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

[b33g33]

Dear BMW NA,

Thank you for doing the right thing.

While a lot of your dealers kinda suck, it makes us loyalist glad to hear that you may be in our corner.

You have also made it highly likely that my next new car purchase will also have a ///M badge.

Sincerely,

Grateful customer and fan.

[e92livin]

Word to woody.. Tough to find a BMW dealership that do the right thing now a days....

[regular guy]

Originally Posted by SenorFunkyPants

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

SFP, I think you're doing great work...I really do. I love that you're taking the time and doing a really good job of collecting all this data on failures, just like I tried collecting all the data on bearing measurements. I'm just not convinced there's any correlation between the octane and failures because I still see too many other reasons why people may or may not report their failures in the various localities.

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 was one tuner who did this a while ago. He's gone from the scene now. I'm not sure how many others do this, if at all. But I wouldn't be surprised if some still do.

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.

I know detonation is the cause for some engine failures because I've seen (non public) photos of their pistons. These were all supercharged however. For you, I think it's better to try to concentrate on NA engines because nobody disputes that supercharging will lead to accelerated wear...and including supercharging into your data dilutes the correlation to actual causes.

[US///M3]

Am I going to get a new engine if mine shits the bed bc of the rod bearings, car is out of warranty as well?

[X5-User]

So rod bearing problems is confirmed on S65 engines !!! that sucks man

[MParallel]

Good news for OP.

Haven't heard much about S65 bearing failures here in EU.

Most people here use Ron100 or 102, regardless of octane number being a possible cause or not.

[satinghostrider]

http://www.m3post.com/forums/showpos...5&postcount=76

http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthr...light=bearings

Originally Posted by elmariachi

Your post made me research on this issue.

To confirm this, I went to realoem.com and input my MY 2008 and did a search on the crank bearings. Attaching a screenshot.

2008 Realoem Part Numbers and Descriptions



So knifegun was right after all. BMW DID UPDATE THE BEARINGS AFTER 10/2008 = MY 2009 !

I went through a painful rebuild process after my 2008 M3 engine gave up. This was a few years back when a few of us had this issues and most blamed it on tunes.
I am reposting this again after 4 years for your references. And chances are BMW did change the part numbers for the bearings. Either by a new supplier or correcting something that was never supposed to happen in the first place.

In any event, thumbs up for BMW for addressing this issue.

[Brian_Fantana]

I'm so confused after reading this. Am I to start getting an blackstone report at every oil change and drain my 10-60w and replace it with 0-40w? My car barely ever even hits 210 degrees especially now. I would think running cool is a good thing though, but have heard it's not a good thing to not reach 210 every time you start it. Please help us guys that have zero mechanical knowledge. I'm 6 months out if warranty but drive on the freeway like 9 miles out of every 10 I put on the car and have never had any major issues with my cars driving them this way, but now I'm feeling super paranoid.

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by regular guy

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.

I'd really like to emphasize the difference between and engine builder and and an engine engineer. Even more specifically a rotating machinery tribology engineer. I doubt if you asked 10 of them you'd get 10 different opinions... Cavitation is a well know general fluid flow phenomena and does occur in bearings. It is highly errosive to even tough metallic surfaces. However, it is almost always too large of a clearance that leads to cavitation not too small of a clearance. The source for that conclusion is Garner, D.R., James, R.D. and Warriner J.F., "Cavitation erosion in engine bearings - theory and practice", 13th CIMAC Conference, Vienna (1979). From samples of known cavitation failures I have seen, these look nothing like it. In short, and again, I'm not an expert in this field, but I think I know enough to know this Porsche expert ain't one either.

[BMRLVR]

Originally Posted by swamp2

I'd really like to emphasize the difference between and engine builder and and an engine engineer. Even more specifically a rotating machinery tribology engineer. I doubt if you asked 10 of them you'd get 10 different opinions... Cavitation is a well know general fluid flow phenomena and does occur in bearings. It is highly errosive to even tough metallic surfaces. However, it is almost always too large of a clearance that leads to cavitation not too small of a clearance. The source for that conclusion is Garner, D.R., James, R.D. and Warriner J.F., "Cavitation erosion in engine bearings - theory and practice", 13th CIMAC Conference, Vienna (1979). From samples of known cavitation failures I have seen, these look nothing like it. In short, and again, I'm not an expert in this field, but I think I know enough to know this Porsche expert ain't one either.

0.001" per inch of journal diameter is not too much clearance...... And this is the clearance that all of us suggested. Too little clearance will more often cause issues in an engine rather than too much. The clearance in an engine is not too great as long as oil pressure can be maintained at an acceptable level which ensures the bearings are adequately fed with oil

[swamp2]

Hope the new digs are treating you well!

