BMW NA Approves New S65 Engine Replacement Due to Bad Rod Bearings

[Jadar]

Congrats on getting it taken care of. Even reading your post makes me want to keep purchasing BMW vehicles. Especially if they take care of people with legit concerns such as yours and you were not at fault.

Good job BMW. Thumbs up

[VCP]

[auggiem3]

Originally Posted by VCP

Great thread - reaffirms my loyalty and decision to order the new f80 as my family sedan

[VCP]

Originally Posted by swamp2

I don't want to get too far off topic here... but...

You worked very hard to get some input on this situation from Clevite. That's great. Now most of what they say that disagrees with "your" speculation (and that of our other non engineer experts in the main thread) and you call conflict of interest. You not only call conflict of interest but you call it on only those parts of what they say that you don't find palatable. I don't disagree that there could be conflict of interest but you can't have you cake and eat it too. Clevite claims they do not see clearance as a problem, period.

Look, flow rates are cooling are pretty obviously tied to both clearances and viscosity but bearing lubrication, specifically pressurized oil fed journal bearing tribology is not a simple subject, not in any way. That is why there are Professors at top Uni's who devote a considerable portion of their careers to this subject. Thus unless we are talking about variation in the oil pressure along the axial direction of the bearing or some other subtlety of the tribology, I'll have to claim ignorance on their comment about "more area".

Now matter how much emotion we all have here on this topic. We should accept the reasonable analysis I've done placing this at a maximum failure rate of 0.5% and substantially lower than that during the early E46 M3 bearing situation. Would 0.1% be "better" sure, acceptable, that's a relative term. Would all owners prefer a 0.01% rate, sure. Did BMW believe that the overall financial, longevity and performance tradeoffs were best met with their existing clearances? Yes almost for sure. Let's not forget those that blame the accountants here - BMW is running very tight tolerances, as you measured and as are required to run tight clearances in the first place. This is not cheap and was not a bean counting decision.

nice

Originally Posted by fuddman

Has it ever occurred to you that BMW is replacing the engine because they are simply trying to do the right thing?
I've been in two situations with BMW where the stakes involved were about the same as being discussed here. One thing I learned during those occasions was that BMW was staffed with good people. Top to bottom. Perfect? No. But then, neither am I.
Do I think the S65 is perfect? No. But, despite all the consternation, it remains perfect enough for me.

nice

Originally Posted by BMW M Power Mexico

To the few commenters throwing BMW under the bus here for "a faulty engine design" what a bunch of privileged BS.

One case in one thread and - from a 2nd owner - who has no way of knowing if this car was properly broken in and cared for.

I know there are more cases (out of thousands of M3s sold), but like swamp said above failures will happen. We should be commending BMW for goodwilling this instead of spinning conspiracy theories. It stands to reason that BMW will take good care of ///M customers, specially after the E46 problems.

My E90 has 50K miles with PERFECT reliability so far and has been tracked quite a bit. If anything, this thread makes me HAPPIER to be a BMW owner and know that - if - my engine fails in the future it's likely that BMW will help me out when my car has been out of warranty for years.

nice

Originally Posted by regular guy

BTW, OP congrats on the new engine. I'd say no doubt BMW is aware of the issue and definitely aware of the various bearing and blown engine threads on this forum.

To all the naysayers who believed BMW designed the perfect engine with the perfect bearing clearance mated with the perfect oil: what's your explanation for BMW replacing an engine free of charge 1+ years out of warranty?

Who said perfect? There has to be "acceptable loss" though.

[bbbbmw]

Happy this worked out for the OP - that BMW stepped to the plate. My experience was different. The catalytic converter failed on mine when the car had about 20k on it. BMW replaced it without question. Fast forward some years and miles later (about 85k as I remember), and the replaced cat failed with 65k on it. Turn out BMW found that they had received a bad bunch of cats from their supplier, and had replaced my bad one with another from the bad bunch. But they refused to replace it, as "we already replaced it once." So I was out $1400 + labor for their defective part.

