quattro digest, Vol 1 #3469 - 11 msgs

[Graham COLLIN]

----- Original Message -----
From: <quattro-request at audifans.com>
To: <quattro at audifans.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2002 4:10 AM
Subject: quattro digest, Vol 1 #3469 - 11 msgs


> Send quattro mailing list submissions to
> quattro at audifans.com
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://www.audifans.com/mailman/listinfo/quattro
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> quattro-request at audifans.com
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> quattro-admin at audifans.com
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of quattro digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. 1984 coupe gt (Jim Bonnet)
>    2. Resolved:93 90 - Not Starting (Schoenly,Michael)
>    3. 91 Coupe Quattro Exhaust Manifold Cracked (PrschRS911 at aol.com)
>    4. Re:'89 200 running cool (P. Stegawski)
>    5. 84 CGT clutch (Jim Bonnet)
>    6. Re:regulator-based MBC for 5kcstq, 15psi [long] (JShadzi at aol.com)
>    7. Re:84 CGT clutch (Huw Powell)
>    8. Re:regulator-based MBC vs. WG spring/preload [long]
(auditude at get.net)
>    9. Re:'89 200 running cool (Huw Powell)
>   10. Re:Dead Fuel Pump? (Huw Powell)
>   11. Re:H4... (Huw Powell)
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 14:07:31 -0700
> From: Jim Bonnet <jimbo at sysdump.com>
> To: quattro at audifans.com
> Subject: 1984 coupe gt
>
> folks--
>
> does anyone have any pricing information on 84 coupes for recent sales?
> We have located one close to home that the guy is asking $700 obo for.
> Its straight, Ca. car, no rust I can see. Needs CV joints for sure. Its
> missing a badge on the rear hatch. Rubber is just OK, wheels are some
> aftermarket junk.front seats are covered with sheepskins, assume they
> are trashed, rear seat is OK. dash has dashmat. Not ratty looking, just
> needs a cleanup. no radio.. gauges reported to work. steering rack
> reported not to leak?!
>
> how big of a PITA to replace CV joints on this year?
>
> as I have done only a visual on the car and have an appointment to catch
> up with the guy later, he claims no smoke and running well. I haven't
> verified yet. It has 220,000 on the clock and owner claim all
> electricals work including the odometer and speedo.
>
> it is not however runnable because the CV's are totally shot. he said
> steering is floppy because the cv's are done.. I wouldnt want to drive
> it that way..
>
> so, assuming it idles ok, starts, no smoke, etc.. I think shes worth
> about $500 according to kbb but, anyone have comments?
>
> Thanks alot.
> Jim Bonnet
> 93S4
> 84coupeGT? Maybe.
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 2
> Subject: Resolved:93 90 - Not Starting
> Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 16:27:03 -0600
> From: "Schoenly,Michael" <mschoenly at learn.colostate.edu>
> To: <quattro at audifans.com>
>
> Prelude:
> Throughout the time I've owned the car it has blown fuses for the dash
> lights fairly regularly, and not wanting to research it, just popped new
> fuses in. It seemed to work for a while before popping another one.
>
> Here's the story:
> After not driving the car for a few weeks this past winter, I started it
> up and not knowing at the time, had a fire. I thought that it was that
> the defroster had gotten too hot from having snow pack on the rear
> window. So I turned it off and the burnt smell stopped getting worse.
> Everything seems to work, so I was happy and started driving the car
> regularly.
>
> Months later.....
> I get in the car and drive to Denver (~60 miles). Come home from Denver
> and the 'check engine' light comes on. Didn't think much of it at the
> time since the car was running just fine.
>
> 2 Days later.....
> After not driving the car for 2 days, I get in the car to go to work. We
> load up the wife and kid to go to daycare. I put the key in the
> ignition, turn it and nothing, no dash lights, no check engine light,
> etc - dead car. Not having time to check it out (already late for work)
> I yelled some (many) obscenities at the car, unloaded everyone, loaded
> up the truck and took off to daycare. When I get home, I pour myself a
> beer to relax before I start to operate. I find a blown fuse to the ECU.
