BMW M3 Forum (E90 E92)

BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Go Back   M3Post - BMW M3 Forum > E90/E92 M3 Technical Topics > Engine, Transmission, Exhaust, Drivetrain, ECU Software Modifications
 
Steve Thomas BMW
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      06-23-2013, 03:25 PM   #23
VCMpower
Banned
 
Drives: 2010 Dakar, 2013 Fire Orange
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Victoria B.C.

Posts: 941
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Benvo
Quote:
Originally Posted by W/// View Post
I've said this in pretty much every thread about rod bearings and I'll say it again. When you change your oil, send a sample to Blackstone to get it analyzed. It's like $25 each time (every 7500 miles).

1) If oil analysis comes back and shows no bearing issue, why bust the engine open to change the bearings unless you are going FI?
2) As mentioned in every thread, the tolerances are very tight in these engines. However, there's also a good chance your engine is perfectly fine too.

Now if your oil analysis came back with high lead count, then that's another subject
My lead count has consistently been 44.

I think this might have been when some leaded fuel went in, but I can't be sure.

I'd like to see it say 0, but I guess consistency is good as well.
Consistently wearing out !? Lol
VCMpower is offline   Canada
0
      06-23-2013, 03:34 PM   #24
Mike Benvo
BimmerPost Supporting Vendor

 
Mike Benvo's Avatar
 
Drives: 08 E90 M3 / 400whp Turbo 7
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: SoCal

Posts: 4,689
iTrader: (7)

Garage List
2008 BMW M3  [5.00]
1990 BMW 735i Turbo  [5.00]
2004 BMW M3  [0.00]
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Benvo
Quote:
Originally Posted by VCMpower View Post
Consistently wearing out !? Lol
I've only run the factory 10w-60 since the car was purchased new with 2 miles on it. Keep in mind that if this was leaded fuel that was put in, that it might take a thousands of miles for the lead count to drop. It's not necessarily an indicator of consistent wear. But then again, I'm not an expert in hardware, only software. So I will defer to those on here that are. This is what Blackstone said in my last report:

***
Lead is still somewhat elevated compared to averages. The fact that it's steady though, is promising. Hopefully this isn't an issue, but maybe the elevated readings are a result of the kind of use this engine sees. Or maybe it's from the occasional use of leaded or racing fuel from the track. With other metals looking good, we're hoping this isn't a serious problem, but it's worth keeping an eye on. If you see any unusual fluctuations with the oil pressure, take a second look to ensure no serious problems are in the
works. Otherwise, just check back to monitor.
***

That was at 49K miles and about 6K on the oil. Since new the oil has been changed 9 times. (At 1,153, 12,925, 19K, 25,039, 28,794, 34K, 42,948, and 49K). Every change was done at the dealer with Castrol 10W-60.

The car doesn't skip a beat ever. It runs like an absolute dream. So I'm insanely torn about leaving it or putting new bearings and con rod bolts in. I'd replace with stock bearings, or go with the VAC ones if there was more definitive information on clearances between the setups available for replacement.

My S85 V10 M5 only has 30,000 miles on it, and I've never done an oil analysis, but I guess I should do that at the next change.
__________________

-----| Like us on Facebook | Instagram || Tuning Information | Remote Coding |-----
----Visit us at www.BPMSport.com - Emotion. Driven. | Toll Free: (888) 557-5133----
Mike Benvo is offline   United_States
0
      06-23-2013, 03:34 PM   #25
W///
Brigadier General
 
W///'s Avatar
 
Drives: 2008 E92 M3/1999 E36 M3 Coupe
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: SC

Posts: 4,954
iTrader: (12)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Benvo View Post
My lead count has consistently been 44.

I think this might have been when some leaded fuel went in, but I can't be sure.

I'd like to see it say 0, but I guess consistency is good as well.
44? Jesus. Mine was at 9 (right at the average).

But as you said, at least it's staying consistent. I'm tempted to say it was most likely due to leaded fuel though. A member (Mtrois I believe) used some leaded fuel by mistake and got very similar readings.
__________________
2008 E92 M3: Sparkling Graphite | Bamboo Beige | 6MT | CF Roof | HRE | Eisenmann | BPM Sport | Swift | Arkym | Mode Carbon | M.Perf
W/// is offline  
0
      06-23-2013, 03:44 PM   #26
VCMpower
Banned
 
Drives: 2010 Dakar, 2013 Fire Orange
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Victoria B.C.

Posts: 941
iTrader: (0)

Good info
VCMpower is offline   Canada
0
      06-23-2013, 03:50 PM   #27
VCMpower
Banned
 
Drives: 2010 Dakar, 2013 Fire Orange
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Victoria B.C.

