Running In Service

[Fishy Dave]

It's been cropping up from time to time in the 'M market watch' thread, but does anyone know the facts about the running in service?

Presumably these are factory filled oils that aid the bedding in process, be that gears/cogs/bearing/rings.

BMW will know that owners will be bringing their cars in for this first service sometime around 1200 miles but are likely to be a little early or late so is their a written amount of tolerance? Is this partly a money making exercise for BMW or a means to check that the car is sound before people start thrashing them (avoiding negative publicity)? If not then what (if any) damage is actually caused by leaving the fluids in too long? Now the cars are ten years and tens of thousands of miles older are we actually seeing any problems from cars with running in service abnormalities? Presumably the fluids used are lubricants after all (not sand!)? Should this be a genuine concern for buyers of an M in otherwise good condition except for a late/early running in service or would you not worry?

:?

The definitive answer appeared on about page 4 or 5 and is repeated here for ease of searching:

I've had a definitive answer back from BMW and they have given me permission to quote this publicly. It confirms what Babw said and hopefully clears this up for ever more....

Dear Mr Smitheram

Thank you for your patience whilst we have been waiting to hear back from our contacts at the factory. We are pleased to confirm that the oil for rear axle differential, gearbox and engine are all the same as the oils used for replacement servicing.

LD39658 E85 M Roadster
Production date: 24-Aug-2006

Engine - S54
- SAE 10W-60

Gearbox - GS6-37BZ
- MTF-LT-2

Rear axle
BMW MSP/A Synthetic

No running-in lubricants are used in these components between build and 1,200 miles service.

Building upon this information, we are mindful that your initial concern was regarding the long-term impact of cars missing or having late 1,200 mile services. Our ‘best-practice’ recommendation would always be for prospective owners to look for vehicles with a service history that rigorously applies to the recommended schedules.

The 1,200 mile service for M-Product is designed in order to remove any deposits within engine / gearbox / differential that occur naturally with the bedding in of new components. Given M vehicles can and do operate at higher loads, temperatures and speeds compared to ‘normal’ Series BMW’s, effects of missing the 1200 mile service could have a detrimental effect on component longevity. It is perhaps worth highlighting that although BMW recommends service completion at 1,200 miles, a grace period for warranty purposes can be applied mindful of the fact that customers may wish to complete running-in during a vacation or similar. That grace period is +500 miles (1,700 for a maximum permissible). No grace for warranty is provided beyond that mileage.

Kind regards,

(Name Supplied)

BMW
United Kingdom
BMW Genius


My thoughts, for what they are worth:
An early or late running in service could indicate an uncaring first owner, but at least we have reassurance from BMW that their are no specific bedding in oils in our/my S54 (as confirmed by Babw and suspected by myself and many others). There could be metallic particles in the oils during the first 1200 miles, but I would have thought an oil filter would catch these from the engine oil, leaving just the gearbox and diff with bits potentially floating about. Most cars now are probably not warrantied by BMW anymore, so unless you were thinking of having a BMW warranty or p/x with a main dealer I don't think the grace period will be an issue for many.
Only the first owner will know how they drove the car in that first 1200 miles, they may have been too gentle, too harsh, thrashed from cold, who knows?
An early or late running in service wouldn't put me buying off a car providing other factors such as servicing and wear were as expected, 5+ owners and 10 years later a late first service is probably of minor consequence now.

Cheers, Dave

 

[Smartbear]

Not sure how relevant this is, but with motorbikes the engine oil from the factory is often a mineral oil which allows the metal surfaces to bed into each other to aid the running in process.
The initial service changed this oil to a low friction synthetic oil to slow down subsequent engine wear
Rob

 

[Darren Slone]

I'm under the impression that the running in oils are coarser for the bedding in process, the recommendation from BMW is 1200 miles +/- 600, my car was a dealer car first off and RIS was done at 1805, I went to the supplying dealer a few years ago, Mill in Sunderland iirc, just to get clarification and they told me that upto 2400 miles before changing the running in oils wouldn't cause any issues, I think that it's less relevant now the cars are getting higher mileages and will have had their inspection services, mines on 44K and ins2 is due in 4K mikes which will be next year now for me,

 

[srhutch]

That service also used to be free, so nothing in it for the dealers.

