Anyone in 100k mile club

[royp4]

My 2003 C2 cabriolet just rolled over 100k miles. I have learned a great many things about the 996, but struggle with the amount of time I spend working on this car. I love driving it, but it seems that all my spare time (which I have very little of) is spent fixing problems. Fortunately I have not experienced major failures. Just small things like replacing ignition switch, replacing cabrio hydraulic cylinders, and replacing window regulators. Have also had to have the dealer repair a broken water pump and install an ecu which was drowned in a rainstorm. Anyway I guess that's the price of ownership

[Vish_ster]

All,

How are the high milers doing? 

More miles since posted or moved onto to low milers? 

 

Cheers!

V

Edited August 29, 2017 by Vish_ster

[2000GotBoxS]

Just hit 111,000.

 

2000 986 S 6-spd.  I captured the moment that I ticked over 100k

Edited October 17, 2017 by 2000GotBoxS

[Heavydee]

I just bought a 1999 Boxster with 127,548 miles on it. It has a couple of things that I have to work out, mostly because the previous owner did not take care of it properly. But it still drives great.

[Guest]

Just clicked over 130,000 over the holidays and celebrated with a IMS upgrade, RMS install and 2nd cat delete.   Ready for 2018!

[Lebby83]

I just picked up a 2001 Boxter S with 139k on the clock.  Looking forward to having some fun with her.

[Heavydee]

On 1/8/2018 at 10:50 PM, boxzilla said:

Just clicked over 130,000 over the holidays and celebrated with a IMS upgrade, RMS install and 2nd cat delete.   Ready for 2018!

Boxzilla --

We're both in NNJ. I see that you did an IMS upgrade. Did you do it yourself, or at a shop? Did you do a full replacement, or just certain parts? I don't know much about the history on my car, but I have over 127,000 miles. I am considering doing the IMS.

 

Regards,

Heavydee

[joe hurst]

132k on mine, after some fettling it's running very nicely!

[rogerjohnsen]

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.

[evetselous]

My 2000 Boxster just turned over 196,000 today. I do all the work on it these days. My advice is to drive it a lot and stay on top of the little things. Last month I replaced the water pump and AC compressor pulley. Last weekend I replaced the drivers side airbag bracket to keep the horn from tooting over bumps. It’s not a maintenance hog though. Most of the time i just get in it and go. I’m the second owner. It has the original engine and IMS bearing. 

[mickeyb37]

138,000 on my Artic Silver 1997.  Still a blast to drive.  Currently have hard top on it and snows since I'm in Michigan and it looks like an early winter!

[Mark St Martin]

My summer ride for the last 30 years has been a '63 Pontiac Parisienne convertible with 99,875 original miles. Long overdue for work, it will be taking a rest ...

In it's place will be a '97 Boxster Tiptronic  with 117000 miles on it. I can say I'm truly looking forward to road trips with this car!!

 

Edited February 10, 2019 by The MotorMan

[jimbo409]

I have been reading all the response and no one talks about the replacement of the ims bearing, On other forums that is all they talk about.I have just bought a 2001 boxster s with 66000 miles and it is a tritronic transmission and I don't know what to do should I replace the ims bearing or just drive the hell out of it

[rogerjohnsen]

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.

[jimbo409]

How many of the 100,000 club have replaced the ims bearing

[rogerjohnsen]

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...

[JFP in PA]

43 minutes ago, rogerjohnsen said:

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.

 

Sorry, but that is complete nonsense.  We have seen IMS failures with less than 10K miles, and more than 100K miles.  Basically, if you have a single row engine, you are at a 10-12% risk of losing the engine; if you have a dual row engine, the risk level is lower, perhaps 2-3%.  The risk is there, is real, and the decision of replacing the bearing is typically based on how risk tolerant you are.  We have seen people trade in or sell otherwise fine cars because they were concerned; and we even had one customer that lost an engine in one car, got a factory reman and then traded the car in on a later model (still with the single row IMS), only to have that engine fail after about 6 months.  He no longer drives Porsches.

 

Don't over react to the issue, but don't sweep it under the rug and say you are past some imaginary mileage and it can't happen to you; you are only deluding yourself.  I can assure you that with the factory bearing, it can still happen...

[rogerjohnsen]

1 hour ago, JFP in PA said:

 

Sorry, but that is complete nonsense.  We have seen IMS failures with less than 10K miles, and more than 100K miles.  Basically, if you have a single row engine, you are at a 10-12% risk of losing the engine; if you have a dual row engine, the risk level is lower, perhaps 2-3%.  The risk is there, is real, and the decision of replacing the bearing is typically based on how risk tolerant you are.  We have seen people trade in or sell otherwise fine cars because they were concerned; and we even had one customer that lost an engine in one car, got a factory reman and then traded the car in on a later model (still with the single row IMS), only to have that engine fail after about 6 months.  He no longer drives Porsches.

 

Don't over react to the issue, but don't sweep it under the rug and say you are past some imaginary mileage and it can't happen to you; you are only deluding yourself.  I can assure you that with the factory bearing, it can still happen...

 

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?

[JFP in PA]

9 hours ago, rogerjohnsen said:

 

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?

