We recently had an aftermarket warranty company pay us to apply an IMS retrofit to a Boxster with an impending IMS bearing failure. Porsche dealerships are also looking to this technology to repair engines that have IMS issues that have not scattered parts as of yet.

I just completed an invasive diagnostic of one of the cars that came into us last week with an IMS failure that had been diagnosed by a Porsche dealership. The failure was not the IMS bearing, but rather another occurrence of the IMS tensioner paddle and it's plastic tensioner wear pad failing as a primary failure. The secondary failure was valve timing changes that collided the valves into the pistons. More on this one later when I have the failure report logged and fully documented.

The moral of the story is that lots of IMS failures aren't IMS failures. the IMS gets the blame because thats just the easiest thing for people to do. This failure is worse than the IMS, because this tensioer can't be removed to allow any preventive to be applied.

 

Not sure if this is repost http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PxV4XRTLBKY
The bearings have plastic inside too! WTF???

 

I still think I'd rather not do the retrofit proactively, and put the money instead into extended warranty because as you say, IMS is only one [of about what? a dozen?] potentially expensive failure to which the engine is susceptible. Not to mention the gearbox, A/C, starter/alternator, ABS, etc, etc, that can all go haywire and cost a fortune to repair, whether they're a one-time huge sum like an engine, or a series of $1000-2000 repairs that ultimately add up.

But it's good to know your retrofit is gaining acceptance and could become an option under warranty coverage if I would need it, assuming I would be lucky enough to catch the problem before terminal damage occurs.

Having survived something that has a better than 50% mortality rate myself, I no longer lose sleep over things like whether my car engine will someday fail. The best things in life...aren't things.

 

This one is sitting on the lift right now.. The engine was being pulled when I walked by and did a quick inspection..

I found the "Money shot" that took this one out quickly.. What you see at the crack in the bellhouse is the broken IMS spindle and nut. This shears off when the bearing seizes.
See the circled portion of the image.

The is what we'll see when we separate the engine from the tranny

 

Scary photos! Jake, I don't have a background in AE but I do have a background in metallurgy, so this all interests me (though I wish it was purely academic vs having one of these engines).

Looking at the photos and where the shaft seems to have sheared, something comes to mind. Do you think it's possible that a miscalculated torque specification for the shaft-end nut (or under- or over-torquing during assembly) could be contributing to why some fail prematurely and others don't?

Also, I've seen you mention halving the oil-change intervals (which I'm with you 100% on even if this issue didn't exist), but one question: am I correct that only helps with the IMS bearing if the bearing seal has been removed to allow oil inside? Or is there some benefit to the IMS bearing even if the seal is intact?

 

Why in the 'BLUE HELL' is Dell stirring up trouble?

Doesn't he have some statistics to teach or sumptin'?

 

Here's the pics of my bearing. It was a "single row" bearing out of an '02 C2 996.

The good news was there is almost zero wear or play in the bearing. The bad is that I probably removed a perfectly good part.

That being said I have little doubt that the bearing I replaced it with is superior to this one, so I guess I purchased a little piece of mind. Since I was replacing the clutch anyway, it wasn't super expensive.

 

So, if your stock bearing was in perfect shape, why is the replacement any better? Is it somehow going to be better than perfect?

 

What was the mileage Ray?

 

It is a higher quality ceramic bearing than the original steel piece.

Simply put, it's a better part.

 

The car has about 55k on it.

 

Here's what LN says about their replacement part.

Based off of the knowledge gained from our bearing analysis of both factory single and double-row IMS bearings and significant research, we've employed a custom ceramic hybrid bearing, featuring precision Japanese-made tool steel races and genuine USA-made Timken sintered silicon nitride ultra-low friction roller *****. We use exclusively ceramic hybrid bearings on both our IMS upgrade and retrofit kits. On average up to thirty times more expensive than conventional steel ball bearings, the benefits far outweigh the cost.

Recent improvements in purity and grain structure have given silicon nitride a high stress fatigue life equal to, or better than, that of bearing steels. Some tests have shown life 3 to 5 times that of M-50 steel. Performs up to 15 times longer in poor lubrication environments (like suggested by the bearing analysis above) as compared to steel.

Other benefits include...

Less maintenance - Due to a minimum level of Adhesive Wear, bearing components and lubricants last much longer, saving you expensive service and repair time.

High Hot Strength - High compressive and flexural strength over a wide temperature range. Lends itself for use to 2200 degrees F.

Low Density - Specific density of 3.2 compared to 7.8 for steel. At high bearing operating speeds, the bearing ***** have a centrifugal force which may exceed the external loads on the bearing. The low density of ceramics can reduce this load considerably.

High Hardness - While bearing steel is in the RC 58-64 hardness range, silicon nitride has a hardness of RC 75-80 and offers excellent wear resistance and resistance to denting or flat-spotting.

Coefficient of Friction - Silicon nitride has a coefficient of friction which is significantly lower, especially under marginal lubrication conditions. It also exhibits better resistance to scuffing and seizing than bearing steel.

Corrosion Resistance - Silicon nitride is unaffected by most common corrosive agents, and is well-suited for use in hot corrosive atmospheres, or where lubricants have been known to attack conventional bearing steels.

 

So, I still don''t undertand why it is better. It is a FACT that your stock bearing had no wear and you are HOPING the new bearing will also have no wear. What did you gain? We know what you lost. Seems like the stock bearing is more than enough for the engine and paying extra money for a non proven bearing is silly.

 

Why it's better is patently obvious if you read any of the info above or saw the quality of the new part.

The question you should be asking is was the swap really necessary. Based on the condition of the bearing I removed it was not. Can the old part fail? It would certainly seem so based on some reports, but I am not convinced (as I suspect you are also) that this part is the ticking time bomb some have made it out to be.

So did I waste my money. Probably at this point based on the wear of the current part. Down the road who knows?

I will tell you one thing. Mobil 1 0W40 seems to have done an excellent job maintaining this particular part in my engine.....

 

So Ray, why there's no grease on your bearing? Has the grease been removed or the grease was already gone when the bearing was replaced?