BMW and the 10W60 thing???!!!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: bimmerdriver
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Awesome timing on that post. I just got back from the household of a friend whose lightweighted all-motor E46 M3 will have to be pried from his cold dead fingers.

The same household also includes an E39 M5, a beautiful all-motor 128i, an E46 330i ZHP, and an E91 328i, as well as a new Boxster and a 930 Carrera. This is the family that sold me my last car, an E36 M3 (which I owned at the time of the post you're responding to). It's basically a small monument to naturally aspirated, chassis-oriented, Bavarian-made sport sedans. In our extended circle of mutual friends, there is at least one more ZHP and more E46 and E9x M3s than I can count, as well as various other naturally aspirated M cars.

So, yeah, I feel like I know a thing or two about what makes BMW M cars great. In a nutshell, it's not about numbers or easy speed; it's about legit race car dynamics in a usable package. The main reason I no longer own a BMW M car is that I don't feel they take that formula far enough.

But you don't know me at all, so I can't blame you for being so dismissive. No worries.

Yes, there are a lot of active M3 enthusiasts online. The Internet can make just about any interest group look big. The fact remains that, to most people, the M3 is just another performance car that rides too hard, guzzles too much gas, and doesn't seem too impressive on paper. People buy the car for the status, or because they think it's fast, or because they're 17 and have too much money, or because they want something "nice" that'll still keep up with their buddy's Mustang. To those people, what really makes a naturally aspirated M3 great -- its throttle response, its high redline, its magical handling -- is completely unintelligible.

Why do you think the M3's competitors all have more torque and sloppier handling? Do you really think AMG and quattro couldn't hang if they wanted to, or could it be that most people would take low-end torque and a softer ride over genuine race car dynamics?

Why do you think it's essentially impossible to find an E46 M3 for sale in good condition? Is the car really that fragile, or are proper enthusiasts that rare?

Why do you think BMW's current model lineup is so annoyingly soft? Is BMW actively trying to drive away real enthusiasts, or is it following the more prevalent market trends?

Even in the enthusiast-laden online communities, there are hordes of people trying to cheap out on upkeep in ways that make you wonder why they bought an M3 in the first place. So many M3s ride on junk tires and have suspensions that are completely shot, and their owners are constantly trying to find a cheaper oil to run. Among the people who want to go fast, so many are terrified of the engine's best RPM range -- they think using 50% throttle and shifting at 6k is "racing." This is not something you'd expect to see if informed and passionate owners were any more than a tiny minority.

Yes, there are enthusiasts. Yes, they are passionate. Yes, they know their cars. They do not represent the majority of M3 owners, and they are essentially nonexistent in the grand scheme of the automotive market as a whole. They (we) are a subset of a subset of a subset of people who like performance cars, which itself is a minority in the general population. It hurts, but it's a truth that must be faced.

I agree with much of what you posted, but what's your point? My post wasn't about those issues, but rather I called you on your claim that an M3 will "punish" you if you don't drive it hard. It's a baseless claim and nothing you said convinces me otherwise.

I'm not sure where you're going about not owning a BMW M car because they aren't performance oriented enough. Why you driving an RX-8 then?

There are a lot of reasons why it's so hard to find an M3 in good condition. For one, many people blindly follow BMW's 15000 mi / 20000 km oci, which is double what it should be. (FWIW, my mechanic, who works on BMW, Porsche, MB, etc. considers new BMWs to be disposable because if people follow BMW's recommended maintenance intervals, the engines inevitably will become sludged up and dirty. It's well known that BMW isn't alone on this regard. The same thing applies to VAG.)

The other reason it's so hard to find an M3 in good condition is because the cars are becoming cheap enough for young drivers to purchase without knowing how expensive the cars are to own. They can't afford proper tires. They can't afford oil changes. Etc. The result is that cars owned by such people end up as beaters or get totaled. The same thing happened with E36s and E30s. Try finding either of them in good condition.

As for the direction BMW is going, it's irrelevant what I think. I assume BMW is doing what they perceive will result in the most profit and that they couldn't care less what enthusiasts or owners of older models think. I think it's fair to say that if they gave a sh*t, they would have addressed the oil, VANOS and subframe issues differently, as opposed to not all.



