Any one know WHEN the solution will be ..

Available ? It sounds great, what ever it is

It was 8 years for my Classic Tawny.

Currently available at Flat 6 Innovations where it was invented and fully developed. We have been installing them for several months now, just not advertising it. We are no longer carrying out retrofits for single row equipped cars using the original ball bearing retrofit kit, we now exclusively utilize the IMS Solution. Now that the New Year is here you'll see full disclosures about how it works and what it offers. Unfortunately it's time to sell them:-( Sign up for our newsletters for the first release information.. It's not being sold retail, only through major distributors to shops.

Quotes source post: 10111134

Is it as "simple" to install as the bearing retrofit solution? What about price comparing the two solutions?

launching Late January if it works out with my plater but it wont fit your car

It's the same install procedure as a standard retrofit bearing with two very simple additional steps. We are only selling it for professional install, through distributors and only to shops. Cost is certainly more because it is a much more difficult to produce unit and it has cost us a ton to develop it over the past few years. Rough cost at retail will be 1,500.00 not including install. Remember, this is a permanent replacement, it does not have to be proactively replaced at 50k miles as it does not utilize a ball bearing design. The constant simple mistakes made by DIY installers with the standard retrofit bearing has grown so old that we'd rather sell less units as to deal with the support related to DIY installs of the IMS Solution arrangement.

Looking forward to learning more about it.

We have plenty of solutions, whats your problem Some are available now some could take some time! They ALL involve you sending me money......make that lots of money

Jake, So are you saying that current LN bearings should be "proactively" replaced at 50k miles?I installed my LN bearing at 34k miles so should I be looking at proactively replacing that bearing at 84k miles?

This is the first I've heard of the 50K "proactive" replacement. Can you please provide more details?

Quotes source post: 10114292

This is widely known and has been on the LN webpage since the very beginning in regard to the single row bearing equipped engines.

Quotes source post: 10114298

Mr. Raby... not to be obtuse; could you please provide a link to your website regarding the above 50K mile replacement for the single rows....i don't seem to be able to locate it....thanks

Would my 2004 40th w/ x51 engine Anniversary Edition be single row?

Meares, even the Bentley manual admits that the IMSB is now considered a service item to be replaced at a recommended mileage interval. Thats why Im buying the $165 bearing and changing it with every clutch service. So the IMSB retrofit is gonna cost me @$165 plus my time. Where you been???? Miami, I think 02 and up are single row?

I cannot seem to find the info regarding the "Solution". Did I mis-understand the thread here?

The solution=not so top secret idea of replacing a roller bearing with an oil lubed bushing? Dedicated oil supply to bearing? (WAG)

[QUOTE=KrazyK;10117086]Meares, even the Bentley manual admits that the IMSB is now considered a service item to be replaced at a recommended mileage interval. Thats why Im buying the $165 bearing and changing it with every clutch service. So the IMSB retrofit is gonna cost me @$165 plus my time. Where you been???? on the air cooled side

Quotes source post: 10117002

Yes, all bearing from 2002 thru early 2005 were the original single row type.

Quotes source post: 10119325

what about 1999??

Quotes source post: 10119352

1999's are all dual row. On the 2000 and 2001 models some were single and some dual row.

My '99 was dual but if the engine was ever changed, it could be something else. I've replaced my dual row with a hybrid dual row, cost of bearing was $100. Then machined a spacer and a circlip to make it fit. Been in the car for only 2500km but the results so far are very promising.

Quotes source post: 10117093

Nothing has been released yet, but when you get your Panorama Magazine next week you'll see it... Then we'll open the site and share the videos. Till then...

This is for the single row engines I take?

Yes, single row only. The dual row retrofit bearings are so robust we are not going to produce a "solution" for them though we do have one already designed. The single row cars are what we are concerned with.

If this is being marketed as a "permanent replacement" and only sold for professional install (& cost $1500), does it come with a lifetime warranty?

Quotes source post: 10119759

The issue is defining the "lifetime" of an already used engine. I extend a lifetime warranty with the IMS Solution when it is part of one of my engine packages that we construct from scratch, but even then there are conditions. We are not big on over promising, especially when other failures can create collateral damage that could take out the IMS Solution, thus leading to a finger pointing exercise. We avoid those at all costs.

Imo000, can you post more info about the bearing you used? Part #, pics, etc. I am interested in just accepting the fact its a service item and refuse to pay $625 or $1500 when I can just replace the bearing with every clutch job. Thanks.