Posts: 941
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Benvo
Quote:
Originally Posted by VCMpower View Post
Consistently wearing out !? Lol
I've only run the factory 10w-60 since the car was purchased new with 2 miles on it. Keep in mind that if this was leaded fuel that was put in, that it might take a thousands of miles for the lead count to drop. It's not necessarily an indicator of consistent wear. But then again, I'm not an expert in hardware, only software. So I will defer to those on here that are. This is what Blackstone said in my last report:

***
Lead is still somewhat elevated compared to averages. The fact that it's steady though, is promising. Hopefully this isn't an issue, but maybe the elevated readings are a result of the kind of use this engine sees. Or maybe it's from the occasional use of leaded or racing fuel from the track. With other metals looking good, we're hoping this isn't a serious problem, but it's worth keeping an eye on. If you see any unusual fluctuations with the oil pressure, take a second look to ensure no serious problems are in the
works. Otherwise, just check back to monitor.
***

That was at 49K miles and about 6K on the oil. Since new the oil has been changed 9 times. (At 1,153, 12,925, 19K, 25,039, 28,794, 34K, 42,948, and 49K). Every change was done at the dealer with Castrol 10W-60.

The car doesn't skip a beat ever. It runs like an absolute dream. So I'm insanely torn about leaving it or putting new bearings and con rod bolts in. I'd replace with stock bearings, or go with the VAC ones if there was more definitive information on clearances between the setups available for replacement.

My S85 V10 M5 only has 30,000 miles on it, and I've never done an oil analysis, but I guess I should do that at the next change.
Yes. Definitive info on clearances. Seeming inconsistency is scary. If you are going FI, rod bolts are a +, bearings just because you're there. Stock are fine. I have new bearings sitting at my shop and am going to measure the uppers to lowers to see. I also have a couple sets of VAC bearings I will measure and let ya know. Talk soon Mike!
VCMpower is offline   Canada
0
      06-23-2013, 03:54 PM   #28
Mike Benvo
BimmerPost Supporting Vendor

 
Mike Benvo's Avatar
 
Drives: 08 E90 M3 / 400whp Turbo 7
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: SoCal

Posts: 4,689
iTrader: (7)

Garage List
2008 BMW M3  [5.00]
1990 BMW 735i Turbo  [5.00]
2004 BMW M3  [0.00]
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Benvo
Quote:
Originally Posted by W/// View Post
44? Jesus. Mine was at 9 (right at the average).

But as you said, at least it's staying consistent. I'm tempted to say it was most likely due to leaded fuel though. A member (Mtrois I believe) used some leaded fuel by mistake and got very similar readings.
Yeah.. the first sample I ever sent out was right after the tracking in 100F ambient temperature when I was stress testing our 240E software about this time last year.

Oil temperatures were 300F+ and I did not let off. Before that I was at the pump and trying to get it to work (it was a really old school pump), and then I realized it was 110 leaded gas. It was over a year ago and I can't remember if I pumped any in, or if none went in at all. So the truth is that I have no idea if it's related to leaded fuel but can only hope that it is. I'll send my E60 M5 sample off soon and see what that comes back with for fun. I love spinning the V10 to almost 9 grand

Keep in touch VCM! Interested to hear what you find before I tear my baby apart for yet another project
__________________

-----| Like us on Facebook | Instagram || Tuning Information | Remote Coding |-----
----Visit us at www.BPMSport.com - Emotion. Driven. | Toll Free: (888) 557-5133----
Mike Benvo is offline   United_States
0
      06-23-2013, 04:59 PM   #29
Mike Benvo
BimmerPost Supporting Vendor

 
Mike Benvo's Avatar
 
Drives: 08 E90 M3 / 400whp Turbo 7
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: SoCal

Posts: 4,689
iTrader: (7)

Garage List
2008 BMW M3  [5.00]
1990 BMW 735i Turbo  [5.00]
2004 BMW M3  [0.00]
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Benvo
Crazy enough...

Just got a call from a friend with a 2011 M3 w/ 30,000 miles.

Car went into limp mode on the track and then he pulled off. Restarted it and there were no errors. Left the track, and drove for about 20 minutes and got a message to immediately add oil or engine damage will ensue. There was a puddle of oil under the car, and he said it sounds like he's got bearing noise.

Car was towed to the dealer and I'll keep you guys updated. Sounds like another bearing horror story...
__________________

-----| Like us on Facebook | Instagram || Tuning Information | Remote Coding |-----
----Visit us at www.BPMSport.com - Emotion. Driven. | Toll Free: (888) 557-5133----
Mike Benvo is offline   United_States
0
      06-23-2013, 05:00 PM   #30
regular guy
Banned
 
Drives: Sprint car
Join Date: May 2013
Location: California

Posts: 1,375
iTrader: (0)

It looks like some clarification may be in order to answer a bunch of these question.

The factory bearings are Mahle-Clevite-77. BMW uses blue and red bearings for top/bottom shells, not different sizes.

My people exhaustively measured the clearances and shared our results with select individuals on this forum, including BMRLVR. We measured two factory cranks, and four sets of connecting rods. Two sets of factory connecting rods and two sets of Carrillo rods. We experimented with red/blue shells to see if there was any size difference.

We used bore dial indicators to measure clearance, not Plastigauge. Nothing against Plastiguage and it's decent when in a bind, but it's not as accurate as bore gauges. The accuracy of Plastigauge will depend on its placement. Put Plastigauge in the wrong spot or wrong orientation, and the results are not dependable.

Our measurements showed very consistent results. Clearance on both main and rod journals was between 0.00096 - 0.00100, with most closer to 0.00100 than 0.00096. It didn't matter if we used factory connecting rods or the two different sets of Carrillo's because both measured the same. It also didn't matter if we matched two red and two blue bearing shells, as they measured the same as well.

There are two different types of coated bearings that we've seen for S65 engines. Most people, including VAC, use bearings coated by Calico Coatings. Calico web site specifies the coating between 0.0002 - 0.0004 thickness. The other coated bearing appears to be a Mahle-Clevite TriArmor bearing (although we can't be totally sure). The thickness of the TriArmor coating is spec'ed by Mahle-Clevite as 0.0003 - 0.0005 thickness. According to these manufacturers specifications, that would mean using the coated bearings would reduce your clearance by 20%-50% depending on which coated bearing you use if you do not add extra clearance by reducing the size of your crankshaft journals or using larger bearings (larger bearings are not available).

Even though we had access to both sets of coated bearings, we did not measure them. Now that there's sufficient interest in this topic, we plan to measure both types of coated bearings for the next engine we build.

Both Calico and Mahle-Clevite specify proper bearing clearance at 0.001" per 1-inch of journal diameter. BMW went much smaller, and according to Mahle-Clevite they do this for two reasons: 1) minimize noise in aluminum blocks; 2) reduce horsepower loss. But Mahle-Clevite also warns against these tight tolerances and says any such small clearance should also be mated with thinner oils like 5-30W.

There's actually much, much more to this topic with much greater details, warnings, and recommendations. But hopefully this clears up some things for now.

I hope this helps.
regular guy is offline  
0
      06-23-2013, 05:03 PM   #31
VCMpower
Banned
 
Drives: 2010 Dakar, 2013 Fire Orange
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Victoria B.C.

Posts: 941
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Benvo
Crazy enough...

Just got a call from a friend with a 2011 M3 w/ 30,000 miles.

Car went into limp mode on the track and then he pulled off. Restarted it and there were no errors. Left the track, and drove for about 20 minutes and got a message to immediately add oil or engine damage will ensue. There was a puddle of oil under the car, and he said it sounds like he's got bearing noise.

Car was towed to the dealer and I'll keep you guys updated. Sounds like another bearing horror story...
If he has oil on the ground from a "bearing" issue he would not be driving it, or running it. That is catastrophic. Maybe something else?
VCMpower is offline   Canada
0
      06-23-2013, 05:03 PM   #32
Mike Benvo
BimmerPost Supporting Vendor

 
Mike Benvo's Avatar
 
Drives: 08 E90 M3 / 400whp Turbo 7
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: SoCal

Posts: 4,689
iTrader: (7)

Garage List
2008 BMW M3  [5.00]
1990 BMW 735i Turbo  [5.00]
2004 BMW M3  [0.00]
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Benvo
(regular guy) - Great post, thank you.
__________________

-----| Like us on Facebook | Instagram || Tuning Information | Remote Coding |-----
----Visit us at www.BPMSport.com - Emotion. Driven. | Toll Free: (888) 557-5133----
Mike Benvo is offline   United_States
0
      06-23-2013, 05:05 PM   #33
Mike Benvo
BimmerPost Supporting Vendor

 
Mike Benvo's Avatar
 
Drives: 08 E90 M3 / 400whp Turbo 7
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: SoCal

Posts: 4,689
iTrader: (7)

Garage List
2008 BMW M3  [5.00]
1990 BMW 735i Turbo  [5.00]
2004 BMW M3  [0.00]
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Benvo
Quote:
Originally Posted by VCMpower View Post
If he has oil on the ground from a "bearing" issue he would not be driving it, or running it. That is catastrophic. Maybe something else?
It's possible that a loss of oil caused the bearings to wear - The cause and effect at this point is unknown. I'm going to overnight him a cable on Monday to see what the limp mode was about and check the adaptations, prior history and environmental conditions, and well as combustion quality. That will immediately point to an isolated issue in a particular cylinder.
__________________

-----| Like us on Facebook | Instagram || Tuning Information | Remote Coding |-----
----Visit us at www.BPMSport.com - Emotion. Driven. | Toll Free: (888) 557-5133----
Mike Benvo is offline   United_States
0
      06-23-2013, 05:08 PM   #34
VCMpower
Banned
 
Drives: 2010 Dakar, 2013 Fire Orange
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Victoria B.C.

