Why did I install an EPS Bearing??

I wanted to drop a quick post here not to open a can of worms but to provide some info about why I made the decision to use the EPS "Eternal" IMS bearing in my 108k engine. I want to preface this with the fact that I have been researching the IMS issues for about 4 years. I started reading well prior to the purchase of my car almost 3 years ago. My car is a 1999 dual row bearing car, I originally purchased it to replace my LS powered Mazda Rx7 track car but the car quickly became my top choice for my commute and I put about 20k on it the first year. It suffered a cracked head/intermix issue in Feb of 2016 and I decided to DIY replace everything while I had it apart. I was determined to replace the bearing for peice of mind. My car has 108k miles on it and I figured I was on borrowed time with the OEM Bearing from everything I had read. When I pulled the bearing I was disappointed and joyed to find it in perfect shape, save for some oil past the rubber seals and in the IMS shaft. The oil was clean that came out of the bearing and the bearing was in perfect shape. After discovering that putting a new stock bearing (that lasted 108k with no signs of letting up) back in wasn't possible, I decided to try and replicate that...I had read some threads on home brew bearings and decided to go that route at first. I bought a dual row NSK/SKF bearing and coupled it with the Pelican basic IMS kit and was going to install that without a second thought... and then some "unpleasantness" came out, although I wasn't using ceramic or Boca bearings I just couldn't commit to really gambling with my engine at this time. There are plenty of people on the LN bandwagon and if I could afford it I would go with the DOF "Solution" from LN. But I can't. I didn't want to spend $800 for just a basic Bearing Set with no real warranty (due to no pre qualification on my engine, and DIY status). As well as reading of others who have had LN failures. And so I looked at alternatives. I saw the EPS bearing and could only find 1 thread where a shop said that the EPS bearing in an engine was "on the way out" but probably due to install issues.. I asked around and the new "best ever" non DOF appears to be the Cylindrical Roller Bearing use. I read all the nasty talk from people about the EPS thrust control, the bad English on the website, the talk about the weakened oil pump drive etc... But couldn�t really find people with glaring failures. There are lots of people saying "have xx,xxx miles with no issues" but no real hateraide. So I bought the kit and it was delivered the other day. I opened the box and the kit is well done everything appears to be of good quality and it was packaged well. For those worried about the hex drive, the slot is so small (the photos are not representative of the actual depth at all (red drive key pictured in advertising) as it would never really effect the integrity of the drive.. The bearing although pretty, is nothing special, and the rest of the kit is tools and the flange. There are some things about the setup I am not super excited about (Loctite use, tapping holes in the IMS covers etc) but after holding the Pelican/LN single row el cheapo replacement in my hand with its spacers and the wobbliest bearing I have ever seen and knowing that there are cars rolling around with that setup I feel really confident. I may decide that this is a wear item vs an Eternal fix as they say (do it again next clutch) or I may not.. Overall only time will tell if I made the right call for my car and my wallet. Like I said I only dropped this here so that others considering this setup have some info, despite knowing that it will probably get cluttered with a bunch of stuff telling people that this setup is garbage. I honestly know why Porsche spec'd a new engine vs a new bearing, because all of these fixes no matter how elegant or well-advertised, or successful are a work around to a serious engineering problem. LN, RND, EPS, all of these companies have eaten their own engines and customers engines while trying to save customers engines, it happens, mechanical parts fail, in the end we as owners have to decide how much hype, customer satisfaction, and failure rate we are willing to live with. Personally I pulled a bearing that was perfectly good with a reported less than 1% failure rate to lose sleep over a bearing with an unknown failure rate with no real world guarantee. Personally if I could go back in time I would have checked my dual row in the car, and left it there... But alas I have made my bed and now have to lie in it.. Wish me luck.

Pretty much sums up exactly why I�m doing the same on my car at the moment. Just one question though: Is it really possible to inspect the IMS bearing fully when still in the car?

This is exactly why I haven't replaced the IMS on my car. I have an early 99 C2 and have had no issues at all with this. Heck I've had my car in the shop for a number of other issues recently, but none are related to the IMS.

You can't fully inspect the bearing without actually dissecting it. But you can do a very thorough inspection by removing the outward facing seal, and using an inspection camera or mirrors and flashlights. Bearings in general have a "feel" when they are going out. But looking for worn races/journals, pucking on surfaces, and excessive play can tell a big story. Using a pick to check lateral play on the cage etc can all be done with the bearing in the car.

I am also quite interested in the EPS solution. For many of your reasons you state. the only thing holding me back is the way it is oiled. is it really necessary to put a hole in the flange? My situation is a little different as i have a 02 single row on 67k miles, and the clutch i think needs to be replaced. Some local indys here in london will not install any IMSB solutions, others are installing the old LN solution. Having also owned a RX7 the 996 issues dont seem that bad. it just isnt as certain with what you should replace with upgraded parts.

