Single row. Vs. double row bearings

[Rlwalker799]

Just started looking at the IMS issue and class settlement info. My 2001 s, made in Finland is not in the vin sequence listed in the settlement doc. Do I have single row or double Which has a better track record?

[Topless]

Most likely you have the single row bearing with estimated failure rate of 8-10%. Might want to consider a clutch/IMS replacement.

[kjc2050]

What's your engine number?

You likely have the single row, as Topless pointed out.

[BrokenLinkage]

I thought the vin sequences specified in the settlement document effectively delineated the more failure-prone single-row bearings. Did I misunderstand?

[kjc2050]

Originally Posted by BrokenLinkage

I thought the vin sequences specified in the settlement document effectively delineated the more failure-prone single-row bearings. Did I misunderstand?

No, you didn't misunderstand. I've used the engine number ranges shown in this Pelican technical article: IMS Replacement & Upgrade

[ccjazz]

I recently did a bit of research on my 01' S, also from Finland. I was at the dealer for a new version coolant cap and had them print out the "warranty data sheet" for me.

Turns out it has a production date of March/01 and engine M96/21, engine# 671 08159. Based on Pelican's technical article as kcj2050 linked (thanks kjc), theoretically I may have a double row bearing in my 01'.

So if you can determine your engine number it might narrow it down for you. You'll still only know for sure once the transmission/ clutch are removed so you can see what's in there.

[Rlwalker799]

I don't have my engine #. In looking at my post I see my last question was ambiguous
Restating the question, which is purported to be more reliable single or double row?

[kjc2050]

Originally Posted by Rlwalker799

I don't have my engine #. In looking at my post I see my last question was ambiguous
Restating the question, which is purported to be more reliable single or double row?

Double row.

[fatmike]

My 2002S was made in Finland as well, and it is also not in the published VIN range. I assume that means it has a dual row.



/

[oc-boxster]

Originally Posted by fatmike

My 2002S was made in Finland as well, and it is also not in the published VIN range. I assume that means it has a dual row.



/

My 2002 S built in January 01 has a single row so I changed it-good thing too, it was in stage 3 failure with a bad leak-no signs or noise at all-replaced about 3 months ago, I'm convinced by the state of the bearing it would have failed for sure by now

[fatmike]

Originally Posted by oc-boxster

My 2002 S built in January 01 has a single row so I changed it-good thing too, it was in stage 3 failure with a bad leak-no signs or noise at all-replaced about 3 months ago, I'm convinced by the state of the bearing it would have failed for sure by now

Good to know, and glad you caught it.

Did you check the VIN range that was published? Was it in the range?



/

[Meat Head]

Single row- 8-10% failure rate. Double row- Less than 1%

If I had a single row bearing car, I would give serious consideration to a clutch IMS bearing replacement. I have a double row bearing car and I'm going to wait till I need a new clutch before I worry about the IMSB. At a 1% failure rate, I'm not overly concerned (hopefully the stats are correct).

[Chuck W.]

Originally Posted by oc-boxster

My 2002 S built in January 01 has a single row so I changed it-good thing too, it was in stage 3 failure with a bad leak-no signs or noise at all-replaced about 3 months ago, I'm convinced by the state of the bearing it would have failed for sure by now

Something is wrong here. I have a 2001 S I special ordered in early 2001. It has a build date of 3/01. How can you have a 2002 S built three months earlier than my 2001?

[clickman]

Based on the info from those that work on these engines on a regular basis, even with the class action info and engine S/N info etc, for 2000 - 2001 you won't know for sure which bearing you have until the tranny is out and you see the outside cover of the IMS.

[southernstar]

Chuck, perhaps he is referring to the engine build date. My 2000 2.7 has a serial number indicating that the engine was actually built in 1998, although assembly of the car was not until mid 1999.

Brad

[Chuck W.]

Originally Posted by southernstar

Chuck, perhaps he is referring to the engine build date. My 2000 2.7 has a serial number indicating that the engine was actually built in 1998, although assembly of the car was not until mid 1999.

Brad

Ahhhhhhhh.... I learn something everyday. Thanks.

[woodsman]

I'm confused- do we go by the VIN or the engine VIN?
By the way, my 2001S was special ordered and built in GERMANY- and HAD a single row that seemed to be in excellent condition at 75000mi.

[southernstar]

No, you are not confused, IT is confusing. I believe that the settlement in the class-action suit lists vehicle VIN's and, of course, Porsche will know what original engine number matches the body. If your car is a 2001 with a single-row bearing, its VIN should be listed in the range of the ones included in the setllement.

Porsche's parts catalogue lists a cutoff date for the dual-row bearing based upon the engine's serial number: essentially, the final 5 sequential digits of 11237 for the 3.2 and 12851 for the 2.7. This is, of course, assuming that the engine was not replaced or rebuilt after the introduction of the single-row bearing, in which case it would have the 'updated' single-row, even if it was originally manufactured with the dual-row. A Porsche remanufactured engine will have the letters 'AT' in the serial number; however, some engines have been rebuilt by dealers (or elsewhere) and while the original serial number will be on the engine, the IMS shaft and bearing could have been replaced.

The engine serial numbers are, as indicated, the cut-off date for the dual-row and accordingly, all engines manufactured after those numbers should have the single-row IMS bearing. Ones prior to that may have either, although it is my understanding the the single-row bearing was a mid 2000 model-year update on the 2.7 and 3.2 made late in the 1999 calendar year.

Ultimately, this means that as far as 2.7's and 3.2's, you will only be safe to conclude that it was manufactured with a dual-row bearing if the engine was manufactured in 1998 (represented by the letter 'Y' in the engine serial number, just prior to the final 5 sequential digits). An engine with a 'Z' preceding these digits, will have been built in 1999: if early that year (i.e., prior to the introduction of the new bearing in late 1999) it will have the dual-row bearing. After that, it could have either (the same for engines built in 2000, which have a number '0' prior to the final 5 sequential digits, or 2001, which will have the number '1' at that location). Again, any engine serial numbers afther the ones listed above, which again is the cut-off point for the dual-row, will have single-row bearings.

If your engine was built in 1999, as the serial number denotes only the year and not the date of manufacture, you cannot be absolutely certain whether it was built before, or after the introduction of the single-row bearing. If your 2000 was assembled in 1999, however, it will be far more likely to have the dual-row bearing, as there appears to have been some significant lead-time between the assembly of the engines and the installation in car bodies. As I have indicated in another post, the engine in my 2.7 was manufactured in 1998, but the assembly date for my car was in August 1999. If your car's assembly date was in late 1999 and your engine serial number shows that it was built in 1999 (remember, the letter Z), I believe it is safe to assume that it will have a dual-row bearing as engines manufactured in late 1999 were likely not installed in bodies until the year 2000. Clear as mud?

Lets put it this way, if your 2.7 or 3.2 was sold and initially registered as a 1999 in a country where the model year is based upon the date of manufacture (as I understand it, in the UK and most of Europe), then you should have the dual-row bearing. Support for this proposition can be found in Porsche's indication that the single-row bearing was not introduced until the 2000 model year. Hence, the same should be true for 2000 model year 2.7's and 3.2's sold in North America, if the manufacturing date of the car was in 1999.

Brad

[woodsman]

wow!!! okay but didn't the settlement state that cars over 10 yrs weren't covered? And, are cars from lands other than USA, covered?

[oc-boxster]

Originally Posted by Chuck W.

Something is wrong here. I have a 2001 S I special ordered in early 2001. It has a build date of 3/01. How can you have a 2002 S built three months earlier than my 2001?

My memory may be off as to the month of build but I do know the original owner bought, and was driving the car at the beginning of November 01.