229 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHALL 3.4's Will Eventually fail!
Reported or suspected cause
obviously rare based
Reported cause
No successful repair reported for this finding.
1
Identified cause
0
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 report identifying 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.
Reported cause
The problem is obviously rare based on the numbers of M96 cars sold versus the grenades that have surfaced.
Leading evidence: 'obviously rare based' (1 discussions report identifying this cause; no attributable repair resolution). Across 1 matching discussions, the most frequently mentioned possible cause is 'obviously rare based' (1 discussions; 1 report identifying it and 0 suggest it). The most frequently discussed action is 'Adjust accordingly' (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 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 · Original poster
Checked into Renntech after an absence and looked at a sticky at the top of the 996 forum(sorry not skilled enough to link it), the title is the
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
Hartech have been servicing Porsche in the UK since 1984 - and the article posted was part 4 of their buyers guide to used Porsche cars.
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
My interpretation is that you perceive the risk to be higher than it is and that's fine - work with how you see things and adjust accordingly.
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
Unfortunately a reliable source of data to confirm such claims doesn't exist, except probably the data Porsche has, but isn't making available.
Repair techniques and options, there is always information
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
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
Actually, I liked the article, because when a mechanic goes to the trouble of photographing broken down engines and explaining repair techniques and options, there is always information to be gleaned.
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.
229 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.
1 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.
Outcome without a verified action link
I see you are still having fun with these postings!
Checked into Renntech after an absence and looked at a sticky at the top of the 996 forum(sorry not skilled enough to link it), the title is the
'Reliability of
996 engines'
or words to that effect.
Well I must say it ain't good & if I wasn't worried about 3.4 (& 3.6) potential failures- I am now.
Scouser has cited an article written by an engineer/mechanic from a company called Hartech in the U.K. They specialize in rebuilds of Boxtser engines(2.5,2.7 &3.2's) and 996's(3.4's & 3.6's). The author reveals detail I was completely unaware of. He states that the 2.5,2.7 and 3.4 are basically the same engine. He then builds a thesis that the 3.4 is essentially an 'oversize' engine, meaning that a 3.4 would be the maximum oversize motor possible for this block,(correction:3.6's are) and here is where it gets really depressing. He goes on to say that because the 3.4 has naturally a larger bore, the thickness between the bores is therefore significantly thinner than the 2.5 and the 2.7 Boxster motors. Consequently,at a certain point of an engines life( he suggests tentatively 75K miles), the bore becomes excessively 'oval'(because of this thinner wall between cylinders) mainly at what he calls the 'thrust' point of the piston travel in the bore. Guess what happens: cracks in the cylinder liner or oil blow by when rings can't seal properly or both!
It gets worse: although he hopes he's wrong,he predicts that because of this inherent design fault,he can't see how any 3.4's or 3.6's will escape a premature demise. He commented that all of the 100,000 mile plus engines he had pulled down had 'oval' bores. The rest of the article(long) goes on to detail the best solutions from both a technical and cost perspective.
From my reading this doesn't look very promising. The old expression 'a ticking bomb' comes to mind. I hate to say it, but maybe ol' Bob may have been right.
Time will tell.
Where did he come up with the sampling of engines? We have owners here with well over 100K on their 3.4s.
Maybe I missed that class but don't all engines have a life span? I have 78K on my engine. Should I start sourcing for a 3.6 engine to replacing my ticking time bomb?
If I get 120K out of my one engine, it equals to 2 top ends a 993 engine needs and those overhauls run $5-$6K a pop.
I have 116k on mine, and it doesn't burn a drop of oil, or lose any in between changes. If my cylinders had "oval bores", then I can't see how they would maintain a proper seal.
Anyway - a mechanic making blanket statements about engines that he's worked on is like a cancer specialist making blanket statements on patients he's worked on.. "ALL humans will get lung cancer.. I keep seeing lung cancer in all my patients, therefore everyone will get it."
"He then biulds a thesis that the 3.4 is essentially and 'oversize' engine, meaning that a 3.4 would be the maximum oversize motor possible for this block"
... huh? The 3.4 and 3.6 is the same block... actually the the 996/997 are all the same block. The 3.6 has the same bore as the 3.4, but different stroke. Therefore the 3.6 falls in the same "time bomb category".
Yes I agree, but its an objective fact that the gap (the wall) between the bores is thinner and therefore the potential is there.
p.s wow 116k(miles?) congratulations! Was yours the guards red 996 ElTorrente?
I sure hope mine fails. I have been trying to blow mine up since I got it. Considering the power my engine has, it should have exploded years ago. Maybe I need to switch to 0W40 to help it along?
Another baseless thread by somebody that is naive enough to believe the crap posted out there re: the M96 motor. Still amazes me to this day the crap people will believe if they read it on the internet. What would y'all have to believe in if Al Gore never invented the internet?
FYI.....it's not just the 2.5, 2.7, 3.2, and 3.4. that is part of the M96 motor line. The 9X7 line is also in that stack.
I realize it's late, the weekend is here, and the drinks are flowing down under in Oz but munro you really gotta stop reading scare threads while enjoying some libations
Yes I have. Have you read the article Loren linked in post #1 of that thread you are referring to? Totally contradicts the scare article you point and goes on to state how incredibly robust and trouble-free the M96 is (relatively speaking to previous generations).
Further, keep in mind Scouser's history with his car and the countless engine repairs and claims denials resulting in out of pocket expense after expense. It's a "good paper" according to Scouser b/c it fits with what he WANTS it to support.
You are very selective- that article doesn't even refer to the 'ovaling' phenomenon and its was written in 2005. So between then an now more engines have accumulated more mileage and hence more problems manifest themselves and so on into the future. Why do you characterise the article as 'crap'?
Although not journal standard and of course empirically subjective, he's in a position to make the claims, which he does very thoroughly.
Since the 996 and 986 were being designed in the same building, almost side-by-side, do you mean to tell us that Porsche decided to build the perfect or maximum size block for the 986 and then at the last second decide (oops, we forgot about a bigger bore for the 996 guys/gals) damn, we are going to use an undersized block and bore it past the limit, even though we know it may fail. Come on...
