Bimmerfest BMW banner

1 - 20 of 20 Posts

·
Come Back Soon
Joined
·
290 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I am planning a road trip of about 350 miles. (Assuming that I ever get my car back from the dealer). If I average 80 to 85 miles per hour, what type of gas mileage should I expect and what is the typical range on a tank of gas at that speed? The tank seems small, what is it 18 gallons?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
8,650 Posts
I took a 2,000 miles road trip up through California and Oregon back in November.

My average for the entire trip was 24MPG including both city and highway driving. On the highay alone, I was getting 26MPG. Well over 400 miles per tank.

Note that these numbers are for a 645 Coupe. Convertible will get a mile or two less.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,421 Posts
Did a trip recently
At fill up I had

Miles......Avg Speed.....iDrive MPG.......Gals............Actual MPG
440.2....... 78.6.............. 26.4.............17.685...............25.12
422.6....... 79.2.............. 25.5.............17.134...............24.66
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,970 Posts
cobradav said:
Did a trip recently
At fill up I had

Miles......Avg Speed.....iDrive MPG.......Gals............Actual MPG
440.2....... 78.6.............. 26.4.............17.685...............25.12
422.6....... 79.2.............. 25.5.............17.134...............24.66
Along with everything else, do you mean to tell us that iDrive is a :liar: too?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,421 Posts
Malibubimmer said:
Along with everything else, do you mean to tell us that iDrive is a :liar: too?
Oh yea. I’ve known that for some time and tried to calibrate it but did not have the patience to do it. It’s in another “secret” menu process, and I’ll have to retrieve that some day and pass it along. I love keeping records so I have spreadsheets for everything, including ALL actions on the 6er including every fill up, tire pressures, log of all CBS items in iDrive, etc. Also have this data for the entire 200K miles on two other vehicles. The only one I cannot keep track of is my wife’s car. It all started when I was doing the “books” for one of my wife’s businesses, but also happens to be a flaw in my character.:angel: :p
 

·
Nothing witty here
Joined
·
2,604 Posts
Getting about 22mpg highway and 14mpg city consistently. But then again, I only have 600 miles on it so far.

I don't go just by the I-Drive/OBC. I divide my miles on the tripmeter by how many gallons I put in it to get full again. It's not scientific but it gets me a 2nd opinion on the OBC readout.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,421 Posts
Here is the comparison of iDrive to calculated over the first 55 fill ups.

I see also a steady increas in average. Probably due to the nice weather now and AC not being on.
 

Attachments

·
Banned
Joined
·
8,650 Posts
lawman800 said:
Getting about 22mpg highway and 14mpg city consistently. But then again, I only have 600 miles on it so far.

I don't go just by the I-Drive/OBC. I divide my miles on the tripmeter by how many gallons I put in it to get full again. It's not scientific but it gets me a 2nd opinion on the OBC readout.
Do you have SMG? I would have to drive pretty agressively to get under 18MPG with the auto.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,970 Posts
cobradav said:
Oh yea. I’ve known that for some time and tried to calibrate it but did not have the patience to do it. It’s in another “secret” menu process, and I’ll have to retrieve that some day and pass it along. I love keeping records so I have spreadsheets for everything, including ALL actions on the 6er including every fill up, tire pressures, log of all CBS items in iDrive, etc. Also have this data for the entire 200K miles on two other vehicles. The only one I cannot keep track of is my wife’s car. It all started when I was doing the “books” for one of my wife’s businesses, but also happens to be a flaw in my character.:angel: :p
Cobradav - I think you may have compulsive obsessive disorder! (Of course, now I am diagnosing you on line, which I realize is a problem, but remember, I am a lawyer, so take it with less than a grain of salt.)

Any new SIBs in the last two days?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,421 Posts
Malibubimmer said:
Cobradav - I think you may have compulsive obsessive disorder! (Of course, now I am diagnosing you on line, which I realize is a problem, but remember, I am a lawyer, so take it with less than a grain of salt.)

