[amaksoud]

Hello,

I posted the below post the other day

https://www.e90post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1684784

I turns out to be some sh!t that impacted the crankshaft and I had no other options but replacing the engine!

Long story short, the engine oil level lit up in orange, I drove around 10-15 KM until I topped up oil and recently before the light came up, I started hearing plastic knocking noise coming from the engine bay.

I was wondering if the sensor could have been malfunctioning in such a way that I didn't detect that oil was critically low for a while ?
Is that a possibility ?

Also while monitoring the oil level in the new engine, sometimes I see it at max and within the same trip it could goes all the way down to medway between max & minimum, I can understand this night happen as oils runs down the engine parts, but the thing is, during the same trip, it can also come back to the max again (specially after a right or left turn)!!!

Is that normal ?

[AngelFarelli]

This is the exact reason why bmw was stupid to take out the dipstick. The most crucial part to a car's maintenance is oil and the dipstick not only tells you without a doubt your oil level but also oil heath and whether or not coolant is mixing with your oil. I would never rely on a single sensor (only one!!! No backup!!!!) to tell me whether or not my entire engine is going to blow. They should have at least built the engine with the ability to add a dipstick for added cost! They would rather your engine fail and you pay them to replace it

[amaksoud]

I do agree with you AngelFarelli.

Any feedback regarding my questions would be appreciated

[Efthreeoh]

I read your other thread as well. From what I can tell, the VANOS solenoids were either cleaned or replaced. The N64 engine and cylinder head design is similar to the N52 6 cylinder, which I am highly familiar with. Because I think you said there was oil leaking from the VANOS solenoid on to the lower part of the engine and you said some shit hit the crankshaft, I suspect one of the mounting bolts for the solenoids was accidentally dropped down into the cam chain timing case by the mechanic. The solenoids are a tight fit in the cylinderhead so they can sit in the head without the mounting bolt and work for a while, but will leak oil.

The dropped bolt finally found its way into the timing gear (chain and sprockets) and damaged the engine.

The oil level sensor on the other hand is highly reliable. I've managed to reach 239,000km... correction... 622,580km in 13 years on my N52 E90.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by AngelFarelli

This is the exact reason why bmw was stupid to take out the dipstick. The most crucial part to a car's maintenance is oil and the dipstick not only tells you without a doubt your oil level but also oil heath and whether or not coolant is mixing with your oil. I would never rely on a single sensor (only one!!! No backup!!!!) to tell me whether or not my entire engine is going to blow. They should have at least built the engine with the ability to add a dipstick for added cost! They would rather your engine fail and you pay them to replace it

So your argument is about 14 years too late and hundreds of millions of miles off base. The are millions of BMWs (and other brands) driving around with just an oil level sensor to track oil level in the engine. The system has several protections built into it to prevent the engine from being driven with a low oil level. Being the engine uses oil to control valve operation, if the engine is severely low on oil, it will not run correctly and throw cam timing codes. Also, there is a low oil pressure sensor (just one BTW), which low oil level will trigger a low oil pressure condition and trigger the low oil pressure light. Third, as soon as the ignition is energized, the engine does a static oil level test, which verifies there is enough oil in the engine to safely operate it. The N52 hold 7 quarts of oil, which is about double the amount it needs to prevent bearing oil starvation. My personal experience has shown that the +1QT warning is quite accurate and has never failed to notify that the engine requires a 1-qt/1L top off. I have two N52 equipped cars with a combined mileage of 488,000 miles.

If one suspects coolant contamination, it is discoverable by opening the oil fill cap or opening the OFH cap.

All of this has been well documented and discussed here on E90 Post for the past 14 years or so.

[AngelFarelli]

Yes bmw is not the only one who has done it but from what I understand the only logical reason for taking out the dipstick was to make it harder for consumers to work on their cars! Using parts that cannot be easily fixed like sensors will bring the customer back for more services and that is it??
Am I correct? Is there any logical reason to not have a dipstick ?
I have heard that mechanics have lists of different methods for checking oil but you can not argue that anyone in their right mind would rather have a dipstick than a sensor no doubt I have never heard anyone once say that they enjoy not having a dipstick!!
Yes , I don't doubt there are some benefits to an electric sensor other than the convenience of being able to check it while you are driving , It's okay to add the sensor but they did not need to take out the dipstick

[gbalthrop]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

...I've managed to reach 239,000km in 13 years on my N52 E90.

I thought you had nearly 385,000 MILES on your E90 -- did you "Run the Converter in the Wrong Direction"?

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

So your argument is about 14 years too late and hundreds of millions of miles off base...All of this has been well documented and discussed here on E90 Post for the past 14 years or so.

One should NOT feel bad 'cuz he refuses to understand new technology -- MANY people are still living with concepts formed in adolescence -- kinda like the guy that digs coal but HATES windmills, even though he knows more about windmills (and "wind") than anyone.

Excellent analysis of the rationale for the BMW system, BTW. Auto manufacturers realized in the 80's that many auto owners knew/cared little about how the engine worked, and how oil pressure changed related to oil temperature and engine RPM. So to avoid calls to dealer 'cuz the oil pressure gauge was so low when the driver finally looked at it when stopped at a light after driving for 20 minutes, they quit putting the "confusing gauge" on the dash and replaced it with the aptly-named "idiot" light. Some years later, the obligatory "effing" prefix was added before "idiot" by cabinet members of a certain administration.

