BMW HPFP problems

[bill murray]

FWIW, this popped up on my AOL News a few minutes ago.

I believe we use essentially the same system, no?????

Bill

http://www.dailyfinance.com/story/a...afety-risk-to-drivers-and-the-compa/19560998/

 

[RonPorter]

FWIW, this popped up on my AOL News a few minutes ago.

I believe we use essentially the same system, no?????

Bill

http://www.dailyfinance.com/story/a...afety-risk-to-drivers-and-the-compa/19560998/

Essentially yes. As does any direct-injrction engine, including diesels. Don't know how BMW has theirs set up, but if I understood it correctly, the new SHO can run on the fuel tank pump pressure at lower rpms, then the high-pressure (up to 2,150 psi) comes in as rpm rises. So it sounds like the SHO engine should keep running.

Now, Kirk had some issues at the track. He ended up going to an engineer's house that night. His problem seemed to be the high-pressure pump, but it seemed to be a wiring problem, as the issue came and went.

 

[luigisho]

I wonder if this is consistent with the presumed tranny problems other have been experiencing with drop/loss in power when they need to accelerate?

 

[Aelwell]

They replaced my HPFP with 1400 miles on the car. Engine would cut out on hard acceleration.

 

[EcoBrick Bob]

My good friend had this happen to his 2008 535IX wagon about 10 days ago. Was running 70 and all of a sudden engine started to run very rough and check engine light went on. Everything went into limp mode. BMW wouldn't tell him he couldn't drive it slowly, but said if it didn't clear up after a couple on/offs with some time between them, it needed to be flat-bedded to BMW dealer, which is what happened. I picked him up and actually sat in car when he started it, and it acted like it was on 3 or 4 cylinders. His BMW has 42,000 mi on it.

Also posted about this on thread about SHO's with rough idling engines at start-up, as his BMW wagon had been doing this frequently, but roughness always went away when warmed up.

Hopefully we won't have the full-blown issues that are affecting some DI BMW Turbo engines. Also have another friend with a 2008 335 BMW Conv that had to have the turbo's replaced. This is an older couple who likely never even floored the car.

 

[RonPorter]

My good friend had this happen to his 2008 535IX wagon about 10 days ago. Was running 70 and all of a sudden engine started to run very rough and check engine light went on. Everything went into limp mode. BMW wouldn't tell him he couldn't drive it slowly, but said if it didn't clear up after a couple on/offs with some time between them, it needed to be flat-bedded to BMW dealer, which is what happened. I picked him up and actually sat in car when he started it, and it acted like it was on 3 or 4 cylinders. His BMW has 42,000 mi on it.

Also posted about this on thread about SHO's with rough idling engines at start-up, as his BMW wagon had been doing this frequently, but roughness always went away when warmed up.

Hopefully we won't have the full-blown issues that are affecting some DI BMW Turbo engines. Also have another friend with a 2008 335 BMW Conv that had to have the turbo's replaced. This is an older couple who likely never even floored the car.

FWIW, YMMV, etc......

There has been a LONG running thread on the LegacyGT foum about the tiny oil screens in the fittings before the turbo. For the life of me, I can't see how they can clog with regular oil/filter changes, but guys on the Forum have found crap in them. And these are the enthusiasts that I assume are more fastidious than the typical owner.

Subaru had a 7,500-mile oil change frequency, and had no opinion on synthetic oils. I used to do 7,500 M1/Castrol Synthetic changes every 7,500. Since '07, they call all turbo engines "severe service" and recommend 3,750 oil changes. It technically doesn't apply to me, but I have gone to 3,750 oil changes with dino oil. Subaru still has no opinion on synthetic oils, they still stay with mileage intervals.

 

[bill murray]

I just want to throw in a quick thank you to the folks that have responded here.

Also, to let you know I am not trying to stir up trouble, invent problems or anything like that. It is just that I believe our system is similar/identical to the general BMW fuel delivery system and I have been following several threads on this Forum relating to various degrees of loss of engine power.

If I have understood it correctly, most of those have been said to be related to the TPS or one of the similar commands dealing with the transmission.

Having spent 5 years at the dealer level and 25 years with two manufacturers, I am well aware of problems that continue to be misidentified until it gets ugly.

In the case of Volvo, the first year B-20 motors had bad/porous castings in the camshaft and they were dying by the hundreds here in the US. For the longest time the Swedes said it could not be the camshaft, it was something else. Finally, we (Volvo Western Distributing at the time) sent a pallet, yes a pallet, of bad camshafts to the Managing Director's office in Göteborg.

That got his attention and the problem was recognized for what it was and was remedied. I have similar stories about SAAB Turbos and trannies for another day.

