Who is this raby guy or shop?

[Allen K. Littlefield]

Originally Posted by Jamesp

About 1% for dual row and 8% for single row. How much risk do you run not changing a timing belt? Some of those go a long time, some don't.

I have an '02 base 2.7 with single bearing, the most likely to fail (8%). Every oil change I check the magnetic plug and cut open the paper filter and check for ferrous particles. So far so good but the first evidence of iron in the oil on goes the new ceramic double bearing.!!! I am putting "resources", as the govt. likes to define money, aside for the operation.

I don't understand the semi or outright animosity toward Jake and his development of solutions to the problem. We all knew there was a problem with the number of posts concerning IMS failure. Jake came up with a solution and continues to refine the M96 for us. I thank him for that otherwise I would probably have just sold the car and moved on.

Yes, when I heard about the IMS failure I was "scared" but now have a fix. Porsche engineering unwillingness to admit to the problem or offer a fix scared me not Jake's solution. Let's keep things in perspective here after all we are all supposed to be friends.

AKL

[rick3000]

Originally Posted by Jamesp

About 1% for dual row and 8% for single row. How much risk do you run not changing a timing belt? Some of those go a long time, some don't.

I am not trying to stir the pot, but I have never seen anyone be so definitive about the percentages, do you have a source? I am genuinely interested, if there is hard data I would love to see it, it might change my view.

Originally Posted by thstone

Minor clarification:
Porsche Boxster 986/987 (early 987's should be counted) were at 200,000 in Nov, 2006.
Porsche Boxster/Cayman total sales surpassed 300,000 in June, 2011.

http://www.autoblog.com/2006/11/20/porsche-produces-200-000th-boxster/

Porsche Celebrates Production of 300,000th Boxster Cayman

Just keeping the numbers current for other readers doing the math at home.

I was specifically talking about 986 Boxster's (source). When production wrapped up 164,874 986 Boxsters had been sold, although you are right about including early 987's in the IMS issue.

EDIT:
I am trying to figure out the numbers a bit, although there is no public hard data on the issue so it is all speculation.

If we take 164,874 986 Boxsters, and divide by 8 years of sales 97-04. We end up with 20,609 Boxsters sold per year on average, however only years 01-04 are really affected by the IMS issue, so 82,437. However, in the header of Jake Ray's PCA article years 01-05 are noted to be those most affected. So if we use the number given in the top autoblog article, that 27k Boxsters and Caymans where sold in 05/06, and assume half are Boxsters we can add another 13,500. So total estimated cars affected by single Row IMS issue - 95,937. That is just an estimate, however it does support the case of IMS being a higher percentage issue, because in the past people (including myself) often referred to the issue as being out of 200k Boxsters sold, not 95k. The unknown variable is still how many cars actually suffered a failure.

EDIT 2:
Here is a link to the Class Action lawsuit, mentioned by Jake below. Section II B gives a good idea of the numbers. They had access to PCNA files, so I would assume the numbers are pretty accurate. 4-8% for 2001-2005 (which is in line with the 5% normally speculated on these forums in the past), less than 1% for other years. That does change view significantly, glad I could be a part of the discussion.

[Jake Raby]

Those percentages came from the discovery documents that were part of the Eisen Vs. Porsche Class Action suit.

You'll never find us posting a percentage, because the numbers that would be utilized to create the equation simply are not available with any level of accuracy.

All I know is how many failure calls we have per week. This is for all modes of failure, not just the IMSB. We don't receive as many IMSB calls as we used to, because so many cars have been retrofitted.

[VWAudiChris]

Originally Posted by Jake Raby

Those percentages came from the discovery documents that were part of the Eisen Vs. Porsche Class Action suit.

You'll never find us posting a percentage, because the numbers that would be utilized to create the equation simply are not available with any level of accuracy.

All I know is how many failure calls we have per week. This is for all modes of failure, not just the IMSB. We don't receive as many IMSB calls as we used to, because so many cars have been retrofitted.

Has this lawsuit been resolved? If you buy a car with a blown motor I assume you can't collect on this since the guy who had the car would be the rightful recipient of that cash right?

[Porsche9]

VWAudiChris,

For more info on the lawsuit checkout this website.

IMS Porsche Settlement Class Action Lawsuit Information Center | IMS Porsche Settlement

[Jake Raby]

The case was a settlement.
Still think there's not a problem? Come answer my phones for a week, after the second day you'll be blown away.

[Timco]

Originally Posted by Allen K. Littlefield

I have an '02 base 2.7 with single bearing, the most likely to fail (8%). Every oil change I check the magnetic plug and cut open the paper filter and check for ferrous particles. So far so good but the first evidence of iron in the oil on goes the new ceramic double bearing.!!! I am putting "resources", as the govt. likes to define money, aside for the operation.

I don't understand the semi or outright animosity toward Jake and his development of solutions to the problem. We all knew there was a problem with the number of posts concerning IMS failure. Jake came up with a solution and continues to refine the M96 for us. I thank him for that otherwise I would probably have just sold the car and moved on.

Yes, when I heard about the IMS failure I was "scared" but now have a fix. Porsche engineering unwillingness to admit to the problem or offer a fix scared me not Jake's solution. Let's keep things in perspective here after all we are all supposed to be friends.

AKL

I think it's more the delivery than the product.

Having said that, the entire 986 class owes a huge thanks to people like Jake who develop solutions to engine killing issues like this. The option is there if you choose to take that route just like any preventative maintenance. Folks are free to swap a water pump if they want or can wait for failure signs. Part of that decision should be the opinions of people who know the engine and it's failures. It was easy for me to advocate owners being free to make their own maintenance decisions and not feel shamed into those decisions, while at the same exact time my own water pump was failing.........

[Jake Raby]

Thank you.
Anyone who has been around these cars for more than a decade remembers when there were no options. Most people here on this forum don't remember those days.

Nothing worse than a problem that has no solution.

[woodsman]

......but it looks like to do the IMS fix you have to pull the motor from the car to get to it so how much risk are you really running by leaving the stock bearing in and just hoping for the best?[/QUOTE]

You have to pull the tranny in Boxsters but not the engine. I think you have to pull engine and tranny in 911's with the auto box, only.

[JFP in PA]

.......................................

[VWAudiChris]

Originally Posted by woodsman

......but it looks like to do the IMS fix you have to pull the motor from the car to get to it so how much risk are you really running by leaving the stock bearing in and just hoping for the best?

You have to pull the tranny in Boxsters but not the engine. I think you have to pull engine and tranny in 911's with the auto box, only.[/QUOTE]

Oh, ok thanks.

The more I read about how problematic and expensive these motors are the more sense it seems to make to put a LS motor in there and call it good!

So I think I'm on the lookout for a Boxster roller that I can do that to!

[thom4782]

@ rick3000

The Eisen estimates suggest there have been at least 3500 IMSB failures in the US and more than 7000 worldwide.

[Jake Raby]

Originally Posted by thom4782

@ rick3000

The Eisen estimates suggest there have been at least 3500 IMSB failures in the US and more than 7000 worldwide.

Thats the ones they know about. It doesn't count the ones that were misdiagnosed and etc.

[VWAudiChris]

Originally Posted by thom4782

@ rick3000

The Eisen estimates suggest there have been at least 3500 IMSB failures in the US and more than 7000 worldwide.

Man thats really a high number for whats suppose to be a high end car!!!!! Mazda had there issues with the RX8 cars blowing up and they just gave everyone a longer warranty so why didn't Porsche do the same??

[Johnny Danger]

I guess the part about Lee Harvey Oswald is false ?

[Porsche9]

Read pages 16 and 17 of the February Panomara.

[Jake Raby]

I posted this on another thread and figured I'd post it on this one, too.

Guys,
I've got to stop taking this stuff so seriously online. I either have to go, or seriously change the direction of my posts, their content and its clear that I simply can't be so direct.

I am surrounded by blown up engines at all times. Nothing comes here for an oil change or simple repairs, and not nearly enough engines come here for preventive measures.

Over the past several years it has rubbed off on me. Today while I was out driving my tow truck (hauling furniture of all things!) a Boxster pulled in behind me and was in the rear view mirror for a good while. I realized that all these failures have taken a toll on me when I had the thought cross my mind of "Should I just go ahead and stop in the middle of the road, and load that car on the truck before I see it due to a failure!". Failures and solving them for years have obviously taken their toll, because its literally all I think about.

When the car passed me I recognized the driver, and yes, I sold her the car with a bunch of upgrades about 5 years ago, but sadly she has really allowed it to really go downhill on the exterior.

