43 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHIMS - would you ???
Reported or suspected cause
expire next year
Reported cause
No successful repair reported for this finding.
1
Identified cause
0
Suspected cause
0
Reported fixes
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 report identifying a cause
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.
Reported cause
FWIW, the warranty of the dual row LN IMS retrofit kit that was installed in the 2000 C4 Cab that I bought a year ago is due to expire next year.
Leading evidence: 'expire next year' (1 discussions report identifying this cause; no attributable repair resolution). Across 1 matching discussions, the most frequently mentioned possible cause is 'expire next year' (1 discussions; 1 report identifying it and 0 suggest it). The most frequently discussed action is 'Install ln ims bearing will look like' (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
I'm very curious to see what the previously installed LN IMS bearing will look like after 10 years and 55k miles.
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
My IMS was replaced using an LN bearing 10 years ago but the car only has about 20,000 miles on the replaced bearing.
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
My IMS was replaced using an LN bearing 10 years ago but the car only has about 20,000 miles on the replaced bearing.
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
Mine has been in place for 10 years and 55k miles and is getting replaced with a new unit during a clutch job.
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
I'll be reporting back with an update on the state of the bearing after 4 year longer time in service than recommended, even though it's fine miles wise.
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
The other thing I recall reading (which may or may not be true) is that, if an LN IMS bearing is NOT installed by an "authorized" repair shop, their warranty may not be honored.
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.
43 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.
Rennlist: 1 discussions
0 evidence records excluded for query context · 0 excluded by outcome qualification · 0 adjusted by outcome qualification.
0 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.
Generation: 20261027T044418Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
I have just bought a 2000 996, it has a LN sticker with a serial number relating to 2011. So that�s 9 years ago but only 30,000 drive. Would you change it out again or just drive it as is? Current mileage is 61,000.
Thanks.
In all honesty, I probably wouldn't change either the IMS or the IMSB. The IMSB is beyond its service life, but I'd put the odds of failure low enough to take the risk.
Yes, as Mike Murphy points out, the answer would depend on whether the LN installation 9 years ago was a single row or a double row. If its a single row, definitely change it pronto preferably with a double row or better. Best of luck.
I'm in a similar situation with about 10 years in service and about 55k miles on mine. Just so happens that my clutch started slipping so I'll be doing that, new LN IMS, RMS, and throwing on the spin-on filter with the adapter for good measure and obviously some fresh DT40 oil. I'm very curious to see what the previously installed LN IMS bearing will look like after 10 years and 55k miles. I asked the shop to save it for me and I'll be sure to post my findings once I have it in my hands.
IMO, it depends on how long you plan to own the car and the level of risk of a possible future LN Retrofit failure.
FWIW, the warranty of the dual row LN IMS retrofit kit that was installed in the 2000 C4 Cab that I bought a year ago is due to expire next year.
I presently do not plan to keep my 996 all that much longer and replacing the IMS again w/the "Solution" will NOT enhance the resale or trade-in value of the car sufficiently to justify the expense. The engine runs well and I have a high tolerance for risk (and the $ to pay for repairs if necessary).
So, I have no plans on replacing the IMS "again" if I still have the car when the LN warranty expires, which may not be honored anyway because the installation was NOT done by an LN "authorized" shop.
However, those plans may change if it looks like I'll be keeping the 996 longer than expected and if other engine work is necessary that requires removal of the engine.
sgt1372 - could you clarify the warranty part? The warranty covers the IMS Retrofit for 2yrs and 24k miles but that does not imply that's when you need to replaced. The service life is more like 6yrs and 75k miles. Mine has been in place for 10 years and 55k miles and is getting replaced with a new unit during a clutch job. I'll be reporting back with an update on the state of the bearing after 4 year longer time in service than recommended, even though it's fine miles wise. Most will agree that both time in service is just as important as mileage.
My two cents are how tolerant are you to risk taking behavior? The odds may be with you, but keep in mind the risk is @$20k+ to avoid a $2-$3k investment. This doesn't address the lack of sleep issue...
The Solution is the solution IMHO.
Sorry if I wasn't clear.