If you can't sleep at night because you're concerned that your motor will self-destruct at some point, you should sell the car. When there are so many other vehicles to choose from, why keep that one that's causing you so much grief? Maybe you can contact the engine guru and have him direct you to something that will run perfectly forever and you can return to a state of total bliss.
Many of us have already read those article many months agos ( I did before I bought mine, which helped me to justify, at least to me, that a 3.6 would be less likely to be trouble)...and I don't recall any where them saying "All 3.4's will fail". Every engine will fail eventually, and as others have stated, Porsche engines are often rebuilt, at a lower miles, for near the cost of a whole new engine on a 996. I also don't ever recall any 3.6 failing from a cylinder wall failure..only IMS bearing failure, which can happen to any 3.4, 3.6, 3.8 watercooled engine, especially if overreved or oil starved. One of the articles states that there were some casting issues and likosil (?) cylinder treatment issues on early blocks. Had a compression and leakdown test doen on my engine before I bought it at 37.5 k and all numbers were excellent, so I'm not worried at this point.
That was f'in hilarious! I (and my wife) just laughed so hard reading that. Nice to have a little afternoon humor courtesy of my good friends on RL
Time to unsubscribe from this trainwreck of a thread. Why do I continue to post to these things?
Air-cooled motors suffer from ovalling (if thats a word?) more than water-cooled engines could ever imagine. Many air-cooleds have made the 200-300k mile mark without destruction.
Aviation engines oval the barrels over time, doesn't mean the engine will self-destruct by any means.
If anyone has stressed their bores, it would be '99 and Redridge. Their cylinder pressure is higher than just about any N/A motor out there due to supercharging.
This theory doesn't hold much weight IMO.
Good ol' Dell needs the support of others so he can pile on. How is it gullible? the guys got more knowledge in his little toe than Mr statistics genius(must be a rivetting career). And Mr Well whatever how can it be a 'car accident' when its a 50 page illustrated argument? The wrecks are going to be your 20K 996 with a repair bill worth half its value. Now won't that be f#%@@@ hilarious?
Actually, to you it's Prof. Dell and Dr. Wellard. We're big on accuracy.
Something tell me that someone needs a hug from his mommy.... and an english lesson. Verbal vomit is rarely coherent and your post is a prime example.
I finally figured it out with you mate. Jealousy. Can't support your bs with facts so you claim piling on, insulting my career, and all the other crap you post in my threads with worthless substance.
And by the way, it's not the statistics that are riveting (I just happen to be very smart in that area as my Ph.D training is in that area), it's being a professor that I enjoy. Knowing that I am helping somebody in one of the most altruistic professions (teaching, law, fire, etc) is what gets me going every day. What about you?
Well,
You do realize I was just kidding you and Dell don't you? I didn't even read the thread except the post where he was taking shots at you guys. I generally ignore all "993 vs 996" and "she's gonna blow" threads unless I'm in the mood to give someone some sh#t.
Jim
I'm not your mate and jealous? Of what? Your overtly conceited, overbearing manner? Not likely. In Australia we have a thing called the 'Tall Poppy Syndrome'. Australians loathe people that always pontificate,name drop and brag about there achievements instead of just getting out and walking the walk. The tall poppy is hacked down because its just a worthless noxious flower on the end of a long stalk that sticks up above everything. So just let me say this: the man put forward a logical,coherent, experienced based argument-enough I would think to establish-at least- a viable premise that sustains his conclusion.
Calling it "bs","crap","worthless substance(contradictory?)","naive" etc etc are all personal insults that avoid the issue at hand. By the way I've worked in healthcare all my life-altruistic enough for you?
No its not actually "the way". Its narcissistic bigheads like you that need to be brought down a peg or to because sooner or later you wreck everything for everyone else. Its teamwork over here, not self-indulgent glory seekers who don't no when to stop.
Okay, gotta admit that Olivia Neutron Bomb gets my motor running. She was frequently in my wet dreams as a teenager.
Nicole Kidman never did anything for me.
BTW, I've just noticed the Shock Doctor decal on your car - I loved your avatar before, but now I've just gotta admit that's a seriously cool ensemble.
Aww, damn, how could I forget Elle!
See, this makes my point precisely, the good people get so pissed off by the rest of the country dragging them down that they leave and come here to the US!
Nice guy-makes light of people that die of melanoma.You must be great to live with. And how, pray tell, is Australia reponsible for skin cancer genius? Thats the environment,so not a valid criticism of the Australian people.
p.s and get that grotesquery off your headlights please Mr Dull'ard
^ Yup - I drank a lot of Victoria Bitter when I visited Townsville when I was in the Navy.
I hooked up with a girl named Samantha, too. She was pretty hot.
So why would you take a cheap shot at those in Australia who have suffered and died? And I'm not your buddy ok? Why don't you go down to hooters, you can brag all you wan't there-they won't know....
Wellard.....quit feeding the troll. Read the last several pages of him shouting "HEY GUYS, IT'S ME THAT STARTED THIS THREAD, QUIT HAVING FUN AT MY EXPENSE AND QUIT IGNORING ME!!!!"
He's not the one that has been posting from Friday night on through to 626am Saturday morning local time so he probably isn't thinking very clearly right now.
See how easy that was to ignore him and still talk to my RL buds at the same time. As the Guiness guys say.....Brilliant!
I'm bored. Let's make fun of the "I know it's slow and doesn't handle very well but I over paid for it because it's doors make a really cute pingy noise and all the other guys except the guys with boxsters and 996s wave at me when I flash my lights at them" guys for awhile!
Which is it? Saving lives or worried about what is being said in your precious little thread and by whom so you can post all night to it?
Now, who has the God complex? If you have been saving lives all night, I assume you are an ER physician? Trauma surgeon? what?
Sorry Jim, got sidetracked by the troll. I'm just don't know what to say as I am still laughing hysterically that I am even paying attention anymore to this thread. Time for a dirty martini
Boy you are a piece of work aren't you."your precious little thread". You need to go and have a good long look at yourself, You are so deluded with your own hubris that it allows you to make a comment like that. I made a simple post, with a valid argument and then made my own conclusion-rightly or wrongly-my conclusion-all you've done is petulantly dismissed it with statements like 'bs, naive,crap,worthless substance' and the like. How about replying to the'substance' of the thesis? Know you can't do that. Your legendary MO is open with some arrogant imperious pronouncement and then back off like a scolded puppy. Have a look back at your style-time and time again it happened:"Sorry I didn't mean to offend" or" well you may be right on that we'll agree to disagree" Its so obvious to any casual observer that you cannot entertain the fact you might be WRONG sometimes or you cannot accept that someone knows more than you. I'm going home to bed- your right I must be tired.
