M30 air intake manifold

On Apr 18, 5:09 pm, "Bill" > wrote:
> > wrote in message
>
> ups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 18, 12:04 pm, "Bill" > wrote:
> > > > wrote in message
>
> > roups.com...
>
> > > > I am about to buy a 1991 BMW 535i (in Canada) that has 345000 km and a
> > > > leak in theairintakemanifoldas well as an engine oil leak. Price
> > > > 300 dollars. Car still runs. I plan on repairing theintakemanifold
> > > > and sealing the engine oil leak. Then I will work on strapping on a
> > > > hydrogen booster. Can anyone assist me with theairintakemanifold?
> > > > How do I replace it and what does it cost?
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Noobiedoobie
>
> > > Sounds like the rubber boot connecting the airbox to theairflow meter,
> > > shaped like an "L". It runs about $28. There's another straight rubber
> boot
> > > between theairflow meter and the throttle body, about $25. Don't forget
> > > the myriad rubber hoses that are cracking. Easy and cheap, but
> > > time-consuming to replace. Check this site:
>
> > >www.realoem.com
>
> > > Bill in Omaha
> > > '86 535i
>
> > Yes! Thank you Bill in Omaha. With your help, I think I am going to
> > just about steal this thing off of the seller's hands tonight for only
> > 300 Canadian. I will try these simple fixes first. I hope these work
> > and I don't have to get at the head gasket. Is it common for head
> > gaskets to blow on these cars, I mean, the car is 345000 kilometres
> > and 16 years old.
> > -----
>
> M30 head gaskets are pretty tough and most would say the M30 is
> bullet-proof... if the basic maintenance has been done. I like mine for the
> timing chain and seemingly over-engineered design. No belt to break, just
> change the oil regularly,airand oil filters, plugs every other year, and
> valve clearances every other year or so.
> Do a compression check on the engine and that will tell a lot. Cylinders
> should be within 5% (?) of each other. Mine are and it has 173,000 miles.Airleaks are the main thing, but the M30B35 has a newer ECU and should be a
> little more tolerant than my M30B34. Don't look at the miles, look at the
> condition of the engine/body. Cheers!
>
> Bill in Omaha
> '86 535i- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Hi Bill,
I did it! I bought the BMW for 300 bucks Canadian. What a steal! I
drove it home about 20 miles and it now sits in my garage awaiting my
tools. The engine sounds really rough and it obviously wouldn't start
in the winter, but only when idling. As soon as you drive away, it is
almost as smooth as my brand new Odyssey or Altima. I figure the
problem is with the air intake. On idling, it also misfires
occasionally, so I think the compression of the cylinders is not in
sync.

On Apr 18, 5:58 pm, JRE > wrote:
> wrote:
>
> <snip>> It's a simple electrolysis unit that you can make at home
> > for under 40 or so bucks that splits regular tap water into HHO gas
> > and this is sucked up into theairintakesuch that the gasoline gets
> > a complete burn because hydrogen burns cleaner than anything else in
> > the universe and doesn't even require oxygen to do so.
>
> <snip>
>
> Sorry, but I'm afraid that hydrogen _does_ require oxygen to burn,
> though the engine will adjust the fuel mix based on the hydrogenintake
> as long as the adjustment falls within the maps in the ECU (else it will
> try as hard as it can and then light the MIL, aka check engine light).
> So it might or might not be necessary to add O2 to the mix to get the
> thing to run right if all you do is keep the H from the electrolysis.
>
> Further, you'll have a _very_ explosive mix sitting around if you trap
> both the H and the O2 from electrolysis and store them together...and in
> perfect proportion. This is the basis of FAEs (fuel-airexplosives) but
> using pure H and O2 goes one better since atmosphericairis only 21% or
> so O2.
>
> There's no way you can collect enough of this combination of gases top
> be useful without compressing it, and compressing both together will be
> very hazardous. Not to mention having it in the car in case of an
> accident (assuming you even succeed in compressing it without it going
> bang!). I hope this isn't what you're planning. If it is, I hope I'm
> not near where you live or plan to operate this vehicle and that
> innocent people are not injured.
>
> Moreover, the energy spent splitting water into hydrogen and O2 will not
> be regained in internal combustion no matter how you handle it. Unless
> electricity is *dirt* cheap where you live, or you're using a renewable
> primary energy source to generate it, you'll lose money on the deal.
>
> JRE

