Who is this raby guy or shop?
 

Now that I'm looking at buying one of these things I keep seeing this name pop up everywhere. What's the deal?

Top engine rebuilder / mods.

Jake Raby. He's the guy who shot Lee Harvey Oswald back in '63.

It was in all the papers.

Just reminiscin'..........;)

TO

Oh cool so sine I'm looking to maybe get a hot motor for a Boxster he'd be the guy to talk to ?

This is forum. It has posts. It has a search function.
You do not have to pay for any of this.

Also free and useful: A website called Google.
They have a lot of stuff, including videos.


Now where is that lazy servant of mine with my crepes Suzette?
I hate doing things for myself. My first option is always to have others deliver to me what I want.

Thank you :)

Anytime. We R helpful hear. C u latr.

p lap
 

a little edegy today?

Jake Raby designed the IMS retrofit via Flat 6 Innovations, which I think may be part of LN Engineering which sells it now. He is also active on this forum, so perhaps he will reply.

If you reading old IMS threads, I have something for you to keep in mind. Prior to Jake arriving about 5-6 years ago with the IMS retrofit, IMS was an issue that got discussed, but not nearly at the level it is today. His product promoted a lot of discussion about the IMS issue, which created a lot of IMS fear as people learned about the potential of having an IMS engine failure.

Over time this has caused people to not even question whether IMS affects any significant number of 986's. Now everyone just assumes IMS failure is going to happen to them and they need an IMS prevention product.

With the assumption now being that IMS failure will happen to you without one of these products, people forget that prior to these prevention products being introduced there where maybe a dozen IMS failures actually reported on these forums, out of 165k Boxster's. If you go to this thread only 6 IMS failures where reported on this site after over 40,000 views.

I think the IMS products are great insurance, they buy piece of mind for 986 owners with Single Row bearings. But I wonder if the fear that motivates these purchases is justified. I am sure Jake will disagree with me, but he also played a large part is the publicity the IMS issue has received.

I should add that I am not trying to bash anyone, this is simply my view on the IMS issue with the perspective of having been around before and after the IMS prevention products where introduced a few years ago. Like I said, the IMS products are great insurance and people seem very happy with them.

Jake Raby
 

You can find him on facebook too. About once a week he is posting the progress on someone's Porsche engine rebuild and the cause of failure. He knows his stuff. He's Flat 6 Innovations on FB.

This is a great forum with some world class people that are very willing to help. Based on your posts, you are either very uninformed or just here to mock…..sorry but I believe you need to be called out and move on...

If it wasn't a problem Porsche wouldn't have settled. They would have moved for dismissal and told everyone to pound sand. If they weren't confident of getting the case tossed it was because there were bad documents that would have supported the plaintiffs opposition to the dismissal. Litigation costs of trying the case are insignificant given that this isn't a case involving millions of cars like a Toyota or GM car. So no its not just fear, the issue is nothing more than logic. A sealed bearing within an engine is prone to oil starvation or oil contamination depending on driving and maintenance practices. And no sealed bearing lasts forever, it needs to be replaced at some interval, sooner if those prior practices are unknown to the new owner or if they were in fact detrimental to bearing longevity.

I dont see any of this, i mean aside from not knowing that shell of a car was majorly overpriced. http://986forum.com/forums/general-discussions/50710-what-have-you-done-break-stereotype.html

Incorrect. Flat 6 Innovations is a division of Raby Engine Development. Our company carries out development and has partnered with LN Engineering on many products. With the exception of maybe one product that LN sells we have carried out all of their testing since day one, even before LN was actually a company. The very first product that LN Engineering ever had was billet Nikisil cylinders for the Porsche 914 engine, and the very first set that was ever made can be found in my 356 and its 2.6L, 220HP 914 based engine.

Even though I assisted in the founding of LN Engineering, the two companies are completely separate from each other.

We dislike selling products and manufacturing them, so after development our part is done. LN Engineering manufactures the products and then they are channeled to large distributors across the world to be sold to Porsche shops and dealerships.

We develop the products so they will be available for use in our engines, which are our only commodity that we sell direct, and we only sell them direct. Our engine program was the first in the Porsche industry for the M96 powered cars and was in place years before anything else.

Our IMS product line was also the first, and we developed the IMS Retrofit (TM) procedure from scratch. I invented the first IMS extraction tool, as well as the Faultless IMS Tool recently released. We invented and developed the IMS Solution, and the Single Row Pro (dual row bearing for a single row application) and the list goes on. Today our competitors that have spawned in the past few years use the tools, procedures and (some) of the same parts to try to assemble an engine as good as ours, but they can't, because the specific components that we use aren't sold to anyone else, or even divulged. Thats the benefit that we have from having assisted with the founding of LN Engineering.

On the IMS issue, no one here knows what actually transpired or who pushed Charles (from LN Engineering) and I to create IMS related products. I divulge some of this in my book.

It was just as big of a deal, the difference was NOTHING could be done about it. If an engine started to fail because of an IMSB, you either sat back and let it consume it's self, or you bought a new engine. No resurrections were possible. The IMSB at that time was believed to be non-replacable and impossible to remove (dual row especially).

People have opinions that are based on assumption, about a topic that they know nothing about. We never tried to scare anyone, we told them the truth and that scared the hell out of them. Today we can't even share the truth or what we find without people and their opinions getting in the way.

We responded to a DEMAND and solved a problem. ALL I care about is solving problems, its all I know how to do. Read this PCA article about me and my shop that was published in December of 2013. See page 11 of this PDF for a better understanding as the interview reveals quite a bit thats never been mentioned before.
http://www.peachstatepca.org/content/newsletters/PresseFall2013.pdf

Hey man like I said Ive been around Audi and VW for years but other than hearing this and that have never really looked into buying a Porsche or working on it. Maybe I'm not as smart as you but don't call me an idiot.

See heres what I don't know I keep reading about all this IMS fuss and I know that there are some people who sadly have been screwed by it but out of the half million or however many cars were built how many have really blown up over this?

Ive put plenty of cam followers into the VW and Audi FSI motors since its a simple job and the parts are cheap 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?

Jake, I want to thank you for replying and clarifying everything. I should add that I think you offer a great product, that it provides a solution to a problem that could not previously be solved and gives a lot of people piece of mind. If I had a single row IMS I would likely buy your retrofit when I changed my clutch. I have a lot of respect for you for creating a solution.

@VWAudiChris - That post is my opinion, which is that, yes IMS failure can happen, but it is not as likely as the number of posts about it would have you believe. Almost every potential or new Boxster owner that comes to this site posts about it.

There where about 165,000 986 Boxster's ever sold, there is no solid statistic on how many suffered IMS failures. So any number is pure speculation, the average guess is between 1-8%. It's up to you to decide how worried about it you want to be, and if you are worried Jake has provided you with a solution. If you aren't then you can start enjoying your Boxster that much sooner!

EDIT:
Well worth a read:

Jake,
I'm a beneficiary of your IMSB retrofit, and I'd like to thank you for that. Car runs beautifully minus the anxiety.

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. :)

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.