▀▄ eas | S65 Rod Bearing Replacement: An ongoing "Journal"

[CSL_E36]

Originally Posted by chris719

Why did S54 ship with 5w-30 then get changed to 10w-60 if this is such a sin to deviate. Why did they continue to blow up after the 10w-60 switch? Why did the Z3M S54 not blow up as much? I'll give you a hint: it's not because BMW was all knowing and perfect in their oil selection for the clearances of the engine.

I don't think you understand much of the physics at play here. If you have high-G cornering problems you need an accusump or dry sump, you don't need thicker oil. That's like putting a band-aid on a bullet hole.

You did not come up with the correct conclusions so I'm not going to continue to argue.

Chris, I'm not going to play 21 questions with you. You keep saying "baind aid". Thats because you agree using thicker oil is effective. Of course, for cars running R compound tires they will pull enough Gs to require some sort of dry sump system.

If BMW thought these motors would live strong during track conditions on 5w-30 then why did they change it?

I can live with fact I made an incorrect conclusion. Can you live with the fact you are arguing for something you cant fully prove or understand? Just answer the question, without "hints". What is the scientific benefit of running a thinner oil in these motors?

[chris719]

If a thicker oil is actually effective for lateral G force induced oil starvation, can you explain why 987.1 Cayman/Boxster S (M97.21 engine) on street tires blow up on hard left hand turns regardless of the oil used?

The engineering solution is to fix the oiling system / scavenging. Thicker oil seems to be an ineffective mitigation for the real problem. If your engine blows up during hard cornering, it's not because you used a thin oil, it's because your oiling system failed to deliver that oil where it needed to be.

Thinner oil works better on startup and cold operation, and also if the engine clearances are too tight. Thicker oil increases oil pressure, but it also reduces flow! Flow is what you need...


Regarding S54: If BMW didn't think they would live during STREET driving on 5w-30, why would they spec it and ship cars filled with it? The 10W-60 switch for S54 was a last ditch effort to see if the engines would stop spinning bearings. BMW switched, engines kept dying. BMW then finally owned up to the problem and recalled the bearings. Once the bearings were "fixed" there are several cost related reasons they may not have not to switched back. It's possible they qualified the fix (bearing tolerances) using the 10W-60 and would have to repeat all that testing with 5W-30. Or maybe it's just expensive and confusing to switch every dealership in the world back again and have them throw away barrels of 10W-60.

[Killerfish2012]

Originally Posted by chris719

Regarding S54: If BMW didn't think they would live during STREET driving on 5w-30, why would they spec it and ship cars filled with it? The 10W-60 switch for S54 was a last ditch effort to see if the engines would stop spinning bearings. BMW switched, engines kept dying. BMW then finally owned up to the problem and recalled the bearings. Once the bearings were "fixed" there are several cost related reasons they may not have not to switched back. It's possible they qualified the fix (bearing tolerances) using the 10W-60 and would have to repeat all that testing with 5W-30. Or maybe it's just expensive and confusing to switch every dealership in the world back again and have them throw away barrels of 10W-60.

Dude 5W-30, is just the wrong oil for these motors. Direct injection engine spinning to nearly 9,000rpms, will just murder any oil. While I agree that 10W-60 (especially Castrol TWS), is just too thick, they did the switch most likely because they wanted you to start out at a very high KV 100, so that by the time you change the oil (approximately 15K miles or whenever the oil indicator flags it), you still have some viscosity left. Note that the 10W-60 by 15K miles will shear down to almost a 5W-30, which is why you don't want to start out with that.

[CSL_E36]

Originally Posted by chris719

If a thicker oil is actually effective for lateral G force induced oil starvation, can you explain why 987.1 Cayman/Boxster S (M97.21 engine) on street tires blow up on hard left hand turns regardless of the oil used?

The engineering solution is to fix the oiling system / scavenging. Thicker oil seems to be an ineffective mitigation for the real problem. If your engine blows up during hard cornering, it's not because you used a thin oil, it's because your oiling system failed to deliver that oil where it needed to be.

Thinner oil works better on startup and cold operation, and also if the engine clearances are too tight. Thicker oil increases oil pressure, but it also reduces flow! Flow is what you need...


