Re: That is very eloquently stated, as usual...

http://www.theimssolution.com/

Let the debating begin.

Things I found interesting in reading the announcement.

Aluminum bearing.

Been using triple bearing in high HP rebuilds.

Cost.

First published estimate for specific bearing failure rates based on factory bearing I've seen or heard from him.

I saw that when researching when I should change the oil after my own upgrade...Very Interesting to say the least.

It took longer to show up here than I imagined it would.

Yes it is expensive, no it is not for everyone. The technology was originally only intended for my engines.

Remember, the other plain journal bearings within your engine that are located in the main and rod bearing positions are also aluminum faced. Since the unit is hydrodynamic, the wear surface is actually the film of oil between the rotating and stationary components that comprise the assembly. The "aluminum" used for the rotating component is not normal, it is a very special alloy that took us three generations of development to source and apply. This alloy of aluminum is made especially for bearing material and is not cheap.

why debate? Either someone believes in it or they don't. I developed it for my engine program and thats all I care about.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/20/2013 10:55PM by Jake Raby. (view changes)

hmmm..... That's an interesting perspective on the value of debate.

Not sure Socrates would have agreed with you. But then, he wasn't much of a thinker, was he.

Quote
Roger987
Not sure Socrates would have agreed with you. But then, he wasn't much of a thinker, was he.

The philosophy department at the University here has a motto: Just think about it. Of course, the converse could be the Nike slogan: Just do it.

Certainly, the use of the "old" technology from the previous Porsche engine design that injected an oil flow into a bearing and didn't seem to have issues that made headlines seems a reasoned potential solution. One of the concerns with the design is the lack of oil flow in both the Porsche sealed and L&N's replacement bearing. Thinking about it is made more difficult, of course, by the lack of empirical evidence. Time will tell if this is better and nothing will be proven without testing it, both during development and in real world use. We know that these bearings have failed and I personally know two cars that have had the factory IMS bearing fail without warning resulting in engine replacements. I also know others that have failed in other ways such as rod failure and cam shaft failure.

Anything mechanical has trade offs against things like longevity, weight, serviceability and performance. Usually, the engineers get it right and sometimes they learn from the experience. Of course, we could also talk about the Boeing Dreamliner problems. At least so far, they haven't had an engine fall off the wing during flight like the DC10...

Dave - 06 987 S coupe SG/NL; gone (but still my first love): 03 986 AS/GG/BK;

Quote
Dave In MD

Quote
Roger987
Not sure Socrates would have agreed with you. But then, he wasn't much of a thinker, was he.

The philosophy department at the University here has a motto: Just think about it. Of course, the converse could be the Nike slogan: Just do it.

Certainly, the use of the "old" technology from the previous Porsche engine design that injected an oil flow into a bearing and didn't seem to have issues that made headlines seems a reasoned potential solution. One of the concerns with the design is the lack of oil flow in both the Porsche sealed and L&N's replacement bearing. Thinking about it is made more difficult, of course, by the lack of empirical evidence. Time will tell if this is better and nothing will be proven without testing it, both during development and in real world use. We know that these bearings have failed and I personally know two cars that have had the factory IMS bearing fail without warning resulting in engine replacements. I also know others that have failed in other ways such as rod failure and cam shaft failure.

Anything mechanical has trade offs against things like longevity, weight, serviceability and performance. Usually, the engineers get it right and sometimes they learn from the experience. Of course, we could also talk about the Boeing Dreamliner problems. At least so far, they haven't had an engine fall off the wing during flight like the DC10...

or layshaft in the older engine designs (and the one in my Turbo's "old" engine) are rather balanced smooth running shafts. I do not know the proper terminology but they do not have to translate reciprocating motion into rotary motion.

In the case of the crankshaft it has to do this, obviously. Thus the crankshaft sees a wider variation in pressure and the crankshaft moves/bends some.

What this means is part of the problem of the stock IMS bearing and its failure mode may be related to the variable loading it receives arising from the fact it is at the flywheel end of the crankshaft with all that brings to the table. There is of course the action of the clutch controlled by a human that also might create or attenuate some of the movement at the flywheel end of the crank. It appears that Tip equipped cars are less likely to experience an IMSB failure which suggests the Tip's cushioning of the transmission of power from the crank to the transmission and the reduction of the shocks going the other way may play a role in this lower failure rate.

The hydrodynamic bearing modification does nothing to address the crankshaft's propensity (in at least one case observed by an engine builder in the UK) to whip around. It has been some time ago but this engine builder I believe came up with an aftermarket hydrodynamic bearing solution for its special rebuilt engines.

