Please have your rod bearings checked...

Sympathies Ga41 :( Feeling for you but I know it will rise like a Phoenix from the fire.

For the S54 engine, isn't it recommended to try and limit revs to 7k? read it somewhere I think.
 
chris6 said:
I wonder how many M's are driven hard before properly warm .Surprised there isn't an oil temperature guage fitted as standard .At least you would then know there would be less chance of harm being caused to a cold motor.

Err... do you mean pressure as the M has an oil temp gauge fitted.
 
srhutch said:
ga41 said:
Well... mine has certainly had plenty of max revs moments... also read this thread by "pal", he may be a member here too, describing his second(!) bearing replacement on his car http://www.zpost.com/forums/showthread.php?t=883939

This guy has done over 80 track days with lots of full throttle under his own admission.

I recall reading somewhere i think it was E36 M3's that if you track them you need to upgrade the conrod bolts because if them stretching and spinning shells. Wonder if this is a similar issue with tracked S54's


So possible oil starvation then causing excessive wear? Yes these are performance cars but they all need some care, even if using high performance oil, warming up and cooling down. By the OP admission he has done a fair few track days and runs fairly sticky tyres - Yoko on his car. Unless you are running a baffled or dry sump car then you stand a chance of oil starvation. This was a fairly common problem on the Toyota lump used in the old Elise/Exige.

Unfortunately it's one of those things that has to be sucked up unless you have a warranty and that's where it's worth it's weight in gold, for that one time BIG bill.
 
greddyl30pjg said:
Without doing any research ive not heard that its an especially common occurance in the S54 so may be a little extreme worrying everyone by advising (as thoughtful as it is to pre warn others) that everyone should do this relatively major & labour intensive, disruptive procedure as a check.

Where have you been!

The S54 engine was dubbed the "Engine of Damocles" because when it was first introduced in the E46 M3, so many of them suffered catastrophic failure due to bearing shell failure. BMW did a recall of 48,000 E46 M3s (see: http://members.roadfly.org/kmurph/BearingsSB.pdf) in an attempt to rectify the problem. However, BMW omitted to recall all the S54 M Coupes and M Roadsters, claiming that bearing shell failure couldn't occur in these variants because the redline was set at 7600rpm. However, I know of at least 9 such instances in UK cars, including my own 2002 S54 M Coupe which suffered catastrophic bearing shell failure in 2009 with 31k miles on the clock.

Obviously, BMW has managed to reduce the incidence of bearing shell failure in later E46 M3s and Z4Ms, but clearly, the S54 engine, like any engine, can never be immune to this problem, and it still seems to be a weakness. It's not something I would worry about, but it would be wise to inspect AND replace the bearing shells and con-rod bolts whenever there's any need to do any major work near the engine as a precautionary/preventive action.

When bearing shell failure strikes there is no prior warning: you just suddenly hear a regular knocking noise which is in phase with engine revs and the best thing to do is switch the engine off and don't restart it until the car has been inspected on a ramp and new bearing shells have been fitted. It sounds nothing like a noisy vanos.
 
damn dude... feel for you!

the worst thing that could have happened to anyone when they own a car....a toasted engine... :cry:
 
Have you considered contacting BMW and seeking repair as a goodwill gesture? You'll need to push hard, but citing the recall of the E46 M3 might sway them. IIRC Exdos had a new engine for his Z3M Coupe without a warranty.
 
srhutch said:
ga41 said:
Well... mine has certainly had plenty of max revs moments... also read this thread by "pal", he may be a member here too, describing his second(!) bearing replacement on his car http://www.zpost.com/forums/showthread.php?t=883939

This guy has done over 80 track days with lots of full throttle under his own admission.

I recall reading somewhere i think it was E36 M3's that if you track them you need to upgrade the conrod bolts because if them stretching and spinning shells. Wonder if this is a similar issue with tracked S54's

I'm in trouble then if the S54 cannot handle track use :o
 
im not worried about this really.... will just add it to my maintenance cycle... bare in mind the TQ of my s/c kit will add addition wear to these shells... currently on 11700 miles, most of the miles on the car have been supercharged and harder, so im really looking forward to pulling mine in the name of research, for those that really need a detailed view on whats happening.... read below ALTHoUGH im not convinced on their "solution". At the end of the day, Many many High hp, low CC, high revving motors have similar issues, is it right were seeing this issue?? of course not, anything to loose sleep over??? imo not in the slightest..... sadly the ///M motors of late are all suffering the shell issue, s65, s85, s54.... BTW my last oil change done 2 weeks ago sent a sample of my oil away, looking forward to seeing if i have the high lead readings which indicate significant bearing wear. GA41 sorry about this buddy, wish you all the best!

take a read guys!