Anothing thing we have to keep in mind that most people buying M cars these days are NOT driving them in a manor in which they were built to be driven. These are high-revving, high piston speed race motors, in essence. Speaking with a couple of the local shops really getting into S54 performance what they're finding is that when doing S54 work (especially turbo, swapping them into E36's, etc.) - first thing you do is pull the pan and roll new bearings into it, because they WILL be worn. These engines need to be warmed up gently before being driven, something 99% of drivers are not doing, and that is exacerbating the bearing issues. They need to be warmed up to full temp, then driven WOT. Max load, ran to redline. Every day. It's what they're designed to do.
 
I don't buy that argument. BMW knows these are street driven cars. There is no reason the car should need special treatment like that. I do agree that it was designed for hard driving, but that doesn't automatically mean it wasn't designed for around-town stuff.

Tens of thousands of M cars have seen 99.9% of their miles on the street without much complaint. Mine has done 57,000 total, and I'd bet that 56,750 of it is DD duties.
 
BMW also know that they make plenty of other cars that aren't much slower on the street and vastly more sensible in that environment. I'm especially thinking of CATERHAM's post about his encounter with a BMW engineer, who was confused when asked about oil choice for M3s that never see high oil temps. His response was something to the effect of "why not get a normal 3er then?"

More importantly though, I think "designed for"/"not designed for" is too black-and-white. It's a spectrum: Prius on one end, race car on the other, infinite shades in between. The E46 and E9x M3s are somewhere between Prius and race car, but farther from the "Prius" end than most street cars.
 
Originally Posted By: KenO
Originally Posted By: bimmerdriver
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Awesome timing on that post. I just got back from the household of a friend whose lightweighted all-motor E46 M3 will have to be pried from his cold dead fingers.

The same household also includes an E39 M5, a beautiful all-motor 128i, an E46 330i ZHP, and an E91 328i, as well as a new Boxster and a 930 Carrera. This is the family that sold me my last car, an E36 M3 (which I owned at the time of the post you're responding to). It's basically a small monument to naturally aspirated, chassis-oriented, Bavarian-made sport sedans. In our extended circle of mutual friends, there is at least one more ZHP and more E46 and E9x M3s than I can count, as well as various other naturally aspirated M cars.

So, yeah, I feel like I know a thing or two about what makes BMW M cars great. In a nutshell, it's not about numbers or easy speed; it's about legit race car dynamics in a usable package. The main reason I no longer own a BMW M car is that I don't feel they take that formula far enough.

But you don't know me at all, so I can't blame you for being so dismissive. No worries.

Yes, there are a lot of active M3 enthusiasts online. The Internet can make just about any interest group look big. The fact remains that, to most people, the M3 is just another performance car that rides too hard, guzzles too much gas, and doesn't seem too impressive on paper. People buy the car for the status, or because they think it's fast, or because they're 17 and have too much money, or because they want something "nice" that'll still keep up with their buddy's Mustang. To those people, what really makes a naturally aspirated M3 great -- its throttle response, its high redline, its magical handling -- is completely unintelligible.

Why do you think the M3's competitors all have more torque and sloppier handling? Do you really think AMG and quattro couldn't hang if they wanted to, or could it be that most people would take low-end torque and a softer ride over genuine race car dynamics?

Why do you think it's essentially impossible to find an E46 M3 for sale in good condition? Is the car really that fragile, or are proper enthusiasts that rare?

Why do you think BMW's current model lineup is so annoyingly soft? Is BMW actively trying to drive away real enthusiasts, or is it following the more prevalent market trends?

Even in the enthusiast-laden online communities, there are hordes of people trying to cheap out on upkeep in ways that make you wonder why they bought an M3 in the first place. So many M3s ride on junk tires and have suspensions that are completely shot, and their owners are constantly trying to find a cheaper oil to run. Among the people who want to go fast, so many are terrified of the engine's best RPM range -- they think using 50% throttle and shifting at 6k is "racing." This is not something you'd expect to see if informed and passionate owners were any more than a tiny minority.

Yes, there are enthusiasts. Yes, they are passionate. Yes, they know their cars. They do not represent the majority of M3 owners, and they are essentially nonexistent in the grand scheme of the automotive market as a whole. They (we) are a subset of a subset of a subset of people who like performance cars, which itself is a minority in the general population. It hurts, but it's a truth that must be faced.