> I replace the fuse and the car starts right up.
>
> Next Day....
> Next day, me, with a big grin on my face, says "Hun, let's take the car,
> I fixed it last night." I put the key in the ignition, turn it and
> vroom, the engine roars to life. We get everyone in loaded in the car. I
> go to back the car out of the garage and I can't get it out of park.
> Again, not having time to check it, I yelled many more obscenities at
> the car, unloaded everyone, loaded up the truck and took off to daycare
> grumbling all the way.
>
> Solution:
> I get home and start emailing Elliot Potter back and forth (what a
> knowledgeable guy - check out www.12v.org), he gives me a how-to on
> getting engine codes (indication - check engine light coming on). I give
> him the trouble codes 2411 and 1111. Elliot explained to me that the
> 2411 indicated a wiring problem and that I should look at the wiring
> harness going from the driver's side trunk - in front of the tail light
> to the trunk lid. He was exactly right. This is when I discovered that
> months ago I had a fire. The harness behind the trunk carpet was so
> fried that I could see all of the copper wire for all of the wires that
> led to the trunk. The harness literally fell apart in my hand, at this
> point I was wondering how the car could have been functioning, not to
> mention how lucky I was the car didn't blow up. I evaluated the wires
> and could almost recognize the wire colors so I thought that I should
> reconstruct the harness. Any way, get home Friday night and wifey wants
> to take Zach (son) to see "Spirit" (kid's horse movie), working on the
> car sounded like a good idea to get out of seeing "Spirit". So, two
> hours later - some trial and error with colors, a solder burn on my hand
> a small solder burn on Zach (he likes touching hot things for some
> reason) and viola the Audi is back in business.
>
> Morale of the story:
> I guess the car had some electrical problems for quite some time (since
> before I bought it). I was a little taken back after the "new" wiring
> harness was complete. I didn't have to wait for the door lock cycle to
> completely finish before I could unlock the doors and there was a beep
> (horn) sound when you lock the doors?! I think I will research the next
> car purchase to find out the quirks before I purchase and check the car
> over.
>
> The End.....
>
> Ah the joys of Audi ownership.....
>
> Michael Schoenly
> 90s 118K miles
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 3
> From: PrschRS911 at aol.com
> Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 18:36:26 EDT
> Subject: 91 Coupe Quattro Exhaust Manifold Cracked
> To: quattro at audifans.com
>
> I think this problem was more common on the 5000 series, and have only
seen a
> couple of mentions of it on the 20V Quattro list, is this not a common
> occurrence on the Coupe Quattros or 20V's and I just got lucky (unlucky)?
I
> am replacing the clutch and so while I am at it I thought I would pull the
> exhaust manifold and replace the gaskets as I could see evidence of a
small
> carbon leak from the gasket on the rearmost cylinder.  I could also hear a
> slight leak, especially now the car is lowered and running on lower
profile
> tires - almost sounded like fuel pinging which I could hear inside the car
> (even with the Scorpion exhaust).  It was not that noisy in the engine
> compartment, although I could feel some hot exhaust gasses at the rear of
the
> engine, but not much...
>
> Once the manifold was removed, I could see that the rearmost and frontmost
> cylinder gaskets were leaking and partially degraded at 9 o'clock and 3
> o'clock respectively.  I assume this means the manifold had warped
slightly,
> all the gasket degradation appears to be on the manifold surface so I am
> confident the head is fine and looked ok against a straightedge.  The car
has
> never overheated, run low on coolant, etc...  I noticed a hairline crack
> about two inches long on the outside of the manifold, and looking closer,
> noticed that it is cracked inside as well in a different place between two
of
> the runner channels.  I ground out the crack on the outside for welding
and
> brought it to a welding shop today to be TIG'd, and then it will go to the
> machine shop to be surface milled flat across the ports.  I plan on using
Lab
> Metal on the crack inside the runners.  My thought is that once it is
welded,
> all of the warping it wants to do will have already occurred and it will
then
> be structurally reinforced and sealed externally.  The Lab Metal will seal
> internally between the runners.  I also ordered a replacement right-side
> engine mount (from GPR - those guys are helpful), although the original
looks
> strong and non-fatigued.  Somewhere I read that the cracking may be due to
> loading on the exhaust when the mount is fatigued.
