Pelican Parts

Do you double dog dare me????

Add to repair workspace

New repair projectOpen repair workspace

Original source

1 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis

THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW

Discussion summary

YOUR RESEARCHDo you double dog dare me????

Leading reported evidence

Use 2000>

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.

Performed · outcome unconfirmed · Original poster
I did a nice job of freaking myself out on the ims/rms last night, but I understand the pre-2000's had a slightly more robust bearing than the single row they used 2000>
Original post Read captured discussion
Do you double dog dare me????

Read full discussion summary

Leading evidence: 'Use 2000>' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Use 2000>' (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.

Read captured replies

1 matching discussions · 1 captured posts examined · 0 partial discussions

Frequently discussed actions (1)

These are separate views of the same evidence. Frequency alone does not establish a fix, and these counts must not be added together.

Use 2000>

No successful repair reported for this finding.

0
Reported fixes: 0
Unsuccessful attempts: 1
Discussions

Read evidence and context

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
I did a nice job of freaking myself out on the ims/rms last night, but I understand the pre-2000's had a slightly more robust bearing than the single row they used 2000>
Original post Read captured discussion
Do you double dog dare me????

Coverage and how to read this overview

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.

1 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.

Pelican Parts: 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: 20261026T133652Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources

POST 1 / ORIGINAL POSTEROriginal post

I am an avid Boxster fan but.... I came across a 996 with a bad gearbox and I am wondering if I should take it home and try to reclaim its former glory. Two brothers have owned the car for the past 7 years, they have driven it very little, (98K on the odo) and it is my understanding the gearbox issue has sidelined the car for the past two years. A local indie installed a fuel pump and gave the car a once over this past week, it fires right up and revs freely and smoothly. The undercarriage is dry as a bone and the overall the car is in nice condition. the only other obvious defect is clear coat deterioration on top right fender and a thin strip across the top of the bumper. Questions, I see that swapping the gearbox is not particularly difficult, my interest would be other than the gear box, what else would you do to this car while you were swapping the box out? Clutch? IMS/RMS? I did a nice job of freaking myself out on the ims/rms last night, but I understand the pre-2000's had a slightly more robust bearing than the single row they used 2000> Lastly, these cars seem to be available for 15-18K, I am ball parking the repairs at aound 6K, any opinions on pricing??? Thanks for looking and appreciate any and all comments!

This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.