E92 m3 engine knock, any ideas?

[vmudry]

Does any one know where are the alignment marks for cam, crank, when I take apart the whole engine?

[Killerfish2012]

Originally Posted by swartzentruber

I have to wonder if it's just something as simple as the more time spent at higher RPMs, the more wear and increased possibility of failure. I was thinking about this recently that between time spent warming up, and bad weather where you probably don't want to be driving in the 6 - 8k RPM range, my car sees little high RPM driving time (Chicago area driver). Contrast that to the Southwestern states, where there's little rain, no snow, and fast warmups, and you could spend a lot of time in that RPM band if you so choose.

Some tunes eliminate the warm up sequence entirely, and folks are sitting there redlining cold engines, without any restrictions. I'm guessing that causes just a little bearing wear.

[Killerfish2012]

Originally Posted by Obioban

It doesn't matter what the roads are like-- you're not able to corner hard enough for long enough on a public road to oil starve the engine.

Talking like a member of the novice group on track days

Originally Posted by Obioban

Or on street tires, for that matter. We're not talking about a lincoln town car that isn't designed for hard cornering. I haven't even seen oil pressure issues from people tracking the things, for that matter, though I wouldn't say that's impossible. It's a two pump, 10 quart system on the s65, though-- BMW didn't slack on oiling!

No it's a two pump 8.5Liter system. I know, cuz I've done oil changes and BMW did slack on oiling cuz there's a lack of lubrication issue. Since you defend this point, give us your reasoning on the cause of the lack of lubrication issue.

Originally Posted by Obioban

Do you have a link to it? I haven't seen a dry sump setup for the s65 that preserves ac!

I'll have to look into this.

[Obioban]

Originally Posted by Killerfish2012

Talking like a member of the novice group on track days

Hopefully that's not me. 8000+ track miles on my S54 (with the stock oiling system) and many, many more on my S50B32 (also stock oiling system).

Originally Posted by Killerfish2012

No it's a two pump 8.5Liter system. I know, cuz I've done oil changes and BMW did slack on oiling cuz there's a lack of lubrication issue. Since you defend this point, give us your reasoning on the cause of the lack of lubrication issue.

Oh boy... I'm not sure anyone should be taking oil system advice from you, if you don't realize you're not draining the entire system when you do an oil change

I find the tolerance stack up theory the most compelling explanation of the failures. I have seen zero evidence of oil pressure being an issue, and that would be one of the easiest to prove. Significantly low oil pressure results in a low oil pressure light on the dash, which I haven't seen anyone reporting. It would be exceedingly easy for anyone to throw an oil pressure gauge on and watch/log oil pressure. I literally made one for my S50B32 with $40 of pep boys parts. If oil pressure was the issue, the issue would have been long since 100% identified.

Originally Posted by Killerfish2012

I'll have to look into this.

Sounds good, please do. I'm pretty sure lack of an AC compressor would be a deal breaker for 95% of people who are still street driving their cars. Before I owned a race car with cool suit, I ran my AC on track with the windows down

[Obioban]

Originally Posted by modkrazy

So you change your oil every 15K miles.

I am not going to bother addressing the rest of your post asking for big brother surveillance of private property, as you've shown yourself to be a colossal tool. Emphatically so.

lol, that's actually a really good point.

Sunsweet: how often are you changing your oil? Because oil is more acidic when first put in the engine. Changing it more frequently than the BMW recommended 15,500 mile OCI's means you're running more acid in your engine than BMW planned, which can wear internal engine components. Additionally, it's a 60 weight for ~500 miles, so if you're changing the oil more frequently, you're running it more frequently as a 60 weight than BMW intended. In the event of engine failure, BMW probably shouldn't cover it since you weren't following their service recommendation

[Killerfish2012]

Originally Posted by Obioban

I find the tolerance stack up theory the most compelling explanation of the failures. I have seen zero evidence of oil pressure being an issue, and that would be one of the easiest to prove. Significantly low oil pressure results in a low oil pressure light on the dash, which I haven't seen anyone reporting. It would be exceedingly easy for anyone to throw an oil pressure gauge on and watch/log oil pressure. I literally made one for my S50B32 with $40 of pep boys parts. If oil pressure was the issue, the issue would have been long since 100% identified.

