Scary rod bearing thread s85

[kawasaki00]

Originally Posted by Longwong

I agree with another fellow who questioned several random people who are not engineers let alone engineers who designed, built and specced the s65 engine for the M division. The tws for the e46 may have been a "fix" but the s65 was designed with plenty of time to look at bearing clearences and oil choices. I really find it hard to believe a few random guys know better than the m division.

After reading a lot, I really feel it is often the guys who do not get their oil temps high enough consistently and don't drive the car consistently hard enough to get the oil up to a good temp. I have always followed strictly keeping revs low until oil temps up to near middle. Then I daily push the car hard enough to keep the oil needle at the middle or higher in summer. Car has almost 60k, runs stronger than the day I bought it new and change oil every 7500 since day 1. Change sparks every 10k-15k, air filter every 7500 and drive it like I stole it once engine is warm.

I believe the M division knows what clearences to pick and which oil to use. It just seems silly to think they made the wrong decision. Rather people buy the wrong car and don't use the m3 and the s65 engine for how it was built and designed which is to get the operating temps nice and high, and use the high revs which inherently get the oil hot.

You can't design an oil and engine for all walks of life. The focus of the car was to make power at high rpms and to push the car. So that is how they designed it and spec'ed the oil. If you never push the car than the m3 was not designed and likely it is those people who suffer from the bearing issues IMO

The proof is all over the wall, look at the pictures of the bearings that people have been swapping. If anyone thinks that the bearings are NORMAL the only person being fooled is themself.
Anyone that thinks that you have to beat the crap out of the car for it to live is really in denial. Rotating speed stress of the engine goes up by a factor of 4 for every 1k rpm increase, cruising the car around and not flogging it is less stress, end of story.
Furthermore if you knew some of the jacklegs working for auto manufacturers you would be surprised.
I am not going to pull my own chain but I work for the best engine shop in America, it is a fact. The most technology, the most money, best equipment, dynos that blow the consistency of a GM or such out of the water and some of the best engine builders and engineers in the country for this industry. We have all looked at these pictures and everyone agrees on the problem at hand. Within 5 seconds every engine builder in the shop looks at he pictures and comes to the same conclusion. LACK OF OIL, the clearance is too tight, the only way to band aid the problem is to run a thinner oil.

[W///]

Originally Posted by Longwong

I agree with another fellow who questioned several random people who are not engineers let alone engineers who designed, built and specced the s65 engine for the M division. The tws for the e46 may have been a "fix" but the s65 was designed with plenty of time to look at bearing clearences and oil choices. I really find it hard to believe a few random guys know better than the m division.

After reading a lot, I really feel it is often the guys who do not get their oil temps high enough consistently and don't drive the car consistently hard enough to get the oil up to a good temp. I have always followed strictly keeping revs low until oil temps up to near middle. Then I daily push the car hard enough to keep the oil needle at the middle or higher in summer. Car has almost 60k, runs stronger than the day I bought it new and change oil every 7500 since day 1. Change sparks every 10k-15k, air filter every 7500 and drive it like I stole it once engine is warm.

I believe the M division knows what clearences to pick and which oil to use. It just seems silly to think they made the wrong decision. Rather people buy the wrong car and don't use the m3 and the s65 engine for how it was built and designed which is to get the operating temps nice and high, and use the high revs which inherently get the oil hot.

You can't design an oil and engine for all walks of life. The focus of the car was to make power at high rpms and to push the car. So that is how they designed it and spec'ed the oil. If you never push the car than the m3 was not designed and likely it is those people who suffer from the bearing issues IMO

Then don't create 5 oil threads at the same time if you are so confident in the way you take care of your car...

How do YOU know that your bearings aren't wearing right now? You don't. As if the way you warm up your engine and driving style is 100% fool proof solution. It just isn't. You could spin a bearing tomorrow, or your car will make it 300k miles. Who knows?

You said so yourself. There's no way to design an oil to go in the car that will be perfect for everyone. Even during the summer, my oil temp during my 20 min commute to work will just barely reach 210 by the time I reach the parking lot. In the winter, it doesn't reach 210 at all. So yes, this is why I'm considering (<-- key word) a lighter oil that will provide better cold protection. During my ownership, this car has never seen oil temp past 230-240.

Again, I've told you this about 5 times. There are plenty of cars that revs higher than our S65's, yet they use lower weight oils.

If you've read this thread that you create at all, you'd know that:
- Tight tolerances. Doesn't matter how you drive the car
- Lower oil weight will not solve the tight tolerances, but it can help.

