Supercharged e90 M3 Failure

[M3PO]

Originally Posted by Raptor251

I managed to pull off a money shift a few years ago in my LS1 off road buggy and the results were nothing like this...The ECU showed and over rev and it bent the fu*k out of the valves as well as damaged the tops of the pistons...

I think there is way too much missing info in this story and I dont think its fair to take sides just yet...both parties have some explaining to do asap

This seems to be the consensus on the evidence of a money shift. None of that was present here IIRC.

[Raptor251]

Originally Posted by Mike Benvo

You better hide behind that couch!

Come on guys... let's keep this on topic.. We need the facts, the OP needs to agree to a reading of the freezeframe data from his DME.

Sorry Mike I promise to stay on topic! And thank you for coming on here to help get the facts, the world needs more people like you! Now lets get to the bottom of this!

[Raptor251]

Originally Posted by M3PO

This seems to be the consensus on the evidence of a money shift. None of that was present here IIRC.

And now that I think back to my days racing motocross I would see this all the time with the introduction of the modern 4 stroke. Its really easy to mis shift and over rev an MX bike on a track...same results every time...bent valves!! I know this has nothing to do with an M3 but my point is I have had my share of money shifts with 4 stroke motors and had the same damaged pistons/bent valves result every time.

AA please explain why this didnt happen if this was in fact a driver error.

[US///M3]

Mike Benvo knows his $hit.hahaha

[SflBimmer8484]

Originally Posted by Mike Benvo

I am not sure why AA would claim 8705+.

Just so you guys can see, below is a readout from my car. The car logs RPM at the crankshaft, transmission, and at the vanos unit.

You can see in my case that it was 100% full throttle and a bounce off of my raised rev limiter.

And it was over 20K miles ago, engine is running better than ever. Low oil consumption, great gas mileage, and very solid numbers.

A small german lesson (in order of red boxes in picture):
maximum speed rpm / minute
reference speed from Vanos
gearbox input speed

accelerator pedal position
air mass (this will likely be calculated from the MAP sensor)

(I will be removing this picture in a couple days, I posted so you guys can see for the time being)

Mike,

Please post a picture of what your rev limiter is set to it seems to be cut off.

Thank you

[Daft]

The worst part is that AA asked the OP to put everything back to stock and hide any eveidence that it was modified then try to claim warranty with BMW. If my engine grenaded and ESS told me to do that I'd tell them that's a pretty sick joke!

[akh23456]

Originally Posted by Daft

The worst part is that AA asked the OP to put everything back to stock and hide any eveidence that it was modified then try to claim warranty with BMW. If my engine grenaded and ESS told me to do that I'd tell them that's a pretty sick joke!

if you read aa response they never told him to do it.

[Jaypod]

Daft - you obviously did not read the thread

[BPMSport]

Originally Posted by Andrew@ActiveAutowerke

Mike,

Please post a picture of what your rev limiter is set to it seems to be cut off.

Thank you

Andrew,

Nice speaking with you on the phone.

My freezeframe data will show the factory redline, as there is no need in tipping off the dealer that the redline is infact raised.

On the phone you told me that you had a printout of the freezeframe data from this car at hand. I suggest that you post that for everyones sake to get to the bottom of this.

As far as I am concerned, this is up to the OP to allow validation of this data to support (or not support) your rendition of the events derived from the freezeframe data pulled from the OP's car.

[SflBimmer8484]

Mike,

I appreciate the phone call its always nice to be able to compare data and opinions.

As you can see the Max rev limiter was set to 8100.

[m33]

Originally Posted by SehrSchnell

This has been covered to death, mate.

Originally Posted by Raptor251

Sorry Mike I promise to stay on topic! And thank you for coming on here to help get the facts, the world needs more people like you! Now lets get to the bottom of this!

your a funny dude

Originally Posted by akh23456

if you read aa response they never told him to do it.

care to answer my questions ?

[M3PO]

Originally Posted by Mike Benvo

I am not sure why AA would claim 8705+.

Just so you guys can see, below is a readout from my car. The car logs RPM at the crankshaft, transmission, and at the vanos unit.

You can see in my case that it was 100% full throttle and a bounce off of my raised rev limiter.

And it was over 20K miles ago, engine is running better than ever. Low oil consumption, great gas mileage, and very solid numbers.

A small german lesson (in order of red boxes in picture):
maximum speed rpm / minute
reference speed from Vanos
gearbox input speed

accelerator pedal position
air mass (this will likely be calculated from the MAP sensor)

(I will be removing this picture in a couple days, I posted so you guys can see for the time being)

Originally Posted by Mike Benvo

Andrew,

Nice speaking with you on the phone.

My freezeframe data will show the factory redline, as there is no need in tipping off the dealer that the redline is infact raised.

On the phone you told me that you had a printout of the freezeframe data from this car at hand. I suggest that you post that for everyones sake to get to the bottom of this.