Paging Dr. Munro.........still waiting to hear what job you have that you have been saving lives all night. You opened that can of worms so I'm waiting........
Well that explains it then. Let me guess....... claims to be in healthcare, save lives, won't state in what capacity, get offended easily, etc ,etc, etc.......
Must be nurse as a technician wouldn't behave that way.
Can you say "Meet the Parents?" He chose to be a nurse because becoming a doctor would be considered as an overachiever. I don't think munro86 knows that Dell's wife is a doctor.
Behave what way? you raving peurile lunatic-your the doyen of getting offended and why be derogatory to nurses? Ok bigshot here it is: I'm called a hospital scientist working in a major trauma hospital. The laboratory is next to the trauma unit which handled two gunshot wound victims tonight- I provide all the blood products,collect samples from victims,run the biochemistry,haematology and blood bank depts by myself overnight The surgeon has just rung to thank me for my efforts-my shift was 11.5 hours long and I just done' six in a row and as a release I come back and forth to post here.
Wellard!!!! Where ya been? I see hitting the weights and burning off a few pounds. Let me catch you up on what you missed. Munro got his feelings hurt and has been on the warparth ever since. Each successive post he makes is more and more diatribe filled. It's actually quite good comedy.
Don't **** him off, he has been saving lives and not in the mood. I love how loosely he is able to take credit for saving lives.
And by the way munro, I wasn't being derogatory toward nurses, just using the typical sterotype out there of the BAD APPLE nurses and you just seemed to fit it. My wife will be the first to say that nurses are invaluable but you behavior is typical of the jealous nurse. Trust me, it's a small percentage but the stereotype is there for a reason....a small number brings down the rest.
Thanks for the great source of entertainment over the last several hours. Time to go mix those martini's I am craving, watch a movie, spend time with my family, and just go on with loving life.
Have fun perseverating on this thread and figuring out what whitty (detect sarcasm) comeback you car formulate.
I'll watch the rest of this one from the sidelines..............you boys play nice
Cool! I was impressed that you kept him baited while i was gone. Actually, my wife and son just got home, so I've got to go and play daddy again. Sadly, much as I love playing with dimwits I love my family more.
Have a great weekend everyone - catch y'all later!
munro86 - Your problem here is that you're telling people something that they don't want to hear.
So they'll do pretty much anything to divert attention, change the subject, make you look like a troll etc etc
See previous postings as definitive proof.
It's amazing how many pocket experts we have, who will dismiss the effort and experience that someone has put into stripping down and fixing their favorite car, and insist that it must be BS.
They can all stand up and show how they have more experience of course, right guys?
I mean, you wouldn't be calling BS on someone when you had no actual experience to back up you position, would you?
I mean, other than driving the thing... which really doesn't count for ****.
I think the Ban Hammer should be brought out to teach a few folks some manners
What's wrong with being a statistician....the ability to garner information from data is something that is lacking in most every profession, including healthcare. Most Ph. D.'s I work with don't know the first thing about data acquisition or analysis. Most authors of books/articles on reliability are in the same boat.
Oops...back to your regularly scheduled programming. Glad I have a turbo.
Cheers
Aww, come on, get real. We've had this discussion so many times that I've lost count. It has even become a sport in the 993 crowd to bait the 996 owners with this junk. You know it as well as I. We get someone in here every week playing this game.
The whole point is that no-one has any data on the engine failures, IMS failures, RMS failures (pick your topic), but there are plenty of scaremongers that are willing to claim that the sky is failing. Only Porsche knows the extent of any of these failures.
Here's the thing, if this is so common, why is it that out of all the Porsche owners I know, I've never met anyone with these issues outside of this forum? If it were so bad, then Porsche would be recalling cars to protect their reputation and the cars would be getting dumped faster than a hot turd.
The point is that there's no shortage of people who are more than willing to spout hysteria with no data. Emotion is a wonderful and powerful thing, but without data it's all baseless. The truth is that this forum and our respective PCA regions are full of 996 owners that are happy with their trouble-free cars. Just because someone cries wolf doesn't make them correct. I refer you back to my previous comment on farts.
A couple of points to note:
1) The guy writing the article clearly has way more actual M96 experience than anyone posting **** on this thread
2) You acted like an ***
3) You're now trying to defend the fact that you acted like an ***, by saying it's 'business as usual' - very poor.
Go back and read the first post in this thread again. Count the number of completely absurd statements (don't use your fingers, you'll run out). Ask yourself why people would question those. It doesn't take a M96 "expert" to see how comical many of his conclusions are. (FWIW, I don't personally care if the 3.4's blow or not and I'm not trying to support any other posters.)
none sense.
i personally know of several 3.4 that are over 100k with no issues. in fact one of which tracked the *** out of his car and no prob.
btw, ALL engines (event GT3, TT, GT3, cup car) will eventually fail, you know!
stop worrying, buy one, drive it. blow it up and buy another.
I guess I should be glad my wife is pregnant again.....so I can stretch the 500 miles until sudden dead of my 996 because in about 500 miles it will hit 75,000 MILES...AIIAIAIAIAIAIA.......
And even when the engine goes......my P looks damn sexy sitting on my drive way catching dust!!
What a f******g appalling way to address someone who tries to bring an interesting and informative technical article up for discussion.
Personal attacks............nice touch.
First, addressing the article. Do you not agree that is a total scare article with claims that the Porsche engineers and R&D folks have failed and created a ticking time bomb? Interesting? No. Informative? Depends on your interpretation of "information".
Second, personal attacks are ones started by munro long ago and you fail to see his history. Typical post by munro is to come into a thread, throw a grenade or an attack UNPROVOKED and then bail. So, if there is a reason munro gets what he does is that he has brought it upon himself.
My guess is that if he actually contributed to this site with help instead of worthless diatribe, supported the site itself, or actually came out from behind that mask of anonymity then maybe things would be different.
