997 Gen 2 DFI Engines - Woes finally sorted? - Page 5 - Porsche General - PistonHeads UK

Do these engines mark the end of the much discussed weaknesses, i.e; liner cracking, bore scoring and IMS failures? Can we now buy with confidence? Or is it too early to conclude? Is coking up a real issue on these engines? MTR

No coking it is not a real issue because there has yet to be one confirmed case of it happening - despite lots of dire predictions on this forum. That said, it is still early days and only time will tell. Prepare for the stampede of clairvoyants...

If you're really worried, the 2.9l Cayman/Boxter uses the new engine without Direct Injection. SS7

If you're really worried a) Don't buy one b) If you do, get a warranty Either way it then doesn't matter.

I am not worried. I am interested in whether these engines have finally been 'fixed'. MTR

mollytherocker said: I am not worried. I am interested in whether these engines have finally been 'fixed'. MTR I don't know the answer to that (not that you expect me to ) But what I do know is that regardless of real world statistics, the scaremongerers (word?) will find a reason to make everybody s t themselves about their P&J going bang. Personally I'm bored of reading threads with people asking questions about if their car will either lose money or go pop. Cars will always lose money and some engines will go pop. It would be interesting to know what the real world percentage is of 996/997 engines that have had the faults we all assume our own cars have. One thing to bear in mind is the cost of the warranty is not very expensive and if Porsche were replacing loads of engines and whatever else that keeps breaking, it would be a whole lot more than it is. I'm not having a dig at you Sir, and I think we should start a 'My car is really reliable, and I love it' thread!

HoHoHo said: mollytherocker said: I am not worried. I am interested in whether these engines have finally been 'fixed'. MTR I don't know the answer to that (not that you expect me to ) But what I do know is that regardless of real world statistics, the scaremongerers (word?) will find a reason to make everybody s t themselves about their P&J going bang. Personally I'm bored of reading threads with people asking questions about if their car will either lose money or go pop. Cars will always lose money and some engines will go pop. It would be interesting to know what the real world percentage is of 996/997 engines that have had the faults we all assume our own cars have. One thing to bear in mind is the cost of the warranty is not very expensive and if Porsche were replacing loads of engines and whatever else that keeps breaking, it would be a whole lot more than it is. I'm not having a dig at you Sir, and I think we should start a 'My car is really reliable, and I love it' thread! I appreciate and respect that you are not interested in this topic. I am though from a technical point of view, and I would imagine that many other Porschefiles are too. MTR

mollytherocker said: HoHoHo said: mollytherocker said: I am not worried. I am interested in whether these engines have finally been 'fixed'. MTR I don't know the answer to that (not that you expect me to ) But what I do know is that regardless of real world statistics, the scaremongerers (word?) will find a reason to make everybody s t themselves about their P&J going bang. Personally I'm bored of reading threads with people asking questions about if their car will either lose money or go pop. Cars will always lose money and some engines will go pop. It would be interesting to know what the real world percentage is of 996/997 engines that have had the faults we all assume our own cars have. One thing to bear in mind is the cost of the warranty is not very expensive and if Porsche were replacing loads of engines and whatever else that keeps breaking, it would be a whole lot more than it is. I'm not having a dig at you Sir, and I think we should start a 'My car is really reliable, and I love it' thread! I appreciate and respect that you are not interested in this topic. I am though from a technical point of view, and I would imagine that many other Porschefiles are too. MTR No problem bye

HoHoHo said: If you're really worried a) Don't buy one b) If you do, get a warranty Either way it then doesn't matter. How dare you offer such sound and practical advice on a thread of this nature! Do you know nothing about these types of threads?? Either re-post, using an appropriate measure of panic and impending engine related doom, or go elsewhere.

HoHoHo said: Either way it then doesn't matter. If these engines coke-up like other DFI engines, yes it bl**dy does matter! I don't want a car that only makes 300BHP in a couple of years time because of the valves being choked with crap and Porsche doing a 'What problem sir...'? I'll put good money on Porsche NEVER decoking one of these engines under warranty. For the moment, this whole topic is on hold until I get (or someone else gets) a borescope down the inlet tract of one of the DFI engines and we can assess the extent of the coking problem. There will be one as all DFI engines (and Diesels) have this issue to a greater or lesser extent - it's just a case of how much and what effect it has on the engine's output. As for the machanical issues - yes the DFI engine seems to have cured all the previous generation's ills. Anecdotally, there's no tales of woe on forums across the world and technically, they addressed all the right parts of the engine. Below are some excerpts from the Porsche Technical manual about relevant changes to the new engines: Engine A totally redesigned generation of engines is used for the new 911 models. As on the previous model, these engines have a different displacement - a 3.6-litre flat-six engine is used on the 911 Carrera, while the 911 Carrera S has a 3.8 litre flat-six engine. Although the displacement is the same as on the previous models, the performance and torque have been increased significantly, while fuel consumption is reduced by approx. 15%. This was primarily achieved through the use of direct fuel injection (DFI), by reworking the intake and exhaust system and by improving the engine internally in order to reduce friction and drive losses. By reducing the oil pan height, it was possible to lower the installation position of the engines by approx. 10 mm, thereby lowering the vehicle’s centre of gravity and improving driving dynamics. Crankcase The new 911 models feature a two-part, vertically split crankcase with an integrated crankshaft thrust block. The advantage of this design is that smaller components can be used, while the separate bearing saddle with cast-in cast iron elements is no longer needed, thereby reducing the overall weight of the engine. The actual crankcase on the new 911 engines is made completely of an aluminiumsilicon alloy (ALUSIL). This procedure offers the following advantages: • With ALUSIL, the crankcase can be made from one cast, without cylinder sleeves and without having to coat the cylinder bores afterwards. • ALUSIL is an excellent heat conductor and thus allows high specific engine output values. • ALUSIL has excellent friction properties. Since the pistons and piston rings slide on the exposed silicon crystals, they have a low tendency to seize. • ALUSIL does not present any recycling problems because the crankcase does not include any foreign materials, e.g. cast-in cast iron cylinder sleeves. The listed advantages of the alloy are certainly important arguments in its favour. Indeed, the low-pressure chill-casting procedure, which has since proved to be the best solution by far for casting ALUSIL, is an important prerequisite for reliable, mass-produced crankcase cast parts. Cylinders are now connected differently in the cylinder-head cover area. The individual cylinders, which originally stood freely in the water jacket (open deck design), are now connected by a closed cylinder deck (closed deck design). The advantage of this design is high cylinder stability, particularly the cylinder shape (roundness and low cylinder deformation) over a wide load and temperature range. This has the added advantage of reducing friction and thus reducing fuel consumption. Even piston and piston-ring sealing has been improved as a result of the higher retention of roundness of the cylinders. The entry of oil from the crankcase into the combustion chambers and the entry of the fuel-air mixture from the combustion chambers into the crankcase is reduced. This both improves consumption and reduces performance- inhibiting overpressure caused by blow-by in the crankcase. Crankshaft/crankshaft bearings The drop-forged crankshaft runs in eight bearings and has twelve counterweights. Main bearing 4 is designed as a thrust bearing. Axial play is determined by two thrust plates, which are inserted at the left and right of the bearing. The main bearings are designed as plain bearings with a diameter of 63 mm. Main bearings 1/3/5/7/8 are smooth bearings, while main bearings 2/4/6 are grooved bearings. These grooved bearings supply oil to the lubrication points of the crankshaft bearings. The drive mechanism for the two drive chains for the camshafts and demandcontrolled oil pump is located on the pulley side. Piston cooling The piston crown temperature in the 911 Carrera engines is reduced by means of piston injection cooling. The spray nozzles are forced-fitted into the crankcase and cannot be replaced. To ensure the necessary engine oil pressure at low revs and high engine oil temperatures, these spray nozzles only open at a higher oil pressure. Chain drive Another special feature of the new generation of engines is that these engines no longer have an intermediate shaft. This drive shaft, which was fitted between the crankshaft and the camshafts on previous models, was required in order to reduce the transmission ratio and thus the dynamic forces of the timing chains. Through the use of new, high-performance timing chains, it was possible to simplify the drive mechanism for the camshafts in spite of higher revs, thereby reducing the weight of the engine significantly by removing the intermediate shaft. Together with an additional crankshaft bearing location, this allows greater stability and a significantly higher engine speed potential. Oil supply The oil supply in the new generation of engines has been essentially redesigned with the following objectives in mind: • To ensure the supply of oil even during very high lateral and axial acceleration • To reduce friction and drive losses The main differences between the new oil supply system and that used on previous models are as follows: • Additional oil extraction point in the cylinder head • Electronic demand-controlled oil pump • Additional watertight sheetmetal panel between crankcase and oil pan Compared with the previous models, the new 3.6 and 3.8-litre engines have not only one, but two extraction points in each cylinder head. In addition, the new 911 engines now have a total of 5 oil pumps instead of 3. These are located in the oil pan and are driven by a shared shaft. They include 4 extraction pumps for the cylinder heads (2 per cylinder head) and a new demand-controlled oil pressure pump. As you can see from the above, almost all the points that have been described by Hartech and others (and identified as potential weak points in the M96/7 engines) appear to have been totally redesigned. The exception, as it's not described in the technical manual (other than via a couple of diagrams) is the cooling system, so I have no way of knowing how the system is designed on the DFI motors or whether the idiosyncrasies of the previous generation engine are repeated.

