LN bearing life

So here is a question. I swapped out my IMS for an LN bearing at 32,000 miles 2.5 years ago car is now going on 56,000 and heading to major service soon at 60,000 miles along with my clutch, AOS and water pump. So how long will the LN bearing last before it is an issue or need replacement?

Good question, I am interested also. I just had my LN installed a few months ago.

I think the conventional wisdom is now that even the LN retrofit is a wear item. I'm sure an expert will chime in, but I'd bet they'll say every 50,000 miles or some number like that. I've had mine installed for over three years. For me, that has not added up to a lot of miles. Since the LN bearing is lubricated by engine oil, I just add it to the list of reasons to change the oil often. If I were keeping the car, I'd probably have a look in a couple of years or whenever the next excuse to drop the engine pops up.

LN recommends changing out its bearing every 40k(?) miles or so. The exact mileage is on their website in their literature, however, it is clear that they consider it a "maintenance" item requiring replacement. It's not a secret hidden or buried somewhere or something that people might have different opinions on. It was expressly not designed to last the lifetime of the engine. -Eric Edit: I went to their website and found the quote: "It may be advisable to consider the IMS a service item, like a timing belt in many modern cars. Seeing that we started to see more MY05 engines with IMS failures in late 2009 as well as failures in MY06 (with revised 3rd gen bearing) in late 2010, that may suggest that bearing replacement (or inspection at bare minimum) should be considered as part of the normal maintenance every 4-5 years or 50-60k miles, maybe even sooner with the case of the single row bearing." http://www.lnengineering.com/ims.html

I think that's a good way to look at it - a regular maintenance item. Even if you use ceramic in the bearing as LN Engineering does, it's still prone to wear. Ceramic is a much harder material than metal, but it still wears. I'm sure that the guys at LN Engineering have studied the tribological performance of their ceramic bearing compared to metal bearings, but we'll have even more information as more of these bearings are put to use in M96 engines.

40,000 miles? ****, I though being ceramic and oil lubricated would last longer than that.

I bought the ceramic triple row bearing upgrade. Those bearings are going to have to last. Period.

I used to have some neat facts... I am going from memory. But I heard, they have bearings out there with over 100K on them Mine has 45 K on it The part I cant remember is the life of a ceramic bearing vs the type that was in the car. the life is I think 7X longer.... I THINK.. you can do research on it Im sure

Quotes source post: 9852064

I agree with that, granted I have a new clutch as of this year and the LN dual row bearings. I will hope they last till the next time I need a clutch and get it done again at the same time. LN did say even with their bearings...nothing is bulletproof....but I do like the piece of mind having it installed.

The bearing design is te root of the issue.. That's why we have developed the IMS Solution and I am writing this message from the passenger seat of a Porsche equipped with it that's been driven over 5,000 miles in one week. The single row bearings (01-05) are simply too small to carry the loads, the ceramic bearing makes up for a lot of the deficiencies but it's not a be all end all. The IMS Solution is a once and for all bearing retrofit that applies a design change. If it didn't work we wouldn't have driven from Georgia to Edmonton Canada flawlessly. This is the final test, but it's more of a succes tour than a test since the development has been complete for months now. The 40k lifespan is conservative, many bearings have way more than that on them already. Charles and I don't like to overstate and under deliver, quite the opposite actually. Look for the solution to debut for install at Flat 6 early in 2013, kits will be available in 2014.

As an easily accessible, replaceable part (at least up through 2004/5) -- I think the IMS just isn't a big deal. I had a Fiat Dino with the 2 liter Ferrari engine in it. Common knowledge was that if you babied the engine, it might last 25k before a full rebuild. If you drove it enthusiastically, you might only get 12-15k out of the engine. It was not a cheap engine to rebuild. A little IMS bearing....especially one that you can replace when you buy the car and then when you replace the clutch?....just isn't a problem. Even replacing the AOS, water pump, radiator reservior, etc., are just modest accessory items. Aside from all the teeth gnashing and trembling of hands....the M96 engine (especially the MKII) has been a solid engine. Are there some wear/maintenance items? Yep. If I wanted an Accord, I would have bought one. I look at the 991's and I'm quite pleased to have a 996.

