Official S65 Bearing Specification/Clearance Wiki

[Petros]

Originally Posted by s85e90

What gets me the most is even the manual states you could hear audible pinging are knocking if you use bad gas it's a fact many people can hear knocking from bad gas when the car is under load especially one that lacks and torque such as the M3 get here we are today and I'm arguing with fools on the Internet who said there's no way I can tell what audible knocking sounds like

Ok I'll play along. Let's assume the M3 knock detection is crap, and gas sucks, and engines are getting knock all over the place. What does that have to do with the rod bearings? Is the implication that knock exacerbates rod bearing wear? If so, how do you explain the E60 M5? It has pretty much the same engine with the same bearing problem, but a totally different knock detection system. Any good hypothesis must have explanatory scope. It must explain ALL the available evidence. So if there is a problem with the knock detection system, does that mean BMW screwed up the knock detection system twice in two very different ways? That seems very unlikely and a violation of Occam's razor.

[Malek@MRF]

Originally Posted by Petros

Ok I'll play along. Let's assume the M3 knock detection is crap, and gas sucks, and engines are getting knock all over the place. What does that have to do with the rod bearings? Is the implication that knock exacerbates rod bearing wear? If so, how do you explain the E60 M5? It has pretty much the same engine with the same bearing problem, but a totally different knock detection system. Any good hypothesis must have explanatory scope. It must explain ALL the available evidence. So if there is a problem with the knock detection system, does that mean BMW screwed up the knock detection system twice in two very different ways? That seems very unlikely and a violation of Occam's razor.

Make that 3 engines. The S54 suffers from the same issue, tight bearing clearances and accelerated bearing wear.

[Pro-AM3]

Lets be real here, knock does affect bearing wear. The extent can be debated since the clearances on the S65 are far more to worry about. However, disregarding a known fact would be amateur

[chris719]

Originally Posted by Petros

Ok I'll play along. Let's assume the M3 knock detection is crap, and gas sucks, and engines are getting knock all over the place. What does that have to do with the rod bearings? Is the implication that knock exacerbates rod bearing wear? If so, how do you explain the E60 M5? It has pretty much the same engine with the same bearing problem, but a totally different knock detection system. Any good hypothesis must have explanatory scope. It must explain ALL the available evidence. So if there is a problem with the knock detection system, does that mean BMW screwed up the knock detection system twice in two very different ways? That seems very unlikely and a violation of Occam's razor.

I agree, however to be fair we need to point out that we are saying BMW screwed up the bearing design on 2 separate designs (S54 and S85+S65) as well.

What makes the anti-knock system a less plausible culprit is that, as Malek points out, the S54 and S65/S85 use completely different anti-knock systems but suffer from the exact same wear pattern on the rod bearings and yet none of the telltale signs of detonation on other engine internals. Further, it seems unlikely the S54 anti-knock system is flawed since this system appears to be the exact same system used in N52/N54 engines which are not suffering from any known bearing issues. N54 is tuned very aggressively by the aftermarket and detonation does not seem to be killing bearings in these cars. Finally, the S54 engine in the Z3M had it's redline lowered to 7,600 RPM by BMW themselves to mitigate the bearing issue when it first came to light. If the problem is detonation related, why is BMW lowering the redline. Detonation would still be occurring at WOT under load in other conditions.


So we have to ask ourselves, which is more likely: BMW designed two completely different anti-knock systems which function via completely different mechanisms and yet both are ineffective in the same manner? OR BMW made a "mistake" (could be intentional) in all 3 of these engines which redline at 8k RPM or above.

Based on the available facts, I am not sure how anyone could reasonably conclude this is caused by detonation. I will be happy to change my mind if any actual evidence to the contrary turns up.

[Petros]

Originally Posted by chris719

I agree, however to be fair we need to point out that we are saying BMW screwed up the bearing design on 2 separate designs (S54 and S85+S65) as well.

.

I don't think they count as "separate" designs in this case, since all those engines have the same issue which is too little clearance. It's actually pretty much the only thing all those engines have in common, which further supports the lack of clearance as being the main cause of the bearing wear.

[regular guy]

Originally Posted by chris719

I agree, however to be fair we need to point out that we are saying BMW screwed up the bearing design on 2 separate designs (S54 and S85+S65) as well.