Thank you Holger.
The OP posted an absurd article under an inflammatory title, wondered why people picked on it, then got defensive and abusive. You wonder why we picked on him?
cdodkin is entitled to his opinion (see my comment on farts to see what I think about opinions), but unless someone backs things up with data, then to be honest that opinion isn't worth much.
I have little time for the Chicken Little's of this world.
Did Dell and I act like asses, sure, we had some fun with him because he was trying to back up an indefensible position, then got offensive (remember he started the abuse discussion before we did) when we called BS on him.
I don't often give someone a beating like that, but if you want to get abusive with those that call you on BS, then you should have the data to back it up.
Actually, I liked the article, because when a mechanic goes to the trouble of photographing broken down engines and explaining repair techniques and options, there is always information to be gleaned.
True, seeing that is always useful. Pity it had to be coupled with hysteria.
It's funny how some get sensitive when others are called on BS taught a lesson - I remember times in grad school (and actually a few times in my industrial career) that I've seen people almost reduced to tears because an audience laid into them after they said something that they could not substantiate and refused to back down.
I have been in Maine for awhile. I see you are still having fun with these postings! As for me, you know my 2001 had 57K miles when I determined a replacement was needed. $8.5K for the rebuilt engine from dealer with 2 yr warranty unlimited mileage(New actually) plus $1K for Lutzo to put in and I am happy as a clam. For those who cannot handle the issue, I say maybe another brand of car is where they might go.
Hope to see you in the fall at VIR. Also, I am volunterring at the Club Race in August. Are you particpating?
AB
Alex, hey buddy! Haven't seen you in the paddock for a while so the Maine excursion explains it. I'll talk to you offline. And yes, I'll be at the Club Race weekend. All paid up and ready to go!!!!
This is hilarious...
If you're not 'man enough' to take a blown engine or two, you should f*** off?
What the hell does that say about the brand!
The people 'not handling it very well', are the ones that keep insisting that nothing goes wrong, it never happens, it's all hype etc etc
That's called
denial
- and there's a whole lot of it on display here.
It seems to promote a gang bully mentality, and then a whole load of back slapping and self congratulation as to how 'brutal' they could be to the OP.
You guys should be ashamed.
You should be ashamed that you are using wikipedia as a citation.
As far as your belief that the M96 will blow once or twice to everybody is what is truly absurd. If the problem WAS as pervasive as you and the rest of the bashers believe then why do you continue to own this ticking time bomb?
The problem is obviously rare based on the numbers of M96 cars sold versus the grenades that have surfaced. Y'all go ahead and feed the machine of fear while I enjoy my M96 car with no worries.
Maybe you didn't read the definition of denial?
Actually you are correct on one thing, there is no excuse. Instead there is a REASON.
Time to stop getting dragged into this crap and let it die the death it deserves.........
I don't know of a generation in porsche engine since its inception where it did not need some type of overhaul/rebuild or major maintainance before it hits 100K miles. If you were not aware of it, you didn't do your homework.
Frankly, its the price of admission just like owning a 348/355 Ferrari which requires a $10K engine out major overhaul every 3 years regardless of miles.
I own one because I feel my 996 offers good value for the performance per dollar spent even if I have to replace an engine.
Buy a Japanese make performance car if you disagree. Buying my P car was an emotional decision and it will always worth my cost of ownership.
I'm aware of things ok - I'm personally two M96 engines down already.
Is that enough awareness for you?
Again, the 'Porsche breaks so live with it' argument is pure BS
I don't expect to need a new engine at 9,000 miles, or 20,000 miles, or 75,000 miles, or 100,000 miles - that's not acceptable.
Which is what? Calling a spade a spade? Well then yes, my MO hasn't changed. Just tired of 2 types of people here: (1) those that spread scare and fear on baseless claims; and (2) people like yourself that act like the scorned woman that was cheated on (in your case twice) and hates all men b/c of it when in fact the one that failed you is a SMALL percentage of all. Sell the car and move to another marque if you are so bitter or enjoy what you have. Either way, my skin is thick so your bs doesn't do much but entertain me
Dell, you always do the same thing.
Come into a thread that's clearly going to upset you - then do the "I'm prof stats so any 'evidence' you have is statistically irrelevant" routine - then tag team with your bully pal to humiliate the OP - then do the 'grand exit' claiming that you're bored with the whole discussion.
It's like watching a bad movie on endless repeat.
What ever you have to say about my experience with M96
1) I have a perspective based on seeing the downsides - and you don't
2) I'm still here, and I still own 2 M96 cars
So please leave as you stated you would - at least follow through on that promise.
I generally respect your opinions, but in this case I find you to be way off base.
Who is saying that the issues never happen? We were only saying that they're not as common and pervasive as some might have you believe.
There is no denial, there is realism. I'm a realist. It's my job to assess risk and I do not regard any of the issues mentioned as significant risk in the general 996 population. My interpretation is that you perceive the risk to be higher than it is and that's fine - work with how you see things and adjust accordingly. As others have said, maybe you should consider another car if you're living in fear of impeding engine detonation.
I recognize that some people are driven by emotion, I am not one of them. It's all about the facts. To paraphrase you, "If you're not 'man enough' to show data, you should f*** off"
Typical, when you have no evidence you make crap up. I never said what you have stated. Did no such thing trying to humiliate the OP rather he started with his own brand of throw a grenade and run and then was called out on it.
Upset? Not a chance. I actually find it comical and somewhat entertaining that some of y'all are so easily influenced by crap you read on the web. But I understand your stance now as misery does love company.
Grand exit? You are quite the delusional one as you seem to be the one that worries about my exit strategy.
If you are that hell bent on getting me to leave then maybe I'll just stick around to see what other barbs you can fling. This is really getting good.
I'd hate to see what would have happened if Ben was still around. Dear God, most of y'all would be in tears by now.
What are you some kind of superhero protecting the weak?
Denial of Denial is another form of Denial - complicated, but there you go.
So, if we can agree that you shouldn't bully people on here that disagree with you, we can all put our toys back in the toy box and play nicely.
You man enough to step up to that one?
You're a funny boy. If asking someone to justify and support their position is bullying, then I plead guilty. I guess you're not as hard on insisting on obtaining the facts as I like to be.
