M6 Clutch Failure
Discussion
I have just recently purchased myself a 2005 M6 within 4 days of owning the car problems started with the clutch engaging and disengaging. BMW assist was phoned car was picked up a tooken to my local dealer. Who then phoned to say clutch has to be removed to investigate problem but this would not be covered i disagreed, i was told car was drivable so i picked the car up on my way home had the "red cog" and Clutch adatation! active showing on the display. Car was taken straight home and contacted the BMW garage i purchased the car. Was agreed that the car would be taken to another BMW garage, the clutch was removed and as seen in the video this is the damage.
http://u235294.sendgrid.org/wf/click?upn=Q-2FixV2G...
The car was sitting for 2 weeks like this before the garage the car was purchased from and told they are not paying for the clutch because they know the car has be driven hard (straight line 1/4 mile), The clutch was now replaced and i am still in arguments to who should pay for this. Since then now it has been said the clutch slave cylinder is needing to be replaced aswell this making the bill 3200. I cannot believe that me driving the car 0 - 100 four times in a whole day is this cause of the damage shown. Is this due to realese bearing fault? should this not be repaired by BMW if this is a known fault with these SMG boxes?
http://u235294.sendgrid.org/wf/click?upn=Q-2FixV2G...
The car was sitting for 2 weeks like this before the garage the car was purchased from and told they are not paying for the clutch because they know the car has be driven hard (straight line 1/4 mile), The clutch was now replaced and i am still in arguments to who should pay for this. Since then now it has been said the clutch slave cylinder is needing to be replaced aswell this making the bill 3200. I cannot believe that me driving the car 0 - 100 four times in a whole day is this cause of the damage shown. Is this due to realese bearing fault? should this not be repaired by BMW if this is a known fault with these SMG boxes?
i have contacted trading standards and i am trying to get this resovled but nobody seems to be getting back to me from BMW and is getting a joke this has been 3 weeks now and i have had no courtesy car during all this.
The red cog was not on when i got the car.
Is there any checks that should be done on the clutch during the 120 point AUC checks?
The red cog was not on when i got the car.
Is there any checks that should be done on the clutch during the 120 point AUC checks?
My sympathies, but your post implies that you carried out at least 4 launch control starts with that car. This will weaken your case in the same way it would if you had dropped the clutch 4 times in a conventional manual car. An LC start will accelerate wear on the drivetrain, so limits have to be set with regard to free repairs.
Appologies if I've miss-interpreted your post.
Appologies if I've miss-interpreted your post.
no i never used the launch control atall it was just 4 0 - 100 runs in m mode no launch control used as i didn't want to risk using it incase it did damage the clutch, but now it has made no diffrence and the clutch is destroyed not even using it. i could see there point if i did use launch control.
I have been very disappointed with the customer service i am getting with this.
Car only has 36,000miles, owned car for 3 days 4th morning problem starts i cant see how they are trying to no pay for this. It is a performance car it should be more than capable.
I have been very disappointed with the customer service i am getting with this.
Car only has 36,000miles, owned car for 3 days 4th morning problem starts i cant see how they are trying to no pay for this. It is a performance car it should be more than capable.
Seems harsh if LC wasn't used. The video of your clutch looks like catastrophic failure, which is why the question of abuse has come up. Equally, this could be due to the release bearing problem, or, possibly the effects of the clutch slave cylinder problem.
You may need to escalate this to BMW UK Customer Services, but I guess they will be guided by the opinion of the technician who stripped it down.
You may need to escalate this to BMW UK Customer Services, but I guess they will be guided by the opinion of the technician who stripped it down.
I have contacted BMW customer services and i just seem to get a phone back from the garage i purchased it from. As i was told by trading standards i have emailed BMW finance and am currently waiting for a reply from them but this is coming up for a week and no reply.
There has also been other problems found with the car. Rattle from drivers door and windscreen was replaced but with wrong windscreen for the M6 model with heads-up display. This really does concern me with the AUC checks which have been carried out.
The 1/4 mile runs were on a old airfield which does do events.
But really is a M6 is not capable of going through the gears without failing this really isn't the car i thoughts i bought. It's not as if i was on a track all day going up and down gears.
There has also been other problems found with the car. Rattle from drivers door and windscreen was replaced but with wrong windscreen for the M6 model with heads-up display. This really does concern me with the AUC checks which have been carried out.
The 1/4 mile runs were on a old airfield which does do events.
But really is a M6 is not capable of going through the gears without failing this really isn't the car i thoughts i bought. It's not as if i was on a track all day going up and down gears.
Also, did you do any research on the M5 or M6 before buying?? If you had done then you'd have known the 40k point (plus or minus 10k) is where the clutches on these cars normally run out. To admit youd been 1/4 miling it without knowing the cars transmission history is a bit of a school boy error and to the dealer does smack a little of improper abuse!!
i'm not really up on consumer law but look at some of these
http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/nireland/consumer_ni...
taken from the sale of goods act''.....(c)freedom from minor defects,..............
(e)durability.
i'd be asking a solicitor about this.
14 Implied terms about quality or fitness.
(1)Except as provided by this section and section 15 below and subject to any other enactment, there is no implied [F11term] about the quality or fitness for any particular purpose of goods supplied under a contract of sale.