What makes the anti-knock system a less plausible culprit is that, as Malek points out, the S54 and S65/S85 use completely different anti-knock systems but suffer from the exact same wear pattern on the rod bearings and yet none of the telltale signs of detonation on other engine internals. Further, it seems unlikely the S54 anti-knock system is flawed since this system appears to be the exact same system used in N52/N54 engines which are not suffering from any known bearing issues. N54 is tuned very aggressively by the aftermarket and detonation does not seem to be killing bearings in these cars. Finally, the S54 engine in the Z3M had it's redline lowered to 7,600 RPM by BMW themselves to mitigate the bearing issue when it first came to light. If the problem is detonation related, why is BMW lowering the redline. Detonation would still be occurring at WOT under load in other conditions.


So we have to ask ourselves, which is more likely: BMW designed two completely different anti-knock systems which function via completely different mechanisms and yet both are ineffective in the same manner? OR BMW made a "mistake" (could be intentional) in all 3 of these engines which redline at 8k RPM or above.

Based on the available facts, I am not sure how anyone could reasonably conclude this is caused by detonation. I will be happy to change my mind if any actual evidence to the contrary turns up.

I think SFP summed it up best with these comments:

Dude you are wasting your time with these clowns...none of them have a clue ... otherwise they wouldn't be arguing with you.

[regular guy]

I think I'll drop these pictures in right here and maybe the experts with no credentials can tell me what to do with this.

[Leonardo629]

Originally Posted by Petros

Ok I'll play along. Let's assume the M3 knock detection is crap, and gas sucks, and engines are getting knock all over the place. What does that have to do with the rod bearings? Is the implication that knock exacerbates rod bearing wear? If so, how do you explain the E60 M5? It has pretty much the same engine with the same bearing problem, but a totally different knock detection system. Any good hypothesis must have explanatory scope. It must explain ALL the available evidence. So if there is a problem with the knock detection system, does that mean BMW screwed up the knock detection system twice in two very different ways? That seems very unlikely and a violation of Occam's razor.

bro, S85 and S65 have essentially the same ion sensing monitor system.

Ion current combustion monitoring
The ion current combustion monitoring is also
used in the MSS60 for knock identification
and misfiring identification. In principle, the
method of action is identical to the S85 and its
MSS65.
The S85 has two ion current monitoring
devices, each of which covers a whole cylinder
bank. In the S65, the electronic ion current
system is integrated into each ignition coil and
the ion current monitoring devices are not
required.
During ignition, the measurement current is
stored in a capacitor integrated in the ignition
coil, and after ignition, is available at the spark
plug electrode. In the S65, the ion current
measurement and evaluation is also
performed exclusively by the MSS60.
The functional range of the ion current
electronics has been further refined. There is
no longer a need for two measurement control
lines, and the ignition current and the ion
current measurement signal have been
combined into a single transmission route
(separate in the S85). For the purposes of
smoothing the voltage and electromagnetic
compatibility, an "ignition suppression
capacitor" is installed in the wiring harness of
each cylinder bank (in the S85 this is in the ion
current control device).

Ion sensing anti knock system has been around for a while, first introduced by Saab in 1992. As far as applications go, I know 430 Scuderia, 458 Italia, and the new 488GTB all employed the technology.

I wonder what RS4 uses for anti-knock.

[regular guy]

Originally Posted by Leonardo629

Ion sensing anti knock system has been around for a while, first introduced by Saab in 1992. As far as applications go, I know 430 Scuderia, 458 Italia, and the new 488GTB all employed the technology.

SFP and others think knock detection in general, and ION sensing in specific are relatively new and immature technologies, and that's why they are suspect in this case.

Don't you hate it when facts get in the way of ignorance? Party pooper.

Oh wait...I hear a knock. Is it my car, or is it my front door? Definitely the car because millions of people heard the same thing.

[s85e90]

RG still running your mouth. FYI petros the s85 also uses the ionic knock system. My thoughts are that it's contributory and that's it. Regular guy still can't answer how can he not listen to a motor and tell what audible pinging due to detonation is.

To petros question on how bearing wear can be correlated to detonation is simple: when the preigntion occurs the piston is forced back down and the thin oil film riding the UPPER bearing shell will be pushed away outwards from the shell and can/will cause premature wear.


Regular guy still making jokes but has yet to answer the question; how do you set the timing on a car with a distributor and know how far the advance can go??? Keep making fun or brushing off the question. You saw it before. And yes, again, there's millions out there who can hear audible knockng from a car.


