Official S65 Bearing Specification/Clearance Wiki

[SenorFunkyPants]

Originally Posted by aus

Just an FYI, lower octane is available in ALL STATES in the US- usually it's 87, 89, 91/93 octane. These "misuelings" could be happening ALL OVER THE US. Why would it be more in Cali only? The only misfueling I've ever done is put premium fuel in my minivan by accident. It's just automatic for me to get premium since we've have two BMW's for many years now. If you think the 91 is causing the failures, then thatn's a different story.
That is most likely a function of more blown motors are opened up for bearing upgrade when the owners want to go for big power.
That is a VERY biased arguement if you think boost is causing the bearing failures. I'm sure there are more blowers sold in Cali than any other state too, just like there are more M3's sold here than any other state.
Just to clarify, I have no "side" in the bitch slap match, but just wanted to clarify that lower octane fuel is available all over the US.
.

I never had any intention of even getting involved in this thread, as I declared at the beginning I have scant knowledge on this issue but it was an interesting discussion that I've been following for quite a while.
It was the question asking what could account for why there haven't been some/any rod bearing failures in the UK that sucked me in. The only thing I could think of that differentiates the UK market from the USA market was fuel. My first look at the engine failure thread showed a spike of failures in California and that led to the discovery that there were no recorded failures in markets where low octane fuel is unavailable. Its been a developing theory from then - the spike in Ca failures seemed important at the beginning but it seems far less so now.

[Yellow Snow]

Originally Posted by SenorFunkyPants

Looking at the pictures in the first post: One thing that strikes me in some of the pictures showing bearings in the early stages of wear...
in particular:
S65, 30000 Miles, Bone Stock, 2008.
S65, 31000 Miles, Naturally Aspirated, 2008
...is that the highest wear is concentrated at the 6 o'clock position ie in the middle of the bottom bearing. Simple accelerated wear would show as a more even increase in bearing wear.
So logically this elevated wear at that location would be a function of the vertical load exerted during the power stroke of the engine. So increase the force of the power stroke (by say supercharging) will increase the rate of wear - which appears to be the case. By extension, increase the vertical load during the power stroke through poor combustion should also increase wear to some extent. Not talking about massive pre-ignition or pinging the crap out of the engine that would be readily visible on all related parts - but an increase in load as a result of the engines S65 anti-knock system being unable to always fully accommodate the poor burn characteristics of low octane fuel.
Not making it the cause of increased wear but a component.

BTW I don't need Regular Guy to answer this post...if anyone with an open mind wants to reply then that would be great though.

The reason for the narrow wear band is due to the high eccentricity of the bearing. ie, the out of round condition where the surface contact is smaller than it would be with a perfectly round bearing.

No one has come up with a reason on why the S65 bearings have a much higher eccentricity than most.

[SenorFunkyPants]

Originally Posted by Yellow Snow

The reason for the narrow wear band is due to the high eccentricity of the bearing. ie, the out of round condition where the surface contact is smaller than it would be with a perfectly round bearing.

No one has come up with a reason on why the S65 bearings have a much higher eccentricity than most.

Thanks for that...now I know something I didn't know yesterday.
The wear is only showing at the 6 o'clock position not the 12 o'clock position. So the wear still remains a function of the power stroke loads rather than simple accelerated uniform wear?

[regular guy]

Originally Posted by SenorFunkyPants

Thanks for that...now I know something I didn't know yesterday.
The wear is only showing at the 6 o'clock position not the 12 o'clock position. So the wear still remains a function of the power stroke loads rather than simple accelerated uniform wear?

I'm pretty sure this is another one of Snow's made up pieces of data to support another made up theory. That seems to be a habitual practice -- whether it's the fake Honda rod bearing clearances or the fake data for S54 failures. Less than two weeks ago, Snow acknowledged he had never taken these eccentricity measurements. I have to assume these measurements and the theory they support are still fictitious because Snow has not provided any measurement data since that discussion.

See the following statement:

Originally Posted by Yellow Snow

I think you understand exactly what I meant. At no stage did I say it was measured in a rod. I am well aware that it's a spring.

For whatever reason, both of you seem highly motivated to use any means necessary to discredit and cast doubt. I believe it's having the opposite effect and I'd like to thank you both for keeping this thread at the top of the reader's queue. Knowing that most readers won't read all 35+ pages of this thread, I've been using these fictitious theories and the articles Snow has posted to refine the front page articles to make them even more impervious to false data attacks. So for this, I thank you both.

Snow, I think you've given me the motivation to go take those eccentricity measurements this weekend (if time permits). After they are posted, I'll be interested to read your response.