[CSBM5]

Originally Posted by BMRLVR

Going from a Xw60 to an Xw40 oil is not going to significantly affect oil pressure guys! The S65 oiling system is not maxed out by any means!

Also opening up clearances to around 0.002 - 0.0025 is not going to drop oil pressure to a level that is too low for safe operation of the engine. I have confirmed that Dinan uses an OEM oil pump non-modified, I have also confirmed that they open up the clearances on the mains and rods to 0.0019 and 0.0025 respectively. Do you honestly think Dinan did this without doing any R&D? No company charging 25k for their engine with 2 years of warranty or a company like BMW would design an engine would run an oil pump that is maxed out for flow. I wish I could flow test an S65 pump to confirm its flow rate for all of you that worry about oil pressure!

I think this is an important point, so thank you for sharing that information. I enjoyed a presentation that Steve did a few years ago on the S62 they've had such success with in the Rolex series, and one of the things they mentioned was how much R&D they had done in reducing frictional losses by careful analysis and experimentation. Making a change to rod and main clearances isn't something he would just do for fun -- there is a reason, backed by substantial theory and empirical data, and it would be great to have a discussion with him sometime about that experience (that is if he felt free to discuss it of course). (obviously some posters in this thread have already pointed this out who have an incredible background and experience -- just adding my thoughts on your specific reference to Dinan built engines).

As an aside, he said that in the race S62 engines (they have 12 total race S62 engines that they lease out, sealed) they use the stock S62 rod bearings, and they change them out about every 27 hours of usage. He stated that none have ever shown wear or problems at all, but are just changed out with other bearings, etc, as the motor is refreshed (of course I assume the race engines have dry sumps, etc.).


As a "second aside": It's been 2+ years back now, but at that same meeting he was discussing the S65 as they were deep into research preparing it for the Rolex to take over the S62's role since they thought at that time the series rules were going to force them to switch the next year (they didn't). He didn't sound too excited (my thought) about it since the largest displacement they can get out of the S65 is 4.5L. He thought they could get close to the same peak HP out of the S65 as the S62, but they'll have to rev it about 1500-1700rpm higher resulting in more pumping and frictional losses. The only pros were that it is slightly lighter and smaller, so it can be placed a bit lower in the chassis, and they'll have some small amount of ballast they can place appropriately.

Regards,
Chuck

[CSBM5]

Originally Posted by kawasaki00

The proof is all over the wall, look at the pictures of the bearings that people have been swapping. If anyone thinks that the bearings are NORMAL the only person being fooled is themself.
Anyone that thinks that you have to beat the crap out of the car for it to live is really in denial. Rotating speed stress of the engine goes up by a factor of 4 for every 1k rpm increase, cruising the car around and not flogging it is less stress, end of story.
Furthermore if you knew some of the jacklegs working for auto manufacturers you would be surprised.
I am not going to pull my own chain but I work for the best engine shop in America, it is a fact. The most technology, the most money, best equipment, dynos that blow the consistency of a GM or such out of the water and some of the best engine builders and engineers in the country for this industry. We have all looked at these pictures and everyone agrees on the problem at hand. Within 5 seconds every engine builder in the shop looks at he pictures and comes to the same conclusion. LACK OF OIL, the clearance is too tight, the only way to band aid the problem is to run a thinner oil.

...and one can't help but smile at the "Internet wizards", i.e. common posters, who think that Castrol TWS is *required* to prevent bearing problems (although here I'm speaking from the standpoint of the S62 and years of background on the M5board rod bearing discussions -- although I do not believe the S62 has these tight clearances of the S85 and S65, so perhaps that's a different discussion altogether).

Thanks for your posts and contributions. They are very helpful.

Regards,
Chuck

[CSBM5]

kawasaki00,

Setting aside bearing clearance discussions for the moment, do you have any thoughts on other aspects of oil delivery? For example, during extreme acceleration, especially in 1st gear where the rate of change is the highest, is it possible there are oil delivery problems out the bore in the connecting rod? I would assume there is a negative pressure gradient along that path, and if the momentary pressure falls low enough in the extreme case of rapid rod acceleration (coupled with its high peak velocity), any entrained air could possibly be released? I would think that even a one-time situation that results in bearing film violation and cavitation could be enough to cause need to replace the bearings?

Stating the obvious, lol, I'm not an engine designer or anything. Just an old, emphasis on old, mechanical engineer with a lot of interest in the subject.

