ESS VT3 - LC built engine failure in 2,000 miles

[US///M3]

Originally Posted by Mit_Boost

You're stupid.... ESPECIALLY if you read about what happened to the 1st motor...... It's not like Drew is running some crazy setup that's pushing the envelope, with unsafe high boost, a consistent 13+ AFR and a fuel system that's above 90% duty cycle (in which case, your "russian roulette" argument might hold some water/vodka). If you get bad gas, you just stay out of high RPMs/boost and burn through it. The motor isn't going to implode if you hold a stead 3k RPMs while you're putting around.


You DO realize that even with all the supercharger available on the S65, NONE of them have any of the factory safety nets (knock detection/limp mode/etc) turned off?

Didnt ESS blame an engine failure on the owner using 87 octane gas even tho He denied it?

Because we all know a stock S65 self destructs when you use 87 octane gas.

[duk]

Originally Posted by Lute

No worries, OP had the ultimate one

ice cold

[Mit_Boost]

Originally Posted by US///M3

Didnt ESS blame an engine failure on the owner using 87 octane gas even tho He denied it?

Because we all know a stock S65 self destructs when you use 87 octane gas.

That engine failed because of owner negligence. If you put 87 octane in a car designed to run on 91/93/100+, and then proceed to run it into the 8k redline several times, it's going to detonate itself to death..... HUGE DIFFERENCE then just cruising around in the car, keeping RPMs low & not going WOT, so you can empty out the tank

[astris]

Originally Posted by US///M3

Didnt ESS blame an engine failure on the owner using 87 octane gas even tho He denied it?

Because we all know a stock S65 self destructs when you use 87 octane gas.

Please fill up with 87, do lots of pulls to redline, report back. Thanks.

[US///M3]

Originally Posted by Mit_Boost

That engine failed because of owner negligence. If you put 87 octane in a car designed to run on 91/93/100+, and then proceed to run it into the 8k redline several times, it's going to detonate itself to death..... HUGE DIFFERENCE then just cruising around in the car, keeping RPMs low & not going WOT, so you can empty out the tank

Yeah it was h4nh negligence, I see a pattern forming. It's always the owner's fault. Hahaha

Your typical stock BMW engine doesnt implode because of fuel pump failure otherwise they would've been tons of blown N54's with the hpfp's fiasco.

[US///M3]

Originally Posted by astris

Please fill up with 87, do lots of pulls to redline, report back. Thanks.

Yeah, all those M3's that were taken on test drives were filled with 92 octane gas by the stealerships and for the new ones they made sure the proper breaking procedures were followed.

[Mit_Boost]

Originally Posted by US///M3

Yeah it was h4nh negligence, I see a pattern forming. It's always the owner's fault. Hahaha

Your typical stock BMW engine doesnt implode because of fuel pump failure otherwise they would've been tons of blown N54's with the hpfp's fiasco.

With each post, your credibility is getting closer to zero .

Yes, it's owner negligence if you take a performance sports car that specifically recommends the maximum available pump octane and then you put low octane fuel in it, ESPECIALLY if that car has been supercharged and has an explicit minimum octane requirement.

And regarding the N54, BMW actually designed the fueling system where if the High Pressure Fuel Pump DID fail, that you could still limp the car to a dealer/garage on just the Low Pressure Fuel Pump & Direct Injection system. This is why people get a Limp Mode that would limit low RPM/no boost engine activity when the HPFP failed.

But regarding the S65, the VT3 has an aftermarket, multi-fuel pump fueling system. So while the engine might be able to run on a failed pump, the system will not be able to move enough fuel if all of the pumps aren't running 100% -- Resulting in running lean, detonation, and potential engine failure.


Anything else?

[US///M3]

Originally Posted by Mit_Boost

Your knowledge & credibility is getting worse and worse with each post.

Yes, it's owner negligence if you take a performance sports car and you put low octane fuel in it, ESPECIALLY if that car has been supercharged and has a minimum octane requirement.

And regarding the N54, BMW actually designed the fueling system where if the High Pressure Fuel Pump DID fail, that you could still limp the car to a dealer/garage on just the Low Pressure Fuel Pump & Direct Injection system. This is why people get a Limp Mode that would limit low RPM/no boost engine activity when the HPFP failed.



Anything else?

The claim that h4nh ran lower octane gas was a claim made by ESS, he denied he ran 87 octane gas.
Does The ESS tune lower rpm's when it senses fuel pressure drops not safe for sc operation ?

[Mit_Boost]

Originally Posted by US///M3

The claim that h4nh ran lower octane gas was a claim made by ESS, he denied he ran 87 octane gas.
Does The ESS tune lower rpm's when it senses fuel pressure drops not safe for sc operation ?