I bought my 996 last year but the LN IMS Retrofit kit was installed in my 996 about 4 years ago and the 5 yr warranty is due to expire next year.
The other thing I recall reading (which may or may not be true) is that, if an LN IMS bearing is NOT installed by an "authorized" repair shop, their warranty may not be honored. I'm going on the assumption that they would NOT honor a warranty on the LN retrofit kit that was installed in my car. If I'm wrong, all good but, if not, I already know that I'm on my own.
There's only 1 more year to worry about it, nonetheless.
No worries but I'm still somewhat unclear with your definition of warranty. The warranty is in place for a duration of 2yrs/24k miles as started on the product page (
https://lnengineering.com/products/i...r-my97-01.html
). This covers the bearing should it for some reason fail during that time and that is the reason why LN would require that it is installed by an authorized shop so they feel comfortable that the job was done correctly. Not to say that an unauthorized shop can't do it but it's something they can monitor I suppose. I don't know what it takes to become a certified installer. If it wasn't they still could cover it but that's really up to them at that point and I'd imaging some sort of evidence would need to be provided. If you look here (
https://lnengineering.com/products/i...7-engines.html
) you can see that the retrofits are NOT a permanent fix and have a service interval which for your bearing would be 6yrs/75k miles, whichever comes first. This is NOT to be understood as a warranty. It's simple a guide as when one should replace it. It isn't a lifetime warranty like you can get with brake pads for example where if you wear them out you simply get a new set.
If your car drives fine now and you're doing regular oil changes with a quality oil I'd consider doing the bearing during a clutch job but wouldn't rush to do it immediately. Like other said, if you're loosing sleep and have sweaty palms when driving because of this, get it done. If not, that's ok too and get it done when you think it's appropriate. Everyone will have a different tolerance with this. My LN IMS has been in place for 10 years. I'm swapping it out during the clutch job. If I didn't need a clutch I'd probably wait a bit longer and schedule it when I'm away or something like that.
SGT, sounds like you are confusing "warranty" with "service interval". Depending upon which retrofit solution you have (Classic, which was the original single row replacement; dual row, or single row pro), the service interval (meaning when the designer says you should REPLACE it) is 4yrs/50k for the Classic and 6yrs/75K for the other two.
I do not know what the Classic had for a warranty, but the Dual Row and the Single Row Pro have 2 yr/24k limited warranties. There are no "5 year warranties".
OP, according to the designer, your IMS is out of its service life and should be replaced. Go with the IMS Solution and never think twice about the IMS. It is what I plan to do when my service interval is up on my Dual Row Retrofit.
Getting an oil analysis is always a good move but it's important to remember that they are most valuable in building a trend over time. A single analysis wont tell you everything and won't pick up particles that are too big and provide inaccurate readings.
My IMS was replaced using an LN bearing 10 years ago but the car only has about 20,000 miles on the replaced bearing. It's hard for me to imagine that the mere passage of time would degrade the replacement bearing that much, and on LN's web site they claim that they've had no failures on any of their replacement bearings. So I won't replace mine unless I need clutch work, then do it at the same time.
All depends on how the car was stored, how often the oil was changed, how many short trips, if your fuel injectors are leaking, proper warmup times, etc. Any metal that sits in liquid is subject to the wrath of such a liquid, err, mixture.
From what I understand (and correct me if I'm wrong) the cause of failure is not the bearing itself wearing out due to use. What happens is the rubber seal fails and lets all the lubrication out of the bearing. At some point after that, the bearing fails due to losing its lubrication. Since it's really a rubber seal issue it has more to do with time in service, oil changes, concentration of gas in the oil to erode the seal, etc. Not with miles.
Mine has an LN bearing replacement too. The thought occurred to me that I really don't know what LN did to improve the issue with the bearing losing it's seal. I need to go to their website and see if there's an answer there.
�The Solution� isn�t a �$2-$3k� investment.
An authorized installer is going to charge 2 to 3 times that amount.
But I agree that it�s money well spent if you�re risk adverse.
