Peter 642

For what it's worth, in his email to me, he noted that it was an opinion, and that others might not share it. There's no "truth." Sorry, Mulder.

KrazyK

Wow! Thought I was joining in on the movie quote IMS parody and I get slammed? The IMS fiasco isnt really funny but its better to laugh than cry about it. Remember Porsche designed it, not me. Make sure your upset with the right people for your IMS woes.

I bet the designers of the Titanic were bragging how great their ship was as it spiralled to the ocean floor. The only reason Im still looking for a 996 is becuase the prices are dropping from the net hysteria almost making them a bargain.

logray

Hey Wayne, is it true your kit is approximately rated as strong as the original bearings, or are you beefing them up a little similar to the LNE option?

fivepointnine

from the info on the website it looks like it is a *modified* stock style bearing

DaveSpeed

Despite all the negative talk about IMS falure it has to be a very small % of cars. If not Porsche would have been forced to recall. I had the LN IMS upgrade done when I had the leaking RMS replaced. Two different indy's at two different shops have said their experience is the 996 is a reliable car with less issues than any previous 911.

The 996 is a great car period.

I love my 996 and plan on us having a long relationship. I accept the cost of R&M can be very high. A small price to pay for the joy of the drive! I think to may people buy a 25K car and dont understand the cost of service.

Hurdigurdiman

If only 10% of all 996s made will have a IMS failure, I look at it this way. If 10 cars were lined up all 996 from 1999 to 2004 models, what's the chances of me picking a good one. I think I stand a damn good chance of picking one of the good nine. Why do we 'live in the wreckage of our futures' so to speak. Or put in an opposite way. A ten horse race, whats the chance you could pick the winner. I bet you wouldn't put your wages on it. Those are the odds that you got yourself a bad 996. Sleep well my friends. If it happens it happens but you are on a ten to one shot that it won't. If it is a 5% chance than it gives you better odds again. Double the odds.

PelicanParts.com

Here's how I see it in my opinion. Note, this is just my opinion based upon my experience with the cars, and also my background in Mechanical Engineering (MIT).

It would appear that *all* the cars suffer from a distinct design issue that causes premature failure of this bearing. The exact factors that make the failure more or less prone in individual cars is not widely understood. I personally have a 31,000 mile car that had a completely destroyed bearing in it. It's my opinion that frequent oil changes (every 5000 miles or less) can help considerably to mitigate the effects and slow down the wear of the bearing. I believe that all the cars have this issue - it's how they are maintained (or not maintained) that may contribute to the speed at which the bearing wears out.

-Wayne

Charles Navarro

I have to concur with Wayne, it's just a matter of time. The whole ball-bearing supported IMS is a flawed design. Every bearing engineer I've spoken to can't understand why they would have put on there to start with, especially without a service interval for the bearing.

roadsession

And you sir...have mad PHOTOGRAPHY skills....who is that...got a website?

carcster88

I did the same thing, needed a new clutch and did the IMS retrofit with the dual row bearings on my 2000. Made sense to me and I have no regrets. I had no issue with the article, I read it also. Guess better safe than sorry. I plan on keeping the car for a long time.

Cicerosecundus

I have a 996 with 107K miles on it. At 96K I did the clutch, LNE double bearing replacement and had the shop also put in a newer version of the main bearing seal for which the older version frequently fails. I sent the old factory bearing assembly to LNE for analysis, and to obtain their warranty. The bearing was intact but had leaked engine oil into the "permanently" greased bearing assembly, which meant that the seals were not intact. It is my understanding that the mixture of engine oil and the factory grease can cause the bearings to freeze and fail. Now that I understand that the LNE double bearing replacement has not failed, I feel quite good about the "operation." I have not replaced the water pump, as I have absolutely no symptoms, such as leaking or sound, but, as the majority opinion in this Forum is to replace the water pump as preventive maintenance, I will do so the next time I have my Porsche serviced, but I do not know whether to do a factory pump or a steel impeller after market pump. 2001 Carrera 4 - runs better at 107K than when it was young - most that ride in it cannot believe it is 10 years old with over 100K mileage. I change oil at 7K and never, never rev above 3K until the motor and transmission are saturated with heat.

street rod

I also have a 2001 C4 and they are now installing the 997 water pumps in the 996's. I just had mine replaced at RUF and thats what they put in. I don't know what the impellers are made of however.

rpm's S2

Excellent summation... Which completely validates Joe Reiser's statement in Pano that the LN bearing retrofit is a "must."

Frankly I am surprised at all the fervor this comment has generated. You can argue percentages and causes all day long, but the bottom line is that these failures happen and spending $2k to avoid an $18k nightmare is a no-brainier, particularly if you are already doing a clutch or replacing a leaky RMS (and acknowledging that the RMS Guardian and perhaps the soon-to-bow Pelican solution are also worth considering).

I personally think this discussion is closed, and as you can see from my signature I put my money where my mouth was.

And it bears repeating... If you can't afford the repairs, perhaps you should not own the car...

Van

I'm going to stick up for Joel Reiser here. It is a strong statement to say *every* factory IMS bearing needs to be replaced, but, taken in the context that he runs a successful Porsche and race shop, it makes sense. For his customers, for their piece of mind - and his piece of mind, they should all do the upgrade. He'd rather recommend it and do his best to ensure they won't have problems. If you look at the bearing retrofit price vs an engine replacement, it is sort of a "no brainer".

If I had a shop and relied on customer satisfaction to stay in business, I'd recommend everyone replace it, too. The risk of losing customers to engine failures isn't worth it. Obviously, if a customer doesn't want to do the upgrade, for whatever reason (e.g. cost, principle, inconvenience, etc.), Joel's done his job as long as he tells them about the risk.

Palmbeacher

...and dollars Actually the statement is one of those that is correct in the abstract but meaningless in the real world. Like stating that everyone's heart will eventually fail (quite true, if nothing else causes mortality first), therefore everyone should get a proactive transplant. The fact only a very small number of cars have had verifiable IMS bearing failure, and the fact many many cars have gone well over 100K on their original bearings while others have failed at very low mileage does not lead logically to the conclusion that the design itself is faulty. More likely than not, there are tolerances in the installation that cause some bearings to wear prematurely. Even LN agrees on their website: .

Where the failure is in the design, is in the fact a single bearing is allowed, if it fails, to damage the engine beyond repair. If it were simply a matter of a bearing failing and needing replacement, the whole issue would not have the magnitude it does.