997 as a daily - Page 2 - 911/Carrera GT - PistonHeads UK

Hi, I’m considering getting a 997 4S and using it as my daily which is mainly B and A roads around Norfolk to run the kids about in (not together) and general stuff (I work from home). We have an estate for the more practical stuff aswell. I’d be planning to use it all year round especially in winter (I have another fun car for summer no kids driving). I’ve had a 991.2 S before but I think the 997 will be more engaging and fun (though slower) . Will be become a bit of maintenance nightmare given the age? I’ll probably do around 6-8k miles a year. Any thoughts welcome

If its serviced properly by a Porsche specialist it will be fine. I have a 997 which does 5k miles pa - most of them ragging it up and down the Alps on the way to laps round Corsica. Its been fine for the last 5 years. Its about 70k miles. 997.2 C2S. Normal things like tyres and pads, oil and filters. I had the clutch done at 60k, it was worn, but that's when its meant to get worn. Otherwise I think they replaced a fuel pump as it was on its way out. Thats it. Both of these were surprisingly cheap. Service costs me about £350. No expense spared, done by Autofarm. Its German engineering, it will last longer than you will

Great car for that sort of daily use. But the ride is firm for B roads.

Discombobulate said: Great car for that sort of daily use. But the ride is firm for B roads. Does the non-S have a better ride?

Not sure, about that. I think its an option but probably one that all cars have fitted. PASM, Porsche Adjustable Suspension Management. You can turn on / off for firmer suspension. I leave mine in soft all the time. Fine for crappy Oxfordshire pot holed roads. If I'm in Europe on super smooth roads I firm it up, but basically soft is fine unless you are trying to set a track time

PASM was the default option on an S but you could untick the box and get -10mm (or was it 20mm?) passive instead as a no cost option

If I was to daily a 997 I’d want an automatic; Tip or PDK. The clutch is heavy on the manuals and the gearbox, mine for sure, need warming up before it is smooth to engage. Plus they’re long geared so the advantage of a manual is a moot point unless you track it. Good luck.

maz8062 said: If I was to daily a 997 I’d want an automatic; Tip or PDK. The clutch is heavy on the manuals and the gearbox, mine for sure, need warming up before it is smooth to engage. Plus they’re long geared so the advantage of a manual is a moot point unless you track it. Good luck. Agree, gearbox on mine takes some warming up and the clutch is heavy, but I don't DD mine, I have something else (EV) for the grind. Depends on the use case though really. For me, if I had to pop out on a couple of 20-30 mile runs every week, then my 997 would be ideal and a joy to use. If it's multiple shorter, 3-5 mile runs around town, into the village, over to the in-laws, kids football on Sat kind of stuff, then no, it would become tiring after a while. Can't comment on a Tip, never driven one, but assume it would make life a lot easier for the around town stuff. Or, maybe I'm just getting old and heavy, cold, grumpy, recalcitrant manual gearboxes are actually fine around town in traffic

dgswk said: If it's multiple shorter, 3-5 mile runs around town, into the village, over to the in-laws, kids football on Sat kind of stuff, then no, it would become tiring after a while. This driving is really bad for 996/7/1s and I assume 992s, they need to get hot when driven or it can lead to fuel dilution of the oil, I think it's something to do with flat piston design.

FriedMarsBar said: This driving is really bad for 996/7/1s and I assume 992s, they need to get hot when driven or it can lead to fuel dilution of the oil, I think it's something to do with flat piston design. The 992 DFi engines should be more than equal to the task, especially if you shorten the interval between oil changes to be on the safe side. But numerous short journeys in a 997.1 and 996.2 whereby the warm up cycle is prolonged due to sitting in traffic and driving at low rpm, are a surefire way to encourage bore score issues. Tips worse still.

Slippydiff said: The 992 DFi engines should be more than equal to the task, especially if you shorten the interval between oil changes to be on the safe side. But numerous short journeys in a 997.1 and 996.2 whereby the warm up cycle is prolonged due to sitting in traffic and driving at low rpm, are a surefire way to encourage bore score issues. Tips worse still. Thanks for that. Can I ask you do you think the 997.2 DFI is at risk from fuel dilution from short journeys? I don't do this in my 997.2 but I'm curious and it might help the op.

