|
|
01-17-2016, 01:58 PM | #133 |
Lieutenant General
2349
Rep 12,905
Posts |
The BE Bearings are a TriMetal bearing + PTFE coating. The closest equivalent to OEM bearings would be to start with 088/089 (Clevite TriMetal) bearings and add the PTFE coating.
The last set of 088/089 bearings we bought cost us $640 for the V8 set. If we added the PTFE coating for about $75, the total cost would come out to $715 for the OEM equivalent to what BE is making. |
Appreciate
0
|
01-17-2016, 02:54 PM | #134 |
First Lieutenant
125
Rep 322
Posts |
I'm not saying don't change...just change them for a known product. If you got say 70K miles from OEM clearance bearings then there is every likely hood you will get 70K from another set.
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-17-2016, 03:30 PM | #135 | |||
Lieutenant Colonel
145
Rep 1,665
Posts |
Quote:
Did you email anybody at BE Bearings to ask this question? Of course you didn't. Pretty obvious you have a personal agenda here if you're not asking these questions to both BMW and BE before you post something like this. You don't seem to care what BMW would do, only what BE would do. Well then, why don't you ask them? Pretty obvious you don't want to. Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
Appreciate
0
|
01-17-2016, 03:49 PM | #136 | |
New Member
0
Rep 9
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-17-2016, 05:38 PM | #137 | |
Lieutenant Colonel
145
Rep 1,665
Posts |
Quote:
I've got a pint that says you never sent any email and that you can't produce one with all of its headers, dates, and security checksums in your next response. People with something to prove usually provide proof. I got a pint that says you don't have any and can't produce any. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-17-2016, 05:52 PM | #138 | |
New Member
0
Rep 9
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-17-2016, 06:30 PM | #140 | |
Lieutenant Colonel
145
Rep 1,665
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-18-2016, 02:04 AM | #141 | |
Lieutenant Colonel
145
Rep 1,665
Posts |
Quote:
Sure but if the clearance wasen't so tight there would be oil on the bearings during cold start. If it was purely ethanol content we would see bearing failures in all vehicle combustion engines. I'd really love to know what the oiling schematic on the crank is. Now BE bearings opens up clearance yet you dont see any issue with putting stock bearings back in? |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-18-2016, 03:38 AM | #142 | |
First Lieutenant
125
Rep 322
Posts |
Quote:
I certainly don't get why anyone not involved in the project would advocate for a product that most likely will be less reliable than OEM....or at least whose reliability will remain suspect until proven otherwise. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-18-2016, 04:11 AM | #143 | |
Lieutenant Colonel
145
Rep 1,665
Posts |
Quote:
Please explain in detail how you think BE bearings will be most likely less reliable then OEM.... Stock: 0.0014 clearance (far to tight for the size of the rod journal) so we already have a problem and then 10w60 a big no no for that clearance, together we have a disaster, also a cheap tin aluminum bearing. BE bearings: The HIGHEST quality bearing available on the market with 0.0026 clearance (correct for the size of the rod journal) and 10w60 perfect for BE bearings clearance.....pretty easy choice for me. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-18-2016, 05:30 AM | #144 | |
First Lieutenant
125
Rep 322
Posts |
Quote:
Tut tut though....criticizing VAC, shamelessly promoting BE while all the time pretending to be all impartial... Apart from by nearly doubling the RB clearance, you will get increased oil leakage from the bearings causing a reduction in local oil pressure making the oil film less able to resist high combustion stroke loads...apart from that do you mean? Last edited by Sneaky Pete; 01-18-2016 at 05:50 AM.. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-18-2016, 07:25 AM | #145 | |
Brigadier General
4036
Rep 4,065
Posts |
Quote:
End the BS and continue to believe what you will, you will use stock bearings with no chance at any improvement, others will use the bearings with more clearance because they believe the evidence and think there is a good chance of the problem being lessened.
__________________
|
|
Appreciate
1
|
01-18-2016, 07:51 AM | #146 | |
New Member
0
Rep 9
Posts |
Quote:
Nothing wrong with .0014" clearance at all or even slightly less. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-18-2016, 08:09 AM | #147 | |
Brigadier General
4036
Rep 4,065
Posts |
Quote:
What about all the evidence from pulled bearings that show signs of wear that can be attributed to clearance issues?
__________________
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-18-2016, 08:09 AM | #148 | |
First Lieutenant
125
Rep 322
Posts |
Quote:
And during all that time they never thought once to mention to the M division that they were using completely the wrong clearance for the M5 and the M3...Seriously? There are plenty people who have no idea (probably the majority) of the issues involved who are being carried along by the hype and are buying these completely untested bearings...shouldn't they at least hear the counter arguments....and why it is always the same cache of people who try so hard to discourage negative comments about them. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-18-2016, 08:13 AM | #149 | |
Brigadier General
4036
Rep 4,065
Posts |
Quote:
BMW spec'd the engine too tight, not enough blow up to justify a recall. Most cars will last through their warranty period. Also BMW specs the bearing likely without sharing any info with Clevite most likely doesn't even know what the final clearance will be. If they had asked for a recommendation i'm sure they would have got it.
__________________
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-18-2016, 08:19 AM | #150 | |
Lieutenant
325
Rep 489
Posts
Drives: 2011 E90 M3 6MT
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Middletown, MD
|
Quote:
And, to your second point, those of us who bought the bearings realize the context. I don't need "saving" from myself. If things turn out to be as you say, I have no one to blame but myself. But it is a solution based on logic and science. Your "solution" is no solution at all, nor is it a "counterargument." It's just throwing rocks at the solution and is entitled to very little if any weight given the "science" behind your arguments. Got it, understand your point, they are untested. Now go away or come up with some other solution than the stupidity advanced so far, like ethanol in gas. |
|
Appreciate
1
|
01-18-2016, 08:58 AM | #151 | |
Major
1251
Rep 1,288
Posts |
Quote:
What's your counterargument? Please provide it with data and facts. Preferably something other than bmw m division made it this way. I've see the facts and data supporting my need for larger clearance. Where's your data? I've measured several cranks myself but according to you that isn't good enough. I know race engine builders that laugh at the bearing clearance. What credible source do you and this other guy klip turn to to say that 1.3 thousandths is good? Again, besides bmw because bmw hasnt been consistent. Every clearance ive measured has been different. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-18-2016, 09:31 AM | #152 |
Lieutenant Colonel
234
Rep 1,673
Posts |
You should really stop providing false accusations and information when you don't know what you are talking about. What you just said is false. There is no oil leakage, its called a increase in flow rate. The oil pump and system is more than adequate to compensate for the pressure demands of the bearings.
__________________
Electronics Junkie, Engine Builder.
Last edited by kawasaki00; 01-18-2016 at 09:38 AM.. |
Appreciate
1
|
01-18-2016, 10:27 AM | #153 | |
Major General
4587
Rep 7,210
Posts |
Quote:
Sorry for my ignorance but wanting learn... Thanks |
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-18-2016, 10:47 AM | #154 |
Major
1251
Rep 1,288
Posts |
I check my existing clearance with stock rod bearings and it was really tight. I reached out to a few different engine builders and they pretty much laughed at how tight it was.
Stock honda clearance is usually around 1.8-2.0 thousandths. Beyond that it becomes a builder's preference. |
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
|
|