61 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCH03/01 996 build, single or dual IMS?
Leading reported evidence
Install by the owner
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.
Leading evidence: 'Install by the owner' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, the most frequently mentioned possible cause is '"hype" and you have' (1 discussions; 0 report identifying it and 1 suggest it). The most frequently discussed action is 'Fill tank' (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
Joe, he is likely stating that when he went in to have the Solution installed, there was an LNE Retrofit bearing that was installed previously.
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
At Flat 6, our only commodity that is offered is a full engine, and of course that will be fitted with an IMS Solution.
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
And bonus, Porsche never kept track aside from the date the original factory burned down and they changed engine and car production lines.
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
Many have changed their IMSB, while few have changed their IMS.
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
In post 9 I stated my car is a 04/01 build date, the bearing was changed shortly before I purchased the car , the owner gave me the name of the shop that had been servicing the car for years so I called and talked to them multiple time, I was told that the bearing they removed was a duel row and that it was replaced with a duel row and that he still had the bearing if I would like to come take a look at it, I chose not to.
These are separate views of the same evidence. Frequency alone does not establish a fix, and these counts must not be added together.
"hype" and you have
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Identified cause
1
Suspected cause
0
Reported fixes
Read evidence and context
Discussions that suspect 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.
Suspected cause
It's pretty simple, if you think the IMSB problem is "hype" and you have to make up some reason to support that, and it includes someone else making money from you, well you are just a vendor hater.
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.
Suspected cause
But here, we�re not going to drink the Kool Aid every time someone says something that has been proven to be false over and over again nor allow someone to discourage healthy debate.
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.
61 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.
2 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.
Outcome without a verified action link
I've lived through the excursion ford 6.0 diesel issue (fixed it)and the audi s8 4.0 oil screen (went by vin and came out ok)and came out ok.
Sold my 04 lapis blue C4s cab 2 months ago and miss it already. A buddy just bought a 09 S coupe and wants to sell me his 01 cab with 10k miles on it. He bought it 3 yrs ago with 5k miles and probably has put 8k into it fixing minor maintenance items. I was original owner of the 04 and never worried about the ims since I live in fl and drove it 2-3x a week and always drove it aggressively. Never put a dime in the car other than normal maintenance.
So with the 01 yr I'm reading some early cars had the dual row, is there a vin number cutoff or a build date to reference?
Thanks in advance for any knowledge.
The simple answer to your question is - no. There is no VIN number cutoff or build date or engine number sequence to reference. On a 01 cab the only way to know is to pull the transmission, clutch, flywheel and inspect the IMSB cover flange. And at that point, might as well install the IMS Solution and be done with it.
I�m not an expert but I have watched every video on the subject made by the person who is.
The �01 996 should have the more �problematic� single row.
Unless the engine has been replaced.
^^^ Not necessarily... There were '01 motors (M96/04) with dual row IMSB's... I know, I've got one (it's got the "dual row" IMS Solution in it now....).
Mine is/was a replacement engine (not a factory/AT) - not original to the car (5/'99 build date). I actually found out it had a dual row LNE bearing in it when I installed it's first IMS Solution back in 2016...
thanks, did u know it was a dual row before changing it? How did it look when it came out and if u didn't know beforehand would you have still changed it?
my understanding dual row is much more capable to hold up vs single. Honestly if I knew for sure it was a dual I wouldn't consider changing it. I've lived through the excursion ford 6.0 diesel issue (fixed it)and the audi s8 4.0 oil screen (went by vin and came out ok)and came out ok.
Previous owner had it done , the old bearing was prefect, car had 56,000 miles.
They didn't know till they got in there which bearing the car had , I would have had it changed if not already done just for peace of mind .
My GF's '01 Boxster 2.7 has the dual row. Fully expected to find a single row when I tore it apart. So yes, no rhyme or reason to know what's in there until you look.
.02
Phiphe, a lot of what you read on the
internet
about the IMS bearing is fear mongering, misinformation and/or commercial. The truth is you probably want to inspect it and
maybe
replace it with the exact same type if it shows any signs of wear or damage. Extract the bearing, walk over to your SKF/Timken/NSK etc dealer and ask for an exact replacement. It will cost you something like 20 USD. Read what I have written in the IMS discussion thread from post #492 and some 10-20 posts forward.
https://rennlist.com/forums/996-foru...-first-33.html
Those are retrofits installed by the owner. I'm speaking about the OE bearing installed at the factory. If you're 01 still has the factory bearing, it [could] be the 6204 single row bearing. Must investigate.
