OEM 702/703 to BE Bearings

[Sneaky Pete]

Originally Posted by L4ces

Like to hear more on the bearing issue.

Only on a forum can you find people gullible enough to believe that some random muppets can guess a better rod bearing clearance that BMW M Power...and then they actually buy and fit these engine critical bearings despite them not having been subjected to any real world testing whatsoever.
I just hope the guinea pigs who have already bought them on a hope and a prayer don't live to regret it.

[JRV]

Originally Posted by Sneaky Pete

Only on a forum can you find people gullible enough to believe that some random muppets can guess a better rod bearing clearance that BMW M Power...and then they actually buy and fit these engine critical bearings despite them not having been subjected to any real world testing whatsoever.
I just hope the guinea pigs who have already bought them on a hope and a prayer don't live to regret it.

Oh you mean the same folks that now have had at least 3 chances to make NA high revving motors without having rod bearing issues...look at my pic. If that looks like BMW chose the perfect specs then I don't what to say to you. Also note nobody "guessed" anything as you just said. What do you have to say about Calico and WPC and how Dinan mentioned they don't feel comfortable with the RB clearance BMW dishes out for the S65 and end up mixing and matching to get desired clearance? All fools because BMW always gets it right? Any other brilliant comments you have?

[Rajmun340]

Originally Posted by Helmsman

Interesting input Joe.
In Sweden we have a 5% ethanol mix as it seems regardless of supplier and octane.
- What's the number in the US?

We only have around 500 E9x' over here, I've heard about at least a couple of engine brake downs due to bearing so obviously happens here as well but it seems very rare.

Thanks Helmsman. In the US 10% ethanol (E10) is firmly established but ethanol free pumps can be found.
RB failure is rare everywhere in general, but correlates with ethanol use. The higher the worse. The UK's is also on a 5% ethanol maximum legislation and there are no bearing failure there to my knowledge. This forum RB registry wrongly listed one UK member for RB engine replacement. His engine was pre-emptively replaced after excessive oil consumption, not RB failure.

Originally Posted by JRV

Not going to dispute this because I really couldn't tell you, but what I will say from observation is why is this issue only prevalent with BMWs NA M high revving motors? Shouldn't this be across the board along with other manufacturers?

Thank you for this constructive question. I was strongly anticipating it.

The issue is prevalent in any high revving engine and accentuated further in over-designed capacity oil cooling systems because they take longer to warmup. The S65 oil system was designed to keep the engine cool at the track. But in daily use this results in longer warmup times and thus faster oil dilution with ethanol. High revving racing engines are known to have faster oil dilution rates, but they systematically flush the oil after each racing event or practice session.

With ethanol free fuel, the oil dilution does not cause the same issue as with ethanol. When ethanol is present it will cause bearing surfaces to corrode at the microscopic level, reduce surface hardness and cause pitting. Ethanol will also reduce the oil lubricity. This increase frictions and causes higher temperatures on the bearing surfaces. Higher temperatures amplifies the detergent and corrosive effect of ethanol.

Now the second part of the answer.

It is only in 2009 that European legislation has been put in place to offer E10 and to enforce auto manufacturers to support it in Europe.

In the USA in 2003, California banned MTBE and replaced it as an octane booster by ethanol. Other states followed over time. At that time German auto manufacturers strongly opposed ethanol fuels.

The S65 engine developed on Preussen strasse Munich by bmw M division is a 2 cylinders knock- off from the 10 cyl s85 engine in the e60 m5 which critical testing was completed around early to mid 2004 and started production in 2005. In 2004 corn fuel was not expected to power mainstream vehicles much less did auto manufacturer expect that it would politically become a fuel requirement. It is safe to say that the s85 M5 engine was tested on ethanol free fuel. The s65 is essentially the same high revving engine except for the fuel pump and the HP vanos. Both run 10W60 oil.

With ethanol entering the consumer market in the USA in 2003 in California the Honda s2000 F20C engines failures due to spun bearing started to increase in 2006 three years after E10 introduction in California and occurrences peaked in 2007-2008. A short RB failure registry was made. i have logs for 14 F20C RB failures. We have to ask ourselves why S2000 engines did not spun bearings before ethanol started to be used.

