IMS Chronology for prospective buyers

[Perfectlap]

Here is a chronology of the IMS bearing "updates" for all you prospective buyers or recent purchasers posted by LN.

p.s.
If you are in NJ I recommend having the IMS swap done at R.O.C.S. in Belleville (15 mins from Newark Airport).

-------------------------------


"97-early 2000= Factory Dual Row

Mid year 2000 some engines began using the single row bearing, 2000 model year cars can be either single or dual row, there is no rhyme or reason to these and directives that state what the engine is equipped with have proven to be less than accurate. Until a visual inspection of the flange is carried out there is no way to determine which bearing is installed.

Post 2001-early 2005= Factory single row with the standard outside diameter. These bearings were not an upgrade at all and they have the highest instances of failure with the most radical damage since the bearing is 1/2 as large as the earlier dual row bearing.

2005 Model year- Can be either the standard single row bearing or the later, larger diameter "upgraded" bearing. Like model year 2000 these cars require a visual inspection to determine which bearing is installed.

Late 2005- end of M97 production= The "upgraded" bearing that is generally referenced. These are the bearings that can't be extracted.

In reality there was only a single upgrade, the larger bearing applied in 2006. These also fail and I have one at the shop now that beings to a client who has experienced two failures in the same car.

The 97-99 dual row bearings are the most robust. All generations of the bearing fail, 01-early 05 are
by far the worst. "

[tonycarreon]

if i might just clarify a little based on model year:

97-99: dual row
00-01: dual row or single row, requires inspection
02-04: single row
05: single row or a non-servicable dual row "larger" bearing requiring disassembly
06-08: non-servicable dual row requires disassembly
09+: no IMS

i can see someone just starting to investigate wondering what happens for model year 01 since the timeline shows 97-00, mid-year 00, after 01

[Burg Boxster]

Wonder if a similar report is available for

the number of LN IMSR bearings which have

failed?

Curious as to overall failure rate and if any

correlation b/w MY/type?

[Perfectlap]

Originally Posted by Burg Boxster

Wonder if a similar report is available for

the number of LN IMSR bearings which have

failed?

someone on this forum linked a thread where there was discussion of 3 failures out of 4,000 upgrades. Think about the odds, 0.1%? must be up there with getting eaten by a shark. Well not really but still...

[JFP in PA]

Call or email Charles Navarro at LN, he will openly share the details of the few replacements that have encountered problems. I recently spoke with him at length on this exact subject, and he was completely frank and honest on the history of the upgrade...............

[JFP in PA]

The correct number is actually four; three of which were caused by poor installation techniques or the IMS bearing ingesting debris from another type of engine failure (e.g.: spun rod bearings, dropped valve, etc.). The fourth unit appeared to be the bearing itself.

[jotoole]

Perfectlap-
If you were a betting man, what odds would you give my 2000 base, built in Finland, April 2000, having a single row bearing.
Thanks

[Perfectlap]

Originally Posted by jotoole

Perfectlap-
If you were a betting man, what odds would you give my 2000 base, built in Finland, April 2000, having a single row bearing.
Thanks

our Boxsters are like a month apart. My build date is March 20.
How do you know its a single row? if you are referring to your odds of failure with the LN upgraded IMS then it seems well worth spending the money. Even if your clutch isn't toast you still get a new clutch that can last you years and years. Why try and save a few hundred bucks putting off the clutch at the risk of a blown $10K+ engine/swap?
OTOH If you are referring to your odds with the factory IMS.... the Arab Israeli peace issue seems less controversial.

Honestly I'm not an expert on this issue at all. I waited until the IMS upgrade unit was available from LN for a bit (burned the $600 flywheel by putting it off that long, my only car though) and then went to my indy and said git er done.

