EPS Eternal fix Cylindrical roller bearing ims with oil feed

Ok has anyone fitted this bearing it's the EPS ETERNAL FIX CYLINDRICAL ROLLER BEARING IMS SOLUTION from Vertex auto, they have also recently included a slotted oil pump drive key which feeds oil through the inside of the ims to lubricate the bearing IM NOT INTERESTED IN ANY OTHER BEARING OR STARTING ANY TICKLE TACKLE ABOUT CERAMIC BEARING SOLUTIONS THANKS!!

THEN WHY ARE YOU ASKING, JUST BUY IT AND INSTALL IT.

Noz1974 - was this an advertisement for the Vertex bearing? It certainly was not a great post. I would actually like a comparison between the Vertex and the LN versions. That would make for far better reading. Enjoy your Vertex bearing.

No it's not that I'm excluding any other bearing but last time I posted I just ended up starting an endless ln bearing discussion , just wanted to know if the eps bearing was any good as it looks quite impressive, was just wondering if anyone had one with some mileage under its belt

Porsches are fairly low-production vehicles as mass-produced cars go, and going by the class-action suit statistics, there is only an 8% failure rate for the OEM bearing. The Vertex bearing is relatively new on the market, and nobody is telling how many of them have been put in service or for how many miles. So even if there are zero reports of failures, compared to a handful with the LN ceramic, I would be reluctant to make any conclusions. My personal view is that the predominant reason for failures of the OEM bearing is the trapping of abrasive grit within the confines of the seals, and any fix that allows free(er) exchange of oil (combined with frequent oil and filter changes) is going to bring that 8% failure rate down drastically.

I have also been interested in seeing any installations of this combo of roller bearing and oil pump lube shaft. From an engineering perspective, but not one of empirical experience, this looks like a very good design or solution. The two caveats that the other bearing maker points out with some validity is that the oil pump shaft is delivering hot and unfiltered oil to this bearing, and that the roller bearing has little to no axial support for the shaft. I doubt that axial support is a big issue, but there are failure modes on the shaft which can't be easily seen without running the engine at speed for a long time. Harmonic vibration or differing torque loads applied from the cam lobes could have an effect on the axial load on the shaft. I just don't know if it would be an issue or not. It appears that the IMS is driven by a non-beveled gear from the crankshaft, so that would not generally impart an axial load on the shaft, but again - I have no experience directly in this area.

The slotted oil pump drive key is a really neat idea, have just ordered one, will get it fitted in the next few months, preventative maintenance and it's about time to do the clutch anyway at 200,000 km and the rear main seal has been on and off leaking, but it seems to have "gone dry" for the last 10,000 km. Hats off to the person who thought of this, really so simple, bet those who have gone to great lengths to design and get into manufacture direct oil feed systems are wondering why they didn't think of it, and I bet some of them will chime in (here or elsewhere) and say they thought of it but for this and that reason their product is better, will be interesting to see what they say, and this is the sort of thing that it's very hard to have the last word on human creativity being what it is. A friend is a mechanical engineer, and I asked him the question "how much would this weaken the drive" and he said "although it depends on what the starting point is (i.e. how good is the original product) probably just as serviceable and if better material and if the slot is in the correct place and properly machined there may be no measurable difference". Although I'm not an engineer the design is really neat and appeals to me, a slow drip feed or even a very slow squirt into the tube where the other end is a bearing that has had both seals removed would never do much more than coat the inside of the tube with oil and thereby constantly lubricate the bearing as the oil returns to the sump, and my guess is that it would not do any harm to the engine balance, think harmonic balancer. And should have said, already have the Flat 6 ceramic bearing kit to fit but will now remove both seals. All constructive comments welcome.

Why? What benefits will you see from this?Please utilize the components as they were developed, and thats with the inner seal in place. No additional oil delivery is necessary, nor is it beneficial with this component.

Hi Jake, thanks for the advice, understand what you're saying and also understand that you have put hundreds if not thousands of hours into this and that it would be hard to find anybody more experienced, but I'm just one of those people that likes to have a go, and until somebody convinces me that more oil in a bearing is detrimental then I'll just have a go, perhaps I'm in the school of thinking that says it can't do any harm so why not, and if somebody said to me it can do some harm I'd be saying "so how is too much oil is a problem?" Anyway thanks again because having owned my 2002 Targa for about 7 years now I have followed the 996 "saga" and I really appreciate the development work you have done, have a few of your products on my car and whilst they do add that "neat upgraded look" they are all practical engineering fixes and improvements.

Do some searches on "bearing churning". You'll see that over lubrication can be a negative. Too much of a good thing, is no longer a good thing.

Thanks for the follow up Jake, takes me back 43 years to the auto mech class at Tech School, having a better memory for those long ago times than I seem to have with the shopping list can be helpful, 1st year included a class on packing wheel bearings, too much grease and you risked churning the grease which the teacher said caused the ***** to slide on the grease rather than roll and the friction and pressure causes the grease to break to resemble very old dried out grease, 3rd year was a class on automatic transmission theory, we were told that one of the reasons for using ATF was its lower churn factor leading to more retained power. And I did the search you suggested and there seems to be mention of the same two types of churn only, maybe I'm missing something but a dribble of oil that runs through an open bearing does not seem to be either type of churn. And thanks for your interest, it's great for us to have you contributing.

Quotes source post: 11698701

It's clear that you are determined to do this. No use to argue, you must also be informed that any unauthorized modifications will void all warranty for your LN IMSB. Also, when core drilling the "plug" inside the IMSB to allow for oil to pass through it, simply consider what would happen if that "plug" becomes dislodged. Where's the oil pump drive going to go? What's going to happen when and if it "goes"? Yes, been there, done that. It was a 25,000.00 experiment. Your car, your call.

xx

Quotes source post: 11699915

Way too many comparisons in your post.. And you are confusing apples with grapefruits.. That said, The IMS Solution oil feed is not to be confused with, or compared to anything else. The reason for this is due to the plain bearing working from hydrodynamic properties radially and hydrostatic properties longitudinally. The IMS Solution works like the rod and main bearings with your engine, it will not work from splash oiling for the same reasons that your rod and main bearings won't sustain life with splash oil only. The rod and main bearings, and the IMS Solution never see metal to metal contact, the "wear surface" is literally the hydro elastomeric film of oil between the components.