The story repeats for the E46 M3 S54 engine. bearing failures followed a similar time table.

Why some other NA high revving engine brands are less impacted (Porsche) could be due to a better oil system with faster warmup times and better oil pressures. However they occasionally spin bearings too.

Originally Posted by rcracin

We should inform blackstone about the issue so they test our oil samples for ethanol content. Thank you for this wonderful discovery!

Blackstone oil labs analysis cannot specifically detect ethanol in the oil. Their oil analysis sheet gives fuel but cannot distinguish between ethanol and gasoline and they do not have equipment to do that. I asked them months ago.

Expectedly this steers heavy sentiments. For haters, sorry to ruin your love of E85.

[Rajmun340]

Originally Posted by Sneaky Pete

Only on a forum can you find people gullible enough to believe that some random muppets can guess a better rod bearing clearance that BMW M Power...and then they actually buy and fit these engine critical bearings despite them not having been subjected to any real world testing whatsoever.
I just hope the guinea pigs who have already bought them on a hope and a prayer don't live to regret it.

I second that.

Those people are opportunists, the same people that spread fear on this forum, continue to use fear to built a market and bank on it. I would not be surprised if BMW filed a lawsuit against BE bearing for the diffamatory and scare rhetorics they use as advertising material to make sells. I actually would encourage bmw to sue them.

[JRV]

Originally Posted by JoeM3SSII

Thanks Helmsman. In the US 10% ethanol (E10) is firmly established but ethanol free pumps can be found.
RB failure is rare everywhere in general, but correlates with ethanol use. The higher the worse. The UK's is also on a 5% ethanol maximum legislation and there are no bearing failure there to my knowledge. This forum RB registry wrongly listed one UK member for RB engine replacement. His engine was pre-emptively replaced after excessive oil consumption, not RB failure.

Thank you for this constructive question. I was strongly anticipating it.

The issue is prevalent in any high revving engine and accentuated further in over-designed capacity oil cooling systems because they take longer to warmup. The S65 oil system was designed to keep the engine cool at the track. But in daily use this results in longer warmup times and thus faster oil dilution with ethanol. High revving racing engines are known to have faster oil dilution rates, but they systematically flush the oil after each racing event or practice session.

With ethanol free fuel, the oil dilution does not cause the same issue as with ethanol. When ethanol is present it will cause bearing surfaces to corrode at the microscopic level, reduce surface hardness and cause pitting. Ethanol will also reduce the oil lubricity. This increase frictions and causes higher temperatures on the bearing surfaces. Higher temperatures amplifies the detergent and corrosive effect of ethanol.

Now the second part of the answer.

It is only in 2009 that European legislation has been put in place to offer E10 and to enforce auto manufacturers to support it in Europe.

In the USA in 2003, California banned MTBE and replaced it as an octane booster by ethanol. Other states followed over time. At that time German auto manufacturers strongly opposed ethanol fuels.

The S65 engine developed on Preussen strasse Munich by bmw M division is a 2 cylinders knock- off from the 10 cyl s85 engine in the e60 m5 which critical testing was completed around early to mid 2004 and started production in 2005. In 2004 corn fuel was not expected to power mainstream vehicles much less did auto manufacturer expect that it would politically become a fuel requirement. It is safe to say that the s85 M5 engine was tested on ethanol free fuel. The s65 is essentially the same high revving engine except for the fuel pump and the HP vanos. Both run 10W60 oil.

With ethanol entering the consumer market in the USA in 2003 in California the Honda s2000 F20C engines failures due to spun bearing started to increase in 2006 three years after E10 introduction in california and occurences peaked in 2007-2008. A short RB registry was made. i have logs for 14 F20C RB failures. We have to ask ourselves why S2000 engines did not spun bearings before ethanol started to be used.

The story repeats for the E46 M3 S54 engine. bearing failures followed a similar time table.

Why some other NA high revving engine brands are less impacted (Porsche) could be due to a better oil system with faster warmup times and better oil pressures. However they occasionally spin bearings too.

Blackstone oil labs analysis cannot specifically detect ethanol in the oil. Their analysis sheet gives fuel in the oil but cannot distinguish between ethanol and gasoline. I asked them before.

