From: <dmcnews_at_dml_yahoogroups.com>
To: <dmcnews_at_dml_yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [DML] Digest Number 2013
Date: Thursday, May 13, 2004 1:08 AM

There are 5 messages in this issue.

Topics in this digest:

1. Re: Still no start
From: "content22207" <brobertson_at_dml_carolina.net>

2. Re: Trailing arm bolt procedure w/ jack stands?
From: "David Teitelbaum" <jtrealty_at_dml_webspan.net>

3. Soliciting Suggestions For Fuel Tank Mod
From: "content22207" <brobertson_at_dml_carolina.net>

4. Rear louver
From: jimbo0946_at_dml_aol.com

5. Snapping input shafts - an update
From: Martin Gutkowski <martin_at_dml_delorean.co.uk>





Message: 1
Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 22:06:46 -0000
From: "content22207" <brobertson_at_dml_carolina.net>
Subject: Re: Still no start

Based on #4, either your starter motor's bendix (the gizmo that throws
the gear out) is bad, or you've got broken teeth on the flywheel.
Shine a light into the bellhousing to eliminate the latter.

Bill Robertson
#5939

>--- In dmcnews_at_dml_yahoogroups.com, "nbrommer2k" <nickbrom_at_dml_a...> wrote:
> Hello list,
> 
> Still having starting problems. Here's what I've done so far.
> 
> 1) Removed starter and took it to an Auto Electronics shop. Guy said 
> it tested fine, I could hear it spinning when he had it on his bench.
> 
> 2) Gave a good cleaning to all connections on starter and the leads 
> going to starter. Cleaned battery terminals and cables.
> 
> 3) Reinstalled starter. Still won't fire. I turn the key and hear the 
> relay clicking, but starter does not turn.
> 
> 4) When I jump between the terminals on the starter, it spins but 
> does not engage and turn the engine.
> 
> 5) I interchanged the start inhibit relay (it's an auto) with the 
> relay next to it (a/c illumination?), but with no different results.
> 
> 6) Swore and scratched my head a little.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> Nick




________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________


Message: 2
Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 23:25:07 -0000
From: "David Teitelbaum" <jtrealty_at_dml_webspan.net>
Subject: Re: Trailing arm bolt procedure w/ jack stands?

I do not like ramps. For the most part they are made very cheaply.
Even on a hard level surface many are so weak that you could push the
car sidways and the ramps would just fall over. In many cases you
would hit the underbody of the car if you where to try to drive up
onto them. If you have to jack the car up anyway jackstands are MUCH 
safer. Jackstands take up less room and allow you to remove the
wheels, you can't do that with ramps. Most of the time when you need
to get a car up off the ground you have to remove the wheels anyway.
You can get a car a lot higher with jackstands than a ramp and for a
Delorean it makes it nicer to work under if you can get it higher. I
would never go under a car with a creeper that is on ramps. For some
jobs like trans and clutch ramps are just too low. You can get a good
set of 2 jackstands around 2-3 tons for $25 per pair. You can easily
spend more than $50 dollars for 1 set of ramps. Of course you will
have to spend for a floor jack but it is one of the more useful tools
you can have for a car. NEVER EVEN THINK OF USING CINDER BLOCKS TO
SUPPORT A CAR!!!!!! They can crumble without warning. Same goes for
wire milk crates, plastic boxes and all the other things you can
imagine. If you are doing work on the car for enjoyment and/or to save
money it is worth your life to spend a little of your savings on some
quality tools.
David Teitelbaum
vin 10757


--- In dmcnews_at_dml_yahoogroups.com, tobyp_at_dml_k... wrote:
> Adam - Having the car on ramps is absolutely okay in terms of 
> torqueing up the TAB's.  The only condition that is really "sub-





________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________


Message: 3
Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 23:08:10 -0000
From: "content22207" <brobertson_at_dml_carolina.net>
Subject: Soliciting Suggestions For Fuel Tank Mod

My current PRV has developed a hole in the top a'la Dave Swingle (who
theorizes this may become a common affliction among cars that
languished outdoors). Recesses in the "Valley of Death" were suctioned
out the first time I ever removed the intake manifold, but obviously
damage was already done. Didn't leak then, but it sure does now. If
you ever lose the top of your engine you'll know it -- oil absolutely
everywhere, even on the exterior where it gets slung out the louver vents.

Yes: I replaced the front oil seal and ensured timing chain cover was
tight (even reseated lower 8 bolts in silicone with oversize washers).
Verified my hole, with the manifold in place, by flooding the top of
the engine then checking my oil -- full of foam (my head gaskets do
not leak).

Since I have a factory new block sitting idle, will try to transplant
it before Pigeon Forge.

This new block is carbureted, so I need to tone down or jetison the
current CI pump in the tank. My preference is a blank plate over the
opening with a tube straight down into the baffle. Will run a new low
pressure line to the rear of the car, where the pump will probably be
located.

Any suggestions to secure, and seal, a plate over the tank opening?

Bill Robertson
#5939






________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________


Message: 4
Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 19:44:14 -0400
From: jimbo0946_at_dml_aol.com
Subject: Rear louver

I was wondering if anyone on the board has a rear louver that they would like to sell.  Some A$$hole decided to walk over my car when I had it parked and stepped through one of the ribs.

Thanks,
Jim
VIN # 15880



________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________


Message: 5
Date: Thu, 13 May 2004 01:59:35 +0100
From: Martin Gutkowski <martin_at_dml_delorean.co.uk>
Subject: Snapping input shafts - an update

Hi All

I had an interesting conversation today in my search for a gearbox 
specialist who can fix a manual tranny we've removed.

I remembered the kit-car place close to where I grew up, found their 
website and gave them a call. I remember reading their site on the use 
of the PRV and the UN1 gearbox (identical to the 369 apart from the 
linkage).

To cut a long story short, they have gone through the exact same 
problems as DeLorean owners who drop in a big engine and break input 
shafts - particularly in GT40 replicas apparently. I need to do some 
more investigation, but they have a guy who rebuilds their UN1 boxes 
with strengthened input shafts _and_ a limited slip diff.

The GT40 replicas use a "long legged" final drive to give a good top 
speed - which bears out what I've been saying about the final drive 
being the key. All the performance Renaults using the UN1 or 369 have a 
3.8:1 or even 4.1:1, and they never break...

I will find out more in the coming week when they strip our box down.

Martin
DMUK





________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________


To address comments privately to the moderating team, please address:
moderators_at_dml_dmcnews.com

For more info on the list, tech articles, cars for sale see www.dmcnews.com

To search the archives or view files, log in at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dmcnews
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
     http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dmcnews/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
     dmcnews-unsubscribe_at_dml_yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
     http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------