58 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHInteresting Intermediate Shaft info..
Reported or suspected cause
rare too
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 E46 M3 rod bearing issue was rare too and for the engines impacted by this, BMW extended the warranty by a huge margin from the original factory warranty.
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
Anybody who is half awake knows before they write the check for a Porsche or anything like it that they are buying more risk than they would with a mass produced car.
Leading evidence: 'rare too' (1 discussions report identifying this cause; no attributable repair resolution). Across 1 matching discussions, the most frequently mentioned possible cause is 'rare too' (1 discussions; 1 report identifying it and 0 suggest it). The most frequently discussed action is 'Check porsche or anything like it' (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 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.
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
Impressive for a exotic, or say at the least semi, that just happens to be used by many as a DD.
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
The speculative conclusion, if you will, to the IMS bearing failures is due to running the engine with low oil levels which is wholly the responsibility of the owner to keep full,
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
Anybody who is half awake knows before they write the check for a Porsche or anything like it that they are buying more risk than they would with a mass produced car.
These are separate views of the same evidence. Frequency alone does not establish a fix, and these counts must not be added together.
Check porsche or anything like it
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
Anybody who is half awake knows before they write the check for a Porsche or anything like it that they are buying more risk than they would with a mass produced car.
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
A properly engineered roller or ball bearing, suitable in size for the anticipated load should last nearly indefinatly when well supplied with clean oil and operated within its limitations for load and temperaure.
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
Oh forty, based on my limited knowledge, does a better job than other oil weights in getting to all the nooks and crannies of the engine than the heavier oils that some of the others recommend here that are not recommend by Porsche.
These are separate views of the same evidence. Frequency alone does not establish a fix, and these counts must not be added together.
rare too
No successful repair reported for this finding.
1
Identified cause
0
Suspected cause
0
Reported fixes
Read evidence and context
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 E46 M3 rod bearing issue was rare too and for the engines impacted by this, BMW extended the warranty by a huge margin from the original factory warranty.
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
The speculative conclusion, if you will, to the IMS bearing failures is due to running the engine with low oil levels which is wholly the responsibility of the owner to keep full,
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.
58 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.
Just talked with my P car tech and he informed me in all his years with Porsche and Ruf, he's only seen a few instances of IMS issues with the 996 - the Boxter was another story. He says RMS is far and away the most prevalent issue with the 996 FWIW
Well, last year the IM shaft failed on my 1999 996 with 73k miles... so it does happen!
Thank god for the merciful engine replacement program from Porsche. Ended up with all new stuff under the engine lid with a 2 year warranty on all of it for a pretty reasonable price. Can't complain.
David
If it were the dealer telling me that, I'd see your point.
It'd really be interesting to compile a list of who has had IMS failures and include variables such as: build date, maintenace frequency, drive style, climate car is most frequently driven in, etc.. One thing I'm really interested knowing of those who've had IMS failures, was it coupled with anything else (like RMS) and how diligent were those with failures at allowing their cars to warm to proper operating temps. before 3k+ revs.
Much of that information is buried in a policy Porsche had for engine replacements rather than repairs at the local dealership so that no mechanical "autopsies" were ever done. The most common failures seemed to be IMS failure, intermix failures, and the rear main seals...but as these cars exceed warranty coverage, the IMS and other failures are being exposed at a more frequent rate. I would imagine that a company like the Auto Farm in England would have some good information on those failures since they're a major rebuilder of the 96 engines. There was an effort sometime back to try to capture some of this sort of information in a poll....I don't know what ever happened to that poll, but in reality it would only show the folks who know about the forum where it was run.
That is simply not true. It is not "quite common." Quite common would mean that at least half of the 996 engines experienced a IMS failure. The truth is, it's a very small percentage.
-Charles
I agree - hence the request at starting a poll (one thing I didn't mention in OP was to inlude manual or tip)
This is one area confusing me - as
dertub
says in his post, his happened at 11k, was that recently or 5 years ago?
Maybe we can put a bit more effort into this poll?
What is the point of a poll for this issue though? In no case will it hold any statistical merit as the use group is biased and will invariably represent a non-valid cross-section of owners. All of this is either personal experience or word of mouth. The only party that could really tell you is Porsche and they are not talking.
Statistical merit is furthest from my mind - I'd really like to see if there's a constant variable to be found. If so, what can others do (if anything) to prevent?
I can see your point about a non-valid cross-section of owners, just really at the mercy of those who'd respond with just the facts!
