16 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHHans Mezger's Involvement in the M96 Engine
Reported or suspected cause
use of a questionably appropriate ball bearing
Reported cause
No successful repair reported for this finding.
1
Identified cause
0
Suspected cause
0
Reported fixes
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 report identifying a cause
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.
Reported cause
It was the use of a questionably appropriate ball bearing to support one end that was Porsche�s folly (I�ve never heard of a failure of the end with the plain bearing).
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
Porsche further went on to reduce the number of cylinder head gaskets from 2 to 1, for a cost savings measure, thereby having to adjust the size and design of the Coolant holes, which some argue has been known to contribute to other issues, such as bore scoring.
Leading evidence: 'use of a questionably appropriate ball bearing' (1 discussions report identifying this cause; no attributable repair resolution). Across 1 matching discussions, the most frequently mentioned possible cause is 'use of a questionably appropriate ball bearing' (1 discussions; 1 report identifying it and 0 suggest it). The most frequently discussed action is 'Adjust size and design of the coolant holes' (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 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
Porsche further went on to reduce the number of cylinder head gaskets from 2 to 1, for a cost savings measure, thereby having to adjust the size and design of the Coolant holes, which some argue has been known to contribute to other issues, such as bore scoring.
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
Anyway, when checking the patent application database for Mezger as inventor only applications with Porsche AG as a proprietor pop up.
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
yeah I am guessing someone thought it was going to save money and changed the design
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
It was the use of a questionably appropriate ball bearing to support one end that was Porsche�s folly (I�ve never heard of a failure of the end with the plain bearing).
These are separate views of the same evidence. Frequency alone does not establish a fix, and these counts must not be added together.
Adjust size and design of the coolant holes
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
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
Porsche further went on to reduce the number of cylinder head gaskets from 2 to 1, for a cost savings measure, thereby having to adjust the size and design of the Coolant holes, which some argue has been known to contribute to other issues, such as bore scoring.
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
It was the use of a questionably appropriate ball bearing to support one end that was Porsche�s folly (I�ve never heard of a failure of the end with the plain bearing).
These are separate views of the same evidence. Frequency alone does not establish a fix, and these counts must not be added together.
use of a questionably appropriate ball bearing
No successful repair reported for this finding.
1
Identified cause
0
Suspected cause
0
Reported fixes
Read evidence and context
Discussions that report identifying a cause
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.
Reported cause
It was the use of a questionably appropriate ball bearing to support one end that was Porsche�s folly (I�ve never heard of a failure of the end with the plain bearing).
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.
16 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.
Rennlist: 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: 20261026T161109Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
In his autobiography, Porsche and Me: Hans Mezger with Peter Morgan, page 176, Mezger discusses his involvement in the the development of the M96 engine. He had retired two years prior but he and some of his team returned to Porsche as consultants to help develop the M96 engine.
In the book he mentions a patent on the oil sump housing of the M96 engine, which he still receives royalties on. I was wondering if anyone knows where that patent can be retrieved.
I'm curious to see what that's about.
Cheers.
No Idea but
HERE
is the list op patent applications which have his name as inventor on it.
Alle of them state Porsche AG as applicant. So probably it is not the one you are looking for. As I think you can consider those applications owned by Porsche AG and not Mezger himself.
the misunderstanding of the �awesome IMS� is comical... FYI - there is nothing wrong with concept of the intermediate shaft per se� (its used in all the awesomecair-cooled engines). It was the use of a questionably appropriate ball bearing to support one end that was Porsche�s folly (I�ve never heard of a failure of the end with the plain bearing). Even more amusing is that the use of a ball bearing was most likely dictated by bean counters/cost savings as opposed to sound engineering practices.
Correct - it was to have a single cylinder head casting instead of two different part numbers, thus forcing engineers to solve a problem whereby cylinder head oil passages didn�t exist in all places that it needed to be when the 2nd cylinder head was turned around on the other Bank.
Porsche further went on to reduce the number of cylinder head gaskets from 2 to 1, for a cost savings measure, thereby having to adjust the size and design of the Coolant holes, which some argue has been known to contribute to other issues, such as bore scoring.
Oh no! Hans was involved in the M96! How could such a legend have a hand in the making of an engine designed and crafted from blown glass with fifty thousand failure modes? How could you Hans!? (FYI I really don't blame him for the weaker points of the engine at all, Porsche was trying to stay afloat and I get that some quality was pushed down the importance Totem pole)
The M96 engine design covers also the GT3 and Turbo versions. They have Nikasil liners, plain IMS bearing, dry sump etc.
In fact none of the weak points of the MY96 NA mainstream engine most of us refer to.
You could consider all of these weak points being the result of cost saving desicions imposed from above in order for Porsche avoiding bankrupcy. I am almost sure the engineers have warned that (some) of these changes could implicate the reliability of this totally new engine design. As they have never been thoroughly tested in an engine design before.
What? The "Integrated dry sump" thats really just a wet sump?
As for Patents... Typically when someone works for a company and "invents" something associated with their job, the Patent is filed for, paid for, and issued to the company,with the Inventor and all contributors listed on the Patent as well.
Some of us aren't that lucky, we had to pay for the Patent ourselves.
Typically Indeed. All depends on the employment conditions/contract between the two parties.
The topic starter referred to Mr. Mezger working as a consultant, so it could imply that this would be under a different constellation as usually is expected.
Anyway, when checking the patent application database for Mezger as inventor only applications with Porsche AG as a proprietor pop up. So most probably Mezger invented them working as a employer for Porsche.
I refer to Patent applications, it does not necessarily mean they became a Patent at the end. But that is another discussion.
My guess , taken into account the price tag of the IMS retrofits and Solution, that by now you sold already such amount of them to more than cover those development and patent expenses. And I hope by this time you are that lucky to get a good bit of profit from it