This world operates on fact and perception of fact. Sadly, the former is not always related to the latter in the case of people who are willing to let their lives be run by their perception of reality.
I do not bully, I hold people accountable to their words - more people should do the same and this world would be a better place.
And that is? Call somebody's bs what it is and then when they get their feelings hurt it is like arguing with a wall and so I leave? Then yes, you hit the nail right on the head. It's called lack of tolerance for ignorance.
Look, I'm not the one whining like a little girl because his ego got bruised while defending someone who was indefensible.
Honestly, big boy, grow a pair and move on because those huge **** of your are getting in the way of clear vision.
The OP was ignorant and become abusive - he got as much as he gave.
Ahh, that's it. We've found someone who was picked on at school and we've hit his sensitivity button. Oh Purleese! Just listen to yourself. My 3 year old has more maturity and cries less.
This is where this whole thing gets suspicious for me...
Although I haven't looked into it, I am betting that the author of the article would be more than happy to SELL you some of the mentioned solutions. Once the sale of a product of service is associated with the article, the article is no longer a friendly informational service to fellow Porsche owners, it is marketing collateral. It is nothing more than a commercial.
Now, the article may still be accurate, but as a commercial (however cleverly disguised it may be) it should be considered with caution, and confirmed by other (hopefully more trustworthy) sources. Unfortunately a reliable source of data to confirm such claims doesn't exist, except probably the data Porsche has, but isn't making available.
So while there is an unspecified body of evidence that hints at the scope of catastrophic M96 issues, it is going to take more than a commercial to convince me that I have a significant chance of experiencing such issues myself.
Just my $.02
RobC
Dell and Wellard - couldn't agree with you more regarding the alarmist nature of the OP. No gray area. munro posted that all of the engines will fail. Instantly inaccurate. Read the numerous posts from owners who have said otherwise! It's insane to argue that "all" will fail.
Munro pulled no punches here either. Neither did cdodkin. In the end, you have the Porsche guys who are saying that the premise/subject line of the OP is flawed - which it is. Munro and cdodkin, get another car under a different brand. Holy crap! If I were out sailing on a beautiful ocean and you told me about the hazards of sailing that will eventually consume all sailors, I'd shove you out of the boat! That's human nature. I'm having fun! I know the risk!
Don't get on a public forum and tell everyone that the end of our engines is absolutely coming. It's been done to death - search Rennlist or Renntech or 6speed.
You know what? It just might happen - same was true for my 951 and my Boxster S. And I might get cancer and I might have diabetes, and my house might burn down, and there might be another terrorist attack. OK - we all get it!
Dell and Wellard - thanks for fiercely sending the message back that many of us are tired of this alarmist topic.
Bob
I had the same concerns about the write ups from the UK outfit Autofarm.
They were clearly selling a product, but the need for that product wouldn't exist if people didn't have the problem in the first place.
And no-one would have bothered doing all of that research if there wasn't some form of pay-off at the end of it.
That's just business - but the information provided is at least a better look at what's going on inside the block.
Thank you Bob. I'm glad that others understand.
Dell and I have no patience for alarmists crying wolf with no data to support their assertions.
Ignorance can be fixed with education, stupidity goes through to the bone. I have lots of patience for the former, but not the latter.
Thanks Ash - glad to see that someone else upholds some basic standards of decency on the forum.
Personal attacks are always the last resort of the desperate - sad to see.
Porsche Cars North America, Inc.
980 Hammond Drive
Suite 1000
Atlanta, Georgia 30328
Phone: [phone removed]
Fax: [phone removed]
Porsche AG
Dr. Ing. h.c. F. Porsche AG
Porscheplatz 1
D - 70435 Stuttgart
Phone: +49 (0) 711 911 - 0
Fax +49 (0) 711 911 - 25777
Ah, the old engine failure discussion. Above you will find the contact information for Porsche. I will contact them and ask for the engine failure statistics. Please feel free to do the same yourself.
Let's assume they decline to provide any information (I'll let you know, it may take a few weeks), then here's what I suggest. If you worry about this problem: 1) Don't buy a Porsche 2) Sell your Porsche. Pretty freakin simple.
These days you can get a 1999 0r 2000 996 for 20K-25K easy, maybe less, maybe the price has dropped below 10K this week. Obviously your engine is going to blow, it's guaranteed, mine never has and I beat the crap out of it but of course I'm the only exception. So let's add another 12K for that new engine. So now you have a 996 for 32-37K with a brand new engine. All things considered...not the worst deal out there.
+1 Bob
I am frankly fed up feeling like I have bought the bastard step child of all Porsche's.
Despite the fact I had an engine let go I knew it was possible going in. Since then all I have had to do is change the oil add gas keep it shiny side up and enjoy enjoy enjoy!!!
And BTW for a 5yo car, its an 03 C2, when none Porsche folks ask what year and I tell them they say "oh gee it looks brand new". the style is still very fresh.
Thanks for letting me vent/rant.
happy motoring all,
Geoff
if you believe people like munro and cdodkin it was doomed before it even exited the production line.
It's so sad to have such a negative view of a vehicle that brings us all so much pleasure. Makes you wonder why they continue to own a Porsche - hell, if I had their views of the world I'd be slashing my wrists. I'm glad that I usually see a more optimistic view of the world around me.
Actually it's never been my view that they were 'doomed' - you made that up for yourself.
Clearly I'm an optimist, otherwise I wouldn't be on Porsche #3 at this point.
You can't get past you're stereotypical viewpoint, hence your clear inability to understand why I still love my 996.
I'm only judging you by your words - remember I'm data driven and take things on their face value. I make no assumptions. I'm not big on stereotypes.
William Blake once said, "To generalize is to be an idiot". Generalizing that all 996s are doomed due to a supposition that lacks data is clearly unwise.
Let me make it easier for everybody......
We are ALL going to die...sooner or later and a Porsche or any other car, computer, fridge, tv, phone is going to break one day...some sooner....some later.....so now are we going to live like there is no tomorrow?? without car, fridge, tv or phone??? NOOO way...... enjoy your stuff while it lasts and just hope that it won't die on you!
Great timing of this thread as I just got back from my PO BOX and cracked open my newest issue of PANO (July 2008) and the first question in the Tech Q&A section asked about the reliability of the M96 motor.
