Not sure if it was mentioned here before.
BBC Watchdog reported that few years old BMW N47 engines can fail suddenly due to timing chain snapping.
After that I looked up on web and discovered that car forums are flooded with complaint.
|
|
Looks like getting rid of the X1 was a good move !
|
Makers make mistakes, its how they deal with the problem and how they protect their customers thats more important, hence how well Toyota have ridden their storms and their reputation has if anything strengthened.
How are BMW behaving with covering failures out of warranty?
|
>>How are BMW behaving with covering failures out of warranty?
They don't want to know ... unless it has full pain dealer s/history.
|
>> They don't want to know ... unless it has full pain dealer s/history.
As the EU ruled that manufacturers could not discriminate against cars that had been serviced by 3rd parties for resale/tradein, that would certainly seem to break the spirit, if not the letter, of those rules.
By definition, a car that is excluded from goodwill by reason of 3rd party servicing would have a lower value than one with a full manufacturer's history and we're back where we started.
|
Good will is precisely that, good will, which comes into play after the new car warranty has expired.
Even if the indie has serviced the car above and beyond the call of duty, there's no guarantee that the manufacturers recommended service schedule has been adhered to using specified lubricants, filters etc.
|
|
Probably worth remembering just how many of these engines (it's the 2.0 diesel isn't it?) are around to put the number of complaints in context, but still not great!!
|
I agree that when something like this happens its interesting to see how they behave.
To add some balance, the bit I saw from last weeks watchdog was a guy in a 100K 3 series with a history from an indy. BMW's reply was that as they had no way of establishing what had / had not been done at the services plus the car had covered 100K they they would not help, but where the affected cars had full dealer history then they had made substantial goodwill contributions
Now if it was me I would be gutted, and would have a go for goodwill, but think I would accept that a 100K car out of the dealer network is not likely to be well received
|
|
Seems fair to me though - BMW's goodwill policy is pretty good - as long as it's dealer serviced. Why should they bail someone out if they go outside the dealer network....you pays your money etc. etc..
|
The problem is the manufacturers want their cake and eat it. Take my Volvo as an example. My car has a. mixture of maindealer and independent service history. The brakes up until May this year had only ever been serviced by Volvo. My brake shoes were renewed by Volvo in December, they failed in April. 12 months parts warranty, what 12 months parts warranty ? Volvo do not want to know about poor workmanship in their dealer network.
Hardly surprising a manufacturer will wriggle on a four figure claim.
|
>> Seems fair to me though - BMW's goodwill policy is pretty good - as long
>> as it's dealer serviced. Why should they bail someone out if they go outside the
>> dealer network....you pays your money etc. etc..
>>
My own experience backs this up. Always used BMW dealers for servicing and always got goodwill (even to 100% of cost).
Dreading ever finding myself in a similar situation with Audi though. They are not exactly the most customer-friendly company in the business.
|
So BMW developed an engine where chain cam is at the back of the engine - requiring full dismount of engine for inspection/require. They claimed it is a non serviceable item. Yet lots of engines failed (few at lowish mileage ~30k).
Usually cam chains don't require servicing. But why they had to put it at the back of the engine? Definitely it is a design issue and they should not try to fleece customers to repair it.
|
>>But why they had to put it at the back of the engine?
There are two good reasons
For an engine mounted longitudinally, putting the drive chain at the back means the front end of the engine can be lower, and this helps design the front end of the car for pedestrian safety.
Taking the drive for the cams from the flywheel end of the crank means that the drive chain wheel is closer to a nodal point along the crank, and is therefore subject to lower levels of torsional vibration, and this should give a more quiet drive, and longer life.
|
Thanks - that's quite an insight. Do all RWD/longitudinal engines have cams at the back?
Although in this case it is not giving longer life :-)
|
>>Do all RWD/longitudinal engines have...
No, but, it's becoming a more popular design choice.
|
>>Although in this case it is not giving longer life :-)
Yes.
It's good design in principle, but there's clearly some other detail which is letting the drive down.
|
|
According to various sites, it's largely down to the crankshaft sprocket design in N47 engines. Surprisingly, because chain/sprocket design is well established, there is said to be an issue with the profile of the sprocket teeth. What it is, is not specified, so I imagine there is more to it as usual. So take with a pinch of salt. There is info about a redesigned sprocket, BUT, the original sprocket is welded to the end of the crankshaft: big money to rectify.
|
I suppose in theory a timing chain should be maintenance free through the life of the engine, so maintenance considerations would play very little part in the choice of location when the engine was being designed.
