32 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCH1st 996 Porsche Advice
Leading reported evidence
Replace engine
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: 'Replace engine' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, the most frequently mentioned possible cause is '2nd generation m96 one' (1 discussions; 0 report identifying it and 1 suggest it). The most frequently discussed action is 'Recommend i removed the bearing seal' (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 service specialist removed the bearing seal, observed no unusual wear and replaced the flange with the new, ported one that came with the DOF kit.
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 suspect 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.
Suspected cause · Original poster
My impression from talking to 2 other independent Porsche specialists is that the bearing is probably the 2nd generation M96 one.
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
As recommended I removed the bearing seal when I was doing the clutch, and it is no longer something I worry about.
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
What year was it replaced (do you have the invoice)?
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
If it is a large IMSB engine, the only way to replace the IMS bearing (or do the LN Solution) is to split the case, and even LN Engineering says that's unnecessary.
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
Use the IMS excuse to maybe get a better price, but if that engine was replaced in 05, it is a very good chance it has the large bearing, in my opinion, other things will fail before that bearing does.
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.
32 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: 20261027T140027Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
Considering purchase of 2003 996 Targa w/57k miles. No documented IMS replacement. 2nd owner had engine failure (IMS shaft broke near bearing) at 19k miles. Other than no IMS remedy, car is in close to excellent condition and well documented for that past 3 years with current owner. Blackstone oil analysis came back very positive. My question is what is reasonable discount from market value as relates to the IMS gap? Any advice/experience in former deals is appreciated.
Just my opinion. But i don't feel the gap should devalue the car in any way shape or form. The car isn't broke. When i purchased my car directly from a Porsche dealer i asked if they had any idea if it had been done since it was proven the car still had the original engine. The salesman responded that it had not been done but they were willing to split the cost of the repair. I did it for peace of mind.
Also to note.....depending on when the engine was swapped it may have the newest factory version of the IMS which cannot be serviced without complete engine tear down.
Current owner was told that Porsche warranty engine put back in car was an "05-M97". I talked to the service department at the dealer that did the replacement in 2005 and they could only verify that the replacement was an M96 engine. My impression from talking to 2 other independent Porsche specialists is that the bearing is probably the 2nd generation M96 one. I've offered the owner his asking price, which was a little high (maybe $1500) according to my market analysis less $3500 for me to have the IMS Solution done. He's thinking about it...given that his own INDY has previously recommended that he do the replacement. We'll see...
Current owner was told when he bought from another Porsche dealer in 2016 that the warranty replacement engine was an "05-M97". My followup recently with the dealership service department confirmed the replacement engine was an M96. Lease me to believe is was the 2nd generation IMSB. My offer was the sellers asking price, which was a little high (maybe $1500) based on my market analysis, less the cost of the IMS Solution ($3500). At first he said no, but he was going to consult with his INDY, who has previously recommended that the IMSB be replaced. We'll see...
That's a replacement motor - AT in the serial number indicates austauschmotor (probably spelled wrong). What year was it replaced (do you have the invoice)? The AT engines got all updates, so it
may
have the updated large bearing, in which case there is no need for an aftermarket bearing. Only way to know for sure is to pull the transmission and see which IMSB it has (large nut=large bearing). But the year it was installed is a good indicator... If it is a large IMSB engine, the only way to replace the IMS bearing (or do the LN Solution) is to split the case, and even LN Engineering says that's unnecessary. Ergo, there is no "IMS gap" and you should pay fair market value.
My 02 had its engine replaced under warranty (05 I think) and the new engine has the large IMS bearing. As recommended I removed the bearing seal when I was doing the clutch, and it is no longer something I worry about.
The engine was replaced in 2005. No invoice. Only the screen shots of service order from Porsche dealer showing engine numbers and such. Not much detail. When he bought the car 3 years ago he was convinced the engine had an “upgraded” bearing design, which has influenced his decision not to proceed with any remedy. No way to tell for sure without dropping the transmission as you said. In the event that it actually is the large unserviceable bearing for the M96 what is the consensus on longevity?
Everything I read says longevity of the larger bearing is good. People that know a lot more than me say to remove the outer oil seal if you happen to be in there, but don't make a special service to do it.
Trying hard to get to the bottom of it...being skeptical...may cost me a chance at this one, but when I get one I will know what I am getting. Or I’ll have some reserve to pay for the unknown. Thank for your comments all.
Given my engine number is later than yours and yours has the larger bearing one might conclude that my prospect engine also has the larger bearing...if only I could verify this, I’d call the seller right now an revise my offer.
You like the car, buy it, drive it like you should and enjoy. Use the IMS excuse to maybe get a better price, but if that engine was replaced in 05, it is a very good chance it has the large bearing, in my opinion, other things will fail before that bearing does.
Or, negotiate the cost of pulling the tranny into the sale price. It won�t pay for a solution but you�ll get peace of mind one way or the other.
TC
ETA: Anyone know the rate of failure on rebuilt M96 motors after �04?
Kidding...
Thanks to all. Just to close the original discussion topic, about 6 weeks after I took ownership I decided to go with the TuneRS direct oil feed solution for the IMS. It turns out that the 05 replacement engine had the larger bearing (not externally removable). The service specialist removed the bearing seal, observed no unusual wear and replaced the flange with the new, ported one that came with the DOF kit. The bearing now swims in cooled, pressurized oil with lifetime warranty.
