Go Back   986 Forum - The Community for Porsche Boxster & Cayman Owners > Porsche Boxster & Cayman Forums > Performance and Technical Chat

Post Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-28-2010, 10:06 PM   #1
Registered User
 
Idaho Red Rocket 3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Nampa, ID.
Posts: 488
Thank you all very much. Not sure I understand the series of engine numbers, but I'll find out what engine number is in the car to compair against the list.

BTW, which size bearing is NOT replacable while engine is intact ?
Single ?
Double ?
Something Else ?
Idaho Red Rocket 3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2010, 05:53 AM   #2
Engine Surgeon
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Cleveland GA USA
Posts: 2,425
The non-replaceable unit is the large diameter single row bearing. It has a 22mm retaining nut.
__________________
Jake Raby/www.flat6innovations.com
IMS Solution/ Faultless Tool Inventor
US Patent 8,992,089 &
US Patent 9,416,697
Developer of The IMS Retrofit Procedure- M96/ M97 Specialist
Jake Raby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2010, 06:30 AM   #3
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: GA
Posts: 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jake Raby
The non-replaceable unit is the large diameter single row bearing. It has a 22mm retaining nut.
Jake, Thanks in advance.

Despite the already upgraded to a larger IMS in MY06-08, you still see some failure. What is the comparison between the MY06-08 with your retrofit IMS?

If it need to be tear down the engine to do the retrofit, is it worth it.
Cost wise?

I just bought an 06 boxster S with 2 year CPO. Thinking about retrofit it and keep it for a while or dump it after CPO run out.
lifeisgood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2010, 07:21 AM   #4
Engine Surgeon
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Cleveland GA USA
Posts: 2,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifeisgood
Jake, Thanks in advance.

Despite the already upgraded to a larger IMS in MY06-08, you still see some failure. What is the comparison between the MY06-08 with your retrofit IMS?

If it need to be tear down the engine to do the retrofit, is it worth it.
Cost wise?

I just bought an 06 boxster S with 2 year CPO. Thinking about retrofit it and keep it for a while or dump it after CPO run out.
Their isn't a comparison between the two...

Currently MY 06 vehicles are just coming out of warranty, most of the reports we have heard so far of these bearings failing have come from Dealerships that slipped us some info. Now that these can't be swept under the rug as easy the reports should elevate a bit, like they did with the earlier cars.

LN and I have already produced a ceramic bearing for the MY 06, large IMS, it is in testing in a full blown track car.

Cost wise: If I tear into an engine I ONLY fully upgrade it, I refuse to just open it up and swap the IMS, because thats a waste of effort and leaves a dozen more points of possible failure in existence. Prices for a fully upgraded FSI engine start at 16K, (most are 18-20 and can reach 22-25K) but the least of those makes 30HP more than factory and includes installation, assembly by a single Human and dyno optimization.
__________________
Jake Raby/www.flat6innovations.com
IMS Solution/ Faultless Tool Inventor
US Patent 8,992,089 &
US Patent 9,416,697
Developer of The IMS Retrofit Procedure- M96/ M97 Specialist
Jake Raby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2010, 09:52 AM   #5
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Sanford NC
Posts: 2,598
But how is a track car

a test of how a ceramic bearing will perform in the cars we have and the many of us drive?

I recall your comments that cars driven gently (and specifically TIP cars because that transmission's shift patterns promotes low-rev higher-MPG driving) suffer more failures than cars driven at high RPM.

It would seem that a track car would be testing in a very different driving style than the street car norm..or is your car babied around the track at less than 3k RPM? I'd have thought that Atlanta traffic at rush hour would be a better test environment than Road Atlanta.
mikefocke is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2010, 10:28 AM   #6
Engine Surgeon
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Cleveland GA USA
Posts: 2,425
Mike,
More will come in street cars. This one got applied to the track car for many reasons.

We have lots of time, we won't be seeing the majority of these cars equipped with the larger diameter bearing for 2-3 more years.

The larger diameter bearing responds to engine RPM differently.

It is more difficult to carry out development and check up on the larger diameter bearing, since it can't be removed without complete teardown..

At the present, if we update an MY 06 or newer engine, we back date the IMS and use the triple row IMS update, something thats proven.
__________________
Jake Raby/www.flat6innovations.com
IMS Solution/ Faultless Tool Inventor
US Patent 8,992,089 &
US Patent 9,416,697
Developer of The IMS Retrofit Procedure- M96/ M97 Specialist
Jake Raby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2010, 11:57 PM   #7
Registered User
 
Idaho Red Rocket 3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Nampa, ID.
Posts: 488
I just found another MY06 with a build date of 8/05. It is a base with Sport Chrono. Would this car be more safe than the 10/05 built car ?
Idaho Red Rocket 3 is offline   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 07:22 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