BMW M3 Forum (E90 E92)

BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Go Back   M3Post - BMW M3 Forum > E90/E92 M3 Technical Topics > Engine, Transmission, Exhaust, Drivetrain, ECU Software Modifications
 
Mporium BMW
Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      03-03-2021, 07:54 PM   #1
GearKid
Private
30
Rep
62
Posts

Drives: S2000, Subaru STI, Tacoma
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: San Francisco Bay Area

iTrader: (0)

Rod bolt won't torque to spec

Has anyone experienced an ARP bolt not able to torque down to specification? The shop was trying to explain this issue during a rod bearing job. Max torque achieved was 20 N-m. I asked if the threads were stripped and they are not. Not sure what the deal is. I'm heading to the shop tomorrow to get some eyes on this. Any recommendations as for how to handle this?
As if this weren't enough, the adjacent rod journal is out of round (min: 50.6mm max:52.0mm).
Motor did not spin any bearings but the two in question were well worn into the copper (2008 model year). What's the max tolerance for out of round journals and how does this happen? I guess there's no visual scratches. Shop thinks I need to pull the motor and find a new one.
Appreciate 0
      03-03-2021, 08:12 PM   #2
Bubbles
Brigadier General
Bubbles's Avatar
Cayman Islands
471
Rep
3,910
Posts

Drives: Green Bastard
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Bishop Bend

iTrader: (3)

Quote:
Originally Posted by GearKid View Post
Has anyone experienced an ARP bolt not able to torque down to specification? The shop was trying to explain this issue during a rod bearing job. Max torque achieved was 20 N-m. I asked if the threads were stripped and they are not. Not sure what the deal is. I'm heading to the shop tomorrow to get some eyes on this. Any recommendations as for how to handle this?
As if this weren't enough, the adjacent rod journal is out of round (min: 50.6mm max:52.0mm).
Motor did not spin any bearings but the two in question were well worn into the copper (2008 model year). What's the max tolerance for out of round journals and how does this happen? I guess there's no visual scratches. Shop thinks I need to pull the motor and find a new one.
Did they break a bolt off? Very odd. Good luck.
__________________
Appreciate 0
      03-03-2021, 08:34 PM   #3
Davisca455
First Lieutenant
Davisca455's Avatar
United_States
684
Rep
333
Posts

Drives: 2008 M3
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Davis, California

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by GearKid View Post
Has anyone experienced an ARP bolt not able to torque down to specification? The shop was trying to explain this issue during a rod bearing job. Max torque achieved was 20 N-m. I asked if the threads were stripped and they are not. Not sure what the deal is. I'm heading to the shop tomorrow to get some eyes on this. Any recommendations as for how to handle this?
As if this weren't enough, the adjacent rod journal is out of round (min: 50.6mm max:52.0mm).
Motor did not spin any bearings but the two in question were well worn into the copper (2008 model year). What's the max tolerance for out of round journals and how does this happen? I guess there's no visual scratches. Shop thinks I need to pull the motor and find a new one.
I have to convert to english units to understand the numbers.
As I understand it, the rod bolts should be torqued to 50ft lbs, but they only achieved 14.75ft lbs (20nm).
That sounds like something yielded, but it's hard to imagine one of those bolts yielding so far below their intended design?
The crank rod journal variance seems WAY too high?
1.4mm (.0551") difference between min and max?
I'm not buying that.
Either the measurements were incorrect or the reporting of the measurements is a mistake.

I would also very carefully inspect the internal threads of the connecting rod and ask them to remeasure the crank journal, so you can see the numbers yourself.
What does their torque wrench look like?