I agree with much of what you posted, but what's your point? My post wasn't about those issues, but rather I called you on your claim that an M3 will "punish" you if you don't drive it hard. It's a baseless claim and nothing you said convinces me otherwise.

I'm not sure where you're going about not owning a BMW M car because they aren't performance oriented enough. Why you driving an RX-8 then?

There are a lot of reasons why it's so hard to find an M3 in good condition. For one, many people blindly follow BMW's 15000 mi / 20000 km oci, which is double what it should be. (FWIW, my mechanic, who works on BMW, Porsche, MB, etc. considers new BMWs to be disposable because if people follow BMW's recommended maintenance intervals, the engines inevitably will become sludged up and dirty. It's well known that BMW isn't alone on this regard. The same thing applies to VAG.)

The other reason it's so hard to find an M3 in good condition is because the cars are becoming cheap enough for young drivers to purchase without knowing how expensive the cars are to own. They can't afford proper tires. They can't afford oil changes. Etc. The result is that cars owned by such people end up as beaters or get totaled. The same thing happened with E36s and E30s. Try finding either of them in good condition.

As for the direction BMW is going, it's irrelevant what I think. I assume BMW is doing what they perceive will result in the most profit and that they couldn't care less what enthusiasts or owners of older models think. I think it's fair to say that if they gave a sh*t, they would have addressed the oil, VANOS and subframe issues differently, as opposed to not all.



Anothing thing we have to keep in mind that most people buying M cars these days are NOT driving them in a manor in which they were built to be driven. These are high-revving, high piston speed race motors, in essence. Speaking with a couple of the local shops really getting into S54 performance what they're finding is that when doing S54 work (especially turbo, swapping them into E36's, etc.) - first thing you do is pull the pan and roll new bearings into it, because they WILL be worn. These engines need to be warmed up gently before being driven, something 99% of drivers are not doing, and that is exacerbating the bearing issues. They need to be warmed up to full temp, then driven WOT. Max load, ran to redline. Every day. It's what they're designed to do.

There are plenty of threads over on M3F about rod bearings. They do wear, but typically it's gradual wear. It's also easy to diagnose with an oil analysis. S54 engines do need to be warmed up gently, which is why they have the temperature varying redline, but I don't know where you get the idea that they "need" to be redlined every day. They simply need to be warmed up completely, but that is no different from any other engine. If you take any car that is driven frequently without being warmed up and not given regular oil changes, it will have deposits and sludge inside the engine. There are also plenty of examples of E46 M3 valve cover deposits. The only S54 engines that have clean valve covers are the ones that get frequent oil changes.
 
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
BMW also know that they make plenty of other cars that aren't much slower on the street and vastly more sensible in that environment. I'm especially thinking of CATERHAM's post about his encounter with a BMW engineer, who was confused when asked about oil choice for M3s that never see high oil temps. His response was something to the effect of "why not get a normal 3er then?"

More importantly though, I think "designed for"/"not designed for" is too black-and-white. It's a spectrum: Prius on one end, race car on the other, infinite shades in between. The E46 and E9x M3s are somewhere between Prius and race car, but farther from the "Prius" end than most street cars.

If that's the case, then what's your explanation for the N54/N55 engines, which are regular engines designed for the range of BMW vehicles. If they are not given more than BMW recommended oil changes, they will sludge up. Same for audi engines.
 
I can't explain something I didn't bring up and that doesn't seem relevant...
21.gif
 
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
BMW also know that they make plenty of other cars that aren't much slower on the street and vastly more sensible in that environment. I'm especially thinking of CATERHAM's post about his encounter with a BMW engineer, who was confused when asked about oil choice for M3s that never see high oil temps. His response was something to the effect of "why not get a normal 3er then?"

More importantly though, I think "designed for"/"not designed for" is too black-and-white. It's a spectrum: Prius on one end, race car on the other, infinite shades in between. The E46 and E9x M3s are somewhere between Prius and race car, but farther from the "Prius" end than most street cars.