Billy_Whizzzz said: My 992.2 C4s went rusty as anything used as an occasional daily alongside several other more sensible cars. And I don’t live by the sea. No way would I run one again and ever expose it to mud salt or moisture Edited by Billy_Whizzzz on Monday 3rd June 15:52 I’m guessing you mean 997.2 as 992.2’s are not out yet?

My 997.2 C4s went rusty as anything used as an occasional daily alongside several other more sensible cars. And I don’t live by the sea. No way would I run one again and ever expose it to mud salt or moisture Edited by Billy_Whizzzz on Monday 3rd June 15:52 Edited by Billy_Whizzzz on Monday 3rd June 19:02

maz8062 said: I’m guessing you mean 997.2 as 992.2’s are not out yet? Sorry yes butter fingers - 997.2

maz8062 said: Billy_Whizzzz said: My 992.2 C4s went rusty as anything used as an occasional daily alongside several other more sensible cars. And I don’t live by the sea. No way would I run one again and ever expose it to mud salt or moisture Edited by Billy_Whizzzz on Monday 3rd June 15:52 I’m guessing you mean 997.2 as 992.2’s are not out yet? Sorry yes I meant 997.2

FriedMarsBar said: Thanks for that. Can I ask you do you think the 997.2 DFI is at risk from fuel dilution from short journeys? I don't do this in my 997.2 but I'm curious and it might help the op. They'll be no worse than any other DFi car in my estimation. Ultimately you've got two options in this scenario, do at least one decent, longish journey of at least an hour at full operating temperature every couple of weeks (but ideally every week in the Winter) and reduce the mileage between oil changes to 5,000 miles, though if you're doing really short daily journeys, I'd change the oil every 6 months irrespective of the mileage. Try and time oil changes so you do one midway through the Winter Also, in the Winter don't start the car up to de-ice/ warm the interior through, for 5-10 minutes before driving off. Rather clear the screens by your chosen method : tepid water, de-icer, scraper, then get in start the engine, and drive off immediately, as the sooner the engine is under load, the quicker it will warm up.

I had daily 997.2 C2S for two years doing 50k miles I then got another daily and did just 5k in the last 12 months in 997 and to be honest it didn't like it, drove badly and stuff went wrong, for me they need driving as mine didn't like being stood on the driveway all week.

Billy_Whizzzz said: My 997.2 C4s went rusty as anything used as an occasional daily alongside several other more sensible cars. And I don’t live by the sea. No way would I run one again and ever expose it to mud salt or moisture Edited by Billy_Whizzzz on Monday 3rd June 15:52 Edited by Billy_Whizzzz on Monday 3rd June 19:02 Wow! My 08 looks like new underneath (exhaust fittings, tandem pump and cross bars under the engine aside). So much so, that when I removed the arch protectors and under trays to add rustproofing I asked myself why I bothered. Yours look like it was used to pull boats out the sea...

Slippydiff said: FriedMarsBar said: Thanks for that. Can I ask you do you think the 997.2 DFI is at risk from fuel dilution from short journeys? I don't do this in my 997.2 but I'm curious and it might help the op. They'll be no worse than any other DFi car in my estimation. Ultimately you've got two options in this scenario, do at least one decent, longish journey of at least an hour at full operating temperature every couple of weeks (but ideally every week in the Winter) and reduce the mileage between oil changes to 5,000 miles, though if you're doing really short daily journeys, I'd change the oil every 6 months irrespective of the mileage. Try and time oil changes so you do one midway through the Winter Also, in the Winter don't start the car up to de-ice/ warm the interior through, for 5-10 minutes before driving off. Rather clear the screens by your chosen method : tepid water, de-icer, scraper, then get in start the engine, and drive off immediately, as the sooner the engine is under load, the quicker it will warm up. If you're right, this kills that age old argument you see about whether you should let 996s and 997s warm up on your drive or not. I've always gone with "drive it gently until it's up to temp".

