[GrannyShiftG80]

Originally Posted by destoyan

About the rods: I know few guys with blown engine because they pushed too much. Basically even with maxed stock turbos, you can bend rod and with hybrids (if torque is not in check, you def. blow engine).

About the bearings: I personally experienced it and saw how they look. I am building my engine and gearbox currently. At 9000 km (5600 mi) my main and rod bearings were already in bad shape. I know lots of other S58 opened engines with very little milage and they all had same issues. I assume it is the OEM oil and the Bearings materials.

About the clutch: A friend was running 25k km (15.5k mi) on stage 2 and he gave his gearbox for upgrade. Clutch was done. So basically above 900 nm (660-700 ft lbs) you will roast the clutch at some point.

For me:
1. Change frequently oil (3000 mi) and I think it is better to switch to different oil (not OEM).
2. Torque must be limited 650-700 ft lbs (if one plan to drive the car for a long term)
3. If one plans to go hybrids or frame - just do engine and gearbox (not worth the risk).

Any more bearing failures ?

[destoyan]

Originally Posted by Allenssmart

Any more bearing failures ?

I went with the B58 gen 1 bearings. 😂
But from what I saw recently, starting to believe that this wear is normal in the oem s58 bearings. They just designed that way. Car with 30 miles- they look the same like mine.

[chris719]

Originally Posted by destoyan

I went with the B58 gen 1 bearings. 😂
But from what I saw recently, starting to believe that this wear is normal in the oem s58 bearings. They just designed that way. Car with 30 miles- they look the same like mine.

I am starting to think this is a feature of the Glyco material they use on these bearings. They claim they are "intelligent" bearing materials that get harder after the wear-in layer is gone. How are your B58 IROX bearings holding up? I am still not sure why they used the S63 rod and bearing assembly in S58. The S63 and therefore S58 rod bearing is the same material used in N54, N55, S55, etc. The B58 bearing seems superior but there must be a reason unless they never validated the combination of S63 rod with new bearing design and didn't want to spend the money.

[forcefed]

Originally Posted by chris719

I am still not sure why they used the S63 rod and bearing assembly in S58.

It's not the s63 rod.

[yoandry]

Originally Posted by destoyan

I went with the B58 gen 1 bearings. 😂
But from what I saw recently, starting to believe that this wear is normal in the oem s58 bearings. They just designed that way. Car with 30 miles- they look the same like mine.

Then, there is this guy with 1000bhp s58 for 2years of beating. Quoted.
Rods are pretty much in the same condition.

[chris719]

Originally Posted by forcefed

It's not the s63 rod.

S58 technical training manual says:

The forged connecting rod of the S58 engine has a nominal length of 151.1 mm. The connecting rod is a carry-over part from the S63B44T4 engine.

[SwankPeRFection]

Originally Posted by yoandry

Then, there is this guy with 1000bhp s58 for 2years of beating. Quoted.
Rods are pretty much in the same condition.

Proper fueling and that Motec along with a really good tuner who’s dead on familiar with every inch of that standalone will get you an engine that won’t blow up. It’s all in the tuning really and where most general tuners will lean a lot on the ECU safeties to keep things in check for most street tunes, you can’t keep expecting timing pull via knock feedback to save the day. Most really good Motec standalone tuners will tune like the Euro and Aussie tuners tune and that is, they will load the drivetrain at every single load point on the tune when on the dyno and check the limits of that load point before the engine either doesn’t make any more power or it develops knock, then back off that limit by a good margin. What ends up happening is you get a tune that you literally can bang on 24/7 no matter what and the combustion chamber never gets anywhere near knock for correction safeties to even kick in. Those tuners know not to ride the safeties and their engines last. You don’t ride the bleeding edge of the VE of an engine at every load point and you won’t have issues. I never understood why more tuners in this country don’t have the same philosophy as the other side of the pond. 🤷*♂️

[AhsanU]

Originally Posted by SwankPeRFection

I never understood why more tuners in this country don’t have the same philosophy as the other side of the pond. 🤷*♂️

Hot take: I wouldn't put the blame solely on the tuners. A lot of it has to do with the end user and their quest for clout, fame, records, etc.

