IMS Bearing Replacement DIY by Pelican Parts!

The M96/M97 Carrera engine has had a checkered past when it comes to reliability. One of the weaknesses identified in recent years by Porsche has been the intermediate shaft bearing (IMS bearing), which supports the intermediate shaft on the flywheel end of the motor. Porsche designed these motors using a sealed ball bearing that is pressed into the intermediate shaft. These types of bearings are typically used in devices like copy machines and other machinery used in dry conditions. In theory, the area where Porsche designed the bearing to sit is supposed to be dry. However, after years of use within the engine, it would appear that oil and contaminants from the engine seep past the bearing seal, wash out the original lubricant, and become trapped inside. The result is that the bearing now operates in a less-than-ideal environment and begins to wear prematurely and may eventually cause significant damage to the engine. We have spent numerous hours to provide you with the most detailed step-by-step DIY with clear pictures of each step. If you are considering this project, check out the article and let us know what questions you have along the way. Go for it! Click here-> IMS Bearing Replacement DIY

Quotes source post: 10405180

[Image-only post; no author-written text. Original image references:] https://rennlist.com/forums/graemlins/roflmao.gif

Wayne, thanks for posting this. Gonzo seems really happy about it too. I used many of your parts for the IMSB (and other "while your in there parts") I'm doing myself right now. I reviewed many of your tips and articles and found them to contain great info. Thanks for being a site sponsor. My only question is who makes the "improved" heavy duty bearing retaining stud/bolt that you use in the Pelican kit? I had to buy your whole kit just to get the HD bolt instead of re-using the OEM one. Would you consider selling a basic single row kit with: HD retaining bolt/with nut/o-ring/crush collar updated flange seal snap ring new flange bolts and let the buyer source his own bearing, any of the fine ceramic hybrids out there? You could even add your own sourced seal-less ceramic bearing to the above and have a really nice basic kit for the single row cars.

Of course Jake and Charles are now declining to sell their replacements to the DIY market. I have great respect for both of them for the work they have done on these engines, the knowledge they have developed and the products they make. However this decision was very disappointing to me. I compliment Pelican for the detailed information and DIY instructions for the IMS bearing replacement they provide which appear to be much better than LNE and Flat6 provided.

The question for Pelican is -will you continue to sell the LNE bearing ?I believe it is still in your catalog .

I would recommend adding the tip to place one finger on the bearing when trying to seat the Spiroloc clip. That would help prevent the clip falling into the case on a missed attempt. Also clarify the orientation (sounds silly, but might as well add to improve) of the K: Short center bolt spacer/L: Long center bolt spacer (for engine with single-row bearing) on Fig 19.

Doug, I agree but thanks to all the info about the kits out there, anyone can source most of the parts (including bearings) themselves now. +1 on using a finger to prevent Spiroloc or snap ring from falling in case. Bentley video shows this. Also, I did not use the "set screw" method. Seemed too risky to me compared to fully locking both cam sets and crank. Impossible for engine timing to move with engine fully locked at TDC and makes it easier to verify timing afterwards. Not sure why Wayne promotes the "set screw" method, especially if you have the cam locking hardware anyway as shown in pics. Either way, great info and I would recommend someone thoroughly read Pelicans, LNE's, JR's and watch Bentley's before doing an IMSB replacement. The job is actually very easy if you take your time. There's really no excuse not to do this with all the options and help out there now. It's no harder than a plug change, just takes longer.

Quotes source post: 10410375

I agree. With the saved cash on doing the IMS swap, get the right tools!

sorry for my possible newbie question ... so the pelicanparts is a different ims bearing or it is just different installing tool from the Flat 6 IMS retrofit ? thanks

Quotes source post: 10405552

Selling a kit without the bearing would be an excellent idea. This should remove pretty much all liability as the bearing is the biggest potential falire point.

Sorry to post this on your thread, but there is another IMSB "solution out there now as well as the LN/Raby and Casper bearing. Pedros garage has come out with their own "solution". It's a forced oil lubricated ceramic bearing. Unlike Raby's solution which which uses an adapter that connects to the oil filter, Pedro uses an unused oil pressure gallery to source the oil from. Then he lubricates a ceramic bearing with it, instead of LN/Raby's plain bearing. http://www.pedrosgarage.com/Site_5/T...d,_part_2.html And if it's any consolation Wayne, I buy all my BMW and Porsche parts from you guys. What a choice these days.