I agree.. It's a wear item, just because the factory never meant forit to be changed doesn't mean anything. Other cars need timing belts at 50-60k and those can cost more than an IMS Retrofit. Now that the procedure is no longer black art an even Porsche dealerships are doing them, it's only going to be more accepted. A few years ago, after I had retrofitted the first cars we were crucified on these forums just for coming up with the process. It's funny how things change after about 7,000 units are sold. Now others jumped on the bandwagon, there are install videos and thousands of posts all over the net from guys who have retrofitted. My guess is the Solution will be even more viral, though it is twice the cost.

Is the solution converting the inside of the IMS to a friction bearing?

Quotes source post: 9852762

Good point on the dealerships installing them. I was surprised when I asked my local dealer if they would do it and they willingly took on the challenge. It's reassuring seeing the little sticker in the engine bay knowing that at least I've got that one engine concern covered for a while.

Quotes source post: 9852720

I'm sure you'll tell us in time but I will ask anyways. Does the "design change" mean a change that's self contained in the IMS itself or a change outside of it? And will the IMS Solution be a DIY like your current IMS retrofit? Since you had used the wording "change" instead of "improvement" are we to assume the system has been totally revamped somehow that operates differently than the existing system? Will you still be carrying the IMS retrofit once the IMS Solution comes to market? I'm sure people are dying to know and have a lot of questions. Great way to hype up and tease us way ahead of schedule. You're cruel, even Movies don't do that to us.

If the solution wasn't an improvement we wouldn't have worked since 2009 to perfect it. In time the Solution will be a retrofit kit that's just as easy to install as the current retrofit. Upon my return on Friday those who own my engines will receive an email unveiling the technology to them with their opportunity to upgrade their Flat 6 Innovations engine with the IMS Solution. Next after those people will come the cars that we have carried out our retrofit services for using the current LN bearing. After these we will then offer the Solution for install here at Flat 6 only for the first year or so, before starting to sell it to other shops and etc. we have not decided whether or not we will require installers to attend training before they are permitted to install the Solution. We approaching this with great care and until March 2011 we hadn't shared anything about it with anyone, anywhere. Currently at 5,500 mikes for the trip and the vitals for he engine are perfect.

Honestly I'm not so sure that I believe that porsche designed the later (-05+) motor to last 100K before needing a rebuild (with the fatter bearing).

Quotes source post: 9853394

Jake I hope you can clarify on a couple things for me. You state that the retrofit solution is just as easy to install as the current one but you are undecided whether they should be required to attend a training class for it? This doesn't make sense as the current retrofit kit doesn't require any classroom training, correct? Secondly, can you explain how this long road trip has any big significance in testing other than the product being ready to go to market(basic QA tests being normal in the development lifecycle)? I think we are all looking for a permanent or a very long term solution for something that would last a lifetime so how would this kind of testing be replicated under 10k miles? Just trying to understand...

Quotes source post: 9852014

When I read the aforementioned quote from the LN site, to me at least, it sounds like they're referring to the original bearing and not their replacement??

Quotes source post: 9853847

I agree yet I have not gone to the original source to clarify.

Quotes source post: 9852233

+1 I consider the ceramic triple row bearing upgrade to be a permanent solution & don't give it another thought.

Interested in other solution if cheaper than LN.

The Solution is more expensive, the kit will be roughly 1500.00 an well worth it. Correction: I wrote that we hadent divulged the technology until March 2011, that should have been March 2012 when I sent a pic of it to Pete Stout, Editor of Excellence Magazine. Damn phone! The IMS Solution is another co-development of Flat 6 Innovations and LN Engineering.

Since the single row bearings have too small of a surface area but the LN bearing will last at least, 40K miles. Can an assunption be made that the double row replacement LN beatings will last, at least, twice as long?

So my LN replacement bearing on my 2004 is a single row?

Quotes source post: 9854150

Yes. All 02-04 996 engines had the single row bearing. Starting sometime in 05-06 Porsche moved to the larger, non serviceable single row bearing.

I'll add that single row engines must stay single row, the shaft design will not allow a dual row retrofit in a single row shaft. Last week some rocket scientist decided to try to fit a dual row into a single shaft and he was very unsuccessful. Funny thing is he was a former technical writer for an established parts supplier. Just another parrot.

Quotes source post: 9854506

But is it safe to assume that the new solution for single row bearings will be an advancement/improvement/stronger/longer lasting than the current LN ceramic bearing is engineered to be??

