doppler signal) because there isn't one. The jammer is sitting on a stationary object. So what do they do? They excite the radar gun with a tuning fork thereby creating a signal. Remember this signal from above? Tuning forks create vibrations of specific frequencies, or non-Doppler signals. The radar gun displays a blank reading because there is no moving or Doppler signal. When mechanical interference is used to excite the radar gun, the "passive" jammer blocks this non-Doppler signal. Hardly proof that a "passive" jammer will work against a radar gun even though the results reported in advertising will be a successful test of a "passive" jammer. The bottom line is this: "passive" jammers have no effect against any radar gun. They only affect the specific frequency produced by a tuning fork, or non-Doppler signal. Radar remember works on the Doppler signal. Another method used to test and report "passive" jammers work came from Autotronics, March 1995. "The VP of Sales and Product development for Phantom Technologies bristled at the idea of our testing his Mirage 200 I at atypical radar ambush range of 600-800 feet. No, he insisted, officers usually begin clocking target vehicles beyond 2,700 feet." For a radar ticket to be upheld in court, the officer must first observe the target vehicle speeding and then confirm his visual estimate of its speed with a radar gun. What is important to keep in mind is the idea of anyone being able to visually identify and estimate a speeding vehicle from 1/2 mile away so they can then confirm their visual estimate of speed with a radar gun! As you can see, "passive" jammers are also tested by beginning a test run towards a radar gun from outside the range of a radar gun. The time it takes for the speeding car to travel from the beginning of the test and outside the range of the radar gun to when the vehicle is within the range of the radar and its speed is captured by the gun is the time reported to the unsuspecting consumer as the amount of "blanking time" or protection provided by a "passive" jammer. The interpretation is clear-clever wording and testing to dupe the consumer into believing a "passive" jammer offers protection from a radar encounter when in fact it doesn't. The test was initially conducted outside of the range of the radar gun to begin with!

I think you will find the a unit that will actually jam using power output, will have a few other "issues".These will be things like, the risk of microwaving anybody walking in front of the unit, the amount of sheilding required to keep the car occupants "safe" from the unit. As well as the physical size of the unit. These an old aircraft graveyard or 2 in Arizona that might nett the necessary "goods" to do the task. The RMR passive jammers units dont work anywhere, they have been tested in both the US (by Car and Driver), and in NZ by NZ Car, and their claims are crap. If fact the radar detector within the unit is only average for NZ conditions. The Car and Driver article had a microwave expert gave a speel on the technical reasons why they would never work from what I can recall.