So since virtually NO ONE ever took the time to open the hood and check the dipstick anyway, the OZS was just what most everyone actually needed (and it gave the "purists" something to complain about ;-) Speaking of "purists", when's the LAST time anyone checked STATIC oil level using the OZS BEFORE starting your engine? How many even KNOW that there IS such a feature that can be utilized in 10 seconds or less, without opening the hood, just by operating two buttons, Controls "B" & "C"? If you are concerned about whether the OZS is operating properly, THAT is a quick check. Personally, I know it's there, and have used it several times, just to see how/if it works, but I have NOT used it or even thought about it in a year or more.

When one stops to think about the general degree of laziness or willful ignorance "we" actually have (or you can use "they" if your are "in denial" ;-) BMW made the correct call, 'cuz we're just TOO BUSY to stop & think about our car until a flashing "FI" light gets our attention, or the engine starts making terrible sounds or stops/seizes altogether.

George

[AngelFarelli]

I do agree with what you guys are saying, you are right that most people do not care and those that do probably still don't have a accurate understanding of their engine and are probably better off with a sensor to tell them that they are low on oil . It's also very possible that the electric oil sensor has prevented more oil loss catastrophes than it has caused. But the best case scenario would have been to have both the sensor and dipstick for added assurance.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by gbalthrop

I thought you had nearly 385,000 MILES on your E90 -- did you "Run the Converter in the Wrong Direction"?


One should NOT feel bad 'cuz he refuses to understand new technology -- MANY people are still living with concepts formed in adolescence -- kinda like the guy that digs coal but HATES windmills, even though he knows more about windmills (and "wind") than anyone.

Excellent analysis of the rationale for the BMW system, BTW. Auto manufacturers realized in the 80's that many auto owners knew/cared little about how the engine worked, and how oil pressure changed related to oil temperature and engine RPM. So to avoid calls to dealer 'cuz the oil pressure gauge was so low when the driver finally looked at it when stopped at a light after driving for 20 minutes, they quit putting the "confusing gauge" on the dash and replaced it with the aptly-named "idiot" light. Some years later, the obligatory "effing" prefix was added before "idiot" by cabinet members of a certain administration.

So since virtually NO ONE ever took the time to open the hood and check the dipstick anyway, the OZS was just what most everyone actually needed (and it gave the "purists" something to complain about ;-) Speaking of "purists", when's the LAST time anyone checked STATIC oil level using the OZS BEFORE starting your engine? How many even KNOW that there IS such a feature that can be utilized in 10 seconds or less, without opening the hood, just by operating two buttons, Controls "B" & "C"? If you are concerned about whether the OZS is operating properly, THAT is a quick check. Personally, I know it's there, and have used it several times, just to see how/if it works, but I have NOT used it or even thought about it in a year or more.

When one stops to think about the general degree of laziness or willful ignorance "we" actually have (or you can use "they" if your are "in denial" ;-) BMW made the correct call, 'cuz we're just TOO BUSY to stop & think about our car until a flashing "FI" light gets our attention, or the engine starts making terrible sounds or stops/seizes altogether.

George

Lol. Oops. I multiplied by 0.62. Coffee hadn't kicked in I guess.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by AngelFarelli

Yes bmw is not the only one who has done it but from what I understand the only logical reason for taking out the dipstick was to make it harder for consumers to work on their cars! Using parts that cannot be easily fixed like sensors will bring the customer back for more services and that is it??
Am I correct? Is there any logical reason to not have a dipstick ?
I have heard that mechanics have lists of different methods for checking oil but you can not argue that anyone in their right mind would rather have a dipstick than a sensor no doubt I have never heard anyone once say that they enjoy not having a dipstick!!
Yes , I don't doubt there are some benefits to an electric sensor other than the convenience of being able to check it while you are driving , It's okay to add the sensor but they did not need to take out the dipstick

The dipstick was redundant. The engine computer HAS to know how much oil is in the engine because of the VANOS. Besides, it probably helps a tiny bit in emissions control by not having a vacuum source leak.

I enjoy not having a dipstick. I'm a pretty serious gearhead too. I was weary at first, as I have admitted to in other posts, but once I figured out and learned how it works, I've come to realize it is better.

This may help:

https://www.e90post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1533444

[AngelFarelli]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

I enjoy not having a dipstick.

There should at least be a way to add one in since there is no arguments against a dipstick.

[AngelFarelli]

In fact Mercedes engines that have no dipstick at least have a special tool similar to dipstick to measure oil physically without sensor, now that's genius. BMW should've followed their footsteps. I've also heard that bmw makes some of their Diesel engines with dipsticks so they clearly think it is useful.

[AngelFarelli]

Your right that it has been long over discussed in many forums but if you read them you will see almost no one defending the removal of dipstick and those who do defend it have little to no logical reason to back it up. I read your prior posts about this in similar no dipstick thread and yes you are right that adding the sensor was a great thing for engines and consumers however taking out the dipstick not so much.