Posts: 941
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by regular guy
It looks like some clarification may be in order to answer a bunch of these question.

The factory bearings are Mahle-Clevite-77. BMW uses blue and red bearings for top/bottom shells, not different sizes.

My people exhaustively measured the clearances and shared our results with select individuals on this forum, including BMRLVR. We measured two factory cranks, and four sets of connecting rods. Two sets of factory connecting rods and two sets of Carrillo rods. We experimented with red/blue shells to see if there was any size difference.

We used bore dial indicators to measure clearance, not Plastigauge. Nothing against Plastiguage and it's decent when in a bind, but it's not as accurate as bore gauges. The accuracy of Plastigauge will depend on its placement. Put Plastigauge in the wrong spot or wrong orientation, and the results are not dependable.

Our measurements showed very consistent results. Clearance on both main and rod journals was between 0.00096 - 0.00100, with most closer to 0.00100 than 0.00096. It didn't matter if we used factory connecting rods or the two different sets of Carrillo's because both measured the same. It also didn't matter if we matched two red and two blue bearing shells, as they measured the same as well.

There are two different types of coated bearings that we've seen for S65 engines. Most people, including VAC, use bearings coated by Calico Coatings. Calico web site specifies the coating between 0.0002 - 0.0004 thickness. The other coated bearing appears to be a Mahle-Clevite TriArmor bearing (although we can't be totally sure). The thickness of the TriArmor coating is spec'ed by Mahle-Clevite as 0.0003 - 0.0005 thickness. According to these manufacturers specifications, that would mean using the coated bearings would reduce your clearance by 20%-50% depending on which coated bearing you use if you do not add extra clearance by reducing the size of your crankshaft journals or using larger bearings (larger bearings are not available).

Even though we had access to both sets of coated bearings, we did not measure them. Now that there's sufficient interest in this topic, we plan to measure both types of coated bearings for the next engine we build.

Both Calico and Mahle-Clevite specify proper bearing clearance at 0.001" per 1-inch of journal diameter. BMW went much smaller, and according to Mahle-Clevite they do this for two reasons: 1) minimize noise in aluminum blocks; 2) reduce horsepower loss. But Mahle-Clevite also warns against these tight tolerances and says any such small clearance should also be mated with thinner oils like 5-30W.

There's actually much, much more to this topic with much greater details, warnings, and recommendations. But hopefully this clears up some things for now.

I hope this helps.
Thanks so much for this. I did just measure the stock and yes no thickness difference upper to lower.
VCMpower is offline   Canada
0
      06-23-2013, 05:11 PM   #35
VCMpower
Banned
 
Drives: 2010 Dakar, 2013 Fire Orange
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Victoria B.C.

Posts: 941
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Benvo
Quote:
Originally Posted by VCMpower View Post
If he has oil on the ground from a "bearing" issue he would not be driving it, or running it. That is catastrophic. Maybe something else?
It's possible that a loss of oil caused the bearings to wear - The cause and effect at this point is unknown. I'm going to overnight him a cable on Monday to see what the limp mode was about and check the adaptations, prior history and environmental conditions, and well as combustion quality. That will immediately point to an isolated issue in a particular cylinder.
A lot of starvation, but yes. This then would not be a fault of the bearing or clearance itself aside from what was said about no room for error.
VCMpower is offline   Canada
0
      06-23-2013, 05:17 PM   #36
BMRLVR
Grease Monkey
 
BMRLVR's Avatar
 
Drives: 2011 E90 M3,1994 Euro E36 M3/4
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Fort McMurray, Alberta, Canada

Posts: 2,329
iTrader: (3)

Quote:
Originally Posted by VCMpower View Post
If folks set clearances to say, .002, oil pressure drops to 20-25 psi below 2k rpm from 40 psi. How will this affect stop and go, sitting at traffic light style driving? Without playing with oil weight. All components of this engine are designed to see 40-80 psi(vanos included). Maximum pressure is 60 with .002 clearance. Would a revised oil pump be a full package solution along with more clearance? I have measured 2 motors both closer to .0015, but I do not disagree that there are ones closer to .001. If this can be proven without doubt should BMW not take accountability?
20-25PSI of oil pressure is lots below 2K RPM. Like was mentioned many times before, Dinan builds their Strokers with 0.019" Main & 0.025" Rod and they dont change the oil pumps in any way. They have their cranks pre-machined with to be at these clearances with stock bearing shells........ With Dinan building most of the BMW engines for race teams across NA (Fall Line Motorsports, and the Grand-Am Rolex Sports car series Daytona prototype class to name only a few) I think they know what they are doing!

