Go Back   986 Forum - The Community for Porsche Boxster & Cayman Owners > Porsche Boxster & Cayman Forums > Boxster General Discussions

Post Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-01-2018, 10:25 AM   #1
Who's askin'?
 
maytag's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Utah
Posts: 2,448
Quote:
Originally Posted by JFP in PA View Post
That is complete nonsense. We have seen no statistically significant relationship between mileage and failure rates.
Jfp, would you elaborate on this for us, please?
General consensus all over the internet seems to corroborate what the mechanic told him; if your IMS hasn't failed by xx miles (I've read anywhere from 60k to 75k) then it's very unlikely it WILL fail.

I value your knowledge, as it's based on real experience, rather than just what I've read, haha. Can you tell us what's behind this idea, and what your own experience says are real factors?



Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk
maytag is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2018, 12:23 PM   #2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: It's a kind of magic.....
Posts: 6,614
Quote:
Originally Posted by maytag View Post
Jfp, would you elaborate on this for us, please?
General consensus all over the internet seems to corroborate what the mechanic told him; if your IMS hasn't failed by xx miles (I've read anywhere from 60k to 75k) then it's very unlikely it WILL fail.

I value your knowledge, as it's based on real experience, rather than just what I've read, haha. Can you tell us what's behind this idea, and what your own experience says are real factors?



Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk
Over the years, we have see several IMS failures, which were confirmed by at least a partial engine tear down (we don't say IMS failure until we know it was). The mileage of these cars were all over the place, some were 'garage queens doing less than 1K miles a year, others were daily drivers with well over 100K miles on them at the time of failure. If you looked at the confirmed failures we have seen, while the mileage data seems almost randomly scattered, one very obvious similarity was that most were single row engines, with only a smattering of dual rows, similar to the data published in the factory's legal case. An outlier in the data was one owner that had a relatively low mileage failure, he had a higher mileage replacement engine installed, only to have that one fail many thousands of miles later. Last I heard, he was driving a Nissan.

On the basis of this experience, I don't see a mileage relations relationship. Other shops may or may not have had a different history, but we don't go by unconfirmed chatter off the web, I can only speak for what we have seen.
__________________
Anything really new is invented only in one’s youth. Later, one becomes more experienced, more famous – and more stupid.” - Albert Einstein
JFP in PA is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2018, 12:37 PM   #3
Who's askin'?
 
maytag's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Utah
Posts: 2,448
Quote:
Originally Posted by JFP in PA View Post
Over the years, we have see several IMS failures, which were confirmed by at least a partial engine tear down (we don't say IMS failure until we know it was). The mileage of these cars were all over the place, some were 'garage queens doing less than 1K miles a year, others were daily drivers with well over 100K miles on them at the time of failure. If you looked at the confirmed failures we have seen, while the mileage data seems almost randomly scattered, one very obvious similarity was that most were single row engines, with only a smattering of dual rows, similar to the data published in the factory's legal case. An outlier in the data was one owner that had a relatively low mileage failure, he had a higher mileage replacement engine installed, only to have that one fail many thousands of miles later. Last I heard, he was driving a Nissan.

On the basis of this experience, I don't see a mileage relations relationship. Other shops may or may not have had a different history, but we don't go by unconfirmed chatter off the web, I can only speak for what we have seen.
Thank you.
And the delineating line for when a shingle row was used, rather than the dual row? Do I understand this happened mid - year '02?

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk
maytag is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2018, 01:29 PM   #4
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: It's a kind of magic.....
Posts: 6,614
Quote:
Originally Posted by maytag View Post
Thank you.
And the delineating line for when a shingle row was used, rather than the dual row? Do I understand this happened mid - year '02?

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk
No. The transition period was the 2000-2001 years; with either year, you can have either a single or dual row, and the only way to know is to pull the car apart and look, regardless of what the internet chatter thinks. I personally own a 2000 and 2001 M96 engine cars that were both purchased new. The 2000 car is a very early (in the model year) car, and it was a single row. The 2001 was one of the last built that model year, and it was a dual row, which is exactly backwards from what a lot of people think it should be. Both now carry IMS Solutions.
__________________
Anything really new is invented only in one’s youth. Later, one becomes more experienced, more famous – and more stupid.” - Albert Einstein
JFP in PA is online now   Reply With Quote
Post Reply



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On




All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:16 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2025 Pelican Parts, LLC - Posts may be archived for display on the Pelican Parts Website -    DMCA Registered Agent Contact Page