I will offer only one caveat to the use of the notched oil feed, which I've mentioned before. The oil being supplied to the bearing is coming directly from the oil pump which is the only part in the entire engine that does not get filtered, cooled oil. I would recommend that along with the modification to the oil pump shaft, one puts in the full-flow oil filter adapter, so that all the oil from the engine is filtered at least once per cycle through, and there's no more oil bypassing the filter.

Quotes source post: 13667032

I have also opted to install the LN no bypass filter. Although.. I am not fully familiar with the oil bypass and when it chooses to bypass, I can only imagine that would occur if the oil change interval was extended or ignored?

Quotes source post: 13667016

In my best estimation the EPS bearing could survive with just the oil bath as this is how the LN bearings are cooled and oiled. I know the Rollers have more surface in friction although I don't think this would out work the oil in that area. I have decided to install the kit as intended and let the cards fall where they may. All the talk about unbalancing the IMS, pressure pushing the chain gears off all seems a little extreme to me.. My IMS shaft was full of oil on the stock bearing, the LN original kit has no seals on the bearing at all..

Quotes source post: 13667016

According to EPS/Vertex and other Roller IMS bearing vendors, the supplementary oiling is not essential. However, their technical credentials and credibility are questionable. We recently discussed this in another thread. On any Roller bearing issues, RND would be a more credible source of info.Their product has no supplementary oil feed. The alternative (theoretical)oil feed would be a Roller IMSB kit with DOF like Pedro's.You can buy it w/o a bearing and supply your own(NUP204?).Ask Pedro? He is a very pleasant fellow. http://www.pedrosgarage.com/Site_2/TechnoFix_DOF.html

I did the same. I searched extensively and couldn't find any reference to failures related to the EPS kit. I chose it based on the lack of negative things said about it... I could not find a single reported failure and the price seemed right. The main question for me was surrounding the bearing's thrust load capacity. But in this application, the bulk of load seems to be centrifugal and thrust seems to be less of a focal point. My 94k mile bearing came out in perfect condition and the new bearing has been doing fine for 1300 miles thus far. I have not noticed any apparent changes to the engine's oil pressure values since the hole was punched in the IMS cap to allow the direct oil feed. Engine runs smooth as silk (chain tensioner pads were changed too) and I couldn't be happier. Seems to be a very good product, being sold at a very good price, with minimal self-promotion from Vertex/EPS. I'm a big fan of quiet confidence, and I haven't seen EPS/Vertex on any of the common forums trying to push their products and I searched high and low to find reported failures of this bearing and came up with nothing derogatory from an acutal end-user. There does not seem to be a need for them to be online defending their products. The seem to sell plenty. In this day and age, that speaks volumes to me as an EPS bearing failure would be impossible to hide from the internet. So far.... I'm thrilled and can't help but recommend this product. I drive my car with considerablly more peace of mind than before and was able to use the money saved ($449 for EPS bearing kit vs. $800+ for LN's solution) to pay for my clutch kit and a few other new bits. If my opinion of this product changes, I'll be back to let readers know that too. But so far, so good...

My instinct is that in a dual-row engine with 108K on it, any of the ball or cylindrical retrofits would probably last the probable remaining life of the engine. That is, if there is no debris in the engine that could damage an open bearing, and if the retrofit is properly installed.

Quotes source post: 13667251

I would take this a step further and suggest that any 996 that has over maybe 70K miles on it with no issues would be just fine with about any bearing you install. I am assuming, of course, that the bearing you remove is in good condition at the time of the replacement. I went with the RND to get the roller bearing and I don't understand the value of the DFO since the bearing is submerged when the engine is off and surrounded by oil mist when it is running.

I went with the EPS Bearing as well. The cost was a large factor in my decision however, I was sold on the cylindrical bearing as a reasonable option based on my experience with my KTM LC4. KTM had a issue with premature ball bearing failure on their crankshaft. The solution was replace it with a roller bearing. Here's a quick write-up. http://advrider.com/index.php?thread...-how-to.73558/

Good post, but I don't think it adds much to this ongoing decade-plus controversy. My local indy, who I respect very much, uses the EPS when he does engine rebuilds. My '99 Boxste' has 164,000 very abusive miles on it, original IMSB, lots of track time. Maybe it will implode this weekend at the Chuckwalla raceway, maybe not. Seems to me that as long as you don't go the KK route and build your own IMSB, the vast majority should be fine with whatever option he, she, or he-she chooses..

cuda, who is your local indy? i'm close by...just for future reference- m

^^^ Mulligan Racing. 1304 N Melrose Dr., Vista, CA 92083 [phone removed] Tell Mike Mulligan I sent you.

Quotes source post: 13669183

I agree, and honestly don't believe that much more can be added to change that. I only posted because there appears to be so much shaming and back and forth regarding people's choices and I did sift through almost all of it. I do not believe that the choice I made is the right one for everyone but while I searched I would have loved to have seen people's thought process behind their choices. Cheers!

It would be great if someone could put together a table showing the various IMSB alternatives, cost, warranty, etc.

