Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris F.
Well hello to you too ard, thanks for the lecture? 
I don't think either one of us can say whether the engine in the X Tim is looking at is within spec or out of spec without looking at BMWs warranty history on the N63 and a number of other things - the timing chain issues seem to be caused by a lot of stop and go traffic (or so someone said), and it was my understanding the engine runs hot, hence the more frequent oil changes.
Do you know exactly what BMW is analyzing when they hook the car into ISTA/D and send the data via a PUMA case? I don't know, and I'm sure that's proprietary information that a class action lawyer would love to get their hands on.
Having said that, I don't know how this particular vehicle was driven, a 2011 with 80k+ seems to me would be a lot of highway miles, but I don't know.
Chris |
Sorry, I tend to come off like that...
I took a position purposefully...in fact I always tend to take a 'worst case' view.... BMW dealers, car salesmen, etc...and even members here will post "most likely". Or worse, "what we hope" or "what BMW tells us". So to counter that mindset I try to present the worst case and what a buyer/owner needs to consider or protect themselves from.
Anyway, nobody is talking about the real truths behind this N63 action. Everyone seems excited about 'new parts'.... BMW doesnt take a $$millions hit for 'customer satisfaction'. IMO there is a real and major risk here, which is why they took action. I think the critical failure mode is: rich running>>>reduced oil lubrication due to fuel shear & long BMW change intervals>>engine wear>>>chain wear (aka "stretch"). Is it injectors? is it MAFs? And I think you are correct that PUMA develops an assessment of cause when they read multiple parameters- injector timing, cam/valve timing, lot numbers, etc.