The IMS Dual Row and Single Row Pro retrofit solutions ARE NOT sealed bearings. They are unsealed ceramic hybrid ball bearings that allow engine oil to freely move through the bearing. Oil from the IMS tube is centrifugally fed to the bearing in use. The inventor states that they are a
wear item
and should be treated as such (he also insists that the OEM bearings should have been treated thusly).
A failure mode for the OEM single row bearings is also insufficient load bearing capability. The Single Row Pro retrofit uses a dual row bearing to alleviate this. Lubrication is an issue for both of the OEM sealed bearing types.
Yes. Reading the LN website I now see where they say they unsealed the retrofit bearing and increased the load capacity. So, if you have an LN replacement, then oil change intervals shouldn't be much of an issue when it comes to the IMSB. Though they probably still make a difference when it comes to bore scoring.
If seal failure isn't an issue with the LN bearings, I wonder why they have a time in service limit rather than just a mileage limit?
My guess would be around the wear due to difference in materials used. I don't know the details nor am I an engineer but if the ***** are made out of ceramic, which is a harder material, they could create wear on the races on which they spin, which are probably some sort of metal, which is softer then a ceramic ball. Over time this could cause enough wear to warrant a service interval, even with lubrication. If this is the case, this should be marketed as a hybrid ceramic bearing. This is commonly used and sometimes misunderstood in cycling where ceramic bearings are becoming more popular. Hybrid ceramic bearing will have ceramic ***** and a metal race while a full ceramic will have the ***** and races made out of a ceramic material, both of which would have equal hardness.
It IS marketed as a hybrid ceramic bearing....clearly in their literature.
I highly doubt LN would agree with that statement...oil changes are still crucial due to contamination and its effects on components. Frequent oil changes are a must according to the designer of the part......from the website: "
The IMS tube itself will end up storing a sizable amount of oil that will centrifugally be fed to the bearing during operation. This is another reason why frequent oil changes are a must – as this oil gets trapped and is one of the sources for lubrication of the new bearing!"
Bottom line...the designer considers it a wear item based both upon time and mileage. That's a pretty good indication. The fact that they say none of their bearings have failed is, I am sure, predicated on correct installation and regular oil changes. If one of those two elements is not in the picture, they would not say the that bearing failed, but that it was user/installer error.
Change it or don't at your discretion, but know that, unless you use the IMS SOLUTION, it is not guaranteed to survive indefinitely and has never been suggested that it can.
Given the probability vs cost, I am a numbers man and would not. Lots of fear mongering on IMS, especially those who pocket from it. I’ve seen plenty of replacement IMS bearings fail as well.
Actually, I was confusing the 5yr/unlimited mile warranty on the "Solution" with the 2 yr/24k mile warranty offered on the other retrofit kits. So, my IMS has been "out of warranty" (assuming I could even make a claim) for 2 years already. Oh well . . .
Sorry for any confusion this may have caused.
It's just like any catastrophic failure item with massive collateral damage - timing belt is the usual example. The answer is always simple, and it's always the same: replace it the day before it fails.
Speaking of which, had a funny feeling about tomorrow, so dropped it off at the shop today for clutch/IMS/RMS. Throwing in the spin-on adapter and filter for good measure for the fresh DT40 oil.
Thought about it but this bill will be a hefty one, especially if I need a flywheel too. I'll probably plan to tackle the UAOS myself in spring along with the coolant reservoir and coolant flush
Barry Hart of Hartech says maybe best to leave working ISBs in place because the bearing design requires a thin outer race which if distorted during install will lead to the catastrophic failure you're trying to avoid. If LN or other expert has answered that issue I don't recall seeing it.
This is why you use the only novel concept that removes the outer race from the equation. It doesn�t have a race. The IMS Solution, is a true solution.
That said, it takes a neanderthal to damage a bearing on installation. This is why I invented the Faultless IMS Installation tool, and procedure. This mechanically installs the bearing in a precision manner. No hammer needed.
We have seen a huge spike in IMSB failures in the last month. This is certainly the biggest spike since 2013.
Interesting! Perhaps people taking their already lightly driven cars for a last drive pre-winter storage and things go bad. Your wait list must be flirting with 2 years wait time in this case!
