Supercharged e90 M3 Failure

[SflBimmer8484]

Originally Posted by MPoweredAuto

I don't have much time to elaborate on everything, due to time constraints but will tomorrow. Maybe you should speak with your former sales staff who recommended I return back to stock. Also, in 6th gear to run a top speed it will certainly do 198mph.

The rest of the allegations "Andrew" imposed will be addressed tomorrow. I have a pregnant wife and I must go. I will include more details tomorrow. And as for the thought of me "money shifting" it, that is 100% untrue and will remain that way until I die. Anyone who has ridden in a car with me knows I backhand from 3rd to 4th and have NEVER "money shifted" a car.

More elaboration to everything tomorrow. Thanks

We await your response tomorrow.

[MilehighM3]

We all do!

[Rshane]

Originally Posted by Andrew@ActiveAutowerke

To address the allegations laid against us by Jordan Russ of Import Motor Werks, formerly M Powerered Automotive, please see as follows:

Jordan purchased a Level 2 SC kit for his E92 M3 from Active Autowerke, it was installed at our facility in August, 2010, mileage 24,345. In October, 2010; approximately 6-7 weeks after, we were informed that his engine blew . We immediately requested pictures of spark plugs, etc., and also to look at the ECU as this will also provide information on what went wrong; all were provided along with the request from Jordan to return the ECU to stock.

Real evidence lies within the stored ‘Shadow Memory’ of the ECU. Active Autowerke never suggested that Jordan take his car to BMW to claim any kind of warranty, as we know it would be a useless claim because the shadow memory would be checked and the data would show cause of engine failure. Here were our findings when we viewed his ECU:

The Maximum engine speed recorded indicated 8705+ RPM when the factory rev limiter is set to 8300, and Active Autowerke clearly set the rev limiter to 8100RPM for the supercharged cars.

He was not at 6000 RPM when the engine failed.

The throttle position showed 36% opening and not 100% opening when the engine failed, this would indicate that the engine most likely was in a deceleration mode. Active suspects a driver mis-shift going from 4th to 5th gear and hitting 3rd by mistake. Why? Because the road speed at the time with the 36% throttle opening indicated a 207 KM/hr speed (128 MPH). If the supercharger created excessive load on the engine to break the connecting rod, the shadow memory would most likely indicate that the throttle would be closer to 100% opening where the maximum supercharged power is developed.

He claimed that his car was pushed on the dyno to 190+ MPH, the gearing on this vehicle makes it impossible for this to happen; it allows for maybe 183-185 MPH at 8150 RPM, this is the rev limit that was set by Active to the SC. In addition, Active Autowerke’s Mustang dyno does not allow for road speeds above 160 MPH.

He said he drove the vehicle for only 1,200 miles, the recorded mileage in his ECU was 26,183 (42231 KM); therefore 26,183 less 24,345 = 1,838 miles driven after the SC install. If the SC system was the problem, damage should have occurred within 200 miles and not after 1,800 miles.

All his spark plugs showed that the engine had no problems with any kind of improper tuning that would lead to “meltdown” due to lean mixtures or improper ignition timing, also, the pistons were not overheated due to ‘meltdown’, ‘meltdown’ is indicative of poor tuning, too low a fuel octane number, lean fuel mixtures..

The engine connecting rod that failed clearly showed that it was still free to move on the crank pin journal, it was also free to move on the small end where it is attached to the piston; this was confirmed by Jordan when he was asked, his pictures also supported this. This verifies that lubrication was sufficient and the failure was not due to the connecting rod “seizing” against the crankshaft rod journal.

There was no evidence of valves floating or broken due to contact with the piston of the damaged cylinder.

In summary, E9X M3’s equipped with Active Autowerke’s Level 2 SC have run on the race tracks for driving and racing events, of which there has been no engine failures. Dan Schaut ran his 2008 BMW M3 equipped with the Active Autowerke Level 2 SC system in the 2011 One Lap of America event placing 1st in his class. In this race, cars are subjected to maximum use of power under the most rigorous condition for 7 consecutive days and covering over ~~4,000 miles of road and track. The E9X Active Autowerke supercharger system in Level 2 configuration has with stood the test of maximum reliability and at the same time delivering maximum performance under rigorous conditions and has shown that our SC system is well engineered and manufactured.