Regarding S54: If BMW didn't think they would live during STREET driving on 5w-30, why would they spec it and ship cars filled with it? The 10W-60 switch for S54 was a last ditch effort to see if the engines would stop spinning bearings. BMW switched, engines kept dying. BMW then finally owned up to the problem and recalled the bearings. Once the bearings were "fixed" there are several cost related reasons they may not have not to switched back. It's possible they qualified the fix (bearing tolerances) using the 10W-60 and would have to repeat all that testing with 5W-30. Or maybe it's just expensive and confusing to switch every dealership in the world back again and have them throw away barrels of 10W-60.

Okie dokie let me clarify my original comment regarding oil starvation. I made that example of a motor blowing up in a fast bend as an example, due to low oil psi from thin oil. If a motor has lower oil psi it can experience oil starvation during hard acceleration, braking or cornerning. A 100mph sweeper is just one of many places where a motor exhibiting low oil psi can be damaged. Im NOT saying that the thinner oil slips out of the bearings during hard cornering and causes oil starvation, get it?

Low oil psi is my argument, not dry sump oil systems. So if you or Kawasaki have any concrete facts to prove how your thinner oil and lower oil psi benefit the S65 I'm all ears...but please, spare me the theoretical lesson, "less pressure equals more flow", any racers or engineers back up the claim you make? Seems pretty logical and straightforward if you were correct. Since most racers don't use 0w-40 on the S65, I still don't see any proven real world benefits.

[kawasaki00]

Originally Posted by 96LTWM3

Okie dokie let me clarify my original comment regarding oil starvation. I made that example of a motor blowing up in a fast bend as an example, due to low oil psi from thin oil. If a motor has lower oil psi it can experience oil starvation during hard acceleration, braking or cornerning. A 100mph sweeper is just one of many places where a motor exhibiting low oil psi can be damaged. Im NOT saying that the thinner oil slips out of the bearings during hard cornering and causes oil starvation, get it?

Low oil psi is my argument, not dry sump oil systems. So if you or Kawasaki have any concrete facts to prove how your thinner oil and lower oil psi benefit the S65 I'm all ears...but please, spare me the theoretical lesson, "less pressure equals more flow", any racers or engineers back up the claim you make? Seems pretty logical and straightforward if you were correct. Since most racers don't use 0w-40 on the S65, I still don't see any proven real world benefits.

BMW has a minimum oil pressure for the s65 and with 0-40 it still meets these requirements. Just because you drop a few lbs of op does not mean that what it has is not sufficient. There are plenty of guys on here that are racing the s65 with this oil, do a search. Furthermore, the pressure specs that the guy above posted are not inline with what multple other people have recorded including myself. There are only a few lbs difference when at temperature.
The only way a engine will be damaged under the g loads is if the oil is pulled away from the pick-up of the pump. The viscosity of the oil has nothing to do with that. That is a design flaw not a oil problem.
You should read through the bearing thread and it will answer all the questions you may have as I wont clog this thread back up with the same info all over again.
We have the racer and engineer part covered too.

[Killerfish2012]

Originally Posted by 96LTWM3

However with all the people saying 10w-60 is wrong, you people advocating 0w-40 don't have enough proven/scientific facts or miles to claim that 0w-40 is better and by how much?

It's better for the bearings, based on multiple used oil analysis showing a dramatic drop in lead. There should be no issues running 0W-40, as long as shorter oil drain intervals are done. This is less economical for me, which is why I chose a 10W-50, which spec shows KV 100/40 numbers that are much closer to 0W-40, while being substantially less than Castrol 10W-60.

[CSL_E36]

Originally Posted by kawasaki00

BMW has a minimum oil pressure for the s65 and with 0-40 it still meets these requirements. Just because you drop a few lbs of op does not mean that what it has is not sufficient. There are plenty of guys on here that are racing the s65 with this oil, do a search. Furthermore, the pressure specs that the guy above posted are not inline with what multple other people have recorded including myself. There are only a few lbs difference when at temperature.
The only way a engine will be damaged under the g loads is if the oil is pulled away from the pick-up of the pump. The viscosity of the oil has nothing to do with that. That is a design flaw not a oil problem.
You should read through the bearing thread and it will answer all the questions you may have as I wont clog this thread back up with the same info all over again.

Sorry man, I've read all 90 pages and the only thing concrete from that thread is that you, swamp2 and Regular guy have ego issues. So much good info is shared by you guys only to leave out supporting facts details because you guys get into cock measuring contests all the time. Just like now, I the average member playing devils advocate asks you the pro to provide examples of people racing with 0w-40, and your reply? "Do a search"....thanks for your advise its much apprecietted.