My 02 has 97k miles with the original single row bearing. It seems obvious to me that any roller bearing is a normal wear item..the question with any of these roller bearings is how long they will last. In my mind, the reasonable "solution" to this maintenance issue is a reasonably priced roller bearing which can be changed out during normal clutch service intervals. There is no reason why there is not a suitable replacement roller bearing available for under $100. If someone wants to spend $1500++ on the new "solution"..well thats a fine option for some folks. At the end of the day, I prefer a solution that I can install myself. I'm sure there are a lot of folks out there with the same mindset. If anyone has knowledge of a reasonably priced replacement for the single row bearing i'd love to hear about it. Kudos to the Flat 6 team for developing this new technology and for their persistence in addressing the problem. Can't wait to hear more about it when it is fully unveiled.

Quotes source post: 10119783

Don't want to sidetrack this thread any further. You can find the engine repair thread on the Canadian forum. It shows the replacement bearing and all the info for it. The thread is called "I dragged home one of these" that I started in July. If you have any questions just post it in that thread and I'll answer it. Interestingly enough, my buddy and I were contemplating and even drew out the design for the exact same setup as the Solution. At the end, it was my decision not to go with the friction bearing setup as it was simpler to use another ball bearing. When I saw the pictures last night, it was cool to see that, what one set of brains thought would be an ultimate design is thought by others too.

Got it, Thank you.

I can see a design flaw in the picture of the parts. But I am sure that all your testing has revealed it and it has changed on the production run.

Yeh, the cost.

Quotes source post: 10121566

No, he is serious. He is the one that came up with this same idea, when I was repairing my engine.

I already have the solid models drawn up for this, when Imre decided to just use the off the shelf bearing. his was a double row. I suspect that the fact that it requires running a lube line from the engine is why they won't sell to the diy crowd. That does have some merit as that would be considered an advanced skill, but not out of the realm of the advanced diy'er.

Then I guess some of us have been thinking of similar ideas. Only thing is, I dont see how there would be a large enough market for this to be cost effective. We'll see.

at 1500 each it is very cost effective.....

Seems with labor that would be about the cost of an extended warranty .....that would cover a bunch of stuff.

Thats not a design flaw.. It is a functional part of the design and it has proven priceless already during testing. This arrangement was developed the old fashioned way and not just on paper. Thats why it works.

What are you referring to as "Thats...."?

If it is sold directly to my indy shop, will they be able to install the Solution if they are familiar with installing the LN ceramic bearing? I'm guessing the Solution would require a completely different set of install tools than those they might already have for other LN bearings put in cars?

Quotes source post: 10123233

Yes, as 2/3 of the procedure is exactly the same as the standard retrofit. The remaining 1/3 just takes common sense to apply.

Interesting

After having the single-row retrofit installed, at significant cost, it's slightly unnerving to hear that 'so many people have installed them incorrectly and experienced failures... ' I thought that having the single row retrofit installed would give me relative peace of mind, but I suppose that was foolish. One has to wonder if the number of 'botched' install single-row retrofits approaches the percentage of 'natural' IMS failures. In fact, if the number of botched installs is so great that they've actually stopped selling the kit all together, it would hint that more people than we'd like to imagine have somehow managed to screw up the install and grenade their $20k motors. Would be nice to know the relative distribution of failures for (1) dealer installs (2) indy installs and (3) shade-tree backyard installs, simply as someone who bought the product and would like to make an educated decision as to what to do with it now that it's already on my car. I assume there is no way to spot a 'botched' install until the motor actually grenades, at which point no one is going to accept any liability whatsoever because nothing can be proven with regards to the install if everything is in pieces. Just my thoughts. Not trying to aggravate things. Just slightly unnerved by these revelations.

Always appropriate to blame the install.

