Blrmkr

Agree with all that has been said here. The dealer knows what the weak point is in these cars and knows that it is the intermediate shaft bearing. This is their business and they are fully aware of the class action lawsuit settlement. Meets my expectations of dealers. I hope that this turns around for you.

ZuffenZeus

See the OP's post regarding a written agreement to have IMS retrofit replacement carried out by the dealership as part of the original sale:

QUOTE:
"re: IMS, to clarify the procedure. While reading the below, please note that I have, in writing, confirmation that a complete IMS retrofit was going to be done"

ewc

Exactly -- the dealer is playing word games on their definition of "IMS retrofit replacement." In an ideal world, OP would have asked the dealer to precisely clarify that "IMS retrofit replacement" meant "LN Engineering Single Row Retrofit Bearing Kit" and that the IMS bearing would be replaced. The confusing thing is that the dealer used the words "retrofit replacement," but their definition meant only a seal replacement, not a bearing replacement. I don't fault the OP for misunderstanding what was being done. Who would think that the term "retrofit replacement" means simply replacing some $10 seals? The OP trusted an authorized dealer to address the known IMS issue which he specifically raised with them, but they just danced around it and sent him on his way.

The lesson here is to be 100% clear in writing on what exactly is being replaced so everyone is on the same page, and not to rely on assumptions.

jaetee

WOW! OP driving around thinking his IMSB issue is addressed, when in fact it was not. UGH... Then IMSB fails after shopping for new Porsche at said dealer. That's a swift kick in the nuts courtesy of either very poor communication or cleaver after-the-fact semantics. What I see here is that the dealer missed out on an opportunity to make more service revenue on an IMSB swap back then, and likely lost a potential long term customer at the same time.

IMHO, this falls directly on the Service Advisor. It's not like this wasn't a known issue in 2014. Sounds to me like he typed the wrong codes into the work order. Based on the reply from the dealer, if OP truly did ask for a new LN bearing, the dealer should have told him "Sorry, I can't do that, but we'll put in a new Porsche IMSB." OP's situation would be very different right now. That said, scrutiny of the invoice at pick up is key. There should have been an IMSB parts charge, and if that was missing it's up to the OP to catch that then. Can't do squat about it now.

Still, I would be talking to the owner of that dealership. Especially if I had it in writing that LN bearing was requested. That implies IMSB swap! Not seal inspection. I bet the invoice was more than $5k, so easy for line items to get overlooked....

Even if the blame falls 50/50, it's the OP that is being left with 100% of the headache.

gnat

We haven't seen what he has in writing and I find it more likely that the fog of history and newness (to the OP) of the subject at the time had him interpret what was written with a certain expectation (e.g. a misunderstanding).

I'm no fan of dealers and I agree they should have known exactly what was being requested and either quoted him for the correct job or told him clearly that it's not something they do. There is always responsibility on the customer to understand A) what they are asking for and B) what they are getting though.

As it stands now, I don't put blame on either side. As I said in my last post, I think it's more a fault of the 996 community as a whole that we continue to make a mess of this stuff. It's not something a new/prospective owner can sit down and figure out in an evening or two due to all the conflicting information that casts doubt on the opposite view.

Now if he does indeed have something that very clearly and specifically says an actual retrofit will be performed with an aftermarket bearing, that's a different story altogether. It's just that from the information we have at hand right now a simple misunderstanding seems the more likely root cause.

HallEYA

Raby has read the full interaction w/dealer: pretty clear there was a gap in explicit instructions/expectations vs. actual remedy, re: the IMS(B) issue.

However, primarily wanted to update OP to reflect that the failure was not post- IMSB retrofit, as I had initially, and mistakenly, described. (Certainly enough 996 boogeymen w/out adding another).

This forum and others have plenty of other real-time examples of 996 engine failure, so me adding another log to the fire as a cautionary tale ultimately serves little purpose, other than my own catharsis.

