Blown motors, Rod Bearing failure S65 Registry.

[admranger]

Originally Posted by swamp2

I guess sarcasm or a weak attempt to attack me is your only reply when proven wrong. Nice try... Any more six sigma BS to discuss?

I didn't have any six sigma BS to begin with, your misunderstanding of my criticism of the 2% failure rate led you to believe that. Besides, your hyperbole started the issue when you sarcastically used "whopping" with the 2% number.

I'm sure you can find 3.4 defects (real or imaginary) in the million opportunities for error in everything everyone does who disagrees with you. I hope it fulfills you.

Originally Posted by swamp2

That being said I still firmly hold to my position that there was no way this was a BMW "fuck up". That is almost impossible by definition. They have very smart and talented people working on such issues, in design, engineering, simulation, test, etc. To me a definition of a "fuck up" is that they had dumb or unqualified people and/or missed something simple and/or significant.

There are some astronaut families from Columbia and Challenger that would like to talk to you about how smart and talented people can make mistakes and not realize it until it's too late. There's a probe flying aimlessly throughout the galaxy that's a bit miffed too. Let's not assume BMW is infallible. They allowed Bangle to design cars, after all.

[vsix]

I'm on a little more over 85K and lets be honest, better for me to invest those few bucks and get an rod bearing replacement done, then freaking facing a bill of 10k+ on a new/used engine.
Gonna get it done in two or three month.
Better safe then sorry!

[pbonsalb]

http://www.m3forum.net/m3forum/showthread.php?t=547002

This is a good one. Guy has deposit on car, I think a 2012, and goes for test drive and engine fails.

[pbonsalb]

Here is an engine failure in a 2009 from bimmerforums:

http://www.bimmerforums.com/forum/sh...291539-M3-Down

[aus]

Originally Posted by pbonsalb

Here is an engine failure in a 2009 from bimmerforums:

http://www.bimmerforums.com/forum/sh...291539-M3-Down

Thanks. I added this one.
If there's anymore info on the other one confirming it was the bearing's, I'll add that one too.
.

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by ///M Power-Belgium

Let's say the list of bearing failures on page 1 of this thread is imaginary as well ..
And BMW made the best ever bearings for our S85 and S65 engines ..
And this noise is imaginary as well ..

Honesty, what is the point you are trying to make? Who has denied that some bearings have failed?

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by admranger

I didn't have any six sigma BS to begin with, your misunderstanding of my criticism of the 2% failure rate led you to believe that. Besides, your hyperbole started the issue when you sarcastically used "whopping" with the 2% number.

Not sure how many times we have to beat the dead horse here. You said, "In a 6-sigma world, 2% is laughable quality." which I showed to be empirically unfounded. You then proceeded with a small litany of completely irrelevant exampled which I also pointed out as such. So yes your use of six sigma in this context was BS.

Originally Posted by admranger

There are some astronaut families from Columbia and Challenger that would like to talk to you about how smart and talented people can make mistakes and not realize it until it's too late. There's a probe flying aimlessly throughout the galaxy that's a bit miffed too. Let's not assume BMW is infallible.

More utter hyperbole between billions of dollars and loss of many lives and the "first world problem" of luxury/sports car engine longevity. Keep up these solid/relevant comparisons.

I still have not said BMW didn't or could not have made some mistakes here. What I do believe is that is wasn't a "fuck up" as many have claimed (according to my working definition of such). It is more likely nothing more than a calculated risk.

[admranger]

Originally Posted by swamp2

Not sure how many times we have to beat the dead horse here. You said, "In a 6-sigma world, 2% is laughable quality." which I showed to be empirically unfounded. You then proceeded with a small litany of completely irrelevant exampled which I also pointed out as such. So yes your use of six sigma in this context was BS.

2% engine failure rate is laughable quality to me. I don't care if it isn't to you. Not my problem and not a dig at you, just a difference of opinion. To me a 2% failure rate on an engine always will be laughable whether it's BMW or any other manufacturer. I can't imagine anyone at BMW or the other manufacturers stands up at the LA Auto Show and touts how wonderful it is that 98% of the engines in their cars didn't fail.

