FAQ on Carbon Build-Up Issue (First Attempt) - Page 40

wilsodh · 5th January 2006, 07:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by greg

Dave - where does this come from? Is it true only for in-warranty vehicles? My car is out of warranty - so I'm very interested to know more about this....

Actually I should clarify one point: not all states have emission inspection and maintenance (I/M) programs. But those that do (33 and growing) all have emission repair cost caps. These repair cost caps are not governed by vehicle warranty status. The caps are based on a calculation that apparently includes a local economic variable and a consumer price index variable. Thus, the caps vary from state to state and can vary in different areas within a state. As an example, from the Virgina Department of Environmental Quality:

When a vehicle fails...a waiver may be obtained if a specified amount (currently $620) has been spent on emissions-related repairs for that vehicle. This waiver amount is set by federal law and may change periodically based on the Consumer Price Index.

In scanning the various emissions I/M programs from state to state, the largest repair cap I saw was $710. The repair cost cap for your state (CA)appears to be $450 (http://www.smogcheck.ca.gov/StdPage.asp?Body=/geninfo/factsheets/referee_centers.htm)

FYI, here is the complete listing of emissions I/M programs in the US and Canada: http://www.etools.org/files/public/IM_Overview_12_02_05.pdf.

A useful webpage giving links to the various state programs can be found at: http://www.obdiicsu.com/

Thus it would appear that in the future as more states implement emission I/M programs, all will be subject to the emission repair cost caps per the fed.

Now, as regards our situation (ODB failure, the SES light coming on due to carbon build up), there is reason to fret about our status. From an EPA document giving detailed guidance on implementing state emission I/M programs (http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/im/obd/r01015.pdf) the EPA recommends against granting waivers for OBD failures:

The reason for wanting to avoid granting a waiver to a vehicle with an illuminated MIL (malfunction indicator lamp = SES light) is two-fold: 1) it reinforces bad behavior (ie., ignoring illuminated MILs) and 2) once lit, a MIL that was illuminated for a relatively minor problem effectively eclipses new, major problems, should they develop.

As I mentioned a few posts ago, some states do not allow OBD failures to qualify for the waiver, or they limit OBD-failed vehicles to a single waiver. In looking over several state-sponsored research reports analyzing cost/benefits of their I/M programs, I think this attitude about OBD waivers is predicated on a general perception that average emission repair costs are in the neighborhood of a few hundred bucks at most (based on estimates in these cost/benefit reports). It seems to me that the intent of the federal law on repair cost limits is to provide some consumer protection against poorly designed emissions systems and to limit the financial hardship for individual consumers in complying the the Federal Clean Air Act. Reading the EPA regulations, the language and liability is generally aimed squarely at the car manufacturers, no doubt to encourage robust design (hence the federal emissions warranty). I seriously doubt the bizzare BMW situation of $5,000-$8,000 for clearing carbon out of the secondary air system has been comprehended in any meaningful way, probably because BMW owners with this problem that did not receive a goodwill repair have historically been dutifully (and rather quietly) forking over most or all of these outrageous sums to have the carbon scraped out of their secondary air systems. I see this completely at odds with the intent of the federal regulations.

This just ain't right!!

Hope this helps.

Dave

wilsodh · 6th January 2006, 19:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by toofast4U

Westchester BMW finally returned my Beast 12/27 [dealer had it since 11-17-05]....and the SES was reset [off]. This allowed them to renew NY emissions.
60 miles later the SES has returned as yellow as ever. Paid BMW just north of $1,000. for diagnosis [yes it's the CBU] and related "work". End result was the dealer pulled and cleaned out [clogged 100% w/carbon buildup ]the tubes leading from the secondary air pumps to the heads, and repalced other emissions items "covered" within Federal regs [8/80]. To this date I have yet to receive any written reponse to my letter [thanks for your help] sent to BMWNA [see my post to this board of 12-15-05] ! !

Any thoughts from the "boys on here on the M5board" ?

Thanks for all your help

Hi Eddie,

Thanks for the update. Some interesting info. Just to clarify, Westchester did not pull the heads for the carbon job? This is the first I've heard of an intermediate repair (by an BMW dealer) of just pulling the aluminum tubes for cleaning. Obviously this is much less demanding of a procedure, but as we've seen from the experience of others on the board, the SES light may come back on within a few months. If this happens, will Weschester cover another carbon job? Might want to see if you can get some assurance that if the problem returns, you get credited for what you already paid for an ineffective repair.

Also, curious - do you know what other 'emissions related items' were replaced under the Federal 8/80 warranty?

Finally, interesting that the initial SES re-set allowed a NY emissions pass. I don't know off hand if NY does a full OBD check during the emissions inspection (some states do, some states don't). With the OBD check, the emissions facility can tell if codes have been recently reset and this will not result in a 'pass'. As I understand it, you would have to drive the car for about a week before the codes would be 'inspection ready'.
Well, glad you finally got your car back!

Cheers,
Dave

c4m5 · 6th January 2006, 21:00

I just played the OBD reset game to pass the Smog Check here in CA, we cleared the codes and then I drove the car with the cruise control on at about 2000 RPM for about 40 minutes this allowed the car to "test" enough of its systems to pass the test.

Philip · 8th January 2006, 18:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by wilsodh

[/indent]In scanning the various emissions I/M programs from state to state, the largest repair cap I saw was $710. The repair cost cap for your state (CA)appears to be $450 (http://www.smogcheck.ca.gov/StdPage.asp?Body=/geninfo/factsheets/referee_centers.htm)

FYI, here is the complete listing of emissions I/M programs in the US and Canada: http://www.etools.org/files/public/IM_Overview_12_02_05.pdf.

Dave

Regarding California's Smog Test financial limits, I reviewed the California Bureau of Automotive Repair form required to be filled out by the car owner to receive financial assistance for failing the test. It states that if you fail the smog test AND you are low income or Test Only station, you are eligible for assistance up to $500. Not much help for the repair you guys are looking for.

Has anyone considered fooling the sensor that tells the computer low air flow? Figure out how it works and fool it.

toofast4U · 10th January 2006, 02:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by wilsodh

Hi Eddie,

Thanks for the update. Some interesting info. Just to clarify, Westchester did not pull the heads for the carbon job? This is the first I've heard of an intermediate repair (by an BMW dealer) of just pulling the aluminum tubes for cleaning. Obviously this is much less demanding of a procedure, but as we've seen from the experience of others on the board, the SES light may come back on within a few months. If this happens, will Weschester cover another carbon job? Might want to see if you can get some assurance that if the problem returns, you get credited for what you already paid for an ineffective repair.

Also, curious - do you know what other 'emissions related items' were replaced under the Federal 8/80 warranty?

Finally, interesting that the initial SES re-set allowed a NY emissions pass. I don't know off hand if NY does a full OBD check during the emissions inspection (some states do, some states don't). With the OBD check, the emissions facility can tell if codes have been recently reset and this will not result in a 'pass'. As I understand it, you would have to drive the car for about a week before the codes would be 'inspection ready'.
Well, glad you finally got your car back!

Cheers,
Dave

Dave;

To clarify, heads were not pulled. I understand in NY, should the initial emissions OBD test results fail, state regs require car to be driven 30 miles [upon completion of all repairs] PRIOR to full OBD check/restest for emissions compliance. Car did pass but SES returned within 60 miles upon my receipt of car. Will follow up this post next day or 2 with details of all items replaced within 8/80 Federal Emissions regs.

Eddie B

ard · 10th January 2006, 02:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Philip

Has anyone considered fooling the sensor that tells the computer low air flow? Figure out how it works and fool it.

Exactly my thought a while back. Usually flow is inferred from pressure differential at two points- just change the offset of one of the pressure sensors! if it is a 'needed' sensor, you could set it up so the offset reverts after a while (set time post start up).

But of course one would rather fix the problem....or have BMW fix it.

A

wilsodh · 10th January 2006, 16:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by toofast4U

Dave;

To clarify, heads were not pulled.

