The outcome unfortunately is that the seals done ABSOLUTELY nothing at all for me. Apart from make the wallet a little lighter.
Having researched into this vanos thing a little, I have a few questions that may provide an answer to why I never felt any difference. Oh! Before I forget-I got the idle jolts severly this morning. Now I have no doubt whatsoever that the seals work as members of this forum have confirmed, but I think the seals only work on the older models.
Going back to the inspection stage of the seals, I noticed that although the seals had fully degraded, the pistons did not move in the vanos casing at all as Rajaie had stated. Rajaie has stated that if you youmove the vanos side to side you will hear the pistons moving back and forth. I did not experience this. This fact together with the fact that the seals didn't workfor me has prompted a few questions. Since Rajaie has said that during the devlopment stage of the seals he ascertained that BMW where infact well aware that the seals in there cars had and where failing, could it not of have been possible that instead of using different seals in the vanos system that BMW instead made the vanos casing smaller in width to stop movement of the pistons? After all my pistons where very loose but did not move the slightest in the casing. For example BMW might of made the casing of the M54 vanos a little smaller in comparison to the M52TU vanos? Or did BMW alter another such part in the vanos to eliminate vanos movement? Since I have not seen the vanos of the two mentioned vehicles side by side and have not had a chance to make comparisons, someone that is knowledgeable in this field can provide an answer perhaps? Or maybe someone can take it upon themselves to investigate this possibility?
This is all confusing as I had high hopes of having this problem resolved.

• Past the 500 mile mark. Bad news - iffy 2008-06-22 07:15:29 (952 views)
  • Re: Past the 500 mile mark. Bad news - Rajaie 2008-06-22 13:40:35 (647 views)
    • Re: Past the 500 mile mark. Bad news - iffy 2008-06-26 10:14:05 (420 views)
      • Re: Past the 500 mile mark. Bad news - Rajaie 2008-06-26 20:59:05 (375 views)
        • Re: Past the 500 mile mark. Bad news - iffy 2008-07-01 07:58:56 (271 views)
          • Re: Past the 500 mile mark. Bad news - Rajaie 2008-07-01 17:39:06 (261 views)
        • Re: Past the 500 mile mark. Bad news - mroek 2008-07-01 07:00:41 (265 views)
          • Re: Past the 500 mile mark. Bad news - iffy 2008-07-01 07:46:55 (239 views)
            • Re: Past the 500 mile mark. Bad news - mroek 2008-07-01 12:30:22 (259 views)
          • Re: Past the 500 mile mark. Bad news - iffy 2008-07-01 07:46:31 (229 views)
    • Re: Past the 500 mile mark. Bad news - iffy 2008-06-22 19:00:41 (311 views)
      • Re: Past the 500 mile mark. Bad news - Rajaie 2008-06-22 20:47:58 (312 views)
        • Re: Past the 500 mile mark. Bad news - poolman 2008-06-23 11:57:00 (308 views)
          • Re: Past the 500 mile mark. Bad news - kobus 2008-06-23 13:48:07 (242 views)
            • Re: Past the 500 mile mark. Bad news - poolman 2008-06-23 22:51:08 (231 views)
              • Re: Past the 500 mile mark. Bad news - kobus 2008-06-24 14:07:56 (231 views)
                • Re: Past the 500 mile mark. Bad news - iffy 2008-06-26 10:15:46 (261 views)
                  • So three weeks later--whats the outcome? (nt) - poolman 2008-07-13 16:56:34 (231 views)
                    • Re: So three weeks later--whats the outcome? - iffy 2008-07-22 16:55:15 (247 views)
                      • Re: So three weeks later--whats the outcome? - poolman 2008-07-25 13:16:28 (224 views)
                        • Re: So three weeks later--whats the outcome? - iffy 2008-07-25 19:17:08 (240 views)
                      • Re: So three weeks later--whats the outcome? - poolman 2008-07-23 19:16:41 (260 views)