Originally Posted by swamp2

More utter hyperbole between billions of dollars and loss of many lives and the "first world problem" of luxury/sports car engine longevity. Keep up these solid/relevant comparisons.

Actually, it's a directly relevant complex machine of many parts that failed analogy. Especially when you touted how smart BMW staff were (then conveniently changed the argument to a 'calculated risk'). Therefore, I compared another group of really smart engineers (and scientists) that made some tragic errors. Surprised you missed that...

Originally Posted by swamp2

I still have not said BMW didn't or could not have made some mistakes here. What I do believe is that is wasn't a "fuck up" as many have claimed (according to my working definition of such). It is more likely nothing more than a calculated risk.

If it is a calculated risk, I hope the lawyers in NJ doing the class action lawsuit make them pay dearly for that risk being realized. The people who made the risk calculation used poor judgement (or fucked the calc up...lol).

[swamp2]

Apologies to all for contributing to getting the thread off topic.

It really seemed like a very reasonable time to revisit the failure rate estimate and compare vs. the rest of the players.

Originally Posted by admranger

2% engine failure rate is laughable quality to me. I don't care if it isn't to you. Not my problem and not a dig at you, just a difference of opinion. To me a 2% failure rate on an engine always will be laughable whether it's BMW or any other manufacturer. I can't imagine anyone at BMW or the other manufacturers stands up at the LA Auto Show and touts how wonderful it is that 98% of the engines in their cars didn't fail.

We agree that 2% is too high. However, it seemed obvious to me that you implied that the very nature of 6 sigma manufacturing and quality techniques inherently implied that BMW engine failure rated should be 6 sigma cases.

Again, it is on the high end of the spectrum but it is not completely out of the norm across many manufacturers. So, I guess you have to laugh at everyone. That's inherently less "funny".

Originally Posted by admranger

Actually, it's a directly relevant complex machine of many parts that failed analogy. Especially when you touted how smart BMW staff were (then conveniently changed the argument to a 'calculated risk'). Therefore, I compared another group of really smart engineers (and scientists) that made some tragic errors. Surprised you missed that...

It's really a whole different level. It's still readily apparent with your diction just above... Nothing "tragic" about what is happening here... You say tomato, I say tomato... If you know anything about my overall position on this whole scenario, you will know that for a very long time I've suggested the calculated risk angle with some measurable benefit is the most likely scenario. That is certainly, even by a superficial thought experiment, much more likely than "they fucked up".

Originally Posted by admranger

If it is a calculated risk, I hope the lawyers in NJ doing the class action lawsuit make them pay dearly for that risk being realized. The people who made the risk calculation used poor judgement (or fucked the calc up...lol).

I've not been hanging out here much at all and was not aware of a class action. Info, link(s)?

That being said, I don't think you are in a position to evaluate poor judgement by BMW. How do you know what the total liability is (either with or without the lawsuit) vs. the cost savings or other gained advantages in a trade study. No one has this information except BMW and thus no one is qualified to speak to that balance. All we can really say is "I expect better from BMW" or "2% is too high in my opinion" or "too high for my own risk tolerance", etc.

[admranger]

Originally Posted by swamp2

Apologies to all for contributing to getting the thread off topic.

It really seemed like a very reasonable time to revisit the failure rate estimate and compare vs. the rest of the players.


We agree that 2% is too high. However, it seemed obvious to me that you implied that the very nature of 6 sigma manufacturing and quality techniques inherently implied that BMW engine failure rated should be 6 sigma cases.

Again, it is on the high end of the spectrum but it is not completely out of the norm across many manufacturers. So, I guess you have to laugh at everyone. That's inherently less "funny".

I was applying six sigma (pejoratively) to the individual piece parts, not the assembly. However, it's irrelevant as we both agree a 2% failure rate is excessive.

Originally Posted by swamp2

It's really a whole different level. It's still readily apparent with your diction just above... Nothing "tragic" about what is happening here... You say tomato, I say tomato... If you know anything about my overall position on this whole scenario, you will know that for a very long time I've suggested the calculated risk angle with some measurable benefit is the most likely scenario. That is certainly, even by a superficial thought experiment, much more likely than "they fucked up".