Some great info there Ian, many thanks. In terms of the general coking issues on this type of engine, what can an owner do to limit the issue? MTR

With respect Ian - the coking subject is not on hold, it is non existent until such time as someone shows it to be an issue. Why be so negative about loss of power and Porsche not coughing up when no one knows if coking is an issue with these engines. Why not act on your paranoia and get your car scoped as you said you would weeks ago. If it's coked then there is indeed a problem. If it's not then you can lay it to rest. But all this what if crap is such a waste of time and energy.

I reckon mine is coked. Couldn't shake a Granturismo S MC-shift off my tail the other day. It was firmly locked-on upto 1.3 leptons

Phooey said: I reckon mine is coked. Couldn't shake a Granturismo S MC-shift off my tail the other day. It was firmly locked-on upto 1.3 leptons Hmmm... Or could be operator failure

Phooey said: I reckon mine is coked. Couldn't shake a Granturismo S MC-shift off my tail the other day. It was firmly locked-on upto 1.3 leptons You should get a GT3, ooops, sorry, I forgot you used to have one!!!! g

drmark said: Why not act on your paranoia and get your car scoped as you said you would weeks ago. Thanks for the compliment. A Doctor who obviously hasn't a clue what paranoia means! Let me educate you. Paranoia - "a mental disorder characterized by systematized delusions". Kindly explain to me how the simple, scientific understanding of the inevitable consequences of a known type of mechanical system can be systematized delusion? Denying the simple, well-understood science is delusional, not accepting it and trying to quantify its effects. The reason I didn't get the car scoped is because my local independent didn't have a borescope that we could get pictures from. It has a tiny 2" screen that is too small and also too dim to photograph. And of course I daren't say on here that I've seen an issue then not put pics up to 'prove' it. I'd obviously have been lying and spreading unfounded myths about cars that in reality are completely perfect in every way. There you go - no paranoia here!

I've certainly heard some tales of woe concerning Audi's DFI engines - some older RS4s making about the same bhp as the previous gen S4! I guess that at least with IMS, you have a perfect engine one day, and a bag of bolts the next, and depending upon your own situation (newish car with OPC warranty, or older car that someone like Hartech can rebuild) you just deal with it. I'd be a bit peeved if I thought that I was simply getting used to the power of my shiny new car, only to find out that 100 odd horses had been coked up over time.

I wrote to EVO about this some time ago. And they basically said DFI is great, dont worry about coking! Edited by J-P on Friday 6th May 14:43

Phooey said: I reckon mine is coked. Couldn't shake a Granturismo S MC-shift off my tail the other day. It was firmly locked-on upto 1.3 leptons That is worrying. A friend has one, a beautiful car and an exquisite noise. My 997tt absolutely slaughters his Granturismo S, even my 360 is quicker. A C2S should pull away from a Granturismo, albeit slowly. I had a C2S (gen 2) stay with me in the 360, was only a short blast, but seemed to be just as quick.

Well I have got an Audi S6 V10 with 83,000 miles. Still pulls pretty strong - but must admit I have not rolling road checked the bhp. If you can clock 100K without any real noticeable difference on a 911 I wont be losing sleep over it.

drmark said: With respect Ian - the coking subject is not on hold, it is non existent until such time as someone shows it to be an issue. Why be so negative about loss of power and Porsche not coughing up when no one knows if coking is an issue with these engines. Why not act on your paranoia and get your car scoped as you said you would weeks ago. If it's coked then there is indeed a problem. If it's not then you can lay it to rest. But all this what if crap is such a waste of time and energy. It is not unreasonable to anticipate this problem with the Gen 2 997. My understanding is that the problem affects all DFI engines petrol or diesel made to date to a greater or lesser extent. It is also not unreasonable to expect Porsche not to help based on their approach over the last 10 years with M96/7 issues. I have personal experience of extortionate service at more than one OPC and downright incompetence. I use Hartech and will continue to do so. I am very interested in the preventative products that are on the market for DFI engines and how they work. Wynn's seem to be big in this area. Anybody any experience?? Edited by ScienceTeacher on Friday 6th May 16:17

drmark said: With respect Ian - the coking subject is not on hold, it is non existent until such time as someone shows it to be an issue. It is an issue and it does exist. As Ian already stated, the extent of the issue has not yet been confirmed for the 997, but it has been confirmed elsewhere for a Cayenne. Ian and I contributed to that thread (he even started it, IIRC). For a self-styled rocket scientist (possibly with a PhD), your response completely rejects the adage "absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence". Worse, now that I have reminded us all on this thread of a case affecting a Porsche engined car (see Ian's original thread - titled "Heads up etc"), the matter of evidence should lead you to amend your odd science on this thread. One would hope, of course (but I won't hold my breath!). drmark said: Why be so negative about loss of power and Porsche not coughing up when no one knows if coking is an issue with these engines. He wasn't being negative. He was stating facts and sharing them. If you have deemed them "so negative" that was your interpretation . MTR expressed an interest in it from a scientific point of view. I share that view. So does Ian. So do the team at Hartech. Yet you, a self styled scientist want this shut up. Why? drmark said: Why not act on your paranoia and get your car scoped as you said you would weeks ago. If it's coked then there is indeed a problem. If it's not then you can lay it to rest. He did act, and he's not shown any evidence on here as far as I can tell to suggest he is paranoid. Happily, he's responded to you directly. You should perhaps read (or remember that you even contributed to the thread documenting how he acted). drmark said: But all this what if crap is such a waste of time and energy. Gosh, this really is the best bit - because you claim to be a rocket scientist and you don't see the irony in any of your statements on this subject. Anyway, drmark, I'm not interested in conversing with you (for reasons you already know) so any response by you will be ignored. But for the sake of others who might be swayed by your points, I thought it would be helpful to point out just how much ill-informed and ill-researched rubbish you have put in one post. Cordial saludos to all pursuing the science of DFi engines for the benefit of us all. It's time.....and I'm off to enjoy the sun.

JLJ said: Phooey said: I reckon mine is coked. Couldn't shake a Granturismo S MC-shift off my tail the other day. It was firmly locked-on upto 1.3 leptons That is worrying. A friend has one, a beautiful car and an exquisite noise. My 997tt absolutely slaughters his Granturismo S, even my 360 is quicker. A C2S should pull away from a Granturismo, albeit slowly. I had a C2S (gen 2) stay with me in the 360, was only a short blast, but seemed to be just as quick. Are you sure it was the newer 4.7 and not the 4.2? I've driven said car (my mates), and it really is a quick piece. Supposed to be 440bhp... but i swear it's pushing 500, maybe more. Just feels extremely rapid for a near-on 2 tonne vehicle. We had a few good runs, and the Mazzer was glued to my ass. I'm sure it's the same engine from the 430, just *supposedly* downtuned?? In all honesty, i expected to slightly pull away from him. Feckin coked. Must be

mollytherocker said: Do these engines mark the end of the much discussed weaknesses, i.e; liner cracking, bore scoring and IMS failures? Can we now buy with confidence? Or is it too early to conclude? Is coking up a real issue on these engines? MTR Had 2, both have been f king awesome - in technical terms

Phooey said: Are you sure it was the newer 4.7 and not the 4.2? I've driven said car (my mates), and it really is a quick piece. Supposed to be 440bhp... but i swear it's pushing 500, maybe more. Just feels extremely rapid for a near-on 2 tonne vehicle. We had a few good runs, and the Mazzer was glued to my ass. I'm sure it's the same engine from the 430, just *supposedly* downtuned?? In all honesty, i expected to slightly pull away from him. Feckin coked. Must be Not sure about the Maser GT, but the 4200/GS have a bored out and detuned version of the 360 Modena engine if memory serves.... The engine in my old 4200 is still the favourite engine I've had the privilege to have under my right foot bar the Enzo V12 in a 599 I drove last year.

bcnrml said: Gosh, this really is the best bit - because you claim to be a rocket scientist and you don't see the irony in any of your statements on this subject. Anyway, drmark, I'm not interested in conversing with you (for reasons you already know) so any response by you will be ignored. But for the sake of others who might be swayed by your points, I thought it would be helpful to point out just how much ill-informed and ill-researched rubbish you have put in one post. Cordial saludos to all pursuing the science of DFi engines for the benefit of us all. It's time.....and I'm off to enjoy the sun. I am all for anticipating issues - it's a fundamental of my work - but we address them when and if they arise and concentrate on advancement in the meantime. If we didn't there would be no engines to worry about - let alone any jet or rocket engines. Not being narky, just realistic. I really wish people enjoyed what they had rather than worried about things that may never happen. I don't have a gen 2 so no vested interest. This thread will run and run - all I ask is that it is based on fact rather than speculation. But this is PH .... Over and out.