Quotes source post: 9854693

If it wasn't we would'nt have spent all this time and money to develop it. I could be at home on my couch now instead of finishing a 7,000 me trip in a Porsche. The current LN bearing maximizes te single row design, nothing more could be done without a complete design change. The dual row retrofit is so robust that we are not even going to offer the solution for it in the immediate future. It's developed but no reason to offer it. The Solution is just that.

Quotes source post: 9854129

That certainly didn't prove to be the case with the OE part.

Quotes source post: 9854775

But that's it.....yours didn't and my project '99 996, that has 200K miles has a stock, double row bearing. I'm planning on changing it to the LN unit and wanted to know what to expect from it. If they are as robust as claimed above, this should be the last bearing this engine will ever need.

Jake, I am not trying to be confrontational but you don't seem to have answered the original question, how long does the bearing last, or what is the recommended replacement mileage? My gearbox is out and I'm considering the LN but like the OP woul like a clear guide on its life

So if someone say purchased a 99-01 996 and put in the LN dual row bearing that would be considered the "fix" for the IMS issue? I'm looking at 996's and although I prefer the 2002 plus headlights, I would prefer reliability over style.

My original question is I put an LN bearing in car at 32k miles not about ready to do 60k and clutch so will have transmission / engine separated should I be thinking well might as well replace bearing again? I mean does not really make sense to put in a new LN bearing again down the road and have to consider again separating transmission / engine just for that.

Great post. Looks like I will be fine with my new dual row LN IMS bearing fix. Also, my dealer out here was very familiar with it and they recommend the fix to 996 owners when they have the clutch replaced. I have a good dealer though that treats me like gold. That is nice for a change.

I have a 00 C2, like you, carcster88, with the last 4 VIN digits being ... 0220. Do this mean that I have a dual-row IMS bearing as you originally had before your replacement? My car has 140k kms on it but I know of someone with a 99 C4 whose IMSb blew his engine at 160k kms. These IMSb blow-outs are very erratic, indeed! Martin

Quotes source post: 9857024

There is only one way to be 100% sure. Have to look at the flange.

Quotes source post: 9857024

I'm pretty sure the answer is yes. Mine ends in 2351, and I had the dual row bearing.

Quotes source post: 9855361

On the one hand you've only got 28K miles on the bearing. It really should not need replacing, especially if you've changed oil frequently. Despite Jake's well-intentioned assertion that the small bearing is inadequate, the engineering facts are that the cam tensioning should be equal and cancel out, thereby the bearing should have little or no radial/lateral loading. Likewise if the IMS shaft is lined-up with the bearing spindle and bolt and the bearing runs true, it really oughtn't be under much if any load. I'm sure Porsche's engineers calculated the expected load and specified a bearing capable of enduring it. However they may have chosen one that is quite near the edge the envelope, thus if there are other factors out of tolerance that do increase the load it could prove too much for the bearing. My personal opinion based on knowledge of engineering is that the greatest likelihood as to why a number of the small single-race LN bearings have failed comes down to incompetent installation protocols or what in medicine is referred-to as improper case selection, eg installing a new bearing in an engine with preexisting damage or debris. That said, since you will be undertaking the labour anyway, it seems sensible to change the bearing, assuming whoever is doing the job is at least as competent as whomever installed the last one. I'm in a slightly different boat, in that I had my clutch and the LN bearing done 9000 miles ago, which for me represents 1,5 years of (daily) driving. I've got 4,5 years remaining on my extended warranty, whereupon the bearing (and clutch) will have a total of only 36,000 miles. Terms of my warranty mandate I change oil every 5K miles or 6 months, which in my case works out to an oil service every 3K miles. So I'm not even thinking about touching the LN bearing until the warranty expires. If I should decide to keep the car after that point (it will be 12 years old by then) I'll revisit the issue. There's only so much money I'd want to throw at that bearing, given that as the miles mount so does the possibility of one of the other catastrophic failure modes claiming the engine.

Subscribed. Keep us posted please.

Quotes source post: 9857024

You should have dual row as well. When I had my upgrade done at the dealer, they did order both the single and dual row just in case. Mine was dual. At least I got lucky somewhere....LOL.

Quotes source post: 9857024

Its my understanding that all 1999 cars got the dual row, and in the 2000 and 2001 its a crap shoot. You could have the single or the dual and need to take a look in order to be sure.

Quotes source post: 9860094

I may be wrong, but I didn't think they went back and forth between two rows and one row. I thought the changeover was a mid-year event. IIRC, when I had my dual row replaced, the VIN was how LN could confirm the dual row was correct. The previous poster's VIN suggested his car was built prior to mine.

