5 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHHave I been wronged in IMSB leakl
Leading reported evidence
Replace by a local indy shop
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 · Original poster
This past fall I decided to have the noisy transmission (pinion bearing) replaced by a local indy shop.
Leading evidence: 'Replace by a local indy shop' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Repair leak' (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 · Original poster
Because the dealer and he both used P-car parts for the upgrade/repair and there is sill a leak the indy claims that there in nothing defective or wrong with his labor.
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
Expecting the indy who did the later transmission work to diagnose and repair the leak with 100% accuracy seems unrealistic.
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
On the other hand, my expectation was that after the repair the leak would be fixed and the back end of the car would be dry.
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
His remedy for the leak was to install (replace) a new P-car seal around the IMSB.
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 · Original poster
Because the dealer and he both used P-car parts for the upgrade/repair and there is sill a leak the indy claims that there in nothing defective or wrong with his labor.
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.
5 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.
1 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.
Outcome without a verified action link
It sucks that it didn't resolve the leak, but they did the agreed-upon work.
Please offer an opinion. Have I been wronged?
Almost 2 years ago in the fall I had my local P-car dealer install the LN IMS bearing in my �99 C4 w/ 100K. I drove the car for a few weeks and then put in winter storage. When spring/summer rolled around I noticed a slight oil leak right at the spot where it is either the rear main seal or IMS bearing. I figured it had to be the RMS since the IMSB had just been replaced. I was kind of PO�ed at dealer for not noticing or mentioning any RMS issues.
This past fall I decided to have the noisy transmission (pinion bearing) replaced by a local indy shop. When he got the transmission off he found that the RMS was dry but the IMSB was leaking. His remedy for the leak was to install (replace) a new P-car seal around the IMSB. I literally drove the car from the shop to the winter storage location. During the winter I found a small spot of oil under the car and oil dripping from the same spot as before.
This spring I took my car back to the shop and after inspection the shop has taken the position that there is something defective with the IMSB cover or some other part that causes the leak. Because the dealer and he both used P-car parts for the upgrade/repair and there is sill a leak the indy claims that there in nothing defective or wrong with his labor.
On the other hand, my expectation was that after the repair the leak would be fixed and the back end of the car would be dry.
Have I been wronged or should I suck it up and accept a small oil leak after having the transmission out twice in 2 years?
Was the flange replaced or just the seal? Maybe the flange is bad. Plus the bolts should be micro encapsulated and additional sealant around the bolts and nut when installed.
Ultimately, you're the one to determine if you've been "wronged." My '99 does not leak oil after the IMS bearing was replaced, and if it leaked oil AFTER a repair was performed when it previously did not leak oil, I would certainly pursue that with the establishment that performed the repair that resulted in a leak.
Expecting the indy who did the later transmission work to diagnose and repair the leak with 100% accuracy seems unrealistic. Based on the information provided, a new seal appeared to be a logical repair, so that's what they tried. It sucks that it didn't resolve the leak, but they did the agreed-upon work. If you determine that the NEW seal was installed poorly or was damaged during the installation, the indy should make it right. If the problem lies elsewhere, it's not the indy's fault. They worked with what you brought them.
The timing is unfortunate. I think either shop would naturally be more inclined to help had you noted the oil leak and returned the following week, whereas they're much less inclined to take responsibility for a leak that was caused and not reported a year ago, let alone two years beforehand.
Just out of curiosity, how much leakage are you seeing? If we're talking a drop every now and then, that ain't so bad for a 15-year-old car.
Lots of things in this region can leak other than the IMS flange. This includes RMS, case bolts, AOS boot and many, many others. You can even have a case porosity issue that allows oil to hemorrhage right through the material.
