35 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCH996.1 or 996.2? Help me decide.
Reported or suspected cause
ageing fuel injectors
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
Maybe this is due to ageing fuel injectors that are washing cylinders, with the 3.6 being more sensitive to the thinner oil.
Leading evidence: 'ageing fuel injectors' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, the most frequently mentioned possible cause is 'ageing fuel injectors' (1 discussions; 0 report identifying it and 1 suggest it). The most frequently discussed action is 'Clean early car' (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
Somehow it just lacked the grace of a clean early car with turbo wheels.
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.
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
More and more, I am falling in love with the "stealth" look of a clean gen 1, with a 18 wheels, with the litronic lights for me please, manual.
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
At least if you plan to keep in top shape, which is in your best interest to attempt avoiding big repair bills.
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
The biggest complaint about the early cars was always the interior quality, but finding a car with full leather completely changes the feel and makes it a very high end place to sit.
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.
35 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: 20261026T135432Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
Hello RL,
Any discernible reason to choose the .1 or .2 over the other? I do think the headlights on the .2 look better but not so much that I would pass up on a great deal for a .1. I am aware of the IMS bearing being different in the earlier 996s but not too worried about that either with the permanent solutions being available for either model. I don't think there were any other issues other than the IMS, right? I've always been told that the 996 is a great, reliable car when the IMS is taken care of.
So if the headlight design is a non-issue, does it really matter what year?
The goal is a C2 or C2S, manual transmission, coupe. This car will get driven quite a bit and possibly a PCA event here or there as I live just 7 miles from Road Atlanta.
Thank you!
Both are great cars. Do a bit more research, there ARE other differences. I believe things like cup holders, glove box, throttle cable vs. e-throttle (99s had cable). One isn't vastly superior to the other though. My best advice, buy the nicest car you can find and afford that meets your criteria of features.
They didn't make a C2S 996, so if you want the wide body you'll need to find a C4S.
Enjoy the shopping process, its a lot of fun, and not something many people get to do (shop for and buy a 911), so savor it. Make sure to get out and see the cars in person. Internet shopping is great, but you don't get to see details the way you do in person.
3.4l - 3.6l and 20 hp difference .2 has quite a bit of updates/improvements over the .1. The main expensive one is that the ,2 gearbox is tougher. .1 is drive by wire, known to rust out and require replacement.
Gotcha, I had drove a couple C4S 996s and naturally assumed there was a C2S. I've driven the 996.2 C2 and thought it had great power, more than enough to have a lot of fun in.
Kind of goofy but I think the glovebox and cup holders are important. I drive my car a lot (10k miles a year) and having the cup holder is a major convenience. Not having a glovebox would annoy the crap out of me, not that I keep a lot in it but it was just stupid that they didn’t have it from the start.
The �99 has a throttle cable. I think that�s what you meant. �Drive by wire� means there is no mechanical connection between the accelerator pedal and the throttle butterfly - it is controlled by electronic signal via wired connection, hence the name. But only the �99 has the throttle cable, as I understand it.
I like the added power and appearance of the .2, many feel like the .1 offers a more pure 911 experience.
If you decide on a .1, there�s a gem currently for sale here on Rennlist, but hurry, doubt it will last long...
https://rennlist.com/forums/market/1120613
The 996.1 has
* Dual row ims bearing
* Throttle by Cable
* LSD option
* Lighter
* No CEL when upgrading to GT3 master cylinder
* JR says, "it's the one to buy"
I think the above should say the "1999 996" has the above features.....but if you have a 99 C4 like I have, it DOES NOT have a throttle cable, it's a throttle by wire, so that is only applicable to the 99 C2's.
Well... the easy way to answer the question would be... yes, the 996.2 is obviously better car than the 996.1 (Any iteration is better than the previous one)
But that is only, the "cold numbers"
It is the 996 better than a 993? absolutely... which one you would buy... that is another question.
For me, the 996.1 is growing in character and also in esthetic. More and more, I am falling in love with the "stealth" look of a clean gen 1, with a 18 wheels, with the litronic lights for me please, manual. If you are able to find a good 996.1 well optioned, I don't think you ever will regret not buying the equivalent 996.2.
Both are great cars IMHO. I bought the 996.2 because I love the 4S since I was a teenager. But I would be really happy with a nice 996.1
I also have one of both. For a daily, a 996.2 would be my choice. But for track use or mixed track use the 996.1 would be my choice. The road feel and general sounds are sublime.
Drive both. Find clean examples and decide.
Just my 2 cents but my early build 99 C2 is such an incredible driving experience, always puts a smile on my face.
The only way I would consider a .1 is if it had the aero kit. The dailyability of the .2 is what drew me to it, also ( personal preference I know) I really prefer the mature look of the turbo headlight vs the Boxster lights. The extra HP is noticeable having driven both back to back but the 3.4L is still plenty of engine. There really isn't a wrong answer as both are great cars and if you end up with a less expensive .1 it just leaves more money for upgrades!
