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

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-24-2017, 12:26 PM   #41
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: S.California
Posts: 2,011
"remember Porsche themselves read a bearing catalogue and look where that got them! "
Probably the Product Costing Dept. choice, not the Product Engineering Dept.
Just read the Boca bearing thread linked above
Gelbster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2017, 12:58 PM   #42
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: LB, Germany
Posts: 1,311
Quote:
Originally Posted by 78F350 View Post
I respect Markus's opinions, but Why not replace the center bolt? The original bolt design is flawed. During the replacement of the bearing it is simple to just put a new center bolt in (Silber sourced one easily with the Pelican kit).


Hi 78F350,

for shure you can replace the center bolt if you want. My point was how to remove it if you want to reuse it. And if the one in the car is worn or the IMSB is worn, there is no other way as to replace it. The OEM one wasn't designed to be removed in the way it is done by pulling the IMSB with it and than reuse it. That was my point.

Another point is material quality, rigidity, durability, expansion. Maybe the replacement looks better, but that always does mean it is better. Shure, the after market manufacturers will know what they do, but bigger doesn''t always mean better. It has to fit the conditions and than has to be made better.

Regards, Markus
Smallblock454 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2017, 01:12 PM   #43
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Sanford NC
Posts: 2,315
Jake was one of the first to do IMS bearing replacements at a time when Porsche said it could not be done. He was involved in testing some of the designs that eventually evolved into what we now know as LN bearing kits, tools and directions. He has done thousands of replacements I'd wager.

Knowledge improves over time (witness the engines Jake blew up testing before they got it right and were ready with a product you could buy, witness the changes in one of the LN products between initial availability and today). Having a high quantity of samples and a "please return" policy also improves the insight into needed design changes. It also gives forum readers insight into what may be working and what isn't. Statistics are meaningful.

But in the end, it is your car, your money, your decision. Come back in 5 years and tell us how it all worked for you keeping in mind even that much quantity one usage means little when assessing product quality and suitability.

(That my single and double row experiences were without failure is meaningless in the path to determining product reliability. Too small a sample. To reveal my bias for quantity testing, I come from a background where millions of test cycles were a minimum.)
mikefocke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2017, 04:58 PM   #44
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikefocke View Post
To reveal my bias for quantity testing, I come from a background where millions of test cycles were a minimum.)
I have great faith an SKF's testing methodology. My challenge is to make sure that the bearing has conditions that are acceptable. I think the best way to do that is with a freeze plug. Preventing oil from washing out the bearing will enable me to get the SKF rated service like from my chosen bearing.

I am definitely going out on a limb, at least as far as the Porsche community is concerned. You're right, Time will tell.

As to the cautionary tale of KK, he was trying to use a cheaper bearing with inferior ratings to do the job. I am trying to use a top notch bearing with exceptional ratings to do a hopefully better job than what is currently available on the market.

Absolutely without pioneers I would not be in a position where I could take this experiment and have any minimal chance of success. The work of others has put me in a position where I can possibly even incrementally improve the IMS situation.

What I want is a lifetime solution, and I'm going to do my darndest to get as close to that as humanly possible.

And, I reserve the right to cancel my experiment and go with a proven quantity if that is what I determine to be the best course of action. So far my plan still looks good, but I'm always open to being proven incorrect.

Regards,

Silber
Silber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2017, 09:38 PM   #45
Registered User
 
thom4782's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Foster City CA
Posts: 1,074
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silber View Post
What I want is a lifetime solution, and I'm going to do my darndest to get as close to that as humanly possible. Silber
The IMS Solution is the closest you'll get to a 'lifetime solution' It's just that simple.
thom4782 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2017, 10:31 PM   #46
Custom User Title Here
 
particlewave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: KC
Posts: 5,718
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by thom4782 View Post
The IMS Solution is the closest you'll get to a 'lifetime solution' It's just that simple.
It's not that simple and there is exactly zero data to back that up. Plain bearings are not permanent and do wear/fail. It's just a fact. That's why you replace them when rebuilding an engine.

Until many have been pulled and measured for wear after 50k, 75k, 100k miles, and until many of them have done years of service without failure, it's all just guessing and marketing hype.

I would trust it more than a single row ball bearing, but the price is ridiculous.
I'm glad I have a dual row that will only be replaced with the same.