Well just like this thread, there's no thread supporting your claims of whether h4nh put 87 or 93.... Just another "he said, she said"

And I wouldn't assume so, since it uses an external fuel pressure regulator. Which is ESS strongly recommends gauges that monitor Fuel Pressure/AFR with a VT3 setup (besides the fact that anybody running a supercharger should have these gauges).

[US///M3]

Originally Posted by Mit_Boost

Well just like this thread, there's no thread supporting your claims of whether h4nh put 87 or 93.... Just another "he said, she said"

And I wouldn't assume so, since it uses an external fuel pressure regulator. Which is ESS strongly recommends gauges that monitor Fuel Pressure/AFR with a VT3 setup (besides the fact that anybody running a supercharger should have these gauges).

That's why I wouldnt play russian roulette with my s65 with something like a VT3. Because by tge time you detect a lean condition on a high boost application, it's probably too late.

[US///M3]

Originally Posted by Mit_Boost

You're stupid.... ESPECIALLY if you read about what happened to the 1st motor...... It's not like Drew is running some crazy setup that's pushing the envelope, with unsafe high boost, a consistent 13+ AFR and a fuel system that's above 90% duty cycle (in which case, your "russian roulette" argument might hold some water/vodka). If you get bad gas, you just stay out of high RPMs/boost and burn through it. The motor isn't going to implode if you hold a stead 3k RPMs while you're putting around.


You DO realize that even with all the supercharger available on the S65, NONE of them have any of the factory safety nets (knock detection/limp mode/etc) turned off?

Reading comprehension?

Originally Posted by AJ@ESS

Again, just to make this 100% clear: There is a very good reason we set the maximum boost pressure the way we do in the various kit stages. We do not leave massive amounts of safe power on the table as some people seem to think. If you increase boost over our standard settings, there will be a much greater risk of failure as Sergei has demonstrated. The fact that the bolt-on 625 kit ran for 67.000 miles with a massively overboosting 92mm pulley is actually much longer than expected.

When Sergei was getting ready for the Moscow unlimited 1 mile race on his second engine he asked me what I thought of running the 650 crank/92mm SC combo, and I specifically told him that he may get through the race but that the engine will with very high probability be damaged in a short period of time. The stock S65 simply can not take 11-12 PSI. He made his race, and the car ran for another week or two before caving in -as expected. The cost of a new engine is the price he chose to pay to run 4PSI overboost at his event.

When it comes to the VT3, it is critical that fuel delivery is monitored at all times. If any part of the new stand-alone, high capacity fuel system fails the engine will be damaged in a matter of seconds at high load. In Sergei's case with a brand new VT3 prototype setup being installed, I told him that I strongly recommend leaving the car with us for 6-8 weeks after assembly to properly test it in various conditions. He did not have time for this and forced us to deliver the car 1 day after assembly with only a few dyno pulls and a short road test in 35F, wet roads conditions on it's back. He then chose to ignore my specific instructions on not operating the car hard without O2 monitoring equipment installed. I specifically recommended the EAS gauge setup. He chose to ignore all warnings, and he denied to send us the car back when he experienced high load acceleration hesitations and a primary O2 sensor on bank 2 error code. Instead he kept driving the car without any monitoring equipment until the engine eventually had massive failure due to fuel starvation combined with high load operation.

We received the email of the engine condition yesterday from Sergei, and my initial plan was to simply have the car sent back to us in Norway as previously instructed and sleeve the block/install new pistons and go through the entire fuel system/O2 sensor system again to find the error that most likely has developed during his 2000 miles of use as the car operated and dynoed correctly before we delivered it. This is a relatively quick and easy fix that does not cost very much, however we do not and we never will give any kind of warranty on high-boost custom setups as the chance of failure is very high unless the driver is attentive and has proper measurement gauges installed. The VT3 is a race setup, and it should only be used by people who are aware of it's risks and high chance of long term problems due to the massive power delivery and the complex nature of the system. Sergei was informed over and over again of these risks, both on overboosting his previous VT2 kits as well as on the prototype VT3 setup.

Sergei's VT3 engine build, boost and software is identical to Drew's setup. The only difference that keeps Drew's still running strong is the awareness of the driver when operating such a complex and delicate beast. If an O2 sensor goes bad, back off it! If one of the fuel pumps stops working correctly, back off it! Follow these simple rules and the VT3 will live for a long time as Drew has demonstrated.

[M3-S65]

I only read ESS comment and then stopped reading:
12 psi of boost + 12:1 compression ratio + 8300 RPMS + S65 = BOOM

[bigjae1976]

The OP just wreaks of...I just beat the piss out of my car until it blew up.

[Mit_Boost]

Originally Posted by US///M3

Reading comprehension?

Read the last sentence.... Drew's VT3 has lasted over 2 years and 15k miles. There's absolutely NOTHING wrong with building a low compression, supercharged S65 (lowered compression = you can run more boost safely). You just need to make sure that whatever setup you run (Stock S65, Stroker Motor, Stock Motor/Supercharged, Low Compression Built Motor/Supercharged, even Turbocharged) that you have a solid tune & healthy, supporting fueling system.