Quotes source post: 13669149

Fascinating alternative approach to a similar problem.Thanks for Posting. http://advrider.com/index.php?thread...-how-to.73558/

Quotes source post: 13670250

Initially I went with the single-row classic LN ceramic IMSB, because at the time it was the only one available for an engine-in retrofit. When I put a remanufactured engine in I went with The Solution, because I felt it was the kind of bearing Porsche should have used from the start.

I don't understand how the EPS addresses anything for you. You stated that you have a '99, which would have a dual row IMS. A dual row means double the amount of bearings to lubricate compared to a single row, yet dual row bearings appear to have a much lower failure rate than single rows. If that's the case, then I don't think it's an issue of not having enough oil. It sounds to me like it's an issue of load-bearing, or lack of that ability. All the oil oil feed in the world isn't gonna fix a load issue.

In the UK, we use the stock bearing with the dust covers removed. the bering gets constantly covered in oil from the timing changes and no one who has done this has reported an issue.

A quick question for those who have installed the EPS solution themself: I'm in the middle of installing the bearing but can't for the life of me understand the instruction regarding how far to install the bearing in the shaft. The instruction say to insert the bearing until the tool bottoms out on the IMS surface, the problem is that the tool is smaller in diameter than the bearing so it can't bottom out on the IMS shaft, the bearing will, if driven far enough into the shaft, bottom out, but on the pictures I have seen it looks like the bearing should be level with the edge of the IMS shaft, any ideas?

911 tobbe The tool will bottom out, the edge of the bearing does protrude slightly from the shaft so don't go whacking it to drive it further in, put the bearing in the freezer overnight to shrink it slightly, this will help it go in, don't forget to put some locktite on the outside of the bearing to fix it in place .

In theory the correct bearing retaining compound/sealant/adhesive should be Loctite 609 or 603. But regular threadlocker is very similar. In the specific IMSB situation , I don't understand why a retaining compound is required unless it is a very slightly sloppy fit in the IMS tube/bearing housing -yikes !? The Blue 242 threadlocker will soften with moderate engine heat so if you are considering using it as an adhesive the correct Retaining Compound may be better. If you use Red Threadlocker instead, it needs tremendous heat to break the bond -(250 C ) Henkel has more info. There may be a case for using Blue as a 'lubricant' when installing the bearing ?Be aware that your frozen bearing will be wet with condensation when you install it. So add a little liquid soap for lube ?Or, just follow the LN instructions - they(& Mother) know best !

Well I should have just ignored the instructions, including skipped reading and looking at pictures of installed bearings on the web, it just made it more confusing. Drive in the bearing until you feel it bottom out, end of story. And no, my bearing does not protrude from the IMS shaft, actually it's slightly below the edge. Why other people have bearings that protrudes the shaft I don't know, different batches of bearings? Different IMS shafts?

Quotes source post: 13674460

What generation bearing is this specific to?

I just mentioned the thread locker as it's in the instructions but the bearing isn't sloppy as you have to drive it in with a mallet on the special installation price which fits on the bearing and then you hit with the mallet until it bottoms out. The bearing doesn't protrude as such but the edge of the outer bearing race should sit slightly proud of the outer ims shaft as this is the thrust control and runs against the specially designed ims flange along with oil lubrication and acts like a thrust bearing would, if you look on the EPS website at the installation process you can see the bearing they show on the installation instructions protrudes slightly also, I'm sure yours is the same if you just drove it in until it bottomed out !!

See Page 9 here for the 'bead'(??) of threadlocker: http://europeanpartssolution.com/wp-...ernal.IMS_.pdf Note a different color of threadlocker is used on the flange bolts in the Instructions. In neither case is a specific part number for the threadlocker given ,even though they mention a brand - Loctite. Not saying any of this is wrong ,nor commenting on the bad spelling & syntax -just the usual sloppy writing from EPS. Interesting to note the cut-out on the inner face of the flange for -what ? An external cam-cover oil line DOF supply like Pedro's ??

I just completed the install today. I will say, the instructions are basically useless. You are installing it blind which very easily could lead to installing it wrong. It also leads to lack of confidence in the installers part. Its the little things.. but overall with gaps in the instructions filled in it went in easy. Gaps I found: 1- instructions are from before they started including the updated flange, bolts and before they included the punch and end caps. 2- the flange and stud are different than the photos 3- the bearing tool doesn't technically bottom out... the bearing does 4- the center shaft/stud has about 1mm of fore and aft movement before you tighten it up. This is normal. Do not take the bearing out or lose sleep. 5- instructions don't really talk too much about the size of the hole you punch in the IMS cover.. it says small which is relative. I basically punched it until I felt there was a hole.. but that sucks. I have no idea how big or small the hole should be. The punch should be more refined to only allow the correct size hole. 6- thread locker install specs are misleading. That is about it.... I feel that overall the install went well. Fingers crossed that it stands the test of time.