While this hydrodynamic bearing is probably a very good solution for a specially prep'd engine, one that is suitably balanced and possibly fitted with a more rigid cranksahft or the crankshaft is fitted into a stiffer block or all of the above this hydrodynamic bearing may not be the solution for just any old stock engine.

Or maybe it is.

Guess we'll just have to wait and see.

"A mile of highway will take you one mile. A mile of runway will take you anywhere."

After reading the threads and the information provided on the IMS Solution site, I reach the following conclusion (really just a theory).

The single or dual row units have multiple wear points. When their ball bearings degrade for whatever reasons, the IMSB starts to spew debris throughout the engine. The damages other parts of the engine sometimes beyond repair. There are few ways to detect an impending failure of the IMSB. So when the single or dual row bearings fail, the first symptom can be a blown engine.

The IMS Solution eliminates most of the wear points. And, this is just a guess, when the new design wears, it doesn't spew debris throughout the engine. Hence, the IMS Solution is a permanent solution in the sense that it eliminates the possibility of a catastrophic failure.

I have a 100K car. It still has the original bearing. I want to replace it. The roll of the dice for me is when to do it. I'd like to take it to the shop tomorrow, but the timing of when the IMS Solution will be available is still vague -- sometime between March and September. If the IMS Solution were available today, I pick it over the IMS Retrofit in a heartbeat.

I'd love to hear what others think of my theory.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/21/2013 04:58PM by thom4782. (view changes)

I understand the IMS uncertainty... and the new solution provides a non catastrophic option. But why not install the IMS Guardian? And, what are the statistics related to the success of the IMS Guardian in detecting a potential failure and the owner shutting down prior to significant damage?

The IMSG is great at detecting an issue, it does not solve the issue like a retrofit or the IMS Solution.

Is there pricing?

Cost will be up to your local shop. These kits are not being sold retail, only through a distribution agreement with SSF auto parts. This means your local shop can source the kit through their normal channels and then install it into your vehicle at the cost that they see fit for the entire job.

Here I charge the same price for the IMS Solution install as a standard IMS Retrofit. For us there are no additional labor hours and since we did all the development in house we have become very proficient with the install procedures, meaning we can do the work at a cost lower than anyone else. Being at the source for the kit also saves money.

Pedro and I have talked and he will be coming to our facility for a training session on the proper installation of the IMS Solution. Pedro will be one of the first installers offering the technology when it is available in summer 2013. Till then, we are slammed with installs here.

"Not sure Socrates would have agreed with you."
Pretty sure that I don't care.

Raby

Thanks for the info re cost, Jake.

I think the other question asked pertained to the guarantee you may be offering. That will be useful information.

I don't regard a discussion/debate/dialogue about any mechanical issue/proposed solution to be pointless. In fact, it's through such a dialogue that we learn more, and make informed decisions.

Most of what I've learned about my Boxster I've learned from this Board, and most of my parts/upgrade decisions have been made after I've had the benefit of discussion here. With the exception of a replacement engine, I've done all the work on my Boxster with my own hands, again with the benefit of dialogue here (and in the case of my roof, Maurice's very capable hands-on guidance.)

Heck, I even bought, and installed your 160 degree thermostat after reading the debate about it here, even though some (many?) said (with an explanation) it would not have any bearing (so to speak) on the engine's performance/longevity.

It would be incorrect to assume that a discussion of your products would necessarily be a condemnation, or that it would not result in a favourable response to your products/services.

Quote
Roger987
I've done all the work on my Boxster with my own hands, again with the benefit of dialogue here (and in the case of my roof, Maurice's very capable hands-on guidance.)

Rog....you're a great painter

"A mile of highway will take you one mile. A mile of runway will take you anywhere."

Oops.

Better make that "mechanical work, after the expiry of the factory warranty".

Gary - a reward for your careful scrutiny of my post:

"A mile of highway will take you one mile. A mile of runway will take you anywhere."

Even the part where you so generously give me credit for playing with your top!

Also, since this is advertised as a "final solution", I too would be interested in hearing about the existence or lack of a written warranty, if any.

Regards, Maurice.

Quote
Jake Raby

"Not sure Socrates would have agreed with you."
Pretty sure that I don't care.

Raby

Pretty sure he doesn't either since he died in 399 BC!