Some details: Please don't make this more than what it is. There have not been "so many failures" from bad installs. The total amount of failures from the single bearings have been 5 out of around 7,000 at last count. Of those we know the following: -One was installed without a snap ring to retain it- it failed. -At least two were installed AFTER an OEM bearing had began to fail and contaminated the engine with debris. These failed because the bearings were destroyed by the debris.(those engines were not resurrected properly or should not have been retrofitted at all as they were already injured) -We have seen at least two others come to us after the installer did not tighten the retention nut correctly- I literally removed it with my fingers and video documented it. - NONE of the single row bearings that we have installed on site have failed and all are serialized since day one. No, you did what you could with what was released at the time. We did what we could by taking the time to develop a final solution that works and is proven. The sucky part is how we have had to protect it and the act that we couldn't even warn anyone that it was coming without compromising the patentability of the unit. For the past few months when someone called us about a single row IMSR they were transferred to me and I offered them the IMSR using the IMS SOlution, all were blown away and appreciative that we didn't sell them on current technology without warning them of future technology. I stopped carrying out standard IMSR jobs months ago on single row cars just because I didn't want pissed off customers that felt they paid 3500 bucks for yesterdays news. This has all been a well planned and exceptionally executed development in every way. READ THIS: **MY COMPANY** has stopped applying the standard IMSR using the ball bering, LN still makes the bearing that we designed and tested together and will continue to as a lower cost install for those not wanting the IMS Solution. We did this because the technology was born here and our engines are always outfitted with our technology and nothing else, thats just pride and application. People come here and ship their cars from all over NorthAmerica for a reason, and not because its a cheap solution to the problem. The way I see it, my efforts of creating the IMS Solution are wasted unless all my engines feature the technology. The total number of failures for all above is around 5-7 and thats it. Its nothing to worry about, or be alarmed about. BUT your bearing is rated for 50K miles and thats not the case with the IMS Solution arrangement- thats the difference. Not keeping the car for more than 50K miles? Don't worry about it. Most companies would be happy as hell if they sold 7,000 units all over the world to everyone from dealer techs, to experts, to Engineers, to complete dummies and ONLY had 5-7 failures. Here I lost my appetite for 3 days after we had the very first failure; even though it was later learned that the installer left the snap ring out (installer was a professional). One failure is too many. Period. Even though the engine was broken it was inconclusive what happened LN replaced the bearing lived up to their warranty, and I put the entire engine back together and shipped it to the owner. Done deal. Scenarios may vary, especially when an engine has 23 other documented modes of failure, the majority of which can be confused with IMSB trauma. Just my thoughts. Not trying to aggravate things. Just slightly unnerved by these revelations. In summary: The failure of the current IMSB retrofit bearings are not of concern at all and thats why you have not read stories online of such failures. The single row bearing is simply too small and the best way to create a final solution to the problem is to omit the ball bearing completely. Our VERY FIRST idea about solving the bearing failure issues was to use this plain bearing design, but it was taking too long to perfect (years) so we worked diligently behind closed doors to develop this. Love the car and want to keep it forever? If you haven't retrofitted it, then use the IMS Solution. If you have retrofitted it, ride out the 50K rating and replace it with the final solution. Like the car but don't want to keep it more than 50K? Just install the standard retrofit and save yourself 600 bucks or so, drive it 50K and live with having a ball bearing in the engine. In my opinion the only bad decision is for single row customers to not take some sort of action, and at least install an IMS Guardian, or apply the lowest cost bearing from Pelican. Something beats nothing all to hell. I'll counter with: "Always appropriate to blame the manufacturer".

Quotes source post: 10130616

Which leads me to wonder if Imo000 off the shelf bearing is what Pelican is selling. Anyone have any way to find out? Curious if Casper Labs/Pelican/Imo000 all are using the same bearing. I can't imagine there would be too many bearing manufacturers for that type of specific bearing, but I could be wrong.

This design was granted a patent?

Quotes source posts: 10130944, 10130953

Imo000's bearing is one that is available off the shelf. A small spacer was fitted and the snap ring needed to be thinner slightly to fit into the groove. The bearing could have just as easily have been ground down as well. Also note that the snap ring holding the bearing does nothing. The original design inherently holds the bearing in place. If there was a failure due to a snap ring not being there, their design must not be very good. If you look at the original design from Porsche, you would see that the snap ring would have been just to hold the assembly together until installed. Once installed, the bearing cannot migrate as it it held in place on one side by the intermediate shaft and on the other by the housing bolted into the case. This is frequently done when one manufacturer makes an assembly and ships it elsewhere to be installed. That's not what he said. He said the patentability would have been reduced if they let it out what they were doing. This could mean anything. Specifically worded vaguely to invoke confusion. I suspect that they had a lot of the original design in stock and needed to move it so they wouldn't be stuck with it. Specially if they stopped using the single row 'for months now'

well...what's the cost for the solution install...i've got the 3500 for the retrofit kit....now i've got to spend another grand? i'm going to put the kit on SOON...like in 2 wks

69gaugeman, seems like you have a lot of insight into this. May I ask if you are an engineer?(meaning to be a compliment). Also you indicated that you had already come up with the same design as the solution before in solidworks. Have you created any prototypes or tested it in any way outside of computer simulation? I don't expect you to actually answer this as I don't know what the implications of any patent liability would be. Curious as to what you meant by "flaw" for us simpletons. Feel free to pm me.