EPS should pay you to correct their "Instructions" and do a video ! Your comments should be saved by anyone planning to install a roller bearing IMS. I presume the FVD Instructions for their roller IMS (in German) are better ! Just to be fair & balanced - the LN Instructions for their IMSB are 17 single spaced pages full of IMPERATIVES ! You can almost hear Jake's voice in them all the way from Georgia ! http://lnengineering.com/files/IMSR-...n-Warranty.pdf Clearly a 'different' standard :-)

The written instructions from EPS is pretty bad, it's obviously a rewrite of the instructions for previous types of bearings both in text and in pictures, they do however answer quickly on their support email. The instructions I found do specify the size of the hole to be 1-3mm in size. Don't get hung up on the threadlocker used, it's only a recommendation to use it, not a requirement, according to their support they don't even use it themself.

Exactly my point. And they also claim the hole is unnecessary but fail to point out that gives you the option of fitting the upgraded oil-pump shaft(Modes of Failure !) if you are not needing their (weakened) grooved drive shaft. The product may be good (& probably is) but the marketing is bungling amateurish. FVD anyone?Part number is : FVD 105 901 03 but I can not find any Instructions from FVD to offer Rennlisters. Meanwhile Rennlisters will provide the band aids and comforts - like 'don't worry about the free play in the central bolt ' YIKES ! See point 4. in Post 30 above.

Quotes source post: 13677766

Man, Schnell, be careful! You are starting to sound like a broken record (or a parrot)! LOL! Counterpoint: Having held both the bearing and the grooved replacement shaft in hand and examined them up close, I never felt anything less than pure confidence the parts would more than adequately do what they need to do. The groove shaft fits snugly into position and appeared to be of very high quality. Once inserted into position, I tried pulling it out with my fingers and it would budge. And that groove is definitely not deep enough to appreciably weaken the part for the loads it experiences. Granted, the paperwork and marketing materials were not polished up by someone with any kind of degree in English, but having spoken with the Vertex folks on the phone it's obvious to me their first language is Spanish. I guess they don't care to market to the pedantic. Maybe a consult with a professional proofreader or product marketing specialists would do EPS some good, but I'll also add that the lack of polish on that front is directly reflective in the decent pricing. I feel like they passed some of that savings on to the eventual end-users as $450 for what you get (and what it does) seems quite a bargain compared to some of the other IMSB solutions out there. Sometimes you have to see through things like that and let the product speak for itself. Having put over 1500 miles of rigorous driving on mine, my confidence in the product has grown since the install. And if things end up going south in my engine due to having picked this bearing, I'll be the first to report back here and share that. But, no regrets at all so far....

"And that groove is definitely not deep enough to appreciably weaken the part for the loads it experiences." If you read up on the oi pump drive shaft, ,it has a history of snapping. And that is before a groove(stress riser) is machined into it !But because you couldn't pull it out with your fingers it was not weakened ?Yup that it the EPS engineering standard alright. "I never felt anything less than pure confidence the parts would more than adequately do what they need to do" How can feelings validate the engineering and metallurgy of an engine part? To quote another Engineer here:As an engineer I have zero (0.000) capacity to feel any emotion about this topic as I view it as purely technical data and am thankful for the information. Some folks clearly have an emotional investment in this data which frankly completely baffles me. Unsubscribed.This is now a 'feelings' thread ! cue Parrot wings flapping.

I will post some pictures, my stock hex key did have some stress marks as if it had been flattened or "stressed". I can definetly appreciate the concern. Although I will also post a comparison of the two drives. The slot is so small it could be confused at a tooling mark. The product has been refined since it initially hit the market.

I didn't think the instructions were too bad myself but I agree that some of the pictures need updating as they have changed the design a little. The groove in the oil pump drive is really shallow I'm sure it's not deep enough to weaken the shaft, hopefully it's an improved material like the one from LN but not sure Schnell, there is no notch in the flange for an oil feed it must just be the pictures making it look that way, as you know the oil feed through the ims, the groove in the shaft governs the flow making the hole behind it which is punched in not as critical from a size point of view as the flow has already been restricted by the groove in the oil pump drive if you see what I mean!

I have to agree with NOZ1974 the grove on the Hex-drive for the pump looks almost etched and not very deep as it would have you believe from their advertisement picture. Just finished installing the Roller Bearing EPS bearing option in my car. Still assembling the motor from a refresh and tear down, but I will report once the bearing gets some miles under it's belt.

Quotes source post: 13678819

I do see your point... published load numbers would make things considerably more clear as to exactly how good the product is. Pricing, and the complete absence of negative reviews after product has been available for over 2 years had more to do with my purchase decision than my feelings. Or rather... the lack of negative reviews made me feel good about my purchase decision.