Lack of lubrication has nothing to do with oil pressure my friend. In this case it is referring to how easily 60 weight oil can move in between tight spaces less than a millimeter. If tolerance is the issue, then we won't be seeing failures after 40K miles, but we do.

[Killerfish2012]

Originally Posted by Obioban

Sunsweet: how often are you changing your oil? Because oil is more acidic when first put in the engine. Changing it more frequently than the BMW recommended 15,500 mile OCI's means you're running more acid in your engine than BMW planned, which can wear internal engine components. Additionally, it's a 60 weight for ~500 miles, so if you're changing the oil more frequently, you're running it more frequently as a 60 weight than BMW intended. In the event of engine failure, BMW probably shouldn't cover it since you weren't following their service recommendation

Castrol 10W60 is not BMW LL01 approved. It's not even LL98 approved. LL01 approval would mean that an oil meants BMW's minimum requirement for detergency, and corrosion resistance over a long drain interval.

[Obioban]

Originally Posted by Killerfish2012

Lack of lubrication has nothing to do with oil pressure my friend. In this case it is referring to how easily 60 weight oil can move in between tight spaces less than a millimeter. If tolerance is the issue, then we won't be seeing failures after 40K miles, but we do.

The benefit of a (retrofitted) dry sump is still being able to gather oil under high g load, on cars that have issue with that. If it the stock system is starved for oil under g loading, it will suck air, and oil pressure will go down. This has not been an issue for the S65/e9x.

What, exactly, are you hoping converting to dry sump will accomplish? As in, what shortcoming in the S65/S65 oiling system do you see a dry sump conversion making up for?

Originally Posted by Killerfish2012

Some tunes eliminate the warm up sequence entirely, and folks are sitting there redlining cold engines, without any restrictions. I'm guessing that causes just a little bearing wear.

The warm up sequence warms up the catalytic converters, not the engine itself. It's function is to reduce cold start emissions, not heat the oil.

Originally Posted by sunsweet

While bmw might not say so officially, they can and do take records of your car ECU wirelessly year after year without your car having to be at the dealer.

Hello conspiracy theory. Link with any mention of this "feature"?

[Cassius]

Originally Posted by modkrazy

I am not going to bother addressing the rest of your post asking for big brother surveillance of private property, as you've shown yourself to be a colossal tool. Emphatically so.

[Killerfish2012]

Originally Posted by Obioban

The benefit of a (retrofitted) dry sump is still being able to gather oil under high g load, on cars that have issue with that. If it the stock system is starved for oil under g loading, it will suck air, and oil pressure will go down. This has not been an issue for the S65/e9x.

You spin stuff worse than Fox news. Re-read my post, and quit dodging.

Originally Posted by Obioban

What, exactly, are you hoping converting to dry sump will accomplish? As in, what shortcoming in the S65/S65 oiling system do you see a dry sump conversion making up for?

Dude, no one builds a wet sump oil system track car. nuff said. But this is still dodging. I'm talking about a lack of lubrication, and I guess your solution to that is somehow adjusting tolerances, which absolutely no one has shown can work.

Originally Posted by Obioban

The warm up sequence warms up the catalytic converters, not the engine itself. It's function is to reduce cold start emissions, not heat the oil.

No guy, you're warming up 60 weight oil. If the engine is cold, how do you expect molasses to flow into those tight tolerances, you've sited?

[Killerfish2012]

Originally Posted by sunsweet

You are an arrogant fool putting words in other people's mouth then wondering why they shove your dirt back into your mouth where it belongs. I suspect you're some college boy driving a used beaten m3 based on your immature posts.