Last edited by particlewave; 07-24-2017 at 11:01 PM.
particlewave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2017, 07:00 AM   #47
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: S.California
Posts: 2,011
KK used a Ceramic Hybrid bearing and removed both seals.That bearing is more 'expensive' than the usual $3 steel bearing, not cheaper.
Nothing wrong with the bearing spec but it failed in his engine.
https://rennlist.com/forums/996-forum/750825-different-approach-to-diy-imsb-retro-parts-and-pics.html

"As to the cautionary tale of KK, he was trying to use a cheaper bearing with inferior ratings to do the job."

Last edited by Gelbster; 07-25-2017 at 08:33 AM.
Gelbster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2017, 07:24 AM   #48
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 56
I'm thinking it may be beneficial to post some of my thoughts about this, so if you don't like rambling skip this post.

Porsche had some of the best engineers in the world designing this engine. They looked at the numbers for the bearings, and their load data, and came up with their bearing being a lifetime solution. These were smart guys, they didn't just go to a bearing catalog and pick something at random.

But, obviously, they made some sort of mistake or we wouldn't see the failure rates we do. What was their mistake? I think it was the open tube inside the IMS shaft. Thing is, that tube acts like a small lung. Every time your car heats up, the air inside it expands and it "exhales" through the seals of the IMS bearing. Then when you stop your car and it cools it "inhales" oil from the sump through the IMS bearing seals and into the IMS tube as it cools and the air contracts.

So, I think the enemy of the IMS bearing is heat cycles. Every time the car heats up and cools down, a little bit of grease gets washed out of the bearing. Does evidence support my theory? The bearings have the grease washed out, the IMS tube is usually full of oil. At least some evidence exists. Sealed bearings running in an oily environment don't normally wash out as bad as these IMS bearings do, by a long shot. Reading some Machining forums sealed bearings in oil is fairly common and not problematic.

So, I think the Porsche engineers got it right, in that the bearings they specified, if kept intact, will work as long as they thought. They did not predict the lung effect.

I think the lung effect can be countered by plugging the IMS shaft tube with a freeze plug. Your lung will go from the size of a small dog's lung, to the size of a gerbil's. Not near as much, if any, oil will get pulled through the bearing. This allows the 2rs seals to do their job of keeping the grease intact and allowing the bearing to live to its rated service life.

Is this theory a good one? I think so. The bearing washout and oil getting into the IMS tube in the quantities it does has to be explained somehow. Will my solution (2rs + Freeze plug) actually work? I think so, but you are all right, it has to be proven, as unproven it is nothing more than ramblings of an internet nobody.

Silber
__________________
2002 Boxster S, prepared for SCCA STR Autocross class.
Ksport Coilovers - Quaife LSD - E-Bay muffler - Litronics
Silber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2017, 07:36 AM   #49
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 56
Quote:
KK used a Ceramic Hybrid bearing and removed both seals.That bearing is more 'expensive' than the usual steel bearing, not cheaper.
Nothing wrong with the bearing spec but it failed in his engine.
I looked up the bearing he used. From what I can tell, it was a $60 or so ceramic hybrid bearing, where the SKF hybrid is $150. It was a cheap hybrid, maybe price wise above a steel bearing, but effectively you would be worse off with that bearing as compared to an SKF steel one. Fatigue limits for his bearing were very poor, not a bearing suited for an engine.

Silber
__________________
2002 Boxster S, prepared for SCCA STR Autocross class.
Ksport Coilovers - Quaife LSD - E-Bay muffler - Litronics
Silber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2017, 08:18 AM   #50
Motorist & Coffee Drinker
 
78F350's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 2,208
Garage
I hate reading Rennlist because there is so much cr@p to wade thru to find any content. What I did find from the links Gelbster posted was that the spec of the bearing, as Silber just said, was a 'light duty' bearing which had no place being used in an engine. 6204 spec. If what I read is correct.
Another interesting bit was the mention of counterfeit/sub-spec NSK bearings possibly being used by Porsche.

Edit: Looking further into the bearing info (I know nothing about bearings) It looks like the post on Rennlist wasn't exactly correct about the numbers in the bearing code, unless I misread.
This was a good chart to look over: http://www.kykbrg.com/KYK%20pdf/Bearing%20Classification.pdf
My take-away is that Personally, I should leave bearing selection to others.