You are old school, my friend. Obviously, the energy put into
splitting is greater or equal to than the energy gained, and the power
of hydrogen and oxygen combined is what NASA uses, but that is not how
this works. There is NO onboard storage of explosive gases. It is
produced as needed. The HHO or Brown's gas (there are debates as to
what is being produced exactly) helps the octane to completely burn,
whereas in a normal situation the octane is still burning as it leaves
the exhaust and relies on the catalytic converter to finish the job.
The minute amount of hydrogen is sort of like a catalyst that reduces
the time it takes for the octane to ignite so it burns faster during
the combustion cycle and therefore more completely resulting in more
power and increased mileage. There are many companies, led by the
Canadian ones who are already marketing these electrolysis units and
many truckers already have been using them for over a decade.

On Apr 19, 3:13 pm, wrote:
> On Apr 18, 5:58 pm, JRE > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > wrote:
>
> > <snip>> It's a simple electrolysis unit that you can make at home
> > > for under 40 or so bucks that splits regular tap water into HHO gas
> > > and this is sucked up into theairintakesuch that the gasoline gets
> > > a complete burn because hydrogen burns cleaner than anything else in
> > > the universe and doesn't even require oxygen to do so.
>
> > <snip>
>
> > Sorry, but I'm afraid that hydrogen _does_ require oxygen to burn,
> > though the engine will adjust the fuel mix based on the hydrogenintake
> > as long as the adjustment falls within the maps in the ECU (else it will
> > try as hard as it can and then light the MIL, aka check engine light).
> > So it might or might not be necessary to add O2 to the mix to get the
> > thing to run right if all you do is keep the H from the electrolysis.
>
> > Further, you'll have a _very_ explosive mix sitting around if you trap
> > both the H and the O2 from electrolysis and store them together...and in
> > perfect proportion. This is the basis of FAEs (fuel-airexplosives) but
> > using pure H and O2 goes one better since atmosphericairis only 21% or
> > so O2.
>
> > There's no way you can collect enough of this combination of gases top
> > be useful without compressing it, and compressing both together will be
> > very hazardous. Not to mention having it in the car in case of an
> > accident (assuming you even succeed in compressing it without it going
> > bang!). I hope this isn't what you're planning. If it is, I hope I'm
> > not near where you live or plan to operate this vehicle and that
> > innocent people are not injured.
>
> > Moreover, the energy spent splitting water into hydrogen and O2 will not
> > be regained in internal combustion no matter how you handle it. Unless
> > electricity is *dirt* cheap where you live, or you're using a renewable
> > primary energy source to generate it, you'll lose money on the deal.
>
> > JRE
>
> You are old school, my friend. Obviously, the energy put into
> splitting is greater or equal to than the energy gained, and the power
> of hydrogen and oxygen combined is what NASA uses, but that is not how
> this works. There is NO onboard storage of explosive gases. It is
> produced as needed. The HHO or Brown's gas (there are debates as to
> what is being produced exactly) helps the octane to completely burn,
> whereas in a normal situation the octane is still burning as it leaves
> the exhaust and relies on the catalytic converter to finish the job.
> The minute amount of hydrogen is sort of like a catalyst that reduces
> the time it takes for the octane to ignite so it burns faster during
> the combustion cycle and therefore more completely resulting in more
> power and increased mileage. There are many companies, led by the
> Canadian ones who are already marketing these electrolysis units and
> many truckers already have been using them for over a decade.-


Mythbusters did something liek this where they produced hydrogen and
allowed it to be sucked into the intake along with air, instead of
using gas(oline). It ran fine for a short while then the hydrogen ran
out.