I had the IMS retro fit done by one of LN Engineering's approved installers. Dual row came out and dual row went in. Don't have any kind of idea what the bearing number was...'cause it was sent to LN Engineering for the retrofit warranty AND they would not guarantee the retrofit if the pre-qualification was not met and/or the bearing was damaged.
2001. Build date: 12/00.
I am 2nd owner, PO had tons of records and none refer to IMS bearing.
Just sayin'
I think some of us just got lucky, mine was also a dual row that came out and replaced with a duel row retrofit, it sound like very few 2001 cars came with dual row bearings.
Just checked my build date 11/22/2000 I pulled the original dual row out of it 2 years ago. I did not order the bearing until transmission was off. So that is four. Many 2001s have a dual row.
I realize this will probably come across as petty, but I'd like the remind everyone that there is a difference between an IMS (intermediate shaft) and IMSB (intermediate shaft bearing). The two acronyms tend to be used be used interchangeably, unfortunately. Either can fail. The IMSB tends to fail more often and more spectacularly, but the IMS can fail as well. Many have changed their IMSB, while few have changed their IMS.
There is no dual IMS engine.
This forum tends to be technical in nature, rather than a trite forum about slamming and xenon conversions, so we should all make the effort to use technical terms correctly.
Flame away.
/climbs down from soap box
I think you may be mistaken if you reread, the cases noted here are all original dual replaced with dual after they were opened up. I could be wrong but that's how I read it. I've read that most early 01's had the dual, just trying to figure out how late into the yr, feb, march, april, may.
I did read about a factory fire at the main porsche plant in late 00 and 911 production was moved to a factory that was tooled for dual row exclusively, thus some cars are single and some dual. It really is a shame Porsche wont just release what build dates have what, they have the info. Thanks
agreed but those writing here on this board all had dual and replaced with dual. Am I missing something here? Maybe my comprehension level isnt what it used to be. Thnx
I do apologize for sounding absolute in my original post. I meant "could have". Therefore, if you don't know, you have to presume the 2001 has the single row until proven otherwise. This is because Porsche began phasing out the dual row engines in 2000.
Look at the attachment.
dporter's car the M96.04 did confirm was an original dual row, but others would still have to confirm because Porsche began the transition in 2000 to the single row bearing.
just one more - he never mentioned his year of 996 nor did he confirm or have eye witness account that his OE bearing was a dual row. He just mentioned the retrofit was dual row.
SVAZ - is a 2001 Carrera Cabriolet. He also didn't confirm his car had an OE dual row bearing. Again, the M96.04 could have had either since Porsche moved away from dual row during in 2000. He just confirmed his retrofit is a dual row.
The original engine in your 2004 C4S would have the 6204 bearing from the factory. However, if the engine was ever replaced under warranty it could have a much newer engine with the 6204 or the M97 6305 bearing. Again, you must confirm and not assume. One way is by looking at the engine serial number. It will give you a date and the tell tale sign is the "AT". AT is german for replacement.
Your 2001 would more than likely have a 6204, but there is a slight chance depending when it was manufactured, that it has the dual row like dporter. But you must confirm and not assume it is. Also, just like your C4S, the engine could have been replaced under warranty. Look at the serial number and report back. If it was replaced during the 6204 days (2002 - 2005), then it will have the most problematic bearing.
Hope that all makes sense.
Not to confuse things even more, but my MY 1999 C2 with an M96.01 engine was manufactured in 7/98. By that example, some 2000 MY cars were made in 1999 and sold as a 2000. Same goes for 2001, those cars were made in 2000 up to some point. This is one reason it is so difficult to pin down specific engines, M96.01, 02, 03, 04, with model years and single vs dual row IMSB's. All our cars made in 1998 and 1999 have dual row bearings. The shift came in 2000 and 2001 cars. And bonus, Porsche never kept track aside from the date the original factory burned down and they changed engine and car production lines.