Is the shop supplying the bearings and bolts, and what brand are they?
__________________

Chris,
2008 E92
Appreciate 3
SYT_Shadow7946.00
DrFerry823.00
slcook54165.00

      03-03-2021, 08:53 PM   #4
GearKid
Private
30
Rep
62
Posts

Drives: S2000, Subaru STI, Tacoma
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: San Francisco Bay Area

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Davisca455 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by GearKid View Post
Has anyone experienced an ARP bolt not able to torque down to specification? The shop was trying to explain this issue during a rod bearing job. Max torque achieved was 20 N-m. I asked if the threads were stripped and they are not. Not sure what the deal is. I'm heading to the shop tomorrow to get some eyes on this. Any recommendations as for how to handle this?
As if this weren't enough, the adjacent rod journal is out of round (min: 50.6mm max:52.0mm).
Motor did not spin any bearings but the two in question were well worn into the copper (2008 model year). What's the max tolerance for out of round journals and how does this happen? I guess there's no visual scratches. Shop thinks I need to pull the motor and find a new one.
I have to convert to english units to understand the numbers.
As I understand it, the rod bolts should be torqued to 50ft lbs, but they only achieved 14.75ft lbs (20nm).
That sounds like something yielded, but it's hard to imagine one of those bolts yielding so far below their intended design?
The crank rod journal variance seems WAY too high?
1.4mm (.0551") difference between min and max?
I'm not buying that.
Either the measurements were incorrect or the reporting of the measurements is a mistake.

I would also very carefully inspect the internal threads of the connecting rod and ask them to remeasure the crank journal, so you can see the numbers yourself.
What does their torque wrench look like?

Is the shop supplying the bearings and bolts, and what brand are they?
My sentiments as well. The facts are questionable so I'll need to verify while on site. The new parts are BE bearings with the BE specified ARP bolts.
Appreciate 1
DrFerry823.00

      03-03-2021, 08:58 PM   #5
Davisca455
First Lieutenant
Davisca455's Avatar
United_States
684
Rep
333
Posts

Drives: 2008 M3
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Davis, California

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by GearKid View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Davisca455 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by GearKid View Post
Has anyone experienced an ARP bolt not able to torque down to specification? The shop was trying to explain this issue during a rod bearing job. Max torque achieved was 20 N-m. I asked if the threads were stripped and they are not. Not sure what the deal is. I'm heading to the shop tomorrow to get some eyes on this. Any recommendations as for how to handle this?
As if this weren't enough, the adjacent rod journal is out of round (min: 50.6mm max:52.0mm).
Motor did not spin any bearings but the two in question were well worn into the copper (2008 model year). What's the max tolerance for out of round journals and how does this happen? I guess there's no visual scratches. Shop thinks I need to pull the motor and find a new one.
I have to convert to english units to understand the numbers.
As I understand it, the rod bolts should be torqued to 50ft lbs, but they only achieved 14.75ft lbs (20nm).
That sounds like something yielded, but it's hard to imagine one of those bolts yielding so far below their intended design?
The crank rod journal variance seems WAY too high?
1.4mm (.0551") difference between min and max?
I'm not buying that.
Either the measurements were incorrect or the reporting of the measurements is a mistake.

I would also very carefully inspect the internal threads of the connecting rod and ask them to remeasure the crank journal, so you can see the numbers yourself.
What does their torque wrench look like?

Is the shop supplying the bearings and bolts, and what brand are they?
My sentiments as well. The facts are questionable so I'll need to verify while on site. The new parts are BE bearings with the BE specified ARP bolts.
Hmmm...
Attached Images
 
__________________

Chris,
2008 E92
Appreciate 4
Move Over800.00
SYT_Shadow7946.00
Bartledoo1952.50
TX226.00

      03-03-2021, 09:21 PM   #6
Move Over
Colonel
Move Over's Avatar
800
Rep
2,151
Posts

Drives: M3 6MT
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Peninsula

iTrader: (8)

Definitely sounds like something is awry. Maybe their torque wrench is not calibrated properly.
__________________
2010 E92 M3 DCT
IG: alex_miller
Appreciate 0
      03-03-2021, 09:38 PM   #7
tdott
Colonel
1731
Rep
2,869
Posts

Drives: M3
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: South FL / 6ix

iTrader: (3)

What do they mean by can't torque down? Is it spinning or did it snap?
Appreciate 1
Bartledoo1952.50