Quotes source post: 11699968

Let me try to put it in less fruitful terms. The OEM bearing was supposed to remain sealed for the life of the engine but it doesn't. Instead, it lets oil in, but not out. So the dirty oil and any leftover grease inside acts like grinding paste. Result, the bearing fails.

Put simply, the single row bearing fails because its overloaded. The first stage of failure for any IMS bearing is seal failure. The main contributor to this is high oil temps (all M96 engines see them) coupled to extended oil service intervals. These harden and compromise the seal. The problem is not lubrication, and never has been. The problem is overloading of the bearing. Yes, with the IMS Solution we are not spraying uncontrolled oil onto the surface of a radial component. With the IMS Solution, the oil IS THE WEAR SURFACE and supports radial and longitudinal loads. We are way off topic now. No need to hijack this thread.

xx

Quotes source post: 11700360

Well since you started it, just to clarify, are you saying all single row bearings on a 996 is inadequate? You mentioned failure of single row is due to being overloaded which doesn't seem too clear to me.

LOL Alpine, the "reasons" for failure served up by the people who profit from the aftermarket fixes have less reasoning and more spin than an IMS bearing A 1-gallon bucket does not need the bottom to be thick enough to hold the weight of 2 gallons. But if the bottom starts to rust, then the thicker one won't drop out as soon. Same deal with the IMS bearing. The small one can last the life of the engine (and many do) as long as the bearing is not damaged by other causes . In a small but significant proportion, the seals let some oil in, but not out. Dirty oil mixes with the grease, turns acidic, and acts like grinding paste, weakening the bearing. At which point the lighter-duty bearing is unquestionably more likely to fail and fail sooner than the heavier-duty bearings. That is reasoning based on science, and if anyone wishes to challenge it with science that's fine.

So how difficult is it to inspect the seal? Can it be done with the engine in the car? Are frequent oil changes and clean oil a good means of preventing contamination of the seal? I'm not trying get into the class action issue but has Porsche ever written anything on the issue and offered advice on the seal corruption as the beginning of the end? There seem to be a group in Rennlist who are impatient or bored with this subject and resent others bringing it up again and again. However many of us who are new owners of the 996 are gaining a lot of information but having the issue kept a live and active. My own intermediate solution has been to buy a 3 year/36000 mile service contract that covers the entire engine and trans. That provides me with time to read, learn, and make up my own mind while not feeling pressure about a sudden engine failure. And perhaps in the next three years an even better solution will present itself.

Quotes source post: 11708275

Inspecting the seal can be done with the engine in, but the transmission has to be dropped. If the car was brand new it might be an option to just remove the seal, (as is the only option with the later engines where the bearing can't be removed without splitting the engine case) but by the time you're into that much labor to drop the trans it makes no sense not to put in the ceramic bearing.

Hey to all this is my first post, The IMS Issue has really got my attention. I deal with bearing that fail daily. I have removed thousands of them. I have built manual transmissions for more than 30 years. I have seen the engineers attempts at solving bearing failure. The one constant is damage to very expensive parts. That has not changed for 30 years. It Is the roller, tapered roller, ball bearing, ball bearing sealed combination, million dollar question . the ball sealed like in our 996-997 has always been a bad idea. they tend to fail in all unit, the metal shed is contained, Prematurely wears and failure. when I replace a sealed ball I have been removing the inner seal since before it was blowing up the first 996. ball bearing are an easy way to solve the thrust and the load at the same time but that is a lot of stress and failure . taking the seal off helps squirting oil helps. a ball bearing still fails more from my experience. the roller tapered seems to work well but you have to shim tolerances with minor wear the tolerances change and misalignment progresses and failure. the roller, if they used this bearing more I would be out of business. it is a load bearing flat thrust. the thrust and load angles is in the L shape . the EPS is my choice I ordered it Thursday. the guys at EPS Vertex seemed to be very informative. I will keep you up to date

^^^^Martin? Is that you? This is getting comical.

My car is a 2000. It had a dual row bearing but of course that was not known until it was inspected as that year could have had either type. Jake did my replacement with the ceramic dual row LN bearing, which should be good for 75000 more miles, probably longer. If I had a single row bearing I would have had him install the IMS SOLUTION which is the best way to go if its possible. Only the single row cars can have that installed. After that installation the IMSB is no longer an issue because it uses the same type of bearing as a rod bearing and is pressure fed, there is never ANY metal to metal contact just as there is never any in a rod bearing. There is no use waiting for a BETTER way to do it as there will never be one. The other ways are improvements of various degrees, most are just fine but the BEST is the IMS SOLUTION. It may just be that the IMSB will outlast everything else in the engine after that modification and we will get to know what the second most common serious defect will be.

Gaprecisiongear Since you are a new to the Forum(1 post only) ,you may have missed this? http://imsretrofit.com/roller-bearings/ Since you are very experienced with bearings, it would be interesting to hear your reaction to the linked page above. You seem experienced with the 996 also ,so that will make your comments even more interesting. The key question for roller vs ball bearing seems to be to know the maximum thrust force & frequency/duration on the IMS bearing in the M96. I have never seen a figure. It seems LN and JR found that number to be way too high to risk selling a roller bearing

I have read the report, this is done with all the bearing companies to best fit the bearing to the right application, in this case with the 996 there should have never put a bearing at the end of the IMS just look at the other side no problem no bearing. the fix that is the most expensive make the most sense to me they don't use a bearing they mimic the other side. i just don`t want to put anymore money into this car than i have to. Porsche is to blame for a crappy attempt at building a car like a bad sequel to a great movie. my point is that many other things are potentially problems. it suck this is one of the best driving cars i have ever put my butt in. back to the bearing ball vs roller if you notice the EPS IMS use the load portion on the roller and the thrust portion on the face of the outer race that is slick in my opinion i have seen this in some manual transmissions and it works well. as far as frequency test roller bearing have more surface area contact that is how they support more load. all the ideas are a flip of a coin to me. the idea that this has to be done every 50,000 to 70,000 mile is infuriating to me. Porsche should have to pay for every single repair. the build sheet on my 996 was $97,000 REALLY!!!!!! they all should be ashamed

Quotes source posts: 12006775, 12006775

Well, there IS a bearing at the other end of the shaft... If Porsche had made a decent replacement bearing available and had added it to the maintenance schedule, I don't think many people would have squawked. There are plenty of $100,000 cars that have expensive scheduled maintenance requirements. I think the shameful part is the steadfast refusal to acknowledge and offer a solution to rectify the issue.

there is a bearing in the front of the IMS, but it is not a roller or a ball bearing. it is a bushing- Babbitt - sleeve -journal cup style like the expensive fix for the rear.