Those of you here who also owned/own 2nd Gen Lightnings will remember the "Spitting Spark Plugs" and the "Leaking Intercoolers" which Ford basically blew off for the longest time.

I truly hope we are not looking at a problem but I am taking the slant that to be informed about such things is not a bad thing.

I still have not finished my "First 5,000 miles impression" on my SHO but will mention my recent trip to Nebraska and back netted me some bugs in the front bumper that are not coming off totally and I seem to have a number of chips in the coating on the wheels. Today will be the first day after the trip to thoroughly examine these two items.

As a final note, other than one or two trips a year, I don't drive my SHO more than 500 miles a month but change the oil every 3 months. I also use 91/93 octane fuel. Cheap insurance I believe.

Damn, wrote a book when I intended just a quick post. Oh Well......

Bill

 

[RonPorter]

WRT the Ford 5.4 spark plug issue. I have a 2000 F-250. I had the dealer do the plugs at 99K when I bought it in late '06. I will also have a dealer do the plugs in the near future at 190K, because of the plug issue on the early 5.4 engines.

 

[hawkeye18]

Let's also not forget the spark plugs that like to break off in the head on 4.6Ls in Mustangs (and others).

 

[luigisho]

Those were a 2 piece design. Most of the porcelan comes out and then leaves the second part behind.

 

[LotusDriver]

If I have understood it correctly, most of those have been said to be related to the TPS or one of the similar commands dealing with the transmission.

Having spent 5 years at the dealer level and 25 years with two manufacturers, I am well aware of problems that continue to be misidentified until it gets ugly.

Bill

I believe of all the Gen 4 SHO's on here, I have dealt with the worst of the power loss problems. I am confident that these problems have been a result of faulty transmission sensors, and NOT the high pressure fuel system.

Just before the last time my car went in for this problem, it was noticed that at the same time the car goes into limp mode, the reverse lights flicker on and off. My wife was travelling behind me, and called me. She asked.. "why do your reverse lights keep going on and off". I then told her, as she followed me in her truck, to raise her hand when they came on again. Sure enough, it was almost perfectly syncd' to the car cutting out. Which lead me, and the Ford Engineers to believe that sure enough the transmission range sensor was faulty. I have a hard time believing that my reverse lights turning on and off would somehow be related to a fuel pump.

The sensor was recently replaced, for the second time. This time with a brand new updated sensor. So far, I have not had any problems. While I agree many compluter related systems are "misidentified", You will not convince me that my problems have been caused by a fuel pump.

s

 

[IM Buddy8]

Glad your car is running correctly now Lotus you dealt with this problem I think worse than anyone.. Maybe this updated sensor fixed the problem? What was the build date on your car just curious? Sometimes they like to fix stuff without saying anything just don't want to let everyone know they made a mistake in the first place..

 

[EcoBrick Bob]

While sometimes too much information is not good, I really appreciate knowledgeable postings on troublesome issues. I have not had any mechanical issues with my EB Flex in almost 10K of mileage, (mfg 10/09).

A couple years ago, we grenaded the supercharger on our SeaDoo RXP. Due to internet postings, I found out that the ceramic bearings are destroyed when that happens and can be ingested into the engine. Internet article told to clean oil screens and sure enough mechanic found pieces of ceramic all over them. Had he not cleaned them, which he was unaware of needing to be done, the engine likely would have been destroyed.

Have owned numerous Saab and Volvo turbos, with no problems, but never kept them past 40K.

Update on friend's 2008 - 535 BMW wagon that went into limp mode. BMW determined the problem was a miss on the #3 cylinder and that re-programming the ECM was all that was needed. Seems to be running fine after re-programming, but friend is not pleased that something like this could happen at any time, and when he is miles from a BMW dealer. Since he also has a new 650 Conv. is now a bit skittish....

 

[SHO U UP]

While sometimes too much information is not good, I really appreciate knowledgeable postings on troublesome issues. I have not had any mechanical issues with my EB Flex in almost 10K of mileage, (mfg 10/09).

A couple years ago, we grenaded the supercharger on our SeaDoo RXP. Due to internet postings, I found out that the ceramic bearings are destroyed when that happens and can be ingested into the engine. Internet article told to clean oil screens and sure enough mechanic found pieces of ceramic all over them. Had he not cleaned them, which he was unaware of needing to be done, the engine likely would have been destroyed.

Have owned numerous Saab and Volvo turbos, with no problems, but never kept them past 40K.

