27 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHIMS Experts - take a look
Leading reported evidence
Replace rms
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.
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
As long as you lock the engine at TDC cyl #1, lock the bank 1 cams, remove the bank 1 tensioner and IMS chain tensioner, you should be able to remove the flange and inspect the bearing.
Leading evidence: 'Replace rms' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Inspect bearing' (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
All tranny bolts had anti seize applied which was fresh, clutch looks it was 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 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
As long as you lock the engine at TDC cyl #1, lock the bank 1 cams, remove the bank 1 tensioner and IMS chain tensioner, you should be able to remove the flange and inspect the 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 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
to inspect the IMS and replace it with Pelican in case it's single.
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
Unless you really want to inspect the IMS or change it, I suggest you dont remove the flange.
These are separate views of the same evidence. Frequency alone does not establish a fix, and these counts must not be added together.
Inspect bearing
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
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
As long as you lock the engine at TDC cyl #1, lock the bank 1 cams, remove the bank 1 tensioner and IMS chain tensioner, you should be able to remove the flange and inspect the bearing.
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.
27 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: 20261026T222516Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
Hi all,
Expert opinion needed.
C2 2001 90k with no history.
Pulled tranny yestarday, and got my engine on stand, doing VarioCam chain pads.
All tranny bolts had anti seize applied which was fresh, clutch looks it was replaced. Looking at the IMS flange, what do you guys see?
Single, double, probably replaced already?
Initional Idea was to replace it with Pelican if it's single.
What if I remove the flange, I can simply put it back with a new seal I presume?
Thanks in advance, any help will be appreciated.
No expert. It looks like a double row since the flange is shallow dish. The oozed out sealant indicates someone has been there before. Maybe the bearing has already been changed. As long as you lock the engine at TDC cyl #1, lock the bank 1 cams, remove the bank 1 tensioner and IMS chain tensioner, you should be able to remove the flange and inspect the bearing. Just clean up the area real good before removing the flange.
@Triple Black - leaky leaky
@Ashai - thanks for the link, looks defiently not that shallow as the single on that page. So got to be double. Good thing I guess
It's not recommended to remove the flange without first also locking the cams down (in addition to locking engine at TDC, and removing the IMS tensioner and tensioner on the bank where you locked the cams down).
That is a double row IMS flange and I dont think the bearing was replaced with the LN engineering one since they include a different flange with their kit. The eps kit also includes their own flange. I have a 99 and mine looks the same factory flange. Before you do anything further, STOP and read! It looks like the PO did a good job since RMS and IMS flange are not leaking. Unless you really want to inspect the IMS or change it, I suggest you dont remove the flange. If you do, have some sealant available such as curil-t. Maybe the PO removed the bearing's outer seal so that it lubricates better? This is common practice among the 997 folks and some 996 users. I did remove mine and so far no issues. Like everyone said, you need to lock cams from the 1-3 cyl head (driver side), here are the steps I followed:
- Turn engine to TDC and lock it using a pin, short screw driver or drill bit
- Remove lower cam plug(or all for 2002+) from 1-3 cyl head (driver side)
- Install the cam locking tool (If cam locking tool does not go in easily, you have to turn the engine 360 degrees at the crank)
- Remove Chain tensioner from the 1-3 cyl head
- Remove IMS Chain tensioner (center)
- Remove IMS Flange
You need at least the following new parts:
- new cam plug's (one for 3.4l, two for 3.6l)
- new tensioner o-rings
- new IMS Flange bolts
- curil-t sealant
- IMS flange nut
Neto, thanks for detailed reply !
Indeed, everything looks clean and no leaks there. Clutch has 997 part number on it too.
Initial plan was,. while I'm doing my chain guides. to inspect the IMS and replace it with Pelican in case it's single. As it turns out to be double, Pelican is out of question, and LN is not my cup of tea. I just read too much of eveything here and there to close my eyes and replace something that is not broken. I
I did my precalif myself. No metal was found anywhere, except plastic bits of from Vario chains guides. So i decided to pull the engine to do them.
I still think I will take the cover off and see what's inside. Too much hype around this bearing to just stop there
Thanks for the engine number. I was working on mine yesterday and didn't check the forum.
My 01 C4 has engine number M96/0466100681. I forget how many digits make up the serial number, whether it's five or six digits. I have not yet dropped the transmission on my car to look. Just trying to get a feel for double row versus single. I have about 58k and still the factory bearing as far as I know.
Lang
I also decided to keep the double row bearing. I believe there are two problems with IMS bearings, one is overload and the other is lack of lubrication. Only single rows are affected by overload. Both double row's and single rows are affected by lack of lubrication since the grease they have from factory gets consumed by the penetrating oil over time. Removing the outer seal helps with lubrication and prevents sludge buildup. Now, if big particle goes inside the bearing, it can cause trouble.
Our 01 had a dual in it. It's plate is in pretty bad shape but what I can make out is M96/0466112
536
. The 5 is hard to make out, but thanks to Youri's pic I'm 90% sure that's what it is. The 3 is a best guess that I have no confidence in. The last 6 is probably about a 70% sureness level.
I was flipping through some fellas post about intermix he got and guy was mentionning water deposit in a simillar picture to mine,
I just noticed some yellow stuff in the left upper corner of the casing. Is this an intermix from Oil Cooler? I was about to replace O-Rings on that one, while I have the engine out. Guess it will be more than necessary
Comments anybody?
