Worth it to 'check' IMS bearing during clutch? Clutch recommendations?

[JFP in PA]

Originally Posted by piper6909

Fair enough. I totally get that, on principle, a plain bearing is far more durable than a ball or roller bearing. So you're saying you won't install LN's other bearings, only the "solution'?

I agree with you that it's a fine product, and there's a solid argument to be made that it's actually the best out there. But when it costs at minimum twice as much as anything else out there, don't you agree that they can offer a much better warranty? I mean, seriously. After all the pre-qualifications, and to only honor the warranty if it's installed by an authorized mechanic, don't you think they should believe in their product enough to offer a lifetime warranty? To me it screams that they don't believe in it, not even as much as you do.

I have installed many of both style LN bearings, and have even uninstalled LN ceramic hybrids to replace them with the IMS Solution (two in my own cars as a matter of fact). When the Solution was first released to the public, it was only available in a single row configuration, the dual row came much later. So at one point in time, if you had a dual row, the ceramic bearing was your only choice unless you sent the car to Jake's shop, as he was the only one installing the dual row Solution before it was release to the general public. The IMS Solution is a better answer, regardless of the price, if you intend to keep the car for a long time, race the car frequently, and particularly if you have a Tiptronic trans, as it never has to be replaced. It is also the only retrofit that can be pulled out of one engine and successfully installed in another with out issues.

[piper6909]

Originally Posted by JFP in PA

I have installed many of both style LN bearings, and have even uninstalled LN ceramic hybrids to replace them with the IMS Solution (two in my own cars as a matter of fact). When the Solution was first released to the public, it was only available in a single row configuration, the dual row came much later. So at one point in time, if you had a dual row, the ceramic bearing was your only choice unless you sent the car to Jake's shop, as he was the only one installing the dual row Solution before it was release to the general public. The IMS Solution is a better answer, regardless of the price, if you intend to keep the car for a long time, race the car frequently, and particularly if you have a Tiptronic trans, as it never has to be replaced. It is also the only retrofit that can be pulled out of one engine and successfully installed in another with out issues.

Like I said, I'm sure it's a fine product. My only beef is that if they want to claim it's a 'permanent solution', warranty it as such. They should put their money where their mouth is.

However, as I said before, regardless of the warranty, the product is not for me. It's a solution for only one of a myriad of other issues that can blow up the motor. I consider it insurance. Using homeowner's insurance as an example, I would never buy insurance that would cost me half as much as the house, especially if the policy only covered earthquakes, when you also have risk of fire, vandalism, water, etc.

If I decide to change my IMSB, I'll replace it with an OEM type bearing. I can't justify putting $1850 + labor costs (because doing it myself would void the joke of a warranty) into an engine that I could replace for less than $4000. Now, if I had a built racing engine, then I may reconsider.

And my question was referring to present and future, not the past, when the "solution" wasn't available. So you will not install LN's other IMSB products? Only the "solution'?

[JFP in PA]

Originally Posted by piper6909

Like I said, I'm sure it's a fine product. My only beef is that if they want to claim it's a 'permanent solution', warranty it as such. They should put their money where their mouth is.

However, as I said before, regardless of the warranty, the product is not for me. It's a solution for only one of a myriad of other issues that can blow up the motor. I consider it insurance. Using homeowner's insurance as an example, I would never buy insurance that would cost me half as much as the house, especially if the policy only covered earthquakes, when you also have risk of fire, vandalism, water, etc.

If I decide to change my IMSB, I'll replace it with an OEM type bearing. I can't justify putting $1850 + labor costs (because doing it myself would void the joke of a warranty) into an engine that I could replace for less than $4000. Now, if I had a built racing engine, then I may reconsider.

And my question was referring to present and future, not the past, when the "solution" wasn't available. So you will not install LN's other IMSB products? Only the "solution'?

No, we still install both style bearings, the hybrid and the Solution.

[piper6909]

Originally Posted by JFP in PA

When you and your shop's name is on a retrofit, you cannot accept risks, you need to go with what works time and again. I like to sleep at night, so we only went with what we knew works.

But you admitted that the hybrids fail.

[JFP in PA]

Originally Posted by piper6909

But you admitted that the hybrids fail.

Fist of all, all ball and roller bearings as subject to both wear and possible failure.

Some people, for various reason, do not want to go the Solution route, so the ceramic hybrids are the second, but very sound choice.

