[John Tanglewood]

Originally Posted by goj

I get the feeling that he tried to drive through a puddle that was too deep and the intake gulped up the water.

He's trying to deflect blame

He shouldn't have to try and deflect blame. He was driving his car in the rain, as all of us do. Maybe he hit a puddle, maybe he didn't. But I would never call that negligent on his part as he was just driving his car normally in shitty conditions.

[goj]

Originally Posted by John Tanglewood

He shouldn't have to try and deflect blame. He was driving his car in the rain, as all of us do. Maybe he hit a puddle, maybe he didn't. But I would never call that negligent on his part as he was just driving his car normally in shitty conditions.

I never said negligent. I'm just stating that I'm sure that he drove through a puddle. By saying a tidal wave hit his car seems like he's trying to attribute the cause to something other than simply driving thru a puddle that was too large.

He's presenting it like he's hiding something lol. That's my point, but it doesn't change the sad reality of the situation

[Ali Shiralian]

Originally Posted by MalibuBimmer

Cautionary tale. I wonder what mods, if any, the car had. As for the intersection where he said the damage occurred, the municipality will probably have records as to how deep the water gets there.

This video by the same guy is interesting and ironic. Lots of water being shot around the engine. Coincidence? I have no idea.

I do the exact same thing to my cars all the time and never a problem.

[pz619]

I think there has to be more to this than being presented. There are plenty of mercs that drive through bad weather and don't hydrolock. I suspect the puddle is bigger than he thought.

[Viffermike]

Welllll ... check this post out on the 2Addicts forum. This was in Montreal.

Granted, the victim was an utter dolt and was ultimately so shamed by us 2Addict long-termers that he was banned and that thread locked ... but his car hydrolocked in what I figure was about 18 inches of water.

It happens ... and BMWs are definitely not immune ...

[David70]

Originally Posted by Viffermike

Welllll ... check this post out on the 2Addicts forum. This was in Montreal.

Granted, the victim was an utter dolt and was ultimately so shamed by us 2Addict long-termers that he was banned and that thread locked ... but his car hydrolocked in what I figure was about 18 inches of water.

It happens ... and BMWs are definitely not immune ...

For reference, the diameter of my wheel is 18"
Without shoes on this is almost up to my knee cap (I am 6' 1").

This is far from getting splashed by a passing car.

[Viffermike]

Originally Posted by David70

For reference, the diameter of my wheel is 18"
Without shoes on this is almost up to my knee cap (I am 6' 1").

This is far from getting splashed by a passing car.

Yes, you're right. The diameter of the wheel on the car in that thread is also 18" -- and that's probably in the area where the semi is wading through behind the M235.

Who knows for certain what happened in either case. The point is, you don't have to have the nose of your car submerged to tempt hydrolock. My personal rule of thumb is if I can't see the center of the wheels on the cars ahead of me, I don't go in. You just don't have any idea how deep the water is beyond that.

[YVRF80]

Originally Posted by Viffermike

Welllll ... check this post out on the 2Addicts forum. This was in Montreal.

Granted, the victim was an utter dolt and was ultimately so shamed by us 2Addict long-termers that he was banned and that thread locked ... but his car hydrolocked in what I figure was about 18 inches of water.

It happens ... and BMWs are definitely not immune ...

That was the most embarrassing thread to read. If that was legit, How he functions in society would be amazing to know. Hopefully Daddy pays his rent too!

[Mingwan]

Originally Posted by Viffermike

Welllll ... check this post out on the 2Addicts forum. This was in Montreal.

Granted, the victim was an utter dolt and was ultimately so shamed by us 2Addict long-termers that he was banned and that thread locked ... but his car hydrolocked in what I figure was about 18 inches of water.

It happens ... and BMWs are definitely not immune ...

Lmao at the pictures in thread.

[TomHudson]

No reason to do what he said. Obviously there is no cold air intake, and there is no question about this at the dealership, as they looked at his stock air filters.
A car coming the other way, and driving through as much water as there was, could very well cause the problem he is describing.

I don't believe that somebody driving a brand new C 63 AMG is going to start running through huge puddles.

Either way, it's still insurance, and a real pain in the ass. Whether the turbo chargers contribute to this in some manner, is up for debate.

This isn't the first time this has happened! We have our fair share of rain storms here, and our fair share of cars that got Hydro locked in storms.

Dude, I wish you all the best, post a video what she's all back together again. Shit happens

[mojobmw_e90]

Why would his insurance pick up the tab for the replacement engine if he has warranty? Motor hydrolocked, it's not like he crashed into someone or anything else.

[zx10guy]

Originally Posted by mojobmw_e90

Why would his insurance pick up the tab for the replacement engine if he has warranty? Motor hydrolocked, it's not like he crashed into someone or anything else.

Why would a manufacturer's warranty cover something like this? It's not a manufacturing defect per say. Someone can argue it's a design flaw if in fact things happened the way the owner said. But good luck getting the manufacturer to accept responsibility for it as this could be treated as an "act of God" situation. As a result, this would fall under auto insurance as the car was being operated at the time. Because of the situation, this should be covered under comprehensive coverage. If his insurance feels they have a case to make the manufacturer accept liability, then the insurance company would go after the MB for reimbursement. It's better for the insurance company to pursue this avenue versus the owner as obviously the insurance company has more resources and pull.