Originally Posted by BMRLVR

Too little clearance will more often cause issues in an engine than too much.

Disagree. Too much clearance reduces the ultimate load carrying capacity and ultimately results in contact. Too much clearance will also lead to cavitation. Too little clearance will result in starvation and overheating. It is a pretty fine line in the middle.

[regular guy]

Originally Posted by elmariachi

http://www.m3post.com/forums/showpos...5&postcount=76

http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthr...light=bearings



I went through a painful rebuild process after my 2008 M3 engine gave up. This was a few years back when a few of us had this issues and most blamed it on tunes.
I am reposting this again after 4 years for your references. And chances are BMW did change the part numbers for the bearings. Either by a new supplier or correcting something that was never supposed to happen in the first place.

In any event, thumbs up for BMW for addressing this issue.

Ladies and Gentlemen, please let me introduce you to the one person who may have been the very first documented case of bearing failure on the forums. I followed his case four years ago when BMW denied his warranty. If I remember correctly, it was main bearing failure and BMW denied your warranty because they said you had a tune.

[W///]

Originally Posted by Brian_Fantana

I'm so confused after reading this. Am I to start getting an blackstone report at every oil change and drain my 10-60w and replace it with 0-40w? My car barely ever even hits 210 degrees especially now. I would think running cool is a good thing though, but have heard it's not a good thing to not reach 210 every time you start it. Please help us guys that have zero mechanical knowledge. I'm 6 months out if warranty but drive on the freeway like 9 miles out of every 10 I put on the car and have never had any major issues with my cars driving them this way, but now I'm feeling super paranoid.

There's info everywhere, you just got to sift through it. Regardless it's still very dependent on who you are talking to. So here's what I recommend (some members will agree, some won't)
1) Get Blackstone every oil change and build up a trend. I do not believe in cracking open these engines if you don't have a reason to
2) Engine warms up quicker with 0W40. That's a good thing. Warming up quicker is good. Running HOT is not good. 210 is not considered hot.
3) If you ask me, I'd run 0W40 based on how you drive your car. But the biggest thing is to start doing Blackstone analysis

[FogCityM3]

I would be interested in finding out how much timing advance is considered "too too much" for 91 octane. I have logged two different tunes and both have targets set around 34 degrees at WOT (imputed from the max ignition advance I've observed with no knock intervention in cool weather and/or with racing gas).

Originally Posted by SenorFunkyPants

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.

[satinghostrider]

Originally Posted by regular guy

Ladies and Gentlemen, please let me introduce you to the one person who may have been the very first documented case of bearing failure on the forums. I followed his case four years ago when BMW denied his warranty. If I remember correctly, it was main bearing failure and BMW denied your warranty because they said you had a tune.

That's absolutely correct.
Not to mention, 4 years ago I did warn everyone with SCing their 2008 built cars (Look below at post link). Funny, took a few blown engines before everyone started to freak out and put a disclaimer on bearings upgrade for 2008 built S65s before supercharging them. Probably even to the point not offering the kits for 2008 built cars unless bearings upgrade were done. ;p

http://www.m3post.com/forums/showpos...6&postcount=75

[US///M3]

Originally Posted by srtoad4

Do they know about your exhaust and tune you have on there? They didn't void it out based on those mods?

Congrats nonetheless, definite WIN for you!

I don't think the op shared that with BMW and probably wants that info kept quiet.

[SenorFunkyPants]

Originally Posted by FogCityM3

I would be interested in finding out how much timing advance is considered "too too much" for 91 octane. I have logged two different tunes and both have targets set around 34 degrees at WOT (imputed from the max ignition advance I've observed with no knock intervention in cool weather and/or with racing gas).

Am I right in thinking that:
The DME map is basically a table of settings...Ignition advance, air/fuel ratio, valve timing etc that is referenced for the engine settings dependent on throttle opening, revs, temps, manifold pressure etc. Its not an infinite table in the sense that there are top and bottom limits to the amount of ignition advance that the DME can use....the standard table might run from say 12 degrees minimum to 32 degrees maximum. So if you want to add 2 degrees of extra ignition advance at the top end you have to move the whole table up 2 degrees which now means the minimum amount of advance that can now be set to counter knock is 14 degrees.
All else being equal the higher the fuel octane the more time the engine can run at the preset maximum ignition of 32 degrees = better performance. Conversely the lower the octane the less time the engine will be able to run at the maximum ignition advance.
So basically the stock car with 93 octane (USA) fuel will spend more time running in the top half of the table while with 91 octane fuel you will spend more time running in the lower half and consequently be more likely to utilize the minimum ignition advance. Obviously this is a very simplistic take on a very complex issue but if I am understanding this correctly there isn't really that much to gain in having a tune on an M3 that is running 91 octane fuel and if the tune is too aggressive then you could do some harm instead if the (now higher) minimum available ignition advance is no longer enough to fully counter any knock.