Sorry but this is simply not true unless your running a pre-lube system before startup and after shutdown. Your comment does illustrate a very good reason to use an M96 specific oil for protection. Pre-lube systems were all the rage when I used to build boat racing engines. Even a manual type Moroso accumulator is better than nothing.

Quotes source post: 12006950

Earth to Martin.....If not you I'm sorry but me thinks it is.

Martin or whoever: I am trying to help you. I agree LN/JR should have competition. JR agrees.It is the American Way. But to compete you need to be at least equal,or better.So let us help you? You said: " ball vs roller if you notice the EPS IMS use the load portion on the roller and the thrust portion on the face of the outer race that is slick in my opinion" You mean their roller bearing has thrust flanges -I think? Just like the LN/JR rejected design. In what way is the Vertex cylindrical roller bearing different the one LN/JR abandoned ? It is linked here - you have seen this before: http://imsretrofit.com/roller-bearings/ I think this is what you mean? EPS IMS Oil Lubrication on Vimeo Please understand I am asking just about the bearing design. Not the pump drive shaft, not oil-feed, just the physical features of the bearing. They are identical. This solves the steel ball-bearing related weakness(?) of radial load but introduces three new problems -thrust load inadequacy,uncontrolled oil-pressure bleed and heat generation. So ,logically , why do you/Vertex claim the cylindrical roller bearing,even with thrust flanges is adequate when Timken/Ed & the number one sales/marketing/development/patent guys have generously identified the fatal weakness of the cylindrical roller bearing for this application ? Look for posts by Rennlister "EIB" -the ex-Timken Engineer. I am not championing LN/JR. Vertex and others could compete with an equivalent design ,but not with an inferior one. Their only advantage for me is that they are diy-friendly.Pity it is not proven as effective as some of the alternatives. Why not try something that LN/JR have not offered/patented ? For example (mad perhaps?) a cylindrical roller bearing with needle roller thrust bearings to answer the thrust problem?Too much heat/rolling resistance? Perhaps a spherical bearing? Or a diy-friendly staggered ,dual row steel deep-groove ball bearing for the single-row cars. With/without oil-feed from the filter sandwich adapter or the cam cover. You'll find we are a very helpful bunch here at Rennlist - if you answer technical objections to your recommendations directly. If it is just your opinion/faith/dislike of some personality - that is O.K. too. But to avoid being ridiculed you need data/evidence/measurements/facts if you are persistently recommending an expensive choice that may be very harmful to our fellow Rennlisters. If it is just your opinion - that is great - just say so. I am trying to help you.

The name Is Scott, you are telling me that the solution to the ball bearing failing is to use the same ball bearing in a ceramic and Knock out the seal on one side and splash oil on it. and because timken did a study and said the roller got hot. all bearing get hot *** long as there is sufficient oil to cool 9.5 QT. there is more surface area on a roller to get hot that is why it supports more load. what ever they come up with nobody offers a warranty to replace the motor if there product fails. Every post I have read in reference to the IMS issue makes more sense than anything Porsche has said or done!! In the end I want to drive my car and not worry about the engine exploding and rendering my car sold for parts on eBay. I do love this car but it is a abusive relationship. I would like to ask the CEO why the f would you have some of the best engineers in the world build such a beautiful car with mechanical flaws that were created by saving money on a $100,000 sports car. hopefully the EPS IMS bearing will give me piece of mind and I can enjoy the car.

Ah yes, er ... Scott . Cześć :-). Now you have vented, can we get back to the Engineering ? Can you answer any of the questions I gently posed to you? If you can't give technically sound answers,perhaps someone from EPS or Vertex could help out? Because so far the case for a roller bearing is not convincing. 1. Thrust load 2. Heat 3. Pressure bleed You can say all 3 are insignificant - that is O.K. But do you have data for that or just angry feelings ? The anger is O.K. but not if you claim it is verifiable Engineering fact. If you say it is your opinion but you have no facts- that is O.K. too. Maybe EPS or Vertex have the facts. So far they have produced none -just an oily video. And btw - most of us are painfully aware of the failings of this design but we don't rant much anymore. We're here to fix the problems -without any false hopes. We desperately need diy-friendly cost-effective fixes and Rennlist is a great place to exchange ideas & experiences. But there is a responsibility to strictly differentiate between mad ideas , previous experience, speculation, fact and nonsense. If Rennlist becomes renowned for promoting ineffective/unproven 'solutions' ,it will produce some very disillusioned Rennlisters. And you should talk to Martin - he mimics your 'literary style' perfectly. It is like a signature -unique down to syntax,gramar and vocabulary.Amazing coincidence. Perhaps he is originally from the same town as you ?

It dose feel good to vent thanks, i feel that ALL these companies are trying to solve the problem and i am grateful because otherwise we are all screwed. I Don`t claim to have anything more than a opinion. but I do look at bearing failure all day and make changes to help correct these problems. I see less of ball bearing and more roller bearing in the same application with less failure. I hope that EPS works for me and i am sure you do to. And maybe when the Ball bearing exploded in a 60 ton Drake press and one of the ***** went through my shoulder and came out my armpit that gave me a bias opinion. Cheers Scott

