Supercharged e90 M3 Failure

VCP · 01-24-2012, 10:47 AM

Is it just me but this spark plug does look like factory or the hks m45

pbonsalb · 01-24-2012, 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kr3st

I wouldn't be surprised if you broke a rod in a stock S65 powered car by driving around and continuously revving it to 8000 rpm and then lifting suddenly.

That would be really bad. These engined have an 8300 rpm redline and tuners such as Dinan that warranty motors with their mods are comfortable raising that to 8600.

Probably most S65s that have been on the dyno have been run to 8300 and then the throttle has been lifted suddenly.

CanAutM3 · 01-24-2012, 11:32 AM

Always thought that the S65 had a 8400RPM red line. Isn't 8300RPM the power peak?

I just checked the BMW press release, an they do quote 8400RPM red line

.

CanAutM3 · 01-24-2012, 11:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kr3st

You CAN throw a rod through the block by over revving the engine and NOT have valve damage. If AA's freeze frame is authentic, and the throttle position was indeed 37%, the car could have been shift-locked and it's very possible that it snapped a rod because of increased piston speed with no combustion. I've seen S52 powered drift cars initiate drift by shift locking, only to blow a rod out of the block.

+1

sA x sKy · 01-24-2012, 11:37 AM

Salna · 01-24-2012, 11:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kr3st

I wouldn't be surprised if you broke a rod in a stock S65 powered car by driving around and continuously revving it to 8000 rpm and then lifting suddenly.

Are you supposed to gently (but quickly) get off the throttle when shifting then?

Edjay · 01-24-2012, 11:51 AM

I think he is talking about rev to red, the lifting but not doing anything else, then stomping on it again (staying in te same gear) then lifting again. Using the engine as an ebrake.
And can someone please explain the purpose of the RO posted? I thought it would say why warranty was denied, But it just said warranty denied, safe to assume his warranty was denied and he didnt need to post proof of this

Ohh and btw, your engine pic does not look like it was detonating. So I have to ask how else would a SC cause engine failure if it wasnt detonating.

Singletrack · 01-24-2012, 12:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MPoweredAuto

Here is undeniable proof the freeze frame information Active Autowerke supplied was either altered, OR was not my vehicle. *My engine failed at 27,278 miles. *This translates to 43,897 km. *

How could I have put 1,000 miles on a car with a blown engine?? *This should completely dissolve their stand on me "over revving" the car, causing this failure. Also here are pics showing ZERO valve damage.

Thank you active for allowing me to prove that you have lied about this information once again. *I will be getting the cable from Mike and pulling data soon and will concrete this information for you all.

So what does this say about AA? *You can make that decision yourself. *Thank you all.

Ok, so you are saying that the over-rev didn't cause it. Let's just assume that's true. Where is the proof that AA's tuning caused the failure? Since that is what you claim. I don't see how this shows that the data AA posted was altered or invalid. Looks like you over-reved the car, you are just stating that it kept driving fine for another 1k miles before it let go.

Likewise, where is the service report showing that the warranty was voided because it was run to 190mph+ on the dyno. Or did you lie about that?

Finally, the valves won't contact the pistons on this engine at 8-9k RPM. This has been stated like 5 times in this thread.

Singletrack · 01-24-2012, 12:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Salna

Are you supposed to gently (but quickly) get off the throttle when shifting then?

This is not really accurate - BMW beats the living shit out of these engines at higher than stock redlines.

Drive it like you stole it and don't look back!

BMRLVR · 01-24-2012, 12:15 PM

Three of the cylinders have very white looking exhaust valves. If they weren't cleaned in any way I would guess there was a lean running condition in this engine! This could mean detonation and is most likely the reason why AA changed their tune shortly after your engine failure!

To Jordan, I understand your issues with a company lying to you! With that being said, AA has the terms and conditions posted on their site that state that they are not responsible for damages resulting from their parts, you have very little recourse in this matter. When you paid AA for the kit, you accepted the terms and conditions and that is legally binding!

TheRealOrosie · 01-24-2012, 12:27 PM

Quote:

To Jordan, I understand your issues with a company lying to you! With that being said, AA has the terms and conditions posted on their site that state that they are not responsible for damages resulting from their parts, you have very little recourse in this matter. When you paid AA for the kit, you accepted the terms and conditions and that is legally binding!

+1

Singletrack · 01-24-2012, 12:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BMRLVR

Three of the cylinders have very white looking exhaust valves. If they weren't cleaned in any way I would guess there was a lean running condition in this engine! This could mean detonation and is most likely the reason why AA changed their tune shortly after your engine failure!