I am the wisest man alive, for I know one thing, and that is that I know nothing. - Socrates

Dave - 06 987 S coupe SG/NL; gone (but still my first love): 03 986 AS/GG/BK;

I wonder what the next most common mode of failure is? Chain guides?

Intermix from cracked heads.

In 1960 I rebuilt a Hirth roller bearing crankshaft in my 1300S with aluminum alloy sleeve bearings. The car is alive and well in Germany.

Ed B

30 day warranty for manufacturing defects.

If we carry out the retrofit here at Flat 6 and the car passes my pre-inspection and is found suitable for the retrofit the conditional guarantee will be 90 days.

Any other warrantees will be up to the installer of the technology.

With majority of these cars and engines at 80K+ these days the reality is any other warrantees would just be a selling aid on a worthless piece of paper filled with fine print, which is what warrantees are all about in today's world. Its the biggest false sense of security that you can ever purchase. Basically I don't believe in people buying any product or service just to receive a warranty when we have documented 24 modes of engine failure, with the IMSB being just one of them.

I avoid finger pointing exercises where something else may fail and take out my technology and there isn't enough left of the engine to conclusively prove what happened first. A broken IMS Tensioner paddle could kill the IMS Solution, and then we'd have to prove otherwise. I'd rather lose sales as to deal with that. This approach has kept our record clean, kept us out of court and has built a strong customer base filled with people who believe in what we do.

Thats not the answer that any of you here will appreciate, but its the answer that anyone who wishes to purchase the technology needs to hear. Remember; Porsche still maintains that it is impossible to extract the IMSB and what we are doing is complete black art.
Raby

So, if I have this right Jake, you are offering the ultimate solution to a vexing issue that will be expensive, but we don't know how much; was developed for racing with limited, at best, long term road testing, that will come with a 90 day limited warranty if you do the inspection and install, otherwise it's on the back of the 3rd party installer.

You're correct that most warranties aren't worth the paper lawyers have written them on, and many times are just a false sense of security not unlike many "wonder" products. I wish you luck with your new solution. Like Socrates, I know nothing.

"A mile of highway will take you one mile. A mile of runway will take you anywhere."

When anything breaks the very first thing thats questioned is the very last thing, or most expensive thing that the finger can be pointed at. When someone has something fail and they have purchased a product with a warranty from a company with a strong reputation to maintain and plenty of cash in the bank, guess who gets the gavel pointed at them? You got it.

Thats why I don't sugar coat a damn thing and make people understand all the risks beforehand. I turn down more engine sales than we accept.

The problem is when these engines break there are no conclusive results as to what failed first. The foremost expert that would be called in on these engines would either be me, or a competitor of mine hired by some slime ball, so guess what that leads to. Its a finger pointing exercise where we have to prove that the product did not fail first. No thanks.

Lots of people out there will give you a warranty for something that they know is a pile of junk, but here you can't even purchase a warranty, false promise or lie. Did I ever mention that I hate selling things?

It seems to have gone from unkowwn, to a bad rumour, to accepted, and now to panic.

Yep, IMSes fail.

Yep, i replaced mine (LN) with my clutch. Then another in a different car.

However, as i've even shown first hand, these bearings *can* go 150k. Not sure why some do and others dont.

And, as Jake says, there are other weaknesses which, once an IMS has been repalced once, are likely to be bigger threats to one's motor.

So i agree Jake can't warranty the motor. (But he could warranty the IMS bearing).

More importantly, how much should one spend to strengthen a single, famous, link in a chain, when there are other weak links?

I'm simply saying don't attribute all failrues to IMSes. I've no personalyl seen two that have been diagnosed as failed IMSes, and subsequently held the perfectly good IMS-B in my hand.

Grant

Grant

gee-lenahan-at-gee-mail-dot-com

that is going in a known contaminated environment in the presence of other known worn parts with future uncertain maintenance any of which could cause trouble and that trouble could be attributed by someone else to the part you are asked to warranty? Recall the recent story of the 917 overrev'ed by a journalist. And the part will, in the future, be installed by someone else.

I recall the customer who switched serial numbers on machinery to get me to replace under warranty, we caught on when the replacements totaled more than he had bought from us.

Maybe for his engines where he builds/rebuilds 'em entirely, they are starting with all fresh parts, and they must use his oil at his specified intervals.

Quote
mikefocke, '01S Sanford, NC
that is going in a known contaminated environment in the presence of other known worn parts with future uncertain maintenance any of which could cause trouble and that trouble could be attributed by someone else to the part you are asked to warranty? Recall the recent story of the 917 overrev'ed by a journalist. And the part will, in the future, be installed by someone else.