Quotes source post: 12007367

Except that they're not. Schnell, you and I have crossed paths on a boxster forum where I disclosed that I was willing to try the EPS bearing. I've since ordered and received the bearing. It differs significantly from some of their published pictures and is quite different from the one in the link provided. The roller bearing in that write up has a cage with an inner and outer race, just like the ball bearings originally fitted. With the EPS bearing the inner race and roller bearings take ZERO thrust load by design. By my measurement, the outer bearing race has 0.006" clearance between the thrust face of the IMS bolt, and the IMS cover. Those faces are full diameter, precision ground surfaces. It's not just "a washer" as I've seen some people call it. Even if the rollers were taking thrust load, and we accept that the thrust capacity of a roller is less than a ball bearing, how much thrust load is there? Back when I used to hop up VW type 1 motors I managed to hammer a crank case pretty badly. The main bearing which took all the thrust was fine, it was the case web under the bearing that didn't do so well. But in the type 1 it has helical cut cam gears which generated quite high thrust loads which changed direction depending on whether you were hard on the throttle (asking 3X the power that the engine ever developed stock) or under heavy engine breaking. I went with straight cut cam gears and lived with the noise they produced (I rather liked it actually). The M96 has chains which don't in themselves generate fore/aft thrust. It is my theory (read: opinion, not fact) that the only thrust loads the M96 IMS shaft will see is from the inertia of acceleration and deceleration of the vehicle. That inertia is a product of the weight of the IMS shaft (it's a hollow tube and quite light) and some of the weight of the three chains which go over the IMS. That's really not a whole lot of weight to restrain, and while my 986 is fast it is not exactly eyeball flattening. If the limit for a roller was 150 lbs of thrust that would be allow a 50 pound shaft assembly to have 3G acceleration/deceleration. As it is I don't think the IMS even weighs 3 pounds. It would be quite difficult to calculate the amount of chain weight carried by the IMS. It is obviously more than just the part wrapped around the sprockets since the ramps do nothing to restrain fore/aft motion. Even if we used the entire weight of the three chains (I'm omitting the outer two chains since they can't possibly impart thrust to the IMS), it doesn't add up to 10 pounds, which means I can subject the car to 15G fore/aft acceleration. That is space shuttle territory or a collision to develop those numbers. The logical way to determine what thrust loads there really are would be to instrument the car and go drive the **** out of it. I would not be even slightly surprised to know that Jake has done this. Before I say this next part, Schnell I have no beef with you or anything you've written and I enjoy the discussion so this isn't directed at you in any way. All I'm doing is restating what I mentioned in another forum: As of a few months ago Vertex had done 800 installs of the EPS roller in two years with no returns. If that bearing were junk we would certainly have data to show that the roller really is bad and be able to offer more than just point to a one page document telling us why it won't work. Me, I'm going to run one for 6-8 months and then tear my engine down again and do it right (3.6L LN Nickies and some decent connecting rods for starters). I'll cheerfully post up pics of my bearing when it comes out.

Nice post, interesting talking points. -The Other Schnell

Let's be clear, nobody has called the roller bearing "Junk". Let's try to use engineering terms in their most pedantic ,conventional meaning because otherwise this discussion will deteriorate to uselessness quickly. As far as the others terms are concerned: "washer" ? I think you mean Thrust Flange? Thrust face is different. A normal IMSB bolt does not have one on the IMS cover plate side.Did you mean 'nut' or is the Vertex/EPS bolt totally different to say an LN/Porsche IMSB bolt?? In what way? You might want to go through your interesting post and adjust for conventional use of terms like radial/thrust /axial/dynamic load. Most of what you describe are radial loads,not thrust. But if you fix it,it could be interesting.I just want to be sure we all use the same conventional terms. Otherwise Martin, err Scott may as well write in Polish to us. It is a pity that no engineer from EPS or Vertex has stepped up.The questions are simple and pertinent. Just trying to understand. I agree with you(and have stated it elsewhere) that without knowing the actual thrust forces experiences by the IMSB, that objection to the roller bearing is difficult to accept. The heat issue with the roller bearing - the heat will be transmitted to the oil.How much of a problem is that ? Track cars will quickly expose that issue ? The pressure bleed issue -how much bleeds off? No data. Pedro's DOF uses only 1/2 p.s.i. It is interesting that Pedro/TuneRS who have a DOF system(taps the camshaft cover by removing a blanking bolt) ,do not offer a roller bearing option. Just deep groove steel or ceramic *****. Why? They have the oiling system and it would have been easy to spec & offer a roller bearing option. Lots of questions.Few answers.

If the thrust is your concern, look at the fix for the early double row ball bearing there retainer doesn't sit in a groove they wedges a Spiro-loc in the bore. they do not seem to be worried about the thrust. that was a fear of mine. I have the double row and was afraid that the Spiro-loc could fall out.

Yup, without the IMSB thrust data the technical discussion can't proceed. It becomes conjecture & who do you trust ? Once the thrust forces are known, there is still the heat and oil pressure bleed issue to evaluate. Since neither EPS and Vertex offer nothing in these 3 fundamental issues in their literature or here on the Forum, their cylindrical roller bearing seems to be condemned by their own silence.Sad. We've given EPS many priceless opportunities here to answer the issues . Pretty photos in Excellence and oily videos don't address any of these technical concerns.

Scott "I have the double row and was afraid that the Spiro-loc could fall out" Do you mean Spiro lox ? http://www.spirolox.com/ or: http://www.underhoodservice.com/tech...on-procedures/ or Spiralock ?that is like a helicoil Or do you mean the part-circle wire retainer of the LN Gen 2 staggered dual row bearing? http://imsretrofit.com/gen-2-single-row-ims-retrofit/ Just helping clarify your post.

images[2].jpg

If you tell me the size of the LN or OEM bearing this fits I can look up the shear load it will tolerate. Even the light duty ones are often well over 10,000 pounds !

There is no shear load it dose not sit in a groove.

You've lost me . A Spiro Lox that does not fit in a groove on an OEM or LN IMSB ? So what does function does it perform on a deep-groove ball bearing in a shaft? Is this what you mean? Smalley Spirolox Retaining Ring Manual Installation - External / Shaft - YouTube

No, that is not correct, read the install manual. Sits in smooth bore against the face of bearing. we can go back and forth all week, But I and many other people have a different understanding of mechanical problem dealing with them all day. My opinion dose not matter. engineering data and facts are the beginning of most mechanical creations for automobile. but we are left with the fact that a engineer created the 996 and its engine. some times creative mechanical people find solutions. All of these companies are trying there best. we have to critic, that is how products improve. I did allot of research before i made my choice. thanks for letting me have my opinion. I hope it was helpful for someone that has to pick from 4 great products. Cheers Scott

Which bearing you mean? Please be specific to avoid wasting time with confusion. I have asked several times.I'll make it easier -here is a list of a few of the more popular ones: 1. LN IMS 2 row retrofit ? SKU: 106-08.4 http://lnengineering.com/products/im...r-my97-01.html 2. Gen 2 Pro IMS retrofit(staggered dual row+ external wire retainer) 3. IMS solution 4. Vertex/EPS roller ? 5. OEM single 6. OEM double If you mean 1. above -any bearing chart will give you the shear(not sheer!) data for the retainer ring or Spiro Lox. LN would probably give you a range - if you ask nicely.It is standard bearing data. My guess is 10,000lb+ .That is why such a powerful tool is required to extract it. If the IMSB receives thrust loads that exceed that spec - we have other problems ! And it isn't the Spiro Lox.