No PM's. Put your thoughts on the table.

Quotes source post: 10131252

Slippery slope = 12+ pages or IBTL, whichever occurs first.

This is gonna be good!

Incorrect. The single row bearings can barely stay on the shelf. You guys have my company confused with LN Engineering. We are the developers and installers of these types of technology, LN is the manufacturer and co-developer. The standard retrofit bearings are currently still being sold and that will not change, they will maintain their advantage of the lower cost alternative, since the retail price is 600+ less than the IMS Solution. When I said we are no longer selling the single row bearings that was from an installation standpoint, they will still be sold by LN and are still working fine. I originally wanted to develop the IMS Solution ONLY for my engines, generally I only care about my engine program. Ltusler knows a little about the IMS Solution, he is the owner of a Raby engine and has had his hands on the unit.

There does not seem to be much point to replacing a stock bearing with the LN bearing anymore if the "final solution" is $600 more and the suggested LN bearing life is 50k miles vs. forever. I don't think anyone here isn't looking long-term and saving $600 now only to have to fork over multiples of that 50,000 miles down the road seems foolish. (if one intended to replace the stock bearing to begin with, that is.). Saving $600 in this scenario seems penny-wise but pound-foolish, especially compared to the normal running costs already.

I'm satisfied with this answer, thanks! I'll keep my single-row retrofit on for 50k and then move on to the non-bearing solution that has been produced.

Quotes source post: 10130944

I have no idea what kind the Pelican kit has but, either way, hybrid or not, it's probably off the shelf unit (like what I used). From the pictures it looks like the Pelican kit always uses a single row but with a bigger spacer for the double row IMSs. What I used was a proper double row hybrid (ceramic *****) unit that is readily available. Ths spacer was not much thicker than a couple of flat washers stacked up. All the details, with pictures, are on the thread in the Canadian forum. I'm not going to hide anything. I think I even posted on the possibility of first making a friction bearing to go into the IMS. I'll have to check as it's been a few months since that happened.

Yes I am in the automotive parts manufacturing sector. Specifically for the last 6 years in a plant that makes transmission shafts that run in and have bushings. My isp was out last night so I was not able to post my response as well as my concern. Then while at dinner I was reading this thread on my phone and Flat 6 responded about the patent. Now that post has disappeared. Not before I saw it though. So before I post the response I had written, I do have a couple of questions. Is the design in the picture the same as the one in the patent application? I have never heard of a temporary patent number. Usually it is patent pending and if you are granted a patent, they then give you a number. Can someone tell me if patent law in the united states has changed recently?

Quotes source post: 10131115

PM sent. For the rest I will post my concerns soon.

Can a Porsche dealer install the Solution, Mr. Raby....or do i need to get the car to you?

Quotes source post: 10132417

I am sure your dealer could as could have mine. But, I chose to send my car to Jake directly and have his team do the install. Why not go right to the source and not risk a faulty install. Shipping costs from NC should not be exhorbitant as it wasnt for me from Florida. Plus, customer service and communications from Flat 6 has been nothing but 5 stars. People may not realize that Flat 6 also offers Porsche service for all of your repair needs. They are my indy of choice.

Quotes source post: 10132263

I have been educated. You can get a provisional patent for 12 months by just submitting an application. After 12 months it expires, though, and unless you have applied for a patent by then it ceases to protect intellectual property.

This will surely cause the price of a ceramic/hybrid or plain IMS bearing to fall? I think a plain replacement bearing is $165 now. Will the ceramics come down soon?

Quotes source post: 10132792

Imre's is ceramic. Well the ***** at least. No need for ceramic race as the ***** are the primary wear feature in the bearing. And his was around 100$ shipped

The LN ceramic bearing price went up in the last quarter of 2012. There are no talks of any prices dropping, at least at this level. I would not expect any price drops at all. The two technologies are not competing; one of them will have a completely different buyer with a different outlook for the future of their Porsche ownership. As I had stated, my original intent of this product was to apply it only to my engines. Thats the same intent that I had for the DT40 Joe Gibbs oil product.