>
> What do you all think, does my solution sound reasonable?  What are the
> alternatives, are there upgraded or improved exhaust manifolds available?
> This is the original cast iron manifold from the factory.  I saw mention
of a
> different type manifold in a previous listing, but no details or info.
Does
> anyone know the whole story on the cracked exhaust manifolds?  Thanks in
> advance!  Tim
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 16:59:29 -0700 (PDT)
> From: "P. Stegawski" <piotrs at u.washington.edu>
> To: Jon Boyer <jonboyer at hotmail.com>
> Cc: quattro at audifans.com
> Subject: Re: '89 200 running cool
>
> My 200 TQ does the same thing. I made it a lot better by putting in a new
> thermostat, but the car still runs a little cool. Coming down from a ski
> area (ie. start car and let it coast downhill) it still doesn't warm up,
> so I let it run for a few minutes to get up to temperature, and then it
> doesn't cool off when driving. My oil temp. gauge also reads low, but it
> doesn't change for some reason whether the coolant temp. is low or in the
> mid range, so I suspect that oil temp is not reading correctly.  The
> thermostat I bought came from the dealer, and opens at 87C (I think that
> is what was stamped on it). Does anyone know of higher temp. thermostats
> that work for these cars? Right know during prolonged freeway driving the
> coolant temperature settles to 1/3 of the scale - is that normal?
>
> Peter
> '90 200 TQ
>
> On Fri, 24 May 2002, Jon Boyer wrote:
>
> > 1989 200 TQ 10V 185kmi
> >
> > Thanks to the listers who helped me fix my non-functioning temp gauge -
> > Sending unit and wiring were the culprit.
> >
> > I noticed right away that the temp gauge needle only made it to the
first
> > heavy line (about midway to half scale).  If the car sat and idled, it
wo=
> uld
> > reach the midpoint of the gauge.  Start driving, and the needle drops.
I
> > replaced the Thermostat, and there is no change.  At highway speeds, I
re=
> ach
> > the midpoint of the gauge only if ambient temps are 70+ =B0F.  If it is
c=
> ool
> > out, the car does not appear to warm up.  I also notice about a 2 MPG
> > increase when the weather is warmer.
> >
> > Some of my thoughts:  Another temp sensor related to EFI is bad, and
caus=
> ing
> > me to run rich when air temp is colder.  O2 sensor has been on there for
=
> at
> > least 100Kmi, Maybe time to replace it anyway...
> >
> > Any BTDT?
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Jon Boyer
> > 1989 200 TQ10V
> > Lago, 16" A4 wheels
> > 185Kmi and counting
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
> >
> >
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 17:31:27 -0700
> From: Jim Bonnet <jimbo at sysdump.com>
> To: quattro at audifans.com
> Subject: 84 CGT clutch
>
> Question- The car isnt at my house, but.. In 84CGT is that a hydraulic
> clutch or cable?
>
> Thanks..
> Jim
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 20:38:47 -0400
> From: JShadzi at aol.com
> To: auditude at get.net (Ken)
> Cc: quattro at audifans.com
> Subject: Re: regulator-based MBC for 5kcstq, 15psi [long]
>
>
>
> >That does make sense. =A0I guess with the stock system, the WGFV will
just=
>  apply more vacuum to the upper chamber to lower the boost to the mapped
>t=
> arget?
>
> Yes
>
> >
> >A concern I have about adding preload to the spring is that it may
decreas=
> e the total travel available for the WG. =A0It's almost like the orifice
is=
>  being made smaller (at WOT/target boost) by reducing the travel.
