Do all E9x M3 have rod bearing problems?

[Scharbag]

Originally Posted by Assimilator1

Big end bearings not a common US term?

No, it seems we typically refer to them as "rod bearings" as the small end is not a bearing.

On a similar note, I personally think that metric tonnes should be simply referred to as megagrams (Mg) and tried to affect this change at my old work-site. I say this because a metric tonne (t, 2204.6lb), a short ton (ton, 2000lb) and and long ton (in or WT, 2240lb) are easily confused.

My efforts were in vain...

But I digress

[SYT_Shadow]

Originally Posted by akkando

This guy is just guessing. He didn't look at anything, he didn't measure anything. Just musing that it could be people tuning their engines, not warming up their car, using the wrong oil, waiting too long between oil changes, etc. Basically he is saying "In my experience, everything is user error, so this must be too"

Exactly

My E92 M3 was bought brand new, it followed the most stringent break in procedure on the planet, had oil changes (with BMW oil) every 5k miles, was never driven in cold temps, was never driven hard until fully warmed up.

Guess what, at 30k the rod bearings looked like crap.


Back in 2010 I was curious about whether it was user error and was determined to find out with my 2013 E92 M3.

[SYT_Shadow]

Originally Posted by wfdeacon88

you probably have the "newer" bearings being a 2011 MY. Still just as likely to fail as the previous bearings.... So it won't change the need to get them changed to BE.

Yup. There have already been a few 'blackstone looks good, blows engine next day' M engines in the past

That's why I don't bother with the analysis anymore... waste of time

[Assimilator1]

I don't suppose you have links of those cases do you? (beyond the ones I have above).

Scharbag
Lol , I always wondered what a short & long ton were , why the hell do they even exist!?
I like your Mg idea! Although some might confuse it for micrograms, or Manganese

[dcstep]

Way late to this post, but finally selling my 2009 E92 M3, 6-speed, after 176,000 miles, including around 100 autocross laps. Never lugged or revved high before warmup, and maintained by the book (no extra oil changes, but always on time).

There are no signs of bearing issues: HOWEVER, price is impacted. It looks fantastic, but EVERY potential buyer thinks it's about to blow up.

[M3JayM]

Originally Posted by dcstep

Way late to this post, but finally selling my 2009 E92 M3, 6-speed, after 176,000 miles, including around 100 autocross laps. Never lugged or revved high before warmup, and maintained by the book (no extra oil changes, but always on time).

There are no signs of bearing issues: HOWEVER, price is impacted. It looks fantastic, but EVERY potential buyer thinks it's about to blow up.

When you say it “looks fantastic”, did you actually open up the engine and look at the condition of the current RBs? And if you did that, you may as well have just gotten them replaced at the time. Just my $.02

[DrFerry]

Originally Posted by dcstep

Way late to this post, but finally selling my 2009 E92 M3, 6-speed, after 176,000 miles, including around 100 autocross laps. There are no signs of bearing issues.

What are the signs of bearing issues you mentioned above?

[Assimilator1]

Perhaps he means (terminal!) issues (sounds) like knocking or squealing?

And yea, with 176k on the clock, I'd be expecting to pay less for one that hasn't had the rod bearings done yet, especially if it's the early type bearings!

[dcstep]

Originally Posted by DrFerry

What are the signs of bearing issues you mentioned above?

I think that you mixed up my post with another. My M92 has no signs of bearing issues at 176,000 miles.

[gnx]

There are no M engines that have a rod bearing problem. They all need to be changed preventively so they do not cause problems or catastrophic failures.

Now if an engine needs main bearings, that is an expensive problem.

[icpee]

I'm so torn between getting an E9X M3 or an ISF. The rod bearing issue being the main issue I'm not automatically choosing the BMW.

[Assimilator1]

Originally Posted by icpee

I'm so torn between getting an E9X M3 or an ISF. The rod bearing issue being the main issue I'm not automatically choosing the BMW.

IDK what an ISF is, so can't help you there.

Buy an M3 that has had the rod bearings done (with an invoice that you can check up with). Or if not, buy one then immediately get the rod bearings done, factor that into the price of purchase (ideally by knocking them down somewhat, if they haven't already).

[M3SQRD]

The e9x M3 with the s65 is a perfect match and there’s only a few cars with a similar driving experience. The Lexus ISF is not one of them. Buy the e9x M3, immediately swap the RBs and then never think about RBs again!

[dcstep]

Originally Posted by dcstep

I think that you mixed up my post with another. My M92 has no signs of bearing issues at 176,000 miles.

I sold my 2009 E92 M3 to a gentleman that is going to replace the RBs. He promised to send me pix of how they look after 176,000 miles of usage. I'll post here when I receive them.

[E92Bean]

Originally Posted by icpee

I'm so torn between getting an E9X M3 or an ISF. The rod bearing issue being the main issue I'm not automatically choosing the BMW.

It’s pretty overblown, just swap them and forget. I’ve driven mine for 35k miles with track days after swapping mine and it’s good.
ISF isn’t comparable, more GT less sports car. Has a lazy transmission and a v8 closer to a mustang without the redline.

[Assimilator1]

Originally Posted by M3SQRD

The e9x M3 with the s65 is a perfect match and there’s only a few cars with a similar driving experience. The Lexus ISF is not one of them. Buy the e9x M3, immediately swap the RBs and then never think about RBs again!

What do you reckon are those few cars?