Thanks for the update Eddie. Westchester appears to have gone outside the BMW TSB on carbon build up (SI B11 05 04 Feb 2005 rev 1 / rev 2 June 2005), which calls for removing the heads and cleaning out the ports to address the secondary air flow fault. One wonders what their guidance was for simply cleaning the external aluminum secondary air tubes, and what their response will be if this fix proves ineffective. Perhaps BMWNA has put some energy into looking at intermediate fixes (an update to the above TSB?), or perhaps someone was reading this thread (

), or perhaps they were just winging it to see if this fixes the problem in this instance. I worry about the scenario of unloading carbon fouled cars by doing a tube-cleaning to get the SES light off and then selling the car, thereby propogating the problem to others.

Cheers,
Dave

wilsodh · 10th January 2006, 19:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by ard

Exactly my thought a while back. Usually flow is inferred from pressure differential at two points- just change the offset of one of the pressure sensors! if it is a 'needed' sensor, you could set it up so the offset reverts after a while (set time post start up).

But of course one would rather fix the problem....or have BMW fix it.

A

Desperate issues can call for desperate measures. Personally I would not lose sleep at night if I could find a work-around to the carbon build-up issue, given that we have had very little support from the manufacturer on this. I think this idea was kicked around earlier in this thread. Alas, this thread has gotten so large, I'd have to look back through it to refresh my memory on where the discussion went. Luke was the last person planning to undertake a hardware work-around, but Luke seems to have left us for a while (a PM last week was not answered).

An update from me: I recently had a series of back-and-forth correspondances with BMWNA. Nothing ground-breaking to report except that I was assured that customer relations management is aware of our concerns. I was asked (again) to work through my local service manager on initiating an investigation into our concerns. Although I categorized our concerns as having both a technical and and legal/regulatory component (the later being outside a SM's purview), it was explained to me the mechanism for elevating this to an investigation was to have a local SM present the issue to a BMWNA Marketing Group (MG). The MG includes engineers, so we might be able to get some knowledgeable people to at least address this issue with us. I don't know about the legal/regulatory component, but I would expect that the MG would refer the matter to the appropriate resource(s) within BMWNA to address this.

In any case, my plan now (as I described to BMWNA Customer Relations) is to summarize our concerns in written fashion. That way when they are presented to the MG, all the information will be presented accurately. I emphasize 'our concerns'. I think this will have more leverage if my summary is on behalf of M5board members rather than just an isolated customer with an isolated concern. With that in mind, I am planning on summarizing 'our' concerns in a letter to my SM for presentation to the BMWNA MG. I am really tied up this week, but will work on a draft for feedback from the board possibly some time next week. At this point I'm still inclined to do exactly what BMWNA customer relations tells me to do in terms of getting this issue elevated through the proper channels.

Someone posted the e-mail address of Tom Purves (President of BMWNA) in the context of the US launch control issue on the e60 board. Thus far, the e60 crowd has not gotten a response from BMWNA on their concerns (after a group letter, together with numerous individual letters). Its ashamed that a company that so regularly touts how customer-oriented they are finds it difficult (or unprepared) to respond effectively to these concerns. I will continue to be hopeful that this mainly reflects caution on their part. Perhaps after the Fox/pixel experience, they've become a little wary of message boards. Alas, this is the information age, so I would hope they don't remain flat-footed in dealing with us. We might want to consider starting a campaign direct with Tom Purves if this continues to go no where through Customer Relations.

Dave

c4m5 · 10th January 2006, 19:56

Where do I sign?

Ridgeback_Pilot · 10th January 2006, 21:08

Okay, I dropped my car off at the local dealership this morning at the request of BMWNA. Two engineers from BMWNA are scheduled to perform an "FSE Inspection" tomorrow.

Interestingly, when I dropped by car off with the Service Manager, he was expecting me and gave me a service slip that said the following:

"Enging Repair Diagnostic: Customer reports check engine light is on, secondary air faults. BMWNA to look at vehicle on Wednesday. Need to perform SIB 110504."

It looks as if BMWNA is well aware of the carbon build-up problem. I'm hoping that once they verify that my car is, in fact, suffering from this problem they will agree to perform the Service Bulletin at no charge to me. I'll let you know what they find and what they offer as a solution.

Stay tuned!

Mike