> >
>
> Theoretically that is a concern, but realistically, with about 1" of
compre=
> ssion, this has never been a problem for me.  It would be easy to see,
thou=
> gh, boost should be rock solid, if it fluctuates up or down then the
scenar=
> io you describe could be true - like I say, though, never happened to me
ye=
> t=2E
>
> >Did you rethread the WG cap for the different thread pitch?
>
> Yes, as I said, 9/16" 12 pitch.
>
> >
> >The bolt I got was a direct fit, per the specs online/archived. =A0I
still=
>  need to cut the nut in half tho'.
> >
>
> Yes, I know the stock bolt fits, but it threads are too fine for practical
=
> purposes, took me about 10 minutes to drill and tap to the size I wanted.
>
> >The washers I saw at the store didn't have a large enough hole in the
cent=
> er of them to perfectly fit onto the upper WG spring perch. =A0Do you
drill=
>  out the plain old washers to fit the perch?
> >
>
> ya, sure, I suppose whatever works.  I don't think I've ever had a problem
=
> with ripping diaphrams either, I don't really use washers.
>
> >
> >p.s. =A0Since I'm posting again, I was thinking about how now that I'm
run=
> ning the SchrapnelKnobben mod on my car, I can switch back to the stock WG
=
> spring.
> >
> >My idea is that it would provide the following changes/benefits:
> >
> >One feature that I like about this mod is that, I believe, the WG doesn't
=
> even begin cracking until the boost (lower chamber) exceeds the regulated
p=
> ressure (upper chamber). =A0So, unlike a simple stiffer spring, the WG
isn'=
> t partially open before target boost is achieved. =A0With a spring type
mod=
> , you are "chasing" boost as exhaust leaks past the WG before max boost is
=
> achieved.
> >
>
> Not true, if you crank down the spring 3 more lbs, then its no differnet
th=
> an the upper chamber mod.  The nice thing about cranking down on the
spring=
> , you greatly reduce boost creep because of the higher initial pressure on
=
> the valve.
>
> >With a stock spring and Schrapnelknobben mod, the WG closing force is
more=
>  pressure-based than mechanical/spring force-based. =A0That may allow me
to=
>  run closer to the edge of detonation, since the WG may be quicker(?) when
=
> biased towards pneumatic control. =A0Seems like it would, since I would be
=
> putting out higher pressure on the upper chamber than currently, so the WG
=
> would stay totally closed until that higher limit.
> >
>
> I doubt it, that is stretcing the theories a bit, practically speaking,
you=
>  will experience detonation because of your timing maps, maybe fuel if its
=
> running in just the right mixture, but if you boost comes on 1/10th of a
se=
> cond sooner or later, that just won't matter wrt detonation.
>
> >In other words, I've got boost pressure trying to push the WG open at
3psi=
> , and the WG is holding the additional 12psi. =A0So, it's leaking "some
exh=
> aust" between 3psi and 15psi. =A0After swapping in the stock spring, I
shou=
> ld have no boost trying to push the WG open until about 9psi, then the
spri=
> ng will take care of the additional 6psi. =A0So, boost may build up
quicker=
>  between 3 and 9 psi after going back to the stock spring.
> >
>
> Ken, boost is pushing at 3psi, and in either case, you have 3psi more
initi=
> al pressure, there is NO difference.
>
> >I realize this all happens at the same time, and I can't attribute
specifi=
> c pressures to one or the other (spring vs. regulator). =A0But is the
conce=
> pt valid? =A0Quicker boost buildup, due to reduced WG leakage (higher WG
cr=
> acking point)?
> >
>
> No, its all about creating a higher opening threshold through increased
pre=
> ssure on the mechanism holding the wastegate shut - the same thing in
eithe=
> r scenario.
>
> Javad
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 22:04:07 -0400
> From: Huw Powell <human747 at attbi.com>
> Reply-To: human747 at attbi.com
> Organization: HUMAN Speakers
> To: Jim Bonnet <jimbo at sysdump.com>
> Cc: quattro at audifans.com
> Subject: Re: 84 CGT clutch
>
>
> > Question- The car isnt at my house, but.. In 84CGT is that a hydraulic
> > clutch or cable?
>
> should be cable.
>
> --
> Huw Powell
>
> http://www.humanspeakers.com/
>
> http://www.humanthoughts.org/
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 8
> From: auditude at get.net
> To: JShadzi at aol.com
> Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 19:20:23 -0700
> Subject: Re: regulator-based MBC vs. WG spring/preload [long]
> Reply-To: auditude at get.net
> Cc: quattro at audifans.com
>
> Hi Javad,
>
> Further comments and questions below.
>
> On 28 May 2002 at 20:38, JShadzi at aol.com wrote:
> >
> > > A concern I have about adding preload to the spring is that it may
> > > decrease the total travel available for the WG. =A0It's almost like
> > > the orifice is being made smaller (at WOT/target boost) by reducing
> > > the travel.
> >
> > Theoretically that is a concern, but realistically, with about 1" of
> > compression, this has never been a problem for me.  It would be easy
> > to see, though, boost should be rock solid, if it fluctuates up or
> > down then the scenario you describe could be true - like I say,
> > though, never happened to me yet.
>
> I was thinking a question that could be answered would be how much travel
i=
> s left in the system (how big
> is the passage) when the wastegate is functioning.  I'm not necessarily
ask=
> ing you Javad, but the question
> popped up earlier in my mind.
>
> > > p.s. =A0Since I'm posting again, I was thinking about how now that I'm
> > > running the SchrapnelKnobben mod on my car, I can switch back to the
> > > stock WG spring.
> > >
> > >My idea is that it would provide the following changes/benefits:
> > >
> > > One feature that I like about this mod is that, I believe, the WG
> > > doesn't even begin cracking until the boost (lower chamber) exceeds
> > > the regulated pressure (upper chamber). =A0So, unlike a simple stiffer
> > > spring, the WG isn't partially open before target boost is achieved.
> > > =A0With a spring type mod, you are "chasing" boost as exhaust leaks
> > > past the WG before max boost is achieved.
> >
> > Not true, if you crank down the spring 3 more lbs, then its no
> > differnet than the upper chamber mod.  The nice thing about cranking
> > down on the spring, you greatly reduce boost creep because of the
> > higher initial pressure on the valve.
>
> I heard that the WG spring is half deflected at half the max boost.  Do
you=
>  disagree?  Is it deflected at all
> below max boost?
>
> Adding preload or a stiffer spring would put more pressure on the valve,
re=
> ducing boost creep, sure.  But I
> don't think it's "no different" than having equalized boost pressure on
bot=
> h sides of the wastegate
> diaphragm, in addition to whatever spring stiffness and preload is there.
>
> With the regulator routing limited boost to the upper WG chamber, there
wil=
> l be zero cracking below the
> boost the regulator is set at.  There would have to be, since no net
pressu=
> re is pushing on the diaphragm.
>
> > > With a stock spring and Schrapnelknobben mod, the WG closing force
> > > is more pressure-based than mechanical/spring force-based. =A0That may
> > > allow me to run closer to the edge of detonation, since the WG may
> > > be quicker(?) when biased towards pneumatic control. =A0Seems like it
> > > would, since I would be putting out higher pressure on the upper
> > > chamber than currently, so the WG would stay totally closed until
> > > that higher limit.
> >
> > I doubt it, that is stretcing the theories a bit, practically
> > speaking, you will experience detonation because of your timing
> > maps, maybe fuel if its running in just the right mixture, but if
> > you boost comes on 1/10th of a second sooner or later, that just
> > won't matter wrt detonation.
>
> I see your point regarding timing maps.  In my situation, using a TAP ecu,
=
> I may not want the boost to
> come on too much earlier in the rpm range than usual. I'll have to think
ab=
> out my spring and regulator
> settings as a combination to see if I can optimize it.  There's that boost
=
> referenced retard that MSD or
> somebody makes, I suppose.