To make a long story short Reiser stated "The real question is whether the engine might actually fail outright...........There have only been a VERY FEW that have failed and needed replacement, and I don't know of any that were factory reman engines....."
Actually Dell - it's a question about rebuilt engines being used as replacements for early units that were returned to Porsche following RMS issues.
So he's saying that very few have failed outright due to RMS issues - you're deliberately misrepresenting the article.
Nice try though.
You do indeed generalize.
In your world, if you want to discuss 996 engine issues then you should 'buy another car'.
If you're on rennlist, then you shouldn't discuss engine failures.
Suggest two simple steps that might help you:
1) Don't click on threads that have obvious titles suggesting engine failures, you're only going to get upset and then offend someone
2) Start your own forum, perhaps called rose-tinted-996.com and ban all posts about engine failures
Not trying to misrepresent a thing, but nice try on your part.
Re-read his words and explain to me how he is talking about something other than OE and Reman motors? So you are stating that his words are that there have been very few REMAN (new word added for cdodkin) motors that have failed and needed replacment, and I don't know of any that were REMAN engines? Doesn't that sounds a bit redundant???
cdodkin, I give up. You win, the M96 sucks and is going to blow as is stated by the advertisement for services offered article that munro posted. I need to go put my CAB up for sale since it's worthless.
I am sure there will be others to play with you so no need to worry, you'll have company.
ps. I'll let the door hit me on the way out or whatever it is you planned to come back with as usual.
Author clearly states that it would be cheaper to do the repair than take out a $4000 warranty - how is a replacement engine going to cost less than $4000?
Well, this thread took the usual turn, from its intended intelligent automotive discussion to the Dell & Wellard let-me-belittle-all-who-are-less-educated-than-me show.
I typically enjoy your posts and harsh nature but this one beats them all.
I am not taking any sides here, really. Just a view from a neutral party.
What would be great is if someone could, in fact, come up with actual numbers, percentage of engine replacements, from PCNA or AG. Wouldnt you agree hard data is equally necessary for both sides of this forever aging argument in the water cooled section?
Technically speaking, the best advice I have learned regarding 986/996 service is, at each oil change, to peel-open the (old) oil filter, spread out the pleated material and have a look for swarf, shavings etc. This is really the only way to forewarn yourself of engine troubles.
No, not at all. There's no claim of holier than thou, just a call for common sense and realism.
If you think this is harsh, then you've not met most of the scientists I have worked with. I'm one of the nicer ones.
[QUOTE=chris walrod;5621749]Well, this thread took the usual turn, from its intended intelligent automotive discussion to the Dell & Wellard let-me-belittle-all-who-are-less-educated-than-me show.
I typically enjoy your posts and harsh nature but this one beats them all.
__________________________________________________
If you think this thread has a harsh nature, I dare you to read the linked thread below from Ferrari Chat.
If you have found this thread to be entertaining, then this link will have you in stitches.
http://ferrarichat.com/forum/showthread.php?t=204329
WARNING - If you click on the link be sure to have popcorn, your favorite beverage, and some spare time to laugh you’re a$$ off.
wellard I want to drive my P...I really do...but my little daughter is so CUTE....I can't leave her and I am afraid that when I take her in the P...the engine will blow up and we will be stranded....so I am stuck...my escalade uses 1gallon every 7 miles so that is not an option either...see life isn't that easy.
Hey, hasn't stopped me from getting out with my son - he cries if he thinks I'm going for a drive without him. I already have a second seat lined up for the new arrival so that I can have both of them in the car.
I agree.
I'm usually very nice up until the point where I don't have to be nice.
When I worked in MA I had the misfortune of working in a place that was mostly populated with MIT grads... oh boy!
Just like with anyone, they aren't all so bad. You know within 15 min of talking with one if you want them around or not. Its all in the attitude and whether or not they will be a team player. I have no room for any self promoting don't give a cuss about the real problem at hand types. Lots of MIT Phds are very very odd, but in the end that doesn't matter, if they play nicely.
Is this too off topic?
I figured any change would be an improvement.
In summary: the thread is an embarrassment to the community. Fortunately, discussions on this thread have no statistical relevancy to the quality of our community, similar to the unquantifiable engine failures. I am as just as confident that the majority of our members are well mannered as I am that the majority of our cars are sound.
Okay Wellard took your advice and brought my 996 another 40 miles closer to "the end"......got ride of one kid for a week and put him on a plane/////damn that tunnel to and from the airport in 2nd gear (switching to manual on my tip) the sound in that tunnel makes me feel very f'ing happy that I bought this ultimate sports car almost 3 years ago and you are right Wellard.....I don't how to get myself in the car after putting a child seat behind mine...... I am going to try to fit them all (accept for the 13yr old) in the back.....and go into (according to the guy who started all this nonsense) uncharted territory over 75K and beyond to prove the world that it can be done!! ( I know it has been done many times before---but I am going to do it again!!)
how about this for outside the P??
All I'll say is you'd be surprised how many 97-08 986 Boxster motors through 3.4-3.8 litre motors let go (I'm around them all day). I own one and it's a small worry in the back of my mind but I just look at it as a way to upgrade to X51 engine package. :-) BTW - my coworker read the whole article posted by Munro and he said it was well-written and made sense. If you want to do yourself a favour though, talk to a master tech at the dealer and ask him for his honest opinion on which car you should buy. It makes far more sense than asking owners on a message board.
I love your idea!!
Yeah, if we had two kids close to the same age and in Recaro seats, then it would be a tight fit.... thankfully my son will be just old enough to fit into a smaller seat by the time the second one arrives and it hopefully will not be an issue to have him sitting behind me.
Crap, I forgot the "
" icon...
Yes, of course this thread is pointless. My car is on its second engine...the demise of the first engine had nothing to do with the thickness of the cylinder walls. There are many reasons that any engine can fail; I'm of the school of thought that says that if this is something that greatly concerns you, you're probably better off choosing a different marque of car.
I'll be out driving my Porsche.
I will admit that if you open a thread with the subject "ALL 3.4's Will Eventually fail!" that you are indeed looking for trouble but this thread certainly is not what I would call in the Rennlist spirit. It would be bettor off in the abyss.
