20 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCH4S to rwd questions
Leading reported evidence
Use axle nuts
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
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 performed work without a confirmed outcome
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.
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
This is what I did, and I used new axle nuts from Porsche for the reinstall.
Leading evidence: 'Use axle nuts' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Replace like the strut and brakes' (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
I guess u could convert the entire upright but almost everyrhing must change like the strut and brakes.
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 · Original poster
Or do you need to change the pasm programming to a 2wd code?
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
You can find conversion tension bolts ($$$) or just use the outer CV joint with the axle removed.
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 report an unsuccessful attempt
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.
Unsuccessful attempt
Ran around in 2WD for months and felt no difference.
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.
20 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: 20261027T044418Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
I'm thinking about converting to rwd. I don't want to scrap the G96.31. I've read what I can find, but the 2wd operation with the .31 isn't clear. If I pull the driveshaft, front transaxle, and front shafts then put in shafts stubs is that all that's required? Or do you need to change the pasm programming to a 2wd code?
I'm just a little unclear as to whether the unit will continue to try and shift power to the front.
thaks for any info.
Easiest thing is to just pull the driveshaft between the transmission and front differential.
But if you pull the cv axles and front differential, you can either reuse your outer CV axles hub parts or buy stubs.
I bought stubs and never used them, switched back to the AWD system. Ran around in 2WD for months and felt no difference.
it�s a mechanical system, no dme input.
The C2/Boxster/Gt3 tension bolts don't fit the AWD front hubs which is unfortunate.
You can find conversion tension bolts ($$$) or just use the outer CV joint with the axle removed.
did not know..... is it because of the bearing or the overall difference in the upright? I guess u could convert the entire upright but almost everyrhing must change like the strut and brakes.
That's what I did - converted the entire upright to GT2 units. I think the difference is the upright is wider so the tension bolt is not long enough. Or maybe the AWD inner diameter is smaller so the tone ring won't fit. I can't remember exactly.
It would be cool if we could compare the 2. They both use the same wheel hub so the spline would be the same. It looks like they both have a machined surface at the base. Maybe it is the length? Maybe its the tone ring diameter?
I just completed this on my 997.1 and it was very easy. I bought the stub axels for $180 each.
https://rennlist.com/forums/997-foru...l#post19874181
And my write up with the torque specs
https://www.ohioperformancesolutions.com/blog
Mike
OPS
I did not know that! Please disregard my axel stubs.
Looks like these will work but now its getting expensive..
https://www.rennline.com/996-997-rwd...ZQ5VZWzI00kCSn
Mike
I posted this in the wrong thread. About keeping the "4S" parts if converting to a C2. Owner was going to keep parts to convert back to C4 if needed in future.
Good Idea. I wanted a C4S, probably for all the reasons Porsche made it that way in the first place.
I "passed" on 2 C4S because they had been converted to C2. One had parts saved, the other did not have parts saved. Neither owner would put the car back to C4. WTF, a C4S is "special" in appearance and AWD. IMO, both go together or the value of a C4S drops considerably if converted to C2.
YMMV
Yes, I don't blame you however most folks seem to feel it is worth the effort. It may be Placebo.
Andre is one of the few individuals who has decided it is not worthwhile and has reinstalled the front drive components. That means one of two things. Either the system is an advantage and therefore he reinstalled it or, it was no different so he reinstalled it for reasons that might include the ones you have stated.
Meanwhile, apparently many of the differentials are actually no longer significantly functional and in that case removing it might not seem to make any difference . Our friend PorschrTech 3 , skip, has mentioned a simple test to evaluate if it works or not.
One question I would have is if you knew your system was not working would that make a difference in whether you left it installed ? Also , it is interesting that this four-wheel drive system, although less complex and without the associated sensor problems , is not the sophisticated system of the 964 which was derived from the excellent 959 engineering.
Since Im here I will just throw my $.02 in. I've only really noticed the front end when I was on gravel or turning at low speeds. Coming out of corners it would pull through the wheel but not enough for me to think it was diverting from the joy of driving. I cannot comment fully on the difference because the weather has not cooperated here since I removed it. Its not being sold (the car or the parts) so I have nothing to loose.
Mike
OPS
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.