"///M People" Power

The subject of engine failures with M3 E46 models (including S54 M
Coupes and Roadsters) and how BMW is dealing with this problem,
worldwide, is a current thread on
http://www.z3mcoupe.com/
http://www.zroadster.net/
and
http://www.bmwcarclubforum.co.uk
and is obviously a "hot" topic affecting many owners of expensive
BMW cars.

As a result of the acknowledged problem with engine failures, in the
US and Australia, BMW have now extended the Manufacturer's
Warranty for the ///M engine to 6 years and/or 100,000 miles,
whereas in the UK the Manufacturer’s Warranty remains at just 3
years. This obviously is unfair treatment of the UK ///M owner
relative to the US or Oz owner and means that a UK owner needs to
purchase BMW's Extended Warranty cover at £510 per year mainly to
cover expensive engine repairs/replacements which may well be
manufacturer's faults. As such, BMW (GB) charges an extra £1,530
over 3 years out of ///M owners. How many owners would take out
BMW's Extended Warranty after the car's 3rd "birthday" if the engine
were covered by the Manufacturer's Warranty until the car's 6th
birthday?

If the ///M engine was covered for 6 years and/or 100,000 miles by
the Manufacturer's Warranty, then, of course, BMW wouldn't be able
to charge as much as £510 per year and this is just another example
how the large multi-national companies view the UK as "Rip-Off
Britain".

Since BMW has extended the Manufacturer's Warranty to 6 years/and
or 100,000miles for the ///M engine for US and Oz owners, BMW has
in truth drawn a line in the sand on a world-wide basis that any ///M
engine which fails before 100,000 miles or within 6 years of first
registration is 100% the fault of BMW, IRRESPECTIVE of the country in
which the car was purchased, including the UK. In the light of this, I
doubt if BMW could now win a legal action brought in the UK by an
owner seeking full compensation for the cost of a replacement
engine at, say, 99,999 miles and/or within 5years and 364days of
first registration.

Yes, this is a worldwide problem for owners all around the world with
BMW ///M models, and here we are communicating on the worldwide
web! No longer can there be different treatment in different markets,
because owners have now got the power to freely communicate with
each other. The world is now a "global village" where it should be no
longer possible to sub-divide markets into various groups of
differing treatment and profitability. BMW must learn that the
prestige marque which it has managed to establish in the UK is,
indeed, very fragile, and is dependent upon treating past customers,
who have spent large sums on its products, equitably. A dis-satisfied
customer is a lost future customer and BMW needs to be made highly
aware of this fact.

The high purchase price of BMW cars is underpinned by the relatively
high residual values of their cars on the used car market. Should
BMW obtain the reputation of treating a group of its customers badly,
and NOT sufficiently backing up its products with a Manufacturer's
Warranty of sufficient substance, then the marque in the UK will
collapse in time. Gerald Ratner learned the hard way that the public
will not buy rubbish, BMW need to realise that it is no different and that
it MUST assert the quality of its products by proving its faith in its
own products by VOLUNTARILY putting the UK customer on parity
with its US and Oz customers and increasing the Manufacturer's
Warranty.

Likewise BMW must lower the cost of the Extended Warranty to
reflect that its Manufacturer's Warranty has increased cover for the
engine.

There is nothing like "People Power" for effecting change. If every ///
M owner sent a letter to
BMW (GB) Ltd
Ellesfield Avenue
Bracknell
Berkshire
RG12 8TA
asking that their car’s Manufacturer's Warranty should be extended
and covered on the same terms as in the US and Australia and
specifically asking a question that requires a written reply, then the
staff at Bracknell would be so occupied with dealing with
correspondence of an unprecedented level that it would soon realise
the strength of feeling from its customer base. If everyone on this
forum, irrespective of model variant, writes his or her own individual
non-standard letter, then each letter cannot be dismissed with a
standard reply from BMW.

Come on lads and lasses get writing! One simple letter might save
you £1,530 and more!

People Power ended the Cold War!

I have posted this message onto each of the three forums listed at
the beginning

Post edited slightly, although still keeping the original meaning.

Please post with the forum guidelines

Edited by Nigel

Is it stupid of me to ask why no one at the BMW Car Club GB who have very close contacts with BMW GB seem to be taking up the fight on behalf of all the owners affected by this problem?

All of us who are members of the BMW Car Club GB affected by this problem are expecting the support of the Car Club.

