42 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHNo IMS fix for you!
Leading reported evidence
Inspect leaks
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.
Leading evidence: 'Inspect leaks' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Check with my mechanic' (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
Replaced engine with rebuilt unit from Porsche per PCNA.
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
Guys, keep in mind that engines were replaced by Porsche for any number of reasons and not necessarily due to "catastrophic engine failure".
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
I just remember that it wasn't an issue for me because the engine in my 996 was replaced in 2007.
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
Replaced seal and powdered back of engine with baby powder and ran engine on hoist with transmission removed for 1 hour per PCNA.
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
6/2009: 2nd failure at 27k miles - 1st reman engine replaced with 2nd reman engine with the same description of "3.6L 05 996 CARR" - way out of warranty but previous owner was able to get PCNA to do a "one-time goodwill warranty".
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 · 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: 20261026T112012Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
I am "this close" to closing the deal on my first Porsche, a nice MY00 coupe. The car has slow oil leaks and I already picked the shop where the RMS and IMS retrofit will be done as soon as I get the keys.
Yesterday I made a few "cold calls" to Porsche dealers in the areas listed by CarFax as being where the car had been registered. I was able to learn quite a bit about the car's past this way. All was good until I found out that the motor had been replaced in late 2005. Of course the seller sees this as a bonus. To me it likely means: no IMS fix for you!
I am trying to get the engine code/number to see if the IMS bearing type can be determined that way. From what I have learned it seems that pulling the transmission and looking at the IMS bearing nut is the only way to know for sure whether this motor is a candidate for the LN Eng retrofit.
In my case the motor replacement is no bonus. Had I not happened to call the right dealer (1700 miles away) and reached a cooperative service adviser, I would not have found out about the engine swap until the call came from the local shop saying this motor can't get the LN Eng IMS fix. Quite an education I am getting. I know the bearing can be upgraded with a tear down... for that level of investment I think would make more sense to buy something other than a 996.
there is NO upgrade for the larger bearing offered, only OEM
I suggest calling Jake Raby and see if he gives you a warm fuzzy so you can continue. For me a new engine would be a plus, but i understand your position. Dont know if Jake can provide you the info or not, but worth a call... heck calls is what got you here
best of luck
Jake, I just tried to go to your website with the link you provided. Norton blocked it and gave me a warning that it is a malicious website. I have gone there numerous times in the past without problems. I just thought you might want to know that there is possibly a security problem with your website.
I would make sure you find out where the leaks on the car is coming from. My car's motor from 2000 is dry as a bone. Perhaps you should look for a car with a dry engine?
I'd consider the replacement engine a big plus. That engine should have the updated oil filler tube, air oil separator, clutch/pressure plate, throttle not to mention other accessories like starter/alternator, etc. many w/997 part numbers.
That said, if it's in the budget, the 02+ cars have numerous upgrades that make them a better car.
I must say that the car in question sounds, revs and drives as well or better than any MY99/00 996 I have driven. Maybe I'm drinking the Kool-Aid but I'd rather invest $3000 in a fresh RMS and IMS retrofit than not have the option with a MY05+ refurbed motor.
FYI: So far two of the four 996 I have seriously looked at have catastrophic IMS failures in their histories. If the claims I have read here are correct... there have only been 8 other m96 IMS failures worldwide
The newer bearing
is
bigger but is still greased and sealed like the apparently flawed original m96 IMS bearing
. To my knowledge there is only anecdotal evidence regarding IMS failures with any of the bearing types. I have personally been acquainted with two M96 engines that suffered total IMS failure.
I got a quote of a llittle less than $3000 for RMS and IMS retrofit when the motor was thought to be a MY00. I don't have a formal quote for a MY05 motor, but was told to expect to spend more than double for the equivalent work by the same mechanic. Wow.
I'm with you... I'd rather get the car with the 00 motor so I can do the upgrade. Sure a new motor in 05 is nice but wouldn't be so nice if in the end it became a huge paper weight in the driveway..
I've seen one 996 with a dry sump cover. All the others have had a thin layer of black wet oily dirt. Of course I prefer a bone dry engine. I have owned Japanese and european motorcyles...guess which dripped oil on my garage floor. I've heard seom experts say that they have seen Ducati's and Porsches that leak oil through pores in the castings.
I was under the impression that the bearing fix did not occur until 2006 which means that even a replacement engine from 2005 may be subject to failure; however, it's been a while since I read that article in Excellence and I can't remember if that's accurate. I just remember that it wasn't an issue for me because the engine in my 996 was replaced in 2007.
There are no issues.. Traffic has been crazy on the site with the release of the IMS Guardian.
I surf the site with no issues with any browser until I set the security sensitivities at maximum.
To the OP:
I'd be very happy with a replacement engine IF there were no leaks. If I had to bet I would put my money on the RMS being the issue now. That is of course if this engine is the updated engine with the larger IMS bearing.
Get the # of the engine block so you can find out what you are dealing with and go from there.
Good luck.
Ahmet, I just purchased an '02 with the engine replaced in 6/2009. Service records just describe the reman motor as "3.6L 05 996 CARR". How would one go about determining whether or not my MY02 has the newer 6305 single row bearing (MY06+) vs. the 2nd gen bearing and one that I could have the IMS retrofit done on?
I'm a newbie here but been lurking for awhile... my first P-car. 2002 996 C2 Cabriolet, seal gray, black interior, 32k miles, full service records, original engine replaced at 15k miles on 5/2005 and then replaced again at 27k on 6/2009 (both with dealer description of "3.6L 05 996 CARR" for the reman engine). Engine and bone dry and car runs strong. Loving it!