Does this coking issue mean we should all be getting a couple of shots of Redex put in when we fill up like my Dad used to do back in the 60s ?

Phooey said: JLJ said: Phooey said: I reckon mine is coked. Couldn't shake a Granturismo S MC-shift off my tail the other day. It was firmly locked-on upto 1.3 leptons That is worrying. A friend has one, a beautiful car and an exquisite noise. My 997tt absolutely slaughters his Granturismo S, even my 360 is quicker. A C2S should pull away from a Granturismo, albeit slowly. I had a C2S (gen 2) stay with me in the 360, was only a short blast, but seemed to be just as quick. Are you sure it was the newer 4.7 and not the 4.2? I've driven said car (my mates), and it really is a quick piece. Supposed to be 440bhp... but i swear it's pushing 500, maybe more. Just feels extremely rapid for a near-on 2 tonne vehicle. We had a few good runs, and the Mazzer was glued to my ass. I'm sure it's the same engine from the 430, just *supposedly* downtuned?? In all honesty, i expected to slightly pull away from him. Feckin coked. Must be It's a 4.7 'S'. Said friend is a little 'light in the loafers' and isn't the most aggressive guy behind the wheel. Having said that, the 360 definately gets off the line much better than the Maser. The 997tt is out and out a lot faster, regardless. I shall try and get a drive of the Maser this weekend as I'll be seeing him, I shall report back!

Phooey said: I reckon mine is coked. Couldn't shake a Granturismo S MC-shift off my tail the other day. It was firmly locked-on upto 1.3 leptons OT: what's the more hardcore version of that masser called? Mate being loaned one over weekend. He previously had the model you refer to. Will let you know what the hardcore one is like?'or maybe that IS the mc?

Phooey said: I reckon mine is coked. Couldn't shake a Granturismo S MC-shift off my tail the other day. It was firmly locked-on upto 1.3 leptons Are you still hankering after a Turbo?

tomw2000 said: Phooey said: I reckon mine is coked. Couldn't shake a Granturismo S MC-shift off my tail the other day. It was firmly locked-on upto 1.3 leptons OT: what's the more hardcore version of that masser called? Mate being loaned one over weekend. He previously had the model you refer to. Will let you know what the hardcore one is like?'or maybe that IS the mc? MC Stradale

JLJ said: Phooey said: JLJ said: Phooey said: I reckon mine is coked. Couldn't shake a Granturismo S MC-shift off my tail the other day. It was firmly locked-on upto 1.3 leptons That is worrying. A friend has one, a beautiful car and an exquisite noise. My 997tt absolutely slaughters his Granturismo S, even my 360 is quicker. A C2S should pull away from a Granturismo, albeit slowly. I had a C2S (gen 2) stay with me in the 360, was only a short blast, but seemed to be just as quick. Are you sure it was the newer 4.7 and not the 4.2? I've driven said car (my mates), and it really is a quick piece. Supposed to be 440bhp... but i swear it's pushing 500, maybe more. Just feels extremely rapid for a near-on 2 tonne vehicle. We had a few good runs, and the Mazzer was glued to my ass. I'm sure it's the same engine from the 430, just *supposedly* downtuned?? In all honesty, i expected to slightly pull away from him. Feckin coked. Must be It's a 4.7 'S'. Said friend is a little 'light in the loafers' and isn't the most aggressive guy behind the wheel. Having said that, the 360 definately gets off the line much better than the Maser. The 997tt is out and out a lot faster, regardless. I shall try and get a drive of the Maser this weekend as I'll be seeing him, I shall report back! Not difficult to understand a 440bhp car staying with a 911 GTS or a C2S gen2 staying with a 360, I find you need a lot more power and torque to really show a meaningful difference on the road esp when your starting speed is say 40-60 mph. From a standing start the 911 should have a good advantage due to weight and traction but thats not really real world driving. I've had Vantages and e92 M3's keep up with my C2S but with similiar power and torque I'd fully expect them to.

As far as this coking issue is concerned, I cannot understand (if it is happening) why after the engine has been on the market for nearly 3 years that there isn't one published example of a coked gen2 911 engine? The Americans are pretty hot on this stuff (over on rennlist) lots of complaints about oil usage but no evidence of coking. But again as many people say their cars don't use oil that complain about oil usage. After 3 years and with thousands of cars delivered I think the "absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence" arguement is wearing a bit thin. I do have a dog in this fight, and therefore would love some evidence gents (you know who you are)

Wills2 said: JLJ said: Phooey said: JLJ said: Phooey said: I reckon mine is coked. Couldn't shake a Granturismo S MC-shift off my tail the other day. It was firmly locked-on upto 1.3 leptons That is worrying. A friend has one, a beautiful car and an exquisite noise. My 997tt absolutely slaughters his Granturismo S, even my 360 is quicker. A C2S should pull away from a Granturismo, albeit slowly. I had a C2S (gen 2) stay with me in the 360, was only a short blast, but seemed to be just as quick. Are you sure it was the newer 4.7 and not the 4.2? I've driven said car (my mates), and it really is a quick piece. Supposed to be 440bhp... but i swear it's pushing 500, maybe more. Just feels extremely rapid for a near-on 2 tonne vehicle. We had a few good runs, and the Mazzer was glued to my ass. I'm sure it's the same engine from the 430, just *supposedly* downtuned?? In all honesty, i expected to slightly pull away from him. Feckin coked. Must be It's a 4.7 'S'. Said friend is a little 'light in the loafers' and isn't the most aggressive guy behind the wheel. Having said that, the 360 definately gets off the line much better than the Maser. The 997tt is out and out a lot faster, regardless. I shall try and get a drive of the Maser this weekend as I'll be seeing him, I shall report back! Not difficult to understand a 440bhp car staying with a 911 GTS or a C2S gen2 staying with a 360, I find you need a lot more power and torque to really show a meaningful difference on the road esp from say 40-60 mph. From a standing start the 911 should have a good advantage due to weight and traction but thats not really real world driving. I've had Vantages and e92 M3's keep up with my C2S but with similiar power and torque I'd fully expect them to. Very true, there usually has to be a fair amount of power differential to 'pull away' from another performance car. However, the 997tt with only 40bhp difference, pulls cleanly away from the Granturismo S as it does from my (80bhp down) 360. As previously said, I don't believe my friend is getting the most from the Maser, so could conceive of it keeping with the 360 or a C2S if driven 'properly'. This discussion really brings home just how effective the 480bhp is in the 997tt. The 911 turbo has always punched above it's weight. The new 997tt S with a mere 530bhp is right up there with much higher powered super cars in terms of sheer pace. Stuttgart ponies really do pull harder than most