Regards,
Chuck

[kawasaki00]

Originally Posted by CSBM5

kawasaki00,

Setting aside bearing clearance discussions for the moment, do you have any thoughts on other aspects of oil delivery? For example, during extreme acceleration, especially in 1st gear where the rate of change is the highest, is it possible there are oil delivery problems out the bore in the connecting rod? I would assume there is a negative pressure gradient along that path, and if the momentary pressure falls low enough in the extreme case of rapid rod acceleration (coupled with its high peak velocity), any entrained air could possibly be released? I would think that even a one-time situation that results in bearing film violation and cavitation could be enough to cause need to replace the bearings?

Stating the obvious, lol, I'm not an engine designer or anything. Just an old, emphasis on old, mechanical engineer with a lot of interest in the subject.

Regards,
Chuck

One would more than likely see a pressure drop if that happens. Most gauges really dont react fast enough to see these drops in pressure. A logging system with a 100hz record rate might pick it up.
That being said it is usually never a problem with street engines. The oiling system is USUALLY way overkill for what it needs to acomplish. The only way to get a idea is to install a flow meter to measure oil flow inline but it is hard to do in a wet sump engine. That and the fact a good meter is usually a thousand dollars and then you have to have the aquisition system. This engine makes no torque anyway, it is a short stroke motor so there is not going to be much bore deformation with the NA stuff. FI might be different but I cant say for sure.
If you want my take on what is happening it is this. Imagine a garden hose that you pinch the end of it off. Still have plenty of pressure but no flow. I believe this is what is happening with the rod problem. Until it gets to full operating temp and maybe even not then, because the clearance is so tight you always have pressure but the system has a hard time pushing the thick oil through the tight rod clearance. This results in cavitation because there is no flow. When bearing shells show the typical bottom shell looks ok top shell is bad worn that is the number one indication of just a plain lack of lubrication.
It has been tested to death and there is no denying that the tws is a fantastic oil. If it were available in a 0-40/50 or a 5-40 option I would still run it. BMW and there infinite wisdon says it is ok to run the oil 15k miles no matter how hard you drive it. The only way to make this happen it to run a robust oil such as the tws. That doesnt mean it is the best option though for us street drivers. Also remember this car was designed in 2006, much has changed over the last 7 years in regards to the quality of oil available. I am currently running a 0wt but I am also changing it every 4k miles because I dont drive it all the time. I would never try to run the 0wt for even 10k miles let alone 15k miles but that s just me.

[BMRLVR]

To Longwong:

You started this thread to ask a question and now you are starting to question the answers..... Why ask a question if you know all the Answers?

Myself, regular guy and kawasaki00 have all tried to help answer your question(s) based on our experience and knowledge.

I build and work on Large Diesel engines for a living....... Engines that spend nearly their entire life under 100% load in some of the harshest conditions in the world. My company don't accept engine failures lightly since the trucks I work on make over $10,000 per load of Oilsand they haul, and haul up to 25 loads a day. My company employs some of the best people in the industry, engineers, technicians, tribologists, reliability planers and all hours, maintenance and costs and downtime are tracked by our computer systems. Since I get paid big money to build these engines I don't owe it to the forum to come on here and share my knowledge and experience, I do this to share information and insight with the community!

Regular guy has intimate knowledge of the S65 due to his relationship with some serious engine building shops that have been involved in more than a dozen S65 builds of all kinds, LC SC strokers, NA Strokers, & SC LC stock displacement engines.

Kawasaki00 works for an engine builder that builds NASCAR engines and he has access to the state of the art in tooling and equipment.

Neither of us are a joke, and I will be adding clearance to my engine in the near future when I build me a stroker, until then I intend to use a 0W40 or 5W40 wt oil in my car. You can listen to our advice if you wish, but as for you I am done wasting time replying to your questions and listening to your nonsense.

I wish you luck with TWS and your S65, please post photos of your first bearing changeout if you keep your car that long!

P.S.: No engine is designed around a specific engine oil...... An engine is designed and a suitable oil is specced based on its intended operating conditions and expected usage profile!!!

[kawasaki00]

Originally Posted by BMRLVR

To Longwong:

You started this thread to ask a question and now you are starting to question the answers..... Why ask a question if you know all the Answers?

Myself, regular guy and kawasaki00 have all tried to help answer your question(s) based on our experience and knowledge and experience.

I build and work on Large Diesel engines for a living....... Engines that spend nearly their entire life under 100% load in some of the harshest conditions in the world. My company don't accept engine failures lightly since the trucks I work on make over $10,000 per load of Oilsand they haul, and haul up to 25 loads a day. My company employs some of the best people in the industry, engineers, technicians, tribologists, reliability planers and all hours, maintenance and costs and downtime are tracked by our computer systems. Since I get paid big money to build these engines I don't owe it to the forum to come on here and share my knowledge and experience, I do this to share information and insight with the community!

Regular guy has intimate knowledge of the S65 due to his relationship with some serious engine building shops that have been involved in more than a dozen S65 builds of all kinds, LC SC strokers, NA Strokers, & SC LC stock displacement engines.

Kawasaki00 works for an engine builder that builds NASCAR engines and he has access to the state of the art in tooling and equipment.

Neither of us are a joke, and I will be adding clearance to my engine in the near future when I build me a stroker, until then I intend to use a 0W40 or 5W40 wt oil in my car. You can listen to our advice if you wish, but as for you I am done wasting time replying to your questions and listening to your nonsense.

I wish you luck with TWS and your S65, please post photos of your first bearing changeout if you keep your car that long!

P.S.: No engine is designed around a specific engine oil...... An engine is designed and a suitable oil is specced based on its intended operating conditions and expected usage profile!!!

[B767capt]

Thinking out loud here as I put Rotella T6 in for the break in. Will run it 1200 miles. Then I'm at a loss on what to run after that. I have a lot of LM 10W60 on the shelf but wondered if you run 50/50 mix of the LM and Rotella together. Is that a big no, no? The vanos system on my car can spike up to 1500 psi if I remember correctly so I wonder about that part of it too.

[BMRLVR]

Originally Posted by B767capt

Thinking out loud here as I put Rotella T6 in for the break in. Will run it 1200 miles. Then I'm at a loss on what to run after that. I have a lot of LM 10W60 on the shelf but wondered if you run 50/50 mix of the LM and Rotella together. Is that a big no, no? The vanos system on my car can spike up to 1500 psi if I remember correctly so I wonder about that part of it too.

I wouldn't worry about the pressure of the VANOS system at all........ All fluids are stable under pressure....... Fluids are virtually incompressible.

My recommendation is to run an oil and stick with it, otherwise it will be difficult to see if the different viscosity oil is making any difference in bearing wear. I would personally take a loss on the LM or and try and sell it. If you decide on either the T6 5W40 or M1 0W 40 as your regular fill I am sure you will be fine, both are exceptional oils and should be more than up to the task of lubricating the S65.

Maybe Kawasaki00 can chime in with his view on this!

[B767capt]

Good point. Thanks.

[W///]

Hopefully that keeps Longwong out of this thread. To all the other guys here, thank you so much for your insight. I've learned a ton.

This is such useful information to guys that are out of warranty and can run any oil they want. I'm learning towards M1, but going to pick kawasaki's brain tomorrow when I see him for the mountain run.

[Richbot]

FWIW, Mobil 1 0w40 is now available in 5-quart jugs at Wally World for $23-27, pretty much chops the cost of a change in half

[kawasaki00]

Originally Posted by BMRLVR

I wouldn't worry about the pressure of the VANOS system at all........ All fluids are stable under pressure....... Fluids are virtually incompressible.

My recommendation is to run an oil and stick with it, otherwise it will be difficult to see if the different viscosity oil is making any difference in bearing wear. I would personally take a loss on the LM or and try and sell it. If you decide on either the T6 5W40 or M1 0W 40 as your regular fill I am sure you will be fine, both are exceptional oils and should be more than up to the task of lubricating the S65.

Maybe Kawasaki00 can chime in with his view on this!

Mixing oil is no issue, I do not mix group 3 with group 4 or esther based but that is just my preference.
Mobil 1 0w40 is one of the few true group 4 base oils
The 0w40 castrol made in belgium is thinner than M1 and is still a cracked group 3 if I recall.

[Fsarc]

Originally Posted by kawasaki00

I did along with about 5 other oils. The 5-30 castrol is really of no use to us.
The German castrol 0w30 is almost a 40 wt. however it is not a sn oil. The new belgium castrol 0w40 is really good and is a sn. The mobil 1 0w40 is the best of the bunch really. It is the heaviest of the 40 wt oils I have tested. I checked the 5w50 castrol has and it is higher in zinc but it will shear quickly to a 40 wt.
it really is a lot to go through but thinnest to thick is as follows
Castrol 5w30
German castrol 0w30
Belgium 0w40. This oil is replacing the current 5w40 on shelves
Mobil 1 0w40
Rotella t6
Mobil 1 0w50
Castrol5w50

Multiple 10w40s can go here
Castrol tws
Liquid moly 10w60

I would definitely not run the liquid moly because it does not have the cold flow properties as the tws but is equal hot.
I will do my best to answer questions on other oil if someone has some.