I think many tuners are pushing these S58's and even their own abilities to the bleeding edge simply because the end user wants to achieve xyz record or goal. Stock motor 1/4 with full interior, upgraded turbos with no interior, stock motor and trans on Pirelli's, and so forth. These micro records are being chased constantly and while it's great to have a goal in mind and executing them, doing so just for the sake of gloating on social media feels disingenuous and is leading to a lot of people finding the limits of the S58 as it stands now.

I understand aftermarket shops like MPower House, Autocraft, MLife, RK Tunes, etc. going to a friendly war with one another in order to obtain records and gain clientele - it's business. But when typically normal guys 'n gals with big wallets go at each other with these "micro records" - we see cars having issues and the negative affects of social media. The fact is, the S58 is still in its relative infancy. We don't even have a fully unlocked DME yet. femto don't fully unlock these DME's for MHD/bootmod3 to use at their unfettered disposal, hence the reason why it has to go back to femto for any sort of major update like rev2 on bootmod3.

[forcefed]

Originally Posted by chris719

S58 technical training manual says:

The forged connecting rod of the S58 engine has a nominal length of 151.1 mm. The connecting rod is a carry-over part from the S63B44T4 engine.

Sometimes training manuals are wrong, if you watch the evolve/mr vanos video on rebuilding the s58 they show both rods and the s63 is shorter and the s58 has a much wider bearing.

Skip to 5:02

https://youtu.be/o9X8zrMYy94

[chris719]

Originally Posted by forcefed

Sometimes training manuals are wrong, if you watch the evolve/mr vanos video on rebuilding the s58 they show both rods and the s63 is shorter and the s58 has a much wider bearing.

Skip to 5:02

https://youtu.be/o9X8zrMYy94

Guess I'm wrong, I thought they were confused in the video because he started saying S5 before he got cut off. I'm confused though because the specs for the bearings on S63 and S58 look the same at a quick glance but maybe the journals are wider.

[SwankPeRFection]

Originally Posted by AhsanU

We don't even have a fully unlocked DME yet. femto don't fully unlock these DME's for MHD/bootmod3 to use at their unfettered disposal, hence the reason why it has to go back to femto for any sort of major update like rev2 on bootmod3.

It was my understanding that this was due to how BMW had handled the lock of them and how FEMTO, while still able to unlock them, had some limitations in how they were able to still do it. Are you saying you have credible info that says otherwise and FEMTO is asking a premium for a DME unlock that “should” be the same as before but isn’t because of a decision they made to either keep control or make more money out of additional unrequired transactions? Please do elaborate.

[AshtonPJT]

Originally Posted by SwankPeRFection

It was my understanding that this was due to how BMW had handled the lock of them and how FEMTO, while still able to unlock them, had some limitations in how they were able to still do it. Are you saying you have credible info that says otherwise and FEMTO is asking a premium for a DME unlock that “should” be the same as before but isn’t because of a decision they made to either keep control or make more money out of additional unrequired transactions? Please do elaborate.

It’s all about money, they are still the only one that can unlock the ecu so why share that info with others and lose money. If femto shared the info with someone state side 80% of there revenue would be lost.

And from what I heard no one state side really wants to unlock due to possible lawsuit reasons with Bosch, over in Finland they are pretty much lawsuit safe.

[SwankPeRFection]

Originally Posted by AshtonPJT

It’s all about money, they are still the only one that can unlock the ecu so why share that info with others and lose money. If femto shared the info with someone state side 80% of there revenue would be lost.

And from what I heard no one state side really wants to unlock due to possible lawsuit reasons with Bosch, over in Finland they are pretty much lawsuit safe.

