30 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHI don't know, but is this crazy?
Leading reported evidence
Run on the hood
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
Did you notice the wavy quarter panels and the paint run on the hood?
Leading evidence: 'Run on the hood' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Run on the hood' (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.
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.
30 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: 20261026T100758Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
- 99 C2 chassis and engine
- 91000 miles on it.
- Claims they spent $60K on parts (can't disagree here but can argue - 'why'?)
- Claims 355HP for a 99 3.4L at the WHEELS with no internal mod's listed (Calling BS on this one - 355hph at wheels means close to 390HP at the flywheel)
- Doesn't list ANY suspension work such as new shocks, bushings or steering gear maintenance.
- No updated IMS bearing listed as installed.
- $36K or make an offer.
Is it me or is this a really weird project? I mean $36K could get me a nice, more modern car with perhap a CPO and without the headache of figuring out what the value of this car would be for insurance write downs? (I figure your insurance agent goes with the 99 blue book price if it gets stolen. = rape mode on what you paid.)
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Repli...fCarsQ5fTrucks
Roughly assume a 15% drivetrain loss so 355hp at the rear wheels requires more than 390hp at the crank. Calling BS on the 355hp number is being kind.
As for the money spent...Just because something can be done doesn't mean it should be done.
Pics not very good but the headlight washers are missing and the bolts along side the front trunk sides look to be non-standard. Not too impressed with the front bumper's fit.
I hope you're not thinking of buying this car?
Sincerely,
Macster.
The horsepower obviously is coming from the round headlights..... That's why Porsche purists demanded that is the only way 911 should be made..... Get with it guys.
$60K in mods? Really? Why not sell the stock 996 for $15K, combine that with the $60K in mod money and buy a real 997 Carrera S?
"THE UP MOST ATTENTION TO DETAIL WAS USED IN CRAFTING THIS CAR TO BE WITHOUT A DOUBT BREATHTAKING."
How about putting the "
utmost
attention to detail" into your writing skills while you're at it.
I don't know what the fuss is - that thing is one of the best poser vehicles I've ever seen. Much better than putting a MK1 or MK2 body kit on your C2 and dropping a GT3 badge on it.
I bet someone at 6speed is drooling right as we speak.
Just sayin.
-td
very entertaining. if you've been around porsche long enough, you know it's only a matter of time before aging 996 and boxsters become the bases for these local detail show monstrosities. used to be vw bug > speedster (i secretly like these), of course you've got 911 > 959, 911 > 993tt. boxster >cgt exsts, is pretty bad.
If anything, the flaw in this one is it's too conservative! (yes i saw the red second wing element)
Gaps between fender and hood look weird. Bumper seams where they meet fenders look poorly matched up too. Only intriguing thing is maybe the stereo installation and amps in the trunk!!!
Peter
They have a name for those in Germany: Schei�e Porsche. Aftermarket wheels no less, with Hankooks. For $36,000 you are nearly at a used 997 coupe price (2005) that isn't messed with, and with probably less miles.
Listen - that was an expensive factory option! You got that when the robot's software rebooted during mid spray and sent too much air into the mix. It's very rare and highly sought after for those in the know. People look down their noses at orange peel paint jobs but the decrease in shine can help fellow motorists when the sun barely reflects off your paint.
Seems to indicate 997 "REAR QUARTERS AND BUMPER" - but those look a lot like 996 tail lights
Also claims "ENTIRE CONSOLE RECONFIGURATION TO REPRESENT A 2011 PORSCHE" - again, looks a lot like my 04 996.