Let's get this straight; this all started because I added my 2 cents and said I have heard knockimg from a few diff cars... That's all, plain and simple, I stated I have heard knockimg. Right away you said its not possible. And the. Proceeded to say I have no credentials to listen and discern ebgine noises. Gimme a break. It's not rocket science. I'm done here. You should act your age and stop breaking balls on the Internet. Not a good look for an old man.

[s85e90]

Originally Posted by Petros

Car companies should save up on the cost of implementing knock detection systems. They should just shove s85e90 under the hood and have his bionic ears monitor knock instead

Get a clue. Didn't I tell you once to stop following me around. You come around to bust chops too but then you'll post senseless shit and disappear.

[s85e90]

Originally Posted by Petros

Ok I'll play along. Let's assume the M3 knock detection is crap, and gas sucks, and engines are getting knock all over the place. What does that have to do with the rod bearings? Is the implication that knock exacerbates rod bearing wear? If so, how do you explain the E60 M5? It has pretty much the same engine with the same bearing problem, but a totally different knock detection system. Any good hypothesis must have explanatory scope. It must explain ALL the available evidence. So if there is a problem with the knock detection system, does that mean BMW screwed up the knock detection system twice in two very different ways? That seems very unlikely and a violation of Occam's razor.

Another misinformed post. Take RG advice and do some reading.

[s85e90]

Originally Posted by regular guy

SFP and others think knock detection in general, and ION sensing in specific are relatively new and immature technologies, and that's why they are suspect in this case.

Don't you hate it when facts get in the way of ignorance? Party pooper.

Oh wait...I hear a knock. Is it my car, or is it my front door? Definitely the car because millions of people heard the same thing.

No one said its new in general but it was to BMW and the s85 for a production car.

[s85e90]

Originally Posted by BossManE90

Lets be real here, knock does affect bearing wear. The extent can be debated since the clearances on the S65 are far more to worry about. However, disregarding a known fact would be amateur

Thank you. The point was that all cars will knock. But if you add the fact of a heavy oil + tight clearances already it's a recipe for something bad to happen (spin bearings). This shouldn't even have to be debated. It's a fact.


And to put a rest to all the bullshit; Google pinging under load and see how many pages of results there are. Maybe they're also all fools right RG?? How on earth could they hear that? Maybe I will message all of them and ask for credentials to back up their claims !

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by Petros

So if there is a problem with the knock detection system, does that mean BMW screwed up the knock detection system twice in two very different ways? That seems very unlikely and a violation of Occam's razor.

Again S65 and S85 knock systems are very similar.

Not sure how Occam's razor applies, that is about the simplest explanation often being more likely to be correct.

Does it make sense that BMW screwed up clearances on 3 engines? Or again, perhaps some aspects of their designs require a clearance tighter than other engines and they made a very purposeful choice...

(I've not followed the long term history in the S54 but clearly remember the initial and dramatic problems very early in production attributed to bearings way off resulting in hundreds of very rapid failures. This was rapidly corrected by BMW (after some initial period of denial).)

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by BossManE90

The rest of you are bickering for the sake of bickering. If you cant prove you point with actual data, please stop wasting all of our time.

Let's not forget that the tight nominal + tolerance stacking claims here are very much a hypothesis. Luckily RG has some plans to do some experiments to help move from a hypothesis to a theory. Proof and experiment are inextricably linked and thus far we have absolutely no experimental evidence and no "proof" of anything.

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by regular guy

I think I'll drop these pictures in right here and maybe the experts with no credentials can tell me what to do with this.

I asked about this prior and you did not reply. In what way do you think you can use oil flow and pressure information to better understand the bearing tests you will be doing? Being somewhat ignorant of the S65 overall lubrication system I'll ask - can you determine flow to the bearings vs. flow to the entire system (seems highly doubtful)? Do you think that the change in bearing size from OEM to the new design will significantly alter oil flow or pressure? Isn't it the case that any production engine will achieve plenty of oil flow volume per unit time to lubricate the entire engine even at a significantly reduced overall system pressure (i.e. large safety margin on pressure)?

On a loosely related point. Will the new bearing alter mean clearance and clearance range simultaneously? Since the crank journals are essentially not part of the tolerance stacking "equation" (they are very well controlled) and assuming one won't be required to get new rods, then if the range is to be altered it seems is must require significantly better bearing tolerance control than originals. Or perhaps multiple bearing sizes will be offered (and of course that seems super costly and unlikely). It sounds a bit odd that Clevite may now be able to manufacture bearings with significantly improved tolerances than those supplied originally to BMW.