I believe they now charge on ///M cars though for the running in service.

 

[mr wilks]

I'm under the impression that the running in oils are coarser for the bedding in process, the recommendation from BMW is 1200 miles +/- 600, my car was a dealer car first off and RIS was done at 1805, I went to the supplying dealer a few years ago, Mill in Sunderland iirc, just to get clarification and they told me that upto 2400 miles before changing the running in oils wouldn't cause any issues, I think that it's less relevant now the cars are getting higher mileages and will have had their inspection services, mines on 44K and ins2 is due in 4K mikes which will be next year now for me,

That's the first time ive seen that info come up D & hopefully clarifies a cloudy issue as some owners believe that if the running in service is after 1200 miles then that's a black mark against the history
I know my previous M roady was around 1500 which some potential owners could have deemed late , i simply bought the car at 78k on its current condition + price , , i wouldn't have dismissed a car due to this but i think some people looking for their first S54 possibly do :?

 

[tomscott]

The running in oil is deliberately used to allow parts to "Bed-In" and allows the frictional moving parts to Bed-In (Wear) faster than normal. This allows piston to bore wall clearence to establish it's self correctly ensuring a perfect seal without allowing the bores to "Glaze Up" before the running in period is complete. Also this allows the bearing coatings to bed in correctly on the crankshaft journals and the same proceedure for all frictional parts.

So basically, the engine components wear (Bed In) faster than if the correct running oil had been used from the start.

Any engine that had the "Running In Oil" left in the engine for an excessive period, would have worn its frictional surfaces more than normal.

Which is also why they say not to take the engine over 3000rpm in this period. When the oil is removed it also takes the tiny shardes of metal which cause borescoring or more commonly faster wear of the half shell bearings which is probably why people are shocked at some of the more warn examples.

So basically if you run the car for longer than 1200 miles, you WEAR THE ENGINE EXCELSSIVELY and the engine "ages" prematurely.

The engine is most vulnerable when new and "as they get higher milage" is all well and good but once they get to 60-70k you may find the engine may be worse with bore scoring etc and essentially the likelihood of a failure is higher. 12k+ for a new engine and labour... just saying

I wouldn't touch one with a bargepole.

 

[pvr]

Yes, it was free for the client - but I assume that the dealer would charge BMW direct for it so would make out of it anyway.

The guideline I was given was 1200 +/- 10%. I had a heck of a job getting the mileage up as I needed to do it in 3 days before the Z Scotland trip.

It is more another indicator on how the owner treats the car than actual damage to the car. I did not notice any difference in temperature before or after the running in service though.

 

[Darren Slone]

So basically if you run the car for longer than 1200 miles, you WEAR THE ENGINE EXCELSSIVELY and the engine "ages" prematurely .

I can only go on what I was told by Mills Tom, they would be happy with a car that was upto 2400 miles, I'm frantically looking through my ///M stuff for the +/- 600 miles info as I've not made it up

 

[Smartbear]

The running in oil is deliberately used to allow parts to "Bed-In" and allows the frictional moving parts to Bed-In (Wear) faster than normal. This allows piston to bore wall clearence to establish it's self correctly ensuring a perfect seal without allowing the bores to "Glaze Up" before the running in period is complete. Also this allows the bearing coatings to bed in correctly on the crankshaft journals and the same proceedure for all frictional parts.

So basically, the engine components wear (Bed In) faster than if the correct running oil had been used from the start.

Any engine that had the "Running In Oil" left in the engine for an excessive period, would have worn its frictional surfaces more than normal.

Which is also why they say not to take the engine over 3000rpm in this period. When the oil is removed it also takes the tiny shardes of metal which cause borescoring or more commonly faster wear of the half shell bearings which is probably why people are shocked at some of the more warn examples.

So basically if you run the car for longer than 1200 miles, you WEAR THE ENGINE EXCELSSIVELY and the engine "ages" prematurely.

The engine is most vulnerable when new and "as they get higher milage" is all well and good but once they get to 60-70k you may find the engine may be worse with bore scoring etc and essentially the likelihood of a failure is higher. 12k+ for a new engine and labour... just saying

I wouldn't touch one with a bargepole.

