16 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHM96 clutch/flywheel review
Reported or suspected cause
dampening springs in the flywheel giving out
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
When my failed, it was due to the dampening springs in the flywheel giving out.
Leading evidence: 'dampening springs in the flywheel giving out' (1 discussions report identifying this cause; no attributable repair resolution). Across 1 matching discussions, the most frequently mentioned possible cause is 'dampening springs in the flywheel giving out' (1 discussions; 1 report identifying it and 0 suggest it). The most frequently discussed action is 'Check ) so it was definitely due' (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 · Original poster
I mic'ed my clutch and it was around 7.8 to 8.1 mm (depending on where I checked) so it was definitely due for a change.
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
Keep in the back of your mind that the LN Retro will need to be replaced depending in its age.
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
Unless you can confirm its exact very recently replaced history.
Clean shiny surface so curious what acceptable looks like
Suggestion or failed attempt
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 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
It's a high friction area that sees a lot of heat so I'm not expecting a clean shiny surface so curious what acceptable looks like.
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 · Original poster
I measured the clutch disc thickness, and it seems to float between 7.8 and 8.1 mm (depending on where I measure it), I suppose its possible that the *only* thing the shop did was replace the bearing, but that seems....weird.
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 · Original poster
I don't have a lot in the way of maintenance records, so I had assumed (I *think* mistakenly) when the IMS was replaced with an LN retrofit, that they PO would have had them do the clutch and RMS, if not the flywheel.
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.
16 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: 20261026T130754Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
So I have the motor our of my 2000 carerra 4 for some maintenance, and though I would at least look at the clutch. I don't have a lot in the way of maintenance records, so I had assumed (I *think* mistakenly) when the IMS was replaced with an LN retrofit, that they PO would have had them do the clutch and RMS, if not the flywheel.
The bearing was put in in 2021 (@61k miles(, about 18k miles ago (now sitting right at 79k). Looking at the clutch, pressure plate, and flywheel..... I'm thinking they need to be replaced, but I'd appreciate a second set of eyes to let me know if they are as as bad as I think they are. It does look like the RMS is leaking given where the oil build up is... but it seems odd that it would have failed that fast *if* it had been replaced.
I measured the clutch disc thickness, and it seems to float between 7.8 and 8.1 mm (depending on where I measure it), I suppose its possible that the *only* thing the shop did was replace the bearing, but that seems....weird.
Given the attached pics, it looks like a new clutch, pressure plate, and flywheel (and RMS) are in the cards for me, but would love to hear others thoughts on it.
I don't really feel and grooves or other damage, but the heat discoloration has me mildly concerned, but I'm not an expert at clutch wear either. thanks!
I recently bought a 996 and am having the clutch done� this is what mine looked like at 37k miles. Appears the previous owner might have been riding the clutch a bit.
Re-machine the flywheel. Replace clutch, pressure plate, throw-out bearing, pilot bearing, and RMS. Inspect slave bearing for worn out end, if worn out, replace it too. Do replace the flywheel bolts (don't cheap out on that).
Looks like it has seen pretty much heat.
I'd replace the clutch plate, pressure plate, thow-out bearing and the flywheel. Dual mass flywheel does not neccessarily take well the re-surfacing.
Of course everybody does as pleases to their own car, but above is my recommendations.
The dual mass flywheel won�t like being machined. You should test the bounce back on the flywheel, if it�s sluggish then it�s clear that PO didn�t do the flywheel and given that the clutch has �meat� on it then I would bet that wasn�t done either. Are you positive that the IMS was actually done as that doesn�t look like it was recently disturbed but it may be that the weeping from RMS is making it look like that.
At this point I�ve pretty much accepted I need a flywheel
the ims bearing has records to support the claim, (and more importantly physical examination has the laser etched LN logo on it. Given the state of the rms and clutch� I�m guessing the PO paid for the bearing, but did not do the rms/clutch/flywheel. I don�t have an answer why someone would half *** that�. But I guess it is what it is.
I feel better that other eyes have looked at it and agree with my initial thoughts.
I’m aware. Right now it’s about 4 years old with 17k miles on it. While I’d like to go the ims solution route there are prerequisites for that I need to address first. (Cam deviation is within Porsche selection, but not for the solution, but I have the parts to address those now, but haven’t finished the install
Edit: "it" being the ims, not the car
Any photos out there of what expected wear on a flywheel should look like? It's a high friction area that sees a lot of heat so I'm not expecting a clean shiny surface so curious what acceptable looks like. I have about 43,600mi on my flywheel and clutch as of today and when the engine rebuild was done, everything looked good and went back in. This was about 13k miles ago and shifting is still going great.
FWIW I haven't seen a clutch come out of a 911 yet that "didn't " have hot spots all over it ...if it has any miles at all on it ...
If someone has a picture of a 911 clutch with no hot spot and miles on it I would LOVE to see it ...
Kind of my point, Skip!
When my failed, it was due to the dampening springs in the flywheel giving out. Seems like a more common failure than the surface being completely unusable and gone. At the end of the day, inspect and proceed accordingly!
I think the point here is its considered good mechanical practice to always change out a clutch whenever the tranny is out. Unless you can confirm its exact very recently replaced history.
Reasoning being, on most cars its more expensive for labor to get to the Clutch/Flywheel then the actual parts cost. That being said most cars flywheels aren't as expensive as the 996 and many can just get a flywheel resurfaced cheaply, not so for a 996. And the way 996 DMF fail is not like most other cars. If you're doing all the labor DIY, and its no big deal for you to rip out the drive-train again, than leave the old clutch there and gamble...
From non-porsche experience, I'd lean towards taking measurements. The 996 clutch is supposed to have ~ 10mm of thickness when new (according to what I just read), and should be replaced at 7.7mm (or lower). I mic'ed my clutch and it was around 7.8 to 8.1 mm (depending on where I checked) so it was definitely due for a change.
With the engine out for me, now is the time to do it, I just made some fauty assumptions and am mildly annoyed at dropping another 2k.
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.
