37 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHMy turn IMS pic
Leading reported evidence
Replace without
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.
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
Good to know that a filter can be changed without changing the oil.
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 dawns on my mind now that all high-end automobiles where the stakes for potential catastrophic failure, that could lead to complete engine or gearbox failure, should include such a device as a feedback system much the same way they do by providing idiot lights that tell operators to check the engine for less critical parts like failing O2 sensors, and or to change oil or warn of low oil.
Leading evidence: 'Replace without' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Check engine' (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
but you ran the vehicle another 2500 miles before doing so...
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 dawns on my mind now that all high-end automobiles where the stakes for potential catastrophic failure, that could lead to complete engine or gearbox failure, should include such a device as a feedback system much the same way they do by providing idiot lights that tell operators to check the engine for less critical parts like failing O2 sensors, and or to change oil or warn of low oil.
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
Right down the pipe of prevailing wisdom: Check for glitter in your oil filter.
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.
These are separate views of the same evidence. Frequency alone does not establish a fix, and these counts must not be added together.
Check engine
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
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 dawns on my mind now that all high-end automobiles where the stakes for potential catastrophic failure, that could lead to complete engine or gearbox failure, should include such a device as a feedback system much the same way they do by providing idiot lights that tell operators to check the engine for less critical parts like failing O2 sensors, and or to change oil or warn of low oil.
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.
37 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.
3 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.
Just a gratuitous pic of my IMS bearing caught in time. Pulled the seal and let it drain. Right down the pipe of prevailing wisdom: Check for glitter in your oil filter. It will also be magnetic. Read it might be bits chewed up by the oil pump. But glad (?) to know it's metal chewed up inside the bearing before it gets out. You can just feel the runout on the bearing. Engine sounded fine and regular. Did the LNE fix. No editorials, just geeking out. Might take the bearing apart to look at the pitting. 2001 3.4 65K.
Mostly track the car now. Oil changes around 2500 miles or 3 track days/weekends. I was using a 50% blend of 15-50 and 0-40. Mech recs all 15/50. Used to live in Boston for 3 yrs so it would sit all winter w/ weekly warmups. Probably didn't help. Oil change prior to the last one, noticed a touch of glitter in the filter but thought it might be "normal". 2500 is pretty short for a street car, but one can just change the filter and check.
What year is the car? What is the milage? Good to know that a filter can be changed without changing the oil. Never thought of that and filters are cheap enough. Has the plastic been removed on the other side of the bearing? If that metal came from the bearing and the plastic is still in place, then oil must get to the *****. That fact would contradict all logic on the design of the bearing. Isn't it a sealed unit?
"
Oil change prior to the last one, noticed a touch of glitter in the filter but thought it might be "normal".
What could make you think that 'could be normal?
Did the fact that you discovered the first white traces make you pull the bearing for this photo? but you ran the vehicle another 2500 miles before doing so...
Sorry I only just noticed he end of your posting.. 2001 3.4 65K. That should be a single row bearing then.
Supposed to pick up small bits prior to disaster.
Also will pick up minute metal from engine wear,so they reccomend 3-5K
Oil changes or you will get possible false alarm.
Down South,
2001 was a bridge year. Had to order both bearings from LNE. It ended up being the single row.
HurdiGurdi,
It IS a sealed bearing but sealed bearings are not really sealed. I won't argue w/ the noticing a very small amount of glitter on the prior oil change and not opening it up. Won't make that mistake again, but apparently it'll last 2500 miles w/ 1000 miles of that being on the track. I suspect I didn't have much time left, so I'm feeling quite lucky. As it was, I had a sinking feeling looking at glitter. Feel for those who had to listen to the marbles sound and lost an engine.
On good outcome,
Check the oil often. My mech and I were musing about the 15K service on oil. Not that oil can't go that long (I wouldn't do it), but doing it at 2500 intervals forces a frequent check. One might say tracking the car has helped me save it, ironically. A magnetic plug is a must.