TBH, I was unaware of your calculated risk angle. My take on it is that given the expense of the last time they made a rod bearing calculated risk (the S54), it cost them a ton. Doing it again seems to be a low probability event sequence to me. Regardless of the reason, it's unfortunate that it's happening at all.

Originally Posted by swamp2

I've not been hanging out here much at all and was not aware of a class action. Info, link(s)?

Class Action Lawsuit Thread

Originally Posted by swamp2

That being said, I don't think you are in a position to evaluate poor judgement by BMW. How do you know what the total liability is (either with or without the lawsuit) vs. the cost savings or other gained advantages in a trade study. No one has this information except BMW and thus no one is qualified to speak to that balance. All we can really say is "I expect better from BMW" or "2% is too high in my opinion" or "too high for my own risk tolerance", etc.

Fair enough. I don't have all the information. I do expect better from BMW on their flagship engines (S85, S65). A 2% failure rate is far too high in my opinion.

[leo95se]

Can you keep the childish banter elsewhere please? I'm sure there is a Honda forum that can use some attention.
Please try to keep this thread valuable. Thanks

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by leo95se

Can you keep the childish banter elsewhere please? I'm sure there is a Honda forum that can use some attention.
Please try to keep this thread valuable. Thanks

Wow, it seems you have an incredibly low threshold for "childish banter" especially to be participating in a automotive enthusiasts internet forum (of any brand)...

I think the minor discussion I got involved in here recently is a bit off topic and I already apologized for that. However, calling it a "childish" one is also significant hyperbole.

[Properstyle]

What performance car didn't have 2percnet fail rate? lets be honest. the new f80/f82 m3 has had recent crank hub issues in manuals. the e92 has a 2 percent on rod bearings. the e46m had rod bearings smg failures in the first 30k miles, to include vanos, the m5 e60 had the same, the e36 had subframe failures as well. c63 amg had head bolt issues that only effect 2 percent, e55 had 2 percent that were effect by lack of fuel line loop, new 550i had chain stretch and injector issues, 335i had the same injector issues. SO how is 2 percent failure bad quiality in a HIGH performance car?

Originally Posted by Properstyle

What performance car didn't have 2percnet fail rate? lets be honest. the new f80/f82 m3 has had recent crank hub issues in manuals. the e92 has a 2 percent on rod bearings. the e46m had rod bearings smg failures in the first 30k miles, to include vanos, the m5 e60 had the same, the e36 had subframe failures as well. c63 amg had head bolt issues that only effect 2 percent, e55 had 2 percent that were effect by lack of fuel line loop, new 550i had chain stretch and injector issues, 335i had the same injector issues. SO how is 2 percent failure bad quiality in a HIGH performance car?

Are you comparing rod bearing issue with injector malfunctioning?

injector issue will dont blown your engine.... 2% blown motors sound really dangerous.

[Shredicus]

Originally Posted by TL866

Are you comparing rod bearing issue with injector malfunctioning?

injector issue will dont blown your engine.... 2% blown motors sound really dangerous.

Injector failure could hydrolock your motor = dead

[jcolley]

Originally Posted by Shredicus

Injector failure could hydrolock your motor = dead

True statement. I have two S85 blocks that died that way.

Stuck injector washes down the cylinder wall and then scores away.

[Obioban]

Originally Posted by jcolley

True statement. I have two S85 blocks that died that way.

Stuck injector washes down the cylinder wall and then scores away.

Keca?

Or have two people suffered 2 x S85 failures due to suck injectors?

[jcolley]

Two core motors I have. Eventually they will be bored and sleeved.

Originally Posted by Shredicus

Injector failure could hydrolock your motor = dead

wow yep, are u right

[e46e92love]

Originally Posted by swamp2

Apologies to all for contributing to getting the thread off topic.

It really seemed like a very reasonable time to revisit the failure rate estimate and compare vs. the rest of the players.

We agree that 2% is too high. However, it seemed obvious to me that you implied that the very nature of 6 sigma manufacturing and quality techniques inherently implied that BMW engine failure rated should be 6 sigma cases.

Again, it is on the high end of the spectrum but it is not completely out of the norm across many manufacturers. So, I guess you have to laugh at everyone. That's inherently less "funny".