Oh, yeah, Pedros system is made for dual row, single row and the later 997 single row through 2008. What's interesting is the 997 single row solution reuses the existing bearing , and adds a pressure lubricated cover, so the case does not have to be split. By adding pressure lubrication to the existing single row bearing, the hope is added life.

The plain bearing is the best solution. I am not sure that a lubricated bearing is better than the sealed one. Ceramic acts differently in the presence of oil vs grease. The film needs enough strength to coat the ***** and prevent spalling of the race.

I agree about the plain bearing. LN's plain bearing with Pedro's oil source would be the best combo. I don't like the oil filter adapter oil supply of LN. I would prefer to keep the oil filter stock like Pedro's system.

Incorrect. Several years ago while developing the IMS Solution we robbed oil from that location. The oil is not "just filtered" and is less than 12 average PSI less at all RPM points than the SPOFA location which has the same oil pressure as what the main bearings see. Robbing oil from that location was just that, and it posed several challenges, including lazy lifters and tensioners on that bank of the engine, which is already at the end of the primary oil system. There is a reason why it has taken Charles and I years to develop the IMS Solution. The easiest place to get the oil supply was not the best. The only failure that we experienced with the IMS Solution in testing was when oil was being taken from "that" location. If we could have taken oil effectively from that location the cost of our kit would have been greatly reduced, but it didn't make the grade. There's also a reason why the very first product that Charles and I released was the spin on oil filter adaptor, it was a by product of the IMS Solution development that was already in testing as we had already learned what others still haven't. If they pay close enough attention and have a proper means of gathering data, they will over time. Remember, the reason why the factory used a sealed ball bearing and did not retain the Mezger design with an oil fed plain bearing (like the IMS Solution) is because there was no high volume, high pressure oil in the region of the IMSB with the M96 design as the crankshaft was oiled through its carrier assembly. Unlike the Mezger design the M96 had all its oil passages cast in to the block, and they were not drilled. Opinions will vary, then there's data, experience and practical application. The view from the inside is a bit more clear. Eliminate the ball bearing= eliminate the problem. BTW- Kudos to Wayne for supporting the DIY crowd, that takes much more patience and understanding than Charles and I have, and someone has to do it.

Quotes source post: 10418602

"not just filtered" doesn't mean **** in this location. If oil is picking up debris between the filter and here, then you have bigger issues to worry about. 12 psi is plenty enough pressure for a plain bearing in this location. Likely the flaw in your design (which I pointed out in your other thread) is what caused your failure and not 12psi of oil pressure. Oil taken from there is, in my opinion, the best location as it is at the end of the oil channel and will not rob critical flow from other areas. Of course it means you won't sell as much 'stuff' either....

Y'all beat me to it. Oiled ball bearings is a poor solution, and not robbing any pressure from within an engine that has had instances of oil pressure starvation and using full filtration is a must have requirement. The spin on adapter and magnetic drain plug were the first things I bought for my car in '08. JR: Do you just machine the right sized port in to the spin on adapter for the feeder line or is it a different adapter? Please re-read: He clearly stated that the other location is 12psi less than the after filter location. The robbing of pressure from a supply line to other bearings within the engine would be poor engineering.