I cannot believe that there is one new thing to say about this. Anything anyone wants to know is available by searching forums. And rehashing it again and again has a wonderful effect on Google page rank, thereby ensuring that all future buyers of 996s have the erroneous impression that the cars are time bombs and therefore should be cheap to buy.
And we want to add to all this wonderfulness a bogus poll that, methodologically, would make USA Today blush.
If you really want to see previous efforts at statistical info gathering...do a search for "Class Action"....every so often someone digs up the old issues about failures and tries to gather info....but the question is....to what end? The comment about the information being skewed is true. To me, only someone like the Auto Farm's repair records would possibly produce better statistical information since they've been rebuilding the engines for a quite some time since the warranties ran out....but again...to what end? Where is this going? Another class action? Curiosity? To feel better about the longevity of the engines? Fact is, there were failures...some that occurred more often than they should have....but we have no accurate stats about what percentages those failures represent within the whole population of the many that were produced.....only a gathering place for the stories about those that failed.
I had an IMS failure in my 40th Anniversary a couple of months ago at 15,000 miles, covered on warranty. This is my first Porsche which I purchased last August. Needless to say I was dissappointed. My dealer, Barrier Porsche, did a great job replacing the shaft.
My concern, which remains, is what is the cause of this. We don't know how common this is, Porsche isn't telling. If the part is underengineered we would expect the failures to be more common with failure increasing with time on the engines. From what I've read these things seem to fail early-on, suggesting that it may be a quality control issue. There is the possiblity that is something else we haven't thought about.
When this one component fails it is without much warning, catastrophic and very expensive. It is frequent enough to have drawn plenty of attention. It was mentioned to me that my shop had seen twenty or more of these fail. There should be no engineering questions about something as simple as a layshaft and it should virtually never fail. Have any of us heard of something this simple being a source of this much trouble on other modern car engines. Remember this shaft just turns the cams and is not involved directly in carrying the stresses of making power. These are not just wearing out, but failing!
For me it all boils down to this. The Intermediate Shaft is a potential "hand grenade" in our engines. Although I have been assured it doesn't reoccur once replaced, as there has been no explanation as to why this happened.
I believe Porsche should offer this:
1. Explain why these seemingly routine but crucial and expensive, non exotic, bearings fail.
2. A clear desciption of what has been done to improve the replacement part. I still don't know if the replaced shaft is really any better, beyond being informed it is "better".
When my CPO nears expiration I will have to consider if I like the car enough to continue to own it out of warranty, knowing it has the potential to unpredictably and expensively fail. Do we know of any other cars that have this record of expensive engine problems? Go page through a Corvette board for example. Do they have a similar problem persisting and repeating for years?
Maybe a class action suit is the answer. Really, these are very expensive high performance engines that have a very expensive and as yet unexplained potential for failure of what should be a routine component. Simply put, Porshe should be more forthcoming on this, perhaps extending the warranty on this component to the life of the engine.
[/SIZE][/SIZE]
Spare yourself the stress. Seriously. Even Toyota never gave people that much satisfaction when they got nailed with a class action on the oil gelling issue. You're never going to get your 'explanation'. Never. And, for that reason, you're never going to get clear information about what improvements have been made. Given the affluence of Porsche owners (and the number of them that are probably lawyers, for that matter), if there was any hope for legal recourse it would have happened by now.
If you can't afford to keep the car, then sell it. I wish people would stop whining about this, but I doubt it with prices dropping the way they are and ever-less-affluent owners joining the club. You bought a low volume semi-exotic sports car from a company with a well-documented, long, long history of making funky engineering decisions that sometimes don't work out. (Sorry, but the M96's issues aren't the first Porsche has had, nor are they the most expensive to fix). Love it or leave it. Caveat emptor. It's not a Toyota. Sometimes even a Toyota is not a Toyota.
Bruce is right - every porsche that has come down the pike has had some sort of issue that needed resolution - 993's had leaking valve guides and SAI port clogs, early 964's had head gasket issues, SC's had the rubber centered clutch that exploded, 2.7 liter cars were notorius for weak studs, 2.0 cars had collapsing chain tensioners, etc. Of all the 911 variants issues the 996 may be the best value of all seeing as instead of expensive fix you can get an entirely new motor for what a top end rebuild on any of these other cars cost.
Spoken like a presumptuous self - righteous Canuck.
I pay for every car in full, title in hand, thank you. That shouldn't mean I can't come to a public forum and inquire (like others you say are whining) to see what may be common amongst owners (even the lowly poor) who have experienced failures. If there's one too many posts about this, then don't read them - stick to your USA Today subscription
I can afford a Porshe, I wrote a check for it, no financing.