90,000 Miles on 986 Engine #2
Doesn't mean that I can't discuss engine failures through - I'm not a fan of the extreme polarization that some here are proposing.
'Talk about engine failures - buy a Honda' - doesn't work for me.
I kinda like free speech and open discussion rather than being told what I can or cannot say, or which car I can or cannot own.
Absolutely.
But that's where the OP went wrong. He seems to forget that the M96 "expert" is stating an
opinion
, not a
fact
. Had he worded his post differently, this thread never would have gotten so hostile. Obviously, every 3.4 doesn't self-destruct at a set number of miles. Making that blanket statement is just absurd.
This is insane nonsense. Stop this doomsday crap about the 3.4 engine, and let us just admit that all engines eventually brakes sooner or later.
This much depends how the engine is treated but of course you can find a few exeptions...if you look hard enough.
I have never heard of a high performance car that just keep on driving without any problems, despite I have never myself had any issues with my 996
My 5 cents.
Yup, stating an opinion is fine - everyone is allowed an opinion and is allowed free speech. When you state opinion as fact, then others have the right to call you for your BS and tell you that you're full of it.
There's a huge difference between opinion and fact and you should always be careful to distinguish between the two - especially when it's easy to show that your opinion is contradicted by the facts.
Is it me or is anyone else tired of these stupid detonation post? I can not even read them anymore.....ah hell I might as well as just sale the damn POS
I think the consensus is that the majority of us are sick and tired of the those that want to blow hot air over this.
Some love to talk the subject to death and speculate over something that has less substance than butt fluff, but most of us don't want to hear it any more. I know I don't want to hear it, but when I see the conspiracy theorists representing pure speculation as fact, then I also don't want to see that - It's harmful to the community and our resale values.
If you check, I'm pretty sure you have power over your own destiny, and can choose
NOT
to click on threads that might upset your delicate nature.
So rather than trying to hound people out of town for posting - just pass on by and have a stress-free forum.
It's not rocket science.
This thread ceased being about cars or facts a long time ago. Sorry Wellard, but your "back it up with facts" talk lost all credibility at post 74.
Stefan
Post 74 was not about cars, but it was a fact.
Hey, I've never cared if people agreed with me or not. I don't care if my opinion is popular. You can guarantee that I will always stand up for what is right. This is no different. This is not about popularity, it's about right and wrong.
Yeah, that was funny considering that only the OP and the mod can lock the thread and strangely enough the OP has gone AWOL... how did Dell put it, "lob the grenade, then run"?
Damn, tooloud - that's the first hurtful thing anyone has said.
Comparing to OT is just low.
I am also surprised that this has not been shut down - it's long past it's expiration.
I agree Wayne, I am glad you and Dell stepped up to squash this nonsense. Saying that all 3.4's will fail is just unbelievable IMO.
I wish John D would eliminate this thread
, it is not fair to you guys who own the 3.4's.
I for one, plan on getting back into the 996 or possibly a 997 in the future. I am not scared of these cars by any means.
The 996 has suffered enough from all this false hype and has cost many here and around the world lots of money in depreciation. It is sickening.
While this thread was roaring on there was a thread in the racing section about starting a 3.4L 996 spec class in club racing. I think it's a great idea. Our cars make great race cars and I found the 3.4 to be a very capable race engine. I ran one on the street and in DE for 4 years and then club raced it for another. It was still rock solid when we swapped it for a 3.6L X51 for the extra power.
I didn't read this whole thread so I don't know how out of hand it got but I'm firmly with the crowd that knows a occasional 3.4 goes pop but by and large they are a great engine.
Jim
Thanks Cory (and Jim)
I know that there were some out there that did not appreciate how Dell and I went about handling this, but ultimately what we did and said was right. Blanket statements about the impending detonation of 996 engines are false, misleading, and harmful to the community.
The majority are tired of the Chicken Little attitude that is totally unsupported by reality. Sure, some engines do go wrong, but not the majority. The vast majority of 996 owners are happy and have no problems. Dell and I took a stand against the hype on a matter of principle. As I said in a previous post, it's about right and wrong and in this case the facts do do not support those that say the sky is falling in.
I think that we should egg on the subject even more.....after a lot of research I came to the conclusion that the Porsche 911 (doesn't matter what design number) is actually a VW beetle and therefor overpriced and overrated. My recommendation therefor would be that we all visit the VW/Audi/Porsche dealership and trade in our 911 (whatever year, yes that goes for you too 997 owners..you are no that special...your engine WILL FAIL TOO..some day!!) for a VW beetle turbo, put a flower in the dashboard and start enjoying life a little without all the doomsday thought of failing engines, RMS issues, flat tires, non-working remotes, rattles in your dashboard, allignment issues, etc etc. Life is too short!!
my 2 cents....
HEEEEEE.....why so negative about my boat??? I can't afford a real boat and this comes closest. And I got a "SEA" of space to haul everybody in my growing family and that for only about a dollar per mile!! LOL
[Image-only post; no author-written text. Original image references:]
https://rennlist.com/forums/graemlins/thumbup.gif
https://rennlist.com/forums/images/smilies/beerchug.gif
Doesn't matter what you thought about the subject matter, that sort of behavior was a no time justified.
And all the patting on the back, and 'well done for shutting him down' comments won't change that fact.
Pretty funny.
Hey, if that's the worst that someone can come up with while hiding under a fake username, then life is not bad.
I've been called worse than that to my face and taken it as a compliment. My wife normally uses language like that as foreplay.
Damn, I'll be glad when she's not pregnant so that she can start abusing me again.
wellard there you go now you know......it seems like if you write too many lines in your post, you automatically become an AH.......so I am going to keep it short, without any valuable info (like usual) in that way I am the good guy, nobody learns anything from.
I think that people are getting confused between well informed posters taking the time to write down their knowledge or opinions and arrogant ******, trying to force everybody to see it their way....
Thank you. I can be both if you like, they're not mutually exclusive.
Nicolaas, that's especially nice of you considering that we've had a disagreement or two in the past. It's nice to know that you still love me.
Well, they'd start by setting up a dozen user names--in 2004--to pull out of their *** when they chose.
I haven't met any moderators on RL that have so little going on in their life that they'd do that. If they didn't like it, they'd just close the thread or pull out the ban churro.
