Looking for new theories on IMS bearing failure. Several thoughts...
10-08-2014, 07:28 PM
#1
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Looking for new theories on IMS bearing failure. Several thoughts...
The auto industry is filled with examples of bad designs that have had serious failures. Ford, GM, Audi, Toyota, Jag...no one has been perfect and all have made sins of ommission or commission. And there are examples of how it is sometimes impossible to make a bad design into a good car...such as the Maserati Biturbos as sold in the US.
Porsche however has a status and reputation in the industry that is hard to equal. Things break. Nothing is perfect. But I find it hard to imagine that Porsche has been intentionally, for many years now, negligent in this IMS bearing issue.
1. The low volume and random nature of the IMS bearing failures makes it hard to point at design flaws. Especially when the design fix would have been so easy and when the turbo engines seem free of this flaw or other flaws like it.
2. The engines are hand assembled...has anyone ever traced the failures back to the people who assembled the specific engines that failed...to a specific team or group or shift or individual?
3. Assuming that the flaws are not in the design of the bearing or the engine assembly, and assuming that the bearings are not created inhouse but comes from a supplier, one has to wonder if Porsche has vetted their supplier for poor quality control or even disgruntled worker sabatoge?
4. Lastly, the class action suit proves that Porsche is like most companies and that they may have felt it is cheaper to pay for things to go away rather than defend their product in court. That said, has there been any statistical analysis for common threads of service or driving styles or conditions to see if there is a "possible" service or driver factor that stands out in these failures?
5. Since the issue seems restricted to 996s, how has the design changed in the 997 to avoid the problem...and can that change be retrofitted to the earlier cars?
Just thoughts for discussion.
Porsche however has a status and reputation in the industry that is hard to equal. Things break. Nothing is perfect. But I find it hard to imagine that Porsche has been intentionally, for many years now, negligent in this IMS bearing issue.
1. The low volume and random nature of the IMS bearing failures makes it hard to point at design flaws. Especially when the design fix would have been so easy and when the turbo engines seem free of this flaw or other flaws like it.
2. The engines are hand assembled...has anyone ever traced the failures back to the people who assembled the specific engines that failed...to a specific team or group or shift or individual?
3. Assuming that the flaws are not in the design of the bearing or the engine assembly, and assuming that the bearings are not created inhouse but comes from a supplier, one has to wonder if Porsche has vetted their supplier for poor quality control or even disgruntled worker sabatoge?
4. Lastly, the class action suit proves that Porsche is like most companies and that they may have felt it is cheaper to pay for things to go away rather than defend their product in court. That said, has there been any statistical analysis for common threads of service or driving styles or conditions to see if there is a "possible" service or driver factor that stands out in these failures?
5. Since the issue seems restricted to 996s, how has the design changed in the 997 to avoid the problem...and can that change be retrofitted to the earlier cars?
Just thoughts for discussion.
10-08-2014, 07:49 PM
#3
Rennlist Member
Wow.
10-08-2014, 08:10 PM
#6
The thing I found is one IMS thread is never enough...ppl like to have their OWN IMS thread...
OP, not to be hard on you but if you search, there must be like 100's of IMS threads on this site alone and everything you asked has been discussed ad nauseum.
10-08-2014, 08:21 PM
#7
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
yes there 100s of ims threads...and none of them brought up these points...at least that I could find. So in good faith I am asking these questions and would like to hear replies.
As the new owner of a 2003 996 with 39000 miles I have dealt with the issue for now by purchasing a 3 year 36k service contract. That seems like enough protection for the immediate future and it will allow the design to speak for itself.
John
As the new owner of a 2003 996 with 39000 miles I have dealt with the issue for now by purchasing a 3 year 36k service contract. That seems like enough protection for the immediate future and it will allow the design to speak for itself.
John
Trending Topics
10-08-2014, 08:42 PM
#9
Rennlist Member
And, the IMSB problem is not limited to 996s. It occurred in all M96 engined Porsches including 986 and early 987 Boxsters, 996s and early 997s.