This component should almost never fail, just wear out along with the rest of the engine. Engines can blow from hard imprudent use. Some components are understandably consumables, belts, water pumps.
A properly engineered roller or ball bearing, suitable in size for the anticipated load should last nearly indefinatly when well supplied with clean oil and operated within its limitations for load and temperaure. It is particularly distrubing that if this bearing should fail, the consequences are so severe. In the case of my car it began making noise only about half a mile from my dealer, lucky coincidence. If I have been pushing the engine at the time of failure the engine would have suffered terrible damage.
It seems that our engines come with a $10,000 or so hand grenade that may pull its own pin as standard equipment. Too bad no "hand grenade" delete option available.
What has my nationality got to do with this?
If you want to get personal, bring it. Anybody who is half awake knows before they write the check for a Porsche or anything like it that they are buying more risk than they would with a mass produced car. I'm not saying it's right or wrong. It just is what it is. As for the gratuitous insults, as I say, bring it. It's what people usually do when they don't have anything intelligent to offer in counter to an argument. Which does nothing for your case.
I don't know why I wade into these discussions assuming that people are literate or will take the time to read my posts...
I AM NOT DEFENDING PORSCHE. That clear enough? All I am saying, all I have ever said, is that the pissing and moaning will not help, will probably hurt us all, and adds nothing new to the discussion. The subject has been covered to death in forums like this and in magazines besides.
Life is not a safe and certain thing. When it comes to buying a Porsche, at least you know it going in. And, again, nobody has lawyered up, and this in a country where lawyers are allowed to work on contingency. It's done. Move on. There are more important causes.
It doesn't matter where in the world you're from. My "case"? Hmmm..that would be that you're an ostentatious
North American
.
pas de touche'
Amigo.
As for countering an "argument" - what IS your argument? That we, as P-Car owners should just grin, accepting failures, sign the check - because, after all, it's not brand specific? LOL, well, that in itself is beyond asinine, an antonym to your self-proclaimed "intelligent" offerings.
Well, no worries. You're not the first bigot I've met on this board. And you're right, it doesn't matter where in the world you're from. Which is why I consider it bigoted to attach insults to nationality.
I've made my position very clear and simple, it's a philosophical one, and you're free to disagree with it. But you're obviously too emotional to reason with, or to truly understand what I'm saying. Whereas you continue to have plenty of energy for insults. Which hurts your credibility more than it does my feelings.
You deserve to be happy. I wish for you a life in which nothing ever goes wrong. Failing this, I wish for you a life in which if things do go wrong, you will always receive prompt and full compensation for your suffering, and public acknowledgment of your victim status.
With warmest regards...
Cauck is an insult? If using the excuse that I'm too "emotional to reason with" validates your point - so be it..I'm actually humored as I'm typing (laughter is the by-product of emotion though..).
Thanks for your well-wishes. I cordially invite you to experience some great deep sea fishing with us at end of this month in Cabo San Lucas; surely a welcomed gesture as you peer out at the snow. If you can't make it, maybe meet me in Banff in June, I've got a great friend working there until September, says the biking is first rate.
Way too much posturing going on in here. Seriously guys, leave that up to me.
True.
I know we love our 911s and certainly there is no car that drives, sounds, and looks like a 911. It's also true that Porsche doesn't make the most reliable cars. I have more faith in my Jeep lasting XXX,XXX miles than the 911. I find the IMS/RMS issue to be pretty silly and excuses are made because of the romanticism involved in owning one of these machines. Fine, I'm obviously cool with sippin' some of the Kool Aid.
The S2000 and the M3 had their own set of issues, but both Honda and BMW stepped up in resolving them and as such there is no IMS/RMS equivalent in the S2000, E46 M3 world. S2000 had the #4 cylinder issue early on and the E46 M3 had the rod bearing issue. #4 cylinder issue was very rare. The E46 M3 rod bearing issue was rare too and for the engines impacted by this, BMW extended the warranty by a huge margin from the original factory warranty. On forums, there aren't nearly as many posts about their failures as there are with IMS and the annoyance that is RMS.
With that said, I can totally understand bronston's lack of faith in the machine. Had I gone thru what he went thru with his engine blowing, I'd likely ditch the car myself. My car has a remanufacturered engine and that's a good thing (crazy) in this world! I'm willing to roll the dice that it's going to be healthy for the time that I own the car and being a good steward, I will take good care of it for the next gal/guy's enjoyment. But spending that amount of dough on a low mileage, "special edition" 911 only to experience a catastrophic failure is absolutely asinine so I feel for him.