To Jordan, I understand your issues with a company lying to you! With that being said, AA has the terms and conditions posted on their site that state that they are not responsible for damages resulting from their parts, you have very little recourse in this matter. When you paid AA for the kit, you accepted the terms and conditions and that is legally binding!

Uh-oh...I did miss that. Focused on the valves in the foreground, which look good.

MilehighM3 · 01-24-2012, 12:34 PM

White exhaust valves can be from burning small amounts of oil as well. I see that a lot with other engines that have worn valve guides. Also could be a result of the meth as well.
Companies constantly upgrade their tunes and products, the fact that AA has updated a tune is irrelevant to this case.

THE TECH · 01-24-2012, 12:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BMRLVR

To Jordan, I understand your issues with a company lying to you! With that being said, AA has the terms and conditions posted on their site that state that they are not responsible for damages resulting from their parts, you have very little recourse in this matter. When you paid AA for the kit, you accepted the terms and conditions and that is legally binding!

It may depend on when those terms were added. We don't know if they were in place before or after this incident. He would have to check his actual paperwork from them in regards to this.

BMRLVR · 01-24-2012, 01:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by THE TECH

Quote:

Originally Posted by BMRLVR

To Jordan, I understand your issues with a company lying to you! With that being said, AA has the terms and conditions posted on their site that state that they are not responsible for damages resulting from their parts, you have very little recourse in this matter. When you paid AA for the kit, you accepted the terms and conditions and that is legally binding!

It may depend on when those terms were added. We don't know if they were in place before or after this incident. He would have to check his actual paperwork from them in regards to this.

True enough, however I would suspect those terms have been around for quite a while!! Most companies have almost the exact terms and conditions and rarely sign one off deals, especially on early production kits!!!

THE TECH · 01-24-2012, 01:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BMRLVR

True enough, however I would suspect those terms have been around for quite a while!! Most companies have almost the exact terms and conditions and rarely sign one off deals, especially on early production kits!!!

I agree. Just wanting to not add more speculation to things.

US///M3 · 01-24-2012, 01:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by US///M3

Here's a video of the 92 catastrophic engine failure at sebring. (Shown toward the end of the vid)
I wonder if the OP or drew's engine failure looked like that? Jst curious.

It looks like this one failed runnin at a constant rpm.

mattgold · 01-24-2012, 01:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by THE TECH

It may depend on when those terms were added. We don't know if they were in place before or after this incident. He would have to check his actual paperwork from them in regards to this.

Come one now... Let's be realistic...

Terms look the same back in 2007 as they do today:

http://web.archive.org/web/200704032...tion/terms.php

I think everyone knows, when you get into upgrading / going to forced induction on a N/A car - YOU are taking on responsibility for whatever goes wrong. You make a conscious decision, that you are giving up your warranty and may blow your motor. You should have the rainy day fund set aside to cover that.

Just like tracking a car. If you are taking your car to a track and doing 140MPH+ you better be confident you can fix whatever breaks when things don't go the way you expect.

In this situation, it doesn't appear to be as a result of a SC/tune (driving around at 6K then pop) but mere bad luck; having the motor go after it was modified to the extent the warranty is void is a bummer.

-M

mattgold · 01-24-2012, 01:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by THE TECH

Posting for Jordan:

Also, I thought this was supposed to show that the cause of the voided warranty was the 'shadow memory' saying the car went 198MPH.

If that wasn't the point... what is? Just the fact that it was a denied claim?

THE TECH · 01-24-2012, 01:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mattgold

Also, I thought this was supposed to show that the cause of the voided warranty was the 'shadow memory' saying the car went 198MPH.

If that wasn't the point... what is? Just the fact that it was a denied claim?

That's just what AA said the reason why they denied the claim. So as far as the BMW paperwork goes, it would appear that it was denied for other reasons. I think this just lends more credit to the fact that AA isn't telling the entire truth about what occurred.

BMRLVR · 01-24-2012, 01:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mattgold

Quote:

Originally Posted by THE TECH

It may depend on when those terms were added. We don't know if they were in place before or after this incident. He would have to check his actual paperwork from them in regards to this.

Come one now... Let's be realistic...

Terms look the same back in 2007 as they do today:

http://web.archive.org/web/200704032...tion/terms.php

I think everyone knows, when you get into upgrading / going to forced induction on a N/A car - YOU are taking on responsibility for whatever goes wrong. You make a conscious decision, that you are giving up your warranty and may blow your motor. You should have the rainy day fund set aside to cover that.

Just like tracking a car. If you are taking your car to a track and doing 140MPH+ you better be confident you can fix whatever breaks when things don't go the way you expect.

In this situation, it doesn't appear to be as a result of a SC/tune (driving around at 6K then pop) but mere bad luck; having the motor go after it was modified to the extent the warranty is void is a bummer.