I bought the BMW for 300 bucks Canadian. What a steal! I
> drove it home about 20 miles and it now sits in my garage awaiting my
> tools. The engine sounds really rough and it obviously wouldn't start
> in the winter, but only when idling. As soon as you drive away, it is
> almost as smooth as my brand new Odyssey or Altima. I figure the
> problem is with the air intake. On idling, it also misfires
> occasionally, so I think the compression of the cylinders is not in
> sync.-

Vacuum problems or air leaks usually present themselves as stalling or
constant poor running at closed throttle with fine running at open
throttle.
Occasional misfiring at idle is more likely spark plugs and things
like that in my experience.

$300 might be a steal but I figure you're either going to learn a lot
about this car or end up spending a lot of money. Usually if there's
one thing the owner doesn't want to fix then there's half a dozen more
they haven't told you about.

On Apr 19, 11:37 am, adder1969 > wrote:
> I bought the BMW for 300 bucks Canadian. What a steal! I
>
> > drove it home about 20 miles and it now sits in my garage awaiting my
> > tools. The engine sounds really rough and it obviously wouldn't start
> > in the winter, but only when idling. As soon as you drive away, it is
> > almost as smooth as my brand new Odyssey or Altima. I figure the
> > problem is with theairintake. On idling, it also misfires
> > occasionally, so I think the compression of the cylinders is not in
> > sync.-
>
> Vacuum problems orairleaks usually present themselves as stalling or
> constant poor running at closed throttle with fine running at open
> throttle.
> Occasional misfiring at idle is more likely spark plugs and things
> like that in my experience.
>
> $300 might be a steal but I figure you're either going to learn a lot
> about this car or end up spending a lot of money. Usually if there's
> one thing the owner doesn't want to fix then there's half a dozen more
> they haven't told you about.

Ahhh...a pessimist. You gotta take a gamble sometimes. Thanks for
the insight on the air leaks and misfiring. I am surely going to
learn a heck of a lot about this car...I hope the oil leak isn't too
much of a problem...

On Apr 19, 11:33 am, adder1969 > wrote:
> On Apr 19, 3:13 pm, wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 18, 5:58 pm, JRE > wrote:
>
> > > wrote:
>
> > > <snip>> It's a simple electrolysis unit that you can make at home
> > > > for under 40 or so bucks that splits regular tap water into HHO gas
> > > > and this is sucked up into theairintakesuch that the gasoline gets
> > > > a complete burn because hydrogen burns cleaner than anything else in
> > > > the universe and doesn't even require oxygen to do so.
>
> > > <snip>
>
> > > Sorry, but I'm afraid that hydrogen _does_ require oxygen to burn,
> > > though the engine will adjust the fuel mix based on the hydrogenintake
> > > as long as the adjustment falls within the maps in the ECU (else it will
> > > try as hard as it can and then light the MIL, aka check engine light).
> > > So it might or might not be necessary to add O2 to the mix to get the
> > > thing to run right if all you do is keep the H from the electrolysis.
>
> > > Further, you'll have a _very_ explosive mix sitting around if you trap
> > > both the H and the O2 from electrolysis and store them together...and in
> > > perfect proportion. This is the basis of FAEs (fuel-airexplosives) but
> > > using pure H and O2 goes one better since atmosphericairis only 21% or
> > > so O2.
>
> > > There's no way you can collect enough of this combination of gases top
> > > be useful without compressing it, and compressing both together will be
> > > very hazardous. Not to mention having it in the car in case of an
> > > accident (assuming you even succeed in compressing it without it going
> > > bang!). I hope this isn't what you're planning. If it is, I hope I'm
> > > not near where you live or plan to operate this vehicle and that
> > > innocent people are not injured.
>
> > > Moreover, the energy spent splitting water into hydrogen and O2 will not
> > > be regained in internal combustion no matter how you handle it. Unless
> > > electricity is *dirt* cheap where you live, or you're using a renewable
> > > primary energy source to generate it, you'll lose money on the deal.
>
> > > JRE
>
> > You are old school, my friend. Obviously, the energy put into
> > splitting is greater or equal to than the energy gained, and the power
> > of hydrogen and oxygen combined is what NASA uses, but that is not how
> > this works. There is NO onboard storage of explosive gases. It is
> > produced as needed. The HHO or Brown's gas (there are debates as to
> > what is being produced exactly) helps the octane to completely burn,
> > whereas in a normal situation the octane is still burning as it leaves
> > the exhaust and relies on the catalytic converter to finish the job.
> > The minute amount of hydrogen is sort of like a catalyst that reduces
> > the time it takes for the octane to ignite so it burns faster during
> > the combustion cycle and therefore more completely resulting in more
> > power and increased mileage. There are many companies, led by the
> > Canadian ones who are already marketing these electrolysis units and
> > many truckers already have been using them for over a decade.-
>
> Mythbusters did something liek this where they produced hydrogen and
> allowed it to be sucked into theintakealong withair, instead of
> using gas(oline). It ran fine for a short while then the hydrogen ran
> out.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Yes! It is absolutely possible and feasible to run an ICE on
Hydrogen. But I won't be using hydrogen alone. I will simply be
helping the octane to burn better in the engine by adding a little
tiny stream of Hydrogen. Much safer.