So I think to be fair in this discussion, and providing the most merit in the conversation, we should include the car manufacture date as well as model year. Perhaps if we do this long enough, a clearer picture of which cars have dual row IMSB's and which have single row IMSB's will result.
In post 9 I stated my car is a 04/01 build date, the bearing was changed shortly before I purchased the car , the owner gave me the name of the shop that had been servicing the car for years so I called and talked to them multiple time, I was told that the bearing they removed was a duel row and that it was replaced with a duel row and that he still had the bearing if I would like to come take a look at it, I chose not to.
I'm in the camp if I have to worry about it I'm going to replace it, I bought my car to use on long trips so worrying about a bearing whether its single row or duel row is just not worth it, I guess I'm not much of a gambler.
I only have experience with one bearing and one car, b3freak has seen hundreds so I would be inclined to go with what he say's
Thank you for correcting my oversight. When I see threads like this it concerns me. Why? Because it seems that many people think the dual row bearings will never fail or are told to just "leave it alone". Flat 6 Innovations is seeing more and more of these dual row bearings fail as the early 996 cars pass the 20-year mark. Unfortunately, when they begin to fail, they shed more metal than the single row 6204. Damage is catastrophic for those that turn a blind eye and say it's all a big hoax. I'm definitely no expert. I'm an M9X owner just like all you guys and enjoy learning from everyone. And unfortunately, we learn more from our failures, than our successes as Jake Raby says.
You seem like you have the right attitude. That is, to err on the side of caution. Just remember, your bearing will need to be swap out based on time in service or miles, whichever comes first.
Happy motoring!
this, the more we can learn around build date, the more educated we can be since porsche "apparently " has no records. I would be comfortable running a dual row to 100k miles.
thanks, my 04 C4S was original owner(me)and original engine. and the 01 has had 2 local owners who are known to me and is original engine as well. Personally I think the 03/01 has the dual row and if purchased i would not replace it until i would have 75-100k miles. But that's me, i know others need peace if mind. Id rather run it hard and just enjoy it, I'm not replacing the ims every 4-5 yrs.
Personally, I'm going to replace it at clutch service with the IMS Solution from LN Engineering. The only one I'd leave alone is the 6305 "M97" bearing found in the cars from 2006 until 2008.
Watch this video. Peter was ALSO the original owner of his 2003 Porsche 996...
You Tube
Just had time for a brief read - several expressing interest in learning more about the IMS problem - we have a free technical report on it available from
[email removed]
which includes a very good value for money and reliable alternative.
Baz
for me clutch service is at 75-100k, so maybe. And there's no way in hell I'm putting any credibility into a video produced for the sole purpose of scaring people, I consider it on par with a political commercial a week before the election.
at this point I'm more concerned with the pixels out on the dash. How do i easily fix those ? Thanks
The bearing we fit in our re-manufactured IMS for both all models of all ages (including Boxsters and the first roller chain engines originally fitted with both single and dual row ball bearings) is the 6305 - glad it has your approval - never given a moments problem.
Baz
Joe, he is likely stating that when he went in to have the Solution installed, there was an LNE Retrofit bearing that was installed previously. There are visual ques that take the guess work out of whether a Solution is installed or not.
�The only thing we have to fear is fear itself.�
Facts are easily twisted to ones financial benefit, everyone's individual concerns are theirs and to be respected. Too many looking out for the worst and not enjoying the present.
IMHO, you're way off on that one. You came here on Rennlist and started an IMS bearing thread which implies concern. Obviously, you've done some "research" about the problem or you wouldn't have started this thread. No reason to bash Jake Raby or the video team for bringing awareness of the issue(s) surrounding the M96 Porsche engines. If anything, Raby helps buyers and DiY'ers become more educated on what to look for when vetting these cars. Flat 6 Innovations doesn't benefit from presenting the failure modes of these engines. If anything, he would be more profitable to sit back and wait for failures to come to him. Pete Sayeski, that was interviewed in the video, was the original owner of the 996 and wasn't aware of the IMS bearing problem. He maintained his car by the book and still had catastrophic engine failure. Regardless, enjoy that new car. It's truly a beauty!
hey b3freak, i did not come on rennlist to start a "imsb concern" thread, i think i've been posting on here almost as long as you though I don't share the same alarmist attitude. I did come on here to ask if there was a database of vin #'s, not model yr to determine if a vehicle was single or dual. I didn't mean to bash Jake, I know he's helpful to many and I absorb his advice and make decisions independently. I also tend to discount a little advice when it comes from a salesman who has a financial interest in the conversation. Call me a skeptic, that's fine. Jake if I offended you I apologize.
