42 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHRMS........What to do about it
Reported or suspected cause
cause of the leak
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
But it still leaks, so I set up a new appointment this week and was told they replaced the RMS last time as it was the cause of the leak.
Leading evidence: 'cause of the leak' (1 discussions report identifying this cause; no attributable repair resolution). Across 1 matching discussions, the most frequently mentioned possible cause is 'cause of the leak' (1 discussions; 1 report identifying it and 0 suggest it). The most frequently discussed action is 'Check almost every day' (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 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
In the original thread someone said the problem was using a hammer to insert the seal into the bore.
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 seal is a bit recessed as that is how it was installed back then.
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 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.
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.
42 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 · 1 excluded by outcome qualification · 0 adjusted by outcome qualification.
2 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.
Outcome without a verified action link
I tried copying the picture, but that didn't work and I tried pasting the link after my signature, and that didn't work either.
Yes folks.....it's yet another one of those RMS threads.
But this one has a different angle.
You've all read and heard way too much about this dreaded RMS nightmare
and many of you will have already had to endure it. Some of you have
endured it several times over.
RMS = Rear Main Seal.
Porsche AG call it the "Crankshaft Seal - Flywheel side".
The RMS can fail in your 996 C2/C4 or 986 at any time. Your car could
be barely weeks old or it could be an early 1997 model. It doesn't
matter. There are even reports of delivery mileage cars dripping oil
in the dealer showroom! The dreaded RMS failure now talked about on a
daily basis on this board or another, can exhibit itself for no
apparent reason. You may track your car or it may be a garage queen;
it could be your daily driver or just a weekender. It doesn't matter.
Why? Because none of these factors take into account a manufacturing
fault that's persisted since the first Boxter rolled out of Stuttgart.
And that's exactly what this RMS problem is: A Manufacturing flaw.
But Porsche AG won't admit to this fact. Furthermore, if your car is
out of warranty then they will often leave you with the legacy of their
incompetence by asking "YOU" to pay the hefty bill to replace the
engine seal.......and it typically takes 8 to 10 hours to perform the
repair!
If that sounds frightening, consider that it might happen again. And
again. And again. And again. Yes it's happened to my 996 5 times and I
am still counting! But that's not all, how do you feel about having to
purchase a new engine for one of these babies? Ouch! I hear you say.
The worst part about this whole fiasco is that we, the customers just
take it like a piece of cake. We bitch and moan but still go ahead and
pay upwards of $100,000 for one of these tainted automobiles. Gorgeous,
fast, stunning, jaw dropping and as exciting as they are, it is our
pockets that take the hit in the end. Isn't it about time we all
united to get something done about it?
I am asking all fellow 996 and 986 owners to support a cause to get
Porsche AG to acknowledge this fault and do something about it. All
you have to do is display the "Porsche owners RMS Club" in your forum
postings. A good place for it is in your signature. By displaying this
image, it symbolizes your support to bring to the attention of Porsche
AG that as a 996 and/or 986 owner (or prospective owner), you are greatly
dissatisfied with the marque's ongoing RMS problem and that you are
formerly demanding an official statement from them as to how they intend
to compensate and/or provide warranty for past and present 996 and 986
owners, both now and in the future.
THIS IS YOUR CHANCE TO SAY AND DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. I CANNOT GUARANTEE
IT WILL GET US ANYWHERE BUT WE HAVE NOTHING TO LOOSE.
Please feel free to use the image as you wish, either here or on any
other Forum board or whatever media you choose. All I ask is that you do
not modify it in any way.
Link to the image at:
http://forums.rennlist.com/upload/rmsclubfailed.jpg
Don't just wait for it to happen to you. Do something about it NOW!
Your could be the next RMS plagued customer!
Many thanks for your valued support.
I am all for the cause and due to my recent RMS problem will be joining in. However, I have one request...could we resize the image so that it is not quite so obtrusive to the posting? I know the purpose is to bring attention but a slightly less lenghty vertical image (maybe more horizontal?) would be a little more considerate of others. Especially on other forums who don't quite understand the purpose behind it the signature.
Plus it would make a nice Avatar.
OK, hows this one. Sized good enough for an avatar.
URL for it is here:
http://forums.rennlist.com/upload/rmsclubfailed2.jpg
Same deal folks, use either image.
Yeah thats this week. But what about next week
Thanks Jeff. And for those that don't know it, the RMS is the dark outer circle with little speckled circles all the way around it.
The bottom pic is the Intermediate Seal (IMS).
Jeff a question for you, the crankshaft in that pic above seems to sit
a lot more proud within the bearing than it does in the pic of my avatar.
If you look closely (BTW: this was one of your pics too
) you will see that
the crankshaft is quite deep within the whole. Any ideas?
That very is funny.
That is a 2000 3.2 Boxster motor owned by Chris Murray. It came out of a car that was in a wreck, with 1,500 miles. Chris bought the wreck and made a track car out of it. It has a 3.4 996 motor now. I bought his 3 spoke steering wheel a few years ago. Then I saw him last week at a Porsche swap meet and he still had the original motor.
It has the "new" style seal that came out over 4 years ago. You can tell by the number of dimples on the back of the seal. The seal is a bit recessed as that is how it was installed back then. Now with the new tool the seal is pushed into the bore a bit deeper.
In the original thread someone said the problem was using a hammer to insert the seal into the bore. You cannot install the seal with a hammer so who knows where this misinformation comes from.