[regular guy]

Originally Posted by SenorFunkyPants

Looking at the pictures in the first post: One thing that strikes me in some of the pictures showing bearings in the early stages of wear...
in particular:
S65, 30000 Miles, Bone Stock, 2008.
S65, 31000 Miles, Naturally Aspirated, 2008
...is that the highest wear is concentrated at the 6 o'clock position ie in the middle of the bottom bearing.

None of these bottom bearings show greater wear than the top. The top bearings in all the photos show greater wear than the bottoms.

BTW I don't need Regular Guy to answer this post...if anyone with an open mind wants to reply then that would be great though.

Sometimes it's necessary to correct false and misleading information.

[SenorFunkyPants]

Originally Posted by regular guy

For whatever reason, both of you seem highly motivated to use any means necessary to discredit and cast doubt.

Are you new to the internet and forums?
You put up a theory for peer review what exactly did you expect?

[SenorFunkyPants]

Originally Posted by SenorFunkyPants

Looking at the pictures in the first post: One thing that strikes me in some of the pictures showing bearings in the early stages of wear...
in particular:
S65, 30000 Miles, Bone Stock, 2008.
S65, 31000 Miles, Naturally Aspirated, 2008
...is that the highest wear is concentrated at the 6 o'clock position ie in the middle of the bottom bearing. Simple accelerated wear would show as a more even increase in bearing wear.
So logically this elevated wear at that location would be a function of the vertical load exerted during the power stroke of the engine. So increase the force of the power stroke (by say supercharging) will increase the rate of wear - which appears to be the case. By extension, increase the vertical load during the power stroke through poor combustion should also increase wear to some extent. Not talking about massive pre-ignition or pinging the crap out of the engine that would be readily visible on all related parts - but an increase in load as a result of the engines S65 anti-knock system being unable to always fully accommodate the poor burn characteristics of low octane fuel.
Not making it the cause of increased wear but a component.

Originally Posted by regular guy

None of these bottom bearings show greater wear than the top. The top bearings in all the photos show greater wear than the bottoms.

Thanks for the correction and of course it makes far more sense.
However the proposition remains the same, just need to change two words around to become:
[....]the highest wear is concentrated at the 12 o'clock position ie in the middle of the top bearing. Simple accelerated wear would show as a more even increase in bearing wear.
So logically this elevated wear at that location would be a function of the vertical load exerted during the power stroke of the engine. So increase the force of the power stroke (by say supercharging) will increase the rate of wear - which appears to be the case. By extension, increase the vertical load during the power stroke through poor combustion should also increase wear to some extent.[....]

[regular guy]

Originally Posted by SenorFunkyPants

Thanks for the correction and of course it makes far more sense.
However the proposition remains the same, just need to change two words around.
[....]the highest wear is concentrated at the 12 o'clock position ie in the middle of the top bearing. Simple accelerated wear would show as a more even increase in bearing wear.
So logically this elevated wear at that location would be a function of the vertical load exerted during the power stroke of the engine. So increase the force of the power stroke (by say supercharging) will increase the rate of wear - which appears to be the case. By extension, increase the vertical load during the power stroke through poor combustion should also increase wear to some extent.
I Will go back and edit the earlier posts to account for the change but leave the original here unchanged as reference.

Have you considered this latest theory points to a bearing clearance design flaw? Since oil film created by proper clearance will prevent direct contact between bearings and journals, this theory of yours relies on direct contact -- hence improper clearance.

[Yellow Snow]

Originally Posted by regular guy

Snow, I think you've given me the motivation to go take those eccentricity measurements this weekend (if time permits). After they are posted, I'll be interested to read your response.

I certainly look forward to seeing some actual eccentricity measurements but please be honest with them. I am somewhat skeptical that you would ever lower yourself to agree with my findings.

A proper Talyrond graph or Cmm plot would be nice.

Lets see what the measurements bring

[kawasaki00]

Originally Posted by Yellow Snow

I certainly look forward to seeing some actual eccentricity measurements but please be honest with them. I am somewhat skeptical that you would ever lower yourself to agree with my findings.

A proper Talyrond graph or Cmm plot would be nice.

Lets see what the measurements bring

We have Mahr Federal air gauges, it is the most accurate way of measuring rod bearings. If anyone wants to send me a rod I will happily measure and post the data so we can put this to rest.

[regular guy]

Originally Posted by Yellow Snow

I certainly look forward to seeing some actual eccentricity measurements but please be honest with them. I am somewhat skeptical that you would ever lower yourself to agree with my findings.

I always start by the assumption that we're all here to tell the truth and present data accurately until proven otherwise. But I can tell that you have a completely different view. So let me help you with that.