Any new SIBs in the last two days?
Is this the same Malibu I thought I saw seeking sexual disorder advice over the net - ah, perhaps someone was seeking it for u:rolleyes: But yes, there is a "compulsive" something in me:p

Nothing new on SIB front. Ran a sweep late last night.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,970 Posts
cobradav said:
Is this the same Malibu I thought I saw seeking sexual disorder advice over the net - ah, perhaps someone was seeking it for u:rolleyes: But yes, there is a "compulsive" something in me:p

Nothing new on SIB front. Ran a sweep late last night.
Someone else accused me of that (libel), and I innocently asked another poster what his website was for, but the only medical problems I have that I know about are allergies. Also, being an attorney, I do not have a heart.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,742 Posts
Malibubimmer said:
Someone else accused me of that (libel)
:rofl:

and I innocently asked another poster what his website was for
My response was a total lie, too. :thumbup:

Also, being an attorney, I do not have a heart.
Im in the midst of a very frustrating lawsuit right now with an insane son of a b!tch who is representing himself (purely because it is frivolous as all hell). I could use some free advice right about now. Coincidentally, its an illegitimate libel case...
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,970 Posts
Nevervana said:
Im in the midst of a very frustrating lawsuit right now with an insane son of a b!tch who is representing himself (purely because it is frivolous as all hell). I could use some free advice right about now. Coincidentally, its an illegitimate libel case...
Ordinarily I'd tell you that maybe you should get a lawyer to represent you, and maybe you have an anti-SLAPP motion, but I will not tell you that because LA525Ti will pop up and accuse me of (a) giving you legal and advice and, therefore (b) being your lawyer.

So, all I will tell you is that you should get yourself a good lawyer. Is the insane son of a b!tch an attorney?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,742 Posts
No. He's certifiably insane. He's just some dude who created a fake product in his kitchen and started selling it to people online, and spamming my website with ads. We banned him and he kept coming back. He did the same on multiple other sites. All sites banned him, and he continued bypassing IP bans. Eventually the users started getting angry and harassing him, and once we all found a way to eliminate him from the site, he initiated lawsuits against everyone for trade libel and conspiracy to commit unfair business somethingoranother. I run a forum like this one and he's suing 50 of the users, claiming they work for competing companies, hired to trash talk his product. The sick part is, he has admitted he wont win the case. He's making the entire thing up. And thanks to California law, he can file a completely bunk lawsuit and the court system has no checks and balances to stop it before it goes anywhere. He's just having fun costing me $50,000-$100,000 in attorney's fees getting a SLAPP suit drafted and filed, as he repeatedly files motions that I have to pay attorneys to respond to, over and over. He says even after all this, he will continue to appeal it over and over and over into eternity. We won a venue change motion and he's still appealing it, on his own time to the supreme court. Trust me... he's insane. He sits in the library and drafts improperly formatted motions all day. Two judges have gotten pissed at him, but since he is Pro Per, they are protecting him from our sanctions requests. So the only winner here is my attorney. SLAPP hearing scheduled for March. This guy has a rap for attempted murder because he didn't like the results of a cosmetic surgery he had done. Sat outside the docs office with a loaded gun and was arrested for death threats. Hes nuts, and my BMW money is going to an attorney :(
 

·
Nothing witty here
Joined
·
2,604 Posts
So your attorney is getting a new BMW, Neverana?

Malibu, my heart is growing back slowly, I can see fresh sprigs popping out since I cut back on the practice. There is hope!
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,970 Posts
Boy, Nevervana, I wish I was your attorney!

Since you have your own attorneys, who seem to be doing well, just let me make the general observation that in California a person who represents himself and has lost a certain number of cases, can be declared by the court (upon motion by an affected party) to be a "vexatious litigant," and he will be prohibited from filing new lawsuits unless he first gets a court to allow him to do so. (He has to provide the presiding judge in the county where he is going to file a copy of the proposed new lawsuit. If it's the same old b.s. by a nutter, the court won't allow him to file. He can take it up on appeal, but no party from the other side is involved, and the court of appeal isn't going to cut him any slack.)

The courts keep lists of these vexatious litigants, pursuant to statute. So, at some point people harassed by lunatics should be able to get some relief. Being involved as a defendant with a large number of other people also allows those wrongly sued to share the defense costs. But it is a pain.

When I have defended cases against pro pers it's been very frustrating for everybody concerned (except the pro per). There is a wonderful cartoon from the New Yorker that illustrates this. It's courtroom scene. The judge has a thought bubble over his head: "How did this case get this far?" The plaintiff's attorney has a thought bubble over his head: "Why did I ever take this case?" The defense attorney has a thought bubble over his head: "How can I get rid of this guy?" And the plaintiff, who is on the witness stand, has a thought bubble, too, which reads: "This is great!"
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,742 Posts
Problem with the vexatious litigant strategy: Apparently old cases get stashed under the rug. Some are incredibly hard to find. If you don't already know about them, you very well might not find them at all, because they don't stay on any available searches for too long. I found that out by running a background check on this guy. Some listed cases aren't even retrievable unless you physically go down to every single court house he's sued people in, and ask for a copy.