Quotes source post: 9860102

Ok maybe so but if thats the case I wonder why they went back to the single row when building some of the 2001 cars?

Quotes source post: 9860107

Common confusion, because it seems so counter-intuitive... the early M96s got dual row bearings, and Porsche switched from dual to single row, for some reason. Early cars, dual. Later cars, single.

Quotes source post: 9860112

Your right it is confusing Bruce. Its strange that they switched mid year for all 2000 cars then in 2001 went back to using both single and dual. I was glad when I found out my 2001 had the dual.

The single row bearing wasn't an upgrade! It only stimulated the accounting balance at the factory. It's not counter intuitive to a wan counter, as these cars evolved they learned how to make more money, not necessarily make a better engine. This is apparent from the mass single row failures that occur compared to dual row. All bearings fail, 01-05 single row failures make up the majority. We received two more this week, check out our Facebook page for the pics of the carnage and the post -mortem explorations. I thought one could be saved, but the driver "drove it to death"

so what did they do for the 997's in 06-08 ... are they dual row bearings?

Quotes source post: 9860515

So i tried to get your fb page by typing in your company name, and only came up with dean c jones' fb page. I note hes a manager at your shop. Is this the image your company wants to publicly portray? Just wow!

The facebook page is www.facebook.com/fixabroken6 We hide nothing here, nothing is sugar coated or candy coated to taste better it's all reality. Dean has his thoughts and expresses them, I am the same way and no we don't agree all the time. At any rate the 06-08 bearings are single row larger diameter bearings that are not serviceable.

Quotes source post: 9860554

Page was not found and I couldn't find it through my desktop either.

Sorry, my bad. Try www.facebook.com/fixabrokensix I am still exhausted from driving 7,000 miles in 8 days!

Quotes source post: 9860515

From all authoritative sources (and a physical comparison confirms this as the most plausible explanation) the reason Porsche went to the single-row bearing was in order to accomodate a deeper flange with triple seals. At the time, stopping oil leakage was the high priority. Whether Porsche could have predicted that decreasing the bearing rating in favour of a heftier seal would result in more catastrophic IMS failures is something upon which we can only recklessly speculate.

It's all reckless speculation because the factory will never state true reasoning for anything these days. I do t buy the triple row seal reasoning because a dual row bearing can also see the same flange seal upgrade. In many model year 2000 engines found specifically in te Boxster S we see factory triple row seals employed on the dual row bearing flanges. Those are among the most resilient engines when it comes to bearing failure. Removing 1/2 the load carrying surface is a bad idea that could only look good on paper.

Have a look here - some very interesting reading http://www.hartech.org/docs/buyers%2...20part%204.pdf And here http://www.hartech.org/docs/buyers%2...20part%205.pdf

Quotes source post: 9861055

At the point Porsche switched to water-cooled engines, their old guard was still resisting giving-up on the Teutonic precept of over-building. The double-row bearing was in all likelihood over-specified "on paper" for the calculated load...which as you know, if the shaft, alignment, and cam-chain tensions are in proper balance, is rather mild. More than likely the single-row bearing was "adequately specified", again, "on paper". I doubt Porsche knew the requirements and purposely specified a bearing that wouldn't suffice. What they missed, I believe, was that the sealed bearing wouldn't remain so; that it would then begin to wear prematurely and quickly; and that once the bearing is no longer functioning perfectly, then its specifications are inadequate...whereas the double and large-single bearings have enough residual capacity to hold together longer.

Quotes source post: 9855361

To my way of thinking, I would consider it a complete waste of money! 28k miles on one of these super-duper ceramics that cost an arm and a leg! No way I would consider replacement of this bearing at this low mileage.

Quotes source post: 9855592

Mine too! When I asked them to replace the bearing they said sure, no problem. Even already had the tools from previous jobs. Keep forgetting to send the original bearing back to LN!!!

So I just replaced my original slipping clutch and original IMS which looked good as new with an LN classic single row on my 2002 Porsche 996 C2 with 90000 miles. LN mentions the ceramic is 3-5 times stronger than steel bearings but gives a 4year/50000 miles interval so my question is if my original IMS lasted 90000 miles and still good, then shouldn't the LN bearing last at least 90000 miles? Or are they trying to push parts every 4 years for profit.

