The ultimate IMS UPGRADE = ENGINE LIFEGUARD
09-19-2010, 09:15 AM
#31
3rd Gear
First of all good evening- and calmness. Here we're to be able to discuss about a problem solution. In the following paragraphs I'll try to explain all the doubts you would have concerning to Insaro reinforcement Kits.
Regarding to M96 engine knowledge, I'm sensible to know that there will be lots of people with a great experience in this particular issue, for istance yourself Jake. A few of us have learnt thanks to your threads and experience.
I have a huge experience on the field of design, finite elements analysis, tridimensional model generating, and big machines, robotized systems research and developing in the field of iron and steel sector, that means is a good platform. I hope you could believe me Jake, 'cause there are very complex systems with efforts and working atmosphere, with a huge difficult component more than a M96 engine could never arise. I could tell you lots of them but, as an example I can show you this robot (by the way is working in your country):
I'm a person who is used to place myself in an engine, a processing equipment industrial plant, an industrial oven, etc, trying to study and develop solutions to improve, upgrade at this point. This is my speciality, where I hit on the nail: to anylize and improve the quality of elements. That's why though I'm not an specific specialist on M96 engines, that question is not relevant to disqualify me, to be ready to offer my little contribution to Porsche world (I hope you don't worry about it Jake). I can assure from my deep heart that my only purpose is always to grow, and evolve over a problem root.
The main question is that Porsche enthusiastics could know the product, its improvements, and after that they could choose. It would be a great benefit for this community to have several choices.
Once I cleared these things, we can go to directly to study the piece. I like simplify ideas, 'cause It is the best way to interpret a problem solution
Porsche has a design problem at present, ok. You make an analysis and contribute to solve the problem, generating a mechanized piece over a melting piece design. Then you add it to an hybrid bearing. The improvent is good, but I don't consider it as a solution. I hope this argument wouldn't disturb you Jake. I say it with all repects to you.
To solve the problem is the same as erase the problem. I always think that anything is forever, anything will work as eternal, so in the likelyhood of an hybrid bearing failure... what could happen? I know It's too difficult but not impossible.
At this point we place a first step: to look for a problem solution which means that if the IMS fails the engine could be intact, 'alive'.
If the main bearing fails, we have another point to lean the IM shaft on. The principal aim is avoid the shatf taking down, and keep the chains on. But the most important is that the driver could realize the problem.
Inside the piece, we looked for a new design completely new and never similar to Porsche OEM one. We consider that It's a wrong design, so if you continue making something similar we'll finally fall down at the same point: a total disaster. We begin with a holder piece 3 times increased than the original one. So we can assure that It is holding the IMS more efficiently, and with less posibility to generate vibrations in its spinning work.
Besides, we reinforce the piece in a better steel alloy. Remember that Porsche's bearing support is melted, and if you want to increase this stiffness, you'll need to begin with a more structural steady piece designed, with less arris, and stronger to take the new generated efforts
We go for a 20 mm bearing support, instead of the 6-8 mm current, where the bearing is perfectly placed and supported and not a 57% as you can check in the current market pieces. As you said It's very important to make a deep study of a system which is supporting a bearing, especially when It's generating a pile of working frequencies. We humans are placed over two feet, 100% of support. If we'd lift a leg, then we'll be placed in a single foot, just 50% of support.. Currently, Porsche's bearing and yours are placed and supported only in a 57%. The rest is placed in a traction working shaft, with a 5% gap/hence/fedge So the result is that more than half bearing is suported in a non steady surface. This is not only my own appreciation, you can check it here:
IMHO this is an error, a serious error, to support a bearing in a mix way. It generate stabilty lack, a terrible lack of support just in the point where radial forces are being generated
Talking about lubrication, I must say that the main bearing is being lubricated by engine oil, obviously It is mounted without side covers.
The second bearing receives lubrication at the same time with engine oil with the centrifuge effect generated by the IMS spinning.
At present, there are no bearings which could suffer a failure being stopped and lubricated. Concerning to a probably main bearing failure and a working task for the secondary, the generated gap between the bearing and the internal shaft was calculated to produce a little alternative strain in the chains. That was thought to alert both hall sensors and produce an 'check engine light in your dashboard.
We did several studies checking different phase angles in the sensors, with different strain chains to analize where is the margin of fine working before offer error in the Motronic unit. We know very well the electronics as we are specialist in remapping since 1989. In this case we designed it to produce a little pitching in the bearing support and alert the driver that something wrong is happening.