I'm not sure if the NHTSA/EPA ever figured that out, but BMW was at serious risk for not issuing a recall. Extending the warranty on the car is a good idea - did BMW charge the OP for the warranty?

[aus]

Originally Posted by bbbbmw

Happy this worked out for the OP - that BMW stepped to the plate. My experience was different. The catalytic converter failed on mine when the car had about 20k on it. BMW replaced it without question. Fast forward some years and miles later (about 85k as I remember), and the replaced cat failed with 65k on it. Turn out BMW found that they had received a bad bunch of cats from their supplier, and had replaced my bad one with another from the bad bunch. But they refused to replace it, as "we already replaced it once." So I was out $1400 + labor for their defective part.

I'm not sure if the NHTSA/EPA ever figured that out, but BMW was at serious risk for not issuing a recall. Extending the warranty on the car is a good idea - did BMW charge the OP for the warranty?

I thought emissions devices were warrantied for 100,000 miles?

.

[bbbbmw]

Originally Posted by aus

I thought emissions devices were warrantied for 100,000 miles?

.

Nope - I think it's 80k

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by AlpineSwift

SO MUCH WIN!!! Congrats OP. BMW Owner For Life here after reading this.

Don't get too optimistic. BMW have told many folks to "go jump off a cliff", like they did me when I had a part fail at about 40 miles over the 50k limit... In some cases they are great and in others pretty cold and hard asses. It is a bit luck of the draw. Anyway, I for one certainly won't make this single story my new found passion for a lifelong commitment to BMW.

[positiveions]

That's some awesome news. I am happy that BMW picked up the tab.

[PrimoM3]

They also took care of me after catastrophic engine failure at 9,500 miles. See signature.

I will say, however, the amount of help you get is directly proportional to the mount of sweat equity you put in and patience you have. Get to the "right" person at BMW.

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by regular guy

I did work very hard to get the info; an I presented it without any additions or subtractions. But just because I worked hard to get the information from Clevite doesn't mean I should be deprived of the opportunity to state my opinion, or deprived of my opportunity to analyze it -- especially when others are using it in a way that seems inconsistent with its meaning. We're all here trying to make sense of the situation. And just like you want to call out hyperbole when you see it, I want to point out an inconsistency like this when I see it. See my example above. I'm not young and naive enough to think a lifelong BMW mechanic knows anything about engine design or the chemical composition of gasoline...so I called it out as unlikely and untrustworthy.

That part doesn't give me much difficulty. I guess my consternation comes from your highly selective belief from this expert. Perhaps I misunderstood your use of them as an expert. I thought they were going to be the somewhat unquestionable expert on the entire topic. They even called you out as being all "hot" on the clearance topic while saying they don't believe that is the issue. Though again at the same time I agree that their statement that oil viscosity and clearances are more or less unrelated just doesn't seem right.

[AlpineSwift]

Originally Posted by swamp2

Don't get too optimistic. BMW have told many folks to "go jump off a cliff", like they did me when I had a part fail at about 40 miles over the 50k limit... In some cases they are great and in others pretty cold and hard asses. It is a bit luck of the draw. Anyway, I for one certainly won't make this single story my new found passion for a lifelong commitment to BMW.

I'm on my 4th BMW and I've never had a bad experience with the service I've been given. Sounds like you just have bad luck.

[sor]

I realized how great BMW is only after I switched. Now dealerships, they can be hit or miss, but BMW as a company has been class act. For instance, letting you trade your lease free and clear (Audi doesn't, keeps you on the lease even if you trade it to someone), great lease rates, their lease damage policy per the book is much more forgiving than others, and my interaction with support staff has been superior.

I know for every one of these posts, we can probably dig up one that didn't go so well (often involving a dealer), but I'm looking forward to swapping out my S4 next year.

