Jump to content

Conserv

Alpina
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    15,495

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    113

  • Feedback

    100%

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Conserv

  1. Conserv
    Answers: 1. Sanden 2. I still use original condensers (Clardy and Behr) 3. I still use original auxiliary fans (Clardy and Behr), but I’m likely going to swap out the original Clardy auxiliary fan, which looks like something borrowed from a 1940 pickup truck and converts a lot of electricity into very little air movement. 4. No idea. Whatever brand the A/C guy wants to install. 5. Recall that, from my perspective, all ‘02 A/C units are aftermarket. The Frigiking, Behr, and Clardy were all original R12 systems. I.C.E. AIr, of course, is an R134a system. I’ve kept my A/C’s R12, largely because I wanted to retain the original condensers and get maximum cooling out of limited-capacity units. I’ve had both expansion valves replaced. My experience — well, actually Korman’s experience — with my systems on R12 is that they needed dedicated R12-only expansion valves, as they made excess noise (the sound of fluid/gas running through a hose) with expansion valves claiming to be R12/R134a compliant. So, although I answered your query, it seems I’ve been able to provide very little useable data! ? Regards, Steve
  2. Conserv
    Congrats! Looks like a dry car, indeed! Strong sheen on those bumpers: a good sign! Thanks and regards, Steve
  3. Conserv
    Thanks, but we really need more than a VIN and a (current? factory?) color! Please email those VIN’s to the BMW Group Archives (info.grouparchiv@bmwgroup.com) and request their data on the three cars. At no cost, and generally within two business days, you’ll have precise manufacturing dates for all three (along with Archives confirmations of the original colors). Share with us here and/or place those three cars in this forum’s Registry! Thanks and regards, Steve
  4. Conserv
    I’ll take it, Rick. Please look for my PM. Thanks and regards, Steve
  5. Conserv
    Oh, I didn’t notice there was a photo with a VIN revealed! My records show VINs 2760129 and 2760156 as being manufactured on December 17, 1971. Although not the equivalent of a BMW Group Archives data dump, this certainly suggests that this car, VIN 2760152, would have a December 17, 1971 manufacturing date as well. But if you’re considering the car, get an Archives report to confirm the original color, so you know whether you’re buying a factory Inka car, or something else (info.grouparchiv@bmwgroup.com). VIN 2760152, of course, left the factory with a 121 head and plastic intake runners. I note this because the car now carries aluminum intake runners. The car has been re-painted — lots of overspray and previously-plated components now painted (e.g., the hood hold-down bar) — but so have most ‘02’s by this point in time. That’s it for now. No, I’m not going to discuss the e21 radiator and the presence of an “S” on the radiator support! ? Regards, Steve
  6. Conserv
    Absolutely, It’s not been done yet. I’m just waiting for some adventurous soul, who is less sensitive to altering his/her ‘02, to work out the details. And then I’ll follow! By the by, apart from a long history of big cars — e.g., Cadillacs in the 1950’s, Mercedes 300 Adenauers in the early 1960’s — using trunk-mounted A/C units, there was an aftermarket supplier who built a trunk-mounted A/C unit for the NK sedans. That’s pretty close to home and I’m kicking myself for not buying one I saw for sale 8-10 years ago! Still, it will be a challenge to provide adequate condenser capacity for two evaporators. But someone can do it! Regards, Steve
  7. Conserv
    Yes, and yes! Best regards, Steve
  8. Conserv
    Just so you know what I’m thinking, Simeon: What if those flow-through ventilation tubes carried return air to a trunk-mounted A/C evaporator? They alone probably don’t have adequate capacity — you’d have to supplement them — but they would be pulling out some of the warmest air in the car (at the very top of the greenhouse) and chilling it.... OK, yes, I’m wandering off topic... ? Best regards, Steve
  9. Conserv
    A $6,000 Inka ‘72 tii comes on the market with an asking price that is 50%? 33%? 25% of its perceived market value. Granted, we haven’t seen enough of the car to develop an informed opinion as to which of those percentages applies. And, no, I haven’t given away “our hand”: any seller can tell by the responses here alone that his pricing is...very attractive. But this forum is “Mad as hell and not going to take it anymore!” Yes, members are frustrated because there is a line around the block hoping to buy this car at that crazy asking price, but I’m fairly confident that the car will not sell — at whatever price — to the person hurling the greatest insults and threats.... Nor is anger likely to force a quick sale of this car. Most of us have seen similar situations previously. I’d wager this car will be sold to someone who speaks nicely to the owner. This is my opinion. Yours may differ! ? Regards, Steve
  10. Conserv
    Leave them plugged, Nick!
  11. Conserv
    My early ‘70, with sunroof, Mike, (VIN 1668093, September 8, 1969) was obviously later than your ‘69. And I recall discovering the foam stuffed in at least one of the flow-through holes, assumed it was a factory accident, and discarded the errant foam... Luckily, I totaled that car before the headliner blew out at speed....?? Hey, I was a punk kid. What the hell did I know! ? How could I have known that a respected German car manufacturer would solve a design defect by stuffing foam rubber scraps in a duct? ? Best regards, Steve
  12. Conserv
