BMW turbo replacement

[Lolvoguy]

Came across this interesting video on YouTube of a fellow replacing a set of turbos on a late 00's BMW.
After being on other BMW forums, seems like this is a common issue.
Given the age of these cars, the cost of having these replaced at a shop is equivalent to the value of the car (which is usually why you see so many for sale at drastically lower prices than an equivalent Lexus etc.)

I was under the impression that turbo technology has advanced leaps and bounds over that of what was offered in the 80's.
What gives?!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jWhgKqlTHGY

 

[billt460]

They may be better constructed, and last longer than they did in the 80's. But as you correctly mentioned, they still cost a fortune to replace. And that scares away a lot of people. Many just don't see an advantage to them, once the magical "cool" terminology of the word "Turbo" wears off. So their expensive reputation continues to precede them.

 

[RooflessVW]

Turbo failures on the N54 are typically the result of running higher than factory boost levels. Once above 12-13 PSI turbine speeds increase drastically, the bearings wear, and the seals start to fail. If you wait too long then boom goes the dynamite.

They did have wastegate issues but most have them have been repaired under the 8/82 extended warranty.

 

[MCompact]

Originally Posted by billt460
They may be better constructed, and last longer than they did in the 80's. But as you correctly mentioned, they still cost a fortune to replace. And that scares away a lot of people. Many just don't see an advantage to them, once the magical "cool" terminology of the word "Turbo" wears off. So their expensive reputation continues to precede them.


Exactly! I see no advantage to owning a car that runs the quarter in the high twelves yet still averages 26 mpg.

 

[billt460]

Originally Posted by Lolvoguy
I was under the impression that turbo technology has advanced leaps and bounds over that of what was offered in the 80's.
What gives?

It's really pretty simple when you lay it all out. There are several big problems turbo's have a very difficult time overcoming. And that is any performance gain worth their added cost and complexity. A very good example of this, is in the comparison of the new 2018 V-6 Toyota Camry vs, the 2018 Honda Accord 2.0, 4-cyl Turbo. Both are very similar vehicles. The Accord is no longer available with the V-6 engine option. It has been replaced with a 2.0L, 4 cylinder turbo. Which supposedly offers the latest and greatest in turbo technology.

Yet when you compare them up and down the line, the turbo offers little to no advantage. And several disadvantages. First off, the turbo 4-cyl Accord costs over $1,700.00 more. In spite of the fact it produces almost 50 less horsepower. And it gets the exact same fuel economy as the V-6 Camry. So where is the advantage of the added cost and complexity of the turbo? It doesn't exist.

Not only that, but which one will be more desirable, and less risky to own, when both are sitting on a dealers lot, out of warranty with, "Pre Owned" plastered across their windshields? Used turbo equipped vehicles out of warranty are very difficult to sell. Unless you get them cheap enough for someone to be willing to take on the risk of costly repairs in the event of a turbo failure.

The only way the manufacturers can overcome this added repair cost and risk, is to provide much longer and better warranties on their turbo equipped vehicles. In order to take this risk out of the equation for people shopping for a used turbo. Thus far they have not done it. The reason is the same for them as it is for the used turbo purchaser. The risk is simply not worth it.

2018 Camry XSE V6..... 2018 Accord 2.0T Sport Touring

MSRP (Base): $34,940..... MSRP (Base): $36,675

Engine: 3.5L V6 w/D-4S Dual Injection..... Engine: 2.0L Turbo 4-Cylinder

Transmission: 8-Speed Automatic...... Transmission: 10-Speed Automatic

Horsepower: 301 @ 6600 rpm..... Horsepower: 252 lb-ft @6500 rpm

Torque (lb-ft): 267 lb-ft @4700 rpm..... Torque: 273 lb-ft @4000 rpm

MPG: 22/32/26 (city/hwy/combined)..... MPG: 22/32/26 (city/hwy/combined)

Safety: TSS-P w/ Pedestrian Detection..... Safety: Honda Safety Sense w/Speed Limit Sign Monitoring

Curb Weight: 3,572 lbs..... Curb Weight: 3,428 lbs

Airbags: 10..... Airbags: 8

https://www.haleytoyota.com/2018-camry-vs-accord-comparison/

 

[Audios]

The N54 wastegates were a huge problem, we were doing them under warranty in 07-08 when I was still at the dealers. The easiest way to change them was support the engine on top and remove the complete front suspension and subframe, and roll it away, struts wheels arms still intact. Then swap everyhting out from the bottom and align it. The fix isnt permanent either, we had a 335 with 175k on it starting to rattle again, turbos done under the recall. Plus another local woman who barely uses the car and ignored the recalls, just needed them at 45k, she went to the dealer to try and get a goodwill repair. The impellers can also make sort of a droning whoosh under boost when theyre starting to let go, thats your only warning before it implodes.

 

[MCompact]

Originally Posted by billt460
Originally Posted by Lolvoguy
I was under the impression that turbo technology has advanced leaps and bounds over that of what was offered in the 80's.
What gives?

