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
 
INDustry distribution
Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      11-18-2013, 02:49 PM   #1035
whats77inaname
Native Texan
 
Drives: when at all possible
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Tx

Posts: 1,759
iTrader: (16)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thebrain View Post
I for one think that the e46 m3, e60 m5 and e92 m3 were the 3 best or 3 of the best ever performance sedans in history....To each his own argument I guess but credibility really suffers from this poster.
You don't say....well, so your credibility isn't compromised in the future:

a) E46 never came in sedan form
b) the E92 is a coupe


Quote:
Originally Posted by Cool Steel View Post
Isn't some kind of a petition a more plausible solution? A lawsuit is to negative an action. A petition signed by many and presented to BMW to do research into this issue is something we should do. Our concern would be documented, and if ignored can be used against them if needed in the future that they did nothing.
I don't think it would carry much weight w/BMW. Personally, I'd like to get the NHTSA involved, as I suspect they'd be a bit less biased about an investigation. From their website:

Quote:
Improving Safety On Our Highways
NHTSA encourages complaints from vehicle owners and drivers, conducts defect investigations and administers safety recalls to support its mission to improve safety on our nation's highways
Considering this http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=904414 post and the following statements:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Artem@ONEighty View Post
Tonight on my way home the car shut off on me and hasn't started since. After the car shut off the steering got tight and almost caused me to crash while I was taking a left turn.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artem@ONEighty View Post
Just spoke to my dealer. Looks like I spun the crank shaft bearing. They sent a few photos up the chain and waiting to get an approval... Fingers crossed that this will be a smooth process
....I think it would be right up their alley. While BMW won't release failure data to us, you can bet your ass that if the NHTSA requests this information, it will have to be provided.

Last edited by whats77inaname; 11-18-2013 at 03:00 PM.
whats77inaname is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      11-18-2013, 04:07 PM   #1036
regular guy
Banned
 
Drives: Sprint car
Join Date: May 2013
Location: California

Posts: 1,375
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yellow Snow View Post
So even you would have to admit that the sizes of both those cranks and the 78k mile S85 that I measured all being within a tenth is pretty good. Yes?
The rods being within 1 tenth is good. Mains were 3.5 tenths. You've never presented any journal data for review or verification, so we can't use it for anything.

Quote:
My research told me that the Carillo rods that you had installed on your previously rebuilt Na motor were replaced for a new set with extra material on the shoulders due to bore distortion and the addition of a blower.

Yes the pattern across 2 or 3 others was similar.

It was highlighted to show that even Carillo rods can have faults. I note they also seem to run tighter than the BMW rods.
To be clearer: bore distortion caused when using the rods beyond their design limits. You can't fault Carrillo for that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yellow Snow View Post
I wouldn't say this particular Carillo rod looks as good as an oem rod for roundness.

By doing your research, you showed an understanding why the bearing cap pinched. So you know it had nothing to do with roundness.

Here's some OEM rods for you that pinched equally or worse that the Carrillo's. NA motor too. BOOM!

S65, 31000 Miles, Naturally Aspirated, 2008. More Photos
Factory Bearings: 088/089
Category: 04-Moderate
Description: 27,000 Miles Naturally Aspirated, 4000 Miles Supercharged
regular guy is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      11-18-2013, 04:33 PM   #1037
swamp2
Lieutenant General
 
swamp2's Avatar
 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Posts: 10,201
iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by BMRLVR View Post
The fact that they look in much better shape than bearings from stock engines should tell you that the OEM rods inability to stay round on the big end bore is a contributing factor to the bearing wear.
If you are implying that BMWs S65 rods are also of an insufficiently stiff design than I say your rampant, unabashed speculation continues to amaze me... I don't think anyone would deny the causal relationship between insufficient rod bearing bore stiffness and premature bearing wear. However, if you think BMW does not know the exact peak load, stress and resulting deformation of the rods in this engine under all peak load conditions from a detailed finite element and kinematics simulation then quite frankly you're mad. Of course

Is their design sufficient for 300k mi of longevity at 15k mi oil changes?
Do aftermarket rods offer an improved big bore (or overall) stiffness?