[Killerfish2012]

Originally Posted by kawasaki00

There are plenty of guys on here that are racing the s65 with this oil, do a search.

Pressure debate aside, these mavericks should be doing more frequent oil changes, period. That 0W-40 will become 0W-20 fast!

[Killerfish2012]

Originally Posted by 96LTWM3

Sorry man, I've read all 90 pages and the only thing concrete from that thread is that you, swamp2 and Regular guy have ego issues. So much good info is shared by you guys only to leave out supporting facts details because you guys get into cock measuring contests all the time. Just like now, I the average member playing devils advocate asks you the pro to provide examples of people racing with 0w-40, and your reply? "Do a search"....thanks for your advise its much apprecietted.

I'm enjoying reading this debate, but this will get you banned on here. Just Fyi!

[Z K]

Originally Posted by 96LTWM3

Sorry man, I've read all 90 pages and the only thing concrete from that thread is that you, swamp2 and Regular guy have ego issues. So much good info is shared by you guys only to leave out supporting facts details because you guys get into cock measuring contests all the time. Just like now, I the average member playing devils advocate asks you the pro to provide examples of people racing with 0w-40, and your reply? "Do a search"....thanks for your advise its much apprecietted.

MRF Engineering runs 0w40 on their track car. They noticed some benefits such as lower oil temps on track. This was mentioned in another thread. Change it frequently and there should be no problems. If you plan to stick with 15k oil changes then 10w60 may be right for you.

[tom @ eas]

Originally Posted by 96LTWM3

Sorry man, I've read all 90 pages and the only thing concrete from that thread is that you, swamp2 and Regular guy have ego issues. So much good info is shared by you guys only to leave out supporting facts details because you guys get into cock measuring contests all the time. Just like now, I the average member playing devils advocate asks you the pro to provide examples of people racing with 0w-40, and your reply? "Do a search"....thanks for your advise its much apprecietted.

Guys, let's not derail yet another bearing thread with silly debates and name calling. Let's keep it civil.

[CSL_E36]

Originally Posted by tom @ eas

Guys, let's not derail yet another bearing thread with silly debates and name calling. Let's keep it civil.

Apologies Tom, this thread is a great resource and I don't mean to litter in it.

Back on topic. Kawasaki mentioned the oil psi from the member above was NOT inline with what others have posted and what he has observed himself. I can agree that IF 0-40 only provides a a couple psi loss then as long as its above or at the engines requirement then theres no issue. However with the significant loss of psi observed above, would you say this motor is safe to run to 8400 all day with no issue? What is the reason then for his significant loss of oil psi? If you don't have an answer thats ok, and if you do and I learn something, thats ok too...

[kawasaki00]

Originally Posted by 96LTWM3

Apologies Tom, this thread is a great resource and I don't mean to litter in it.

Back on topic. Kawasaki mentioned the oil psi from the member above was NOT inline with what others have posted and what he has observed himself. I can agree that IF 0-40 only provides a a couple psi loss then as long as its above or at the engines requirement then theres no issue. However with the significant loss of psi observed above, would you say this motor is safe to run to 8400 all day with no issue? What is the reason then for his significant loss of oil psi? If you don't have an answer thats ok, and if you do and I learn something, thats ok too...

I will find the chart I had with the oil pressure. I have it in some papers. Maybe we can get some pictures of install to see if where the sensor is at or something is causing a difference in readings.
I did also observe that 5psi blip he was talking about though. It did that with the tws also so it was not a concern. If I was guessing it would be the vanos or the flow compensating pump???

[tom @ eas]

Originally Posted by 96LTWM3

Apologies Tom, this thread is a great resource and I don't mean to litter in it.

Back on topic. Kawasaki mentioned the oil psi from the member above was NOT inline with what others have posted and what he has observed himself. I can agree that IF 0-40 only provides a a couple psi loss then as long as its above or at the engines requirement then theres no issue. However with the significant loss of psi observed above, would you say this motor is safe to run to 8400 all day with no issue? What is the reason then for his significant loss of oil psi? If you don't have an answer thats ok, and if you do and I learn something, thats ok too...

It seems every oil company seems to know all weaknesses regarding its competitors and why theirs is superior.

