View Poll Results: did YOUR car suffer an IMS failure
Voters: 1663. You may not vote on this poll
IMS failure for your 997 car, Y or N? tell us (yr, 997.1, .2, m96, m97, failure mode)
#976
Nordschleife Master
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 5,128
Likes: 906
From: Destin, Nashville, In a 458 Challenge
The 6% is of course only people who have replied to THIS poll. The real number is likely lower. 2006-2008 IMS failures are exceedingly rare - it does not keep me up at night owning at 2008 997.1. However, the failures that did occur, according to my research, happened on the track where oil starvation issues due to high lateral G forces caused lack of lubrication. So if you are going to be tracking your 997.1 hard, then look into preventive maintenance. Some will indeed say that the smartest buy is a 2005 with the IMS solution. But I don't fear an IMS failure with the updated bearings on the late model 997.1.
#977
The other problem with this poll thread is that it also lumps all the 997.1s together - both the small bearing cars and the large bearing cars. It should really have been done like the Cayenne Bore scoring survey with specific model (engine 3.6 or 3.8), model year, bearing type (small or large), track or street car, failure location (track or street), and modified or not.
#978
Nordschleife Master
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 5,128
Likes: 906
From: Destin, Nashville, In a 458 Challenge
The other problem with this poll thread is that it also lumps all the 997.1s together - both the small bearing cars and the large bearing cars. It should really have been done like the Cayenne Bore scoring survey with specific model (engine 3.6 or 3.8), model year, bearing type (small or large), track or street car, failure location (track or street), and modified or not.
#979
Wasn't the 997.1 IMS failure rate in THIS POLL much higher (maybe mid teens) before someone made the decision to combine the 997.2 numbers with the 997.1 numbers? Combining 997.1 and 997.2 numbers would make the 6% completely bunk, understated or meaningless since the 997.2 does not have an IMS or IMS failures. Might as well throw 991s and 992s in there now and really dilute the number down to 1% . . .
#981
Is your engine destroyed due to a catastrophic failure, or you just need to replace the bearing? You said your engine was running fine before the clutch job tear down. They make an IMS bearing removal kit for the 2006-2008 model year. It requires boring out the existing case to make the hole large enough to remove the old bearing. Sounds to me like a ims bearing failure, but not a catastrophic engine failure. keep us posted on how you fix it. Hoping for the best!
Last edited by qikqbn; 01-24-2019 at 05:46 PM.
#982
In the photo, it looks like the grease seal on the backside of the bearing is still intact - at least at the top. If it's also intact at the bottom, I would assume that nothing entered the engine or the main oil supply to the engine. When they pulled the IMS bearing flange and RMS to discover that, was there a bunch of metal shrapnel and the remnants of the other grease seal trapped in there. If so, you might have caught it just in time. Pull the filter and see if there's any metal debris in it, especially ferrous metal debris. Were you running the LN Engineering magnetic drain plug too - what's stuck to that. The missing ***** from that bearing are ferrous (magnetic). I would also pull the sump pan to see if there's anything trapped in the corners or the pick-up screen.
#983
There is metal on my magnetic drain plug and in the filter. So even if I were to replace the bearing, metal bits will be floating about and ruining the new bearing. It's either sell as a roller, rebuild the motor, or replace. Right now I'm leaning to selling it as is. Needs: new motor, clutch, and slave cylinder.
#984
There is metal on my magnetic drain plug and in the filter. So even if I were to replace the bearing, metal bits will be floating about and ruining the new bearing. It's either sell as a roller, rebuild the motor, or replace. Right now I'm leaning to selling it as is. Needs: new motor, clutch, and slave cylinder.
#985
Multiple choices after I get over it:
1. Go backwards to the 996 so I can change out the IMS bearing without an engine rebuild.
2. Go forward to the non IMS cars.
3. Only way I would buy a 997.1 now would be a turbo model.
4. Put the money I would be spending in the 1966 912 that I have.
1. Go backwards to the 996 so I can change out the IMS bearing without an engine rebuild.
2. Go forward to the non IMS cars.
3. Only way I would buy a 997.1 now would be a turbo model.
4. Put the money I would be spending in the 1966 912 that I have.
#986
Multiple choices after I get over it:
1. Go backwards to the 996 so I can change out the IMS bearing without an engine rebuild.
2. Go forward to the non IMS cars.
3. Only way I would buy a 997.1 now would be a turbo model.
4. Put the money I would be spending in the 1966 912 that I have.
1. Go backwards to the 996 so I can change out the IMS bearing without an engine rebuild.
2. Go forward to the non IMS cars.
3. Only way I would buy a 997.1 now would be a turbo model.
4. Put the money I would be spending in the 1966 912 that I have.
#989
It is the larger non serviceable bearing. Even if it was the smaller bearing, the amount of metal on the magnetic drain plug and in the filter would require an engine tear down.
for late night reading enjoyment: https://www.oregonpca.org/wp-content.../ORPCA-IMS.pdf
for late night reading enjoyment: https://www.oregonpca.org/wp-content.../ORPCA-IMS.pdf
#990
You can gain access to the larger bearing the same way you would the smaller bearing, you just can't remove it from the case without splitting it because the bearing OD is actually larger than the hole in the case. With the larger bearing, all you can do is remove the outer grease seal so the bearing can get better lubrication from the motor oil and not rely on the lubrication sealed inside the bearing, that actually gets washed out by the motor oil.