16 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHHow's this car look?
Reported or suspected cause
lot of traffic miles)
Suggestion or failed attempt
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Identified cause
1
Suspected cause
0
Reported fixes
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 suspect a cause
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.
Suspected cause
I've had to replace a lot of the same wear items as higher mileage cars - the clutch/flywheel being one of them (with this car being in LA, probably a lot of traffic miles).
Leading evidence: 'lot of traffic miles)' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, the most frequently mentioned possible cause is 'lot of traffic miles)' (1 discussions; 0 report identifying it and 1 suggest it). The most frequently discussed action is 'Use steering wheel buttons without engaging the manual position' (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.
Use steering wheel buttons without engaging the manual position
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
With 2002 or newer you can shift the gears "on demand" using the steering wheel buttons without engaging the manual position.
These are separate views of the same evidence. Frequency alone does not establish a fix, and these counts must not be added together.
lot of traffic miles)
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Identified cause
1
Suspected cause
0
Reported fixes
Read evidence and context
Discussions that suspect a cause
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.
Suspected cause
I've had to replace a lot of the same wear items as higher mileage cars - the clutch/flywheel being one of them (with this car being in LA, probably a lot of traffic miles).
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.
16 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.
Rennlist: 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: 20261026T212127Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
I'm seriously considering making an offer on the car in my the attached link. Do any of you guys have any advice? Also, does this car have the earlier IMS bearing? I see some wet marks under each exhaust... Not sure if that's a warning sign or not.
Thanks in advance!
Lucas
https://www.cars.com/vehicledetail/d...2658/overview/
Looks way over priced. Did it pass a PPI? Does it have the options you are looking for?
i think you could find similarly optioned car for $19k to $21k. I recommend you keep looking
Wow, I hope it sells for full price! For reference, that looks virtually identical to my car that I bought for $18k 1.5 years ago. Only appreciable differences were mine was a 2001 w/ 70k miles, and has comfort seats, aftermarket sport suspension, and $5k worth of stereo equipment.
The ad says "automatic" and "4wd". Neither are true. It looks clean in the pics. What do the maintenance records look like? How many keys come with it? For that price, it should be complete and it's history clear.
Pretty car, way overpriced. The dealership doesn't even provide an accurate description of the car so I'm guessing they washed it and put it on the line and hope a sucker would come along and pay more than it is worth. The CarFax original sales date leads me to believe the car was made after May of 2000, meaning it should have the later and more problematic IMS bearing. Again based on car fax, the car wasn't even given its 30k service until it was over nine years old. Makes me very concerned that this is a pig in lipstick with many many issues to be addressed. All bushings, rubber, shock seals, water pump, AOS, (and yes) IMS bearing, etc etc etc. I'd walk away and find a better car with more miles and more service history.
If you are looking for an automatic (which I have) you should really consider a 2002 or newer with the updated transmission. The difference is significant. With 2002 or newer you can shift the gears "on demand" using the steering wheel buttons without engaging the manual position. It's nice to be able to drop down a gear or two in an instant when looking for the extra burst of torque.
The MK-I (Pre-2002) tiptronics operate the same way. I can shift the gears via the steering wheel buttons no matter if it's in manual or automatic mode on my MY2000.
^ this. 100%. For that price, it should really should be complete and be nicely optioned. With two keys; maintenance records; owner's manual; tools/jack/trunk accessories, and maybe even the original window sticker...
Looks like they cleaned it up real good, but they didn't even bother to list it properly as they got the entire drivetrain description wrong. You can tell from the spare tire being visible in the frunk that it is a RWD C2 car, not a C4... And it's a manual tranny (preferred anyway, IMHO). At least it has the full leather interior option, which is a nice add.
I think photos like this are about the same as looking at car from 10 feet away. I'd say it's a $22k-24k car based mostly on on low mileage and the apparent visual condition. But, that assumes the engine isn't a leaky mess underneath and that the car is a good "2-footer" upon up-close personal inspection as well.
Good to know. Others with MK1 tips have recently posted they are unable to shift gears unless in manual mode. Don't know why they think that, good to know that's not the case.
If you don't want to do the IMSB, you should look for a MY99. 2000 is going to be a toss up.
From someone that bought a low mileage 996, I'd say save the money and get a higher mileage example that was well maintained. I've had to replace a lot of the same wear items as higher mileage cars - the clutch/flywheel being one of them (with this car being in LA, probably a lot of traffic miles).
I just bought a 2000 996 over a week ago. My $0.02 after owning one for a short while is this, if you buy an expensive 996 like this one or a cheaper one, the *same* things can break or fail.
Low mileage seems little protection on these cars against faults, defects or work down the road. Also some parts age, even if this car had 5 miles on the clock, rubber ages, hoses age etc
Good luck
Yeah, but think of how much more money you'll get for yours when you sell it!
As for MY 2000 being a toss-up, I'd wager that the overwhelming majority (if not all) of MY 2000 cars have double row bearing. The word on the street here is that the switch from double to single row happened mid-2000, and that the assembly line for model-year changeovers for P-cars usually coincides with German summer vacation schedules. So, most MY 2000 cars were probably made between July 1999 and June 2000. Anything made after July 2000 was more than likely a MY 2001 car, and many of those apparently still had double-row bearings too... From looking at the IMSB Issue Poll sticky in the forum, this seems to hold true.
As a point of reference, my 2000 Millennium Edition car is # 164 out of 911 made, and it has a date code of 10/1999.
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.