On 19 Apr 2007 07:13:22 -0700, wrote:

>On Apr 18, 5:58 pm, JRE > wrote:
>> wrote:
>>
>> <snip>> It's a simple electrolysis unit that you can make at home
>> > for under 40 or so bucks that splits regular tap water into HHO gas
>> > and this is sucked up into theairintakesuch that the gasoline gets
>> > a complete burn because hydrogen burns cleaner than anything else in
>> > the universe and doesn't even require oxygen to do so.
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>> Sorry, but I'm afraid that hydrogen _does_ require oxygen to burn,
>> though the engine will adjust the fuel mix based on the hydrogenintake
>> as long as the adjustment falls within the maps in the ECU (else it will
>> try as hard as it can and then light the MIL, aka check engine light).
>> So it might or might not be necessary to add O2 to the mix to get the
>> thing to run right if all you do is keep the H from the electrolysis.
>>
>> Further, you'll have a _very_ explosive mix sitting around if you trap
>> both the H and the O2 from electrolysis and store them together...and in
>> perfect proportion. This is the basis of FAEs (fuel-airexplosives) but
>> using pure H and O2 goes one better since atmosphericairis only 21% or
>> so O2.
>>
>> There's no way you can collect enough of this combination of gases top
>> be useful without compressing it, and compressing both together will be
>> very hazardous. Not to mention having it in the car in case of an
>> accident (assuming you even succeed in compressing it without it going
>> bang!). I hope this isn't what you're planning. If it is, I hope I'm
>> not near where you live or plan to operate this vehicle and that
>> innocent people are not injured.
>>
>> Moreover, the energy spent splitting water into hydrogen and O2 will not
>> be regained in internal combustion no matter how you handle it. Unless
>> electricity is *dirt* cheap where you live, or you're using a renewable
>> primary energy source to generate it, you'll lose money on the deal.
>>
>> JRE
>
>You are old school, my friend. Obviously, the energy put into
>splitting is greater or equal to than the energy gained, and the power
>of hydrogen and oxygen combined is what NASA uses

You mean the Space Shuttle runs on WATER? By god man that's astounding!

> but that is not how
>this works. There is NO onboard storage of explosive gases. It is
>produced as needed. The HHO or Brown's gas (there are debates as to
>what is being produced exactly) helps the octane to completely burn,
>whereas in a normal situation the octane is still burning as it leaves
>the exhaust and relies on the catalytic converter to finish the job.
>The minute amount of hydrogen is sort of like a catalyst that reduces
>the time it takes for the octane to ignite so it burns faster during
>the combustion cycle and therefore more completely resulting in more
>power and increased mileage. There are many companies, led by the
>Canadian ones who are already marketing these electrolysis units and
>many truckers already have been using them for over a decade.