Jake, so now your saying the "solution" will only be on cars you repair? Wouldnt there just be 3 choices for the customer now? replacement bearing @$165 LNE @$650 Solution @$1500+

No. I must be doing a poor job explaining myself here, so I apologize. Here is some clarification: When originally invented the IMS Solution was only intended to be applied to my engines. At that time that was no big deal, because our only competitor was Porsche; there were no other engine solutions and no one else was crazy enough to touch the internals of the M96. Back then, we didn't care about anything else, or shops doing the work, because no one else was doing anything. At that point the IMS bearing was thought impossible to be removed and if your IMS bearing even started to fail, the engine was toast. Remember, even 4 years ago most people did not think that an IMS retrofit could be carried out. For many years the M96 was considered disposable and not rebuildable, but LN and I were on this from day one. Lots has changed since then, to say the least. Now IMS Retrofits are standard procedure and when I instruct my M96 Engine Mechanical Classes to 35-50 technicians all over North America I generally only have 4-5 attendees that raise their hand and state that they have not carried out a retrofit procedure. Basically. I have my own engine program where we develop products to create those engines and our products are always used there first and foremost. The components trickle down from there and get into the rest of the industry, thats how we were carrying out IMS retrofits for more than a year before anyone else, because I developed the procedure and I built the extraction tool. At any rate, if your Indy sources parts from SSF Auto Parts they will have the ability to order the solution in summer 2013, as we are currently making the production run to fill the SSF order. SSF distributes parts to Porsche shops all across the USA and they currently stock the IMSR standard retrofit bearings. If you wanted an IMS Solution installed tomorrow, my facility is the only place you could achieve that, but you would have had to be on our schedule two months ago :-)

Thanks to 69gaugeman for explaining on what he deems as a potential flaw in the solution. With his permission, I'm quoting his explanation for all to see and discuss in a civilized manner(I hope). Please let's try to keep this on focus by addressing the design only and keep the mudslinging out. Jake, Based on this explanation, can you explain if there are any chances for oiling deficiencies to occur. If minimal and with the type of metal used, would this holdup to a "lifetime" of wear without any adverse affects? Would there be any chances of seeing metal to metal contact, especially at startup where there is minimal oil flow? And if so, what would be the long term effects? TIA

Oil supply is easy, there is a sandwich adapter already made that fits between the spin on adapter and engine with fittings to use an Accusump. So the same or similar device could have a single line that pumps oil from there to the bearing. It's only like 16 inches away, but the housing would have to have a groove machined in it for the line. So this is just an aluminum journal with oil flow? That makes no sense to me. Why not use a bearing, with oil flow, designed so that the shaft is sealed from filling with oil? I must be missing something. I guess I just have to wait until it is formally announced.

Quotes source post: 10130616

I believe this is Porsche's reaction to the IMS drama also after selling how many units of 996s, 997s and Boxsters. Around 170,000 units of 996s were sold worldwide. Even more 997.1s and how many Boxster units?

Extensive development has occurred with this product to include evaluations with extremely high start cycles that number over 5,000. We have subjected this unit to the worst possible scenarios, to include no oil pressure at start up, very low oil pressure and over temped oil. The distributors that are selling these units have very strict guidelines that the product must conform to which include metallurgy and our testing regimen was a big part of getting these products into the industry at this level. In short, I subjected the units to the worst possible conditions, and noted the results. Remember, these units go into my engines, which have historically set the bar for the rest of the industry. Perryinva, we have a design that fills the shaft with oil and another design that does not as the units were tested in both configurations. The kits are set up in the manner that performs the best, with the least compromise. As always, I won't try to "sell" or convince anyone of anything, either you believe in our creations and technology enough to buy them, or you don't. The choice is that of the buyer, just like it should be and we don't go overboard with promises and unreal expectations.

Quotes source post: 10142477

Interesting concept so we just have to have faith in your products just by your reputation alone and not expect any explanations on your product? I've merely asked some basic and fundamental questions that I hoped you'd clear up for the rest of us trying to understand "the solution".

No problem with your questions or explanations. The website will be open this week and will address all these points. I just don't have the time to sit here on the forum these days, sorry.