Have you asked BMW GB if they plan on extending the warranty to 6 years/100K? If they are not planning on extending it, why?
What is the situation in Germany with the warranty?

Roger, I have read other forums, particularly BM3W, which I am sure you know of.....

They have been getting a list together of all the M3 owners to send a letter direct to GB and get a final response. As you said, some are low milers but just as many are not.

I think the BM3W group are concerned at the 2nd hand values should they not want to use their car as a trade-in for a new car. Other readers like myself have expressed concern over those cars that are traded-in at the dealers and how it affects their warranty/extended warranty and the values......a dealer has already sold an M3 without the customer knowing that his engine had recall work, then replaced....the dealer could not understand the fuss??

I do not read the car magazine as much as I used to, but other members BM3W have not read stories about what is happening to the S54 and how BMW are dealing with the issue.....do the press really know, should they know, should Watchdog be informed.....

Who knows, but it would be good for all M3 and S54 engined car owners to receive a personal response from BMW GB about this and other issues regarding the recalls etc.

Ramble over....

Here is the official reply from BMW (GB) relating to my query about
a possible recall of the S54 M Coupe:
_________________________________________________________

BMW Customer Service
Tel:(01344)426565
Fax:(01344)480545
customer.service@bmw.co.uk

October 19, 2004

BMW - Z3 M Coupe - S54 Engine

Dear .....

Thank you for your letter dated October 4, 2004 regarding the BMW
S54 engine. I am sorry this matter has caused you such concern and
appreciate the opportunity to comment in this instance.

As you have correctly stated the S54 engine is fitted to both M3 and
the M Coupe models, but with one significant difference, the power
output. While the M3 delivers 343bhp, the M Coupe offers 321 bhp.
This is achieved by an earlier limitation of engine revolutions and is
necessary as a result of the M Coupes' smaller engine bay not being
able to offer the same air intake and cooling capacity as the M3.

I can confirm that BMW has recently released a quality enhancement
relating to the M3 S54 engine that involves the replacement of the
con rod bearing shells. However due to the reduced engine speed of
the M Coupe, our internal testing has confirmed that its engine is not
susceptible to the bearing shell wear and consequently, is not
necessary for the same action to be taken on M Coupe models. With
that said, obviously it is impossible to predict the future and should
any such difficulties arise when the car is outside of its warranty,
BMW would obviously look upon repair costs as generously as
possible.

In parting, I trust the information above has been of use to you and
has helped to restore your confidence in our product. Should you
have any further questions or comments please do not hesitate to
contact me directly.

Yours sincerely,
Ewan Wilson
Customer Service Manager

_________________________________________________________


I think the reply deserves further comment and answers, so below
is my written response to BMW (GB):

____________________________________________________________

T

Mr Ewan Wilson
Customer Service Manager
BMW (GB) Ltd
Ellesfield Avenue
Bracknell
Berkshire
RG12 8TA

22nd October 2004

Dear Mr Wilson,

Thank you for your letter of reply dated 19th October 2004.
Although I understand the explanation that you have given why my M
Coupe should not be affected by the problem that befalls the M3,
from my participation on BMW car-related internet forums, I would
suggest that what you say is not actually true, because there are 2
owners, at least, (1 M Coupe and 1 M Roadster), both of whom have
both suffered the problem of bearing shell failure in their cars and
needed replacement engines.

Although you suggest that the S54 engine, when fitted in a Z3 M
variant, is protected from the inherent fault of con rod bearing shell
failure by the “earlier limitation of engine revolutions” than when
fitted in the M3, the fact that the failure has in fact happened to at
least two Z3 M cars despite the “earlier limitation of engine
revolutions”, as described above, shows that in practice the S54
engine, can, and does, suffer the problem of bearing shell failure. As
such, the fact that at least 2 engines restricted in this way have
already failed when fitted in Z3 M variant models, clearly contradicts
the findings of your “internal testing”, which must, in truth, make
such findings inaccurate, and therefore unreliable, at best. Can you
please tell me how many S54 Z3 M Coupes and Z3 M Roadsters have
already required replacement engines or other remedial repairs in
the UK under Manufacturer’s Warranty?