On 19 Apr 2007 08:59:30 -0700, wrote:

>On Apr 19, 11:33 am, adder1969 > wrote:
>> On Apr 19, 3:13 pm, wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Apr 18, 5:58 pm, JRE > wrote:
>>
>> > > wrote:
>>
>> > > <snip>> It's a simple electrolysis unit that you can make at home
>> > > > for under 40 or so bucks that splits regular tap water into HHO gas
>> > > > and this is sucked up into theairintakesuch that the gasoline gets
>> > > > a complete burn because hydrogen burns cleaner than anything else in
>> > > > the universe and doesn't even require oxygen to do so.
>>
>> > > <snip>
>>
>> > > Sorry, but I'm afraid that hydrogen _does_ require oxygen to burn,
>> > > though the engine will adjust the fuel mix based on the hydrogenintake
>> > > as long as the adjustment falls within the maps in the ECU (else it will
>> > > try as hard as it can and then light the MIL, aka check engine light).
>> > > So it might or might not be necessary to add O2 to the mix to get the
>> > > thing to run right if all you do is keep the H from the electrolysis.
>>
>> > > Further, you'll have a _very_ explosive mix sitting around if you trap
>> > > both the H and the O2 from electrolysis and store them together...and in
>> > > perfect proportion. This is the basis of FAEs (fuel-airexplosives) but
>> > > using pure H and O2 goes one better since atmosphericairis only 21% or
>> > > so O2.
>>
>> > > There's no way you can collect enough of this combination of gases top
>> > > be useful without compressing it, and compressing both together will be
>> > > very hazardous. Not to mention having it in the car in case of an
>> > > accident (assuming you even succeed in compressing it without it going
>> > > bang!). I hope this isn't what you're planning. If it is, I hope I'm
>> > > not near where you live or plan to operate this vehicle and that
>> > > innocent people are not injured.
>>
>> > > Moreover, the energy spent splitting water into hydrogen and O2 will not
>> > > be regained in internal combustion no matter how you handle it. Unless
>> > > electricity is *dirt* cheap where you live, or you're using a renewable
>> > > primary energy source to generate it, you'll lose money on the deal.
>>
>> > > JRE
>>
>> > You are old school, my friend. Obviously, the energy put into
>> > splitting is greater or equal to than the energy gained, and the power
>> > of hydrogen and oxygen combined is what NASA uses, but that is not how
>> > this works. There is NO onboard storage of explosive gases. It is
>> > produced as needed. The HHO or Brown's gas (there are debates as to
>> > what is being produced exactly) helps the octane to completely burn,
>> > whereas in a normal situation the octane is still burning as it leaves
>> > the exhaust and relies on the catalytic converter to finish the job.
>> > The minute amount of hydrogen is sort of like a catalyst that reduces
>> > the time it takes for the octane to ignite so it burns faster during
>> > the combustion cycle and therefore more completely resulting in more
>> > power and increased mileage. There are many companies, led by the
>> > Canadian ones who are already marketing these electrolysis units and
>> > many truckers already have been using them for over a decade.-
>>
>> Mythbusters did something liek this where they produced hydrogen and
>> allowed it to be sucked into theintakealong withair, instead of
>> using gas(oline). It ran fine for a short while then the hydrogen ran
>> out.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
>Yes! It is absolutely possible and feasible to run an ICE on
>Hydrogen. But I won't be using hydrogen alone. I will simply be
>helping the octane to burn better in the engine by adding a little
>tiny stream of Hydrogen. Much safer.


What exactly is OCTANE?

Octane is an Alkaline with the chemical formula CH3(CH2)6CH3. It has 18 isomers.

One of the isomers, 2,2,4-trimethylpentane or isooctane, is of major importance,
as it has been selected as the 100 point on the octane rating scale, with
n-heptane as the zero point. Octane ratings are ratings used to represent the
anti-knock performance of petroleum-based fuels (octane is less likely to
prematurely combust under pressure than heptane), given as the percentage of
2,2,4-trimethylpentane in an 2,2,4-trimethylpentane / n-heptane mixture that
would have the same performance. It is an important constituent of gasoline.