JLJ said: Wills2 said: JLJ said: Phooey said: JLJ said: Phooey said: I reckon mine is coked. Couldn't shake a Granturismo S MC-shift off my tail the other day. It was firmly locked-on upto 1.3 leptons That is worrying. A friend has one, a beautiful car and an exquisite noise. My 997tt absolutely slaughters his Granturismo S, even my 360 is quicker. A C2S should pull away from a Granturismo, albeit slowly. I had a C2S (gen 2) stay with me in the 360, was only a short blast, but seemed to be just as quick. Are you sure it was the newer 4.7 and not the 4.2? I've driven said car (my mates), and it really is a quick piece. Supposed to be 440bhp... but i swear it's pushing 500, maybe more. Just feels extremely rapid for a near-on 2 tonne vehicle. We had a few good runs, and the Mazzer was glued to my ass. I'm sure it's the same engine from the 430, just *supposedly* downtuned?? In all honesty, i expected to slightly pull away from him. Feckin coked. Must be It's a 4.7 'S'. Said friend is a little 'light in the loafers' and isn't the most aggressive guy behind the wheel. Having said that, the 360 definately gets off the line much better than the Maser. The 997tt is out and out a lot faster, regardless. I shall try and get a drive of the Maser this weekend as I'll be seeing him, I shall report back! Not difficult to understand a 440bhp car staying with a 911 GTS or a C2S gen2 staying with a 360, I find you need a lot more power and torque to really show a meaningful difference on the road esp from say 40-60 mph. From a standing start the 911 should have a good advantage due to weight and traction but thats not really real world driving. I've had Vantages and e92 M3's keep up with my C2S but with similiar power and torque I'd fully expect them to. Very true, there usually has to be a fair amount of power differential to 'pull away' from another performance car. However, the 997tt with only 40bhp difference, pulls cleanly away from the Granturismo S as it does from my (80bhp down) 360. It's the torque thats the killer punch of the TT. 40bhp more than the Maserati but 120ft/lb more torque, thats like having another engine! As someone once said power sells cars but torque wins races... Edited by Wills2 on Saturday 7th May 11:04

Wills2 said: From a standing start the 911 should have a good advantage due to weight and traction but thats not really real world driving. Thing is i reckon in the real world, auto's are so much quicker. Trying to get each gear change spot on in a manual is an art in itself (one i'm sure i haven't yet mastered admittedly), whereas in an auto, every run is upto optimum performance. So in that i reckon I or any average driver in a manual would be hard pushed (or lucky) to pull away from any auto car with equivalent power - regardless of power-to-weight ratio. The book times mean nothing in the real world. IYNWIM I have driven this Mazzer, and it is very very quick for a 2 tonne machine Tom - Mc Stradale Martian O - I will NOT have a turbo. untill gen2 PDK's are £75 - £80k

Phooey said: ....Martian O - I will NOT have a turbo. untill gen2 PDK's are £75 - £80k Pooey, you don't really want a PDK, surely? They're great at 8/10ths but sheite when pressing on.

Phooey said: Wills2 said: From a standing start the 911 should have a good advantage due to weight and traction but thats not really real world driving. Thing is i reckon in the real world, auto's are so much quicker. Trying to get each gear change spot on in a manual is an art in itself (one i'm sure i haven't yet mastered admittedly), whereas in an auto, every run is upto optimum performance. So in that i reckon I or any average driver in a manual would be hard pushed (or lucky) to pull away from any auto car with equivalent power - regardless of power-to-weight ratio. The book times mean nothing in the real world. IYNWIM I have driven this Mazzer, and it is very very quick for a 2 tonne machine Tom - Mc Stradale Martian O - I will NOT have a turbo. untill gen2 PDK's are £75 - £80k I'm with you on that, my gear changes aren't the best either! But a manual is so much more enjoyable, I've always thought autos are faster as all you have to do is plant your right foot in any given situation. I guess my point ref off the line was PDK 911 GTS vs MC GT the 911 would pull away up to 60-70mph but once at 60-70mph, there would be nothing in it, as you have experienced. I wonder if Maserati understate the power output to make sure they don't upset their friends at Ferrari?

Wills2 said: I guess my point ref off the line was PDK 911 GTS vs MC GT the 911 would pull away up to 60-70mph but once at 60-70mph, there would be nothing in it, as you have experienced. Agree on the PDK. I had a GTS PDK for a few days and it really did feel the quicker car (than my manual GTS). I've not driven anything that moves off the traffic lights like that PDK, and that was just in standard setting WITHOUT using 'launch-control'. Wills2 said: I wonder if Maserati understate the power output to make sure they don't upset their friends at Ferrari? You wouldn't be the first to say this. And i don't think you'll be the last either Martian O said: Pooey, you don't really want a PDK, surely? They're great at 8/10ths but sheite when pressing on. I would deffo consider a PDK mate. My first initial test (2-3 hours) was not enough to learn how the PDK thinks/operates. I spent 6 days and probably at least 300 miles with 2 997 PDK's. I absolutely fell for the box, it was a pleasure to drive slow, and fast. I admittedly didn't have it in 'Sport-Plus' for long - this i found held onto the gear for too long, and i was constantly over-riding it manually (changing up) then having to wait for it to adjust back to 'auto'. I found the best mode was to have it in 'Sport' (dampers set to 'Normal'), just to sharpen the throttle a little. Leaving 'Sport' off altogether also made for a satisfying ride/drive, with the next cog only a small press of the accelerator pedal. I didn't even bother with using the paddles - i wasn't on track, and the gearbox in 'auto' can do a much better job than i can

Phooey said: I would deffo consider a PDK... Would you go PDK or manual next time then?

whoami said: MC Stradale That's the chap. Will give my thoughts next week

911p said: Phooey said: I would deffo consider a PDK... Would you go PDK or manual next time then? Deffo PDK. I don't use the car for track - all i do is rip the countryside up a bit and pop here and there, and PDK is more than capable of getting me from A-B quicker than my manual. tbh, i have fallen out of love for the manual gearbox on my GTS. From day 1 (3 miles on the clock) it has suffered clutch judder. It was found to be faulty - had marks on the flywheel - nothing to do with abuse. I had a new clutch and flywheel. It still judders. 200 miles after the NEW clutch i also encountered the clutch pedal not fully releasing on a spirited start. Zip will back me up on this one. Changing gear once moving is fine... very very refined and direct, but stop-start moving in traffic is not good. The box on my GT3 was unrefined when cold (stiff and slightly notchy) but when warm.... the best manual stick i have ever used to swap cogs with :bliss:

Slightly off topic, but the Gen1 997 has just been Awarded the mantle of usa's most reliable car according to a 2011 survey of 2007/8 cars carried out by JD Power

My Turbo 'box/clutch is fine. You know you want a Turbo!

Martian O said: My Turbo 'box/clutch is fine. ...and that's what gets my goat. Do you not even get a LITTLE judder when creeping with low revs?

I've had clutch judder and the burning smell of a clutch that won't fully release on a sprited step off myself, both went away as the miles went on. Can I ask Phooey, do you regret changing?

Wills2 said: I've had clutch judder and the burning smell of a clutch that won't fully realise on a sprited step off myself, both went away as the miles went on. Can I ask Phooey, do you regret changing? I know that smell VERY well. I only dialled up approx 3-4k rpm and dropped the clutch. Was trying to get away from Zip in his turbo. Instead i ended up stranded on the spot, smelling of fish, and stuck behind a Fiat Multipla! No. I don't regret changing. I never got to use the GT3 enough unfortunately. I DO miss it occasionally though, especially when you get an hour of free time and a nice dry day

Phooey said: Martian O said: My Turbo 'box/clutch is fine. ...and that's what gets my goat. Do you not even get a LITTLE judder when creeping with low revs? Nope, nothing at all.

Phooey said: Wills2 said: I've had clutch judder and the burning smell of a clutch that won't fully realise on a sprited step off myself, both went away as the miles went on. Can I ask Phooey, do you regret changing? I know that smell VERY well. I only dialled up approx 3-4k rpm and dropped the clutch. Was trying to get away from Zip in his turbo. Instead i ended up stranded on the spot, smelling of fish, and stuck behind a Fiat Multipla! No. I don't regret changing. I never got to use the GT3 enough unfortunately. I DO miss it occasionally though, especially when you get an hour of free time and a nice dry day Ah well you can't have everything! As for the judder and sticking clutch, as I said it happened to me when my car was new (I guess we have the same spec clutch and gearbox) The judder does go with miles, and so does the sticky clutch. (well thats my experience)

Wills2 said: The judder does go with miles, and so does the sticky clutch. (well thats my experience) Hope so. Cheers Might be my OCD, but does make you wonder if the gen2 suffers with this

Phooey said: Hope so. Cheers Might be my OCD, but does make you wonder if the gen2 suffers with this Stop it! We've got enough trouble with the coking issue, nevermind clutch judder.