Quotes source post: 10142595

Thank you Jake. As you've done in the past with letting the cat out of the bag early, there are many that will naturally be curious and have questions before it's actually ready to be released. Looking forward to finding out more later.

Your welcome.

I understand that the solution was developed because the single row ceramic hybrid bearing supposedly has a lifespan of ~ 50,000 miles (they probably give this as a conservative number). Also, it seems the only reported LN bearing failures are on the single row bearings. However, it has been claimed that the belief is most of these failures were due to improper installation. I'm not super familiar with the install process, but have skimmed though the instructions in the past. Wouldn't the dual row bearings be prone to the same potential improper installations as the single row? If the installation was the problem, I would expect the number of single and dual row ceramic failures to be proportional to the amount of each bearing that were installed at places other than Flat 6.

Here we carry out a much more invasive inspection than anyone else ever would when retrofitting an engine. We do not retrofit every car that rolls in the door, but most shops do not have this mindset. They can always blame the part, but here that is not a possibility. To date none of the bearings (single or dual row) that we have installed have failed.

Quotes source post: 10143942

See the LN website for the details. The 50K rating is nothing new, the single row has had this rating since the beginning.

Quotes source post: 10143964

Jake, That was a spammer , randomly picking out a short phrase from one of the previous posts while attaching web hosting spam ads. Fortunately he's been axed now!

Quotes source post: 10143964

what's the rating for dual row retrofits (performed early 2010)?

Quotes source post: 10145888

ZERO FAILURES from any dual row bearing. Thats not just from what we have installed, thats global.

Quotes source post: 10145898

so just replace with the next clutch? even if that's not for another 100K miles? p.s. good work. I can't think of another time when a manufacturer just told out of warranty folks to pound sand... and it was an aftermarket company that basically did all of the leg work on a vital component.

Quotes source post: 10145898

So would then a double bearing be the solution? Why would Porsche go back to a single row design?

Quotes source post: 10146141

Probably to save a few $.

So glad to have my dual row upgrade from Flat 6. Hearing the zero failure rate is even more of a confidence builder.

So the web site is posted on page 87 of the new Pano. You can get all of your questions answered... if you have the password!?!?

Website isn't finished.. We have been trying to finish it all week, but the flooding has killed our connection, even though its fiber optic! The phone company came to repair it today and got stuck! Trying to have it finished by Friday.

We wait with bated breath. Damn phone co.

Quotes source post: 10149788

The wait is over: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCqiY...ature=youtu.be

Quotes source post: 10179220

Actually it's just beginning! After filling two installation slots this morning we are now up to May 2013 for backlog :-)

Quotes source post: 10179226

That actually caught my attention first

is their an oiling solution for the dual row as well... Ive been absent for awhile, so excuse my ignorance.

Thanks for the link. Just wondering though based on the lubrication moving upward if the IMS solution has been tested rigorously without the oil feed hooked up. I'm wondering at what point does wear occur if there is no oil supplied to it? What I'm getting at as for my curiosity is after how many cold starts/low oil pressure situations(track wise) can we expect to see wear from the IMS solution parts(doing an oil analysis for example). Just thinking out loud...

Quotes source post: 10179247

I have one those too. Not sure if its this thread or some other forum but they said they have it but aren't putting it for sale. Too few of the dual rows to bother... or something.

If the IMS Solution loses oil pressure, so does the rest of the engine. If this happens your least worry will be the IMS as you'll have a connecting rod through the block. Yes we have forced the Solution to fail and we know what happens and when. I shut the oil flow off at 7,200 RPM at WOT and cost myself 5k bucks in less than one minute. When it died I had a smile on my face. Cold starts have been well over 5,000 cycles under intense scrutiny. The engine idled for two solid weeks without being shut down with less than 10 psi OP and it still didn't fail. That was done in the middle of July when we had to hose the radiators down just to keep coolant temps less than 250, Oil temp was past 270. That was day and night and that was just one test. The IMS Solution has been employed on the track in customers cars already, this may be new to you here and to the industry in general, but not to our purchasers. If it didn't work I'd not be installing it in all my engines as standard equipment, if one fails that has my reputation on the line. Last time I checked I only have one chance and my reputation is only as good as the next discerning purchaser that I have to satisfy.

Quotes source post: 10179561

Thank you for the info. Have you come up with a qualified installer list by chance?

