7 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHHelp with question on replaced engine
Leading reported evidence
Replace with clutch
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
IMO treat the IMS bearing like a service replacement part replaced with clutch
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
There is a really high chance that the motor will last a very long time but I still am in the camp that when the time comes to replace the clutch (assuming its a 6 speed) that you pop in the LME
Leading evidence: 'Replace with clutch' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Replace clutch (assuming its a 6 speed)' (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
There is a really high chance that the motor will last a very long time but I still am in the camp that when the time comes to replace the clutch (assuming its a 6 speed) that you pop in the LME
These are separate views of the same evidence. Frequency alone does not establish a fix, and these counts must not be added together.
Replace clutch (assuming its a 6 speed)
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
There is a really high chance that the motor will last a very long time but I still am in the camp that when the time comes to replace the clutch (assuming its a 6 speed) that you pop in the LME
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.
7 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: 20261026T091943Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
Ok, need some help here. I'm seriously looking at a 2003 C4S that had it's engine replaced in 2007 under warranty by Porsche. Is there a chance this engine will have the non-upgradable IMS bearing in it? How could I find out for sure? (short of pulling the tranny)
Jason
it should have the latest and greatest Porsche bearing/seal/cover
That said, there is no real data that I have heard as to how well the newer bearings work and what exactly the makes the new bearings better. There is a really high chance that the motor will last a very long time but I still am in the camp that when the time comes to replace the clutch (assuming its a 6 speed) that you pop in the LME
IMO treat the IMS bearing like a service replacement part replaced with clutch
Ed,
If this engine has the "latest and greatest IMS bearing" from Porsche in it, could that mean it is the 997 MK1 design and is not serviceable?
I think that is what the OP is asking.
To the OP, the replacement warranty is expired by now as well.
You engine should have the latest upgrades which were available in 2007. Porsche upgraded the IMS bearing assembly on the 997 engines in 2006, so I think you should be OK. I am not certain if that would be the "non-upgradable" IMS bearing.
I spend a decent amount of time on the 997 Forum and have heard very little about IMS issues there in the last couple of years. I believe that the 997 engines from 2006 - 2008 have had relatively few IMS issues when compared to the 996 engines.
The owner is going to get me the paperwork on the replacement so I'll contact LNE with it and see if they know which version IMS bearing it has. Either way it will at least be a single row bearing. I'm probably being too concerned with this. I spoke with a local independant Porsche mechanic (that actually trained in Germany) and he said he has only seen 3 engines self destruct from an IMS problem out of thousands they have serviced since the 996 was introduced. I got the same story from a dealer I talked to. They said they only have seen 1.
NO - not the 997 bearing, the latest bearing for that model year car (03') with the newest seal and cover available in 07' (maybe 05-06') so IIRC there is a point where the bearing becomes too big to replace and the "service" becomes remove the sealing ring on the bearing - not sure what year that took place but the new motor would not be built with a differant shaft than it left the factory with in 03'
I was told by a senior 30+ year tech at a P dealer, in the replacement motors for the 996 had all related intermediate shaft issues addressed as well as many other improvements. Aside from the motor, fuel injectors, most all sensors, PS pump, alternator, idler, belt, coils, air/oil separator and other components are new as well. Should make for a much more reliable and better car.
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.
