I discussed the limited warranty extension with friends and decided that this was really taking too long to arrive at a satisfactory conclusion. I wrote my fourth letter to BMW NA, this time addressed to Don Chamberlain, with whom I'd recently had an interesting conversation. I believe it is time to put the screws to BMW NA and, if possible, BMW AG, until we have the safe, reliable cars that we believed we purchased.
Delivery confirmed on January 9, 2003

So, the actual letter (text identical to what was posted by BMW to Roadfly) arrived today, complete with the warranty card to put in the booklet. This appears to be a good step, but in reality I fear it is a huge problem for owners of high-risk cars. I believe that it will 1) provide far too little real backing to make owners feel secure with the vehicle's reliability; 2) Not protect owners from the potential hazard of sudden catastrophic engine failure; 3) Not prevent resale rates from falling by being too limited to appeal to purchasers, plus it may even hurt values more by providing a written admission that there is a problem with the S54 engines. Why did BMW do it? In an attempt to prevent a lawsuit.

After over three weeks of waiting, Don Chamberlain finally returned my return of his call. He let me know about the six-year/100,000 mile limited warranty extension (which I'd already learned from Roadfly) and spoke of Hans Duenzl's dedication to helping owners. Salient points include: he confirmed that some parts were not right, requiring a change in vendors and that there is currently no engine re-design.

Here's the letter I sent to AutoWeek in the hopes of clarifying a few issues and narrowing the focus of the discussion to the real issues. See AutoWeek's article Munich, we have a problem: A cadre of owners raises brow - and stink - over M3 engines gone bad.

Here's the letter Dr. Schiano received from BMW NA after writing his very well-put and technically-adept letters to them. It suggests that, maybe, we'll see a confirmation of the bearing issue, some technical disclosure, and, just possibly, an extended warranty. See the Roadfly post.

This owner of an at-risk (but running) M3 is trying to get NHTSA to take a look at the situation. It'd be far easier if every owner of a failed M3 did this, but I think it's still worth a try. This is a valid, serious safety concern and BMW NA is continuing to drag their heels. Note that it took the NHTSA three-and-a-half months to respond!

I had called for Gene Stewart last Thursday. My phone rang just after 9am PST this morning and there was Gene, returning my call. He sounded sincere when he said he understood my corcerns regarding both safety and resale value. He sounded fairly well-informed and more than a little frustrated. According to Gene, BMW AG has a good idea of what's going wring with late '01 production cars and will have some resolution by the end of the year. Whether BMW will actually come through by then or wether we'll like the solution or not may be another issue.

Update 11.14.02: Gene was "re-assigned" by BMW NA because of this conversation and my posting it. I feel bad that Gene took flak. BMW NA has just made yet another PR blunder with this action.

[I ended-up sending this letter Certified Mail on October 30] Having never received a personal response from BMW NA or my dealership and having seen no evidence that BMW is doing anything other than waiting for engines to fail, I could no longer contain my frustration. I wrote this, my third letter to BMW NA. In it I mention, again, the significant risk of injury or death when these engines fail, what I would like BMW to do for us, and what we may do if the company does not take some major steps to solve this problem.
Delivery confirmed on November 4, 2002

This is the response I finally received to my first letter (below). In this form letter, received by a number of owners, they say they are "evaluating every situation there engine damage occurs and are currently analyzing failed engines to determine the cause." This is a decent start, at last, though I have a few problems with this letter. They talk only of replacing engines that fail due to a defect; they do not suggest any plan to pro-actively prevent any of us from having the engine fail in the first place. Further, they again spend half of the letter harping on proper maintenance, though they at lease begin the phrase with "Respectfully,..." You can read this letter here.

After receiving their general mailing (below), I was irate. I have not heard from BMW NA or from my dealership (which I copied on the original letter). Following is my second letter to BMW NA. I think that, if this doesn't elicit some direct contact, I may go to the media with something.

I would have to characterize this letter as condescending marketing bullshit. If it was sent in response to my letter, it entirely misses the point. You really ought to read this letter, which I copied verbatim to this site. It begins with marketing crap, then addresses the following issues: proper engine oil changes, proper transmission and real axle differential oil changes, use of premium gasoline (in bold, no less), proper engine break-in, proper engine warm-up (with more bold type), and avoidance of overrev conditions. End with more marketing dribble, and you've got the gist.

In my initial letter, I wrote to BMW North America to express my concerns about the atypical number of engine failures in these cars. I noted that the preponderance of failures is in November 2001 production cars such as mine. I expressed concerns regarding safety and warranty and made clear my disappointment that BMW has not done anything to reassure owners of cars that may be affected. You may read letter I sent to BMW NA.