JFP in PA

Not necessarily, but I would still keep an eye on it as the loose nut did not do it any favors………

Attach a fuel pressure test gauge to the fuel rail and check the pressure before and when the tank gets down to the magic level, if it suddenly falls off, I'd pull the fuel pump and reservoir and check them; they could be either blocked by debris or coming apart............

If you are interested, Pelican does list their "kit" on their website at the moment, but without pricing.

To my knowledge, there are no limits placed upon the purchaser of their tools, I have also seen them come up for resale online from time to time. You can also obtain similar tooling from aftermarket sources, albeit at a higher price. I recently saw a just released photo of the Pelican kit, and I have to say that even without pricing being released, I am not impressed. The bearing (there is only one size) is sealed and appears to use spacers to compensate for the different style OEM bearings that were used, which would imply the bearing is the smallest style. I'm rather uneasy about that.

Maintainers measure voltage to obtain state of charge. Interestingly, a nearly dead battery will measure full voltage, but not have enough current (amperage) to turn the motor over, usually due to extremely high internal resistance. That is why the standard shop test for battery condition is a load test, not a voltage test.

Strange, I have several Ctek's, mostly 3300 and 7002's, and they all reset automatically after a power outage...................

The actual current number is four; three failed from either poor installation techniques (failure to fully install the spiral lock retainer) or the bearing ingesting debris from other sources (broken chain tensioner paddles, etc.). Only one appears to be the bearing itself, Jake Raby has been dissecting the engine to figure out what happened................

I knew that Porsche only sold the bearing with the tube (after all, the factory still says you cannot remove the bearings without splitting the cases); which just exacerbates the cost issue as well as the complexity..... Strange how $600 does not sound all that bad in light of this; LN's and Jake's work have altered the "value proposition" somewhat. From a marketing prespective, those that now offer a cheaper alternative will need to work to address the question of "Is their's as good?"

No disrespect to Wayne, but as he already sells LN parts; I am surprised he would try to develop his own IMS retrofit. That said, to my understanding, his retrofit uses the same style bearing as the OEM (steel with seals), but employs a larger center bolt much like the LN unit. While the smaller center bolts on the OEM style can fail, I really do not think that the bolt is the primary issue, which is lubrication or a lack thereof. All things considered, the primary costs for an IMS retrofit is not the price of the bearing; by far, most of it is labor. After paying all the labor hours, wouldn’t you want to install the strongest and most proven bearing you could lay hands on? Including LN, there are now four possible alternatives either in the market, or close to entry. Some appear to be copying LN, others going the “low cost alternative” approach, and one that supposedly uses bearings within bearings in conjunction with a “knock sensor” to catch a failure developing. While I am confident that the market place forces will eventually result in “shake out” of the lesser players, it is an interesting example of what happens when someone finds a way around a profound problem that the OEM says cannot be done (Porsche still insists that the bearings cannot be changed without splitting the cases, and this remains the “official line” at many dealerships), and the concept quickly turns into a multi million dollar aftermarket business............... I am doing the labor myself so yes the cost of the part is important to me. If I can pay half of the LN price for the same part and it is just as reliable then that is a no-brainier. My point is that LN has had a little bit of a monopoly and it's time for a little competition to bring the price down. $600 for a bearing? I think that is a little pricey. I wish Pelican or Casper Labs would come through for the ones of us who want reliability but without getting gouged! I agree with J_beede, where is the data for LN. JFP in Pa, where is the data that you claim LN has, " the strongest and most proven bearing you could lay hands on". Where would I find that information? There is no question that it is our only option right now. Do you have a report that we can read to back your statement. I am very interested. Again, I would look for the "Excellence" articles (there were two) from 2010 on the subject. I think Charles Navarro may have also addressed the relative strength characteristics of the LN bearing to the OEM style online at one time or another. That would also be well worth a search. As for how much these things cost, price out an OEM replacement IMS bearing, you just might be surprised............ I also have to say that in defense of small business owners that spend both their time and money developing and sourcing what at least appear to be superior replacement components, I cringe when someone uses words like “gouging”. You do not have to purchase these products, you can continue to run the OEM unit, or even replace it with another OEM unit.

I have little use for software on phones as diagnostic tools; far too many times, I have had customers bring cars in that were supposedly throwing this or that code, only to find something entirely different when we get it into the shop and on our Durametric Pro system. The OBD software system that Porsche uses is far to sophisticated and specific for cheap generic diagnostic software on a phone to deal with, and even the people that make some of the best (and most expensive) OBDII diagnostics software for VW and Audi will tell you that Porsche's software is so unique that their stuff will not work on it. As for figuring out if a PIWIS system is real or a knock off, that is going to be a problem. The only sure way would be to go to a Porsche dealer, theirs are all real ones. I have seen Asian knock off systems selling for less than $1000, when the real tool leases (it is never for sale) for in excess of $15,000 for the first year. You could also look for a independent that uses the Durametric software, about 85% as capable as the PIWIS, but one Hell of a lot cheaper; and even the Durametric software system can only be used on Porsche's, it is non functional on other makes.

The LN bearing uses a Timken silicon nitride bearing assembly that is both ultra low in internal friction and demonstrates a higher strength over a wider temperature range than steel counterparts, and the ability to withstand higher structural loadings as well. It also has outstanding wear characteristics under marginal lubrication conditions. Unfortunately, I lent someone my copies of the “Excellence” magazine article on the subject, which contains more details of the bearings materials of construction, and have not gotten them back yet (another example of why you should never lend out stuff). Perhaps you can locate copies of the two part series they did on the subject about 2 years ago.

