Hi there, look forward to meeting up, please don’t take my observations as a rejection / criticism per se,...just trying to separate fact / fiction...Pyranha wrote: ↑Wed Nov 14, 2018 9:35 pm Rob and Pbondar - I knew this information would be met with scepticism, but I thought it would be useful to share, even if I can not prove it to you.
I had assumed that the engine production line just built identical 2.0ltr engines and shipped them to the various car production sites. The final power output could then be determined at the end of the line when they were programmed depending on model demand. This would be the most efficient production method, so I was surprised to hear they differentiated the pistons and no other parts.
Pbondar - I hope to make it along to a Scottish meet up next year - I will explain what I do for a living, will help to clarify my source.
When I look at the US technical documentation which appears to be relatively transparent / open about the engine / chassis etc there is nothing to suggest such an approach...also as someone who has had to deal with turbo charged engines that were on the limit in another life, the hypothesis suggested seems at odds with the necessity for field support / explanation of these..of course the US market had but one variant of the N20 for the Z4 ie the 28i unit...so they could choose to skip that detail...
It seeems that no one else has stated this in the public domain...save doing a chemical analysis of e such pistons from 3 such engines it’s difficuit to conclusively say one way or another..
All manufacturers have secret safes with some naughty secrets so to say it is impossible would be too assumptive..
However I await more proof...it’s intersting to note that most failures have come from cylinder head failures where piston related issues do not appear to be directly correlated...
Still great theory, pity it was not April 1st?