Last edited by 78F350; 07-25-2017 at 11:40 AM.
78F350 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2017, 08:20 AM   #51
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: S.California
Posts: 2,011
There is way more to this subject than the merely the specs of the bearing or discussing load vs lube.This is just conventional M96 wisdom.I am not an expert . 6204 & 5204 are just a dimension code. the Abec rating is a useful spec but C3 seems adequate.Tight clearances like 5+ may be a disadvantage ? then there is cage, seal, hybrids etc.
M96 engines may have different IMSB-related defects and to varying degrees. So are we discussing a better spec for a specific engine, a specific tye of bearing/year model or a panacea for all M96 ?
Let's exclude the collateral/ FOM damage failures because they are unrelated to IMSB specs.

Until you know the IMS-related defects(if any) in a specific engine ,how will you propose a solution for that engine ? And how does that spec apply to all M96 ?
For example -if Runout of the tube and/or sproket is the problem, tweaking ball bearing specs won't fix it. A plain bearing or a roller bearing might up to a limit . But what runout limit ?
If there are no IMS related defects in an engine , a1RS $3 OEM-spec bearing would probably be O.K. - particularly if the original bearing did not fail even after 100k miles. In such a case a superior spec bearing could be installed and after another 100k miles it would also be in good condition. Which would prove what about "better" bearing specs.?
Perhaps the best justification for using a "better" spec is that the upgrade costs little and does no harm - as long as you remove only 1 seal. 1RS seals do not seem to fail.Why?
The wisdom of using a plug in the IMS tube like "The Solution: has been reviewed and dismissed in previous discussions. For deep groove ball bearings and roller bearings 1RS works well in thousands of applications, so what additional benefits would the IMS Tube plug offer?
Note that seal failure often precedes IMSB failure. In which case, the primary cause of failure is seal spec/placement not bearing spec.
After years of participating in such discussions I have learned how much I/we do not know about this subject and just follow what works for people who install or warranty hundreds or even thousand of these bearings.Some of them still try to help in these Threads but it is futile.

Last edited by Gelbster; 07-25-2017 at 12:02 PM.
Gelbster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2017, 08:32 AM   #52
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: S.California
Posts: 2,011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silber View Post
I looked up the bearing he used. From what I can tell, it was a $60 or so ceramic hybrid bearing, where the SKF hybrid is $150. It was a cheap hybrid, maybe price wise above a steel bearing, but effectively you would be worse off with that bearing as compared to an SKF steel one. Fatigue limits for his bearing were very poor, not a bearing suited for an engine.

Silber
But what about the Installation or Pre-Qualification ?
For example - CH bearings are brittle compared to steel and therefore vulnerable to Installation mistakes.
Maybe the CH bearing was also knock-off like some NSK reputedly may have been ? - There is way more to this than just bearing specs.

Last edited by Gelbster; 07-25-2017 at 09:03 AM.
Gelbster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2017, 09:00 AM   #53
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: LB, Germany
Posts: 1,311
Hi,

i'd like to summarize some things.

The IMSB specs are important. Especially the technical specs of the bearing itself. Same size and type doesn't mean same technical specs.

If you remove a seal from a sealed IMSB you just have no specs, because the bearing wasn't designed and tested for that by the manufacturer.

If you have a damaged IMSB, you need to do much more than just to replace it and the risk that your engine might fail is very very high.

The lung effect (as Silber called it) is for shure problem. And no tiny IMSB seal will handle that. So there were many attempts to solve the problem. DOF and open bearings and so on. In the end the plain bearing might be a solution, but at a price point where i just say no, because there are also other engine parts that can fail, so no win.

The IMSB is one thing, but the other more important thing (compared to a better spec IMSB than the OEM one) is the proper deinstallation of the IMSB and parts related, so the IMS doesn't get damage in any way and also the proper installation of the new IMSB and all the parts related. I think that topic is often underrated, but it's very easy to harm an IMSB or IMS when you install or deinstall.

My personal conclusion: i have a manual transmission. I need a new clutch around every 100 K Km (approx 66 K miles). I do an IMSB change every time i do the clutch. I do a yearly oil change, even if i drive much less than 5 K Km (3 K miles) a year. And if the engine or ISMB fails, it fails.