Its hard to get any sort of an unbiased opinion on oils which is why we're pushing to get as many samples/analysis performed as possible. For example, Midnight Oil Motors (San Diego) seems to prefer 10W-40SR1-R Torco in their engines (and R&R on a regular basis), the high pressure Vanos on the S54s likely beat up the oil a lot more than the S65s would.

Not recommending a particular oil over others by any means, but just providing another real-world example of what others are doing. We've both TWS 10W60 and the Torco SR1 (10W40) in the past.

An oil analysis is the closest we can get to knowing what's going on inside without pulling apart the motor.

[pbonsalb]

There are also thin and thick 0W40 and Mobil 1 is considered a thin one. Bobistheoilguy has some info on the subject.

[MFL]

Originally Posted by 96LTWM3

Sorry man, I've read all 90 pages and the only thing concrete from that thread is that you, swamp2 and Regular guy have ego issues. So much good info is shared by you guys only to leave out supporting facts details because you guys get into cock measuring contests all the time. Just like now, I the average member playing devils advocate asks you the pro to provide examples of people racing with 0w-40, and your reply? "Do a search"....thanks for your advise its much apprecietted.

Well, they are doing this research in their own free time. Are you their boss? Are you their project manager? No on both counts?

These guys don't owe you a damn thing and they are trying to do a service to the people of this board by documenting and identifying real/potential issues regarding these engines.

They aren't your personal wikipedia/search function and they certainly don't owe you an answer.

[CSL_E36]

Originally Posted by MFL

Well, they are doing this research in their own free time. Are you their boss? Are you their project manager? No on both counts?

These guys don't owe you a damn thing and they are trying to do a service to the people of this board by documenting and identifying real/potential issues regarding these engines.

They aren't your personal wikipedia/search function and they certainly don't owe you an answer.

You are just another example of someone getting defensive when they are asked to prove their claim.

Dodging the question and now Im the bad guy for asking one?

Take a chill pill dude, I never implied any of the above that you mentioned.

[MFL]

How are they dodging a question by telling you to research it because it's already been covered? Is the search function too difficult?

They don't owe you an answer, nor do they have to prove anything to you. The data is in this thread and in this forum if you take a little bit of time out of your day to find it.

Go hit up grindr if you need your hand held.

[chris719]

Originally Posted by Killerfish2012

Dude 5W-30, is just the wrong oil for these motors. Direct injection engine spinning to nearly 9,000rpms, will just murder any oil. While I agree that 10W-60 (especially Castrol TWS), is just too thick, they did the switch most likely because they wanted you to start out at a very high KV 100, so that by the time you change the oil (approximately 15K miles or whenever the oil indicator flags it), you still have some viscosity left. Note that the 10W-60 by 15K miles will shear down to almost a 5W-30, which is why you don't want to start out with that.

Sorry, I think you missed the context of my post. The engine discussed in the post is the S54, which is not direct injected and has a redline of 7900. There was no switch for S54 for any reason other than engines blowing up. Owner's manuals were printed calling for 5w-30 for months.

Further, if we talk about S65, that engine is not direct injected either and the redline is 600 shy of 9000.

[CSL_E36]

Originally Posted by MFL

How are they dodging a question by telling you to research it because it's already been covered? Is the search function too difficult?

They don't owe you an answer, nor do they have to prove anything to you. The data is in this thread and in this forum if you take a little bit of time out of your day to find it.

Go hit up grindr if you need your hand held.

I have been following all the bearing threads for the last year and I'm in the majority of members who feel like there is inconclusive evidence of claims that the oil is the only/main cause of bearing failures.

"They" are not required to answer my left field skeptism. If they choose to, maybe we all learn something, or maybe they will return and attack me for "not knowing enough".
I wonder how that would pan out...

I wont be responding to any of your comments any more as they have no relevance to me or this thread.

[gatorfast]

Originally Posted by 96LTWM3

I have been following all the bearing threads for the last year and I'm in the majority of members who feel like there is inconclusive evidence of claims that the oil is the only/main cause of bearing failures.
.

So just stick with TWS then and be happy

No point in stirring the pot by asking redundant questions when your mind is clearly made up.

[Killerfish2012]

Originally Posted by chris719

Sorry, I think you missed the context of my post. The engine discussed in the post is the S54, which is not direct injected and has a redline of 7900. There was no switch for S54 for any reason other than engines blowing up. Owner's manuals were printed calling for 5w-30 for months.

Further, if we talk about S65, that engine is not direct injected either and the redline is 600 shy of 9000.

I stand corrected.