Another important thing: this kit could save your life. Imagine thta you're driving in a sharp bend road and you decide to make a passing maneuver. Imagine that at this point, you suffer a IMS failure... Imagine that a truck comes to you ... but and you calculated the distance with your superb Porsche... you could die without power. Insaro don't leave you without power. You could continue driving without any problem and accelerating te same as before. Think about it...
As you well know, Porsche's Variocam system works with twim signals.
A hall pushing time failure, will give you Check Engine Light, to alert you that the engine is failing, and in the likelyhood of a main bearing failure, the second bearing will produce a Christmas tree in the dash to prevent you that something wrong goes, and stop the engine.
The secondary bearing doesn't have the aim to last the whole life, nor lasting 1000 working hours. Its aim is avoid the IMS to take down producing a total disaster . This a contribution to solve the problem as we understand under our point of view Concerning to the doubts about the second bearing, I'll do a comparison to Porsche OEM bearing.
Porsche OEM bearing, as we know could make a good amount of miles but after that, and due to several things, finally could fail. Well, I'm going to show you Porsche OEM bearing endurance data, and after that our Insaro secondary bearing endurance data.
As you can see, besides being better than Porsche's one in all load capabilities, we include something very important: our secondary bearing can hold axis loads, and ***** bearings mounted as main bearing do not.
Porsche OEM bearing Vs INSARO secondary bearing
I have no problem to show you original data from Manufacturer website if you don't believe any data posted here. They are joined in a table to appreciate directly and clear that Insaro's bearing exceeds more than 3 times lots of endurance aspects of Porsche's one. There's no way to doubt about its endurance.
These data made me think the following: If Porsche's bearing is able to last till 10 years working, Insaro's one will be capable to last 5 minutes working till you'd find a clear zone to stop your car and toe to your car to your mechanic. You'll get your car saved. The only thing would be to install a new piece, new oil, an so on, always better than a new engine. That's the target.
Besides we increased for 3 times the sealing capabilities. As you know your car could suffer IMS oil leaks. Our Insaro piece has 3 special Viton seals which make it impossible to leak.
Jake, we have so much safety and confidence in our product that is protected with an international patent and registered for the main markets in USA, Europe, Africa, Oceania, etc
We are so confident in our kits that we offer 3 year warranty. Not more we can add about safety in our job.
I don't like to critizice in an aggresive way any aspect of your design, and in fact, I could do it, but I'll just try to explain you INSARO qualities. It's better to show Porsche world all the positive things of the market kits and better to get in a primary school argue.
Concerning to the endurance, all the pieces were re-designed and we added all the improvements of steel compounds, thermal treatments, and they don't look similar in any aspect to Porsche OEM or LN design. By the way, the pusher tool is very similar to yours, jake, but you know there's nothing special to design a simple cylinder to place a bearing in.
Here you can see several videos comparing both pieces. I'd like to know where you can see any estructural weakness
I can assure you that if we begin talking about Porsche estrutural weakness, we'll need a lot of time for it
For me it`s very clear, this kit is not a copy, is a new development at 100%.Talking about prices is relative. Here is a contribution where you can see a problem completely solved. There is a NEW design, new improvements in avoiding oil leaks (triple protection seals), high quality materials, high quality bearings, and what's more: a problem solved. So, do you really can meassure how much the product cost?
Charles & Jake, I do all this work since the most repectable attitude to your company and your preventive solutions. I respect your brilliant career, and I expect that you could understand my words and explanations.
What I did id nothing similar to yours. It's other point of view looking for a definitive solution and I must say that there is an important difference between both products. There are no simitudes.
Kind regards
Roberto R.
INSARO Proyect Manager.
Joaquin thank you for believing in our product and its possibilities
.
Regarding to M96 engine knowledge, I'm sensible to know that there will be lots of people with a great experience in this particular issue, for istance yourself Jake. A few of us have learnt thanks to your threads and experience.
