25 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHIMS Bearing "Recall" Replacement Pre-2007?
Leading reported evidence
Inspect but not
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
Paying to have the IMSB inspected but not replaced is certainly not smart.
Leading evidence: 'Inspect but not' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Check issues' (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
The IMS bearing had been replaced on my porsche prior to my purchase in 2007 @ 27K at that time by the dealer due to a recall, and I also had it inspected when the clutch was replaced the mechanic advised me that the bearing doesn't need to be replaced
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
They did inspect it when they replaced the clutch a few years ago.
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
He was able to show me the receipt from 2016 where the clutch was replaced and the bearing was checked.
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
The IMS bearing had been replaced on my porsche prior to my purchase in 2007 @ 27K at that time by the dealer due to a recall, and I also had it inspected when the clutch was replaced the mechanic advised me that the bearing doesn't need to be replaced
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
The IMS bearing had been replaced on my porsche prior to my purchase in 2007 @ 27K at that time by the dealer due to a recall, and I also had it inspected when the clutch was replaced the mechanic advised me that the bearing doesn't need to be replaced
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.
25 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: 20261026T181445Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
I searched google & Rennlist for this and couldn't find an answer. I also looked at the IMS thread. I just looked at a 2002 C2 today. The guy claims this in his ad:
The IMS bearing had been replaced on my porsche prior to my purchase in 2007 @ 27K at that time by the dealer due to a recall, and I also had it inspected when the clutch was replaced the mechanic advised me that the bearing doesn't need to be replaced
From what I read, there really was no "recall" for this. Just a settlement in 2013. Does anyone know of situations where a dealer has replaced a bearing without an engine failing? He was able to show me the receipt from 2016 where the clutch was replaced and the bearing was checked. There's only been around 4K put on the car since then.
Charles Navarro of LN spoke about Porsche producing a recall type factory IMS bearing kit that Porsche temporarily supplied dealerships in response to the class action law suit. The IMS replacement kit didn't stay in the Porsche parts system for very long, but Charles was able to purchase some of these before they were removed. I would think this might be want the seller is referring to, but maybe PorscheTech3 can chime in on the details.
Sounds like complete BS to me.In 2007 Porsche was saying it was impossible to replace them, which means it couldn't have been inspected and found to be in good condition. Even if true (which it isn't) the bearing would need to be replaced again as it's at least 13 years old.
Yea, I've read so many stories on the subject. Porsche "didn't have a way to safely remove the old bearings" and thus engine replacement or complete IMS shaft replacement was the answer. I do know that Jake Raby says he was told it couldn't be done and of course, that's like war in his mind. Now, his bearing removal invention is being used by independents and dealerships.
The Porsche "retrofit" bearing was introduced WAY after the class action suit was long over. And was soon discontinued. I think it was not really intended to be released.
In the class action, customers were reimbursed for any cost incurred from failing single row bearings, even if done by an Indy or Dealership, just show the receipts, and depending on mileage and whether original owner or CPO a percentage of actual cost from 25% to 100% would be refunded, even if a complete Factory Crate engine was installed.
No bearings were replaced proactively. The Dealership I worked for would only use Porsche Approved Parts for repairs, I tried to talk them into the LN bearings, but the Corporate office said NO. I know some smaller Dealerships DID install LN bearings during that time.
Any idea when that was? That lawsuit was filed in 2011 and this "replacement" would have happened in the 2004-2007 range.
Ugh. I liked this car but if he's lying then I don't know what else he might be hiding. He says he's owned several older Porsches and works in the body shop of a non Porsche dealership. I think if the place he bought it from lied to him he would have figured it out. The status of the bearing isn't the issue. Even if it happened it was done 50K miles ago. It's more about his truthfulness.
They did inspect it when they replaced the clutch a few years ago. He chose not to replace it because it looked fine. That tells me he wasn't concerned about the bearing even though he knew they could be an issue. He said it was a $200 part (I think he's referring to the Pelican update kit) so he would have done it if it needed it.
During the 2004-2007 time frame, it would have either gotten an new(reman) complete engine, or the engine would have been dissembled. cleaned, and a new intermediate shaft installed.
The cost should have been covered under the 4-50k warranty, or CPO warranty, or reimbursed in 2011 under the class action.
