Early 996 engines

:bye: I'm in the market for an early 996, 98/99 15k budget but I'm put off by the failure rate of these engines. I was told by a reputable independent: "It is a fairly common fault and something you have to consider when buying an early 996 or 986. The best solution would be to find one that has had a new Porsche engine fitted and not a rebuilt unit. Porsche made many improvements to the engine and this is not possible with a rebuilt engine." What do you think?... :?: Saw a nice one on 60k no engine rebuild, is this likely to go bang or is best to go for one with higher miles?

I'm not sure I fully agree with the Independents advice tbh. Whilst it's better to get one with a new engine, if the engine is to fail, they usually fail before 40k miles. If they get to higher mileage, then they are generally ok. However, the engine will most likely fail at some point. For example, the internal chain is only designed for about 150k miles I believe. If the engine has been refurbished at somewhere like Autofarm and Hartech (especially), then the engine is at least as good as a new one. Especially the Hartech one as they upgrade the common failure components. However, outside of these places, it's unusual for an engine to be repaired, as the cost is negligible. Although I read somewhere that sometimes Porsche offer a repaired engine as a cheaper replacement....not sure if this is true though, as I thought failed engines generally went back to Germany for inspection. Personally, the only 996 I'd avoid is the 98 orange light version. However, a friend of mine has owned his since new and has had no problems with it and there's a few people on here that also have the early 996 without issue. Also have a read of the current mileage thread. The only thing I'd add is remember that you're buying an 11 year old car and if you are stretching your budget to avoid it, it's probably not the car for you. Budget 2-3k running costs a year + an additional 8k to replace the engine.

Brendan: go buy your car, you won't get as much awesome car for so little... the 996 is generally reliable, the few failures are highlighted/talked about by "experts" to the point where people believe the folklore that they are particularly prone to failure. Previous post on this thread states that the timing chain is 'believed' to last for 150K miles... some people believe that the good lord created our world 600 years ago and the fossils were made to allow us to invent Darwinism. The timing chain in the 996 engine is "life long" and whilst this item will wear can you imagine Porsche manufacturing an engine with built in life expetancy of 150K miles. I suspect your dealer who "advised" you would not have offered same advice if he had a suitable car to sell you. Fact is that a properly rebuilt unit would have the areas of concern rectified, the indy dealer will know this. Buy your car & enjoy it, the chances of catastrophic failure have to be less than your suffering a major road accident, you only live once (unless of course you have the luxury of the disillusion that you will be in a better place once your time on god's earth is used up!!).

Douglas, Regarding the internal chain belt, that's very factual and is from Porsche Germany. I said "believe", because it was an approximation, I can't remember exactly, but was certainly around that number. Have a search for the thread where the guy had a catatrophic engine failure and his insurance company refused to pay out because of the timing belt failure. I pointed out that this was a non-serviceable part, he checked with Porsche, who confirmed the life expectancy. As a result, the insurance company paid out, as his car had done considerably less miles. That is "designed for", doesn't mean that it will necessarily fail at this point. You can go all biblical and philosophical, so why not consider this....why do you think that the Porsche insurance cover stops at 120k miles? Is it because that's deemed in proportion to other manufacturers, or is it that they've worked out that a high performance engine would have ceiling of sort that when reached, would require work. The debate of 996 and earlier engines has been discussed at length and the reality is that when a 996 goes, it typically goes in a big way, however, it's not always catastrophic (as Porsche would have you believe, by the amount they swap out, rather than repair). This is because Porsche have put a lot of work into reducing the cost of a replacement, rather than a repair. Consider that against the 993/964 and other earlier engines. They typically need a rebuild about this age and is considered normal, but they don't typically go like the 996 and 997 engines do. However, it's a risk that you'd take with any high performing 10 year old+ car, but as a general rule, it's sensible to avoid the first iteration of any new product, certainly Porsche first foray into water cooled engines.