I have a huge experience on the field of design, finite elements analysis, tridimensional model generating, and big machines, robotized systems research and developing in the field of iron and steel sector, that means is a good platform. I hope you could believe me Jake, 'cause there are very complex systems with efforts and working atmosphere, with a huge difficult component more than a M96 engine could never arise. I could tell you lots of them but, as an example I can show you this robot (by the way is working in your country):
I'm a person who is used to place myself in an engine, a processing equipment industrial plant, an industrial oven, etc, trying to study and develop solutions to improve, upgrade at this point. This is my speciality, where I hit on the nail: to anylize and improve the quality of elements. That's why though I'm not an specific specialist on M96 engines, that question is not relevant to disqualify me, to be ready to offer my little contribution to Porsche world (I hope you don't worry about it Jake). I can assure from my deep heart that my only purpose is always to grow, and evolve over a problem root.
The main question is that Porsche enthusiastics could know the product, its improvements, and after that they could choose. It would be a great benefit for this community to have several choices.
Once I cleared these things, we can go to directly to study the piece. I like simplify ideas, 'cause It is the best way to interpret a problem solution
Porsche has a design problem at present, ok. You make an analysis and contribute to solve the problem, generating a mechanized piece over a melting piece design. Then you add it to an hybrid bearing. The improvent is good, but I don't consider it as a solution. I hope this argument wouldn't disturb you Jake. I say it with all repects to you.
To solve the problem is the same as erase the problem. I always think that anything is forever, anything will work as eternal, so in the likelyhood of an hybrid bearing failure... what could happen? I know It's too difficult but not impossible.
At this point we place a first step: to look for a problem solution which means that if the IMS fails the engine could be intact, 'alive'.
If the main bearing fails, we have another point to lean the IM shaft on. The principal aim is avoid the shatf taking down, and keep the chains on. But the most important is that the driver could realize the problem.
Inside the piece, we looked for a new design completely new and never similar to Porsche OEM one. We consider that It's a wrong design, so if you continue making something similar we'll finally fall down at the same point: a total disaster. We begin with a holder piece 3 times increased than the original one. So we can assure that It is holding the IMS more efficiently, and with less posibility to generate vibrations in its spinning work.
Besides, we reinforce the piece in a better steel alloy. Remember that Porsche's bearing support is melted, and if you want to increase this stiffness, you'll need to begin with a more structural steady piece designed, with less arris, and stronger to take the new generated efforts
We go for a 20 mm bearing support, instead of the 6-8 mm current, where the bearing is perfectly placed and supported and not a 57% as you can check in the current market pieces. As you said It's very important to make a deep study of a system which is supporting a bearing, especially when It's generating a pile of working frequencies. We humans are placed over two feet, 100% of support. If we'd lift a leg, then we'll be placed in a single foot, just 50% of support.. Currently, Porsche's bearing and yours are placed and supported only in a 57%. The rest is placed in a traction working shaft, with a 5% gap/hence/fedge So the result is that more than half bearing is suported in a non steady surface. This is not only my own appreciation, you can check it here:
IMHO this is an error, a serious error, to support a bearing in a mix way. It generate stabilty lack, a terrible lack of support just in the point where radial forces are being generated
Talking about lubrication, I must say that the main bearing is being lubricated by engine oil, obviously It is mounted without side covers.
The second bearing receives lubrication at the same time with engine oil with the centrifuge effect generated by the IMS spinning.
At present, there are no bearings which could suffer a failure being stopped and lubricated. Concerning to a probably main bearing failure and a working task for the secondary, the generated gap between the bearing and the internal shaft was calculated to produce a little alternative strain in the chains. That was thought to alert both hall sensors and produce an 'check engine light in your dashboard.
We did several studies checking different phase angles in the sensors, with different strain chains to analize where is the margin of fine working before offer error in the Motronic unit. We know very well the electronics as we are specialist in remapping since 1989. In this case we designed it to produce a little pitching in the bearing support and alert the driver that something wrong is happening.
Another important thing: this kit could save your life. Imagine thta you're driving in a sharp bend road and you decide to make a passing maneuver. Imagine that at this point, you suffer a IMS failure... Imagine that a truck comes to you ... but and you calculated the distance with your superb Porsche... you could die without power. Insaro don't leave you without power. You could continue driving without any problem and accelerating te same as before. Think about it...
As you well know, Porsche's Variocam system works with twim signals.
A hall pushing time failure, will give you Check Engine Light, to alert you that the engine is failing, and in the likelyhood of a main bearing failure, the second bearing will produce a Christmas tree in the dash to prevent you that something wrong goes, and stop the engine.