While the hybrids wear out and eventually need replacement, a limited number of them have reportedly failed, not because of the design as much as other factors (installation issues, debris circulating within the engine due to other component failures, etc.). One of the largest failure factors involved the single row design, which is rather susceptible to misalignment "cocking" during installation's (this is a major problem even with all steel retrofits because many times excessive force or attempted partial extraction is used to attempt to correct this, and which damages the races and ball cages, leading to anything from shortened life spans to near immediate failures. This is why LN had always recommended not reusing a bearing that has to be extracted due to improper installation.). Several years ago, Jake developed and perfected a totally new extraction and installation tool call the Faultless Installation Tool. If you have ever use the original installation tool kit, it requires smacking the installation tool rather stoutly with a mallet to drive the bearing into the shaft, and if the bearing is not perfectly aligned with the shaft, cocking will occur. With the Faultless tooling, the possibility for cocking is completely eliminated along with the use of a mallet, and successful installation is nearly effortless. Because of the high probability for damaging single row bearings during installations, LN mandated use of the new tool when installing the newer "Single Row Pro" ceramic hybrid bearing, which is actually a dual row bearing that fits into the single row shaft. Having used the new tool, and seen how much easier and faster you get a perfect installation, it is now used by many shops for all style retrofits, including the Solution. So moving to this newer installation has all but eliminated the problems created by the process, as well as most of the premature failures.

[Homeoboxter]

Originally Posted by JFP in PA

The bearing engineer hired by Jake and Charles during their development of the ceramic hybrid bearing basically indicated that a roller bearing offered no advantages over a ball bearing design in this application, and could have limitations, which is why they went with the ceramic ball design rather than a roller design.

I wonder how the engineer came up with this conclusion. Most of the load on the shaft is radial load, and cylindrical bearings are designed specifically for that. So they should last longer in this application.

On the other hand, ceramic bearings are to be used in conditions like high temperature and speed, conditions that are not really true for the IMS. Also, hybrid bearings are not recommended at applications where lubrication is not really good, as the much harder ceramic balls will abrade the steel rings. And lubrication is thought to be not that good inside the IMS.

Another known feature of hybrid bearings is that they withstand shock loads worse than steel bearings, because in the events of shock loads the much harder ceramic balls will make indentations in the steel raceways leading to rapid wear and early failure. Steel is flexible and takes up the shock loads. I wonder if opening valves can be considered as shock load that manifests as repetitive radial impacts on the bearing.

I`m not saying it`s a terrible idea since many cars are ok with it, but there are examples of failed ones too... So are they actually any better than the original dual rows still running in 20 year old cars over 100k miles?

[Homeoboxter]

Originally Posted by JFP in PA

EPS promotes using a point steel implement to punch a hole of a specific size in the pump end of the shaft to allow oil to flow towards the bearing, and then use an oil pump drive shaft with a grove cut into it for the oil.

A little correction, this is what EPS says on their website:

Is the Pressurized Oil Feed Kit necessary?

No. The bearing is completely submerged in oil thus not requiring the Pressurized Oil Feed Kit. However, due to some misleading information of the internet, some installers feel that it's important to implement this modification.

[piper6909]

Originally Posted by JFP in PA

Fist of all, all ball and roller bearings as subject to both wear and possible failure.

Some people, for various reason, do not want to go the Solution route, so the ceramic hybrids are the second, but very sound choice.

While the hybrids wear out and eventually need replacement, a limited number of them have reportedly failed, not because of the design as much as other factors (installation issues, debris circulating within the engine due to other component failures, etc.). One of the largest failure factors involved the single row design, which is rather susceptible to misalignment "cocking" during installation's (this is a major problem even with all steel retrofits because many times excessive force or attempted partial extraction is used to attempt to correct this, and which damages the races and ball cages, leading to anything from shortened life spans to near immediate failures. This is why LN had always recommended not reusing a bearing that has to be extracted due to improper installation.). Several years ago, Jake developed and perfected a totally new extraction and installation tool call the Faultless Installation Tool. If you have ever use the original installation tool kit, it requires smacking the installation tool rather stoutly with a mallet to drive the bearing into the shaft, and if the bearing is not perfectly aligned with the shaft, cocking will occur. With the Faultless tooling, the possibility for cocking is completely eliminated along with the use of a mallet, and successful installation is nearly effortless. Because of the high probability for damaging single row bearings during installations, LN mandated use of the new tool when installing the newer "Single Row Pro" ceramic hybrid bearing, which is actually a dual row bearing that fits into the single row shaft. Having used the new tool, and seen how much easier and faster you get a perfect installation, it is now used by many shops for all style retrofits, including the Solution. So moving to this newer installation has all but eliminated the problems created by the process, as well as most of the premature failures.

Agreed that all bearings fail. Even plain bearings. Ask anyone who has experienced a rod knock.

I have a faultless installation tool: The freezer. Freeze the bearing and it slides in like butter.

[dghii]

And Hopefully, the 153rd IMS bearing thread will come to an end.
Now lets talk about oil...

[piper6909]

Originally Posted by JFP in PA

...The bearing engineer hired by Jake and Charles during their development of the ceramic hybrid bearing basically indicated that a roller bearing offered no advantages over a ball bearing design in this application, and could have limitations, which is why they went with the ceramic ball design rather than a roller design.
...
LN actually makes a roller bearing for the IMS, which is used pretty much exclusively by engine rebuilder RND out of Atlanta.
...

So their engineer says a roller bearing has "no advantage" and could "have limitations", yet LN still sells a roller bearing?

[JFP in PA]

Originally Posted by piper6909

So their engineer says a roller bearing has "no advantage" and could "have limitations", yet LN still sells a roller bearing?

LN produced it at the request of a client who buys a lot of them and likes to be different; LN also makes the single row steel IMS retrofit that Pelican sells, but that doesn't mean they endorse or support either product, they just supply them.

[piper6909]

Originally Posted by JFP in PA

LN produced it at the request of a client who buys a lot of them and likes to be different; LN also makes the single row steel IMS retrofit that Pelican sells, but that doesn't mean they endorse or support either product, they just supply them.

Let's be clear on the terminology, because it matters. Does LN "produce" or "make" the bearings themselves or do they source them out and re-sell?

[JFP in PA]

Originally Posted by piper6909

Let's be clear on the terminology, because it matters. Does LN "produce" or "make" the bearings themselves or do they source them out and re-sell?

LN has the ceramic hybrid bearing produced to their specifications, everything else in the kits are produced at their machine shop. The IMS Solution is done completely in house. I've never inquired about the roller bearings, as I had no interest in them. The Pelican kit is just the OEM single row bearing, with some additional bits LN makes for the kits, which are to Pelican's specification.

[thom4782]

Originally Posted by piper6909

That's what they claim, but they only guarantee it for 5 years.

This rant about warranties serves little value because is doesn't help one make a call.

A warranty doesn't prevent actual failures. It simply says who will pay should a failure occur. Can anyone cite an example where a manufacturer warrants a part for longer that 5 years which, if the part fails, will destroy an engine that costs $15K to $20K to replace with a fresh unit.

Here's how I see it. Porsche offered either a 3 or 4 year warranty (I don't recall which time period it was). Now your at 100K+ miles on a car that is likely 12+ years old and its time to replace the clutch. You're way beyond any numbers that Porsche would stand behind. Now do you really want to bet that the original IMSB will last another 100K miles/ many years until your next clutch job. I wouldn't take that bet unless I planned to sell the car in a year or two.

[piper6909]

Originally Posted by thom4782

A warranty doesn't prevent actual failures. It simply says who will pay should a failure occur. Can anyone cite an example where a manufacturer warrants a part for longer that 5 years which, if the part fails, will destroy an engine that costs $15K to $20K to replace with a fresh unit.

NO warranty covers consequential damages, and at no time have I called for that. There are, however, plenty of lifetime warranties where they would replace the part, if it fails. Lifetime brake warranty, is just one example, but it won't cover your rotor if the pad fails and scores it. No one is asking for that.

All I'm saying is that if you claim your product is the "permanent solution" give it a permanent warranty. If not, you're just all talk and no substance.

Originally Posted by thom4782

Here's how I see it. Porsche offered either a 3 or 4 year warranty (I don't recall which time period it was). Now your at 100K+ miles on a car that is likely 12+ years old and its time to replace the clutch. You're way beyond any numbers that Porsche would stand behind. Now do you really want to bet that the original IMSB will last another 100K miles/ many years until your next clutch job. I wouldn't take that bet unless I planned to sell the car in a year or two.

And I'd agree.

If I had a manual transmission, I'd replace the IMSB when changing the clutch. But I would not spend 1/2 the cost of an engine on it. I'd get an OEM-style bearing for less than $50. If it lasted 100K+ miles, like your example, there's no reason why the new one shouldn't last 100K.

[boxster]

Originally Posted by piper6909

Point taken, but I don't recall Porsche claiming their car is the "permanent solution" for your car needs. Do you?

If they claim it's the "permanent solution", they should put their money where their mouth is and make it a lifetime warranty. They charge enough for the item. That's all I'm saying.

They do warranty it for unlimited miles, but you better get those unlimited miles in within 5 years.

They know that for most people these aren't their daily drivers, so they threw the unlimited miles warranty in there to make it look good, but knowing full well that most cars will get far less than 50k in those 5 years.

I'm not taking anything away from the product, but why not just guarantee it forever? Most likely something else will blow up the engine anyway.

Spot on!!!