An engine replaced in 09 by Porsche would certainly have the updated bearing.
Guys, keep in mind that engines were replaced by Porsche for any number of reasons and not necessarily due to "catastrophic engine failure". It was Porsche's policy for some time to not open the motors (or transmissions) if there was any sign of internal work being required, perhaps even something as simple as a ticking lifter....
Hang on....did Porsche build 3.4 litre engines with the 2nd gen IMS bearing as well?
The 997 motors were strictly 3.6 and 3.8 litres remember. Presumably the OP car is still a 3.4.
I posted about this topic a few days ago. Mostly I got beat up for making a post containg the letters IMS, but other than that there appears to be little known about the new style bearing.
Okay, I had a 1999 that had the motor replaced in 2008 by my local Porsche dealer. Although it did have all of the updates applied it was still a 3.4 motor to make it compatible with my year of car. That meant the IMS was the same design offered in 3.4 motors. Unless the previous owner had the car rewired to support Variocam + for the newer motors then you probably still have a 3.4 Variocam motor with the upgradable IMS option. I think the easy way to check this is looking at the cylinder head area to see if Variocam or Variocam + is showing.
David
2002 996 C2 3.6L
5/2005: 1st failure at 15k miles - original 3.6L replaced with reman engine with the description of "3.6L 05 996 CARR" under original warranty
-- Service Record states: Oil leaking from engine bell housing area. Removed transmission and inspected for leaks. Found leak at Intermediate Shaft Housing Seal. Replaced seal and powdered back of engine with baby powder and ran engine on hoist with transmission removed for 1 hour per PCNA. Re-examined leak. Baby Powder shows signs of leakage at case seam at intermediate Shaft. Replaced engine with rebuilt unit from Porsche per PCNA. Test drove car. Rechecked for leaks. No further leaks found.
6/2009: 2nd failure at 27k miles - 1st reman engine replaced with 2nd reman engine with the same description of "3.6L 05 996 CARR" - way out of warranty but previous owner was able to get PCNA to do a "one-time goodwill warranty".
-- Service record states: Owner states there is a bad shatter coming from the engine, sounds like metal flying around in engine. Oil leaking. Had codes P0344 and P0346 phase sensor Banks 1 and 2. P0021 camshaft position with respect to crankshaft Bank 2. P0355 RPM input circuit intermittent. P0300, P0305, P0301, P0306 misfire codes. Chainshaft bearing has seized causing camshafts to jump timing on both banks. Oil has a significant amount of metal in it. Replaced engine with remanufactured unit. Transferred over A/C compressor, exhaust, coolant hoses, clutch and flywheel. Aligned vehicle. Test drove vehicle.
Car currently has 32k miles since the 2nd reman in 2009. Just more info, previous owner was meticulous about service. Records show every year at spring - in dealer for annual maintenance (oil change, etc.), every other year brake fluid flush. He didn't drive it much - approx 3-4k per year.
So my original question was: is there any definitive way to determine if this 2nd reman engine has the 2nd gen or 3rd gen IMS bearing? Would PCNA put a 997 3.6L (3rd gen IMS bearing) into MY02 but this being the 2nd replacement and as late as 2009?
Thanks. And yes, I'm a newb. But learning quickly.
Any engine built in or after MY06 will have the larger 6305 series bearing. I personally have a reman 99-01 996 3.4 built in 2009 and purchased in 2010 and it has the larger bearing.
The only question I have is Porsche went to a 3.4 crank with 3.6 main journal diameters in 2006 (for the Cayman). So does my 3.4 built in 2009 have this upgrade or is it like the earlier engines? I guess I'll just have to tear it apart to find out, but the 2010 Cayman S is scheduled first for its 4.0 upgrade, as we're actively working on upgrades for the 9A1 engines now :-)
So far it seems that the only way to know (conclusively) that your IMS bearing can be updated--without R&I and teardown--is to pull the transmission and measure the bearing center nut. From what I have learned, if you buy a 996 with a reman m96 you are likely not going to be a candidate for the $3000 LN Eng IMS bearing retrofit.
I'd be pleased to find out that I am wrong
. If you buy a later 996 or an early 996 with reman with the intention of updating the IMS bearing you and your mechanic might be unpleasantly surprised when dropping the transmission reveals the big bearing.
Without a visual inspection there are no guarantees what anyone has with an 05 model car or a reman engine.
The center IMS stud nut on the bearings that are replacable is 13mm, the non replaceable is 22mm. The difference is easy to note.
Just to be painfully clear... a visual inspection of the IMS bearing nut means dropping the transmission. Might as well do the RMS while you are in there. For the used 996 buyer this would result in a rather expensive PPI.
Imagine the disappointment if the nut measures 22mm.
The trans can be left in the car.. Just remove the bell house bolts, pop off a couple of items and slide the trans back 1.5". This allows a sneak peek via boroscope to the bearing flange and nut, behind the flywheel.. A trained eye can see it without the boroscope.
Broken "Big Bearing" from an 05
Broken "small bearing" from an earlier '05
As you can see here, with the flywheel still in place you can see the style of IMS bearing that you have... Note the snapped in half stud in the photo and the huge amount of oil around the failed area. had this driver been paying attention, this engine could have been saved. It gave WAY MORE advanced notice than most do.
Any sellers care to comment on whether they would allow their transmission to be "pulled back" this way during PPI? I will check with my mechanic to see what he would charge to inspect and identify the IMS bearing this way.
Thanks for the tip JR!