[Image-only or quote-only post; no author-written text.] https://www.pistonheads.com/inc/images/hehe.gif

Phooey said: I know that smell VERY well. I only dialled up approx 3-4k rpm and dropped the clutch. Was trying to get away from Zip in his turbo. Instead i ended up stranded on the spot, smelling of fish, and stuck behind a Fiat Multipla! FWIW I know that smell too! I had the sticky clutch thing going on but it's gone now

tomw2000 said: That's the chap. Will give my thoughts next week OT: ok so I spent some time in the maser stradale this weekend. Even Managed to wangle a decent drive. On iPhone now so won't do massive review. But very impressive noise in Race mode. Solid car. And the auto box was better than I imagined. It's not double clutch but changes gear well enough. Any questions ask away.

tomw2000 said: That's the chap. Will give my thoughts next week OT: ok so I spent some time in the maser stradale this weekend. Even Managed to wangle a decent drive. On iPhone now so won't do massive review. But very impressive noise in Race mode. Solid car. And the auto box was better than I imagined. It's not double clutch but changes gear well enough. Any questions ask away.

tomw2000 said: OT: ok so I spent some time in the maser stradale this weekend. Even Managed to wangle a decent drive. On iPhone now so won't do massive review. But very impressive noise in Race mode. Solid car. And the auto box was better than I imagined. It's not double clutch but changes gear well enough. Any questions ask away. They look a big car so was it easy to hustle along a B road like a 911? or was it more a loud Grand Tourer than B road sports car?

Wills2 said: They look a big car so was it easy to hustle along a B road like a 911? or was it more a loud Grand Tourer than B road sports car? It did feel a bit big to me and it felt wrong hustling along b-roads. But it was good at the job, did feel very rapid, though not sure the figs are much different to my own C2S. So more very loud (in race mode) GT really as you say. Very grateful to get a spin in it. The noise is very impressive - and I can see thats all the 'occasion' some would need to justify buying it.

tomw2000 said: It did feel a bit big to me and it felt wrong hustling along b-roads. But it was good at the job, did feel very rapid, though not sure the figs are much different to my own C2S. So more very loud (in race mode) GT really as you say. Very grateful to get a spin in it. The noise is very impressive - and I can see thats all the 'occasion' some would need to justify buying it. Occasion, that's the word, I feel that's the thing missing from the 911 that sense of occasion you get from the Italians. I bet it was a lovely noise.

Apologies for the OT post The following refers to the new Gen-2 DFI Cayman S' and not the DFI 997 (don't personally know the difference aside capacity/bore/stroke) but as I'm also interested in knowing some answers to MTR's original question (remember what it was kids? ) I thought the following might be interesting, it's from the following thread http://www.planet-9.com/cayman-interseries/39744-w... posted by one of the guys running the USA-based Cayman Interseries Championship http://www.napletonmotorsports.com/ and http://www.caymaninterseries.org/ said: We have learned that the new engine is perfect. No oiling issues, overheating, or bearing failures. Power steering failures are non exsistint since the fluid is cooled thru the engine cooler. No ABS issues whatsoever. We have over 30K track miles on the cars now with several 3 and 4 hour enduros,98 degree race weekends,rain you name it. They have performed without a "hiccup" said: We have not had a problem with carbon build up as you can imagine. These cars are run constanly at high RPM not like a Cayenne. We do run some "secret sauce" in the fuel to keep the high pressure pumps lubed,other than that it's all normal. The power steering is an all new design said: Please keep in mind that the Interseries cars are STOCK said: As of now we have delivered 28 Cayman Interseries race cars. If you add up all the mileage from the cars it's over 60,000 RACE MILES!!!! Below is the total engines replaced so far; Didn't see any right??? How about transmissions replaced??? Well we did have to change 1 trans,but ONLY because of a misaligned shifter cable and it was causing a notchy 2nd gear downshift.The rest have been perfect. We have not had any power steering issues or engine over heating. We have replaced some wheel bearings and a fuel pump...other than normal maintenance the cars have been trouble free. We have moved to a "Guard" limited slip and also developed a special 6 piston caliper brake package from "StopTech" along with our own series "flash" for the ECU that was necessary for the ABS/PSM balance. said: We have not be using anything different than what you would use in normal good track prep. SRF brake fluid, Mobil1 Delvac trans oil and Mobile1 engine oil. We do add a external oil pump with a cooler for the trans and a third radiator for the engine. As for the Diff,we needed more grip than what the factory diff offered considering the type of tires and the suspension we are using. said: As of 12/15/2010, we have delivered 40 cars with about 100,000+ race miles combined...........!!!!!!! Lee Davis, Ryan Eversley and Keith Carroll just won their class {3rd overall} in the 8 hour NASA race last week at Road Atlanta and never changed a thing during the race except tires. We have run several 4 hour races,but this was the longest so far for the cars...we were impressed!!! The engines have been extremely reliable with out any issues at all. We did have a few flywheel failures, so for 2011 we are going to change the rule to allow single mass units. We have not made a choice as to which type we will allow in the rules. Sachs has a new package with a light steel flywheel which might be the way to go. We have had some axle issues due to heat build-up and the angles we run the cars. We change them out about every 2500 -3k miles just as a precaution Under heavy use the shift cables tend to get out of adjustment,so as a matter of practice we have been changing them out as well. The transmissions have been flawless,but they do run hot so it is important to change the fluid frequently. We use "Mobile1 Delvac" We have switched the diffs to the "Guard" unit with some tinkering of the ramps. The ABS is very sensitive and we have developed a ECU program that works very well with the "StopTech" brakes and "Performace Friction" pads that have been developed for the Interseries cars. Castrol SRF is a must. All the other demons that were in the "Gen1" cars are non-existint. All in all the cars are very low maintenance and have shown themselves to be reliable, fast and fun. said: We have found that under extreme racing conditions and with the type of tires and suspension we have been using in the "Cayman Interseries" cars we were not able to keep the tires from spinning/slip in the corners. We did experiment with changing/modifing the diff clutch discs. However, by changing to the "Guard" diff the performance has been outstanding without ANY abnormal wear or malfunctions. Matt has a great product. In my opinion the stock diff is perfect for a street or lightly modified car,but if you are going racing or have a track only car, then you will probably want to change it. The power steering fluid is cooled by the stock oil/water heat exchanger which also cools the engine oil. We have had ZERO issues with this system Shame they didn't test sitting in traffic for an hour and then hooning it like a loon for twenty mins before a further traffic jam stint still, sounds pretty positive stuff...

I wonder if they have actually looked at the bores of any of those engines?

///ajd said: bcnrml said: It is an issue and it does exist. This is what caused my misunderstanding, but I can see in your above post that you are, to an extent, trying to keep your fear over the coking issue in perspective. Fear? Over the engine of a car? That's like suggesting I fear crossing the road! Or getting on a plane as often as I once had to.... I don't understand why you think (or thought) DFI engines don't have a coking issue though. But that's a rhetorical question and the answer's ultimately your business - until (and if) you start declaring there isn't an issue and encouraging everyone to do as others did over the 996 and 997 engine issues (which at one stage not so long ago couldn't possibly have existed, the 997 one especially non-existent because of all of Porsche's virtues as a company!).

bcnrml said: ///ajd said: bcnrml said: It is an issue and it does exist. This is what caused my misunderstanding, but I can see in your above post that you are, to an extent, trying to keep your fear over the coking issue in perspective. Fear? Over the engine of a car? That's like suggesting I fear crossing the road! Or getting on a plane as often as I once had to.... I don't understand why you think (or thought) DFI engines don't have a coking issue though. But that's a rhetorical question and the answer's ultimately your business - until (and if) you start declaring there isn't an issue and encouraging everyone to do as others did over the 996 and 997 engine issues (which at one stage not so long ago couldn't possibly have existed, the 997 one especially non-existent because of all of Porsche's virtues as a company!). I never said they don't have a coking issue - just that the potential issue shouldn't be assumed (at the moment) to be as serious as e.g. the ims and other issues - which I've always considered (anecdotally) seriously off putting. Do you actually like porsches - I'm a bit confused as to your motivations for your style of posting? Did you have 996 that blew up? If so I could understand your bitterness.

JLJ said: That is worrying. A friend has one, a beautiful car and an exquisite noise. My 997tt absolutely slaughters his Granturismo S, even my 360 is quicker. A C2S should pull away from a Granturismo, albeit slowly. I had a C2S (gen 2) stay with me in the 360, was only a short blast, but seemed to be just as quick. I would say that a gen2 C2S would be quicker than a 360, a 4s is just as quick. But i would then say that the engine in the Ferrari is more reliable, who would have thought that back in the late eighties when Porsches where the unbreakable sports car!