That’s not what the other poster alluded to. They said that FEMTO isn’t doing a true full unlock of the DME, that it was let’s call a soft unlock (possibly just a small bootloader change) to allow for running of a modified map, but perhaps they misunderstood how some of this stuff works. Traditionally, an unlock is a booloader bypass check where the ECU is told to just boot all the way to operational state without any checks on the checksum of the rest of its contents at the very least or basic level (it can get fancier with encryption, etc). This allows you to then modify the remainder of the flash which is all the calibration stuff by just changing the values of the calibration but not the structure in any way. So, you can tune it, but you can’t add features like multi-map or two-step or whatever unless those functions were originally built into the maps structure but dormant or not used by BMW (which I seriously doubt). The base bootloader instruction set also usually houses a memory addressing map which tells it where everything else if in the rest of the flash so it knows where all the functions/capabilities and maps are. I believe that when FEMTO is saying they need the DMEs back to be able to add features like map switching or other stuff BM3 is adding to their newer versions, FEMTO is having to reflash the base booloader and memory range addressing to allow for the new structure in the rest of the flash. This would be the only way the ECU would know where the tables and functions were for the new features. Think of it like a table of contents if you will. Without this base knowledge you wouldn’t know where in the book (ie the rest of the memory range which houses stuff) is. So yeah, since FEMTO doesn’t want to tell people how they procedurally gain low level access to the DME, no one else can easily modify them to allow either basic stock memory structure calibration changes (since the checksum would be different) and they also can’t change the base low level memory addressing scheme to add in new features either.

[AhsanU]

Originally Posted by SwankPeRFection

It was my understanding that this was due to how BMW had handled the lock of them and how FEMTO, while still able to unlock them, had some limitations in how they were able to still do it. Are you saying you have credible info that says otherwise and FEMTO is asking a premium for a DME unlock that “should” be the same as before but isn’t because of a decision they made to either keep control or make more money out of additional unrequired transactions? Please do elaborate.

Originally Posted by SwankPeRFection

That’s not what the other poster alluded to. They said that FEMTO isn’t doing a true full unlock of the DME, that it was let’s call a soft unlock (possibly just a small bootloader change) to allow for running of a modified map, but perhaps they misunderstood how some of this stuff works. Traditionally, an unlock is a booloader bypass check where the ECU is told to just boot all the way to operational state without any checks on the checksum of the rest of its contents at the very least or basic level (it can get fancier with encryption, etc). This allows you to then modify the remainder of the flash which is all the calibration stuff by just changing the values of the calibration but not the structure in any way. So, you can tune it, but you can’t add features like multi-map or two-step or whatever unless those functions were originally built into the maps structure but dormant or not used by BMW (which I seriously doubt). The base bootloader instruction set also usually houses a memory addressing map which tells it where everything else if in the rest of the flash so it knows where all the functions/capabilities and maps are. I believe that when FEMTO is saying they need the DMEs back to be able to add features like map switching or other stuff BM3 is adding to their newer versions, FEMTO is having to reflash the base booloader and memory range addressing to allow for the new structure in the rest of the flash. This would be the only way the ECU would know where the tables and functions were for the new features. Think of it like a table of contents if you will. Without this base knowledge you wouldn’t know where in the book (ie the rest of the memory range which houses stuff) is. So yeah, since FEMTO doesn’t want to tell people how they procedurally gain low level access to the DME, no one else can easily modify them to allow either basic stock memory structure calibration changes (since the checksum would be different) and they also can’t change the base low level memory addressing scheme to add in new features either.

Pretty much yeah, I believe so.

An example that gives credence to my claim is the fact that there are many out there running pre-June 2020 DME's on the G8X by getting their hands on X3M DME's from before that date. The X3M, remember, has the S58 and as a result, can be used on the G8X. Merrick, whom is the owner of M PowerHouse and is currently #3 on the list of fastest G80's out there, recently told me how nice it was that he didn't have to send his DME to femto at all since he's on a pre-June 2020 DME. When PTF released CustomROM, he had to just flash it whereas everyone that had a post June 2020 femto unlocked DME had to send their DME back to femto just to get CustomROM. Further evidence is found in how femto is handling the release of bootmod3's rev2 board. Again, all of us with already "unlocked" DME's from femto will have to send it in again to get rev2 functionality. If our DME's were truly unlocked, surely we could just flash it right? Nope, because it's not really completely unlocked.