Thank you for all of your contributions. Any opinions on Red Line Synthetic Oil and which would you recommend based upon "their" techincal properties? I've listed their 10W60 as well:




10W60

TYPICAL PROPERTIES


API Service Class SN/SM/SL/CF
SAE Viscosity Grade (Motor Oil) 10W60
Vis @ 100°C, cSt 25.9
Vis @ 40°C, cSt 170.4
Viscosity Index 187
CCS Viscosity, Poise, @*C 65@-25
Pour Point, °C -45
Pour Point, °F -49
Flash Point, °C 234
Flash Point, °F 454
NOACK Evaporation Loss,1hr @ 482°F (250°C), % 6
HTHS Vis, cP 150°C, ASTM D4741 5.8



5W50

TYPICAL PROPERTIES


API Service Class SN/SM/SL/CF
SAE Viscosity Grade (Motor Oil) 5W50
Vis @ 100°C 21.0
Vis @ 40°C 130
Viscosity Index 186
CCS Viscosity, Poise, @*C 60@-30
Pour Point, °C -45
Pour Point, °F -49
Flash Point, °C 232
Flash Point, °F 450
NOACK Evaporation Loss,1hr @ 482°F (250°C), % 6
HTHS Vis, cP 150°C, ASTM D4741 5.0




0W40

TYPICAL PROPERTIES


API Service Class SN/SM/SL/CF
Viscosity Grade SAE 0W40
Vis @ 100°C, cSt 15.4
Vis @ 40°C, cSt 86
Viscosity Index 190
CCS Viscosity, Poise, @*C 57@-35
Pour Point, °C -60
Pour Point, °F -76
Flash Point, °C 230
Flash Point, °F 446
NOACK Evaporation Loss,1hr @ 482°F (250°C), % 9
HTHS Vis, cP 150°C, ASTM D4741 4.0




5W30

TYPICAL PROPERTIES


API Service Class SN/SM/SL/CF
Viscosity Grade SAE 5W30
Vis @ 100°C, cSt 11.9
Vis @ 40°C, cSt 71
Viscosity Index 166
CCS Viscosity, Poise, @*C 60@-30
Pour Point, °C -45
Pour Point, °F -49
Flash Point, °C 232
Flash Point, °F 450
NOACK Evaporation Loss,1hr @ 482°F (250°C), % 6
HTHS Vis, cP 150°C, ASTM D4741 3.7



5W40

TYPICAL PROPERTIES


API Service Class SN/SM/SL/CF
Viscosity Grade SAE 5W40
Vis @ 100°C, cSt 15.6
Vis @ 40°C, cSt 97
Viscosity Index 174
CCS Viscosity, Poise, @*C 58@-30
Pour Point, °C -45
Pour Point, °F -49
Flash Point, °C 232
Flash Point, °F 450
NOACK Evaporation Loss,1hr @ 482°F (250°C), % 6
HTHS Vis, cP 150°C, ASTM D4741 4.4

[Longwong]

Sorry guys my post came off wrong I REALLY appreciate the information and have spent days digging into reading as much as I could about oil, clearances, bearings, viscosity etc as I could. Just to make sure I was educated enough to make an educated decision for my car. After all that, including all the great information you guys gave, I gathered that since I (for good or bad) drive my car hard everyday, and live in warm climate with no winter, and my oil is always at half-way or beyond (usually beyond) that I got a better idea that if the vision of this car was harder driving that my educated guess was perhaps they designed the car not to fail when pushed hard with less importance on people who drive it overly calm or live in cold climates and never get the oil temps up... Perhaps a wrong direction for them but I feel it was probably a calculated decision. Of course I do not know.