Billy_Whizzzz said: My 992.2 C4s went rusty as anything used as an occasional daily alongside several other more sensible cars. And I don’t live by the sea. No way would I run one again and ever expose it to mud salt or moisture Edited by Billy_Whizzzz on Monday 3rd June 15:52 This is pretty bad for such a new car! My car lived fairly near the sea for a year prior to me buying it and despite being 13 years old it had no rust underneath at all. The alloy components had aged but all the steel parts had survived fairly well. I'm intending to get my car on the stands soon and coat the underside with a protective coating like Bilt Hamber UC wax Edited by FriedMarsBar on Monday 3rd June 20:27

I do and love it! Every journey feels special, even bumbling about. Sounds great, and honestly it’s a very comfortable place to be (S model with PASM), more so than the Golf R or Giulia I’ve had previously, and it even does speed bumps better than the Giulia if we’re talking about living with it.

Hoofy said: If you're right, this kills that age old argument you see about whether you should let 996s and 997s warm up on your drive or not. I've always gone with "drive it gently until it's up to temp". The longer it is between startup and reaching optimum running temperature, the longer the ECU hoses excess fuel into the cylinders. And it’s that excess fuel that contributes to bore washing and in turn bore scoring. Driving off immediately and getting the engine under load produces more heat, more quickly.

Slippydiff said: Hoofy said: If you're right, this kills that age old argument you see about whether you should let 996s and 997s warm up on your drive or not. I've always gone with "drive it gently until it's up to temp". The longer it is between startup and reaching optimum running temperature, the longer the ECU hoses excess fuel into the cylinders. And it’s that excess fuel that contributes to bore washing and in turn bore scoring. Driving off immediately and getting the engine under load produces more heat, more quickly. Thanks, that certainly makes sense. Is this true for all ICEs?

Slippydiff said: Ultimately you've got two options in this scenario, do at least one decent, longish journey of at least an hour at full operating temperature every couple of weeks (but ideally every week in the Winter) and reduce the mileage between oil changes to 5,000 miles, though if you're doing really short daily journeys, I'd change the oil every 6 months irrespective of the mileage. Try and time oil changes so you do one midway through the Winter Also, in the Winter don't start the car up to de-ice/ warm the interior through, for 5-10 minutes before driving off. Rather clear the screens by your chosen method : tepid water, de-icer, scraper, then get in start the engine, and drive off immediately, as the sooner the engine is under load, the quicker it will warm up. 6 months or 5K mileage is when I change the oil and always drive off ASAP, this is something I've picked up from my gen 1. Im lucky as I have a garage so the car doesn't need defrosting. Thanks slippydiff Edited by FriedMarsBar on Monday 3rd June 22:10

Hoofy said: Thanks, that certainly makes sense. Is this true for all ICEs? In a word, yes.

Slippydiff said: Hoofy said: Thanks, that certainly makes sense. Is this true for all ICEs? In a word, yes. Thanks.

Don't understand the notion that bore wash during the warm up phase is particularly a factor in M97 bore scoring. If it is, how does one account for the scoring pretty much always being bank two, and again very much most often on cylinder six, occasionally on five and even less frequently on bore four? You can account for that courtesy of bank two running hotter than bank one due to the coolant flow and balance, and in turn cylinders four, five and then six each running respectively hotter, the idea being that excess heat causes the oil film to break down on the thrust side, leading to bore to piston contact / released particles of the Lokasil bores being trapped between the bore and piston instead of suspended in the oil and, presto, the damage begins. Cylinder six runs hottest, thus cylinder six fails by far the most frequently. I may be missing something, but I can't see how the bore wash during warm up phase gets you to cylinder six in particular being a bore score basket case.

jamsp00n said: Don't understand the notion that bore wash during the warm up phase is particularly a factor in M97 bore scoring. If it is, how does one account for the scoring pretty much always being bank two, and again very much most often on cylinder six, occasionally on five and even less frequently on bore four? You can account for that courtesy of bank two running hotter than bank one due to the coolant flow and balance, and in turn cylinders four, five and then six each running respectively hotter, the idea being that excess heat causes the oil film to break down on the thrust side, leading to bore to piston contact / released particles of the Lokasil bores being trapped between the bore and piston instead of suspended in the oil and, presto, the damage begins. Cylinder six runs hottest, thus cylinder six fails by far the most frequently. I may be missing something, but I can't see how the bore wash during warm up phase gets you to cylinder six in particular being a bore score basket case. I'll apologise in advance, my days of debating/arguing with strangers on forums are a thing of the past. I have however taken the time to find the relevant section whereby bore washing is discussed in this video, and it's cued up at the juncture where this issue is debated and thus ready for you to watch. Both individuals have far more knowledge than I do when it comes to M96/M97 engine issues : https://youtu.be/-xbPE3YVy3k?t=514 So if having watched it, you don't concur with what I've stated in my posts, do please feel free to discuss it directly with either Charles Navarro of LN Engineering and Tribologist Lake Speed, Jr. of Total Seal Piston Rings, or if you want to discuss it with someone closer to home, you could speak speak to Baz or Grant at Hartech.