It's really a whole different level. It's still readily apparent with your diction just above... Nothing "tragic" about what is happening here... You say tomato, I say tomato... If you know anything about my overall position on this whole scenario, you will know that for a very long time I've suggested the calculated risk angle with some measurable benefit is the most likely scenario. That is certainly, even by a superficial thought experiment, much more likely than "they fucked up".

I've not been hanging out here much at all and was not aware of a class action. Info, link(s)?

That being said, I don't think you are in a position to evaluate poor judgement by BMW. How do you know what the total liability is (either with or without the lawsuit) vs. the cost savings or other gained advantages in a trade study. No one has this information except BMW and thus no one is qualified to speak to that balance. All we can really say is "I expect better from BMW" or "2% is too high in my opinion" or "too high for my own risk tolerance", etc.

No apologies needed SWAMP but may I suggest that the use of facts, well founded engineering principles and other scientific analysis pretty much left these forums about 6 years ago. Now everyone prefers to throw around hyperboles and mash together random facts to prove their point. My favorite is opinions advertised as facts.

Still waiting for a calm, fact based, thorough, non-hysterical discussion on this topic. Actually, not really holding my breath and keep those conversations for the pros who simply don't have the time to argue on the forums.

That all being said, I appreciate your efforts.

Cheers,
e46e92

[e46e92love]

Originally Posted by swamp2

Being generous, it appears that 93 failures have been posted in this registry as of today. Is the data yet available in a spreadsheet format (I did not read the whole thread)? Are all of member SFPs data included in this registry?

Over 2 years ago I made a reasonable estimate of the total failure rate to be between 0.1% and 0.5%. You can see the simplistic method I used for estimating the denominator in the ratio here. It is a crude estimate, for sure, but clearly way better than using the total production number of the S65 as the denominator (which is 65985). It accounts for both facts that not all owners post here and even owners who do post may not report a failure, although I think that is much less of an uncertainty.

Based on the same methodology (i.e. same denominator, 4500) the failure rate estimate can be updated to a whopping 2%. Obviously, as time and mileage accumulation march on, the failure rate will also do so (i.e. my prior estimate was not wrong per se at the time I made it). I would also make an educated guess, perhaps only a guy feeling, that this 2% number is more like an upper limit. An absolute lower limit (also clearly a known poor estimate, but clearly a true lower limit) is 0.1% (93/65985).

Is this still yet "the sky is falling"?

Is it that "BMW massively screwed up their design"?

Could it be again that BMW knowingly took some benefits along with some penalties in decisions on bearings/clearances/eccentricities/oil? The penalty obviously being allowing a higher failure rate than many other vehicles. It does seem reasonable that some form of tolerance stacking might be involved and determine which vehicles will fail.

I'm not saying I am happy with this situation. Neither am I happy with a 2% failure rate on the true heart of a gem of an engine design. I feel very sorry for all of the hassle (and time, expense, stress, etc.) all of the folks have gone through who have experienced these failures. But all that being said, the sky just isn't falling. And, we still have not a shred of empirical, test based evidence that any aftermarket bearing or coating will do one iota in terms of preventing/solving the problem.

I'd suggest that until we can ascertain the following facts for ALL or MOST of the failures, it's tough to say if this was BMW taking on a random risk, or simply them designing an engine that required strict adherence to operating protocol listed in her manual:

1) Were all of the cars broken in correctly (according to methods outlined in the manual)

2) Were all of the cars properly warmed up under the FACTORY cold start protocol and according to listed procedures (according to methods outlined in the manual)

3) Were all of the cars properly cooled down (no high rpm, WOT, redline pulls) within just a few miles of where the car was to be parked and turned off.

4) Were all of the cars "stock" as far as engine tunes and / or supercharging.

4) Were the cars in question Sri en as DD or left to sit for months during the winter with little activity.


To ignore these variables to me means one is not serious about understanding the problem, it's causes and BMW's level of responsibility. I also believe these variables and BMW's true lack of complete control over and the relative ignorance of mostly its customers was a CONTRIBUTING factor for abandoning the N/A, high revving, high strung engines.

Cheers,
e46e92

[pbonsalb]

Do you think the answers to those questions are much different than the answers to the same questions asked of owners of other high performance cars with lower failure rates? Or are BMW M3 owners just more irresponsible and worse drivers?