Change HistoryDiscussion of Boxsters and other Porsches |  |  |
|
Buying through this link, gets PB a donation. |
Expect the best, and accept no substitute. |
 | |
Message: Re: Any replaced IMS failures out there?
Changed By: Boxsterra
Change Date: June 03, 2013 02:40PM
Re: Any replaced IMS failures out there?
Change Date: June 03, 2013 02:40PM
Re: Any replaced IMS failures out there?
[quote=Dunkirk]
... Now here's the question:
"There's a new IMS replacement out there. It is better. Costs twice as much as the old one. We should have that new gizmo in our shop in a few days."
In other words, I'd be the first guy from their shop to try out the new IMS gizmo. They've done a ton of the "old" ones.
I talked to my regular Porsche service guys back in Seattle (Chris' Porsche - love these guys) and they said: Don't be the first.
I asked the chaps here if they had ever heard of an IMS failure occurring on a replaced IMS using the LM gear. No, was their response.
Anyone have any advice either way? I'm ready to tell them to go ahead with both the clutch and the old-style IMS replacement (LM). Any particular reason I should trust a new version of the IMS versus the old? (I believe the new is from these guys: http://www.flat6innovations.com )
TIA,
Dunkirk.[/quote]
Dunkirk:
There is another "final "solution", a demonstration of which I have personally witnessed two days ago at BRBS. The demonstration was done on an actual cutaway of a Cayman engine that was capable of "running" on a battery which powered a windshield wiper motor to turn the crankshaft. There was one piston left inside the engine with the cranskshaft so that one could observe its operation. For IMS purposes, everything else was visible and operating....the timing chains, the IMS tube, the paddles, the cutaway of the oil pan and pick-up tube, the IMS flange and even a view of the IMS bearing (which was visible through a slit behind the flange). The demonstration was conducted by Pedro, who is partnering with TuneRS Motorsports in Florida.
The solution consisted of a pressure-fed oil line that ran from one of the already available (but plugged-up on factory engines) oil ports and a custom IMS flange which incorporated a fitting to squirt oil directly on the bearing.
This has already been discussed on this board a few months ago, but I wanted to mention it to give you why I think this is something you should consider and look into for yourself.
Its simplicity in design is what makes it a winner, IMO, and it addresses what everyone has agreed is the root of the problem: inadequate [b]lubrication[/b].
1. There are no additional parts which might have unintended, uncalculated or unforeseen consequences: the modified flange is a patented replica of the factory flange with the addition of an oil feed. Keep in mind that the IMS flange is stationary and fixed in place by the three small bolts.
2. You have the option of leaving your existing IMS bearing in place if it's in good shape and only remove the seal which faces the transmission side. This is especially beneficial for those with M97 motors where the IMS bearing cannot be replaced without an engine teardown.
3. In the unlikely event that the oil line somehow gets pinched, you are back to where you were in the first place (i.e., the IMS bearing will function the way the factory designed it until you can correct the pinched line). This is in marked contrast to another "Solution" which relies on a film of oil to prevent the new type of bearing from seizing almost immediately with oil starvation.
According to the developers, the oil pressure drop from using the factory-plugged oil port is negligible.
Again, IMO, since the acknowledged problem is lack of lubrication, this addresses that problem without introducing any other unknowns. It's certainly something worth looking into for anyone concerned about potential IMS failure.
Regards, Maurice.
... Now here's the question:
"There's a new IMS replacement out there. It is better. Costs twice as much as the old one. We should have that new gizmo in our shop in a few days."
In other words, I'd be the first guy from their shop to try out the new IMS gizmo. They've done a ton of the "old" ones.
I talked to my regular Porsche service guys back in Seattle (Chris' Porsche - love these guys) and they said: Don't be the first.
I asked the chaps here if they had ever heard of an IMS failure occurring on a replaced IMS using the LM gear. No, was their response.