Schnell, maybe you could consider using PM to badger other members and then post a summary of whatever information you consider to be of value. Your questions are both pedantic and condescending in tone - and while I recognize that this is your intent, it's getting old.

I am trying to understand the guy. If you know which bearing he means please let us know.It makes a big difference to the discussion about thrust forces on the IMSB for which we have no public data and we are trying to find - because it is the crux of the Roller vs ball debate.

Really? It seems like you're more interested in applying your linguistic and semantic forensics to determine if two IDs are owned by the same user and delivering sidehanded, sarcastic digs...of course, if I've misread your intentions, I'm deeply sorry.

English is Martin's 3rd language. I am trying to help him. Common English is difficult enough but engineering English/American is more so. That is why I use photos, numbers.links and short sentences and apologized for being pedantic long ago. Martin is one of the few to have recently made a challenge to the IMSB issue.He deserves a fair hearing ?That is a basic American value.The last challenger was Feelyx - and that protracted discussion produced - yes -the roller bearing IMSB. But I agree the Spiro Lox is a dead objection imho. I give up. The heat and pressure bleed we may never get to discuss. I give up. Pity. I am all for Rennlisters having more choice in products but not buy ineffective, expensive products. Time will tell on the cylindrical roller bearing+thrust flanges. I am still kinda rooting for it as an underdog. And for Martin/Scott since he reformed.A reformed sinner -has an American value too. I'm done.

I thought Martin's written English was pretty damn good for it not being his first language. You should see the crap I have to read each and every day for work, written by people that grew up in the U.S. Appalling, really.

With all this new found engineering knowledge I guess that I have to accept that 2 stroke racing engines that rev to +15,000 rpm with roller bearing: big ends, small ends and mains whilst being lubricated by an oil in fuel mixture are a mere figment of my imagination.

IMG_0898.jpg 79,000 miles, Bearing as good as new, no signs of wear no grease left. engine oil was present. Good point about the 2 smokers pushed them to the limit never had bearing failure. even with the newer four strokes 250s and 450s Ball bearings for the outter cams and cranks. I do think the load is less, the rpm`s are out the roof. This bearing looks like it would have gone another 79,000. You just never Know. Cheers Scott

You have 79k on the EPS bearing (the four pieces to the left, including the nut)? Or on the stock two row ball bearing with the snapped cage? And, what is the story on that snapped cage? RE: the retaining ring, There's a groove on the inside of the IMS which lines up with the groove in the two row bearing. The ring is squeezed into the groove on the bearing for installation and expands into the groove in the IMS, so it is partially in each groove. That ring snapped, exactly as Wayne's book said it would, when I pulled mine out. It's only part of the reason it takes a beefy tool to pull the bearing out. Don't forget that the bearing is an interference fit in the IMS and would get quite a lot of traction all by itself.

Sorry, 79,000 miles, on original ball bearing, I cut the outer race for inspection, Bearing was as good as new. I put the new EPS bearing in the pic to show the new design, I heard there was a washer for the thrust, this kit has no washer. very easy install. with oil pump modification 6 to 7 hours. I am left wondering why the old bearing is perfect after 79,000 with no grease, only motor oil inside the seals. better to be safe than sorry, now that it is done i stopped having nightmares of bearing failure. Cheers Scott

Quotes source post: 12013075

And in a dual row LN bearing, you place the spiroloc in the groove previously occupied by the snap ring you break when removing the stock bearing.

Quotes source post: 12012495

The last Porsche engine to utilize a roller bearing crank was the 547, in 1958.

Quotes source post: 12015011

Betting Porsche would go back in time and spec it for the IMSB if they could. Roller bearings aren't found in mass production primarily for cost reasons, nothing to do with load, utility or MTBF. If that's what you were implying. BTW, the 547 had a pretty remarkable run all things considered.

in my opinion the bearings Kyosho ( http://www.acerracing.com/Kyosho-19-1.html ) are the best, both for quality and for life . There are all kinds of ( ceramic and steel) and any measure . costs are the highest , but the quality has a price . Boca Bearings and OEMs , are better than steel , speak well of them in many forums even though I've never tried. bearings Omnia , good price and high quality , http://www.omniabearings.com/bearings/roller_bearings/cylindrical_roller_bearings , I read about them on helifreak , which are the Germans , of excellent quality , durability, and you can find all measures . Void are of inferior quality , even if they speak well , i do not like its, even if they have very low prices . So the best are Kyosho and Omnia . according to me are better than steel than ceramic . I hope it help

1st post and Johnny the Divine bearing guru chooses this one to loose his virginity with. Why?

Interesting in deed. Martin, Scott and Johnny.....hmmm. All share the same language skills.

Quotes source post: 12044709

sure I'm not the bearing guru... but it is a topic that I have deepened both for helicopters and for cars and I wanted to contribute. I'm happy to have found the guru of humor! bye

Quotes source post: 12012495

One HUGE difference being longevity of these types of engines. Snowmobiles is where my 2 stroke experience comes from. Good luck getting 5000 miles out of a high performance 2 stroke. Rebuilds are MUCH cheaper than 4 strokes but you are doing them much more often. Of course running 180-200hp/ltr of displacement at 8000 rpm definitely shortens life cycles. Rarely do you see roller bearings fail in these though. It is much more common to replace a couple of top ends (pistons, rings, re-nik'ed cylinders) before the lower end bearings are of any concern. Newer designs of 2 strokes for sleds have eliminated fuel mix in the crank case. They directly feed lube oil to mains and rods remain splash lubricated. This change was based more on new direct fuel injection technology than a need to change oiling for the lower ends. So, yes, 2 strokes use ball bearings that see ridiculous forces with minimal lubrication but, engines like that do not last.

yr quote; "it is a topic that I have deepened both for helicopters. ..." Helicopters ? But I know a helicopter mechanic who contributes here and he is a very sharp guy. So establish your cred. Which helicopters ? Mil or civil, piston/turbine, maintenance/inspection certification / FAA or other? It seems from your syntax/vocab that it probably is not U.S. based?

i'm italian. man, I meant helicopter models, the ones racing.

