22 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHIMS
Leading reported evidence
Install ln retro (dual row)
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
We installed the LN Retro (dual row) on both our 996 and Boxster S ~10 years ago with no intention of replacing them due to the vehicles limited use of ~1-2K/year, regular service with high quality oil, etc.
Leading evidence: 'Install ln retro (dual row)' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Disconnect eternal statement' (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 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
The Solution- permanent fix that will never need to be replaced due to its plain bearing design.
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.
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
It may be durable as hell, but i dont know anybody that has tested it like the Retro has been tested across the PCA track community.
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
I think we should disconnect the eternal statement to the guarantee each manufacturer gives.
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
We installed the LN Retro (dual row) on both our 996 and Boxster S ~10 years ago with no intention of replacing them due to the vehicles limited use of ~1-2K/year, regular service with high quality oil, etc.
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.
22 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: 20261027T061840Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
How long can I go without replacing my L&N bearing? Soon after I got my 2001 996 C2 in 2018, I had a L&N upgrade dual row bearing installed. According to L&N it only warrantied for 6 years. I was trying to wait for my next clutch replacement. I'm already 2 years past warranty but it has ceramic dual bearings, right? Thoughts?
I have no idea why a ball bearing would be a time replacement, it is an operational time replacement. If you have a dual row, I'm going to say you are good for another 100,000 miles or if you want to play it safe, 50,000 miles. Sleep good my friend.
I concur operational time replacement is more logical. They do add a figure of 75,000 miles whichever comes first. I saw the 6 years and had a 20K meltdown my bad.
Next clutch replacement I'm going with the EPS (eternal parts solution "eternal fix") upgrade roller bearing. This way no cutting into the block (for oil line) like the L&N solution requires. My question is, why does the EPS roller bearing claim eternal fix, and the similar L&N roller bearing model claim the same 6-year 75,000 warranty as their ball bearing model.? Also, how can EPS claim "eternal" yet only offer a 5-year warranty?
I also have a 2001 dual row LN bearing that was done ~20,000 miles ago in 2017. After installing the UAOS Track and running +1 Qt my Indy, who has a 99 996 C4 in his collection of 9 pcars, sees the LMS concern as resolved.
Do not dismiss EPS, they also have a good solution. Which one is better, we have to count the failures.
I think we should disconnect the eternal statement to the guarantee each manufacturer gives. A mechanical engineer can tell us whether they will fail or not based on their design, forces, etc. My opinion is that the simple LN or EPS solution will not fail once they replace the faulty OEM IMS bearing. I was reading on a post that at 7k engine rpm, the bearing only turns at 3.5k rpm and these solutions are manufactured to withstand over 15k rpms... So at some point I think it becomes a marketing tool, the comparison between the simple version vs the eternal version. Ultimately I believe that even the cheaper LN or EPS solution will outlast other parts of the m96 engine.
Replacing the original IMSB with the Solution seemed like the best choice to me. A design that works like the oil pressure fed plain bearing on Mezger engines. It�s probably overkill for a dual row with a low failure rate. But I�ll never have to worry about it again.
The small notch needed for the oil line really doesn�t concern me.
The "damage" appears inconsequential, but the price is 2x as much as the retro fit kit of either company. Plus, installation which has to be more considering fabrication work.
All in 5-6K?
I'm about to do the IMS bearing replacement on my base 2003 C2 with 79k miles (just bought it). I'm all in on the EPS solution, I like the cylindrical bearings. Reading the website, I see "
includes an oil feed modification kit.
" How is the EPS oil mod different than the L&N?? Does EPS require the notch cut as well??
IMS BEARING UPGRADE KIT — European Parts Solution
As per their website:
Is the Pressurized Oil Feed Kit necessary?
No. The bearing is completely submerged in oil thus not requiring the Pressurized Oil Feed Mod. However, due to some misleading information of the internet, some installers feel that it's important to implement this modification.
I also got the simple version without the kit...
After watching the video, I still think the LN Solution is a better design. Second best is to get the LN Retro and replace it every 6-10 years which is what i have done since the LN Retro became available on the market years ago.
Quite frankly, i am agnostic as to who makes what product. All i care about is getting best product on my car. I dont like headaches nor problems. JMHO.
Add: because I track my car, I have my indy drop my engine and/or trans more frequently than the typical street only 996, so the LN Retro is an easy part to replace, which i why I never went with the Solution. However, one of these days I will do an elective mega rebuild and will have the Solution put on the engine and not worry about it for the next 25 years.
We installed the LN Retro (dual row) on both our 996 and Boxster S ~10 years ago with no intention of replacing them due to the vehicles limited use of ~1-2K/year, regular service with high quality oil, etc. Figuring the conservative recommended time replacement interval is out of concern for corrosion which I don't see as a concern for us. That being said I'll be replacing the chain guides on the 996 and will do another LN Upgrade then, since we will be in there. ~60K total miles and she just started to put significant amounts of plastic in her filter.
I chose against the Solution as I don't like the use of an adapter and cannister filter, partly because of the inconsistent quality of aftermarket filters.
Interestingly, a friend just had a partial failure of an LN Single Row Pro replacement after 11K miles and 8 years. The engine started to make metal, and it appeared that the cage had failed in the replacement bearing. The rolling elements appeared fine, but the race was worn. It was properly installed by an authorized installer and registered and just sent back to LN so we will see what they say. Replaced with the same. Our indy is still a fan of the IMS Upgrades, and thought my friend was just "unlucky". We'll see...
I still don't grasp this situation: Why spend $1,899 for the LN kit (including the spin on filter conversion... WTF?)
LN Engineering - 106-08.20 - IMS Solution Intermediate Shaft Bearing Upgrade Kit - Single Row
The EPS kit is only $679.
IMS BEARING UPGRADE KIT — European Parts Solution
They both provide oil flowing to the bearing. Why would I pay $1,220 more for the solution?
My indy does the LN kit, he's not familiar with the EPS bearing. With sales tax, he's quoting me $4,800 or so (clutch is pretty new).
Wow, amazing prices. I did mine with the EPS bearing (in Greece) for 1200 EUR tax included... It was a full day's work at a specialized Porsche shop, including engine out. 60eur per labour hour is too much but still too low compared to US standards. I don't want to imagine how much doctors charge in the US...
Go with the one your indy is familiar with. No reason to provide on the job training for them at your cost.
You have 2 IMSB choices from LN,
1. The Solution- permanent fix that will never need to be replaced due to its plain bearing design. So it costs more.
2. The Retro- not a permanent fix but a timed fix that will eventually need to be replaced again due to its ceramic bearing design. So it costs less than the Solution.
Both are excellent. Comes down to your budget and objectives.
I look at the EPS product as a competitor to the LN Retro since it will time out. It may be durable as hell, but i dont know anybody that has tested it like the Retro has been tested across the PCA track community. Its also the most popular IMSB. So I replaced mine with a new Retro as a happy customer.
Agree with this 100%
I look at the EPS product as a competitor to the LN Retro since it will time out. It may be durable as hell, but i dont know anybody that has tested it like the Retro has been tested across the PCA track community. Its also the most popular IMSB. So I replaced mine with a new Retro as a happy customer.[/QUOTE]
EPS has good penetration in Europe in which LN (unfortunately) is non existent. Probably has good access to Russia as well (before sanctions), which undoubtedly is the largest Porsche market worldwide... Me too, if I had the option I would seriously examine the LN solutions, but not for the cost of a kidney and a leg.
I hear you. Geography dictates availability and cost, and ultimately what you use. Plenty of parts in Europe i would love to get my hands on if I could.
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.
