BMW M5 Forum and M6 Forums banner

21 - 40 of 41 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
121 Posts
Q to all: What are the "best bearings" when replacing? OEM latest gen, ACL, other?

Are all bearings the same size or is there a block stamp to indicate bearing size per journal?

When I COMPLETELY rebuilt my Toyota/Yamaha 2ZZ-GE, I worked with the dealer and ordered each bearing to size. I had a GREAT parts guy that was also a Toyota mechanic and he was also surprised that they (Toyota) offered a "kit" of standard bearings.

Please advise as my plan continues to rebuild "engine 1"

NOTE: "engine 2" received today!

Thank you,
Mr. P
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
45 Posts
Discussion Starter #22
I went with ACL because they are to gold standard on many other platforms. BE uses custom specced ACL
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
1,957 Posts
I went with ACL because they are to gold standard on many other platforms. BE uses custom specced ACL
Where did you get that BE are custom spec'd ACL? BE is custom ordered from clevite and then individually binned to tighten clearance even further. Nothing to do with ACL.


Any bearing that gives proper clearance will work (not bmw!). Only way to accurately measure clearance is by measuring each crank journal, con rod bore and bearing thickness separately then doing some math. BE is the only supplier that measures and bins each bearing so that clearance variance is minimized. ACL is probably fine as well, although their STD set is on the tight side and HX on the loose side of what ideal clearance should be per the clevite catalog. I believe Lang mix STD and HX to come up with a target clearance similar to BE.

Plastigauge is like using a yard stick to measure inches. It will give you a rough idea but won't tell you if clearance is .0018" or .0022".

I'd forgotten about this thread where Jim talks about 6 engines with increased clearance showing no signs of oil starvation. Also his experiment on using thinner 0w40 oil and still ending up with abnormal bearing wear:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
45 Posts
Discussion Starter #24
I think I maybe mixed up BE and Lang. Sorry getting information for these has been difficult and now I’m making it worse lol
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
439 Posts
Where did you get that BE are custom spec'd ACL? BE is custom ordered from clevite and then individually binned to tighten clearance even further. Nothing to do with ACL.


Any bearing that gives proper clearance will work (not bmw!). Only way to accurately measure clearance is by measuring each crank journal, con rod bore and bearing thickness separately then doing some math. BE is the only supplier that measures and bins each bearing so that clearance variance is minimized. ACL is probably fine as well, although their STD set is on the tight side and HX on the loose side of what ideal clearance should be per the clevite catalog. I believe Lang mix STD and HX to come up with a target clearance similar to BE.

Plastigauge is like using a yard stick to measure inches. It will give you a rough idea but won't tell you if clearance is .0018" or .0022".

I'd forgotten about this thread where Jim talks about 6 engines with increased clearance showing no signs of oil starvation. Also his experiment on using thinner 0w40 oil and still ending up with abnormal bearing wear:
So Flaco, why does Troy stand behind 5w50?
I can tell you my motor runs better on 5w50. Response is better, cold starts are day and night better.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
1,957 Posts
Ask Troy? LOL....

When I switched to 5w50 I felt... no difference. No better response, no difference in cold starts. The only difference I was expecting was better mileage. Didn't happen. I even went with M1 which has the lowest HTHS of the major 5w50 oils. But after seeing the blackstone report for the 10k miles used TWS oil it made perfect sense as viscosity had dropped to that of new 5w50.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
439 Posts
well i tried mobil 1 and my motor swallowed it like nothing.
i was using liquimoly 10w60 until i spun my bearing. since then i use castrol super synthetic 5w50.

not sure what area you live in but here in canada 5w50 works better and alows me to sleep better at night.
the only time 10w60 did not make me worry is when we had ambient temps of 30deg. c or more.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
415 Posts
But after seeing the blackstone report for the 10k miles used TWS oil it made perfect sense as viscosity had dropped to that of new 5w50.
This is the problem with Castrol's 10w60, it shears (breaks down) quickly, which is great for lowering actual viscosity. However, it now it is no longer in spec for HTHS which it was originally specified for. Hence BMW, very frequent (and ridiculously low) recommended oil change interval. If you're not running the car hard and long then this isn't a big problem, but if you are then you are going to have excessive wear (not necessarily in the rod bearings but in other places where the film thickness was required.

LM's 10w60 has been proven to hold up better...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
415 Posts
Q to all: What are the "best bearings" when replacing? OEM latest gen, ACL, other?

Are all bearings the same size or is there a block stamp to indicate bearing size per journal?

When I COMPLETELY rebuilt my Toyota/Yamaha 2ZZ-GE, I worked with the dealer and ordered each bearing to size. I had a GREAT parts guy that was also a Toyota mechanic and he was also surprised that they (Toyota) offered a "kit" of standard bearings.

Please advise as my plan continues to rebuild "engine 1"

NOTE: "engine 2" received today!

Thank you,
Mr. P
Best thing to do is measure your crank journal bearings. You will be one of the very few that have actually done so, but that is the right way to go about it. You already have your crank out, so this will be quite easy. Then do the simple math, and figure out if you want to go with ACL's standard H bearings, the smaller (larger clearanced) HX bearings, or a mix of H and HX.