[David70]

Originally Posted by Viffermike

Yes, you're right. The diameter of the wheel on the car in that thread is also 18" -- and that's probably in the area where the semi is wading through behind the M235.

Who knows for certain what happened in either case. The point is, you don't have to have the nose of your car submerged to tempt hydrolock. My personal rule of thumb is if I can't see the center of the wheels on the cars ahead of me, I don't go in. You just don't have any idea how deep the water is beyond that.

Agree but every time we have heavy rains that cause any amount of flooding there are warnings about driving through standing or fast moving water, then people always do it. If I think I will submerge my axles I won't go, if there is a pothole in the middle or I am wrong I could end up just like this guy.

I think the recommendation is about 4" which puts at most 2-3" of your wheel underwater.

[TomHudson]

Originally Posted by mojobmw_e90

Why would his insurance pick up the tab for the replacement engine if he has warranty? Motor hydrolocked, it's not like he crashed into someone or anything else.

WTF are you talking about?

[omasou]

Originally Posted by mojobmw_e90

Why would his insurance pick up the tab for the replacement engine if he has warranty? Motor hydrolocked, it's not like he crashed into someone or anything else.

Comprehensive not collision.

If the hydrolocked engine occurred because of water, such as driving through a puddle on the road, then you need more than what basic insurance would allow.

Your basic policy is what the state requires and only covers what happens in a car crash with another vehicle. The state mandates bodily injury and property damage liability.

Your engine doesn’t hydrolock because of being involved in a car crash (unless your crash sends your car crashing into a lake, river, or another body of water). Since this is unlikely, you need to look at having other coverage.

Comprehensive coverage is what you need to have on your auto insurance policy if you want the protection for a hydrostatic locked engine. You would be protected against weather-related damage including:

• floods
• rain
• puddles

[bimmer456]

So here is an update video. The car is totaled as a new engine costs $71K and the car is about $85K. If it's 80% or more of the value of the car they total it. Not sure why he's still upset I'd rather a new car than getting the engine replaced in that car which could have other issues.

[bimmer456]

Originally Posted by omasou

Comprehensive not collision.

If the hydrolocked engine occurred because of water, such as driving through a puddle on the road, then you need more than what basic insurance would allow.

Your basic policy is what the state requires and only covers what happens in a car crash with another vehicle. The state mandates bodily injury and property damage liability.

Your engine doesn’t hydrolock because of being involved in a car crash (unless your crash sends your car crashing into a lake, river, or another body of water). Since this is unlikely, you need to look at having other coverage.

Comprehensive coverage is what you need to have on your auto insurance policy if you want the protection for a hydrostatic locked engine. You would be protected against weather-related damage including:

• floods
• rain
• puddles

I think he's financing the car so it would have full coverage. See the update video above, the car is totaled so he would be getting a check for it.

[jmg]

Originally Posted by bimmer456

So here is an update video. The car is totaled as a new engine costs $71K and the car is about $85K. If it's 80% or more of the value of the car they total it. Not sure why he's still upset I'd rather a new car than getting the engine replaced in that car which could have other issues.

I didn't want to sit through 11min of filler. Did he say insurance covered it or not? I'd want the car totaled myself instead of a new engine.

[omasou]

Originally Posted by bimmer456

So here is an update video. The car is totaled as a new engine costs $71K and the car is about $85K. If it's 80% or more of the value of the car they total it. Not sure why he's still upset I'd rather a new car than getting the engine replaced in that car which could have other issues.

He's probably upset b/c of the gap that's coming out of his pocket and the loss of YouTube income while he wait for a new car.

[bimmer456]

Originally Posted by jmg

I didn't want to sit through 11min of filler. Did he say insurance covered it or not? I'd want the car totaled myself instead of a new engine.

Yes he said it was covered but doesn't know how much he's getting. He thought he'd get a new engine instead of totaled since the car is brand new but the engine costs almost as much as the entire car so the insurance is totaling it. Of course it depends on the financing and how much he owes that will get paid off by the insurance first before he gets anything.

[bimmer456]

Originally Posted by omasou

He's probably upset b/c of the gap that's coming out of his pocket and the loss of YouTube income while he wait for a new car.

He doesn't know yet how much he's getting. If I were him I would have gotten new car replacement coverage. He's actually getting more YouTube visits and thus more income as a result of this.

[David70]

Things I learned from the latest video

The 11 minute video could easily have been 2 minutes
Insurance will pay for it
He takes no responsibility for it happening
He has "enormous emotional connection to the car" but it is almost brand new.


My thoughts -
He will have a huge bill when they give him a check for what the car was worth when it was totaled.
A $71k engine is crazy.
Based on this I would never consider doing something to this engine which could jeopardize the warranty as an engine failure could total the car.
I would never take this car to a track day as an engine failure could total the car and possibly neither the warranty or insurance would pay for it.
I would likely never buy a car that had this engine in it or I would get rid of it at the end of the warranty.
I would never follow this guys video's, they are painful to watch
If I were his insurance company I would tell him I wasn't thrilled with him recording our phone conversations and posting them on the internet. I wonder what the law would say about it.