Quote:
Originally Posted by regular guy View Post
It looks like some clarification may be in order to answer a bunch of these question.

The factory bearings are Mahle-Clevite-77. BMW uses blue and red bearings for top/bottom shells, not different sizes.

My people exhaustively measured the clearances and shared our results with select individuals on this forum, including BMRLVR. We measured two factory cranks, and four sets of connecting rods. Two sets of factory connecting rods and two sets of Carrillo rods. We experimented with red/blue shells to see if there was any size difference.

We used bore dial indicators to measure clearance, not Plastigauge. Nothing against Plastiguage and it's decent when in a bind, but it's not as accurate as bore gauges. The accuracy of Plastigauge will depend on its placement. Put Plastigauge in the wrong spot or wrong orientation, and the results are not dependable.

Our measurements showed very consistent results. Clearance on both main and rod journals was between 0.00096 - 0.00100, with most closer to 0.00100 than 0.00096. It didn't matter if we used factory connecting rods or the two different sets of Carrillo's because both measured the same. It also didn't matter if we matched two red and two blue bearing shells, as they measured the same as well.

There are two different types of coated bearings that we've seen for S65 engines. Most people, including VAC, use bearings coated by Calico Coatings. Calico web site specifies the coating between 0.0002 - 0.0004 thickness. The other coated bearing appears to be a Mahle-Clevite TriArmor bearing (although we can't be totally sure). The thickness of the TriArmor coating is spec'ed by Mahle-Clevite as 0.0003 - 0.0005 thickness. According to these manufacturers specifications, that would mean using the coated bearings would reduce your clearance by 20%-50% depending on which coated bearing you use if you do not add extra clearance by reducing the size of your crankshaft journals or using larger bearings (larger bearings are not available).

Even though we had access to both sets of coated bearings, we did not measure them. Now that there's sufficient interest in this topic, we plan to measure both types of coated bearings for the next engine we build.

Both Calico and Mahle-Clevite specify proper bearing clearance at 0.001" per 1-inch of journal diameter. BMW went much smaller, and according to Mahle-Clevite they do this for two reasons: 1) minimize noise in aluminum blocks; 2) reduce horsepower loss. But Mahle-Clevite also warns against these tight tolerances and says any such small clearance should also be mated with thinner oils like 5-30W.

There's actually much, much more to this topic with much greater details, warnings, and recommendations. But hopefully this clears up some things for now.

I hope this helps.
Thanks for helping shed some light on my claims......... Hopefully all of the non believers will sit-up and listen now!
__________________
2011 E90 M3 ZCP - Individual Moonstone/Individual Amarone Extended/Individual Piano Black With Inlay:LINK!!!
1994 Euro E36 M3 Sedan - Daytona Violet/Mulberry:LINK!!!

Last edited by BMRLVR; 06-23-2013 at 05:26 PM.
BMRLVR is offline   Canada
0
      06-23-2013, 05:27 PM   #37
Mike Benvo
BimmerPost Supporting Vendor

 
Mike Benvo's Avatar
 
Drives: 08 E90 M3 / 400whp Turbo 7
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: SoCal

Posts: 4,689
iTrader: (7)

Garage List
2008 BMW M3  [5.00]
1990 BMW 735i Turbo  [5.00]
2004 BMW M3  [0.00]
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Benvo
Quote:
Originally Posted by VCMpower View Post
A lot of starvation, but yes. This then would not be a fault of the bearing or clearance itself aside from what was said about no room for error.
100% Agreed. Will keep you guys updated.
__________________

-----| Like us on Facebook | Instagram || Tuning Information | Remote Coding |-----
----Visit us at www.BPMSport.com - Emotion. Driven. | Toll Free: (888) 557-5133----
Mike Benvo is offline   United_States
0
      06-23-2013, 05:30 PM   #38
Checkcaptain
Captain
 
Drives: BMW M3 E92
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Germany

Posts: 995
iTrader: (0)

Send a message via MSN to Checkcaptain Send a message via Skype™ to Checkcaptain
Bearings of a Dinan stroker after 20.000KM:


Checkcaptain is offline   Germany
0
      06-23-2013, 05:34 PM   #39
aussiem3
Lieutenant Colonel
 
aussiem3's Avatar
 
Drives: Goggomobil
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Kangaroo land

Posts: 1,612
iTrader: (1)

Garage List
2014 BMW X5 30d  [0.00]
2007 E92 M3  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by regular guy View Post
It looks like some clarification may be in order to answer a bunch of these question.

The factory bearings are Mahle-Clevite-77. BMW uses blue and red bearings for top/bottom shells, not different sizes.

My people exhaustively measured the clearances and shared our results with select individuals on this forum, including BMRLVR. We measured two factory cranks, and four sets of connecting rods. Two sets of factory connecting rods and two sets of Carrillo rods. We experimented with red/blue shells to see if there was any size difference.

We used bore dial indicators to measure clearance, not Plastigauge. Nothing against Plastiguage and it's decent when in a bind, but it's not as accurate as bore gauges. The accuracy of Plastigauge will depend on its placement. Put Plastigauge in the wrong spot or wrong orientation, and the results are not dependable.

Our measurements showed very consistent results. Clearance on both main and rod journals was between 0.00096 - 0.00100, with most closer to 0.00100 than 0.00096. It didn't matter if we used factory connecting rods or the two different sets of Carrillo's because both measured the same. It also didn't matter if we matched two red and two blue bearing shells, as they measured the same as well.

There are two different types of coated bearings that we've seen for S65 engines. Most people, including VAC, use bearings coated by Calico Coatings. Calico web site specifies the coating between 0.0002 - 0.0004 thickness. The other coated bearing appears to be a Mahle-Clevite TriArmor bearing (although we can't be totally sure). The thickness of the TriArmor coating is spec'ed by Mahle-Clevite as 0.0003 - 0.0005 thickness. According to these manufacturers specifications, that would mean using the coated bearings would reduce your clearance by 20%-50% depending on which coated bearing you use if you do not add extra clearance by reducing the size of your crankshaft journals or using larger bearings (larger bearings are not available).

Even though we had access to both sets of coated bearings, we did not measure them. Now that there's sufficient interest in this topic, we plan to measure both types of coated bearings for the next engine we build.

Both Calico and Mahle-Clevite specify proper bearing clearance at 0.001" per 1-inch of journal diameter. BMW went much smaller, and according to Mahle-Clevite they do this for two reasons: 1) minimize noise in aluminum blocks; 2) reduce horsepower loss. But Mahle-Clevite also warns against these tight tolerances and says any such small clearance should also be mated with thinner oils like 5-30W.

There's actually much, much more to this topic with much greater details, warnings, and recommendations. But hopefully this clears up some things for now.

I hope this helps.
Very well informed. Mine is an '07 with 38k km and all these things are doing my head in. I am planning to keep the car also because I am not in a position financially to upgrade or even getting a run-of-the-mill 3 series given the trade-in they offer.

I will have the oil tested for lead to see whether there has been any wear.

On a serious note, BMW has sold is a ticking bomb ... it's not fair. Although it might be happening only on a handful of car, it's still a design issue, and any such issue should be taken care of through at least goodwill warranty. Looks like irrespective of how the car has been driven, your engine can explode instantly. This is more scary than I first thought given a '11 car with 30k m giving up.

Do cars from AMG or Quattro have this kind of issues? I had the bearings changed on my E46 ///3 as a recall, and it showed some scoring on every single one of them. And had it been left alone I am sure it would have been kabum!

I don't know whether the same thing is going on currently inside my engine.
__________________

2007 E92 6MT - Silverstone II with /// Performance Exhaust with ACM Test Pipes and BPM Sport Stage II Dev-Tune - Proper engine warm up, 12-monthly oil change, Castrol TWS 10w-60
2014 F15 X5 3.0d
aussiem3 is online now   Australia
0
      06-23-2013, 05:51 PM   #40
VCMpower
Banned
 
Drives: 2010 Dakar, 2013 Fire Orange
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Victoria B.C.

Posts: 941
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by BMRLVR
Quote:
Originally Posted by VCMpower View Post
If folks set clearances to say, .002, oil pressure drops to 20-25 psi below 2k rpm from 40 psi. How will this affect stop and go, sitting at traffic light style driving? Without playing with oil weight. All components of this engine are designed to see 40-80 psi(vanos included). Maximum pressure is 60 with .002 clearance. Would a revised oil pump be a full package solution along with more clearance? I have measured 2 motors both closer to .0015, but I do not disagree that there are ones closer to .001. If this can be proven without doubt should BMW not take accountability?
20-25PSI of oil pressure is lots below 2K RPM. Like was mentioned many times before, Dinan builds their Strokers with 0.019" Main & 0.025" Rod and they dont change the oil pumps in any way. They have their cranks pre-machined with to be at these clearances with stock bearing shells........ With Dinan building most of the BMW engines for race teams across NA (Fall Line Motorsports, and the Grand-Am Rolex Sports car series Daytona prototype class to name only a few) I think they know what they are doing!

Quote:
Originally Posted by regular guy View Post
It looks like some clarification may be in order to answer a bunch of these question.