It could be far worse in any case. Many four cylinder motorcycle engines have the timing chain running centrally, between cylinders 2 and 3.
|
>>four cylinder motorcycle engines
With a clutch on one end, and a magneto/generator on the other end of the crank, a 4 cylinder motorbike engine will tend to have the nodal point closer to half way along the shaft, so, that's the sensible place to drive the cam from.
|
>> With a clutch on one end, and a magneto/generator on the other end of the
>> crank, a 4 cylinder motorbike engine will tend to have the nodal point closer to
>> half way along the shaft, so, that's the sensible place to drive the cam from.
>>
>>
Well, if nobody else is going to ask what the hell is a nodal point, neither am I.
|
>>Well, if nobody else is going to ask what the hell is a nodal point, neither am I.
Very shrewd.
:-)
It's a point along the shaft, where at the resonant frequency, there is no vibration. One one side of the point, the shaft is twisting one way, and on the other side of the node, twisting the other way.
Conversely, the nose of the crank is where the vibration is usually largest, and so it can be a good place to fit the crankshaft damper.
The old fashioned high school physics demonstration of this was using small slips, or "riders" of paper which would bounce along a vibrating string until a nodal point was reached, and the "rider" would stop.
The two dimensional equivalent of this is to scatter chalk dust or fine sand on a vibrating plate, and the nodal lines are where the sand/dust settles - google "Chladni" patterns for some piccies of this.
Last edited by: Number_Cruncher on Tue 18 Jun 13 at 15:40
|
I don't like the way BMW appear to handle these epidemic faults. Maybe there's something about the culture of the franchise or it's policy to suppress the knowledge of common problems.
Maybe it's just BMW GB, who have successfully positioned the brand here as something special for years, when they are really just Sierras with a propeller badge;)
The Nikasil engines were replaced in hundreds, but customers were commonly told their problem was unusual, and when the cat was out of the bag blame was put on supermarket fuel (which presumably met the required standards for everybody else). That was decades ago but not much seems to have changed.
There was the wheel cracking saga, which they stuck to blaming customers, roads, anything but themselves, for until a studio full of disgruntled customers appeared with Ann Robinson.
They'd do better to say "our cars employ advanced technology for best performance and efficiency. Sometimes unexpected problems emerge - when they do, we fix them".
|
I agree Toyota are the best. Even replacing what I considered just worn brake pads and discs under warranty, nobody else would do that.
But Vauxhall bless their cotton socks fixed an engine that had gone bang after a cam belt snapped despite it having being serviced outside their dealer network for free, I was quite impressed.
|
Toyota have just done a recall on cars built in 2002, for a problem that has appeared sub 100 times worldwide and has never caused an accident. Not many manufacturers would look to do that on a car that's eleven years past its build date I imagine.
My experience of Toyota recalls is an apologetic approach, a free courtesy car whilst it's done if required, your car cleaned and vacuumed and a voucher for £30 for your trouble. That might just have been my dealer of course.
|
These timing chain failures happen to be on one of the most poular Diesels with very extended service intervals, similarly the engine is well known for lunching turbos at around 45k miles (happened on the family compact), fortunately almost all incl ours is/was covered by BMWs excellent new or used warranty.
There must be some other luddites out there apart from some of us who simply refuse to tow the line with such things and either change their own engine oil and filter mid term or get someone else to do so for them even the dealer.
Has anyone who's read various fora on this problem come across any evidence even anecdotal to link more 'enthusiastic' servicing to greater life span with this admittedly poor design?
|
You could also ask the question the other way - Is there any evidence to suggest that this failure has anything to do with lubrication?
NIL's post above suggests that the problem is to do with the design of the teeth on the crankshaft - the root cause of this failure could be a purely geometrical error, and have nothing at all to do with servicing or oil.
|
Indeed that why i asked if anyone had seen evidence anecdotal or otherwise.
It works the other way too.
Intereresting if BMW have given the real reason, poor sprocket design/fitment, doesn't that leave them open to a group case of not fit for purpose retro claims from affected owners if servicing made no difference.
