steved0x

http://theimssolution.com/

cmjohnson

Cool. Dare I say....great minds think alike?

Flat6 Innovations

To clarify:
This kit is a product of RND, not LN or Flat 6. It was developed specifically at the request of SSF Auto Parts for an exclusive product; just like all other RND products.

The bearing, and especially the method of thrust support are dramatically different than any other similarly appearing component.

Please do not confuse anything that "sprays oil" with that of my IMS Solution. The IMS Solution does not spray oil onto dynamic components; it delivers oil to controlled, load bearing surfaces to control both the radial and longitudinal thrusts and loads of the IMS assembly. It also gathers just filtered oil from the Spin On Oil Filter Adaptor to carry out this job, all of which is protected by US Patent 8,992,089 B2.

johnsjmc

Sorry Jake I know the difference between your plain bearing pressure fed oiling and Pedros open ball direct oil feed and EPS dribble through the rear of the pump. I was just trying to steer back to my original question WITHOUT arguing about which method was superior. I am convinced your "solution" is likely the best answer out there but it is also the most expensive.

Flat6 Innovations

Thats good. Too many people confuse the delivery of oil, and what its going to, as well as where its coming from. All they see is something with an oil line being fed to the IMS region.

It always will be. My engine is also the most expensive that can be bought, the IMS Solution was originally invented for use in my engines.

johnsjmc

The only problem with "best/most expensive" is as these cars continue to depreciate it becomes harder to justify a preventative repair procedure that equates to as much as 25% (or more) of the value of the car to avoid engine failure which might not happen anyway. Even doing the work myself a Boxster S is less than 10K now and a replacement IMSB at it,s cheapest is more than $500 in parts plus tools.

Flat6 Innovations

Porsche engines have historically cost as much, or more than the cars they are fitted to at some point in the car's life. This is nothing new; I was selling 10-15k engines for 356/ 912/ 914 models when the cars were worth 1/3 to 1/2 that much money. That was years ago, but people loved the cars and they knew they couldn't buy a car as good as what they already had, for what a real engine cost. Today the tides have turned for those cars, and they are no longer cheap to buy or sell.

That said, IMS Solution sales are climbing every year, and this year the distributors asked for the dual row version to be manufactured from inquiries and requests. Keep in mind that the cars that use the dual row version are the oldest, and least expensive of the Boxster/ 996 line up. This makes it clear that people are willing to outfit the earliest cars with the technology, even though nothing on the market is more costly to install.

The difference is, people can see the value of the technology, and they appreciate the development that went into inventing, developing, and patenting it.

Dan87951

I agree. The IMS bearings are pricey. The lowest price for the LN IMS I can find is almost $800 from Pelican. That is hard to justify on a car that in today's market is worth about $5k (early Boxster). Maybe there might be a time when Boxster's will trend up in value but I don't see that anytime soon. Great cars though, but unfortunately this IMS cloud over M96 is definitely taking its toll on resale value.

Flat6 Innovations

Its not engine problems that made these vehicles drop in value. Look at every single European spots car, or even sedan made during the same era and you'll see equal depreciation from the original sales prices.

Take a Cayenne for instance, they have fallen to Boxster price levels, even though they cost more than a Boxster did when new, and the oldest one is a 2003. Mercedes and BMW's have done the same thing. I recently bought an S430 that was a one owner car from 2002 for 2500 bucks, and looked like new. My wife has been driving the wheels off it, and it keeps her out of my Porsche built 500E.

Over 1/2 of my workload for complete engines for the next 13 months is comprised of early cars. Of those, NONE of them are worth more than the engine that we are building for the car. Thats true on the open market, and KBB, but its not true to their owners, who believe the car is a solid investment that can be driven every day for years to come after we build a real engine for it.

If someone asks me how do I justify spending XX on a car thats worth XX, my reply is "you don't; you either love the car enough to do this, or you throw it away".

johnsjmc

Morning Jake and others. I remember agonizing about the cost of chain tensioner upgrades on my ancient 1967S and chose to rebuild/reseal them again and add collars. The car had devalued to about $2500 at the time(1976). Wish I still had it along with a 1976 930 I had later ,but who knew. Today I think the Boxster and 996 represent fantastic value as a sports car driver, but volume production numbers will likely keep them from ever going the way of the early air cooled cars.
The Pelican kit is what I would use if doing an inexpensive single row car but wish they sold a budget double row bearing (instead of a single row and a spacer). FVD or EPS is cheapest there but at $500+ then the LN ceramic ball kit then seems more or less equally appropriate.

