S65 M3 engine

[Nederlander75]

I'll play. I have one of these works of art in my M3. Mine sees around 2,000 miles of track tine per year and 14,000 commuting/street time. It sees speeds in excess of 100mph daily as well when winter doesn't impede, so I clearly use it. As doodfood does I warm it up slow and drive it the way it was intended when warm. I also use an oil pan heater in winter when temps get near 20F and mine sees time in Banf for four weeks in the winter. I stick to the 10w60 that is specd. Don't worry about brand, use overhead there for other things car. I also feel rod bearings are part of the price of admission. Other cars of this caliber, and less even, may not have issues in this regard, but they do in other areas that are equally expensive or worse. Just plan to do your RBs with whatever option you think is best as part of your maintenance regimen. They usually cost between $2,000 and $3,000 per service currently and you make up for that by avoiding maintenance expenses other cars endure. These are not maintenance intensive so it all evens out.

 

[d00df00d]

Originally Posted by Nederlander75
Other cars of this caliber, and less even, may not have issues in this regard, but they do in other areas that are equally expensive or worse. Just plan to do your RBs with whatever option you think is best as part of your maintenance regimen. They usually cost between $2,000 and $3,000 per service currently and you make up for that by avoiding maintenance expenses other cars endure. These are not maintenance intensive so it all evens out.

Perfectly stated.

That's pretty much why I bought this car. I taught myself a long time ago to look at the net overall cost in time and money rather than freaking out over the mere existence of a big-ticket item. From that perspective, the E9x M3 is pretty great for what you get.

 

[SteveSRT8]

Originally Posted by MCompact
Originally Posted by SteveSRT8

At least doodfood has been to a track. Some of our critics can't seem to do anything but quote ragazine articles.


I call those self-proclaimed "experts" Read Testers.



HAW! Nice one, very apropos!!!

 

[Jimmy_Russells]

Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by A_Harman
Originally Posted by d00df00d
Guys, the LS is beyond reproach. Yes, GM has made a ton of mistakes, uninspiring engines and systematically crappy vehicle lineups among them. But the LS isn't one of those mistakes. It's low, light, powerful as heck, unbelievably versatile, and rock solid.

It's also a prime example of what you have to sacrifice for reliability. Weak top end, uninspiring redline, torque curve like an economy car V6, mediocre-at-best throttle response. It's one of the main reasons why the Corvette has always been such a blunt instrument. It pulls the numbers all day, but it's a handful to drive and feels unbelievably clumsy next to its "overpriced" German competitors. The LS is much better suited to trucks and big sedans, where you don't expect so much finesse. No surprise it fares so much better vs. its competitors in those applications than it does in the Corvette.

The S65, on the other hand, would be right at home in one of those high-dollar sports cars that make the Corvette seem so primitive. You gotta pay to play.


Show me a BMW that does a better lap time than the C7 Corvette in the Car and Driver Lightning Lap competitions.
An engine doesn't need to rev to 8000 rpm to be good. Even current BMW twin-turbo V8's don't go to 8000 rpm.

No, engine does not need 8,000 rpm, unless you want to make one. BMW is perfectly capable of making huge engines with big displacement and lot of power (McLaren F1 for example). That is not the point.
Also, there is no "even" in current TT BMW engines. I highly doubt BMW with TT engine would cost this much if it was capable of reaching 8,000rpm. It would be out of reach of pretty much everyone.
I cannot remember though any GM product that has four doors, has car seat latches, ski bag in the middle of the rear seat, and doing those lap times like M3.


I'm not a huge GM fan but your last paragraph perfectly describes the CTS-V. That car is for real.

 

[d00df00d]

Originally Posted by Jimmy_Russells
Originally Posted by edyvw
I cannot remember though any GM product that has four doors, has car seat latches, ski bag in the middle of the rear seat, and doing those lap times like M3.


I'm not a huge GM fan but your last paragraph perfectly describes the CTS-V. That car is for real.

Agreed. [censored] good car.

Remember the CTS-V Challenge at Monticello Motor Club back in 2009? They dared anyone to bring ANY stock 4-door car and try to post a faster lap than the other contestants could in a CTS-V. So ballsy. It worked, too. Overall, the CTS-V came out on top pretty convincingly.

Though, among the contestants, one did beat the CTS-V's time. In this thread, one would be remiss not to notice what he was driving...

https://www.automobilemag.com/news/...posts-best-time-of-challengers-2-135343/

 

[d00df00d]

Originally Posted by SteveSRT8
Originally Posted by MCompact
Originally Posted by SteveSRT8

At least doodfood has been to a track. Some of our critics can't seem to do anything but quote ragazine articles.


I call those self-proclaimed "experts" Read Testers.



HAW! Nice one, very apropos!!!

Let's keep it real: there's plenty of read testing to go around in this thread.

