JFP in PA

Are there any stats on how much lower? I think I need to clarify what I meant. ... "What lets you know a car is a MY07?" meant ... when buying a second hand 987 privately, what is the thing to look at to determine whether its a MY07? Is it the Servicebook? Something else? Is there any way to tell from a listing or do you need to look at the paperwork? There are no "hard" stats on the final IMS design as Porsche has continued to be tight lipped, so all the information is second hand. But they can and do fail. If you want to know what year Porsche thinks the car is, you need to run the VIN and/or find the build date.

Thanks again Ahsai!. What would have been the harm of it being driven after these happened? :cursing: It should create a major oil leak, with everything that entails. A larger question would be why it happened in the first place, these plugs simply do not fall out on their own.............. That sir is the real question. I do not know what would be the cause. I was at the track autocrossing, did a 360 and did not hit anything. Thats when this all happened. The oil pressure and levels dropped but not to significant levels. There were no alarms or CEL indications. It was drove off the track and retired for the day :( They are metal are they not? So I really don't know how or why it came out. No, they are synthetic rubber or plastic material (flexible) and held in by friction and the sump vacuum:

Thanks again Ahsai!. What would have been the harm of it being driven after these happened? :cursing: It should create a major oil leak, with everything that entails. A larger question would be why it happened in the first place, these plugs simply do not fall out on their own..............

For those that would like to know a bit more about the water pump issues on these cars, the May 2014 issue of Excellence has an in-depth explanation in the "Tech Notes" section, starting on page 36 in the letter titled "Anxious Pump Watcher". A good read........

+1, which is why the part counter guy at your dealer often asks for the car's VIN number, from that he knows exactly what is in the car, regardless of what anyone calls it.

The original paperwork determines the model year, as it is what the state uses to title the car. The M96 vs. M97 depends upon where your head is at; if the possibility of an IMS failure concerns you, a car that can be updated would be preferable. If you are comfortable living with the non-serviceable IMS lower but still persistent failure rates, then the M97 would be fine.

Sometimes when the IMS starts to beat itself to death, one of two things can happen that will cause oil leaks. There is a seal on the IMS bearing center bolt that fails, allowing oil to leak out. In extreme cases, the center bolt can even fail completely, allowing the nut with part of the center bolt to actually fall off and drop to the bottom of the bell housing, which will also allow the oil to leak out:

I sometimes start to get a headache from all the "latest" IMS cures. Couple of points: The oil pump drive shaft is already a weak point in these engines, now you are going to machine away some of its mass to create an oil passageway. Not so sure that is a good idea. Second, this approach will need to flood the entire IMS shaft before the oil even gets to the rear of the IMS bearing, so it will just sit in the shaft, making it heavy and loading the chain cam drive system even further Third, the rear of the IMS bearing is sealed, so unless you are going to take the bearing out and replace it with an unsealed bearing, oil is not even going to reach the IMS bearing. Fourth, the end user needs to make a tool to hammer a 1-3MM opening in the plug in the oil pump end of the IMS shaft; that is a pretty small opening to get with a ground down punch and a hammer, so what happens if it is too big, say 6MM by accident (easy enough to do when you are whacking something with a hammer to get an opening)? No oil pressure perhaps? Yikes! If you have to take the bearing is out, why not just install the proven LN Ceramic kit, which has shown in more than ten thousand installations that it does not need pressurize oil feeds, or any other Band-Aids, and put the car back together? Less complications, proven results...................

Did you mean Suncoast? Sunset Porsche is a RennTech.org board sponsor.

When you get an AOS going south, you really should change everything connected to it as there will be built up oil residue in them. People often skip this to save money, but it is false economy because you usually end up going back and changing it later.

You can also get the same information in the 996 Bentley manual, although they are usually listed in small tables in the section referring to the repair at hand. The Bentley manual is available at the RennTech "store" at Amazon.

