rogerjohnsen

This sounds so familiar to a problem I had a few years back. Turned out to be the starter but it happened on my Ferrari - not Porsche. It would only start with a jump. Looking at the voltage / electrical makes sense to me.

Yes indeed - both my Boxster S and 911 Turbo have the same thing. About 3 MPH over actual speed. I took it into my dealer to fix and was told they had to be within 5 MPH - anything over / under they would fix. So I’ve just dealt with it. In my case it had nothing to do with tire size - all stock. I could see where that would affect it as well but a larger diameter would reduce the speed reading. I’ve just accepted probably all Porsche models around this period read higher than actual speed.

Definitely not a dumb question... I know if you have a 2-seater then you still qualify for 3+ carpool lanes when driving with 2 occupants. Ultimately you'd run at 3+ to qualify for the more restricted HOV access requiring 3 or more occupants. Most HOV are 2+ so you're fine with that setting in those circumstances. One additional item to be aware of is tolls allowing non-HOV use for a fee; use the Mylar bag to prevent getting "dinged" on these for those running the original toll tag. (Seems like the "Flex" version is meant to prevent this.) Finally - keep an eye on your Fastrak statement as CalTrans uses license plate readers and I've had multiple charges resulting from a misread glitch. You can always contact Fastrak customer service for any problems and they've been great in my experiences. You don't need to have your toll tag to use your Fastrak account either as long as your license plate is listed on your account. (Vehicles can be added / deleted through your online account or over the phone.) I have had over 20 vehicles on my account and didn't want to pay the security deposit for toll tags > 3 or whatever the limit was. Also works for rental vehicles - call Fastrak and provide the license plate to them with the time frame you'll have the car. FasTrak WWW.BAYAREAFASTRAK.ORG

After looking into the LS conversion, I've found it's only available for manual transmission and the cost is much more than anticipated. I spoke to Renegade Hybrids today and was told it's close to $30K for a turn key conversion but doesn't support tiptronic or PDK models - only manual transmission. That said - I have a tiptronic so I'm back to the IMS as a preventative measure and likely should have rushed to have it done back when the class action was settled. Oh well - if the new IMS from LN Engineering is indeed a 75K mile fix vs. the 24K-50K I had seen then it's a little more agreeable but still wouldn't call it a "permanent" fix. Ultimately it looks like my mind may have been changed and I would probably recommend getting the IMS retrofit after all assuming the IMS is indeed "guaranteed" to fail at some point. The "permanent" fix LN Engineering solution doesn't appear to be permanent in this guy's case after failing @ 30K miles ---> https://rennlist.com/forums/996-forum/869599-ln-engineering-ceramic-ims-bearing-failure-at-30k-miles.html I found this while trying to track down the 75K mile warranty claim. It seems this poor guy encountered the failure when trying to do a preventative fix for his IMS bearing. What I still find odd is the reference made to a 75K mile warranty for the LN Engineering solution. The only warranty I could find on their site mentioned a 2 year warranty "if" several hoops were jumped through to qualify. I'm sorry but this whole IMS thing has been riddled with speculation and conjecture so I'd appreciate it if you could refer me to the source of your 75K mile warranty claim and anything that would support LN Engineering being a permanent fix for the IMS. Apart from rolling the dice on the IMS - I'm wondering if electric conversion would ultimately be the best solution across the board. I'm amazed by performance with electric vehicles and the conversion costs seem reasonable. I'd just have to share the charging port with the Tesla...

I'll dig around some more but wasn't able to verify Porsche confirming any numbers - the settlement was clear Porsche didn't agree with failure claims. Eisen v. Porsche Cars North America, Inc WWW.EISENIMSSETTLEMENT.COM Eisen v. Porsche Cars North America, Inc What concerns me is despite the retrofit - it sounds like an ongoing problem due to design and despite having a retrofit it could still happen. Seems a retrofit gives 24K-50K and has to be redone? Ultimately I'm not trying to be a jerk about this and feel Porsche burned a great many bridges with their handling. I'll be honest - I found it confusing trying to assess the risk but if it's a 10% failure at 90K miles then it still strikes me as low. (Read: not acceptable but low in the grand scheme of things) That said - I still don't know how the numbers change as mileage increases whereas I initially thought if it hasn't happened within "X" miles you were safe. Would I be stupid to think the LS swap wouldn't be advantageous? Assuming the IMS is an ongoing maintenance item then it's not a one-time expense. Assuming the engine is poor design then a reliable V8 sounds appealing - granted pricey. To be at 400HP stock lessens the cost concerns. Can anyone weigh in with other options? My Boxster S is a fun car and I'd probably like to keep it for the rest of my life. I like the newer designs but have resisted the temptation mainly because of how Porsche treated the IMS and won't likely own any others in the future. Sorry to hijack this thread and I'll start one for best IMS solutions as I can dig around more and gain knowledge on tyre subject.

Interesting - so 10-12% of all single row engines have had an IMS failure and 2-3% of dual row engines have also? I've seen references from a "Porsche enthusiast" that you may be getting this from and seem to see that as the accepted failure rate being repeated multiple times. (i.e. 90% survival rate to 90K miles) If you could help point to the data source(s) you're referencing I would appreciate it. Nobody is arguing it hasn't happened, however, it's still not clear to me as to why the disparity and demonstrated likelihood. If you go back to the original question - should one be concerned with getting the IMS bearing retrofit? To say how "risk tolerant" one might be is better answered by having accurate data by which to make an informed decision. Unfortunately, when I became aware of the IMSB issue there seemed to be a lot of conflicting and obviously nonsensical information floating around. Hopefully, given the time lapse, there's better information available?