Now for you to state Flat 6 doesn't benefit from presenting failure modes is false, let me rephrase, completely false. They have sold 40,000 ims retrofits since 2008, let's use a wholesale/retail blended price of $1,000 = $40,000,000. substantial in my book, maybe not yours?
I've been through the ford diesel 6.0 egr and audi v8 4.0 turbochargers issues, every car has issues. Just drive them hard and enjoy them if that's what they were made for. As a date once told me, screw me like your paying for it!
Anyway for those that actually responded with a helpful response, thanks and appreciated. (think it's time for this thread to drift into oblivion)
ok
IMS Solution Retrofits
Here at Flat 6 we Invented the IMS Solution, developed the IMS Retrofit procedures, and spearheaded all things IMS. Due to this we have maintained our position at the top of the �IMS food chain� over many years. Holding a total of four US Patents for IMS Bearing related products, tools, and procedures proves this. We�ve written the directives, created the processes, and authored the resource materials used by other facilities, and stolen by the imitators.
Today we are very selective with the vehicles that we offer our IMS Solution
Damn right, I'm a pioneer, and I'll be as associated, or disassociated with this issue as I want to be.
Fact is, I don't want to be. I don't want to do more than develop, and build engines.
LN Engineering handles manufacturing, distribution, and sales of the IMS Solution. It has been theirs since I walked away in 2012. At the same time I also gave them my online parts business, just to get rid of it.
When we had differences about warranty, it wasn't worth the fight. I thought that no IMS product should see a warranty of any sort. I hate warrantees, and fine print/ BS, and "leverage" from buyers.
I was unwilling to sell the product with a warranty, and I wanted the only shops that were allowed to do the work be trained, Certified Installers. I wanted to ensure that Porsche dealerships would never be able to touch what I had invented, and I did not want the products to be sold wholesale, to just anyone.
Needless to say, this didn't work. The easiest thing for everyone was for me to leave, and I haven't been back since. Today, the Knowledge Gruppe is paid to train the IMS Solution Certified Installers, and I do that training. Outside of that, I have zero role, and don't want one. If Charles tries to ask me a question, for my input, I remind him that he doesn't;t want to hear my input, and that's the end of the topic.
My part of all of this was over once they launched the product. I had developed the process, invented the tools, invented, and developed the procedures of using the tools, and had written the instruction manuals.
Those were the parts of this that I felt I played a role in, with them completed, I was done and I walked away with a much simpler life. I haven't answered a submitted technical question in over 8 years. I haven't made presentations, or been forced to do any of the things that I hate. When someone calls us and asks for help, I get to say "Sorry, we do not sell products, or offer support unless you have one of our engines. What's your FSI engine serial number?"
That said, call my facility and try to buy any IMS product, or any IMS tool. You will be told that we are not accepting IMS Retrofit work, and that we do not sell any individual products, bearings, or tools; only engines.
You will be referred to a shop in Atlanta named Cali Auto, who we have allowed to use our Certified Installer position, so Georgians can have the work done, since we no longer do it.
At Flat 6, our only commodity that is offered is a full engine, and of course that will be fitted with an IMS Solution. We don't even perform repairs anymore.
I did my part, checked out, and went on to the next thing. That's what I do. My "next thing" after the IMS Solution was over wasn't even related to vehicles, or engines.
Further, my finances, or anyone else's are no one's business here, or anywhere.
I own my factory because I love it, and started it at age 13. It's pretty simple, if you think the IMSB problem is "hype" and you have to make up some reason to support that, and it includes someone else making money from you, well you are just a vendor hater. When you fill your tank with fuel, do you hate the guy that owns the gas station? When you eat a nice steak do you hate the person who prepared it for you?
Yeah, modern humans probably do. Live a little more like me, and don't give a damn. You'll find that life is simpler, easier, more fulfilling, and less hateful.