We will be filing a vex lit. motion in regards to his multiple frivolous motions. Can vex lit be used within a case against someone clearly trying to run up the other's bill with multiple motions? I heard not.

Ive been unable to include the other website owners as they are all looking out for # 1 and don't want to get involved if he hasn't gone after them yet. Naturally, I assured them that when he does go after them, I won't be of much help when they need me.

By the way, he has sued microsoft in small claims court. Just for the exposure. He lost of course. But he sold all of his little "gadgets" that he was claiming microsoft had infringed the patent on... simply because of all the exposure he got. Mission accomplished.

I hope he watches "My name is Earl" sometime...
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,970 Posts
Nevervana said:
Problem with the vexatious litigant strategy: Apparently old cases get stashed under the rug. Some are incredibly hard to find. If you don't already know about them, you very well might not find them at all, because they don't stay on any available searches for too long. I found that out by running a background check on this guy. Some listed cases aren't even retrievable unless you physically go down to every single court house he's sued people in, and ask for a copy.

We will be filing a vex lit. motion in regards to his multiple frivolous motions. Can vex lit be used within a case against someone clearly trying to run up the other's bill with multiple motions? I heard not.

Ive been unable to include the other website owners as they are all looking out for # 1 and don't want to get involved if he hasn't gone after them yet. Naturally, I assured them that when he does go after them, I won't be of much help when they need me.

By the way, he has sued microsoft in small claims court. Just for the exposure. He lost of course. But he sold all of his little "gadgets" that he was claiming microsoft had infringed the patent on... simply because of all the exposure he got. Mission accomplished.

I hope he watches "My name is Earl" sometime...
I don't want to provide you with specific legal advice. But, here is the vexatious litigant statute in California. "CCP" refers to the Code of Civil Procedure. A person who is involved in a lawsuit can move in that lawsuit to have the plaintiff declared vexatious and require a bond to be posted before the litigation can continue. I've highlighted that section.

CCP §391. Definitions
As used in this title, the following terms have the following meanings:
(a) "Litigation" means any civil action or proceeding, commenced, maintained or pending in any state or federal court.
(b) "Vexatious litigant" means a person who does any of the following:
(1) In the immediately preceding seven-year period has commenced, prosecuted, or maintained in propria persona at least five litigations other than in a small claims court that have been (i) finally determined adversely to the person or (ii) unjustifiably permitted to remain pending at least two years without having been brought to trial or hearing.
(2) After a litigation has been finally determined against the person, repeatedly relitigates or attempts to relitigate, in propria persona, either (i) the validity of the determination against the same defendant or defendants as to whom the litigation was finally determined or (ii) the cause of action, claim, controversy, or any of the issues of fact or law, determined or concluded by the final determination against the same defendant or defendants as to whom the litigation was finally determined.
(3) In any litigation while acting in propria persona, repeatedly files unmeritorious motions, pleadings, or other papers, conducts unnecessary discovery, or engages in other tactics that are frivolous or solely intended to cause unnecessary delay.
(4) Has previously been declared to be a vexatious litigant by any state or federal court of record in any action or proceeding based upon the same or substantially similar facts, transaction, or occurrence.
(c) "Security" means an undertaking to assure payment, to the party for whose benefit the undertaking is required to be furnished, of the party's reasonable expenses, including attorney's fees and not limited to taxable costs, incurred in or in connection with a litigation instituted, caused to be instituted, or maintained or caused to be maintained by a vexatious litigant.
(d) "Plaintiff" means the person who commences, institutes or maintains a litigation or causes it to be commenced, instituted or maintained, including an attorney at law acting in propria persona.
(e) "Defendant" means a person (including corporation, association, partnership and firm or governmental entity) against whom a litigation is brought or maintained or sought to be brought or maintained.
CCP §391.1. Motion for Security Based on Ground Plaintiff is Vexatious Litigant
In any litigation pending in any court of this state, at any time until final judgment is entered, a defendant may move the court, upon notice and hearing, for an order requiring the plaintiff to furnish security. The motion must be based upon the ground, and supported by a showing, that the plaintiff is a vexatious litigant and that there is not a reasonable probability that he will prevail in the litigation against the moving defendant.