[regular guy]

Originally Posted by s85e90

RG still running your mouth. FYI petros the s85 also uses the ionic knock system. My thoughts are that it's contributory and that's it. Regular guy still can't answer how can he not listen to a motor and tell what audible pinging due to detonation is.

Focus and talk to one person at a time. BTW, I already answered your question. Why can't you go read it?

Regular guy still making jokes but has yet to answer the question; how do you set the timing on a car with a distributor and know how far the advance can go??? Keep making fun or brushing off the question. You saw it before. And yes, again, there's millions out there who can hear audible knockng from a car.

There's a reason I've never answered this before, and it's because you never asked it before.

Well, now that you ask...here's the answer.

To adjust timing on a distributor:
You will need the following tools: timing light (these instructions will assume an adjustable timing light), and usually a simple wrench. Start by hooking up the timing light inductor coil to cylinder-1 spark plug wire (yes, I'm assuming it's exposed). Connect the other two terminals to your battery to make it work. Assuming you know where the timing marks are on your engine, and assuming they're visible and exposed, while the engine is warmed and running, flash the timing light on the timing marks. Not all cars have timing marks at TDC. Some have them before TDC, some at TDC, and others after TDC. Whatever your situation, adjust the timing light to 0-degrees, and flash the timing light to find out if an adjustment needs to be made. If the timing marks are not aligned, then you will need to make an adjustment. To find out how far to adjust, use the dial on your adjustable timing light, turning in either direction until the timing marks align. That last part was just for informational value and doesn't serve a functional purpose. Loosen the distributor lockdown clamp and slowly rotate the distributor, while flashing the timing light at the timing marks. Rotate the distributor in either direction until the timing marks are aligned, and tighten the lockdown clamp. You are now finished.

To figure out how far advance, or retard can go, do the following:
Tools required: same as above.
Set the dial on the adjustable timing light to 0-degrees. Loosen the lockdown clamp to rotate the distributor. Not all distributors have a limit stop, and some of them will turn freely all 360 degrees. For ones with a limit stop, use an adjustable timing light flashing on a timing mark. If the timing mark is not already at zero degrees, adjust your adjustable timing light for the degree offset of the timing mark. Rotate the distributor in either direction (advance or retard) until you hit the limit stop. Use the adjustment dial on your adjustable timing light until you until the timing mark is back at 0-degrees. Look at your adjustment dial on your adjustable timing light and add/subtract this from your initial value (depending on the direction you went: advance/retard). If you just measured retard, repeat the process for advance. The result you just calculated is the amount of advance and retard you can go on the distributor. For distributors without a limit stop, the answer is 180 degrees in each direction, or 360 degrees.

There...you happy?

Let's get this straight; this all started because I added my 2 cents and said I have heard knockimg from a few diff cars... That's all, plain and simple, I stated I have heard knockimg.

You have a strange, misguided, and inaccurate memory. This all got started here...when you started it.

Right away you said its not possible. And the. Proceeded to say I have no credentials to listen and discern ebgine noises. Gimme a break. It's not rocket science. I'm done here. You should act your age and stop breaking balls on the Internet. Not a good look for an old man.

There's a phrase you like that mocks people for reading comprehension. I'm thinking now's a good time to look that up, and try to apply whatever you learned to the response I gave you.

For whatever reason, you get confused and think I've many things you can't seem to find anywhere except inside your own head.

[regular guy]

Originally Posted by swamp2

I asked about this prior and you did not reply. In what way do you think you can use oil flow and pressure information to better understand the bearing tests you will be doing?

I want to see the relationship between clearance, oil viscosity, oil pressure, and oil temperature. I'm not sure and I don't think I can answer that question directly, but the instrumentation can certainly help to see if there's any obvious detriment (as has been alleged) to oil flow, temperature, and pressure from increasing bearing clearance.

Being somewhat ignorant of the S65 overall lubrication system I'll ask - can you determine flow to the bearings vs. flow to the entire system (seems highly doubtful)?

That's certainly not possible with anything I can afford.

Do you think that the change in bearing size from OEM to the new design will significantly alter oil flow or pressure?

I don't know. I'm just trying to quantify it. I don't want to predict anything because this isn't my area of expertise. But I think I've got the correct instruments now to quantify it.

Isn't it the case that any production engine will achieve plenty of oil flow volume per unit time to lubricate the entire engine even at a significantly reduced overall system pressure (i.e. large safety margin on pressure)?

