It's 2013 - any updates on IMS issues or cost of engines?

[rondocap]

So it's now 2013, and a good amount of time has passed since the IMS issues were found. To be honest, as a new Boxster owner, there is a tremendous amount of information and fear through various forums of this IMS failure - which does happen, albeit it seems to be rare. (But not rare enough)

Having said that, I have a 2001 Boxster - no issues so far, 54k miles. The previous first owner drove it about 40k miles in 5 years, and the 2nd owner only 13k miles in 6 years. Now I have it, and obviously am driving it for fun much more, so the IMS issue worries me.

Basically, $2k is not expensive with the clutch and IMS upgrade - but in 2013, just how much is a replaceable good condition engine in case the worst happens?

I've seen some working engines on eBay in the $3k to $5k range for a 986 2.7 liter like is already in my 2001. Is that a good range for the real world, or are these eBay auctions not reliable and trustworthy for a good engine?

Heck, if a new (used) engine was only $3,500 plus a few hours of installation, that does not seem like the end of the world, and only a little bit more compared to a $2k IMS upgrade job.

So the question remains...with lower engine prices, risk it or still do the IMS...

I do plan to get a 2009 Boxster most likely next year, so I need the car to hold out for at least another 1-2 years and 15-20k miles!

[linklaw]

I got an email back in December from Flat 6 (Jake Raby's Company) that said they developed a new, permanent fix for the IMS bearing. They apparently eliminate the roller bearing and replace it with a conventional, oil fed bearing. I didn't see any info on pricing or on whether the replacement can be made without engine disassembly. They call it the Ultimate Solution, I think.

[johnsimion]

Originally Posted by rondocap

Basically, $2k is not expensive with the clutch and IMS upgrade - but in 2013, just how much is a replaceable good condition engine in case the worst happens?

I've seen some working engines on eBay in the $3k to $5k range for a 986 2.7 liter like is already in my 2001. Is that a good range for the real world, or are these eBay auctions not reliable and trustworthy for a good engine?

Heck, if a new (used) engine was only $3,500 plus a few hours of installation, that does not seem like the end of the world, and only a little bit more compared to a $2k IMS upgrade job.

So the question remains...with lower engine prices, risk it or still do the IMS...

Failure to replace the IMS might result in catastrophic engine failure at an inopportune time such as a vacation trip out of town, or in heavy traffic, resulting in a safety issue. Preventive replacement of the IMS takes place at your convenience and can be combined with clutch replacement (if needed), saving labor costs. More important, it leaves your car with matching engine and VIN numbers as well as your complete service history. This HAS to help your ability to resell the car at a later date compared to selling it after replacing a failed engine. And replacing the engine with a new (used) engine would give you an engine with an unknown service history and the same potential IMS problem. It is rare but not unheard of for owners to suffer two IMS failures. And the $2K to replace the IMS is still a lot less than the $3500 for a new (used) engine, which will also involve a certain amount of labor. If you intend to keep the car any appreciable length of time, the IMS replacement would seem to make financial sense. Of course, if you are selling or trading it quite soon, it would not make sense.

[JFP in PA]

Originally Posted by linklaw

I got an email back in December from Flat 6 (Jake Raby's Company) that said they developed a new, permanent fix for the IMS bearing. They apparently eliminate the roller bearing and replace it with a conventional, oil fed bearing. I didn't see any info on pricing or on whether the replacement can be made without engine disassembly. They call it the Ultimate Solution, I think.

To my knowledge, this new system will at least initially only be available as a install at Jake’s shop in GA, and not as a “field retrofit”.

[Perfectlap]

another advantage of doing the IMS, and sooner than later, you'll stand a better chance of being able to re-use the flywheel. That added like $700 to the cost of my clutch/IMS/RMS swap bringing it close to $3K. Pricey.

As for putting it off because used m96 engines may be getting cheaper. I wonder about that. Older Boxsters and Carreras are coming down in price to the point where many will be using them for daily driving after the cars spent nearly the first decade of their existing as garage queens. I tend to think that will shake out the bad apples at an accelerated rate. Which in turn could increase the demand for engines. However, this might be mitigated by the number of cars that are totaled (frontal impacts where the engine is immediately sold) as a consequence of more Boxster/Carrera miles being driven.

Either way you are replacing a question with another question when you replace a grenaded engine. And you are doing so at a premium over simply swapping the IMS. I don't have a reason to believe that a well maintained m96 engine will not last well past your needs.

[The Radium King]

great thread on pelican about an oil-fed ims:

Who has done an IMS change (New Oil Fed Design Idea) - Pelican Parts Technical BBS

started about a year ago. now Raby has one in development. parallel evolution?

from what i can see, feelyx taps the block and runs a line internal to the bellhousing. the raby solution uses an external oil line (from a sandwich plate on the filter?) that passes through the bellhousing. both use an exposed bearing and a modified cover plate with an oil fitting.

one of the things that feelyx's design does that i'm uncertain the raby one does is move the bearing further inboard in an effort to reduce radial torque on the bearing (presumably one of the causes of failure, along with insufficient/failed lubrication).

[rondocap]

You guys are right, ims upgrade makes sense.

I'm going to wait a couple of months, then I will have an idea of how long I'll keep the car before I get a newer one. If its longer, I'll do the ims upgrade.

[Jake Raby]

Originally Posted by linklaw

I got an email back in December from Flat 6 (Jake Raby's Company) that said they developed a new, permanent fix for the IMS bearing. They apparently eliminate the roller bearing and replace it with a conventional, oil fed bearing. I didn't see any info on pricing or on whether the replacement can be made without engine disassembly. They call it the Ultimate Solution, I think.

Its called the IMS Solution, see it in next month's edition of Panorama. We started the development of this prior to the standard IMS retrofit and its taken years to perfect it. We have been installing these solutions for quite a while, even though it is not advertised. We have a backlog of installs booked through late March 2013 right now.

All of our engines are now utilizing the IMS Solution. Active sales through shops and major distributors will begin in summer 2013. Until then the only place to get it is where it was invented, right here :-)

All sales will be through shops by IMS Solution LLC. This development is not intended to be sold for DIY installations. Units will not be sold at a retail level.

Anyway, engine prices aren't dropping- they are going up just like everything else these days. Last year after many years the OEM crate engine price from Porsche finally met the price of my engines for the first time. This year our prices increased for the first time since 2007. Interestingly the price of my engines 5 years ago was over 15K for any ofering while the factory Porsche engine price was only 5-7K. Today the price for our engines is generally 18-20K and any engine from the dealer is also the same price, but the factory core charge is equal to or more than the cost of the engine and you may not see any of that money back. Because the OEM prices have risen and our engines become more and more respected we are busier today than ever. I currently have cars in-process for engine reconstructions from 20 states and 2 Canadian provinces due to this.

The parts and processes to create one of my engines cost over14K for any engine and some are as much as 16.5K, but we have more and more people wanting to go my way, in fact I have sold three engines so far this year and didn't even try.

There are more corner cutters popping out of the wood work to "rebuild" these engines and they offer cheap prices. You will get exactly what you pay for. Results may vary.

[Jager]

What? The current LNE IMS bearing retrofit is not good enough?

[Jake Raby]

Originally Posted by Jager

What? The current LNE IMS bearing retrofit is not good enough?

We have developed the IMS Solution as a final solution to IMS retrofit bearing replacement thats recommended for single row equipped cars only. The single row bearing simply is not large enough and even the "best" bearing that can be made still simply is not large enough for the load seen within the engine.

Basically all we have done is backdated the bearing design to that of the aircooled engine that utilized a layshaft. GT3/ Turbo engines also use the same design.

[Perfectlap]

Originally Posted by The Radium King

great thread on pelican about an oil-fed ims:

Who has done an IMS change (New Oil Fed Design Idea) - Pelican Parts Technical BBS

started about a year ago. now Raby has one in development. parallel evolution?

from what i can see, feelyx taps the block and runs a line internal to the bellhousing. the raby solution uses an external oil line (from a sandwich plate on the filter?) that passes through the bellhousing. both use an exposed bearing and a modified cover plate with an oil fitting.

one of the things that feelyx's design does that i'm uncertain the raby one does is move the bearing further inboard in an effort to reduce radial torque on the bearing (presumably one of the causes of failure, along with insufficient/failed lubrication).