 

Actually, that data comes directly from Porsche as part of the class action lawsuit on the subject a couple of years back, and failures have continued since the court closed the book on the subject with the settlement.  Amongst the shops involved in retrofits, those numbers are widely accepted as representative of the failure rates, even though they do not include the post settlement failures.  There are reasons why after trying three different bearing designs, Porsche spent the money and engineered the IMS out of the 9A1 engine starting in 2009.

[Mark St Martin]

13 hours ago, rogerjohnsen said:

 

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?

 

First off, if you are the original owner and if you changed the oil every 5-6K miles (less intervals than what Porsche recommends @ 15k) and you have been using top synthetic oil, I suspect you may never have an IMS bearing issue ...

Stats are great, but as most cars will go through multiple owners, one will rarely know the history of who & how the car was driven as well as how faithful they where at oil changes.

 

This '97 Boxster M96 2.5  I recently purchased ran fine with no irregular sounds, no signs that would warrant concern. Probably the best advice on the net for these cars is have the oil pan removed and inspected for peace of mind. If there is a possibility IMS or other related failure, chances are there will be debris in the bottom of the oil pan. As well on my car, the debris had also collected on the screen of the oil pickup spout. Further inspection of the oil filter one could easily see the finer particles within the folds of the filter.

 

Yes I could run'r till she drops but at varying cost of replacement engines from 3 to 10K for a used assembly, I'd rather do the bearing along with any other warn parts now, rather than take a chance later on someone else's used engine with surprises. In fact this Body & chassis is so nice, I should price out a crate engine from Porsche but I can just imagine what that may cost!!!  As a do it your'selfer, I am quite enjoying taking this thing apart, but there again I have a warm shop with all the tools, only thing missing is a hoist!

 

Attached picture is the debris in the bottom of my oil pan.

 

Cheers,

Mark

[rogerjohnsen]

On 2/25/2019 at 3:51 AM, JFP in PA said:

 

Actually, that data comes directly from Porsche as part of the class action lawsuit on the subject a couple of years back, and failures have continued since the court closed the book on the subject with the settlement.  Amongst the shops involved in retrofits, those numbers are widely accepted as representative of the failure rates, even though they do not include the post settlement failures.  There are reasons why after trying three different bearing designs, Porsche spent the money and engineered the IMS out of the 9A1 engine starting in 2009.

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. 

[JFP in PA]

37 minutes ago, rogerjohnsen said:

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. 

 

There is only one permanent IMS Solution (never needs to be replaced), which is to replace the ball bearing assembly with LN Engineering's IMS Solution, an oil fed solid bearing that will out live your engine,  Their ceramic hybrid bearings are now rated for 75K miles.

[Mark St Martin]

8 minutes ago, JFP in PA said:

 

There is only one permanent IMS Solution (never needs to be replaced), which is to replace the ball bearing assembly with LN Engineering's IMS Solution, an oil fed solid bearing that will out live your engine,  Their ceramic hybrid bearings are now rated for 75K miles.

 

Not to mention adding to the resale value ... I will have to agree and consider it money well spent.

The thought of major engine failure 100s of miles from home, no brain'r.

 

[rogerjohnsen]

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...

[JFP in PA]

5 hours ago, rogerjohnsen said:

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...

 

OK, let's start with the obvious:  Your link above to a supposed IMS Solution failure does not lead anywhere.  Correction: OK, now I got the link to work, but the bearing in that post is NOT LN permanent fix, it was a single row bearing.  The permanent fix is the IMS Solution, which contains no balls or rollers, it is a solid bearing. And if you read the entire thread, there was some question about the engine that was retrofitted that should not have been, per the prequalification process, and the shop involved had been subsequently banned from the site due to questionable motivations in the post as he (Porsche-Land) was trying to use this failure to get his competing roller bearing kit into wholesale distribution by disparaging LN . 

 

Secondly, ALL IMS retrofits are subject to prequalification's done by the installers prior to the actual retrofit, so not all engines will qualify or be retrofitted.  This came about because engines that were already in the early phases of IMS failure, which were full of circulating metal filings were still retrofit, only to promptly suffer IMS failure due to the abrasive grit running through the engine which destroyed the new bearings.  In reality, no bearing of any design would have survived in these conditions, so they created a prequalification checklist to prevent this from happening again.  We have had to reject engines on more than one occasion as they did not meet these tests, and while the owners were not happy, that decision was in their and our best interest's.  Spending all the time and money to do a retrofit only to have it die is obviously not going to please the owner, and we really didn't need the fall out hitting the shop's reputation either, so we strictly adhered to this qualification process.

 

As for LN's projected service intervals, the following is from their IMS website ( http://imsretrofit.com/ims-101/ ):

 

"LN Engineering currently offers a Dual Row IMS Retrofit as well as the Single Row Pro IMS Retrofit, where the engine does not have to be disassembled to replace the factory sealed ball-bearing, both with a 6 year/75,000 mile service interval. IMS Solution LLC’s oil fed plain bearing arrangement similar in functionality to the intermediate shaft bearing used in the past aircooled models and most recently in the GT2, GT3, and Turbo models based off the GT1 aka Mezger engine, eliminates the ball-bearing design completely and is a permanent fix."