///ajd said: bcnrml said: ///ajd said: bcnrml said: It is an issue and it does exist. This is what caused my misunderstanding, but I can see in your above post that you are, to an extent, trying to keep your fear over the coking issue in perspective. Fear? Over the engine of a car? That's like suggesting I fear crossing the road! Or getting on a plane as often as I once had to.... I don't understand why you think (or thought) DFI engines don't have a coking issue though. But that's a rhetorical question and the answer's ultimately your business - until (and if) you start declaring there isn't an issue and encouraging everyone to do as others did over the 996 and 997 engine issues (which at one stage not so long ago couldn't possibly have existed, the 997 one especially non-existent because of all of Porsche's virtues as a company!). I never said they don't have a coking issue - just that the potential issue shouldn't be assumed (at the moment) to be as serious as e.g. the ims and other issues - which I've always considered (anecdotally) seriously off putting. Do you actually like porsches - I'm a bit confused as to your motivations for your style of posting? Did you have 996 that blew up? If so I could understand your bitterness. Haven't had a laugh like this since people like the now very quiet bennno, kva and soovy insisted on similar things! You confess to not understanding a person's motives or communication style and then take a negative view of that which you don't understand? You assume far too much. Your text (as I've emobldened) is as relevant and mature as the stuff being bandied around by drmark et al (including the three named above) when they shouted down everyone who said Porsche engines had a problem. Some were shouting very loudly in 2004-2005 when I first lurked! Now if you'd read enough of the first few pages and the last five-ten of Tonikaram's sticky, you'd probably learn the answers to your questions of me. You should, at the very least, learn - from a respected Indie on here - that there are up to 16 modes of failure for the outgoing engine. I didn't state that. Others did. Meanwhile, I haven't heard a word of apology or any humility from any of you who play(ed) this down with your line of reasoning. Now you're trotting out the usual rubbish (distracted by personal stuff, etc). The emotive, usually infantile and personal stuff has almost entirely come from those claiming the problem is overstated or doesn't exist. So, ajd, I wish you saludos. I shall not be responding to your posts in future - y'see, I gave you the benefit of the doubt, but your last two posts show that was an error on my part! I'm happy to quit now, and if you don't understand why, it doesn't matter.

cayman-black said: But i would then say that the engine in the Ferrari is more reliable, who would have thought that back in the late eighties when Porsches where the unbreakable sports car! What makes you say that? I haven't heard of any gen2 engine failures, do you have experience of a failed gen2 engine?

bcnrml said: ///ajd said: bcnrml said: ///ajd said: bcnrml said: It is an issue and it does exist. This is what caused my misunderstanding, but I can see in your above post that you are, to an extent, trying to keep your fear over the coking issue in perspective. Fear? Over the engine of a car? That's like suggesting I fear crossing the road! Or getting on a plane as often as I once had to.... I don't understand why you think (or thought) DFI engines don't have a coking issue though. But that's a rhetorical question and the answer's ultimately your business - until (and if) you start declaring there isn't an issue and encouraging everyone to do as others did over the 996 and 997 engine issues (which at one stage not so long ago couldn't possibly have existed, the 997 one especially non-existent because of all of Porsche's virtues as a company!). I never said they don't have a coking issue - just that the potential issue shouldn't be assumed (at the moment) to be as serious as e.g. the ims and other issues - which I've always considered (anecdotally) seriously off putting. Do you actually like porsches - I'm a bit confused as to your motivations for your style of posting? Did you have 996 that blew up? If so I could understand your bitterness. Haven't had a laugh like this since people like the now very quiet bennno, kva and soovy insisted on similar things! You confess to not understanding a person's motives or communication style and then take a negative view of that which you don't understand? You assume far too much. Your text (as I've emobldened) is as relevant and mature as the stuff being bandied around by drmark et al (including the three named above) when they shouted down everyone who said Porsche engines had a problem. Some were shouting very loudly in 2004-2005 when I first lurked! Now if you'd read enough of the first few pages and the last five-ten of Tonikaram's sticky, you'd probably learn the answers to your questions of me. You should, at the very least, learn - from a respected Indie on here - that there are up to 16 modes of failure for the outgoing engine. I didn't state that. Others did. Meanwhile, I haven't heard a word of apology or any humility from any of you who play(ed) this down with your line of reasoning. Now you're trotting out the usual rubbish (distracted by personal stuff, etc). The emotive, usually infantile and personal stuff has almost entirely come from those claiming the problem is overstated or doesn't exist. So, ajd, I wish you saludos. I shall not be responding to your posts in future - y'see, I gave you the benefit of the doubt, but your last two posts show that was an error on my part! I'm happy to quit now, and if you don't understand why, it doesn't matter. ?? I just asked why you feel so strongly about the issue? I wasn't being rude by saying you sound bitter. I was just asking why. I have a look in the posts. I've never doubted the engines issues are real fwiw.

bcnrml thank you for your informative post, you appear to be an expert in this topic(not taking mick;)

Wills2 said: What makes you say that? I haven't heard of any gen2 engine failures, do you have experience of a failed gen2 engine? Wills2, sorry i was talking about 996/997 cars. bcnrml talks the facts. For some the truth seems too hurt.

Rimkah and cayman-black, thanks for your comments.

cayman-black said: Wills2 said: What makes you say that? I haven't heard of any gen2 engine failures, do you have experience of a failed gen2 engine? Wills2, sorry i was talking about 996/997 cars. bcnrml talks the facts. For some the truth seems too hurt. Ah I see, as for the facts bcnrml has no more idea than me about coking issues in the 997.2 DFI engines he hasn't seen it and neither have I. Facts are actually in short supply.

bcnrml said: ///ajd said: bcnrml said: ///ajd said: bcnrml said: It is an issue and it does exist. This is what caused my misunderstanding, but I can see in your above post that you are, to an extent, trying to keep your fear over the coking issue in perspective. Fear? Over the engine of a car? That's like suggesting I fear crossing the road! Or getting on a plane as often as I once had to.... I don't understand why you think (or thought) DFI engines don't have a coking issue though. But that's a rhetorical question and the answer's ultimately your business - until (and if) you start declaring there isn't an issue and encouraging everyone to do as others did over the 996 and 997 engine issues (which at one stage not so long ago couldn't possibly have existed, the 997 one especially non-existent because of all of Porsche's virtues as a company!). I never said they don't have a coking issue - just that the potential issue shouldn't be assumed (at the moment) to be as serious as e.g. the ims and other issues - which I've always considered (anecdotally) seriously off putting. Do you actually like porsches - I'm a bit confused as to your motivations for your style of posting? Did you have 996 that blew up? If so I could understand your bitterness. Haven't had a laugh like this since people like the now very quiet bennno, kva and soovy insisted on similar things! You confess to not understanding a person's motives or communication style and then take a negative view of that which you don't understand? You assume far too much. Your text (as I've emobldened) is as relevant and mature as the stuff being bandied around by drmark et al (including the three named above) when they shouted down everyone who said Porsche engines had a problem. Some were shouting very loudly in 2004-2005 when I first lurked! Now if you'd read enough of the first few pages and the last five-ten of Tonikaram's sticky, you'd probably learn the answers to your questions of me. You should, at the very least, learn - from a respected Indie on here - that there are up to 16 modes of failure for the outgoing engine. I didn't state that. Others did. Meanwhile, I haven't heard a word of apology or any humility from any of you who play(ed) this down with your line of reasoning. Now you're trotting out the usual rubbish (distracted by personal stuff, etc). The emotive, usually infantile and personal stuff has almost entirely come from those claiming the problem is overstated or doesn't exist. So, ajd, I wish you saludos. I shall not be responding to your posts in future - y'see, I gave you the benefit of the doubt, but your last two posts show that was an error on my part! I'm happy to quit now, and if you don't understand why, it doesn't matter. OK, now I've read some of the thread you suggested. I haven't learnt much about your motivations, but... Wow. What an attitude you have. Even being obnoxious & rude to poor old helpful Hartech, and somehow trying to take on the role of moral guardian of the thread with simply breathtaking arrogance. You seem to be trying to do the same here.... I don't understand the secrecy though over your interest? Why won't you admit your interest? Are you interested in owning a Porsche xxx/996/997/991 at some point, or have you had bad experiences of previous ownership that make you so angry & frustrated? I suspect given your previous form you will refuse to answer this question. What does that say about you? I've said it in nearly every post on here - but I have never doubted that the 996/997 engine issues are real. I'm not sure why you keep implying I am some sort of non-believer? Does your arrogance impede your basic comprehension skills?

I thought I would give my 2.5 year old thread a bit of a bump to see if anythings changed? These engines have now served for circa 5 years and reliability is looking good. So, can we truly say that Porsche are fully back to making quality engines again?