In conclusion, Senior Technician, ‘Scrappy’ and Technical Director, Karl, in looking at the recorded data in the “Shadow Memory” of the engine’s ECU along with all of the stated observations, have concluded that the damage done to the engine was due to “driver’s error.”

After no determination was shown for fault due to the SC system, an agreement was made for reimbursement for the cost of the system. Evidence of this reflected in the fact that both Import Motor Werks and Active Autowerke have mutually enjoyed a year of business relations. Recently Jordan emailed and demanded us to pay $25,000 or he would go to the forums. Although sympathetic to his loss as no one ever wants to ever have to pay for a broken motor, Active Autowerke cannot accept liability for damages it did not incur.

Active Autowerke is a reputable BMW tuner and is now in its 31st year of business. We have sold innumerable forced inductions kits since 1995 and have always stood by our products.

Thanks for clearing things up. I normally stay out of threads like this because I was "not there" at the time of the incident and usually get only part of the story.

Although I am not a tuner, I have a fair amount of knowledge with force induction with past vehicles...mostly various Mustangs. I have grenaded my share of motors too...one money shift on my turbo 03 Cobra (new short shifter is what I'll blame for that one), one bad tune, and two meltdowns from excessive heat.

A bad tune on the ops car would have shown itself a lot sooner, and the plugs would have shown that. I also ASSUME the knock sensors would have picked that up.

From the evidence shown, if I were a betting man, I would put all my money on a "money shift".

Once again, i wasn't there, and there are other possibilities such as a manufacturers defect on the part of BMW, but i have my doubts about that.

IMO. AA went above and beyond by buying back there SC kit...they didn't have to do that, and with the prices of those kits...that's about half the cost of a new motor right there...so, in my warped mind AA paid for half your new motor when they didn't have too.

Originally Posted by THE TECH

True but we would need to see some proof that the OP changed the tuning to allow the higher rev limit as suggested by Active. Otherwise, as far as we know, Active could have upped the rev limit when they did the tune.

No tune in the world will prevent an overrev ona money shift...

[M3_WC]

If in fact it was a money shift. Doesn't matter what kit it had on it, the engine is going to pop.

[Mr. 5]

Unnecessary 3rd party advertisements have been deleted.
Keep on topic guys.

[M3ryder55]

Obviously this was an accident.... a very expensive accident... My brother did this on his E36 M3 back in the days driving home slightly buzzed..

cost him like 6 K to fix..bmw told him the same thing that the car was over revved and he grenade his s52 motor with 4 K miles. Take it like a man and stop pointing the finger at Active. The timing sucks especially with the baby on the way but live and learn my man.

[SflBimmer8484]

Just a reminder this happened over a year ago.

http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthr...A+supercharger

[Beedub]

all in all this pus me off strapping a supercharger to a n/a high revving high compression engine!!!

The worry thing is, ive already done it!!! LOL!!! these threads really set me with worry!!!

[Brainofjjj]

Sucks for the OP but I'm glad we're seeing both sides, at least we should soon.

I find it odd that AA and Jordan's company are connected. Jordan advertises AA on his website and I assume sells their kits. Just not the normal thread you see when things like this happen.

You boost your car then you assume the risk in my book.

[J08M3]

Originally Posted by whats77inaname

Hmmmmmmmmm, you're blaming the OP for trying to cheat BMW when it was aftermarket company that suggested it and then do it. Might be helpful to get your facts straight....

Originally Posted by J08M3

Nothing is proven fact posted on here. If OP is willing to lie to BMW how do we know he's not lying about AA??? ...... just saying....

hmmm.... like I said before. Someone's got a big lie going on here.

[GOVCO]

...well, I think the OP is clear in his intentions, in that his thread was

Again, this isn't intended to flame, but rather inform.

Well, how's that working...Seems some folks can't let things go...hide behind their PC/Mac, and really add fuel to the fire. There is always risk involved with modifying a car [period]. Heck, there is risk involved with walking across a busy street. We make these decisions on a daily basis...live with it. Try and help one another, not hinder. Damn people! I'm off to drive my stock N/A M3. She blows up...I'll take the bus.