Perhaps Feelyx is familiar with the term prior art. Posting your R&D online is certainly one way to establish a record.

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.

[Jake Raby]

Originally Posted by Perfectlap

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.

[JFP in PA]

Originally Posted by Perfectlap

Posting your R&D online is certainly one way to establish a record.

More likely, the courts would see it as sharing it with the world rather than attempting to prevent replication

Originally Posted by Perfectlap

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.

They did, but just in the $50K+ engines, not the $20K ones..........

[Jake Raby]

They did, but just in the $50K+ engines, not the $20K ones..........

Very well put.

And here is how you can make your 20K one like the 50K one :-)
Pictures have NEVER been posted anywhere before this.. Not even on our sites. You'll find no info about this anywhere online today, not even our sites or LN. :-)

[JFP in PA]

Pretty impressive Jake.................

[smshirk]

I don't believe Jake is making any claims as to an increase in power with this upgrade, but my car saw a significant increase in HP with this solution. Granted I have one of Jake's balanced HP 3.6 motors, but I had to have the final solution. The pictures of the parts above simply can't do the real thing any justice. Sliding the parts together in your hands and realizing there is no bearing to disintegrate and dribble particles into the motor is something I just couldn't resist. My first question to Jake was why didn't Porsche do this? The answer of course is $$$$$ like everything else, and in 96/97 Boxsters weren't cheap cars and the 2000 996 I had carried a sticker of over $80k. I didn't buy it new, but the guy still had the sticker. Porsche was broke though at the time, and the M96 project catapulted them back into profitability and left us with motors that were not engineered to previous Porsche standards. In spite of that I still want to drive a Porsche. The Boxster I drive to work everyday looks like any other 986S, but I can run with just about anything on any kind of surface and I know I can drive it every day for as long as I want to. This is my 3rd M96 car. MY only regret is that I didn't find out about about Jake when I still had my 97. It was silver with the red full leather and I could have made it look like the one in the Porsche museum for not a of of extra money. Not that I'm not happy with the rainforest green, it's not an everyday color, which is why I bought it, but the classic silver lightweight 97 would have been my first choice or maybe the 2004 GT silver special edition. I would recommend to anybody who likes his Boxster and wants to keep it, to seriously consider one of Jake's upgraded engines. It is worth every cent and then some. AS info, I have no affiliation other than I am a satisfied customer of flat6 that happens to be lucky enough to live about an hour from Jake's shop. I heard about the IMS development work on one of the forums, either here, or more likely Rennlist and jumped right in.

[tonycarreon]

Originally Posted by Jake Raby

Very well put.

And here is how you can make your 20K one like the 50K one :-)
Pictures have NEVER been posted anywhere before this.. Not even on our sites. You'll find no info about this anywhere online today, not even our sites or LN. :-)

i want to lick it!

[Jager]

I LIKE!

Jake, I'm sure some of us on this forum could install this solution with your directions. Not that I'm in any hurry to replace my single row LNE bearing at this time, but some of us like doing this kind of work. Your thoughts?

[Steve Tinker]

Originally Posted by JFP in PA

Pretty impressive Jake.................

As above....

Raby, I take my hat off to you - that thing looks like it comes strait out of NASA.
I'll bet you spent a lot of time and effort to get it this far, & going on your past efforts over the last few years, I'm sure it will work exceptionally well.
I hope you make a million $$.

But beware, to doomsday protagonist's won't be far behind, predicting all sorts of hate & fraud & deceit. You'd better prepare yourself - but you've been there before & know what to expect, so just ignore them.
Thanks for your dedication.....
Steve

[1olddude]

Jake, don't know if you will see this but will I be able to go to my Porsche dealer this summer and have this installed in my 2002 S? I was thinking of doing the LN bearing this summer as my 2002 has only 14,000 miles on it so I feel like I am driving a ticking time bomb as most failures seem to happen in early miles. Thanks for all you do. These are such fun cars to drive and your solution would only add ten fold to the enjoyment.