meirschwartz

so let me get that.
according to your logic, people are willing to pay more money on a car with a non addressed issue, just so they can spend more money to address the issue, just so when they are going to sell the car, they are going to lose more money just because they addressed the issue

Woodman71

What's the difference between "certified" and "preferred"?

alpine003

Just to be clear, I don't think people will pay more, but instead people will seek out those unmolested cars as they would have the work done themselves and know it's been done correctly rather than taking a chance on sub par or unfavorable conditions on why/how IMS retrofit was done in the first place.

alpine003

"Certified" is Jake's own pick and ones that's passed his tests and code of conduct. "Preferred" is anyone willing to pay Jake to have their name on a list. At least that's my understanding.

Woodman71

Well, ****. My indy isn't on either of those lists.

gnat

I'm probably in the minority that I would pay more.

I also don't believe that the IMSB is as big of a problem as the hype suggests (it's a problem, but it's often mis-blamed which inflates the numbers).

The reality is that any modification gets its cost back at resale.

At the end of the day it is all a gamble so it's about hedging your bets. I'll bet on an original bearing with a good PPI far more than a I will an example like this with no clear reliable documentation on the swap.

It simply comes down to knowing the health of the motor at the time of the swap. Unfortunately a bad few have tarnished for all.

gnat

Jake came up with the protocols, but substitute LNE for Jake in those sentences.

gnat

Neither is the guy that did mine, but I trust his work and advice.

Yes by my own logic that means I should lose money when we sell it, but since we've had it since new and I'm looking a sinking a full paint job into it it's a pretty safe bet it's not going anywhere

JimmyChooToo

I would also pay more for an unmolested dual row designed by a multi-billion dollar famed car company than some retrofit from who knows where? I'm sure Porsche did tons of endurance (hundreds of thousands of actual and simulated miles) testing on the 986/996 prototypes during original engine development. The single rows I have no opinion on, but I would definitely prefer the original dual rows that have a less than 5% failure rate over any retrofit.

gnat

I wouldn't go that far. Like all companies (especially ones on the brink of financial ruin), Porsche cut corners and used cheaper options in some places. It's pretty well proven that a sealed bearing was a poor application here and going to a smaller bearing is also questionable.

It's really about being able to make the choice for yourself (and sticking with the factory bearing is a perfectly valid option) and if you do replace it, getting to know the whys, hows, and wherefores of it.

JimmyB

Poor ME - I don't think this'll polish out:

http://www.autozin.com/2000-porsche-...538-atzlisting

JimmyChooToo

By the time the single row was being designed to replace the double row in these engines (circa 2000), Porsche was already the most profitable car company in the world on a unit basis. The single rows wasn't designed for the purposes of extracting another $5 in profits. The break even on that project would never work. The single rows surely was a design flaw, but it wasn't because of money.

I would pay a premium for the factory original double row over any retrofit for the simple reason that it's proven. Not a single retrofit has gone over 100,000 miles or maybe even 50,000 miles. What retrofit company had a fleet of test mules racking up 100,000+ miles on the road and in the lab like the original 986/996 double row development? Yeah, None.

KoB

Here's something you don't see every day ... the ultra-rare 2001 Cab with the 3.4 liter V8. And factory running boards.

http://newyork.craigslist.org/lgi/cto/5739573863.html

A quick Google of the VIN shows the car in a Copart auction with mechanical damage. Maybe that's when the running boards were installed ;-)

Woodman71

Wow this is cheap.

http://sfbay.craigslist.org/nby/cto/5743858827.html

VivG

If it passes a thorough PPI, yeah. That's like 20%+ under market value, I bet there's a reason.