Quotes source post: 13674460

My indy reports exactly the same thing. He's been working on and racing 996's since they were first made and hasn't had a single failure of a stock/OEM bearing that had the outer seal removed. He removes the IMS bearing seal on every clutch job he performs on any 986/996/987/997. My original dual-row IMS bearing had failed at 75k, though not catastrophically, and fortunately we caught it in time. The bearing cage closest to the end (the viewable side) had broken, and the IMS was only supported by the inner bearing set. He doesn't trust aftermarket bearing solutions, so his plan was to replace it with an OEM 997 IMS shaft and bearing (which requires the case to be opened and would have also required a later 996 crankshaft because of the different type of chain/sprockets, but he had that lying around anyway). By pure luck/accident he ran across a new OEM 996 IMS shaft with a dual-row bearing that had gotten lost in one dealer's inventory and was just found last year, so we installed that without the bearing seal. The indy said, with full confidence, that I will never have to worry about it. Only 3,000 miles since that, but I have pretty good peace of mind. Breaking open the case is an extreme, expensive solution, but if you're in a situation where the engine is apart anyway (I was getting head work done due to a bad water pump failure that circulated debris throughout the engine, so he pulled it all apart), that seems like the way to go.

Hi Rrtech, Thank you for choosing our EPS Patented Cylindrical IMS Bearing . We appreciate the time taken to post your experience on our product. You mentioned that you can�t find any failure report about our product, this is true. Since we started to sell our EPS Cylindrical IMS Bearing since 2013, we have sold 5,000 units in total, and we have NOT had a report of a single failure. The reason why our IMS Cylindrical Bearing does not fail is because it is made of a completely different technology than the traditional ball bearing at Porsche and LN. The reason for the IMS failure is due to the type of bearing that is employed. LN and Porsche use a ball bearing that applies the load on a single point of about 1.0mm. Our EPS Cylindrical bearing spreads out the pressure point, applying the load on approximately 15mm. You can see how the ball bearing is inferior to the cylindrical bearing by referencing Porsche�s attempt to correct the IMS problem throughout the years. Porsche changed the ball bearing 3 different times. First, a single row of 47mm, then a double row of 47mm, and finally a single row of 62mm. All three bearings failed. Just to give you a little spec information, the IMS shaft turns at HALF the speed of the engine (max 3,500 RPM). Our EPS IMS Cylindrical bearings can operate at speeds up 15,000 RPM. The speed that the IMS bearing is operating originally at (max 3,500) is a leisurely pace compared to its ability of 15,000 RPM. Hope you enjoy our product and share your experience with us later. If you have any questions, please feel free to reach out to us. Thanks, EPS Team epsauto.com

Quick question. You say your IMS bearing is patented. What is the patent number and when did you get it? Just wondering.....thanks!

Quotes source post: 14425178

Was looking through their site and came across this info: patented system - U.S. Patent 9004766B1

...

Quotes source post: 14425269

Did you search what it is?

Quotes source post: 14425452

Sounds like a job for an investigation reporter from CNN of Fox

Well I guess since this necropost was resurrected, the really good question would be, how is the OP's bearing holding up? How many miles ya got on it? How is she running? Cheers, ​​​​​​D.

The unbelievable post spamming on every EPS thread is infuriating. Why??? Definelty did not provide the results I think they were hoping for.... new customer confidence is most likely at an all time low... My bearing is fine, haven't driven the car much, but no reason to lose sleep. I really don't understand who thought thread spamming was a good marketing ploy...🙄

So the patent is for a washer ("Thrust control device")? WTF ?

I am going my 2002 this winter and was considering this bearing but now seeing all this post spamming I don't know. Resurrecting year old threads to do copy and paste ads without any relevant info is in very bad taste.

Cosmo, Great plan to replace and do some useful while-you-are-in-there work. But just to be clear, there seem to be no prohibitive objections to roller bearings in general. Some of us just advocate the most appropriate design and do-no-harm Instructions . RND ? Good Luck with your project

Quotes source post: 14432003

We are certainly NOT trying to SPAM. We are simply trying to respond to questions and concerns about our product. We have also read that some of the forum users were concerned with our lack of response, and we are finally at a place where we can take the time to address all of the questions and concerns regarding our products. If you have a better suggestion as to how I should reply to these questions, please let me know. Thank you!

EPSAuto: First I have no skin in this game as I am an outlier who is leaving my IMSB alone. However, dredging up a 10 month dead thread does seem a little desperate and unseemly. Kind of like calling an old girl friend up late at night after striking out at the bars. Especially by throwing all kinds of ads on the forum in an alleged defense of your product. I see you are not listed as a Sponsor and I was under the impression that advertising in the forum when not a sponsor was taboo. I must be mistaken about that part, but desperate seeming; most assuredly

Quotes source post: 14445906

The questions people want you to answer you really can't/don't. Anti-EPS people look at your marketing materials, patents, and claims as vague or unfulfilling. And honestly you really can't win with this group. The only thing that is going to win people over is your pricing, coupled with people like me using your products and posting positive results....

Everyone had different questions in different threads, but each one received the same copy-pasta with the name at the beginning altered. Not who I would want to business with, which is exactly why I went with LN. Jake provides a wealth of knowledge on here, as well as how he came up with his patents through R&D. That stands out a lot more than resurrecting ancient threads.

"Why did I install an EPS Bearing??" I will go with" Who gives a ****" for a rats azz Alex.

Quotes source post: 14448633

Stay Classy Rennlist.

Quotes source post: 14446454

First off, I want to apologize for coming off the wrong way. After reviewing my original post on this thread I can see how it can be interpreted as spammy. My intent was to assure you of your purchase and give everyone a bit of insight to our patented technology. RRtec, Thank you for going with the EPS IMSB and thank you for the feedback on our instruction. We WILL go back and improve on them. Now to our bearing and our patent, which is what I think you are referring to when you say “The questions people want you to answer.” I know I mentioned most of the things below in another thread. Sorry if this info is redundant to any of you. We first used NJ204 bearing for about the first thousand units we manufactured. Now we use a German made cylindrical bearing that has been customized for us at a nonstandard measurement of 15mm. The reason why we switched to this bearing was in an effort to use all the real estate available to spread the load over the largest possible area. Additionally, due to our patented thrust control, the roller is a free wheeling roller, meaning there is no contact on the sides of the roller. Unlike ANY other cylindrical bearing solution, our axis load (thrust control) is not applied to the rollers, instead, it is applied to the entire perimeter of the outer race. The main advantage of this technology is that the rollers are not loaded from the side. Cylindrical roller bearings are not intended for carrying large axial loads. When they are used for thrust control the roller becomes compromised due to the limited surface contact area on the sides of the rollers. The results of using a cylindrical bearing for thrust control will be similar to all other ball bearing solutions. In our system, we separate the radial Load and the axial load, the roller bearings do not carry the axis load (thus control) on the side, thus leaving the roller free to carry only one load, the radial load, which is the main load. The axial load is carried exclusively on the entire perimeter of the outer race. Our patent invention is based on an innovative way to use cylindrical bearings with thrust control. This patent goes beyond the IMSB and can be applied to various other applications beyond Porsche. If anyone has any further questions about our product, I will gladly reply as best as possible.

Quotes source post: 14450632

Thank you for the supply of a great product. Some people had unsatisfied with your manual. Did you upgrade the manual?

Forgive the double posts, but thought this thread (link below) would be useful since there has been quite a bit of IMS bearing discussion. I learned a great deal from it. Check it out! https://rennlist.com/forums/996-foru...his-first.html

Quotes source post: 13666930

I've been to the rodeo with my 996 m97 engine and I have one thing to say when it comes to IMS bearings if it rolls it doesn't belong in there. replace your bearing with the oil fed sleeve. IMS Solutions. .

A roller bearing seems to make sense but why didn't Porsche use one? They are not stupid. Theoretically, the bearing should not be a problem.

Quotes source post: 13666930

Hello all; With a 1998 986 2.5 with 186,000 kms that does not appear to have had any major component upgrades I am ever so interested in what May or may not happen without warning to my very enjoyable investment. I have looked at a number of different alternatives when it comes to the dreaded IMS bearing and I must admit agonizing about changing out a bearing that may very well be in perfect condition for one that has no warranty or guarantee seems a little bizarre I did see on the other hand an alternative or different approach to the ball bearing or roller bearing or passing engine oil through the unit and that is with a bush that still requires oiling. This alternative has virtually no moving parts won�t collapse or self-destruct without any warning and is just as easy or difficult to fit. Now why am I even considering all that labor and parts cost when I have no reason or even suspicion that there is an issue? I still think that all the hysteria is misplaced and will stand by that until the moment my Stuttgart hand grenade detonates. I will keep carrying out preventative maintenance and inspecting used oil and oil filters desperately looking for what I don�t wish to find and driving �Hilda� at 2500-3500 rpm if not higher as this is what she was designed to do. Meanwhile changing AOS, water pump and thermostat, checking coolant hoses, bleeding brakes and of course checking suspension wear will keep me amused prior to going for a drive and I will fix things when I return! Yes I used to own Ducati�s which were the same except they were worse electrically aren�t they? Anyhow enjoy the journey both in and out of the garage. Cheers JK

When I bought my 996, I had the IMS bearing replaced by the selling shop. A very bad decision: the original dual-row bearing was just fine and the replacement bearing (I don't know the brand -- most likely FVD) failed catastrophically after 1.5 years. The shop had told me that they installed an LN bearing but that was certainly not what came out of the engine. I can only recommend the IMS solution from now on. Don't install any crappy replacement bearings, they are worse than the original.

frederik: How do you know it wasn�t an LN bearing that the shop installed? If you have no idea what bearing it actually was, why mention any names at all?

Because I personally inspected it -- or what was left of it. All it said was "Made in Germany". It must be the FVD Brombacher one, not EPS since it was a ball bearing. I've edited my post accordingly, but the point still stands. It's also possible that it was installed incorrectly at the time. Obviously not all FVD bearings are grenading after 1.5 years, but mine did, and the engine was otherwise healthy.