Originally Posted by M3-S65

I only read ESS comment and then stopped reading:
12 psi of boost + 12:1 compression ratio + 8300 RPMS + S65 = BOOM

This is a LOW compression build, no longer using the factory 12:1

[filinm3]

Originally Posted by filinm3

Thank you for your advice!

I am going to obtain 2 new pistons in addition to mine 6 in good conditions... Remember those pistons are Mahle 10:1 specially made by ESS order for VT3 engine...

As for the coated bearings and their clearance, I am seriously now thinking of installing OEM 702/703 after what I seen inside the engine passed 3000 kms...

Fotos of coated rod bearings and OEM main bearings after 3000 kms in VT3 built engine...

Curious wether something was wrong during their installation or what is the reason for such a wear???

What to do with new rod bearings - to install full set of Calico coated or full set of OEM 702/703???

[Beedub]

interesting wear for sure..... never been a fan of coated bearings, id rather use stock , treat them as a wear item and swap them out at certain intervals, depending on how the motor is used would dictate my chosen interval....

[US///M3]

Originally Posted by Mit_Boost

Read the last sentence.... Drew's VT3 has lasted over 2 years and 15k miles. There's absolutely NOTHING wrong with building a low compression, supercharged S65 (lowered compression = you can run more boost safely). You just need to make sure that whatever setup you run (Stock S65, Stroker Motor, Stock Motor/Supercharged, Low Compression Built Motor/Supercharged, even Turbocharged) that you have a solid tune & healthy, supporting fueling system.

You just proved that even an idiot like you, can call anyone stupid.

Here's what you said:

It's not like Drew is running some crazy setup that's pushing the envelope, with unsafe high boost, a consistent 13+ AFR and a fuel system that's above 90% duty cycle (in which case, your "russian roulette" argument might hold some water/vodka). If you get bad gas, you just stay out of high RPMs/boost and burn through it. The motor isn't going to implode if you hold a stead 3k RPMs while you're putting around.

The kit requires monitoring fuel pressure, afr at all times per ESS meaning it has no ability to go into limp mode if the fuel pressure drops for the SC safe op.

Sergei was running the same setup as Drew.

Your response to the above points is to talk about low compression SC'ed S65's how it can handle more boost, something nobody is arguing.

[US///M3]

Thanks for the pictures Sergei. I think you did the right thing , not going the Arizona route, that sounded like a crazy proposition to me in term of time and transportation cost.
I dont think the guys at ESS value the dollar or your time.

[Mit_Boost]

Originally Posted by US///M3

The kit requires monitoring fuel pressure, afr at all times per ESS meaning it has no ability to go into limp mode if the fuel pressure drops for the SC safe op.

What?!? Of course it has no ability to "Limp Mode" with regards to the fuel system, it's a completely externally run fueling system (which is why it requires a Fuel Pressure Regulator). If a pump fails mid pull you and start to run lean, you just have to back off & get it fixed. The OP's motor shows signs of continued abuse from running lean (unknown to him because of the lack of gauges), which are clearly visible on the piston pics that show dome damage.

I think this was clear to everyone else but you that the factory safety nets wouldn't detect a failure in the upgraded fuel system? Which is why gauges were strongly recommended....

[US///M3]

Originally Posted by Mit_Boost

What?!? Of course it has no ability to "Limp Mode" with regards to the fuel system, it's a completely externally run fueling system (which is why it requires a Fuel Pressure Regulator). If a pump fails mid pull you and start to run lean, you just have to back off & get it fixed. The OP's motor shows signs of continued abuse from running lean (unknown to him because of the lack of gauges), which are clearly visible on the piston pics that show dome damage.

I think this was clear to everyone else but you that the factory safety nets wouldn't detect a failure in the upgraded fuel system? Which is why gauges were strongly recommended....

Yes, that's why I said I dont want to play russian roulette with my s65 by installing the vt3.

And the gauges that are part of the safety net that ESS refused to install.

[Gfunk720]

Originally Posted by US///M3

Yes, that's why I said I dont want to play russian roulette with my s65 by installing the vt3.

And the gauges that are part of the safety net that ESS refused to install.

I can't figure out the point you are trying to make? Are you defending the OP or just bashing ESS?

Drew has been very open about having challenges and issues with his setup, and has addressed them in a timely manor without major failure. The OP seems to have been less concerned with issues that may have been leading up to his failure and still tried to beat the crap out of the car despite being advised not to.

Are you still hung up on the fact that they wouldn't install gauges for him?

[TommyLights]

Just a thought....ESS refuses to add these gauges which are obviously super important because it doesn't want to have to warranty them? Seems a rather stupid thing to do especially comparing the cost of a build like this to the cost of the gauges. And the problems that follow.