Update on friend's 2008 - 535 BMW wagon that went into limp mode. BMW determined the problem was a miss on the #3 cylinder and that re-programming the ECM was all that was needed. Seems to be running fine after re-programming, but friend is not pleased that something like this could happen at any time, and when he is miles from a BMW dealer. Since he also has a new 650 Conv. is now a bit skittish....

That's a SEXY car!

 

[zeus268]

These HPFP problems and stories always made me nervous when I had my 09 535xi sedan, however I never experienced any troubles related to the pump or injectors. The car was not flawless though having experienced many electrical issues and even a blown power steering pump hose just in the first 3 months of ownership.
One of the reasons that I got the SHO was because of the direct injection, twin turbo designed engines that it shared with my BMW. And for the most part I'm very satisfied with my SHO, however my BMW was FAR more fuel efficient than the SHO. I find the EcoBoost moniker to be complete bull-****
In fact the fuel economy on my SHO is so dismal that I've found that my old 2005 Chrysler 300C with a 5.7L V8 got better mileage numbers.

If I had bought this car primarily for the fuel economy I would be really mad about this, but it was the performance and nostalgia of the original model that made me get it and for the most part i am happy with it. Being an IT professional I think that the technology really attracted me to this SHO as well and it doesn't disappoint!

 

[esfoad]

These HPFP problems and stories always made me nervous when I had my 09 535xi sedan, however I never experienced any troubles related to the pump or injectors. The car was not flawless though having experienced many electrical issues and even a blown power steering pump hose just in the first 3 months of ownership.
One of the reasons that I got the SHO was because of the direct injection, twin turbo designed engines that it shared with my BMW. And for the most part I'm very satisfied with my SHO, however my BMW was FAR more fuel efficient than the SHO. I find the EcoBoost moniker to be complete bull-****
In fact the fuel economy on my SHO is so dismal that I've found that my old 2005 Chrysler 300C with a 5.7L V8 got better mileage numbers.

If I had bought this car primarily for the fuel economy I would be really mad about this, but it was the performance and nostalgia of the original model that made me get it and for the most part i am happy with it. Being an IT professional I think that the technology really attracted me to this SHO as well and it doesn't disappoint!

Hmmm. Not sure what mileage you are getting or what your expectations are but for a full size car with the performance of the SHO, 25mpg on the highway and an overall average of 22.5 for the first 10K miles is damn good in my opinion. Especially since most of that mileage was done with regular gas. Now I drive the car reasonably hard and average 73MPH on the highway. My commute is 20 miles each way of back roads. So.......

 

[zeus268]

Hmmm. Not sure what mileage you are getting or what your expectations are but for a full size car with the performance of the SHO, 25mpg on the highway and an overall average of 22.5 for the first 10K miles is damn good in my opinion. Especially since most of that mileage was done with regular gas. Now I drive the car reasonably hard and average 73MPH on the highway. My commute is 20 miles each way of back roads. So.......

My expectations aren't high, however I don't think that getting an average of 16.7 mpg should allow Ford to use the word "Eco" in the title of the car. I know that I drive my cars hard and I'm used to paying for fuel but I just don't like the misleading marketing of the fuel economy on this car. My Hemi V8 in my Chrysler 300C never claimed to have good fuel economy however it managed to impress with an average of 18 mpg.
Don't get me wrong, I LOVE my SHO, but does it get the fuel economy of a v6 with the power of a v8? Power? Absolutely! Fuel economy? **** no.....

 

[esfoad]

My expectations aren't high, however I don't think that getting an average of 16.7 mpg should allow Ford to use the word "Eco" in the title of the car. I know that I drive my cars hard and I'm used to paying for fuel but I just don't like the misleading marketing of the fuel economy on this car. My Hemi V8 in my Chrysler 300C never claimed to have good fuel economy however it managed to impress with an average of 18 mpg.
Don't get me wrong, I LOVE my SHO, but does it get the fuel economy of a v6 with the power of a v8? Power? Absolutely! Fuel economy? **** no.....

I hear ya. Not sure why your car is delivering low fuel economy. Aside from driving hard does your commute require alot of idling? Mind you, that would not explain how the Hemi was better but..............

 

[LotusDriver]

16.7??? Then obvisouly you don't drive it like the average person, for which the MPG ratings are based. That's hardly Fords marketing fail. I'm averaging 22mpg, with a combination of city and highway cruising as well as the occassionaly romp that makes this car fun.

 

[thepawn]

I hear ya. Not sure why your car is delivering low fuel economy. Aside from driving hard does your commute require alot of idling? Mind you, that would not explain how the Hemi was better but..............

I'm about 90% city driving and I only average in the 15-17 range. When I actually get some highway trips it hits the 20's, but not otherwise.