 

[DoubleWasp]

BMW made another engine with rod bearing issues?

I figured they had learned everything they needed to about high revving V8s from the E39 M5.

 

[Jimmy_Russells]

Originally Posted by d00df00d
Originally Posted by Jimmy_Russells
Originally Posted by edyvw
I cannot remember though any GM product that has four doors, has car seat latches, ski bag in the middle of the rear seat, and doing those lap times like M3.


I'm not a huge GM fan but your last paragraph perfectly describes the CTS-V. That car is for real.

Agreed. [censored] good car.

Remember the CTS-V Challenge at Monticello Motor Club back in 2009? They dared anyone to bring ANY stock 4-door car and try to post a faster lap than the other contestants could in a CTS-V. So ballsy. It worked, too. Overall, the CTS-V came out on top pretty convincingly.

Though, among the contestants, one did beat the CTS-V's time. In this thread, one would be remiss not to notice what he was driving...

https://www.automobilemag.com/news/...posts-best-time-of-challengers-2-135343/


It's clear you are very happy with your car, and that's cool.

I was talking more about the new Alpha chassis car, which as a driver's car, simply craps on the F80.


Originally Posted by DoubleWasp
BMW made another engine with rod bearing issues?

I figured they had learned everything they needed to about high revving V8s from the E39 M5.


Also the first couple years of the E46 M3 had issues too. I have no idea why they can't figure it out, the design of these things hasn't changed in like 100 years. It's weird.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by Jimmy_Russells
Originally Posted by d00df00d
Originally Posted by Jimmy_Russells
Originally Posted by edyvw
I cannot remember though any GM product that has four doors, has car seat latches, ski bag in the middle of the rear seat, and doing those lap times like M3.


I'm not a huge GM fan but your last paragraph perfectly describes the CTS-V. That car is for real.

Agreed. [censored] good car.

Remember the CTS-V Challenge at Monticello Motor Club back in 2009? They dared anyone to bring ANY stock 4-door car and try to post a faster lap than the other contestants could in a CTS-V. So ballsy. It worked, too. Overall, the CTS-V came out on top pretty convincingly.

Though, among the contestants, one did beat the CTS-V's time. In this thread, one would be remiss not to notice what he was driving...

https://www.automobilemag.com/news/...posts-best-time-of-challengers-2-135343/


It's clear you are very happy with your car, and that's cool.

I was talking more about the new Alpha chassis car, which as a driver's car, simply craps on the F80.


Originally Posted by DoubleWasp
BMW made another engine with rod bearing issues?

I figured they had learned everything they needed to about high revving V8s from the E39 M5.


Also the first couple years of the E46 M3 had issues too. I have no idea why they can't figure it out, the design of these things hasn't changed in like 100 years. It's weird.

The F80 was worst M5. They tried to appease buyers of Mercedes, Audi and Lexus, and then think of BMW traditional buyers. That is more or less with all F models with exception of 2 series. And it is not only M models, it is all line up of F models (except 2 series) that is attempt to lure in buyers of other luxury brands.
It seems that G models are different, we will see. There is a reason why M2 became most popular M model in last few years, and price is not a reason.
On issue of rod bearings, yes E46 M3 had that issue in the beginning, and S65 was IMO unnecessary departure from tradition due to pressure to have numbers for people who buy cars based on 0-60 times. IMO, BMW suppose to stay with inline six even for E90 chassis, but then it is all about selling cars, and enthusiasts are not in large numbers to make BMW do things differently.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by DoubleWasp
BMW made another engine with rod bearing issues?

I figured they had learned everything they needed to about high revving V8s from the E39 M5.

S65 issues are nothing compared to N63 and S63.
That is where people should stop reading magazines and watch youtube. N63 was declared "by far" best engine in the world for a year that was introduced (forgot which year was that). Oh boy, did owners of those engines, especially in the US where V8 is popular for suburban audience that makes 3 miles a day with a vehicle.

 

[Jimmy_Russells]

Originally Posted by edyvw
[
Agreed. [censored] good car.

Remember the CTS-V Challenge at Monticello Motor Club back in 2009? They dared anyone to bring ANY stock 4-door car and try to post a faster lap than the other contestants could in a CTS-V. So ballsy. It worked, too. Overall, the CTS-V came out on top pretty convincingly.

Though, among the contestants, one did beat the CTS-V's time. In this thread, one would be remiss not to notice what he was driving...

https://www.automobilemag.com/news/...posts-best-time-of-challengers-2-135343/


It's clear you are very happy with your car, and that's cool.

I was talking more about the new Alpha chassis car, which as a driver's car, simply craps on the F80.


Originally Posted by DoubleWasp
BMW made another engine with rod bearing issues?

I figured they had learned everything they needed to about high revving V8s from the E39 M5.