Porsche deserves all the discredit they've earned for this issue, but I also bought mine with eyes wide open (though never would have without the "full" IMSB fix, irony of ironies). Like myriad others before me, I think it likely that my gut-punch/anger/shock/disgust is no more or less than anyone else's.

I think there is plenty of blame to go around, but re-litigating 2.5 yrs on serves no purpose. May as well yell at the clouds.

ZuffenZeus

And so HallEYA, what is your next move on the C4S? replace the engine? roller? etc???

HallEYA

B3freak,
Just sent this to Raby & Co, so here's where I am:

Thanks guys. I am supposed to hear from my dealer this afternoon as to what they'd be willing to do re: credit of the broken 911 towards a Cayenne purchase, at which time I will decide on my next steps. I am all over the place, working through the car version of textbook stages of grief (shock, denial, anger, bargaining, guilt, depression, acceptance).

gnat

Again, best of luck. I know it's not an easy thing to deal with, but you seem to be taking it pretty well and dealing with it logically rather than emotionally. That is an accomplishment in itself to be proud of

5CHN3LL

Harsh toke, OP.

HallEYA

Thanks very much. The grief stages a little hyperbole: actually been pretty easy - costs are sunk, engine is nuked, no one (realistically) to blame. From here it's a pretty simple cost/benefit analysis. I have no attachment to car other than it was fun to drive. Lots of those.

ZuffenZeus

Man, try not to beat yourself up. I know you feel gutted, but remember, it's better to tear down a building and rebuild it from the ground up to make it stronger. We live and... and we learn from our mistakes and hopefully, not repeat them.
Personally, I think this crosses the line of "Buyer Beware" and more like "The Devil's in the Details". I've been down this road before too with my Volvo and fortunately, went to the service manager and things were made right. They didn't try to place blame on me for not understanding part numbers, brand terminologies, and such. They took care of it. And that's one reason why I stick with Volvos for my daily drivers. They are great cars and my local dealership has a great reputation. Anyway, I hope you find a solution and not let this lose your faith in the 996. We all understand the risks associated with these cars and know what we need to do to make them last a long time. Heck, Jake Raby and Flat6 is next door to me and so I don't have an excuse. But I'm saving up my pennies (so to speak) and plan to install the "IMS solution" if I'm fortunate enough to hang on the car long term. I hope I don't eat my words by waiting.

Blrmkr

You made a very smart move by consulting with Jake. He will give you very direct/accurate advice. Worked with him when he installed my IMS Solution. Great Experience!

docmirror

It troubles me that the '996 community' is slathered with this mess. The 996 community had no hand in the development, design, assembly, sales, service, diagnosis, or remediation of the mess. We are not at fault for anything, and as a new owner from 11 months ago, I went in with eyes wide open, and pretty full accounting of the weak points of the IMSB. Surely I have learned more since purchase, but I was well aware of the failure modes, and the testing prior to purchase. I took it upon MYSELF to take out the filter, remove the pan, inspect the entire engine for signs of any damage. I agree that it didn't take a night or two, it took several nights and plenty of questions. But - the info is there for all to see. I would put this squarely on the dealer as they didn't fulfill the new owners desires, whether they were able to or not. The dealer could and likely should have stood face to face with the buyer and tell them 'sir, we do NOT replace, alter the IMS bearing...'. But, knowing that might cost a sale, they took the shadow method of obscuring the service performed with some kind of mishigoss internal service code which I consider duplicitous. But - that's me, and maybe I'm too critical when buying a car from a car dealer.

Flat6 Innovations

This is a classic example of trusting the source, only because they are the source.

This is a clear lack of communication/ miscommunication that lacked any clarity for the owner of the vehicle.

Many independents have more direct experience with real- world issues with these cars than dealers ever did, as they have been working with the cars longer today.

I refer people to dealers for three things:
-SRS/ POSIP system issues
-PSM Issues
-Convertible top problems.

Thats it.