Seems the clairvoyants and naysayers have yet to be proved right. Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty? Or evidence based practice? Edited by drmark on Monday 30th December 22:10

Ian_UK1 said: Thanks for the compliment. A Doctor who obviously hasn't a clue what paranoia means! Let me educate you. Paranoia - "a mental disorder characterized by systematized delusions". Kindly explain to me how the simple, scientific understanding of the inevitable consequences of a known type of mechanical system can be systematized delusion? Denying the simple, well-understood science is delusional, not accepting it and trying to quantify its effects. The reason I didn't get the car scoped is because my local independent didn't have a borescope that we could get pictures from. It has a tiny 2" screen that is too small and also too dim to photograph. And of course I daren't say on here that I've seen an issue then not put pics up to 'prove' it. I'd obviously have been lying and spreading unfounded myths about cars that in reality are completely perfect in every way. There you go - no paranoia here! And since the thread has been ressurected, may I point out that paranoia is also defined as "intense fear or suspicion - often unfounded". Quod erat demonstrandum. And I am not trying to be nasty, just couldn't resist Edited by drmark on Monday 30th December 22:36

anonymous said: [redacted] This is exactly my frustration! It would have cost very little to sort the fundamental design issues, and they just said 'f k it' for 10 years! I dont get it, and never will.

I think five years of the 9A1 and it's looking good. There are some fairly high milers out there and they seem to be coping. Heard of a very few that needed engine out work and mine had a replacement lump. Seems pretty good. PDK not failing in any numbers either. Let's try again in a couple more years.

anonymous said: [redacted] Aye, but you are still innocent until proven guilty even if you have form. And the concerns about coking were new and based on pure speculation - there had been not a single recorded case. And I don't think there has been one since. All I suggested was that we stopped debating an issue that wasn't yet an issue. Is that so daft?

I refuse to pass comment on this thread as I'm not renewing the warranty on mine this year.

Ekona said: I refuse to pass comment on this thread as I'm not renewing the warranty on mine this year. Fail. However, the omens seem to suggest there are very few gremlins with the DFi engines. Fingers crossed...

I've run mine for 2 1/2 years and 25k miles (now on 33k) all in warranty, but the only work the cars had is a new tail light as one filled with water to a point where it failed. Had the fuel pump recall, but it's been a totally reliable daily. The 3 years of warranty extension has been a waste of money for me. Other than piece of mind that is. I will not be renewing it in May next year, but then I'll be trading it for a 991 soon after. Mines had routine servicing and a new battery. No other costs. Lots of scare mongering. Personally I'd now take the risk (as I have the ability to fund major work if god forbid something happened). If you don't, don't buy an expensive car ( or buy the warranty)

Just traded up to a GEN 2s, my third 911, did 30,000 miles in an 03 C4S and 12,000 miles in an immaculate 997 gen1 C2S with no engine issues whatever except ignition coil replacement on C4S, also have 2 yrs OPC warranty on new car for peace of mind but will be surprised if I need it

It would be interesting to hear from someone who has covered a lot of miles in a direct injection car, any issues etc. A quick look on autotrader showed cars on 50,000 miles.

projectgt said: It would be interesting to hear from someone who has covered a lot of miles in a direct injection car, any issues etc. A quick look on autotrader showed cars on 50,000 miles. I'm sure that if there had been any real issues we would have heard. What was a relatively small number of failures with the Gen1 cars got a huge billing on the internet. Almost total silence on the DFI engines can only be good news, unless there's some high mileage issue waiting to happen as you say. I suppose all engines with high mileage will have problems at some point or other but there does not seem to be anything endemic so far with the DFI engines.

projectgt said: It would be interesting to hear from someone who has covered a lot of miles in a direct injection car, any issues etc. A quick look on autotrader showed cars on 50,000 miles. Mine's done 42K now, and I've had zero issues with the engine at all. I've had the fuel pump replaced under the recall, but that's as close as I've got to an actual fault. It still pulls as strong as it's ever done, and I've no reason to believe that there's anything nefarious going on in there.

projectgt said: It would be interesting to hear from someone who has covered a lot of miles in a direct injection car, any issues etc. A quick look on autotrader showed cars on 50,000 miles. I did over 50,000 miles in my Gen2 C2S, the only engine related issues were a solenoid and the recall on the fuel pump.

burman said: Just traded up to a GEN 2s, my third 911, did 30,000 miles in an 03 C4S and 12,000 miles in an immaculate 997 gen1 C2S with no engine issues whatever except ignition coil replacement on C4S, also have 2 yrs OPC warranty on new car for peace of mind but will be surprised if I need it I'm a year into my gen 2 C2S and am about to invoke the OPC warranty for a minor coolant leak - which does however require considerable labour. No other engine related issues @ 22k miles but I've used the warranty for a central locking issue and having both rear lights replaced as they filled with water. Corrosion of the wheels wasn't covered but they did do a goodwill refurb (however badly).

My Gen 2 T4S is coming up to 50k miles although I've only done the last 5k. Next time it's at OPC I will ask if it's had any specific engine warranty work. During my 5k miles I've had an exhaust oxygen sensor go (but this may have been self-inflicted by driving through a large puddle!). Mine does use its Mobil 1. I would say 0.25l per 1000 miles which worries me, but is within spec. It worries me because others say theirs don't use a drop between services. No evidence of a leak on the driveway.

Mine didn't use any oil, but plenty of people suffer from oil useage so I'd say it's normalish.

On the C2S my first engine could drink a litre in well under a 1000 miles. The new engine uses virtually none. The C4S on original engine just doesn't use oil. Whether this is running-in, engine tolerances or something else I don't know.

I've covered over 39,000 miles in my Gen2 997 C2 (it's got 53,000 on the clock) and the issues this far have been the HPF pump under warranty, a lambda sensor and a failed door lock. It does drink oil though - probably 0.5l every 1,000 miles - and with the long service intervals I reckon it will have had the oil replaced completely in between services with the regular top-ups. As to whether to renew the Porsche warranty this year - that's a very good question which I haven't yet decided on...

Done roughly 5000 miles in each of 4 gen2s.... 2xC2s C4s Targa and 9000 miles in a GTS none of which have shown any excessive oil consumption only minor topping up. No track use only varied partly spirited A and B road driving. This wide variation in oil consumption others have posted is puzzling... My cars have all been PDK. There is a strong suggestion that the way a car is run in could well determine how good the engine is and degree of oil consumption later in its life. Clearly excessive revs when new is not advisable but "mollycoddling" the engine is equally detrimental and labouring it is probably the worst case scenario. Because PDK is more "nanny state" as compared to "manuel", it is impossible to labour the engine. Could the majority of the "oil burners" perhaps be "manuel" transmission the engines of which could have been laboured when new...........

av185 said: Could the majority of the "oil burners" perhaps be "manuel" transmission the engines of which could have been laboured when new........... qué?

Wills2 said: av185 said: Could the majority of the "oil burners" perhaps be "manuel" transmission the engines of which could have been laboured when new........... qué?

av185 said: Could the majority of the "oil burners" perhaps be "manuel" transmission the engines of which could have been laboured when new........... Nope - mine is PDK! Magic mentioned tolerances earlier - you'd hope Porsche's were both close and consistent, so it is looking more like the initial running in. Under normal driving conditions is everyone's water temp at 80C and oil temp at 90C?

Do you think the gauges show accurate figures? Didn't show the correct water temp on earlier cars when checked against ODB port.

Wills2 said: Mine didn't use any oil, but plenty of people suffer from oil useage so I'd say it's normalish. My C2S (manual+SSK) had 13,000 on the clock when I bought it - to 16000 miles, it used oil at c.5000miles/litre. to 18500, it used the stuff at 4000miles/litre and, at 22000 miles, it's averaging 2100miles/litre - higher than I'd like but OPC assures me it's within spec of 1l/1000miles. What's changed? Such evidence as I have suggests that the car was pretty lightly worked by its first two owners - and there were no rev ranges showing on the DME report at purchase. Over the first couple of '000 miles I had the car, I was just getting used to it and wasn't giving it full welly, as evidenced by the 27-29mpg I was getting. After a full year-and-a-bit I've been learning to use more of the performance and my fuel consumption is down to 23-25mpg. It's perhaps therefore not surprising that it's now burning more oil. I've much more experience of high-performance engines in bikes than cars, where there's plenty of evidence that using them sensibly but hard from new results in lower oil burning as the miles rise, so wonder if the same is true of our Porsches?