As far as I am concerned, this is up to the OP to allow validation of this data to support (or not support) your rendition of the events derived from the freezeframe data pulled from the OP's car.

Originally Posted by Andrew@ActiveAutowerke

Mike,

I appreciate the phone call its always nice to be able to compare data and opinions.

As you can see the Max rev limiter was set to 8100.

Mike, your redline was raised or not?

Both screenshots show 8705 RPMs as the max engine speed. Both cars were over-revved?

Also, I'm curious why the transmission input speed is so much lower than the other two speeds on AA's screenshot?

[BPMSport]

Originally Posted by M3PO

Mike, your redline was raised or not?

Both screenshots show 8705 RPMs as the max engine speed. Both cars were over-revved?

Also, I'm curious why the transmission input speed is so much lower than the other two speeds on AA's screenshot?

Yes, my redline is raised.

My car was not over revved. If you use the factory rev limit as a reference point, I guess you can say it has been. However, an over rev to me is a different situation, not a car with a raised redline within acceptable limits.

Transmission input speed can be lower if the clutch goes in, clutch slippage, or something to that effect.

I have not reviewed AA's post, but want to thank them for posting that. However, I would much rather have a picture of the readout rather than a screenshot of an editable text file. I am not saying that there is foul play here - please don't construe it as such. I just want the evidence to be 100% unrefutable. And the best way for that is to involve a non interested third party to read the data.

I think this all comes down to the OP. If the OP is willing to have me read it, this will tell us with undisputed certainty with the facts at hand. If the OP stays behind the bush, I think that this is a clear indication of what happened.

At the end of the day, I highly doubt the failure was caused by AA given the circumstances of one piston leaving the block, no evidence of damage to the other cylinders, no evidence of knock due to changes in knock strategy or mirfire/knock detection, etc..

I'm signing myself out at this point. OP, please contact me if you wish and I will be happy to read the data.

Thanks
Mike

[Daft]

Originally Posted by Jaypod

Daft - you obviously did not read the thread

Ok I'm guilty here. I didn't want to go thru 200 posts. Did the OP retract that fact or was he proven wrong? I guess I'll start reading from post #2!

[spdu4ea]

Speed gradient 5000rpm/s
Rpm 8705+
Clutch torque 448nm (in reverse direction)


...moneyshift...



Cars usually bent valves because the valvetrain is usually the weakest link. But if you have a 10k rpm valvetrain and a 9k rpm bottom-end -- you're not going to see a top end failure...

[BPMSport]

Originally Posted by spdu4ea

Speed gradient 5000rpm/s
Rpm 8705+
Clutch torque 448nm (in reverse direction)


...moneyshift...



Cars usually bent valves because the valvetrain is usually the weakest link. But if you have a 10k rpm valvetrain and a 9k rpm bottom-end -- you're not going to see a top end failure...

Valvetrain is going to break before the bottom end. It's a matter of the valve floating and the piston giving it a kiss of death.

[FormulaMMM]

Speed gradient 5000rpm/s
Rpm 8705+
Clutch torque 448nm (in reverse direction)


...moneyshift...

Mike, presuming Active's .txt file is unaltered, is this your assessment of the data as well?

Both screenshots show 8705 RPMs as the max engine speed. Both cars were over-revved?

8705 for both cars -- is this the max rpm that can/will be recorded then? Is this why Active said 8705+?

Thanks.

[Raptor251]

Originally Posted by spdu4ea

Speed gradient 5000rpm/s
Rpm 8705+
Clutch torque 448nm (in reverse direction)


...moneyshift...



Cars usually bent valves because the valvetrain is usually the weakest link. But if you have a 10k rpm valvetrain and a 9k rpm bottom-end -- you're not going to see a top end failure...

This is 100% not true and is total speculation

[BPMSport]

Originally Posted by LM3

Mike, presuming Active's .txt file is unaltered, is this your assessment of the data as well?



8705 for both cars -- is this the max rpm that can/will be recorded then? Is this why Active said 8705+?

Thanks.

I have made no assesment yet. Preparing a coding flash drive for a customer and trying to get it out before my business meeting in an hour. I'll take a look later.

As far as 8,705, this is not the max that the car will record. There is a "buffer" for RPM intervention. So if your redline is set to 8,650, it's not unlikely that you could overshoot it by 50 RPM without a money shift.

My redline was set to 8,600 or 8,650 when the car recorded the event. That is a marginal difference over the redline, quite different from 600 RPM more.

I will post more on this later, I have to jet.

[stefan]

Originally Posted by smmmurf

I agree with this +1. Why start with the wrong car? The whole point of it is N/A power and nice handling balance. Start with a GT500 or GT-R.

At least the OP has a new engine. Engines were updated in 2009 I believe.

Great advice. Or at least run conservative boost. Stage 1's boost with Stage 2's cooling.

