15 captured repliesPartial discussion capture · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCH996 108,000 miles
Leading reported evidence
Inspect by ams in kimpton
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that performed work without a confirmed outcome
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Leading evidence: 'Inspect by ams in kimpton' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Inspect by ams in kimpton' (1 discussions). For that action, 0 discussions report a resolution and 0 report an unsuccessful attempt. No action has an explicit, attributable resolution report under the current rules. These are forum reports and suggestions, not a confirmed diagnosis.
Source reports, not a diagnosis or a success probability. Counts refer to discussions and can overlap.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that performed work without a confirmed outcome
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Performed · outcome unconfirmed · Original poster
The IMS was fully replaced, the invoice states that the whole thing was done rather than the seal.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
Did they replace the IMS bearing seal, or the bearing itself?
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Counts describe captured discussions, not unique people or a diagnosis. Author identities are not reliably stored. Exact duplicate evidence is counted once across matching discussions; one discussion counts at most once per action/state. Multiple repairs reported together remain a combination. Suggestions and failed attempts do not establish a fix. Matches cover whole discussions and can include related faults, model variants and incomplete threads.
15 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.
911uk: 1 discussions
0 evidence records excluded for query context · 0 excluded by outcome qualification · 0 adjusted by outcome qualification.
0 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.
Generation: 20261026T150451Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
Hi All
Seen a 996.2 c2 manual with 108,000 miles on it, it has a good SH and has had the ims, rms and clutch done in the last 3k miles.
Should i be concerned with those miles? Im going to have a PPI done on the car.
Thanks
The RMS is just a seal. Sometimes they fail sometimes they last forever, just like any of the hundreds of others on the car. The IMS bearing is mainly just hype and you've probably got more chance of the replacement failing than you have of the original one failing. The car's done 108k miles without it failing, why would it fail now? And what's to say the one that's been shoved in won't fail next week?
3.6 engines can get bore scoring, especially higher mileage - where's the sellers gumph that its been addressed for bore scoring?
3.4 doesn't get the same bore scoring.
And if the price is anywhere near 20k or above then its colossally over priced.
Its priced at well below £20k , interesting about the IMS casue the SH shows that it went in for a service and the dealer found the IMS was leaking ( Octane Garage in Crowborough) and so they replaced it along with the clutch and RMS. That was approx £3k ago.
Im having it fully inspected by AMS in Kimpton.
The ims doesn't leak. What they mean is the cover plate that supports the ims was leaking and that leak was addressed. That doesn't necessarily mean the bearing was replaced. The leak has nothing to do with the condition of the bearing. 2 totally separate things.
When garages do mess with the IMS bearing they can do more damage than good and this bearing being replaced is by far not a good selling point with regards to condition of the car.
The IMS was fully replaced, the invoice states that the whole thing was done rather than the seal.
Im assuming that a full PPI would show up any faults with the car? Any one used AMS before?
Hi
Yes it is Angus, spoke to him found him very friendly, as im new to all of this Porsche stuff just wanted to know if anyone had used them before as i could not find alot. Thats good to hear, AMS will be getting the car to inspect. Thanks.
Everyone knows that a 911 with >100,000 miles on = RIP
Being serious it sounds like it's had all the work done that you might want. Suspension might be one to question at this age and mileage if it's on its original dampers, but not a deal breaker. Get someone who knows what they're doing to inspect it for you and be prepared to walk away.
What a load of crap, you can have as many issues on a low mileage 996 than a high one. Sure when it get above 100k its likely to benefit from a rebuild but there are plenty that are running well without a rebuild.
Each car has its own history, don't forget that
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.
