View Single Post
Old 01-04-2013, 12:00 PM   #12
Jake Raby
Engine Surgeon
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Cleveland GA USA
Posts: 2,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by Perfectlap View Post
The entire concept is fascinating. Am I to understand that this solution, if oil starvation is a/the prime failed IMS culprit, basically works/addresses any m96 bearing? If that is indeed the case it really makes you wonder why the guys in Germany didn't do this from the start or at least afterwards when they were debating moving from single row vs. dual.
The "Guys in Germany DID DO THIS! They just didn't do it with the M96 engine.

The only reason thats logical as to why the factory did not follow the previous designs of the Metzger aircooled engine or any other engine that uses a "layshaft" is because of cost. The M96 engine has a crankcase that is cast with 1/3 the amount of internal oil passages that were found in the aircooled engines. Because of this there are no pressurized oil passages in the region of the IMS and adding them would have been extremely expensive, requiring major redesign of the crankcase. All of this increases production costs and we already know that the accountants were in charge of engineering.

The use of a "permanently lubricated" bearing allowed the engine to be built with less internal passages within the crankcase, meaning a crankcase that was simpler to cast and machine. This means it was cheaper to build.

All previous Porsche engines that utilize a plain bearing with a pressure fed design have historically never experienced any sort of "IMS Failure". All we did was make a retrofit thats possible with the engine installed into the car and assembled and used the same type design as the engines that date back to 1955.

Here is a picture of a 547 4 cam Carrera engine from the 1950s that utilizes a layshaft to carry out the same job as the "IMS" in your M96 engine. Note the method of bearing support that is utilized. The IMS Solution design goes one step further and also sets the "end play" of the entire shaft with one easy to install, pre-set arrangement that bolts right in.


This retrofit only takes one hour longer to complete than a standard IMSB retrofit using the current LN bearing. That extra hour is just to install the oil filter adaptor and the external oil feed hose.

We'll open the IMS Solution web page next week and have some videos posted of how it works to help you better understand it.
__________________
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