View Poll Results: Has YOUR car suffered an IMS failure
Voters: 1602. 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)
#1141
Instructor
Tony Heyer has been my indie for about 25 years now and I wouldn't doubt what he says. However, it's a probability thing. My 2002 came "this close" to a massive failure. It was caught during an oil change after I installed a magnetic drain plug at Tony's recommendation, shedding metal like there was no tomorrow. There's a long story attached to this, but that's the summary for the topic at hand. Yours is a 1999 with a much stronger IMS bearing. I've done a lot of research and talked extensively with Jake Raby while going through this with mine, and from my understanding, for your case, I would recommend 1) Magnetic drain plug, 2) Spin-on oil filter to eliminate the stock oil filter bypass valve. But if you haven't had a failure yet, especially given you have a '99, it is unlikely you will, even with the low mileage.
#1142
Former Vendor
The IMS/RMS Monster is a sleeping beast. It could literally happen at any and every second to 100% of every 996 ever made. Ever. I just want viewers at home to know I made it another few miles without harm. Hide your friends, hide your wife. IMS Monster all up on erry'body here.
Actually, I moved on from Unimogs a few years ago. I shifted my focus to armor, and tracked vehicles. Yeah, tanks and half tracks are more effective around here. Looks like you must be one of those "Must be nice" guys? What isn't "nice" is dealing with people that think like you-
Anyway, you are so misinformed that it isn't even funny.. Well, it kind of is funny.
I haven't sold IMS products, or had anything to do with the IMSB sales since 2011. I buy my IMS Bearings from LN Engineering just like everyone else does, and I also buy the tool kits like everyone else does. I did my part as the idea guy, and the developer. When that part was done, I checked out, and have not looked back.
Today what pays for tanks, and half- tracks isn't people that are afraid of failure buying products, its actually the contrary. Failure is what drives my business, and business is good. The more people that don't address failure before it happens, the busier that we become.
Today these people are part of two groups, the ignorant that had no idea these engines failed, or the ones that choose not to address things preventatively. (They think that it's "hype" or "fear mongering") I deal with the former, and latter on a daily basis, but the one things we no longer do here is preventative IMSR work- we don't have the time.
So, you might want to alter your signature, to be more accurate. Thank you.
BTW- I took the Sabre to Caffeine and Octane yesterday, and left the Porsche cars at home. It was a good time, and I actually enjoyed myself, which is much different than when I show up driving a Porsche~
#1143
Only 10%!
Just a thought... with so many owners replacing the bearing preemptively, it would be interesting to know how many issues there COULD have been. Seems that only about 10% of cars had this problem, of course, a fatal issue. How much greater a number of failures would we have seen if everyone wasn't replacing it. Guess we will never know...
I keep seeing “only 10%” failure rate for 996 IMS. I think that is actually a very high percentage. I don’t know what the real number is but a manufacturer that puts out a supposedly high quality product with that kind of failure rate seems pretty darn incompetent, irresponsible or malevolent to me .
#1145
Rennlist Member
I bought a 2002 C2 Cab with 24,800 mi and replaced IMS with Single Row Pro as I recall. I now have about 50K mi .
I keep seeing “only 10%” failure rate for 996 IMS. I think that is actually a very high percentage. I don’t know what the real number is but a manufacturer that puts out a supposedly high quality product with that kind of failure rate seems pretty darn incompetent, irresponsible or malevolent to me .
I keep seeing “only 10%” failure rate for 996 IMS. I think that is actually a very high percentage. I don’t know what the real number is but a manufacturer that puts out a supposedly high quality product with that kind of failure rate seems pretty darn incompetent, irresponsible or malevolent to me .
#1146
I bought a 2002 C2 Cab with 24,800 mi and replaced IMS with Single Row Pro as I recall. I now have about 50K mi .
I keep seeing “only 10%” failure rate for 996 IMS. I think that is actually a very high percentage. I don’t know what the real number is but a manufacturer that puts out a supposedly high quality product with that kind of failure rate seems pretty darn incompetent, irresponsible or malevolent to me .