Expectedly this steers heavy sentiments. For haters, sorry to ruin your love of E85.

All things considered, replacing your rod bearings on these cars is preventive maintenance that you can choose to do or not. I chose to and glad I did. Too many stories that were too late and when you do pull them it's evident. However it doesn't mean yours will go during ownership, everyone will make their own decision.

[OM VT3]

Originally Posted by m3aviator

Slap bearings in with out measuring anything? Rod ecc, rod stretch, journal diameter? Etc? You really think this is one size fits all? Every crank is the same? Every rod/main journal ?

This is all marketing nonsense. If at all anything put stock bearings back in, with stock bolts. Years of discussion and yet not a single engineer or anyone with inside knowledge has made a single post. Every single comment is pure speculation. The owners of this forum are in bed with the manufacturer. We know nothing for a reason.

Im sorry but can you find a better fix with out spending 10k plus? You think engineer hasnt help to pick the clearances of these bearings, people that build indy car motors and nascar motors have also helped. This is the best fit with out a rebuild and i have seen it work

[OM VT3]

Originally Posted by Sneaky Pete

Only on a forum can you find people gullible enough to believe that some random muppets can guess a better rod bearing clearance that BMW M Power...and then they actually buy and fit these engine critical bearings despite them not having been subjected to any real world testing whatsoever.
I just hope the guinea pigs who have already bought them on a hope and a prayer don't live to regret it.

Go on the clevite site and have a read what it says about clearance and what they should be.....but i guess they wouldnt know hey

[OM VT3]

Originally Posted by JoeM3SSII

I second that.

Those people are opportunists, the same people that spread fear on this forum, continue to use fear to built a market and bank on it. I would not be surprised if BMW filed a lawsuit against BE bearing for the diffamatory and scare rhetorics they use as advertising material to make sells. I actually would encourage bmw to sue them.

It would never happen bmw would then clearly be exposed about there clearances and that they arent inline with the industry standards

[jcolley]

BRB, Im'ma grab some popcorn...

The argument about oil taking longer to warmup due to the great cooling capacity of the engine design only has one argument going against it. Thermodynamics.

Q=m(dot)*c * (Th-Tc). Kind of hard to have Q when m(dot) = 0 during warmup.

[squartus]

Originally Posted by JoeM3SSII

I second that.

Those people are opportunists, the same people that spread fear on this forum, continue to use fear to built a market and bank on it. I would not be surprised if BMW filed a lawsuit against BE bearing for the diffamatory and scare rhetorics they use as advertising material to make sells. I actually would encourage bmw to sue them.

You would be right except your not... proof is in the facts, are all these shitty bearings and blown engines photo shopped? Guess I shouldn't trust what iv seen with my own eyes either. Like it or not its a problem and the damages will only go up as more miles are put on the cars. If I would of listned to people like you I would be out 25k for a new engine instead of catching it in time and only spending 1800. Glad I used my common sense

[rcracin]

Originally Posted by m3aviator

Slap bearings in with out measuring anything? Rod ecc, rod stretch, journal diameter? Etc? You really think this is one size fits all? Every crank is the same? Every rod/main journal ?

This is all marketing nonsense. If at all anything put stock bearings back in, with stock bolts. Years of discussion and yet not a single engineer or anyone with inside knowledge has made a single post. Every single comment is pure speculation. The owners of this forum are in bed with the manufacturer. We know nothing for a reason.

BMW only sells one size rod bearing whereas other manufacturers such as Honda have multiple options. Other companies are offerring one size, just with slightly larger clearances.

If you approached things a little more nicely, maybe you would have spoken to those people who measured many different s65 cranks, detailing what they found. Rods were also measured and detailed.

Even the last guy who had a motor for sale with replaced bearings detailed the clearance on each rod after he installed the new bearings. Proper information is out there for those who seek it without hostility.

[rcracin]

Originally Posted by JoeM3SSII

Thanks Helmsman. In the US 10% ethanol (E10) is firmly established but ethanol free pumps can be found.
RB failure is rare everywhere in general, but correlates with ethanol use. The higher the worse. The UK's is also on a 5% ethanol maximum legislation and there are no bearing failure there to my knowledge. This forum RB registry wrongly listed one UK member for RB engine replacement. His engine was pre-emptively replaced after excessive oil consumption, not RB failure.