It is a design problem.
In all seriousness, read the IMS threads.
Also check the 986 Forum.
Heck, even search other forums on the web.
There are lots of questions and very few answers.
Last edited by Spokayman; 10-08-2014 at 08:43 PM. Reason: spelling
10-08-2014, 08:48 PM
#10
Race Director
1) The M96 was not low-volume (in Porsche terms, at any rate).
3) The flaw was using bearing A for application B. "Sealed" bearings are not permanently sealed - I just replaced the "sealed" bearing in my front-loading washing machine. Once the seal is compromised, the bearing is toast. You'd be amazed at how much the bearing in my washer looked exactly like a chowed IMS bearing. There is no subterfuge, no conspiracy.
4) It's ENORMOUSLY cheaper to replace SOME engines under warranty and SOME under the class-action (as long as they've been in service for less than 10 years) than to replace ALL engines w/ a recall.
5) The issue is not limited to the 996 - the M96 motor was used in the Boxster for years as well.
The "fix" for the M97 - to use a bigger, non-removable bearing - didn't fix it. Porsche produced engines with permutations of the IMS bearing we know and love for 11 years.
3) The flaw was using bearing A for application B. "Sealed" bearings are not permanently sealed - I just replaced the "sealed" bearing in my front-loading washing machine. Once the seal is compromised, the bearing is toast. You'd be amazed at how much the bearing in my washer looked exactly like a chowed IMS bearing. There is no subterfuge, no conspiracy.
4) It's ENORMOUSLY cheaper to replace SOME engines under warranty and SOME under the class-action (as long as they've been in service for less than 10 years) than to replace ALL engines w/ a recall.
5) The issue is not limited to the 996 - the M96 motor was used in the Boxster for years as well.
The "fix" for the M97 - to use a bigger, non-removable bearing - didn't fix it. Porsche produced engines with permutations of the IMS bearing we know and love for 11 years.
10-08-2014, 08:50 PM
#11
yes there 100s of ims threads...and none of them brought up these points...at least that I could find. So in good faith I am asking these questions and would like to hear replies.
As the new owner of a 2003 996 with 39000 miles I have dealt with the issue for now by purchasing a 3 year 36k service contract. That seems like enough protection for the immediate future and it will allow the design to speak for itself.
John
As the new owner of a 2003 996 with 39000 miles I have dealt with the issue for now by purchasing a 3 year 36k service contract. That seems like enough protection for the immediate future and it will allow the design to speak for itself.
John
Service contract terms need to be read very carefully for exactly what is covered. Some contract says specifically only the engine parts that are lubricated by engine oil are covered (as far as engine coverage goes). Now I can definitely see that the warranty company can argue the IMSB is NOT lubricated by engine oil, well at least not by design...you get my point.
10-08-2014, 08:57 PM
#13
Rat Balls
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Scottsdale AZ, USA
Posts: 3,636
Likes: 0
Received 13 Likes
on
13 Posts
1. The low volume and random nature of the IMS bearing failures makes it hard to point at design flaws. Especially when the design fix would have been so easy and when the turbo engines seem free of this flaw or other flaws like it.
2. The engines are hand assembled...has anyone ever traced the failures back to the people who assembled the specific engines that failed...to a specific team or group or shift or individual?
3. Assuming that the flaws are not in the design of the bearing or the engine assembly, and assuming that the bearings are not created inhouse but comes from a supplier, one has to wonder if Porsche has vetted their supplier for poor quality control or even disgruntled worker sabatoge?
4. Lastly, the class action suit proves that Porsche is like most companies and that they may have felt it is cheaper to pay for things to go away rather than defend their product in court. That said, has there been any statistical analysis for common threads of service or driving styles or conditions to see if there is a "possible" service or driver factor that stands out in these failures?