This is a recommended service interval. It is based from practical application trend data, bearing load ratings, and the recommended service interval of each particular style of bearing by the manufacturer. The reason the service intervals are clearly stated up front, is to allow the purchaser to clearly judge which components is best for their intended application, how long they intend to own the car, and etc. The Classic Single Row has the shortest service interval of all LN products at 4 year/ 50. The Single Row Pro has a 75K mile interval (its a dual row bearing for single row applications) and the IMS Solution is a permanent retrofit that has no service interval. Why? Because it lacks the moving parts that ALL the ball and roller bearings have. Though I only develop these products, and do not sell them, I know the reasons why the service intervals are selected, and it isn't money driven. I promise you that.

Quotes source post: 13027242

Like Jake stated, the original bearing should have had a service interval. It didn't. We have to come up with what we believe is a very conservative service life considering the huge range of mileages we have seen failures. Wayne recommends 30k miles for his kit that uses the OES bearing. Some choose not to replace their bearings. Some find their original bearing is fine and likewise, some find that their original bearing was just about to fail. Many modern engines have timing belts that need to be replaced every 4 yr, 50,000 miles, but most choose not to change it. We all have choices.

Quotes source post: 13028333

Actually I refused to replace my original timing belt on my 1986 Porsche 928 @ 45k miles interval until my water pump started leaking around 100k miles and did the belt, pump and tensioners. What Puzzles me is if the ceramic is so robust with no seals, then does it really matter if it's submerged in oil for 4 years and not driven.

Quotes source post: 13030741

Must not have ever heard of corrosive wear.... Or high Total Acid Numbers (TAN)

Quotes source post: 13030741

Long drain intervals with owners who think they don't have to change their oil every six months regardless of mileage is the exact reason we go with time or mileage recommendations. Remember, cars that are barely driven or subjected to crazy long drain intervals seem to fail more often. It would sound like you are questioning the use of a ceramic hybrid bearing. Do some searches and you'll see why we chose this type of bearing for all the IMS Retrofit kits. Our bearings are not out of a catalog or sitting on a shelf somewhere either - they are custom made for us.

[QUOTE=Charles Navarro;13031482]Long drain intervals with owners who think they don't have to change their oil every six months regardless of mileage is the exact reason we go with time or mileage recommendations. Remember, cars that are barely driven or subjected to crazy long drain intervals seem to fail more often. It would sound like you are questioning the use of a ceramic hybrid bearing. Do some searches and you'll see why we chose this type of bearing for all the IMS Retrofit kits. Our bearings are not out of a catalog or sitting on a shelf somewhere either - they are custom made for us.[/QUOTE I know for sure ceramics are more chemical resistance but my original IMS bearing lasted 13 years and 90k miles in good condition. I live in southern Califirnia. I did 12K miles DIY oil change mobile synthetic 0w-40 and sometimes it took 2 years. Sometimes car sat in the garage for months connected to a battery maintainer during my overseas trips. My original IMS has the following stamped on it: England NSK 6204DUI7 782. I'm hoping to get at least 90k miles on the LN classic. The only reason I did the upgrade is because of the clutch and in case I decide to sell the car to a picky buyrr. As I mentioned before, we have a better chance of getting cancer than an IMS failure. Thank you for all your replies.

Technically true, but since the odds of developing some form of cancer during your lifetime (assuming you are an American male) is 43.31%*, I don't think that's as amazing a comparison as you think it is. Numbers accurate as of 10/2014

Quotes source post: 9851720

In a conversation with Jake R ( i was thinking about getting some work done by them but I had already had the LN bearing upgrade fitted a few k miles ago) that I should just go ahead and drive it for 50k miles on the bearing then think again about having it replaced or "the solution" fitted.

50k miles sounds pretty poor to me. I feel it should last the remaining life of the engine. Timing belts are made of rubber, and they last 60k miles, timing chains last for life. Recommending that the ceramic bearing is replaced every few years, smacks of a lack of confidence in what they've made, my opinion only of course. I'll fit something else when my clutch needs replacing.

like what?

Quotes source post: 13076018

My OEM original is going great at 125k +. Wonder who has the highest mileage retrofit on here?

If the original dual row had a failure rate of 1% I would guess the LN Pro Dual Row upgrade with ceramic bearings and seals removed to allow splash lubrication of bearing would have a failure rate of .01%. Nothing scientific just my wild *** guess.