>
> > > In other words, I've got boost pressure trying to push the WG open
> > > at 3psi, and the WG is holding the additional 12psi. =A0So, it's
> > > leaking "some exhaust" between 3psi and 15psi. =A0After swapping in
> > > the stock spring, I should have no boost trying to push the WG open
> > > until about 9psi, then the spring will take care of the additional
> > > 6psi. =A0So, boost may build up quicker between 3 and 9 psi after
> > > going back to the stock spring.
> >
> > Ken, boost is pushing at 3psi, and in either case, you have 3psi
> > more initial pressure, there is NO difference.
>
> Really?  At 3psi boost in that second scenario (stock weak WG spring,
boost=
>  controlled by the regulator),
> how much pressure is being exerted on the lower wastegate chamber?  I say
Z=
> ERO.
>
> With the cranked up or stiffer WG spring holding the WG close without help
=
> from the regulator, you would
> have 3 psi acting on the lower WG.  To me that's different.
>
> Maybe you're talking about leaving the stock WGFV in place in your
scenario=
> ?  Is that why there's no
> difference?  Maybe that's why I don't see how they are they same?
>
> You're saying you can crank down the spring to regain that 3psi "cracking
p=
> ressure", but doesn't that also
> add 3 psi to your max boost?  Or, am I misunderstanding what you mean
above=
>  about being able to
> control max boost with spring preload/tension?  Is there a way to
"eliminat=
> e" or reduce boost creep, while
> not also affecting max boost?
>
> I'll gladly entertain the idea that postponing the cracking of the
wastegat=
> e is a bad thing, but that is not
> what we are talking about here.  I'm saying that this regulator mod helps
b=
> uild boost faster than using the
> WG spring and preload could.
>
> Or perhaps someone might explain that my understanding of how a pressure
re=
> gulator functions is not
> correct.  I think of it as a like a voltage clamp, or a low pass
crossover,=
>  to use some unrelated terms.  I
> think the pressure is equal on both sides of the regulator, input and
outpu=
> t, below the regulated limit.
> Then, if the input pressure is higher, the regulated output is never
exceed=
> ed.
>
> Now, if this is wrong, and the regulator is more of a proportional type of
=
> situation, "below" the regulated
> limit, then that's different.  Then maybe a stiffer WG spring and/or
preloa=
> d is "the same" as the regulator
> way.  In this example, you set the regulator to limit to 10psi, and at
5psi=
>  input it's output is something
> less than 5psi.  I don't think that's how they work tho'.
>
> My "theory", if it has to be one, is that minimum boost can be controlled
b=
> y the regulator, and maximum
> boost can be controlled by the spring.  The pressure difference between
the=
> se two values is the max
> boost that is generated by the (same) spring if it were by itself.
>
> For example:
> [My way]
> Regulator set at 10 psi, 7psi spring.  Wastegate stays TOTALLY closed
until=
>  10 psi, THEN starts
> cracking.  Max boost is limited to 17psi.
>
> [WG spring only]
> 17psi spring.  Wastegate starts cracking at some pressure below 17 psi,
mos=
> t likely even below 10(?)
> Perhaps at 8.5psi it's half open?  Max boost also limited to 17psi.
>
> > > I realize this all happens at the same time, and I can't attribute
> > > specific pressures to one or the other (spring vs. regulator). =A0But
> > > is the concept valid? =A0Quicker boost buildup, due to reduced WG
> > > leakage (higher WG cracking point)?
> >
> > No, its all about creating a higher opening threshold through
> > increased pressure on the mechanism holding the wastegate shut - the
> > same thing in either scenario.
>
> In "my" scenario, where boost pressure is acting on the upper wastegate
cha=
> mber, the wastegate will not
> be cracked _at all_ until the upper chamber is exceeded.  From this boost
l=
> evel on, the spring is being
> compressed and exhaust gas is flowing through the wastegate.
