simsgw

Most of the model run sold in a year is built in the preceding year. For reasons no easier to fathom than I expect, Marketing people sometimes describe the first cars off a line as being models of the year in which they are actually built. Other times, they decide to give them the model name of the next year. Sometimes they just wander around looking confused, but that's a risk of their trade and not to be given undue attention.

Dealers also make local choices about the registration forms based on state licensing considerations. All the engineers do is put the information about manufacturing date on the car itself and then back away from all those illogical questions. Just check your door jamb and don't worry what it says on the registration.

G

997_rich

Gary- clarifiying. It's OK to vote if you have a 997.1 or 997.2, M96 or M97. Just please specify what you have in your post.

It looks like there are some m97 IMS failures (very few- I think one or two but I'm not reading through all the posts again) and the rest are M96 failures. And a few people misvoted over time- someone had a boxster etc.

As far as the percentage of failures for M96 or M97 engine.. that's harder to determine and the data here sucks. Best guess is ~<5% for M96 and ~<1% for M97 based on the data here so far. Again, the data in these polls can be notoriously bad and failures tend to be over-reported because people with failures tend to talk more than people who are ignorant of the problem. That's normal human nature- "the squeaky wheel gets the grease".

The intent of this thread was just to give owners a sense of how big the problem is. I've heard some really baseless comments about the IMS over time from different people in the community (someone said "50% of m96s have/will fail due to IMS").

Most vehicles have a weak point (some weaker than others but something has got to fail first). This at least gives a larger pool of anecdotal information. Personally I'm more interested to hear how these failures occured- what it a car that barely sees 4000 RPM? Was it a track engine the gets bounded off redline? Did the car sit? etc.

Hopefully it helps the community get a better sense of the problem.

-Rich


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Many have been asking to understand how many of the 997 cars have had IMS (intermediate shaft) failures. Please post only IMS failures (not IMS seal failures or RMS seal failures, these are not catastrophic). Although the people on this board are not necessarilly a random sampling of 997 owners I would like to see a poll to get a better sense of it.

Please vote only once for each 997 you own (yes or no).. you can post multiple times but only vote once
Please include details of your car and engine if it failed via IMS (m96 or M97) and when.
Please let us know if there were any mitigating factors (low oil, overheat, etc) that might've led to the failure
Please post only about IMS failures, this is not about RMS failures or IMS seal failures.
Please post only for your car, no heresay or posting for a friend who doesn't frequent the board
Please post what was done to rectify the failure if your car failed (CPO engine, engine out of pocket, used engine, sold, insurance fire, pushed it into a river etc)
Hopefully this will help owners and soon-to-be owners get a sense of how frequently this occurs.

*Thanks*

gota911

Rich,

Owners of 997.2 cars should not vote because their cars do not have an Intermediate Shaft.

997_rich

Ah- I see. Of course. I guess we should limit to 997 cars with m96 and m97 engines. M97 has the IMS bearing that requires splitting the case halves to replace (I see only one or two of those failing by my count)

tx targa

2006 S, 27,000 miles. No IMS or RMS issues. CPO'd till Halloween next year. Water pump, front strut, and Nav/audio system replaced under warranty. No other issues. Love it.

ADias

The M96/M97 engines belong to the 997.1.

The 997.2 engine series is called 9A1 and does NOT have an IMS. The 9A1 engine has 40% fewer rotating parts than the M96/M97.

simsgw

I think it's a good poll for that purpose, Rich. It certainly gave me a better idea how limited the problem is. Most polls ask questions like "Do you leave the radio on at DE days?" but this one actually is useful for current owners and potential buyers.

Gary

Mspeedster

Going by your VIN, your car is a MY05, sequence number 2,410. Unless your car received a new motor after the fact, the sequence number seems a little low to have the newer bearing type. What month in '05 was your car built? You can find it on your driver's side door jam.

swajames

2008 C2S, no issues so far.

AYHSMB

No it isn't. It is in no way representative of the number of people who have had failures.

If you want a better idea of how many IMS failures have occurred in 997's, just google it. Some places to look are Total911 and Pistonheads. You can also consult the boxster and cayman boards which have their own failure threads and basically the same problem on the same engine.

MLindgren

I will look when I get my car back later this week. How many 911s do you think they built in 2005?

Mike in CA

Actually, it's at least as valid as googling the issue and coming up with a number of complaints that has no real meaning unless you also know the total number of engines involved. Just as an example, you could read through 100 IMS failure posts, which would sound pretty bad, but if 10,000 engines were in the sample that's a problem rate of only 1%, which would be quite insignificant. Besides, Rich's stated intent with his poll was to get a sense of the scope of the IMS problem, not do a scientifically valid study, and Gary simply agreed that it gave him a better feeling for the limits of the issue. Reading through this multi page thread and finding just 2 people with IMS failures certainly does that.

simsgw

+1

Thanks, Mike. Saved me trying to compose a polite reply.

Gary

Coloradoheel

2007 Carrera 4S, 20k, all OEM, no issues.

403portside

2006 C2S, 15K, all OEM, no issues (fingers crossed).