How long does it take once an IMS starts to go?

[pothole]

Christ. I've got to stop reading these bloody IMS threads.

[Overdrive]

Forum threads tend to make the issue look way more frequent than it really is, so I can understand the frustration. I guess I read them in relative comfort since I had the retrofit done going on 2 years ago, and while I know that's not bulletproof, it's at least better than it was, and I can drive the car without being stressed out and worried like I was for the first year I had it.

[southernstar]

Yes, they do tend to create paranoia - although this thread shows many more owners who have had zero problems with their IMS bearing in spite of some significant mileage. At one point alarmists were making it seem as if every Boxster with an IMS had a ticking time bomb for an engine - and no doubt this has fueled the incredible depreciation that all Boxsters seem to have suffered over the last couple of years.

Fortunately, the numbers released by Porsche in the course of production for the class-action suit puts things in perspective: in the worst case scenario, a single-row bearing car in California, only 10% of the cars are apt to suffer a failure of the original IMS bearing. Inotherwords, you have a 90% chance of it not happening even if you do nothing.

In the best case scenario - a double-row bearing, you have much less than a 1% chance of the original IMS bearing failing. Indeed, the reliability of the dual-row bearing seems to have been the greatest evidence that the plaintiff's had that the single-row bearing, with its much higher failure rate, was designed negligently and as a result the reliability of the cars so effected fell below the standards that one would/should reasonably expect in a modern performance car (for over a century the courts have ruled that there is an implied warranty that any product is at least reasonably suited for the purpose for which it is intended).

The good news, as I see it, is as follows:

1. We now have some real numbers upon which to base our assessment of the risks and the cost/benefit analysis of any upgrades/repairs.
2. The numbers establish that failure of the IMS bearing is by no means a given and, in fact, is unlikely (and extremely unlikely in the case of a dual-row bearing).
3. IMS bearings (up until the final, larger bearing) can be replaced without an engine tear-down.
4. If replaced at the same time as a clutch replacement, very little additional labour is required.
5. The cost of the upgraded bearings varies from quite low for the Pelican bearing (suitable for single-row replacements, less suitable for dual-row as it downgrades to a single-row with a spacer) to a high of $649.00 for the LN engineering ceramic.
6. While there is an additional incentive for owners of cars with single-row bearings to be proactive and replace the bearings without waiting for a required clutch replacement, nevertheless, the improved resale value (and peace of mind) should make the decisioin more palatable for those who consider an 8-10% risk too high.
7. Thereafter, upgraded bearings should be able to be viewed as a maintenance item which thereafter will only need replacement when the clutch is also replaced.
The LN 'solution', although more expensive, may even be a permanent solution (as claimed).

I can't help but believe that the hysteria can now die down. Many performance cars (inlcuding many highly soft-after Porsches such as the 911SC) have had mechanical issues that require upgrades to the engine. Very few of those who risk waiting on upgrading the IMS bearing will suffer a failure. What's more, once upgraded the owner can seemingly have confidence that the problem has been overcome. This should, over time, lead to an improvement in the resale value of these otherwise incredible and highly desireable cars.

Cheers!

[Overdrive]

To be honest, Boxsters are simply going to take a harder depreciation hit than 911s because that's just how it is, especially the older early cars. Certain special models and well-kept examples will wear a higher price tag for such reasons, but I don't feel that any vehicle, 911 or Boxster, should receive a markup or an expected improvement in resale value for doing something to fix the IMS bearing issue. Maybe someone may be personally willing to pay more dollars, or at least more attention, to a car that has had something done to decrease the chance of shaft bearing failure, but I don't think if I had two identical cars side-by-side that are exactly the same down to their options and odometer readings, that the one with an IMS retrofit, upgrade, or whatever else should command a different price tag because of that, just command more consideration for purchase at the same price. I may be in the minority with that mindset, but I just don't see it as reasonable for someone to tack on another grand to the price tag, or to expect it, because they call out their IMS bearing retrofit in their sale ad.

[Skootnasty]

Originally Posted by southernstar

Perfectlap, you would only get more contamination from a dual-row bearing if it is failing - something it does much less often than a single-row (less than 1% versus 8-10%). Nevertheless, you and Homeboy make a strong case for replacing the single-row bearing as a prophylactic measure.