The EPS system is robust in one way, the LN system is robust in another way... the OEM system isn't. Just don't cheap out if you have a newer IMS that requires the block to be bored using the Vertex method... split the block and do it right.

Almost ten years into this thread, and having read all of it now, I can say this has definitely caused more confusion than understanding. Here�s my take-aways from this only thread: 1. Some people say do nothing at all, the original dual rows don�t fail as much. 2. Some people say the later M96-gen Porsche updated bearings don�t fail as much, do nothing. 3. Some say do EPS, some say do LN, some say do neither because only the �solution� will be true peace of mind. well,well,well,� here I am with my 78k 2003 996 with the updated Porsche bearing wondering if I should be spending 4.5-6k at all to do this.

Quotes source post: 18188145

Yes, no, maybe or just upgrade to a mezger motor . Its a decision for u to make, your not gonna get any different advice then what has been posted. If u want to do a poll, then if i had the big bearing that required splitting the case i would leave it alone unless u was doing a full rebuild.

That $4.5 - 6k sounds excessive. Is this for an auto transmission? In December of 2020 I paid $4100 (all parts and labor) for this job AND it included a new clutch and flywheel + RMS. The LN IMSB was $679. This pricing was from an indy in the DC area which is not known to be affordable.

Quotes source post: 18188257

It DOES sound excessive, doesn't it? Well - I guess this is the post pandemic Chicago stagflation world we live in. The reason why the shop told me it will be so high is because: - I have the upgraded Porsche bearing which will require splitting the trans & engine in order to get a new one installed - I do have a tiptronic Another shop told me: "Haven't seen a failure on those upgraded Porsche bearings so I would leave it alone given that otherwise you'd have to split the case and then you might as well go full rebuild."

Quotes source post: 18188145

​​​​​​​Hartech uses the larger bearing in their rebuilds so that would answer the question for me.

Quotes source post: 18188285

By "the larger bearing", are you referring to the upgraded Porsche OEM bearing in the later years 996s? Or a different one all together?

Quotes source post: 18188297

[Image-only post; no author-written text. Original image references:] https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/rennlist.com-vbulletin/602x644/sdfsdfsdfsff_9e53e45e6abf47275f1f5de2882660ce2d30b5c5.jpg

Quotes source post: 18188343

helpful - thank you. Now the big question is: Is there any way of telling what IMSB you have without having to split trans and engine? Is there a way to tell by the engine detail codes if one has the new one?

You can get eyes on when the clutch is out, which should give you enough information to know if it can be removed or if the case needs to be split, of course you're already in for a lot of labor to get to that point.

Hartech have stated if you can't do the "big bearing" which involves a complete engine tear down - and some know how with earlier cases, they support the "LN Solution".

Quotes source post: 18188145

Since bore scoring seems to be the other inevitability with the M96, at your mileage I think I'd add the option to just keep up with maintenance until it was time for a full rebuild.

Quotes source post: 18190025

that�s the path!

Quotes source post: 18188145

Look at it this way, as perspective often will help you reach a decision. The actual odds of no failure are in your favor. Let�s be pessimistic here and say there�s a 10% chance of failure due to the faulty bearings affecting roughly 10% of all 996s. If you had to gamble in any scenario, would you gamble if it�s 90% chance in your favor? Now that you have come to terms with 90% odds, now you have to decide whether or not the money spent for LN, DOF, or any of the kits out there is worth bettering those odds. How much of an increase in your favor now boils down to brand and their way of solving the issue. Only you can decide is that juice is worth the squeeze. That�s how I approached it. And since my car is daily driven, the more the odds are in my favor the better. So I went with the LN Solution because it uses a plain bearing (no moving parts) since at the end of the day, why replace a ball bearing that potentially fails with another ball bearing that could potentially fail if there�s an alternative with less moving parts? The ball bearings getting into the engine are what �grenade� it. Atleast if the plain bearing fails, it�s likely sheared off or seized without debris furthering the damage. Spend $1000 on something to prevent $10k down the road�why not?

Quotes source post: 18193792

yes - that�s how I think too, but, add the layer of i am going to do a full rebuild with boring out the cylinder 2-3 years down the line anyway, costing well over $10k. It�s about the probable cost of those odds over the time frame. And my engine is a 2007 low-mileage motor with the upgraded Porsche bearing, so I�d argue it�ll last another 2-3 years!

Just an uneducated thought on this. Having experienced a failing IMSB (being lucky enough to catch it in it's infancy) AND after reading numerous threads and discussions, I have come to the conclusion that, at least on earlier cars (98 to 2007+), the IMSB is a wear item, period. I don't think it matters who's solution you choose to go with, you'll have to do it one of these days. IMSB mileage will vary and be different for every car out there. Lots of variables, including oil change frequency, driving styles and frequency of use. The old "it was only X% of failures noted in the lawsuit against Porsche" argument is not really valid any more. Our cars have aged (significantly) since that lawsuit. We now see many low mileage cars and even cars being gently, suffering IMSB failures (and other issues). It's a costly fix for some of us, but we all know it is a possible eventuality, so we deal with it. It's part of the ownership program, so to speak. Ok, flame on.