Last edited by: gordonbennet on Tue 18 Jun 13 at 14:37
|
>> Indeed that why i asked if anyone had seen evidence anecdotal or otherwise.
One of my colleague's catchphrase in relation to medical studies went along the lines of:
"What's the plural of anecdote? Not evidence."
Very drole, but anecdote at best can help you look further with scientific study, and at worst leads to major harm it treated as gospel (metaphorical 'gospel' - the real one has little to do with truth or science I expect!).
Similarly, as soon as someone utters "Well it stands to reason........" I usually find whatever follows contains no evidence and is often completely false.
|
>>>>>Intereresting if BMW have given the real reason, poor sprocket design/fitment, doesn't that leave them open to a group case of not fit for purpose retro claims from affected owners if servicing made no difference.
I had a similar type of experience with VW over perforation on a front wing. Very common problem, lots of cases on the forums but VW absolutely refused flat to agree it was a warranty issue (12 year anti-perforation warranty, of course it is you fools!) they even had a tech bulletin acknowledging it and the repair procedure. They dealt with it through customer services as a goodwill payment as in their words the car had FVWSH and customer loyalty - I had owned several VAG cars (gave them the reg numbers and supplying dealer.) I suspect BMW are following a similar plan.
|
In the late 1990s I had a 323i that was affected by the Nikasil problem. The dealer reckoned that it was caused by fuel from the Stanlow refinery(!) but assured me that the block and pistons would be replaced at BMW's expense. The only cost to me was having to top up the engine oil rather frequently while waiting for the relevant parts - they were in short supply.
The dealer had a 5 series courtesy car on extended loan from BMW to loan to affected customers.
The car did have a BMW service history.
|
|
I read somewhere that the Niksail failure was due to poor quality UK fuel, lack of 98RON being one thing....
|
|
Reading up on-line suggests the failure of Nikasil was due to relatively high levels of sulphur in some fuels. I think the maximum permitted level of sulphur has been reduced over the years so maybe survivors are now ok!
|
Interesting stuff. I used to blindly follow manufacturers recommended service intervals but on my latest car it has a feature where its little brain works out when it needs a service based on the type of usage it gets and flashes a message on the dash to that effect. In my case it seems to run to about 19,000 miles between required visits which feels like a lot. Influenced mainly by some here I have shortened that to 15,000 mile intervals.
The service manager at the MB dealer I use just says something like "very wise sir" when I mention that I want it done early. Maybe a cynic would say that "he would say that wouldn't he" but maybe, just maybe, he actually agrees. I'll almost certainly never know, but when it's a car I need to rely on to be a daily functional element of my ability to earn money and indeed generate profit for my employer, I ( and my boss who's actually paying for the service ) prefer to hedge our bets.
In the scheme of things, if I run this car for 100,000 miles it'll have 6 services instead of 5 which if it serves to keep it in better order feels like a reasonable outcome.
|
|
HDB, a question if I may? As someone who has never had a company car (and won't) does your boss/company mind you taking it in early?
|
@RP - 60,000
@sooty - No, he does the same with his fortunately.
|
|
That's good for you, I take it's not a contract company for your car? Reading about some of those with company cars a company can make all the choices?
|
|
No, we own all the company cars. I think when they're leased its up to the leasing company to decide whether to approve work and tyres etc. but I'm lucky in the respect that my immediate boss is the founder and CEO of the company so I haven't got any intermediate hierarchy to keep sweet ! The FD moans a bit sometimes about such things but I just remind him that without me and my team he wouldn't have any chuffing numbers to add up and while we continue to give him more black ones than red ones to put on his spreadsheets he should be happy !
|
|
Ok thanks I can imagine how much more convenient having that arrangment is than doing it through a company.
|
My experience of the 3 major UK leasing companies is that they will keep maintenance costs to a minimum. To be fair they always allowed fitment of matching original equipment tyres and with variable servicing intervals would happily let you book it in as soon as the countdown warning appeared (so maybe 1000 miles early). However, they wouldn't diverge from whatever the manufacturer stipulated and why would they? Their business is to run new-ish cars as profitably as possible, they're not a charity and (frankly) the subsequent owner takes the risk of any failures due to extended servicing but probably saves 50% or more on the purchase price ?