Quotes source post: 12049561

Really?

Quotes source post: 12047351

still i don't understand what do you want to me! I am an engineer and I love the mechanics. do you not like my post? it's not my business. i want to partecipate because i read a lot about this topic. i have think that the goal of the forum is this. maybe i make mistake peace!

Quotes source post: 12049584

what?

they are the same but smaller. it's a ****ing hobby.

Snr. Divine, This may break your heart. Your interest in toy helicopters fails to qualify you to advise us on roller bearings. Hopefully you have some more advanced credential to offer?

Master's Degree in engineering and anyway, I said that I improved the topic for both cars and both helicopters model. I work with the engines every day. if you want to talk about serious things, if you can, we will talk.

I am impressed - if you can apply the theoretical knowledge to our issue. Sorry if we are harsh initially but many fools apply for the position of bearing expert.Here is your chance to ascend to stardom. What does your Masters Degree in Mech Eng suggest to help us with the IMSB issue ? Here is the Executive Summary of the issue we are discussing: 1. Are the technical objections to substituting a roller bearing (with thrust flanges) for a deep groove ball bearing valid ? 2. Which of the inherent limitations of the roller bearing would be the probable cause for rejecting it as a retrofit solution- and why ? 3.Can you propose a method of resolving any/all of the limitations of the roller bearing for the IMSB retrofit? BTW - most of what I know about flat engines ,I learned as a boy with a Lancia Flavia -in Roma at the sfasciacarrozze.

if i understand the first question, i think that,bearings in this type of engine must support two different forces: radial + axial. different other engines a winning choice could be given by the tapered roller bearings TwinLine, because respond well to the forces even if they lose in perfect swing.in the middle, the radial ball bearings, with two rows. less resistant to the forces but run better

While Snr. Devine may very well be a qualified/brilliant engineer, I foresee his English language skills being a major impediment to any useful discourse on this forum.

ok! bye

Are you taking your toys too ? This is what I was hoping for: http://www.robinsonheli.com/manuals/r22_mm/r22_mm_9.pdf or even: http://science.howstuffworks.com/tra...elicopter5.htm woops, they use ball bearings !

Quotes source post: 12052013

who died and left you in charge???

Quotes source post: 12052716

+996

At some point, Mssrs. Gelb and others were appointed as hall monitors for the bearing threads. Coooooooooool.

I almost hate to post lol for fear of being landblasted (I love the personal protectors of the site. god forbid someone tries to chime in on a subject) But Jake suggests that oil temperature/heat is the reason for bearing failure. So I assume (?) that a lower temp thermostat would be a good idea, or perhaps an additional oil cooler to lower temps? Perhaps the primary cause of damage should be thought about more

Jake's indicated in several threads is that overloading is the cause of the M96 IMS bearing failure. You're mixing apples and oranges - or, in RL parlance, "modes of failure." A T-stat change isn't going to do boo for your IMS bearing. The low-temp t-stats are GREAT, however, at spawning arguments. "Landblasted" = "lambasted?" Typo or wordplay? Funny either way. Please note that my reply was landblast/lambaste free, and contains no corn syrup nor genetically modified organisms.

Quotes source post: 12053885

Gluten free as well ?

Quotes source post: 12053885

um OK. looks like youre not reading the thread youre so good at derailing as far as GMO, funny how these things become en vogue. been going on since vegetables and fruits arrived in the supermarket, just in different ways of getting there

Quotes source post: 12055051

Hey now, Quotey McQuotesalot - If you're going to throw quotes around, you might as well include the very next sentence Jake wrote: "The problem is not lubrication, and never has been. The problem is overloading of the bearing." Cooling the oil is not going to address whether or not a bearing is overloaded. As for GMO - people are f****g dumb, almost as stupid as the anti-vaccine crowd. Everything we eat is the product of genetic manipulation. Apparently, though, it's only evil if the genetic tinkering takes place in a lab instead of the massively inefficient method involving selective breeding over many generations...

if the first step is seal failure, then would the bearing remain OK? Im not looking for anecdotal or "im an engineer" (total BS. Unless youre an engineer in a very very very similar field, why this matters is beyond me), but people like Jake and similar who do this for a living, a reasonable question would be if I can lower my oil temp, is there a reduced risk of failure? I built an electric car. Feel free to google it. This does not make me an expert in designing an electric motor, a contactor, or anything else.

Quotes source post: 12055454

I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night. (?)

5chn3ll is a bright guy - particularly when discussing plant genetics.:-).It must be the inter-molecular fluorescence? I am with you on the BS, btw. Back to IMSB. Which of all the issues mentioned are cause & which are consequence ? - Indirectly - if the cause is (*insert any diagnosis from above posts), why does DOF seem to work (?) on a whimpy, generic single row bearing ? Cop-out answer - there are not enough DOF units installed for long enough to draw that conclusion. Are we hiding behind spurious epidemiology ? Define 'enough'. Let's suppose DOF does work as well as any other IMSB 'solution' (no failures so far according to Pedro), the basic cause was therefore inadequate lubrication ? Maybe, but perhaps the DOF was cooling the bearing. Maybe the DOF flushes contaminants,reduced thermal shear of the under-spec oil or....? To answer this we need a M.SC. Eng helicopter expert(not me) -where'd he go? Lots of contributors(including one Bearing Engineer & me) to these threads will be looking very silly if something a simple as DOF is the answer.

I tried to make this simple, and bait you to my hook, but then two alter egos re-emerged (one of which I kinda like btw...) Such brilliant engineering minds, and people who use words like "epidemiology" to make it sound like a high-brown convo. Some of us had to take courses in that stuff, and it can get slightly loathsome. But back to my original question. To quite the fantastic Pedro: theres that little word again: cooling. So if it is indeed the oil temp, would an effort to reduce this, even indirectly by a lower temp thermostat, be a somewhat prevention effort? I know Jake reads all this stuff, and would love to know how they view this, as clearly they have approached this stuff in about every imaginable way

Quotes source post: 12056583

High brown??? Ummm... No, I won't go there.

