Welcome to RennTech.org Community, Guest
There are many great features available to you once you register at RennTech.org
You are free to view posts here, but you must log in to reply to existing posts, or to start your own new topic. Like most online communities, there are costs involved to maintain a site like this - so we encourage our members to donate. All donations go to the costs operating and maintaining this site. We prefer that guests take part in our community and we offer a lot in return to those willing to join our corner of the Porsche world. This site is 99 percent member supported (less than 1 percent comes from advertising) - so please consider an annual donation to keep this site running.
Here are some of the features available - once you register at RennTech.org
- View Classified Ads
- DIY Tutorials
- Porsche TSB Listings (limited)
- VIN Decoder
- Special Offers
OBD II P-Codes
- Paint Codes
- Videos System
- View Reviews
- and get rid of this welcome message
It takes just a few minutes to register, and it's FREE
Contributing Members also get these additional benefits:
(you become a Contributing Member by donating money to the operation of this site)
- No ads - advertisements are removed
- Access the Contributors Only Forum
- Contributing Members Only Downloads
- Send attachments with PMs
- All image/file storage limits are substantially increased for all Contributing Members
- Option Codes Lookup
- VIN Option Lookups (limited)
I converted a 99 3.4 to put in my wife's tip 99 Boxster many years ago. We had to make spacers to lower the drivetrain about one inch (because the intake is much taller), which involved putting in semi-solid mounts for the transmission. The engine wiring harness is missing the wire for the plenum flapper, which can be added. The car was re-coded with a PST2 to think it's a 996 and DME programmed as a 3.4 RoW. I would also advise fitting a 987 airbox to the car- the stock 2.5 airbox is very restrictive and will choke the engine.
The only universal kit is the PEL-IMS-1, which includes spacers and uses the OEM sealed 6204 bearing. All LN IMS Retrofit and IMS Solution products are bearing specific - you replace a factory single row with the appropriate 106-08.2.2 or 106-08.20. Likewise, dual row uses 106-08.4 or 106-08.40. Other kits that say they are universal use one size bearing and don't bother with any mechanical retention for said bearing other than the very light press fit they have. If the shaft has any runout or taper, the bearing can (and does) move in the housing bore. As far as OEM replacement, Porsche came out with their own kit to replace the factory single row bearing with a sealed, ceramic hybrid single row bearing about two years ago. It was available for purchase only for a short period and was removed from the catalog shortly thereafter. I have several of these kits in my possession as proof of their existance.
cnavarro replied to maor's topic in 996 Series (Carrera, Carrera 4, Carrera 4S, Targa)What did you torque to IMS Guardian drain plug to and what model year is your vehicle? Does it have the later oil pan with support ribs? The only time we have seen the drain plugs leak is if they are improperly torqued or the hex on the o.d. of the drain plug contacts the pan before it has actually seated and compressed the crush gasket. Both these issues are addressed on the IMS Guardian website. LN Engineering took over sales of the IMS Guardian in January of 2013, so you probably purchased them through Wright Tune in the UK, with which we have no relationship as they sourced them from Flat 6 Innovations and you'll have to speak to them if there is a warranty concern as we cannot support a product we did not sell nor do we manufacture. Since Jan. 2013, we have included custom drain plug spacers for late model or replacement sump pans required for proper installation as well as a proper socket with a cutout for the drain plug connection lead to clear to address these concerns. These along with replacement IMSG drain plugs are available for purchase from LN Engineering.
Yes, that's what I said. Happy Porscheing, Pedro Wow. Not only did you originally carry out an IMS Retrofit procedure on an engine where the original bearing had failed, you chose to extract the bearing and re-install it in another engine. Two things we explicitly say not to do. When shops carry out procedures like this or people see this online and try it for themselves, only bad things can happen from this. Yes, you pulled it off, but I can cite a dozen or more instances where it didn't. Foreign object debris causes collateral damage that can take 6 months or a year to wipe out the new bearing or even the entire engine. On reusing ball bearings: http://tech.bareasschoppers.com/resources/why-cant-you-re-use-bearings/
Thank you for your photo Pedro. The last photo shows exactly why you cannot use the DOF with the LN kit. There is not enough thread engagement for the center nut with the DOF and the center bearing support in the LN Engineering IMS Retrofit. Installing one with insufficient thread engagement will not allow you to accurately torque the center nut. And even if you do manage to torque it, with subsequent heat cycles the top threads will likely not hold the torque. We've already determined an improperly torqued center nut - either too tight or loose will cause a failure! I hope for your sake there aren't many out there like this. Additionally, we closely measure and blueprint (and have so for several years) to ensure proper fitment. How does someone installing the DOF know that the flange provided is made to the same specifications as the LN Engineering IMS flange? Lastly, how can the DOF be compatible with both the stock center stud and LN Engineering stud since they seal in different manners. Our center stud is ground to a precise dimension to ensure leak free operation with the internal o-ring located in the flange. Stock flange relies on a larger o-ring located on the center stud. Lack of an internal o-ring will result in leaks over the long term. We also know this for first hand experience where users damaged the internal o-ring or accidentally removed it. Even with loctite and flange sealant, they will eventually leak and cause a comeback. Again, first hand experience.
That's why we developed the IMS Solution - to address the weaknesses of the single row bearing. However, we have no plans to release the IMS Solution for the dual row IMS bearing even though we have developed it since the dual row bearing is clearly the most superior version of all the IMS's used by Porsche.
Take the car somewhere else to someone that knows what they are talking about. There have been very few problems with the LN replacement bearings, most of which were traced to poor installation techniques. The number of installations done and still running number in the thousands; the ceramic bearing has proven itself. When LN first introduced the replacement bearing, they did recommend replacing the bearing at each clutch change, but have backed off that somewhat as the ceramic bearing has continued to show its long term strength. As for using cheaper replacements, in this application you really do get exactly what you pay for. One domestic supplier mentioned above uses all steel single row bearings with spacers to replace double row bearings; so you end up replacing one of the strongest design bearings with one that is known to be the weakest. But you saved a few bucks. Swell. If you have a dual row bearing car, the LN dual row replacement is the way to go. If you have a single row, going with the solid bearing "IMS Solution" would be optimal, but you could also consider the LN single row if you are on a tighter budget. In either case, go with an approved installer. I touched on this in a post over on Pelican: Service intervals are something that the factory should have had on this bearing from the first place. These are all mechanical systems and if we have learned anything, all mechanical systems fail. The M96 just does a better job of failing than others. Not putting a service interval on these parts would have one been foolish and also deceptive. The IMS Retrofit has always been considered a maintenance item. Only with years and millions of miles of service have we figured out that the dual row and 06-08 IMS when configured with our ceramic hybrid bearings is pretty much bulletproof and probably will never need replacing where the single rows due to their reduced load capacity will still require replacement, however at a lesser rate than a conventional bearing. I still don't know for sure how long you could run a single row IMS Retrofit's ceramic hybrid bearing - we have some units with way more than 50,000 miles that have been pulled with no wear whatsoever. We do know that if you are going to have a problem, the lower load capacity of the 6204 bearing does pre-dispose the bearing to problems we just don't see in the other bearings, be it improper installation techniques or FOD or even internal defects in the bearing that can't be detected. I'm being as real and honest as I can here. That said, Jake and I have been developing the next generation of IMS Retrofit and the associated tools to carry out these revised procedures. Only thing in the way right now of bringing these products to market is the patent process.
For those following this thread, here's an excellent discussion on this topic on the Pelican forums: http://forums.pelicanparts.com/boxster-cayman-forum/757877-direct-oil-injection.html
It can be installed on cars with the LN Engineering IMS ceramic bearing, the original OEM bearing, a replacement OEM bearing, the Pelican parts replacement bearing, etc... Regards, Maurice. We have not verified compatibility with the IMS Retrofit and I'm sure if you contact Pelican Parts, they will advise against their kit being modified outside of its original parameters for installation and operation.
No. It cannot be used with the LN Engineering IMS Retrofit and we advise against it on our website and is not necessary. The bearing provided with the IMS Retrofit does not require any additional lubrication than what it receives from in the sump. Remember, the M96 engine is a wet sump engine and the IMS bearing is submerged in normal operation.
Not elitism. Practicality. Even well known and highly regarded shops in the Porsche community have botched installs, so consider for a moment if you have techs with that level of experience having problems, just imagine the magnitude of issues we see from first time installers. Although we don't sell the IMS Retrofit direct anymore, Pelican still carries them and they can provide you support (just make sure you own Wayne's projects book). The reason you don't see most of the problems is that most of these people aren't on forums or if they are, they realize their mistake and aren't going to post about it. Installing an IMS bearing and doing a complete rebuild are two completely different things. Some people believe since they can change their own brake pads that they are qualified to do a bearing install. Same person usually is smart enough to realize that an engine overhaul is outside their area of expertise. If and when a do it yourself-er decides they want to tackle such an undertaking, we go through great lengths to dissuade them from doing so. If they still insist, we try to schedule them into our engine rebuild course at Flat 6 Innovations (only if they have prior engine building experience) and we have had many people choose this route. There have even been a few that after taking the course decide just to have Jake build the engine. The point I'm trying to make is we can take the time to weed through potential customers looking to do a rebuild and gauge whether or not they should or shouldn't tackle such a project, but there is no way we can do this with the IMS Retrofit and now the IMS Solution. The paid support service by Flat 6 doesn't work as Jake mentioned. Shops are typically the ones who use the service when they mess up their first install which usually ends in the shop having to buy more parts to correct their mistake. Customers are pissed if they have to pay for support and even more so if they have to buy more parts or tools to get them out of the mess of their own making. Yes, there are exceptions, but they are not the norm and unfortunately, I'm not available 24/7 to personally handle each situation. I had to come up with directives so that my staff can remain productive and allow me to work on the back end to ensure we continue to deliver a quality product and so I can focus on R&D. Without a shift to almost exclusively wholesale distribution, there would be no time for R&D and the IMS Solution, for example, would have been many more years in the making.
Many of the procedures we have in place are to protect the consumer. It is a fact that most (if not all) of the failures of our bearings have been due to not following the IMS retrofit procedure as outlined. With the IMS Solution, Jake and I are taking extra steps to ensure the installations are carried out properly by professionals only and we're even offering training and support to those who choose to be certified.
For everyone to read, here is the original thread from 986forum concerning Homeboy's issues with the LN Engineering IMS Retrofit: http://986forum.com/forums/general-discussions/43558-deconstructing-lne-ims-installation-failure.html There are some points that need clarification/correction: Casper's bearing is a ceramic hybrid, just like ours. Both have ceramic balls with steel races. Regarding bearing "feel", this is subjective and very dependent on the amount of oil in the bearing and even the thickness of the oil. A ceramic hybrid bearing with no lubricant in it feels/sounds horrible. Our kit comes with detailed instructions designed for shops. No pretty pictures, but there are plenty of photos and even a video with the process on our website to go along with the instructions. Again, we've never had a single complaint with our instruction. If someone wants pretty pictures, those can be found in the factory manual. The center stud is thicker without the o-ring groove since the factory stud is a known weakness. Even the Pelican kit doesn't resort to re-using the center stud knowing this is a problem. There is nothing wrong with how we seal our IMS flange - the Curil T under the head of the nut and wicking loctite after torquing the nut was adapted from techniques used by most Porsche dealerships. One of my friends works for Porsche and they learned early on that an ounce of prevention goes a long way. The last thing you want is to have to re-do a 10-14 hour job because you have a leak. If you add the cost of a new flange ($144.67 current retail price), o-ring ($2.42), nut ($2.78), and bolts ($3.48) you are at $476.35, not including the center stud, for the Casper kit. Shops won't reuse the original parts, they want new ones. Yes, that's cheaper than the LN kit, but figure shops won't even consider buying and selling a part without 20% markup. You're already at $595.44 before adding in the cost of the center stud. Now add in what the wholesalers have to make to distribute to the shops. I'll let you do the math. We've sold almost 1700 tool kits to shops and wholesalers since the beginning and have made additions so that it is all inclusive with every tool a shop might need and the tools are made to last. We get nothing but positive feedback and complements. Never once have I been told they were too heavy. And numbers do not lie. How many complaints do you see on all the forums? None. We sell almost exclusively through wholesale channels and have made the decision to discontinue retail sale of the IMS Retrofit since 99.9% of issues with the IMS Retrofit are as a result of do-it-yourself installations. The only reason we did offer them for retail sale is some shops ask customers to buy them and provide them to the shop and why it was clearly posted that professional installation was recommended and no support was provided. Casper has it right - we should have never sold the IMS Retrofit retail from the beginning. The IMS Solution will only be available through shops and not for retail sale.
cnavarro replied to Cloudsurfer's topic in 996 Series (Carrera, Carrera 4, Carrera 4S, Targa)The vane cell units do go bad, so it's a possibility. Internal cracking of the heads is also a definite possibly, would require removal and some elaborate rigs to pressure test them. Seen this happen as well.