10 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHRear main seal w/clutch job??
Leading reported evidence
Replace non-leaking rms
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
I had a non-leaking RMS changed along with the leaking IMS flange seal update.
Leading evidence: 'Replace non-leaking rms' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Replace non-leaking rms' (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
replace a questionable part with a proven winner for $20 during a $2K repair?
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 · Original poster
He specified in the ad that it had a new clutch so I inquired if the mechanic had also replaced the rear main 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.
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.
10 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: 20261026T161109Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
I just rec'd and email from the owner of a '99 996 I'm interested in (90k mls.). He specified in the ad that it had a new clutch so I inquired if the mechanic had also replaced the rear main seal. He said he called the "(expert Porsche guy)" and they replaced
"...the Disc, Plate , bearing , and Slave Cylinder - the seal was not replaced as no need."
Now I've worked on numerous cars, but never a 996, Is there any
sane
reason to have
NOT
replaced the RMS while the clutch was being done?
Only if you did not know any better, and were unaware of the RMS problems and the cheap PTFE seal fix Porsche came up with to fix it. The new design seal cost about $20, factor that into the cost of doing the clutch and it is peanuts..........
So I called the guys shop and the mechanic said that the new Porsche seal doesn't have a spring on the lip and is desigend to utilize the engines oil pressure to give it enough tension. He had several of the new type seals fail so if it's not leaking he leaves the old one in.
Gee, so I guess the couple hundred we have installed are going to be coming back..................... And the only time the new seals leak is when someone has installed them incorrectly..............
If it isn't leaking why change it?
I had a non-leaking RMS changed along with the leaking IMS flange seal update. (pre LN IMSB) They had to go back in twice until we got one that did not leak. In hindsight, at the time, I wished I had not disturbed the good seal.
5 years later I installed the LN IMSB and the new, no spring, RMS so far ~200 miles no leaks. The old seal (#3) had sweated enough to reach the top of the IMS flange.
Easy: It is a $20 part that can oil down and destroy a new clutch and flywheel worth nearly $2K.
The redesigned part works very well, and has proven itself to be long lived. Why on Earth would you
not
replace a questionable part with a proven winner for $20 during a $2K repair?
There are two schools of thought on it:
1. If it is not broke don't touch it.
2. Performing the operation as preventative maintenance at a slight additional cost.
Personally I would hate to look at the customer in the eye sometime in the future and tell him the RMS is leaking now and I should have done it with the clutch.