Octane has 18 isomers :

Octane (n-octane)
2-Methylheptane
3-Methylheptane
4-Methylheptane
3-Ethylhexane
2,2-Dimethylhexane
2,3-Dimethylhexane
2,4-Dimethylhexane
2,5-Dimethylhexane
3,3-Dimethylhexane
3,4-Dimethylhexane
2-Methyl-3-ethylpentane
3-Methyl-3-ethylpentane
2,2,3-Trimethylpentane
2,2,4-Trimethylpentane (isooctane)
2,3,3-Trimethylpentane
2,3,4-Trimethylpentane
2,2,3,3-Tetramethylbutane


And you CAN actually distinguish the combustion of OCTANE in gasoline/petrol.

Do leave off!

>I hope the oil leak isn't too
> much of a problem...
>

Can you determine where the leak is originating from? MAybe spray some
engine cleaner, soak about 30 minutes, pressure wash off. Run engine to
operating temp to dry off. I used a car wash for $2 and did mine before
finding the front crank seal was leaking. Quick and easy. I know of several
locations and possible quick fixes. Please let us know where it is.

Bill in Omaha
'86 535i

On Apr 19, 12:54 pm, wrote:
> On 19 Apr 2007 07:13:22 -0700, wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Apr 18, 5:58 pm, JRE > wrote:
> >> wrote:
>
> >> <snip>> It's a simple electrolysis unit that you can make at home
> >> > for under 40 or so bucks that splits regular tap water into HHO gas
> >> > and this is sucked up into theairintakesuch that the gasoline gets
> >> > a complete burn because hydrogen burns cleaner than anything else in
> >> > the universe and doesn't even require oxygen to do so.
>
> >> <snip>
>
> >> Sorry, but I'm afraid that hydrogen _does_ require oxygen to burn,
> >> though the engine will adjust the fuel mix based on the hydrogenintake
> >> as long as the adjustment falls within the maps in the ECU (else it will
> >> try as hard as it can and then light the MIL, aka check engine light).
> >> So it might or might not be necessary to add O2 to the mix to get the
> >> thing to run right if all you do is keep the H from the electrolysis.
>
> >> Further, you'll have a _very_ explosive mix sitting around if you trap
> >> both the H and the O2 from electrolysis and store them together...and in
> >> perfect proportion. This is the basis of FAEs (fuel-airexplosives) but
> >> using pure H and O2 goes one better since atmosphericairis only 21% or
> >> so O2.
>
> >> There's no way you can collect enough of this combination of gases top
> >> be useful without compressing it, and compressing both together will be
> >> very hazardous. Not to mention having it in the car in case of an
> >> accident (assuming you even succeed in compressing it without it going
> >> bang!). I hope this isn't what you're planning. If it is, I hope I'm
> >> not near where you live or plan to operate this vehicle and that
> >> innocent people are not injured.
>
> >> Moreover, the energy spent splitting water into hydrogen and O2 will not
> >> be regained in internal combustion no matter how you handle it. Unless
> >> electricity is *dirt* cheap where you live, or you're using a renewable
> >> primary energy source to generate it, you'll lose money on the deal.
>
> >> JRE
>
> >You are old school, my friend. Obviously, the energy put into
> >splitting is greater or equal to than the energy gained, and the power
> >of hydrogen and oxygen combined is what NASA uses
>
> You mean the Space Shuttle runs on WATER? By god man that's astounding!
>
>
>
> > but that is not how
> >this works. There is NO onboard storage of explosive gases. It is
> >produced as needed. The HHO or Brown's gas (there are debates as to
> >what is being produced exactly) helps the octane to completely burn,
> >whereas in a normal situation the octane is still burning as it leaves
> >the exhaust and relies on the catalytic converter to finish the job.
> >The minute amount of hydrogen is sort of like a catalyst that reduces
> >the time it takes for the octane to ignite so it burns faster during
> >the combustion cycle and therefore more completely resulting in more
> >power and increased mileage. There are many companies, led by the
> >Canadian ones who are already marketing these electrolysis units and
> >many truckers already have been using them for over a decade.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

You're a real Einstein, aren't ya? Of course the space shuttle
doesn't run off of water, the booster rockets do. More specifically,
the recombination of hydrogen and oxygen into water which releases
more energy per unit of reactant than any other combination. That's
why NASA uses it, among other reasons like...pollution. This has zero
emissions.