In your letter you state; "BMW would obviously look upon repair costs
as generously as possible" for owners suffering engine failures
outside of the Manufacturer's Warranty of 3 years. This is currently a
"hot" topic on three separate BMW car-related internet forums. As I
understand it, in the case of the M3, in the United States of America
and also in Australia, BMW has increased the Manufacturer's Warranty
for the S54 engine from 3 years to 6 years and/or 100,000 miles. An
S54 engine is what it is, in whatever car it is installed and in any
country in the world, and it has an acknowledged inherent weakness,
period! It therefore seems most unfair that the owners of any of
BMW's cars fitted with S54 engines in the United Kingdom are not
placed on parity with the owners in the USA and Australia, by BMW
simultaneously increasing the Manufacturer’s Warranty of the engine
to 6 years and/or 100,000 miles, on a worldwide basis.

In the last paragraph of your letter you state that you hope that the
information you have given me “has helped to restore your
confidence in our product”, and in answer, I have to say in all
honesty, that your answer has in fact decreased my confidence in
your product because I consider that BMW is attempting to pull the
wool over our eyes. I consider that BMW is treating owners of S54
Z3M Coupes and M Roadsters very badly and as though we are
stupid. You say that BMW would "look upon repair costs as
generously as possible" for owners of failed S54 engines out of
Manufacturer's Warranty, to my mind, this phrase is far too vague
and does not act as a legal definition as to precisely what action BMW
will take in each and every instance of S54 engine failure. Your
comment suggests that the repair costs would be subject to BMW’s
discretion and to separate negotiation with each individual owner,
and that BMW may limit its generosity to some form of percentage of
the total repair costs. Since BMW has manufactured all cars fitted
with S54 engines with parts which electronically manage the engine's
output and also monitors various parameters of use and
performance, which in turn, is used to instruct the owner of when
servicing is necessary, then, in truth, provided the owner of a car
with the S54 engine (all models) complies with the servicing
schedule, then surely BMW, as the manufacturer, should demonstrate
its faith in its own product, and "put its money where its mouth is" to
UK owners by also increasing the Manufacturer's Warranty to parity
with that now offered in the USA and Australia for the M3.

Further, as you are aware, the M Coupe and M Roadster, at least, are
still tainted by the possibility of VANOS failures, therefore, it appears
to most owners of BMW’s M cars, that the engines in their cars are
somewhat blighted by either susceptibility to failure of con rod
bearing shells and/or VANOS unit, and as such, we all live in dread of
such occurrences when our cars are out of warranty. Obviously, as
owners, we can never be in the same position as BMW as
manufacturer, to know the precise weaknesses and frequency of
defects occurring of BMW products. Therefore an owner’s confidence
in BMW’s products can only be complete when BMW itself, shows
100% faith in both its product and the level of customer support that
it will give after purchase, by voluntarily extending the
Manufacturer’s Warranty on all M engines for UK owners, as I have
suggested above.

I am aware that it is possible to take out an Extended Warranty after
the Manufacturer’s 3 year Warranty, covering the engine, expires,
and for the M Coupe that this costs around £510 per annum. I am
also aware that if BMW (GB) increased the Manufacturer’s Warranty
for the S54 engine in all its M cars to 6 years and/or 100,000 miles,
then the annual cost of the Extended Warranty would have to be
considerably reduced and that BMW would have to absorb an
additional cost in replacing and repairing defective engines which
would otherwise be covered by the Extended Warranty. However, in
view of the fact that BMW has already received considerable sums of
money for each and every M car sold, then it appears only equitable
to me, as one of the owners having already spent heavily in a BMW
product, that my expenditure has been made on a long-lasting and
durable product fit for the purpose intended.

I have taken the trouble to write this letter from the customer’s point
of view in the hope that BMW (GB) sees this as very constructive and
fair criticism from which, in the long term, both customers and
manufacturer will benefit. Surely, it is far easier for BMW to keep
existing owners loyal to the brand, thereby encouraging repeat
future custom, by treating us all the same, in all corners of the world,
rather than alienating a large and significant group in the UK by
treating us as second-class customers?

I would appreciate your comments. Again, it is my intention to post
this letter and your reply on BMW car-related internet forums.

Finally, as a point of correction, BMW claims that the S54 engine
fitted to the M Coupe and M Roadster produces 325 bhp and not 321
bhp as you state.

Many thanks.

Yours sincerely,

etc


Edited by philbattenburg

whiffs of a standard letter to me!

First The Nikasil Issue, and now this...

As long as BMW keep pushing the new models out of the showroom doors then their attitude to stalwarts is "let them eat cake"