12-22-2013, 11:59 AM
|
#61
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Sanford NC
Posts: 2,549
|
Boxster, yes, no and maybe. The IMS will fail. The dual row less than the single. Some fail at 15k, some are still fine at 200k. There is no way of knowing where on the time versus failure probability curve your particular sample will fall. Nor is there any way of knowing how much risk your specific installer and his experience/skills/tools would add or subtract.
Roll the dice.
|
|
|
12-22-2013, 12:21 PM
|
#62
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Foster City CA
Posts: 1,099
|
All '99 Boxsters, with original engines, have dual row bearings.
Data from the IMS class action lawsuit showed less than 1% of OEM dual row bearings had failed.
Dual row OEM bearings fail typically when their outer seals degrade and leak.
Outer seals degrade when they are exposed to contaminated engine oil for long periods of time.
You may want to replace your dual row bearing before replacing the clutch if you haven't changed oil frequently (once a year or every 5000 miles whichever came first), you've let your car sit for long intervals between drives, or you/ve tended to take many drives where the engine hasn't run for 20 minutes or more at operating temperature.
If you're worried, replace the bearing now.
|
|
|
12-22-2013, 12:23 PM
|
#63
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Tucson
Posts: 240
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikefocke
Boxster, yes, no and maybe. The IMS will fail. The dual row less than the single. Some fail at 15k, some are still fine at 200k. There is no way of knowing where on the time versus failure probability curve your particular sample will fall. Nor is there any way of knowing how much risk your specific installer and his experience/skills/tools would add or subtract.
Roll the dice.
|
The 99s are dual row, they are not prone to fail any more than any other part in the engine.
The rods will fail too, eventually.
I think its more PR to tell anyone with a Boxster to hurry out to your approved IMS bearing installer and have it switched out asap regardless of the year.
|
|
|
12-22-2013, 12:34 PM
|
#64
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: It's a kind of magic.....
Posts: 6,458
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by evomind
The 99s are dual row, they are not prone to fail any more than any other part in the engine.
The rods will fail too, eventually.
I think its more PR to tell anyone with a Boxster to hurry out to your approved IMS bearing installer and have it switched out asap regardless of the year.
|
We have a couple OEM dual row customer's that would disagree with you as they had to replace their engines when the "not prone to fail" IMS bearings killed their otherwise fine M96's.................
__________________
“Anything really new is invented only in one’s youth. Later, one becomes more experienced, more famous – and more stupid.” - Albert Einstein
|
|
|
12-22-2013, 04:14 PM
|
#65
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Foster City CA
Posts: 1,099
|
JFP's implied guidance is spot on. Approximately 375 OEM dual row IMSBs failed in the United States up through 2005.
|
|
|
12-22-2013, 04:58 PM
|
#66
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Arizona
Posts: 90
|
I have been running the single row bearings on a test jig to see how they are failing and may have something that may be interesting. With the standard single row bearing, the cage is usually made of two strips of metal riveted together to form the cage. My testing has shown that this type cage comes apart after only 10 to 15 minutes at about 5K rpm (no lubrication). So I transplanted a W type, or crown type cage used in the double row bearings into a single row bearing and ran it at 5K for 30 minutes with no signs of cage failure, and the balls still have a mirror finish (no lubrication). I am going to take the bearing apart to examine it and then get it back on the test jig for more running.
__________________
It's all bad
|
|
|
12-22-2013, 06:14 PM
|
#67
|
Engine Surgeon
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Cleveland GA USA
Posts: 2,425
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Walter White
I have been running the single row bearings on a test jig to see how they are failing and may have something that may be interesting. With the standard single row bearing, the cage is usually made of two strips of metal riveted together to form the cage. My testing has shown that this type cage comes apart after only 10 to 15 minutes at about 5K rpm (no lubrication). So I transplanted a W type, or crown type cage used in the double row bearings into a single row bearing and ran it at 5K for 30 minutes with no signs of cage failure, and the balls still have a mirror finish (no lubrication). I am going to take the bearing apart to examine it and then get it back on the test jig for more running.
|
Spinning the bearings unloaded doesn't tell you much of anything. You do realize how much engine RPM would equate to 5,000 IMS RPM, correct?
The only "jig" that works for this sort of testing or development is a running engine. Its called the M96.
__________________
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
|
|
|
12-22-2013, 07:11 PM
|
#68
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Arizona
Posts: 90
|
2 hours later, the balls have lost their mirror finish, and I can move the balls a little bit within their cage cells. But the cage still shows no signs of failing.
It's a little hard to keep the rpm up to 5k now because the bearing is beginning to vibrate a lot.