All the bearing mfgs are slightly different nominal size. What really matters is actual since there is dimensional variation.

BE bearings are in very short supply since it seems that BE orders these in batches and then it is up to Clevite on when to do their production run.

I would avoid BMW OEM.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
1,957 Posts
well i tried mobil 1 and my motor swallowed it like nothing.
i was using liquimoly 10w60 until i spun my bearing. since then i use castrol super synthetic 5w50.

not sure what area you live in but here in canada 5w50 works better and alows me to sleep better at night.
the only time 10w60 did not make me worry is when we had ambient temps of 30deg. c or more.
I've only used M1 5w50 for a couple thousand miles. I do record mileage and date of every quart of oil that has gone in and out of the engine since I bought the car. So far I haven't seen any difference with M1. I'm near the IL / WI border; cold but not as cold as you. Do you get near 0F often? If so then yeah you're at the limit of what BMW spec'd TWS for.

This is the problem with Castrol's 10w60, it shears (breaks down) quickly, which is great for lowering actual viscosity. However, it now it is no longer in spec for HTHS which it was originally specified for. Hence BMW, very frequent (and ridiculously low) recommended oil change interval. If you're not running the car hard and long then this isn't a big problem, but if you are then you are going to have excessive wear (not necessarily in the rod bearings but in other places where the film thickness was required.

LM's 10w60 has been proven to hold up better...
I've seen this quoted in BITOG as well (TWS shearing quickly). But haven't seen any proof. To me TWS shearing down to a 50wt viscosity in 10k miles is great! All oils shear so can't do anything about it. Will see how M1 5w50 does after 10k miles.

What happens to HTHS after 10k miles is unknown afaik. Blackstone does not offer that test. I've read it's a much expensive test to run. But of course logic says it will go down. The SAE specs apply to new oil only so to say it goes out of spec is true for any oil not just TWS.

What is this frequent oil change interval you're thinking of? The break-in oil period is 1200 miles. After that the car uses CBS (condition based service) where the DME calculates when it's time for an oil change. Appears to be 15k or 24 months afaik. The DME may have logic based on engine running conditions to shorten that period, but I'm speculating here. BTW the DME can be queried for history on when the oil life indicator was reset since the car was new. Maybe your car shows oil change required every 1200 miles? Then it was never brought out of break-in mode. This is called out in newtis for the first oil change.

Personally I don't like LM 10w60. When I compared specs for all 10w60 oils a while ago LM is the only manufacturer that was so lazy that just copied the 60wt SAE specs onto their datasheet (viscosity hot, cold, flash, pour point, HTHS, missing something else I'm sure). So using their published numbers HTHS will be out of spec as soon as you run the engine and it shears. If you go by their datasheet too it's the heaviest 60wt oil out there.

Can you point to any evidence of LM holding up better than TWS? Haven't found that either.

Best thing to do is measure your crank journal bearings. You will be one of the very few that have actually done so, but that is the right way to go about it. You already have your crank out, so this will be quite easy. Then do the simple math, and figure out if you want to go with ACL's standard H bearings, the smaller (larger clearanced) HX bearings, or a mix of H and HX.

All the bearing mfgs are slightly different nominal size. What really matters is actual since there is dimensional variation.
True. But for the one-time DIY rebuilder cost of proper accuracy NIST calibrated equipment can be prohibitive. You can get a pretty good guess of what you will get by using the numbers posted in the BE wiki page. Gotta give credit to BE for doing all the work and posting results for all brands of bearings. BE will give you the least variation. But mix of H and HX (Lang) should be close to BE. Use plastigauge as a sanity check only.

Also BE's wiki numbers are before they started binning each shell. I was one of the first customers to get binned shells and they explained what they do, see:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
121 Posts
I LOVE this site!

So many helpful responses from real owners with some actual knowledge!

Thank you all for replies! If not stated earlier, I am a OCD engineer and this S85 is a very fun new project. I am also fortunate enough to have access to NIST traceable, certified gauges so I can measure each journal to +/-0.005mm (0.001 on gauge!)

As a final step, I also Plastigauge the final assembly. Some people do not like, but the Plastigauge is quite accurate and there is no worry about stacked tolerances and/or measurement vairablity.

Thank you all again,
Mr. P
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
415 Posts
There are a variety of specifications that govern the test criteria and standards for oil, some are API, ACEA, ASTM, DIN, etc. ASTM dicates the standards for viscosity testing. Manufacturers will often cite the tested values at certain temperatures, they generally don't show the whole curve (temp vs viscosity). It is a bit difficulty to compare across mfgs if they publish their numbers at different temps. The viscosity at the temperature you care about is most important, the SAE oil weight class (0,5,10, 15,20, 30, 40, 50, 60, etc) is just a range, and there is overlap in the ranges. That's why a 10w can "be a recommended oil" at 0F. A10w multigrade oil is far from ideal at 0F, which is why I and others have been saying for a long time. However, I'm not writing this to convince you, it is for others' benefit. If an oil has a minimum centipoise value(viscosity measurement) that falls within the range of a 10w then it can be labeled as such. Not sure what BITOG means here.