      03-03-2021, 09:57 PM   #8
Properstyle
Major
479
Rep
1,375
Posts

Drives: 2011 e90 ZCP m3
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Killeen, TX

iTrader: (0)

It's stripped. Answer new rod is needed. Sucks to say.
__________________
2011 E90m3 ESS G2, active auto x pipe, RK FULL E85, DD
2015 X5M Bootmod3, Downpipes, Mineral white-The wifes DD
1994 300zx 2jz Swapped slicktop- The toy/track car
Appreciate 0
      03-03-2021, 09:57 PM   #9
GearKid
Private
30
Rep
62
Posts

Drives: S2000, Subaru STI, Tacoma
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: San Francisco Bay Area

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by tdott View Post
What do they mean by can't torque down? Is it spinning or did it snap?
After asking for clarification a few different ways I realized I need to have the conversation with a trained technician. The bolt didn't snap and it didn't strip, so I'm at a loss. If it stripped then what are the odds of that? Also trying to imagine a rod having this issue as a preexisting condition before it was disassembled.
If the rod is truly stripped, then this is a new one for me. Go figure...I save the motor from rod bearing failure but it still needs to be replaced for a stripped rod and out of round crank...
Appreciate 0
      03-03-2021, 10:01 PM   #10
GearKid
Private
30
Rep
62
Posts

Drives: S2000, Subaru STI, Tacoma
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: San Francisco Bay Area

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Move Over View Post
Definitely sounds like something is awry. Maybe their torque wrench is not calibrated properly.
Reasonable thought. I'm hoping to have more than one tech verify these claims with different tools if necessary.
Appreciate 0
      03-03-2021, 10:47 PM   #11
Scharbag
Lieutenant Colonel
Scharbag's Avatar
Canada
1798
Rep
1,746
Posts

Drives: 2011 E92 M3
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Victoria

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2011 BMW E92 M3  [0.00]
How are they able to measure the big end bore for roundness without a full tear down? Or are they measuring the crank? Regardless, there is no way in hell that a rod or crank is that out of round without puking parts all over the ground.

And as for not tightening... if they managed to strip the rod, that would be a surprise. They are made of very stout stuff. As are the bolts.

This smells fishy.

Keep us posted.
__________________

2011 E92 M3 - 6MT, ZCP, ZF LSD, Some other goodies...
Appreciate 2
      03-03-2021, 11:24 PM   #12
GearKid
Private
30
Rep
62
Posts

Drives: S2000, Subaru STI, Tacoma
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: San Francisco Bay Area

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scharbag View Post
How are they able to measure the big end bore for roundness without a full tear down? Or are they measuring the crank? Regardless, there is no way in hell that a rod or crank is that out of round without puking parts all over the ground.

And as for not tightening... if they managed to strip the rod, that would be a surprise. They are made of very stout stuff. As are the bolts.

This smells fishy.

Keep us posted.
Thanks! My latest theory...
The old OEM bolts were used to measure clearances, and I'm wondering if they could be over tightened. Could the "torque+130 degrees" procedure for new OEM bolts yield an over tightened bolt if it was already stretched?
Appreciate 0
      03-03-2021, 11:27 PM   #13
Davisca455
First Lieutenant
Davisca455's Avatar
United_States
684
Rep
333
Posts

Drives: 2008 M3
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Davis, California

iTrader: (0)

When problem solving it's really difficult to force yourself to stay out of the "solution" space while you are trying to determine "What is" and "What is not". Try to understand the actual facts first.

Some of what I can think of to look for and ask about:
Is your oil pan covered and safe from debris?

Was this the first cylinder they attempted?
Or the 3rd, or 8th, or...?

I would inspect the internal threads of the connecting rod.
Is there residual anti-seize on the threads?
Are the threads pulled out or torn?
Will the rod easily accept, by hand, an undamaged bolt (even an original bolt)?
If the untorqueable rod and cap are still assembled, look to see if you can see the parting line between the rod and cap and if the numbers are lined up and the same, it should be nearly impossible to see the parting line.