September 10, 2013

When we first began looking at the S54 knowing its history of rod bearing failure we immediately noticed how small the rod bearings were compared to other engines we’d built. To be more specific, the width of them is relatively narrow compared to other engines that are designed to make that much power. When you look at the rest of the engine you see similar ideas in other areas. BMW made every attempt to eliminate friction surfaces in this engine to increase efficiency and power. This is, of course, is every automotive engineer’s goal. The expense of doing this of course can mean that engine reliability can suffer. Every engine will have a weak point at which it will fail first, or at least most commonly. For the S54 this is the rod bearing. For another engine it might be the rod or the cylinder wall, or something else. Whether its a design failure or intentional, the S54 has a very well documented history of consuming rod bearings at a rate faster than desired.

I’ll do my best to illustrate this with words but really the easiest way to explain it is by simply looking at the engine internals on an S54. Here at Lang Racing Development we have engineered racing engines for some time now, not just the S54. That experience gives us a broad perspective when we look at every engine.

To understand why the rod bearing fails on this engine you first have to understand how the bearings on the crankshaft work. The bearing is a wearable surface, i.e. softer than the material of the crankshaft and the rod itself which are both, typically 4340 steel, one of the hardest/strongest steels available. If those two were to contact each other we’d be in a world of hurt as they would wear each other out. The bearings job is to prevent that from happening. The bearing is designed to be a relatively soft metal alloy so that when it does touch the crankshaft journal it wears away, rather than wearing the crankshaft. Now ideally we keep an oil film between the journal of the crankshaft and the bearing. We choose an oil viscosity based on the bearing clearance we decided on when we assemble our engine.

When BMW built this engine they decided some numbers they thought would work really well. We found out though in 2003 that they made a mistake. They made their recall explaining that there was a problem with the rod bearings they manufactured in the early years. The explanation they gave was that the rod bearings were manufactured incorrectly resulting in too tight of a rod bearing clearance when the engines were assembled. This resulted in inadequate oil film between the crank journal and the rod bearing.

My personal suspicion is that this is merely an excuse and that that the recall was actually an update to a bearing with larger clearance. BMW could never admit openly “our original engine design had too small of a rod bearing clearance and made the bearings spin”. At the time of the recall we noticed that the rod bolts/entire rod changed design as well, but of course there wouldn’t be a recall on rods themselves, that would be a full rebuild of an engine. And finally, the most vital component that couldn’t be recalled in a cost effective manner would be the crankshaft. Does the rod bearing recall solve the problem? My answer is no, and I see this time and time again that even engines that have had the rod bearing recall done fairly recently still exhibit a large amount of rod bearing wear.

Let’s get down to what I consider the main problem: when the piston is on its compression stroke and the mixture is ignited a tremendous pressure is imparted on the top of the piston, down the wrist pin, through the rod, and into the rod bearing. Some engines have trouble or weakness upwards of this chain but what the S54 does is squeeze out all the oil causing the bearing to wear on the top side. This is a simple conclusion to reach when you dissect S54′s day in and day out, the bearing wear tells the story. This situation is also what makes me a bit uneasy about the common suggestion that a coated rod bearing is a great solution on the S54. If a coated bearing is adding material to a rod bearing then, obviously, it must also be reducing the bearing clearance on the crankshaft journal. Some rod bearing treatments are designed to allow the bearing to retain oil better, which, if they do actually do that would be helpful. Still, I don’t believe that these bearings adequately address the original engine design flaw.

There are a couple ways to solve this problem, BMW tried the simplest. Increase the oil viscosity and increase the bearing clearance. This provides a higher volume of viscous oil for the combustion pressure to act upon. Does this help the problem? Definitely. Another option would be to increase oil pressure, this is one of the reasons that some people say all S54 race cars should have a dry sump oil system. This helps not so much because it prevents oil starvation but also because you are able to change gear sizes to obtain the oil pressure you desire.