    Very nice! It’s got a three-spoke steering wheel, padded dash, and outside rearview mirror mounted at the rear of the front vent windows, so it’s probably not a super-early (September 1967), but it’s got a silver instrument cluster bezel, so I’d guess it’s still fairly early, possibly before January 1, 1968. Regards, Steve
  13. Conserv
    Do it all: it certainly can’t hurt. But, ultimately, the greenhouse has a lot of glass for its size. If you can figure out how to distribute the cooled air to the outer perimeter of the greenhouse — in contrast to the common Frigiking, Behr, and Clardy units, which only distribute air to the inner core of the greenhouse — you’ll wind up with a better A/C system. Please keep us posted. Regards, Steve
  14. Conserv
    I’ve noticed no temperature difference between air conditioned cars without sunroofs (having flow-through ventilation) and those with sunroofs (having no flow-through ventilation), which suggests the flow-through ventilation is pretty ineffectual, particularly when your windows are closed, which they will be while you’re operating the air conditioning. Still, although I’m sold on ‘02 air conditioning, it most certainly does not meet modern cooling standards, or even the cooling standards of U.S. domestic cars of the ‘02 era. The limitation is the distribution of the cool air, and the flow-through ventilation is probably not a material detriment. Regards, Steve
  15. Conserv
    ‘02’s without sunroofs have a 1960’s version (read, “primitive”) of flow-through ventilation: air is sucked/forced into the headliner just above the rear window and exhausted under the trunk lid, on either side of the trunk. The first two photos show the right and left exhaust outlets. The third and fourth photos show the partially-corrugated plastic tubes that conduct the extracted air from the rear bulkhead to the exhaust outlets. The system, in my opinion, is ineffectual. ’02’s with sunroofs do not have this system: the factory was concerned that air within the headliner could balloon the headliner, and possibly blow it out. Accordingly, they made adjustments to examples with sunroofs. Regards, Steve
  16. Conserv
    Holy cow: I just needed to read all your posts! Awesome! How about making this an article so we don’t lose track of it? VIN 1676333 is probably September 1970, which suggests all (at least most?) 1971 models had Borg Warner synchros. VIN 1571878 is sometime after April 1970 — sorry, I have no U.S. 1602 data points after April 1970. I find it interesting that BMW’s bulletin focuses solely on the change of synchros, and makes no mention of the shift of transmission models, presumably 235 to 245. And even the factory numbering of the “universal gearboxes” did not change with this upgrade of synchros. Best regards, Steve
  17. Conserv
    Wow, Jim, keep reading these bulletins! Even if it’s difficult to know — based on a lack of data — what VIN’s relate to transmission 200101, the January 1971 date of this bulletin gives us a pretty good idea of the changeover date! Best regards, Steve
  18. Conserv
    Beautiful, Andrew! Best regards, Steve
  19. Conserv
    +1 to Delia’s and Les’s comments, Stated differently, a U.S.-spec ‘02 manufactured in November or December 1969 would be a U.S. 1970 model. The manufacturing date issue, and, thus, the model year issue, can be resolved quickly and at no cost, with only 1 minute of modest effort. Email the VIN to BMW Group Archives (info.grouparchiv@bmwgroup.com) and request their data on the car. You will generally receive a reply within two business days. GLWS, Steve
  20. Conserv
    Plastic, Paul, But they’re not for the floor. They’re for the flow-through ventilation holes — in lieu of ventilation tubes. I don’t have a good photo of one in place, but the photo below shows the general context. Best regards, Steve
  21. Conserv
    The 1968 transmission was certainly originally equipped with Porsche synchronizers. The 1971 transmission might have originally been equipped with Borg Warner synchronizers, but there’s a thread on here — probably within the last year — that discusses the changeover from Porsche to Borg Warner synchronizers. A great many people believe the Borg Warner synchronizers wear much better than the Porsche synchronizers. On the other hand, quite a few people prefer the smooth shifting action of the Porsche. Regards, Steve
  22. Conserv
    Jim G. posted the brochure on multiple occasions, such as: And, yes, 1.6 liters. Regards, Steve
  23. Conserv
    I was fairly confident that the 1502 (November 1974-77) used a 1.6-liter engine, de-tuned for low-test gasolines. There’s a 1502 brochure somewhere around here.... Regards, Steve
  24. Conserv
    Thanks, Lorin, I assumed they were aluminum because of the thick walls and the deep pitting. But I should take a magnet to them — if I can just find that manifold! Best regards, Steve
  25. Conserv
    David, I can’t address the insurance issue, but I can address the salt issue. My ‘76 spent its first 35 years in the Northeast — primarily Pennsylvania, Connecticut, and New York — the first 7 of those years as a daily driver. It was constantly bathed in salt during those winters. Yet it had virtually no rust at the recent Big Re-Paint — just the front fenders and the small box section of the trunk floor between the fuel tank and the right quarter panel. No rocker issues, no frame rail issues, no quarter panel issues, no wheel well issues, no floor issues, no nosepiece issues, no nothing. The only thing I did different from most ‘02 owners was to rinse the underneath frequently in the winter. I’d take a sh*tload of quarters to the do-it-yourself car wash and really rinse the underside, right through the winters. A little salt will not hurt an ‘02 if you rinse it off. Below, a Reading, PA to Rochester, NY run in February 1977. Best regards, Steve
×
×
  • Create New...