Almost all oils that we buy are multigrade, which are blends of different base stocks. They are blended to active the desired viscosity). I doubt anyone runs a monograde motor oil because the range of such an oil is quite limited.

What what matters is actual viscosity, and less about what the SAE rating class it is. SAE class is great for consumers who need to know what to buy, just like an octane rating for gas. Viscosity can be measured quite easily, you just need a calibrated flow cup and stopwatch, and it has to be done at a controlled temperature since oil viscosity varies by temp. Clearly there are more accurate ways of measuring the time, but you can do this yourself with new and used oil. This will give you a pretty close idea of just how much the oil has "thinned out". You also have to account for the fact that there may be other substances in the used oil that affect viscosity like water and fuel. That can be boiled off before hand. ASTM standards are not just for new product, D4683 is valid for used oil too.

Here is LM's data sheet. Not sure what you mean about them being lazy. Castrol is the one who seems to have less published info. As far as tests go, Auto Motor and Sport and other german magazines do test comparisons on oil, I don't know when or if they've done recent tests on 10w60. As mentioned before, you can do this yourself to get a comparison of viscosity when new and used, but you'd have to be repeatable in terms of how that oil was treated in the engine. That's not possible with humans driving the car and then saying "I saw no difference".
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
415 Posts
Gotta give credit to BE for doing all the work and posting results for all brands of bearings. BE will give you the least variation.
From what I remember reading, Van Dyne Engineering did most of the work and discovery of the issues. BE bearings then formed as a result of that.

The whole point of "blueprinting" is to measure all critical dimensions and then fit the appropriate parts. It is all doable by ordinary people. You actually need variation to get the dimensional stack up to the target you want. That is the whole point of statistical process control. No doubt Mr. P gets this, he's is also an engineer. One does NOT need to have NIST calibrated equipment (and a temperature and humidity controlled clean room) at this resolution to measure the crankshaft journals but it helps. A micrometer that measures down to 0.0001" is fine and they usually always come with a gauge. Buy or borrow a Mitutoyo, Brown & Sharpe, or Starrett, even used ones often have been calibration records. Accuracy of the tool is not the biggest factor when using a mic measuring at this resolution, it is the repeatability of the operator and torquing down the thimble consistently.

Mr. P has access to those tools and gauges, so he could actually measure every single shell and journal and fit the right shell. He may even have access to a DMM. That would be the best way to measure the shells, he can plot the eccentricity very easily. If he had a full set of 20 H and 20 HX (40 bearings in total) he would be able to achieve a fit like no one else could with just 20 BE bearings that are dimensioned but not serialized with a layout sheet. He'd also save money and time since BE bearings are backordered everywhere.

Just because BE has done 100% measurement and sorting to remove bearings out of spec from the population, there are still stackup situations that will result in too large or too small of a clearance. No one has proven that ACL ships shells that are out of spec, they could go/no go gauge every shell that they ship, we don't know what their statistical process controls are. It's not hard for Mr. P to do this.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
121 Posts
Hello gmtegear,

Are you a Quality engineer? You get it! As the required measurements are going to +/- 005mm or 0.0002"...dust/pollen is an issue!

CRAZY measurement and even touching the gauge too long introduces heat the can affect measurement.

Not realistic for a manufacturing environment, but still listed by the design engineers as "spec". Looks great in Catia or Solidworks, but....not on the floor.

Anyway, No CMM at my work, but we do have some nice equipment...for a paint shop!

Cheers!

Mr .P
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
415 Posts
Not anymore, I was a manufacturing process engineer early on i my career and I've done all the six sigma stuff. I moved on to vehicle engineering and chassis development at Ford. I had mentioned this in a prior post since someone was questioning my prior commentary. I've been warned 2x by the moderator not to talk about my experience or background this on this forum otherwise I will be banned.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
121 Posts
Hello gmtegear,

Thanks for the response! Your technical skills are obvious in your posts.

Do not want to cause any waves/rifts on forum....I like here. Many great people with technical skill!

Mr. P
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
63 Posts
Not anymore, I was a manufacturing process engineer early on i my career and I've done all the six sigma stuff. I moved on to vehicle engineering and chassis development at Ford. I had mentioned this in a prior post since someone was questioning my prior commentary. I've been warned 2x by the moderator not to talk about my experience or background this on this forum otherwise I will be banned.
Why would anybody be banned due to background/experience?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
415 Posts
I'm not sure actually, I'll refrain from posting it publically. I will send you the post where I was told this.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
121 Posts
Hello flacoramos,

What happened? Inside forum issue? Public post?

I am a newbie, but ???? Why can a person not provide background and/or experience when posting?

I really like this site because I have not noticed postings from people with no knowledge and/or interest on the subject matter (trollers are limited)

Mr .P
 
21 - 40 of 41 Posts
Top