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

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-30-2016, 10:45 AM   #1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Beverly Hills Mi
Posts: 64
When Porsche replaced Boxster engines, what spec did they use?

Hi, I'm going to look at a 99 base Boxster (worse than that, it's an auto!!!) that had a new Porsche engine fitted, buy Porsche in 2005. Since then It's done less than 20K miles.

What I want to know is what engine would Porsche themselves have fitted to a 99 Boxster in 2005? Would it be:
A: Early duel row IMS Bearing 2.5
B: Would it be a 2.5L but with the later single row bearing.
C: Would they have just used the then current engine which would be a 2.7 with a single row bearing.
D: Something else.

I'm hoping it's A actually as the single row IMS bearing seems to have a lower failure rate from what I can tell than the later duel row bearing?

Thanks

Last edited by Adrian Thompson; 04-30-2016 at 11:04 AM.
Adrian Thompson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2016, 11:39 AM   #2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: It's a kind of magic.....
Posts: 5,099
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adrian Thompson View Post
Hi, I'm going to look at a 99 base Boxster (worse than that, it's an auto!!!) that had a new Porsche engine fitted, buy Porsche in 2005. Since then It's done less than 20K miles.

What I want to know is what engine would Porsche themselves have fitted to a 99 Boxster in 2005? Would it be:
A: Early duel row IMS Bearing 2.5
B: Would it be a 2.5L but with the later single row bearing.
C: Would they have just used the then current engine which would be a 2.7 with a single row bearing.
D: Something else.

I'm hoping it's A actually as the single row IMS bearing seems to have a lower failure rate from what I can tell than the later duel row bearing?

Thanks
Porsche tended to match the engine specs to the original (yours would be a 2.5L engine), with some notable exceptions like installing the oversized non serviceable IMS bearings. Unfortunately, as yours is from the transitional year, the only way to know if it is the oversized bearing, or the more failure prone single row, is to pull it apart and look at the IMS center bolt; if it is a 22MM center bolt, you have the oversized bearing.
__________________
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 offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2016, 04:51 PM   #3
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Beverly Hills Mi
Posts: 64
Well I've just bought the car so well see. What's the current consensus of the current failure rate? I've heard 10% for the single row but I don't think I've ever seen a number for the 05 up non serviceable version.
Adrian Thompson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2016, 05:41 PM   #4
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Emerald City
Posts: 885
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adrian Thompson View Post
Well I've just bought the car so well see. What's the current consensus of the current failure rate? I've heard 10% for the single row but I don't think I've ever seen a number for the 05 up non serviceable version.
If you literally look in the General Discussion Forum there's a thread on the larger bearing. And you're better off calling it the 06 and up bearing because a lot of 05s still had the old single row.

Welcome to the forum. Use the search function to help topics stay relevant. If you had used the search you'd have gotten a ppi, because you'd know how valuable those are when buying a p car. You'd also see that for the 01-05 smaller single row the number is 8 percent and the 97-00 dual row was about 1 percent. Less failures with the large non serviceable but I'll let you read the other thread.
jdraupp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2016, 11:15 AM   #5
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Beverly Hills Mi
Posts: 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdraupp View Post
If you literally look in the General Discussion Forum there's a thread on the larger bearing. And you're better off calling it the 06 and up bearing because a lot of 05s still had the old single row.

Welcome to the forum. Use the search function to help topics stay relevant. If you had used the search you'd have gotten a ppi, because you'd know how valuable those are when buying a p car. You'd also see that for the 01-05 smaller single row the number is 8 percent and the 97-00 dual row was about 1 percent. Less failures with the large non serviceable but I'll let you read the other thread.
Thanks for the feedback. I know about PPI's and wouldd have got one on any other Boxster. But when I set out to look for a car I was planning on either a nice Z4 M Roadster ($20-25K) or the best late 03+ glass window 986S I could find for around $20K which should have been a mint one. But then this car came up through a friend of a friend for cheap, like seriously cheap as in cheaper than any other running Boxster I've heard about and less than many cars needing a new engine. So as it's got less than 20K miles on a new Porsche engine I've taken a chance. I mean, what's the worse thing that could happen!

I already needed to be rescued once with jumper cables by, ironically, the most unreliable car in the world, a Land Rover Discovery! Looking for the radio code (not found the card yet) before getting a new battery.

I'll post an intro and running thread once I've got it titled and insured tomorrow.

Last edited by Adrian Thompson; 05-02-2016 at 12:41 PM. Reason: Typos
Adrian Thompson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2016, 06:21 PM   #6
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Colorado
Posts: 442
Garage
I bought a 99 that blew the engine in 2006 with 37kmiles, i bought in 2014 with 58k miles. It had an X in the replacement Porsche rebuild back to factory specs engine. it has been running spotless. I have 97kmiles on it now.
jdlmodelt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2016, 06:54 PM   #7
Engine Surgeon
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Cleveland GA USA
Posts: 2,424
Being replaced in 2005 it can have the M96 Single Row (horrible) or the M97 Single Row bearing. Its a toss up.
__________________
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
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

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 10:08 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2018 Pelican Parts, LLC - Posts may be archived for display on the Pelican Parts Website -    DMCA Registered Agent Contact Page