That's pretty much what I said but you've used 10x as many words
Rob

 

[Pastry]

That's pretty much what I said but you've used 10x as many words
Rob

Don't forget the capitals Rob

 

[Smartbear]

That's pretty much what I said but you've used 10x as many words
Rob

Don't forget the capitals Rob

As if I would do that Mr Pastry :wink:
Rob

 

[Yorkie Z]

The running in oil is deliberately used to allow parts to "Bed-In" and allows the frictional moving parts to Bed-In (Wear) faster than normal. This allows piston to bore wall clearence to establish it's self correctly ensuring a perfect seal without allowing the bores to "Glaze Up" before the running in period is complete. Also this allows the bearing coatings to bed in correctly on the crankshaft journals and the same proceedure for all frictional parts.

So basically, the engine components wear (Bed In) faster than if the correct running oil had been used from the start.

Any engine that had the "Running In Oil" left in the engine for an excessive period, would have worn its frictional surfaces more than normal.

Which is also why they say not to take the engine over 3000rpm in this period. When the oil is removed it also takes the tiny shardes of metal which cause borescoring or more commonly faster wear of the half shell bearings which is probably why people are shocked at some of the more warn examples.

So basically if you run the car for longer than 1200 miles, you WEAR THE ENGINE EXCELSSIVELY and the engine "ages" prematurely.

The engine is most vulnerable when new and "as they get higher milage" is all well and good but once they get to 60-70k you may find the engine may be worse with bore scoring etc and essentially the likelihood of a failure is higher. 12k+ for a new engine and labour... just saying

I wouldn't touch one with a bargepole.

So if it had the service at 1199 then that's brilliant. If it was serviced at 1201 you wouldn't touch it with a barge pole!!!

What if the car was serviced at 1150 miles but it was driven by some spoilt rich kid who couldn't give a flying f**k about the 3000rpm limit? I totally agree that correct servicing is important, but it all has +/-tolerance. Perfect history does not make a prefect car.

 

[Fishy Dave]

Thanks all for the info so far, I'm trying to establish the facts.

Good to know that at that time this service was not charged for, also that there was possibly a permitted tolerance from BMW regarding warranty claims.
I can't find any specs for the fluids used in the initial fill, for example whether they are a mineral, semi synth, what weight and if they have any additives?
I understand the theory about what the running in process was designed to do and it is often repeated on forums, BUT for those cars that had their service early or late has their been any actual evidence that this has caused issues later down the line? Gearbox, diff and piston ring wear/failure seem rare in our cars, with only occasional bearing shell and follower/cam wear, any correlation in those cases to bedding in service?
No axe to grind here, but genuine interest and to see IF there is evidence of issues caused by this service rather than forum paranoia.

 

[PerryGunn]

So if it had the service at 1199 then that's brilliant. If it was serviced at 1201 you wouldn't touch it with a barge pole!!!

What if the car was serviced at 1150 miles but it was driven by some spoilt rich kid who couldn't give a flying f**k about the 3000rpm limit? I totally agree that correct servicing is important, but it all has +/-tolerance. Perfect history does not make a prefect car.

Precisely, and suppose someone had their running-in service done at 250 miles or 300 miles because they were going on a long trip.... is that worse than having it done at 1500 miles or 1800 miles?

If manufacturers quote 1200 miles, you can be sure that they've allowed a very wide margin for error and someone who's done, say, 2,000 miles before the running-in service will not have done irreparable harm to their engine...

 

[buzyg]

The running in oil is deliberately used to allow parts to "Bed-In" and allows the frictional moving parts to Bed-In (Wear) faster than normal. This allows piston to bore wall clearence to establish it's self correctly ensuring a perfect seal without allowing the bores to "Glaze Up" before the running in period is complete. Also this allows the bearing coatings to bed in correctly on the crankshaft journals and the same proceedure for all frictional parts.

So basically, the engine components wear (Bed In) faster than if the correct running oil had been used from the start.

Any engine that had the "Running In Oil" left in the engine for an excessive period, would have worn its frictional surfaces more than normal.

Which is also why they say not to take the engine over 3000rpm in this period. When the oil is removed it also takes the tiny shardes of metal which cause borescoring or more commonly faster wear of the half shell bearings which is probably why people are shocked at some of the more warn examples.