To really get down to properly fixing the engine we have to go back and re-engineer it. The best way would be to make a new billet crankshaft (like we do for our stroker kits). A cheap alternative is to have the stock journal reground to accept a wider bearing. To do this we also have to choose a bearing that has a smaller diameter. Conveniently this also means that we can fix some crankshafts that have already spun bearings. We grind down the journal and widen it to accept the bearing for our new rod. For economics we choose a rod bearing that is common and easily available. This also means we have a wide variety of rods to choose from that are available in different lengths. Once we choose the rod, which can vary depending on customers preferences, we then measure the compression height we desire and order our custom piston from one of the various suppliers we use. Obviously what I’m describing takes quite a bit more thought than simply reassembling a stock engine and as such the labor cost is higher, and that might scare some people away.

I like to let them think about the cost for a new set of OEM rings, or pistons, or rods from BMW and compare those costs to the cost of some aftermarket rods/bearings/rings from aftermarket sources. Often times the quality is better and the cost is significantly less. The end result is an engine that costs very close to what an OEM rebuild would cost and ends up with lighter weight components that are fully balanced and engineered. More over some of the compromises that BMW made on their production engines don’t need to be made when building custom engines for race applications.

Some might say that its best just to replace the S54 rod bearings as part of regular maintenance, perhaps every 50k miles or so. I think this is a good suggestion but it also carries an expense and is a bandaid on a permanent problem. If a person is in the position to do a complete rebuild and intends to drive the car aggressively I think modifying the crankshaft for future reliability is a wise decision to minimize future maintenance and reduce the chances of catastrophic engine failure.

Even more so I think it makes the most sense for those in the position that their engine has already spun a bearing and has damaged a crankshaft. At this point they are left with the decision to either purchase a used crankshaft or try to repair their current one. The cost of modifying the crankshaft journal for this wider bearing is only slightly more than a standard crankshaft repair when a rod bearing has spun.

If a rebuild is in your future on an S54 I encourage you to investigate the costs of a standard rebuild and compare those costs to our rod bearing modification kit.
__________________
 
^^^

That makes a lot of good sense. I have to agree with the writer about the use of coatings on bearings: surely they must reduce clearance? My own feeling on the early failures is that many were due to stretching conrod bolts, and BMW have redesigned the pistons and conrod bolts since then and so the S54 engine in a Z4M is NOT the same as an early E46 M3: it is now a stronger engine.

The fundamental problem though is that the piston speed of the S54 engine is extremely high and with a long stroke and is the 4th fastest of all production cars made, as below:

1. Honda S2000:
Engine Code: F20C1
Bore/Stroke: 3.43" X 3.31"
Redline: 9000rpm
Piston Speed: 4965 Ft/min

2. Lamborghini Gallardo
Engine Code: N/A
Bore/Stroke: 3.25" X 3.65"
Redline: 8000rpm
Piston Speed: 4866.67 Ft/min

3. Acura Integra Type R
Engine Code: B18C5
Bore/Stroke: 3.19" X 3.43"
Redline: 8400rpm
Piston Speed: 4802 Ft/min

4. BMW M3 (Germany)
Engine Code: S54
Bore/Stroke: 3.43" X 3.58"
Redline: 8000rpm
Piston Speed: 4773.33 Ft/min

5. Honda S2000 2004
Engine Code: F22C
Bore/Stroke: 3.43" X 3.57"
Redline: 8000rpm
Piston Speed: 4760 Ft/min

It is an absolute pain if you suffer BS failure, because it's not something that you get any early warning symptoms of, for which you can then take immediate action to prevent. You either have BS failure or you don't. I think that the suggestion given in the above report of grinding the crankshaft and fitting other bearing shells gives another alternative, should you suffer this problem. If you do suffer this problem then make sure that you put your car in the hands of a good engine builder with experience of race engines and you will be OK although your wallet will become considerably lighter, which is the part that hurts the most. It's not something that I will spend any time worrying about, but as with all cars, some cars do prove to be "expensive". Personally, I would never buy a car with very expensive brakes or other components which would be hugely expensive to repair, even though I could afford to buy the car itself, because I don't want the risk of massive additional costs. When I suffered BS failure with my MC, BMW gave me a new short engine FOC as goodwill, so I was lucky that time.
 
