45 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHNeed a new IMS poll
Leading reported evidence
Replace oil every 3k and keep an eye
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
Drive your car hard, change your oil every 3K and keep an eye on what comes out of your oil.
Leading evidence: 'Replace oil every 3k and keep an eye' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Replace oil every 3k and keep an eye' (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
I guaranty you that no one has figured out how to replace their IMS without splitting the case.
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
Your engine may have that combination of tolerances where everything will run happy forever...or you might have gotten that one with enough crank slop to doom your IMSB 3 years down the road.
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 · Original poster
I think this would also help resale values of those cars still running strong in original state.
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
Your engine may have that combination of tolerances where everything will run happy forever...or you might have gotten that one with enough crank slop to doom your IMSB 3 years down the road.
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.
45 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: 20261027T022239Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
And the purpose of this exercise would be what? The determination of the 8% # was for the purpose of the class action lawsuit, and only reflects the failures up to the point of the lawsuit. What would your guess be based on?
No, we don't need another...I'd bet the majority of 996 owners who've had IMSB failure aren't even Rennlist members. The 8% failure rate is inaccurate and is actually higher (they're still failing) in my opinion.
Drive your car hard, change your oil every 3K and keep an eye on what comes out of your oil.
Be proactive and get the bearing replaced with every clutch replacement if you can't afford the risk of blowing your motor.
To answer your question, the purpose would be to get a better understanding whether you can expect an ims failure later in the cars life or if it primarily shows up in the first 1-5 yrs, similiar to my Ford Excursion 6.0. If it didn't happen in the first couple of years, it wasn't happening.
I sense bitterness in your post, u must be one of the 8%?
It's a subject that has been beaten to death here for over a decade. The experts have made their recommendations and they should be considered.
It's not the only part that can fail in these motors that cause catastrophic damage...
Have you watched the Rennvision videos on YouTube? They are very educational.
The bottom line is, IMS Bearings are still failing today as we speak. I know of one a week ago! What does that tell you?
My personal opinion is people need to stop focusing on the IMSB. It's just one of many known issues with these engines. And when I say one of many, I'm talking about many issues as catastrophic as a failed IMSB.
I feel the focus needs to move from the IMSB towards highlighting all of the other issues so future buyers can know what they are getting into.
I am more concerned about year 2, 4, 6 and 8.
Your guess would have no validity. Nor would anyone else's guess. There are far too many variables involved and to base this on (questionable) data from an enthusiast forum may not be representative of the general population.
My suggestion would be to go through the original poll and categorize the data in a format that would help you analyze it in your own special way. Get back to us with your conclusions.
I talked to three different independent shop mechanics in connection with my hunt for a 996. They all said the same thing totally unprompted by me: other than the IMS, the engine on these cars is extremely reliable. I then read posts on this site and its like these cars are ready to blow up at any minute. Those same people will then tell you these cars won't ever appreciate in value because there are so many of them on the road, which sort of cuts against the notion that they are always blowing up. Anyway, someone is smoking some dope. Bob.
This I agree with, I've had a Porsche in my garage for over 30 yrs and personally think who gives a ff but there always seems to be so much discussion on the issue that if I were a 996 buyer in todays market I would like to have an educated (as best as possible) knowledge of whether my chances are diminished as time goes on. I think this would also help resale values of those cars still running strong in original state.
Anyway let's kill this thread as the super commentators on this board have deemed it unnecessary. Thnx Phil
Without some real engineering analysis via Porsche, it's impossible to say whether the rate it will reduce or increase over time (the total failures will *definitely* increase over time, of course). I wonder if there is any public engineering analysis as part of the class action settlement. If it was just bad design, there's no reason it wouldn't continue to fail when presented with the same condition. If it was an intermittent quality issue (like some bearings shipped from the manufacturer with debris in the bearing, or the assembly was inconsistent) there could be a capped number of failures. We'll not likely find out with root cause analysis from Porsche.
Nope, no bitterness! Maybe a little incredulity, as this subject has been beaten to death - just do a forum search. The reasons for IMSB (Not IMS...) failure are several, and none of them relate strictly to the age of the car. In other words, there are all kinds of factors that go into a failure - age being one, but nothing takes place in a vacuum. So the answer to your question isn't a simple one, and by extension there's no "cut off date" where you can wipe the sweat from your forehead and say "Phwew, I'm in the clear now"
The best I can recommend for you is to take your time and read as much as you can about the IMSB and all the other modes of engine failure. One thing you'll notice about all of them is that there's no specific time frame that they happen in, there are myriad factors that contribute to them, and they often seem to "come out of nowhere"...