I recall the customer who switched serial numbers on machinery to get me to replace under warranty, we caught on when the replacements totaled more than he had bought from us.

Maybe for his engines where he builds/rebuilds 'em entirely, they are starting with all fresh parts, and they must use his oil at his specified intervals.

that even with a Porsche new car warranty or CPO warranty you show up with a car with a sick engine it is not a given you are going to get any satisfaction. The warranty claim may be denied if there are grounds to do so.

One of the things that Porsche is going to do is read out the over rev counters and look for anything that suggests the engine failure arose from operator error.

There are I suspect -- but have no hard evidence of this mainly just an an over active imagination -- other vehicle/engine telemetry that Porsche could also pull out and and use to deny a warranty claim. Or of course honor a warranty claim.

My info is whenever a car is brought in for major service or warranty repair a Porsche diagnostics computer is connected to the car and a scan of all the car's controllers is done. Pages of data is pulled from these and sent to Porsche. The techs have no control over this. They do not generally see the data and probably it wouldn't be much value to them if they did see it. (From my work I know what some of this data looks like or could find out what it looks like and thus derive perhaps some enlightenment from the data but none of the products I work on require I know what this data looks like to any detail and I have plenty of other things my work requires I do know.).

But my guess is it is data that could show (among other things) evidence of mistreatment or abuse. I mean were I in Porsche's shoes you bet I'd collect whatever I thought I needed to prevent an invalid claim (though made innocently and not an attempt to defraud) and of course those claims that could be considered fraudulent.

Flat 6 doesn't have the installer network nor they the equipment to be as thorough and investigative as Porsche so it would be open to for whatever reason all sorts of unjustified claims.

"A mile of highway will take you one mile. A mile of runway will take you anywhere."

Quote
grant
It seems to have gone from unkowwn, to a bad rumour, to accepted, and now to panic.

Yep, IMSes fail.

Yep, i replaced mine (LN) with my clutch. Then another in a different car.

However, as i've even shown first hand, these bearings *can* go 150k. Not sure why some do and others dont.

And, as Jake says, there are other weaknesses which, once an IMS has been repalced once, are likely to be bigger threats to one's motor.

So i agree Jake can't warranty the motor. (But he could warranty the IMS bearing).

More importantly, how much should one spend to strengthen a single, famous, link in a chain, when there are other weak links?

I'm simply saying don't attribute all failrues to IMSes. I've no personalyl seen two that have been diagnosed as failed IMSes, and subsequently held the perfectly good IMS-B in my hand.

Grant

Then the next question would seem to be if the 24 modes of failure presented a significant risk, why bother with just an IMSB assy?

Jake apparently feels the remaining weak points represent a significant risk to the longevity of a motor that has his IMSB replacement in it, hence the 30-90 day warranty.

periodic inspection as you do with the ceramic replacement bearing?

What is required to do the install?
Is this still a drop the tranny, pull the old bearing out through the hole job or does the engine need to be pulled and opened up?

Inspection is not necessary as there are no "wear parts" like there are with the ball bearing. With the IMS Solution the only thing that would ever wear is the bushing. Unlike a ball bearing, if the bushing wears nothing breaks, the engine only picks up a noise and continues to run just fine. When we purposely created wear the noise was just there all the time and sounded like an old chevy with bad cam bearings. It didn't get any worse and it never broke; valves remained controlled and there were no timing deviations and no foreign object debris levels that were elevated.

The process of IMS Solution installation requires the same tool kit as the standard IMSR kit. These kits are only being sold for professional installation this time around, I have integrated the IMS Solution retrofit into my WTI training course and will instruct 600 technicians all over North America how to install it this year. We also plan webinars for installers so we do not have issues where improper assembly is a possibility. While the install process remains simple, there are no margins for error with the IMS Solution at first start up.

Thats why the installs are only being carried out at my facility now, we must ensure the first purchasers of this technology have a flawless experience, so the same hands that has done all the development work on the arrangement from day one are carrying out these installs. We did the same thing with the classic retrofit bearing. The IMS Solution is not designed to be a DIY job, and support for DIY efforts will not exist.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/23/2013 07:22PM by Jake Raby. (view changes)

Regarding the installation question--does the motor have to be pulled and opened up or is it installed with the motor in place?

This is a retrofit, unless your car is 06 or newer it is installed just like the classic IMSR arrangement. Engine in car and assembled, tranny and flywheel pulled.