Originally Posted by DLSJ5

My situation was different, I had an agreement with Gintani prior to the Supercharger being installed that they would cover it if the engine blew. While it's rare, it's not unheard of for companies to assist with these type of failures, many at the very least offer free labor, or pay half of the damage, still I feel very lucky that I was able to recoup much of the loss, BUT it was the agreement we made, no special favors after the fact were done in my case.

So smart. I definitely wouldn't say there is any place to blame AA or even BMW for this (even with the suspected no.5 cyl issues). However, there is some trust that the tuner has vetted the engine as acceptable, based on their technical expertise. Best way to ensure this is to ask for a warranty! Otherwise, of course, it's pay to play!

[MPoweredAuto]

Hello all,

I want to say first and foremost thank you for awaiting my response to all questions/allegations etc.

Andrew @ Active- I respect your jumping into this fight for your company when you had nothing to do wih ANY of it when it occurred. I guess the truth is there are only a select few people who know exactly what transpired during this event on the side of AA. Unfortunately the people I dealt with on a weekly basis are no longer there, and I would not ask them to chime in on my behalf, so as not to burn their own bridges with AA. However, if for some reason they read this thread and want to give their unbiased side of the story while working at Active, I could only be happy, because they know the truth. Andrew, I don't believe we have ever had the pleasure to meet, but I spent a good amount of time with the designer of the s/c kit, Scrappy and have nothing but praises for him, his work ethic, and his talent. I always had nothing but respect for Active Autowerke, until everything happened and I was asked to please keep quiet. I was fully prepared to push your s/c kits on my customers and had several interested in pulling the trigger, until they saw what happened to my car and backed out. I invested a large portion of time and money to come down to Miami and bring 3 of my employees for 3 days while this kit was installed on our M3, in an effort to build a strong business relationship with AA. I even recently installed this same kit on a customers car, and warned him of possible issues.

This car had your performance software on it before the s/c was added, which based on what employees at AA and your website indicate, raised the RPM limiter. A "money shift" would bend valves and do damage to the head. There were no bent valves in this engine after disassembly, and as stated before- I have NEVER "money shifted" a car.

Andrew, are you saying that the RPM reading of 8705 was recorded in the shadow memory or are you calculating top speed to RPM's?
As for it being my idea to revert back to stock and take to BMW, you can rest assured I came to AA for help first. It was an owner at AA who said to me it wasn't their fault but sounds like a defect and they would suggest putting back to stock and taking to BMW. He knew that was not the right thing to do when suggesting it. I hate that you are being thrown into this, and I know you have an obligation to dispute everything I say because your boss is trying to protect AA's name and reputation, which I feel lately was built up a lot by it's sales staff-2 people in mind.

Now for the other questions,

Mike- yes I would entertain you pulling data from the car and posting up. I guarantee that an RPM of 8705 was not recorded at time/date of the incident. I also assure you that I was well under 100mph when this occurrd and if you can show that to everyone I would appreciate it.

Dishonest you say? The ONLY thing I was not 100% about was not telling BMW of prior mods. That's it. Period. End of discussion. Read reviews on my website, which should help build my character to strangers. I am not lying to anyone on this forum about my occurrence, and I am sure if the people involved came forward to vouch on my behalf it would prove that. However, I don't want any bridges burned on their end with AA because I feel it is not my place to drag others into this and harm relationships of theirs.

Mike- please email me so that I may get data sent to you. Mpoweredauto@yahoo.com

And for the record, I never modified the kit in any way, software or hardware.

And like I have stated from the very beginning, I am not talking poorly of AA as a whole, but a company is run by individuals. I will not be doing business with them or pushing their products anymore based off my personal experiences now. It is Unfortunate to say the least because I feel they do have a strong product line. It would be reassuring to know their warranty is good from preventing engines to blow as well. I guarantee I wouldn't have purchased a kit of this price had I thought it would make my engine fail in less than 30,000 miles.

I appreciate everyone's comments, questions, etc. And will do my best to answer any and all, but I am not glued to a computer 24/7 so it can take a little bit for me to read through and get responses, but I will do my best.

[mattgold]

So Jordan,

Do you believe this is an issue with the AA SC Kit or a failing of a system in the S65 (bearings, lubrication)?

If for a moment we believe that the S65 does have an Achilles Heel and that is an issue surrounding Cylinder 5, do you think the SC *caused* the failure? Exacerbated it? Or is it an issue of "the motor failed and I happened to have a SC on it"? You mentioned (or I read) the car dyno'd lower then expected before the SC was put on, in hindsight, could this be seen as a pre-cursor for the failure?

Whether people want to believe it or not, there seems to be more vehicles here and abroad with a failing Cylinder 5 (stock or modified) then with people SCing their car and having it fail.


Bottom line for me is; there seem to be a healthy number of people running SCs of all walks, and rarely are they popping motors, especially when you factor out driver errors. So to point at this one example and say "an AA SC caused this and therefore the AA SC is bad" might be taking the example to the extreme. If it was the case that there was an inherent issue with the AA SC, I feel we'd be seeing many more horror stories like this.

Thoughts?