Quotes source post: 18199138

I don't think there's much to flame about. You are right, and the gist of what you are saying, I think, is that IMSB needs continuous replacement over the life of the vehicles. This would include the upgraded Porsche bearing. I don't actually think this changes anything about the current status of holding off with the IMSB build for 2-3 years and continuing to observe the situation. As soon as it either breaks or the oil analyses start returning concerning numbers, it is time for the rebuild and IMSB Solution.

Quotes source post: 18199138

This is not a flame�Your use of the word �Solution� in �it doesn�t matter who�s solution you choose�, is misleading, confusing, and just plain wrong. The fact is that there is only one �IMS Solution�. It is the only �do it once and you�re done� IMS bearing that�s available, and it�s patented. So yes, it does matter who�s �solution� you choose�

If you assume that the AGE of the seals in the original bearings is probably a factor, and the aging is aggravated by not being driven. it stands to reason that a car driven regularly and probably over maintained (As compared to Porsche's schedule...) "seems" to have less occurrences. it would seem like there are external factors fairly easy to track the odds on....

Quotes source post: 18188257

I was just looking into it and got two quotes from two shops for the IMS Solution (not a retrofit LN bearing) and clutch (including flywheel pricing, just in case) at over $6.8 to 7.2k before taxes. I was a bit shocked.

Cost of ims solution, Clutch and flywheel; plus service hours including dropping the engine...that range may be about right today. More than half of that would be parts which aren't cheap anymore. Might as well throw in a UAOS and a new oil coiler as well because you are in there and round it up to 9k and you are set for a decade or two. Not being silly. I just went thru the same exercise with mine. Clutch and flywheel were fine and relatively new so I didn't need to do them.

I’m sorry. Dropping the engine?

Quotes source post: 18209856

Slowly

I think his point was no need for an an engine drop for the solution, clutch, and FW.

Sure. Plenty of ways to handle service procedures. My personal preference is to have the engine dropped if replacing these items for one simple reason. It gives me and my indy a more comprehensive view to see what you have and what in addition should be replaced or watched closely. Comes down to your preference and objectives. But yeah, unfortunately there is always a cost one way or another with a 20 year old classic sports car.

Quotes source post: 13677725

Seven years later, how has your EPS IMS bearing held up?

Quotes source post: 18233293

He sold the car back in 2017. And, someone got a killer deal at only $15,650 for a coupe 996. That car is probably worth close $30,000 or more today. https://rennlist.com/forums/996-foru...rm-gain-2.html

Quotes source post: 18233363

. ^^ Assuming the bearing hasn�t given up the ghost^^� 😉

Quotes source post: 18235842

No doubt about it!

Put the EPS in my 99 986 with 85K and so far its been flawless.

Quotes source post: 18203150

There are more solutions for the IMS problem out there that don't have the name "Solution" in their commercial name, but are also patented. DOF (direct oil feed) by TuneRS is one of them

Quotes source post: 18430984

Yep. With all the imsb products available, seems that the probability of imsb failure has pretty much become a low probability event. Now if we can just get new buyers to scope the bores and check the service records to see whats been serviced and when before buying we can eliminate the bore scoring issues and typical failures that hit the RL airwaves. But what will we have to talk about?

Quotes source post: 18431029

The headlights that won LeMans, obviously.

Quotes source post: 18430984

Is that the one that has you bore out the crankcase if you have the large non- serviceable bearing? Oh yeah, that�s a �solution�� 🙄😏

Quotes source post: 18435464

I don�t think it�s the same. TuneRS and Vertex are different shops and geographically about 3hrs from each other, I�m not 100% but to my knowledge Vertex bores the flange�. Ask me how I know.

Quotes source post: 18436085

Ugh� sorry to hear that 😩

My targa has the TuneRS bearing. There's a notch cut in the edge of the bell housing to allow the oil line through to the IMSB flange. No crankcase holes.

Quotes source post: 18436192

Yeah but I do try to spread the word, in general TuneRS has a good rep down here and also the dry ice cleaning place. I don�t particularly care to fight with people in regards to the bearing but EPS makes a good one and the Vertex bore install isn�t the best choice. With all that said I can see why people can get annoyed with LN calling their product the �solution� when there are many variables and stipulations to what�s considered a proper candidate�. It should be absolute. Like @GC996 said earlier, we�re at a point that the IMS failure shouldn�t be a thing anymore with all the fantastic options available.

Quotes source post: 18436325

Yea, for 20 years the IMS problem has existed and yet we still have hoards of people who deny the problem... .. Hell there is a whole Facebook page/groups of thousands that was only created to deny the existence of the problem,,,lol.. But the more they have denied, the more people show up posting failed bearings..lol