My guess would be that a ceramic bearing requires less oil than a plain bearing, which necessitates the LN filter adapter system for the plain bearing solution. Not really an apples to apples comparison as far as the oil requirements between the two. Rolls Royce and others use patented system that rely on oil vapor alone. In fact, the original LN ceramic bearing didn't rely on any external pressurized oiling. So an oil supply source that was low pressure would be better than none at all. That said, the impact of using that oil on the engine is another issue, which Jake seems to have tried and ruled out. I don't know how much is "enough" in terms of scavenging oil from the unused port, that would be sufficient to lube a ceramic bearing, yet have a negligible effect on the oiling system. I am sure the proper balance could be achieved. It seems unlikely that Porsche would have designed these engines so precisely that there isn't any accommodation for a small amount of oil to be scavenged for lubricating a ceramic bearing. And 69 Gaugemans comment above are a can of worms if true, since most of the IMSB replacement schemes rely on oil for bearing lubrication, not grease. Following is a brief discussion (not mine) about that issue though.... Lubrication All bearings, whether steel or ceramic, require lubrication. Grease and oil are common lubricants for hybrid bearings, but ceramic bearings are less sensitive to fluctuations in lubrication conditions. For example, compared to steel bearings, ceramic ***** can operate under the same lubrication conditions at speeds up to 20% higher. Except for those applications that operate at high speeds, grease is the recommended lubricant in most ceramic bearing applications. Grease is preferred because it is more easily retained at the bearing than oil and provides better protection against moisture and contaminants. The most common grease used with ceramic bearings is lithium grease with a mineral oil base, suitable for precision bearings. For high-speed, high-temperature and prolonged service life applications, synthetic lubricants are preferred. Regardless of the type of grease used, the quantity should never exceed 30% of the free space in the bearing. In high-speed applications, this quantity should be less than 30%. As with any type of bearing, freshly greased ceramic bearings require a low-speed run-in period to ensure even distribution within the bearing. Excess grease is ejected during this period. Without a run-in period, premature bearing failure can result from sudden temperature rises. A grease replenishment schedule should be calculated based upon the specific application. For high-speed applications, all grease should be removed and replaced with fresh grease on a fixed schedule. Oil is typically used in applications where grease is either technically unsuitable or economically undesirable. Other situations where oil is preferred include those where grease relubrication cycles would be too short or when heat has to be removed from the bearing. The combination of high operating speeds and low operating temperatures of spindle bearings require the use of circulating oil or oil spotting for lubrication. For other applications, oil bath, oil drop, oil jet and oil mist are suitable. While oil must be changed at specific intervals, several lubrication methods offer slight exceptions to this rule. With oil-bath lubrication, an annual oil change is sufficient if bearing temperatures are generally lower than 122�F. At higher temperatures, oil should be changed more frequently. Where oil drop, oil mist or oil spot lubrication systems are in place, replacement generally is not necessary.

I invented the IMS Solution for my engines. As long as we have it for our own use, I could care less how many units are sold. Let's stay on topic guys. I don't want to detract from Wayne's thread, and nothing else really needs to be said.

Quotes source post: 10418761

While true that oil mist systems in ceramic bearings are used (most notably in 15,000 rpm and greater machine tool spindles) it's application is critical. As is also true that grease causes an increase in bearing temperature as speed rises to maximum. But the TYPE of lube in either system is the critical issue. While engine oil MAY be fine, it is not an oil used by bearing manufacturers. And the adage that ANY oil is OK is simply not true. I would use the sealed grease from the factory. Change out the bearing at clutch time for the 100 bucks or so and be done with it.

Quotes source post: 10418776

If the factory grease seals worked properly, this might be a good solution. But they don't.

Quotes source post: 10418872

We don't know the cause of the seal failure. So any conclusion is speculation. There are many causes for seal failure.

I still stand by the best solution being a plain bearing as used in the Turbo version of this engine. It is the best solution. If Imre's bearing lasts through a clutch life cycle, that would be my choice.

The point is the factory grease seals fail, and can fail with low miles. Why they fail is irrelevant to this discussion. The factory bearings are not reliable.

So, just had the LNE retrofit done with my clutch 3 weeks ago. Used to be the right move. Has this already Jumped the Shark?

No, it hasn't, it is still a more reliable solution that the original. I think, though, that a better sealed CH bearing in the Pelican kit would be a popular and improved option in design for the DIYer that wants to go this route. Heck I may go that route when I do it. I find it immensely difficult to believe that a sealed CH bearing that can last in a light duty like this in 250F oil can't be found.

The one I bought is good till 325F.

Back to on topic. The Pelican kit uses only one type of bearing for both dual row and single row engines, a single row bearing. I doubt any dual row owners would choose to substitute a single row bearing where a dual row bearing was originally fitted. At least I wouldn't . Additionally, the Pelican bearing is a steel bearing the same as the OEM bearing, although it is stated the grease seal is improved over OEM.

But it is a standard sized bearing, so I could buy the kit an just substitute the better CH bearing, which is basically what KK is doing. Is there a post with your bearing model Imo000?

Quotes source post: 10420664

Here is the page from my thread on the Canadian forum. https://rennlist.com/forums/rennlist...-these-16.html

I agree except for one detail. "Sealess" CH bearing in the Peilican kit would be great for DIY'ers and quite affordable. Both high dollar retrofit kits use open CH bearings. The Pelican kit with a good CH bearing could be $200 maybe less if you dump the extra dual row parts.