With that said II, given bronston's experience, do I have less faith in the overall reliability of these M96 units? Not really. I'll take a gamble and really it's not much risk as I know that there are many workhorse M96ers out there. So for now, I'm going to enjoy that PSE/flat6 noise and not look back.
I grow to appreciate my 911 more and more. I'm learning from a lot of you guys. Many thx.
I've read on IMS failures until my eyes bled
I generally agree with Bruce and expressed much the same in previous posts concerning this subject.
Regardless, it is a shame this IMS issue = a new engine for the unfortunate ones, even if it is a low percentage and that it still is.
I focus on the fact that most 996's enjoy a long spirited life w/low repair/maintenance cost. Impressive for a exotic, or say at the least semi, that just happens to be used by many as a DD. Not many like it to compare to.
This is one reason why the passion (or religion as Ben calls it) burns deep in me.
I have no warranty left on my 01 with 12K miles, could give a flying ****. A solid history, maintenance and good driving habits are more than good enough for me
.
So the best might just be to accept the good and bad and enjoy it for what is, much like one does with a good woman/wife.
Global warming will probably get us way before all the IMS questions are answered, it's a money thing as usual
Soooo enjoy the warmer weather coming our way and potential new ocean front properties for the lucky ones.
No. Neither is American. It only becomes an insult when you attach pejorative adjectives to it, inferring that they're connected. For example, I'm actually a dual citizen, born in Illinois to Canadian parents. I might also be ugly. So, you can call me ugly, and that would be insulting but possibly true. You can call me American. That would be true. But calling me an ugly American would be bigoted.
Just wanted to clear that up.
Enjoy your fishing. Wear a life jacket.
PS Wait, you're a cyclist? That explains the attitude. We're all ******! Skiing in Banff the end of this month, actually. The last time I cycled there was a few years ago, on a relay team that was trying to set a record for Vancouver-to-Toronto. They were ******, too. The kind you drink iced vodka with, though.
Sorry to bring up an old argument. I am just beginning to study the IMS failures, but I am more interested in finding out more about the actual cause of the failue instead of identifying if Porsche makes ****ty cars.
So the failure of the IMS is from what?
Robin, a good number of us here picked up Adrian Streather's excellent 996 book and on page 182, he submits some well researched, bulleted points about why IMS bearing failures cannot necessarily be pointed to manufacturing defect(s).
The speculative conclusion, if you will, to the IMS bearing failures is due to running the engine with low oil levels which is wholly the responsibility of the owner to keep full,
and
the type of oil which will certainly open up yet another can of oily worms in this forum.
Oh forty, based on my limited knowledge, does a better job than other oil weights in getting to all the nooks and crannies of the engine than the heavier oils that some of the others recommend here that are not recommend by Porsche. Porsche makes it VERY clear with their approved oil weight/brand list for all of their engines.
So pretty much, Streather's book recommends the obvious to us:
1) Maintain your oil level per the manual
2) Use Porsche approved oils
Adrian's book stating the IMS failure can't be pointed to a mfg defect may be true, but it can certaily be pointed to an engineering fault. The mfg may have been to spec, but if the engineering design is inherently weak, then failures will result.
My IMS failed with the oil topped off using Porsche approved oils.
Robin, the July, 2006 article from the UK magazine
Total 911
has a plausible description. To paraphrase their analysis of the problem, one of the sprockets on the intermediate shaft is retained with a small stud. The stud can break, destroying the bearing that supports the shaft. The unsupported shaft loses mesh with the chains driving the camshafts and mechanical chaos ensues.
Although the article isn't entirely clear, I believe they're talking about the rearmost sprocket on the intermediate shaft. That would be the sprocket on the right end of the shaft in the diagram below.
There is also at least one TSB related to changes in the sprocket and chains, but that TSB claims to change things to reduce noise.
If anyone buys into this speculation.............wow...........I find this as crap.......sorry, I dont buy this speculation one bit................
blaming the owners, spit spit
It seems like the failure was not anticipating people doing things advised against!!
And point of fact, obesity does impact more than half the population. Two thirds by most estimates. Same with heart disease (among the fifty plus at risk population).
Doug,
Thank you for the reply, I read that there were also update to bolt #15? When you said the right side sprocket, so looks in order to remendy this or to do any preventive work the engine have to come apart.