I keep seeing “only 10%” failure rate for 996 IMS. I think that is actually a very high percentage. I don’t know what the real number is but a manufacturer that puts out a supposedly high quality product with that kind of failure rate seems pretty darn incompetent, irresponsible or malevolent to me .
#1147
Former Vendor
The percentages always have been, and always will be nothing more than vaporware.
The data that is required to create a sum doesn't exist with any degree of accuracy.
The engines that were misdiagnosed are one big factor in this equation.
Today we see just as many failures reported as ever, and the majority of these people had no idea that the engine had an IMS Bearing, or what it even is. It seems the only folks that are experiencing failures today are the ones that aren't informed.
Every now and then someone that was "on the fence" about IMS Retrofit will have a failure. The one group that never admits they were wrong is the camp that says this is all hype, and then it happens to them. They never admit they were wrong when it happens, they just crawl under a rock, but I am able to figure out who they are from time to time.
The data that is required to create a sum doesn't exist with any degree of accuracy.
The engines that were misdiagnosed are one big factor in this equation.
Today we see just as many failures reported as ever, and the majority of these people had no idea that the engine had an IMS Bearing, or what it even is. It seems the only folks that are experiencing failures today are the ones that aren't informed.
Every now and then someone that was "on the fence" about IMS Retrofit will have a failure. The one group that never admits they were wrong is the camp that says this is all hype, and then it happens to them. They never admit they were wrong when it happens, they just crawl under a rock, but I am able to figure out who they are from time to time.
The following users liked this post:
dporto (02-11-2020)
#1148
Track Day
All good, maybe?
1999 original dual row at 88k miles, replaced proactively. I say 'maybe' because 2 things seemed off when I pulled the bearing. First, there was pretty severe pitting on the inside of the flange, maybe normal, I am not sure. Second, although both seals were in place and looked good, when I pulled the bearing quite a bit of oil came out of the IMS, and it definitely had an off smell, not like normal motor oil. If the seals were truly working I would have expected no oil behind the bearing.
Nonetheless, replaced with the LN ceramic. The LN toolset worked great for pulling and installing. I am also replacing the AOS, water pump, oil hex drive shaft, and RMS while the engine is out, so a little while longer before its all back together. So much of the plastic has gotten very brittle over 20 years of heat cycles.
Nonetheless, replaced with the LN ceramic. The LN toolset worked great for pulling and installing. I am also replacing the AOS, water pump, oil hex drive shaft, and RMS while the engine is out, so a little while longer before its all back together. So much of the plastic has gotten very brittle over 20 years of heat cycles.
#1149
996.2 12K miles / 7 years on a single row classic question
Sorting out my new-to-me 72K 2002 996 C2 Cabrio Tip that had an RMS single row classic retrofit back in Sept 2013 at 59K. The service interval says replace the bearing at 4 years or 50K. Can someone explain to me why IMS Retrofit would advise replacing a bearing before achieving less than the rated mileage? A 50K bearing service life makes sense to me, but an apparently arbitrary expiry time does not. The car being a Tip means there is no periodic clutch replacement anticipated, so I would obviously prefer to wait until the odometer hits 109K or thereabouts before replacement, unless I am missing something? These bearings are open bath or have had the seals removed, right?
#1150
Rennlist Member
Sorting out my new-to-me 72K 2002 996 C2 Cabrio Tip that had an RMS single row classic retrofit back in Sept 2013 at 59K. The service interval says replace the bearing at 4 years or 50K. Can someone explain to me why IMS Retrofit would advise replacing a bearing before achieving less than the rated mileage? A 50K bearing service life makes sense to me, but an apparently arbitrary expiry time does not. The car being a Tip means there is no periodic clutch replacement anticipated, so I would obviously prefer to wait until the odometer hits 109K or thereabouts before replacement, unless I am missing something? These bearings are open bath or have had the seals removed, right?
Or google it and you'll see many links to the topic of discussion...
#1151
Pro
Sorting out my new-to-me 72K 2002 996 C2 Cabrio Tip that had an RMS single row classic retrofit back in Sept 2013 at 59K. The service interval says replace the bearing at 4 years or 50K. Can someone explain to me why IMS Retrofit would advise replacing a bearing before achieving less than the rated mileage? A 50K bearing service life makes sense to me, but an apparently arbitrary expiry time does not. The car being a Tip means there is no periodic clutch replacement anticipated, so I would obviously prefer to wait until the odometer hits 109K or thereabouts before replacement, unless I am missing something? These bearings are open bath or have had the seals removed, right?
The following users liked this post:
808Bill (04-14-2020)
#1152
Guess I am surprised it would have any inner seal at all, making it an open bath bearing lubricated by the engine oil. Forget using the factory bearing grease for lubrication, that's the root cause of the problem in the first place so I would think any retrofit kit would throw the inner bearing seal away. I replaced a 986 IMS bearing with the Pelican Parts kit several years ago and the inner seal was simply removed. That kit has just a mileage limitation - I think it was 30K, but no mention of a time limit since the lube is constantly being renewed each time the engine is run.
Anyway I reached out to RMS engineering for their thoughts on the subject. I'll be bummed if I learn that the classic kit is just a sealed bearing replacement with factory lube. No better than the Porsche original so what's the point?
Anyway I reached out to RMS engineering for their thoughts on the subject. I'll be bummed if I learn that the classic kit is just a sealed bearing replacement with factory lube. No better than the Porsche original so what's the point?
#1153
Pro
Definitely let us know which one it is. I had a new OEM single-row installed about three years ago (because the engine was apart anyway for cleaning due to a bad water pump failure and he was able to source a full OEM intermediate shaft with single-row bearing for early 996’s) and the engine builder pulled the grease seal on that one. Said he’s been doing that for years on 9x6/9x7’s and never had a problem with any of them. But there is still a risk that any crap in the oil (plastic wearing off from chain guides) could lead to its destruction as well, so I still plan to replace it regularly as a maintenance item.
#1154
Rennlist Member
Guess I am surprised it would have any inner seal at all, making it an open bath bearing lubricated by the engine oil. Forget using the factory bearing grease for lubrication, that's the root cause of the problem in the first place so I would think any retrofit kit would throw the inner bearing seal away. I replaced a 986 IMS bearing with the Pelican Parts kit several years ago and the inner seal was simply removed. That kit has just a mileage limitation - I think it was 30K, but no mention of a time limit since the lube is constantly being renewed each time the engine is run.
Anyway I reached out to RMS engineering for their thoughts on the subject. I'll be bummed if I learn that the classic kit is just a sealed bearing replacement with factory lube. No better than the Porsche original so what's the point?
Anyway I reached out to RMS engineering for their thoughts on the subject. I'll be bummed if I learn that the classic kit is just a sealed bearing replacement with factory lube. No better than the Porsche original so what's the point?
#1155
Rennlist Member
Guess I am surprised it would have any inner seal at all, making it an open bath bearing lubricated by the engine oil. Forget using the factory bearing grease for lubrication, that's the root cause of the problem in the first place so I would think any retrofit kit would throw the inner bearing seal away. I replaced a 986 IMS bearing with the Pelican Parts kit several years ago and the inner seal was simply removed. That kit has just a mileage limitation - I think it was 30K, but no mention of a time limit since the lube is constantly being renewed each time the engine is run.
Anyway I reached out to RMS engineering for their thoughts on the subject. I'll be bummed if I learn that the classic kit is just a sealed bearing replacement with factory lube. No better than the Porsche original so what's the point?
Anyway I reached out to RMS engineering for their thoughts on the subject. I'll be bummed if I learn that the classic kit is just a sealed bearing replacement with factory lube. No better than the Porsche original so what's the point?
All LN IMS Retrofit products are open bearings with no grease seals.