" little word again: cooling " Actually there were several " little words" . Why select only 'cooling' ? And all the little words are mere assertions until/unless we get test data.Which nobody has got/offered to support a specific IMSB remedy. If we just select our favorite assertion ,it is technically meaningless. Which is fine if the lack of technical basis is admitted. Flaps is doing us all a service by experimenting with a solution that mere assertions (thrust/heat) have dismissed. Bravo Flaps! Just my "high brown" 2cents.

One should never landblast anyone for high-brown conversations...

Brilliant

Quotes source post: 12056718

Sorry, didn't mean to incinerate anything by that comet. Guess I'll go back to huffing WD-40.

Hi All Dare I comment on this hallowed subject!! Aswel as the overloading of the single row bearing I read that the lubrication is a major contributing factor ,as the seal lets oil in and the grease gets washed away, the seal is then effectively preventing enough good oil getting in to the bearings, the small amount of oil that gets through turns bad and stays in the bearing and ims shaft turning into an acidic state which attacks the bearings and races which starts the failure process so even though DOF doesn't solve the overloading problem it can help keep the bearing properly lubed, I've heard of a lot of Indy garages popping the seal of the bearing if clients don't want an ims job to at least help the bearing get some fresher oil. I'm going with the EPS bearing in my engine with oil feed, I know the jury is still out on this bearing so we can see how she goes! Noz

Quotes source posts: 12052716, 12053601

"While Snr. Devine may very well be a qualified/brilliant engineer, I foresee his English language skills being a major impediment to any useful discourse on this forum." It (my above quote) was a simple observation/statement based on JohnnyDevine's poor writing skills (not to mention the fact that he somehow confused the operating parameters of a bearing in a toy helicopter with the IMSB). Perhaps you should suck in your chest, go sit down, and brush up on your reading comp. skills... You too!

so the seal fails, mainly due to...wait for it....heat. so if the seal doesnt fail, the bearing never fails. is that an agreed upon census?

Quotes source posts: 12052013, 12058520

actually after you made your comment, you waved goodby. That is was I was commenting on. Maybe you should brush up on your reading skills, or at least recall what you post

Quotes source post: 12058900

If heat was the root cause, single row bearings would not be 10x more likely to fail than dual-row. You are charging the wrong windmill.

Quotes source post: 12059417

im not so sure, and I believe it is 8x more, not 10. the original double-row bearing apparently had a higher load capacity = less failures. then switched to a single row that failed more commonly. then they increased the single row capacity and apparently had lower failure rates. Then the final non-serviceable bearing which has yet a lower railure rate. This is the one where they remove the grease seal to allow engine oil to lubricate the bearing. Im sure this is where the idea for some of these 'solutions' came about. the immediate conclusion is the load capacity is important, although Pedro argues when properly lubricated, the bearings are all fine. This makes me wonder if there is more going on here, and its got something to do with heat... What do people often find when removing the bearing... I sure you know guy-with-two-names. edit: I removed the part about the f'ing weirdness of the two screen names...carry on

Quotes source post: 12060156

Hey, are you suggesting that the failure is heat-related? Or that heat might be involved? Because, you know,I'm getting the feeling you think it might involve heat. Or heat.

Quotes source post: 12060822

or oil detergents. still havent quite figured out why u post in the thread. YOu have questions I can answer for you? Feel free to ask. Were all friends here

Quotes source post: 12060838

My point is that you keep carrying on about heat being the critical issue. A dual-row bearing generates more heat than a single row bearing, yet the first-gen M96 single row bearing fails up to 10 times more often. This suggests that of the two variables - load and temperature - load is the one more likely to cause IMS bearing failure.

Quotes source post: 12060893

Pedro believes its strictly a lubrication issue. Id post more witty stuff but in the middle of removing intake from e65 and replacing valley pan gasket. fun fun

It seems to me the problem is both load and lube, whats so hard to grasp about that. One fix may be better than the other however I bet either one is better than stock and if either fix is used it will probably be just fine. The only thing for positive is that the original single row has failed in enough cars to justify changing it.

"This suggests that of the two variables - load and temperature - load is the one more likely to cause IMS bearing failure" Yes, logical. Failed single row bearings may look like load failure . But that could(?) be misleading .Why? Because failed single row bearings have inadequate lubrication once the bearing seals failed(because of heat?) , the grease flushed out and is replaced by rancid oil .Sniff one of these failed single row bearings- they usually stink ! Huffing WD40 is for mere boys :-). Without effective lubrication the single row bearing fails fast. So when you supply a very small but continuous oil-feed to the single row bearing ,there is sufficient lubrication to prevent metal-metal contact ? Why - because only a tiny amount of oil is required to maintain the oil film that the ***** ride on ? Pedro has a video showing the temperature control achieved by DOF . The pressure drop of DOF is less than 1/2 p.s.i. and the oil volume insignificant.This info has been posted many times. Yes more ***** and more bearing surface generate (some) more heat but DOF will cool it adequately. However, if that lubrication system fails, the heat will rise exponentially - that kind of heat will destroy the bearing because that heat destroys the oil film for the *****/rollers to ride on. But just normal driving with an effective DOF - no problem- regardless of the bearing chosen -single, staggered-dual, double or roller ? By DOF I mean the cam cover to IMSB flange system that Pedro has - not the punch and grooved oil-pump drive-shaft system. Time will tell if it works. Please note the many ? question marks ? above.I do not have the answers. Just WAG.

+1 to all that. nice post. Im adding two2cool at each oil change. Problem officially solved

"actually after you made your comment, you waved goodby. That is was I was commenting on." Ok... and that "leaves me in charge" how? For some reason I thought waving goodbye meant...goodbye, not "now I'm in charge"

I've seen a lot of advertisements for this EPS product on the forum and I've heard good things about it elsewhere. But I couldn't help wondering about two things not mentioned in this thread thus far. Wouldn't the roller bearings have more rotational friction and inertia than ball bearings (at least if they have the same diameter)? (This would seem consistent with them producing greater heat (though I can see other possible reasons).) And if so, could this (slightly) reduce power from the engine and/or throttle respone and/or the ability of the valves which are ultmately driven by the IMS to respond quickly? (And no, as may already be obvious, I'm not an engineer. But I hope that even by the high standards of this thread, it's still OK to ask questions if I'm not chief bearing engineer for a (full sized) helicopter manufacturer, just not to answer them ;-) )

Quotes source post: 11694233

Hello, Did you end up installing this bearing(roller)? Any updates? Thanks!