femto are basically allowing the tuning platforms bootmod3 and MHD small bits of access to the DME in order to code and do the things that they need to do. You've said it in far more fancier terminology than I have, but you're correct - they're limiting functionality for sure. This is done so as to not have their unlock reverse engineered and figured out by someone else. This is part of the reason why rev2 is taking so long - PTF is being forced to do a lot of work with their hands tied behind their backs essentially, all because femto won't supply us completely unlocked DME. It's a business and I understand it, but it just completely sucks for the end user that has to pay exorbitant amounts just to get some relatively basic functionality.

It's extremely unlikely femto will ever completely unlock the DME as it'd literally turn their extremely profitable business to smithereens, but such is life. Thankfully, MaxxECU is showing strong promise as a port controller/ethanol analyser that connects via CAN bus and has a lot of functionality.

[Sedgehammer]

I was going to use the S58 for a swap into a 93 Defender. Based on possible bearing issues, would the B55 be better for what I am doing?

[Sedgehammer]

Originally Posted by destoyan

I am switching to 5w40
I know lots of guys running 5w40 and even thicker oil.

It is stupid that B58 has zero issues with bearings and S58 sux

Incase you didn't see my post at the end of this thread, I'll ask it directly. I am planning on putting a s58 in a 93 Defender. Would the B55 be better? looking for around high 500 to low 600 HP @ the wheels

[GrannyShiftG80]

Originally Posted by Sedgehammer

Incase you didn't see my post at the end of this thread, I'll ask it directly. I am planning on putting a s58 in a 93 Defender. Would the B55 be better? looking for around high 500 to low 600 HP @ the wheels

What's a b55

[SwankPeRFection]

I think he means B58.

There’s no bearing issues on the S58 dude…. Lol

[ChrisM4]

Originally Posted by destoyan

This is my engine. I can show same looking bearings on 11000km engine and also 8000km engine.

Did you have any oil pressure issues or rod knock? Did you actually spin a bearing or was it just wear found at tear down and the motor was otherwise operating normally?

[SwankPeRFection]

Originally Posted by ChrisM4

Did you have any oil pressure issues or rod knock? Did you actually spin a bearing or was it just wear found at tear down and the motor was otherwise operating normally?

If you’re taking about those pics on page 2, that’s the coating on the bearings that’s wearing down as the engine works. Majority of it is the main crank ones, but they all do it. If you look carefully, you’ll see there is no scoring or scratches on the shiny spots, which means it’s fine. This coating is meant to come off as the engine breaks in… hell, you can even see the QR code still on them. Not sure why people are freaking out. Even the lines in the coating can still be seen. That engine is pretty fresh still.

[ChrisM4]

Originally Posted by SwankPeRFection

If you’re taking about those pics on page 2, that’s the coating on the bearings that’s wearing down as the engine works. Majority of it is the main crank ones, but they all do it. If you look carefully, you’ll see there is no scoring or scratches on the shiny spots, which means it’s fine. This coating is meant to come off as the engine breaks in… hell, you can even see the QR code still on them. Not sure why people are freaking out. Even the lines in the coating can still be seen. That engine is pretty fresh still.

Perfect thanks, that’s why I was asking…they didn’t look bad to me.

[SwankPeRFection]

Originally Posted by ChrisM4

Perfect thanks, that’s why I was asking…they didn’t look bad to me.

Yeah, if anything, it actually shows that the tolerances are larger than what people seem to think and BMW’s only reason for running a thin FE 0w30 oil is strictly for emissions and certainly not because the tolerances are tighter and requiring a thinner oil. The drift brothers for Motul ran 50 weight on their stock bottom end and it was fine. I personally wouldn’t run more than 5-40, but I’m gonna use the 5-30 Motul one initially and gauge it from there. I tend to drive my engines hard and 🤞considering the S4 engine passed 200k on Motul 5-40 excess gen 2… well, it’s my favorite by far.