18 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHNew to 996's - What's your thought on this one?
Leading reported evidence
Use ...ca29952s654457
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that performed work without a confirmed outcome
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Leading evidence: 'Use ...ca29952s654457' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Replace )' (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.
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
The car appears to lack the removable wind deflector which came standard (it's around $300 to replace).
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
uuuuuuum I would have to have a closer look before I would run away from this one.
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
usually CELs tell us nothing but this one said it all: "Run from me."
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.
18 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: 20261026T105141Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
I'm new to the Porsche world and have been doing some research on 996's. I've come across this '02 C4 Cab that has sparked my interest:
http://www.baronbmw.com/details/Used...CA29952S654457
I took it for a test drive today and the car was driving beautifully....until coming to a stop toward the end of the drive and the CEL came on. The car was idling smoothly but once the throttle was touched, it sounded as if it was missing and had little to no power. I limped it back to the dealership and the sales guy assured me they would get it to the mechanic and would let me know what the issue was. I was told that the alternator had just been replaced and that they were using a local Porsche mechanic and not doing work through their techs. I'm assuming a 60K mile service has not been performed.
I'm certainly not in any rush to jump on this but would appreciate anyone's comments concerning the shape of the car given it's age, mileage and price. Of course I would get a PPI done by a local specialist before doing anything!
The car appears to be in really good condition save for some minor rock chips and little imperfections here and there. I'm just wanting to gauge what some of the experts here might think of this one. Thanks!
I'm no "expert", hell, I wasn't even really aware that there was a C4 NON-S cabrio in 2002....I thought they were C4S by default but clearly not.
The pics look good from the outside, that interior looks much more beat than my '02 Coupe with similar miles. Especially the headlight switch and the levers on the column. Miles are about average for the year IMO. Price - I'd say it's a starting point but wouldn't pay that much myself for that particular car. But that's personal. Records are important, if there is no history available on the car then the PPI is doubly important. And do not take it to "their" guy for that.
It'd be interesting to find out what tripped the CEL. Be careful with that, it could be the reason the prior owner got rid of it. It's easy to make the light go away for a few days but then it will come back if the underlying issue is not resolved.
I wouldn't like the idea of it throwing a cel on your first drive. Could be just the tank was full throwing fuel into a carbon cannister that the car throws a cell for shutting a valve or such. Normally the cars read between 3/4 and full when stopping pumping at the first shut off which is adviseable to prevent the cel and damaging the carbon in the cannister.
Personally I'd not bother with this one. All that is shiny on the outside is not gold - and I have an issue with dealers, especially with high line dealers, not investing in a car to assure that it is problem free before offering it for sale. The overall condition does not look so great to begin with, and throwing a CEL and then the explanation of an outside tech working on the car would be of concern to me.
The good news is that it has sparked your interest, these cars aren't scarce so one could really enjoy the hunt for that "right car". And good that you are not in a rush to have this particular car.
I'm with the "pass on it" bandwagon. The CEL isn't good. The thrashed switches etc. inside suggest prior owner neglect. The car appears to lack the removable wind deflector which came standard (it's around $300 to replace). The spec list for this model on Edmunds.com suggests it should come with a spare tire, which isn't there--I know my '02 C2 cab has one, but the photo of the frunk doesn't even show a spare tire anchor point so edmunds.com may be wrong. It also appears significantly overpriced, given its condition--$20K tops.
If you do decide to pursue the car, have it taken to a Porsche specialist of your choice for a thorough PPI before you make any commitment. I would not trust the dealer selling the car (particularly a BMW dealer) to provide you any statement of mechanical fitness.
If you do pass, know that there are plenty of very good examples of the 996 available. Once you do get one, you'll have trouble wiping the huge grin off your face!
Good luck
Before pursuing further, I'd want to know what the CEL code is/was that came on. Then post the code so we can shed some insight on the code. As mentioned. there are plenty of used Porsche 996s out there. Be choosey and GL.
A CEL light on the fist drive would have me worried. There are LOTS of fish in the sea. If it's not this one another one will pop up soon enough. Don't limit yourself to local cars. Being in KC also, I've bought cars from as far as Arizona and California. No issues so far.
A CEL at the end of a test drive with the engine acting like it did does not give me the warm fuzzies about the car.
I'm of the mind that if a serious problem crops up during the test drive that does it for me. The car is off my list. I'm not interested in taking on a car that needs sorting when I buy a used car.
Oh and kudos to you for taking the car on a long enough test drive. This is so important as I think your experience shows.
One big thing not going for this car is the 60000 has probably not been done. The cabriolets with hard tops, 4 wheel drives, 3.6 engines Not excessive milage. All put the price up. So If the 60K maintenance HAS been done (which I very much doubt) then the price is good. I still dont like that light switch condition and a few of the other sticks on the column. Does suggest someone has been messing inside the steering colum or underneath the dash. To me the real red flag. Probably some heavy handed jerk who knows sweet F A about the car and was probably too tight fisted to take it to a good Porsche mechanic.. uuuuuuum I would have to have a closer look before I would run away from this one. A real closer look and a 100 mile fast drive with the hard top on ( to listen to the gearbox/transmission) and off to see if the rag top works as it should do. vWInter time is NOT the time to be looking at a cabriolet. It could cost a buyer an arm and a leg when summer comes.
OK, I just heard back from the dealership and the "explanation" from their "mechanic" is that there must have been something in the fuel tank from it sitting on the lot for so long that got sucked into the fuel system. But, he has it all fixed up and it's "running great." I think I'm going to have to pass on this one and keep the search going! Thanks again for all the replies.
Good call, Matt. I'm looking for my first 911 right now and have (sigh) passed on several that had something not right about them. If you don't you'll regret the car - the opposite of the right feeling. Your car is out there - good luck.
Also, I agree - pass on that dealership. Cheers
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.