15 captured repliesPartial discussion capture · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHANY IDEA IF THIS IS A STANDARD FRONT BUMPER OR A MOD JOB?
Leading reported evidence
Use front bumper, as
Suggestion or failed attempt
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 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
PU=PolyUrethene, the name that a lot of people use for the front bumper, as that is the generic name for the material it is made from.
ANY IDEA IF THIS IS A STANDARD FRONT BUMPER OR A MOD JOB?
Read full discussion summary
Leading evidence: 'Use front bumper, as' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Use front bumper, as' (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.
ANY IDEA IF THIS IS A STANDARD FRONT BUMPER OR A MOD JOB?
Coverage and how to read this overview
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: 20261027T011819Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
Hi while looking on ebay i came across a pre facelift 996 with a turbo/c4s front bumper?
I was just wondering if that would be a straight fit after the headlight area had been modified or is there more too it??[/img]
The PU must have been hacked and filled to make it fit around the lights. I'd like to see a close-up of that area. The PU is also a poor colour match by the look of it.
Unless you see it in the flesh, you can't tell if it is well done or a bodge. Guess which my money is on.
thanks Richard
Do you think its worth a try on that mod... Sorry but what does PU stand for..
On the turbo bumpers are the front wings winder aswel compared to the narrow body 996s?
PU=PolyUrethene, the name that a lot of people use for the front bumper, as that is the generic name for the material it is made from. (Actually, it is PP+EPDM, but that's another story).
The turbo front end will fit a facelift car without any problem, as that is what they fit to the narrow-body Anniversary Edition.
Obviously you can make it fit the pre-facelift cars, but you end up with a bit of a mongrel. Just my opinion......
The 'shark mouth' GT3 front PU suits the overall shape much better IMO and doesn't end up with the kind of reaction that it's caused here.
Plus the aerodynamics are sure to be out of kilter without a decent front splitter? I merely speculate though........
Looks like a 4S splitter with the slats completely filled in and then painted over in silver that doesn't match the rest of the car....
Nice touch :roll:
turbo bumper on narrow body
Guys,
These parts have been available for sometime now...design911.com sells the turbo bumper made to fit the early headlights, for around £595.00 +vat and the gt2 rear spoiler costs a pretty penny and is available for narrow body cars...i think design911 sells that too, or maybe speedart.de.
The sills are mk1 gt3...i was gonna maybe get that bumper but decided against it a long time ago for the very reason that this thread highlights!!
If you want a turbo...buy one! if you want a gt2/3...buy one... if you cant afford it and dont want a standard carrera 2 then buy neither, but doing this leaves you with a car that has a slight identity crisis IMO :?:
People not in the know will not know the difference while purists and trained eyes will only shake their head when you drive by...
I thought you guys would be more knowledgeable.
This is a very rare Porsche 996 3.4 GT32 TT only available in different shades of Artic Silver :roll:
Edited to add that I would love to know what is on the rear boot lid :?:
....lets put it this way, who would want to take it near 170 with that aerokit fitted......not I the man says
Porsche spend millions getting balanced aerokits just right. Slapping on a GT2 rear spoiler then not have enough downforce up front, may become the drive into oblivion after 160
It's the GT2M from misha911.com
Smaller than the GT2 spoiler and doesn't sit as high, also the aerodynamic effects are less. It also doesn't have the large air scoop the GT2 has, it has the same slats as the MKI and II GT3 lid. Again less downforce effect.
Together with the 4S front end (very similar to the Turbo) which has more front downforce than standard carrera bumper I think the increased rear downforce should be fine. You GT2 boys cope fine with a larger rear downforce and larger front at 170mph, why not slightly less rear and slightly less front? It all balances out...
My main concern at speed would be the high 'stance', that car is aching for a good suspension set up.
Oh, and who cares if the skirts don't match the bumper or the wing! Obviously not the owner, and probably not the eventual buyer. I think we're all getting way too @n@l about these things...
What I'd like to see is a 996C4S, put and GT3 RS wing on the back, GT3 cup bumper on the front and see how that looks, like a widebody GT3RS... Is that sacrilege aswell?
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.