Yikes. Blown engines?
M5, M6 oil pumps faulty: deliveries halted
Posted On Sep. 23, 2012
The 2013 BMW M5 and M6 Coupe and Convertible are unquestionably very good cars. But it appears about two month's production of them are fitted with faulty oil pumps--which may fail so catastrophically and suddenly as to result in "severe engine damage" due to a complete loss of oil pressure.
According to a Reuters report, BMW sent a technical service message to its dealers of a potential problem with the oil pump on 2013 M5 and M6 models equipped with the 4.4-liter S63Tü twin-turbo V-8 engine. BMW found a manufacturing defect in vehicles built between July and September 2012. BMW is contacting owners affected by the issue.
The defect could cause the engines to suddenly lose oil pressure, resulting in significant engine damage. Deliveries of cars equipped with the S63Tü engine have been halted until they can be inspected and repaired prior to customer delivery.
That's not good. It's also not something that appears to have a quick and ready fix. One owner in the thread documenting the issue at Bimmerpost says he was told not to drive his car, the dealership would come pick it up--and they might have it "for a few weeks."
That's also not good. It's not just an inconvenience to the owners--most buyers of the 2013 M5 or M6 probably have another car or three in the garage--it's a black mark on the company's reputation, happening nearly at launch of the 2013 cars. First impressions are important, and this isn't a good one. The notice outlining the problem to BMW dealers says more information will be coming shortly.
If the engine blows, will the radio still play engine noises when you get on the loud pedal?
At least BMW is not trying to sweep the issue under the rug..
I look forward to a day, about six or seven years into the future, when everyone is afraid to buy them because they read on the internet that all M5s and M6s are plagued by faulty oil pumps that will destroy the engine in your bargain basement BMW M car moments after you roll out of the original owner's driveway while tears of depreciation roll down his face.
You mean the same way that every E39 M5 suffers from massive oil consumption, will clog EGR passages in the head monthly, needs new MAFs with every oil change and has a cooling system that will explode as soon as the odometer clicks over 100,000? 
So...should have stuck with the V-10? 
I was talking to a BMW insider friend of mine at the O'Fest Club Race this past weekend and he told me he could not believe that they did it it again with a flagship vehicle this time.
It is basically the same issue as the M50/52 S50/52 oil pump nut falling off. They will have to recall all of the ones delivered already, drop the pan, re-torque and ensure it is not ever going to fall off. DOH!
oldtin
SuperDork
9/26/12 10:03 a.m.
Liebe BMW, bitte lassen Sie mich Ihnen vorstellen ...
yamaha wrote:
Appleseed wrote:
So...should have stuck with the V-10?
It sounded better......
I thought the V10 sounded like ass
yamaha
Dork
9/26/12 10:08 a.m.
In reply to mad_machine:
Its still better than the M42/44 we're both used to.......
oldtin wrote:
Liebe BMW, bitte lassen Sie mich Ihnen vorstellen ...
I have a crap ton of that stuff sitting in stock.....perhaps I should call up the bmw dealerships and give quotes?
dyintorace wrote:
That's also not good. It's not just an inconvenience to the owners--most buyers of the 2013 M5 or M6 probably have another car or three in the garage--it's a black mark on the company's reputation, happening nearly at launch of the 2013 cars. First impressions are important, and this isn't a good one. The notice outlining the problem to BMW dealers says more information will be coming shortly.
It's nothing new. They've been releasing poorly engineered product on their buyers for years. Remember the Nikasil blocks?
amg_rx7 wrote:
It's nothing new. They've been releasing poorly engineered product on their buyers for years. Remember the Nikasil blocks?
Not to pick nits... but this one isn't an engineering issue at all and the Nikasil thing can be forgiven (the handling of claims by BMW USA cannot). This one is an assembly / process issue that will be fixed at the plant w/o changing a single part on the car. At the dealership, it will involve a torque wrench and maybe a drop of 262.
The Nikasil issue... was caused by sulfur content in low quality fuel. They should have known that some markets for the car would have crap fuel but much of europe where the cars are designed would have never encountered the problem. So, it was a "blindsided by unforseen consequences" sort of materials selection issue. Unfortunately the UK and a lot of the US get garbage gasoline. The cars sold in Sweden (and the rest of mainland EU) are all still just fine.
yamaha
Dork
9/26/12 12:23 p.m.
GPS is right, wasn't the issue in the US mainly due to owners not running premium fuel(for the most part)
soooo how about explaining the part where E46 325/328 rear control arms tore out of the subframes? Or the E46 ZF torque converters needing replacement every 70k miles or so? what about the E46 GM transmission "forgetting" that it had reverse gear? or the numerous oil and intake leaks present in every E46 ever made in the history of the world?
E92 twin turbo fuel pump failure anyone?
Yeah. BMW is a reliable company
gimpstang wrote:
Or the E46 ZF torque converters needing replacement every 70k miles or so? what about the E46 GM transmission "forgetting" that it had reverse gear? or the numerous oil and intake leaks present in every E46 ever made in the history of the world?
E92 twin turbo fuel pump failure anyone?
No BMW I've ever owned had one of these so called "Torque Converters" or "Turbos". You must be thinking of one of the ones aimed at effeminate men, cripples and secretaries.
Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote:
gimpstang wrote:
Or the E46 ZF torque converters needing replacement every 70k miles or so? what about the E46 GM transmission "forgetting" that it had reverse gear? or the numerous oil and intake leaks present in every E46 ever made in the history of the world?
E92 twin turbo fuel pump failure anyone?
No BMW I've ever owned had one of these so called "Torque Converters" or "Turbos". You must be thinking of one of the ones aimed at effeminate men, cripples and secretaries.
I completely agree, If it isn't a high revving n/a engine with 3 pedals and a lever, it doesn't deserve a ///M badge.....
Not worried about what the secretary wants or such....
oldtin wrote:
Liebe BMW, bitte lassen Sie mich Ihnen vorstellen ...
Invading Poland isn't a solution to this problem.
In reply to DukeOfUndersteer:
Sure it is....
mad_machine wrote:
I thought the V10 sounded like ass
If my farts sounded like a V-10, I'd call it a day.
In reply to Giant Purple Snorklewacker:
Lack of robustness to fuel is ok, then. interesting.
That very, very, very much screams engineering issue.
It would be interesting to read the sulfur claim, since US fuel is actually quite good, and has been for a long time. Blaming things on the fuel is old hat.
If not for the high performance nature of the car line, well (aka- if happend to the Camry, or Civic, or F150, hell would be having snow ball fights)
In reply to alfadriver:
The fuel in europe has less contaminants......IIRC, this was part of their crackdown on emissions. Ours is NOT better by any means......well, aside from countrymark in the midwest. CM 90+ is epic win.....lacking ethanol naturally.
IIRC, the Nikasil problem happened about 15 years ago.
Keith Tanner wrote:
IIRC, the Nikasil problem happened about 15 years ago.
It did. Closer to 18 actually. The cars were on the market in '95. BMW Gmbh handled it well but BMW USA left an unsavory taste in the mouths of people who forked over big $$ by not just replacing them until they exhibited symptoms.
When Alfa says blaming the fuel is old hat - he is referring to this incident of how everyone learned that they need to be cautious of the lowest common denominator world-wide, not just where they do the testing.