Sorry to dive in but isn't the MY00 - 02 a better engine than the 98 - 99? I heard some story about the tooling jig being dropped that produced the very early 996 PU's?

Thanks for the comments. As ever things are divided, :dont know: but I will try and buy as late as possible, may be :?: 2000. But at the moment still need to sell my car. Not good time to sell car at the moment though :bye:

Swings and roundabouts as they say..... not a great time to sell but a great time to buy so much of a muchness. However, 996's plumeted 6 - 12 months ago but they have certainly crept their way back up recently. Ruddy media-hype I say.

Early Boxsters had the liners pushed to hard into place and caused microscopic cracks, which is the jig issue you refer to. This was only the earlier 2.5 engine and wasn't an issue on 996. The problem with the 996 engines is that the 3.4 and 3.6 engines are bored too thinly, especially when compared to the Boxster engine (similar, if not the same, crank casing, smaller displacement). In order to compensate for the wider bore, Porsche used Lokasil liners (Nikasil on the GT3 and Turbo, hence why they have seen less failure rates), which now seem to warp over time (not a known issue at time of design). No one is sure why they warp, but it's most likely down to heat/expansion (so cars driven small distances on a regular basis), driving the engine continually hard and reving the car relatively high when the engine isn't sufficiently warm, coupled with the thin casing. The M96 has gone through a lot of minor design iterations, which is why the later models are considered better, however, it's likely they will all start to fail more consistently above 150k miles. Have a look at this article: http://www.hartech.org/docs/buyers guide web format Jan 2008 part 4.pdf Especially pages 116, 129, 130-132, 140-143 and 155. Now I find it quite amusing when people (like Douglas) say there's no real issue with these engines when the evidence (from people who really know what they are talking about, rather than people like Douglas and myself) is compelling. I'm sure more knowledgeable people on this forum (like Big Bob and Richard H will also have an opinion). I made a lot of research into this area, because whilst the Internet is a great place for blowing items out of proportion, there isn't smoke without fire and I wanted to ensure that when spending 30k+ cash on a car, I wasn't going to have to pay a further 10k cash out on replacing an engine. After reading into this, it nearly put me off buying the car, not because I couldn't afford it, but because I'd resent paying this much out for a car with an inherent design flaw, which would need fixing at my cost. As such, I decided to either buy a new 997, or as later 996 as I could find, where I knew its complete history and run with a warranty. Fortunately, I bought my 996 from a close relative who traded up to a new 997 Targa 4S (which I'll probably subsequently buy). The added bonus is that it's a Tip, which prevents the engine from being over-rev'd (even if it does detract from the enjoyment - where there's a clear road, which is not often on the M25). This is why I got so angry when Porsche changed their warranty scheme, not the fact that it went up to 900 to £1400, but the fact that any 3rd party attachment would prevent the warranty being re-issued (eg. Bluetooth, radar detectors, reversing sensors) - fortunately some OPCs are now seeing sense with this, but it's still quite rare. So where does this leave us with the original OP question? The Internet certainly does blow things out of proportion and engine failures typically do happen either early on in life, or generally when approaching or into the 100k miles. If you are thinking that a 996 for 15k represents good value for money, then consider that these cars cost a lot of money new (60k+) and do have an inherent design flaw which will go wrong at some point. So consider that as long as you are comfortable that you may (not will) have to contribute another 10k to get the engine replaced, then I think it represents great value for money.....but remember, there's no such thing as a bargain cheap Porsche.

Or go to spending 21k and buy my lovely 19k miles MY00

I will regret saying this BUT it really is just a few of the problems that get over and over talked about whereas the rest of us happily plod on! I may expand on that one! Also mine gets warmed up properly before pushing on .... now surely a well looked after car/engine will be beteer than a "hammered" one???

I think that's exactly the issue, no one knows for sure what causes the problem. Also, when buying used, you might have looked after the car well, but the owner before that, the owner before that? Like I said, the NA engine does have that issue, but as long as you can afford to the run and maintain the 996, it represents fantastic value at £15k.