and other such related questions are interesting but I won't speculate on them.
swamp2 is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      11-18-2013, 04:37 PM   #1038
swamp2
Lieutenant General
 
swamp2's Avatar
 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Posts: 10,201
iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by swartzentruber View Post
Regular_guy, in the interests of keeping this thread accurate, I think it would be helpful to edit this in your list of "3 truths", particularly since people have mentioned using this thread as evidence of a problem if their engine blows -- "2.The bearing wear patterns we're seeing all match the Clevite online/interactive bearing failure diagnosis web site, example #12 "Oil Starvation / Marginal Oil Film Thickness." The main cause mentioned by Clevite for this type of failure is "too little bearing oil clearance." (3)". As I've previously pointed out, Clevite lists 7 distinct causes, and makes no mention of a "main" cause. You have previously admitted you decided this was a main cause because it was listed first. I'm just pointing this out, because you seem to want this thread to be pretty factual, and I don't find this statement to be very factual.

Secondly, you continue to express frustration/surprise/etc. on the fact that people continue to link the "too little clearance" data you've presented to engine failures. I would urge you to reread the section on the first page titled "What does this mean to you?". While I agree you don't come right out and link too little clearance to engine failures, it also stands to reason that any informed person reading your data and then reading that paragraph would not immediately jump to the conclusion that low clearance = engine failure. You even mention catastrophic engine failure in that paragraph. If you are truly trying to keep this thread factual about bearing clearances and not engine failure, then I'd urge you to edit or even remove that paragraph. If not, then I'd suggest you should not be surprised that engine failure theories continue to come into this thread.
Quote:
Originally Posted by swartzentruber View Post
I don't think anyone in the thread, even the more skeptical members, are questioning the importance of proper bearing clearance.
+1. Good posts. I've mentioned to regular_guy that his claims of complete and utter objectivity on this issue are not quite what he claims they are. It's certainly 100% "fine" if he wants to conclude that BMW have screwed up either their clearances, tolerances or those combined with their oil recommendation. But again that is a hypothesis, not merely objective data and not a theory.
swamp2 is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      11-18-2013, 05:36 PM   #1039
Yellow Snow
Second Lieutenant
 
Drives: 335d Coupe. Stock no more!
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Newcastle

Posts: 265
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by regular guy View Post

To be clearer: bore distortion caused when using the rods beyond their design limits. You can't fault Carrillo for that.
Would I be correct in saying that there are quite a few Supercharged M3's out there running standard rods that don't show the bores pinching?

If your original Carillo rods weren't up to the job, surely ESS etc shouldn't be strapping blowers on with apparently inferior oem rods?
Yellow Snow is offline   United Kingdom
0
Reply With Quote
      11-18-2013, 05:54 PM   #1040
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 swamp2
Quote:
Originally Posted by BMRLVR View Post
The fact that they look in much better shape than bearings from stock engines should tell you that the OEM rods inability to stay round on the big end bore is a contributing factor to the bearing wear.
If you are implying that BMWs S65 rods are also of an insufficiently stiff design than I say your rampant, unabashed speculation continues to amaze me... I don't think anyone would deny the causal relationship between insufficient rod bearing bore stiffness and premature bearing wear. However, if you think BMW does not know the exact peak load, stress and resulting deformation of the rods in this engine under all peak load conditions from a detailed finite element and kinematics simulation then quite frankly you're mad. Of course

Is their design sufficient for 300k mi of longevity at 15k mi oil changes?
Do aftermarket rods offer an improved big bore (or overall) stiffness?

and other such related questions are interesting but I won't speculate on them.
You act like cost is no object to BMW. Everything they put in a mass produced engine is not going to be the best of the best!

Of course a carillo rod is stiffer. That is carillo's business, they make rods that are stronger than what engines are specced with from OEM!

