that listing could not have less information.

Interesting indeed.. guy's brother is Enzo Potolicchio finished 7th overall at Le Mans last year, 1st in LMP2

You didn't get my sarcasm. I think that the car can last another 10 years even without the bandaids mentioned. ;) ...and if it doesn't, it's still ok cause I already got my money's worth....

I resemble that remark! :rolleyes:


"I developed the IMS Solution because I did not want a ball bearing to reside within my engines. The ball bearing is the problem and the source of all evil. Anything else is just a band aid."

The original statement speaks for itself.

Regards, Maurice.

So it follows that the "IMS Solution" consists of two very expensive band aids and a cheap bearing? (Note that when I say "cheap" I am not referring to the quality but the fact that plain bearings are less expensive than ball bearings)

From everything I've read, the source of the IMS failures is inadequate lubrication of the bearing, not issues with the quality or design of the bearing itself. Aside from being expensive and unnecessary, there is a risk associated with introducing a new type of bearing that I personally wouldn't want to take.

Incorrect. The material that must be utilized for the IMS SOlution plain bearing is super expensive. We have paid as much as 1200 bucks for a 2' long piece of the blank material. This does not include the manufacturing process of the bearing which must maintain tolerances to .0005".

A ball bearing that is omitted from the engine is a ball bearing that cannot fail within the engine. Collateral damage from foreign object debris generated by ball bearing failure is the most expensive collateral damage that can occur from IMSB failure.
That said, I developed the IMS Solution for my engines and honestly could care less if anyone else ever buys one. My engines are my primary objective with every development that we create.

At the end of the day, replacing the IMSB as preventative maintenance is just like buying insurance against a catastrophic (and really expensive) engine failure). And just like insurance, the different types of replacement options provide car Boxster owners with different levels of insurance they can buy.

Replacing the stock bearing with another stock bearing is the lowest level in that one is only offsetting aging of the original part. It's like changing oil at factory specified intervals.

The Pelican replacement bearing provides better protection because it is a relatively low cost beefed up alternative that presumably will last longer than the stock part.

The IMS Retrofit is the next higher level of insurance - much higher IMHO - against total engine destruction with its ceramic bearings and other improvements that last much longer than the stock bearing.

The IMS Solution is the highest level of protection for the following reason. If the flat design fails, no bearing debris is spread throughout the engine. Moreover, the timing chains don't jump sprockets, which would lead to pistons and valves banging into each other. It's the one option that eliminates one of the possible causes of catastrophic engine failure.

The way I see it is that each owner can decide what level of insurance he or she want to buy. It ranges from doing nothing to installing the IMS Solution. The distinctions are real; they are not band aids by any stretch of the imagination.

but does the factory even advise you to replace the stock IMSB like they advise you to change the motor oil?

No, they don't even offer a bearing part#. It is to be a non-serviced item.

Remaining at the top of the food chain is all that matters to me. We've been there with these engines and developments since day one.

Since it is widely accepted that lack of lubrication is the main cause of IMS bearing failure, providing a solution which provides adequate lubrication should solve the problem. Then there is no need to unnecessarily be alarmist about pistons and valves banging into each other.

The above also ignores the additional unknowns that may be introduced by a new design with new parts. All of those parts add a level of complication which is simply not necessary to solve the problem, namely lack of lubrication.

Finally, from my limited understanding of bearings I know that journal bearings don't fare as well as roller element bearings (ball bearings) at the time when most engine wear occurs...at initial startup.

If there are any bearing engineers amongst our members, perhaps they could edify us further.

More time and more real world testing will provide the answer to the question of which approach solves the only problem that we should be considering... lack of lubrication.

In practical terms, I'm not so much interested in the "art", but more in the result. "Art for art's sake" is a good motto for MGM, but not for bearings. This would not be the first time that a less expensive, simpler solution proves to be the best solution.

Regards, Maurice.

Its not simpler, its more complex. The same amount of components are present within the composition of the ball bearing and a sub-system is introduced. No parts are omitted with this arrangement; components are added. The IMSS may add a similar subsystem, but it removes 11 wear components as a trade-off.

The balls, cage and inner and outer races are all still residing within the engine. The simpler product is the one that has fewer wear components.

And guess what? We have allowed engines to go through 5,200 start cycles and even idle for as much as 170 hours straight during development as just a small portion of the process that has taken years to develop the IMS Solution. Under UOA and particulate testing of oil samples as well as numerous visual inspections and measuring every part over and over again we determined that start up wear was nil with the IMSS. My UOA before and after 5200 starts was so close that one would not be able to note which was the before or after sample.

Idling with 5PSI oil pressure and 290 degree oil for 170 hours killed the rest of the engine, but didn't hurt the IMS Solution. This just barely touches the surface of what seven generations of IMSS development have entailed. This wasn't developed overnight, or with anything less than an open checkbook.

Hi jake,
A few questions:

1) why would an idling engine "fry" at 5 psi and 290df?

2) Why would an idling engine have an oil temp in excess of 290df?

I understand that 5psi and 290df is sub optimal, but these parameters theoretically provide better lubrication then the engine gets for the first 10 minutes of running after start up on a cold morning.

Also, why would your bearing survive while the rest "fry"? I understand the crank is under a different load than the IMS, but the crank has more than triple the number of bearings to carry that load.

While I've never rebuilt a Pcar engine, I've rebuilt the engines of a few others, both air and water cooled. I've also spent a lot of time chasing cooling issues on air cooled engines. My experience monitoring engine parameters tells me that its that there is more to this story. I don't see why an idling engine with the cooling system functioning properly would ever see oil temps of 290. That's auto crossing on a hot day oil temp, not ticking over at 600 rpm oil temp...

Shad,
It would seem that extreme conditions that don't even exist in the real world were created on purpose to torture the IMSS during testing.
By surviving such torture, the product demonstrates its robustness.
Ingenious and simple all in one.

This engine, by design has the highest loads on the valve train at idle. Internally lubricated components that are only cooled and lubricated by the engine's oil need a constant flow of that oil to provide full film lubrication and to keep them at a sane temperature.

Low speeds have proven to kill these engines more than anything else in my research.

-Because the engine is most inefficient at idle speed
-Because the engine's coolant temps were 250F sustained (little volume of coolant circulation through the radiators at idle)
-Because this test was carried over over a week with the highest temperatures ever recorded at the test location, where temps were 100-108F for a solid week and the "low" temperatures at night stayed in the mid 80s.
-Because the engine ran night and day without being shut down at all.
-Because the oil was having to soak up so much heat from the severely "heat soaked" engine that never was given a chance to cool down

But not when sustained over 170+ hours. Cold start development was the absolute biggest concern that we had and the issue was never experienced. Not once, not ever and thats even when applying a test engine in Chicago over the winter where cold start temps well below zero are common. DLC utilization provides even more resistance to start up wear. The benefits of materials and tolerances applied don't stop there.

During development we used check valves, oil pressure senders in line, residual pressure valves and etc to ensure there were no issues. What we learned was the unique location where we pull oil from IS THE VERY FIRST part of the oil system to receive primary oil pressure. With multiple oil sending units we have proven time and time again that the IMS Solution plain bearing receives oil pressure before even the main bearings within the engine. That is why the adaptor that we have developed as part of the arrangement that provides JUST FILTERED oil to the IMS Solution is part of the patent for the entire device. We robbed oil from many other regions within the engine and we learned the pros and cons of each and trust me, there are HUGE trade offs if oil is robbed from certain regions. With those test we didn't see issues with the IMS Solution, we saw big issues with other aspects of the engine. I'll let others find out what those things are on their own, just like we did. Unfortunately it appears that customers are going to find those issues before anyone else~.

That engine didn't fail. We took it apart at least 5 times during the IMSS development and after the idle test we found that all the main bearings were showing wear through the dermis and epidermis layers of materials. The bearing clearances were opened by 15% due to wear from that test alone. The IMS Solution journal bearing saw a wear measurement after that test of less than 1/4 that amount. The difference was so small that it was only measurable in one part of the journal that was less than 1/6 the diameter of the journal. This test proved conclusively that even when subjected to the highest temperature, heaviest load and least amount of operation oil pressure that the IMS Solution bearing showed LESS wear than the main and rod bearings within the same engine, being subject to the same horrific operating conditions. Diamond Like Carbon (casidiam) processes proved to eliminate even that small amount of wear that ONLY existed when idling for over 100 hours sustained. For that study we even used filtered and non-filtered oil and a teardown before and after to illustrate the measurable differences.

Life for a journal bearing does not get any worse than low oil pressure (lack of hydrodynamic full film lubrication) heavy load (idle speed) that promotes oil shear and hot oil (lacking film strength) after so many hours of heat soaked operation.

I could tell from your questions that you lacked direct experience, and complete understanding of the M96 platform.

This proves more than you do not have interface with the M96. It is common for oil temps within the M96 engine to see normal operation at 230-250F in a bone stock engine, on the street.

No, autocrossing is drag racing through cones for a couple of minutes. Doing this with an M96 engine will generally lead to COOLER oil temps than we see on the street since the higher RPM promotes oil circulation, coolant system circulation and full film lubrication.

A car sitting idle in the middle of July in Georgia in a year when we have record high temps leads to high oil temps. We had to set up a water sprinkler on the radiators to circulate cold water on them just to keep the coolant temps at 250 without the engine failing. It ran night and day over and over again. I totally expected to come in one morning and find the car burned to the ground and thats why we parked it all by it's lonesome in the middle of a field next to the facility. The car used previously belonged to a 986forum.com member.

The bottom line is, I know this product. I invented it and I developed it to be the heart of the engines that assume my name when they leave my facility. I assume nothing and quantify everything, because one test is worth 1,000 opinions. These are the reasons that the IMS Solution has taken years to develop.

The funny thing is, generally people who have never touched these engines feel their way is the best. Thats why when attendees fill my classrooms for an M96 period of instruction, the very first thing I tell them is to forget EVERYTHING they know about any other engine. Until they do that all the prior experience is just a bad habit, that will inhibit their ability to become proficient with the understanding of the M96 platform.

I have stopped stressing about my IMS, my car has 130k on it and I have AAA, I had my motor blow in my BMW 2002 tii with 200k on it. I had it replaced with a baby 6 and it was way more fun to drive. If my boxster blows tonight I will ship it to Jake for a much bigger engine.

I'd ship it to Renegade Hybrids for an LS1. Why put *another* poorly designed engine in there? Do you LIKE rewarding Porsche for their shoddy engineering? :rolleyes:

Note to self. Drive car at high RPMs.

Not just bigger, but much more efficient and without any ball bearings inside of it!

That would be way fun too, but I do not know if they are doing boxsters yet.

I drive my car daily at high RPM and I think it is what keeping it going. The old IMS has been leaking clean oil out of it for two months now. I take my car to Red line once everyday. I drive it like a Porsche. :)