Another Regan fan; "Trust, but verify............." :thumbup:

Possibly; high pressure fuel pump issues are fairly well known, fuel intrusion from the DFI is leading to cylinder wall scoring issues, and more importantly there have been some multiple reports of abnormal cam chain wear. If the chain fails, the end result would be the same as an IMS failure. Argh, that's disappointing to say the least. Thanks for the info. I was hoping the 9A1 a bullet proof engine :( The closest thing Porsche has produced to being bullet proof was the Metzger lump (now discontinued) that used to come in the Turbo and GT cars. Brutally strong, and ridiculously expensive; but you could still break it if you really tried. Hopefully the engines in the new 991 cars particularly the Turbos and GTS have been sorted out by now?? At this time, I do not have enough information about what changes were made between the regular 9A1 and the Turbo versions to really be definitive on all the differences; there has to be more than a few, but Porsche has been pretty closed mouth about it. As we get to spend more time with these newer cars, all shall be revealed.... Hopefully WW's influence is wearing off. Porsche is back to racing and hopefully back to making tough cars. I'm sure they have taken the time to strengthen components to withstand the rigors of the Turbo cars and how they are used, but without having seen one example of each engine disassembled side by side, it is often difficult to figure out what they have done.

Very simple: When the AOS fails, it tends to pull a lot of oil into the intake system. There are a myriad of little nooks and crannies where the oil can sit in the intake, so it comes out very slowly over time causing prolonged smoke unless you pull the entire intake off and manually clean it out. thanks for your reply throttle and plenum has been cleaned twice the problem is The oil in TB/PLNUM bcoz of oil coming from vent line and drops in the intake What is the reason for this amount of oil seep out from AOS Through vent line Which cause the oil in TB/intake As I mentioned above to aos Was changed 2 time Is because of bad ring ? Unfortunately, most of the oil from the AOS is inside the intake runners them selves, not just the area behind the throttle body. To get it all out, you literally need to remove the entire intake system and clean it manually. If left alone, it will burn off over time, but how much time depends upon how much oil is in there. If they changed the vent line when they did the AOS, there should be no oil in it. If it is a new vent line, and it has oil in it, I would suggest getting a leak down test run on the engine to make sure it is sealing tightly.

Possibly; high pressure fuel pump issues are fairly well known, fuel intrusion from the DFI is leading to cylinder wall scoring issues, and more importantly there have been some multiple reports of abnormal cam chain wear. If the chain fails, the end result would be the same as an IMS failure. Argh, that's disappointing to say the least. Thanks for the info. I was hoping the 9A1 a bullet proof engine :( The closest thing Porsche has produced to being bullet proof was the Metzger lump (now discontinued) that used to come in the Turbo and GT cars. Brutally strong, and ridiculously expensive; but you could still break it if you really tried. Hopefully the engines in the new 991 cars particularly the Turbos and GTS have been sorted out by now?? At this time, I do not have enough information about what changes were made between the regular 9A1 and the Turbo versions to really be definitive on all the differences; there has to be more than a few, but Porsche has been pretty closed mouth about it. As we get to spend more time with these newer cars, all shall be revealed....

Enjoy Jake's class, the man literally "wrote the book" in the M96/97 engine.

Very simple: When the AOS fails, it tends to pull a lot of oil into the intake system. There are a myriad of little nooks and crannies where the oil can sit in the intake, so it comes out very slowly over time causing prolonged smoke unless you pull the entire intake off and manually clean it out.

Correct. Use some thread locker on the flange bolts, they are under a lot of stress and prone to loosen.