Thanks for the video, Slippydiff. Will watch it later! Without having read every post and not wanting to go that rabbit hole again, so I keep it very general. What wears engines (and it's individual components) more than mileage, are heat cycles. An engine has 3-500 different parts, most of them made from metal, many different . They all heat up -and thus expand- at different rates. So tolerances between individual parts vary during a cold engine and one that is warmed up properly. Those tolerances are set to be at their optimum in a properly warmed up, i.e. an engine that has reached operating temperatures. Until warmed up, those tolerances, for instance between a piston and the cylinder lining, are not in their optimal range and result in a greater rate of wear. Excessive heat or heat spots are again an unwanted state to run an engine in. This applies to basically every ICE. This is why often cars that have been used for long distances with higher mileage are no worse, or in fact often better than cars with low mileage that have been used to run around the city. Oversimplified example (!): Car A - 10 y.o. 120'000 miles - used 50 weeks a year for 2 x 100 miles journeys each week - 1'000 heat cycles Car B - 10 y.o. 50'000 miles - used 5 times a week (50 weeks a year) for 2 x 10 miles commute - 5'000 heat cycles Car B has less than half the miles but I suspect the bores on car A look better. Also because Car B has driven few miles, people tend to service them only every second year, so probably has only had 5 oil changes (one every 1'000 heat cycles) whereas car A probably has had 10 oil changes (one every 100 heat cycles). This is before you consider that Car B has had it's door open 5x more often, someones ass been dragged over the side bolster 5x more often, starter has cranked the engine 5x more often, etc. As stated, this is oversimplified and not an indepth analysis. Also I'm not an engineer. But I have always bought cars based on condition and neglected mileage to a great extent. Also because of the market, high mileage cars are mostly far cheaper to buy in the first place (and they often had other components like suspension replaced whereas the low mileage car hasn't had this done). In the showroom, car A and B look great being freshly prepared for sale. Car A has some stone chips in the bonnet, because it has seen far more and more often motorway driving than the pristine, presumably sympathetically cared for Car B. 8 out of 10 people will want the low mileage car. I would want (and have bought) Car A. Before someone else says it: I know it is very hard, and in many instances impossible, to know how a car has been driven before. I tend to buy the seller and I like to have the least amount of previous owners to eliminate unknown variables.

I think PASM is standard on all S models and an option on Carreras. A popular upgrade to the PASM equipped cars is a DSC Sports Controller, which replaces the Porsche PASM controller and makes the PASM shocks much more adaptive and uses a larger range of the shock than Porsche does. I don't think 6-8K is particularly high mileage so it really comes down to a few things, how hard it's driven, the conditions the car is driven in (salty roads?) and what's been sorted previously. As you probably know these cars have mild steel hardware and alloy engines etc so fixings rust/corrode/seize in situ which results in higher repair costs. Porsche reckon the suspension is good for 100K but most cars will need some suspension/chasis fixes before this point. My own car has just been into Centre Gravity and only needed to two rear contol arms but NOT as they had failed but rahter the concentric adjustable bolts had seized in the arms and therefore couldn't be adjusted and this meant they had to be cut out and replaced. My car was on 65K at the time and I forget the cost, probably £400 in total. Other points to consider are the exhaust valves seize, through heat cyles and being exposed to the damp, they're not massively expensive but in an indi they're probably £500 for a pair and a couple of hours of labour so circa £800. I think HP fuel pumps are now about £600 and again a couple of hours of labour to fit. I think on a decent car, mid mileage car, it would be advisable to allocate £2K per year for serving and repairs. I love my gen 2's performance, size and "feel" from the steering AND the PDK box. I know the PDK isn't the purist's choice but I'm not a purist and it's not an investment car, just a bog standard C2S. Good luck Edited to add, I know a few people who have bought 18" wheels and use them with the deeper profile tyres with a less stiff sidewall, which provides a softer ride if the 19" and ultra high performance tyres prove to be too uncomforatable. Edited by FriedMarsBar on Monday 3rd June 14:55 Edited by FriedMarsBar on Monday 3rd June 14:59 Edited by FriedMarsBar on Wednesday 5th June 16:28