But without all you smart people and your info I would not have been able to make an educated decision for me. I really appreciate it and sorry if it came off wrong. I just put faith in M engineers or any other experts. Not that they cant make a mistake but this engine was certainly not "new" They learned from the e46, then the e60 s85 so I just feel that they changed the bearing part number for a reason and did not change the oil recommendation so they must have known that this is the best combination because if you look at what their motive is-having bearing problems certainly does not look good so I would think given whatever constraints, this was the best oil recommendation taking into account everything including engine protection for people who choose to drive the car hard, at high revs and at high temps

[kawasaki00]

Originally Posted by Fsarc

Thank you for all of your contributions. Any opinions on Red Line Synthetic Oil and which would you recommend based upon "their" techincal properties? I've listed their 10W60 as well:

0W40

TYPICAL PROPERTIES


API Service Class SN/SM/SL/CF
Viscosity Grade SAE 0W40
Vis @ 100°C, cSt 15.4
Vis @ 40°C, cSt 86
Viscosity Index 190
CCS Viscosity, Poise, @*C 57@-35
Pour Point, °C -60
Pour Point, °F -76
Flash Point, °C 230
Flash Point, °F 446
NOACK Evaporation Loss,1hr @ 482°F (250°C), % 9
HTHS Vis, cP 150°C, ASTM D4741 4.0




5W40

TYPICAL PROPERTIES


API Service Class SN/SM/SL/CF
Viscosity Grade SAE 5W40
Vis @ 100°C, cSt 15.6
Vis @ 40°C, cSt 97
Viscosity Index 174
CCS Viscosity, Poise, @*C 58@-30
Pour Point, °C -45
Pour Point, °F -49
Flash Point, °C 232
Flash Point, °F 450
NOACK Evaporation Loss,1hr @ 482°F (250°C), % 6
HTHS Vis, cP 150°C, ASTM D4741 4.4

Either of these too, the VI is much higher on the 0w but has higher NOACK so it is really a toss up.
If looking at the 0w stuff I would only run the Mobil 1.

[Cidle]

Originally Posted by kawasaki00

Either of these too, the VI is much higher on the 0w but has higher NOACK so it is really a toss up.
If looking at the 0w stuff I would only run the Mobil 1.

Are you referring to off the shelf M1 0w40 or the M1 racing line?

Keep all the great knowledge coming guys, greatly appreciated!!!

[Richbot]

Pretty sure we're talking about the BMW LL01 approved Mobil 1 from earlier posts in the thread

[kawasaki00]

Originally Posted by cidle323

Are you referring to off the shelf M1 0w40 or the M1 racing line?

Keep all the great knowledge coming guys, greatly appreciated!!!

Originally Posted by Richbot

Pretty sure we're talking about the BMW LL01 approved Mobil 1 from earlier posts in the thread

Yes, thats it. The Mobil is really about a 2.5w-45 relative to other oils with the same nomenclature

[regular guy]

Originally Posted by Longwong

I agree with another fellow who questioned several random people who are not engineers let alone engineers who designed, built and specced the s65 engine for the M division. The tws for the e46 may have been a "fix" but the s65 was designed with plenty of time to look at bearing clearences and oil choices. I really find it hard to believe a few random guys know better than the m division.

After reading a lot, I really feel it is often the guys who do not get their oil temps high enough consistently and don't drive the car consistently hard enough to get the oil up to a good temp. I have always followed strictly keeping revs low until oil temps up to near middle. Then I daily push the car hard enough to keep the oil needle at the middle or higher in summer. Car has almost 60k, runs stronger than the day I bought it new and change oil every 7500 since day 1. Change sparks every 10k-15k, air filter every 7500 and drive it like I stole it once engine is warm.

I believe the M division knows what clearences to pick and which oil to use. It just seems silly to think they made the wrong decision. Rather people buy the wrong car and don't use the m3 and the s65 engine for how it was built and designed which is to get the operating temps nice and high, and use the high revs which inherently get the oil hot.

You can't design an oil and engine for all walks of life. The focus of the car was to make power at high rpms and to push the car. So that is how they designed it and spec'ed the oil. If you never push the car than the m3 was not designed and likely it is those people who suffer from the bearing issues IMO

Driving the way you do puts you more at risk using stock clearance, not less as you're thinking. Here's the way our shop explained it to the customer whose engine clearance was measured.

The stock BMW clearance is fine for the guy who drives the car as a grocery getter. It's not OK for the guy who is running 10-10ths all the time. For the guy who short shifts 90% of the time and occastionally sees 8400, stock clearance is fine. But for the guy who lives at 8400 all the time, you need the extra clearance. The customer took the advice, and added the extra clearance.

It's the same thing kawasaki is saying...just a different way of saying it.

[mtbkr31]

Originally Posted by kawasaki00

Could you check what the pressure is hot at idle?

The oil pressure during idle after driving the car for over 30 miles in mixed highway and city is around 32 +- 1 psi.

While in 6th gear (I have a manual) at around 3200 rpm oil pressure is around 66 or so psi.