Video: Bore Scoring is Overblown

New video on YT channel 11 after 9 “Bore Scoring is Overblown: Blackstone Labs Porsche Data Revealed” Blackstone sees far lower % of cars with bore scoring than the Internet “gurus” and vendors advertise. Main lesson is to get a used oil analysis at every oil change so you can see trends in metal concentrations and engine deterioration. Also interesting were two other topics that have been discussed ad nauseum on this forum: on aging of motor oil in engine and type of oil that can be used in M96/M97 engines. You Tube

LOL, here we go again, rabbit hole time..lol...this video has been hashed over a million times. It's been proven that having your oil tested will help determine the state of the motor but there's no magic wand that tells you for certain....so take it for what's its worth.....if it wasn't for the inter net....LOL

not this again

Overblown or Underblown.....You have to take everything on Social Media with a grain of salt, and filter it through a "truth filter"....( even this video ) The fact is you can't " manufacture" a mechanical problem with " words " .... Bore Scoring is real.....filter the internet bull**** through your truth filter..

We had a discussion on this video about when it came out. The low single digit % of affected vehicles seem plausible, like a reasonable estimate. What % of cars do many miles/year, have owners that go looking for it, may be abused etc. At the end of the day all cars are ****. Crank pulleys fall off of Corvette motors, Toyota and GM leave bits of metal in, and Porsche made a bunch of bores out chocolate. 25 years on, what % of these cars do you guys think are still on the road? I would say a pretty good number of them. These have been pretty cheap relative to their upkeep, so even those that have had issues were deemed worth the investment. � and more (most?) importantly, the aftermarket support at this time is fantastic, there are available products/technologies to address almost all the factory issues, regardless of use case. Lots of lifestyle and custom mods too� custom bodywork even. This isn�t like an R8 where the shock towers can come off the car, or an NSX/S2000 with a nearly unrebuildable FRMC block, and you are in need of an exotic solution. There are many reputable vendors that specialize in one way or another.

Quotes source post: 20693520

Well said.

Listen, these percentages of failure rates are not what they seem... All the Big Kahuna's in Auto Makers use Six Sigma Methodology ( or a variant ) which strives for defect rate of 3.4 per one million of parts.( that's 0.00034% ).. Most of the parts reach this goal, but if a Cup Holder doesn't reach this quality standard, it's no big deal. But if the bore fails at a higher rate...( like 2.2% which is suggested in this video ) that is HUGE !!! So don't be mislead by video's like this suggesting that 2.2% is a LOW defect rate on Bores.... It is HUGE when striving for 0.00034%....... How would you like your BRAKE FAILURE RATE to be 2.2% ???? NOTE :: defect rates is not the same a wear out rates or damage from improper use ..

Quotes source post: 20694041

Honest question, what would be an acceptable mileage for onset of bore score� or more appropriately, when bore score would begin to affect rated performance? Would 3.4/million cars losing 10% of HP at 100k miles be acceptable? I�m pretty agnostic on this argument, even owning on of them. Borescore is a pretty stupid failure mode, but after 20 years our best experts argue about contributing factors and root causes (let�s not go there!). The piston skirt coating is a big one, and that failure rate is probably higher, but for the follow on effects/performance impact is a ways downstream of that. Statements that every M96 is way out of spec for OOR and many are scored by 100k miles can be true, while the same motor is still running as intended and making good power at that time� and many here, myself included have cars with double that mileage. There are also plenty of 30k mile bore scored cars - chalk those up in the failure column! In all these discussions, the cars and data are lifetime based, not by time (except for the IMSB data from the lawsuit in early 2000s), so they aren�t failing 2% per year. It�s 2% all time, based on their whole data set. That includes the guy who made 5HP more running in the desert with no air filter, and cars like mine at 195k miles. So what I�m asking for Chuck is a qualifier for the 3.4/million in terms of time or mileage. If the six sigma was based on 100k miles of use, I�m out on the other tail of the curve!

Quotes source post: 20694283

First off my name is not Chuck... Secondly these questions will never be fully and accurately answered that why there is numerous misconceptions, due to the following reasons :::... Porsche has not collected long term data and posted it.... they moved on from the m96/7 2 decades ago.. Shops have not tested the same engines when new and then at 100k miles to compare data....( they are busy trying to stay in business and feeding families) Owners have not tested their engines when new and then at 100K miles to collect data, for lots of reasons . Like not that interested, don/t have the skillz, didn't/haven't owned it that long.. don't have 100k miles on it yet ect. ect.. The problem does have numerous contributing factors that cause the defect to arise in anywhere from 30k miles to never.... I mean like out of thousands and thousands of Rennlisters only a dozen or so have even tested their Blow-By/Engine Health using the simple test that I invented... It is a complicated subject, (and companies like LN have developed a solution to the defect) that every Tom Dick and Harry wants a talking point about, so the discussions just go on and on in a continuous loop with opinions and influencers in the mix .. Just as a comparison to how much of an issue I think this is. I worked for a large FoMoCo Dealership for 2 decades that sold 300 new cars every month, whereas the Porsche Dealer I retired from only sold on average 30 new cars a month.... Out of all those FoMoCo cars that were sold and service for 2 decades the v8's v6's in-line 4's and 6's, not even one cracked cylinder, porous bore, slipped sleeve, or bore scored engine came through the door.... and that was before Six Sigma Methodology was implemented by all the Big Kahuna's .. I'm not saying FoMoCo made a better product, because they don't, I am saying Porsche pushes the envelope very hard and when they go over the line, it is a big F**K-up... Luckily, we have fixes for all the stuff...Bore-score, IMS, AOS, oil starvation ... so don't sweat the small stuff....... it is not a "safety" factor, PS :: it's all small stuff !!!