Quotes source post: 10179644

No, but one thing is for certain, not everyone with a tool box will be installing these. We must ensure the installer knows more than just how to hook up a diagnostic device to the engine to solve a problem.

Okay just read through this whole thread and thanks to a couple of members, I've filled in the blanks. This story unfolds like this to me... My shaft is flawed. Some make it 250+ some die early around 30k. Crap shoot tic tic boom. Hybrid bearing retrofit available. Change it and forget about it and sleep at night. Now I'v been hearing its a 50K service item to be done with your next clutch job? Even if you learned to drive a stick on your porshe, it doesn't take another 50k miles before you learn not to burn it up! So now your buying another clutch or at least inspecting it while your in there replacing the bearing? And full cost of another retrofit because they don't sell the bearing by itself and price isnt budging. I've never like and dont like the hybrid bearing solution because its open design. So been watching new solutions like Feelyx over on Pelican. (Great thread) Some try to shoot him down but he kept moving "Onward". With no sign of the hybrid bearings coming down in price, and with other solutions coming up, we get the Solution. Great technology love it. One eye brow in the air because of the timing. Oh well. So, if you send it to Cleveland GA, you must pay for new clutch in order to get the solution right? And now with the new patent, does that mean there will be no other alternatives as far as lube bearing goes?

If someone has a clutch that does not look worn and they insist that we keep it in place, then we will do so as long as it was a quality OEM unit. This is generally not a wise decision if the unit has more than 20K miles on it, because these cars are hard on clutches. Our goal is to intervene, apply the products and for the car/ engine to remain untouched for as long as possible afterward. Don't worry, if you don't want to ship your car to us you can still take advantage of the IMS Solution technology; but it will be several months from now before the first shops see them through the supply system.. We can only do so much here anyway and we only have one slot left before we are booked through June 2013 just for IMS Solution installs.

Jake...i'm about 2 weeks out from doing the retrofit kit....my ims has 109,000 miles on it....when do you think a porsche dealer in raleigh nc will be able to install it....time is of the essence, thank you for your response

It took Porsche dealers two years to install the classic retrofit. At this point unless a dealer buys the units from Our distributor they won't be able to source the units at all. If that ever happens with dealers I'd expect it to be at least mid 2014 before any dealer sees the IMS Solution for install.

will you sell it to them if i make them buy it, instead of the retrofit kit?

Please read the thread and you'll see how we have structured the sales of these units. My company, nor LN Engineering are selling these units directly. IMS Solution LLC is selling all units to a single distributor of automotive parts. All we have done is develop the units and because of that I have formed an exclusive installation agreement with IMS Solution LLC to have the technology exclusively for my engines and retrofits. We can install one for you, but May is my earliest slot that's available.

i know...sorry...just as i clicked "post" i remembered that.....i should have scheduled it when i first chatted with you...it was march for the first available, then...i'll just do the kit for 50,000 and then get you to do the solution....

That works.. Lots of people make that choice and that's fine :-)

maybe i should call with this question....if so, i will...should i do your break in oil 100 miles JUST before i take it to the dealer for the install and then start the DT40 OR do the kit and fill it back up with break in oil for 100 miles and then change over to the DT40...thx

I'd run the break in oil as a flush before having the bearing done. This will help flush any debris from the engine before the new IMSB is installed. Debris is a huge enemy. After the IMSB is retrofitted fill with DT40 and drive.

10-4 THANK YOU!!!! i guess i get the break in oil from you...just call and y'all will deliver it...along with the DT40....only 100 miles on the flush/break in oil, right? sounds good...it's 70 miles to the dealer...perfect

No need to buy it from us. You can purchase the oil from Summit Racing along with the BR break in oil. All we did was develop it and we use it in our engines, don't really even want to sell it.

jeez...hate to ask this....ANYTHING at all from Lucas Oils i can use?....thx

funny...summit price by the case is 10.99 ea and if you buy it by the quart it's 10.95...

Quotes source post: 10192474

I have zero experience with Lucas other than using it to quieten a rod knock in my 1949 Ford tractor.. It didn't work. I only use what we develop, so sorry, I cannot comment on anything else with any first hand information. If I did, I'd just be like every other "Parrot" out here in the cyber world recommending things that they have zero idea about.

do i use the 15w50 break in or the 5W30 break in oil....just noticed there were 2 diff. weights...sorry for so many questions...THANK YOU