Uh, I think that's a double row bearing. It's got a snap ring on it (no snap ring on the single row) and unless the picture is distorted, it looks too wide to be a single row bearing.
Did the "while your in there" thing and popped for a light weight flywheel and clutch. Yes, it'll be nice on the track when I go next, and their is a subtle accel diff. Risk/reward calculus said do it, but hope not to be pushing my luck. But that's another well worn thread.
99's all have the dual row bearings. 2000 and 2001 some had single row and some had dual row. My 2001 happened to have the dual row when I got the retrofit done. Your pic does look like a dual row but if you say it was single than maybe the angle of the pic is playing tricks on us. Either way great to hear that you caught it and always nice to have a good outcome. The retrofit is cheap insurance especially if you are getting a clutch anyway.
Mechanic at the Porsche dealer that did the PPI on my C4S told me that although he had not yet seen an IMSB failure in his 17 years as a Porsche mechanic, he was aware of the issue. One thought he had was that cars that are not
driven
to full operating temperature have more problems because of moisture related issues. He did to tell me that no one really knows why these bearing fail but that the failure rate is far less than internet discussions suggest.
That said, I have finally made up my mind and my local dealer is ordering the LNE IMSB and I will replace it when they do the clutch. Decision finally made.
Thanks for sharing your experience of a good outcome.
>> I hope you got the flywheel balanced...
OK, do you mean as part of the crank, or as an individual unit. You can see where they balanced as a unit w/ drill outs. It's an AASCO unit if that helps to explain what you mean. I have read about the cracked cranks from LWFW's in web searches, but my mech has 30 or so in the field and track w/ good reliability so far.
>Was there noticeable wobble in the shaft and did all the bearings look as bad as this one? How was the >cage? Thanks for pics btw.
Yes there was some wobble. Maybe around 50 mils at the tip of the bolt. The pic was the worst ball, but they all looked bad. Cage was fine.
Yes.
On another note:
We saved this one this week. Zero IMS failure symptoms, no noise, no oil leak- Pulled the flange as standard procedure and found this. This was a dual row also, if it was a single row it never would have gone this far without grenading.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OkYXpB7D52o
Jake....Or how many miles were on the clock when you checked this one out? Also were there any fine metal found in the filter? Also why were you checking it in the first place? There has to be a better reason reason the 'Just standerd procedure'. Thanks
Ok, I understand that it happens, but what about Oil analysis? I change the oil now at 5000 miles, 0-40 Mobil One. I have Blackstone do an oil analysis, nothing shows as yet at 43,000 miles. Do you think that this procedure will do at least as good a job as the Guardian addition? After all a Mass Spectrometer will show minor levels of wear from races , at a level impossible to see by visual inspection or a device meant to attract and warn of excessive wear. I am convinced it takes at least five thousand to ten thousand miles for the bearing to go from showing minor wear and the oil analysis showing excessive levels of wear to the failure point. I know that probably isn't documented and maybe changes in each circumstance but i still think Oil Analysis is way better than anything else. What say?
What's the point in avoiding the Guardian as a primary level feedback (early warning) system? Years ago I used to work on reciprocating and jet aircraft engines, and as I recall, every reciprocating and jet aircraft engine has a first stage warning device like The Guardian to warn about possible ferrous metal detections in the oil. Heck, some aircraft have one in gearbox as well. Oil analysis was a secondary process conducted at scheduled periods of maintenance or when metals detections occurred in a first stage warning and does not give more immediate warning of an eminent critical part failure.
In my opinion The Guardian is just a plain common sense good idea regardless of whether the concern is the IMSB. It dawns on my mind now that all high-end automobiles where the stakes for potential catastrophic failure, that could lead to complete engine or gearbox failure, should include such a device as a feedback system much the same way they do by providing idiot lights that tell operators to check the engine for less critical parts like failing O2 sensors, and or to change oil or warn of low oil.
Again... just my opinion.