Watched it, as far as I can see that video didn't explain anything and didn't have any 'debate'. It just says, 'driving off is better / leaving it idling is bad'. Am I missing something? As it happens, everything I mentioned earlier comes from Barry Hart who I've spoken to quite a bit on the topic (I've wandered round the rebuild shop with Grant a few times, too). No mention of bore wash from Barry, I don't think there's any in the Hartech guides, either. Again, I may have missed something. No that it matters, but personally I rate Barry more than LN and Flat 6 Innovations and think his explanations of what's going on make more sense. But even if you give them all the same weighting, the problem is that they don't entirely agree on the subject. Not remotely wedded to any particular explanation. I didn't come up with the one I posted earlier, it's Hartech's and simply the one that makes most sense as far as I can see. If there is an account for bore wash causing scoring that fits with the reality of bank two and number six, fine by me, I just haven't seen one!

Ah, got it, you're back, yet again.

jamsp00n said: Don't understand the notion that bore wash during the warm up phase is particularly a factor in M97 bore scoring. If it is, how does one account for the scoring pretty much always being bank two, and again very much most often on cylinder six, occasionally on five and even less frequently on bore four? You can account for that courtesy of bank two running hotter than bank one due to the coolant flow and balance, and in turn cylinders four, five and then six each running respectively hotter, the idea being that excess heat causes the oil film to break down on the thrust side, leading to bore to piston contact / released particles of the Lokasil bores being trapped between the bore and piston instead of suspended in the oil and, presto, the damage begins. Cylinder six runs hottest, thus cylinder six fails by far the most frequently. I may be missing something, but I can't see how the bore wash during warm up phase gets you to cylinder six in particular being a bore score basket case. You’re a bit too clever for this community mate, we prefer to follow the advice on the internet rather than listened to reasoned explanations. Those that know are often quiet when it comes to explaining what you’ve covered in your post. Why they choose not to chime in and explain things, clear up misunderstanding, only God knows. But I appreciate you going there and clearing things up. Now back on topic - 997 as a daily? Yes you can and it’ll be fun, for your kids especially, but not recommended especially in manual form. Enjoy.

In 2019 [and 2020] I used my 1998 996 c2 manual as a Daily. It was then 21 years old. So similar to using a 2003 car today. My car lived outside and was used all year round. In those days people used to commute to an office and I did this also. It probably took its toll on the car. I still have it today but it's basically just outside unused and rotting. Would I do it again - yes. Was it practical - no. Was it logical - no. Was it cost efficient - no. So what's the point? I was commuting in traffic in a city with an old or classic car. It was not a perfect example and I didn't exactly treat it like a garage queen. It collected various dings, bashes and scrapes from the lovely British public who were clearly unable to avoid it whilst parked on public roads. But every day I got to feel good about the fact I drive an old Porsche, which is possibly the worst car to choose for commuting in heavy traffic. If you would like your own memories like these then you need to just do it and not consider all the reasons why it's a bad idea.

That's the way to do it, as Mr Punch would say. (Although, I don't think much of his sausage securty advice.) Shame about the keying and shopping dinks but people are crap like that. At least you can still enjoy the drive while everyone else slowly watches their lives ooze through their fingertips as they roll along in the same traffic in their Mundano.

Interesting how compact it looks in proximity to the bloated modern hatches. Good on you for using it as a daily. I did the same when I had a 997. I had to as it was the only car in the family

First Sea Lord said: Interesting how compact it looks in proximity to the bloated modern hatches. Good on you for using it as a daily. I did the same when I had a 997. I had to as it was the only car in the family When it makes an Opel Adam ? look bloated, you know the 996, especially in it's most basic form is a very svelte thing indeed