M3 is designed and built in Germany with European buyer in mind. No one buys M3 to go to the store or driving kids to kindegarten. Petrol is too dear to do that. These cars are driven here by die hard enthusiast who either don't drive it at all or by people who track them all the time. In US with cheap petrol, fairly cheap cars they become interesting to a wider public.
 
Originally Posted By: chrisri
In US with cheap petrol, fairly cheap cars they become interesting to a wider public.

Like my brother-in-law, who drives his '13 M3 to work, 2 miles each away, and maybe to the grocery store on the weekend. That's about it, I think.
 
Originally Posted By: chrisri
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
BMW also know that they make plenty of other cars that aren't much slower on the street and vastly more sensible in that environment. I'm especially thinking of CATERHAM's post about his encounter with a BMW engineer, who was confused when asked about oil choice for M3s that never see high oil temps. His response was something to the effect of "why not get a normal 3er then?"

More importantly though, I think "designed for"/"not designed for" is too black-and-white. It's a spectrum: Prius on one end, race car on the other, infinite shades in between. The E46 and E9x M3s are somewhere between Prius and race car, but farther from the "Prius" end than most street cars.


M3 is designed and built in Germany with European buyer in mind. No one buys M3 to go to the store or driving kids to kindegarten. Petrol is too dear to do that. These cars are driven here by die hard enthusiast who either don't drive it at all or by people who track them all the time. In US with cheap petrol, fairly cheap cars they become interesting to a wider public.



My M3 stickered for $73,375 + tax + gas guzzler fee when the original buyer snatched it up in early 2011. I wouldn't call that a "fairly cheap car." Our gas might be cheaper in the US, but an M3 is still expensive here. The new ones can pass $80k pretty easily.
 
His point was that cars are generally less expensive in the US than they are in the rest of the world, and that that makes Americans relatively more willing to put up with terrible fuel economy if they like the car otherwise.
 
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
His point was that cars are generally less expensive in the US than they are in the rest of the world, and that that makes Americans relatively more willing to put up with terrible fuel economy if they like the car otherwise.


That was my point. I know that M car is not cheap anywhere but they are cheaper in US by a big margin. An M3 owner in US is similar to a 335d M Pack owner in Europe.
 
Last edited:
Back in 1991 I've used M1 10w60 SF in a Honda XLX600R I had, put with 1 k miles on the bike and run it until I sold it two years later at 14,5k miles. At that time I didn't know nothing about oil and the shearing up those VIIs at gears and wet clutches ... The guy who bought it ran for a few years and may have changed the oil soon. I did several dirty off road trips with it. At least for 13k miles the oil did fine.
 
Originally Posted By: chrisri
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
His point was that cars are generally less expensive in the US than they are in the rest of the world, and that that makes Americans relatively more willing to put up with terrible fuel economy if they like the car otherwise.


That was my point. I know that M car is not cheap anywhere but they are cheaper in US by a big margin. An M3 owner in US is similar to a 335d M Pack owner in Europe.


M's are not exactly cheap in the US.

And, with the exception of the relatively prolific M3's, there aren't that many around.
 
Originally Posted By: Gtiguy34
But an S2000 does and that doesn't need fancy oil :p


That's because it doesn't make enough horsepower.
 
I suspect oil temps are more to the point there. The S2000 might not be generating enough heat to require a ridiculously thick oil.
 
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
I suspect oil temps are more to the point there. The S2000 might not be generating enough heat to require a ridiculously thick oil.


Good point. But the M3's S65 engine which is specd for 10-60 runs at an operating temp of 210F which is certainly not high.
 
I'm pretty sure the 10w-60 is more for the max temps than for the typical temps. In other words, it's to make sure you're okay in the middle of a hard track session on a hot summer day, not during mild use on the daily commute.

IF -- and I'm not sure if this is true, but IF -- the S2000 doesn't heat its oil as much as the M3 does under those conditions, that might partly explain the difference in oil specs.
 
Originally Posted By: Gtiguy34
It was in reference to the piston speeds being similar to an F1 engine. They make plenty of horsepower.... Just not enough torque


237 HP is not plenty.

Two of the little 2.2 liter 4 cylinders hooked together wouldn't make plenty of horsepower.

And I think my Kohler powered lawn mower puts out more than 162 ft-lbs of torque.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top