I have so many disagreements with my wife everyday (about everything) that 1 or 2 with a guy don't matter....but now that you brought it up (and I don't remember..but still) SO YOU ARE AN AH!!LOL
Clearly the idea that someone registered an ID in 2004, so that 4 years later they could take pot shots at Well'ard without revealing their true identity, is so much more likely......
Cue X-Files music
hilarious thread.
engine fails, so.. buy another. they will all fail.
why do you eat every day, you will get hungry again... well eat again.
why do you shower everyday, you will get dirty again.... just shower again.
so drive the **** out of your cars, blow it up, buy another.
Cdodkin, I agree with certain things you have posted on this thread but you are completely wrong on this issue.
Joel Reiser's exact words in that article are "The real question is whether the engine might actually fail outright(referring to 996 engines). That would be the way you'd be ahead with the aftermarket warranty. There have only been a very few that have failed and needed replacement, and I don't know of any that were factory reman engines."
Joel is stating that very few original 996 engines blow-up and to his knowledge, no reman engine has failed. BTW, Joel is very knowledgeable when it comes to 996s, he is the PCA tech for the 996 and he also is the owner of a performance shop specializing in 996s among other late model Porsches. He has great knowledge of the 996 and he has had contact with vast numbers of 996 owners. His statements are directly counter to the statements made by the mechanic referenced in the original post. I for one hold Joel's opinion in a higher regard than the mechanic referenced to by the OP.
Also, I recall very distinctly comments made by Rennlist member 99firehawk in which he claimed that he saw very few blown 996 engines in his shop and most of those that he did encounter were due to money shifts. 99firehawk was/is a Porsche tech/mechanic at a Porsche dealer in Miami, Florida. Again, his comments were in stark contrast to the comments made by the mechanic referenced by the OP.
I hate to perpetuate this thread because I do feel that it is an embarrassment to RL and Porsche owners in general in so many ways. However, the statements made by the OP are so outrageous and unfounded that they need to be addressed.
I too wish the moderators would delete this thread or at the very least change the title due to its blasphemous nature.
This is like saying everyone will eventually die, life is a fatal disease... mechanical things wear out, meaning all engines will eventually fail
mines running well and it has about 100k km on the clock(knocks on wood), if i was to believe what i read on the web i must be in the minority, but everone else i know who has a 3.4 doesnt have problems either.
I have had a failure in my hydraulic accumulator (abs pump (not my bladder)) ;P and have heard of at least 2 other 996's having the same problem with similar aged cars, should i start scare mongering about that to at least give a new focus. Im guessing that most of these comments originally started from the water cooled will never be as good as air cooled brigade and the poor old 996 being the first of its kind will always suffer from these type of comments.
That is a little laughable. None of the admins are afraid to post or PM their thoughts. They all know me and would not hesitate to let me know their opinions.
I thought it interesting that Concept and Munro registered in the same timeframe. Hmm.
Alright I suppose it's time to come clean. I'm munro86 and concept. I'm also RayS, LVDell, Palting and Mooty. I am Wellardmac and I was Ben until they threw me out. I�m still Scouser but I�ve been too busy replacing engines to post much. When I�m feeling helpful I�m Loren and when I�m not I�m�.well you can fill in the names here.
So why do I come on Rennlist and talk to myself all day? I�ve made it my personal mission to destroy the market for 996s. As it turns out, I don�t actually own any of the cars I�ve claimed. No cup cars, no 996 racecar, no cab. For years I�ve dreamt of nothing else but to own a 99 996 coupe with a sun roof and six disk cd changer. I�ve managed to amass $4,000 in cash, a pre-approved home equity line of credit and eight credit cards for a total $16,521 in hard cold cash. The way I see it, another 6,000 or so negative posts and I should have the value of my dream car right where I want it.
Thanks to all of you that have been unwittingly helping me with my cause.
Unfortunately, the idea that remanufactured M96 engines don't fail is a myth.
http://www.rennteam.com/showflat.php...gonew=1#UNREAD
And as anyone who has had to deal with Porsche North America will tell you, when you get into a discussion about your engine failure, they quickly produce the Non Disclosure Agreement paperwork, and quietly swap out your engine.
Joel may or may not know people with blown engines, but given the dependence of Panorama magazine on Porsche, he's unlikely to be in a position to discuss the issue without serious economic impact to the publication.
4 out of 5 local 986 & 996 Porsche owners I know have required new engines - and that's as significant a stat as Joel's - as Dell delights in telling me
As for discrediting the tech at Hartech - no idea why you'd feel that was a valid position to take. Hartech have been servicing Porsche in the UK since 1984 - and the article posted was part 4 of their buyers guide to used Porsche cars.
http://www.hartech.org/buyers.html
So they'd be deliberately putting people off from buying used cars from them, if they were just making the stuff up. I'd suggest you read the full 4 part article before you trash the tech or the dealership.
I still haven't seen or heard anyone on here that has more experience of M96 engine tear downs than that referenced in the article.
Note, most Porsche dealerships in the US, and their staff, are used to engine replacements rather than engine rebuilds.
Those that do tear down and rebuilds tend to be race shops - and those I've dealt with are more than happy to discuss the known engine failure issues on M96 - they are of course not under the NDA from Porsche.
So, you can make your own mind up - but denying any discussion of the subject is unlikely to put you in a position to make an informed judgement.
I'm kinda glad that some of the engines have failed - don't care which percentage have failed, either. It's made the prices drop (plus lots of inventory) significantly, so you can get a great deal on them.
It's just nice that you can buy a modern Porsche for 20-something thousand, and even if the engine blows up you can replace it and still have spent much less than most modern cars nowadays. They are a true bargain. I would be scared and upset if 996's were still 60-thousand dollars or more, but they are only a third that much, so we should all rejoice.
First off, ovalling has been around since engines have been around. It is not a theory, it is a fact than can be proved with a ID mic or telescoping gauges.
Now, the degree the cylinder ovals is the issue that has to be addressed and I am fairly sure no one on this board has been able to do a test themselves.
I heard that the medical center in San Fran has developed a treatment for ovalling. Apparently there is a growing number of people experiencing the problem. They say the ncrease in cases is do to the increase in the number a gerbils roaming the streets and parks.
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.
