Should I Buy A 987 Registered In June 2005?

[Adrian Major]

Hi there, new to this group and joined on recommendation. 

Looking to buy my first 987 Boxster and very tempted by a car looking in fantastic condition registered on 22 June 2005.

It has done 62k miles and has FSH and only 3 owners etc.

Naturally I am worrying about the dreaded IMS bearing issues and trying to find out when in 2005 the stronger bearing was fitted.

All I can determine is that early 2005 models should be avoided if concerned about the problem.

Appreciate this topic has been discussed to death but can anyone give advice to a first time buyer.

Budget is £10k so plenty of 06/07 models around if best just to avoid 05s but this car seems to tick all the boxes.

Look forward to hearing views.

 

Thanks

Adrian

 

[Menoporsche]

I think the IMS sticky has engine numbers in it. Someone else here has commented on chassis numbers and build dates.

An increasingly popular view here, with that car on 62k miles, is if it was going to go wrong it probably would have done by now.

Good luck in your choice.

[½cwt]

I've been looking at the IMS from the other end of the issue with the 986 and when the single row bearing was introduced.  There is a nice clean engine number to work with on these from Porsche data, however there does not seem to be the same hard data for the 987.  The only suspicion I have is that the change may have been made to the 2.7 when the 3.4 was introduced which was for the 2007 model year.  However I have more research to do on this to get a definitive answer.  The only guarantee I can give on a 987 is go for a 987.2 as these engines don't ahve an intermediate shaft and therefore no bearing to fail, but £10k won't get you one of those.

Otherwise as above, if it was going to fail it most likely would have by 62k miles, however check for regular oil changes in the service history as old oil could to be a contributing factor to the failure.

[Ninesomething]

There 2 schools of thought on this. One is that Porsche 'used up' the stock of old IMS bearings after the new ones came in so no-one really knows what they've got until much later. The other is that there is a cut off point at engine number x and anything after that is the new style.

Way I see it Porsche got their arses kicked in the U.S. court and had to pay out for a lot of new/rebuilt engines. Then they had to pay out to redesign the bearing. So why would they continue to stick the old potentially unreliable bearing in? It's the dictionary definition of sinking a ship for a ha'peth of tar. Are Porsche that daft?

I were a cynic I'd say the story 'you might still have the dodgy plastic bearing'  was put about by them who were selling the expensive upgrade bearings. Unless someone can genuinely say 'I pulled the bearing out of my 06/07 car and it was the old type'.

[minimoog]

This is the source I semi-comforted myself with when buying my early '05 - https://autohaushamilton.com.au/news/ims-bearing-the-facts-made-simple

From my car (registered April 05, bearing type unconfirmed) and others I've read about with similar engine numbers and a confirmed upgraded bearing that suggests the change happened around February/March '05. That coincides with the date of Feb 21st 2005 that was cited as the changeover data in the USA IMS class action lawsuit against Porsche. However just to keep it antsy I've seen posts in here recently quoting a substantially higher engine number as being the changeover. 

It doesn't get any less confusing when some people talk about 996/7 engine numbers on 986/7 threads/pages (not talking about on here particularly, just in Porsche forums generally).

[Ninesomething]

Of all the failed IMS bearings in all the cars in all the world (to misquote Humphrey Bogart) very few (almost none) are in 2.7s.  

[Adrian Major]

1 hour ago, Menoporsche said:

I think the IMS sticky has engine numbers in it. Someone else here has commented on chassis numbers and build dates.

An increasingly popular view here, with that car on 62k miles, is if it was going to go wrong it probably would have done by now.

Good luck in your choice.

Many thanks for your help.

[Menoporsche]

43 minutes ago, JonSta said:

Of all the failed IMS bearings in all the cars in all the world (to misquote Humphrey Bogart) very few (almost none) are in 2.7s.  

yes but they are afraid of the other misquote - "Of all the IMS bearings in all the cars in all the world, you had to fail in my one"....

[Adrian Major]

53 minutes ago, minimoog said:

This is the source I semi-comforted myself with when buying my early '05 - https://autohaushamilton.com.au/news/ims-bearing-the-facts-made-simple

From my car (registered April 05, bearing type unconfirmed) and others I've read about with similar engine numbers and a confirmed upgraded bearing that suggests the change happened around February/March '05. That coincides with the date of Feb 21st 2005 that was cited as the changeover data in the USA IMS class action lawsuit against Porsche. However just to keep it antsy I've seen posts in here recently quoting a substantially higher engine number as being the changeover. 

It doesn't get any less confusing when some people talk about 996/7 engine numbers on 986/7 threads/pages (not talking about on here particularly, just in Porsche forums generally).

Ok managed to obtain the engine number which is  61508371 so could be after the cut off point?

[½cwt]

1 hour ago, minimoog said:

This is the source I semi-comforted myself with when buying my early '05 - https://autohaushamilton.com.au/news/ims-bearing-the-facts-made-simple

From my car (registered April 05, bearing type unconfirmed) and others I've read about with similar engine numbers and a confirmed upgraded bearing that suggests the change happened around February/March '05. That coincides with the date of Feb 21st 2005 that was cited as the changeover data in the USA IMS class action lawsuit against Porsche. However just to keep it antsy I've seen posts in here recently quoting a substantially higher engine number as being the changeover. 

It doesn't get any less confusing when some people talk about 996/7 engine numbers on 986/7 threads/pages (not talking about on here particularly, just in Porsche forums generally).

Thanks! That updates a chunk of 987 research that I was planning to do having sussed the 986, although their broad statement about ALL 986s being at risk is incorrect as the earlier to mid 2001 model year, dual row bearing is far more resilient (<1% failures vs approx. 8% for the single row bearing).  It also sinks my theory earlier in the topic but in a good way by making my knowledge more complete. 

