21 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHIMS bearing done today
Leading reported evidence
Test things
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
Okay, some are clearly flawed but they tested the things to last.
Leading evidence: 'Test things' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Test things' (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.
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.
21 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
Had my shop do the LN bearing today. The old bearing (single-row, car is an '01) looked to be in great shape, well-oiled, solid, etc. I guess I was hoping the old one would be about to fall apart, but good news and now feel good that that particular risk has been addressed. They're not all about to grenade I guess.
most replacements will be of "good" bearings....trouble is you dont know when its will go bad - if ever I suppose....
send me your bearing and I will photo it under the microscope for you...that's the real tell tale of wear
BTW WTG - another IMS thread and a happy one - I guess
Unless you have an IMS Guardian and it does what it's supposed to do, right?
That's the problem I have with this swap -- Porsche engineered the thing to last for the life of the car. Okay, some are clearly flawed but they tested the things to last. LNE provides a replacement part...one that's engineered to last 50K miles. In 40K miles, that's a bearing that's expected to show wear at that stage while the Porsche version shouldn't...it's all a bit scary if you dwell on it too much.
-Eric
We'll just have to wait until the early adopters start experiencing failures to know how long the upgrade lasts. That will be my canary in the mineshaft to prompt an IMS Guardian install.
I have a 1999 tip with 138,000 miles on it. Car has been perfect and I've had to do nothing other than routine maintenance. My mechanic is trying to sell me on the LN Engineering retrofit arguing that because the bearing will wear like other parts-- and given the mileage on the car-- I should get it done. I am conflicted like many others. Paying $2k now sounds a lot better than $18k later. I am having a hard time pulling the trigger...any advice?
I have 20k miles and had bought an extended warranty under which my RMS was fixed. I have a year left on that, and am looking into an extended powertrain only warranty. I'm planning to compare the price of that extension with a preventive IMS retrofit.
That bearing wasn't engineered to last. Maybe they THOUGHT it was, but it obviously wasn't. If it had been, they wouldn't have redesigned the bearing and flange multiple times over the years. I had mine replaced at around 110K miles and even though mine was in good shape, I'm glad it was replaced.
Last thing I want to do is get in a discussion over IMS bearings with people over the internet but there can be many reasons for redesigning a piece, including (likely in this case) accommodating the quieter/simpler chain drive of the later models. My single row has 165k miles on it.
Yes. Many were done before mine and there are many more in use, so the odds on mine being the first to fail are pretty slim. No one knows the lifespan of the beefed up LN bearing, which presumably will last longer than the supposed poorly designed OEM bearing.
I wouldn't take out an insurance policy on my insurance company.
Take that bearing apart... Then judge it. Look for corrosive wear on the races and reduced ball diameters/ spalling.
I have yet to see any of these "perfect" bearings that everyone online speaks of... After 221 retrofits being carried out here, to include the VERY FIRST one I haven't seen a perfect bearing extracted as of yet. If the bearing feels fine, take it apart. Don't judge a book by it's cover~