Thanks for answering this. Can you clarify something for me? You said no bearings were replaced proactively but then said some smaller dealerships did replace them with LN bearings. Could this guy be telling the truth about it being replaced?
I don't want to pass on the car if he's being honest (or if he thinks he's being honest) but I don't want to pay for a PPI if he's lying.
Is there a chance the current owner is going off what he believes based on what the previous owner told him? Does it matter that much? Is there something else that doesn't seem right about the car or the owner?
If you really like the car and are planning on a PPI, does his 'story' mean all that much? Maybe a little more digging will help you decide if he is honest or not. Best of luck, regardless.
What I mean is no bearings were replaced proactively under the class action lawsuit.
You could certainly pay someone to install an LN retrofit, like some of the smaller Dealerships or Indy's.
But at the Dealership I worked for, you could not even pay for a non-Porsche Approved Part to be installed.
So he could be telling the truth about it being installed by a Porsche Dealership, but not under the class action lawsuit.
Selling a 996 has to be worst. I always see so many accusations of buyers and whatever this Perry Mason moment is trying to be,... If you like the car do a ppi and buy it. It's really that simple, no need to overthink it. This is why BAT is the place to sell a 996. The car is gone in 7 days and you don't have to deal with the 996 buyers for longer than that.
All good questions I've asked myself. He bought the car from a dealer so I'm not sure if a reputable dealer would have told him it was replaced due to recall. He works at a dealership (non Porsche) in the collision department. He says he's owned several Porsches. The clutch was done at a steep discount by some of his mechanic friends in the Armenian community. So, he should know what was and was not recalled. If he wants to hide something he has the knowledge and resources to do it well.
I've looked at 3 so far and when I listened to the engine, I wouldn't say there was a ticking noise but it did seem a little noisier in that regard than the other two. Both tailpipes on this one were sooty but not one more than the other. It could be nothing but the other two I looked at didn't have soot.
Oh, and he has a ponytail.
He may think he's being truthful based on what the previous owner told him. Paying to have the IMSB inspected but not replaced is certainly not smart. Penny wise, pound foolish.
Yeah that's the one thing that makes me think that he believes the bearing was replaced with a better one.
I'm not seeing a lot of sellers that are too worried about it. The three that I looked at, they all know about it but figure they'll replace it when they get around to it. I've only seen a couple advertised that said it had been replaced.
I wonder how they inspected the bearing and would know it "looks good" I thought it was pretty much a once in once out part.. ?
I mean given the trouble to pull it the cost would be stupid not to at least put a new bearing in.
Just to update everyone on this…
Yesterday I emailed him with two followup questions. One about the title and the second asking him what the dealer told him about the IMSB being replaced under recall. He emailed back last night answering the question about the title and ignoring the one about the IMSB.
Then this morning he emailed saying for my peace of mind he’d be willing to replace the IMSB for me and would add it to the price of the car. No explanation about the previous replacement or recall.
I answered back that it really wasn’t about the bearing, look at it from my perspective, a knowledgeable guy in the car industry saying something was recalled when it wasn’t, etc and I’d need to keep looking.
He said he understood and said he was just telling me what the dealer told him.
Anyway, on to the next one.
^^ Good call - it's amazing to me/us how little people know about their cars, because we're "enthusiasts" (or "nut jobs" by many peoples standards
). There are still plenty of good ones out there
I agree. But someone correct me if I'm wrong. The big issue is that the seal on the bearing goes out which de-lubricates the bearing over time. Once that happens, there is more friction and the bearing fails. I assume what people are doing is looking at the seal on the side they can see without removing it. I see a lot of people here talking about looking at the bearing during a clutch job. I figure they see the seal on that side is good so the bearing must be good and they go on their merry way.
It�s slightly more complicated than that, but you have the gist. The original grease is diluted by oil that seeps in, but the oil can�t be refreshed often enough to be an adequate replacement with the seals still in place (still a simplification). The LN and other replacements have no seals and allow oil in and out to lubricate the bearing. Of course, this is unfiltered oil, so oil changes become that much more important since anything in oil pan can find its way into the bearing.
I think the check is more than a peek at seal in most cases. Once the cover is removed to view the bearing, the stud that is pressed into the inner race is right there, sticking up like a sore thumb. Very easy to give it a spin and a wiggle to check for issues. But it�s like your retirement investments; past performance does not guarantee the future.
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.