Dan87951

Come on Jake be reasonable. To say the M96 IMS cloud hasn’t affected resale is a bit laughable. I venture to guess if you took a newbie Porsche enthusiast off the street who did his research, 9 times out of 10 they would avoid the M96 IMS cars. Most people who can’t work on their own cars don’t want the hassle that could be associated with an engine replacement. The cost could be enormous even if you’re proactive or reactive with these cars. Personally, I wouldn’t have touched one of these cars in the past but now the prices for people like me (DIY’er) are attractive and the risk has become more acceptable.

Your argument doesn’t hold much water in terms of resale value. Going by your logic then, why does a 1 year older Porsche 911 (98’ 993) worth over 100% more than one that is 1 year newer (99’ 996)? There only one year apart so there depreciation can’t be all that much different. Correct? I mean, it certainly can’t have anything to do with the engines or the quality of the car. Right? I’m sure you already know this but it’s no secret the bean counters and accountants took over with the development of the 996 and 986 cars and really cut costs, so much so it has hurt reliability and quality. Historically, if you look back at the resale value of 911’s, the 996 has the worst depreciation out of all of them.

No question the board appreciates the work you do on these cars. I just wish you were geared more towards the DIY’er crowd. I’m a strong believer if you want something done right you have to do it yourself.

cmjohnson

Speaking as someone who does not yet own a Porsche but intends to change that, and who does not have the sort of high income levels generally associated with the ability to purchase a new Porsche, I can say that yes, I do believe that the IMS bearing issue is THE single greatest contributing factor in the low resale values of the 996/986 and earlier years of the 997/987 platforms.

Anything older than a 986/996 often brings absurd money. Collectors and enthusiasts are mad for them. Values for any later 997/987 without the bad IMS design are holding quite well. Only the models and years affected by the IMS issue are in the tank, price-wise.

I'm actually glad that there are at least some Porsches that are within my reach BECAUSE of the IMS issue. But I'm rolling the dice if I buy any of them and if I do, I have to budget for an immediate IMS fix because I don't like to gamble when I can't afford to lose. 2K for an IMS retrofit/upgrade now is way better than spending, what, 10K to rebuild the engine or at least 5K to get a used replacement that may have the same problem? 2K to address the issue sounds like a bargain, relatively speaking.

Schnell Gelb

An important issue not mentioned is : Car has M96 engine with a very recent IMSB replacement .
1. If the replacement was done incorrectly,it could be a disaster soon.
2. If the old bearing had begun to deteriorate and the swarf was not completely removed(total tear-down & thorough rebuild) also a disaster.
So beware of the 996/Boxster touting a new IMSB and be particularly careful of one that has had a new IMSB fitted but the seller did not tell you !

mikefocke

Comparing a 993 era car and its depreciation and a Boxster or 996 era car you are comparing a limited production classic and a mass produced driver. Of course they are going to be priced/valued differently. And for every enthusiast who might buy a Boxster, there are many more who don't do any research, just see the name on the car and want one. So maybe 20% of the potential buyers are not going to consider one. That leaves a lot of cars for a lot of buyers if marketed correctly. I sold one in less than 4 hours and I had 2 other buyers begging me to hold it for them.

Dan87951

Sure...now its easy to say which one is going to be a classic now that the market has already reacted. If everyone knew the 993's were going to be a classic back in the 90's why did they sell them for 996's? Back when these cars were new the 996's and 993' had very similar MSRP's.

Are you a car dealer? A simple search on craigslist, autotrader, and cars.com will show these things aren't exactly flying off the lots. Most have been for sale since last year. Tyson's had a $5500 97' Boxster for sale since last October and just now recently sold it. You could probably make a good living at Tyson's?

Most of the guest car enthusiast that join our PCA club meetings are very well informed and seem to dismiss the 986/996 cars right off the bat because of IMS. I was actually quite surprised how informed some of these buyers were considering some of them can't even change their own oil.