__________________
It's all bad
|
|
|
12-22-2013, 09:16 PM
|
#69
|
I am my own mechanic....
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Posts: 3,432
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Walter White
I have been running the single row bearings on a test jig to see how they are failing and may have something that may be interesting. With the standard single row bearing, the cage is usually made of two strips of metal riveted together to form the cage. My testing has shown that this type cage comes apart after only 10 to 15 minutes at about 5K rpm (no lubrication). So I transplanted a W type, or crown type cage used in the double row bearings into a single row bearing and ran it at 5K for 30 minutes with no signs of cage failure, and the balls still have a mirror finish (no lubrication). I am going to take the bearing apart to examine it and then get it back on the test jig for more running.
|
So if I run my engine with no oil, at the RPM that would spin the IMS at 5k RPM, your testing shows that it will last about 2.5 hours? (The bearing, not the pistons)
Seems more people change water pumps more often than IMS. Maybe test those?
__________________
'04 Boxster S 50 Jahre 550 Spyder Anniversary Special Edition, 851 of 1953, 6-sp, IMS/RMS, GT Metallic silver, cocoa brown leather SOLD to member Broken Linkage.
'08 VW Touareg T-3 wife's car
'13 F150 Super Crew long bed 4x4 w/ Ego Boost
|
|
|
12-22-2013, 11:58 PM
|
#70
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Tucson
Posts: 240
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by thom4782
JFP's implied guidance is spot on. Approximately 375 OEM dual row IMSBs failed in the United States up through 2005.
|
Out of how many manufactured? 375??? Lets see, every Boxster produced between the years 1997 and 1999 had a dual row, some cars from 2000 had a dual row. How many cars is that??
Sounds like just as much chance as cylinder linings cracking...Hurry, go rebuild your engine just in case.
I don't know guys.....
|
|
|
12-23-2013, 12:01 AM
|
#71
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Tucson
Posts: 240
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by JFP in PA
We have a couple OEM dual row customer's that would disagree with you as they had to replace their engines when the "not prone to fail" IMS bearings killed their otherwise fine M96's.................
|
So based on a couple of bad ones EVERYONE should have it done ASAP???
And how much do you charge for that?
|
|
|
12-23-2013, 12:04 AM
|
#72
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Tucson
Posts: 240
|
Look I realized its something that should be pointed out, but on models of cars where failure isn't prone I don't think the chicken little routine is necessary.
I think some people are over dramatizing this on the dual row cars.
Single row yes, I agree, much higher failure rate.
|
|
|
12-23-2013, 03:39 AM
|
#73
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: It's a kind of magic.....
Posts: 6,458
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by evomind
So based on a couple of bad ones EVERYONE should have it done ASAP???
And how much do you charge for that?
|
I am simply stating an observed fact: All ball bearing IMS units have some level of failure potential, and that the dual rows do fail and take the engines with them. We have had personal experience with failed single row, dual row, and even the oversized post 2005 units. The risk is real, and how people respond to those facts is entirely up to them and their personal level of risk aversion. Not everyone can afford to jump for a new bullet if their current engine suddenly dies, and some people intend to keep these cars for a long time, so they adjust their priorities accordingly. No one is holding a gun to their heads. And if you choose not to do anything about yours, well, that is your business.............
__________________
“Anything really new is invented only in one’s youth. Later, one becomes more experienced, more famous – and more stupid.” - Albert Einstein
Last edited by JFP in PA; 12-23-2013 at 03:55 AM.
|
|
|
12-23-2013, 04:10 AM
|
#74
|
Beginner
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Houston
Posts: 1,659
|
Walter White, Jake is spot on with the comment that spinning an unloaded bearing does not reflect what is happening in the engine. Ivory tower bearing life (all other things being equal) is related to load and RPM. The implication is that operating temperature lubrication, vibration, contamination are all nominal for the bearing. Take a look at bearing manufacturers design handbooks for more information. The reason I did not perform an L-10 calc for the IMSB was because the load would have to be an estimate making the result worthless. By the way, RPM is at 1/3 crank speed. As far as changing the IMSB, Porsche should have manned up early and declared it a maintenance item, particularly the single row . As has been pointed out below, every part of a car eventually fails, the trick is to understand required maintenance to head off collateral damage from failed parts. To reduce the chance of IMSB failure in my engine, the intermediate shaft was modified and the bearing replaced with a high temperature C3 single row bearing. The bearing will be changed out as if it were a timing belt. That means scheduled bearing replacement, something Porsche dealers should have been doing years ago.
Last edited by Jamesp; 12-23-2013 at 11:19 AM.
|
|
|
12-23-2013, 05:03 AM
|
#75
|
I am my own mechanic....
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Posts: 3,432
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by evomind
Look I realized its something that should be pointed out, but on models of cars where failure isn't prone I don't think the chicken little routine is necessary.
I think some people are over dramatizing this on the dual row cars.
Single row yes, I agree, much higher failure rate.
|
You say that like every person drives the same way.
How many IMS online complaints have I read that started out with "I was doing 20 mph when it failed, and really never drive on the freeway at all, let alone in higher RPMs.." thinking that would help their case?
Two identical bearings. Two drivers. Two different potential results. Now, how many cars were made total?
__________________
'04 Boxster S 50 Jahre 550 Spyder Anniversary Special Edition, 851 of 1953, 6-sp, IMS/RMS, GT Metallic silver, cocoa brown leather SOLD to member Broken Linkage.
'08 VW Touareg T-3 wife's car
'13 F150 Super Crew long bed 4x4 w/ Ego Boost
|
|
|
12-23-2013, 11:32 AM
|
#76
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: malta
Posts: 210
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by thom4782
All '99 Boxsters, with original engines, have dual row bearings.
Data from the IMS class action lawsuit showed less than 1% of OEM dual row bearings had failed.
Dual row OEM bearings fail typically when their outer seals degrade and leak.
Outer seals degrade when they are exposed to contaminated engine oil for long periods of time.
You may want to replace your dual row bearing before replacing the clutch if you haven't changed oil frequently (once a year or every 5000 miles whichever came first), you've let your car sit for long intervals between drives, or you/ve tended to take many drives where the engine hasn't run for 20 minutes or more at operating temperature.
If you're worried, replace the bearing now.
|
I change the oil every year. I hardly use the car, sometimes it sits in the garage for about 2 months. When i change the oil my mechanic jokingly tells me that he feels like selling my old oil to someone else, as it's colour is that of brand new oil,sometimes with as little as 500 miles on it.
I still make it a rule to change it every year though, and inspect the magnetic drain plug and oil filter really well.
So do you think i should change the bearings because i don't use the car much?
|
|
|
12-23-2013, 01:29 PM
|
#77
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Arizona
Posts: 90
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxster
I change the oil every year. I hardly use the car, sometimes it sits in the garage for about 2 months. When i change the oil my mechanic jokingly tells me that he feels like selling my old oil to someone else, as it's colour is that of brand new oil,sometimes with as little as 500 miles on it.
|
I had a suspicion that my mechanic was putting used oil in my car! It's yours!
__________________
It's all bad
|
|
|
12-23-2013, 01:49 PM
|
#78
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Arizona
Posts: 90
|
Bench-top testing isn't as futile as some would think. The first bearing I tested, I had no idea what was going to happen. I figured that maybe a few hours, maybe days, or even weeks, the bearing would begin to vibrate, wobble, screech and then maybe come apart with balls looking like raisins. But when that first piece of the cage came flying out of the bearing after only a matter of minutes it was a total surprise, I just didn't see that coming, literally. Then when I saw pictures of failed bearings with the cage broken in exactly the same areas, it got me thinking in a whole different direction.
Along those lines, I was wondering if the idea of drilling some holes in the IM shaft to equalize pressure has been bench-tested. It doesn't seem too difficult to set up. A piece of 2" PVC pipe, capped at both ends with a grommet in the center of one cap, slip a piece of tubing into the grommet (with a little grease) and connected to a manometer or a bottle of water. Spin the thing at maybe 3k rpm and see if pressure remains equal.
__________________
It's all bad
Last edited by Walter White; 12-23-2013 at 03:47 PM.
|
|
|
12-24-2013, 09:43 AM
|
#79
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Foster City CA
Posts: 1,099
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxster
I change the oil every year. I hardly use the car, sometimes it sits in the garage for about 2 months. When i change the oil my mechanic jokingly tells me that he feels like selling my old oil to someone else, as it's colour is that of brand new oil,sometimes with as little as 500 miles on it.
I still make it a rule to change it every year though, and inspect the magnetic drain plug and oil filter really well.
So do you think i should change the bearings because i don't use the car much?
|
No. I'm simply saying that the evidence for OEM dual row bearings suggests that the odds of failure increase in cars with longer oil change intervals or low use. It's unclear by how much the odds. If your worried and plan to keep your car for a long time, upgrade the bearing and put the problem behind you.
|
|
|
12-24-2013, 10:44 AM
|
#80
|
Engine Surgeon
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Cleveland GA USA
Posts: 2,425
|
Keep experimenting for another decade, then we'll compare notes.
Cage failures are generally collateral damage.
__________________
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
Last edited by Jake Raby; 12-24-2013 at 10:49 AM.
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:44 AM.
| |