Anyone have any advice either way? I'm ready to tell them to go ahead with both the clutch and the old-style IMS replacement (LM). Any particular reason I should trust a new version of the IMS versus the old? (I believe the new is from these guys: http://www.flat6innovations.com )
TIA,
Dunkirk.[/quote]
Dunkirk:
There is another "final "solution", a demonstration of which I have personally witnessed two days ago at BRBS. The demonstration was done on an actual cutaway of a Cayman engine that was capable of "running" on a battery which powered a windshield wiper motor to turn the crankshaft. There was one piston left inside the engine with the cranskshaft so that one could observe its operation. For IMS purposes, everything else was visible and operating....the timing chains, the IMS tube, the paddles, the cutaway of the oil pan and pick-up tube, the IMS flange and even a view of the IMS bearing (which was visible through a slit behind the flange). The demonstration was conducted by Pedro, who is partnering with TuneRS Motorsports in Florida.
The solution consisted of a pressure-fed oil line that ran from one of the already available (but plugged-up on factory engines) oil ports and a custom IMS flange which incorporated a fitting to squirt oil directly on the bearing.
This has already been discussed on this board a few months ago, but I wanted to mention it to give you why I think this is something you should consider and look into for yourself.
Its simplicity in design is what makes it a winner, IMO, and it addresses what everyone has agreed is the root of the problem: inadequate [b]lubrication[/b].
1. There are no additional parts which might have unintended, uncalculated or unforeseen consequences: the modified flange is a patented replica of the factory flange with the addition of an oil feed. Keep in mind that the IMS flange is stationary and fixed in place by the three small bolts.
2. You have the option of leaving your existing IMS bearing in place if it's in good shape and only remove the seal which faces the transmission side. This is especially beneficial for those with M97 motors where the IMS bearing cannot be replaced without an engine teardown.
3. In the unlikely event that the oil line somehow gets pinched, you are back to where you were in the first place (i.e., the IMS bearing will function the way the factory designed it until you can correct the pinched line). This is in marked contrast to another "Solution" which relies on a film of oil to prevent the new type of bearing from seizing almost immediately with oil starvation.
According to the developers, the oil pressure drop from using the factory-plugged oil port is negligible.
Again, IMO, since the acknowledged problem is lack of lubrication, this addresses that problem without introducing any other unknowns. It's certainly something worth looking into for anyone concerned about potential IMS failure.
Regards, Maurice.
Original Message
Author: MauriceonLongIslandDate: June 03, 2013 01:09PM
Re: Any replaced IMS failures out there?
[quote=Dunkirk]
... Now here's the question:
"There's a new IMS replacement out there. It is better. Costs twice as much as the old one. We should have that new gizmo in our shop in a few days."
In other words, I'd be the first guy from their shop to try out the new IMS gizmo. They've done a ton of the "old" ones.
I talked to my regular Porsche service guys back in Seattle (Chris' Porsche - love these guys) and they said: Don't be the first.
I asked the chaps here if they had ever heard of an IMS failure occurring on a replaced IMS using the LM gear. No, was their response.
Anyone have any advice either way? I'm ready to tell them to go ahead with both the clutch and the old-style IMS replacement (LM). Any particular reason I should trust a new version of the IMS versus the old? (I believe the new is from these guys: http://www.flat6innovations.com )
TIA,
Dunkirk.[/quote]
Dunkirk:
There is another "final solution", a demonstration of which I have personally witnessed two days ago at BRBS. The demonstration was done on an actual cutaway of a Cayman engine that was capable of "running" on a battery which powered a windshield wiper motor to turn the crankshaft. There was one piston left inside the engine with the cranskshaft so that one could observe its operation. For IMS purposes, everything else was visible and operating....the timing chains, the IMS tube, the paddles, the cutaway of the oil pan and pick-up tube, the IMS flange and even a view of the IMS bearing (which was visible through a slit behind the flange). The demonstration was conducted by Pedro, who is partnering with TuneRS Motorsports in Florida.
The solution consisted of a pressure-fed oil line that ran from one of the already available (but plugged-up on factory engines) oil ports and a custom IMS flange which incorporated a fitting to squirt oil directly on the bearing.
This has already been discussed on this board a few months ago, but I wanted to mention it to give you why I think this is something you should consider and look into for yourself.
