12 captured repliesPartial discussion capture · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHJust tested an '08 CSS. Are these warning signs to run?
Leading reported evidence
Inspect from the bottom
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
If that looks good, I'll have him drop the sump pan and inspect from the bottom.
Just tested an '08 CSS. Are these warning signs to run?
Read full discussion summary
Leading evidence: 'Inspect from the bottom' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Inspect from the bottom' (1 discussions). For that action, 0 discussions report a resolution and 0 report an unsuccessful attempt. No action has an explicit, attributable resolution report under the current rules. These are forum reports and suggestions, not a confirmed diagnosis.
Source reports, not a diagnosis or a success probability. Counts refer to discussions and can overlap.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
After time that is suppose to naturally change evenly.
Just tested an '08 CSS. Are these warning signs to run?
Run higher risk as miles climb, can't argue
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
Certainly running a higher risk as miles climb, can't argue that.
Just tested an '08 CSS. Are these warning signs to run?
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.
12 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.
Planet-9: 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: 20261026T220748Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
145k miles, ticking sound from cylinder 6 on cold start, bank 2 downstream O2 sensor throwing a code, and burning 1 quart per 2500 miles. Was not able to scope on site. Just typing this I feel like I'm being a idiot for even still considering it. I scheduled a PPI/Scope, but as I sit here thinking, it seems like a scope isn't really needed to verify what I'm thinking. Any chance the engine hasn't already started to eat itself?
Nope. You have no confidence in it so don't buy it - you'll just worry over it forever. BTW - 1 quart/2,500 miles IS perfectly acceptable and wouldn't produce any visible smoke (ie - not "burning"). What code is the downstream O2 sensor throwing? That isn't typically a sign of bore scoring, it's usually the sign of a worn out cat-converter or sensor.
Is there a chance? It’s possible sure but not likely.. what is likely is a future rebuild but that’s the case for all of us.. most bore scoring believe it or not happens on lower mile cars because tolerances are much tighter. After time that is suppose to naturally change evenly. Check it out tho. Not sure what there asking for the car, but a bad motor car suddenly goes from 25-30k down to 5k and less… it’s real expensive so if you didn’t know now you do… (I’m sure you knew this tho)
Thanks. After much debate I'm going to reach out to the mechanic tomorrow to discuss the scope. It's a Porsche racing specialty shop, so they're very familiar. I plan on doing a top side inspection of #6. if even a single score line is visible, I'm out. If that looks good, I'll have him drop the sump pan and inspect from the bottom. I'm pretty confident we'll find something, but I like the car otherwise and figure it's worth a few hundred dollars to find out for sure.
The current owner purchased the car only 1,500 miles ago with the intent of tracking it, but life got in the way. He took the car to this specialty shop and told them to go over it top to bottom and get it track ready, so it's well sorted. They asked him if he wanted it scoped and he doesn't as he said it didn't seem important to him. I honestly just think he's not aware of the potential damage, nothing sneaky. At least that's the vibe I'm getting. We'll find out soon enough.
Ah, gotcha. Certainly running a higher risk as miles climb, can't argue that. If the engine does somehow check out, maybe I can get 3-4 years out of it and Raby's new system will be out and it will only be a $10k engine repair. lol
In all honesty, I'm expecting to find damage from the ticking sound alone, and I'm ready to walk. So I'm just doing as much research and prep as possible so I know all of the avenues once the scope is completed. I've made some stupid car decisions over the last 30 years, but this one I can't afford to dig myself out of. So knowledge is power.
Yes, that system. I'm sure it is light. I have no idea on pricing, but I have to assume the goal is an easier, therefore less expensive rebuild. Not cheap, but less expensive.
If you tear a perfectly good but high mileage engine down, there are a good many parts that will be replaced as a matter of course while you're in there. Even that will be well over $10,000.
But I assume you aren't paying much for this car.
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.