Thank you for this constructive question. I was strongly anticipating it.

The issue is prevalent in any high revving engine and accentuated further in over-designed capacity oil cooling systems because they take longer to warmup. The S65 oil system was designed to keep the engine cool at the track. But in daily use this results in longer warmup times and thus faster oil dilution with ethanol. High revving racing engines are known to have faster oil dilution rates, but they systematically flush the oil after each racing event or practice session.

With ethanol free fuel, the oil dilution does not cause the same issue as with ethanol. When ethanol is present it will cause bearing surfaces to corrode at the microscopic level, reduce surface hardness and cause pitting. Ethanol will also reduce the oil lubricity. This increase frictions and causes higher temperatures on the bearing surfaces. Higher temperatures amplifies the detergent and corrosive effect of ethanol.

Now the second part of the answer.

It is only in 2009 that European legislation has been put in place to offer E10 and to enforce auto manufacturers to support it in Europe.

In the USA in 2003, California banned MTBE and replaced it as an octane booster by ethanol. Other states followed over time. At that time German auto manufacturers strongly opposed ethanol fuels.

The S65 engine developed on Preussen strasse Munich by bmw M division is a 2 cylinders knock- off from the 10 cyl s85 engine in the e60 m5 which critical testing was completed around early to mid 2004 and started production in 2005. In 2004 corn fuel was not expected to power mainstream vehicles much less did auto manufacturer expect that it would politically become a fuel requirement. It is safe to say that the s85 M5 engine was tested on ethanol free fuel. The s65 is essentially the same high revving engine except for the fuel pump and the HP vanos. Both run 10W60 oil.

With ethanol entering the consumer market in the USA in 2003 in California the Honda s2000 F20C engines failures due to spun bearing started to increase in 2006 three years after E10 introduction in California and occurrences peaked in 2007-2008. A short RB failure registry was made. i have logs for 14 F20C RB failures. We have to ask ourselves why S2000 engines did not spun bearings before ethanol started to be used.

The story repeats for the E46 M3 S54 engine. bearing failures followed a similar time table.

Why some other NA high revving engine brands are less impacted (Porsche) could be due to a better oil system with faster warmup times and better oil pressures. However they occasionally spin bearings too.




Blackstone oil labs analysis cannot specifically detect ethanol in the oil. Their oil analysis sheet gives fuel but cannot distinguish between ethanol and gasoline and they do not have equipment to do that. I asked them months ago.

Expectedly this steers heavy sentiments. For haters, sorry to ruin your love of E85.

I don't know how you manage to dream up this stuff. I need some of what you're smoking.

If you have any type of fuel in your oil, your primary concern should not bearings.

[m3aviator]

Originally Posted by rcracin

BMW only sells one size rod bearing whereas other manufacturers such as Honda have multiple options. Other companies are offerring one size, just with slightly larger clearances.

If you approached things a little more nicely, maybe you would have spoken to those people who measured many different s65 cranks, detailing what they found. Rods were also measured and detailed.

Even the last guy who had a motor for sale with replaced bearings detailed the clearance on each rod after he installed the new bearings. Proper information is out there for those who seek it without hostility.

That really is funny that you think every crank in every engine has the same journal diameter. I'm not instilling fear, and honesty there is no hostility. If someone wants to slap a set of bearings and hope for the best that's their prerogative. I plan on keeping my m long term and would like to resolve the issue the correct way.

[rcracin]

Originally Posted by m3aviator

That really is funny that you think every crank in every engine has the same journal diameter. I'm not instilling fear, and honesty there is no hostility. If someone wants to slap a set of bearings and hope for the best that's their prerogative. I plan on keeping my m long term and would like to resolve the issue the correct way.

Who said they all have the same diameter? Look for the thread I mentioned and you'll see all the clearances arent the same. What they are is within an acceptable tolerance. You can strive for perfection but that comes at a cost. Even the bmw factory functions within acceptable tolerances. Truly blueprinting a motor is outrageously expensive. We're not racing at a high level squeezing every last ounce of performance from the engine to warrant the cost.

