[regular guy]

Originally Posted by nthretourNAFTW

This forum is the first place people come to bitch about a problem with their car. But some of the most vocal bitches have no problem with their engine. So you'd have to ask yourself why some people are like this. The answer is simple. They are the ones with modified or tuned engines running a higher risk.

Actually, the real answer is much simpler than that. Read this thread for details.

http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=892838

Having surveyed the forum since 2007, rarely did the interval between engine breakdown report threads was less than at least a month or two. It's not every week or every days like some bitch like to lie about. There is no doubt the internet gives a grossly overblown impression of this issue.

Surveyed forum since 2007, but created screen name in 04/2015 just to respond to engine failures. Got it.

There are only 60 documented reported cases in this forum over the 89 months period from 2008 to today. That's an average of only 1 case every 1.5 month. Sure, those only represent reported cases in the forum so, to give a broader view i made an estimate spreadsheet.

In the first column you decide for yourself how representative the m3 forum reported cases are by giving it a guessed "reported percentage" out of the the total cases having occurred (known and unknown). Your guess should be largely guided by how many m3 owners worldwide would publish such a case in this forum (or someone connected to them would) should their engine fail.

OK, let's use your example. In your version, you assume that everybody who owns an m3 is on the forum. That's obviously a false assumption.

Here's my version. 5% of total m3 owners on this forum at any given time. Let's be liberal and say 25% of those would actually report their failure on the forum. There are 60 reported forum failures. Normalizing those 60 failures across the 5% of m3 owners on the forum gets you to 1200 failures. Normalizing those 1200 failures to the 25% who would actually report them gets you to 4800 failures (60 / (0.05 * 0.25) = 4800). Using your 57559 total production units gets you to 8.3% total failure rate. That's pretty crappy.

I don't necessarily disagree with your other points (except 150k miles being normal), so I didn't quote or comment on them.

Now think about all those rod bearing scare threads, and those bitches liers they give absolutely flippant impressions that 1 out of 5 car fails (20%). Just like i said, it's internet scare bullshit.

There's only one or two people on the forum like that. So it's unfair to say all of the threads are like that and itself is a misrepresentation of what they post. If you think you can support your "1 out of 5 car fails" comment with examples, I'd like to see it.

I'm not saying the engine is 100% proof but 98.75% is actually rather good, don't you think so ? I think BMW should step up for those 1.25% and cover them 100%. But i think those RB scare threads are bullshit and counter productive.

Actually, even 98.75% would be pretty crappy IMO. Should be 99.75% or less IMO. But using your own technique and using more realistic data, the failure rate would be closer to 8.3%. You still think that's pretty good?

But if you think the "RB scare threads are bullshit and counter productive" then explain what's bullshit about them, and what's counter productive about them. Don't do what you're accusing others of doing. Back it up with examples so we can at least hear why you say that. I may agree with you in the end, or I may not. But don't assume we all know what you are talking about without some examples behind it.