>
> Was there a reason that the WG spring and/or preload is "better" than the
u=
> pper chamber regulator mod?
>
> If it's true that these two mods are the same with regard to the
performanc=
> e or boost, then at least the
> upper chamber mod has the benefit of making the diaphragms life easier.
Th=
> e only boost that "needs" to
> be applied to the diaphragm is to offset the stock spring, if it's
configur=
> ed that way.  With the WG spring
> alone, the diaphragm gets to make peace between the boost and the spring.
>
> Later,
>
> Ken
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 22:27:20 -0400
> From: Huw Powell <human747 at attbi.com>
> Reply-To: human747 at attbi.com
> Organization: HUMAN Speakers
> To: "P. Stegawski" <piotrs at u.washington.edu>
> Cc: Jon Boyer <jonboyer at hotmail.com>, quattro at audifans.com
> Subject: Re: '89 200 running cool
>
> > Right know during prolonged freeway driving the
> > coolant temperature settles to 1/3 of the scale - is that normal?
>
> sounds it.  1/3 on highway, 2/3 in hot stop and go.
>
> --
> Huw Powell
>
> http://www.humanspeakers.com/
>
> http://www.humanthoughts.org/
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 22:29:14 -0400
> From: Huw Powell <human747 at attbi.com>
> Reply-To: human747 at attbi.com
> Organization: HUMAN Speakers
> To: msmsbassoon02 at earthlink.net
> Cc: quattro at audifans.com
> Subject: Re: Dead Fuel Pump?
>
>
> > Made a long trip yesterday, and within the first hour, the car started
to=
>  shudder - really badly.  It got to the point where it would start to
shake=
>  really badly under any load other than a just barely cracked throttle.
It=
>  would shut off in traffic at idle.  We managed to restart the car, and
lim=
> p it to the apartment complex where Dad lives.  It seems like the problem
i=
> s the fuel pump.  Any suggestions otherwise?
>
> Yeah, it could be almost anything else as well.  How's the old "deferred
> maintenance" going?  Check when all the "routine" stuff was last
> replaced first.
>
> --
> Huw Powell
>
> http://www.humanspeakers.com/
>
> http://www.humanthoughts.org/
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 11
> Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 22:50:11 -0400
> From: Huw Powell <human747 at attbi.com>
> Reply-To: human747 at attbi.com
> Organization: HUMAN Speakers
> To: BenediktRochow at oaktech.com
> Cc: quattro at audifans.com
> Subject: Re: H4...
>
>
>
> > I had a brief look at the headlights of a new US-spec Mercedes G the
other
> > day; 7" diameter, H4 bulb, and apart from the fluted or frosted top-3/4"
> > strip, bunch of writing at the bottom, the lens was completely clear.
> >
> > If this is legal, I wonder what else might be (I guess regular old H4
> > lights just lack
> > the DOT seal?) - and is it possible to buy generic-sized lights that
work
> > this way?
>
> Well... the "replaceable bulb" generic sized lenses that are easy to get
> come in four sizes.  The DOT approval issue is irnoic - it's just a
> matter of having the "aimer mounting" nubs on the lens front.
>
> I have 7" round H4's on my F250, and those are, I think, DOT-approved.
> Kick butt lights, too.
>
> I have the 5-1/4" ones on my coupe, H4 and H1 both, neither are DOT
> nubbed.
>
> There are also the two sizes of rectangular bulbs.
>
> These are essentially the four standards that used be used in the old
> sealed beam days.
>
> Those MB lenses are clear because they've used the shape of the
> reflector to set up the beam instead of a "fresnel" lens in the glass
> itself, probably.
>
> hope that helps a tiny bit.
>
> --
> Huw Powell
>
> http://www.humanspeakers.com/
>
> http://www.humanthoughts.org/
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> _______________________________________________
> quattro mailing list
> quattro at audifans.com
> http://www.audifans.com/mailman/listinfo/quattro
>
>
> End of quattro Digest
>