Ims beware

Just wanted to share some imteresting facts that i found today. Im a Porsche wrench and have been for 20+ years. Today i had a customers boxster that was making noise and had cam timing issues. Car has been to several shops with no solution but thousands spent to try and fix it. First thing i notice is an IMS fix from Pedros Garage. I gather data to get a baseline and then i disconnected the line and plugged it up, started the engine and the noise is gone and cam timing is back to normal. I have not done more testing but saw enough to know that i will never put one of these on any motor ever!! Chris

Do you mean the IMS Solution from LN Engineering and Flat 6 Innovations?

This is going to get good...

This? http://www.pedrosgarage.com/Site_2/TechnoFix_DOF.html Any speculation on how it created such problems?

I'm getting popcorn and mike and Ike's ready...good luck everyone.

Oil pressure robbed causes timing chain tensioners/variocam to collapse?

Fascinating... It'll be interesting to see how this unfolds.

that does it.....my indy shop gave the old parts as a memento like many others I'm having them put back in

Quotes source post: 11676732

Goobers and Raisinets for me. Still like to hear some logical scientific explanation on how plugging up oil feed can affect cam timing. OP, can you confirm if the solution was installed correctly to begin with?

Not another IMS thread.

Quotes source post: 11676703

This is the tech fix explanation from Pedros Garage ...

Quotes source post: 11676790

Well, this can get kind of involved… First though I have to say I do not think the cam timing was affected. More likely valve lifters were a bit starved for oil pressure, though if the oil pressure loss was enough chain tensioners and even the VarioCam or VarioCam Plus (variable lift) was affected. Next I know next to nothing about the DOF "fix" for the IMSB other a general understanding of what it does. But I do know it does have to get its oil supply from somewhere as there is not a specific oil feed for this add-on. Now I would think that the line that taps into the oil supply would be sized to restrict/limit the amount of oil the DOF can take. A problem could arise if this parasitic line had a manufacturing defect, say was missing an oil restricter jet and as such was diverting too much oil from the camshaft feed. Your question is quite on the mark asking if there is any confirmation the DOF was installed correctly and while you didn't ask this it along with that that the DOF hardware was intact and untampered with. Now a problem could arise if the engine develops an internal oil leak. For instance under the camshaft cover. The camshaft cover and where it bolts to the head have oil passages that pass oil from the head to the cover. If the seal fails this can allow high pressure oil to leak out from between the head and the camshaft cover and this can really drop the oil pressure at least at that head. If this is the side of the engine from which the DOF gets its oil this extra consumer of oil then can have the oil pressure at that head too low. The internal oil leak doesn't have to be at the camshaft cover. It could be the valve in the oil line that feeds the piston oil jets. This valve is supposed to close if oil pressure drops too low to ensure the mains/rods get plenty of oil. If this jet doesn't close when it supposed to this can have the engine running with lower oil pressure. Toss in the oil the DOF requires and you have noise at the valve hardware. I think it is a bit premature to condemn the DOF. This does highlight the importance of ensuring this hardware is installed correctly and this should include -- if the instructions do not already cover this -- confirming oil pressure is ok by using a real oil pressure gage. In fact it might not be a bad idea to take an oil pressure reading before installing the unit to verify the engine's oiling system is up to snuff and then be able to look at the after pressure to make sure the unit is not causing too big a pressure drop. If it does this could be a sign the unit is defective or the installation is somehow bad.

Yes its was Pedros fix DOF. They take oil from the wrong part of the engine. It starves the cams, lifters etc. It did effect cam timing and made the lifters noisy. As soon as it was removed the problems went away. Only bank 1 was effected, not bank 2. Im only posting my person findings and i am not here to promote anything. Just sharing what I found. chris

Quotes source post: 11676947

Jake also pointed out that deficiency before but this is the first time I heard it really happens, barring any defects and installation errors. Would have been obvious on a 996 which has the oil pressure sender in bank 1 and a pressure gauge in the cluster.

Since I am anti-IMS retrofit, kindly remind me again where the LN solution taps into vs Pedro's DOF? I know they sold quite a few already. Wonder if others are having problems.

Chris, could you also kindly tell us how many IMSB failures you've seen in your 20+ yrs wrenching on Porsche and is the alleged 5-10% failure rate even close to reality in your experience?

Quotes source post: 11677074

Mine is ok. I am feeling more and more like a guinea pig.

I learned a few things back in 2007, the biggest of those was to patent all my ideas, both good and bad. To be clear, the product being described here is NOT an "IMS Solution" which is my invention, and the name is trademarked. The IMS Solution does not share anything in common with the product described here. There's a reason why we developed the Spin On Filter Adaptor and why its used as the feed point for the IMS Solution.

Pedro says he sold "thousands". I am pretty addicted to these boards and this is the first failure/issue I've seen. Chain tensioners etc are known failure modes of these engines so there may be more at play here. I am not defending Pedro's product, but there may be more to the story before you condemn his stuff. My indy, while he has no experience with this product, has seen other's bearings fail at least once. Stuff breaking happens.... what makes something good or bad is the failure rate. Peace Bruce in Philly

Quotes source post: 11676632

Fascinating that none of those other shops looked at the engine and thought, "WTF is that thing?"

The DOF will reduce the head oil pressure on that side, but the key question is, in a healthy engine, would it cause enough of a reduction to create any operational issue? I don’t know the answer, but I think the manufacturer’s position is that it does not. I seem to recall some quantification of the oil pressure drop, but I can’t remember where I read that, or who posted it. It would seem logical that these same symptoms are not generally observed in most DOF installations, as it would have come to light already. I agree with Macster that this may be an indicator of other problems that may have already impacted oil pressure, to the point where the addition of the DOF feed “pushed things over the edge”. Certainly it seems the OP’s diagnostic job has only just begun. The recommendation to directly measure oil pressure before and after DOF installations is sensible. Personally I had been leaning toward the DOF, but ended up going with the “dual row pro” ceramic from LN to replace my absolutely pristine original bearing two months ago. It will be interesting to follow this. It is way too early to write off the DOF.

Oil feed is the same location as the oil pressure sending found on Bank 2 but, is plugged on Bank1?

I only know of one case where the customer forgot to tell the shop that his last oil change had been over 20,000 miles before. The DOF was installed and upon startup there was valvetrain and ticking noise as the OP describes. The shop decided to open the oil pan and here's what they found: http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j3...ps0b4fb0fa.jpg Then they removed the oil filter and this was in there: http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j3...ps8234bbcb.jpg This car's engine was throughly flushed and cleaned with Wurth Engine Flush and Claeaner. New oil filter and fresh oil at the correct level went in and all noises went away. It's very easy to blame the DOF (or any other new part) when in fact, the culprit was the negligence of the owner (in the above case). Happy Porscheing, Pedro

An IMSB thread. So glad I checked the forum this morning. This type of stupidity cant be cured. Im curious what the suspect engines "real" oil pressure was before the DOF install, after the DOF install, after the line disconnect/plug. Depending on how the oil feed line was tapped in and oil line discharge nozzle size, couldn't the engine (especially with marginal pressure to begin with) see the DOF as a massive internal oil passage leak? Even the Pedro promo videos showing splash lubrication are highly suspect. The videos actually prove splash oil is fine for an open seal bearing. The important lesson from all the DOF's and other high priced gimmicks is to just replace the bearing with a high quality open sealed one when you change the clutch and don't worry about it. On the other hand, all the work and research done by Jake and Pedro is much appreciated.

"open sealed"? I assume you mean the open ceramic? FVD is marketing an upgraded sealed bearing too... Although I am not a DOF customer, and am not convinced one way or the other at this stage, I think dismissing it as a gimmick misses the point that the DOF can be a relatively cost effective way to deal with M97 engines where the bearing replacement is not possible without a teardown. Having said that, there is a lot I don't know, such as the real failure rate of any of these, especially the larger M97 bearing etc. But I don't think anyone on here can really put that to bed anyway.

Quotes source post: 11677660

Is this Pedro from "Pedro's Garage"? If so, can you give us a rough ballpark of how many have been sold and when the first one was sold? I too think there is something more going on here than just the product.

Quotes source post: 11677710

No he said "open seal" meaning no matter what bearing you decide to use, you open the seal instead of leaving it closed on both sides if the bearing came with both seals in place.

The DOF people say the issue that kills the imsb is lubrication, and that can't be denied, but it is a perversion of the facts. How lubrication affects the imsb is when the seals allow just enough oil inside to mix dirt and debris with the remaining grease, which then wears and overheats the bearing. If the seals would remain sealed, or become completely unsealed, the bearing won't fail prematurely. The proof of this is the 92% that survive without any intervention. Splash lubrication is enough, especially with a ceramic bearing. The only time oil feed would be of benefit is with a plain bearing like Jake's Solution which doesn't get splash lubed.

Aplys correct and knows what I meant. Maybe better to say open previously sealed? JMHO but I think your better to install the bearing after removing the seals from both sides. I also agree with what Ben Z posted.

I've seen 5 M97 IMSBs fail in the past 6 years from street cars. Thats all. The diameter of the M97 bearing moves the failure point from the street to the track, and if a car isn;'t a track car, the M97 bearing has proven very effective. In my directives concerning the M97 equipped street engines I recommend just leaving them as factory and nothing needs to be done at all. I have two different M97 products to release, but we haven't, because there's no need. Thats what 6 years of exposure at our level has proven. The M97 IMSB has too high of a surface speed when tracked, which creates an issue that nothing will ever solve, except omission of the component with technology that doesn't include ball or roller bearings.

Quotes source post: 11678314

Please delete the post above so that I can afford to have a 997 in the near future. I think you just may have increased the resale by 5-10% with that statement. Now what were you saying was wrong with the 9a1's?

Great info Jake. Could you please provide some details about the M97 IMSB's failures?

Quotes source post: 11678342

Not the time or place for that.. Don't want to hijack the thread.

Jake, am I assuming correctly that you would generally include factory remanufactured M96 engines built after the 997's release date?

Quotes source post: 11677693

While I agree a 20K mile interval between oil changes is well, stupid, I would not necessarily blame the owner. He may have just been following the factory oil change service schedule. I have come across some posters on a UK board and factory service intervals are 20K miles for some models and some MY's. A few years ago in the UK car mags that ran long term test cars, some cars -- Audi comes to mind -- would go the whole test period without an oil change scheduled. 15K every 20K miles was the mileage. And the reviewers would mention this in a favorable tone. OTOH, one car, a Subaru, received negative comments because the factory scheduled a new car oil/filter service at IIRC 3K miles.

I totally agree.. The M96 was released with a 20K service interval and in the early days as much as 24K was acceptable! Go back a decade and look at what people said when we told them to change their oil every 5K miles.. They called us stupid! Go back and look at the days before the IMS retrofit was believed to be a black art- they told me it was impossible. To that I say the difficult we do right away, and the impossible;e just takes a little longer. Now, don't be getting your hopes up on the M97 IMSB engines, fellas. While these engines don't have IMS issues on the street, they have more issues with broken rod bolts and several other modes of failure than all the others, especially scored cylinders. They do have IMSB issues on the track, and nothing helps them. We have 32 builds on our books now, of those 32, 30 of them are from failures and 20 of those are M97s. Thats right, only two elective builds will carry us through July of 2015 for completions for engine reconstructions.