Also the first couple years of the E46 M3 had issues too. I have no idea why they can't figure it out, the design of these things hasn't changed in like 100 years. It's weird. [/quote]
The F80 was worst M5. They tried to appease buyers of Mercedes, Audi and Lexus, and then think of BMW traditional buyers. That is more or less with all F models with exception of 2 series. And it is not only M models, it is all line up of F models (except 2 series) that is attempt to lure in buyers of other luxury brands.
It seems that G models are different, we will see. There is a reason why M2 became most popular M model in last few years, and price is not a reason.
On issue of rod bearings, yes E46 M3 had that issue in the beginning, and S65 was IMO unnecessary departure from tradition due to pressure to have numbers for people who buy cars based on 0-60 times. IMO, BMW suppose to stay with inline six even for E90 chassis, but then it is all about selling cars, and enthusiasts are not in large numbers to make BMW do things differently. [/quote]


Uhh, well first off the F80 is an M3. Secondly I was comparing that car because it is the most recent model along with the newest CTS-V. It is no secret the new M cars are not the cars of old. I am well aware of the M2, I came very close to purchasing one until I realized they announced the car, came out with the LCI update and then announced the M2 Competition all within the span of about 20 months. That is really bad business practice IMO, their customers deserve more than that. Then I thought briefly about waiting for an M2C but realized it's just a smaller M4 which I didn't want either.

 

[edyvw]

Quote
Uhh, well first off the F80 is an M3. Secondly I was comparing that car because it is the most recent model along with the newest CTS-V. It is no secret the new M cars are not the cars of old. I am well aware of the M2, I came very close to purchasing one until I realized they announced the car, came out with the LCI update and then announced the M2 Competition all within the span of about 20 months. That is really bad business practice IMO, their customers deserve more than that. Then I thought briefly about waiting for an M2C but realized it's just a smaller M4 which I didn't want either.




Sorry, I am really not fallowing F model numeration. Isn't CTS-V like 240hp stronger than M3?
With F models BMW went all in with these market gimmicks like competition etc. But in case of M2 competition there is actually valid reason.
As far as I know, BMW never actually planned M2, M235i was as far as they were willing to go. With success of M235i, they figured that traditionalists want smaller BMW than F30, and M that is smaller than F80 (thanks again for pointing). However, due to open deck architecture of N55, they could not reliably squeeze out more than what? 360hp in M2. Since M2 became huge success, they figured that offering engine from F80 would be good deal, that is why competition exists.

 

[d00df00d]

Originally Posted by Jimmy_Russells
Originally Posted by DoubleWasp
BMW made another engine with rod bearing issues?

I figured they had learned everything they needed to about high revving V8s from the E39 M5.


Also the first couple years of the E46 M3 had issues too. I have no idea why they can't figure it out, the design of these things hasn't changed in like 100 years. It's weird.

Every time there's a thread like this, people come out of the woodwork to talk like everyone knows how to make a >100 hp/L NA >8000 RPM engine as trouble-free as a Corolla.

I must be living under a rock. Where are these engines?

 

[DoubleWasp]

Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by DoubleWasp
BMW made another engine with rod bearing issues?

I figured they had learned everything they needed to about high revving V8s from the E39 M5.

S65 issues are nothing compared to N63 and S63.
That is where people should stop reading magazines and watch youtube. N63 was declared "by far" best engine in the world for a year that was introduced (forgot which year was that). Oh boy, did owners of those engines, especially in the US where V8 is popular for suburban audience that makes 3 miles a day with a vehicle.


This is the first time hearing anything about this. Haven't had the chance to read any mags about it. It is nice to see the inline 6 come back. Easily one of BMWs most endearing qualities. Always enjoyed my E30. Loved how they clearly shoehorned the engine into the thing. Acted like it too. One of the most American things I've seen in a German car. Mine was an iS model. That thing couldn't keep it's tires planted when I got on it, and the Rev limiter came fast if one was not really on the ball.

Love BMW, but never sat in anything they made that made me feel like I did in my E30. I tried one of the M-model 1 series models, because they said it was tooooootally made to be like an E30. It wasn't.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by DoubleWasp
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by DoubleWasp
BMW made another engine with rod bearing issues?

I figured they had learned everything they needed to about high revving V8s from the E39 M5.

S65 issues are nothing compared to N63 and S63.
That is where people should stop reading magazines and watch youtube. N63 was declared "by far" best engine in the world for a year that was introduced (forgot which year was that). Oh boy, did owners of those engines, especially in the US where V8 is popular for suburban audience that makes 3 miles a day with a vehicle.


This is the first time hearing anything about this. Haven't had the chance to read any mags about it. It is nice to see the inline 6 come back. Easily one of BMWs most endearing qualities. Always enjoyed my E30. Loved how they clearly shoehorned the engine into the thing. Acted like it too. One of the most American things I've seen in a German car. Mine was an iS model. That thing couldn't keep it's tires planted when I got on it, and the Rev limiter came fast if one was not really on the ball.