[Disciple7]

http://www.walmart.com/ip/Mobil-1-0W...Quart/23636902

So is this oil the general consensus to use from now on? Also if I bring it in to my SA at my next free oil change you think they'll give me shit? Or just stay on TWS until free maintenance is over?

[regular guy]

Originally Posted by SenorFunkyPants

Am I right in thinking that:
The DME map is basically a table of settings...Ignition advance, air/fuel ratio, valve timing etc that is referenced for the engine settings dependent on throttle opening, revs, temps, manifold pressure etc. Its not an infinite table in the sense that there are top and bottom limits to the amount of ignition advance that the DME can use....the standard table might run from say 12 degrees minimum to 32 degrees maximum. So if you want to add 2 degrees of extra ignition advance at the top end you have to move the whole table up 2 degrees which now means the minimum amount of advance that can now be set to counter knock is 14 degrees.
All else being equal the higher the fuel octane the more time the engine can run at the preset maximum ignition of 32 degrees = better performance. Conversely the lower the octane the less time the engine will be able to run at the maximum ignition advance.
So basically the stock car with 93 octane (USA) fuel will spend more time running in the top half of the table while with 91 octane fuel you will spend more time running in the lower half and consequently be more likely to utilize the minimum ignition advance. Obviously this is a very simplistic take on a very complex issue but if I am understanding this correctly there isn't really that much to gain in having a tune on an M3 that is running 91 octane fuel and if the tune is too aggressive then you could do some harm instead if the (now higher) minimum available ignition advance is no longer enough to fully counter any knock.

You are describing what sounds like a standard lookup table approach to DME programming. That is called "open loop" programming where based on the conditions, the ECU looks up the values in a table for fuel and timing. The MSS60 does not operate this way. Instead, the MSS60 is "target" based ECU. This is called "closed loop" programming where the ECU has "target" values programmed into the lambda (afr) and spark tables and based on the sensor readings it receives from previous combustion cycles, the ECU calculates whatever fuel and spark is necessary to hit the target.

Target based programming is much simpler for the tuner, but much harder for the programmer. I'm being very careful here not to call the tuner a programmer because in spite of what impressions they give you here, the tuner can't actually change the source code programming of the ECU itself. For example the tuner can't change how these target calculations are made, they can only change the target value itself.

But there is only so far the ECU can go to hit the timing and lambda (afr) targets. In addition to the target tables, there is a minimum and maximum values the ECU is allowed to set. So in this regard, it's not infinite. Some tuners were known to adjust these min/max values to "force" timing to unsafe values. I don't know if any of them do this any longer, but there was one tuner a few years ago who used to do this (he's now gone from the BMW scene).

[jphughan]

Originally Posted by e92livin

Word to woody.. Tough to find a BMW dealership that do the right thing now a days....

Come to BMW of Austin. I can't remember a time when my service advisor DIDN'T go above and beyond for me, which he's done in about 50 different ways since I got my M3. I even bought him a bottle of JW Black Label for Christmas for how amazing he is.

The entire dealership itself is amazing too. Where else do you have a movie theater with a 500-disc Blu-ray changer to occupy you while you wait for service?

[W///]

Originally Posted by Disciple7

http://www.walmart.com/ip/Mobil-1-0W...Quart/23636902

So is this oil the general consensus to use from now on? Also if I bring it in to my SA at my next free oil change you think they'll give me shit? Or just stay on TWS until free maintenance is over?

That's the oil that people are switching to (everyone has their own opinions). I'd talk to your SA and see what he says first. But the key is just to keep intervals reasonable. Don't go 10k+ without changing your oil.

Originally Posted by jphughan

Come to BMW of Austin. I can't remember a time when my service advisor DIDN'T go above and beyond for me, which he's done in about 50 different ways since I got my M3. I even bought him a bottle of JW Black Label for Christmas for how amazing he is.

The entire dealership itself is amazing too. Where else do you have a movie theater with a 500-disc Blu-ray changer to occupy you while you wait for service?

Ok, that's amazing. Wish we had dealerships like that around here.

[aus]

Originally Posted by Disciple7

http://www.walmart.com/ip/Mobil-1-0W...Quart/23636902

So is this oil the general consensus to use from now on? Also if I bring it in to my SA at my next free oil change you think they'll give me shit? Or just stay on TWS until free maintenance is over?

You could also ask for the BMW 5W30 oil, which should be pretty similar to the Mobil 0W40. I have noticed my lifter noise is now gone since switching to 0W40.

.