Technomad said: Wills2 said: Mine didn't use any oil, but plenty of people suffer from oil useage so I'd say it's normalish. My C2S (manual+SSK) had 13,000 on the clock when I bought it - to 16000 miles, it used oil at c.5000miles/litre. to 18500, it used the stuff at 4000miles/litre and, at 22000 miles, it's averaging 2100miles/litre - higher than I'd like but OPC assures me it's within spec of 1l/1000miles. What's changed? Such evidence as I have suggests that the car was pretty lightly worked by its first two owners - and there were no rev ranges showing on the DME report at purchase. Over the first couple of '000 miles I had the car, I was just getting used to it and wasn't giving it full welly, as evidenced by the 27-29mpg I was getting. After a full year-and-a-bit I've been learning to use more of the performance and my fuel consumption is down to 23-25mpg. It's perhaps therefore not surprising that it's now burning more oil. I've much more experience of high-performance engines in bikes than cars, where there's plenty of evidence that using them sensibly but hard from new results in lower oil burning as the miles rise, so wonder if the same is true of our Porsches? Perhaps, I had mine from new so followed the "hard but fair" procedure, made sure the engine had plenty of load but didn't hang onto high revs for the first couple of K but still extended the engine. Porsche didn't recommend a running period on the gen2 so I followed what I thought was right. Mine had the SSK as well and I miss that gearbox so much.

So, with the prices of the earlier Gen 2s now being within "an engine rebuild" of the last Gen 1s (ie: ~£10k) does this mean its a good idea for me to consider a Gen 2? Man maths at its best!

RiccardoG said: So, with the prices of the earlier Gen 2s now being within "an engine rebuild" of the last Gen 1s (ie: ~£10k) does this mean its a good idea for me to consider a Gen 2? Man maths at its best! I think so.

Nice read on this thread.

RiccardoG said: So, with the prices of the earlier Gen 2s now being within "an engine rebuild" of the last Gen 1s (ie: ~£10k) does this mean its a good idea for me to consider a Gen 2? Man maths at its best! I did - same math used very happy with the outcome.

Ian_UK1 said: As for the machanical issues - yes the DFI engine seems to have cured all the previous generation's ills. Anecdotally, there's no tales of woe on forums across the world and technically, they addressed all the right parts of the engine. Below are some excerpts from the Porsche Technical manual about relevant changes to the new engines: Engine A totally redesigned generation of engines is used for the new 911 models. As on the previous model, these engines have a different displacement - a 3.6-litre flat-six engine is used on the 911 Carrera, while the 911 Carrera S has a 3.8 litre flat-six engine. Although the displacement is the same as on the previous models, the performance and torque have been increased significantly, while fuel consumption is reduced by approx. 15%. This was primarily achieved through the use of direct fuel injection (DFI), by reworking the intake and exhaust system and by improving the engine internally in order to reduce friction and drive losses. By reducing the oil pan height, it was possible to lower the installation position of the engines by approx. 10 mm, thereby lowering the vehicle’s centre of gravity and improving driving dynamics. Crankcase The new 911 models feature a two-part, vertically split crankcase with an integrated crankshaft thrust block. The advantage of this design is that smaller components can be used, while the separate bearing saddle with cast-in cast iron elements is no longer needed, thereby reducing the overall weight of the engine. The actual crankcase on the new 911 engines is made completely of an aluminiumsilicon alloy (ALUSIL). This procedure offers the following advantages: • With ALUSIL, the crankcase can be made from one cast, without cylinder sleeves and without having to coat the cylinder bores afterwards. • ALUSIL is an excellent heat conductor and thus allows high specific engine output values. • ALUSIL has excellent friction properties. Since the pistons and piston rings slide on the exposed silicon crystals, they have a low tendency to seize. • ALUSIL does not present any recycling problems because the crankcase does not include any foreign materials, e.g. cast-in cast iron cylinder sleeves. The listed advantages of the alloy are certainly important arguments in its favour. Indeed, the low-pressure chill-casting procedure, which has since proved to be the best solution by far for casting ALUSIL, is an important prerequisite for reliable, mass-produced crankcase cast parts. Cylinders are now connected differently in the cylinder-head cover area. The individual cylinders, which originally stood freely in the water jacket (open deck design), are now connected by a closed cylinder deck (closed deck design). The advantage of this design is high cylinder stability, particularly the cylinder shape (roundness and low cylinder deformation) over a wide load and temperature range. This has the added advantage of reducing friction and thus reducing fuel consumption. Even piston and piston-ring sealing has been improved as a result of the higher retention of roundness of the cylinders. The entry of oil from the crankcase into the combustion chambers and the entry of the fuel-air mixture from the combustion chambers into the crankcase is reduced. This both improves consumption and reduces performance- inhibiting overpressure caused by blow-by in the crankcase. Crankshaft/crankshaft bearings The drop-forged crankshaft runs in eight bearings and has twelve counterweights. Main bearing 4 is designed as a thrust bearing. Axial play is determined by two thrust plates, which are inserted at the left and right of the bearing. The main bearings are designed as plain bearings with a diameter of 63 mm. Main bearings 1/3/5/7/8 are smooth bearings, while main bearings 2/4/6 are grooved bearings. These grooved bearings supply oil to the lubrication points of the crankshaft bearings. The drive mechanism for the two drive chains for the camshafts and demandcontrolled oil pump is located on the pulley side. Piston cooling The piston crown temperature in the 911 Carrera engines is reduced by means of piston injection cooling. The spray nozzles are forced-fitted into the crankcase and cannot be replaced. To ensure the necessary engine oil pressure at low revs and high engine oil temperatures, these spray nozzles only open at a higher oil pressure. Chain drive Another special feature of the new generation of engines is that these engines no longer have an intermediate shaft. This drive shaft, which was fitted between the crankshaft and the camshafts on previous models, was required in order to reduce the transmission ratio and thus the dynamic forces of the timing chains. Through the use of new, high-performance timing chains, it was possible to simplify the drive mechanism for the camshafts in spite of higher revs, thereby reducing the weight of the engine significantly by removing the intermediate shaft. Together with an additional crankshaft bearing location, this allows greater stability and a significantly higher engine speed potential. Oil supply The oil supply in the new generation of engines has been essentially redesigned with the following objectives in mind: • To ensure the supply of oil even during very high lateral and axial acceleration • To reduce friction and drive losses The main differences between the new oil supply system and that used on previous models are as follows: • Additional oil extraction point in the cylinder head • Electronic demand-controlled oil pump • Additional watertight sheetmetal panel between crankcase and oil pan Compared with the previous models, the new 3.6 and 3.8-litre engines have not only one, but two extraction points in each cylinder head. In addition, the new 911 engines now have a total of 5 oil pumps instead of 3. These are located in the oil pan and are driven by a shared shaft. They include 4 extraction pumps for the cylinder heads (2 per cylinder head) and a new demand-controlled oil pressure pump. As you can see from the above, almost all the points that have been described by Hartech and others (and identified as potential weak points in the M96/7 engines) appear to have been totally redesigned. The exception, as it's not described in the technical manual (other than via a couple of diagrams) is the cooling system, so I have no way of knowing how the system is designed on the DFI motors or whether the idiosyncrasies of the previous generation engine are repeated. So... probably enough time has passed, plenty of cars with decent miles on now, did it work? Any feedback notes on Porsche's homework? I'm very ignorant about the engine that followed the M97

Very nifty I think everybody has just been waiting for the problems and certainly from the GT4 Clubsport side I have seen nothing but good news ... Engines stripped after three seasons with nothing to be done other than the consumables of a rebuild .... oil temperatures over 150C with the solution being an oil change after each race day (how surprising!) resulting in a willingness to disconnect the distracting high temp oil warning ... so far so good ? It is also interesting that the 718 Clubsport still uses the 981 engine in X51 tune, and unlike GT3 Cup and RSR, it's all un-lifed ... so based on 10 years experience in the field Porsche themselves voted in favour of the Gen-2 engine for this race car.

That all sounds rather good to me! The changes did look like they might have done my favourite thing to look for in an engine and over engineered it to fix the issues

I started looking for a Gen 2 S manual 18 months ago. I had 3 cars inspected by an independant specialist and two of them were rejected. The first looked stunning from the outside and ticked all the boxes, low milage, guards red and Sports chrono but the thing struggled to idle sounded lumpy and the seller refused the person inspecting a test drive which raised alarm bells. The 2nd was due to be sold to a well known 911 specialist for stock and they were inspecting it for their own reasons but gave me a phone call out of curtosy as they knew I was in the market. It failed a bore score check on one of the rear cylinders and I was told to avoid it if it came back on the market. 3rd time lucky I ended up with a single owner car with slightly more miles than I would have liked (but below the average) amazing over rev report and genrally cherrished motor.