15 captured repliesPartial discussion capture · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCH996 C2 - good value?
Leading reported evidence
Test car
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that performed work without a confirmed outcome
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
I also recalled reading - many years ago - of the aero-balance requirement so dug out an AutoCar roadtest from December 2001 in which they tested a car with that rear spoiler.
Leading evidence: 'Test car' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Check history' (1 discussions). For that action, 0 discussions report a resolution and 0 report an unsuccessful attempt. No action has an explicit, attributable resolution report under the current rules. These are forum reports and suggestions, not a confirmed diagnosis.
Source reports, not a diagnosis or a success probability. Counts refer to discussions and can overlap.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
It would be worth checking the history to see what was done and when.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
The front PU is exactly the same as the one in this advert but the test car has aerodynamic side skirts.
Discussions that performed work without a confirmed outcome
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
I also recalled reading - many years ago - of the aero-balance requirement so dug out an AutoCar roadtest from December 2001 in which they tested a car with that rear spoiler.
Counts describe captured discussions, not unique people or a diagnosis. Author identities are not reliably stored. Exact duplicate evidence is counted once across matching discussions; one discussion counts at most once per action/state. Multiple repairs reported together remain a combination. Suggestions and failed attempts do not establish a fix. Matches cover whole discussions and can include related faults, model variants and incomplete threads.
15 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.
911uk: 1 discussions
0 evidence records excluded for query context · 0 excluded by outcome qualification · 0 adjusted by outcome qualification.
0 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.
Generation: 20261026T205155Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
Hi
Still pondering a 996 and was wondering whether this car seems too expensive for the description? Also, is the service history not a bit light; 8 stamps for 2003 car? Any thoughts on this and generally?
https://www.priddysmotorcompany.co.uk/cars/porsche/911/carrera/426000/
Thanks
Price is higher end but seems reasonable for the relatively low mileage assuming very good condition. Doesn't seem to have big spec and not seen that spoiler before. Worth giving them a call and going through details of history, invoices etc. I would expect a lot of history showing strong maintenance at that price.
It's top end money but mileage is low, I would be scrutinising the history and condition but ideally it would lose the tinted windows and be back on the original wheels.
Looks clean enough,.low mileage and 20k it should have extensive maintenance record.
Not a fan of the slate grey interior, but does work with the lapis blue
That's the aerokit Carrera spoiler, available alongside the much more usual aerokit Cup (ie GT3) spoiler. The funny thing is Porsche would only fit the spoiler at the rear and the aerokit front bumper together, to maintain aero balance, so it would be worth checking what the spec was when new. I'm not saying it's had a new front bumper or that the spoiler was added later - the spoiler may have been dealer fit for example - but my understanding is that the spoiler alone would not be 'factory".
I don't like the grey leather either but for the miles, if the condition's as it should be, it seems a very good price. I wouldn't worry about 8 services in 17 years with 20k miles even if it is supposed to be annual, but is it not 2 yearly on the 996.2?
these have jumped in price in the last year, so i dont think its crazy! Ive said for a long time that £20k is what you need for a decent example whether thats a fixer upper or a nice example.
The car looks well presented, it is a low optioned car. Great colour combo, i had a grey interior previous and its quite nice. IMO of course.
The servicing in the 2003 cars was every 2yrs so its about the right amount, i would see the date of them to be sure.
It's about the going rate for a C2 Manual in good, tidy condition with that sort of mileage.
I'd like to see the service history based on time and mileage intervals, not just "8" services. It could have had a gap of years between some services, as the MOT history shows only 20,000 of those 60 odd, done since 2008.
It would be worth checking the history to see what was done and when.
I don't think it's an unreasonably high price, but it's at the top end. I bought my C2 last month from a dealer for £16k on 68k miles with FSH (every year) and IMS having been replaced. I'm not sure if prices are generally a bit lower for a 996.1 though - mine is a 98 car with not many options other than the LSD.
996.1 and .2 are about same in price for equivalent spec from same seller. In the past .2 were worth more, now .1 caught up and I guess will overtake soon as they are becoming harder to find and starting to be recognised.
However purchase price is fairly irrelevant at this end of market. Condition is everything (and associated maintenance costs which can be significant and easily make the biggest difference between 2 cars).
I also recalled reading - many years ago - of the aero-balance requirement so dug out an AutoCar roadtest from December 2001 in which they tested a car with that rear spoiler.
The front PU is exactly the same as the one in this advert but the test car has aerodynamic side skirts. It's the lack of these that I'd be checking out.
Aside from that it looks a great car at (imo) the right price.
Hi
Thanks for the comments. I like the colour combo very much and don't mind the rear wing which doesn't seem too intrusive - it is also shown as factory fit on the options label.
I am not so keen on the tints and am not sure about the wheels (are they 19s from a 997?)
Cheers.