I always make all of my data available to download to anybody who asks. The spreadsheets are available, and photos contain complete metadata to help you prove if data has been falsified. Send me a PM and I'll guide you (or anybody) through the download process without any hesitation.

A proper Talyrond graph or Cmm plot would be nice.

I don't know what that is, so if you want it, you'll have to generate it yourself from the data, or take your own data measurements and post it.

Lets see what the measurements bring

We will.

[regular guy]

Originally Posted by kawasaki00

We have Mahr Federal air gauges, it is the most accurate way of measuring rod bearings. If anyone wants to send me a rod I will happily measure and post the data so we can put this to rest.

I will send a complete set of OE rods, and the last set of bearings that were posted up. It will be good to have two sets of measurements.

[jcolley]

Originally Posted by kawasaki00

We have Mahr Federal air gauges, it is the most accurate way of measuring rod bearings. If anyone wants to send me a rod I will happily measure and post the data so we can put this to rest.

I know a guy with about 100 rods laying around from rebuilt engines. I can probably get a set sent to you for measurement. They are however from the clearly inferior, not-as-state-of-the-art S85 though, so I'm not sure if they will be of use.

[kawasaki00]

Originally Posted by regular guy

I will send a complete set of OE rods, and the last set of bearings that were posted up. It will be good to have two sets of measurements.

^ This Regular Guy is one of the most helpful people I have delt with.

Sounds good to me, looking forward to it.

[Yellow Snow]

Originally Posted by kawasaki00

We have Mahr Federal air gauges, it is the most accurate way of measuring rod bearings. If anyone wants to send me a rod I will happily measure and post the data so we can put this to rest.

Can you also post up measurements of the same unused shells in free state along with the torqued rod bore sans bearings. Thanks

[jayzF30]

All you guys talking about oh BMW engineers cannot be wrong, so much testing yada yada especially with all this evidence presented to you really need to stop arguing and accept the issue is there. BMW screwed up royally on the E46 M3 why is the S65 any more special now than the S54 was to them back then. Just drop the nonsense posts and focus on the data and pictures presented. The issue is more than real and they simply screwed up, again!

[Yellow Snow]

Originally Posted by jazze90

All you guys talking about oh BMW engineers cannot be wrong, so much testing yada yada especially with all this evidence presented to you really need to stop arguing and accept the issue is there. BMW screwed up royally on the E46 M3 why is the S65 any more special now than the S54 was to them back then. Just drop the nonsense posts and focus on the data and pictures presented. The issue is more than real and they simply screwed up, again!

Buy an Audi then

[kawasaki00]

Originally Posted by jcolley

I know a guy with about 100 rods laying around from rebuilt engines. I can probably get a set sent to you for measurement. They are however from the clearly inferior, not-as-state-of-the-art S85 though, so I'm not sure if they will be of use.

Regular Guy is sending a few rods to me for measurement. Thanks for the offer, the V10 M5 is bad ass, one of the best sounding engines to date.

[jayzF30]

Originally Posted by Yellow Snow

Buy an Audi then

What exactly do you mean by that? Don't be butthurt, the issue is clear as day here and people need to stop whining and listen to the experts and focus on all the data gathered in finding solution(s) instead of living in complete denial. Reminds me of my E46 M3 days. Same situation until BMW actually owned up to it and issued a recall.

You go get an Audi LOL

[Yellow Snow]

Originally Posted by jazze90

What exactly do you mean by that? Don't be butthurt, the issue is clear as day here and people need to stop whining and listen to the experts and focus on all the data gathered in finding solution(s) instead of living in complete denial. Reminds me of my E46 M3 days. Same situation until BMW actually owned up to it and issued a recall.

You go get an Audi LOL

It's not clear as Day to me. I'm actually here to get to the bottom of if there is a problem and if so, what's causing it.

I'm no sycophant, so I choose which experts I trust.

Genuine question for Reg Guy.

What's been done to the bearing shiny looking shell on Page one? Is it a coating?

[regular guy]

Originally Posted by Yellow Snow

It's not clear as Day to me. I'm actually here to get to the bottom of if there is a problem and if so, what's causing it.

I'm no sycophant, so I choose which experts I trust.

Genuine question for Reg Guy.

What's been done to the bearing shiny looking shell on Page one? Is it a coating?

You talking about the shiny bearing in this post?
http://www.m3post.com/forums/showpos...71&postcount=7

That was from Kawasaki and the only information I have is what I posted. It's possible I missed some info. If you're talking about a different photo, gimme a link to the post and I'll take a look.

[MWM3]

this thread makes me sad