Official S65 Rod Bearing Condition Example Thread

bmw_m3_kid wrote

Serviced my 2011 BMW E90 M3 rod bearings today! 120,127 miles. Doesn't look too bad, what are your thoughts?

Looks IMHO great after 120k miles!

Had my 2010 E90 M3 rod bearings serviced by MWorks in Cincinnati. 70k miles. Looks to be about perfect timing.

2008 E92 M3
65k mi

Work done at Bavarian Specialties. Great shop to work with.

Blackstone report was unremarkable, but the top shells were looking rough.

bmw_m3_kid wrote

Serviced my 2011 BMW E90 M3 rod bearings today! 120,127 miles. Doesn't look too bad, what are your thoughts?

Good job and thanks for posting. My thoughts are, if those are original OEM beaeings from the factory, then you’re a lucky man. The German bearing lottery is a game of tolerance stack up and yours just maybe on the looser side of the tolerance stack up window. Hence, the bearings look pretty good for that much mileage in an S65.

crowtrobot wrote

2008 E92 M3
65k mi

Work done at Bavarian Specialties. Great shop to work with.

Blackstone report was unremarkable, but the top shells were looking rough.
.....

Photos are rather dark, are the top shells showing copper?

102000 miles, MY 2008. Need to check on my Blackstone reports; they were all clean, but don't recall if I did them for the past couple oil changes; don't drive it much for the past couple years. Car was lightly tracked in its most recent history. Ran the car with 0W40 for most of the past 40k miles, but upped to OEM weight for the last change, when it was tracked. Always drive it easy until warmed up. Shop says crank looks fine. It is notable that I bought it used, so can't speak for its first ~60k miles.

I am sorry but would like to ask.

Is there any case (here on the forum) when BE Bearings on S65 has been failure?

Thank you!

endur0 wrote

102000 miles, MY 2008. Need to check on my Blackstone reports; they were all clean, but don't recall if I did them for the past couple oil changes; don't drive it much for the past couple years. Car was lightly tracked in its most recent history. Ran the car with 0W40 for most of the past 40k miles, but upped to OEM weight for the last change, when it was tracked. Always drive it easy until warmed up. Shop says crank looks fine. It is notable that I bought it used, so can't speak for its first ~60k miles.

Looks nasty, good to change. Another sign to me that lighter oil isn't the thing for these engines really. They need that thick stuff to provide a healthy film...

MY/2011, 66k miles. The wear shows worse in pictures than in person and my mechanic told me these looked pretty healthy to him.

2013 57k. Looks worn.

2013 e93 with 50k miles. Replaced with BE Bearings Std and Arp bolts. Only thing notable was the "dots" of something embedding in several bearings. No issues as crankshaft was perfect.







Also did engine mounts and slon Vanos covers. Feeling pretty good for 100k before anything else major. Already did breather valve. Tracking ICV and throttle actuators as next possible issues.

Assimilator1 wrote

Photos are rather dark, are the top shells showing copper?

No, none of them were through to the copper.

endur0 wrote

102000 miles, MY 2008. Need to check on my Blackstone reports; they were all clean, but don't recall if I did them for the past couple oil changes; don't drive it much for the past couple years. Car was lightly tracked in its most recent history. Ran the car with 0W40 for most of the past 40k miles, but upped to OEM weight for the last change, when it was tracked. Always drive it easy until warmed up. Shop says crank looks fine. It is notable that I bought it used, so can't speak for its first ~60k miles.

....

Wow! Some of those are rough! The next stage would've been the copper breaking up!

rodeo82 wrote

2013 57k. Looks worn.

Ooo no4 has a nasty score! The crank alright there?

AndyW wrote

2013 e93 with 50k miles. Replaced with BE Bearings Std and Arp bolts. Only thing notable was the "dots" of something embedding in several bearings. No issues as crankshaft was

.......

Also did engine mounts and slon Vanos covers. Feeling pretty good for 100k before anything else major. Already did breather valve. Tracking ICV and throttle actuators as next possible issues.

Yea those black dots are quite common on the tin/alu shells, strangely.

endur0 wrote

102000 miles, MY 2008. Need to check on my Blackstone reports; they were all clean, but don't recall if I did them for the past couple oil changes; don't drive it much for the past couple years. Car was lightly tracked in its most recent history. Ran the car with 0W40 for most of the past 40k miles, but upped to OEM weight for the last change, when it was tracked. Always drive it easy until warmed up. Shop says crank looks fine. It is notable that I bought it used, so can't speak for its first ~60k miles.