Its simplicity in design is what makes it a winner, IMO, and it addresses what everyone has agreed is the root of the problem: inadequate [b]lubrication[/b].
1. There are no additional parts which might have unintended, uncalculated or unforeseen consequences: the modified flange is a patented replica of the factory flange with the addition of an oil feed. Keep in mind that the IMS flange is stationary and fixed in place by the three small bolts.
2. You have the option of leaving your existing IMS bearing in place if it's in good shape and only remove the seal which faces the transmission side. This is especially beneficial for those with M97 motors where the IMS bearing cannot be replaced without an engine teardown.
3. In the unlikely event that the oil line somehow gets pinched, you are back to where you were in the first place (i.e., the IMS bearing will function the way the factory designed it until you can correct the pinched line). This is in marked contrast to another "Solution" which relies on a film of oil to prevent the new type of bearing from seizing almost immediately with oil starvation.
According to the developers, the oil pressure drop from using the factory-plugged oil port is negligible.
Again, IMO, since the acknowledged problem is lack of lubrication, this addresses that problem without introducing any other unknowns. It's certainly something worth looking into for anyone concerned about potential IMS failure.
Regards, Maurice.
... Now here's the question:
"There's a new IMS replacement out there. It is better. Costs twice as much as the old one. We should have that new gizmo in our shop in a few days."
In other words, I'd be the first guy from their shop to try out the new IMS gizmo. They've done a ton of the "old" ones.
I talked to my regular Porsche service guys back in Seattle (Chris' Porsche - love these guys) and they said: Don't be the first.
I asked the chaps here if they had ever heard of an IMS failure occurring on a replaced IMS using the LM gear. No, was their response.
Anyone have any advice either way? I'm ready to tell them to go ahead with both the clutch and the old-style IMS replacement (LM). Any particular reason I should trust a new version of the IMS versus the old? (I believe the new is from these guys: http://www.flat6innovations.com )
TIA,
Dunkirk.[/quote]
Dunkirk:
There is another "final solution", a demonstration of which I have personally witnessed two days ago at BRBS. The demonstration was done on an actual cutaway of a Cayman engine that was capable of "running" on a battery which powered a windshield wiper motor to turn the crankshaft. There was one piston left inside the engine with the cranskshaft so that one could observe its operation. For IMS purposes, everything else was visible and operating....the timing chains, the IMS tube, the paddles, the cutaway of the oil pan and pick-up tube, the IMS flange and even a view of the IMS bearing (which was visible through a slit behind the flange). The demonstration was conducted by Pedro, who is partnering with TuneRS Motorsports in Florida.
The solution consisted of a pressure-fed oil line that ran from one of the already available (but plugged-up on factory engines) oil ports and a custom IMS flange which incorporated a fitting to squirt oil directly on the bearing.
This has already been discussed on this board a few months ago, but I wanted to mention it to give you why I think this is something you should consider and look into for yourself.
Its simplicity in design is what makes it a winner, IMO, and it addresses what everyone has agreed is the root of the problem: inadequate [b]lubrication[/b].
1. There are no additional parts which might have unintended, uncalculated or unforeseen consequences: the modified flange is a patented replica of the factory flange with the addition of an oil feed. Keep in mind that the IMS flange is stationary and fixed in place by the three small bolts.
2. You have the option of leaving your existing IMS bearing in place if it's in good shape and only remove the seal which faces the transmission side. This is especially beneficial for those with M97 motors where the IMS bearing cannot be replaced without an engine teardown.
3. In the unlikely event that the oil line somehow gets pinched, you are back to where you were in the first place (i.e., the IMS bearing will function the way the factory designed it until you can correct the pinched line). This is in marked contrast to another "Solution" which relies on a film of oil to prevent the new type of bearing from seizing almost immediately with oil starvation.
According to the developers, the oil pressure drop from using the factory-plugged oil port is negligible.
Again, IMO, since the acknowledged problem is lack of lubrication, this addresses that problem without introducing any other unknowns. It's certainly something worth looking into for anyone concerned about potential IMS failure.
Regards, Maurice.