Once it's apart, do the mating faces of the rod and its own rod cap have any smearing?
(If the cap was put on backwards, or a cap from another cylinder was used, then the freshly cracked faces will likely show evidence of misalignment and skidding or smearing, shiny spots.)
Does the face of the rod cap, where the bolt head touches, show any uneven scuffing, or is it uniform?

See pictures for reference of what the mating faces and parting line should look like.

Inspect the bolt.
Does it have residual anti-seize on it?
Lay the threads on top of the threads of another bolt and see if they mesh correctly.
Does the bolt easily, by hand, thread into a known good rod?

Inspect the rod bearings, especially the set from the untorqueable cylinder.
Do they look any worse than the other rod bearings?

Ask to see the torque wrench.
What is the appearance of the torque wrench?
Does the torque wrench have a calibration sticker on it, if so, is it up to date?

Here's why I suck at problem solving, I can't help jumping into the "solution" space.
If, if, if, the threads in the rod are pulled out, what would explain that?
What are the forces required to pull out connecting rod threads? (Bert at BE can probably answer that?)
Would using the BMW torque to yield procedure on the BE bolt cause threads to rip out? (Bert would probably know?)
Could a faulty torque wrench cause that?

As far as the crank variant of 1.4mm, that needs to be verified (ain't no way).
I could very well be wrong, and have been MANY MANY times, but the idea that ripped threads in the connecting rod and the crank being out of round by that much, being explained as a pre-existing condition...not buying that at all.
Just my opinion.
Attached Images
   
__________________

Chris,
2008 E92

Last edited by Davisca455; 03-03-2021 at 11:39 PM..
Appreciate 9
Scharbag1798.00
akkando4429.50
GearKid30.00
Ajolives288.00
DrFerry823.00
slcook54165.00
ando1064.00

      03-04-2021, 08:58 AM   #14
Davisca455
First Lieutenant
Davisca455's Avatar
United_States
684
Rep
333
Posts

Drives: 2008 M3
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Davis, California

iTrader: (0)

The only reason that I can imagine why the shop believes that the crank rod journal isn't round, is if they didn't actually measure the crank, but instead applied either multiple pieces of plasti-gauge across the bearing, or one long piece lengthwise to the bearing and then made an interpretation of that data?
Bearing shells are not uniform thickness by design, and the plasti-gauge would show approximately a .0005" (.0127mm) variance.
The mechanic would then have had to screw up some decimal points to report the variance that they did though, but at least that would be believable.
Attached Images
  
__________________

Chris,
2008 E92
Appreciate 2
GearKid30.00
DrFerry823.00

      03-04-2021, 09:23 AM   #15
GearKid
Private
30
Rep
62
Posts

Drives: S2000, Subaru STI, Tacoma
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: San Francisco Bay Area

iTrader: (0)

Rod bolt won't torque to spec

Quote:
Originally Posted by Davisca455 View Post
When problem solving it's really difficult to force yourself to stay out of the "solution" space while you are trying to determine "What is" and "What is not". Try to understand the actual facts first.

Some of what I can think of to look for and ask about:
Is your oil pan covered and safe from debris?

Was this the first cylinder they attempted?
Or the 3rd, or 8th, or...?

I would inspect the internal threads of the connecting rod.
Is there residual anti-seize on the threads?
Are the threads pulled out or torn?
Will the rod easily accept, by hand, an undamaged bolt (even an original bolt)?
If the untorqueable rod and cap are still assembled, look to see if you can see the parting line between the rod and cap and if the numbers are lined up and the same, it should be nearly impossible to see the parting line.

Once it's apart, do the mating faces of the rod and its own rod cap have any smearing?
(If the cap was put on backwards, or a cap from another cylinder was used, then the freshly cracked faces will likely show evidence of misalignment and skidding or smearing, shiny spots.)
Does the face of the rod cap, where the bolt head touches, show any uneven scuffing, or is it uniform?