People really are too concerned with the other guy, and "following" them. If they worried about themselves, and furthering themselves, they may be amazed at what they could accomplish.
So, at the end of the day, guess what? When my engines get their IMS Solution as a standard offering,
I have to buy that damn bearing just like any of you would
. I typically buy them from SSF Auto Parts, and not LN.
Now, go swallow that, and see how it feels.
By all means, if you want to hate someone, exert that effort on me.
Jake, there's no hate on you, everyone is entitled to make a buck and you're very good at what you do with engines and innovations, your success is reflected by that. I wish you nothing but continued success and your sharing of what you've learned is helpful to all here.
My bad on thinking you still have financial gains other than patent $ in the product sales, your website wasn't to clear on that but no biggie
Not even sure how the vendor hater issue came into play, your inclusion of the word fear in previous posts led me to say
"
everyone's individual concerns are theirs and to be respected. Too many looking out for the worst and not enjoying the present"
. and then you come back with
"
Live a little more like me, and don't give a damn. You'll find that life is simpler, easier, more fulfilling, and less hateful.
People really are too concerned with the other guy, and "following" them".........
Are we saying the same thing?
I just find B3freak tiring in his dogmatic, absolute unrelenting views of the issue(s)
Anyway peace and good health.
[Image-only post; no author-written text. Original image references:]
https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/rennlist.com-vbulletin/633x422/screen_shot_2020_10_01_at_5_49_24_pm_778b444be8682f99a23fd3fa31b4ac07c64448d4.png
They way I see it B3 was just trying to help you. You should have appreciated his efforts, not scold him just because he offered an opinion you didn�t agree with. This is not the tickle-your-ear club! This is a technical forum where we debate the merits on every aspect of these cars. We learn from debate and opposing viewpoints should always be encouraged. What we don�t need is whiny little bitches complaining every time someone says something that hurts their little feelings. If you need a safe space, then Seattle is your place to be! But here, we�re not going to drink the Kool Aid every time someone says something that has been proven to be false over and over again nor allow someone to discourage healthy debate. If anything I�ve learned in academics you have to be thick skinned if you want to debate or it will drive you nuts.
What gets under my skin worse than anything is when people are antagonistic or complete asses to industry leaders like Charles Navarro, Jake Raby, Barry Hart, and PorscheTech3 to name a few. These men have spent their lives offering solutions to problems with Porsches. What have you done for this industry? Whether their knowledge is offered on a forum post or YouTube video, saying they�re not creditable or they are using scare tactics shows your ignorance.
Looks to me you quickly back peddled and changed your tune when Jake Raby showed up and called you out for such a lame comment. You need to be a little more grateful to everyone's contribution when trying help you and if you can�t, there's a complaint jar at the exit door on your way out! Now quit looking at the dark in everything, and go enjoy that cabriolet.
Hey Buttercup, I've got no problem with an opinion the first time, second time ok I hear you, third enough already, fourth stfu. If you're into hearing the same thing over and over great.
As for Jake I've got no issue with him and thought I made that clear by trying to be courteous, he made a point and that's fine but why would I ever quickly back peddle my comments to a guy who owns an high end shop? He's built a great business and name for himself but I'm sorry he's not winning a Nobel prize. Guys like us keep him in business and that's my contribution to the industry and the Jake's of the world.
It's funny u say I look at the dark in everything when all I've ever said was let people enjoy their ride in whatever fashion they want, I think most of us here have achieved enough success through hard work and luck that we're capable of figuring out our plan of action without being told repetitively by a core group of ims doom and gloomers.
Enjoy your titillating academic debates and maybe someday we'll meet up in a Seattle Starbucks for whatever the cafe of the day is that academics drink.
I'm done with this thread snowflake, so flame away all you want.
[Image-only post; no author-written text. Original image references:]
https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/rennlist.com-vbulletin/374x196/aa7dab8a_ef4c_45e6_b9c1_fffa57a16a84_5db4d9e4d879b7639e6ecc271f46accbef0df604.gif
[Image-only post; no author-written text. Original image references:]
https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/rennlist.com-vbulletin/480x292/giphy_2f8b8841fba5c5fb323b9f02928a8da31466c47a.gif
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.