The factory bearings are Mahle-Clevite-77. BMW uses blue and red bearings for top/bottom shells, not different sizes.

My people exhaustively measured the clearances and shared our results with select individuals on this forum, including BMRLVR. We measured two factory cranks, and four sets of connecting rods. Two sets of factory connecting rods and two sets of Carrillo rods. We experimented with red/blue shells to see if there was any size difference.

We used bore dial indicators to measure clearance, not Plastigauge. Nothing against Plastiguage and it's decent when in a bind, but it's not as accurate as bore gauges. The accuracy of Plastigauge will depend on its placement. Put Plastigauge in the wrong spot or wrong orientation, and the results are not dependable.

Our measurements showed very consistent results. Clearance on both main and rod journals was between 0.00096 - 0.00100, with most closer to 0.00100 than 0.00096. It didn't matter if we used factory connecting rods or the two different sets of Carrillo's because both measured the same. It also didn't matter if we matched two red and two blue bearing shells, as they measured the same as well.

There are two different types of coated bearings that we've seen for S65 engines. Most people, including VAC, use bearings coated by Calico Coatings. Calico web site specifies the coating between 0.0002 - 0.0004 thickness. The other coated bearing appears to be a Mahle-Clevite TriArmor bearing (although we can't be totally sure). The thickness of the TriArmor coating is spec'ed by Mahle-Clevite as 0.0003 - 0.0005 thickness. According to these manufacturers specifications, that would mean using the coated bearings would reduce your clearance by 20%-50% depending on which coated bearing you use if you do not add extra clearance by reducing the size of your crankshaft journals or using larger bearings (larger bearings are not available).

Even though we had access to both sets of coated bearings, we did not measure them. Now that there's sufficient interest in this topic, we plan to measure both types of coated bearings for the next engine we build.

Both Calico and Mahle-Clevite specify proper bearing clearance at 0.001" per 1-inch of journal diameter. BMW went much smaller, and according to Mahle-Clevite they do this for two reasons: 1) minimize noise in aluminum blocks; 2) reduce horsepower loss. But Mahle-Clevite also warns against these tight tolerances and says any such small clearance should also be mated with thinner oils like 5-30W.

There's actually much, much more to this topic with much greater details, warnings, and recommendations. But hopefully this clears up some things for now.

I hope this helps.
Thanks for helping shed some light on my claims......... Hopefully all of the non believers will sit-up and listen now!
Now now, condescending? Reg guy gave me the data I was looking for, thanks.
VCMpower is offline   Canada
0
      06-23-2013, 06:02 PM   #41
kawasaki00
Major
 
kawasaki00's Avatar
 
Drives: E92
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Charlotte NC

Posts: 1,151
iTrader: (4)

Quote:
Originally Posted by regular guy View Post
It looks like some clarification may be in order to answer a bunch of these question.

The factory bearings are Mahle-Clevite-77. BMW uses blue and red bearings for top/bottom shells, not different sizes.

My people exhaustively measured the clearances and shared our results with select individuals on this forum, including BMRLVR. We measured two factory cranks, and four sets of connecting rods. Two sets of factory connecting rods and two sets of Carrillo rods. We experimented with red/blue shells to see if there was any size difference.

We used bore dial indicators to measure clearance, not Plastigauge. Nothing against Plastiguage and it's decent when in a bind, but it's not as accurate as bore gauges. The accuracy of Plastigauge will depend on its placement. Put Plastigauge in the wrong spot or wrong orientation, and the results are not dependable.

Our measurements showed very consistent results. Clearance on both main and rod journals was between 0.00096 - 0.00100, with most closer to 0.00100 than 0.00096. It didn't matter if we used factory connecting rods or the two different sets of Carrillo's because both measured the same. It also didn't matter if we matched two red and two blue bearing shells, as they measured the same as well.

There are two different types of coated bearings that we've seen for S65 engines. Most people, including VAC, use bearings coated by Calico Coatings. Calico web site specifies the coating between 0.0002 - 0.0004 thickness. The other coated bearing appears to be a Mahle-Clevite TriArmor bearing (although we can't be totally sure). The thickness of the TriArmor coating is spec'ed by Mahle-Clevite as 0.0003 - 0.0005 thickness. According to these manufacturers specifications, that would mean using the coated bearings would reduce your clearance by 20%-50% depending on which coated bearing you use if you do not add extra clearance by reducing the size of your crankshaft journals or using larger bearings (larger bearings are not available).

Even though we had access to both sets of coated bearings, we did not measure them. Now that there's sufficient interest in this topic, we plan to measure both types of coated bearings for the next engine we build.

Both Calico and Mahle-Clevite specify proper bearing clearance at 0.001" per 1-inch of journal diameter. BMW went much smaller, and according to Mahle-Clevite they do this for two reasons: 1) minimize noise in aluminum blocks; 2) reduce horsepower loss. But Mahle-Clevite also warns against these tight tolerances and says any such small clearance should also be mated with thinner oils like 5-30W.

