7 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHTook the flywheel out, surprise surprise!
Leading reported evidence
Replace sop is
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
When the RMS is replaced SOP is to not install it to exactly where the old or previous one was installed.
Leading evidence: 'Replace sop is' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Check flywheel.there is a simple' (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
Most important - check the flywheel.There is a simple but rather odd procedure for this .Lots elsewhere if you search.
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 SOP (again) is when replacing the RMS to replace the IMS flange with the new improved 3-ribbed seal and new micro-encapsulated bolts.
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 problem is while the RMS removal/installation is a piece of cake easy -- relatively speaking -- to replace the IMS flange requires more work.
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 SOP (again) is when replacing the RMS to replace the IMS flange with the new improved 3-ribbed seal and new micro-encapsulated bolts.
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: 20261026T194705Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
It looks like the flywheel of this car was previously removed and my guess was to change the RMS due to a leak. While the car was not leaking on the floor, it looks like the RMS not pushed to its propper depth, its right at the border... Also, they used green locktite on the flywheel bolts where I think you are suppose to put them dry correct? The last thing I noticed is that they put silicone around the IMS flange... Im guessing they did this to prevent any oil or dirt to go inside?
The first owner of this car or whoever worked on it was a lil piggy
Before cleaning:
After Cleaning:
When the RMS is replaced SOP is to not install it to exactly where the old or previous one was installed. The old seal can have worn a groove in the crank and if the new seal is installed at this same point the new seal can leak.
As long as the seal is installed fully into the block and it is square and it is no installed exactly where the previous seal was installed that is about all that matters
The sealant may have been to address a leaking IMS flange and bolts. The SOP (again) is when replacing the RMS to replace the IMS flange with the new improved 3-ribbed seal and new micro-encapsulated bolts. Even if the IMS flange is the new style it probably should be replaced. Oftentimes it is hard to impossible to know if the RMS is leaking or if the IMS flange/bolts is leaking.
The problem is while the RMS removal/installation is a piece of cake easy -- relatively speaking -- to replace the IMS flange requires more work.
A DIY'er might have decided that was too much work and tried to reseal the flange or the bolts with sealant.
There is a special diy tool to seat the RMS correctly- search Renntech.
When you see sloppy work in a vital area like the IMS it makes me suspicious of all the work done by the P.O. For example -is just the seal on the flange of the IMS damaged or did he gouge the case ?
Probably need to get the IMS tool ,remove,inspect and put a better bearing in there ?
Most important - check the flywheel.There is a simple but rather odd procedure for this .Lots elsewhere if you search. Refitting a worn DMF is an expensive mistake eventually:
The LuK Dual-Mass Flywheel (DMF) -- simply explained! [Schaeffler] - YouTube