My opinion is that the torque is more noticeable than the HP. The .1 torque is gradual but from 5500-7300, it�s fast. The .2 has a torque bump and the cam comes on stronger, making it feel faster. That said, the .2 is only 1/2% faster than the .1
This.
Recently purchased a 996 but the hunt was quickly narrowed to a .1 after I started looking and driving cars. The 996.2 started getting different wheels and clunkly looking body kit side skirts. Somehow it just lacked the grace of a clean early car with turbo wheels. IMO the early 996 cars are aging so well. It might be silly but another reason for the 996.1 was the sound. The 3.4L is much more raw, it makes that lovely high pitch ziiiiing at low revs which turns into a deeper bark at the top of the rev range. It's a great sound that isn't obtrusive or offensive. Sounds like a more refined air cooled 911 (and the engine block is a 964 part number). The 3.6 sounds good but it's toned down. You don't hear much until you're on it. The biggest complaint about the early cars was always the interior quality, but finding a car with full leather completely changes the feel and makes it a very high end place to sit. If you want a glove box & cupholder than obviously the .2 is the car for you.
Thanks for the replies and I'll keep an eye open for a nice .1 local to compare seeing as I've driven a few .2s already. In my head, I'm thinking of a making my version of a 996 "T", a no nonsense, lightweight fun car to drive, hell, it's probably not far from what some would consider a "T" version already. This car wouldn't be a daily but would get driven a lot.
BTW, who is JR?
The .2 tip gearbox is better, if the OP was looking for a tip. The manual gearbox is essentially the same with only minor improvements. Not sure what you mean by "rust out". I have never heard of a difference in rustproofing between model years. A 99 is 5 or 6 years older than a 04, so I can see that a car driven winters in the north would be more prone to rust if it has been driven 5 or 6 additional years.
The .1 did come with cup holders by the way. They mount to the air vent covers (trim) on each end of the dash. If you look closely, you will see three holes in the trim that the holder mounts to. The only disadvantage to these holders is that the windshield is not too far away from the top of the holder and you can't put tall cups in it.
Let's not forget the main advantage of the early 996s; lever and cable to open the frunk and engine deck lid! It's hard to get locked out of the frunk in a .1.
It appears the 3.6 engines are more prone to bore scoring than the 3.4. As I recall from a recent thred, most of the rebuilds at Flat6 are engines in the early to late stages of bore scoring. It appears to me, based on threds in this forum, that scoring is now more common than IMSB failures. Maybe this is due to ageing fuel injectors that are washing cylinders, with the 3.6 being more sensitive to the thinner oil.
My recommendation is to look until you find a car that pushes your buttons. You will be happy with either version. I love my 99, but I am sure I could love a .2 also. Buy one that has been well maintained.
I just bought my relatively well optioned, low mileage, one owner .2 coupe in November. Having driven it a few thousand miles now, I�m very happy with my decision. But this is my only car. If it was a second car, that .1 linked to in this thread would�ve been the kind of thing I was looking for. As far as the .1 being �cleaner� than the .2, I disagree. They�re both a 996 with a slightly different character and you�d be happy with either, I�m sure. The best advice I�ve heard about which 911 to get is this: get the nicest one you can afford. Obviously, �nice� is purely subjective. Porsche has done an amazing job at keeping the 911 DNA alive throughout the entire lineage, so any iteration you get will be a 911 through and through.
Oh ya, JR is Jake Raby (Flat 6 Innovations). You�ll hear a lot about him.
good deal. No truer words with these cars is pay now or pay later. Even if you can wrench yourself you will have to put money into these cars periodically as they are aging. At least if you plan to keep in top shape, which is in your best interest to attempt avoiding big repair bills. That car I linked above looks to be good to go so you could by and drive for a while without any further outage.
If if you decide to go with a .2, link bellow to another well optioned example. Clearly you can see I�m a fan of Blk/Blk. And imo, above all else, full leather interior is a necessity (which both cars have)...
https://rover.ebay.com/rover/0/0/0?m...2F372572251098
I've been trying to maintain a comprehensive list of differences here:
https://rennlist.com/forums/996-foru...l#post15173972
. And please let me know if anyone has any other notes to add there.
So take a look, there were many differences. And then also read the article where most of this info came from.
https://rennlist.com/forums/996-foru...l#post15174035
Same here. I looked for quite a while before finding a nice 99. Mine is also a 2/98 build date - near as I can determine that was the first month for US production. It seems like in 996 terms, the very early cars have some nice benefits, although you also give up some useful additions on later cars. Overall I could not be happier with mine; a glove box would be nice but I can live without it. All of the other "missing" items can be added if I choose to, like cupholders. Mine needed a clutch when I bought it, so went ahead and had the IMS bearing done using the LM retrofit kit. The bearing that came out looks like brand new, so at least in my case I probably could have skipped that job. Feel better about having done it though.
Also call me strange, but I actually prefer the early headlights, especially the very early headlights with the amber turn signal and running lights. When these were just introduced I remember thinking how cool, better looking and modern these were compared to the 993. I still feel that way - in my opinion a narrow-body 996 is one of the best looking 911 variations.
Daryll