I don't know.

On a loosely related point. Will the new bearing alter mean clearance and clearance range simultaneously? Since the crank journals are essentially not part of the tolerance stacking "equation" (they are very well controlled) and assuming one won't be required to get new rods, then if the range is to be altered it seems is must require significantly better bearing tolerance control than originals. Or perhaps multiple bearing sizes will be offered (and of course that seems super costly and unlikely). It sounds a bit odd that Clevite may now be able to manufacture bearings with significantly improved tolerances than those supplied originally to BMW.

Let me come back to this after some sleep.

[chris719]

Originally Posted by swamp2

Again S65 and S85 knock systems are very similar.

Not sure how Occam's razor applies, that is about the simplest explanation often being more likely to be correct.

Does it make sense that BMW screwed up clearances on 3 engines? Or again, perhaps some aspects of their designs require a clearance tighter than other engines and they made a very purposeful choice...

(I've not followed the long term history in the S54 but clearly remember the initial and dramatic problems very early in production attributed to bearings way off resulting in hundreds of very rapid failures. This was rapidly corrected by BMW (after some initial period of denial).)

Did you even take 2 minutes to read my post above which addresses everything you just mentioned?

If anyone isn't familiar with the S54 I will recap: lots of them blew up early due to a tolerance issue with the rod bearings (BMW blames supplier). BMW recalled all S54 engines EXCEPT those in the Z3M cars which came out of the factory with lowered redlines of 7600 rpm. The S54 continues to suffer from late-life rod bearing issues albeit not quite as often as the V10 and V8 it seems. The S54 bearings look just like leaded S85 or S65 bearings when torn down and the wear pattern observed is the same.


BMW themselves are telling you it is related to high RPM operation with their treatment of the Z3Ms.

How likely is it that S65 and S85 bearings exhibit the same wear pattern as S54 bearings and have a different root cause?

The cause might not be insufficient clearance, but it would seem to be very unlikely to be detonation related. S54 has the same style anti-knock sensors as N52 and N54 and we have no basically zero reports of rod bearing failure in those engines. N54 is tuned to within an inch of its life on all kinds of fuels and yet the rod bearings don't seem to be a common failure mode. If it's detonation why is BMW lowering the redline on Z3M S54 engines?

Why are the detractors ignoring what I posted? Seems like they are ignoring what doesn't fit their pet theory.

Based on comments from Lang Racing and a technical link from Swamp, I wouldn't doubt that, for whatever reason, these bearings are aggressively "narrow" for the forces applied and BMW intentionally chose a very tight tolerance to try to mitigate this. It would seem that they do not have sufficient QC to guarantee this will work, especially with the newer cars that have lead free bearings.

[SenorFunkyPants]

Originally Posted by regular guy

I think I'll drop these pictures in right here and maybe the experts with no credentials can tell me what to do with this.

Me me me! I'll have a go.
Hmmmm tough one...apart obviously from the answer begging to be given.
So then I'll go for them being the last parts for the flux capacitor to finally get your car back together after 4 years?
Do I win...is there a prize?...I love prizes.

Originally Posted by regular guy

I think SFP....

Originally Posted by regular guy

SFP and ....

And you've only mentioned me twice in the last few hours....you seriously need to up your game or I might have to reconsider keeping you on as my pet stalker.

[SenorFunkyPants]

Originally Posted by aussiem3

So what does this pinging/pinking - whatever one may want to call it - sound like? I've had this car for almost 8 years, and I wouldn't have the faintest idea as to what this is. There is so much going on under the hood, it would be great if I could differentiate each. Yes, to a trained ear, it will be easy. But not your average driver like me

Its not an easy noise to describe - I've read it variously described, the closest was that it sounded like a tin can with marbles inside being quickly shaken but even that doesn't perfectly describe it.
I'm not surprised that you haven't heard it. Its a rare thing in a modern car. If you had ever owned or spannered an old car with an old school distributor you are more likely to be acquainted with it.
Old cars had no feedback from sensors in the exhaust gas stream...you set the ignition timing, adjusted the fuel mixture and then test drove it to check it was ok. Distributors had all sorts of devices to alter the ignition timing according to varying demands, weights, springs and often a vacuum device connected to the inlet manifold. Plenty of opportunity for combustion to be less than ideal.
The sound was most commonly heard when suddenly applying full throttle at low rpms and always worse if going up a hill.