Did BMW not have a recall where E46 rod bolts were replaced with stronger ones? I am sure they did there testing in the S54 too...... But they ended up beefing up those rod bolts three years into production!
__________________
2011 E90 M3 ZCP - Individual Moonstone/Individual Amarone Extended/Individual Piano Black With Inlay:LINK!!!
1994 Euro E36 M3 Sedan - Daytona Violet/Mulberry:LINK!!!
BMRLVR is offline   Canada
0
Reply With Quote
      11-18-2013, 06:54 PM   #1041
Yellow Snow
Second Lieutenant
 
Drives: 335d Coupe. Stock no more!
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Newcastle

Posts: 265
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by BMRLVR
Quote:
Originally Posted by swamp2
Quote:
Originally Posted by BMRLVR View Post
The fact that they look in much better shape than bearings from stock engines should tell you that the OEM rods inability to stay round on the big end bore is a contributing factor to the bearing wear.
If you are implying that BMWs S65 rods are also of an insufficiently stiff design than I say your rampant, unabashed speculation continues to amaze me... I don't think anyone would deny the causal relationship between insufficient rod bearing bore stiffness and premature bearing wear. However, if you think BMW does not know the exact peak load, stress and resulting deformation of the rods in this engine under all peak load conditions from a detailed finite element and kinematics simulation then quite frankly you're mad. Of course

Is their design sufficient for 300k mi of longevity at 15k mi oil changes?
Do aftermarket rods offer an improved big bore (or overall) stiffness?

and other such related questions are interesting but I won't speculate on them.
You act like cost is no object to BMW. Everything they put in a mass produced engine is not going to be the best of the best!

Of course a carillo rod is stiffer. That is carillo's business, they make rods that are stronger than what engines are specced with from OEM!

Did BMW not have a recall where E46 rod bolts were replaced with stronger ones? I am sure they did there testing in the S54 too...... But they ended up beefing up those rod bolts three years into production!
That's correct. BMW did change the bolts in the E46 M3. They changed to thinner bolts from 11mm down to 10 mm
Yellow Snow is offline   United Kingdom
0
Reply With Quote
      11-18-2013, 06:55 PM   #1042
regular guy
Banned
 
Drives: Sprint car
Join Date: May 2013
Location: California

Posts: 1,375
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by SenorFunkyPants View Post
Originally Posted by SenorFunkyPants
What stands out is that the supercharged motor shows far less wear than the stock car...this is surely contrary to expected as the increase in CR and HP should cause significantly higher loads on the bearings during the combustion cycle of the supercharged motor.


So just to be absolutely clear...at maximum supercharger boost the effective CR does not exceed that of the standard engine?
Compression ratio doesn't change with boost. Compression ratio is defined as the ratio of cylinder volume at BDC divided by the cylinder volume at TDC.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SenorFunkyPants View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by SenorFunkyPants
It is a bit rich that pictures of piston crowns posted to demonstrate that no detonation was occurring then require some contortions to try and explain the clear evidence of poor combustion and micro pitting.


Take piston #8
What indicators of some level of detonation are you looking for: Firstly the evidence of a clean burn in the area of the cooler intake valves combined with a build up of carbon in the area below the hotter exhaust valves due to poorly controlled and accelerated combustion. Secondly a fine grainy sand blasted appearance visible on the carbon deposits in the same area below the exhaust valves.
Can you please circle the area you think you've seen detonation?

Quote:
Oh and the shop started up and stopped the car every day for 2.5 months! really? If so, I hope the cats had been removed else they would be most likely shagged.
You could have asked before jumping out on a limb.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SenorFunkyPants View Post
[i]Originally Posted by SenorFunkyPants
Ethics are very much a personal thing.
If someone dropped a large $ bill and walked off I would pick it up and gave it back.
If I got too much change from a small corner shop I would give it back.
Where it starts to get blurred is with big companies, if I got too much change from a large supermarket I would be far less bothered about fessing up.
I've never been in the position where I have had to lie to a car dealer to get the right thing done...(I have had to argue extensively to get the right thing done plenty times though)....so I don't know what I would do.
Stunning admission that evil corporations deserve to be defrauded by their customers because they are profit seeking evil corporations.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SenorFunkyPants View Post
I think I must be getting confused.
post #2 under the section headed:

"Discovering S65 Bearing Issue
The bearings shown above came from a supercharged stroker motor. The engine was 4.6L and ran a very modest 6.0 PSI boost. After 24,000 miles, the engine was disassembled in July 2010 to rebuild as a low comperssion 4.7L motor. The bearings were photographed and stashed away. I always thought the bearings looked pretty "ratty" but at the time, nobody thought anything else about it. Today these photos might be ground-zero, exhibit-one in the discussion of rod bearing clearance."