Around here, this will get you banned! If you choose to engage the trolls, do so with dignity. Remember, a troll is a sexually frustrated male age 16-35, who intercepts an on going online discussion, and then turns all the attention away from the topic, and unto himself. Remember what's causing the behavior in the first place.

[Obioban]

Originally Posted by Killerfish2012

You spin stuff worse than Fox news. Re-read my post, and quit dodging.



Dude, no one builds a wet sump oil system track car. nuff said. But this is still dodging. I'm talking about a lack of lubrication, and I guess your solution to that is somehow adjusting tolerances, which absolutely no one has shown can work.

I've read your posts repeatedly, and can't find a single mention of how you think a dry sump system if going to address the problem. You just keep stating "it's a lubrication issue, therefore, dry sump".

I'm not dodging. I'm trying as hard as I can to find any point in what you're saying.

Dry sump systems have 4 benefits:
1) you can mount the engine lower in the car for lower COG. Don't think that's what you're going for here
2) You can mount the oil tank inboard, improving center of mass. Don't think this is what you're talking about, either
3) you can run a higher quantity of oil. Could be related, but I suspect it's not what you're going for either. 10 quarts is already a pretty large amount, even though you're under the impression it's 8.5
4) Not being oil starved under high g load

The only one of those than could be related to the topic at hand is (4). For (4) to be relevant and useful, the car has to be experiencing oil starvation with the current setup. Can you should any (shred) of evidence that this is the case? It's not at all a hard thing to document-- oil pressure gauges are cheap and easy (as I pointed out earlier). Logging oil pressures is easy as well. Oil starvation will result in loss of oil pressure. If it happens for a significant period, the car will throw a light (I used to trigger said light in my wife's R56 mini on hard cornering, in fact, which has the exact same display screen as the e9X cluster).

I have seen nothing that points towards the S65 having issues with oil starvation on the track, much less the street, so I find it extremely unlikely that that is the cause of bearing failure on purely street driven cars.

I am, however, open to ALL EVIDENCE to the contrary. I assure you, I am not spinning or dodging-- purely looking for any piece of information that backs up what you're saying. Or, if I'm misunderstanding what you're saying (since you seem to think I'm dodging), please clarify what benefit you see from a dry sump oiling system that I have not listed.

My goal is to get a fix for this issue, not to justify a specific fix. I have no horse in this race-- I'm not going to even buy an S65 powered car until (if) there is a fix for this issue.
(that said, if dry sump did end up being the fix, I would need a solution that preserved AC, as I'll be using the e90 as the DD/beater... where AC is a requirement. I don't believe such a system yet exists on the market for the s65)

Originally Posted by Killerfish2012

No guy, you're warming up 60 weight oil. If the engine is cold, how do you expect molasses to flow into those tight tolerances, you've sited?

Yes, oil needs to be warmed up to flow properly, and is thicker on cold start. Absolutely, 100% true.

but

The purpose of the "warm up" portion of the ecu's startup sequence that people disable is not to warm up the engine. It's to get the catalytic converters up to temp within 2 minutes to make the car legally emissions compliant. If you don't live in a sniffer state, disabling that allows the engine to run optimally (for the situation/temp) immediately instead of compromising to heat the cats.

Warmer sooner is certainly beneficial. It's just unrelated to the startup sequence that tuners disable upon request.

[Killerfish2012]

Originally Posted by Obioban

I've read your posts repeatedly, and can't find a single mention of how you think a dry sump system if going to address the problem. You just keep stating "it's a lubrication issue, therefore, dry sump".

I'm not dodging. I'm trying as hard as I can to find any point in what you're saying.

Again, lets try this again. Until we get past this, I'm not debating anymore of your points. The following is an example of spin- being asked a direct question, then spinning the debate around on it's head, by deflecting into another point entirely:


Quote:
Originally Posted by Killerfish2012
Lack of lubrication has nothing to do with oil pressure my friend. In this case it is referring to how easily 60 weight oil can move in between tight spaces less than a millimeter. If tolerance is the issue, then we won't be seeing failures after 40K miles, but we do.

