2 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHIMS Axial thrust load
Reported or suspected cause
when we were developing the ims retrofit, we considered
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
It just turned out that when we were developing the IMS Retrofit, we considered using a roller bearing and already had a cylindrical roller bearing ims bearing replacement option available (which became the RND RS Roller kit):
Leading evidence: 'when we were developing the ims retrofit, we considered' (1 discussions report identifying this cause; no attributable repair resolution). Across 1 matching discussions, the most frequently mentioned possible cause is 'when we were developing the ims retrofit, we considered' (1 discussions; 1 report identifying it and 0 suggest it). 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.
These are separate views of the same evidence. Frequency alone does not establish a fix, and these counts must not be added together.
when we were developing the ims retrofit, we considered
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
It just turned out that when we were developing the IMS Retrofit, we considered using a roller bearing and already had a cylindrical roller bearing ims bearing replacement option available (which became the RND RS Roller kit):
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.
2 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: 20261026T144035Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
I�ve seen LN�s published data on the radial vs axial load ratings of the dual row ceramic ball bearing as well as the RND roller bearing. It�s clear that thrust control is the issue with roller bearings. My question is: does anyone have any data on what axial loads the IMS typically experiences during normal operation? Has this ever been measured, calculated or discussed?
Short answer, no. There is no data.
However, we know that Porsche originally chose a ball bearing rather than a roller bearing, so there must have been a thrust component to the load, especially since there is no thrust control on the other end. Also when Porsche developed their own "retrofit kit", they still chose to use a ball bearing (a sealed ceramic hybrid ball bearing in fact).
Normally in applications where there is a thrust load, roller bearings are typically paired up with a ball bearing, like in a gearbox.
I can tell you from the numerous other used roller bearing kits we've seen, there is indeed thrust load present with visible wear to the roller bearing itself and associated flange or "thrust" surfaces. That's one reason why SSF Imported Auto Parts came to us and asked for a roller bearing option since shops were asking for something better than what was already out there. SSF had the exclusive on these for a while but they are now available through Worldpac and other wholesalers.
It just turned out that when we were developing the IMS Retrofit, we considered using a roller bearing and already had a cylindrical roller bearing ims bearing replacement option available (which became the RND RS Roller kit):
https://lnengineering.com/products/t...ofit-kits.html
For those curious as to the load ratings for various IMS bearings, we have them listed here:
https://imsretrofit.com/roller-bearings/
These figures can be found from any bearing supplier as from brand to brand these ratings remain universal for each specific bearing type/model.
I'll add that with these hard numbers it is easy to see that claims made by some suppliers as to bearing strength are seriously inflated. Unfortunately magazine publishers have no interest in policing the claims made by these sellers, who when pressed on this forum about this years ago, left and never came back.
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.
