RMS Question

If the RMS has been replaced, does that usually solve the problem over the long term, or will the seal again fail due to other tolerance issues in the engine? I am in the market for a 996 and have found a few at Porsche dealerships which have had the RMS replaced in order to re-sell them.

Do a search on this and you will find a multitude of RMS related pages. Everything you ever wanted to know about RMS is at your fingertips.

lol, and more even!

Just crawl underneath the car and look at the engine. If you see oil don't buy it. Look at the bolts to see if they have been removed. Bolts that have been removed will have marks on them from the wrenches etc. If they are virgin bolts and there is no oil anywhere you're golden. I'd rather do that than trust the dealership to do a PPI

It's a problem with the seals. There were a few engines where the seal seat itself was out of spec, but Porsche now has a tool that detects those and have replaced the engines. The latest seal seems to be golden. Have taken mine to 6 days of DE and several thousand miles already. No problem. The latest seal came out November 2005. So, if the seals were replaced after that date, they should be the new seals.

I have done a search on RMS and have read many posts about it on other threads. However, I'm still not sure I understand the problem completely. Some posts have talked about the actual seat (as mentioned in the previous post) or block tolerances being slightly off, so that even a new seal won't solve the problem. This would seem to explain why Porsche replaced a number of engines rather than just replacing the seals. However, other posts (here and elsewhere) indicate that replacing the seal with a new one will do the trick. Am I to understand from the replies to this thread that both could be true (i.e. the blocks that were out of tolerance got replaced and that those that weren't only needed replacement of faulty seals)? If the dealer has a used car for sale that is out of warranty, I suspect they would go for the cheapest fix (just replacing the seal), rather than replacing an entire engine. What I am trying to figure out is whether used cars with a service history of RMS problems should be avoided unless they've had a complete engine replacement, or whether one with a seal replacement is OK.

If you are going to let it worry you, but a CPO. it's not worth the aggravation to look under the car every week dreading the day you will see an oil leak. If you are the type who doesn't worry then take your chances, and get a great 00 or 01 for 30 to 35k. Even if you have an RMS leak it's not that big of a deal for a wonderful car. Around 800 bucks to fix in most areas. You'll spend a few extra K on a CPO but will have peace of mind. I really believe it is a personality trait issue. RMS leaks even happen on brand new 997s. Either way, buy a 996. You won't regret it, unless your name is Bob.

AFAIK, all engines that fail the seal seat test tool are replaced by PCNA, even out of warranty. Fail the seat test, engine is replaced. Of course, I'm sure there are exceptions. However, this is usually at the dealer's discretion. Since the dealer owns the used cars, and PCNA pays for the new engines to replace those that fail the seat test, I am fairly certain the used car from a Porsche dealer will have seal seats that pass. Of course, there is always the CPO for peace of mind.

Thanks guys for answering my questions. I apologize for beating the RMS dead horse topic, but I needed some clarification. It doesn't seem from what I've learned here, that the RMS issue is as big a deal as many people make it out to be.

It was a big deal because it is a design fault with the engine and not the seal. PAG was able to engineer a seal to work around the problem for the majority of engines, we think. It has been less than year so its too early to tell but the frequency of RMS repairs seems to have dropped. Its a tough call to make because so many owners are concerned with their resale value that its nearly impossible to get a real idea of the numbers (owners of previous model 911s do/did the same thing.) The only reassuring thing is that PAG finally sorta/kinda acknowledged the problem (in the media) so that means they may have some confidence in the latest seal. With the major design defects effecting previous 911s they were able to keep quiet and the owners in the dark mainly because there really weren't many/any places for owners in large numbers to compare notes (there were very few of us on Porschephiles/Porschefans in the early nineties). Today if I were buying a used 996 and I had the choice between one with a history of RMS repairs and one without I would buy the one without unless there was a significant discount. If a year from September the leaks haven't returned in similar numbers (the time between all previous seal fixes has been around 2 years) then I would possibly ignore the RMS history but not yet, it is too early to tell.