Brad

I am not attampting to start an argument. That being said, any orig. dual row bearings that are still installed in an engine is failing. The outer seal on the bearing has been sitting in oil for at least 13 years. That rubber seal has become hard and pulled away from the sealing surface. This has allowed grease to be displaced with dirty, inadequate oil. This has resulted in *SOME* degree of metal wear. The amount of wear...... who knows with out taking every one that is left out of the engine and measuring every ball. It is very true that two rows of balls does equal a stronger bearing in respect to breakage. However, do not fool yourself, those seals are compromised and the balls inside are losing metal in larger quantities than the serviceable single row replacements.

Skoot

[pothole]

Low values have nothing to do with the bearings failing. It's that they built loads of them. Now they're getting old but they haven't reached classic status.

Imagine a scenario where the bearing problem didn't exist and you assumed values of early 986s were higher. Well, you'd have to push prices up for all newer Boxsters, too. Because if you push up the value of an early 986, it becomes worth the same as a late 986. So adjust that up, too. Then it overlaps with 987s. Etc etc.

If you look at used values, the late 987s with 9A1 and no IMS are also depreciating and there's a pretty consistent slide in values as go down through the older models. There's no massive, massive drop in value when you go from an early 987.2 to a late 987.1. Yes, there's a gap, but it's just a normal gap given the 987.2 is the newer model.

There's just no space in the value hierarchy for early 986s to be worth significantly more than they are.

People tend to forget these are mass market cars. They built loads of them, so supply is strong. And most people who own them are not enthusiasts who spend the time to learn about this stuff.

Moreover, once you get to proper classic status, these sorts of issues completely fade away. People don't value 60s Ferraris on the basis of reliability.

[shadrach74]

Originally Posted by Skootnasty

I am not attampting to start an argument. That being said, any orig. dual row bearings that are still installed in an engine is failing. The outer seal on the bearing has been sitting in oil for at least 13 years. That rubber seal has become hard and pulled away from the sealing surface. This has allowed grease to be displaced with dirty, inadequate oil. This has resulted in *SOME* degree of metal wear. The amount of wear...... who knows with out taking every one that is left out of the engine and measuring every ball. It is very true that two rows of balls does equal a stronger bearing in respect to breakage. However, do not fool yourself, those seals are compromised and the balls inside are losing metal in larger quantities than the serviceable single row replacements.

Skoot

My single row bearing was removed @51K and 11 years. Rubber was not hard and bearing had no visible signs of wear or play. It was as tight as the LN piece that replaced it. Do you think I'm in the minority? I'm more inclined to think that Homeboy's car is in the minority.

[Overdrive]

Originally Posted by pothole

Low values have nothing to do with the bearings failing. It's that they built loads of them. Now they're getting old but they haven't reached classic status.

Imagine a scenario where the bearing problem didn't exist and you assumed values of early 986s were higher. Well, you'd have to push prices up for all newer Boxsters, too. Because if you push up the value of an early 986, it becomes worth the same as a late 986. So adjust that up, too. Then it overlaps with 987s. Etc etc.

If you look at used values, the late 987s with 9A1 and no IMS are also depreciating and there's a pretty consistent slide in values as go down through the older models. There's no massive, massive drop in value when you go from an early 987.2 to a late 987.1. Yes, there's a gap, but it's just a normal gap given the 987.2 is the newer model.

There's just no space in the value hierarchy for early 986s to be worth significantly more than they are.

People tend to forget these are mass market cars. They built loads of them, so supply is strong. And most people who own them are not enthusiasts who spend the time to learn about this stuff.

Moreover, once you get to proper classic status, these sorts of issues completely fade away. People don't value 60s Ferraris on the basis of reliability.

Exactly. Someone else gets my drift.

[Skrapmot]

Also, they may seem cheap, but that , like anything is because they cost less than the perceived value.
If you compare a BMW z3 for instance from 2001, they are selling for $7k , it's not because they weren't popular or junk, and actually has more to do with that are so many still driving around, and they aren't scarce. For a lot of other "luxury" sports cars from the same period.
Then tag on the impracticality of a 2 passenger cost, and the well deserved reputation of expensive maintenance, and that drives always many customers and keep the market saturated and the price down.
Then there's that perceived price, where i truly believe many people, having never priced the car, think its priced out of their budget to the name brand. Whenever I mention I'm not doing a particular thing at work or with friend because I find it too expensive, I always get the reply, "and this is coming from a man whose drives a Porsche" and I believe they think my car is far more valuable than it is. Ironically I could buy 4 for the price of one of their Lexus or Bimmers

[southernstar]

Skootnasty, I was hoping that the hysteria concerning the failure rate of IMS bearings could finally die down now that we have some numbers from Porsche. We now know that all engines are not ticking time bombs and that only a small proportion of the bearings will fail.

In the case of the dual-row bearing, a failure rate of "much less that 1%" puts the lie to your comment that 'any original dual-row bearing is failing'. It is unhelpful as it grossly overstates the case.

I agree that (and in a previous thread commented that) the value of the 986 Boxster as a collectible will never reach the levels of their more rare 356 and 911cousins. Lets face it, the laws of supply and demand will always determine price.

However, while the supply of 986's is quite large, the supply of good ones is now diminishing. This is partly due to age and mileage. It is also partly due to the high cost of maintenance which means that many who have purchased at the recent bargain-basement prices will be unwilling/unable to maintain them. In the medium and long-term, that will tend to drive up the price of good examples.

The orignal 986 Boxster was for many a seminal moment in automotive history. It was a wonderful mix of vintage styling cues with completely state of the art engineering. Much like the 1965-1966 Mustang, it spoke to a generation of people. As a result, and also like the original Mustang, I suspect that demand will continue to be high and that eventually it will become a sought-after collectible At that point, the fact that it was sold in large numbers will actually become an advantage for people of relatively modest means: there will be a large supply of used parts and there will be a greater likelihood of companies producing reproduction parts.

In the short-term, I disagree with those who suggest that the IMS bearing failure hysteria has not effected the price. Many prospective purchasers check out reliability/problem areas of a used car prior to purchase and in the case of the Boxster, what will they find? How many prospective purchasers, faced with the risk of total engine failure and uncertainty about the number of cars so afflicted, will look elsewhere to spend their hard-earned dollars? Uncertainty fueled by comments by owners like Skootnasty who suggest that ALL DUAL ROW BEARINGS ARE FAILING.

Does a new clutch/upgraded IMS bearing improve the value of the car? For any reasonably knowledgeable prospective purchaser - especially of a single-row bearing car, it will. Indeed, for many it will make the difference between buying a used Boxster, or not buying one. The supply of cars with an upgraded IMS is much lower than the overall supply, and the demand will be higher (as it will include all persons interested in buying one, as well as ones who would buy one only with an upgraded IMS bearing).

In any event, I believe that the resale value of the 986 Boxster can only be helped by the elimination of the uncertainly (and yes, hysteria) that originally accompanied such discussions. And that is good for all of us!

Cheers!

[paintboy]

Jesus died for your IMS.

[southernstar]

Until the class-action law suit, that was pretty much Porsche's approach to the issue!

[Overdrive]

southernstar, I see what you're saying, and I don't disagree that the issue has affected the cars' values, because it definitely has. I just don't feel that an IMS remedy should drive the value of a car up over one that hasn't had the work done, be it short term or long term. I'm not trying to say anyone is right or wrong, it's just how I see it. To me it's not all that different from someone trying to recoup the cost of modifications that they made to a car that's simply not worth what they're looking to get for it, but they mark it up because they put $xx,xxx.xx in modifications into said car, except we're talking about a mechanical fix. Probably not the best comparison for me to use, but hopefully you see where I was going with that.

[Perfectlap]

The issues with Boxster values has less, much less, to do with IMS (the average buyer doesn't know IMS from IRS) and much more to do with the same issues that plague older Mercs and Bimmers. Costs of maintenance and repair do not scale down with age. And as much as a well to-do middle aged buyer (the typical driver) would like, the Boxsters never going to have more than two seats.

The average Porsche buyer has kids, the bloated Carreras of the water-cooled era, though just as mass-produced as Boxsters, have that rear seat so wifey won't give hubby a ton of grief about buying a car that sits in the garage most days. Roadsters will always be the hardest to sell new and used. Once you add in the large quantities made, it further aggravates supply/demmand. It's the right car for the right driver only problem is there are very few of those drivers.

And if air-cooled Carreras were more popular in their day and not cars that nearly bankrupted the brand, to the point of being sold in water-cooled production numbers, they'd be losing value as well. That's the irony of Porsche values, the cars that saved the company are now too plentiful. You can now buy a water-cooled Carrera for the same $10K that it might cost to rebuild an-air cooled engine.

[Overdrive]

Originally Posted by Perfectlap

The average Porsche buyer has kids, the bloated Carreras of the water-cooled era, though just as mass-produced as Boxsters, have that rear seat so wifey won't give hubby a ton of grief about buying a car that sits in the garage most days.

Hah, nice! Wait...does that mean I'm above average or below if I'm missing the kids, wifey, and bloated Carrera parts?
:dance: