19 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHRear main seal, not leaking should I do it?
Reported or suspected cause
newer updated design
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
The first reason is that it was the newer updated design, so it had been replace previously and the second reason is that with rear main seals, its easy to screw up the install and lots of times you don't know until you have it all back together.
Leading evidence: 'newer updated design' (1 discussions report identifying this cause; no attributable repair resolution). Across 1 matching discussions, the most frequently mentioned possible cause is 'newer updated design' (1 discussions; 1 report identifying it and 0 suggest it). The most frequently discussed action is 'Replace because i'm in there or leave it be' (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
So tranny is out and I just replaced the IMS with the LN Solution.
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
Pull it out and replace because I'm in there or leave it be?
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
The first reason is that it was the newer updated design, so it had been replace previously and the second reason is that with rear main seals, its easy to screw up the install and lots of times you don't know until you have it all back together.
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
Careful not to score the seal bore if you start using shop made tools.
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
The first reason is that it was the newer updated design, so it had been replace previously and the second reason is that with rear main seals, its easy to screw up the install and lots of times you don't know until you have it all back together.
These are separate views of the same evidence. Frequency alone does not establish a fix, and these counts must not be added together.
newer updated design
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
The first reason is that it was the newer updated design, so it had been replace previously and the second reason is that with rear main seals, its easy to screw up the install and lots of times you don't know until you have it all back together.
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.
19 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: 20261027T005001Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
Hey all
So tranny is out and I just replaced the IMS with the LN Solution. When I got may car, there was oil residue under the bell housing so I suspected the rear main seal. Once I pulled the flywheel, I discovered the leak was from the ims flange and the rear main seal was dry.
I have a new seal on hand, but a part of me says "let sleeping dogs lay" and just leave it alone. What would you guys do? Pull it out and replace because I'm in there or leave it be?
Absolutely... NOT! Keep it on hand for "next time you're in there"... Fix the things that need fixing and leave the good things alone - unless it's a part that's known to wear and/or needs to be replaced at a certain interval. The rear main seal is not one of these. If it's not leaking/weeping, you got a good one. The chances of you making the new one leak are probably greater than if you leave the original one.
Hard and fast rule in the shop , It always gets replaced. It only takes 15 minutes to do it with the trans out, If it has any miles on it there is a good chance that it will start leaking before the clutch has to be serviced again.
It's not hard to do, but you want to get the depth right. If you don't have access to the factory tool, RL member ChrisMA sells one that is 3D printed, inexpensive, and works well for a home mechanic.
I left mine for 2 reasons. The first reason is that it was the newer updated design, so it had been replace previously and the second reason is that with rear main seals, its easy to screw up the install and lots of times you don't know until you have it all back together. If you have access to the correct tool, its probably worth the first - but if it isn't leaking, and you don't have the install tool my vote would be leave it alone.
Do you know if its the original seal? If you're not sure how to tell, you can post a pic here and someone can verify if its the updated version or not.
If I remember correctly, the tool I got from ChrisMA on here was around $30-ish. He also had them on
ebay
, but he gives Rennlisters a discount if you go direct.
Seal removal is fussy, but if you are a handy DIY, you'll be fine. Careful not to score the seal bore if you start using shop made tools.
It's an easy job , the newer seal is much better and after doing the rest why not ? It's a wear item that's known to fail
I wouldn't hestitate
my car only had 35000 miles on it when I did the ims , I did the seal too
the car was low miles but ten years old .
It is a late 2004 car and had the old style sea
assuming you have the skills and tools to replace it, I don't understand why anyone would recommend to leave it alone if you have already done the work to get there
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.