The secondary bearing doesn't have the aim to last the whole life, nor lasting 1000 working hours. Its aim is avoid the IMS to take down producing a total disaster . This a contribution to solve the problem as we understand under our point of view Concerning to the doubts about the second bearing, I'll do a comparison to Porsche OEM bearing.
Porsche OEM bearing, as we know could make a good amount of miles but after that, and due to several things, finally could fail. Well, I'm going to show you Porsche OEM bearing endurance data, and after that our Insaro secondary bearing endurance data.
As you can see, besides being better than Porsche's one in all load capabilities, we include something very important: our secondary bearing can hold axis loads, and ***** bearings mounted as main bearing do not.
Porsche OEM bearing Vs INSARO secondary bearing
I have no problem to show you original data from Manufacturer website if you don't believe any data posted here. They are joined in a table to appreciate directly and clear that Insaro's bearing exceeds more than 3 times lots of endurance aspects of Porsche's one. There's no way to doubt about its endurance.
These data made me think the following: If Porsche's bearing is able to last till 10 years working, Insaro's one will be capable to last 5 minutes working till you'd find a clear zone to stop your car and toe to your car to your mechanic. You'll get your car saved. The only thing would be to install a new piece, new oil, an so on, always better than a new engine. That's the target.
Besides we increased for 3 times the sealing capabilities. As you know your car could suffer IMS oil leaks. Our Insaro piece has 3 special Viton seals which make it impossible to leak.
Jake, we have so much safety and confidence in our product that is protected with an international patent and registered for the main markets in USA, Europe, Africa, Oceania, etc
We are so confident in our kits that we offer 3 year warranty. Not more we can add about safety in our job.
I don't like to critizice in an aggresive way any aspect of your design, and in fact, I could do it, but I'll just try to explain you INSARO qualities. It's better to show Porsche world all the positive things of the market kits and better to get in a primary school argue.
Concerning to the endurance, all the pieces were re-designed and we added all the improvements of steel compounds, thermal treatments, and they don't look similar in any aspect to Porsche OEM or LN design. By the way, the pusher tool is very similar to yours, jake, but you know there's nothing special to design a simple cylinder to place a bearing in.
Here you can see several videos comparing both pieces. I'd like to know where you can see any estructural weakness
I can assure you that if we begin talking about Porsche estrutural weakness, we'll need a lot of time for it
INSARO Vs Porsche
INSARO Shaft Vs Porsche Shaft
For me it`s very clear, this kit is not a copy, is a new development at 100%.Talking about prices is relative. Here is a contribution where you can see a problem completely solved. There is a NEW design, new improvements in avoiding oil leaks (triple protection seals), high quality materials, high quality bearings, and what's more: a problem solved. So, do you really can meassure how much the product cost?
Charles & Jake, I do all this work since the most repectable attitude to your company and your preventive solutions. I respect your brilliant career, and I expect that you could understand my words and explanations.
What I did id nothing similar to yours. It's other point of view looking for a definitive solution and I must say that there is an important difference between both products. There are no simitudes.
Kind regards
Roberto R.
INSARO Proyect Manager.
Joaquin thank you for believing in our product and its possibilities
.
09-19-2010, 10:24 AM
#32
Burning Brakes
Thread Starter
Rober, I really do trust in your solution, because I've been following the advances you were making, in our Soloporsche spanish forum.
I found awesome your exposition, plenty of details, and offering a new point of view, never seen before.
I found awesome your exposition, plenty of details, and offering a new point of view, never seen before.
09-19-2010, 01:20 PM
#33
Rennlist Member
Well, huh. I think Jake certainly has a good point and I have to agree on his view that this thread is allowed to continue and the OP not being a sponsor.
I also agree that Jake had in fact done the research to figure a way to pull the old bearing and now that he proved it can be done, And built and designed a puller., Now he has the reality to deal with that others can also make a solution for the IMS using his knowlege about getting the old bearing out. I see his point and he needed to patent the bearing removal and didnt do so for whatever reason. Maybe in a hurry to get the product to the market. I dunno. I know how he feels.
I also agree that Jake had in fact done the research to figure a way to pull the old bearing and now that he proved it can be done, And built and designed a puller., Now he has the reality to deal with that others can also make a solution for the IMS using his knowlege about getting the old bearing out. I see his point and he needed to patent the bearing removal and didnt do so for whatever reason. Maybe in a hurry to get the product to the market. I dunno. I know how he feels.