The update to bolt #15 (3 each) was part of a TSB dealing with RMS replacement. That TSB also specified new bolts (4 each) to replace the bolts holding the rear of the crankcase together. The replacement bolts had sealant pre-applied to their threads and the surface under the head to stop oil wicking up the threads and causing an oil leak that would subsequently be misidentified as an RMS leak.
On Edit: Yeah, I don't think there is anything to "fix" there without disassembly of the engine.
I had a discussion with a engine repair shop in CA and he hardly saw any IMS problems, but the ones he did experience he noted that the IMS gear on the shafts where slipping causing the problem and he since modified it by pinning it of sorts in all his rebuilds.
I'd lean on Adrian's experience and research along this front per what he has written on page 182 of his 996 book.
Rest easy, fellas. Just take care of that engine with some Porsche approved oils, keep an eye on topping it off as needed, and go enjoy the drive!
when i bought the car they changed the ims gasket or seal, is this a good thing for me ? this crap is freaking me out.
either this car has no problems or you need a brand new engine.
lets pray.
Think of the difference between a 996 and an older 911 as being like the difference between hang gliding and smoking a pack a day. The older car is like the cigarettes... sooner or later, you're going to pay the price. The 996 is like hang gliding... really fun and, most likely, nothing will ever happen. It's just that if it does, it's messy.
Sometimes the stud breaks and sometimes the bolt on the shaft breaks.
Pic one too late for the stud breakage. Pic two flange bolt sheared off (saving most but not all of the engine).
(photos courtesy Tool Pants and RennTech)
Loren
Thanks for posting- I have a better idea now.
I am just curious:
1. What changes were made by Porsche, and
2. If their silence is fear of a class action law suite
3. Fear to be responsible for the repair bills?
John
I think a better question is, why has nobody been able to certify a class? One suspects that perhaps the numbers are too small. Being silent didn't help Toyota.
My speculation, and it's only that, but here's what it smells like to me:
These engines are not fundamentally suited to the use they get by a lot of drivers. There is no permanent, comprehensive fix without starting from a clean sheet of paper. Porsche will do this eventually. In the meantime, they are better off not saying anything and buying us off with cheap replacement engines until the cars are so old that they can't reasonably be held responsible for failures. A healthy aftermarket for rebuilding will eventually emerge to fill the void, and the 996 will eventually pass into history as a 911 better suited to hot-rodding than to preserving for posterity.
You heard it here first.
Interesting also is that the 997 facelift (MY09) get a new engine (and PDK transmission).
"New engine generation with direct fuel injection (DFI):
- 3.6-l boxer engine with 345 hp (+20 hp), 390 Nm (+20 Nm)
- 3.8-l boxer engine with 385 hp (+30 hp), 420 Nm (+20 Nm)"
"7-speed Porsche Doppelkupplung (PDK)"
It's about damn time
j/k
I can totally see the pre-2009 997 guys doing one of the following three items:
1) Aggrandizing their current car's merits by citing reasons why it's better than the '09s like oh I'm glad I have the 3.6 because now I can supercharge it reliably v. having to wait for DFI to settle with the aftermarket vendors oh it's too much power I'm still learning to exploit the limits of my car as-is so no need for more power blah blah
2) Looking to dump their cars asap cuz they now feel less adequate with their non-DFI 3.6/8s
3) 1 & 2
I'm looking forward to how the '09s look and if the aerokit changes any. I definitely like the introduction of the LEDs in front and rear. I find the 997's rear light lens a step backwards from the 996. It's too reflective and bright.
http://www.autocar.co.uk/blogs/autoc...olkswagen.aspx
I was perusing through the 997 GT3 forum and not to perpetuate rumors so typical of forums... but given our space here in the world, it sounds like RMS isn't exactly foreign to that special group either.
So I'm not so sure us wondering if these hold up better is truly reflective of how these engines hold up given the big picture which I've come to learn from sources that have done some leg work... hold up just fine.
It's all speculation, but I guess it's what makes this forum go?
So my point is, I'm just going to accept it on its own merits and wish for those that do buy it, to enjoy it without any worry just as I am with my M96.
And to continue the positive good feelings, did you guys know the M96 is one of the lighest Flat6s made? just a little over 400lbs with the flywheel or something like that. The 6GT3's engine is over a 100lbs heavier! Same goes with the Turbo engine.
I agree with the bigger picture concept except when I stub my toe it's just hard to see the bigger picture. Maybe extended warrenty if so lucky and consider the engine outcome moot.