Regards, Markus

PS: SIlber: i think you have the right approach, but i wouldn't insist on looking for a "lifetime" solution.
Smallblock454 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2017, 09:10 AM   #54
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: S.California
Posts: 2,011
Welcome back Markus. Your wisdom and perspective were missed.
Speaking of wisdom - perhaps we both need to abandon Threads long before we get exasperated with repetition ?
Another good example is the 6 speed transmission oil spec ! :-)
Your contribution to that subject was also invaluable but often ignored
Gelbster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2017, 09:18 AM   #55
edc
550 Anniversary
 
edc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Surrey, UK
Posts: 576
Garage
In the UK there is a well known engine builder (amongst other things) that do use an updated or updated IMS shaft as part of their rebuilds.
__________________
Current: 550 Spyder Anniversary- Carnewal exhaust - 100 cell cats - stainless manifolds - 4" underdrive pulley - poly gearbox mounts - rear lower alu brace - adjustable rear toe links
Sold: 986S - Zenith Blue - 18" Sport Classics - Black Zunsport grilles - Stainless silencer and manifolds - K&N panel - shortshift - M030 suspension - 75mm throttle body - custom 83mm intake - SmartTop - custom remap - MDS underdrive pulley
edc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2017, 09:28 AM   #56
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 56
Just bought two of these:

http://www.jegs.com/i/Dorman/326/565-104.1/10002/-1?CAWELAID=230006180037518699&CAGPSPN=pla&CAAGID=44693592161&CATCI=aud-194567928791la-182821358711&CATARGETID=230006180039216703&cadevice=c&gclid=EAIaIQobChMImbyXnvqk1QIVRpd-Ch3EmAVREAYYASABEgL5LvD_BwE

I went with brass for two reasons:

1) it is softer so less likely to damage IMS shaft on insertion.

2) It expands at a slightly higher rate than steel, so this will keep it snug when the engine heats up.

Only need one, got a spare just in case. Will measure when they get here to see if one will fit properly.

Silber
__________________
2002 Boxster S, prepared for SCCA STR Autocross class.
Ksport Coilovers - Quaife LSD - E-Bay muffler - Litronics
Silber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2017, 11:12 AM   #57
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: S.California
Posts: 2,011
Quote:
Originally Posted by edc View Post
In the UK there is a well known engine builder (amongst other things) that do use an updated or updated IMS shaft as part of their rebuilds.
Do you mean to say Hartech?
I have the hard copy of the Magnum Opus by Baz.
https://www.hartech.org/images/downloads/Hartech%20Engine%20Guide%20(interim).pdf
this is fun:
https://www.hartech.org/hartech-videos
Gelbster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2017, 01:10 PM   #58
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: LB, Germany
Posts: 1,311
Hello Silber,

some thoughts on the plug idea:
Make shure it can't move.
Make shure it doesn't put too much pressure on the IMS tube and that the pressure is evenly.
Make shure it doesn't influence the balancing of the IMS tube.
Make shure it is removable – just in case.

Also i would calculate the possible pressure differences, just to get an idea what differences you have to handle.

This is why i would rethink the idea and would come up with a more sophisticated plug. OK, i'm a native german guy.

Also study the OEM main bolt and the IMSB. There was the idea that both together create a seal towards the IMS tube that is more sealing than the IMSB seal itself.

Regards, Markus

Last edited by Smallblock454; 07-25-2017 at 01:13 PM.
Smallblock454 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2017, 08:21 PM   #59
Registered User
 
thom4782's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Foster City CA
Posts: 1,074
Quote:
Originally Posted by particlewave View Post
It's not that simple and there is exactly zero data to back that up. Plain bearings are not permanent and do wear/fail. It's just a fact. That's why you replace them when rebuilding an engine.

Until many have been pulled and measured for wear after 50k, 75k, 100k miles, and until many of them have done years of service without failure, it's all just guessing and marketing hype.

I would trust it more than a single row ball bearing, but the price is ridiculous.
I'm glad I have a dual row that will only be replaced with the same.
Yes, everything fails in time, but if you read closely Silber's goal, he's looking for the solution that will last the longest. From the known data of ISMB replacements, the LN single row and double row replacements have the fewest failures. While the IMS Solution has sold fewer units and less actual data, there are no reported failures. It information such as this that leads to informed decision in light of imperfect data. That's not guessing nor is it marketing hype. To say so is disingenuous.
thom4782 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2017, 11:13 PM   #60
Custom User Title Here
 
particlewave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: KC
Posts: 5,718
Garage
That's a bold statement, though. I don't believe that they have a lower incidence of failure as there is no data to back that up. I require numbers from independent sources. When you're getting all of your information (not data) from the seller of the product or their affiliates, that information must be met with a degree of skepticism.

It's all guessing and marketing hype.
particlewave 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 07:39 PM.


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