Mspeedster

Interesting. So if 695 07475 is the start of larger IMS bearing for the C2 (3.6L) MY05, my estimate would place the change over at about the same time as the 3.8L C2S models - around early March '05.

This estimate is based on: Boolala's 3.6 engine #5025 built in 12/04, Palmbeacher's engine 5xxx built in 1/05 and your engine 9xxx built in late 5/05.

pewter82

Got a print out from Porsche on my 06 S. Engine number is 68607880 the car was invoiced on 11/16/05 but the warranty start is 24 May 06. Probably when it was delivered. I think the build sticker shows 11/05 on the door.
I'm guessing I have the improved bearing.

DDL24

Digging up the old thread. Mine is April 2005 built date and the 3.6L engine # is 695 08533 which further connecting the dots....but I do not know if I have the larger bearing or not.

mgordon18

Bringing this thread back up again because I found some new information.

Based on the class action suit, people with "Model year 2001 - 2005 Porsche 911 vehicles manufactured with an IMS between May 4, 2001 and February 20, 2005, excluding the Turbo, GT2, and GT3 models, with VINs in the following ranges..." Then it lists a bunch of ranges.

This is further evidence that the IMS bearings changed over to the new larger bearings in February 2005 - exactly the month we thought.

AP997S

Was this Class Action Suit validated in court and agreed upon by PCNA?

Mspeedster

Seems like it. The thread is posted in the 996 and 986 forums.

https://rennlist.com/forums/996-foru...-mar-12-a.html

If my VIN decoder understanding for the 997 models is correct, these '05 997cars are included in the suit:

o WP0AA29905S715077-WP0AA29905S717475
o WP0AB299X5S740081-WP0AB29955S742109
o WP0CA29935S755064-WP0CA29935S755209
o WP0CB29915S765072-WP0CB29925S765212
o WP0ZZZ99Z5S731099
o WP0ZZZ99Z5S701444

Later '05s and '06-'08 are not included. Nor are the very early 996s cars (pre-2001) for some reason.

alexb76

Exactly, this makes it a lot easier. Basically if your car has build date post Feb. 20, 2005, you got the upgrade. What I am not so sure if Feb. 2005 car could have been cold as 2006 car or not, I assume not.

jcnesq

Interesting news! My 05 997S was a launch car (bought it on launch day) an so clearly has the earlier IMS. And I'm clearly in the class covered by that class action suit. (No problems with the car so far, although it has hardly been driven the last few years.)

AP997S

I'm right in there (VIN range) as well w/ my 2005 997S Launch Car. I'm going to check w/ my local dealer to make sure that the Class Action is still in effect. I've been toying w/ the idea of a warranty via the Costco Link but now it's a no brainer as long as PCNA will take care of an IMS failure (if one should occur). If I read the agreement it's good for 10 years or 130K miles (whichever comes first). I have about a 1 1/2 years left before I get to the 10 year mark.

Mspeedster

Feb. 2005 built cars are MY05. MY06 built cars didn't start production until around July or Aug. 2005. The number before the letter S in the VIN is the model year.

o WP0AA29905S715077-WP0AA29905S717475
o WP0AB299X5S740081-WP0AB29955S742109
o WP0CA29935S755064-WP0CA29935S755209
o WP0CB29915S765072-WP0CB29925S765212
o WP0ZZZ99Z5S731099
o WP0ZZZ99Z5S701444

997S.Aero

Subscribed

Papa Fittig

My MY2005 (production date May 2005) 997 Carrera S coupe has engine#
M97/01 68513295
and has larger revised IMS

Papa Fittig

If you have not seen it (from older thread):
Base engine (3.6) has designation "M96", has both the older IMS and revised larger bearing, you will need your engine number to determine which one you have:

Engine (3.6) number up to M96/05 69507475 has the older IMS bearing and Engine number from M96/05 69507476 has the larger revised IMS.

"S" engine (3.8) has designation "M97", also has both the older IMS and revised larger IMS bearing:

Engine (3.8) number up to M97/01 68509790 has the older IMS bearing and Engine number from M97/01 68509791 has the larger revised IMS.

carjmark

I must be backwards. I've started my search for a 997 and I'm only looking for M96 style bearing cars. I'm not convinced Porsche has fixed the problem as I continue to hear of M97 failures and like M96's no one but Porsche knows the % of actual failures.

I would rather have a M96 and replace the IMS bearing w/the ceramic LN bearing. As others have mentioned, a M97 (w/new bearing design) requires the cases split to replace the bearing, an impractical cost for most.

Maybe the lucky guys have the M96 or like me are looking for one that may sell at a discount due to a weaker, but (preferable) replaceable bearing design.

rsabeebe

Great thread. '05 S guys need to figure out where we stand with this bearing issue. It still sits in the back of my mind and bugs me that Porsche really never stepped up to take care of this issue. If you read the documents of the class action suit, compensation for used buyers is crap - 25% of cost of a documented failure. Tons of documentation required, blah, blah, blah. Their lawyers did everything they could to make sure they would have to cover as few of these as possible, especially on pre-owned, non-CPO'd cars. Feb '05 seems like a reasonable time frame for the switch, but even Porsche has said that bearings were used on an available basis during the switch. So, any Jan/Feb/Mar cars are still in the dark on which bearing they have. Unfortunately, I'm a 1/05 build date.

The question becomes, as the mileage goes up are we going to see a greater percentage of failures (if not replaced with LN). They like to quote <1% for failures, but that was at an earlier date and mileages, on average, were lower. My feeling now is, as the mileages continue to increase, the overall percentage of failure rate should continue to climb. Porsche should have stepped up and made this a recall issue.