So basically if you run the car for longer than 1200 miles, you WEAR THE ENGINE EXCELSSIVELY and the engine "ages" prematurely.

The engine is most vulnerable when new and "as they get higher milage" is all well and good but once they get to 60-70k you may find the engine may be worse with bore scoring etc and essentially the likelihood of a failure is higher. 12k+ for a new engine and labour... just saying

I wouldn't touch one with a bargepole.

That's pretty much what I said but you've used 10x as many words
Rob

Well as I was going to agree with your first post Mr Bear, I'll agree with Tom's.

That initial high wear is never going away. All other things being equal the engine is going to die younger.

All other things are seldom equal though. So as always buy on condition. But do take note of that initial service mileage.

 

[VRSteve]

So basically if you run the car for longer than 1200 miles, you WEAR THE ENGINE EXCELSSIVELY and the engine "ages" prematurely.

The engine is most vulnerable when new and "as they get higher milage" is all well and good but once they get to 60-70k you may find the engine may be worse with bore scoring etc and essentially the likelihood of a failure is higher. 12k+ for a new engine and labour... just saying

I wouldn't touch one with a bargepole.

"EXCELSSIVELY".....wtf does that mean.

I think it was you who decided a car that had the running in service at 1400 miles wasn't worth buying.
What evidence do you have for the above statement, or are you just spreading misinformation on the back of your own assumptions??

 

[PerryGunn]

I think it was you who decided a car that had the running in service at 1400 miles wasn't worth buying.
What evidence do you have for the above statement, or are you just spreading misinformation on the back of your own assumptions??

Be fair, Tom's a Porsche fan so he's rightly scared of premature engine failure...

 

[buzyg]

I think it was you who decided a car that had the running in service at 1400 miles wasn't worth buying.
What evidence do you have for the above statement, or are you just spreading misinformation on the back of your own assumptions??

Be fair, Tom's a Porsche fan so he's rightly scared of premature engine failure...

That made me chuckle. :lol:

I'm still with Tom's basic premise. The longer the running in oil has been left in, past the recommended mileage. The shorter the life of the engine there after. But for all I know that could be 1 mile less or 50k miles less. That's the hard part to calculate. :?

 

[john-e89]

So if it had the service at 1199 then that's brilliant. If it was serviced at 1201 you wouldn't touch it with a barge pole!!!

What if the car was serviced at 1150 miles but it was driven by some spoilt rich kid who couldn't give a flying f**k about the 3000rpm limit? I totally agree that correct servicing is important, but it all has +/-tolerance. Perfect history does not make a prefect car.

Precisely, and suppose someone had their running-in service done at 250 miles or 300 miles because they were going on a long trip.... is that worse than having it done at 1500 miles or 1800 miles?

If manufacturers quote 1200 miles, you can be sure that they've allowed a very wide margin for error and someone who's done, say, 2,000 miles before the running-in service will not have done irreparable harm to their engine...

Have to agree with this. What's your acceptance mileage of failure anyway? Is it ok it pops at 80k, 120k 150k? Are all the engines built to exactly the same tolerances no matter how tiny? I would think a slight difference on build would make more difference than another 1k on a running in service.

Bottom line is if it sounds ok, isn't blowing smoke and has a good service record even with the odd discrepancy then that is all you can hope for. As said there's no way of knowing how the cars been treated from new.

Just imo.

 

[paulgs1000]

Interesting - makes sense to me that there is a tolerance in the bedding in oil being changed. I'm from a generation when most vehicle engines were expected to be run in on the road and one of the most important aspects was not just the mileage that was covered as part of the running in process but also the WAY in which it was done. Simply running an engine at constant revs was said NOT to be the way to run an engine when bedding it in - it was expected that the owner would run at varying revs and loads and that these would be increased over a period of time/miles. I get the logic but think that there are so many variables in this process (short journeys where engine temperature would be lower than longer journeys for example) that a mileage tolerance +/- makes sense.
I've a vested interest in this as I was surprised to see that the initial oil service on my M was late (but well within the +/- mentioned above). I was less concerned when I was told that the M's initial owner was BMW . . . . I'm assuming they would have changed it within spec and tolerance.