Sorry Charles! The data I referred to about failure rates was in reference to the Blackstone fella in the video, he quoted some single digit percentages depending on bore size in the last third of the video. I won�t state them for fear of misquote, just watch the video. Those failure rates would be all time based on all units he�s had samples and client feedback for. Your blow by test is a pretty good indicator that does indicate health. It would be nice to have more M96 low mile/new data but there is plenty of guidance and engineering science to point towards expected values. But, even without 0 day data on performance, Porsche said 296hp. The dynos we do get across mileages is usually in the ballpark if the ancillaries are in fair shape. Next time someone comes in crying about bore score we should ask for a blow by test and a dyno instead of an oil analysis! The anecdote about OE engine changes at FoMoCo vs Porsche probably stands up pretty well. The only defence for Porsche may be that the same proportion Ford had just as many of the ~100HP/L machines they sold come back! As you stated, the margins are thinner where Porsche operates� but they damn well charge and advertise in kind as well, so that is no defence at all. The reality is that present owners have to put up with any of these issues if they are still in play� and that brings us to the present discussion.

For those of us 996 owners who are not up to speed on the "truths" with this discussion, is there any practical takeaway in the video, say frequency of oil changes or additives to the oil?

Years ago, when I worked in policing, one of my staff, an experienced police constable while having a conversation that crime has dropped significantly over the last 20 years (this was in 2005), said these wise words to me: the drop in crime rates mean nothing if you are the victim. I would suggest the same thing for bore scoring and IMS failure. These discussions regarding the rates of failure mean nothing if you experience it. To that end, I had the solution installed in 2018. And this year, started to use 5W50 to mitigate risk of bore scoring in addition to all the other recommendations. The solution eradicated my IMS failure risk to negligible. However, not sure there is anything that can be done for bore scoring regardless of these stats.

Quotes source post: 20695107

In this video? Not really. It�s a broad overview discussion between a decent host that isn�t very knowledgeable and a key guy from Blackstone Labs who do a lot of oil analysis and so have a lot of test data. He suggests there are few failures in early cars, and more in later bigger bore cars (3.8L). The gurus suggest good oil and frequent changes, driving the car often, not idling for long periods at start up, and healthy water pumps. Am I missing anything? There are a few threads active right now talking about what to do or when to react to damaged bores. Jury is out! LOL The point about stats being irrelevant when you are in them is well taken. The hazard of this discussion is similarly those who might take less enjoyment in the local park or their Porsche due to the fear of repercussions that may or may not be well founded. Contextualizing the risk and repercussions for both is difficult.

Everyone should take a look at the "Bore Scoring Survey" thread located at the top of all the 996 threads. Bore scoring is real but it can be prevented with the right procedures and parts. Problem is many just drive and service a 996, 997, 991 and even 992s like a Toyota and will suffer from it. If only folks would run great oil with high moly and high viscosity amd change it frequently, they would have alot less to worry about.

Quotes source post: 20695504

I agree bore scoring is real. That being said, this discussion being about statistics, the stats in the bore scoring survey suggest at least over 30% have had bore scoring. And assuming that rate for the ones that are unknown, then it would put it at close to 50% of cars have bore score. That is very different than suggested in the video at 3% or 5%. The survey results are also contradictory to the many posters quoting their mechanics in reference to the rate of bore scoring. There are many posts that say their mechanics rarely see bore scoring or IMS failures. Is this true, I have no idea. What I know to be true is that regardless of statistics, when it happens to you, stats don't mean anything. I've had 3 dogs. First lived to be 14. Second lived to 18. Last one died earlier this year at 7. That's an average lifespan of 13. So, I did pretty good? Absolutely not. The impact of my dog dying at 7 was very impactful and painful. The stats mean nothing when it happens to you.

Here is an interesting stat for you .. If you do an advanced search in the 996 only forum for "Bore Score" in the title only, you get 89 threads with Bore Score in the Title..... Just in the Titles with about 2k views each...and dozens of comments.. If someone wanst to add up all the views and comments on those *( threads then look for bore scoring in the context of any thread and count those... Then gather all the pics of bore scoring and put them in a folder for all to see......lol The Truth is that "Bore Scoring " is not overblown , It is a real concern and big problem, the "discussion" about Bore Scoring is overblown, like I said, every Tom, Dick, and Harry wants a talking point on it....

I bought a 2000 C2 coupe in zenith blue as a project car. The car had spun bearing and 4 of 6 cylinders scored. IMS was still in good shape at 85k.

2005 C4S Bore scoring 5 and 6 bores(badly) at @52k miles in 2019. I bought the car in 2014 with zero maintenance records. So Six Sigma is irrelevant to me. Bore scoring is real. Jake fixed it for me!!