[F12(2)Where the seller sells goods in the course of a business, there is an implied term that the goods supplied under the contract are of satisfactory quality.
(2A)For the purposes of this Act, goods are of satisfactory quality if they meet the standard that a reasonable person would regard as satisfactory, taking account of any description of the goods, the price (if relevant) and all the other relevant circumstances.
(2B)For the purposes of this Act, the quality of goods includes their state and condition and the following (among others) are in appropriate cases aspects of the quality of goods—
(a)fitness for all the purposes for which goods of the kind in question are commonly supplied,
(b)appearance and finish,
(c)freedom from minor defects,
(d)safety, and
(e)durability.
(2C)The term implied by subsection (2) above does not extend to any matter making the quality of goods unsatisfactory—
(a)which is specifically drawn to the buyer’s attention before the contract is made,
(b)where the buyer examines the goods before the contract is made, which that examination ought to reveal, or
(c)in the case of a contract for sale by sample, which would have been apparent on a reasonable examination of the sample.]
Satisfactory quality, s 14(2)
[11] The quality of the goods sold must be satisfactory (prior to 1994, this provision required 'merchantable' quality; this requirement has been retained in most Commonwealth versions of the Act). The Act provides an objective test to determine satisfactory quality; the standard that a reasonable person would regard as satisfactory, taking into account the price, description and any other relevant factors.[12] The courts have identified certain factors that may raise or lower the expectation of satisfaction. Second hand goods, per Bernstien v. Pamson Motors Ltd.,[13] will attract a lower expectation. On the other hand goods of a reputable brand may attract a higher expectation, the judge in Bernstien used the example of a small ping on a Rolls-Royce being unsatisfactory. 'Other relevant factors' may include advertising in the case of consumer contracts.[14]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sale_of_Goods_Act_197...
yes it's a long post but it's a lot of money for a car that needs a clutch after 4 days.
http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/nireland/consumer_ni...
taken from the sale of goods act''.....(c)freedom from minor defects,..............
(e)durability.
i'd be asking a solicitor about this.
14 Implied terms about quality or fitness.
(1)Except as provided by this section and section 15 below and subject to any other enactment, there is no implied [F11term] about the quality or fitness for any particular purpose of goods supplied under a contract of sale.
[F12(2)Where the seller sells goods in the course of a business, there is an implied term that the goods supplied under the contract are of satisfactory quality.
(2A)For the purposes of this Act, goods are of satisfactory quality if they meet the standard that a reasonable person would regard as satisfactory, taking account of any description of the goods, the price (if relevant) and all the other relevant circumstances.
(2B)For the purposes of this Act, the quality of goods includes their state and condition and the following (among others) are in appropriate cases aspects of the quality of goods—
(a)fitness for all the purposes for which goods of the kind in question are commonly supplied,
(b)appearance and finish,
(c)freedom from minor defects,
(d)safety, and
(e)durability.
(2C)The term implied by subsection (2) above does not extend to any matter making the quality of goods unsatisfactory—
(a)which is specifically drawn to the buyer’s attention before the contract is made,
(b)where the buyer examines the goods before the contract is made, which that examination ought to reveal, or
(c)in the case of a contract for sale by sample, which would have been apparent on a reasonable examination of the sample.]
Satisfactory quality, s 14(2)
[11] The quality of the goods sold must be satisfactory (prior to 1994, this provision required 'merchantable' quality; this requirement has been retained in most Commonwealth versions of the Act). The Act provides an objective test to determine satisfactory quality; the standard that a reasonable person would regard as satisfactory, taking into account the price, description and any other relevant factors.[12] The courts have identified certain factors that may raise or lower the expectation of satisfaction. Second hand goods, per Bernstien v. Pamson Motors Ltd.,[13] will attract a lower expectation. On the other hand goods of a reputable brand may attract a higher expectation, the judge in Bernstien used the example of a small ping on a Rolls-Royce being unsatisfactory. 'Other relevant factors' may include advertising in the case of consumer contracts.[14]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sale_of_Goods_Act_197...
yes it's a long post but it's a lot of money for a car that needs a clutch after 4 days.
davewhitt said:
yes it's a long post but it's a lot of money for a car that needs a clutch after 4 days.
Its not 4 days though old though is it? Sure, there may have been signs hidden by the seller but in reality its a 2006 car with 36k on the clock and a car whos clutch / box does not show wear until it fails, by nature of its design. These cars are nigh on bomb proof in every other way, but dont think that 507bhp isnt going to have some effect on it after 36k if its on its first friction plates. Simple research (which i have questioned the OP if he did any or not) will show where the car normally hick-ups, and the OP is far from being the first to have dragged his newly purchased, second hand M5/6 up the runway / traffic light GP to find the clutch has decided to pack in on the 3rd or 4th go. AUC checks pretty much everything ref condition and driving feel, but the clutch is something that is difficult to inspect without dropping the box. AUC cars dont even have to have a full BMW history, just pass the multipoint check.
The fact that many owners sold M5's and M6's at around the 40k mile mark is a stark indicator that they knew something expensive was coming their way. The dealer only has to fix whats broken and in this case i think should replace the clutch for the OP. But, admitting that its been 'tested' on the 1/4 mile may be his downfall.
Eddie
Gassing Station | M Power | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff