Who is this raby guy or shop?

[Jamesp]

Originally Posted by VWAudiChris

how much risk are you really running by leaving the stock bearing in and just hoping for the best?

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.

[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

[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.

[smshirk]

Originally Posted by 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.

I certainly do. the first I heard about Jake, I drove up there, saw what he was doing and bought an engine he hadn't built yet. I'm still driving it. Best thing that ever happened for M96 owners. Porsche was shipping engines back and forth to
Gemany every day from all over the place, and there were no other choices if your engine failed. If under warrantly or f you bought new and weren't too far past 50k they might help you out as a good will gesture and you had a 996 with an 80k sticker. Not many Boxsters were fixed as good will gestures. I had two before the one I have now, a 2000 996 and a 97 986. Luckily I got rid of the first two before I lost an engine, but the odds would have caught up to me eventually. Now I worry less about the 01 Boxster than my wife's Lexus.

Plus I have a 3.6 Boxster that can run with most anything I have the nerve to stay up with. The only thing I regret is not using one with traction control. The other two both had it. This one has no nannies, other that ABS. Good thing the engine is in the right spot is all i can say.

Hats off to you Jake, and Charles as well. I hope the twp of you get rich enough to be named Max Hoffman! You would most certainly have made Mr. Ludvigsen's books if he was still writing them. Well, maybe not. He was pretty close to the Porsche family.

[Lobo1186]

Originally Posted by smshirk

Plus I have a 3.6 Boxster that can run with most anything I have the nerve to stay up with. The only thing I regret is not using one with traction control. The other two both had it. This one has no nannies, other that ABS. Good thing the engine is in the right spot is all i can say.

That is exactly how my 2.7 is... just ABS. I once thought about getting a 3.6 or 3.8 or hell some raby 4.0 monster engine... Then I said hell screw it. If my Boxster motor eats the big one. Ill go with an LS3. Since I came to that decision... ive not really worried about M96 engine failure...

[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.