5 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCH997 Mk I vs. Mk II
Leading reported evidence
Clean sheet design)
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.
Leading evidence: 'Clean sheet design)' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Clean sheet design)' (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.
5 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: 20261026T181445Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
The 996 Mk I's took a hit when the 996 Mk II's came out. The Mk II's had some nice improvements, but the upgrades on the 997 Mk II's seem to be better still.
- Brand New engine (clean sheet design).
- Direct Injection
- PDK option vs. Tip option
- Enhanced PSM
- Bigger Brakes
- Revised Instrument panel
- Freshened exterior
I'd bet the 997 Mk I is going to get hit worse than the 996 Mk I did (depreciation wise). What do you guys think?
I think the biggest enemy to 997 values is the leasing. I mean they are leased to death (and they sticker for a bit more too!). This increases volumes and decreases tenure of ownership, meaning there should ostensibly be more inventory for sale in the secondary market (instantaneously) than at the same time in the 996 Mk1 lifecycle.
But I don't feel that the consumer oriented models (carreras and turbos) will depreciate much more severely than the 996s due in any large part to the potential leap in performance of the newer 997 Mk2s. After all, the great silent majority of primary and secondary Porsche owners did not buy their cars with performance at the top of their lists, nor did they likely perform any extended research into mechanical reliability etc like a Rennlister did. They bought them because they were first and foremost Porsche 911s, with all the prestige, pedigree and appearance associated with the marque and model.
The 997s are more outwardly reminiscent of the archetypal 911 than the 996s, perceived to be more mature in terms of technology and reliability (not really proven yet!), and are more comfortable, luxurious etc. They should hold up decently on paper even with the higher volume and cyclicity, however there's no accounting for two external variables which impact the demand side: the general malaise and imminent death of non-prime auto lending/leasing and other sources of easy credit, as well as the US consumer economy weaknesses, including gasoline, eurodollar. Should they continue to impact demand, these factors and the greater supply of off lease vehicles would definitely make the 997s seem like a screaming bargain!
While I'm not a fan of conventional leasing (I've never done it), I've got a friend who's convincing me that artificially low residual (think 20% to 25%) leasing is the way to buy one year old vehicles (I am a business owner), not for the payments but the tax treatment of the principal (you make large lump sums to knock out as much as possible from the possible interest expense) and the proceeds of eventual disposition. It seems that tax adjusted in my personal situation I would come out way, way ahead of ownership. The guys who lease classics do the same thing, I finally am beginning to understand why, it's just a wrapper around your purchase, there's really no substantial interest expense if you do it right, and it's tax advantageous.
As for the Mk2, I like what I read so far. I think I'll give the PDK and DFI and new motor dimensions a year to work themselves out, and I could definitely see a 997.2S or TT w/ PDK as a DD, but if I could get a CPO 997TT for even money to a 2010 Carrera S, I'd have a hard time not doing that (figure that's ~90K in 12-24 mos) I might not be able to resist.
I'd agree with you that leasing is not going to do any favors for 997 values, but keep in mind the 996 was also heavily leased.
My question really has more to do with the advance of the engine and PDK tansmission. For example If you want an automatic, I can't imagine anyone on the used car market wanting the old tip over the PDK. Additionally, the new motor (if it lives up to it's promise) is supposed to virtually eliminate RMS failures, intermediate shaft failures (that will be gone for good), oiling issues, etc.
Obviously at this point no one knows for sure if all this new stuff will perform as advertised. However, if it does.......why would you ever choose to buy a Mk I without a pretty big discount?
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.