Love BMW, but never sat in anything they made that made me feel like I did in my E30. I tried one of the M-model 1 series models, because they said it was tooooootally made to be like an E30. It wasn't.

N63 was very good idea. N63TU proved to be quite reliable. You know how Germans design/engineer stuff: it must be this way, because, well, this is how it works on Autobahn. Per BMW TBS, problem is suburban driving, and valve stems that are pretty hard did not help. There is no single N63/S63 that did not have valve stem issues, turbo cooling issues, injector issues and due to suburban driving, fuel dilution issues.
I had E30 318i with M10 engine, and that thing was as analog as you can get. I was actually going to ski with it, with 100kg bag in the back, of course

 

[oghl]

[/quote]
Every time there's a thread like this, people come out of the woodwork to talk like everyone knows how to make a >100 hp/L NA >8000 RPM engine as trouble-free as a Corolla.

I must be living under a rock. Where are these engines?[/quote]


They are all over the place in the motorcycle world. Honda, Suzuki, Kawasaki, Yamaha, Ducati, Aprilia, Triumph, BMW, just off the top of my head, all have bikes exceeding 100HP/L at much greater than 8k rpm. I think they are closer to 200hp/L actually. And these are street legal, run on pump gas, off the shelf peoducts that you can buy from a regular dealership.

 

[Jimmy_Russells]

Originally Posted by edyvw
Quote
Uhh, well first off the F80 is an M3. Secondly I was comparing that car because it is the most recent model along with the newest CTS-V. It is no secret the new M cars are not the cars of old. I am well aware of the M2, I came very close to purchasing one until I realized they announced the car, came out with the LCI update and then announced the M2 Competition all within the span of about 20 months. That is really bad business practice IMO, their customers deserve more than that. Then I thought briefly about waiting for an M2C but realized it's just a smaller M4 which I didn't want either.




Sorry, I am really not fallowing F model numeration. Isn't CTS-V like 240hp stronger than M3?
With F models BMW went all in with these market gimmicks like competition etc. But in case of M2 competition there is actually valid reason.
As far as I know, BMW never actually planned M2, M235i was as far as they were willing to go. With success of M235i, they figured that traditionalists want smaller BMW than F30, and M that is smaller than F80 (thanks again for pointing). However, due to open deck architecture of N55, they could not reliably squeeze out more than what? 360hp in M2. Since M2 became huge success, they figured that offering engine from F80 would be good deal, that is why competition exists.



They always planned on an M2 after the success of the 1M. The original N55 M2 was killed because it would not pass the newest WLTP emissions requirements and they had no choice but to put the S55 in the car. They should have done that from the beginning.

 

[Jimmy_Russells]

Originally Posted by d00df00d
Originally Posted by Jimmy_Russells
Originally Posted by DoubleWasp
BMW made another engine with rod bearing issues?

I figured they had learned everything they needed to about high revving V8s from the E39 M5.


Also the first couple years of the E46 M3 had issues too. I have no idea why they can't figure it out, the design of these things hasn't changed in like 100 years. It's weird.

Every time there's a thread like this, people come out of the woodwork to talk like everyone knows how to make a >100 hp/L NA >8000 RPM engine as trouble-free as a Corolla.

I must be living under a rock. Where are these engines?


S2000 (actually 9k)
RS4 Sedan
Lambo/Audi V10
Multiple Ferraris (granted they never see high mileage)

That's just off the top of my head. People want to talk about revs and pistons speeds and blah blah, who cares if it is not long term reliable.



Originally Posted by oghl
They are all over the place in the motorcycle world. Honda, Suzuki, Kawasaki, Yamaha, Ducati, Aprilia, Triumph, BMW, just off the top of my head, all have bikes exceeding 100HP/L at much greater than 8k rpm. I think they are closer to 200hp/L actually. And these are street legal, run on pump gas, off the shelf peoducts that you can buy from a regular dealership.


This is true but it's easier to make that much power per liter with a smaller engine and none of those engines are going much past 50k miles before needing a rebuild.

 

[oghl]

Originally Posted by Jimmy_Russells


This is true but it's easier to make that much power per liter with a smaller engine and none of those engines are going much past 50k miles before needing a rebuild.


I sold a bike to an older gentleman a while back. It was a 1000cc in-line 4 producing about 150hp with a deadline at ~12000 rpm. He rode it hard for next 80k miles, and finally the replaced the engine at 95k. He asked me a bunch of questions including what oil to use. I told him to use rotella or delvac 15w40. I think he followed my advice because he did everything else I told him.

 

[oghl]

Forgot to say that you are right: it is easier to make high rpm engines out of small displacements. I wonder what speeds turbo diesels in locomotives and cruise ship/oil tankers run at.