View Poll Results: Has YOUR car suffered an IMS failure
Voters: 1601. You may not vote on this poll
IMS bearing failure for your 996, Y or N? tell us (yr, 996 Mk1 or MK2 failure mode)
#346
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Jake at Flat 6 - looking to get a used 996 - 1999 to 2004. I am assuming the C4 has the same issues as C2? Secondly, are there shops in Dallas, Tx that I can buy your parts from and they know how to install it? or do you only do your parts in Georgia?
#350
Instructor
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Hello everyone,
I recently purchased an '02 C4S that was once a CPO. This 996 has 38k miles and in the service history, it shows a RMS replacement back at about 11k miles (8 years back) done by Porsche. Service shows the tranny was removed to proceed with this repair. I called the dealer to inquire if they serviced the IMS but they could not verify. How can I look further into this? I have called Porsche and they are unable to help. I've driven this 996 @ relatively high RPM's prior to inspection and after. Runs solid...no leak.
Is there a way to determine if this 996's IMS was addressed by Porsche back when the RMS was replaced? Why else would Porsche remove the tranny to service the RMS?
Thank you in advances to all responses!
I recently purchased an '02 C4S that was once a CPO. This 996 has 38k miles and in the service history, it shows a RMS replacement back at about 11k miles (8 years back) done by Porsche. Service shows the tranny was removed to proceed with this repair. I called the dealer to inquire if they serviced the IMS but they could not verify. How can I look further into this? I have called Porsche and they are unable to help. I've driven this 996 @ relatively high RPM's prior to inspection and after. Runs solid...no leak.
Is there a way to determine if this 996's IMS was addressed by Porsche back when the RMS was replaced? Why else would Porsche remove the tranny to service the RMS?
Thank you in advances to all responses!
#351
Drifting
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
The transmission needs to be separated from the engine to gain access to the RMS seal, no other way around it.
If the record doesn't show any IMSB work/replacement, then it likely wasn't done.
If the record doesn't show any IMSB work/replacement, then it likely wasn't done.
#352
Instructor
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
The point being, there is always a trace of IMSB replacement in labor or parts on the work order. If it's not there explicitly, the work was very unlikely to have been done. With an '02 you have the M96 single row bearing which at least can be replaced, which I would strongly urge you to do especially if the car was not regularly driven and has low mileage (and has no metal traces of any sort in the oil).
#353
Instructor
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I had the car go through my longtime indy. He said everything checked out fine when servicing the oil and other components. However, I was thinking along your suggested advice as well. When you say to replace the bearing, am I looking at the LN kit or is there better options available for the '02 models?
#354
Instructor
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I had the car go through my longtime indy. He said everything checked out fine when servicing the oil and other components. However, I was thinking along your suggested advice as well. When you say to replace the bearing, am I looking at the LN kit or is there better options available for the '02 models?
#355
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I recently took a 2000 in trade on another car. The previous owner bought the car new and it only has 18000 miles on it. The previous owner has several exotic cars so the Porsche was not driven very often. He did have the oil changed every year which equates to an oil change about every 1300 miles. I love the way the car looks and drives so I decided to keep it for myself. I came on this board and read about the IMS problems and have decided to just ship the car to Jake and have him do whatever it takes to keep it from becoming a problem. Hopefully it has yet to spew metal thru out the engine. The RMS and the IMS have never been touched. Its seems to me as a newbe to the Porsche world that this particular model is a crapshoot. Many have no problems but many do. The cars aren't worth much but they are beautiful and if they don'r blow up they are fun to drive and a great value at todays prices. To me they look like not a good car to buy as an investment but a great car to own and drive if the IMS issue doesn't bite you in the ***.
#356
Race Director
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
The cars aren't worth much but they are beautiful and if they don't blow up they are fun to drive and a great value at today's prices. To me they look like not a good car to buy as an investment but a great car to own and drive if the IMS issue doesn't bite you in the ***.