It's really pretty simple when you lay it all out. There are several big problems turbo's have a very difficult time overcoming. And that is any performance gain worth their added cost and complexity. A very good example of this, is in the comparison of the new 2018 V-6 Toyota Camry vs, the 2018 Honda Accord 2.0, 4-cyl Turbo. Both are very similar vehicles. The Accord is no longer available with the V-6 engine option. It has been replaced with a 2.0L, 4 cylinder turbo. Which supposedly offers the latest and greatest in turbo technology.

Yet when you compare them up and down the line, the turbo offers little to no advantage. And several disadvantages. First off, the turbo 4-cyl Accord costs over $1,700.00 more. In spite of the fact it produces almost 50 less horsepower. And it gets the exact same fuel economy as the V-6 Camry. So where is the advantage of the added cost and complexity of the turbo? It doesn't exist.

Not only that, but which one will be more desirable, and less risky to own, when both are sitting on a dealers lot, out of warranty with, "Pre Owned" plastered across their windshields? Used turbo equipped vehicles out of warranty are very difficult to sell. Unless you get them cheap enough for someone to be willing to take on the risk of costly repairs in the event of a turbo failure.

The only way the manufacturers can overcome this added repair cost and risk, is to provide much longer and better warranties on their turbo equipped vehicles. In order to take this risk out of the equation for people shopping for a used turbo. Thus far they have not done it. The reason is the same for them as it is for the used turbo purchaser. The risk is simply not worth it.

2018 Camry XSE V6..... 2018 Accord 2.0T Sport Touring

MSRP (Base): $34,940..... MSRP (Base): $36,675

Engine: 3.5L V6 w/D-4S Dual Injection..... Engine: 2.0L Turbo 4-Cylinder

Transmission: 8-Speed Automatic...... Transmission: 10-Speed Automatic

Horsepower: 301 @ 6600 rpm..... Horsepower: 252 lb-ft @6500 rpm

Torque (lb-ft): 267 lb-ft @4700 rpm..... Torque: 273 lb-ft @4000 rpm

MPG: 22/32/26 (city/hwy/combined)..... MPG: 22/32/26 (city/hwy/combined)

Safety: TSS-P w/ Pedestrian Detection..... Safety: Honda Safety Sense w/Speed Limit Sign Monitoring

Curb Weight: 3,572 lbs..... Curb Weight: 3,428 lbs

Airbags: 10..... Airbags: 8

https://www.haleytoyota.com/2018-camry-vs-accord-comparison/


When my Chapter 7 expires a V6 Camry is definitely on my short list.

 

[slo town]

That turbo replacement job looks like a gigantic PIA.

Although I like power as much as the next guy, the turbos on the 335s are the very reason we bought our 328. That and the fact the the N51/N52 328 motors are port injected and don't require intake valve cleaning.

To me, the only realistic DIYs for the enthusiast without a lift is suspension modifications. And even then some of those have become a PIA.

Seeing this video makes me love my E46 even more than I already do. Compared to our E90, the E46 is easy to work on. Just doing a water pump replacement; it's an easy 45 minute job on the E46 that can be done standing up! On the E90 it would take a couple of hours laying on your back underneath the beast and contorting yourself to get to all the connections.

Scott

 

[BMWTurboDzl]

Originally Posted by Lolvoguy
Came across this interesting video on YouTube of a fellow replacing a set of turbos on a late 00's BMW.
After being on other BMW forums, seems like this is a common issue.
Given the age of these cars, the cost of having these replaced at a shop is equivalent to the value of the car (which is usually why you see so many for sale at drastically lower prices than an equivalent Lexus etc.)

I was under the impression that turbo technology has advanced leaps and bounds over that of what was offered in the 80's.
What gives?!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jWhgKqlTHGY


Turbo technology is fine as long as you remain at factory boost levels. Unfortunately the BMW turbo I6 is a favorite among the tuning crowd so a lot of these leased vehicles were running excessive boost while new and the 2nd/3rd owner was left with having to deal with the problems.

Today's turbos are smaller which significantly reduces turbo lag and are oil/water cooled.

 

[Andy636]

Today's turbos are bulletproof unless you are borderline retarded and take off like you are in some sore of GP race just after you started the engine, or you drive it like you stole it and turn off the engine with no cooling time at idle. Buddy of mine is on his 3rd turbine in 10 years, I drive way more aggressive than him, bur never when engine is could...

 

[MCompact]

I've owned five turbo cars since 1993 and I've only replaced exactly one turbo- and that was under warranty due to a problem with seals. Its replacement went over 138k miles and was running just fine when I sold it for another turbo powered vehicle. I currently run two turbo cars and I am not concerned about their longevity in the slightest.

 

[y_p_w]

Originally Posted by Andy636
Today's turbos are bulletproof unless you are borderline retarded and take off like you are in some sore of GP race just after you started the engine, or you drive it like you stole it and turn off the engine with no cooling time at idle. Buddy of mine is on his 3rd turbine in 10 years, I drive way more aggressive than him, bur never when engine is could...

I wouldn't necessarily recommend driving a turbo car hard and then shutting it down immediately, but water cooled turbos aren't supposed to have bearing coking problems any more. The cooling system is supposed to draw in heat (even without being pumped) via thermal siphon.