Your response:

The benefit of a (retrofitted) dry sump is still being able to gather oil under high g load, on cars that have issue with that. If it the stock system is starved for oil under g loading, it will suck air, and oil pressure will go down. This has not been an issue for the S65/e9x.

What, exactly, are you hoping converting to dry sump will accomplish? As in, what shortcoming in the S65/S65 oiling system do you see a dry sump conversion making up for?

[Obioban]

Originally Posted by Killerfish2012

Again, lets try this again. Until we get past this, I'm not debating anymore of your points. The following is an example of spin- being asked a direct question, then spinning the debate around on it's head, by deflecting into another point entirely:


Quote:
Originally Posted by Killerfish2012
Lack of lubrication has nothing to do with oil pressure my friend. In this case it is referring to how easily 60 weight oil can move in between tight spaces less than a millimeter. If tolerance is the issue, then we won't be seeing failures after 40K miles, but we do.

Your response:

The benefit of a (retrofitted) dry sump is still being able to gather oil under high g load, on cars that have issue with that. If it the stock system is starved for oil under g loading, it will suck air, and oil pressure will go down. This has not been an issue for the S65/e9x.

What, exactly, are you hoping converting to dry sump will accomplish? As in, what shortcoming in the S65/S65 oiling system do you see a dry sump conversion making up for?

I honestly don't even know what you're trying to say. Are you not suggesting dry sump is a solution? Did I confuse you with someone else?

This post makes me think you're arguing for thinner oil-- is that the case, and you weren't suggesting dry sump as a solution?

If you read what you posted, you'll see you posed no question to me. Note the lack of question mark. I'm not intentionally dodging anything-- pose a question and I'll happily answer it!

Perhaps I got you mixed up with someone else. I thought you were the member suggesting dry sump as a solution. If you weren't, I appologize. Will reread tomorrow on a computer and see who I meant to reply to.

[Obioban]

Originally Posted by Killerfish2012

Again, lets try this again. Until we get past this, I'm not debating anymore of your points. The following is an example of spin- being asked a direct question, then spinning the debate around on it's head, by deflecting into another point entirely:


Quote:
Originally Posted by Killerfish2012
Lack of lubrication has nothing to do with oil pressure my friend. In this case it is referring to how easily 60 weight oil can move in between tight spaces less than a millimeter. If tolerance is the issue, then we won't be seeing failures after 40K miles, but we do.

Your response:

The benefit of a (retrofitted) dry sump is still being able to gather oil under high g load, on cars that have issue with that. If it the stock system is starved for oil under g loading, it will suck air, and oil pressure will go down. This has not been an issue for the S65/e9x.

What, exactly, are you hoping converting to dry sump will accomplish? As in, what shortcoming in the S65/S65 oiling system do you see a dry sump conversion making up for?

I just reread the thread, I don't think I was confused-- looks like it was you supporting dry sump as a solution.

My goal is not to dodge-- it's to figure out what benefit you think dry sump brings to this situation.

Question, as I feel like maybe this is the point of confusion: are you under the impression that a dry sump based system inherently flows more oil than a wet sump system, outside of an oil starvation situation (higher cornering g load that moves the oil away from the wet sump pickup)?

I'm trying to have an actual conversation here-- not looking to prove or justify anything. If you have a question, please ask it. I don't see anything in you're above "question" to answer. Seems like a series of statements.

[modkrazy]

I'm enjoying quite a bit watching Killerfish try to dig himself out of the hole and instead burying himself ever deeper. Ah yes, I forgot that "master mechanics" and "genius engineers" are so plentiful around this forum. And it seems some posts got deleted and I didn't get to respond to sunsweet's pompous and meaningless blather. Damn, oh well, I'm sure he'll afford me the opportunity with the very next thing he posts.

[///M Power-Belgium]

Still nerves my friend ?