[THE TECH]

I eagerly await the OP's upcoming response.

[m33]

Originally Posted by Andrew@ActiveAutowerke

From My explanation Above.

Real evidence lies within the stored ‘Shadow Memory’ of the ECU. Active Autowerke never suggested that Jordan take his car to BMW to claim any kind of warranty, as we know it would be a useless claim because the shadow memory would be checked and the data would show cause of engine failure. Here were our findings when we viewed his ECU:

Before commenting I just wanna say I'm not in any way pointing fingers or blaming anyone !

You do know that shadow memory does not record time date info? There is no way anyone can tell when an rpm limit was achieved. There is no way for anyone to know when any recorded data was recorded.
At this point the data in the shodow memory confirming what happen during motor failure is 100% speculation....

[m33]

They can turn down his claim after seeing the car hit 190+mph , aswell as over revving !

I have a friend who would redline his motor on a daily basis ( don't remember the exact details as it been some time ) and after a while he had an engine problem & Try'd getting his motor warranty'd , one scan from the dealer reveal'd how many times he was in the redline zone so they put the together the number of redlines and came up with a ridiculous number of how often this kid redlined his car so they denied his claim ...
But they ware never able to say you redlined your car at this date and time .
Pretty nuts cause he wasn't even supercharged the car was stock lol

[SflBimmer8484]

Originally Posted by m33

Before commenting I just wanna say I'm not in any way pointing fingers or blaming anyone !

You do know that shadow memory does not record time date info? There is no way anyone can tell when an rpm limit was achieved. There is no way for anyone to know when any recorded data was recorded.
At this point the data in the shodow memory confirming what happen during motor failure is 100% speculation....

You are correct the shadow memory does not store the time that this "failure" occurred.

It does however store the mileage the damage occurred.

[THE TECH]

Originally Posted by Andrew@ActiveAutowerke

It does however store the mileage the damage occurred.

And what relevance does that have? Just cause he said it was ~1200 and you say it happened at ~1800 after install?

[SflBimmer8484]

It was the last recorded data saved to the ecu which matches the miles on the car.

[THE TECH]

Originally Posted by m33

You do know that shadow memory does not record time date info? There is no way anyone can tell when an rpm limit was achieved. There is no way for anyone to know when any recorded data was recorded.
At this point the data in the shodow memory confirming what happen during motor failure is 100% speculation....

Originally Posted by Andrew@ActiveAutowerke

You are correct the shadow memory does not store the time that this "failure" occurred.

It does however store the mileage the damage occurred.

Originally Posted by Andrew@ActiveAutowerke

It was the last recorded data saved to the ecu which matches the miles on the car.

Ok, so I still am not understanding the relevance. The last data would obviously show the last mileage on the car. There is still no evidence that the max rev info, throttle info, etc were at the same time that the last mileage was stored.

[m33]

I guess they can look at the mileage vs last data recorded vs the kaboom and combine all 3 and get an idea of a tale, I'm a bit stumped myself ..
Good info though which goes to show how they keep tabs with these cars , I wont be surprised if one day they can tell time , place and reinact what actually happend .

[SflBimmer8484]

Yes exactly its just like a black box when a plane goes down.

[THE TECH]

Originally Posted by m33

I guess they can look at the mileage vs last data recorded vs the kaboom and combine all 3 and get an idea of a tale

Yes, of course that is assuming that it all happened at the same time. But yet again, that is an assumption if indeed there is no way to know when the alleged "money shift" occurred. I don't wanna sound like I'm taking sides, I just want facts and not speculations. Once AA chimed in, everyone took their side as fact yet according to what has been posted by both sides, nothing can be proved. Continuing to play the devil's advocate, isn't there a possibility that the alleged bad shift could have occurred a mile from AA after the kit was installed?

[THE TECH]

Originally Posted by Andrew@ActiveAutowerke

Yes exactly its just like a black box when a plane goes down.

So do we know what this data is/was? Because this is now conflicting with the shadow memory scenario which has been spoken about already.