After the past few days I have pretty much decided not to publish the failure chapter of my book, and not to post anything further about failures. I'll ask you guys not to ask me the questions about failures, and I'll need your help to keep this all positive.

In person things are a lot different than what they are here online and while I can still be direct in my classes, its not content that can be shared via text without being overly direct. I need to do more of my hands on classes, I really enjoy hosting them.

I don't mean to bust on DIY guys, but again dealing with their complications took their toll on me and things have been so much better since we stopped selling products direct. I'd love to figure out a way to support the DIy installs and provide parts without it dragging us down. Thats a monumental challenge that more than likely can't be achieved.

Thanks, guys.

[Timco]

Originally Posted by Jake Raby

I posted this on another thread and figured I'd post it on this one, too.

Guys,
I've got to stop taking this stuff so seriously online. I either have to go, or seriously change the direction of my posts, their content and its clear that I simply can't be so direct.

I am surrounded by blown up engines at all times. Nothing comes here for an oil change or simple repairs, and not nearly enough engines come here for preventive measures.

Over the past several years it has rubbed off on me. Today while I was out driving my tow truck (hauling furniture of all things!) a Boxster pulled in behind me and was in the rear view mirror for a good while. I realized that all these failures have taken a toll on me when I had the thought cross my mind of "Should I just go ahead and stop in the middle of the road, and load that car on the truck before I see it due to a failure!". Failures and solving them for years have obviously taken their toll, because its literally all I think about.

When the car passed me I recognized the driver, and yes, I sold her the car with a bunch of upgrades about 5 years ago, but sadly she has really allowed it to really go downhill on the exterior.

After the past few days I have pretty much decided not to publish the failure chapter of my book, and not to post anything further about failures. I'll ask you guys not to ask me the questions about failures, and I'll need your help to keep this all positive.

In person things are a lot different than what they are here online and while I can still be direct in my classes, its not content that can be shared via text without being overly direct. I need to do more of my hands on classes, I really enjoy hosting them.

I don't mean to bust on DIY guys, but again dealing with their complications took their toll on me and things have been so much better since we stopped selling products direct. I'd love to figure out a way to support the DIy installs and provide parts without it dragging us down. Thats a monumental challenge that more than likely can't be achieved.

Thanks, guys.

This guy needs a vacation. I mean getting somewhere where he has zero chance of seeing a Boxster so he won't worry about it's IMS.

You should try to get past the need to force a new bearing in every car you see or discuss online, (or stop and tow every working car you see for a bearing swap) and help those who want the help. Here you have a great thread with many singing your praises, and you publicly announce on a DIY board no more DIY suggestions or support rather than simply say it's too complicated and you've seen too many get in too deep because it's a precise thing, not changing brakes. There's no shame in not wanting to give out free advise all day, but there's a better way of saying it.

The degree of help you offer here is your decision to make, just like the decision to spend thousands on a fix a car may never need. (Apparently a 90% chance)

[recycledsixtie]

Timco and Jake,
I see both sides of the equation. Jake is just trying to make a living. This is the perfect place for him to advertise his expertise. I can see where he is coming from in only selling his products to recommended installers. Selling them to diy guys/girls and trying to support their installation would be a nightmare.

Conversely having a few ims failures posted in this forum puts fear in the members. We know the approximate odds of a failure. For me to spend $4000(clutch, ims, rms, flywheel etc) prevention on my $19k Boxster makes very little sense. I have the IMS Guardian installed. I will take my chances.

The individual has to make his/her own choice on preemptive repairs. What do you feel comfortable with?

Cheers, Guy.

[Perfectlap]

Flat6 and LNE don't have to sell anything in the forums. By that I mean that nearly all Porsche specialists who know what they're doing will suggest to an wholly un-informed owner that they replace the bearing when the customer comes in for a clutch replacement. And it's not a hard sell, "if you replace this bearing your engine will be out of danger for that type of failure. We already have everything apart to do it. Do you want to add it to the job?". Sold.
An extra bit of income on parts and labor for that shop owner.


Now multiply this hundreds of times per shop including Porsche dealerships.
Most Boxster/996 owners aren't any where near these forums. And I'd bet that most who have replaced their IMS bearings on their mechanics suggestion did so without ever having stressed over it pre and post swap.