09-19-2010, 01:35 PM
#34
Parts Specialist
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
reading it over
so if I "get it" the plan is for the new bearing to be fine and have a back up plan inserted into the pipe with some amount of clearance so when/if there is a main bearing failure the IMS shaft vibrates causing propes to light up the dash signifying a failure of the main bearing.
interesting thought
I would like to know what the 5 pins are around the flange backside radially?
your "claims" are a little mis-leading although I trust you have thought thru many things, be careful on that ice. eg. 3 times the sealing capacity??? the outter seal looks very much the same as the stock one and that leave only the inner seal to be "better" - better maybe... 3x better? - also "save your life" is a bit of a stretch, yes its true in some wierd instance but that is not something that needs to be added to the discussion IMO
you have to keep in mind when offering a "better mouse trap" you will take some heat. Well done in your initial explainations
one last point.. the machine work is a little rough... tools are dull and not cutting properly.. just look and in a microsecond you can see the tearing. Make sure and hammer on the the guys making the parts to cut the material - BTW what is the allow?
so if I "get it" the plan is for the new bearing to be fine and have a back up plan inserted into the pipe with some amount of clearance so when/if there is a main bearing failure the IMS shaft vibrates causing propes to light up the dash signifying a failure of the main bearing.
interesting thought
I would like to know what the 5 pins are around the flange backside radially?
your "claims" are a little mis-leading although I trust you have thought thru many things, be careful on that ice. eg. 3 times the sealing capacity??? the outter seal looks very much the same as the stock one and that leave only the inner seal to be "better" - better maybe... 3x better? - also "save your life" is a bit of a stretch, yes its true in some wierd instance but that is not something that needs to be added to the discussion IMO
you have to keep in mind when offering a "better mouse trap" you will take some heat. Well done in your initial explainations
one last point.. the machine work is a little rough... tools are dull and not cutting properly.. just look and in a microsecond you can see the tearing. Make sure and hammer on the the guys making the parts to cut the material - BTW what is the allow?
Last edited by ivangene; 09-19-2010 at 02:12 PM.
09-19-2010, 01:56 PM
#35
Rennlist Member
Thank you for your expaination. It is a novel concept to try to prevent the secondary failure (microwelding of the ims bearing to the shaft caused by the outer race riding on the ims flange) after the primary failure (ims bearing itself failing).
Have you fitted this in more than the Tiptronic car shown in the photo and video? Many of us who have discussed your solution as shown cannot understand how the timing teeth clear your ims flange? You can see the two photos of an ims flange with a manual transmission's dual mass flywheel and it's timing teeth well below the height of the ears of the flange that support the flange and attach it to the engine. The teeth travel though these ears as the engine turns over.
Can you show a similar photo to what we have posted showing how your design can physically even fit (and turn over) with a dual mass flywheel, as shown?
Have you fitted this in more than the Tiptronic car shown in the photo and video? Many of us who have discussed your solution as shown cannot understand how the timing teeth clear your ims flange? You can see the two photos of an ims flange with a manual transmission's dual mass flywheel and it's timing teeth well below the height of the ears of the flange that support the flange and attach it to the engine. The teeth travel though these ears as the engine turns over.
Can you show a similar photo to what we have posted showing how your design can physically even fit (and turn over) with a dual mass flywheel, as shown?
09-19-2010, 02:12 PM
#36
Burning Brakes
Charles and I didn't rush anything to the market.. We didn't care about a patent and we still don't. The patent isn't going to provide any real sense of security for the technology as changes to certain aspects of the bearing could still allow other solutions. We spent our money developing and testing the solution to outfit the technology in the field. Rather than spending the money on buying a piece of impressive paper (patent) we got our hands dirty and the results are speaking for themselves.
My experience with software modeling and those who rely heavily on it to develop components has been less than satisfactory. The real world isn't digital.
My experience with software modeling and those who rely heavily on it to develop components has been less than satisfactory. The real world isn't digital.
09-19-2010, 02:20 PM
#37
Rennlist Member
I also agree that Jake had in fact done the research to figure a way to pull the old bearing and now that he proved it can be done, And built and designed a puller., Now he has the reality to deal with that others can also make a solution for the IMS using his knowlege about getting the old bearing out. I see his point and he needed to patent the bearing removal and didnt do so for whatever reason. Maybe in a hurry to get the product to the market. I dunno. I know how he feels.
If and when any solution comes out, it will be cheaper either by design or manufacturing (ours is made in the USA - with exception of Japanese bearing races and separators) OR it will cost more because there are added benefits.