However, I've never opted for variable servicing on my own cars, whilst my leased A4 demanded services every 18K miles my leased 330d only requested an oil change at 23K miles, were it my own or had I purchased it at the end of the lease (which was my original intention) then I'd have changed this to standard service intervals if BMW actually allows them these days ?
Back to the original post, at what point is a manufacturer deemed to no longer have responsibility for their product ? A car with 100K miles, no dealer service history and out of warranty surely cannot be their responsibility? I suspect all cars contain some design flaws due to the many many design decisions made during their inception, that's why cars are modified during their production life. If I had a 37 month old vehicle with full dealer service history and 30K miles on it then I might expect BMW to cough up but at some point (which I am deliberately not specifying) this smacks of 'something for nothing' to me.
|
|
They are liable for 6 years to the original owner if it can be proved the fault was there from day 1.
|
|
I guess chance of original owner hanging on the car, on 6th year, is quite slim. Under those cases, BMW might pay some "goodwill" gesture anyway.
|
However you look at it that engine has a design flaw that argues careless or hurried development engineering. Even BMW can't win them all.
We still haven't got a clear reason for these chain breakages though, despite N_C's admirable and informative posts on torsional vibration and nodal points which could well be the explanation.
In the vintage days when there were many designs, some sporting vehicles had gear driven ohcs, at least one with the drive in the middle of the engine. Perhaps some motorbikes still have gear drives, I wouldn't know.
I've tangled with a couple of chain-driven camshafts. Duplex chains seem a good idea. One thing I found odd was that new crankshaft sprockets had a v-shaped gap between the teeth rather than a rounded one. Obviously after some running the gaps would wear down into a more rounded shape, and the resulting whip in the chain would be taken up by a tensioner of some kind. As tensioners tend to be on one side of the chain run, the results of wear would include a slight change in valve timing...
I know it will sound fuddy-duddy but for smoothness, guts and trouble-free longevity you can't beat a really well-designed and properly adjusted pushrod engine in correct tune.
|
>>which could well be the explanation.
I offer no input at all about the cause of the failure - I was just talking about why a design engineer might choose to drive a cam from the flywheel end of the crank.
I think NIL's post about tooth shape might have something behind it, as apparently there has been a design change of these crankshafts.
Putting the tensioner is the naturally slack side of the chain is the best way to reduce any timing variation without going to extreme (expensive!) lengths.
Poppet valves themselves are rather a triumph of development over elegance; violent accelerations, snapping shut, hindering airflow, making noise; horrid things.
|
>> a triumph of development over elegance; violent accelerations, snapping shut, hindering airflow, making noise; horrid things.
2 strokes and rotaries have their problems too though N_C. And usable automotive turbines are not yet with us. Of course the internal combustion engine is a thoroughly Heath Robinson device, a triumph of development indeed. It's one of the things I like about it.
Poppet valves, valve seats and ports can be hand-fettled to improve airflow at high rpm... likewise inlet tracts. Different examples of the same design can vary a lot in power delivery, output, driveability and so on. Even new units straight from the factory can be noticeably different.
Horrid things. But I like them (and I bet you do too).
|
>> They are liable for 6 years to the original owner if it can be proved
>> the fault was there from day 1.
>>
Pretty tough to prove something like that.
|
>> They are liable for 6 years to the original owner if it can be proved
>> the fault was there from day 1.
Says who?
|
>> As someone who has never had a company car
>>
I'm finding it difficult understanding why on earth you'd even think about doing this with a company car. Why would you give two hoots about some later owner finding it longer-lived due to the more generous servicing in its early life?
Company car to me means "someone else's problem when it goes wrong". The best reason for having one.
|
Hoot hoot.
I'd still prefer a well maintained reliable car. Quite possibly quieter too if things aren't wearing away in watery, dirty oil; and more chance of picking up wearing brakes, seized calipers, leaks, damage if it's looked at properly.
And he's not paying for it.
|
|
...and I might want to buy it for herself if it's the right price and has been a good car. Done that before with company cars. They can be real bargains too. Especially if you know and trust the history it often doesn't feel so much of a risk buying a high miler if you're the one who's put the miles on and have avoided bending it.
|
|
Its very wide and has very expensive mirrors.......
|
|
Aye true enough, hadn't thought of that.
|
Good aftermarket parts industry though, all you need then is a competent MB indy to come up with a quick release fitting and you could have a stock of refurbed repaired units on the shelf ready to fit on an exchange basis when she gets home.
