Runaway BMW??

No, but I have listened to the interview.

The interviewer lady asked:

"Again couldn't you just have turned the engine off Kevin?"

K: "Ehh I remember speaking about this on the actual phone to when I was on the police, ehh thinking about it now if I'd turned the engine off then I would have lost absolutely everything. I've would have had no control of the steering wheel because it's all power steering...".

"So it was safer to get going in a sense?".

K: "People are going to say yes, and people are going to say no."

S**te engines badly maintained seem ok at holding their V-max - the 405 still used to get very near (it took a LOT of road) on the GPS - about 8mph over on the speedo :) Which I thought was pretty good for it's age/shiteness.

Because it was an automatic.

He was doing about 100mph when he ploughed into the roundabout at Blyth.

Try gathering facts;-) I have had both ZF and GM boxes linked to BMW engines and a Mercedes tiptronic type and none have a facility for locking out Neutral. Also they 'fail-safe'. Also had earlier ZF boxes and same applies though they [early ones from the mid 80's] had a related issue which is not relevant in this context .

Huw

The message from "Ivan" contains these words:

Depends on the box. With some you may find it disonnects - in effect neutral. Others may stay engaged - with some engine braking down to quite a low speed. this is because the oil pump the gearbox relies on is still going round 'cos the input shaft is still going round - and this is because the gearbox is able to drive it because the oil pump's still going round. Not as deranged as it sounds - it's rather like the reason you can't push start most automatics - until the input's going round there's no oil pressure to make all the hydraulics work - but once it is then it'll continue to work till the car nearly stops.

Whichever, it'll still stop soon enough if you cut the power and aren't facing downhill.

The message from "Senor Osito" contains these words:

It's possible the dibbles have a policy of not telling people to turn the ignition off in case they turn it too far and engage the steering lock, crash and sue the dibbles for telling them to do it.

Perhaps you'd like to try it for us..... apply full throttle with the 'box in 'top' then, whilst still on full throttle, slip it into neutral and see what happens...... any reasonably intelligent box wouldn't allow you to do that.

They all allow you to do this for safety reasons;-) I run these things while you are just surmising ISTM. All modern engines are governed to have maximum revs which are within safe parameters. If it did exceed those boundaries for a few seconds it is unlikely that any harm would occur and even if it did it would be infinitely preferable to careering down a motorway at top speed with no control. Try revving those Italian cars of yours. I bet they have rev limiters.

Huw

This was an old BMW with a 4HP ZF box. Just a selector lever on the floor.

Tim S Kemp ( snipped-for-privacy@timkemp.karoo.co.uk) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying :

It's a Kev in an aging Beemer.

"Properly maintained"?

Almost certainly will have had an induction kit and big exhaust bolted on, meaning it's more than likely to be well down on power over the OEM spec ;-)

So it's only thinking about it now that he has a reason for not doing it? I note he doesn't say whether the police suggested it was a good idea or a bad idea.

Also, "no control over the steering wheel"? What complete crap.

Conor wrote on Sun, 12 Mar 2006 10:55:09 -0000:

It'd get you a lot slower than 130mph, though... At that speed, I imagine even down a gentle hill in neutral, you'd still slow down a bit from air resistance.

GMT:

I think that I would have turned the engine off, it would be an instinctive response. I would avoid turning the steering wheel at a large angle that could engage the steering lock. Once the engine cut out, then you can turn the key back to a position where it can't engage the steering lock. Then the braking would work (even without servo), I would just stamp hard on the brakes and the car would quickly come to a stop.

Coming very slowly to a stop would have been equally acceptable in his situation.

John

The message from John Henderson contains these words:

Perhaps when he gets a new car he'll do the job properly next time.

but if you are driveing down the road and have covered 60 miles, some of them on the nard shoulder, you can still turn the engine off and slow down to a point where you will stop in less than 60 miles ;) he should have turned the engine off when he was doing 70 though

but why wasn't he doing 135?

Haven't a clue. Maybe the small amount left of his brakes had cooled down and been able to slow him a little bit by then?