Am I understanding this correctly - This "ground zero" engine was not using BMW standard rods but Carillo aftermarket rods?
If so why are its bearing data/pictures even being included?
"Ground Zero" == first discovery. The engine also had an aftermarket crankshaft. Why not throw in that diversion as well? Doesn't matter because they share the same journal size and rod bore size as factory.
regular guy is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      11-18-2013, 07:11 PM   #1043
regular guy
Banned
 
Drives: Sprint car
Join Date: May 2013
Location: California

Posts: 1,375
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by swartzentruber View Post
Regular_guy, in the interests of keeping this thread accurate, I think it would be helpful to edit this in your list of "3 truths", particularly since people have mentioned using this thread as evidence of a problem if their engine blows -- "2.The bearing wear patterns we're seeing all match the Clevite online/interactive bearing failure diagnosis web site, example #12 "Oil Starvation / Marginal Oil Film Thickness." The main cause mentioned by Clevite for this type of failure is "too little bearing oil clearance." (3)". As I've previously pointed out, Clevite lists 7 distinct causes, and makes no mention of a "main" cause. You have previously admitted you decided this was a main cause because it was listed first. I'm just pointing this out, because you seem to want this thread to be pretty factual, and I don't find this statement to be very factual.
I changed the wording to say: Most of the bearing wear patterns we're seeing all seem to match the Clevite online/interactive bearing failure diagnosis web site, example #12 "Oil Starvation / Marginal Oil Film Thickness." The first of many causes mentioned by Clevite for this type of failure is "too little bearing oil clearance."

Quote:
Secondly, you continue to express frustration/surprise/etc. on the fact that people continue to link the "too little clearance" data you've presented to engine failures. I would urge you to reread the section on the first page titled "What does this mean to you?". While I agree you don't come right out and link too little clearance to engine failures, it also stands to reason that any informed person reading your data and then reading that paragraph would not immediately jump to the conclusion that low clearance = engine failure. You even mention catastrophic engine failure in that paragraph. If you are truly trying to keep this thread factual about bearing clearances and not engine failure, then I'd urge you to edit or even remove that paragraph. If not, then I'd suggest you should not be surprised that engine failure theories continue to come into this thread.
You are referring to a subsection of "Connecting Rod Side Clearance Issues" not a separate topic. That's why the heading font size is smaller and the font color is different than the main topic. However, I removed that one sentence causing confusion, and reworded the remainder of the paragraph as follows: "Here's some photos of the micro "blue marks" and abrasive scuff marks left on my Carrillo connecting rods from the previous engine build with improper side clearance."
regular guy is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      11-18-2013, 07:39 PM   #1044
swamp2
Lieutenant General
 
swamp2's Avatar
 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Posts: 10,201
iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by BMRLVR View Post
You act like cost is no object to BMW. Everything they put in a mass produced engine is not going to be the best of the best!

Of course a carillo rod is stiffer. That is carillo's business, they make rods that are stronger than what engines are specced with from OEM!

Did BMW not have a recall where E46 rod bolts were replaced with stronger ones? I am sure they did there testing in the S54 too...... But they ended up beefing up those rod bolts three years into production!
No, not really...

I've spent plenty of posts here on the forum with harsh and appropriate (IMHO of course) words critical to BMW M for their obsession with cost and its detrimental effects on their cars. I've also blasted their marketing nonsense as well. My favorite topics there are that 50-50 weight balance is somehow ideal for a performance oriented car. I've also posted on their very dubious claims of weight loss in the E92 M3 (it was a lack of even additional weight gain...). I've also posted quite a bit on why composites still are not widely used in BMW M cars (they do exist and have since the E46 bumper support beams). The issue there is just volume (volume, volume, volume).

Anyway, I understand the cost vs. feature/performance see-saw pretty well. Having some professional mechanical and manufacturing engineering experience of real production parts helps as well.