It seems like a pretty small percentage of people were ever actually affected and then some decided to fix it despite not actually even having a problem. I think you’re safe at 66K miles as I seem to recall the problem happening before that or considered you’re safe if you get past 50K miles. Ultimately it still seems a bit mysterious to me why some had it and strikes me as a low number with little predictive and or substantive data. When I first heard about the IMS bearing it really changed my perception of the car and Porsche for how they handled it. I’ve since calmed down being worried my engine would grenade and put it behind me. I still think Porsche could have handled it differently. I think about it like this - if I had the IMS bearing go out I’d be very vocal about it - rightfully so. Porsche eventually covered it as I recall. I almost had it replaced out of perceived fear it could happen. After reading more and calming myself down I didn’t sweat it and I’m glad I didn’t get it replaced. I figured I’d do the LS swap if it ever happened and think that was what “really” let me move on. I’ve owned my car since new and haven’t abused it so I have that peace of mind as well. I’d say drive it, enjoy it and don’t fear the IMS boogeyman. While I’ve seen predictions of 10% failing by 90K miles - it didn’t seem scientifically based and was from someone selling a fix. I’d be skeptical at best given this scenario. Sorry I can’t give you hard numbers for what you’re asking - just trying to share my experience and empathize on how it worried me as well but never materialized into anything real for me. The up side is it’s probably affected the perceived value of the car and they’re cheaper as a result. Is there anything going on with your Boxster S that concerns you or is it being worried you may be affected at some point and trying to rationalize spending the money to retrofit? I just tried to get the cost for a retrofit IMS bearing and didn’t find it but saw a solution that provides a 2 year 24K mile warranty? That seems laughable at best. Dump $????? Into a preventative fix with no guarantee you had or would have the problem and get a 2/24K warranty? Wow! I’m still thinking LS swap or maybe electric if the IMS bearing ever does go...

I'm at 108K with zero problems of any significance on my 2003 Boxster S tiptronic. The headlight switch assembly has gone out twice now but that's the extent. I'm the original owner and don't think about getting rid of this car anytime in the future. It's a fun little car with 2x the miles of my 2004 911 turbo convertible. I used it as my primary commute vehicle following a second nasty motorcycle accident and now just for fun drives.

When you say discharges steam - where do you observe that? Have you checked your oil to see if any discoloration? Anything on radiators or hoses showing possible leaks?

I've never heard anything like that from mine. It's kind of hard to hear but sounds like it's right at the end of the video.

Hmmmm - Audi had a recall a while back due to the part shorting out and replaced it with the newer module and a wiring harness to mate the old and new design. This probably explains why I can't find the Audi part any longer and perhaps Porsche didn't get the memo? I can still find the Porsche part all day long - just no Audi comparable; which makes sense to me now... Recall Number 06V198000 Recall Date 06/05/2006 Component ELECTRICAL SYSTEM Summary ON CERTAIN PASSENGER VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH HALOGEN LOW BEAM HEADLIGHTS, CERTAIN CONNECTOR PINS IN THE HEADLIGHT SWITCH CONNECTOR COME INTO CONTACT WITH EACH OTHER CAUSING A SHORT CIRCUIT. NOTE: VEHICLES WITH XENON LOW BEAM HEADLIGHTS ARE NOT AFFECTED BECAUSE THE CIRCUIT IN THESE VEHICLES CONTAINS A FUSE, WHICH PRECLUDES EXCESSIVE CURRENT FLOW IN THE CASE OF A SHORT CIRCUIT. AUDI S6 AND S6 AVANT VEHICLES ARE ALL EQUIPPED WITH XENON LOW BEAM HEADLIGHTS AND, THEREFORE, ARE NOT LONGER AFFECTED BY THIS RECALL. Consequence THIS CONDITION COULD LEAD TO OVERHEATING OR FIRE. What Owners Should Do DEALERS WILL REROUTE THE WIRING HARNESS BY INSTALLING A JUMPER WIRING HARNESS. THE RECALL BEGAN ON DECEMBER 16, 2006. OWNERS MAY CONTACT AUDI AT 1-800-822-2834.

Thank you - I've seen them cheaper but the identical Audi part was around $35 vs. $141. Doubtful but maybe mine will have the Audi part number on it somewhere so I'll check that too and post it if I'm able to locate it. It appears to be a common issue and remember the first time I had this problem - leaving the office late one night and my lights wouldn't turn on. I've seen suggestions about adding a relay to the wire because these go bad from the "arc" created on the terminals when power applied.

Thank you - different part though.

I've included a picture as well. I know the part cross references to an Audi / VW part number; which is what I'm looking for... Many thanks! I've searched Google high and low and don't know why I'm not able to find it but had run across a post years ago when I last replaced it. I was able to find it again for my 996 TT when that one went out but can't seem to find it anymore and would rather not pay the Porsche premium price for a semi-generic part. Porsche part number 996-613-535-00

Purchased my 2003 Boxster S (Tiptronic, Guards Red) new and it's just over 108K at the moment. Zero problems other than the headlight switch (need a replacement again). All service performed by dealer or my mechanic.