See pictures for reference of what the mating faces and parting line should look like.

Inspect the bolt.
Does it have residual anti-seize on it?
Lay the threads on top of the threads of another bolt and see if they mesh correctly.
Does the bolt easily, by hand, thread into a known good rod?

Inspect the rod bearings, especially the set from the untorqueable cylinder.
Do they look any worse that the other rod bearings?

Ask to see the torque wrench.
What is the appearance of the torque wrench?
Does the torque wrench have a calibration sticker on it, if so, is it up to date?

Here's why I suck at problem solving, I can't help jumping into the "solution" space.
If, if, if, the threads in the rod are pulled out, what would explain that?
What are the forces required to pull out connecting rod threads? (Bert at BE can probably answer that?)
Would using the BMW torque to yield procedure on the BE bolt cause threads to rip out? (Bert would probably know?)
Could a faulty torque wrench cause that?

As far as the crank variant of 1.4mm, that needs to be verified (ain't no way).
I could very well be wrong, and have been MANY MANY times, but the idea that ripped threads in the connecting rod and the crank being out of round by that much, being explained as a pre-existing condition...not buying that at all.
Just my opinion.
Thanks for the detailed thought process. I'll definitely take your advice about obtaining the facts first.
Appreciate 1
DrFerry823.00

      03-04-2021, 09:28 AM   #16
GearKid
Private
30
Rep
62
Posts

Drives: S2000, Subaru STI, Tacoma
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: San Francisco Bay Area

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Davisca455 View Post
The only reason that I can imagine why the shop believes that the crank rod journal isn't round, is if they didn't actually measure the crank, but instead applied either multiple pieces of plasti-gauge across the bearing, or one long piece lengthwise to the bearing and then made an interpretation of that data?
Bearing shells are not uniform thickness by design, and the plasti-gauge would show approximately a .0005" (.0127mm) variance.
The mechanic would then have had to screw up some decimal points to report the variance that they did though, but at least that would be believable.
These guys come highly recommended so I would think measuring clearances would be done with high precision. On that note, how should one measure journal roundness?
Appreciate 0
      03-04-2021, 09:44 AM   #17
DukeofAlexandria
Private First Class
DukeofAlexandria's Avatar
100
Rep
124
Posts

Drives: 2007 E85 Z4 / 2013 E93 M3
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Maryland

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2013 BMW M3 E93  [0.00]
2007 BMW Z4 E85  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by GearKid View Post
These guys come highly recommended so I would think measuring clearances would be done with high precision. On that note, how should one measure journal roundness?
You measure multiple spots over the journal and compare your numbers. Ideally you measure in multiple spots with the main OUT of the car so you can go around the entire thing. You'd need a micrometer and bore gauge. If these guys are even semi-professional, then they should have both of those tools and high quality ones at that.

Sure, you can get away with using plasti-gauge, I've built plenty of american motors with the stuff, but with the tolerances in these bearings/engines, I probably wouldn't go that route. If these guys are using plasti-gauge and going that route, that's a non-starter for me.

-Duke
Appreciate 0
      03-04-2021, 12:52 PM   #18
Davisca455
First Lieutenant
Davisca455's Avatar
United_States
684
Rep
333
Posts

Drives: 2008 M3
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Davis, California

iTrader: (0)

...and my understanding is that BE pre measures all of their shells and builds their kits according to a target clearance that their research has determined.
So, if your crank is within the tolerances of what BE expects it to be, then the bearings should create the intended gap that BE was aiming for.
I don't know if it's a fact, but I've heard that some shops don't measure the crank rod journals, but give the journals a visual inspection and then proceed.
__________________

Chris,
2008 E92
Appreciate 1
DrFerry823.00

      03-04-2021, 01:13 PM   #19
SYT_Shadow
///M Powered for Life
SYT_Shadow's Avatar
United_States
7946
Rep
8,036
Posts

Drives: E90M/E92M/F80CS/X5 35/MiniCS
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Greenwich, CT

iTrader: (1)

this case stinks to high heaven... good luck OP
Appreciate 3
DrFerry823.00
chocstraw256.50

      03-04-2021, 01:31 PM   #20
ha9981
Second Lieutenant
Canada
83
Rep
233
Posts

Drives: 2007 328i e90
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Greater Toronto Area

iTrader: (0)

Contact a lawyer

Plenty bearings come out that look like it would have blown, yet none of these issues arise. This crank is very hard and doesn't scratch easily.