[regular guy]

Originally Posted by swamp2

That part doesn't give me much difficulty. I guess my consternation comes from your highly selective belief from this expert. Perhaps I misunderstood your use of them as an expert. I thought they were going to be the somewhat unquestionable expert on the entire topic. They even called you out as being all "hot" on the clearance topic while saying they don't believe that is the issue. Though again at the same time I agree that their statement that oil viscosity and clearances are more or less unrelated just doesn't seem right.

I'm a firm believer in presenting multiple points of view and letting the reader decide. I may not always agree with them, but at least their viewpoint should be presented and discussed. What he said in private didn't differ all that much from what he said in public -- other than the comments about ECU tuning and octane rating. In private he basically made the same point I was making that if the S65 can't run on 91 octane without detonation (which SFP believed was leading to premature bearing wear), then BMW really f*cked up the ECU tuning.

A few days ago I sent all those bearings to another engine expert. This time it was a Porsche engine expert. I spoke to him about it yesterday. He described something called "oil cavitation" caused by the thick oil and said it was ripping off the coating from the bearings near the parting lines. He went on to say that material once ripped was meshing with compression stroke and causing the excessive wear patterns always seen on the upper bearing. It's just like Kawasaki said: get 10 experts, and you get 10 opinions. Clevite was just one of them...that's all.

[aussiem3]

Board members were quick to dismiss when I first said that BMW will assess case-by-case and extend a goodwill warranty in the event of bearings failing. This is a classic example. So don't despair because there is extended hope given the coverage the issue has attracted everywhere.

Well done BMW

[turge]

Glad to see you got everything taken care of Justin!

[sjf430]

That's amazing, congratz bro, nice of them to do that

[BPMSport]

Congratulations OP. I hope this sets precedence for future cases.
This is a definite step in the right direction. Enjoy the new motor (and the new bearings!).

[monkawekrue]

some pretty badass news for some people.

[sensi09]

Awesome. I'm glad it worked out for you.

I wonder what the deciding factors are on whether you're granted or denied a new motor.

[SenorFunkyPants]

Originally Posted by regular guy

the same point I was making that if the S65 can't run on 91 octane without detonation (which SFP believed was leading to premature bearing wear), then BMW really f*cked up the ECU tuning.

I'll recap what I'm thinking:
Looking at the geographical location of likely [1] bearing related engine failures and comparing it with the fuel octane available in those locations there is an obvious pattern.
Highest failure rate is in California fuel rating range 91 - 87
Medium rate is in markets with fuel octane rating is 93 -87
Low rate [2] is in markets with fuel octane rating is 94 - 91

Its my understanding that:
If you run any fuel below 91 octane then that is likely to lead to engine damage.
If you run with an aggressive ECU tune that over elevates the minimum level of ignition advance that the ECU can use to stop detonation and 91 octane fuel then that may also lead to engine damage (more likely with hot air temps).
There are cases were M3 owners have been observed using 87 octane fuel.
Business lease car owners are far less likely to care what fuel they use - storing up damage for later users.

This doesn't mean that I'm suggesting that detonation is the lead cause but simply that it could be considered as a factor in some cases.

[1] This is from data that has been supplied by owners & third parties and that found by Internet searching. There are undoubtedly more failures that remain undiscovered but Euro M3 forums just don't have the failures stories that USA M3 forums do (I found 1 non bearing failure in a UK M3 forum).
Europe in general has a high Internet penetration similar to the USA, we are equally as car obsessed and like to moan about our problems on forums the same as everyone else. There is no reason why Euro M3 forums aren't filled with engine failure horror stories other than they just aren't happening on the same scale.
[2] Haven't found any yet.

[swifty]

^ so would you guys suggest 91 with no ethanol or 94 with 10% ethanol and additives for a non tuned m3?

I'm asking this because all this time, I've been using non ethanol 91 from Shell that's available in Canada (Ontario) but there's been discussion about using 94ultra which is essentially 91 with ethanol and additives to get to 94.