Actually, what is happening is a little different. First, the screen shot capture I posted was taken when software version 6.0.3.1 was current, 6.3.2.5 is what is current now, so that was just a matter of an intervening software update. The correct DME for your car is the 5.2.2 (1998-1999 model years) not the 7.2 (2000-2001 model years). There are significant differences between the capabilities of these two versions of the DME, and the earlier version is not as capable by comparison. Selecting the wrong DME in the Durametric system can often lead you astray, so go with what is actually in the car. Your early DME does not have all the display capabilities of the later units, so some "actual values" are not available to look at. If your cam deviation values are within +/-6 degrees at idle, your cams are in correct timing. If you activated the VarioCam at idle, you should see the cam deviation values jump to show the system trying to move the cam around 25 degrees, and the car will start to idle roughly; that would show that the VarioCam unit is functional. If your cam deviation values are in range, the VarioCam is working, and the Durametric is not seeing the P1531 code return, you should be good to go.

First of all, when was the last time the clutch hydraulic fluid was flushed? We see a fair number of "dead clutches" that suddenly come back to life with some attention to the hydraulic system. RMS, if you are in there, change it. Porsche has significantly updated these seals, and the latest PTFE versions have all but eliminated leakage issues. You can definitely install the RMS using a 4" OD PVC pipe union, if you exercise care. Using the old flywheel bolts, which will rest on the ridge inside the union, hand tighten the bolts in a cross pattern slowly until you obtain the correct installed distance from the flywheel mating surface, which is 13MM, not 14. During the installation of the seal, keep all the surfaces scrupulously clean and free of any lubricant or sealants. Axles: As you did not say two or four wheel drive, the front axle to flange is 29 ft. lb.; rears are 60 ft. lb. at the transmission, 340 ft. lb. at the hub. Pressure plate bolts are 17 ft. lb., flywheel bolts are 19 ft. lb. +90 degrees. Both the flywheel and pressure plate bolts are single use only, so do not reuse them.

Not completely; the 2006 engine definitely does not have the serviceable IMS bearing, but the 2005 may or may not (visual inspection is required) as they came both ways.

They are both VarioCam Plus and should both be using the 7.8.1 DME.

It is often said that with enough time, money, welding rod, and duct tape; anything is possible. But the question is, would the view be worth the climb...... The later engine has significant system changes, your 2006 engine uses a 7.8.1 DME, the 2010 engine would use a SD13 DME. The 2010 engine is setup for DFI, which your car lacks; amongst other changes you would need to make would be to retrofit the 1700 PSIG fuel system from the 2010 car into your 2006 chassis, which is a major undertaking. And that is only scratching the surface of the changes required. I think you need to expand your search for a replacement engine that matches your car, or consider having a top flight engine builder like Flat Six Innovations re-do yours; even with a lot of updates, it would probably be cheaper and would produce a lot of power while bolting right in.

Actually they do make contact just fine. Because to do the triple row, you need to disassemble your engine, and send your IMS shaft to LN Engineering and have it modified to accept this multiple ceramic bearing system, there are relatively few of them on the street. But it is immensely strong (strongest of any design using a ball bearing) as all three rows are in full contact, and has been used in a handful of highly modified engines with total success (no failures, even with only a limited number were ever done this way). Squirting oil onto the bearing may or may not help, depending upon where the oil is coming from. The "competition" you mention use an oil feed from one of the hottest and dirtiest parts of the engine to spray oil onto the ball bearing, which risks introducing debris and hot oil into an already fragile system. Both LN and Jake Raby have been quite vocal about why this is a bad idea and could actually lead to a failure that would not have occurred otherwise. If memory serves, Jake actually experimented with oil fed single row ball bearings, but went away from the design due to the additional problems it introduced, and eventually went to his patented ball bearing less Solution design for single row engines, which mimic's the style of oil fed solid surface bearing already in use in other similar Porsche engine applications, which if you think about it also totally puts to rest the concept that the shaft rocking is the problem. Until (and if) they develop a "Solution" style solid bearing for dual row applications, with tens of thousands of successful installations, their splash oil fed dual row bearing system remains the proven way for dual row owners to go.

Unfortunately, as RennTech vigorously respects all intellectual property rights, this thread has now been closed.