My unofficial theory is that a car that spent much of its engine life sitting long periods or has not had at least twice a year oil changes is an excellent candidate for an IMS upgrade. If you don't know how frequently your Boxster was driven week in an week out (not to be confused with annual mileage) or are uncertain how often the oil was changed then you really have no forensic history to go by. Get it done, why take the risk. The other issue that prompted me to get the upgrade was that until the IMS was swapped, the previous owner used Mobil 1 and only changed the oil once a year due to garage queen mileage. However this was only for the first 10K miles. I subsequently put on another 50-60K miles and do oil changes with Castrol Syntec (or whatever they call it now) twice a year. Not to stir up the Mobil 1 controversy pot but some people very familiar with these engines feel that its reformulation was inadequate and its longevity questionable. That's the claim no need to argue it you can decide for yourself.

[NoGaBiker]

Originally Posted by Perfectlap

our Boxsters are like a month apart. My build date is March 20.
How do you know its a single row? if you are referring to your odds of failure with the LN upgraded IMS then it seems well worth spending the money. Even if your clutch isn't toast you still get a new clutch.

While yours is a lucid and reasonable post, I think he's just saying "what are the odds my bearing is single-row vs. double-row, since it was built in April 2000?"

[Perfectlap]

Originally Posted by NoGaBiker

While yours is a lucid and reasonable post, I think he's just saying "what are the odds my bearing is single-row vs. double-row, since it was built in April 2000?"

oops.

Sounds like its a dual row. But those are no stranger to sudden Boxster/Carrera engine death neither.
having a dual row doesn't seem like it protects you from squat. Other factors must be at work.

[fivepointnine]

there is something else wrong (driver or maintenance) if a single car has had more than one failure. How do you explain the cars with well north of 100k having no failures?

my question is when did the IMS frenzy REALLY take off?

the 996 guys really dont seem as concerned as the Boxster guys

[landrovered]

Originally Posted by fivepointnine

there is something else wrong (driver or maintenance) if a single car has had more than one failure. How do you explain the cars with well north of 100k having no failures?

my question is when did the IMS frenzy REALLY take off?

the 996 guys really dont seem as concerned as the Boxster guys

About the same time the Tick Tick Boom ads came out.

[Burg Boxster]

Originally Posted by landrovered

About the same time the Tick Tick Boom ads came out.

...better have your flame suit buttoned up tightly

[fivepointnine]

Originally Posted by landrovered

About the same time the Tick Tick Boom ads came out.

is that the same time that Boxster values took a nose dive also?

[thstone]

Originally Posted by fivepointnine

is that the same time that Boxster values took a nose dive also?

Boxster values are fairly consistent with other luxury cars that sold for similar prices new. Take my 2002 BMW X5 for example; $60K new and 10 years/100,000 miles later its worth about the same as a 2002 Boxster with similar mileage.

What drove Boxster (and BMW X5) prices down is simply the large number that were sold. Fast forward 10 years and now there is a glut on the market of used, good condition cars which causes the price to drop.

This is different from the 993 and previous 911 air cooled models that never sold nearly as many cars and with the advent of the water cooled engine have acheived somewhat cult status - both of which have tended to keep re-sale prices high.

[Idaho Red Rocket 3]

Is it possible to buy a 2005 with a double row that can be replaced on the car ?

[Perfectlap]

Originally Posted by fivepointnine

is that the same time that Boxster values took a nose dive also?

The values took a dive when the credit market locked up in 2009. Before then values were holding up pretty well despite the IMS issue being well known.
So it was more the economy that took what I calculated to be single digit drops in resale value to double digits and not the IMS. Most buyers during that drop didn't know IMS from IBS.
By the way, if you really want to look at nose dives look at the 996 Carrera prices in 2009. Some fell by as much 40% in a single year. It looks like people were trying to get out of what was left of those Carrera monthly payments in a hurry. I met a guy this weekened who showed me his 996 Turbo that he was able to score in the high 20's in 2009. The seller couldn't get cash for a home or business loan so he unloaded the Turbo at a screaming deal.

[Perfectlap]

Originally Posted by fivepointnine

the 996 guys really dont seem as concerned as the Boxster guys

There seems to be a daily thread in the 996 forums asking about the IMS from prospective buyers or recent buyers. Nearly all of these threads are greeted with a collective "Not this crap again!" or someone posting a photo of a dead horse being beaten.

You can score a 996 for as little as $19K now so the lookie loos are coming out of the woodwork. IMS must be a top Google result for "Porsche issues".