5. Since the issue seems restricted to 996s, how has the design changed in the 997 to avoid the problem...and can that change be retrofitted to the earlier cars?
Just thoughts for discussion.
2. The engines are hand assembled...has anyone ever traced the failures back to the people who assembled the specific engines that failed...to a specific team or group or shift or individual?
3. Assuming that the flaws are not in the design of the bearing or the engine assembly, and assuming that the bearings are not created inhouse but comes from a supplier, one has to wonder if Porsche has vetted their supplier for poor quality control or even disgruntled worker sabatoge?
4. Lastly, the class action suit proves that Porsche is like most companies and that they may have felt it is cheaper to pay for things to go away rather than defend their product in court. That said, has there been any statistical analysis for common threads of service or driving styles or conditions to see if there is a "possible" service or driver factor that stands out in these failures?
5. Since the issue seems restricted to 996s, how has the design changed in the 997 to avoid the problem...and can that change be retrofitted to the earlier cars?
Just thoughts for discussion.
1. The Turbo models do not have an IMS. In the non Turbo models it wasn't fixed at the factory since the flaw was not readily known when they were in production. Plus, Porsche was going broke in the early days of the 996 and would not/could not have done anything about the design. For all the 996 haters out there (you will find out why if you do another search), the 996 saved Porsche.
2. The IMS is in all 996 and the early 997's. I am sure Gerhardt who works on the assembly line may have had a few bad days, but it would be difficult to know if it was he or Hans that failed to tighten down that last bolt on the IMS. I suppose either one could have been in a hurry to get to the bathroom after having eaten bad schnitzel, but I doubt there would be records of which autoworker installed each specific IMS. It is also thought that the single row bearing is less robust than the double row, although both have been reported as failing.
3. Your assumption is wrong. IMS failures are a result of IMS bearings that fail. I like your sabotage idea though. Now that IS an IMS discussion I have not heard of before. Maybe Hans and Gerhardt were both disgruntled because they really wanted to work in the brand new Cayenne Assembly Plant, complained and were told they were going to the Boxster Factory if they didn't shut up.
4. As noted ad nauseum in this forum. Yes. Garage Queens and cars that are not driven "Like you stole it", seem to be more susceptible presumably because the engine (and IMS) is not getting lubed properly (I sound like JRosa here). Also, Porsche did recommend oil changes at high mile intervals, but it is generally agreed upon that every 6 months or 5000 miles is a good deterrant to IMS failures. It also gives you the opportunity to cut open your oil filter and look for metal (ferrous only) debris.
5. The early 997's (997.1) had IMS issues because they have an IMS. The 997.2 models avoid the IMS issue completely...because they don't have one.
Anyway, Welcome to Rennlist! Do you have a pic of your car?
10-08-2014, 09:01 PM
#14
Race Director
True:
False: One car is not a valid sampling. Even if the actual failure rate was 25% (and I am not suggesting it is 25%, so everyone can take a breath), your specimen would only have a 25% chance of exhibiting the issue. A single data point is not sufficient for "the design to speak for itself."
You may come to the conclusion that we're all a-holes, but waltzing in here with 5 posts spouting off about IMSB conspiracy is going to raise a few hackles...
You may come to the conclusion that we're all a-holes, but waltzing in here with 5 posts spouting off about IMSB conspiracy is going to raise a few hackles...
10-08-2014, 09:34 PM
#15
Racer
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You're covered then for the yr/mileage (as long as the the service contract is good. More on that point later). Maybe after the term is up, re-evaluate and just replace it if it keeps you awake at night. In the meantime, install a magnetic drain plug, do oil change every 5k/6 months and inspect oil filter for debris pretty much minimum.
Service contract terms need to be read very carefully for exactly what is covered. Some contract says specifically only the engine parts that are lubricated by engine oil are covered (as far as engine coverage goes). Now I can definitely see that the warranty company can argue the IMSB is NOT lubricated by engine oil, well at least not by design...you get my point.