There's actually much, much more to this topic with much greater details, warnings, and recommendations. But hopefully this clears up some things for now.

I hope this helps.
Well you just made my mind up, I would never put coated bearing in my engine from Calico, we have failed so many of those bearings it is not even funny. Calico was good before they got bought out, now not so much.
Mahle also recommends thinner oils....Imagine that.
If they are Mahle bearings that also means they are quite inconsistent from batch to batch. Mahle has a tolerance of about +-.003 on the shells.
__________________
Electronics Junkie, Engine Builder.
kawasaki00 is offline  
0
      06-23-2013, 06:14 PM   #42
VCMpower
Banned
 
Drives: 2010 Dakar, 2013 Fire Orange
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Victoria B.C.

Posts: 941
iTrader: (0)

So with that said, seeing some clearances closer to .0015 is not magical. I had 2. Thanks.
VCMpower is offline   Canada
0
      06-23-2013, 06:21 PM   #43
VCMpower
Banned
 
Drives: 2010 Dakar, 2013 Fire Orange
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Victoria B.C.

Posts: 941
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by kawasaki00
Quote:
Originally Posted by regular guy View Post
It looks like some clarification may be in order to answer a bunch of these question.

The factory bearings are Mahle-Clevite-77. BMW uses blue and red bearings for top/bottom shells, not different sizes.

My people exhaustively measured the clearances and shared our results with select individuals on this forum, including BMRLVR. We measured two factory cranks, and four sets of connecting rods. Two sets of factory connecting rods and two sets of Carrillo rods. We experimented with red/blue shells to see if there was any size difference.

We used bore dial indicators to measure clearance, not Plastigauge. Nothing against Plastiguage and it's decent when in a bind, but it's not as accurate as bore gauges. The accuracy of Plastigauge will depend on its placement. Put Plastigauge in the wrong spot or wrong orientation, and the results are not dependable.

Our measurements showed very consistent results. Clearance on both main and rod journals was between 0.00096 - 0.00100, with most closer to 0.00100 than 0.00096. It didn't matter if we used factory connecting rods or the two different sets of Carrillo's because both measured the same. It also didn't matter if we matched two red and two blue bearing shells, as they measured the same as well.

There are two different types of coated bearings that we've seen for S65 engines. Most people, including VAC, use bearings coated by Calico Coatings. Calico web site specifies the coating between 0.0002 - 0.0004 thickness. The other coated bearing appears to be a Mahle-Clevite TriArmor bearing (although we can't be totally sure). The thickness of the TriArmor coating is spec'ed by Mahle-Clevite as 0.0003 - 0.0005 thickness. According to these manufacturers specifications, that would mean using the coated bearings would reduce your clearance by 20%-50% depending on which coated bearing you use if you do not add extra clearance by reducing the size of your crankshaft journals or using larger bearings (larger bearings are not available).

Even though we had access to both sets of coated bearings, we did not measure them. Now that there's sufficient interest in this topic, we plan to measure both types of coated bearings for the next engine we build.

Both Calico and Mahle-Clevite specify proper bearing clearance at 0.001" per 1-inch of journal diameter. BMW went much smaller, and according to Mahle-Clevite they do this for two reasons: 1) minimize noise in aluminum blocks; 2) reduce horsepower loss. But Mahle-Clevite also warns against these tight tolerances and says any such small clearance should also be mated with thinner oils like 5-30W.

There's actually much, much more to this topic with much greater details, warnings, and recommendations. But hopefully this clears up some things for now.

I hope this helps.
Well you just made my mind up, I would never put coated bearing in my engine from Calico, we have failed so many of those bearings it is not even funny. Calico was good before they got bought out, now not so much.
Mahle also recommends thinner oils....Imagine that.
If they are Mahle bearings that also means they are quite inconsistent from batch to batch. Mahle has a tolerance of about +-.003 on the shells.
Did you mean tolerance of .0003 or .003?
VCMpower is offline   Canada
0
      06-23-2013, 06:47 PM   #44
kawasaki00
Major
 
kawasaki00's Avatar
 
Drives: E92
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Charlotte NC

Posts: 1,151
iTrader: (4)

Quote:
Originally Posted by VCMpower View Post
Did you mean tolerance of .0003 or .003?
.0003, sorry. That is why mahle doesn't make .0005 increments. The tolerance overlaps too much.
Probably why some have seen a range of .00096 to .0015, that makes sense.
If the demand is high enough they will make -.001 bearings.
__________________
Electronics Junkie, Engine Builder.
kawasaki00 is offline  
0
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:15 PM.




m3post
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST