Schnell Gelb

Dennis and I are both Engineers. Neither of us could figure this out quickly. There are lots of posts elsewhere asking the same question: "which bearing do I have?"- particularly for the cross-over years of 2000/2001. In no other post I could find mention of " buttress". It is an obvious i.d. point for those of us who don't have your experience nor the two different parts to physically compare. .So it is easy to i.d. the two bearings ? Perhaps not. Even engine numbers may be an unreliable predictor of which bearing is present. Perhaps a replacement engine? Or an after-market bearing+ cover plate? My engine number indicates it should be fitted with a double row bearing. The LN cover plate I have just removed from this engine measures as a double row bearing should. But if I ordered a double row replacement, it would not fit .Why? The LN bearing currently fitted is a single row.It came as a kit form Pelican -LN106-08-2 mentioned above.The cover plate in this kit measures as a double row,not a single row. It has no buttress and looks exactly like the double row bearing cover plate in the Pelican photos.This LN bearing is marked 6204RS1/1 on the single seal & "LN Engineering" on the outer race, with 8 ceramic balls.The bearing removed to fit the LN part was a single row OEM Porsche part that I still have .It is marked NSK 6204-DU17. If one of our readers orders the wrong part, it is a $600 mistake. Just thought this word of caution and a few photos may be helpful ? I'll try and unravel this mystery and post the photos later to help others with the same issue.

Yes, it is the buttress that is the easy to spot distinguishing feature but I never saw that feature mentioned so thought it helpful to point is out. If you have an LN cover plate the photos above will give the wrong and very expensive identification as explained above. I can't get the photos resized yet but will try later .Hopefully that will clarify. Meanwhile I found some engine number references that may be (??) helpful.Others feel free to correct. Double row = M96.21 651 12851 - 671 11237. Mine is 671 11708 but has a single row dimension LN cover.LN 106-08-2 Single row =651 12852/ M96.22 -67111238/ M96.21

Dennis , Thanks for raising this issue of identifying which bearing/flange is present for the problematic 2000/2001 period. I have a 2001 Boxster S and am doing a total rebuild but still had problems identifying the parts.I offer a small addition to your good work below. There is some half helpful info on the parts sites that mentions a "cover dish" depth of either 13mm or 19mm for 2row/1 row. But they do not give any reference to where to measure the distance exactly ! Saying "deep" or "very deep" dish doesn't help either unless you have a known example of each ! The situation is further complicated by after-market parts and the fact there is a no-returns-accepted disclaimer on parts that won't fit /mistakenly ordered.Why? If you look carefully at the helpful Pelican photo linked above ,you'll see that the flanges of the OEM deep dish/single row has a unique buttress that extends the inner edge of the flange into the center of the cover.That may be a useful clue if you have an OEM flange ? IF you have an LN cover dish marked "E3" ,it seems to be different. I have a single row LN hybrid ceramic bearing with the LN cover - purchased as a kit from Pelican #106 08 2 .But the cover dimension seems to be for a double row ! .This cover is only 13mm deep(=shallow =2 row) from the outer face of the flange(where the 3 flange bolts fit) to the deepest part of the dish(where the center stud nut fits). I'll try to upload some photos later to show where I measured. My suggestion is to send a vendor photos similar to mine and let them decide which you have because they will have the deep/shallow parts to compare and could at least give some specific dimensions.

Jake already responded but it was more humor than help: http://rennlist.com/forums/boxster-and-boxster-s-986-forum/823233-lifter-replacement-upgrade-fix.html

Is there any confirmation that the lifters on the M96 engine can be replaced by much cheaper(but identical) lifters labeled for other vehicles? I ask because 24 lifters x $40++ each at the dealer is painful if merely different packaging reduces the price to less than $10 each. There are many posts about 'bad' Lifters in both the Boxster and the 996 Section of Rennlist. There are well informed discussions about the original part number being revised from 996.105.041.50 to 996.105.041.72 because of unspecified improvements in design. There is further discussion by Dharn55 of a direct interchange of 996.....72 for BMW part number 11.321.748.884 as listed for a BMW X5. See post #20 in this Rennlist link: http://rennlist.com/forums/996-forum/623466-lifter-noise-2.html That alone reduces the price by much more than half ! http://www.fcpeuro.com/products/bmw-camshaft-follower-oem-11321748884 Further Interchange research (on RockAuto) produced a direct equivalent to the BMW part number of BGA HL6330 for less than $10. https://www.rockauto.com/catalog/raframecatalog.php?carcode=1433871&parttype=5548&a=www.google.com%2BSearch%2Bfor%2B2004%2BBMW%2B325I%2B2.5L%2BL6%2BEngine%2BValve%2BLifter&ck[iD]=0&ck[idlist]=0&ck[viewcurrency]=USD&ck[php_SESSION_ID]=qq2i539bh838vqurpfvugm8k47 My question is: Within the Rennlist knowledge base,have we any assurance that these interchange 'discoveries' are 100% effective substitutes? If not which non-Porsche part numbers are known to be perfect substitutes please ? If I was buying just a few lifters ,I wouldn't waste anyone's time with this question and would buy the "Porsche" (actually INA is the OEM supplier) part but on 24 lifters the potential savings is significant! If we can find a $10 ea. substitute it will save a new Rennlister much more than the cost of lifetime membership to the Forum!

I had researched this and was surprised to find the XP inferior on paper (no pun)in one regard. The problem with the XP is that it's stats do not look so good compared to the regular paper element Wix 51042. Look at the Beta ratio for the two filters on the Wix site. The 1042 has a Beta of 2/20=6/20 -this means 50% efficient @ 6microns and 95% at 20 The 1042XP is only B2=20 -this means 50% @20 - so by comparison it is only a rock filter ! I am not a tribologist so must leave others to interpret.There is some suspicion that um numbers are not reliable for Wix. So I would rather rely on JFP's experience http://www.renntech.org/forums/topic/45559-ln-engineering-spin-on-oil-filter-adapter/ If you are a geek on this just research on bobistheoilguy- there are some actual tribologists there.They seem to like Fleetguard -for the accuracy of their tech data. Fleetguard LF796 may be a possibility? http://www.oilfilter-crossreference.com/convert/FLEETGUARD/LF796

I understand the Napa Gold filter is made by Wix -try the 51042.