27 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHDoes this ims/clutch job look ok?
Leading reported evidence
Install fully
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
One thing that is fairly obvious - the RMS does not appear to be installed fully.
Leading evidence: 'Install fully' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Install fully' (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
No....unless they replaced the original IMS with another original factory one (which is doubtful)
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: 20261026T135432Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
Thinking about purchasing a 996.
prior owner said ims and rear main seal + clutch had all been done.
do these pics look ok? Anything stick out to you?
upload images
Seems OK to me. It would have been better to have a picture of the new clutch package on the car but it is obvious that there was a new package … purchased. I am not sure what that yellow stuff is right under the new RMS.
Difficult to tell from what is provided. One thing that is fairly obvious - the RMS does not appear to be installed fully. It looks flush with the boss. It should be deeper than that.
It's obvious.
They took a Sharpie and marked "Dual IMS"...send it!
The shop probably talked them out of replacing it since it is an "indestructible" dual row bearing, so now the IMS is "done."
If I were to buy this 996, the first thing I would do is install The IMS Solution.
I know someone who sells these for a great price.
There is some light grey RTV round the IMSB centre nut too and you can see the screwdriver has slipped off the centre stud so they did go in there for something.
The dual row bearings are very robust so if only the seals were leaking, it's good that they did that but the buyer needs to keep in mind that they didn't change the bearing so the seller shouldn't advertise it as such.
It looks like it's missing the REAR most piece, actually. The majority of 996s I've seen are missing the rear most piece (goes onto the aluminum bar in the rear, and provides cooling to the transmission).
Its piece number 16 in the picture. Ive also noticed most 996s I see don't have that piece, nor does my own car. Il'l be getting one from LA dismantler.
Two pictures are attached. if somebody else doesn't chime in with a better picture, I'll take one next time mine is on a lift.
EDIT: Top of first picture below, you can see the zip ties attach it to #5 in your diagram.
No problem, glad it was helpful. It is so rare to see it that I had to dig around quite a bit to even find a pic. Like I said, most are missing the piece...
The RMS looks like an original. The new updated units have fewer mold marks around the circumference.
https://www.pelicanparts.com/More_In...RoCHmkQAvD_BwE
The radiator cooling air exit ducts are missing in the second picture. Note the two open triangles beneath the radiator. The missing ducts direct the exit air to the side of the car. As it is now, the cooling air would exit under the car.
The duct you're referring to in the front is not installed on the above Carrera as delivered from the factory. Indeed, in front of front wheels (under the car) is the correct factory radiator outlet duct work for a Carrera.
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.