#357
Instructor
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I received a formal response from one of the administrators in the class action lawsuit on the IMSB:
"Based on the information provided to us by Porsche in discovery, the failure rate of vehicles with our version of the IMS, from 2001 to 2005, was in the range of 4 to 10%. Porsche began using that particular version of the IMS that was subject to the higher failure rate as part of its production runs exclusively as of May 4, 2001. This same IMS model was used through February 21, 2005. The failure rate of the IMS in Porsche vehicles pre-dating May 2001 and post-dating February 2005 was documented at less than 1%. The higher failure rate between May 4, 2001 and February 21, 2005 is the reason why some vehicles are included and others are not."
So there you have it...
"Based on the information provided to us by Porsche in discovery, the failure rate of vehicles with our version of the IMS, from 2001 to 2005, was in the range of 4 to 10%. Porsche began using that particular version of the IMS that was subject to the higher failure rate as part of its production runs exclusively as of May 4, 2001. This same IMS model was used through February 21, 2005. The failure rate of the IMS in Porsche vehicles pre-dating May 2001 and post-dating February 2005 was documented at less than 1%. The higher failure rate between May 4, 2001 and February 21, 2005 is the reason why some vehicles are included and others are not."
So there you have it...
#358
Former Vendor
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I received a formal response from one of the administrators in the class action lawsuit on the IMSB:
"Based on the information provided to us by Porsche in discovery, the failure rate of vehicles with our version of the IMS, from 2001 to 2005, was in the range of 4 to 10%. Porsche began using that particular version of the IMS that was subject to the higher failure rate as part of its production runs exclusively as of May 4, 2001. This same IMS model was used through February 21, 2005. The failure rate of the IMS in Porsche vehicles pre-dating May 2001 and post-dating February 2005 was documented at less than 1%. The higher failure rate between May 4, 2001 and February 21, 2005 is the reason why some vehicles are included and others are not."
So there you have it...
"Based on the information provided to us by Porsche in discovery, the failure rate of vehicles with our version of the IMS, from 2001 to 2005, was in the range of 4 to 10%. Porsche began using that particular version of the IMS that was subject to the higher failure rate as part of its production runs exclusively as of May 4, 2001. This same IMS model was used through February 21, 2005. The failure rate of the IMS in Porsche vehicles pre-dating May 2001 and post-dating February 2005 was documented at less than 1%. The higher failure rate between May 4, 2001 and February 21, 2005 is the reason why some vehicles are included and others are not."
So there you have it...
Then, why do we run across 2005 models as late as October reduction dates that have M96 diameter single row bearings in their original engines?
How do we run across cars that have VIN that are within the range of the class action suit that have the later, M97 IMSB that are not supposed to be covered by the class action suit? Again, original owners, no engine replacements.
Believe nothing of what you hear and only 1/2 of what you see.
#359
Instructor
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
So, how do we run across 2000 model cars with original owners and no engine replacements that have single row bearings?
Then, why do we run across 2005 models as late as October reduction dates that have M96 diameter single row bearings in their original engines?
How do we run across cars that have VIN that are within the range of the class action suit that have the later, M97 IMSB that are not supposed to be covered by the class action suit? Again, original owners, no engine replacements.
Believe nothing of what you hear and only 1/2 of what you see.
Then, why do we run across 2005 models as late as October reduction dates that have M96 diameter single row bearings in their original engines?
How do we run across cars that have VIN that are within the range of the class action suit that have the later, M97 IMSB that are not supposed to be covered by the class action suit? Again, original owners, no engine replacements.
Believe nothing of what you hear and only 1/2 of what you see.
#360
Former Vendor
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
The answer is clear.. They kept horrible records. After all there were no IMS issues, right? So why keep track or care about which engines had what.
You can guarantee that the accounting records per engine would prove which engine had what.
Also, the 8% single row failure report was as of 2012, that number didn't stop..... We've entered 21 engine failures in our failure log since October 1 of this year... No one knows how many of those were the IMSB. We won't see most of the cars, but I do have the reports and symptoms of the failure.
You can guarantee that the accounting records per engine would prove which engine had what.
Also, the 8% single row failure report was as of 2012, that number didn't stop..... We've entered 21 engine failures in our failure log since October 1 of this year... No one knows how many of those were the IMSB. We won't see most of the cars, but I do have the reports and symptoms of the failure.