09-19-2010, 02:41 PM
#38
Parts Specialist
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
I,for one, think the price is not an issue....
I find when involved in a "this thing cost $xxx.xx" conversation that simply handing the item being slammed for price to the preson shouting about it and stating "expensive? you make one" seems to put it into perspective
no price worries here
I find when involved in a "this thing cost $xxx.xx" conversation that simply handing the item being slammed for price to the preson shouting about it and stating "expensive? you make one" seems to put it into perspective
no price worries here
09-19-2010, 03:30 PM
#39
Rennlist Member
I'm not concerned about having not patented anything we have done. We charge a reasonable price for what we have developed. We don't deal with end users anywhere near as often as the independent shop or even Porsche dealerships, and as such, some criticize the retail price but you must have to realize that you have to allow those using and reselling the parts to make money as well, or they will have no incentive to use, sell, or support it.
If and when any solution comes out, it will be cheaper either by design or manufacturing (ours is made in the USA - with exception of Japanese bearing races and separators) OR it will cost more because there are added benefits.
If and when any solution comes out, it will be cheaper either by design or manufacturing (ours is made in the USA - with exception of Japanese bearing races and separators) OR it will cost more because there are added benefits.
09-19-2010, 03:37 PM
#40
Basic Sponsor
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
Interesting thread - lots of emotions running high here. I'll let you guys slug it out on your own, but I will add this to the mix. Pelican has developed it's own IMS bearing replacement kit and we are in the final stages of testing. This kit is designed to be an improved replacement for the factory bearing, and as such, it utilizes the factory bearing flange, thus bringing down the cost considerably. Although there are many theories, I don't think anyone definitively knows what causes the bearing failure. As such, any proposed solution (no matter how much redundancy is designed into it) could possibly fail in a similar manner to the original bearings. The Pelican solution is designed to be a simple replacement that is performed during each clutch job. We consider the IMS bearing to be a short-life wear part (like a clutch disc), and now recommend changing it every 30-40K miles or so (when you replace the clutch). Performing this replacement at a specified interval is (in my opinion), the best method to prevent a potential failure.
I have a detailed article on the kit replacement here:
http://www.pelicanparts.com/techarti...ft_Bearing.htm
I estimate the cost of the kit to be less than $200 retail when it's going to be released on our website (probably in December). We're in the process of testing it right now (so far so good, with no oil leaks!). There appear to be advantages and disadvantages to all of the IMS kits - we plan to carry them all and let the customer decide which one they wish to install on their baby!
-Wayne
I have a detailed article on the kit replacement here:
http://www.pelicanparts.com/techarti...ft_Bearing.htm
I estimate the cost of the kit to be less than $200 retail when it's going to be released on our website (probably in December). We're in the process of testing it right now (so far so good, with no oil leaks!). There appear to be advantages and disadvantages to all of the IMS kits - we plan to carry them all and let the customer decide which one they wish to install on their baby!
-Wayne
__________________
Your Trusted Source For DIY and Parts
FREE SHIPPING over $99 click here
Porsche Parts | DIY Tech Articles | Facebook | Twitter | Instagram | YouTube | Promos
888.280.7799 | 6am - 5pm PST
FREE SHIPPING over $99 click here
Porsche Parts | DIY Tech Articles | Facebook | Twitter | Instagram | YouTube | Promos
888.280.7799 | 6am - 5pm PST
Last edited by PelicanParts.com; 09-20-2010 at 02:50 PM.
09-19-2010, 03:48 PM
#41
Basic Sponsor
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
I also agree that Jake had in fact done the research to figure a way to pull the old bearing and now that he proved it can be done, And built and designed a puller., Now he has the reality to deal with that others can also make a solution for the IMS using his knowlege about getting the old bearing out. I see his point and he needed to patent the bearing removal and didnt do so for whatever reason. Maybe in a hurry to get the product to the market. I dunno. I know how he feels.
-Wayne
09-19-2010, 04:09 PM
#42
Rennlist Member
And thanks to that, we have the ability to do dual row bearings. We were blissfully in the dark doing single and triple ones before that for quite some time. Once we started doing them regularly, we found the Stahlwille and Kukko tools did not last, leading to Jake to come up with the tools and method as used today.