-M

Please explain to me how you can tell if the tune was bad or not? Based on the info in this thread there are holes in both side's stories!

I don't have any experience with meth, but generally speaking, white exhaust valves and spark plugs point to a lean running condition which usually equals detonation!

Edjay · 01-24-2012, 01:17 PM

I dont think AA ever said it went 198mph. But they did state it over rev. 8300 or so when they set the limit at 8100. I think Jordan has the burden of proving AA is responsible, IE instulation error or tuning error. Having a SC alone wont hold AA responsible for repairs, as they have that disclaimer.

That RO doesnt discredit AA imo. If im missing it please explain.

Btw piston top and combustion chamber does not look pitted, so i think the motor was not running lean enough to cause detonation bad enough to throw a rod.

01-24-2012, 10:47 AM	#463
VCP Colonel 1390 Rep 2,336 Posts Drives: M4GTS BSM/F90comp/BSM M2CS Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Canada iTrader: (0)	Is it just me but this spark plug does look like factory or the hks m45
	Appreciate 0 Quote

01-24-2012, 11:32 AM	#465
CanAutM3 General 21115 Rep 20,741 Posts Drives: 2021 911 turbo Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Montreal iTrader: (1) Garage List 2022 Audi RS6 [10.00] 2021 Porsche 911 turbo [10.00]	Always thought that the S65 had a 8400RPM red line. Isn't 8300RPM the power peak? I just checked the BMW press release, an they do quote 8400RPM red line .
	Appreciate 0 Quote

01-24-2012, 11:37 AM	#467
sA x sKy Sameet 739 Rep 2,541 Posts Drives: AY/B M4 '15 Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Long Island, New York iTrader: (3) Garage List 2015 BMW M4 [0.00]
	Appreciate 0 Quote

01-24-2012, 11:51 AM	#469
Edjay First Lieutenant 4 Rep 350 Posts Drives: 08 E90 AW, 76 2002 Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Sacoftomatoes Ca iTrader: (0)	I think he is talking about rev to red, the lifting but not doing anything else, then stomping on it again (staying in te same gear) then lifting again. Using the engine as an ebrake. And can someone please explain the purpose of the RO posted? I thought it would say why warranty was denied, But it just said warranty denied, safe to assume his warranty was denied and he didnt need to post proof of this Ohh and btw, your engine pic does not look like it was detonating. So I have to ask how else would a SC cause engine failure if it wasnt detonating. Last edited by Edjay; 01-24-2012 at 11:56 AM..
	Appreciate 0 Quote

01-24-2012, 12:15 PM	#472
BMRLVR Grease Monkey 293 Rep 2,646 Posts Drives: 2011 E90 M3,1994 Euro E36 M3/4 Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Fort McMurray, Alberta, Canada iTrader: (3)	Three of the cylinders have very white looking exhaust valves. If they weren't cleaned in any way I would guess there was a lean running condition in this engine! This could mean detonation and is most likely the reason why AA changed their tune shortly after your engine failure! To Jordan, I understand your issues with a company lying to you! With that being said, AA has the terms and conditions posted on their site that state that they are not responsible for damages resulting from their parts, you have very little recourse in this matter. When you paid AA for the kit, you accepted the terms and conditions and that is legally binding! __________________ 2011 E90 M3 ZCP - Individual Moonstone/Individual Amarone Extended/Individual Piano Black With Inlay:LINK!!! 1994 Euro E36 M3 Sedan - Daytona Violet/Mulberry:LINK!!!
	Appreciate 0 Quote

01-24-2012, 12:34 PM	#475
MilehighM3 Brigadier General 914 Rep 3,456 Posts Drives: Harrop E90 M3 Join Date: May 2011 Location: Colorado Springs iTrader: (14) Garage List 2009 E90 M3 [6.50]	White exhaust valves can be from burning small amounts of oil as well. I see that a lot with other engines that have worn valve guides. Also could be a result of the meth as well. Companies constantly upgrade their tunes and products, the fact that AA has updated a tune is irrelevant to this case.
	Appreciate 0 Quote

01-24-2012, 01:17 PM	#484
Edjay First Lieutenant 4 Rep 350 Posts Drives: 08 E90 AW, 76 2002 Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Sacoftomatoes Ca iTrader: (0)	I dont think AA ever said it went 198mph. But they did state it over rev. 8300 or so when they set the limit at 8100. I think Jordan has the burden of proving AA is responsible, IE instulation error or tuning error. Having a SC alone wont hold AA responsible for repairs, as they have that disclaimer. That RO doesnt discredit AA imo. If im missing it please explain. Btw piston top and combustion chamber does not look pitted, so i think the motor was not running lean enough to cause detonation bad enough to throw a rod.
	Appreciate 0 Quote