[The Caped Crusader]

On the 987, as of engine number 62504095 it got the larger IMS bearing. 

[minimoog]

18 minutes ago, The Caped Crusader said:

On the 987, as of engine number 62504095 it got the larger IMS bearing. 

There's that number again. Source?

[½cwt]

OK, this is making a lot of sense.

Engine number 61504715 would be the last small bearing on the 2.7 (M9625 engines) and engine number 62504095 the first with the larger bearing on the 3.2 (M9626 engines).  Given standard and S production are fairly even but in favour of the 2.7 these would be around a third to half way through the 2005 model year in Nov/Dec 2004 (Model years start in August of the preceding year).

Wasn't planning to investigate this area of the IMS issue yet but this has pulled together a lot of info in a very short time.

[Adrian Major]

20 minutes ago, ½cwt said:

OK, this is making a lot of sense.

Engine number 61504715 would be the last small bearing on the 2.7 (M9625 engines) and engine number 62504095 the first with the larger bearing on the 3.2 (M9626 engines).  Given standard and S production are fairly even but in favour of the 2.7 these would be around a third to half way through the 2005 model year in Nov/Dec 2004 (Model years start in August of the preceding year).

Wasn't planning to investigate this area of the IMS issue yet but this has pulled together a lot of info in a very short time.

So actually engine number 61508371 on a 2.7 2005 987 could have the problem bearing? Reg June 22 2005?

[Adrian Major]

1 minute ago, Adrian Major said:

So actually engine number 61508371 on a 2.7 2005 987 could have the problem bearing? Reg June 22 2005?

sorry other way round!

[minimoog]

20 minutes ago, ½cwt said:

OK, this is making a lot of sense.

Engine number 61504715 would be the last small bearing on the 2.7 (M9625 engines) and engine number 62504095 the first with the larger bearing on the 3.2 (M9626 engines).  Given standard and S production are fairly even but in favour of the 2.7 these would be around a third to half way through the 2005 model year in Nov/Dec 2004 (Model years start in August of the preceding year).

Wasn't planning to investigate this area of the IMS issue yet but this has pulled together a lot of info in a very short time.

I was wondering if that's how the numbering worked.

[½cwt]

18 minutes ago, Adrian Major said:

So actually engine number 61508371 on a 2.7 2005 987 could have the problem bearing? Reg June 22 2005?

This engine number is higher so as long as everything stacks up with this information, it should have the large bearing and therefore not prone to the high rate of IMS failure.  That's not to say they NEVER fail but significantly lower risk....

[Ninesomething]

The fact that it's almost impossible to find someone who's had the revised bearing fail however hard you google makes it pretty unlikely to have happened. The internet is a magnifying glass for problems. Also you have to split the block to replace the new design so people would be howling at the cost.  Don't think I've ever heard of one but to read the internet you'd think every 986 had blown up spectacularly. Which obviously isn't the case.

I subscribe to the theory that if the bearing lasts long enough for the outer seal to become a bit loose then it's saved by the ingress of engine oil. When that happens is anyone's guess but you'd think that any 986 would be safe by now. Fingers crossed. 

I suppose that's another reason to be wary of really low mileage cars.

[beaks]

my 3.2 was one of the first to be made. registered 19th Jan 2005.

it has 94,000 miles on the clock.

it has never had any issues with bearings.

it still goes like stink.

it still sounds biblical.

it still handles a treat.

it doesn't sit in the garage hibernating.

and the owner doesn't sit around procrastinating about what could go wrong.

people need to realise that yeah, there were 'some' failures, but 'the internet' amplifies any issues by a factor of circa 1,382.48%.

when you look at a car, have a look underneath for oil (or traces of frenzied cleaning) - if it all looks Kool and the Gang... get it bought and start enjoying it.

I'll see you at the bar. mine's a pint.

Ian B

[TROOPER88]

1 minute ago, beaks said:

my 3.2 was one of the first to be made. registered 19th Jan 2005.

it has 94,000 miles on the clock.

it has never had any issues with bearings.

it still goes like stink.

it still sounds biblical.

it still handles a treat.

it doesn't sit in the garage hibernating.

and the owner doesn't sit around procrastinating about what could go wrong.

people need to realise that yeah, there were 'some' failures, but 'the internet' amplifies any issues by a factor of circa 1,382.48%.

when you look at a car, have a look underneath for oil (or traces of frenzied cleaning) - if it all looks Kool and the Gang... get it bought and start enjoying it.

I'll see you at the bar. mine's a pint.

Ian B

Well said Mr Beaks!! 

I wish everyone on this site was as positive as you, the world would be a much better place! 👍

[PFX]

Or, you could save up a little more, buy a late 2009 987.2 with good service history, and never talk about IMS again 😀

[TV8]

I wouldn't rule out a good 986 either. I am looking at getting a Boxster again and some of those early 986 on ambers look fantastic! 

The road tax on the slightly later 987s is double from memory. I had a 2005 and it was in the lower tax band which is important on the principle to me!

Personally, I wasn't even aware of the "problems" with the 3.4 engine until after I got my 996!

The main thing is that you really want the car, colour, interior trims and any specifics important to you.

Enjoy!

[The Caped Crusader]

5 hours ago, minimoog said:

There's that number again. Source?

I can't remember if this is where I got the number from but, from google:

https://www.porscheclubgb.com/forum/tm.aspx?m=1048885

 

 

[Robster66]

FWIW Definitely have an inspection from a Porsche Indie

Theres other (bigger) maintenance areas to be concerned with... coolant pipes, brakes & pipes, suspension, air con and checking the service history of course.

I’m coming up to 3 years with my 05 987 Tip and it’s been great fun as my daily