Excellent information lads. This is a problem with engines that are hybrid design where max power against normal driving conditions are encountered. In reality this is something you just live with when owning a high performance machine..
 
Sad to hear of your news, I hope it goes well for you. A replacement engine sounds the the easiest option, hopefully you can find a good one.
 
it seems the general consensus by certain professionals and even oil manufacturers is a lower weight oil would help this issue...... how accurate this is and how much it helps is anyones bet.... but... i guess a lower weight oil would help with the tight clearance on the bearing... take a read if you have 30 mins or so.....

http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=887379

overhyped or real talk??
 
Stuart Truman said:
We could do with 2alpsade's input. Oil is his game iirc


definitely... thinking about it logically a lighter weight oil should help lube the tight cleareance BUt i guess would need changing more regularly....
 
As a newbie who has yet to collect his car, this all makes for depressing reading, even comming from a history of old Ferraris and TVR's, those highly reliable cars.

So a sense of perspective here...... Was it quoted as 6 known z4m's out of how many sold in the UK, alongside all the later M3's? I assume as well that sensible measures will help.....follow the warm up rev router and oil temp guage, regular oil servicing and keeping an eye on levels? If on track, an oil service afterwards would be a good idea perhaps?

Te idea of a different oil viscosity, what is the BMW recommendation, has this changed from the original S54 engine advice?
 
I am sure that BMW will remain silent regarding the issue of S54 rod bearings. S54 is an engine of the past, out of production and, even better for BMW, out of warranty. There's no reason for BMW to spend time and money into looking for a solution, unless a wave of consistent failures of S54 engines suddenly pop up all over the world - which is very unlikely. So forget about any help from BMW.

Alternatively, a solution may come from racing teams which use or have been using S54 engines.
However, data coming from race-only S54s may not be that relevant for the normal S54 owner, who usually drives his Z3M / Z4M / M3 E46 in public traffic (either daily or during the weekends only), with or without a few track days per year.
Also, radical approaches, such as sending the crankshafts to have the bearings enlarged and fitting other rods, are too unpractical for the common S54 owner.

The actual issue of S54 rod bearings is that they wear out too fast. About twice as fast compared to other engines. It's more a maintenance nuisance (and cost) than a reliability problem. But just ignore it, and you're in the risk zone of terminal engine damage.
If you search through the messages posted on this subject on various forums for the last 5 years or more, you will find many examples of BMW owners which strayed from S54 maintenance schedule indicated by BMW. Some owners use RedLine or Liqui Moly 10W60 instead of BMW TWS / Castrol Edge 10W60. Most of them change the oil more frequently than required by BMW. A few owners have even tested with lighter weight oils. Others have replaced their OEM rod bearings with coated ones.
Despite all this, the holy grail of S54 rod bearings still squats hidden.

I dare to say that it is very unlikely to reach a definitive answer to S54 rod bearings issue during the next couple of years.
The fix - before it can be called "the fix" - must first be identified, then tested and confirmed by a reasonable number of S54 owners (let's say a minim of 20) for at least 100,000 miles of road drive (or equivalent road + track combined) each. That takes years.

So, my stomach says the following:
(1) Accept that S54 rod bearings are consumables. Plan a preventive replacement every 50,000 road miles / 80,000 road Km (or equiv. road + track) and enjoy your S54 in the meantime. If you cannot cope with such a tight maintenance, better sell your S54 powered vehicle.
(2) Continue to use the oil of your choice, just mind to replace it more often (like every 6,000 miles / 10,000 km - road only). Arguably, the best shot is to stick with BMW TWS / Castrol Edge 10W60. However, unless you're really into racing or have an intensive track sessions schedule, then almost any good quality synthetic oil seems to do no harm, but also also no help.
(3) We are now 12 years away from the moment the first S54 reached its customer. The infancy cancer was cured in 2003, but its sequela lives on to this day.
If a definitive and convenient rod bearings fix hasn't surfaced during the past 12 years, then it may never do. The fact that the number of S54 owners keeps on decreasing every day is not helping.
 
Back
Top Bottom