 

[DejaVue]

Originally Posted by y_p_w
Originally Posted by Andy636
Today's turbos are bulletproof unless you are borderline retarded and take off like you are in some sore of GP race just after you started the engine, or you drive it like you stole it and turn off the engine with no cooling time at idle.

I wouldn't necessarily recommend driving a turbo car hard and then shutting it down immediately, but water cooled turbos aren't supposed to have bearing coking problems any more. The cooling system is supposed to draw in heat (even without being pumped) via thermal siphon.

And with today's better oils, I would go back to Andy636's post there and similar for probable main reasons why a turbo fails on a current car even if it wasn't water-cooled.

I've seen trusted makers of aftermarket turbos say the only reason they offer their turbochargers with a water-cool option is because some customers wrongly think they need it and won't buy it otherwise.

I've removed the water-cooling on some turbos for various reasons including one of the rubber hoses feeding it sprung a leak. I considered removing the water-cooling to be making the vehicle more reliable. I change my oil on a regular basis though. Turbos operated by people who neglect routine maintenance need all the water-cooling help they can get.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by Lolvoguy
Came across this interesting video on YouTube of a fellow replacing a set of turbos on a late 00's BMW.
After being on other BMW forums, seems like this is a common issue.
Given the age of these cars, the cost of having these replaced at a shop is equivalent to the value of the car (which is usually why you see so many for sale at drastically lower prices than an equivalent Lexus etc.)

I was under the impression that turbo technology has advanced leaps and bounds over that of what was offered in the 80's.
What gives?!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jWhgKqlTHGY

N54 because it has actually two turbos is tuners favorite. N55 which fallowed later has one turbo and two stages, but no issues.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by billt460
Originally Posted by Lolvoguy
I was under the impression that turbo technology has advanced leaps and bounds over that of what was offered in the 80's.
What gives?

It's really pretty simple when you lay it all out. There are several big problems turbo's have a very difficult time overcoming. And that is any performance gain worth their added cost and complexity. A very good example of this, is in the comparison of the new 2018 V-6 Toyota Camry vs, the 2018 Honda Accord 2.0, 4-cyl Turbo. Both are very similar vehicles. The Accord is no longer available with the V-6 engine option. It has been replaced with a 2.0L, 4 cylinder turbo. Which supposedly offers the latest and greatest in turbo technology.

Yet when you compare them up and down the line, the turbo offers little to no advantage. And several disadvantages. First off, the turbo 4-cyl Accord costs over $1,700.00 more. In spite of the fact it produces almost 50 less horsepower. And it gets the exact same fuel economy as the V-6 Camry. So where is the advantage of the added cost and complexity of the turbo? It doesn't exist.

Not only that, but which one will be more desirable, and less risky to own, when both are sitting on a dealers lot, out of warranty with, "Pre Owned" plastered across their windshields? Used turbo equipped vehicles out of warranty are very difficult to sell. Unless you get them cheap enough for someone to be willing to take on the risk of costly repairs in the event of a turbo failure.

The only way the manufacturers can overcome this added repair cost and risk, is to provide much longer and better warranties on their turbo equipped vehicles. In order to take this risk out of the equation for people shopping for a used turbo. Thus far they have not done it. The reason is the same for them as it is for the used turbo purchaser. The risk is simply not worth it.

2018 Camry XSE V6..... 2018 Accord 2.0T Sport Touring

MSRP (Base): $34,940..... MSRP (Base): $36,675

Engine: 3.5L V6 w/D-4S Dual Injection..... Engine: 2.0L Turbo 4-Cylinder

Transmission: 8-Speed Automatic...... Transmission: 10-Speed Automatic

Horsepower: 301 @ 6600 rpm..... Horsepower: 252 lb-ft @6500 rpm

Torque (lb-ft): 267 lb-ft @4700 rpm..... Torque: 273 lb-ft @4000 rpm

MPG: 22/32/26 (city/hwy/combined)..... MPG: 22/32/26 (city/hwy/combined)

Safety: TSS-P w/ Pedestrian Detection..... Safety: Honda Safety Sense w/Speed Limit Sign Monitoring

Curb Weight: 3,572 lbs..... Curb Weight: 3,428 lbs

Airbags: 10..... Airbags: 8

https://www.haleytoyota.com/2018-camry-vs-accord-comparison/

Please man. Toyota's V6 are absolutely average engines. On top of that, that new DI V6 is actually IMO step back compared to 2GR-FE in Sienna I have. But even 2GR-FE is not anything special. It is dead at lower rpm's, it is mediocre at mid range, and has very short torque curve at high rpm's. On top of that, turbo's are much, MUCH better at high altitude. That new V6 in Toyota IMO is lacking power in all rpm range due to Atkinson cycle.
Turbo engines are fine as long as you maintain them in same way as your average V6. Average turbo engine is not N54 from BMW which was technological bomb when it got out and naturally carries risks. But then, turbo's are present in diesels forever and I do not hear people calling for naturally aspirated diesels.
Now, truth is that Honda really messed up 1.5T when it comes to fuel dilution.
I on other hand for last 20 years drive VW turbo engines, and yet to have an issue.