A tool came out in 1997 to push the seal into position. It was revised some time ago to push it in deeper. It is attached to the end of the crank after the replacement seal has been placed on the crank. You tighten the bolt on the end of the tool and then it pushes the seal into the bore. No hammer needed.
The old is on the left.
You know, this whole thing is a crying shame. I'm really annoyed with Porsche. They seem to be well on their way to destroying the reputation of one of the world's great automotive marques.
I feel bad for those of you experiencing the RMS problem (and the countless other 996 faults) and I really feel for those of you who have not yet had the RMS problem but are worried about getting it. That's got to be an awful feeling. Me, I've found a nice '99 Carrera that I don't dare buy. So I sit here frustrated. This really burns me.
You guys! YOU GUYS!....
Cheers, I mean really. I appreciate it.
Over time, if we get enough support I will take this to the Porsche mags. In the meantime, I am going to go ahead with the RMS Club web page. I might need some input and ideas but stay tuned.
Cheer,
I'm in Scouser, we appreciate your efforts
But you should make a very similar looking one but for owners who haven't had an RMS leak... yet. Saying something like "Porsche, solve the RMS issue of your engines!" or other. This affects them as well since they may not only get a leak, but also affetcts them when they try to sell their 996 even if it didn't get one.
Ok, I'm a computer idiot. I don't understand how I get the picture in my signature. I tried copying the picture, but that didn't work and I tried pasting the link after my signature, and that didn't work either.
What do I so? I certainly qualify as a member of the club and would like to display my membership proudly!
In your signature line add the following, but replace the { and } with [ and ]
{IMG}
http://forums.rennlist.com/upload/rmsclubfailed2.jpg
{/IMG}
and you'll get this:
I'm in (I hope. I followed Poursha's instructions)
Let us know, Scouser if you create an image for those of us whose RMS hasn't failed yet. I find myself checking almost every day. Scary isn't it with only 2050 miles?
I hear you guys....
Here's one for prospective 996 owners. Again thanks for the great support guys.
Link to it at:
http://forums.rennlist.com/upload/rmsclubfailed5.jpg
I guess I was in the club and did't know it. I was told I had a valve cover leak last Feb. The dealer fixed it under warenty. But it still leaks, so I set up a new appointment this week and was told they replaced the RMS last time as it was the cause of the leak. That was at 4000K mi. now at 9000K. Looks like I may be on the endless seal replacement train as well.
The rear seal looks pretty standard as seals go. It also appears to be a non vinton type seal. I havent had one in my hand. If some one will send me one I would love to try and match it up to a more substantial seal. Knock on wood my 01 S has 32K and no tell tail signs.
Scouser,
I'm in.
I had the engine replaced at 24K miles. Now have almost 30K miles. No leaks since engine replacement. Keeping my fingers crossed as I only have 10 month of warranty left.
Scouser - how about a version for those of us who have a car that hasn't failed yet, but we are very concerned with the problem. Resale value to upgrade???
Congratulations Scouser, you made it over the hump......
Now with critical mass you and all who join you will have a better chance of success.
I remember your original posts & the responses; I personally thank you for sticking with it.
Best of it, mate...........
Thanks Torags. Need a lot more support yet though. Trying to get the other pcar forums to join in too. If I get 100 supporters I will go to the mags myself. As I said before there is no guarantee this will get us anywhere but The Lord loves a tryer
Here's one for you guys that haven't had the RMS problem but are either worried that it might inflict your car or you would like to support our cause anyway. Much obliged guys. Seriously.
The link:
http://forums.rennlist.com/upload/rmsclubfailed7.jpg
I'm in. Sort of reminds me of the song Alice's Restaurant...
"You know, if one person, just one person does it they may think he's really sick and they won't take him. And if two people, two people do it, in harmony, they may think they're both ******* and they won't take either of them. And three people do it, three, can you imagine, three people walking in singin a bar of Alice's Restaurant and walking out. They may think it's an organization. And can you, can you imagine fifty people a day,I said fifty people a day walking in singin a bar of Alice's Restaurant and walking out. And friends they may thinks it's a movement.
And that's what it is , the Alice's Restaurant Anti-Massacre Movement, and
all you got to do to join is sing it the next time it come's around on the
guitar."
Thanks Scouser (kid). You've got a movement going!
Too funny. But no pain no gain.
The one thing I can tell ya is "I AINT NO ******!"
...walks off singin' Alice's Restaurant......hmmm......yeah I can dig it
This has been explained umpteen times but .....
The leak is typically only a very small drip on the garage floor. Maybe once per week or less.
Sometimes there is no drip but only oil seepage.
The leak can be seen at the junction of the gearbox bell housing where it joins the engine.
The leak is "dead centre" so if it isn't dead centre, it is a different problem.
Jack the rear of the car up. looking at it from the back underneath the car, check for oil seepage at the back
of the engine (that's towards the front of the car) where it meets the gearbox. If you see
oil at that junction and it is dead centre then sadly you have the RMS syndrome. I sincerely hope you don't.
Oh and BTW, it might not be the RMS. It could be the IMS (Intermediate shaft seal) or loose engine block bolts. I put all these into the same category though.
i don't know anything more about this issue than what i've just read here. if this is a common problem, why isn't there some sort of class action being organized?
i don't think i have this problem... i hope!
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.