CCP §391.2. Hearing
At the hearing upon such motion the court shall consider such evidence, written or oral, by witnesses or affidavit, as may be material to the ground of the motion. No determination made by the court in determining or ruling upon the motion shall be or be deemed to be a determination of any issue in the litigation or of the merits thereof.
CCP §391.3. Order to Furnish Security
If, after hearing the evidence upon the motion, the court determines that the plaintiff is a vexatious litigant and that there is no reasonable probability that the plaintiff will prevail in the litigation against the moving defendant, the court shall order the plaintiff to furnish, for the benefit of the moving defendant, security in such amount and within such time as the court shall fix.
CCP §391.4. Dismissal When Security is Not Furnished
When security that has been ordered furnished is not furnished as ordered, the litigation shall be dismissed as to the defendant for whose benefit it was ordered furnished. CCP §391.5. [Repealed 1982 ch. 517.]
CCP §391.6. Litigation Stayed by Motion
When a motion pursuant to Section 391.1 is filed prior to trial the litigation is stayed, and the moving defendant need not plead, until 10 days after the motion shall have been denied, or if granted, until 10 days after the required security has been furnished and the moving defendant given written notice thereof. When a motion pursuant to Section 391.1 is made at any time thereafter, the litigation shall be stayed for such period after the denial of the motion or the furnishing of the required security as the court shall determine.
CCP §391.7. Motion to Prohibit Vexatious Litigant from Filing New Litigation
(a) In addition to any other relief provided in this title, the court may, on its own motion or the motion of any party, enter a prefiling order which prohibits a vexatious litigant from filing any new litigation in the courts of this state in propria persona without first obtaining leave of the presiding judge of the court where the litigation is proposed to be filed. Disobedience of the order by a vexatious litigant may be punished as a contempt of court.
(b) The presiding judge shall permit the filing of that litigation only if it appears that the litigation has merit and has not been filed for the purposes of harassment or delay. The presiding judge may condition the filing of the litigation upon the furnishing of security for the benefit of the defendants as provided in Section 391.3.
(c) The clerk may not file any litigation presented by a vexatious litigant subject to a prefiling order unless the vexatious litigant first obtains an order from the presiding judge permitting the filing. If the clerk mistakenly files the litigation without the order, any party may file with the clerk and serve on the plaintiff and other parties a notice stating that the plaintiff is a vexatious litigant subject to a prefiling order as set forth in subdivision (a). The filing of the notice shall automatically stay the litigation. The litigation shall be automatically dismissed unless the plaintiff within 10 days of the filing of that notice obtains an order from the presiding judge permitting the filing of the litigation as set forth in subdivision (b). If the presiding judge issues an order permitting the filing, the stay of the litigation shall remain in effect, and the defendants need not plead, until 10 days after the defendants are served with a copy of the order.
(d) For purposes of this section, "litigation" includes any petition, application, or motion other than a discovery motion, in a proceeding under the Family Code or Probate Code, for any order.
(e) The clerk of the court shall provide the Judicial Council a copy of any prefiling orders issued pursuant to subdivision (a). The Judicial Council shall maintain a record of vexatious litigants subject to those prefiling orders and shall annually disseminate a list of those persons to the clerks of the courts of this state.
Are we off topic, or what??
 

·
Nothing witty here
Joined
·
2,604 Posts
Mal, at what point, after you have defended multiple, frivolous motions, can you claim abuse of process and ask for attorney's fees? I have no experience in that.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,970 Posts
lawman800 said:
Mal, at what point, after you have defended multiple, frivolous motions, can you claim abuse of process and ask for attorney's fees? I have no experience in that.
Nevervana was right. You have to have the plaintiff found vexatious from prior litigation, and it can require a lot of detective work. Once you have ascertained that the plaintiff qualifies, you go in on a motion in the current case you have. It can even be before you have to file a response to the complaint. (The response will usually be a demurrer, because these nutters file therapeutic complaints and it's usually obvious that they hear messages from Captain Xircon at Lunar Station Beta in the special radio receiver in one of their molars.)

Usually it takes a while to locate the information, so you're usually already stuck in to the case. But the statute also provides at C.C.P § 391.6 that the case is stayed once you file your motion, so you don't have to respond to b.s. discovery and other demands from the nutter once you file.

To answer your question expressly, if your vexatious litigant doesn't have the qualifying number of prior cases in the qualifying time period, then you go under C.C.P § 391(b)(3), but most judges won't do anything until there's been a lot of abuse. However, if you get a judge with sufficient intestinal fortitude, he/she will eventually issue orders and take some control over the litigation to stop the abuse early on. Of course, you'll also be engaged in discovery and the nutter doesn't think the rules apply to him. So you'll usually be getting discovery orders and eventually a litigation-ending order without having to go to trial. But it can be exhausting and time consuming, and it can cost defendants plenty. Having said that, most nutters who file these cases are serial offenders, so most of them are already well known to the legal community. Unless you're really unlucky, you won't get a nutter in his first, or even tenth, frivolous lawsuit. But it can happen.
 
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
Top