You win the prize for the highest number of shells showing copper on this thread IMO. And not just a little - but a lot of copper on many of them. I bet you're glad you got them replaced when you did...

Thanks for posting the photos. I still numerous cars on BAT and elsewhere without the rod bearings having being changed. As my Belgium friend says ///M Power-Belgium "it's a German lottery" but as the miles pile on, it's more of a time bomb IMO. What brand of bearings did you go with for replacements?

RomanK wrote

I am sorry but would like to ask.

Is there any case (here on the forum) when BE Bearings on S65 has been failure?

Thank you!

No, I don't believe there is. Green-Eggs would know for sure.

So does MY08 have comparatively worse stock bearings than later MYs?

2008M36MT wrote

So does MY08 have comparatively worse stock bearings than later MYs?

The switchover was gradual from 2010 through 2011. But yes, recent results suggest earlier = worse. The earlier ones regularly wear to the point of showing copper, whereas I'm pretty sure we still haven't seen a single set of the newer bearings where that has unambiguously happened. They do discolor, but the discoloration is superficial.

DrFerry wrote

You win the prize for the highest number of shells showing copper on this thread IMO. And not just a little - but a lot of copper on many of them. I bet you're glad you got them replaced when you did...

Thanks for posting the photos. I still numerous cars on BAT and elsewhere without the rod bearings having being changed. As my Belgium friend says ///M Power-Belgium "it's a German lottery" but as the miles pile on, it's more of a time bomb IMO. What brand of bearings did you go with for replacements?

Ya saw the pic and was very glad I got them done. Knew I was on borrowed time given the car's mileage, but had no idea I was that close to winning the grand prize... car had no symptoms, but that's how this fail mode works. They wore nice and evenly so I was able to show copper on all tops without grenading the engine LOL. Somehow, no gouges anywhere. Also no flakes in the filter in any of the oil changes. I checked every time.

Did BE Bearings with ARP bolts. Actually bought them a long time ago and they just sat on the office shelf.

IamFODI wrote

The switchover was gradual from 2010 through 2011. But yes, recent results suggest earlier = worse. The earlier ones regularly wear to the point of showing copper, whereas I'm pretty sure we still haven't seen a single set of the newer bearings where that has unambiguously happened. They do discolor, but the discoloration is superficial.

I don't think the newer "tin" type rod bearings contain a copper layer anymore.

DrFerry wrote

I don't think the newer "tin" type rod bearings contain a copper layer anymore.

They do. Deansbimmer and Assimilator1 confirmed this (close-up pics and sanding through the top layer, respectively). Not in the mood to find the links RN but the posts are in this thread. The original source for the “no copper” idea — the bearing Wiki — has been amended accordingly.

IamFODI wrote

They do. Deansbimmer and Assimilator1 confirmed this (close-up pics and sanding through the top layer, respectively). Not in the mood to find the links RN but the posts are in this thread. The original source for the “no copper” idea — the bearing Wiki — has been amended accordingly.

Thanks so much. I sit corrected. Well done. I'll poke around on this thread to learn a little more.

Updated:
Found it. You were right:
.
http://wiki.rcollins.org/core/index.php/Engine_Specs_-_S65_Rod_Bearings#OEM_702.2F703_Bearings
.

This is my post about it, where I rubbed down one of Helmsman's shells.
And here and here are a couple of posts by Deasbimmer on the tin/alu/copper bearings (and the lead/copper type).

IamFODI wrote

The switchover was gradual from 2010 through 2011. But yes, recent results suggest earlier = worse. The earlier ones regularly wear to the point of showing copper, whereas I'm pretty sure we still haven't seen a single set of the newer bearings where that has unambiguously happened. They do discolor, but the discoloration is superficial.

Whilst I do agree that lead/copper bearings typically come out looking worse, and I also believe we haven't seen any tin/alu/copper bearings that have worn down to copper so far, but I wouldn't call the wear to the tin/alu bearings as merely discolouration.
There is physical wear happening to those bearings, not just deposition of (say) carbon on the shells, the shells micro grooves are often seen to have be worn, or even completely smoothed out. As can be seen in the 3rd and 4th photos in Deansbimmer post here and by these excellent quality photos by Ximian (the lower ones).