X5 4.4 - Sludge in engine and oil filter housing... help!

[X5 Meister]

I'd have to double check but I know that from 2002+ it was 100,000 miles and not lifetime.

Coolant change interval went from 4 years in 2003 to lifetime in 2004+.

Originally Posted by FSETH

Yes, they sure did, but I am not positive when that was.

[JCL]

Originally Posted by X5 Meister

I'd have to double check but I know that from 2002+ it was 100,000 miles and not lifetime.

Coolant change interval went from 4 years in 2003 to lifetime in 2004+.

Meister, some good detailed information in your posts above. One comment would be that BMW can't be said to be changing their recommendations (which implies that the same engine or transmission is under discussion) if in fact the components changed from year to year. Your note shows that different engines have different maintenance recommendations. It isn't all about extending the intervals, it is about optimizing the maintenance cost when considering risks and other factors. If BMW are providing different recommendations for different engines (in the same model year) then that implies to me that the marketing department is not simply saying don't maintain them, but that the engineering department is saying that in this case, with this usage profile, with this engine, do the following.....

For most components, changing the fluid has little downside. For coolant, I would do it every four years, as the only downside I see is the environmental impact of disposal of the used fluid. You aren't going to negatively impact the cooling system. You can get coolant tested, but that is probably more work than reasonable.

The tranmission is the only component that I wouldn't touch, and it is due to the risk, which I have seen the consequences of. I know that I called it slight (Sunny keeps reminding me) but it is still greater than the offsetting benefit in my mind.

If I had a 100,000 mile warranty, and a 100,000 mile fluid change interval recomendation from BMW, I certainly wouldn't give BMW cause to deny warranty (when I fully expect the trans to fail anyway) by touching it. It is very easy to tell if a transmission has been opened.

Yes, it is a thoroughly dead horse, but I suspect some people are still finding out new information.

[sunny5280]

Originally Posted by X5 Meister

I'd have to double check but I know that from 2002+ it was 100,000 miles and not lifetime.

I would like to hear JCL and other's explanation as to why BMW did this.

[FSETH]

Originally Posted by sunny5280

I would like to hear JCL and other's explanation as to why BMW did this.

Last ditch effort here. From what I have read, they changed the definition of "lifetime" regarding the trans fluid because nobody knew what lifetime meant. Lifetime of the car, the component, the original ownership, etc. They threw a number on it to try and clear up some confusion. I have not heard that it was due to the fluid going bad, trans failures or anything related to maintenance. Pretty sure it had more to do with marketing and customer relations.

[X5 Meister]

Yeah but they went in the opposite direction with the coolant and you can ask the same question !?

Originally Posted by FSETH

Last ditch effort here. From what I have read, they changed the definition of "lifetime" regarding the trans fluid because nobody knew what lifetime meant. Lifetime of the car, the component, the original ownership, etc. They threw a number on it to try and clear up some confusion. I have not heard that it was due to the fluid going bad, trans failures or anything related to maintenance. Pretty sure it had more to do with marketing and customer relations.

[sunny5280]

Originally Posted by X5 Meister

Yeah but they went in the opposite direction with the coolant and you can ask the same question !?

It's a foolish explanation. What he's saying is BMW decided, for marketing purposes, to recommend a proceedure alleged to cause transmission failure.

[FSETH]

Originally Posted by sunny5280

It's a foolish explanation. What he's saying is BMW decided, for marketing purposes, to recommend a proceedure alleged to cause transmission failure.

That explaination comes from Mike Miller.

We are officially done here sunny.

[BMWvoid]

Mike Miller's Alternative BMW Maintenance Schedule
Avus Autosport, Inc. Blog Mike Miller Alternative Maintenance Schedule

[JCL]

Originally Posted by sunny5280

It's a foolish explanation. What he's saying is BMW decided, for marketing purposes, to recommend a proceedure alleged to cause transmission failure.

BMW decided, for marketing purposes, to sell M vehicles in a country with 65 mph speed limits. Speeding is a procedure alleged to cause bodily harm. However, they probably figured they could move a few vehicles, and make a dollar. Good for them. What was your point?

[sunny5280]

Originally Posted by JCL

BMW decided, for marketing purposes, to sell M vehicles in a country with 65 mph speed limits. Speeding is a procedure alleged to cause bodily harm. However, they probably figured they could move a few vehicles, and make a dollar. Good for them. What was your point?

My point is, if we're told hold your assertion true to any reasonable degree, then BMW is recommending to their customers a needless proceedure that will result in transmission failure. Do you really think they'd do that for marketing reasons?