To me the problem is there are too many threads like this. Too many people hear so much about these cars being crap and then forums perpetuate it. One big issue - not enough people talking about how much the ENJOY their car! When i purchased my car i did all the preventative maintenance it needed and had the IMS bearing done. I beat the hell out of my car and maintain the crap out of it. The days i drive it I don't let any of this stuff mess with my head. I may own it for 10,000 miles before something big blows up. Or it could be 100,000 miles before bore scoring gets me. One day every car engine is going to fail. But i am going to enjoy every minute with a smile until that day comes!
Hmmmm, interesting... Who did the aftermarket replacement, and which bearing did they use, and of course, did they "qualify" the car before installing the new bearing?
Can we at least agree to call it an IMSB? The IMS rarely fails, but it does. Calling the IMSB the IMS is confusing and inaccurate. I guaranty you that no one has figured out how to replace their IMS without splitting the case. #petpeeve
I've been trying to find a way to state this without sound like an *** - and failing - so I'll just write it out. It's not meant to sound critical.
Even if you found that number - precisely - it would be no more useful than the existing data for predicting IMSB failure for any specific vehicle. Knowing that 8.2215229 percent of 996's had bearing failures doesn't tell you whether your 996 - or the one you're interested in - is going to fail. The care and maintenance of each car is a huge factor. If we're mixing apples and Schnauzers by including both original and retrofit bearings, the qualifications of the shop (and the pre-qualification of the vehicle) also become significant factors. Finally, and most frustratingly, chance* is a HUGE factor. Your engine may have that combination of tolerances where everything will run happy forever...or you might have gotten that one with enough crank slop to doom your IMSB 3 years down the road.
Most of us at one time or another have charged this same windmill. My suspicion is that you will eventually realize that even if you do the work you've suggested, you won't be any closer to having an IMSB "rule" that applies to all 996's. Frankly, the crucial data point is already known: the number that will fail from IMSB issues is greater than zero, so it should be included in your maintenance schedule to the extent you believe it needs to be addressed.
*I recognize that tolerances aren't technically "chance," but they are variables over which the end user has zero control.
Yah I prefer driving my car to worrying about it anymore. Once, I considered long and hard about selling. Now I�ve doubled down and have both a 986 and 996. I get them up to operating temp and let �er rip too. Fatigue...... that is a spot on description.
It's a nonissue. Even if the unscientific poll discovered that the failure rate post-2008 was literally 0, the topic has been so tirelessly discussed and continues to be propagated by an endless procession of threads exactly like this, that someone would have to be out of their mind to either buy a 996 without a retrofit, or buy one without having it pre-qualified and then immediately replace it. It sounds like you have a really nice, and relatively low mileage C4S. You should really consider an ounce of prevention in this case, unless you plan on keeping the car forever and don't mind spending $15-20k to rebuild your engine if (but most likely when) the IMS bearing goes.
^^Who exactly is "BIG PORSCHE" ? Your post is ironic, because Porsche wanted nothing to do with the IMSB issue. The courts forced them to acknowledge it, and subsequently to re-mediate the fallout. Your declaration makes you sound/look ignorant... Or in the case that it's a tongue in cheek attempt to be funny, it isn't. There's certainly plenty of misinformation around the web without 1 more silly post.
BIG RUSSIA PUSHES BIG IMSB. CAUSES AMERICAN MENTAL BREAKDOWNS. NEXT ON CNBCNNFOX NEWS.
Big Porsche. Nobody knows, it's a secret. But they're out there, preying on 996 owners and future owners.
My declaration should sound ignorant, because it was a joke. Just like these threads that pop up at least once a week. At a certain point, these posts are redundant and quite literally beating a horse that's been long dead, decayed, and has since turned into fossil fuels that have probably already been pumped into another M96. While there's plenty of misinformation, there is plenty of true information if people would do some research rather than poll a bunch of forum goers who are exhausted from seeing the same posts about the same topic over and over.
Bill seemed to enjoy my post. Maybe it's because we share the same name..., or we're both tired of the same thing.
Can I choose between a single and a double row? Also, I want it to be thrown by Nolan Ryan, no exceptions.
Hear, hear...the CBA on these cars seems like a no-brainer to me at their current price point vs. what they cost new (and how good they feel even compared to current Porsches).
I suppose the exception is if you are someone who is at the ragged edge of what you can afford when buying a used 996 for $15 - 25k. In which case, you should buy something (even) more affordable; that is your actual problem.
^^^^^
This
It is perplexing to see these threads one after another.
Buy a car, join a forum about the car, then bash the car.
If people are consmed about their IMSB and another potential problems, sell your car and move on.
Let us who own 996s enjoy our cars. By now we all know about what could happen.
I 100% agree with you. People certainly underestimate the failure rate of the bearings, we have been seeing them more and more lately especially with the 2005+ being the majority of the failures.
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.