Quotes source post: 11700343

Hi Ben Z, Thank you for your questions. We have sold over 5,000 units since we started to sell our EPS Cylindrical IMS Bearing in 2013, and we have NOT had a single report of failure. The reason why our IMS Cylindrical Bearing does not fail is because it is made of a completely different technology than the traditional ball bearing at Porsche and LN. The reason for the IMS failure is due to the type of bearing that is employed. LN and Porsche use a ball bearing that applies the load on a single point of about 1.0mm. Our EPS IMS Cylindrical bearing spreads out the pressure point, applying the load on approximately 15mm. Regarding any doubts on whether oil lubrication is the problem, here is why it isn�t. The bearing is positioned at the bottom of the oil pan, so it is essentially submerged in oil at all times. Lubrication is not the problem here. If you have any questions, please feel free to reach out to us. Thanks, EPS Team epsauto.com

Quotes source post: 11676699

Hi 911sanantone , Thank you for your interest in our product. Our EPS IMS bearing differentiates from that of LN because it is based on a completely different technology. LN uses a ball bearing that applies the load on a pin point of about 1.0mm. Our EPS IMS bearing is cylindrical, meaning that it applies the load across the total length of the cylinder, approximately 15mm. The reason for the IMS failure is due to the type of bearing that is employed. The LN ball bearing is incapable of carrying the load applied on it even with proper lubrication. Also, since LN�s ball bearing is open caged, it fails with the same or greater frequency than the factory bearing. To give you a little reference on how the ball bearing is inferior to the cylindrical bearing, you can take a look at Porsche�s attempt to correct the IMS problem throughout the years. Porsche changed the ball bearing 3 different times. First, a single row of 47mm, then a double row of 47mm, and finally a single row of 62mm. All three bearings failed. Our EPS Patented Cylindrical bearing does not fail because the load is spaced out across the entire surface area of the cylinder. Hope this clarifies your doubts. If you have any questions, please feel free to reach out to us. Thanks, EPS Team epsauto.com

The Apples to Apples comparison for the EPS product would be with the RND cylindrical roller bearing. You may find their description rather dry. (pun?) It lacks the hyperbole and nonsense of EPS. The technical differences between a generic (EPS or EBay) cylindrical roller bearing and the RND will make some eyes glaze over with boredom. http://imsretrofit.com/roller-bearings/ and http://rndengines.com/roller-bearing-ims-retrofit-kit/ But to the geeks the differences are quite clear, significant and cost effective. I wish the RND bearing had been available when I did mine.

Just installed EPS Eternal Fix on my 199 boxster 986 woth 5 chain motor, all is well. Very easy install except maybe couple things to add to previous suggestions: -do not tighten supplied IMS bearing flange bolts to 13-15lbs torque, bolt will snap. Mine twisted off @12lb. Called EPS and they suggested 10lb/ft torque. I reused old bolts with thread locker @10lb/ft torque. I Tighetend center nut to 24lb/ft torque as it felt very tight to me (Not 30-35 as recomended in EPS instructions) -like said before somewhere, the bearing will stop where it needs to be, not the installation tool. I just whacked it until it wouldnt go anymore and then whacked it some more to make sure Very well built kit, and EPS picked up the phone and answered my questions. I installed their upgraded clutch kit btw, and new LUK flywheel from rockauto. With new bolts of course. So far 700miles and it hasnt blown up. my engine ate 10 quarts of DT40 and its right at the top bar per electric and dipstick meters. If anyone is interested here is a video of me doing ims install and oil feed mod, look through my videos. I am not pro youtooober, just thought i would share my findings. Not much out there about EPS Eternal Fix. my first post btw. You Tube You Tube ​​​

[Image-only post; no author-written text. Original image references:] https://rennlist.com/forums/graemlins/order.gif https://rennlist.com/forums/graemlins/icon501.gif

Quotes source post: 14619292

So what was he doing wrong? This is the way the IMS is installed using the LN tools.

Yeah, lol i did feel like i was whacking it a bit, but one has to make sure its in theere, right? Anyway im very happy with EPS. Very good value for the hard earned dollars.

Quotes source post: 14619366

Those are the instructions for the IMS Solution. You are installing a solid bushing into the IMS housing bore when doing this, not driving in a ball bearing, or roller bearing like other technologies. I invented the Faultless IMS tool to mechanically deliver IMS retrofit components without the necessity of a hammer.

So at 1:05 in the video, it looks to me like the back of the center bolt flange pretty much seals the back of the bearing from the inside of the IMS shaft. I see a hole in the center of the back but can't see if it lets oil into the bearing. I also wonder how much oil the IMS shaft holds and how often it gets refreshed? When I install an IMS bearing, I freeze the bearing and use a heat gun on the IMS shaft, then the bearing slides in without pounding.

Quotes source post: 14621436

Yes, but if you don't buy the faultless tools, your dual row retrofits are driven in similarly with the regular ims tools correct? It says to do so in your dual row instructions on your website. (Above, I posted the instructions from the solution just to make it more clear). http://imsretrofit.com/wp-content/up...arranty-2y.pdf I 100% agree, the faultless tools are the best way to go, but I just wanted to point out that the guy in the video was following instructions.

Only the classic dual row. The Single Row Pro requires the Faultless tool for delivery into the shaft, as it compresses the internal wire lock on the OD of the bearing as the unit is delivered. The Faultless tool can deliver all forms of IMS Retrofit, but is only REQUIRED for the Single Row Pro.

Quotes source post: 14621489

I am under the impression the oil enters between the bearing and the rear gap between the rear flange, After bearing is installed and when the outer flange nut is tightened, there should still be a gap on the inside of the IMShaft. I do think oil capacity is increased by atleast a quart or more, i have exactly 10quarts in it now and im right the maximum mark..

Quotes source post: 14621489

Okay, maybe a dumb question on my part, but I have to ask. Why would you heat the IMS shaft? Doesn't heat expand the metal, and the ID of the bearing is smaller from freezing? The freezing of bearings makes sense when you want the OD smaller than the opening you are putting it into (like the outside of the IMS bearing going into the intermediate shaft). I don't see the rationale in expanding the shaft and contracting the ID of the bearing. What am I missing?

Right, the shaft is a bit larger from heating, and the bearing a bit smaller from freezing.

Ooh, I get it. I was misunderstanding. Thanks.