Porsche Boxster reliability -- let's get better info

[ganseg]

sometime in 2000, they switched from two rows of ball bearings to one row. The statistics used for the law suit says the dual row had fewer failures than the single row. Later (I think 2006) a bigger single row was used that appears to have fewer problems. Mine is a 2002 S.

[mkaresh]

Thanks for the info, I hadn't realized this. This makes most of the 986s in the survey single-row cars--unless the bearings were upgraded / replaced with something else. With over 200 cars involved, we've had one reported failure in the past two years--to a car with an upgraded bearing. My sense is that they're not likely to fail after a certain number of miles, and upgrading the bearing reset the clock.

[recycledsixtie]

Thanks for the info Michael . I just reenrolled after changing my email address. You do a great service to the car community.
Cheers, Guy

[DennisAN]

Originally Posted by ganseg

sometime in 2000, they switched from two rows of ball bearings to one row. The statistics used for the law suit says the dual row had fewer failures than the single row. Later (I think 2006) a bigger single row was used that appears to have fewer problems. Mine is a 2002 S.

From what I've read it's not that simple. Any MY 2000 car "should" have a dual row IMSB. But there's no simple engine serial number cut off. Single row IMSBs started appearing apparently at random in 2000 and there were many dual row IMSBs still installed in MY 2001 cars. I specifically sought out a MY 2000 car since it wouldn't have the casting problems of the 2.5l cars yet it "should" have a dual row IMSB. My engine serial number is in the "safe" range....but that's not conclusive.

So this summer I plan to drop the tranny. pull the clutch and flywheel, and inspect the IMSB cover. Only then will I know for sure which IMSB I have. If it's a single row I'm putting an LN bearing in. If it's a dual row.....I may just put it back together with a new RMS and clutch and forget about it.