09-19-2010, 05:07 PM
#43
Burning Brakes
Thread Starter
He's called Jose Mª Barragan (nick barracuda), an amateur mechanic who owns a 996 C4S Cabrio. He extracted the bearing building his own extracting tool:
here you can see the operation:
http://soloporsche.com/showthread.php?t=33716
home made extracting tool:
09-19-2010, 05:31 PM
#44
Burning Brakes
Thread Starter
Interesting thread - lots of emotions running high here. I'll let you guys slug it out on your own, but I will add this to the mix. Pelican has developed it's own IMS replacement kit and we are in the final stages of testing. This kit is designed to be an improved replacement for the factory bearing, and as such, it utilizes the factory bearing flange, thus bringing down the cost considerably. Although there are many theories, I don't think anyone definitively knows what causes the bearing failure. As such, any proposed solution (no matter how much redundancy is designed into it) could possibly fail in a similar manner to the original bearings. The Pelican solution is designed to be a simple replacement that is performed during each clutch job. We consider the IMS to be a short-life wear part (like a clutch disc), and now recommend changing it every 30-40K miles or so (when you replace the clutch). Performing this replacement at a specified interval is (in my opinion), the best method to prevent a potential failure.
I have a detailed article on the kit replacement here:
http://www.pelicanparts.com/techarti...ft_Bearing.htm
I estimate the cost of the kit to be less than $200 retail when it's going to be released on our website (probably in December). We're in the process of testing it right now (so far so good, with no oil leaks!). There appear to be advantages and disadvantages to all of the IMS kits - we plan to carry them all and let the customer decide which one they wish to install on their baby!
-Wayne
I have a detailed article on the kit replacement here:
http://www.pelicanparts.com/techarti...ft_Bearing.htm
I estimate the cost of the kit to be less than $200 retail when it's going to be released on our website (probably in December). We're in the process of testing it right now (so far so good, with no oil leaks!). There appear to be advantages and disadvantages to all of the IMS kits - we plan to carry them all and let the customer decide which one they wish to install on their baby!
-Wayne
I think that It's important to offer different choices to Porsche users. And having a replacement kit as a cheap and safe operation it's a quite good choice too.
That's what I decided to do in my car, just copying the same thing that "barracuda" did in soloporsche. He advised me to use a 12 mm bearing support bolt custom made by a lathe operator in F125 steel alloy. I used the same reference SKF hybrid bearing which he told me to purchase, and using the factory bearing flange with an enlarged hole to place the reinforced bolt in.
SKF ceramic bearing = 155 €
Lathe operator = 60 €
I want to say again that my only aim always was share info with other users. The same thing I did with LN/Raby in soloporsche.
Last edited by juankimalo; 09-19-2010 at 05:50 PM.
09-19-2010, 05:47 PM
#45
Looks great Wayne, what is your warranty on the new product?
Interesting thread - lots of emotions running high here. I'll let you guys slug it out on your own, but I will add this to the mix. Pelican has developed it's own IMS replacement kit and we are in the final stages of testing. This kit is designed to be an improved replacement for the factory bearing, and as such, it utilizes the factory bearing flange, thus bringing down the cost considerably. Although there are many theories, I don't think anyone definitively knows what causes the bearing failure. As such, any proposed solution (no matter how much redundancy is designed into it) could possibly fail in a similar manner to the original bearings. The Pelican solution is designed to be a simple replacement that is performed during each clutch job. We consider the IMS to be a short-life wear part (like a clutch disc), and now recommend changing it every 30-40K miles or so (when you replace the clutch). Performing this replacement at a specified interval is (in my opinion), the best method to prevent a potential failure.
I have a detailed article on the kit replacement here:
http://www.pelicanparts.com/techarti...ft_Bearing.htm
I estimate the cost of the kit to be less than $200 retail when it's going to be released on our website (probably in December). We're in the process of testing it right now (so far so good, with no oil leaks!). There appear to be advantages and disadvantages to all of the IMS kits - we plan to carry them all and let the customer decide which one they wish to install on their baby!
-Wayne
I have a detailed article on the kit replacement here:
http://www.pelicanparts.com/techarti...ft_Bearing.htm
I estimate the cost of the kit to be less than $200 retail when it's going to be released on our website (probably in December). We're in the process of testing it right now (so far so good, with no oil leaks!). There appear to be advantages and disadvantages to all of the IMS kits - we plan to carry them all and let the customer decide which one they wish to install on their baby!
-Wayne