[southernstar]

Joshnich, if I had your car: a single-row bearing engine with extremely low mileage plus leaks from the RMS seal) I too would have proactively changed the IMS bearing with one from LN Engineering. The situation, of course, is considerably different for the owners of cars with dual-row bearings (which is the subject of this thread).

Since my post a couple of weeks ago I have been able to confirm through the information released by Porsche in the course of the class-action suit, that my engine number and build date (a 2000 MY built in August 1999) was prior to the introduction of the single-row bearing. Yahoo! Previously I had thought that the single row bearing was introduced with the first 2.7 and 3.2 engines and that it was impossible to tell which bearing one had without removal! Consdiering an IMS bearing failure rate of well less than 1% on the dual row (versus 8-10% on the single row), oil changes every 5-7000 km (3000 - 4400 miles) and only 93,000 km (55,000 miles) on the clock of my car, I have ZERO concern about not changing out the bearing until I need to change the clutch, or unless I find any significant metal particles in the filter or on the magnetic drain plug during an oil change in the interim.

What is more, it seems that in this regard I am not alone as most owners of dual-bearing vehicles appear to be taking the same approach. Lets face it, especially when compared to early model year 2000 2.7 and 3.2's, the added reliablity of the dual-row bearing is probably the biggest difference from later 986's.

Brad