:-)
|
|
Been 6 months now since she's knocked any mirrors off. I'm starting to believe it was just a phase. She still swears it was the others...
|
What they need to do is link the power folding mirrors to either the parking sensor, radar cruise or the blind spot warning option in such a way that if it sensed something that could get a bit close to the mirror it folded it in. Problem solved!
edited to add that on the basis a metallic painted, heated, electric, power folding and auto dimming mirror with an indicator built in is probably rather pricey, prevention is better than cure!!
Last edited by: PeterS on Thu 20 Jun 13 at 17:43
|
Indeed, or perhaps one could simply drive with appropriate regard to the dimensions of one's car.
:-)
Just out of curiousity, I wonder what an MB dealer would charge for a new mirror? "Lots" probably...
Last edited by: Humph D'Bout on Thu 20 Jun 13 at 17:48
|
|
Well, if you have control over that then its definitely the best option... ;-)
|
>> Just out of curiousity, I wonder what an MB dealer would charge for a new
>> mirror? "Lots" probably...
>>
Depends on model, spec, and side...
Off the top of my head, say a E class, off side mirror...
Frame (main part, inc motor) £300.
trim and indicator £150
mirror glass (self dimming) £300. non dimming basic spec or NS £50.
(plus fitting!!)
Last edited by: swiss tony on Thu 20 Jun 13 at 22:56
|
>> Depends on model, spec, and side...
>>
>> Off the top of my head, say a E class, off side mirror...
>> Frame (main part, inc motor) £300.
>> trim and indicator £150
>> mirror glass (self dimming) £300. non dimming basic spec or NS £50.
>>
>> (plus fitting!!)
>>
>>
Ouch...! So with paint and VAT, well north of £1k for the whole thing. The glass at £300 is an eye opener though - I like the auo dimming wing mirror, but wondered why it was only MB that had them as standard fit (Audi and BMW charge extra on most models). Now I know - much more profitable once in service!!
|
Most trims come painted, and I included VAT. (as one should when quoting to retail customers)
The quoting of prices by other people often annoys me, it's plus VAT to trade, and inc VAT to retail... VERY easy to cover bases even if you're not sure if the customer is trade or retail....
'That's £100.00 plus VAT, so a total of £120.00 including'
|
|
Ah Ok - thanks :-) That makes it just under £1k fitted at MB labour rates I expect... Since the cheapest E Class is around £30k, it could be 6% of the cost of a new one just to replace both wing mirrors ;-)
|
>> Ah Ok - thanks :-) That makes it just under £1k fitted at MB labour
>> rates I expect... Since the cheapest E Class is around £30k, it could be 6%
>> of the cost of a new one just to replace both wing mirrors ;-)
Apparently there's quite a big problem with people nicking BMW X5 mirrors and they're a couple of grand a pair to replace. Yikes!
|
>>
>> Apparently there's quite a big problem with people nicking BMW X5 mirrors and they're a
>> couple of grand a pair to replace. Yikes!
>>
I remember reading the same thing about mk3 Cavalier heated mirrors in the early 90s at about £250 each.
Scumbags are going up in the world, it seems ;-)
|
|
All this talk of expensive mirrors is giving me dyspepsia...
|
CRV II - door mirror glass with heater element from Honda was under £20.
|
>>
>> >> Depends on model, spec, and side...
>> >>
>> >> Off the top of my head, say a E class, off side mirror...
>> >> Frame (main part, inc motor) £300.
>> >> trim and indicator £150
>> >> mirror glass (self dimming) £300. non dimming basic spec or NS £50.
Priced one up today for Hump's car (guessed a bit on spec...)
Frame 235.00 +v
cover 112.00 +v
Glass 304.00 +v
£651 + v
total £781 inc vat.
|
>> Blimey!
>>
I guess you will take more care going through gaps tomorrow? ;-)
Last edited by: swiss tony on Fri 21 Jun 13 at 21:30
|
Nah, like a ninja, me.
:-)
|
BMW - Watchdog - engine failure - R.P.