Again, it is likely Carillo rods are stiffer than OEM but I wouldn't guarantee it in all cases. Also, you need to stop mixing/confusing stiffer with stronger, these things are not interchangeable. Since you've already decided that Carillo rods are far superior to BMWs I suggest you see what technical data Carillo will share with you for your exact chosen rods vs. the stock ones. Please report back. My point of this line of questioning is that they certainly have a good reputation, but you are likely just jumping on their bandwagon being their fanboy with no evidence.

I do not recall a S54 rod bolt recall or major part change. Could be but the rod and bolt system are best designed as a matched set.

I'm no BMW fanboy and have never claimed BMW never screw up. They have and will continue to do so, it is almost a given, given the breadth, depth and complexity of their business and engineering. Perhaps the key question on this point is do they screw up more or less often than their peers and are the screw up more or less serious.

Last edited by swamp2; 11-18-2013 at 07:52 PM.
swamp2 is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      11-19-2013, 12:12 AM   #1045
regular guy
Banned
 
Drives: Sprint car
Join Date: May 2013
Location: California

Posts: 1,375
iTrader: (0)

These are the second piston-top and bearing photos I promised. Unlike the first set, this one has spark plug photos available too. Click on any of the images to view full size images (maybe too big). These aren't the only piston photos; there's a complete album of them showing the pistons from different angles and different light. Piston Photos HERE.

S65, 30000 Miles, Bone Stock, 2008. More Photos
Factory Bearings: 088/089
Category: 04/05-Moderate
Description: Bone stock engine disassembled to make stroker motor.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
regular guy is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      11-19-2013, 01:04 AM   #1046
whats77inaname
Native Texan
 
Drives: when at all possible
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Tx

Posts: 1,759
iTrader: (16)

Quote:
Originally Posted by regular guy View Post
These are the second piston-top and bearing photos I promised. Unlike the first set, this one has spark plug photos available too.
Plugs don't show signs of detonation. Do you happen to know when they were changed last?

In looking @ the S54 rod bearing issues and recall, I found something interesting:

http://www.m3forum.net/m3forum/showp...1&postcount=20

In this thread, no one had ever mentioned the reason for the recall, so I wanted to know specifically what the issue was and how was it remedied.

BMW also changed the ECM to adjust the cold start for those who thought they were having cold start issues. This was done free of charge even if an S54 wasn't part of the recall.
whats77inaname is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      11-19-2013, 01:08 AM   #1047
regular guy
Banned
 
Drives: Sprint car
Join Date: May 2013
Location: California

Posts: 1,375
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by whats77inaname View Post
Plugs don't show signs of detonation. Do you happen to know when they were changed last?
I don't know when the plugs were changed. Sorry.
regular guy is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      11-19-2013, 03:49 AM   #1048
SenorFunkyPants
Colonel
 
SenorFunkyPants's Avatar
 
Drives: E92 DCT M3
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: UK

Posts: 2,525
iTrader: (0)

Originally Posted by SenorFunkyPants
So just to be absolutely clear...at maximum supercharger boost the effective CR does not exceed that of the standard engine?


Quote:
Originally Posted by regular guy View Post
Compression ratio doesn't change with boost. Compression ratio is defined as the ratio of cylinder volume at BDC divided by the cylinder volume at TDC.
Its exactly this kind of deliberate obfuscation that devalues anything you write.
Try again: [Please confirm that] at maximum supercharger boost the EFFECTIVE CR does not exceed that of the standard engine?
__________________

Last edited by SenorFunkyPants; 11-19-2013 at 04:02 AM.
SenorFunkyPants is offline   United Kingdom
0
Reply With Quote
      11-19-2013, 04:01 AM   #1049
SenorFunkyPants
Colonel
 
SenorFunkyPants's Avatar
 
Drives: E92 DCT M3
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: UK

Posts: 2,525
iTrader: (0)

Posted by SenorFunkyPants
Oh and the shop started up and stopped the car every day for 2.5 months! really? If so, I hope the cats had been removed else they would be most likely shagged.