Few people have been lucky to spin bearings and walked off without replacing the crank as journals looked fine. They shut the car off soon as they caught a noise. One fool slapped new bearings on a scoured crank and his engine lives on for longer than we expected.

This shop must have done the damage to the rod during repair.
Appreciate 1
      03-04-2021, 01:47 PM   #21
GearKid
Private
30
Rep
62
Posts

Drives: S2000, Subaru STI, Tacoma
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: San Francisco Bay Area

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ha9981 View Post
Contact a lawyer

Plenty bearings come out that look like it would have blown, yet none of these issues arise. This crank is very hard and doesn't scratch easily.

Few people have been lucky to spin bearings and walked off without replacing the crank as journals looked fine. They shut the car off soon as they caught a noise. One fool slapped new bearings on a scoured crank and his engine lives on for longer than we expected.

This shop must have done the damage to the rod during repair.
So I've been to the shop and have an update. The #8 rod is definitely stripped. The tech confirmed the use of the original OEM bolt was retorqued using the specified 6nm to 20nm and then 130degrees. While all the other bolts went up to final torque apparently this one didn't get past the 20nm point. That's the story.
I'm not giving any credibility to the rod journal measurement since it doesn't seem like there's a reliable way to do this with the crank in the motor.
It seems pretty evident that the engine needs to be pulled. At that point it's either a rebuild or a replacement.
The shop was not about to admit guilt and I respect that. Theories as to the rod threads being buggered as a pre-existing condition were weak at best. The best theory put forth was excessive heat due to oil starvation from lack of regular oil changes. I'm not sure how much heat would be needed to compromise the threads however. The #7 bearing was the most severely worn and that rod was fine. Pics of the original bearings are attached. There's very fine pitting that was hard to notice close up. This was the evidence for the poor maintenance upkeep.
Attached Images
  
Appreciate 0
      03-04-2021, 02:22 PM   #22
Scharbag
Lieutenant Colonel
Scharbag's Avatar
Canada
1798
Rep
1,746
Posts

Drives: 2011 E92 M3
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Victoria

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2011 BMW E92 M3  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by GearKid View Post
So I've been to the shop and have an update. The #8 rod is definitely stripped. The tech confirmed the use of the original OEM bolt was retorqued using the specified 6nm to 20nm and then 130degrees. While all the other bolts went up to final torque apparently this one didn't get past the 20nm point. That's the story.
I'm not giving any credibility to the rod journal measurement since it doesn't seem like there's a reliable way to do this with the crank in the motor.
It seems pretty evident that the engine needs to be pulled. At that point it's either a rebuild or a replacement.
The shop was not about to admit guilt and I respect that. Theories as to the rod threads being buggered as a pre-existing condition were weak at best. The best theory put forth was excessive heat due to oil starvation from lack of regular oil changes. I'm not sure how much heat would be needed to compromise the threads however. The #7 bearing was the most severely worn and that rod was fine. Pics of the original bearings are attached. There's very fine pitting that was hard to notice close up. This was the evidence for the poor maintenance upkeep.
If the rod bearing did not spin, and that seems to not be the case here, then there is no chance of "heat damage" to the rod.

Maintenance and upkeep has very little to do with how your bearings look.

I would get another opinion from a professional before allowing the shop off the hook.

Keep us up to date.

Cheers,
__________________

2011 E92 M3 - 6MT, ZCP, ZF LSD, Some other goodies...
Appreciate 3
DrFerry823.00
ha998183.00

Post Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:30 AM.




m3post
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST