I always recommend a "Competent ,honest Indie". Ask here for other recommendations in your area.
But if you are talking about engine rebuilds, that is a different story. Even really good Indies may be marginal at rebuilding the M96.

Replacing an IMSB is a different standard than M96 rebuilding. But don't think that is easy ,please. As evidence, read the 17 single spaced pages of "Instructions" for the LN bearing. It reads like a translation of a Prussian Army Manual. It is full of imperatives . 17 pages would cover an entire engine rebuild for a 'regular' engine ! All those pages for one small bearing !

I've seen one report but not multiple ones. ???

The failure rate for the 2nd generation single row bearings that was admitted to by Porsche was as of several years ago. I'd presume the percentage of failures would increase with time so it would be higher today?

And to be fair , some of us did learn something in this Thread:
JFP's posts 26,27,28 contain info that few of us were familiar with.

Im going to do some searching and talk to my mechanic. Good luck all.

We have had two in the shop ourselves, plus what we have heard from other shops, in addition what has been talked about on the web. Unfortunately, reports or threads about this online tend to be attacked by those with direct interest in the product, usually ending the conversation quickly rather than exploring it further.

There was some discussion on this point a while back, but I cannot pinpoint the exact thread now. From a numerical standpoint, there were more single row engines (2001-2005) produced than dual rows (1997-2000), and the single rows were (from from Porshce's original litigation data) much more prone to failure than the dual rows, so it is a reasonable assumption. Unfortunately, once the litigation was settled, there has not been detailed additional hard data released, only occasional "snippets". With the legal action over, and all of the potential cars long out of warranty, the final numbers will probably never be known.

We are all beside the point here. The gentlemen asked a question that was very simple to ask and a simple answer would have sufficed. The question was "Has anyone tried this, looks like a very robust solution:"IMS Bearing Upgrade Kit | EPS those that did could have answered with there opinion and the others could have just shut up not bash him. Anyways to the bashers all these threads that start with a legit question all end up with no valuable answer or a dead end. There I spoke my piece and now leave it alone.

I wish everyone the best of luck. In the future, I will try a search.

Thanks for your help. I think Im going to go with the LN IMS Solution.

I just sold my 2002 S with 39k miles and bought a 2005 S

And for the record, Im sorry I got mad. I just asked a question. I am new to this forum and to Boxster S cars this year and I know you guys have been doing this for a while. I have been a vette, mercedes guy.

I have an 02s i am selling on Monday and I bought a 05 987s. Im looking to do the ims on it, it has 26k orig miles.http://986forum.com/forums/uploads02...1480300601.jpg
http://986forum.com/forums/uploads02...1480300627.jpg
http://986forum.com/forums/uploads02...1480300652.jpg

Very nice looking car. Best of luck with it.

Thanks.
 

Thanks. I wish you luck with your car too!

Yeah, same here. I can be a bit blunt, but we are all in the same boat. Sorry about that. My point in my first post was that debates over the IMS options get ugly quick and I (and most here) prefer to keep things light and avoid confrontation...which I failed at miserably in this thread, haha :)

That's a beautiful 987 and don't feel like you aren't welcome here. The 986 and 987 are still very similar and there are plenty of guys here with the 987, so plenty of help and discussion to be had.

FWIW, I think the roller bearing is superior to any single row ball bearing, ceramic hybrid or not. However, if I replaced my double row bearing, I'd probably favor a double row ceramic hybrid ball bearing over roller.
Single - roller bearing.
Double - ceramic hybrid ball bearing.

Thank you
 

Thank you. Im looking at either the ceramic or if larger, sealed bearing, DOF and oil filter adapter. Im having my mechanic look at car and go from there. I dont know if mine is serviceable or is the larger single row. Thank you.

keeping things light
 

Mr. Wave. You like to keep things light? Do you moderate the forum? This turned into a pretty informative thread after all, in spite of the name calling (jerk face?)

PW.
Nice post!

I've had my car over 8 years.. I've sold three other Boxsters along the way. Even with my so-so abilities, I find that my DYI knowledge of the Box is above my new owners....
It appears I have become a personal mechanic to the cars I've sold as I've sold all cars to long time friends. Can't seem to break free but I realize that, perhaps, it is my way of paying for all the good, free advice I've received on this and other forums.

Well, in the spirit of FWIW, there is no reason to replace a single row bearing with another single row bearing. LN Engineering offers a ceramic double row retrofit as well as the plain bearing Solution for single row cars. Moreover, there is no objective evidence that pressurized oil feeds extend the IMSB operating lifetimes

IMS Bearing
 

Hi All , great discussion subject
Bought my mid 2001 Boxster a year ago, a 2.7L with 167K km.
DIY Preventative maintenance ?
Removed the IMS bearing, it was NSK DOUBLE row ballrace still in very good condition, both seals were in place, no grease, bearing full of engine oil, also about 100ml (1/2 cup) inside the IMS hollow shaft.
Re-assembled with new NSK bearing SEALS REMOVED, new RMS and clutch
Using Penrite Full syn oil 15w50 SN/CF ACEA A3/B4 high zinc.
Past 170K km runs like a Rolex so far so good.
Regards Brian

I just put the EPS roller bearing in a month ago. After researching this issue to death I ended up deciding to put this particular bearing in based on the following:

1) Roller bearing has a higher radial of load capacity than a ball bearing. I read estimates that the failure rate of single row ball bearings is as high as 10% before 100k miles but that the double row bearings had failure rates closer to 1-2%. The dual row bearing has more balls to distribute the radio load. This results in lower cyclic contact stresses in the balls and the races. In fatigue failure, even small decreases in stresses can dramatically increase the average time to failure of a part. A roller bearing distributes its load along the line of contact rather than a point. This design feature means that roller bearings will see much lower cyclic stress levels than a ball bearing of the same form factor. I chose a roller bearing over dual row ball bearing because I believe the cyclic stress level will be lower in the roller bearing than in a dual row bearing.
2) In reviewing pictures of the of the Boxster‘s engine’s internals, and the support configuration for the intermediate shaft, I did not see any sources of significant thrust load on the shaft. Given the lack of thrust loading, I concluded that the EPS bearings thrust washers would probably be sufficient to manage a inertial thrust loads.
3) I called EPS and spoke with them, and although they have not sold as many Bearings as The alternative suppliers on the market, they have not had a single reported failure. On the other hand I have read about failures on ball bearing retrofits (and The manufacture simply blamed installation rather than Entertaining the possibility that they supplied a defective product..)
4) cost. The EPS bearing was cheaper than a ceramic ball bearing retrofit, and the manufacturer claims it will last the life of the engine. Contrast that to the ceramic ball bearing that costs more and should be replaced every 40k miles. If I had all the money in the world to throw at this problem I would buy the Journal bearing retrofit kit, but for me it was just crazy to drop $1.7k on a 10% chance my $6k engine would blow up.
4) the speed of the ims shaft is compatible with the rated speed of a roller bearing of this size.

Finally, if I had a dual row bearing already in my car from the factory... I probably would have just left it alone... 2% failure rate isn’t high enough to justify the expense and hassle of replacing the bearing.

Please excuse typos. I wrote this on my phone and dictated some of it to Siri... she doesn’t hear me well sometimes.

Not looking to debate what solution is best, just throwing out the reason I made the choice I did in case it helps others with this decision.

Thanks for sharing your thoughtful analysis.
Having chosen the roller bearing option, why EPS and not RND ?
Roller Bearing IMS Retrofit Kit – RND Engines