Quote:
Originally Posted by regular guy View Post
You could have asked before jumping out on a limb.
So you are saying that the car already had the cats removed?
Nevertheless the shop spent 2.5 months starting the car, driving in and out of the shop every day and then stopping it. But curiously the piston crowns don't show any indications of 75 start/stops on the rich cold start cycle.
__________________

Last edited by SenorFunkyPants; 11-19-2013 at 04:24 AM.
SenorFunkyPants is offline   United Kingdom
0
Reply With Quote
      11-19-2013, 04:19 AM   #1050
SenorFunkyPants
Colonel
 
SenorFunkyPants's Avatar
 
Drives: E92 DCT M3
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: UK

Posts: 2,525
iTrader: (0)

Originally Posted by SenorFunkyPants
Am I understanding this correctly - This "ground zero" engine was not using BMW standard rods but Carillo aftermarket rods?
If so why are its bearing data/pictures even being included?


Quote:
Originally Posted by regular guy View Post
"Ground Zero" == first discovery. The engine also had an aftermarket crankshaft. Why not throw in that diversion as well? Doesn't matter because they share the same journal size and rod bore size as factory.
So to sum up the "ground zero engine" had a difference crankshaft, different rods and what looks like different pistons.

I can see how the bearing wear that was found, pointed you in the direction you have taken, but presenting pictures of the actual bearing wear as proof is invalid due to the use of non stock parts. You simply can't use pattern parts as proof that the oem parts are "faulty".
__________________
SenorFunkyPants is offline   United Kingdom
0
Reply With Quote
      11-19-2013, 04:51 AM   #1051
Yellow Snow
Second Lieutenant
 
Drives: 335d Coupe. Stock no more!
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Newcastle

Posts: 265
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by SenorFunkyPants
Originally Posted by SenorFunkyPants
Am I understanding this correctly - This "ground zero" engine was not using BMW standard rods but Carillo aftermarket rods?
If so why are its bearing data/pictures even being included?


Quote:
Originally Posted by regular guy View Post
"Ground Zero" == first discovery. The engine also had an aftermarket crankshaft. Why not throw in that diversion as well? Doesn't matter because they share the same journal size and rod bore size as factory.
So to sum up the "ground zero engine" had a difference crankshaft, different rods and what looks like different pistons.

I can see how the bearing wear that was found, pointed you in the direction you have taken, but presenting pictures of the actual bearing wear as proof is invalid due to the use of non stock parts. You simply can't use pattern parts as proof that the oem parts are "faulty".
Not to forget that those bearings had just gone through 2.5 months of cold cycle only runs every day. Plus the carillo rods run even tighter clearance than the oem rods.

Last edited by Yellow Snow; 11-19-2013 at 06:02 AM.
Yellow Snow is offline   United Kingdom
0
Reply With Quote
      11-19-2013, 08:14 AM   #1052
Billj747
Lieutenant
 
Billj747's Avatar
 
Drives: Everything
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Wellington, FL

Posts: 424
iTrader: (0)

Send a message via AIM to Billj747
Quote:
Originally Posted by SenorFunkyPants View Post
Originally Posted by SenorFunkyPants
So just to be absolutely clear...at maximum supercharger boost the effective CR does not exceed that of the standard engine?


Its exactly this kind of deliberate obfuscation that devalues anything you write.
Try again: [Please confirm that] at maximum supercharger boost the EFFECTIVE CR does not exceed that of the standard engine?
Do you mean cylinder pressure?


Carrillo is a very reputable brand and makes some of the best rods out there.
__________________
Billj747 is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      11-19-2013, 08:24 AM   #1053
SenorFunkyPants
Colonel
 
SenorFunkyPants's Avatar
 
Drives: E92 DCT M3
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: UK

Posts: 2,525
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yellow Snow View Post
Not to forget that those bearings had just gone through 2.5 months of cold cycle only runs every day.
Good point...that is not going to have been healthy for the bearing surfaces.
__________________
SenorFunkyPants is offline   United Kingdom
0
Reply With Quote
      11-19-2013, 08:38 AM   #1054
SenorFunkyPants
Colonel
 
SenorFunkyPants's Avatar
 
Drives: E92 DCT M3
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: UK

Posts: 2,525
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Billj747 View Post
Do you mean cylinder pressure?
AIUI as a rough guide
Effective Comression Ratio (ECR) = ((boost / 14.7) +1) *cr
Where: Boost = Max Supercharger Boost (psi)
14.7 = Atmosheric Pressure @ Sea Level (psi)
CR = Engine Compression Ratio
__________________
SenorFunkyPants is offline   United Kingdom
0
Reply With Quote
      11-19-2013, 10:03 AM   #1055
regular guy
Banned
 
Drives: Sprint car
Join Date: May 2013
Location: California

Posts: 1,375
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by SenorFunkyPants View Post
What stands out is that the supercharged motor shows far less wear than the stock car...this is surely contrary to expected as the increase in CR and HP should cause significantly higher loads on the bearings during the combustion cycle of the supercharged motor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by regular guy View Post
The supercharged motor actually had slightly lower compression than stock...not more.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SenorFunkyPants View Post
Originally Posted by SenorFunkyPants
So just to be absolutely clear...at maximum supercharger boost the effective CR does not exceed that of the standard engine?


Its exactly this kind of deliberate obfuscation that devalues anything you write.
The mistake and obfuscation is all yours. BTW, when you see the word "ratio" -- it means you need to divide two numbers.

Quote:
Try again: [Please confirm that] at maximum supercharger boost the EFFECTIVE CR does not exceed that of the standard engine?
That's irrelevant to bearing clearance. Do you plan on answering any of my questions about your every-twisting theory? Do you need a reminder?

Quote:
Originally Posted by SenorFunkyPants View Post
Posted by SenorFunkyPants
Oh and the shop started up and stopped the car every day for 2.5 months! really? If so, I hope the cats had been removed else they would be most likely shagged.


So you are saying that the car already had the cats removed?
Nevertheless the shop spent 2.5 months starting the car, driving in and out of the shop every day and then stopping it. But curiously the piston crowns don't show any indications of 75 start/stops on the rich cold start cycle.
So according to your theory, not only does the mere presense of low octane gas in a region destroy the bearings in a pattern that remarkably resembles too little bearing clearance, but +CAT/-CAT can affect bearing wear as well. That's quite a convoluted theory you've got going. Got any proof...of ANY of it?

Quote:
Originally Posted by SenorFunkyPants View Post
Originally Posted by SenorFunkyPants
Am I understanding this correctly - This "ground zero" engine was not using BMW standard rods but Carillo aftermarket rods?
If so why are its bearing data/pictures even being included?


So to sum up the "ground zero engine" had a difference crankshaft, different rods and what looks like different pistons.

I can see how the bearing wear that was found, pointed you in the direction you have taken, but presenting pictures of the actual bearing wear as proof is invalid due to the use of non stock parts. You simply can't use pattern parts as proof that the oem parts are "faulty".
This thread is about clearance and bearing wear due to lack of clearance. Too little clearance is determined by the ratio (there's that word again) between journal diamter and clearance. Whether it's aftermarket crank and rods doesn't matter because they follow the same factory specifications. As such, they were designed to have the same (too little) clearance as BMW and notably had the same fate. There is no twisted logic necessary to see this, not affected by the mere presense of low octane gas in a region, the hypothesis isn't affected by CAT's, presents a very plausible explanation for <25000 mile engine failures, and doesn't keep changing to match every new obfuscation thrown at it. Don't you wish the same could be said about your theory...or theories?

Should we expect any answers from you any time soon on the many unanswered questions for your evolving theory?

Do you ever plan to circle any spots you see detonation on those pistons? What's next? Now that you're locked in to an explanation of the previous piston pictures, the new piston pictures should make your head spin trying to explain without contradicting what you said yesterday. I truly can't wait to see what comes next.
regular guy is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      11-19-2013, 10:28 AM   #1056
SenorFunkyPants
Colonel
 
SenorFunkyPants's Avatar
 
Drives: E92 DCT M3
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: UK

Posts: 2,525
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by regular guy View Post
The mistake and obfuscation is all yours. BTW, when you see the word "ratio" -- it means you need to divide two numbers.
That's irrelevant to bearing clearance.
Further obfuscation and evasion noted.
__________________
SenorFunkyPants is offline   United Kingdom
0
Reply With Quote
Post Reply

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 04:04 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