Can I tell with the engine number whether IMS is problem?

[JFP in PA]

Originally Posted by geraintthomas

Okay, your example is completely flawed as you've already replaced yours with an aftermarket solution. If you had the original in there with it being a 2001 Boxster, with only 12k miles on the clock, you'd more than likely have issues at this point. Not all are the same, but an old, low mileage Boxster is usually asking for trouble due to the bearing not being lubricated to the amount it needs to be, causing premature failure in comparison to daily drivers. You can't really argue with that point, and that's all we've been saying.

But that was his whole point, the car he was looking at didn't have an uprated bearing, so we're warning him of the possible dangers of buying an old, low mileage Boxster. The fact you have an older model with low miles makes absolutely no difference to the point being made as you've changed your bearing, so I'm not sure what you're talking about with his 'glaring hole' in his theory.

And the "flaw" with your argument is "an old, low mileage Boxster is usually asking for trouble due to the bearing not being lubricated to the amount it needs to be, causing premature failure in comparison to daily drivers." The factory bearing is sealed on both sides, and even when the seals fail, the bearings do not get regular forms of lubrication, which is why they die. Age or mileage has nothing to do with it. Over the years, we have seen engines of all levels of mileage lose their IMS bearings; 10K miles or 110K mile made absolutely NO difference. Once the grease was gone, and no real lubrication was taking place, they died.

When we compiled our data from years of exposure to the issue and did a statistical analysis, mileage show a very low correlation with IMS failure; when we added in the data from two other shops to increase the sample size, it only got worse.

[geraintthomas]

Originally Posted by JFP in PA

And the "flaw" with your argument is "an old, low mileage Boxster is usually asking for trouble due to the bearing not being lubricated to the amount it needs to be, causing premature failure in comparison to daily drivers." The factory bearing is sealed on both sides, and even when the seals fail, the bearings do not get regular forms of lubrication, which is why they die. Age or mileage has nothing to do with it. Over the years, we have seen engines of all levels of mileage lose their IMS bearings; 10K miles or 110K mile made absolutely NO difference. Once the grease was gone, and no real lubrication was taking place, they died.

When we compiled our data from years of exposure to the issue and did a statistical analysis, mileage show a very low correlation with IMS failure; when we added in the data from two other shops to increase the sample size, it only got worse.

How can it have nothing to do with mileage?

Yes there have been some that have failed even in higher mileage and daily cars, but seals will fail due to little use resulting in them drying up, which leads to a brittle seal, which cracks and fails. This is far more likely to be found on low milers than ones which are driven daily.

So let's just get this clear a second for everyone:

Are you saying that if one person bought a 14 year old Boxster with 12,000 on the clock, and another person bought a 14 year old model with 120,000 on the clock, the chances of problems with the bearing are going to be the same between both? That blows my mind if you think that.

[JFP in PA]

Originally Posted by geraintthomas

How can it have nothing to do with mileage?

Yes there have been some that have failed even in higher mileage and daily cars, but seals will fail due to little use resulting in them drying up, which leads to a brittle seal, which cracks and fails. This is far more likely to be found on low milers than ones which are driven daily.

So let's just get this clear a second for everyone:

Are you saying that if one person bought a 14 year old Boxster with 12,000 on the clock, and another person bought a 14 year old model with 120,000 on the clock, the chances of problems with the bearing are going to be the same between both? That blows my mind if you think that.

It is not "what I think", it is what the data says.

And we have seen absolutely no evidence to support your conjecture that "seals will fail due to little use resulting in them drying up, which leads to a brittle seal, which cracks and fails. This is far more likely to be found on low milers than ones which are driven daily". We have pulled IMS bearings out of cars with as little as 6K miles on them on 10+ year old cars, and the seals looked brand new, and were soft and pliable. We have also pulled IMS bearings out of daily drivers with over 100+ miles, whose seals were dried out and cracked.

[jborchel]

Originally Posted by JFP in PA

It is not "what I think", it is what the data says.

And we have seen absolutely no evidence to support your conjecture that "seals will fail due to little use resulting in them drying up, which leads to a brittle seal, which cracks and fails. This is far more likely to be found on low milers than ones which are driven daily". We have pulled IMS bearings out of cars with as little as 6K miles on them on 10+ year old cars, and the seals looked brand new, and were soft and pliable. We have also pulled IMS bearings out of daily drivers with over 100+ miles, whose seals were dried out and cracked.

I've found another Boxster to look at. It has 100,000 miles and is very clean. Can you point me to the new fix that is available? Does this new fix have certain engineered characteristics that substantially lower the possibility of future failure if the car is maintained regularly? Is the fix low enough in cost to do it even if there are no signs of pending failure?