If the EVAP canister was dead, you would have a code. The tank filling issue is caused by an anti surge flap at the base of the filler neck not opening when the upper flap at the filler neck entrance is opened (the "click" mentioned above). On the early cars, there were lines inside the tank that would slip out of position and block the lower flap, causing the issue and requiring accessing the tank to move them back out of the way. Later cars, this problem tended to be electrical (the E6 fuse). If memory serves, there are TSB’s on both.

The E6 fuse for the telephone is shared by the fuel filler flap system. If the unused telephone plug shorts to ground, it blows the fuse needed by the lower flap.

No disrespect to Wayne, but as he already sells LN parts; I am surprised he would try to develop his own IMS retrofit. That said, to my understanding, his retrofit uses the same style bearing as the OEM (steel with seals), but employs a larger center bolt much like the LN unit. While the smaller center bolts on the OEM style can fail, I really do not think that the bolt is the primary issue, which is lubrication or a lack thereof. All things considered, the primary costs for an IMS retrofit is not the price of the bearing; by far, most of it is labor. After paying all the labor hours, wouldn’t you want to install the strongest and most proven bearing you could lay hands on? Including LN, there are now four possible alternatives either in the market, or close to entry. Some appear to be copying LN, others going the “low cost alternative” approach, and one that supposedly uses bearings within bearings in conjunction with a “knock sensor” to catch a failure developing. While I am confident that the market place forces will eventually result in “shake out” of the lesser players, it is an interesting example of what happens when someone finds a way around a profound problem that the OEM says cannot be done (Porsche still insists that the bearings cannot be changed without splitting the cases, and this remains the “official line” at many dealerships), and the concept quickly turns into a multi million dollar aftermarket business...............

Do you have wear data on the LNE bearing? I have requested this data from Flat6 and was told that the wear data was LNE property and they are not sharing it. I believe that LNE would agree that the real problem is lack of IMSB lubrication not bearing quality. The contribution that LNE has made--without question--is the bearing puller that alows the IMSB to be replaced (in some M96) without tear down. No one does. As I mentioned, LN has a substantial installed base, but is still recommending replacing the bearing at typical clutch change intervals (40-60K miles). Wear pre se was never the issue with the OEM rear shaft bearing, they typically fail due to lack of lubrication (grease leaks out of the unit, engine oil that replaces the grease gets trapped and beat to Hell, bearing starts chewing itself to pieces). When you pull an OEM bearing that is on the way out, they tend to either have no lubrication inside at all, or are full of some really nasty motor oil that stinks to high heaven, indicating how beat up it has become. The LN bearings do not use seals, so the bearing is continually splash lubricated by the engine oil to reduce wear. The LN unit is also a ceramic hybrid style rather than steel like the OEM, so it is much harder. LN has kept their data pretty close to the vest, which any small business man can understand. But the product seems to be working.

I'm not exactly sure what you are referring to, are you talking about a ball joint separation tool?

P000A is a generic code for a slow cam position response, but if it is correct, it could be the cam position sensor and may or may not have anything to do with the oiling or solenoid system. Before I went tearing into anything, or spending a lot of money on parts or other "fixes", I’d get the vehicle rescanned with either a real PIWIS or the Durametric system; this would not be the first “ghost code” I’ve heard coming from knock off PIWIS systems…………..

Only problem here is that you have no data on the quality,performance, or longevity for this kit, the LN unit has over 4,000 units installed in the field. I'm sure Casper knows their bearings, but I would be remiss if I did not note that LN and Jake Raby tested the Hell out of the LN unit before they made it available; I have seen no data on what level of testing this other supplier has done. Sometimes you do get what you pay for.....................

You could, but then you would have to thoroughly clean out the bleeder before you could use it with hydraulic fluids (brake fluid) again. Hydraulic fluid and ATF/gear oil should never be mixed as it will lead to all sorts of problems. Their "fill" unit also has a schrader valve on it which the brake unit does not, which allows you to pressure up the fill unit with the shop's compressed air line, making it even easier to use. It is up to you, but I prefer to have one for bleeding brakes and clutches, another for filling transmissions and differentials. If you go in the direction of using one for both, I’d suggest looking into Motive’s quick disconnecting fittings, which allow you to switch adaptors and hoses in seconds (we have six or seven different adaptors for brakes alone). The quick disconnect are listed in their “spares” section, are cheap and very well made. We have them on all our Motive equipment.

Yes, it can pump any reasonable viscosity fluid, like ATF, and it comes with the shutoff valve, tygon tubing lines, and the curved end piece to fit into the bottom of the trans. If you read the other poster's write up, you will see basically the same stuff that he fabricated to do the job. You can locate and assemble all the bits your self, or buy one ready to go.

There is a Casper Labs that do aircraft stuff, do not know if they are the same outfit.

If you are un-inclined to make your own fill tool, Motive Products (maker of the pressure bleeding system everyone uses for the brakes and clutch hydraulic systems on these cars) makes an excellent "off the shelf" tool for doing exactly what you are interested in: http://motiveproducts.3dcartstores.com/POWER-FILL-PRO-1-gallon_p_79.html

I have never been a fan of vacuum bleeding tools for a variety of reasons; get a pressure unit such as the one Motive Products makes.

That is not completely correct; you still need to hold the pedal to the floor while using a pressure or vacuum bleeder. When you are finished, the pedal will stay down, and needs to be manually pulled up, after which it will function normally......

The "Northwest Passage" in the heads is a critical component in the X51 package, the pan a baffle alone really don't add much other than a small increase in total oil capacity. I'd also suggest doing some searching, another shop (EBS) recently released a very nice looking stainless steel baffle assembly that has gotten some good press.