[m3aviator]

Originally Posted by rcracin

Who said they all have the same diameter? Look for the thread I mentioned and you'll see all the clearances arent the same. What they are is within an acceptable tolerance. You can strive for perfection but that comes at a cost. Even the bmw factory functions within acceptable tolerances. Truly blueprinting a motor is outrageously expensive. We're not racing at a high level squeezing every last ounce of performance from the engine to warrant the cost.

My comment is based on the principle that I should buy a set of brand "x" bearings and the problem is fixed. Because it's not.

[jcolley]

Originally Posted by m3aviator

That really is funny that you think every crank in every engine has the same journal diameter. I'm not instilling fear, and honesty there is no hostility. If someone wants to slap a set of bearings and hope for the best that's their prerogative. I plan on keeping my m long term and would like to resolve the issue the correct way.

Funny, the crank repair shop I use just did an S85 Rod journal repair for me. I asked them if they recommended grinding/polishing extra clearance on each rod journal or use higher clearance bearings. They recommended not spending extra money with them and using the higher clearance bearings.

Turns out math=math.

[Rajmun340]

Originally Posted by squartus

You would be right except your not... proof is in the facts, are all these shitty bearings and blown engines photo shopped? Guess I shouldn't trust what iv seen with my own eyes either. Like it or not its a problem and the damages will only go up as more miles are put on the cars. If I would of listned to people like you I would be out 25k for a new engine instead of catching it in time and only spending 1800. Glad I used my common sense

There is no need to get fired up. I did not say a band aid fix like swapping bearings is bad, if we did not have ethanol fuels that would never be needed.

Use OEM bearings if you think you must replace yours, not trusting your engine to random people who are rebranding clevite bearings without understanding the root cause of the problem in the first place and are in it to make money. Better stick with BMW M engineers who actually designed the engine.

[rcracin]

Originally Posted by m3aviator

My comment is based on the principle that I should buy a set of brand "x" bearings and the problem is fixed. Because it's not.

I compared that to how bmw only sells one size of rod bearings. Go to a dealer for rod bearing service. They'll use identical bearings on every journal.

[Sneaky Pete]

Originally Posted by OM VT3

Go on the clevite site and have a read what it says about clearance and what they should be.....but i guess they wouldnt know hey

They ought to know...they were the OEM supplier to BMW for the S85 and S65 for the best part of a decade (IIRC from initial S85 engine design to the change to lead free bearings for the S65).
You think in their long term partnership with BMW they supplied M5/M3 rod bearings to use at a clearance that they now consider to be incorrect?

[m3aviator]

Originally Posted by rcracin

I compared that to how bmw only sells one size of rod bearings. Go to a dealer for rod bearing service. They'll use identical bearings on every journal.

So much talk about brand "x" but wait they're banned. Even if you had the dealer do it were not sure it would fix the problem.

The part i disagree with is that replacement rod bearings fixes the problem. I don't care how much r&d they did or what name you drop.

Wait let's hope and see and drive some more and pull the bearings again and see what they look like.

[rcracin]

Originally Posted by m3aviator

So much talk about brand "x" but wait they're banned. Even if you had the dealer do it were not sure it would fix the problem.

The part i disagree with is that replacement rod bearings fixes the problem. I don't care how much r&d they did or what name you drop.

Wait let's hope and see and drive some more and pull the bearings again and see what they look like.

I'm not even using BE bearings but I am using another set that I will pull off in 20-30k miles. I'll do so because I am worried about how bitchy this motor seems to be. I'll be pulling it to inspect main and rod bearings as well as the rods.

I think VAC did pull aftermarket bearings off after 40k miles of testing and it looked perfect compared to oem. The thread is floating around if you search.

[m3aviator]

Originally Posted by rcracin

I'm not even using BE bearings but I am using another set that I will pull off in 20-30k miles. I'll do so because I am worried about how bitchy this motor seems to be. I'll be pulling it to inspect main and rod bearings as well as the rods.

I think VAC did pull aftermarket bearings off after 40k miles of testing and it looked perfect compared to oem. The thread is floating around if you search.

Good luck and report back.